Geologic Investigation Report
Plum Creek Watershed FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design
Hays County, Texas

Work Order number: 12FPC219F0063
Contract number: IDIQ-AECOM-2018-79017
AECOM Project number: 60615067

June 2021

Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board
1497 County View Lane
Temple, TX 76504

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

Quality information
Prepared by

Checked by

Verified by

Mariana Conceição de Sá, E.I.T.
Geotechnical Engineer

Lance Finnefrock, P.E., G.E.
Geotechnical Engineer

Glenn Hilton, P.G.
Senior Geologist

Revision History
Revision

Revision date

Details

Authorized

Name

Position0

11/24/2020

Initial Draft

11/24/2020

MJL

PM

1

6/25/2021

Final

6/25/2021

LA

PM

Distribution List
# Hard Copies

PDF Required

Association / Company Name-X

Steve Bednarz, P.E. / TSSWCB-

X

Ronnie Skala, P.E., CFM / TSSWCB-XLuis Alday, P.E. / AECOM-

X

Manfred Daut, P.E. / AECOM-TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
2

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

Prepared for:Mr. Steve Bednarz, P.E.
Statewide Programs Engineer
Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board (TSSWCB)
1497 County View Lane
Temple, TX 76504

Prepared by:

Lance Finnefrock, PE, GE
Geotechnical Engineer
M: 512.413.7269
E: lance.finnefrock@aecom.com

Glenn Hilton, PG
Senior Geologist
M: 214.641.6353
E: glenn.hilton@aecom.com

Mariana Conceição de Sá, EIT
Geotechnical Engineer
M: 703.474.6778
E: mariana.sa@aecom.com

AECOM
9400 Amberglen Boulevard
Austin, TX 78729
aecom.com

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
3

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

Table of Contents
1.

2.

3.

4.

Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 7
1.1 Project Overview ........................................................................................................ 7
1.2 Proposed Modifications .............................................................................................. 7
1.3 Purpose and Scope of Work....................................................................................... 7
1.4 Authorization .............................................................................................................. 8
Site Description.................................................................................................................... 9
2.1 Site Location ............................................................................................................... 9
2.2 Dam Description ......................................................................................................... 9
2.3 Geologic Setting ....................................................................................................... 10
2.3.1 Physiography ................................................................................................ 10
2.3.2 Geology ........................................................................................................ 10
2.3.3 Soil Mapping ................................................................................................. 11
2.3.4 Structural Geology ........................................................................................ 11
2.3.5 Faulting......................................................................................................... 12
2.3.6 Seismicity and Earthquake Record .............................................................. 13
2.3.7 Other Geologic Hazards ............................................................................... 14
2.3.7.1 Karst ................................................................................................. 14
2.3.7.2 Landslides ........................................................................................ 14
2.4 Previous Site Investigations .................................................................................... 14
2.4.1 Soil Conservation Service – 1967 Geologic Investigation ............................ 14
2.4.2 Soil Conservation Service – 1967 Soil Mechanics Report ........................... 15
2.4.3 NRCS – 2010 Dam Safety Inspection .......................................................... 15
Field Geologic Investigation............................................................................................... 16
3.1 Geologic Reconnaissance ........................................................................................ 16
3.2 Geologic Investigation Summary .............................................................................. 16
3.2.1 Embankment Crest ....................................................................................... 17
3.2.2 Downstream Toe of the Embankment .......................................................... 17
3.2.3 Upstream toe of the Embankment ................................................................ 17
3.2.4 Principal Spillway ......................................................................................... 17
3.2.5 Auxiliary Spillway .......................................................................................... 18
3.2.6 Proposed Outlet Channel ............................................................................. 18
3.2.7 On-Site Borrow Area .................................................................................... 18
3.2.8 Embankment Slopes .................................................................................... 18
3.3 Staking, Utility Locates, and Survey ......................................................................... 19
3.4 Soil Borings .............................................................................................................. 19
3.4.1 Drilling Methods ............................................................................................ 19
3.4.2 Sampling Methods ........................................................................................ 19
3.4.3 Borehole Logging and Sample Preservation ................................................ 20
3.4.4 Groundwater Measurements ........................................................................ 20
3.4.5 Borehole Backfilling ...................................................................................... 21
3.5 Piezometer Installations ........................................................................................... 21
3.6 Laboratory Testing .................................................................................................... 21
Subsurface Conditions....................................................................................................... 22
4.1 Generalized Stratigraphy .......................................................................................... 22

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
4

Geologic Investigation Report

5.

6.
7.

Project number: 60615067

4.1.1 Embankment Fill ........................................................................................... 22
4.1.2 Downstream Fill ............................................................................................ 23
4.1.3 Alluvium ........................................................................................................ 23
4.1.4 Residuum ..................................................................................................... 23
4.1.5 Shale ............................................................................................................ 24
4.2 Centerline of Embankment Crest ............................................................................. 24
4.2.1 Stratigraphy .................................................................................................. 24
4.2.2 Groundwater................................................................................................. 25
4.3 Embankment Slope .................................................................................................. 25
4.3.1 Stratigraphy .................................................................................................. 25
4.3.2 Groundwater................................................................................................. 26
4.4 Downstream Toe of Dam .......................................................................................... 26
4.4.1 Stratigraphy .................................................................................................. 26
4.4.2 Groundwater................................................................................................. 27
4.5 Principal Spillway ..................................................................................................... 27
4.5.1 Stratigraphy .................................................................................................. 27
4.5.2 Groundwater................................................................................................. 28
4.6 Existing Vegetated Auxiliary Spillway ....................................................................... 28
4.6.1 Stratigraphy .................................................................................................. 28
4.6.2 Groundwater................................................................................................. 28
4.7 Proposed Roller Compacted Concrete (RCC) Spillway ........................................... 29
4.7.1 Stratigraphy .................................................................................................. 29
4.7.2 Groundwater................................................................................................. 29
4.8 Proposed Outlet Channel for RCC Spillway ............................................................. 30
4.8.1 Stratigraphy .................................................................................................. 30
4.8.2 Groundwater................................................................................................. 30
4.9 Borrow Area .............................................................................................................. 30
Interpretations and Conclusions ........................................................................................ 31
5.1 Existing Embankment ............................................................................................... 31
5.2 Downstream Toe of Dam .......................................................................................... 32
5.3 Auxiliary Spillway ...................................................................................................... 32
5.3.1 General ......................................................................................................... 32
5.3.2 Headcut Erodibility ....................................................................................... 33
5.4 Principal Spillway ..................................................................................................... 33
5.4.1 Existing PSW Structures .............................................................................. 33
5.4.2 Proposed PSW Structures ........................................................................... 34
5.5 Proposed RCC Spillway ........................................................................................... 34
5.6 Borrow Areas and Embankment Fill Sources ........................................................... 34
5.7 Design and Construction Considerations ................................................................. 36
5.7.1 Site Preparation............................................................................................ 36
5.7.2 Excavations .................................................................................................. 36
Limitations.......................................................................................................................... 37
References ........................................................................................................................ 38

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
5

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

TablesTable 1. Summary of Borings ...................................................................................................... 41
Table 2. Summary of Groundwater Readings ............................................................................. 43
Table 3. Sample Inventory .......................................................................................................... 45

FiguresFigure 1. Site Vicinity Map .......................................................................................................... 53
Figure 2. Geologic Map ............................................................................................................... 54
Figure 3. Stratigraphic Column for Hays County ........................................................................ 55
Figure 4. Earthquake Map (TXEQ) ............................................................................................. 56
Figure 5. Earthquake Map (USGS) ............................................................................................. 57
Figure 6. Earthquake Map (TXEQ and USGS) ........................................................................... 58
Figure 7. Plan of Field Investigation ............................................................................................ 59

Appendices
Appendix A NRCS Websoil Survey Data .................................................................................... 60
Appendix B Seismicity Data ........................................................................................................ 61
Appendix C Site Photographs ..................................................................................................... 62
Appendix D Hammer Calibration Report ..................................................................................... 63
Appendix E Boring Logs ............................................................................................................. 64
E.1 Key to Terms and Descriptions ................................................................................. 65
E.2 Boring Logs .............................................................................................................. 66
Appendix F Sample Photographs ............................................................................................... 67
Appendix G Piezometer Construction Diagrams ........................................................................ 68
Appendix H Geologic Profiles ..................................................................................................... 69
Appendix I Recommended Headcut Erodibility Index Parameters ............................................. 70

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
6

Geologic Investigation Report

1.

Introduction

1.1

Project Overview

Project number: 60615067

The Plum Creek Watershed Floodwater Retarding Structure (FRS) No. 2 (Plum Creek 2) is asingle-purpose, zoned earthen embankment dam that was designed and constructed as a low
hazard (class “a”) structure for the purpose of watershed protection and flood prevention. Plum
Creek 2 was constructed in 1969 on Plum Creek, located about 1.5 miles east of Kyle, Texas(Hays County). The National Inventory of Dams (NID) Identification Number is TX01589.
Since original construction of the dam, residential and commercial structures, major highways,
and utilities have been constructed downstream. As a result, catastrophic failure of the dam would
result in property and infrastructure damages and potential loss of life. As such, the dam has been
reclassified by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) as a high hazard dam. The
existing dam does not meet current conformance criteria and performance standards for highhazard dams.
The Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board (TSSWCB) is assisting the local sponsors
with rehabilitation of the dam. The TSSWCB has contracted with AECOM Technical Services, Inc.
(AECOM) to provide geotechnical engineering services and to design proposed improvementsthat will rehabilitate the dam to meet high-hazard criteria. Development of the dam rehabilitation
design will be in general accordance with the NRCS guidelines and criteria as documented in the
NRCS National Engineering Handbook (NEH) and in the library of NRCS Technical Releases(TR). However, because the NRCS no longer has an existing agreement with the sponsor, theNRCS criteria no longer apply. The applicable engineering criteria governing development of therehabilitation modifications are those in Chapter 299 of the Texas Administrative Code, as
overseen by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's (TCEQ) Office of Dam Safety.

1.2

Proposed Modifications

The proposed rehabilitation of Plum Creek 2 is intended to mitigate identified dam safety
deficiencies associated with the dam’s reclassification as a high hazard dam. The proposed
modifications include the following major components:•

Widening the vegetated auxiliary spillway (ASW) channel from 150 feet to 250 feet;•

Raising the crest elevation of the existing ASW to Elevation (El.) 659.8 (approximately +1.15
feet);•

Abandoning the existing principal spillway (PSW) inlet riser and 24-inch diameter conduit;•

Installing a new PSW inlet riser with crest at El. 645.4, impact basin, and new 48-inch
diameter conduit;•

Installing a filter/drainage diaphragm around the new PSW conduit to provide seepage
control and for a preventative measure against internal piping erosion; and•Constructing a 200-foot-wide structural spillway consisting of roller compacted concrete(RCC) with crest elevation at El. 658.6.

1.3

Purpose and Scope of WorkAECOM was contracted to perform a site-specific field Geologic Investigation (GI) and prepare a
GI Report (GIR) of the findings and interpretations. The purpose of the GI is to collect geotechnicalinformation about the following aspects of rehabilitation design:TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
7

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067•

the existing earthen embankment fill material;•

foundation soils for construction of the proposed RCC auxiliary spillway, which will consist of
a crest structure on the embankment, stepped chute structure on the downstream slope, andstilling basin at the downstream toe;•erodibility of existing vegetated earthen ASW channel;•

required excavation for the construction of the proposed RCC spillway chute;•required excavation for the widening of the existing ASW channel and the suitability of thismaterial as dam embankment fill;•

the potential need for additional on-site borrow sources;•

proposed modifications to PSW structures including abandonment of the existing conduit pipeand demolition of the inlet and outlet structures; and•installation of new PSW structures (inlet tower, conduit pipe, and impact basin) and a filter
diaphragm.

Included in AECOM’s scope is assignment of geotechnical laboratory testing, geotechnicalengineering analyses, and preparation of a Soil Mechanics Report (SMR) which will be issued
under separate cover.

1.4

Authorization

This Geologic Investigation Report was prepared by AECOM Technical Services, Inc. (AECOM)
for the Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board (TSSWCB) in accordance with theStatement of Work described in Work Order No. 79017-6-ESF and executed under the terms andconditions of Contract No. IDIQ-AECOM-2018-79017.

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
8

Geologic Investigation Report2.

Site Description

2.1

Site Location

Project number: 60615067

Plum Creek 2 is located in Hays County, Texas about 1.5 miles east of downtown Kyle, TX. The
site is located 0.75 miles east of the intersection of IH-35 and Center Street and 1.75 miles southof the intersection of IH-35 and Bunton Rd. Access to the site is through the main entrance of
Lake Kyle Park, on 700 Lehman Rd., Kyle, TX 78640. Within the site, access is mostly via
pastures and dirt roads. A vicinity map of the site is provided in Figure 1.

2.2

Dam Description

Plum Creek 2 has a maximum dam height of 38 feet 1, a dam length of 2,588 feet, designed
maximum storage capacity of 1,034 acre-feet 2, and is comprised of about 128,030 cubic yards ofearth and rock fill 3. Primary and auxiliary spillway discharges have a combined design value of
2,679 cubic feet per second (cfs) 4.
The dam is a zoned earthen embankment with a 14-foot wide crest, and 2.5H:1V upstream anddownstream slopes. The as-builts indicate the maximum crest elevation is at El. 663.8 5 fromoriginal dam centerline stations (Sta.) 23+00 to Sta. 28+00 (i.e., overbuild allowance forsettlement), and crest elevations of El. 662.9 and 662.8 at the left and right abutments,
respectively. Current topographic survey performed for this project in 2019 indicates the current
dam crest varies from about El. 661.2 to 662.4, suggesting apparent post-construction
settlements on the order of about 1 to 3 feet across the crest. A 12-foot wide “local berm” at El.
647.5 is present on the upstream slope. A 20-foot wide “crossing berm” with top elevation at El.
635.4 is present at the downstream toe over the PSW conduit. A minimum 12-ft wide cutoff trench,extending to a maximum depth of about 8 feet and with 1H:1V side slopes was constructed at thedam centerline. The original geologic investigation report called for extending the cut-off throughthe upper alluvial clays, and to partially penetrate the shaley residual clays. The as-built profile
suggests the cutoff trench typically extends 2 to 3 feet into the residual clays and a maximum
depth of about 6 to 7 feet into residual clays near the original creek alignment.
The as-builts indicate two material zones were used in the embankment, designated as Zone 1
and Zone 2 as described as follows:•

Zone 1 materials were designated for the embankment core and cutoff trench and wereprescribed to consist of non-calcareous, silty clays (CH) obtained from the on-site borrow
area located in the present-day reservoir.

•

Zone 2 materials were designated the upstream and downstream embankment slopes(shell zones). These materials were described as either silty fat clays (CH) from thedesignated borrow area, or non-calcareous, silty, clayey sand (SC) obtained from required
excavations for the ASW channel.

Materials from both zones were specified to be placed in maximum 9-inch thick loose lifts andcompacted to a minimum density. Compaction criteria for the silty fat clays (CH) from the borrow
area were at least 85% of maximum dry density at a moisture content above optimum moistureper ASTM D1557 (Modified Proctor). Compaction criteria for the silty, clayey sand (SC) sourced
1

Based on As-Built Drawings dated May 28th,1969.
Based on As-Built Drawings dated May 28th,1969 and NRCS Dam Assessment Report (Oct, 2010).
3
Based on As-Built Drawings dated May 28th,1969 and NRCS Dam Assessment Report (Oct, 2010).
4
Based on As-Built Drawings dated May 28th,1969.
5
Elevations herein correspond to North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88). A correction of +0.39 feet has been applied toelevations obtained from as-builts to convert from National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD) to NAVD88, and rounded to
the nearest 0.1 feet.
2

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
9

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

from the ASW excavation spoils were at least 95 percent of maximum dry density at a moisture
content above optimum moisture per ASTM D698 (Standard Proctor). The maximum allowableparticle size for each material was specified as 6 inches.
The existing ASW consists of vegetated earthen channel located near the left abutment with the
crest at El. 658.9. The channel is about 1,140 feet long and 150 feet wide. According to the asbuilts, the ASW channel was generally excavated 1 to 8 feet below pre-construction grade toexpose alluvial and residual clays. Review of aerial images available on Google Earth indicate
the ASW channel was engaged during a storm event in October 2013. The 2018 inspection report(TCEQ, 2018) also indicates the ASW was engaged during another storm event in October 2015
which led to the formation of gullies within the ASW channel.
The existing PSW consists of an approximately 13-foot-tall concrete inlet structure, and a 210foot long, 24-inch inside diameter (ID) conduit pipe discharging to a plunge basin. The crest of theinlet structure is located at El. 648.0 and it features four low-level ports (two in each side) at El.
640.4. A gated outlet is also provided on the inlet structure at El. 636.6. The PSW conduit pipe is
supported on an unreinforced concrete cradle, and the discharge end of the PSW conduit iscantilevered and supported on a concrete column and shallow spread footing. Foundation support
for the inlet and pipe cantilever consists of shallow footings, which measure 7.67-feet by 8.16-feetin plan for the inlet, and 3.5-feet by 3.5-feet in plan for the pipe cantilever. The PSW inlet tower,
and majority of the conduit pipe, were constructed on compacted embankment fill with a maximum
height of about 5-6 feet at the upstream end which gradually tapers to zero in the downstream
direction. The downstream 4 or 5 pipe segments were constructed at or slightly below preconstruction grade. The PSW pipe cantilever footing was constructed on native alluvial or residual
clays in an excavated trench extending to about 5-6 feet below pre-construction grades. The
plunge basin is un-lined and was originally excavated into native soils. The PSW conduit was
furnished with a series of five concrete anti-seep collars spaced at 200 feet center-to-center. No
internal filter or drainage elements were recommended during original design, and are not present
within the dam embankment according to the as-built drawings.

2.3

Geologic Setting

2.3.1

Physiography

The project site is located within the Blackland Prairies physiographic province. The Blackland
Prairies are bounded by the Balcones Fault Zone (BFZ, also referred to as the Balcones
Escarpment) to the west and north, which consists of a curved band of numerous major normal
faults. The Blackland Prairies are a sub-province of the Gulf Coast Plains and the bedrock in thisregion is described as consisting mostly of chalks and marls which weather to deep, black, fertile
clay soils. This sub-province is described to be underlain by Upper Cretaceous marine chalks,marls, limestones, and shales, which allowed for the development of the characteristic black,calcareous, clay soils. The province is also characterized by its low rolling terrain with beds tilted
south and east (Wermund, 1996).

2.3.2

Geology

The Geologic Atlas of Texas, Seguin Sheet (Proctor et al., 1974) shows the mapped geologic unit
underlying the project site as the late-Cretaceous Pecan Gap Chalk (“Kpg”). The geologic map isreproduced in Figure 2. The Pecan Gap Chalk is a formation of the Taylor Group, which also
includes the Wolfe City Formation (“Kwc”) and the Ozan Formation (“Ko”), also referred to as“Lower Taylor Marl). The stratigraphic column of Central Texas is provided in Figure 3.
Young (1977) describes the Pecan Gap Chalk as a medium gray, chalky, or marly formation withcalcium carbonate content ranging from about 25 to over 75 percent. The formation is composedof massive lower chalk which grades upward to a chalky marl with microgranular calcite in the
TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
10

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

clay matrix. Well-rounded quartz grains are common the lower portion. Insoluble residues include
organic material, clay, and silt (TxDOT, 1966).
The Pecan Gap Chalk is typically medium gray, and weathers to a light gray to white color. The
formation has a maximum thickness of approximately 200 feet in the vicinity of this site, andgrades laterally to a marl in select locations (Proctor et al., 1974). Near the ground surface, thePecan Gap Chalk weathers into a highly plastic, fat clay with significant potential for verticalmovement as a result of changes in moisture content.
The Austin Chalk (Kau) unit is also mapped approximately 1 mile west of the project site. The
Austin Chalk underlies the geologically younger Pecan Gap Chalk. This Cretaceous-aged unit isprimarily composed of chalk and marl with a nearly 85 percent calcium carbonate content. It is
grayish white to white in color with medium gray bentonitic seams and pyrite nodules. This unit isgenerally observed to form scarps on the land surface. Thicknesses range from 325 feet to 420
feet in this area.
The original 1967 GIR for this project reports the underlying geologic unit at the site to be the
Taylor Group, but does not specify which formation is present. The interpretation of Pecan Gap
Chalk Formation (Taylor Group) is also supported by data from the current investigation.

2.3.3

Soil Mapping

The NRCS Web Soil Survey database was examined to identify near-surface soils mapping of
the site. The Web Soil Survey data is provided in Appendix A.
The mapped soil types within the vicinity of the dam areas are described as calcareous clayey
alluvium and clayey residuum resulting from in-place weathering of the parent bedrock. Residuum
soils are mapped at the abutments and the upper portions of the alluvial valley. Alluvium ismapped in the lower portions of the alluvial valley, approximately below El. 642± based oncomparison to current topographic maps. Four specific soil units are mapped within the vicinity ofthe dam and spillway:-

Heiden clay, 1 to 3 percent slopes (HeB): clayey residuum-

Heiden clay, 3 to 5 percent slopes (HeD3): clayey residuum-

Lewisville silty clay, 1 to 3 percent slopes (LeB): calcareous clayey alluvium-

Tinn clay, 0 to 1 percent slopes (Tn): calcareous clayey alluvium

Typical index and physical properties indicate these materials generally classify as fat clay (CH)with less frequent silty lean clay (CL) according to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS).
The units described as residuum (HeB and HeD3) generally exhibit less of a range in plasticity
relative to the alluvium; the liquid limit (LL) of the residuum can range from 50 to 80, and plasticity
index (PI) can range from 30 to 55. In contrast, the alluvium has LL generally between 39 and 76,
and PI between 18 and 49. Fines content (fraction finer than the U.S. #200 sieve by weight) is
typically greater than 60 to 70 percent. Slightly higher clay content is typical in the residuum (40to 60 percent) versus the alluvium (30 to 60 percent).

2.3.4

Structural Geology

The project site is located along the eastern fringes of the BFZ, the most prominent geologic
feature in Central Texas which extends along the IH-35 corridor from San Antonio to Austin to
Dallas. The BFZ is several miles wide, consisting of a series of sub-parallel normal faults generally
trending northeast-southwest. Downward displacement of the BFZ is to the southeast, forming aseries of stepped “echelon” faults.

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
11

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

The BFZ was most recently active about 15 million years ago during the Pliocene epoch, althoughmost of the fault movement is believed to be during early Miocene. This activity was related tosubsidence of the Texas Coastal Plain, most likely from seaward-progressing sediment load
deposition from Texas rivers, cyclic progression/regression of the Gulf of Mexico, andconsolidation of these sediments. The BFZ is in one of the lowest risk zones for earthquakes in
the U.S., and is considered seismically inactive (Weeks, 1945).

2.3.5

Faulting

The major fault trend in Hays County is about N 45º E and the individual faults in the major fault
zones strike between about N 35º E and N 50º E (DeCook,1963). Based on review of publishedgeologic maps, no faults are mapped intersecting the project site. The nearest mapped faults arelocated approximately 1.5 miles east (San Marcos Springs fault) and 0.8 miles west of the site
(Kyle fault), both of which are northeast-southwest trending normal faults likely associated with
the BFZ and are not considered to be seismically active (see Figure 2). However, based on theproximity to the BFZ, it is possible that unmapped faults associated with that fault zone (i.e.,
northeast/southwest trending normal faults and/or secondary faulting) may be present andconcealed by the overburden soils.
The San Marcos Springs fault is nearly 2.1 miles long, and forms the southeastern-most boundaryof the Edwards limestone in Hays County. The fault branches into two primary faults near San
Marcos, located about 7 miles south of Plum 2. The main (southern) branch of the fault has astrike of about N 40º E, and continues north and east of the Plum 2 site. The southern branch isreported to have more than 300 feet of fault displacement at San Marcos Springs (the second
largest group of springs in Texas), where the upper part of the Edwards Limestone is thrown
against part of the Austin Chalk. The magnitude of fault displacement of the southern branchtends to decrease towards the north. The northern branch only extends a short distance, andstrikes about N 25º E toward Kyle (DeCook, 1963).
The Kyle fault marks the contact between the Pecan Gap Chalk and the Austin Chalk. The Kylefault is a normal fault with a strike of about N 30º E, and is likely an extension of the San Marcos
Springs fault, with approximate length of 2.4 miles in this area. The Kyle fault forms thesoutheastern boundary of the Edwards Aquifer from San Marcos to Buda, and extends throughthe city of Kyle. The fault is exposed along Plum Creek where it marks the contact between theAustin Chalk and the Pecan Gap Chalk. According to DeCook (1963), immediately northeast of
Kyle (in the general area of interest for this project) the fault displacement is likely less than 50
feet.
According to the USGS Quaternary Fault and Fold Database, no Quaternary-active faults arepresent at the project site. The USGS database indicates the nearest Quaternary-active faults are
the Gulf-margin normal faults, the western limits of which are located approximately 46 miles eastof the project site. The Gulf-margin normal faults are described as a seaward-facing belt of poorly
defined normal faults with low seismicity. This zone borders the northern Gulf of Mexico inwesternmost Florida, southwestern Alabama, southern Mississippi, all of Louisiana, southernmost
Arkansas, and eastern and southern Texas (Ewing and Lopez, 1991). Due to the large number offaults within this system, the Gulf Coast faults are divided into four groups in order to better
represent regional differences. The Texas portion of the Gulf-margin normal faults dip varies
widely, reported as 0º to 90º to either the southeast or northwest. The long term slip rate is lessthan 0.2 mm/year.

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
12

Geologic Investigation Report

2.3.6

Project number: 60615067

Seismicity and Earthquake Record

As required by the current NRCS Technical Release (TR) TR-210-60, a map of recent and historic
earthquakes within a 100 kilometer (about 62 miles) radius of the site is provided in Figures 4
through 6. The figures present earthquake records from two different sources for comparison: 1)
the University of Texas (TXEQ) database spanning a period from 1847 to 2014, and 2) the UnitedStates Geological Survey (USGS) database spanning a period from 1900 to 2016. Historic
earthquakes are presented in terms of Moment Magnitude (M). Earthquakes with M<3 are notplotted due to the limited effects of such small earthquakes. Within the area of interest (100 km),the TXEQ database shows five recorded earthquakes which occurred as close as 15 miles
northeast of the site (1902 in Creedmoor, TX), and as far as 50 miles northeast of Plum Creek 2(1887 in Paige, TX). These earthquakes were of relatively low intensity, and are summarized
below. The USGS database contained no historic earthquakes with M>4.1 within the area ofinterest. No earthquakes have been recorded in Hays County in either database.

TXEQ Earthquake ID

Year

Magnitude

City

County1847Feb140200A

1847

3.6

SeguinGuadalupe

1873May010430A

1873

3.1

Manor

Travis1887Jan051757A

1887

4.1

Paige

Bastrop1902Oct091900A

1902

3.9

Creedmoor

Travis

1984Aug080131A

1984

3.1

Spring Branch

Kendall

Prior to conducting the current field investigation, a screening-level analysis was performed toevaluate the potential need for specialized field investigation procedures to characterize seismic
hazards (e.g., liquefaction, cyclic softening). The screening procedure was conducted according
to Table 2-5 of the National Engineering Handbook (NEH), Part 631, Chapter 2, Engineering
Geologic Investigations (NRCS 2012). Seismic hazard data for the site was obtained from theonline USGS National Seismic Hazards Mapping Tool. Based on the deaggregation of seismic
hazard, the Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) for a site underlain by “soft rock” (i.e., C-D
boundary) is 0.025g for the 2% in 50 year earthquake event (2,475-year return period) at the
project site. The deaggregation data is provided in Appendix B. Sites with PGA less 0.10g for the
2,475-year event do not require specialized additional seismic field investigation, and therefore
special field investigation procedures for seismic hazards at this site were found to be notnecessary.
For design-level evaluations of seismic hazard, analyses of site seismicity should be conductedin accordance with the current version, NRCS TR-210-60 (2019). That analysis includes anevaluation of the design PGA based on the seismic site class and consequences of seismic failureof the dam, which may correspond to design PGA with earthquake return periods ranging from
1,000 and 10,000 years. Deaggregation data from the USGS database for additional return
periods up to the 10,000-year event are provided in Appendix B. Further analysis of seismicity
will be provided in the SMR.

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
13

Geologic Investigation Report

2.3.7

Project number: 60615067

Other Geologic Hazards

2.3.7.1 Karst
Although the Pecan Gap Chalk contains a relatively high percentage of calcareous material, theunit is not known for long-term dissolution capable of producing karst conditions. Zones ofsinkhole development and other karst related features have not been identified at the project
location. Therefore, karst risk is anticipated to be very low at this site.
2.3.7.2 Landslides
The project site is located in a relatively flat area with gentle, rolling hills. No landslides have been
identified on or near the project site. Therefore, the risk of landslides is anticipated to be very low
for this site.

2.4

Previous Site Investigations

2.4.1

Soil Conservation Service – 1967 Geologic Investigation

The original GI for design of the dam was conducted by the former Soil Conservation Service(SCS), a predecessor to NRCS, in May 1967 and summarized in a GI Report dated June 12, 1967
(SCS, 1967a). A plan of borings and subsurface profiles are contained in both the GIR and theas-built drawings (SCS, 1968). The investigation consisted of 12 borings along the dam centerline(holes No. 1 through 7 and 51 through 55); 8 borings along the auxiliary spillway (holes No. 251
through 258); 4 borings along the principal spillway alignment (holes No. 301 through 303 andhole No. 351); and 20 borings in a borrow area located in the present-day reservoir (Holes No.
151 through 170). Six exploratory borings (Holes No. 451 through 456) were also performed in
the vicinity of the original creek channel.
The stratigraphy encountered in the borings was generally characterized as about 0 to 8 feet (upto 11 feet in the borrow area) of clayey Alluvium overlying Clayey Residuum. In accordance with
the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) the Alluvium was generally classified in the field asbrown, stiff, silty fat clays (CH) and stiff, slightly calcareous, lean clays (CL) with a slight gravel
content. Occasional sand and gravel lenses encountered were thicker near the left abutment
down to depths of 8 to 11 feet near the interface with the underlying Residuum. The Alluvium
thins towards the right abutment. The underlying Residuum was described as tan, stiff, shaley,
residual clays of the Taylor Group (which includes the Pecan Gap Chalk formation), and was
identified at depths generally ranging between about 1.5 and 8 feet. The Residuum was primarily
classified in the field as a fat clay (CH), and generally ranged from about 5 to 17 feet thick. Below
depths of about 15 feet in the left abutment and 24 feet in the floodplain, blue shale of the Taylor
Group was encountered with a hardness rating of Hd 1 (very soft) to Hd 2 (soft).
It should be noted that the SCS (1967a) characterization of clayey Alluvium covering the majorityof the project site differs from the interpretation provided on the NRCS Web Soil Survey database,discussed in Section 2.3.3, which maps Alluvium only in the lower portion of the creek valley
along the original creek alignment with Residuum overlying the rest of the site.
Groundwater was not encountered during this investigation but was observed within the original
stream channel. The GIR recommended the embankment cutoff trench be extended to depths of
3 to 7 feet below the original ground surface, lowest elevation at El. 626.1 (3 feet below original
grade) along the centerline of the principal spillway and at El. 619.5 (6 feet below original grade)on the centerline of the embankment. No drainage measures were recommended.
The GIR recommended a zoned embankment with higher plastic clays (CH) reserved for the coreand central portion of the embankment, and low plastic clays (CL) and silty clayey sands (SC) be
placed in the outer shell of the dam including the crest, upstream slopes, and downstream slopes.
A cutoff trench extending through the alluvial gravelly clays to the bottom of the shaley clays was
TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
14

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

recommended between approximately Sta. 21+00 and Sta. 31+00, in order to remove gravelly
materials that may be more permeable and to control seepage in the foundation.

2.4.2

Soil Conservation Service – 1967 Soil Mechanics Report

The original soil mechanics report (SMR) for Plum Creek 2 was completed by SCS on July 18,
1967 (SCS, 1967b). The report contained results of laboratory testing on three (3) composite
samples recovered from borings during the 1967 GI drilled in the borrow area and emergency
spillway. Lab testing including gradation, Atterberg limits, soluble salts, specific gravity, anddispersion (double-hydrometer). Proctor compaction was also performed on remolded composite
bulk samples. Index test results indicated one sample as clayey sand (SC) to sandy lean clay(CL), and the other two samples as fat clay (CH) materials. The liquid limit (LL) of the fat clay was
52 to 56, plasticity index (PI) was 32 to 34, and fines content was 77 to 90%. The clayey
sand/sandy clay had LL of 28, PI of 13, and fines content of 48 to 64%. Double hydrometer testing
indicated the soils are probably not dispersive. (12 to 21% dispersion).
The SMR concluded that the foundation soils underlying FRS No. 2 had overall low to very low
permeability, and a cutoff trench extending below depths of dry weather shrinkage cracks was
expected to provide adequate control of seepage through the foundation.
Excavation for the principal spillway conduit was recommended to the extent necessary to remove
topsoil and roots, as well to provide adequate grade for the pipe. No recommendation was madein regard to reaching a specific foundation bearing elevation or stratum.
Embankment slopes of 2.5H:1V were recommended for a slope stability minimum safety factor of
2.0 based on total stress (consolidated-undrained) strength parameters. Effective stress strengthparameters were not considered in the original dam design. As-built drawings show therecommended 2.5H:1V slopes were adopted into dam design and construction. Settlement
corresponding to 2% of the height of the fill was expected; as such, the SMR recommended
settlement allowance of 1 foot be added to the fill height during construction.
No groundwater table was encountered during the field GI and the SMR conclusions did notrecommend any drainage measures.

2.4.3

NRCS – 2010 Dam Safety Inspection

A visual inspection of the dam was conducted on October 19, 2010 by NRCS and M&E
Consultants as part of the dam assessment (NRCS, 2010). The inspection identified erosion on
the upstream wave berm, which was obscured by overgrown vegetation. A void was observed
under the principal spillway conduit cradle, which had been previously identified during NRCS
dam safety inspection dated June 13, 2006.
Photographs in the inspection report depicted good vegetative coverage throughout the dam
particularly within the ASW and the dam embankment. A stage recorder and rainfall recorded
were identified on site during this inspection.
The 2010 inspection concluded that FRS No. 2 was performing as designed, but due to urban
encroachment and the dam’s present deteriorated condition, it likely qualified for assistancethrough the watershed rehabilitation program. The watershed rehabilitation program is intended
to bring this dam up to safety standards of high hazard dams.

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
15

Geologic Investigation Report3.

Field Geologic Investigation

3.1

Geologic Reconnaissance

Project number: 60615067

A limited geologic reconnaissance was conducted by an AECOM geologist during the field drilling
program. The reconnaissance included prior desktop review of available data (as-built plans,aerial photos, topography, geologic maps, etc.), and a visual walk-over of the dam conducted in
March 2020. Photographs taken during the geologic reconnaissance are presented in Appendix
C.
In general, the dam appeared to be in relatively good condition. No visual evidence of slope
instability or seepage was observed during the visual reconnaissance. The embankment crest
was observed to be in good condition, with well-established vegetative covering throughout.
However, grass was relatively high in some areas (more than 2 feet tall) which made it difficult toclosely observe the ground surface around the dam. No wet areas or ponding were encounteredduring the site visit. The upstream slope of the dam near the water line appeared to be oversteepened due to wave erosion.
A few animal burrows were observed on the upstream
embankment slope near the weather monitoring instrumentation, and on the downstream slope.
Rut marks were observed near the downstream toe of the dam likely resulting from vehicular
and/or mowing equipment traffic. No instance of ponding was observed near the dam, but ponded
water was noted on the access road to the site.
Some erosion was observed under the cradle of the principal spillway conduit. This area of erosion
was observed in previous inspections and has been monitored by NRCS since at least 2006. Highvegetative covering did not allow for closer inspection of the erosion area, but no evidence ofstructural distress was noted.
The 2020 walk-over was conducted during a relatively dry period, and the PSW inlet tower anddebris racks were observed to be in good condition. Some debris and growing vegetation wereobserved on the upstream slope among the rock riprap protective layer, and should be removed.

3.2

Geologic Investigation Summary

AECOM conducted the first phase (Phase 1) of a geologic investigation (GI) for this project
between December 2019 and January 2020. The Phase 1 GI was focused on generalcharacterization of site stratigraphy and groundwater conditions to support rehabilitation design
specific to the spillways and embankment modifications.
A second phase (Phase 2) of the GI was initiated following completion of preliminary design
activities needed to identify the specified location for the proposed overtopping RCC spillway andoutlet channel. The Phase 2 GI was a targeted investigation to characterize subsurface conditions
for design of the overtopping RCC spillway, and was focused on evaluating bearing capacity,
lateral earth pressures, swelling potential, compressibility, and piezometric levels. The field workfor the Phase 2 began in September 2020 and was completed in October 2020.
The investigation was conducted in general accordance with the Field Investigation Plan (FIP)
reviewed and approved by the TSSWCB. A total of thirty-six (36) conventional geotechnicalborings and seven (7) hand auger borings were completed as part of this geologic investigation.
Specific areas of proposed investigation are described below. The locations of the completed
boreholes are shown on Figure 7. Locations and depths of the borings are also summarized inTable 1.

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
16

Geologic Investigation Report

3.2.1

Project number: 60615067

Embankment Crest

Six (6) test borings designated 8-19 through 12-19 and 15-19 were drilled along the existingembankment dam crest. The purpose of these borings was to characterize existing embankment
materials, underlying foundation materials, and the phreatic surface through the embankment tosupport the embankment stability analysis and design of the new PSW structures (i.e. impact
basin, inlet tower, and spillway conduit).
Two (2) additional borings, designated 13-20 and 14-20, were drilled during the supplemental
investigation in the proposed location of the proposed RCC spillway. These borings were intended
to further characterize foundation conditions under the RCC spillway slab and walls, assessmaterial variability, and obtain samples for additional laboratory testing.
Disturbed soil samples were collected for index testing while relatively undisturbed samples (field
extruded push tubes and laboratory extruded Shelby tubes) were collected for advancedlaboratory testing (shear strength, consolidation, and dispersion potential).

3.2.2

Downstream Toe of the Embankment

Five (5) test borings designated 601-19 through 605-19 were drilled near the downstream toe ofthe dam. The purpose of these borings was to characterize foundation conditions to support thedesign of the proposed PSW structures (i.e. impact basin and spillway conduit) and internal
drainage/filter layers.
Two additional borings, designated 702-20 and 703-20, were drilled during the supplemental
investigation in the proposed location of the new RCC spillway. These borings were intended tofurther characterize subsurface conditions for the design of the proposed 200-foot-wide structural
RCC spillway.
Disturbed soil samples were collected for index testing, and relatively undisturbed samples (field
extruded push tubes and laboratory extruded Shelby tubes) were collected for advancedlaboratory testing (shear strength, consolidation, swell potential, and dispersion potential).

3.2.3

Upstream toe of the Embankment

One (1) test boring, designated as 701-20, was drilled near the upstream toe of the dam. The
purpose of this boring was to characterize upstream foundation conditions for embankment slope
stability evaluation at the proposed RCC spillway location.
Disturbed soil samples were collected for index testing, and relatively undisturbed samples (field
extruded push tubes and laboratory extruded Shelby tubes) were collected for advancedlaboratory testing (shear strength, consolidation, swell potential, and dispersion potential).

3.2.4

Principal Spillway

Two (2) test borings (304-19 and 305-19) were drilled alongside the PSW alignment. Boring 30419 was located on the local berm on the upstream embankment slope, while 305-19 was drilled
at the downstream toe. The purpose of these borings was to provide design information for the
proposed replacement of the existing PSW system with a new 48-inch I.D. conduit and inlet tower.
Disturbed soil samples were collected for index testing while relatively undisturbed samples
were collected for advanced laboratory testing (shear strength, consolidation, and dispersion
potential).

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
17

Geologic Investigation Report

3.2.5

Project number: 60615067

Auxiliary Spillway

Ten (10) test borings designated as 201-19 through 210-19 were drilled near within the existing
ASW channel. The purpose of these borings was to characterize subsurface stratigraphy, anddevelop estimates of headcut erodibility indices and other soil parameters for SITES hydraulicanalysis.
To develop estimates of the SITES analysis input parameters, representative samples of eachgeologic stratum were subjected to index testing (moisture content, Atterberg limits, sieve analysis
with hydrometer), dispersion testing, and natural density and unconfined compression testing on
relatively undisturbed tube samples (push and Shelby tubes).

3.2.6

Proposed Outlet Channel

Two (2) borings designated 401-20 and 402-20 were drilled within the proposed outlet channelalignment downstream of the dam between the end of the proposed stilling basin for the new
RCC spillway and the existing creek. The borings were intended to characterize channel
erodibility, and suitability of materials in the required excavation for use as embankment fillborrow source.
Disturbed and relatively undisturbed soil samples were collected for index testing and todelineate stratigraphy. Bulk samples were collected from the auger cuttings in select depth
intervals to allow additional laboratory testing including index properties, moisture-density
relationship (Standard Proctor compaction), and engineering properties on remolded samples(shear strength, etc.).

3.2.7

On-Site Borrow Area

An on-site borrow area was investigated for suitability as a potential source of embankment fill.
Since the embankment crest will not be raised as part of the dam rehabilitation, a relatively
small amount of fill was anticipated for the rehabilitation. Preliminary estimates of required
borrow volume were on the order of 20,000 cubic yards (CY) or less.
Based on the estimated borrow requirements, six (6) test borings designated as 101-19 through106-19 were completed in a potential on-site borrow area located on the left bank of thereservoir upstream of the dam embankment. Borings were advanced to maximum depths of 10
feet bgs or to auger refusal, whichever occurred first. Disturbed and relatively undisturbed soil
samples were collected for index testing and to delineate stratigraphy. Bulk samples were alsocollected from the auger cuttings in select depth intervals to allow additional laboratory testing
including index properties, moisture-density relationship (Standard Proctor compaction), andengineering properties on remolded samples (shear strength, etc.).

3.2.8

Embankment Slopes

Two (2) hand auger borings designated as 1301-19 and 1302-19 were drilled near the existing
PSW alignment on the relatively steep embankment slope faces where drill rig access was not
feasible. Five (5) additional borings, designated 1701-20 through 1705-20, were drilled on the
upstream and downstream embankment slopes near the proposed location of the new RCC
spillway. The purpose of these borings was to confirm whether embankment zoning was
performed according to the as-built drawings by sampling soil types in the upstream anddownstream shell zones of the dam. Disturbed samples were collected for subsequent laboratory
index testing.

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
18

Geologic Investigation Report

3.3

Project number: 60615067

Staking, Utility Locates, and Survey

All borings locations were staked by the AECOM geologist or engineer prior to the beginning ofdrilling activities and were surveyed in the field by the CP&Y, Inc., project surveyors. The final
drilled borehole locations, where different from the original surveyed locations, were re-staked by
AECOM and subsequently re-surveyed by the surveyors. Surveyed elevations were measured
with respect to the NAVD88 datum. Additional information regarding survey data can be found in
the project Design Summary Report (DSR), which is submitted under separate cover.
AECOM notified Texas 811 utility location service as required by law prior to conducting drilling
activities. The utility locate service did not find buried utilities in close proximity to the dam
embankment, but did provide confirmation of the presence of a known former United Gas
Corporation (now Pennzoil) high pressure gas line located at the right abutment approximately 50
feet beyond the right end of the dam. This gas pipeline was shown in the as-built drawings, but
appears to have been relocated as part of original dam construction.

3.4

Soil Borings

3.4.1

Drilling Methods

Drilling and sampling activities were performed by Total Support Services (TSS) of Austin, Texas
under subcontract to AECOM. AECOM provided full-time monitoring of field activities by ageologist or engineer working under the supervision of a Texas-licensed Professional Geologist(PG) and Texas-licensed Professional Geotechnical Engineer (PE).
Soil test borings were advanced using 3.25-inch inside diameter (ID) and 7.5-inch outside
diameter (OD) hollow-stem auger (HSA) drilling methods. Consolidated materials requiring rockcoring methods to advance borings were not encountered during the investigation. Soil samples
were collected continuously in the upper 10 feet, and at maximum 5-foot intervals thereafter. A
truck-mounted drill rig (CME-45B) was used for the first phase of the investigation in December
2019 and January 2020. A track-mounted drill rig (CME-55LC) was used for the second phase of
the drilling in September and October 2020.
Hand auger borings on the embankment slopes were performed by TSS using a 3-inch OD handoperated auger. A 5-foot extension rod was used to reach maximum drilling depths of 10 feet bgs.
Grab samples from the cuttings were collected at typically 1- to 2-foot intervals or more frequently
when changes in soil type were observed.

3.4.2

Sampling Methods

Sampling methods in conventional borings consisted of alternating Standard Penetration Testing(SPT), thin-wall Shelby tube sampling referred to as “Push Tubes (PT)” for field-extruded samples,and “Shelby Tubes (ST)” for tubes sealed in the field and extruded in the laboratory. For handauger borings and some conventional borings, “grab (G)” samples were collected from auger
cuttings at select depth intervals. Large volume “bulk” samples were collected from auger cuttingsin select borings (e.g., 100-series borings) where materials were to be evaluated for suitability as
potential embankment fill borrow.
The SPT sampling was conducted in general accordance with ASTM D1586. The number of blows
required to advance the sampler a depth of 18 inches was counted for each 6-inch interval. The
number of blows required to drive the sample the last 12 inches, referred to as the “N-value”, isrecorded and reported in units of blows-per-foot. Practical refusal conditions were generally
considered to be 50 blows or greater per 6 or less inches of penetration. An automatic trip hammer
was used for the field investigation. TSS provided AECOM with a recent hammer energy
calibration report from another project for one of two drill rigs used during the investigation (GRLTSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
19

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

Engineers Inc, 2016). The calibration report indicates the energy transfer ratio of the hammer
was approximately 80% for the CME-55LC rig (ER=1.33). While a recent hammer energy
calibration report was available for the CME-45b rig, AECOM’s experience is that the energy
transfer of most automatic hammers is typically about 80% (ER=1.33) or higher. The hammer
calibration report is presented in Appendix D.
Both PT and ST sampling was conducted using 3.0-inch OD, thin-wall Shelby tubes (ASTM
D1587). Due to the relatively stiff soils, heavy-gauge Shelby tubes (e.g. 1/8-inch walls as opposedto the conventional 1/16-inch walls) were generally required for sampling. For economic reasons,the ST sampling was performed only in select intervals of fine-grained soils to collect relatively
undisturbed samples for advanced laboratory testing. The ends of ST samples were sealed in thefield to preserve moisture content and transported to the laboratory for subsequent sample
extrusion. The PT samples were extruded in the field using a hydraulic jack and placed into
resealable bags to preserve moisture content.

3.4.3

Borehole Logging and Sample Preservation

An AECOM geologist or engineer provided full-time monitoring of field drilling and sampling
activities. The AECOM geologist or engineer prepared field boring logs, classified soil samples in
the field, labeled, and packaged soil samples for transport.
Each soil sample was classified in the field based on the observed texture and plasticity in generalaccordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) and NRCS guidelines. Pocket
penetrometer testing was performed on PT samples and the exposed end of ST samples. Pocket
penetrometer testing was also performed on some of the recovered SPT samples to evaluatevariations within the sample; however, they should not be relied upon since these tests were
performed on -disturbed samples. Computer-generated logs of the borings are provided inAppendix E. Note that while the boring logs herein have been updated to include index test
results, where available, from the SMR laboratory testing program, the USCS field classifications
have not been modified in order to maintain consistency with the field classifications. A
comparison of laboratory and field classifications is provided in the SMR, where available.
Recovered samples were photographed in the field prior to classification and sample preservation
to maintain a visual record of the intact sample. Photographic logs of the recovered soil samples
are provided in Appendix F.
The SPT, PT, and grab samples were placed in resealable plastic bags to minimize moisture loss
and labeled for subsequent identification and testing. The bagged samples were placed into
corrugated, waxed cardboard core boxes for storage and to reduce the extent of PT sample
disturbance during transport. The ST samples were sealed with plastic end caps secured withelectrical tape and were labeled for subsequent identification. Prior to sealing, foam packing
and/or expandable packers were placed in the top end of the ST tubes to minimize sample
movement. The ST samples were stored in the field and transported in an upright position withfoam padding to minimize disturbance. The bulk samples were placed into large plastic bags or
5-gallon buckets.

3.4.4

Groundwater Measurements

An electronic water level indicator was used to measure groundwater depth during and at the endof drilling activities of each boring. Following the completion of a borehole and removal of the drill
string, the majority of the drill holes were left open overnight prior to backfilling so that a static
groundwater level (“24-hour” reading) and/or caving depth could be recorded. In some borings,
several days of post-drilling monitoring was required before obtaining a static water level. Notethat borings on the embankment were not left open/unsupported for an extended period of timeTSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
20

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

due to the risk of caving within the embankment and were backfilled shortly after completion ofdrilling activities. A summary of groundwater measurements is provided in Table 2.

3.4.5

Borehole Backfilling

Test borings that were not completed as piezometers were abandoned by backfilling with cementbentonite grout mixture (about 5% bentonite by weight of cement) tremied into the borehole fromthe bottom of the bore hole to the ground surface. Additionally, for boreholes located inplowed/cultivated fields, the upper approximately 2 feet was backfilled with soil auger cuttings.
The use of excessive grout volumes was not observed during backfilling of the completed
boreholes.
Hand auger borings on the embankment slopes were backfilled with either granulated bentonite
chips or cement bentonite grout mixture. Logs of the borings are provided in Appendix E.

3.5

Piezometer Installations

Two (2) conventional stand-pipe piezometers, PZ-9-19 and PZ-11-19, were installed on theembankment crest. The PZ-9-19 was completed in the Residuum and screened within the
Residuum and embankment cutoff trench materials at a depth between 14.5 and 34.5 feet below
the current ground surface. PZ-11-19 was completed in the shale, and screened through theshale, residuum, and embankment cutoff trench between 34.5 and 59.5 feet below the groundsurface. A third piezometer, designated 702-20, was installed at the downstream toe in the vicinityof the proposed RCC spillway stilling basin. Boring 702-20 was completed in the shale, andscreened in both shale and residuum.
The piezometers consisted of 2.0-inch diameter Sch. 40 PVC well casing and slotted PVC wellscreen. Filter pack material consisting of 20/30 washed silica sand was placed in the boreholeextending from one foot above and below the screened interval. A 1- to 5-foot thick seal of
hydrated bentonite pellets was placed above each filter pack. Following bentonite hydration, theremainder of the annular space was tremie-grouted with cement-bentonite grout mixture. Surface
completion consisted of a minimum 2-foot thick concrete surface seal and a traffic-rated flushmount manhole. Piezometer construction diagrams are provided in Appendix G.
After each piezometer was installed water level readings were obtained immediately after
installation, and in subsequent site visits in the months following the field investigation. No water
was introduced in the boreholes during the drilling operations or completion of the piezometer,with the exception of hydrating the bentonite pellets. A summary of the groundwater readings isprovided in Table 2. Supplemental groundwater measurements may be obtained from thepiezometers over the course of the project design phase for use in slope stability and seepage
analyses to be performed as part of the SMR.

