The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About _ 9.11(c)--Authorize Fifth Amendment to Consulting and Professional Services Contract C-8541 GI �" Y � F � � � ° � � � " � � CITY OF REDDING REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 7, 2023 FROM: Chuck Aukland,Public ITEM NO. 9.11(c) Works Director ***APPROVED BY*** � ��n � .�.._ s.N,.�� ukl�n�l,H'ciblic Wc�aks L'��reGt ' 2/?3/2423 ry ip}�in,�C"i ana � '?l2�/2423 caulcland@ci.redding.ca.us btippin@cityofredding.org SUBJECT: 9.11(c)--Consider Fifth Amendment to Consulting and Professional Services Contract (C-8541) for the Pum House 1 Re lacement Project. Recommendation Authorize the following actions relative to Consulting and Professional Services Contract (C- 8541) for the Pump House 1 Replacement Project (Project): (1) A�uthorize the City Manager to execute the Fifth Amendment to Consultant and Professional Services Contract with Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc., (Jacobs) for Phase 2 design services, including environmental permitting, project funding assistance, surveying and mapping, right of way support, final design services, bid phase services, and engineering services during construction for an amount of$5,495,518, increasing the total contract amount to $6,584,764, and extending the term of the contract through 2027; (2) Authorize the City Manager to approve additional contract amendments not to exceed $500,000; and (3) Adopt Resolution approving and adopting the 82nd Amendment to Budget Resolution No. 2021-078 allocating $5,400,000 from the Water Utilities (Fund 143) beginning cash balance into distribution account 143-$69-3020-04 for the project. Fiscal Impact The total project costs are expected to be approximately$40 million. Funding will come from the Water Utility (Utility) Fund and the project is included in the current Capital Improvement Program. The City of Redding (City) staff intends to obtain State or Federal loans andlor grants to fund a portion of the construction costs for the project, if authorized by the City Council (Council). The Utility has been setting aside six percent of annual revenues for several years and accumulated a balance of$15,102,572 as of the fiscal year ending 2022. Report to Redding City Council March 2,2023 Re: 9.11(c)--Authorize Fifth Amendment to Consulting and Professional Services Contract C- 8541 Page 2 The proposed Fifth Amendment (Amendment) to the Consulting and Professional Services Contract — C8541 (Agreement) to fulfill the Pump House 1 Replacement Project (Project) includes services to assist the City with preparing and applying for grants and loans for the project, including but not limited to California State Water Resources Control Board Clean Water State Revolving Fund and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act loans. Should funding from loans or grants not materialize, then the City may need to issue municipal bonds. The attached budget resolution wi11 add $5,400,000 to the current year Utility budget and is needed to fully fund the proposed amendment to the agreement with Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. (Jacobs). Alternative Action The Council may choose not to approve the amendment to the agreement with Jacobs and consider one of the following alternatives: 1. Issue a new request for proposals (RFP) to obtain Phase 2 design services from a different consultant. The associated RFP, consultant selection process, contract award, and learning curve for a new design team would likely add costs and delay the project development. This may subject the City's water system to vulnerabilities by extending the service life of the existing pump house that may include regulatory action or unmet system demand needs. 2. Eliminate the proposed project from the Water Utility CIP. This alternative would subject the City's water system to significant vulnerabilities and potential regulatory action as well as not meet projected water system demands with surface water contract allocations. 3. Provide staff with an alternative direction. Background The City's Pump House 1 (PH1) is located on the south bank of the Sacramento River, along the Sacramento River Trail and approximately one-quarter mile west and upriver from the Diestelhorst and Lake Redding Bridges. It pumps water from the Sacramento River to the City's Foothill Water Treatment Plant (FWTP). It is the City's largest and primary water supply, providing more than half of the City's drinking water during average and peak demands. PH1 is the only source of raw water to the FWTP, which makes it a critical component of the City's water supply system. PH1 was constructed in 1937, and has been in continual service since that time. Major modifications were performed in 196$, 1981, and 1989, to replace aging pumps and add new pumps to increase the station's capacity. It currently has �ve vertical turbine pumps and its �rm capacity is approximately 29 million gallons per day. City staff plans to completely replace PH 1 because of the following general deficiencies: � Its intake is located in a shallow area of the river that impacts its pumping capacity depending on the status of the Anderson Cottonwood Irrigation District (ACID) dam which is downriver. � The existing intake and scre�ns may not meet long term State and Federal criteria regarding protection of endangered fish species. • Pumping eapacity will need to be increased to meet the future demands of the FWTP. Report to Redding City Council March 2,2023 Re: 9.11(c)--Authorize Fifth Amendment to Consulting and Professional Services Contract C- 8541 Page 3 • Based on the City's General Plan seismic hazard map, it is located in an area of high seislnic liquefaction potential and may not be adequate to withstand critical damage during an earthquake. Design services for the PH1 replacement have been separated into two phases. Phase 1 includes preliminary design services and preparation of a preliminary design report, and Phase 2 includes environmental permitting, project funding assistance, right-of-way acquisition, final design, and engineering services during bidding and construction. On May 5, 2020, the Council authorized execution of Consulting and Professional Services Contract (C-8541) for $488,829 with Jacobs for Phase 1 of the design. As was noted in the May 5, 2020, staff report, Phase 2 design services were included in the competitive proposal but were not included in the original agreement. The intent was to award Phase 2 design services with an amendment to Jacobs's contract, if the City was satisfied with the services through Phase 1. Jacobs's Phase 1 design services included preparation of a preliminary design report evaluating project alternatives for the PH 1 replacement, incl�uding the following: 1. Replacement at the existing PH 1 location; 2. Replacement at a new river trail location, approximately 1,600 feet west and upriver; 3. Replacement with a riverbank filtration collector well system; and 4. Combinations of Alternatives Since May 2020, four amendments to the original contract with Jacobs were executed to provide more extensive investigation associated with a riverbank filtration collector well system alternative (Alternative 3), and to extend the term of the contract. The first three amendments provided for a three-step approach to narrow potential collector well sites and evaluate geotechnical conditions with geophysical surveys, geotechnical borings and small-scale pump tests, and a large-capacity pump testing with monitoring wells. On July 20, 2021, the Council authorized the City Manager to execute the Third Amendment, thereby increasing the contract amount to $1,089,246, to allow for installation of monitoring we11s and large-capacity pump testing at the City's future bike park, located east of the Market Street Bridge. In July of 2022, Jacobs completed its Preliminary Design Report. The extensive geotechnical investigation and testing associated with Alternative 3 determined that a riverbank collector well system would not provide enough capacity to replace PH 1. Given the limited capacity of Alternative 3 and lengthy delays with boring equipment availability to complete the borings and pump testing, the City and Jacobs elected to separate the detailed evaluation for Alternative 3 into a standalone report. The Preliminary Design Report then focused on project alternatives to replace PHl at its existing location or to install the replacement station 1,600 feet up river (Alternatives 1 and 2). Based on the Preliminary Design Report and Jacobs's recommendations, staff intends to proceed with Alternative 2, to replace PH1 with a new station approximately 1,600 feet upriver from its existing location. This is the preferred project alternative for the following reasons: � It is a location with deeper water depth in the Sacramento River, thereby a replacement pump station at this location can meet peak demands with or without the ACID dam in place; Report to Redding City Council March 2,2023 Re: 9.11(c)--Authorize Fifth Amendment to Consulting and Professional Services Contract C- 8541 Page 4 • It will a11ow for use of a screen material that will simplify future operation and maintenance; • Better access to this location can be provided from Overhill Drive, which will also benefit the public by providing additional access to the Sacramento River Trail; • It will include restoration of Jenny Creek, a need that State regulating agencies previously indicated the City will need to perform at some point; and • It is less expensive than Alterative 1. Jacobs also submitted a draft collector well feasibility report in November 2022 and is preparing the final report. The City could consider installing a collector well at the City's future bike park at some point in the future, but it would be a separate project and it would only supply approxiinately 10 percent of the flows that wi11 be required from the replacement Pump House 1 during peak demands. Jacobs has completed its contracted services through Phase 1 of the design for the project and staff is satisfied with the services provided to date. There have been some project delays because of COVID 19 and availability of geotechnical equipment, but staff believes that these delays were mostly beyond Jacobs' control. The proposed Fifth Amendment will provide Phase 2 design services for the project, in line with staff's expectations since the RFP development in 2019. Staff has negotiated the proposed scope and fee with Jacobs and determined the fee to be fair and reasonable, given the size and complexity of the environmental and design services required. The attached amendment has been approved as to form by the City Attorney. Environmental Review This action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA), and no further action is required. Contract amendment would allow the consultant to perform the technical environmental studies necessary for compliance with CEQA and the National Environmental Policy Act should federal resources be obtained. Council Priority/City ManageN Goals � This agenda item is a routine operational item. Attachments ^Resolution ^Location Map Fifth Amendment First Amendment Second Amendment Third Amendment Fourth Amendment Consulting and Professional Services C-8541 Preliminary Design Report Draft Collector Well Feasibility Report Previous Staff Report- 5/5/2020 Previous Staff Report- 7/20/2021 Resolution No. 2023 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF REDDING APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE $2°d AMENDMENT TO CITY BUDGET RESOLUTION NO. 2021-078 APPROPRIATING $5,400,000 FOR THE PUMP HOUSE 1 REPLACEMENT PROJECT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-23. BE IT RESOL VED BY THE CITY CO UNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDDING THAT Budget Resolution No. 2021-078 be and is hereby amended as follows: FUND DIVISION DESCRIPTION 1NCREASE DECREASE 143 869 Water—Capital Outlay $5,400,000 THAT account titles and numbers requiring adjustments by this Resolution are as follows: USE SOURCE OF FUNDS OF FIJNDS Increase Revenue 143-869-1-0001-01 Water Urility Capitai Outlday Division Balance. $ 5,400,000 Increase(Decrease)Expenditures 143-869-3020-04 Pump Housc 1 Repiaccmcnt $ 5,400,000 Total $ 5,400,000 $ 5,400,000 THAT the purpose is to appropriate $5,400,000 for the Pump House 1 replacement project for �scal year 2022-23. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Redding on the day of , 2023 and was duly adopted at said meeting by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: MICHAEL DACQUISTO,Mayor ATTEST: FORM APPROVAL: PAMELA MIZE, City Clerk BARRY E. DeWALT, City Attorney �� ; � � � �o . , �. . ` � , .� ' �` '.� � ��ERNi�°�., �� ., , ':..- �V�� . • ` '� _�.'� `;� . ' �..D . . � � . R � _ , . .. �� S.. .c� � � � � A . �Ly i^ z 0 _. '^ �'`. J� .� � �''ly � , �� z � �� . . , �� ' v� �� O,� , 'Q�� .,:, � ` ` _.. � . ., C . l```. fFj�,,� , i'!'J�,j�/ �� . y _ t � \ ,i` \� - ' ,�\q` m �i P�.AC�IVI��IT �RN`�� P MP �IC�USE � , ^ � � ... ,.. ,��, � _., <, �: � �' °v� � i .� � t'IONtER l, ; a , , . � > _ . �. . ,NIGI...I SCI'00� ,rr � �� r ' � ; - . .. ,t �,, `�, , � � , r ,� � � r , . � _ � ��_ ; , � P�� . l � , � _ _. { , �J ��` f ��~'``F J NY +CRE�K _ _ ; ,3 ,f � ,R STC)�i/�TION � � �� . � �,� � �� ' � ,� � Aot,A�live�wnr � � � � sNAsrA � � ; i ` , r , � . �. � � ... � � ,...HIGH SCH00� ...... i � ; , . . ; ; `� ,. ,,,, ,,,_�.. I � ��V�� ,. . , � � �� \, . , _., � ;. . , ,.. ...., : ,� r� ;�� , �P �. � �`� ` / �� ' � ��.. � � �' i ,'.� �: � S � ,�"j� ' � � : SI�l.+\STA �s �� KE R��, I F��NING CEN f�f2 ;,� Q� 'r� �`�'i" � ` � ��, � i r��lV� �R , > _. , , , �`P' '; \.i` � ? _ -- ,..� �.,;` ��., �,o, � ' ` � , �, , , �' . _..- , .� � i ,� �� z � � � � � � Q� a ,. , ,� � �' '�7 �`�Fi A� �. . ... , ' . o � � �;r rn y ti � r � � , , Q� . � � _ � r �y � r y � , o ' W , ' � � � s� r ' �z ' � ,� _� _ �� o z i � . Q " �. _.: � ,,, �� ' � � �� ,�` .� � � U �� , � o : _..... ,., ,._ ... . ' ' ` �` `�> �A � � �� ,..._ ; ,, , J N� ; �� ;:. � ,;� � ; � ' .. . s � .. ,.�'� �. � r � Q � ... � �'i � ...� � �a < m „ s . . � /Si�. /� 1 oi t ' r '�� .e- �� `�, �'y ` �,/ , ; � �� , . �� - u S �.�' � / `� �' �sAc�MENro RivE� Twai�- �i ,. ` � � --� -� ��r,"�� a� �� ! � . . _. �T � ,�� ^' t � � � ,�� .�` i � U&' '�`�._-=� �. J� =l ,.. � . ' � , .� � .__ ,. , ��r ; �,Al 'V �,;� �� ` �r� ,� : , .. \ ` � .' � i �� , � , ,' . ' �� '� � �V a� � n^ � D�ESTELMOI�Sfi BRID�� \ J \ �..� �wn.�.Y�'� ( �(2 � . i .. �� v'"�^�mmm. t �t \ '�J.\ J Y" ' . • � �' �' � x � ti \ f . l.+.ST/ /" . � ' � .. � � � � �.. / / � �� J�� O \ / / \ !� �, � �. � ,' . � . . �. 1 ��' r \. , . \ � , i � � �\.... �\ , , .. J �` \ \. \ � l' \\ C /' � \ � � \. �G �� ' , , � '� �m � / / � ,� ., , . y r ' ,; �� .� A. �'y� r � �� „ �. ,, ,- ..�, ' � , : -. _ i, y \ �. _. � 5� c . m � �-� c6��ER �. ..,� � � \ �� ACID DAM � � "� -� � � - tn � � �� a (�( \ : '. . . �`�---' � � � � Y. �' ��, .. � � �i o� �, ,� � �', �, f� ' � �� o . " . : ,..... . Z, '�N�P S��,� '� � � f � � � ,,, ,,a, GW-�FO t2 .. . , f, .. ..._.� � ,�,. � ,,� �'� ; �� ''r. �, r � , � ., � ,. , / � < 'i . �. �" . ,.� f LJ � . � + � ��o � S . .. � _ _` ` '>, x .-, t MPR; , ' �- - ��y � �� , , � \ ��'�r � ca��w�� Parzi �'`'� �� , � �� / �,_ ; ti�� / � ; ' - „ , � , . r �� _ � ��, ��d � . �� j ,,r s � � , , �, , � � � � �' " �F �F� �, �"� CITY OF REDDING � � � : ,Q ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT L O CAT I O N M AP ��FO�I� SCALE: 1" = 800' DATE: JANUARY 19, 2023 FIFTH AMENDMENT TO CONSULTING AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT(G8541) Pump House 1 Replacement Project(Phase 2-Design) The Consulting and Professional Services Cantract C-8541 ("Contract") dated May 1 l, 2020, and amended on September 11,2020,January 12,2021,July 23,2021,and December 8,2022,between the City of Redding, California, ("City") a municipal corporation, and Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. ("Consultant") is hereby amended as follows: SECTI�N 1. is amended to read in its entirety as follows: Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Contract, Consultant shall provide to City the services described in Exhibit A,A-1,A-2,A-3,and A-4,attached and incorporated herein. Consultant shall provide the services at the time,place and in the manner specified in Exhibit A, A-1, A-2, A-3 and A-4. The Exhibit A-4 attached to this amendment is incorporated into the Contract dated May 11,2Q20, and amended on September 22, 2020, January 12, 2021, July 23, 2021, and December 8, 2022, as Exhibit A-4. SECTION 2.A. is amended to read in its entirety as follows: A. City shall pay Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Contract, at the times and in the manner set forth in Exhibit B and Exhibit B-1, incorporated herein, in a total amount not to exceed Six Million Five Hundred Eighty-Four Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty-Four Dollars ($6,584,764). T'his sum includes all out-of-pocket travel, lodging and incidental expenses incurred by Consultant that are reasonably associated with the provision of services under this Contract. The payments specified herein shall be the only payments to be made to Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Contract. The Exhibit B-1 attached to this amendment is incorporated into the Contract dated May 1 l,2020 and amended on September 1 l, 2020, January 12, 2021, July 23, 2021, and December 8, 2022. SECTION 2.D. is amended to read in its entirety as follows: D. Pursuant to Section 1781 of the Labor Code, Consultant is advised that the work contemplated in Exhibit A, Task 2.2 and 2.3 and Exhibit A-1, Task 2.2.1, Exhibit A- 2, Task 2.2.2, E�ibit A-4, Task 4 and 5 of this contract is subject to the payment of prevailing wages and all other requirements of the Prevailing Wage Law. The prevailing wage of each job classification may be found by inquiry with the California Department of Industrial Relations. Consultant shall comply with all laws related to the performance of public work including, but not limited to, the employment of apprentices pursuant to Section 177?.5 of the Labor Code, work day/week hours and overtime rates pursuant to Sections 1813 and 1815of the Labor Code and the obligation set forth in Section 1774-177b of the Labor Code in regards to payment of prevailing wages and to provide the City of Redding and Department af Industrial Relations certified payrolls when required. A certified copy of aIl payroll records relative to this project shall be submitted to th�City of Redding along with the related invaice. Receipt of certi�ied payroll records iS a prerequisite to receiving payrnent. SECTIC?N 3.A. is amended to read in its entirety as fallows; A, Consultant shall commence work on ar abaut May 11,2p20, and complete said wark no later than December'31, 2Q27. Time is of the essence. All other terms and conditians of the Contract dated May 1 l, 2020, and amended on September 11, 2020, January 12,2021, July 23, 2021, and December 8, 202�, shall remain in full force arid effect. 'The date of this Amendment shall be the date that it is signed by the City. IN TNESS OF, City and Consultant have executed this Amendment an the days and year set forth belaw: CITY OF DbING A Munfcipal Corporation Dated: ,2023 By: MICHAEL DACQUIST(?,Ma�yor Farm App�°aved.• BA YE. DeWAI;T Attest.� City Attorney PAMELA 1VIIZE, City CZerk Byr GaNSULTANT Jacobs Engin�erzng C'raup lnc. m Dated: � ' , 2023 ; By: �� r�'�� ' ��'�?�i��' � pt�.° Tcrxpayer I.D. No.: ��'� �l �`��;� City of Redding and Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. Pump House 1 Replacement Project -Amendment No. 5 Exhibit A-4 lacobs Engineering Group Inc. (Jacobs) proposed Scope of Engineering Services Amendment No. 5 (Exhibit A)for the Pump House 1 (PS1j Replacement Project (Project) assigned to the City of Redding (City) Consulting and Professional Services Contract C-8541.Jacobs will perform the work on a not-to- exceed time and materials basis per the rate schedule(Exhibit B-1). Per Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 5094,the effort associated with this Project requires two separate phases. Phase 1 involved preliminary design (alternatives evaluation) services and preparation of a Preliminary Design Report (PDR) with recommendations and is considered complete.This Amendment No. 5 is for Phase 2 of the RFP and involves the detailed engineering and design,environmental compliance documentation, permitting, project funding assistance, right-of-way acquisition support, and preparation of construction contract documents, as well as services during the bid and construction phase of the Project. The following table of contents outlines the tasks to be performed with this Project: Table of Contents Phase 2: Final Design, Bid Phase Services, and Construction Period Services Task 1—Project Management and Meetings.....................................................................3 Task 2—Environmental Compliance and Permitting..........................................................4 Task 3—Project Funding Assistance...................................................................................9 Task4—Survey and Mapping...........................................................................................12 Task 5—Geotechnical Investigation .................................................................................14 Task6—Right of Way Support..........................................................................................15 Task 7—Final Design Services—Drawings, Specifications and Engineers Estimate.........16 Task 8—Supplemental Services........................................................................................19 Task 9—Bid Phase Services...............................................................................................23 Task 10—Engineering Services During Construction........................................................24 The Final Preliminary Design Report for the City of Redding Pump House 1 Replacement Project, dated luly 2022 recommends the City proceed with plans to implement Alternative 2, New River Trail Location. The Project is anticipated to consist of the following main components: • Demolition of the existing intake and pump station building and restoration of the Site. • A new 42-million-gallon-per-day(mgd) intake structure located on the right bank(south)of the river approximately 1,600 feet upstream of the existing pump station (Site). • Intakes Screen, Inc(ISI) cylindrical tee screen units (two)with integral brush cleaning system and retrieval system. , • Raw water supply pumps (four duty plus one spare); initial capacity of 36 mgd at reduced speed and 42 mgd at full speed. • A new pump station building that will house the pump units and related mechanical and electrical equipment along with sewer pump for private bathroom. • Ancillary facilities, including seal water supply system with booster pumps,flowmeter, hoisting equipment, heating and air conditioning, and surge tank. • Electrical system and instrumentation and control (I&C), including a S-kilovolt(kV)switchgear, a 5-kV variable frequency drive, a 208/120-volt transformer/distribution, utility meter, utility transformer, main programmable logic controller(PLC), fiber optics, and ethernet radio. • A SCADA tower will be designed. • A new 42-inch-diameter pipeline to connect the new pump station to the existing 30-inch-diameter pipelines immediately east of the Site. • A new 16-foot-wide paved access road from Overhill Drive to the Site.The access road maximum grade will be 10 percent and designed for 15-mph vertical curves. • Utilities, including potable water, sewer, electric service, and fiber optics,that will be tied into existing utilities at Overhill Drive and routed underground along the new access road to the Site. It is assumed a separate electrical feed will be extended underground from the existing pump station. It is assumed the sewer will need to be pumped to Overhill Drive. • Jenny Creek fish passage improvements, including replacement of the culverts in accordance with modern fish passage criteria, an engineered fishway, and a clear-span bridge or other means for providing safe and effective fish passage. • Site civil improvements, including restoration of the River Trail within the Project to pre-project conditions. Assumptions: • The City's equipment tagging convention will be used. • The City's standby generator will remain at the existing Site. • Utilities (water, sewer,fiber optics, and electrical)will be sourced from Overhill Drive. • The collector well design will be a separate design and contract. • The City will work with Contractor to facilitate short duration closures near the construction action area during pile driving and significant overhead/crane activities that may require safety exclusions for noise or falling objects. It is assumed the Contractor will develop a pedestrian routing plan to provide for safe pedestrian and bicycle routing alternatives during construction at all other times. • The City or Contractor will apply and pay for construction permits. • The City will pay for permit application fees. • The City will prepare the front end legal documents. • Jacobs will prepare technical specifications. • The City will pay for cost to acquire property necessary for the Project. • The City will perform SCADA programing.Jacobs will provide functional descriptions. • Additional assumptions are provided through the scope of services. 2 Scope of Additional Engineering Services in Amendment 5 Phase 2: Final Design and Bid & Construction Period Services The scope of engineering services to provide for the additional Phase 2 services are outlined by the tasks below. Task 1 — Project Management and Meetings Subtask 1.1—Project Management The purpose of this subtask is to provide for the initiation and overall management of Project activities. An overall schedule, including preliminary construction milestones, and work plan will be implemented so that work activities are completed in a properly integrated and timely manner. In addition,this task includes those elements necessary to properly manage, lead, and control the Project. Jacobs will furnish project management services for the Project, as follows: • Status Reporting, consisting of monthly status reports with the monthly invoices—Monitor budget, progress, and schedule. Monitor work efforts and evaluate actual versus planned progress. Update schedules for all tasks and subtasks. Changes in scope will be communicated and approved by the City. Prepare monthly invoices and Project status reports. • Administration—Maintain Project records, manage and process Project communications, and coordinate Project administrative matters. • Coordination—Coordinate tasks/subtasks and staff, including coordination with the City, to complete authorized work on schedule and within budget. Coordinate with the City to support environmental documentation and permits for construction. • Staff Management—Supervise and control activities of staff assigned to the Project. Coordinate and schedule appropriate staffing to meet Project requirements in a timely manner. Jacobs will manage the health, safety, and environmental activities of its staff.Jacobs will prepare a project-specific Health and Safety Plan.Jacobs will address safety in the office and during site visits. Jacobs is not responsible for the health and safety of other Project participants. Deliverables: Monthly invoices and progress reports. Schedule updates. Subtask 1.2—Meetings The purpose of this subtask is to provide coordination of Project activities. Jacobs anticipates the following meetings will be required during the Project: • Design kickoff ineeting (assumed 2 hours) with City staff in Redding to reinforce the Project objectives, critical milestones, budget, critical success factors, and team roles and responsibilities (assume Project Manager, Design Manager, and three key design team members). • Three design review meetings (assumed 2 hours each review meeting)with City staff in Redding (assume Project Manager, Design Manager, and three key design team members). • Monthly status conference calls (assumed 1 hour) or meetings at City Hall between City and Jacobs. lacobs will prepare monthly agendas and summary minutes, including ongoing work, action items, and status of coordination items (assume Project Manager, Design Manager, and other design members,as necessary). 3 Jacobs assumes an average of 1.5 person-days per meeting, plus miscellaneous minor technician and office support(total of 3 person-days per meeting),will be needed to meet the requirements of this task. Notes for each meeting sponsored by lacobs will be prepared and distributed to attendees. When practical, meetings will be consolidated to occur on the same day. It is assumed that comments from regulatory agencies will be relatively minor and will not significantly impact the previously developed design or the design delivery schedule. Deliverables: Meeting agendas and meeting minutes. Task 2— Environmental Compliance and Permitting This task identifies necessary technical evaluations and supporting documentation needed to support obtaining the permits and authorizations identified below to construct the Project.This task assumes USACE will remain the National Environmental Policy Act(NEPA) and overall lead federal agency.The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) is assumed to be Categorically Excluded from the NEPA process but will provide input under Task 3 (Project Funding Assistance).The City will serve as the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) and lead state agency in support of obtaining the necessary environmental approvals identified below. It is assumed CEQA documentation will be required and prepared under a subsequent Subtask. Assumptions:The City will pay all permit application fees. Subtask 2.1—Environmental Permit Applications Subtask 2.1.1 Environmental Permitting Agency Coordination Jacobs will initiate telephone calls and coordinate, as needed,with the applicable permitting agencies, USACE, Reclamation, and the City. Calls, public meetings, and coordination will be conducted to discuss Project status and progress, permit application requirements, review and approval schedules, and Project issues. Deliverables: Notes from the phone calls and internal meetings prepared and distributed, as appropriate. Subtask 2.1.2 USACE—Section 404/Section 10 Permit This subtask includes the preparation of an application for a Clean Water Act(CWA) Section 404 Department of the Army Nationwide Permit and Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) based on the PDR. The PCN will include reference of the need for the Project to comply with Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbor Act,An Aquatic Resources Delineation Report documenting impacts of the U.S., including wetlands, and an assessment of impacts to federally-listed species. Assumptions: • One site survey will be conducted by a qualified biologist. • Up to three Jacobs staff will participate in one pre-application meeting with USACE in Redding. • The Project will be covered under a Nationwide Permit and will not require an Individual Permit. • lacobs will submit the compiled Section 404 PCN application package to USACE; City wil) pay application fees. Deliverables: • Aquatic Resources Delineation Report in electronic PDF format. • Biological Resources and Habitat Assessment. • Compiled Section 404 PCN application package. 4 Subtask 2.1.3 Central Valley Regional Water Quatity Contro/Board(RWQCB)—Section 401 Water Quality Certification Given the Project requires a Section 404 authorization from USACE, a Water Quality Certification (WQC) per Section 401 of the CWA must be obtained.A request for WQC for the Project will be prepared. Assumptions: • Up to two lacobs staff will participate in one in-person meeting with the Central Valley RWQCB in Redding. • Jacobs will submit the compiled Section 401 WQC application package to the Central Valley RWQCB; City will pay application fees. Deliverables: Compiled Section 401 WQC application package. Subtask 2.1.4 Central Valley RWQCB—NPDES Dewatering Permit and Fish Rescue This subtask includes preparation of an application to obtain a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) discharge permit. Assumptions: • Jacobs will submit application on SMARTs application using the City's login information or a new account created on behalf of the City; City will pay application fees. • Up to two JACOBS fisheries biologists will participate in one one-day fish salvage and recovery event. Deliverables: • Compiled NPDES discharge permit application package. • Completed 10A.1.A fish rescue documentation. Subtask 2.1.5 CDFW—Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement and Section 2080.1 Incidental Take Permit Authorization A �ake and Streambed Alteration Agreement(LSAA) application on behalf of the City for submittal to the CDFW(Region 1)will be prepared. It is anticipated that identification of appropriate permit conditions for terrestrial and aquatic species will require coordination related percussive impacts, monitoring during pile driving, and water quality protection.Jacobs will also prepare and submit an application for Incidental Take Authorization under Section 2080.1, if required. It may be possible for CDFW to issue a Consistency Determination (CD)with the Federal Incidental Take Authorization from USFWS and NMFS. Jacobs will apply for and obtain take coverage for the City relative to State of California listed species through one of these mechanisms under this task. Assumptions: • One meeting with a CDFW representative at the Project Site to provide Project information and to discuss likely CDFW requirements for the Project will be required. • One additional meeting in Redding(two Jacobs team attendees) may be required. • Jacobs will submit the compiled Section 1602 LSAA and Incidental Take Authorization applications/ packages to CDFW; City will pay application fees. Deliverables: • Compiled Section 1602 LSAA application package. • Compiled ITP package (or CD request) as preferred by CDFW. 5 Subtask 2.1.6 State Lands Commission—Land Lease The State of California maintains ownership of the bed of the Sacramento River, and placement of any structure within theirjurisdiction requires a public agency lease issued by the State Lands Commission. It is assumed that Public Resource Code 6327 will apply,and a State �ands Commission �and Lease will not be required for the fish screen but that a lease will be required to construct the fish ladder.This task will provide for coordination with the State �ands Commission to obtain the lease. Assumptions: • No in-person meetings will be required. • A State �ands Commission Land Lease will not be required for the fish screen, but a lease will be required for the fish ladder. • Jacobs will submit the compiled Land �ease application package to the State �ands Commission; City will pay application fees. Deliverables: Compiled Land �ease Application package. Subtask 2.1.7 CVFPB—Encroachment Permit The placement of any structures within the designated floodway of the Sacramento River,which is under the jurisdiction of the CVFPB, requires the issuance of a Floodplain Encroachment Permit. A Floodplain Encroachment Permit application will be prepared for submittal to the CVFPB. Assumptions: • It is assumed that USACE has no Section 408 jurisdiction at this location. • One virtual meeting (two Jacobs team attendees) is assumed as part of this task. • Jacobs will submit the compiled Encroachment Permit application package to CVFPB; City will pay application fees. Deliverables: • Compiled CVFPB Encroachment Permit application package, including final TM prepared under Task 8.1. Subtask 2.1.8 City—Encroachment Permit This task will include the preparation of the City encroachment permit application.This permit is required to complete work within the City right-of-way areas during the design phase. Assumptions: • No in-person meetings will be required. • Jacobs will submit the compiled Encroachment Permit application package to the City; City will pay application fees if not waived. Deliverables: Compiled City Encroachment Permit application package. Subtask 2.1.9 State Water Resources Control 8oard(SWRCB)—Change in Point of Diversion This Project includes moving an existing diversion structure, which requires a Change in Point of Diversion (CPOD), per California Water Code Section 1700.This task will include preparation of the application and associated coordination with SWRCB. 6 Assumptions: • Up to three virtual pre-application meetings (2 JACOBS team attendees)with SWRCB are assumed as part of this task. • This subtask will be completed by a Subconsultant. • lacobs will submit online application using the City's login information or a new account created on behalf of the City; City will pay application fees. • Review of existing CalSim run published by DWR or Reclamation will be sufficient to verify impacts on downstream diversions. • No more than two opposition letters will be provided to the City by SWRCB following the public comment period. • Preparation for and participation in one in-person public hearing with the SWRCB is assumed as part of this task. • Application will be submitted no earlier than three months after the close of public comment period on the Draft EIR. Deliverables: Compiled CPOD application package. Subtask 2.1.10 Construction Permits This task includes the preparation of applications and approvals for required non-discretionary construction permit. Assumptions: • No in-person meetings will be required. • Jacobs will submit the compiled Building Permit application package to the City; City will pay application fees if not waived. Deliverables: • Compiled City Building Permit application package. Induding two (2)full size sets of applicable plans. Subtask 2.2—CEQA/NEPA Subtask 2.2.1 Preliminary CEQA Analyses To determine the level of CEQA compliance that will be required to implement the Project, some preliminary analyses will need to be conducted.This subtask will include the analyses that will not be delivered under Subtask 2.1, including preliminary noise modeling with results captured in a TM and the preparation of a CEQA Appendix G Environmental Checklist,which will be used as the foundation of subsequent CEQA documentation, either in the form of an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND)or an Environmental Impact Report (EIR}. Assumptions: No in-person meetings or field surveys will be required. Deliverables: • Noise TM, documenting noise modeling results. • Completed CEQA Appendix G Environmental Checklist. 7 Subtask 2.2.2 CEQA/NEPA Documentation The level of CEQA compliance required for the Project will not be determined until after the biological and cultural resources surveys conducted under Subtasks 2.1.2 and 2.3.3, respectively, are completed, and the analyses under Subtask 2.2.1 are conducted. However, it is anticipated that the Project will require the development of an EIR.This subtask therefore estimates the level of work required to develop an Administrative Draft EIR (ADEIR) and Final EIR. Should it be determined that an IS/MND or Categorical Exemption is sufficient,the scope of work and level of effort associated with this subtask will be reduced accordingly. Assumptions: • The ADEIR will include evaluation of all resource areas identified in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. • Each environmental resource chapter will include a description of the environmental setting,the regulatory setting, significance criteria that are used to determine the resource impacts, analysis methodology and assumptions, issues or potential impacts not discussed further,and detailed discussion of the potential environmental effects of the Project. • Impact conclusions will be based on substantial evidence, and mitigation measures will be recommended for impacts identified as significant. • The supporting technical studies prepared by Jacobs under Subtasks 2.1 and 2.2.1 will be cited, as necessary, and included as appendices to the EIR. • The Project is assumed to be Categorically Excluded from the NEPA process, but if NEPA is determined to be required,this subtask will include development of a joint EIR/Environmental Impact Study(EIS) document. • Jacobs will lead all public outreach efforts related to the EIR (and EIS, if required). City will review meeting materials and participate as needed. • CEQA-Plus documentation is assumed to satisfy State Revolving Fund (SRF) requirements. Deliverables: • Notice of Preparation (NOP). • Administrative Draft EIR and Final EIR. • Responses to comments received during the public review process. Subtask 2.3—Additional Environmental Clearance Support Subtask 2.3.1 NMFS—Endangered Species Act(ESA)Section 7 Consultation Support for Fisheries This subtask includes coordination and assistance (including with USACE, the federal lead agency)to obtain necessary federal ESA approvals related to potential impacts to federally-listed aquatic species. Federal species anticipated to be addressed are federally-listed salmonids.This task assumes preparation of a draft and final Biological Assessment(BA) in close coordination with USACE based on an approved format assumed to be provided by USACE. Assumptions: • Site survey will be conducted under Subtask 2.1.2; no additional field surveys will be required. • One meeting in Redding with NMFS, USACE, and City (two Jacobs team attendees)will be required. • City will pay fees associated with consultation. s Deliverables: Biological Assessment for fisheries. Subtask 2.3.2 USFWS—ESA Section 7 Consu/tation Support for Terrestrial Species Jacobs will assist the City(and the USACE,the federal lead agency) in completing the USFWS consultation process for terrestrial species. Federal species anticipated to be addressed are assumed to be limited to Valley elderberry longhorn beetle (VELB).This task assumes preparation of a draft and final BA in close coordination with USACE based on an approved format assumed to be provided by USACE. Assumptions: • Site survey will be conducted under Subtask 2.1.2; no additional field surveys will be required. • One meeting in Redding with USFWS, USACE, and City(two Jacobs team attendees) will be required. • City will pay fees associated with consultation. Deliverables: Biological Assessment for terrestrial species. Subtask 2.3.3 State Historic Preservation Office(SHPO)—Section 106 Consultation This subtask provides for the preparation of an Archaeological Reconnaissance Report (ARR), which is assumed to be required by USACE and SHPO for Section 106 consultation.The ARR wil) require a desktop level review through the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) as well as a field survey. Assumptions: • One site survey will be conducted by a Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA). • No in-person meetings will be required. • City will provide expense reimbursement for CHRIS search fees and pay fees associated with consultation. Deliverables:Archaeological Reconnaissance Report. Subtask 2.3.4 Assembly Bitl 52(AB-52)—Tribal Consu/tation Jacobs will assist with the tribal consultation process required by AB-52 by preparing Draft Tribal consultation letter. Assumptions: • City will request list of Tribes for consideration from the Native American Heritage Commission. • City will circulate Tribal consultation letters. • One meeting in Redding with USACE, Reclamation, and City(two Jacobs team attendees) will be required. Deliverables: Draft Tribal consultation letter. Task 3 — Project Funding Assistance This task will provide Project Funding Assistance to the City of Redding. Subtask 3.1 Funding Strategy lacobs will continue to identify potential outside funding opportunities for the Project and update such opportunities as shown in the PDR. This will include monitoring changes in the EPA, State, and other Federal agency opportunities. Funding opportunities change from year to year pending the scope and 9 size of a project.Jacobs will work with the City to understand the City's demographic and financial context relevant to assessing opportunities to secure funding for this Project. lacobs will identify funding programs that align with the Project and City financing goals, City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP), and to prioritize opportunities for the Outside Funding Strategy for this Project. Assumptions: • The City will provide information that relates to funding,financing, and demographic context to aid in understanding future opportunities for the City to qualify for principal forgiveness loans and other favorable elements of available funding programs. Examples would include the following: — Any information on the demographics of the City's service area (income, percent minority population)that can help identify if the City might qualify to be categorized as a disadvantaged community(either as a whole or for neighborhoods within the City's service area) — Any previous financial plans, summaries of financial context, or financial policies the City may have adopted,which would help assess how competitive the City might be for grant and loan programs that include reviews of the City's financial strength (for example, information on bond rating or levels of debt service coverage that the City could target and achieve) — Any other general economic information on the City's service area (rate of growth, state of the local economy) • Redding is assumed to be a disadvantaged community. • Meeting will be held via Microsoft Teams or in Redding. • Jacobs will present the key attributes of the grant and loan programs, including application cycles, level of effort to apply, likely competitiveness for the available funds, reporting and compliance requirements, and specific benefits/financing flexibilities available through the various programs. • Jacobs will develop recommended follow-up actions for the City,which may include the following: — Prioritization of the identified funding programs to pursue. — Research and technical analysis that may be needed to improve the City's opportunity for success in project funding program applications. — Recommendations for completion of Project development milestones to submit funding applications. — Preliminary recommendation of when to submit applications for the Project based on competitiveness, readiness assessment, and other factors. — High-level assessment of financial and rate impacts for any recommended loans that need to be repaid and grants that require local matching shares by the City. • A separate TM or other documents will not be prepared for the findings of the workshops. Deliverables: Meeting agendas, handouts, and minutes, as applicable. Work products to be incorporated into the Project Design Report. Subtask 3.2 Prepare Drinking Water SRF Planning Funding Applications Jacobs will support the City with each of the four packages in the California Drinking Water SRF Planning Financing Application: • General Information Package:This package includes basic Applicant and project information. ,o • Technical Package: This package includes project report that the applicant must submit an engineering report. • Environmental Package:This package includes information and documentation necessary to evaluate applicable state and federal environmental requirements. • Financial Security Package:This package includes information and certifications necessary to evaluate the financial security of the Applicant and the proposed Financing Agreement. Assumptions: • City will review documents within 2 weeks of receiving applications. • City will pay for any application fees and is not included in this scope of work. • City will provide budget information and other financing plans and documents of debt and other requirements necessary for the Financial Security Package. Deliverables: Jacobs will submit electronic application and supporting documents to the Agency. Subtask 3.3 Prepare Drinking Water SRF Construction Funding Applications Jacobs will support the City with each of the four packages in the California Drinking Water SRF Construction Financing Application: • General Information Package:This package includes basic Applicant and project information. • Technical Package: This package includes project report that the applicant must submit an engineering report. • Environmental Package:This package includes information and documentation necessary to evaluate applicable state and federal environmental requirements. • Financial Security Package:This package includes information and certifications necessary to evaluate the financial security of the Applicant and the proposed Financing Agreement. Assumptions: • City will review documents within 2 weeks of receiving applications. • CEQA Plus will be required for this application and will be provided in Task 2. • City will pay for any application fees and is not included in this scope of work. • City will provide budget information and other financing plans and documents of debt and other requirements necessary for the Financial Security Package. Deliverables: Jacobs will submit electronic application and supporting documents to the Agency. Subtask 3.3 WIFIA Letter of Interest Funding Application lacobs will assist the City in the development of a letter of interest (LOI)to the EPA WIFIA Loan Program administered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency(EPA). The �01 phase of the WIFIA loan application process is the first,competitive part of the process. If the City is successful in being invited to submit a full WIFIA loan application,the second part of the application process,Jacobs will develop and submit a scope of work and fee estimate to support the City in that part of the process. Subtasks are included below for the primary elements of the WIFIA L01. Based on discussion with the City and the timing of most recent rating reports, it is assumed that the City will need to submit a pro forma financial model as part of the LOI process. The letter of interest is defined into the following sections: „ • �OI Section A—Key Loan Information • �OI Section B—Engineering and Credit • �OI Section C-Selection Criteria • �OI Sections D and E -Contact Information and Certifications Assumptions: • City will review documents within 2 weeks of receiving applications. • City will pay for any application fees and is not included in this scope of work. • One hour pre-application meeting with EPA that is permitted by WIFIA process that provides both an opportunity to ask questions but also to give the EPA WIFIA team an early opportunity to hear about the projects and City of Redding context ahead of their review of the LOI. • City will be available to respond to questions and help provide supporting information it may have related to the topics within the Selection Criteria Responses for Section C. • Jacobs will develop a Financing Plan,with the assistance of the City, for funding of improvements that will be partially financed or funded through the WIFIA loan program,for review by City, including the pro forma financial model that will need to be uploaded to the SharePoint site that EPA will provide to the City. • City will provide historical budget and financial information and input on financial assumptions for the projection of the pro forma financial model. • City staff will assist in coordinating obtaining certifications from City decision makers and City's contractors for Section E. • Phases beyond the WIFIA letter of interest are not included in the scope and fee. Deliverables: Jacobs will upload electronic application and supporting documents to the EPA SharePoint site for the WIFIA applicants. Task 4—Survey and Mapping The following surveying and mapping tasks will be performed to support design activities for the Project: • Control surveys to tie the Project design surveys to past City control,the Northwest Hydraulic Consultants (NHC} survey, and to the U.S. Geological Survey(USGS) �iDAR data.A total of six semi- permanent onsite control monuments will be established. • A bathymetry survey to collect and develop 1"=20', 1-foot contour interval contours and an INROADS DTM for the 1.1-acre area Pump Station Design Bathymetry Area shown on Figure 1 to support design activities for the pump house design.The bathymetry survey will include land side point data ties to the River Trail Area. • Up to six additional bathymetry cross sections across the Sacramento River to support hydraulic modeling. • A survey to collect and develop 1"=20', 1-foot contour interval planimetric and topographic base mapping and an INROADS DTM for the 0.9-acre River Trail Area shown on Figure 1.The DTM for this area will be primarily based on new field surveyed break line and spot elevation point data rather than the USGS LiDAR data. In addition to other planimetric features, special care will be taken to document the stairs and the location of the earthen carving wall in this area. Additionally,visible above ground utilities, and trees greater than 6" diameter will also be located. ,2 • A survey to collect and develop 1"=20', 1-foot contour interval planimetric and topographic base mapping and an INROADS DTM for the 2.3-acre Roadway Area shown on Figure 1.The DTM for this area will be a fusion of new break line and spot elevation data supplemented by ground data points from the 2018 USGS Class 2 LiDAR point data where the topography has not changed. In addition to planimetric features,visible above ground utilities, and trees greater than 6" diameter will also be located. • A survey for Jenny Creek to determine the thalweg profile (x,y, z point/line data)for 320 feet upstream from the upstream end of the existing Jenny Creek culvert.The hydraulic survey will also include nine 100-foot-wide cross-sections centered along the Jenny Creek thalweg at 40-foot intervals from the upstream end of the culvert. • To facilitate repair of the river trail after construction has been completed, a survey will be performed to capture edge of pavement observations, and observations five feet outside of the edge of pavement, on both sides of the river trail at 50-foot intervals from the east end of the River Trail Area survey to Court Street.The length of River Trail for this area is approximately 2,675 feet. �ans;= _ �;...;� � ��f �. ��_.. �a R F�� ;�� 4 � r..,,. �t '�� `''' " � �9 i r 5 j u,t ,, ^, .. axa� . t r. ,�i e�' � r.UH� � u�..��..w+.�.., .wa� '4� �° �:; 3a �.. � �� - d 14 �w��:�,� �t.�;��.�-� S�"� '��`�„��x� Ib�,cxn�^s.,.�. - ��i��,.,, �I�iURE�'F ,��. L�ege�zf � �t ,,, SFFPkYE'P AI#EJ4s� ��,i� � ,„.}�t ra,t�As r w�v.nrc�n� ��h..�%�'��N3'' � �"j, Y.�}�' v !S ftTf'JtLArP'YIT?16}RYEYMe£M '�215�} . ��y � + b �t�� 11 AL M3.t TGYX GTM1d l§'i GV M#Lh ��„v,"� z�� 4 y�fin'.�:,. �tt��;..Y�,i;,,:fJ r} }tj4})\�� — tt.ervkv u§; ,� ".�'c �1.��.,. � �'n{�yY� � £NM4C}LKC(�JY�a�^FIGNS�. A '� `.:�.,. �" . RtUtkTPA�T6uvLtR C.n, 6xV'�"�Ta� r �n F - —stFFRfiYF�fXL�`it�9iW�Fr"RCrFv}CLN�'iiit�'2 .. iPf-R:Tie[KiGL.+'NIN'W4':Lti3itGN v 'A o i� �2yx!�� . �� d'$ �� ),,. , \ d �a.. .. ` .�.,j;: ,,., , ...,�....�� ,. . �,._ �...r<....�,.�.,...�. A total of six semi-permanent onsite project control monuments will be established,three along the River Trail Area and three along the proposed access road from Overhill Drive. Vertical control will be based on the National Geodetic Survey Benchmark—LU1871 previously used by NHC and published control used for the Carr Fire �iDAR acquisition.That control is based on the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83), 2011, California State Plan Zone 1 for the horizontal and the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) Geoidl8 for the vertical.These control monuments will also be used for conducting the survey tasks identified above and for confirmation surveys for the mapping conducted by NHC and the USGS Carr Fire LiDAR data (for confirmation of the map content, and the horizontal and vertical accuracy, coordinate system, and horizontal and vertical datum). The control will also be used during the construction phase of this Project, so they will be placed in areas that will not be disturbed by construction. 13 The Project area includes roughly 725 feet of river length with a river cross section of approximately 500 feet in width. River depth is approximately 14 to 16 feet during low flow (3,250 cubic feet per second [cfs]) condition.The terrestrial topographic and planimetric surveys will be completed concurrently with the bathymetric survey to tie the new bathymetric data to the riverbank area and the terrestrial survey, including the Carr Fire �iDAR mapping within the floodplain. Special care will be taken to capture detail in the vicinity of the intake structure.The bathymetric and terrestrial surveys will utilize RTK GPS and will be based on the onsite control monuments.The final supplemental mapping files, INROADS DTM and CAD contour and planimetric mapping will be delivered as a single continuous mapping area, including the river and the floodplain area together with the proposed access road from Overhill Drive. A survey report will be provided to document the control monuments found and used as the basis for the survey and the onsite control monuments established.The report will describe the survey methods used, and the horizontal and vertical accuracies attained. Furthermore,the report will document the coordinate system and the horizontal and vertical datum.The report will be stamped, dated, and signed by the California Licensed �and Surveyor in responsible charge.A quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC)statement will be included in the report to describe the QC checks made and procedures followed together with root mean square error(RMSE) accuracy calculations to document the map accuracy at the 95 percent confidence level. Assumption:Jacobs intends to use a subconsultant for the bathymetry survey. Deliverables: Results of the surveying and mapping tasks will be provided on the design drawings. Task 5 — Geotechnical Investigation Subtask 5.1—Geotechnical Investigation Jacobs contracted NorCal Geophysical to conduct a seismic refraction survey at the site of Alternative 2, which was completed in August 2020;this survey revealed that the soil underneath the Site is about 12 to 15 feet deep with Chico Formation bedrock underlying it. A hand-auger boring was drilled near the Alternative 2 location along the riverbank when the water was low enough to expose the sandstone bedrock.The hand-auger boring was advanced to a depth of 9 feet into the bedrock before meeting refusal, indicating that the bedrock is soft or weathered rock in the upper portion.The bedrock is exposed in the bottom of the Sacramento River, and extends across the river to the north side of the river.The exposures of the bedrock on the north side of the river are similar in characteristics, in regards to rock type and degree of weathering,to the exposures on the south side, and conditions in the river are estimated to also be of similar characteristics. Additional borings are required to collect information on the hardness of the bedrock to estimate feasibility of predrilling the rock for installation of a sheet pile cofferdam.These borings will be drilled on the Sacramento River trail.The borings will be drilled using rotary drilling methods through the soil. After reaching bedrock, diamond core drilling will be performed to obtain continuous rock cores of the bedrock for testing and characterization.Two to three borings to a depth of up to 50 feet are proposed along the length of the proposed intake facility. If the first two borings at the upstream and downstream end of the intake facility show identical conditions,the third boring may be eliminated. Boring locations will be approximately recorded with measurements from existing Site features and use of handheld Global Positioning System devices. Following the completion of the field exploration and preparation of boring logs,the number of lab tests to be performed will be selected by Jacobs in accordance with the materials encountered.The budget includes costs for gradation testing and Atterberg limit testing on the soil, and for uniaxial compressive strength, point load index, and density of the rock core samples. 14 Soil samples will be classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) soil classification system,and the boring logs will be updated accordingly following laboratory testing. Rock materials will be classified in general accordance with Caltrans rock classification manual. The geotechnical data collected should be sufficient to define the characteristics of the geologic subsurface units that would be penetrated by the proposed steel sheet piles at the Site to support the facilities to be constructed. Assumptions:Shasta County Permit (assumed $800)and City Encroachment permit(fees paid by City) Deliverables: No specific deliverables; work products to be incorporated into the design. Subtask 5.2—Geotechnical Data Report A Geotechnical Data Report(GDR) will be prepared to document sample locations and depths, provide boring logs with geotechnical descriptions of soil and rock, document sample collection and handling methods, summarize the results of geotechnical testing, and provide laboratory reports.Jacobs will submit a draft and final version of the GDR to the City for review. Deliverables: Geotechnical data report. Deliverables will be provided in electronic PDF format. Subtask 5.3—Geotechnical Interpretive Report A Geotechnical Interpretive Report(GIR)will also be prepared to provide recommendations and design criteria for use by the design team. Deliverables: Geotechnical Interpretive Report. Deliverables will be provided in electronic PDF format. Task 6— Right of Way Support Subtask 6.1—Boundary Survey This subtask includes the following: • Perform research of the Shasta County public records database for current deeds, parcel maps,tract maps, and records of survey impacting the Project area. • Prepare a preliminary boundary map of the Project area using the public record documents. Generate search coordinates for boundary monuments and other boundary evidence. • Search for field boundary monuments and other property ownership evidence in the field. • Resolve preliminary boundary map with the found evidence and prepare a final boundary map with survey-accurate property and right-of-way locations. Deliverables: Preliminary boundary map. Deliverable will be provided in electronic PDF format. Subtask 6.2—�egals and Plats This subtask includes the following: • Prepare legal descriptions and exhibits (a.k.a. "plats and legals")for up to six easement and/or property acquisitions. • Address one set of comments and/or modifications to the legal descriptions and exhibits. Assumptions: • Right of entry will be provided to all areas and arranged by the City when necessary. • No boundary monuments will be set. ,5 • No record of survey will be filed. • An outline of the proposed property or easement acquisition areas will be provided in a CAD drawing. Deliverables: Legal Descriptions. Deliverable will be provided in electronic PDF format. Subtask 6.3—Right of Way and Acquisition Services It is anticipated that six(6) parcels will be impacted: APNs 103-280-028-000, 103-730-027-000, 103-730- 029-000, 103-730-030-000, 103-780-026-000, and one unknown parce) number owned by United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR).This subtask includes the following: • Right of way management and coordination services. • Right of way acquisition cost estimates—review recent sales data and provide an estimate of total acquisition costs based upon the anticipated permanent and temporary impact areas. • Permit to enter documents to perform necessary field investigations. Exhibits will be shown and identify the activities that will take place on the property. • Obtain title reports/title research. • Appraisal process—notice of intent to appraise letters along with acquisition policy brochures will be provided to all impacted property owners. • Appraisal review reports—will be completed by a Certified General Real Estate Appraiser. • Negotiation for right of way—prepare offer package and meet with all owners in person to present and explain the offer package details. Negotiate with the property owner to arrive at a mutually agreeable settlement and prepare necessary purchase agreements such as Grant Deeds, Easement Deeds, and Temporary Construction Easement Deeds. • Escrow coordination—assist in opening escrow. • Right of Way Certification—supply all required documents for the right of way certification. Assumptions: • Any rights on or beyond the river will not be acquired as part of this project. It is assumed City holds the rights of the River. • All appraisals will be prepared by an appraiser licensed with the State of California and will comply with all laws applicable to the specific appraisal and the Uniform Standards of Professional Practice 49 CFR 24.2(a)(3). • The offer letter will include the offer letter, written summary of just compensation with supporting appraisal information, property owner exhibit showing property map with right of way take locations,Title VI information, and "Your Property—Your Transportation Project" booklet. • It is anticipated that early contact will be made with USBR to meet all environmental requirements associated with the acquisition of the parcel will be met during the environmental phase. Deliverables: Documents listed below will be provided electronically. • Right of way acquisition cost estimates • Permit to Enter documents for up to six(6) parcels and one unknown parcel number • Preliminary title reports for up to six (6} parcels and one unknown parcel number 16 • Appraisal reports and Appraisal Review reports for up to six (6) parcels and one unknown parcel number • Right of way agreements,Grant and Easement Deeds, and any Administrative Settlements with diaries, written summary of acquisitions and any impasse letters for up to six(6) parcels and one unknown parcel number • Escrow documents and closing statements • Right of way certification documentation Task 7— Fina) Design Services— Drawings, Specifications and Engineers Estimate Jacobs will follow a four-phase process for delivery of the final design and bid documents for the construction of the Project.This process includes producing design deliverables at four stages of the design (30 percent, 60 percent, 90 percent, and bid-ready).At the 30 percent, 60 percent, and 90 percent design stage,Jacobs will provide information for review and provide for resolution of key issues before proceeding to the next stage.The information collected, and the concepts defined in each consecutive stage will form the basis for subsequent work. Each phase of design will include specific deliverables,which are identified in the following subtasks. Submittal review workshops with the City and internal QC reviews will be conducted to monitor the quality of the Project at critical design milestones as identified in the following subtasks.The City staff review comments and resource agency comments are assumed to be consolidated into one comprehensive package and submitted to Jacobs before submittal review workshops identified herein. The City and the resource agencies will provide comments to Jacobs within 4 weeks of receiving the documents. Contract documents will be prepared assuming a single successful general contractor that will furnish all equipment, materials,and labor necessary to construct the Project.The contract documents will consist of bidding information and forms, conditions of the contract, general requirements,technical specifications, and drawings. The technical specification sections will be based on Jacobs master specifications using Construction Specifications Institute (CSI) standards format and customized for the specifics of this Project. Specifications will be produced using Jacobs standard Microsoft Word software and 8.5- by 11-inch format. Drawings and technical specifications will be stamped in accordance with California law and signed by licensed engineers of the appropriate disciplines. Jacobs assumes up to 171 drawings are required to show the work (refer to Attachment 1 for preliminary list of drawings).The drawings will show the level of detail deemed necessary by Jacobs to obtain reasonable bidder response and to limit change orders. Drawings will be produced using the lacobs standard MicroStation software and 22- by 34-inch (C size) drawing format. lacobs will prepare construction cost estimates at the 30 percent, 60 percent, and 90 percent submittal stages. Estimates will be prepared to the level of accuracy based on the information available within normal industry standards. Estimates will be formatted in accordance with the Project design CSI specification format and segregated by facility. Where sufficient detailed information is lacking to obtain reasonably accurate prices of materials, a contingency allowance may be applied. Escalation allowances will be used to provide an opinion of the estimated construction costs at the midpoint of construction. Subtask 7.1—30 Percent Design (Design Development) lacobs will prepare 30 percent complete design drawings and a table of contents of technical specifications for the Project. A draft Project Design Report will be prepared to document the major ,� design criteria used for the various Project components.This report is expected to be an incomplete working document at this stage of design. Assumptions:The City requested at least two architectural design concepts/renderings for the building. The City will decide on architectural features early in the project phase and such features will be incorporated into the 30 percent design. Deliverables: Electronic files (PDF format) and ten (10) hard copy sets of 11- by 17-inch drawings, a table of contents of technical specifications for the Project, construction cost estimate, and a draft Project Design Report. Jacobs and the City will meet(in-person workshop held in Redding)to discuss review comments on the 30 percent design submittal as outline in meeting subtask. City comments will be incorporated in the 60 percent design submittal. Subtask 7.2—60 Percent Design (Draft Bid/Contract Document Preparation) Jacobs will prepare 60 percent complete design drawings and compile a draft version of technical specifications for the Project.The City will provide its boiler plate front-end specifications for Jacobs review and utilization.To assist with the City's preparation of front-end specifications,Jacobs will provide a draft bid item list with measurement and payment clauses for all project bid items,as well as an estimate for the working days that wil) be required for the Construction. The Project Design Report will be revised as necessary to document the major design criteria used for the various Project components. Deliverables: Electronic files (PDF format) and ten (10) hard copy sets of 11- by 17-inch drawings, a draft version of the technical specifications, construction cost estimate, and draft Project Design Report. Jacobs and the City will meet(in-person workshop held in Redding)to discuss review comments on the 60 percent design submittal as outline in meeting subtask. City comments will be incorporated in the 90 percent design submittal. Subtask 7.3—90 Percent Design (Draft Bid-Ready Documents) Jacobs will prepare 90 percent complete bid documents for the Project.This will be the final review submittal.The 90 percent submittal will include the technical specifications, drawings, and City provided front-end specifications necessary for bidding the construction contract.The final engineer's estimate of construction cost will also be included.The 90 percent review submittal is intended to be essentially bid- ready.The Project Design Report will be finalized to document the major design criteria used for the various Project components. Deliverables: Electronic files (PDF format) and ten (10) hard copy sets of 11- by 17-inch drawings, project specifications (complete bid documents),final construction cost estimate, and the final Project Design Report.Two (2)full size hard copy sets of 22-by 34-inch drawings to be provided to the City's Building Department for review. Jacobs and the City will meet(in-person workshop held in Redding)to discuss review comments on the 90 percent design submittal as outline in meeting subtask. City comments will be incorporated in the bid-ready submittal. Subtask 7.4—Bid-Ready Design This is the final phase of the detailed design delivery approach. City review comments from the 90 percent design submittal will be incorporated.Jacobs will prepare a Bid Document package suitable ,s for bidding the Project, consisting of final design drawings, specifications, and details for competitive bidding. Bid Documents will be stamped in accordance with California law and signed by the Jacobs licensed engineers of the appropriate disciplines. Deliverables:lacobs will prepare and submit to the City a USB drive containing electronic PDF full size 22- by 34-inch drawings,8.5- by 11-inch specifications, and all other full-size Bid Documents (provisions and plans) complete with Engineer's stamps and signatures. An Excel spreadsheet for the cost estimate summarizing unit and total costs for each bid item that will be provided in the project. This will assist the City with preparation of the bid proposal forms and bid evaluation. Subtask 7.5—Quality Control Review The purpose of this subtask is to provide QA/QC for the Project. Upon completion of the 30 percent, 60 percent, and 90 percent design phases, senior members of the Jacobs team will review design and construction methodology, drawings, calculations, Project Design Report, and the overall integrity of the design. Internal reviews by senior staff using quality review forms (QRFs)will be performed on the deliverables. Comments received from the QC reviewers will be reviewed and adjudicated by the design team, with changes and additions incorporated into the design documents prior to delivery to the City. Assumptions:Jacobs internal quality control disciplines includes mechanical, electrical, geotechnical, site civil, hydraulics, structural, corrosion, instrumentation and controls, and overall project. Deliverables: No specific deliverable; work products to be incorporated into the design deliverables. Task 8—Supplemental Services Subtask 8.1—Sacramento River Hydrology and Hydraulics The Sacramento River Hydrology and Hydraulics will be required for this Project and information will be provided to CVFPB.This subtask includes the following: • Develop basis of design assumptions and references including regulatory criteria related to flow and stage. • Obtain existing hydrologic information or develop other estimates of flow rates in the Sacramento River at the Project Site for a range of return interval (annual exceedance percentage) events. Regulated releases from Shasta Dam hold the 10-year, 50-year, and 100-year flow events to 79,000 cfs. • Develop site specific frequency duration curves, project rating curve, and related hydrologic design criteria from available local data. • Obtain effective 1-D HEC-RAS hydraulic model from FEMA or the City for the reach of the Sacramento River adjacent to the Project Site. • Modify the effective Baseline model to reflect changes to the river cross section associated with the proposed Project, based on the latest design drawings. Quantify any predicted changes in water level associated with Project features. • Perform scour analysis based on 1D hydraulic model developed for the Project and standard methods. • Develop draft and final TMs detailing the process and results of the hydraulic analyses. Assumptions: Multi-dimensional modeling will not be conducted for this Project. 19 Deliverables: Draft and final TMs encompassing evaluations of river hydrology, hydraulics, and scour potential at the Site. Deliverables will be provided in electronic PDF format. Subtask 8.2—Surge Analysis Jacobs will perform a surge evaluation of the proposed pump station and existing conveyance pipelines to the Foothill Water Treatment Plant.This analysis will consist of various critical events and operational scenarios to determine the potential surge pressures associated with the pipeline system.This analysis will be performed for the maximum flow condition. If the initial analysis indicates that surge conditions may be leading to excessive positive or negative pressures, additional surge analysis will be performed to evaluate potential surge mitigation alternatives. The following tasks are anticipated to complete the analysis: • Gather appropriate information on the system including pump station,transmission system alignment and profiles, pipe material,sizes, pump station data and operation modes, air and control valve locations and operation, and existing surge control devices. • Prepare node, pipe, and appurtenance (pump,valve, reservoir) data for input into a pipe network model such as InfoWater to perform a steady-state analysis as the initial conditions for the surge analysis. Existing hydraulic system models can be utilized for developing the steady-state hydraulics model. • Prepare data such as acoustic wave speed and boundary conditions for input into the transient analysis models. • Perform a base surge analysis simulating power failure (or other appropriate operating scenarios) with no additional surge protection using our proprietary SURGETM program (hydraulic transient analysis). • Determine necessary surge control and mitigation alternatives and test them through analysis. These may include the following: — Surge chambers (hydropneumatic tank) — Surge relief valves — Air admission/air release valves — Surge arrestor valves — Surge tanks (open to atmosphere) — Bypass lines — Flywheels • Consider mitigation alternatives related to operational considerations such as pump time delay and soft restarts related to both power failure and normal operation to reduce system wear and tear. • Develop a draft TM describing the system characteristics, boundary conditions, results, and conclusions including the advantages and disadvantages of proposed surge mitigation measures. This will include valves or device locations, sizes, models, and types. • Refine the analysis based on review comments on the draft TM. • Prepare the final TM with recommendations plus tables and figures showing simulated system response.The final TM will include the following figures: zo — Envelopes of maximum and minimum hydraulic grade lines and pressures for various alternatives — Pressure versus time plots at selected locations in the system for various alternatives — A schematic showing system layout with labeled pipes and nodes that define locations described in previous figures Deliverables: Draft and final TMs. Deliverables will be provided in electronic PDF format. Subtask 8.3—Computational Fluid Dynamic Modeling lacobs will develop a sequence of computational fluid dynamic (CFD) models to evaluate the hydraulic flow characteristics of the proposed pump station.This information will help minimize risk and improve the design for the approach flow conditions related to pump station performance. This analysis will assist with understanding the approach flow patterns,velocities, identifying potential inefficiencies, and developing proposed improvements for the design.The models will be used to accomplish the following: • Characterize the hydraulics for pump approach conditions and suction piping layout as compared to the Hydraulic Institute (HI) standards. • Evaluate the pump intake hydraulics to determine the potential for inefficiencies and poor performance resulting from poor velocity distribution, pump swirl angle, and potential zones of vortex activity. • Identify potential improvements to the design configuration. The following tasks are anticipated to complete the analysis: • Review data, generate model geometry and mesh. — Create a three-dimensional model of the overall model domain of the pump station.This will include key hydraulic features such as the suction piping, header, cans, and pumps. Specific boundaries and size of flow domain will be refined during the modeling effort. — Develop the CFD model, including appropriate mesh to capture overall hydraulic performance and spatial variation within the model and appropriate boundaries based on the agreed scenarios. • Model initial configuration scenario,generate results, review, and discussion. — The initial model will be evaluated at the maximum flow to determine level of convergence of the solution and overall hydraulics.The mesh will be updated and refined to ensure accuracy of results appropriate to describe the hydraulic features. — The pump hydraulic investigation will focus on analyzing swirl angles and average velocity distribution in the pump bell as defined by the HI standards. General flow distribution in the suction piping will also be reviewed to identify areas of poor approach flow conditions that may lead to solids deposition, and development of free surface and submerged vortices.The results will include graphical representations of the flow patterns along with distributions of velocity. The pump station performance will be compared against the HI acceptance criteria to identify undesirable pump approach flow conditions. • Model alternative pump station configurations, generate results, review, and discussion. — The initial model results will be used to identify proposed improvements to the standard design. The performance can be compared against parameters consistent with HI standards evaluations. z, — The pump station investigation will focus on improving swirl angles and average velocity distribution in the pump bell as defined by the HI standards.This includes modifications of piping arrangement related to approach conditions.The results will include similar graphical representations of the flow patterns along with distributions of velocity.The pump station performance will be compared against the HI acceptance criteria to identify undesirable pump approach flow conditions. — This portion of the work includes evaluation of up to three pump station modifications. Note: in order to maintain efficient scope and schedule, all combinations of flow scenarios and configurations may not be modeled. • Develop a TM summarizing the analysis, results, and conclusions.This will include description, figures, graphs, and discussion related to the analysis. Assumptions: • The pump station flow rates will be evaluated as a steady inlet and outlet condition. • Small features that do not significantly impact the analysis will not be included. • Moving mechanical parts may be simplified or omitted from the model. Deliverables: Draft and final TMs. Deliverables will be provided in electronic PDF format. Subtask 8.4—Physical Modeling Jacobs will subcontract physical hydraulic modeling services for the pump inlet conditions to Clemson Engineering Hydraulics, Inc. A summary of of the Physical Hydraulic Modeling work to be performed is as follows: • Initial model proposa) and approva) • Creation of physical model geometry • A series of tests, observations, data collection, and alternatives evaluation • Comparison to acceptance criteria (HI standards) • Presentation and reporting of relevant information • Witness testing to demonstrate physical model performance and results, attended virtually via video conference Assumptions: • The physical modeling will be conducted after the 30%design and results will be incorporated into subsequent design phases. Subtask 8.5—Utility Investigation and Coordination Jacobs will coordinate with utility companies during the design of the Project.Jacobs will request as- built drawings indicating the approximate location of existing utilities in the vicinity of the proposed Project. Digital files on parcels, rights of way,water, sewers, and storm drains will be requested from the City. In addition,Jacobs will locate the existing utility lines and structures on the drawings based on site visits and information received by the utility owners and available as-built drawings. Visible utility features such as manholes, drain inlets,valves, and meter boxes will be identified on the plans. lacobs will attempt to design the Project to have minimal disruption to existing utilities; however, some conflicts may be inevitable.Jacobs will submit one set of 60 percent drawings to each known utility 22 owning facilities within the Project limits. It is assumed that each utility will provide review comments within 2 weeks of receiving the drawings. It is assumed that relocation and design of the utilities in conflict with the Project (i.e.,water, sewer, storm drain,telephone, electrical, cable, fiber optic, or gas lines}will be completed by the owners of the utility. lacobs will develop and maintain a utility log documenting the delivery and receipt of information from the utility companies.The utilities that may be contacted include gas, electric,water, sewer, storm drain,telephone, and fiber optics. Assumptions: • lacobs will use the City's GIS system and Record Drawing Manager to obtain existing City Utilities. • Assumes up to 60 hours for this subtask. • Utility investigations such as potholing or ground penetrating radar are not included. • If pothole information is necessary, it is assumed that the City will perform task and Jacobs will provide pothole list and map of requested potholes. Deliverables: Utility log; utility information will be incorporated into the design. Subtask 8.6—Public Outreach Technical Assistance Assist City by providing technical information related to the Project.This information will be used by the City, in discussions with stakeholders, property owners, and general public impacted by the Project. Jacobs will attend public meetings as requested by the City.Jacobs has assumed attendance at up to six public meetings (1 hour each) and four City of Council Board Meetings (2 hours each). It is assumed that these meetings will be attended in Redding. Assumptions:Assumes up to 60 hours for this subtask. Deliverables:Technical materials and drawings as needed. Task 9— Bid Phase Services Jacobs will provide services to assist the City during the bidding phase.These services will consist of the following: • Coordinate and as directed by the City to respond to bidders'technical questions and requests for additional information.Jacobs will furnish technical interpretation of the Bid Documents and provide revised drawings and/or specifications, modifications, and clarifications,as needed. Jacobs has assumed 80 hours for technical review. • Jacobs will attend a pre-bid conference (assumes 2 hours) with the City and potential contractors (assumed Project Manager and Design Manager). It is assumed the City will lead and prepare the agenda, materials,and meeting minutes for the pre-bid conference. • lacobs will provide Conformed Documents for use during construction of the Project.Technical specifications, standard details, and drawings changed by addenda will be updated.Jacobs has assumed 80 hours for the conformed documents. Assumptions: City will distribute bid documents for advertising bids, conduct and develop the agenda and contents of the pre-bid conference, incorporate changes made by addendum during the bid period into the contract documents, and evaluate the bids. 23 Deliverables:Technical assistance as needed.Ten (10} half-size copies of the Conformed Documents (plans and specifications) and an electronic PDF for record purposes. Task 10— Engineering Services During Construction lacobs will provide engineering services during construction (SDC) in support of City during the construction of the Project.As described below, office SDC will generally include providing the engineering support required to administer the construction contract between City and the Contractor. Subtask 10.1— Pre-Construction Conference lacobs will participate in a pre-construction conference with City and Contractor to review the Project communication,coordination,and other procedures; discuss the Contractor's work plan and requirements of the Contract Documents; and discuss the Contractor's schedule. It is assumed the City will lead the pre-construction conference as the Construction Manager and prepare the agenda, materials,and meeting minutes. Subtask 10.2— Review of Shop Drawing, Samples, and Submittals Submittal Schedule:Jacobs will review Contractor's construction submittal schedule,which should identify all shop drawings,samples, and submittals required by the Contract Documents, along with anticipated dates for submission. Upon receipt,Jacobs will provide timely reviews of submittals to assist with maintaining the approved schedule, when feasible. Coordination and Tracking: Coordination services for construction shop drawings, samples, and submittals, including preparation of a tracking system,which cross-references submittal status to the Contract Document requirements, will be performed by the Contractor.Jacobs will establish a separate internal system and set of procedures for managing,tracking status, and storing all submittals transmitted by Contractor. Review:As requested by the City,Jacobs will review technical submittalstransmitted by the Contractor as part of the Contract Documents requirements.Jacobs' review will be for conformance with the design concept and compliance with the requirements of the Contract Documents.Such review will not relieve the Contractor from its responsibility for performance in accordance with the Contract Documents, nor is such review a guarantee that the Contractor performed work covered by the shop drawings,samples,or submittals is free of errors, inconsistencies,or omissions. The budgetary amount established for submittal review assumes the processing of approximately 150 submittals(total includes re-submittals). Deliverables:Jacobs will review and process technical submittals transmitted by the Contractor and provide review comments/markups and statuses for each submittal to the City, in conformance with the Construction Contract Document requirements. Subtask 10.3—Construction Contract Requests for Information lacobs will review and provide responses for Contractor's requests for information (RFIs)or clarification of technical requirements of the Contract Documents. Jacobs will log and track RFIs received from the Contractor.When necessary,Jacobs will provide design clarifications and/or revised drawings to clarify the design intent. The budgetary amount established for RFI review assumes the processing of approximately 100 RFIs, each requiring an average of about 4.5 hours of review and processing time. Deliverables:lacobs will prepare responses to RFIs for issuance by the City. 24 Subtask 10.4—Change Requests lacobs will review and evaluate Contractor-requested changes to the contract documents.Jacobs will make recommendations to City regarding the acceptability of the Contractor's request and, upon approval of City, assist with preparing information to negotiate the requested change. Upon agreement and approval,Jacobs will prepare final change order documents for issuance by City. The budgetary amount established for evaluating these requests assumes 150 hours of evaluation and processing. Deliverables:lacobs will prepare change order documents for issuance by the City. Subtask 10.5— Progress Meetings lacobs' project engineer will periodically participate in weekly construction progress meetings by conference call (assume 1 hour each and 1 hour to prepare), as requested by City,to provide technical input and support related to construction activities. The budgetary amount established for progress meetings assumes Jacobs' project engineer will be required to participate in up to 76 construction progress meetings. Subtask 10.6— Periodic Engineering Field Inspection Construction Observation: During the course of construction,Jacobs' project engineer will make up to 20 onsite visits. Each onsite visit will include 1/2 day of construction observation during regular working hours including start-up of major equipment,commissioning of equipment, and final inspection at substantial completion. Observation of the Contractor's work is intended to review the general conformance of the work with the design intent and the requirements of the contract documents.These periodic onsite observations will supplement onsite inspection performed by City construction management. Documentation and Reporting:Jacobs will provide the City with a report of onsite field observations, including but not limited to a summary of the Contractor's execution and progress of the work, work deficiencies identified, and other matters not in conformance with the Contract Documents. Scheduling:The City will coordinate with Jacobs to determine the appropriate timing and schedule for the onsite field visits based on the Contractor's approved construction schedule. Deliverables:Jacobs' project engineer will document and submit to the City reports of onsite field observations. Subtask 10.7— Record Drawings Jacobs will revise the Conformed Drawings to reflect available as-built record drawing information provided by the Contractor.The City will provide Jacobs with a single marked-up set of drawings showing all record information. Such marked-up drawings will be prepared using a color coded insert/delete/explanation code to facilitate Jacobs revisions.Jacobs will only make the revisions shown on the markup. Contractor and City will be responsible for reviewing the information for accuracy and completeness prior to delivering to Jacobs.Jacobs will not be responsible for any errors or omissions in the information provided and incorporated into the record drawings. The budgetary amount established for record drawings assumes minimal changes and anticipating 2 hours of CAD technician time and %Z hour of engineering time per sheet. Deliverables:lacobs will prepare and submit one electronic PDF of the Record Drawings to the City within 1 month after receipt of markups. 25 Schedule The Scope of Engineering Services and activities are anticipated to commence in January 2023 and will be completed no later than December 2027.The Scope of Engineering Services and activities associated with this Project will be completed in accordance with the following estimated durations for the milestones: • Project Authorized and Notice to Proceed (NTP) by the City • Complete 30% Design—8 months after NTP • Complete 60% Design—8 months after receive agency comments • Complete Environmental Compliance and Permitting—18 months after 30 Percent Design • Complete 90% Design—8 months after receive agency comments • Complete Final Design—4 months after receive agency comments • Complete Bid Services—3 months • Complete Services during Construction—18 to 36 months The Scope of Engineering Services will be considered complete when final deliverables are deemed acceptable by the City.Jacobs will exercise diligence in the performance of its services, consistent with this schedule and the generally accepted standard of care for performing such services. It is agreed that Jacobs cannot be responsible for delays occasioned by factors beyond Jacobs' control, or factors which would not reasonably have been foreseen at the time this Scope of Engineering Services was executed. Modifications to the schedule may be made to accommodate changing project demands, so long as they are agreed to by both parties.Jacobs will modify the schedule to account for schedule delays due to influences outside of its control and report the modified schedule to the City. Budget The budgetary not-to-exceed amount for professional services and expenses is provided in Exhibit B-1. Jacobs will make reasonable efforts to complete the work within the budget. Jacobs is not obligated to incur costs beyond the indicated budget, as may be adjusted, and the City is not obligated to pay Jacobs beyond these limits. The rates as shown in Exhibit 6-1 will be escalated for subsequent years,while not exceeding the authorized total amount. In the event that a task or subtask is complete and the task or subtask budget is not fully spent, upon City approval, remaining funds may be transferred to other tasks that might require additional budget, while not exceeding the authorized total amount. Additional Services Not Included The services described below are not included in this Scope of Engineering Services but can be performed if requested and approved by the City and Jacobs.Time, scope, and fee have not been budgeted for the tasks listed hereunder.Authorization to proceed will be in the form of an amendment to this Scope of Engineering Services specifying the work to be performed and the additional payment for such services rendered. • Design services for environmental mitigation exceeding those restoration listed above • Design services for landscaping 26 • Construction permitting support required from Contractor(SWPPP, preconstruction surveys, etc.) • Environmental mitigation support(including construction monitoring as determined necessary) • Environmental permitting support exceeding those listed above • Support or participation in Value Engineering Studies or analysis for the Project • Procurement of materials or equipment • More than one construction contract • Operations assistance and performance monitoring services • Survey and mapping exceeding those listed above • Printing of deliverables beyond the quantity listed • Investigation and analysis of water rights and fishery issues • Preparation of additive, deductive, or alternate design and construction scope • Potholing utilities • Operations and Maintenance Manuals • Commissioning and/or start-up of the equipment • Additional workshops not listed above • Construction management services • Materials testing or special inspection services • �itigation or construction claims support • Additional items noted to be excluded within the Scope of Engineering Services If you have any questions or require further information do not hesitate to contact Kimberly Hein at 530.355.8488. Sincerely, �.�m� :,�'�-'�`__� � Kimberly Hein, P.E. John Schoonover Project Manager Manager of Projects v City of Redding Pump Station 1 12/20/22 EXHIBIT B-1 Subcontractor Task Number and Name labor Fee Fee Expenses Fee Task Totals Task 1-Project Management and Meetings Subtask 1.1- Project management $252,095 $0 $2,100 $254,195 Subtask 1.2- Meetings $126,253 $0 $0 $126,253 Task 1 SubTota) $380,448 Task 2-Environmental Compliance and Permitting Subtask 2.1- Environmental Permit Application $232,389 $105,000 $9,975 $347,364 Subtask 2.2-CEQA/NEPA $873,640 $0 $0 $873,640 Task 2 SubTotal $1,221,003 Task 3-Project Funding Assistance Subtask 3.1- Funding Strategy $31,240 $0 $6,300 $37,540 Subtask 3.2- Prepare Drinking Water SRF Planning Funding Application $34,304 $0 $0 $34,304 Subtask 3.3- Prepare Drinking Water SRF Construction Funding Application $73,634 $0 $0 $73,634 Subtask 3.4- Prepare WIFIA Leter of Interest Funding Application $68,354 $0 $0 $68,354 Task 3 SubTota) $213,832 Task 4-Survey and Mapping Task 4-Survey and Mapping $77,628 $15,750 $11,025 $104,403 Task 4 SubTotal $104,403 Task 5-Geotechnica) Investigation Subtask 5.1-Geotechnical Investigation $23,320 $63,000 $6,773 $93,093 Subtask 5.2-Geotechnical Data Report $18,194 $0 $0 $18,194 Subtask 5.3-Geotechnical Interpretive Report $18,194 $0 $0 $18,194 Task 5 SubTotal $129,481 Task 6-Right of Way Support Subtask 6.1- Boundary Survey $34,092 $0 $0 $34,092 Subtask 6.2- �ega) and Plats $17,407 $0 $0 $17,407 Subtask 6.3- Right of Way and Acquistion Services $14,700 $164,378 $0 $179,078 Task 6 SubTotal $230,577 Task 7-Final Design Services-Drawings,Specifications,and Engineers Estimate Subtask 7.1-30 Percent Design $414,914 $0 $3,938 $418,851 Subtask 7.2-60 Percent Design $883,769 $0 $3,938 $887,706 Subtask 7.3-90 Percent Design $735,101 $0 $3,938 $739,039 Subtask 7.4- Bid Ready Design $280,292 $0 $3,938 $284,229 Subtask 7.5-Quality Control Review $155,173 $0 $0 $155,173 Task 7 SubTotal $2,484,998 City of Redding Pump Station 1 12/20/22 EXHIBIT B-1 Subcontractor Task Number and Name labor Fee Fee Expenses Fee Task Totals Task 8-Supplemental Services Subtask 8.1-Sacramento River Hydrology and Hydraulics $33,052 $0 $0 $33,052 Subtask 8.2-Surge Analysis $29,540 $0 $0 $29,540 Subtask 8.3-Computational Fluid Dynamic Modeling $51,232 $0 $5,250 $56,482 Subtask 8.4- Physical Modeling $21,812 $89,250 $0 $111,062 Subtask 8.5- Utility Investigation and Coordination $10,148 $0 $0 $10,148 Subtask 8.6- Public Outreach Assistance $14,605 $0 $0 $14,605 Task 8 SubTotal $254,888 Task 9-Bid Phase Services Task 9- Bid Phase Services $31,868 $0 $10,500 $42,368 Task 9 SubTota) $42,368 Task 10-Office Services During Construction Subtask 10.1- Pre-Construction Conference $5,630 $0 $0 $5,630 Subtask 10.2- Review of Shop Drawings, Samples, and Submittals $163,156 $0 $0 $163,156 Subtask 10.3-Construction Contract Request for Information $93,831 $0 $0 $93,831 Subtask 10.4-Change Requests $31,574 $0 $0 $31,574 Subtask 10.5- Progress Meetings $35,655 $0 $0 $35,655 Subtask 10.6- Periodic Engineering Field Inspections $16,386 $0 $0 $16,386 Subtask 10J- Record Drawings $76,787 $0 $10,500 $87,287 Task 10 SubTotal $433,519 TOTAL $4,979,968 $437,378 $78,173 $5,495,518 $5,495,518 City of Redding Pump Station 1 Estimated Labor Hours 12/20/22 Sr. Engineer Project Principal/ Technologist/ Specialist/ Staff Staff Staff Senior-Level Mid-Level Junior-Level Office/Clerical/ Hydrologist Principal Sr. Project Project Engineer/Staff Engineer 3 Engineer 2 Engineer 1 Technician Technician Technician Accounting Total Labor Hours Project Manager Mana er Mana er Engineer 4 Subtask 1.1- Project management 1,150 - - 1036 - - - - - - - 114 Subtask 1.2- Meetings 541 - 47 447 47 - - - - - - - Subtask 2.1- Environmental Permit Application 1,212 8 134 114 296 496 - 88 - 64 - 12 Subtask 2.2-CEQA/NEPA 4,638 8 486 382 864 2350 - 316 - 232 - - Subtask 3.1- Funding Strategy 136 - 24 112 - - - - - - - - Subtask 3.2- Prepare Drinking Water SRF Planning Funding Application 152 - 24 104 24 - - - - - - - Subtask 3.3- Prepare Drinking Water SRF Construction Funding Application 338 - 48 216 48 - - 8 - 10 - 8 Subtask 3.4- Prepare WIFIA Leter of Interest Funding Application 314 - 48 192 48 - - 8 - 10 - 8 Task 4-Survey and Mapping 424 12 32 40 138 16 186 - - - - - Subtask 5.1-Geotechnical Investigation 104 - 8 96 - - - - - - - - Subtask 5.2-Geotechnical Data Report 90 - 8 60 - - - 4 - 12 - 6 Subtask 5.3-Geotechnical Interpretive Report 90 - 8 60 - - - 4 - 12 - 6 Subtask 6.1- Boundary Survey 152 28 - 88 18 - 18 - - - - - Subtask 6.2- Legal and Plats 80 28 - 12 - - 40 - - - - - Subtask 6.3- Right of Way and Acquistion Services 56 28 - 28 - - - - - - - - Subtask 7.1-30 Percent Design 2,355 - 28 493 181 142 121 378 730 165 88 29 Subtask 7.2- 60 Percent Design 4,942 - 74 1046 305 321 194 817 1602 271 230 84 Subtask 7.3-90 Percent Design 4,002 - 56 1027 203 198 97 707 1284 162 172 96 Subtask 7.4- Bid Ready Design 1,527 - 28 304 92 40 40 278 517 106 86 36 Subtask 7.5-Quality Control Review 560 300 60 200 - - - - - - - - City of Redding Pump Station 1 Estimated Labor Hours 12/20/22 Sr. Engineer Project Principal/ Technologist/ Specialist/ Staff Staff Staff Senior-Level Mid-Level Junior-Level Office/Clerical/ Hydrologist Principal Sr. Project Project Engineer/Staff Engineer 3 Engineer 2 Engineer 1 Technician Technician Technician Accounting Total Labor Hours Project Manager Mana er Mana er Engineer 4 Subtask 8.1-Sacramento River Hydrology and Hydraulics 184 - 32 20 - 80 - 44 - 8 - - Subtask 8.2-Surge Analysis 148 16 - 32 60 8 8 4 - 16 - 4 Subtask 8.3-Computational Fluid Dynamic Modeling 256 24 - 48 112 40 8 4 - 16 - 4 Subtask 8.4- Physica) Modeling 100 12 - 48 24 - 16 - - - - - Subtask 8.5- Utility Investigation and Coordination 60 - - 24 - - - 36 - - - - Subtask 8.6- Public Outreach Assistance 60 - 14 46 - - - - - - - - Task 9- Bid Phase Services 164 - 8 76 0 8 - 16 36 - 20 - Subtask 10.1- Pre-Construction Conference 24 - - 24 - - - - - - - - Subtask 10.2- Review of Shop Drawings, Samples, and Submittals 860 24 60 256 40 60 40 280 24 16 - 60 Subtask 10.3-Construction Contract Request for Information 450 24 40 184 12 30 20 80 20 20 - 20 Subtask 10.4-Change Requests 158 2 2 70 - 24 - 8 28 8 8 8 Subtask 10.5- Progress Meetings 152 - - 152 - - - - - - - - Subtask 10.6- Periodic Engineering Field Inspections 80 - - 56 - - - 24 - - - - Subtask 10.7- Record Drawings 430 4 - 88 16 8 8 40 160 12 90 4 25,989 518 1,269 7,181 2,529 3,820 796 3,144 4,400 1,139 695 498 City of Redding Pump House 1 2023 Billing Rates Professionals and Technicians* Classification 2023 Rate Principal/HydrologistPrincipal Project Manager 305 Sr. Technologist/Sr. Project Manager 275 Engineer Specialist/Project Manager 22p Project Engineer/Staff Engineer 4 201 StafF Engineer 3 165 Staff Engineer 2 143 Staff Engineer 1 127 Senior-�evel Technician 193 Mid-Level Technician 133 Junior-Level Technician gg Office/Clerical/Accounting 115 * Includes Engineering, Consultants, Planners, Scientist, Surveyors, etc. Notes: 1) A markup of 5 percent wilt be applied to all Other Direct Costs and Expenses. 2) Direct expenses are those necessary costs and charges incurred for the PROJECT incLuding,but not Limited to: a) The direct costs of transportation,meals and lodging,mail,subcontracts,outside services,and equipment and supplies. b) Consuttant's current standard rate charges for direct use of ConsultanYs vehicles,laboratory test and analysis, printing and reproduction services,and certain field equipment;and c) Consultant's standard project charges for special health and safety requirements of Occupational Safety and Health Administration. 3) Consuttant's current standard rates for direct expenses shalt be used.These rates are subject to change following internal audits and reviews. 4) These rates are effective January 1,2023,through December 31,2023.Rate schedule is subject to annual revision to reflect current rates and not to exceed 4 percent per year for subsequent years of the contract. Attachment 1 DRAWING LIST Count Drawing Title 1 COVER, LOCATION MAP,AND VICINITY MAP 2 INDEX TO DRAWINGS 3 ABBREVIATIONS 4 SYMBOLS LEGEND 5 GENERAL NOTES 6 CIVIL LEGEND 7 ARCHITECTURA�GENERA�NOTES, MATERIAL SYMBOLS,AND LEGEND 8 PUMP STATION BUILDING �IFE SAFETY PLAN AND CODE DATA 9 STRUCTURAL NOTES 1 10 STRUCTURA�NOTES 2 11 SPECIA�INSPECTION PLAN 1 12 SPECIAL INSPECTION PLAN 2 13 SPECIA�INSPECTION PLAN 3 14 PROCESS MECHANICAL�EGEND 15 PIPING SCHEDULE 16 HVAC LEGEND 17 P�UMBING LEGEND 18 HVAC AND PLUMBING SCHEDULE 19 INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL LEGEND 1 20 INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL�EGEND 2 21 ELECTRICAL LEGEND 1 22 ELECTRICAL LEGEND 2 23 SECURITY LEGEND 24 HYDRUALIC PROFILE 25 BORING SITE MAP 26 BORING LOGS 1 27 BORING �OGS 2 28 OVERAL�DEMO�ITION PLAN 29 EXST INTAKE DEMOLITION PLAN 30 EXST INTAKE DEMOLITION SECTION 31 EXST PUMP STATION BUILDING DEMOLITION P�AN 32 EXST PUMP STATION BUILDING DEMOLITION SECTION 33 SITE DEMOLITION PLAN (CONC STRUCT&JENNY CRK CU�VERTS) 34 TREE REMOVA�PLAN 35 DEMOLITION PHOTOGRAPHS 36 DEMO�ITION PHOTOGRAPHS 37 NETWORK BLOCK DIAGRAM 38 P�C BLOCK DIAGRAM 39 OVERAL�P&ID 40 FISH SCREEN P&ID 1 41 FISH SCREEN P&ID 2 42 PUMP STATION P&ID 1 43 PUMP STATION P&ID 2 44 FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS 45 SURGE TANK, F�OW METER 46 OVERALL SITE PLAN AND KEY P�AN 47 SURVEY CONTROL AND LAYOUT DATA 48 CONSTRUCTION ACCESS AND STAGING PLAN 49 SITE PLAN (EXST SITE) 50 GRADING PLAN (EXST SITE) 51 SECTIONS (EXST SITE) 52 DETAILS (EXST SITE) 53 PUMP STATION SITE PLAN 1 54 PUMP STATION SITE PLAN 2 55 PUMP STATION GRADING PLAN 1 56 PUMP STATION GRADING PLAN 2 57 SECTIONS SS SECTIONS 59 DETAILS 60 YARD PIPING PLAN 1 61 YARD PIPING PLAN 2 62 YARD PIPING PLAN 3 63 YARD PIPING PLAN 4 64 YARD PIPING SECTIONS 65 YARD PIPING DETAILS 66 JENNY CREEK PLAN 1 67 JENNY CREEK PLAN 2 68 JENNY CREEK PROFI�E 1 69 JENNY CREEK PROFI�E 2 70 JENNY CREEK SECTION 71 JENNY CREEK DETAI�S 72 JENNY CREEK PLAN 73 JENNY CREEK SECTIONS 74 JENNY CREEK DETAILS 75 ACCESS ROAD PLAN AND PROFILE 1 76 ACCESS ROAD PLAN AND PROFILE 2 77 ACCESS ROAD ENLARGED PLAN 78 ACCESS ROAD TYPICA�SECTION AND DETAILS 79 ACCESS ROAD SECTIONS 1 80 ACCESS ROAD SECTIONS 2 81 RIVER TRAI�CLOSURE P�AN 82 RIVER TRAIL RESTORATION PLAN 1 83 RIVER TRAI�RESTORATION PLAN 2 84 RIVER TRAIL RESTORATION PLAN 3 85 RIVER TRAI�RESTORATION TYPICA�SECTION AND DETAILS 86 PUMP STATION RENDERING 87 PUMP STATION RENDERING 88 PUMP STATION FLOOR PLAN 89 PUMP STATION ROOF PLAN 90 PUMP STATION E�EVATIONS 91 PUMP STATION SECTIONS 92 PUMP STATION SCHEDULES 93 PUMP STATION FOUNDATION PLAN 94 PUMP STATION ROOF P�AN 95 PUMP STATION BRIDGE CRANE PLAN 96 PUMP STATION SECTIONS 97 PUMP STATION SECTIONS 98 PUMP STATION DETAI�S 99 PUMP STATION DETAILS 100 INTAKE FOUNDATION KEY PLAN 101 INTAKE FOUNDATION PLAN 1 102 INTAKE FOUNDATION PLAN 2 103 INTAKE DECK KEY PLAN 104 INTAKE DECK PLAN 1 105 INTAKE DECK PLAN 2 106 INTAKE SECTIONS 107 INTAKE SECTIONS 108 INTAKE DETAILS 109 INTAKE EASTTRAINING WA�L PLAN 110 INTAKE WEST TRAINING WALL PLAN 111 INTAKE EASTTRAINING WA�L ELEVATION 112 INTAKE WEST TRAINING WALL ELEVATION 113 TRAINING WA�L SECTIONS 114 TRAINING WALL DETAILS 115 F�OWMETER VAULT PLAN 116 F�OWMETER VAULT SECTIONS AND DETAILS 117 SURGE TANK PLAN, SECTION,AND DETAI�S 118 PUMP STATION FLOOR PLAN 119 PUMP STATION SECTIONS 120 PUMP STATION DETAILS 121 INTAKE SUCTION PIPING PLAN 1 122 INTAKE SUCTION PIPING PLAN 2 123 INTAKE DECK P�AN 1 124 INTAKE DECK PLAN 2 125 INTAKE SECTIONS 126 INTAKE SECTIONS 127 INTAKE DETAILS 128 F�OWMETER VAULT PLAN 129 F�OWMETER VAULT SECTIONS 130 SURGE TANK PLAN, SECTION,AND DETAI�S 131 PUMP STATION F�OOR PLAN 132 PUMP STATION SECTIONS AND DETAILS 133 PUMP STATION PLAN 134 PUMP STATION SECTION 135 PUMP STATION HVAC AIRF�OW AND CONTROL SCHEMATICS 136 ONE-LINE DIAGRAM 137 ONE-LINE DIAGRAM 138 SITE PLAN 139 SITE PLAN 140 SITE PLAN 141 SITE PLAN 142 EXISTING GENERATOR 143 SITE LIGHTING PLAN 144 PUMP STATION POWER PLAN 145 PUMP STATION LIGHTING PLAN 146 CABLE BLOCK DIAGRAMS 1 147 CABLE BLOCK DIAGRAMS 2 148 SWITCHGEAR POWER PLAN 149 SWITCHGEAR E�EVATIONS 150 MOTOR CONTROL DIAGRAM 151 LUMINAIRE AND PANEL SCHEDULE 152 RACEWAY SCHEDULE 153 STANDARD DETAILS 154 STANDARD DETAI�S 155 STANDARD DETAILS 156 STANDARD DETAI�S 157 STANDARD DETAILS 158 STANDARD DETAI�S 159 STANDARD DETAILS 160 STANDARD DETAI�S 161 STANDARD DETAILS 162 STANDARD DETAI�S 163 STANDARD DETAILS 164 STANDARD DETAI�S 165 STANDARD DETAILS 166 STANDARD DETAI�S 167 STANDARD DETAILS 168 STANDARD DETAI�S 169 STANDARD DETAILS 170 STANDARD DETAI�S 171 STANDARD DETAILS FIRST AMENAMENT TO CONSULTING AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT (C-8541) Pump House 1 iteplacement Project(Phase 1-Preliminary Design) 'The Consulting and Professional Services Contract C-8541 ("Contract") dated May 11, 2020, between the City of Redding,California,("City")a municipal corporation,and Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. ("Consultant"} is hereby amended as follows: SECTION 1. is amended to read in its entirety as follows: Subj ect to the terms�tt3 cpnditions set forth in this Contract,Consultant shall provide to City the services des�ri�ed in Exhibit A,and A-1,attached and incorporated herein. Consultant shall provide th�services at th�tirne, place and in the manner specified in Exhibit A and A-1. SECTION 2.A. is�mended to read in its entirety as follows: A. City shall pay��nsu�tant for servic�s rendered pursuant to this Contract,at the times and in the manner set forth in Exhibit B, incorpc�r�ted herein,in a total amount not to exceed Five Hundred Sixty Two Thousand Eight Hundr�d Twenty Nine Dollars($562,829). This sum includes all out-of-pocket travel,lodging an�i incidental expenses incurred by Consultant that are reasonably associated with the provis�t�n of ser�ices under this Contract. The payments specified herein sha11 be the anly paym�nts to be rntad�to Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Contract. The Exhibit A-1 attached to this First Amendrnent is incorporated into the Contract dated May 11, 2020, as Exhibit A-1. The Exhibit B attached to this amendment shall replace in its entirety the Exhibit B attached to the Contract(C-8541) dated May 11,2020. All other terms and conditions of the Contract dated May 1 l,2��{�, shall remain in full force and effect. The date of this Amendment shall be the date that it is signed by the City. � � �- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Amendment on the days and year set forth below: CITY OF REDDING A Municipal Corporation Dated: �, � ��'�.'�� By: BA IN, eity Manager Form Approved: BARRYE. DeWALT Attest.• City Attorney ,� � Y �. �__ � PAMELA MIZE, Ciry erk By: CONSULTANT Jacobs Engineering Group,Inc r Dated: ,"Zf}'}�Q� � A � 3 �� - BY= Lisa Alliger, PE/Designated Project Executive Taxpayer I.I�. No.: 95-4081636 �� 2525 Airpark Drive ��.I�� .I l )1� Redding,CA 96001 1.:,1 v L�J United States T+1.530.243.5831 F+1.530.243.1654 Exh i bit A-1 www.jacobs.com August 1$,2020 Kurt Maire,Public Works Engineer City of Redding 777 Cypress Avenue Redding,CA 96001 Subject: City of Redding(COR)Pump Hctuse 1 Replacement Project Ame�dment No. 1 —Geophysical Survey Dear Mr.Maire: This letter presents Jact�t�s Engineering Group,,lnc.'s(JACOBS)proposed scope of engineering services for Amendment No.1 to the Pump Ht�use 1 Reptac�mer�t Project(Project)assigned to the City of Redding Consulting and Professional Services Contra�ct C-854�f�Amendment No. 1 is made to incorporate investigations and subsequent evaluation of geophysi�al surveys in support of potential horizontal collector well(HCW)sites. Jacobs current scope of work,specific ta the HCW in�e�tigation,indudes drilling two(2)exploratory borings and a pumping well test.The exploratory borings were anticipated to be drilled immediately upstream of the ACIO Diversion Dam and near Aqua Golf.Jacobs understar�ds the CQR i�nc�tonger interested in investigating the Aqua Golf site. The COR(Kurt Maire,Josh Watkins,and Conrad Tona),Jatobs(Kim Hein,Kevin Bral,Mark Twede,and Brad Memeo),and Henry Hunt convened in the field on June 24,2020 to r�view and identify potential HCW sites.The field reconnaissance,induding prior desktop review of"auailable data,lead to an interest in investigating a number of potential HCW sites.Figure 1 shows six(6)paientiat HCUV sites,sele�ted in coordination with the COR, to be considered for further investigation.On July 30, 2020 the COR informed JACOBS that no further investigation should be made at the proposed Rodeo line,Hwy 44 Line,and Auditoriurn East line. � '��.".�d ;j'..r"'""Q�O.^'�y �,�;t.• ;�jtab._ -�--��» -':sd �r ti') y .� r .�-� �,� ; �� .��'�'",.ri.�""'��l��'7� �+.�"'0�'�.-.�Lr�i�{t�.. ;2�g��'„ t�`�,4 �j�,�. , ,� �'�'t � -+�r • 1�/ 4. k-r vc . -.;�"�'� .�� "�j'$1.-�`,�'!3`T i�p�� ".'�.ai �,� �l��'sr � s� t Mld' S3l�'4yy��__�� V 'w:�".�.. Y.t� 11�1� s' � .r ) nT'�� L+GI . �V. ..r�`4. �x,tlfl n�yt �i • � �- -��- YJi.+ ,. ..16'�!.`' " �n..,s 3 � ;�.r�;.e � � �� - - ��7I,�F�. 4k. 6 � ' , . ��,. h "T' � ; � _,�': �'�. y��r ..- ��\ h r� l,3. r+—` " �'gr` �'�-8. ` ��. �93� .��+,�,s u Ifjt;��!�(�..i��'',;��r�`��''�.�r ��, v/��.:�+�+1'�1'y.,A.� ��. p ^a {� t�1 ts 9FY" t Y �,�M' � �' !)1�, '1' 1' (� l,.�� T��,'k � ��w� � "�/ �1I�' �QJ ��'W�i.�i�} 3��"��1�jrCY�`�^'-��'��''f `}y��[<;y�p.*�,{ t�/�C.y �"r�' �.�_u ��•� �I31C9 ��+r %� .Y'��1'R��'f��/.��' �- —�}1�`'�G-�y�w, ... ��•. � i. �$�. �i�s — � " i.,�`�� '�J a t _ �' �'� n �y�`r" r -�'_'^---_...__,,,_e �y. r.�'�'! l��.'1�f`.,yti�i�"'S��p�,�°, �!.a.. � m �`'_rv�.}}''�� '-x---_»"^'y��'��'34_�F �� _ ��.---�._=.__ ,��.;cc��`C� �� t~�'i�� '��"�' � ��I'�(��, "� �`1.''\ R Z ``�j.'�",�y+�+�L�"\�� "� ��y �.��` ��y��..��y l•�..i��f }�\, 5,��. ?�!j '�{ �,�� '�'�Y�i�1�d�'�`�1'114� ��rp;,.�.q'� �-c�,�L�-r h". j�''�x'�ars''ov. �a^��s ��'-��L :�� C-��*�.`��,�.��,� f�`�� '�0 ... �?�` �� ,�,�-��:��Y� i •-i�� '�F�-�:� '- ` � � - � .�� , . ��`'�'��-��' �v n-,..�'.��'�_�� , �.�� '�'� �`t� ��;' * _t �: Figure 1.Potential HCW Sites Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. 