20210921-EMI Soil Characterization Memo Rev 3

DATE: September 21, 2021
PREPARED FOR: Mr. Peter Chou - Parsons
PREPARED BY: Amir Zand, Ph.D., G.E. - Earth Mechanics, Inc.

Te-Chih Ke, Ph.D., G.E. - Earth Mechanics, Inc.
SUBJECT: Soil Characterization Memorandum for Tunneling, Revision 3.0

BART Silicon Valley Phase II Extension
1 Geology
1.1 REGIONAL AND LOCAL GEOLOGY
The BSVII project is located in the Coast Range Geomorphic Province of California, more
specifically, the Santa Clara Valley, which is bounded by the San Francisco Bay (Bay) to the north, the
Diablo Mountain Range to the east and the Santa Cruz Mountains to the west. The valley floor is
covered by alluvial fan, flood plain, levee, and terrace deposits and active stream channel and terrace
deposits with marine estuary deposits along the Bay margins.
The BSVII tunnel alignment is located primarily within Holocene- and Pleistocene-age (less than 2.6
million years old) alluvial (water-bearing sedimentary) deposits. Figure 1 is a surficial geologic map of
the central portion of the Santa Clara Valley showing the varied alluvial deposits located in the San
José area (modified from Wentworth et al 1999). The alluvial deposits expected to be encountered
within the upper 300 feet of the ground surface (including the BSVII tunnel, stations, emergency stops,
and adits) consist of a sequence of interbedded coarse- and fine-grained soils.
1.2 SEISMICITY
The Santa Clara Valley is bounded by the San Andreas fault, approximately 11 miles (mi) to the west-
southwest, and the Hayward and Calaveras faults, approximately 3.4 and 6.4 mi, respectively, to the
east-northeast. Each of these historic active faults has produced large damaging earthquakes (>
Magnitude [M] 5) in the past. The margins of the Santa Clara Valley are also flanked by zones of
Holocene and Quaternary faults including the Berrocal fault zone, Monte Vista-Shannon, Cascade,
Stanford and San José faults to the west and southwest.
Based upon prior studies and an ongoing fault study by VTA, there is one fault source that crosses the
eastern half of the project, the Silver Creek fault zone. This fault zone crosses the tunnel alignment,
along Santa Clara Street, between approximately South 19th Street and South 25th Street. Data and
information related to the Silver Creek Fault can be found in the report titled “Fault Displacement
Hazard Considerations for the North Silver Creek Fault” (HNTB/WSP JV 2020). The study included
performing two new, high-resolution seismic-reflection lines, reprocessing of a 2006 USGS seismic
reflection line, and a subsurface investigation of the Silver Creek Fault during late 2019 and early
2020. The subsurface investigation included eight (8) CPTs and four (4) borings down to depth of 150
ft. Discontinuous structures consistent with fault activity was detected in all three seismic-reflection
lines. Interpretations of the seismic-reflection and subsurface investigation for Line 2 along E.
Williams St. indicated an anomalous 1200-foot wide zone of disturbed reflectors. At least three
geophysical anomalies (interpreted to be faults) were characterized by wavy, warped reflectors that are
vertically separated.
According to this report, two magnitude 6 (6.0 M) earthquakes in 1903 may have been caused by
movement on the Silver Creek Fault, however the location and magnitude of the earthquakes was
determined from anecdotal accounts of ground shaking and damage, in lieu of scientific earthquake
instruments (HNTB/WSP JV 2020).
1.3 HYDROGEOLOGY
In general, five groundwater zones or layers (from the ground surface downward) can be identified,
though not necessarily present everywhere along the alignment:
 Surface Aquifer. Composed of artificial fill, clays and silts, with buried lenses and/or channels
of sand and/or fine gravel. The coarse-grained lenses and/or channels are most common near
the Downtown San Jose Station, Guadalupe River and Los Gatos Creek. This layer extends
from the ground surface to an approximate depth of 25 feet below ground surface (bgs) across
the BVSII project area.
 Confining Layer. Composed of clays and silts, with intermittent buried braided channels of
sand and/or gravel. The buried channels are most common near the Downtown San Jose
Station, Guadalupe River and Los Gatos Creek. This layer varies in thickness from about 25 to
55 feet and extends from approximately 25 feet bgs to an approximate depth of 50 to 80 feet at
the station locations.
 Upper Aquifer. Consists of silty sand, sand, gravelly sand, and sandy gravel. It includes broadly
deposited, intersecting and coalescing channels of varying thickness and differing permeability.
The top of this unit varies from approximately 50 to 80 feet bgs, thickness varies from 30 to 70
feet, and bottom depth ranges between 80 to 150 feet bgs.
 Major Aquitard. Composed of clays and silts, but can include channel deposits of sand, silty
sand and gravel. The top of this unit varies from approximately 80 to 150 feet bgs
(approximately 110 to 150 feet at the station locations), thickness varies from 100 to 120 feet
and bottom depth ranges between 200 to 250 feet bgs.
 Lower Aquifer. The zone of major groundwater withdrawals in the valley, consisting of
broadly deposited sand and gravel zones with interlayered clay and silt. The top of this unit
varies from approximately 200 to 250 feet bgs and the thickness may be about 800 feet or
more.
Artesian conditions in the confined areas of the Santa Clara Valley create hydrostatic pressures in the
Upper and Lower aquifers that can be and are measured by piezometers or observed in open standpipe
wells, typically as upward gradients in wells or pressurized well-heads. The observed artesian
conditions along the alignment are further discussed in Section 4.
Earth Mechanics, Inc.

Geotechnical & Earthquake Engineering
2 Engineering Classification of Soils
2.1 SOIL TYPES
The subsurface soils encountered during the geotechnical investigations are classified according to the
Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The subsurface soils have been divided into three different
soil classes (Fill Soils, Class I and Class II).
Class I and Class II soils should not be taken as massive or uniform in the geological sense. Each is
interbedded, interlayered, and crosscut in its deposition. This is evident in the results of geotechnical
explorations that provide finer resolution, such as cone penetration tests and Sonicore holes.
 Fill Soils: Fill soil for this Project is defined as concrete, brick, wood, logs, timber, asphalt,
mixed soils and other debris and/or fill material. This material is generally near the ground
surface.
 Class I – Fine-Grained Soils: Class I soil for this Project is defined as fine-grained soils,
consisting of silts and clays, with greater than 50% of soil passing a No. 200 sieve.
 Class II – Coarse-Grained Soils: Class II soil for this Project is defined as coarse-grained soils,
consisting of sands and gravels, with less than 50% of soil passing a No. 200 sieve.
Class I/II soil types can be further refined using grain size distribution of the soil samples on gradation
curves. Gradation curves for soil samples within the tunnel envelope were reviewed along the
alignment and are discussed in Section 3.4.
2.2 HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY
Calculated hydraulic conductivity values are listed in the GDR. For baseline purposes, assume the
hydraulic conductivity values shown in Table 1. Because of the variable nature of the subsurface
materials, hydraulic connectivity of Class II soils will exist both vertically and laterally. As a result, the
ground mass will demonstrate hydraulic conductivity values more reflective of the Class II soils
presented in Table 1. For baseline purposes, assume that the vertical hydraulic conductivity will be one
order of magnitude lower than the horizontal hydraulic conductivity.
TABLE 1. BASELINE HORIZONTAL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY VALUES

Horizontal Hydraulic Conductivity Value, cm/sec
Soil Class Minimum Maximum Average
-8 -5
Class I 10 10 10-6
Class II 10-4 101 10-3
EMI reviewed the hydraulic conductivity data in the GDR. It appears that these recommendations are
mainly based on dissipation tests in CPTs. For Class I soils about 70% of the measurements were
between 10-6 and 10-7 cm/s.

2.3 FLOW VELOCITY
Valley Water manages an aquifer recharge program along the eastern and western margins of the Santa
Clara Valley that helps establish adequate pressures in the Lower aquifer, which sustains artesian,
subartesian1, and upward-gradient groundwater conditions in both the Lower and Upper aquifers.
These conditions establish a general northwest, upward groundwater gradient (flow) toward the bay
minimizing saltwater intrusion into the Lower aquifer.
Flow velocities were evaluated at the three stations based on the test data provided in the GDR.
For baseline purposes, assume the flow velocity ranges shown in Table 2.
TABLE 2. BASELINE FLOW VELOCITY VALUES

Flow Velocity
Station Segment Range (ft/day) Direction
Diridon Segment 3 0.4 to 1.6 North
Downtown San
Segment 4 0.1 to 2.4 Northwest
Jose
28th Street/Little
Segment 6 0.02 to 1.0 Northwest
Portugal
3 Soil Conditions
3.1 SOIL PROFILE SEGMENTS
According to the GDR and GBR, soil stratigraphy varies largely along the proposed tunnel alignment,
where alluvial deposits are located. However, to facilitate and simplify the subsequent geotechnical
design work, seven idealized soil profiles (Segments 1 to 7) were generated. These segments are
applicable to bored tunnel alignment only, not the stations or mid tunnel facilities (MTF).

TABLE 3. TUNNEL SOIL PROFILE SEGMENTS
Segment Starting Sta.
# No. Ending Sta. No. Length (ft) Starting Location Ending Location
West End of West
1 845+40 820+00 2540 1200' East of West Portal
Portal
1200' East of West West End of Stockton Ave.
2 820+00 782+00 3800
Portal MTF
West End of Stockton
3 782+00 735+00 4700 East End of Diridon Sta.
Ave. MTF
East End of Diridon East End of Downtown
4 735+00 698+00 3700
Sta. San Jose Sta.
East End of
5 698+00 657+00 4100 Downtown San Jose East End of 13th St. MTF
Sta.
East End of 13th St. East end of 28th St./Little
6 657+00 599+00 5800
MTF Portugal Sta.
East end of 28th
7 599+00 560+75 3825 East end of East Portal
St./Little Portugal Sta.
The Silver Creek fault crossing is in Segment 6 and is considered a separate design cross section due to
fault displacement criteria. Figure 2 shows a plan view of the tunnel alignment segments.
The approximate number of soil exploration for each segment is shown in Table 4.

TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF SOIL EXPLORATION FOR TUNNEL SEGMENTS
Avg. Distance Avg. Distance
Total No. of between between CPTs
Borings Borings Total No. of (Usable CPTs) (ft)
Segment Length (Usable (Usable CPTs (Usable
# (ft) Borings)* borings) (ft) CPTs)*
1 2,540 25 (18) 100 (140) 10 (5) 250 (510)
2 3,800 19 (6) 200 (630) 14 (8) 270 (480)
3 4,700 28 (11) 170 (430) 10 (4) 470 (1180)
4 3,700 31 (19) 120 (190) 21 (13) 180 (280)
5 4,100 30 (21) 140 (200) 27 (19) 150 (220)
6 5,800 36 (27) 160 (210) 30 (24) 190 (240)
7 3,825 19 (16) 200 (240) 22 (21) 170 (180)
Note: number in parenthesis indicate number of explorations that deep enough to near base of tunnel
envelope and within 100 ft of alignment.
3.2 IDEALIZED SOIL PROFILES
An idealized soil profile was developed for each segment. The profile is simplified in order to
represent the entire segment, rather than specific locations. The idealized profiles are presented by
depth below ground surface. These profiles are presented in Appendix A.
The soil type encountered in tunnel horizon is also classified as Class I (fine-grained) vs. Class II
(coarse-grained). This classification is shown on the soil profile in Figure 3.
3.3 SOIL PARAMETERS
Preliminary soil properties based on correlations in the interpretive report are provided for each soil
layer in Appendix A. We reviewed these properties and in general they are reasonable.
3.4 SOIL GRADATION CURVES
Soil gradation curves for samples within tunnel envelope depth are plotted for each segment. These
graphs are provided in Appendix B.
4 Groundwater Conditions
Historically, seasonal groundwater fluctuations in the upper and lower aquifers and major aquitard
have occurred and generally peak in the spring and decline through the fall. Artesian conditions have
periodically been recorded in wells located near the West Portal, 13th Street mid-tunnel facility, and
the 28th Street/Little Portugal Station. Peak pressure recordings in these locations are summarized in
Table 5.

The GBR recommends assuming the TBM will experience a maximum free-field, water pressure head
at the point of interest on the TBM equivalent to the depth of the point below ground surface plus five
feet.
Table 6 lists the artesian groundwater observations for the project.
TABLE 5. PEAK RECORDED ARTESIAN CONDITIONS ALONG THE PROJECT

ALIGNMENT
Location Depth of Maximum Groundwater Elevation
VWP/Screen (ft) (ft NAVD88)
28th Street/Little Portugal Station 160 90.4 (2.4 ft above ground surface)
East Emergency Stop 90 ~83 (~2 ft above ground surface)
13th Street mid-tunnel facility 55 82.0 (1.0 ft above ground surface)
West Portal 130 70.0 (4.0 ft above ground surface)
TABLE 6. SUMMARY OF ARTESIAN GROUNDWATER MEASUREMENTS

Max.
Station Ground GW Screen Min. GW
Segment # Boring No. GW El.
No./Offset Elevation (ft) Depth (ft) El. (ft)
(ft)
826+10.81/17
1 PZ-8A 68.1 130.3 55 71
RT
5 BH-019 665+31.11/5 LT 62 90 63 83
5 ST-5 659+07.95/6 LT 81 55 68 82
609+69.50/14
6 BH-154 89.31 160.6 79 90
LT
608+14.35/108
6 BH-164 88.63 160 79 90
RT
A summary of groundwater measurements in the tunnel horizon layer is provided in Table 7. The
minimum and maximum groundwater levels for the tunnel depth are shown on soil profile of Figure 3.
According to project Design Criteria Manual, Section 3.1.1 (Permanent Loads), the design of tunnel
linings and cut-and-cover structures must consider temporary conditions during construction, including
dewatering, in-service conditions and the 100- and 500-year floods inclusive of sea level rise due to
global warming.

TABLE 7. SUMMARY OF GROUNDWATER MEASUREMENTS FOR TUNNEL DEPTH
Approximate
Boring GW Screen Min. GW EL. Max. GW EL.
Segment Station No./Offset Ground
No. Depth (ft) (ft) (ft)
# Elevation (ft)
1 BH-178 845+22.27/106 RT 65 29 53 56
1 BH-176 834+68.68/41 RT 67 29.4/57.4 55 58
1 MW-8A 826+84.10/47 RT 68 53 54 59
1 PZ-8A 826+10.81/17 RT 69 86.3 56 60
2 BH-173 817+86.97/327 RT [far] 68 70 56 60
2 BH-171 796+91.58/17 LT 77 100 58 64
3 BH-180 781+27.82/47 LT 82 115 64 69
3 BH-079 776+54.75/0.1 RT 82 76/119 55 75
3 BH-169 770+40.82/180 RT [far] 80 103 66 72
3 BH-166 759+56.98/11 LT 87 105 66 74
3 BH-163 745+77.71/11RT 88 94 68 74
3 BH-153 736+98.98/219 LT [far] 90 64.7/93.7 66 73
3 BH-152 735+38.81/119 LT 87 67/90 67 74
4 BH-160 715+29.60/161 LT [far] 83 63/115 65 75
4 BH-150 702+03.78/210 RT [far] 87 49.8/79.8/99.8 65 73
5 MW-2 685+06.92/1 RT 80 60 63 79
5 BH-158 674+45.41/95 LT 82 80 71 82
5 BH-019 665+31.11/5 LT 80 90 63 83
5 ST-5 659+07.95/6 LT 81 55 68 82
5 PZ-3C 658+76.17/6 LT 81 59 65 75
5 BH-179 658+65.04/141 RT [far] 81 61/92 76 78
6 BH-015 644+42.82/74 LT 94 90 62 83
6 BH-013 639+86.13/4 RT 95 100.5 63 84
6 BH-009 618+94.01/9 LT 91 75 65 86
6 BH-154 609+69.50/14 LT 88 77.6 79 90
6 MW-2E 608+32.40/73 RT 89 110 77 84
6 PZ-2C 608+16.95/83 RT 88 55/98 64 83
6 BH-164 608+14.35/108 RT 88 70/95 77 86
6 BH-063 606+51.79/36 RT 90 81 64 85
6 BH-155 602+54.24/37 LT 88 78.8 78 85
7 BH-004 589+26.11/1 RT 90 52 82 86
7 BH-159 583+44.07/201 LT [far] 87.5 82 80 84
7 ST-1 578+71.83/48 LT 86 58 79 84
7 BH-002 576+80.48/47 RT 87 52 78 83
7 BH-165 570+21.37/21 RT 90 38/72 79 82
Based on this data, the recommended groundwater levels for preliminary design of bored tunnel only
(not portals or station shafts) for cost-estimating purposes are summarized as follows:
 For TBM operation, the best estimated groundwater level is the Maximum Measured (orange
line) on Figure 3.
 For tunnel operation, the maximum values recommended in the GIR, excluding higher
pressures recommended below 200 ft depth can be used.
 For flood condition, the flood condition values recommended in the GIR, excluding some of
the very high pressures below 200 ft depth can be used.

These recommendations are summarized in Table 8 (values are rounded upward).
TABLE 8. RECOMMENDED GROUDNWATER DEPTH FOR PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF

BORED TUNNEL
Segment # Best-Estimated Depth Maximum Depth Maximum Depth
for Construction Expected for Expected for Flood
Phase Operation Condition
1 5 ft above ground 5 ft above ground
Maximum (Orange)
Line on Figure 3
5 Soil Abrasivity
Per the GBR, soil abrasion tests were performed on soil samples taken from seven recent borings (from
Segments 1 to 6) for the proposed tunnel horizon, based on the NTNU SAT testing procedure (Nilsen
et al, 2007). The measured metal loss varies from 4 to 13 mg. According to the AVS classification
(Nilsen et al, 2007), the metal loss due to in-situ soil abrasion is classified as ‘Low’ to ‘Medium’. Also
according to GDR, seven (7) abrasion tests performed per NTNU/SINTEF SAT procedure (Jakobsen
et al, 2013) resulted in weight loss values between 4.5 to 11 mg, with average of 8.07 and standard
deviation of 2.03. Abrasion data for each segment is summarized in Table 9.
The GBR states that for baseline purposes, the Contractor should assume that the cutting tool abrasion
is medium.

TABLE 9. SUMMARY OF SOIL ABBRASIVITY TESTS
Soil
Sampling
Station Abrasion AVS
Boring No. Depths (ft, Soil Type Segment #
No./Offset Test1 Result, Classification2
bgs)
AVS (mg)
612+63.84/14 Sand/Gravel (Class
BH-112 65-76 4-5 Low 6
RT II)
BH-115 80-96 8 Low 6
LT II)
BH-116 110-116 8-9 Low 5
RT II)
BH-124 100-102 9 Low 4
RT II)
Sand/Gravel (Class Low to
BH-137 783+64.83/4 LT 90-96 9 - 13 4
II) Medium
BH-140 85-91 10 - 11 Low 2
RT II)
BH-141 30-40 6-8 Low 1
LT II)
Notes:
1. Performed per NTNU SAT (Nilsen B, Dahl F, Holzhauser J, Raleigh P, 2007, "The new test methodology for
estimating the abrasiveness of soils for TBM tunneling," Rapid excavation and tunneling conference (RETC), pp
104–116.)
2. Based on Table 1 of the above reference (Low: AVS 4 - 12 mg).
6 Soil and Water Corrosivity
Soil corrosion tests have been performed in several borings in each segment. Corrosive soil was
detected in Segment 1 only (low PH). Potentially corrosive material (low resistivity screening) was
encountered in Segments 3 and 7, but these samples were not found to have low PH or high soluble
sulfate/Chloride content. These results are summarized in Table 10. Groundwater corrosion tests are
summarized in Table 11.
The number of corrosion tests for some segments could be considered too low to make a blanket non-
corrosive assessment. Therefore there is some merit in performing additional corrosion tests,
particularly for Segments 1, 6, and 7.