3.6

Laboratory Testing

During the field investigation, the soil samples were periodically transported and delivered by
AECOM staff to the geotechnical laboratory. TRI Environmental, Inc. (TRI) in Austin, Texas
provided the laboratory geotechnical testing for this project. Laboratory test assignments weredeveloped by AECOM and performed by TRI. The results of laboratory testing will be discussed
in detail in the SMR.

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
21

Geologic Investigation Report

4.

Subsurface Conditions

4.1

Generalized Stratigraphy

Project number: 60615067

Geologic profiles of the field investigation are presented in Appendix H. The profiles illustrateexisting ground surface (from LIDAR and topographic survey data), preliminary design proposed
grades, and abridged boring logs indicating field USCS classification, pocket penetrometervalues, SPT N-values, and measured groundwater levels. Abridged logs from the original 1967
GI are also included on the embankment centerline profile.
The results of the current GI were generally consistent with that of the original 1967 GI as theborings encountered foundation materials consisting of a relatively thin, dark brown upper clayey
layer (similar to that characterized as alluvium in the 1967 GI) overlying very stiff to hard, shaley
clay residuum of the Pecan Gap Chalk (part of the Taylor Group) which then grades to highly
weathered, weak calcareous shale with depth.
As noted previously, the interpreted geologic origin of the upper dark brown clayey layer differs
between the 1967 GI and NRCS Web Soil Survey. Based on the NRCS Web Soil Survey mapping,
the current borings were located in areas mapped as residuum (Heiden Clay)Due to general site-wide similarities in visual appearance of the upper dark brown clay layer,
similarities in description of the residual and alluvial clays within the NRCS Web Soil Survey andgeneral lack of significant spatial differences in material properties of this material across the site
in this layer (e.g., field pocket penetrometer and SPT), the “alluvium” interpretation was adopted
herein to maintain consistency with the 1967 GI and for convenience.
The generalized stratigraphy is described in the following sections.

4.1.1

Embankment Fill

Compacted Embankment Fill materials were encountered in each of the borings drilled along thedam crest centerline (8-19 through 12-19, 13-20, 14-20, and 15-19) and on the upstream anddownstream slopes of the embankment (304-19, 1301-19 through 1302-19, and 1701-20 through1705-20). The Embankment Fill was classified in the field as predominantly a fat clay (CH) andmedium-plastic lean to fat clay (CL-CH), with some intervals of lean clay (CL) and occasional
clayey silt (ML). The color and materials characteristics of the Embankment Fill varied
considerably, which was likely associated with the geologic origin of borrow sources used as fillmaterial (i.e., residual or alluvial).
The intervals of Embankment Fill identified as fat clay (CH) were typically described as darkbrown, black, or dark gray in color, with occasional tan to gray mottling. These intervals weretypically moist to slightly moist, and generally stiff to hard in consistency. The material wasobserved to contain trace to some organics, trace fine subangular to rounded gravel typically
about ¼ to ½ inch in diameter, and trace calcareous nodules and shell fragments.
The intervals of Embankment Fill identified as medium-plastic clay (CL-CH), silty lean clay (CL),or clayey silt (ML) were typically light gray, light brown, tan, and/or orange in color with occasional
iron oxidation staining. These intervals were typically dry to moist, very stiff to hard in consistency,
and in some cases chalky and/or friable. The materials contained trace to some fine to coarse
gravel, trace to abundant calcareous nodules and calcite crystals, and typically had a strong
reaction to hydrochloric acid (HCl).
Embankment Fill encountered in the upstream and downstream slopes of the embankment waslargely similar to that encountered along the centerline, indicating that similar materials were used
to construct both the core and shell zones of the dam.

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
22

Geologic Investigation Report

4.1.2

Project number: 60615067

Downstream Fill

Suspected Downstream Fill materials up to about 8 feet thick were encountered in boring 305-19,
which was drilled on the PSW crossing berm at the downstream toe. These materials wereidentified as fill material based on the mixed composition and color of the recovered samples,proximity to the original stream channel where PSW excavation and backfilling areas are indicatedon the as-built drawings, and comparison of pre-construction and existing topographic data. The
extent of fill likely extends left of 305-19 to at least the designated “waste area” limits shown on
the as-built drawings, which are located in the old channel alignment near Sta. 23+00 andcorresponds to the left-most extent of the crossing berm. The right extent of the Downstream Fillis likely near Sta. 28+00, where the as-builts show the right-most extent the crossing berm. Whileboring 603-19 was drilled within these station limits, it appears to have been drilled justdownstream of the fill area based on visual characteristics of the material and examination of
topographic data.
The Downstream Fill was classified in the field as a fat clay (CH) and medium-plastic clay (CLCH). It was described as very stiff to hard, moist to dry, with trace to some subangular fine tocoarse gravel up to 1.5 inches in diameter. Trace to some organic matter was also present.

4.1.3

Alluvium

Alluvium consists of natural soils developed by floodplain deposition. The Alluvium at this site
was identified as a relatively thin, dark brown clayey layer present across much of the project
area ranging from about 2 to 8 feet in thickness (where present). Given the relatively broad, lowenergy creek valley and predominantly fine-grained soils, there were limited visual indicators ofobvious alluvial deposition. It was difficult to clearly discern geologic origin, particularly given theprevious ground-disturbing activities at the site.
Alluvium appeared to have been encountered in the proposed borrow area borings (101-19
through 106-19), the ASW borings (201-19 through 210-19), the downstream toe borings (60119 through 605-19, 702-20, and 703-20), proposed outlet channel borings (401-20 and 402-20),
and upstream toe boring 701-19. As indicated in the as-built drawings, the Alluvium appears tohave been removed from under the embankment centerline to construct the cutoff trench.
The Alluvium was classified in the field as a high-plastic fat clay (CH). It was described as darkbrown, brown, and/or black in color, and typically moist, and stiff to very hard. The Alluvium
contained trace to abundant organics, trace to some fine to coarse subrounded to subangulargravel, calcareous nodules and inclusions, iron oxidation staining, and trace shell fragments.

4.1.4

Residuum

Residuum consists of natural soils derived from in-place weathering of the parent Pecan Gap
Chalk formation. Residuum was encountered in each boring drilled for the project, except mostof the embankment slope borings (1301-19, 1302-19, 1701-20 through 1704-20, and 1705-20).
The Residuum was classified in the field primarily as a medium- to highly plastic, lean to fat clay
(CL-CH) and fat clay (CH). However, a significant proportion of the Residuum was classified asa low-plasticity, silty to sandy lean clay (CL) and clayey silt (CL-ML), with some instances of
non-plastic silty sand (SM) in the ASW borings.
The Low Plasticity Residuum (LPR) was typically described as light gray, gray, light brown, or
tan in color with fine to coarse sand and gravel. The unit was dry to moist, hard, and friable with
abundant calcareous material and has a strong reaction to HCl. The LPR was primarily
encountered in the upper elevations of ASW borings between about EL. 645 and 655 with amaximum thickness of about 10 feet. Near the dam embankment, the LPR was encountered inboth upstream borings (304-19 and 701-19) and upstream borrow area borings (101-19 through
TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
23

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

106-19), and downstream toe borings located near the left abutment (601-19 and 602-19) andthe right abutment (605-19). The thickness ranged from about 4 feet in the borrow area tonearly 20 feet at the abutments.
The Medium to High Plasticity Residuum (MPR) was typically described as tan and/or light grayin color, becoming increasingly more gray with depth in the less-weathered intervals. The unit
was moist and very stiff to hard in consistency, becoming increasingly dry and hard with depth.
The weathered upper zones contained trace fine gravel, iron oxidation staining, calcareous
inclusions, gypsum crystals, occasional shell fossil imprints, and trace black specks interpreted
as manganese oxide. Reaction with hydrochloric acid ranged from slight to strong, indicating
appreciable calcareous content of the clays consistent with published information of the Pecan
Gap Chalk formation. With depth, the Residuum became increasingly blocky in structure, withinstances of very narrow to closed near-vertical fissures that were in some cases oriented in
multiple directions (i.e., similar to orthogonal joint sets in rock).

4.1.5

Shale

Bedrock consisting of moderately- to highly-weathered, calcareous shale with occasional chalkymarl layers and partings was encountered below the Residuum. The shale was described as lightgray to white in color, dry, extremely weak to weak, fine grained, fissile, and friable with strong
reaction to HCl. Occasional pyrite and gypsum crystals were noted. Based on published dataand sample appearance, the bedrock was judged to be part of the Pecan Gap Chalk formation
because of the presence of abundant calcite in the clay matrix and the light gray to white color,both characteristic weathering features of this formation (Barnes, 1979).

4.2

Centerline of Embankment Crest

4.2.1

Stratigraphy

Borings drilled along the centerline of the embankment crest included 8-19 through 12-19, 13-20
through 14-20, and 15-19. Ground surface elevations along the embankment crest ranged fromEl. 661.2 to 662.4. Total depth of the borings ranged from 30.0 to 60.0 feet bgs. Stratigraphy
along the embankment centerline consisted of 8 to 40 feet of Embankment Fill overlying
Residuum. Calcareous shale was encountered below the Residuum in borings 11-19, 12-19,
13-20 and 15-19, while the other borings terminated in Residuum. Thickness of the Residuum
where fully penetrated ranged from about 15 to 17 feet. The Embankment Fill encountered inboreholes drilled along the dam centerline included cutoff trench materials below surrounding
grade, penetrating through Alluvium and into Residuum. The uncorrected field SPT N-values inthe Embankment Fill ranged from 8 to 25 blow-per-foot (bpf), with an average of 17 bpf. Pocket
penetrometer values ranged from 1.0 to 4.5+ tons-per-square foot (tsf), with most values greaterthan 2.0 tsf.
The encountered Residuum appeared to be the MPR with field descriptions of light brown to
tan and gray, dry to moist, stiff to hard, blocky fat clays (CH) and lean to fat clays (CL-CH), withsome lean clay (CL) in boring 12-19. Top elevation of the Residuum ranged from about El. 655
near the left abutment to El. 623 in the lower creek valley near and to the right of the PSW. The
uncorrected SPT N-value ranged from 17 bpf to 34 bpf, and pocket penetrometer values
generally between 2.5 tsf and 4.5+ tsf.
The underlying shale was encountered at elevations ranging from about El. 622 in the middle ofthe creek valley down to about El. 608 near the PSW in the lower part of the valley. The upperzone of the shale at the transition from Residuum encountered in borings in 13-20 and 15-19
was dark gray and weathered to a hard clay (classified as CH and CL-CH) with uncorrected
SPT N-values of 32 and 70 bpf. At the lower elevations in borings 11-19 and 12-19, the shale

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
24

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

was observed to be white to light gray, dry, weak rock that was highly calcareous, highly
weathered, and fissile. The SPT N-values ranged from 50 blows for 2 to 3 inches of penetration(50/2” to 50/3”).

4.2.2

Groundwater

Groundwater was encountered at the time of drilling in boring 8-19 at 18.5 feet bgs (El. 643.7)
and in boring 11-19 at 27.5 feet bgs (El. 633.7). Boreholes drilled on the embankment crest were
backfilled after drilling in order to reduce the likelihood of caving during the collection of delayed
groundwater readings. Prior to backfilling, the water level in 8-19 dropped to 28.1 feet bgs (El.
634.1).
Borings 9-19 and 11-19 were completed as piezometers, and a series of groundwater readings
were collected between January and October 2020 (see Table 2). Both piezometers werescreened across the Embankment Fill / Residuum interface, with 9-19 completed in Residuumand 11-19 completed in shale.
While 9-19 was dry during and after drilling, piezometer readings have varied considerably witheach subsequent piezometer measurement, ranging from 14.9 feet bgs in August (El. 647.5) to
32.8 feet in March (El. 629.6). These elevations correspond to a groundwater table fluctuating
across the Embankment Fill / Residuum interface, from about 3.5 feet above the contact to about
14.4 feet below. With respect to surrounding the grade at the downstream toe, measured
groundwater corresponds to depths ranging from about 3 to 20 feet at the toe. The source of thehigh variability is unclear, as both materials were logged as clay with medium to high plasticity
which would be expected as relatively impervious.
The first piezometer reading in 11-19 was nearly 20 feet lower than the groundwater measurement
at the time of drilling, but has steadily risen from 46.1 feet bgs (El. 615.1) to 21.0 feet bgs (El.
630.3) which is within a few feet of the initial reading. The results of the 11-19 piezometer suggest
a relatively low hydraulic conductivity.

4.3

Embankment Slope

4.3.1

Stratigraphy

Two hand auger borings, 1301-19 and 1302-19, were drilled on the downstream and upstream
slope face of the embankment, respectively, near the PSW alignment. The borings were generally
drilled at the mid-slope of the embankment, with ground surface at El. 648.5 and El. 657.8,
respectively. Borings 1301-19 was advanced to a depth of 10.0 feet bgs, while 1302-19
encountered refusal at 6.5 feet bgs. The borings encountered existing Embankment Fill to theirtermination depths. The material was generally described as light brown to tan and gray, dry tomoist, stiff to hard, fat clays (CH) to borderline lean to fat clays (CL-CH) with organics, fine tocoarse gravel, and trace gypsum crystals. Occasional seams of gravelly clay were also
encountered. No in-situ testing was performed in the hand auger borings, but pocket
penetrometer testing on relatively intact blocks of soil from the inside of the cutting barrel ranged
from 1.75 to 4.5+ tsf.
Near the proposed RCC spillway, five additional hand auger borings were drilled in the upstream(1701-20 and 1702-20) and downstream (1703-20 through 1705-20) slopes of the embankment.
Ground surface elevation at the borings ranged from El. 653.7 (downstream) to El. 657.7(upstream). Each of these borings were drilled to depths of 10 feet bgs, except for 1702-20 and
1703-20 which encountered refusal at 4.75 and 6.75 feet bgs, respectively. These borings
encountered largely similar Embankment Fill materials as described for the slope borings near
the PSW, consisting of medium, low, and high-plastic clays (CL-CH, CL, and CH) with varying

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
25

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

proportions of organics, gravel, and calcareous material. Based on the bottom elevations ofborings 1703-20 and 1704-20, these borings likely penetrated through the bottom of fill into
underlying natural foundation soils; however, an obvious contact of this interface could not be
ascertained from the borings due to the relatively disturbed nature of recovered samples.

4.3.2

Groundwater

No groundwater was encountered in the hand auger borings, indicating the absence of a phreatic
surface near the surface of the embankment slope. This is consistent with field observations,which did not indicate visual evidence of through-seepage on the downstream slope face.

4.4

Downstream Toe of Dam

4.4.1

Stratigraphy

Borings drilled along the downstream toe of the dam included borings 601-19 through 605-19,
boring 305-19 (near the existing PSW alignment), and borings 702-20 and 703-20 (near the
proposed RCC spillway alignment). The borings were advanced to depths of 25.0 to 29.5 feetbgs. Ground surface elevation ranged from El. 658.3 at 605-19 near the right abutment to El.
634.9 at 603-19 near the lower part of the creek valley. The lowest ground surface at thedownstream toe is approximately El. 629.0 within the existing creek centerline based on
topographic survey.
The borings drilled at the downstream toe of the dam encountered a layer of Alluvium extending
from ground surface to depths ranging from about 2 to 8 feet bgs, with the exception of boring305-19 where approximately 6 feet of fill was present overlying the Alluvium. The Alluvium wasdescribed in the field as dark brown to black, moist, stiff to hard fat clay (CH) with abundantorganic matter, and trace to some subrounded to subangular, fine to coarse gravel. The
uncorrected SPT N-value ranged from 12 to 26 bpf, and pocket penetrometer ranged from 3.25
to 4.5+ tsf..
In boring 305-19, a layer of suspected Downstream Fill was encountered to a depth of about 6
feet bgs directly overlying Alluvium at about El. 629. The Downstream Fill consisted of a mix oflean to fat clay (CL-CH, CH) with gravel and organics, with a single uncorrected SPT N-value of
34 bpf and pocket penetrometer values between 3.75 tsf and 4.5+ tsf.
Residuum was encountered below the Alluvium. In general, the top of Residuum was roughly
parallel to ground surface, ranging from about El. 647 to 641 on the left side of the dam (601-19,
602-19, 702-20, and 703-20), about El. 655 near the right abutment (605-19), and from about El.
632 to 630 in the lower area of the creek valley right of the PSW. Residuum was encountereddeeper in boring 305-19 near the PSW and original creek centerline, located at about a depth of
13 feet bgs (El. 622). Where fully penetrated by the borings, total thickness of the Residuum
ranged from about 15 to 22 feet, except at boring 305-19 where the thickness was about 10.5
feet. As discussed previously, the Residuum was broadly subdivided into calcareous, friable low
plastic clay and silty clay (LPR) and medium to high plastic clay (MPR) layers. The occurrenceof the materials varied along the downstream toe, with the LPR being more prevalent left of the
PSW within higher elevation intervals (generally above El. 625 to 635), with some indications of
this material in 605-19 near the right abutment in higher elevations. The LPR was generally absent
in the lower part of the creek valley. There was no appreciable difference in the consistency of
the LPR and MPR; the uncorrected SPT N-values ranged from 1414 to 30 bpf, with pocket
penetrometer values of 3.5 to 4.5 tsf.
Shale was encountered in five of the eight borings directly underlying the Residuum at depths
ranging from 23 to 28 feet bgs (about El. 620 to 611), with the lowest elevations encountered near

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
26

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

the bottom of the creek valley near the PSW. The shale was described as light gray to white, dry,moderately to highly weathered, extremely weak to weak rock that was friable, chalky, and slightly
fissile. The shale was calcareous with strong HCl reaction and contained disseminated gypsum
crystals and trace pyrite. The uncorrected SPT N-values ranged from 35 to 100 bpf, with several
instances SPT refusal in the lower-elevation Shale intervals. Shelby tube samples was possible
in 703-20, and the pocket penetrometer reading was 4.5+ tsf.

4.4.2

Groundwater

Groundwater was not encountered at the time of drilling in any of the completed boreholes. The
majority of the boreholes were left open overnight for 1 to 5 days to obtain delayed groundwaterlevels to provide estimates of static water levels. Static groundwater was encountered only inboring 601-19 at a depth of 11.3 feet bgs (El. 638.4), which was similar to the adjacentembankment piezometer 9-19 readings which had ranged from about El. 630 to 647. After one
or more days, sidewall caving was encountered in most of the open boreholes at depths ranging
from 13.8 to 22 feet bgs (about El. 613 to 642).
Boring 702-20 was completed as a piezometer in October 2020. While the boring was dry during
drilling, the water level in the piezometer 3 days after drilling was measured at a depth of 27.5
feet bgs (El. 620.3). The measured groundwater level was lower than the range of measurements
obtained in the adjacent open borehole 601-19 and nearby embankment piezometer 9-19, but it
is likely that the water level in piezometer 702-20 was still stabilizing. Subsequent readings
through the remainder of the design phase and/or prior to construction were recommended toevaluate whether the wide range in fluctuations at boring 9-19 were localized or representative of
this area of the dam.

4.5

Principal Spillway

4.5.1

Stratigraphy

Borings drilled adjacent to the existing and proposed principal spillway alignment included 30419 and 305-19. Boring 305-19 was drilled just to the left of the spillway pipe at the downstream
toe, while 304-19 was drilled on the local berm on the upstream slope of the dam embankment.
Additional nearby borings also included 11-19, 1301-19, and 1302-19.
Boring 304-19 encountered existing Embankment Fill representative of the embankment shellzones, which was generally described as very stiff to hard, lean to fat clays (CL-CH and CH). The
Embankment Fill had SPT N-values ranging from 8 to 10 bpf, and pocket penetrometer values of
1.5 to 4.5+ tsf. Thickness of the Embankment Fill was about 18 feet at 304-19.
Below the Embankment Fill, the underlying Alluvium was encountered at a depth of about 18 feetbgs (El. 628), followed by Residuum at about 23.5 feet bgs (El. 646.4). The Alluvium was about
5.5 feet thick and was described as a dark brown to dark gray fat clay (CH), with a single pocket
penetrometer value of 3.0 tsf.
The Residuum was described as medium plastic clay (CL-CH) underlain by silty, friable lean clay
(CL-ML). The lowest sample in the Residuum was collected at 33.5 to 35 feet bgs (El. 613 to611.5) and was more gray in color, relatively less weathered, and was likely obtained slightly
above the shale contact as evidenced by the higher SPT N-value of 44 bpf compared to the 13
bpf near the top of Residuum. One pocket penetrometer reading was 4.5+ tsf.
The preliminary bearing level of the proposed PSW structures range from about El. 630 on the
upstream side (Inlet Tower) and El. 626.5 on the downstream side (Impact Basin).

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
27

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

Detailed description of subsurface conditions in the other borings is provided in previous sections.
In brief, observations in these borings was relatively similar to 304-19. An approximately 5 to 6foot thick layer of Alluvium was present at about El. 627± under the various fill materials
comprising the embankment slopes and at the downstream toe, but was absent under theembankment centerline where the core/cutoff trench was installed into Residuum. The
description of the Residuum under the upstream shell of the dam included both the MPR and LPR
designations, but descriptions were more characteristic of the MPR designation under the dam
centerline and downstream toe areas. Top of shale was encountered around El. 608 to 611 in thevicinity of the PSW alignment.

4.5.2

Groundwater

Groundwater was not encountered at the time of drilling the boreholes along the PSWalignment, with the exception of 11-19, as previously discussed. Sidewall caving was noted at
22 feet bgs (El. 613.1) in downstream boring 305-19. Piezometer readings in boring 11-19 havesteadily increased to about El. 630 in the months following installation.

4.6

Existing Vegetated Auxiliary Spillway

4.6.1

Stratigraphy

Borings drilled within the existing ASW channel included 201-19 through 210-19. Borings wereadvanced to depths ranging from 25.0 to 35.0 feet bgs. Ground surface elevation ranged between
El. 635.7 near the existing downstream exit channel (boring 210-19) and El. 658.8 located near
the inside edge of the spillway, upstream of the control section (boring 207-19).
The borings encountered 2 to 6 feet of Alluvium underlain by Residuum. The Alluvium wasdescribed as dark brown fat clay (CH) with some medium-plasticity clay (CL-CH), with a single
uncorrected SPT N-values of 15 bpf and pocket penetrometer values ranging from 2.5 to 4.5+ tsf.
The LPR was encountered above about El. 644 to 650 in each boring except 205-19 and 210-19.
The LPR was described as lean clay (CL), silty lean clay (CL-ML), silt (ML), and silty sand (SM)with some intervals of medium plasticity clay (CL-CH). The MPR was encountered in each of theborings to termination depth and was described as lean to fat clay (CL, CL-CH, and CH) withsome isolated silty sand (SM).

4.6.2

Groundwater

The groundwater table was not identified at the time of drilling any of the borings in the ASW;
however, groundwater was encountered at the end of drilling activities in in boring 209-9 at 21.4
feet bgs (El. 626.9). Delayed groundwater readings in open boreholes were obtained one toseveral days after the completion of drilling activities. Groundwater was detected in several
boreholes at elevations ranging from about El. 622 at the downstream end of the ASW channel(210-19) to El. 646.7 at the outside edge of the ASW channel just downstream of the control
section (203-19). The measured groundwater depth ranged from 8.9 to 23.1 feet bgs (where
encountered). Sidewall caving was noted in a number of the open holes at depths ranging from
12.2 to 22 feet bgs. A summary of the groundwater readings is provided in Table 2.

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
28

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

4.7

Proposed Roller Compacted Concrete (RCC) Spillway

4.7.1

Stratigraphy

A proposed 200-foot wide structural RCC spillway is planned between the approximate dam
centerline Sta. 16+50 to Sta. 18+50. The preliminary proposed bearing elevations for the various
structure components of the RCC spillway are listed as follows:•

Crest Structures (embankment crest):

El. 655.5±•

Chute Structure (downstream slope):

Varies; from El. 655.5± to El. 638.7±•

Stilling Basin (downstream toe):El. 638.7±

A second phase of the geologic investigation was performed to investigate foundation conditions
for the proposed RCC spillway alignment to supplement the nearby borings 601-19 and 9-19.
The investigation was initiated in September 2020 after the geometry and location of the proposed
spillway had been selected by the design team. Borings drilled included the following:•

Upstream toe: 701-20•

Upstream slope (proposed RCC crest structure): 1701-20 and 1702-20•

Dam centerline (proposed RCC crest structure): 13-20 and 14-20•

Downstream slope (proposed RCC chute structure): 1703-20 through 1705-20•

Downstream toe (proposed RCC stilling basin): 702-20 and 702-20

Based on the preliminary design elevations, the proposed RCC crest structure will be founded
upon existing Embankment Fill comprising both the core and shell zones of the dam. This material
was largely described as fat clay (CH) and medium plasticity clay (CL-CH) in the borings. Below
El. 655.5, the thickness of the Embankment Fill is about 12 to 15 feet, and the uncorrected SPT
N-values range from 11 to 17 bpf with pocket penetrometer values of 1.0 to 4.25 tsf. Excavatedmaterials above El. 655.5 include fat clay (CH), lean to fat clay (CL-CH), and limited silt (ML).
Alluvium and/or Residuum is present below the Embankment Fill.
The upper portions of the proposed RCC chute structure (above about El. 645±) will be primarily
located on the downstream shell zone of the Embankment Fill, while the lower portions of thechute will be located on Alluvium and Residuum. Between the planned bearing elevations of El.
655.5 and El. 638.7, the materials were described as typically stiff to hard fat clay (CH), medium
plastic clay (CL-CH), and silty clay (CL-ML). Excavated materials will likely consist of similar soil
classifications.
The stilling basin structure will be located below the Alluvium and on Residuum at the downstream
toe. Below El. 638.7, the total thickness of Residuum is about 15 to 20 feet, and its uncorrected
SPT N-values range from 14 to 21 bpf with pocket penetrometer values ranging of 3.5 to 4.5+ tsf.
Residuum was generally characterized as LPR at the left side of the stilling basin, with a thinner
layer of LPR overlying MPR at the middle and right side of the stilling basin. Materials withinrequired excavations for the stilling basin above El. 638.7 are generally silty clay fat clay (CH),and silty clay (CL-ML).
Discussion of specific borings is provided in previous sections of this report.

4.7.2

Groundwater

Groundwater conditions have been described in earlier sections of this report. Specific to thelocation of the proposed RCC spillway, measured groundwater levels in open boreholes and

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
29

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

piezometers ranged from about El. 630.9 to 647.6 at the dam centerline and El. 620 to 638 at thedownstream toe. Based on preliminary structure bearing elevations, the highest measured
groundwater levels were 7.9 feet below the crest structure and 0.3 feet above the stilling basin.

4.8

Proposed Outlet Channel for RCC Spillway

4.8.1

Stratigraphy

A new outlet channel is planned to be constructed immediately downstream of the proposed RCC
spillway stilling basin. The channel is planned to extend approximately 250 to 300 feetdownstream to convey flow away from the dam and towards the creek. The channel will be
excavated below existing grade to depths ranging from about 3 to 6 feet based on current design
information, corresponding to channel invert elevation between about El. 643 to 644. Planned
width is about 200 feet.
Borings drilled within the proposed outlet channel included 401-20 and 402-20. Borings wereadvanced to depths of 20 feet bgs. Ground surface elevation at the borings ranged from about El.
646.6 to 648.
The borings encountered 4 to 6 feet of Alluvium underlain by Residuum at about El. 642± totermination depth. The Alluvium was described as dark brown to black, moist, very stiff fat clay
with gravel (CH) and gravelly fat clay (CH), with pocket penetrometer values ranged from 3.5 to
4.5+ tsf.
The description of the underlying Residuum was consistent with the MPR characterization,
consisting primarily of orange, brown, and/or gray medium-plasticity clay (CL-CH). The
Residuum was slightly moist, very stiff to hard, became blocky with depth, and contained trace
fine to coarse gravel. The pocket penetrometer values in the Residuum exceeded 4.5+ tsf.

4.8.2

Groundwater

Groundwater was not encountered at the time of drilling in either of the borings in the proposed
outlet channel. Delayed readings in the open boreholes were dry.

4.9

Borrow Area

A potential borrow area located on the left bank of the reservoir upstream of the embankment wasinvestigated for suitability as a source for embankment fill. Borings drilled in the borrow area
included 101-19 through 106-19. The borings were advanced to depths of 10 feet bgs. Groundsurface elevation ranged between El. 647.8 closest to the edge of the reservoir (106-19) and El.
652.0 located further inland to the left (in the northeastern direction) away from the reservoir (10119).
The borrow area borings encountered 2 to 4 feet of Alluvium described as fat clay (CH). Residuum
was encountered at depths roughly parallel to ground surface, corresponding to a range of El.
465 to 476, and extended to the boring terminations depths. The upper 3 to 5 feet of the Residuum
was LPR and consisted of calcareous silty clay (CL-ML). The lower portion of the Residuum was
MPR and consisted of medium-plasticity clay (CL-CH).
No groundwater table was identified at the time of the investigation of the borrow area borings.
Borings were left open for several days to check for static groundwater levels. The borings
remained dry, but sidewall caving was noted in four of the six borings at depths between about
6.1 to 6.9 feet bgs (El. 635.3 to 645.9).

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
30

Geologic Investigation Report

5.

Interpretations and Conclusions

5.1

Existing Embankment

Project number: 60615067

The existing earthen embankment is comprised by mostly lean to fat clays (CH, CL-CH) thatappear to be well-compacted on the basis of SPT and pocket penetrometer data. Samples fromboth the centerline of the embankment and slope faces were visually similar, with no obvious
distinction between core/cutoff trench materials and embankment shell materials. This finding
differs from the zoned embankment configuration described in the original SMR (SCS 1984b),
which suggested that low-plasticity clayey sand and sandy clay (SC, CL) would be reserved forthe upstream and downstream shell zones, and that the silty fat clay (CH) materials would bereserved for the central core and cutoff trench. Further review of the original GIR (SCS 1984a)
indicates that the estimated borrow volume of available SC/CL materials (7,000 CY) was
significantly less than the volume of CH materials (>170,000 CY), which suggests that aninsufficient volume of material was available to construct the zoned embankment configuration asshown in the original SMR. This is partially reflected by the as-built drawings, which also specify
a zoned embankment configuration but allows the use of SC and CH materials in the embankmentshell zones. Consequently, the shell zones of the embankment appear to consist of more clayeysoils with higher plasticity than described in the original SMR.
AECOM is not aware of any historic problems of slope instability, erosion, or through-seepage,and has found no evidence of such during the field investigation. Based on this information, theembankment appears to be performing adequately.
The embankment cutoff trench was found to extend through the natural alluvial soils and into
the clayey Residuum; generally consistent with the as-built plans. The cutoff trench appears tobe providing adequate seepage cutoff based on the depth of groundwater encountered in open
boreholes and piezometers along the dam centerline and downstream toe, as well as the lack of
any observed seepage at the immediate downstream toe of the dam. AECOM is not aware of
any historic under-seepage problems.
Anomalous fluctuations in groundwater levels have been recorded in embankment centerline
piezometer 9-19, with successive readings varying between about 14.9 to 32.8 feet bgs (El.
629.6 to El. 647.5). No obviously pervious zones were observed in the borings at this location,and groundwater levels in surrounding borings have been lower than El. 638. Nearby
piezometer 702-20 has not been in service long enough to compare relative fluctuations inwater level. Piezometer 9-19 is located on the left side of the embankment where the groundsurface elevation of the upstream toe (about El. 650±) is significantly higher than the reservoir
normal pool (low ports at El. 640.4) and slightly higher than PSW crest (El. 648.0). On thisbasis, it is unlikely that the measured groundwater levels are due to reservoir fluctuations. The
anomalous groundwater levels in piezometer 9-19 could be associated with cross-valley surface
water flows and/or perched groundwater originating from the left abutment following storm
events. Consideration may be given to instrumenting piezometer 9-19 and/or 702-20 with anautomatic water level data logger to provide detailed information on rates of change ingroundwater level, which may be compared to precipitation data to provide better understandingof the groundwater regime in this area. Groundwater at this location is of particular importancedue to the proposed adjacent RCC spillway.
The proposed rehabilitation design will not include an embankment crest raise or downstream
slope flattening. Modification of the embankment will likely be limited to minor amounts of new
fill to level the embankment crest, and possibility some minor cut/fill grading to smooth theembankment slopes. Areas to receive fill should be prepared as described in Section 5.6.1.

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
31

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

The normal pool is currently planned to be lowered slightly, with a slight increase (1 to 2 feet) in
the ASW crest raise elevations. Based on these factors and the lack of historic seepage
problems at the site, internal drainage for the embankment (e.g. toe drain, chimney) are likely
not required as part of the rehabilitation. However, if the rehabilitation design is modified toinclude fill on the downstream slope, consideration may be given to including a toe drain and/or
partial height chimney as a protective measure, as well as taking advantage of the protective
cover for the drain materials that would be provided by new embankment fill.

5.2

Downstream Toe of Dam

The downstream toe of the dam is underlain by relatively stiff, clayey natural soils and compacted
fill materials. Based on correlation with the SPT and field pocket penetrometer values, thesefoundation soils are expected to be moderately over-consolidated with relatively high shear
strength and low to moderate compressibility. Static groundwater is expected to be deeper than
10 feet bgs along the downstream toe based on measurements from open boreholes andpiezometers. Further assessment of shear strength, seepage, and settlement estimates will need
to be performed as part of the SMR.
The proposed dam modification is currently planned not to include a significant crest raise or slope
flattening. New fill placement on the dam itself will likely be limited to minor re-grading on theembankment crest (less than 1 to 2 feet in thickness). Planned excavation and fill placement at
the downstream toe of the dam will likely be restricted to abandonment of the existing PSW andchannel, construction of the new PSW and RCC spillway, and excavation of the new outlet
channel. Interpretations and findings specific to each of these areas are provided in subsequent
sections.

5.3

Auxiliary Spillway

5.3.1

GeneralThe stratigraphy encountered in the existing ASW channel borings generally consisted of a
relatively thin layer of clayey Alluvium overlying Residuum. The encountered Residuum consistedof a lower-plasticity layer (LPR), and lower medium to high plasticity layer (MPR).
Due to the encroachment of urban development at the left abutment, widening of the ASW on theoutside edge of the channel will not be feasible. Channel widening will expand the channel totowards the right side of the dam (interior side of spillway) and will require partial removal of theexisting embankment. In general, removal of the left end of the embankment will expose the topof the existing cutoff trench at surrounding grade elevation. The Embankment Fill associated withthe cutoff trench will likely be relatively more erodible than the surrounding natural Alluvium andResiduum. However, the soils at this location (based on boring 8-19) were described as very stiffto hard, moderate-plasticity clays (CL-CH) which will likely be relatively erosion resistant.
Based on preliminary design of the ASW modifications, the existing ASW crest may be raised by
1 to 2 feet using earthen fill within the existing ASW and/or proposed channel widening area.
Additionally, earthen training dikes will be constructed to manage flow through the spillway. In
general, the erodibility of compacted earthfill is greater than that of natural materials. Carefulattention to quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) measures will be needed to ensure
the proposed fill materials meet material specifications and are properly constructed during
grading operations. An area of focus during construction of the ASW should be the tie-in of theright training dike to the existing embankment to preclude development of preferential seepage
paths. Recommendations on material and placement criteria will be provided in the SMR.

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
32

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

Excavation depths and grading (if required) in the channel widening area should be carefully
controlled in order not to remove more material than needed and to assure minimum slopes aremaintained to prevent ponding. While not expected, should strongly cemented layers of Residuum
be encountered in the excavations, consideration may be given to cleaning the exposed surface
to identify any possible surficial irregularities that may cause issues in the future.
Establishment of robust vegetative cover within the widened ASW is crucial to minimize erosion.
Project specifications should include references to grass seed mixtures that are well-suited to the
local climate and would minimize soil exposure.

5.3.2

Headcut Erodibility

Hydraulic analysis and design of vegetated earthen spillways is typically performed using theWater Resources Site Analysis computer program (SITES) developed by NRCS. SITES is used
to evaluate erosional stability and head-cutting potential for auxiliary spillway channels subjected
to flows associated with the design flood event. SITES input values includes soil unit weight,
plasticity, gradation, and empirical headcut erodibility index (Kh).
Recommended soil stratigraphy and SITES input values are provided in the Technical
Memorandum included in Appendix I. Recommendations for site-specific soil index parameters
were developed based on analysis of laboratory testing data presented in the SMR. The
estimated Kh values were developed based on correlation with field and laboratory strength
testing according to the procedures in Part 628, Chapter 52, Field Procedures Guide for the
Headcut Erodibility Index of the NRCS National Engineering Manual (NEH) (NRCS 2001),
supplemented by recent guidance provided in the accompanying DRAFT Appendix 52D,
Erodibility Parameter Selection for Soil Material Horizons (NRCS 2011), other publishedreferences (McCook, 2005), and email communication with the NRCS NDSMC.
In general, the soils are relatively stiff and cohesive, which are favorable characteristics withrespect to erodibility resistance. Considering the inherent variability in natural soil materials,
recommended SITES parameters were provided in sets of “favorable” and “unfavorable” values
to ?? the likely values encountered and to examine of the sensitivity of the model outputs. The
unfavorable values were selected to represent the approximate 33rd percentile value inferred fromthe test data (i.e., roughly average minus 0.5 standard deviations), while the favorable values
represented the approximate 66th percentile value (i.e., roughly average minus 0.5 standard
deviations). Further details are provided in Appendix I.

5.4

Principal Spillway

5.4.1

Existing PSW Structures

The current design plans are to abandon the existing PSW by removing the inlet tower, removing
several pipe segments on both ends of the PSW, grouting the remaining pipe, and backfilling theplunge basin. The existing invert elevation of the PSW conduit varies from approximately El. 635
to 630. The bottom of the existing plunge basin is at about El. 621.
The existing PSW conduit was constructed with concrete anti-seep collars. A number of casestudies published in the years since construction of this dam have demonstrated that concreteanti-seep collars increase the risk of development of preferential seepage paths along the conduit,
and may lead to particle migration and internal erosion (piping). The designer should evaluate
the need to install a new filter diaphragm around the downstream side of the conduit pipe tomitigate this risk.
Excavations to facilitate structure removal/abandonment and backfilling activities are anticipatedto penetrate through Embankment Fill, Downstream Fill, Alluvium, and possibly Residuum. WhileTSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
33

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

measured groundwater levels at the downstream toe were generally below the proposed
excavation depths, groundwater levels can fluctuate over time based on antecedent rainfall
events and other factors. Consequently, construction documents should include a provision for
construction dewatering by the Contractor and sloping/shoring of temporary excavations should
groundwater be encountered during construction.

5.4.2

Proposed PSW Structures

The proposed new PSW will include a new inlet tower, conduit pipe, and impact basin. The
bearing elevation for the impact basin structure and outlet channel excavation will beapproximately El. 451. The invert for the new PSW structures and conduit pipe will vary fromabout El. 630 to 626.5. The proposed PSW structure foundations are anticipated to beconstructed upon stiff to hard Residuum, which should provide firm bearing strength.
Construction of proposed PSW structures will require a full breach excavation of the dam
embankment. Consequently, reservoir drawdown will be required to construct the inlet tower andupstream portion of the conduit pipe.
Excavations are anticipated to penetrate Embankment Fill, Downstream Fill, Alluvium, andpossibly Residuum. Based on measured groundwater levels in borings and piezometers,
saturated zones in the embankment and/or foundation materials may be encountered evenfollowing drawdown of the reservoir. Construction dewatering and sloped excavations should be
anticipated by the Contractor.
The new PSW conduit should be furnished with a concrete cradle to assure good compaction
around the sides of the pipe and reduce the risk of preferential seepage zones. A filter diaphragmshould be installed around the pipe to collect and filter potential seepage around the pipe. The
diaphragm should be furnished with strip drains to discharge the collected seepage. Additionally,
the filter materials should be designed to be filter compatible with surrounding embankment andfoundation materials according to current NRCS criteria.

5.5

Proposed RCC Spillway

Borings drilled along the proposed RCC spillway alignment encountered relatively stiff clayey soils
that should provide firm bearing support for structure foundations. However, these borings also
indicate the presence of highly-plastic soils that may have expansive (shrink/swell) properties thatare not be compatible with the proposed structures. A focus of the geotechnical laboratory testing(to be performed as part of the SMR) should include characterizing the swelling properties ofthese soils, and to evaluate whether the soils will provide suitable foundation support and/or canbe used as backfill against the structures. Over-excavation and replacement with compacted
non-swelling soils may be an option if the laboratory testing identifies unfavorable material
properties.

5.6

Borrow Areas and Embankment Fill Sources

An on-site borrow area located on the left bank of the reservoir and upstream of the dam wasinvestigated as a potential source of borrow materials for use in dam rehabilitation activities. The
upper 2 to 4 feet consists of fat clay (CH) of alluvial origin, underlain by 3 to 5 feet of calcareous
silty lean clay (CL-ML) characterized as LPR. Moderate-plasticity lean to fat clay (CL-CH)
characterized as MPR was encountered at depths of about 8 feet bgs. Existing ground surface
in the borrow area is generally equal to or higher than the existing PSW crest elevation (El. 648.7),
and at least 7 feet above the low-port elevation on the PSW which maintains a normal poolelevation of El. 640.4. In general, the maximum excavation depth (lowest elevation) of the borrow
area should be at least 2 feet above the static groundwater elevation to allow equipment access.

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
34

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

For planning purposes, the excavation grade in the borrow area should be no lower than El. 643
unless reservoir drawdown is planned. However, the Contractor should be made aware that
surface water inundation of the borrow area is possible during storm events.
Required excavations for the proposed outlet channel from the RCC spillway may also produce
cohesive materials suitable for embankment fill. Borings drilled in the proposed outlet channel
encountered approximately 6 feet of fat clay (CH) of alluvial origin, underlain by lean to fat clay
(CL-CH) of residual origin. Proposed excavations in this area are well above the anticipatedgroundwater levels in this location, and dewatering should not be necessary. Based on crude
approximations of the potential excavation limits associated with the various potential borrow
areas, order-of-magnitude estimates of potential borrow volume are provided in the table below(see next page). The estimated available borrow is more than 150% of the estimated 20,000 CY
of fill to be identified according to NRCS preference (i.e., 30,000 CY). Actual quantities ofrequired cut and fill will be refined as design advances, and additional guidance on available
borrow volume can be provided in the SMR.
An important consideration in evaluating borrow suitability will be plasticity of the fat clays due topotential long-term strength from seasonal wetting-drying cycles and associated risk of shallow
wet-weather slides. Plasticity and swell potential should also be evaluated for proposed backfill
against structures (e.g. PSW and RCC Spillway) to assess the risk of expansive soils, related
shrink/swell movements, and swelling pressures that may be imparted to adjacent structures.
Laboratory index classification testing, as well as engineering properties testing on remolded
samples from these borings, will be performed as part of the laboratory investigation for the SMR
to confirm suitability of these materials as potential embankment fill sources.

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
35

Geologic Investigation Report

Borrow
SourceGeologic Origin and USCS

Project number: 60615067

Estimated
Average Layer
Thickness(feet)

Estimated
Plan Area(feet x feet)

Estimated
Volume(CY)

Potential Use

4

250 x 200

7,400

Embankment Fill0(1)250 x 200

0

Embankment Fill

Alluvium (CH)4600 x 600

53,000Embankment Fill

Residuum (CL-ML)

3600 x 600

40,000Embankment Fill

Excavation Embankment Fill, Residuum,
Alluviumfor RCC
Spillway(CH, CL-CH, CL-ML, CL, ML)8(3)200 x 100

5,900

Embankment Fill

TOTAL

---

---

106,300---

Excavation Alluvium (CH)for
Proposed
Residuum (CL-CH)
OutletChannelOn-SiteBorrow
Area

Notes:(1) Limited by plan excavation grade in outlet channel; bottom varies El. 643 to 644.
(2) Limited by reservoir level; assumes lowest excavation depth of El. 643 with no reservoir drawdown andpermanent excavation slopes on the order of 5H:1V.
(3) Based on weighted-average excavation depth along spillway from preliminary design drawings.

5.7

Design and Construction Considerations

5.7.1

Site Preparation

Areas to receive fill should be stripped of vegetation, topsoil, and debris. Soft soils should be overexcavated and replaced with compacted fill. Particular attention should be paid to the areas where
possible waste fill was identified in the as-built drawings. Proof rolling of the proposed subgrade
is recommended prior to the placement of any new fill to identify potential soft zones. Removal ofoversize particles (greater than 3 inches in diameter) from the exposed subgrade will aid
compaction efforts. Additional subgrade preparation requirements will be provided in the SMR.
For planning purposes, the anticipated depth of stripping/over-excavation will likely be about one(1) foot.

5.7.2

Excavations

Required excavations are not expected to encounter bedrock or other resistant material in the
proposed work areas. For the purpose of cost estimating and planning, excavation quantities cangenerally be classified as “common excavation” according to NRCS Construction Specification(CS) 21, Excavation.

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
36

Geologic Investigation Report

6.

Project number: 60615067

Limitations

This report was prepared by AECOM using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised undersimilar circumstances by responsible engineers and geologists practicing in the same generallocation. No other warranty or representation, either expressed or implied, is made as to thefindings and professional advice in this report.
The opinions, conclusions, and recommendations contained in this report are based on the fieldobservations and subsurface explorations, laboratory tests, and present understanding of the
proposed improvements. The findings in this report are believed to describe site conditions to theextent practical given the scope of the investigation. However, this investigation, like all suchinvestigations, can only directly explore subsurface conditions at the boring locations within thesite. Soil and geologic conditions can vary greatly between or beyond the exploration sites, anddifferent conditions may be found during subsequent investigations or project construction.
The conclusions and recommendations contained herein are based in part upon information
provided by others (including our subcontractors), and upon the assumption that all relevant
information has been provided by those parties from whom it has been requested and that suchinformation is accurate. Information provided to AECOM has not been independently verified by
AECOM, unless otherwise stated.
There is no intention that this report addresses any environmental issues (for example,
environmentally affected soil or groundwater, or historic site uses) related to this site. Suchevaluations are outside the scope of this work and should be addressed in separate studies. In
the event that changes are made to the nature, design, or location of the proposed construction
layout or design criteria, the conclusions and recommendations presented herein should not be
considered valid, unless AECOM has reviewed the changes and addresses their impact to therecommendations provided.

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
37

Geologic Investigation Report

7.

Project number: 60615067

References

ASTM. D2113-08, Standard Practice for Rock Core Drilling and Sampling of Rock for Site
Investigation.
ASTM. D5434-12, Standard Guide for Field Logging of Subsurface Explorations of Soil and Rock;
DeCook, K. J. (1963). Geology and ground-water resources of Hays County, Texas (pp. 45-50,
Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1612). Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office. doi:10.3133/wsp1612
Ewing, T.E., and Lopez, R.F., compilers, 1991, Principal structural features, Gulf of Mexico basin,in Salvador, A., ed., The Gulf of Mexico basin: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society ofAmerica, The Geology of North America, v. J, pl. 2.
M&E Consultants (M&E), 2010, Dam Assessment Report, Plum Creek Watershed Floodwater
Retarding Structure No. 2, Hays County, Texas. October.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2001. National Engineering Handbook (NEH)
Part 628, Chapter 52, Field Procedures Guide for the Headcut Erodibility Index. March.
NRCS. Technical Release 210-60 (TR-210), Earth Dams and Reservoirs. March 2019.
NRCS. 2012. NEH Part 631 – Geology, Chapter 2 Engineering Geologic Investigations. January.
NRCS. 2012. NEH Part 631 – Geology, Chapter 3, Engineering Classification of Earth Materials.
January.
NRCS. 2012. NEH Part 631 – Geology, Chapter 4, Engineering Classification of Rock Materials.
January.
NRCS. 2012. NEH Part 631 – Geology, Chapter 5, Engineering Geology Logging, Sampling, andTesting. January.
NRCS. 2012. NEH Part 631 – Geology, Chapter 12, Rock Material Field Classification System.
January.
NRCS, 1994, Supplemental Watershed Agreement and Plan for Watershed Protection and Flood
Prevention, Plum Creek Watershed Hays, Caldwell and Travis Counties, Texas. October.
NRCS. 2017b. Title 210 – National Engineering Manual (NEM), Part 531 – Geology, Subpart A –Geologic Investigations. June.
NRCS. 2019. Technical Release 210-60 (TR-210), Earth Dams and Reservoirs. March 2019.
Proctor, C. V., Jr., Brown, T. E., Waechter, N. B., Aronow, S., Pieper, M. K., and Barnes, V. E.,
1974, Geologic Atlas of Texas, Seguin Sheet: The University of Texas at Austin, Bureau of
Economic Geology, Geologic Atlas of Texas, map scale 1:250,000.
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR). Engineering Geology Field Manual, 2nd Ed. Volumes 1 and
2.
SCS. 1967a. Soil Conservation Service (SCS). Geological Report, Texas, Plum Creek Site 2,
Hays County. June 12.

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
38

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

SCS. 1967b. Soil Conservation Service (SCS). Soil Mechanics Report, Texas, Plum Creek Site
2, Hays County. July 18.
Texas Water Science Center (USGS TWSC). Geologic Database of Texas, 2014-02-01. Web.
2020-06-16.
Texas Earthquakes – The University of Texas Institute for Geophysics, the Texas Division of
Emergency Management, and the U.S. Department of Energy RPSEA Program. Accessed
through: http://www-udc.ig.utexas.edu/external/TXEQ/index.html on 16 June 2020.
U.S. Geological Survey, 2006, Quaternary fault and fold database for the United States,
accessed June 2020, from USGS website:
https://usgs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=5a6038b3a1684561a9b0a
adf88412fcf
Young, K., 1977. Guidebook to the Geology of Travis County. Austin, Texas: The Student
Geology Society, The University of Texas.

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
39

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

TABLESTSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
40

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

Table 1. Summary of Borings

Test HoleNo.