1 �acobs. August 18,20Z0 Subject: Amendmertt Mo.1 Geophyiscal Survey-City of Redding(COR)Pump House 1 Reptacement Project HCW investigations typically proceed as a series of steps,one after the other upon obtaining favorabte results from the previous step.In generat terms,we recommend the subject investigation proceed as fotlows: • Review Available Information—Review of available background information on hydrogeology,land uses,and property access. • Surface Geophysics(Amendment No.1)—Conduct a surface geophysicat survey(non-invasive)to identify areas with suitable lithology. � Exploratory Borings—Dril!exploratory borings at sites with potential suitable lithotogy to confirm and calibrate the geophysicat survey results.Not induded in this amendment. - Pumping Test—Ct�nstruct test pumpi�g well and monitoring weits at sites proven from the exploratory borings. ■ Yield Calcutati�rns—Estimate the potenti�l yield of the locations that were subjected to a pumping test. • Design,Construction,Testing—If the tast step results in a desirable result,design the HCW,complete construction,and perform finat pumping tests. Not included in this amendment. Scope of Engineering Services The scope of engineering services assaciated with this�rr�endment are as follows: Task 2—Data Review,Geotechn�cal Investigations,and Survey/Mapping Subtask 2.2.1 Geophysical Survey JACOBS wilt perform a geophysical survey at the potent#�al HCW sites shovun on Figure i (approximatety 5,435 linear feet totai),excluding the proposed Rodeo tine,tiwy 44 line,and Auditorium East line, Data collected witl be evatuateci and recommendations for next st�ps including subsequent investigations(i.e.,exploratory borings), if appropriate,will be made. Assumptions:The COR will provide access to the proposed HCW sites.It is a�s�med that np,permits witl be needed to perForm the geophysical survey. Detiverables:A technical memorandum wilt be prepared to summarize th�fteid investigation and results.The evatuation and summary will be incorporated in the PDR. Schedule The scope of engineering services and activities associated with this Amendment will be completed in accordance with the foltowing approximate milestones: • Authorization and Notice to Proceed by City of Redding—August 14,2Q20 ■ Complete Geophysical Survey—October 16,2020 The Scope of Engineering Services shalt be considered complete when final deliverab[es are deemed acceptable by the City.Effarts will be made by the JAC065 to complete the work in a timety manner.tiowever,it is agreed that the JACOBS cannot be responsible for delays occasioned by factors beyond JACOBS tontrot,ar factors which woutd not reasonabty have been foreseen at the time this Amendment was authorized. z �acobs. August 18,2020 Subject Amendment No.1 Geophyiscal Survey-City of Redding(COR)Pump House 1 Replacement Project Budget The budgetary amount for Amendment No. 1 is$74,000.JACOBS witt make reasonable efforts to complete the work within the budget.JACOBS is not obligated to incur costs beyond the indicated budget,as may be adjusted, and the City of Redding is not obligated to pay 1ACOBS beyond these limits. If you have any questions or require further information do not hesitate to contact Kimberly Hein at 530.355.8488. Sincerety, Kim Hein,P.E. Project Manager cc: Josh Watkins,Ciiy of Redding J Exhibit B Engineering Services for the Purr�ap �-louse 1 RepBacemen� Project for the City of Redding (vvi$h Arnenc8rnerat 1) Consultant Fee Phase 1 Fee Summary Subcontractor Task No. Description Labor Fee Fee Expenses Fee Task 1 Project Management Task 1.1 Project Ma�agement $23,376.00 $0.00 $0.00 $23,376.00 Task 1.2 Meetings $21,148.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $22,148.00 Task1.3 QualityControl $17,664.00 $0.00 $0.00 $17,664.00 Task 1 Subtotal $62,188.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $63,188.00 Task2 Data Review, Geotechnical Investigations, and Survey/Mapping Task2.1 Data Review $14,892.00 $0.00 $0.00 $14,892.00 Task2.2 Geotechnical $41,016.00 $19,541.00 $2,000.00 $62,557.00 Investigations Task 2.2.1 Geophysical Investigatians $36,�{�9.00 $35,671.00 $1,520.00 $74,000.00 (Amendment 1) Task2.2 Drilling/PumpTesting $0.0(? $135,,524.00 $0.00 $135,524.00 Task2.3 Surveying and Mapping $4,�#��.00 $7'a�}55.00 $800.00 $12,335.00 Task 2 Subtotal $�6,79?.{�0 $198,191.0{� $4,320.00 $299,308.00 Task3 Preliminary Environmental $44,288.00 $0.{�Q" $�,410 $44,288.00 Review Task 3 Subtotal $44,288.00 , $U,Q{I $0.00 $44,288.00 Task4 ConstructionFunding $19,576.00 $0.00 $0.00 $19,576.00 Evaluation Task 4 Subtotal $19,576.00 $0.00 $0.00 $19,576.00 TaskS PreliminaryDesignReport (Preliminary,Pre-Final, $136,469.00 $0.00 $0.00 $136,469.00 and Final PDR) Task 5 Subtotal $136,469.00 $0.00 $0.00 $136,469.00 TOTAL PHASE 1 $562,829.00 �ae�8.�5 Consultant Rates Engineering Services for the Pump House 1 Replacement Project for the City of Redding 2020 Hourly Billing Rates Hourly Bitling labor Ciassification Rate Office/Clerical/Accounting $108 Junior-Level Technician $gp Mid-ievel Technician $123 Senior-Level Technician $�79 StaffEngineer1 $�22 StaffEngineer2 $133 Associate Engineer $135 Project Engineer $�87 Engineer Specialist/Associat��roject Man�ger $204 Senior Technologist/Project Manager $255 PrincipalTechnologist/SeniorProjectManager $283 Includes engineering,consulting planne�'��nd scientist disciplit�es. Notes: 1) A markup of 5 percent will be app(ied to all�ther�irect Costs and Expenses. 2) Direct expenses are those necessarycosts and charges incurredit�rthe PR{�JfCTincluding,but not limited to: a) The direct costs of transportation,meals and lodging,mail,subcon�tr�cts,outside services,and equipment and supplies. b) Consultant's current standard rate charges for direct use of Consu��t"s vehicles,laboratory test and analysis,printing and reproduction services,and cert�in fi�it��quipment;and c) Consultant'sstandardprojectchargesforspecialhealthandsafetyrequirementsofOccupationat Safety and Health Administration. 3) ConsultanYscurrentstandardratesfordirectexpensesshallbeused.Theseratesaresubjecttochange following intemal audits and reviews. 4) TheseratesareeffectiveJanuary1,2020,throughDecember31,2020.Ratescheduleissubjecttoannual revisionto reflectcurrentratesand notto exceed 4 percentperyearforsubsequentyears of the contract. .;acobs SECOND AMENDMENT TO � CONSULTING AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT (C-8541) Pump House 1 Replacement Project (Phase 1-Preliminary Design) The Consulting and Professional Services Contract C-8541 ("Contract") dated May ll, 2020, and amended on September 11, 2020, between the City of Redding, California, ("City") a municipal corporation, and Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. ("Consultant") is hereby amended as follows: SECTION 1. is amended to read in its entirety as follows: � Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Contract,Consultant shall provide to City � the services described in Exhibit A, A-1, and A-2, attached and incorporated herein. Consultant shall provide the'�ervices at the time, place and in the manner specified in Exhibit A, �-1and A-2. The Exhibit A-2 attached to this amendment is incorporated into the Contract dated May 11, 2020, � and amended on S��tember 22, 2020, as Exhibit A-2. SECTION 2.A. is amended tc�r��d in its entir�t�,;as follows: A. City shall pay Consultant for services rend�r�d pursuant to this Contract, at the times and in the manner set forth in Exhibit B, incorpa�'ated herein, in a total amount not to exceed Six Hundred Thiriy-Eight Thousand Ei�ht Hundred T'�enty Nine Dollars($638,829). This sum includes all out-of-pocket travel,lcrdgingnand incidental e�penses incurred by Consultant that are reasonably associated with the provisic�n af services u�der this Contract. The payments specified herein shall be the only paym�nt�to be made tc� Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Contract. The Exhibit B attached to this amendment shall replace in its�entiret�the Exhibit B attached to the Contract (C-8541) dated May 11, 2020 and amended on September 1��1, 202Q. All other terms and conditions of the Contract dated May 1 l, 2�2�, shall remain in full force and effect. The date of this Amendment shall be the date that it is signed by the City. C� ��. � IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have exe�uted this Amendment on the days and year set forth below: CITY OF REDDING A Municipal Corporation �� r:;�-! - . Dated: �-�'�,��b),�,,1�.�'i,l � �--.. ,_2020 � i � -��'.t,. �� ,fi c!� : � c� '',' � Y�I�By: BARRY W. TIPPIN,�C,ity Manager `�.1 Form Approved: BARRYE. DeWALT A t � � City Attorney �. � ��'�� ;�PAMELA MIZE, City Clerk By; CONSULTANT Jacabs� Engineering Group Inc. r, ' � . Dated: , 2020 �l� ,�C�� lZ �3I Z�'�U By: Lisa Ptiliic�er, PE/Designated Project Executive T�t��y�r I.D.Nc�.; J5-4081636 2525 Airpark Drive �acobs Redding,CA 96001 United States www.jacobs.com Exhibit A-2 December 14,2020 Kurt Maire,Pubtic Works Engineer City of Redding 777 Cypress Avenue Redding,CA 96001 Subject: City of Redcling(COR)Pump 1�iouse 1 Replacement Project Amendment No.2—Collector Well Investigations Dear Mr.Maire: This tetter presents Jacabs Engineering Group Inc.'s(JACOBS)proposed scope of engineering services for Amendment No.2 to the Pump Wcrus�e 1 Replacernent Project(Project)assigned to the Ciry of Redding Consulting and Professionat S�rvrices Contract C-$54't:Amendment No.2 is made to incorporate investigations and subsequent evaluation of potential#�c�rizontal coll�ctor well(HCW)sites. HCW investigations typicatly proceed as a series of steps,one afte�the other upon obtaining favorable resutts from the previous step.In generat terrns,we recommer�d the subject investigation proceed as follows: • Review Available Information—Review af available background information on hydrogeology,land uses,and property access. • Surface Geophysics(Amendment No. 1)—Conduct a surface geopf�ysical suroey(non-invasive)to identify areas with suitable lithology. ■ Exptoratory Borings(Amendment No.2)—(7rill explca�-atcrry bc�rirrgs,coupt�d with smatl-scale pump tests,at sites with potentiat suitable lithology to confirm and catibrate the geopt�ysical survey resutts. • Pumping Test(Future Amendment)—Construct test pumping well anc�monitoring w�tls at sites proven from the exploratory borings. • Yietd Calculations—Estimate the potential yield of the loc�tians that were subjected to a pumping test. • Design,Construction,Testing—If the last step results in a desirabte result,design the HCW,comptete construction,and perform final pumping tests.Not induded in this amendment. Amendment No. 1 provided geophysical data collected by Collier Geophysics on September 22,2020 through September 26, 2020 at ACID, Bike Park,Auditorium West,and Turtte Bay. The data report presented promising information and supports continuing with additional exptoration(Amendment No.2). COR provided direction on December 2,2020 to continue forward with geotechnical investigations(i.e.boring and small-scale pump testing)at ACID, Bike Park,Turtle Bay and adding Highway 44 as shown in Figure 1 that includes up to 12 borings and 6 small-scale pumping test. ;a_'obs Er�g�r�eering Grot,��kr-�::. vaCObS. December 14,2020 Subject: Amendment No.2 Collector Well Investigations-City of Redding(COR)Pump House 1 Replacement Project tr� ,� t � ,� � • l!+• F ,. � �,2• 1 x ';� a . ,:s.�j4* ��,�y'y,.x t` 4 ��. � �'r "yk��,}�;� "`4�J � 1 j � �f� $'� R't.""-g+ � ' - �� ' 3 9 ' ''��F �C S,�-F a;'°*.qz ¢�� a �� ,W,` T,.� " � . i ��+ �/a ".. r � � �„ e t 1�-�p +3'f. .(a' T3 S�..� ? � ��..i�: ��et�,�pq„W&1 (��"�f` T.Ir��„ :�'`��' A kF'L�!{ �T�t' l� F ,:M��.i �� j�"..�� :�n 5 .y ��,� �,Sq' , „�F , . a � . �:a. '��'. ` • ' q ' ��w � *�� *. _�SA1EOrn9�� --.i.. . •r . ��:' �ocamns �ea y � �,r ��; a, �_.+,e" Gr:•,. ;r'�-,t+Q? 3 ❑ i-ss((,, 1?..?n SDfivn - � � 3 M _ - ..M _'" � .rjR � � ` � . �� t .* r ��t ` ��',�� *t ` � py r� 1 .. �f§ �3: ,;�{' ,� �k'.L�, :�, F• ? ,�: . � . t� ' �i E' '?,��"� ��"� � , .'� � � „� `, � ��'� "�t.� ,�' '.L .�,..r� �P' .. "' .�t�,��'"'r;,�:-��,.- _��,f�� f�� ',L;�„y� c(;�' I ,r ._(�^�� ?. _x�� ` § �, ,iCk�� tQ � _ 'i r �r.+. •' w�" �� ` ,<,�� t'� , , �.' �4;�k�C� � '�,5�'",i,.��,x4,, �„ •t - .'le:.�� +��.v:. �y �� Y ,�'. :��i�'�• � R �.. � � d ,ys .�""^�w �' �41� �� ", �'��` ��,x.�`�,'.44�.+•�� -�.� �`.�t �h�.r�'e�'t:��p .`::.,.� - �-�-��'»�.�`�.=�L.s�6�`^ . r � 1�r ��w, * i;^" > t �1% t� y i �('��'� �'� ��"��tw'�\'",'��t.`^ ,�`. . �� d?"^„� YTq"�?'?� '�i ` d,a � �^� e=1t'��a•`�-��_ + i�`_ � '�>'#�,t'�t n �." » � ,.z�� '�. �F S�� q,��.,t�i q . �`",�� i^77w� " R w � .j a p t-f� , �'- " r , �1 �tE a ��t 16 .��` '1'�j�`!r � �'R� "� N � • .Y .1�� '�� f,m��,� . :x2"' , .:_ � � � ` �; `'�'�C ' ��«��,rg�`,iJ . � �t . �r � � h��+�. y � ��' ��. . ,,�. � " ' � ` � f �` �v � �;. �� £� r �� ' � r 4 � J ��5��.��}`,��' �y�I ��:.�t 4 � �j, '.,�'. ;��"j]tA '�-�`-�✓'�+,�'��,�,u` A ��,�.�< ��',# MI` � 'E +��r'�• � - ;u � �.�� ° � �:."`,`�'.J�' ��'� ` ��'�"�:,��e�' �e,."2*� �`n ,.."�� . ;aii` �. s' e,j �"�,.: i , Figure 1. HCW Boring Site Locations fr�r Amendment Nt�.2 Scope of Engineering Services The scope of engineering services associated with this amendment are as follows: Task 2 —Data Review,Geotechnical Investigations, and Su�vey/Mapping Subtask 2.2.2 Cotlector Wetl Investigations ' JACOBS wilt perform up to 12 exptoratory borings at the potentiat HCW sites shown in Fi�ure 1. Data coltected will be evaluated and recommendations for next steps including subsequent investFgations(i.e., pumping test),if appropriate,wilt be made.The technical specifications for the�xploratat�bnrings is induded as Attachment 1. Assumptions: • The COR will provide access to the proposed HCW sites. • Shasta County permits will be required for each exploratory boring;the budgetary estimate included herein includes$2,500 for Shasta County permit fees. It is assumed up to 4 hours to obtain permits. • It is assumed that no other permits will be required for the exploratory borings and smatl-scale pump tests.A 1600/LSAA permit is not required for geotechnical drillings(email from CDFW dated November 16, 2020).The RWQCB R5 exemption waiver for dewatering is assumed. e Yellow Jacket Drilling Services,LLC(subcontractor)wilt conduct up to twelve exploratory borings and six interval testing according to technical specifications included as Attachment 1 and per their proposal dated December 14, 2020. . • One Jacobs Hydrogeologist Technician will be on site for up to 10 consecutive days and 4 days off then 10 consecutive days(assumes maximum of 20 fietd days, 10 hours days)plus travel and travel expenses. �acobs. December 14,2020 Subject: Amendment No.2 Collector Well Investigations-City of Redding(COR)Pump House 1 Replacement Project • Jacobs Technotogist(Kevin Bral)will be on site for 2 consecutive days during the work plus travel and travel expenses. The Technologist will work ctosely with the fietd hydrogeologist on a daily basis during the boring construction,provide analysis and reporting. Oeliverables:A technical memorandum witl be prepared to summarize the field investigation,data,results,and recommendations for next phase(i.e.pumping test).The evaluation and summary will be incorporated in the Preliminary Design Report. Schedule The scope of engineering seruices and activities associated with this Amendment will be completed in accordance with the fc�tlt�wing approximate mitestones: ■ Authorization and Notice to Proceed by Ciry of Redding—December 2020 • Complete HCW�nvestigations associat�d'with Amendment 2—Three months after Notice to Proceed The Scope of Engineering Services shalt be considered complete when final deliverables are deemed acceptable by the Ciry.Efforts witl be made by JACOBS to complete the work in a timely manner.However,it is agreed that the JACOBS cannot be respc�osible f�r delays�accasioned by factors beyond JACOBS control,or factors which woutd not reasonably have been foreseen�t the time this Amendment was authorized. Budget The not-to-exceed budgetary amount for Amendment No.2 is$�b5,253.It is assumed that the budget authorized under the current contract C-$541,,tJ�t�d May 13,:202(?for Task 2.2(Drilling/Pump Testing)of ' $135,524 witl be applied to this Amendment No.2. Therefc�re the adtlitionat budget needed to complete this � Amendment No.Z is$129,729.The City will authorize an�dditional$76,fl00 to the contract amount in this Amendment No.2. The remaining funds necessary tr�cc�rnplete this Amendment No.2(not-to-exceed$53,729) scope of work is assumed to be utilized from auth€�rizetl Task 5(Preliminary Design Report)or any other authorized tasks and budgets under the origin�l�ontract. JACOBS wilt make reasonable efforts to complete the work within the budgets as outlined in the Amendment No.2.It is envisioned that.a separate and future amendment will be required to cornpiete the work for Phase 1 induded in the original scope of work.JACO65 is not obligated to incur costs;beycar�rJ the indicated budget,as may be adjusted,and the City of Redding is not obligated to p�y JACOB�bey�nd these limits. If you have any questions or require further information do not hesitate to contact Kimberly Hein at 530355.8488. Sincerety, Kim Hein, P.E. Project Manager cc: Josh Watkins,City of Redding TECHIVICAL SPECI�IC�►TIONS �OR THE COIVSTRl1CT10N OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS City of Redding, CA City of Redding Pump House No. 1 Replacement Project I�ecem ber 2020 ��-. Table of Contents 1.0 GENERAL.........................................................................................................................:...............3 1.l DEFINTI'IONS...............................................................................................................................3 12 PROJECT DESCRIPTION.............................................................................................................3 1.3 SPECIFICATIONS.........................................................................................................................4 1.4 HOURS AND TiME OF WORK....................................................................................................4 1.5 SCHEDULING...............................................................................................................................4 1.6 COORDINATION..........................................................................................................................5 1.7 SITE CONDiTIONS.......................................................................................................................5 1.8 INTERFERING STRUCTURES.....................................................................................................6 1.9 MAINTENANCE OF EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS....................................................................6 1.10 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION UTILITIES AND FACILITIES..............................................6 l.l 1 SAFETY AND CONVENIENCE..................................................................................................7 1.12 PRESERVATION,RESTORATION,AI�I�3 CLEANUP................................................................7 1.13 MATERIALS AND WORKMANSHIP.'. ........: ......................................................................7 1.14 MAINTENANCE AND GUARANTEE... ......... ......................................................................7 1.15 INSPECTIONS............... ........: ..................... ......................................................................8 1.16 PERMITS,LICENSES,LAWS AND REGULATIONS................................................................8 ?A MOBILIZATION/DEMOBILIZA'T'ION/CLEANUP.. ..:..................................................................8 3.0 EXPLORATORY BORING DR1L1�1NG.............................................................................................9 l.0 SOLIDS AND WATER DISPOSAL. ......... ................................................................................ 11 Page 2 of 12 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS 1.0 GENERAL 1.1 DEFINITIDNS 1. Wherever in these specifications the word OWNER is used, it shall refer to the City of Redding,CA. 2. Wherever in these specifications the word ENGINEER is used, it shall refer to Jacobs Engineering. 3. Wherever in these specifications the word SUBCONTRACTOR is used, it shall refer to the firm or business that is contracted to the ENGINEER to perform this work. 1.2 PROJECT DESCR/PTION 1. There are four proposed areas#r�r the installation of exploratory borings along the Sacramento River in the City of Redding.These areas are the Andersar�'Cottonwood Irrigation District(ACID)diversion, Bike Park,Turtle Bay, and Highway 44 Bridge. ?. The exact location for the borin�s will be determined by the ENGINEER, but they will be located in the areas as shown on Figure 1. The te�t bc�ring Ic��a#i�+ns are shown on Figure 1 as red circles located on previously conducted surface geophysical lines. The geophysical work was done prior to boring instaflation and the results of the geopt�ysics were us�cl to finalize the number and location of the borings. 3. At the OWNERS discretion, not all borings may kae cc�nstructed or�dditional borings may be requested. If requested,the SUCONTRACTOR shall construct�dditional borings and perform all work at the unit prices quoted in the Bid Schedule. G. For the purpose of the fee estimate,the exploratory barings include, hut are not timited to the following assumptions and activities. a) Construct approximately twelve exploratory borings using rotosonic methods. b) The SUBCONTRACTOR shall propose a rotosonic drilling method that prouid�s continuous cores of drill cuttings that can be analyzed by mechanical sieve analysis ta eztirnate collector well potential yield. c) Field oversight of key boring installation activities will be provided by the ENG�NEER. d) Each boring will be completed to a total depth of approximately 50 feet. Final boring depths will be directed by the ENGINEER. In some locations, borings may be as shallow as 12 feet. e) Exploratory borings will be abandoned in strict conformance with the State of California water well regulations following construction. f) A Pre-Construction meeting will be held onsite following Bid Award. The selected SUBCONTRACTOR shall attend the Pre-Construction Meeting. g) Questions during the bid period should be directed to the ENGINEER, Kevin Bral, PE, kevin.bral@iacobs.com, 303-881-5752 and Mark Twede, PE, mark.twede@iacobs.com, 530- 229-3320. Page 3 of l2 ��*�•y n�'�' y�0.'�"��+�4 f x tKa. +5 � �� .;_ w � ��n��' ,��t t�'�.y -�e�-� a � �� :� � �� C �y�� ra �s ��Z`� �'�'� � � '�� -%i�i ,C'f�;'. � ��` � �S1v��`�i}�: �44: _'•4- y 4Y � ��'d'a, '��f e i �,� �� s a;' �� h � w.� '�ytai��,r �*tF� e >' S': .� :. S r �� .t�,�, c ��goi�n7 '��r � :�-.•M.� ,.z`.'�€�� «�,"' � �� ,w be� ,�.�;,� �' �,��''�t T`, �Lbr.3u:;•s 'u�v - :€.�A _ � �"�3,i.1.��e� ��i '�-� )7cOtinGS�hJvi� ..�:•. v' h i e ��/�'�' � � :-. . ;�._ ' '. � . ' , �'K.a� c"�� • i�d i�,q{�� a. . "k.s.,� c 6 . �•p�� '��^.�'`�`1v ,. - .-A �� 0t�4�� r Z �.� s�} _� s„ � .. .�.5 � �.:��1 � �'� � ' t � a aS ,. .y,� - �u �.t � 't' 's� `..` �: e+,�.�S -�,; t�V 3r'"aF i � _f t S �* +' � � ' t! N �,c .4 t ��„�+-� �"��'�r'"' Y s'�.�` �. I "f+�1, ,�"� , a.1� ' ' t k rS,,, �C t� <� ��'� y 4 ,t�' �� , '�Fk�y� �. a 'v��!'� ..;:�q � ��y� t .i,# �"`t'�� .��$� � � '.� '� r , -t'� d 'R ,�`°`�` .. � 'r:.. a {� � .,,rwt�.,� � T'�`'��!�.� �'� .a, F 1" f . : � � y i i i l ��„"w� �`, �.'t :..'� *� � t �`` 4a^`� �E.ltc �' �r ¢ }` � .��C�'�� '' �''�� ki.= d"-��.%�t � �� s, x ..� Css`� T .s� k��,L� ,;. L �„ S�y 43 �,� �� ''^ xJ�'�'" m � L�r',�` Fj «n"" � + '� t��{�i� .�+-r,, �^ rt� :q` �� at .a, �,r .yq, rr" `�_ .....,: �,y ��g �'j'��.,, �..-,w� ��r,��• � �� `�� G �„ � �.��`�"��°n'�''�.�•"" "�i��`�"'Y��'� ��'� '' �� v'�"ry:.� `-�r"'_ �"' ��'" � � �� t '� � ,i. , ��f �:r ��".S�� +�$.y�,.��§�,.`��1�y�t,y��.a�. `' '�. �� :,.s-�.:- . '�,?�` v�.'�"�.`."�' � �.�:t'�^�� _: �.�Y �� < ��1�,� �7��. ;tt�,��+��`�,'3`,�� re v��„ �� 1' ,�. .,��,�«..9�� `�7`7?�.�.�.l.��t6 � �$i#s��1'+`�`��'+�iTa�.,j ��. ;.. ��d'a�•.a t ..�. � �^'��t'^ �:� �,��',�''��i�'�.'4-.'; ,��k�¢�a � r��1 ��i � �� 4�1 �,z�,�y-y � 1 � �� ;�'i 'n� f �Y'!?'��}��S�, � � ''��"t":� r ��y ��, '�' +�.:� ry �,. ,�,}. �' u�'iT S� r4�-a. � � ... � > .. � � r��,. �, �'� �,� �� ,��.' �v � y ' #, , r��'t�,�y�v � T i� �� p �a rrc � � . ��u�. ,r.}��„��`. �f�j � &"`�'"��,-+ �R �� "4"�,� � '� . �$"� �+�� - ' � � + ��"f�' �.-�»'�r '��'�' �� ",�.� '" � �� F � td"j:l..��LJ1 �E''� .7��:��y��..Sei .ur � � iL�''.kQl � ��i��;� Figure 1 Propased Test Boring Locations 1.3 SPECfFICATIONS 1. The SpecifiCatic�ns included in these Contract Documents establish the performance and quality requirements for materials antl equiprrxent as well as the minimum standards for quality of workmanship and appearance.Any que�tions concerning interpretation of any portion of these Specifications should be directed to the ENGINEER. 1.4 HOURS AND TIME OF WQRK 1. Work may be conducted during dayligh#h�urs, 7 am tt�,5 pm (10 hour days), 7 days a week, Monday through Sunday. 2. After working for 10 consecutive days,the work sh�ll be suspended for 4 consecutive days to allow time off for the SUBCONTRACTOR and ENGIlV�E�t. 3. Special permission must be requested and granted, by the ENG�NEER,for conducting work other than during the hours specified. 1.5 SCHEDULING ` 1. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall plan the work and carry it out with minimum interference to property owners and adjacent land users. Prior to starting the work, the SUBCONTRACTOR shall confer with the ENGINEER to develop an approved work schedule,which will allow minimal interference and meet the objectives of this project. 2. ENGINEER and SUBCONTRACTOR recognize that time is of the essence of this Agreement and that the ENGINEER will suffer financial loss if the Work is not completed within the times specified below, plus any extensions thereof allowed. � Page 4 of 1: 3. The activities are expeded to be completed as concurrently as possible. If the SUBCONTRACTOR de- '' mobilizes from the site for any reason before completing his work,the ENGINEER will not be responsible for paying the SUBCONTRACTOR to re-mobilize. 4. Work shall not be considered complete until all work activities have been completed, or as approved by the ENGINEER. 5. Completion of the work shall be in accordance with the following milestones.Schedule may vary ' due to weather or other issues related to this project. ' Milestone Schedule 1—Completion of 12 exploratory borings,as 10 continuous calendar days on,4 specified. continuous calendar days off, 10 continuous calendar days on. 2—Completion of 12 exploratory borin�s,as All twelve borings shall be completed and specified. the SUBCONTRACTOR demobilized from the �ite within 6 continuous calendar weeks. 1.6 COORDINATION 1. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall coop�rate in the coordination of their activities in a manner that will minimize interference with the prap�rty c�wners,ex�sting construction activities and adjacent land uses. 1.7 SlTE CONDlTIONS 1. The OWNER has the responsibility to provide legal acce�s tt�the wark sites. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall utilize the primary access routes to each site directed by th�€N�INEER. 2. The SUBCONTRACTOR acknowledges to his satisfadion as t�a the nature antl location of the work, the general and local conditions, particularly those bearing upon availabiiity of transportation, access to the site,disposal, handling and storage of m�teriats,auailability of labc�r,water,electric power, roads, requirements for temporary roads, and uncertaintie�of weather,or similar physical conditions at the site,the conformation and conditions of the ground,the ch�racter of equipment and facilities needed before and during execution of the work,and all other matters which can in any way affect the work or the cost thereof under this Contrad. 3. The SUBCONTRACTOR further acknowledges satisfaction as to charatter,quality,and quantity of surface and subsurface materials to be encountered from his inspedion of the site and from reviewing any available records. Failure by the SUBCONTRACTOR to become acquainted with the physical conditions of the site and all the available information will not relieve the SUBCONTRACTOR from responsibility for properly estimating the difficulty or cost of successfully performing the work. 4. The SUBCONTRACTOR warrants that as a result of examination and investigation of all the aforesaid data,the SUBCONTRACTOR can perform the work in a good and workmanlike manner and to the satisfadion of the ENGINEER.The ENGINEER assumes no responsibility for any representations made by any of its officers or agents during or prior to the execution of this Contrad,unless(1)such representations are expressly stated in the Contract,and(2)the Contract expressly provides that responsibility thereof is assumed by the EN6INEER. i. If the ENGINEER provides information concerning subsurface conditions or surface topography,the ENGINEER does not assume any responsibility whatsoever with respect to the sufficiency or Page 5 of 12 accuracy of the information,or of the interpretations made thereof, and there is no warranty or guarantee,either expressed or implied,that the conditions indicated by such investigations are representative of those existing throughout such area,or any part the�eof,or that unforeseen developments may not occur. 1.8 /NTERFERING STRUCTURES 1. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall protect an and all existin structures from dama e durin execution of Y g B $ the work.Where existin fences ates buildin s or an other com onen r g ,g , g , y p ts o strudures must be removed to properly carry out the work,or are damaged during the work,they shatl be restored at the SUBCONTRACTOR's expense to their original condition and to the satisfadion of the property owner. 1,9 MAINTENANCE C�F EX#ST�N�IMPROVEMEAITS 1. The SUBCONTRAC7t?Ft shall be respor�sible for coordinating and conducting a utility notification and locate prior to the start of work. Unless c�therwise indicated in the Figures or specified herein,or otherwise call�d for by the ENGINEER ti�ereof,all water,sewer,gas,or oil lines, lighting,power,or communicatia��ines,or other surface�r sub-surface structures of any nature that may be affected by the work sha#1 be maintained by the SUBCONTRACTOR and shall not be disturbed,disconnected, or damaged by t�e SUBCONTRACTOR during the progress of the work. 2. In the event the SUBCQ�JTRACTOR, in t#�e'perf€�rmance of the work should disturb,disconnect or damage any of the items listed ahave,the SUBCC?NTRACTOR shaA bear all expense of whatever nature arising from such disturbances or the replacement or repair thereof.When said damage causes an unscheduled interruptic�n of service,the SUBCONTRACTOR shall immediately alert the utility company involved and shalt make the ne�essary arrangements with the utility company to expedite repairs. Reconstrudion shall be c�f the same types of materials and to the same or better quality as that which existed prior to the start of the rn�flrk. 3. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall neither disturb nor ma�re fences,trees,shrubbery,or other plantings along the project access routes,except after ap�r�`oval by the ENCiNEER.Any such improvements that are moved,disturbed or damaged shall be restt�red by th�SUBCONTRACTOR to their original condition and to the satisfaction of the prt�perty own�r, 4. All public and private streets, roads and driveways and other paved are�s damaged or excavated by the SUBCONTRACTOR shall be reconstructed by the SUBCONTRACTOf�with rn�terials,and to a degree of quality at least equal to that which existed prior to the beginninp€�f the project. In no case shall elements of restoration be inferior to the applicabl�requirements set forth elsewhere in these specifications. 1,10 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION UTILITIES AND FACILITIES 1. As directed by the ENGINEER,the SUBCONTRACTOR shall be responsible for and provide his own construction water. Potential locations include: a) Provide potable construction water from a remote source. b) Obtain potable construction water through arrangements with the OWNER. 2. All water produced during the work shall be disposed of in strict compliance with all applicable local, State, and Federal regulations. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall be responsible for the disposal of all produced water and shall prepare his bid accordingly. Page 6 of 12 � 3. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall provide all temporary power required to conduct ali work as specified in these contract documents. I 4. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall provide sanitary facilities at each of the four exploratory boring sites for the duration of drilling activities at that site. 1.11 SAFETY AND CONVENIENCE 1. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall develop and maintain a safety program that witl effectively incorporate and implement all required safety provisions for the duration of this Contract.The SUBCONTRACTOR � shall appoint an employee who is qualified and authorized to supervise and enforce compliance with the safety program. 2. The SUBCONTRACTOR sh�l)re�riew,sign and abide by the provisions outlined in the ENGINEERS Field Safety Instructions as provided�ythe ENGINEER prior to starting work. 1.92 PRESERVATlt�N, RESTORATIflN, AND CLEANUP i. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall stockpile drill cuttings in a manner that will cause the least damage to adjacent fields, lawns,grassed areas,gardens,shrubbery,or fences,regardless of whether these are on private property,or on state, county,or city rights-of-way.The SUBCONTRACTOR shall remove all drill cuttings from grassed andplanted areas,and leave these surfaces in a condition equivalent to their original conditit�n.Areas c€�vered with the drill cuttings will be raked and graded by the SUBCONTRACTOR to conform to their c�riginal cc�ntours. Drill cuttings can be spread within SO feet of the exploratory boring in unpau�tl, non-grassed c�r planted areas and graded to blend to the existing topography,as direded by the ENGINEER. 2. Upon completion of the project,�1�areas used by the SUBC�NTRACTOR shall be properly cleared of all temporary structures, rubbish,and w�tste materials�nd pr�perly graded to drain and blend in with the abutting property and restored to their original'condition, 1.13 MATER/ALS AND WORKMANSHIP i. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall,except as specificaily stated in the Cc�ntract Cft�cuments, provide all labor, materials,equipment,tools,and ather facilities and servites necessary for proper completion of al)work under the CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. 1.14 MA/NTENANCE AMD GUARANTEE 1. The SUBCONTRACTOR hereby guarantees that the entire scope of wr�rk performed under this contract will meet fully all requirements thereof as to quality of,wc►rkmanship and of materials furnished by him. 2. The SUBCONTRACTQR hereby agrees to make at his own expense any repair or replacement made necessary by defeds in materials or workmanship supplied by him that becomes evident within a one-year period after date of final payment,and to restore to full compliance with the requirements of these specifications. 3. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall make all repairs and replacements promptly upon receipt of written orders for the same from the ENGINEER. If the SUBCONTRACTOR fails to make repairs and replacements within 60 days upon notification,the ENGINEER may contrad with others for performance of the work and the SUBCONTRACTOR shall be liable to the ENGINEER for the cost thereof. Page 7 of l2 1.15/NSPECTIONS 1. Final acceptance of the materials and equipment to be provided by the SUBCONTRACTOR wiil be made bythe ENGINEER. 2. The ENGINEER shall have the right at all times and places to reject articles and/or materials to be furnished hereunder which, in any resped,fail to meet the requirements of these specifications, regardless of whether the defects in such articles or materials are detected at the point of manufacture or after completion of the work at the site. If the observer,through an oversight or otherwise, has accepted material or work which is defective or which is contrary to the specifications,such material, no matter in what stage or condition of manufacture,delivery,or eredion may be rejected by the ENGINEER. Compliance with the specifications is distinctly a duty of the SUBCONTRACTOR and shall not be avoided by act or omission on the part of the ENGINEER. 3. Rejected articles andJor materiais'Shall be removed promptly after notification,to a satisfactory ' distance from the uicinity of the accepted articles and/or materials at the expense of the SUBCONTRACTC}R.Any adjustments,carrections or repairs found necessary after the delivery of articles or materials, including all additi�►nal handling and shipping shall be paid for by the SUBCONTRACT�R. . �, 1.16 PERMITS, LICENSES, LAWS AND REGULATIONS 1. The SUBCONTRA�T(7R shal�camply with�1)fe�#eral,state,and locat laws, regulations,and I ordinances related to canducting the wark. 2. The SUBCONTRACTOR is responsi�ie for supplyin�and submitting all forms required for the ' exploratory wells per State of California regulatiens. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall provide copies of all required records to the ENGINE'ER. 3. When the exploratory wells are to b�abandraned,the SUBC(71UTRACTOR shall report to the State of California as required. This will include the locatior�r�f the well,landowner's name, method,type of material, its placement and amount used to plug th�abandoned well. 2.0 MOBILIZATION/DEMOBILIZA710N/CLEAN�.Ip i. This item includes the work necessary to mobilize,demobilize,and de�n up the site related to the drilling,construction and testing of the exploratory borings. 2. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall set up drilling and other related equipment within the area designated by the ENGINEER and OWNER.All required work will be accomplist�ed in accordance with applicable portions of these Specifications. Construdion facilities wi�l!�e set up in a neat and orderly manner within the designated area.Alt required work will be accomplished in accordance with applicable portions of these Specifications.The SUBCONTRACTOR shall confine their operations to the immediate vicinity of the exploratory wells. 3. The removal and replacement of minor obstructions such as fencing and similar items shall be anticipated by the SUBCONTRACTOR. Major obstructions encountered that could not have been foreseen,should immediately be brought to the attention of the ENGINEER.The ENGINEER will make a determination for proceeding with the work. 4. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall avoid contamination of the Project site and will not dump waste oil, rubbish, or other similar materials on the ground. 5. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall be fully responsible for the disposal of all fluids, and solids. Page 8 of 12 I 6. During execution of the Work,the SUBCONTRACTOR shall daify clean the site,and properly dispose of waste materials,debris,and rubbish to assure that the grounds,and public and private properties a�e maintained free from accumulations of waste materials and rubbish. SUBCONTRACTOR shall provide containers for collection and disposal of waste materials, rubbish,and debris. 7. Upon completion of the work,the SUBCONTRACTOR shall remove from the site the related equipment,and all debris,unused materials,and other miscellaneous items resulting from or used in the operations.The SUBCONTRACTOR shall replace or repair any facility that has been damaged during the construction work and restore the site as nearly as possible to its original condition. 3.0 EXPLORATORY BORING DRILLING i. This item includes the wc�rk r��cessary to drill up to twelve(12}exploratory borings for the purpose of conducting subsurf��e exploratac�ns. 2. The SUBCONTRACTCIR shall drill exploratory borings at the locations as directed by the ENGINEER. 3. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall be licensed to drill exploratory borings in the State of California and shall construct the bc�rings in strid conforrrtance with all the laws, rules, regulations and standards related to the ct�nstruction of exploratory borings in the State of California. 4. The SUBCONTRAG��R shall sc�bmit the follpwing to the ENGINEER for approval priorto beginning work: ' a) Detailed description of drilling program including details on the proposed equipment, drill cutting collection for inspecti�n`and analysis,�nd colledion of samples for mechanical sieve analysis. 5. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall submit k�te fallc�wir�g to the ENGI�#EER during drilling activities: a) Drill cutting samples. b) Daily drilling log(to 6e available for inspectic�n�t site at all times),to include: i. Log of borehole which carefully,and accurately describes the rn�terials penetrated. ii. At a minimum,depth of water strata,depth tc�;material contacts,and penetration rate. 6. Drilling Equipment: a) The exploratory borings shall be drilled using a rotosonic methc�c!prc�pr�sed by the SUBCONTRACTOR.The drilling method details proposed by th�SUBCONTRACTOR must be approved by the ENGINEER prior to the SUBCONTRA�TGfEt mabilizing to the site. b) Provide all drilling equipment and accessories required to complete the exploratory well(s)as specified. 7. Exploratory Boring Drilling: a) The borings shall be drilled to produce representative drill cutting samples that can be analyzed for future collector well potential yields,and be straight and plumb. b) Exploratory Boring: i. Drill each borehole to an estimated depth of 50 feet. 8. Drill the exploratory borings as specified be{ow: Page 9 of 12 Well Type Quantity Total Depth per Diameter of Borehole(inches) Bore(ft) Exploratory 12 50 SUBCOIVTRACTOR proposed Boring and approved by the ENGINEER 9. Water: a) The SUBCONTRACTOR shall utifize one of the source water options specified,to be used as a supply source for all water needed to drill,construct and develop the exploratory wells. The source water to be utilized must be approved by the ENGINEER 10. Exploratory Boring Sampling: a) ENGINEER will have sameat��nsite during drilling to accurately identify final depth of the boreholes and the lithology of�uttings. b) Rate of pene#ration of borehole sFrall be limited to what is required for the SUBCONTRACTOR to obtain,and the ENGWEER to log,gecalogic samples. c) The SUBCCI�ITRACTOR shall recover representative samples of the material being drilled. Samples shall be taken continuously,starting at the ground surface and continuing to the bottom of each boring. The sampling method must yield samples that are representative of subsoil conditions atthe a�ual depth,tc�which dril�ing has progressed. d) The ENGINEER shall review the samples and identify samples to be sent out by the SUBCONTRACTOR for mechanical sieve analysis. ,Sieve analysis shall be run in accordance with ASTM D6913. SUBCONTRACt'C}R shal)provid�tfie ENGINEER the sieve analysis reports in two weeks following the receipt af the samples. The samples to be sent out for sieve analysis will be sent by the SUBCONTRACTOR tc�a selected and ENGINEEft approved geotechnical laboratory in six shipments,one shipment for each'area tested. il. Interval Testing a) Hydraulic interval testing may be conduct�d an a selected nurt�ber of test borings. The boring and interval to be tested will be seleded by the ENGI�I�ER pn the#�asis of the tlrilling and sampling results. b) Upon reaching the total completion depth of the selected test boring,the casi��will be pulled back to the bottom of the interval to be tested,and a temporary screen will be inst�lled in the seleded interval. The temporary screen will be 4-inch diameter, 10-foot ic�ngf w�r�-would continuous slot 0.050-inch slot screen. The compfete screen assembly shvulc{be e�uipped with a K-packer and adapter pipe to seal the screen in the drill rods,and allow for removal by the rods following testing. The K-packer should be placed above the 10-foot screened sedion to prevent formation materials from entering between the screen and outer drill casing. c) Development of the test interval will be accompiished by air lifting until the water produced is visibly clear and contains little or no sediment. The airline for development should have the ability to be varied throughout the screened interval. The minimum development time shall be two(2) hours. Response of the well to development pumping shall be noted so that pumping rates for the hydraulic interval testing can be estimated. d) The test boring and temporary screen will be equipped with a temporary pump capable of pumping a maximum of 100 gallons per minute. Temporary piping including a throttling valve and in line flowmeter will be provided and installed to accurately determine the pumping rate. The selected Page 10 of 12 i interval will be pumped for a minimum of two(2)hours. The pumping period will be divided into four(4)steps of at least thirty(30)minutes duration. During each step,the pumping will be maintained at a constant rate.The pumping rate will be varied from a low rate to a high rate between steps so that the steps are run at approximately 25%,50%,75%and 95%of the maximum achievable pumping rate. The pumping rate should be adjusted and stabilized as quickly as possible between steps. e) The ENGINEER will be responsible for measuring and recording water level depths and pumping rates during the interval tests. Depths to water will be measured to the nearest 0.01 foot in the test boring prior to and during the pumping period. 4.0 SOLIDS AND WATER DISPOSAL 1. This item includes al�the work, m�terxals, labor,and equipment necessary to dispose of all solids and water generafied tluring the explara�tory wel)construdion. 2. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall comply with�II applicable permits,and local,State and Federal regulations in tlisposing of solids and w�ter generated during exploratory well construction. � 3. The solids will be temporarily stored onsite on a membrane barrier to allow for the ENGINEER to examine the sarnples and prevent potential leaching of fluids from the solids contacting ground surface. 4. Upon completion of drilling,the 5l�BCONTRACTOft will dispose of the water. Potential methods include 1.Transporting the water�ffsite for disposal,2. Disposal on the site by infiltration into the ground. Water disposed of on the site cannot be alidwed to enter the river directly. All water must infiltrate the ground. ' Page 11 of 12 , Yeilow Jacket Driliing Services, LLC Proposal#(CA)DC20-1473R3 BID SCHEDULE City of Redding Exploratory Boriog Installation fnclude all taxes in Base Bid for California and all other sales or use taxes. The total payment to the SUBCONTRACTOR shall be made based on the Bid[tems. No other payments wi(1 be made. SUBCONTRACTOR shall submit the following items with the bid: a. Proposed detailed drilling and sampling methods b. Proposed source of water and power c. Proposed schedule of work d. Proposed water and solids disposal plan Table 1: Base Bid Items _. _ Extended Estimated Total [tem Wark and Material uanti Unit Price Unit Amount Exploratorv Borin�s'Each a. Mobilization/Demobilization/ Lump Cleanup � $12,500.00 Sum $12,500.00 b. Drill 12 Explar�tory Borin�s 18 $7,000.00 Per Day $126,000.00 c. Sieve Analysis 36 $400.00 Each $ 14,400.00 d. Exploratory Borin�Abandonment 12 $ 500.00 Each $ 6,000.00 e. Interval Pumpin�Tests 6 $ 2,000.00 Each $12,000.00 f. Offsite Disposal COSt+ 20% g. Prevailing Wages INCLUDED Grand Total $170.900.00 � Firm:Yellow Jacket Drillinp Services, LLC Signature: T�,C,GC;,� I�a#e: 12/14/2020 Page 12 of 12 Exhibit B Engineering Services for the Pump House 1 Replacement Project for the City of Redding (with Amendment 2) Phase 1 Fee Summary Subcontractor Task No. Description Labor Fee Fee Expenses Fee Task 1 Project Management Task 1.1 Project Management $23,376.00 $0.00 $0.00 $23,376.00 Task 1.2 Meetings $21,148.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $22,148.00 Task 1.3 QualityControl $17,664.00 $0.00 $0.00 $17,664.00 Task 1 Sut�tcrt�t' $62�i88.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $63,188.00 Task 2 pata Review,Geote�hnical Investigations,and Survey/Mapping Task 2.1 Data Review $14,8�2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $14,892.00 Task 2.2 Geotechnical Investigations $41,016.00 $19,541.00 $2,000.00 $62,557.00 Task Geophysicat lnvestigatic�ns $36,8CI�.pt7 $35,671.00 $1,520.00 $74,000.00 2.2.1 (Amendment 1) Task Collector Wetl Investigations $7�,252.00 $179,445.Q0 $13,556.00 $265,253.00 2.2.2 (Amendment 2) Task 2.2 Drilli�g/Pump Testin9 $p.C1(I $135,52y,p� $0.00 (removed task) $135,524.00 Task 2.3 Surveying and Mapping $4,080.OQ $7,455.(1� $800.00 $12,335.00 Task 2 Subtotal $169,04'9.�0 $242,312.00 $17,876.00 $429,037.00 Task 3 Preliminary Environmental $44,288.00 $0.00 $t�.�b $44,288.00 Review Task 3 Subtotal $44,288.00 $0.#�0 $0.00 $44,288.00 Task 4 tonstruction Funding $19,576.00 $0.00 $0.00 $19,576.00 Evaluation Task45ubtotal $19,576.00 $0.00 $0.00 $19,576.00 Preliminary Design Report Task 5 (Preliminary,Pre-Final,and Final PDR) $136,469.00 $0.00 $0.00 $136,469.00 1'asE� Coll�Yor�r�il InvesYig�ons $53,729.00 $0.00 $0.00 $53,724.00 2.2.2 (�oe�o�r�d from th6s t��5) Task 5 Subtotal $136,469.00 $0.00 $0.00 $136,469.00 TOTAL PHASE 1 $638,829.00 ►ieCObS i Consultant Rates Engineering Services for the Pump House 1 Replacement Project for the City of Redding 2020 Hourly Billing Rates ; Hourty B111Ting ` Lat�or"ClassiEitadon ' RaLe' Office/Clerical/Accounting $�pg Junior-Level Technician $gp _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ Mid-tevel Technician $123 _.. Senior-Levet Techniciar► $179 Staff Engineer 1 .$122 Staff Engineer 2 $133 Associate Engineer $135 ' ProjectEngineer $1g7 Engineer Specialist/Ass�ciate Prt�Jett Manager $204 _ _ _ _ ._ _. Senior TechnologistjProject Manager, $255 ; Principal Technologist/Senior Project'Manager $283 _ Inctudes engineering,consulting ptar�r�er,and scientist disciplirres. Notes: 1) A markup of 5 percent will be apptied to all Other fl'rrect Costs and Expenses. 2) Direct expenses are those necessary costs and charges incurred fc�r the PRt71ECT inctuding,but not limited to: a) The direct costs of transportation,meals and lodging,mail,subca�ttracts,outside services,and equipment and suppties. b) Consultant's current standard rate charges for direct use of Can�ultant's�rehicles,laboratory test and analysis, printing and reproduction services,and cerCain field equipment;and c) Consultant's standard project charges for special health and safety requirements of Occupational Safety and Health Administration. 3) Consultant's current standard rates for direct expenses shatl be used. These rates are subject to change following internal audits and reviews. 4) These rates are effective January 1,2020,through December 31,2020.Rate schedule is subject to annual revision to reflect current rates and not to exceed 4 percent per year for subsequent years of the contract. �acobs City of Redding-Pump Station 1 Amendment No.2-Estimated Hours and Estimated Ezpenses December 14,2020 Estimated Estimated Name Title Hours z020 Rates �� p�umptiom Kim Hein Project Manager 30 $Z04 56,120 Meetings,Coordination,PM tasks Brad Memeo Design Manager 4 $204 $816 Coordination 100 5255 $25,500 2 field days at 10 hours/day,2 travel days,8 houn City meetings, Kevin Bral Senior Technologist 20 hours for field coordination,40 hours analysis and reporting 252 5122 530,744 ZO field days with daily writeup at 10 hours/day,2 travel days,32 Seamus Mclau hlin Geologist Professional hours report,coordination,and prep Mark Twede Geotechnical En meer Z4 $Z04 $4,896 B 4 hours for permitting,meetings,field work and review John Schoonover Permitting 4 $255 $1,020 Permitting Senior QC Senior QC 4 $255 $1,020 Senior QC Administretion Administration ]6 5108 $1,728 Report processing and Administration support Safety Coordinator Safety Coordfnator 2 5204 $408 Satety Coordinator u T(�TAL 436 $72,252 Estimated Expenses Estimated No.ltem Quantity Co3t Towl Notes 3 $650 $1,950 assumes 10 days on and 4 days off for geologist therefore two 1 Flights flights and one flight for senior technologist assumes 20 field days far geofogist,(2)1 day prior to field work, 26 $20Q $5,200 and 2 fieid days for Senior Technologist a�d 1 day prior and i day 2 Hotels aher field work assumes 20 field days for geologist,{2)1 day prior to field work, 26 'S50 $i,3C10 and 2 field days for Senior Technologist and 1 day prior and 1 day 3 Car Rental after field work 28 $70 $?.g� assumes 20 field days for geologist,4 travel days for geologist, 4 Per Diem and 2 f'reld days for SeniorTechnologist and 2 travel days Tptal $10,410 5 Counry Permit 1 $300 53(7Q First bore 6 County Permit 11 $200 $2,2{liJ additional bores ; Toul $2,500 7 Exploration Borings 1 $170,4W $17p,9{10 See quata#ion from Yelfpw)acket dated December 14,2020 Total 517Q40U SubTotalExpenses $183,810 � Markup(SY) $9,191 TotalExpenses $193,001 TOTAL Amendment No.2 $265,253 THIRD AMENDMENT TO CONSULTING AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT (C-8541) Pump House 1 Replacement Project (Phase 1-Preliminary Design) The Consulting and Professional Services Contract C-8541 ("Contract") dated May 11, 2020, and amended on September 1 l, 2020, and January 12, 2021, between the City of Redding, California, ("City") a municipal corporation, and Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. ("Consultant") is hereby amended as follows: SECTION 1. is amended to read in its entirety as follows: Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Contract,Consultant shall provide to City the services described in Exhibit A, A-1, A-2, and A-3, attached and incorporated herein. Consultant shall provide the services at the time, place and in the manner specified in Exhibit A, A-1, A-2, and A-3. The Exhibit A-3 attached to this amendment is incorporated into the Contract dated May 11,2020, and amended on September 22, 2020, and January 12, 2021, as Exhibit A-3. SECTION 2.A. is amended to read in its entirety as follows: A. City shall pay Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Contract,at the times and in the manner set forth in Exhibit B, incorporated herein, in a total amount not to exceed One Million Eighty-Nine Thousand Two Hundred Forty-Six Dollars ($1,089,246). This sum includes all out-of-pocket travel,lodging and incidental expenses incurred by Consultant that are reasonably associated with the provision of services under this Contract. The payments specified herein shall be the only payments to be made to Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Contract. The Exhibit B attached to this amendment shall replace in its entirety the Exhibit B attached to the Contract dated May 1 l, 2020 and amended on September 1 l, 2020, and January 12, 2021. SECTION 3.A. is amended to read in its entirety as follows: A. Consultant shall commence work on or about May 11,2020,and complete said work no later than December 31, 2022. Time is of the essence. Ali other terms and conditions of the Contract dated May 1 l,2020,and amended on September 11, 2020, and January 12, 2021, shall remain in full force and effect. The date of this Amendment shall be the date that it is signed by the City. �� CG� �J'� � �'y�-��J i V V �.� � � `-!`:% �r �- ( `8 IN WITNESS WHEItEOF, City and Consultant have executed this Amendment on the days and year set forth below: CITY OF REDI�ING A Municipal Corporation Dated: 7�,�-,� , 2021 i��.-�"... By' Kristen Schredex Vice Mayor Form Approved.� I3ARRYE. DeWAL7' At e : Ciry Attorney �, _ � `� `� � � ��;� AME�A MI2E Ci lerk g, '�"§� ' 1: CONSULTANT Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. � Dated: E�`��`� ~�'� , 2021 �° � �y: Taxpayer I.D. No.: ��~ � �� ' �� 2525 Airpark Drive . Redding,CA 9G��1 United 5tates www.jacobs.com Exhibit A-3 May 21, 2021 Kurt Maire, Public Works Engineer City of Redding 777 Cypress Avenue Redding,CA 96001 Subject: City of Redding(COR)Pump Nouse 1 Replacement Project Amendment No.3—Cottector Welt Pump Test Dear Mr.Maire: This tetter presents Jacobs Engineering Group inc.'s(JACOBS)proposed scope of engineering services for Amendment No. 3 to the Pump House 1 Replacement Project(Project)assigned to the City of Redding Consulting and Professional Services Contract C-8541.Amendment No. 3 is made to incorporate investigations and subsequent evaluation of potential horizontal collector welt(HCW)sites. HCW investigations typicatty proceed as a series of steps,one after the other upon obtaining favorable results from the previous step. In general terms,we recommend the subject investigation proceed as fotlows: • Review Availabte Information—Review of available background information on hydrogeology, land uses,and property access. ■ Surface Geophysics(Amendment No. 1)—Conduct a surface geophysicat survey(non-invasive)to identify areas with suitable lithology. • Exploratory Borings(Amendment No.2)—Drill exploratory borings,coupled with smatl-scale pump tests,at sites with potentiat suitable lithotogy to confirm and catibrate the geophysical survey resutts. � Pumping Test(Amendment No.3)—Construct test pumping wett and monitoring wells at sites proven from the exploratory borings. ■ Yield Calcutations(Amendment No. 3)—Estimate the potential yield of the tocations that were subjected to a pumping test. • Design,Construction,Testing—If the last step results in a desirable resutt,design the HCW,complete construction,and perform finat pumping tests.Not induded in this amendment. Amendment No. 1 provided geophysical data collected by Cotlier Geophysics on September 22,2020 through September 26, 2020 at Anderson-Cottonwood Irrigation District(ACID), Bike Park,Auditorium West,and Turtle Bay. The data report presented promising information and supported continuing with additional exploration (Amendment No. 2). Amendment No. 2 provided twelve(12)geotechnical boring investigations and four(4)small-scale pump testing at ACID, Bike Park,Turtte Bay, Highway 44,and Southern Pacific.The data from Amendment No.2 provided information and supported continuing with additional larger pumping test(Amendment No.3). On May 11,the City provided direction to continue forward with the Bike Park site only. Jaco�s Engineering Group Inc. 1 May 21,2021 Subject: Amendment No.3 Collector Well Testing-City of Redding(COR)Pump House 1 Replacement Project �' `:�" 273 � i ,� l�r � t.�� t ,�'� � �: ��y � � �� , ��:�g�� . r= � �i e; �� ` ..�� tl � .i � � �� i`� �*�� a 1 � �,._ ,"� ��u '$ "}� „� � �* �� 3 �,.,: �. ' ;. r ",. , � . a � „ .ts ° , �! �" s„�,r��. .. +,. ' _�C� - �� . , .,r„�.- . . �„- � .... -� . ��. � � ^� �...A,x. �....,. � e, e; <.. �. f k!.'.-. w+n, .. � y ��..�-G. ��:;. � � � ' } � BGKeParK �.^• S�te � '"- �' .� ... ! � o ,s ° c.... Park�ng Lot storm Ora1n � M� , , � � � , :r , � , �z�r � 40 � z � �. : w <. � �� ' �� q,. .; .,� ; � � _ • K , . ,. _, ♦ �A �,.- + -. . r'.� Q '" � � . � s q ... . . ' .� � . ' .. ' ".x.-wj� �n' � n � � '� ��. .. '� . . ��; _ � 4$ � .�.�.,..� ' � �° � r st o� . ° x� � �,°'a�'" .e�` ��.; -� . � m, � . ��,.E� , , . i � �7 �r a a a � d ;. �� . . , -. �y .:#� f � , , �,� ..�. ;- .� � -.� �.�. ,a"`� `� �,.. =r , ��e ; �,W. .� Figure 1. Pumping Test Site locations(Bike Park)for Amendment No.3 Scope of Engineering Services The scope of engineering services assaciated with this amendment are as fotlows: Task 1 —Project Management 5ubtask 1.1 Projett Management Additional project management fee to complete the work. The originat work was anticipated to be completed by March 2021. The amendments extended the completion date therefore anticipating comptetion date to be February 2022. Assumptions:approximately 8 additional months to complete task. Subtask 1.2 Meetings Additionat meeting scope and fee to comptete the work.The originat work was anticipated to be completed by March 2021.The amendments extended the completion date therefore anticipating completion date to be February 2022. Assumptions:approximately 8 additionat months to complete task. � May 21,2021 Subject: Amendment No.3 Cotlector Well Testin9-City of Redding(COR)Pump House 1 Replacement Project Task 2 —Data Review, Geotechnical lnvestigations, and Survey/Mapping Subtask 2.4 Cotlector Wetl Investigations Additional fees associated with completing this task and as outlined in Amendment No. 2. Subtask 2.5 Collector Well Pump Test JACOBS witl perform 1 pumping test at the Bike Park site as shown in Figure 1. Data collected will be evaluated and recommendations for next steps—final design(not inctuded in this Amendment).The technical specifications for the pumping tests are included as Attachment 1. Assumptions: • The COR will provide access to the Bike Park site. • Shasta County permits will be required for each exploratory boring;the budgetary estimate inctuded herein includes$1,500 for Shasta County permit fees. It is assumed up to 10 hours to obtain permits. • It is assumed that no other permits witl be required for the exploratory borings and smatt-scale pump tests.A 1600/LSAA permit is not required for geotechnical drillings(email from CDFW dated November 16, 2020).Jacobs assumes the Ciry will attow and issue permit to discharge ctean and clear groundwater to a sanitary sewer or storm system manhote in the vicinity of the bike park location.Given the volume of discharge, it is assumed that land application and percolation will not be feasible.An encroachment permit application may be required from City for the temporary discharges. • Yetlow Jatket Drilling Services, LLC(subcontractor)will conduct one pumping test according to technical specifications included as Attachment 1 and per their proposal dated May 17,2021. • Field work wilt be conducted sequentially on an uninterrupted 10 days on,4 days off,daylight hours only schedule. • Field work will be covered by either a Field Geotogist(Redding staf�or Hydrogeologist(Sacramento staffl plus travel and travel expenses. • One Principat Technologist witl visit the dritling and testing operations 2 times,once each during the monitoring well layout and initial construction,the test well construction and the test well pumping tests plus travel and travet expenses. • One Hydrogeologist witl visit the drilling and testing operations 4 times,once each during the monitoring wetl layout and initial construction,the test wetl construction,and the test welt pumping test p(us travet and travel expenses. • Equipment necessary for the fietd work;the budgetary estimated included herein inctudes$12,000 for rented field equipment. Deliverables:A technical memorandum wilt be prepared to summarize the field investigation, data,and results. The evaluation and summary wilt be incorporated in the Preliminary Design Report. Schedute The scope of engineering services and activities associated with this Amendment wilt be completed in accordance with the following approximate milestones: ■ Authorization and Notice to Proceed by City of Redding—July 2021 • Field work- 5 weeks(10 days on,4 days off) 3 May 21,2021 Subject: Arnendment No.3 Collector Wett Testing-City of Redding(COR)Pump House 1 Rep(acement Project ■ Comptete pumping test associated with Amendment 3—Two months after Notice to Proceed ■ Complete feasibitity project—February 2022 The Scope of Engineering Services shalt be considered compLete when final deliverabtes are deemed acceptable by the City.Efforts will be made by JACOBS to complete the work in a timely manner.However, it is agreed that the JACOBS cannot be responsible for delays occasioned by factors beyond JACOBS control,or factors which would not reasonably have been foreseen at the time this Amendment was authorized. Budget The not-to-exceed budgetary amount for Amendment No.3 is$450,417.00.JACOBS will make reasonabte efforts to complete the work within the budgets as outtined in the Amendment No. 3.JACOBS is not obligated to incur costs beyond the indicated budget,as may be adjusted,and the City of Redding is not obligated to pay JACOBS beyond these limits. if you have any questions or require further information do not hesitate to contact Kimberty Hein at 530.355.8488. Sincerely, ._'---�' �/ �.__------._� John Schoonover Kim Hein, P.E. Manager of Projects Project Manager cc: Josh Watkins,City of Redding 4 Attachment No. 1 I L IFI I FOR THE coNSTRucTioN oF TEST WELL, MONlTORING WELLS, and AQUIFER TESTING City of Redding, CA City of Redding Pump House No. 1 Replacement Project May 13, Zo2� CONSTRUCTION OF TEST WELL, MONITORING WELLS, and AQUIFER TESTING C4NSTRUCTION OF TEST WELL, MONITORING WEL�S, and AQU[FER TESTING 1.0 WORK DESCRIPTION 1. The proposed test well and monitoring wells are located at the Bike Park along previously completed geophysical survey lines along the Sacrarnento River in the City of Redding as shown in Figure 1. z�s � � ��''� � r'� _ �� , , ' - �� .�, � '-;� °�` � . � �� ,� �, �� -w � �,�R�� :��, �� S � �" . ,�4s � � . � „ . � � � � ��r � � y � . �� -� �,M � , �� - x, `� � �� , �, $fi� . � � � �� 3�. �„��`� �: � �� _ � � �� .. . ,�� „ ,- �� ., . . . , a= ,�� ' � �� , 0 . .. ,... ' ' �,.L„ P a�Rar�. � .. �. r �.. , > S:^+� �_:. ,,;�.-. . ' '- :., ,,�� :,,� �..� ��,1 P Y r.:�l.�!S n�rt Drre,, �, ,z� - � � ��. ' ��,. ,. � i � � � � � � , . �:t� ,.�,t.,, `.� �,: %;� , � n �, w ,._ _�. . .� ,., , . � ; " f�� ,. ��'.. r ` �'w.. !. . , � g. " .; � �. j; �' � �. �v# � � � . � � � � '�' �"- �" � �� ` y� � �� . �'�* �,,*� .s,.- ��a � � . _ i. �zs.�� S «�. � . -. � , �. � � wu �y " r R � � � : �, � � a sr,.. .:> . a -�� ; . .�� : ��_ � r ��.�C- � . �. ., . . .., „ . „> _: , .._. �.�. . . � n_ .: ` -, . °�.� ,"' ... , _- , .. „ �.� �si . . . t � a Figure 1—Proposed Test Well Location 2. The work shali include, but not be limited to,the following tasks: a) One 12-inch test well and four, 2-inch monitoring wells will be constructed. b) A step pumping test followed by a constant rate pumping test will be conducted. Each test wiil utilize the newly constructed test well,and four newly constructed monitoring wells configured similar to the Pumping Well Test Layout diagram below in Figure 2. The Engineer will work with the Subcontractor and lay out each pumping test and mark the weil locations. Pa�e2of16 CONSTRUCTION OF TEST WELL, MONITORING WELLS, and AQUIFER TESTING SACRAMENTO RIVER r.r.z� wu i 150, 2C' �oa• nv�a E5T vELL RpN110RIt1Ci tiELI TYP(,�F 9 �C' HY-� PUMPING TEST WELL LAYOUT Figure 2. Typica)Pumping Test Layout c) The Subcontractor shall conduct utility locates for all buried utilities in the vicinity of the test wells and monitoring wells. It is solely the responsibility of the Subcontractor to obtain utility clearances to drill. The Engineer will provide soil boring township, range, and quarter section information if requested by the Subcontractor. d) Construct the monitoring wells first using the rotosonic drilling methods. e) Construct the test wells following the monitoring wells. Use a driiling method that combines borehole drilling and casing advance to keep the borehole open for later installation of the weil casing and screen. The Subcontractor shall propose the drilling equiprnent and drilling method for the Engineers approval. f) Ail driliing methods used shall minimize or eliminate the use of drilling fluids. g) Develop the test well using a combination of surge block and airlifting followed by over pumping. Develop each monitoring well by air lifting and bailing. h) An 8-hour variable rate pumping test with a minimum of four steps will be performed on the test well. Water levels must be allowed to recover from the variable rate test and any re- deve�opment of the well prior to conducting the constant rate test. i) A 72-hour constant rate pumping test will be performed on the test well with recovery monitored. If necessary to achieve equilibrium with induced flow fram the river,the length of testing may be adjusted in the field. During the test, water levels will be measured as specified in Section 9, and a transducer will also be used to monitor river stage throughout the test and recovery. j) Field oversight of key well construction and pump testing activities will be provided by qualified Jacobs Geologists or Engineers. k) Following all testing,the test and monitoring wells at the Bike Park site will be abandoned. Pa u�'i nf t(, CONSTRUCTION OF TEST WELL, MONITORING WELLS,and AQUIFER TESTING SCHEDUL/NG 1. The SUBCONTRACTOR shall plan the work and carry it out with minimum interference to property owners and adjacent land users. Prior to starting the work, the SUBCONTRACTOR shall confer with the ENGINEER to develop an approved work schedule,which will allow minimal interference and meet the objectives of this project. 2. ENGINEER and SUBCONTRACTOR recognize that time is of the essence of this Agreement and that the ENGINEER wiil suffer financial loss if the Work is not completed within the times specified below, plus any extensions thereof allowed. 3. The activities are expected to be completed as concurrently as possible. if the SUBCONTRACTOR de- mobilizes from the site for any reason before completing his work,the ENGINEER will not be responsible for paying the SUBCONTRACTOR to re-mobilize. 4. Work shall not be considered complete until ail work activities have been completed,or as approved by the ENGINEER. 5. The schedule for the work requires that all work will be completed within five (5j calendar weeks including mobilization/demobilization, cleanup, al�well construction, development, and pumping testing. 6. The work shall be conducted during daylight hours following a schedule of 10 continuous calendar days on,4 continuous calendar days off, 10 continuous calendar days on, etc. 2.0 TEST AMD MQNITORING WELLS i. This item includes the work necessary to drill the test and monitoring welis for the purpose of conducting pumping tests. 2. The Subcontractor shall drill the well at the location shown in Figure 1 and as directed by the Engineer. 3. The Subcontractor shall be licensed to drill water wells in the State of California and shall construct the welis in strict conformance with all the laws, rules, regulations and standards related to the construction of wells in the State of California. 4. The Subcontractor shali submit the following to the Engineer for approval prior to beginning work: a) Detailed description of any drilling fluids pragram proposed, and the water transport and disposal program for the well construction. 5. The Subcontractor shall submit the following to the Engineer during drilling activities: a) Drill cutting samples. b) Daily drilling log, (to be available for inspection at site at all times),to include log of borehole which carefully and accurately describes the materials penetrated. 6. Drilling Equipment: aj The monitoring wells shall be drilled using the rotosonic drilling methods. b) The test wells shall be drilled using rotary drilling methods using casing advance to hold open the borehole during well completion and to minimize or eliminate the use of drilling fluids, or as recommended by the Subcontractor and approved by the Engineer. c) Provide drilling equipment and accessories required to complete the well(s) as specified. PanP d nf 1! CONSTRUCTION OF TEST WELL, MONITORING WELLS, and AQUIFER TESTING 7. Borehole Drilling: a) The test well shall be drilled so as to permit the installation of the casing and screen,straight and plumb. 8. The finai depths of the test well will be selected based on the results of the drilling by the Engineer. The Subcontractor shall prepare his bid assuming each test and monitoring well will be constructed to the depths shown in Table 1 and shown on Figure 3. TAB�E 1—Wel!Construction Target Depths Monitoring Welis Bike Park Site Depth of Blank Casing(ft, bgs) O to 14 Depth of Cement Grout Seal (ft, bgs) 0 to 10 Depth of Bentonite Seal (ft.bgs) 10 to 12 Depth of Well Screen(ft, bgsj 14 to 43 Depth of Gravel Pack(ft, bgs) 12 to 43 Depth of Blank Sump(ft, bgs) � Well Total Depth (ft, bgs) 43. Test Wells Bike Park Site Depth of Blank Casing(ft, bgs) 0 to 14 Depth of Cement Grout Seai (ft, bgsj 0 to 10 Depth of Bentonite Seal (ft.bgs) 10 to 12 Depth of Well Screen (ft, bgs} 14 to 43 Depth of Gravel Pack(ft, bgs) 12 to 46 Depth of Blank Sump(ft, bgs) 43 to 45 Well Total Depth (ft, bgs) 46 bgs—Below Ground Surface Page 5 of 16 CONSTRUCTION OF TEST WELL, MONITORING WELLS,and AQUIFER TESTING Bike Park Site � Test Well Monitoring Well(Typ 4) CEMENT GROUT FROM 0 TO 10 FEET CEMENT GROUT 5 � -•� - i•2-•FNGH�S�FEEL•�8L-ANK•-GASING- FROM 0 TO 10 FEET ........ ....... . . . .. ................................ FROM 0 TO 14 FEET 2-INCH SCH 80 PVC CASING 1 � BENTONITE SEAL FROM 0 TO 14 FEET ................. .... . . � � - ......-- FROM ]0 �T0 12 FEET-�.. ....... ... .......................... . .. . ......................... BENTONITE SEAL � 1 � •' '� FROM 10 TO 22 FEET j ......... • . ........i 2�=TNCH �:�i'0'0'=Tr��.H....... : ....... .. . ...............�--- -�--................... W STEEL �OUVERED SCREEN �- 2-INCH 0.060-INCH (1J ...............FROM .14_.T0.4_3..FEET_. � � . SLOTTEO PVC . ._. � : _...... ;... -�FROM..I.q..T�..-03��FEET................. v 2 -��- ..............��aV��i�aC.K....................._ : ;....... ; ,�..,-.G.RAV�I,.PA�K.......................... = TANCA SAN� AND GRAVEL TANCA SAND AND GRAVEL f 3� ... 3/8_BY__B_8�EN0. ' • �: 4 BY 12 BLEND .. ............... . •.......; . . ........FROM..1a...TO-.q3..FEE.T.........._... � Ff20M 12 TO 46 FEET •: .: ............. � ----- - �. . : . 0 3 5 � �................ . : ....... : ....................................................... 4 D .....--......-- �- - -- � � - : . . ..................... :......._. 12-INCH STEEL ;........................................................ B�ANK SUMP WITH CAP - � ' � 4� .............FRONF•43�•7�-•45�FbE�.........._. � 5(� Figure 3—Bike Park Well Construction Diagram 9. Water: a} The Subcontractor shall utilize potable water as a supply source for all water needed to drill, construct and develop the test and monitoring welis. Potable water is avai�able at City fire hydrants. The Subcontractor shall make arrangements with the City to connect to,and use potabie water from hydrants, and pay all associated costs. 10. Borehole Sampling: a) Engineer will have a qualified Engineer or Hydrogeologist onsite during drilling to determine the exact depth of borehole and to accurately identify the drill cuttings. b) The Subcontractor shal( recaver representative samples of the material being drilled. Samples shall be taken at 2-foot intervals, and every change in strata starting at the ground surface and continuing to the bottom of each well. The sampling method must yield samples that are representative of subsoil conditions at the actual depth to which driiling has progressed. Each sample shail be approximately one quart in volume.The Engineer will be onsite to collect the samples and bag, label, and store the samples. 3.0 CASING AND SCREEN l. This item includes the work necessary to provide and set the casing and screen for the test and monitoring welis for the purpose of conducting a pumping test. 2. The Subcontractor shall submit the following to the Engineer for approval prior to beginning work: PaapF,nft� CONSTRUCTION OF TEST WELL, MONITORING WEILS,and AQUIFER TESTING a) Welding qualifications. Welder shall be qualified in accordance with AWS 82.1 for level AR-1 or AR-2, and in the 2G and 56 or 6G positions. b) Casing and screen manufacturer, sizes, wall thickness,and applicable standard. Gravel manufacturer and gradation data. 3. The Subcontractor shall submit the following to the Engineer following completion of the work: a) Well Completion Reports/As-builts, 4. Test and Monitoring Weli Casings: a) The exact depth of the well and length of the casings are to be determined by the Engineer in the field. b) For purposes of preparing this bid,the Subcontractor shall assume the test well and each monitoring well is completed as shown on Figure 3,the well construction diagrams. c) Casing: Ail blank steel casing and screen for the test wells shal� be new and unused 12-inch diameter carbon steel, Q.375-inch wall thickness, and conform to AWWA A-100,ASTM A139 or A53,Grade B or equal, and be manufactured by Roscoe Moss Company, or alternative as approved by the Engineer. d) Ail blank casing for the monitoring wells shall be flush threaded 2-inch Schedule 80 PVC, conforming to ASTM 1785 and ASTM F480. e) The test welis will be completed with a 2-foot blank sump section below the screen. The blank casing shall be provided with a steel bottom plate continuously welded and of material equal to the pipe. f} The monitoring well bottom end shail be fitted with a PVC cap. g) The test well casing/screen assembly shall be installed at a sufFicient height above the bottom of the borehole to ensure the weight of the casing will not be resting on the bottom. 5. Screen and Gravel Pack: a) The well screen for the test wells shall be 12-inch carbon steel, louver design, of strength for the intended application, and manufactured by Roscoe Moss, or approved equal. bj The well screen for the monitoring weils shall be 2-inch flush threaded PVC, ASTM D1785 and ASTM F480, as manufactured by Johnson Screens, or approved equal. c) Screen openings and gravel pack gradations shall be as follows: Test Wells Site Bike Park Screen Opening 5ize(inch) 0.100 Gravel Pack Tacna13/8" by 8 Monitoring Welis Site Bike Park Screen Opening Size(inch) 0.050 Gravel Pack Tacna,4 by 20 Notes 1,Tacna Sand and Gravel, or Equal Pana^/�.f t6 CONSTRUCTION OF TEST WELL, MONITORING WELLS,and AQUIFER TESTING Gravel Gradations Tacna 3/8"by 8—Test Welis Particle Size(inches) Percent Passing 0.375 88.3 0.312 76.1 0.25 31.2 0.187 16.7 0.132 11.1 0.0937 2.4 Tacna 4 by 20—Monitoring Wells Particle Size(inches) Percent Passing 0.187 99.5 0.132 56.3 0.0937 17.0 0.0787 9.5 .0661 q,g .0469 p,g d) The Subcontractor shall provide ali well casing and screen assembly fittings as necessary to complete the well. e) Centralizers: Weld-on to pipe, rolled or bent bar type carbon steel centralizers for the carbon steel test well casing and clamp-on type for the monitoring well screens shall be provided. 1. Extend out a minimum of 2 inches from casing or screen to within 1/2 inch of borehole wall. 2. Place at approximately 20 foot intervals depending on screen and casing depth starting at the well sump and extending to ground surface. 3. Attach at 0 degrees, 90 degrees, 180 degrees,and 270 degrees around casing at each position,or as determined by Engineer. e) Welding: 1. Perform welding in accordance with the AWS B2.1. 2. Upon completion of welding, remove weld spiatter,f�ux,slag, and burrs left by attachments. 3. Repair welds to produce a workmanlike appearance, with uniform weld contours and dimensions. 4. Welding rod or wire shail match the material being welded and be approved by the Engineer. f) All necessary precautions shall be taken to prevent contaminated water,gasoline, or other deleterious substances from entering the well, either through the opening or by seepage through the ground surface. Precautions shall be maintained during and after the construction of the weil until accepted by the Engineer. Paaa R nf 1F CONSTRUCTION OF TEST WELL, MONITORING WELLS,and AQUIFER TESTING g) The Subcontractor shall provide all temporary and permanent materials, equipment,and labor required to accomplish the work as specified. The Subcontractor shall have equipment capable of installing the test well in the manner described above. 4.0 GRAVEL PAGK 1. This item includes the work, materials and equipment necessary to provide and place the gravel pack in the test and monitoring welis. 2. The Subcontractor shail submit the following to the Engineer for approval prior to beginning work: aj Ship gravel pack samples to: Kevin Bral 373 Post Oak Circle Franktown, CO 80116 3. Gravel pack shall conform to AWWA A100, be rounded washed silica and be a gradation specified by the Engineer based on the soil cuttings samples. 4. Before gravel pack placement in the test well, adequate preparations shall be made for continuous circulation of clear water. Circulate clear water and swab and airlift well, while installing pack and until pack is fully in-place. S. Gravel pack shall be placed by tremie method using a tremie pipe set to the depth required for the pack. The grave) pack will be installed as shown in Figure 3. 6. The weil casing and well screen shall be supported and anchored in such a way as to hold them in- place during piacement of gravel pack. 7. If borehole does not take the calculated volume of gravei pack with ailowances for normal losses and settiing Engineer wili have cause to reject the well. 5.0 ANNULAF. SEAL 1. This item includes the work, materials and equipment necessary to provide and place the annular bentonite seal on top of the gravel pack. 2. A bentonite seal shall be placed on top of the gravel pack prior to grouting. The seal shall be placed as shown on Figure 3 and must keep the cement grout from entering the gravel pack prior to it setting. 6.0 GROUTING 1. This item includes the work, materials and equipment necessary for placement of grout seal. 2. Grout: a) Neat Portland Cement, mix one 94-pound sack with no more than 6 gallons of water, Bentonite powder may be added to the Portland Cement with a gallon of water added per 2 pounds of bentonite. 3. The Subcontractor shall notify Engineer at least 4 hours prior to placement of grout seal. PaaP 9 nf 1F CONSTRUCTION OF TEST WELL, MONITORING WELLS, and AQUIFER TESTING 4. Water: a) Use potable water to mix the grout. 5. Grout Piacement: aj Piace grout by tremie method using a tremie pipe, as approved by Engineer. b) Extend from ground surface to the bottom of zone to be grouted. c) Place grout from the bottom to top, in a continuous operation. d) Slowly raise grout tremie pipe as grout is placed. e) Discharge end of grout tremie pipe shall remain submerged in grout until grouting is completed. f) Maintain a full grout pipe until completion of grouting of the specified interval. 6. Work shall not be conducted on well or heavy equipment operated onsite during the 24-hour period immediately following placement of the grout, or as directed by the Engineer. 7.0 WELL DEVELOPMEiVT 1. This item includes the work, materials and equipment necessary for the development of the test wells using a combination of the surge block and airlifting methods,followed by over pumping.The Subcontractor shall comply with applicable permits, laws and regulations in disposing of water generated during well development. The monitoring weils will be developed by air lifting and bailing. 2. Subcontractor shall provide staff knowledgeable in well development techniques with a minirnum of 2 years of experience developing water suppiy welis. 3. Test Wells: a) Following completion of the test well,the well shall be developed by the Subcontractor. Development shall be by surge block and airlifting followed 6y over pumping. All temporary and perrnanent materials,equipment and labor required to accomplish the work as specified shall be provided, including: 1. A surge block consisting of a double swab with an outside diameter of no more than 1 inch smalier than the inside diameter of the screen section. The two swabs shall be separated by a 10-foot section of perforated drill pipe. 2. The air compressor and necessary equipment used for air-lift pumping capable of pumping up to 200 gpm during development(depending on submergence). 3. Test pump. b) The discharge line and air-line shall set up in such a manner that the entire surge blockjair-lift assembly can be suspended from the derrick and allows the entire assembly to swab a minimum of 10 feet of screen while simultaneously pumping. c) Surge block redevelopment of the well shall begin by gently surging and simultaneously air lifting the top of the uppermost screen section. The screen shall be surged and airlifted in 10- foot sections. The surge block shall be raised and lowered several times every 15 minutes. Each screen section shall be worked until successive surging produces little change in color and discharge is relatively clear. Development shall continue for approximately 2 hours for each 10- paaP�n�f�� CONSTRUCTION OF TEST WELL, MONITORING WELLS,and AQUIFER TESTING foot interval of screen. This period may be extended or shortened at the discretion of the Engineer based an the condition of the discharge wate�. d) Following surge block and air-lift development, instal)test pump to perform pump development of well. 1. Do not remove pump from well untii well testing, including recovery monitoring is complete. 2. Set suction inlet at a depth determined by Engineer. 3. Pump well at a restricted initial pumping rate. 4. As water clears,gradualiy increase pumping rate, as determined by Engineer, until maximum discharge rate is reached. 5. At regular intervals,stop pump and allow water to refill well casing. 6. Develop weli by pumping and surging until it produces at maximum discharge, as determined by Engineer, and specified sand production limitations are met, up to 10 total hours. e) Upon completion of this procedure,the well shall be bailed clean of all accumulated sediment to its full depth. f) Well Development Discharge: Separate suspended solids from fluids generated during development using appropriate equipment, including temporary tankage to allow sufficient settling time to meet discharge requirements for suspended solids and turbidity. 1. Prevent site flooding or erosion that might be caused by discharge. g) Field Quality Control: Well shall be considered thoroughly developed when the following occurs: 1. Specific capacity,gpm per foot of drawdown, is relatively constant plus or minus 5 percent at design capacity of well. 2. Weli does not produce sand in excess of sand production limitations: When water produced contains less than 5 parts per million sand after 15 minutes of surging and pumping at design capacity of well. h) The Subcontractor shall keep well development records including static water level,sand content, color of discharge water, interval being redevetoped,time spe�t in each interval, drawdown, specific capacity, estimated flow rate, and other pertinent information regarding well development. Static water level shall be measured each day before the start of development. Other items shall be recorded at the beginning and end of surging and airlifting each screened interval or as directed by the Engineer. 4. Monitoring Wells a) The monitoring weils will be developed by air lifting followed by bailing. b) The wells shall be developed until the produced water is clear and free from sand, as directed by the Engineer. 8.0 TEST PUMP EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION 1. This item includes the work necessary to provide, install and remove all associated appurtenances for the test pump installation, and includes providing and setting the test pump, providing the PaaF 11 nf1� CONSTRUCTION OF TEST WELL, MONITORING WELLS,and AQUIFER TESTING discharge piping,flowmeter and butterfly valve, and providing and installing the two(2), 1-inch access pipes. 2. Provide a vertical turbine well purnp and motor,column,discharge head and fittings, capable of pumping the rates as specified for the variable rate testing shall be provided. The pump shall not be removed from the well until the associated pump testing is complete, including a minimum of up to 24-hours recovery, or as directed by the Engineer. 3. The maximum diameter of the pump column assembly shall be sized to allow for the installation of two(2) 1-inch access pipes. 4. Pump Installation: a) The pump, drop pipe,sounding tubes, motor cable shall be disinfected with chlorine solution before installing in the well. b) Pump shall be installed in full compliance with AWWA E101. Drop pipe shall be handled and couplings tightened in accordance with API 5C1. c) Setting Depth: Pump intake set at 5 feet off the bottom of the test well. 5. Provide two, 1-inch diameter PVC pipes for each pump assembly with end caps and perforations along the upper and lower 10 feet, adequate for insertion of a water level pressure transdueer and an electronic water level indicator for manual readings, before, during, and after test pumping. Allow free passage of pressure transducer. 6. Flow Meter: a) Provide a flow meter capabie of continuously measuring the pump discharge rate within plus or minus 5 percent of the true flow rate with built-in flow totalizer shall be provided. 7. Throttling Valve: a) Provide a throttiing valve for each pump assembly. b) Control capable of adjusting the flow rate between 100 gpm and 1,000 gpm shall be provided. 8. Discharge Piping: aj As required to convey clear water from the test welis to the discharge point. b) Erosion control shall be provided as necessary to avoid erosion. 9.0 WELL PUMPIPIG TESTS i. This item includes the work, materials and equipment necessary to complete the initial 8-hour variable rate pumping test,and 72-hour constant rate pumping tests. The Subcontractor shall comply with all applicable permits, laws and regulations in disposing of water generated during well testing. 2. The Engineer shall provide the foilowing work, materials and equipment: a} Data Logger: Provide(6j data loggers, including setup and removal (one for the river, one for the test well and four for the monitoring wells). The logger shall be capable of reading and storing all the data from one compiete test and be downloadable to a portable computer. The P��o t�„f t� CONSTRUCTION OF TEST WELL, MONITORING WELLS,and AQUIFER TESTING data logger shail be Troli 700's manufactured by Insitu with compatible transducers. The Engineer shall download the data at the end of each test. b) Data loggers shall be programmed to a logarithmic scale with a maximum time interval of two minutes. c) Data loggers will be set-up 1 day prior to the start of the pumping test and will begin recording static water levels. Data loggers will remain in all four locations for the entire duration of the 8- hour variable rate test, 72-hour constant rate pumping tests,and for any additional days following completion of the pumping tests at the discretion of the Engineer. 3. The Subcontractor shall provide the following work, materials and equipment: a) The Subcontractor shall conduct the tests using his personnel as specified, for all equipment setup and operation, including manual water level measurement,fiow rate adjustment and data recording. b) Electronic Water Level Indicator: The Subcontractor shall provide an operating electronic water level meter with a measurement tape of suitabie length that fits inside the water level sounding tubes and extends to the bottom of the well. The electronic water level measurement tape shall be as manufactured by Solinst Model 101, or approved equal. c) The Subcontractor will not begin testing before well water level has recovered following well development. d) The Subcontractor shail measure static water level prior to start of each test. e) Well water level recovery shall be considered complete after the well has been allowed to rest for a period at least equal to elapsed pumping time of aborted test,with the exception that if any three successive water level measurements spaced at least 20 minutes apart show no further rise in water level,test may be resumed at the directian of Engineer. f) 8-Hour Variable Rate Testing: 1. Controi pump discharge rate with throttling valve. 2. Control and maintain at approximately the desired discharge rate for each step with an accuracy of at least plus or minus 5 percent. 3. If possible, perform test at rates of approximately 25%, 50%, 100%, and 125%of the design capacity of well. Verify actual rates with Engineer prior to the start of the test. 4. Well Design Capacity: up to 1,000 gpm 5. Duration: Perform each step of the variable-rate test for 120 minutes,or as directed by the Engineer. The variable rate test will be conducted following well disinfection. 6. Water level measurements shall be recorded at the test weil, river piezometers and monitoring well locations using the Solinst water levei meter and the data loggers. g) 72-Hour Constant-Rate Testing: 1. Control pump discharge rate using the throttling valve. 2. Controi and maintain at discharge rate specified by Engineer for duration of test with an accuracy of at least plus or minus S percent. When necessary, make adjustments in pumping rate using the in-line valve. 3. Duration: Pump well continuously at a constant rate, as determined by Engineer,for a period of 72-hours or until Engineer terminates test. 4. Water level measurements will be recorded at all monitoring welis,test well and river piezometer locations using the Solinst water level meter and the data loggers. PaEe 13 of 16 CONSTRUCTION OF TEST WELL, MONITORING WEILS, and AQUIFER TESTING 5. Following completion of the 72-hour constant-rate test do not conduct activities in the well or nearby weli that might affect water levels during recovery period. 4. Recovery Period a} Water level measurements shall be recorded at all monitoring well,test well and river locations using the data loggers to be provided by the Engineer. 5. Test Failure a) In the event that test fails to meet specified duration requirement, or if test is initiated too soon after an aborted test,test wili be declared invalid, and shall require a retest. bj Aborted Test: Failure of pump operation for a period greater than 1 percent of elapsed pumping time shall require test be aborted and further testing suspended untii water level in the pumped well has recovered to its original level. 6. Well Test Data a) Maintain for each test. b) Records shall include pumping rate,water level, drawdown,specific capacity, and all other pertinent information regarding weii testing. c) The Subcontractor shail submit well test data to Engineer at end of each test. 10.0 WELL�4�ANDONMENT 1. Following completion of construction and testing,the Subcontractor shall abandon the test well at the Bike Park site,as specified below: A. Test and Monitoring Wells: l. Calculate volume of existing well casing and allow 20%additional cement for losses. Calculated volume shall be reviewed by Engineer. 2. Fill the well with Portland cement grout using a tremie pipe The grout may be piaced in the wells in a single stage. 3. Extend tremie pipe from ground surface to the bottom of zone to be grouted. 4. Place grout from the bottom to top in a continuous operation. 5. Slowly raise grout tremie pipe as grout is placed. 6. Discharge end of grout tremie pipe shall remain submerged in grout until grouting is completed. 7. Maintain a full grout pipe until completion of grouting of the specified interval. 8. The Subcontractor shall remove the top 3 feet of cement and existing well casing. The final abandonment shall provide a cement seal from 3 feet below ground surface to total depth of the well. B. Monitoring Welis: 1. Remove PVC casing and screen. Fill the borehole with cement grout placed by tremie pipe following the abandonment procedure for the Test Well. Page 14 of 16 CONSTRUCTION OF TEST WE�L, MONITORING WELLS,and AQUIFER TESTING 10.0 SOLIDS AND WATER DISPOSAL 1. This item inciudes all the work, materials, labor, and equipment necessary to dispose of all solids and water generated during weil construction and testing. 2. The Subcontractor shall comply with all appiicable permits, and local, State and Federal regulations in disposing of solids and water generated during weii installation, development and testing. 3. All solids generated during the test well installation process, other than drilling cuttings,shall be contained and disposed of offsite by the Subcontractor. 4. Fluids generated during development that are cloudy or contain sand and silt shall be disposed of onsite by surface discharge and subsequent infiltration into the ground. The water must be discharged onto the ground is such a way as to not cause erosian of the ground,and not allowed to run freely away from the immediate area of discharge or enter the Sacramento River. 5. It is anticipated that the drill cuttings from the wells will be able to be disposed of at the drilling site. Solids will need to be spread out or buried in an appropriate area at the driliing site, as approved by the Engineer. 6. Clear water generated during development and testing at the Bike Park site will be piped to the storm drain in the Bike Park parking lot as shown on Figure 1. 7. Fluids shall be disposed of as to not adversely impact adjacent landowners, the Sacramento River, and in strict accordance with all applicable local, State, and Federal regulations. Pa�e IS of 16 ' Yelfow Jacket Drilling Services, L.LC Proposal�#(CA}DC21-2313 CONSTRUCTION OF TEST WELL, MONITORING WELLS,and AQUIFER TESTING BID SCHEDULE CONSTRUCTION OF TEST WELL, MONITORING WELLS,and AQUIFER TESTING City of Redding, CA a) Include all taxes in Base Bid. b) Subcontractor will have current California DIR License Number to work on Public Works project and will include prevailing wage. c) The total payment to the Subcontractor shall be made based on the Bid Items. No other payments will be made. d) Subcontractor shafl submit the following items with the bid: i) Proposed source of water ii) Proposed schedule of work Item Estimated Unit Extended No. ItemlDescri tion Bike Park Site Units Quanti Price Price 1 Mobilization/Demobilization/Cleanup �S 1 570,000.00 $70,000.00 2 Drill Test Well Borehole FT 46 $500.00 $23,000.00 3 Furnish and Install Carbon Steel Casing(Sumpj FT 2 $300.00 $600.00 4 Furnish and Install 12-inch Carbon Steei Screen FT 2g $175.00 $5,075.00 5 Furnish and Instail 12-inch Test Well Casing FT 14 $90.00 $1,26Q.00 6 Furnish and Install Test Well Gravel Pack FT 34 $100.00 $3,400.00 Furnish and Install Cement Seai between Test Weli Casing 7 and Borehole � 12 $1Q0.00 $1,200.00 8 Development by surge block/airlifting,and over pumping HR 7 $400.00 $2,800.00 9 Construct and develop 4 monitoring wells complete FT 172 $250.00 $43,000.00 10 Furnish, instal) and Remove Test Pump for Pumping Tests EA 1 4,000.00 $4,OOO.aO 11 Test Pumping(8-hour variable rate, 72-hour constant HR gp $400.00 $32,000.00 rate) 12 Test Well Surface Completion EA 1 1,000.00 $1,000.00 13 Monitoring Wel)Surface Completion EA 4 $1,250.0 $5,000,00 Total $ 192,335.00 Name: Dean Cobfish Signature• �� Company: Yellow Jacket Drillinq Services LLCDate: 5/17/2021 Phone Number: 909-544-1135 Email• dean@yjdrilling.com DIR No: 1000055613 Page 16 of 16 Exhibit B Engineering Services for the Pump House 1 Replacement Project for the City of Redding (with Amendment 3) Phase 1 Fee Summary Subcontractor Task No. Description Labor Fee Fee Expenses Fee Task 1 Project Management Task 1.1 Project Management $23,376.00 $0.00 $0.00 $23,376.00 Task 1.1 Project Management (Amendment3) �79,680.00 $0.00 $0.00 $19,680.00 Task 1.2 Meetings $21,148.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $22,148.00 Task 1.2 Meetings(Amendment 3) $21,216.00 $0.00 $0.00 $21,216.00 Task13 QualityControl $17,664.00 $0.00 $0.00 $17,664.00 Task 1 Subtotal $103,084.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $104,084.00 Task 2 Data Review,Geotechnical Investigations,and Survey/Mapping Task 2.1 Data Review $14,892.00 $0.00 $0.00 $14,892.00 Task 2.2 Geotechnical Investigations $41,016.00 $19,541.00 $2,000.00 $62,557.00 Task 2.2.1 Geophysical Investigations (Amendment 1) $36,809.00 $35,671.00 $1,520.00 $74,000.00 Task 2.2.2 Cottector Well Investigations (Amendment 2) $�8,523.00 $179,445.00 $13,556.00 $211,524.00 Task 2.2.2 Cottector well Investigations (Amendment 3) $38,914.00 $0.00 $0.00 $38,914.00 Task 2.23 Cotlector Welt Pumping (Amendment 3) $142,804.00 $201,952.00 $25,851.00 $370,607.00 Task 2.3 Surveying and Mapping $4,080.00 $7,455.00 $800.00 $12,335.00 Task 2 Subtotal $297,038.00 $444,064.00 $43,727.00 $784,829.00 Task 3 Preliminary Environmentat Review $44,288.00 $0.00 $0.00 $44,288.00 Task 3 Subtotal $44,288,pp $0.00 $0.00 $44,288.00 Task4 Construction Funding Evaluation $19,576.00 $0.00 $0.00 $19,576.Od Task45ubtotal $19,576.00 $0.00 $0.00 $19,576.00 Pretiminary Design Report Task 5 (Preliminary,Pre-Finat,and Finat PDR) $136,469.00 $0.00 $0.00 $136,469.00 Task 5 5ubtotal $136,469.00 $0.00 $0.00 $136,469.00 TOTAL PHASE 1 $1,089,246.00 aJr�CO�J$. 1 Consultant Rates Engineering Services for the Pump House 1 Reptacement Project for the Ciry of Redding 2020 Hourly Billing Rates Hourly Billing Labor Classification Rate Office/Clericat/Accounting $108 Junior-Level Technician $80 Mid-tevel Technician �123 Senior-Level Technitian $7 79 Staff Engineer 1 $�22 Staff Engineer 2 $133 Associate Engineer $135 Project Engineer $187 Engineer Specialist/Associate Project Manager $2p4 Senior TechnologistJProject Manager $255 Principa�Technologist/Senior Project Manager �2g3 Includes engineering,consutting planner,and scientist disciplines. Notes: 1) A markup of 5 percentwitl be applied to all Other Direct Costs and Expenses. 2) Direct expenses are those necessary costs and charges incurred for the PROJECT including, but not limited to: a) The direct costs of transportation,meals and lodging,mail,subcontracts,outside services,and equipment and supplies. b) Consultant`s current standard rate charges for direct use of Consultant's vehictes,laboratory test and anatysis,printing and reproduction services,and certain field equipment;and c) Consuttant's standard project charges for special health and safety requirements of Occupational Safety and Health Administration. 3) Consultant's current standard rates for direct expenses shatl be used. These rates are subject to change foltowing internal audits and reviews. 4) These rates are effective January 1,2020,through December 31,2020.Rate schedute is subject to annual revision to reflect current rates and not to exceed 4 percent per year for subsequent years of the contract. .✓'c�CO�JS � , � d _ . � -� � � �� c� / � 'r.e �� 777 CYPRESS AVENUE, REDDING, GA 9F�OO1 °' � � ��a✓•s«!� .: � �g ,j P.O. BOX 496071, RE�owG, CA 96049-6071 PAMELA MIZE,CITY CLERK SHARLENE TIPTON,ASSISTANT CITY CLERK 530.225.4447 530.225.4463 FAX July 23, 2021 Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc Attn: Kim Hein, P.E. 2525 Airpark Drive Redding, CA 96001 SUBJECT: Third Amendment to Consulting and Professional Services Contract, C-8541 Dear Ms. Hein, Enclosed please find the fully executed original of the above referenced Third Amendment to Consulting and Professional Services Contract by and between the City of Redding and Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc regarding Pump House 1 Replacement Project. The Redding City Council approved this amendment at its regular meeting on July 20, 2021. If you have any questions regarding this matter, or if we can be of assistance, please contact the Office of the City Clerk at(530) 225-4044. Sincerely, �� ,/ , � � Joan Twomey Executive Assistant Enclosure cc: Maire McCollum Kraft Grannis �° IT 'I` �, S I � � VI (C`- 1) �'�z��-Ics�zs� 1 l��i��t��°�j��t(�� l�P�°�l��f��y��f��j Tl�� csns�z��ira� d P�c��ssi�a�a� S� i��s �Q��r�.��541 ("�c�r�t�a�t"j d��ed 1�il�y 1�, 2020, ar�d � ��d�d�r��pt� b��11,�02Q,3�ntaa�y 12,ZQ21, d J�l�23,2a21,b� ��r�th��i�y t�flt.�ddi��, ��lifc� aa, �"��ty>g�� ipal��rpc�rat�c��, d J��s�bs��i��errr��C�rc�ttp I��o E46��s�s�,t1 t"�is h��by � ended�s f�l�c��se � 30 0 �s �r�ded tt� read z� �ts�rati��ty�s ftsllc��e �, Cc��st�lt��t�h��l�cs ��c��c�rk s��r�btat�t�I�y 11,2024, d�ca plet�s�id�ork�ca later thara 3�a�a� 30, 2023 a Ti � is �f�h��s��ra��. A11�th�r�� s�r�d�eaa�ditic��s s�f tl��c�r�tr��t d��d �y 1�,2020,��d� �nded a� S�pt��b�r 11, 2Q20� 3�� t°y 12, 2Q21, d 3�tly 23, 2Q21, s1��11�� iz�i� �i�1I f��°�� d�ff�ct, 'Ih� ��thi� ��d ��t s��l b��he dat� th�t��s s��d by�� itye I I'�` S� , �ity��d�c��s�.z� t h��c�zted��Zis�1 �r�d �r�� c�r�tl��d�ys aa�d ye�r ��t fa�th be�c��ra `I' I i�� nr �� ic� I7ated: � , 2422 ye .A I i c��ta��r �"a�°�A��°c��c�: 13.� Y�, 1.7�I�14�,�" A�t�,st: �it�y�4�c��°a��y � � � � ��" �� . � ��µ� �� w� �4 1' �, a�jr �� ym �' A ��c��s E��t��t°�t�� I��m I?at�de �{ , 2022 � � . ��M �� ' p�y�r I.I�. �1c�a: � l ! CITY OF REDDING CONSULTING AND PROFE5SIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT THIS CONTRACT is made at Redding, California,by and between the City of Redding("City"), a municipal corporation,and Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.("Consultant")for the purpose of City of Redding Pump House 1 Replacement Project(Phase 1-Preliminary Design). WHEREAS, City does not have sufficient personnel to perform the services required herein thereby necessitating this Contract for personal services. N4W, THEREFORE, the Parties covenant and agree, for good consideration hereby acknowledged, as follows: SECTION 1. CONSULTANT SERVICES Subject to the terrns and conditions set forth in this Contract, Consultant shall provide to City the services described in Exhibit A,attached and incorporated herein. Consultant shall provide the services at the time, place and in the manner specified in Exhibit A. SECTION 2. COMPENSATION AND REIMBURSEMENT OF COSTS A. City shall pay Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Contract, at the times and in the manner set forth in Exhibit B, attached and incorporated herein, in a total amount not to exceed Four Hundred Eighty-Eight Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty- Nine Dollars ($488,829). This sum includes all out-of-pocket travel, lodging and incidenta.l expenses incurred by Consultant that are reasonably associated with the provision of services under this Contract. The payments specified herein shall be the only payments to be made to Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Contract. B. Consultant shall submit monthly invoices to City for work completed to the date of the invoice. All invoices shall be itemized to reflect the employees performing the requested tasks, the billing rate for each employee and the hours worked. C. All correct,complete and undisputed invoices sent by Consultant to City shall be paid within thirty(30)calendar days of receipt. D. Pursuant to Section 1781 of the Labor Code, Consultant is advised that the work contemplated in E�chibit A,Task 2.2 and 2.3 of this contract is subject to the payment of prevailing wages and all other requirements of the Prevailing Wage Law. The prevailing wage of each job classification may be found by inquiry with the � California Department of Industrial Relations. Consultant shall comply with all laws ' related to the performance of public work including, but not limited to, the ` c:� � PAEVWAGE-Consultin�andProfessionalServicesContract Page t Rcv.02/17 ,._.- '�,�.�� .� employment of apprentices pursuant to Section 1777.5 of the Labor Code, work day/week hours and overtime rates pursuant to Sections 1813 and 1815of the Labor Code and the obligation set forth in Section 1774-1776 of the Labor Code in regards to payment of prevailing wages and to provide the City of Redding and Department of Industrial Relations certified payrolls when required. A certified copy of all payroll records relative to this project shall be submitted to the City of Redding along with the related invoice. Receipt of certified payroll recards is a prerequisite to receiving payment. E. No Consultant or subconsultant may be listed on a bid proposal for a public works project unless registered with the Department of Industrial Relations pursuant to Labor Code Section 1725.5. No Consultant or subconsultant may be awarded a contract for public work on a public works project unless registered with the Department of Industrial Relations pursuant to Labor Code Section 1725.5. All Consultants and subconsultants must furnish electronic certified payroll records to the Labor Commissioner. This requirement applies to a11 public works projects, whether new or ongoing. Consultant is further advised that the work contemplated herein is subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the Department of Industrial Relations. SECTION 3. TERM AND TERMINATION A. Consultant shall commence work on or about May 1 l,2020,and complete said work no later than December 31, 2021. Time is of the essence. B. If Consultant fails to perform its duties to the satisfaction of City, or if consultant fails to fulfill in a timely and professional manner its obligations under this Contract, then City shall have the right to terminate this Contract effective immediately upon City giving written notice thereof to Consultant. C. Either Party may terminate this Contract without cause on thirty (30) calendar days' written notice. Notwithstanding the preceding, if the term set forth in Section 3.A. of this Contract exceeds ninety (90) calendar days in duration, Consultant's sole right to terminate shall be limited to termination for cause. D. Consultant hereby acknowledges and agrees that the obligation of City to pay under this Contract is contingent upon the availability of City's funds which are appropriated or allocated by the City Council. Should the funding for the project and/or work set forth herein not be appropriated or allocated by the City Council, City may terminate this Agreement by furnishing at least thirty (30) calendar days' written notice of its intention to terminate. In the event of a termination pursuant to this subdivision, Consultant shall not be entitled to a remedy of acceleration of payments due over the term of this Agreement. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the power to terminate described herein is required by Article 16, Section 18, of the California Constitution, and that constitutional provision supersedes any law, rule, regulation ar statute which conflicts with the provisions of this Section. PREVWAGGConsulting and Professional Services Contracl Page 2 Rev.02/17 E. In the event that City gives natice of termination, Consultant shall promptly provide to City any and all finished and unfinished reports, data, studies, photographs,charts or other work product prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Contract. City shall have full ownership, including, but not limited to, intellectual property rights, and control of all such finished and unfinished reports, data, studies, photographs, charts or other work product. F. In the event that City terminates the Contract, City shall pay Consultant the reasonable value of services rendered by Consultant pursuant to this Contract; provided, however, that City shall not in any manner be liable for lost profits which might have been made by Consultant had Consultant completed the services required by this Contract. Consultant shall, not later than ten (10) calendar days after termination of this Contract by City, furnish to City such financial information as in the judgment of the City's representative is necessary to determine the reasonable value of the services rendered by Consultant. G. In no event shall the termination or expiration of this Contract be construed as a waiver of any right to seek remedies in law, equity or otherwise for a Party's failure to perform each obligation required by this Contract. SECTION 4. MISCELLANEOUS TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT A. City shall make its facilities accessible to Consultant as required for Consultant's performance of its services under this Contract, and, upon request of Consultant, provide labor and safety equipment as required by Consultant for such access. B. Pursuant to the City's business license ordinance, Consultant shall obtain a City business license prior to commencing work. C. Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of any nature whatsoever that are legally required for Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect or obtain at all times during the term of this Contract any licenses, pertnits and approvals that are legally required for Consultant to practice its profession. D. Consultant shall, during the entire term of this Contract, be construed to be an independent contractor and nothing in this Contract is intended, nor shall it be construed, to create an employer/employee relationship, association, joint venture relationship,trust or partnership or to allow City to exercise discretion or control over the professional manner in which Consultant performs under this Contract. Any and all taxes imposed on Consultant's income, imposed or assessed by reason of this Contract or its perforrnance, including but not limited to sales or use taxes, shall be paid by Consultant. Consultant shall be responsible for any taxes or penalties assessed by reason of any claims that Consultant is an employee of City. Consultant shall not PREVWAGE-Consulting and Fro(essional Services Contraa Page 3 Rev.02/17 be eligible for coverage under City's workers' compensation insurance plan,benefits under the Public Employee Retirement System or be eligible for any other City benefit. E. No provision of this Contract is intended to,or shall be for the benefit of,or construed to create rights in, or grant remedies to, any person or entity not a party hereto. F. No portion of the work or services to be performed under this Contract shall be assigned, transferred, conveyed or subcontracted without the prior written approval of City. Consultant may use the services of independent cantractors and subcontractors to perform a portion of its obligations under this Contract with the prior written approval of City. Independent contractors and subcontractors shall be provided with a copy of this Contract and Consultant shall have an affirmative duty to assure that said independent contractors and subcontractors cornply with the same and agree to be bound by its terms. Consultant shall be the responsible party with respect to all actions of its independent contractors and subcontractors, and shall obtain such insurance and indemnity provisions from its contractors and subcontractors as City's Risk Manager shall determine to be necessary. G. Consultant, at such times and in such form as City may require, shall furnish City with such periodic reports as it may request pertaining to the work or services undertaken pursuant to this Contract, the costs or obligations incurred or to be incurred in connection therewith, and any other matters covered by this Contract. H. Consultant shall maintain accounts and records, including personnel, property and financial records, adequate to identify and account for all costs pertaining to this Contract and such other records as may be deemed necessary by City to assure proper accounting for all project funds. These records shall be made available for audit purposes to state and federal authorities, or any authorized representative of City. Consultant shall retain such records for three (3) years after the expiration of this Contract, unless prior permission to destroy them is granted by City. I. Consultant shall perform all services required pursuant to this Contract in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of Consultant's profession. All products of whatsoever nature which Consultant delivers to City pursuant to this Contract shall be prepared in a professional manner and conform to the standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing the profession of Consultant and its agents, employees and subcontractors assigned to perform the services contemplated by this Contract. J. All completed reports and other data or documents, or computer media including diskettes,and other materials provided or prepared by Consultant in accordance with this Contract are the property of City, and may be used by City. City shall have all intellectual property rights including, but not limited to, copyright and patent rights, in said documents,computer media,and other materials provided by Consultant. City shall release,defend, indemnify and hold harmless Consultant from all claims, costs, PREVWAGE-ConwltingandProfessiona.iServicesContract Page 4 Rev.02/17 expenses, damage or liability arising out of or resulting from City's use or modification of any reports, data, documents, drawings, specifications or other work product prepared by Consultant,except for use by City on those portions of the City's project for which such items were prepared. K. Consultant, including its employees, agents, and subconsultants, shall not maintain or acquire any direct or indirect interest that conflicts with the performance of this Contract. Consultant shall comply with all requirements of the Political Reform Act (Government Code § 8100 et seq.) and other laws relating to conflicts of interest, including the following: 1) Consultant shall not make or participate in a decision made by City if it is reasonably foreseeable that the decision may have a material effect on Consultant's economic interest, and 2) if required by the City Attorney, Consultant shall file financial disclosure forms with the City Clerk. SECTION 5. INSURANCE A. Unless modified in writing by City's Risk Manager, Consultant shall maintain the following noted insurance during the duration of the Contract: Covera�e Required Not Required Commercial General Liability X Comprehensive Vehicle Liability X �� Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability X Professional Liability(Errors and Omissions) X (Place an"x"in the appropriate box) B. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: l. Insurance Services Office form number CG-0001, Commercial General Liability Insurance, in an amount not less than$1,000,OQ0 per occurrence and $2,000,000 general aggregate for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage; 2. Insurance Services Office form number CA-0001 (Ed. 1/87), Comprehensive Automobile Liability Insurance, which provides for total limits of not less than$1,00Q,00Q combined single limits per accident applicable to all owned, non-owned and hired vehicles; 3. Statutory Workers' Compensation required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers' Liability Insurance in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence.Both the Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability policies shall contain the insurer's waiver of subrogation in favor of City, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers; PRGVWAGE-ConsultingandProfessionulServicesContract Page 5 Rev.02/17 4. Professional Liability (Enors and Omissions) Insurance, appropriate to Consultant's profession, against loss due to error or omission or malpractice in an amount not less than $1,000,000. 5. The City does not accept insurance certificates or endorsements with the wording "but anly in the event of a named insured's sole negligence" or any other verbiage limiting the insured's insurance responsibility. C. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by City. At the option of the City,either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claims administration and defense expenses. D. The General Liability shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions: 1. City, its elected officials, officers,employees, and agents are to be covered as additional insured as respects liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of Consultant; premises owned, leased or used by Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to City, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers. 2. The insurance coverage of Consultant shall be primary insurance as respects City, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by City,its elected o�cials,officers,employees, agents and volunteers, shall be in excess of Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. 3. Coverage shall state that the insurance of Consultant shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought,except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. 4. Each insurance policy required by this Contract shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled except after thirty (30) calendar days' prior written notice has been given to City. In addition, Consultant agrees that it shall not reduce its coverage or limits on any such policy except after thirty (30)calendar days' prior written notice has been given to City. E. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M.Best's rating of no less than A-VII. F. Consultant shall designate the City of Redding as a Certificate Holder of the PREVWAGE-Conwlling and Professionat Sarvices Controct Page 6 Rev.02/17 insurance. Consultant shall furnish City with certificates of insurance and original endorsements effecting the coverages required by this clause. Certificates and endorsements shall be furnished to: Risk Management Department, City of Redding, 7�7 Cypress Avenue, Redding, CA 96001. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by the insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City's Risk Manager prior to the commencement of contracted services. City may withhold payments to Consultant if adequate certificates of insurance and endorsements required have not been provided, or not been provided in a timely manner. G. The requirements as to the types and limits of insurance coverage to be maintained by Consultant as required by Section 5 of this Contract, and any approval of said insurance by City, are not intended to and will not in any manner limit or qualify the liabilities and obligations otherwise assumed by Consultant pursuant to this Contract, including, without limitatian,provisions concerning indemnification. H. If any policy of insurance required by this Section is a"claims made"policy,pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 342 and Government Code § 945.6, Consultant shall keep said insurance in effect for a period ofeighteen{18)months after the termination of this Contract. I. If any damage, including death, personal injury or properry damage, occurs in connection with the performance of this Contract, Consultant shall immediately notify City's Risk Manager by telephone at (530) 225-4068. No later than three (3) calendar days after the event, Consultant shall submit a written report to City's Risk Manager containing the following infarmation,as applicable: 1)name and address of injured or deceased person(s);2)name and address of witnesses; 3}name and address of Consultant's insurance company; and 4) a detailed description of the damage and whether any City property was involved. SECTION 6. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS A. Consistent with California Civil Code § 2782.8, when the services to be provided under this Contract are design professional services to be performed by a design professional, as that term is defined under Section 2782.8, Consultant shall, to the fullest extent permitted by law, indemnify protect, defend and hold harn�less, City, its elected officials,officers,employees,and agents,and each and every one of them, fram and against all actions, damages, costs, liability, claims, losses, penalties and expenses (including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney's fees of the City Attorney or legal counsel retained by City, expert fees, litigation costs, and investigation costs)of every type and description to which any or all of them may be subjected by reason of, or resulting from, directly or indirectly, the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant, its officers, employees or agents in the performance of professional services under this Contract,except when liability arises due to the sole negligence, active negligence or misconduct of the City. PitEVWAGE-Consulting and Professional Services Controa Page 7 Rev.02/17 B. Other than in the performance of professional services by a design professional, which is addressed solely by subdivision(A)of this Section, and to the fullest extent permitted by law,Consultant shall indemnify protect,defend and hold harmless,City, its elected officials, officers,employees,and agents,and each and every one of them, from and against ail actions, damages, costs, liability, claims, losses, penaities and expenses (including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney's fees of the City Attorney or legal counsel retained by City, expert fees, litigation costs, and investigation costs)of every type and description to which any or all of them may be subjected by reason of the performance of the services required under this Contract by Consultant its officers, employees or agents in the performance of professional services under this Contract, except when liability arises due to the sole negligence, active negligence or misconduct of the City. C. The Consultant's obligation to defend, indemnify and hold hartnless shall not be excused because of the Consultant's inability to evaluate liability. The Consultant shall respond within thirty (30) calendar days to the tender of any claim for defense and indemnity by the City, unless this time has been extended in writing by the City. If the Consultant fails to accept or reject a tender of defense and indemnity in writing delivered to City within thirty (30) calendar days, in addition to any other remedy authorized by law, the City may withhold such funds the City reasonably considers necessary far its defense and indemnity until disposition has been made of the claim or until the Consultant accepts or rejects the tender of defense in writing delivered to the City,whichever accurs first. This subdivision shall not be construed to excuse the prompt and continued performance of the duties required of Consultant herein. D. The obligation to indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless set forth in this Section applies to all claims and liability regardless of whether any insurance policies are applicable. The policy limits of said insurance policies do not act as a limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by Contractor. E. City shall have the right to approve or disapprove the legal counsel retained by Consultant pursuant to this Section to represent City's interests. City shall be reimbursed for all costs and attorney's fees incurred by City in enforcing the obligations set forth in this Section. SECTION 7. CONTRACT INTERPRETATION.VENUE AND ATTORNEY FEES A. This Contract shall be deemed to have been entered into in Redding, California. All questions regarding the validity, interpretation or performance of any of its terms or of any rights or obligations of the parties to this Contract shall be governed by California law. If any claim, at law or otherwise, is made by either party to this Contract, the prevailing party shall be entitled to its costs and reasonable attorneys' fees. B. This document, including all exhibits, contains the entire agreement between the PREVWAGE-Consulting and Professional Services Contract Page O Rev.02/17 parties and supersedes whatever oral or written understanding each may have had prior to the execution of this Contract. This Contract shall not be altered, amended or modified except by a writing signed by City and Consultant.No verbal agreement or conversation with any official, officer, agent or employee of City, either before, during or after the execution of this Contract, shall affect or madify any of the terms or conditions contained in this Contract, nor shall any such verbal agreement or conversation entitle Consultant to any additional payment whatsoever under the terms of this Contract. C. No covenant or condition to be performed by Consultant under this Contract can be waived except by the written consent of City. Forbearance or indulgence by City in any regard whatsoever shall not constitute a waiver of the covenant or condition in question. Until performance by Consultant of said covenant or condition is complete, City shall be entitled to invoke any remedy available to City under this Contract or by law or in equity despite said forbearance or indulgence. D. If any portion of this Contract or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall be invalid or unenforceable to any extent, the remainder of this Contract shall not be affected thereby and sha11 be enforced to the greatest extent permitted by law. E. The headings in this Contract are inserted for convenience only and shall not constitute a part hereof. A waiver of any party of any provision or a breach of this Contract must be provided in writing, and shall not be construed as a waiver of any other provision or any succeeding breach of the same or any other provisions herein. F. Each Party hereto declares and represents that in entering into this Contract, it has relied and is relying solely upon its own judgment, belief and knowledge of the nature, extent, effect and consequence relating thereto. Each Party further declares and represents that this Contract is made without reliance upon any statement or representation not contained herein of any other Pariy or any representative, agent or attorney of the other Party. The Parties agree that they are aware that they have the right to be advised by counsel with respect to the negotiations,terms, and conditions of this Contract and that the decision of whether or not to seek the advice of counsel with respect to this Contract is a decision which is the sole responsibility of each of the Parties. Accordingly, no party shall be deemed to have been the drafter hereof, and the principle of law set forth in Civil Code § 1654 that contracts are construed against the drafter shall not apply. G. Each of the Parties hereto hereby irrevocably waives any and all right to trial by jury in any action, proceeding, claim or counterclaim, whether in contract or tort, at law or in equity, arising out of or in any way related to this Agreement or the transactions contemplated hereby. Each Party further waives any right ta consolidate any action which a jury trial has been waived with any other action in which a jury trial cannot be or has not been waived. H. In the event of a conflict between the term and conditions of the body of this Contract PREV WAGE-Consulting and Professional Services Contraa Page 9 Rev.02/17 and those of any exhibit or attachment hereto, the terms and conditions set forth in the body of this Contract proper shall prevail. In the event of a conflict between the terms and conditions of any two or more exhibits or attachments hereto, those prepared by City shall prevail over those prepared by Consultant. SECTION 8. SURVIVAL The provisions set forth in Sections 3 through 7, inclusive, of this Contract shall survive termination of the Contract. SECTION 9. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS -NONDISCRIMINATION A. Consultant shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances and codes of federal, state and local governments. B. In the performance of this Contract, Cansultant shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, ancestry, national origin,religious creed, sex,sexual orientation,disability, age,marital status,political affiliation, or membership or nonmembership in any organization. Consultant shall take a�rmative action to ensure applicants are employed and that employees are treated during their employment without regard to their race,color,ancestry,national origin,religious creed,sex, sexual orientation,disability,age,marital staius,political affiliation, or membership or nonmembership in any organization. Such actions shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation and selection for training. SECTION 10. REPRESENTATIVES A. City's representative for this Contract is Kurt Maire, email k��1�< <ci��i€��>f=�•��c�ir�47,a�•��, telephone number (530) 225-4081, fax number (530) 245-7024. All of Consuitant's questions pertaining to this Contract shall be referred to the above-named person, or to the representative's designee. B. Consultant's representative for this Contract is Kim Hein, email ��i��:�-I��.i��c��€��?s.�c��a, telephone number (530) 355-848$. All of City's questions pertaining to this Contract shall be referred to the above-named person. C. The representatives set forth herein shall have authority to give all notices required herein. SECTION 11. NOTICES A. All notices,requests,demands and other communications hereunder shall be deemed given only if in writing signed by an authorized representative of the sender(may be other than the representatives referred to in Section 10) and delivered by facsimile, PREVWAGE-Consulting and F'rofessional Scrvices Contract Page 10 Rev.OZ/I7 with a hard copy mailed first class, postage prepaid; or when sent by a courier or an express service guaranteeing overnight delivery to the receiving party, addressed to the respective parties as follows: To City: To Consultant: City of Redding—Engineering Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. Mr. Kurt Maire, P.E. Mrs. Kimberly Hein, P.E. 7'77 Cypress Avenue 2525 Airpark Drive Redding, CA 96001 Redding, CA 96001 B. Either party may change its address for the purposes of this paragraph by giving written notice of such change to the other party in the manner provided in this Section. C. Notice shall be deemed effective upon: 1)personal service;2)two calendar days after mailing or transmission by facsimile, whichever is earlier. SECTION 12. AUTHORITY TO CONTRACT A. Each of the undersigned signatories hereby represents and warrants that they are authorized to execute this Contract on behalf of the respective parties to this Contract; that they have full right, power and lawful authority to undertake all obligations as pravided in this Contract; and that the execution, performance and delivery of this Contract by said signatories has been fully authorized by all requisite actions on the part of the respective parties to this Contract. B. When the Mayor is signatory to this Contract, the City Manager and/or the Department Director having direct responsibility for managing the services provided herein shall have authority to execute any amendment to this Contract which does not increase the amount of compensation allowable to Consultant or otherwise substantially change the scope of the services provided herein. SECTION 13. DATE OF CONTRACT The date of this Contract shall be the date it is signed by City. PRGVWAGH-Consulting and Profcssional Services Contract Page 11 Aev.02/17 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,City and Consultant have executed this Contract on the days and year set forth below: CITY OF REDDING, A Municipal Corporation � � Dated: , �° �,� , 2020 ; By: ADAM McEL AIN, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: BARRY E. DeWALT City Attorney i ��.%'�.,�-' �/;'`�� , ��'`� � �'�'` � � � � ��PAMELA MIZE, City Clerk �y: CONSULTANT Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. � Dated: , 2020 �� ' � By: Lisa Alliger, PE Principal-in-charge Department of Industrial Relations No.: 1000057877 TaY ID No.: 95-4081636 PRBVWAGL-Consulting nnd Professionat Services Contracl Page 12 Rev.02/17 7 2525 Airpark Drive Redding,CA 96001 United States T+1.530.243.5831 F+1.530.243.1654 www.jacobs.com , Exhibit A April 14,2020 Attention:Josh Watkins,Water Manager City of Redding 777 Cypress Avenue Redding,CA 96001 Subject: Scope of Engineering Services to City of Redding(CC1R)Pump House 1 Reptacement Project (Phase 1 —Preliminary Design) Qear Mr.Watkins: This letter presents Jacobs Engineering Group,Inc.'s(JACOBS}proposed Scope of Engineering Services (Exhibit A)for the Pump House 1 Reptacement Project-Phase 1 Pretiminary Design(Project).We are proposing to perform the work under the City of Redding Consulting and Professional Services Agreement on a not-to- exceed time and materiats basis per the rate schedule(Exhibit B). Per Request for Proposal(RFP)Na.5094,the effort associated with this Project wilt require two separate phases. Phase 1 will involve preliminary design(alternatives evatuation)services and preparation of a Pretiminary Design Report(PDR)with recommendations. Phase 2 will involve the detailed design,environmental comptiance documentation,permitting,project funding assistance,right-of-way acquisition,and preparation of contract documents,as wetl as design services during the bid and construction periods for reptacement of Pump House 1 (PS1)and instaltation of a new raw water pipeline,as required.The Ciry witl issue a contract for Phase 1.If the City is satis�ed with the PDR and the JACOBS services to that point,the City intends to provide JACOBS a contract amendment to work on Phase 2. Praject Introduction The City of Redding{City)PS1 supplies approximately 28.9 mitlion gallons per day(mgd)of Sacramento River water to the Foothitl Water Treatment Plant(FWTP)through two 30-inch-diameter pipelines.It is the primary delivery source and a criticat component for the FWTP. P51 is currently tocated on the right bank(loaking downstream)of the Sacramento River atong the Sacramento River Trait approximatety 0.25 mites upstream of the Diestelhorst Bridge. P51 is scheduled for reptacement based primarily on the following: • Current location is within significant habitat for endangered winter-run salmon and the current streening is not optimat for species protection and does not meet state and federal fishery criteria. ■ Limited intake capacity during low river stages due to shaltow river depth during times when the Anderson- Cottonwood Irrigation District(ACID)diversion dam flashboards are not in place.This situation makes the City dependent on ACID operations at the diversion dam,whith typicatly has flashboards installed only from April to November. Jacobs Engineering Group li�c. {�P504027_013�+�RDD 1 � . Aprit 74,2020 Subject Scope of Engineering Services to tity of Redding(COR)Pump House 1 Reptacement Project • The City's General Plan identified P51 as being located in an area of high seismic liquefaction potential and recommended that the structure be evaluated for its ability to withstand damage during a design earthquake. • Proposed FWTP expansion up to a capacity of 42 mgd per the City's Water Master Ptan. • Limited workspace for maintenance around the pumping units and other equipment. The objeetive of Phase 1 Preliminary Design is to provide review of alternatives,sufficient engineering,major design etements,economic information,and screening the alternatives so the City can decide how to proceed with implementation af the Project.Atternatives, inctuding combinations thereof,will be selected in a collaborative process with the City to be evatuated during Phase 1 and inctude the following: • Alternative 1 —Existing Pump Station 1 Location ■ Alternative 2—New River Trait Location ■ Alternative 4—Keswick Reservoir Location • Alternative 5—Riverbank Filtration Cotlector Wetl System Scope of Engineering Services The scope of engineering services to provide for the Project definition phase are outlined by tasks below: Task 1 -Project Management,Meetings, and 4uality Control Subtask 1.1 —Project Management The purpose of this subtask is to provide far the initiation and overalt management of Project�ctivities.An overall schedule and work plan will be developed and imptemented so that work activities are completed in an integrated and timety manner. In addition,this task inctudes those etements necessary to manage,lead,and control the Project. JACOBS witl furnish project management services for the Project,as foltows: ■ Status Reporting—Monitar budget,progress,and schedute.Monitor work efforts and evaluate actual versus planned progress.Changes in scope wilt be communicated to the City. Provide verbal progress reports to the City's project manager as necessary. • Administration—Maintain Project records,mana9e and process Project communications,and coordinate Project administrative matters. Prepare monthly invoices and Project status reports. ■ Coordination—Coordinate tasks/subtasks and staff,inctuding coordination with the City,to complete authorized work on sthedule and within budget. JACOBS witl manage the heatth,safety,and environmental activities of its staff.JACOBS will prepare a project- specific Health and Safety Plan.JACOBS will address safety in the o�ce and during site visits.JACOBS is not responsibte for the heatth and safety of other project participants. Deliverables:Monthty invoices with status reports. Subtask'1.2—Meetings The purpose of this subtask is to provide coordination of Project activities. PP50402201345RDD � � _ April 14,2020 Subject Scope of Engineering Services to City of Redding(COR)Pump House 1 Replacement Project JACOBS wilt conduct meetings for the Project as fotlows: • Kickoff meeting with City of Redding at Ciry Hall to reinforce key project objectives,critical milestones, budget,critical success factors,and team roles and responsibilities(assume 4 hours with Project Manager, Design Manager,and four key design team members}. • Up to 12 monthty status conference calls or meetings at Ciry Hatl between City and JACOBS.JACOBS witl prepare monthly agendas and summary minutes,including angoing work,issues pending,action items,and status of open action items. ■ One(1)Alternatives Analysis Workshop with the City(assume 4 hours;attended by Project Manager, Design Manager,Environmentat,and Permitting Leads). ■ One(1)Preliminary Design Workshop with City and state/federal agencies(assume 4 hours;attended by Project Manager,Design Manager, Environmental,and Permitting leads). Detiverabtes:Meeting agendas and meeting minutes. Subtask 13—4uality Control The purpose of this subtask is to provide quatity assurance/quality control(QA/QC)for the Project.Upon comptetion of the Draft and Pre-Finat PDR phases,senior members of the JACOBS team will review design and construction methodology,drawings,calcutations,Project design report,and the overall integrity of the design. Intemal reviews by senior engineers using quatity review forms(QRFs)witl be performed on Draft and Pre-Final PDR deliverables. Comments received from the quality control reviewers will be reviewed and adjudicated by the design team,with changes and additions incorporated into the design documents prior to detivery to the City. Deliverables: No specific deliverables;work products to be incorporated in the POR. Task 2 —Data Review, Geotechnical Investigations,and Survey/Mapping Subtask 2.'t Data Review JACOBS witl review avaitabte data,reports,mapping,and geotechnical reports.The following information may inctude,but not limited to: ■ CH2M HILL(now JACOBS)prepared the�raft Feasibility Study for the City of Redding Pump Nouse No. 1 Fish Protection Project in February 2002. � Record Documents:JACOBS witl review availabte record documents, inctuding record drawings,technical spedfications,design reports,and geotechnical data reports. � Federal,State,and Local Requirements:JACOBS wilt determine,with assistance from the City,regutatory requirements applicable for the Project.JACOBS will research and document restrictions as they pertain to the proposed Project alternatives. Deliverabtes:No specific deliverables;work products to be incorporated in the PDR. �'P504Q22Q1345RDD 3 � - April 14,2020 Subject Scope of Engineering Services to City of Redding(COR)Pump House 1 Replacement Project Subtask 2.2 Geotechnical Investigations JACOBS will perform geotechnical and geophysical investigations necessary to provide sufficient data for Phase 1. Geophysicat refraction surveys witt be performed to provide profiles with well-contrasted changes in seismic velocity that facilitates interpretation of subsurface stratigraphy.The seismic vetocity of the rock witt evatuate the feasibility of excavation,or excavatability,of the rock and feasibility of driving sheet piles for scour protection and cofFerdam construction. One geophysical refraction survey line is proposed for each Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 (two lines total),but no survey lines wilt be provided for either Atternative 4 or Alternative 5.The survey reveats subsurface strata to the anticipated excavation depth. Fotlowing the completion of the geophysical survey, up to two soit borings wilt be dritted adjacent to the river trail at the location of the proposed pump station. The potentiat for tiquefaction wilt be evaluated from the borehole data,as liquefaction mitigation would significantly contribute to the cost of the atternative.Samples are tested in the laboratory to evaluate their consistency and properties. Up to two soil borings total will first be dritled at two potential collector wetl sites.The sites are identified as Area 4 in the 1972 report to the City by Ranney,and an area on the south side of the river near the ACID Fish Screen. If the soil borings find adequate sands and gravels are present for a potentiat coltector welt and the City approves the pumping wett site, up to one 12-inch-diameter pumping well wilt be completed. Three observation welts would be instalted at approximate radial distances between 30 to 150 feet from the pumping/test well at a location approved by the City.These wetls would be used to monitor how the water table responds to pumping from the test welt.Following devetopment of all the wells,the test well woutd be pumped for a minimum of 24 hours while observing the response in the monitoring wells.The results of the pumping test will be used to estimate the hydrautic capacity of the proposed collector well site. Assumptions:The soil boring drilling and geophysical surveys are performed during the course of one working day at each tocation.The well instaltation devetopment and testing would be compteted during approximately 2 weeks at each location.lt is assumed that site access is provided for the geophysical crew and drill rigs.It is assumed that no permits will be needed to perform the geophysical survey.Well permits will be obtained through Shasta County.The geophysical survey and drilling crews will work under the supervision of JACOBS. Assume that City encroachment permits will be required for borings and City will waive the encroachment permit fees. Deliverabtes:A geotechnicat data report witt be prepared to summarize the fietd investigation and testing resutts. The geologic hazards associated with each alternative will be discussed and a determination witl be made of the potentiat for a future coltector welt at up to two sites.A geotechnical data report will be intorporated in the PDR. Su6task 2.3 Surveying and Mapping Ground surface surveys,both on bank and on the river bottom,wilt be performed as necessary to complete the preliminary design for Atternative 1 and Alternative 2.Two cross-sections perpendicular to the river will be surveyed at both the Alternatives 1 and 2 sites to determine pretiminary facility elevations.Assumes two people PPSd402%01345RDD t, 7 �. April 14,2020 Subjecr Scope of Engineering Services to City of Redding(COR)Pump House 1 Reptacement Project for one day in the field for this task. No surveying and mapping are induded herein for Atternatives 4 and 5 because this information is not required for Phase 1 evaluations. JACOBS wilt perform a preliminary right-of-way assessment and identify potential right-of-way issues based on readily avaitable GIS data.Right-of-way surveys witl be performed in Phase 2. Detiverables:No specific detiverables;work products to be incorporated in the PDR. Task 3—Preliminary Environmental Review The purpose of this task is to evaluate the environmental viability and issues related to each proposed atternative.JACOBS will perform a screening-level review of the biotogical and cultural impact potentiat for each site based upon readily available data and technical experience in the Project area.This includes for each site: • One-day reconnaissance levet site visit with Catifornia Natural Diversity Data Base(CNDDB)and Biogeographic Information and Observation System Database(BIOS)data reviews for any potentiat endangered or listed species within each Project. • Identification of the likely Area of Potential Effect(APE)and initial review by a JACOBS archaeologist and cultural resources specialist.Catifornia Historical Resource Information System(CHRIS)surveys will tikely only be completed for the setected alternative in Phase 2. ■ Review of water rights and evaluation for change in point-of-diversion. ■ Preliminary delineation of the Ordinary High-Water Mark(OWHM)is performed for an engineering alternatives review.Detailed wetland delineation and permitting is completed in Phase 2 once the Project is defined. ■ Coordination with National Marine Fisheries Service(NMFS),California Department of Fish&Wildtife (CDFW),and United States Army Corps of Engineers(USACE)to determine the preliminary feasibility of each selected alternative. • Gather information retated to existing river bank coltector well systems adjacent to anadromous waterways in northern Califomia and analyze their permitting and regutatory challenges. Assumptions: • Least Environmentally Damaging Practicabte Rlternative(LEDPA)document witt not be compteted in Phase 1. LEDPA analysis will be induded in Phase 2 if individual permit cannot be avoided from USACE. • California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)and National Environmental Poticy Act(NEPA)compliance is considered for each atternative with assumptions.CEQA and NEPA documents are inctuded in Phase 2. Deliverables:No specific deliverabtes;work products to be incorporated in the Preliminary Design Report. Task 4—Construction Funding Evaluation The purpose of this task is to provide a list of viable funding alternatives tike California State Revolving Fund (SRF)and the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act(WIFIA)for the project construction and rank them based on tikelihood of successful apptication,associated interest rates,terms,design or construction retated requirements,potentiat impacts ta the project schedule,retated reporting or monitoring requirements,and other important aspects associated with each funding atternative. PPS0�+022Qi345RD0 5 7 . April 14,2020 Subject Scope of Engineering Services to Ciry of Redding(COR}Pump House 1 Replacement Project Assumptions: ■ Up to four funding mechanisms are reviewed and ranked in the PDR. ■ Applications for funding submission are not inctuded in Phase 1. Deliverables:No specific deliverables;work products to be incorporated in the Pretiminary Design Report. Task 5—Preliminary Design Report The purpose of this task is to provide the City of Redding with a PDR with the preferred atternative for the City to consider for Phase 2 Final Design. JACOBS witt foltow a three-phase process for delivery of the preliminary design for the Project.This process includes producing pretiminary deliverables at three phases of the design(Draft, Pre-Final,and Final Preliminary Design).At the Draft and Pre-Final phases,JACOBS wilt provide information for review and provide for resolution of key issues before proceeding to the next phase.The information collected,and the concepts defined in each consecutive phase,wilt form the basis for subsequent work. Each phase will include specific deliverabtes,which are identified in the following subtasks. Design review workshops(at City Hatl)with the City af Redding will be conducted at crititat design mitestones as identified in the following subtasks.The City of Redding wilt provide comments to JACOBS within 3 weeks of receiving the documents. Project Design Criteria The Project design criteria witl be developed for evatuating the alternatives and wilt be induded in the PDRs. Engineering design criteria will address resource agency criteria,structurat,civil,geotechnical,mechanical, etectrical,conveyance pipeline,cost and financial analysis,and construction elements.Operations criteria will encompass diversion requirements and other operations to maintain water deliveries during construction. Development and Evatuation of Alternatives and Components Atternatives wilt be developed in concert with the City.JACOBS anticipates up to four atternatives witl be evaluated per the project design criteria.JACOBS will prepare information associated with each alternative to provide information for a project workshop with the City and agencies to ensure consensus of alternatives. JACOBS will evatuate design criteria and prepare conceptual design documents for the alternatives and components.Conceptual design documents will indude approximately three drawings per alternative:site plan, facility layout plan,cross sections, river and screen criteria,construction phasing approach,operations and maintenance(0&M),construction cost estimates,and tife-cyde cost witl be induded in the PDRs. JACOBS will provide a ctearty defined ranking system and rank the four atternatives based on performance, capitat and operating costs,environmental impacts,and other factors that should be considered. Subtask 5.1 —Draft Pretiminary Design Report JACOBS witl prepare Draft Preliminary Design Report to document the information prepared to setect the preferred design alterative for the Project. w�sa��ozzra7��s��o � � � April 14,2020 Subjec� Scope of Engineering Services to tity of Redding(COR)Pump House 1 Replacement Project The Draft PDR witl inctude cost estimates for the remaining phases of the Project,inctuding environmental and permitting,easement acquisition(City to provide tand value assumptions),final engineering and design,services during construction(engineering support and construction management),construction,and 0&M. Construction cost estimates witl be prepared to the tevet of accuracy based on the information availabte within normat industry standards. Estimates witl be formatted in accordance with the Project design CSI specification format and segregated by facility.Where sufficient detailed information is lacking to obtain reasonably atcurate prices af materiats a contingency allowance may be applied.Escatation altowances witl be used to provide an opinion af the estimated construction costs at the midpoint of construction. This report is expected to be a working document at this stage of design. JACOBS will facilitate a Pretiminary Design Workshop with the City and agencies to review the preliminary design and receive input from the City and agencies. Deliverabtes:Electronic fites(pdf format)and five(5)hard copy sets of Draft PDR documents and preliminary construction cost estimates. Subtask 5.2—Pre-Final Preliminary Design Report JACOBS witt prepare Pre-Final PDR for the Project. PDR review comments from the City and federal and state agencies will be incorporated_The Pre-Final submittat witl indude the concept drawings and pretiminary construction costs. The PDR witl indude an estimate for annual operating costs,estimated service life for major components and equipment,and provide a tife-cycle cost analysis for each alternative. The Pre-Finat PDR review submittal wilt recommend a project atternative and is intended to be essentiatty ready for City of Redding preferred alternative setection.The PDR will document the major design criteria used for the various project components. Deliverables:Electronic files(pdf format)and five(5)hard copy sets of Pre-Finat PDR documents and preliminary construction cost estimates. Subtask 5.3—Final Pretiminary Design Report This is the final phase of the PDR. Review comments from the Pre-Final PDR from the City of Redding review will be incorporated.JACOBS witl prepare the Finat PDR,which wilt be stamped by Catifornia Registered Professional Engineers.The Final PDR will indude design criteria,to be used as the pretiminary basis of design for Phase 2,for the City's preferred alternative. Deliverables:Electronic files(pdf format)and five(5)hard copy sets of P.E.stamped PDR documents. Schedute The Scope of Engineering Services and activities is anticipated to commence in May 2020 and will be completed no later than Marth 2021 assuming COVID-19 does not affect field work schedutes.The Scope of Engineering Services and activities associated with this Project will be completed in accordance with the following approximate mitestones: ■ Project Authorized and Notice to Proceed by City of Redding—Mid-May 2020 • Comptete Draft Preliminary Design—September 2020 ��sc<<a�zo�3lFs�oo ; � Aprit 14,2020 Subject Scope of Engineering Servites to City of Redding(COR)Pump House 1 Replacement Project • Complete Pre-Final Preliminary Design—December 2020 • Complete Final Preliminary Qesign—March 2021 The Scope of Engineering Services shall be considered complete when final deliverabtes are deemed acceptabte by the City. Efforts witt be made by the JACOBS to comptete the work in a timely manner. However,it is agreed that the JACOBS cannot be responsible for detays occasioned by factors beyond JACOBS controt,or factors which would not reasonabty have been foreseen at the time this Scope of Engineering Services was executed. Budget The budgetary amount for professional services and expenses are provided in Exhibit B.JACOBS witl make reasonable efforts to complete the work within the budget.JACOBS is not obligated to incur costs beyond the indicated budget,as may be adjusted,and the City of Redding is not obtigated to pay JACOBS beyond these limits. The rates as shown in Exhibit B will be escalated for year 2021,while not exceeding the authorized totat amount. In the event that a task or subtask is complete and the task or subtask budget is not fully spent,upon City approval,remaining funds may be transferred to other tasks which might require additional budget,while not exceeding the authorized total amount. Additional Services Nat Included The services described below are not included in this Scape of Engineering Services but can be performed if requested and approved by City and JACOBS.Time,scope,and fee have not been budgeted for the tasks listed hereunder.Authorization to proceed shal(be in the form of an amendment to this Scope of Engineering Services specifying the work to be performed and the additionat payment for such services rendered. • Additionat workshops not tisted above ■ Enviranmental permitting support exceeding those listed above ■ Survey and mapping exceeding those tisted above • Final engineering and design services ■ Construction management services ■ Materials testing or special inspection services ■ Additional items noted to be exduded within the Scope of Engineering Services If you have any questions or require further information do not hesitate to contact Kimberly Hein at 530355.848$. Sincerety, �.0 1t�/(�, Lisa Alliger, P.E. Kimberly Hein, P.E. Manager of Projects Project Manager cc: Kurt Maire,City of Redding Public Works Engineer ��s��o?zo>>�s�oo g Exhibit B Engineering Services for the Pump House 1 Replacement Project for the City of Redding Consultant Fee Phase 1 Fee Summary Task Subcontractor No. Descriptian Labor Fee Fee Expenses Fee Task 1 Project Management Task 1.1 Project Management $23,376.00 $0.00 $0.00 $23,376.00 Task 1.2 Meetings $21,148.00 $0.00 $1,Q00.00 $22,148.00 Task 1.3 Quality Control $17,664.00 $0.00 $0.00 $17,664.00 Task 1 Subtotal $62,188.00 $0.00 $'I,000.00 $63,188.00 Task 2 Data Review,Geotechnical Investigations,and Survey/Mapping Task 2.1 Data Review $14,892.00 $0.00 $0.00 $14,892.00 Task 2.2 Geotechnical $41,016.00 $19,541.00 $2,000.00 $62,647.00 lnvestigations Task 2.2 Drilling/Pump Testing $0.00 $135,524.00 $Q.00 $135,524.Q0 Task 2.3 Surveying and Mapping $4,080.00 $7,455.00 $800.00 $12,335.00 Task 2 Subtotal $59,988.00 $162,520.00 $2,SOO.QO $225,308.00 Task 3 Preliminary Environmental $44,288.00 $0.00 $0.00 $44,288.00 Review Task 3 Subtotal $44,288.00 $0.00 $0.00 $44,288.00 Task4 ConstructionFunding $19,576.00 $0.00 $0.00 $19,576.00 Evaluation Task 4 Subtotal $19,576.00 $0.00 $0.00 $19,576.00 Task 5 Pretiminary Design Report (Preliminary,Pre-Final,and $136,469.00 $0.00 $0.00 $136,469_00 Final PDR} Task 5 Subtotal $136,469.00 $0.00 $0.00 $136,469.00 TOTAL PHASE 1 $488,829.00 .�acobs. ��::�;,�,�.._<:i;:_. _;,.,_,:. Consultant Rates Engineering Services for the Pump House 1 Replacement Project for the City of Redding 2020 Hourly Billing Rates Hourty Bitling Labor Classification Rate O�ce/Clericat/Accounting $-�pg Junior-Level Technician $gQ Mid-level Technician $�23 Seniar-Levet Technician $�79 Staff Engineer 1 $122 Staff Engineer 2 $133 Associate Engineer $135 Project Engineer $�87 Engineer Specialist/Associate Project Manager $204 Senior Technotogist/Project Manager $255 Principal Technologist/Senior Project Manager $283 Inctudes engineering,consulting ptanner,and scientist disciptines. Notes: 1) A markup of 5 percent witl be applied to all Other Direct Costs and Expenses. 2) Direct expenses are those necessary costs and charges incurred for the PROJECT including, but not timited to: a) The direct costs of transportation, meals and lodging,mail,subcontracts,outside services,and equipment and supplies. b) Consultant's current standard rate charges for direct use of Consultant's vehides,laboratory test and analysis,printing and reproduction services,and certain field equipment;and c) Consultant's standard project charges for special heatth and safety requirements of Occupational Safety and Heatth Administration. 3) Consultant's current standard rates for direct expenses shalt be used. These rates are subject to change following intemat audits and reviews. 4) These rates are effective January 1,2020,through December 31,2020.Rate schedule is subject to annual revision to reflect current rates and nat to exceed 4 percent per year far subsequent years of the contract. �acobs. ,a�,. , »;,t :,� �,�� ,(;��_: ,�-�.��.��:� 7 ..��CO �. Fina� �relimir��r}� ��igr� R�p�►rt �OQROF ESS/pN� �`�� Q'�"� �ARy l��c� `�' m�' S z City of Redding Pump House No. 1 Replacement Project � � C69208 Z � City of Redding Department of Public Works — Water Utility ��,.9� c v��- ��.* F�F C A��F� Document no: PP501 26221 1 37RDD July 13, 2022 July 2022 7 ..��CO �. Final Preliminary C7esign Report Client name: City of Redding Department of Public Works—Water Utility Project name: City of Redding Pump House No. 1 Replacement Project Client reference: City of Redding Project no: W8Y06200 Document no: PP501 26221 1 37RDD Project manager: Kim Hein, PE Revision no: Final Prepared by: Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. Date: July 2022 Document Hist�ry �nd Status - e f o - �� r' ,,, ,;�., .� !� s • �,,r ,�,,i��, ,�{�� . . ., Y. � p, '� �' I' ' I II d Draft 2/10/2022 Draft PDR Pre-Final 5/11/2022 Pre-Final PDR Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. 2525 Airpark Drive T+1.530.243.5831 Redding,CA 96001-2443 F+1.530.243.1654 United States www.jacobs.com Copyright Jacobs Engineering Group Inc O 2022. All rights reserved.Reproduction and redistribution without written permission is prohibited.Jacobs,the Jacobs logo,and alt other Jacobs trademarks are the property of Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. NOTICE:This document has been prepared exdusive�y for the use and benefit of)acobs'dient.Jacobs acwpts no liability or responsibility for any use or re�iance upon this document by any third party. Final Preliminary Design Report C+antents Acronyms and Abbreviations.........................................................................................................................................iv 1. Introduction........................................................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Background and Purpose of Study.................................................................................................................1-1 1.2 Project Setting........................................................................................................................................................1-2 1.3 Overview of the Project A�ternatives.............................................................................................................1-2 1.4 Alternatives Summary.........................................................................................................................................1-3 2. Survey and Mapping.........................................................................................................................................2-1 3. River Hydrology..................................................................................................................................................3-1 3.1 Ftood FLows,Stage,and Frequency Data.....................................................................................................3-1 3.2 Ftow-Duration Analysis.......................................................................................................................................3-1 3.3 Low River Stage......................................................................................................................................................3-3 4. Fish Protection and Criteria.............................................................................................................................4-1 4.1 Fish Protection.......................................................................................................................................................4-1 4.2 Facility Criteria and Assumptions...................................................................................................................4-2 43 Pumping System Design Criteria and Assumptions................................................................................4-2 5. Intake ALternatives EvaLuation.......................................................................................................................5-1 5.1 Basic Methodology...............................................................................................................................................5-1 5.2 Identification of Alternative Structural Configurations and Fish Screen Types............................5-1 53 Description of Alternative Structurat Configurations and Fish Screen Types...............................5-1 5.4 Eva�uation of Alternative Structura�Configuration and Fish Screen Types...................................5-7 6. Alternative 1:Existing PS1 Location.............................................................................................................6-1 6.1 Overview...................................................................................................................................................................6-1 6.2 Intake Structure.....................................................................................................................................................6-2 6.3 Pump Station Building........................................................................................................................................6-3 6.4 Mechanical Equipment.......................................................................................................................................6-3 6.5 Electrical Equipment............................................................................................................................................6-5 6.6 Civil Features...........................................................................................................................................................6-6 6.7 Geotechnical...........................................................................................................................................................6-7 6.8 Constructability......................................................................................................................................................6-7 7. Alternative 2:New River Trait Location........................................................................................................7-1 7.1 Overview...................................................................................................................................................................7-1 7.2 Intake Structure.....................................................................................................................................................7-2 7.3 Pump Station Building........................................................................................................................................7-2 7.4 Mechanical Equipment.......................................................................................................................................7-3 7.5 Electrical Equipment............................................................................................................................................7-5 7.6 Civil Features...........................................................................................................................................................7-6 7.7 Geotechnical...........................................................................................................................................................7-9 PPS0126221137RDD i Final Preliminary Design Report 7.8 Constructability......................................................................................................................................................7-9 7.9 Conveyance to Foothill Water Treatment Plant.....................................................................................7-10 7.10 Utilities...................................................................................................................................................................7-10 7.11 Potential Jenny Creek Restoration..............................................................................................................7-11 8. Alternative 3:Horizontal Cotlector Wetls....................................................................................................8-1 8.1 Overview...................................................................................................................................................................8-1 8.2 Potential Locations...............................................................................................................................................8-1 8.3 Horizontal Collector Well Investigations.....................................................................................................8-1 9. Alternative 4:Combination of ALternatives.................................................................................................9-1 10. EnvironmentaL Compliance and Permitting.............................................................................................10-1 10.1 Environmental Compliance............................................................................................................................10-1 10.2 Permits and Approvals.....................................................................................................................................10-1 11. Construction Funding EvaLuation...............................................................................................................11-1 11.1 Loan Programs....................................................................................................................................................11-1 11.2 Grant Programs...................................................................................................................................................11-2 113 Infrastructure Bitt Impacts..............................................................................................................................11-3 11.4 Funding Strategy................................................................................................................................................11-4 12. Capital Cost Estimates...................................................................................................................................12-1 12.1 ContractCost.......................................................................................................................................................12-1 12.2 Non-contract Cost..............................................................................................................................................12-1 12.3 Definition of Estimate Class...........................................................................................................................12-1 12.4 Totat Capital Cost...............................................................................................................................................12-2 12.5 Capital Cost Estimate Summary...................................................................................................................12-2 13. Operation and Maintenance.........................................................................................................................13-1 14. Comparison and Summary of Alternatives..............................................................................................14-1 15. Recommendations and Next Steps............................................................................................................15-1 16. Imptementation Schedule............................................................................................................................16-1 17. References........................................................................................................................................................17-1 1 A Pump Curves B City of Redding Surface Geophysical Survey/nvestigations Summary and Recommendations Technica(Memorandum C City of Redding Horizontal Cottector Well 8orehole lnvestigations Summary and Recommendations Technical Memorandum D Construction Cost Estimate E Preliminary Implementation Schedute ii PPSQ126221137RDD Final Preliminary Design Report 1"abl�� 3-1 U.S.Geotogicat Survey 11370500(SACRAMENTO R A KESWICK CA) Ftow Exceedance by Month 3-2 River Stage Data at Alternative 1, Existing P51 Location 3-3 River Stage Data at Atternative 2, New River Trait Location 4-1 Approximate Water Surface E�evations at Project Alternative Sites 5-1 Intake Structurat Configuration and Fish Screen Type Matrix 5-2 Comparison of Vertical F�at P�ate and Cylindrical Tee Screens Characteristics in an On-bank Structura�Configuration 7-1 Jenny Creek Issues and California Department of Fish and Wildlife Conclusions 10-1 Potentially Applicable Federal,State, Regionat,and Local Permits and Approvals 11-1 Loan Programs Description 11-2 Loan Programs Financing Details 11-3 2021/2022 Grant Opportunities 12-1 Capital Cost Estimate Summary 14-1 Summary of Atternatives 1 1-1 Project Location 1-2 Alternative 1 and A�ternative 2 Location 5-1 City of Sacramento In-river Intake Structure 5-2 Freeport Regiona�Water Authority On-bank Intake Structure 5-3 TypicaL Vertical Flat Plate Screen 5-4 Indined Flat P�ate Screen System at Buckman Diversion 5-5 Cylindrical Tee Screen Isometric 5-6 Conical Screen at Red Bluff Diversion Dam 6-1 Alternative 1 Existing P51 �ocation Site Plan 6-2 Alternative 1 Existing P51 Location Section 6-3 Alternative 1, Existing PS1 Location—Channet Cross Section 7-1 Alternative 2 New River Trail Location Site Plan 7-2 Alternative 2 New River Trail�ocation Section 7-3 Alternative 2, New River Trai�Location—Channel Cross Section 7-4 Alternative 2 Overall Access Ptan 7-5 Alternative 2 Overhitt Access Road 7-6 Overall Uti�ities P�an 7-7 Jenny Creek Culverts—Outlet at Sacramento River 7-8 Jenny Creek Culverts—Inlet and Upstream Nabitat 7-9 Jenny Creek Restoration 8-1 Collector Wel�Locations 8-2 Alternative 3 Horizontat Collector Wett Location (Location 3—Bike Park) PPS0126221137RDD iii Final Preliminary Design Report Acrcanyrns and Abbr�viatic�ns ACID Anderson-Cottonwood Irrigation District AOR allowabte operating region ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ATS automatic transfer switch CC contract cost CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CEQA California Environmental Quality Act cfs cubic feet per second City City of Redding CMU concrete masonry unit dam Diversion Dam FC field cost FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FIS Flood Insurance Study fps foot per second FWTP Foothill Water Treatment Ptant HCW horizontal collector well hp horsepower ISRF Infrastructure State Revolving Fund kV kilovolt LiDAR light detection and ranging mgd mittion gallon(s) per day NAD83 North American Datum of 1983 NAVD88 North American Vertical Datum of 1988 NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NHC Northwest Hydraulic Consultants Inc. NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 0&M operation and maintenance iv PPS0126221137RDD Final Preliminary Design Report POR preferred operating region project Pump House No. 1 Replacement Project P51 Pump House(Pump Station) No. 1 PVC polyvinyl chtoride Redamation Bureau of Reclamation SCADA supervisory controt and data acquistion SFR State Revolving Fund TBD to be determined TDH totat dynamic head USGS U.S.Geological Survey WIFIA Water Infrastructure and Innovation Act WSE water surface elevation PPS0126221137RDD v Final Preliminary Design Report 1 o In�rodu�ta�n 1.1 Background and Purpose of Study The City of Redding(City) Pump House(or Pump Station) No. 1 (P51)was constructed in 1937.P51 draws raw water from the Sacramento River and pumps to Foothill Water Treatment Ptant(FWTP)for treatment. FWTP is the City's Largest and primary water supply,providing more than hatf its water suppty demands.PS1 supplies approximatety 28.9 mitlion gatlons per day(mgd),or 44.7 cubic feet per second(cfs),of raw water to FWTP through two 30-inch-diameter pipetines(instatled circa 1976 and 2010).Raw water is diverted under the City's pre-1914 Sacramento River water rights and its Central Vatley Project contract supplies. PS1 underwent major modifications in 1968 and 1989 to add pumping capacity by reptacing aging pumps and adding new pumping units.The existing intake was retrofitted circa 2006 to inctude six single-cyLinder intake screens(drums).The Sacramento River in the Redding area is critical for the Sacramento River fishery resources and has spawning beds used by endangered salmon species. Both PS1 and FWTP have been identified as critical facilities in the City of Redding's Local Hazard Mitigation Ptan to supply safe drinking water, meet fire suppression demands,and supply the Redding Power Plant.The existing P51 facility has reliably served the City's water supply for over 85 years but has significant limitations in terms of continuing to meet the City's increasing water supply needs in a reliable and environmentally acceptable manner.The City's water system demands will continue to increase with population growth,and projected demands require a supply of up to 42 mgd (65 cfs)from P51. PS1 is located in a shallow area of the Sacramento River,which impacts its operations depending on the status of the Anderson-Cottonwood Irrigation District(ACID) Diversion Dam (dam).The ACID dam is a seasonal dam used to back up the water in the Sacramento River and create an etevated pool to allow diversion into the ACID CanaL The dam is typically installed in April at the beginning of the irrigation season and removed in early November at the end of the season.When the dam is removed,water depths in the area around the pump station are approximately 3 feet or less. Four of the five pump units cannot operate because of cavitation caused by the shallow water depth. PS1 is scheduled for replacement for the following reasons: ■ There is concern the intake does not meet long-term state and federal criteria regarding protection of endangered fish species.Modified fish screens were instatled at P51 in 2006 and are being monitored for effectiveness under a waiver from the National Marine Fisheries Service(NMFS),a division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries,to continue operating the facility. ■ There is limited intake capacity during low river stages and compounded during minimum river flows when the ACID dam flashboards are not in place. ■ The City's General Plan identified P51 as being located in an area of high seismic liquefaction potential and recommended that the structure be evaluated for its ability to withstand damage during a design earthquake.This was determined to not be a concern for the proposed alternatives as further discussed in the geotechnical sections. ■ The City's Water Master Plan proposed the FWTP to be expanded up to a capacity of 42 mgd.Current capacity is 28.9 mgd. ■ The pump station facility is generally outdated, relative to current design and service standards,and needs numerous minor and significant improvements.The primary electrical supply and controls equipment is relatively old and cannot accommodate any load increases;there is no space on the main intake structure for any new equipment such as pumps or fish screen-related components;and outdoor pumps cause excessive noise and complaints in an area of heavy public recreational use. Work space for maintenance around the pumps and other equipment is limited. PPS0126221137RDD 1-1 Final Preliminary Design Report CH2M HIL�(now Jacobs) prepared a feasibility study for the City of Redding Pump House No. 1 Fish Protection Project in 2002.The study evatuated four atternatives to conceptuat Level as follows: Alternative 1 Existing P51 Location,Alternative 2 New River Trail Location,Alternative 3 ACID Intake Location,and A�ternative 4 Keswick Reservoir Location.The City has eliminated Alternative 3 and Alternative 4 from the 2002 Feasibility Study and added the evaluation of horizontat cottector welts (HCWs)for this Pump House No. 1 RepLacement Project(project). The City selected Jacobs in 2020 to re-evaluate the Pump House No. 1 Rep�acement Project,and this pre�iminary design report hightights the fotlowing findings of four alternatives for the City to consider for final design of P51: ■ Develop up to four alternatives to a conceptual level. Key information to be addressed include layout, sizing,features,and operations of each facility, including river and fish screen hydraulics. ■ Estimate the scope and type of the anticipated environmental studies. ■ Identify the permitting requirements. ■ Develop concept drawings for the recommended alternative. ■ Develop funding opportunities for this project. 1.2 Project Setting P51 is located on the south bank of the Sacramento River,approximately 0.25 mile upstream of the Diestelhorst Bridge and about 1 mile upstream of the ACID dam.The scope for the project indudes the reach of the Sacramento River from the Sundial Bridge to approximatety 1,600 feet upstream of the existing P51 �ocation (Figure 1-1).This river reach is critica�for the Sacramento River fishery resources and has spawning beds used by endangered satmon species. The project reach is undertain by a layer of Quaternary alluvial or Pleistocene deposits of sand,gravet,silt, and c�ay.The thickness of the soit deposits varies from zero up to approximately 40 feet beneath the proposed project alternative facilities. Bedrock consists of sandstone and siltstone of the Chico Formation and is exposed within the Sacramento River channel upstream of the existing pump station.The top of bedrock varies from approximate elevation 488 feet on the upstream end of the project to 470 feet on the downstream end of the project study area,with some low spots between that are as low as 446 feet. 1.3 Overview ofi the Project Alternatives 1.3.1 Alternative 1: Existing P51 Location Alternative 1, Existing PS1 Location,would inctude constructing a new intake structure,fish screen,and pump station adjacent to the existing PS1 facility.This alternative woutd seek to maintain use of an existing diversion site.This a�ternative is referred to as the"Existing PS1 Location" or"Alternative 1." 1.3.2 Alternative 2: New River Trail Location Alternative 2, New River Trait Location,would inctude constructing a new intake structure,fish screen,and pump station at a more favorabte Location in the river approximatety 1,600 feet upstream (west of Jenny Creek)of the existing PS1.This alternative is intended to locate the intake and pump station in a section of the river with reliable depths and sweeping f�ows under all river conditions,to ensure long-term, reliable operation of the new water supply intake.A new short pipeline section would be constructed to connect to the existing pipetine(s)along with rehabititating the Jenny Creek culverts.This alternative is referred to as the"New River Trail Location" or"Alternative 2." 1-2 PPS0126221137RDD Final Preliminary Design Report 1.3.3 Alternative 3: Horizontal Collector Wells Alternative 3, Horizontat Collector We��s,would include constructing a new HCW and pump station in a favorable location along the river between Turtle Bay and existing P51 �ocation.This a�ternative is not anticipated to produce the full buildout capacity of 42 mgd but rather a capacity between 5 to 10 mgd. Engineering investigations are currently taking ptace to determine the potential HCW yietd in the most beneficial location along the river.This alternative woutd supplement PS1 raw water deliveries (Alternative 1 or Atternative 2)to FWTP. It would also provide a suitabte water source to FWTP during the winter months when river turbidity is a concern.This alternative is referred to as the"Horizontal Collector Wells"or"Alternative 3." 1.3.4 Alternative 4: Combination of Alternatives Alternative 4, Combination of Alternatives, is a combination,or hybrid,of an intake structure atong with HCWs.This atternative is referred to as the"Combination of Atternatives"or"Atternative 4." Since the Alternative 3, HorizontaL Collector Wetts, geotechnicat phase has not been completed and capacity has not been determined,this alternative, if desired by the City, can be considered prior to final design of the intake faci�ity. 1.4 Alternatives Summary Atternatives 1 and 2 witl be evaluated and compared against each other for a fult buildout of 42 mgd as shown on Figure 1-2.Some of the sections within this preliminary design report witl only apply to Alternatives 1 and 2,such as the fish screen protection and criteria.Some of the subsections in Alternatives 1 and 2 wilt repeat themselves so that the reader does not need to flip back to a previous section. Alternative 3 has been deemed not feasible to provide full buildout capacity of 42 mgd,and investigations and analyses for potentiat yield will continue,as discussed in a later section showing the steps that have been taken thus far. As discussed with the City,Alternatives 1 and 2 will be compared for full buildout, and Alternative 3 will be a stand-alone project and wilt be presented in a separate report once investigations and analyses are completed.Therefore,Alternative 4 may be considered by the City at some tater date,after the Alternative 3 investigations and analyses are completed. PPS0126221137RDD 1-3 , 3. Alternative2: New �`� �� i�t� '�i t i"I� P1, 4�� V�� , ,�,i� RiverTrail Location Q so�� ; � "��,�� e�; ��P � '�� r ' �',;9�. � � � � Alternafiive1:°�Existing Pump � � ,�� ' Station 1,Location m`� Diestelhorst Bridge QG' qlternafive 3: Harizontal � Collector Wells Jenny�Creek ��' Lake Redding �� Ri� Tr • � �r a�l �`� ' Saeramenfo River QJec�\��pc�ve Z ID Diversian Dam Sundial Bridge �. . �� ., n . � ,�. �. �Z' �° � "� � � Wsw� .� � � �os� � � . Turtle�Bayn� .� �� S r- �� °°� " State Route 44 ��"� Route 299 � Eureka WaY��a�e �: ., :� � � � ; �tt.. � �u., � n �� 8�;�� Foothill�Water , � � �< Treatment�Plant � �� .r� ; �� Flow Direction of River Figure 1-1.ProJect Location � Preliminary Design Report u so° ,,soo City of Redding Pump House No. 1 Replacement Project North Approximate scale in feet Redding,California 9 2 3 4 5 6 d > � � � � „ � ..e, a _e. .,.. . � ; •`, ¢ m°�p:�� , a '�. �M,��k Mb� Y " Y` � l� rv �a: �t� � �� t� d i '� � '�"w.., � � A "r U 4 � C.g� �'A° ny4� °, e< . � .w ....,,}.' O :A ;6.��.�`�`�'S.`�1.��' � `�` "�Y R � ' � �� (i " F� � t Wy ., ., t'�, e� �,i s � � � � � � � `� �,�� o � �, � '�p � e. L �„`-�, ;, ': ,<u. .,t,..,. . �..,...:�;i;�"`�.� , j <c 4 ... ,��, �4�,,.:..z� h*, �\ ^� �y ��.:� :i:, �,`u�� so i ��. � .... �y ,� . ,.: ��`�Y"�°,"e:�.'i�1� ,. .�"r�'`'z,�t?� �`a`�\ i' .v�, ,};� l' i' �o , . �„ .r� �'" `,q; � , ,i , x., yh'��"' i�.. �;.. . �, t _ �..� ,i � n � � , , t`' .a , 'is,..�., ..a,' . A.. ,:, � .; .,.,� °s�� , .,,. � a t t4`Y „^�.>x,,an, �?s,. y " •.,s �„ r ,t, :, .�� .„ '�, �,�, ... .,..... .�S?e�3�,�3�,'�� .� w. �: ,;� '��.. . � , S .:�= � ��t. ro:,. ti....,, �� ., . ..,.� .1� ., :... ��:�t.. .a .a u� ;,,, ��. �\�.�.,�, ,�.`�`� ��. �`v�� ", x>�. >�r i'�"a'�... , ,, ��!� 0 � , L 1 L , �y � � �, ; .,„,:, z,� ,, . �, � . � ,a,3,,,. � .._. '�.. � �^`... -�,� �. .�� he „ ,��:' �s,. ... :_ •,i >:, ' �,. 1 t�, - ... .. :A �,i �i��".Ae. \.�.: ..;.`.. +" a. ,,, ...\ 1.., h ..� , ,.. .� '� Sr o�. ..> .t�!� L� � tt0 �'�..`? ' ,u �.. .,� ...�� ..,.�.�1�b' ... ��... .1..,. t .. ,Y, .'��,. .,,.�"�„ , ,.:.�,1, .>„,v. �:, :zf . '^ x ?f �� ` ,�,L,� .l. � �,\. 'yye6.$, < � , .., ��1 ,�,,. .�� . �. f ., :',,.: ��, ... wx , a �,ti,�k�;9 ..:a. ,. .... ,, . ,;'a ,.s, t-. ; .�. �.a.,,,,., �� . , k., y,.,,�.,c :;:.. ,. � "«..,.,� �,r s.„�i`��'�:... .�:� w > ...� .�, �,.:- i �4>� '� �.§., ..� � .<�. a. ,.. . �.��,h�,n ......, ..�,, � ,. tla�ii, �s7..��x`,\t,, a,� t ., �,. , ..; .,, i ,.:�� .,.. ... : , o :,.. ,,�.. , , . ...,. +;� � .a,:�i�11 `� i£:� , ...., i�\ .;1�„ �,. .:,�' �4�.,�.. 4,. ,;.: ��"�� r•... � � � �� .. a-. ��.�., �t�' ,,,.: , ?�: 1 ��,. � . ..� �.xrs�;, , .:�, ...�.. ��.. ..a.. ,.. s. < „�. ... ,.. .._... ,,.�.� :, ,.,. ... �, t , .�, �"�s ,.�. � ,., .,t�., 4. ��, e r, , , .., ,.:, ,t.,; .�.:. . .,,*"'.:,: �... >. , . �s�..,�a; w 's`i�.fiY'� �a .,, ..:,. <� ;xt .�;.u� , .,.�� . , � ,.,,.. . .�. ... r ¢ ;.. � .��k�.W�.;',�N.`��'Ska.� .?��k`�.. ,.a, s, �. . �a�:�...:�.. �a . , _,-� ..... �u,., ..... :r 3-. .._, a:. > o-..� a .. ."":.��c"=i. .. .:. ��x � . �..,.. ,, ,, . .."�,. . ,.. �.., a�..a,.'�,,,�,.:... e. ,� ..� ;.... , �., ,., ,:�... ,£..,..:-. ,..,:, ,t a >.: �4a�;:.,c..;. .;,`v.:, .�u�.'a .. �. .� �3. �..t �,,, .. ,... ..� .,,,.. ... �.,:�.. , ,:�e .�.. 5 s , .. a, �. ,,.:, ,<. � ...��s .. c.. S �� ,. ;�:� t ,r>t��... � ,.. ,�., , ,.ea ,.. .�. `�, , 3�.. >.. � � , t�a;u��a�aa .�c� `u � .�NS. � , . �'� � ,�. „r,,, , ,,. ,. �..,a,: ::�, :': a . .,. t.�4.§s ,�'.". zz ..� r � . ..� .. .,., ,... . .,, �:. .. ._. ... � , .....x�*.�.. :� a�� w.;, . w., :,�,. '�..: . ..,.. .:, 4..:.,t,za � �' � � � � ti , .�. '.., .,. � .....,� ` .�.. . ..aY. �... . .. S .... ,.. � 1.. . � ,,. .+. �..<.., �_.. ., ,. M�� ,3J.� ..l. � . � . , ...h.. k .. } '.. ., rf � - , .�. fi „�:_., a.: ..,,.. ..� .�;:... ', '��,. 1 , ��u� ....: � t �; ,.... . t: ..,.; .,. ..�. ....�.. � �� ., �. ��s ,. „ �..a�;�em �...c�. .."`�:. ..�... �.,....., � , .z ,,e ,. ...�...: ,'' _, ,..�. ow ...; ,ti� �; ¢ ,v .,^, ,:`�S �.¢�k.� .,�aa :��,t .. _`+.... �1.. �. ,. ,. . � ..,.... ,...,..,.... �:.:.,� �, k. �,;��.s§:� v ... .""'�.. �, , . r � � ,a ,., , �.�..... ...,, �.s.:�. .�. � .:.., ....m 4L:,,. - , � �'�� '�u t..� � . � .::., c,. ',"� <. .,� \ „ ��,�. .r �C�ii.. a, �, , .,,, ,,. a ....,., .i,+. ,..,.. .,.:....,.,� , „, „_. ..i,. ..,. s;,i„i. ��.., ��3.�....o��`,�a\. . , i , _.. .�� . .... �r. ., ... _.,, ��v': :.:: 4.. e :, , r r:s�„ z,,. �. ,�;�� _ t ,, v„ ,�, � � u �,.:;:..,,,.. � \ � �� , ,.,, .., ..., l = ,.+�a r....:._ �,.. . . .,a.,�m. ,,., ��. ..� . .,....... 1. 3, " t s, �.g rn .,. ..ti` .,. -.a..t. �+� 1�" .�� 3 '�� ,,. , rv. -.. �. .,, !^t=.� �. � ,.,� .... ..,,.. .... . t `„� m� �4S .;,r ,,,, :. � �., .,.. . ....�s \ ..r.. �.�.�aw "ti. n.. , d..a.... .. i,i�:x� c, i v ..., ,:., . ti.. „�.v... .., .. �P, .v...N�. , Y. , vJ_ ., ... r., t'. .. .� ,�, +, ..i., ., _., ,.. ..:.. .:, 1.,.... ...�.. .. :4.. �' .�, .i.,... . � '�`"?� .`£.. . �e �S XI. <. . ..� �e � `�'tV �.. 3 t z� . s..�. �. r.. ..i . ..k � ; ... .;... .... ,.. �..'.. 4� 6�. ,� "`�}„t.. � ,,.,.��. ". �t� ... a�,.� .. .- ,._ ...Rf � .. u... ., . ,�,`,. �`.r .� x..... �, ., , h.. ., ''�""i. :,�� , v . .... �:� ...,, „ , ,,,,.t. . �, i. � ... � � ��. ,. . .. .. ��i, °' �.�. � '�.. ., � ,.�' .,� �' ,., , cki�a ,.. , .:.. . . .... ...� .;, ,.. ..�. ...... .,.. . ,, .,s, ��.:5 .,\ .,., w rC ,t... `�"+�`'$y ,, � .. �,.. i c. . .. ,... ... .. `�a. ,, . . ..,. ..�� , "s , ,,. e:: ,., ,.. .. �. ... �, .. �.� ,,.w� R..;.:.:..�.. � �. ..x=u . �"r,. , ., ,,.,.e , .,. :., ..:. .. ., ... ..s„ �. . . .,, i„ , .� ,, 'e „-s t .$� �. � a. ...: .. �, c� a ar, � , ..�,. ..,, u.�..jt.. .. `v, v�;r ..,�.� �, ti. ..' ..... i "�.`,..., .::. �Y i>.� , >.z . �., . _..}. . . � �..e ti.. . ti ..... ��i �.. � ': , � ...., , , � ;�: ... � .i�. .4' 'a ,,,. .� :_' , k e .. , .,.., ,,.. .s,. � T`. .f , , `�,. �c.... ... . ...... � , wi .�:a ,a Y . �, ., 3 . \3 ..,. ��',�.�.. .a, , r� .._ :' ., '., .a .,. �, . ,. ,.. ..,.� ,_ � . .� ,.::� Q ...� v.. .. , e. , �.,� , . , e . . ... . •,.. . ..... . .v.,. `,,. .W. , '�t+ ,.x .4 :'o-�. ,, lv�. , i , .,... ,.... .i . > � �� .� t� e ..:. �� ., e ,: .,.�. �-. ... . , �� :'+w,. 'k t ". . ..,, i , , :R:, .r . :, O � � �l � :. � � n � 1 � '�`� .,. ua+ . :'3. .,, �`. �,5 ....� �' , a � e .'�.... .�. s ;. ix..�'. . :...� ..k < .�� , a .:,�,:. �... ., �.. ; -� < <,."� `,� �.�. . ... ,.�n '�.., :.. a .. :, �...,� '.. ,,..h � 'a .�:...�, w �w... „ ..��,.. S , ., ..�.. �. .� , :, s� r . \.. ,�..��. � ..� �. :, : , �t ....;, ,. �w\,.. � �:, ,. � � �� u "� � ,' �; � � s � � �..,,, , a, � 3 ,, ... , ., v,... � �, , . �. , , . � � »., � �.�. � ,. � � 'w�. �, s � ... .�s k. t �t .... �. � 1, �� '.., ., . ,. . . ��. �,'� ,.,�, �. ,.:�.., ..:. . „ ... ,.� �. .,.. a , ta'� �i U.. ,^.:. 1 � °�-� '..,. :.. . ,�,. .. �.. :. �`�7�v'�'"., ;,., .„ „.. ;:. ..t„..u S�:. ,,... as7l. �.. .„; .r i� : .�� . L , a ,. �,.. 1�..., .. .. , . `i ....9s��..1 . 'l. �.� �. .. a ' .�... .. .. , ..,. ,>v15435 �.,. ,.ro. .,, .: �. .. � , i � .,. , t. ...��. > ., n.,,, . , � ,�� ,., , �, �; � . �xi'�a +�.. �s.., <.. ,;, �. ,, �„6 �r �� y. ti �, � �, a °'. a, ,, �� , . ,, . >, � � . *�, �, k �, �.,,, �"� ,_ �. < , „ a.. �� l 4 , LL � .il ,,, m.. ._ a . S..n.a � x r, ��, .� �....°;. ;..,. i x\ �.... i ,� .,. . 1 .�.V ... 0 .. r ! .,.,':.� `n.. ,�. �:. ...,...' � .� � >.S� ..., �.v n. �.:. ,� ... .. ..v.. ,... 1 ...,..�. � ".. ,. � .i... 1 , 3 � , ..3� .\ ..., .,� ..a � �.,�, �. M.. �1 ..... . �#..,. e �« ....r...... L. ....�. O ��... . ....... � , ....n i �:... .., .;' 4 .,,.. .e . .: ..,e n�r� ,�l�, a� ... "u.. ��W� n a:; ..x..., ... . +'.:.. .� �.; '{ :�,� U.. . ,,�:.y .e .„�.. , ,� : �.. ,ta .A... .1..#.,4 � ,i.. , �� -a... .i_. ..� >..a s i�. . �,. ... `�li� . �3 ,.:,:. �r .,i , r.., . ..> ..Y. v ��5 �,.� y`�b.. ..y. ,:: Po. � .:y ,.y�� .... . . � �t, o�: r � 4 .. , �,.�.. : '. , ,4, , �,. ' „ .., ,,,:. �", ,,, �,. ,, a . , , ,v.. � i ., , a. �S �� ,Y . Y ., .,,..}, rs�,d&....� ��:. . .. ...� i . � . :� .,� a . ��k ,? ,."W,=.. it� .s . �;• �."i l� o .,,.. .+e,.�..x,x:..3. "...i ` �� iv,.F 3 . e .. , ..Si' '� :. ., .. �, . .� . .a'*. . . �.. .�.�' ..i'�, , .��n�„" � ,.�3 �� ;. ,. X .,.z .t., i-p `�..� , .... . � . ., e.i. '\ - . �r.:. ,,. � , .r, .. *. �rt ,.,� :.x, , ... ,� : +. �;H.ti . � , . ... �,.�. a ... , , :��... � ." .; �.'� . �% ..., i. ,w...>� �u ��. . � �':.�" ,„,o;.. . : 3et, ... .. ,,., ,S *.,. > �... , ,.. it .,,, �, ., ..., �,. ..:, .. ..�., ,,: '.�:.a>.„' u',>� .,,,,: . ' . . . ' e:... � w s ,.4 ..�. s . .a.: .�. ,� :,,. f, ,.i u'��"; ... ..r, .r,. �.. .," .m, .. `;..'- u. � . �* � s, C,... �. r , „ . , . 1 � � �., �,. � , �� ,: � �,,:. \�, _ , .,. ,a (^ '� ,:, .. ,, �. ._��. �� t1� . ., . �. ., � kz.&., tE'..,':" , �k .. � �`a'�'� ,. ;�... 0 y�.. S ,.,, . ., w ... , '��, v g �"� , , '�:, ,;. .. ..._ �,.,,. � .;. ,. ..ttd, �. � 'a ..9;.. .�... ..>s,r ,. �r � . . a ,..,., .:. :: . �«.:.... ,..:.. � , �;; . .,t.' �,. ,. ; :'a. `� , .. �. , .,., ...,. .; � ..., t. � �. �.t ,. ...� � v,.. .,.� . �:: .��,.. . �i a.... ..< . �...,. �i....�§ .,.� .. .:i,.... 2 �.� rc �� .,.t , xi .. . u� .., . ��.:. J a. 3 . Y .� .,.. .,,w, �, ..�a ta�..� ti. �. . ..-, s: .. �, . , ":r �w"�5 ... �it )„ ..a �b � �a �'�l ..., '�. � _,. ... }.. _�.� , i ..,. , �, ,l .n d;�:. „� s�.:� d t >�s*.. u ... ..... �..- .... '. , n�`:., � .�.,,,o. "9.. ., ., .a. , �h .... � .., ... , �.�., ... a.,:. . . ..� . ,. �.„r. . 4 , . '. . .... , .... `�ra., . r.. °.; „ � � » . „ w , s. ..,. e,.. . . ..>.. � ��.. ... . .., �, ...,. ., r- .. . �:�� ir,..i, �;k i �- '`t ,� `t , t . , . 4 �k ��>, s��; .. t .,, d,+..., e t�.� ..... �"�,. �� .,.,>.. ...,. ,... .: _, . ..i'�.. . ,. �� .:. .E, t ::,. , , . .�. ;�� t .,,„., , �� , n� :�:. � . , e. ,�,.. „ , �k -, . ..,,:' .�` 3�s.. T �., 7��`,§ .<.,., . F� '.. :;�� , , ��, �,. � .,,�� , e.,.,� ,, i,,,,,.:� ,,:, ��. �o „�+ �,r .x:. , e ? „ �. �... �Ni`� ,ii\,-� ., „ .:... ..,. ..'.A .... �� ..,. , � .,._. .. ��.+„�'?. � , .,,. .� ,��: �,, ....-. ,y,. ,,. . .s �. �a � . .c� ,.._ � �.�. �. 0 , „ a b �� >' r � " ;' � � `�; � �, „. S. , . s r>' � t � , „� u: � 7 W x... e r �.,. � u. „ , a . �.��, � �.,. .� . ._, , � .:, ti �... � � ,�,s, �, r k� . � � :� � ,:. < „ ,,,.. t . �,. .,.. z-. �. �4 ,..: ,k ,..,...,.. \ a� , t._. „ �... , , . ..� . .,. .�.,� � 3�� . , �w � �� ..�,.�., ..., �•�� . ,�, .� ...,.� � t;°'s..u, � , . ., w ....,u .+. . �::,r ,.., ,S< ��. ; .",., h , . b......,� . C. �,.z„ - .;.,v �. . .;;at,� ,�. „ M.z ...,��, ,. ,x�.... , .4.'. „ ... � a � m:: ,:�, � ..S , � m a �..c1 ,, ,,.,, n . � „ ..�`.�� .�.u t ,„ �:.., , .. w^..� ., , �: . M� . ., .., ... `.v � .��. .,.., .>". O ,r. , ., < �.: �� )? ..� � , ,.� ,,. �..: >,,,.: , ..,: ..,,� ,. .> �...a�.. , k. , ,. �t.., .... ��' ; r , .,.,. . ...r .,�� ..... � ., � ::..� ,1 �zn,, '�. ,. .,. �, .. .� e�.'.., <.. ..t,� = 3!��. `",�- ,.,...� *,� � �� `+S .�J r�r., ... ,,,., .: � ', .. ..,. � ...� . ..t.. ;„,: , �..x ....,.: ...,,) zrc B . :a��,z�c.,� .„, .:. , ,.. i ., ..,,.� ,,.,,. ...e �, q ......k,��, x. ,.... �s. .. { � ... e:: . � . '.;.... ...w,., .., . . �;' c ..t,`t ` � a ,,. . x �: ...,. . . �h, .1.. k ,w.... ,,� „ ..,,.. ,t >. ��'.��. 4 .,. .� Z,,, a�.. . .,,z .. .i � ;.� .'�. '. s �,... ,. ...., r , ... z...7�.�. ,� ,., �. . .,..,t� c '� , 7 ��:;. ...., , .n.,,.'. v , .,,, . �, Y ,. .,..... ,,.... ,..,,. �, �.... < .. a ...,,. . �..�: . �.,.��,��.., 7 t \ ,: .,�..: ...�, -:; �,...�.. ...� , ,. ti .., :. ..., : �.,,...: , ,� . , ., ..>., .. �.. .�<... a ��.. ..i, ......" , i t�� ...,. �.i,. ,.. ,.. u� . ,, x : � .,. . '. _,F,.'o l ', . .. ... �..ti.� x, , , ..., �w ,� o...w. .„„. *. ". ,,. .: ...,. � .,..,�:... ,x. ... , . ., � 4 i fr � ,�5.. , hv.�.. �,... ex� ..,. ��. ., . �� . w ,. ,..:...b ..� .>5 t,s„�., r.. r �., .,.. ,.«..i.. '� . �' ; .,. ... » '�� z: .., 5':'� r: :��.` �. , ., �� .., � 's� �ZST ,:Sr4 . . ,. e ., d:,.r.,. <. � : . .. �:.„::..,"^W�.:'� , z„ �.: ,< <„ ,, .� 1`: rid�. v�tt , `e: .t.. � l� �.>.., �v. � ,�' ."� ... ti:: . . . � , ..V a . . „ ':, ,;. ....,,�... ;.. .�( ..3 .,,... ...r K ....a ,>i, � . f.., ¢ � an '�.,i� "i1 '.. .� .... , ; �� ..>... � �c�i.�.. ,., �,.� �<.� ' .,.. x , ��. .�. , °,, ;�� . , <.1 ..... .�,.. � , . .. . ' �, t�. � , �. � t�.. �. ...n , .� �..... �. � ^�'.�i\..... . . .; . .....� ,. ....., , .�t ,��..��a ,.� .. ��. ,, a ..... w � � � � � . �. .n � , @ � , � <e ; x. -�� , v ...� ,� ��: t�, �,. �:`�y �, .,a .,..a , . � .._ �, ,. ��,�c .-;�. , .,,i . a ...�, .v. .., :. `l,� ... �i1 . , � ..'�. ,.'�'...' , �` +,. >�,�.:.:q ,., �,,..rt. \\,. ,. ;?,;.,. ,.. -x a� , ... ,..., �. �.,��,� u1`�' ,ati,a t. :�« `,;�, ..�± �. � V' i ,y�:. .��... ;:t:� •x7....�,��Y 9r,, . \ �::.. , .,.,. z ;,�.. .....,,., ,.', .. �.. .,� �,� .&z . , e,.. }„ .x v� �;�� e� S :�,' ti . ;��.,., .. 3. t .4 �. r. ... _� ,,. „r `� �r ,. � E �3 . � �, , �, , ,.. „ �. .., <� , � � .»4,�.� ,� ,.�. , t. , c ..,,. . a , 3 i , �* i, � �� . `. � 1t�. d�t. i /j� wo . ..,�.., , �,..,. ., .�1 ....,,z :� vl . , .,, .. ,...,.. .,. ,. ...� ,,.: ...,,r. ., u ..a.� =.J � , a, "� � ,. � � ,,: ,� , �" � ,, � �, �.� �� 1 , , � <y, � . , „ �_,,. � � .. ,,� ,�,� a �ti � �„ � ,� ., . , ,� � � � . �; , 1. ..,.., , ,,.. �.,.� �� ., a �:, .:,.. . ,, ..s. .:, �.V��en ,.,, .. � ,.A..� ,.�:,u,a �. ,s,'. �. . �,� � ,:, \, ��i,., 3. , . :,,:... v ,� ,.., ��. ,.�,�. � s.,�>. ,' ,. �,. � ..:i a '�tA<a, � .,.. ..n .: ,: .� ��,�.,, ,n. v "(/ > � Et: . �'�.�, ..,. ..:..i' t` ;�� . „ s.�, � .,...... .. � ,r .., i,��'�.� {,,,'�',:. ...,c .,,,.,. .i l., w 4' t3 . 4 4, c< t. . � t z � a �. � �" , t � .,. , 0. �` '. 'y a �� a, ,, ti t � �< „_ . , x��a. �. z � ,� � <. y �, „� �,` � 1 � � , ,, .. �� ,�. Q �,.. . � � �, z a ,�: ,., a.. . ... \ ti, .o. �i� �... r� .a » ti .0 .�.s.. .. ��d. .,... c.. >. �. i ,e �'�.�.:. , .r � t � �.., {�..:..� . . 0 � s� .; `,;7`ti � e. � � &r e 4� x w � ,, � "� � � � � . �,. � -. � <, , O � � � `ti t N, ,�� - , , , w a � . , * , a �_.' ,.,. , . , t. � ,� � '; . , . � �. , ` �� u _, µ� , � � ,. �:� r ... .. �.� ..... , 4 O � � a 5 t -., � :�� . � � . , ,. ,_ �n ,�� . �� , �,.... a �P .. .a. ...: �,. .., , ... .. .' i- 4\ z ,�, x .. , ..,��. ��.� � , � :� 3 . � , v ,. .... .�, „ ?�� t# �. ..� f, r \ � .. ,� a sP � � � ,N � ,ta� �`.... . , , .sz. . ... , . , .,, e... , .:4..� , � , ...., . ,� ,� � . ,. �. .� ,. . � , ..a � .. � „ . � .. , � � ..... , . , „ v..., .t � t. .,.,, , .. �... ..' � 7 � . , � ,. � , ..,., ,�.. .< ... ',� .3 . ,, , ��, ,� . i: ..... � ..�. �. � ,. , . 2. � X,.., � . .. s '��. e �. . 2^,�i ,`; ... , .,.. ... , ..r ;l ..,�„ '� , �t > ,., , £ �. y �� .,. .. ,.�. t, � .„ a .. . ,�, 4. t , .... . �. .? � . �. :�'�:.... w �, . � t r ,., . � ,.... .:..,� �{ � u� ..:. ..�. �. .. .,;"i , �o . �,. � �. .. ., , � ., ..., . ,. . ,_ , ,.. s.. ,. .. ,.., w. .� �� .t � . �'t � , �. ^� � � . .. , � ,, k..... � .� . �t �.5� . > .. �.a ,. ��,,, ,. ' ., .., s , ..:m �. S . £ ....e�., v ....., t 3, , \ . . � �. ...�.. '4 ... �,\ . r 4, .... ., i,...> ';' , F.. "*��, ..>, 7 ..t 25.`« 1 �`1.. , t.... . �P . , 1. �� ti:.�. � � ,=,m. . +„ ...., z � a,... ��..:, � : ' ., l'. ....� ,..., ,��., � v � (� . \ . .�e\ � .n.. . . , ,.. , a 1. ...v ..,. .x.� . ..�.. V. ��. .1� �i s l i ti* � ..a. � �., i '-y F- , , .\ � ,. t .,..a .. \ , 5 ,.e1,�. , . �. �S� ,� . '. �". S �.:.{ 'i� � 4 r �. Z ..i, t x. ��:, r � } . :� >, i. .�: \ '^. , � ,. , 4 a:, � ...� ..:. �.x <.,k�.� . ..,. .a .:: �... �, ...�. .. ,,.. ,. � �, ,.. .. .:,e. , ,' . �..h , ,�' �. �� . ..v. ,..x ..� �, .. .r .�, i .. � ,�.. s.. \ �. .S l ...,. ..t�. r �, <� . ,.4 ,,.. , ..., � r TM, � x�:� .. ��;. „ .. ,._ ..,e 4 ,.. ta�: .S , ra.. .., ., Y, ;, O . U..,.. ...r � � . . '�::+ �,. .. .., k :.. ,v ., .t , t i. �.,.. t ,..> , rG . li. i ...� t ..��. '�\ � \ �.-2 1. <. .+ �b. .� F i ... ., v z , :. ,s ,. '�Y`tt^... .. E ., n .,, � , � ��``�.>:� ,. �`�.. �C:..., . .. ..".`.. .., .. ��#�� "t�..... .�i.v'�1�Y �,.,, ..�.. ,.... ..� .s �\e.s�e. 5 . .:..,�lii . .;. �. t `r: � � �" t .., ". <. �.;, � , ., u , l,ti ? ; '�. , � .., t ... . � �r� .:�. .. .K... � .,. t, � � a � S � ,>, l x� , °� m . ti w - � Q � ts rh,``� � °`� � � . � r �e r... � �: ,. , `, r. a r, ,.. y, �� . � ,� �� : �A � . � �� . � r .. £� ,� � , ., . .. �,; � r � � ,. � � ; � 3 . . �� r,� 3 xi u . a � k. 7 �� . , � � r � n �,... < .� Y, `t ., , .t . .,.. �... .. '�, t 1. � � , �, , ....�. . .. ...,. .. �; ,. �. � � � , t .. � � �� v � �$ � �. ,, � , 3„ ,.::. ....� 4� � i Z ..z,� �.:. ...,,� , � ..� � .. 4 .„ d..r�,� ,� � �� , > ' _ < �, , €�;, , ,. ,ti4 Z � �., � <, i o L � � t � �"� 4 , . � . , � t,., � ,.. r, z .: � t, � , � � ., x,. : > �. . ,.:�.:: � ..� � �1 s,3 �..,a Y. .. ...., r �. .,.. � ',,... :. . i,., .. ,.,, �� .:,r . . �� , ';�a.. .��;.�. :�,,,, .,.. S, - .. ..,.,. . ..::. �2t .c ... .. ., , o ..,. ,, r �.. �, '�'1 . . �,.:_ , :.i , . , .....x .."��°`�' �, a. .,,.. � ...� ,.. ,i . ... ; �. , 1�. . .�, ..,�. , � .,.. . .,.. ......r< „ . .� `t �.,.:. ., t S :. . .. �. ..�? . � „ , ., , u � �:�u .:. .,.. r '� �., �. .. , SiS �.. ,. �... ..Y t , . ... >. �,..'. , .. ...�... . , ...,,. � ro. ,� .„ „ .,, .o �. � ._. . ., r � � .. 4 � ..,., , � . , ... ''�t,.... . 1.,�� . . � v .. .. � . .. , , , � � c� w,� � �. � z �. � �. r, � ,. �� z i � ,.„ n �. �, z�. �� x� w A � � ,- . e � � , �, „ti o . t,,, � .� .� ... . , '�.., ..., s., . �.. . :. '> ��..,�sd , . _rc � , l.,.. ...., �. . ,... ��... 2 .,.. , , .. , x o � ,: , r ,,, � , .1.-. ...,.. i, �,>z.. , > ,„ > z< ..:, x s ,. .�,.. , �.,,, .. �: �. .� .. .... � � ';. . � . ,, i �� , s �, .z. . �> � .,.a . :, ...n . , ��... .� , . � ._ 4 � : i � ,,, � � a „., � � � � � � � � � � � , s �_ x � . w , , �. s� : t � � � t � �. � fi t � : o � , �t., � � , . � �z � 2 � �. , , 1 : � � . z ` ..R A � � �, � � �, ,� � . � ,_ ��, � � � , .,, } � > � � r � . �; � , � ,... .... a. ., ..,, ,z.;... 4, :, < ... �,.,.: , ..� �, � _ � �� , �` �, ..:. � c� , . ... ., s, �.. � ..� �, , ,. <: ,. , _.... ,� ... .'i�..:.,"�,` i ., .t t .,3`�, '� � `� ,. , , . � ,. , ... ,. .,. � ,,. .� . ��.. �� .< � t ^�, . ,, �..... c e .,.. .. ...'�. .,". ,r. a..,, ,,.. �,. .... �..._? s .., . , � '`?.. 4 � �' �:.. �. , ,_.. ., �� .. .�, ..�.. � �.w±.. � .E a... . . ,. ., .,.... .,.. ,.. .�... � ,.:,.. w .�rt''3h. u.. ..x. ... ,. . . . , , ... , ...Y t z . . 1 ..:,... ,. .1. �4 �a �.. ... , i ,:� . . .a.. .. ,�.. .a r � , , ., l . . _ � .4 i ,. ... i,. .. �.� a. . ..: ......� �.x�a a �' ,, "�,. �� i , , . . x , � . � � c� �. r t aa a '�� t , , �, C� � � . w ,. ,.�_ , t � � �� t , � � � � � �, � , , �,, � � , ti , w � ; e a �? , �, , „r rt t t <. � m ., , ,p, n �. � ..,. , l , L . <'� � . J „. � �c_ ,, x �f �g , t� � . t �..7 , A x w i �a � � �. t , � �. � , �., . � r ,� , x c. ¢ �,. , � . E. �� _, x c � v ti . �.., , � �. _ � � "�, .a;,....:�„. � :�'�:.,., .'��' � � ...,.,,. .. \a k.'� .� ; '... ,. .., ... :, � ., . ,,. . .... .,_ r. .._. ..a',. , . N ,. . � , ;,.. .v�'�'��, i. :t.. - � <... ._i.. . .., � .,.. ., e. .:z.. ... .., . ..., .��: r.. . \ ..... , � ... .. 'y o . i ,.._..,�.. ,. ,.. ,... .... v� ..,�,,.? ,.. �� 4^ .,._. � . , ,� �i ,. �. , � ,r. �. , .. , .. ...^,t_ , :. �. . �. .., . .:�. , �€� '�.:.., � . .� �. r. T. � , .. ,. �� ', t.....t, ....r � �t.. a .,.. ..t> . ,.. t a. � \.. N::, ...> , , . .,.;� , L>.�, �.. . �,. .. a... ., ., � .. ;�..� ..3.,.� � .. '� , .< , : � � � 1�� `� '.�� > � �, � , f . � 4. fi � u �.� � � � � � � � ., � � � , z � : \ ,, „ �, �,. . ; u tr�. t n �, � r � , r v rv „ � "� r, ti � r� ,z �_ � �� , � � � � , vY � 4 w s � � ,. � �. � �,, �_ � c z ....... ::: \ \ ....�. u. 4 .r....`,u. .k'4, a i .. .. <�..,i � „ ....��, :'\•. �4 l. . \. `i5,.`�+ am_ .1.. . .Y .�, .3 `t� r ..�,....� .kF l .t..kF... : F�w� .� �. . . ..... �:: ��. . �.., a .v. r . . .a.. .,, .. ,.. .+,,.., w , '+'�. , t ..�,i . .... . .'\ . i'.. ��.�' ^ .3.. , i, i. .. r. .... �, .a. ...t. 3. t. .Y ..f.. .4� `�..� ,.. ... � . .. . .... � `? . � ?:��... 3\ ��,. �. .4 e ..^.. ..C.. �. ,. � ..� .'. .,. <,. >,�.- ... ..?.. .,._ t... S �,. ,. .. . ..�„ ��... l ., . ,. ,. .`�,. _.. .> , .,., s .., ..<. , :,.: t .��... � ,. i ..:�. �.. ... ..., ;,� ,..,. .- ..., _ ,.. a�� x .... � .�-��. ..t.., .... ��.. ..,, . . . ,.. ,-� a.. , , . ��.. . �.,.. ... � c.,� ; .r, t� „ � w �. _. �. , t. � t. � i .. , t , �. ,r , c 7 .., r x.. ,, � � . , � ,. r �. ��. , �.. �.. �,;� .': ..� . t ... „ ,,. t. .�; 1 ..C,. , f...a. .Y. "e ...,� ..� � ..r . 4 . .. , „U ..: ,.1 , .� 14... ,.,. 4 a .... r... , . .., ; t ., r. ,..... �. ... 1...7� ,.t . ..>, v, ...� ., .:,. .. ,.i. � s � :. �1 .. . � � �. „ � �. �.. � � n.„ �. w .... w � z � . � ..: ..� :, ,� � .. s .,. � .<. � �§t .. ..- . K? ,..r,s. ..w�. .. , << .� ,., t �., ...�.,.. ... \ .r .a, r � .,.c�. .. ,..a 3 r... > , � , x. � � ., r '� , r : � � a �.; `, � a �. �, x� > t � , "� � � ,, 3.;.x ,. �^� L„ n.. � ;, � t a . � � . ..,... �. ,. , ..,.,..... .,,. .�, �, \ ,.� . ..., _a .. ��', �. ... ..� .`. .. � , `�, v ..,.t .,^. ....., ,� - .... °�° z ,,.. .... ..,...�. . .... `.. z . r.,. �� .., `�a�. v�. .� , � , <_ .. �. .. .., ,,...., : t .. � .. . w �`a , n , �,. , , > � � r � t � t � � � o , � � , �, z .x � , „�. � `z s �z c M. � s .,.. �., .� v � . ., ,. a „� � ��.1 , .. , .,..,. , ,. ., .,4, s... . : �. '.�, . ,. ... .,. , �.:. �. , ..,. .. ... �:, .. , .,._�.., - .. ..r, , ,. ,.a �,. \ „ .�..`, . ..... � � t . .,.. i ..4: i.. .... , � ,, .� ...,.:�. . .o,... ,... t �l. .,., a, ..:. . rt � +, , ... ... .n , t: , o .. -�.. .�.�.E, �.. ..��.. . ,.. it ., -.. }� .f. ,. ,.>. , �, ; �? r s.. �. i , ... "it 1 . _* �: t ... .. ... t� . ..,.� ,.:. , ..a� .� , ;�'_ 'Y �c� :.. . ...,.. r...�. 'o- .n .,. h.. A. � .n � i , v.. ,.. . ,.. .... . r t"�`""�i.' . , ..,. .�� ,t�t.'i`. , ...... ... , � � ... ..��. �:, n.. , , <:..a . „ .� ..,..., .�, . ?... '.J ,.. .S . , . � �... .,. s �� z .., -, :,> .�. a ,� , , ... ..,.,. . ,... ..,. .. . „ ,.. . .... _ ...4. .l �1,.� . .�.: , .i. .... ;., ,� a r,... , :.e..,.� 7 �... S. 4. � .i u. ... ...aU t. ... .v .... .. ......� ... `: ..�,.. .)� i �... . ... "3" +,. .'. .. ..�N> . �. �. � ....., c ,. ..... , ;:,�� ,,. -fi � 'a�,r� r- .�,i.. , .. ., �:... , .,, .... .. , ,. :� ....,., ..,� :'�^"*,.. ..,,.,.� �, � Rt , �;.v. � ,t. ... � .r �,,,.. ,. .., � > a �. �._ .. , , .t. � , �a .,.. ,.t , ...,, ,.. .. �`-...., ..v�. ,. , . i �, . . r�::. .. �..�„ 'x� ,. . ., ,,:�, �,... i=.� ., .,. � . . .� `. ., .. .,.. , ..w .= i ,.. �.:..:, _ � � � ' � r.� � � ,. � � o � �, ,� t., � � � � . e a �l U, c � ,�., ..,.w, i i ...s. ..,.. �..,,1... � v >t. . 2 4I ,� �, m-.:,� "`a. ..� , . ... ..: . , . �?' � ,.(.. '.,,. . „ < t � . {z-� ... , .... ,,, t .�_ .<.� _� ....4, . � , ,.. .s� ,s , <, .. .,, ..,,z :'a�R ,. ., l� �. ,. , ,v.. { , . ... .,... .. ....r,� .:.�; . ,. �...1.� � ...., . ,. ., 1 s .. � „ , ..,. < .,. i� ,,.,7 ...T. , , , r,.�+"a � c � .�. n ..., :.9�A': : �....�, .. .,,. , tv. ,. .,s�, .'��. `i� , .i�" .... ...,�, ,.�.. .w..trv.e .. � t ��. ... . , :. ..... ."r.. h ...Sr..t ...\� \ . �o. . a . 4.. . ,,. ,Z ,. ..>., i. ..0 .� .\ t � ..� . � .,... ,.. ,. ,.... . l ..,,,t,. . ..,. ...:. . _ .� , �.r� � .. . < ,.o_. , v: , < <.. ,. ..� . i . ...� . . �, ''� ....k.. �., t, � s.. W ,�. �.... <. ., ,.. .. ...� .k. .a ,, .��,,. . .. �.. ,> ,... � , .....�. 'i -. .-.., „ , , ,.....�.� .:.. . ...7 2 ..t. . ......, ... , � �� < i . . -.'S�i :�"`t ...,. � _r, „.2. ..� ,.� ..�... . .:.. ,,.. . .4,;, .� . '.@».S .:., ,,, `, ..,� . .f... iN� .. .+,. �, z.. �;.� � �,... , . �. .r. ,.. .2 ,.. i , ., ... \ , . �.. VI r ...,t ..,... ,n...1., .,..:.. .ct. ., ,�:. ,.,,. . Y.u.. .. ...n . � b;�..., i z�: - . .�, . ... 2... . ... ,. `:., ., .v. . .:w� , - , .`J„... ,.,.,... .. ,r ,., , .. .,. 2.,. � �+, r t ,. x . .;. , .. . ..�...„„, .... � , �:., �� :. �t � `� � , . � � � .. i u � 7. w , �, t c � , , < t � �, , . .Y.. .... �.. ,. �. .. ..3 , .. , J�.: ., so .. � , �..v�. . .. .�. , � x.� t. "� , , ...: ,_...„, .. .< 2.. s,. , , � �.`�. .. , ,.....�. . , ..;,. . �. ,..., .._ .. t�, . . d.: � ..�X. ....a . � . ., , ,. ..�..� , .� � . :h �. ,,..z. , a. t� ,� � � , .- . w a � � , _ � : , � � �- � , .� °�". x � � � r � � � �t t � t ...., *� , � k . t t r , � � t ." ,. � > � � � . , . . k . , _� � .,.. .... � ^�, .:: � ,. ;, .. .....,. .,�. . , t. ,... ..,..,,� � �. .< -..,. , �,.,.. c . �.::,._, - , t a . �` �- �: �`w. . � � w . :,. .,�., .�.., „ ,., ... .,. ,.. , '�.._..a . z ',��:w� .! � ...1., i.. il z, ., � , .�' ..�.i .... �} , . , . �,,., .�. .... i ., .... n ,. .,i� .... .,t ,...`: t, �� ... '�i ... ... �. r ..., e. rr ...... � . .�.... ..c ,�.,.' . ..�`... � 'r ...: . �. \�. •'l ',.. . . S;. ..e .a � H .. ., . �. .....� .... ."�l.* r; .,. .. . 1.. > .�., ti.. ��; a ..I. ..... � ...s .a. ..�. .... . � ..c , �.:.: , . .�`.... ,. .. , 4 . . , ', a.. , ., a. ., .,..,.. >i a . . � v. Y. t<t , . ....._ . , � ..�. i.a .`�'. .m. > ..� 's� ... .,.. c. r.. �.. .�.. . .. ,3 �.,, .. .., ti 2 . �� ..� �. .,.. .,. � ,.1:...a ,.... ,t. �, .,.: ,�: �� ... . , . ,�:,_ , .t ., .,..�, �, .. , ., �... �� ..,�� . ,� x „ L...,�.. ., ... +:,.,. � .1. �, ....... a. .` . �, , . .1 .> W ..... *�'S r, .a ...c. .:..?`, c . � �:�.. ,.. ��. �w �.a6.. _.„v �e:. , C ' . i 'a. �. ,.i a . .�„. ,.... 1 :... . .'� < a. .. ,a c . ,1, ., '4, .� .�.�� S.: .. .'#'. ..� .r '4 t; L '�\ . � +. .. , \, u ,. vS z. � �. �' _ t 1 � .... � . � i, ;... . ,. � „�, . .:� ". 4. � .�.�. �t4��i �... ...a� � , a.M ,.. ,, i ,.. � ..,.. 1 .<. .,., .1 � a .,.. ,. > > `�. � : ^u.:+i ,. ..t, .. ; . ... �.. � a .k �. .,. , -� .., :.. , o , c� . ,.,, � , ��' s zn., ,. .,. r �.= n. „ .., ..,. ..�, .1.. u. � , . ,.; .�'�. . ,... ..,,... ,��.:. .... u. � .,. . '� � ., ,:;... .,' ...� .< <.. �. ..:t.. �.,�„� .. ... .�\q�� , ..t ., . „� .. , , , m �. ,.. , , ..� `C`3� ..�. .�a ....l .,..4�� e*'�.. o. ..., , c , ', ..r �. � .. . .,. z„ �.., .,.' ..,.it .... �"�: ,. .� z .,. t ,,. �.. .., ,. �:', ,. . , , :,. , .. ,.. , .,..-�., . , ,.... �..�. �, ,... �.. m t�':. .; l. t. > >., , „ '., ��,.. '�:.v . .:;.. ...ti. <... ., ..� :..c .l .r �v �# ..,.. . . ':, „� ,._ .. ., .*� . � ,,:. ... , ' �' . ... .. ,. ,,, x <.. .A ... u_ r s .,. ., ,.., .., .. . ... .� ..,:. .A.. .,. .. , . ,``°, .A�. a:: ,<.... , , .k.> . _. �� 1 , .:, :� � ,�:; . �, . ... ti. ..,. . ., :s:: ... '. .' w i.�.�"'�t< ,� ': :: �.. � la 4 �. ....... ,. .`, .. , , x ,., ..�..: �l .4,r,.. .�� .a; � .., ,�. .....� , ,.�n, .,. . „ e .�� .. ,... �� .� ...u, ..,. ,�, „„�.�� w .. � , .�.,,, . �... .. �: , ,.. .' ,. .. �..�r. .. e , �.,: ,., ,. .., � , �' ,.,. .. „ _.,, e... ,r �.4,� ..s ..'�` -� a . , ...? ,�� ...�,. ..sr � ,• � � o � � � :.. � �? � _ . , <. 4. �, � <. � � ,, a � � � � ,. ,. b a, � � Y � � � .>, s � "ta � a. " �`, t ., � � < �; � � ._,. � � �a. � �. �. Y' � �. �� v s ,. > ti ,.,� v � � �: , W � ':_ � ...s ..,. ,.. , n��. ,.x _l�� .'� , e, ,3 •,., �. . , ..�.. x r �'s.f .. . � �.:.*... ? �� ..i te....,. � ,�.\ .�' .{ s �i' :.r..a. ..: ... < .:.. ,. � .,, . � . .� ..' . v ..,.. � : ... ..> .... .t ,ti. ri ... � ...,.. .. . .. ,.. . ^. . '� .:,. �..,: ,.,A. t- { . � ...... ...... ....�. 'i .x.�:. +.. .:. ..� . ..: . „ .. �.. ,. . .., �.. .<� .. .. . ��. ..� ....� �`�,,. .�.. .� � , , �,,.. . .,s `�. . ...., ....4, .� � , . , .� ., .r... �: ..�.. .. �..�. . .,. ..,, .,... ...E.� �. . ... .... :�; 4 .�; . ..�_. . .� ,,. . . ..... . . ..... � �.a .. ��:. . . ... �.�.. , ...:. a a. . ..>.... ...t..,.. .� , r,. � t .. �, ,.L..... „� ....... . ;�,. . ..... ,.. . ..+:.... .j .�� . . ., i � . r, ..c ;,..�., a,... ....,... . .., ..- ,.�.. .�_. ..a . e . C. `� h . � s . ., � . , .:u�. „ ,�. ,. , �`,�i � �v� .�, . � t� �c J. � >_. � i � .> � � p , i � , ,_ n � � W � �. � v , t t .. ;.0 � 4, .,�.. ....r,.�� ..`� . -, �... t. ... .,. . „ � :� , �.< ... �.. , .. � ,s i � ,, � s., � � ��` �h ... , . r � � . � �; �„ � ''� � _, r o � � .n � , � , � t � . �. tk , 3� � : � k , � �� z � �_ . _y , .. � � � ,„ ; � �'� �� . < � � . , . _. �. , � � ; v� , � , , b � n � � 5 � , ., � ,.. _.... : � .� ,.... .. '�, .., o �. t::�. ,. .c� , 7 . -::.: : �.... .. ... �. � �.... � , �, t... � ,„ , .., .... .. .:, ... . , .. ..,. .� �..�.. .. �: . .. , �w �,. r .. .:..., ,..... „ tti.. .�. .�.. "l .� ?�.s . . ��,., .,r.. _Y. :� ... 7 z .. .,. , .? .., ..,. ,� . ,... .. � , ..., � ., s .+ .�e:. ,. `� � �'� „� w. :.... `ti �w . .. .v. .:, � .,.:. , .., > ':.. .,..:s.,. , .. ,.v. T3� � �. �. x. ..� M. >. .;a �� , ;.... ::;, �,.. ,"tY. .' .,.. ,.: ., . , � ,� . ,, t..�.. , ,.. �... .r. .:. .��. ,r ,. ... . � ,.. . ,,e .'S ��.. "�. 3� _1. ;s� , .. � ,� .. .R.t ., .. .: �� .�. .� . , .:..a > ;k , _Y. , .. .�. e, x �, a .,... ., ., , . , a,�� , z „ �, Y �, , � _ t t y �� . � . �, r . . � , � � � � � � �� „ � : , � < ;� �, � ,. , � � � ,� � � `� z � a ,� Y, � � � � � E , � ti � �� ,_ z r �i _, '*, � ,. � ; � . � a , � .� ..:, .. .,. ..>.. .,.,. .�. ,. .� 2 ..:�,. �x .. � ..r. o ...+ '... ... .�.. .. ES.. ..,,...,. .. , .,. .., , ..,..... a��'� .n � ....., � ..;.i . ��.. .., n , i i.. ,�... , ., . �. ,. �., �a.. 4.. .�. � . .� ;� .:,. .a. . `"�. 1'3 . . ,,.. .; ... . � .. ::.. ..�.. �� A,. . . ...: w.4. ..:. .� ,... � ��. � ..� .�, � :.. . , . , . ..., . . . ...4_ .� F . ... .. „ .�,�... ..... ..... �.. ..... s �,:,.� . . . .. „ , .�: �... ...�. ,�'s . ,�, "�. .....:- e. . . ..x. ..., ..�.. ,.s. . .. � i. ...�*... � :,.. ..... , , . . . . . . >.:�. � , � � � � � ,a , � �� . � „ ., . ., ��. ,a. � t� .'e , . :� ,,, y<. .�. �. .,� „ ��'. s:: .�. ...,. :'' .�. �.. .,�.. � . ...� . , ,,,. „:�.. , ,. ~1 �Z _t .�.. � ,� w. , ..,,.. ..� .. `..a... �.:�� i 't� . F .,. ..,... ^ ' .,i .. ,. . .. ..... .,C ,<.. _ z, � , � , h � 1. t , �� . , � �� b �. , � � r � a � . � � � �,...r� � � k , W , ��:. ,, � �� : a � _� , �� `. , � � _� ti� � _, v � � , � y � , i ,�� v '�' � \ > �} ..r .. . ...J �.;,.. . .... =t� �:�.. ..a... '�; ... ,,r , . 1�r .�...�.. . ,.,. ;� ... .... �, :,� ...§� \ .� 4 � ,} . . > , .,... r t. �, ... 1,. .. ..� �, �� _.. ..� 1�, �t .... „ .. � ,.. ....� ,. .... �S� �r. ..n �..< < ...,.. . �� „... ....i� . l . . �... r�•: ... . :.... .,.�. 3 � l. .... ,� � , :.' .,.. . ._�.. u ..... , ... ..... . ...��,.�: , � s .. ..... � z � �o � �� > r' k �.. �l � ...., ...,.t.. ��'. . . . . r , _z, .z�.� �:.,, c . , „_ o >. ..� . �� f `� �,,. . t a <,. _. � ��i � , > � . � , � �, w;'��. ..., ..,��,s�. . e .:� ...... �� .. .1 . ...,. �. .. �: �"� t �... ,.,... � r. ., a � � , � t �, c ,,.�.. �� , ,....� . .. . � ....�.�.. . k , . ..s. .. s. ...,,. , �.... �,,�. � � � .�. �s. � . � ..�.. ...,, .`,, .. .. t r� . . 5v �F .... ... .._. ., ,. ', _ . ...t�¢. . .�". �,. .... , � i, �, � W l.. . ��; ,,. : . . , ,:.... � � � z �, . ��, ' � � s ., , � r 3 � � �' � � `� w m� � .< ,� �� r � , � , �� t� � t z : � ;. , , �, �: W �� . � . �p � � � , � �� 4� �� , r � � ;� � � � < � .. . a ,.,.�: � �, .� �a;;.��,�� . , a4�: �R,a=. ..'�Y.<.. ,:��?`2��,�.�a,:.�s��„�..,��^„��`�i::��.xz�...:.:�,�, 3 z...:�,�.,., a...,. .�, �� :,�>�� ...��. �4.L ,.�,.�,. ,.� ..t. �^,,,�.� �� t�,�. ..��'� �.,ti ....�,�,3,.� �� ,�.Ss�S.... �. tr,,,. . . . . . . . . . . ...,;.tissti,,. . .. �.,.: ,. .,a . . , :. ; .' , � . ;:, .�.. . , : „ ..._ � ,::�� .s�� ...�,s.. :,, ! ., ...._ c, �a �� oz o� N �� C �/ � U O Q Z�� 4�� O Scale In Feet � � Q � U � � � f/3 Z O U � O D u- � W8Y06200 Q Z 2525AIRPARKDR. PRELIMINARY DESIGN REPQRT ° REDDING,CA 96001 (53p)243-583'i /� .A�T1�TRCNpAPTinIVT�\/1C n (� tYNQ I�L 1 I�RIVC11 I V L G � CITY QF REDDING PUMP HOUSE NO.1 REPLACEMENT PROJECT �(�CATION PLAN z CITY OF REDDWG � PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT-WATER DEPARTMENT � DATE JU�Y2022 FIGURE 1-2 W PROJ W8Y06200 REDDING,CAIIFORNIA �'' � $PWURL \\USLASO-APP385\ICS_workdiri29030\9349403_121999-FIG_1-2_W8Y06200.dgn FILENAME: 999-FIG_1-2_WSY06200.dgn P�OT DATE:7/8J2022 PLOT TIME: 10:01:43 AM Final Preliminary Design Report 2. Survey �nd Mapping Jacobs contracted with Northwest Hydraulic Consultants Inc.(NHC)to provide bathymetric,ground,and facitity survey for the project at the existing P51 Location (Alternative 1)and at the New River Trail Location (Alternative 2).The survey was completed on July 21, 2020. The horizontal datum of the survey was the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)(2011), California State Ptan Zone 1.The vertical datum of the survey was the North American Verticat Datum of 1988 (NAVD88)Geoidl8. The bathymetric survey was tied to loca�global positioning system and vertical controt at the National Geodetic Survey Benchmark—LU1871,approximate�y 1.5 mi�es from P51,a�ong State Highway 299.Two survey measurements using Trimb�e's"observed control point"setting (180 epochs each)were co��ected at LU1871. Fottowing the survey, raw data were exported from the Trimbtejob file using Trimble Business Center.The survey data were corrected (translated) using the difference between the known location of LU 1871 and the average of the two observed control point measurements.The data were then checked for errors and simplified for delivery.A supplemental survey was extracted from Class 2 ground light detection and ranging (LiDAR)from the U.S.Geological Survey(USGS)site.The LiDAR was completed in 2018. To validate the accuracy of benchmark LU1871,static data were collected at the base station during the duration of the survey.The data from the base were converted to RINEX and processed using NOAA's Online Positioning User Service.The solution to these results suggests a horizontal and vertical agreement between the survey and benchmark LU1871 to be less than 0.039 and 0.043 foot, respectively. NHC used an 18-foot jet boat with the following survey equipment:Trimble RTK-GN55 system (R8 and R10 receivers and TSC3 controller)and a CEE ECHO single-beam,single-frequency echo sounder. NHC completed river cross sections as requested by Jacobs and also provided ground shots inctuding corners of primary existing building,the corner of concrete at the top of the existing intake structure, utility poles,water valves along the River Trail,and the top centerline of one of the intake cylinders in the lowered position. Survey shots of the staff gage,corner of the smaller westerly building,and the fire hydrant were unabLe to be coLLected due to overhead obstructions. �imitations of overhead obstruction (i.e.,canopy cover)and overgrown blackberry bushes along the cross sections were acknowledged. An adequate number of survey points were taken to provide the general shape of the bank from the edge of pavement along the River TraiL down into the river. Due to dense vegetation,an edge-of-water shot could not be collected at two of the cross sections.A few extra points were collected at the upstream corners of the"unknown"instream concrete structure at the Alternative 2 location and at the culvert tops where Jenny Creek spills into the Sacramento River. At the ACID dam, points were surveyed along the abutment platform and benchmark"488." Additional ground survey, using project datum,was completed by the City of Redding survey crew in December 2021 to verify the location and top of culvert at the upstream end of the existing Jenny Creek culverts. Existing top-of-culvert shots at the river from the previous ground survey were used for controt points in this supplemental survey.These additional shots were used to create the profile of the existing Jenny Creek culverts. PPS0126221137RDD 2-1 Final Preliminary Design Report 3� I�iver Hydro�og� To design structures within the river to withstand flood forces, it is necessary to estimate the frequency, magnitude,and duration of flooding at the project site. Normal and low-flow conditions must also be defined to allow proper screen and pump design. 3.'i Flood Flows, Stage, and Frequency Data The Flood Insurance Study(FIS)for Shasta County, California,dated March 17, 2011, indicates that operations of Shasta Dam regulate the 10-, 50-,and 100-year floods to 79,000 cfs in the Redding area (Keswick to Clear Creek).According to the USGS stream gage 11370500, located 0.8 mite downstream from Keswick Dam,the maximum discharge of record since regulation by Shasta Dam in 1943 was 83,000 cfs,which occurred on February 14, 2017. The base flood elevation, corresponding to 79,000 cfs,at the A�ternative 1 site was taken from Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA) Ftood Insurance Rate Map Number 06089C1535G at cross-section BS with an etevation of 497.4 feet referenced to NAVD88. The base flood elevation, corresponding to 79,000 cfs,at the ALternative 2 site was interpolated between FEMA cross-section BT and BU (FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Number 06089C1535G)with an etevation of 499.1 feet referenced to NAVD88. 3.2 Flow-Duration Analysis Daily average flow data from the USGS stream gage 11370500 from water year 1981 through water year 2021 were evaluated for flow-duration statistics. The Keswick gage is approximately 2.2 miles upstream of P51. No incremental inflows were included for tributaries between the USGS stream gage and the project site.There are no known diversions between the USGS stream gage and project site. The period from 1981 through 2021 was used to deve�op flow-duration data and capture operations and management of the river.The daily river-ftow data for the 41-year period were parsed into monthly data sets to develop monthly exceedance flow values. Table 3-1 shows exceedance f�ow values for each month. Each exceedance flow value represents a percent of time at which the river is above that flow during the month.These exceedance flow values were used to evaluate critical months(November through March)for low river conditions when the ACID dam flashboards are removed to improve fish passage at the dam. PPS0126221137RDD 3-1 Final Preliminary Design Report 1'able 3-1.�1.5.Geological Surw�y 113705Q0(SACRAMENI"0 R A KESWICK�A) Florrv Exceedance by�ltor�th � ' -e • • � • -• a 100 2,850 2,850 2,360 2,510 4,980 4,150 6,990 6,680 3,860 3,160 2,910 2,900 99 3,090 2,921 2,527 2,543 5,576 6,919 7,247 7,177 4,450 3,434 3,190 3,070 95 3,206 3,210 2,946 3,116 6,520 7,430 8,944 7,756 5,300 3,856 3,620 3,286 90 3,270 3,260 3,220 3,310 7,162 8,350 9,720 8,492 6,220 4,260 3,890 3,490 80 3,420 3,370 3,370 4,130 7,720 9,692 10,800 9,380 6,850 5,010 4,270 3,790 50 4,460 4,185 4,690 6,220 9,490 11,200 13,300 11,000 8,000 6,160 5,250 4,980 25 6,280 7,538 11,800 8,830 11,300 13,600 14,800 12,600 9,050 7,100 6,000 6,210 15 13,000 23,715 23,740 11,900 12,900 14,300 15,000 14,000 9,550 7,622 6,994 9,942 10 18,680 34,750 31,700 15,170 14,000 14,600 15,100 14,300 10,100 8,000 7,600 14,500 5 29,940 50,000 45,980 25,445 16,540 15,100 15,300 14,800 11,100 8,514 13,900 19,240 2 46,588 59,492 53,280 36,866 23,408 15,638 15,400 15,056 11,800 8,886 14,800 35,500 1 49,528 70,282 60,100 40,014 27,208 17,069 15,528 15,100 13,100 12,228 18,338 38,312 0.0 77,900 79,000 74,800 50,100 39,100 20,700 16,800 15,300 14,500 12,500 21,400 60,200 N otes: PTE=percent time exceeded Flashboards are typicalty installed in the ACID dam around April 1 st(start of irrigation season)and removed around November 1 st(end of irrigation season). Exceedance values are based on average daily flows at USGS stream gage#11370500 for the period 1981 through 2021. 3-2 PPSQ126221137RDD Final Preliminary Design Report 3.3 Low River Stage Tables 3-2 and 3-3 summarize river water surface measurements collected at the Atternative 1 and Alternative 2 sites, respectively. Table 3-2. F2iver Stage Data at Alternatiue 1, Existing P51 Locati�n ..- s ' o 11-05-2021/3:00 p.m. 1.0 483.9 3,990 11-10-2021/1:30 p.m. 0.8 483.7 3,590 02-03-2022/3:30 p.m. 0.6 483.5 3,200 Notes: Staff gage tevel zero°0"corresponds to etevation 482.88 feet according to project survey. Sacramento River flow is approximate and based on USGS stream gage 11370500.Flow is noted by USGS as provisional data subject to revision. `Tabte 3v3. iver Sta e ata at Alt�rnative 2, ew iver Trail Location • '- �s � ' a 11-05-2021/2:30 p.m. 5.5 484.3 3,990 11-10-2021/1:45 p.m. 5.8 484.0 3,590 02-03-2022/3:45 p.m. 6.0 483.8 3,200 Notes: Reference point is northwest corner of existing rectangular concrete structure at elevation 489.78 feet according to project survey. Sacramento River flow is approximate and based on USGS stream gage 11370500.Flow is noted by USGS as provisional data subject to revision. PPS0126221137RDD 3-3 Final Preliminary Design Report �. Fish Pr��r� and Cri�t�ri� 4.1 Fish Protection Fish protection is provided,in part,by using fish screens to exdude fish from being entrained by the intake structure and allowing them to safely move past the facility while swimming in the source water body. Requirements for salmonid species in the Sacramento River are regutated by NMFS.Satmonids are also regulated on a state level by the Catifornia Department of Fish and Wildlife(CDFW).These regulatory agencies have specific requirements and guidelines related to the type of fish screening systems and related structures that can be used to accomplish the fish protection goals.The following information was reviewed retative to potentiat intake structural configurations and fish screen system types and their characteristics. ■ Fish Screening Criteria for Anadromous Salmonids, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Nationa�Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Region,January 1997 ■ Fish Screen Criteria,June 19, 2000 version,Appendix 5,California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual, State of California,The Resources Agency, California Department of Fish and Game,Witdtife and Fisheries Division, Fourth Edition,JuLy 2010 ■ NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-1xx, NOAA Fisheries West Coast Region Anadromous Salmonid Passage Design Guidelines, Nationat Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service West Coast Region, Environmental Services Branch, Peer Review Draft, August 16, 2018 Regulatory screen-sizing criteria for salmonid protection limit maximum approach velocity to 0.33 foot per second (fps)according to NMFS and CDFW requirements. Approach velocity(VA) is defined as the velocity component of the flow being diverted that is perpendicular to the fish screen face. It is normally determined by dividing the diversion flow rate(Q) by the effective wetted screen area (As),or: VA= Q/As The actual area of the fish screen panels must be slightly larger than the computed value to facilitate real-time operational compliance with the limiting approach velocity at the design diversion flow rate. An additional allowance factor(F)of 5%to 10%of the screen (represented by F=1.05 to 1.1) is normally provided to allow for some variation in approach velocity across the screen area and to account for structuraL members that btock portions of the screen flow area. Field measurements are performed during commissioning and operations to verify actual approach velocity and demonstrate compliance. For example,a fish screen designed for salmonid protection with a 42-mgd (65-cfs) diversion flow rate and 5%to 10%additional area would need to have an effective wetted fish screen panel area of about 207 and 217 square feet(sq ft), respectively,as follows: F [Q/VA] =As or 1.05* [65 cfs/0.33 fps] = 207 sq ft PPS0126221137RDD 4-1 Final Preliminary Design Report 4.2 Facility Criteria and Assumptions Facility criteria and assumptions are as follows: ■ Buitdout diversion flow rate—42 mgd (65 cfs). ■ CDFW will require the intake fish screens to be designed to protect juvenile fish species and witt require sizing to be based on a design approach velocity of 0.33 fps. ■ NMFS requires the intake fish screens to be sized based on a design approach velocity of 0.40 fps where exposure time(defined as the time it takes a particle to travel the length of the screen when moving at the speed of the sweeping velocity) is limited to less than 60 seconds,or 0.33 fps where exposure time is greater than 60 seconds. ■ Design low Sacramento River flow—3,250 cfs.The Bureau of Redamation's(Rectamation) proposed flow objectives below Keswick Dam is 3,250 cfs,according to Table 1 of the NMFS June 4, 2009, Biologica�Opinion. However,the 1960 Memorandum of Agreement between Reclamation and CDFW as well as the State Water Resource Controt Board Water Rights Orders 90-05 indicate minimum f�ow requirements of 2,000 cfs on the Sacramento River below Keswick Dam during a critically dry period. The design Low Sacramento River flow criteria will be confirmed by the City prior to final design. ■ Design high Sacramento River flow—79,000 cfs.Operations of Shasta Dam regutate the 10-, 50-,and 100-year floods to 79,000 cfs according to the FIS for Shasta County, California,dated March 17, 2011.Since regulation by Shasta Dam in 1943,the maximum discharge measured at USGS stream gage 11370500 is 83,000 cfs which occurred on February 14, 2017. ■ California Code of Regu(ations,Title 23,Water Requirements,states:"Structures must be securely anchored and fLoodproofed to at Least two(2)feet above the 100-year flood elevation or two(2)feet above the design flood plane,whichever is higher.The ftoodproofing must be consistent with the potential uses of the structure." Table 4-1 Lists the design Sacramento River flows and water leveLs for each site. Ta le 4-1. proxi ate ater Su ace Et�vatians at Pra�ect Alternative Sites a a . . . . � � . s High WSE @ 79,000 cfs 497.4a 499.1b �ow WSE @ 3,250 cfs 483.5 483.8 a High WSE corresponds to the base flood-ftow WSE at FEMA cross-section BS(Ftood Insurance Rate Map Number 06089C1535G). b High WSE corresponds to the base ftood-flow WSE interpolated between FEMA cross-section BT and BU(FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Number 06089C1535G). Notes: No taitwater effects from the ACID dam(that is,dam flashboards are removed). WSE=water surface elevation 4.3 Pumping System Design Criteria and Assumptions The fottowing summarizes related pumping system criteria and assumptions that are relevant to this project for Alternative 1 and Alternative 2: ■ Design (firm)capacity, ultimate buildout:42 mgd ■ Design (firm) capacity, initial: 36 mgd ■ Low-flow capacity: 3 mgd or Less,achievable via pump turndown and flow recirculation 4-2 PPSQ126221137RDD Final Preliminary Design Report ■ Assumptions for design capacity catculations: — Alternative 1 river WSE:497.4 feet maximum to 483.5 feet minimum — Alternative 2 river WSE:499.1 feet maximum to 483.8 feet minimum — Maximum discharge WSE at Foothill Junction Box: 754.0 feet — "Aged" pipetine friction: Hazen-Williams Coefficient= 100 — °New" pipetine friction: Hazen-Williams Coefficient= 150 Raw water pump selection witt be subject to the following general requirements: ■ Pumps will provide complete and gap-free coverage of the entire operating range defined by an operating envelope bounded by high-and low-system curves,and minimum and maximum design ftow rates. ■ Pumps will operate within the preferred operating region (POR)to maximize efficiency and longevity, with only timited excursions permissible outside of the POR,which woutd still be within the allowable operating region (AOR). ■ The quantity of duty pumps will be minimized to reduce the capital cost of pumping equipment and supporting infrastructure,and to minimize maintenance costs. ■ Where feasible,all pumps will be identical to provide uniformity of spare parts and ease of maintenance. ■ For uniformity and simplicity of controt,all pumps will be driven by variabte-frequency drives. ■ Pumps will be selected to accommodate both the ultimate buildout firm capacity and the initial firm capacity.Where feasible,fewer pumps will be installed initially,with positions for future pumps, piping, and associated etectrical gear Left available to satisfy ultimate buildout conditions. Appendix A shows a representative pump curve that woutd satisfy the required capacity and head along with the same representative pump curve in multi-pump paratlel operation superimposed over project system curves for three alternatives.Gray-shaded areas define the envelope of head and flow coverage within the pump POR provided by parallel pump operation using variable-frequency drives.The light-blue-shaded area defines the required operating envelope of the system. The combined pump and system curves show that four identical pumps can adequatety cover the required system operating conditions. Pump coverage is comptete and within the pump POR from approximatety 6 mgd to 42 mgd,with Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 having a minor and acceptable excursion into the AOR that occurs at approximatety 12.2 mgd when transitioning from single-pump operation to two-pump operation. Minimum pump flow without use of recirculation and within the AOR is approximately 5 mgd. The low-flow system capacity of 3 mgd is achieved by recircutating the surplus flow. Two sizing scenarios were investigated: ■ Four duty pumps to provide 42 mgd: — Instatt four duty pumps plus one spare(4+1) initialty and operate at reduced speed to provide the required initial capacity of 36 mgd. — Pump duty point: • Alternative 1: 10.5 mgd at 319 feet total dynamic head (TDH). • Alternative 2: 10.5 mgd at 320 feet TDH. — See Appendix A, Pump Curves,Alternative 1 and Atternative 2. — Pros: • Maximum operating brake horsepower(hp)is comfortably below the motor's 800-hp rating. PPS0126221137RDD 4-3 Final Preliminary Design Report • All required infrastructure for buildout capacity is installed initially. • Increased capacity and redundancy prior to the anticipated buildout date. • Relative to expanding the pump station at a later date, instalting alt pumps during the initial phase of construction may be more cost effective. • Uniformity of pumping units is assured. • Pump design and intake design coordination are better assured,as design of each occurs during the same project. — Cons: • Additional capital cost to install a fourth duty pump and associated electrical gear. • Potentially more maintenance due to one more pumping unit. ■ Three duty pumps to provide 36 mgd: — Instalt three duty pumps plus one spare(3+1) initialty and operate at full speed to provide the required initial capacity of 36 mgd. Instalt a fourth duty pump later when buildout ftow is required. — Pump duty point: 12 mgd at 310 feet TDH. — See Appendix A, Pump Curves,Alternative 2A. — Pros: • Initial capital cost is minimized. • Until buildout occurs,there is potentiatty less maintenance due to one less pumping unit. — Cons: • Maximum operating brake horsepower is ctose to the motor's 800-hp rating.There is some risk that factory performance testing witt indicate that derating is necessary to avoid overloading the motor,which could result in performance yietds below 36 mgd under high static and high pipe friction conditions. • Buildout capacity will be greater than is required. • Larger pump impellers are required, resutting in higher pump shutoff head. • A separate project is required to equip the pump station with a fourth duty pump. • The fourth duty pump may not match pumps installed initiatty,which could complicate maintenance. • Additional capital cost and facitity configuration will be required to instatt an addional duty pump at a future date. 4-4 PPS0126221137RDD Final Preliminary Design Report 5m Intak� ��rnatives Eeealuatie�n 5.1 Basic Methodology The methodoLogy employed to determine the type of intake structurat configuration and associated fish screen types to be further considered for the project invoLves the foLtowing process: ■ Review potentia�intake structura�configurations and fish screen types. ■ Consider applicable regulatory requirements and guidelines atong with site conditions,similar experience,and engineering judgement to determine the structural configurations and fish screen types that are considered appticable and viable for the project. ■ Conduct a comparative evaluation of the alternative structurat configurations and fish screen types retative to their appticabitity to the proposed intake sites, regutatory compliance,engineering suitability,and operations and maintenance factors. 