Attachment A- Report of Geotechnical Investigation

CRUDE UNLOADING FACILITY PRELIMINARY STORMWATER PROPOSAL

DOC NO: 457832-PSP 1 REV. A, JANUARY 31, 2013

Attachment A- Report of Geotechnical Investigation

R E P O R T

PHILLIPS 66 COMPANY FERNDALE REFINERY

FERNDALE, WA REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

CRUDE UNLOADING FACILITY – SOUTH OPTION

URS Job #33763923

Prepared for

Phillips 66 Company Ferndale Refinery 3901 Unick Road Ferndale, Washington 98248

January 15, 2013

1501 Fourth Avenue, Suite 1400

Seattle, Washington 98101-1616

URS Corporation Z:\Conoco Phillips Ferndale\Crude Unloading 2012\Report\Final Report\Report 01-15-12.doc Wed16Jan2013 @ 15:57 p3/21

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 1

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................... 1

3.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES .................................................................................................................... 1

4.0 PERTINENT SITE HISTORY ......................................................................................................... 2

5.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ....................................................................................................... 2

5.1 GEOLOGIC SETTING ................................................................................................................. 2

5.2 SUBSURFACE ............................................................................................................................. 3

5.3 GROUNDWATER ....................................................................................................................... 4

6.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY TESTING ........................................................................................ 4

7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................... 4

7.1 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................................. 4

7.2 SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................................... 6

7.3 SITE GRADING AND ITS EFFECTS ......................................................................................... 6

7.4 RETAINING WALLS .................................................................................................................. 8

7.5 TRACK AND UNLOADING AREA SUPPORT ........................................................................ 8

7.6 MITIGATION OF SETTLEMENTS ............................................................................................ 9

7.6.1 Reducing the Magnitude of Settlement ............................................................................... 10

7.6.2 Modifying the Rate or Sequence of Settlement .................................................................. 10

7.6.3 Use of Wick Drains ............................................................................................................. 11

7.7 EARTHWORK AND GENERAL CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS ........................... 12

7.8 MISCELLANEOUS CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................ 13

8.0 LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................................... 13

Z:\Conoco Phillips Ferndale\Crude Unloading 2012\Report\Final Report\Report 01-15-12.doc Wed16Jan2013 @ 15:57 p4/21

FIGURES

FIGURE 1 SITE LOCATION MAP

FIGURE 2 SITE PLAN AND BORING LOCATION

FIGURE 3a ESTIMATED PROFILE A – A’

FIGURE 3b ESTIMATED PROFILE A – A’ (CONTINUE)

FIGURE 4 RECOMMENDED LATERAL PRESSURES FROM SURCHARGE LOADING

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A – 2012 FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM

APPENDIX B – LOGS OF PREVIOUS BORINGS NEARBY

APPENDIX C – 2012 GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

URS 1

Z:\Conoco Phillips Ferndale\Crude Unloading 2012\Report\Final Report\Report 01-15-12.doc

REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED CRUDE UNLOADING FACILITY – SOUTH OPTION

PHILLIPS 66 COMPANY, FERNDALE REFINERY FERNDALE, WA

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation for the proposed Crude Unloading Facility Project at the Phillips 66 Company, Ferndale Refinery. The Crude Unloading Facility Project consists of the Rail Spur – South Option which will be about 6919 feet long (1.3 miles). This report addresses the current understanding of subsurface conditions at the site based on the URS 2012 field investigation program for this project and previous borings drilled nearby in 1952 through 2012 for other projects, and provides recommendations for site development, foundation design and construction of the proposed facilities.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The proposed Crude Unloading Facility is to provide additional flexibility of receiving crude oil by rail in addition to the current ship and pipeline capabilities. Information provided indicates that the rail will enter the property at about Elevation 200 near 2nd and M Streets, proceeding south just east of M Street (see attached Site Plan, Figure 2). The single track spur then bears southeastward near the south end of the Final Holding Pond, expanding to 4 or 5 tracks east of Station 146 and terminating in a single track configuration about 300 feet north of Slater Road and 800 feet east of Byers Road. The current plan shows that along the rail alignment, cuts up to about 6 feet and compacted fills up to about 25 feet will be required to attain proposed grades. The fill will be placed as an embankment with side slopes inclined at 2 horizontal to 1 vertical (2H:1V). Further information about the distribution of cut and fill is presented in Section 7.3 Site Grading and Effects. A concrete unloading platform approximately 94 feet wide and 1700 feet long will support the multi-track area east of about Station 150. The portion of the alignment initially occupied by a single track may be expanded to two tracks in a future construction phase. The existing Olympic Pipeline that now approximately occupies the future rail alignment north of 6th Street will be re-located eastward, likely sometime after the start of the rail construction work.

A site location map is shown on Figure 1, and a site plan showing the approximate layout of the proposed facility is presented on Figure 2.

3.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES

The scope of services for this phase of the project was identified in the URS proposal of October 3, 2012, and included the following:

TASK 1 - Data Review

Review existing subsurface information along the proposed rail spur and identify previous borings and lab test data that can be used to evaluate the current project. This information would be used to the

URS 2


maximum extent to reduce the level of field exploration and lab testing effort for the project. A number of pertinent previous borings by URS have been identified and are shown on the attached Figure 2 - Site Plan, and Appendix B.

TASK 2 - Subsurface Exploration

Soil and groundwater conditions need to investigate at locations along the alignment where previous borings are not available. Five boring locations (designated UR-1-12 through UR-5-12 on the attached Site Plan) are proposed along the initial designed alignment, and borings will be drilled using hollow stem auger drilling equipment provided by the URS drilling subcontractor Environmental Drilling Inc. (EDI). EDI has substantial experience on the site, and has a very favorable safety record. The borings will be drilled to depths ranging from 25 to 40 feet, for a total of about 160 feet of drilling. Samples will be collected at 5-foot intervals using Standard Penetration Test (SPT) methods. Relatively undisturbed samples of the potentially compressible clay/silt will be obtained using Shelby tubes. Pocket penetrometer tests will be performed on a portion of the clay samples to measure the undrained shear strength in the field.

TASK 3 - Laboratory Testing

Laboratory tests will be performed on selected samples of soil obtained during drilling in order to assist in estimating the physical and engineering properties of the soils encountered. Tests for moisture content, grain size distribution, plasticity (Atterberg Limits) and, if soft soils are encountered, consolidation characteristics will be performed.

TASK 4 - Engineering Analysis and Report Preparation

Evaluate the allowable soil bearing pressures and deformation modulus values for design of track slabs and miscellaneous footings; estimate the magnitude and rate of settlement that will be induced by the new fill and assess the impact of the settlement on the new facilities; evaluate the appropriate types of retaining walls for new fill and lateral earth pressures for design of walls and any underground detention vaults or culverts; evaluate other geotechnical design parameters for static and seismic loading as needed for structures proposed; prepare a geotechnical report that presents the results of the field investigation and laboratory testing, and recommendations for design and construction of the project.

4.0 PERTINENT SITE HISTORY

In 2012, 2007, 2005, 1982, 1976, 1973, and 1952 URS (formerly Dames & Moore) drilled over 20 borings near the immediate vicinity of the currently proposed alignment. The borings were drilled to depths ranging from approximately 20 to 122 feet. The ground surface at that time was at approximately Elevation 125 to 190 feet.

5.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

5.1 GEOLOGIC SETTING

Published information (Dragovich et al., 2002) on the geologic setting for this area indicates that the site is occupied at the ground surface primarily by the geologic unit identified as “Modified Land (Qml)”. This unit consists of controlled (engineered) and uncontrolled fill. Also mapped in the vicinity of the project site is the geologic unit identified as “Glaciomarine Drift (Qgdm)”. This Glaciomarine Drift unit

URS 3


typically consists of glacially deposited poorly stratified gravelly silt containing lenses to thick layers of fluvial, deltaic, and glaciomarine gravel, sand, silt, and clay.

5.2 SUBSURFACE

Subsurface conditions for the proposed Crude Unloading Facility have been estimated from the five borings drilled during this investigation (Borings UR-1-12 to UR-5-12), and at least twenty borings advanced by URS (previously Dames & Moore) drilled for previous projects nearby. The ground surface elevation at the borings varied approximately from 125 to 190 feet. Figure 2 shows the locations of various borings drilled in the vicinity of the project, and the location of key elements of the proposed facility. Logs of the five 2012 borings for this project and a description of the field exploration program are presented in Appendix A. The logs of all previous borings are presented in Appendix B. An estimated profile along the proposed rail alignment is presented on Figures 3a and 3b.