Surveyed
Ground Elev.
(ft)

Surveyed
Northing

Dam Centerline
008-19662.2113908370009-19662.3813907885010-19662.2013907469011-19661.2413907218
012-19662.3713906968013-20662.2713907775014-20662.1613907678015-19662.4413906655
Upstream Embankment Slope Face
1302-19657.8113907039
1701-20657.9113907764
1702-20657.7413907667
Downstream Embankment Slope Face
1301-19648.4613907145
1703-20653.6713907897
1704-20653.6413907784
1705-20654.0713907686
Principal Spillway
304-19646.3813907232305-19635.1013907130
Existing Auxiliary Spillway
201-19656.4913908513
202-19656.8913908622
203-19656.9113908583
204-19651.2613908509
205-19644.3513908421
206-19656.5513908395
207-19658.8313908503
208-19654.7713908437
209-19648.3413908358

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

Surveyed
Easting

Total Depth(ft)

2330059
2330266
23304162330294
2330049
23303192330360
2329759

Groundwater at Timeof Drilling

Drill Hole Completion(2)Depth (ft)Elev. (ft)

30.0
35.0
45.0
60.0
60.0
40.0
40.0
45.0

18.5
NE
NE
27.5
NE
NE
NE
NE

643.7
----633.7---------

Cement Bentonite Grout
Stand-Pipe Piezometer
Cement Bentonite Grout
Stand-Pipe Piezometer
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout

2330083
2330292
2330332

6.5
10.0
4.8

NE
NE
NE

-------

Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout

2330273
2330294
2330340
2330380

10.0
6.8
10.0
10.0

NE
NE
NE
NE

---------

Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout

23302142330314

35.0
25.0

NE
NE

-----

Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout

2329837
2329966
2330174
23304132330664
2329905
2330038
2330234
2330480

25.0
25.0
25.0
25.0
25.0
25.0
35.0
25.0
25.0

NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE

-------------------

Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout

AECOM
41

Geologic Investigation Report210-19635.7413908272
Proposed Outlet Channel
401-20647.9613907933
402-20646.5513907784
Downstream Toe of Embankment
601-19649.7013907928602-19642.6713907467603-19634.8613906953
604-19637.9513906842
605-19658.2913906607
Upstream Toe of Embankment
701-20648.7413907753
Proposed Overtopping Auxiliary Spillway
702-20647.7913907801
703-20646.3313907705
Borrow Area
101-19652.0413908101
102-19650.0613907929
103-19647.1313907727
104-19651.2513908032
105-19649.5513907862
106-19647.7913907684

Project number: 60615067

2330732

25.0

NE

---

Cement Bentonite Grout

2330545
2330496

20.0
20.0

NE
NE

-----

Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout

2330345
23305232330187
23300772329798

25.0
25.0
25.0
25.0
25.0

NE
NE
NE
NE
NE

-----------

Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout

2330261

30.0

NE

---

Cement Bentonite Grout

2330379
2330421

30.0
30.0

NE
NE

-----

Stand-Pipe Piezometer
Cement Bentonite Grout

232979323298312329897232959023296302329663

10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0

NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE

-------------

Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout
Cement Bentonite Grout

Notes:(1)(2)(3)

Survey coordinates provided by CP&Y.
Elevations reported with respect to NAVD88 datum.
NE – Not encounteredTSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
42

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

Table 2. Summary of Groundwater Readings

Boring ID

008-19009-19(piezometer)

011-19(piezometer)

Surveyed
GroundElev. (ft)

662.2

662.4

661.2

Groundwater Level at Time ofDrilling
Date

Depth
(feet)

Elev.
(feet)

1/9/2020

18.5

643.7

1/27/2020

12/16/2019

NE

27.5

---

633.7

Groundwater Level atCompletion of Drilling
Date

Depth
(feet)

Elev.
(feet)

1/9/2020

28.1

634.1

1/27/2020

12/17/2020

NE

27.5

---

633.7

Delayed Groundwater Level Readings

Date

Time
after
Drilling(hours)Depth(feet)

Elev.
(feet)

---

---

NE

---

1/30/2020

---

16.3

646.1

2/13/2020

---

NE

---

3/26/2020

---

32.8

629.6

8/26/2020

---

14.9

647.5

10/8/2020

---

31.5

630.9

1/30/2020

---

46.1

615.1

2/13/2020

---

43.6

617.6

3/26/2020

---

38.8

622.4

8/26/2020

---

33.8

627.4

10/8/2020

---

31.0

630.2

Note

101-19652.0

1/3/2020

NE---

1/3/2020

NE---

1/7/2020

---

NE

---

102-19650.1

1/3/2020

NE---

1/3/2020

NE---

1/7/2020

---

NE

---

103-19647.1

1/3/2020

NE---

1/3/2020

NE---

1/7/2020

---

NE

---

104-19651.2

1/3/2020

NE---

1/3/2020

NE---

1/7/2020

---

NE

---

Caved at 6.9'

105-19649.5

1/3/2020

NE---

1/3/2020

NE---

1/7/2020

---

NE

---

Caved at 6.1'

106-19647.8

1/3/2020

NE---

1/3/2020

NE---

1/7/2020

---

NE

---

Caved at 6.3'

1/2/2020

---

NE

---

201-19656.5

12/31/2019

NE

---

12/31/2019

NE

---

1/7/2020

---

NE

---

656.9

12/30/2019

NE

---

12/30/2019

NE

---

1/2/2020

---

NE

---

656.9

---

---

---

---

---

---

1/7/2020

---

NE

---

656.9

12/30/2019

NE

---

12/30/2019

NE

---

12/31/2019

24

18.4

638.5

656.9

---

---

---

---

---

---

1/7/2020

---

10.2

646.7

202-19203-19TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
43

Caved at 6.1'

Caved at 21.2'

Caved at 22'

Caved at 15.2'

Approx.
Reservoir
Elev.
(NAVD88)

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

656.9

---

---

---

---

---

---

1/20/2020

---

10.2

646.7

204-19651.3

12/19/2019

NE

---

12/19/2019

NE

---

12/19/2020

3

23.1

628.2

205-19644.4

12/18/2019

NE

---

12/18/2019

NE

---

1/2/2020

---

NE

---

656.6

1/2/2020

NE---

1/2/2020

NE---

1/2/2020

---

NE

---

1/7/2020

---

NE

---

1/2/2020

---

NE

---

1/7/2020

---

10.5

648.3

1/2/2020

72

20.9

633.9

1/7/2020

---

16.1

638.7

12/30/2019

---

8.8

639.5

12/31/2019

---

8.8

639.5

1/2/2020

---

8.2

640.1

1/7/2020

---

8.9

639.4

206-19658.8

12/31/2019

NE

---

12/31/2019

NE

---

207-19654.8

12/30/2019

NE

---

12/30/2019

NE

---

208-19648.3

12/19/2019

NE

---

12/19/2019

21.4

626.9

209-19

Caved at 18.3'

Caved at 15.6'

Caved at 12.2'

210-19635.7

12/9/2019NE---

12/9/2019NE---

12/17/2019

---

13.6

622.1

304-19646.4

1/9/2020

NE---

1/9/2020

NE

---

---

---

---

---

305-19635.1

1/7/2020

NE---

1/7/2020

NE---

1/8/2020

---

NE

---

649.7

1/2/2020

NE---

1/2/2020

NE---

1/6/2020

96

11.4

638.3

1/7/2020

---

11.3

638.4

1/6/2020

---

NE

---

1/7/2020

---

NE

---

Caved at 17.8'
Caved at 15.3'

601-19642.7

1/2/2020

NE---

1/2/2020

602-19NE---603-19634.9

1/6/2020

NE---

1/6/2020

NE---

1/7/2020

---

NE

---

604-19630.0

12/9/2019NE---

12/9/2019NE---

12/17/2019

---

NE

---

605-19658.3

1/6/2020

NE---

1/6/2020

NE---

1/7/2020

---

NE

---

702-20(piezometer)

647.8

10/5/2020NE---

10/5/2020NE---

10/8/2020

72

27.5

620.3

1. Elevations reported with respect to NAVD88 datum.
2. NE – Not encountered prior to the start of coring.
3. Values with “ * ” designate measurement is indicative of rock coring fluid level added during drilling.

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
44

Caved at 22'

Caved at 13.8'

Caved at 16'

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

Table 3. Sample Inventory
Boring ID

Top
Depth
(ft)

BottomDepth (ft)Sample ID

Sample Type see legend

Recovery(inch)

Field Classify

8-19
8-19
8-19
8-19
8-19
8-19
8-19
8-19
8-19

0.0
2.5
4.0
6.5
8.0
13.0
18.5
23.5
28.5

2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0

P-1
SS-2
P-3
SS-4
P-5
ST-6
SS-7
SS-8
SS-9

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Split Spoon (SPT)
Split Spoon (SPT)

18
15.5
12
15.5
17.5
12
18
18
18

CH
CH
CH,CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH

9-19
9-19
9-19
9-19
9-19
9-19
9-19
9-19
9-19
9-19

0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
13.0
18.5
23.0
28.0
33.5

2.0
3.5
6.0
7.5
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0

P-1
SS-2
P-3
SS-4
ST-5
P-6
SS-7
ST-8
P-9
SS-10

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)

20.5
15
16.5
16.5
12
16
18
18.5
19
18

CH
ML
CL/CH
CL/CH
CH
CL/CH
CH
CH
CH
CH

10-19
10-19
10-19
10-19
10-19
10-19
10-19
10-19
10-19
10-19
10-19
10-19

0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
13.0
18.5
23.0
28.0
33.0
38.5
43.0

2.0
3.5
6.0
8.0
9.5
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
45.0

P-1
SS-2
P-3
ST-4
SS-5
P-6
SS-7
ST-8
P-9
ST-10
SS-11
P-12

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube

20
15
16
14
14
16
18
15
13.5
19
18
14.5

CH
ML
CH
CL
CH
CH
CH
CH
CH
CH
CH
CLCH

11-19
11-19
11-19
11-19
11-19
11-19
11-19
11-19
11-19
11-19
11-19

0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.5
13.0
18.0
23.5
28.0
33.5
38.0

2.0
3.5
6.0
8.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0

P-1
SS-2
ST-3
P-4
SS-5
P-6
ST-7
SS-8
P-9
SS-10
ST-11

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube

21
11
13.5
17.5
16
18.5
21.5
18
20
18
11.5

CH
CH,CH/CL
CH/CL
CH/CL,CH
CH/CL,CH
CH
CH
CH
CH/CL,CH
CH/CL
CH/CL

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
45

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

11-19
11-19
11-19
11-19
11-19

43.0
48.5
53.0
53.5
58.5

45.0
50.0
53.5
55.0
60.0

P-12
SS-13
ST-14
SS-15
SS-16

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Split Spoon (SPT)

15.5
18
2
4
2.25

CH/CL
CH/CL
Shale
Shale
Shale

12-19
12-19
12-19
12-19
12-19
12-19
12-19
12-19
12-19
12-19
12-19
12-19
12-19
12-19
12-19

0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
13.0
18.5
23.0
28.0
33.0
38.0
43.0
48.0
53.0
58.5

2.0
3.5
6.0
7.5
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
34.5
40.0
45.0
50.0
54.5
60.0

P-1
SS-2
P-3
SS-4
ST-5
P-6
SS-7
ST-8
P-9
SS-10
ST-11
P-12
ST-13
SS-14
SS-15

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Split Spoon (SPT)

17.5
16
13
16
12
20
18
16.5
19.5
18
21
21
17
7
3

CH
CL/CH
CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL
CL
Shale
Shale

15-19
15-19
15-19
15-19
15-19
15-19
15-19
15-19
15-19
15-19
15-19
15-19

0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.5
13.0
18.0
23.5
28.0
33.0
38.0
43.5

2.0
3.5
6.0
8.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
45.0

P-1
SS-2
P-3
ST-4
SS-5
ST-6
P-7
SS-8
ST-9
P-10
P-11
SS-12

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)

20.5
13
15
16
13
21
19
18
20
20
20
18

CH
CL/CH
CH,CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH

1301-191301-191301-191301-191301-19

0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0

2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0

G-1
G-2
G-3
G-4
G-5

Shelby Tube
Shelby Tube
Shelby Tube
Shelby Tube
Shelby Tube

24
24
24
24
24

CH
CH/CL
CH/CL
CH
CH

1302-191302-191302-191302-19

0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0

2.0
4.0
6.0
6.5

G-1
G-2
G-3
G-4

Shelby Tube
Shelby Tube
Shelby Tube
Shelby Tube

24
24
24
6

CH
CH/CL
CH
CH

101-19101-19101-19101-19

0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0

2.0
3.5
6.0
7.5

P-1
SS-2
P-3
SS-4

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)

9
17
14
16.5

CH
CH
CL-ML
CL-ML

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
46

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

101-19101-19101-19

8.0
0.0
5.0

10.0
5.0
10.0

P-5
BucketBucketPush Tube
Shelby Tube
Shelby Tube

15

CL-ML
CH
CL-ML

102-19102-19

0.0
2.0

2.0
3.5

P-1
SS-2

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)

16
15

CH
CL-ML

102-19

4.0

6.0

ST-3

Shelby Tube

20

CL-ML

102-19102-19102-19102-19

6.0
8.0
0.0
3.5

7.5
10.0
3.5
7.5

SS-4
P-5
BucketBucketSplit Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Shelby Tube

18
13

CL-ML
CL/CH
CH,CL-ML
CL-ML,CL/CH

103-19103-19103-19103-19103-19103-19103-19

0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
0.0
5.0

2.0
3.5
6.0
7.5
10.0
5.0
10.0

P-1
SS-2
P-3
SS-4
P-5
BucketBucketPush Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Shelby Tube

20
16
21
18
20

CH
CH
CL-ML
CL-ML
CL/CH
CH
CL-ML,CL/CH

104-19104-19104-19104-19104-19104-19104-19104-19

0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
0.0
6.0
7.5

2.0
3.5
6.0
7.5
10.0
6.0
7.5
10.0

P-1
SS-2
P-3
SS-4
P-5
BucketBucketBucketPush Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Shelby Tube
Shelby Tube

17.5
18
11.5
18
15

CH
CH
CL-ML
CL-ML
CL/CH
CH
CL-ML
CL/CH

105-19105-19105-19105-19105-19105-19105-19

0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
0.0
5.0

2.0
3.5
6.0
7.5
10.0
5.0
10.0

P-1
SS-2
P-3
SS-4
P-5
BucketBucketPush Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Shelby Tube

19
8
18.5
15
19

CH
CH
CL-ML
CL-ML
CL/CH
CH
CL-ML,CL/CH

106-19106-19106-19106-19106-19106-19106-19

0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
0.0
2.5

2.0
3.5
6.0
7.5
10.0
2.5
2.5-10

P-1
SS-2
P-3
SS-4
P-5
BucketBucketPush Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Shelby Tube

21
15
14.5
16
19

CH
CL-ML
CL-ML
CL-ML
CL/CH
CH
CL-ML,CL/CH

201-19201-19201-19201-19201-19

0.0
2.0
4.5
6.0
8.0

2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
9.5

P-1
ST-2
SS-3
P-4
SS-5

Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)

17.5
23
15
17
18

CH,CL/CH
CL-ML
SM
CL/CH
CL/CH

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
47

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

201-19201-19201-19

13.0
18.0
23.5

15.0
20.0
25.0

ST-6
P-7
SS-8

Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)

19.5
19
18

CL/CH
CL/CH
CH

202-19202-19202-19202-19202-19202-19202-19202-19

0.0
2.0
4.5
6.0
8.0
13.5
18.0
23.5

2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0

P-1
ST-2
SS-3
P-4
ST-5
SS-6
P-7
SS-8

Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)

14
15
18
15
16.5
18
18.5
18

CH
CL
ML
ML
ML
CH
CH
CH,CL

203-19203-19203-19203-19203-19203-19203-19203-19203-19203-19203-19

0.0
2.0
2.0
3.5
6.0
6.0
8.0
13.0
13.0
18.5
22.5

2.0
3.5
3.5
5.5
8.0
8.0
9.5
15.0
15.0
20.0
24.5

P-1
SS-2A
SS-2B
ST-3
P-4A
P-4B
SS-5
P-6A
P-6AB
SS-7
ST-8

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube

10
6.25
10.75
10
3.5
7.5
18
4
12.5
18
21.5

CH
CL/CH,CL
CL/CH,CL
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
SM
CH

204-19204-19204-19204-19204-19204-19204-19204-19204-19204-19204-19204-19

0.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
4.5
6.0
6.0
8.0
8.0
13.0
18.0
23.5

2.0
2.0
4.0
4.5
6.0
8.0
8.0
9.5
9.5
15.0
20.0
25.0

P-1A
P-1B
ST-2
SS-3A
SS-3B
P-4A
P-4B
SS-5A
SS-5B
ST-6
P-7
SS-8

Push Tube
Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)

12.75
12.75
11.5
18
18
12
12
18
18
24
20.5
18

CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH

205-19205-19205-19205-19205-19205-19205-19205-19205-19

0.0
2.0
3.5
3.5
6.0
8.0
13.5
18.5
23.0

2.0
3.5
5.5
5.5
7.5
10.0
15.5
20.0
25.0

P-1
SS-2
P-3A
P-3B
SS-4
ST-5
P-6
SS-7
ST-8

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube

10.5
14.5
9.5
9.5
18
20.75
22
18
15.75

CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH

206-19206-19

0.0
2.0

2.0
3.5

P-1
SS-2A

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)

19
18

CH
CL/CH

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
48

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

206-19206-19206-19206-19206-19206-19206-19206-19206-19

2.0
2.0
4.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
13.0
18.0
23.5

3.5
3.5
6.0
6.0
7.5
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0

SS-2B
SS-2C
P-3A
P-3B
SS-4
ST-5
P-6
ST-7
SS-8

Split Spoon (SPT)
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)

18
18
11.5
11.5
18
18.5
22
22
18

ML
CH
CH
SM
SM
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH

207-19207-19207-19207-19207-19207-19207-19207-19207-19207-19207-19

0.0
2.0
4.5
4.5
6.0
8.0
13.0
18.0
23.5
28.0
33.0

2.0
4.0
6.0
6.0
8.0
9.5
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0

P-1
ST-2
SS-3A
SS-3B
P-4
SS-5
P-6
ST-7
SS-8
P-9
ST-10

Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Shelby Tube

12.5
12
15
15
10.5
18
22
29.5
18
23
22.5

CH
CH
CH
ML
ML
CL-ML
CL/CH
CL/CH
CH
CH
CL/CH

208-19208-19208-19208-19208-19208-19208-19208-19208-19208-19208-19

0.0
0.0
2.0
4.5
4.5
6.0
8.0
13.0
18.0
23.5
23.5

2.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
6.0
8.0
9.5
15.0
20.0
25.0
25.0

P-1A
P-1B
ST-2
SS-3A
SS-3B
P-4
SS-5
ST-6
P-7
SS-8A
SS-8B

Push Tube
Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Split Spoon (SPT)

14
14
11
18
18
22
5
19.5
20
18
18

CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CH
CL/CH
s. CL
CL
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH

209-19209-19209-19209-19209-19209-19209-19209-19209-19209-19

0.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
13.0
18.0
23.5

2.0
2.0
3.5
6.0
6.0
8.0
9.5
15.0
20.0
25.0

P-1A
P-1B
SS-2
P-3A
P-3B
ST-4
SS-5
P-6
ST-7
SS-8

Push Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)

11
11
15
11.5
11.5
15.25
18
22
27.25
18

CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH

210-19210-19210-19210-19210-19

0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0

2.0
3.5
6.0
8.0
10.0

P-1
SS-2
P-3
P-4
ST-5

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Push Tube
Shelby Tube

15
11.5
18
22
16

CH
CH
CH
CL/CH
CL/CH

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
49

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

210-19210-19210-19

13.5
18.0
23.5

15.0
20.0
25.0

SS-6
ST-7
SS-8

Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)

18
24.5
18

CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH

304-19304-19304-19304-19304-19304-19304-19304-19304-19304-19

0.0
2.5
4.0
6.0
8.5
13.0
18.0
23.5
28.0
33.5

2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0

P-1
SS-2
P-3
ST-4
SS-5
P-6
ST-7
SS-8
ST-9
SS-10

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)

13.5
18
16
12
18
18
14
15
15
18

CH,CL/CH
CL/CH,CH
CH,CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CH,CL/CH
CL/CH
CL-ML
CL-ML

305-19305-19305-19305-19305-19305-19305-19305-19

0.0
2.5
4.0
6.0
8.5
13.0
18.0
23.5

2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0

P-1
SS-2
ST-3
P-4
SS-5
P-6
ST-7
SS-8

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)

17
15.5
11
15.5
18
17
19.5
13

CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CH
CH
CH,CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH

601-19601-19601-19601-19601-19601-19601-19601-19

0.0
2.0
3.5
6.0
8.0
13.0
18.0
23.5

2.0
3.5
5.5
8.0
9.5
15.0
20.0
25.0

P-1
SS-2
ST-3
P-4
SS-5
ST-6
P-7
SS-8

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)

11
5
12
15
18
18
20.5
18

CH
CH
CL-ML
CH,CL-ML
CL-ML
CL-ML
CL-ML
CL-ML

602-19602-19602-19602-19602-19602-19602-19602-19

0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
13.0
18.0
23.5

2.0
3.5
6.0
8.0
9.5
15.0
20.0
25.0

P-1
SS-2
P-3
ST-4
SS-5
ST-6
P-7
SS-8

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Shelby Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)

11
18
9.5
16.5
18
19
16.5
18

CH
CL-ML
CH
CL-ML
CL-ML
CL-ML
CL
CL/CH

603-19603-19603-19603-19603-19603-19603-19603-19

0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
13.0
18.5
23.5

2.0
3.5
6.0
7.5
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0

P-1
SS-2
P-3
SS-4
ST-5
P-6
SS-7
SS-8

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Split Spoon (SPT)

11
11.25
8.5
10
19
17.5
18
10.5

CH
CH
CL-ML
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
CL/CH
Shale

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
50

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

604-19604-19604-19604-19604-19604-19604-19604-19

0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.5
13.5
18.0
23.5

2.0
3.5
6.0
8.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0

P-1
SS-2
ST-3
P-4
SS-5
P-6
P-7
SS-8

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)Push Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)

18.5
12
16.5
17
17
17
20.5
8

CH
CH
CH
CH
CH/CL
CH/CL
CH/CL
CH/CL

605-19605-19605-19605-19605-19605-19605-19605-19

0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
13.0
18.0
23.5

2.0
3.5
6.0
8.0
9.5
15.0
20.0
25.0

P-1
SS-2
ST-3
P-4
SS-5
ST-6
P-7
SS-8

Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)
Shelby Tube
Push Tube
Split Spoon (SPT)

10
14.25
13
16
18

CH
CH
CL
CL
CL
CL
CL
CL

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

18
18

AECOM
51

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

FIGURESTSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
52

360

V
U
V U

£
¤

35

10
§
¦
¨

183

£
¤

CY
DA

LE
KY WY
PK

§
¦
¨

BE
BE
RD E

G

O

FO

R

TH

RD

AN

RD

(
!

LN

ek

90

Lulingch

GUADALUPE

304

U
V

Porter Cre

80

U
V

n
Bra
ws
dre
An

ch
ra n

123

U
V

W
IL IND
L Y
R
D

nd B

CALDWELL

183

£
¤

H

G

130

U
V

142 Lockhart

U
V

¦
¨
§

150

BASTROP

Niederwald

Uhland

(
!

35

New
Braunfels

Bastrop
21

h mo

46

Kyle
San
Marcos

COMAL

U
V

U
V

45

Relief Map: USGS The National Map: 3D Elevation Program. USGS
Earth Resources Observation & Science (EROS) Center: GMTED2010.
Data refreshed January, 2020.

Ric

2770

U
V

183

Br a n c h

1626
HAYS

KOHLERSXING

U
V

Buda

Woodcreek

71

£
¤
35
§
¦
¨
ton
Bu n

(
!
MountainCity

Hays County

290

£
¤

Dripping
Springs

95

U
V

TRAVIS

Austin

KYLE
XIN

71

LE
H

M

Kyle

!
(

PLUM
CREEK WS SCS
SITE 2 DAM
P lu

m
eek
Cr

YA
R

B la

nc

PO
ST

L:\AGE\Projects\INFR\TSSWCB\Elm_and_Plum_Creek_Dam_Rehabs\900_GIS\MXD\Figures\Fig01_Plum2_Location.mxd

(
!

oR
iv

er

RI
NG

TO

N

C lea r Fo rk

±

reek

Y
HA

1
Miles

Hem
ph i

!
(

O
SC

UN

L
WE
LD
A
C

35

0.5

P lum CSan
Marcos§¦¨
0Uhland150

Project Dam

ll C

ree
k

TY

O
LC

UN

TY

¬
«
21

Project Number: 60615067
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

Figure 1
Location Map

Ko

Source:Texas Bureau of Economic Geology
Kfr
Kdg

Mountain
City

1626

Keb

KOHLERSXING
Qhg

2770
Kdg

Keb

§
¦
¨

Keb

Kpg

35

Kau
150

Kpg

Kdg

Kyle Fault

Qle

Kyle

!
(

Qle

PLUM
CREEK WS SCS
SITE 2 DAM

Kknm
Kpg
Qal

San Marcos
Springs Fault
Kdg

Kau

Qt

Qle

Kknm

Kpg

Uhland

150

Keb
Qle
C

Keb

GeologySan
Kau: Austin Chalk

Kdg: Del RIoMarcos
Clay and Georgetown
Formation
Kpg

Keb

±

0

§
¦
¨

Kfr: Fredricksburg Group undivided

Keb: Eagle Ford Group and
Buda
Kpg
Limestone

Ko: Ozan Formation

Kdg:35
Del Rio Clay and Georgetown
Formation undivided

Kau

0.5

Keb: Eagle Ford Group and Buda
Limestone undivided

1
Miles

!
(

Project Dam

Kpg: Pecan Gap Chalk
Qal: Alluvium

Kknm: Navarro Group and Marlbrook Marl("upper Taylor marl")S

Kau

Normal Fault
Unspecified

Qhg: High gravel deposits¬«

Qle: Leona Formation

21

Qt: Fluviatile terrace deposits

Kpg

Project Number: 60615067
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

Figure 2
Geologic Map

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

Figure 3. Stratigraphic Column for Hays County

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
55

Source:
TXEQ data - University of Texas Institutefor Geophysics, the Texas Division of
Emergency Management, and the U.S.
Department of Energy through its
RPSEA program.

(
!

!
(
(
!

(
!
(
!

(
!
! !
(
(
(
!
(
(!
!

(!
!
( !( !(
!
(
(
!
(
(
!
( !
!
(
!
(!
!
(
!
(
(
!
(!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!

!!
(
(

(
!

(
!

(
!

(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
(!
!
(
!

!
(
(
!

(
!
(
!
!!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(
!

(
!
!
(
(!
!
(
(
!
(
!

!!
(
(
(
(!
!
( !
!
(

(
!

(
!

(
!

(
!

!
(
(
!

!
(
(
!

(
!
(
!

!
(
( !
!
(

(
!
!
(
(
!

!!
(
(

(
!
( !
!
(

(
!!
(
(
!
(
!

(
!
!!
(
(
!
(
(!
!
(!( !(

!
(
(!
!
(

(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!

(
!

(
!

(
!
!
(
!
(
(
!

(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!

!
(

!
(
(
!

(
!

(
!
(
!

(
!

L:\DCS\Projects\INFR\TSSWCB\Elm_and_Plum_Creek_Dam_Rehabs\900_GIS\MXD\Figures\Earthquakes\Fig04_Plum2_Earthquakes.mxd

(
!

(
!

(
(!
!
(!
!
(
!
!
( (
!
(
(
!
(
(!
!
(
!
(
!

(
!

PLUM CREEKWSSCSSITE2DAM

Ear
thquakeMagn itude
TXEQ data(
18472014)
(
!

(
!

!
(

3 - 3.9
4 - 4.9
5 - 5.9!
( => 6

±

0

50

100
Miles

!
(

Project Dam

100 km-Radius

Project Number: 60615067
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

Fi
gur
e4
Mapo fRec en t an dHi
s to ricEarthquakes w ithM≥3.
0Source:
USGS data - USGS Earthquake
Hazards Program

(
!
(!
!
(
(
!
! !
(
(!
(
(
!

(
!

(
!
(
!
(
(!
!
(
(!
!

(
!

(
!

(
!

(
!

(
!!
(

(
!

(
!

(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!

( !
(
!
!!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
(!
!

!
(
(
!

(
!
(
!
!
(

(
!
(
!

( !
!
(
(
!

(
!
(
(!
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!

(
!
(
!
!
(

!
(
(
!

(!
!
(
!!
(
(!
(
(
!
(
!

!!(!
(
(!
(!
(

(
!

(
!

!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!

!
(

L:\DCS\Projects\INFR\TSSWCB\Elm_and_Plum_Creek_Dam_Rehabs\900_GIS\MXD\Figures\Earthquakes\Fig05_Plum2_Earthquakes.mxd

(
!

(
!

(
!

(
!
(
!
( !
!
(
(!
( !
(!
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!

( !
!
(

PLUM CREEKWSSCSSITE2DAM

Ear
thqu akeMagnitu d eUSGSd ata(
19002016)
(
!

(
!

!
(

3 - 3.9
4 - 4.9
5 - 5.9!
( => 6

±

0

50

100
Miles

!
(

Project Dam

100 km-Radius

Project Number: 60615067
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

Fi
gu r
e5
Map o fRecent and Hi
sto r
i
c
Ear
thqu akeswi
thM≥3.
0Source:
TXEQ data - University of Texas Institutefor Geophysics, the Texas Division of
Emergency Management, and the U.S.
Department of Energy through its
RPSEA program.
USGS data - USGS Earthquake
Hazards Program

(
!
!!
(
(

!
(

!
(
(
(!
!

(
!
! !
(
(!
(
(
!
(
(!
!
(
!

(!
!
( !( !(
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
(
!
(
( !
!
(!
!
(!
!
(
(
( !
!
(
!
(!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!
(

(
!

(
!

!!
(
((
!

(
!

(
!

(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
(!
!
(
!

(!
!
(
( !
(
!
!!
(
(
(
!
(
!
(!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
(
!
(!
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!

!
(
(
!

(
!

(
!
(
!

!
(
(!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!

( !
!
(
(
!

(!
!
!
(
(

!
(
(!
!
(
(
(!
!
( !
!
(
(!
!
(
!!
(
(!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!

!!
(
(
(
(!
!
(
!
(!
!
(

(
!

(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!

(
!

(
!

(
!

(
!

!
(
(
!

(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
(
!
!!
(
(

!
(

!
(
(
!

(
!

L:\DCS\Projects\INFR\TSSWCB\Elm_and_Plum_Creek_Dam_Rehabs\900_GIS\MXD\Figures\Earthquakes\Fig06_Plum2_Earthquakes.mxd

(
!
(
!

(
!
(
(!
!
(
!
(
!

!
(

(
!

(
!
!!(!
(
(
!
(
(!
!
(!( !(

(!
!
(
(!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!

(
!
(
!

(
!

(
!
(
!

(
!
(
!
(
!
(!
!
(
(
!
(
(!
!
( !
(!
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!

(!
!!
(
(

PLUM CREEKW SSCSSITE2DAMEar
th q uakeMagnitude
TXEQ data(
18472014)
(
!

(
!

!
(

3 - 3.9

5 - 5.9!
(!
( => 6±4 - 4.9(!

5 - 5.950

3 - 3.9(!

4 - 4.9

0

USGSdata(
19002016)!
( => 6
100
Miles

!
(

Project Dam

100 km-Radius

Project Number: 60615067
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

Figur
e6
Map ofRecent andHistor
icEarth q uakes w ith M≥3.
0

H
ER
IV
C

ST
TER
WIN

IR

202-19203-19@A
201-19207-19@A@A

204-19@A
206-19208-19@A

008-19@A@A

209-19@A

205-19@A@A

210-19@A
101-19@A

104-19@A

102-19@AD

1704-20 702-20
E
1701-20 !
@ 402-20
A@H
HA
013-20@!
A
701-20@ 703-20
A
H 1705-20@!
HA!
1702-20 014-20

103-19106-19@A@
A

PLUM CREEK WSSCS SITE 2 DAM@
A

010-191302-19@A

012-19602-19@A

011-19E

HA
1301-19 !
@
H
!

@
A

D

304-19305-19603-19@A
604-19@A

015-19@ 605-19
A
@
A

±

USDA

0

150

300
Feet

D

L:\DCS\Projects\INFR\TSSWCB\Elm_and_Plum_Creek_Dam_Rehabs\900_GIS\MXD\Borings\Fig7_Plum2_Borings.mxd@
AD

105-19401-20601-191703-20 A@H
009-19 E!

@
A

E

H
!
@
A

Boring Completed as Piezometer
Hand Auger Boring

Project Number: 60615067
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

Soil Boring

Boring Location
MapGeologic Investigation ReportTSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

Project number: 60615067

AECOM
71

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

Appendix A NRCS Websoil Survey DataTSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
60

609200

60930060940060950060960060970060980060990061000061010097° 51' 10'' W

6102006103006104006105006106003318200

97° 52' 7'' W

Soil Map—Comal and Hays Counties, Texas(Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation)

29° 59' 23'' N

3318100

3318100

29° 59' 23'' N

3317900

3317900

3318000

3318000

AR

3317800

3317800

AR

3317700

3317700

R

3317500

3317600

3317600

R

3317500

AA

3317300

3317300

3317400

3317400

R

29° 58' 50'' N

609300609400609500609600609700609800609900610000610100610200610300Map Scale: 1:7,010 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.

N

Meters
600
Feet
0
300
600
1200
1800
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 14N WGS84
0100

Natural Resources
Conservation Service

200

400

Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey

R - Residuum
A - Alluvium

61040061050061060097° 51' 10'' W

60920097° 52' 7'' W

29° 58' 50'' N

3317200

Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.

5/27/2020
Page 1 of 3

Soil Map—Comal and Hays Counties, Texas(Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation)

MAP LEGEND
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp

MAP INFORMATION
Spoil Area
Stony Spot

The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:20,000.

Very Stony Spot

Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.

Wet Spot

Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soilline placement. The maps do not show the small areas ofcontrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.

Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography

Mine or Quarry

Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as theAlbers equal-area conic projection, should be used if moreaccurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data asof the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Comal and Hays Counties, Texas
Survey Area Data: Version 16, Sep 12, 2019

Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water

Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.

Rock Outcrop

Date(s) aerial images were photographed:30, 2017

Saline Spot
Sandy SpotFeb 8, 2015—Nov

The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines werecompiled and digitized probably differs from the backgroundimagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.

Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic SpotNatural Resources
Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey

5/27/2020
Page 2 of 3

Soil Map—Comal and Hays Counties, Texas

Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Rehabilitation

Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol

Map Unit Name

Acres in AOIPercent of AOI

ByB

Branyon clay, 1 to 3 percent
slopes

0.0

0.0%

DAM

Dams

1.2

0.5%

HeB

Heiden clay, 1 to 3 percent
slopes

105.4

43.5%

HeC3

Heiden clay, 3 to 5 percent
slopes, eroded

0.0

0.0%

HeD3

Heiden clay, 5 to 8 percent
slopes, eroded

53.3

22.0%

LeB

Lewisville silty clay, 1 to 3
percent slopes

28.5

11.8%

Tn

Tinn clay, 0 to 1 percent
slopes, frequently flooded

37.0

15.3%

W

Water

16.5

6.8%

242.0

100.0%

Totals for Area of Interest

Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey

5/27/2020
Page 3 of 3

Map Unit Description: Branyon clay, 1 to 3 percent slopes---Comal and Hays Counties, Texas

Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Rehabilitation

Map Unit Description
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent thesoils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions in thisreport, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition andproperties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one ormore major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified andnamed according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within ataxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils.
On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have thecharacteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of someobserved properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit ismade up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named, soils that are
similar to the named components, and some minor components that differ in use
and management from the major soils.
Most of the soils similar to the major components have properties similar to thoseof the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use andmanagement. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They
may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Some minor
components, however, have properties and behavior characteristics divergent
enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called
contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas andcould not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas ofstrongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special
symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting
minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with somecharacteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been
observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions,especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to makeenough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on thelandscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes theusefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineatepure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms orlandform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The
delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for thedevelopment of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned,
however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils andmiscellaneous areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil
properties and qualities.

Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey

5/27/2020
Page 1 of 4

Map Unit Description: Branyon clay, 1 to 3 percent slopes---Comal and Hays Counties, Texas

Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Rehabilitation

Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. All the soils ofa series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, andarrangement. Soils of a given series can differ in texture of the surface layer,
slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affecttheir use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil
phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil
series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or
management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of
the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an
intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on
the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are
somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an
example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because ofpresent or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was notconsidered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas
separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous
areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an
example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areasthat could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similarinterpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern andproportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform.
An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, orit can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, isan example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soilmaterial and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
Additional information about the map units described in this report is available inother soil reports, which give properties of the soils and the limitations,capabilities, and potentials for many uses. Also, the narratives that accompany
the soil reports define some of the properties included in the map unit
descriptions.

Comal and Hays Counties, Texas
ByB—Branyon clay, 1 to 3 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2shgw
Elevation: 290 to 1,040 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 33 to 39 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 66 to 70 degrees F
Frost-free period: 243 to 288 days
Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey

5/27/2020
Page 2 of 4

Map Unit Description: Branyon clay, 1 to 3 percent slopes---Comal and Hays Counties, Texas

Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Rehabilitation

Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Branyon and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects ofthe mapunit.
Description of Branyon
Setting
Landform: Stream terraces, stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Microfeatures of landform position: Circular gilgai, circular gilgai
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Calcareous clayey alluvium derived frommudstone of pleistocene age
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 12 inches: clay
Bkss - 12 to 72 inches: clay
BCkss - 72 to 80 inches: clay
Properties and qualities
Slope: 1 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Moderately well drained
Runoff class: Very highCapacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very
low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 35 percent
Gypsum, maximum in profile: 5 percent
Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 7.0
Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.2 inches)Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2e
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Ecological site: Southern Blackland (R086AY011TX)
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Lewisville
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Riser
Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey

5/27/2020
Page 3 of 4

Map Unit Description: Branyon clay, 1 to 3 percent slopes---Comal and Hays Counties, Texas

Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Rehabilitation

Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Convex
Ecological site: Southern Clay Loam (R086AY007TX)
Hydric soil rating: No
Houston black
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope
Microfeatures of landform position: Circular gilgai
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Convex
Ecological site: Southern Blackland (R086AY011TX)
Hydric soil rating: No
Burleson
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Stream terraces, stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Microfeatures of landform position: Circular gilgai, circular gilgai
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Ecological site: Southern Blackland (R086AY011TX)
Hydric soil rating: No

Data Source Information
Soil Survey Area: Comal and Hays Counties, Texas
Survey Area Data: Version 16, Sep 12, 2019

Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey

5/27/2020
Page 4 of 4

Map Unit Description: Heiden clay, 1 to 3 percent slopes---Comal and Hays Counties, Texas

Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Rehabilitation

Comal and Hays Counties, Texas
HeB—Heiden clay, 1 to 3 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2v1v9
Elevation: 290 to 1,020 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 33 to 45 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 63 to 68 degrees F
Frost-free period: 224 to 278 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Heiden and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects ofthe mapunit.
Description of Heiden
Setting
Landform: Ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve
Microfeatures of landform position: Linear gilgai
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Clayey residuum weathered from mudstone
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 6 inches: clay
A - 6 to 18 inches: clay
Bkss - 18 to 58 inches: clay
CBdk - 58 to 70 inches: clay
Properties and qualities
Slope: 1 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 40 to 65 inches to densic material
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Very highCapacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very
low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 40 percent
Gypsum, maximum in profile: 5 percent
Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0
to 2.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 12.0
Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.3 inches)
Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey

5/27/2020
Page 1 of 2

Map Unit Description: Heiden clay, 1 to 3 percent slopes---Comal and Hays Counties, Texas

Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Rehabilitation

Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Ecological site: Southern Blackland (R086AY011TX)
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Houston black
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Landform: Ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder, summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve
Microfeatures of landform position: Circular gilgai
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Linear
Ecological site: Southern Blackland (R086AY011TX)
Hydric soil rating: No
FerrisPercent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Microfeatures of landform position: Linear gilgai
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Convex
Ecological site: Southern Eroded Blackland (R086AY009TX)
Hydric soil rating: No

Data Source Information
Soil Survey Area: Comal and Hays Counties, Texas
Survey Area Data: Version 16, Sep 12, 2019

Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey

5/27/2020
Page 2 of 2

Map Unit Description: Heiden clay, 3 to 5 percent slopes, eroded---Comal and Hays Counties,
Texas

Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Rehabilitation

Comal and Hays Counties, Texas
HeC3—Heiden clay, 3 to 5 percent slopes, eroded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2v1vb
Elevation: 300 to 1,390 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 33 to 48 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 64 to 68 degrees F
Frost-free period: 233 to 278 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Heiden, moderately eroded, and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects ofthe mapunit.
Description of Heiden, Moderately Eroded
Setting
Landform: Ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Microfeatures of landform position: Linear gilgai
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Clayey residuum weathered from mudstone
Typical profileA - 0 to 13 inches: clay
Bss - 13 to 22 inches: clay
Bkss - 22 to 58 inches: clay
CBdk - 58 to 80 inches: clay
Properties and qualities
Slope: 3 to 5 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 40 to 65 inches to densic material
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Very highCapacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very
low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 40 percent
Gypsum, maximum in profile: 5 percent
Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0
to 2.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 12.0
Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.3 inches)
Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey

5/27/2020
Page 1 of 2

Map Unit Description: Heiden clay, 3 to 5 percent slopes, eroded---Comal and Hays Counties,
Texas

Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Rehabilitation

Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Ecological site: Southern Eroded Blackland (R086AY009TX)
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Houston black
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Landform: Ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Microfeatures of landform position: Circular gilgai
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Linear
Ecological site: Southern Blackland (R086AY011TX)
Hydric soil rating: No
Ferris, severely eroded
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Microfeatures of landform position: Linear gilgai
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Convex
Ecological site: Southern Eroded Blackland (R086AY009TX)
Hydric soil rating: No

Data Source Information
Soil Survey Area: Comal and Hays Counties, Texas
Survey Area Data: Version 16, Sep 12, 2019

Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey

5/27/2020
Page 2 of 2

Map Unit Description: Heiden clay, 5 to 8 percent slopes, eroded---Comal and Hays Counties,
Texas

Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Rehabilitation

Comal and Hays Counties, Texas
HeD3—Heiden clay, 5 to 8 percent slopes, eroded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2v1vd
Elevation: 250 to 940 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 33 to 40 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 64 to 68 degrees F
Frost-free period: 245 to 278 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Heiden, moderately eroded, and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects ofthe mapunit.
Description of Heiden, Moderately Eroded
Setting
Landform: Ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Microfeatures of landform position: Linear gilgai
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Clayey residuum weathered from mudstone
Typical profile
A1 - 0 to 8 inches: clay
A2 - 8 to 22 inches: clay
Bss - 22 to 44 inches: clay
CBd - 44 to 80 inches: clay
Properties and qualities
Slope: 5 to 8 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 40 to 65 inches to densic material
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Very highCapacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very
low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 40 percent
Gypsum, maximum in profile: 5 percent
Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0
to 2.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 12.0
Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.1 inches)
Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey

5/27/2020
Page 1 of 2

Map Unit Description: Heiden clay, 5 to 8 percent slopes, eroded---Comal and Hays Counties,
Texas

Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Rehabilitation

Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Ecological site: Southern Eroded Blackland (R086AY009TX)
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Ferris, moderately eroded
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Landform: Ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Microfeatures of landform position: Linear gilgai
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Convex
Ecological site: Southern Eroded Blackland (R086AY009TX)
Hydric soil rating: No
Heiden, severely eroded
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Microfeatures of landform position: Linear gilgai
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Concave
Ecological site: Southern Eroded Blackland (R086AY009TX)
Hydric soil rating: No

Data Source Information
Soil Survey Area: Comal and Hays Counties, Texas
Survey Area Data: Version 16, Sep 12, 2019

Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey

5/27/2020
Page 2 of 2

Map Unit Description: Lewisville silty clay, 1 to 3 percent slopes---Comal and Hays Counties,
Texas

Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Rehabilitation

Comal and Hays Counties, Texas
LeB—Lewisville silty clay, 1 to 3 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2vtgn
Elevation: 240 to 1,470 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 32 to 44 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 63 to 68 degrees F
Frost-free period: 240 to 270 days
Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Lewisville and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects ofthe mapunit.
Description of Lewisville
Setting
Landform: Stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Calcareous clayey alluvium derived frommudstone
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 15 inches: silty clay
Bk1 - 15 to 38 inches: silty clay
Bk2 - 38 to 69 inches: silty clay
Properties and qualities
Slope: 1 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):
Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 40 percent
Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline (0.7 to 1.1 mmhos/cm)
Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.7 inches)Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: Southern Clay Loam (R086AY007TX)
Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey

5/27/2020
Page 1 of 2

Map Unit Description: Lewisville silty clay, 1 to 3 percent slopes---Comal and Hays Counties,
Texas

Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Rehabilitation

Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
AltogaPercent of map unit: 10 percent
Landform: Stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Convex
Ecological site: Southern Clay Loam (R086AY007TX)
Hydric soil rating: No
Branyon
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Stream terraces, stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Microfeatures of landform position: Circular gilgai, circular gilgai
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Convex
Ecological site: Southern Blackland (R086AY011TX)
Hydric soil rating: No

Data Source Information
Soil Survey Area: Comal and Hays Counties, Texas
Survey Area Data: Version 16, Sep 12, 2019

Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey

5/27/2020
Page 2 of 2

Map Unit Description: Tinn clay, 0 to 1 percent slopes, frequently flooded---Comal and Hays
Counties, Texas

Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Rehabilitation

Comal and Hays Counties, Texas
Tn—Tinn clay, 0 to 1 percent slopes, frequently flooded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2vtgr
Elevation: 330 to 750 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 35 to 47 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 63 to 68 degrees F
Frost-free period: 226 to 263 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Tinn and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects ofthe mapunit.
Description of Tinn
Setting
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Microfeatures of landform position: Circular gilgai
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Concave
Parent material: Calcareous clayey alluvium
Typical profileA - 0 to 17 inches: clay
Bss - 17 to 57 inches: clay
Bkssy - 57 to 80 inches: clay
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Moderately well drained
Runoff class: HighCapacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very
low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: Frequent
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 25 percent
Gypsum, maximum in profile: 2 percent
Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0
to 2.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 2.0
Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.4 inches)Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey

5/27/2020
Page 1 of 2

Map Unit Description: Tinn clay, 0 to 1 percent slopes, frequently flooded---Comal and Hays
Counties, Texas

Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Rehabilitation

Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Ecological site: Clayey Bottomland (R086AY013TX)
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Whitesboro
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Microfeatures of landform position: Circular gilgai
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Concave
Ecological site: Loamy Bottomland (R086AY012TX)
Hydric soil rating: No
Gladewater
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Concave
Ecological site: Clayey Bottomland (R086AY013TX)
Hydric soil rating: Yes

Data Source Information
Soil Survey Area: Comal and Hays Counties, Texas
Survey Area Data: Version 16, Sep 12, 2019

Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey

5/27/2020
Page 2 of 2

Map Unit Description: Water---Comal and Hays Counties, Texas

Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Rehabilitation

Comal and Hays Counties, Texas
W—Water
Map Unit Composition
Water: 100 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects ofthe mapunit.

Data Source Information
Soil Survey Area: Comal and Hays Counties, Texas
Survey Area Data: Version 16, Sep 12, 2019

Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey

5/27/2020
Page 1 of 1

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

Appendix B Seismicity DataTSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
61

U.S. Geological Survey - Earthquake Hazards Program

Uni ed Hazard Tool

Please do not use this tool to obtain ground motion parameter values for the design codereference documents covered by the U.S. Seismic Design Maps web tools (e.g., theInternational Building Code and the ASCE 7 or 41 Standard). The values returned by the two
applications are not identical.

 Input
EditionDynamic: Conterminous U.S. 2014 (upda

Spectral Period
Peak Ground Acceleration

LatitudeTime Horizon

Decimal degrees

Return period in years

29.983965
Longitude
Decimal degrees, negative values for western longitudes-97.857596
Site Class
760 m/s (B/C boundary)2500

 Hazard Curve
Hazard Curves

Uniform Hazard Response Spectrum
0.12
0.11

1e-3

0.10

1e-4

0.09

Ground Motion (g)Annual Frequency of Exceedence

1e-2

1e-5
1e-6
1e-7
1e-8
1e-9
1e-10
1e-11

Time Horizon 2500 years
Peak Ground Acceleration
0.10 Second Spectral Acceleration
0.20 Second Spectral Acceleration
0.30 Second Spectral Acceleration
0.50 Second Spectral Acceleration
1.00 Second Spectral Acceleration
2.00 Second Spectral Acceleration

1e-2

Annual Frequency of Exceedence

0.05
0.04

Spectral Period (s): PGA
Ground Motion (g): 0.0246

0.01
0.00
1e-1

1e+0

0.0

1e-3
1e-4
1e-5
1e-6
1e-7
Time Horizon 2475 years
Grid
Fault
Cluster

1e-1

Ground Motion (g)

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

Spectral Period (s)1e-2View Raw Data

0.06

0.02

Component Curves for Peak Ground Acceleration

1e-2

0.07

0.03

Ground Motion (g)

1e-8

0.08

1e+0

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

 Deaggregation
Component% Contribution to Hazard
5
10

Total

5

4

4.5

5

w)
e (M 7ditu 6.5
gn
Ma 6
5.5

7.5

8

ε = (-∞ .. -2.5)
ε = [-2.5 .. -2)
ε = [-2 .. -1.5)
ε = [-1.5 .. -1)
ε = [-1 .. -0.5)
ε = [-0.5 .. 0)ε = [0 .. 0.5)
ε = [0.5 .. 1)
ε = [1 .. 1.5)
ε = [1.5 .. 2)
ε = [2 .. 2.5)
ε = [2.5 .. +∞)

8.5 5
165

Cl
325 osestDista
485 nce,rRup(
645 km)
805

165

965
32
Clo 5
ses
tD
ista 485
nce, rR
up 645
(km
)

805
965

4

4.5

5

7 )
6.5e (Mw
6 itudn
5.5 Mag

7.5

8

8.5

Summary statistics for, Deaggregation: Total

Deaggregation targets

Recovered targets

Return period: 2500 yrs
Exceedance rate: 0.0004 yr⁻¹
PGA ground motion: 0.024562158 g

Return period: 2505.3577 yrs
Exceedance rate: 0.0003991446 yr⁻¹

TotalsMean (over all sources)

Binned: 97.45 %Residual: 2.55 %Trace: 3.1 %m: 5.77
r: 177.09 km
ε₀: 0.14 σMode (largest m-r bin)Mode (largest m-r-ε₀ bin)

m: 4.9r: 49.87 km
ε₀: -0.16 σContribution: 2.25 %m: 4.9r: 69.88 km
ε₀: 0.27 σContribution: 1.08 %Discretization

Epsilon keys

r: min = 0.0, max = 1000.0, Δ = 20.0 km
m: min = 4.4, max = 9.4, Δ = 0.2
ε: min = -3.0, max = 3.0, Δ = 0.5 σ

ε0: [-∞ .. -2.5)
ε1: [-2.5 .. -2.0)
ε2: [-2.0 .. -1.5)
ε3: [-1.5 .. -1.0)
ε4: [-1.0 .. -0.5)
ε5: [-0.5 .. 0.0)
ε6: [0.0 .. 0.5)
ε7: [0.5 .. 1.0)
ε8: [1.0 .. 1.5)
ε9: [1.5 .. 2.0)
ε10: [2.0 .. 2.5)
ε11: [2.5 .. +∞]Deaggregation Contributors

Source Set  Source

Type

r

m

ε0

lon

lat

az

%

USGS Fixed Smoothing Zone 2 (opt)

Grid

14.78

SSCn Fixed Smoothing Zone 2 (opt)

Grid

14.63

USGS Adaptive Smoothing Zone 2 (opt)

Grid

12.15

SSCn Adaptive Smoothing Zone 2 (opt)

Grid

12.01

SSCn Adaptive Smoothing Zone 1 (opt)

Grid

9.64

USGS Adaptive Smoothing Zone 1 (opt)

Grid

9.56

SSCn Fixed Smoothing Zone 1 (opt)

Grid

9.05

USGS Fixed Smoothing Zone 1 (opt)

Grid

8.97

SSCn New Madrid
NMFS RLME 1

Cluster

SSCn Meers Full Rupture
Meers CEUS - SSC

Fault

USGS New Madrid 500-year

Cluster

987.487.74

2.10

90.374°W

35.555°N

46.50

3.51
1.03

526.967.14

1.45

98.300°W

34.709°N

355.60

1.84
1.84
1.10

U.S. Geological Survey - Earthquake Hazards Program

Uni ed Hazard Tool

Please do not use this tool to obtain ground motion parameter values for the design codereference documents covered by the U.S. Seismic Design Maps web tools (e.g., theInternational Building Code and the ASCE 7 or 41 Standard). The values returned by the two
applications are not identical.