TABLE 10. SUMMARY OF SOIL CORROSION TESTS
Soluble Soluble
Minimum Sulfate Chloride
Boring Sample Depth Resistivity Content Content
Segment No. Station No. (feet) Soil Type (ohm-cm) pH (ppm) (ppm)
1 BH-176 834+68.68 15 CH 490 4.69 910 81
2 BH-137 783+64.83 115.5~116.5 CH 2293 7.70 40 13
2 BH-139 802+53.54 110.5~111.0 CH 2338 8.10 113 7
2 BH-173 817+86.97 85 CL 2000 8.04 ND ND
3 BH-161 736+53.45 20 CL 940 8.23 150 ND
3 BH-161 736+53.45 109 CL - 8.15 31 ND
3 BH-162 742+13.56 90 CL 3600 7.65 ND ND
3 BH-163 745+77.71 112 CL-ML 2500 8.23 ND ND
3 BH-167 753+13.81 71.5 CL 1200 8.15 120 ND
3 BH-166 759+56.98 113.5 ML 660 6.12 440 ND
3 BH-168 763.03.82 97 GW 3400 7.21 ND ND
3 BH-169 770+40.82 97 CL 2000 7.99 ND ND
3 BH-180 781+27.82 75 CL 1700 8.48 150 27
4 BH-160 715+29.60 89.5 CL 3200 8.58 ND ND
4 BH-123 725+76.14 85.5~86.5 CL 4235 7.50 47 10
4 BH-125 730+84.27 101~102 CL 1416 7.60 315 15
5 BH-116 658+50.65 101~102 CL 1635 8.20 104 12
5 BH-179 658+65.04 40 CH 1500 7.95 140 ND
5 BH-179 658+65.04 100 CL 11000 7.63 86 ND
5 BH-158 674+45.41 94 SW 1700 7.52 170 ND
5 BH-157 686+32.86 80.5 GP - 7.84 17 ND
6 BH-164 608+14.35 96.5 CL 1200 7.77 40 70
6 BH-114 628+72.89 100.4~101.3 CL 1996 8.20 59 7
7 BH-165 570+21.37 35.5 CL 350 8.18 680 170
7 BH-108 582+99.41 90.5~91.5 CH 1337 7.90 245 9
7 BH-159 583+44.07 85.5 CL 1100 7.98 36 120
According to the Caltrans Corrosion Guidelines (Caltrans, 2018), soils are considered corrosive if the pH is 5.5 or less, or
chloride content is 500 parts per million (ppm) or greater, or sulfate content is 1,500 ppm or greater.

TABLE 11. SUMMARY OF WATER CORROSION TESTS
Total
Dissolved
Segment Station Alkalinity Solids Langlier Ryznar
# Boring No. No./Offset (mg/L) pH CaCO3 (mg/L) Index SI Index SI
608+32.40/73
6 390 7.71 270 780 0.807 6.226
MW-2E RT
N/A MW-6L N/A 430 7.22 320 740 1.161 5.778
4 MW-5A near DTSJ Sta. 370 7.61 300 620 0.971 5.858
4 ST-8 near DTSJ Sta. 87 9.68 70 220 0.020 8.000
near Diridon
3 190 7.32 130 360 0.142 7.276
ST-10 Sta.
near Diridon
3 200 7.47 140 380 0.562 7.026
MW-6H Sta.
825+38.55/2
1 330 7.19 310 660 0.556 6.518
ST-13 LT
826+84.10/47
1 270 7.37 210 490 0.211 7.088
MW-8A RT
Notes:
1. Langlier Saturation Index – Predicts the scaling of water based on the calcium carbonate equilibrium values. If the
pH of water is below the calculated pH, the Langlier Index is negative, indicating that the water will dissolve
calcium carbonate and that it will be corrosive, particularly if dissolved oxygen is present. If the actual pH of water
is higher than the calculated pH, the Langlier Index is positive, indicating that scaling will likely occur.
2. Ryznar Stability Index – Predicts the tendency for scaling and corrosion. Widely used to predict the reaction of
metal in saturated subsurface conditions. Water is corrosive if the index is higher than 7, and incrusting if it is lower
than 7.

7 Hazardous Material
Sampling for hazardous material was performed in 30 borings from depths of tunneling. The detected
limits of different parameters were compared with disposal criteria from the six (6) nearby landfills:
 Dumbarton Quarry Landfill (Class III)

 Tri-Cities Landfill (Class III)
 Kirby Canyon or Altamont Landfills (Class II or III)
 Ox Mountain Landfill (Class III)
 Newby Landfill (Class II)
Based on these investigations the soil waste to be generated during tunnel construction can be disposed
in most of the considered nearby landfills. Per the above reference, only Dumbarton disposal criteria
for total chromium (>50 mg/kg) was exceeded in just over half of the borings drilled within the
proposed tunnel alignment. These samples were located throughout the alignment, not concentrated in
one area. In general observed chromium levels were in agreement with background levels in north
Santa Clara County (avg. 51.28 mg/kg, max. 170 mg/kg).
A few other samples exceeded the criteria for arsenic and Nickel. Regarding the sole arsenic
exceedance in Boring BH-159 (Sta. 583+44.07/201 LT, Segment 1) exceeded the disposal criteria for
Dumbarton and Tri-Cities, but it is not likely to characterize the entire alignment, because arsenic did
not exceed the criteria in the other borings during current investigation. Similarly the single nickel
exceedance in Boring BH-114 (Sta. 628+57.52/5 RT) is higher than disposal criteria at Kirby Canyon /
Altamont Class III landfills, but less than Class II landfills at these facilities.
Other contaminants found within a quarter mile of the alignment include gasoline, diesel, benzene,
MTBE, BTEX, and various solvents. These were found at shallow depth for the most part, and none of
these contaminants have been detected at tunnel depth, based on the available test data. However some
of these are considered as Dense, Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids (DNAPLs), which can pass downward
through groundwater to tunnel depth.
8 Gassy Material Observations
A few observations of gassy material (methane, hydrogen sulfide, bubbling etc.) have been mentioned
in the GDR. These observations were in Segments 5 and 6 and summarized in the attached
spreadsheet. According to the GBR in some borings methane and low oxygen levels were detected. In
addition hydrogen sulfide was indicated at depth of 120 ft. The GBR suggests the risk of encountering
hazardous levels of methane and hydrogen sulfide in ventilated excavations is relatively low, however
hazardous concentrations will be encountered in excavations without ventilation. Overall the project
alignment has been classified as “Potentially Gassy” by Cal/OSHA.

9 References
1. Geotechnical Interpretive Report Rev. B (5/21/21)
2. Draft Geotechnical Baseline Report, CP2 Tunnel and Track (7/28/21)
3. Final GDR Vol I Rev 1 (Mar-21)
4. VTA BSV II Geotechnical Baseline Report (Dec-08)
5. Advance Soil Chemical Profile for BSV2 Tunnel Alignment Report (4/23/2019)
6. Addendum to Advance Soil Chemical Profile for BSV2 Tunnel Alignment Report (7/30/2020)
IO
AT
M
APU
N IT
S
M
R
FO
S
antaC
laraV
alle
y
IN
Q
hbm-B
ayM
ud(H
O L
O C
ENE
)
AL
TI
Q
hb-B
asind
epo
sits(H
O L
O C
ENE
)
EN
D
FI
Q
hfp-F
loo
dpla
ind
epo
sits(H
O L
O C
ENE
)
N
O
-C
Q
hl-Le
veed
epo
sits(H
O L
O C
ENE
)
T
EC
Q
ht-S
tre
amte
rra
ced
epo
sits(H
O L
O C
ENE
)
N
N
A
llu
via
lfa
nde
p o
sits(H
OLOC
ENE
)
O
C
Q
hf1-Y
oun
gerA
llu
via
lfa
nde
p o
sits
Y
E
Q
hf2-O
lde
rAllu
via
lfa
nde
p o
sits LL
VA
Y
Q
pf-A
llu
via
lfa
nde
p o
sits(U
PPE
RPLE
IST
O C
ENE
)
BA
C
O Y
O T
EBL
O C
K
T
b r-B
rio
nesF
o rm
atio
n(U
PPE
RMIO
CENE
)
T
cc-C
lare
m o
ntF
o rm
atio
n
(U
PPE
RTOMID
DLEM
IOC
ENE
)
B
erry
essaF
o rm
atio
n(C
RET
A C
EOU
S)
K
bc-C
ong
lome
rate
C
oastR
ang
eOp
hio
lite(JU
RAS
SIC
)
W en two rth ,C.M .,B lakeJr,M .C .,M cLau g hlin,R.J.,
Jb
k-B
asa
lt, k
e ra
top
hyre
,andq
uartzk
e ra
top
hyre &G raym er,R .W .(1 9 9 9).Preliminaryg eo log icmap
ofth eS a nJo se3 0x6 0
-m inuteq uadrang le,
Jsp-S
erp
entin
ize
dha
rzb
urg
itea
n dd
unite California ;ad ig
ita ld atabas
Ue
SD(N
A F
So.,9
A 8
Ge-
o7
E9
y
e5,)
M.axar
USG eo
lo g ica
lS u rv e
y .
G
eolo
gicM
apo
fPro
jec
tSite
B
A R
TS iliconVa
lle yPhaseIIExten sionP roje ct
1 0
.5 0 1 D
ec2
020 GeotechnicalD a
taR e
p o rt
B
SVIIA
lig
nme
n t SantaC la
raV
a lleyT
ransportationA utho rity
1in=1m
ile SanJo se,Californ ia
Fig
ure
Figure 14
Segment 7
Segment 1 Segment 6
Segment 2
Segment 5
Segment 3 Segment 4
VTA BART Silicon Valley Phase II Extension Plan View of Soil Profile Segments
Project No. P19-085 Date: August 2021 Figure 2
Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Segment 4 Segment 5 Segment 6 Segment 7
Maximum Measured Groundwater for Tunnel Depth

Minimum Measured Groundwater for Tunnel Depth
Note: The maximum values (orange line) represents the best-

estimated groundwater level for construction phase. For other
conditions (long-term operation or flood) see Table 8.
FIGURE 3. SOIL PROFILE AND GROUNDWATER LEVELS FOR TUNNEL DEPTH

Appendix A
Idealized Soil Profiles

17800 Newhope Street, Suite B, Fountain Valley, CA 92708
phone: (714)751-3826, Fax (714)751-3928
Project: BART Silicon Valley Phase II Extension Project No. TBD

By AZ Date 9/20/2021 Check by TK Date 9/20/2021 Sheet
Idealized Soil Profile for Segment 1 (Sta. 845+40 to Sta. 820+00)
Hydraulic
Depth soil description g Conductivity f' c' Su K0 OCR n Gmax Es (0.1%e) Es (0.1%e) Es (1%e) Es (1%e) Approx. EL.
(ft) (pcf) kh (degree) (psi) (psi) undrained/ (ksi) drained undrained drained undrained (ft)
cm/sec drained (ksi) (ksi) (ksi) (ksi)
+.0 +68.0
1.0E-6 to 4 (top) to 5 top 4.3 top 8.0 bot top 5.8 bot top 7.2 bot top 1.3 bot top 1.6 bot
Clay with Silt 120 25 0.70 0.95 0.49 / 0.2
1.0E-7 (bot) bot 3.0 9.3 6.7 8.4 1.5 1.9
+20.0 +48.0
Sand with 1.0E-1 to Min Cover top 3.0 top 10.6 bot top 8.8 bot top 1.6 bot
Gravel/Clay
125
1.0E-4
35 - - 0.65
10' bot 2.3
- / 0.1
17.6 14.7
-
2.7
-
+40.0 +28.0
Clay with 125 (top) to 1.0E-6 to 0.5 (top) to 6.75 (top) to top 2.3 top 10.8 bot top 7.8 bot top 9.7 bot top 1.8 bot top 2.2 bot
31 0.7 0.49 / 0.2
Sand/Gravel 130 (bot) 1.0E-7 0.3 (bot) 11 (bot) bot 2.0 16.7 12.0 14.9 2.7 3.4
Max
+80.0 Cover 52' -12.0
Sand with 1.0E-1 to top 2.0 top 29.1 bot top 24.3 bot top 4.5 bot
130 38 - - 0.5 - / 0.1 - -
Clay 1.0E-4 bot 2.0 36.8 30.7 5.7
+110.0 -42.0
Clay with 1.0E-6 to 15 (top) to top 2.0 top 19.8 bot top 14.3 bot top 17.7 bot top 3.3 bot top 4.1 bot
130 25 0.70 0.7 0.49 / 0.2
Sand/Silt 1.0E-7 28 (bot) bot 2.0 30.4 21.9 27.2 5.0 6.2
+210.0 -142.0
Gravel with 1.0E+1 to top 2.0 top 65.3 bot top 54.5 bot top 10.1 bot
130 41 - - 0.5 - / 0.1 - -
Sand 1.0E-2 bot 2.0 71.5 59.7 11.1
+260.0 -192.0
Note: Assume vertical hydraulic conductivity one order of magnitude lower than horizontal hydraulic conductivity
Segment 1 Water Pressure Recommendations from GIR
Note: Water pressure exceeding the Reference line indicates artesian condition.
phone: (714)751-3826, Fax (714)751-3928