5.2 Identification of Alternative Structural Configurations and Fish Screen Types In accordance with the methodotogy described above, structural configurations and fish screen types employed throughout California were considered for application to the project.Two atternative structural configurations and four alternative types of fish screens were identified for consideration.Table 5-1 shows a matrix of the structural configurations and fish screen types as we��as their relative compatibility with each other.These alternatives are described in greater detail in the following sections. Tabte 5-1.Int�ke S�ructural Configurati�n and Fish Sereen Type Matrix e � r �- ' �, � Vertical Flat Plate Screens Compatible Compatible Indined Flat Plate Screens Possible,but unusual Compatible Cylindrical Tee Screen Possible,but unusual Compatible Conical Screens Possible, but unusual Compatible 5.3 Description of Alternative Structural Confiigurations and Fish Screen Types 5.3.1 Alternative Structural Configurations 5.3.1.1 In-river Screen Structures In-river screen structures are placed within the river channel and have fish screens on each side parattet to fLow. Normally,vertical flat ptate screens are used on the sides of in-river structures. lt also appears to be possible to use inctined itat ptate screens,cylindrical tee screens,or conicat screens in a similar configuration, but it would be unusual in a river. Figure 5-1 shows the City of Sacramento's 160 mgd (248 cfs) in-river screen structure. It employs vertica�f�at p�ate screens permanently attached to the structure below the water leve�. PPS0126221137RDD 5-1 Final Preliminary Design Report Figure 5-1.City of Sacramento In-river Intake Structure r „' �� ei ' tt��i i Q� tii� SF�y �� ; � � �,i C�p��°��4�'s'i,;��i�� ' �; ' i �� a I �,�� u i al �3� .� € � t�r } , �� 3. I k 5}� y ; ``��.,��,�43` ��,�''�� t I{. i��. �,r i �� I' , �q r � � ��.�..�.�.�...;. ��. The screen structure is typicatty placed near the deepest part of the river and is situated to ensure that suitabte space is avaitable on each side;this facilitates river flows around both sides, providing sweeping action to hetp fish move past the screens. Conveyance conduits connecting to the ftoor of the structure are typically used for gravity flow to the riverbank and beyond.Alternativety, pumps inside the structure can atso be used for pressure flow via conveyance conduits that run either beneath the riverbed or are suspended above the river water surface on a bridge structure. This structural configuration is typicatty designed similar to a large bridge pier and has hydraulically efficient Leading and trailing transition sections to provide relatively smooth flow transitions between the structure and the river.These transitions also minimize floodwater surface increases and help control scour. Normally,an access bridge is provided to allow vehicular access from the riverbank to the top of the structure. 5.3.1.2 On-bank Screen Structures On-bank screen structures are constructed on the riverbank along the edge of the river channel and have fish screens only on the river side.They are typically ptaced atong straight sections of the river or near the outside of moderate river bends to facilitate sweeping of fish,debris,and sediment past the structure and to take advantage of the deeper side of the river.The configuration along the bank helps the structure b�end into the river cross section to minimize ftoodwater surface increases and facititate sweeping ftows past the screens. Figure 5-2 shows the Freeport Regional Water Authority's 185 mgd (286 cfs)on-bank fish screen structure. It employs verticat ftat ptate screens that stide into ptace from the top of the structure using guide slots. 5-2 PPSQ126221137RDD Final Preliminary Design Report Figure 5-2. Freeport Regional Water Authority On-bank Intake Structure y � �� ,�!, 'i, V, �i ��pi�� I�G��I�i�� ii , �� .� �� ' � �' � ; � �� , �;r, � � x, ttr� �� a i�a�, �u��, � �o tix �� 1�4,��i "�^`�Y�wS�,"�,'a�?S ti�� ;, yR �' `,c � � .� 8�3, '�� T ��`�`�`41� s.�'''� , . �.r `�L��!o �{, � � r 4 �� ,��. �.t�:`�'§ 1� �`� �.� � ';�i�%`�"iv��-'��'��4`,�tka� s�,�tZ� ��;�;•3�"��.,��r ' 4 �� '��G. �. .��',. ,. , �a.,> "�2 �,..��4k'�'' ,;I,. �,� a `�k:�'Y, `t` �,s tt ` �., �`?t�� a z`;i, y� Conveyance conduits extend from the back of the intake structure and allow flow through the riverbank. Pumps can also be installed inside the structure for pressure flow via the conveyance conduits. This type of structure is typically designed with curved transitions(training walls), upstream and downstream,that tie the face of the structure to the riverbank side slope.The training watts provide a smooth ftow transition in the river. Fill may be placed behind the watts to allow vehicular access to the top of the structure. 5.3.2 Alternative Fish Screen Types 5.3.2.1 Vertical Flat Plate Screens Vertical flat plate fish screen systems have a continuous lineup of verticalty placed fish screen panels submerged in the river ftow profile.The screen panels are normatty arranged paraltel to the river flow at a depth where they are atmost atways submerged.The bottom of the panels are positioned above the portion of the river channet that carries most of the bedload sediment. Figure 5-3 shows a section through a typical verticat ftat ptate screen structure. Screen panets are instatted from the top of the structure using guide slots that allow them to be slid into ptace along the face of the structure.Sotid panels are placed above the screen panels using the same guide slots.Sotid panels block flow and ensure that diverted flows only move through the fish screens. A supptemental guide stot immediately behind the forward screen and solid paneL guide stot can be used to instatt a removabte perforated baffle plate system behind the screen panel to help adjust the flow rate through the screen panels.This rear guide slot is also used to store solid panels that are used when screen panels are removed for maintenance.This arrangement keeps the intake structure sealed from fish entrainment at all times. PPS0126221137RDD 5-3 Final Preliminary Design Report Figure 5-3.Typical Vertical Flat Plate Screen � �� 4�.., 'k'�"¢k'§ ��.'�.` ;P; �`..., ��.�.... 2��.b�.;3`k'&'>�1: jt � (i; C, � � 4 � : �ti �m�Nl:�. s>>i . �n �� ? I � �N� $ � � :��..�" ��.!"�� '�''��':��;.. j� i �', G ?,m4°�,.l:i"m34c^^�-� ,` . µ �$�"`"� ..�.�`�a" �'s. � �_ �. . �M.,�,,....�.,�..�,.�. ,.o'�#.�� 3=�, �..:.� ...... ... . � ��„�.�.: TM�@ �� ,s ,"�� A H� :�� .. ' �i� � i. --m..= ... NF`„ .. �"'.��'��',.,N�'��'—_, i '. i. , � �.k�:�` "* "`��.� �w�t�� . ��. � �h�,�t �� ,. ,.�,:� ............ .n , ,,. t�� t�R��. t En . ,. tiuM��.,�,.s .. E �'��3.�.. ' � 98 � €r `�^� ��„� ��a � � �`s,» �.�� : q � j, �' ��'� �' � � �T " I �� r^��. ' �°; � tu�� .N4u� ; �� z � <� �i��!"' � m �� `��'e �� i':� s�� `z��.a .� . � �� s.; �_ � a�; �� f I �� ? I � �' €. i� f � ' �� .� : , � i � w. ; �� ma.�t � '�s. F � T �i... „ .. , �,, , ...,� � �, ' :".- "�.`'�;;.� ..M..''�t+l.':�;v. .;4:.'x�,:'3�':3 94c, �u:; � � ., i . .:... �', Y )i �` Y �., b':5:.... 7 �w; _..:��;�P' ..+.�'�"�v.:�`�*'�9@.`�`��.. �t� �' ��•�Fk..,L' �'": € �'; i ; � [ � � i � { R �:M��m ....�� '��'?��._ ... � :�.. S .��.... ........... ......... ��: . � ... ... N�a.��a�'. i 5-4 PPSQ126221137RDD Final Preliminary Design Report The verticat screen panets are deaned by a travetting brush system that moves back and forth across the face of the screen panets.The brush is driven by a cable and pulley system from a drive motor on the top deck of the structure. 5.3.2.2 Inclined Flat Plate Screens Inclined flat plate screen systems have a continuous line-up of fish screen panels positioned in an inclined configuration and submerged in the river flow profite.The screens are normatly arranged paraltet to the river fLow. For on-bank screen structures,the inclined configuration allows the fish screen structure to somewhat mimic the slope of the river or streambank.The inclined panel configuration atso provides more screen area within the same depth of flow as compared to the vertical flat plate configuration. Figure 5-4 shows an inctined itat ptate screen at the Buckman Diversion on the Rio Grande River in New Mexico. Figure 5-4. Inclined Ftat Plate Screen System at Buckman Diversion � ��° � , s� � � ��`� � � F� ,R� ..._. " � _ d. � �.,� r �, �w z � � tr'' :i � Bm . , �. � ��a�`��s� :�� '� � �"\ tS3``�= , �a�15�`��3��.��it��'Cl''t��,'a;s� tis��,��4x�c`y`� �,: '�t� ��' ��a��.� � "��.. � �'� � '� ,��"t ::�. ,u�. ' .,t' ,.0 E,,�.'� , ,,, � . ,� � :} s tz`�> ��, � �> �� : ,� �� st�, ��. ,�.. ,�; � ti � � �` , � � ��: � �s � ��. ��f� 4# �:,� �> �,; �` �' Screen panets are normally fixed in a submerged position in the river ftow profile.These screen systems woutd require a permanentty instatted perforated baffle plate system behind the screen panets to adjust the flow rate through the screens. Removal and replacement of an indined f�at plate screen system normally involves divers,fish rescue from inside the structure,and is more difficult and comptex than the process for vertica�f�at p�ate or cy�indrica�tee screen systems. This type of intake structure is normally arranged in the on-bank configuration.Given the greater screen surface area for the same available depth of water,this configuration can result in a shorter diversion structure.The larger screen area can also result in screen paneLs that are so large they must be divided into multiple sub-panels to facilitate handling and cleaning. Inctined screens are normally cleaned using an air burst system with air nozzles distributed beneath the screen face to allow air bursts to flow up through the screen panels and remove debris and other accumulated material by agitation.An air compressor and accumulator tank feed an air piping manifold with quick action control valves at each screen panel location. PPS0126221137RDD 5-5 Final Preliminary Design Report 5.3.2.3 Cylindrical Tee Screens Cylindrical tee screen systems have a continuous lineup of cylindrical screens installed on fabricated tee-type assemblies that convey flow into the intake structure.This system results in a tee configuration with a cylindrical screen section on either side of the central tee manifold. Figure 5-5 shows a three-dimensional(3D)isometric of the typica�configuration for a pair of cylindrical tee screens.The screens are norma��y arranged in the on-bank configuration with the cylinder axis parallel to the river flow. Figure 5-5.CyLindrical Tee Screen Isometric � „. �, � �� , r , s� � �� z�}� f , � � f ; ; t ..�� r;, t��rt� �, ,,, � �` ''. '`e � i ` ''i �� , ti ' t �s t ' �� ' S ; i c i'��~ &i r� B t � 7 � ��t )1i�� r;��}��±`'�kit7�,�a e��1�� tr S �� y �s i 4.{�� t��S t't5�F't� tt�. �t � �„ �' }.r s �� , , � ,.,, �.; ; ,,,�t g .: �,. ,..„ ..:� 3 f e. ., �r,r.t� ' f . . r , ....+,..ati'} � £ \ r t �w.. ...-�a �m�......w.... .. , . ......._,,.wa...., ..Ka.....�....... '.w�.r'da' w+ �. m...,.. , >`o-^."'� `3 :` 1 �,.. :. ��. ..�:....«».e.» ,� , ,..� ;, �. }.�. w....��.��., �. . -.�..�,»..,,n..:,.. -� . u „».,.......w....., w....�.,i.��._.�..�• :�'a 4� � m �� N � � II 1� �1 r . -:.....—,-,-»«.�..-.. . . . , � . Screen units are installed from the top of the structure using a winch and guide stots that allow them to be stid into ptace along the face of the structure. A self-contained slide gate is incorporated in the guide stot and serves to isotate the intake when the screen unit is removed for maintenance.This arrangement keeps the intake structure seated from fish entrainment at att times. The cylindrical shape allows more screen area with lower depth profite requirements than the verticat ftat pLate systems.This can result in a shorter diversion structure. Screens are cleaned by rotating the cytindricat screens on each side of the tee manifold over an interior and exterior brush system. 5.3.2.4 Conical Screens Conical screens are normally reserved for retatively small diversion rates in shallow water app�ications because the conical shape provides a �arge,submerged screen area even with shallow water depths. They are typicatly installed in backwater or s�ough areas; however,they have been used in ftowing water applications. Figure 5-6 shows a 32-mgd (50-cfs)conical screen at the Red Bluff Diversion Dam. 5-6 PPSQ126221137RDD Final Preliminary Design Report Figure 5-6.Conical Screen at Red Bluff Diversion Dam ;��»�.,..,,, t �� . „ � �,,... � t,� � � � ..; , „ t„�� {�� -, ,. >��.��.�: „ � �� r a. 1;�"� ,t�,�� n�r��,a, <, ��,a �� . � •, � �� r� i k.� �@�` ��'� �� e�1°p � � � � t k tS � �tx�. 1 3 Z + l y {Y � � d�� `.. �`� �,�,R �� i'.0 tp } v4� c.� �i�� `U�1{*a� 4�� M ��i a� \�� 4 �� '� �� w u �y ��" $� �� n�r�� k� il�� { '�� ,,:4}�"�, �., �^�` �� r,i � ��', z, � � �� .. .... .'�, u. c '; ' x�i,„;��3�. 5.4 Evaluation ofi Alternative Structural Confiiguration and Fish Screen Types The two alternative structural configurations and the four atternative fish screen types were evaluated for suitabitity to be used as part of the project. Initially,several of the alternatives were eliminated from further consideration,and the remaining alternatives were then compared in additional detail. 5.4.1 Initial Screening 5.4.1.1 Alternative Structural Configurations In-river Screen Structures:The in-river structurat configuration was etiminated from further consideration for the foltowing reasons: ■ Experience shows it is more difficult to obtain uniform flow through the screens on in-river structures due to flow irregularities caused by the leading edge of the structure in the river flow path and by the configuration of the connecting conduits inside the structure.This difficutty is compounded by the higher velocity requirement to keep sediment in suspension in the conduits.Achieving flow uniformity is expected to require the structure be lengthened to mitigate the river ftow irregularities;and widened and fitted with comptex baffling and flow control features to mitigate the effect of the connecting conveyance conduits. PPS0126221137RDD 5-7 Final Preliminary Design Report ■ The structure requires an extensive bridge access system.The position of the structure in the deepest part of the river(with adequate width on each side to encourage sweeping ftows)would place the structure well out in the river section.The structure itself and access bridge are expected to be costty and cause more visual impacts in the Lake Redding setting than the on-bank atternative. ■ The width and position of the structure in the river are expected to result in an unacceptabte rise in ftoodwater surfaces.While definitive river ftow modeting results are not availabte at this time to specifically define the expected rise, modeling for similar structures has demonstrated a higher impact on flood-flow levels and an increase in velocity along the river bank from this type of structure.Also, the cofferdam required for construction would be wider than the finished structure and may be in place for several years.That cofferdam would be expected to have an even greater negative impact on fLood tevels. ■ Bathymetric surveys, refer to Figures 6-3 and 7-3,show a relatively uniform river bottom across the entire channel cross section at the Atternative 1 site and a deep section along the right bank at the Alternative 2 site.Therefore,there is no apparent benefit from an in-river structure. 5.4.1.2 Alternative Fish Screen Types 5.4.1.2.1 Inclined Flat Plate Screens Indined flat plate screen systems were eliminated from further consideration because the only practicable cleaning system is manual brushing by divers or air burst systems. NMFS guidelines require screen cleaning systems to be capabte of cleaning the screen face every 5 minutes.Therefore,an intake facility cannot practicably rely on a team of divers to be present in the water during all diversion periods. Experience has also shown that air burst systems cannot effectivety remove bio-growth on the screen's wedgewire surfaces.Only brushing or high-pressure water jets have proven effective for this aspect of screen cleaning.Therefore,air burst screens can be expected to develop more"hot spots"where the approach velocity can vary considerably from the required value.This can tead to noncompliance relative to regulatory performance requirements.To date, no effective brush screen cteaning systems have been developed for indined flat plate screen systems. Furthermore, NMFS guidelines also require the top of the screen to be submerged a minimum of 1 foot at the low stream design flow.This requirement is considered infeasible at the Alternative 1 site because of the shallow water depth. 5.4.1.2.2 Conical screens Conical screens are considered impractical due the expected difficu�ty in properly maintaining the screen units. ln addition,these screens are not considered a good choice for stringent uniform flow performance criteria in a riverine environment. Experience has shown that approach velocity uniformity is difficult to achieve in a riverine environment;extensive numerical and physicat modeling woutd be necessary to support this screen type. 5.4.2 Comparison of Formal Alternative Fish Screen and Structure Types After initia�screening, one alternative structurat configuration (on-bank screen structure)and two alternative fish screen types(vertical flat plate and cytindricat tee screens) remain under consideration. Combining the structurat configuration with the screen types results in two combined structural configuration and fish-screen-type atternatives,as fottows: ■ On-bank intake structure with vertical ftat plate screens ■ On-bank intake structure with cylindrical tee screens 5-8 PPSQ126221137RDD Final Preliminary Design Report Both screen systems have shown good performance at multipte locations in the Sacramento River. Existing intake structures on the Sacramento River use both the verticat fLat ptate screen systems and the cytindricat tee screens sized for the salmonid approach velocity design criteria. Tabte 5-2 provides a tabutar comparison of the characteristics of the two alternatives. Tabte 5-2.Co arisor�of Vertical Flat late�n Cylin rical Tee Scre�ns Chara�teristics in an n- a►ak StructUral Confi taration s �� e • ' • Screen Cleaning • Counterweighted brush moves both • Cylinders rotate forward and backward on directions on wire rope and pul�ey interior and exterior brushes. system. ■ Superior deaning if brushes are maintained ■ Effective cleaning if proper�y maintained in good condition;fewer hot spots. and adjusted. ■ Better biofouling performance,less 0&M • High maintenance requirements; effort. frequent adjustments needed. • Minor debris co�lection potentia�on external ■ "Striping"common;bands of screen face brushes. that are not fully deaned. ■ Little to no noise from deaning system since ■ Biofouling would require more 0&M. system is submerged. • Subject to debris co��ection and damage. ■ Noise(high-pitch squealing)commonly generated from screen deaning pulley system. Fish Protection ■ Flat structure surface,little opportunity ■ Space between screen cylinder units(about for predator holding. 1 foot)and on downstream side of tee • Requires longer structures,therefore connection may be a potential predator longerjuvenile fish exposure. holding area.No definitive data to support ■ Opportunities for refugia(resting areas) this would be a concern for the size of intake minimal without adding to length. contemplated. • Substantially shorter structure and fish exposure than vertical flat plate system. ■ High refugia opportunity along structure face,but minimal along screens. 0&M ■ Screen removal frequency simi�ar. ■ Screen removal frequency simi�ar. • Screen removal harder due to access. • Screen removal easier due to retractab�e ■ Screen cleaner more complex. system(track and hoist). ■ No submerged equipment(i.e.,motors). ' More motors,al�submerged but accessib�e • Adjoining wet we«requires sediment when screen unit raised;generatly low jetting system. maintenance motors. • Possibly more debris collection. ■ Experience shows that cylindrical screen systems require less routine maintenance effort than vertical flat plate systems. • No sedimentjetting system. Other Factors ■ Best screen material is manufactured by ■ Currently,only a single supplier of rotating only one firm. brush-deaned units. • Expected to result in higher cost intake • Expected to result in tower cost intake facilities. facilities. ■ Known regulatory acceptance. ■ Potentially able to set screens at variable withdraw levels. • Known regulatory acceptance. Note: 0&M=operation and maintenance PPS0126221137RDD 5-9 Final Preliminary Design Report The verticat flat plate screen type has been selected at the Atternative 1, Existing PS1 Location,site because of the shaltow water depth at the design Low Sacramento River flow.That is to say,the cylindrical tee screen would not meet NMFS criteria due to shallow water depth at low river flows. The cylindrical tee screen type has been setected at the Atternative 2, New River Trail Location,site because of the superior cteaning capabitity, ease of screen removat, minimal maintenance,and known regulatory acceptance. 5-10 PPS0126221137RDD Final Preliminary Design Report �. Al��rn�tive 1� Exd��ing PS 1 Loca�ic�r� 6.�1 Overview Alternative 1, Existing P51 Location,would inc�ude constructing a new intake structure,fish screen,and pump station adjacent to the existing P51 facility and newly installed generator. Refer to Figures 6-1 and 6-2 (Located at the end of this section)for the site ptan and section, respectivety. Provisions would need to be made to keep the existing facitity operational during construction; however,a facitity shutdown woutd Likety be required to comptete site civil improvements(training watt)and facility startup.Once the new facitity has been commissioned,the existing facility would be demolished. The existing site has some benefits such as an established diversion facitity from a water rights and pubLic impacts perspective,existing raw and potabte water supply pipetine connections,and avaitabte power suppty. The main drawback to the site is the retatively shaltow depth of water at Low river flows and insufficient space to install a new efficient structure while maintaining continuous diversions during construction. Bathymetric surveys were used to evatuate river depth and the generat topographic shape of the subaqueous conditions at the site.The bathymetric survey found a uniform riverbed at etevation 480 feet across the entire channel cross section at the existing P51 site,and a narrow and moderately deeper channel section, elevation 478 feet,approximately 100 feet out from the low water-level bank height. The channel cross section is shown on Figure 6-3. Figure 6-3.Atternative 1, Existing PS1 Location—Channet Cross Section ��;f� �� 1� �� . � ""��a � �� _ �S"4k � �; � � �� . �� E�f��L�i�'R��4��a �; -' �#��' 4 �� .. .. d�� 7� �3 1+±7� �+�1� .��r�tl� ��7 ��-t�� t�� T��d��F�� The design Low WSE at the site is 483.5 feet at the design Low river ftow(3,250 cfs)when the ACID dam flashboards are removed.The shallow water depth at low river flows predudes use of cylindrical tee screens at the site. NMFS criteria state that cylindrical screens must be submerged to a depth of at least one screen radius below the minimum water surface and have a minimum of one screen radius ctearance between the screen surface and natural or constructed features(NMFS 2018). Furthermore,excavating or dredging the riverbed to enhance intake characteristics at the site is not recommended, because it is reasonable to assume alluvial sediments would compromise such efforts and,thus, require frequent dredging to maintain effective screen area.This would have environmental and 0&M impacts and may cause other local disruption.The effective screen invert of a vertical flat plate screen is usually set 1 to 2 feet above the stabte river bottom so that shoating of sediments in front of the screens witt not affect screen performance. Due to the shallow water depth at the site,the effective screen invert woutd be set only 0.5 foot above the riverbed or, in this case,at elevation 480.5 feet.This setting is not ideal but is made to minimize screen length and fish exposure time. PPS0126221137RDD 6-1 Final Preliminary Design Report The new intake and fish screen structure woutd be constructed approximately 40 feet out from the Low water-level bank height.The structure would be a cast-in-place, reinforced concrete structure,with curved transitions(sheet-pile training walls), upstream and downstream,that tie the face of the structure to the riverbank side slope. Fill would be placed behind the training walls to allow vehicular access to the top of the structure.To minimize encroachment of the intake structure into the river flow cross section and minimize the associated impact on flood-flow WSEs,the river bathymetry and riverbank configuration must accommodate construction of the intake structure and associated training waLts without extending the intake structure into the river more than about 50 feet(preferabte)to 75 feet(maximum).The actuat impact of this issue would need to be evaluated in greater detail in future engineering anatyses. The deck elevation would be set such that the structure is floodproofed to at Least 2 feet above the 100-year flood elevation. The number of screen panels required is based on the required effective screen area necessary to meet the screening criteria(approach velocity= 0.33 fps)at the design capacity of the facility,42 mgd(65 cfs), during a Low river elevation of 483.5 feet for a flow of 3,250 cfs.The preliminary paneL dimensions are 10 feet wide by 5 feet tall,and eight panels are required to meet the screening criteria.Two additional screen panels are induded,for a total of 10 panels,to serve the spare pump. Each pump,four duty and one spare,would be paired with two screen panels. The vertical flat plate fish screen would be cLeaned using a weighted brush arm driven by an etectric motor drive coupled to a cable system.The brush arm is mounted on a set of trolleys that ride on a monorail mounted to the structure.The brush arm is weighted to maintain a uniform pressure against the surface of the screens.The brush arm is driven by the cable system in both upstream and downstream directions and wipes the surface of the flat plate screens with nylon bristles.This approach has proven to be effective for controlling and removing algae and debris from the surface of the flat plate screens, provided it is regularly maintained. The facility would include a sedimentjetting system to reduce sediment buildup in the intake.A sediment jetting pump, located in a dedicated bay at the upstream end of the intake structure,or the raw water pumps would provide pressurized diverted water to a series of sediment jetting nozzles embedded in the floor of the intake.The sedimentjetting pump woutd be supplied diverted water through an opening in the concrete wall separating the pump bays. 6.2 Intake Structure The intake structure would be a cast-in-ptace reinforced concrete structure with ftat-plate fish screen panels.The purpose of the structure is to support,access,and maintain the fish screens.The fish screens wouLd inctude an automated cteaning mechanism that would be designed to resist normal Loads caused by the flowing water and impact loads that might be caused by floating debris.The screen panels would be designed and sized in accordance with NOAA Fisheries anadromous salmonid passage design guidelines. The screen fabric wouLd be wedge wire with a 1.75-millimeter dear gap between wires.The fabric would be supported by stiffening ptates that span to a perimeter tube steel frame.The fish screens woutd be Located in the front guide and would be designed to be flush with the panel guides to create a continuous flush surface along the length of the screen.The intake structure woutd convey water to the pump station wet well by gravity.The intake structure foundation woutd be embedded in the river bottom the minimum distance required for cutoff and scour protection. Foundation support and cutoff protection would be based on the requirements of the project Geotechnical Report for the selected site. Belowgrade retaining walls would be designed for saturated at-rest, surcharge,and dynamic earth pressures.The foundation would be designed to resist buoyancy uplift forces.A sheet-pile cofferdam would be needed to construct the intake structure.The contractor would be responsible for designing the cofferdam based on the design criteria listed in the project Geotechnical Report. 6-2 PPSQ126221137RDD Final Preliminary Design Report 6.3 Pump Station Building The pump station building would house the pumps and related mechanica�and electrical equipment required for 0&M of the facility.The pump station building wou�d be divided into two main areas:the pump room and the electricat equipment room. It is assumed the buitding woutd be simitar to many of the City's existing utitity buildings.To match other existing facitities,the watts woutd be constructed of reinforced sptit-face concrete masonry unit(CMU) block with a cast-in-place concrete slab foundation. Abovegrade CMU walls would be designed as special reinforced masonry shear wa�ls.The roof framing system would be selected to accommodate the structural loading demand along with process requirements,dimate and local environmental considerations,and architectural aesthetics. It is assumed that the roofing would consist of architectural metal roofing if a sloped roof were used and single-ply membrane roofing if a ftat roof were used.Considerations wouLd be made for a bridge crane as required for moving heavy equipment, piping,and parts.Access skylights or roof hatches would be provided for removing each pump unit. Special attention would be given to security and vandal-resistant features.An anti-graffiti coating would be applied to the CMU walls,consisting of a water-repellent sealer.Miscellaneous building features wouLd indude overhead coiling roll-up door(s)and hollow metal doors for equipment and personnel access. Secure and vandal-resistant features would be provided.Accessible louvers would be protected by a safety grille.All building enclosure elements would be insulated to meet or exceed minimum building code requirements.The heating,ventilation,and air condition (HVAC)system would be designed for temperature control and equipment heat loads.The following is a summary of the building attributes: ■ Actual Area: Reference preliminary figures for approximate dimensions;final dimensions to be determined. ■ Occupancy Group: F-1 (Factory/Industrial Moderate Hazard). ■ Construction Type:To be determined. ■ Risk Category: IV(Essential Facility) — Non-sprinklered, portable fire extinguishers conforming to code requirements and generally located at main points of egress. — Chemicat Storage/Hazardous Materiats: None. ■ Accessibitity: Machinery spaces are not required to be accessible(according to California Building Code Section 11 B-203.5). 6.4 Mechanical Equipment Mechanical equipment required for this facility would be essentially identicat to that of Atternative 2,with the same size, number,and configuration of pumps and auxiliary equipment.The City's equipment tagging conventions will be used in final design.Tagging will be provided for instruments, pumps/motors, e�ectrica�equipment,and valves. 6.4.1 Raw Water Pumps See Section 4.3 Pumping System Design Criteria and Assumptions for pump selection and sizing criteria. The foLtowing is a summary of recommended pump attributes: ■ Type:Vertical turbine,abovegrade discharge. ■ Shaft configuration and lubrication: Enclosing tube,externat clean-water flush. PPS0126221137RDD 6-3 Final Preliminary Design Report ■ Materiats:"Standard" pump construction materials would consist of ductite iron, bronze,steel, stainless steel,or other materials as recommended by ANSI/AWWA E103.Wetted materials,including coatings,wou�d be"lead-free"as defined by NSF/AN51 372. ■ Intake type: Rectangular intake with partition walls in accordance with ANSI/HI 9.8, Pump Intake Design. ■ Motor: lnverter rated,800 horsepower,4,000 vott,vertical high-thrust,solid shaft,open drip proof (ODP)enclosure, 50 degrees Cetsius rated. 6.4.2 Seal Water Supply System Raw water pumps would require a source of dean water to provide cooling and lubrication of shaft- endosing tubes.Clean water would be sourced from the existing potable water system that currentty serves the existing P51. A booster pump system woutd be required to achieve the required seat water pressure.The booster pump system would consist of packaged dup�ex or triplex vertical inline centrifugal pumps, complete with valves, hydropneumatic tank,and controller. 6.4.3 Pumped Flow Recirculation System A bypass line with a modutating ftow controt valve would be instatted to permit pumped flow to be returned from the pump station discharge pipe to the intet side of pumps.This system woutd allow detivery of reduced flow rates to FWTP by bleeding excess flow back to the pump suction. 6.4.4 Piping ■ Above grade: — 4-inch and Larger:Steel or ductile iron,with cement-mortar lining and paint coating. — Smaller than 4-inch:Copper,stainless stee�, or polyviny�chloride(PVC)as appropriate for the service. ■ Below grade: — 4-inch and Larger: Ductite iron,with cement-mortar lining and wrapped with polyethylene tube encasement. — Smaller than 4-inch:Copper, PVC, or high-density polyethylene(HDPE)as appropriate for the service. 6.4.5 Valves ■ Equipment isotation: — Valves smaller than 3-inch: Ball,gate, or gtobe as appropriate for the service. — Valves 3-inch and larger: ButterfLy type in accordance with AWWA C504. ■ Pump service check va�ves:Tilting disc,with hydraulic snubber if recommended for surge mitigation. ■ Modulating controt valves: Globe type, pilot actuated. 6-4 PPSQ126221137RDD Final Preliminary Design Report 6.4.6 Hoisting Equipment An overhead traveling bridge crane would be provided to service equipment including pumps, motors,and valves. If the bridge crane is used for pump removal in lieu of a portable crane accessing pumps through the building roof hatches, pumps must be partiatty disassembled and removed in sections. 6.4.7 Heating and Air Conditioning ■ Pump room:Ventilation exhaust fan or supply fan (to be determined [TBD�)with acousticat louvers at building openings. Unit heaters will be considered for equipment freeze protection if City staff indicate that att pumps may be idted for an extended duration during winter months. ■ Electrical room:Mechanical cooting. 6.4.8 Flow Metering A belowgrade vautt and itow meter woutd be instatted to measure flow discharged from the pump station to FWTP.An abovegrade f�ow meter would be insta��ed in the pump station to measure flow through the ftow recircutation system.Total pumped flow woutd be the ca�culated sum of flow discharged to FWTP and flow returned to the intet side of the pumps by the recirculation system. Both flow meters would be an electromagnetic type sized to provide good accuracy and reasonable flow ve�ocities over their design ftow range. 6.4.9 Pipeline Hydraulic Transient Mitigation (Surge Tank) Hydrautic transients,also called surge or water hammer,are high- or low-pressure waves generated by vetocity changes in full pipelines containing incompressible fluids such as water. Hydraulic transients are typicatty caused by pump startup and shutdown, or vatve operation.Some hydraulic transients are relatively benign,causing only noise and slow pipe deterioration;however,the transients can be serious enough to cause pipe collapse, pipe rupture,joint movement,and structural damage. Power failure is usually the most concerning hydraulic transient scenario because it causes an uncontrotled and simultaneous shutdown of all operating pumps.The magnitude of resultant pressure fluctuations is a function of the velocity change and piping system characteristics,and if not mitigated can exceed the safe operating rating of pipe and piping system appurtenances. A high-level preliminary estimate of the anticipated hydraulic transient response was performed to gauge whether surge mitigation would be required and to inform which method of surge mitigation would likely be most practicabte and effective. Pretiminary findings indicate that surge mitigation is required and may be effectively provided by use of an air-over-water hydropneumatic surge tank.The surge tank woutd be a horizontal steel tank with a footprint approximately as shown by pump station site plan figures.The tank would be equipped with level instrumentation and a controller designed to maintain a target water Level by either venting or adding air.Compressed air would be provided by a packaged air compressor system. Surge system design considerations and sizing should be confirmed during final design. 6.5 Electrical Equipment The electrical system would comprise an existing standby generator,an existing 5 kilovo�t(kV)automatic transfer switch (ATS), new 5 kV switchgear, new 5 kV variable-frequency drives,and new 208/120 volt transformer/distribution.The ATS and switchgear would be located outdoors in two separate National Electrical Manufacturer's Association (NEMA) 3R enclosures.The variable-frequency drives and 208/120 vott distribution equipment would be located indoors in a conditioned space. A new transformer will need to be provided by Redding Electric Utility with a secondary voltage of 4,160 to replace the existing one. In addition,some changes will need to be made to the generator. PPSQ126221137RDD 6-5 Final Preliminary Design Report The stator witt need to be rewired from a wye configuration to a delta configuration. In addition,the potentiat transformers witt need to be changed out from 2400/120 to 4160/120 along with adjustments to the vottage regutator. One main programmabte Logic controtter(PLC)panel witt be provided indoors. Fiber optic cables,two woutd be provided for redundancy,would be installed from the generator and ATS to the PLC panet. This would allow for communications from the new pump station to the generator and ATS. From the new pump station,an ethernet radio wou�d be used to communicate back to the City's supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA)system.A radio path survey will be performed by the contractor to determine the best path for communications and antenna/mast requirements. City's equipment tagging conventions will be used in final design.Tagging will be provided for instruments, pumps/motors,electrical equipment,and valves. 6.6 Civil Features The site civil design criteria for the project indude the following. 6.6.1 Design Codes, Standards, and References The latest adopted version of the foltowing codes,standards,and references appty to the project unless otherwise noted: ■ City of Redding Construction Standards and Specifications ■ California Department of Transportation Highway Design Manual ■ California Department of Transportation California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices 6.6.2 Site �ayout The existing P51 location is adjacent to the Sacramento River Trail,approximately 0.25 mile from the south trail parking lot(at south Diestlehorst Bridge).The existing site is relatively flat,with the existing pump station building offset from the edge of trait by 15 to 20 feet.The proposed pump station would be constructed on fill material placed within the Sacramento River and would be located east of the existing pump station and approximatety 80 feet from the existing River Trait. Pump station replacement at this Location may require temporary removal or relocation of the proposed standby generator to accommodate construction, east of the existing pump station. The foundation would be set such that the structure is floodproofed to at least 2 feet above the 100-year flood eLevation,as referenced above. 6.6.3 Access and Parking The existing P51 location and proposed replacement would be accessed via the Sacramento River Trail. This mutti-use path is designed for bicycles and pedestrians, but the 10-foot minimum width accommodates maintenance vehicles to access the existing pump station and project site. No public vehicular access is attowed, and temporary trail ctosures woutd be necessary for the 0.25-mile access route down the trail during periods of construction. Standard maintenance vehicles(passenger-type vehicte or pickup truck)can complete a muttipoint turnaround at the existing site prior to traversing back up the River Trail.The extension of the proposed site into the Sacramento River would accommodate larger construction vehicles(crane or tractor-trailer type)access and turning movement to traverse back up the River Trail to the River Trail parking lot. Maintenance vehicle parking would be located within the extended site behind the existing pump station and generator,and demolition of the existing P51 structure would provide additional storage and parking area. 6-6 PPSQ126221137RDD Final Preliminary Design Report 6.6.4 Site Security The project site would be endosed within an 8-foot-high metal security picket fence without privacy screens. Doubte swing gates or cantilever slide gates would be provided at the west and east ends of the site,along the River Trait,for vehicutar access. 6.7 Geotechnical The Alternative 1 location is underlain by the Red Bluff formation as mapped by Hotlister and Evans (1965).The soil materials surrounding the existing pump station are visible on the exposed river bank slope.The soil consists of ctayey sand with gravel and cobbles and is consistent with the Red Bluff formation soi�s.The gravel and cobbles are subrounded, and the fines have medium ptasticity.The soil around the pump station likely includes backfitl ptaced at the time of construction more than 80 years ago. Sandstone bedrock is exposed in some eroded areas in the slopes above and south of the pump station and within the Sacramento River bed.The sandstone belongs to the Chico Formation.The upper surface of the sandstone is weathered to a soft rock and can be scratched easity with a steel knife. Jacobs contracted with NorCal Geophysical Consuttants to conduct a seismic refraction survey at the existing P51 �ocation,which was completed on August 18, 2020.The seismic refraction line was tocated on the ftat bench east of the existing pump station buitding along the Sacramento River trail.Atong the survey line location,the Red Bluff Formation soil is estimated to be approximately 15 to 20 feet thick, undertain by the Chico Formation bedrock.The existing pump station appears to be founded within the sandstone bedrock,as the floor of the pump station is approximately 30 feet below the level of the Sacramento River trail. It is estimated from the seismic velocities that the bedrock may be excavated by a high-power excavator(e.g., Cat 345)down to about elevation 485 feet(NAVD88)and is rippable with a D8 dozer down to about elevation 480 feet(NAVD88).A rock hammer would likely be required to excavate trenches below the elevations listed. In accordance with the seismic velocity measured for the soil and bedrock and converted to shear wave velocity, Soil Site Class C may be assumed for the site in accordance with American Society of Civit Engineers(ASCE) 7-16.Site design spectral acceleration parameters,Sosand So�,of 0.836 for a 0.2-second period and 0.437 for a 1-second period should be used for seismic design in accordance with ASCE 7-16. The estimated shear wave velocity of the soil surrounding the existing pump station is greater than 300 feet per second,and therefore has a low potential for liquefaction during an earthquake in accordance with Youd et at.(2001).The pump station is founded on the sandstone bedrock which is not at risk of liquefaction. The existing riverbank has an average slope inctination of 1.5 horizontal to 1 verticat.There are some oversteepened sections near the top of slope that are subject to stoughing over time.Shaltow foundations should be set back at least 15 feet from the crest of the slope. 6.8 Constructability The construction site for this facility would encompass approximate�y 1.5 acre, not including a construction staging area. For construction in the dry,an outer cofferdam would be required.The required water retention height is too much for sheet pites to function as a canti�ever walt above the river bottom.The sheet piles would need to be either braced with ang�ed steel piles on the landside of the cofferdam,or the sheet pites could be supported by vertical king pites.The angted pile bracing woutd Likely get in the way of proposed construction and is, therefore,less Likety to work.The king pites coutd be steel H-pites or pipe pites with the sheet piles instalLed between them.The king piles would be instalted deep,and the sheets could be driven just untit refusal. Alternatively,a waler attached to H-piles could be used to buttress a continuous sheet-pile walL The required spacing of the deeper piles is estimated to be approximately 7 feet along the wall. PPSQ126221137RDD 6-7 Final Preliminary Design Report The upper part of the Chico Formation sandstone along the shore is weathered such that H-pites could feasibly be driven up to at least 10 feet deep into the sandstone with a diesel hammer.lt is possible that weathered sandstone has been scoured away farther out in the river.lf refusal occurs in bedrock,the H-piles could be installed within a dril�ed hole and backfi�led with concrete to embed the pites to the required depth. Sheet piles would be difficu�t to drive more than a couple feet even in the weathered rock due to the hardness of the weathered rock compared to the pile stiffness.Sheet piles only need to be driven sufficiently to seat the bottom of the sheet pites and get a good seat to Limit water seepage.If hard,unweathered rock is encountered out in the river bottom,the sheet pites could be installed within an excavated trench and backfitled with concrete around the sheet pite to get a good seal to limit water seepage. For retention of the final backfill behind the permanent sheet-pite training walls upstream and downstream of the pump station,tie-backs and anchors would be required to stabilize the sheet-piLe watts. The anchors woutd need to be located inland and could consist of another row of king/sheet piles or concrete deadman anchors. It is estimated from the seismic vetocities that the bedrock may be excavated by a high-power excavator (e.g., Cat 345) down to about etevation 475 feet(NAVD88)and is rippable with a D8 dozer down to about etevation 470 feet(NAVD88). The existing pump station woutd need to remain in service(operationat) during construction of the new facitity.This adds difficulty in constructing a cofferdam to work in the dry while maintaining the operations of the existing pump station.Some temporary cofferdam walls,or intake extensions through the cofferdam,would be required that are not shown on the facility layout. Significant fitt materials would be required to backfill behind the training walls.This materiat woutd need to include granular,free-draining backfill to limit the horizontal earth pressures.A source for this material has not been identified. 6-8 PPS0126221137RDD W W WWWWWWWWWWW W WW W W W W 48 0 480 482 482 482 484484 4 8 4 4 8 6 486 48 8 488 4 9 0 490 49 2 492 494 494 49 6 496 498 498 500 500 502 502 504 504 506 506 506 506 50 6 508508 FILENAME:PLOT DATE:PLOT TIME:7/8/2022 9:50:19 AM C H 2 M H IL L 2 0 2 0 . A L L R IG H T S R E S E R V E D . T H IS D O C U M E N T , A N D T H E ID E A S A N D D E S IG N S IN C O R P O R A T E D H E R E IN , A S A N IN S T R U M E N T O F P R O F E S S IO N A L S E R V IC E , IS T H E P R O P E R T Y O F R E U S E O F D O C U M E N T S : 1 2 3 4 5 6 B C D PROJ DATE A \\USLAS0-APP385\ICS_workdir\29030\1349403_9\999-FIG_6-1_W8Y06200.dgn C H 2 M H IL L A N D IS N O T T O B E U S E D , IN W H O L E O R IN P A R T , F O R A N Y O T H E R P R O J E C T W IT H O U T T H E W R IT T E N A U T H O R IZ A T IO N O F C H 2 M H IL L . $PWURL 2525 AIRPARK DR. (530) 243-5831 REDDING, CA 96001 W8Y06200 REDDING, CALIFORNIA 999-FIG_6-1_W8Y06200.dgn P R E L IM I N A R Y - N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T IO N CITY OF REDDING FIGURE CITY OF REDDING PUMP HOUSE NO. 1 REPLACEMENT PROJECT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - WATER DEPARTMENT JULY 2022 W8Y06200 0 10 20 30 Scale In Feet SACRAMENTO RIVER N 6-1 PRELIMINARY DESIGN REPORT RIVER TRAIL ROLL-UP DOOR TYP 24" RW PUMP STATION 42" RW SWITCHGEAR VFDs ELECTRICAL ROOM 18" BYPASS SHEET PILE WALL, TYP SURGE TANK VAULT FLOWMETER 42" RW METAL BEAM GUARD RAIL PUMP HOUSE 1 EXISTING TYP 10'-0" 135'-0" INTAKE STRUCTURE TYP OF 5 RW PUMP EXISTING 36" RW EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER SCREEN DRIVE PLATFORM COFFERDAM A 6-2 FENCE GENERATOR PROJECT JETTING PUMP SEDIMENT HVAC PAD SHEET PILE WALL TEMPORARY SEE FIGURE 6-3 FOR RIVER BATHYMETRY.1. NOTES: VERTICAL FLAT-PLATE SCREEN SITE PLAN 36" RW SCREEN CLEANER PARKING AREA ALTERNATIVE 1 EXISTING PS1 LOCATION TO EXISTING PARKING LOT RELOCATE PUBLIC RESTROOM Al gim SCREEN CLEANER K4ECHAK DESIGN HIGH VVSE4074 79,000 CFS VERTICAL FLAT -PLATE SCI SACRAMENTO RIVER x COFFERDAM DESIGN LOW VVSE483 5 c 3.250 CFS _ TOP OFCONCRETE IBM C' IZ`" 'f' L I -r ''"'^"M M r-^°°^'^' D_"� ( SECTION 6-1 IUD RNERTRAL---o ^ � D ~ � ~' o~ ~ �6 NURL \\USLASO-APP385\ICS workdir\29030\1349403 10\999-FIG_6-2 WBY06200.dgn FILENAME: 999 -FIG 6-2 W8YO6200.dgn PLOT DATE: 7/8/2022 PLOT TIME: 10:05:42 AN • � -WO 7.1 Overview Alternative 2, New River Trail Location, would include constructing a new screened intake and pump station approximately 1,600 feet upstream of the existing PS1 site, along the south bank (right riverbank) of the river and west of Jenny Creek. The proposed facility site plan and section are shown on Figures 7-1 and 7-2, respectively (located at the end of this section). The existing PS1 facility could be demolished and the site restored to a native condition upon commissioning of the new facility. This evaluation considered major factors such as river depth at low river flows, sweeping velocity, existing Land use, access, and potential environmental impacts. The primary benefits of Alternative 2 include the following: ■ Adequate water depth near the riverbank at low river flows (about 16 feet deep at 3,250 cfs with ACID dam flashboards removed). ■ Excellent fish screen site characteristics: — Good water depth at low river flows; no reliance on the ACID dam. — Good sweeping velocity. — Fish screens of efficient size can be positioned within the river flow profile to provide an acceptable depth of submergence under low river flow conditions while maintaining adequate clearance from the riverbed (space for sediment transport past the site). ■ Stable riverbed and riverbank. ■ Existing utilities (power, potable water, and raw water pipeline) are nearby. ■ Smaller site footprint. ■ Opportunity to rehabilitate Jenny Creek culverts and provide fish passage improvements. ■ No interference with existing pump station during construction. Bathymetric surveys were used to evaluate river depth and the general topographic shape of the subaqueous conditions at the site. The bathymetric survey confirmed the existence of a deep hole along the right riverbank that was first discovered in 2001 as part of the 2002 feasibility study for the City of Redding Pump House No. 1 Fish Protection Project. The river bottom at the proposed site, specifically along the right riverbank, varies from elevation 467 to 470. The fact that this alluvial incision has persisted for at least the last 22 years offers good evidence of bed stability. The channel cross section is shown on Figure 7-3. The design tow WSE at the site is 483.8 feet at the design low river flow (3,250 cfs) when the ACID dam flashboards are removed. Therefore, this site offers a water depth of approximately 14 to 16 feet during low -flow conditions. The site layout is restricted because of the narrow strip of bank that exists between the River Trail and water's edge. To accommodate the footprint of the proposed facility, a retaining wall would be installed with curved transitions (sheet -pile training walls), upstream and downstream, that tie the face of the structure (concrete retaining wall) to the riverbank side slope. Fill would be placed behind the retaining and training walls to create usable space for the proposed facility and allow vehicular access to the top of the structure. PPS0126221137RDD 7-1 • �-'WO Figure 7-3. Alternative 2, New River Trail Location - Channel Cross Section I® 510 500 90 00 470 450 0 The proposed intake uses cylindrical tee screens designed to be retractable along a vertical fixed -track assembly mounted flush with the face of the concrete retaining wall. Electric hoists would be installed at the top of the fixed -track assembly to retract the screen and manifold assembly for inspection or maintenance. A self-contained slide gate would be incorporated in the guide slot to isolate the intake when the screen unit is removed for maintenance. Water diverted through the cylindrical tee screens would be conveyed to the raw water pumps through a closed conduit (i.e., manifold, piping, pump can) to avoid sedimentation issues that would otherwise be expected in an open wet well. The electrically operated cylindrical tee screen unit would prevent fish from entering the pump suction can and being pulled into the pump. Each screen unit would consist of a pair of 42 -inch -diameter by 60 -inch -long rotating drum wedgewire screens mounted on either side of a common suction manifold. Vertical flat plate screens are also an option; however, cylindrical tee screens are recommended at this site based on the comparison made in Section 5. 7.2 Intake Structure A cast -in-place concrete gravity retaining wall structure would be constructed to support the retained soil at the face of the facility. The concrete retaining wall would be connected to the sheet -pile training walls at the upstream and downstream ends of the facility. The tee screen retrieval system would be attached to the face of the concrete retaining wall to facilitate installation and removal of the tee screens. The intake structure foundation would be embedded in the river bottom the minimum distance required for cutoff and scour protection. Foundation support and cutoff protection would be based on the requirements of the project Geotechnical Report for the selected site. A sheet -pile cofferdam would be needed to construct the intake structure. The contractor would be responsible for designing the cofferdam based on the design criteria listed in the project Geotechnical Report. Belowgrade retaining walls would be designed for saturated at -rest, surcharge, and dynamic earth pressures. 7.3 Pump Station Building The pump station building would house the pumps and related mechanical and electrical equipment required for 0&M of the facility. The pump station building would be divided into two main areas: the pump room and the electrical equipment room. It is assumed the building would be similar to many of the City's existing utility buildings. To match other existing facilities, the walls would be constructed of reinforced split -face CMU block with a cast -in-place concrete slab foundation. Abovegrade CMU walls would be designed as special reinforced masonry shear walls. The roof framing system would be selected to accommodate the structural loading demand along with process requirements, climate and local environmental considerations, and architectural aesthetics. It is assumed that the roofing would consist of 7-2 PPS0126221137RDD • � -ffo architectural metal roofing if a sloped roof were used and single -ply membrane roofing if a flat roof were used. Considerations would be made for a bridge crane as required for moving heavy equipment, piping, and parts. Access skylights or roof hatches would be provided for removing each pump unit. Special attention would be given to security and vandal -resistant features. An anti -graffiti coating would be applied to the CMU walls, consisting of a water-repellent seater. Miscellaneous building features would include overhead coiling roll -up door(s) and hollow metal doors for equipment and personnel access. Secure and vandal -resistant features would be provided. Accessible louvers would be protected by a safety grille. ALL building enclosure elements would be insulated to meet or exceed minimum building code requirements. The heating, ventilation and air condition (HVAC) system would be designed for temperature control and equipment heat loads. The following is a summary of the building attributes: ■ Actual Area: Reference preliminary figures for approximate dimensions; final dimensions to be determined. ■ Occupancy Group: F-1 (Factory/Industrial Moderate Hazard). ■ Construction Type: TBD. ■ Risk Category: IV (Essential Facility) — Non-sprinklered, portable fire extinguishers conforming to code requirements and generally located at main points of egress. — Chemical Storage/Hazardous Materials: None. ■ Accessibility: Machinery spaces are not required to be accessible (according to California Building Code Section 11 B-203.5). 7.4 Mechanical Equipment Mechanical equipment required for this facility would be essentially identical to that of Alternative 1, with the same size, number, and configuration of pumps and auxiliary equipment. The City's equipment tagging conventions will be used in the final design. Tagging will be provided for instruments, pumps/motors, electrical equipment, and valves. 7.4.1 Raw Water Pumps See Section 4.3 Pumping System Design Criteria and Assumptions for pump selection and sizing criteria. The following is a summary of recommended pump attributes: ■ Type: Vertical turbine, abovegrade discharge. ■ Shaft configuration and lubrication: Enclosing tube, external clean -water flush. ■ Materials: "Standard" pump construction materials would consist of ductile iron, bronze, steel, stainless steel, or other materials as recommended by ANSI/AWWA E103. Wetted materials, including coatings, would be "lead-free" as defined by NSF/ANSI 372. ■ Intake type: Closed -bottom can in accordance with ANSI/HI 9.8, Pump Intake Design. ■ Motor: Inverter rated, 800 horsepower, 4,000 volt, vertical high -thrust, solid shaft, open drip proof (ODP) enclosure, 50 degrees Celsius rated. PPS0126221137RDD 7-3 • � -MWO 7.4.2 Seal Water Supply System Raw water pumps would require a source of clean water to provide cooling and lubrication of shaft -enclosing tubes. Clean water would be sourced from the existing potable water system that currently serves the existing PS1. A booster pump system would be required to achieve the required seat water pressure. The booster pump system would consist of packaged duplex or triplex vertical inline centrifugal pumps, complete with valves, hydropneumatic tank, and controller. 7.4.3 Pumped Flow Recirculation System A bypass line with a modulating flow control valve would be installed to permit pumped flow to be returned from the pump station discharge pipe to the inlet side of pumps. This system would allow delivery of reduced flow rates to FWTP by bleeding excess flow back to the pump suction. 7.4.4 Piping ■ Above grade: - 4 -inch and Larger: Steel or ductile iron, with cement -mortar lining and paint coating. - Smatter than 4 -inch: Copper, stainless steel, or polyvinyl chloride (PVC) as appropriate for the service. ■ Below grade: - 4 -inch and larger: Ductile iron, with cement -mortar lining and wrapped with polyethylene tube encasement. - Smatter than 4 -inch: Copper, PVC, or high-density polyethylene (HDPE) as appropriate for the service. 7.4.5 Valves ■ Equipment isolation: - Valves smaller than 3 -inch: Ball, gate, or globe as appropriate for the service. - Valves 3 -inch and larger: Butterfly type in accordance with AWWA C504. ■ Pump service check valves: Tilting disc, with hydraulic snubber if recommended for surge mitigation. ■ Modulating control valves: Globe type, pilot actuated. 7.4.6 Hoisting Equipment An overhead traveling bridge crane would be provided to service equipment including pumps, motors, and valves. If the bridge crane is used for pump removal in lieu of a portable crane accessing pumps through the building roof hatches, pumps must be partially disassembled and removed in sections. 7.4.7 Heating and Air Conditioning ■ Pump room: Ventilation exhaust fan or supply fan (TBD) with acoustical Louvers at building openings. Unit heaters will be considered for equipment freeze protection if City staff indicate that all pumps may be idled for an extended duration during winter months. ■ Electrical room: Mechanical cooling. 7-4 PPS0126221137RDD 7.4.8 Flow Metering A belowgrade vault and flow meter would be installed to measure flow discharged from the pump station to FWTP. An abovegrade flow meter would be installed in the pump station to measure flow through the flow recirculation system. Total pumped flow would be the calculated sum of flow discharged to FWTP and flow returned to the inlet side of the pumps by the recirculation system. Both flow meters would be an electromagnetic type sized to provide good accuracy and reasonable flow velocities over their design flow range. 7.4.9 Pipeline Hydraulic Transient Mitigation (Surge Tank) Hydraulic transients, also called surge or water hammer, are high- or low-pressure waves generated by velocity changes in full pipelines containing incompressible fluids such as water. Hydraulic transients are typically caused by pump startup and shutdown, or valve operation. Some hydraulic transients are relatively benign, causing only noise and slow pipe deterioration; however, the transients can be serious enough to cause pipe collapse, pipe rupture, joint movement, and structural damage. Power failure is usually the most concerning hydraulic transient scenario because it causes an uncontrolled and simultaneous shutdown of all operating pumps. The magnitude of resultant pressure fluctuations is a function of the velocity change and piping system characteristics, and if not mitigated can exceed the safe operating rating of pipe and piping system appurtenances. A high-level preliminary estimate of the anticipated hydraulic transient response was performed to gauge whether surge mitigation would be required, and to inform which method of surge mitigation would Likely be most practicable and effective. Preliminary findings indicate that surge mitigation is required and may be effectively provided by use of an air -over -water hydropneumatic surge tank. The surge tank would be a horizontal steel tank with a footprint approximately as shown by pump station site plan figures. The tank would be equipped with level instrumentation and a controller designed to maintain a target water Level by either venting or adding air. Compressed air would be provided by a packaged air compressor system. Surge system design considerations and sizing should be confirmed during final design. 7.5 Electrical Equipment The electrical system would comprise an existing 3.0 mega -watt standby generator, an existing 5 kV ATS, new 5 kV switchgear, new 5 kV variable -frequency drives, and new 208/120 volt transformer/distribution. The ATS and switchgear would be located outdoors in two separate National Electrical Manufacturer's Association (NEMA) 3R enclosure. The variable -frequency drives, and 208/120 volt distribution equipment would be located indoors in a conditioned space. The generator and ATS would already be Located at the existing PS1 Location and functioning when this project gets underway. A new utility transformer, utility meter, 5 kV service breaker, existing ATS, and existing generator would be Located at the existing pump station Location. From the ATS, a single 5 kV, 3-phase, feeder would be run 1,600 feet to the new pump station Location where it would be terminated at the new 5 kV switchgear. This would serve as the only power feed for the new pump station from the ATS. One main PLC panel will be provided indoors at the new PS1 location. Fiber optic cables (two would be provided for redundancy) would be installed from the generator and ATS to the new pump station Location. This would allow for communications from the new pump station to the generator and ATS. From the new pump station, an ethernet radio would be used to communicate back to the City's SCADA system. A radio path survey will be performed by the contractor to determine the best path for communications and antenna/mast requirements. The City's equipment tagging conventions will be used in the final design. Tagging will be provided for instruments, pumps/motors, electrical equipment, and valves. PPS0126221137RDD 7-5 • � -MWO 7.6 Civil Features The site civil design criteria for the project includes the following. 7.6.1 Design Codes, Standards, and References The latest adopted version of the following codes, standards, and references apply to the project unless otherwise noted: ■ City of Redding Construction Standards and Specifications ■ California Department of Transportation Highway Design Manual ■ California Department of Transportation California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices 7.6.2 Site Layout The New River Trail Location is adjacent to the Sacramento River Trail, approximately 0.5 mile from the south trail parking lot near Diestlehorst Bridge and just west of the Jenny Creek outlet. The top of bank is approximately 20 feet from the edge of trail pavement, leaving limited room for construction of the proposed pump station. To accommodate the proposed footprint, sheet -pile walls would be installed within the Sacramento River, and fill material would be placed between the existing bank and sheet -pile walls to create the proposed site. The site would extend approximately 70 feet from the edge of trail into the Sacramento River. A metal beam guardrail system or equivalent protection would be installed along the sheet -pile wall, and gravel surfacing would be installed over the fill material. The foundation would be set such that the structure is floodproofed to at least 2 feet above the 100 -year flood elevation. 7.6.3 Access and Parking Three access options are being considered for construction and permanent access to the New River Trail Location. The options are defined on Figure 7-4 (located at the end of this section) and described in detail below. 7.6.3.1 River Trail Access Similar to Alternative 1, the New River Trail Location can be accessed via the existing Sacramento River Trail, with twice the distance to travel to this Location (Figure 7-4). The curvature of the sheet -pile walls containing the proposed site would allow vehicles to access the structure and complete a multi -point turn to return back up the River Trail to the River Trail parking lot. Bicycle and pedestrian traffic is heavy and consistent on the Sacramento River Trail, and daily interruptions to a main segment of trail for maintenance vehicles would be unfavorable to the public trail users and may even be ignored, creating a potential safety issue. Construction and maintenance vehicles considered include a small crane and single -unit type vehicle (or SU -40) (Exhibits 1 and 2). A larger tractor -trailer, such as a WB -40, could also be accommodated during construction (Exhibit 3). 7-6 PPS0126221137RDD Units: feet Units: feet Units: feet 13.53 17.42 4.00 25.00 7a Ill 3.00 12.50 PPS0126221137RDD 7-7 • �- ME 7.6.3.2 Overhill Drive Access The City of Redding operates Mary Street Wastewater Lift Station located at Mary Street and Overhill Drive. The lift station is southeast of the New River Trail Location with approximately 35 feet of vertical elevation difference. An existing connector trail exists between Overhilt Drive and the Sacramento River Trail with the connection directly adjacent to the New River Trail Location with a staircase onto the trail. This approximate trail alignment could be improved to a 16 -foot -wide, paved maintenance access route and pedestrian path to allow easier access to the New River Trail Location without impacts to the main trail route (Figure 7-5; located at the end of this section). The maximum preferred allowable grade for the access route is 10% with 15 -mph vertical curve design, in accordance with the City of Redding Parks Department's request. The two access routes initially considered from Overhill Drive have been combined into a dual access option for vehicle routing through the site. The West Access route is a longer route that closely follows the existing connector trail and enters the proposed site at the west end. The access route would cross the existing railroad grade, and extensive cut and fills would be required to maintain the maximum grade. Retaining walls or cut slopes up to 15 feet high would be required. The East Access route is a more direct route from Overhill Drive with the trail connection and site entrance at the east end of the proposed site. This route generates larger cut slopes with the perpendicular crossing of the existing railroad grade. Cut slopes up to 25 feet high are anticipated with a potentially larger impact to the existing vegetated slope that is adjacent to the River Trail. CDFW has indicated that there may be historical contaminants within the existing railroad grade material that will need to be further considered during final design. The revised dual connection option at the Sacramento River Trail and New River Trail Location would accommodate a SU -40 or single -unit crane vehicle as well as a WB -40 or small tractor trailer -type vehicle to use the East Access route to enter the east end of the site. The vehicle could travel through the site and then exit back to Overhill Drive via the West Access route. This dual option generates additional excavation of the existing railroad grade but eliminates the need for oversized vehicle traffic on the River Trail. Although this access provides the most direct approach to the proposed location, the earthwork required would be significant and the existing pedestrian connector trail would be realigned as a shared -use path in conjunction with the proposed Overhill Drive access. This would eliminate the existing stairs for bicycle users but would require the connector trail be shared with maintenance vehicle traffic. The railroad grade is currently owned by Reclamation, and the property or an easement would need to be acquired to use the route. 7.6.3.3 Bureau of Reclamation (Abandoned Railroad) Access An abandoned railroad grade parallels the Sacramento River Trail to the south of the trail at an elevation 30 feet higher than the trail. The tracks have been removed, and the 20 -foot -wide path has railroad ballast remaining. A connection at Benton Drive/Court Street to the east could be graded for a maintenance access path along the abandoned railroad grade (Figure 7-4). Vegetation clearing and grading would be required at various locations on the 0.5 -mile access route to provide a minimum 16 -foot -wide roadway. Similar to Overhill Drive access, significant grading would be required at the New River Trail site to get down to the River Trail and pump station. The railroad grade is currently owned by Reclamation, and the property or an easement would need to be acquired to use the route. The existing railroad grade also has significant drainage and erosion issues that would need to be addressed due to failing culverts and high-volume runoff. Other factors such as adjacent residences would need to be considered to use this access. 7-8 PPS0126221137RDD Final Preliminary Design Report 7.6.4 Site Security The project site would be enclosed within an 8 -foot -high metal security picket fence without privacy screens. Access to the interior of the security fence is provided by 4 -foot -wide pedestrian gates and double swing vehicle gates at both ends of the site. 7.7 Geotechnical The Alternative 2 location is underlain by the Red Bluff Formation as mapped by Hollister and Evans (1965). The soil materials are visible on the exposed river bank slope, consisting of clayey sand with gravel and cobbles, which are consistent with the Red Bluff Formation soils. The gravel and cobbles are subrounded, and the fines have medium plasticity. Sandstone bedrock is exposed in a cut slope on the south side of the Sacramento River Trail, in which the contact between the soil and bedrock can be observed. The sandstone belongs to the Chico Formation, and is very similar to the bedrock at the existing pump station downstream. The upper portion of the sandstone is weathered to a soft rock. A hand -auger boring was able to be advanced on December 16, 2021, to a depth of 9 feet below the surface of the sandstone, or approximate elevation 479 feet (NAVD88). Jacobs contracted with NorCal Geophysical Consultants to conduct a seismic refraction survey at the Alternative 2 location, which was completed on August 18, 2020. The seismic refraction Line was located along the edge of the Sacramento River Trail. Along the survey line location, the Red Bluff Formation soil is estimated to be between 12 to 15 feet thick, underlain by the Chico Formation bedrock. The sandstone is exposed in the riverbank at approximate elevation 488 feet (NAVD88), where the hand -auger boring was advanced. Shallow -spread footings within the upper soil material may be designed using an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot for dead load plus live loads. Footings bearing within the deeper sandstone may be designed using an allowable bearing pressure of 7,000 pounds per square foot for dead Load plus Live Loads. Restrained structure walls should be designed to resist an at -rest equivalent fluid weight of 60 pounds per cubic foot above design flood Level and 95 pounds per cubic foot below design flood Level. In accordance with the seismic velocity measured for the soil and bedrock and converted to shear wave velocity, Soil Site Class C may be assumed for the site in accordance with ASCE 7-16. Site design spectral acceleration parameters, SDs and SD1, of 0.835 for a 0.2 -second period and 0.437 for a 1 -second period should be used for seismic design in accordance with ASCE 7-16. The estimated shear wave velocity of the soil overlying the bedrock is greater than 300 fps and, therefore, has a Low potential for Liquefaction during an earthquake according to Youd et at. (2001). The proposed facilities would be founded on the sandstone bedrock, which is not at risk of Liquefaction. 7.8 Constructability The construction site for this facility would encompass approximately 0.6 acre, not including a construction staging area. For construction in the dry, an outer cofferdam would be required. The required water retention height is too much for sheet piles to function as a cantilever wall above the river bottom. The sheet piles would need to be either braced with angled steel piles on the landside of the cofferdam, or the sheet piles could be supported by vertical king piles. The angled pile bracing would Likely get in the way of proposed construction and is, therefore, less Likely to work. The king piles could be steel H -piles or pipe piles with the sheet piles installed between them. The king piles would be installed deep, and the sheets could be driven just until refusal. Alternatively, a water attached to H -piles could be used to buttress a continuous sheet -pile wall. The required spacing of the deeper piles is estimated to be approximately 7 feet along the wall. PPS0126221137RDD 7-9 • � -mWo The upper part of the Chico Formation sandstone along the shore is weathered such that H -piles could feasibly be driven up to at least 10 feet deep into the sandstone with a diesel hammer. It is possible that weathered sandstone has been scoured away farther out in the river. If refusal occurs in bedrock, the H -piles could be installed within a drilled hole and backfilled with concrete to embed the piles to the required depth. Sheet piles would be difficult to drive more than a couple feet even in the weathered rock due to the hardness of the weathered rock compared to the pile stiffness. Sheet piles only need to be driven sufficiently to seat the bottom of the sheet piles and get a good seat to Limit water seepage. If hard, unweathered rock is encountered out in the river bottom, the sheet piles could be installed within an excavated trench and backfitled with concrete around the sheet pile to get a good seal to limit water seepage. For retention of the final backfill behind the permanent sheet -pile training walls upstream and downstream of the pump station, tie -backs and anchors would be required to stabilize the sheet -pile walls. The anchors would need to be located inland beyond the pump cans and could consist of another row of king/sheet piles or concrete deadman anchors. For the concrete retaining wall of the pump station, counterforts could be used to decrease the thickness of the wall stem and create a more rigid wall with less deflection. It is estimated from the seismic velocities that the bedrock may be excavated by a high-power excavator (e.g., Cat 345) down to about elevation 475 feet (NAVD88) and is rippable with a D8 dozer down to about elevation 470 feet (NAVD88). A rock hammer may be required to excavate trenches for the pipes from the manifold to the pump cans. Significant fill materials would be required to backfill behind the training walls. This material would need to include granular, free -draining backfill to limit the horizontal earth pressures. A source for this material has not been identified. 7.9 Conveyance to Foothill Water Treatment Plant The City has two 30 -inch -diameter pipelines from the existing PS1 to FWTP. One 30 -inch -diameter pipeline was installed in 1976 and travels west toward Alternative 2 and turns south toward Overhill Drive then to FWTP. The other 30 -inch -diameter pipeline was installed in 2010 and travels from the existing pump station to the south by the Shasta High School grounds to FWTP. A short section of raw water piping would be required to connect the proposed 42 -inch -diameter discharge pipe from the pump station to the existing 30 -inch -diameter pipeline (Figure 7-6; Located at the end of this section). 7.10 Utilities 7.10.1 Potable Water Potable water would be routed along the River Trail from the existing PS1 (Figure 7-6) or from the proposed Overhill Drive access. 7.10.2 Electrical and Fiber Optics Underground electrical conduits and fiber optics would be routed along the River Trail from the existing PS1 (Figure 7-6) or from the proposed Overhill Drive access. The City requested to evaluate moving the standby generator from the existing PS1 location to OverhiLL Drive. After reviewing relocation cost with the City and Redding Electric Utility, there was no additional benefit to moving the standby generator to Overhill Drive due to the high cost to relocate. This standby generator is still in design and has not been constructed yet. The standby generator final Location placement should be considered for this project. Moving the standby generator would also require possible redesign, additional air quality permits, and would place the generator in proximity to the schools. 7-10 PPS0126221137RDD • � -WO 7.11 Potential Jenny Creek Restoration The City of Redding requested that since Alternative 2 would be upstream of Jenny Creek and that the raw water pipeline needs to cross the Jenny Creek culverts, that Jacobs review the potential to restore Jenny Creek. The City will provide direction for Jenny Creek Restoration prior to commencement of final design. The Jacobs team met with CDFW representatives Michael Harris and Ryan Revnak for an initial site review of Jenny Creek on January 10, 2022. Figure 7-7 is a photograph taken on January 10, 2022. It was noted that above-average rainfall had occurred within the Jenny Creek watershed in the weeks prior to the visit. At this time, the ACID dam flashboards were removed, and the discharge from Keswick Dam (KES) was approximately 3,277 cfs. There was a vertical drop of approximately 3.8 feet from the culvert invert to the river water surface. Figure 7-8 shows the culvert inlet and habitat upstream of the culverts. The purpose of this meeting was to introduce CDFW to the project and to obtain input on the potential requirements and feasibility for restoration of salmonids and steelhead into Jenny Creek. Table 7-1 summarizes the discussion topics and conclusions from the meeting. Based on the input from CDFW, a conceptual layout was created to illustrate the potential Layout for a basic restoration of Jenny Creek (Figure 7-9; Located at the end of this section). Figure 7-7. Jenny Creek Culverts - Outlet at Sacramento River PPS0126221137RDD 7-11 Figure 74lJenny Creek Culverts — Inlet and Upstream Habitat 7-12 PPS012622113/RUD $PWURL \\USLASO-APP385\ICS workdir\29030\1349403 2\999 -FIG 7-1 W8Y06200,dgn FILENAME� 999 -FIG 7-1_W8YO6200.dgn PLOT DATE: 7/8/2022 PLOT TIME: 10:05:32 AM Al BI If, DESIGN LOW WSE 483.8 C 3,250 CFS CIL EL 480.3 SACRAMENTO RIVER TOP'OF.,CONCRETE 467.2 DI -------------------------------------- -------------------------------- LIZW I I e+ I 1-r 1 r -I I If, AM r'lr't, A f'N% /A I 7-1 111111015 RIVER TRAIL WBY06200 I U ?T JRL \\USLASO-APP385\ICS workdir\29030\1349403 6\999 -FIG 7-2 W8Y06200.dgn FILENAME: 999 -FIG 7-2_W8Y06200.dgn PLOT DATE: 7/8/2022 PLOT TIME: 10:05:44 $PWURL \\USLASO-APP385\ICS workdir\29030\1349403 4\999-FIG 7-4 W8YO6200,dgn FILENAME: 999-FIG 7-4_W8YO6200,dgn PLOT DATE: 7/8/2022 PLOT TIME: 9:50:26 AM $PWURL \\USLASO-APP385\ICS workdir\29030\1349403 3\999-FIG 7-5 W8Y06200,dgn FILENAME: 999-FIG 7-5 W8YO6200,dgn PLOT DATE: 7/8/2022 PLOT TIME: 9:50:16 AM it A .......... "N 10 E - N R .10 i, tPROJECT zz w EXISTING 16" PW ow TO EXISTING 36 RW, EXISTING EXISITIN 01 30" RW 1,$i PW z. OVERHEAD POWER 10 lk -w B.... .... . . so's ft, I w T wo 0 Tz .. . . .. . ... A 4 zw "�g 11PWuw 81, PW 'p 0 w z z VI Ad ` w. -NI",", 00, 0 z 4424, z ",',JOINT'UTILITY T RENCH 41 W-00, th" I v OPTIQN*FRqqOVERHILL DR , f* Offs 2 4 Im", C O LIFT"STATION . . ....... ....... w. 30 IRrt # j h '7 w 79% % MA , CK IMAGE FROM CITY OF REDDING GIS JANUARY 2022 N U) z 0 LEGEND 0 100 200 111111%mffi�� 0 D Approximate Scale In Feet LL PROPOSED RAW WATER FORCE MAIN W8Y06200 0 EXISTING RAW WATER AND POTABLE WATER z JOINT UTILITY TRENCH 2525 AIRPARK DR.PRELIMINARY DESIGN REPORT REDDING CA 96001 EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER JACOBS (530) 243-�831 OVERALL UTILITIES PLAN E I= E ME E INS s EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER CITY OF REDDING PUMP HOUSE NO, 1 REPLACEMENT PROJECT PW - POTABLE WATER CITY OF REDDING RW = RAW WATER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT- WATER DEPARTMENT DATE JULY 2022 w REDDING, CALIFORNIA FIGURE 7®V w PROJ 1TY:0i:i2t11l a_ WWURL \\USLASO-APP385\ICS workdir\29030\1349403 5\999-FIG_7-6 WBY06200.dgn FILENAME: 999 -FIG 7-6_W8YO6200,dgn PLOT DATE: 7/8/2022 PLOT TIME: 9:50:31 AM $PWURL \\USLASO-APP385\ICS workdir\29030\1349403 8\999-FIG 7-9 W8Y06200.dgn FILENAME: 999-FIG_7-9 W8Y06200,dgn PLOT DATE: 7/8/2022 PLOT TIME: 10:06:05 AM • �- ME Is City required to restore Jenny Creek to allow for fish passage? The baseline condition of Jenny Creek does not currently allow for fish passage, so CDFW would conclude that the California Environmental Quality Act baseline condition is "no upstream habitat exists." City is not technically required to restore Jenny Creek to allow for fish passage. Does CDFW see benefit in improving fish After reviewing the upstream habitat near the Jenny Creek culvert inlet, passage to allow for fall -run Chinook and CDFW concluded there would likely be benefits to improving fish steelhead at Jenny Creek? passage. They noted that winter -run salmon would not benefit from passage because Jenny Creek summer flows would be minimal or too warm for successful spawning and rearing; however, fall -run and late fall -run Chinook as well as Central Valley steelhead would likely benefit and use the upper reaches of Jenny Creek, resulting in potentially successful spawning once seasonal rainfall began. What are the potential options to 1. CDFW believes complete removal of the culverts to open the improving Jenny Creek to allow for fish channel is infeasible. The culverts are positioned at an acceptable passage? slope that fish could likely swim through in their current configuration. CDFW also acknowledges there may be historical contaminants within the railroad grade material that may be an issue. The amount of earthwork/excavation to open the entire channel is infeasible and not necessary for fish passage. Z There is a public benefit to restoration of fish passage at Jenny Creek. Numerous public agencies would be interested in seeing fish passage restored to Jenny Creek, and the public would likely benefit from potential viewing and educational opportunities along the River Trail. Once connectivity is restored for fall -run Chinook, there is a high likelihood that future projects would be identified to further benefit salmon spawning in the upstream areas above the culverts once they become passable. 3. The installation date of the Jenny Creek culverts is unknown but likely multiple decades old. Based on cursory -level field observations, structural rehabilitation is likely necessary because of the observed condition of the existing corrugated metal pipe culverts where the invert is corroded and haunch support may be missing, resulting in reduced load-bearing capacity and susceptibility of pipe buckling or collapse. Structural rehabilitation options may include slip lining, spiral -wound systems, cured -in- place pipe, or spray -applied structural liners. What other benefits would opening Jenny Creek to fish passage present? ■ Potential for educational/interactive area for the public to view salmon swimming upstream • Opening/restoring potential spawning and rearing habitat for salmon and steelhead ■ Potential to obtain grant funding for multibenefit and habitat improvement • CDFW indicated there is strong public support for improving Jenny Creek fish passage What other challenges would need to be A fish ladder or bank slope improvements would be needed to bridge addressed to complete fish passage at the area between the Sacramento River and the perched culverts. This Jenny Creek? may be accomplished with a fish ladder or by constructing step pools to make the transition. CDFW noted that the City may need to clean the fish ladder annually if limbs or debris accumulate. PPS0126221137RDD 7-19 • � -ffo 8. 1 Overview Alternative 3, Horizontal Collector Wells, would construct new HCWs and a pump station in a favorable Location in the river reach stretch between Turtle Bay and the existing PS1 location. This alternative would be intended to locate the HCW in areas that produce the greatest capacity based on geotechnical findings. According to discussions with the City on January 14, 2022, this alternative would be presented as a stand-alone technical memorandum because investigations have shown that this alternative would not be feasible to provide full buildout capacity of 42 mgd, but could provide supplemental water in the range of 5 to 10 mgd. The HCW investigation that follows describes the work completed prior to January 2022 to find the most feasible location for the HCW. The following sections describe the process followed to select the future Bike Park (near Market Street Lift Station) as the most feasible site for the HCW. 8.2 Potential Locations Five locations were investigated for the feasibility of HCWs between Turtle Bay and the existing PS1 Location (Figure 8-1) as follows: ■ Location 1 (ACID): between Benton Drive and upstream of ACID diversion ■ Location 2 (Rodeo Grounds): between the rodeo ground and west of Sundial Bridge adjacent to Aoki Way ■ Location 3 (Bike Park): City -proposed bike park between east of South Market Street bridge to the City's North Market Street Lift Station ■ Location 4 (Turtle Bay): between the east side of Sundial Bridge to the east curve in the Sacramento River ■ Location 5 (east side of State Route 44 bridge): between south side of State Route 44 bridge and Turtle Bay East Open Space The five locations considered for Alternative 3 are underlain by Quaternary alluvium as mapped by Hollister and Evans (1965). The purpose of the investigations was to locate alluvium with sufficient thickness and coarse sediments that provide permeability suitable to provide sufficient yield to warrant the construction of an HCW. 8.3 Horizontal Collector Well Investigations 8.3.1 Process to Determine Potential Capacity HCW investigations are typically conducted with a series of sequential steps, proceeding upon obtaining favorable results from the previous step. In general terms, an investigation proceeds as follows: ■ Review available information such as hydrogeology, Land uses, and property access. ■ Conduct a surface geophysical survey (non-invasive) to identify areas with suitable lithology. ■ Drill exploratory borings, coupled with small-scale pump tests, at sites with potential suitable lithology to confirm and calibrate the geophysical survey results. ■ Conduct pumping from a test well and measure response in surrounding monitoring wells at the sites proven from the exploratory borings. ■ Estimate the potential yield of the locations that are subject to the pumping test. PPS0126221137RDD 8-1 Insert Figure Q-1.Collector Well Locations (8.5x 11) 8-2 PPS012622113/RUD 8.3.2 Redding Electric Utility Input Redding Electric Utility provided the following appurtenant information on the five collector well locations: Location 1 (ACID): Most viable location for dual feeds from different substations. One feed exists onsite, and an additional feed would need to be installed along the dirt access road from Court Street. Floodplain Limits could pose an issue. Location 2 (Rodeo Grounds): Infrastructure in proximity but only one circuit. This area is served radially by one circuit from the State Route 44 crossing. A circuit would need to be extended from Park Marina across State Route 44 that is approximately 2,500 feet with a highway overpass crossing to obtain a second feed. Location 3 (Bike Park): Dual -circuit feed possible but from same the substation (different transformer banks). Circuits would need to be extended about 1,500 to 2,000 feet down Traveled Way. Location 4 (Turtle Bay): Similar limitations as Location 2 but with additional circuit extension due to remote location. Accessibility would need to be improved. Possible floodplain issues. Location 5 (east side of State Route 44 bridge): No infrastructure in proximity. Nearest tie point is the end of Palisades. Circuit would need to be upgraded. No dual feed possibility. Extreme terrain variations from tie point to well location. Not a preferred location. 8.3.3 Geophysical Seismic Refraction Surveys Geophysical seismic refraction surveys were conducted by NorCal Geophysical Consultants in August 2020 at Location 1 (ACID). The seismic refraction surveys obtained seismic P-wave velocity data to determine the thickness of overburden and characterize the underlying bedrock. Up to approximately 35 feet of alluvial material was estimated to overlie bedrock at Location 1. The bedrock is soft rock, likely the same sandstone that is encountered in exposures upriver near the existing pump station. In accordance with the seismic velocity measured for the shallow alluvial soil and bedrock, and converted to shear wave velocity, Soil Site Class C may be assumed for Location 1 (ACID) in accordance with ASCE 7-16. Similar seismic conditions are estimated for all five potential horizontal well locations. 8.3.4 Geophysical Survey The surface geophysical investigation delineates the alluvial thickness and identifies the layered relative permeability of the alluvial sediments through field survey measurements using Frequency Domain Electromagnetics and Electrical Resistivity Tomography methods. The geophysical survey, by Collier Geophysics, LLC, was conducted in September 2020 at four locations: Location 1 (ACID), Location 2 (Auditorium West), Location 3 (Bike Park), and Location 4 (Turtle Bay). The City decided on July 30, 2020, that investigations at Location 2 (Rodeo Grounds) and Location 5 (east side of State Route 44 bridge) were no longer necessary. Jacobs City of Redding Surface Geophysical Survey Investigations Summary and Recommendations Technical Memorandum, dated October 22, 2020, proposed the following locations for geotechnical borings: Location 1 (ACID), Location 2 (Auditorium West), Location 3 (Bike Park), and Location 4 (Turtle Bay) (see Appendix B). 8.3.5 Geotechnical Borings and Low -Capacity Pumping Testing From the results of the geophysical surveys, the City decided on December 2, 2020, to continue geotechnical investigations at Location 1 (ACID), Location 3 (Bike Park), and Location 4 (Turtle Bay) because these Locations have the most favorable lithologies for water collection. Additional exploratory borings were advanced at Location 5 (east side of State Route 44 bridge) and at a location near a Southern Pacific PPS0126221137RDD 8-3 • �- ME Railroad well on the north side of the Sacramento River; but shallow bedrock was encountered, and those Locations were dropped from consideration. Yellow Jacket Drilling drilled a total of 12 boreholes and conducted low -capacity pumping test in four of those boreholes in February 2021. Shasta County permits were approved for each of the exploration borings. A 1600/1-ake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSAA) permit was not required from CDFW via email confirmation on November 16, 2020. Jacobs' City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigations Summary and Recommendations Technical Memorandum, dated March 12, 2021 (Appendix C), proposed continuing with pumping tests from the boring results at two locations: Location 1 (ACID) and Location 3 (Bike Park). The testing at Location 3 (Bike Park) resulted in the highest yields from the low -capacity pumping tests. 8.3.6 Large-scale Pumping Test From the results of the geotechnical borings, the City decided on May 11, 2021, to advance a targe -scale well pumping test at Location 3 (Bike Park) only. Four monitoring wells were installed by Yellow Jacket Drilling in October 2021 at Location 3 at strategic distances from the proposed pump test location as shown on Figure 8-2. A large -diameter well installation, large-scale pumping test, and estimated yield calculations are the next steps in the collector well investigation. This installation is anticipated in July 2022. The results of this pumping test will be provided in a stand-alone document. 8-4 PPS0126221137RDD Insert Figure 8-2. Alternative 3 Horizontal Collector Well Location (Location 3 — Bike Park) (8.5x 11) PPS012622113/RUD a -s Alternative 4,Combination ofAlternatives, isocombination, orhybrid, ofanintake structure along with HCWs. As stated in previous sections, this combination of alternatives may be considered in the future pending the collector well analysis and City's direction. PPS012622113/RUD 9`1 • � -WO 10.1 Environmental Compliance 10.1.1 California Environmental Quality Act The California Environmental Quality Act (CEGA) was enacted in 1970 with the primary purpose of informing local and state government decision makers and the public about the potential significant environmental effects of proposed activities and identifying the ways that environmental damage can be avoided or minimized to prevent significant, avoidable damage to the environment. CEQA compliance is anticipated for the PS1 replacement and would be similar for each of the alternatives. Due to the potentially significant noise impacts associated with pile driving, an environmental impact report is likely to be required. 10.1.2 National Environmental Policy Act The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) was signed into law on January 1, 1970, to establish a national environmental policy with the goals of protecting, maintaining, and enhancing the environment. NEPA provides federal agencies with a process for implementing these goals. NEPA compliance is required by all federal agencies undertaking a proposed action or project, as well as actions and projects undertaken by non-federal agencies that are federally funded. NEPA compliance may be required if funding is identified from federal sources and for any additional right-of-way impacts to the Reclamation -owned railroad grade for Alternatives 2 and 4. 10.2 Permits and Approvals Several permits and approvals from federal, state, regional, and local agencies for construction and operation were considered potentially applicable to this project for all alternatives. These permits and approvals, the agencies responsible for their oversight, a determination of their applicability to the project, and the responsible party, when applicable, are presented in Table 10-1. Table 10-1. Potentially Applicable Federal, State, Regional, and Local Permits and Approvals Federal Agency Permits and Approvals U.S. Army Corps of Clean Water Act A Section 404/10 permit Owner/USACE 9 months Engineers Section 404/Rivers will be required for work and Harbors Act within the Sacramento Section 10 Individual River. Work may fall within Permit Pre- Nationwide Permit Construction depending on final design Notification layout, but may also be in Individual Permit. U.S. Army Corps of Section 408 408 will not be required, Owner/CVFPB Not required Engineers but will be reviewed as part of the CVFPB permit process. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Endangered Species Section 7 consultation will Owner/USFWS 4 to 6 months Service Act Section 7 be required as part of the Consultation USACE 404 permitting process. PPS0126221137RDD 10-1 State Agency Permits and Approvals California Central Encroachment Permit Project will be constructed Owner 60 to 90 days Valley Flood National Historic within area designated Owner/USACE 30 to 90 days Protection Board Preservation Act 0.2% Annual Chance Section 106 Flood Hazard; therefore, a Consultation permit is required. California Department Lake or Streambed A 1600 Agreement will be Owner 45 to 90 days of Fish and Wildlife Alteration Agreement required for any alteration of the bed/bank/channet along the Sacramento River and Jenny Creek California Department California Fish and CESA authorization may Owner 30 to 60 days of Fish and Wildlife Game Code Section be required for impacts to Owner/USACE (assuming Consultation 2081 Management listed anadromous fish Consistency Agreement species due to pi[e-driving Determination impacts, process) Regional Agency Permits and Approvals Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Construction General Permit A 401 certification wit[ be required for any work in the Sacramento River. Preparation of NOI/SWPPP witI, be required due to the size of the project within the Sacramento River. Owner Owner 60 days 2 weeks State Historic National Historic Section 106 consultation Owner/USACE 30 to 90 days Preservation Officer Preservation Act will be required to Section 106 demolish the existing PS1 Consultation structure along with other potential cultural resources and Native American consultations (including AB 52) due to excavation in the Sacramento River. Section 7 National Marine Section 7 consultation will Owner/USACE 6 months Consultation Fisheries Service be required due to work within the Sacramento analysis wit[ need to be prepared, and consultation will be initiated by USACE under the Section 404 process. Local Agency Permits and Approvals City ofRedding Grading Permit TB[} Owner Depaomentof | | | | Public Wor 10-2 PPS0126221137RDD • � -ffo City of Redding Encroachment Permit Required. Contractor Department of Public Works City of Redding Transportation Permit Required. Contractor Department of Public Works City of Redding Noise Ordinance TBD. Owner Municipal Code Notes: AB 52 = Assembly Bill 52 CESA = California Endangered Species Act CVFPB = Central Valley Flood Protection Board N01 = Notice of Intent SWPPP = stormwater pollution prevention plan USACE = U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 10.2.1 Alternative 1: Existing PS1 Location Permitting for Alternative 1 is summarized in Table 10-1. Permitting within the Sacramento River involves significant preparation of biological assessment, cultural resources report, aquatic resources delineation report, hydraulic modeling, and other background documentation to submit permit applications. It is anticipated that permitting for Alternative 1 will take up to 1 year to complete. Permitting for Alternative 1 would be slightly more complex than for Alternative 2 because of the magnitude of the proposed encroachment of the intake structure. Compensatory mitigation would be required for any permanent impact to waters of the U.S. Alternative 1 would also require slightly more shaded riverine habitat removal, which may require additional compensatory mitigation. 10.2.2 Alternative 2: New River Trail Location The new River Trail location includes a smaller overall riverine impact than the existing pump station Location; however, there may be additional impacts to Jenny Creek for the discharge conveyance pipeline. Permitting for Alternative 2 would be similar to Alternative 1 with all of the required permits described in the Table 10-1. Alternative 2 would involve potentially less mitigation due to the construction of a new facility as well as demolition of the old pumping plant, which would result in possibly lower net impacts below the ordinary high-water mark. 10.2.3 Alternative 3: Horizontal Collector Wells Alternative 3 permitting will be similar to Alternatives 1, 2, and 4 depending on the final design and depth of the collector well assemblies beneath the river channel of the Sacramento River. Agencies may require additional review of the collector wells to ensure impacts to spawning beds could be avoided. A collector well has never been permitted within the Sacramento River watershed, so the requirements of permitting are unknown. Collector wells have been permitted and constructed in some California coastal river systems in Humboldt and Sonoma Counties. It is assumed that significant permitting agency coordination would be required to install collector wells, and a permitting strategy will be more clearly defined if the City decides to proceed with this alternative in the next phase of design. PPS0126221137RDD 10-3 10.2.4 ALternative 4: Combination of ALternatives Alternative 4 would include all permits and challenges associated with both the new or existing demolition and reconstruction of the pumping plant within the Sacramento River, as well as the added permitting associated with the collector well array impacts below the Sacramento River from Alternative 3. 10-4 PPS012622113/RUD Jacobs was also tasked to identify various funding sources that would be applicable and viable to the pump station upgrade. The following sections discuss the major state and federal programs that would be available to the City that can be broadly categorized into loans and grants. Some of these programs, especially Local grant opportunities, see more annual fluctuation in funding availability and state priorities; but the collection of current opportunities included in this section serves as a good example of the kinds of sources that may be available once the project is ready to secure outside funding. A brief note on the implications of the recently passed Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act has also been included. Although the specific implementation of this Legislation through various funding streams is still being worked out at the federal and state level, the discussion here summarizes the Latest developments atthe time ofwriting. The section concludes with a discussion of the pros and cons of each funding source as well as a high-level description of the kinds of factors the City should consider as it develops its financing strategy. 11.1 Loan Programs In addition to traditional municipal revenue bonds, the project wilt also be eligible for several Low-interest Loan programs. These include the Water Infrastructure and Innovation Act (WIFIA) program offered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the State Revolving Fund (SRF) and the Infrastructure State Revolving Fund (ISRF) offered by California state agencies. These programs offer interest rates that range from slightly to significantly below market rates and repayment structures that can be beneficial to interested applicants who can take advantage of these terms and minimize financial impacts to their ratepayers. WIFIA and SRF offer the most competitive interest rates and financing terms, but also come with larger application efforts and more restrictive project eligibility requirements; they will only fund components of the project specifically related to service/operationaL improvement. ISRF loans vary depending on the applicant, but they come with Less competitive (but still beLow-market) interest rates, have similar application efforts, and offer broader project eligibility than SRF and WIFIA. Municipal bonds can bethe easiest of the loan options but come with less forgiving repayment terms and higher costs of issuance. Table 11-1 provides ahigh-level description ofeach funding source, and Table 11-2summarizes key relevant metrics. Water Infrastructure U.S. Program will fund a maximum of 49% of total Multiple — includes Finance and Environmental project costs including design -phase activities. water, wastewater, Innovation Act Protection The application process has been more and desatinization, green (WIFIA) Agency(EPA) more streamlined each year, although there is a infrastructure, and mandate for even geographic spread, which drought prevention. makes California projects particularly Clean Water/ State Water Program has been underfunded for many years, Mukipte — includes Drinking Water State Resources and the application process is competitive and water, wastewater, Revolving Fund (SRF) Control Board time consuming. SWRCB will fund projects in desalinization, green (SWRCB) their entirety but has also recently begun infrastructure, and offering partial funding to applicants. drought prevention. PPS012622113/RUD 11-1 Infrastructure 6 6 ". 4- 11=mmaw Revolving Fund and Economic agreements but larger than many grant anything within the (ISRF) Development opportunities. Wide range of eligible project purpose of the Bank costs and broader applicability to different borrowing agency. project types (educational and recreational). and other Municipal Revenue Public Market Relatively straightforward process but will Very Broad Eligibility — Bonds Clean Water/Drinking require a Municipal Advisor to obtain credit anything within the 30 years; repayment can Up to 1 %of total ratings and assist in the various legal processes purpose of the be deferred up to 1 year leading up to loan closing. borrowing agency. MMM7M 6 6 ". 4- 11=mmaw Water Infrastructure (Minimum) $20 M (Minimum) 2.14% 30 years; repayment can $250Kto$350K Finance and Innovation be deferred up to 5 years for application fee Act (WIFIA) after construction and other completion processing costs Clean Water/Drinking No specific limit 1.10% 30 years; repayment can Up to 1 %of total Water State Revolving (dependenton be deferred up to 1 year loan amount to Fund(SRF) available funding) after construction cover processing completion costs Infrastructure State $500K to $25M Varies, but Set to either the useful Varies Revolving Fund (ISRF) below market life of the project or value 30 years Municipal Revenue Bonds Set by borrower 2.95% Set by borrower; 15 to 1 % to 2% of total (dependenton 30 years is common loan amount utility financial ° Assuming au-yea,maturity, asnfJanuary 20,7o77. x=dmusand w=million 11.2 Grant Programs Numerous grant programs are offered by both state and federal agencies. These programs are often funded through Legislative action or annual allocations from parent organizations; and thus, their particular terms, priorities, and funding amounts often vary from one fiscal year to the next. Regardless of the total value of grant opportunities available each year, they can be a strategic way to fund project elements that may be ineligible for Larger programs that focus on service and operational infrastructure, or for elements of the project that provide specific environmental or multiuse benefits. Table 11-3lists the programs that were/are available for the ZOZ1 and 2O22fiscal years. Some program application deadlines have already passed and may not be renewed for the coming year, some deadlines would be due before the City would need to secure project funding, and some have an ongoing submittal structure. Although the exact grant opportunities cannot be known until the time comes for project funding, this list serves as a good example of the kinds of opportunities for which the project may be eligible and the terms and possible Levels of assistance that can be expected. 11-2 PPS012622113/RUD 11.3 Infrastructure Bill Impacts Of the $550 billion in national federal investments contained within the $1.2 billion Infrastructure Bill that was passed by Congress in November 2021, approximately $55 billion has been allocated to water infrastructure programs over the next 5 years: ■ $35.7 billion for safe drinking water - $15 billion specifically for lead service line replacement - $11.7 billion for other drinking water improvement projects - $4 billion to address emerging contaminants - $5 billion to address emerging contaminants specifically in disadvantaged communities ■ $12.7 billion for clean water investments ■ $2 billion for regional water protection and other investments ■ $4.6 billion allocated to other U.S. Environmental Protection Agency water programs - Includes $250 million allocated to the WIFIA program PPS0126221137RDD 11-3 Central Valley Bureau of Ecosystem restoration; habitat protection $120M in 50% Project Habitat & Reclamation and conservation. available Facility funds Improvements WaterSMART Bureau of Integrated water management projects $2M cap 25% Environmental Reclamation with ecological benefits. Resources National Fish U.S. Fish and Activities that restore fish passage and $2M cap 50% Passage Program Wildlife Service improve existing infrastructure. Candidate U.S. Fish and Conservation tasks that benefit high-risk $1 K—$500K None Species Wildlife Service species in the United States. Includes cap Conservation habitat restoration and education Fund outreach activities. Central Valley Bureau of Projects that benefit federally listed $1 M cap None Project Reclamation species that have been affected by the Conservation Central Valley Project. Program National Bureau of Land Habitat conservation and restoration, with $1M in None Operation Center Management an emphasis on "aquatic organism available Fisheries and passage" projects. funds Aquatic Resource Management Habitat Wildlife Fisheries and habitat restoration; removal $1M in None Enhancement Conservation of fish passage barriers. available and Restoration Board funds Program Ecosystem Sacramento- Will fund a variety of water improvement $3.1 M in None Restoration and San Joaquin projects including those that focus on available Water Quality Delta ecosystem enhancement. funds Grant Program — Conservancy Proposition 1 11.3 Infrastructure Bill Impacts Of the $550 billion in national federal investments contained within the $1.2 billion Infrastructure Bill that was passed by Congress in November 2021, approximately $55 billion has been allocated to water infrastructure programs over the next 5 years: ■ $35.7 billion for safe drinking water - $15 billion specifically for lead service line replacement - $11.7 billion for other drinking water improvement projects - $4 billion to address emerging contaminants - $5 billion to address emerging contaminants specifically in disadvantaged communities ■ $12.7 billion for clean water investments ■ $2 billion for regional water protection and other investments ■ $4.6 billion allocated to other U.S. Environmental Protection Agency water programs - Includes $250 million allocated to the WIFIA program PPS0126221137RDD 11-3 • � -WO The majority of this funding is anticipated to be delivered through individual state revolving funds; in California's case, $609.4 million has been allocated to its state revolving fund for fiscal year 2022 by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. New language in the bill has also reduced the level of state fund matching, and many of these funds are available as grants/principal forgiveness loans in addition to Low-interest financing. And while the $250 million allocated to the WIFIA program may on the surface appear to be paltry compared to the funds being delivered to SRFs, with the way WIFIA leverages its loans, this will likely result in an additional $5 billion in available financing each year (it was able to finance $6.7 billion in 2021). For the City of Redding's project, one of the major takeaways is that both low-interest loan programs discussed above, SRF and WIFIA, will likely be less competitive. Once the new funding is dispersed, it should reduce and address historical SRF funding issues, and will allow the WIFIA program to fund more California projects than it can currently, due to its mandate of equal geographic distribution. There are few details known at this time related to how this funding will translate to grant opportunities, but the grant Landscape is also expected to improve as a result. 11.4 Funding Strategy With the various funding sources that are likely to be available to the City, it is important to consider the benefits and drawbacks of each of the options described above. A full financing plan cannot be developed without a more detailed understanding of the City's current financial position and fiscal priorities; but, in general, the following factors are likely to have notable influence on which sources are pursued and which are excluded: ■ Debt capacity ■ Cost of financing ■ Rate impacts ■ Application effort The rest of this section revisits the previously described funding sources and describes how they stack up against these factors. It begins with the source with the cheapest financing costs (cash) and concludes with the most expensive source (bonds). Cash, whether in the form of existing reserves or anticipated future revenues, is by far the cheapest and easiest form of capital improvement plan funding. It eliminates the need for burdening the utility with annual debt payments (which often will remain in place for decades), minimizes lifecycle costs because interest payments are a non -factor, and comes with little to no external restrictions or oversight. Its main drawback is simply that utilities often do not have enough on hand or backed into their future cashflows to meet the high dollar value of capital expenditures. Also, raising customer rates in the short term to fund a capital improvement plan via cash payments is nearly always politically infeasible. That said, it is generally recommended that cash contributions in the project funding plan are maximized to their greatest extent while still meeting other organizational priorities. In the context of a broader, multi -source funding scheme, maximizing cash contributions will help to minimize total financing costs, keep long-term rate impacts low, and provide a level of financial flexibility to the program that cannot be achieved by other sources that come with certain constraints and restrictions. After cash, the second source of funding that is often recommended to be maximized is grant programs. Distributions from successful grant applications have the same advantages as cash because they are Lump -sum allocations without any long-term financial obligations for repayment. Their primary drawbacks are that applicable programs can be difficult to identify, application efforts can be tedious, and available funding is often relatively small and restricted to very specific project components. Thus, the general recommendation is that grant funding should be pursued to the maximum extent so long as the submitted applications are for applicable programs with sufficient funding and a reasonable chance of being accepted. This is to ensure time, resources, and planning strategy are not wasted on programs that are simply not worth the effort based either on likelihood of securement or the amount of funding available. 11-4 PPS0126221137RDD • � -WO After cash and grant opportunities have been exhausted, the next best sources are alternative financing programs - specifically, SRF/ISRF and WIFIA. These programs will add costs to the project in the form of interest payments and will also burden the utility with debt payments for 20 to 30 years, but not as significantly as debt that is issued through municipal bonds. The repayment terms on these loans are also more flexible than bonds and, thus, can be structured to have reduced impacts to rate payers. Their application efforts are similar to those of many grant programs, but with the amount of funding available and their focus on funding large construction projects in particular, there is not as much concern with application efforts being worthwhile. It is Jacobs' recommendation that both SRF and WIFIA be pursued as a part of the project funding plan. Both of these programs will help minimize total financing costs should debt be required and will have the smallest impact to rate payers. It is worth reiterating here that WIFIA is, in general, the more streamlined of the two programs but comes with slightly higher interest payments and could be competitive for the City as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency sees many applications from California. SRF has the cheapest interest rates of any Loan program, but it is also competitive, and applications can take years to be processed (it remains to be seen if things will become more streamlined after Infrastructure Bill allocations have been distributed to the state). Although they are the most expensive financing options, municipal revenue bonds are not without their advantages. The processes for issuing a bond are faster and Less tedious than any grant or alternative financing program, and the funds they provide are significantly less restrictive. Depending on interest rates at the time of issuance, their impacts to rate payers can still be manageable. But their high financing costs are still a major factor; their interest rates can be double that of alternative financing, and they can often come with debt coverage requirements that would force the City to meet revenue targets above what would be required just to pay the annual obligation in full, adding even more burden to the City's bottom Line and to rate payers. PPS0126221137RDD 11-5 • � -WO Preliminary capital cost estimates were prepared for Alternatives 1 and 2. The cost estimates are based on February 2022 price levels and include escalation of costs to the projected midpoint of project construction (May 2026). Cost information used in preparing the estimates included cost estimates for similar completed projects, vendor quotes, and cost -estimating database tools. The cost estimates are preliminary (i.e., not based on completed engineering designs and site investigations). These estimating steps will be required at a Later stage of project development to refine the cost estimates for any improvements that proceed beyond this evaluation. A detailed cost estimate is provided in Appendix D. 12.1 Contract Cost The contract cost (CC) includes directly related costs and overhead and profit for a contractor to complete a specific improvement. Design contingency is added to the total CC. The design contingency represents the items yet to be defined or designed to a Levet that can be quantified. As the project design progresses, the design contingency factor will decrease and ultimately be removed from the total capital cost estimate at the final design stage. For this evaluation, the design contingency is 25%. To bring the CC to the field cost (FC) Level, land -acquisition and construction contingency costs are added to the CC. Construction contingency is an allowance intended to account for costs resulting from changes in designs or different site conditions encountered in the field. For this evaluation, the construction contingency is 15%. As the design progresses, the construction contingency factor will decrease in similar manner as the design contingency. 12.2 Non -contract Cost Non -contract costs are added to field costs to develop the total capital cost. Add-on percentages are assumed as follows: ■ Engineering and design: 15% of FC ■ Construction services and management: 15% of FC ■ Legal and administrative: 6% of FC ■ Permits and environmental documentation: 10% of FC ■ Compensatory mitigation: Based on a 1:1 mitigation ratio for comparison purposes only. The estimated cost of compensatory mitigation from the USACE In -Lieu Fee program could be imposed at a 2:1 or possibly a 3:1 ratio, which would double or triple the mitigation cost, respectively. The current cost for Aquatic Resource Credits is approximately $200,000 per acre of impact. 12.3 Definition of Estimate Class These cost estimates were prepared in accordance with the guidelines of the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE) International, which defines a Class 4 Estimate as follows: Class 4 Estimate. This estimate is prepared based on very Limited information, and subsequently have very wide accuracy ranges. They are typically used for project screening, determination of feasibility, concept evaluation, and preliminary budget approval. Typically, engineering is from 1 % to 5% complete, and would comprise at a minimum the following: plant capacity, block schematics, indicated layout, process flow diagrams for main process systems and preliminary engineered process and utility equipment lists. Level of Project Definition Required: 1 % to 15% of full project definition. PPS0126221137RDD 12-1 • � -WO The cost estimates shown, which include resulting conclusions on project financial or economic feasibility or funding requirements, have been prepared for guidance in project evaluation and implementation from the information available at the time of the estimate. The final costs of the project and resulting feasibility will depend on actual labor and material costs, competitive market conditions, actual site conditions, final project scope, implementation schedule, continuity of personnel and engineering, and other variables. Therefore, the final project costs will vary from the estimate presented herein. Project feasibility, benefit/cost ratios, risks, and funding needs must be carefully reviewed prior to making specific financial decisions or establishing project budgets to help ensure proper project evaluation and adequate funding. 12.4 Total Capital Cost Table 12-1 summarizes the total capital costs for the project alternatives. Mobilization/Demobilization 6 $518,000 1 $484,000 Bonding/Insurance $386,800 $364,000 Demolition of Existing PS1 $569,700 $575,000 Site Clearing/Grubbing $40,800 $26,000 Site Improvements $2,211,800 $1,353,000 Intake and Pumping Plant $13,762,300 $11,675,000 Pipeline and Surge Tank $547,400 $1,099,000 Site Electrical $92,900 $411,000 Site Utilities $48,800 $428,000 Site Access $0 $261,000 River Trail Restoration $62,500 $63,000 Jenny Creek Fish Ladder $0 $239,000 Jenny Creek Culvert Rehabilitation $0 $169,000 Subtotal $18,241,000 $17,147,000 Design Contingency (25%) $4,560,000 $4,287,000 Total Contract Cost $22,801,000 $21,435,000 Permanent Easement $0 $0 Temporary Easement $0 $0 Construction Contingency (15%) $3,420,000 $3,215,000 Total Field Cost $26,221,000 $24,650,000 Engineering Design (15%) $3,933,000 $3,698,000 Construction Management (15%) $3,933,000 $3,698,000 Legal and Administrative (6%) $1,573,000 $1,479,000 Permitting/Environmental (10%) $2,622,000 $2,465,000 Compensatory Mitigation (1:1 ratio) $400,000 $250,000 Total Non -contract Cost $12,461,000 $11,590,000 Total Capital Cost $38,682,000 $36,240,000 12.5 Capital Cost Estimate Summary The cost for Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 is similar; however, Alternative 2 is lower even with the additional work of Jenny Creek and Overhill Drive access and utility improvements. 12-2 PPS0126221137RDD • � -WO Day-to-day operation of Alternative 1 and 2 would generally resemble current operations. The new facilities will require regular maintenance activities to maintain an operable system. The facilities would need to be monitored and visually inspected often, especially when changing flows occur in the river. Energy costs for Alternatives 1 and 2 would be similar because the pump TDH for both alternatives is nearly identical; however, energy use would be slightly higher for Alternative 1 because of the sediment jetting pump. Because of similarities in river conditions and proposed facilities, a detailed 0&M cost analysis was not conducted since 0&M costs are anticipated to be similar. The potential 0&M differences are highlighted below: ■ Alternative 1 will have additional energy cost for the sedimentjetting system. From a maintenance perspective, vertical flat plate screens will require a boom truck and labor (2 persons minimum) to periodically remove and clean (pressure wash) the screen panels. Furthermore, this alternative may require in -river work on an annual or more frequent basis to manage sediment at the face of the screen. Alternative 2 is anticipated to require Less maintenance because the cylindrical screens will be retractable for ease of inspection and maintenance, and therefore, will not require a boom truck and associated personal. PPS0126221137RDD 13-1 • � -WO ® Comparison and Summary of ALternatives s w Table 14-1 summarizes and compares Alternatives 1 and 2. Table 1-1. Summary of Alternatives Location Design Firm (Ultimate Buildout) Capacity Design Initial Capacity High WSE at 79,000 cfs Low WSE at 3,250 cfs Riverbed Elevation River Conditions at Facility Intake Design Facility Footprint Access to Facility Fish Protection Mechanical equipment • Immediately downstream of existing 1,600 feet upstream of existing P51 P51 • 42 mgd 42 mgd 36 mgd • 497.4 feet • 483.5 feet ■ 480.0 feet ■ Poor, shallow area ■ Vertical flat plate screen ■ Ten panels (10 feet wide by 5 feet tall) • Longer, on -bank structure • Approximately 1.6 acres (not including ■ construction staging area) Existing River Trail ■ • Meets state/federal fish criteria ■ Longerjuvenile fish exposure time ■ 4 duty plus 1 spare (800 hp): ■ Initial Capacity (36 mgd) at reduced speed ■ Ultimate Buildout (42 mgd) at full speed • 3 duty plus 1 spare (800 hp): ■ Initial Capacity (36 mgd) at full speed • Additional pump required for Ultimate Buildout ■ Sedimentjetting system 36 mgd 499.1 feet 483.8 feet 467.0 feet Good, deeper area Cylindrical tee screen Two screens (42 -inch diameter by 60 - inches long) Smaller, on -bank structure Approximately 0.6 acre (not including construction staging area) Existing River Trail, Reclamation abandoned railroad road, or Overhill Drive Closer to Foothill WTP if Overhill Drive is used • Meets state/federal fish criteria ■ Shorterjuvenile fish exposure time ■ 4 duty plus 1 spare (800 hp): ■ Initial Capacity (36 mgd) at reduced speed ■ Ultimate Buildout (42 mgd) at full speed • 3 duty plus 1 spare (800 hp): ■ Initial Capacity (36 mgd) at full speed ■ Additional pump required for Ultimate Buildout PPS0126221137RDD 14-1 Electrical equipment Similar for both alternatives Similar for both alternatives ■ Existing generator stays at existing PS1 Existing generator can stay at existing location PS1 location or be moved to Overhill Drive Utilities (potable water, At existing PS1 location 0 Extension of utilities from existing electric, and fiber optic) River Trail or Overhill Drive Conveyance At existing PS1 location Short section of pipeline required to connect to existing City pipeline Permitting/Environment More complex due to encroachment Potentially less mitigation al of the intake structure in the river Jenny Creek Restoration ■ Compensatory mitigation required for permanent impact to waters of the U.S. Noise Screen pulling system (potential high- Little to no noise for the cleaning pitch squealing) system since system is submerged Constructability Coordination with existing PS1 Construction would take place as operations and cross over to new existing PS1 remains in operation alternative 1 will add more complexity Cofferdam required • Cofferdam required ■ Significant fill 0&M Boom truck required for retrieving Less 0&M for cylindrical screens vertical panels Possibly more debris collection ■ Cleaning system more complex ■ Frequent screen adjustments • Screen removal more frequent 0&M Cost Similar; but more energy for sediment Similar jetting system Additional Benefits At same location as PS1 Community access from Overhill Drive to River Trail • Jenny Creek Restoration Funding Opportunities Cash Cash ■ Grant opportunities Grant opportunities • Loan Loan Capital Cost Class 4 estimate Class 4 estimate ■ February 2022 prices escalated to February 2022 prices escalated to midpoint of construction (May 2026) midpoint of construction (May 2026) • $38,682,000 $36,240,000 14-2 PPS0126221137RDD • � -WO . r 10 • " %., Jacobs recommends the City proceed with plans to implement Alternative 2, New River Trail Location, because of the following considerations: ■ This alternative provides a better intake facility location with deeper river conditions. ■ This site will provide the best construction sequencing with the existing PS1 crossover and decommissioning. ■ The site allows the use of cylindrical tee screens, which will simplify 0&M. ■ If the City chooses, Jenny Creek could be restored at the same time as this project. ■ Overhill Drive access can provide the City better access to the Alternative 2 location along with public benefit, provided access to the River Trail. ■ This alternative is less expensive than Alternative 1, even with the additional access road and Jenny Creek Restoration. The collector well investigations will continue to move forward, and the large-scale pumping test is anticipated to take place in July 2022. Upon selection of a preferred project alternative, next steps may include the following: ■ Obtain detailed surveying, mapping, geotechnical investigations, and existing utility information for the project site. ■ Analyze detailed river flow two-dimensional (2D) modeling, surge analyses, and corrosion analyses. ■ Develop permit applications. ■ Consult with NMFS, CDFW, and USFWS. ■ Develop final design drawings sufficient for permit acquisition and construction. ■ Prepare detailed construction schedule and cost estimate, and conduct a more detailed constructability evaluation. PPS0126221137RDD 15-1 A preliminary implementation schedule for the project is provided in Appendix E. The following are critical milestones: • Draft Preliminary Design Report — February 2O22 • Pre-finaiPreliminary Design Report — May 2O2J • Final Preliminary Design Report — July JO22 • Collector Well Pump Well Construction — July 2U22 PPS012622113/RUD 16-1 [H2MHILL. 2UU2.Draft Feasibility Studyf/ the City ofRedding Pump House No. /Fish Protection Project. February. Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2011. Flood Insurance Studyfor Shasta County, California. March 17. Hollister, V.F., and J.R. Evans. 1965. Geology of the Redding quadrangle, Shasta County, California. . Jacobs. 2020. City of Redding Surface Geophysical Survey Investigations Summary and Recommendations Technical Memorandum. October ZZ,2OJO. Jacobs. 202 1. City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigations Summary and RacoxnnnendotionsTechn/co//Nennonnndurn. March 12, 202 1. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Region. 1997.Fish Screening Oiterio/orAnudn/nnousSu/rnon/ds.January. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service West Coast Region. 2018. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC- lxx, NOAA Fisheries West Coast Region Anadromous Salmonid Passage Design Guidelines. Peer Review Draft. Environmental Services Branch. August 16, 2018. State ofCalifornia, The Resources Agency, California Department ofFish and Game, Wildlife and Fisheries Division. 2000. Fish Screen Criteria. Appendix S, California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual. June 19. Youd, T.L., I.M. Idress, Ronald D. Andurs, and Ignacio Arango. 2001. "Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils." Journal of Geotechnical and Geo-Environmental Engineering. October. PPS012622113/RUD 1+1 Customer : Jacobs Engineering Pump Performance Datasheet 111005 PENTAIR Project name : Sacramento River PS -Redding Encompass 2.0 - 21 3A Operating Conditions Liquid Flow, rated 10,50 MG/day Liquid type Differential head / pressure, rated (requested) 320,0 ft Additional liquid description Differential head / pressure, rated (actual) 320.4 ft Solids diameter, max Suction pressure, rated / max 0.00 / 0.00 psi.g Solids diameter limit NPSH available, rated Ample Solids concentration, by volume Site Supply Frequency 60 Hz Temperature, max Performance Fluid density, rated / max Speed criteria Synchronous Viscosity, rated Speed, rated 1180 rpm Vapor pressure, rated Impeller diameter, rated 17.74 in Material Impeller diameter, maximum 18.92 in Material selected Impeller diameter, minimum 16.28 in Pressure Data Efficiency (bowl pump) 85.18 / - % Maximum working pressure NPSH required margin required 22.85 / 0.00 ft Maximum allowable working pressure nq (imp. eye flow) / S (imp. eye flow) 68 / 187 Metric units Maximum allowable suction pressure Minimum Continuous Stable Flow :6.24 MG/day Hydrostatic test pressure Head, maximum, rated diameter 516.4 ft Driver & Power Data (@Max density) Head rise to shutoff (bowl / pump) 61,18 / Driver sizing specification Flow, best eff. . point (bowl / pump) 10.58 / - MG/day Margin over specification Flow ratio, rated / BEP (bowl / pump) :99.26 / - % Service factor Diameter ratio (rated / max) :9176 % Power, hydraulic Head ratio (rated dia / max dia) :83.69 % Power (bowl /pump) Cq/Ch/Ce/Cn [ANSI/HI 9.6.7-20101 1.00 / 1.00 / 1.00 / 1.00 Power, maximum, rated diameter Selection status Acceptable 800 600 400 n 0 200 0 800 720 640 560 480 400 320 240 160 80 0 40 co r 20 Cf) n 0 1 16.28 Minimum recommended motor rating Bowl performance. Adjusted for construction and viscosity. The duty point represents the head at the bowl. 84 85 0.00 in 1.88 in 0.00% 68.00 deg F 1.000 / 1.000 SG 1.00 cp 0.34 psi.a Maximum power 0.00% 1.00 590 hp 692 / - hp 697 hp 800 hp / 597 kW Minimum Continuous Stable Flow Max allowable flow Preferred oDeratina reaion 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Flow - MG/clay FAIRBANKS NIJHUIS PHONE: +1-913-371-5000 - FAX: 3501 FAIRBANKS AVENUE PENTAIR KANSAS CITY, KANSAS 66106 WWW.FAIRBANKSNIJHUIS-COM Customer : Jacobs Engineering Pump Performance Datasheet 111005 PENTAIR Project name : Sacramento River PS -Redding Encompass 2.0 - 22.0.0 Operating Conditions Liquid Flow, rated 12.00 MG/(Jay Liquid type Differential head / pressure, rated (requested) 310,0 ft Additional liquid description Differential head / pressure, rated (actual) 310.0 ft Solids diameter, max Suction pressure, rated / max 0.00 / 0.00 psi.g Solids diameter limit NPSH available, rated Ample Solids concentration, by volume Site Supply Frequency 60 Hz Temperature, max Performance Fluid density, rated / max Speed criteria Synchronous Viscosity, rated Speed, rated 1180 rpm Vapor pressure, rated Impeller diameter, rated 18.38 in Material Impeller diameter, maximum 18.92 in Material selected Impeller diameter, minimum 16.28 in Pressure Data Efficiency (bowl pump) :84.42 / - % Maximum working pressure NPSH required margin required 25.65 / 0.00 ft Maximum allowable working pressure nq (imp. eye flow) / S (imp. eye flow) 68 / 187 Metric units Maximum allowable suction pressure Minimum Continuous Stable Flow :6.46 MG/day Hydrostatic test pressure Head, maximum, rated diameter : 554.3 ft Driver & Power Data (@Max density) Head rise to shutoff (bowl / pump) :7&80 / % Driver sizing specification Flow, best eff. . point (bowl / pump) 10.91 / MG/day Margin over specification Flow ratio, rated / BEP (bowl / pump) 109.96/-% Service factor Diameter ratio (rated / max) :97A5 % Power, hydraulic Head ratio (rated dia / max dia) :91.09 % Power (bowl /pump) Cq/Ch/Ce/Cn [ANSI/HI 9.6.7-20101 1.00 / 1.00 / 1.00 / 1.00 Power, maximum, rated diameter Selection status Acceptable 1,000 CL 750 500 a- 0 250 0 800 720 640 560 480 400 320 240 160 80 0 50 r 25 Cl) 0 Minimum recommended motor rating Bowl performance. Adjusted for construction and viscosity. The duty point represents the head at the bowl. 0.00 in 1.88 in 0.00 % 68.00 deg F 1.000 / 1.000 SG 1.00 cp 0.34 psi.a Maximum power 0.00% 1.00 652 hp 773 / - hp 773 hp 800 hp / 597 kW Minimum Continuous Stable Flow Max allowable flow Preferred operating region 18.92 in 18.38 in 52 63 72 79 84 85 16.28 in 85, 84 79 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Flow - MG/clay FAIRBANKS NIJHUIS PHONE: +1-913-371-5000 - FAX: 3501 FAIRBANKS AVENUE PENTAIR KANSAS CITY, KANSAS 66106 WWW.FAIRBANKSNIJHUIS-COM 550 500 450 400 350 300 v 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 Flow (gpm) 25,000 30,000 35,000 550 500 450 400 350 300 v 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 Flow (gpm) 25,000 30,000 35,000 550 500 450 400 350 300 v 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 Flow (gpm) 25,000 30,000 35,000 t t ' • i City of Redding Surface Geophysical Survey Investigations Summary and Recommendations Technical !'100 .;acobs Draft Memorandum 2525 Airpark Drive Redding, CA 96001 United States T +1.530.243.5831 F +1.530.243.1654 www.jacobs.com Subject City of Redding Surface Geophysical Survey Investigations Summary and Recommendations Attention City of Redding, Public Works From Kevin Bral/Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (Jacobs) Date October 22, 2020 1. Purpose and Scope Jacobs proposed surface geophysical surveys to the City of Redding (City) in a memorandum titled Horizontal Collector Well Investigation (July 23, 2020). The geophysical surveys are a prudent step into assessing the suitability of the lithology of proposed horizontal collector well (HCW) sites. Subsequent steps in the investigation include soil borings and hydraulic testing, followed by design, construction, and testing of an HCW if found feasible. The geophysical survey commenced September 22, 2020, and was completed September 26, 2020. Four geophysical lines were surveyed using both the frequency domain electromagnetic (FDEM) and electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) methods. Collier Geophysics (Collier) conducted the survey and provided a draft report titled City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation (October 9, 2020), attached hereto. This technical memorandum has been prepared to provide recommendations for the next step of the investigation, which involves rotosonic soil borings to confirm and calibrate the geophysical survey results. If the results are favorable, small-scale pumping of select borings should be performed to identify if certain locations should be further investigated through full-scale pumping tests. 2. Geophysical Survey In the Horizontal Collector Well Investigation memorandum, Jacobs recommended six geophysical lines be run along the Sacramento River to investigate the thickness and nature of the alluvial deposits in areas that were selected from an earlier data review. These six lines were named as follows: ■ Line 1: ACID Line ■ Line 2: Bike Park Line ■ Line 3: Rodeo Line ■ Line 4: Auditorium Line ■ Line 5: Turtle Bay Line ■ Line 6: HW 44 Line The lines ranged from 630 feet in length to 2,100 feet in length and were accessible from nearby trails or bike paths. At the City's request, the Rodeo Line (Line 3) and HW 44 Line (Line 6) were removed from the investigation, and the Auditorium Line (Line 4) was shortened during the scope of work development. PPS1022201721RDD City of Redding Surface Geophysical Survey Investigations Summary and Recommendations The geophysical survey began using FDEM methods over all selected lines as a screening survey to estimate depth to any shallow bedrock and eliminate any area with very shallow bedrock that could not support an HCW. None of the lines were eliminated from the FDEM work because in many places the bedrock depth exceeded the depth limitation (2S to 30 feet) of the FDEM method. The geophysical survey then continued, and the ERT method was used to create resistivity profiles along the lines to a depth of 100 feet. The resistivity profiles as presented in the Collier report were used to identify areas with possible thick, coarse gravels and/or cobbles that would have the capacity to transmit large quantities of water to an HCW. The profiles were provided as color plots of the resistivity values along the depth and length of each Line. Distance along the line is represented as the profile x-axis, which is divided into 200 -foot -length markers. The colors in the plot represent the resistivity value, with dark red indicating the highest resistivities grading through shades of orange, yellow, green, and blue, and dark blue indicating the lowest resistivity. High resistivity values are desired for an HCW application and are represented by possible sands, gravels, and cobbles. Collier provided the general color interpretation listed below. ■ Red and Yellow — sand and gravel with the coarsest and most permeable material in dark red ■ Green — could be weathered rock or finer sand ■ Blue — very low resistivity and is interpreted as the shale bedrock 2.1 Existing Borings and Wells Seven previously constructed borings and wells in the area were in the vicinity of the geophysical lines and were used to initially compare the resistivity values measured by the geophysical survey to actual field data. Subsequent soil borings will be needed directly on the geophysical line to fully calibrate the geophysical data and interpret the results. Table 1 lists these seven borings and wells with the relative geophysical line, boring depth, and proximity of the length markers on the Collier plots. Table 1. Existing Borings and Wells near the Geophysical Lines A brief discussion of the characteristics of the ERT follows for each line surveyed. The discussion is presented starting with the geophysical Line that shows the most promise with thicker and coarser d •11j Geophysical Depth Boring or Well Line (Feet) Comments B-2 ACID 13 300 feet north of Length Marker 1800. Sand and gravel to 13 feet; shale at 13 feet. B-5 ACID 9.5 250 feet northeast of Length Marker 1800. Sand and cobbles to 9.5 feet; shale at 9.5 feet. B-4 ACID 20 300 feet east of Length Marker 1800. Sand, gravel, cobbles to 20 feet; shale at 20 feet. 853 N. Market Street Well Bike Park 52 750 feet north of Length Marker 600. Sand, gravel, boulders to 52 feet. Shale not penetrated. DH -2 Bike Park 40 300 feet east of Length Marker 1600. Sand and gravel to 40 feet. Siltstone at 40 feet. SB -1 Auditorium 34 300 feet east of Length Marker 600. Sand, gravel, cobbles to 34 feet. Chico Formation at 34 feet. SB -2 Turtle Bay 34 150 feet south of Length Marker 0. Sand, gravel, cobbles to 34 feet. Chico Formation at 34 feet. A brief discussion of the characteristics of the ERT follows for each line surveyed. The discussion is presented starting with the geophysical Line that shows the most promise with thicker and coarser d •11j City of Redding Surface Geophysical Survey Investigations Summary and Recommendations sediments followed by those lines that may consist of thinner and finer sands and gravels. The reader is referred to the attached City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation, Figure 5. Bike Park Line (Line 2) — The Bike Park Line is located on the northern side of the river east of the ACID and runs from the S. Market Street bridge 1,700 feet to the east. The western side of the Bike Park Line is seen to contain highly resistive material and depths close to 40 feet. The eastern side of the tine has lower resistivity values suggesting finer material but at depths up to 50 feet. An existing well log located at 853 N. Market Street indicates that 52 feet of sand and gravel exist there; however, it is located about 750 feet north of Length Marker 600 feet. Another soil boring was previously constructed about 300 feet east of the eastern edge of the Bike Park Line and indicates sand and gravels exist there to 40 feet. Turtle Bay Line (Line 4) — The Turtle Bay line is located on the southern side of the river east of the Sundial Bridge and runs about 1,700 feet east to where the Sacramento River bends south. The Turtle Bay Line is seen to exhibit highly resistive sediments to over 35 feet in some locations, with the western side of the line showing the coarser and thicker sediments. Existing well togs from an area near the Turtle Bay Museum indicate sand and gravels down to 34 feet and correlate well with the resistivity values observed. ACID Line (Line 1) — The ACID Line is located on the southern side of the river and runs from Benton Drive to the ACID fish Ladder. A railroad trestle crosses the river on the western end of this tine, and geophysical data could not be obtained over about 75 feet upstream and downstream of the trestle. The western side of the ACID line is seen to contain shallower bedrock and finer sand than the eastern side of the line. The eastern side of the line appears to be of thicker and coarser sediments. However, actual soil borings near the fish ladder do not confirm the geophysics results. The borings in that area were about 250 to 300 feet from the geophysical line. Auditorium Line (Line 3) — The Auditorium Line is located on the southern side of the river just west of the Sundial Bridge and runs about 630 feet to the west. The western area of this line indicates unconsolidated deposits as deep as about 70 feet and thins to the east to 20 to 40 feet. However, the resistivity values appear to indicate the sediments are mostly sand and fine sand, not coarse sands and gravels. Some of the resistivity values in the eastern part of this line indicate coarser sands; however, they are less than 20 feet in thickness. An existing boring about 300 feet to the east of the eastern edge of the Line indicates sand and gravels down to 34 feet. 3. Recommendations The geophysical results indicate there are deposits in the Sacramento River alluvium that may support an HCW with the targeted 10 -million -gallon -per -day capacity. Therefore, Jacobs recommends the City proceed with the next investigation step, which is the construction of soil borings along the geophysical Lines. Jacobs recommends proceeding with soil borings starting at the most promising lines. As the borings are advanced, the Lithology will be logged and compared to the geophysical resistivity results to better define the resistivity values, and understanding of the local area hydrogeology can then be interpreted from the resistivity values. In selected borings, a temporary small well will be installed; and short, low -capacity pumping tests will be performed. These low -capacity pumping tests will enable a rough estimate to be made of future HCW capacities that may be available at the Location. Two borings on each line are proposed to meet the above goals. Table 2 lists the proposed boring Locations. PPS1022201721RDD City of Redding Surface Geophysical Survey Investigations Summary and Recommendations Table 2. Proposed Soil Borings Geophysical Line Recommended Boring Locations Comments Bike Park Two soil borings. One at Length Marker 600 Guided by existing N. Market Street and another at Length Marker 1800 (400 feet well and the DH -1 soil boring and the past the western end of the line). presence of very high resistivity. Turtte Bay Two soil borings. One at Length Marker 200 Guided by existing soil boring SB -2 and and another at Length Marker 450. the presence of very high resistivity. ACID Two soil borings. One at Length Marker 1600 Guided by the favorable Location of this and another at Length Marker 1800. site for an HCW and the higher resistivity values seen in the eastern portion of this Line. Auditorium Two soil borings. One at Length Marker 150 Although the resistivity values are not and another at Length Marker 900. seen to be very high along this tine, these borings wiLL complete the correlation of the resistively values to actual. Local hydrogeotogy. .. I •NE Attachment City of Redding River Intake Geophysical October 9, 2020 7711 W. 6th Ave., Ste G/H I Lakewood, CO 80214 1 (720) 487-9200 A Service -Disabled Veteran -Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) Kimberly Hein, P.E. Project Manager JACOBS Engineering Group, Inc. 2525 Airpark Drive Redding, CA r- t RE: Draft Geophysical Letter Report I Project #20-151 City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation Redding, CA Collier Geophysics, LLC (Collier) conducted a geophysical investigation on behalf of JACOBS Engineering Group, Inc. (JACOBS), located in Redding, CA. The objective of the investigation was to map the depth to bedrock (i.e., the Chico Formation siltstone), and determine the soil stratigraphy in the upper 60 feet of the subsurface along the Sacramento River. The project has a special emphasis on areas of deeper sand and gravel deposits that are likely to be hydraulically connected to the Sacramento River. A two phased survey was conducted first using Frequency Domain Electromagnetics (FDEM) and then follow-on Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT). The geophysical survey was conducted across three sites along the Sacramento River (ACID, Bike Park, and Turtle Bay, See Figure 1). The final survey locations were determined in the field with onsite communication with the client. The survey was performed September 22nd through 26th, 2020. The survey was led by Collier geophysicists Jacob Sheehan and Kristen Marberry. The following report presents results from the geophysical investigation and summarizes the site conditions, field methods, data acquisition, and interpretation procedures. For further information regarding the details of FDEM and ERT techniques, Collier can submit method addenda upon request. City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project #20-151 October 9, 2020 Figure 1: Site location and line layout Site Conditions The sites were located along the Sacramento River along bike paths, non-public roads and trails. The weather was warm and dry. The only complicating factor to data collection was the public nature of the Bike Park and Turtle Bay sites. This required placing one of the geophysical crew members at the end of the line to warn people not to touch the system and to answer many questions about the data collection. No safety issues occurred around this issue. The subsurface geology is thought to be alluvial sands and gravels overlying the Chico Formation Siltstone. Figure 2. Site conditions during data acquisition. Geophysical Letter Report 2 Collier Geophysics, LLC City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project #20-151 October 9, 2020 Data Acquisition Frequency Domain Electromagnetics An FDEM instrument consists of at least one pair of transmitting and receiving coils. A primary magnetic field of a constant frequency is generated using an alternating current in the transmitter coil, and a secondary magnetic field is detected in the receiving coil as a result of the interaction of the primary field with the subsurface. The FDEM instrument allows for simultaneous measurements of both the in-phase and quadrature (orthogonal phase) components of the secondary magnetic field. The in-phase component is measured in parts -per -thousand (ppt) of the amplitude of the primary magnetic field. The in-phase response is primarily sensitive to magnetic susceptibility, generally due to the presence of metallic or ferromagnetic material in the subsurface. The quadrature component (90 -degrees out of phase with the primary signal) is primarily sensitive to electrical conductivity, due to changes in lithology, moisture, and/or fines (clay) content. The quadrature response is calibrated and measured as apparent bulk conductivity in millisiemens per meter (mS/m). Note that these are the primary sensitivities, but that both components can be affected by buried metal or geologic features. For this project, the results have been used model an earth resistivity model based on the bulk conductivity values. FDEM data were acquired using a CMD -Explorer, by GF Instruments (see r inset photo right). The CMD -Explorer consists of a boom with three sets of FDEM coil pairs, at three separations; 1.4 in (4.5 ft), 2.8 in, (9.2 ft), and 4.5 in (14.8 ft). The effective depth of sensitivity of the FDEM method is a function of the antenna spacing between the transmitter and receiver, the antenna orientation, the frequency of the primary field, and the bulk electromagnetic properties of the subsurface. Data were acquired using a vertical dipole orientation, which results in the greatest depth of investigation. The depth of investigation is not precise, but as a rule of thumb when using a vertical dipole orientation, is approximately equal to the antenna spacing. In this case of the CMD -Explorer the values recorded would correspond to the bulk electromagnetic properties in the upper 5 feet, 10 feet, and 15 feet, of the subsurface respective to each antenna separation. CMD -Explorer data were collected at a rate of 10 Hz, using a primary field frequency of 10 kHz at all three antenna spacings simultaneously. Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT) The electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) method is used to characterize subsurface lithology and/or materials in terms of electrical resistance. The electrical resistivity method incorporates the injection of an electrical current into the ground through a pair of electrodes (current electrodes) while simultaneously measuring the potential or voltage between an offset electrode pair (potential electrodes) in contact with the ground. The subsurface resistance or apparent resistivity is then calculated from the measured voltages, according to electrode geometry. Geophysical Letter Report 3 Collier Geophysics, LLC City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project #20-151 October 9, 2020 The apparent resistivity (p) represents the bulk resistance of earth materials where the majority of injected current flows and subsequent potential measurements exceed noise levels and fall within the dynamic range of the field equipment. The geometry between two current electrodes and two or more potential electrodes define an array. The distance between the potential electrodes is directly related to resistivity measurements with depth. The amount of current injected and distance between the current electrodes determines the depth potential, i.e., larger spacing forces more available current to flow at depth. The ERT survey was performed using an Advanced Geophysical Systems Inc. (AGI) Super Sting R8 8 -channel multiple electrode resistivity imaging system (the Sting, see inset photo to the right). The survey equipment consisted of a transmitter/receiver and cables capable of utilizing up to 84 -takeouts for electrodes. The line locations and orientations were measured with a Trimble Geo7x, a handheld global positioning system (GPS) unit with sub - foot precision. Optimum array geometry was determined by satisfying four requirements: time efficiency, data quality, vertical/horizontal resolution capacities, and desired investigative depth. The ERT survey utilized the combination of the strong gradient array and dipole -dipole array. The dipole -dipole array is more sensitive to horizontal changes in the subsurface such as would be expected from the presence of faults and fractures and from karst features. The electrode spread geometry was controlled by the internal transmitter switching system of the Sting. Multiple measurements were made along each line to measure the lateral and vertical changes in subsurface resistivity. The array geometry for the surveys was limited by the length of the resistivity cables, electrode spacing, and equipment parameters. The array geometry and the geology limit the instruments depth of penetration. Data Processing Frequency Domain Electromagnetic Raw FDEM data were exported in tabular format using CMD Data Transfer, version 1.6.1, by GF Instruments. Positions for each measurement are interpolated for each record from GPS positions using the data transfer software. The data were then processed using Geosoft Oasis montaj, version 9.3 (Geosoft), a processing and data visualization software suite used for analysis of geophysical data sets. Data were checked for quality then gridded using a minimum curvature method. The in-phase response was inspected and used to understand where data was affected but utilities and other cultural features. Geophysical Letter Report 4 Collier Geophysics, LLC City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project #20-151 October 9, 2020 Example of FDEM data from this project showing conductivity values for coils 1, 2, and 3 as green, red, and blue lines, respectively Aarhus Workbench, version 5.9.3.0 was used to generate an earth resistivity model based on the FDEM bulk conductivities values. This process includes: decoupling the recorded EM response from surface features by removing affected data, using a 4 -meter moving -window average to generate a pseudo-FDEM sounding every 25 cm along the acquired transects, and geophysical inversion of the processed pseudo -soundings. The geophysical inversion process iteratively fits a subsurface electrical resistivity model to each of the pseudo -soundings generated from the first processing steps, subject to lateral smoothing constraints (i.e., along data collection profiles). Resistivity model from the geophysical inversion are then exported in x -y -z -v format (31) position and value) to Geosoft for final visualization. Electrical Resistivity Tomography The resistivity data were downloaded from the Sting and converted for analysis using Advanced Geosciences Inc. (AGI) software, Supersting Administrator, after the completion of each line. The data was then checked for errors and completion before moving the equipment to another location. Data was processed using AGI's 2D Earthlmager software package for inversion. The data is processed by completing a forward model from the measured resistivity data. The forward data is then inverted to model resistivity values at depth. The data was inverted using a smooth inversion scheme. Starting from a static background model, a calculated apparent resistivity pseudosection is generated using the parameters of the survey and the resistivity values recorded. This section is compared to the measured section, creating a difference matrix which is used to iteratively change the terrain model until the best fit (minimum difference between measured and calculated apparent resistivity values) is achieved. Multiple models are generated subject to different parametric smoothing constraints to achieve the best fit model to the measured data, ground truth, and geologic conditions. One important measure of data quality is the Root Mean Square (RMS) error between the processed field data and the inversion model. Geophysical Letter Report 5 Collier Geophysics, LLC City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project #20-151 October 9, 2020 The modeled soundings exhibited an RMS error in the range of 8%-10%. It was possible to get the RMS values lower, but at the expense of model stability and smoothness. Results and Discussion Many factors can affect the bulk resistivity of geologic materials. Some known factors pertinent to this site include: varying particle size and/or mineral distribution in the unconsolidated soils overlying bedrock; varying degree of saturation (i.e., vadose zone and phreatic surface); interconnectivity of pore space; and, and elevated total dissolved solids (TDS). Clay has lower resistivity than mixtures of sand, gravel and cobbles. Saturated soil and rock will typically have lower resistivity than unsaturated soil and/or rock of the same composition. Increasing the fluid filled pore volume and interconnectivity of pore spaces will typically lower the bulk resistivity. The resistivity of ground water varies considerably depending on the salinity and TDS concentration in the water, such that clean distillate water has high resistivity and high TDS brine water will have very low resistivity. The bulk resistivity measured with a surface ERT survey for identification or delineation of the lithologic units is then influenced by some or all of these factors. Table 1, below, shows typical ranges resistivity (and conductivity) for various soil types. For this project, we expect to the soil to be primarily composed of sand and gravel. Table 1: Typical resistivity values by soil type SOIL TYPE vs. RESISTIVITY CH L CLAS z OL ML SC U MH Sm SAND GW GC GRAVEL GP le CONDUCTIVITY ITY (nn RIM11,00n) Figure 4, attached as a large format 1. lx17 plate to the end of this report, shows the results of the FDEM survey along with a plan map of the survey area. The Phase 1 FDEM data were collected to potentially eliminate or modify the locations where the ERT data would then be collected in Phase 2. Although there are variations in the modeled resistivity values from the FDEM, there Geophysical Letter Report 6 Collier Geophysics, LLC City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project #20-151 October 9, 2020 was no clear evidence that suggested modifications or alternative positioning to the ERT field survey plan (i.e., the four lines shown in Figure 1). Figure 5 shows the results from the resistivity survey. The site map at the bottom of the figure shows both the line locations and the distances down the line that correspond to the horizontal axis for each ERT line. Note that the resistivity scale is logarithmic to better visualize the range of resistivities obtained at this site. Some sections of the ERT profile line were negatively affected by cultural features, including buried metallic or energized utilities. The in-phase response from the FDEM confirms the presence of these features. The measured responses from these cultural features create anomalies that can mask the response due to geology. The effect of these utilities has been minimized by removing data points that appear to be affected by them. One area that shows the most interference is when crossing beneath the railroad bridge on the western side of Line 1. This area has been blanked out on the results. As anticipated, the alluvial sands and gravels are resistive compared to the siltstone rock. This agrees well with the trends observed in the ERT results shown on Figure 5. A dotted orange line has been placed on the results from each line to represent the interpreted boundary between the undifferentiated alluvial materials and the siltstone bedrock. There are two valuable pieces of information that can be gleaned from these results. • First, within the interpreted alluvial deposits, higher resistivity values are likely to correspond to clean sands and gravel deposits, while lower resistivity likely indicates more fine grained materials are present in the soil matrix. For example, along Line 2 (the line located within the Bike Park) the first 750 feet of the line has higher resistivity values within the interpreted alluvium layer than the remainder of this line. This could mean that from 750 feet down the line to the end there is increased fines content in the soils compared to the start of the line. The same is true when comparing the alluvial deposits along all of Line 4 (the Turtle Bay area) with those along all of Line 1 and the eastern end of Line 2. 0 Second the thickness of the alluvium deposits varies across the area. For example, the western end of Line 1 shows about 40 feet of alluvium, which then decreases to less than 20 feet about 385 feet down the line. From there, it deepens to the east, where it could be as thick as 100 feet at a downline distance of about 1,550 feet. Line 2 results reveal less variability in the alluvial thickness, but still show the alluvial soil thickness varies between about 30 and 55 feet. Line 3 shows a thickness of about 65 feet at the west end of the line, which then decreases to about 20 feet at a distance of about 400 feet down the line. Line 4 shows an alluvium thickness of about 35 feet on the west side, shallowing to about 20 feet on the eastern side of the line, which is the most consistent thickness observed along any of the ERT lines. Geophysical Letter Report 7 Collier Geophysics, LLC City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project #20-151 October 9, 2020 These two factors are likely to be relevant toward selecting favorable collector well sites. In general areas with thick alluvium and more permeable alluvium will produce higher well yields. The areas with the thickest alluvium are not generally the same as the areas with the most permeable alluvium as estimated from the resistivity data. This will require additional investigation in the form of soil borings and pumping tests to determine which locations are the most favorable for a well. The interpreted contact between the alluvium and the siltstone has been used to generate a plan view map of estimated alluvium thickness (Figure 6). This map clearly shows which areas have thicker alluvium deposits (red, pink and orange) compared to thinner deposits (blue and green). Based on this map, there is an obvious effect on the data when passing underneath the railroad bridge on the western end of Line 1. The thickest deposits are on the eastern side of Line 1 and the western end of Line 3. tsUmated Alluvium Tmekness 060 Figure 6: Estimated Alluvium Thickness based on ERT results. Closure The geophysical methods and field procedures defined in this report were applicable to the project objectives and have been successfully applied by Collier geophysicists to investigations of similar size and nature. However, sometimes field or subsurface conditions are different from those anticipated and the resultant data may not achieve the investigation objectives. Collier warrants that our services were performed within the limits prescribed for this project, with the usual thoroughness and competence of the geophysical profession. Collier conducted this project using the current standards of the geophysical industry and utilized in house quality control standards to produce a precise geophysical survey. The overall quality of the data acquired during this investigation was fair to good. The quality of the data yields a high degree of confidence in the results obtained and presented in this report. If you have any questions regarding the field procedures, data analyses, or the interpretive results presented herein, please do not hesitate to contact us. We appreciate working with you and look forward to providing Jacobs with geophysical services in the future. Respectfully Submitted, Geophysical Letter Report 8 Collier Geophysics, LLC City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation Project #20-151 October 9, 2020 Collier Geophysics, LLC Jacob Sheehan Senior Geophysicist (1 copy e-mailed PDF format) John Jansen Senior Geophysicist Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Geophysical Letter Report 9 Collier Geophysics, LLC Resistivity s� 127 1 17 l s.. S�Nc I t ,. 60 53 46 �s 29 17 !e: s ui �5 z 4 � i i 4 ,r ro,"". .,Y' e. -;'.,,,., h2 S'r. '.:. ..,.. h... .,., 1k5 n x .:. .... .. . .. .. ..:. ...,,,� ". [� ..,.,i ,,,,,:• ,.. ,,, « P s 2 Y 4 # r ? t > lr W -20,- -40- 44 aj 77 T \, e. y�^^pp33 ,,,, ,.,;,#•. , `x...,,a" ,.' .., .. ,�. \�a ,. >.t t Z .o.,:.-: F£'t � 4 }s :} t,4 i r „t.,t' , fit: ::+„ cr,_"� i ..{Zin�l1'� t tt -: P4y}3f\�7y7,t tF 5; to z t ., ti s ? t u} .". c 4 tltlf2 u�}�`•1\SFt7 ?. t : t tt E,{�"; - s p-� 1 i 1 Y t 0 260 400 660 Bt00 1,060 12'00 5 00 16'00 ISI arce (foet) Interpretedsoil/rock boundary Distant (feet) 1000 00 800 700 600 400 300 200 1FT s�� ast Y�2�z�341i31�//� 2�2 tJ s.i \\2 Ftft jit Sri Y?X 5ft Y. b. 4�tj k r 7�t 100 -80 70 60 5 Electrical resistivity Results, City of Redding River Intake Investigation Redding, CA Jacobs Project #, 20151 October 2020 CDLLIER Drafted by:. Sheeharm Checked by Figure 5 Append*lx C City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigations and Recommendations Technical .;acobs 2525 Airpark Drive Redding, CA 96001-2443 United States T +1.530.243.5831 F +1.530.243.1654 www.jacabs.com Subject City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations Attention City of Redding, Public Works From Ryan Alward, Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (Jacobs) Kevin Bral, Jacobs Date March 12, 2021 1. Purpose and Scope Jacobs conducted a subsurface investigation to evaluate the feasibility of using horizontal collector wells (HCWs) as a source for City of Redding water supply. A total of twelve boreholes at five different sites in Redding, California, were drilled and logged from January 30 to February 17, 2021. Collier Geophysics performed a geophysical investigation in September 2020 as the first step in assessing the suitability of sites for HCWs. A subsurface investigation with boreholes was the second step in assessing the suitability of the investigated sites for HCWs. Electrical resistivity tomography and electromagnetic methods were used to assess the potential thickness of coarse sediments. Yellow Jacket Drilling Services of Rancho Cucamonga, California, drilled the boreholes using a truck -mounted rotary sonic drill rig. The purpose of each borehole was to drill through the alluvium and into the bedrock to determine the thickness, lithologic description, and saturation of the alluvial sediments. Borehole depths ranged from 21 to 46 feet below ground surface (bgs). The alluvial sediments were the only water -bearing sediments encountered; the bedrock is a barrier to groundwater flow and was dry where encountered. For boreholes that were determined to be potentially suitable for operation of an HCW, short low -capacity pumping tests were conducted within the borehole by constructing a temporary well within the drill casing and pumping water from the borehole with a submersible pump. Four such tests were conducted— three 2 -hour step tests and one 2 -hour constant -rate test. This technical memorandum was prepared to present the results of the borehole investigation and low - capacity pumping tests, and to identify recommended sites suitable to move forward with the third and final step of the investigation, full-scale pumping tests. 2. Borehole Investigation Boreholes were drilled at a total of five sites, which were designated as follows: 1) Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District (ACID) (four boreholes) 2) Bike Park (BP) (three boreholes) 3) Turtle Bay (TB) (two boreholes) 4) Highway 44 (HW 44) (two boreholes) 5) Southern Pacific (SP) (one borehole) City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations The location of each borehole for the ACID, Bike Park, and Turtle Bay sites was selected using the results from the geophysical investigation. Geophysical investigation was not conducted at the Highway 44 or Southern Pacific site. The HW 44 borehole Locations were selected after performing a site visit to determine suitable locations for the drill rig near the river and after review of historical nearby borehole Logs. The borehole location for the Southern Pacific site was selected by the City given its proximity to an existing irrigation well operated by the City. The following sections describe the borehole details observed at each site including the borehole Location, depth of each borehole, thickness of the alluvium, thickness of saturated sediments, and depth to bedrock. Figure 1 shows the Location of all the boreholes drilled as part of the subject investigation. Attachment 1 contains the borehole Logs for each borehole. Figure 1. Borehole Locations 2.1 Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District Boreholes Four boreholes were drilled at the ACID site. Low -capacity pumping tests were performed in boreholes ACID -B-1, ACID -B-2, and ACID -B-3, but not ACID -B-4. The ACID -B-1 and ACID -B-2 boreholes are within about 200 feet of each other on the eastern end of the site. The geophysical resistivity was highest around these two boreholes, and the depth to bedrock was measured at 34.5 and 37.0 feet bgs, respectively. The boreholes also had a saturated thickness of 19 and 21 feet, respectively. The ACID -B-3 borehole was drilled at the western edge of the site to compare the observed tithology with the geophysical IaI.��IG�iTiF�iyi�. 7: iId11 City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations investigation, which showed a lower resistivity, potentially indicating finer sediments. The ACID -13-3 borehole did have finer sediments than observed in ACID -13-1 and ACID -13-2, and the low -capacity pumping test results for all the boreholes at this site are described in the following section. The fourth borehole at the site, ACID -13-4, was drilled about 400 feet east of the train trestle, between ACID -13-3 and ACID -13-2. The location of this borehole was selected because the geophysical investigation indicated higher resistivity values than near borehole ACID -13-3 and to help define the extent of the higher resistivity observed near boreholes ACID -13-1 and ACID -13-2. ACID -13-4 borehole had a shallower depth to bedrock than both boreholes to the east of it and was deeper than ACID -B-3 to the west. The saturated thickness in ACID -B-4 was 11 feet and was the thinnest of all four boreholes at this site. ACID -13-3 had the most saturated thickness; however, it was likely due to a creek approximately 20 feet to the west that was draining into the Sacramento River. This allowed for higher saturation, but the sediments that were saturated were much finer grained and consisted of fine sand and clay. Table 1 summarizes details pertaining to the boreholes at the ACID site, and Figure 2 shows the locations of the boreholes. Table 1. Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District Site Borehotes Borehole Name Total Depth (feet bgs) Depth to Bedrock (feet bgs) Saturated Thickness (feet) Low -capacity Pumping Test Performed (Yes/No) ACID -B-1 40.5 34.5 19.0 Yes ACID -B-2 43.0 37.0 21.0 Yes ACID -B-3 36.0 32.0 26.0 Yes ACID -B-4 32.0 27.0 11.0 No Figure 2. Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District Borehole Locations I�Y.��I��iil►�iiF��]. i�1�7 City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations 2.2 Turtle Bay Boreholes A total of two boreholes were drilled at the Turtle Bay site, and no low -capacity pumping tests were performed. The depth to bedrock at the Turtle Bay boreholes was shallower than anticipated based on the geophysical investigation. Part of this discrepancy can be explained by the borehole at TB -B-1 being drilled at a lower elevation than the bike trail upon which the geophysical survey was conducted. A lithologic log near TB -B-1 indicated that gravels were observed up to 30 feet bgs, and bedrock was encountered in TB -B-1 at 15.5 feet bgs. However, TB -B-2 was drilled upon the bike trail, and bedrock was encountered at 16.5 feet bgs. The paleo topography of the site, combined with any previous gravel mining/dredging, can change the thickness of gravel deposits and create varying gravel thickness. Based on the results of the boreholes at this site, we do not recommend further investigation of the Turtle Bay site for a collector well. Table 2 summarizes details pertaining to the boreholes at the Turtle Bay site, and Figure 3 shows the locations of the boreholes. Table 2. Turtle Bay Site Boreholes Figure 3. Turtle Bay Borehole Locations Low -capacity Pumping Borehole Total Depth Depth to Bedrock Saturated Thickness Test Performed Name (feet bgs) (feet bgs) (feet) (Yes/No) TB -B-1 21 15.5 <1 No TB -B-2 26 16.5 <1 No Figure 3. Turtle Bay Borehole Locations City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations 2.3 Bike Park Boreholes Three boreholes were drilled at the Bike Park site, and one Low -capacity pumping test was performed. The first borehole, BP -B-1, was drilled in the parking lot near the southeast corner of the site. The depth to bedrock was 42 feet bgs, the deepest of any borehole during this investigation. The saturated thickness was 27 feet, which was the thickest of any borehole during this investigation. A low -capacity pumping test was conducted on this borehole, and the results are presented in Section 3.1. The second borehole, BP -B-2, was drilled in a Location that showed the highest resistivity based on the geophysical investigation, therefore, the highest potential for coarse sediments at the site. However, bedrock was encountered at 21 feet bgs, and there was only a 6 -foot -thick saturated section, so a Low - capacity pumping test was not conducted. A third borehole, BP -B-3, was drilled to determine how far to the west the coarse sediments observed in BP -B-1 extend. The borehole was drilled approximately 300 feet west of BP -B-1. The observed LithoLogy at BP -B-3 indicates the depth to bedrock was 34 feet, shallower than observed at BP -B-1. The saturated thickness was also Less at 19 feet; therefore, a Low - capacity pumping test was not conducted in this borehole. Table 3 summarizes details pertaining to the boreholes at the Bike Park site, and Figure 4 shows the locations of the boreholes. Table 3. Bike Park Site Boreholes Borehole Name Total Depth (feet bgs) Depth to Bedrock (feet bgs) Saturated Thickness (feet) Low -capacity Pumping Test Performed (Yes/No) BP -B-1 46 42 27 Yes BP -B-2 26 21 6 No BP -B-3 38 34 19 No Figure 4. Bike Park Borehole Locations City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations 2.4 Highway 44 Boreholes This site was selected based on historical lithologic boreholes across the river. Geophysical investigation was not conducted at this site. Two boreholes were drilled at the HW 44 site, and bedrock was encountered between 20 and 24 feet. This resulted in not having enough saturated sediments to perform a low - capacity pumping test. Table 4 summarizes details pertaining to the boreholes at the Highway 44 site, and Figure 5 shows the locations of the boreholes. Table 4. Highway 44 Site Boreholes Figure 5 — Highway 44 Borehole Locations Low -capacity Pumping Borehole Total Depth Depth to Bedrock Saturated Thickness Test Performed Name (feet bgs) (feet bgs) (feet) (Yes/No) H44 -B-1 26 24 8 No H44 -B-2 35 20 5 No Figure 5 — Highway 44 Borehole Locations City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations 2.5 Southern Pacific Borehole This site was selected by the City as an additional location to assess subsurface conditions because the City currently operates a nearby well that is nearing the end of its useful lifespan and has experienced a reduction in the production rate over time. This site was investigated to determine if it would be suitable for a collector well or a replacement vertical well. Geophysical investigation was not performed at this Location. The depth to bedrock was 19.5 feet bgs, and the saturated thickness was minimal; therefore, a Low -capacity pumping test was not performed. Table 5 summarizes details pertaining to the borehole at the Southern Pacific site, and Figure 6 shows the location of the borehole. Table 5. Southern Pacific Site Borehole Figure 6. Southern Pacific Borehole Location 3. Low -capacity Pumping Tests and Sieve Analyses For this investigation, up to six short, low -capacity pumping tests were planned. Having the option of six tests allowed for at least one half of the 12 selected boreholes to be subjected to a low -capacity pumping test, if determined to be necessary. The decision to perform the low -capacity pumping test was made by Jacobs hydrogeologists at the time the borehole was drilled and logged by assessing the thickness of the coarse sediments encountered, depth to bedrock, and the overall thickness of saturated sediments. Four boreholes were selected for low -capacity pumping tests, and they were performed on three boreholes at Low -capacity Pumping Borehole Total Depth Depth to Bedrock Saturated Thickness Test Performed Name (feet bgs) (feet bgs) (feet) (Yes/No) SP -B-1 22 19.5 3.5 No Figure 6. Southern Pacific Borehole Location 3. Low -capacity Pumping Tests and Sieve Analyses For this investigation, up to six short, low -capacity pumping tests were planned. Having the option of six tests allowed for at least one half of the 12 selected boreholes to be subjected to a low -capacity pumping test, if determined to be necessary. The decision to perform the low -capacity pumping test was made by Jacobs hydrogeologists at the time the borehole was drilled and logged by assessing the thickness of the coarse sediments encountered, depth to bedrock, and the overall thickness of saturated sediments. Four boreholes were selected for low -capacity pumping tests, and they were performed on three boreholes at City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations the ACID site and one borehole at the Bike Park site. The boreholes drilled at the Turtle Bay, Highway 44, and Southern Pacific sites were determined to not be suitable for conducting a low -capacity pumping test because the sites tack a thick saturated section and relatively thin coarse sediments and shallow depth to bedrock. Soil samples were collected from boreholes in which low -capacity pumping tests were performed and delivered to Materials Testing, Inc. of Redding, California, for a particle -size distribution sieve analyses using method American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) D6913. The samples were collected from discrete depth intervals from the boreholes to determine the gradation of the sediments in areas with coarse, water -bearing sediments. Some samples were also collected from boreholes where low - capacity pumping tests were not performed to assess the gradation of sediments that were not hydraulically tested but are near sites that were. The results of the sieve analyses were used to estimate the horizontal hydraulic conductivity of the sediments using the Hazen (1911) and Kozeny-Carman (Carrier 2003, Kozeny 1927, and Carman 1937 and 1956) methods. 3.1 Low -capacity Pumping Test Results The results of the low -capacity pumping tests combined with the estimated hydraulic conductivity of the sediments are the basis for our recommendation to proceed with additional large-scale low -capacity pumping tests. The low -capacity pumping tests performed enable a rough estimate to be made of potential HCW yield capacities that might be available at that Location. The rough estimate was based on an analysis using both the low -capacity pumping tests and the sieve analyses results. To perform the analysis, a transmissivity value was first estimated from the first step of the low -capacity pumping test using a Cooper -Jacob analysis (Driscoll 1986). Then a bulk hydraulic conductivity of the screened aquifer section was calculated by dividing by the aquifer saturated thickness. This hydraulic conductivity and that obtained from the sieve analysis hydraulic conductivity were then used to estimate the potential yield of a future HCW using the formulation developed by Hantush and Papadopulos (1962). The potential yield of a vertical well at the two locations was also estimated using a Cooper -Jacob analysis (Driscoll 1986). From the analyses, it would appear that it is realistic that either site (east side of both the ACID and the Bike Park sites) could result with a collector well in the 5- to 10-mgd range, with the Bike Park site likely being closer to the 10-mgd capacity due to its greater saturated thickness. In comparison, a large - diameter conventional vertical well at those two sites would be expected to yield up to 1 mgd at the ACID site, and up to 2 mgd at the Bike Park site. Table 6 summarizes the data collected during each of the tow -capacity pumping tests. For ACID -B-1, ACID -B-2, and BP -B-1, a 2 -hour step test was performed. This consisted of pumping each borehole for four 30 -minute steps, each with a different pumping rate. To determine the rates, the maximum pumping rate was established and then it was divided into four pumping rates as closely spaced as possible. The flow rate was controlled by a ball valve that made it difficult to achieve precise flow rate steps. For ACID -B-3, the borehole did not produce a high enough flow rate to divide the flow into four steps. Instead, a 2 -hour constant -rate test was performed at a rate deemed sustainable for the 2 -hour test without breaking suction on the pump. Attachment 2 shows the low -capacity pumping test drawdown plots. I QvI City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations Table 6. Low -capacity Pumping Tests Borehole Name Step Pumping Rate (gpm) Static Water Level (feet bgs) Pumping Water Level (feet bgs) Drawdown (feet bgs) Specific Capacity (gpm/foot) ACID -B-1 1 6 13.4 13.67 0.27 22.22 2 18 13.4 14.07 0.67 26.87 3 28 13.4 14.89 1.49 18.79 4 42 13.4 16.02 2.62 16.03 ACID -B-2 1 7 13.75 13.81 0.06 116.67 2 16 13.75 14.03 0.28 57.14 3 31 13.75 14.28 0.53 58.49 4 42 13.75 14.69 0.94 44.68 ACID -B-3 Constant Rate 15 14.70 26.45 9.75 1.5 BP -B-1 1 5 12.35 12.36 0.01 500.00 2 17 12.35 12.41 0.06 283.33 3 25 12.35 12.45 0.10 250.00 4 41 12.35 12.52 0.17 241.18 Notes: Each step was 30 minutes in duration, for a 2 -hour test. The ACID -B-3 constant -rate test was 2 hours in duration. gpm = gallons per minute 3.2 Sieve Analyses Results The sieve analyses results were used to estimate the aquifer hydraulic conductivity using the methods of both Hazen, and Kozeny and Carman. The estimation of hydraulic conductivity from grain -size distribution provides a rough value of hydraulic conductivity due to its empirical nature and lack of consideration of other significant parameters such as fluid temperature, electrochemical reactions, and the coarse particle sizes commonly relied on in collector well construction. However, combined with the low -capacity pumping tests conducted, these methods provide a good guide on the overall suitability of collector well operation. The Hazen formulation relies on one grain -size data point, the 10 percent passing particle size, and assumes a uniform sand size particle. The Kozeny-Carman formulation relies on the entire particle distribution and, therefore, is considered a more accurate representation of the sand and gravel sizes encountered during this investigation. For reference, a hydraulic conductivity value in feet/day of several hundred to over one thousand feet/day is considered very good for a collector well application, and the larger saturated thickness locations are also more desirable. When an HCW is pumping, the water level needs to remain above the intake Laterals, and a thicker section of saturated sediments allows for more drawdown, therefore, more production. A minimum pumping level of 3 feet above the center Line of the laterals should be maintained as a safety factor. Table 7 shows the hydraulic conductivity results calculated from the Hazen and Kozeny-Carman methods using the sieve results from this investigation. Attachment 3 contains the sieve analyses lab results. City of Redding Horizontal Cottector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations Table 7. Sieve Analysis Hydraulic Conductivities Borehole Name Depth Interval (feet bgs) Hazen K (feet/day) Kozeny- Carman K (feet/day) USCS Soil Type Visual Description ACID -B-1 18.5-19 359.5 60.2 SP Brown sand with gravel 19-21 NA 1001.8 GW Brown gravel 21-23.5 445.9 90.7 GP Brown gravel with sand 23.5-26 340.7 87.3 GW Brown gravel with sand 26-28.5 362.3 132.0 GW -GM Brown gravel with silt and sand ACID -B-2 18.5-21 368.6 214.2 GW Brown gravel with sand 21-23.5 778.3 95.5 GP Brown gravel with sand 24-25 255.1 82.4 GP -GM Brown gravel with silt and sand 28.5-31 NA 673.8 GW Brown gravel 31-33.5 1,274.8 161.8 GP Brown gravel with sand 33.5-36 780.1 139.5 GP -GM Brown gravel with silt and sand ACID -B-3 10-12 NA 5.6 CL Brown sandy clay 20-22 NA 3.5 SC Gray clayey sand 22-26 110.6 228.6 GW -GM Reddish brown gravel with silt and sand 26-28 732.2 440.5 GP Brown gravel with sand 28-30 395.4 385.8 GP -GM Brown gravel with silt and sand 30-32 548.5 269.6 GW Grayish brown gravel with sand ACID -B-4 21-22.5 584.8 282.5 GW -GM Grayish brown gravel with silt and sand BP -B-1 16-19 533.7 263.0 GW Brown gravel with sand 19-21 802.9 156.4 GW Brown gravel with sand 28-30 5,631.6 389.5 GW Brown gravel with sand 23.5-26 340.7 87.3 GW Brown gravel with sand 26-28 2,952.1 297.7 GP Brown gravel with sand 30-32 781.3 201.8 GP Brown gravel with sand 38-40 4,720.1 332.3 GP Brown gravel with sand 40-42 1,869.5 179.2 GP Brown gravel with sand BP -B-3 15-17 379.7 236.2 GW -GM Brown gravel with silt and sand SP -B-1 13-16 1,209.8 371.3 GW Reddish brown gravel with sand Notes: Hazen K results are not applicable (NA) for D10 approaching or greater than 3. CL = inorganic clays of tow to medium plasticity GM = silty gravels GP = poorly graded gravels GW = welt -graded gravels K = hydraulic conductivity SC = clayey sands SP = poorly graded sands USCS = Unified Soil Classification System 10 PPS0311211259RDD City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations 4. Summary Our review of the geophysical investigation indicated there might be deposits in the Sacramento River alluvium to support an HCWwith the targeted 10 -million -gallon -per -day (mgd) capacity. The investigation conducted and reported herein took those results a step further and sampled and tested those areas to assess the local hydraulic conductivity. Testing results reveal locations where it appearsthe sediments would support a collector well. In summary: ■ The location investigated at the west side of the ACID site, the location investigated at the Southern Pacific site, the locations on the west side of the Bike Park site, and the locations investigated at the Highway 44 site were found to be either too shallow or too low in hydraulic conductivity to support the feasibility of a collector well. The east side of both the ACID site and the farthest east side of the Bike Park appear to have suitable hydraulic conductivity, although the saturated thickness is on the low side for an HCW when accounting for the minimum pumping level being maintained at least 3 feet above the center line of the laterals. However, either of the two sites (east side of both the ACID and Bike Park sites) appears to be likely candidates for a collector well. At this point in the investigation, it is realistic that either site (east side of both the ACID and Bike Park sites) could support a collector well in the 5- to 10-mgd range, with the Bike Park site likely being closer to the 10-mgd capacity because of its greater saturated thickness. In comparison, a large -diameter conventional vertical well at those two siteswould be expected to yield up to 1 mgd at the ACID site and up to 2 mgd at the Bike Park site. 5. Recommendations Based on the results of the subject investigation, consideration should be given to conducting up to two long-term (approximately 48 to 96 hours) high-capacity pumping tests. Each pumping test would consist of a 12 -inch pumping well and four 2 -inch monitoring wells. The monitoring wellswould be spaced parallel and perpendicular to the river, and would test an area about 250 feet wide parallel to the river and about 100 feet wide perpendicular to the river. These long-term high-capacity pumping tests will provide further validation of the feasibility of a collector well at each site and a sound foundation to design the full-size collector wells should that option be selected by the Qty. The proposed long-term high-capacity pumping test locations are listed in Table 8. Table 8. Proposed Long-term Test Locations Site Recommended Long-term Pumping Test Locations Comments ACID Recommend a long-term high-capacity pumping Both AGD-B-1 and ACID -B-2 boreholeswere test between ACID -B-1 and AGD-B-2. suitable for future testing. Sediments thin and bedrock shallows toward the western edge of the site. Bike Park Recommend a long-term high-capacity pumping An HCWfacilitywould have to be factored test near BP -B-1. into the current Bike Park design to minimize impact to the current plans. PPS0311211259RDD 11 City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations 6. References Carman, PI.1937."Fluid Flow through Granular 8eds.^Transactions, Institution ofChemical Engineers, London. 15:150-166. Carman, P.C. 1956. Flow of Gases through Porous Media. Butterworths, London. Carrier III, VV.David. 2OO].^Goodhya Hazen; Hello, Kozeny-[arnnan.^Journal ufGeotechnical and Geoenvinonrnentu/Engineering. Vol. 129.No. 11'November 1. Driscoll, F.G. 1986. "Groundwater and Welts." Johnson Filtration Systems, Inc. Technical Book. Hantush, M.S., and I.S. PapadopuLos. 1962. "Flow of Groundwater to Collector Welts." Journal of the Hydraulics Division. ASCE. Hazen A.1911.^Discussion:Dams onSand Foundations.^Trans AnnSocOvEng.73:199-2U3. Knzeny'J. 1927.''UeberkapiiiareLeitungdes VVasseoinn8oden.^SdzungaberAkodkNss,Wien. 136(2a):271-306. 12 pPs0311211259xoo Attachment 1 Borehole Logs PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I ACID -B-1 SHEET 1 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION : Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 1/29/2021 END: 1/29/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a Z' °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs v W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE w0 o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� FILL Hand Auger. Fill, gravel, sand 5.0 5 • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Reddish brown. 80-85% rounded to subrounded gravel from 0.25" to 3", 15% • • • subrounded to angular sand, trace silty fines. • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) ... Grayish brown. 80% rounded to subrounded gravel up to 6". Metamorphic clasts, 20% • • • subrounded to angular sand with trace silt. 10 11.0 S-1 ••• • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) ... Grayish brown. 70% rounded to subrounded gravel up to 6". Metamorphic clasts, • • • 20-25% fine to medium sand sand with 5% silty fines 15 • • • moist sediments SILTY SAND (SM) • • • Brown. 80% fine to coarse angular to subrounded sand, 20% silty fines, trace clayey fines WELL GRADED GRAVEL (GW) Brown. 90%.25"-2" subrounded to subangular gravel, 10% medium to coarse .' subangular sand, trace clayey fines • • • POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) 20 ... Brownish black. 90% fine to coarse subrounded sand 5-10% fine gravel. Fines upwards • • • with some fine gravel at base WELL GRADED GRAVEL (GW) • • • 10.0 S-2 • • • Brown. 80% rounded coarse gravel to 6". Some layers up to 0.5 foot thick with 20% coarse sand and trace low plasticity fines 25 ••• 1 1I j I WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND (GW -GM) FI } Brown. 60% gravel with 30% sand and 10% silty fines i}cIII 1 16 1 10.0 S-3 j i F101 jII icl�l rt�Ijl PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I ACID -B-1 SHEET 2 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION : Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 1/29/2021 END: 1/29/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a F °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w W SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs z v o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE LU o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� III rltl all t6l�1 Il.lt 10.0 S-3 r� T t�I�I Fltl 35 Dry - bedrock Weathered bedrock, siltstone 4.5 S-4 40 Boring terminated at 40.5 It bgs. 45 50 55 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I ACID -B-2 SHEET 1 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION : Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 1/31/2021 END: 1/31/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC W 0 3: < Z' 00 SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 11 — LU SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS SAMPLE IDs > W 0 COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE Z wD 0 0 0 DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o 0 Uj STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY FILL Hand Auger. Gravel, sand, silt 6.0 5 POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) Brown. Fine to medium grained angular to subrounded sand, trace silty fines WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) 10 Brown. 80-85% subrounded to rounded gravel from fine to 4", 15-20% subangular to rounded fine to coarse sand. From 14'-16' average gravel size is a little smaller but there is a 6" clast. - 10.0 S-1 15 Saturated sediments NO RECOVERY No Recovery WELL GRADED SAND WITH CLAY (SW -SC) Brown. 75% fine to very coarse angular sand, 15% angular to subrounded fine gravel and 10% low -plasticity clayey fines. GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) 20 •••WELL Brown. 80-85% gravel from fine to 6", 15-20% fine to coarse angular to subrounded sand, some trace silt stringers in gravel matrix - 8.0 S-2 25 NO RECOVERY No Recovery 8.5 S-3 WELL GRADED GRAVEL (GW) Brown. Fine to coarse gravel to 4", trace clayey fines in PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I ACID -B-2 SHEET 2 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION : Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 1/31/2021 END: 1/31/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a Z' °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs mn v w W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE z o LU DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Brown. Fine to coarse rounded gravel up to 5", some mixed layers 0.5' thick with 40% • • • medium to coarse angular sand, mostly 80-85% gravel. 8.5 S-3 • . • 35 ••• Gley, Weathered bedrock, siltstone Dry - bedrock 40 6.0 S-4 Boring terminated at 43 It bgs. 45 50 55 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I ACID -B-3 SHEET 1 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION : Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/14/2021 END: 2/14/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a Z' °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs v W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE z o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL UJ o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� FILL Hand Auger. Fill, gravel, sand, silt, clay 4.0 5 2.0 s-1 CLAYEY SAND (CL) Brown. 85% clayey fines with 15% fine sand, saturated. Some roots and organics Water. Hole is adjacent to creek. Water level corresponds to creek water level 10 9.0 S-2 15 POORLY GRADED SAND WITH CLAY (SP -SC) iv Brown. 85-90% medium to fine sand with 10% low -plasticity clayey fines, some j„ roots/organics ri.•ri j Color change from brown to black POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) 20 Black/Gray. Fine grained sand, trace clayey fines CLAYEY SAND (SC) 11.0 S-3 Gray. 80% clayey fines with 20% sand WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND (GW -GM) Brown. 60% angular to subrounded gravel, 30% fine to coarse sand, 10% silty fines. .4�III rtII ihl#I l 25 •I t .4�III rt6!jl • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Brown. 70% rounded gravel to 3", 25% fine to coarse angular sand, 5% clayey fines 10.0 S-4 ••• • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Brown. 55% angular to subrounded gravel to 3", 40% fine to coarse angular sand, 5% • • • clayey fines PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I ACID -B-3 SHEET 2 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION : Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/14/2021 END: 2/14/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a F °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs v W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE z DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL LU 01 STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY 0 Gley, Weathered bedrock, siltstone 10.0 S-4 35 Boring terminated at 36 It bgs. 40 45 50 55 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I ACID -B-4 SHEET 1 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION : Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/17/2021 END: 2/17/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC W 0 3: < Z' 00 SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 11 — LU W SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS SAMPLE IDs Z > 0 0 COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE wD 0 0 Uj 0 DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY FILL Hand Auger, Brown, fine sand 4.5 5 POORLY GRADED SAND WITH CLAY (SP) 1.5 S-1 Brown. 85% medium to fine sand with 10% low plasticity clayey fines NO RECOVERY No Recovery POORLY GRADED SAND WITH CLAY (SP) Brown. 85% medium to fine sand with 10% low plasticity clayey fines 10 8.0 S-2 WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND SAND (GW -GC) 64/. Brown. 60% gravel to 5" with 20% sand and 20% med plasticity clayey fines �11 15 �p�p 7P)a I • : : WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Brown. 60% rounded gravel, with 35% fine to coarse angular sand, 5% clayey fines NO RECOVERY Saturated sediments No Recovery 2.0 S-3 CLAYEY SAND (SC) Brown. Fine sand with 15% low plasticity clayey fines 20 6V WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND (GW -GM) Brown. 65% rounded gravel, to 3", 30% fine to coarse sand, 10% silty fines DCIII rtll6 6.0 S-4 II6 25 iCIII rtII lei + 10 1 Dry - bedrock Weathered bedrock, Siltstone .in 6.0 S-5 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I ACID -B-4 SHEET 2 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION : Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/17/2021 END: 2/17/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a w mn LU z v o ° c� F w o w W o °o a SOIL DESCRIPTION SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs 6.0 S-5 Boring terminated at 32 It bgs. 35 40 45 50 55 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I TB -B-1 SHEET 1 OF 1 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Turtle Bay ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/2/2021 END: 2/3/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC W 0 3: < Z' 00 SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 11 — LU SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS SAMPLE IDs Z > 0 W 0 COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE wD 0 0 DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o 0 Uj STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY FILL Hand Auguer, fill. Gravel, sand and silt 3.0 WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT AND GRAVEL (SW -SM) Brown. 60% fine to coarse angular to subrounded sand, 25-30% fine to 1 rounded to 2.0 s_j Asubrounded gravel, 10% silty fines POORLY GRADED FINE SAND (SP) 5 Black. 85-90% fine sand with 10-15% rounded gravel from 1/2" to 3" SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) 3.0 S-2 Brown. 35% fine sand with some coarse sand, some orange and gray streaks, very �saturated like mud. L L Brownish blue, organics with sticks and roots. WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Gray. Gravel to 1" with 20% fine sand. NO RECOVERY 10 No Recovery - 1' cobble was stuck in core barrel 4.0 S-3 WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Gray. Same as 6-8' Another cobble blocked core barrel 15 WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Same as 12-14.5' but with some clay in matrix Some moist sediments, didn't encounter POORLY GRADED FINE SAND (SP) fully saturated zone Black. 80% fine to coarse subrounded sand with 15% fine to medium rounded gravel, some silty fines. Glay. Weathered siltstone bedrock 5.0 S-4 20 Boring terminated at 21 ft bgs. 25 .in PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I TB -B-2 SHEET 1 OF 1 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Turtle Bay ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/3/2021 END: 2/3/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a Z' °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs mn v w W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE z o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL LU o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� Hand Auger, Fill 3.0 • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL (GW) • • • 80% gravel with 20% sand 2.0 S-1 ••• 5 ••• NO RECOVERY No Recovery 1.0 S-2 From top to 8 feet the sediments were • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Brown to light gray. 70% gravel from fine to coarse with some cobbles up to 8", 30% sub moist. Then they became dry • • • angular to rounded fine to coarse sand 10 ••• 4.0 S-3 ••• 3.0 S-4 ••• 15 ... • • • Some moisture at 16-16.5 feet then bedrock is dry Glay. Weathered siltstone bedrock, friable, dry 20 10.0 S-5 25 Boring terminated at 26 ft bgs. PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I BP -B-1 SHEET 1 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL : 16.0 ftbgs START: 2/10/2021 END: 2/10/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC a o Z' °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs mn v w W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE z o LU DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� ... FILL (GW) • • • Hand Auger. Fill, Sand, Gravel 4.5 ••• 5 • • • WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (GW) • • • 60% Coarse gravel up to 8", 35% fine to coarse sand and silty fines. May be fill. 10 11.0 S-1 ••• NO RECOVERY Large cobble in bit pushed through No Recovery sample Large cobble in bit pushed through sample • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) 15 ... Brown. 70% Rounded coarse gravel, 20% coarse sand, 10% silty fines • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) ... 50-60% Rounded gravel from fine to 6", 30-35% fine to coarse angular to subrounded • • • sand, 5-10% silty fines, some layers cleaner than others. At 38' & 40' thin layers of poorly sorted sand with gravel. 20 4.5 S-2 ••• 25 ••• 6.0 S-3 ... ••• PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I BP -B-1 SHEET 2 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL : 16.0 ftbgs START: 2/10/2021 END: 2/10/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC a o F °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs v W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE z o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL LU o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� 6.0 S-3 NO RECOVERY No Recovery • POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP) 35 Brown. 65% rounded gravel up to 6", 30% med to coarse sub angular sand, 5% silty fines • • 40 12.0 S-4 •• SILTY GRAVEL WITH SAND (GM) Brown. About 45% med to coarse rounded gravel, 35% fine sand with 20% silty fines. Transition to Chico Fm. Some bedrock rip -up clasts in matrix. Weathered siltstone bedrock 45 Boring terminated at 46 It bgs. 50 55 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I BP -B-2 SHEET 1 OF 1 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL : 15.0ftbgs START: 2/9/2021 END: 2/9/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC W 0 3: < Z' (D0 SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 11 — LU SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS SAMPLE IDs Z > 0 W 0 COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE wD 0 0 DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o 0 Uj STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY FILL Hand Auger. Fill, sand and gravel 2.5 FILL Same as 0-2.5' 3.5 S-1 WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) 5 Black. Rounded gravel to 3", fine to coarse angular sand, very dark in color SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM) gray with brown mottling, 50% sand, 35% silty fines, 15% fine rounded gravel -Dark NO RECOVERY No Recovery SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM) 10 Dark gray with brown mottling, 50% sand, 35% silty fines, 15% fine rounded gravel SILTY SAND (ML) - 7.0 S-2 Black with brown mottling, 60% fine sand, 35% sility fines, 5% rounded gravel to 1" WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Brown, rounded fine gravel to cobbles up to 6", 40% medium to coarse subangular sand, some clayey fines. 15 WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Sediments saturated Brown. rounded gravel up to 2", 45% medium to coarse subangular sand, cleaner, less �fines than 11 -15. From 16-18', driller said he thinks seds NO RECOVERY are similar to 15-16' based on drilling. No Recovery Cobble in bit may have caused loss of recovery POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP) Blackish brown, 75% subangular to angular medium to coarse sand, 20-25% subangular fine gravel, trace fines. SILTY GRAVEL WIH SAND (GM) 20 Brown. 50% rounded gravel up to 6", 30-5% fine to medium subangular sand, 15-20% silty fines - 8.0 S-3 Glay. Weathered bedrock, siltstone 25 .in Boring terminated at 26 It bgs. PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I BP -B-3 SHEET 7 of 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/13/2021 END: 2/13/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a Z' °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs v W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE w0 o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� FILL Hand Auguer. Fill, cobble, sand and clay 4.0 A,6 "ti WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND SAND (GW -GC) 5 �.0 S :i Brown. 60% rounded gravel, 40% rounded fine to medium snad, 10% low plasticity ffl clayey fines. ire sAA NO RECOVERY No Recovery 10 8.0 S-2 • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Brown. 70% rounded gravel to 8", 25% fine to medium sand, 5% fines 15 • .•• • . WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SW) Saturated sediments start Brown. 60% fine to coarse angular to subrounded sand, 35% rounded gravel to 5", 5% 2.0 s-3 :: silty fines A6/ WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND SAND (GW -GC) 164/s/ Light orangish brown. 60% rounded gravel, 40% fine to coarse angular to subrounded »/ sand, 10% low plasticity clayey fines. Gravle clasts, metavolcanics, oxidized orange mottling in clay Prr 20 f1016 16 Ati 46h/ 8.0 S-4 S »' f' f ire 41,616 CLAYEY GRAVEL WITH SAND (GC) 23-24' Dry sediments Brown, grey. 50% subrounded gravel, highly weathered metavolcanic clasts. Fractured clasts with oxidation, 30% fine to coarse angular sand, 20% medium plasticity clayey 25 fines with trace grey silt. WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND SAND (GW -GC) Brown. 60% rounded gravel, 30% fine to coarse angular sand, 10% clayey fines f11 rt WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND (GW -GM) 8.0 S-5 .111 1.1 #1 Light orange/gley. 60% subangular gravel, clast cored that was 1' long, subrounded r� t weathered siltstone clasts, oxidized. 30$ angular fine to coarse sand, 10% silty fines rt�III I h1I; I PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I BP -B-3 SHEET 2 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/13/2021 END: 2/13/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a F °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w W SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs z v o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE LU o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� III 8.0 S-5 rltl 4 ( I t�I�I �Fltl rltl SII t6!�I Weathered bedrock, siltstone Dry at beginning of bedrock 35 5.0 S-6 Boring terminated at 38 It bgs. 40 45 50 55 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I H44 -B-1 SHEET 1 OF 1 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Highway 44 ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/11/2021 END: 2/11/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a Z' °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs v W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE w0 o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� FILL Hand Auger. Cobbles, sand and clay 3.0 FILL Cobbles, sand and clay 3.0 S-1 5 NO RECOVERY No Recovery • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) 10 ... Brown. 70% rounded gravel to 7', fine to coarse angular sand, 5% silty fines 7.0 S-2 ••• 15 ••• Saturated sediments POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) Brown. Fine to coarse sand, some rounded gravel. • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Brown. 70% rounded gravel to 3" with 25% fine to coarse angular sand with silty fines. WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SW) Brown. 80% fine to coarse angular sand with 15% rounded gravel to 2" with some silty 20 fines NO RECOVERY No Recovery - Large cobble displaced sediments 6.0 S-3 Dry at bedrock Glay, Weathered bedrock, siltone. Transition from gravel to siltstone 25 Boring terminated at 26 It bgs. PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I H44 -B-2 SHEET 1 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Highway 44 ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/12/2021 END: 2/12/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC W 0 3: < Z' 00 SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 11 — LU SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS SAMPLE IDs > 0 W 0 COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE Z wD 0 DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o 0 Uj STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY FILL Fill - gravel, sand, silt 5 POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP) Brown. 80% fine to med sand with 20% fine to medium rounded gravel POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) Brown. Fine to medium sand 10 10.0 S-1 POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP) Brown. 80% fine to med sand with 20% fine to medium rounded gravel WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Brown. 75% rounded gravel up to 8", 20% fine to coarse sand with 5% clayey fines 15 Saturated WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SW) Borwn. 75% coarse sand with 20% gravel up to 2", 5% clayey fines WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND SAND (GW -GC) Brown. Transistion to bedrock, rounded gravel to 6" with 20% fine sand, 5-10% clayey fines towards the bottom ffl frt 2010.0 S-2 r rr Glay, Weathered Bedrock, siltstone with some gravel Bedrock is different than other borings. It is siltstone mixed with gravel and some clay 25-- .in 10.0 S-3 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I H44 -B-2 SHEET 2 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Highway 44 ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/12/2021 END: 2/12/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a w mn LU z v o ° c� F w o w W o °o a SOIL DESCRIPTION SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs 10.0 S-3 35 Boring terminated at 35 It bgs. 40 45 50 55 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I SP -B-1 SHEET 1 OF 1 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Southern Pacific ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL : 16.0 ftbgs START: 2/16/2021 END: 2/16/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC a o Z' °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs v W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE z o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL LU o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� ... FILL (GW) ... Hand Auger. Fill. Gravel, sand, clay. 5.0 ••• 5 ••• SILTY SAND (SM) Brown. Fine sand with 20% silty fines. Trace fine gravel. Rounded rt 6I j I WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND (GW -GM) I I Brown. 60% rounded gravel, 20% angular fine to coarse sand and 10% silty fines i f I 7.0 S-1 rtI,•) * I i hI; 10 j SILTY SAND (SM) • • • Brown. 80% fine sand and 20% silty fines ... WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) • • • Brown. 65% angular gravel up to 4", 30% medium to coarse sand with clayey fines " • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND SAND (GW -GC) 44/6, Brown. 60% fine to coarse gravel, 30% fine to coarse sand, 10% clayey fines WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) • • • Brown. 50% gravel to 4", 45% fine to coarse sand, 5% clayey fines 15 ••• Moist, water present • �� WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND SAND (GW -GC) 164/e/ Brown. 60% fine to coarse gravel, wiht 30% fine to coarse sand and 10% clayey fines 10.0 s-2 ff� ire s �tii 20 Dry at bedrock Weathered siltstone bedrock Boring terminated at 22 It bgs. 25 Attachment 2 Drawdown Plots 0.02 0.04 0.06 bn 0.08 0 _0 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 BP -B-1 Step -test m ACID -B-1 Step -test w m m m w m ea m m m ACID -B-2 Step -test um m Attachment 3 Sieve Analyses Lab Results In 11 Mr. Mark Twede Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 2525 Airpark Drive Redding, CA 96001-2443 Materials Testing, Inc. 8798 Airport Road 865 Cotting Lane, Suite A Redding, California 96002 Vacaville, California 95688 (530) 222-1116, fax 222-1611 (707) 447-4025, fax 447-4143 Client No: 3283-004 Date: 02/08/2021 Subject: City of Redding PS #1 Collection Well LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Dear Mr. Twede: As requested, MATERIALS TESTING, INC. performed laboratory testing services for the samples submitted on 02/01/21. The samples were tested according to the referenced standard test procedures and relate only to the items inspected or tested. Any comments and exceptions are addressed under the Notes or Remarks section. Results included in this submittal package: 1.1 — Particle Size Distribution Report We appreciate the opportunity to provide our services to you on this project and look forward to providing additional service, as needed, in the future. The results included are for this project only and its intended use. Results are not transferable and shall not be reproduced, except in full, without written permission from MTI. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please contact our office at your convenience. Copies: 1 via mail Respectfully Submitted, MATERIALS T STING, INC. Andrew L. King, P.E. Principal. Engineer Construction Materials Testing and Quality Control Services Soil - Concrete - Asphalt - Steel - Masonry 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � NM o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 15 12 13 47 10 3 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 1 1/2" 97 1" 90 3/4" 85 1/2" 81 3/8" 78 #4 73 #8 64 #16 42 #30 20 #50 8 #100 4 #200 2.9 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Sand with Gravel (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 25.4000 D85= 19.0500 D60= 2.0186 D50= 1.4767 D30= 0.8378 D15= 0.4822 D10= 0.3561 Cu= 5.67 CC= 0.98 Classification USCS= SP AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 0300-001 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � Nm o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 57 31 6 4 1 1 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 1 1/2" 80 1" 60 3/4" 43 1/2" 29 3/8" 21 #4 12 #8 7 #16 5 #30 3 #50 2 #100 2 #200 1.4 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel (visual) Atterbe_rq Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 44.3729 D85= 41.2738 D60= 25.4000 D50= 21.5219 D30= 13.1628 D15= 6.6751 D10= 3.6911 Cu= 6.88 Cc= 1.85 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 0300-002 100 90 80 70 tr W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � NM o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. % Gravel % Sand % Fines +3„ Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 41 21 8 19 7 4 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 1 1/2" 93 1" 69 3/4" 59 1/2" 50 3/8" 46 #4 38 #8 32 #16 23 #30 14 #50 8 #100 5 #200 4.1 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterbe_rq Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 35.8305 D85= 32.9121 D60= 19.7888 D50= 12.7000 D30= 1.9747 D15= 0.6536 D10= 0.3966 Cu= 49.90 Cc= 0.50 Classification USCS= GP AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 0300-003 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � NM o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 28 34 12 15 7 4 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 11/2" 89 1" 82 3/4" 72 1/2" 58 3/8" 51 #4 38 #8 28 #16 20 #30 14 #50 9 #100 5 #200 4.0 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterbe_rq Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 39.4650 D85= 30.1759 D60= 13.5852 D50= 9.0897 D30= 2.7502 D15= 0.6802 DSO= 0.3467 Cu= 39.18 Cc= 1.61 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 0300-004 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � NM o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 34 33 11 11 6 5 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 1 1/2" 92 1" 75 3/4" 66 1/2" 54 3/8" 46 #4 33 #8 24 #16 17 #30 13 #50 9 #100 6 #200 5.1 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Silt & Sand (visual) Atterbe_rq Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 36.1309 D85= 32.1020 D60= 15.5332 D50= 11.0600 D30= 3.8266 D15= 0.8704 D10= 0.3575 Cu= 43.45 Cc= 2.64 Classification USCS= GW -GM AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 0300-005 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report o00 n- 0 000 0 0�0 100 10 1 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine 0 25 39 12 13 6 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 1 1/2" 100 D60= 12.3100 1" 87 D30= 3/4" 75 D15= 0.8156 1/2" 61 Cu= 3/8" 52 Cc= 2.32 #4 36 Classification #8 26 USCS= GW #16 18 AASHTO= #30 13 #50 9 #100 6 #200 4.8 Tested By: John Hubbard 0.1 0.01 % Fines Silt 5 Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterbe_rg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 27.5464 D85= 24.1620 D60= 12.3100 D50= 8.8835 D30= 3.2105 D15= 0.8156 D10= 0.3606 Cu= 34.14 Cc= 2.32 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 Date: 02/04/2021 Figure 0300-006 100 90 80 70 tr W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � NM o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 23 35 14 19 5 4 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 1 1/2" 96 1" 87 3/4" 77 1/2" 63 3/8" 57 #4 42 #8 31 #16 20 #30 11 #50 8 #100 6 #200 4.4 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterbe_rq Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 28.3230 D85= 23.8285 D60= 11.1336 D50= 6.8787 D30= 2.2080 D15= 0.8490 D10= 0.5240 Cu= 21.25 Cc= 0.84 Classification USCS= GP AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 0300-007 100 90 80 70 tr W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � NM o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 23 34 11 20 6 6 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 D60= 11.3716 1 1/2" 94 D30= 1" 85 D15= 0.6633 3/4" 77 Cu= 1/2" 63 Cc= 0.96 3/8" 56 Classification #4 43 USCS= GP -GM #8 34 AASHTO= #16 23 #30 14 #50 10 #100 7 #200 5.6 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Silt & Sand (visual) Atterbe_rq Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 31.581.4 D85= 25.4000 D60= 11.3716 D50= 7.1057 D30= 1.8085 D15= 0.6633 D10= 0.3000 Cu= 37.91 Cc= 0.96 Classification USCS= GP -GM AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � Nm o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. % Gravel % Sand % Fines +3„ Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 51 35 6 3 2 3 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 D60= 23.4755 1 1/2" 94 D30= 1" 65 D15= 5.1656 3/4" 49 Cu= 1/2" 30 Cc= 2.35 3/8" 24 Classification #4 14 USCS= GW #8 9 AASHTO= #16 7 #30 5 #50 5 #100 4 #200 3.3 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel (visual) Atterbe_rq Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 35.4208 D85= 32.9321 D60= 23.4755 D50= 19.4281 D30= 12.7000 D15= 5.1656 D10= 2.9197 Cu= 8.04 Cc= 2.35 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 0300-009 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � NM o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 28 34 13 18 3 4 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 1 1/2" 98 1" 82 3/4" 72 1/2" 58 3/8" 51 #4 38 #8 27 #16 17 #30 9 #50 6 #100 5 #200 4.1 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterbe_rq Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 30.4708 D85= 27.2548 D60= 13.5430 D50= 9.0797 D30= 2.8787 D15= 1.0200 DSO= 0.6706 Cu= 20.20 CC= 0.91 Classification USCS= GP AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 0300-010 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � NM o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. % Gravel % Sand % Fines +3„ Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 27 34 11 19 4 5 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 1 1/2" 95 1" 81 3/4" 73 1/2" 60 3/8" 53 #4 39 #8 30 #16 20 #30 11 #50 8 #100 6 #200 5.3 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Silt and Sand (visual) Atterbe_rq Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 32.5959 D85= 28.4887 D60= 12.7000 D50= 8.3129 D30= 2.3600 D15= 0.8457 D10= 0.5246 Cu= 24.21 Cc= 0.84 Classification USCS= GP -GM AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 0300-011 In 11 Mr. Mark Twede Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 2525 Airpark Drive Redding, CA 96001-2443 Materials Testing, Inc. 8798 Airport Road 865 Cotting Lane, Suite A Redding, California 96002 Vacaville, California 95688 (530) 222-1116, fax 222-1611 (707) 447-4025, fax 447-4143 Client No: 3283-004 Date: 02/17/2021 Subject: City of Redding PS #1 Collection Well —Bike Park LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Dear Mr. Twede: As requested, MATERIALS TESTING, INC. performed laboratory testing services for the samples submitted on 02/10/21. The samples were tested according to the referenced standard test procedures and relate only to the items inspected or tested. Any comments and exceptions are addressed under the Notes or Remarks section. Results included in this submittal package: 7 — Particle Size Distribution Report We appreciate the opportunity to provide our services to you on this project and look forward to providing additional service, as needed, in the future. The results included are for this project only and its intended use. Results are not transferable and shall not be reproduced, except in full, without written permission from MTI. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please contact our office at your convenience. Copies: 1 via mail Respectfully Submitted, MATERIALS T TING, INC. Andrew L. King, P.E. Principal Engineer Construction Materials Testing and Quality Control Services Soil - Concrete - Asphalt - Steel - Masonry 100 90 80 70 Of W 60 Z LL Z 50 W U Of W 40 IL 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report aoa 100 10 1 0.1 GRAIN SIZE - mm. +3" % Gravel % Sand Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine 0 31 35 13 11 6 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) I I) I I I I I L I I 1" --------- I I! I I I L --a L I 56 3/8" 49 #4 34 #8 23 I I I If I li I I I 1 1 -------L--- I I I I I! I I I I - I� I I I I I I I 1 I #50 -------- -------- -. I I I! I I I I I I I I I 4.2 I L I I li I I I I j { { .r } - li I I I I I! I I I I I I I I { I I --- ----- -------- . I I I I I I I } t--{ { - - I, I I I I I I I I I I I li I I I I I I I I) I 100 10 1 0.1 GRAIN SIZE - mm. +3" % Gravel % Sand Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine 0 31 35 13 11 6 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 1 1/2" 91 1" 76 3/4" 69 1/2" 56 3/8" 49 #4 34 #8 23 #16 17 #30 12 #50 8 #100 5 #200 4.2 Tested By: John Hubbard 0.01 % Fines Silt 4 Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 37.0733 D85= 32.5990 D60= 14.3969 D50= 9.9669 D30= 3.8248 D15= 0.9067 D10= 0.4339 Cu= 33.18 Cc= 2.34 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. 0.001 Date: 02/17/2021 Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding PS #1 Colection Well Project No: 3283-004 Figure 0300-001 100 90 80 70 W 60 Z LL Z 50 W U W 40 CL 30 20 10 0 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) 2 1/2" 100 2" 94 I 1 1/2" 81 1" 72 3/4" 59 1/2" 47 3/8" 42 #4 32 #8 24 #16 17 #30 11 #50 6 #100 4 #200 3.4 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 46.4126 D85= 41.8922 D60= 19.4759 D50= 14.5526 D30= 4.0403 D15= 0.9505 D10= 0.5322 Cu= 36.60 Cc= 1.57 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Date: 02/17/2021 Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding PS #1 Colection Well Project No: 3283-004 Figure 0300-002 100 90 80 70 W 60 Z LL Z 50 W U W 40 CL 30 20 10 0 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) 2 1/2" 100 2" 95 I 1 1/2" 84 1" 65 3/4" 51 1/2" 38 3/8" 32 #4 21 #8 14 #16 9 #30 7 #50 5 #100 4 #200 3.3 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 43.9588 D85= 38.9832 D60= 23.0098 D50= 18.6043 D30= 8.5429 D15= 2.6486 D10= 1.4095 Cu= 16.32 Cc= 2.25 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Date: 02/17/2021 Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding PS #1 Colection Well Project No: 3283-004 Figure 0300-003 100 90 80 70 Of W 60 Z LL Z 50 W U Of W 40 IL 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report aoa 100 10 1 0.1 GRAIN SIZE - mm. +3" % Gravel % Sand Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine 0 31 41 13 9 3 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) I I) I I I I L I I 1" --------- I I! I I I L -------a L I 52 3/8" 45 #4 28 #8 17 I I L I li I I I I 1 l L I! I I I I f { .{ I I I 1 I - -------- ---------- -------- -. I I I! I I I I I I I f } - I I 3.4 I L I I li I I I I j { { .} } - li I I I I f { { } F I! I I I I I I I { I { I --- ----- -------- . -------- I I I I I I I }-- { { - --- ---- I, I I I } } { I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 7�?7 I �1' it 100 10 1 0.1 GRAIN SIZE - mm. +3" % Gravel % Sand Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine 0 31 41 13 9 3 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 11/2" 98 1" 81 3/4" 69 1/2" 52 3/8" 45 #4 28 #8 17 #16 11 #30 7 #50 5 #100 4 #200 3.4 Tested By: John Hubbard 0.01 % Fines Silt 3 Material Description Brown Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 30.6865 D85= 27.6458 D60= 15.5673 D50= 11.8624 D30= 5.1864 D15= 1.9400 D10= 1.0205 Cu= 15.25 Cc= 1.69 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. 0.001 Date: 02/17/2021 Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding PS #1 Colection Well Project No: 3283-004 Figure 0300-004 100 90 80 70 W 60 Z LL Z 50 W U W 40 CL 30 20 10 0 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) 2 1/2" 100 2" 96 1 1/2" 82 1" 67 3/4" 57 1/2" 45 3/8" 39 #4 27 #8 19 #16 15 #30 11 #50 6 #100 4 #200 3.6 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 44.3674 D85= 40.3922 D60= 20.7669 D50= 15.3002 D30= 5.7576 D15= 1.1800 D10= 0.5250 Cu= 39.56 Cc= 3.04 Classification USCS= GP AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Date: 02/17/2021 Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding PS #1 Colection Well Project No: 3283-004 Figure 0300-005 100 90 80 70 Of W 60 Z LL Z 50 W U Of W 40 IL 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report aoa 100 PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) I I) I I I I L I 1" --------- I II I I I L-- a L I 62 3/8" 55 #4 37 #8 20 I I-------- L li I I I f 1 -------- I I 1— #50 ----------- --------- I I! I I I --- f } - ----- I 2.8 -------- ----------- 100 10 1 0.1 GRAIN SIZE - mm. +3" % Gravel % Sand Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine 0 23 40 20 13 1 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 11/2" 96 1" 90 3/4" 77 1/2" 62 3/8" 55 #4 37 #8 20 #16 9 #30 5 #50 4 #100 3 #200 2.8 Tested By: John Hubbard 0.01 % Fines Silt 3 Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 25.4000 D85= 22.4615 D60= 11.7706 D50= 7.7695 D30= 3.6273 D15= 1.8161 D10= 1.2904 Cu= 9.12 Cc= 0.87 Classification USCS= GP AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. 0.001 Date: 02/17/2021 Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding PS #1 Colection Well Project No: 3283-004 Figure 0300-006 100 90 80 70 W 60 Z LL Z 50 W U W 40 CL 30 20 10 0 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) 2 1/2" 100 2" 94 I 1 1/2" 91 1" 80 3/4" 74 1/2" 67 3/8" 61 #4 49 #8 36 #16 17 #30 7 #50 6 #100 5 #200 4.6 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 36.0793 D85= 30.0189 D60= 9.0646 D50= 5.0645 D30= 1.8884 D15= 1.0802 D10= 0.8121 Cu= 11.16 Cc= 0.48 Classification USCS= GP AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Date: 02/17/2021 Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding PS #1 Colection Well Project No: 3283-004 Figure 0300-007 In 11 Mr. Mark Twede Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 2525 Airpark Drive Redding, CA 96001-2443 Materials Testing, Inc. 8798 Airport Road 865 Cotting Lane, Suite A Redding, California 96002 Vacaville, California 95688 (530) 222-1116, fax 222-1611 (707) 447-4025, fax 447-4143 Client No: 3283-005 Date: 02/24/2021 Subject: City of Redding PS #1 Collection Well Southern Pacific Railroad, Bike Park, ACID LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Dear Mr. Twede: As requested, MATERIALS TESTING, INC. performed laboratory testing services for the samples submitted on 02/16/21. The samples were tested according to the referenced standard test procedures and relate only to the items inspected or tested. Any comments and exceptions are addressed under the Notes or Remarks section. Results included in this submittal package: 9 — Particle Size Distribution Report We appreciate the opportunity to provide our services to you on this project and look forward to providing additional service, as needed, in the future. The results included are for this project only and its intended use. Results are not transferable and shall not be reproduced, except in full, without written permission from MTI. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please contact our office at your convenience. Copies: 1 via mail Respectfully Submitted, MATERIALS STING, INC. Andrew L. King P.E. Principal Engineer Construction Materials Testing and Quality Control Services Soil - Concrete - Asphalt - Steel - Masonry 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � _ _� o NM 10o�N 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 39 28 9 17 3 4 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER c0 N .— M 7t ?k ik ik ik it tk it ik 2" 80 11/2" 80 V, 68 3/4" 61 IdI I I I 3/8" 45 #4 33 #8 25 #16 19 #30 9 #50 6 #100 4 #200 3.7 I I� I I I I LI- 1 NHI� I II I I I I L L- I — — ----------- I I I� I 11 I I I I I I I I I I I II I I� I I I I I I I - T S { --- ----- -------- . }------- - --- ---- { { I II I I I I I I I I I� I I I I I I I I I 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 39 28 9 17 3 4 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 3" 100 2 1/2" 91 2" 80 11/2" 80 V, 68 3/4" 61 1/2" 49 3/8" 45 #4 33 #8 25 #16 19 #30 9 #50 6 #100 4 #200 3.7 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Reddish Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 62.3856 D85= 57.1714 D60= 18.3678 D50= 13.2517 D30= 3.8778 D15= 0.9062 D10= 0.6533 Cu= 28.11 Cc= 1.25 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS#1 Collector Well Redding, California Project No: 3283-005 F Date: 02/24/2021 0300-001 Particle Size Distribution Report o00 _C\1 M� 0 00010 o�o 100 I li I I I I I I I I� I I I I 90 80 Nr70 L1 1 I -------- 1 �__ 1--w s01-- -.f}-- ----- Z 50 lu ry W 40 L } j .} }--- ----- 1 }-- { j 30 .I- - 1 --------- 1 - --- ---- I II I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 10 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0 30 28 17 14 5 6 Material Description SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) Brown Gravel with Silt & Sand (visual) Atterbe_rg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 43.5185 D85= 36.4472 D60= 10.9051 D50= 6.5571 D30= 2.6446 D15= 0.8254 D10= 0.3660 Cu= 29.80 Cc= 1.75 Classification USCS= GW -GM AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. * (no specification provided) Location: Bike Park B-3 Sample Number: 2 Depth: 15.0'- 17.0' Date: 02/24/2021 Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. �r Project: City of Redding - PS#1 Collector Well 1 Redding, California ' aK.wA Project No: 3283_005 Figure 0300-002 SIEVE PERCENT SPEC." i PASS? 2 1/2" 100 2" 95 11/2" 86 1" 79 3/4" 70 1/2" 62 3/8" 58 #4 42 #8 28 #16 18 #30 13 #50 9 #100 7 #200 5.7 Tested By: John Hubbard Particle Size Distribution Report o00 _C\1 M� 0 00010 o�o 100 90 80 70LL1 I L L l -------- 1 L__ w 60 I L I�--1 .I--- t-- - -. I I( I Z 50 lu ry W 40 L } 1 1 .} } } 1 --- ----- }-- { l 30.I------ J- --- ---- I II I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 10 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine ESilt Clay 0 1 6 0 0 39 54 Material Description SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) Brown Sandy Clay (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 0.1899 D85= 0.1500 D60= 0.0841 D50= D30= D15= D10= Cu= cc= Classification USCS= CL AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. * (no specification provided) Location: ACID B-3 Sample Number: 3 Depth: 10.0'- 12.0' Date: 02/24/2021 x Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. T Project: City of Redding - PS#1 Collector Well t Redding, California Pro'ect No: 3283-005 Figure 0300-003 SIEVE PERCENT SPEC." i PASS? 1" 100 3/4" 99 1 /2" 96 3/8" 95 #4 93 #8 93 #16 93 #30 93 #50 93 #100 85 #200 54 Tested By: John Hubbard 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report G G O O O 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 0 0 0 4 73 23 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 1/2" 100 3/8" 100 #4 100 #8 100 #16 100 #30 99 #50 86 #100 42 #200 23 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Gray Clayey Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 0.3298 D85= 0.2939 D60= 0.1992 D50= 0.1718 D30= 0.1093 D15= D10= Cu= Cc= Classification USCS= SC AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS#1 Collector Well Redding, California Project No: 3283-005 F Date: 02/24/2021 0300-004 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z w Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � _ _� o NM 10o�N 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 48 22 7 9 7 7 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER c0 N .— M 7t ?k ik ik ik it tk it ik 2" 80 1 1/2" 71 V, 58 3/4" 52 1/2" 43 3/8" 39 #4 30 #8 24 #16 19 #30 16 #50 12 #100 9 #200 7.2 LI-- l L L l -------- I L-- I� I I I I t I I --------- I II I I I I I II I I I .I------- ---- I I l --- ----- I II I } t--{ - - I I l I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 48 22 7 9 7 7 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 3" 100 2 1/2" 80 2" 80 1 1/2" 71 V, 58 3/4" 52 1/2" 43 3/8" 39 #4 30 #8 24 #16 19 #30 16 #50 12 #100 9 #200 7.2 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Reddish Brown Gravel with Silt & Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 70.6798 D85= 67.6310 D60= 27.5829 D50= 17.4409 D30= 4.7500 D15= 0.4973 D10= 0.1975 Cu= 139.69 Cc= 4.14 Classification USCS= GW -GM AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS#1 Collector Well Redding, California Project No: 3283-005 F Date: 02/24/2021 0300-005 Particle Size Distribution Report o00 _� 0 00010 o�o 100 I li I I I I I I I I� I I I I 90 80 70 1 l L L l -------- w 60 1 1 L I�-- 1 .............. --- t - - - ----- zZ 50 lu ry a 40 L r 1 1 F - .r 1 --- ----- } t-- { 1 3o.I- ------- - --- ---- 20 — 11 I II I I I I I I I I I I I 10 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE - mm. % Gravel % Sand % Fines +3„ Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0 53 25 6 7 5 4 Material Description SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterbe-rg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 55.2973 D85= 51.5314 D60= 33.4149 D50= 22.6124 D30= 8.8816 D15= 1.5154 D10= 0.5051 Cu= 66.15 Cc= 4.67 Classification USCS= GP AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. * (no specification provided) Location: ACID B-3 Sample Number: 6 Depth: 26.0'- 28.0' Date: 02/24/2021 tet, ,•fi5 f Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS#1 Collector Well t Redding, California Pro'ect No: 3283-005 Figure 0300-006 SIEVE PERCENT SPEC." i PASS? 2 112" 100 2" 84 1 1 /2" 66 1" 52 3/4" 47 1/2" 36 3/8" 31 #4 22 #8 17 #16 14 #30 11 #50 7 #100 5 #200 4.1 Tested By: John Hubbard 100 90 80 70 tr W 60 Z w Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � _ _� o Nm 10o�N 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. % Gravel % Sand % Fines +3„ Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 52 24 6 7 6 L 5 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER c0 I N .— I M 7t ?k ik ik ik it tk it ik I I I NH'1� I Cu= V, 55 Cc= 4.61 I Id I I I I 'I�HH 3/8" 32 AASHTO= #4 24 #8 19 #16 15 #30 12 #50 9 #100 6 #200 5.1 I I I I I I I I I I! I I I I I I) I L) 1 I I I I L L -I I I -------- I I! I I I I I I� I I I I .I--- tI I I I I I I -------- -. I II I I I I I II I I I I I I --- ----- I II I } I I I I II I } { I I I { } F I 1 { --------- I t-- I I } } { { I I { I 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. % Gravel % Sand % Fines +3„ Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 52 24 6 7 6 L 5 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 3" 100 D60= 39.4890 21/2" 70 D30= 2" 70 D15= 1.1800 1 1/2" 59 Cu= V, 55 Cc= 4.61 3/4" 48 Classification 1/2" 37 USCS= GP -GM 3/8" 32 AASHTO= #4 24 #8 19 #16 15 #30 12 #50 9 #100 6 #200 5.1 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Silt & Sand (visual) Atterbe-rg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 72.5475 D85= 70.6801 D60= 39.4890 D50= 20.3354 D30= 8.2484 D15= 1.1800 D10= 0.3735 Cu= 105.72 Cc= 4.61 Classification USCS= GP -GM AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS#1 Collector Well Redding, California Project No: 3283-005 F Date: 02/24/2021 0300-007 Particle Size Distribution Report o00 _C\1 M� 0 00010 o�o 100 I li I I I I I I I I� I I I I 90 80 70 L1-- 1 I L L I -------- 1 �__ 1 -� I I I I w 60 - -. - - I f } tL. Z 50 lu ry W 40 L } j .} } j --- ----- }-- { j 30.I------ �--- - --- ---- 20 I 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I, I I I I I I II I I I 7i, I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE - mm. % Gravel % Sand % Fines +3„ Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0 41 29 7 13 6 4 SIEVE PERCENT SPEC." PASS? Material Description SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) Grayish Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterbe-rg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 43.4015 D85= 38.9372 D60= 19.6888 D50= 14.1245 D30= 4.7500 D15= 0.7406 DSO= 0.4399 Cu= 44.76 Cc= 2.61 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. * (no specification provided) Location: ACID B-3 Sample Number: 8 Depth: 30.0'- 32.0' Date: 02/24/2021 tet, ,Fay Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS#1 Collector Well z Redding, California Project No: 3283-005 Figure 0300-008 i 2 1/2" 100 2" 96 1 1 /2" 84 1" 68 3/4" 59 1 /2" 47 3/8" 40 #4 30 #8 24 #16 19 #30 13 #50 7 #100 5 #200 4.1 Tested By: John Hubbard 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z Z 50 w U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � _ _� o NM 10o�N 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine FSilt 0 39 27 10 14 5 5 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER c0 N .— M 7t ?k ik ik ik it tk it ik 2" 88 1 1/2" 81 V, 69 3/4" 61 1/2" 50 3/8" 45 #4 34 #8 26 #16 19 #30 12 #50 8 #100 6 #200 5.0 LI- 1 L L- I — — -------- ----------- I II I I I I I ---------- - --------- I I� I I I I I II I I I I I -------- I II I I I I I II I I I I I { I I I I I I I 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine FSilt 0 39 27 10 14 5 5 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 3" 100 21/2" 88 2" 88 1 1/2" 81 V, 69 3/4" 61 1/2" 50 3/8" 45 #4 34 #8 26 #16 19 #30 12 #50 8 #100 6 #200 5.0 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Grayish Brown Gravel with Silt & Sand (visual) Atterbe-rg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 66.4897 D85= 44.6212 D60= 18.4041 D50= 12.7000 D30= 3.4555 D15= 0.8176 D10= 0.4542 Cu= 40.52 Cc= 1.43 Classification USCS= GW -GM AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS#1 Collector Well Redding, California Project No: 3283-005 F Date: 02/24/2021 0300-009 Construction Cost Estimate 01 roject Project Name: DR imator: Nick RDD .Jacobs Job Size: Project Number W8 Y 6 Replacement SUMMARYREPORTExisting PS Location Rev 3 Rev s on/Date: 3C/ Marllri 2022 Duration: Design Stage: Feasibility Estimate Class: 4 .AKS .. aakity .. .. , p4snrH "' ' Takaa4fqu'atwt#y .. ... .. e4*,0!WAlMt ... "hlatbtkJtGXSt♦{iitit ... ... Stt4t CagtItirdt ... . , t1th G'astYitMt ... . , hie" TotahC and Tatopik s... 798,261 6,137.267 hrs Subtotal Tit Prime Markups "",I 16,028,296 Non Markup Items 2,212,854 Subtotal W1 Escalation 2,212,854 18,241,150 - _ 01 Alt 1: Existing PS1..Location 25.000 % Subtotal / Design Contingency 4,560,288 22,801,438 Construction Contingency 3,420,216 15.000 % Total Construction Cost; 3,420,216 26,221,654 )DI 1M biliaat n` —bili -11 n 100 LS _ ILS _ ILS _ ILS ILS 518,00000 R.S 518,00000 R.S 518000 51800000 ILS 518000_ 002 Bondny_/lisvrance 100 LS _ ILS /L9 /L9 /L9 38680000 /L8 386,80000 /L8 386,800 38680000 /L8 386,800_ 003 Ste Clear ng/Grubb ng _ _ _ 1.00 L9 14,198 98 /L9 50&73 /LS 4.1%31 31 /LS 5,000M ILLS `Ls 29,054 02 ILS 29,054 40,824 61 ILLS _ 40,825 004 ell. Qavements _ 1.00 LS 200,98&59 59 ILS 157,380M /L9 170,683M /L9 109,500M /_L9 938,800M ILS 1,577,351,62 /L9 1,577,352 2 211 &45 && !LS 2,211.846 005 Irtake and Pumpng Plant 412400P SF 1955 'SF S46 /SF 12688 /SF 6629 /SF _ ISF 21818 /SF 8,997858 33371 /SF 13,762,317 006 Conveyance PpeW— and Surge Tank 100 LS _ 91161S /LS 6,95749 ILS 4457600 ILS 30160000 ILS _ ILS 362,24964 ILS 362,250 _ 54740426 ILS 547,409 007 El-W-1lmproverzcants_ 100 L9 _ 1?57470 ILS 1,47&95 /L9 200000_0 ILS 1650000 /L9 /LS 55,.55365 /L3 55,554 9294274 /_L9 92,943 _ _ 008 Ste Utilities 1,00 LS 3 141 07 ILS 3 5 290 ILS 25,000.00 ILS _ ILS _ /LS 2&,434 57 ILS 28,435 _ 48,78916 ILS _ 48,790 012 Fxstng. Pump Statan 1 Demaltan 100 LS 21799814 ILS 169,69222 'LS 2000000 ILS ILS ILS 407,69036 ILS ! 407,690 56969544 !LS 569,695 013 Rl— Tra I R --fl— Pat Construct pn 1,00 LS 14.85&36 {LS 3,539M ILS 25,000M ILS /LS /LS 43,394M !LS 43,395 62 52571 ILS 62,526 01 Alt 1: Existing PS1 Location 1.00 LS 1,284,108.36 /LS 570,282.85 /LS 5,542,071.01 /LS 3,166,325.00 /LS 1,843,600.00 /LS 12,406,387.22 /LS '.. 12,406,387 18,241,150.76 /LS 18,241,151 Estimate Totals Labor 1,847,726 18,621.262 hrs Material 8,877,760 Subcontract 4,504,549 Equipment 798,261 6,137.267 hrs Subtotal Tit Prime Markups 16,028,296 16,028,296 Non Markup Items 2,212,854 Subtotal W1 Escalation 2,212,854 18,241,150 Design Contingency 4,560,288 25.000 % Subtotal / Design Contingency 4,560,288 22,801,438 Construction Contingency 3,420,216 15.000 % Total Construction Cost; 3,420,216 26,221,654 COR P1 Replacement Alt 1 Site Rev 3 3/1/2022 4:33 PM Page 1 01 DETAIL REPORT �. Project type: Project Name: COR P1 Replacement Alt 1 Existing PS Location Rev 3 Estimator: Nick Cavalleri/RDD Job Size: Project Number: W8Y06200 Revision/Date: 3 / Mar 1, 2022 Duration: Design Stage: Feasibility Estimate Class: 4 COR P1 %plao —t Alt 1 Slte Rev 3 3/1/2022 4:36 PM Page 1 01 DETAIL REPORT �. Project type: Project Name: COR P1 Replacement Alt 1 Existing PS Location Rev 3 Estimator: Nick Cavalleri/RDD Job Size: Project Number: W8Y06200 Revision/Date: 3 / Mar 1, 2022 Duration: Design Stage: Feasibility Estimate Class: 4 ; kaa .. .. �^IcYk ,b9.., 12bt1ChF'1iV' i{Ytettriye .. #¢'Sb,NpUr+n ... "1`xkenf(taixentiLy ... ...ta4rtr'Ccsryllrvtt... ... n fpbrre4t(6rc.... .. M-Itt ial6`ea tlUfrlt... ...3abCa9tNatt... .., tay+v+Cug,Wnh ... '##rn6Ytnva(Ca write ' iNreSfTawF . .. YiizndTaWf#des...-genarala- ......0111111 '', 26.89 ICV '', 67 ',.. 4151 ICV '', 104 tat <<< o 1 "'p-1 1<. 11 Sf`uc d dI concrete Pac,9, slab on 9ratle PumPetl over 6" -nclutles 250 CV 21.18 ICV '', 511 ICV '', '', thick stoke off & dpnso tlafon exclutles material Cf -h flrs fpr spcf mtl ccs firs ac dss 1,2 3 a,d I,- d cm Ps ovd fir fit, A, vel f35/25,bu11 fltmdh, MAIV t -I I - -bid) -I p cn strkn 120 00 sf _ It d Isf 1103 Isf - - 0.91 If 109 140 Isf 168 Curing sprayed memb ,e dung compound - - - 03 1113 11C.m !n -f_. e ger 110 e a5b E h25< 1,700004 ftanP S(�o E! ncaf Ropy pmen(Peds 0300 006 Pt. SlaOon hfVAC Pad _120 csf J`+) l`Y _250 CY 91 /csf 101.11 C.Y 401 t0 /C.Y _ 169 /CY _ 76B 1C.IF _ 1220 luf _ 1Ff IN CY_ CY _ 36178 /CY _ /CIF _ 21.94 /csf _ 26 CY 611._1/ CY 1616 _ /C.Y 670,5/ IC.Y 16"]6;_ 3_487 luf 42 1161 F1 CY I - 1064]6 IC.Y _ 2662 _. P 11)05 )f �saFc P (rE@c 1c41 .6 li'uG� C.I P,=, forms, slab on 9ratle. etl9e wpptl to 6 h gh, 4 us dudes erect3q brad ng stnpp,gand dean. Steel, in place. slab on 9ratle. #3 to #], 1615. 9ratle ',. t12 00 1f 015 tan ',. 4.25 1If ',. 1 200.60 Iron ',. - ',. - ',. 045 I11 ',. - 1500.00 Iron ',. - ',. 470 11f ',. 150 ',, I. 2,700.60 Iron ',. 405 728 I f ',. 233 4,291 73 Iron '., 644 60,-n -, for acces excI mate -al for accessories Re Morc ng nplace.0 loatl ng&sort nq,_add to above slabs 1St tcp-v,,Idy m. normal wt 4500 p--Wd-ocal a99re9ate santl,Portland cement antl water,del,-d -I- .1I _ ',.. adafYes and t-tmema Structural pl.-96" '', _015 tan 150 cy 125 CV '', 41.]0 /ton 21.18 ICV '', 66].. Iron - 511 ICV '', 13300 Icy - '', 48.40 Iron Z,_ 133.00 Icy oc ,. '', ', 26.89 ICV '', 34 ',. 7,153 /ton 11 21625 /cy 324 4149 /CV '', 52 concrete slab on gratle PumPetl, over thick -nclutles stoke off & donso tlafon, exclutles material _... spcf mtlm acts firs ac clss 1,2 ,3 antl 4,acM1v a '', fir fit, A, vel f35/25,bu11 fltmchn fit -I I -I lwlk bhn1 exc p cn -, 6,100 sf '', _ 0.88 Isf '', 0.03 Isf '', '', i.. '', ', 0.91 If '', 58 ',. 140 If '', 90 Curing s,dyed me -d-- dg compound _ _064 If 975 /csf 1220 luf_ 21.95 /csf 14 3491 /csf _ 22_ 'In, gred„ fine grad for slab on -I -h- 0.$ 057601, 1,411,- r yea SW, I'll (I1,1d, 6lh.- 0 00 00 ,76 P -P st n hIVAC Pad - _ 0300008 Pv SlaOon Swtchgear Pad 711 sy 'I:5 rY _ 1 25 1 1.02 /sy I,.: 7 CY 434.57 ICY _ 070 _/sy 1i i'll lY _ 1t BO�C.Y _ _ 1113/ C_Y_ lYfY _ _ RSJ 3] /C.Y /C.V _ _ 1 .72 rey 12 114,14 1Cv 111. _ _ - /C.V 70414 IC 810 ..2 65 Isy _ 19 111618 C i191 ] i 1018 /C. IF _ ] 3B6 1,4 )051.' -F 11145. ,1l>_.'21;><Gr C.IP. concrete forms, slab on 9ratle. etl9e wpptl over 12° 4 us clutles erecting brat ng stnpPng and dean., Re morc,g Steel, in pl ce. slab d1,,dde. #3 to #7 A615,dd, 86 00 sfca 1 05 tan 7.57 1-- 1 200.63 Ito, '., - 143 1-- 1 500 00 /ton - '., 9.00 1-774 270063 Ito, 2 836 1401 1-1 205 4 291 70 Ito, 4 506 ''. 60,-n -, for acces excI mate -al for accessories Re Morcng n place F-d,g& sortn,,add to above slabs Strut cp-v, r,Idy m. normal wt 4500 p--Wd-ocal a99re9ate santl,Portland cement antl water,del Yereaezclutles al _ ',.. adafYes and o-eatmems Structural pl.-96" '', 105 tan 1250 cy 1 1200 CV '', 4171 /ton i1 21.18 ICV '', 670 Ito, - 511 ICV '', 133.00 /cy i - '', 4841 /ton 51 1 i 133.00 /cy i 16631 ,. '', ', 26.89 /CV '', 323 ', 7.4_70 /ton 78 21624 /cy i 2,703 41 50 /CV '', 498 concrete slab on gratle PumPetl, over thick -nclutles stoke off & cpnso tlafon. exclutles material Cfnc�M1 firs fpr spcf and ccs firs ac dss 123 antl4-a fir fit, A, vel f35/25,bu11 fltmchn fit -I I -I lwlk bhn1 exc p cn strkn 30600 sf 0.88 Isf 003 Isf - - 0.91 If 2781 I ... 140 Isf 429 C_unngspreyed memb adoring co Qund _ 306 csf 975 /csf 1220 luf 21.94 /csf 6Z; 3488 luf 10Z Fine gratl,g fine g,dd for slab on gratle.-h- 0,4 1 105111 1,411""Y 1y CP1 1.45 PIP "111yµ 0.700008 P111P Stenon Swtchgear Pad_ 03 00 ,ma Mr... _3400 sy ep 11 lY 1200 CY 3J 7g CY 1.02 1, 919/1)9 l;Y 212.02 /CY 205,11 1Y _ 0]0./sy - j-gB�CY 891 /CY 8:3. /Cv _ _ - 11115 llY - 1l`Y _ 21315 1yy /CV 99.162 /G v. 1 _ _ 1.72 Isy 5`3 - fY c641s CY - 11 111 /CV 504.16 /CV 6050;.. 1 508,7; 1Y 171711 _ 265 Isy 90 6174, 5CY _ 9F1] 80143 /CY 961] .11B I 27321. 0400000 Pv P qS"" Exte. or CMU Wafts _.. /4100101 M 4r C ceG�aV rllrr� 8' Grout door frames,3 x] open ng 25C_F per open ng 200 opng 3416 loan, 219 lop,, 1385 loan, 50.19 lop,, 100 7861 lop,, 157 G_mut doo tremas 6x7 open ng 35C,F perogen ng '', Grout for bond beams, lutes 100 opng 1]15 ex 45.54 loan, 5.86 Idf 292 loan, 0.37 If '', 1940 lopes 5.55 62.86 loan, 68 11.78 Icf '', 20213 10632 loan, 106 1864 Icf 31,981 and concrete masonry Frit/CMU) cares C476 nclutles material only cf _ R_emorcng st-1 bars 1615 placed honzonta aergge ttabar Masonry re more bars, #3 #4 reimorc bars, 164746 Ib 111588 Ib 126 flb 1.62 flb '', _ ''., _ 040 flb _ 0.62 11,'', _ 1.66 Ib _ 2731 ''., 2.24 111, '', 3838 259 Ib _ 4269 350 Ib '', 6,010 n9 and n9 steel did vert dally ASTM 1615 (Masonry e -n9 bars truss type re Morc 5411 028.29 /cf - 1,. - 2950 /elf 5719 103127 9162 /cf 4958 steel tont n9 m11 standartl s.1,d, d 12 -, Co bock decor tYe faced -d face 2000 6,86500 SF 874 /SF 560 ISF 14.34 /SF 98421 2259 /SF 155.068 rete spit ps 8 x8"x16" exclutles scat d., grout antl Farad -ng... - - P,gleframing,-tura) area, 2"x2 x1/4", field ob-t,d Incl curt,, &-d n9 3400 If 22.81 If 124 If 252 If - 26.57 If 9031 4121 If 1401 c".-,wetarrepellents spreyed on CMU 2caet _ 13.73000 0.19 Isf 087 1.00 Isf 136.91 161 If 22047 Regit nc and-pperaoy 20 ounce Regi t dounter flasking f 'll and capper Illy 20 ounce, 12 wide - - - 0.455 1 R F1V ?_ r CCr c�r r'lf 616 _ 36200 If If 36200 If 616`01 ?I 253 flf 4.39 If ',. 1706 11 _ _ - ',. 01).1 _ If _ 28] If 5.25 111 ',. - )54 SF. St _ _ _ 5.40 If 1956 ',. 9.64 I f 3491 St 11.64 St 146:-1,. ... _ 858 If 3105 1532 I f 5.545 14 )A `S1 114 641.. 74 Q400000Ran'"" tori EztenorCMUWafk ( iln(enorCMUWaf1s v S"-' 0400002 -'P" 14 10 0101 `11 - Grout doorframes 3'. T open ng 25C_F per pen , 4$6500 SF 100 opng 12,10 /SF 3416 loan, - Ot015F 219 .loan, - B54 /SF - /SF 1385 loan, - /SF 2i ¢4 IF - 1485401 50.20 loan, 50 ,74 18 /SF - 234647. 2862 loan Z9 g _ _ R_e motto, stae bars A615 placed honzonta) a ergge #4 bar Masonry re more bars,lf3- lt4 reimorci,g bars, 16980 Ib 12485 Ib 126 111, 1.62 111, '', _ ''., _ 040 flb _ 0.62 11,'', _ 1.66 Ib _ 2'1440 ''., 2.24 it '', 279 Ib _ 440 350 Ib 437 n9 steel pl-d --fly, ASTM A615 __... Concrt block,M1igM1 1. 50000 SF ', 7.28 /SF ', - 1,. - 4.16 /SF ', .. 1,, 1,. 1144 ISF ', 5]20 1,, 1800 /SF ', 9,000 stm9thollow,3500 Psi,8"8"16;nclutls mortar antl h-tidiot m(rcn9 every other dourse,exc utls sclntln,grout antl vert cl mfrcng Pn91e framing, 2x2 fleltl fabricated incl '', 8 00 If '', 22.81 I f ',. 1.24 I f ',. 2.52 If ',. '.. ... '',. ',. 26.57 I f ',. 213 ',. 41 21 If ',. 330 structural stee, x1/4", cutin,&weltl n9 Sl e water epelle_ts sprayed on CMU l dpat_ 11411 118 Jnr.._. r f a ts4?. e.Wfi B' 0400002 PurnPfpq St -I Inferior CMUWaf1s 4s +larrvul _ - - 050 I./.1ela4 100000 sf ..1011) I 1`0000 SF `,71`00 11 014 M_ +i.at fs1 8R3 /5F 1176 IF 0)1.1 002 /SF - 010 IF _ 040 If _ 411 SF. �1 _ 532 1 /SF _ 925 /SF - /S1 _ 0.54 M_ 540 �t 14,17 11 11..1.. /SF 14.1] /SF ].084';.. - /S1 2113 /SF - 155X14 087 M86] St i 111' 2231,{ 2230 /SF j,337 IF _ 11798 0500004 '.' Ih S ear rllnfsA.e 911s1e!l Sc eP.n Pan@As SST ESM1 Screens wlF ames and Re morcement _ SS Spare Fsh Screens wl I`-- aria ---t _(Purchase -1y) 1000 EA 100 ee _ 60527 IEA '. _ 16]10IEA '. _ 1770000 IEA '. _ - 1770000 lea - '. _ 18472.37 IEA '. _ 184 ]24 17700.00 lea 177001 _ 2719828 IEA 271.983 2612211 lea 26122 Offload of equ pment to be ti- o s ta._ lud,g spa a screens 1 00 Is 503 02 I s _ 491 12 I s _ _ _ 994.14 1Y _ 994 138516 1385 Poosty Plates Alla-- 1000 EA oa2] IEA '', 16].10 IEA '', 17]0000 IFA '', - ''., 18,4]2.3] IFA '', 134 724 2],19828 /EA 271.983 COR P1 Replaoernent Alt 1 Slee Rev 3 3/1/2022 4:36 PM Page 2 01 DETAIL REPORT �. Project type: Project Name: COR P1 Replacement Alt 1 Existing PS Location Rev 3 Estimator: Nick Cavalleri/RDD Job Size: Project Number: W8Y06200 Revision/Date: 3 / Mar 1, 2022 Duration: Design Stage: Feasibility Estimate Class: 4 COR P1 %plao —t Alt 1 Slte Rev 3 3/1/2022 4:36 PM Page 3 01 DETAIL REPORT �. Project type: Project Name: COR P1 Replacement Alt 1 Existing PS Location Rev 3 Estimator: Nick Cavalleri/RDD Job Size: Project Number: W8Y06200 Revision/Date: 3 / Mar 1, 2022 Duration: Design Stage: Feasibility Estimate Class: 4 reap SEAtio i u�.:nont �., EY o 1r x ( S(e0on Oemohlwn oamon1on or e.lstinp Is 1 crew ana Duration 11 a r sry ron �z Doo ae rpas sr tne�„Qnran 42 F Cor,m(iprns 65J spng Primps enwlrt on roll Restorptlpn Pwt Cons4'uctlon COR P1 %plao -t Alt 1 Slte Rev 3 3/1/2022 4:36 PM Page 4 01 DETAIL REPORT �. Project type: Project Name: COR P1 Replacement Alt 1 Existing PS Location Rev 3 Estimator: Nick Cavalleri/RDD Job Size: Project Number: W8Y06200 Revision/Date: 3 / Mar 1, 2022 Duration: Design Stage: Feasibility Estimate Class: 4 COR P1 %plao —t Alt 1 Slte Rev 3 3/1/2022 4:36 PM Page 5 01 DETAIL REPORT �. Project type: Project Name: COR P1 Replacement Alt 1 Existing PS Location Rev 3 Estimator: Nick Cavalleri/RDD Job Size: Project Number: W8Y06200 Revision/Date: 3 / Mar 1, 2022 Duration: Design Stage: Feasibility Estimate Class: 4 Estimate Totals Labor 1,284,108 18,621.262 hrs Material 5,542,071 Subcontract 3,166,325 Equipment 570,283 6,137.267 hrs Subtotal Direct Costs 10,562,787 10,562,787 Material Sales Tax 457,221 8.250 Subtotal Wit Sales Tax 457,221 11,020,008 Concrete Work I,OH&P 2,576 15.000 Masonry Work I,OH&P 23,344 15.000 Architectural (Div 6-12)I,OH&P 20,807 15.000 Mechanical Work I,OH&P 29,295 20.000 Electrical Work I,OH&P 169,174 25.000 Process Piping I,OH&P 20.000 Instruments & Controls I,OH&P 29,567 25.000 Process Equipment I,OH&P 578,911 15.000 Subtotal W1 Subcontractor OH&P 853,674 11,873,682 General Conditions 712,421 6.000 Subtotal W/ General Conditions 712,421 12,586,103 Prime Contractor Overhead 1,510,332 12.000 Prime Contractor Profit 845,786 6.000 Subtotal W1 Prime Markups 2,356,118 14,942,221 Non Markup Items 1,843,600 Subtotal W/ Non Markup Items 1,843,600 16,785,821 Escalation 1,455,331 8.670 Subtotal W/ Escalation 1,455,331 18,24.1,152 Design Contingency 4,560,288 25.000 Subtotal W/ Design Contingency 4,560,288 22,801,440 Construction Contingency 3,420,216 15.000 Subtotal W1 Construction Contingency 3,420,216 26,221,656 Total Construction Cost 26,221,656 COR P1 %plao —t Alt 1 Slte Rev 3 3/1/2022 4:36 PM Page 6 Cost Estimating - Escalation Calculation Report Escalation report prepared: 2/28/2022 Escalation Model Used: AVE Average Project Project: COR PSI Replacement Event Date Data Date 1/1/2021 Start Date 5/1/2025 115 Mid Point 5/1/2026 End Date 5/1/2027 110 Value Calculation 105 ...... Escalations �� 8.670%� 100 Years z 5.3 Rate Per Annum3 1.573% 95 Historica14 2.9% Volatility5 5.0% 90 Escalation', Data Date = 100 Data Date Start Date Mid Point End Date Notes: 1- Escalation begins with the data date and assumes equal spending from project start to end dates 2 - Years is the duration from the Data (Estimate) date to the mid point of the project 3 - Rate Per Annum is the annual rate of escalation which when compounded over Years, equal Escalation 4 - Historical is the annual rate of escalation for the weighted model from 2015/Q1 to 2021/Q2 5 - Volatility is the std. deviation of the model's Historical annual rates of escalation, equivalent to a p=0.84 value Forecasts are based on data provided by IHS Markit though 2021-Q4 with model weighting as given below 4.3843% - PP1324110AY2.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Diesel Fuel 1.9523% WPIP1321.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Sand Gravel and Crushed Stone 3.343% - PP1327320P.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Ready -Mix Concrete 1.3109% PREBAR.Q.FOS USA, Spot Price, Reinforcing Bar (Rebar) Steel 0.6176% - WPIP08.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Lumber and Wood Products 0.8038% WPIWP133.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Concrete Products 0.1949% - PP1331318.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Other Aluminum Rolling Drawing and Extruding 2.5468% PP13311107.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Hot Rolled Bars Plates and Structural Shapes 0.3362% - WPIP081.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Lumber 2.1699% PP13241221.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Roofing Asphalts, Pitches, Coatings, Cements 1.3843% - PP1332321.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Metal Window and Door 0.902% PP1327420.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Gypsum Wallboard 0.902% - PP1325510.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Paints and Coatings 0.434% WPIS30S.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Finished Goods 6.1449% - WPIPII.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Machinery and Equipment 0.4685% PP1337214.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Office Furniture 0.344% - PP1334516.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Laboratory Analytical Instruments 0.344% PP13353141.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Relay and Industrial Controls 0.0442% - WPIP1144.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Industrial Material Handling Equipment 5.1446% PP1331511.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Iron Foundries 2.8158% - WPIP0721.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Plastic Construction Products (Primarily Pipe) 14.0085% PP1332996.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Fabricated Pipe and Fittings 1.8242% - PP1335929D.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Building Wire and Cable 1.132% - PP1335313.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Switchgear and Switchboard Apparatus 8.9795% - PP1331210.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Iron/Steel Pipe and Tube Mfg From Purch Steel 0.9327% PP13339121.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Air and Gas Compressors 0.4664% - WPIP07.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Rubber and Plastic Products 2.7982% PP1333911.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Pumps and Pumping Equipment 0.4664% - PSTAINSHEET304.Q.FOS - USA, Spot Price, Stainless Coil Steel, Grade 304 32.8041% CEU2000000008.Q.FOS USA, Average Hourly Earnings, Construction r) n Estima I— — C ArYIOLJ r) G) M 3%-S% Schematic Construction Cost Estimate Accuracy Ranges Project Design Definition 100% 0 M z C r - M M r - w LEVEL E I FP 0' C DEFINITION Expressed .a. % a' motors 0% to 2% % to 151% 101% to 409% 30% to 70% 50% to 1001% 777 ion definition END USAGE Concept Screening or Feasibility Budget Authorization, or Control Control or Bid I Tender Check Estimate or Bid I Tender Purpose of Estimate _______.777777- METHODOLOGY Capacity Factored, Parametric Models, Semi -Detailed Unit Costs with Assembly Level Typical estimatingEquipment method Judgment, or Analogy Factored or Parametric Models Line Items Detailed Unit Cost with Forced Detailed Take -Off Detailed Unit Cost with Detailed Take -Off EXPECTED ACCURACY RANGE Typical variation in low L: -20% to -50% K +30% to +100% L: -15% to -30% H: +20% to +50% L: -10% to -20% to +30% T L: -5% to -150/6 % L: .3-1. to .10% T H-. +3% to +15% and hi ran es Jul PREPARATION EFFORT Typical degree of effort relative 1 2 to 4 3 to 10 4 to 20 5 to 100 to feast Cost index of 1 [bl Class 5 estimates are generally prepared based an Very Class 4 estimates are generally prepared based an very Class 3 estimates are generally prepared to tam the basis for Class 2 estimates are generally prepared to form a detailed class 1estimates are generally prepared for discrete parts or limited Information, and subsequently have very wide accuracy limited information, and subsequebby have very wide accuracy budget authorization, appropriation, and/or funding, As such, central Census against which all project work is monitored in sections of the total project rather than generating this level of ranges As such, some Companies and organizations have ranges. They are typically used for project screening, they typically ion the initial central estimate against Mich all terms of cost and progress Control. For contractors, this class detail for the entire product The parts of the project estimated at elected to determine that due to the inherent inaccuracies, deterne Justice of feasill fifty, concept evaluation, and prelim inary actual costs and resources wilt be mentioned. Typically, of estimate is often used as the "bid" estimate to establish this level of detail will typically be Used by subcoubractom for bids, such estimates Cannot be classified in a Conventional and budget approval. Typically, engineering is from 1 % to 5 % riginecring is pace 10% to 40-A complete, and would Contract wine. Typically, engineering is from 30 % to 70 % or by owiroar for Check estimates. The updated estimate Is often systematic manner, Class 5 estimates, due to the complete, and would comprise at a minimum the following: compose at a minimum the foflowkjg process flow diagrams, Complete, and would comprise at a minimum the following: refected to as the current control estimate and becomes the new requirements ofend use, may be prepared within a very plant Capacity, block schematics, indicated layout, process if utility flaw diagrams, preliminary piping and instrument I Process flow diagrams, utility Pow diagrams, piping and baseline for Cost/schedule central of the project. Class I REFINED CLASS limited amount of time and with very little effort expended - diag rams (PF Dal for me in process systems and prelfirninis ry diagrams, bfifity III ow diagrams, preliminary piping and instrument Pow diagrams, heat and material batances, final estimates may be prepared for pari; ofthe project to comprise a DEFINITION sometimes requiring less than I hour to prepare. Often, little engineered process and utility equipment lists. Level of Project instrument diagrams, plot plan, developed layout drawings, plot plan, final layout drawings, complete engineered process fair price estimate or Ind check estimate to compare against a more Than proposed plant type, locaution, and capacity are Definition Requ ired: I % to 15% of full project definition, ;and essentially Complete engineering process and utility and utility equipment lists, single fine diagrams for electrical, contraotor's bid estimate, or to ovaluatardispute claims, Typically, known at the time of estimate preparation, equipment fists. Level Of Project Definition Requiredt 10% to fectri equipment and motor schedules, vendor quotations, engineering is from 50% to 100% Coup plate, and would compose 40% of full project definition, started project execution plans, resourcing and work force virtually all erginee4rig and design documentation of the project, JamT Cie. and complete seseect execution and crentrissioning plans. Level for Project Definition Required! 50% to 100% offifil project definition. Glass 5 estimates are prepared for any number ofstrategIG C lass 4 estimates are prepared for a number of purposes Class 3 estimates am typically prepared to support full project lass 2 estimates are typically prepared as the detailed control Class 1 estimates am typically prepared teform a current ;7,;tiTl business, planning purposes, such as but not limited to market ..h as but not limited to, data it.d strategic planning, bus mow funding requests, and become the first of the project phase baseline against which all actual Costs an resources will now estirriatetto bemed as thefirsh output baseline against which all inches, reamarrentofiratial vlabliftv, evaluation of alternate evelopment, project screening at more developed stages, 'Control intimat.'against which .1factual Costs and resources be monitored for variation to the budget, and form a part of the actual toasts and incomes will now be monitored far variations charimps, project screening, project location studio., ternative scheme a na Iva is, confirmation of am nom ic and/or Will be monitored for variations to the budget. They are used a ichange/vacation control program. to the budget, and firm a part of the changelveriation central END USAGE DEFINED evaluation brifossource needs and budgeting, Jong-rige chnical feasibility, and preliminary budget approval or the project budget until replaced by ..re detailed estimate.. In program. They may be used to evaluate bid checking, to support capital planning, oto. Juproval to proceed to next stage. many owner organizations, a Class 3 estimate may be the last vendor/contactor negotiations, or for claim evaluations and estimate required and Could well fare the only basis for dispateapardittim, onsittritted.le Central, Class 5 estimates virtually always use stochastic estimating Class 4 estimates virtually always use stochastic estimating l Class 3 estimates usually involve more deterministic Class 2 estimates always involve a high degree of Class 1 estimates involve the highest degree of daternenistio methods such as oosithcapacity Curves and factors, seek of methods such as chad/capacity, curves and factors, scale of estimating methods that stochastic methods, They usually aternbuistic estimating methods. Class 2 estimates are estimating methods, and require a great amountof effort, Cie.. 1 operations factors Lang factors, Hand fastors, Chilton factors, perations factors, Lang factors, Hand factors, Chilton factors, involve . high dogma ofifirst cast line items, although these prepared in great detail, and often involve tens of thousands of estimates are prepared in great distal, and thes are usually ESTIMATING PetemsTkarneffam factors, Guthrie factors, and otherf Peters-Timmerhaus factors, Guthrie factors, the Miller method, maybe at an assembly level of detail rather than individual unit cost fine items. For these areas of the project still performed of, only the most important or crificrif areas of the METHODS USED parametric and modeling techniques. rose unit bashiftaboa, and other parametric and modeling Components. Factoring and other stochastic methods may be undefined, an assumed level of detailed takeoff (forced detail) project. All items in the estimate are usually unit cost line items techniques used to estimate less-kignificant areas of the project, may be developed to use as line items in the estimate instead based on actual design quantities - I relying on factoring methods. Typical accuracy ranges for Clan 5 estimates are -205r, io- - Typical accuracy ranges for Class 4 estimates are -15% to Typical accuracy ranges for Class 3 estimates are -10% to - Typical accuracy ranges for Class 2 estimates are -5% to - Typical accuracy ranges for Class I ustricstes, are -3% to 0% on the Joel side, and +30% to + 100% on the high sld% 30% on the low side, and +20% to +50% on the high side, 20% on thislow, aid., and +10% to+30%0h the high aide, 15% an the low side, and +5% to +20% on the high side, 10% on the law sm, and +3% to +15% on the high side, spending on the tochrologfoafecouplexity, ofthoprafect, spending on the technological Complexity ofthe project, depending on the technological Complexity of the project itspending on the technological complexity of the project, depending on the technological Complexity of the project, EXPECTED ppropidate, contingency determination, Ranges Could exceed perennials reference information, and the inclusion of an pproptiage reference information, and the inclusion ofan appropriate reference Information, and the inclusion of an appropriate reference Information, and The inclusion ofan ACCURACY RANGE than, shown in unusual circumstances. ppropriate Contingency determination. Ranges could exceed appropriate confinorel determination, Ranges Could eximad appropriate contingency determination. Ranges could exceed approphate, Contingency determination. Ranges could nons] shown in unusual circumstances. those shown in unusual Circumstances, these shown in unusual circumstances those shown in unusual Circumstances. As little as 1 hour or tess to prepare to perhaps more than 200 Typically, as little as 20 hours or less to perhaps more than Typically, as little as 150 hours or less to perhaps more than Typically, as little as 300 hours or less to perhaps more than Class 1 estimates require Iffamostaffort to create, and assucb hours, depending on the project and the estimating 300 hours, depending on the project and the estimating 1500 boom, depending on the project and the estimating 3000 hours, depending an the project and the estimating am generally developodfor onlyselockid areasofthe project, or methodology used, methodology used. methodology used. methodology used. Bid Estimates typically require more effort for bidding purposes, A complete Class 1 estimate may twelve EFFORT TO PREPARE than estimates used for funding or control purposes as ifliss as 600 hours or Ins, to perhaps more then 6000 hours, (for US$20MM project): depending on the project and the estimating methodology used. Bid tostunate, typically require more effort than estimates used for funding or central threaten, ANSI Standard Order of Magnitude Estimate, Ratio, ballpark, blue sky, seat -of I Budget Estimate; Screening, top-down, feasibility, Budget Estimate, Budget, scope. sanction, semi -detailed, Definitive Estimate; Detailed Control, forced detail, execution Deffiriffive Estimate; Full detail, release, fall -out, tender, firm price, Reference Z94.2-1989 cable, ROM, idea study, prospect estimate, concession license uthorization, factored, pre -design, pre -study. authorization, preliminary central, concept study, development, phase, master Control, engineering, bid, tender, change order tirdicire-UP, final, detailed walnut, forced detail, alsioution Phase' name; Alternate timate, guesstimate, ruleofffrumb ": bress'"riginaering phase estimatetarget aeffmate. estimate. master Coal fair prim, defirrifive, change order estimate Estimate Names, Terms, Expressions, S non ms: Class 5 Class 5 Class 4 Class 4 Class 3 Class 3 Class 2 class 2 Class 1 Class Project Scope Desai tion c3enerat Defined Defined Defined Plant Production / Facility C.O.mt, —Preliminary Preliminary 6efined Defined Defined Plant Location General A —imate S oafto S ecific S.ctFc Sails & Hydrology None Preliminary Defined Defined Defined Integrated Project Plan None PTaliminaw Defined Defined De, ad Project Master Schedule None Prelimina Defined Defined Defined Escalation Strategy None Preliminary Defined Defined Defined War k Breakdown Structure None Preliminary Defined Defined Defined Project Code of ccounts None Preliminary Defined Defined Defined ontracting Strategy I Assumed III Assumed Nfinteary Defined Defined e Ciass5 •• •• Class4 Class3 Class, -• _- •-,•-• - •,•_• Class Block Flow Diagrams Preliminary /Complete Compete Care at.+„�W� Plot Plans Started Preilnin.` /Com let. Complete Corselet. Process Flow Diagrams p Started / Preliminary Preliminary ( Com let. Complete Com fete Utility Flow Diagrams (UFDs) Staged /Preliminary Preliminary I Carritlate, Complete Com tete Piping & Instrument Dia rams P&IDS Started Preliminary I Complete, Complete Com tete Heat and Material Balances Started PreliminaryComplete ' Complete Com lete Process Equipment List Started / Preliminary Preliminary! Complete Complete Complete Utility E ui ment List Started / PreliminaryPreliminary m i Coate Complete Com tete Electrical One Line Drawin e Started / Preliminary Preliminary / Com fete. Complete Com late Specifications and Datasheeta Started Preifmina Com fete Correlate Com late General Equipment rran ement Drawln s Started Preiimir ai f C m fete : Com let, Com [ata Sears Parts Lists Started t Preliminary PreliminaryCom to rchitectural Details / Schedufes Started Preliminary /Complete Complete Complete Structural Details Started Preliminary,!Cora eta Complete Complete Mechanical Discipline Drawin a Started Preliminary Prelimina 1Com tete Electrical Discipline Drawin a Started Preliminary , prelfrafirropelcoreglets, System Discipline Drawings Started Preliminary Prelimina /Com tete ivil/Site Discipline Drawln s _ _ Started Preliminary Prelimin.rtComrete t____ Demolition Details I Started Pre{i ins /Corn etaI Complete . Comajete.��....�...r.�.. 7 SUMMARY REPORT s Project type: Project Name: COR P1 Replacement Alt 2 New River Trail Location Rev 3 Estimator: Nick Cavalleri/RDD .JacobJob Size: Project Number: W8Y06200 Revision/Date: 3 / Mar 1, 2022 Duration: Design Stage: Feasibility Estimate Class: 4 Estimate Totals Labor 1,957,898 18,663.892 hrs Material 10,715,983 Subcontract 1,959,151 Equipment 839,798 6,692.827 hrs Subtotal W1 Escalation 15,472,830 15,472,830 Non Markup Items 1,675,306 Subtotal W1 Non Markup Items 1,675,346 17,148,136 Design Contingency 4,287,034 25.000 % Subtotal W1 Design Contingency 4,287,0134 21,435,176 Construction Contingency 3,215,276 15.000 % Total Construction Cast 3,215,276 24,650,446 COR P1 Replacement Alt 2 Site Rev 3 3/1/2022 4:35 PM Page 1 01 DETAIL REPORT �. Project type: Project Name: COR P1 Replacement Alt 2 New River Trail Location Rev 3 Estimator: Nick Cavalleri/RDD Job Size: Project Number: W8Y06200 Revision/Date: 3 / Mar 1, 2022 Duration: Design Stage: Feasibility Estimate Class: 4 COR P1 Replacement Alt 2 Site Rev 3 3/1/2022 4:36 PM Page 1 01 DETAIL REPORT �. Project type: Project Name: COR P1 Replacement Alt 2 New River Trail Location Rev 3 Estimator: Nick Cavalleri/RDD Job Size: Project Number: W8Y06200 Revision/Date: 3 / Mar 1, 2022 Duration: Design Stage: Feasibility Estimate Class: 4 ;kaa .. .. �^IcYk,b9.., l2btiChF'1iV' i{ftettriye .. #¢'Sb,NpUr+n ... "1`xkenf(taixentiLy ... ...ta4r/r'Ccsryllrvtt... ...nifipbfre4t(rrrc.... .. %YaC¢rial6`eatlUfrlt... ...3abCa9tNatt... .., tay+v+Cug,Wnh ... '##rn6Ytnva(Cawnte ' iNreSfTawF . .. YiizndTaWf#dcs ... rend ralaxwim ......o _ »131, rat ,<< o t "'p-1 1,+,L v. CP. Concrete fo+ms, slab on greae. edge woad, ] to 12" h.gh ,i cutles erecting bacng stnppng and Ceanng Rent -q Stee,in place slab ong aria 143 to #7 A615.9reae 100 00 sfce 050 tan 10.87 1-- 1200.62 /ton 1.14 1- - - 150000 11- - 12.01 1-1 201 2]00.62 11- 13501 18 76 1-1,876 432568 /ton 2163 ''.. 60,-n abor for acces -I mate -al for accessories -- -q nplace u loatlng& soring,add to above slabs ',.Stlud Concrete reatlY ---I wt 4500 Ps; nclutles ocal aggregate -d IIland Cement antl water,delveretl,ezcI-. ',.. ,dd.. - ana o-eatmema St t -7g 6' 050 tan 550 Cy 500 CV 4172 /ton '.. 21.18 ICV 670 Icon - 133.00 /Cy - 571 ICV 48.42 It- 24 133.00 ICY 732. 26.89 ICV 134 7536 /ton36 21791 /Cy 1,199 4184 /CV 209 al cone ' PI slab ongatle PumPetl over '.. Nick --Wd- sI, off &conso tlafon exclutles material I cN'h firs r r'P=rma CC' fir' aC CI" 1,2 3 ana 4,- a 5555 5555 5555 _Ps -fl, fi-A, vol f35/25,bo11 fit -h, RAIU t -I 5555 (wlk bhn1 exc pcn stlkn 1zs oo 'r 5555 _ I Isr 5555 1103 lar - - 5555 5555 191 If na I 5555 5555 5555 5555 141 If m 5555. _ C_9'preyed memb ne cu ng compound 0,7 11 , ""I In -f., e I+ rrr t l.5+ e aJ., 11 hr+ 0.700002 Pt+lnp S(atio E nen. Peri,' 0700004 PI Eec('caft mE9+pnen(Pad' 125 Csf .+fir l'Y ..500 CY 974 /csf -It I 367.24 ICY _ _ 1220 luf _ 11 /ry 34411 l;Y_ CY 706_./CY 34215 IC.Y. /CY _ 21.94 /csf _ 27, CY 111 1'1Y 36J2. /CY ]3645 ICY 3681;.. 3516 luf _ 44 117410 CY 48Ip_ 6114 t0 /C.Y pSaton 1f <i06tYrr+ Concrete surtace treatment bond ng agent epoxy resp 805E .Peg lon 4 gallon cos cutles material only I fo+ms, to6 1g1.4 150 9a1 4900 1f '., 5.54 If 1,. - '., 6250 Igal ', - 1,, 045 Ilf 1,. '., , 62.50 Igal ', 94 ', 1,, 5.99 If 1,. 294 10240 Igal ', 154 936 If 459 . oncrete slab on gratle. Id, 111d us clutles erecting b-, st,pp,g and Cean ng Renforcng Steel, in pl.- slab on gratle.#3 to#7 A615. gratle 025 tan 1200.64 11- '', - '., 150000 11-n '', - '., 2700.64 /ton ''.. 675 432580 /ton '.. 1061 ''.. 60,-n abor for acces -I mate -al for accessories Re Morc ng nplace.0-d., & -ng,_adtl to above slabs 1St i Concrete eadymu normal wt 4500 ps-It,d-ocal aggregate -d IIland Cement antl water, delveretl,ezcI-. ',.. add.,,. ana o-eatmema St t 6'' _025 tan 300 Cy .....250 CV 41.70 Icon 21.18 ICV 668.. Icon - 13300 Icy - 571... ICV 48.40 /ton 12 133.00 Icy 3991 26.89 ICV _ 67 7528 /ton 19 21791 ICY 654 .4184 /CV al cone ' PI-7ggrade PumPetl over sNke off &conso cf-hflrs for spcf ma ccs firs ec dss 123 -d 4,- 5555 5555 5555 _Ps -fl, fi-An vol f35/25,bdr fit -h, fit -I tnN 5555 (wlk bhn1 exc pcn stlkn 12000'f 5555 _ 0.88 5f 5555 003 Isf - - 5555 5555 ,... 0.91 If 1091 5555 5555 5555 5555 141 If 170 5555. Cunng 'preyed memb ne -,qcompound - - - 03 ) fC.m !n -f_, e + rrr t1n e a5b 1 hr5< 1,700004 Prang S1 -E! ncaf 1- pmen(1. 0700 006 Pt. SlaOon hfVAC Pad _120 csf 2") I _250 CY 974 /csf 301.1r CY 401 t0 /C.Y _ _ 1220 luf _ I I, /CY 16 51CY_ CY _ 7691C.Y _ 71178 /CY _ /C.Y _ 21.94 /csf _ 26 CY C/O '17 C.Y 1616 _ /C.Y 670,17 IC.Y 1678;_ 3513 luf 42 ')1520 Cy 11.... 107720 IC.Y _ 28&7 P t 10 O5 )f �sa� c P (rE@c 1c43 .6 li'uG+ C.I P,=, fo+ms, slab on gratle. etlge wootl to 6 M1 gh, 4 ps clutles erect3g b-119 sNpp ngand d-,, Re Morc n9 Steel, in place. slab on gratle. #3 to #7, 6615, gratle ',. 3200 1f 015 tan ',. 4.25 I1f ',. 1 200.60 Icon ',. - ',. 045 I1f ',. - - ',. 1500.00 Icon ',. - ',. 4.70 I1f ',. 150 ',, I. 2,700.60 Icon ',. 405 734 I f ',. 235 432580 Icon '., 649 '.. 60,-n abor for acces -I mate -al for accessories ---q ng nplace.0 loatl ng&sort ng,_adtl to above slabs 1St i Concrete eadymu normal wt 4500 ps-It,d-ocal aggregate santl,Portland Cement antl water,delveretl,ezcI-. _ ',.. add.,,. ana o-eatmema SirucNral 6" '', _015 tan 150 Cy 125 CV '', 41.70 /ton 21.18 ICV '', 667.. Icon - 13300 Icy - 5.71 ICV '', '', 48.40 Icon 7.. 133.00 Icy ca ;. '', ', 26.89 ICV '', 34 ',. 7520 Icon 11 21791 /Cy 327 4183 ICV '', 52 concrete Pac n9slab on gratle PumPetl, over '. '. '.. Nick -nclutles sNke off &conso tlafon, exclutles material '. _... Cfnsh,flrs far spcf mtlm acts firs ac cls' 1,2 ,3 antl 4,achv a ', 5555 5555 5555 _Ps -fl, fi-An vol f35/25,bdr fit -h, fit -I tnN 5555 (wlk bhn1 exc pcn stlkn 64 00 sf ', 5555 _ 0.88 Isf ', 5555 0.03 Isf ', 1,. 5555 5555 i.. 1,. 1,. 0.91 If ', 58 ',,. 5555 5555 5555 5555 142 If ', 91 5555. C_9'preyed memb ne cu 7compound _ _064 If 975 /Csf 1220 luf_ 21.95 /csf 14 3517 /csf _ 23_ Fne Brea ng fine Brea for slab on g, -e -h-711 0.$ 05760x, Ir_F.c- r red ,I : P-lh.- 0 00 ,7006 P -P st n-CPad _ 0700008 Pv SlaOon Sw.ch9ear Pad 'y 1;5 rY _125 C 1.02 /sy I,.7 t;Y 434.17 /C.Y _ _ _ 070 _/sy 1i @I` ;Y 3113/ t;_Y_ +1Y tt BO�C.Y - 4.73] /C.Y /C.V _ _ _ 1 .72 /sy 12 t",v Ir4, 14 fY ANr. /C.V 704 - t4 /C.Y _ - - 860 i.. ..267 I'Y _ 19 112,0' C 141 1 12107 /C.Y _ 1408 1,4 )051.' fs a,4� -,d, 11 U><Gr C.IP.Concretefo+ms, slab on greae. edge wood over 1T4 us clutles erecting b-119 sNppng and Cean ng Renforcng Steel,in pl- slab on grade.#3 to#7A-.gratle 6600 sfce 1 105 tan 7.57 1-- 1200.63 It- '', 143 1-- - '., 150000 /ton '', - 9.00 1-7741 '., 2700.63 It- ''.. 2836 1413 1-1,215 432573 It- '.. 4542 ''.. 60,-n abor for acces -I mate -al for accessories Rent -q nplace a loatlng& sorin,,add to above slabs Stivd Concrete readymu normal wt 4500 ps-It,d-ocal 5555 5555 5555 5555. aggregate santl,Portland cement antl water,delveretl,ezcI-al 5555 _ ',.. add.,,. ana o-eatmema SirucNral 6" '', 105 tan 1250 Cy 1 5555 1200 CV '', 4171 /ton 5555 21.18 ICV '', 670 11- 1 133.00 /Cy - i - 5555 5555 5.71 ICV '', '', 4841 /ton 51 1 i 133.00 /cY i 16631 5555 5555 5555 5555 ;. '', ', 26.89 /CV '', 323 ', 7531 /ton 79_ 21791 /cY i 2,724 5555. 41 84 /CV '', 502 concrete P ac n9, slab on gratle PumPetl, over sNke off &conso tlafon, exclutles material '. Cf -,o, for spcf mtl ccs firs ac d-1 2 3 and 4,- a 5555 5555 5555 _Ps -fl, fi-An vol f35/25,bdr fit -h, fit -I tnN 5555 lwlk bhn1 exc p cn stlkn 306 00 sf 5555 0.88 Isf 5555 1103 Isf - - 5555 5555 0.91 If 278 5555 5555 5555 5555 I ... 141 If 433 5555. Cunng 'preyed memb e7-- Qd _ 306 csf 975 /csf 1220 luf 21.94 /csf 6Z; 3515 luf _ 108_ Fradng ne gfine grad for slon-maC rade f..pg 1 1051+r.,, Ir_I.5 _ Ir red t ala 12 h.ch 0.700008 PC- Stenon Swtchgear Peri__. 0700009 Ca P+mp Ca+ Fo Sfab :If I . rY ....1200 CY 1.02 1, 2,'{'1,17 t;v 212.02 /CY _ _ _ 070 _rey €98.../Cv Ir" lz /GY_ /1v 898_. /CY _ 263 15 /C.Y. /CV _ _ 1.72 111,58+_ fY 114.1.' Cy l;.:C'... /CV 504.15 /CV 6050';.. ..267 Isy 91 01778 CY 9693 807]8 /CY 9693 Ot )05 )R 4T&t 5 tn7s1, f + 111c 9( dIP.$11- NG<C.IP. concrete fo+ms, slab on grade. edge woad, 7 to 12 -huh C I P 4u clutles eredng bacng sNpp.ng ana Ceann9 _.. Re-, Steel, in place. slab on gratle. #3 to #7, A615.9ratle ', 6000 sfce 1 1150 tan ', 9.06 1-- 1 200.62 Icon ', 1 14 1-- 1,. 1500.00 Icon ', i 10.20 111-612 1 ,. 1,. 1,. 2,700.62 Icon ', 1 350 ', 15 96 Isfce 957 432572 /ton ', 2,163 ''.. 60,-n abor for acces -I mate -al for accessories Rent -q nplace u loatlng& sorin,,add to above slabs ',.Stlud Concrete reatlY ---I wt 4500 Ps; nclutles ocal aggregate santl,Portland Cement antl water,delveretl,ezcI-. ',.. add.,,. ana o-eatmema St t -cog 6';. 050 tan 425 cY .....400 CV 4172 It- '.. 21.18 ICV 670 Icon - 133.00 /Cy - 571... ICY 48.42 /ton 24 133.00 /Cy 565 26.89 ICV _ 106..,.. 7534 /ton 38 21791 /Cy 926 .4184 /CV _ 16] al cone ' PI slab ongaae P -,d over Nick -nclutles sI, off & conso tlafon exclutles material Cf -,o, ter spcf ma ccs firs ec des 123-d4, hoe 5555 5555 5555 _Ps -fl, fi-An vol f35/25,bdr fit -h, fit -I tnN 5555 (wlk bhn1 exc pcn stlkn C_, Prayed memb -,Y -p-d 16000'( 5555 160 Csf 0.6v M 5555 9.74 /csf 1103 Isf - - 5555 5555 1,. 1220 Icsf 0.91 If 146; 5555 5555 5555 5555 1,. 21.94 Icsf 35 141 If 226 5555. 3514 Icsf 56 COR P1 Replacement Alt 2 Site Rev 3 3/1/2022 4:36 PM Page 2 01 DETAIL REPORT �. Project type: Project Name: COR P1 Replacement Alt 2 New River Trail Location Rev 3 Estimator: Nick Cavalleri/RDD Job Size: Project Number: W8)(06200 Revision/Date: 3 / Mar 1, 2022 Duration: Design Stage: Feasibility Estimate Class: 4 ;�kaa .. . ("a�tty .. �^IcYk�,b9.., 12bt1ChF'1iV' i{itettriye .. #¢'Sb,NpUr+n ... "1`xkenf(taixentiLy ... ...ta4rtr'Ccsryllrvtt... ... �nitipbfre4t(rrrc.... .. %YaC¢rial6`e�tlUfrlt... ...3abCa9tNatt... .., tay+v+Cug,Wnh ... '##rm6Ytnva(Ca�wnte ' iNreSfTawF . .. YiizndTaWf#des ... <+prenn ralaxwim . Ot 1)or 1A Fl.e 'red ng f.e 'red forsleb on'rede.. -M1- +76 ..P, r,e �, 4 P 8 MIA Q300009 Can ftangC 4mtla(on Slab _ 0300040 Flo M Vault Concrete 1778 sy 41)> ry _400 CY 1.02 Isy "1., /CY 456,pi /C.Y 070. Isy _ 10 ]/C1, _ 75079 /r,_Y. _ /C _ _ lo]6�C.Y 450 ]B /C.Y /C.Y 1.12 Isy 31 _ CY /n. tb /CY _ lalp�_ /C.Y ]t],¢6 /C.Y 28]01 ..267 Isy 48 4 ' ICY _ �5l 1 111¢41 /C.Y 4581 "101 11 ria : e 1-1 1111 ,:s,111rGr P. concrete forms, slab on 9ratle. etl9e wootl over 12 4 III, dudes e—,, beam' stnpp nga.d dean, __. ---q n9 Steel, in plac, slab on 9ratle. #3 to #], A615. 9ratle ', 55 00 sfca 075 tan ', 7.57 Isfca ', 1 200.63 Icon ', - '., 143 Isfca ', - 1,. 1500.00 /ton ', '., 9.00 Isfca ', 495 ... 1,. 1,. 2,700.63 Icon ', 2 025 ',,. 1413 Isfca ', 777 432571 Icon ', 3.244 ''. 60,-n abor for occas excl mate -al for accessories Rem rc "s n plece,.0 load ng &sort 'add to above slabs Stluct concrete reatlYmix normal ,t 4500 Ps; nclutles odor '' aggregate santl,Portland cement antl water,d,IYeretl,ezcI—. ',.. ,dd.— ,d o-eatmema St t 6' 075 ton 725 cY '. .....700 CV 41.]2 /ton _ ''.. 21.18 ICV 669 Icon ', 133.00 /cY '. 571 ICV 4841 /ton 361 __ ... ''.. ', 133.00 /cY '. 964 ',. 26.89 ICV 188 2533 /ton 57 21791 /cY '. 1580 4184 /CV 293 al concrete Pac n9 slabo 9ratle Pumpetl over thick -nclutles strike off &conso tlafon. exclutles material _... CfnsM1,flrs far spcf mtlm acts firs ac clss 1,2 ,3 antl 4,acM1v a ', _P, -fir fltn A, vol —25 1,11 fit,— fi—I tnN (wlk -hn1 ext p cn —, 188 00 sf ', 0.88 Isf ', 0.03 Isf ', 1,. i.. 1,. 1,. 0.91 If ', 171 ',,. 141 If ', 266 C_unng s,,,,d mem- ne dung compound _ 188 -f 975 /csf 1220 luf_ 21.95 /csf 41 3516 luf 66 tln., gratl for slab on gratle.—h— Fine grag f m 511 Ire"_ dee 14,4 pre at 1- 1t1)Ob,f �.. �e.tr.,$ .f,l 14�t, 61Yr1 Forms -.place, wall, sv, frametl plriv dto 16'h,gh,3 2089 sy —1'1 I 78400 sfca 1.02 ly 14/1.1 /qY 6.35 If-- _ _ _ 1170./sy _ 97I ly _ 1119ry t;Y _ ly '., 540 1-1,. _ _ 1.72 ly 36 _ CYJff53r t;v _ r45&t 11.]5 If -9213', _ 267 Isy 56 9(y149 Cv _ 18]3 If -14,685 use/month '', Fo Ido em9e tines g eat, maxmu cutles material .only _.. Remorcng Steel, in place. walls, #3 to #], A615. 9ratle 60, incl ', 209 911 070 ton ', 1 200.63 /ton ', 2150 1,.1 1,. 1500.00 Icon ', 21.50 1,.1 45 ... 1,. 1,. 2,700.63 Icon ', 1 890 ',,. 3522 /ga 74 432573 /ton ', 3.028 ' '. labor for accessories, excl material for accessories Ramon.'. place u loatlng&sort ng, add walls cos beams Stluct concretereatly mixnormal wt 4500 ps; nclutles odor aggregate santl,Portland cement antl water,d,I Yeretl,ezcl— a l ',.. adafYes and o-eatmema 070 tan 800 cy .....750 41 71 /ton 669 Icon - 133.00 Icy - 4840 /ton 34 133.00 /cy 1064 ' 7530 /ton 53 21791 ly 1143 St t al concry cn9 walls Pumpetl 15 track, nclutles stoke o1 & conso tlation, ext utles material Concretefl—h., wells burlap cub with gout eludes b,akng ties and patch ng -d, 0 11 1 m C!n 11 I., F1,k _ ,4 1, CV 78400 l _ 111 1 32.65 ICV 1.17 If ly 9."1 Y 881 ICV - 004 If - 941 1Y _ 6u6.� OY 41.46 ICV 311 1.21 If 9461 _ OY i"1', 0 OY _ Tx'OJr 6451 /CV 484 188 Isf 1475 _ 18 C _ 11 541 12 " >) 01,' C:, r.a .cf e --d—k, 12 InCI< I C.I.P. concrete fo.ms,eeveted slab flet plate, plywood, to 15 ',. high, 4 -nc brae _ 161 00 sf 1 5.95 Isf - 1 BZ Isf - i 7.82 Isf 1 260 1 1233 Isf 1,985 use, utles sh ring, erecfng, ng st,pp,, and clearing or trete forms,e—vdslab box outfors-allow slab 1600 if 5.56 If ',. - ',. 256 If ',. - ',. 8.12 If 130 1284 If 205 open n9s,over 10 sf (use Perimeter) "nclutles s- g erect g brad_.' stnpp ng antl clean n9 C.I.P. ortns, forms to6 h.gh,4 5100 if 4.35 If ',. ',. 034 If ',. '',. 4.69 If ',. 239 732 If 373 concrete ale ,d slab etl9e at us nclutles 0 -Ig,_ 11, bracng,_st ppng and dean:,' Remorcng Steel, in place. el,—d slabs #4 to #7, A615. gratle o55 tan 828.02 /ton '', - 1 250 00 /ton '', - 207802 /ton ''. 1 A43 3.33638 /ton 1 835 ''. 60,-n abor for accessories—I material for accessories Remorcng n place I—d.,g& sort.', add to above decks Stluct concrete ready mun—,t4500 ,.,dudes odor a99re9ate santl,Portland cement antl watee,d,l Yeretl,ezcl—. ',.. and o-eatmema 055 ton 650 cy 4170 /ton 669 Icon - 133.00 Icy - 48.40 /ton 27. 133.00 /cy 8651 7529 /ton 41 21791 ly 1,416 adafYes St t al concrete P cn9 ale atetl slab Pumpetl ov,r10' ''. thick -Id-strike off & conso tlafon, exclutles material _ Fl—h.,g eevslab bull float manual float& Isteel trowel 600 CV 1.6100 sf 2177 ICV 12_0 /sf 587 ICV _ _ _ 27.64 /CV 166 1.20 Isf 193 4300 ICV 258 186 If _ 300_ Curing spreyed mem- a curing tom two d elevmetl decks - .1.03 1 1, r In_rr i P r,a 1 e.. s4 ()P, 4 1 (q x _. '.. 1,300040 FIowMe{fir. tCon - _ _ 030004) Ca (. Wall al T.ee Screens _ 1 61 csf 611 11 2050 CY 975 —1 ra 17,, t;Y 526,71 /C.Y 245 _ 1245 luf _ _ v Ili"' .Y 41. . Y /(: 1149 /C — — _ 851 /C.Y 51445 IC /C.Y 22.19 — 36 Y _. —_ —_ 1 61 4 (:Y 4 xaf /C.Y I-66 /CY 21518 35 56 1uf _ 5_7 ' )]8",i CY 6-1I1.. 1 675 64 /C.Y 74,151 _. 04 10Ol J4lig ael.tr r.r 4 1<n1 �qh h C.L oncrete forms foofn9-Id canfnuous Il,mrelsuPportsl us re 111, 20 below 9ratle,111 utles erecfng, brae ng, stnpp ng and d .1119. C. I. P. forms— ke 40001( 4000 if 619 If ',. 3.56 If ',. - ',. 15611f ',. - ',. 053 Ilf ',. ',. 8.3511f ',. 334 '',. 4.09 If ',. 164 1312 If 641 If 257 concrete 19 ,tapered—,2 x6",4 us cutles erecting b-119 stnpp ng and dean ng R--.9 Ste,l, in place. footings, 1111 A615 11d, 60, 325 tan 1200.63 /ton '', - 150000 /ton '', - 8 2700.63 /ton ''. ]77 432572 /ton 14059 accesson xcl material for accessories '. Remorc'steel u11 -d antl sort add to base 325 ton 4171 /ton 669 Iron 48.41 /ton 157 7532 /ton 245 Re mo c'stee cren tom for ha d,c average add Stluct concretereatly mix,normal wt 4500 Ps; nclutles ocal a99re9ate santl,Portland cement antl water,d,l Yeretl,ezcl—. ',.. adafYes and o-eatmema St t al concry ng cant uous foot.' deep Pumpetl Wdu strike off &conso tlafon, exclutles material 325 ton 3800 cy 3700 CV 45,34 /ton '.. 2449 ICV 727 Ito. 133.00 Icy - 661 ICY - - 52.62 Ito. 171, 133.00 ICY 5054 31.09 ICV 1150. vd 8_187 /ton 26_6 21791 ICY 8281 4838 /CV 1790 03 ! 1141, lnl ,.1 1,111111111111 11,11111, 24 141006 8 ls,1 <<r 1,11 !, 1 Ih alh 48 Urt'c lms-. place, well, stee framed pywoad, —M1,gh,3 use/month ',. Fo lc... g tines gear, maxmu cutles material .only Re more ng Ste, 1. place —114, 3to#7 A615 gratle 60 i-1 'IY) l`Y 1,00000 sfca 267 911 250 ton 148 7' f,Y 7.33 /sfca 1,. 1200.62 /ton '', 1A3 /fY 11061 l;Y GY - 5,45 /sfca 1,. 2150 /gal - '', 150000 /ton '', - GY 411.23 f,Y A081 1218 Isfca 12]79, 1,. 21.50 1,.1 57 '', 2700.62 Iron ''. 6752 6611/ CY 1'u922 2933 Isfca 20332 3523 /ga 94 432572 /ton 10814 ' '. labor for accessories, excl material for accessories Re mord.'. place u loatlng&sort ng,add walls cos beams Rem c g, crane cost r,' handling, add to above wars, co s ',. beams St -concrete dy mxnormal wt 4500 Ps nclutles oval aggregate santl,Portland cement antl water,de'Yeretl,ezcl—. adafYes and o-eatmema 250 ton 250 tan 2900 cy 4172 Icon 45.34 Icon 669 Icon 7.2] Iron - - 13300 Icy 4841 Ito. 121 52.62 Ito. 132 133.00 /y 3857 ' 7532 /ton 188 81 86 /ton 205 21791 ly 6319 COR P1 %placertmnt Alt 2 Site Rev 3 3/1/2022 4:36 PM Page 3 01 DETAIL REPORT �. Project type: Project Name: COR P1 Replacement Alt 2 New River Trail Location Rev 3 Estimator: Nick Cavalleri/RDD Job Size: Project Number: W8Y06200 Revision/Date: 3 / Mar 1, 2022 Duration: Design Stage: Feasibility Estimate Class: 4 I- ria patch ng vdd, m>C8I 'tl lYrh _ rvP P Formsi. place, well, steel Premed plw d,-16`hgh,3 .,.d,N 0 1 vem9e van geelY maxima uaes material only ReiMs , sleet I. place, walls, # td #7, A615, greae 60, -1.... labor Idraccessofles, excl matadal Idrad .-fides eM I. -1-d., &dd co wells s beam _ s ReiMlrciRq, crane cost for h-1, add td above, wells, cols, ,,d- 1 1 creteiready-,.d- wt 4500p ncluaes Deal ag9regale-pd,d---t and waleoa,W.,-d -I- ,dd.,,e, and t --t, 1 1 I Pn,v pi ng walls pumped 15Nck .eludes stoke Pfi & cP-Plitletd., excI- maledal 0 1 r.eh Rg walls bud, mb wlthg t .eludes b,Ik,,g Grout for bond beams,11,111, I'd concrete masonry unit 11 care, C476 nclutles materiel only R- ng Slee bars A615 placed hpnz nta a -d, to Masonry reiMPeeing bees, st dna #4 reiMPmin9 alaeI bars, did ved telly ASTM A615 Masonry v.Mrn , bees, buss type "'I joint reiMPeeln9, n std d -s.11 -d 12'wtle Cantrell block, aecpmlive, split face Prscoretl split face, 2 ps 8 z8"x16" exelua see d., ymut andreMoec nq P,gle td I, -tum! alae!,2"x2"x1/4", field fabricated, it si 01 DETAIL REPORT �. Project type: Project Name: COR P1 Replacement Alt 2 New River Trail Location Rev 3 Estimator: Nick Cavalleri/RDD Job Size: Project Number: W8)(06200 Revision/Date: 3 / Mar 1, 2022 Duration: Design Stage: Feasibility Estimate Class: 4 . ble frequency tlrives, c 1pm-eng.ne d, 460 volt 800 HP 5.00 ee 5,415.55 lee 506.03 lee 75.000.00 lee motor siEe ' MCC Nlmrance 100 LS 628216 ILS 14675 11 1500000 /LS Ele local Ptool Nlpwaoce locu Cpnaot Cp duclpes and 100 Is 37669.44 Is 400000 lls 7500000 lls Pppuaenan 1,5 1 ea367 ,(e.0 cyOthHr 11 13 @f]p 89 ll; _ C 1). `0 A'S 2600000 Rano S(alib�ElecNcal _ _ l007l 5 IS ]t 021-18 /IS _ 66]689._[15 _. 46.r 00000 /IS 26 G@IWGvk... T ]T "111 / S 6676 19 / S 6 ,PPP 00 /6S. Errt real ( atrr Exaavarneo-ench �pmmpn sono 314 azo oo ev i 6 3 ICY I as3Icv I - ex valor 10 tp 14' de excludes sheet q praewelennQ_ Sl ekple Excavatetl Spp is 82000 cy 2.02 Icy 2]1../cy 000 Icy ,R.vt Ecrt _crn r Gz�rs.Yt+lmn _170 11 Rv t,0/ 1 ]34... /(:v Il Gg t rvraRah Eil, gravel nl, compaclea, antler Door slab1b allemale pncmg 11000 CV 13.16 ICV '. 07v 1— '. 44.50 ICO method 12"deep _. _. ?TI Ol ,(�N rvc r.r< r3,1 1�I<<.l X11. T'((Ipl l`Y "t_f rCY _ 0/81C.Y _ 9s0 11 C: rctlrral ( na rel _... Flll from stp ple, 130 H P„ 2-1/2 C ., 300 haul spread fill, T000 00 CV 1.18 /CV 1 95 ICY - 3.31/CV 23,116 '.. 4.65 ICV 32,584 2.27 /cy 15 881 329 /cy 23V4 23.89 /15 22611 34 59 /I S 3)8 212. 2].96 If 10]4821 17990 If 151112 27.92 Ilpn _ 1267 3926 Ilpn _ 1781 62.19 /ton 30481 9446 Ilpn 4,285 00.00 I s 24 000 31.72221 21 I s 35 722 82.]1 flf 13895 12040 flf 20,228 78.89 ISF 397615 11405 /SF 574817 COR P1 Replacement Alt 2 Site Rev 3 3/1/2022 4:36 PM Page 5 01 DETAIL REPORT �. Project type: Project Name: COR P1 Replacement Alt 2 New River Trail Location Rev 3 Estimator: Nick Cavalleri/RDD Job Size: Project Number: W8Y06200 Revision/Date: 3 / Mar 1, 2022 Duration: Design Stage: Feasibility Estimate Class: 4 COR P1 Replacement Alt 2 Site Rev 3 3/1/2022 4:36 PM Page 6 01 DETAIL REPORT �. Project type: Project Name: COR P1 Replacement Alt 2 New River Trail Location Rev 3 Estimator: Nick Cavalleri/RDD Job Size: Project Number: W8Y06200 Revision/Date: 3 / Mar 1, 2022 Duration: Design Stage: Feasibility Estimate Class: 4 COR P1 Replacement Alt 2 Site Rev 3 3/1/2022 4:36 PM Page 7 01 DETAIL REPORT �. Project type: Project Name: COR P1 Replacement Alt 2 New River Trail Location Rev 3 Estimator: Nick Cavalleri/RDD Job Size: Project Number: W8Y06200 Revision/Date: 3 / Mar 1, 2022 Duration: Design Stage: Feasibility Estimate Class: 4 COR P1 Replacement Alt 2 Site Rev 3 3/1/2022 4:36 PM Page 8 01 DETAIL REPORT �. Project type: Project Name: COR P1 Replacement Alt 2 New River Trail Location Rev 3 Estimator: Nick Cavalleri/RDD Job Size: Project Number: W8Y06200 Revision/Date: 3 / Mar 1, 2022 Duration: Design Stage: Feasibility Estimate Class: 4 Estimate Totals Labor 1,330,869 18,663.892 hrs Material 6,585,668 Subcontract 1,305,795 Equipment 591,873 6,692.827 hrs Subtotal Direct Casts 9,814,205 9,814,205 Material Sales Tax 543,318 8.250 Subtotal Wit Sales Tax 543,318 10,357,523 Concrete Work I,OH&P 32,003 15.000 Masonry Work I,OH&P 12,772 15.000 Architectural (Div 6-12)I,OH&P 10,299 15.000 Mechanical Work I,OH&P 16,650 20.000 Electrical Work I,OH&P 204,715 25.000 Process Piping I,OH&P 102,990 20.000 Instruments & Controls I,OH&P 29,567 25.000 Process Equipment I,OH&P 722,474 15.000 Subtotal W1 Subcontractor OH&P 1,131,470 11,488,993 General Conditions 689,340 6.000 Subtotal W/ General Conditions 689,340 12,178,333 Prime Contractor Overhead 1,461,400 12.000 Prime Contractor Profit 818,384 6.000 Subtotal W1 Prime Markups 2,279,784 14,458,117 Escalation 1,253,519 8.670 Subtotal W/ Escalation 1,253,519 15,711,636 Non Markup Items 1,436,500 Subtotal W/ Non Markup Items 1,436,500 17,148,136 Design Contingency 4,287,034 25.000 Subtotal W/ Design Contingency 4,287,034 21,435,170 Construction Contingency 3,215,276 15.000 Subtotal W/ Construction Contingency 3,215,276 24,650,446 Total Construction Cost 24,650,446 COR P1 Replacement Alt 2 Site Rev 3 3/1/2022 4:36 PM Page 9 Cost Estimating - Escalation Calculation Report Escalation report prepared: 2/28/2022 Escalation Model Used: AVE Average Project Project: COR PSI Replacement Event Date Data Date 1/1/2021 Start Date 5/1/2025 115 Mid Point 5/1/2026 End Date 5/1/2027 110 Value Calculation 105 ...... Escalations �� 8.670%� 100 Years z 5.3 Rate Per Annum3 1.573% 95 Historica14 2.9% Volatility5 5.0% 90 Escalation', Data Date = 100 Data Date Start Date Mid Point End Date Notes: 1- Escalation begins with the data date and assumes equal spending from project start to end dates 2 - Years is the duration from the Data (Estimate) date to the mid point of the project 3 - Rate Per Annum is the annual rate of escalation which when compounded over Years, equal Escalation 4 - Historical is the annual rate of escalation for the weighted model from 2015/Q1 to 2021/Q2 5 - Volatility is the std. deviation of the model's Historical annual rates of escalation, equivalent to a p=0.84 value Forecasts are based on data provided by IHS Markit though 2021-Q4 with model weighting as given below 4.3843% - PP1324110AY2.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Diesel Fuel 1.9523% WPIP1321.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Sand Gravel and Crushed Stone 3.343% - PP1327320P.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Ready -Mix Concrete 1.3109% PREBAR.Q.FOS USA, Spot Price, Reinforcing Bar (Rebar) Steel 0.6176% - WPIP08.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Lumber and Wood Products 0.8038% WPIWP133.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Concrete Products 0.1949% - PP1331318.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Other Aluminum Rolling Drawing and Extruding 2.5468% PP13311107.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Hot Rolled Bars Plates and Structural Shapes 0.3362% - WPIP081.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Lumber 2.1699% PP13241221.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Roofing Asphalts, Pitches, Coatings, Cements 1.3843% - PP1332321.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Metal Window and Door 0.902% PP1327420.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Gypsum Wallboard 0.902% - PP1325510.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Paints and Coatings 0.434% WPIS30S.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Finished Goods 6.1449% - WPIPII.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Machinery and Equipment 0.4685% PP1337214.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Office Furniture 0.344% - PP1334516.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Laboratory Analytical Instruments 0.344% PP13353141.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Relay and Industrial Controls 0.0442% - WPIP1144.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Industrial Material Handling Equipment 5.1446% PP1331511.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Iron Foundries 2.8158% - WPIP0721.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Plastic Construction Products (Primarily Pipe) 14.0085% PP1332996.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Fabricated Pipe and Fittings 1.8242% - PP1335929D.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Building Wire and Cable 1.132% - PP1335313.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Switchgear and Switchboard Apparatus 8.9795% - PP1331210.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Iron/Steel Pipe and Tube Mfg From Purch Steel 0.9327% PP13339121.Q.FOS USA, PPI, Air and Gas Compressors 0.4664% - WPIP07.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Rubber and Plastic Products 2.7982% PP1333911.Q.FOS - USA, PPI, Pumps and Pumping Equipment 0.4664% - PSTAINSHEET304.Q.FOS - USA, Spot Price, Stainless Coil Steel, Grade 304 32.8041% CEU2000000008.Q.FOS USA, Average Hourly Earnings, Construction r) n Estima I— — C ArYIOLJ r) G) M 3%-S% Schematic Construction Cost Estimate Accuracy Ranges Project Design Definition 100% 0 M z C r - M M r - w LEVEL E I FP 0' C DEFINITION Expressed .a. % a' motors 0% to 2% % to 151% 101% to 409% 30% to 70% 50% to 1001% 777 ion definition END USAGE Concept Screening or Feasibility Budget Authorization, or Control Control or Bid I Tender Check Estimate or Bid I Tender Purpose of Estimate _______.777777- METHODOLOGY Capacity Factored, Parametric Models, Semi -Detailed Unit Costs with Assembly Level Typical estimatingEquipment method Judgment, or Analogy Factored or Parametric Models Line Items Detailed Unit Cost with Forced Detailed Take -Off Detailed Unit Cost with Detailed Take -Off EXPECTED ACCURACY RANGE Typical variation in low L: -20% to -50% K +30% to +100% L: -15% to -30% H: +20% to +50% L: -10% to -20% to +30% T L: -5% to -150/6 % L: .3-1. to .10% T H-. +3% to +15% and hi ran es Jul PREPARATION EFFORT Typical degree of effort relative 1 2 to 4 3 to 10 4 to 20 5 to 100 to feast Cost index of 1 [bl Class 5 estimates are generally prepared based an Very Class 4 estimates are generally prepared based an very Class 3 estimates are generally prepared to tam the basis for Class 2 estimates are generally prepared to form a detailed class 1estimates are generally prepared for discrete parts or limited Information, and subsequently have very wide accuracy limited information, and subsequebby have very wide accuracy budget authorization, appropriation, and/or funding, As such, central Census against which all project work is monitored in sections of the total project rather than generating this level of ranges As such, some Companies and organizations have ranges. They are typically used for project screening, they typically ion the initial central estimate against Mich all terms of cost and progress Control. For contractors, this class detail for the entire product The parts of the project estimated at elected to determine that due to the inherent inaccuracies, deterne Justice of feasill fifty, concept evaluation, and prelim inary actual costs and resources wilt be mentioned. Typically, of estimate is often used as the "bid" estimate to establish this level of detail will typically be Used by subcoubractom for bids, such estimates Cannot be classified in a Conventional and budget approval. Typically, engineering is from 1 % to 5 % riginecring is pace 10% to 40-A complete, and would Contract wine. Typically, engineering is from 30 % to 70 % or by owiroar for Check estimates. The updated estimate Is often systematic manner, Class 5 estimates, due to the complete, and would comprise at a minimum the following: compose at a minimum the foflowkjg process flow diagrams, Complete, and would comprise at a minimum the following: refected to as the current control estimate and becomes the new requirements ofend use, may be prepared within a very plant Capacity, block schematics, indicated layout, process if utility flaw diagrams, preliminary piping and instrument I Process flow diagrams, utility Pow diagrams, piping and baseline for Cost/schedule central of the project. Class I REFINED CLASS limited amount of time and with very little effort expended - diag rams (PF Dal for me in process systems and prelfirninis ry diagrams, bfifity III ow diagrams, preliminary piping and instrument Pow diagrams, heat and material batances, final estimates may be prepared for pari; ofthe project to comprise a DEFINITION sometimes requiring less than I hour to prepare. Often, little engineered process and utility equipment lists. Level of Project instrument diagrams, plot plan, developed layout drawings, plot plan, final layout drawings, complete engineered process fair price estimate or Ind check estimate to compare against a more Than proposed plant type, locaution, and capacity are Definition Requ ired: I % to 15% of full project definition, ;and essentially Complete engineering process and utility and utility equipment lists, single fine diagrams for electrical, contraotor's bid estimate, or to ovaluatardispute claims, Typically, known at the time of estimate preparation, equipment fists. Level Of Project Definition Requiredt 10% to fectri equipment and motor schedules, vendor quotations, engineering is from 50% to 100% Coup plate, and would compose 40% of full project definition, started project execution plans, resourcing and work force virtually all erginee4rig and design documentation of the project, JamT Cie. and complete seseect execution and crentrissioning plans. Level for Project Definition Required! 50% to 100% offifil project definition. Glass 5 estimates are prepared for any number ofstrategIG C lass 4 estimates are prepared for a number of purposes Class 3 estimates am typically prepared to support full project lass 2 estimates are typically prepared as the detailed control Class 1 estimates am typically prepared teform a current ;7,;tiTl business, planning purposes, such as but not limited to market ..h as but not limited to, data it.d strategic planning, bus mow funding requests, and become the first of the project phase baseline against which all actual Costs an resources will now estirriatetto bemed as thefirsh output baseline against which all inches, reamarrentofiratial vlabliftv, evaluation of alternate evelopment, project screening at more developed stages, 'Control intimat.'against which .1factual Costs and resources be monitored for variation to the budget, and form a part of the actual toasts and incomes will now be monitored far variations charimps, project screening, project location studio., ternative scheme a na Iva is, confirmation of am nom ic and/or Will be monitored for variations to the budget. They are used a ichange/vacation control program. to the budget, and firm a part of the changelveriation central END USAGE DEFINED evaluation brifossource needs and budgeting, Jong-rige chnical feasibility, and preliminary budget approval or the project budget until replaced by ..re detailed estimate.. In program. They may be used to evaluate bid checking, to support capital planning, oto. Juproval to proceed to next stage. many owner organizations, a Class 3 estimate may be the last vendor/contactor negotiations, or for claim evaluations and estimate required and Could well fare the only basis for dispateapardittim, onsittritted.le Central, Class 5 estimates virtually always use stochastic estimating Class 4 estimates virtually always use stochastic estimating l Class 3 estimates usually involve more deterministic Class 2 estimates always involve a high degree of Class 1 estimates involve the highest degree of daternenistio methods such as oosithcapacity Curves and factors, seek of methods such as chad/capacity, curves and factors, scale of estimating methods that stochastic methods, They usually aternbuistic estimating methods. Class 2 estimates are estimating methods, and require a great amountof effort, Cie.. 1 operations factors Lang factors, Hand fastors, Chilton factors, perations factors, Lang factors, Hand factors, Chilton factors, involve . high dogma ofifirst cast line items, although these prepared in great detail, and often involve tens of thousands of estimates are prepared in great distal, and thes are usually ESTIMATING PetemsTkarneffam factors, Guthrie factors, and otherf Peters-Timmerhaus factors, Guthrie factors, the Miller method, maybe at an assembly level of detail rather than individual unit cost fine items. For these areas of the project still performed of, only the most important or crificrif areas of the METHODS USED parametric and modeling techniques. rose unit bashiftaboa, and other parametric and modeling Components. Factoring and other stochastic methods may be undefined, an assumed level of detailed takeoff (forced detail) project. All items in the estimate are usually unit cost line items techniques used to estimate less-kignificant areas of the project, may be developed to use as line items in the estimate instead based on actual design quantities - I relying on factoring methods. Typical accuracy ranges for Clan 5 estimates are -205r, io- - Typical accuracy ranges for Class 4 estimates are -15% to Typical accuracy ranges for Class 3 estimates are -10% to - Typical accuracy ranges for Class 2 estimates are -5% to - Typical accuracy ranges for Class I ustricstes, are -3% to 0% on the Joel side, and +30% to + 100% on the high sld% 30% on the low side, and +20% to +50% on the high side, 20% on thislow, aid., and +10% to+30%0h the high aide, 15% an the low side, and +5% to +20% on the high side, 10% on the law sm, and +3% to +15% on the high side, spending on the tochrologfoafecouplexity, ofthoprafect, spending on the technological Complexity ofthe project, depending on the technological Complexity of the project itspending on the technological complexity of the project, depending on the technological Complexity of the project, EXPECTED ppropidate, contingency determination, Ranges Could exceed perennials reference information, and the inclusion of an pproptiage reference information, and the inclusion ofan appropriate reference Information, and the inclusion of an appropriate reference Information, and The inclusion ofan ACCURACY RANGE than, shown in unusual circumstances. ppropriate Contingency determination. Ranges could exceed appropriate confinorel determination, Ranges Could eximad appropriate contingency determination. Ranges could exceed approphate, Contingency determination. Ranges could nons] shown in unusual circumstances. those shown in unusual Circumstances, these shown in unusual circumstances those shown in unusual Circumstances. As little as 1 hour or tess to prepare to perhaps more than 200 Typically, as little as 20 hours or less to perhaps more than Typically, as little as 150 hours or less to perhaps more than Typically, as little as 300 hours or less to perhaps more than Class 1 estimates require Iffamostaffort to create, and assucb hours, depending on the project and the estimating 300 hours, depending on the project and the estimating 1500 boom, depending on the project and the estimating 3000 hours, depending an the project and the estimating am generally developodfor onlyselockid areasofthe project, or methodology used, methodology used. methodology used. methodology used. Bid Estimates typically require more effort for bidding purposes, A complete Class 1 estimate may twelve EFFORT TO PREPARE than estimates used for funding or control purposes as ifliss as 600 hours or Ins, to perhaps more then 6000 hours, (for US$20MM project): depending on the project and the estimating methodology used. Bid tostunate, typically require more effort than estimates used for funding or central threaten, ANSI Standard Order of Magnitude Estimate, Ratio, ballpark, blue sky, seat -of I Budget Estimate; Screening, top-down, feasibility, Budget Estimate, Budget, scope. sanction, semi -detailed, Definitive Estimate; Detailed Control, forced detail, execution Deffiriffive Estimate; Full detail, release, fall -out, tender, firm price, Reference Z94.2-1989 cable, ROM, idea study, prospect estimate, concession license uthorization, factored, pre -design, pre -study. authorization, preliminary central, concept study, development, phase, master Control, engineering, bid, tender, change order tirdicire-UP, final, detailed walnut, forced detail, alsioution Phase' name; Alternate timate, guesstimate, ruleofffrumb ": bress'"riginaering phase estimatetarget aeffmate. estimate. master Coal fair prim, defirrifive, change order estimate Estimate Names, Terms, Expressions, S non ms: Class 5 Class 5 Class 4 Class 4 Class 3 Class 3 Class 2 class 2 Class 1 Class Project Scope Desai tion c3enerat Defined Defined Defined Plant Production / Facility C.O.mt, —Preliminary Preliminary 6efined Defined Defined Plant Location General A —imate S oafto S ecific S.ctFc Sails & Hydrology None Preliminary Defined Defined Defined Integrated Project Plan None PTaliminaw Defined Defined De, ad Project Master Schedule None Prelimina Defined Defined Defined Escalation Strategy None Preliminary Defined Defined Defined War k Breakdown Structure None Preliminary Defined Defined Defined Project Code of ccounts None Preliminary Defined Defined Defined ontracting Strategy I Assumed III Assumed Nfinteary Defined Defined e Ciass5 •• •• Class4 Class3 Class, -• _- •-,•-• - •,•_• Class Block Flow Diagrams Preliminary /Complete Compete Care at.+„�W� Plot Plans Started Preilnin.` /Com let. Complete Corselet. Process Flow Diagrams p Started / Preliminary Preliminary ( Com let. Complete Com fete Utility Flow Diagrams (UFDs) Staged /Preliminary Preliminary I Carritlate, Complete Com tete Piping & Instrument Dia rams P&IDS Started Preliminary I Complete, Complete Com tete Heat and Material Balances Started PreliminaryComplete ' Complete Com lete Process Equipment List Started / Preliminary Preliminary! Complete Complete Complete Utility E ui ment List Started / PreliminaryPreliminary m i Coate Complete Com tete Electrical One Line Drawin e Started / Preliminary Preliminary / Com fete. Complete Com late Specifications and Datasheeta Started Preifmina Com fete Correlate Com late General Equipment rran ement Drawln s Started Preiimir ai f C m fete : Com let, Com [ata Sears Parts Lists Started t Preliminary PreliminaryCom to rchitectural Details / Schedufes Started Preliminary /Complete Complete Complete Structural Details Started Preliminary,!Cora eta Complete Complete Mechanical Discipline Drawin a Started Preliminary Prelimina 1Com tete Electrical Discipline Drawin a Started Preliminary , prelfrafirropelcoreglets, System Discipline Drawings Started Preliminary Prelimina /Com tete ivil/Site Discipline Drawln s _ _ Started Preliminary Prelimin.rtComrete t____ Demolition Details I Started Pre{i ins /Corn etaI Complete . Comajete.��....�...r.�.. Appendix E Preliminary Implementation ScheduLl ID v t,,...� Project Summary Q""' ' ' ' ' ' Task Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors 2020 2021 2 Inactive Milestone Manual Summary Rollup Mode Summary Inactive Summary iiManual Summary External Milestone Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 {Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr _4 Qtr 1 Qtr_ 1 Page 1 Start Phase 1 Contract (RFP May 2020) 1 day Wed 05/13/20 Wed 05/13/20 I 2 Phase 1 - Preliminary Design Phase Services 622 days Thu 05/14/20 Fri 09/30/22 f 3 W41 Task 1.1 Project Management, Meetings, and 622 days Thu 05/14/20 Fri 09/30/22 Quality Control 4 0041 Project Execution Plan and QA/QC Plan 7 days Thu 05/14/20 Fri 05/22/20 1 5 W4 Kickoff Workshop 1 day Tue 06/02/20 Tue 06/02/20 4FS+6 days 6 am. Project Site Walk - Criteria and Concepts Discussior 1 day Wed 06/24/20 'Wed 06/24/20 55FS+10 days 7 0 Project Stakeholder Workshop - Present Pre -Final 1 day Thu 06/09/22 Thu 06/09/22 PDR and Next Steps 8 Task 1.2 Data Collection and Review 413 days Wed 06/03/20 Fri 12/31/21 17 Collector Well Pumping Test (Task 2.5) 260 days Mon 10/04/21 'Fri 09/30/22 18 Monitor Well Construction 15 days Mon 10/04/21 'Fri 10/22/21 19 Pumping Well Construction 20 days Wed 07/20/22 ',Tue 08/16/22 20 Collector Well Report 33 days Wed 08/17/22 'Fri 09/30/22 19 21 M. Task 1.3 Preliminary Environmental Review 42 wks Mon 07/26/21 'Fri 05/13/22 15SF,,, i 22 M. Task 1.4 Construction Funding Evaluation 42 wks Mon 07/26/21 IFri 05/13/22 15SF 23 EF4 Task 1.5 Preliminary Design Report 250 days Mon 08/23/21 'Fri 08/05/22 24 r Production of Draft PDR 145 days Mon 08/23/21 'Fri 03/11/22 30 Production of Pre -Final PDR 60 days Mon 03/14/22 'Fri 06/03/22 29 35 Production of Final PDR 45 days Mon 06/06/22 IFri 08/05/22 34 P 36 Production of Final PDR 35 days Mon 06/06/22 'Fri 07/22/22 37 COR Final Acceptance 2 wks Mon 07/25/22 'Fri 08/05/22 36 38 Submit Phase 2 Scope to COR 15 days Mon 08/08/22 'Fri 08/26/22 37 39 Phase 2 - Final Design, Bid, and Construction Phase 1240 days Mon 08/29/22 'Fri 05/28/27 38 Services 0 6 Task v t,,...� Project Summary Q""' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 'li Manual Task �e;,t .. ............ Start -only C Deadline Project: Pump Station No. 1 Split Inactive Task Duration -only Finish -only Progress Date: Sun 07/10/22 Milestone Inactive Milestone Manual Summary Rollup External Tasks Manual Progress Summary Inactive Summary iiManual Summary External Milestone Page 1 City of Redding Pump House No. 1 Replacement Project City of Redding Department of Public Works — Water Utility Document no: PPS01 26221137RDD ilk On- GI OTMA Plow r '- Client name: City of Redding Department of Public Works -Water Utility Project name: City of Redding Pump House No. 1 Replacement Project Client reference: City of Redding Project no: W8Y06200 Document no: PPS0126221137RDD Project manager: Kim Hein, P.E. Revision no: 0 Prepared by: Jacobs Date: November 1, 2022 Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. 2525 Airpark Drive Redding, CA 96001-2443 United States T +1.530.243.5831 F +1.530.243.1654 www.jacobs.com Copyright Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. @ 2022. All rights reserved. Reproduction and redistribution without written permission is prohibited. Jacobs, the Jacobs logo, and all other Jacobs trademarks are the property of Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. NOTICE: This document has been prepared exclusively for the use and benefit of Jacobs' client. Jacobs accepts no liability or responsibility for any use or reliance upon this document by any third party. Acronymsand Abbreviations......................................................................................................................................... iii 1. Introduction........................................................................................................................................................1-1 2. Overview of Previous Investigations.............................................................................................................2-1 2.1 Potential Horizontal Collector Well Locations...........................................................................................2-1 2.2 Geophysical Survey..............................................................................................................................................2-2 2.3 Geotechnical Borings and Short-term Pumping Tests...........................................................................2-2 2.4 Preferred Location for Additional Testing...................................................................................................2-2 3. Monitoring Well. Installation...........................................................................................................................3-1 3.1 Borehole Drilling and Well Construction.....................................................................................................3-1 3.2 Well Development and Transducer Installation.......................................................................................3-1 4. Test Well Installation........................................................................................................................................4-1 4.1 Borehole Drilling and Well Construction.....................................................................................................4-1 4.2 Well Development................................................................................................................................................4-3 5. Pumping Tests....................................................................................................................................................5-1 5.1 Overview of Pumping Test.................................................................................................................................5-1 5.2 Pumping Test Monitoring and Background Data.....................................................................................5-1 5.3 Variable-rate Test.................................................................................................................................................5-3 5.4 Constant -rate Test................................................................................................................................................ 5-3 5.5 Microscopic Particle Analysis........................................................................................................................... 5-5 6. Horizontal Collector Well Yield Analysis......................................................................................................6-1 6.1 Pumping Test Analysis........................................................................................................................................6-1 6.2 Potential Collector Well Yield..........................................................................................................................6-2 7. Summary of Findings and Recommendations...........................................................................................7-1 7.1 Summary of Findings...........................................................................................................................................7-1 7.2 Recommendations................................................................................................................................................7-1 8. References...........................................................................................................................................................8-1 A City of Redding Surface Geophysical Survey Investigations Summary and Recommendations Technical Memorandum B City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigations Summary and Recommendations Technical Memorandum C Shasta County Well Permits D Lithologic Logs E Monitoring Well Water Level Data F Photographs G Contractor Field Material Submittals H Microscopic Particulate Analysis I Pumping Test Graphs PPS0126221137RDD 3-1 Summary ofMonitoring Well Construction Information 3-1 4-1 Summary ofTest Well Construction Information .............................................................................................. 4-1 5-1 Summary ofPumping Tests Conducted onBf-TVV1 5-1 8-1 Aquifer Hydraulic ParametorahnmBf-TVV1Pumping Tests .-----------------------'8-2 1-1 Collector Well Locations 1-2 3-1 Test Well, Monitoring Well, and Boring Locations ............................................................................................. 3-2 4-1 Cross-section through Bike Park Test Wei | 4-2 5-1 Sacramento River Discharge at Keswick Station and Approximate Stage at Bike Park ...................... 5-2 5-2 Sacramento River Temperature atKeswick Station .......................................................................................... 5-3 °F degree(s)Fahrenheb A[|O Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District City City ofRedding DO dissolved oxygen gpno gaiion(s)per minute H[VV horizontal collector well Location Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District Location Rodeo Grounds Location Bike Park Location Turtle Bay Location 5 east side of State Route 44 bridge rngd million gaiion(s)per day MPA microscopic particulate analysis NTU nephelometric turbidity unit ORP oxidation-reduction potential PDR Preliminary Design Report Psi Pump House (Pump Station) No. 1 PVC polyvinyl chloride report Collector Well Feasibility Report rpm revolutions per minutes VFD variabie-frequencydrive Yellow Jacket Yellow Jacket Drilling Services PpS0/2622113/RD0 In July 2022, Jacobs submitted the Final Preliminary Design Report (PDR) for the Pump House No. 1 Replacement Project (project) to the City of Redding (City) (Jacobs 2022). One of the alternatives presented in the PDR, Alternative 3, considered the construction of horizontal collector wells (HCWs). Based on discussions with the City on January 14, 2022, an evaluation of Alternative 3 would be presented as a stand-alone technical memorandum, separate from the PDR, because it would not provide the required buildout capacity of 42 million gallons per day (mgd) and field analysis was still being conducted. Alternative 3, however, could provide supplemental water for the City and a suitable water source to Foothill Water Treatment Plant during the winter months, when river turbidity is a concern. HCWs consist of caissons that are constructed into the saturated zone with well screens that extend Latterly from the caisson into the aquifer. Some of the benefits of HCWs are higher yields when compared to traditional vertical wells and the need for Less treatment relative to surface water sources. The PDR identifies five potential sites for HCWs between Turtle Bay and the existing pump station, Pump House (Pump Station) No. 1 (PS1), as follows: ■ Location 1 (Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District [ACID]) ■ Location 2 (Rodeo Grounds) ■ Location 3 (Bike Park) ■ Location 4 (Turtle Bay) ■ Location 5 (east side of State Route 44 bridge) Figure 1-1 shows the locations of the potential sites. The PDR also includes reports that summarize the findings of geophysical surveys and subsurface investigations that were used to screen the feasibility of HCWs at these locations. Based on those findings and input regarding infrastructure requirements, the City identified one potential location, Location 3 (Bike Park), for further evaluation. The additional feasibility evaluation at Location 3 involved the installation of a test well, monitoring wells, pumping tests, and water quality sampling. This Collector Well Feasibility Report (report) documents the findings of the additional field investigations and testing and presents an evaluation of the potential yield for an HCW installed at Location 3. It also includes summaries and associated documentation for the previous phases of HCW investigations, compiling all of this information in one document. The report is organized as follows: ■ Section 1: Introduction — Presents an introduction and overview of the scope of the report. ■ Section 2: Overview of Previous Investigations — Summarizes the results of the previous HCW feasibility investigations. ■ Section 3: Monitoring Well Installation — Describes the installation of the monitoring wells. ■ Section 4: Test Well Installation — Describes the installation of the test well. ■ Section 5: Pumping Tests — Describes the pumping tests that were conducted and water quality sampling. ■ Section 6: Horizontal Collector Well Yield Analysis — Presents analyses of the pumping test data and an evaluation HCW yield. ■ Section 7: Summary of Findings and Recommendations — Presents the overall findings and recommendations. ■ Section 8: References Supporting information and the results of the previous HCW investigations are included as appendices. PPS0126221137RDD 1-1 LEGEND --�Flow Direction ofRiver Potential HCVVLocation ' Selected for Further Evaluation » ~J,� Potential HCVVLocation ' Eliminated hnmFudherEvaluationHCW = Horizontal Collector Well North— Figure 1-1.Collector Well Locations C�|er�rNbUFean�|kyRopod ' — City nfRedding Pump House No. 1Replacement Project Approximate scale mfeet Redding, California Overview of r • # . �r HCW investigations are typically conducted with a series of sequential steps, proceeding if favorable results are obtained from the previous step. The HCW investigation for this project included the following steps: ■ Review available information including hydrogeology, Land uses, and property access. ■ Conduct a surface geophysical survey to identify areas with potential suitable LithoLogy. ■ Drill exploratory borings, coupled with short-term pumping tests, at sites with potential suitable LithoLogy to confirm and calibrate the geophysical survey results. ■ Install a test well with associated monitoring wells and conduct pumping tests to measure response in surrounding monitoring wells and estimate the aquifer hydraulic parameters at the sites proven from the exploratory borings. ■ Estimate the potential HCW yield of the Locations that are subject to the pumping tests. The first three steps were conducted previously and reported in the PDR. This section provides a summary of this previous work. 2.1 Potential Horizontal Collector Well Locations The general area along the river reach between Turtle Bay and existing PS1 was evaluated to identify potential sites for HCWs. Based on a review of existing geologic mapping, property availability, property size, and other Logistical factors, five potential sites for HCWs were identified (Locations 1 through 5) (Figure 1-1). Based on mapping by Hollister and Evans (1965), each of these Locations is underlain by Quaternary alluvium, and based on the proximity to the river, the saturated alluvium in these areas was suspected to be transmissive an in hydraulic connection to the river. To refine the number of sites for further evaluation, Redding Electric Utility provided general information regarding the feasibility of establishing electrical service for an HCW at those Locations; summarized as follows: ■ Location 1 (ACID): Most viable Location for dual feeds from different substations; one feed exists onsite; an additional feed would need to be installed along the dirt access road from Court Street; floodplain Limits could pose an issue. ■ Location 2 (Rodeo Grounds): Infrastructure in proximity but only one circuit; this area is served radially by one circuit from the State Route 44 crossing; a circuit would need to be extended from Park Marina across State Route 44 that is approximately 2,500 feet with a highway overpass crossing to obtain a second feed; not a preferred Location. ■ Location 3 (Bike Park): DuaL-circuit feed possible but from same the substation (different transformer banks); circuits would need to be extended about 1,500 to 2,000 feet down Traveled Way. ■ Location 4 (Turtle Bay): Similar Limitations as Location 2 but with additional circuit extension due to remote Location; accessibility would need to be improved; possible floodplain issues. ■ Location 5 (east side of State Route 44 bridge): No infrastructure in proximity; nearest tie point is the end of Palisades. Circuit would need to be upgraded; no dual feed possibility; extreme terrain variations from tie point to well location; not a preferred location. Based on review of existing information and input regarding the feasibility of establishing electrical service, on July 30, 2020, the City removed Location 5 from further consideration. The remaining sites were retained for geophysical investigation. PPS0126221137RDD 2-1 Draft Collector Well Feasibility Report 2.2 Geophysical Survey The surface geophysical investigation conducted for this project included Frequency Domain Electromagnetics and Electrical Resistivity Tomography. These geophysical methods map the resistivity structure of the subsurface, which can correlate with variations in lithology, including the depth to bedrock; water saturation; fluid conductivity, as well as porosity and permeability. Collier Geophysics, LLC conducted the geophysical survey in September 2020 at four Locations: Location 1 (ACID), Location 2 (Rodeo Grounds), Location 3 (Bike Park), and Location 4 (Turtle Bay). The findings were summarized in Jacobs' City of Redding Surface Geophysical Survey Investigations Summary and Recommendations Technical Memorandum, dated October 22, 2020 (Appendix A). Based on the results of the geophysical surveys, the City decided on December 2, 2020, to proceed with geotechnical investigations at Location 1 (ACID), Location 3 (Bike Park), and Location 4 (Turtle Bay) because the most favorable LithoLogies for water production were observed at these Locations. 2.3 Geotechnical Borings and Short-term Pumping Tests In addition to Locations 1, 3, and 4, where geophysical surveys indicated conditions were favorable for an HCW, exploratory borings were also advanced at Location 5 at the City's request and at a Location near a Southern Pacific Railroad well on the north side of the Sacramento River to confirm LithoLogic conditions. Shasta County permits were approved for each of the exploration borings. A 1600/1-ake and Streambed Alteration Agreement permit was not required from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife via email confirmation on November 16, 2020. Yellow Jacket Drilling Services (Yellow Jacket) drilled a total of 12 boreholes and conducted pumping test in four of those boreholes in February 2021. Boreholes were continuously cored using a rotary sonic drill rig and were advanced to bedrock to verify the thickness of alluvium at each Location. Short duration, Low -capacity pumping tests were conducted within select boreholes by constructing a temporary well within the drill casing and pumping water from the borehole with a submersible pump. Soil samples were collected from boreholes in which Low -capacity pumping tests were performed and submitted for a particle -size distribution sieve analysis. The results of the pump tests and estimates of hydraulic conductivity obtained from partial size analysis were used to calculate rough estimates of HWC yield at those Locations. The testing at Location 3 (Bike Park) resulted in the highest yields from the short-term pumping tests. Shallow bedrock was encountered at Location 5 and the drilling site near the railroad, and those Locations were removed from further consideration. Jacobs' City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigations Summary and Recommendations Technical Memorandum, dated March 12, 2021 (Appendix B), documents the results of the additional geotechnical drilling, pumping tests, and sieve analyses. Based on the findings of that work, Jacobs proposed the installation of test wells, monitoring wells, and further pump testing at two Locations: Location 1 (ACID) and Location 3 (Bike Park). 2.4 Preferred Location for Additional Testing After further evaluation of the investigation results and other factors, the City decided on May 11, 2021, to install a test well and monitoring wells and to conduct pumping testing at Location 3 (Bike Park) only. The following sections of this report will refer to Location 3 or Bike Park only. 2-2 PPS0126221137RDD Monitori This section describes the installation of the monitoring wells that were conducted as shown on Figure 3-1. Yellow Jacket provided borehole drilling and development. 3.1 Borehole Drilling and Well Construction Five boreholes were advanced to complete four monitoring wells (MW -1, MW -2, MW -3, and MW -4) in October 2021. Each borehole was advanced using the rotary sonic drilling technique with a Terra Sonic TSI 150T truck -mounted drill rig. Sonic was selected as the preferred drilling method to facilitate collection of a continuous core and detailed characterization of subsurface lithology. Each borehole was advanced to bedrock, which consisted of siltstone of the Franciscan Formation. During drilling, a 9 -inch -diameter sonic casing was advanced to the total borehole depth to facilitate well construction. Shasta County well permits for the monitoring wells are included in Appendix C. The lithologic logs for the monitoring wells are included in Appendix D. Monitoring wells were completed with 2 -inch -diameter Schedule 80 polyvinyl chloride (PVC) well casing and factory slotted, 0.060 -inch aperture, well screen. After installing well casing, filter pack was installed to a depth a few feet above the well screen, followed by installation of an approximately 2 -foot -thick upper bentonite seal and a cement grout seal to ground level. One borehole (BP -B-4) was drilled and not completed as a well because a higher percentage of clay and silt content was observed in the continuous core at this location; the borehole BP -B-4 was abandoned with cement grout. Monitoring wells were completed with a 12 -inch -diameter belowground traffic -rated vault. Monitoring well completion details are summarized in Table 3-1. MW -1 Monitoring Well 43 39 2 14 to 39 MW -2 Monitoring Well 46 43 2 14 to 44 MW -3 Monitoring Well 46 43 2 16 to 41 MW -4 Monitoring Well 41 40 2 20 to 40 bgs = below ground surface 3.2 Well Development and Transducer Installation The monitoring wells were developed using a combination of surging and bailing. Development proceeded until there was minimal production of filter pack material or formation solids in the well. After completing well development, each monitoring well was equipped with an In Situ Level TROLL 700 data -logging transducer, rated to 30 pounds per square inch (gauge pressure). Transducers were set to record the water level in each monitoring well every 15 to 30 minutes to monitor background water level fluctuation before installing the test well. Background water level data from the monitoring wells is included in Appendix E. PPS0126221137RDD 3-1 Figure 3-1. Test Well, Monitoring Well, and Boring Locations Collector Well Feasibility Report A0 30 60 City of Redding Pump House No. 1 Replacement Project , I I L--1 I Redding, California North Approximate scale in feet This section describes the test well installation and the pumping tests conducted in July and August 2022 and as shown on Figure 3-1. Yellow Jacket provided well installation, development, and testing services. Photos of the work are shown in Appendix F. 4.1 Borehole Drilling and Well Construction Test well BP -TW 1 was drilled and constructed in July 2022. The borehole for BP -TW 1 was drilled using dual rotary drilling techniques with a Foremost DR-14HD truck -mounted drill rig. Dual rotary was selected as the preferred drilling method to facilitate drilling and advancing casing while drilling that prevents collapse of loose overburden and allows for installation of large diameter well casing. The boring was advanced to a total depth of 47 feet bgs. Drill cuttings were collected at 2 -foot intervals from the cyclone for lithologic description. The lithology observed at BP -TW 1 generally corresponded to the lithologic log from the adjacent monitoring well MW -2. The lithologic logs for BP -TW 1 and the monitoring wells are included in Appendix D. BP -TW 1 was constructed using 12 -inch inside diameter, 0.25 -inch wall thickness ASTM A139 Grade B low carbon steel well casing to a total depth of 44 feet bgs, including 29 feet of 0.100 -inch aperture Ful Flo Louvered casing from 15 to 42 feet bgs. All well casing materials were manufactured by Roscoe Moss Company. The borehole annulus was backfilled with 3/8 by 1/8 gravel supplied by Tacna Sand & Gravel (from 15 to 47 feet bgs) and Axner Excavating, Inc. (from 12 to 15 feet bgs). Based on quantity of gravel used, a large void was present near the top of the well screen. Initial well development was performed using a trash pump to settle gravel pack and remove high solids water prior to installing a bentonite seal. Approximately 1,000 gallons of groundwater was pumped during initial development. Medium bentonite chips were placed from 7.5 to 12 feet bgs and hydrated before placing cement bentonite grout to 2.5 feet bgs. The test well was equipped with a blind flange to cap the well and 2- by 2 -foot square traffic rated vault installed in a cement pad at grade. Table 4-1 presents a summary of well completion details for BP -TW 1. NA = not applicable Well casing details, well casing mill test reports, and sieve analysis results for gravel supplied by Tacna Sand & Gravel are provided as Appendix G. An east -west cross-section through test well BP -TW 1 and the four monitoring wells is shown on Figure 4-1. Based on the continuous core collected while drilling the monitoring wells, fill material was encountered in the upper 10 to 13 feet at each location. Below the fill consists primarily of sand and gravel, with some finer -grain materials observed to the west and is underlain by bedrock (siltstone) interpreted to be the Franciscan Formation. The bedrock surface was relatively flat though the area, with the depth to bedrock ranging from 39 to 43 feet bgs. PPS0126221137RDD 4-1 10 20 30 40 50 LEGEND Soil Boring Interval Well Screen Interval Fill Gravel Sand Clay Bedrock Collector Well Feasibility Report City of Redding Pump House No. 1 Replacement Project Redding, California 4.2 Well Development Well development for BP -TW 1 was completed in August 2022 and consisted of mechanical and pumping development. Well development water was discharged to land surface in the open area east of the wells. 4.2.1 Mechanical Development Mechanical development was completed for approximately 6 hours and was performed over 2 days. The process involved swabbing and airlifting using a dual -swab too[ with 12 -inch -diameter swabs separated by 2 feet of perforated pipe. Due to the shallow depth of the well, airlifting was only effective when there was maximum submergence of the swab too[ near the bottom of the well. Therefore, dual -swab airlift development consisted of airlifting from the bottom of the well and periodically swabbing the well screen for approximately 10 -minute intervals, followed by Lowering the dual -swab tool back to the bottom of the well until the discharge cleared. Mechanical development proceeded until there was minimal solids production after swabbing (that is, formation sand and filter pack material) and the turbidity was Less than 50 nephelometric turbidity units (NTUs). 4.2.2 Pumping Development Yellow Jacket installed a temporary test pump to conduct pumping development in BP -TW 1. The test pump was a 40 horsepower 6 -inch Grundfos 11005400-1 submersible pump, rated for 1,100 gallons per minute (gpm). The pump was placed in a PVC shroud and Lowered on 6 -inch -diameter drop pipe to an initial pump setting depth of 37.5 feet bgs. The pump was controlled using a Franklin Electric variable -frequency drive (VFD) to allow for operating the pump over a range of pumping rates. The flow rate was measured using a McCrometer Dura Mag DM06-1011 inline flow meter installed 25 feet from the wellhead with 5 feet of 6 -inch -diameter hard pipe upstream and downstream of the meter. The remainder of the discharge was flexible or Lay flat 6 -inch -diameter hose. Two 1 -inch -diameter PVC temporary sounding tubes were installed along the drop pipe, terminating at the top of the pump, to facilitate installing a pressure transducer and to collect manual water Level measurements during pumping. Pumping development was performed for a total of 4 hours with a total of approximately 150,000 gallons pumped. Drawdown, flow rate, turbidity, temperature, pH, oxidation-reduction potential (ORP), dissolved oxygen (DO), electrical conductivity, and sand content were monitored during pumping development. In addition, water Levels were recorded using In Situ Level TROLL 700 model data -Logging pressure transducers deployed in BP -TW 1 and each of the monitoring wells. Development was performed at successively higher pumping rates, starting at approximately 300 gpm up to a maximum rate of 1,280 gpm. Surge pumping (turning the pump on and off) was conducted at the maximum discharge rate for the final hour of pumping development until turbidity was Less than 50 NTU when the pump was turned on. PPS0126221137RDD 4-3 5. Pumping Pumping tests were conducted at BP -TW 1 in August 2022 following the completion of well development activities. Following pumping development, Yellow Jacket performed the following: ■ Lowered the pump intake 5 feet to approximately 42.5 feet bgs to allow for additional drawdown during the pumping tests. ■ Rerouted the discharge conveyance to the nearby storm drain southwest of the test well. Otherwise, pumping tests were completed using the same pumping equipment previously described for pumping development. 5.1 Overview of Pumping Test The pumping tests conducted on test well BP -TW 1 consisted of pumping the test well while monitoring water levels in the test well, the four onsite monitoring wells, and the Sacramento River. The testing consisted of the following: ■ Variable-rate Test — The first test was a variable-rate test, during which BP -TW 1 was pumped for four 2 -hour steps at successively higher pumping rates. Constant -rate Test — The second test was a constant -rate test where the test well was pumped at a constant rate for 3 continuous days. The dates, times, rates, and durations of the tests are listed in Table 5-1. Monitoring and background data collection activities, the variable-rate test, and constant -rate test are described in the following sections. Section 6 presents an analysis of the pumping test results. Table 5-1. Summary of Pumping Tests Conducted on BP-TW1 I gpm/ft = gallons per minute per foot 5.2 Pumping Test Monitoring and Background Data During the pumping tests, Jacobs monitored drawdown, flow rate, turbidity, temperature, pH, ORP, DO, electrical conductivity, and sand content in BP-TW1; and drawdown in the monitoring wells. In addition, periodic turbidity measurements were taken in the Sacramento River where the water from the storm drain outlet entered the river, as well as upstream and downstream of the discharge, to verify there were no increases in river turbidity as a result of the discharge. Turbidity readings at the point of discharge were ±2 NTU of upstream and downstream readings. PPS0126221137RDD 5-1 8/14/2022 1 9:10 274 120 29,000 1.17 234 2 11:10 590 120 70,000 3.77 156 3 13:10 1,000 120 120,000 8.08 124 4 15:10 1,228 120 147,000 11.92 103 End 17:10 0 NA NA NA NA Constant -rate Pumping Test 8/15/2022 Start 8:00 1,000 4,323 4,327,000 10.9 92 8/18/2022 End 8:03 0 NA NA NA NA gpm/ft = gallons per minute per foot 5.2 Pumping Test Monitoring and Background Data During the pumping tests, Jacobs monitored drawdown, flow rate, turbidity, temperature, pH, ORP, DO, electrical conductivity, and sand content in BP-TW1; and drawdown in the monitoring wells. In addition, periodic turbidity measurements were taken in the Sacramento River where the water from the storm drain outlet entered the river, as well as upstream and downstream of the discharge, to verify there were no increases in river turbidity as a result of the discharge. Turbidity readings at the point of discharge were ±2 NTU of upstream and downstream readings. PPS0126221137RDD 5-1 Before the pumping tests, Jacobs installed etemporary aLiUingwe| inthe Sacramento Rivaroouthofthe test vwel|BF-TW1 and equipped it with a pressure transducer. The sti I I ing wel I was used to m on itor f I uctuat ions in river stage overt he course of the pumping tests. |nadd ition tot hemonitoring previously described, f Iowand temperature f Iowand temperature data were obtained fort he Sacramento River at the Keswick Station, which is operated by the U.S. Geological Survey/ Bureau of Reclamation and located in the Sacramento Rver approximately 3.35 miles upstream of the Bike Park. Figure S-1 shows the daily discharge data at the Keswick Station from 2015 to present and the corresponding approximate stage at the Bike Park which was calculated. Under normal conditions, the stage at the Bike Park only varies seasonally by approximately 2 feet. Figure 5-2 showsthe temperature in the Sacramento River atthe Keswick Station from late 2020topresent. The temperature plot indioataothe temperature in the river may fluctuate up to approximately 14 degrees Fahrenheit ('F) seasonally. 3-2 pPS0126221137RDz 5.3 Variable-rate Test An initial (failed) variable-rate pumping test, planned for four 2 -hour steps at successively higher pumping rates. At the beginning of Step 3,4 hours into the test, a faulty setting on the VFD resulted in the pump shutting off and the test wasterminated. The remainder of the day was spent troubleshooting the issues with the pump and the VFD. The successful variable-rate pumping test was conducted for 8 hours and consisted of four steps lasting 120 minutes (2 hours) each. Steps were completed in order of increased pumping rate and included representative flow rates of 274; 590;1,000; and 1,228 gpm (rates represent average during step after flow adjustments were completed), for a total of 366,000 gallons (1.12 acre-feet) of water extracted. The static water levels in BP-TW1 and the monitoring wells were measured before the onset of pumping. Table 5-1 summarizes the representative flow rates, total volume pumped, the drawdown, and the specific capacity measured at the end of each step. Figure 5-3 displays the measured drawdown at BP -TW -1 and the monitoring wells and the river level's fluctuations during step testing activities. 5.4 Constant -rate Test A 72 -hour constant -rate test was conducted at an average pumping rate of 1,000 gpm, and a total of 4,320,000 gallons (13.26 acre-feet) of water extracted. The cumulative drawdown and specific capacity at the end of the test were 10.9 feet and 92 gpm per foot, respectively. Figure 5-3 displays the measured drawdown at BP-TW1 and the monitoring wells and the river levels fluctuations during the constant -rate pumping test. Static groundwater levels and the maximum drawdown observed during the test at BP-TW1 and the monitoring wells are presented in Table 5-1. Groundwater level recovery was monitored at the conclusion of the test, and greater than 99% recovery in the pumping well was achieved approximately 22 hours after the conclusion of the constant -rate test. PPS0126221137 D 5-3 -BP-TW1 11111-11-111 MW --3 w- 11M-1 - MW --4 MW -2 River LeveL (norMaUzed) 8/16/2022 8/17/2022 8/18/2022 8/19/2022 Date t 72 -hour 1'1�uu 1,300 1200 1,100 1,0()0 900 E CL 800 _3 0) cis 700 CM 600 a E 500 400 300 200 100 0 8/20/2022 Collector Well Feasibility Report City of Redding Pump House No. 1 Replacement Project Redding, California 5.5 Microscopic Particle Analysis Groundwater samples were collected during the last 17 hours of the constant -rate pumping test. The samples were submitted to CH Diagnostic and Consulting Service, Inc. of Berthoud, Colorado, for microscopic particulate analysis (MPA) using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) consensus method (EPA 1992) and analysis for the presence of giardia and cryptosporidium by EPA Method 1623. The MPA sample was collected using the apparatus outlined in the consensus method with approximately 937 gallons of water run through the filter in the apparatus. The sample for analysis of giardia and cryptosporidium was collected asa 1O-gaiiongrab sample atthe end ofthe constant -rate test that was filtered in the Lab for analysis. The Laboratory results for the MPA, giardia, and cryptosporidium analysis are included asAppendix H. MPA isatoo[ typically used to identify whetheragroundwater source isunder the direct influence of surface water as defined by EPA's Surface Water Treatment Rule. In this investigation, the analysis looks for and identifies surface water biota that may have traveled through the riverbank sediments and ultimately be present in the pumped groundwater. The microscopic analysis is conducted looking for the following surface water indicators: • Amorphous Debris • Diatonns—Pardcuiargroupoflivingaioae • Algae — Chlorophyll containing filamentous, colonial and unicellular divisions of algae • Rotifers — Near microscopic animals common in freshwater environments • Plant Debris — Undigested fecal matter from herbivorous animals • PiantPoiien—Aiipoiien • Nennatodes—Nennatodesandtheireggs • Crustaceans • Other Anthropoids • Free -Living amoeba • [iUates—Free-Livingprotozoa • Fiageiiates—Piantiiheprotnzoa • Other — Any other biota found in the sample The occurrence ofthe aforementioned indicators iscounted, and the results used toevaluate whether a groundwater source is under the direct influence of surface water as defined by EPA's Surface Water Treatment Rule. Indicators found inthe four samples are asfollows: 0 The MPA analysis identified amorphous debris and nematodes (14 counts per 100 gallons). n Neither giardia nor cryptosporidium were detected. Based on the results of MPA, giardia, and cryptosporidium analysis, the pumped groundwater was at Low risk for the influence of surface water after 3 days of pumping. PpS0/2622113/RD0 s -s Draft Collector Well Feasibility Report 6. Horizontal Collector WeLL YieLd Analysis This section presents the analysis of pumping test data and the estimated HCW yield. 6.1 Pumping Test Analysis Plots of the well drawdown versus time for the pumping tests conducted at the BP -TW 1 site are shown in Appendix I. The variable-rate pumping test was analyzed to obtain an initial transmissivity, a storage coefficient, and well Loss coefficients using the methods developed by Cooper -Jacob (1946) and Jacob (1947a). Transmissivity is a measure of how easily water can flow though the aquifer. The storage coefficient is a measure of how much water is released from the aquifer pore space due to elastic expansion of the water and elastic compression of the pore space from the changing aquifer water Levels. Well Loss coefficients are headlosses resulting from water flowing into the well and are further defined in this section. The Cooper -Jacob analysis (1946) was used to obtain aquifer transmissivity and storage values from the first variable-rate step. This method was applied to the first step in the variable-rate test as subsequent steps at increasing rates violate the assumptions of the analysis method. Jacob's method (1947a) was then used to determine well Loss coefficients from all four of the steps. Jacob's method (1947a) was used to determine well Losses, with the wellhead Losses defined through the welt -Loss coefficients "B" and "C." These coefficients were calculated for well BP -TW 1 and are defined as follows: The drawdown in the well was assumed to be represented by Jacob (1947a): where: s = AQ + BQ + CQZ = Total drawdown in the pumping well (feet) AQ = Aquifer drawdown following a Theis (1935) response (feet) BQ = Linear headlosses caused by the water flowing from the aquifer into the gravel pack and well screen (well Losses, feet) CQZ = Power function headlosses caused by the water flowing from the aquifer into the gravel pack and well screen (well Losses, feet) Q = Power function headlosses caused by the water flowing from the aquifer into the gravel pack and well screen (well Losses, feet) The "B" and "C" coefficients represent the additional drawdown (well Losses) that will be seen beyond the Theis response in the well due to the headLoss across the well screen, gravel pack, and face of the aquifer. For a constant -rate pumping test with no borehole changes over pumping time, the well Losses should be constant across pumping time and evident by the plotted drawdown data shifting up relative to the theoretical drawdown plot as predicted by the Theis response. The constant -rate pumping test was analyzed using image well theory (Lohman 1972) adjusted for unconfined aquifer conditions with the Depuit correction (Jacob 1947b). Image well theory relies on the principle of superposition and imaginary wells to simulate aquifer boundaries. Calculated drawdowns at and around the pumping well are summed to provide a resulting aquifer response. In this case, an image well was Located the distance "2a" from the pumping well and was simulated as a recharge well. The result PPS0126221137RDD 6-1 is a simulated recharge boundary (the river) a distance "a" from the pumping well. The distance "a" is defined as the distance to the "zero drawdown line" and physically is the distance from the pumping well toward the river where the drawdown from pumping becomes zero. The zero -drawdown line should lie somewhere under the river when a good hydraulic connection between the river and the pumping well exists, and farther away from the pumping well if lower quality hydraulic connections exist. The cone of depression continued to expand through the 3 -day test. Complete equilibrium was not reached. This is not unusual, as cited in Walton (1962), "Considerable time elapses before a cone of depression stabilizes, water is no longer taken from storage within the aquifer, and a new state of approximate equilibrium is established." However, in this case, only very subtle signs of equilibrium were observed, which casts some uncertainty on the calculated potential yields. As seen in the plots for BP -TW 1 in Appendix I, although river effects were seen shortly after the test began, the cone of depression continued to slowly expand throughout the test. This expansion was generally uniform surrounding the test well. Analyses of the pumping tests provided the aquifer hydraulic parameters shown in Table 6-1 Table 6-1e Aquifer Hydraulic Parameters from BP -T 1 Pumping Tests Transmissivity (gpd/foot) NA NA NA NA 350,000 Storage Coefficient NA NA NA NA 0.15 "B" Well -Loss Coefficient (feet/gpm) NA NA NA NA 0 °C' Well -Loss Coefficient (feet/gpm') NA NA NA NA 5.2E-6 Transmissivity (gpd/foot) 140,000 135,000 150,000 140,000 180,000 Storage Coefficient 0.0003 0.0003 0.00013 0.0004 0.10 "B" Well -Loss Coefficient (feet/gpm) NA NA NA NA 0 °C' Well -Loss Coefficient (feet/gpm') NA NA NA NA 2.2E-6 Measured Distance to the edge of the river "a" NA NA NA NA 275 Calculated Distance (feet) to Zero Drawdown Line "a" 8,000 2,000 4,700 5,000 600 feet/gpm = feet per gallons per minute feet/gpm' = feet per gallons per minute squared gpd/foot = gallons per day per foot 6.2 Potential Collector Well Yield The potential yield to a radial collector well was calculated using the methods of Hantush and Papadopulos (1962). The distance to the line of recharge for the radial collector (the "a" distance) was taken as a map -measured distance, and also with the one calculated. The most favorable calculated value is the lowest as the river recharge equilibrium then occurs more rapidly. For comparison, the potential yield from a conventional vertical well relying on bank filtration wells is presented. The potential yield to a radial collector well was first calculated using the methods of Hantush and Papadopulos (1962). The formulation is as follows: 6-2 PPS0126221137RDD b b 2 4PpGr') 1 s — Q7TKbl In ee 2 1 —cos (2z + rW) where: s = Drawdown in collector well Q = Yield of collector well K = Hydraulic conductivity b = Saturated thickness of aquifer a = Effective distance to a Line of recharge L = Average Length of Laterals r = Radius of collector caisson e = (2a-2r-L)/L r,, = Effective radius of each Lateral z = Depth of each lateral below static water level p = (2(a-r))/L The data were reviewed by a third -party HCW contractor, and their estimated yield falls between 2.4 and 4.8 mgd. The range of the calculated values was attributed to the uncertainties in the distance to the zero drawdown, and that range included in their calculations used an "a" distance between 275 and 2,075 feet. To estimate the number of collector Laterals required, the calculated collector well yield considered Limits to the approach velocity through the aquifer sediments toward the collector well Laterals. The approach used was to Limit the approach velocity to the well screen to a value that is a function of the aquifer hydraulic conductivity. This empirical approach was tested by several researchers and found to be Limited to the following empirical relationship (Williams 1981). Velocities exceeding the maximums were observed to Lead to Longer-term sediment plugging in the aquifer near the Laterals. Maximum approach velocity = Va =o using a factor of safety of 1.0 Maximum approach velocity = Va = o using a factor of safety of 2.0 where: K = Aquifer hydraulic conductivity in gpd/foot (gallons per day per foot) Va = Approach velocity, (feet per minute) The maximum capacity of the collector is then calculated based on the approach velocity using the total screened surface area of the Lateral horizontal bore, and Laterals 200 feet Long. PPS0126221137RDD 6-3 Maximum Capacity = Q = Va * rc * d * L With consistent units: Q = Collector well capacity, (volume/time) Va = Approach velocity, (length/time) rc = pi (3.1416) = Diameter of lateral bore, (length) = Total length of all laterals, (length) Table 6-2 summarizes the estimated yields for HCWs and conventional vertical wells for measured and calculated distances to the line of recharge. The calculation suggests for a maximum capacity of 5.2 mgd, two 12 -inch laterals, 200 feet tong, are required to limit the approach velocity to an acceptable value. In practice, at least four or five laterals would need to be installed because all Laterals may not be able to be pushed out the full 200 feet. The design should also include blank ports for additional laterals. W. 011NINFXTO"lary "M "M 1VM- IT-121-MMWITFU Mot TW -1 Calculated' HCW 3,600 5.2 TW -1 Measured' HCW 4,200 6 TW -1 Calculated' Vertical Well 1,260 1.8 TW -1 Measured' Vertical Well 1,380 2.0 ' Effective distance to a line of recharge 6.2.1 Effects of River Stage and Water Temperature The water level in the river affects the ultimate collector capacity because the static water levels in the test well and ultimate collector would be higher with a higher river stage, and lower with a lower river stage. As discussed in Section 5, the river stage at the Bike Park site can vary seasonally by about 2 feet. In response to a river stage change of 2 feet, the collector yield could vary by ±0.2 mgd. The temperature of the water pumped also affects the ultimate collector capacity as water temperature affects the water viscosity, which is proportional to hydraulic conductivity. As discussed in Section 5, the water temperature can vary seasonally by about 14°F. In response to a river temperature change of 2 feet, the collector yield could vary by ±0.5 mgd. 6.2.2 Discussion of Collector Calculated Potential Yield As discussed previously, the pumping test drawdowns never reached equilibrium. This hinders the ability to analyze the test results for the collector potential yield as the collector yield calculations assume steady state (equilibrium) aquifer behavior. The well yield calculated was based on the lowest distance to zero drawdown calculated from the pumping test data and should only be considered an approximate interpretation because of this. 6-4 PPS0126221137RDD 7. Summary of Findings and Recommendations This section summarizes the major findings and recommendations from the drilling, construction, and testing of BP -TW 1 and analysis of a potential HCW at the Bike Park. 7.1 Summary of Findings The results of the investigations and the subsequent analysis of the collected data Lead to the following findings: ■ Of the five Locations investigated for the feasibility of HCWs between Turtle Bay and the existing PS1 Location, the Bike Park site appears to have the highest yield potential, with an expected HCW yield in the range of 2 to 5 mgd from one HCW. ■ The constant -rate pumping test at the Bike Park site did not reach equilibrium or a steady-state condition which hinders the zero -drawdown analysis ("a" distance), and there is uncertainty in the calculated yield of a HCW under this condition. Completing a Longer constant -rate pumping test could reduce the uncertainty in the anticipated yield of an HCW at the Bike Park. ■ The aquifer transmissivity values calculated are considered accurate and are high enough to support a collector well. ■ The results of the MPA, giardia, and cryptosporidium analyses from the water sample collected at the end of the constant -rate test indicate a low risk to the influence of surface water after 3 days of pumping. 7.2 Recommendations Based on the results of this study, Jacobs recommends the following regarding the feasibility of an HCW at the Bike Park. 7.2.1 Option 1 (Horizontal Collector Well Yield Too Low) If an HCW with a yield in the range of 5 mgd is too Low to be considered further, the test well could be permitted and equipped as a non -potable production well and used at the Bike Park site for maintenance, irrigation, etc. Alternatively, the test well and monitoring wells could be Left in place until the City decides the fate of the test well (all the current wells have been capped and secured). In this case, the transducers in the monitoring wells should be removed and returned to the City. 7.2.2 Option 2 (Horizontal Collector Well Yield Acceptable) If an HCW yield of 5 mgd (or possibly more) is of interest to the City, an extended pumping test (60 days or more) using the existing test well and monitoring wells should be performed. The most cost-effective method is for the City to purchase a 1,000 gpm submersible well pump and install it in the test well with a flowmeter, throttling valve, and discharge piping to the storm drain; power connections would be required for the pump. The details of these activities are outlined as follows: ■ The water Level transducers should be Left in the monitoring wells and reprogramed to record data every 15 minutes until a new pump and discharge piping can be installed. ■ The test well should be equipped with a City -purchased pump, drop pipe, and temporary discharge piping to transmit the pumped water to the storm drain onsite. After installation of a pump and discharge piping, a Longer-term pumping test should be completed. PPS0126221137RDD 7-1 � Because the equipment for the testing isonly temporary, the most economical choice for the pump, motor, and equipment that still provides all the functionality for the test should beselected. Suggested components include the following: — A single -stage, 3,600 revolutions per minute (rpm) submersible pump such as a singLe-stage Goulds 1 ORJMC and a Goulds manufacturer recommended -sized 3,600 -rpm motor. — Install the pump on 8 -inch steel, threaded and coupled drop pipe, in standard wall thickness set to 43feet bos.Set a 1 -inch PVC pipe down tothe top ofthe pump for water level access. Install a pressure transducer inthat pipe tothe bottom ofthe PVC. — Equip 1 0 -inch aboveground discharge piping with a sampling tap, fLowmeter, and throttling valve. Ensure there is a minimum upstream and downstream distance of straight pipe before and after the flowmeter of 100 inches, or more, if required by the flowmeter manufacturer. The discharge piping should be ofmaterial that can he exposed in a public park setting. Obtain surveyed elevation measurements of the water level measurement locations (top of the well casing) and atthe ground surface atthe test well and each monitoring well. Locate the previous river Level monitoring location for the testing and obtain an elevation of riverbank edge and river elevation. � Before beginning the pumping test, record all static water levels inthe wells and reprogram the transducer probes tnobtain awater level reading every 1minute. Maintain this frequency for one complete day of the pumping test, then after one complete day, increase the measurement frequency to1Gminutes. Download the transducer data weekly and review. � Consider collecting additional water quality samples from the test well and the Sacramento River during the extended pumping test. Suggested sampling includes the following: — Samples could be taken at different times as the test progresses to identify changes in water quality indicative of the influence from surface water. — Asample should be collected and submitted for MPA near the end of the pumping test. — To the extent practical, daily field water quality data should be collected, such as pH, electrical conductivity, DO, and ORP. /2 PP6012622113/R00 Cooper, H.H,and [E.Jacob. 1946 ^AGeneralized Graphical Method for Evaluating Formation Constants and Summarizing Well Field History.^Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Un/un.VoL27'pp.526— S34. Hantush, M.S., and I.S. Papadopulos. 1962. "Flow of Groundwater to Collector Wells." Journal of the Hydraulics Division. American Society ofCivil Engineers. Hollister, V.F., and J.R. Evans. 1965. Geology of the Redding quadrangle, Shasta County, California. NGMDB Product Description Page .https://ngnndbusga.gov/Prodasc/proddesc_308.htmn. Jacob, C.E. 1947a. "Drawdown Test to Determine Effective Radius of Artesian Well." Transactions of the American Society ufCivil Engineers. Vol. 112,pp. 1O47-1O7O. Jacob, C.E. 1947b. Notes on Determining Permeability by Pumping Tests under Watertable Conditions. b8Geologic Survey Open File Report. Jacobs. 2022. City of Redding Final Preliminary Design Report (PDR) for the Pump House No. 1 Replacement. July 2022. Lohman, S.VV.1972.Ground-Water Hydraulics. Geological Survey Professional Paper 708. Theis, C.V. 1935. "The Relation Between the Lowering of the Piezometric Surface and the Rate and Duration of Discharge of A Well Using Groundwater Storage." Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union. Vol. 16, pp. S19-524. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1992. Consensus Method for Determining Groundwaters Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water Using Microscopic Particulate Analysis (MPA). EPA 9109-92-029. October. Walton, William C. 1962. "Selected Analytical Methods for Well and Aquifer Evaluation." Bulletin 49. State ofIllinois, Department ofRegistration and Education. Williams, E.B. 1981. "Fundamental Concepts of Well Design." Groundwater. September. PpS0/2622113/RD0 8-/ Appendix A City of Redding Surface Geophysica I Survey Investiga tions Summary and Recommendations Technical I It .;acobs Draft Memorandum 2525 Airpark Drive Redding, CA 96001 United States T +1.530.243.5831 F +1.530.243.1654 www.jacobs.com Subject City of Redding Surface Geophysical Survey Investigations Summary and Recommendations Attention City of Redding, Public Works From Kevin Bral/Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (Jacobs) Date October 22, 2020 1. Purpose and Scope Jacobs proposed surface geophysical surveys to the City of Redding (City) in a memorandum titled Horizontal Collector Well Investigation (July 23, 2020). The geophysical surveys are a prudent step into assessing the suitability of the lithology of proposed horizontal collector well (HCW) sites. Subsequent steps in the investigation include soil borings and hydraulic testing, followed by design, construction, and testing of an HCW if found feasible. The geophysical survey commenced September 22, 2020, and was completed September 26, 2020. Four geophysical lines were surveyed using both the frequency domain electromagnetic (FDEM) and electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) methods. Collier Geophysics (Collier) conducted the survey and provided a draft report titled City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation (October 9, 2020), attached hereto. This technical memorandum has been prepared to provide recommendations for the next step of the investigation, which involves rotosonic soil borings to confirm and calibrate the geophysical survey results. If the results are favorable, small-scale pumping of select borings should be performed to identify if certain locations should be further investigated through full-scale pumping tests. 2. Geophysical Survey In the Horizontal Collector Well Investigation memorandum, Jacobs recommended six geophysical lines be run along the Sacramento River to investigate the thickness and nature of the alluvial deposits in areas that were selected from an earlier data review. These six lines were named as follows: ■ Line 1: ACID Line ■ Line 2: Bike Park Line ■ Line 3: Rodeo Line ■ Line 4: Auditorium Line ■ Line 5: Turtle Bay Line ■ Line 6: HW 44 Line The lines ranged from 630 feet in length to 2,100 feet in length and were accessible from nearby trails or bike paths. At the City's request, the Rodeo Line (Line 3) and HW 44 Line (Line 6) were removed from the investigation, and the Auditorium Line (Line 4) was shortened during the scope of work development. PPS1022201721RDD City of Redding Surface Geophysical Survey Investigations Summary and Recommendations The geophysical survey began using FDEM methods over all selected lines as a screening survey to estimate depth to any shallow bedrock and eliminate any area with very shallow bedrock that could not support an HCW. None of the lines were eliminated from the FDEM work because in many places the bedrock depth exceeded the depth limitation (2S to 30 feet) of the FDEM method. The geophysical survey then continued, and the ERT method was used to create resistivity profiles along the lines to a depth of 100 feet. The resistivity profiles as presented in the Collier report were used to identify areas with possible thick, coarse gravels and/or cobbles that would have the capacity to transmit large quantities of water to an HCW. The profiles were provided as color plots of the resistivity values along the depth and length of each Line. Distance along the line is represented as the profile x-axis, which is divided into 200 -foot -length markers. The colors in the plot represent the resistivity value, with dark red indicating the highest resistivities grading through shades of orange, yellow, green, and blue, and dark blue indicating the lowest resistivity. High resistivity values are desired for an HCW application and are represented by possible sands, gravels, and cobbles. Collier provided the general color interpretation listed below. ■ Red and Yellow — sand and gravel with the coarsest and most permeable material in dark red ■ Green — could be weathered rock or finer sand ■ Blue — very low resistivity and is interpreted as the shale bedrock 2.1 Existing Borings and Wells Seven previously constructed borings and wells in the area were in the vicinity of the geophysical lines and were used to initially compare the resistivity values measured by the geophysical survey to actual field data. Subsequent soil borings will be needed directly on the geophysical line to fully calibrate the geophysical data and interpret the results. Table 1 lists these seven borings and wells with the relative geophysical line, boring depth, and proximity of the length markers on the Collier plots. Table 1. Existing Borings and Wells near the Geophysical Lines A brief discussion of the characteristics of the ERT follows for each line surveyed. The discussion is presented starting with the geophysical Line that shows the most promise with thicker and coarser d •11j Geophysical Depth Boring or Well Line (Feet) Comments B-2 ACID 13 300 feet north of Length Marker 1800. Sand and gravel to 13 feet; shale at 13 feet. B-5 ACID 9.5 250 feet northeast of Length Marker 1800. Sand and cobbles to 9.5 feet; shale at 9.5 feet. B-4 ACID 20 300 feet east of Length Marker 1800. Sand, gravel, cobbles to 20 feet; shale at 20 feet. 853 N. Market Street Well Bike Park 52 750 feet north of Length Marker 600. Sand, gravel, boulders to 52 feet. Shale not penetrated. DH -2 Bike Park 40 300 feet east of Length Marker 1600. Sand and gravel to 40 feet. Siltstone at 40 feet. SB -1 Auditorium 34 300 feet east of Length Marker 600. Sand, gravel, cobbles to 34 feet. Chico Formation at 34 feet. SB -2 Turtle Bay 34 150 feet south of Length Marker 0. Sand, gravel, cobbles to 34 feet. Chico Formation at 34 feet. A brief discussion of the characteristics of the ERT follows for each line surveyed. The discussion is presented starting with the geophysical Line that shows the most promise with thicker and coarser d •11j City of Redding Surface Geophysical Survey Investigations Summary and Recommendations sediments followed by those lines that may consist of thinner and finer sands and gravels. The reader is referred to the attached City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation, Figure 5. Bike Park Line (Line 2) — The Bike Park Line is located on the northern side of the river east of the ACID and runs from the S. Market Street bridge 1,700 feet to the east. The western side of the Bike Park Line is seen to contain highly resistive material and depths close to 40 feet. The eastern side of the tine has lower resistivity values suggesting finer material but at depths up to 50 feet. An existing well log located at 853 N. Market Street indicates that 52 feet of sand and gravel exist there; however, it is located about 750 feet north of Length Marker 600 feet. Another soil boring was previously constructed about 300 feet east of the eastern edge of the Bike Park Line and indicates sand and gravels exist there to 40 feet. Turtle Bay Line (Line 4) — The Turtle Bay line is located on the southern side of the river east of the Sundial Bridge and runs about 1,700 feet east to where the Sacramento River bends south. The Turtle Bay Line is seen to exhibit highly resistive sediments to over 35 feet in some locations, with the western side of the line showing the coarser and thicker sediments. Existing well togs from an area near the Turtle Bay Museum indicate sand and gravels down to 34 feet and correlate well with the resistivity values observed. ACID Line (Line 1) — The ACID Line is located on the southern side of the river and runs from Benton Drive to the ACID fish Ladder. A railroad trestle crosses the river on the western end of this tine, and geophysical data could not be obtained over about 75 feet upstream and downstream of the trestle. The western side of the ACID line is seen to contain shallower bedrock and finer sand than the eastern side of the line. The eastern side of the line appears to be of thicker and coarser sediments. However, actual soil borings near the fish ladder do not confirm the geophysics results. The borings in that area were about 250 to 300 feet from the geophysical line. Auditorium Line (Line 3) — The Auditorium Line is located on the southern side of the river just west of the Sundial Bridge and runs about 630 feet to the west. The western area of this line indicates unconsolidated deposits as deep as about 70 feet and thins to the east to 20 to 40 feet. However, the resistivity values appear to indicate the sediments are mostly sand and fine sand, not coarse sands and gravels. Some of the resistivity values in the eastern part of this line indicate coarser sands; however, they are less than 20 feet in thickness. An existing boring about 300 feet to the east of the eastern edge of the Line indicates sand and gravels down to 34 feet. 3. Recommendations The geophysical results indicate there are deposits in the Sacramento River alluvium that may support an HCW with the targeted 10 -million -gallon -per -day capacity. Therefore, Jacobs recommends the City proceed with the next investigation step, which is the construction of soil borings along the geophysical Lines. Jacobs recommends proceeding with soil borings starting at the most promising lines. As the borings are advanced, the Lithology will be logged and compared to the geophysical resistivity results to better define the resistivity values, and understanding of the local area hydrogeology can then be interpreted from the resistivity values. In selected borings, a temporary small well will be installed; and short, low -capacity pumping tests will be performed. These low -capacity pumping tests will enable a rough estimate to be made of future HCW capacities that may be available at the Location. Two borings on each line are proposed to meet the above goals. Table 2 lists the proposed boring Locations. PPS1022201721RDD City of Redding Surface Geophysical Survey Investigations Summary and Recommendations Table 2. Proposed Soil Borings Geophysical Line Recommended Boring Locations Comments Bike Park Two soil borings. One at Length Marker 600 Guided by existing N. Market Street and another at Length Marker 1800 (400 feet well and the DH -1 soil boring and the past the western end of the line). presence of very high resistivity. Turtte Bay Two soil borings. One at Length Marker 200 Guided by existing soil boring SB -2 and and another at Length Marker 450. the presence of very high resistivity. ACID Two soil borings. One at Length Marker 1600 Guided by the favorable Location of this and another at Length Marker 1800. site for an HCW and the higher resistivity values seen in the eastern portion of this Line. Auditorium Two soil borings. One at Length Marker 150 Although the resistivity values are not and another at Length Marker 900. seen to be very high along this tine, these borings wiLL complete the correlation of the resistively values to actual. Local hydrogeotogy. .. I •NE Attachment City of Redding River Intake Geophysical October 9, 2020 7711 W. 6th Ave., Ste G/H I Lakewood, CO 80214 1 (720) 487-9200 A Service -Disabled Veteran -Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) Kimberly Hein, P.E. Project Manager JACOBS Engineering Group, Inc. 2525 Airpark Drive Redding, CA r- t RE: Draft Geophysical Letter Report I Project #20-151 City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation Redding, CA Collier Geophysics, LLC (Collier) conducted a geophysical investigation on behalf of JACOBS Engineering Group, Inc. (JACOBS), located in Redding, CA. The objective of the investigation was to map the depth to bedrock (i.e., the Chico Formation siltstone), and determine the soil stratigraphy in the upper 60 feet of the subsurface along the Sacramento River. The project has a special emphasis on areas of deeper sand and gravel deposits that are likely to be hydraulically connected to the Sacramento River. A two phased survey was conducted first using Frequency Domain Electromagnetics (FDEM) and then follow-on Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT). The geophysical survey was conducted across three sites along the Sacramento River (ACID, Bike Park, and Turtle Bay, See Figure 1). The final survey locations were determined in the field with onsite communication with the client. The survey was performed September 22nd through 26th, 2020. The survey was led by Collier geophysicists Jacob Sheehan and Kristen Marberry. The following report presents results from the geophysical investigation and summarizes the site conditions, field methods, data acquisition, and interpretation procedures. For further information regarding the details of FDEM and ERT techniques, Collier can submit method addenda upon request. City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project #20-151 October 9, 2020 Figure 1: Site location and line layout Site Conditions The sites were located along the Sacramento River along bike paths, non-public roads and trails. The weather was warm and dry. The only complicating factor to data collection was the public nature of the Bike Park and Turtle Bay sites. This required placing one of the geophysical crew members at the end of the line to warn people not to touch the system and to answer many questions about the data collection. No safety issues occurred around this issue. The subsurface geology is thought to be alluvial sands and gravels overlying the Chico Formation Siltstone. Figure 2. Site conditions during data acquisition. Geophysical Letter Report 2 Collier Geophysics, LLC City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project #20-151 October 9, 2020 Data Acquisition Frequency Domain Electromagnetics An FDEM instrument consists of at least one pair of transmitting and receiving coils. A primary magnetic field of a constant frequency is generated using an alternating current in the transmitter coil, and a secondary magnetic field is detected in the receiving coil as a result of the interaction of the primary field with the subsurface. The FDEM instrument allows for simultaneous measurements of both the in-phase and quadrature (orthogonal phase) components of the secondary magnetic field. The in-phase component is measured in parts -per -thousand (ppt) of the amplitude of the primary magnetic field. The in-phase response is primarily sensitive to magnetic susceptibility, generally due to the presence of metallic or ferromagnetic material in the subsurface. The quadrature component (90 -degrees out of phase with the primary signal) is primarily sensitive to electrical conductivity, due to changes in lithology, moisture, and/or fines (clay) content. The quadrature response is calibrated and measured as apparent bulk conductivity in millisiemens per meter (mS/m). Note that these are the primary sensitivities, but that both components can be affected by buried metal or geologic features. For this project, the results have been used model an earth resistivity model based on the bulk conductivity values. FDEM data were acquired using a CMD -Explorer, by GF Instruments (see r inset photo right). The CMD -Explorer consists of a boom with three sets of FDEM coil pairs, at three separations; 1.4 in (4.5 ft), 2.8 in, (9.2 ft), and 4.5 in (14.8 ft). The effective depth of sensitivity of the FDEM method is a function of the antenna spacing between the transmitter and receiver, the antenna orientation, the frequency of the primary field, and the bulk electromagnetic properties of the subsurface. Data were acquired using a vertical dipole orientation, which results in the greatest depth of investigation. The depth of investigation is not precise, but as a rule of thumb when using a vertical dipole orientation, is approximately equal to the antenna spacing. In this case of the CMD -Explorer the values recorded would correspond to the bulk electromagnetic properties in the upper 5 feet, 10 feet, and 15 feet, of the subsurface respective to each antenna separation. CMD -Explorer data were collected at a rate of 10 Hz, using a primary field frequency of 10 kHz at all three antenna spacings simultaneously. Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT) The electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) method is used to characterize subsurface lithology and/or materials in terms of electrical resistance. The electrical resistivity method incorporates the injection of an electrical current into the ground through a pair of electrodes (current electrodes) while simultaneously measuring the potential or voltage between an offset electrode pair (potential electrodes) in contact with the ground. The subsurface resistance or apparent resistivity is then calculated from the measured voltages, according to electrode geometry. Geophysical Letter Report 3 Collier Geophysics, LLC City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project #20-151 October 9, 2020 The apparent resistivity (p) represents the bulk resistance of earth materials where the majority of injected current flows and subsequent potential measurements exceed noise levels and fall within the dynamic range of the field equipment. The geometry between two current electrodes and two or more potential electrodes define an array. The distance between the potential electrodes is directly related to resistivity measurements with depth. The amount of current injected and distance between the current electrodes determines the depth potential, i.e., larger spacing forces more available current to flow at depth. The ERT survey was performed using an Advanced Geophysical Systems Inc. (AGI) Super Sting R8 8 -channel multiple electrode resistivity imaging system (the Sting, see inset photo to the right). The survey equipment consisted of a transmitter/receiver and cables capable of utilizing up to 84 -takeouts for electrodes. The line locations and orientations were measured with a Trimble Geo7x, a handheld global positioning system (GPS) unit with sub - foot precision. Optimum array geometry was determined by satisfying four requirements: time efficiency, data quality, vertical/horizontal resolution capacities, and desired investigative depth. The ERT survey utilized the combination of the strong gradient array and dipole -dipole array. The dipole -dipole array is more sensitive to horizontal changes in the subsurface such as would be expected from the presence of faults and fractures and from karst features. The electrode spread geometry was controlled by the internal transmitter switching system of the Sting. Multiple measurements were made along each line to measure the lateral and vertical changes in subsurface resistivity. The array geometry for the surveys was limited by the length of the resistivity cables, electrode spacing, and equipment parameters. The array geometry and the geology limit the instruments depth of penetration. Data Processing Frequency Domain Electromagnetic Raw FDEM data were exported in tabular format using CMD Data Transfer, version 1.6.1, by GF Instruments. Positions for each measurement are interpolated for each record from GPS positions using the data transfer software. The data were then processed using Geosoft Oasis montaj, version 9.3 (Geosoft), a processing and data visualization software suite used for analysis of geophysical data sets. Data were checked for quality then gridded using a minimum curvature method. The in-phase response was inspected and used to understand where data was affected but utilities and other cultural features. Geophysical Letter Report 4 Collier Geophysics, LLC City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project #20-151 October 9, 2020 Example of FDEM data from this project showing conductivity values for coils 1, 2, and 3 as green, red, and blue lines, respectively Aarhus Workbench, version 5.9.3.0 was used to generate an earth resistivity model based on the FDEM bulk conductivities values. This process includes: decoupling the recorded EM response from surface features by removing affected data, using a 4 -meter moving -window average to generate a pseudo-FDEM sounding every 25 cm along the acquired transects, and geophysical inversion of the processed pseudo -soundings. The geophysical inversion process iteratively fits a subsurface electrical resistivity model to each of the pseudo -soundings generated from the first processing steps, subject to lateral smoothing constraints (i.e., along data collection profiles). Resistivity model from the geophysical inversion are then exported in x -y -z -v format (31) position and value) to Geosoft for final visualization. Electrical Resistivity Tomography The resistivity data were downloaded from the Sting and converted for analysis using Advanced Geosciences Inc. (AGI) software, Supersting Administrator, after the completion of each line. The data was then checked for errors and completion before moving the equipment to another location. Data was processed using AGI's 2D Earthlmager software package for inversion. The data is processed by completing a forward model from the measured resistivity data. The forward data is then inverted to model resistivity values at depth. The data was inverted using a smooth inversion scheme. Starting from a static background model, a calculated apparent resistivity pseudosection is generated using the parameters of the survey and the resistivity values recorded. This section is compared to the measured section, creating a difference matrix which is used to iteratively change the terrain model until the best fit (minimum difference between measured and calculated apparent resistivity values) is achieved. Multiple models are generated subject to different parametric smoothing constraints to achieve the best fit model to the measured data, ground truth, and geologic conditions. One important measure of data quality is the Root Mean Square (RMS) error between the processed field data and the inversion model. Geophysical Letter Report 5 Collier Geophysics, LLC City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project #20-151 October 9, 2020 The modeled soundings exhibited an RMS error in the range of 8%-10%. It was possible to get the RMS values lower, but at the expense of model stability and smoothness. Results and Discussion Many factors can affect the bulk resistivity of geologic materials. Some known factors pertinent to this site include: varying particle size and/or mineral distribution in the unconsolidated soils overlying bedrock; varying degree of saturation (i.e., vadose zone and phreatic surface); interconnectivity of pore space; and, and elevated total dissolved solids (TDS). Clay has lower resistivity than mixtures of sand, gravel and cobbles. Saturated soil and rock will typically have lower resistivity than unsaturated soil and/or rock of the same composition. Increasing the fluid filled pore volume and interconnectivity of pore spaces will typically lower the bulk resistivity. The resistivity of ground water varies considerably depending on the salinity and TDS concentration in the water, such that clean distillate water has high resistivity and high TDS brine water will have very low resistivity. The bulk resistivity measured with a surface ERT survey for identification or delineation of the lithologic units is then influenced by some or all of these factors. Table 1, below, shows typical ranges resistivity (and conductivity) for various soil types. For this project, we expect to the soil to be primarily composed of sand and gravel. Table 1: Typical resistivity values by soil type SOIL TYPE vs. RESISTIVITY CH L CLAS z OL ML SC U MH Sm SAND GW GC GRAVEL GP le CONDUCTIVITY ITY (nn RIM11,00n) Figure 4, attached as a large format 1. lx17 plate to the end of this report, shows the results of the FDEM survey along with a plan map of the survey area. The Phase 1 FDEM data were collected to potentially eliminate or modify the locations where the ERT data would then be collected in Phase 2. Although there are variations in the modeled resistivity values from the FDEM, there Geophysical Letter Report 6 Collier Geophysics, LLC City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project #20-151 October 9, 2020 was no clear evidence that suggested modifications or alternative positioning to the ERT field survey plan (i.e., the four lines shown in Figure 1). Figure 5 shows the results from the resistivity survey. The site map at the bottom of the figure shows both the line locations and the distances down the line that correspond to the horizontal axis for each ERT line. Note that the resistivity scale is logarithmic to better visualize the range of resistivities obtained at this site. Some sections of the ERT profile line were negatively affected by cultural features, including buried metallic or energized utilities. The in-phase response from the FDEM confirms the presence of these features. The measured responses from these cultural features create anomalies that can mask the response due to geology. The effect of these utilities has been minimized by removing data points that appear to be affected by them. One area that shows the most interference is when crossing beneath the railroad bridge on the western side of Line 1. This area has been blanked out on the results. As anticipated, the alluvial sands and gravels are resistive compared to the siltstone rock. This agrees well with the trends observed in the ERT results shown on Figure 5. A dotted orange line has been placed on the results from each line to represent the interpreted boundary between the undifferentiated alluvial materials and the siltstone bedrock. There are two valuable pieces of information that can be gleaned from these results. • First, within the interpreted alluvial deposits, higher resistivity values are likely to correspond to clean sands and gravel deposits, while lower resistivity likely indicates more fine grained materials are present in the soil matrix. For example, along Line 2 (the line located within the Bike Park) the first 750 feet of the line has higher resistivity values within the interpreted alluvium layer than the remainder of this line. This could mean that from 750 feet down the line to the end there is increased fines content in the soils compared to the start of the line. The same is true when comparing the alluvial deposits along all of Line 4 (the Turtle Bay area) with those along all of Line 1 and the eastern end of Line 2. 0 Second the thickness of the alluvium deposits varies across the area. For example, the western end of Line 1 shows about 40 feet of alluvium, which then decreases to less than 20 feet about 385 feet down the line. From there, it deepens to the east, where it could be as thick as 100 feet at a downline distance of about 1,550 feet. Line 2 results reveal less variability in the alluvial thickness, but still show the alluvial soil thickness varies between about 30 and 55 feet. Line 3 shows a thickness of about 65 feet at the west end of the line, which then decreases to about 20 feet at a distance of about 400 feet down the line. Line 4 shows an alluvium thickness of about 35 feet on the west side, shallowing to about 20 feet on the eastern side of the line, which is the most consistent thickness observed along any of the ERT lines. Geophysical Letter Report 7 Collier Geophysics, LLC City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project #20-151 October 9, 2020 These two factors are likely to be relevant toward selecting favorable collector well sites. In general areas with thick alluvium and more permeable alluvium will produce higher well yields. The areas with the thickest alluvium are not generally the same as the areas with the most permeable alluvium as estimated from the resistivity data. This will require additional investigation in the form of soil borings and pumping tests to determine which locations are the most favorable for a well. The interpreted contact between the alluvium and the siltstone has been used to generate a plan view map of estimated alluvium thickness (Figure 6). This map clearly shows which areas have thicker alluvium deposits (red, pink and orange) compared to thinner deposits (blue and green). Based on this map, there is an obvious effect on the data when passing underneath the railroad bridge on the western end of Line 1. The thickest deposits are on the eastern side of Line 1 and the western end of Line 3. tsUmated Alluvium Tmekness 060 Figure 6: Estimated Alluvium Thickness based on ERT results. Closure The geophysical methods and field procedures defined in this report were applicable to the project objectives and have been successfully applied by Collier geophysicists to investigations of similar size and nature. However, sometimes field or subsurface conditions are different from those anticipated and the resultant data may not achieve the investigation objectives. Collier warrants that our services were performed within the limits prescribed for this project, with the usual thoroughness and competence of the geophysical profession. Collier conducted this project using the current standards of the geophysical industry and utilized in house quality control standards to produce a precise geophysical survey. The overall quality of the data acquired during this investigation was fair to good. The quality of the data yields a high degree of confidence in the results obtained and presented in this report. If you have any questions regarding the field procedures, data analyses, or the interpretive results presented herein, please do not hesitate to contact us. We appreciate working with you and look forward to providing Jacobs with geophysical services in the future. Respectfully Submitted, Geophysical Letter Report 8 Collier Geophysics, LLC City of Redding River Intake Geophysical Investigation Project #20-151 October 9, 2020 Collier Geophysics, LLC Jacob Sheehan Senior Geophysicist (1 copy e-mailed PDF format) John Jansen Senior Geophysicist Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Geophysical Letter Report 9 Collier Geophysics, LLC Resistivity s� 127 1 17 l s.. S�Nc I t ,. 60 53 46 �s 29 17 !e: s ui �5 z 4 � i i 4 ,r ro,"". .,Y' e. -;'.,,,., h2 S'r. '.:. ..,.. h... .,., 1k5 n x .:. .... .. . .. .. ..:. ...,,,� ". [� ..,.,i ,,,,,:• ,.. ,,, « P s 2 Y 4 # r ? t > lr W -20,- -40- 44 aj 77 T \, e. y�^^pp33 ,,,, ,.,;,#•. , `x...,,a" ,.' .., .. ,�. \�a ,. >.t t Z .o.,:.-: F£'t � 4 }s :} t,4 i r „t.,t' , fit: ::+„ cr,_"� i ..{Zin�l1'� t tt -: P4y}3f\�7y7,t tF 5; to z t ., ti s ? t u} .". c 4 tltlf2 u�}�`•1\SFt7 ?. t : t tt E,{�"; - s p-� 1 i 1 Y t 0 260 400 660 Bt00 1,060 12'00 5 00 16'00 ISI arce (foet) Interpretedsoil/rock boundary Distant (feet) 1000 00 800 700 600 400 300 200 1FT s�� ast Y�2�z�341i31�//� 2�2 tJ s.i \\2 Ftft jit Sri Y?X 5ft Y. b. 4�tj k r 7�t 100 -80 70 60 5 Electrical resistivity Results, City of Redding River Intake Investigation Redding, CA Jacobs Project #, 20151 October 2020 CDLLIER Drafted by:. Sheeharm Checked by Figure 5 Appendix B City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigations Summary and Recommenda tions Technical . If .;acobs 2525 Airpark Drive Redding, CA 96001-2443 United States T +1.530.243.5831 F +1.530.243.1654 www.jacabs.com Subject City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations Attention City of Redding, Public Works From Ryan Alward, Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (Jacobs) Kevin Bral, Jacobs Date March 12, 2021 1. Purpose and Scope Jacobs conducted a subsurface investigation to evaluate the feasibility of using horizontal collector wells (HCWs) as a source for City of Redding water supply. A total of twelve boreholes at five different sites in Redding, California, were drilled and logged from January 30 to February 17, 2021. Collier Geophysics performed a geophysical investigation in September 2020 as the first step in assessing the suitability of sites for HCWs. A subsurface investigation with boreholes was the second step in assessing the suitability of the investigated sites for HCWs. Electrical resistivity tomography and electromagnetic methods were used to assess the potential thickness of coarse sediments. Yellow Jacket Drilling Services of Rancho Cucamonga, California, drilled the boreholes using a truck -mounted rotary sonic drill rig. The purpose of each borehole was to drill through the alluvium and into the bedrock to determine the thickness, lithologic description, and saturation of the alluvial sediments. Borehole depths ranged from 21 to 46 feet below ground surface (bgs). The alluvial sediments were the only water -bearing sediments encountered; the bedrock is a barrier to groundwater flow and was dry where encountered. For boreholes that were determined to be potentially suitable for operation of an HCW, short low -capacity pumping tests were conducted within the borehole by constructing a temporary well within the drill casing and pumping water from the borehole with a submersible pump. Four such tests were conducted— three 2 -hour step tests and one 2 -hour constant -rate test. This technical memorandum was prepared to present the results of the borehole investigation and low - capacity pumping tests, and to identify recommended sites suitable to move forward with the third and final step of the investigation, full-scale pumping tests. 2. Borehole Investigation Boreholes were drilled at a total of five sites, which were designated as follows: 1) Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District (ACID) (four boreholes) 2) Bike Park (BP) (three boreholes) 3) Turtle Bay (TB) (two boreholes) 4) Highway 44 (HW 44) (two boreholes) 5) Southern Pacific (SP) (one borehole) City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations The location of each borehole for the ACID, Bike Park, and Turtle Bay sites was selected using the results from the geophysical investigation. Geophysical investigation was not conducted at the Highway 44 or Southern Pacific site. The HW 44 borehole Locations were selected after performing a site visit to determine suitable locations for the drill rig near the river and after review of historical nearby borehole Logs. The borehole location for the Southern Pacific site was selected by the City given its proximity to an existing irrigation well operated by the City. The following sections describe the borehole details observed at each site including the borehole Location, depth of each borehole, thickness of the alluvium, thickness of saturated sediments, and depth to bedrock. Figure 1 shows the Location of all the boreholes drilled as part of the subject investigation. Attachment 1 contains the borehole Logs for each borehole. Figure 1. Borehole Locations 2.1 Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District Boreholes Four boreholes were drilled at the ACID site. Low -capacity pumping tests were performed in boreholes ACID -B-1, ACID -B-2, and ACID -B-3, but not ACID -B-4. The ACID -B-1 and ACID -B-2 boreholes are within about 200 feet of each other on the eastern end of the site. The geophysical resistivity was highest around these two boreholes, and the depth to bedrock was measured at 34.5 and 37.0 feet bgs, respectively. The boreholes also had a saturated thickness of 19 and 21 feet, respectively. The ACID -B-3 borehole was drilled at the western edge of the site to compare the observed tithology with the geophysical IaI.��IG�iTiF�iyi�. 7: iId11 City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations investigation, which showed a lower resistivity, potentially indicating finer sediments. The ACID -13-3 borehole did have finer sediments than observed in ACID -13-1 and ACID -13-2, and the low -capacity pumping test results for all the boreholes at this site are described in the following section. The fourth borehole at the site, ACID -13-4, was drilled about 400 feet east of the train trestle, between ACID -13-3 and ACID -13-2. The location of this borehole was selected because the geophysical investigation indicated higher resistivity values than near borehole ACID -13-3 and to help define the extent of the higher resistivity observed near boreholes ACID -13-1 and ACID -13-2. ACID -13-4 borehole had a shallower depth to bedrock than both boreholes to the east of it and was deeper than ACID -B-3 to the west. The saturated thickness in ACID -B-4 was 11 feet and was the thinnest of all four boreholes at this site. ACID -13-3 had the most saturated thickness; however, it was likely due to a creek approximately 20 feet to the west that was draining into the Sacramento River. This allowed for higher saturation, but the sediments that were saturated were much finer grained and consisted of fine sand and clay. Table 1 summarizes details pertaining to the boreholes at the ACID site, and Figure 2 shows the locations of the boreholes. Table 1. Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District Site Borehotes Borehole Name Total Depth (feet bgs) Depth to Bedrock (feet bgs) Saturated Thickness (feet) Low -capacity Pumping Test Performed (Yes/No) ACID -B-1 40.5 34.5 19.0 Yes ACID -B-2 43.0 37.0 21.0 Yes ACID -B-3 36.0 32.0 26.0 Yes ACID -B-4 32.0 27.0 11.0 No Figure 2. Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District Borehole Locations I�Y.��I��iil►�iiF��]. i�1�7 City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations 2.2 Turtle Bay Boreholes A total of two boreholes were drilled at the Turtle Bay site, and no low -capacity pumping tests were performed. The depth to bedrock at the Turtle Bay boreholes was shallower than anticipated based on the geophysical investigation. Part of this discrepancy can be explained by the borehole at TB -B-1 being drilled at a lower elevation than the bike trail upon which the geophysical survey was conducted. A lithologic log near TB -B-1 indicated that gravels were observed up to 30 feet bgs, and bedrock was encountered in TB -B-1 at 15.5 feet bgs. However, TB -B-2 was drilled upon the bike trail, and bedrock was encountered at 16.5 feet bgs. The paleo topography of the site, combined with any previous gravel mining/dredging, can change the thickness of gravel deposits and create varying gravel thickness. Based on the results of the boreholes at this site, we do not recommend further investigation of the Turtle Bay site for a collector well. Table 2 summarizes details pertaining to the boreholes at the Turtle Bay site, and Figure 3 shows the locations of the boreholes. Table 2. Turtle Bay Site Boreholes Figure 3. Turtle Bay Borehole Locations Low -capacity Pumping Borehole Total Depth Depth to Bedrock Saturated Thickness Test Performed Name (feet bgs) (feet bgs) (feet) (Yes/No) TB -B-1 21 15.5 <1 No TB -B-2 26 16.5 <1 No Figure 3. Turtle Bay Borehole Locations City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations 2.3 Bike Park Boreholes Three boreholes were drilled at the Bike Park site, and one Low -capacity pumping test was performed. The first borehole, BP -B-1, was drilled in the parking lot near the southeast corner of the site. The depth to bedrock was 42 feet bgs, the deepest of any borehole during this investigation. The saturated thickness was 27 feet, which was the thickest of any borehole during this investigation. A low -capacity pumping test was conducted on this borehole, and the results are presented in Section 3.1. The second borehole, BP -B-2, was drilled in a Location that showed the highest resistivity based on the geophysical investigation, therefore, the highest potential for coarse sediments at the site. However, bedrock was encountered at 21 feet bgs, and there was only a 6 -foot -thick saturated section, so a Low - capacity pumping test was not conducted. A third borehole, BP -B-3, was drilled to determine how far to the west the coarse sediments observed in BP -B-1 extend. The borehole was drilled approximately 300 feet west of BP -B-1. The observed LithoLogy at BP -B-3 indicates the depth to bedrock was 34 feet, shallower than observed at BP -B-1. The saturated thickness was also Less at 19 feet; therefore, a Low - capacity pumping test was not conducted in this borehole. Table 3 summarizes details pertaining to the boreholes at the Bike Park site, and Figure 4 shows the locations of the boreholes. Table 3. Bike Park Site Boreholes Borehole Name Total Depth (feet bgs) Depth to Bedrock (feet bgs) Saturated Thickness (feet) Low -capacity Pumping Test Performed (Yes/No) BP -B-1 46 42 27 Yes BP -B-2 26 21 6 No BP -B-3 38 34 19 No Figure 4. Bike Park Borehole Locations City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations 2.4 Highway 44 Boreholes This site was selected based on historical lithologic boreholes across the river. Geophysical investigation was not conducted at this site. Two boreholes were drilled at the HW 44 site, and bedrock was encountered between 20 and 24 feet. This resulted in not having enough saturated sediments to perform a low - capacity pumping test. Table 4 summarizes details pertaining to the boreholes at the Highway 44 site, and Figure 5 shows the locations of the boreholes. Table 4. Highway 44 Site Boreholes Figure 5 — Highway 44 Borehole Locations Low -capacity Pumping Borehole Total Depth Depth to Bedrock Saturated Thickness Test Performed Name (feet bgs) (feet bgs) (feet) (Yes/No) H44 -B-1 26 24 8 No H44 -B-2 35 20 5 No Figure 5 — Highway 44 Borehole Locations City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations 2.5 Southern Pacific Borehole This site was selected by the City as an additional location to assess subsurface conditions because the City currently operates a nearby well that is nearing the end of its useful lifespan and has experienced a reduction in the production rate over time. This site was investigated to determine if it would be suitable for a collector well or a replacement vertical well. Geophysical investigation was not performed at this Location. The depth to bedrock was 19.5 feet bgs, and the saturated thickness was minimal; therefore, a Low -capacity pumping test was not performed. Table 5 summarizes details pertaining to the borehole at the Southern Pacific site, and Figure 6 shows the location of the borehole. Table 5. Southern Pacific Site Borehole Figure 6. Southern Pacific Borehole Location 3. Low -capacity Pumping Tests and Sieve Analyses For this investigation, up to six short, low -capacity pumping tests were planned. Having the option of six tests allowed for at least one half of the 12 selected boreholes to be subjected to a low -capacity pumping test, if determined to be necessary. The decision to perform the low -capacity pumping test was made by Jacobs hydrogeologists at the time the borehole was drilled and logged by assessing the thickness of the coarse sediments encountered, depth to bedrock, and the overall thickness of saturated sediments. Four boreholes were selected for low -capacity pumping tests, and they were performed on three boreholes at Low -capacity Pumping Borehole Total Depth Depth to Bedrock Saturated Thickness Test Performed Name (feet bgs) (feet bgs) (feet) (Yes/No) SP -B-1 22 19.5 3.5 No Figure 6. Southern Pacific Borehole Location 3. Low -capacity Pumping Tests and Sieve Analyses For this investigation, up to six short, low -capacity pumping tests were planned. Having the option of six tests allowed for at least one half of the 12 selected boreholes to be subjected to a low -capacity pumping test, if determined to be necessary. The decision to perform the low -capacity pumping test was made by Jacobs hydrogeologists at the time the borehole was drilled and logged by assessing the thickness of the coarse sediments encountered, depth to bedrock, and the overall thickness of saturated sediments. Four boreholes were selected for low -capacity pumping tests, and they were performed on three boreholes at City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations the ACID site and one borehole at the Bike Park site. The boreholes drilled at the Turtle Bay, Highway 44, and Southern Pacific sites were determined to not be suitable for conducting a low -capacity pumping test because the sites tack a thick saturated section and relatively thin coarse sediments and shallow depth to bedrock. Soil samples were collected from boreholes in which low -capacity pumping tests were performed and delivered to Materials Testing, Inc. of Redding, California, for a particle -size distribution sieve analyses using method American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) D6913. The samples were collected from discrete depth intervals from the boreholes to determine the gradation of the sediments in areas with coarse, water -bearing sediments. Some samples were also collected from boreholes where low - capacity pumping tests were not performed to assess the gradation of sediments that were not hydraulically tested but are near sites that were. The results of the sieve analyses were used to estimate the horizontal hydraulic conductivity of the sediments using the Hazen (1911) and Kozeny-Carman (Carrier 2003, Kozeny 1927, and Carman 1937 and 1956) methods. 3.1 Low -capacity Pumping Test Results The results of the low -capacity pumping tests combined with the estimated hydraulic conductivity of the sediments are the basis for our recommendation to proceed with additional large-scale low -capacity pumping tests. The low -capacity pumping tests performed enable a rough estimate to be made of potential HCW yield capacities that might be available at that Location. The rough estimate was based on an analysis using both the low -capacity pumping tests and the sieve analyses results. To perform the analysis, a transmissivity value was first estimated from the first step of the low -capacity pumping test using a Cooper -Jacob analysis (Driscoll 1986). Then a bulk hydraulic conductivity of the screened aquifer section was calculated by dividing by the aquifer saturated thickness. This hydraulic conductivity and that obtained from the sieve analysis hydraulic conductivity were then used to estimate the potential yield of a future HCW using the formulation developed by Hantush and Papadopulos (1962). The potential yield of a vertical well at the two locations was also estimated using a Cooper -Jacob analysis (Driscoll 1986). From the analyses, it would appear that it is realistic that either site (east side of both the ACID and the Bike Park sites) could result with a collector well in the 5- to 10-mgd range, with the Bike Park site likely being closer to the 10-mgd capacity due to its greater saturated thickness. In comparison, a large - diameter conventional vertical well at those two sites would be expected to yield up to 1 mgd at the ACID site, and up to 2 mgd at the Bike Park site. Table 6 summarizes the data collected during each of the tow -capacity pumping tests. For ACID -B-1, ACID -B-2, and BP -B-1, a 2 -hour step test was performed. This consisted of pumping each borehole for four 30 -minute steps, each with a different pumping rate. To determine the rates, the maximum pumping rate was established and then it was divided into four pumping rates as closely spaced as possible. The flow rate was controlled by a ball valve that made it difficult to achieve precise flow rate steps. For ACID -B-3, the borehole did not produce a high enough flow rate to divide the flow into four steps. Instead, a 2 -hour constant -rate test was performed at a rate deemed sustainable for the 2 -hour test without breaking suction on the pump. Attachment 2 shows the low -capacity pumping test drawdown plots. I QvI City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations Table 6. Low -capacity Pumping Tests Borehole Name Step Pumping Rate (gpm) Static Water Level (feet bgs) Pumping Water Level (feet bgs) Drawdown (feet bgs) Specific Capacity (gpm/foot) ACID -B-1 1 6 13.4 13.67 0.27 22.22 2 18 13.4 14.07 0.67 26.87 3 28 13.4 14.89 1.49 18.79 4 42 13.4 16.02 2.62 16.03 ACID -B-2 1 7 13.75 13.81 0.06 116.67 2 16 13.75 14.03 0.28 57.14 3 31 13.75 14.28 0.53 58.49 4 42 13.75 14.69 0.94 44.68 ACID -B-3 Constant Rate 15 14.70 26.45 9.75 1.5 BP -B-1 1 5 12.35 12.36 0.01 500.00 2 17 12.35 12.41 0.06 283.33 3 25 12.35 12.45 0.10 250.00 4 41 12.35 12.52 0.17 241.18 Notes: Each step was 30 minutes in duration, for a 2 -hour test. The ACID -B-3 constant -rate test was 2 hours in duration. gpm = gallons per minute 3.2 Sieve Analyses Results The sieve analyses results were used to estimate the aquifer hydraulic conductivity using the methods of both Hazen, and Kozeny and Carman. The estimation of hydraulic conductivity from grain -size distribution provides a rough value of hydraulic conductivity due to its empirical nature and lack of consideration of other significant parameters such as fluid temperature, electrochemical reactions, and the coarse particle sizes commonly relied on in collector well construction. However, combined with the low -capacity pumping tests conducted, these methods provide a good guide on the overall suitability of collector well operation. The Hazen formulation relies on one grain -size data point, the 10 percent passing particle size, and assumes a uniform sand size particle. The Kozeny-Carman formulation relies on the entire particle distribution and, therefore, is considered a more accurate representation of the sand and gravel sizes encountered during this investigation. For reference, a hydraulic conductivity value in feet/day of several hundred to over one thousand feet/day is considered very good for a collector well application, and the larger saturated thickness locations are also more desirable. When an HCW is pumping, the water level needs to remain above the intake Laterals, and a thicker section of saturated sediments allows for more drawdown, therefore, more production. A minimum pumping level of 3 feet above the center Line of the laterals should be maintained as a safety factor. Table 7 shows the hydraulic conductivity results calculated from the Hazen and Kozeny-Carman methods using the sieve results from this investigation. Attachment 3 contains the sieve analyses lab results. City of Redding Horizontal Cottector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations Table 7. Sieve Analysis Hydraulic Conductivities Borehole Name Depth Interval (feet bgs) Hazen K (feet/day) Kozeny- Carman K (feet/day) USCS Soil Type Visual Description ACID -B-1 18.5-19 359.5 60.2 SP Brown sand with gravel 19-21 NA 1001.8 GW Brown gravel 21-23.5 445.9 90.7 GP Brown gravel with sand 23.5-26 340.7 87.3 GW Brown gravel with sand 26-28.5 362.3 132.0 GW -GM Brown gravel with silt and sand ACID -B-2 18.5-21 368.6 214.2 GW Brown gravel with sand 21-23.5 778.3 95.5 GP Brown gravel with sand 24-25 255.1 82.4 GP -GM Brown gravel with silt and sand 28.5-31 NA 673.8 GW Brown gravel 31-33.5 1,274.8 161.8 GP Brown gravel with sand 33.5-36 780.1 139.5 GP -GM Brown gravel with silt and sand ACID -B-3 10-12 NA 5.6 CL Brown sandy clay 20-22 NA 3.5 SC Gray clayey sand 22-26 110.6 228.6 GW -GM Reddish brown gravel with silt and sand 26-28 732.2 440.5 GP Brown gravel with sand 28-30 395.4 385.8 GP -GM Brown gravel with silt and sand 30-32 548.5 269.6 GW Grayish brown gravel with sand ACID -B-4 21-22.5 584.8 282.5 GW -GM Grayish brown gravel with silt and sand BP -B-1 16-19 533.7 263.0 GW Brown gravel with sand 19-21 802.9 156.4 GW Brown gravel with sand 28-30 5,631.6 389.5 GW Brown gravel with sand 23.5-26 340.7 87.3 GW Brown gravel with sand 26-28 2,952.1 297.7 GP Brown gravel with sand 30-32 781.3 201.8 GP Brown gravel with sand 38-40 4,720.1 332.3 GP Brown gravel with sand 40-42 1,869.5 179.2 GP Brown gravel with sand BP -B-3 15-17 379.7 236.2 GW -GM Brown gravel with silt and sand SP -B-1 13-16 1,209.8 371.3 GW Reddish brown gravel with sand Notes: Hazen K results are not applicable (NA) for D10 approaching or greater than 3. CL = inorganic clays of tow to medium plasticity GM = silty gravels GP = poorly graded gravels GW = welt -graded gravels K = hydraulic conductivity SC = clayey sands SP = poorly graded sands USCS = Unified Soil Classification System 10 PPS0311211259RDD City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations 4. Summary Our review of the geophysical investigation indicated there might be deposits in the Sacramento River alluvium to support an HCWwith the targeted 10 -million -gallon -per -day (mgd) capacity. The investigation conducted and reported herein took those results a step further and sampled and tested those areas to assess the local hydraulic conductivity. Testing results reveal locations where it appearsthe sediments would support a collector well. In summary: ■ The location investigated at the west side of the ACID site, the location investigated at the Southern Pacific site, the locations on the west side of the Bike Park site, and the locations investigated at the Highway 44 site were found to be either too shallow or too low in hydraulic conductivity to support the feasibility of a collector well. The east side of both the ACID site and the farthest east side of the Bike Park appear to have suitable hydraulic conductivity, although the saturated thickness is on the low side for an HCW when accounting for the minimum pumping level being maintained at least 3 feet above the center line of the laterals. However, either of the two sites (east side of both the ACID and Bike Park sites) appears to be likely candidates for a collector well. At this point in the investigation, it is realistic that either site (east side of both the ACID and Bike Park sites) could support a collector well in the 5- to 10-mgd range, with the Bike Park site likely being closer to the 10-mgd capacity because of its greater saturated thickness. In comparison, a large -diameter conventional vertical well at those two siteswould be expected to yield up to 1 mgd at the ACID site and up to 2 mgd at the Bike Park site. 5. Recommendations Based on the results of the subject investigation, consideration should be given to conducting up to two long-term (approximately 48 to 96 hours) high-capacity pumping tests. Each pumping test would consist of a 12 -inch pumping well and four 2 -inch monitoring wells. The monitoring wellswould be spaced parallel and perpendicular to the river, and would test an area about 250 feet wide parallel to the river and about 100 feet wide perpendicular to the river. These long-term high-capacity pumping tests will provide further validation of the feasibility of a collector well at each site and a sound foundation to design the full-size collector wells should that option be selected by the Qty. The proposed long-term high-capacity pumping test locations are listed in Table 8. Table 8. Proposed Long-term Test Locations Site Recommended Long-term Pumping Test Locations Comments ACID Recommend a long-term high-capacity pumping Both AGD-B-1 and ACID -B-2 boreholeswere test between ACID -B-1 and AGD-B-2. suitable for future testing. Sediments thin and bedrock shallows toward the western edge of the site. Bike Park Recommend a long-term high-capacity pumping An HCWfacilitywould have to be factored test near BP -B-1. into the current Bike Park design to minimize impact to the current plans. PPS0311211259RDD 11 City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well Borehole Investigation Summary and Recommendations 6. References Carman, PI.1937."Fluid Flow through Granular 8eds.^Transactions, Institution ofChemical Engineers, London. 15:150-166. Carman, P.C. 1956. Flow of Gases through Porous Media. Butterworths, London. Carrier III, VV.David. 2OO].^Goodhya Hazen; Hello, Kozeny-[arnnan.^Journal ufGeotechnical and Geoenvinonrnentu/Engineering. Vol. 129.No. 11'November 1. Driscoll, F.G. 1986. "Groundwater and Welts." Johnson Filtration Systems, Inc. Technical Book. Hantush, M.S., and I.S. PapadopuLos. 1962. "Flow of Groundwater to Collector Welts." Journal of the Hydraulics Division. ASCE. Hazen A.1911.^Discussion:Dams onSand Foundations.^Trans AnnSocOvEng.73:199-2U3. Knzeny'J. 1927.''UeberkapiiiareLeitungdes VVasseoinn8oden.^SdzungaberAkodkNss,Wien. 136(2a):271-306. 12 pPs0311211259xoo Attachment 1 Borehole Logs PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I ACID -B-1 SHEET 1 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION : Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 1/29/2021 END: 1/29/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a Z' °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs v W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE w0 o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� FILL Hand Auger. Fill, gravel, sand 5.0 5 • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Reddish brown. 80-85% rounded to subrounded gravel from 0.25" to 3", 15% • • • subrounded to angular sand, trace silty fines. • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) ... Grayish brown. 80% rounded to subrounded gravel up to 6". Metamorphic clasts, 20% • • • subrounded to angular sand with trace silt. 10 11.0 S-1 ••• • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) ... Grayish brown. 70% rounded to subrounded gravel up to 6". Metamorphic clasts, • • • 20-25% fine to medium sand sand with 5% silty fines 15 • • • moist sediments SILTY SAND (SM) • • • Brown. 80% fine to coarse angular to subrounded sand, 20% silty fines, trace clayey fines WELL GRADED GRAVEL (GW) Brown. 90%.25"-2" subrounded to subangular gravel, 10% medium to coarse .' subangular sand, trace clayey fines • • • POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) 20 ... Brownish black. 90% fine to coarse subrounded sand 5-10% fine gravel. Fines upwards • • • with some fine gravel at base WELL GRADED GRAVEL (GW) • • • 10.0 S-2 • • • Brown. 80% rounded coarse gravel to 6". Some layers up to 0.5 foot thick with 20% coarse sand and trace low plasticity fines 25 ••• 1 1I j I WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND (GW -GM) FI } Brown. 60% gravel with 30% sand and 10% silty fines i}cIII 1 16 1 10.0 S-3 j i F101 jII icl�l rt�Ijl PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I ACID -B-1 SHEET 2 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION : Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 1/29/2021 END: 1/29/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a F °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w W SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs z v o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE LU o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� III rltl all t6l�1 Il.lt 10.0 S-3 r� T t�I�I Fltl 35 Dry - bedrock Weathered bedrock, siltstone 4.5 S-4 40 Boring terminated at 40.5 It bgs. 45 50 55 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I ACID -B-2 SHEET 1 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION : Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 1/31/2021 END: 1/31/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC W 0 3: < Z' 00 SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 11 — LU SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS SAMPLE IDs > W 0 COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE Z wD 0 0 0 DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o 0 Uj STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY FILL Hand Auger. Gravel, sand, silt 6.0 5 POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) Brown. Fine to medium grained angular to subrounded sand, trace silty fines WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) 10 Brown. 80-85% subrounded to rounded gravel from fine to 4", 15-20% subangular to rounded fine to coarse sand. From 14'-16' average gravel size is a little smaller but there is a 6" clast. - 10.0 S-1 15 Saturated sediments NO RECOVERY No Recovery WELL GRADED SAND WITH CLAY (SW -SC) Brown. 75% fine to very coarse angular sand, 15% angular to subrounded fine gravel and 10% low -plasticity clayey fines. GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) 20 •••WELL Brown. 80-85% gravel from fine to 6", 15-20% fine to coarse angular to subrounded sand, some trace silt stringers in gravel matrix - 8.0 S-2 25 NO RECOVERY No Recovery 8.5 S-3 WELL GRADED GRAVEL (GW) Brown. Fine to coarse gravel to 4", trace clayey fines in PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I ACID -B-2 SHEET 2 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION : Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 1/31/2021 END: 1/31/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a Z' °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs mn v w W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE z o LU DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Brown. Fine to coarse rounded gravel up to 5", some mixed layers 0.5' thick with 40% • • • medium to coarse angular sand, mostly 80-85% gravel. 8.5 S-3 • . • 35 ••• Gley, Weathered bedrock, siltstone Dry - bedrock 40 6.0 S-4 Boring terminated at 43 It bgs. 45 50 55 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I ACID -B-3 SHEET 1 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION : Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/14/2021 END: 2/14/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a Z' °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs v W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE z o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL UJ o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� FILL Hand Auger. Fill, gravel, sand, silt, clay 4.0 5 2.0 s-1 CLAYEY SAND (CL) Brown. 85% clayey fines with 15% fine sand, saturated. Some roots and organics Water. Hole is adjacent to creek. Water level corresponds to creek water level 10 9.0 S-2 15 POORLY GRADED SAND WITH CLAY (SP -SC) iv Brown. 85-90% medium to fine sand with 10% low -plasticity clayey fines, some j„ roots/organics ri.•ri j Color change from brown to black POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) 20 Black/Gray. Fine grained sand, trace clayey fines CLAYEY SAND (SC) 11.0 S-3 Gray. 80% clayey fines with 20% sand WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND (GW -GM) Brown. 60% angular to subrounded gravel, 30% fine to coarse sand, 10% silty fines. .4�III rtII ihl#I l 25 •I t .4�III rt6!jl • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Brown. 70% rounded gravel to 3", 25% fine to coarse angular sand, 5% clayey fines 10.0 S-4 ••• • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Brown. 55% angular to subrounded gravel to 3", 40% fine to coarse angular sand, 5% • • • clayey fines PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I ACID -B-3 SHEET 2 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION : Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/14/2021 END: 2/14/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a F °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs v W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE z DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL LU 01 STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY 0 Gley, Weathered bedrock, siltstone 10.0 S-4 35 Boring terminated at 36 It bgs. 40 45 50 55 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I ACID -B-4 SHEET 1 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION : Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/17/2021 END: 2/17/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC W 0 3: < Z' 00 SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 11 — LU W SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS SAMPLE IDs Z > 0 0 COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE wD 0 0 Uj 0 DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY FILL Hand Auger, Brown, fine sand 4.5 5 POORLY GRADED SAND WITH CLAY (SP) 1.5 S-1 Brown. 85% medium to fine sand with 10% low plasticity clayey fines NO RECOVERY No Recovery POORLY GRADED SAND WITH CLAY (SP) Brown. 85% medium to fine sand with 10% low plasticity clayey fines 10 8.0 S-2 WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND SAND (GW -GC) 64/. Brown. 60% gravel to 5" with 20% sand and 20% med plasticity clayey fines �11 15 �p�p 7P)a I • : : WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Brown. 60% rounded gravel, with 35% fine to coarse angular sand, 5% clayey fines NO RECOVERY Saturated sediments No Recovery 2.0 S-3 CLAYEY SAND (SC) Brown. Fine sand with 15% low plasticity clayey fines 20 6V WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND (GW -GM) Brown. 65% rounded gravel, to 3", 30% fine to coarse sand, 10% silty fines DCIII rtll6 6.0 S-4 II6 25 iCIII rtII lei + 10 1 Dry - bedrock Weathered bedrock, Siltstone .in 6.0 S-5 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I ACID -B-4 SHEET 2 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION : Anderson -Cottonwood Irrigation District ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/17/2021 END: 2/17/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a w mn LU z v o ° c� F w o w W o °o a SOIL DESCRIPTION SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs 6.0 S-5 Boring terminated at 32 It bgs. 35 40 45 50 55 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I TB -B-1 SHEET 1 OF 1 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Turtle Bay ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/2/2021 END: 2/3/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC W 0 3: < Z' 00 SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 11 — LU SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS SAMPLE IDs Z > 0 W 0 COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE wD 0 0 DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o 0 Uj STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY FILL Hand Auguer, fill. Gravel, sand and silt 3.0 WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT AND GRAVEL (SW -SM) Brown. 60% fine to coarse angular to subrounded sand, 25-30% fine to 1 rounded to 2.0 s_j Asubrounded gravel, 10% silty fines POORLY GRADED FINE SAND (SP) 5 Black. 85-90% fine sand with 10-15% rounded gravel from 1/2" to 3" SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL) 3.0 S-2 Brown. 35% fine sand with some coarse sand, some orange and gray streaks, very �saturated like mud. L L Brownish blue, organics with sticks and roots. WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Gray. Gravel to 1" with 20% fine sand. NO RECOVERY 10 No Recovery - 1' cobble was stuck in core barrel 4.0 S-3 WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Gray. Same as 6-8' Another cobble blocked core barrel 15 WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Same as 12-14.5' but with some clay in matrix Some moist sediments, didn't encounter POORLY GRADED FINE SAND (SP) fully saturated zone Black. 80% fine to coarse subrounded sand with 15% fine to medium rounded gravel, some silty fines. Glay. Weathered siltstone bedrock 5.0 S-4 20 Boring terminated at 21 ft bgs. 25 .in PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I TB -B-2 SHEET 1 OF 1 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Turtle Bay ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/3/2021 END: 2/3/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a Z' °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs mn v w W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE z o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL LU o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� Hand Auger, Fill 3.0 • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL (GW) • • • 80% gravel with 20% sand 2.0 S-1 ••• 5 ••• NO RECOVERY No Recovery 1.0 S-2 From top to 8 feet the sediments were • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Brown to light gray. 70% gravel from fine to coarse with some cobbles up to 8", 30% sub moist. Then they became dry • • • angular to rounded fine to coarse sand 10 ••• 4.0 S-3 ••• 3.0 S-4 ••• 15 ... • • • Some moisture at 16-16.5 feet then bedrock is dry Glay. Weathered siltstone bedrock, friable, dry 20 10.0 S-5 25 Boring terminated at 26 ft bgs. PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I BP -B-1 SHEET 1 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL : 16.0 ftbgs START: 2/10/2021 END: 2/10/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC a o Z' °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs mn v w W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE z o LU DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� ... FILL (GW) • • • Hand Auger. Fill, Sand, Gravel 4.5 ••• 5 • • • WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (GW) • • • 60% Coarse gravel up to 8", 35% fine to coarse sand and silty fines. May be fill. 10 11.0 S-1 ••• NO RECOVERY Large cobble in bit pushed through No Recovery sample Large cobble in bit pushed through sample • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) 15 ... Brown. 70% Rounded coarse gravel, 20% coarse sand, 10% silty fines • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) ... 50-60% Rounded gravel from fine to 6", 30-35% fine to coarse angular to subrounded • • • sand, 5-10% silty fines, some layers cleaner than others. At 38' & 40' thin layers of poorly sorted sand with gravel. 20 4.5 S-2 ••• 25 ••• 6.0 S-3 ... ••• PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I BP -B-1 SHEET 2 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL : 16.0 ftbgs START: 2/10/2021 END: 2/10/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC a o F °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs v W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE z o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL LU o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� 6.0 S-3 NO RECOVERY No Recovery • POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP) 35 Brown. 65% rounded gravel up to 6", 30% med to coarse sub angular sand, 5% silty fines • • 40 12.0 S-4 •• SILTY GRAVEL WITH SAND (GM) Brown. About 45% med to coarse rounded gravel, 35% fine sand with 20% silty fines. Transition to Chico Fm. Some bedrock rip -up clasts in matrix. Weathered siltstone bedrock 45 Boring terminated at 46 It bgs. 50 55 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I BP -B-2 SHEET 1 OF 1 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL : 15.0ftbgs START: 2/9/2021 END: 2/9/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC W 0 3: < Z' (D0 SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 11 — LU SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS SAMPLE IDs Z > 0 W 0 COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE wD 0 0 DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o 0 Uj STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY FILL Hand Auger. Fill, sand and gravel 2.5 FILL Same as 0-2.5' 3.5 S-1 WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) 5 Black. Rounded gravel to 3", fine to coarse angular sand, very dark in color SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM) gray with brown mottling, 50% sand, 35% silty fines, 15% fine rounded gravel -Dark NO RECOVERY No Recovery SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM) 10 Dark gray with brown mottling, 50% sand, 35% silty fines, 15% fine rounded gravel SILTY SAND (ML) - 7.0 S-2 Black with brown mottling, 60% fine sand, 35% sility fines, 5% rounded gravel to 1" WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Brown, rounded fine gravel to cobbles up to 6", 40% medium to coarse subangular sand, some clayey fines. 15 WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Sediments saturated Brown. rounded gravel up to 2", 45% medium to coarse subangular sand, cleaner, less �fines than 11 -15. From 16-18', driller said he thinks seds NO RECOVERY are similar to 15-16' based on drilling. No Recovery Cobble in bit may have caused loss of recovery POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP) Blackish brown, 75% subangular to angular medium to coarse sand, 20-25% subangular fine gravel, trace fines. SILTY GRAVEL WIH SAND (GM) 20 Brown. 50% rounded gravel up to 6", 30-5% fine to medium subangular sand, 15-20% silty fines - 8.0 S-3 Glay. Weathered bedrock, siltstone 25 .in Boring terminated at 26 It bgs. PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I BP -B-3 SHEET 7 of 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/13/2021 END: 2/13/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a Z' °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs v W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE w0 o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� FILL Hand Auguer. Fill, cobble, sand and clay 4.0 A,6 "ti WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND SAND (GW -GC) 5 �.0 S :i Brown. 60% rounded gravel, 40% rounded fine to medium snad, 10% low plasticity ffl clayey fines. ire sAA NO RECOVERY No Recovery 10 8.0 S-2 • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Brown. 70% rounded gravel to 8", 25% fine to medium sand, 5% fines 15 • .•• • . WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SW) Saturated sediments start Brown. 60% fine to coarse angular to subrounded sand, 35% rounded gravel to 5", 5% 2.0 s-3 :: silty fines A6/ WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND SAND (GW -GC) 164/s/ Light orangish brown. 60% rounded gravel, 40% fine to coarse angular to subrounded »/ sand, 10% low plasticity clayey fines. Gravle clasts, metavolcanics, oxidized orange mottling in clay Prr 20 f1016 16 Ati 46h/ 8.0 S-4 S »' f' f ire 41,616 CLAYEY GRAVEL WITH SAND (GC) 23-24' Dry sediments Brown, grey. 50% subrounded gravel, highly weathered metavolcanic clasts. Fractured clasts with oxidation, 30% fine to coarse angular sand, 20% medium plasticity clayey 25 fines with trace grey silt. WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND SAND (GW -GC) Brown. 60% rounded gravel, 30% fine to coarse angular sand, 10% clayey fines f11 rt WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND (GW -GM) 8.0 S-5 .111 1.1 #1 Light orange/gley. 60% subangular gravel, clast cored that was 1' long, subrounded r� t weathered siltstone clasts, oxidized. 30$ angular fine to coarse sand, 10% silty fines rt�III I h1I; I PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I BP -B-3 SHEET 2 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/13/2021 END: 2/13/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a F °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w W SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs z v o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE LU o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� III 8.0 S-5 rltl 4 ( I t�I�I �Fltl rltl SII t6!�I Weathered bedrock, siltstone Dry at beginning of bedrock 35 5.0 S-6 Boring terminated at 38 It bgs. 40 45 50 55 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I H44 -B-1 SHEET 1 OF 1 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Highway 44 ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/11/2021 END: 2/11/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a Z' °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs v W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE w0 o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� FILL Hand Auger. Cobbles, sand and clay 3.0 FILL Cobbles, sand and clay 3.0 S-1 5 NO RECOVERY No Recovery • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) 10 ... Brown. 70% rounded gravel to 7', fine to coarse angular sand, 5% silty fines 7.0 S-2 ••• 15 ••• Saturated sediments POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) Brown. Fine to coarse sand, some rounded gravel. • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Brown. 70% rounded gravel to 3" with 25% fine to coarse angular sand with silty fines. WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SW) Brown. 80% fine to coarse angular sand with 15% rounded gravel to 2" with some silty 20 fines NO RECOVERY No Recovery - Large cobble displaced sediments 6.0 S-3 Dry at bedrock Glay, Weathered bedrock, siltone. Transition from gravel to siltstone 25 Boring terminated at 26 It bgs. PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I H44 -B-2 SHEET 1 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Highway 44 ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/12/2021 END: 2/12/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC W 0 3: < Z' 00 SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 11 — LU SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS SAMPLE IDs > 0 W 0 COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE Z wD 0 DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o 0 Uj STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY FILL Fill - gravel, sand, silt 5 POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP) Brown. 80% fine to med sand with 20% fine to medium rounded gravel POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) Brown. Fine to medium sand 10 10.0 S-1 POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP) Brown. 80% fine to med sand with 20% fine to medium rounded gravel WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Brown. 75% rounded gravel up to 8", 20% fine to coarse sand with 5% clayey fines 15 Saturated WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SW) Borwn. 75% coarse sand with 20% gravel up to 2", 5% clayey fines WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND SAND (GW -GC) Brown. Transistion to bedrock, rounded gravel to 6" with 20% fine sand, 5-10% clayey fines towards the bottom ffl frt 2010.0 S-2 r rr Glay, Weathered Bedrock, siltstone with some gravel Bedrock is different than other borings. It is siltstone mixed with gravel and some clay 25-- .in 10.0 S-3 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I H44 -B-2 SHEET 2 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Highway 44 ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 2/12/2021 END: 2/12/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a w mn LU z v o ° c� F w o w W o °o a SOIL DESCRIPTION SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs 10.0 S-3 35 Boring terminated at 35 It bgs. 40 45 50 55 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I SP -B-1 SHEET 1 OF 1 Borehole Log PROJECT : Pump Station #1 - Collector Well Borings LOCATION: Southern Pacific ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL : 16.0 ftbgs START: 2/16/2021 END: 2/16/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC a o Z' °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs v W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE z o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL LU o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� ... FILL (GW) ... Hand Auger. Fill. Gravel, sand, clay. 5.0 ••• 5 ••• SILTY SAND (SM) Brown. Fine sand with 20% silty fines. Trace fine gravel. Rounded rt 6I j I WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND (GW -GM) I I Brown. 60% rounded gravel, 20% angular fine to coarse sand and 10% silty fines i f I 7.0 S-1 rtI,•) * I i hI; 10 j SILTY SAND (SM) • • • Brown. 80% fine sand and 20% silty fines ... WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) • • • Brown. 65% angular gravel up to 4", 30% medium to coarse sand with clayey fines " • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND SAND (GW -GC) 44/6, Brown. 60% fine to coarse gravel, 30% fine to coarse sand, 10% clayey fines WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) • • • Brown. 50% gravel to 4", 45% fine to coarse sand, 5% clayey fines 15 ••• Moist, water present • �� WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND SAND (GW -GC) 164/e/ Brown. 60% fine to coarse gravel, wiht 30% fine to coarse sand and 10% clayey fines 10.0 s-2 ff� ire s �tii 20 Dry at bedrock Weathered siltstone bedrock Boring terminated at 22 It bgs. 25 Attachment 2 Drawdown Plots 0.02 0.04 0.06 bn 0.08 0 _0 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 BP -B-1 Step -test m ACID -B-1 Step -test w m m m w m ea m m m ACID -B-2 Step -test um m Attachment 3 Sieve Analyses Lab Results In 11 Mr. Mark Twede Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 2525 Airpark Drive Redding, CA 96001-2443 Materials Testing, Inc. 8798 Airport Road 865 Cotting Lane, Suite A Redding, California 96002 Vacaville, California 95688 (530) 222-1116, fax 222-1611 (707) 447-4025, fax 447-4143 Client No: 3283-004 Date: 02/08/2021 Subject: City of Redding PS #1 Collection Well LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Dear Mr. Twede: As requested, MATERIALS TESTING, INC. performed laboratory testing services for the samples submitted on 02/01/21. The samples were tested according to the referenced standard test procedures and relate only to the items inspected or tested. Any comments and exceptions are addressed under the Notes or Remarks section. Results included in this submittal package: 1.1 — Particle Size Distribution Report We appreciate the opportunity to provide our services to you on this project and look forward to providing additional service, as needed, in the future. The results included are for this project only and its intended use. Results are not transferable and shall not be reproduced, except in full, without written permission from MTI. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please contact our office at your convenience. Copies: 1 via mail Respectfully Submitted, MATERIALS T STING, INC. Andrew L. King, P.E. Principal. Engineer Construction Materials Testing and Quality Control Services Soil - Concrete - Asphalt - Steel - Masonry 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � NM o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 15 12 13 47 10 3 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 1 1/2" 97 1" 90 3/4" 85 1/2" 81 3/8" 78 #4 73 #8 64 #16 42 #30 20 #50 8 #100 4 #200 2.9 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Sand with Gravel (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 25.4000 D85= 19.0500 D60= 2.0186 D50= 1.4767 D30= 0.8378 D15= 0.4822 D10= 0.3561 Cu= 5.67 CC= 0.98 Classification USCS= SP AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 0300-001 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � Nm o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 57 31 6 4 1 1 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 1 1/2" 80 1" 60 3/4" 43 1/2" 29 3/8" 21 #4 12 #8 7 #16 5 #30 3 #50 2 #100 2 #200 1.4 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel (visual) Atterbe_rq Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 44.3729 D85= 41.2738 D60= 25.4000 D50= 21.5219 D30= 13.1628 D15= 6.6751 D10= 3.6911 Cu= 6.88 Cc= 1.85 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 0300-002 100 90 80 70 tr W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � NM o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. % Gravel % Sand % Fines +3„ Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 41 21 8 19 7 4 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 1 1/2" 93 1" 69 3/4" 59 1/2" 50 3/8" 46 #4 38 #8 32 #16 23 #30 14 #50 8 #100 5 #200 4.1 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterbe_rq Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 35.8305 D85= 32.9121 D60= 19.7888 D50= 12.7000 D30= 1.9747 D15= 0.6536 D10= 0.3966 Cu= 49.90 Cc= 0.50 Classification USCS= GP AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 0300-003 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � NM o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 28 34 12 15 7 4 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 11/2" 89 1" 82 3/4" 72 1/2" 58 3/8" 51 #4 38 #8 28 #16 20 #30 14 #50 9 #100 5 #200 4.0 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterbe_rq Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 39.4650 D85= 30.1759 D60= 13.5852 D50= 9.0897 D30= 2.7502 D15= 0.6802 DSO= 0.3467 Cu= 39.18 Cc= 1.61 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 0300-004 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � NM o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 34 33 11 11 6 5 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 1 1/2" 92 1" 75 3/4" 66 1/2" 54 3/8" 46 #4 33 #8 24 #16 17 #30 13 #50 9 #100 6 #200 5.1 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Silt & Sand (visual) Atterbe_rq Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 36.1309 D85= 32.1020 D60= 15.5332 D50= 11.0600 D30= 3.8266 D15= 0.8704 D10= 0.3575 Cu= 43.45 Cc= 2.64 Classification USCS= GW -GM AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 0300-005 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report o00 n- 0 000 0 0�0 100 10 1 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine 0 25 39 12 13 6 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 1 1/2" 100 D60= 12.3100 1" 87 D30= 3/4" 75 D15= 0.8156 1/2" 61 Cu= 3/8" 52 Cc= 2.32 #4 36 Classification #8 26 USCS= GW #16 18 AASHTO= #30 13 #50 9 #100 6 #200 4.8 Tested By: John Hubbard 0.1 0.01 % Fines Silt 5 Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterbe_rg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 27.5464 D85= 24.1620 D60= 12.3100 D50= 8.8835 D30= 3.2105 D15= 0.8156 D10= 0.3606 Cu= 34.14 Cc= 2.32 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 Date: 02/04/2021 Figure 0300-006 100 90 80 70 tr W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � NM o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 23 35 14 19 5 4 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 1 1/2" 96 1" 87 3/4" 77 1/2" 63 3/8" 57 #4 42 #8 31 #16 20 #30 11 #50 8 #100 6 #200 4.4 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterbe_rq Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 28.3230 D85= 23.8285 D60= 11.1336 D50= 6.8787 D30= 2.2080 D15= 0.8490 D10= 0.5240 Cu= 21.25 Cc= 0.84 Classification USCS= GP AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 0300-007 100 90 80 70 tr W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � NM o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 23 34 11 20 6 6 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 D60= 11.3716 1 1/2" 94 D30= 1" 85 D15= 0.6633 3/4" 77 Cu= 1/2" 63 Cc= 0.96 3/8" 56 Classification #4 43 USCS= GP -GM #8 34 AASHTO= #16 23 #30 14 #50 10 #100 7 #200 5.6 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Silt & Sand (visual) Atterbe_rq Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 31.581.4 D85= 25.4000 D60= 11.3716 D50= 7.1057 D30= 1.8085 D15= 0.6633 D10= 0.3000 Cu= 37.91 Cc= 0.96 Classification USCS= GP -GM AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � Nm o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. % Gravel % Sand % Fines +3„ Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 51 35 6 3 2 3 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 D60= 23.4755 1 1/2" 94 D30= 1" 65 D15= 5.1656 3/4" 49 Cu= 1/2" 30 Cc= 2.35 3/8" 24 Classification #4 14 USCS= GW #8 9 AASHTO= #16 7 #30 5 #50 5 #100 4 #200 3.3 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel (visual) Atterbe_rq Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 35.4208 D85= 32.9321 D60= 23.4755 D50= 19.4281 D30= 12.7000 D15= 5.1656 D10= 2.9197 Cu= 8.04 Cc= 2.35 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 0300-009 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � NM o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 28 34 13 18 3 4 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 1 1/2" 98 1" 82 3/4" 72 1/2" 58 3/8" 51 #4 38 #8 27 #16 17 #30 9 #50 6 #100 5 #200 4.1 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterbe_rq Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 30.4708 D85= 27.2548 D60= 13.5430 D50= 9.0797 D30= 2.8787 D15= 1.0200 DSO= 0.6706 Cu= 20.20 CC= 0.91 Classification USCS= GP AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 0300-010 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � NM o 10 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. % Gravel % Sand % Fines +3„ Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 27 34 11 19 4 5 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 1 1/2" 95 1" 81 3/4" 73 1/2" 60 3/8" 53 #4 39 #8 30 #16 20 #30 11 #50 8 #100 6 #200 5.3 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Silt and Sand (visual) Atterbe_rq Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 32.5959 D85= 28.4887 D60= 12.7000 D50= 8.3129 D30= 2.3600 D15= 0.8457 D10= 0.5246 Cu= 24.21 Cc= 0.84 Classification USCS= GP -GM AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS #1 Collection Well Project No: 3283-003 F Date: 02/04/2021 0300-011 In 11 Mr. Mark Twede Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 2525 Airpark Drive Redding, CA 96001-2443 Materials Testing, Inc. 8798 Airport Road 865 Cotting Lane, Suite A Redding, California 96002 Vacaville, California 95688 (530) 222-1116, fax 222-1611 (707) 447-4025, fax 447-4143 Client No: 3283-004 Date: 02/17/2021 Subject: City of Redding PS #1 Collection Well —Bike Park LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Dear Mr. Twede: As requested, MATERIALS TESTING, INC. performed laboratory testing services for the samples submitted on 02/10/21. The samples were tested according to the referenced standard test procedures and relate only to the items inspected or tested. Any comments and exceptions are addressed under the Notes or Remarks section. Results included in this submittal package: 7 — Particle Size Distribution Report We appreciate the opportunity to provide our services to you on this project and look forward to providing additional service, as needed, in the future. The results included are for this project only and its intended use. Results are not transferable and shall not be reproduced, except in full, without written permission from MTI. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please contact our office at your convenience. Copies: 1 via mail Respectfully Submitted, MATERIALS T TING, INC. Andrew L. King, P.E. Principal Engineer Construction Materials Testing and Quality Control Services Soil - Concrete - Asphalt - Steel - Masonry 100 90 80 70 Of W 60 Z LL Z 50 W U Of W 40 IL 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report aoa 100 10 1 0.1 GRAIN SIZE - mm. +3" % Gravel % Sand Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine 0 31 35 13 11 6 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) I I) I I I I I L I I 1" --------- I I! I I I L --a L I 56 3/8" 49 #4 34 #8 23 I I I If I li I I I 1 1 -------L--- I I I I I! I I I I - I� I I I I I I I 1 I #50 -------- -------- -. I I I! I I I I I I I I I 4.2 I L I I li I I I I j { { .r } - li I I I I I! I I I I I I I I { I I --- ----- -------- . I I I I I I I } t--{ { - - I, I I I I I I I I I I I li I I I I I I I I) I 100 10 1 0.1 GRAIN SIZE - mm. +3" % Gravel % Sand Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine 0 31 35 13 11 6 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 1 1/2" 91 1" 76 3/4" 69 1/2" 56 3/8" 49 #4 34 #8 23 #16 17 #30 12 #50 8 #100 5 #200 4.2 Tested By: John Hubbard 0.01 % Fines Silt 4 Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 37.0733 D85= 32.5990 D60= 14.3969 D50= 9.9669 D30= 3.8248 D15= 0.9067 D10= 0.4339 Cu= 33.18 Cc= 2.34 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. 0.001 Date: 02/17/2021 Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding PS #1 Colection Well Project No: 3283-004 Figure 0300-001 100 90 80 70 W 60 Z LL Z 50 W U W 40 CL 30 20 10 0 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) 2 1/2" 100 2" 94 I 1 1/2" 81 1" 72 3/4" 59 1/2" 47 3/8" 42 #4 32 #8 24 #16 17 #30 11 #50 6 #100 4 #200 3.4 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 46.4126 D85= 41.8922 D60= 19.4759 D50= 14.5526 D30= 4.0403 D15= 0.9505 D10= 0.5322 Cu= 36.60 Cc= 1.57 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Date: 02/17/2021 Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding PS #1 Colection Well Project No: 3283-004 Figure 0300-002 100 90 80 70 W 60 Z LL Z 50 W U W 40 CL 30 20 10 0 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) 2 1/2" 100 2" 95 I 1 1/2" 84 1" 65 3/4" 51 1/2" 38 3/8" 32 #4 21 #8 14 #16 9 #30 7 #50 5 #100 4 #200 3.3 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 43.9588 D85= 38.9832 D60= 23.0098 D50= 18.6043 D30= 8.5429 D15= 2.6486 D10= 1.4095 Cu= 16.32 Cc= 2.25 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Date: 02/17/2021 Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding PS #1 Colection Well Project No: 3283-004 Figure 0300-003 100 90 80 70 Of W 60 Z LL Z 50 W U Of W 40 IL 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report aoa 100 10 1 0.1 GRAIN SIZE - mm. +3" % Gravel % Sand Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine 0 31 41 13 9 3 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) I I) I I I I L I I 1" --------- I I! I I I L -------a L I 52 3/8" 45 #4 28 #8 17 I I L I li I I I I 1 l L I! I I I I f { .{ I I I 1 I - -------- ---------- -------- -. I I I! I I I I I I I f } - I I 3.4 I L I I li I I I I j { { .} } - li I I I I f { { } F I! I I I I I I I { I { I --- ----- -------- . -------- I I I I I I I }-- { { - --- ---- I, I I I } } { I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 7�?7 I �1' it 100 10 1 0.1 GRAIN SIZE - mm. +3" % Gravel % Sand Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine 0 31 41 13 9 3 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 11/2" 98 1" 81 3/4" 69 1/2" 52 3/8" 45 #4 28 #8 17 #16 11 #30 7 #50 5 #100 4 #200 3.4 Tested By: John Hubbard 0.01 % Fines Silt 3 Material Description Brown Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 30.6865 D85= 27.6458 D60= 15.5673 D50= 11.8624 D30= 5.1864 D15= 1.9400 D10= 1.0205 Cu= 15.25 Cc= 1.69 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. 0.001 Date: 02/17/2021 Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding PS #1 Colection Well Project No: 3283-004 Figure 0300-004 100 90 80 70 W 60 Z LL Z 50 W U W 40 CL 30 20 10 0 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) 2 1/2" 100 2" 96 1 1/2" 82 1" 67 3/4" 57 1/2" 45 3/8" 39 #4 27 #8 19 #16 15 #30 11 #50 6 #100 4 #200 3.6 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 44.3674 D85= 40.3922 D60= 20.7669 D50= 15.3002 D30= 5.7576 D15= 1.1800 D10= 0.5250 Cu= 39.56 Cc= 3.04 Classification USCS= GP AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Date: 02/17/2021 Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding PS #1 Colection Well Project No: 3283-004 Figure 0300-005 100 90 80 70 Of W 60 Z LL Z 50 W U Of W 40 IL 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report aoa 100 PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) I I) I I I I L I 1" --------- I II I I I L-- a L I 62 3/8" 55 #4 37 #8 20 I I-------- L li I I I f 1 -------- I I 1— #50 ----------- --------- I I! I I I --- f } - ----- I 2.8 -------- ----------- 100 10 1 0.1 GRAIN SIZE - mm. +3" % Gravel % Sand Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine 0 23 40 20 13 1 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) 2" 100 11/2" 96 1" 90 3/4" 77 1/2" 62 3/8" 55 #4 37 #8 20 #16 9 #30 5 #50 4 #100 3 #200 2.8 Tested By: John Hubbard 0.01 % Fines Silt 3 Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 25.4000 D85= 22.4615 D60= 11.7706 D50= 7.7695 D30= 3.6273 D15= 1.8161 D10= 1.2904 Cu= 9.12 Cc= 0.87 Classification USCS= GP AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. 0.001 Date: 02/17/2021 Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding PS #1 Colection Well Project No: 3283-004 Figure 0300-006 100 90 80 70 W 60 Z LL Z 50 W U W 40 CL 30 20 10 0 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? FINER PERCENT (X=NO) 2 1/2" 100 2" 94 I 1 1/2" 91 1" 80 3/4" 74 1/2" 67 3/8" 61 #4 49 #8 36 #16 17 #30 7 #50 6 #100 5 #200 4.6 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 36.0793 D85= 30.0189 D60= 9.0646 D50= 5.0645 D30= 1.8884 D15= 1.0802 D10= 0.8121 Cu= 11.16 Cc= 0.48 Classification USCS= GP AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Date: 02/17/2021 Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding PS #1 Colection Well Project No: 3283-004 Figure 0300-007 In 11 Mr. Mark Twede Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 2525 Airpark Drive Redding, CA 96001-2443 Materials Testing, Inc. 8798 Airport Road 865 Cotting Lane, Suite A Redding, California 96002 Vacaville, California 95688 (530) 222-1116, fax 222-1611 (707) 447-4025, fax 447-4143 Client No: 3283-005 Date: 02/24/2021 Subject: City of Redding PS #1 Collection Well Southern Pacific Railroad, Bike Park, ACID LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Dear Mr. Twede: As requested, MATERIALS TESTING, INC. performed laboratory testing services for the samples submitted on 02/16/21. The samples were tested according to the referenced standard test procedures and relate only to the items inspected or tested. Any comments and exceptions are addressed under the Notes or Remarks section. Results included in this submittal package: 9 — Particle Size Distribution Report We appreciate the opportunity to provide our services to you on this project and look forward to providing additional service, as needed, in the future. The results included are for this project only and its intended use. Results are not transferable and shall not be reproduced, except in full, without written permission from MTI. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please contact our office at your convenience. Copies: 1 via mail Respectfully Submitted, MATERIALS STING, INC. Andrew L. King P.E. Principal Engineer Construction Materials Testing and Quality Control Services Soil - Concrete - Asphalt - Steel - Masonry 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � _ _� o NM 10o�N 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 39 28 9 17 3 4 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER c0 N .— M 7t ?k ik ik ik it tk it ik 2" 80 11/2" 80 V, 68 3/4" 61 IdI I I I 3/8" 45 #4 33 #8 25 #16 19 #30 9 #50 6 #100 4 #200 3.7 I I� I I I I LI- 1 NHI� I II I I I I L L- I — — ----------- I I I� I 11 I I I I I I I I I I I II I I� I I I I I I I - T S { --- ----- -------- . }------- - --- ---- { { I II I I I I I I I I I� I I I I I I I I I 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 39 28 9 17 3 4 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 3" 100 2 1/2" 91 2" 80 11/2" 80 V, 68 3/4" 61 1/2" 49 3/8" 45 #4 33 #8 25 #16 19 #30 9 #50 6 #100 4 #200 3.7 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Reddish Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 62.3856 D85= 57.1714 D60= 18.3678 D50= 13.2517 D30= 3.8778 D15= 0.9062 D10= 0.6533 Cu= 28.11 Cc= 1.25 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS#1 Collector Well Redding, California Project No: 3283-005 F Date: 02/24/2021 0300-001 Particle Size Distribution Report o00 _C\1 M� 0 00010 o�o 100 I li I I I I I I I I� I I I I 90 80 Nr70 L1 1 I -------- 1 �__ 1--w s01-- -.f}-- ----- Z 50 lu ry W 40 L } j .} }--- ----- 1 }-- { j 30 .I- - 1 --------- 1 - --- ---- I II I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 10 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0 30 28 17 14 5 6 Material Description SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) Brown Gravel with Silt & Sand (visual) Atterbe_rg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 43.5185 D85= 36.4472 D60= 10.9051 D50= 6.5571 D30= 2.6446 D15= 0.8254 D10= 0.3660 Cu= 29.80 Cc= 1.75 Classification USCS= GW -GM AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. * (no specification provided) Location: Bike Park B-3 Sample Number: 2 Depth: 15.0'- 17.0' Date: 02/24/2021 Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. �r Project: City of Redding - PS#1 Collector Well 1 Redding, California ' aK.wA Project No: 3283_005 Figure 0300-002 SIEVE PERCENT SPEC." i PASS? 2 1/2" 100 2" 95 11/2" 86 1" 79 3/4" 70 1/2" 62 3/8" 58 #4 42 #8 28 #16 18 #30 13 #50 9 #100 7 #200 5.7 Tested By: John Hubbard Particle Size Distribution Report o00 _C\1 M� 0 00010 o�o 100 90 80 70LL1 I L L l -------- 1 L__ w 60 I L I�--1 .I--- t-- - -. I I( I Z 50 lu ry W 40 L } 1 1 .} } } 1 --- ----- }-- { l 30.I------ J- --- ---- I II I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 10 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine ESilt Clay 0 1 6 0 0 39 54 Material Description SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) Brown Sandy Clay (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 0.1899 D85= 0.1500 D60= 0.0841 D50= D30= D15= D10= Cu= cc= Classification USCS= CL AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. * (no specification provided) Location: ACID B-3 Sample Number: 3 Depth: 10.0'- 12.0' Date: 02/24/2021 x Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. T Project: City of Redding - PS#1 Collector Well t Redding, California Pro'ect No: 3283-005 Figure 0300-003 SIEVE PERCENT SPEC." i PASS? 1" 100 3/4" 99 1 /2" 96 3/8" 95 #4 93 #8 93 #16 93 #30 93 #50 93 #100 85 #200 54 Tested By: John Hubbard 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z IW Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report G G O O O 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 0 0 0 4 73 23 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 1/2" 100 3/8" 100 #4 100 #8 100 #16 100 #30 99 #50 86 #100 42 #200 23 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Gray Clayey Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 0.3298 D85= 0.2939 D60= 0.1992 D50= 0.1718 D30= 0.1093 D15= D10= Cu= Cc= Classification USCS= SC AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS#1 Collector Well Redding, California Project No: 3283-005 F Date: 02/24/2021 0300-004 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z w Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � _ _� o NM 10o�N 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 48 22 7 9 7 7 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER c0 N .— M 7t ?k ik ik ik it tk it ik 2" 80 1 1/2" 71 V, 58 3/4" 52 1/2" 43 3/8" 39 #4 30 #8 24 #16 19 #30 16 #50 12 #100 9 #200 7.2 LI-- l L L l -------- I L-- I� I I I I t I I --------- I II I I I I I II I I I .I------- ---- I I l --- ----- I II I } t--{ - - I I l I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 48 22 7 9 7 7 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 3" 100 2 1/2" 80 2" 80 1 1/2" 71 V, 58 3/4" 52 1/2" 43 3/8" 39 #4 30 #8 24 #16 19 #30 16 #50 12 #100 9 #200 7.2 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Reddish Brown Gravel with Silt & Sand (visual) Atterberg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 70.6798 D85= 67.6310 D60= 27.5829 D50= 17.4409 D30= 4.7500 D15= 0.4973 D10= 0.1975 Cu= 139.69 Cc= 4.14 Classification USCS= GW -GM AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS#1 Collector Well Redding, California Project No: 3283-005 F Date: 02/24/2021 0300-005 Particle Size Distribution Report o00 _� 0 00010 o�o 100 I li I I I I I I I I� I I I I 90 80 70 1 l L L l -------- w 60 1 1 L I�-- 1 .............. --- t - - - ----- zZ 50 lu ry a 40 L r 1 1 F - .r 1 --- ----- } t-- { 1 3o.I- ------- - --- ---- 20 — 11 I II I I I I I I I I I I I 10 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE - mm. % Gravel % Sand % Fines +3„ Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0 53 25 6 7 5 4 Material Description SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterbe-rg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 55.2973 D85= 51.5314 D60= 33.4149 D50= 22.6124 D30= 8.8816 D15= 1.5154 D10= 0.5051 Cu= 66.15 Cc= 4.67 Classification USCS= GP AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. * (no specification provided) Location: ACID B-3 Sample Number: 6 Depth: 26.0'- 28.0' Date: 02/24/2021 tet, ,•fi5 f Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS#1 Collector Well t Redding, California Pro'ect No: 3283-005 Figure 0300-006 SIEVE PERCENT SPEC." i PASS? 2 112" 100 2" 84 1 1 /2" 66 1" 52 3/4" 47 1/2" 36 3/8" 31 #4 22 #8 17 #16 14 #30 11 #50 7 #100 5 #200 4.1 Tested By: John Hubbard 100 90 80 70 tr W 60 Z w Z 50 W U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � _ _� o Nm 10o�N 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. % Gravel % Sand % Fines +3„ Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 52 24 6 7 6 L 5 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER c0 I N .— I M 7t ?k ik ik ik it tk it ik I I I NH'1� I Cu= V, 55 Cc= 4.61 I Id I I I I 'I�HH 3/8" 32 AASHTO= #4 24 #8 19 #16 15 #30 12 #50 9 #100 6 #200 5.1 I I I I I I I I I I! I I I I I I) I L) 1 I I I I L L -I I I -------- I I! I I I I I I� I I I I .I--- tI I I I I I I -------- -. I II I I I I I II I I I I I I --- ----- I II I } I I I I II I } { I I I { } F I 1 { --------- I t-- I I } } { { I I { I 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. % Gravel % Sand % Fines +3„ Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt 0 52 24 6 7 6 L 5 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 3" 100 D60= 39.4890 21/2" 70 D30= 2" 70 D15= 1.1800 1 1/2" 59 Cu= V, 55 Cc= 4.61 3/4" 48 Classification 1/2" 37 USCS= GP -GM 3/8" 32 AASHTO= #4 24 #8 19 #16 15 #30 12 #50 9 #100 6 #200 5.1 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Brown Gravel with Silt & Sand (visual) Atterbe-rg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 72.5475 D85= 70.6801 D60= 39.4890 D50= 20.3354 D30= 8.2484 D15= 1.1800 D10= 0.3735 Cu= 105.72 Cc= 4.61 Classification USCS= GP -GM AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS#1 Collector Well Redding, California Project No: 3283-005 F Date: 02/24/2021 0300-007 Particle Size Distribution Report o00 _C\1 M� 0 00010 o�o 100 I li I I I I I I I I� I I I I 90 80 70 L1-- 1 I L L I -------- 1 �__ 1 -� I I I I w 60 - -. - - I f } tL. Z 50 lu ry W 40 L } j .} } j --- ----- }-- { j 30.I------ �--- - --- ---- 20 I 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I, I I I I I I II I I I 7i, I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE - mm. % Gravel % Sand % Fines +3„ Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0 41 29 7 13 6 4 SIEVE PERCENT SPEC." PASS? Material Description SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) Grayish Brown Gravel with Sand (visual) Atterbe-rg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 43.4015 D85= 38.9372 D60= 19.6888 D50= 14.1245 D30= 4.7500 D15= 0.7406 DSO= 0.4399 Cu= 44.76 Cc= 2.61 Classification USCS= GW AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. * (no specification provided) Location: ACID B-3 Sample Number: 8 Depth: 30.0'- 32.0' Date: 02/24/2021 tet, ,Fay Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS#1 Collector Well z Redding, California Project No: 3283-005 Figure 0300-008 i 2 1/2" 100 2" 96 1 1 /2" 84 1" 68 3/4" 59 1 /2" 47 3/8" 40 #4 30 #8 24 #16 19 #30 13 #50 7 #100 5 #200 4.1 Tested By: John Hubbard 100 90 80 70 ry W 60 Z Z 50 w U W 40 a- 30 20 10 0 Particle Size Distribution Report C o00 � _ _� o NM 10o�N 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine FSilt 0 39 27 10 14 5 5 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER c0 N .— M 7t ?k ik ik ik it tk it ik 2" 88 1 1/2" 81 V, 69 3/4" 61 1/2" 50 3/8" 45 #4 34 #8 26 #16 19 #30 12 #50 8 #100 6 #200 5.0 LI- 1 L L- I — — -------- ----------- I II I I I I I ---------- - --------- I I� I I I I I II I I I I I -------- I II I I I I I II I I I I I { I I I I I I I 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE - mm. %+3„ % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine FSilt 0 39 27 10 14 5 5 SIEVE PERCENT SIZE FINER SPEC." PASS? PERCENT (X=NO) 3" 100 21/2" 88 2" 88 1 1/2" 81 V, 69 3/4" 61 1/2" 50 3/8" 45 #4 34 #8 26 #16 19 #30 12 #50 8 #100 6 #200 5.0 Tested By: John Hubbard Material Description Grayish Brown Gravel with Silt & Sand (visual) Atterbe-rg Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D90= 66.4897 D85= 44.6212 D60= 18.4041 D50= 12.7000 D30= 3.4555 D15= 0.8176 D10= 0.4542 Cu= 40.52 Cc= 1.43 Classification USCS= GW -GM AASHTO= Remarks Material tested in accordance with ASTM D6913. Client: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. Project: City of Redding - PS#1 Collector Well Redding, California Project No: 3283-005 F Date: 02/24/2021 0300-009 Appendix .0 Shasta County Department of Resource Management ° ` Environmental Health Division �-! yr *r 1855 Placer Street, Suite 201, Redding, CA 96001. Phone (530) 225-5787, FAX (530) 225-5413 WELL PERMIT PERMIT NUMBER: WTR21-0324 Property Owner: REDDING CITY OF Well Number: MW -1 Site Address: 991 N MARKET ST/RIVER TRAIL Assessor's Parcel #: 112300006000 Work Type: NEW WELL Proposed Use: MONITORING Water District: NONE Well Driller: YELLOW JACKET DRILLING SERVICES LLC The permitted well shall conform to the specifications and provisions of the State of California Water Well Standards Bulletin 74- 81 and Supplement Bulletin 74-90. Deviations from the specifications in this permit shall have prior approval from the Shasta County Environmental Health Division. Driller shall possess a C-57 well drilling license and be currently bonded with Shasta County The well shall be located on the property as shown in the attached drawing prepared by JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP and dated 9/14/2021. Changes shall be approved in advance by the Shasta County Environmental Health Division prior to construction. Please contact the Shasta County Environmental Health Division at 530/225-5787, if you have any questions regarding this permit. Standard Permit Conditions: 1: Seal depth shall be a minimum of 20 feet, unless alternate depth is specified in special conditions below. 2: Maintain all required setbacks. 3: Well is to be located a minimum of 50 feet from any sewer, septic tank, or pit privy and a minimum of 100 feet from any structure or facility designed to allow sewage to percolate into the ground. Special Permit Conditions: PROPOSED WELL TO BE CONSTRUCTED PER DETAIL SUBMITTED BY CONSULTANT. This permit does not authorize the violation of any law or regulations of Shasta County and the State of California. The driller shall submit the well completion report to the Shasta County Environmental Health Division within 60 days of construction. Well permits expiring without well completion report may result in a Notice of Non -Compliance recorded on the parcel. The California Department of Water Resources shall be notified within 60 days of construction pursuant to the Water Code, Section 13751. C Issued by: Effective date: 09/29/2021 CHR STY GI EATH, R.E.H.S Expiration date: 09/29/2023 PERMIT IS NON-RENEWABLE SEE REVERSE REGARDING WELL INSTALLATION INSPECTION NOTIFICATION WELL INSTALLATION INSPECTION The SCEHD shall be notified before a well is to be sealed in accordance with the provisions of Section 8.56.080 of the Shasta County Ordinance Code. The policy regarding notification, prior to sealing the annular space on a well, shall be in accordance with the following schedule. The well driller shall notify SCEHD of the time and location the well seal will be poured. If the well seal is to be poured between 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on a given day, the notification to SCEHD shall be made at least two hours in advance of the time the seal will be poured. However, if the well seal location is over 50 miles from the SCEHD office, the notification shall be four hours in advance. If the well seal is to be poured on a holiday or weekend, the SCEHD shall be notified prior to 3:00 p.m. on the last business day before the holiday or weekend. All notifications shall be made by calling the Shasta County Environmental Health Division at 530/225-5787 no later than 3:00 p.m. or 1:00 P.M. (if over 50 miles) on weekdays. Please let us know if you are ready sooner and we will do our best to arrive as soon as we can. Do not start until the inspector is on-site. IVIODR cavo 1S DYjaCODS LEGEND MW --r APPROXIMATE MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS 0 200 400 600 N APPROXIMATE SCALE 1"=400' FIGURE I Proposed Monitoring Well Locations City of - e •d • Pump Station No. I Replacement 10 25 321 0 :313 11111 Bike Pa ift r , Sie MonitoTing MH (Typ UP m ENT GRGUT FR�M 0 TO TO FEET NCH: 9,�.H 90 PVC t7A5':N-,5 --, i i ...... f ! ...... ' t- 1 , , "! .................. 9 To 14 FEET 4EitbNITE SEAL ............... ...... FROM 10 TO 12 FEEll'' INCH 0. 060 - 1INCH, 10-107TED PVC RUWAV TO -43-FEET- EU, POCK, TANCA $AND AND URAVEL di By W BLEND 0 -43- F EU V , ' M-0sp — - .. - .-. _ ............ ....... I ......... .... ....... 2 -,: NCI I LCCk]N0 WELL PLUG -0— CONT FTE :RUN MANTLE W: -H CGVER, HUM FTET AOGI-t7C H: -Z. VHUEL _41 WEIL CAUNG1 lw'l-1 IF'IcK 3/4' GRAWEL LAYER Monitoring We,11 Surface Completion Rodney Thurston From: Twede, Mark/RDD <Mark.Twede@jacobs.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 1:47 PM To: Rodney Thurston; Shasta County Environmental Health Cc: Hein, Kimberly; Alward, Ryan,- Bral, Kevin/DEN Subject: Soil boring permit - Revised location Attachments: ShastaCo_well-permit-application-MW1.pdf, ShastaCo_well-permit-application- MW2.pdf; ShastaCo_well-permit-application-MW3.pdf; ShastaCo_well-permit- application-MW4.pdf; ShastaCo_well-permit-application-MW5.pdf; MW Construction.pdf Q EXTERNAL SENDER: Do not follow links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Rodney, We are submitting permit applications for five new monitoring wells on the north side of the Sacramento River off of North Market Street. The monitoring wells will be used for future well pump tests to evaluate hydraulic characteristics, and are not anticipated to have any contamination. The applications are attached, along with a schematic of the monitoring well construction that is applicable for all five monitoring wells. The wells are located on two adjacent properties, both owned by the City of Redding. The wells may be moved slightly in the field based on ground conditions, but will remain on the same property parcels near the approximate locations shown. Please contact me by email when ready for fee payment. Thanks, Mark Twede, G.E. Jacobs Geotechnical Engineer 530.229.3320 direct 530.215.9265 mobile NOTICE - This communication may contain confidential and privileged information that is for the sole use of th intended recipient. i:ny vie ving, copying or distribution of, or reliance on this message by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. if you have received Ct is message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. 1 SHASTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION 1855 Placer Street, Suite 201, Redding, CA 96001 Telephone (53 )0) 225-5787 FAX (530) 225-5413 ehd.co.shasta.ca.us APPLICATION FOR WATER WELL PERMIT032q- APPLICANT (Must be licensed contractor or property owne Name Jacobs Engineering Group Mailinq Address 2525 Airoark Drive City, State, Zip Code Redding CA 96002 Telephone 530-215-9265 EMail Address mark.twedej2'acobs.com PROPERTY OWNER Name City of Reddina Mailing Address 777 Cypress Avenue WELL CONTRACTOR Name Yellow Jacket Drillinci Services, LLC Mailinq Address 9460 Lucas Ranch Road City; State, Zip Code Rancho Cucamoncia CA 91730 Telephone 909-544-1135 EMall Address cleanCa)vidrillincl.com License # 1034407 PLOT PLAN is to be submitted on 8% x 11 sheet according to the Sample Plot Plan instructions and show all requested information. DIRECTIONS TO LOCATE PROPERTY shall be provided on the back of this application or the back of the plot plan. Directions must be adequate for staff to locate property. WELL NUMBER (if applicable): MW -1 0 - 010no Mill• Proof of legal creation is required on undeveloped parcels. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY received by RT_ — Date: I received Receipt# K 2-1 6�5-6,' Associated Applications and Projects: Zoning/General Plan Legal Creation verified by: Date: Pre -Permit Inspection Required? E]Yes DNo By: Date: Notes: Tinal Inspection By�_ U Date� W4W Citv Reddinci Assessor's Parcel Number 112-031T-006-000 s0c) LOT SIZE x - oracreage 6.53 TYPE OF WORK X New Well El Deepening ElDestroying El Reconditioning F-1 Domestic .............................. 20 foot minimum El Agricultural (Proposed Diameter ") ...... 20 foot minimum ❑ Industrial. . . .... ................ ...... 50 foot minimum ❑ Public ....... .............. 50 foot minimum Xx Monitoring ................. ..... Varies, attach schematic. El Other ........ Varies, attach schematic. * Alternate seal depth may be required by site conditions or as noted in conditions below. Minimum thickness of annular space seal is 2 inches. SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR (if applicant is contractor) I certify that I am licensed under the provisions of Division 3, Chapter 9 of the Business and Professions Code, and my license is in full force and effect. License # 1034407 1 certify that I have read this application and the above information is correct. I agree to comply with all Shasta County Ordir and State Laws relating to this construction. 09/14/21 SIGNATURE—OF CONTRACTOR DATE SIGNATURE OF OWNER (required on all applications) I certify that I have read this application and the above information is correct. I agree to comply with all Shasta County Ordinances and State Laws relating to this construction, and hereby authorize representatives of SHASTA COUNTY to enter the property for inspection purposes. By signing this application 1 agree to defend, indemnify, and hold the county harmless from any claim, action, or proceeding brought to attack, set aside, void or annul the county's approval of this application. I understand that the Shasta County Department of Resource Management, in releasing this permit for the immediate construction of a water well does not guarantee the issuance of any other development permits or land use request for this property, "/ 09/14/21 SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE WELL COMPLETION REPORT SHALL BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO FINAL APPROVAL OF WELL. Completion Notice Received: Well Depth: 43' Casing Depft, Est. G.P.m. inspe 11 cti I o 11 n Notes 11 61' Dib!TIJ�� June 2020 Shasta County Department of Resource Management Environmental Health Division 1855 Placer Street, Suite 201, Redding, CA 96001. Phone (530) 225-5787, FAX (530) 225-5413 WELL PERMIT PERMIT NUMBER: WTR21-0325 Property Owner: REDDING CITY OF Well Number: MW -2 Site Address: 991 N MARKET ST/RIVER TRAIL Water District: NONE Assessor's Parcel #: 112300006000 Work Type: NEW WELL Proposed Use: MONITORING Well Driller: YELLOW JACKET DRILLING SERVICES LLC The permitted well shall conform to the specifications and provisions of the State of California Water Well Standards Bulletin 74- 81 and Supplement Bulletin 74-90. Deviations from the specifications in this permit shall have prior approval from the Shasta County Environmental Health Division. Driller shall possess a C-57 well drilling license and be currently bonded with Shasta County. The well shall be located on the property as shown in the attached drawing prepared by JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP and dated 9/14/2021. Changes shall be approved in advance by the Shasta County Environmental Health Division prior to construction. Please contact the Shasta County Environmental Health Division at 530/225-5787, if you have any questions regarding this permit. Standard Permit Conditions.- 1: onditions: 1: Seal depth shall be a minimum of 20 feet, unless alternate depth is specified in special conditions below. 2: Maintain all required setbacks. 3: Well is to be located a minimum of 50 feet from any sewer, septic tank, or pit privy and a minimum of 100 feet from any structure or facility designed to allow sewage to percolate into the ground. Special Permit Conditions: PROPOSED WELL TO BE CONSTRUCTED PER DETAIL SUBMITTED BY CONSULTANT. This permit does not authorize the violation of any law or regulations of Shasta County and the State of California. The driller shall submit the well completion report to the Shasta County Environmental Health Division within 60 days of construction. Well permits expiring without well completion report may result in a Notice of Non -Compliance recorded on the parcel. The California Department of Water R ources shall be notified within 60 days of construction pursuant to the Water Code, Section 13751. /4 Issued by: Effective date: 09/29/2021 CHR TY GILB ATH, R.E.H.S Expiration date: 09/29/2023 PERMIT IS NON-RENEWABLE SEE REVERSE REGARDING WELL INSTALLATION INSPECTION NOTIFICATION WELL INSTALLATION INSPECTION The SCEHD shall be notified before a well is to be sealed in accordance with the provisions of Section 8.56.080 of the Shasta County Ordinance Code. The policy regarding notification, prior to sealing the annular space on a well, shall be in accordance with the following schedule. The well driller shall notify SCEHD of the time and location the well seal will be poured. If the well seal is to be poured between 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on a given day, the notification to SCEHD shall be made at least two hours in advance of the time the seal will be poured. However, if the well seal location is over 50 miles from the SCEHD office, the notification shall be four hours in advance. If the well seal is to be poured on a holiday or weekend, the SCEHD shall be notified prior to 3:00 p.m. on the last business day before the holiday or weekend. All notifications shall be made by calling the Shasta County Environmental Health Division at 530/225-5787 no later than 3:00 p.m. or 1:00 p.m. (if over 50 miles) on weekdays. Please let us know if you are ready sooner and we will do our best to arrive as soon as we can. Do not start until the inspector is on-site. O 200 400 800 LEGEND pU APPROXIMATE SCALE 1"=400' \~-� FIGURE 1 Proposed Monitoring Well Locations near Bike Park City of Redding Pump Station No. I Replacement (2 51 101 4 5 50 Park Site Monitoring Well (Typ) CEMENT GRCU7 FROM 0 TO 1.0 FEET ............. iNCH' 9,C_H F3G4 PVC 'CAS'"IN'D FROM oll TO 14FEET .............. -------- - 9 EN TO N I T E , 2, E A', - FROM 112 7,0 12 1 --LFT SL07rED PVC .......... ---------- FE ED— SAND AND 0"RAVE:L �P.,Y 2 BLEh�D .......... . . . . .. . . .. . . . I I [ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V , , , , - , , , - * , 14—P.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . J, 11 * * I - I I I I - - - - - I--,.-..-, . .- . -1 . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . 9ELL CASING 2 N C 11 L C C K I N,3' PON 0 A I r.,C, CONCAF TF IRON MAN--rj--E W___H CGVER- MUS -1 MEET MG147C H2,20 tMEEL LWGIN-5 IGH :FLICK GRAWEL LAYEr� Monitoring We]l Surface Completion Rodney Thurston From: Twede, Mark/RDD <Mark.Twede@jacobs.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 1:47 PM To: Rodney Thurston; Shasta County Environmental Health Cc: Hein, Kimberly; Alward, Ryan; Bral, Kevin/DEN Subject: Soil boring permit - Revised location Attachments: ShastaCo_well-permit-application-MW1.pdf; ShastaCo_well-permit-application- MW2.pdf, ShastaCo_well-permit-application-MW3.pdf; ShastaCo_well-permit- application-MW4.pdf; ShastaCo_well-permit-application-MW5.pdf; MW Construction.pdf Qi EXTERNAL SENDER: Do not follow links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Rodney, We are submitting permit applications for five new monitoring wells on the north side of the Sacramento River off of North Market Street. The monitoring wells will be used for future well pump tests to evaluate hydraulic characteristics, and are not anticipated to have any contamination. The applications are attached, along with a schematic of the monitoring well construction that is applicable for all five monitoring wells. The wells are located on two adjacent properties, both owned by the City of Redding. The wells may be moved slightly in the field based on ground conditions, but will remain on the same property parcels near the approximate locations shown. Please contact me by email when ready for fee payment. Thanks, Mark Twede, G.E. Jacobs Geotechnical Engineer 530.229.3320 direct 530.215.9265 mobile NOTICE - This communication may contain confidential and privileged information that is for the sole use of the intenders recipient. Jany vi.^_:ving, copying or distribution of, or reliance on this message by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. If you have rec_eh.ed [I i::> message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. 1 SHASTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION 1855 Placer Street, Suite 201, Redding, CA 96001 Telephone (530) 225-5787 FAX (530) 225-5413 ehd.co.shasta.ca.us APPLICATION t be licensed contractor or propertym JacobsName •: 0 • • Mailing Address 2525 &rpark Drive City, State, • Code Redding CA 96002 Telephone 530-215-9265 PROPERTY OWNER Name City •-!!. ! Mailing Address 777 Cypress Avenue City, State, Zip Code R'.•! n.! CA 96002•!� Telephone 530-605-6456 ! ' ` •' 1 ��t PLOT PLAN is to be submitted on 8'/2 x 17 sheet according to the Sample Plot Plan instructions and show all requestedinformation. DIRECTIONS TO LOCATE PROPERTY shall be provided on the back of this application or the back of the plot plan. Directions must be adequate for staff to locate property. WELL NUMBER (If applicable): MW -2 PUBLIC WATER AVAILABLE El Yes ®No If YES, public water system name: Proof of legal creation is required on undeveloped parcels. Application received by F If Date: ' ") q- 2_ s N7• received Receipt# IZ J S Associated Applications and Projects: I Plan Legal Creation verified by: Date: Pre -Permit Inspection Required? ❑Yes ❑No Dater Permit Issued By-, � Jk �W%M�0310ffi' �F, Date: Final Inspection By:- , - - " Date:jf!� Inspection Notes: - LOCATION OF otes:_ i ` • PROPERTY Street or '..• 991 N Market Street ZP-WIM Redding a!l..i• Assessor's Parcel Number 11 2:PW-006-000 -A 30,0 LOT SIZE x oracreage 6.53 TYPE OF © New Well ElDeepening DDestroying IlReconclitioning ❑ Domestic ...... ::............. ......... 20 foot minimum ❑ Agricultural (Proposed Diameter ")...... 20 foot minimum ❑ Industrial ....... , ............. ..50 foot minimum Public. . .............. 50 foot minimum Fx Monitoring ............ ..... , . , .. Varies, attach schematic. ❑ Other... Varies, attach schematic. Alternate seal depth may be required'by site conditions or as noted in conditions below. Minimum thickness of annular space seal is 2 inches. SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR (if applicant is contractor) I certify that I am licensed under the provisions of Division 3, Chapter 9 of the Business and Professions Code, and my license is in full force and effect. License # 1034407 1 certify that I have read this application and the above information is correct. I agree to comply with all Shasta County Ordina and State Laws relating to this construction. 09/14/21 SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR DATE SIGNATURE OF OWNER (required on all applications) I certify that l have read this application and the above - information is correct. 'I agree to comply with all Shasta County Ordinances and State Laws relating to this construction, and hereby authorize representatives of SHASTA COUNTY to enter the property for inspection purposes. By signing this application 1 agree to defend, indemnify, and hold the county harmless from any claim, action, or proceeding brought to attack, set aside, void or annul the county's approval of this application. I understand that the Shasta County Department of Resource Management, in releasing this permit for the immediate construction of a water well does not guarantee the issuance of any other development permits or land use request for this property. 09/14/21 SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE WELL COMPLETION REPORT SHALL BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO FINAL APPROVAL OF WELL: Est. G:P June 2020 , , �?F, Shasta County Department of Resource Management Environmental Health Division e+ +� 1855 Placer Street, Suite 201, Redding, CA 96001. Phone (530) 225-5787, FAX (530) 225-5413 WELL PERMIT PERMIT NUMBER: WTR21-0326 Property Owner: REDDING CITY OF Well Number: MW -3 Site Address: 971 N MARKET ST/ RIVER TRAIL Assessor's Parcel #: 112300005000 Work Type: NEW WELL Proposed Use: MONITORING Water District: CITY OF REDDING Well Driller: YELLOW JACKET DRILLING SERVICES LLC The permitted well shall conform to the specifications and provisions of the State of California Water Well Standards Bulletin 74- 81 and Supplement Bulletin 74-90. Deviations from the specifications in this permit shall have prior approval from the Shasta County Environmental Health Division. Driller shall possess a C-57 well drilling license and be currently bonded with Shasta County. The well shall be located on the property as shown in the attached drawing prepared by JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP and dated 9/14/2021. Changes shall be approved in advance by the Shasta County Environmental Health Division prior to construction. Please contact the Shasta County Environmental Health Division at 530/225-5787, if you have any questions regarding this permit. Standard Permit Conditions: 1: Seal depth shall be a minimum of 20 feet, unless alternate depth is specified in special conditions below. 2: Maintain all required setbacks. 3: Well is to be located a minimum of 50 feet from any sewer, septic tank, or pit privy and a minimum of 100 feet from any structure or facility designed to allow sewage to percolate into the ground. Special Permit Conditions: 1: PROPOSED WELL TO BE CONSTRUCTED PER DETAIL SUBMITTED BY CONSULTANT. This permit does not authorize the violation of any law or regulations of Shasta County and the State of California. The driller shall submit the well completion report to the Shasta County Environmental Health Division within 60 days of construction. Well permits expiring without well completion report may result in a Notice of Non -Compliance recorded on the parcel. The California Department of Water Resources shall be notified within 60 days of construction pursuant to the Water Code, Section 13751. Issued by: �4Effective date: 09/29/2021 CHRISTY GILB ATH, R.E.H.S Expiration date: 09/29/2023 PERMIT IS NON-RENEWABLE SEE REVERSE REGARDING WELL INSTALLATION INSPECTION NOTIFICATION WELL INSTALLATION INSPECTION The SCEHD shall be notified before a well is to be sealed in accordance with the provisions of Section 8.56.080 of the Shasta County Ordinance Code. The policy regarding notification, prior to sealing the annular space on a well, shall be in accordance with the following schedule. The well driller shall notify SCEHD of the time and location the well seal will be poured. If the well seal is to be poured between 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on a given day, the notification to SCEHD shall be made at least two hours in advance of the time the seal will be poured. However, if the well seal location is over 50 miles from the SCEHD office, the notification shall be four hours in advance. If the well seal is to be poured on a holiday or weekend, the SCEHD shall be notified prior to 3:00 p.m. on the last business day before the holiday or weekend. All notifications shall be made by calling the Shasta County Environmental Health Division at 530/225-5787 no later than 3:00 p.m. or 1:00 p.m. (if over 50 miles) on weekdays. Please let us know if you are ready sooner and we will do our best to arrive as soon as we can. Do not start until the inspector is on-site. p, Modifications by Jacobs LEGEND MW -1 APPROXIMATE MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS 1 200 400 e{1 APPROXIMATE SCALE I"=400' FIGURE 1 Proposed Monitoring Well Locations City of - a e e Pump Station No. 1 Replacement Q 51 1121 11111 like Park Site Monitering We[ll (Typ) GRGU7 FROM. 0 TO 10 FEET 2 -INCH SCS 130 PVC CASM5 F M R 'To, 14 FEET .................. SEAL A FROM 12 TO 12 FEET -INCH 0.060-!NCHi SL07TEC PVC FE F_-1 ....... AM ..'annys, POCK- TANCA SANC AND URAVEL 4 UY 12 BLEW ........................................ ......... __-, i WELL PLLU 1-4-- CONCAFTE 4111111 L MAN-il_-_E W CC,'�`R_ HEFT 06G147C �4ZL-- YVIEEL LUIGINC, �l - it M C H M C f N Ui jdsl 7 FELL CASINS Pon f5t , 1�, N G. 1-1 1 H, I (: K Q 3/4' ORAWEL DYER=� Monitoring We]l Surface Completion Rodney Thurston From: Twede, Mark/RDD <Mark.Twede@jacobs.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 1:47 PM To: Rodney Thurston; Shasta County Environmental Health Cc: Hein, Kimberly; Alward, Ryan; Bral, Kevin/DEN Subject: Soil boring permit - Revised location Attachments: ShastaCo well-permit-application-MW1.pdf; ShastaCo_well-permit-application- MW2.pdf; ShastaCo_well-permit-application-MW3.pdf; ShastaCo_well-permit- application-MW4.pdf; ShastaCo_well-permit-application-MW5.pdf; MW Construction.pdf Q EXTERNAL SENDER: Do not follow links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Rodney, We are submitting permit applications for five new monitoring wells on the north side of the Sacramento River off of North Market Street. The monitoring wells will be used for future well pump tests to evaluate hydraulic characteristics, and are not anticipated to have any contamination. The applications are attached, along with a schematic of the monitoring well construction that is applicable for all five monitoring wells. The wells are located on two adjacent properties, both owned by the City of Redding. The wells may be moved slightly in the field based on ground conditions, but will remain on the same property parcels near the approximate locations shown. Please contact me by email when ready for fee payment. Thanks, Mark Twede, G.E. Jacobs Geotechnical Engineer 530.229.3320 direct 530.215.9265 mobile N )TTCE - This communication may contain confidential and privileged information that is for the sole usc2 of the intended recjpicn`i, /',ny vie�rling, copying or distribution of, or reliance on this message by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. If you have receive;f O'Ii message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to thc: message and deleting it frorn your computer, SHASTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION 1855 Placer Street, Suite 201, Redding, CA 96001 Telephone (530) 225-5787 FAX (530) 225-5413 ehd.co.shasta.ca.us APPLICATION FOR WATER WELL PERMIT WTR-# 2 ( - 03Z (o RI r 15001=-•rxerl 6 serz7M.-r-1 . ffrf� in r) h q r K! ffl I W kJ I[Q 0 ■ -.ft] a am- rom me WIA 1110 0 0 kh F. 9 ZED I RN - Assessor's Parcel Number 112.-.M-005-000 Boo LOTSIZE -x_ oracreage 10.62 PROPERTY OWNE TYPE OF WORK Name Gitv of Reddlhcl ell 11 Mailing Address 777 Cypress Avenue Varies, attach schematic. City, Statei Zip Code Redding, CA 96002 PROPOSED , Telephone 530-605-0456 El Domestic... .. EMail Address kmaire(a-)citvofreddinci.orci El Aaricultural (P -o 10� 119F171IRREM is - - Mailing Address 9460 Lucas Ranch Road City, State, Zip Code Rancho Cucamoncia CA 91730 Telephone 909-544-1135 ElMail Address dean(cDvid rill inq.corn License # 1034407 PLOT PLAN is to be submitted on 8% x 11 sheet according to the Sample Plot Plan instructions and show all requested information. DIRECTIONS TO LOCATE PROPERTY shall be provided on the back of this application or the back of the plot plan. Directions must be adequate for staff to locate property. . . .r• .- - I I Proof of legal creation is required on undeveloped parcels tion received by 91- Date: q' I Lf 41 - 2�4 received Receipt# P -,Z- I 6se' Applications and Projects: eral Plan Legal Creation verified by: . Date: Permit Inspection Required? E]Yes E]No Date: Notes: feepening FIDestroying El Reconditioning E REQUIRED ANNULAR SEAL DEPTH ........ ...... 20 foot minimum nosed Diameter 11) 20 foot minimum F-1 Industrial ........ ...................... 50 foot minimum El Public .... ......................... . . . 50 foot minimum Xx Monitoring ...................... Varies, attach schematic. 11 Other ...... I . Varies, attach schematic. * Alternate seal depth may be required by site conditions or as noted in conditions below. Minimum thickness of annular space seal is 2 inches. SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR (if applicant is contractor) I certify that I am licensed under the provisions of Division 3, Chapter 9 of the Business and Professions Code, and my license is in full force and effect. License # 1034407 (;certify that I have read this application and the above information is correct. I agree to comply with all Shasta County Ordina and State Laws relating 0 this construction. 09/14/21 SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR DATE SIGNATURE OF OWNER (required on all applications) I certify that I have read this application and the above information is correct. I agree to comply with all Shasta County Ordinances and State Laws relating to this construction, and hereby authorize representatives of SHASTA COUNTY to enter the property for inspection purposes. By signing this application I agree to defend, indemnify, and hold the county harmless from any claim, action, or proceeding brought to attack, set aside, void or annul the county's approval of this application. I understand that the Shasta County Department of Resource Management, in releasing this permit for the immediate construction of a water well does not guarantee the issuance of any other development permits or land use request for this property. art K PE 09/14/21 SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE Permit issued By: J �j, '�= Rf�,ff Date: WELL COMPLETION REPORT SHALL BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO Final Inspection BU- Date: FINAL APPROVAL OF WELL Completion Notice Received: Well Depth: 43 Casing Depth: ® _ .,-� �-- W, - =.- June 2026 Shasta County Department of Resource Management Environmental Health Division 1855 Placer Street, Suite 201, Redding, CA 96001. Phone (530) 225-5787, FAX (530) 225-5413 4� WELL PERMIT PERMIT NUMBER: WTR21-0327 Property Owner: REDDING CITY OF Well Number: MW -4 Site Address: 971 N MARKET ST/ RIVER TRAIL Water District: CITY OF REDDING Assessor's Parcel #: 112300005000 Work Type: NEW WELL Proposed Use: MONITORING Well Driller: YELLOW JACKET DRILLING SERVICES LLC The permitted well shall conform to the specifications and provisions of the State of California Water Well Standards Bulletin 74- 81 and Supplement Bulletin 74-90. Deviations from the specifications in this permit shall have prior approval from the Shasta County Environmental Health Division. Driller shall possess a C-57 well drilling license and be currently bonded with Shasta County. The well shall be located on the property as shown in the attached drawing prepared by JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP and dated 9/14/2021. Changes shall be approved in advance by the Shasta County Environmental Health Division prior to construction. Please contact the Shasta County Environmental Health Division at 530/225-5787, if you have any questions regarding this permit. Standard Permit Conditions: 1: Seal depth shall be a minimum of 20 feet, unless alternate depth is specified in special conditions below. 2: Maintain all required setbacks. 3: Well is to be located a minimum of 50 feet from any sewer, septic tank, or pit privy and a minimum of 100 feet from any structure or facility designed to allow sewage to percolate into the ground. Special Permit Conditions: PROPOSED WELL TO BE CONSTRUCTED PER DETAIL SUBMITTED BY CONSULTANT. This permit does not authorize the violation of any law or regulations of Shasta County and the State of California. The driller shall submit the well completion report to the Shasta County Environmental Health Division within 60 days of construction. Well permits expiring without well completion report may result in a Notice of Non -Compliance recorded on the parcel. The California Department of Water Resources shall be notified within 60 days of construction pursuant to the Water Code, Section 13751. Issued by: 0�; Effective date: 09/29/2021 CHRISTY GILB ATH, R.E.H.S Expiration date: 09/29/2023 PERMIT IS NON-RENEWABLE SEE REVERSE REGARDING WELL INSTALLATION INSPECTION NOTIFICATION WELL INSTALLATION INSPECTION The SCEHD shall be notified before a well is to be sealed in accordance with the provisions of Section 8.56.080 of the Shasta County Ordinance Code. The policy regarding notification, prior to sealing the annular space on a well, shall be in accordance with the following schedule. The well driller shall notify SCEHD of the time and location the well seal will be poured. If the well seal is to be poured between 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on a given day, the notification to SCEHD shall be made at least two hours in advance of the time the seal will be poured. However, if the well seal location is over 50 miles from the SCEHD office, the notification shall be four hours in advance. If the well seal is to be poured on a holiday or weekend, the SCEHD shall be notified prior to 3:00 p.m. on the last business day before the holiday or weekend. All notifications shall be made by calling the Shasta County Environmental Health Division at 530/225-5787 no later than 3:00 p.m. or 1:00 p.m. (if over 50 miles) on weekdays. Please let us know if you are ready sooner and we will do our best to arrive as soon as we can. Do not start until the inspector is on-site. FIGURE 1 • e. - a r s i' a • VAT I C77, A -j 10 � 0 4.5 50 B,ike Park Site Monitoring Well (Typ CEMENT GROUT FRAM 0 TO 10 FEET IN 4 N15 FROM TO L4 FEET 1. NTO "EA, 9 N I I E 13 FROM 12 TO L2 ISLET -,2 - INCH 01. OFi-0 - ,'E'vimrt SL07TED PVC FROM 1 A- - T() .................. TANCA SANO AND ORAVE-1 4 BY 2 BL IVD --.-F ROM - .2- �T 0 -A.� FE -:-.T,..........,., 2,,:NCII LCCKINS !AQN-T0FlJT<, YELL PUA'.' d C 4F TfT P R 0 N IV P N E W C C' rV HjJ57 MEET 0(614TC H�Z- 4�IEEL LWIGIN-5 ,rr-. 1. [j4l-,l-1 iFj(:K V4 ' ORAVEL LAY:-:�-� Monitoring Weil Surface Completion Rodney Thurston From: Twede, Mark/RDD <Mark.Twede@jacobs.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 1:47 PM To: Rodney Thurston; Shasta County Environmental Health Cc: Hein, Kimberly; Alward, Ryan; Bral, Kevin/DEN Subject: Soil boring permit - Revised location Attachments: ShastaCo_well-permit-application-MW1.pdf, ShastaCo_well-permit-application- MW2.pdf; ShastaCo_well-permit-application-MW3.pdf; ShastaCo_well-permit- application-MW4.pdf; ShastaCo_well-permit-application-MW5.pdf; MW Construction.pdf Q EXTERNAL SENDER: Do not follow links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Rodney, We are submitting permit applications for five new monitoring wells on the north side of the Sacramento River off of North Market Street. The monitoring wells will be used for future well pump tests to evaluate hydraulic characteristics, and are not anticipated to have any contamination. The applications are attached, along with a schematic of the monitoring well construction that is applicable for all five monitoring wells. The wells are located on two adjacent properties, both owned by the City of Redding. The wells may be moved slightly in the field based on ground conditions, but will remain on the same property parcels near the approximate locations shown. Please contact me by email when ready for fee payment. Thanks, Mark Twede, G.E. Jacobs Geotechnical Engineer 530.229.3320 direct 530.215.9265 mobile NOTICE - This communication may contain confidential and privileged information that is far the sole use of the intenders recipient. iirr vic%vi ng, copying or distribution of, or reliance on this message by unintended recipients is strictiy prohibited, if you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer, 1 SHASTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION 1855 Placer Street, Suite 201, Redding, CA 96001 Telephone (530) 225-5787 FAX (530) 225-5413 ehd,co.shasta.ca.us APPLICATION FOR WATER WELL PERMIT WTR#21- 037-7 APPLICANT (Must be licensed contractor or property owne Name Jacobs Enaineering Group Mailing Address 2525 Airpark Drive City, State, Zip Code Redding CA 96002 Telephone 530-215-9265 EMail Address mark.twedeft_iacobs.corn PROPERTY OWNER Name City of Reddina Mailing Address 777 Cypress Avenue City, State, Zip Code Redding, CA 96002 Telephone 530-605-0456 EMail Address kmaireCokbofireddinci.ora IN El l- g9l, I JA 0 M M72 Myf- License # -1034407 PLOT PLAN is to be submitted on 81/2 x 11 sheet according to the Sample Plot Plan instructions;and show all requested information. DIRECTIONS TO LOCATE PROPERTY shall be provided on the back of this application or the back of the plot plan. Directions must be adequate for staff to locate property. PUBLIC WATER AVAILABLE E]Yes ®No If YES, public water system name: Proof of legal creation is required on undeveloped parcels. I FOR OFFICE USE ONLY by 9 T — Date: -1 -2-1 J Receipt # R2-1675-6 I Applications and Projects: neral Plan Creation verified by: Permit Inspection Required? E]Yes E]No Date: Notes: LOCATION OF PROPERTY Street or Road 971 N Market Street City Bg•dinq Assessor's Parcel Number 11 2-M-005-000 goo LOTSIZE —x_ oracreage.10.62 TYPE OF WORK X New Well 0 Deepening ElDestroying El Reconditioning 0 Domestic ...... ......... ............ 20 foot minimum 1:1 Agricultural (Proposed Diameter_")... ... 20 foot minimum 11 Industrial ...............................50 foot minimum El Public ................................. 50 foot minimum nx Monitoring . ....... Varies, attach schematic. El Other ...... Varies, attach schematic. * Alternate seal depth may be required by site conditions oras noted in conditions below. Minimum thickness of annular space seal is 2 inches. SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR (if applicant is contractor) I certify that I am licensed under the provisions of Division 3, Chapter 9 of the Business and Professions Code, and my license is in full force and effect. License # 1034407 1 certify that I have read this application and the above information is correct. I agree to comply with all Shasta County Ordi]p and State Laws relating to this construction. 09/14/21 SIGNATURE -OF CONTRACTOR DATE SIGNATURE OF OWNER (required on all applications) I certify that I have read this application and the above information is correct. I agree to comply with all Shasta County Ordinances and State Laws relating to this construction, and hereby authorize representatives of SHASTA COUNTY to enter the property for inspection purposes. By signing this application I agree to defend, indemnify, and hold the county harmless from any claim, action, or proceeding brought to attack, set aside, void or annul the county's approval of this application. I understand that the Shasta County Department of Resource Management, in releasing this permit for the immediate construction of a water well does not guarantee the issuance of any other development permits or land use request for this property, 1.. CIINIIK'd"MI11 PE- fy et 09/14/21 SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE Date: !YJ-4�Z( WELL COMPLETION REPORT SHALL BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO Date: FINAL APPROVAL OF WELL. Well Depth: 43° Casing Depth: Est. G.P.M. 6" Diameter Boring June 2020 Shasta County Department of Resource Management Environmental Health Division cis{ e�4 1855 Placer Street, Suite 201, Redding, CA 96001. Phone (530) 225-5787, FAX (530) 225-5413 WELL PERMIT PERMIT NUMBER: WTR21-0328 Property Owner: REDDING CITY OF Well Number: MW -5 Site Address: 971 N MARKET ST/ RIVER TRAIL Water District: CITY OF REDDING Assessor's Parcel #: 112300005000 Work Type: NEW WELL Proposed Use: MONITORING Well Driller: YELLOW JACKET DRILLING SERVICES LLC The permitted well shall conform to the specifications and provisions of the State of California Water Well Standards Bulletin 74- 81 and Supplement Bulletin 74-90. Deviations from the specifications in this permit shall have prior approval from the Shasta County Environmental Health Division. Driller shall possess a C-57 well drilling license and be currently bonded with Shasta County. The well shall be located on the property as shown in the attached drawing prepared by JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP and dated 9/14/2021. Changes shall be approved in advance by the Shasta County Environmental Health Division prior to construction. Please contact the Shasta County Environmental Health Division at 530/225-5787, if you have any questions regarding this permit. Standard Permit Conditions: 1: Seal depth shall be a minimum of 20 feet, unless alternate depth is specified in special conditions below. 2: Maintain all required setbacks. 3: Well is to be located a minimum of 50 feet from any sewer, septic tank, or pit privy and a minimum of 100 feet from any structure or facility designed to allow sewage to percolate into the ground. Special Permit Conditions: 1: PROPOSED WELL/BORING TO BE CONSTRUCTED/DESTROYED PER DETAIL SUBMITTED BY CONSULTANT. This permit does not authorize the violation of any law or regulations of Shasta County and the State of California. The driller shall submit the well completion report to the Shasta County Environmental Health Division within 60 days of construction. Well permits expiring without well completion report may result in a Notice of Non -Compliance recorded on the parcel. The California Department of Water Resources shall be notified within 60 days of construction pursuant to the Water Code, Section 13751. 1 Issued by: Effective date: 09/29/2021 CHRISTY G L ATH, R. .H.S Expiration date: 09/29/2023 PERMIT IS NON-RENEWABLE SEE REVERSE REGARDING WELL INSTALLATION INSPECTION NOTIFICATION WELL INSTALLATION INSPECTION The SCEHD shall be notified before a well is to be sealed in accordance with the provisions of Section 8.56.080 of the Shasta County Ordinance Code. The policy regarding notification, prior to sealing the annular space on a well; shall be in accordance with the following schedule. The well driller shall notify SCEHD of the time and location the well seal will be poured. If the well seal is to be poured between 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on a given day, the notification to SCEHD shall be made at least two hours in advance of the time the seal will be poured. However, if the well seal location is over 50 miles from the SCEHD office, the notification shall be four hours in advance. If the well seal is to be poured on a holiday or weekend, the SCEHD shall be notified prior to 3:00 p.m. on the last business day before the holiday or weekend. All notifications shall be made by calling the Shasta County Environmental Health Division at 530/225-5787 no later than 3:00 p.m. or 1:00 p.m. (if over 50 miles) on weekdays. Please let us know if you are ready sooner and we will do our best to arrive as soon as we can. Do not start until the inspector is on-site. p, Modifications by Jacobs LEGEND MW -1 -�� APPROXIMATE MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS 0 200 400 600 N APPROXIMATE SCALE 1"=400' az� City of Redding Pump Station No. 1 Replacement 4 (23 1, - , " " . " , A. _1 __1111, t 11-1_111-111-_ -1--.111-1 ... 45 ............ ... ........ 50--,- 2 - : NO � LCCK 1,1%0 HQN: 701711 NO WELL PLL.,'C, H41:11 111147_�_111111.4 A111111�1 I;,- IV -'H f._.Ps_ 7AGN MAISNIE W„ -H C(V��P, MUS- IJE-FT 06G1.t'TC 1,122. OHL LOMC'IN NCH MCN 11;_:94 [NIL 6- J&H OVICK 3/4' 'fin WELL CASINT: iiiiiiji GRAVEL 1AYER dike Park,Site Monitoring Well (Typ 0 -- ------ CEMENT GRGUT FROM 0 TO TO FEET Sh is, I FROM 9 TO 14 FEET J 0 HINTIONITE SEAL FROvl i2 TO t2 FEET 1 5 L :0 LA SLGTTED PVC - -43-FEET AT FPW WTC __A Lqj TANCA SAND AND CRAVZL 4 SY 12 BLEND jyj Lij r� 35 ........ 4 (23 1, - , " " . " , A. _1 __1111, t 11-1_111-111-_ -1--.111-1 ... 45 ............ ... ........ 50--,- 2 - : NO � LCCK 1,1%0 HQN: 701711 NO WELL PLL.,'C, H41:11 111147_�_111111.4 A111111�1 I;,- IV -'H f._.Ps_ 7AGN MAISNIE W„ -H C(V��P, MUS- IJE-FT 06G1.t'TC 1,122. OHL LOMC'IN NCH MCN 11;_:94 [NIL 6- J&H OVICK 3/4' 'fin WELL CASINT: iiiiiiji GRAVEL 1AYER Rodney Thurston From: Twede, Mark/RDD <Mark.Twede@jacobs.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 1:47 PM To: Rodney Thurston; Shasta County Environmental Health Cc: Hein, Kimberly; Alward, Ryan; Bral, Kevin/DEN Subject: Soil boring permit - Revised location Attachments: ShastaCo_well-permit-application-MW1.pdf; ShastaCo_well-permit-application- MW2.pdf; ShastaCo_well-permit-application-MW3.pdf; ShastaCo_well-permit- application-MW4.pdf; ShastaCo_well-permit-application-MW5.pdf; MW Construction.pdf Q EXTERNAL SENDER: Do not follow links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Rodney, We are submitting permit applications for five new monitoring wells on the north side of the Sacramento River off of North Market Street. The monitoring wells will be used for future well pump tests to evaluate hydraulic characteristics, and are not anticipated to have any contamination. The applications are attached, along with a schematic of the monitoring well construction that is applicable for all five monitoring wells. The wells are located on two adjacent properties, both owned by the City of Redding. The wells may be moved slightly in the field based on ground conditions, but will remain on the same property parcels near the approximate locations shown. Please contact me by email when ready for fee payment. Thanks, Mark Twede, G.E. Jacobs Geotechnical Engineer 530.229.3320 direct 530.215.9265 mobile C C- - This communication may contain confidential and privileged information that is for the sole use' of tare: intended recipient. l;rr✓ viewing, copying or distribution of, or reliance on this message by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited, If you have received tFi> message in error, piease notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. 1 SHASTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION 1855 Placer Street, Suite 201, Redding, CA 96001 Telephone (530) 225-5787 FAX (530) 225-5413 ehd.co.shasta,ca.us APPLICATION FOR WATER WELL PERMIT WTR4 7-1 - 0322 APPLICANT (Must be licensed contractor or property owner.) Name ®• Enclineering Grour) PROPERTY OWNER Name City of Reddina Mailing Address 777 Cypress Avenue Telephone 530-605-0456 EMail Address kmaire(okbofreddino.orci WELL CONTRACTOR Name -Yellow Jacket Drillinq Servic- •'a• - gAddress 9460 Lucas Ranch Road City, State, Zip Code Rancho Cucamonqa CA 91730 Telephone 909-544-1135 License# 1034407 PLOT PLAN is to be submitted on 8% x 11 sheet according to the Sample Plot Plan instructions and show all requested information. DIRECTIONS TO LOCATE PROPERTY shall be provided on the back of this application or the back of the plot plan. Directions must be adequate for staff to locate property. A Application received by );z T- Date: 9-N-ov $14q'7- V+ received Receipt# V_2_G.�s — Applications and Projects: Zoning/General Plan Legal Creation verified by: - Date: Pre -Permit Inspection Required? E]Yes E:1No By: Date: Notes: Permit Issued Final Inspection By V Date: city Redding Assessor's Parcel Number 112 -LW -005-000 300 LOT SIZE _x_ oracreage 10.62 TYPE OF WORK 7x New Well FlDeepening ElDestroying El Reconditioning F-1 Domestic .............................. 20 foot minimum El Agricultural (Proposed Diameter ") ...... 20 foot minimum El Industrial . , . ......... ................. 50 foot minimum El Public .......... ................... 1 50 foot minimum Z Monitoring .......... ....... ... Varies, attach schematic. 1:1 Other .. I . . . . . Varies, attach schematic. * Alternate seal depth may be required by site conditions or as noted in conditions below. Minimum thickness of annular space seal is 2 inches. SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR (if applicant is contractor) I certify that I am licensed under the provisions of Division 3, Chapter 9 of the Business and Professions Code, and my license is in full force and effect. License # 1034407 1 certify that I have read this application and the above information is correct. I agree to comply with all Shasta County Ordinanciks and Stat:e Laws relating o this construction. ,�� - 09/14121 SIGNATUREOFCONTRACTOR DATE SIGNATURE OF OWNER (required on all applications) I certify that I have read this application and the above information is correct. I agree to comply with all Shasta County Ordinances and State Laws relating to this construction, and hereby authorize representatives of SHASTA COUNTY to enter the property for inspection purposes. By signing this application I agree to defend, indemnify, and hold the county harmless from any claim, action, or proceeding brought to attack, set aside, void or annul the county's approval of this application. I understand that the Shasta County Department of Resource Management, in releasing this permit for the immediate construction of a water well does not guarantee the issuance of any other development permits or land use request for this property. Digi .11y siq' ed b, Kuh M.il.. PE IN1,M .@Cilylrlldd,n' 1g, O=Qly dR�iq, k� E9fi% CNOU=Nblicft='Kun Man, PE' ux, 2021.09 14 1318 17-07'00' 09/14/21 SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE WELL COMPLETION REPORT SHALL BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO FINAL APPROVAL OF WELL. Completion Notice Received. Well Depth: 43' Casing Depth.- Est. G.P.M. 1 11 n 11 sped 11 t I id I n I Notes, 6" Di'amc- e • June 2020 Shasta County Department of Resource Management i Environmental Health Division 1855 Placer Street, Suite 201, Redding, CA 96001. Phone (530) 225-5787, FAX (530) 225-5413 WELL PERMIT Property Owner: REDDING CITY OF Well Number: BP-TW1 Site Address: 991 N MARKET ST REDDING Assessor's Parcel #: 112300005000 Work Type: NEW WELL Proposed Use: MONITORING PERMIT NUMBER: WTR22-0161 Water District: CITY OF REDDING Well Driller: YELLOW JACKET DRILLING SERVICES LLC The permitted well shall conform to the specifications and provisions of the State of California Water Well Standards Bulletin 74- 81 and Supplement Bulletin 74-90. Deviations from the specifications in this permit shall have prior approval from the Shasta County Environmental Health Division. Driller shall possess a C-57 well drilling license and be currently bonded with Shasta County. The well shall be located on the property as shown in the attached drawing prepared by JACOBS and dated 6/9/2022. Changes shall be approved in advance by the Shasta County Environmental Health Division prior to construction. Please contact the Shasta County Environmental Health Division at 530/225-5787, if you have any questions regarding this permit. Standard Permit Conditions: 1: Seal depth shall be a minimum of 20 feet, unless alternate depth is specified in special conditions below. 2: Maintain all required setbacks. 3: Well is to be located a minimum of 50 feet from any sewer, septic tank, or pit privy and a minimum of 100 feet from any structure or facility designed to allow sewage to percolate into the ground. Special Permit Conditions: 1: PROPOSED WELL/BORING TO BE CONSTRUCTED/DESTROYED PER DETAIL SUBMITTED BY CONSULTANT. This permit does not authorize the violation of any law or regulations of Shasta County and the State of California. The driller shall submit the State of California Well Completion Report Form, DWR 188, to the Shasta County Environmental Health Division and California Department of Water Resources within 60 days of construction pursuant to the Water Code, Section 13751. Well permits expiring without well completion report may result in a Notice of Non -Compliance recorded on the parcel. Issued by: Effective date: 06/10/2022 CHRISTY GI REATH, R.E.H.S Expiration date: 06/09/2024 PERMIT IS NON-RENEWABLE SEE REVERSE REGARDING WELL INSTALLATION INSPECTION NOTIFICATION SHASTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION 1855 Placer Street, Suite 201, Redding, CA 96001 Telephone (530) 225-5787 FAX (530) 225-5413 elid.co.shasta.ca.us APPLICATION FOR WATER WELL PERM IT WTR# APPLICANT (Must be licensed contractor or property owner.) Name Jacobs Enaineering Group for City of Redding Mailing Address 2525 Airpark Dr. City, State, Zip Code Redding, CA 96001 Telephone 530-215-9265 EMail Address mark.tw deaiacobs.com PROPERTY OWNER Name City of ReddinQ Mailing Address 777 Cypress Avenue City, State, Zip Code Reddincl, CA 96002 Telephone 530-605-0456 EMail Address kmaire(cDcitvofredding.org WELL CONTRACTOR Name Yellow Jacket Drillina Services, LLC Mailing Address 9460 Lucas Ranch Road City, State, Zip Cod; Ran6ho Cucamoncia CA 91730 Telephone 909-544-1135 EMail Address dean (cDvidrill ina.com License # 1034407 PLOT PLAN is to be submitted on 8% x 11 sheet according to the Sample Plot Plan instructions and show all requested information. DIRECTIONS TO LOCATE PROPERTY shall be provided on the back of this application or the back of the plot plan. Directions must be adequate for staff to locate property. WELL NUMBER (if applicable): BP-TW1 PUBLIC WATER AVAILABLE E]Yes XNo If YES, public water system name: Proof of legal creation is required on undeveloped parcels. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY - ,pplication received by "?7 _ I — Date: N•T3 received Receipt # R,�Zsgl�f Associated Applications and Projects:_ Zoning/General Plan e– 0 P" Creation verified by: Date: Pre -Permit Inspection Required? E]YesKNO By: Date: Notes: Permit Issued By: Final Inspection By: Date: El Completion Notice Received: Well Depth: Inspection Notes:_ LOCATION OF PROPERTY Street or Road 991 N Market St. City Redding NMI '*NMI OT SIZE x oracreage • TYPE OF WORK Rx New Well El Deepening Ehestroying El Reconditioning El Domestic .................... ......... 20 foot minimum 1:1 Agricultural (ProposedDiameter ") ...... 20 foot minimum El Industrial ...... ....... ........... ... .50 foot minimum El Public ................................. 50 foot minimum Z Monitoring ..... ............... Varies, attach schematic. El Other ...... . . Varies, attach schematic. * Alternate seal depth may be required by site conditions or as noted in conditions below. Minimum thickness of annular space seal is 2 inches. SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR (if applicant is contractor) I certify that I am licensed under the provisions of Division 3, Chapter 9 of the Business and Professions Code, and my license is in full force and effect. License # 1034407 1 certify that I have read this application and the above information is correct. I agree to comply with all Shasta County Ordinances and State Laws relating to this construction. SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR DATE SIGNATURE OF OWNER, (required on all applications) I certify that I have read this application and the above information is correct. I agree to comply with all Shasta County Ordinances and State Laws relating to this construction, and hereby authorize representatives of SHASTA COUNTY to enter the property for inspection purposes. By signing this application I agree to defend, indemnify, and hold the county harmless from any claim, action, or proceeding brought to attack, set aside, void or annul the county's approval of this application. I understand that the Shasta County Department of Resource Management, in releasing this permit for the immediate construction of a water well does not guarantee the issuance of any other development permits or land use request for this property. 6/6/2022 SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE WELL COMPLETION REPORT SHALL BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO FINAL APPROVAL OF WELL. Casing Depth: January. 2022 ivvk 971 N MARKET ST A' cess from Traveled Way Sacramento River 7-7 V, ©city-UltyA of R dding GIS Map, Modifications by Jacobs LEGEND TWI -j� APPROXIMATE TEST WELL LOCATION 0 200 400 600 N Im APPROXIMATE SCALE 1=400' FIGURE I Proposed Test Well Location City of Redding Pump Horizontal Collection Well Bike Park Site Test Well CEMENT GROUT FROM 0 TO 10 FEET 5 ......... 1-2---fNC++--S-T-EE-1 .. BLANK -C -ASI -NG -- -------- ------------------ FROM 0 TO 14 FEET - 10 BE NTONI TE SEAL FROM 10 TO 12 FEET 15 Lij LL] LL 20 25 n 30 35 ................. STEEL LOUVERED SCREEN FROM 14, TO 43 FEET ................ ............. . TANCA SAND AND GRAVEL D IRAVEL 'D 3/8 BY 8 ILEI........... . ----------- -------- FROM 12 TO 46 FEET ......................................................... ......... ........... ............. . ..... 40 ----------------------------------------------------------- ------- 12-INCH STEEL BLANK SUMP WITH CAP .......... -FROM-.43.-TO-.45-F-E-ET. ........... . ...... 45 0 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I BP -B-4 SHEET 7 of 2 Borehole Log PROJECT: Pump Station #1 -Collector Well LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 10/9/2021 END: 10/9/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a Z' °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs v W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE w0 o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� FILL Hand auger. Fill, cobbles, gravel, sand and silt. 5.0 5 NO RECOVERY Red rock stuck in core barrel Oust as in No Recovery. BP -B-1) FILL 10 2.0 S-1 Cobbles, gravel, sand silt. NO RECOVERY No Recovery FILL Cobbles, gravel, sand and silt 2.0 S-2 POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) Brown. 90% fine sand, 10% silty fines NO RECOVERY 15 No Recovery (possibly very fine saturated sand as below) POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) Same as 13-14 2.0 s-3 • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL (GW) ... Brown. 80% Gravel up to 2", Subrounded, 10% fine sand , -•10% silty fines 20 2.0 S-4 POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) 1.o S-5 Brown/Black. 95% med. to coarse sand, coarsening downwards, -•5% silty fines, • • • subangular sand clasts. WELL GRADED GRAVEL (GW) 2.0 S-6 ,64, Same as 18-21 23-31 Not very saturated 164/0 WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND SAND (GW -GC) J» Brown. 70% subrounded to subangular fine to coarse gravel, clasts up to 6". 15% fine to 25 i� coarse subangular sand, 15% low plasticity clay and silty fines 2.0 S-7 f ,s Mfr 2.0 S-8 ire 2.0 S-9 ��•� »' PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBSW8Y06200 I BP -B-4 SHEET 2 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT: Pump Station #1 -Collector Well LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 10/9/2021 END: 10/9/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a F °o SOIL DESCRIPTION wW Mn w w o SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs v LU o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE z o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL LU 01 o STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY 0 /AA 1.0 S-10 X416/ •~ WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND SAND (GW -GC) 31-34, reduced environment? 161010 Gley, otherwise same as 23-31 3.0 S-11 �» !lam : A,6 f 6 h/ WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND SAND (GW -GC) 34-36, oxidized layer? 35 f ti Orange, otherwise same as 31-34 2.0 S-12 ffr • 1•'• 416/0 / WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND SAND (GW -GC) 1.0 S-13 ,61.1. Same as 31-34 "A • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND SAND (GW -GC) 164/0, Same as 23-31 1.0 S-14 ffr err 40 1.0 S-15 Bedrock. Dry Gley. Weathered Bedrock, siltstone 2.0 S-16 2.0 S-17 Boring terminated at 44 It bgs. 45 50 55 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS W8Y06200 I MW -1 SHEET 1 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT: Pump Station #1 -Collector Well LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 10/7/2021 END: 10/8/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a Z' °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs v W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE w0 o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� FILL Fill, dry. Hand auger 5.0 5 FILL Brown. Fill, rounded and fractured gravel with fine sand and silt. 3.0 S-1 NO RECOVERY No Recovery 10 rt I j I WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND (GW -GM) 6 Brown. 60% fine to coarse sand, clasts up to 4", 25% fine to coarse sand, 15% silty fines f DCIII 16l I 7.0 S-2 i1&l+l jrltl .t I CII •�IjI 15 WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND (GW -GM) Same as 11-15 with 20% silt and 20% sand 3.0 S-3 1CI�I NO RECOVERY No Recovery, cobble in bit 20 t.I i•'I.1 POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP -SM) Brown. Fine to medium sand with 10% silt WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) ... Brown. 50-60% rounded gravel up to 6", 30-35% fine to med. sand, -•10% silty fines 6.0 S-4 25 CLAYEY SAND (CL) Gley, Claystone with fine gravel and sand, very weathered, oxidized and dry. 24.5 - 26 dry • POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP) Brown. -•70% fine gravel, 25% fine to med. sand, —5% silty fines WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND (GW -GM) 26-27, wet 6.0 S-5 itAappears Brown. -•60% gravel, 25% fine to med. sand, 15% silty fines, some oxidized silt that somewhat dry. POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP) in Same as 26 - 27 with 10% silty fines PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS W8Y06200 I MW -1 SHEET 2 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT: Pump Station #1 -Collector Well LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 10/7/2021 END: 10/8/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC W 0 3: < F 00 SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 11 — wW M 0 E, W Lu Lu SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS SAMPLE IDs To> Z 0 T COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE D LU 0 0 uj 0 DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY 6.0 S-5 IL POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) Brown. 95% fine to med. sand, <5% silty fines • POORLY GRADED GRAVEL (GP) IL Brown. 80% gravel clasts; from 1-2", 15% coarse sand, 5% silty fines. 35 6.0 S-6 • POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND (GP -GM) Brown. 70% gravel, 15% sand, 15% silty fines I II 11111 t. POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL AND SILT (SP -SM) Brown. 60% fine sand, 25% gravel, 15% silty fines Gley. Weathered Bedrock, siltstone Bedrock. Dry 40 5.0 S-7 Boring terminated at 43 It bgs. 45 50 55 6n PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS W8Y06200 I MW -2 SHEET 1 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT: Pump Station #1 -Collector Well LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 10/10/2021 END: 10/11/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a Z' °o SOIL DESCRIPTION w mn w w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs v W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE w0 o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� FILL Borehole is near former BP -B-1 boring Fill, hand cleared 5.0 5 FILL Fill, gravel, cobbles, sand, silt 2.0 S-1 4.0 S-2 10 2.0 S-3rt j I WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND (GW -GM) .l 1 6 Brown. 60% fine to coarse gravel, 25% fine to coarse sand, 15% silty fines f .4�III rtll tM1f� 3.0 S4 15 1 l�)*I 6, 1, NO RECOVERY No Recovery WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SW) 20 Brown. 80% coarse sand, 15% gravel, <5% silty fines 2.0 S-5 �'� • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL (GW) ... Brown. 85% fine to coarse gravel, 10% sand, <5% silty fines NO RECOVERY No Recovery • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL (GW) Brown. 70% gravel from fine to coarse, 20% sand, 10 silty fines, interbedded with 90% • • • gravel, 5% sand and < 5% silty fines. 3.0 S-6 ••• 25 ••• POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) 1.0 S-7 Black. 95% fine to med. sand, coarsening downwards to coarse sand WELL GRADED GRAVEL (GW) ... Same as 23 - 26 with larger gravel clasts 3.0 S-8in ••• PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS W8Y06200 I MW -2 SHEET 2 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT: Pump Station #1 -Collector Well LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 10/10/2021 END: 10/11/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a F °o SOIL DESCRIPTION W w SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs mn v W W o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE z o DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL LU o ° STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� NO RECOVERY No recovery, but most likely gravel as above WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND (GW) 1.0 s -s Brown. 60 - 70% coarse rounded gravel with 15-20% fine to coarse sand and 15% silty • • • fines 4.0 S-10 ••• 35 ••• • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL (GW) Brown. 85% gravel, 10% sand, < 5% silty fines 2.0 S-11 WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) • • ... Brown. 60% fine to med. gravel, 35% fine to coarse sand, <5% silty fines. 2.0 S-12 40 2.0 S-13 2.0 S-14 ••• Bedrock. Dry Gley. Weathered Bedrock, siltstone Borehole collapsed from 44 to 46 prior to 45 2.0 S-15 constructing MW -2 Boring terminated at 46 It bgs. 50 55 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS W8Y06200 I MW -3 SHEET 1 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT: Pump Station #1 -Collector Well LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 10/9/2021 END: 10/10/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC W 0 3: < Z' 00 SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 11 — wW M 0 E, W LU SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS SAMPLE IDs To> 0 LU T COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE Z wD 0 0 DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o 0 Uj STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY FILL Brown. Fill, hand augered. Dry, sand, gravel silt 5.0 5 FILL 1.0 S-1 Same as 0 - 5 - 2.0 S-2 2.0 S-3 - POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP) 10 Black. 90% fine sand with <10% silty fines, from -9 - 11 color is brown. 11 - 14.5 color is dark gray/black. 14.5 - 15 is brown. Sand is moist, some orange oxidized layers in brown sections, some fine rootlets in black section 3.0 S-4 3.0 S-5 15 WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT (GW) Brown. 60 - 70% rounded gravel to 6", 20-30% fine to coarse subangular sand, -10% silty fines 3.0 S-6 NO RECOVERY 20 No Recovery WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT (GW) ... Sameas16-19 3.0 S-7 3.0 S-8 25 WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT (GW) 70% fine to coarse gravel, 20% sand, -10% silty fines. Gravel clasts up to 3" but overall, much finer gravel than 15 - 26. 3.0 S-9 2.0 s-'0 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS W8Y06200 I MW -3 SHEET 2 of 2 Borehole Log PROJECT: Pump Station #1 -Collector Well LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 10/9/2021 END: 10/10/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC o a F °o SOIL DESCRIPTION wW w o SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS / SAMPLE IDs Mn v w LU o a COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE o w0 DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o ° o STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY c� • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL (GW) 2.0 S-10 Brown. 90% rounded gravel from fine to coarse, some sand, some silty fines. 2.0 S-11 ••• 3.0 S-12 ••• 35 ••• • • • WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Brown. 60 - 70% subangular to subrounded fine to coarse gravel. 25% med to coarse 2.5 S-13 • • • sand, —5% silty fines 40 2.5 S-14 ••• ••• 1.0 S-15 Gley. Weathered Bedrock, siltstone Bedrock. Dry 2.0 S-16 45 2.0 S-17 Boring terminated at 46 It bgs. 50 55 PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS W8Y06200 I MW -4 SHEET 1 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT: Pump Station #1 -Collector Well LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 10/11/2021 END: 10/12/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC W 0 3: < Z' 00 SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 11 — wW M 0 E, W LU SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS SAMPLE IDs To> 0 LU T COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE Z wD 0 0 DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL o 0 Uj STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY FILL Fill. Hand auger 5.0 5 FILL 1.0 S-1 Brown. Gravel, sand, silt, unconsolidated 3.0 S-2 10 2.0 S-3 1.0 S-4 2.0 S-5 POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) Sediments moist at 13 Brown. 90-95% med to coarse sand, <5% silty fines 15 2.0 S-6 2.0 S-7 WELL GRADED GRAVEL (GW) 20 3.0 S-8 Brown. 85% rounded gravel, 10% coarse sand, - 5% silty fines POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) 1.0 S-9 Brownish -black. 95% med. to coarse subrouncled sand, <5% silty fines. NO RECOVERY No Recovery. Bit probably pushed through sand WELL GRADED GRAVEL (GW) Brown. 85% gravel, 10% sand, 5% silty fines 3.0 S-10 25 - 2.0 S-11 POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) 1.0 S-12 Brown. 95% med. to coarse sand, <5% silty fines 2.0 S-13 in PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: JACOBS W8Y06200 I MW -4 SHEET 2 OF 2 Borehole Log PROJECT: Pump Station #1 -Collector Well LOCATION: Bike Park ELEVATION: oendina DRILLING CONTRACTOR AND DRILL RIG: Yellow Jacket Drillina. Sonic COORDINATES: pending DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Sonic WATER LEVEL: --- START: 10/11/2021 END: 10/12/2021 LOGGER: Ryan Alward/SAC W 0 3: < F 00 SOIL DESCRIPTION 0 11 — wW M 0 E, W LU SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COMMENTS SAMPLE IDs To> 0 LU T COLOR, MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE Z D 0 0 DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL LU 0 o Uj STRUCTURE, MINERALOGY WELL GRADED GRAVEL (GW) 2.0 S-13 Brown. 90% gravel 1 - 2", with 5% sand and <5% silty fines POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) 1.0 S-14 Brownish -black. 90-95% med. to coarse subrouncled sand, with <5% silty fines WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) 35 Brown. 70% rounded gravel, 25% med. to coarse sand, <5% silty fines 2.0 S-15 NO RECOVERY No Recovery WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) Same as 34 - 36 - 2.0 S-16 Bedrock. Dry Gley. Weathered Bedrock, siltstone 40 2.0 S-17 Boring terminated at 41 It bgs. 45 50 55 6n PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: W8Y06200 BP-TW1 SHEET 1 OF 2 .Jacobs SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT: City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well, Redding, CA LOCATION : Bike Park APPROXIMATE ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Yellow Jacket Drilling DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Foremost DR-14HD, Dual Rotary APPPOYIMATP \NATER I 1=\/I=1 - 99 n ft h.1—, rr ,] enrf— CTART - 7HQ/9n99 GNr) - 7/99/9m9 1 (1(:(,FP - R I orhlnr DEPTH BELOW GROUND SURFACE (ft) SIZE DISTRLI -IONO O SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS o INTERVAL (ft) () BEGONE#TYPE w o o U SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COLOR, DEPTH OF CASING, DRILLING RATE, o w VE DENSITY OR CONTENT, IRE, FLUID OE TESTS, ND DRLABORATORY < < CONSISTENCY, SOIL STRUCTUMOISTURE MINERALOGY TILLING T RESULTSSS, 0f < z ° Well -graded gravel with sand (GW): brown (10YR Adding water to control dust. Start drill at 11:00 80 20 ° 4/3), 80% fine to coarse gravel (up to 1"), 20% ° ° o medium to coarse sand, gravel angular to subrounded. °moo • Poorly -graded gravel with sand (GP): dark yellow 70 25 5 brown (10YR 4/4), 70% fine to coarse gravel , 25% •. fine to coarse sand, 5% silt. • • Poorly -graded gravel with sand (GP): dark yellow 5 50 45 5 brown (10YR 4/4), 50% fine gravel , 30% medium to coarse sand, 15% fine sand, 5% fines. Sands and . • gravel mostly dark lithic fragment. Well -graded sand with gravel (SW): dark yellowish 25 60 15 ; r brown (10YR 40/4), 60% medium to coarse sand, 25% fine gravel, 15% fines. Silty sand with gravel (SM): dark yellowish brown 30 50 20 (10YR 4/4), 50% fine to medium sand, 30% coarse sand and fine gravels, 20% fines. 10 Poorly -graded sand (SP): very dark grayish brown Fines washed from 10-12' sample 10 90 (6YR 3/2), 80% medium to coarse sand, 10% fine gravel, 10% fine sand. All dark lithic fragments. Poorly -graded sand (SP): very dark grayish brown 12:00 stopped, 12:50 resumed. Rig chatter, (6YR 3/2), transitions to poorly -graded sand with either cemented gravel or cobbles. gravel. 50% medium to coarse sand, 40% fine gravel, 10% fine sand. 40 60 13:40 while advancing casing driller said we 1 broke through cobble or boulder Poorly -graded sand with gravel (SP): very dark 25 70 5 grayish brown (10YR 3/2), 70% fine to coarse sand, 25% fine gravel, 5% fine sands and fines. appear to be from larger cobbles or boulders. Well -graded gravel with sand (GW): very dark ° 65 30 5 0 ° grayish brown (10YR 3/2), 65% fine to coarse gravel, ° m 30% medium to coarse sand, 5% fine sand and fines. °moo Gravel p to 1 ", some appear to be from larger cobbles 20 ld .n};fit Well -graded sand with gravel (SW): very dark 15:55 30 70 +,r grayish brown (10YR 3/2), 50% medium to coarse , sand, 30% fine gravel, 20% fine sand. 16:25 finished for day. Resumed 7/20 6:45 Well -graded sand with gravel (SW): very dark 30 70 , ''.. grayish brown (10YR 3/2), 50% medium to coarse sand, 30% fine gravel, 20% fine sand. Gravel up to 1 ". e•) J'i PROJECT NUMBER: BORING NUMBER: W8Y06200 BP-TW1 SHEET 2 OF 2 .Jacobs SOIL BORING LOG PROJECT: City of Redding Horizontal Collector Well, Redding, CA LOCATION : Bike Park APPROXIMATE ELEVATION: DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Yellow Jacket Drilling DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT: Foremost DR-14HD, Dual Rotary APPPOYIMATP \NATER I 1=\/I=1 - 99 n ft h.1—, rr ,] enrf— CTART - 7HQ/9n99 GNr) - 7/99/9m9 1 (1(:(,FP - R I orhlnr DEPTH BELOW GROUND SURFACE (ft) SIZE DISTRLI -IONO O SOIL DESCRIPTION COMMENTS o INTERVAL (ft) () BEGONE#TYPE w o o U SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COLOR, DEPTH OF CASING, DRILLING RATE, o w VE DENSITY OR CONTENT, IRE, FLUID OE TESTS, ND DRLABORATORY < < CONSISTENCY, SOIL STRUCTUMOISTURE MINERALOGY TILLING T RESULTSSS, 0f < z 40 60 ;• / Well -graded sand with gravel (SW): very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2), 50% medium to coarse ° o sand, 40% gravel up to 1.5", 10% fine sand. Larger 11:00 ° gravels are broken from cobbles. 60 40 Well -graded gravel with sand (GW): very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2), 60% fine to coarse gravel °•o (up to 1.5"), 30% medium to coarse sand, 10% fine sand. Well -graded gravel with sand (GW): very dark 12:00 60 40 grayish brown (10YR 3/2), 60% fine to coarse gravel (up to 1.5"), 30% medium to coarse sand, 10% fine °•o sand. 30 • ° Well -graded gravel with sand (GW): very dark 60 40 o grayish brown (10YR 3/2), 60% fine to coarse gravel ° ° m (up to 2"), 30% medium to coarse sand, 10% fine °•o sand. Well -graded sand with gravel (SW): very dark 15 85 4."�. ''.•t grayish brown (10YR 3/2), 60% medium to coarse sand, 25% fine sand, 15% fine gravel. Well -graded gravel with sand (GW): very dark ° 35 : o grayish brown (10YR 3/2), 70% fine to coarse gravel ° ° m (rounded), 20% coarse sand, 10% fine to medium °•o sand. Sample may be influenced by heaving 70 30 ° ° conditions. • Hole heaved sand and gravel when drilling ° o between 36-38'. Sand around 10' into cased ° o m hole. °•o ° Well -graded gravel with sand (GW): very dark Advanced casing to near anticipated bedrock o grayish brown (10YR 3/2), 60% fine to coarse gravel contact drilling from 38-43' was slough from ° ° o (up to 1.5") mostly rounded, 35% medium to coarse casing advance. °•O sand, 5% fine sand and fines. 40 ° � 60 35 5 '° 0 o m °•O x x Bedrock: siltstone/mudstone: very dark gray (5Y 3/1). Borehole stopped producing water when casing x x x x advanced into bedrock. 45 x x x x x x xx x x x x x x x x x x Bottom of Hole at 47.0 ft below ground surface Appendix E Monitoring Well Water Level Data 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a os 0 0 0 1.10 -10 1�1 -.11 1�1 61 6 0> 019 0& --0- V , '7,- �,-o 61 0 0 o" -0, 6' 019 'o, 76 '0 <9 Date 10 10.5 o Transducer Manual 11 4-1 11,5 0 4� 41 CL 12 0 0 12.5 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a os 0 0 0 1.10 -10 1�1 -.11 1�1 61 6 0> 019 0& --0- V , '7,- �,-o 61 0 0 o" -0, 6' 019 'o, 76 '0 <9 Date 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 a 0 01), 0-> 0> 0& OIP --0 -0 -- P�- P-- �? 7 V-- U, os 06 06, T>0 '51 6 0 Date 10 10.5 o Transducer 0 Manual 11 0 4-1 4-1 11,5 0 4� 41 12 12.5 13 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 a 0 01), 0-> 0> 0& OIP --0 -0 -- P�- P-- �? 7 V-- U, os 06 06, T>0 '51 6 0 Date mmm 10 10.5 Transducer Manual 11 CU 11.5 0 (U 12 12.5 13 �'`Si �'i �6 - 0� �i P<% 0�i 0�i 0�i 0�' �'i $'i 0' Qi 0, O'> 019 fid' i Date Rim "6r6 9 d6r',rf 6 Qr i dr 0--0dr Oar" Si 1-r" 9r C�rss C%6r Q - r r % io , r 6`1r 060%,0r�r6r i6"r�6dr'1y' ®6r1 6 6_ 6r i [date Appendix F �� M Test Well Field Work (June through August 2022) Photograph 1: Yellow Jacket Rig for Test Welt Construction Photograph 2: Bike Park Site R ml� Photograph 3: Steel Drill Casing Photograph 4: Drill Bit F-1 Photograph 5:Setup for Water Discharge Photograph 8:Installing the Drilling Casing F2 Photograph T:Well Casing Photograph 8: Test Well Vault Photograph 9:Staff Gauge inthe River Photograph 1OrSet Upfor Pumping Test Photograph 11:Top ofTest Well Photograph 12: Discharge Piping and Instrumentation Photograph 13:Water Discharge Through Storm Drain F4 Contractor HILOW, AC T D IIL1,1NG SFRVIc E;S SUBMITTAL SHEET Yellow Jacket Drilling DATE 06/20/22 SUBMITTAL No.: TO: BJ Lechler CONTRACT No.: JOB No.: 20-0120CA ATTENTION: BJ Lechler PROJECT NAME: Redding Test Well LOCATION: 991 N Market MATERIAL: Casing and Screen Manufacture USE: 12" Casing SUPPLIER: YJD MANUFACTURER: MODEL NUMBER: COMMENTS: 12" casing certs ATTACHMENTS: CUT SHEET: 1 MSDS: SAMPLE: Brochure BY: Joe Villegas SIGNATURE: Je VAywe DATE: 06/20/22 • L 4,PPIZ 1�7 COMPANYROSCOE MOSS 4360 Worth Street Los Angeles, California 90063, U.S.A. Phone: (323) 263.4111, Fax: (323) 263.4497 E-mail: guintero@roscoemoss.com Web site: rose moss.com June 27, 2022 Dean Coblish District Manager Yellow Jacket Drilling Services, LLC 9460 Lucas Ranch Road Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730-5743 Re: Bike Park Submittal Please accept this letter as our Submittal for the casing and screen materials that will be required for the above referenced job. Roscoe Moss Company will supply the following: 1. 12.75" OD ,25" wall Low Carbon Steel Blank Casing, Well casing shall be manufactured in accordance with applicable parts of ASTM A139 Gr B. Welding shall be by the submerged -arc process using at least one pass on the inside and one pass on the outside. Well Casing shall be 12.75" outside diameter and 0.25" wall thickness made from Low Carbon Steel. Casing shall be provided in desired lengths with welded collar. 12.75" OD x.25" wall Low Carbon Steel Ful Flo LouveredCasin Well casing shall be manufactured in accordance with applicable parts of ASTM A139 Gr B. Welding shall be by the submerged -arc process using at least one pass on the inside and one pass on the outside. Well casing shall be 12.75"outside diameter and .25" wall thickness made from Low Carbon Steel. Casing shall be provided in desired lengths with welded collars attached. Well screen shall be manufactured in accordance with the aforementioned casing requirements with the following additions: Screen openings shall be machine made, horizontal to the axis of the casing and of a louver form with the aperture facing downward. The aperture size shall 0.100" with 96 openings per linear foot. The minimum area of opening shall be no less than 5.99% with 28.8 sq in/ft of open area. Enclosed, for your records, are mill certification for the raw materials that will be used in the construction of the blank and screened casings. If you have any questions please don't hesitate to call. Regards, Steve Quintero Sales Director ............. . ... .......... a Ift INSPECTION CERTIFICATE 'r o i� N, o s,r E, 1,,. 1. NI F *4±:T I off-oo 13 1 —9k 0+K -119F96 i M 3"T M 7 4'i 1 4 Z,'A If L� A, (I SPA) 11 Head Office: Kasumigaseki Tokyu Bldg. (15F), 3-7-1 Kasumigasaki. Chiyoda-ku Tokyo 100�%)13 Shipper , , gHlil,06 Contract No. V, 10 P 2 1 1) UVA-7 invoice No tY 018 6: 44 ..................... Customer 1 111 Certificate No. Commodity 111( 1 P 01.1.1 1) 1' t l I t C.ustomer.., ......... ...... _T_ Specilicalion it �, I r1.10 1 1 N , i 6" 1 't P1, 1°1(.l D I I I L Q Project Name 313RItR Tensile A Test -X- 1 W119:411A )v 3 A QLjantity F11, Through -thickness is Impact Test Characteristics Ytw Awl Tom'. nomReduction of Area yiw snv Suo;th Bolin . e . 3 A0„• URemark i j Size Coil No. Charge No. N/mm-(MPa,) 2 3 Piecesl Weight T 4 I NCII) (kg) 500M,0 I I0:� ? 01 .1131060N Al 4 0 0.?390Y48.S00XC01L 11 2N50, /111:11061N 1U40Fr 6, 0.?_ 90X48.500X(' � _,,,0, 0 Io 11113 1 6 1,? to 0 6 li S A I L _J 0.2390X48. 500XC 20"/16 1111„1 311 10 tL,LN AU406G 7 0.2._590X48. 500XGQ I L�ry L 0 )Gi Al 1 10 6.'- N U6' N , ? 20atiU 11111 1 06' /N C 0 6 i L 0.239OX48. 50QXGQ I 5� 1, 1 315RIA MM Standard UIS ZV41 BASTM EVEN C:ENIDM2-1 D: 3 VORFA Ma xwzd Z W; SAVA AlNi7 E41,(-a!id O• 75n Nection of Samphail EK,%'hfl Longaud-nal FRAM Transverse W: Tensile Test Impact Test V, of H;1/4 s,i6 j d Ttjr TgopwjWo, KAIC L: IIN Leeson of Samong W,!14 f 1/6, J: ., D,,,,n -1, MIC1.1 U 00it Specimen K:TD1ittW Raclangular LVURN Round wilmle(i R” a Op W 020M P Ron RAF21 Gauge Length M:20(krm H50mm P46 0:5,65vrSo R: )Egfis han4ed Mo a3%j A= V / I f holxtt TV Vu 2 AtflitIA Bond Test 1.4 GGoW s 4 ft - half - Tfith Visual and Dimensions t(B G:Good t�zI 11011t, (MEV _,t Chemical Composition N 7_1 T- C Si Mn S �E:U�N I _L �fj ] We hereby cerilly that above steels have been satisfactorily tested in accordance with the specification. x100 X1000 X1 00 1 x 113 0 (11w, 1: 1 10 0 0 Charge No. o . 7 8 8 AC4065 6 2 76 19 4 3 22 11 12 3 7 2 EB if T_ IS 1-441-3436 M UK IR Win 113 A= 1 4 3 Chief Inspector OTSUKA YASUHIRO -ci, 1. TAHARA PLANT : 2-1-3, Shiraharna. Tahara TACNA SAND & GRAVEL SIEVE ANALYSIS TEST RESULTS PROJECT: Hole Products DATE: LOCATION: SAMPLE NO.: MATERIAL: 3/8 x 1/8 SAMPLE FROM: TESTED BY: DAVE BURAU 6/15/22 STOCK FRACTION EQUIVALENTS us STANDARD OPENING INCHES PERCENT WEIGHT PERCENT RETAINED PERCENT PASSED SPECS 3/4" 3/4" 0.750 1/2" 1/2" 0.500 3/8" 3/8" 0.375 0.0 0.0 100.0 5/16" 5/16" 0.312 16.4 16.4 83.61 1/4" 1/4" 0.250 47.9 64.3 35.7 3/16" #4 0.187 31.2 95.5 4.5 1/8" #6 0.132 4.3 99.8 0.2 3/32" #8 0.0937 #10 0.0787 #12 0.0661 #14 0.0555 #16 0.0469 #18 0.0394 #20 0.0331 #30 0.0234 #40 0.0165 #50 0.0117 #60 0.0098 PAN 0.2 100.0 TOTAL SUBMITTED BY: David Burau Appendix H Microscopic Particulate Analysis CH Diagnostic and Consuffing Service� irlic. Invoice 20220357 512 Sth Street, Berthoud, Co � 8013 Laboratory Information Customer 20221644 UPS; 8/19/2022; 0900 Hrs; 10-8'C; Wound Jacobs Engineering Results sy ' by: 2525 Airpark Drive -7 Redding, CA 96001 I Sample Identification. BP-TW1, 20220817-BP-Twl-MPA Sample Informiatiom SOURCE: Drilled Well: 46' deep� 220'from surface water; Unchlorinated; pH 6.38 —* pH &36; m�u � Sample Date & Time: 811712022 03� 12 PM —o 811812022 07-A 5 AM Sampler: n Danielson � ' - al) Filter Color, Off white Filter Type., Polypropylene cartridge - Date/Time Eluted: 8/19/2022 10:02 AM Cemtrnumate:o.00282 mu100 1. - ' ..Plant debris Rothrs- ' Nematodes Crustaceans ND � Other Arthropods ND 'Other ND � ~ Amount of sample assaye& 210 L 1-2 prn), silt (2-50 pm), sand (50-2000 prn), inorganic precipitate, aggregates --------- ---~-~--~---'-~�r---�------�------ -~—'`� 10 Gm ' COMMENTS: Score: O -Low Risk per EPA Consensus Method referenced above, ' ANALYSIS FOR WATERBORNE PARTICULATES CH Diagnostic and Consulting Service, Inc. Invoice 20220357 512 Sth Street, Berthoud, CO 80613 P: (970) 532-2078 R (970) 532-3358 Laboratory Information Customer 202216" UPS; 8/19/2022; 0900 Hm 11 2°C, Carboy Jacobs Engineering Resufts�' d by: 2525 Airpark Drive Redding, CA 96001 'Sample Identification. BP - 1, Raw water Sample Information: SOURCE: Drilled Well; 46' deep; 220'from surface water„ Unichlorinated; pH 6,38; 18.66°C; 0,26 NTU Sample Date & Time-, 8117/2022 03:12 PM Sampler- Ryan Danielson Amount: 10L Filter Color- N/A Filter Type; Envirochek"I HV capsule Datefrime Eluted : 811912022 09:46 AM Centrifugate, I mL/100 L Amount of sample assayed: 10 L Total Empty Amorphous I Internal —2 Internal DAPI+ DAPI+ DAPI - IFA Structure Structure Internal Structure (nuclei (intense Count Structure stained) internal staining) Glardia detected 0 0 0 0 0 . .... j 0 0 0 #1L <0, I <6.I 0.1 <0, I <0.1 <01 <0. I <0, 1 Crypt6sporldium detected 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 #/L <0. 1 <0,1 <0.I <01 <0A <G.1 <0. 1 The samp[e was analyzed for Garde andCqlad8idordum try the method oudin: MQIWSU= December 20M- USEPA.WashngtonD-C.,EPA-815-R-M2. All IlMatlimis stated in the method apply, Defection bind calouWied from voiumeassayod, If HV capsule was received, rmithod was modified layrairing Sample through a PM Envirochek- HVirapause at the sample site, If Micros ParficiAato AnMysis was also performed, parficdete .I.til. was modified. Ground Water is Factor Table From: E,P,A. Consensuses Method for Determining Groundwaters Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water Using Microscopic Particulate Analysis (MPA) Table 1. Numerical range of each primary bio -indicator (Particulate) counted per 100 gallons water. lay dicators.�f I According to EPA "Guidance Manualfor Compliance with the Filtration and Disinfection Requirements for Public Water Systems Using Surface Water Sources"', March, 1991 ed. 2. If Giardia cysts or coccidian are found in any sample, irrespective of volume, score as above, 3. Key= EH – extremely heavy M -- moderate NS – not significant H – heavy R – rare 4. Chlorophyll containing Table 2. Relative surface water risk factors associated with scoring of primary bio -indicators (particulate) present during MPA of subsurface water sources. IndicatRelative Risk Factor 3 ors of 2 surface water EH H M R ISIS Glardia 40 J 30 25 20 0 Coccidia 35 30 25 20 0 Diatoms 1 13 6 11 6 0 --10 —+ —11137 ---- A'%A� n I , According to EPA "Guidante Manual for Compliance with the Filtration and Disinfection Requirements for Public Water Systems Using Surface Water Sources", March, 1.991 ed. 2. Refer to Table I for range of indicators counted per 100 gallons. Key== EH – extremely heavy M – moderate NS –art significant H – heavy R – rare 3, Risk of surface water contamination ?20 – high risk 10- 19 – moderate risk :59 – low risk Appendix I Pumping Test Graphl City of Redding Pumping Test Graphs at Bike Park August 2022 Page 1 of 3 City of Redding Pumping Test Graphs at Bike Park August 2022 MW -1 Constant Rate Test 10.00 i 9.00 -------- Theis 8.00 Data 0 0000 7.00 — 6.00 4- 3:5.00 _ o 3: 4.00 000L00 p 3.00 000000 .0000 2.00 1.00 0.00 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 Time (minutes) Page 2 of 3 City of Redding Pumping Test Graphs at Bike Park August 2022 MW -4 Constant Rate Test 4A nn 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 Time (minutes) Page 3 of 3 CITY OF REDDING MEETING DATE: May 5, 2020 ITEM NO. 4.11(d) FROM: Chuck Aukland, Public Works Director ***APPROVED BY*** OudrAukknd, Public Wo&s ° 40M020 caukland@ci.redding.ca.us 1, ippin, C1 4/27 btippin@cityofredding.org SUBJECT: 4.11(d) --Award Request for Proposals No. 5094 and Authorize Execution of Consultin and Professional Services Contract for the Pump House 1 Replacement Project Recommendation Authorize the following actions relative to Request for Proposals (RFP) No. 5094, to provide engineering services for the Pump House 1 Replacement Project: (1) Award to Jacobs; (2) Authorize the Mayor to execute the Consultant and Professional Services Contract with Jacobs for Phase 1 (preliminary design) of the project, including project management, data review, geotechnical investigations, survey/mapping, preliminary environmental review, construction financing evaluation, and preparation of a preliminary design report for replacement of Pump House 1 for a not -to -exceed fee of $488,829; and (3) Authorize the City Manager to approve contract amendments not to exceed $150,000. Fiscal Impact The total project costs are expected to be roughly $30 million. Funding for this project will come from the Water Utility Fund and the project is included in the current Capital Improvement Program. The City of Redding (City) plans to obtain State or Federal loans and/or grants, with the design consultant's assistance, to fund a portion of the construction costs for the project. Should funding from loans or grants not materialize, the City may need to issue municipal bonds. Alternative Action The City Council (Council) may choose not to award the contract for Phase 1 preliminary design services for the project. This alternative will delay or eliminate the construction of the Pump House 1 Replacement Project subjecting the City's water system to significant vulnerabilities and potential regulatory action. Report to Redding City Council Re; 4.11(d) --Award Request for Proposals No. 5094 Background April 28, 2020 Paae 2 The City's water system includes two water treatment plants, approximately 555 miles of conveyance and distribution pipelines, 17 groundwater wells, 10 pump stations, and 12 reservoirs providing a total of 33.5 million gallons of storage. The City's Pump House 1 (PHI) is located on the south bank of the Sacramento River, along the Sacramento River Trail and approximately 1/4 mile upriver from the Diestelhorst and Lake Redding Bridges. It pumps water from the Sacramento River to the City's Foothill Water Treatment Plant (FWTP), its largest and primary water supply, providing more than half of the City's drinking water during average and peak demands. PHI is the only source of raw water to the FWTP, making it a very critical component of the City's water supply chain. PHI was constructed in 1937, and has been in continual service since that time. Major modifications were performed in 1968, 1981, and 1989,.to replace aging pumps and add new pumps to increase the station's capacity. It currently has five vertical turbine pumps and its firm capacity is approximately 28.9 million gallons per day (MGD). In 2002, a feasibility study entitled "Draft Feasibility Study for the City of :Redding Pump House No. 1 Fish Protection Project" (Feasibility Study) was prepared for the City by CH2M Hill (now Jacobs). Available funding was insufficient at that time to construct a new pumping facility or even to complete many of the recommended modifications. Therefore, the City was directed by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries to pursue an interim retrofit solution for fish screening, which was installed at PHI in 2006. However, the retrofitted screens depart from standard criteria under certain river and operating conditions and as such are not a long term solution. City staff plans to completely replace PHI because of the following general deficiencies: • Its intake is located in a shallow area of the river that impacts its capacity depending on the status of the Anderson Cottonwood Irrigation District (ACID) dam downriver. • The existing intake and screens may not meet long term state and federal criteria regarding protection of endangered fish species. • Its capacity will need to be increased to meet the future capacity of the FWTP. • Based on the City's General Plan seismic hazard map, it is located in an area of high seismic liquefaction potential and may not be adequate to withstand critical damage during a design earthquake. City staff will consider four project alternatives, or combinations thereof, for replacement of Pump House 1, including: • Replacement at the existing Pump House 1 location; • Replacement at a new river trail location, approximately 2,000 feet upriver; • Replacement at the Keswick Reservoir; and • Replacement with a riverbank filtration collector well system. Design services for the PHI replacement will be broken into two phases. Phase 1 of the design is included in the attached Consulting and Professional Services Contract. It will include preliminary design services for evaluation of the project alternatives, and preparation of a preliminary design report to allow the City to determine the appropriate project alternative to pursue. Report to Redding City Council April 28, 2020 Re; 4.11(d) --Award Request for Proposals No. 5094 Page 3 Phase 2 of the design is not included in the attached Consulting and Professional Services Contract. It will involve the detailed design, environmental compliance documentation, permitting, project funding assistance, right-of-way acquisition, preparation of contract documents, and design services during the bid and construction periods for the selected project alternative. If the City is satisfied with Jacobs' services at the completion of Phase 1 (expected spring of 2021), then staff intends to recommend at that time that the Council authorize negotiation for an amendment with Jacobs to add Phase 2 design services to the Contract. Otherwise, a separate RFP will be required for Phase 2 engineering services. CONSULTANT SELECTION PROCESS A review and selection panel was formed with five members from the Public Works Water and Engineering Divisions. The panel's evaluation was based on consultants' ability and qualifications to perform all phases of the engineering services that will be required, including both Phases 1 and 2. Four proposals, including design fees in sealed envelopes, were received on January 24, 2020. The panel members evaluated and scored each proposal based on consultants' understanding of the project/scope, project approach, experience with fish screens, experience with riverbank filtration collector wells, qualifications of the project team and manager, familiarity with City projects and required procedures, ability to complete projects on-time and within budget, and the proposed teams' location. After reviewing the proposals, the panel elected to interview all four of the firms that proposed. Oral interviews were held on March 12, 2020, at City Hall. Each consultant team was allowed 55 minutes to provide a presentation and answer the City's questions. The questions asked were the same for all consultant teams and were not provided to any team until they arrived for the interview; at which time, each participant was provided the questions in writing. Review Panel members evaluated and scored each consultant team based on their presentation and responses to the questions. After the oral interviews, the review panel: • Combined scores from the consultants' proposals and oral interview to determine their overall score; • Ranked consultants based on their overall score; and • After ranking, opened consultant's sealed fee envelopes. The panel ranked the firms as follows: Rank Firm Fee 1 Jacobs $488,829 2 Black & Veatch $576,210 3 West Yost $997,956 4 Stantech $1,160,516 Applying the evaluation criteria to the proposals and oral interview scoring, it is the opinion of the selection panel that Jacobs is the most qualified team to provide the required services. This opinion is in part based on Jacobs': • Excellent fish screen and riverbank collector well design experience and qualifications; • Environmental and compliance team has a proven track record with similar projects; Report to Redding City Council April 28, 2020 Re; 4.11(d) --Award Request for Proposals No. 5094 Page 4 • Design experience in the Sacramento River near the project area; • Creative design approach and ideas presented in their oral interview; and • Local team. Replacement of Pump House 1 has been included in the City's Water Master Plan for several years and is a necessary and critical improvement for the City's water supply chain. Staff believes that Jacobs is the most qualified team to provide the required design services and recommends that the Council authorize recommendations listed herein, including award to Jacobs' for an amount not -to -exceed $488,829. Council Priority/City Manager Goals • This agenda item is a routine operational item. Attachments Agreement (available online) Location Map CITY OF RE DDI N A ` ' F ° R 1, CITY OF REDDING REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 20, 2021 FROM: Chuck Aukland, Public ITEM NO. 4.11(a) Works Director ***APPROVED BY*** Qlack'Aukland, Public Works Direct 7/7/2021 Seri DeMaagd, Assistant City i 7/12/2021 caukland@ci.redding.ca.us J btippin@cityofredding.org SUBJECT: 4.11(a) --Third Amendment to Consulting and Professional Services Contract (C- 8541) for the PumHouse 1 Re lacement Pro'ect Recommendation Authorize the following actions relative to Consulting and Professional Services Contract (C- 8541) for the Pump House 1 Replacement Project (Project): (1) Authorize the City Manager to execute the Third Amendment to Consultant and Professional Services Contract with Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. (Jacobs), for Phase One (1) (preliminary design) of the Project, for the addition of pumping tests to determine feasibility of future riverbank collector wells for replacement of Pump House 1 for an amount of $450,417 and extending the term by an additional year resulting in a total not -to -exceed contract of $1,089,246; and (2) Authorize the City Manager to approve additional contract amendments not to exceed $50,000. Fiscal Impact The total project costs are expected to be roughly $30 million. Funding for this project will come from the Water Utility Fund and the project is included in the current Capital Improvement Program. The City of Redding (City) plans to obtain State or Federal loans and/or grants, with the design consultant's assistance, to fund a portion of the construction costs for the project. Should funding from loans or grants not materialize, the City may need to issue municipal bonds. The Water Utility has adequate budgeted project funds to cover the third contract amendment. Alternative Action The City Council (Council) may choose not to approve the Third Amendment for the Pump House 1 Replacement Project (C-8541) Consulting and Professional Services Contract. This alternative could prevent Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. (Jacobs) from completing its original scope of work. It will also eliminate the option to replace Pump House 1 with a riverbank collector well type system, which could provide cleaner source water than a traditional fish screen and provide a significant reduction in capital improvement costs associated with upgrading the Foothill Water Treatment Plant (FWTP) in the future. Report to Redding City Council July 12, 2021 Re: 4.11(a) --Authorize Third Amendment to Consulting and Professional Services Contract C- 8541 Page 2 Background On May 5, 2020, the Council authorized execution of Consultant Professional Services Contract (C-8541) for $488,829 with Jacobs to provide Phase 1 design services for the Pump House 1 (PHI) replacement project and the contract was executed on May 7, 2020. Jacobs is currently progressing through Phase 1 of the design and evaluating project alternatives for replacement of PHI. Project alternatives were selected by the City of Redding (City) prior to issuing the Request for Proposals (RFP) for consultant selection and were determined based on a previous feasibility study entitled "Draft Feasibility Study for the City of Redding Pump House No. I Fish Protection Project" prepared for the City by CH2M Hill (now Jacobs) in 2002. Project alternatives under evaluation include the following: 1. Replacement at the existing Pump House 1 location; 2. Replacement at a new river trail location, approximately 2,000 feet upriver; 3. Replacement at the Keswick Reservoir; 4. Replacement with a riverbank filtration collector well system. The recommended third contract amendment is related to Alternative 4 - riverbank filtration collector well system. The Water Utility is interested in the alternative for a riverbank collector well system because it could provide a cleaner source of water to the FWTP than a traditional fish screen used with the other alternatives. This alternative could allow for the FWTP to operate in the winter when the Sacramento River is turbid, and it may also lead to a significant reduction in Capital Improvement costs required to upgrade the FWTP in the future. Given the potential benefits associated with the riverbank collector well alternative, the Water Utility and Jacobs agreed that it would be beneficial for Jacobs to provide a more extensive investigation for this alternative than was included in Jacobs's original contract. To prevent wasted effort and costs associated with investigating sites that are not well suited for riverbank collector well use, Jacobs is using a three-step approach for the additional geotechnical investigation required. Step one included geophysical surveys at several sites along the Sacramento River to scan the soils, map the depth to bedrock, and estimate the depth of sand and gravel layers that could work well with a riverbank collector well system. The first contract amendment for $74,000 provided for this additional work. The geophysical survey indicated promising areas at four sites along the Sacramento River. Step two included geotechnical borings and small-scale pump tests at the four identified sites to verify geophysical surveys, determine groundwater depths, and obtain additional information about the soils and their hydraulic conductivity. The second contract amendment provided for these additional borings. The contract with Jacobs allows for the City Manager to approve up to $150,000 in amendments. To minimize impacts to the project schedule and perform the borings in the winter, during reduced river flows and when the ACID diversion dam is removed, the second contract amendment was executed for $76,000 and was within the City Manager approval limit. However, Jacobs estimated $265,253 for the added pump test work and utilized the budget associated with other tasks in the existing scope and contract to complete this additional work. The borings and small-scale pump testing identified one out of the four sites that may be well suited for a riverbank collector well installation and warrants further investigation. Itis on the northeast side of the Market Street Bridge, near the future bike park site. Report to Redding City Council July 12, 2021 Re: 4.11(a) --Authorize Third Amendment to Consulting and Professional Services Contract C- 8541 Page 3 Step three of the geotechnical investigation will include large -capacity pump testing with monitoring wells at the future bike park site to further validate results from steps one and two, estimate potential collector well capacity, and provide a solid foundation for design of a collector well system, if viable. This third contract amendment will provide for step three of the investigation. It will also allow for Jacobs to complete all of the tasks under its current scope of work, since some costs incurred for the second contract amendment utilized budget from other tasks in the current contract. To accomplish the work, an additional year is also added to the term of the Agreement with this amendment. Replacement of Pump House 1 has been included in the City's Water Master Plan for several years and is a necessary and critical improvement for the City's water supply chain. Staff believes that the additional cost and geotechnical investigation to determine if a riverbank collector well system is viable is worthwhile because it could provide cleaner source water, allow FWTP to operate throughout the winter, and significantly reduce capital improvement costs for future upgrades at the FWTP. The contract amendment has been approved as to form by the City Attorney. Council Priority/City Manager Goals • This agenda item is a routine operational item. Attachments Location Map First Amendment (available online) Second Amendment (available online) Third Amendment (available online) Consulting and Professional Services C-8541 (available online) " ES- :4 TLA I I MKOA MFMI offe-b"I : 4 0 1 FAA ki IL 1, L01 k Background Phase 1 Preliminary Design Report Phase 2 Design Services * Final Design Environmental and Permitting * Services during Const. Funding O Iiiii 1 "0 IIL "T ra 9 i History ♦ Stats • Completed in 1939 • Primary Water Supply o PH 1 ~40% • Whiskeytown ~ 301 • Wells ~ 30% 1 • Upgraded 1968, 1981, i Deficiencies Age Shallow * Fish Screens d"°a e .v x. q� P .n v ..� e h 'si ray r m. d"°a e JACOBS o Began May 2020 o Alternatives Analysis o Existing Location o New River Trail Location o Collector Well System • Preliminary Design Report • Collector Well Feasibility Report ALTERNATIVES 1 7 'IF 'lla.0 11L JACOBS PRRIMINARY OFSIGN R"ORT AL -V LRNATIVE 2 NEW -RAIL WCA AON STATION 1 X50 STA71ON 4150 RM -R 1, OVERHILL DRIVF ACCESS ROAD r iia FIGURE 7-5 0 :41 INV a I I WTI ILI F2WAPj;MmLI IV -a � 111 o PH1 stays in service durin o Cheaper Alternative ON-AUTAN 19MM1M;Mp1;MML MUMEASMOLIM o Engineering Services During Constructio SAS /- RIVER TRAM 'IN-AUTAN 1VEM1M;MP1;MML Project Funding o $40 Milli Saving % * $15 Million o State/Federal 1 0 36 Am A& A& am= o WIFIA Act • SRF (State Revolving Fun • Fish Passage/Creek Restoration Grants city df Redden Jcr sh LV'at9v ns i4l bee EfpalaCy,.adnntrgen 53022d.:bOZ }uia�tkWns�g�r^ ty fraddrng.usg De,iSsfrCGnztruaium eon cxgh pian 2024 BACKGROUND C3.y cf R ddetg (City) -d 3aouas Engin.�ridg C .up In:. J. -Ids) — e ralma`dng T.a #i d�—,,rued....Thi 'reg .:eed I e ,dng 49.31 Pim.. k— fa 19PS1i 4-aath T.,ea••^ 1. R—,,,IR dCs�g Cd+dfrznt Put vxaa•.rs ra4x'xraszrfcdvxr ih a m-tts Rndar and gr::rm3's{c, t :h F th 4Y d. T dr t {FRtTP 11n FtVTP th kilp i s t Y � —p 3 8 m th turf . f Cn t C k d d Both PSI 1 h FVVTP 4'�Y � Fua haerr danGif�ntrat taw i C the tiny f R d..s,�g s L Saza<d M tka9rcwa Pan a=atppm fa dank waattn meso nre au p,—,sbnd msIg,,-1t. auppq 4he m d `.g F—ar Plans. FS a whsd.wd is, reOse:amant 4c nnea,-nam d—gn and sevr—n-d.rds, and iu prte..t.q..d.. sgaeasnc„AngEtiangerw:... Spv.es Aw '.ESg} ted fsh The iak pvpw,ad.p.,,prd.1—sim rs Ws ed,,y.pr,,:c:...tefy18c0aeek upaid ,of the.. sfarg PSI and the ax s,inp-1,arts Thi mmoPusd F—p stamen m0 n6vaa an in€ab sl—lun,, a fish sd can a pu p staJan and —ess. ,,,ad-, ins.. 0—hill.: nue Je-y C,wak s pn-s:_n ly a' yen d—dar.an &-l-ed xad..d grade a,d.he Clue fRedd ..n,arta Ra.r .,ad V. t--gatad .e.7a,al -[,am JENNY CREEK FISH PASSAGE The Cay s. cdnsbdenng J -my Cti.ak fsh pessag na,rowament, ss par.:.csf the PSS raol— s,,ncw hath prGectsses as rn - Frdx..a<y and —kd gam add,1j a? s pps,1-d:e m,tC dawrefu argznaach The ex�,;rng.i nng 0—kut its h R t i g th i t ice i f n t' ',s. also h g T thyd di, ,m.f ttr,. —I t%f may _ped p i d p ag rrG 4 S R fid .,n and la>c fall -run i.hins.k .anr.a. ..as "a+l as Cal farn..a Cenral hzallay sna head b-1 F I rat rr,agxuue .7enSs—m t,...lr*} api-air M&'i n.-I,,at c.'a'Jarsa, "p, .: madam say passasaa w.dv—, an erg,neared F hwray a 6—,Pan ands. dr vih, f p. -ding C fi f e c # "-yTdNud hi faff—ng ins—sed �rnir',skrx,tare Iran,p n thef sear f a tra, w.sEng and rai—I..urffr an ,sand .ra,na daa,:. Impm ,,si aces.,s fir fth io. €,v[ ia(up_,a m spawning ng and naaring t;aMsl- . viena 9,Aha, 6 efi,s—liw f., fish, -o a ldlife h..tIbt ,wale,, quaftk, srnd in,�grwa•ad ivasyg— f,-fi an. uanarg ng cafi rong$c+'ui.-pp.0 msrfish massage -d hadi.Cmtprdaerz-rsmis va fiinmy +.',week_ ON-AUTAN IVMMIM;MP1;MML Final Design: 2022026 Environmental and Permitting: 2022026 •ing Applications: 20 Construction: 1 999 Recommendation o Authorize Fifth Amendment * Increase $5,495,518 TotalContract$6,584,764 o Authorize City Manager to approve additional