Soil conditions in general include an upper zone of medium stiff sandy fill or stiff clay fill, then very stiff to hard clay, transitioning to a medium stiff to soft form of the clay below about 15 feet depth, overlying a very stiff sandy silt or dense sand to silty sand. A more detailed discussion of the soil layers encountered, starting at the surface and progressing downward, is presented below. The soil layers have been numbered to simplify future references to them in the recommendations.

Stratum 1a- Silty Sand to Sand (SM/SP-SM) (Fill)

This layer mainly exists from Station 121+00 to Station 174+00 near ground surface, with brown to gray silty SAND to poorly-graded SAND with silt and gravel, loose to dense. N-values ranged from 6 to 41 blows per foot. The layer thickness was approximately estimated as 1 to 10 feet.

Stratum 1b- Clayey Silt to Silty Clay (ML/CL) (Fill)

This layer mainly exists from Station 100+00 to Station 121+00 near ground surface, with brown to gray sandy SILT/CLAY, medium stiff to stiff. N-values ranged from 12 to 14 blows per foot. The layer thickness was approximately estimated as 1 to 5 feet.

Stratum 2- Stiff to Very Stiff Lean Clay (CL)

In general this layer is brownish yellow to dark gray in color and stiff to very stiff in consistency throughout the proposed project area. Approximate soil strength measured in the field from pocket penetrometer testing indicated that the undrained shear strength ranged between 1,000 and 4,000 pounds per square foot (psf). N-values ranged from 9 to 28 blows per foot. The layer thickness was approximately estimated as 6 to 15 feet.

Stratum 3- Medium Stiff to Soft Lean Clay (CL)

This layer is generally brownish yellow to gray in color and medium stiff to soft in consistency. Pocket penetrometer tests indicated that the undrained shear strength in this stratum ranged from less than 250 to 7,500 psf. N-values generally ranged from 2 to 9 blows per foot. The layer thickness ranged from 25 to 28 feet where encountered, but the layer was very thin or absent at some locations east of M Street, for example in the vicinity of the new fuel oil storage tank planned at the northeast corner of 4th and M Streets (URS draft report, June 15, 2012).

URS 4


Stratum 4- Very Stiff Sandy SILT (ML)

This layer is generally gray in color and very stiff in consistency, with a trace of fine gravel. N-values were typically 16 to more than 50 blows per foot. This layer was encountered in Borings UR-1-12, UR-3-12, and U-1-05, respectively. It was typically 39 to 47 feet below the ground surface with thickness of about 6 feet.

Stratum 5- Dense to Very Dense Silty Sand (SM)

This layer is generally gray to brown in color and dense to very dense in character, with a trace of fine gravel. N-values were typically 30 to more than 50 blows per foot. This layer was encountered starting at about Elevation 110 in previous Borings U-1-05 and B-1-73 on the west side of M Street, but starting much higher at about Elevation 140 to 148 feet in borings DM-3-74, DM-6-74 , DM7-74, U-1-12 and U-2-12 on the east side of M Street. It was not encountered in the 2012 borings for this project.

5.3 GROUNDWATER

In previous investigations nearby, groundwater was not encountered in most borings. Exception are the reporting of groundwater level at 19 feet below ground surface at about Elevation 139 at Boring U-5-05 (on 5th Street and about 120 feet west of M Street). During the 2012 investigation, water was encountered only in two of the five holes, i.e. in UR-1-12 at a depth of about 38 feet (Elevation 91), and in UR-3-12 at a depth of about 15 feet (Elevation 152) at the time of drilling. Water was measured at a depth of 7 feet in the piezometer installed at U-4-05 on August 24, 2005 , with a well depth of 30 feet (about Elevation 130 feet), one day after the boring was completed. Perched shallow groundwater may be encountered from 3 feet to 5 feet below ground surface at occasional locations on this site.

6.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY TESTING

Field tests were performed in field with SPT sampling and pocket penetrometer measurements of the unconfined compressive strength of the native clay/silt soils during this investigation. The results of these tests are reported on the attached boring logs at the depth of the measurements.

After the field investigation, selected soil samples were tested in the laboratory for physical characteristics to assess the anticipated performance of the foundation soil. Tests for moisture content, grain size distribution, and Atterberg limit tests were performed on selected soil samples. Two consolidation tests were performed on two selected samples to provide information for estimating the magnitude and rate of consolidation settlements. Test results are shown in Appendix C, and for certain tests are shown on the logs of borings at the depth of the sample.

7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

A summary of recommended soil parameters to be used in design of the various structures and equipment planned for the facility is presented in Table 1. The values provided in Table 1 have been estimated using a combination of measured field and laboratory data together with published data on similar soils. It

URS 5


should be noted that in most cases the values listed in Table 1 are intended to represent average or slightly on the conservative side of average conditions.

Table 1 - Summary of Recommended Soil Parameters Imported Stratum 1 Stratum 2 Stratum 3 Stratum 4 Stratum 5 Fill On-Site Fill Lean Lean Sandy Silty SAND Silty SAND/ CLAY CLAY SILT SAND

Item med dense

SILT/CLAY med dense/ med stiff

Stiff to very stiff

Soft to med stiff very stiff

dense to very dense

Typical Uncorrected N-values (bpf) N/A 4 to 12 10 to 29 2 to 6 16 to 53 30 to >50

Pocket Penetrometer (tsf) N/A N/A 1.5 to >4.5 0.5 to 1.5 2.5 N/A

Total Unit Weight (pcf) 130 120 115 105 125 125

Undrained Friction Angle (degr) 36 30 0 0 0 38

Undrained Cohesion c (psf) 0 0 2500 500 3500 0

Static Elastic Modulus E (ksf) 1600 800 1000 300 1600 1600

Poisson's Ratio v 0.35 0.3 0.4 0.45 0.4 0.35

Resilient Modulus Er (ksi) 8.7(*) 2.0 (*) 2.17(*) 1.45(*) 2.17(*) N/A

Active Earth Pressure Coeff Ka 0.24 0.34 0.65 N/A N/A N/A

At-Rest Earth Pressure Coeff Ko 0.38 0.5 0.45 N/A N/A N/A

Passive Earth Pressure Coeff Kp 2.6 2.0 1.5 N/A N/A N/A

Seismic Active Earth Pressure Kae 0.50 0.59 0.59 N/A N/A N/A

Seismic Passive Earth Pressure Kpe 2.1 1.6 1.6 N/A N/A N/A

Soil-to-Concrete Friction Coeff 0.5 0.35 0.4 N/A N/A N/A

Compression Index Cc N/A 0.03 0.02 0.1 N/A N/A

Re-compression Index Cr N/A 0.003 0.002 0.01 N/A N/A

Coeff of Consolidation Cv (ft2/day) N/A 0.32 0.25 0.15 N/A N/A

Notes: 1. (*) Based on "Method for Railroad Track Foundation Design" by Dingqing Li, et al April 1998. 2. The value of Kp includes a 1.5 factor of safety. All other values are considered average to slightly

conservative side of average.

URS 6


7.2 SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

The geotechnical-related parameters to be used for seismic design in accordance with AREMA Manual of Railway Engineering provisions are evaluated as described in Part 1 of Chapter 9. The site peak ground accelerations for potential earthquakes with average return period of 100 years, 475 years, and 2,400 years are obtained from the Figures 9-1-1 to 9-1-3 corresponding to a latitude 48.82 degrees and a longitude of –122.693 degrees, the coordinates of Boring UR-3-12. The recommended values for this site are listed in Table 2.

Table 2 - Seismic Parameters

Ave. Return Bedrock Site Peak Ground

Period (Yrs) Peak Acc. (g) Coefficient Acc. (g)

100 0.15 1.2 0.18

475 0.28 1.2 0.34 2400 0.33 1.2 0.40

Based on Table 1-5 in Chapter 9 of AREMA, the profile at this site is assumed to be consistent with “Soil Type 2”, for which a Site Coefficient = 1.2 is appropriate.

The potential for seismic-induced liquefaction at this site is very low because of the very low groundwater level, and the clayey or very dense nature of the soils.