Idealized Soil Profile for Segment 2 (820+00 to Sta.782+00)
Hydraulic
cm/sec drained
+.0 +73.0
Clay with 120 (top) to 1.0E-6 to 4 (top) to 5.4 top 4.3 bot top 8.0 bot top 5.8 bot top 7.2 bot top 1.3 bot top 1.6 bot
25 0.70 0.9375 0.49 / 0.2
Sand 125 (bot) 1.0E-7 (bot) 2.7 9.8 7.1 8.8 1.6 2.0
+25.0 +48.0
Sand with 1.0E-1 to top 2.7 bot top 12.5 bot top 10.4 bot top 1.9 bot
125 35 - - 0.625 - / 0.1 - -
Clay 1.0E-4 2.2 19.1 16.0 3.0
+45.0 +28.0
Clay with 125 (top) to 1.0E-6 to 0.5 (top) to 7.25 (top) to top 2.2 bot top 11.5 bot top 8.3 bot top 10.3 bot top 1.9 bot top 2.4 bot
31 0.7 0.49 / 0.2
Sand/Gravel 130 (bot) 1.0E-7 0.3 (bot) 12 (bot) Min Cover 2.0 18.0 12.9 16.1 3.0 3.7
52'
+85.0 -12.0
130 38 - - 0.5 - / 0.1 - -
Clay 1.0E-4 Max 2.0 35.5 29.7 5.5
+105.0 -32.0
Cover 81'
Clay with 1.0E-6 to 14.5 (top) to top 2.0 bot top 19.3 bot top 13.9 bot top 17.3 bot top 3.2 bot top 4.0 bot
130 25 0.70 0.7 0.49 / 0.2
Sand/Gravel 1.0E-7 24.75 (bot) 2.0 27.9 20.1 25.0 4.6 5.7
+185.0 -112.0
Gravel with 1.0E+1 to top 2.0 bot top 61.9 bot top 51.7 bot top 9.6 bot
130 41 - - 0.5 - / 0.1 - -
Sand 1.0E-2 2.0 66.6 55.6 10.3
+220.0 -147.0
Note: Water pressure exceeding the Reference line indicates artesian condition.
phone: (714)751-3826, Fax (714)751-3928

Hydraulic
cm/sec drained
+.0 +85.0
Clay with 120 (top) to 1.0E-6 to 4 (top) to top 4.3 bot top 6.8 bot top 4.9 bot top 6.1 bot top 1.1 bot top 1.4 bot
31 0.50 0.90 0.49 / 0.2
Sand 125 (bot) 1.0E-7 6.75 (bot) 2.3 10.8 7.8 9.7 1.8 2.2
+40.0 +45.0
125 35 - - 0.54 - / 0.1 - -
Clay/Gravel 1.0E-4 2.0 25.0 20.9 3.9
+65.0 Min Cover +20.0
45'
130 31 0.30 0.70 0.49 / 0.2
Silt/Sand 1.0E-7 12.5 (bot) 2.0 18.6 13.4 16.7 3.1 3.8
+90.0 -5.0
Max
Sand with
130
1.0E-1 to
38 - - 0.50 Cover 81' top 2.0 bot
- / 0.1
top 31.8 bot top 26.5 bot
-
top 4.9 bot
-
Gravel 1.0E-4 2.0 39.2 32.7 6.1
+120.0 -35.0
130 31 0.30 0.70 0.49 / 0.2
Sand 1.0E-7 20 (bot) 2.0 28.2 20.3 25.3 4.7 5.8
+150.0 -65.0
130 41 - - 0.50 - / 0.1 - -
Clay/Gravel 1.0E-4 2.0 50.5 42.2 7.8
+170.0 -85.0
Clay with 1.0E-6 to 23 (top) to top 2.0 bot top 32.0 bot top 23.0 bot top 28.6 bot top 5.3 bot top 6.6 bot
130 31 0.30 0.70 0.49 / 0.2
Sand/Gravel 1.0E-7 28 (bot) 2.0 38.0 27.4 34.0 6.3 7.8
+210.0 -125.0
Notes:
1. Water pressure exceeding the Reference line indicates artesian condition.

2. The GIR recommendations indicate high artesian pressures equivalent to groundwater
53.5 ft above ground at Diridon station at 276 ft depth.
phone: (714)751-3826, Fax (714)751-3928

Hydraulic
cm/sec drained
+.0 +85.0
Clay with 1.0E-6 to 4 (top) to top 4.3 bot top 6.8 bot top 4.9 bot top 6.1 bot top 1.1 bot top 1.4 bot
125 31 0.50 0.88 0.49 / 0.2
Sand 1.0E-7 7.75 (bot) 2.1 12.2 8.8 10.9 2.0 2.5
+50.0 +35.0
+60.0 125 37 - - 0.53 - / 0.1 - - +25.0
Silt/Gravel 1.0E-4 2.0 23.6 19.7 3.7
Clay with
130
1.0E-6 to
31 0.30
9 (top) to
0.70 Min Cover top 2.0 bot
0.49 / 0.2
top 13.9 bot top 10.0 bot top 12.5 bot top 2.3 bot top 2.9 bot
Sand/Gravel 1.0E-7 11.5 (bot) 2.0 17.3 12.5 15.5 2.9 3.6
+80.0 52' +5.0
Sand with 1.0E-1 to Max top 2.0 bot top 29.1 bot top 24.3 bot top 4.5 bot
130 38 - - 0.50 - / 0.1 - -
Gravel 1.0E-4 Cover 71' 2.0 35.5 29.7 5.5
+105.0 -20.0
130 31 0.30 0.70 0.49 / 0.2
Sand 1.0E-7 21 (bot) 2.0 29.5 21.2 26.4 4.9 6.0
+155.0 -70.0
130 38 - - 0.50 - / 0.1 - -
Silt/Clay 1.0E-4 2.0 51.6 43.1 8.0
+175.0 -90.0
130 25 0.70 0.70 0.49 / 0.2
Sand/Gravel 1.0E-7 30 (bot) 2.0 31.8 22.9 28.5 5.3 6.5
+225.0 -140.0
Notes:

53.5 ft above ground at Diridon station at 276 ft depth.
phone: (714)751-3826, Fax (714)751-3928

Hydraulic
cm/sec drained
+.0 +90.0
Lean Clay 120 (top) to 1.0E-6 to 4 (top) to top 4.3 bot top 6.8 bot top 4.9 bot top 6.1 bot top 1.1 bot top 1.4 bot
31 0.50 0.93 0.49 / 0.2
and Fat Clay 125 (bot) 1.0E-7 5.75 (bot) 2.5 9.4 6.8 8.4 1.5 1.9
+30.0 +60.0
Fat Clay and 1.0E-6 to 5.75 (top) to top 2.5 bot top 10.3 bot top 7.4 bot top 9.2 bot top 1.7 bot top 2.1 bot
125 25 0.70 0.79 0.49 / 0.2
Lean Clay 1.0E-7 8.25 (bot) 2.0 13.1 9.5 11.8 2.2 2.7
+55.0 +35.0
130 38 - - 0.50 - / 0.1 - -
+70.0 Gravel 1.0E-4
Min Cover 2.0 26.4 22.1 4.1 +20.0
52'
Max
Lean Clay 1.0E-6 to 10 (top) to top 2.0 bot top 15.3 bot top 11.0 bot top 13.7 bot top 2.5 bot top 3.1 bot
with Gravel
130
1.0E-7
31 0.30
14.5 (bot)
0.70 Cover 66' 2.0
0.49 / 0.2
21.3 15.3 19.0 3.5 4.4
+105.0 -15.0
130 38 - - 0.50 - / 0.1 - -
Gravel 1.0E-4 2.0 40.4 33.7 6.3
+125.0 -35.0
1.0E-6 to 17 (top) to top 2.0 bot top 24.5 bot top 17.6 bot top 21.9 bot top 4.0 bot top 5.0 bot
Lean Clay 130 31 0.30 0.70 0.49 / 0.2
1.0E-7 21.5 (bot) 2.0 30.1 21.7 27.0 5.0 6.2
+160.0 -70.0
130 41 - - 0.50 - / 0.1 - -
Gravel 1.0E-4 2.0 57.9 48.3 9.0
+205.0 -115.0
Notes:

2. At 13thSt. MTF, due to a lack of groundwater data below 92 feet bgs, the water
pressures at 200 feet were extrapolated (could be higher).
phone: (714)751-3826, Fax (714)751-3928

Hydraulic
cm/sec drained
+.0 +90.0
Fat Clay with 1.0E-6 to 4 (top) to top 4.3 bot top 8.0 bot top 5.8 bot top 7.2 bot top 1.3 bot top 1.6 bot
125 25 0.70 0.90 0.49 / 0.2
Sand 1.0E-7 6.75 (bot) 2.3 11.5 8.3 10.3 1.9 2.3
+40.0 +50.0
Fat Clay and 1.0E-6 to 6.75 (top) to top 2.3 bot top 11.5 bot top 8.3 bot top 10.3 bot top 1.9 bot top 2.3 bot
125 25 0.70 0.75 0.49 / 0.2
Lean Clay 1.0E-7 9 (bot) 2.0 14.0 10.0 12.5 2.3 2.9
+60.0 +30.0
Min Cover
Sand with 1.0E-1 to
52' top 2.0 bot top 23.6 bot top 19.7 bot top 3.7 bot
130 38 - - 0.50 - / 0.1 - -
Gravel 1.0E-4 2.0 34.3 28.6 5.3
+100.0
Max -10.0
Cover 77'
130 31 0.30 0.70 0.49 / 0.2
and Fat Clay 1.0E-7 16.5 (bot) 2.0 23.8 17.2 21.3 3.9 4.9
+120.0 -30.0
130 38 - - 0.50 - / 0.1 - -
Gravel 1.0E-4 2.0 46.1 38.5 7.1
+150.0 -60.0
130 31 0.30 0.70 0.49 / 0.2
and Fat Clay 1.0E-7 33 (bot) 2.0 44.0 31.7 39.4 7.3 9.0
+250.0 -160.0
Notes:

2. At 13thSt. MTF, due to a lack of groundwater data below 92 feet bgs, the water
pressures at 200 feet were extrapolated (could be higher).
phone: (714)751-3826, Fax (714)751-3928

Hydraulic
cm/sec drained
+.0 +89.0
Fat Clay and 120 (top) to 1.0E-6 to 4 (top) to top 4.3 bot top 8.0 bot top 5.8 bot top 7.2 bot top 1.3 bot top 1.6 bot
25 0.70 0.90 0.49 / 0.2
Lean Clay 125 (bot) 1.0E-7 6.75 (bot) 2.3 11.5 8.3 10.3 1.9 2.3
Min Cover
10'
+40.0 +49.0
Max
Lean Clay 130
1.0E-6 to
31 0.30
6.75 (top) to
0.70 Cover 52' top 2.3 bot
0.49 / 0.2
top 10.8 bot top 7.8 bot top 9.7 bot top 1.8 bot top 2.2 bot
1.0E-7 15 (bot) 2.0 21.9 15.8 19.6 3.6 4.5
+110.0 -21.0
1.0E-1 to top 2.0 bot top 36.8 bot top 30.7 bot top 5.7 bot
Sand 130 38 - - 0.50 - / 0.1 - -
1.0E-4 2.0 47.2 39.4 7.3
+155.0 -66.0
1.0E-6 to 21 (top) to top 2.0 bot top 29.5 bot top 21.2 bot top 26.4 bot top 4.9 bot top 6.0 bot
Lean Clay 130 31 0.30 0.70 0.49 / 0.2
1.0E-7 27 (bot) 2.0 36.8 26.5 33.0 6.1 7.6
+200.0 -111.0
Notes:

24.1 ft above ground at 28th St./Little Portugal station at 247 ft depth.
Appendix B
Gradation Curves

Segment 7
Segment 1 Segment 6
Segment 2
Segment 5
Segment 3 Segment 4
VTA BART Silicon Valley Phase II Extension Plan View of Soil Profile Segments
Project No. P19-085 Date: August 2021 Figure 1
Segment 1
Sta. 845+40 to Sta. 820+00
All depths are plotted

BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY
coarse fine coarse medium fine
U.S. STANDARD U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER

SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES
12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)
VTA GRAIN SIZE OVERLAY 1. MMW 2019 - 2020 DATABASE.GPJ EMI LIBRARY CALTRANS 2010.GLB 8/24/21
MMW 2019-2020 Borings
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVES
Earth Mechanics, Inc. DIST. COUNTY ROUTE POSTMILE EA
Geotechnical and Earthquake Engineering PROJECT OR BRIDGE NAME
BRIDGE NUMBER PREPARED BY DATE SHEET

1 of 1
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)
VTA GRAIN SIZE OVERLAY 2. HNTB.WSP 2018 - 2019 DATABASE.GPJ EMI LIBRARY CALTRANS 2010.GLB 8/24/21
HNTB-WSP 2018 Borings

1 of 1
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)
VTA GRAIN SIZE OVERLAY SVRT_PHASE 2_060208.GPJ EMI LIBRARY CALTRANS 2010.GLB 8/24/21
HMM-Bechtel 2008 Borings
Earth Mechanics, Inc. DIST. COUNTY

Santa Clara
ROUTE POSTMILE EA

1 of 1
Segment 2
Sta. 820+00 to Sta.782+00
Tunnel cover: 52 to 81 ft
Curves plotted from 47 to 144 ft
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)

1 of 1
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)

1 of 1
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)

Santa Clara
ROUTE POSTMILE EA

1 of 1
Segment 3
Sta. 782+00 to Sta. 735+00
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)

1 of 1
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)

1 of 1
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)

Santa Clara
ROUTE POSTMILE EA

1 of 1
Segment 4
Sta. 735+00 to Sta. 698+00
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)

1 of 1
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)

1 of 1
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)

Santa Clara
ROUTE POSTMILE EA

1 of 1
Segment 5
Sta. 698+00 to Sta. 657+00
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)

1 of 1
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)

1 of 1
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)

Santa Clara
ROUTE POSTMILE EA

1 of 1
Segment 6
Sta. 657+00 to Sta. 599+00
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)

1 of 1
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)

1 of 1
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)

Santa Clara
ROUTE POSTMILE EA

1 of 1
Segment 7
Sta. 599+00 to Sta. 560+75
All depths are plotted

BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)

1 of 1
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)

1 of 1
BOULDERS
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY

12 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 3/8 4 8 10 16 30 50 100 200
100 0
90 10
80 20
70 30
PERCENT RETAINED
PERCENT PASSING
60 40
50 50
40 60
30 70
20 80
10 90
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)

Santa Clara
ROUTE POSTMILE EA

1 of 1
Appendix C
Summary of Geotechnical Data for Tunnel Segments

Project : BART Silicon Valley Phase II Extension (BSVII)
Task: Geotechnical Recommendations for Tunnel portion (including portals)
Task 1: Segmentation for tunnel portion

References: 1. Geotechnical Interpretive Report Rev. B (5/21/21)
2. Final GDR Vol I Rev 1 (Mar-21) 2. Draft Geotechnical Baseline Report, CP2 Tunnel and Track (7/28/21)
20210729rev2
Segment # Starting Sta. No. Ending Sta. No. Length (ft) Starting Location Ending Location
1 845+40 820+00 2540 West End of West Portal 1200' East of West Portal
2 820+00 782+00 3800 1200' East of West Portal West End of Stockton Ave. MTF
3 782+00 735+00 4700 West End of Stockton Ave. MTF East End of Diridon Sta.
4 735+00 698+00 3700 East End of Diridon Sta. East End of Downtown San Jose Sta.
5 698+00 657+00 4100 East End of Downtown San Jose Sta. East End of 13th St. MTF
6 657+00 599+00 5800 East End of 13th St. MTF East end of 28th St./Little Portugal Sta.
7 599+00 560+75 3825 East end of 28th St./Little Portugal Sta. East end of East Portal
Sum (feet)= 28465

Sum (mile)= 5.4

Segment # Starting Sta. No. Ending Sta. No. Length (ft) Ending Sta. No. Length (ft)
1 845+40 820+00 2540 West End of West Portal 1200' East of West Portal
>Existing Geotechnical Probings:

No. of Existing Borings No. of Usable Borings No. of Existing CPTs No. of Usable CPTs
25 18 10 5
Average No. per Tunnel Length (#/ft)
0.0098 0.0071 0.0039 0.0020
Tunnel Length per Probing (feet)
100 140 250 510
Note: Defined as 'usable', if the probing is within 125ft from alignment center line and its tip is less than 10ft above Ext. Invert, or
at portal, if the probing is within 125ft from alignment center line and its tip is at least 1.5 times U-wall height below the U-wall invert.
>Groundwater Pressures (with artesian condition/500-yr flood considered) [adopting the GW recommendations at West Portal, Ref.1]
Average Groundwater Maximum Groundwater Maximum Groundwater Pressure
Depth (ft, bgs1)
Pressure (Psi) Pressure(2) (psi) During Flood Conditions(3) (psi)
1 0.0 0.0 0.0
5 0.0 0.0 1.3
11 0.0 2.5 3.3
20 3.6 6.3 6.3
25 5.6 8.3 8.3
95 36.1 38.5 38.5
145 62.5 66.7 66.7
Notes: 1. bgs: below ground surface.
2. Recent water level measurements are closer to the maximum groundwater pressure.
3. The 500-year level flood event is considered at 89.2 feet elevation (NAVD88) based on "Surface Water Hydrology and Hydraulics for Facility Design" (MMW 2021).
4. It is recommended to use average of the average and maximum groundwater pressures for tunnel lining design, maximum groundwater pressure for retaining wall analyses, and
maximum groundwater pressure during flood conditions for buoyancy calculations of the tunnel. Maximum groundwater pressure during flood conditions is recommended in the event
of surface flood levels on retaining walls and underground structures.
>Range of Tunnel Depths: 10 to 52' from GL to Tunnel Crown (Tunnel Internal Diameter~43 ft)
>Idealized Soil Profiles:
Average SPT Blowcount, N Unit Weight, Effective Friction Effective Undrained Shear
Top Depth (ft, bgs) Bottom Depth (ft, bgs) Predominant Soil Type
(blows/foot) g (pcf) Angle, f' () Cohesion, c' (psi) Strength, Su (psi)
0 20 Clay with Silt 7 120 25 0.7 4 (top) to 5 (bot)

20 40 Sand with Gravel/Clay 18 125 35 - -
40 80 Clay with Sand/Gravel 25 125 (top) to 130 (bot) 31 0.5 (top) to 0.3 (bot) 6.75 (top) to 11 (bot)
80 110 Sand with Clay 41 130 38 - -
110 210 Clay with Sand/Silt 39 130 25 0.7 15 (top) to 28 (bot)
210 260 Gravel with Sand > 100 130 41 - -
Note: Modified California sampler blowcounts were reduced by a factor of 0.5 to estimate N-Value.
>Corrosion Data and Comtamination:

According to the Caltrans Corrosion Guidelines (Caltrans, 2018), soils are considered corrosive if the pH is 5.5 or less, or chloride content is 500 parts per million (ppm) or greater, or sulfate content is 1,500 ppm or greater.
Therefore, the on-site soils are classified as corrosive based on only one sample, showing low resistivity and pH at a depth of 15'.
Minimum Soluble Sulfate Soluble Chloride
Boring No. Station No. Sample Depth (feet) Soil Type pH
Resistivity (ohm-cm) Content (ppm) Content (ppm)
BH-176 834+68.68 15 CH 490 4.69 910 81
Contamination: 1. Per Ref.3, contaminated soil and groundwater are present due to past land uses and undocumented releases.
2. Types of contaminants found within a quarter mile of the alignment include gasoline, diesel, benzene, MTBE, BTEX, and various solvents.
3. They have been found at shallow depth for the most part, and none of these contaminants have been detected at tunnel depth, based on limited test data.
4. Some of them are considered as Dense, Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids (DNAPLs), which can pass downward through groundwater to tunnel depth.
>Existing Downhole PS Logging Data