 Input
EditionDynamic: Conterminous U.S. 2014 (upda

Spectral Period
Peak Ground Acceleration

LatitudeTime Horizon

Decimal degrees

Return period in years

29.983965
Longitude
Decimal degrees, negative values for western longitudes-97.857596
Site Class
760 m/s (B/C boundary)

10000 Hazard Curve
Hazard Curves

Uniform Hazard Response Spectrum
0.12
0.11

1e-3

0.10

1e-4

0.09

Ground Motion (g)Annual Frequency of Exceedence

1e-2

1e-5
1e-6
1e-7
1e-8
1e-9
1e-10
1e-11

Time Horizon 10000 years
Peak Ground Acceleration
0.10 Second Spectral Acceleration
0.20 Second Spectral Acceleration
0.30 Second Spectral Acceleration
0.50 Second Spectral Acceleration
1.00 Second Spectral Acceleration
2.00 Second Spectral Acceleration

1e-2

Annual Frequency of Exceedence

0.05

Spectral Period (s): PGA
Ground Motion (g): 0.0547

0.04

0.01
0.00
1e-1

1e+0

0.0

1e-3
1e-4
1e-5
1e-6
1e-7
Time Horizon 2475 years
Grid
Fault
Cluster

1e-1

Ground Motion (g)

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

Spectral Period (s)1e-2View Raw Data

0.06

0.02

Component Curves for Peak Ground Acceleration

1e-2

0.07

0.03

Ground Motion (g)

1e-8

0.08

1e+0

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

 Deaggregation
Component% Contribution to Hazard
5
10

Total

5

4

4.5

5

w)
e (M 7ditu 6.5
gn
Ma 6
5.5

7.5

8

ε = (-∞ .. -2.5)
ε = [-2.5 .. -2)
ε = [-2 .. -1.5)
ε = [-1.5 .. -1)
ε = [-1 .. -0.5)
ε = [-0.5 .. 0)ε = [0 .. 0.5)
ε = [0.5 .. 1)
ε = [1 .. 1.5)
ε = [1.5 .. 2)
ε = [2 .. 2.5)
ε = [2.5 .. +∞)

8.5 5
165

Clo
325 sest
Distan
485 ce, rR
up

(km
645 )
805

165
3
Clo 25sestD
ista 485
nce
, rR
up

6
(km 45
)

805
4

4.5

5

7 )
6.5e (Mw
6 itudn
5.5 Mag

7.5

8

8.5

Summary statistics for, Deaggregation: Total

Deaggregation targets

Recovered targets

Return period: 10000 yrs
Exceedance rate: 0.0001 yr⁻¹
PGA ground motion: 0.054669209 g

Return period: 10010.396 yrs
Exceedance rate: 0.000099896152 yr⁻¹

TotalsMean (over all sources)

Binned: 99.96 %Residual: 0.04 %Trace: 2.05 %m: 5.71
r: 91.37 km
ε₀: 0.09 σMode (largest m-r bin)Mode (largest m-r-ε₀ bin)

m: 4.9r: 29.54 km
ε₀: -0.17 σContribution: 4.24 %m: 4.9r: 29.13 km
ε₀: -0.25 σContribution: 1.53 %Discretization

Epsilon keys

r: min = 0.0, max = 1000.0, Δ = 20.0 km
m: min = 4.4, max = 9.4, Δ = 0.2
ε: min = -3.0, max = 3.0, Δ = 0.5 σ

ε0: [-∞ .. -2.5)
ε1: [-2.5 .. -2.0)
ε2: [-2.0 .. -1.5)
ε3: [-1.5 .. -1.0)
ε4: [-1.0 .. -0.5)
ε5: [-0.5 .. 0.0)
ε6: [0.0 .. 0.5)
ε7: [0.5 .. 1.0)
ε8: [1.0 .. 1.5)
ε9: [1.5 .. 2.0)
ε10: [2.0 .. 2.5)
ε11: [2.5 .. +∞]Deaggregation Contributors

Source Set  Source

Type

r

m

ε0

lon

lat

az

%

22.81
13.31
32.51
18.01
27.65

5.19
5.14
5.27
5.16
5.23

-1.02
-1.99
-0.46
-1.43
-0.70

97.858°W
97.858°W
97.858°W
97.858°W
97.858°W

30.186°N
30.096°N
30.276°N
30.141°N
30.231°N

0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

14.44
1.32
1.25
1.25
1.12
1.09

22.81
13.31
32.51
18.01
27.65

5.19
5.14
5.27
5.16
5.23

-1.02
-1.99
-0.46
-1.43
-0.70

97.858°W
97.858°W
97.858°W
97.858°W
97.858°W

30.186°N
30.096°N
30.276°N
30.141°N
30.231°N

0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

14.43
1.32
1.25
1.25
1.12
1.09

22.81
13.31
32.51
18.01

5.19
5.14
5.27
5.16

-1.02
-1.99
-0.46
-1.43

97.858°W
97.858°W
97.858°W
97.858°W

30.186°N
30.096°N
30.276°N
30.141°N

0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

13.30
1.20
1.13
1.13
1.01

22.81
13.31
32.51
18.01

5.19
5.14
5.27
5.16

-1.02
-1.99
-0.46
-1.43

97.858°W
97.858°W
97.858°W
97.858°W

30.186°N
30.096°N
30.276°N
30.141°N

0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

13.28
1.20
1.13
1.13
1.01

SSCn Adaptive Smoothing Zone 1 (opt)
PointSourceFinite: -97.858, 30.186
PointSourceFinite: -97.858, 30.096
PointSourceFinite: -97.858, 30.276
PointSourceFinite: -97.858, 30.141
PointSourceFinite: -97.858, 30.231

Grid

USGS Adaptive Smoothing Zone 1 (opt)
PointSourceFinite: -97.858, 30.186
PointSourceFinite: -97.858, 30.096
PointSourceFinite: -97.858, 30.276
PointSourceFinite: -97.858, 30.141
PointSourceFinite: -97.858, 30.231

Grid

SSCn Fixed Smoothing Zone 1 (opt)
PointSourceFinite: -97.858, 30.186
PointSourceFinite: -97.858, 30.096
PointSourceFinite: -97.858, 30.276
PointSourceFinite: -97.858, 30.141

Grid

USGS Fixed Smoothing Zone 1 (opt)
PointSourceFinite: -97.858, 30.186
PointSourceFinite: -97.858, 30.096
PointSourceFinite: -97.858, 30.276
PointSourceFinite: -97.858, 30.141

Grid

USGS Fixed Smoothing Zone 2 (opt)

Grid

11.99

SSCn Fixed Smoothing Zone 2 (opt)

Grid

11.96

USGS Adaptive Smoothing Zone 2 (opt)

Grid

9.93

SSCn Adaptive Smoothing Zone 2 (opt)

Grid

9.90

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

Appendix C Site Photographs

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
62

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board

Plum FRS No. 2 - East of Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
03/26/2020

Description:
Photo facing northwest
direction shows the existing
dam embankment crest andthe reservoir. Uniform
vegetative covering isobserved throughout theembankment. Rutting marks
can be seen on the crest of thedam.

Photo No.
2

Date:
03/26/2020

Description:
A focused view of rutting
marks near the upstream toeof the dam. Photo facing
northwest direction.

Https://Aecom-My.Sharepoint.Com/Personal/Mariana_Sa_Aecom_Com/Documents/5 TSSWCB Dams/Plum 2/GIR/Appendices/General Site Photos/Plum FRS 2 Site Photos Log - Updated 06.16.2020.Docx 12/20/2013

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board

Plum FRS No. 2 - East of Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
03/26/2020

Description:
Photo facing northwest
direction provides additionalview of the upstream
embankment slope andimpoundment. Barbed wire
fencing can be seen in theforeground along the
upstream slope. Tallvegetation is shown along the
upstream toe.

Photo No.
4

Date:
03/26/2020

Description:
Photo facing northwest shows
the intake tower and stage
recorder. Tall vegetation canbe seen along the upstream
toe of the dam near the
reservoir.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board

Plum FRS No. 2 - East of Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5

Date:
03/26/2020

Description:
Photo facing northwest
direction depicts area ofsuspected animal burrowing
activity near the upstream toeof the dam.

Photo No.
6

Date:
03/26/2020

Description:
A focused view of possible
rutting and erosion damage
observed near the upstream
toe of the dam. Photo facing
southwest direction.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board

Plum FRS No. 2 - East of Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7

Date:
03/26/2020

Description:
Photo facing northwest
direction shows the reservoir,
intake tower, and stage andrainfall instrumentation
installed near the upstream ofthe dam.

Photo No.
8

Date:
03/26/2020

Description:
A view of the existing
auxiliary spillway and training
dike shows good vegetative
covering throughout. Phototaken in east direction.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board

Plum FRS No. 2 - East of Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
9

Date:
03/26/2020

Description:
Photo facing north/northwest
direction shows damage toexisting barbed wire fencing
present near the upstream toeof the dam.

Photo No.
10

Date:
03/26/2020

Description:
A focused view of the dam
embankment crest anddownstream slope. Fenced
area to the left gives access todownstream toe of the dam
and principal spillway stillingbasin. Photo facing southeast
direction.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board

Plum FRS No. 2 - East of Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
11

Date:
03/26/2020

Description:
Photo facing southeast
direction shows the existing
24-inch I.D. principal
spillway conduit, pipe cradle,
and stilling basin. Wellestablished vegetation can beseen on the background along
the edges of the stilling basin.

Photo No.
12

Date:
03/26/2020

Description:
A focused view of suspectedanimal burrow and/or area of
erosion observed near the
fencing surrounding theprincipal spillway stillingbasin.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board

Plum FRS No. 2 - East of Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
13

Date:
03/26/2020

Description:
Additional view of animalburrow observed during field
inspection.

Photo No.
14

Date:
03/26/2020

Description:
A view of faded warning
signs on gate entrance to thedam site.

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

Appendix D Hammer Calibration ReportTSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
63

November 28, 2016
Matt Brenna
Total Support Services
4647 Brass Way
Dallas, Texas 75236
Re:

Energy Measurement for Dynamic Penetrometers
Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Calibration
Dallas, Texas

GRL Job No. 1655059-1

Dear Mr. Brenna:
This report transmits our findings from energy measurements and related data analysis conductedby GRL Engineers, Inc. (GRL) for your four drill rigs located throughout the Dallas region. Four
automatic hammer and penetrometer systems were monitored during Standard Penetration(SPT) tests. Dynamic testing summarized in this report was conducted November 11, 2016.
The purpose in collecting the SPT energy measurements was to compute the energy transfer
efficiency for four drill rig hammers. To meet this objective, an 8G Model, Pile Driving Analyzer(PDA) was used to acquire and process the dynamic test data. Additional information regarding
the testing equipment and analytical procedures is provided in Appendix A.
Test Sequence
Using an instrumented NW-J rod, energy measurements were made at various sample depths
for the drill rig. The drill rigs were identified as a CME 55 (SN:76225), CME 55LC (SN:339465),
CME 55 (SN:210595) & Mobile B-59 (SN:N/A). Dynamic measurements were obtained forsample depths between 10 and 41.5 feet.
Each sample depth consisted of energy
measurements of 18 inches of driving.
Energy Transfer Measurements
An 8G model Pile Driving Analyzer was used to take measurements of strain and acceleration.
The strain and acceleration signals were conditioned and converted to force and velocities by the
PDA. The PDA interprets the measured dynamic data according to the Case Method equations.
Force and velocity records from the PDA were also viewed graphically on an LCD screen toevaluate data quality. All force and velocity records were also digitally stored for subsequent
analysis.

Total Support Services
GRL Job No. 1655059-1
Page 2

November 28, 2016

The maximum energy transferred to the rod (EMX) was calculated by integrating both the force
and velocity records over time as follows:
EMX = ∫F(t)V(t)dt
Where: F(t) = the force at time tV(t) = the velocity at time t
For CME 55LC (SN:339465) and CME 55 (SN:210595), the energy transfer ratio or efficiency iscomputed by dividing EMX by the theoretical SPT hammer energy of 350 lb-ft (computed fromthe product of the hammer weight, assumed to be the standard 140 lbs, and the fall height,
assumed to be 2.5 ft). For CME 55 (SN:76225), the energy transfer ratio or efficiency iscomputed by dividing EMX by the theoretical SPT hammer energy of 420 lb-ft (computed fromthe product of the hammer weight, assumed to be the standard 140 lbs, and the fall height,
assumed to be 3.0 ft). For this hammer, an anvil was used in the system that allowed the drop
height to increase to 36 inches. For this reason, the theoretical potential energy has been
increased to compensate. The SPT N values can then be corrected for a nominal 60% transfer
efficiency, N60, as follows:
N60 = (em / 60) Nm
Where: em = the measured transfer ratio (ETR)
Nm = the measured SPT “N” value

For Mobile B-59 (SN:N/A), the energy transfer ratio or efficiency is computed by dividing EMX
by the theoretical TCP hammer energy of 340 lb-ft (computed from the product of the hammer
weight, assumed to be the standard 170 lbs, and the fall height, assumed to be 2.0 ft. The
potential energy for these samples were modified accordingly). The TCP N values can then becorrected for a nominal 60% transfer efficiency, N60, as follows:
N60 = (em / 60) Nm
Where: em = the measured transfer ratio (ETR)
Nm = the measured TCP “N” value

GRL Engineers, Inc.

Total Support Services
GRL Job No. 1655059-1
Page 3

November 28, 2016

Conclusions
Table 1 presents a summary of the average transferred energy and the energy transfer ratio foreach drill rig at each sample depth calculated using the EMX equation. Included in Table 1 arealso average values of the hammer operating rate, maximum impact force and maximum velocityof the rod. The overall performance, which represents the average of data from all sample
depths for each rig/rod type is also shown. Complete information, including the maximum,
minimum and standard deviation for each sampling depth, is included in Appendix B.
As indicated in Table 1, the average energy transfer ratio (ETR) from individual sample depths
ranged from 93.5 to 95.3% for the CME 55 (SN:76225), from 75.9 to 82.0% for the CME 55LC
(SN:339465), from 83.6 to 83.7% for the CME 55 (SN:210595) and from 79.7 to 83.2% for the
Mobile B-59 (SN:N/A).
The overall transfer ratio (for all sampling depths weighted by N-values for each sample) was asfollows:

SPT Rig (Serial Number)

Overall Transfer
Efficiency

Hammer OperatingRate

CME 55 (SN:76225)

94.4%

33.4

CME 55LC (SN:339465)

79.9%

39.7

CME 55 (SN:210595)

83.6%

52.6

Mobile B-59 (SN:N/A)

81.0%

43.4

Presented N60 values presented in the table do not account for any required corrections such as
overburden or sampling spoon.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of assistance to you. Please do not hesitate to contact us if
you have any questions regarding this report, or if we may be of further service.
Sincerely,
GRL Engineers, Inc.

Brandon Phetteplace, P.E.

GRL Engineers, Inc.

Appendix A
Introduction to SPT Dynamic Pile TestingAPPENDIX A
AN INTRODUCTION INTO SPT DYNAMIC PILE TESTING
The following has been written by GRL Engineers, Inc. and may only be copied with its written permission.

developed between 1964 and 1975, requires that asubstantial ram mass (e.g. a pile driving hammer)
impacts the pile top such that the pile undergoes atleast a small permanent set. Thus, the method is
also referred to as a “High Strain Method”. The Case
Method requires dynamic measurements on the pileor shaft under the ram impact and then a calculationof various quantities. Conveniently, for SPT
applications, the measurements and analyses aredone by a single piece of equipment: the SPT
Analyzer. The Pile Driving Analyzer® (PDA) is also
suitable to perform these measurements and dataprocessing.

1. BACKGROUNDThe Standard Penetration Test is frequently
conducted as an in-situ assessment of soil strength.
This test requires that a 140 lb weight is dropped 30
inches onto a drive rod at whose bottom a sampler isusually installed. The sampler is driven for 18 inches;the number of blows required for the last 12 inches ofdriving is the so-called N-value. The N-value may be
used as a strength indicator for foundation design or
as a means of assessing the liquefaction potential ofsoils.
Obviously, the SPT hammer efficiency is an importantconsideration when using the N-values for design
purposes. Measurements have indicated that theenergy in the drive rod is sometimes only 30% andand may reach 90% of the potential or rated energy of
the SPT hammer (E-rated = 0.35 kip-ft or 0.475 kJ).
The type of hammer used to drive the rod is the main
reason for these variations. On the average, theenergy in the drive rod is 60% of the standard rated
energy.

A related analysis method is the “Wave Equation
Analysis” which calculates a relationship between
bearing capacity, pile stresses, transferred energy
and field blow count. The GRLWEAP™ program
performs this analysis and provides a complete setof helpful information and input data. This program
can be used very effectively to simulate the SPT
driving process.

Because of the variability of energy, methods basedon N-values are considered unreliable. However,measurements during SPT testing using the Case
Method can be done on a routine basis and thesemeasurements yield the transferred energy values.
With measured energy, EMX, known, an adjustmentof the measured N-value, Nm, can be made as follows.

N60 = Nm [Em / (0.6Er )]3. MEASUREMENTS
GRL uses equipment manufactured by Pile
Dynamics, Inc. The system includes either an SPTAnalyzer™ (SPTA) or a Pile Driving Analyzer®
(PDA), an instrumented rod section and two
accelerometers. SPT energy testing is very closely
related to and borrows procedures from dynamic pile
testing. Those interested in the basis of the SPT
energy testing method may obtain extensive
literature on dynamic pile testing from GRL
Engineers, Inc.

(1)

Thus, if the measured energy value is equal to thenormally expected transferred energy of 60% of Erated then the adjusted and measured N-values are
identical. On the other hand, if the measured energy
is only 30% then the adjusted blow count will be
reduced by 50%.

3.1 SPT Analyzer or Pile Driving Analyzer
The basis for the results calculated by the SPTA or
PDA are strain and acceleration measured in an
instrumented rod section. These signals areconverted to rod top force, F(t), and rod top velocity,v(t). The SPTA or PDA conditions, calibrates anddisplays these signals and immediately computes
average pile force and velocity thereby eliminating
bending effects. The product of these two

2. DYNAMIC TESTING AND ANALYSISMETHODS APPLIED TO SPTThe Case Method of dynamic pile testing, named after
the Case Institute of Technology where it was

A-1

measurements is then integrated over time whichyields the energy transferred to the instrumented
section as a function of time (see Section 4.1).

and driving system. EMX allows for a classification of
the hammer's performance when presented as, eT,
the rated transfer efficiency, also called energy
transfer ratio (ETR) or global efficiency.

For convenience and accuracy, strain measurements
are usually taken on an instrumented section of SPT
drive rod. Ideally, the section properties of the
instrumented rod and those of the drive rod are thesame, however, using subs, other sections can also
be utilized.

eT = EMX/ER

where ER is the hammer manufacturer’s rated
energy value or 0.35 kip-ft (0.475 kJ) in the case of
the SPT hammer.

For the instrumented section, PDI provides a force
calibration in such a way that the output of the
instrumented rod is directly calculated without theneed for an accurate elastic modulus or crosssectional area of the rod section.

Often in the SPT literature one finds also reference
to the EF2 energy. This evaluation is based onassumed proportionality between force and velocity(see also Section 5):v(t) = F(t) / Z

The acceleration measurements are often demanding
in the SPT environment, because of high frequency
and high acceleration motion components. An
experienced measurement engineer, therefore, has toevaluate the quality of this data before final
conclusions are drawn from the numerical results
calculated by SPTA or PDA.

Combining equations 2 and 4 leads toEF(t) = oI F(J)2 / Z dJt

(5)

The EF2 transferred energy value is the EF-value atthe time t = 2L/c, where L is the drive rod length andc is the stress wave speed in steel (16,800 ft/s or
5,124 m/s). Since the force is easier to measure thanboth force and velocity, Equation 5 is preferred bysome test engineers. However, the EF method isfraught with errors and certain correction factors
have to be applied to make it approximately correct.
Among the error sources are the following:

3.2 HPAThe SPT hammer’s ram velocity may be directly
obtained using radar technology in the Hammer
Performance Analyzer™. The impact velocity results
can be automatically processed with a PC or recorded
on a strip chart. HPA measurements yield a hammer
kinetic energy, but not the energy transferred to thedrive rod.

•

Proportionality is often violated prior to time
2L/c. The proportionality between force andvelocity in a downward traveling wave only
holds if the wave does not encounter adisturbance prior to reflecting off the pile toe.
Such disturbances include a change in crosssectional area, an open or loose splice or joint,
or resistance along the shaft.

•

Using only one force measurement precludes
a data quality check based on the
proportionality between force and velocity.
Thus, a force measurement that is for somereason in error may not be detectable, which
will lead to errors in the EF2 value. Data
quality checks will be discussed further in
Section 5.

4 RECORD EVALUATION BY SPTA OR PDA
4.1 HAMMER PERFORMANCEThe PDA calculates the energy transferred to the pile
top from:t(4)

where Z = EA/c is the pile impedance, E is the elastic
modulus, A is the cross sectional area and c is the
speed of the stress wave in the pile material..

SPTA or PDA records are taken while the standard Nvalue is acquired in the conventional manner. This
then allows a direct correlation between N-value andaverage transferred energy.

E(t) = oI F(J)v(J) dJ

(3)

(2)

The maximum of the E(t) curve is often called
ENTHRU or EMX; it is the most important quantity foran overall evaluation of the performance of a hammer

A-2

F = F/A = v (E/c)

The use if EF2 is therefore not recommended but it isoften included in result presentations for the sake ofcompleteness.

(6)

or strain, = F/E = v / c

4.2 STRESSES(7)

This means that the early portion of strain times
wave speed must be equal to the velocity unless the
proportionality is affected by high friction near thepile top or by a pile cross sectional change not far
below the sensors. Checking the proportionality is
an excellent means of assuring meaningfulmeasurements but is only truly meaningful for
perfectly uniform rods. Open or loose splices, forexample, will lead to a non-proportionality. For SPT
rods it is fortunate that usually no soil resistance acts
along the shaft and for that reason, proportionality
can exist until the stress wave returns from sampler
top or rod bottom unless connectors are notsufficiently tightened or have a significant mass.

During SPT monitoring, it is also of interest to monitor
compressive stresses at both the top of the drive rod
and at its bottom.
At the pile top (location of sensors) the maximum
compression stress averaged over the rod’s crosssection, CSX, is directly obtained from themeasurements. Note that this stress value refers to
the instrumented section. If the rod has a different
cross sectional area then the stress in the rod will bedifferent from CSX.
The SPTA or PDA can also calculate, in an
approximate manner, the force at the rod bottom,
CFB. To obtain the corresponding stress, this force
value should be divided by the appropriate crosssectional area, e.g. by the rod area just above thesampler or by the sampler area itself. Of course, nonuniform stress components as they might occur at the
sampler tip due to a sloping rock are not consideredin this calculation.

Velocity data quality can also be checked by looking
at the final displacement, DFN, which is calculated
from the acceleration by double integration. If thecalculated final displacement is much higher or lower
than indicated by the N-value, the accelerometerattachment may be loose or the sensor may be
faulty. If major drift in the velocity is observed, theEMX value may be in error, even thoughproportionality from impact to time 2L/c exists. In thiscase, it may be useful to evaluate the energy
transferred to the drill rod at time 2L/c, which is
calculated by the PDA or SPTA as the E2E quantity.

5. DATA QUALITY CHECKS
Quality data is the first and foremost requirement for
accurate dynamic testing results. It is therefore
important that the measurement engineer performing
SPTA or PDA tests has the experience necessary torecognize measurement problems and takeappropriate corrective action should problems
develop. Fortunately, dynamic pile testing allows forcertain data quality checks because two independentmeasurements are taken that have to conform to theso-called proportionality relationship.
As long as there is only a wave traveling in one
direction, as is the case during impact when only adownward traveling wave exists in the rod, force andvelocity measured at its top are proportional
F=vZ

(5)

where Z is again the pile impedance, Z = EA/c. This
relationship can also be expressed in terms of stress© 2003 GRL Engineers, Inc.
App-A-SPT-12-03

A-3

Appendix B
SPT Results

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/28/2016
Summary of SPT Test Results

Project: RIG 1013, Test Date: 11/11/2016 - CME 55 (SN:76225)
FMX: Maximum Force
VMX: Maximum Velocity
BPM: Blows/Minute
Instr.
Blows
Start
Final
LengthApplied
Depth
Depth
ft
/6"
ft
ft
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00

1-5-5
2-3-5
2-3-4
3-4-8

10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00

11.50
16.50
21.50
26.50

EMX: Maximum Energy
ETR: Energy Transfer Ratio - Rated
ER: Hammer Energy Rating
Average
Average
Average
EMX
ETR
ER
ft-lb
(%)
ft-lb

N
Value

N60
Value

Average
FMX
kips

Average
VMX
ft/s

Average
BPM
bpm

10
8
7
12

15
12
11
18

39
40
40
38

17.8
18.3
17.9
19.1

32.5
34.8
34.9
32.4

394
393
398
400

93.8
93.5
94.7
95.3

420
420
420
420

Overall Average Values:
Standard Deviation:
Overall Maximum Value:
Overall Minimum Value:

39
1
40
37

18.3
0.6
19.5
17.4

33.4
1.3
35.3
31.7

396
9
413
367

94.4
2.0
98.3
87.3

420
0
420
420

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/28/2016

RIG 1013
BP
AR: 1.42in^2
LE: 15.00
ft
WS: 16807.9 ft/s

10
Test date: 11/11/2016
SP: 0.492 k/ft3
EM: 30000 ksi

Depth: (10.00 - 11.50 ft], displaying BN: 9
F@15.00 ft (60 kips)
V@15.00 ft (23.7 ft/s)

FMX: Maximum Force
VMX: Maximum Velocity
BPM: Blows/Minute
BL#
BC
/6"
1
1
2
5
3
5
4
5
5
5
6
5
7
5
8
5
9
5
10
5
11
5

A1,2
F3,4

LP
ft
10.50
10.60
10.70
10.80
10.90
11.00
11.10
11.20
11.30
11.40
11.50
Average
Std Dev
Maximum
Minimum

FMX
kips
30
38
39
39
39
40
40
39
40
39
40
39
0
40
38

VMX
ft/s
21.2
17.9
17.9
18.0
17.9
18.0
17.8
17.7
17.6
17.5
17.5
17.8
0.2
18.0
17.5
N-value: 10

BPM
bpm
1.9
33.8
33.9
33.2
32.0
31.7
32.1
31.9
32.2
31.9
32.0
32.5
0.8
33.9
31.7

Sample Interval Time: 18.50 seconds.

EMX: Maximum Energy
ETR: Energy Transfer Ratio - Rated
ER: Hammer Energy Rating
EMX
ETR
ER
ft-lb
(%)
ft-lb
498
118.5
420
392
93.2
420
410
97.6
420
367
87.3
420
413
98.3
420
403
95.9
420
390
92.9
420
386
92.0
420
384
91.5
420
401
95.5
420
394
93.7
420
394
93.8
420
13
3.1
0
413
98.3
420
367
87.3
420

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/28/2016

RIG 1013
BP
AR: 1.42in^2
LE: 20.00ft
WS: 16807.9 ft/s

10
Test date: 11/11/2016
SP: 0.492 k/ft3
EM: 30000 ksi

Depth: (15.00 - 16.50 ft], displaying BN: 19
F@20.00 ft (60 kips)
V@20.00 ft (23.7 ft/s)

BL#
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

A1,2
F3,4

BC
/6"
2
2
3
3
3
5
5
5
5
5

LP
ft
15.25
15.50
15.67
15.83
16.00
16.10
16.20
16.30
16.40
16.50
Average
Std Dev
Maximum
Minimum

FMX
kips
38
39
40
39
39
40
40
40
40
40
40
0
40
39

VMX
ft/s
18.4
18.4
18.4
18.4
18.3
18.3
18.3
18.3
18.3
18.1
18.3
0.1
18.4
18.1
N-value: 8

BPM
bpm
1.9
34.2
34.5
34.7
34.4
34.9
35.3
34.8
34.8
35.0
34.8
0.3
35.3
34.4

Sample Interval Time: 15.63 seconds.

EMX
ft-lb
386
390
386
383
405
389
392
404
398
385
393
8
405
383

ETR
(%)
92.0
92.8
91.9
91.3
96.4
92.7
93.4
96.2
94.6
91.6
93.5
1.9
96.4
91.3

ER
ft-lb
420
420
420
420
420
420
420
420
420
420
420
0
420
420

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/28/2016

RIG 1013
BP
AR: 1.42in^2
LE: 25.00
ft
WS: 16807.9 ft/s

10
Test date: 11/11/2016
SP: 0.492 k/ft3
EM: 30000 ksi

Depth: (20.00 - 21.50 ft], displaying BN: 28
F@25.00 ft (60 kips)
V@25.00 ft (23.7 ft/s)

BL#
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

A1,2
F3,4

BC
/6"
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
4
4

LP
ft
20.25
20.50
20.67
20.83
21.00
21.13
21.25
21.38
21.50
Average
Std Dev
Maximum
Minimum

FMX
kips
39
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
0
40
40

VMX
ft/s
17.0
17.4
17.5
17.4
17.7
17.8
18.0
18.3
18.2
17.9
0.3
18.3
17.4
N-value: 7

BPM
bpm
1.9
34.9
35.0
34.9
35.0
34.9
35.0
34.9
34.7
34.9
0.1
35.0
34.7

Sample Interval Time: 13.73 seconds.

EMX
ft-lb
383
391
393
392
398
404
398
400
399
398
4
404
392

ETR
(%)
91.1
93.1
93.7
93.3
94.7
96.2
94.8
95.2
95.1
94.7
0.9
96.2
93.3

ER
ft-lb
420
420
420
420
420
420
420
420
420
420
0
420
420

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/28/2016

RIG 1013
BP
AR: 1.42in^2
LE: 30.00ft
WS: 16807.9 ft/s

10
Test date: 11/11/2016
SP: 0.492 k/ft3
EM: 30000 ksi

Depth: (25.00 - 26.50 ft], displaying BN: 43
F@30.00 ft (60 kips)
V@30.00 ft (23.7 ft/s)

BL#
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45

A1,2
F3,4

BC
/6"
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8

LP
ft
25.17
25.33
25.50
25.63
25.75
25.88
26.00
26.06
26.13
26.19
26.25
26.31
26.38
26.44
26.50
Average
Std Dev
Maximum
Minimum

FMX
kips
40
40
39
39
39
39
39
38
38
37
37
37
37
37
37
38
1
39
37

VMX
ft/s
18.2
18.6
18.6
18.8
18.6
18.8
18.9
19.0
19.3
19.3
19.3
19.4
19.3
19.5
18.9
19.1
0.3
19.5
18.6
N-value: 12

BPM
bpm
1.9
31.6
32.4
32.8
32.8
32.6
32.4
32.4
32.5
32.6
32.3
32.3
32.0
32.2
32.4
32.4
0.2
32.8
32.0

Sample Interval Time: 25.94 seconds.

EMX
ft-lb
399
407
404
405
402
403
404
400
400
400
399
397
398
401
397
400
2
405
397

ETR
(%)
95.0
96.9
96.1
96.5
95.6
95.9
96.1
95.2
95.2
95.3
94.9
94.6
94.7
95.4
94.5
95.3
0.6
96.5
94.5

ER
ft-lb
420
420
420
420
420
420
420
420
420
420
420
420
420
420
420
420
0
420
420

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/21/2016
Summary of SPT Test Results

Project: CME55 TRACK, Test Date: 11/11/2016 - CME 55LC (SN:339465)
FMX: Maximum Force
VMX: Maximum Velocity
BPM: Blows/Minute
Instr.
Blows
Start
Final
N
LengthApplied
Depth
Depth
Value
ft
/6"
ft
ft
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00

6-6-7
4-5-7
4-5-7
5-12-12

10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00

11.50
16.50
21.50
26.50

EMX: Maximum Energy
ETR: Energy Transfer Ratio - Rated
ER: Hammer Energy Rating
Average
Average
Average
EMX
ETR
ER
ft-lb
(%)
ft-lb

N60
Value

Average
FMX
kips

Average
VMX
ft/s

Average
BPM
bpm

17
15
15
31

37
32
34
33

15.7
13.1
12.7
13.9

37.8
37.8
38.1
42.6

280
266
279
287

79.9
75.9
79.6
82.0

350
350
350
350

Overall Average Values:
Standard Deviation:
Overall Maximum Value:
Overall Minimum Value:

34
3
38
26

13.9
1.4
16.6
10.5

39.7
2.6
43.9
35.6

280
12
298
243

79.9
3.4
85.2
69.4

350
0
350
350

13
12
12
24

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/21/2016

CME55 TRACKBP
AR: 1.42in^2
LE: 15.00
ft
WS: 16807.9 ft/s

10
Test date: 11/11/2016
SP: 0.492 k/ft3
EM: 30000 ksi

Depth: (10.00 - 11.50 ft], displaying BN: 17
F@15.00 ft (60 kips)
V@15.00 ft (23.7 ft/s)

FMX: Maximum Force
VMX: Maximum Velocity
BPM: Blows/Minute
BL#
BC
/6"
1
6
2
6
3
6
4
6
5
6
6
6
7
6
8
6
9
6
10
6
11
6
12
6
13
7
14
7
15
7
16
7
17
7
18
7
19
7

A1,2
F3,4

LP
ft
10.08
10.17
10.25
10.33
10.42
10.50
10.58
10.67
10.75
10.83
10.92
11.00
11.07
11.14
11.21
11.29
11.36
11.43
11.50
Average
Std Dev
Maximum
Minimum

FMX
kips
37
36
37
37
36
38
35
38
37
37
37
37
37
38
38
37
38
38
36
37
1
38
35

VMX
ft/s
17.1
16.8
16.5
16.7
16.1
16.4
15.9
16.6
16.1
16.0
16.0
15.5
15.5
15.5
15.6
15.2
15.5
15.7
14.8
15.7
0.4
16.6
14.8
N-value: 13

BPM
bpm
1.9
35.7
35.7
35.7
37.5
38.5
38.6
38.7
38.5
38.5
38.5
35.6
35.7
35.8
36.7
38.7
38.6
38.8
38.7
37.8
1.3
38.8
35.6

Sample Interval Time: 28.86 seconds.

EMX: Maximum Energy
ETR: Energy Transfer Ratio - Rated
ER: Hammer Energy Rating
EMX
ETR
ER
ft-lb
(%)
ft-lb
260
74.3
350
258
73.7
350
264
75.3
350
261
74.5
350
270
77.2
350
272
77.8
350
285
81.5
350
278
79.4
350
282
80.5
350
274
78.3
350
278
79.4
350
271
77.5
350
275
78.6
350
281
80.3
350
282
80.6
350
280
79.9
350
288
82.3
350
289
82.7
350
272
77.8
350
280
79.9
350
5
1.6
0
289
82.7
350
271
77.5
350

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/21/2016

CME55 TRACKBP
AR: 1.42in^2
LE: 20.00ft
WS: 16807.9 ft/s

10
Test date: 11/11/2016
SP: 0.492 k/ft3
EM: 30000 ksi

Depth: (15.00 - 16.50 ft], displaying BN: 33
F@20.00 ft (60 kips)
V@20.00 ft (23.7 ft/s)

BL#
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35

A1,2
F3,4

BC
/6"
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
7
7
7
7
7
7
7

LP
ft
15.13
15.25
15.38
15.50
15.60
15.70
15.80
15.90
16.00
16.07
16.14
16.21
16.29
16.36
16.43
16.50
Average
Std Dev
Maximum
Minimum

FMX
kips
33
33
35
35
31
34
34
33
35
34
33
30
29
29
29
28
32
2
35
28

VMX
ft/s
13.4
14.0
14.6
14.6
13.0
13.9
14.1
13.8
14.7
14.3
13.5
12.4
11.8
12.1
11.6
11.5
13.1
1.1
14.7
11.5
N-value: 12

BPM
bpm
1.9
37.4
38.5
38.7
38.6
38.8
38.8
38.3
35.8
35.8
35.7
36.9
38.7
38.4
38.9
38.6
37.8
1.3
38.9
35.7

Sample Interval Time: 23.74 seconds.

EMX
ft-lb
261
271
284
279
267
265
268
271
273
271
268
261
263
264
258
257
266
5
273
257

ETR
(%)
74.6
77.4
81.3
79.7
76.3
75.8
76.6
77.3
78.1
77.3
76.6
74.7
75.0
75.6
73.8
73.5
75.9
1.4
78.1
73.5

ER
ft-lb
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
0
350
350

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/21/2016

CME55 TRACKBP
AR: 1.42in^2
LE: 25.00
ft
WS: 16807.9 ft/s

10
Test date: 11/11/2016
SP: 0.492 k/ft3
EM: 30000 ksi

Depth: (20.00 - 21.50 ft], displaying BN: 49
F@25.00 ft (60 kips)
V@25.00 ft (23.7 ft/s)

BL#
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51

A1,2
F3,4

BC
/6"
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
7
7
7
7
7
7
7

LP
ft
20.13
20.25
20.38
20.50
20.60
20.70
20.80
20.90
21.00
21.07
21.14
21.21
21.29
21.36
21.43
21.50
Average
Std Dev
Maximum
Minimum

FMX
kips
28
28
28
27
35
36
28
28
34
31
34
34
35
35
36
36
34
3
36
28

VMX
ft/s
11.4
11.7
12.7
11.1
13.6
13.4
10.6
10.5
12.8
11.8
12.3
12.9
13.0
13.5
13.9
13.8
12.7
1.1
13.9
10.5
N-value: 12

BPM
bpm
1.9
35.8
36.0
38.9
39.0
38.7
38.9
38.9
38.7
35.9
36.0
36.0
38.6
39.1
38.8
38.8
38.1
1.2
39.1
35.9

Sample Interval Time: 23.79 seconds.

EMX
ft-lb
250
256
261
266
287
281
261
243
273
268
276
285
289
290
297
294
279
15
297
243

ETR
(%)
71.5
73.0
74.6
75.9
82.0
80.2
74.7
69.4
78.0
76.6
78.8
81.5
82.5
82.7
84.7
84.0
79.6
4.2
84.7
69.4

ER
ft-lb
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
0
350
350

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/21/2016

CME55 TRACKBP
AR: 1.42in^2
LE: 30.00ft
WS: 16807.9 ft/s

10
Test date: 11/11/2016
SP: 0.492 k/ft3
EM: 30000 ksi

Depth: (25.00 - 26.50 ft], displaying BN: 78
F@30.00 ft (60 kips)
V@30.00 ft (23.7 ft/s)

BL#
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80

A1,2
F3,4

BC
/6"
5
5
5
5
5
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12

LP
ft
25.10
25.20
25.30
25.40
25.50
25.54
25.58
25.63
25.67
25.71
25.75
25.79
25.83
25.88
25.92
25.96
26.00
26.04
26.08
26.13
26.17
26.21
26.25
26.29
26.33
26.38
26.42
26.46
26.50
Average
Std Dev
Maximum
Minimum

FMX
kips
29
29
28
33
33
32
35
34
34
35
32
34
33
34
35
34
34
33
33
33
34
32
35
30
33
29
28
29
26
33
2
35
26

VMX
ft/s
12.5
12.2
12.6
14.9
14.2
13.9
14.5
14.4
14.2
14.7
13.2
14.2
14.1
15.0
14.6
14.1
14.5
13.9
14.0
14.1
14.8
13.6
14.8
13.0
14.1
12.8
12.2
12.2
12.9
13.9
0.8
15.0
12.2
N-value: 24

BPM
bpm
1.9
3.2
35.9
40.5
40.2
42.0
43.4
43.4
43.5
43.3
43.4
43.6
40.1
40.3
39.8
43.9
43.1
43.6
43.5
43.6
43.6
43.1
40.1
40.2
40.3
43.3
43.4
43.4
43.6
42.6
1.4
43.9
39.8

EMX
ft-lb
274
267
283
293
291
292
292
292
290
298
289
290
284
292
297
287
292
289
293
293
295
281
292
276
283
277
276
271
264
287
8
298
264

ETR
(%)
78.4
76.2
80.7
83.6
83.3
83.4
83.4
83.3
83.0
85.2
82.7
82.9
81.1
83.5
84.9
82.1
83.5
82.5
83.7
83.6
84.2
80.3
83.4
78.9
80.9
79.2
78.9
77.6
75.3
82.0
2.4
85.2
75.3

ER
ft-lb
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
0
350
350

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/28/2016
Summary of SPT Test Results

Project: CME55 , Test Date: 11/11/2016 - CME 55 (SN:210595)
FMX: Maximum Force
VMX: Maximum Velocity
BPM: Blows/Minute
Instr.
Blows
Start
Final
LengthApplied
Depth
Depth
ft
/6"
ft
ft
35.00
40.00
45.00

5-14-25
8-6-9
6-7-9

30.00
35.00
40.00

31.50
36.50
41.50

EMX: Maximum Energy
ETR: Energy Transfer Ratio - Rated
ER: Hammer Energy Rating
Average
Average
Average
EMX
ETR
ER
ft-lb
(%)
ft-lb

N
Value

N60
Value

Average
FMX
kips

Average
VMX
ft/s

Average
BPM
bpm

39
15
16

54
20
22

39
36
37

15.9
16.7
16.6

52.7
52.1
52.8

293
293
293

83.6
83.6
83.7

350
350
350

Overall Average Values:
Standard Deviation:
Overall Maximum Value:
Overall Minimum Value:

38
2
41
35

16.2
0.4
17.0
15.5

52.6
0.3
53.1
51.9

293
3
302
287

83.6
0.8
86.3
82.1

350
0
350
350

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/28/2016

CME55
BP
AR: 1.42in^2
LE: 35.00
ft
WS: 16807.9 ft/s

30
Test date: 11/11/2016
SP: 0.492 k/ft3
EM: 30000 ksi

Depth: (30.00 - 31.50 ft], displaying BN: 42
F@35.00 ft (60 kips)
V@35.00 ft (23.7 ft/s)

FMX: Maximum Force
VMX: Maximum Velocity
BPM: Blows/Minute
BL#
BC
/6"
1
5
2
5
3
5
4
5
5
5
6
14
7
14
8
14
9
14
10
14
11
14
12
14
13
14
14
14
15
14
16
14
17
14
18
14
19
14
20
25
21
25
22
25
23
25
24
25
25
25
26
25
27
25
28
25
29
25
30
25
31
25
32
25
33
25

A1,2
F3,4

LP
ft
30.10
30.20
30.30
30.40
30.50
30.54
30.57
30.61
30.64
30.68
30.71
30.75
30.79
30.82
30.86
30.89
30.93
30.96
31.00
31.02
31.04
31.06
31.08
31.10
31.12
31.14
31.16
31.18
31.20
31.22
31.24
31.26
31.28

FMX
kips
39
40
40
40
40
40
40
41
39
40
40
41
41
41
41
40
41
40
40
41
39
40
40
40
41
39
39
39
39
39
38
39
38

VMX
ft/s
16.7
16.3
16.5
16.2
16.2
16.2
16.3
16.3
15.9
16.2
16.3
16.4
16.3
16.3
16.2
16.1
16.3
16.2
16.2
16.2
16.0
15.9
16.0
16.0
16.2
15.9
16.0
15.7
15.7
15.7
15.7
15.6
15.5

BPM
bpm
1.9
52.8
52.0
52.6
52.8
52.9
52.9
53.1
52.9
52.7
52.8
52.8
52.7
53.0
52.8
52.7
52.8
52.8
52.7
52.7
52.8
52.8
52.8
52.7
52.7
52.8
52.8
52.8
52.9
52.7
52.8
52.8
53.0

EMX: Maximum Energy
ETR: Energy Transfer Ratio - Rated
ER: Hammer Energy Rating
EMX
ETR
ER
ft-lb
(%)
ft-lb
292
83.3
350
292
83.3
350
295
84.4
350
297
84.9
350
293
83.8
350
295
84.2
350
295
84.3
350
294
83.9
350
292
83.3
350
295
84.2
350
294
84.1
350
297
84.8
350
294
84.0
350
294
84.0
350
298
85.2
350
294
83.9
350
295
84.4
350
294
84.1
350
294
84.0
350
294
84.0
350
294
84.1
350
290
82.7
350
291
83.2
350
294
83.9
350
295
84.3
350
292
83.3
350
295
84.2
350
291
83.2
350
289
82.5
350
292
83.4
350
292
83.4
350
289
82.6
350
290
82.9
350

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/28/2016
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25

31.30
31.32
31.34
31.36
31.38
31.40
31.42
31.44
31.46
31.48
31.50
Average
Std Dev
Maximum
Minimum

38
38
39
38
38
38
38
39
39
39
39
39
1
41
38

15.6
15.7
15.9
15.6
15.5
15.6
15.7
15.6
15.7
15.5
15.7
15.9
0.3
16.4
15.5
N-value: 39

52.7
52.5
52.5
52.7
52.6
52.4
52.4
52.4
52.6
52.4
52.3
52.7
0.2
53.1
52.3

Sample Interval Time: 49.02 seconds.

290
291
298
290
287
288
292
289
294
291
292
293
3
298
287

82.9
83.2
85.2
82.9
82.1
82.3
83.5
82.6
84.1
83.0
83.5
83.6
0.8
85.2
82.1

350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
0
350
350

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/28/2016

CME55
BP
AR: 1.42in^2
LE: 40.00ft
WS: 16807.9 ft/s

30
Test date: 11/11/2016
SP: 0.492 k/ft3
EM: 30000 ksi

Depth: (35.00 - 36.50 ft], displaying BN: 65
F@40.00 ft (60 kips)
V@40.00 ft (23.7 ft/s)

BL#
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67

A1,2
F3,4

BC
/6"
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
6
6
6
6
6
6
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9

LP
ft
35.06
35.13
35.19
35.25
35.31
35.38
35.44
35.50
35.58
35.67
35.75
35.83
35.92
36.00
36.06
36.11
36.17
36.22
36.28
36.33
36.39
36.44
36.50
Average
Std Dev
Maximum
Minimum

FMX
kips
36
35
34
35
35
35
37
37
36
36
37
36
36
35
36
36
36
36
35
36
36
35
35
36
1
37
35

VMX
ft/s
16.4
16.1
15.9
16.0
15.9
16.1
16.4
16.3
16.9
16.4
16.8
16.6
16.7
16.4
16.8
16.8
16.9
16.8
16.3
17.0
16.7
16.6
16.4
16.7
0.2
17.0
16.3
N-value: 15

BPM
bpm
1.9
51.4
51.0
51.7
51.7
52.2
52.0
52.2
52.0
52.2
52.0
52.1
51.9
52.1
52.0
52.0
52.1
52.1
52.0
52.1
52.1
52.0
52.1
52.1
0.1
52.2
51.9

Sample Interval Time: 25.41 seconds.

EMX
ft-lb
278
278
281
284
280
286
293
288
295
291
292
290
295
297
296
291
288
294
291
294
290
293
291
293
2
297
288

ETR
(%)
79.4
79.5
80.2
81.0
80.1
81.6
83.8
82.3
84.3
83.2
83.5
83.0
84.4
84.8
84.6
83.2
82.3
83.9
83.0
83.9
83.0
83.8
83.0
83.6
0.7
84.8
82.3

ER
ft-lb
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
0
350
350

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/28/2016

CME55
BP
AR: 1.42in^2
LE: 45.00
ft
WS: 16807.9 ft/s

30
Test date: 11/11/2016
SP: 0.492 k/ft3
EM: 30000 ksi

Depth: (40.00 - 41.50 ft], displaying BN: 87
F@45.00 ft (60 kips)
V@45.00 ft (23.7 ft/s)

BL#
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89

A1,2
F3,4

BC
/6"
6
6
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9

LP
ft
40.08
40.17
40.25
40.33
40.42
40.50
40.57
40.64
40.71
40.79
40.86
40.93
41.00
41.06
41.11
41.17
41.22
41.28
41.33
41.39
41.44
41.50
Average
Std Dev
Maximum
Minimum

FMX
kips
38
38
38
38
37
38
36
38
37
37
36
36
38
36
38
38
37
36
36
35
37
36
37
1
38
35

VMX
ft/s
16.6
16.5
16.9
16.8
16.5
17.0
16.4
16.8
16.6
16.7
16.5
16.6
16.7
16.6
17.0
16.8
16.4
16.4
16.2
16.4
16.7
16.5
16.6
0.2
17.0
16.2
N-value: 16

BPM
bpm
1.9
51.4
51.4
52.2
52.5
52.7
52.8
52.8
52.9
52.8
52.9
52.9
52.8
52.9
52.8
52.8
52.9
52.7
52.9
52.7
53.0
52.7
52.8
0.1
53.0
52.7

Sample Interval Time: 23.99 seconds.

EMX
ft-lb
299
287
298
303
294
302
289
296
293
297
292
291
294
289
302
296
292
291
288
293
294
293
293
3
302
288

ETR
(%)
85.4
82.1
85.0
86.6
83.9
86.2
82.7
84.7
83.6
84.7
83.3
83.2
84.1
82.5
86.3
84.4
83.6
83.1
82.3
83.7
83.9
83.6
83.7
1.0
86.3
82.3

ER
ft-lb
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
0
350
350

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/28/2016
Summary of SPT Test Results

Project: MOBILE B59 , Test Date: 11/11/2016 - Mobile B-59 (SN:N/A)
FMX: Maximum Force
VMX: Maximum Velocity
BPM: Blows/Minute
Instr.
Blows
Start
Final
N
LengthApplied
Depth
Depth
Value
ft
/6"
ft
ft
13.00
18.00
23.00

9-12-13
7-12-20
10-10-15

10.00
15.00
20.00

11.50
16.50
21.50

EMX: Maximum Energy
ETR: Energy Transfer Ratio - Rated
ER: Hammer Energy Rating
Average
Average
Average
EMX
ETR
ER
ft-lb
(%)
ft-lb

N60
Value

Average
FMX
kips

Average
VMX
ft/s

Average
BPM
bpm

33
43
33

38
37
39

15.3
15.1
14.9

43.6
43.5
43.1

271
273
283

79.7
80.2
83.2

340
340
340

Overall Average Values:
Standard Deviation:
Overall Maximum Value:
Overall Minimum Value:

38
1
40
36

15.1
0.2
15.6
14.6

43.4
0.6
44.9
41.8

275
7
293
258

81.0
2.1
86.2
76.0

340
0
340
340

25
32
25

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/28/2016
10
Test date: 11/11/2016
SP: 0.492 k/ft3
EM: 30000 ksi

Mobile B59
BP
AR: 1.42in^2
LE: 13.00
ft
WS: 16807.9 ft/s

Depth: (10.00 - 11.50 ft], displaying BN: 32
F@13.00 ft (60 kips)
V@13.00 ft (23.7 ft/s)

FMX: Maximum Force
VMX: Maximum Velocity
BPM: Blows/Minute
BL#
BC
/6"
1
9
2
9
3
9
4
9
5
9
6
9
7
9
8
9
9
9
10
12
11
12
12
12
13
12
14
12
15
12
16
12
17
12
18
12
19
12
20
12
21
12
22
13
23
13
24
13
25
13
26
13
27
13
28
13
29
13
30
13
31
13
32
13
33
13

A1,2
F3,4

LP
ft
10.06
10.11
10.17
10.22
10.28
10.33
10.39
10.44
10.50
10.54
10.58
10.63
10.67
10.71
10.75
10.79
10.83
10.88
10.92
10.96
11.00
11.04
11.08
11.12
11.15
11.19
11.23
11.27
11.31
11.35
11.38
11.42
11.46

FMX
kips
31
38
38
39
39
39
38
38
39
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
39
39
38
38
38
39
38
38
38
39
39
38
38
39
39
38
39

VMX
ft/s
12.1
15.5
15.4
15.7
15.4
15.5
15.5
15.3
15.5
15.2
15.3
15.4
15.3
15.3
15.4
15.2
15.6
15.5
15.4
15.2
15.3
15.2
15.2
15.2
15.2
15.3
15.3
15.2
15.2
15.4
15.3
15.2
15.3

BPM
bpm
1.9
22.8
38.6
42.4
42.6
42.8
42.7
43.4
43.2
43.4
43.6
43.2
43.8
43.7
44.1
44.0
42.1
43.8
42.8
42.5
43.6
43.5
44.5
44.1
44.2
43.1
44.1
43.7
44.6
42.4
43.8
43.7
43.6

EMX: Maximum Energy
ETR: Energy Transfer Ratio - Rated
ER: Hammer Energy Rating
EMX
ETR
ER
ft-lb
(%)
ft-lb
179
52.7
340
275
81.0
340
278
81.8
340
277
81.4
340
279
82.0
340
280
82.3
340
274
80.5
340
276
81.0
340
274
80.6
340
271
79.8
340
274
80.5
340
273
80.4
340
271
79.8
340
273
80.4
340
265
77.9
340
262
77.2
340
270
79.4
340
277
81.4
340
268
78.8
340
258
76.0
340
272
80.0
340
268
78.7
340
269
79.1
340
263
77.5
340
267
78.6
340
273
80.2
340
276
81.1
340
273
80.4
340
274
80.7
340
280
82.4
340
272
80.1
340
274
80.5
340
274
80.6
340

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results
34

BN: 3

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/28/2016
13

11.50
Average
Std Dev
Maximum
Minimum

39
38
0
39
38

15.3
15.3
0.1
15.6
15.2
N-value: 25

44.9
43.6
0.7
44.9
42.1

8-11-15
Sample Interval Time: 46.96 seconds.

276
271
5
280
258

81.1
79.7
1.4
82.4
76.0

340
340
0
340
340

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/28/2016
10
Test date: 11/11/2016
SP: 0.492 k/ft3
EM: 30000 ksi

Mobile B59
BP
AR: 1.42in^2
LE: 18.00
ft
WS: 16807.9 ft/s

Depth: (15.00 - 16.50 ft], displaying BN: 71
F@18.00 ft (60 kips)
V@18.00 ft (23.7 ft/s)

BL#
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70

A1,2
F4

BC
/6"
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20

LP
ft
15.07
15.14
15.21
15.29
15.36
15.43
15.50
15.54
15.58
15.63
15.67
15.71
15.75
15.79
15.83
15.88
15.92
15.96
16.00
16.03
16.05
16.08
16.10
16.13
16.15
16.18
16.20
16.23
16.25
16.28
16.30
16.33
16.35
16.38
16.40
16.43

FMX
kips
38
37
38
38
38
38
38
38
37
38
38
37
37
37
38
37
36
37
37
37
37
36
37
37
37
37
36
36
36
38
37
36
36
38
36
36

VMX
ft/s
15.5
15.7
15.6
15.4
15.5
15.4
15.4
15.4
15.5
15.4
15.5
15.2
15.2
15.2
15.4
15.3
15.3
15.2
15.3
15.1
15.1
15.0
15.1
15.2
15.1
15.0
15.0
14.9
15.0
14.9
14.9
15.0
15.2
15.2
14.9
15.2

BPM
bpm
1.9
40.7
42.6
42.9
42.3
43.1
43.2
42.8
43.2
43.0
43.2
43.5
43.0
42.6
42.6
43.1
43.1
43.5
43.4
43.6
43.6
42.8
43.6
44.2
43.8
43.8
43.8
43.8
43.7
43.9
44.1
43.7
43.5
44.3
44.1
43.8

EMX
ft-lb
283
273
274
274
278
273
276
282
275
272
279
272
269
276
276
268
269
275
277
274
275
267
270
272
272
270
270
269
278
276
269
274
267
274
268
261

ETR
(%)
83.2
80.3
80.6
80.5
81.9
80.3
81.3
83.0
80.9
79.9
82.0
80.1
79.0
81.1
81.2
79.0
79.1
80.8
81.3
80.7
80.9
78.6
79.5
80.1
79.9
79.4
79.5
79.2
81.9
81.3
79.1
80.4
78.7
80.5
79.0
76.9

ER
ft-lb
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results
71
72
73

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/28/2016
20
20
20

16.45
16.48
16.50
Average
Std Dev
Maximum
Minimum

37
37
39
37
1
39
36

15.0
15.0
15.2
15.1
0.2
15.5
14.9
N-value: 32

44.0
44.0
43.6
43.5
0.5
44.3
42.6

Sample Interval Time: 52.53 seconds.

273
273
282
273
4
282
261

80.4
80.2
82.9
80.2
1.3
83.0
76.9

340
340
340
340
0
340
340

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/28/2016
10
Test date: 11/11/2016
SP: 0.492 k/ft3
EM: 30000 ksi

Mobile B59
BP
AR: 1.42in^2
LE: 23.00
ft
WS: 16807.9 ft/s

Depth: (20.00 - 21.50 ft], displaying BN: 106
F@23.00 ft (60 kips)
V@23.00 ft (23.7 ft/s)

BL#
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108

A1,2
F4

BC
/6"
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15

LP
ft
20.05
20.10
20.15
20.20
20.25
20.30
20.35
20.40
20.45
20.50
20.55
20.60
20.65
20.70
20.75
20.80
20.85
20.90
20.95
21.00
21.03
21.07
21.10
21.13
21.17
21.20
21.23
21.27
21.30
21.33
21.37
21.40
21.43
21.47
21.50

FMX
kips
38
39
39
39
40
39
38
39
39
39
39
40
38
39
39
38
39
40
39
39
39
39
39
39
38
38
37
39
39
39
39
39
38
39
39

VMX
ft/s
14.9
14.9
14.8
15.3
15.1
15.2
15.2
14.9
15.2
15.0
15.1
15.1
15.1
14.9
15.2
15.0
14.9
15.2
15.1
14.9
15.0
15.1
14.9
15.0
15.0
14.9
14.6
15.0
14.7
14.9
14.9
14.6
14.8
14.8
14.6

BPM
bpm
1.9
42.6
43.0
2.4
42.2
42.0
41.6
41.7
41.3
42.4
42.8
41.8
42.8
42.3
42.1
42.9
42.7
42.6
42.6
42.9
42.5
42.5
42.8
43.4
42.8
44.2
43.5
43.5
43.8
43.9
43.4
43.4
44.2
43.8
43.8

EMX
ft-lb
277
271
274
287
288
288
289
281
288
284
284
285
279
282
286
278
283
293
292
287
290
293
284
286
288
283
281
286
278
280
283
278
274
271
270

ETR
(%)
81.4
79.7
80.5
84.5
84.8
84.6
84.9
82.7
84.7
83.7
83.4
83.9
82.1
82.8
84.0
81.7
83.3
86.0
86.0
84.3
85.4
86.2
83.6
84.1
84.6
83.3
82.7
84.1
81.8
82.4
83.3
81.9
80.6
79.7
79.3

ER
ft-lb
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340
340

GRL Engineers, Inc.
SPT Analyzer Results

PDA-S Ver. 2016.14.214 - Printed: 11/28/2016
Average
Std Dev
Maximum
Minimum

BN: 83

39
1
40
37

14.9
0.2
15.2
14.6
N-value: 25

43.1
0.6
44.2
41.8

8-12-17
Sample Interval Time: 70.86 seconds.

283
6
293
270

83.2
1.8
86.2
79.3

340
0
340
340

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

Appendix E Boring Logs

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
64

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

E.1 Key to Terms and Descriptions

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
65

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION (ASTM D-2487-98)
MATERIAL
TYPES>50% OF COARSEFRACTION RETAINEDON NO 4. SIEVE

SANDS>50% OF COARSEFRACTION PASSESON NO 4. SIEVE

FINE-GRAINED SOILS>50% PASSES
NO. 200 SIEVECOARSE-GRAINED SOILS>50% RETAINED ON
NO. 200 SIEVEGRAVELS

SILTS AND CLAYS

CLEAN GRAVELS<5% FINESGRAVELS WITH FINES>12% FINES

CLEAN SANDS<5% FINESSANDS AND FINES>12% FINESLIQUID LIMIT<50
ORGANICSILTS AND CLAYS

Cu ≥ 4 AND 1 ≤ Cc ≤ 3

GW

WELL-GRADED GRAVEL

Cu < 4 AND/OR 1 > Cc > 3

GP

POORLY-GRADED GRAVELFINES CLASSIFY AS ML OR CL

GM

SILTY GRAVELFINES CLASSIFY AS CL OR CH

GC

CLAYEY GRAVEL

Cu ≥ 6 AND 1 ≤ Cc ≤ 3

SW

WELL-GRADED SAND

Cu < 6 AND/OR 1 > Cc > 3

SP

POORLY-GRADED SAND

FINES CLASSIFY AS ML OR MH

SM

SILTY SAND

FINES CLASSIFY AS CL OR CH

SC

CLAYEY SAND

PI>7 AND PLOTS>"A" LINE

CL

LEAN CLAY

PI>4 AND PLOTS<"A" LINE

ML

SILT

LL (oven dried)/LL (not dried)<0.75

OL

ORGANIC CLAY OR SILTPI PLOTS >"A" LINECH

FAT CLAYPI PLOTS <"A" LINEMH

ELASTIC SILT

LL (oven dried)/LL (not dried)<0.75

OH

ORGANIC CLAY OR SILT

PT

PEAT

INORGANICLIQUID LIMIT>50

HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILSPRIMARILY ORGANIC MATTER, DARK IN COLOR, AND ORGANIC ODOROTHER MATERIAL SYMBOLSSAMPLE TYPES

Poorly Graded Sand
with Clay

Sand

Clayey Sand

Silt

Sandy Silt

Well Graded Gravelly Sand

Modified California
Sampler - Phase II(2-1/2" OD)

Low to High Plasticity Clay

Gravelly Silt

Grab Sample

Poorly Graded Gravelly Sand

Roadbase

Topsoil

Boulders and Cobble

Auger Cuttings

Modified California
Sampler - Phase I(3" OD)

Split Spoon Sampler- Phase II (2" OD)

Split Spoon Sampler- Phase I (2" OD)

Shelby Tube Phase I & II
(3" OD)

Well Graded Gravelwith Clay
Well Graded Gravelwith Silt

SOIL GROUP NAMES & LEGENDINORGANICORGANICSOIL LEGEND 2 - - 2/21/20 17:13 - C:\USERS\DENISE.VANCE\DESKTOP\LOWER SUNSHINE DAM SOIL DRILL LOGS.GPJ

GROUP
SYMBOL

CRITERIA FOR ASSIGNING SOIL GROUP NAMESADDITIONAL TESTSCA-CHEMICAL ANALYSIS (CORROSIVITY)

SW-

SWELL TESTCD-CONSOLIDATED DRAINED TRIAXIALTC-CYCLIC TRIAXIALCN-CONSOLIDATIONTV-TORVANE SHEARCU-CONSOLIDATED UNDRAINED TRIAXIALUC-

UNCONFINED COMPRESSIONDS-DIRECT SHEAR

(1.5)

-

PP

-

POCKET PENETROMETER (TSF)(WITH SHEAR STRENGTH
IN KSF)(3.0)-(WITH SHEAR STRENGTH IN KSF)

UU

-

RV

-

R-VALUEUNCONSOLIDATEDUNDRAINED TRIAXIALSA-SIEVE ANALYSIS: % PASSING#200 SIEVE

WA-

WASH ANALYSIS

(200)

-

(WITH % PASSING NO.
200 SIEVE(200%) -(WITH % PASSING NO.
200 SIEVE)

WATER LEVEL AT TIME DRILLING, OR AS
SHOWNWATER LEVEL AT END OF DRILLING, OR AS
SHOWNWATER LEVEL AFTER 24 HHOURS, OR AS
SHOWN

LEGEND TO SOIL DESCRIPTIONSJob No. 60429259

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

E.2 Boring Logs

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
66

DATES DRILLED: 1/9/20 - 1/9/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 662.21

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 30

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 008-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Link

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: 18.50 ft / Elev 643.71 ft

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING 28.10 ft / Elev 634.11 ft

HOLE LOCATION: Embankment Crest

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING ---CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13908370.45(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330058.802(ft)or EASTING (ft):

660
SS
2

5

655

10

5-10-10
(20)

86

P
3

4.5+

50

SS
4

4.5+

86

P
5

4.5+

73

ST
6

4.5+

50

650

15

Hard, moist, dark brown with light grayish tan, CLAY,
fine gravel, trace organics, subangular, trace calcium
nodules and trace shell fragments, (CH), (FILL)
Becomes dry, light gray, subrounded, trace burnt
orange pockets, and trace black v-ing, (FILL)
Becomes moist, dark brown, iron oxide staining, andtrace 1/4" to 1/2" gravel, (FILL)
Hard, moist, light gray to tan, CLAY, trace organics,
trace calcium nodules, trace burnt orange pockets, andtrace black specks, (CL-CH), (FILL)
Gravel, rounded, black striation, thumb sized chalkpocket, (FILL)
Hard, dry to moist, brown, CLAY, fine gravel, trace
sand, trace organics, trace black pockets and calcium
nodules, (CH), (FILL)
Dark brown and light grayish tan, CLAY, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)
Hard, moist, CLAY, Crumbly, heavy white chalk/calcium
pockets, burnt orange pockets, black nodules, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)
Hard, moist, CLAY, fine gravel, rounded to subangular,
1/4"-1/2" subangular and rounded gravel, trace shellfragments, sandy, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)

17.5

13.6
17.6

11.5
17.4

9.8

645

SS
7

4-10-12(22)

100

Hard, moist, tan to light gray, CLAY, trace burnt
orange/red compacted layer, trace calcium nodules,
trace blue/black spots, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)

25

SS
8

6-10-10(20)

100

Hard, moist, tan to light gray, CLAY, trace calcium
nodules, blue/black spots, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)

30

SS
9

7-10-14
(24)

100

20

18.7

640

22.1

635
Hard, moist, tan to light gray, CLAY, trace calcium
nodules, trace blue/black spots, tan color becomesburnt orange in places, trace orange/iron powder/filings,(CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Bottom of hole at 30.0 feet.

22.2

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

SAND (%)

GRAVEL (%)

Plasticity Index

Liquid Limit

75

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

4.5+

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)

P
1

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

DATES DRILLED: 1/27/20 - 1/27/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 662.38

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 35

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 009-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M.Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Embankment Crest

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING 16.31 ft / Elev 646.07 ft

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Piezometer

LATITUDE (deg) 13907884.65(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330266.073(ft)or EASTING (ft):

10

4.5+
6-10-10
(20)

69
92

ST
5

4.5+

50

Moist to slightly moist, light brown to orange, CLAY,
high plasticity, abundant iron staining, gray mottling,
trace gypsum crystals, (CH), (FILL)

P
6

4.25

67

Moist, light gray to dark gray, CLAY, strong HCL
reaction, abundant calcite nodules, abundant ironnodules, decreases toward base, (CL-CH), (FILL)

100

Very stiff, very moist, light brown, CLAY, abundantcalcite nodules, abundant iron staining, (CH),(RESIDUUM)

Slightly moist, light brown to tan, CLAY, high plasticity,no calicite nodules, iron staining, gray mottling, (CH),(RESIDUUM)

18.3 116.1 65

41

0

6

94

9.7

40

20

16.7 122.4 68

43

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight(pcf)

STRATIGRAPHY

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

83

SAND (%)

P
3
SS
4

655

10-11-11(22)

Moist, dark brown to black, subangular, CLAY, muchorganics, trace fine gravel, high plasticity, increasing
calcite nodules toward base, slight orange mottling,(CH), (FILL)
Very stiff, dry, light brown to tan, subangular, silty
CLAY, much fine to coarse gravel, strong HCL reaction,
abundant calicte nodules, (ML), (FILL)
Slightly moist, dark brown, subrounded to subangular,
CLAY, trace organics, trace fine to medium gravel,
increasing clay content, abundant calcite nodules,(CL-CH), (FILL)
Very stiff, slightly moist, CLAY, S.A.A., (CL-CH), (FILL)GRAVEL (%)

585

AND REMARKS

Plasticity Index

SS
2

4.0

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid Limit

660

RECOVERY (%)

P
1

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

58.1

89.8

2.3 11.8 85.9 46.4

14.2

20.1 128.3 74

50

20.5 118

60

34

23 128.7 50

29Slightly moist, CLAY, S.A.A. gray clay seams and ironstaining, (CH), (RESIDUUM)

19.7 122

48

Very stiff, slightly moist, CLAY, S.A.A., (CH),(RESIDUUM)

21

97.5

650

15

3.2 16.2 80.6 48.5

645

20

SS
7

8-8-10
(18)

12.9

640

25

ST
8

4.5+

77

P
9

4.5+

79

86.4

635

30

630

35

SS
70

7-13-15(28)

100

Bottom of hole at 35.0 feet.

73

0

2.1 97.9 48.5

DATES DRILLED: 1/27/20 - 1/27/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 662.20

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 45

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 010-19
PAGE 1 OF 2

LOGGED BY: M.Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Embankment Crest

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING ---CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907469.01(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330416.031(ft)or EASTING (ft):

660

SS
2

5

655

8-9-12
(21)

83

P
3

4.5+

67

ST
4

4-4.5+

58

SS
5

5-6-10
(16)

78

10

650

15

P
6

4.0

67

Very stiff, moist, dark black brown, subrounded, CLAY,
much organics, trace coarse gravel, increasing calcite
nodules towards base, light brown mottling toward base,(CH), (FILL)
Stiff, dry, light brown tan, subrounded to subangular,
silty CLAY, much fine to medium gravel, abundantcalcite nodules, trace iron staining, low plasticity, (ML),(FILL)
Stiff, moist, CLAY, 0-11'': S.A.A. trace iron nodules,
increasing coarse gravel
11-16'': (CH) Dark brown/black, high plasticity clay,
trace calcite nodules, trace coarse gravel, (CH), (FILL)
Stiff, moist, light brown tan, CLAY, decreasing silt
content, abundant calcite nodules, trace iron staining,(CL), (FILL)
Stiff to very stiff, moist, CLAY, 0-8.25'': (CH) Dark
brown/black, high plasticity clay, trace calcite nodules,
gray mottling
8.25-14'': (CH) Tan/Light brown, high plasticity, graymottling, abundant iron staining, (CH), (FILL)

19.9
8.3

12.6
2.9
12.5
14.3
11

Stiff, very moist, light brown tan, CLAY, S.A.A. Layer B,(CH), (FILL)

25.3

Stiff, moist, light brown tan, CLAY, S.A.A. black andgray mottling, trace gypsum crystals, (CH), (FILL)

11.7

Stiff, moist, light brown tan, CLAY, S.A.A. increasingcoarse grained calcite nodules, (CH), (FILL)

14.4

645

20

SS
7

3-5-7
(12)

100

640

25

ST
8

4.0

63

P
9

4.5+

56

ST
10

4.5

79

635

30

Stiff, moist, light brown tan, CLAY, S.A.A. increase ironstaining, no calcite nodules, gray/black mottling, (CH),(RESIDUUM)

23.7

630

35

Stiff, moist, light brown tan, CLAY, S.A.A., (CH),(RESIDUUM)(Continued Next Page)

24.7

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

SAND (%)

GRAVEL (%)

Plasticity Index

Liquid Limit

83

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

4.5+

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)

P
1

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

DATES DRILLED: 1/27/20 - 1/27/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 662.20

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 45

LOG NO: 010-19
PAGE 2 OF 2

Stiff, moist, light brown tan, CLAY, S.A.A., (CH),(RESIDUUM) (continued)
625

40

SS
11

5-5-12(17)100

Stiff, moist, light brown tan, CLAY, S.A.A. last .5''transition into light gray/olive gray, (CH), (RESIDUUM)

21.5

620

45

P
12

4.5+

60

Hard, dry to slightly moist, dark gray olive gray, CLAY,
medium plasticity, slight bedding layers, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)
Bottom of hole at 45.0 feet.

17.8

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

SAND (%)

GRAVEL (%)

Plasticity Index

Liquid Limit

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight(pcf)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYLABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

RECOVERY (%)

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

35

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

DATES DRILLED: 12/11/19 - 12/11/19

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 661.24

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 60

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 011-19
PAGE 1 OF 2

LOGGED BY: M. Link

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: 27.50 ft / Elev 633.74 ft

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING 27.50 ft / Elev 633.74 ft

HOLE LOCATION: Embankment Crest

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING 46.06 ft / Elev 615.18 ft

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Piezometer

LATITUDE (deg) 13907217.96(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330293.584(ft)or EASTING (ft):

61

ST
3

4.5+

56

P
4

4.5+

73

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

34

20

4.3 27.6 68.1

9.2 127.5 55

36

82.8

SAND (%)

GRAVEL (%)

4-4-6
(10)

Very stiff to hard, moist, brown to dark brown, CLAY,
organics, trace fine gravel, iron oxide staining, trace
shell fragments, trace dry 1/4" layers with gray-brown
dry soil and calcium pockets, (CH), (FILL)
Hard, dry, light gray to tan, CLAY, medium gravel,angular to subangular, trace gray-black pockets at
sample bottom, powdery. Grades to harder and drierfrom 4 to 6 feet, (CL-CH), (FILL)STRATIGRAPHY

88

AND REMARKS

Plasticity Index

5

4-4.5+

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid LimitSS
2

RECOVERY (%)

P
1

660

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

16.8
8.5

10

129

655

10

SS
5

4-4-6
(10)

89

650

15

14.7

Very stiff to hard, moist, brown to dark brown, highplasticity, CLAY, trace sand, trace fine gravel, calcium
nodules, gray-black pockets, shell fragments, noorganics. Soil is tan at 1.5" of soil. Grades to less moist
and less plasticity after 13'., (CH), (FILL)
Very stiff to hard, moist, tan to light gray, CLAY, trace
fine gravel, iron oxide staining, trace black
specks/nodules, malleable, (CL-CH), (FILL)
Very stiff to hard, moist, tan to light gray, CLAY, trace
fine gravel, iron oxide staining, trace black
specks/nodules, malleable, (CL-CH), (FILL)

P
6

3-4.0

ST
7

3.75-4.5 90

Moist, tannish brown to gray, CLAY, trace fine gravel,iron oxide staining, trace black specks/pockets, calcite
nodules/pockets, (CH), (FILL)

100

Very stiff to hard, moist, tan to light gray, CLAY, trace
fine gravel, iron oxide staining, trace black
specks/nodules, malleable, (CL-CH), (FILL)

77

13.3

20.5

645

20
640

25

SS
8

3-5-7
(12)

19.8

635

30

P
9

2.25-3.5 83

630

35

SS
10

4-4-8
(12)

Stiff, gray, CLAY, gray/black pockets, (CH), (FILL)
Gray to dark brown, CLAY, trace fine gravel, trace shellfragments, (CH), (FILL)

100

19.4

17.3

(Continued Next Page)

29

DATES DRILLED: 12/11/19 - 12/11/19

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 661.24

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 60

LOG NO: 011-19
PAGE 2 OF 2

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

48

SAND (%)

Plasticity Index

22.3 123.9 73

GRAVEL (%)

Liquid Limit

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight(pcf)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYLABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

RECOVERY (%)

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

35

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

Very stiff, moist, tannish brown to gray, CLAY, traceorganics, trace fine gravel, calcite pockets, black/graypockets/nodules, malleable, (CL-CH), (FILL)(continued)

625

40

ST
11

4.5+

48

Hard, moist, tan to light gray, CLAY, trace gypsum
crystals forming in gray clay, trace blacksmears/specks, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)

P
12

4.5+

65

Hard, dry to moist, gray to dark gray, CLAY, flakey,
compacted/bedding layers, powdery at breaks, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)

620

45

16.6

615

50

SS
13

55

ST
14
SS
15

7-16-18
(34)

100

610

50/3"

4.5+

100
133

Hard, dry to moist, gray to dark gray, CLAY, S.A.A.
trace gypsum nodules, gypsum pocket accompaniedwith softer light gray powdery material, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)

Dry, white to light gray SHALE: Weak to extremely
weak, very fine grained, fissile, trace gypsum crystals,
breaks down to silty clay

16.3

5.6 147.9
2

605

60

SS
16

50/2"

100

1.1

Bottom of hole at 60.0 feet.

94.3

DATES DRILLED: 1/21/20 - 1/22/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 662.37

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 60

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOGGED BY: L. Cartwright

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Embankment Crest

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING ---CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LOG NO: 012-19
PAGE 1 OF 2

LATITUDE (deg) 13906968.31(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330049.478(ft)or EASTING (ft):

660

SS
2

5

10

89

4.5+
8-7-11(18)

54
89

Very stiff, moist, dark brown, subangular, CLAY, muchorganics, trace fine to coarse gravel, trace shellfragments,, (CH), (FILL)
Hard, dry, tan light gray, subangular, CLAY, traceorganics, fine gravel, crumbly, shell fragments, trace
chalk, trace iron staining, (CL-CH), (FILL)
Tan to white, CLAY, calcite deposits, iron staining,
gypsum crystals, trace dark brown specks, (CH), (FILL)
Tan light gray, CLAY, trace organics, fine gravel,
crumbly, shell fragments, trace chalk, trace ironstaining, (CL-CH), (FILL)
Very stiff, moist, dark brown dark tan, CLAY, trace
gravel, trace iron stains, chalk, shells, (CL-CH), (FILL)

ST
5

4.5+

50

P
6

3.25

83

Moist, tan to light gray, subangular, CLAY, trace fine tocoarse gravel, iron staining, trace black mottling, trace
shell fragments,, (CL-CH), (FILL)

100

Moist, light gray to dark gray, CLAY, trace fine to coarse
gravel, trace shell fragments, abundant iron staining,(CL-CH), (FILL)

18.9
12.7

2.3
10.5

19.3

650

15

17

645

20

SS
7

2-3-5
(8)

19.9

640

25

ST
8

4.5+

55

Tan to white, CLAY, calcite deposits, iron staining,
gypsum crystals, trace dark brown specks, (CL-CH),(FILL)

23.1

635

30

P
9

3.0

81

Light gray to dark gray, CLAY, trace fine gravel, graymottling, iron staining, wood chips, trace shellfragments, (CL-CH), (FILL)

21.2

630
SS
10

35

6-8-12(20)

100

Light olive to gray, CLAY, trace fine gravel, dark graymottling, trace iron staining, trace chalk, (CL-CH),(FILL)(Continued Next Page)

21.1

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

SAND (%)

GRAVEL (%)

Plasticity Index

Liquid Limit

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

73

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHY

4.5+
11-12-13
(25)

P
3
SS
4

655

RECOVERY (%)

P
1

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

DATES DRILLED: 1/21/20 - 1/22/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 662.37

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 60

LOG NO: 012-19
PAGE 2 OF 2

Light olive to gray, CLAY, trace fine gravel, dark graymottling, trace iron staining, trace chalk, (CL-CH),(FILL) (continued)

625

40

ST
11

4.5+

88

P
12

4.5+

88

ST
13

4.5+

71

Tan to light gray, CLAY, trace fine gravel, calcite
nodules, trace iron staining, gypsum present, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)

23.9

620

45

Hard, dark gray, CLAY, (CL), (RESIDUUM)
18.2

615

50

Dry, tan with gray, CLAY, trace calcite and iron, (CL),(RESIDUUM)

18.5

610
SS
14

50/5"

156

Dry, light gray SHALE: Weak, trace pink shellfragments, breaks down to lean clay (CL)

4.1

SS
15

50/3"

100

No shell fragments present, strong HCl reaction

4.3

55

605

60

Bottom of hole at 60.0 feet.

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

SAND (%)

GRAVEL (%)

Plasticity Index

Liquid Limit

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight(pcf)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYLABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

RECOVERY (%)

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

35

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

DATES DRILLED: 10/6/20 - 10/6/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 662.27

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 40

LOG NO: 013-20
PAGE 1 OF 2

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chester Westbrook
GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOGGED BY: S. Whipkey

DRILL EQUIP: CME 55LCAT TIME OF: ---CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING ---HOLE LOCATION: Embankment Crest

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 10" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING ---CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907775(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330319(ft)or EASTING (ft):

5

29

655

ST
4

2.0

83

10

SS
5

4-6-5
(11)

67

Soft, moist, brown, high plasticity, CLAY, trace medium
to coarse sand, calcareous sand fissile, (CH), (FILL)
Moist, tan and orange, high plasticity, CLAY, iron oxide
staining, gray clay in fractures, trace iron nodules andmod material, (CH), (FILL)

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

4.0

37

SAND (%)

P3

16.8 125.4 64

GRAVEL (%)

50

Plasticity Index

4.0

Stiff, moist, brown, high plasticity, CLAY, trace medium
sand, organics, (CH), (FILL)
Stiff, moist, brown, high plasticity, CLAY, with SILT,
trace medium sand, organics, soft calcareous material,(CH), (FILL)
Tannish yellow brown, high plasticity, CLAY, tracecoarse sand, fine gravel, 80% yellow/tan clay, 20%
brown clay, subangular (sand), high calcareous content,(CH), (FILL)

Liquid Limit

ST
2

660

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

42

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)

4.5

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)

POCKET PEN (tsf)

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

P
1

SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

17.3

19.9

19.1 129.1 61

41

89.5

34

99.2

23.3

650

15

P
6

3.5

58

ST
7

3.0

63

Moist, dark gray to light gray, high plasticity, CLAY,
trace medium sand, blocky, trace green, calcareous
sand and shell fragments, (CH), (FILL)

23.4

645

20

Medium stiff, moist, light gray to orange, high plasticity,
CLAY, trace gravel, iron oxide staining, calcareousmaterial; <5% calcareous gravel, (CH), (RESIDUUM)

23.1 127.2 52

640

6-9-12
(21)

25

635
23.7

30

SS
8

17-13-15(28)

100

Moist, tan, high plasticity, CLAY, with medium sand,iron oxide staining, gray in fractures, fissile, 60-70%
sub-rounded sand, (CH), (RESIDUUM)

630

35

ST
9

3.5

96

24.1

(Continued Next Page)

DATES DRILLED: 10/6/20 - 10/6/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 662.27

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 40

LOG NO: 013-20
PAGE 2 OF 2

Moist, tan, high plasticity, CLAY, with medium sand,iron oxide staining, gray in fractures, fissile, 60-70%
sub-rounded sand, (CH), (RESIDUUM) (continued)

625

40

SS
10

10-14-18(32)

100-Gray to dark gray shaley seam from 38.25 to 38.6 ft
with gypsum crystals at base
-Gray to dark gray shaley seam from 39.25 to 39.6 ft
with gypsum crystals at the base
Bottom of hole at 40.0 feet.

20.2

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

SAND (%)

GRAVEL (%)

Plasticity Index

Liquid Limit

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight(pcf)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYLABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

RECOVERY (%)

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

35

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

DATES DRILLED: 10/7/20 - 10/7/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 662.16

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 40

LOG NO: 014-20
PAGE 1 OF 2

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chester Westbrook
GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOGGED BY: S. Whipkey

DRILL EQUIP: CME 55LCAT TIME OF: ---CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING ---HOLE LOCATION: Embankment Crest

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 10" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING ---CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907678(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330360(ft)or EASTING (ft):

5

33

655

P
4

4.0

33

10

SS
5

5-7-10
(17)

133

58

38

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

4.5+

33

SAND (%)

P
3

53

GRAVEL (%)

25

Plasticity Index

4.5+

Stiff, moist, brown, high plasticity, CLAY, trace medium
sand, with organics, 5% sand, (CH), (FILL)
Moist, tan, medium to high plasticity, CLAY, trace silt,
5-10% silt, calcareous with calc nodules, (CL), (FILL)

Liquid Limit

ST
2

660

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

46

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)

4.5+

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)

POCKET PEN (tsf)

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

P
1

SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

16.3

Moist, tan, medium to high plasticity, CLAY, trace silt,
5-10% silt, 20% brown clay, calcareous with calc
nodules, (CH), (FILL)
Moist, tan, medium to high plasticity, CLAY, trace silt,
trace gravel, 5-10% silt, 20% brown clay, calcareous
with calc nodules, subangular to angular calc gravel(0.25" to 0.5"), (CH), (FILL)

15.3 125

Stiff, moist, brown, high plasticity, CLAY, trace medium
sand, trace organics, blocky, iron oxide staining, 5%
subrounded calcareous sand, shell fragments, (CH),(FILL)

22.1

14.4

12.3

650

15

1.0

P
6

2.0

67

Soft, moist, tan with orange, high plasticity, CLAY, ironoxide staining, light gray in fractures, (CH), (FILL)
Brown with gray, high plasticity, CLAY, trace medium
sand, <5% calcareous sand and shell fragments, (CH),(FILL)

21.3

645

20

ST
7

1.5

54

Brown and tan, high plasticity, CLAY, trace medium
sand, <5% calcareous sand and shell fragments, (CH),(FILL)

89

Stiff, moist, tan to orange, medium plasticity, CLAY,
some fine to coarse sand, blocky, iron oxide staining,
20% calcareous sand and shell fragments, trace
calcareous nodules, (CL), (RESIDUUM)

21 129.8

640

25

SS
8

7-9-14
(23)

14.7

635

30

ST
9

4.0

100

P
10

2.5

100

Moist, light gray and orange, high plasticity, CLAY, ironoxide staining, fissile, (CH), (RESIDUUM)

24.8

630

35

Moist, light gray and orange, high plasticity, CLAY, ironoxide staining, fissile, light gray clay in fractures, (CH),(RESIDUUM)(Continued Next Page)

23.3

80.9

35

40
ST
11
2.5

RECOVERY (%)

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

ELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

625
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
AND REMARKS

Moist, light gray and orange, high plasticity, CLAY, ironoxide staining, fissile, light gray clay in fractures, (CH),(RESIDUUM) (continued)

58
24

Bottom of hole at 40.0 feet.

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

SOIL SAMPLESSAND (%)

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 40

GRAVEL (%)

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

Plasticity Index

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 662.16

Liquid Limit

PROJECT NO: 60615067

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight(pcf)

DATES DRILLED: 10/7/20 - 10/7/20

STRATIGRAPHY

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

LOG NO: 014-20
PAGE 2 OF 2

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTSDATES DRILLED: 1/7/20 - 1/7/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 662.44

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 45

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 015-19
PAGE 1 OF 2

LOGGED BY: M. Link

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Embankment Crest

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING ---CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13906655.38(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2329758.762(ft)or EASTING (ft):

P
1

660

SS
2

5

655

10

4

85

4.5+
5-7-9
(16)

72

P
3

4.5+

63

ST
4

4.5+

67

SS
5

4-7-9
(16)

72

650

15

ST
6

4.5+

88

P
7

4.5+

79

Very stiff to hard, moist, brown to dark brown, CLAY,
organics, trace fine gravel, trace shell fragments, trace
chalk pockets, (CH), (FILL)
Hard, dry, tan to light gray, CLAY, organics, brownmottling, chalky inclusions, slightly friable, (CL-CH),(FILL)-2 ft: contains approx. 30% dark brown fat clay (CH)
Very stiff to hard, moist, brown to dark brown, CLAY,
organics, trace fine gravel, iron oxide staining, ironoxidation staining, trace shell fragments, trace chalky
inclusions, (CH), (FILL)
Hard, dry, tan to gray, CLAY, organics, brown mottling,slightly friable, chalky inclusions, gypsum crystals inpockets and along seams, (CL-CH), (FILL)-6 ft: Becomes dry to moist, tan to light gray, trace finegravel (0.5 to 1 inch), trace black mottling, trace shellfragments-8.5 ft: Becomes moist, some subangular gravel (0.25
to 0.5 inch), increase in chalky inclusions,approximatley 30% dark brown fat clay
-13.5 ft: No visible shell fragments, gravel, or chalky
inclusions

16.6
9.1

15.3

14

11.5

19.3

645

20

-18 ft: Increased moisture, tan with light gray mottling,
trace black specks

18.6

Hard, moist, tan with light gray, CLAY, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)

17

640

25

SS
8

4-10-12
(22)

100

635

30

-Some gypsum crystals, (RESIDUUM)

ST
9

4.5+

83

P
10

4.5+

83

19.2

630

35

-Inclined gypsum layer 0.5 to 1 inch thick, (RESIDUUM)
18.5(Continued Next Page)

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

SAND (%)

GRAVEL (%)

Plasticity Index

Liquid Limit

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight(pcf)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYLABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

RECOVERY (%)

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

DATES DRILLED: 1/7/20 - 1/7/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 662.44

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 45

LOG NO: 015-19
PAGE 2 OF 2

Hard, moist, tan with light gray, CLAY, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM) (continued)
625

40

P
11

4.5+

83

-Inclined gypsum layer 0.25 to 0.5 inch thick,(RESIDUUM)

12.3

Hard, dry, gray with dark gray, CLAY, trace very finecrystals, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)

20.6

620

45

SS
12

25-33-37(70)

100

Bottom of hole at 45.0 feet.

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

SAND (%)

GRAVEL (%)

Plasticity Index

Liquid Limit

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight(pcf)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYLABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

RECOVERY (%)

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

35

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

DATES DRILLED: 1/3/20 - 1/3/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 652.04

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 10

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 101-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Borrow Area

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING --- Dry, caved at 6.1 ft (2pm)

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13908101.15(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2329792.804(ft)or EASTING (ft):

5

10

3-5-6
(11)

94

P
3
SS
4

645

P
5

58
7-8-13
(21)

92

4.25

63

Moist, dark brown to black, high plasticity, CLAY,
organics, trace fine to medium gravel, subrounded tosubangular, calcite nodules increase towards base,(CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Strong HCL reaction at 2 feet below ground surface
Hard, slightly moist, light brown to gray, silty to lean
CLAY, calcite nodules, abundant iron towards base,(CL-ML), (RESIDUUM)
Becomes dry, iron oxide staining, abundant calcite
nodules
Moist to slightly moist, light brown to orange, CLAY,
strong HCL reaction, gray clay seams, abundant calcite
nodules, (CL-ML), (RESIDUUM)
Bottom of hole at 10.0 feet. Bulk samples from auger
cuttings collect as follows: 0'-5' (B-1), 5'-10' (B-2)

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

69

48

90.6

11.5
25.6

90

63

91.8

6.2

39

20

33.3

SAND (%)

14.6

GRAVEL (%)

STRATIGRAPHY

38

AND REMARKS

Plasticity Index

SS
2

3.25

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid Limit

650

RECOVERY (%)

P
1

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

22.1

12.4

DATES DRILLED: 1/3/20 - 1/3/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 650.06

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 10

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 102-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Borrow Area

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING --- Dry, no caving (2pm)

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907928.75(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2329831.089(ft)or EASTING (ft):

ST
3
SS
4

10

5-8-9
(17)

P
5

83

4.5+
5-6-7
(13)

83
100

3.75

54

Moist, dark brown to black, high plasticity, CLAY, muchorganics, fine to medium gravel, abundant calcite
nodules, increase towards base, (CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Dry to slightly moist, light brown, silty to lean CLAY,
trace organics, abundant calcite nodules, trace blackmineral flecks, (CL-ML), (RESIDUUM)
Light brown to orange, silty CLAY, fine to coarse sand,fine to medium gravel, iron oxide staining, calcite
nodules, (CL-ML), (RESIDUUM)
Becomes dry to slightly moist, well graded
Moist, light brown to orange, medium plasticity, CLAY,
iron oxide staining, gray clay veins, trace black mineral
flecks, (CL-ML), (RESIDUUM)
Bottom of hole at 10.0 feet. Bulk samples from auger
cuttings collect as follows: 0'-3.5' (B-1), 3.5'-7.5' (B-2)

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

59

37

89.9

7.1 137.1 35

22

47.5

45

98.7

SAND (%)

18.4

GRAVEL (%)

STRATIGRAPHY

Plasticity Index

567

AND REMARKS

Liquid Limit

645

3.0

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONNatural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

SS
2

RECOVERY (%)

P
1

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)

0

SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER650

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

7.7

5

21.5

65

DATES DRILLED: 1/3/20 - 1/3/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 647.13

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 10

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 103-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Borrow Area

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING --- ????????

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907727.03(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2329897.299(ft)or EASTING (ft):

SS
2

5

P
3
SS
4

640

10

4-5-5
(10)

P
5

89

4.5+
8-10-14
(24)

88
100

4.5+

83

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

77

52

90.8

32

19

58.5

SAND (%)

21.5

GRAVEL (%)

Plasticity Index

645

Moist, dark brown to black, CLAY, much organics, trace
fine to medium gravel, strong HCL reaction, abundantcalcite nodules, (CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Becomes slightly moist to dry

Liquid Limit

83

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

3.25

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)

P
1

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

14.2

Becomes hard
Hard, dry to slightly moist, light brown to tan, silty
CLAY, iron oxide staining, abundant calcite nodules,
abundant black flecks, (CL-ML), (RESIDUUM)
Becomes very stiff, dry, fine to coarse subangulargravel, strong HCL reaction, well graded
Hard, moist, light brown to orange, medium to highplasticity, CLAY, iron oxide staining, gray clay veins,(CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Bottom of hole at 10.0 feet. Bulk samples from auger
cuttings collect as follows: 0'-5' (B-1), 5'-10' (B-2)

15.9
6.3

14

DATES DRILLED: 1/3/20 - 1/3/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 651.25

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 10

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 104-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Borrow Area

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING --- Dry, caved at 6.9 ft (2pm)

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13908031.91(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2329590.036(ft)or EASTING (ft):

P
3
SS
4

10

5-11-20
(31)

P
5

100

4.5+
6-5-11(16)

48

Dark brown to black, high plasticity, CLAY, muchorganics, trace fine to medium gravel, subrounded tosubangular, increasing calcite nodules towards base,(CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Grades to hard, slighly moist
Very stiff, moist to slightly moist, light brown to gray,silty to lean CLAY, iron oxide staining, abundant calcite
nodules, (CL-ML), (RESIDUUM)

100

4.25

63

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

62

45

94.7

51

32

95.7

51

33

92.5

SAND (%)

29.7

GRAVEL (%)

STRATIGRAPHY

Plasticity Index

645

73

AND REMARKS

Liquid Limit

5

3.25

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONNatural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

SS
2

RECOVERY (%)

P
1

650

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

14.9

14.9
14.9

Stiff, moist, light gray to orange, CLAY, trace medium
gravel, iron oxide staining, subrounded, black mineral
flecks, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Bottom of hole at 10.0 feet. Bulk samples from auger
cuttings collect as follows: 0'-6' (B-1), 6'-7.5' (B-2),
7.5'-10' (B-3)

16.5

DATES DRILLED: 1/3/20 - 1/3/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 649.55

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 10

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 105-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Borrow Area

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING --- Dry, caved at 6.1 ft (2pm)

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907862.12(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2329630.015(ft)or EASTING (ft):

P
3
SS
4

640

10

5-7-9
(16)

P
5

44

4.5+
4-5-7
(12)

77
83

4.25

79

Moist to very moist, dark brown to black, high plasticity,
CLAY, much organics, trace fine to medium gravel,subrounded to subangular, increasing calcite nodules
towards base, (CH), (ALLUVIUM)

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

59

36

92.1

52

33

91.2

SAND (%)

16.5

GRAVEL (%)

STRATIGRAPHY

Plasticity Index

579

AND REMARKS

Liquid Limit

645

3.0

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONNatural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

SS
2

RECOVERY (%)

P
1

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

9.5

Slightly moist to dry, light brown to gray, silty to lean
CLAY, iron oxide staining, abundant calcite nodules,
trace black mineral flecks, (CL-ML), (RESIDUUM)
Grades to trace coarse subrounded gravel, strong HCL
reaction
Moist, light brown to orange, CLAY, iron oxide staining,gray clay seams, trace black flecks, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)
Bottom of hole at 10.0 feet. Bulk samples from auger
cuttings collect as follows: 0'-5' (B-1), 5'-10' (B-2)

16.8
12

21.9

DATES DRILLED: 1/3/20 - 1/3/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 647.79

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 10

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 106-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Borrow Area

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING --- Dry, caved at 6.3 ft (2pm)

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907684.33(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2329662.719(ft)or EASTING (ft):

10

P
5

21-15-14
(29)

89

4.25

79

Stiff, moist, light brown to tan, CLAY, iron oxide
staining, gray clay seams, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Bottom of hole at 10.0 feet. Bulk samples from auger
cuttings collect as follows: 0'-2.5' (B-1), 2.5'-10' (B-2)

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

STRATIGRAPHY

SAND (%)

60

GRAVEL (%)

83

P
3
SS
4

640

8-21-20(41)

Dark brown to black, high plasticity, CLAY, muchorganics, trace coarse gravel, subrounded, (CH),(ALLUVIUM)
Grades to light brown, finer gravel, abundant calcite
nodules, strong HCL reaction
Dry, light brown to grayish white, silty CLAY, fine sand,iron oxide staining, abundant calcite nodules, (CL-ML),(RESIDUUM)
Increasing medium to coarse, subrounded tosubangular gravel with depth, well graded
Grades to coarse gravel at 7.5 feet below groundsurface, strong HCL reaction

Plasticity Index

5

88

AND REMARKS

Liquid Limit

SS
2

4.5+

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONNatural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

645

RECOVERY (%)

P
1

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

11.4

40

21

2

20.3 77.7 36.6

69

46

3.4 21.1 75.5 42.6

5.4

21
2.9

24.7

18.7

DATES DRILLED: 12/11/19 - 12/11/19

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 648.46

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 10

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 1301-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Link

DRILL EQUIP: Hand auger

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hand Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Downstream Slope

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 3" OD Hand Auger

AFTER DRILLING ---CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907145(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330273(ft)or EASTING (ft):

645
5

640
10

100

GRAB
2

4.5+

100

GRAB
3

3 to
4.5+

100

GRAB
4

1.75 to
100
2.5

GRAB
5

1.75 to100
2.5

Stiff, moist, light brown to dark brown, CLAY, organics,
trace fine gravel, shell fragments, (CH), (FILL)
Stiff to very stiff, moist, tan to light gray, CLAY, traceorganics, iron oxide staining, trace gray/black mottling,
trace iron oxidation staining, (CL-CH), (FILL)-2 ft: Becomes hard
-3.3 ft: More gray, calcareous nodules and chalky,
trace gypsum crystals-4 ft: Trace white fine gravel, trace calcareous nodules
and gypsum crystals-5 ft: 2 to 3 inch thick gray layer
Stiff to very stiff, moist, light gray to gray, CLAY, tracegray/black mottling, trace calcareous nodules, (CH),(FILL)
6.5 ft: Trace rounded fine gravel
Stiff to very stiff, moist, brown to gray, CLAY,
subangular, trace subangular fine gravel and roundedmedium gravel, trace calcareous nodules, trace shellfragments, (CH), (FILL)
Iron oxide staining, -8 ft: trace iron oxidation staining,
pockets of hard tan-gray lean-fat clay, trace organics
Iron oxide staining, -8.5 ft: Becomes brown to darkbrown
-9.5 ft: Becomes tan to light gray, gypsum crystals
within light gray clay seam
Bottom of hole at 10.0 feet.

44

90.8

13.1

14.9

96.4

51

34

20.6

20.2

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

67

SAND (%)

23.1

GRAVEL (%)

Plasticity Index

2

AND REMARKS

Liquid Limit

1.75

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)

POCKET PEN (tsf)

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS
Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

GRAB
1

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

0.2 2.9 96.9 66.2

0.2 6.8

63

45

93

91.1

61.3

DATES DRILLED: 12/11/19 - 12/11/19

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 657.81

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 6.5

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 1302-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Link

DRILL EQUIP: Hand auger

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hand Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Upstream Slope

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 3" OD Hand Auger

AFTER DRILLING ---CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907039(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330083(ft)or EASTING (ft):

100

GRAB
3

4.5+

100

GRAB
4

3.5 to 100
4.5+

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

SAND (%)

3 to
4.5+

GRAVEL (%)

GRAB
2Moist, brown to dark brown, CLAY, organics, trace shellfragments, trace calcite nodules, trace tan-light grayzones, (CH), (FILL)
Moist, tan to light gray, CLAY, trace organics,
subangular, trace fine subangular gravel, trace
calcareous nodules and inclusions, dry silty inclusions,(CL-CH), (FILL)
Moist, dark brown to light gray, CLAY, organics, trace
sand, trace fine gravel, iron oxide staining, trace ironoxidation staining, (CH), (FILL)
Dry to moist, white to tannish gray, CLAY, calcareous
inclusions, (CL-CH), (FILL)-4.3 ft: Approximately 30% light gray lean-fat clay withorganics, trace shale fragments
Moist, tan to light gray, CLAY, calcareous nodules andinclusions, less silty, inclusions of gray to dark gray clay
with calcite/gypsum crystals, no visible organics,(CL-CH), (FILL)-6 ft: trace orange nodules and inclusions, no visible
crystals
Bottom of hole at 6.5 feet.

Plasticity Index

1.75 to100
3.5

AND REMARKSSTRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)

GRAB
1MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid Limit

5

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS
Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

655

SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

18.9

51

32

0

6.2 93.8 49.3

18.1

55

38

0

7.9 92.1

56

34

90.3
98

DATES DRILLED: 9/3/20 - 9/3/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 657.91

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 10

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Tim

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 1701-20
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M.Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: Hand auger

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hand Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Upstream Slope

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 3" OD Hand Auger

AFTER DRILLING ---CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907764(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330292(ft)or EASTING (ft):

10

100

Soft, dry, tan to brown, low plasticity, CLAY, (CL),(FILL)

GRAB
3

100

GRAB
4

100

Stiff to medium stiff, moist, dark brown and black, highplasticity, CLAY, with trace fine grained gravel, trace
calcareous nodules, abundant organics, (CH), (FILL)-3.5 to 4.5 ft: trace iron oxidation staining observed
Soft, moist, light brown to gray, medium plasticity,
CLAY, with abundant iron oxidation staining, (CL-CH),(FILL)
Soft, moist, light brownish orange with gray, CLAY, with
abundant iron oxidation staining, trace calcareous
nodules, (CH), (FILL)-9 ft: becomes olive gray, shale fragments at 10 ft
Bottom of hole at 10.0 feet.

GRAB
5
GRAB
6

100
100

19

63

42

19.8

16.2

19.9
21.1
23.2

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

34

SAND (%)

9.3

GRAVEL (%)

Plasticity Index

Stiff, dry, dark brown to black, CLAY, with abundantorganics, trace calcareous nodules, (CH), (FILL)STRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)

POCKET PEN (tsf)

AND REMARKS

Liquid Limit

650

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONNatural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

5

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

100

GRAB
1
GRAB
2

655

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

DATES DRILLED: 9/3/20 - 9/3/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 657.74

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 4.75

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Tim

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 1702-20
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M.Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: Hand auger

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hand Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Upstream Slope

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 3" OD Hand Auger

AFTER DRILLING ---CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907667(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330332(ft)or EASTING (ft):

655

100

Stiff, slightly moist, tannish brown and black, CLAY,
with trace organics, trace calcareous nodules, trace ironoxidation staining, trace fine grained gravel, (CL), (FILL)
Bottom of hole at 4.8 feet. Refusal at 4.75 ft

35

17.3

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

57

SAND (%)

15.3

GRAVEL (%)

Plasticity Index

GRAB
2

Medium stiff to stiff, slightly moist, black, CLAY, withcalcareous nodules, abundant organics, (CH), (FILL)

Liquid Limit

100

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

GRAB
1

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS
POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

DATES DRILLED: 9/3/20 - 9/3/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 653.67

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 6.75

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Tim

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 1703-20
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M.Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: Hand auger

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hand Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Downstream Slope

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 3" OD Hand Auger

AFTER DRILLING ---CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907897(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330294(ft)or EASTING (ft):

5

GRAB
1

100

Stiff to medium stiff, dry, dark brown, CLAY, highplasticity, with abundant organics, (CH), (FILL)

18.3

GRAB
2

100

Soft, slightly moist, light brown with gray, CLAY, with
abundant iron oxidation staining, (CL-CH), (FILL)

19.1

GRAB
3

100

-4 ft: trace calcareous deposits
19

Bottom of hole at 6.8 feet. Refusal at 6.75 ft

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

36

SAND (%)

56

GRAVEL (%)

Plasticity Index

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight(pcf)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

Liquid Limit

650

SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

DATES DRILLED: 9/3/20 - 9/3/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 653.64

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 10

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Tim

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 1704-20
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M.Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: Hand auger

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hand Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Downstream Slope

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 3" OD Hand Auger

AFTER DRILLING ---CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907784(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330340(ft)or EASTING (ft):

10

100
100
100
100
100

Soft, light brown with gray, medium plasticity, CLAY,
with trace iron oxidation staining, (CL-CH), (FILL)
Hard, slightly moist, olive gray, CLAY, shaley, highplasticity, with trace iron oxidation staining, trace
calcareous nodules, (CH), (FILL)-4 ft: abundant calcareous deposits
Soft, slightly moist, light brown with gray, medium
plasticity, CLAY, with abundant iron oxidation staining,
trace black flecks, (CL-CH), (FILL)-6 ft: moist, gray clay seams, trace calcaerous deposits
Soft, moist, light brown, high plasticity, CLAY, with
abundant calcareous nodules, trace black flecks, (CH),(FILL)
Bottom of hole at 10.0 feet.

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

17.9

51

33

0.4 10.5 89.1 59.1

67

43

52

35

SAND (%)

STRATIGRAPHY

POCKET PEN (tsf)

RECOVERY (%)
100

Stiff to medium stiff, slightly moist, brown to black, highplasticity, CLAY, with trace iron oxidation staining,abundant organics, (CH), (FILL)GRAVEL (%)

645

100
100

AND REMARKS

Plasticity Index

5

GRAB
2
GRAB
3
GRAB
4
GRAB
5
GRAB
6
GRAB
7
GRAB
8
GRAB
9

100

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid Limit

650

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS
Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

GRAB
1

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

18.8
19.1
20.7
19.8
23.8

24.3
18

0

11.5 88.5 56.4

DATES DRILLED: 10/2/20 - 10/2/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 654.07

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 10

LOG NO: 1705-20
PAGE 1 OF 1

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chester Westbrook
GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOGGED BY: M.Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: Hand auger

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hand Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Downstream Slope

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 3" OD Hand Auger

AFTER DRILLING ---CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907686(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330380(ft)or EASTING (ft):

650
5

10

Soft, slightly moist, black brown, medium plasticity,
CLAY, much organics, trace fine gravel, (CL-CH)

GRAB
1b

Soft, slightly moist, dark brown black, high plasticity,
CLAY, trace organics, strong HCL reaction, (CH)

GRAB
2

GRAB
4

13.9

23.2

Soft, slightly moist, light brown with orange, medium
plasticity, CLAY, trace iron, (CL-CH)
Soft, slightly moist, light brown with orange, medium
plasticity, CLAY, with some stiff gray clay layers, trace
iron, trace calcareous, (CL-CH)

22
20.4

Soft, slightly moist, medium plasticity, CLAY, trace ironwith gray clay seams, (CL-CH)
Bottom of hole at 10.0 feet.

23.8

21.3

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

SAND (%)

GRAVEL (%)

Plasticity Index

Liquid Limit

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight(pcf)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)

POCKET PEN (tsf)

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

GRAB
1a

GRAB
3

645

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

DATES DRILLED: 12/31/19 - 12/31/19

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 656.49

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 25

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 201-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Auxiliary Spillway

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING --- Dry

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13908512.65(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2329836.552(ft)or EASTING (ft):

5
650

SS
3

4.5+

3-3-10
(13)

P
4
SS
5

83
4.5+

3-5-8
(13)

71
100

10

Moist to very moist, dark brown to black, high plasticity,
CLAY, much organics, trace fine gravel, (CH),(ALLUVIUM)
Slightly moist to moist, light brown to tan, CLAY, trace
gravel, iron oxide staining, trace calcite at base,(CL-CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Dry, light brown to orange, silty CLAY, iron oxide
staining, trace calcite nodules, (CL-ML), (RESIDUUM)
Moist, dark brown to black, high plasticity, CLAY, muchorganics, (possilbe fall-in from 0' to 0.75'), (CH)Light brown to tan, silty CLAY, trace coarse gravel,
trace fine sand, subangular, sand is well-graded, grayclay veins, (CL-ML), (RESIDUUM)
Moist, light brown to orange, medium plasticity, CLAY,
iron oxide staining, gray clay seams, trace black flecks,(CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight(pcf)

11.8 136.9 41

26

0.5 19.6 79.9

12

23

9

93

17.8 128.1 60

31

SAND (%)

STRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)
96

AND REMARKSGRAVEL (%)

ST
2

73

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Plasticity Index

4

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

Liquid Limit

2.5

P
1

655

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

26.4

37

19.7
23.5

645

15

ST
6

4.5+

81

640

20

Grades to trace calcite nodules

P
7

79

23.4

635

25

SS
8

5-9-13(22)

100

Light brown to tan, high plasticity, CLAY, iron oxide
staining, gray clay veins, gypsum crystal layer at 17" ingray clay layer, (CH), (RESIDUUM)
Bottom of hole at 25.0 feet.

21.7

0

2

98

47.8

DATES DRILLED: 12/30/19 - 12/30/19

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 656.89

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 25

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 202-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Auxiliary Spillway

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING --- Dry

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13908622.21(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2329966.202(ft)or EASTING (ft):

5
650

SS
3

4-10-12(22)

63

Dry to slightly moist, light brown to grayish orange, silty
CLAY, trace fine gravel, iron oxide staining, abundantcalcite nodules, (ML), (RESIDUUM)
Becomes slighty moist to moist, trace coarse gravel
subrounded

11.4 134.6 24

90

18.7 81.3 27.2

21.5

4.8
10.5

30

18

48

20

51

30

Increase in clay content and gravel, well graded

ST
5

4.5+

69

16

137

645

15

SS
6

3-5-8
(13)

100

Stiff, moist, orange to gray, high plasticity, CLAY, ironoxide staining, gray clay veins, (CH), (RESIDUUM)

20.4

Light brown to gray, CLAY, iron oxide staining, trace
black flecks, (CH), (RESIDUUM)

23.2

640

20

P
7

4.5+

77

635

25

SS
8

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight(pcf)

STRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)
100

P
4

10

63

Moist, dark brown to black, high plasticity, CLAY, muchorganics, trace gravel, (CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Moist to slightly moist, light brown to orange, silty tolean CLAY, some silt, iron oxide staining, abundantcalcite nodules, (CL), (RESIDUUM)
Becomes dry

SAND (%)

4.5+

AND REMARKSGRAVEL (%)

ST
2

58

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Plasticity Index

4.5+

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

Liquid Limit

3.5

P
1

655

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

4-6-12(18)

100

Dark brown to black, CLAY, iron oxide staining, trace
black flecks, (CH), (RESIDUUM)
Very moist, light brown to orange, high plasticity, silty tolean CLAY, abundant gypsum crystals in soft gray clay
layer, (CL), (RESIDUUM)
Bottom of hole at 25.0 feet.

21.9

3.4 29.6

67

37.2

DATES DRILLED: 12/30/19 - 12/30/19

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 656.91

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 25

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 203-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Auxiliary Spillway

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING 18.40 ft / Elev 638.51 ft

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13908582.74(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330174.125(ft)or EASTING (ft):

ST
3

4.5+

P
4
SS
5

94

1.5
5-10-10
(20)

42

46
100

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight(pcf)

STRATIGRAPHY

SAND (%)

650

7-12-16(28)

GRAVEL (%)

5

42

Plasticity Index

SS
2

4.25

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid Limit

655

RECOVERY (%)

P
1

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

32

18

0

18.6 81.4 35.1

Very soft, dry to slightly moist, light brown, poorly
graded, silty SAND, coarse sand, fine gravel, breaks
apart, little clay content, (SM), (RESIDUUM)
Grades to trace calcite nodules.

7.1 123.3 18
8.7

7

34.8

11

NP

46.8

Hard, moist, orange to gray, high plasticity, silty SAND,
iron oxide staining, trace black specks, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)

10.8
21.1

66.9

21.6

98.6

AND REMARKS

Soft, moist, dark brown to black, high plasticity, CLAY,
much organics, (CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Soft, moist to slightly moist, brown, CLAY, abundantcalcite nodules, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Dry, light brown, CLAY, trace organics, abundant calcite
nodules, (CL), (RESIDUUM)
Trace organics at 3.5 feet below ground surface

23.5
18.9
8.5

NL

10
645

15

P
6

4.5+

69

640

20

SS
7

3-6-11(17)

100

Increased iron staining towards base.

635
ST
8

4.5+

90

Moist, orange to gray, high plasticity, CLAY, (CH),(RESIDUUM)

25
Bottom of hole at 25.0 feet.

58

32

0

1.5 98.5

53

DATES DRILLED: 12/19/19 - 12/19/19

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 651.26

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 25

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 204-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Auxiliary Spillway

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

3hrs AFTER DRILLING 23.05 ft / Elev 628.21 ft

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13908508.91(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330413.214(ft)or EASTING (ft):

5
645

SS
3

5-14-14
(28)

P
4
SS
5

100
3.5

2-5-8
(13)

50
100

10
640

15

ST
6

4.5+

100

P
7

4.5+

85

8

1.5 29.3 69.2 36.3

23.3
10.9

20
6.8
22.4
14.7

68

46

18.3 131.1 50

28

9.2
19.5

635

20

Hard, moist, orangeish yellow to light tan, CLAY, ironoxide staining, trace soft gray clay veins, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)

630

25

SS
8

5-10-17(27)

100

Very stiff, moist, orange to light tan, CLAY, abundantgypsum crystals within soft gray clay veins, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)
Bottom of hole at 25.0 feet.

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

8.1 125.7 25

SAND (%)

48

GRAVEL (%)

4.5+

Plasticity Index

ST
2

Moist, dark brown to black, CLAY, trace coarse gravel,
trace organics, subrounded to subangular, (CL-CH),(ALLUVIUM)
Dry to moist, brown to tan, CLAY, trace organics, finegravel, subrounded to subangular, gradually graded
down, layer with possible gypsum or calcite nodules,(CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Hard, dry, brown to tannish orange, CLAY, traceorganics, fine gravel, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Very stiff, moist, dark brown to black, CLAY, traceorganics, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Stiff, dry, orange to light tan, silty CLAY, (CL-ML),(RESIDUUM)
Medium stiff, moist, dark brown to black, CLAY, traceorganics, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Soft, dry to moist, light brown to tan, CLAY, muchcoarse gravel, subrounded to subangular, fine white
nodules, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Moist, brown to orange, CLAY, much fine gravel, ironoxide staining, black flecks, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Iron oxide staining and gray clay veins at 13 feet below
ground surface.

Liquid Limit

53

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

4.5+

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHY

P
1

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)RECOVERY (%)

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

650

SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

20.8

0

2.2 97.8

61

DATES DRILLED: 12/18/19 - 12/18/19

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 644.35

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 25

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 205-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Auxiliary Spillway

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING --- Dry

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13908420.58(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330663.997(ft)or EASTING (ft):

630
15

625
20

620
25

4.5+

5-8-9
(17)

40

100

ST
5

4.5+

86

P
6

4.5+

92

SS
7

ST
8

3-6-9
(15)

100

4.5+

66

32

Large gravel piece at 4.5 feet below ground surface
Light gray clay layer, intermixed, trace gypsum towards
baseVery stiff, moist to dry, orange to yellow, CLAY,(CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)

20.6 125.5 54

30

Moist, light brown to gray, CLAY, iron oxide staining,
nodules towards base, massive iron staining midway
through around 13 inches, erroding nodule, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)

21.7

Stiff, moist, yellowish orange to brown, medium
plasticity, CLAY, iron oxide staining, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)

22.7

Hard, yellowish orange to brown, CLAY, gray clay veincontaining gypsum crystals, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Bottom of hole at 25.0 feet.

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

STRATIGRAPHY

53

Very stiff, moist to dry, dark gray, CLAY, much gravel,subrounded to subangular, slight transition to brown at
9.5 inches, (CL-CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Stiff, dry, yellowish orange, CLAY, much gravel,subrounded to subangular, trace black specks at base,(CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Very stiff, moist to dry, dark brown, CLAY, traceorganics, trace gravel, subrounded, possible calcite
nodules; uneven contact between brown and gray layer,(CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Grades to yellowish-orange, increase in gravel

SAND (%)

10

81

23.1

AND REMARKSGRAVEL (%)

P
3
SS
4

635

9-10-11(21)

Plasticity Index

544

Liquid Limit

640

4.5+

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONNatural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

SS
2

RECOVERY (%)

P
1

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

0

1.9 98.1 66.3

11.7
19.3
16.9
19.2

21.6

DATES DRILLED: 1/2/20 - 1/2/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 656.55

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 25

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 206-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Auxiliary Spillway

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING --- Dry

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13908395.25(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2329905.22(ft)or EASTING (ft):650

9-16-17
(33)

100

P
3
SS
4

10

48
15-19-16
(35)

100

ST
5

4.5+

77

P
6

4.5+

92

Hard, moist, light brown to orange, medium plasticity,
CLAY, iron oxide staining, gray clay seams, trace black
flecks, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)

92

Hard, moist, light brown to orange, medium plasticity,
CLAY, gray clay seams, trace black flecks, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)

645

15

Moist to very moist, dark brown to black, high plasticity,
CLAY, much organics, much fine gravel, increaseabundant calcite nodules at base, (CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Light brown to orange, CLAY, iron oxide staining,(CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Hard, dark brown to tan, much medium to coarse
gravel, abundant calcite nodules
Dry, light brown to tan, well graded, silty CLAY, muchgravel, fine sand, iron oxide staining, subrounded tosubangular, abundant calcite nodules, (ML),(RESIDUUM)
Moist, dark brown to black, high plasticity, CLAY, traceorganics, trace fine to medium gravel, (CH),(RESIDUUM)
Dry, light brown to tan, well graded, silty SAND,
crumbly, trace calcite nodules, (SM), (RESIDUUM)
Grades to poorly graded, iron oxide staining
Moist, light brown to orange, medium plasticity, CLAY,
iron oxide staining, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)

19.7 139.3 NL
8.9NP

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

45

SAND (%)

68

GRAVEL (%)

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight(pcf)

STRATIGRAPHY

79

AND REMARKS

Plasticity Index

5

3.5

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid LimitSS
2

RECOVERY (%)

P
1

655

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

19.4
4.3
14.2
5.2

17.7

5.8

24.9 126.3 67

23.5

43

0

2.1 97.9 73.2

34

0

0.9 99.1 65.6

23.5

640

20

ST
7

22.5 126.3 57

635

25

SS
8

4-7-11(18)

100

Very stiff, moist, light brown to orange, medium to highplasticity, CLAY, gray clay seams, trace black flecks,(CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Bottom of hole at 25.0 feet.

23.5

DATES DRILLED: 12/31/19 - 12/31/19

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 658.83

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 35

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 207-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Auxiliary Spillway

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING --- Dry

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13908502.94(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330037.576(ft)or EASTING (ft):

5

SS
3

5-13-13
(26)

P
4
SS
5

650

83
4.5+

4-8-9
(17)

44
100

10

645
15

640
20

635
25

630
30

625
35

16

14.9 38.9 46.2 35.3

13.5

21.3
6
8.5 133.6 35

20

12.2

37

23

55

29

P
6

4.5+

92

Hard, moist, light brown to orange, medium plasticity,
CLAY, iron oxide staining, gray clay veins intermixed,(CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)

21

ST
7

4.5+

123

Hard, moist, light brown to orange, medium plasticity,
CLAY, iron oxide staining, gray clay veins intermixed,(CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)

22.1 128

Very stiff, moist, light brown to orange, Becomes very
stiff, high plasticity, trace black flecks, (CH),(RESIDUUM)

21.2

Very stiff, light brown to orange, Gypsum crystal seams
in gray clay layer at 28 feet below ground surface, (CH),(RESIDUUM)

21.4

SS
8

4-8-12
(20)

100

P
9

4.5+

96

ST
10

4.5+

94

Very stiff, moist, Grades to light brown to tan, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)
Bottom of hole at 35.0 feet.

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

12.6 131.1 33

SAND (%)

GRAVEL (%)

50

Plasticity Index

4.5+

Medium stiff, moist, dark brown to black, high plasticity,
CLAY, much organics, trace fine gravel, subrounded,
grades toward coarser gravel at last 0.5 inch, (CH),(ALLUVIUM)
Hard, slightly moist to dry, light brown to white, CLAY,
trace coarse gravel, subrounded to subangular, calcitepresent, low clay content more chalk, (CH),(ALLUVIUM)
Dark brown to black, high plasticity, CLAY, trace gravel,
trace organics, (CH), (RESIDUUM)
Very stiff, dry, light brown to white, well graded, silty
CLAY, fine sand, fine to coarse gravel, iron oxide
staining, abundant calcite, (ML), (RESIDUUM)
Increase in subrounded to subangular, coarse gravel
Very moist, light brown to tan, high plasticity, silty
CLAY, trace gravel, iron oxide staining, subrounded,trace calcite nodules, (CL-ML), (RESIDUUM)

Liquid Limit

ST
2

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

52

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)

3.5

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)

POCKET PEN (tsf)655

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

P
1

SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

20.3

0

1.1 98.9 64.8

DATES DRILLED: 12/30/19 - 12/30/19

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 654.77

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 25

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 208-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Auxiliary Spillway

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING 20.90 ft / Elev 633.87 ft

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13908436.88(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330234.091(ft)or EASTING (ft):

5

SS
3

4.5+

5-11-14
(25)

P
4

645

640

SS
5

100
4.5+

5-8-12
(20)

92
28

10

15

635

20

630

25

ST
6

4.5+

81

P
7

4.5+

83

SS
8

5-9-14(23)

100

Moist, dark brown to black, CLAY, much organics, trace
gravel, (CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Slightly moist, light brown to gray, CLAY, traceorganics, trace gravel, subangular, abundant calcite,
trace black specks, (CL-CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Hard, light brown to gray, CLAY, trace organics, ironoxide staining, abundant calcite, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Very stiff, moist, dark brown to black, high plasticity,
CLAY, much coarse gravel, (possible fall-in from 0' to
0.75'), (CH)
Very stiff, slightly moist to dry, light brown to orange,
CLAY, much fine gravel, much coarse sand, iron oxide
staining, subrounded to subangular, abundant calcite,(CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Stiff, moist to very moist, orange to brown, sandy CLAY,
trace gravel, iron oxide staining, abundant calcite, sandis well-graded, (CL), (RESIDUUM)
Moist, light brown to orange, CLAY, subrounded, trace
black specks, trace HCL reaction, (CL), (RESIDUUM)
Very stiff, brown to gray, medium plasticity, CLAY,
strong HCL reaction, iron oxide staining, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)

16

0.2 19.1 80.7 37.9

SAND (%)

10.2 125.3 29

22
13.9

15.4
8.3
13.8 133.4 39

24

13.5

25

15

21.1 124.8 59

36

20

Stiff, moist, light brown to gray, CLAY, iron oxide
staining, abundant gypsum, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Bottom of hole at 25.0 feet.

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight(pcf)

STRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)
46

AND REMARKSGRAVEL (%)

ST
2

58

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Plasticity Index

4.5+

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

Liquid Limit

4.0

P
1

650

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

19.2
20.3

75.8

1.6 10.6 87.8 42.4

DATES DRILLED: 12/19/19 - 12/19/19

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 648.34

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 25

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 209-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING 21.40 ft / Elev 626.94 ft

HOLE LOCATION: Auxiliary Spillway

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING 8.80 ft / Elev 639.54 ft

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13908357.77(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330479.623(ft)or EASTING (ft):

83

P
3

4.5+

48

ST
4

4.5+

64

SS
5

3-5-9
(14)

100

10

635
15

P
6

4.5+

92

Very stiff, moist, light brown to tan, CLAY, iron oxide
staining, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight(pcf)

STRATIGRAPHY

SAND (%)

5-8-10(18)

Moist, dark brown to black, CLAY, trace gravel,subrounded, (CL-CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Grades to moist to dry, light brown to tan, trace organics
and iron oxide staining
Very stiff, white, much coarse gravel, subrounded tosubangular, possible calcite nodules, increasing coarse
gravel towards base, drier towards base, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)
Moist, dark brown to black, high plasticity, CLAY,(possible fall-in from 0' to 2'), (CH)
Moist, orange to yellow, CLAY, much coarse gravel,subrounded to subangular, trace black specks,(CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)-Abundant coarse gravel at top of ST-4 and trace gravel
towards base
-8 ft: light gray mottling, iron oxide staining

GRAVEL (%)

640

46

AND REMARKS

Plasticity Index

5

3.5

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid Limit

SS
2

645

RECOVERY (%)

P
1

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

22 127.6 61

390

1.1 98.9 72.1

40

0

3.3 96.7

25.3
15.8
6.6

21.2
17.5

20.2

21.5

-Iron staining towards bottom of sample P-6

630
20

ST
7

4.5+

114

21.7 129.1 62

625
25

SS
8

5-9-14(23)

100

Very stiff, moist, yellowish orange to light brown, CLAY,(CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)-23.9 ft: becomes gray with abundant gypsum crystals,
gypsum in interlayered gray veins
Bottom of hole at 25.0 feet.

22.7

60

DATES DRILLED: 12/9/19 - 12/9/19

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 635.74

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 25

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 210-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Link

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: S. Whipke

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Auxiliary Spillway

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING --- 13.6

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13908271.89(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330732.068(ft)or EASTING (ft):

SS
2

5
630

10

6-5-10
(15)

64

P
3

4.5+

75

P
4

4.5+

92

ST
5

4.5+

67

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

32

SAND (%)

20.3 129.4 53

GRAVEL (%)

Plasticity Index

Very stiff, moist, light brown to dark brown, CLAY, withsand, some fine to coarse gravel, with organics, trace
inclusions of tan to light gray CH, trace shell fragments,
gravel is subangular, (CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Very stiff to hard, moist, gray with tan, gravelly CLAY,
trace iron oxidation staining, trace black mottling andchalky inclusions, trace black specks, chert fragment at
2', (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)-4 ft: Grades to hard, moist to dry, calcareous
striations, gray mottling, burnt orange pockets, calcite
nodulesHard, moist to dry, light gray to tan, CLAY, black
specks, oxidation stains, brown-black partings, silica
veins, slightly friable, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)-8 ft: brown-black partings, black specks, iron oxidation
staining, silica veins

Liquid Limit

63

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

2.5

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)

P
1

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0635

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

71.8

28.2

15.2

19.1

17.8 132.4 60

380

3.1 96.9 65.2

230

1.9 98.1

625

15

SS
6

3-5-10
(15)

100

620

20

-13.5 to 14 ft: Trace calcite crystals-14 to 15 ft: Seams of gray-white calcite crystals every
3" to 4"

20.6

-18 ft: slightly less hard than above

ST
7

4.5+

102

22.4 127

615

25

SS
8

5-17-22(39)

100

Hard, moist to dry, gray to dark gray, silty CLAY, slightly
powdery, alternating seams of tan and light gray clay
every 4"-6", less gypsum, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Bottom of hole at 25.0 feet.

18.5

52

57

DATES DRILLED: 1/9/20 - 1/9/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 646.38

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 35

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 304-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Link

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Principal Spillway

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING ---CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907231.85(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330214.104(ft)or EASTING (ft):

1.5

P
1

645

SS
2

5

4.5+
4-4-6
(10)

56

100

P
3

3.5

67

ST
4

4.5+

50

640

10

SS
5

2-3-5
(8)

100

635

15

P
6

1.5

75

ST
7

3

58

Stiff, moist, brown to dark brown, CLAY, organics, trace
fine gravel, iron oxide staining, trace shell fragments,
1-2cm gravel, (CH), (FILL)
Hard, moist, tan to light gray, CLAY, trace organics, ironoxide staining, trace black smudges/pockets, (CL-CH),(FILL)
Grades to trace gravel, trace brown striations
Trace gravel, iron oxide staining, rounded, brown to darkbrown CH with pockets of tan to light gray CL-CH,(CH), (FILL)
Very stiff, moist, brown to dark brown, CLAY, trace
calcite pockets, (CH), (FILL)
Hard, tan to light gray, CLAY, more black specks, tracegray CL-CH layer, (CL-CH), (FILL)
Grades to iron oxide staining, gray pockets (size of aquarter), trace gray/brown spots
Very stiff, moist, tan to light gray, CLAY, trace finegravel, trace organics, subangular, trace black specks
and pockets, trace iron striations, trace shell fragments,
trace gray pockets, trace calcite nodules, (CL-CH),(FILL)
Soft, CLAY, iron oxide staining, 2-inch thick layer ofgray to dark gray clay with shell fragments, (CL-CH),(FILL)

23.8 116.2
18.4

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

SAND (%)

GRAVEL (%)

Plasticity Index

Liquid Limit

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight(pcf)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYLABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

RECOVERY (%)

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

93.9

13.7
14.9
22.1 118.1

24.3 122.9 76

0.2 6.2 93.6 60.7

55

91

20

27.4 120.6

0.4 4.7 94.9 59.5

630

20

Very stiff, moist, dark gray, CLAY, trace fine gravel,rounded to angular, 1/4-1 inch gravel, shell fragments,
trace burnt orange pockets, trace black specks, trace
calcite nodules, trace tan pockets, (CH), (ALLUVIUM)

20 121.6 80

59

97.5

39

96.1

625

25

SS
8

2-5-8
(13)

83

620

30

ST
9

4.5+

63

Very stiff, moist, brown to dark brown, CLAY, trace finegravel, iron oxide staining, white specks, trace shellfragments, (CH), (RESIDUUM)
Very stiff, moist, tan to light gray, CLAY, trace finegravel, heavy black mottling, trace calcite nodules,(CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Hard, dry to moist, light gray to gray, silty CLAY, flakey,
powdery, (CL-ML), (RESIDUUM)

20

18.6 131.1 60

615

35

SS
10

6-19-25(44)

100

Trace gray mottling
15

Bottom of hole at 35.0 feet.

DATES DRILLED: 1/7/20 - 1/7/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 635.10

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 25

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 305-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Link

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Principal Spillway

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

LATITUDE (deg) 13907130.49(ft)AFTER DRILLING --- Dry, caved at 22 ft (2:30 pm)or NORTHING (ft):

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite GroutLONGITUDE (deg) 2330313.757(ft)or EASTING (ft):

625

620

615

10

15

20

25

86

ST
3

4.5+

P
4

3.75 to
65
4.5+

SS
5

3-5-7
(12)

100

3.75

P
6

4.5+

ST
7

SS
8

46

4.5+

25-50

4.5+

71

81

108

80% 0 to 0.9 inch layer, 20% 0.9 to 2 inch layer,(RESIDUUM)
Very stiff, moist, brown to tannish gray, CLAY, gravel,gray comes in splotches/mottling, brownish orange
inclusions, trace iron staining pockets, gypsum layers
starting to form, trace gypsum fissures, one 2.5-inch
subangular gravel, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Very stiff, damp, gray to dark gray, CLAY, fissile,(CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)-23.5 ft: Moist, increased plasticity
SHALE: Extremely weak, dry, white to light gray, fissile,trace black shading, trace fine gravel (1-2 cm), breaks
down to silty lean-fat clay
Bottom of hole at 25.0 feet.

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

17.2 12671

48

1.1 6.4 92.5 56.8

15.9 132.4 48

27

SAND (%)

STRATIGRAPHYGRAVEL (%)

10-14-20(34)

Hard, moist, dark brown, CLAY, organics, trace finegravel, iron oxide staining, shell fragments, 1-2 cm
gravel, (CH), (FILL)
Becomes tan to light gray, trace burnt orange pockets,
trace black mottling, 1-3 cm gravel, trace calcite
nodules, (FILL)
Dry, CLAY, gravel, subangular, few 1-1.5 inch gravel,(CL-CH), (FILL)
Trace organics, 70% 0.9 to 2 inch layer, 30% 0 to 0.9
inch layer, calcite nodules, (FILL)
Very stiff, trace organics, iron oxide staining, alternating
layers (90% CH as 0-0.9 inch thick, 10% CL/CH 0.9 to
2 inch thick w/ trace black mottling), (ALLUVIUM)
Medium stiff, moist, brown to dark brown, trace sand,iron oxide staining, trace tan and gray color, heavy ironstain nodules, trace shell fragments, black specks,(ALLUVIUM)

Plasticity Index

571

AND REMARKS

Liquid Limit

630

4.5+

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONNatural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

SS
2

RECOVERY (%)

P
1

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)

0

SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

635

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:27 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

5.1
89.4

18.3

17.9

0.3 7.9 91.8 54.6

24.4

19.8 126.5 60

11.5

35

95.5

DATES DRILLED: 10/1/20 - 10/1/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 647.96

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 20

LOG NO: 401-20
PAGE 1 OF 1

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chester Westbrook
GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOGGED BY: M.Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 55LCAT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Prop outlet channel

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 10" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING ---CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907933(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330545(ft)or EASTING (ft):

640

10

67

P
4

4.5+

69

P
5

4.5+

71

P
6

4.5+

88

P
7

4.5+

100

635

15

37

19.5 4.3 76.2

18.8

4.4 6.7 88.9

16.9

89.9

16.8 134.9 73

23.8

23.8

Bottom of hole at 20.0 feet. Bulk samples from auger
cuttings collect as follows: 0'-5' (B-1 and B-2), 5'-10'(B-3 and B-4), 10'-15' (B-5 and B-6), 15'-20' (B-7 and
B-8)

50

92.1

51

98.3

20.4

630

20

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

4.5+

22.4 123.6 58

SAND (%)

P
3

GRAVEL (%)

48

Plasticity Index

4.5+

Slightly moist, dark brown black, high plasticity, CLAY,
some coarse gravel, moderate HCL reaction, abundant
subrounded gravel, abundant calcarerous, (CH),(ALLUVIUM)
Slightly moist, dark brown black, high plasticity, CLAY,
some fine to coarse gravel, moderate HCL reaction,
trace black flecks, abundant subrounded to subangulargravel, abundant calcarerous, (CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Very stiff, slightly moist, dark brown, medium plasticity,
CLAY, weak HCL reaction, with orange and gray,abundant black flecks, coarse gravel layer at 3",(CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Very stiff, slightly moist, orange, medium plasticity,
CLAY, strong HCL reaction, with gray clay seams, trace
black flecks, increase iron presence, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)
Very stiff, slightly moist, orange, medium plasticity,
CLAY, strong HCL reaction, with abundant gray clay
seams, trace black flecks, iron layers at 8.5" and 8.75",
breaks along planes of weakness, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)
Very stiff, slightly moist, orange, medium plasticity,
CLAY, strong HCL reaction, abundant iron, trace black
flecks, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)

Liquid Limit

P
2

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

46

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHY

3.5

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)RECOVERY (%)

5

POCKET PEN (tsf)645

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

P
1

SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:28 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

75

DATES DRILLED: 10/1/20 - 10/1/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 646.55

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 20

LOG NO: 402-20
PAGE 1 OF 1

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chester Westbrook
GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOGGED BY: M.Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 55LCAT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Prop outlet channel

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 10" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING ---CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907784(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330496(ft)or EASTING (ft):

P
3

4.5
4.5+

46

P
4

4.5+

46

P
5

4.5+

56

P
6

4.5+

88

P
7

4.5+

92

635

15

Very stiff, dark brown, high plasticity, CLAY, trace finegravel, strong HCL reaction, trace subangular to
subrounded gravel, trace iron, (CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Very stiff, slightly moist, orange, medium plasticity,
CLAY, with gray clay seams, iron, (CL-CH),(ALLUVIUM)
Very stiff, dark brown, high plasticity, CLAY, trace finegravel, strong HCL reaction, trace subangular to
subrounded gravel, trace iron, (CH), (RESIDUUM)
Very stiff, slightly moist, gray with orange, medium
plasticity, CLAY, trace gravel, pockets of calcite crystals
in gray clay, trace iron nodules, trace subrounded
gravel, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
CLAY, Increase of orange with gray clay seams,
increase iron content, breaks along planes of
weakness, trace black flecks, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)

53

92.9

20.3

82

62

93.4

17.2

67

48

95

22.6

73

52

68.8

15.7
15.5

24.2

630

20

25.3

Bottom of hole at 20.0 feet. Bulk samples from auger
cuttings collect as follows: 0'-5' (B-1 and B-2), 5'-10'(B-3 and B-4), 10'-15' (B-5 and B-6), 15'-20' (B-7 and
B-8)

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

72

SAND (%)

29

23.1

GRAVEL (%)

3.5

Medium stiff, dark brown, high plasticity, CLAY, trace
fine gravel, strong HCL reaction, trace subangulargravel, (CH), (ALLUVIUM)STRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)

P
2

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)

40

Plasticity Index

10

4.0

AND REMARKS

Liquid Limit

640

P
1

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONNatural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

5

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)645

SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:28 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

DATES DRILLED: 1/2/20 - 1/2/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 649.70

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 25

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 601-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Downstream Toe

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING 11.40 ft / Elev 638.30 ft

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907928.12(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330345.003(ft)or EASTING (ft):

SS
2

645

5

ST
3

635

630

625

SS
5

28

4.5+

4.5+
3-6-10
(16)

50

63
100

10

15

20

25

GRAVEL (%)

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

Plasticity Index

21.9 112.9 79

46

0.9 5.7 93.4 64.3

SAND (%)

Liquid Limit

Moist, dark brown black, CLAY, much organics, trace
gravel, increasing calcite nodules towards base, (CH),(ALLUVIUM)
Grades to very stiff

14.7

Slightly moist, light brown orange, silty CLAY, abundantcalcite nodules, (CL-ML), (RESIDUUM)
Moist, dark brown black, subrounded, CLAY, traceorganics, trace fine gravel, abundant calcite nodules,(CH), (RESIDUUM)
Hard, slightly moist, light brown orange, silty CLAY,
orange/gray patches, abundant calcite nodules towards
base, trace black flecks, (CL-ML), (RESIDUUM)
Grades to dry to slightly moist, well graded, fine tocoarse sand, increasing fine and coarse gravel towards
gravel25.4 123.6 64

35

13

31

15

23.8 132.2 67

44

22.4 124.7 77

54

129

96.2

0

19.8 80.2 38.1

Grades to moist, medium plasticity, iron oxide staining

ST
6

4.5+

75

P
7

4.5+

85

SS
8

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

46

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHY

3.25
5-11-7
(18)

P
4

640

RECOVERY (%)

P
1

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:28 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

4-9-12(21)

100

Grades to hard, trace black flecks towards baseprimarily in gray clay seams

Gypsum crystals in gray calcareous clay seams
20.4

Bottom of hole at 25.0 feet.

97.1

0

1.5 98.5 66.2

DATES DRILLED: 1/2/20 - 1/2/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 642.67

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 25

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 602-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Downstream Toe

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING --- Dry

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907467.34(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330523.174(ft)or EASTING (ft):

640

SS
2

5

635

5-7-10
(17)

100

P
3

4.5+

40

ST
4

4.5+

69

SS
5

3-8-14
(22)

100

10

Moist, dark brown to black, high plasticity, CLAY, muchorganics, much fine gravel, subrounded to subangular,
increasing calcite nodules towards base, (CH),(ALLUVIUM)
Stiff, slightly moist to moist, light brown, silty CLAY,
trace organics, fine gravel, strong HCL reaction,
subrounded to subangular, abundant calcite nodules,
coarser gravel towards base, (CL-ML), (ALLUVIUM)
Moist, dark brown to black, high plasticity, CLAY, muchorganics, trace fine gravel, increasing calcite nodules
towards base, (CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Slightly moist, light brown to tan, silty CLAY, muchcoarse gravel, iron oxide staining, subrounded,
abundant calcite nodules, trace black flecks, (CL-ML),(RESIDUUM)
Increasing clay content, low plasticity, strong HCL
reaction, trace black flecks in gray clay veins

15.8
12.6

18.9

17.3
17.5

630

15

ST
6

4.5+

79

20.6

625

20

P
7

69

Light brown to orange, medium plasticity, CLAY, ironoxide staining, gray clay veins, bladed gypsum crystals
in gray clay seams at base, (CL), (RESIDUUM)

19.4

620

25

SS
8

5-12-18(30)

100

Hard, slightly moist, light gray to olive gray, medium
plasticity, CLAY, iron oxide staining, trace small gypsum
crystals, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Bottom of hole at 25.0 feet.

17.6

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

SAND (%)

GRAVEL (%)

Plasticity Index

Liquid Limit

46

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

4.5+

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)

P
1

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:28 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

DATES DRILLED: 1/6/20 - 1/6/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 634.86

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 25

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 603-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Downstream Toe

LATITUDE (deg) 13906952.99(ft)AFTER DRILLING --- Dry, caved at 15.3 ft (2pm) or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330186.523(ft)
COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Groutor EASTING (ft):

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger
CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

SS
2

630

5

625

10

620

15

615

20

610

25

63

4.5+
9-11-16
(27)

35
56

ST
5

4.5+

79

P
6

4.5+

73

SS
7

5-10-16
(26)

100

SS
8

50/6"

191

Gypsum crystals in 4-inch gray clay seam at 17.25
inches within layer

Small layers of olive gray clay about 1 inch thick at 3.4
to 4.5 inches and 18 to 19 inches in layer, bladed
gypsum layer approximately 0.5 inch thick at 15 inches
in layer

GRAVEL (%)

SAND (%)

19 132.4 67

48

0

11.7 88.3 53.1

12.9

21.7 120.5 62

41

87.9

20.1 129.4 62

40

95

20.3 119.2 29

14

0

69

0.5 30.2 69.3

14.2

4.2 95.8 68.1

17.8

4.2

Strong HCL reaction SHALE: Extremely weak,moderately weathered, white to light gray, very finegrained, iron pyrite in cuttings
Bottom of hole at 25.0 feet.

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

Plasticity Index

Moist, dark brown black, subangular, high plasticity,
CLAY, much organics, trace coarse gravel, strong HCL
reaction, increasing calcite nodules towards base, (CH),(ALLUVIUM)
Very stiff, slightly moist, dark brown black, subangular,
high plasticity, CLAY, much organics, trace coarse
gravel, strong HCL reaction, increasing calcite nodules
towards base, (CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Hard, slightly moist, light brown tan, subrounded tosubangular, silty CLAY, trace coarse gravel, abundantcalcite nodules, abundant iron nodules, (CL-ML),(RESIDUUM)
Very stiff, moist to slightly moist, light brown orange,
CLAY, strong HCL reaction, iron oxide staining,intermixed gray clay seams, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Very stiff, moist to slightly moist, light brown orange,
CLAY, strong HCL reaction, iron oxide staining,intermixed gray clay seams, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)

Liquid Limit

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

46

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHY

4.5+
9-11-15
(26)

P
3
SS
4

RECOVERY (%)

P
1

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:28 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

96

DATES DRILLED: 12/9/19 - 12/9/19

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 637.95

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 25

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 604-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Link

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Downstream Toe

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING --- Dry

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13906795(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330040(ft)or EASTING (ft):

SS
2

635

5

630

10

4-6-11
(17)

67

ST
3

69

P
4

200

SS
5

3-7-11(18)

94

Hard, moist, brown to dark brown, CLAY, trace gravel,
trace organics, angular, trace shell fragments, traceoxidation stains, trace calcareous nodules, sand grainsinterspersed, trace shell fragments, (CH), (ALLUVIUM)

19.1
8.4

-4 ft: Bent tube, couldn't definitively ID soil, probably
new material gray-dark brown, oxidation stains, hard,
dry-moist, (ALLUVIUM)-6 ft: hard, less moist, less organics
Becomes damp
Hard, moist, light gray to tan, CLAY, trace medium
gravel, gypsum striations, gypsum pockets, oxidation
stains, rock chips, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)
Becomes brown to dark brown, black specks
Becomes light gray to tan

11
10.7

12.5

625

15

P
6

4.5+

71

P
7

4.5+

85

Becomes brown to dark brown, fine to coarse gravel
Becomes tan to light gray, 1/4" thick gypsum layers,
clear crystals

19

620

20

Infrequent gray-dark gray layers/splotches of soil, flakey
hard, 1/4" thick gypsum layers, clear crystals

20

615
SS
8

25

40-50/2"

107

No gypsum crystals
SHALE: Weak, dry, light gray, silty, fissile
Bottom of hole at 25.0 feet.

7.4

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

SAND (%)

GRAVEL (%)

Plasticity Index

Liquid Limit

77

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

4.25

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)

P
1

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:28 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

DATES DRILLED: 1/6/20 - 1/6/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 658.29

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 25

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chris Rios

GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOG NO: 605-19
PAGE 1 OF 1

LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 45b

AT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Downstream Toe

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 7.5" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING --- Dry, caved at 16 ft (2pm)

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13906607.14(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2329797.814(ft)or EASTING (ft):

SS
2

655
5

650

6-8-10
(18)

79

ST
3

4.5+

54

P
4

4.5+

67

SS
5

4-8-14(22)

100

Moist, dark brown to black, high plasticity, CLAY, muchorganics, trace coarse gravel, subrounded tosubangular, increasing calcite nodules towards base,(CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Very stiff, slightly moist to moist, light brown with black,
low plasticity, CLAY, trace organics, abundant calcite
nodules, (CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Light brown to tan, medium plasticity, CLAY, iron oxide
staining, trace black flecks with gray clay seams, (CL),(RESIDUUM)
Strong HCL reaction, abundant calcite nodules

18.3
11.7

14.1

16.5

Lessening calcite nodules
14.8

10

645
15

No calcite nodules

ST
6

4.5+

P
7

4.5+

18.7

640
20

Abundant iron black flecks in gray clay seams
75

17.3

635
25

SS
8

5-11-17(28)

100

Bladed gypsum in gray clay layer at 11.5 inches in layer
Bottom of hole at 25.0 feet.

18.4

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

SAND (%)

GRAVEL (%)

Plasticity Index

Liquid Limit

42

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

3.5

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)

P
1

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:28 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

DATES DRILLED: 10/8/20 - 10/8/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 648.74

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 30

LOG NO: 701-20
PAGE 1 OF 1

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chester Westbrook
GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOGGED BY: S. Whipkey

DRILL EQUIP: CME 55LCAT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Upstream Toe

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 10" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING ---CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907753(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330261(ft)or EASTING (ft):

5

640
10

635
15

630

SS
3

8-7-8
(15)

50

10.3

4.5+

50

P
5

4.5+

54

ST
6

4.0

92

7-9-11(20)

100

11.2 138.8 57

With increased fine calcareous gravel (5-10%) andtrace coare gravel (0.5 to 1")

Slightly moist, tan to orange, medium to high plasticity,
silty CLAY, iron oxide staining, trace gray, fissile,(CL-ML), (RESIDUUM)

38

11.6

25.4

With light gray clay in vertical fractures
24.1

20

625
25

620

SHALE: Slightly moist, gray, clayey, fissle

ST
8

SS
9

4.5+

17-30-33
(63)

100

100

20.7 126.3 66

Trace gray seams
18.4

30
Bottom of hole at 30.0 feet.

44

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

SAND (%)

31

With light gray clay

ST
4

SS
7

18.3 130.7 51

22.1

GRAVEL (%)

54

Plasticity Index

4.5+

Stiff, moist, brown, high plasticity, CLAY, coarse sand,trace tan clay nodules, 5% calcareous sand and shellfragments, (CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Dry, tan, medium plasticity, silty CLAY, trace finegravel, blocky, iron oxide staining, calcareous, <5% gine
gravel (<0.25"), (CL-ML), (RESIDUUM)

Liquid Limit

ST
2

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

58

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYRECOVERY (%)

4.0

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)

POCKET PEN (tsf)645

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

P
1

SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:28 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

DATES DRILLED: 10/5/20 - 10/5/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 647.79

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 30

LOG NO: 702-20
PAGE 1 OF 1

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chester Westbrook
GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOGGED BY: S. Whipkey

DRILL EQUIP: CME 55LCAT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Downstream Toe

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 10" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING --- Dry

CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Piezometer

LATITUDE (deg) 13907801(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330379(ft)or EASTING (ft):

46

ST
4

640

SS
5

58
10-9-11(20)

92

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

4.0

44

SAND (%)

P3

15.7 131.3 66

GRAVEL (%)

38

Plasticity Index

3.5

Slightly moist, brown, high plasticity, CLAY, trace
medium sand, 5% sand and shell fragments. mostly
calcareous sand, (CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Iron oxide staining, with calcareous nodules and ironnodulesLiquid Limit

ST
2

AND REMARKS

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight
(pcf)

75

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHY

3.5

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)RECOVERY (%)

5

POCKET PEN (tsf)645

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

P
1

SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:28 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

0

1.7 98.3 47.4

22.5

18.8

Medium to high plasticity, increase calcareous materials
and iron staining, low silt
12.2

Stiff, moist, orange and gray, high plasticity, CLAY, ironoxide staining, fissile, (CH), (RESIDUUM)

16.6

3-4" iron silt seams, gray clay in horizontal beds andvertical fractures

23.3 127.7 73

10

635

15

ST
6

4.0

75

P
7

4.0

92

ST
8

4.0

100

40

630

20

22.9

625

25

With trace gypsum crystals
19.9 124.6 66

620
SS
9

10-15-21(36)

SHALE: Weak, dry, gray, clayey, trace gypsum crystals
in seams

30
Bottom of hole at 30.0 feet.

18.7

44

DATES DRILLED: 10/1/20 - 10/1/20

PROJECT NO: 60615067

SURFACE ELEVATION (ft): 646.33

LOCATION: Kyle, TX

TOTAL DEPTH (ft): 30

LOG NO: 703-20
PAGE 1 OF 1

DRILL COMPANY / DRILLER: Total Support Services / Chester Westbrook
GROUNDWATER LEVELS:LOGGED BY: M. Lyons

DRILL EQUIP: CME 55LCAT TIME OF: --- Dry

CHECKED BY: L. Finnefrock

DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger

AT END OF DRILLING --- Dry

HOLE LOCATION: Downstream Toe

BIT SIZE/TYPE: 10" OD Hollow Stem Auger

AFTER DRILLING ---CASING DEPTH (ft bgs): N/A

COMPLETION: Cement Bentonite Grout

LATITUDE (deg) 13907705(ft)or NORTHING (ft):
LONGITUDE (deg) 2330421(ft)or EASTING (ft):9-11-10
(21)

ST
3

72

4.5+

40

640

10

P
4

4.5+

42

ST
5

3.5

81

Stiff, slightly moist to dry, dark brown, high plasticity,
CLAY, trace fine gravel, trace organics, trace
calcareous subangular gravel, (CH), (ALLUVIUM)
Medium dense
Stiff, dry, orange with gray, low to medium plasticity,
silty CLAY, strong HCL reaction, abundant black flecks,
abundant calcareous, (CL), (RESIDUUM)

11.8

Medium stiff, slightly moist, gray with orange, medium
plasticity, CLAY, fine to coarse gravel, increased clay
content, subrounded to rounded gravel, (CL-CH),(RESIDUUM)

14.3

Very stiff, slightly moist, orange, high plasticity, CLAY,
strong HCL reaction, with gray clay seams, abundantiron, (CH), (RESIDUUM)

22.6

635

15

SS
6

4-5-9
(14)

100

630

20

ST
7

4.5+

92

P
8

4.5+

100

23.9 125.6 61

39

625

25
620

Very stiff, slightly moist to moist, dark gray, medium tohigh plasticity, CLAY, weak HCL reaction, trace iron,light gray clay in seams, (CL-CH), (RESIDUUM)-Gypsum crystals present in seams at 23.7, 24.2, 24.4,
and 24.6 ft

21.3

18.5 127.5 65

30

ST
9

SHALE: Extremely weak, dark gray, very fine grained
4.5+

106

Bottom of hole at 30.0 feet.

42

FINES - Passing
No. 200 Sieve (%)
CLAY - Passing
2 microns (%)

26

16.1

SAND (%)

15.6 131.6 44

16.9

GRAVEL (%)

Natural Moisture
Content (%)
Total Unit Weight(pcf)

STRATIGRAPHY

46

AND REMARKS

Plasticity Index

5

4.5+

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Liquid LimitSS
2

RECOVERY (%)

P
1

645

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

POCKET PEN (tsf)

BLOW COUNTS(N VALUE)SAMPLE TYPE
AND NUMBER

0

SAMPLE SYMBOLDEPTH (ft)

SOIL SAMPLESELEVATION (ft)

AECOM-SMART-SOIL-LAB-ELEV_SOIL_PP+TV_GW - URS_DENVER STD US LAB.GDT - 5/26/21 17:28 - C:\USERS\LANCE.FINNEFROCK\ONEDRIVE - AECOM DIRECTORY\PROJECTS\TSSWCB - 5 DAMS\07. PLUM 2\01. FIELD & LAB\06. GINT LOGS\PLUM 2 LOGS_2021.

PROJECT NAME: Plum FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

Appendix F Sample Photographs

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
67

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 8-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 8-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2.5-4 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 8-19.
P-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 8-19.
SS-4. Depths ~ 6.5-8 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 8-19.
P-5. Depths ~ 8-10 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 8-19.
P-5. Depths ~ 8-10 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 8-19.
ST-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 8-19.
SS-7. Depths ~ 18.5-20 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
9Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 8-19.
SS-8. Depths ~ 23.5-25 ft

Photo No.
10Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 8-19.
SS-9. Depths ~ 28.5-30 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 9-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 9-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2-3.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 9-19.
P-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 9-19.
SS-4. Depths ~ 6-7.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 9-19.
ST-5. Depths ~ 8-10 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 9-19.
P-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 9-19.
SS-7. Depths ~ 18.5-20 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 9-19.
ST-8. Depths ~ 23-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
9Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 9-19.
S-9. Depths ~ 28-30 ft

Photo No.
10Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 9-19.
SS-10. Depths ~ 33.5-35 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 10-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 10-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2-3.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 10-19.
P-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 10-19.
ST-4. Depths ~ 6-8 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 10-19.
SS-5. Depths ~ 8-9.5 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 10-19.
P-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 10-19.
SS-7. Depths ~ 18.5-20 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 10-19.
ST-8. Depths ~ 23-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
9Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 10-19.
P-9. Depths ~ 28-30 ft

Photo No.
10Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 10-19.
ST-10. Depths ~ 33-35 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
11

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 10-19.
SS-11. Depths ~ 38.5-40 ft

Photo No.
12Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 10-19.
SS-11. Depths ~ 38.5-40 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
13

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 10-19.
P-12. Depths ~ 43-45 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 11-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft.

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 11-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2-3.5 ft.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 11-19.
ST-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft.

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 11-19.
P-4. Depths ~ 6-8 ft.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 11-19.
SS-5. Depths ~ 8.5-10 ft.

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 11-19.
P-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 11-19.
ST-7. Depths ~ 18-20 ft.

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 11-19.
SS-8. Depths ~ 23.5-25 ft.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
9Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 11-19.
P-9. Depths ~ 28-30 ft.

Photo No.
10Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 11-19.
SS-10. Depths ~ 33.5-35 ft.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
11

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 11-19.
ST-11. Depths ~ 38-40 ft.

Photo No.
12Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 11-19.
P-12. Depths ~ 43-45 ft.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
13

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 11-19.
SS-13. Depths ~ 48.5-50 ft.

Photo No.
14

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 11-19.
ST-14. Depths ~ 53-55 ft.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
15

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 11-19.
SS-15. Depths ~ 53.2-54.8
ft.

Photo No.
16

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 11-19.
SS-16. Depths ~ 58.5-60 ft.

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 12-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 12-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2-3.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 12-19.
P-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 12-19.
SS-4. Depths ~ 6-7.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 12-19.
ST-5. Depths ~ 8-10 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 12-19.
P-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 12-19.
SS-7. Depths ~ 18.5-20 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 12-19.
ST-8. Depths ~ 23-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
9Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 12-19.
P-9. Depths ~ 28-30 ft

Photo No.
10Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 12-19.
SS-10. Depths ~ 33-34.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
11

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 12-19.
ST-11. Depths ~ 38-40 ft

Photo No.
12Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 12-19.
P-12. Depths ~ 43-45 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
13

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 12-19.
ST-13. Depths ~ 48-50 ft

Photo No.
14

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 12-19.
SS-14. Depths ~ 53-54.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
15

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 12-19.
SS-15. Depths ~ 58-60 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 13-20
Sample: P-1.
Depths: 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2
Description:
Boring 13-20
Sample: ST-2.
Depths: 2-4 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 13-20
Sample: P-3
Depths: 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4
Description:
Boring 13-20
Sample: ST-4
Depths: 6-8 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 13-20
Sample: SS-5
Depths: 8-10 ft

Photo No.
6
Description:
Boring 13-20
Sample: P-6
Depths: 13-15 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 13-20
Sample: SS-8
Depths: 28-30 ft

Photo No.
8
Description:
Boring 13-20
Sample: ST-9
Depths: 33-35 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
9
Description:
Boring 13-20
Sample: SS-10
Depths: 38-40 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 14-20
Sample: P-1.
Depths: 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2
Description:
Boring 14-20
Sample: ST-2.
Depths: 2-4 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 14-20
Sample: P-3
Depths: 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4
Description:
Boring 14-20
Sample: P-4
Depths: 6-8 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 14-20
Sample: SS-5
Depths: 8-10 ft

Photo No.
6
Description:
Boring 14-20
Sample: P-6
Depths: 13-15 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 14-20
Sample: ST-7
Depths: 18-20 ft

Photo No.
8
Description:
Boring 14-20
Sample: SS-8
Depths: 23-25 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
9Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 14-20
Sample: ST-9
Depths: 28-30 ft

Photo No.
10
Description:
Boring 14-20
Sample: P-10
Depths: 38-40 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
9
Description:
Boring 14-20
Sample: ST-11
Depths: 38-40 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 15-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 15-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2-3.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 15-19.
P-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 15-19.
ST-4. Depths ~ 6-8 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 15-19.
SS-5. Depths ~ 8.5-10 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 15-19.
ST-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 15-19.
P-7. Depths ~ 18-20 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 15-19.
SS-8. Depths ~ 23.5-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
9Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 15-19.
ST-9. Depths ~ 28-30 ft

Photo No.
10Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 15-19.
P-10. Depths ~ 33-35 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
11

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 15-19.
P-11. Depths ~ 38-40 ft

Photo No.
10Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 15-19.
SS-12. Depths ~ 43.5-45 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 101-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 101-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2-3.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 101-19.
P-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 101-19.
SS-4. Depths ~ 6-7.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 101-19.
P-5. Depths ~ 8-10 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 102-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 102-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2-3.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 102-19.
ST-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 102-19.
SS-4. Depths ~ 6-7.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 102-19.
P-5. Depths ~ 8-10 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 103-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 103-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2-3.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 103-19.
P-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 103-19.
SS-4. Depths ~ 6-7.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 103-19.
P-5. Depths ~ 8-10 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 104-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 104-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2-3.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 104-19.
P-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 104-19.
SS-5. Depths ~ 6-7.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 104-19.
P-5. Depths ~ 8-10 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 105-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 105-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2-3.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 105-19.
P-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 105-19.
SS-4. Depths ~ 6-7.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 105-19.
P-5. Depths ~ 8-10 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 106-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 106-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2-3.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 106-19.
P-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 106-19.
SS-4. Depths ~ 6-7.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 106-19.
P-5. Depths ~ 8-10 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 201-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 201-19.
ST-2. Depths ~ 2-4 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 201-19.
SS-3. Depths ~ 4-5.5 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 201-19.
P-4. Depths ~ 6-8 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 201-19.
SS-5. Depths ~ 8-9.5 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 201-19.
ST-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 201-19.
P-7. Depths ~ 18-20 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 201-19.
SS-8. Depths ~ 23.5-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 202-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 202-19.
ST-2. Depths ~ 2-4 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 202-19.
SS-3. Depths ~ 4-5.5 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 202-19.
P-4. Depths ~ 6-8 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 202-19.
ST-5. Depths ~ 8-10 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 202-19.
SS-6. Depths ~ 13.5-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 202-19.
P-7. Depths ~ 18-20 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 202-19.
SS-8. Depths ~ 23.5-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 203-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 203-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2-3.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 203-19.
ST-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 203-19.
P-4. Depths ~ 6-8 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 203-19.
SS-5. Depths ~ 8-9.5 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 203-19.
P-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 203-19.
SS-7. Depths ~ 18.5-20 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 203-19.
ST-8. Depths ~ 23-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 204-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 204-19.
ST-2. Depths ~ 2-4 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 204-19.
SS-3. Depths ~ 4-5.5 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 204-19.
P-4. Depths ~ 6-8 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 204-19.
SS-5. Depths ~ 8-9.5 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 204-19.
ST-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 204-19.
P-7. Depths ~ 18-20 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 204-19.
SS-8. Depths ~ 23.5-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 205-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 205-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 3.5-4 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 205-19.
P-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 205-19.
SS-4. Depths ~ 6-7.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 205-19.
ST-5. Depths ~ 8-10 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 205-19.
P-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 205-19.
ST-8. Depths ~ 23-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 206-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 206-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2-3.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 206-19.
P-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 206-19.
SS-4. Depths ~ 6-7.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 206-19.
ST-5. Depths ~ 8-10 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 206-19.
P-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 206-19.
ST-7. Depths ~ 18-20 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 206-19.
SS-8. Depths ~ 23.5-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 207-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 207-19.
ST-2. Depths ~ 2-4 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 207-19.
SS-3. Depths ~ 4-5.5 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 207-19.
P-4. Depths ~ 6-8 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 207-19.
SS-5. Depths ~ 8-9.5 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 207-19.
P-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 207-19.
ST-7. Depths ~ 18-20 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 207-19.
SS-8. Depths ~ 23.5-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
9Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 207-19.
P-9. Depths ~ 28-30 ft

Photo No.
10Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 207-19.
ST-10. Depths ~ 33-35 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 208-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 208-19.
ST-2. Depths ~ 2-4 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 208-19.
SS-3. Depths ~ 4-5.5 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 208-19.
P-4. Depths ~ 6-8 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 208-19.
SS-5. Depths ~ 8-9.5 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 208-19.
ST-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 208-19.
P-7. Depths ~ 18-20 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 208-19.
SS-8. Depths ~ 23.5-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 209-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 209-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2-3.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 209-19.
P-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 209-19.
ST-4. Depths ~ 6-8 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 209-19.
SS-5. Depths ~ 8-9.5 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 209-19.
P-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 209-19.
ST-7. Depths ~ 18-20 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 209-19.
SS-8. Depths ~ 23.5-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 304-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 304-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2.5-4 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 304-19.
P-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 304-19.
P-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 304-19.
ST-4. Depths ~ 6-8 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 304-19.
SS-5. Depths ~ 8.5-10 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 304-19.
P-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 304-19.
P-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
9Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 304-19.
ST-7. Depths ~ 18-20 ft

Photo No.
10Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 304-19.
SS-8. Depths ~ 23.5-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
11

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 304-19.
ST-9. Depths ~ 28-30 ft

Photo No.
12Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 304-19.
SS-10. Depths ~ 33.5-35 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 305-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 305-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2.5-4 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 305-19.
ST-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 305-19.
P-4. Depths ~ 6-8 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 305-19.
SS-5. Depths ~ 8.5-10 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 305-19.
SS-5. Depths ~ 8.5-10 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 305-19.
P-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 305-19.
P-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
9Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 305-19.
ST-7. Depths ~ 18-20 ft

Photo No.
10Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 305-19.
SS-8. Depths ~ 23.5-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 401-19.
Sample: P-1.
Depths: 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2
Description:
Boring 401-19.
Sample: P-2.
Depths: 2-4 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 401-19.
Sample: P-3.
Depths: 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4
Description:
Boring 401-19.
Sample: P-4.
Depths: 6-8 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 401-19.
Sample: P-5.
Depths: 8-10 ft

Photo No.
6
Description:
Boring 401-19.
Sample: P-6
Depths: 13-15 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7
Description:
Boring 401-19.
Sample: P-7
Depths: 18-20 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 402-20
Sample: P-1.
Depths: 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2
Description:
Boring 402-20
Sample: P-2.
Depths: 2-4 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 402-20B
Sample: P-4
Depths: 6-8 ft

Photo No.
4
Description:
Boring 402-20B
Sample: P-5
Depths: 8-10 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 402-20B
Sample: P-5.
Depths: 8-10 ft

Photo No.
6
Description:
Boring 402-20B
Sample: P-7
Depths: 18-20 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 601-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 601-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2-3.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 601-19.
ST-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 601-19.
P-4. Depths ~ 6-8 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 601-19.
SS-5. Depths ~ 8-9.5 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 601-19.
ST-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 601-19.
P-7. Depths ~ 18-20 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 601-19.
SS-8. Depths ~ 23.5-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 602-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 602-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2-3.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 602-19.
P-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 602-19.
ST-4. Depths ~ 6-8 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 602-19.
SS-5. Depths ~ 8-9.5 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 602-19.
ST-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 602-19.
P-7. Depths ~ 18-20 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 602-19.
SS-8. Depths ~ 23.5-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 603-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 603-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2-3.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 603-19.
P-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 603-19.
SS-4. Depths ~ 6-7.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 603-19.
ST-5. Depths ~ 8-10 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 603-19.
P-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 603-19.
SS-7. Depths ~ 18-20.5 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 603-19.
SS-8. Depths ~ 23.5-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 604-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 604-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2-3.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 604-19.
ST-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 604-19.
P-4. Depths ~ 6-8 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 604-19.
SS-5. Depths ~ 8.5-10 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 210-19.
SS-6. Depths ~ 13.5-15 ft..

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 604-19.
P-7. Depths ~ 18-20 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 604-19.
SS-8. Depths ~ 23.5-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 605-19.
P-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 605-19.
SS-2. Depths ~ 2-3.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 605-19.
ST-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 605-19.
P-4. Depths ~ 6-8 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 605-19.
SS-5. Depths ~ 8-9.5 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 605-19.
ST-6. Depths ~ 13-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 605-19.
P-7. Depths ~ 18-20 ft

Photo No.
8Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 605-19.
SS-8. Depths ~ 23.5-25 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 701-20
Sample: P-1.
Depths: 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2
Description:
Boring 701-20
Sample: ST-2.
Depths: 2-4 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 701-20
Sample: SS-3
Depths: 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4
Description:
Boring 701-20
Sample: ST-4
Depths: 6-8 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 701-20
Sample: P-5
Depths: 8-10 ft

Photo No.
6
Description:
Boring 701-20
Sample: ST-6
Depths: 13-15 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 701-20
Sample: SS-7
Depths: 18-20 ft

Photo No.
8
Description:
Boring 701-20
Sample: SS-9
Depths: 28-30 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 702-20
Sample: P-1.
Depths: 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2
Description:
Boring 702-20
Sample: ST-2.
Depths: 2-4 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 702-20
Sample: P-3
Depths: 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4
Description:
Boring 702-20
Sample: SS-4
Depths: 8-10 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 702-20
Sample: ST-6
Depths: 13-15 ft

Photo No.
6
Description:
Boring 702-20
Sample: P-7
Depths: 18-20 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 702-20
Sample: ST-8
Depths: 23-25 ft

Photo No.
8
Description:
Boring 702-20
Sample: SS-9
Depths: 28-30 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 703-20
Sample: P-1.
Depths: 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2
Description:
Boring 703-20
Sample: SS-2.
Depths: 2-3.5 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 703-20
Sample: ST-3
Depths: 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4
Description:
Boring 703-20
Sample: P-4
Depths: 6-8 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 703-20
Sample: ST-5.
Depths: 8-10 ft

Photo No.
6Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 703-20
Sample: SS-6
Depths: 13.5-15 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 703-20
Sample: ST-7.
Depths: 18-20 ft

Photo No.
8
Description:
Boring 703-20
Sample: P-8
Depths: 23-25 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 1301-19.
G-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 1301-19.
G-2. Depths ~ 2-4 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 1301-19.
G-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 1301-19.
G-4. Depths ~ 6-8 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 1301-19.
G-5. Depths ~ 8-10 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 1302-19.
G-1. Depths ~ 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 1302-19.
G-2. Depths ~ 2-4 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 1302-19.
G-3. Depths ~ 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4

Date:
12/9/19

Description:
Boring 1302-19.
G-4. Depths ~ 6-6.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 1701-20
Sample: G-1
Depths: 0-1 ft

Photo No.
2
Description:
Boring 1701-20
Sample: G-2Depths: 1-2 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 1701-20
Sample: G-3
Depths: 03.5-4.5 ft

Photo No.
4
Description:
Boring 1701-20
Sample: G-4
Depths: 6-8 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 1701-20
Sample: G-5
Depths: 8-9 ft

Photo No.
6
Description:
Boring 1701-20
Sample: G-6
Depths: 9-10 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 1702-20
Sample: P-1.
Depths: 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2
Description:
Boring 1702-20
Sample: ST-2.
Depths: 2-4 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 1703-20
Sample: G-1
Depths: 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2
Description:
Boring 1703-20
Sample: G-2Depths: 3-4 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 1703-20
Sample: G-3
Depths: 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4
Description:
Boring 1703-20
Sample: G-4
Depths: 6-7 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5
Description:
Boring 1703-20
Sample: G-5
Depths: 8-10 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 1704-20
Sample: G-1
Depths: 0-2 ft

Photo No.
2
Description:
Boring 1704-20
Sample: G-2Depths: 2.5-3 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 1704-20
Sample: G-3
Depths: 3-3.5 ft

Photo No.
4
Description:
Boring 1704-20
Sample: G-4
Depths: 4-4.5 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 1704-20
Sample: G-5
Depths: 85-5.5 ft

Photo No.
6
Description:
Boring 1704-20
Sample: G-4
Depths: 6-6.5 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
7

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 1704-20
Sample: G-8
Depths: 10-10.5 ft

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
1

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 1705-20
Sample: G-1.
Depths: 0-1 ft

Photo No.
2
Description:
Boring 1705-20
Sample: G-2.
Depths: 2-4 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
3

Date:
10/1/20

Description:
Boring 1705-20
Sample: G2
Depths: 4-6 ft

Photo No.
4
Description:
Boring 1705-20
Sample: G3
Depths: 6-8 ft

Date:
10/1/20

PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Client Name:

Site Location:

Project No.

TSSWCB

Plum 2: Kyle, TX

60615067

Photo No.
5
Description:
Boring 1705-20
Sample: G4.
Depths: 8-10 ft

Date:
10/1/20

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

Appendix G Piezometer Construction Diagrams

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
68

Well/Hole Number:

Drilling Contractor:
Geologist:
Driller:

PZ-702-20

TSS

S. Whipkey

C. Westbrook

LOCATION:

Monitoring Well
Installation Log
Project Name:

Northing:
Easting:Plum Creek FRS #2

Project Number:

Date/Time Started:

10/5/20 - 2:00pm

Date/Time Completed:60615067

Type of Drilling:

Downstream Toe
13907801
2330379

Ground Surface Elev.

Hollow Stem Auger 3.25" ID 647.79

10/6/20 - 9:30am

Top of Well Casing Elev.
ft.msl647.79ft.msl

1. Stick-Up of Protective Casing (If Any) Above Ground:

n/a

ft.

2. Stick-Up Well Casing Above Ground:

n/a

ft.

3. Depth to Base of Surface Seal/Protective Casing:

2.0

ft.

4. Depth to Static Water Level:

Dry

ft.

5. Depth to Top of Screen Interval Seal:

5.0

ft.

6. Depth to Bottom of Screen Interval Seal:

8.0

ft.

7. Depth to Top of Well Screen:

10.0

ft.

8. Total Length of Blank Casing:

10.0

ft.

9. Depth to Bottom of Well Screen:

30.0

ft.

9a. Bottom Cap Length:

6.0

in.

10. Depth to Base of Sand Pack:

30.0

ft.

11. Depth to Base of Bottom Hole Seal:

n/a

ft.

12. Depth to Base of Hole:

30.0

ft.

13. Protective Casing:
14. Concrete Pad:

✔ Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

Diameter: 8.0

in.

10.0

in.

Locking Cap:

15. Type of Protective Casing: Flush-mount
16. Type of Surface Seal: Concrete
17. Borehole Diameter:

18. Type of Annular Seal: Cement-Bentonite Grout
19. Type of Well Casing: Schedule 40 PVC

Diameter: 2.0

in.

20. Type of Screen Interval Seal: Hydrated Bentonite Chips
21. Type/Size of Sand Filter Pack:

SIlica Sand Diameter: 20/40

22. Type of Screen Material: Schedule 40 PVC

Slot Size: 0.01

in.
in

23. Type of Bottom Hole Seal: n/a
24. Borehole backfill material and thickness
Recorded By

S. Whipkey

Date

10/6/20

Checked By

L. Finnefrock

n/a
Date

10/8/20
11/20/18 1:10 AMGeologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

Appendix H Geologic Profiles

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
69

10-19401-20305-19456
1301-1911-193
4

402-20

5+00

0

50

100

SCALE IN FEET

302

200

THIS DRAWING IS
ISSUED FOR REVIEWONLY UNDER THE
AUTHORITY OF
MICHAEL J. LENHERRTEXAS P.E. #100021
ON NOVEMBER 30, 2020.

210-19

258

5+57

N

602-194+0

0

205-19703-20

50
2+

257

455

1705-20
14-20
1702-2000
2+ 702-20

209-192454

11704-2013-20
0
0
1+ 1701-20
701-20601-191703-20

1+5
0

53
12-19

6

452

1302-19
54

151

9-19

204-19

453

5

2+0
0

0+

256

604-193
304-19 +00
301
351

00

255

603-19

303

7

451

52

605-19

152
55

156

15-19

208-19

153

254

157
51

154

203-19103-19
158

8-19

155
207-19159

102-19252
206-19202-19101-19106-19

160

163

251
161

164

105-19162

165

104-19166

BORROW AREA

167

168

169

170

LEGEND:
1967 NRCS TEST HOLE
AUGER/CORE BORING
HAND AUGER BORINGAECOM Technical Services, Inc.
9400 Amberglen Blvd
Austin, Texas 78729
www.aecom.com
TBPE Reg. No. F-3580

201-19Texas State
Soil & Water
Conservation Board

253

13-20
14-20
10-19
12-19

DAM CENTERLINE
AECOM Technical Services, Inc.
9400 Amberglen Blvd
Austin, Texas 78729
www.aecom.com
TBPE Reg. No. F-3580

9-19

Texas State
Soil & Water
Conservation Board

8-19
EXISTING TOP OF DAM

11-19
15-19

207-19EXISTING GROUND
AT DOWNSTEAMTOE OF DAM

THIS DRAWING IS
ISSUED FOR REVIEWONLY UNDER THE
AUTHORITY OF
MICHAEL J. LENHERRTEXAS P.E. #100021
ON NOVEMBER 30, 2020.

201-19202-19208-19THIS DRAWING IS
ISSUED FOR REVIEWONLY UNDER THE
AUTHORITY OF
MICHAEL J. LENHERRTEXAS P.E. #100021
ON NOVEMBER 30, 2020.

203-19AECOM Technical Services, Inc.
9400 Amberglen Blvd
Austin, Texas 78729
www.aecom.com
TBPE Reg. No. F-3580

206-19Texas State
Soil & Water
Conservation Board

207-19EXISTING GROUND

204-19209-19205-19210-19EXISTING VEGETATED AUXILIARY SPILLWAY CENTERLINEAECOM Technical Services, Inc.
9400 Amberglen Blvd
Austin, Texas 78729
www.aecom.com
TBPE Reg. No. F-3580

Texas State
Soil & Water
Conservation Board

THIS DRAWING IS
ISSUED FOR REVIEWONLY UNDER THE
AUTHORITY OF
MICHAEL J. LENHERRTEXAS P.E. #100021
ON NOVEMBER 30, 2020.

11-19

1301-19304-19305-19EXISTING GROUND

EXISTING PRINCIPAL SPILLWAY CENTERLINE

THIS DRAWING IS
ISSUED FOR REVIEWONLY UNDER THE
AUTHORITY OF
MICHAEL J. LENHERRTEXAS P.E. #100021
ON NOVEMBER 30, 2020.

1701-20702-20601-19EXISTING GROUNDREHAB RCC SPILLWAY AT LEFT WALL
AECOM Technical Services, Inc.
9400 Amberglen Blvd
Austin, Texas 78729
www.aecom.com
TBPE Reg. No. F-3580

701-20Texas State
Soil & Water
Conservation Board

13-20

1704-20402-20401-20REHAB RCC SPILLWAY CENTERLINE

9-19

1703-20
EXISTING GROUND

401-20703-20

AECOM Technical Services, Inc.
9400 Amberglen Blvd
Austin, Texas 78729
www.aecom.com
TBPE Reg. No. F-3580

THIS DRAWING IS
ISSUED FOR REVIEWONLY UNDER THE
AUTHORITY OF
MICHAEL J. LENHERRTEXAS P.E. #100021
ON NOVEMBER 30, 2020.

1702-20

Texas State
Soil & Water
Conservation Board

14-20

1705-20402-20EXISTING GROUNDREHAB RCC SPILLWAY AT RIGHT WALL

102-19105-19BORROW AREA LINE B-B

THIS DRAWING IS
ISSUED FOR REVIEWONLY UNDER THE
AUTHORITY OF
MICHAEL J. LENHERRTEXAS P.E. #100021
ON NOVEMBER 30, 2020.

EXISTING GROUNDAECOM Technical Services, Inc.
9400 Amberglen Blvd
Austin, Texas 78729
www.aecom.com
TBPE Reg. No. F-3580

Texas State
Soil & Water
Conservation Board

101-19103-19BORROW AREA LINE A-A

104-19EXISTING GROUND

106-19THIS DRAWING IS
ISSUED FOR REVIEWONLY UNDER THE
AUTHORITY OF
MICHAEL J. LENHERRTEXAS P.E. #100021
ON NOVEMBER 30, 2020.

EXISTING TOP OF DAM

601-19702-20703-20EXISTING GROUND ATDOWNSTEAM TOE OF DAM

BORING 304-19 IS LOCATEDAT UPSTREAM TOE OF DAM

304-19602-19604-19305-19603-19DOWNSTREAM TOE OF DAM (1 OF 2)

EXISTING TOP OF DAM

605-19DOWNSTREAM TOE OF DAM (2 OF 2)

AECOM Technical Services, Inc.
9400 Amberglen Blvd
Austin, Texas 78729
www.aecom.com
TBPE Reg. No. F-3580

Texas State
Soil & Water
Conservation Board

EXISTING GROUND ATDOWNSTEAM TOE OF DAM

Geologic Investigation Report

Project number: 60615067

Appendix I Recommended Headcut Erodibility Index
Parameters

AECOM
2380 McGee Street
Kansas City, MO 64108
aecom.com

TSSWCB_Plum2_GIR_FINAL_2021.06.25_clean.docx

AECOM
70

AECOM
9400 Amberglen Boulevard
Austin, TX 78729
aecom.com

Project name:Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design,
Hays County, TX

Project ref:To:
Jeff Irvin, PE (AECOM)
Monica Wedo, PE (AECOM)

60615067

From:
Lance Finnefrock, PE, GE (AECOM)Mariana Conceição de Sá, EIT (AECOM)

CC:

Date:

Aaron Humphrey, PE (AECOM)
Glenn Hilton, PG (AECOM)May 19, 2021

Technical Memorandum
Subject:

Geotechnical Recommendations for SITES Parameters

1.

Project Information

1.1

Proposed Modifications

The proposed rehabilitation of Plum Creek FRS No. 2 is intended to mitigate identified dam safety deficiencies
associated with the dam’s reclassification as a high hazard dam. The proposed modifications presently include thefollowing major components:•

Raising the existing vegetated auxiliary spillway crest by 1.15 feet to Elevation (El.) 659.8;•

Widening the existing vegetated auxiliary spillway from 150 feet to 250 feet;•

Constructing a new 200-foot-wide overtopping roller-compacted concrete (RCC) spillway with crest at El.
658.6;•

Abandoning the existing principal spillway inlet and 24-inch diameter conduit;•

Replacing the existing principal spillway with a new 48-inch diameter conduit, inlet riser with crest at El.
645.4, and impact basin at the outlet;•

Installing rock riprap wave protection on the upstream embankment slope; and•Maintaining the embankment crest at El. 662.8 (top of compacted earthfill which excludes additional heightof topsoil) with nominal raise in areas that have experienced settling.

1.2

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this memorandum is to provide geotechnical recommendations for soil parameters to be used inhydraulic analysis of the existing earthen auxiliary spillway at Plum Creek FRS No. 2 using SITES software.

TSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

1/25

Memo
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design, Hays County, TX

2.

Subsurface Information

2.1

Site Geology

Published geologic mapping from The Geologic Atlas of Texas, Seguin Sheet (Proctor et al., 1974) indicates the
project site is primarily underlain by the Pecan Gap Chalk (Kpg). The Pecan Gap Chalk is a Late Cretaceous
formation of the Taylor Group. Young (1977) describes the Pecan Gap Chalk as a medium gray, chalky, or marlyformation with calcium carbonate content ranging from about 25 to over 75 percent. The formation is composedof a massive lower chalk with well-rounded quartz grains which grades upward to a chalky marl with microgranular
calcite in the clay matrix.
The Pecan Gap Chalk weathers to light gray and white. The formation has a maximum thickness of approximately
200 feet in the vicinity of this site, and grades laterally to a marl in select locations (Proctor et al., 1972). Near the
ground surface, the Pecan Gap Chalk weathers to a highly plastic, fat clay with significant potential for verticalmovement as a result of changes in moisture content.

2.2

Soil Maps

The NRCS Websoil Survey database (NRCS, 2020) was examined to identify near-surface soil mapping of thesite (i.e., approximately upper 7 feet). The mapped soil types in the vicinity of the dam are largely described asclayey residuum weathered from mudstone. Calcareous clayey Alluvium is mapped in the lower portions of thecreek valley, generally within about 150- to 200-foot wide zone along the original creek alignment and below about
Elevation (El.) 630± feet according to the NAVD88 datum. Alluvium is mapped just north of the discharge channelof the existing auxiliary spillway (ASW) between approximately Station 12+00 and Station 18+00.

2.3

Previous Geologic Investigations

2.3.1

Soil Conservation Service – 1967 Geologic Investigation

The original geologic investigation (GI) for design of the dam was conducted by the Soil Conservation Service(former SCS, now NRCS) in May 1967 and summarized in a GI Report dated June 12, 1967 (SCS, 1967a). A planof borings and subsurface profiles are contained within historical documentation made available to AECOM forreview (NRCS, 1967b). The investigation consisted of 12 borings along the dam centerline (holes No. 1 through 7
and 51 through 55); 8 borings along the auxiliary spillway (holes No. 251 through 258); 4 borings along the principal
spillway alignment (holes No. 301 through 303 and hole No. 351); and 20 borings in a borrow area located in thepresent-day reservoir (Holes No. 151 through 170). Six exploratory borings (Holes No. 451 through 456) were also
performed in the vicinity of the original creek channel.
The stratigraphy encountered in the borings was generally characterized as 0 to 8 feet (up to 11 feet in the borrowarea) of clayey Alluvium overlying clayey Residuum. In accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System(USCS), the Alluvium was generally classified in the field as brown, stiff, silty fat clays (CH) and stiff, slightly
calcareous, gravelly, lean clays (CL). Occasional sand and gravel lenses encountered were thicker near the left
abutment down to depths of 8 to 11 feet near the interface with the underlying Residuum. The Alluvium thins
towards the right abutment. The underlying Residuum stratum consisted of tan, stiff, shaley, residual clays of thePecan Gap Formation and was identified at depths ranging between 1.5 and 8 feet. The Residuum was primarily
classified in the field as fat clay (CH), and generally ranged from about 5 to 17 feet thick. Below depths of about
15 feet in the left abutment and 24 feet in the floodplain, blue shale of the Taylor Group was encountered withhardness rating of Hd 1 (very soft) to Hd 2 (soft).
Groundwater was not encountered during this investigation, but was observed within the original stream channel.
The report recommended the embankment cutoff trench be extended to depths of 3 to 7 feet below the original
ground surface, with the lowest elevation at El. 626.1 (3 feet below original grade) along the centerline of theAECOM
TSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

2/25

Memo
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design, Hays County, TX

principal spillway and El. 619.5 (6 feet below original grade) on the centerline of the embankment. No internal
drainage measures were recommended.

2.3.2

Soil Conservation Service – 1967 Soil Mechanics Report

The original soil mechanics report (SMR) for Plum Creek FRS No. 2 was completed by SCS on July 18, 1967
(SCS, 1967b). The report contained results of laboratory testing on samples retrieved from the 1967 GI, including
gradation, Atterberg limits, and dispersion. Proctor compaction and swell testing were also performed on remoldedcomposite bulk samples. Index test results from the borings indicated clayey sand (SC) and fat clay (CH) materials,
with liquid limits (LL) between 28 and 56, plasticity index (PI) between 13 and 34, and fines content average ofapproximately 73%.
The SMR concluded that the foundation soils underlying FRS No. 2 had overall low to very low permeability anda cutoff trench that extended below all dry weather cracks was expected to suffice in controlling seepage throughthe foundation.
Excavation for the principal spillway conduit was recommended to the extent necessary to remove topsoil androots, as well to provide adequate grade for the pipe. No recommendation was made in regard to reaching a
specific foundation bearing elevation or stratum.
Embankment slopes of 2.5H:1V were recommended for a slope stability minimum safety factor of 2.0 based on
total stress (consolidated-undrained) strength parameters. As-built drawings show the recommended 2.5H:1V
slopes were adopted into dam design and construction..Settlement corresponding to 2% of the height of the fill
was expected; as such, the SMR recommended settlement allowance of 1 foot be added to the fill height during
construction.
No groundwater table was encountered during the field GI and the SMR conclusions did not recommend any
drainage measures.

2.3.3

NRCS – 2010 Dam Safety Inspection

A visual inspection of the dam was conducted on October 19, 2010 by NRCS and M&E Consultants as part of thedam assessment (NRCS, 2010). The inspection identified erosion on the upstream wave berm, which was
obscured by overgrown vegetation. A void was observed under the principal spillway conduit cradle, this void had
been previously identified during NRCS dam safety inspection dated June 13, 2006.
Photographs in the inspection report depicted good vegetative coverage throughout the dam particularly within theauxiliary spillway and the dam embankment. A stage recorder and rainfall recorded were identified on site during
this inspection.
The 2010 inspection concluded that FRS No. 2 was performing as designed but due to urban encroachment andits present deteriorate condition, it likely qualified for assistance through the watershed rehabilitation program.
The watershed rehabilitation program is intended to bring this dam to safety standard of high hazard dams.

2.4

AECOM Geologic Investigation

AECOM conducted a geologic investigation (GI) of the site to support rehabilitation design between December
2019 and January 2020. The GI was conducted in general accordance with the Field Investigation and Testing
Plan submitted to TSSWCB prior to field mobilization. Geologic investigation of the existing ASW included ten (10)borings in the existing channel designated 201-19 through 210-20, boring locations are illustrated in Figure 1. A
description of procedure, findings, and interpretations from the geologic investigation will be provided in aforthcoming Geologic Investigation Report (GIR) prepared as part of the scope of this project.
Additional boreholes, including 9-19, 12-19, 601-19, 603-19, 604-19, were completed in two preliminary locations
investigated for placement of the proposed RCC overtopping spillway. Because the RCC spillway will be a
structural spillway, SITES analyses are not required.

AECOM
TSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

3/25

Memo
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design, Hays County, TX

Laboratory testing conducted on the soil samples recovered from the existing ASW borings included natural
moisture content, natural unit weight, Atterberg limits, sieve and hydrometer, unconfined compression (UC) testing,and dispersion testing including crumb and double-hydrometer. A summary of the laboratory test results performedon samples recovered from the existing ASW borings are provided in Attachment 2. The remainder of laboratory
results will be provided in a forthcoming SMR prepared as part of this project.

2.5

Generalized Subsurface Stratigraphy

The results of the current GI were generally consistent with that of the original 1967 GI, as the borings encountereda relatively thin dark brown upper clay layer (similar to that characterized as Alluvium in the 1967 GI) overlying low
to medium plasticity Residuum. However, based on the NRCS Websoil survey, the completed ASW borings wereprimarily located in areas mapped as residuum. Due to general site-wide similarities in visual appearance of theupper dark brown clay layer and general lack of significant spatial differences in material properties, this material
is generally referred to as “alluvium” herein consistently with the 1967 GI.
Within the existing ASW channel, the alluvium ranged in thickness from 1 to 2 feet and consisted of soft to hard,dark brown fat clays (CH) with abundant organic matter and fine grained gravel. A light brown to tan, silty, clayey
sand (SM-SC) to lean silt (ML) stratum was identified in boreholes 202-19, 203-19, 206-19 and 207-19 fromapproximately El. 644 feet in 203-19 to El. 652 feet in 206-19, with thicknesses of 1.5 to 7.5 feet. This low plasticity,
silty to sandy seam is believed to be of residual nature. A uniform medium plasticity Residuum stratum was also
identified in all boreholes completed on the existing ASW channel underlying the Alluvium and Low Plasticity
Residuum strata to the termination depths of all boreholes. The Medium Plasticity Residuum consisted of stiff tohard, moist, tannish orange to gray lean to fat clays (CL-CH) with gravel and disseminated gypsum.
Based on preliminary design, the existing ASW crest will be raised approximately 1.5 fe or less using earthen fill.
Material within the designated borrow area sampled during this field investigation will be evaluated for use as an
on-site borrow source for the proposed fill, results will be presented in the forthcoming SMR.
Geologic profiles of the field data along the existing ASW profile is presented in Figure 2. The profile illustrates
abridged boring logs indicating field USCS classification, pocket penetrometer values, SPT N-values, andmeasured groundwater levels (when encountered).

2.6

Groundwater

Groundwater table was not identified at the time of drilling in the existing ASW boreholes completed. However,after drilling, groundwater table was encountered in about half of the boreholes drilled in the existing auxiliary
spillway channel, including boreholes 203-19, 204-19, and 208-19 through 210-19. Groundwater table was
encountered at the end of drilling only in borehole 209-19 at 21.4 feet bgs (El. 626.9).
Static groundwater levels (readings obtained several hours to days after drilling is completed) indicated thepresence of groundwater table at elevations ranging from El. 622.1 (13.6 feet bgs) in boring 210-19 to El. 638.5(18.4 feet bgs) in borehole 203-19. Additional readings indicated groundwater recharge in borehole 209-19 inwhich groundwater was identified as 21.4 feet bgs (El. 626.9) at the end of drilling and at 8.2 feet bgs (El. 640.1)
several days after the end of drilling. The relatively slow groundwater recharge rate of this borehole may besuggestive of the presence of a low permeability zone in the vicinity of this borehole consistently with the clayey
nature of samples recovered in this borehole.

AECOM
TSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

4/25

Memo
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design, Hays County, TX

3.

Geotechnical Analysis of Auxiliary Spillway Erodibility

3.1

Analysis Methodology

Hydraulic analysis and design of vegetated earthen spillway for dams is typically performed using the Water
Resources Site Analysis computer program (SITES) developed by NRCS. SITES is used to evaluate erosional
stability and head-cutting potential for auxiliary spillway channels subjected to flows associated with the design
flood event. SITES input values includes soil unit weight, plasticity, gradation, and the empirical headcut erodibility
index (Kh). The Kh is calculated based on the following formula:
𝐾𝐾ℎ = 𝑀𝑀𝑆𝑆 ∙ 𝐾𝐾𝑏𝑏 ∙ 𝐾𝐾𝑑𝑑 ∙ 𝐽𝐽𝑆𝑆
where:

Ms = material strength number of the earth material
Kb = block or particle size number
Kd = discontinuity or interparticle bond shear strength number
Js = relative ground structure number

3.2

Material Parameters Development

3.2.1

Methodology Overview

Development of recommended material parameters for SITES analysis was performed according to the guidance
provided in the National Engineering Handbook, 210-VI-NEH, Part 628, Chapter 52, Field Procedures Guide for
the Headcut Erodibility Index (NRCS, 2001) and the accompanying DRAFT Appendix 52D, Erodibility Parameter
Selection for Soil Material Horizons (NRCS 2011).
Materials considered in the evaluation included those encountered beginning near the proposed finished-gradeelevation of the ASW channel surface and extending down to slightly below the elevation of the downstream exit
channel. The generalized strata in the existing ASW were considered based on the GI results and proposed
grading plan: 1) Alluvium; 2) Medium Plasticity Residuum; 3) Low Plasticity Residuum; and 4) Proposed Fill.
To account for inherent variability in the geologic units, an “unfavorable” and a “favorable” value for each of thevarious SITES input data were developed to check the model sensitivity. The unfavorable and favorable values
were generally selected considering approximate lower one-third (i.e., 33rd percentile) and upper one-third (i.e.,
67th percentile) values of available test data with application of engineering judgment. Note that in some cases,
the lower value may correspond to favorable value for some derived parameters whereas the lower value may
correspond to the unfavorable value for other derived parameters (e.g., UCS for the Ms parameter).
Potential trends between various measured data (e.g., unconfined compressive strength versus liquid limit) were
examined in an attempt to reduce the chance of selecting over-conservative or under-conservative combinationsof favorable and unfavorable input values. However, no evident trend could be distinguished between most ofthese various test data, with the exception of plasticity and clay fraction. A brief description of the various input
parameters is provided in the following sections.

3.2.2

Index Properties

Index properties for soil-like materials used directly in the SITES model and/or used to derive the empiricalcomponents of the Kh calculation include the following:•

Dry Unit Weight, γdry (pounds-per-cubic-foot [pcf])

AECOM
TSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

5/25

Memo
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design, Hays County, TX

•
•
•
•

Liquid Limit, LL
Plasticity Index, PI
Clay Fraction, CF (% finer than 0.002 millimeter diameter)
Representative Diameters, D75 and D50 (millimeters [mm])A tabulated summary of the minimum, maximum, and average test data values for each stratum is provided inTable 1. A tabulated laboratory test results for each of the ASW borings is provided in Attachment 2.
Plots of γdry, LL, PI, CF, D75, and D50 versus depth, annotated to include the selected favorable and unfavorable
values, are provided in Attachment 2. The selected favorable and unfavorable values are also summarized inTable 2.
Note that D75 is typically used in analysis of soil-like materials, and D50 is typically used for rock-like materials.
While the materials at this site are considered soil-like, both the D75 and D50 values are provided herein forreference. Gradation plots indicating the D75 and D50 are provided in Attachment 1. Note that D50 values could
only be only be developed from hydrometer test data due to the fine-grained nature of the test materials. The
hydrometer tests indicate the D50 is smaller than 0.002 mm for select samples, but a precise value could not be
obtained in those cases. Consequently, an assumed value of 0.001 mm was used to reasonably represent manyof these samples.
The Alluvium was generally classified as fat clay (CH) in the field, with laboratory classifications including fat clay
(CH) and clayey sand (SC). Index properties for Alluvium were based on results of index testing performed on
samples collected in the upper 2 to 6 feet of boreholes drilled within the existing ASW channel. Based on these
data, the LL ranges from 33 to 53, PI ranges from 16 to 32, fines content ranges from 46 to 72% (based on two
test samples), and clay fraction ranges from 25 to 40%. A single SPT N-value corrected to 60% hammer efficiency(N60) was 15 blows-per-foot (bpf). Pocket penetrometer values ranged from 2.5 to 4.5+ tons-per-square-foot (tsf),
but were generally 3.5 tsf or greater.
The Low Plasticity Residuum (LPR) was encountered below the Alluvium in boreholes 202-19, 203-19, 206-19,
and 207-19. The material was classified in the field as lean to fat clay (CL, CL-CH, CH), silty clay (CL-ML), silt
(ML), and silty sand (SM). Laboratory classifications included lean clay (CL), silt (ML), and silty sand (SM).. .
Results of laboratory index testing indicate the LL ranges from 18 to 48 (with the exception of two non-plastic [NP]results from samples classifying as SM), PI ranges from 7 to 23 (with the exception of the two NP samples of SM),
fines content ranges from 18 to 67%, and clay fraction ranges from 25 to 40%. The field N60 ranges from 23 to 47
bpf. Pocket penetrometer values generally exceed 4.5+ tsf, with the exception of one sample classifying as SM
which had a value of 1.5 tsf.
The Medium Plasticity Residuum (MPR) materials were encountered underlying either the Alluvium or Low
Plasticity Residuum.The material was classified in the field as lean to fat caly (CL-CH) and fat clay (CH), withlaboratory classifications of fat clay (CH) and elastic silt (MH). Results of laboratory index testing indicates the LL
ranges from 23 to 68, PI ranges from 8 to 46, fines content ranges from 69 to 99%, and clay fraction ranges from27 to 73%. The field N60 ranges from 17 to 52 bpf. Pocket penetrometer values generally exceed 4.5+ tsf, with the
exception of one sample classifying as CH which had a value of 3.5 tsf.
Proposed fill materials for the ASW crest raise will be sourced from required excavations and/or a designated onsite borrow area located on the upstream left bank of the reservoir.. Due to the variability in potential borrowmaterials at the site, recommendations have been provided for two types of proposed fill denoted as Proposed Fill
Type 1 and Proposed Fill Type 2. Type 1 includes low- to moderate-plasticity clay-rich soils anticipated to be
encountered in the required excavation for the proposed ASW, and may be encountered in other required
excavations and/or borrow areas at the site. Type 2 includes high-plasticity clays encountered across much of the
project site.
Favorable and unfavorable values for each material were selected based on the preliminary index test results
obtained and are summarized in Table 2.

AECOM
TSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

6/25

Memo
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design, Hays County, TX

3.2.3

Material Strength Number, Ms

Alluvium and Medium Plasticity Residuum materials were considered “cohesive” for the purposes of estimating
the Ms parameter. The Low Plasticity Residuum was considered “cohesionless” in the unfavorable analysis since
the fines content (percent passing the No. 200 sieve) was less than 50% for two samples which classified as silty
sand (SM) with 18 and 46% fines, and both samples were NP (i.e., PI = 0). The NRCS (2001) further definescohesionless soils as those with plasticity index less than or equal to 10. Due to the limited distribution of NP
samples and higher plasticity measured on other samples of Low Plasticity Residuum, a PI = 11 was selected forthe unfavorable case despite the “cohesionless” designation torepresent the transitional nature of soils in thisstratum which included silts, clays, and sands. The favorable case of Low Plasticity Residuum was considered
as a cohesive material. .
The selected Ms values for Alluvium were estimated based on twelve field pocket penetrometer test results and asingle SPT test which yielded N60 = 20 bpf. Estimated low and high UCS values of 7,290 psf and 9,000 psf wereselected for analyses which correspond to derived Ms values of 0.25 to 0.31, respectively.
The selected Ms values for the Low Plasticity Residuum were estimated based on the results of pocket
penetrometer testing, three (3) field SPT N60 values, and a single laboratory UCS test. The unfavorable analysis
considered N60 value of 24 bpf and a PI of 11 in order to reproduce conditions in which the soil could be treated as“cohesionless”. Based on the ranges stipulated in Table 52-2 (NRCS, 2001), the materials in the unfavorable casewere considered to be medium dense and yielded Ms value of 0.085. In the favorable analysis, the soil was
considered “cohesive” given the PI of 22 and upper bound N60 of 40 bpf. While the blow count exceeds the range
established in Table 52-3 (NRCS, 2001) for cohesive soils, the single UCS value of 6,422 psf reported fromlaboratory testing is within the proposed UCS ranges for cohesive soils. Thus, the material was treated as cohesive(instead of soft rock), in the favorable analysis to obtain derived Ms value of 0.22.
The selected Ms values for the Medium Plasticity Residuum were estimated based on the results of pocket
penetrometer, SPT N60, and fifteen (15) laboratory UCS tests. The Medium Plasticity Residuum was treated as“cohesive”, and was not generally described as blocky on the boring logs. The selected favorable and unfavorable
UCS values for the Medium Plasticity Residuum of 8,019 psf and 9,554 psf respectively, yielded a range of derived
Ms values of 0.27 to 0.33, respectively.
As discussed previously, two types of Proposed Fill materials were considered in the analysis. The Proposed Fill
Type 1 considered similar index properties as the Low Plasticity Residuum, with Ms values based on “cohesive”
soil with a range of UCS values typical for compacted fill material (3,000 to 4,000 psf). On-site materials withsimilar properties include the required excavations for widening the ASW, and middle layer of the borrow area(from about 4 to 8 feet bgs). The Proposed Fill Type 2 considered index properties from samples of fat clay
materials encountered in the existing dam embankment and near the downstream toe of the dam where
excavations will be required to construct the proposed improvements, as well as the near-surface layer (0 to 4 feetbgs) in the borrow area. The same typical range of UCS values (3,000 to 4,000 psf) was assumed for the Proposed
Fill Type 2. The results of site-specific moisture-density (Proctor) compaction tests and remolded UCS test on
bulk samples of materials collected from the borrow area (COMP-100A, COMP-100B), downstream toe (COMP400A), and dam embankment (COMP-1700A), as well as other index test data on disturbed and undisturbed
samples from those areas, confirm that the selected values presented herein are reasonable; these test results
are presented under separate cover in the SMR.
Plots of N60, Su, and UCS versus depth, with interpreted lower and upper bounds, are provided in Attachment 2.
Calculations for the derived Ms values are provided in Attachment 3, and a summary of resulting values isprovided in Table 2.

3.2.4

Block or particle size number, Kb

Because the Alluvium, Medium Plasticity Residuum, and Low Plasticity Residuum (favorable case) wereconsidered as “cohesive” materials, the value of Kb is 1.0 for each analysis case per NRCS 2001. Similarly, theAECOM
TSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

7/25

Memo
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design, Hays County, TX

value of Kb was also 1.0 for the single “cohesionless” analysis performed (unfavorbale case of the Low Plasticity
Residuum).

3.2.5

Interparticle Bond Shear Strength Number, Kd

The value of Kd is equal to the tangent of the residual friction angle (ϕ’r) of the soil. According to NRCS 2001, thevalue of Kd is estimated based on the values of LL and CF using the following formulas:

Plots of LL and CF versus depth, with interpreted lower and upper bounds, are provided in Attachment 2.
Based on feedback received from NRCS geologists at the NDCSMC (email dated April 7, 2020), the equations
presented in NRCS 2001 often produced overly conservative values for Kd. The email indicated that internal NRCS
guidance is to assume Kd = 1.0 for soil-like materials, which is supported by publication subsequent to NRCS 2001
including McCook (2005) and the Draft Appendix 52D (NRCS, 2011). Consequently, Kd = 1.0 was adopted forthese analyses since all materials were considered to be “soil-like”.

3.2.6

Relative Ground Structure Number, Js

Because the Alluvium, Medium Plasticity Residuum, and the favorable case of the Low Plasticity Residuum present
in the existing ASW are considered as “cohesive” materials, the value of JS is 1.0 per NRCS 2001. Similarly, JS
was also 1.0 for the unfavorable analysis of the Low Plasticity Residuum which was treated as “cohesionless”.

3.2.7

Adjustment for High-Plasticity, Blocky Soils

The Draft Appendix 52D (NRCS 2011) and McCook (2005) caution that very stiff, high-plasticity fat clays (CH)with plastic limits (PL) > 25 often have blocky or fissured secondary structure, and such deposits may be moreerodible than indicated by the unconfined compressive strength on intact samples typically used to obtain the Ms
value. While the document states that no case history is available, interim guidance is to apply a reduction factorof 0.5 to the calculated Ms and thus Kh value.
While the ASW boring logs did not specifically note blocky structure of the materials encountered, the deeper
Residuum from the Pecan Gap Chalk typically exhibits blocky structure. Photographs of some of the recovered
Shelby tube samples in the deeper Medium Plasticity Residuum indicate some degree of blocky structure.
However, the blocky soil reduction factor was not applied to the Kh values for this project on the following bases:
1.

The Alluvium is not considered to be blocky, and the PL < 25 (ranged from 17 to 21).

2.

The Low Plasticity Residuum is not considered to be blocky, with PL that generally ranged from NP to 17
with the exception of a single value of 28 on a sample classifying as ML for which the blocky reduction
would not typically apply.

3.

The Medium Plasticity Residuum had PL ranging from 21 to 29, with an average of 24 which is less than thecited threshold value of 25.

3.3

Recommendations

Recommended parameters for SITES analyses are presented in Table 2. Supporting calculations are provided
in Attachment 3. Based on the assumption stated herein, the estimated Kh ranges of unfavorable and favorable
values are as follows:

AECOM
TSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

8/25

Memo
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design, Hays County, TX•

Alluvium:

Kh = 0.25 to 0.31•

Medium Plasticity Residuum:

Kh = 0.27 to 0.33•

Low Plasticity Residuum:

Kh = 0.09 to 0.22•

Proposed Fill (Type 1):

Kh = 0.06 to 0.10•

Proposed Fill (Type 2):

Kh = 0.06 to 0.10

3.4

Limitations

This memorandum was prepared by AECOM using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar
circumstances by responsible engineers and geologists practicing in the same general location. No other warranty
or representation, either expressed or implied, is made as to the findings and professional advice in thismemorandum.
The opinions and conclusions contained in this memorandum are based on interpretations of limited subsurface
information. Soil and geologic conditions can vary greatly between or beyond the exploration sites, and different
conditions may be found during subsequent investigations.
There is no intention that this memorandum addresses any environmental issues (for example, environmentallyaffected soil or groundwater, or historic site uses) related to this site. Such evaluations are outside the scope of
this work and should be addressed in separate studies.