7.3 SITE GRADING AND ITS EFFECTS

The most significant aspect of development of the site is the placement of up to 25 feet of fill for the purpose of bringing the track subgrade areas up to the proposed future grade of approximately elevations 155 to 167, based on information presented in the cross sections received from CH2M Hill on December 3, 2012. After a series of generally minor cuts and fills along M Street, significant thickness of fill starts from about Station 131 with 6 feet thickness, then gradually increasing to 20 to 25 feet starting about Station 136. This maximum height of fill will be placed over an approximately 1200-foot length between Station 136 and Station 148. The fill height then gradually decreases to zero near Station 162 just west of Byers Road. Fill is again required beyond Station 171 where up to 5 feet may be need at the end of the alignment (Station 174). The grading effort will induce moderate magnitudes of settlement in the native clayey soil, particularly in the Stratum 3 soft to medium stiff clay zone. This settlement could adversely affect the performance of the track, unloading platform and utilities unless efforts are made to induce the settlement prior to construction of the critical elements of the facility. If the fill embankment is constructed using retaining walls, adverse effects could occur for certain types of less flexible wall systems.

Estimates of consolidation settlement due to fill placement were made using the commercially available software “UniSettle”, with coefficient of consolidation values as listed in Table 1 - Recommended Soil Parameters. The estimate considered the varying heights of fill over the 3130 feet long by about 30 to 120 feet wide grading area along the alignment. Results of the estimate indicate that settlement at the

URS 7


location of highest fill, i.e. near Station 136 (hence near Boring UR-1-12), will be approximately 7 to 8 inches. At a distance of 1200 feet to the east, i.e. closer to the geometric center of the fill area, the settlement is also estimated to be 7 to 8 inches, and decreases to less than 2 inches at about Station 132 where the rail turns east from M Street. These settlement magnitudes are only due to placement of the fill. Additional settlement will later occur due to loading of the tracks via occupation by the unit trains. The estimated magnitude of settlement from this live load source is discussed in Section 7.5.

It should be noted that the settlement estimates provided above were adjusted downward by 25 to 35 percent from the theoretical values produced by the UniSettle software to account for URS observations made in the Anacortes refineries and elsewhere in the western Skagit and Whatcom County area that show actual measured settlements of stiff clay over soft clay profiles are typically less than predicted. The presence of the upper stiff to hard clay layer apparently tends to spread the applied loads and reduce the settlements in practice.

The settlements given above are expected to occur over an extended period of time that is related to the coefficient of consolidation (Cv) and thickness of the soil layers. URS estimates that 50 percent of the settlement magnitude will occur over a period of 3 to 4 years, while the remainder is expected to occur over a period of 20 years or more. During a construction period lasting roughly 3 months, only about 15 percent of the estimated settlement magnitude will occur. That means roughly 5 to 6 inches of post-construction settlement could occur just due to the weight of the new railway embankment. However, differential settlements over a typical 100-foot length of track would relatively small, except near Station 131 where the thickness of new fill increases more abruptly.

If the existing Olympic Pipeline is left in place during initial site grading work, the placement of new embankment fill will increase the vertical and lateral pressure on the pipe. Available information indicates that the crown of the existing pipe ranges from approximately 5 feet below the existing ground surface near Station 115+00 to more than 20 feet below the existing ground surface near Station 105+00 and northward. The height of new rail embankment fill will be a maximum of about 8 feet, also at about Station 115+00. The increase in vertical and lateral pressure on the pipe at that station will be approximately 1040 psf and 520 psf respectively if the new embankment is constructed of granular compacted soil with a total unit weight of 130 pcf. The magnitude of increased pressure on the pipe will be less at other locations where the height of new fill is reduced or the depth to the pipe is greater. An assessment should be made regarding the possible structural effects of this increased pressure on the pipe.

New embankment fill placed over the existing pipeline will also likely induce some settlement of the Stratum 2 and Stratum 3 soils that underlie the pipe. The Figure 3a soil profile presents a very conservative interpretation of the estimated soil profile. Borings drilled on the east side of M Street, for example those drilled in 1974 and in 2012 for tanks in the northeast corner of 4th and M Streets (URS, 2012), have not shown the soft Stratum 3 Clay that was encountered in Boring B-5-76 and other past borings west of M Street. Assuming that the soils underlying the pipeline are primarily medium stiff to stiff or better, the new rail embankment fill at Station 115+00 could result in an approximately estimated 1-inch of settlement of the pipeline at that location. No estimates have been made of settlements due to the weight of unit trains operating on the future rail.

Mitigation options are available for limiting the increases in pressure on the pipeline due to the new embankment fill. One option is to install a box culvert over the pipeline so that weight of the new embankment fill is transferred to soil below the pipe invert via the walls and footing of the culvert. A space would need to be left between the top of the soil and the underside of the culvert to prevent the transfer of load from the new fill. Other options can also be explored.

URS 8


7.4 RETAINING WALLS

If there is a desire or need to limit the footprint of the new railway embankment, retaining walls or steeper reinforce soil slopes can be used in place of the 2H:1V compacted fill slopes. Relatively inexpensive retaining structures constructed of welded wire baskets such as Hilfiker walls or gabion walls are attractive in that they can tolerate settlements without significant damage. At the locations of highest fill, these walls would need to be tiered, and the backfill reinforced with geogrids. Other less expensive options are metal or concrete bin wall elements without soil reinforcement, concrete blocks such as Lock-Block units with soil reinforcement, or mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls using precast concrete blocks or panels. A combination of lower retaining structure and upper sloping compacted fill could also be used.

Lateral earth pressures used for design of the wall structure may be estimated using parameters listed in Table 1 of this report. Active earth pressures should be used for design of the wall. During an earthquake the active and at-rest pressures will temporarily increase and the passive pressures will temporarily decrease, as described by Whitman (1990) using the Mononobe Okabe (MO) equation and by Sherif et al (1982) using bench-scale experimentation. This seismic-induced pressure acts over the full height of the subsurface portion of wall, and must be added to the static component of earth pressure. Table 1 gives the combined static plus seismic earth pressure coefficient (Kae) per the MO equation for the 475-year return period (AREMA Ground Motion Level 2) ground acceleration levels presented in Table 2above.

Lateral earth pressures on the wall from vertical surcharge loads on the ground behind the wall can be estimated using the relationships in Figure 4. The AREMA-recommended surcharge for each track occupied by a Cooper E-80 train is approximately 1800 psf over the full length of the track and over a width equal to the 8-foot length of the railroad ties.

All fill soil used behind the wall, and in locations that will support the unloading platform above, should be compacted in not more than 8-inch thick lifts to 95 percent of the maximum dry density as measured using ASTM D-1557. The compaction moisture content should be within 2 percent of the optimum value as measured by ASTM D-1557.

Allowable soil bearing pressures of 2500 pounds per square foot (psf) may be used for design of retaining wall foundations. A check must be made on the global stability of the retaining wall with backfill supporting surcharges from the various tracks and, if utilized, a concrete offloading slab. Internal stability of the wall should also be checked as part of the formal design process.

7.5 TRACK AND UNLOADING AREA SUPPORT

Under the current design concept, each of the four unloading tracks are supported directly on 10-foot wide by 3-foot thick reinforced concrete pads running the length of the platform, and separated from adjoining 0.50 to 1-foot thick portions of the pad by construction joints. The platform will be supported on a gravel/ballast base course placed on subgrade soil consisting of either existing fill or native soil in cut areas, or compacted fill where embankments are required. Per guidance from AREMA, the worst case loading applied by each of the tracks carrying a unit train is approximately 1800 psf applied to the 8-foot width of the ties, which is then transferred to the 10-foot wide track pad. The centerlines of the track

URS 9


pads are separated by 22 to 26 feet. Additional load is applied by the concrete pad to the extent it replaces subgrade soil or is set higher than the ground surface. URS assumes that this load could be applied to all tracks for long periods.

The track/train loads will cause the following settlements above and beyond the settlement induced by the placement of fill for grading that was discussed earlier in Section 7.3:

Existing Foundation Settlement - Additional consolidation settlement of the existing Strata 2 and 3 clay layers. The magnitude of additional settlement from this source is estimated at 2 to 3 inches where more than 3 tracks are shown. Following the application of the full track load, approximately 50 percent of this component of additional settlement is expected to occur over a period of 24 to 48 months, provided the load stays in place. The remainder is expected to occur over a period of 10 years or more, but only if the full load level remains on the tracks for much or all of that period. URS is of the opinion that the actual episodal nature of the application of the track load will reduce the amount of settlement occurring beneath the unloading platform to perhaps one-half to two-thirds of the estimated settlement.