Boring No. Station No. GL El. (feet) Top Logged Depth (feet) Bottom Logged Depth (feet)
BH-176 834+68.68 65.35 15 243
BH-178 845+22.27 62.43 10 204
>Proposed Additional Borings

Boring No. Station No./Offset Boring Depth ((feet) PS Logging Corrosion Tests GW Measurement
R-22-012 829+00/12 LT 115 N Y (2) Yes
R-22-013 839+00/0 RT 110 N Y (2) Yes
R-22-014 844+00/0 RT 110 N Y (2) Yes
Note: Proposed Boring Depth = 110 feet or depth from GL to elevation 50 feet below tunnel/U-wall invert, whatever is larger.
>Gravel Layers Encountered from Existing Borings Tunner Ext. Diameter (ft)= 48 Tunner Int. Diameter (ft)= 43 From GL From GL From GL
Boring No. Station No./Offset Thickness in Tunnel (feet) % w.r.t Ext. Diameter Ocurrence outside1 (feet) Remark Boring Tip Depth (ft) Ext. Crown Depth (ft) Ext. Invert Depth (ft) GL El (ft) Boring Tip (ft) E. Crown El (ft)
I880_1955_B-7 820+00.23/55 LT Boring tip 4' Above E. Invert 97 53 101 78 -19 25
LSO-6 820+30.30/79 LT 11 23 h=17', 10' Above Boring tip 6' Above E. Invert 86 44 92 69 -17 25
I880_1955_B-1 820+78.84/40 LT Boring tip 33' Above E. Invert 65 50 98 77 12 27
I880_1955_B-9 821+03.55/84 LT Boring tip 2' Above E. Invert 96 50 98 78 -18 28
LSO-9 821+93.63/66 LT 23 48 none 96 44 92 76 -20 32
I880_1955_B-5 821+94.00/92 LT 0 0 h=17', 6' Above Boring tip 16' Above E. Invert 71 39 87 71 0 32
LSO-4 822+65.26/67 LT 5 10 h=12',0'Above/h=28',1'Below 116 36 84 70 -46 34
LSO-5 823+79.86/55 LT 9 19 h=7', 0' Above Boring tip 8' Above E. Invert 70 30 78 68 -2 38
BH-141 824+63.46/73 LT 3 6 none 118 28 76 70 -48 42
BH-078 825+38.55/2 LT 26 54 h=5', 3' Below 82 25 73 69 -13 44
MW-8B 825+70.15/22 RT 18 38 h=3', 9' Below 108 25 73 70 -38 45
BH-096 825+95.37/17 RT 15 31 h=2', 0' Below 136 23 71 69 -67 46
PZ-8A 826+10.81/17 RT 12 25 none 134 23 71 69 -65 46
MW-8A 826+84.10/47 RT 13 27 none 68 20 68 68 0 48
BH-097 827+51.28/17 RT 10 21 h=5', 3' Below 92 18 66 68 -24 50
2-B2 827+57.21/6 LT Boring tip 30' Above E. Invert 36 18 66 68 32 50
Y&S_BH002 827+57.23/6 LT Boring tip 37' Above E. Invert 30 19 67 69 39 50
BG-1 828+05.42/97 RT 13 27 h=17', 0' Below 111 17 65 68 -43 51
Y&S_BH003 829+00.70/31 RT Boring tip 33' Above E. Invert 30 15 63 67 37 52
2-B3 829+00.73/31 RT 103 16 64 68 -35 52
BH-098 830+40.34/46 RT 3 6 h=3', 2' Below 63 12 60 67 4 55
Tunnel West Portal ~832+00
BH-099 832+83.09/22 LT Outside West Portal 82 67 -15
BH-176 834+68.68/41 RT Outside West Portal 267 67 -200
BH-178 845+22.27/106 RT Outside West Portal 217 65 -152
Note: 1. Only the gravel layer located less than 10' from tunnel outer permeter was recorded; Above = above top of tunnel lining [Ext. Crown]/Below = below bottom of tunnel lining [Ext. Invert].

West End of Stockton Ave.
2 820+00 782+00 3800 1200' East of West Portal MTF

19 6 14 8
0.0050 0.0016 0.0037 0.0021
200 630 270 480
>Groundwater Pressures (with artesian condition/500-yr flood considered) [adopting the GW recommendations at West Portal, Ref.1]
Depth (ft, bgs1)
1 0.0 0.0 0.0
5 0.0 0.0 1.3
11 0.0 2.5 3.3
20 3.6 6.3 6.3
25 5.6 8.3 8.3
95 36.1 38.5 38.5
145 62.5 66.7 66.7
0 25 Clay with Sand 9 120 (top) to 125 (bot) 25 0.7 4 (top) to 5.4 (bot)
25 45 Sand with Clay 29 125 35 - -
45 85 Clay with Sand/Gravel 28 125 (top) to 130 (bot) 31 0.5 (top) to 0.3 (bot) 7.25 (top) to 12 (bot)
85 105 Sand with Clay 30 130 38 - -
105 185 Clay with Sand/Gravel 37 130 25 0.7 14.5 (top) to 24.75 (bot)
185 220 Gravel with Sand 93 130 41 - -

Therefore, the on-site soils are classified as non-corrosive based on three samples.
BH-137 783+64.83 115.5~116.5 CH 2293 7.70 40 13
BH-139 802+53.54 110.5~111.0 CH 2338 8.10 113 7
BH-173 817+86.97 85 CL 2000 8.04 ND ND


Boring No. Station No./Offset Boring Depth (feet) PS Logging Corrosion Tests GW Measurement
R-22-010 793+10/24 RT 170 Y Y (2) Yes
R-22-011 809+00/40 RT 160 Y Y (2) Yes
BH-137 783+64.83/4 LT 156 78 126 82 -74 4
BH-081 783+66.52/1 RT 150 77 125 81 -69 4
BH-043 783+75.68/0 LT Boring tip 76' Above E. Invert 49 77 125 81 32 4
BH-080 788+42.79/92 LT Boring tip 23' Above E. Invert 100 75 123 80 -20 5
BH-102 790+53.52/0 RT 5 10 h=7', 10' Above Boring tip 43' Above E. Invert 80 75 123 80 0 5
BH-138 792+18.53/0 RT 0 0 h=11', 7' Above 152 74 122 80 -72 6
BH-103 792+20.82/0 RT 4 0 none Boring tip 31' Above E. Invert 91 74 122 80 -11 6
BH-106 794+24.93/11 LT 0 0 h=2', 5' Above Boring tip 29' Above E. Invert 90 71 119 78 -12 7
BH-171 796+91.58/17 LT 2 4 none 227 69 117 77 -150 8
BH-139 802+53.54/9 RT 147 67 115 77 -70 10
BH-046 803+91.40/11 RT Boring tip 51' Above E. Invert 61 64 112 75 14 11
BH-140 811+36.28/108 RT 0 0 h=12', 6' Above 141 63 111 74 -67 11
BH-048 812+32.00/36 RT Boring tip 23' Above E. Invert 89 64 112 75 -14 11
BH-173 817+86.97/327 RT [far] 202 51 99 68 -134 17
I880_1955_B-6 819+45.23/96 LT 9 19 none Boring tip 13' Above E. Invert 83 48 96 71 -12 23

West End of Stockton Ave.
3 782+00 735+00 4700 MTF East End of Diridon Sta.

28 11 10 4
0.0060 0.0023 0.0021 0.0009
170 430 470 1180
>Groundwater Pressures (with artesian condition/500-yr flood considered) [adopting the GW recommendations at Stockton Ave. MTF, Ref.1]
Depth (ft, bgs1)
0 0.0 0.0 0.2
10 0.0 0.0 2.3
15 0.0 2.2 3.6
20 2.0 4.4 4.4
59 17.4 21.5 21.5
128 50.7 53.5 53.5
275 111.9 121.5 121.5
0 40 Clay with Sand 12 120 (top) to 125 (bot) 31 0.5 4 (top) to 6.75 (bot)
40 65 Sand with Clay/Gravel 22 125 35 - -
65 90 Clay with Silt/Sand 27 130 31 0.3 6.5 (top) to 12.5 (bot)
90 120 Sand with Gravel 46 130 38 - -
120 150 Clay with Sand 36 130 31 0.3 16.5 (top) to 20 (bot)
150 170 Sand with Clay/Gravel 53 130 41 - -
170 210 Clay with Sand/Gravel 57 130 TBD 0.3 23 (top) to 28 (bot)
210 270 Sand with Gravel 84 130 41 - -

Therefore, the on-site soils are classified as non-corrosive based on seven samples, except the locations of Borings BH-161 and 166, showing low resistivity at depths of 20' and 113.5', respectively.
BH-161 736+53.45 20 CL 940 8.23 150 ND
BH-161 736+53.45 109 CL - 8.15 31 ND
BH-162 742+13.56 90 CL 3600 7.65 ND ND
BH-163 745+77.71 112 CL-ML 2500 8.23 ND ND
BH-167 753+13.81 71.5 CL 1200 8.15 120 ND
BH-166 759+56.98 113.5 ML 660 6.12 440 ND
BH-168 763.03.82 97 GW 3400 7.21 ND ND
BH-169 770+40.82 97 CL 2000 7.99 ND ND
BH-180 781+27.82 75 CL 1700 8.48 150 27

BH-152 735+38.81 81.78 34 260
BH-180 781.27.82 86.59 40 252

R-22-009 774+07/16 RT 175 N Y (2) Yes
BH-152 735+38.81/119 LT 4 8 h=3', 9' Below 276 53 101 87 -189 34
BH-161 736+53.45/84 LT 5 10 h=3', 10' Below 253 52 100 87 -166 35
BH-153 736+98.98/219 LT [far] 253 55 103 90 -163 35
SJA-8 738+67.47/43 RT Boring tip 15' Above E. Invert 83 50 98 86 3 36
NB-07 741+98.31/88 LT 120 45 93 83 -37 38
BH-162 742+13.56/102 LT 1 2 none 220 45 93 83 -137 38
BH-163 745+77.71/11RT 4 8 none 216 54 102 88 -128 34
BH-175 748+41.95/44 LT 3 6 none 182 59 107 89 -93 30
BH-167 753+13.81/53 RT 5 10 none 221 70 118 94 -127 24
NB-08 759+09.58/36 LT Boring tip 37' Above E. Invert 82 71 119 89 7 18
BH-166 759+56.98/11 LT 217 69 117 87 -130 18
BH-039 762+80.38/41 RT 0 0 h=12', 3' Above Boring tip 23' Above E. Invert 96 71 119 85 -11 14
LNZN_B-9 762+94.13/8 LT 0 0 h=5', 5' Above Boring tip 48' Above E. Invert 72 72 120 86 14 14
BH-168 763+03.82/67 RT 7 15 none 202 71 119 85 -117 14
LNZN_B-6 763+82.71/99 LT Boring tip 68' Above E. Invert 53 73 121 86 33 13
LNZN_B-7 764+35.25/17 RT Boring tip 69' Above E. Invert 52 73 121 85 33 12
BH-095 768+19.32/45 RT 3 6 h=8', 0' Above Boring tip 22' Above E. Invert 100 74 122 82 -18 8
LNZN_B-2 769+39.88/9 RT 0 0 h=10', 0' Above Boring tip 42' Above E. Invert 81 75 123 82 1 7
ST-12 769+79.78/80 LT Boring tip 51' Above E. Invert 70 73 121 80 10 7
BH-169 770+40.82/180 RT [far] 252 73 121 80 -172 7
BH-079 776+54.75/0.1 RT 217 78 126 82 -135 4
BH-180 781+27.82/47 LT 3 6 none 255 79 127 82 -173 3

East End of Downtown San
4 735+00 698+00 3700 East End of Diridon Sta. Jose Sta.