3.5

References

M&E Consultants (M&E), 2010, Dam Assessment Report, Plum Creek Watershed Floodwater Retarding Structure
No. 2, Hays County, Texas. October 19.
McCook, D.K. 2005. Guidance on the Selection of the Soil Erodibility Index, Kh for the NRCS/ARS Auxiliary
Spillway Erosion Model (SITES).
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2001. National Engineering Handbook (NEH) Part 628,
Chapter 52, Field Procedures Guide for the Headcut Erodibility Index. March.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2011. National Engineering Handbook (NEH) Part 628,
DRAFT Appendix 52D, Erodibility Parameter Selection for Soil Material Horizons (Surface Detachment
Coefficient and Headcut Erodibility Index). October.
Proctor, C. V., Jr., Brown, T. E., Waechter, N. B., Aronow, S., Pieper, M. K., and Barnes, V. E., 1974, Geologic Atlasof Texas, Seguin Sheet: The University of Texas at Austin, Bureau of Economic Geology, Geologic Atlas of
Texas, map scale 1:250,000.
Soil Conservation Service (SCS). 1967a. Soil Conservation Service (SCS). Geological Report, Texas, Plum Creek
Site 2, Hays County. June 12.
Soil Conservation Service (SCS). 1967b. Soil Mechanics Report, Texas, Plum Creek Site 2, Hays County. July 18.
Soil Conservation Service (SCS). 1969. As-Built Plans, Floodwater Retarding Dam No. 2, Plum Creek
Watershed Project, Hays County, Texas. May 28.
Young, K., 1977. Guidebook to the Geology of Travis County. Austin, Texas: The Student Geology Society, The
University of Texas.

AECOM
TSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

9/25

Memo
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design, Hays County, TX

3.6

Attachments

Table 1. Summary of Laboratory Test Results by Stratum for ASW Borings
Table 2. Recommended SITES Parameters
Figure 1. Plan of Borings
Figure 2. Subsurface Profile for the existing ASW
Attachment 1. Laboratory Test Results Summary Table for ASW Borings
Attachment 2. Laboratory Test Data Plots for ASW Borings
Attachment 3. Kh CalculationsAECOM
TSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

10/25

Memo
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design, Hays County, TX

TABLESAECOM
TSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

11/25

Memo
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design, Hays County, TX

Table 1. Summary of Laboratory Test Data by Stratum for Borings in Existing ASW Channel (1)Stratum
Description(USCS)

Thickness(ft)

Alluvium

2–6

USCS
CH,CL
-CH,
SC

N60
(bpf)

Undrained
Shear
Strength, Su
(psf)

20(2)

2,500 –
4,500(3)

Unconfined Compressive
Strength, UCS
(psf)

(kPa)

5,000 – 9,000(3980)(3)

239 –
431
(191)(3)Dry Unit
Weight
(pcf)

LL

PI

Fines
(%)

CF
(%)

D75 (mm)

D50 (mm)

Crumb

108-11733 - 53(46)

16 - 32(27)

46 - 72
(59)

35(2)

2.08(2)0.12(2)

Gr. 2(2)Medium299 101 CH,
17 - 52
3,125 – 7,819
6,250 -15,638
23 - 68
8 - 4669 - 99
27 - 73
Plasticity
15 - 24749
123
0.001 - 0.14
0.001 - 0.013
CL-CH
(28)
(4,710)(9,420)
(47)
(27)
(91)
(53)
Residuum
(451)
(110)
Low
113 –
SM,
23 - 47
18 - 48
7 - 2318 - 67
Plasticity
1.5 – 7.5
6,422(2)307.5(2)128
0.14(2)0.02(2)
3,211(2)37 (2)
ML
(32)
(34)
(17)
(43)
Residuum(120)
Notes:(1) Format of reported values is Minimum – Maximum (Average). Average value not reported when two of fewer results are available. Average not reported for D75 and D50.
(2) Single test result reported at the time of this report.
(3) Correlated from field pocket penetrometer tests.

AECOM
TSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

12/25

Gr. 1 – 3
(Gr. 1)
Gr. 2(2)MemoPlum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design, Hays County, TX

Table 2. Recommended Material Parameters for SITES Analysis of Existing ASW
Stratum
Description(USCS)

PostGrading
Thickness
(ft)

USCS

Alluvium

2–6

CH,
CL-CH,
SC

MediumPlasticity
Residuum> 15

Low Plasticity
Residuum

1.5 – 7.5

Proposed Fill
Type 1 (2)

1.5 - 3

Proposed Fill
Type 2 (3)Varies

Notes:
(1)
(2)
(3)

CH,
CL-CH

SM, ML

CH, CL,SCCH

Bounding
Case
Unfavorable
ValuesFavorable
ValuesUnfavorable
ValuesFavorable
ValuesUnfavorable
ValuesFavorable
ValuesUnfavorable
ValuesFavorable
ValuesUnfavorable
ValuesFavorable
ValuesDry Unit
Weight(pcf)

Clay
Fraction(2)
(%)

D75
(mm)

D50
(mm)

N60 (bpf)

108

20

7,290(1)

39

21

25

0.50

117

20

9,000(1)

53

32

40

105

23

8,019

37

22

114

31

9,554

58

115

24

--

125

40

100

UCS (psf)

LL

PI

Derived Headcut Erodibilty Index
Parameters
Ms

Kb

Kd

Js

Kh

0.05

0.25

1.0

1.0

1.0

0.25

2.00

0.20

0.31

1.0

1.0

1.0

0.31

42

0.004

0.001

0.27

1.0

1.0

1.0

0.27

33

65

0.017

0.004

0.33

1.0

1.0

1.0

0.33

24

11

25

0.02

0.005

0.09

1.0

1.0

1.0

0.09

6,422

45

22

40

0.20

0.050

0.22

1.0

1.0

1.0

0.22

--

2,000

24

11

25

0.004

0.001

0.061

1.0

1.0

1.0

0.06

110

--

3,000

58

33

65

2.0

0.20

0.096

1.0

1.0

1.0

0.10

90

--

2,000

60

35

40

0.004

0.001

0.06

1.0

1.0

1.0

0.06

95

--

3,000

75

55

65

0.007

0.001

0.10

1.0

1.0

1.0

0.10

Correlated from field pocket penetrometer tests.
Proposed low- to moderate-plasticity fill material obtained from required excavations in the existing ASW channel, or other on-site sources of low-plasticity clayey soils.
Proposed high-plasticity fill materials obtained from required excavations and designated borrow sources in areas of the site other than the ASW channel.

AECOM
TSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

13/25

Memo
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design, Hays County, TX

FIGURESAECOM
TSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

14/25

10-19401-20305-19456
1301-1911-193
4

402-20

5+00

0

50

100

SCALE IN FEET

302

200

THIS DRAWING IS
ISSUED FOR REVIEWONLY UNDER THE
AUTHORITY OF
MICHAEL J. LENHERRTEXAS P.E. #100021
ON NOVEMBER 30, 2020.

210-19

258

5+57

N

602-194+0

0

205-19703-20

50
2+

257

455

1705-20
14-20
1702-2000
2+ 702-20

209-192454

11704-2013-20
0
0
1+ 1701-20
701-20601-191703-20

1+5
0

53
12-19

6

452

1302-19
54

151

9-19

204-19

453

5

2+0
0

0+

256

604-193
304-19 +00
301
351

00

255

603-19

303

7

451

52

605-19

152
55

156

15-19

208-19

153

254

157
51

154

203-19103-19
158

8-19

155
207-19159

102-19252
206-19202-19101-19106-19

160

163

251
161

164

105-19162

165

104-19166

BORROW AREA

167

168

169

170

LEGEND:
1967 NRCS TEST HOLE
AUGER/CORE BORING
HAND AUGER BORINGAECOM Technical Services, Inc.
9400 Amberglen Blvd
Austin, Texas 78729
www.aecom.com
TBPE Reg. No. F-3580

201-19Texas State
Soil & Water
Conservation Board

253

   

1/<=>//;?41 2@? 

    

   







2(*- ,$(3($!!

;;

($

&+.$+2(*- ,$(3($!
!
($!!-0,($-03!

!" #











($!
&+. ,$(3($!!
!

 +3:"$ ""$%+"$"%$,0
4+%"4"3+'"%!546)5







 

 

$"%&"'"$(")%((* +%,-+.
$"%&"'"$/+0)%((* +%,-+.
$"%&"'"10$"%
2+%, +%,-+.

 


!"*$#%

Existing grade of
ASW channel(approximate)








 




!"&$#%!"!$#%#%%!")$#% !"#$#%

 





Alluvium





 






























!"+$#% 




 













 
 



Low Plasticity
Residuum
!"'$#%

Interpreted stratigraphic
contact
  
!"%$#%









 



  !"($#%













MediumPlasticity
Residuum






 





 
















 
 




  







 
 



!#"$#%









  

































 













 



 













 









Legend:Alluvium



M di
MediumPlasticity
Pl i i
Residuum

Low Plasticity
Residuum8"+8)"8$- 7+.,8"%9(3%""$'" 780

&+. ,$(3($!!





/"'$(+0$46)A4;)/B/4)A&1?) CCDDEA/4E=14@11</@1<)/E</)4@B/1/<=)@4/<4FE)1=E &A=E?@&<?E &A=&<?; ? G

1/<=





 


 

















 

 

 



Memo
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design, Hays County, TX

DRAFT

ATTACHMENT 1.
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS SUMMARY TABLEAECOMTSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

17/25

Memo
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design, Hays County, TX

DRAFT

Sample Information
BoringID

Depth(feet bgs)
Top

Sieve/Hydrometer
SampleID

Stratum

Field
USCS

Lab
USCS

wC
(%)

γdry
(pcf)

γtotal(pcf)

Bottom201-19

0.0

2.0

P-1

Alluvium

CH,CL
/CH

201-19

2.0

4.0

ST-2

LPR

CL-ML

CL

11.8

201-19

4.5

6.0

SS-3

LPR

SM

CL

12

201-19

6.0

8.0

P-4

MPR

CL/CH

19.7

201-19

8.0

9.5

SS-5

MPR

CL/CH

23.5

201-19

13.0

15.0

ST-6

MPR

CL/CH

201-19

18.0

20.0

P-7

MPR

CL/CH

23.4

201-19

23.5

25.0

SS-8

MPR

CH

21.7

202-19

0.0

2.0

P-1

AlluviumCH

21.5

202-19

2.0

4.0

ST-2

LPR

CL

202-19

4.5

6.0

SS-3

LPR

ML

202-19

6.0

8.0

P-4

LPR

ML

CL

10.5

202-19

8.0

10.0

ST-5

LPR

ML

ML

16

202-19

13.5

15.0

SS-6

MPR

CH

202-19

18.0

20.0

P-7

MPR

CH

202-19

23.5

25.0

SS-8

MPR

CH,CL

21.9

203-19

0.0

2.0

P-1

AlluviumCH

23.5

GravelSand

Atterberg Limits

Pass
#200

Pass
2µm

(%)

(%)

(%)

(%)

0.5

19.6

79.9

37

Shear Strength

Other Tests

LL

PL

PI

σ’3
(psf)

εfailure
(%)

Su
(psf)

Crumb

DoubleHydro. (%)

41

15

26

0

7.6

4,378

1

14

23

14

9

Field Tests
N
(bpf)

Eh
(-)

N60
(bpf)

Rep. Particle Size
PP
(psf)

Est.
Su
(psf)

D75
(mm)

D50
(mm)

4.5

4500

0.054

0.005

4.5

4500

4.5

4500

0.016

0.002

4.0

4000

4.5

4500

0.050

0.010

4.5

4500

0.139

0.021

4.5

4500

4.25

4250

4.5

4500

0.047

0.011

1.5

1500

4.5

4500

4.5

4500

4.5

4500

0.005

0.002

0.14

0.013

26.4

CH

CL

17.8

11.4

122.5

136.9

93

13

13
108.7

128.1

0

2

98

47.8

60

29

31

0

15.0

3,269

1

134.6

0

18.7

81.3

27.2

24

15

9

0

5.2

6,437

2

22

118.1

137.0

3.4

29.6

67

37.2

12

18

48

28

20

0

10.7

3,211

2

CL/CH
,CL
CL/CH
,CL

13

23.2

51

21

80%

29

80%

29

-

20.4
CH

17

48

4.8
30

80%

17

-

22

120.8

80%

80%

17

30
18

80%

203-19

2.0

3.5

SS-2A

MPR

203-19

2.0

3.5

SS-2B

LPR

203-19

3.5

5.5

ST-3

LPR

SM

203-19

6.0

8.0

P-4A

LPR

SM

203-19

6.0

8.0

P-4B

LPR

SM

SM

8.7

203-19

8.0

9.5

SS-5

LPR

SM

SM

11

46.8

203-19

13.0

15.0

P-6A

LPR

SM

10.8

66.9

203-19

13.0

15.0

P-6AB

MPR

SM

21.1

203-19

18.5

20.0

SS-7

MPR

SM

203-19

22.5

24.5

ST-8

MPR

CH

204-19

0.0

2.0

P-1A

Alluvium

CH

23.3

4.5

4500

204-19

0.0

2.0

P-1B

MPR

CL/CH

10.9

4.5

4500

204-19

2.0

4.0

ST-2

LPR

CL/CH

4.5

4500

204-19

4.0

4.5

SS-3A

MPR

CL/CH

20.0

28

80%

204-19

4.5

6.0

SS-3B

MPR

CL/CH

6.8

28

80%

204-19

6.0

8.0

P-4A

MPR

CL/CH

3.5

3500

204-19

6.0

8.0

P-4B

MPR

CL/CH

204-19

8.0

9.5

SS-5A

MPR

CL/CH

9.2

13

80%

204-19

8.0

9.5

SS-5B

MPR

CL/CH

19.5

13

80%

AECOM
TSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

CL

18.9

28

80%

8.5

28

80%

24

10.4

0

18.6

81.4

35.1

32

14

18

1

37

-

7.1
113.4

123.3

34.8

21.6
CH

CL

CH

11

7

NP

20

98.6

23.6

8.1

18

0

116.3

125.7

1.5

1.5

29.3

98.5

69.2

17
53

36.3

22.4

58

25

68

26

17

22

32

8

3

0

3.0

4,378

80%

80%

27

23

-

37

46

14.7

18/25

17

Memo
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design, Hays County, TX

DRAFT

204-19

13.0

15.0

ST-6

MPR

CL/CH

CH

18.3

204-19

18.0

20.0

P-7

MPR

CL/CH

204-19

23.5

25.0

SS-8

MPR

CL/CH

205-19

0.0

2.0

P-1

AlluviumCH

205-19

2.0

3.5

SS-2

MPR

CL/CH

11.7

205-19

3.5

5.5

P-3A

MPR

CL/CH

19.3

205-19

3.5

5.5

P-3B

MPR

CL/CH

16.9

205-19

6.0

7.5

SS-4

MPR

CL/CH

19.2

205-19

8.0

10.0

ST-5

MPR

CL/CH

110.8

131.1

0

2.2

97.8

61

50

22

28

0

8.4

3,917

1

-

20.8
27
CH

CH

23.1

20.6

53

21

17
125.5

0

1.9

98.1

66.3

54

24

30

0

15.0

4,550

1

80%

80%

4500

4.5

4500

4.5

4500

4.5

4500

4.5

4500

4.5

4500

13.5

15.5

P-6

MPR

CL/CH

21.7

205-19

18.5

20.0

SS-7

MPR

CL/CH

22.7

205-19

23.0

25.0

ST-8

MPR

CL/CH

21.6

4.5

4500

206-19

0.0

2.0

P-1

Alluvium

CH

19.4

3.5

3500

206-19

2.0

3.5

SS-2A

MPR

CL/CH

206-19

2.0

3.5

SS-2B

MPR

ML

206-19

2.0

3.5

SS-2C

MPR

CH

5.2

206-19

4.0

6.0

P-3A

LPR

CH

19.7

206-19

4.0

6.0

P-3B

LPR

SM

206-19

6.0

7.5

SS-4

LPR

SM

206-19

8.0

10.0

ST-5

MPR

CL/CH

4.5

4500

4.5

4500

14.2
CH

SM

4.3

8.9

68

127.9

139.3

17.7

5.8
CH

24.9

206-19

13.0

15.0

P-6

MPR

CL/CH

206-19

18.0

20.0

ST-7

MPR

CL/CH

206-19

23.5

25.0

SS-8

MPR

CL/CH

23.5

207-19

0.0

2.0

P-1

AlluviumCH

13.5

207-19

2.0

4.0

ST-2

AlluviumCH

207-19

4.5

6.0

SS-3A

MPR

CH

207-19

4.5

6.0

SS-3B

LPR

ML

207-19

6.0

8.0

P-4

LPR

ML

CL

8.5

207-19

8.0

9.5

SS-5

LPR

CL-ML

CL

12.2

207-19

13.0

15.0

P-6

MPR

CL/CH

207-19

18.0

20.0

ST-7

MPR

CL/CH

207-19

23.5

25.0

SS-8

MPR

CH

21.2

207-19

28.0

30.0

P-9

MPR

CH

23

45

126.3

0

2.1

97.9

80%

33

80%

33

80%

35

80%

SC

22.5

103.1

126.3

0

0.9

99.1

73.2

67

24

43

0

6.7

3,802

1

65.6

57

23

34

0

11.7

3,643

80%

4.5

4500

4.5

4500

4.5

4500

4.5

4500

21.4

4.5

4500
4500

14.9

38.9

46.2

35.3

33

17

16

0

7.0

5,270

2

15

21.3
6
123.1

133.6

35

15

20

37

14

23

26

80%

22.1

104.9

128.0

0

1.1

98.9

26

80%

17

80%

64.8

55

26

29

0

8.0

4,766

1

20

80%

33.0

35.0

ST-10

MPR

CL/CH

20.3

208-19

0.0

2.0

P-1A

Alluvium

CH

22

4.0

4000

208-19

0.0

2.0

P-1B

MPR

CL/CH

13.9

4.5

4500

208-19

2.0

4.0

ST-2

LPR

CL/CH

4.5

4500

208-19

4.5

6.0

SS-3A

LPR

CH

15.4

25

80%

208-19

4.5

6.0

SS-3B

LPR

CL/CH

8.3

25

80%

AECOM
TSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

113.6

125.3

0.2

19.1

80.7

0.004

0.001

0.043

0.005

27

207-19

10.2

0.122

23

4.5

CL

2.08

35

21
CH

0.001

24
3500

131.1

0.005

47

-

18

116.5

0.001

44

3.5

12.6

0.002

20

23.5
CH

0.001

NP

23.5
101.1

33

0.005

23

205-19

80%

0.001

28

-

15

0.005

36

32
21

104.1

80%

4.5

37.9

19/25

29

13

16

0

3.8

3,125

1

33

Memo
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design, Hays County, TX

DRAFT
4.5

4500

4.5

4500

4.5

4500

3.5

3500

4.5

4500

4.5

4500

4.5

4500

4.5

4500

2.5

2500

4.5

4500

15.2

4.5

4500

19.1

4.5

4500

4.5

4500

4.5

4500

4.5

4500

4.5

4500

208-19

6.0

8.0

P-4

LPR

s. CL

CL

13.8

208-19

8.0

9.5

SS-5

LPR

CL

CL

13.5

208-19

13.0

15.0

ST-6

MPR

CL/CH

CH

21.1

208-19

18.0

20.0

P-7

MPR

CL/CH

20

208-19

23.5

25.0

SS-8A

MPR

CL/CH

19.2

23

80%

208-19

23.5

25.0

SS-8B

MPR

CL/CH

20.3

23

80%

209-19

0.0

2.0

P-1A

Alluvium

CL/CH

25.3

209-19

0.0

2.0

P-1B

LPR

CL/CH

15.8

209-19

2.0

3.5

SS-2

LPR

CL/CH

6.6

209-19

4.0

6.0

P-3A

MPR

CH

21.2

209-19

4.0

6.0

P-3B

MPR

CL/CH

17.5

209-19

6.0

8.0

ST-4

MPR

CL/CH

209-19

8.0

9.5

SS-5

MPR

CL/CH

20.2

209-19

13.0

15.0

P-6

MPR

CL/CH

21.5

209-19

18.0

20.0

ST-7

MPR

CL/CH

209-19

23.5

25.0

SS-8

MPR

CL/CH

210-19

0.0

2.0

P-1

AlluviumCH

210-19

2.0

3.5

SS-2

AlluviumCH

28.2

210-19

4.0

6.0

P-3

AlluviumCH

210-19

6.0

8.0

P-4

MPR

CL/CH

210-19

8.0

10.0

ST-5

MPR

CL/CH

210-19

13.5

15.0

SS-6

MPR

CL/CH

210-19

18.0

20.0

ST-7

MPR

CL/CH

210-19

23.5

25.0

SS-8

MPR

CH

CH

22

21.7

117.2

103

133.4

124.8

75.8

1.6

10.6

87.8

42.4

15

24

25

10

15

59

23

36

20
0

7.2

5,544

1

104.6

127.6

0

1.1

98.9

72.1

61

22

39

0

9.0

4,248

1

129.1

0

3.3

96.7

60

62

22

40

0

6.9

5,990

1

CH

20.3

17.8

23
107.6

129.4

71.8

53

21

132.4

0

3.1

96.9

65.2

60

22

38

0

13.6

7,819

1

CL/CH

22.4

15
103.8

127.0

0

1.9

98.1

57

18.5

52

29

23

0

5.4

4,781

1

20/25

80%

80%

80%

0.001

0.005

0.001

0.004

0.001

0.005

0.001

31

20

20

39

1. Abbreviations:a. USCS – United Soil Classification System
b. LL – Liquid Limitc. PL – Plastic Limit
d. PI – Plasticity Indexe. LPR – Low Plasticity Residuum
f. MPR – Medium Plasticity Residuum

80%

0.003

19

-

20.6
MH

80%

0.0035

24

32
15

112.4

80%

0.001

31

-

22.7
CH

27

10
14

106.1

80%

-

18

Notes:AECOM
TSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

39

52

Memo
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design, Hays County, TX

ATTACHMENT 2.
LABORATORY TEST DATA PLOTSAECOMTSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

21/25

Existing Auxiliary Spillway Borings Test Results
0.0

5.0

Depth below ground surface (feet NAVD88)

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0
2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Undrained Shear Strength, Su (psf)Alluvium- Existing ASW
Silty Residuum - Existing ASW
Alluvium (67th Percentile)
Clayey Residuum (67th Percentile)

Clayey Residuum - Existing ASW
Alluvium (33rd Percentile)
Clayey Residuum (33rd Percentile)

8000

Existing Auxiliary Spillway Borings Test Results
0.0

5.0

Depth below ground surface (feet NAVD88)

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0
4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

Unconfined Compressive Strength, UCS (psf)Alluvium- Existing ASW
Silty Residuum - Existing ASW
Alluvium (67th Percentile)
Clayey Residuum (67th Percentile)

Clayey Residuum - Existing ASW
Alluvium (33rd Percentile)
Clayey Residuum (33rd Percentile)

16000

Existing Auxiliary Spillway Borings Test Results
0.0

5.0

Depth below ground surface (feet NAVD88)

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0
0

10

20

30

40

50

SPT N-value Corrected to 60% Efficiency (bpf)
Alluvium - Existing ASW
Silty Residuum - Existing ASW
Silty Residuum (67th Percentile)
Clayey Residuum (67th Percentile)

Clayey Residuum - Existing ASW
Silty Residuum (33rd Percentile)
Clayey Residuum (33rd Percentile)60

Existing Auxiliary Spillway Borings Test Results
0.0

5.0

Depth below ground surface (feet NAVD88)

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0
100

105

110

115

120

125

Dry Unit Weight, DD (pcf)
Alluvium - Existing ASW
Silty Residuum - Existing ASW
Clayey Residuum (67th Percentile)
Silty Residuum (67th Percentile)

Clayey Residuum - Existing ASW
Clayey Residuum (33rd Percentile)
Silty Residuum (33rd Percentile)130

Existing Auxiliary Spillway Borings Test Results
0.0

5.0

Depth below ground surface (feet NAVD88)

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0
10

20

30

40

50

60

Liquid Limit, LL
Alluvium - Existing ASW
Silty Residuum - Existing ASW
Alluvium (67th Percentile)
Clayey Residuum (67th Percentile)
Silty Residuum (67th Percentile)

Clayey Residuum - Existing ASW
Alluvium (33rd Percentile)
Clayey Residuum (33rd Percentile)
Silty Residuum (33rd Percentile)70

Existing Auxiliary Spillway Borings Test Results
0.0

5.0

Depth below ground surface (feet NAVD88)

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0
0

10

20

30

40

Plasticity Index, PI
Alluvium - Existing ASW
Silty Residuum - Existing ASW
Alluvium (67th Percentile)
Clayey Residuum (67th Percentile)
Silty Residuum (67th Percentile)

Clayey Residuum - Existing ASW
Alluvium (33rd Percentile)
Clayey Residuum (33rd Percentile)
Silty Residuum (33rd Percentile)50

Existing Auxiliary Spillway Borings Test Results
0.0

5.0

Depth below ground surface (feet NAVD88)

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0
20

30

40

50

60

70

Clay Fraction, CF (% finer than 0.002 mm)
Alluvium - Existing ASW

Clayey Residuum - Existing ASW

Silty Residuum - Existing ASW

Clayey Residuum (33rd Percentile)

Clayey Residuum (67th Percentile)

80

Memo
Plum Creek FRS No. 2 Rehabilitation Design, Hays County, TX

DRAFT

ATTACHMENT 3.
HEADCUT ERODIBILITY INDEX CALCULATION SHEETSAECOMTSSWCB_Plum2_SITES_Memo_Final_2021.05.19_clean.docx

24/25

Index Parameters

Summary of Index Parameters and Kh Calculations
Stratum
1

2

3

4

2a- Medium Plasticity
2b- Medium Plasticity
Residuum
Residuum (Favorable)(Unfavorable)

5

6

2c -Low Plasticity
Residuum(Unfavorable)

2d - Low Plasticity
Residuum (Favorable)

Material

1a - Alluvium(Unfavorable)

1b - Alluvium(Favorable)

Ms

0.25

0.31

0.27

0.33

0.09

0.22

Kb

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

Kd

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

Js

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

Blocky soil factor

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

Kh

0.25

0.31

0.27

0.33

0.09

0.22

HEADCUT ERODIBILITY INDEX CALCULATOR
Project Name and Site Number: Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Material Type: 1a - Alluvium (Unfavorable)
Calculate Material Strength Number, Ms
Cohesionless Soils
Standard Penetration Test N60 (bpf)
In-Situ Deformation Modulus, IDM (MPa) - Cohesionless Soils
Calculated Material Strength Number, Ms - Cohesionless Soils
Cohesive Soils
Standard Penetration Test N60 (bpf)
Unconfined Compressive Strength (psf) - Cohesive Soils
Unconfined Compressive Strength (kPa) - Cohesive Soils
Unconfined Compressive Strength (MPa) - Cohesive Soils
Calculated Material Strength Number, Ms - Cohesive Soils
RockStandard Penetration Test N60 (bpf)
Unconfined Compressive Strength (psi) - Rock
Unconfined Compressive Strength (MPa) - RockCalculated Material Strength Number, Ms - Cohesive Soils
Selection of Material TypeIs material being evaluated rock/cohesive soil? (enter "yes" or "no")Is material being evaluated cohesive soil? (enter "yes" or "no")Is soil overconsolidated, fissured/blocky fat clay (CH)? (enter "yes" or "no")Calculated Material Strength Number, Ms, for Cohesive Soil

n/a
n/a
20
7290
349.05
0.35
0.25
n/a
n/a
yes
yes
no
0.248

Calculate Block/Particle Size Number, Kb
Is material being evaluated rock or jointed cohesive soil? (enter "yes" or "no")If "yes", go to C22
Is material being evaluated a massive (unjointed) cohesive soil (enter "yes" or "no")If "yes", Kb = 1 (spreadsheet calculates)
Is material being evaluated a cohesionless soil (coarse detritus, gravel, or boulder formation) whereD < 0.1 m? (enter "yes" or "no")If "yes", go to C26, Kb = 1; if "no" go to C25
RQD (enter from drill logs or enter "NA" and enter Jc below to calculate RQD)
Joint Set Number, Jn (table 52-5)
Joint Count Number, Jc, (table 52-6 or enter "NA" and enter D below (C25) to calculate)
Mean Block Diameter, D (in meters)
Mean Particle Size Diameter, D50
Dry density (in PCF)
Calculated RQD (from input value or calculated from Jc number)
Calculated Jn (from input value or calculated based on material)
Calculated Block/Particle Size Number, Kb

no
yes
no

NA
NA
NA
NA
0.500
108
NA
NA
1.00

Discontinuity/Interparticle Bond Shear Strength Number, Kd
Is material being evaluated a soil? (enter "yes" or "no")If yes, enter "NA" for Jr and Ja parameters
Joint Roughness Number, Jr (table 52-8)
Joint Alteration Number, Ja (table 52-9)

yes

Select Kd calculation method for soil: NRCS NEH Ch 52 (1997) or Draft Appendix 52D (2011)
Residual friction angle from lab test in degrees (Enter "NA" to calculate based on correlation)
Clay Content (percent)Liquid Limit (percent)
Plasticity Index (percent)Residual friction angle in degrees (calculated or from input value)
Calculated Discontinuity/Interparticle Bond Shear Strength Number, Kd

NANA
NRCS(2011)
NA
25.0
39.4
21.1
24.3
1.00

Calculate Ground Structure Number, Js
Is material being evaluated a soil? (enter "yes" or "no")If yes, Js = 1 (spreadsheet calculates)
Exit Channel Slope (degrees)
Spillway Flow Direction (azimuth degrees)
Bedrock Strike (azimuth degrees)
Bedrock Dip (degrees)
Bedrock Dip Direction (azimuth degrees)

1.00
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

Calculated Apparent Dip, a (degrees)
Calculated Effective Dip, q (degrees)
Is dip direction against or with the flow? (Spreadsheet calculates)

0.0
1.0
WITH

yes

Calculated Ground Structure Number, Js

1.00

Summary of Key Properties
Material Strength Number, Ms
Block/Particle Size Number, Kb
Discontinuity/Interparticle Bond Shear Strength Number, Kd
Relative Ground Structure Number, Js
Correction factor for overconsolidated, blocky/fissured high-plasticity soils
Calculated Headcut Erodibility Index, Kh

0.25
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.25

HEADCUT ERODIBILITY INDEX CALCULATOR
Project Name and Site Number: Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Material Type: 1b - Alluvium (Favorable)
Calculate Material Strength Number, Ms
Cohesionless Soils
Standard Penetration Test N60 (bpf)
In-Situ Deformation Modulus, IDM (MPa) - Cohesionless Soils
Calculated Material Strength Number, Ms - Cohesionless Soils
Cohesive Soils
Standard Penetration Test N60 (bpf)
Unconfined Compressive Strength (psf) - Cohesive Soils
Unconfined Compressive Strength (kPa) - Cohesive Soils
Unconfined Compressive Strength (MPa) - Cohesive Soils
Calculated Material Strength Number, Ms - Cohesive Soils
RockStandard Penetration Test N60 (bpf)
Unconfined Compressive Strength (psi) - Rock
Unconfined Compressive Strength (MPa) - RockCalculated Material Strength Number, Ms - Cohesive Soils
Selection of Material TypeIs material being evaluated rock/cohesive soil? (enter "yes" or "no")Is material being evaluated cohesive soil? (enter "yes" or "no")Is soil overconsolidated, fissured/blocky fat clay (CH)? (enter "yes" or "no")Calculated Material Strength Number, Ms, for Cohesive Soil

n/a
n/a
20
9000
430.93
0.43
0.31
n/a
n/a
yes
yes
no
0.312

Calculate Block/Particle Size Number, Kb
Is material being evaluated rock or jointed cohesive soil? (enter "yes" or "no")If "yes", go to C22
Is material being evaluated a massive (unjointed) cohesive soil (enter "yes" or "no")If "yes", Kb = 1 (spreadsheet calculates)noyes

Is material being evaluated a cohesionless soil (coarse detritus, gravel, or boulder formation) whereD < 0.1 m? (enter "yes" or "no")If "yes", go to C26, Kb = 1; if "no" go to C25

no

RQD (enter from drill logs or enter "NA" and enter Jc below to calculate RQD)
Joint Set Number, Jn (table 52-5)
Joint Count Number, Jc, (table 52-6 or enter "NA" and enter D below (C25) to calculate)
Mean Block Diameter, D (in meters)
Mean Particle Size Diameter, D50

NA
NA
NA
NA
2.0
117
NA
NA

Dry density (in PCF)
Calculated RQD (from input value or calculated from Jc number)
Calculated Jn (from input value or calculated based on material)
Calculated Block/Particle Size Number, Kb

1.00

Discontinuity/Interparticle Bond Shear Strength Number, Kd
Is material being evaluated a soil? (enter "yes" or "no")If yes, enter "NA" for Jr and Ja parameters
Joint Roughness Number, Jr (table 52-8)
Joint Alteration Number, Ja (table 52-9)

yes

Select Kd calculation method for soil: NRCS NEH Ch 52 (1997) or Draft Appendix 52D (2011)
Residual friction angle from lab test in degrees (Enter "NA" to calculate based on correlation)
Clay Content (percent)Liquid Limit (percent)
Plasticity Index (percent)Residual friction angle in degrees (calculated or from input value)
Calculated Discontinuity/Interparticle Bond Shear Strength Number, Kd

NANA
NRCS(2011)
NA
40.0
53
32
19.7
1.00

Calculate Ground Structure Number, Js
Is material being evaluated a soil? (enter "yes" or "no")If yes, Js = 1 (spreadsheet calculates)
Exit Channel Slope (degrees)
Spillway Flow Direction (azimuth degrees)
Bedrock Strike (azimuth degrees)
Bedrock Dip (degrees)
Bedrock Dip Direction (azimuth degrees)

1.00
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

Calculated Apparent Dip, a (degrees)
Calculated Effective Dip, q (degrees)
Is dip direction against or with the flow? (Spreadsheet calculates)

0.0
1.0
WITH

yes

Calculated Ground Structure Number, Js

1.00

Summary of Key Properties
Material Strength Number, Ms
Block/Particle Size Number, Kb
Discontinuity/Interparticle Bond Shear Strength Number, Kd
Relative Ground Structure Number, Js
Correction factor for overconsolidated, blocky/fissured high-plasticity soils
Calculated Headcut Erodibility Index, Kh

0.31
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.31

HEADCUT ERODIBILITY INDEX CALCULATOR
Project Name and Site Number: Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Material Type: 2a- Medium Plasticity Residuum (Unfavorable)
Calculate Material Strength Number, Ms
Cohesionless Soils
Standard Penetration Test N60 (bpf)
In-Situ Deformation Modulus, IDM (MPa) - Cohesionless Soils
Calculated Material Strength Number, Ms - Cohesionless Soils
Cohesive Soils
Standard Penetration Test N60 (bpf)
Unconfined Compressive Strength (psf) - Cohesive Soils
Unconfined Compressive Strength (kPa) - Cohesive Soils
Unconfined Compressive Strength (MPa) - Cohesive Soils
Calculated Material Strength Number, Ms - Cohesive Soils
RockStandard Penetration Test N60 (bpf)
Unconfined Compressive Strength (psi) - Rock
Unconfined Compressive Strength (MPa) - RockCalculated Material Strength Number, Ms - Cohesive Soils
Selection of Material TypeIs material being evaluated rock/cohesive soil? (enter "yes" or "no")Is material being evaluated cohesive soil? (enter "yes" or "no")Is soil overconsolidated, fissured/blocky fat clay (CH)? (enter "yes" or "no")Calculated Material Strength Number, Ms, for Cohesive Soil

n/a
n/a
23
8019
383.96
0.38
0.27
n/a
n/a
yes
yes
no
0.275

Calculate Block/Particle Size Number, Kb
Is material being evaluated rock or jointed cohesive soil? (enter "yes" or "no")If "yes", go to C22
Is material being evaluated a massive (unjointed) cohesive soil (enter "yes" or "no")If "yes", Kb = 1 (spreadsheet calculates)
Is material being evaluated a cohesionless soil (coarse detritus, gravel, or boulder formation) whereD < 0.1 m? (enter "yes" or "no")If "yes", go to C26, Kb = 1; if "no" go to C25
RQD (enter from drill logs or enter "NA" and enter Jc below to calculate RQD)
Joint Set Number, Jn (table 52-5)
Joint Count Number, Jc, (table 52-6 or enter "NA" and enter D below (C25) to calculate)
Mean Block Diameter, D (in meters)
Mean Particle Size Diameter, D50
Dry density (in PCF)
Calculated RQD (from input value or calculated from Jc number)
Calculated Jn (from input value or calculated based on material)
Calculated Block/Particle Size Number, Kb

no
yes
no

NA
NA
NA
NA
0.0045
105
NA
NA
1.00

Discontinuity/Interparticle Bond Shear Strength Number, Kd
Is material being evaluated a soil? (enter "yes" or "no")If yes, enter "NA" for Jr and Ja parameters
Joint Roughness Number, Jr (table 52-8)
Joint Alteration Number, Ja (table 52-9)

yes

Select Kd calculation method for soil: NRCS NEH Ch 52 (1997) or Draft Appendix 52D (2011)
Residual friction angle from lab test in degrees (Enter "NA" to calculate based on correlation)
Clay Content (percent)Liquid Limit (percent)
Plasticity Index (percent)Residual friction angle in degrees (calculated or from input value)
Calculated Discontinuity/Interparticle Bond Shear Strength Number, Kd

NANA
NRCS(2011)
NA
42.0
37.3
21.7
25.2
1.00

Calculate Ground Structure Number, Js
Is material being evaluated a soil? (enter "yes" or "no")If yes, Js = 1 (spreadsheet calculates)
Exit Channel Slope (degrees)
Spillway Flow Direction (azimuth degrees)
Bedrock Strike (azimuth degrees)
Bedrock Dip (degrees)
Bedrock Dip Direction (azimuth degrees)

1.00
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

Calculated Apparent Dip, a (degrees)
Calculated Effective Dip, q (degrees)
Is dip direction against or with the flow? (Spreadsheet calculates)

0.0
1.0
WITH

yes

Calculated Ground Structure Number, Js

1.00

Summary of Key Properties
Material Strength Number, Ms
Block/Particle Size Number, Kb
Discontinuity/Interparticle Bond Shear Strength Number, Kd
Relative Ground Structure Number, Js
Correction factor for overconsolidated, blocky/fissured high-plasticity soils
Calculated Headcut Erodibility Index, Kh

0.27
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.27

HEADCUT ERODIBILITY INDEX CALCULATOR
Project Name and Site Number: Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Material Type: 2b- Medium Plasticity Residuum (Favorable)
Calculate Material Strength Number, Ms
Cohesionless Soils
Standard Penetration Test N60 (bpf)
In-Situ Deformation Modulus, IDM (MPa) - Cohesionless Soils
Calculated Material Strength Number, Ms - Cohesionless Soils
Cohesive Soils
Standard Penetration Test N60 (bpf)
Unconfined Compressive Strength (psf) - Cohesive Soils
Unconfined Compressive Strength (kPa) - Cohesive Soils
Unconfined Compressive Strength (MPa) - Cohesive Soils
Calculated Material Strength Number, Ms - Cohesive Soils
RockStandard Penetration Test N60 (bpf)
Unconfined Compressive Strength (psi) - Rock
Unconfined Compressive Strength (MPa) - RockCalculated Material Strength Number, Ms - Cohesive Soils
Selection of Material TypeIs material being evaluated rock/cohesive soil? (enter "yes" or "no")Is material being evaluated cohesive soil? (enter "yes" or "no")Is soil overconsolidated, fissured/blocky fat clay (CH)? (enter "yes" or "no")Calculated Material Strength Number, Ms, for Cohesive Soil

n/a
n/a
31
9554
457.44
0.46
0.33
n/a
n/a
yes
yes
no
0.333

Calculate Block/Particle Size Number, Kb
Is material being evaluated rock or jointed cohesive soil? (enter "yes" or "no")If "yes", go to C22
Is material being evaluated a massive (unjointed) cohesive soil (enter "yes" or "no")If "yes", Kb = 1 (spreadsheet calculates)
Is material being evaluated a cohesionless soil (coarse detritus, gravel, or boulder formation) whereD < 0.1 m? (enter "yes" or "no")If "yes", go to C26, Kb = 1; if "no" go to C25
RQD (enter from drill logs or enter "NA" and enter Jc below to calculate RQD)
Joint Set Number, Jn (table 52-5)
Joint Count Number, Jc, (table 52-6 or enter "NA" and enter D below (C25) to calculate)
Mean Block Diameter, D (in meters)
Mean Particle Size Diameter, D50
Dry density (in PCF)
Calculated RQD (from input value or calculated from Jc number)
Calculated Jn (from input value or calculated based on material)
Calculated Block/Particle Size Number, Kb

no
yes
no

NA
NA
NA
NA
0.0175
114
NA
NA
1.00

Discontinuity/Interparticle Bond Shear Strength Number, Kd
Is material being evaluated a soil? (enter "yes" or "no")If yes, enter "NA" for Jr and Ja parameters
Joint Roughness Number, Jr (table 52-8)
Joint Alteration Number, Ja (table 52-9)

yes

Select Kd calculation method for soil: NRCS NEH Ch 52 (1997) or Draft Appendix 52D (2011)
Residual friction angle from lab test in degrees (Enter "NA" to calculate based on correlation)
Clay Content (percent)Liquid Limit (percent)
Plasticity Index (percent)Residual friction angle in degrees (calculated or from input value)
Calculated Discontinuity/Interparticle Bond Shear Strength Number, Kd

NANA
NRCS(2011)
NA
65.0
58.4
32.8
15.7
1.00

Calculate Ground Structure Number, Js
Is material being evaluated a soil? (enter "yes" or "no")If yes, Js = 1 (spreadsheet calculates)
Exit Channel Slope (degrees)
Spillway Flow Direction (azimuth degrees)
Bedrock Strike (azimuth degrees)
Bedrock Dip (degrees)
Bedrock Dip Direction (azimuth degrees)

1.00
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

Calculated Apparent Dip, a (degrees)
Calculated Effective Dip, q (degrees)
Is dip direction against or with the flow? (Spreadsheet calculates)

0.0
1.0
WITH

yes

Calculated Ground Structure Number, Js

1.00

Summary of Key Properties
Material Strength Number, Ms
Block/Particle Size Number, Kb
Discontinuity/Interparticle Bond Shear Strength Number, Kd
Relative Ground Structure Number, Js
Correction factor for overconsolidated, blocky/fissured high-plasticity soils
Calculated Headcut Erodibility Index, Kh

0.33
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.33

HEADCUT ERODIBILITY INDEX CALCULATOR
Project Name and Site Number: Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Material Type: 2c -Low Plasticity Residuum (Unfavorable)
Calculate Material Strength Number, Ms
Cohesionless Soils
Standard Penetration Test N60 (bpf)
In-Situ Deformation Modulus, IDM (MPa) - Cohesionless Soils
Calculated Material Strength Number, Ms - Cohesionless Soils
Cohesive Soils
Standard Penetration Test N60 (bpf)
Unconfined Compressive Strength (psf) - Cohesive Soils
Unconfined Compressive Strength (kPa) - Cohesive Soils
Unconfined Compressive Strength (MPa) - Cohesive Soils
Calculated Material Strength Number, Ms - Cohesive Soils
RockStandard Penetration Test N60 (bpf)
Unconfined Compressive Strength (psi) - Rock
Unconfined Compressive Strength (MPa) - RockCalculated Material Strength Number, Ms - Cohesive Soils
Selection of Material TypeIs material being evaluated rock/cohesive soil? (enter "yes" or "no")Is material being evaluated cohesive soil? (enter "yes" or "no")Is soil overconsolidated, fissured/blocky fat clay (CH)? (enter "yes" or "no")Calculated Material Strength Number, Ms, for Cohesionless Soil

24
0.027
0.085
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
no
no
no
0.085

Calculate Block/Particle Size Number, Kb
Is material being evaluated rock or jointed cohesive soil? (enter "yes" or "no")If "yes", go to C22
Is material being evaluated a massive (unjointed) cohesive soil (enter "yes" or "no")If "yes", Kb = 1 (spreadsheet calculates)noIs material being evaluated a cohesionless soil (coarse detritus, gravel, or boulder formation) whereD < 0.1 m? (enter "yes" or "no")If "yes", go to C26, Kb = 1; if "no" go to C25

yes

RQD (enter from drill logs or enter "NA" and enter Jc below to calculate RQD)
Joint Set Number, Jn (table 52-5)
Joint Count Number, Jc, (table 52-6 or enter "NA" and enter D below (C25) to calculate)
Mean Block Diameter, D (in meters)
Mean Particle Size Diameter, D50

NA
NA
NA
NA
0.020
115
5
5

Dry density (in PCF)
Calculated RQD (from input value or calculated from Jc number)
Calculated Jn (from input value or calculated based on material)
Calculated Block/Particle Size Number, Kb

no

1.00

Discontinuity/Interparticle Bond Shear Strength Number, Kd
Is material being evaluated a soil? (enter "yes" or "no")If yes, enter "NA" for Jr and Ja parameters
Joint Roughness Number, Jr (table 52-8)
Joint Alteration Number, Ja (table 52-9)

yes

Select Kd calculation method for soil: NRCS NEH Ch 52 (1997) or Draft Appendix 52D (2011)
Residual friction angle from lab test in degrees (Enter "NA" to calculate based on correlation)
Clay Content (percent)Liquid Limit (percent)
Plasticity Index (percent)Residual friction angle in degrees (calculated or from input value)
Calculated Discontinuity/Interparticle Bond Shear Strength Number, Kd

NANA
NRCS(2011)
NA
25.0
24.1
11.2
34.4
1.00

Calculate Ground Structure Number, Js
Is material being evaluated a soil? (enter "yes" or "no")If yes, Js = 1 (spreadsheet calculates)
Exit Channel Slope (degrees)
Spillway Flow Direction (azimuth degrees)
Bedrock Strike (azimuth degrees)
Bedrock Dip (degrees)
Bedrock Dip Direction (azimuth degrees)

1.00
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

Calculated Apparent Dip, a (degrees)
Calculated Effective Dip, q (degrees)
Is dip direction against or with the flow? (Spreadsheet calculates)

0.0
1.0
WITH

yes

Calculated Ground Structure Number, Js

1.00

Summary of Key Properties
Material Strength Number, Ms
Block/Particle Size Number, Kb
Discontinuity/Interparticle Bond Shear Strength Number, Kd
Relative Ground Structure Number, Js
Correction factor for overconsolidated, blocky/fissured high-plasticity soils
Calculated Headcut Erodibility Index, Kh

0.09
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.09

HEADCUT ERODIBILITY INDEX CALCULATOR
Project Name and Site Number: Plum Creek FRS No. 2
Material Type: 2d - Low Plasticity Residuum (Favorable)
Calculate Material Strength Number, Ms
Cohesionless Soils
Standard Penetration Test N60 (bpf)
In-Situ Deformation Modulus, IDM (MPa) - Cohesionless Soils
Calculated Material Strength Number, Ms - Cohesionless Soils
Cohesive Soils
Standard Penetration Test N60 (bpf)
Unconfined Compressive Strength (psf) - Cohesive Soils
Unconfined Compressive Strength (kPa) - Cohesive Soils
Unconfined Compressive Strength (MPa) - Cohesive Soils
Calculated Material Strength Number, Ms - Cohesive Soils
RockStandard Penetration Test N60 (bpf)
Unconfined Compressive Strength (psi) - Rock
Unconfined Compressive Strength (MPa) - RockCalculated Material Strength Number, Ms - Cohesive Soils
Selection of Material TypeIs material being evaluated rock/cohesive soil? (enter "yes" or "no")Is material being evaluated cohesive soil? (enter "yes" or "no")Is soil overconsolidated, fissured/blocky fat clay (CH)? (enter "yes" or "no")Calculated Material Strength Number, Ms, for Cohesive Soil

n/a
n/a
40
6422
307.49
0.31
0.22
n/a
n/a
yes
yes
no
0.216

Calculate Block/Particle Size Number, Kb
Is material being evaluated rock or jointed cohesive soil? (enter "yes" or "no")If "yes", go to C22
Is material being evaluated a massive (unjointed) cohesive soil (enter "yes" or "no")If "yes", Kb = 1 (spreadsheet calculates)noyes

Is material being evaluated a cohesionless soil (coarse detritus, gravel, or boulder formation) whereD < 0.1 m? (enter "yes" or "no")If "yes", go to C26, Kb = 1; if "no" go to C25

no

RQD (enter from drill logs or enter "NA" and enter Jc below to calculate RQD)
Joint Set Number, Jn (table 52-5)
Joint Count Number, Jc, (table 52-6 or enter "NA" and enter D below (C25) to calculate)
Mean Block Diameter, D (in meters)
Mean Particle Size Diameter, D50

NA
NA
NA
NA
0.20
125
NA
NA

Dry density (in PCF)
Calculated RQD (from input value or calculated from Jc number)
Calculated Jn (from input value or calculated based on material)
Calculated Block/Particle Size Number, Kb

1.00

Discontinuity/Interparticle Bond Shear Strength Number, Kd
Is material being evaluated a soil? (enter "yes" or "no")If yes, enter "NA" for Jr and Ja parameters
Joint Roughness Number, Jr (table 52-8)
Joint Alteration Number, Ja (table 52-9)

yes

Select Kd calculation method for soil: NRCS NEH Ch 52 (1997) or Draft Appendix 52D (2011)
Residual friction angle from lab test in degrees (Enter "NA" to calculate based on correlation)
Clay Content (percent)Liquid Limit (percent)
Plasticity Index (percent)Residual friction angle in degrees (calculated or from input value)
Calculated Discontinuity/Interparticle Bond Shear Strength Number, Kd

NANA
NRCS(2011)
NA
40.0
44.5
22.0
22.3
1.00

Calculate Ground Structure Number, Js
Is material being evaluated a soil? (enter "yes" or "no")If yes, Js = 1 (spreadsheet calculates)
Exit Channel Slope (degrees)
Spillway Flow Direction (azimuth degrees)
Bedrock Strike (azimuth degrees)
Bedrock Dip (degrees)
Bedrock Dip Direction (azimuth degrees)

1.00
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

Calculated Apparent Dip, a (degrees)
Calculated Effective Dip, q (degrees)
Is dip direction against or with the flow? (Spreadsheet calculates)

0.0
1.0
WITH

yes

Calculated Ground Structure Number, Js

1.00

Summary of Key Properties
Material Strength Number, Ms
Block/Particle Size Number, Kb
Discontinuity/Interparticle Bond Shear Strength Number, Kd
Relative Ground Structure Number, Js
Correction factor for overconsolidated, blocky/fissured high-plasticity soils
Calculated Headcut Erodibility Index, Kh

0.22
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.22