Compacted Fill Embankment Compression Settlement - Compression settlement of the new embankment fill due to stresses induced by the track load of 1800 psf. The magnitude of settlement from this source depends on the type of fill selected for the embankment. If an offsite borrow source is used to obtain granular fill, the settlement magnitude under each track is estimated at less than approximately 1 to 2 inches. If the fill consists of the clay to sandy clay from on-site borrow areas, this component of settlement could be 2 to 3 inches. This component of additional settlement is expected to occur rapidly, i.e. as the load is applied for the case of sandy fill, or less than a week for a clayey fill from on-site.

The concrete platform should be underlain by a base course consisting of 1-foot of ballast or well graded aggregate to provide a firm uniform bearing surface that will not deteriorate upon saturation. A modulus of subgrade reaction kv of 250 pounds per cubic inch (pci) can be used to design a concrete platform (slab) that is supported on primarily granular compacted fill embankment. The modulus of subgrade reaction should be reduced to 200 pci if the embankment fill is fine grained silt and clay from on-site sources. The long term performance of the platform will be controlled by the consolidation settlement of the underlying Stratum 3 clay. If no preloading or surcharging efforts are made, the total and differential settlement magnitudes estimated above could result in cracking of thinner portions of the concrete platform, depending on the amount of reinforcement incorporated. It seems unlikely that the 3-foot thick track pad portion of the platform would crack, but relative tilting of joint-separated adjoining portions of the platform could occur.

Where no platform is planned, and tracks are supported on ballast placed on the new fill or the existing soils at the site, resilient modulus values for design are presented in Table 1.

7.6 MITIGATION OF SETTLEMENTS

It may be possible to accommodate the magnitudes of post-construction settlements by planning for adjustments of the elevations of tracks and associated pads, platforms and utilities. If the magnitudes of settlement under loads from placement of fill for site grading and from use of the tracks and platforms by

URS 10


vehicles and for storage of materials are considered unacceptable, some strategies for mitigation of the settlement are possible, as described in the next two sections.

7.6.1 Reducing the Magnitude of Settlement

Methods of reducing the magnitude of settlement by ground improvement are possible, although they will be relatively expensive. One of the most efficient methods of ground improvement is to install aggregate piers, also known as stone columns, Vibrocolumns, Geopiers and other trade names. The procedure involves installation of compacted well graded gravel 24-inch to 36-inch diameter columns through the compressible soil layer to firm soils below such that the overall soil mass is stiffer. The columns would be installed at 7 to 10-foot spacing. Another slightly more expensive method is to install soil-mix columns that are formed by in-place mixing of the existing soil with cement using a single paddle or auger mixer, and achieving an unconfined compressive strength of at least 200 pounds per square inch (psi) within the columns. The end product is also a stiffer, less compressible overall soil mass on which the structures and equipment are supported. The total and differential settlements can be reduced by approximately 75 percent using these types of ground improvement.

Settlements can also be reduced by using lightweight fill materials such as expanded polystyrene (EPS) blocks marketed under various names (e.g. Geofoam). The total unit weight ranges from roughly 1 to 2 pounds per cubic feet. It is available locally from at least one supplier (Insulfoam of Kent, Washington). This type of product is not recommended for more intensive loading situations due to its relatively low strength and high compressibility. Geofoam could be used beneath the tracks and unloading platform instead of on-site or off-site borrow soils. For protection against deterioration from spilled petrochemicals, the blocks would need to be encased in a geomembrane wrapping as the blocks are assembled into the desired geometry. Only reduction of settlement due to the grading process can be achieved using this material. Given that some regular granular fill must still be used directly beneath the tracks and platform, the total and differential settlement reduction is estimated at 75 to 80 percent.

7.6.2 Modifying the Rate or Sequence of Settlement

Methods of inducing the settlement in advance of placement of structures and equipment are possible, primarily in the form of “preloading” and “surcharging” the site so as to induce most of the settlement prior to placement of the structures and equipment of concern. Preloading is the process of applying a surface load that will match the future load from new fill and new structures and equipment, and waiting until an acceptable portion of the settlement occurs before final placement of the actual structures and equipment. Surcharging is the process of applying a surface load in excess of the future load from new fill and new structures/equipment, in order to accelerate the settlement and permit earlier construction.

A preload for single-track segments of this project should consist of bringing the new embankment fill (and retaining wall if used) up to the top of the future track level, then adding another 6 feet of moderately compacted fill (to about 110 pcf density) over the full top width of the embankment to simulate the effect of the track load on the native subgrade soil. As the embankment fill will already be up to 25 feet high, this extra fill may be difficult to place. Preloading of the single track segment may not be warranted if adjustments to the track elevation can be made as the settlement slowly occurs.

A preload for the unloading platform segment of the project should consist of bringing the new embankment fill, where needed, up to the top of the tracks, then adding another approximately 17 feet of moderately compacted fill (110 pcf density) to achieve approximately 1800 psf of pressure applied uniformly over the full platform area. Where the existing grade is already above the finished platform elevation, and cutting to the final grade is required (up to 4 or 5 feet maximum cut expected), only enough

URS 11


preload fill to achieve the 17 feet recommended preload pressure need be added. Acceleration of the settlement process can be achieved by installing wick drains from the existing ground surface to the bottom of the compressible Stratum 3 clay. The wick drains will consist of geocomposite strips with an in-plane permeability high enough to provide a ready drainage path downward to the Stratum 5 silty sand below, or upward to a 6-inch minimum thickness granular fill layer at the existing ground surface for discharge of water squeezed from the compressible clay. The faster the water can be drained, the faster the settlement will occur. Flow of water down into the Stratum 4 sandy silt is not expected due to the low permeability of that layer. Further information about URS recommendations for wick drains is presented in Section 7.6.3 below.

Monitoring of settlement of the fill is recommended. This may be accomplished by placing settlement plates at the base of the fill with vertical pipes to the surface that can be surveyed as the fill is raised. Alternatively, a remote read-out liquid-level device can be installed at the base of the fill, and settlements read electronically at a location adjacent to the fill area. Vibrating wire (VW) sensor systems are recommended for the settlement monitoring. Available products include the Model 4650 Settlement Sensor by Geokon or the VW Settlement Cell by Durham GeoSlope Indicator (Vented VW Settlement Cell #52612420). With these systems the VW sensor is mounted on a settlement plate that is placed on the ground on which the new fill is to be placed. A cable and liquid-filled tube will extend from the sensor to a monitoring station that must be placed on ground that is not expected to settle, i.e. at least 50 feet from the edge of the fill area. The accuracy of these systems is typically plus or minus 0.25 inches. It is important to place these instruments and take initial readings before fill placement begins. The Geotechnical Engineer should review the settlements to assess whether actual settlement rates are slower than those anticipated. If that situation occurs, a contingency plan can be created to add more fill to surcharge the site and speed the desired amount of settlement.

Where large preloads have been placed, removal of the preload fill will result in a small amount of “rebound”, i.e. upward movement of the ground surface, in response to removal of the preload pressure. This magnitude of movement in the reverse, i.e. downward, direction will likely occur as loads from the new construction (tracks and platforms) and the unit trains cause “recompression” of the compressible Stratum 3 soil. The magnitudes of these rebound and recompression movements will be small and are not expected to adversely affect the facility.

7.6.3 Use of Wick Drains

Wick drains have been used on several refinery projects in Northwest Washington to speed the process of settlement during new fill placement or during preloading and /or surcharging to reduce post construction settlement of structures. An analysis of the expected rate of settlement at the Crude Unloading Facility was performed using various coefficients of consolidation (Cv) and spacings of drains. Settlement rate data for soil consolidation tests for this project was used to back-calculate a coefficient of consolidation that is as realistic as possible. The results of the analysis indicate that use of a wick drain spacing of 8 feet is expected to speed the consolidation process such that 90% of the estimated settlement presented above will occur in approximately 3 months. Larger wick drain spacings will result in correspondingly slower rates of settlement, and smaller spacings will result in faster rates of settlement.

The 8-foot spacing of wick drains should be used for all areas with a combination of significant amounts of fill, i.e. at least 5 feet, plus settlement-sensitive structures and utilities. The use of wick drains may not be warranted if track and ballast adjustments can be made as settlement occurs, if the amount of fill and hence the magnitude of settlement is less, and if settlement-sensitive utilities can be protected using carrier pipes. The wick drains should be placed in a grid pattern with each row offset one half the drain

URS 12


spacing from adjoining rows. The grid of the wick drains should extend at least 10 feet beyond the edges of the unloading platform and beyond the crest of the fill embankments. Wick drains should be installed in areas where future embankments are planned. The appropriate method of estimating the number of wick drains in a gridded area is to divide the total area by the area formed by an equilateral triangle of 3 drains at the desired spacing.

The disadvantage of using wick drains at this site is that the more compressible Stratum 3 soil is relatively deep, requiring wick drains that are 40 to 50 feet in length. Furthermore the Stratum 1 and Stratum 2 soil overlying the more compressible material is stiff or dense enough at many locations that pre-drilling of some of the wick drains may be needed in the upper 10 to 20 feet. Pre-drilling will increase the cost of the wick drain option.

For the most part, water flowing into the wick drains will discharge upward to the high permeability drainage layer recommended at the ground surface. The quantity of pore water squeezed from the compressible Stratum 3 soil is estimated at approximately 2 gallons per square foot of surface area in which wick drains have been installed. This quantity of water will discharge over the 2 to 3 month period that has been estimated as being required for achieving 90 percent of the consolidation settlement under the applied preload.

7.7 EARTHWORK AND GENERAL CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

A large quantity of fill soil will be needed to construct the proposed railway embankment to the grades shown on Figure 2. As the quantity of fill generated by cuts along the alignment appears to be relatively small, fill from other areas of the refinery or imported from off-site must be considered. Fill generated from cuts on the alignment will consist of a combination of Stratum 1b sandy silt or clay from areas on the east side of M Street and Stratum 1a sand to silty sand from a short interval near Station 124 in the vicinity of 6th and M Streets, plus the cut zone in the vicinity of Byers Road. Stratum 1b silt/clay samples tended to have high moisture contents that are likely higher than optimum, so that moisture conditioning would be needed prior to their use as compacted fill. The Stratum 1b sand to silty sand samples range widely in fines content from less than 10 percent to more than 40 percent, and accordingly some portion should be considered moisture sensitive.

At least two possible sources of fill may be available in the vicinity of M Street. The first is the mound of soil on the northeast corner of 4th and M Streets where the future Fuel Oil Tank is planned. The tentative plan for this site was to cut the grade down by 25 feet, which will produce a relatively large quantity of mixed fill soil that has been described as roughly 60 percent primarily granular soil but with a relatively high percentage of fines. The fine-grained portion of the fill appears to be variable in moisture content, with some portion likely needing moisture conditioning before use as compacted fill. Further information on soils at this site are available in the URS (2012).

A second potential source of compacted fill for the embankment is a stockpile of soil on the east side of M Street near its intersection with 2nd Street. The nature and condition of this soil is not known.

Topsoil removal will be required before placement of new fill for the Crude Unloading Facility. Best management practices should be employed to control potential surface water flows and soil erosion. The excavated topsoil should not be re-used for structural fill due to its organic content, and because this soil is likely wetter than optimum moisture content making it difficult to properly compact. The railway embankment fill should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density as measured using

URS 13


ASTM D-1557. Generally the fill used for railway embankment construction should meet the requirements of WSDOT 9-03.14(3) Common Borrow to the maximum extent possible. However, non-granular plastic on-site soils can be used if compacted within 2 percent of the optimum moisture content, and with the understanding that wet weather construction periods will result in the need to remove and replace some soil that has deteriorated from excessive moisture and construction traffic.

For segments of the new rail along the east side of M Street and north of 6th Street, cutting and filling of and on existing berms around tanks will be required. The nature and condition of soil in these berms has not been directly investigated. A wide range of conditions could be encountered, including wet and soft fine grained silt and clay, and loose granular soil. Where tracks and ballast will be supported directly on berms, the surface subgrade condition should be examined by the Geotechnical Engineer, and for planning purposes the upper 2 feet of soil should be excavated and either recompacted or replaced with select on-site or imported granular fill compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM D-1557. At some locations the subgrade soil conditions may be suitable for use after only proof-rolling, as assessed by the Geotechnical Engineer. Subgrades for placement of new compacted fill rail embankment should be similarly evaluated at this location.

7.8 MISCELLANEOUS CONSIDERATIONS

Access limitations prevented the drilling of borings directly along the proposed rail alignment south of 6th Street, and the most recent borings were generally drilled at least several hundred feet south of the current alignment. The absence of the compressible Stratum 3 clay in previous Boring U-1-07 located about 600 feet north of the alignment suggests that soil conditions are improving significantly moving from south to north across this portion of the site. Additional borings are therefore recommended at locations closer to the currently favored alignment to see if construction may actually result in less settlement and hence offer opportunities for reduced costs. At least 3 new borings are suggested.

As the existing berms for tankage north of 6th Street have not been directly investigated, and there is no readily available documentation of the manner in which the berms were constructed, additional exploration of some sort is also recommended for those earth structures. As the dimensions and geometry of the berms prevent the use of traditional drilling rigs for this exploration, hand auger holes or backhoe test pits can be used to gain information that will help in planning of the proper foundation preparation needed for railways supported on the berm material.

8.0 LIMITATIONS

The recommendations and descriptions presented in this report are based on soil conditions disclosed by borings drilled during this investigation and borings drilled during previous investigations in the vicinity of the site. The existing subsurface information referred to herein does not constitute a direct or implied warranty that the soil conditions between boring locations can be directly interpolated or extrapolated, or that subsurface conditions and soil variations different from those disclosed by the borings will not be revealed. If, during construction, subsurface conditions different from those described herein are observed, URS should be notified so that such conditions can be reviewed and the recommendations given herein revised as necessary. Similarly, changes to the planned project, including modified load magnitudes, should be brought to the attention of URS so that the potential effect of these changes can be assessed.

URS 14


8.0 REFERENCES

FHWA (2009) Design of Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls and Reinforced Soil Slopes”, R. Berg et al, Federal Highway Administration Report No. FHWA-NHI-10-024.

Seed, H.B. and Whitman, R.V. (1970)”Design of Earth Retaining Structures for Dynamic Loads”, ASCE Specialty Conference on Lateral Stresses in the Ground and Design of Earth Retaining Structures

Sherif, M.A. I. Ishibaski and C.D. Lee (1982)”Dynamic Earth Pressure Against Rigid Retaining Walls”, ASCE J. Geotech Eng Div., V.108, No. GT5.

URS Corporation (2012), Report of Geotechnical Investigation, Fuel Oil Tank, Conoco Phillips Refinery, Ferndale, WA, URS Project No. 33761539

FIGURES

Site

Source: USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle, Lummi Bay, Washington, 1994

0 2,000 4,000

Scale in Feet

Washington

Ferndale

Site

Job No. 33763923

South Option - Crude Unloading FacilityPhillips 66 Ferndale Refinery

Figure 1

Site Location

3376

3923

_01.

ai

4

JobNo.33763923

SouthOption-CrudeUnloadingFacility

Phillips66FerndaleRefinery

APPENDIX A

2012 FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM

(Log Key, and UR-1-12 to UR-5-12)

Mor

e th

an 5

0% o

f Mat

eria

l is

Sm

alle

r tha

n N

o. 2

00 S

ieve

Siz

e

Organic Silts and Organic Silty Clays of Low Plasticity

Inorganic Clays of Low to Medium Plasticity, Gravelly Clays,Sandy Clays, Silty Clays, Lean Clays

Inorganic Silts and very Fine Sands, Rock Flour, Silty orClayey Fine Sands or Clayey Silts with Slight Plasticity

Inorganic Silts, Micaceous or Diatomaceous FineSand or Silty Soils

Fine-Grained Soils

Highly Organic Soils

Very loose sandLoose

Medium denseDense

Very dense

Very softSoft

Medium stiffStiff

Very stiffHard

Well-Graded Sands, Gravelly Sands, Little or no Fines

Peat, Humus, Swamp Soils with High OrganicContents (see ASTM D4427-92)

Relative Consistency

Project: Phillips 66, Crude Unloading Facility, South OptionProject Location: Ferndale, WAProject Number: 33763923.00010

Relative Density or Consistency

DryMoistWet

Absence of moisture, dustyDamp but no visible waterVisible free water, frombelow the water table

0 - 5%5 - 12%12 - 30%30 - 50%

Non-standardpenetration test

Mor

e th

an 5

0% o

f Coa

rse

Frac

tion

Ret

aine

d in

No.

4S

ieve

Mor

e th

an 5

0% o

f Coa

rse

Frac

tion

Pas

sing

thro

ugh

No.

4 S

ieve

3" O.D. Split SpoonSample with brassrings

Silty Sands, Sand-Clay Mixtures

Inorganic Clays of High Plasticity, Fat Clays

Grab Sample

Symbols

TraceSlightly (clayey, silty, sandy, gravelly)Clayey, silty, sandy, gravellyVery (clayey, silty, sandy, gravelly)

CleanGravels

Letter

Clayey Gravels, Gravel-Sand-Clay Mixtures

GW

GP

GM

GC

SW

SP

SM

SC

ML

CL

OL

MH

CH

OH

PT

Coa

rse

Gra

ined

Soi

ls

Major Divisions Typical Descriptions

Organic Clays of Medium to High Plasticity, OrganicSilts

Silty Gravels, Gravel-Sand-Silt Mixtures

Graph

Mor

e th

an 5

0% o

f No.

200

Sie

ve S

ize

Liquid LimitGreater than 50%

2.

Sampler Symbols

Well-Graded Gravels, Gravel-Sand Mixtures, Little or noFines

(more than12 % fines)

Sands withFines

Clean Sand

Sand

s

< 22 - 44 - 88 - 1515 - 30Over 30

Moisture Content

Poorly-Graded Gravels, Gravel-Sand Mixtures, Little or noFines

Gravelswith Fines

Field Test Symbols

Hand Vane ShearTest

Pocket PenetrometerTest

Sieve AnalysisMoistureDry DensityAtterberg LimitsHydrometer AnalysisConsolidationConstant Head PermeabilityFalling Head PermeabilityDirect ShearTriaxialTorvane ShearLaboratory Vane ShearPocket PenetrometerOrganic Vapor AnalyzerOrganic ContentNumber of hammer blows for last 12inches sampled

Key to Log of Boringand Descriptive Terms for Soil

SAMDDALHACPcPfDSTXTVLVPPOVAOCN

Piston Sample

3" O.D. ShelbyTube Sample

Core

2" O.D. Split Spoon with140lb Hammer and 30-inchdrop (SPT)

Abbreviations

0 - 44 - 1010 - 3030 - 50Over 50

(more than12 % fines)

Liquid LimitLess than 50%

1.NOTES:

Fine

Gra

ined

Soi

ls

Gra

vels

Poorly Graded Sands, Gravelly Sands, Little or no Fines

Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D2487 & D2488)

N, SPTBlows / ft

Relative Density

Minor Descriptors

Clayey Sands, Sand-Clay Mixtures

Descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive; field descriptions may have been modified to reflect lab test results. Descriptions on these logs applyonly at the specific boring locations and at the time the borings were advanced; they are not warranted to be representative of subsurface conditions atother locations or times.

Dual Symbols are used to indicate borderline soil classifications

(less than5% fines)

Silts

and

Clays

Silts

and

Clays

US

CS

6 Z

:\CO

NO

CO

PH

ILLI

PS

FE

RN

DA

LE\C

RU

DE

UN

LOA

DIN

G 2

012\

FIE

LD, L

AB

WO

RK

S\S

OP

TIO

N\3

3763

923.

0001

0.G

PJ

UR

SS

EA

3B.G

LB U

RS

SE

A3.

GD

T 1

1/7/

12

N, SPTBlows / ft

Coarse-Grained Soils

(less than5% fines)

D2

D18

100

100

100

100

56

D4

S5

233

N=6

455

N=10

669

N=15

Num

ber

US

CS

Rec

over

y, %

Gray Poorly-graded SAND with silt and gravel, gravel fine, sandfine to coarse, angular, moist, medium dense, homogeneous.[FILL]

D3

Gra

phic

Log

PP=0.75 tsf@ 16.3';PP=0.25 tsf@ 17'

Dep

th,

feet

REMARKS ANDOTHER TESTS

29

33

25

23

86810

N=18

CL

Only push downShelby tube 11'' at 15'deep with this kind ofrid.

Driller mentionedmaybe 3' deepencoutering clay layer.

Grades to wet, soft without seashell fragments.

Gray Lean CLAY, trace seashell fragments, moist to wet, mediumstiff.

Grades to trace of fine gravels and stiff.

Yellow brown Lean CLAY, trace of sand spots and fine,subangular gravel, moist, very stiff.

Fine

s C

onte

nt(%

<#20

0 S

ieve

)PP=1.5 tsf

PP=3.5 tsf

SP/SM

CL

PP<0.25 tsf

N 670265.27 E 1189729.98Borehole UTMCoordinates

41.5 feetTotal Depthof BoreholeGround SurfaceElevationSIMCO Track Mounted

I.D. 4 1/2''

1080' N of Slater Rd on E of M St. at S of Phillips 66 Refinery

Drill RigType

Date(s)Drilled

CheckedBy

129.6 feet/ MLLW

GE

O_S

EA

3B Z

:\CO

NO

CO

PH

ILLI

PS

FE

RN

DA

LE\C

RU

DE

UN

LOA

DIN

G 2

012\

FIE

LD, L

AB

WO

RK

S\S

OP

TIO

N\3

3763

923.

0001

0.G

PJ

UR

SS

EA

3B.G

LB U

RS

SE

A3.

GD

T 1

1/18

/12

125

120

115

110

105

Project Number: 33763923.00010Project Location: Ferndale, WA

Sheet 1 of 2

0

5

10

15

20

25

Log of Boring UR-1-12

Drill BitSize/Type

Project: Phillips 66, Crude Unloading Facility, South Option

SAMPLES

11/5/12

Blo

ws/

6in

.

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Type

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt, %

Dry

Uni

tW

eigh

t, pc

f

SPT, Shelby

Location

140-lb manual hammer

EDI

M. McCabe

Bentonite chips

LoggedBy

DrillingContractorSamplingMethod(s)

HSADrillingMethod

HammerData

BoreholeBackfill

K. Yang

Ele

vatio

nfe

et

100

38.5 ft

PP=0.5 tsf

100079

N=16

022

N=4

023

N=5

021

N=3

PP=2.5 tsf

29

Dep

th,

feet


100

100

24

D9

D8

D7

D6PP<0.25 tsf

11

PP=0.5 tsf

End of hole at 41.5ft below ground surface. Measuredgroundwater 38.5 ft below ground surface after 15 minutes ofdrilling. Backfilled with bentonite chips, and about 2ft thick in-sitesoil cutting near ground surface.

Gray Sandy SILT with gravel, sand and gravel fine to coarse,subangular, moist, very stiff.

Grades to medium stiff.

ML

36

Log of Boring UR-1-12Sheet 2 of 2

25

30

35

40

45

50

GE

O_S

EA

3B Z

:\CO

NO

CO

PH

ILLI

PS

FE

RN

DA

LE\C

RU

DE

UN

LOA

DIN

G 2

012\

FIE

LD, L

AB

WO

RK

S\S

OP

TIO

N\3

3763

923.

0001

0.G

PJ

UR

SS

EA

3B.G

LB U

RS

SE

A3.

GD

T 1

1/18

/12

100

95

90

85

80

Project Number: 33763923.00010

Project: Phillips 66, Crude Unloading Facility, South OptionProject Location: Ferndale, WA

Num

ber

Ele

vatio

nfe

et

Rec

over

y, %

Fine

s C

onte

nt(%

<#20

0 S

ieve

)

Blo

ws/

6in

.

US

CS

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt, %

Dry

Uni

tW

eigh

t, pc

f

Type

Gra

phic

Log

SAMPLES


D5

D4

D3

D2

D1

100

100

100

100

457

N=1219

212

N=3

Dry

Uni

tW

eigh

t, pc

f

100

Ele

vatio

nfe

et

Num

ber

Reddish brown Elastic SILT, moist, medium stiff, homogeneous. 52

Rec

over

y, %

19

Gra

phic

Log

Dep

th,

feet


30

21115

N=26

Fine

s C

onte

nt(%

<#20

0 S

ieve

)

CL

MH

245

N=9

Driller thought soil stiff,so did SPT, notShelby

Gray Lean CLAY, moist to wet, soft.

Grades to stiff.

Yellow brown Lean CLAY, moist, very stiff, homogeneous.

222

N=4

PP<0.25 tsf

PP=2 tsf

PP=3 tsf

PP=4 tsf

CL

Ground SurfaceElevation

CheckedBy


27.4 feet

Sheet 1 of 2

138.2 feet/ MLLW

US

CS

Blo

ws/

6in

.

Drill BitSize/Type

1000' W of Byers Rd on N of SlaterRd. at S of Phillips 66 Refinery

Drill RigType

Date(s)Drilled

Total Depthof Borehole

GE

O_S

EA

3B Z

:\CO

NO

CO

PH

ILLI

PS

FE

RN

DA

LE\C

RU

DE

UN

LOA

DIN

G 2

012\

FIE

LD, L

AB

WO

RK

S\S

OP

TIO

N\3

3763

923.

0001

0.G

PJ

UR

SS

EA

3B.G

LB U

RS

SE

A3.

GD

T 1

1/18

/12

135

130

125

120

115


I.D. 4 1/2''

0

5

10

15

20

25

Log of Boring UR-2-12Project: Phillips 66, Crude Unloading Facility, South Option

11/5/12

SIMCO Track Mounted

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt, %

Type

SAMPLES


Location

EDI

140-lb manual hammerSPT, Shelby

HSA

K. Yang

BoreholeBackfill

HammerData

M. McCabe

DrillingMethod

SamplingMethod(s)

DrillingContractor

LoggedBy

Bentonite chips

Rec

over

y, %

Fine

s C

onte

nt(%

<#20

0 S

ieve

)

US

CS

Num

ber

Ele

vatio

nfe

et

Dry

Uni

tW

eigh

t, pc

f

Blo

ws/

6in

.

SAMPLES

100

End of hole at 27.4ft below ground surface. Measured no obviousgroundwater after 15 minutes of drilling. Backfilled with bentonitechips, and about 2ft thick in-site soil cutting near ground surface.

PP<0.25 tsf

Gra

phic

Log

S6 24


Dep

th,

feet

Type


Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt, %MATERIAL DESCRIPTION


25

30

35

40

45

50


110

105

100

95

90

85

GE

O_S

EA

3B Z

:\CO

NO

CO

PH

ILLI

PS

FE

RN

DA

LE\C

RU

DE

UN

LOA

DIN

G 2

012\

FIE

LD, L

AB

WO

RK

S\S

OP

TIO

N\3

3763

923.

0001

0.G

PJ

UR

SS

EA

3B.G

LB U

RS

SE

A3.

GD

T 1

1/18

/12

Project Location: Ferndale, WASheet 2 of 2

224

N=6

15 ft213

N=4

61823

N=41

56

PP<0.25 tsf

PP=0.25 tsf

PP=1.5 tsf

PP=1.75 tsf

Fine

s C

onte

nt(%

<#20

0 S

ieve

)559

N=14

23

Rec

over

y, %

Gra

phic

Log

Dep

th,

feet

21

20.5

S5

D4

D3

D2

D1

50

17

100

100

100

89

19

Grades to wet, soft.

Drak gray Lean CLAY, trace fine, subrounded gravels, moist,medium stiff.

Dark brown Lean CLAY, moist, very stiff.

Grades to Silty SAND, trace of fine, subangular gravel, verydense.

Yellow brown Silty SAND with gravel, gravel fine, sand fine tocoarse, moist, loose, homogeneous. [FILL]

CL

CL

SM


0

5

10

15

20

25

Date(s)Drilled

CheckedBy

Project Location: Ferndale, WAProject: Phillips 66, Crude Unloading Facility, South Option

Drill RigType

415' N of Slater Rd on E of Byers Rd. at S of Phillips 66 Refinery

165

160

155

150

145


US

CS

GE

O_S

EA

3B Z

:\CO

NO

CO

PH

ILLI

PS

FE

RN

DA

LE\C

RU

DE

UN

LOA

DIN

G 2

012\

FIE

LD, L

AB

WO

RK

S\S

OP

TIO

N\3

3763

923.

0001

0.G

PJ

UR

SS

EA

3B.G

LB U

RS

SE

A3.

GD

T 1

1/18

/12

Project Number: 33763923.00010 Sheet 1 of 2

Borehole UTMCoordinates Location

41.5 feetTotal Depthof Borehole

166.8 feet/ MLLWGround SurfaceElevationSIMCO Track Mounted

I.D. 4 1/2''Drill BitSize/Type

N 669597.16 E 1193365.42

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt, %

Type

SPT, Shelby


Blo

ws/

6in

.

Dry

Uni

tW

eigh

t, pc

f

Ele

vatio

nfe

et

Num

ber

SAMPLES

HammerData 140-lb manual hammer

M. McCabe

Bentonite chips

LoggedBy


DrillingMethod

BoreholeBackfill

K. Yang

EDI

11/6/12

HSA

81439

N=53

PP=0.25 tsf

100345

N=9

344

N=8

412

N=3

PP=2.5 tsf

PP=0.75 tsf

24

Dep

th,

feet


10

100

21100

D9

D8

D7

D6

100

End of hole at 41.5ft below ground surface. Measuredgroundwater 15 ft below ground surface after 20 minutes ofdrilling. Backfilled with bentonite chips, and about 2ft thick in-sitesoil cutting near ground surface.

Gray Sandy SILT, trace gravels, sand and gravel fine to coarse,subangular, moist, hard.

Grades to stiff.PP=0.75 tsf

Soil cutting looks wet,very soft in perchedwater.

ML

Driller mentionedsome gravelsencountered.

Log of Boring UR-3-12Sheet 2 of 2

25

30

35

40

45

50

36

GE

O_S

EA

3B Z

:\CO

NO

CO

PH

ILLI

PS

FE

RN

DA

LE\C

RU

DE

UN

LOA

DIN

G 2

012\

FIE

LD, L

AB

WO

RK

S\S

OP

TIO

N\3

3763

923.

0001

0.G

PJ

UR

SS

EA

3B.G

LB U

RS

SE

A3.

GD

T 1

1/18

/12

140

135

130

125

120

115




Type

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt, %

Blo

ws/

6in

.

Dry

Uni

tW

eigh

t, pc

f

Ele

vatio

nfe

et

Gra

phic

Log

Num

ber

US

CS

Rec

over

y, %

Fine

s C

onte

nt(%

<#20

0 S

ieve

)SAMPLES

PP=0.75 tsf

PP=2.5 tsfSM

PP<0.25 tsf

CL

Dry

Uni

tW

eigh

t, pc

f

Ele

vatio

nfe

et

67

56

78

100

PP=1.75 tsf

PP=0.5 tsf

111

N=2

323

N=5

15188

N=26

8912

N=21

122

N=4

44

Dep

th,

feet

Num

ber

US

CS

Fine

s C

onte

nt(%

<#20

0 S

ieve

)

Rec

over

y, %

Gra

phic

Log

CL


25

28

23

D5

D4

D3

D2

D1

100Grades to wet, soft.

Yellow brown to gray Lean CLAY, trace fine, subangular gravelswith thin layer of gray sandy silt, moist, medium stiff.

Grades to with thin layer of gray sandy silt.

Yellow brown Lean CLAY, moist, stiff to very stiff, stratified.

Reddish brown Silty SAND, trace of fine, subangular gravels,moist, loose.

Project Location: Ferndale, WAProject: Phillips 66, Crude Unloading Facility, South Option


SIMCO Track Mounted

150

145

140

135

130

GE

O_S

EA

3B Z

:\CO

NO

CO

PH

ILLI

PS

FE

RN

DA

LE\C

RU

DE

UN

LOA

DIN

G 2

012\

FIE

LD, L

AB

WO

RK

S\S

OP

TIO

N\3

3763

923.

0001

0.G

PJ

UR

SS

EA

3B.G

LB U

RS

SE

A3.

GD

T 1

1/18

/12

Blo

ws/

6in

.

Drill BitSize/Type

1700' E of Byers Rd on N of SlaterRd. at S of Phillips 66 Refinery

Drill RigType

Date(s)Drilled

Borehole UTMCoordinates

Sheet 1 of 2

N 669184.4 E 1193960.29

36.5 feetTotal Depthof Borehole

154.5 feet/ MLLW


0

5

10

15

20

25

Ground SurfaceElevation

11/2/12 CheckedBy

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt, %

Type

SAMPLES


Bentonite chips SPT

Location


LoggedBy


HSADrillingMethod

HammerData

BoreholeBackfill

K. Yang

EDI

I.D. 4 1/2''

M. McCabe

030

N=3


Dep

th,

feet

PP=0.35 tsf

Gra

phic

Log

Rec

over

y, %

Fine

s C

onte

nt(%

<#20

0 S

ieve

)

100

Num

ber

100

100

D6

D7

D8Grades to trace of fine, subangular gravels.



120

N=2

011

N=2

PP<0.25 tsf

PP<0.25 tsf

Project Location: Ferndale, WASheet 2 of 2

US

CS


25

30

35

40

45

50



125

120

115

110

105

GE

O_S

EA

3B Z

:\CO

NO

CO

PH

ILLI

PS

FE

RN

DA

LE\C

RU

DE

UN

LOA

DIN

G 2

012\

FIE

LD, L

AB

WO

RK

S\S

OP

TIO

N\3

3763

923.

0001

0.G

PJ

UR

SS

EA

3B.G

LB U

RS

SE

A3.

GD

T 1

1/18

/12

Type

SAMPLES

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONB

low

s/ 6

in.

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt, %

Ele

vatio

nfe

et

Dry

Uni

tW

eigh

t, pc

f

112

N=4

100

100

100

100

100

D2

D3

183017

N=47

797

N=16

796

N=15

Num

ber

US

CS

Rec

over

y, %

Reddish brown Sandy Elastic SILT, trace of organics, grass roots,moist, soft.D1

Gra

phic

Log

PP=4 [email protected]';PP=1.75 [email protected]'

Dep

th,

feet


20

46

52

D5

D4

257

N=12 CL

ML


Gray Silty SAND, fine grained, moist, very dense.

Grades to wet, soft.

Gray Sandy SILT, trace gravels, sand and gravel fine to coarse,subangular, moist, stiff to very stiff.

Grades to brown.

Yellow brown Lean CLAY, trace of fine, subangular tosubrounded gravels, moist, very stiff.

PP=2.5 tsf

PP=3.5 tsf

PP=0.25 [email protected]';PP=4.5 [email protected]'

PP=2.5 tsfMH

Fine

s C

onte

nt(%

<#20

0 S

ieve

)

SM


31.3 feetTotal Depthof BoreholeGround SurfaceElevation

Sheet 1 of 2

SIMCO Track Mounted

Drill BitSize/Type

500' S of Walltine Rd on W of Lake Terrel Rd. at S of Phillips 66 Refinery

Drill RigType

Date(s)Drilled

CheckedBy

173.8 feet/ MLLW

GE

O_S

EA

3B Z

:\CO

NO

CO

PH

ILLI

PS

FE

RN

DA

LE\C

RU

DE

UN

LOA

DIN

G 2

012\

FIE

LD, L

AB

WO

RK

S\S

OP

TIO

N\3

3763

923.

0001

0.G

PJ

UR

SS

EA

3B.G

LB U

RS

SE

A3.

GD

T 1

1/18

/12

170

165

160

155

150


0

5

10

15

20

25

Log of Boring UR-5-12Project: Phillips 66, Crude Unloading Facility, South Option


11/2/12

SAMPLES

Type

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt, %

I.D. 4 1/2''

Dry

Uni

tW

eigh

t, pc

f

SPT

Location


EDI

HSA

K. Yang

BoreholeBackfill

Ele

vatio

nfe

et

DrillingMethod

M. McCabe

SamplingMethod(s)

DrillingContractor

LoggedBy

Bentonite chips

Blo

ws/

6in

.HammerData


Gra

phic

Log

Rec

over

y, %

Fine

s C

onte

nt(%

<#20

0 S

ieve

)

US

CS

Dep

th,

feet

Dry

Uni

tW

eigh

t, pc

f

Num

ber

50/5''

Grades to poorly graded SAND, trace of fine, subangular gravels.


Blo

ws/

6in

.

2443

50/4''

100

100

D6

D7



SAMPLES

Ele

vatio

nfe

etLog of Boring UR-5-12

25

30

35

40

45

50


145

140

135

130

125

120

GE

O_S

EA

3B Z

:\CO

NO

CO

PH

ILLI

PS

FE

RN

DA

LE\C

RU

DE

UN

LOA

DIN

G 2

012\

FIE

LD, L

AB

WO

RK

S\S

OP

TIO

N\3

3763

923.

0001

0.G

PJ

UR

SS

EA

3B.G

LB U

RS

SE

A3.

GD

T 1

1/18

/12

Project Location: Ferndale, WA

Type

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt, %

Sheet 2 of 2

APPENDIX B

LOGS OF PREVIOUS BORINGS NEARBY

U-1-07 from 2007

U-1-05 and U-4-05 from 2005

B-5-82 from 1982

B-3-76, B-5-76, B-6-76, B-7-76, and B-8-76 from 1976

B-2-73, B-6-73, B-8-73, TP-4-73, and TP-5-73 from 1973

B-6-52 from 1952

APPENDIX C

2012 GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY TEST RESULT

ML

Figure C-1

35.0 ft

0.2 ft

0.2 ft

15.0 ft

0.2 ft

CH

LIQUID LIMIT

60

40

30

20

10

00 20 40 60 100

UR-1-12

50

80

CL-ML

PLLL

PLASTICITY

INDEX

Specimen Identification

Reddish brown Elastic SILT, MH

Project Number: 33763923.00010Project Location: Ferndale, WAProject: Phillips 66, Crude Unloading Facility, South Option

Reddish brown Sandy Elastic SILT, MH

PI

Reddish brown Silty SAND, SM

Drak gray Lean CLAY, CL

52

23

52

36

ATTERBERG LIMITS RESULTS

Yellow brown Lean CLAY, CL

15

Moisture Classification

33

37

UR-5-12

UR-4-12

UR-4-12

UR-2-12

US

_ATT

ER

BE

RG

_LIM

ITS

Z:\C

ON

OC

O P

HIL

LIP

S F

ER

ND

ALE

\CR

UD

E U

NLO

AD

ING

201

2\FI

ELD

, LA

B W

OR

KS

\S O

PTI

ON

\337

6392

3.00

010.

GP

J U

RS

SE

A3B

.GLB

UR

SS

EA

3.G

DT

11/

27/1

2

3

MH

CL

9

11

66 15

44

26

24

51

12

53

9

31 43/4

%Silt

GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS

Cc

U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES

0.001

75

80

85

90

65

100

60

0.010.1110

95

25

1000

5

10

70

20

30

35

40

45

50

55

15

603 10

medium

2

30

HYDROMETER

0.107%Clay

100

SILT OR CLAY


coarse

20

D60

14

UR-3-12

fine

5.0 ft.

UR-1-12

UR-1-12UR-3-12UR-3-12

0.2 ft. Yellow brown Silty SAND with gravel, SMGray Poorly-graded SAND with silt and gravel, SP-SM

Brown Silty SAND, SM


0.2 ft.

2519

12.7


coarse

1.5U

S_G

RA

IN_S

IZE

Z:\C

ON

OC

O P

HIL

LIP

S F

ER

ND

ALE

\CR

UD

E U

NLO

AD

ING

201

2\FI

ELD

, LA

B W

OR

KS

\S O

PTI

ON

\337

6392

3.00

010.

GP

J U

RS

SE

A3B

.GLB

UR

SS

EA

3.G

DT

11/

27/1

2

GRAVEL

UR-3-12

50

D100

4

0.32

1408

PE

RC

EN

T FI

NE

R B

Y W

EIG

HT

40.619.41.6

200

PL

0.4080.309

PI

%Gravel8.0


1/2

17.249.6

%Sand

Classification

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION

U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS

D30

fine

45.90Cu

51.463.548.8

COBBLES

3/8 16

5.0 ft.

40

Figure C-2

LL

6

SAND

0.2 ft.4.9041.2580.102

D10

6

0.2 ft.

Project Location: Ferndale, WA

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

10018


US

_CO

NS

OL_

STR

AIN

Z:\C

ON

OC

O P

HIL

LIP

S F

ER

ND

ALE

\CR

UD

E U

NLO

AD

ING

201

2\FI

ELD

, LA

B W

OR

KS

\S O

PTI

ON

\337

6392

3.00

010.

GP

J U

RS

SE

A3B

.GLB

UR

SS

EA

3.G

DT

11/

27/1

2

Figure C-3

16

1,000

Cv(ft^2/yr)

Gray Lean CLAY, CLGray Lean CLAY, CL

STRESS, psf

STR

AIN

, %

CONSOLIDATION TEST

UR-1-12UR-2-12

20.0 ft.

10,000

MC% CrCc


ClassificationSpecimen Identification

25.0 ft.

Date post:	12-Feb-2022
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	3 times
Download:	0 times

Attachment A- Report of Geotechnical Investigation

Documents