31 19 21 13
0.0084 0.0051 0.0057 0.0035
120 190 180 280
>Groundwater Pressures (with artesian condition/500-yr flood considered) [adopting the GW recommendations at Diridon Sta., Ref.1]
Depth (ft, bgs1)
0 0.0 0.0 0.3
13 0.0 0.0 2.3
15 0.0 1.0 2.6
20 2.0 3.4 3.4
60 18.1 22.2 22.2
134 50.7 53.5 53.5
276 128.8 142.8 142.8
0 50 Clay with Sand 13 125 31 0.5 4 (top) to 7.75 (bot)

50 60 Sand with Silt/Gravel 22 125 37 - -
60 80 Clay with Sand/Gravel 29 130 31 0.3 9 (top) to 11.5 (bot)
80 105 Sand with Gravel 36 130 38 - -
105 155 Clay with Sand 41 130 31 0.3 14.5 (top) to 21 (bot)
155 175 Sand with Silt/Caly 47 130 38 - -
175 225 Clay with Sand/Gravel 69 130 25 0.7 23.5 (top) to 30 (bot)
225 270 Sand with Gravel 54 130 41 - -

Therefore, the on-site soils are classified as non-corrosive based on three samples.
BH-160 715+29.60 89.5 CL 3200 8.58 ND ND
BH-123 725+76.14 85.5~86.5 CL 4235 7.50 47 10
BH-125 730+84.27 101~102 CL 1416 7.60 315 15

BH-151 702+80.99 87.51 39 245

R-22-007 707+15/30 RT 145 N Y (2) Yes
R-22-008 722+81/27 LT 150 Y Y (2) Yes
BH-090 698+64.42/4 RT 20 42 none 212 50 98 87 -125 37
BH-025 700+46.65/27 RT 150 48 96 86 -64 38
BH-066 701+55.43/10 LT 12 25 none 129 50 98 88 -41 38
BH-150 702+03.78/210 RT [far] 253 49 97 87 -166 38
BH-142 702+24.81/552 RT [far] 102 49 97 87 -15 38
BH-151 702+80.99/112 RT 4 none none 275 50 98 88 -187 38
BH-091 703+20.79/7 RT 24 50 h=1', 0' Below 196 51 99 89 -107 38
BH-121 704+79.35/81 RT 0 0 h=7', 10' Below 148 49 97 88 -60 39
BH-070 706+04.34/26 LT 20 42 h=3', 0' Below 148 48 96 87 -61 39
BH-071 706+67.08/2 RT 149 50 98 89 -60 39
NB-19 707+15.00/34 LT 23 48 none 102 50 98 89 -13 39
BH-072 708+44.32/2 LT 13 27 none 162 50 98 88 -74 38
BH-026 709+70.82/1 LT 157 51 99 87 -70 36
NB-05 710+80.14/27 LT 122 55 103 90 -32 35
AT-1 711+36.08/64 LT 13 27 none 102 51 99 85 -17 34
OPUS-5 711+43.51/52 RT 0 0 h=5', 5' Above Boring tip 34' Above E. Invert 62 48 96 82 20 34
OPUS-4 712+29.20/81 RT 2 4 h=3', 0' Above Boring tip 37' Above E. Invert 62 51 99 82 20 31
BH-160 715+29.60/161 LT [far] 207 59 107 83 -124 24
BH-028 719+33.71/4 RT 150 65 113 83 -67 18
CA87_B37 719+59.62/42 RT Boring tip 26' Above E. Invert 88 66 114 83 -5 17
CA87_B30 720+21.25/77 LT 0 0 h=3', 7' Above Boring tip 19' Above E. Invert 96 67 115 83 -13 16
CA87_B24 721+13.39/78 LT Boring tip 13' Above E. Invert 103 68 116 83 -20 15
CA87_B39 721+74.58/65 LT Boring tip 46' Above E. Invert 70 68 116 83 13 15
CA87_B52 721+90.38/86 LT 146 71 119 85 -61 14
BH-122 722+50.53/35 RT 20 42 none Boring tip 43' Above E. Invert 75 70 118 84 9 14
BH-123 725+76.14/6 RT 0 0 h=2', 4' Below 157 69 117 84 -73 15
BH-124 727+91.95/1 RT 156 65 113 86 -70 21
BH-125 730+84.27/7 RT 157 61 109 87 -70 26
SJA-2 732+49.14/70 RT 13 27 none 155 58 106 88 -67 30
86 -2 31

East End of Downtown San
5 698+00 657+00 4100 Jose Sta. East End of 13th St. MTF

30 21 27 19
0.0073 0.0051 0.0066 0.0046
140 200 150 220
>Groundwater Pressures (with artesian condition/500-yr flood considered) [adopting the GW recommendations at 13th St. MTF, Ref.1]
Depth (ft, bgs1)
0 0.0 0.0 0.5
4 0.0 0.0 1.9
7 0.0 1.4 3.0
20 6.3 7.6 7.6
48 17.4 20.8 20.8
102 41.7 45.1 45.1
200(4) 83.3 86.8 86.8
4. Due to a lack of groundwater data below 92 feet bgs, the water pressures at 200 feet were extrapolated.
0 30 Lean Clay and Fat Clay 6 120 (top) to 125 (bot) 31 0.5 4 (top) to 5.75 (bot)
30 55 Fat Clay and Lean Clay 14 125 25 0.7 5.75 (top) to 8.25 (bot)
55 70 Sand with Gravel 29 130 38 - -
70 105 Lean Clay with Gravel 44 130 31 0.3 10 (top) to 14.5 (bot)
105 125 Sand with Gravel 45 130 38 - -
125 160 Lean Clay 37 130 31 0.3 17 (top) to 21.5 (bot)
160 205 Sand with Gravel 55 130 41 - -
205 260 Lean Clay with Gravel 83 130 31 0.3 27.5 (top) to 34 (bot)
260

Therefore, the on-site soils are classified as non-corrosive based on five samples.
BH-116 658+50.65 101~102 CL 1635 8.20 104 12
BH-179 658+65.04 40 CH 1500 7.95 140 ND
BH-179 658+65.04 100 CL 11000 7.63 86 ND
BH-158 674+45.41 94 SW 1700 7.52 170 ND
BH-157 686+32.86 80.5 GP - 7.84 17 ND

BH-179 658+65.04 80.71 10 252

R-22-006 692+81/35 LT 145 Y Y (2) Yes
BH-116 658+50.65/62 RT 10 21 h=6', 0' Above 167 65 113 81 -86 16
BH-179 658+65.04/141 RT [far] 266 65 113 81 -185 16
PZ-3C 658+76.17/6 LT Boring tip 54' Above E. Invert 59 65 113 81 22 16
BH-018 659+07.95/6 LT 4 8 none Boring tip 11' Above E. Invert 102 65 113 81 -21 16
ST-5 659+07.95/6 LT 0 0 h=2', 6' Above Boring tip 42' Above E. Invert 71 65 113 81 10 16
TSP-9 660+88.60/87 LT Boring tip 48' Above E. Invert 65 65 113 82 17 17
TSP-8 661+47.82/1 LT Boring tip 48' Above E. Invert 64 64 112 81 17 17
BH-117 667+34.37/97 LT 162 63 111 82 -80 19
BH-158 674+45.41/95 LT 28 58 h=4', 0' Above 202 62 110 82 -120 20
NB-15 678+80.58/2 LT 10 21 none Boring tip 13' Above E. Invert 91 56 104 80 -11 24
BH-050 680+75.89/13 RT 25 52 none 151 55 103 81 -70 26
NB-16 681+97.66/68 RT 16 33 none 103 54 102 81 -22 27
URS_B-9 682+03.30/82 LT 30 63 none 101 53 101 80 -21 27
BH-052 683+13.80/13 RT 2 4 none 151 54 102 81 -70 27
BH-053 684+47.31/2 RT 149 53 101 81 -68 28
NB-04 684+98.23/31 LT 15 31 none 122 53 101 81 -41 28
MW-2 685+06.92/1 RT 2 4 none Boring tip 18' Above E. Invert 82 52 100 80 -2 28
URS_B-8 685+92.80/93 LT 23 48 none 102 52 100 81 -21 29
BH-054 686+21.26/9 RT 3 6 none 122 51 99 81 -41 30
BH-157 686+32.86/27 LT 10 21 none 202 50 98 80 -122 30
BH-055 687+40.16/8 RT 24 50 h=3', 0' Below 150 49 97 81 -69 32
BH-023 689+07.58/93 RT 10 21 none 131 48 96 81 -50 33
BH-143 689+32.43/528 RT [far] 99 49 97 82 -17 33
BH-064 690+97.65/11 LT 6 13 none 141 49 97 83 -58 34
BH-089 692+78.87/91 RT 5 10 none 203 48 96 83 -120 35
BH-024 693+57.22/12 LT 2 4 h=5', 0' Above 151 49 97 84 -67 35
BH-065 694+62.46/3 RT 0 0 h=10', 0' Above 149 49 97 85 -64 36
BH-077 697+47.18/0 LT 12 25 none 138 50 98 86 -52 36

East end of 28th St./Little
6 657+00 599+00 5800 East End of 13th St. MTF Portugal Sta.

36 27 30 24
0.0062 0.0047 0.0052 0.0041
160 210 190 240
>Groundwater Pressures (with artesian condition/500-yr flood considered) [adopting the GW recommendations at 13th St. MTF, Ref.1]
Depth (ft, bgs1)
0 0.0 0.0 0.5
4 0.0 0.0 1.9
7 0.0 1.4 3.0
20 6.3 7.6 7.6
48 17.4 20.8 20.8
102 41.7 45.1 45.1
200(4) 83.3 86.8 86.8
4. Due to a lack of groundwater data below 92 feet bgs, the water pressures at 200 feet were extrapolated.
0 40 Fat Clay with Sand 8 125 25 0.7 4 (top) to 6.75 (bot)

40 60 Fat Clay and Lean Clay 13 125 25 0.7 6.75 (top) to 9 (bot)
60 100 Sand with Gravel 40 130 38 - -
100 120 Lean Clay and Fat Clay 45 130 31 0.3 14 (top) to 16.5 (bot)
120 150 Sand with Gravel 48 130 38 - -
150 250 Lean Clay and Fat Clay 50 130 31 0.3 20 (top) to 33 (bot)
250 270 Sand with Gravel > 100 130 41 - -

Therefore, the on-site soils are classified as non-corrosive based on two samples.
BH-164 608+14.35 96.5 CL 1200 7.77 40 70
BH-114 628+72.89 100.4~101.3 CL 1996 8.20 59 7

BH-156 600+30.76 88.17 20 261
BH-154 609+69.50 89.31 20 212

R-22-004 622+00/12 LT 155 Y Y (2) Yes
R-22-005 645+16/36 RT 170 Y Y (2) Yes
BH-058 598+93.45/18 LT 152 52 100 88 -64 36
BH-156 600+30.76/235 RT [far] 276 54 102 89 -187 35
BH-155 602+54.24/37 LT 1.5 3 h=10', 4' Below 215 54 102 88 -127 34
BH-060 603+04.47/41 LT 0 0 h=10', 3' Below 153 54 102 88 -65 34
BH-061 604+67.95/20 LT 3 6 none 143 57 105 90 -53 33
BH-085 605+17.03/28 LT 0 0 h=15', 0' Below 204 57 105 90 -114 33
BH-062 605+89.35/26 LT 0 0 h=25', 3' Below 153 57 105 90 -63 33
BH-063 606+51.79/36 RT 0 0 h=8', 10' Below 154 57 105 90 -64 33
BH-164 608+14.35/108 RT 232 56 104 88 -144 32
ST-3 608+16.42/38 RT 5 10 none Boring tip 23' Above E. Invert 81 56 104 88 7 32
PZ-2C 608+16.95/83 RT 5 10 h=4', 1' Below 153 56 104 88 -65 32
MW-2E 608+32.40/73 RT 3 6 far 134 57 105 89 -45 32
BH-154 609+69.50/14 LT 11 23 h=3', 2' Below 227 59 107 90 -137 31
BH-112 612+63.84/14 RT 16 33 none 157 60 108 90 -67 30
NB-02 615+97.02/81 RT Boring tip 26' Above E. Invert 83 61 109 90 7 29
BH-113 619+68.98/97 RT 161 62 110 91 -70 29
BH-011 626+58.74/3 RT 2 4 none Boring tip 4' Above E. Invert 110 66 114 91 -19 25
BH-114 628+57.52/5 RT 170 66 114 91 -79 25
BH-012 633+73.44/4 RT 21 44 none 121 69 117 93 -28 24
BH-115 638+73.76/69 LT 0 0 h=22', 5' Below 176 73 121 96 -80 23
BH-013 639+86.13/4 RT 10 21 none 132 72 120 95 -37 23
IPP-4 641+21.16/17 RT Boring tip 101' Above E. Invert 21 74 122 94 73 20
BH-014 641+57.10/2 RT 20 42 h=3', 2' Below 128 74 122 94 -34 20
NB-03A 641+97.38/57 LT Boring tip 24' Above E. Invert 100 76 124 96 -4 20
BH-015 644+42.82/74 LT 12 25 h=9', 0' Below 131 74 122 94 -37 20
BH-087 647+38.90/10 LT 12 25 none 203 69 117 88 -115 19
BH-016 649+37.35/8 LT 28 58 h=2', 0' Above 116 67 115 86 -30 19
MW-3D 652+41.30/18 RT 2 4 none Boring tip 32' Above E. Invert 80 64 112 82 2 18
MW-3D(R 652+54.69/18 RT 3 6 h=3', 2' Above Boring tip 38' Above E. Invert 74 64 112 82 8 18

East end of 28th St./Little
7 599+00 560+75 3825 Portugal Sta. East end of East Portal

19 16 22 21
0.0050 0.0042 0.0058 0.0055
200 240 170 180
>Groundwater Pressures (with artesian condition/500-yr flood considered) [adopting the GW recommendations at 28th St./Little Portugal Sta., Ref.1]
Depth (ft, bgs1)
0 0.0 0.0 1.2
7 0.0 0.0 2.9
13 0.0 2.8 4.3
20 3.0 6.0 6.0
92 33.5 39.3 39.3
142 55.6 60.4 60.4
247 109.5 117.5 117.5
0 40 Fat Clay and Lean Clay 8 120 (top) to 125 (bot) 25 0.7 4 (top) to 6.75 (bot)
40 110 Lean Clay 20 130 31 0.3 6.75 (top) to 15 (bot)
110 155 Sand 54 130 38 - -
155 200 Lean Clay 76 130 31 0.3 21 (top) to 27 (bot)
200

Therefore, the on-site soils are classified as non-corrosive based on two samples, except the location of Boring BH-165, showing low resistivity at a depth of 35.5'
BH-165 570+21.37 35.5 CL 350 8.18 680 170
BH-108 582+99.41 90.5~91.5 CH 1337 7.90 245 9
BH-159 583+44.07 85.5 CL 1100 7.98 36 120

BH-165 570+21.37 86.01 13 152

R-22-001 570+58/20 LT 110 N Y (2) Yes ~close to BH-165 (for verification of corrosinh test data)
R-22-002 578+71/2 LT 135 Y Y (2) Yes
R-22-003 592+30/30 LT 170 N Y (2) Yes
MCY-16 558+75.60/91 RT Outside East Portal 34 94 60
BH-101 563+18.34/1 LT Outside East Portal 52 91 39
BH-056 565+01.50/18 RT Outside East Portal 43 90 47
BH-057 568+07.32/55 RT Outside East Portal 45 90 45
BH-082 568+83.82/2 LT Outside East Portal 97 90 -7
BH-165 570+21.37/21 RT Outside East Portal 180 90 -90
Tunnel East Portal ~570+40
BH-001 572+53.14/35 RT 63 14 62 87 24 73
BH-002 576+80.48/47 RT 6 13 None 76 26 74 87 11 61
ST-1 578+71.83/48 LT Boring tip 8' Above E. Invert 71 31 79 86 15 55
NB-12 579+28.45/50 RT Boring tip 16' Above E. Invert 68 36 84 87 19 51
BH-108 582+99.41/39 RT 144 49 97 90 -54 41
BH-159 583+44.07/201 LT [far] 212.5 47.5 95.5 87.5 -125 40
BH-109 589+82.54/5 RT 0 0 h=4', 0' Above 148 52 100 90 -58 38
PZ-2A 598+42.51/63 RT 162 49 97 85 -77 36
BH-083 598+68.16/47 RT 85 -117 36

20210921-EMI Soil Characterization Memo Rev 3

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

20210921-EMI Soil Characterization Memo Rev 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DATE: September 21, 2021

PREPARED FOR: Mr. Peter Chou - Parsons

PREPARED BY: Amir Zand, Ph.D., G.E. - Earth Mechanics, Inc.

SUBJECT: Soil Characterization Memorandum for Tunneling, Revision 3.0

1.1 REGIONAL AND LOCAL GEOLOGY

Earth Mechanics, Inc.

2.1 SOIL TYPES

2.2 HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY

TABLE 1. BASELINE HORIZONTAL HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY VALUES

Earth Mechanics, Inc.

TABLE 2. BASELINE FLOW VELOCITY VALUES

3.1 SOIL PROFILE SEGMENTS

Earth Mechanics, Inc.

Earth Mechanics, Inc.

3.2 IDEALIZED SOIL PROFILES

3.3 SOIL PARAMETERS

3.4 SOIL GRADATION CURVES

Earth Mechanics, Inc.

Table 6 lists the artesian groundwater observations for the project.

TABLE 5. PEAK RECORDED ARTESIAN CONDITIONS ALONG THE PROJECT

TABLE 6. SUMMARY OF ARTESIAN GROUNDWATER MEASUREMENTS

Earth Mechanics, Inc.

Earth Mechanics, Inc.

TABLE 8. RECOMMENDED GROUDNWATER DEPTH FOR PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF

Earth Mechanics, Inc.

6 Soil and Water Corrosivity

Earth Mechanics, Inc.

Earth Mechanics, Inc.

Earth Mechanics, Inc.

 Dumbarton Quarry Landfill (Class III)

8 Gassy Material Observations

Earth Mechanics, Inc.

1. Geotechnical Interpretive Report Rev. B (5/21/21)

2. Draft Geotechnical Baseline Report, CP2 Tunnel and Track (7/28/21)

3. Final GDR Vol I Rev 1 (Mar-21)

4. VTA BSV II Geotechnical Baseline Report (Dec-08)

Maximum Measured Groundwater for Tunnel Depth

Note: The maximum values (orange line) represents the best-

FIGURE 3. SOIL PROFILE AND GROUNDWATER LEVELS FOR TUNNEL DEPTH

Idealized Soil Profiles

Earth Mechanics, Inc.

Project: BART Silicon Valley Phase II Extension Project No. TBD

Project: BART Silicon Valley Phase II Extension Project No. TBD

Project: BART Silicon Valley Phase II Extension Project No. TBD

1. Water pressure exceeding the Reference line indicates artesian condition.

Project: BART Silicon Valley Phase II Extension Project No. TBD

1. Water pressure exceeding the Reference line indicates artesian condition.

Project: BART Silicon Valley Phase II Extension Project No. TBD

1. Water pressure exceeding the Reference line indicates artesian condition.

Project: BART Silicon Valley Phase II Extension Project No. TBD

1. Water pressure exceeding the Reference line indicates artesian condition.

Project: BART Silicon Valley Phase II Extension Project No. TBD

1. Water pressure exceeding the Reference line indicates artesian condition.

Earth Mechanics, Inc.

All depths are plotted

U.S. STANDARD U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER

MMW 2019-2020 Borings

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVES

Earth Mechanics, Inc. DIST. COUNTY ROUTE POSTMILE EA

Geotechnical and Earthquake Engineering PROJECT OR BRIDGE NAME

BRIDGE NUMBER PREPARED BY DATE SHEET

U.S. STANDARD U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER