HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/1/2013 - AGREEMENTS (5)Whitewater River Region WQMP
NOTE TO PREPARER
This WQMP template uses ‘hidden’ text to provide important and necessary instructions to the preparer that
will not be printed for your submittal. By default, Microsoft Word 2003 and 2007 are set to not display
Hidden Text on your screen. If you can see the message between the two lines below, your computer is set
to display ‘hidden’ text and you will be able to see the provided instructions.
If you cannot see the message between the lines above, you will need to display hidden text to see the
instructions that are included throughout this template.
To change the options regarding hidden text, do the following:
MS Word 2007
1. With this document open, click on the round Office Button at the upper left of the MS Word window.
2. On the menu that opens, click on ‘Word Options’ (near the bottom of the menu).
3. To view Hidden Text on your screen:
a. In the window that opens, click ‘Display’ on the left.
b. In the right side of the window, under the heading ‘Always show these formatting
marks on the screen’, check the box for ‘Hidden Text.’
4. To change whether or not Hidden Text is printed:
a. In the same window panel as described in b) above, under the heading ‘Printing
Options’ check or un-check the box for ‘Print Hidden Text’.
MS Word 2003
1. With this document open, click on the ‘tools’ menu and then click on ‘options’.
2. To View Hidden Text on your screen:
a. In the window that opens, click on the ‘view’ tab.
b. Under the ‘formatting marks’ heading, check the box for ‘Hidden Text’.
3. To change whether or not Hidden Text is printed:
a. In the same window that opened change to the ‘Print’ tab.
b. Under the heading ‘Include with Document’ heading check or un-check the box for ‘Hidden
Text’.
When printing this template it may be helpful to turn the display of ‘Hidden Text” off
to perform any final formatting or word processing.
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Project Specific
Water Quality Management Plan
For: Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
3400 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
DEVELOPMENT NO. N/A
DESIGN REVIEW NO. N/A
Prepared for:
Palm Springs International Airport
3400 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA
Telephone: 760-778-5600
Prepared by:
Christopher J. Swonke, PE, QSD/QSP
Parsons Brinckerhoff
451 E. Vanderbilt Way, Suite 200
San Bernardino, CA 92408
Telephone: 909-888-1106
WQMP Preparation/Revision Date: 2/13/2013
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
OWNER’S CERTIFICATION
This project-specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) has been prepared for:
Palm Springs International Airport
by Parsons Brinckerhoff
for the project known as Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction at 3400 E.
Tahquitz Canyon Way.
This WQMP is intended to comply with the requirements of City of Palm Springs for Palm Springs
Airport, which includes the requirement for the preparation and implementation of a project-specific
WQMP.
The undersigned, while owning the property/project described in the preceding paragraph, shall be
responsible for the implementation of this WQMP and will ensure that this WQMP is amended as
appropriate to reflect up-to-date conditions on the site. This WQMP will be reviewed with the facility
operator, facility supervisors, employees, tenants, maintenance and service contractors, or any other party
(or parties) having responsibility for implementing portions of this WQMP. At least one copy of this
WQMP will be maintained at the project site or project office in perpetuity.
The undersigned is authorized to certify and to approve implementation of this WQMP. The undersigned
is aware that implementation of this WQMP is enforceable under City of Palm Springs Water Quality
Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 1543 (Ch. 8.70) and 1768.
If the undersigned transfers its interest in the subject property/project, the undersigned shall notify the
successor in interest of its responsibility to implement this WQMP.
"I, the undersigned, certify under penalty of law that I am the owner of the property that is the subject of
this WQMP, and that the provisions of this WQMP have been reviewed and accepted and that the WQMP
will be transferred to future successors in interest."
ATTEST
Owner’s Signature
Thomas Nolan
Owner’s Printed Name
Executive Director
Owner’s Title/Position
Date
3400 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA
760-778-5600
THIS FORM SHALL BE NOTARIZED BEFORE ACCEPTANCE OF THE
FINAL PROJECT SPECIFIC WQMP
Notary Signature
Printed Name
Title/Position
Date
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-i
Contents
SECTION PAGE
I. Project Description .................................................................................................................... 1
II. Site Characterization................................................................................................................. 4
III. Pollutants of Concern ................................................................................................................ 6
IV. Hydrologic Conditions of Concern .......................................................................................... 7
V. Best Management Practices...................................................................................................... 8
V.1 SITE DESIGN AND TREATMENT CONTROL BMPS............................................................. 8
V.1.A SITE DESIGN BMPS................................................................................................. 10
V.1.B TREATMENT CONTROL BMPS ................................................................................ 17
V.1.C MEASUREABLE GOAL SUMMARY ........................................................................... 19
V.2 SOURCE CONTROL BMPS ............................................................................................. 20
V.3 EQUIVALENT TREATMENT CONTROL ALTERNATIVES ................................................... 23
V.4 REGIONALLY-BASED TREATMENT CONTROL BMPS ..................................................... 23
VI. Operation and Maintenance Responsibility for BMPs ........................................................ 24
VII. Funding..................................................................................................................................... 25
TABLES
TABLE 1. POLLUTANT OF CONCERN SUMMARY 6
T ABLE 2. BMP SELECTION MATRIX BASED UPON POLLUTANT REMOVAL EFFICIENCY (1) 9
TABLE 3. IMPLEMENTATION OF SITE DESIGN CONCEPTS 11
TABLE 4. SITE DESIGN BMPS MEETING THE MEASUREABLE GOAL IN WQMP SECTION 3.5.1.1 16
TABLE 5: TREATMENT CONTROL BMP SUMMARY 18
TABLE 6: MEASUREABLE GOAL SUMMARY 19
TABLE 7. SOURCE CONTROL BMPS 20
APPENDICES
A. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
B. VICINITY MAP, WQMP SITE PLAN, AND RECEIVING WATERS MAP
C. SUPPORTING DETAIL RELATED TO HYDRAULIC CONDITIONS OF CONCERN (IF APPLICABLE)
D. EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS
E. SOILS REPORT (IF APPLICABLE)
F. SITE DESIGN AND TREATMENT CONTROL BMP SIZING CALCULATIONS AND DESIGN DETAILS
G. AGREEMENTS – CC&RS, COVENANT AND AGREEMENTS AND/OR OTHER MECHANISMS FOR
ENSURING ONGOING OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, FUNDING AND TRANSFER OF REQUIREMENTS FOR
THIS PROJECT-SPECIFIC WQMP
H. PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT – SUMMARY OF SITE REMEDIATION CONDUCTED AND
USE RESTRICTIONS
I. PROJECT-SPECIFIC WQMP SUMMARY DATA F ORM
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-1
I. Project Description
Project Owner: Palm Springs International Airport
3400 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA
Telephone: 760-778-5600
WQMP Preparer: Christopher J. Swonke, PE, QSD/QSP
451 E. Vanderbilt Way, Suite 200
San Bernardino, CA 92408
Telephone: 909-888-1106
Project Site Address: 3400 E Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA
Planning Area/
Community Name/
Development Name: 786-1J
APN Number(s): 677270019, 677270020, 677270030, 677280040, 677280010
Thomas Bros. Map: 786-1J and 786-2J
Project Watershed: Whitewater River
Sub-watershed: Whitewater River north of Tahquitz Creek
Project Site Size: 29.6 ac
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Code: 4581
Formation of Home Owners’ Association (HOA)
or Property Owners Association (POA): Y N
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-2
Additional Permits/Approvals required for the Project:
AGENCY Permit required
State Department of Fish and Game, 1601 Streambed
Alteration Agreement Y N
State Water Resources Control Board, Clean Water Act
(CWA) Section 401 Water Quality Certification Y N
US Army Corps of Engineers, CWA Section 404 permit Y N
US Fish and Wildlife, Endangered Species Act Section 7
biological opinion Y N
Other (please list in the space below as required)
NEPA - Categorical Exclusion, Approved 4/22/2009
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-3
The Terminal Apron Rehabilitation Project is reconstructing 29.6 acres of existing asphalt concrete apron
on the Palm Spring International Airport, Palm Springs CA. The site includes the entire area around both
the Bono Concourse, the Regional Concourse, baggage make-up and baggage pick-up. The proposed
pavement section is virtually identical to the existing pavement section, so very little working of the
subgrade will be required. The project includes adjusting utilities to grade in the baggage make-up area,
reconstructing a portion of a taxiway edge light circuit and reconstructing several airfield direction signs.
Construction materials that will be used on site will be Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) and Asphalt
Pavement (AC) that will be used to replace existing PCC and AC. There will be a material storage and
work area on site located on the south side of Kirk Douglas Way, please refer to the Apron WQMP
exhibit in appendix B for the approximate location. All waste generated on site will be immediately
removed and disposed of. Materials will be delivered using taxi ways and stored when needed in the
designated material storage area.
Appendix A of this project-specific WQMP includes a complete copy of the final Conditions of Approval
(there are no Conditions of Approval for this project). Appendix B of this project-specific WQMP
includes:
a. A Vicinity Map identifying the project site and surrounding planning areas in sufficient detail
to allow the project site to be plotted on Permittee base mapping; and
b. A Site Plan for the project. The Site Plan included as part of Appendix B depicts the
following project features:
Location and identification of all structural BMPs, including Treatment Control BMPs.
Landscaped areas.
Paved areas and intended uses (i.e., parking, outdoor work area, outdoor material storage
area, sidewalks, patios, tennis courts, etc.).
Number and type of structures and intended uses (i.e., buildings, tenant spaces, dwelling
units, community facilities such as pools, recreation facilities, tot lots, etc.).
Infrastructure (i.e., streets, storm drains, etc.) that will revert to public agency ownership
and operation.
Location of existing and proposed public and private storm drainage facilities (i.e., storm
drains, channels, basins, etc.), including catch basins and other inlets/outlet structures.
Existing and proposed drainage facilities should be clearly differentiated.
Location(s) of Receiving Waters to which the project directly or indirectly discharges.
Location of points where onsite (or tributary offsite) flows exit the property/project site.
Proposed drainage area boundaries, including tributary offsite areas, for each location
where flows exit the property/project site. Each tributary area should be clearly denoted.
Pre- and post-project topography.
Appendix I to the SWMP is a one page form that summarizes pertinent information relative to this
project-specific WQMP.
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-4
II. Site Characterization
Land Use Designation or Zoning: Current/proposed zoning: Airport zone, non-suit covenant
Current Property Use: Fully developed airport terminal apron
Proposed Property Use: Fully developed airport terminal apron
Availability of Soils Report: Y N Note: A soils report is required if infiltration
BMPs are utilized. Attach report in Appendix E.
Phase 1 Site Assessment: Y N Note: If prepared, attached remediation
summary and use restrictions in Appendix H.
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-5
Receiving Waters for Urban Runoff from Site
Receiving Waters for Urban Runoff from Site
Receiving
Waters
303(d) List
Impairments
Designated Beneficial Uses Proximity to RARE
Beneficial Use
Whitewater
Wash just
north of
Tahquitz Creek
none
(these all terminate at the
infiltration basins upstream of the
Airport and do not apply the
portion of the reach that this
project effects, therefore, they will
appear in Table 1)
MUN, AGR, GWR, REC I, REC II,
WARM, COLD, WILD, POW
18 miles or more
depending on where
“rare” occurs in
Coachella Valley
Storm Water Channel
Coachella
Valley Storm
Water Channel
Pathogens - Coachella
Valley Storm Water
Channel from Dillion
Road to the Salton Sea
(17 miles)
PCBs - Lincoln Street to
the Salton Sea (2 miles)
Toxaphene - Lincoln
Street to the Salton Sea
(2 miles), DDT , Diedrin
FRESH, REC I (unauthorized), REC
II (unauthorized), WARM, WILD,
RARE
Somewhere in this 24
mile reach
Salton Sea
Arsenic, Chlorpyrifos,
DDT, Enterococcus,
Nutrients, Salinity,
Selenium
AQUA, IND (potential), REC I, REC
II, WARM, WILD, RARE Included
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-6
III. Pollutants of Concern
Table 1. Pollutant of Concern Summary-Whitewater Wash
Pollutant Category
Potential
for Project
Causing
Receiving Water
Impairment –
Whitewater Wash
Causing
Receiving Water
Impairment –
Coachella Valley
Storm Drain
Channel
Causing
Receiving
Water
Impairment –
Salton Sea
Bacteria/Virus X - X -
Heavy Metals X - - -
Nutrients* X - - X
Pesticides** X - - -
Organic Compounds*** X - - -
Sediments X - - -
Trash & Debris X - - -
Oxygen Demanding
Substances****
X - - -
Oil & Grease X - - -
Other (specify pollutant):
Other (specify pollutant):
*Nutrients- onsite runoff will be treated with site BMPs and will not introduce nutrients to the downstream water body.
** Pestisides-onsite runoff will be treated with site BMPs and will not introduce pestisides to the downstream water body.
*** Organic Compounds- onsite runoff will be treated with site BMPs and will not introduce organic compounds to the
downstream water body.
**** Oxygen Demanding Substances- onsite runoff will be treated with site BMPs and will not introduce oxygen demanding
substances to the downstream water body.
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-7
Hydrologic Conditions of Concern
Local Jurisdiction Requires On-Site Retention of Urban Runoff:
Yes The project will be required to retain urban runoff onsite in conformance with local
ordinance (See Table 6, Permittees Requiring Onsite Retention of Stormwater, of the
Whitewater River Region WQMP). This section does not need to be completed.
No This section must be completed.
This Project meets the following condition:
Condition A: Runoff from the Project is discharged directly to a publicly-owned, operated
and maintained MS4; the discharge is in full compliance with Permittee requirements for
connections and discharges to the MS4 (including both quality and quantity requirements);
the discharge would not significantly impact stream habitat in proximate Receiving Waters;
and the discharge is authorized by the Permittee.
Condition B : The project disturbs less than 1 acre and is not part of a larger common plan
of development that exceeds 1 acre of disturbance. The disturbed area calculation must
include all disturbances associated with larger plans of development.
Condition C: The project’s runoff flow rate, volume, velocity and duration for the post-
development condition do not exceed the pre-development condition for the 2-year, 24-hour
and 10-year 24-hour rainfall events. This condition can be achieved by minimizing
impervious area on a site and incorporating other site-design concepts that mimic pre-
development conditions. This condition must be substantiated by hydrologic modeling
methods acceptable to the Permittee.
None
Refer to Section 3.4 of the Whitewater River Region WQMP for additional requirements.
Supporting engineering studies, calculations, please refer to the “Palm Springs International Airport
Terminal Apron Rehabilitation and Taxiway “G” reconstruction project” hydrology report.
2-Year Storm Event 10-Year Storm Event
Precondition Post-condition Precondition Post-condition
Discharge (cfs)1 61.67 61.67 122.92 122.92
Velocity (fps)2 10.94 10.94 13.05 13.05
Volume (cubic feet)3 111,006 111,006 221,256 221,256
Tc (minutes) 26.88 26.88 22.38 22.38
1 Summation of subwatershed discharged rates
2 Calculated for 54" RCP
3 Sum simplified with synthetic unit triangular hydrograph
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-8
IV. Best Management Practices
This project implements Best Management Practices (BMPs) to address the Pollutants of
Concern that may potentially be generated from the use of the project site. These BMPs have
been selected and implemented to comply with the Section 3.5 of the WQMP and consist of Site
Design, Source Control and, if/where necessary, Treatment Control BMPs as described herein.
V.1 SITE DESIGN AND TREATMENT CONTROL BMPS
Local Jurisdiction Requires On-Site Retention of Urban Runoff:
Yes The project will be required to retain urban runoff onsite in conformance with local
ordinance (See Table 6, Permittees Requiring Onsite Retention of Stormwater, of the
Whitewater River Region WQMP). Section V.1 does not need to be completed.
No Section V.1 must be completed.
This section of the Project-Specific WQMP documents the Site Design BMPs and, if/where
necessary the Treatment Control BMPs that will be implemented on the Project to meet the
requirements within Section 3.5.1 of the WQMP. Section 3.5.1, includes requirements to
implement Site Design Concepts and BMPs, and includes requirements to address the project’s
Pollutants of Concern with BMPs. Further sub-section 3.5.1.1 specifically requires that the
projects Pollutants of Concern be addressed with Site Design BMPs to the extent feasible.
This project incorporates Site Design BMPs to fully address the Pollutants of Concern where and
to the extent feasible. If and where it has been acceptably demonstrated to the Permittee that
it is infeasible to fully meet this requirement with Site Design BMPs, this section includes a
description of the conventional Treatment Control BMPs that will be substituted to meet the
same requirements.
In addressing pollutants of concern, BMPs are selected using Table 2 below.
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-9
Table 2. BMP Selection Matrix Based Upon Pollutant Removal Efficiency (1)
(Excerpted, with minor revision, from the Orange County Water Quality Management Plan dated September 26, 2003
and the San Bernardino Water Quality Management Plan dated April 14, 2004)
Pollutant of
Concern
Biofilters
(2)
Detention
Basins (3)
Infiltration
BMPs (4)
Wet
Ponds
or
Wetlands
(5)
Filtration
Systems (6)
Water
Quality
Inlets
Hydrodynamic
Separator
Systems (7)
Manufactured
or Proprietary
Devices (8)
Sediment/Turbidity H/M M H/M H/M H/M L H/M
(L for
Turbidity)
U
Nutrients L M H/M H/M L/M L L U
Organic
Compounds
U U U U H/M L L U
Trash & Debris L M U U H/M M H/M U
Oxygen
Demanding
Substances
L M H/M H/M H/M L L U
Bacteria & Viruses U U H/M U H/M L L U
Oil & Grease H/M M U U H/M M L/M U
Pesticides
(non-soil bound)
U U U U U L L U
Metals H/M M H H H L L U
Abbreviations:
L: Low removal efficiency H/M: High or medium removal efficiency U: Unknown removal efficiency
Notes:
(1) Periodic performance assessment and updating of the guidance provided by this table may be necessary.
(2) Includes grass swales, grass strips, wetland vegetation swales, and bioretention.
(3) Includes extended/dry detention basins with grass lining and extended/dry detention basins with impervious lining.
Effectiveness based upon minimum 36-48-hour drawdown time.
(4) Includes infiltration basins, infiltration trenches, and porous pavements.
(5) Includes permanent pool wet ponds and constructed wetlands.
(6) Includes sand filters and media filters.
(7) Also known as hydrodynamic devices, baffle boxes, swirl concentrators, or cyclone separators.
(8) Includes proprietary stormwater treatment devices as listed in the CASQA Stormwater Best Management Practices
Handbooks, other stormwater treatment BMPs not specifically listed in the WQMP, or newly developed/emerging
stormwater treatment technologies.
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-10
V.1.A SITE DESIGN BMPS
This section documents the Site Design BMPs that will be implemented on this project to comply
with the requirements in Section 3.5.1 of the WQMP.
x Table 3 herein documents the implementation of the Site Design Concepts described in
sub-sections 3.5.1.3 and 3.5.1.4.
x Table 4 herein documents the extent to which this project has implemented the goals
described in sub-section 3.5.1.1.
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-11
Table 3. Implementation of Site Design Concepts
Included
Brief Reason for BMPs
Indicated as No or N/A
Design
Concept Technique Specific BMP Yes No N/A Site Design Concept 1 Minimize Urban
Runoff, Minimize
Impervious
Footprint, and
Conserve Natural
Areas
(See WQMP
Section 3.5.1.3)
Conserve natural areas by concentrating or cluster
development on the lease environmentally sensitive portions
of a site while leaving the remaining land in a natural,
undisturbed condition.
There are no sensitive portions of the
project. The site is fully developed.
Conserve natural areas by incorporating the goals of the
Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan or other natural
resource plans.
The site has not increased the
pavement footprint
Preserve natural drainage features and natural depressional
storage areas on the site. Unpaved taxiway islands and natural
channels are preserved for this project
Maximize canopy interception and water conservation by
preserving existing native trees and shrubs, and planting
additional native or drought tolerant trees and large shrubs.
No grubbing/vegetation removal is
occurring for this project
Use natural drainage systems.
All existing natural drainage systems
are protected in place.
Increase the building floor area ratio (i.e., number of stories
above or below ground). No structure work
Construct streets, sidewalks and parking lot aisles to
minimum widths necessary, provided that public safety and a
walkable environment for pedestrians is not compromised.
Taxiways are constructed to design
minimums.
Reduce widths of streets where off-street parking is
available. Does not apply to airfields.
Design driveways with shared access, flared (single lane at
street), or wheel strips (paving only under the tires). Does not apply to airfields.
Minimize the use of impervious surfaces, such as decorative
concrete, in the landscape design. Does not apply to airfields.
Other comparable and equally effective Site Design BMP (or
BMPs) as approved by the Permittee (Note: Additional
narrative required to describe BMP and how it addresses
site design concept).
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-12
Table 3. Site Design BMPs (continued)
Included
Brief Reason for Each BMP
Indicated as No or N/A Design
Concept Technique Specific BMP Yes No N/A Site Design Concept 2 Minimize
Directly
Connected
Impervious
Area
(See WQMP
Section 3.5.1.4)
Residential and commercial sites must be designed to contain and
infiltrate roof runoff, or direct roof runoff to vegetative swales or buffer
areas.
Most apron drainage flows through
natural swales. Ultimately,
stormwater flows end at retention
basin.
Drain impervious sidewalks, walkways, trails, and patios into adjacent
landscaping.
Most apron drainage flows through
natural swales. Ultimately,
stormwater flows end at retention
basin.
Incorporate landscaped buffer areas between sidewalks and streets. No streets in this project.
Uncovered temporary or guest parking on residential lots paved with a
permeable surface, or designed to drain into landscaping. No guest/residential parking in this
project.
Rural swale system: street sheet flows to vegetated swale or gravel
shoulder, curbs used at street corners, and culverts used under
driveways and street crossings.
Most apron drainage flows through
natural swales. Ultimately,
stormwater flows end at retention
basin.
Urban curb/swale system: street slopes to curb; periodic swale inlets
drain to vegetated swale or biofilter.
Sheet flows from apron directly
enter natural swales, no curbs
installed.
Dual drainage system: first flush captured in street catch basins and
discharged to adjacent vegetated swale or gravel shoulder; high flows
connect directly to MS4s.
No collected curb flows
Maximize the permeable area by constructing walkways, trails, patios,
overflow parking, alleys, driveways, low-traffic streets, and other low-
traffic areas with open-jointed paving materials or permeable surfaces
such as pervious concrete, porous asphalt, unit pavers, and granular
materials.
No low-traffic areas
Use vegetated drainage swales in lieu of underground piping or
imperviously lined swales. Natural swales have been protected
in place
Incorporate parking area landscaping into the drainage design. No parking areas
Where soil conditions are suitable, use perforated pipe or gravel
filtration pits for low flow infiltration. No storm drain pipe being
constructed
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-13
Included
Brief Reason for Each BMP
Indicated as No or N/A Design
Concept Technique Specific BMP Yes No N/A
Construct onsite infiltration BMPs such as dry wells, infiltration
trenches, and infiltration basins consistent with vector control
objectives.
Open air infiltration basin draws
down in less than 24 hours, no
other infiltration BMPs required
Construct onsite ponding areas or detention facilities to increase
opportunities for infiltration consistent with vector control objectives.
Island areas between taxiway and
apron are sumped to allow for
capture and infiltration of runoff.
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-14
Table 3. Site Design BMPs (continued)
Included
Brief Reason for Each BMP
Indicated as No or N/A Design
Concept Technique Specific BMP Yes No N/A Site Design Concept 2 (cont’d)
Minimize
Directly
Connected
Impervious
Area
(See WQMP
Section 3.5.1.4)
Direct roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels for reuse.
No building/architectural
construction is occurring.
Additionally, existing roof drains are
hard-piped to grade, but they
eventually drain to infiltration basin.
Use vegetated drainage swales in lieu of underground piping or
imperviously lined swales.
All natural earth islands between
taxiway and apron are being
protected in place and utilized for
drainage.
Incorporate tree well filters, flow-through planters, and/or bioretention
areas into landscaping and drainage plans. No landscaping design or trees in
project
Other comparable and equally effective Site Design BMP (or BMPs) as
approved by the Permittee (Note: Additional narrative required
describing BMP and how it addresses site design concept).
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-15
Project Site Design BMPs:
The majority of the Apron area sheet flows to native yet maintained islands between the apron and
Taxiway ‘W’. The natural channel flowlines provide an increased time of concentration and increased
infiltration rate, when compared to direct piping and full pavement. Flows ultimately collect into a master
storm drain system that passes through and existing oil-grit separator. The separator has a maximum oil
storage capacity of 850 gallons, and half-full sediment capacity of 95 cubic-feet. The system is
maintained yearly with full removal of oil and sediments. Roughly 600 feet downstream of the separator,
the airport has installed a 244,000 cubic-foot stormwater retention basin. There is no low-flow outlet,
meaning the entire 4 foot storage depth is infiltrated.
Alternative Project Site Design BMPs:
Industrial Permit Sampling (# 7 33I001282) requires the Airport to sample water quality in any qualifying
discharge rain event. This is a method to verify the effectiveness of the Design and Operational BMPs
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-16
Table 4. Site Design BMPs Meeting the Measureable Goal in WQMP Section 3.5.1.1
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
DRAINAGE
SUBAREA
ID OR NO.
SITE DESIGN
BMP TYPE *
POLLUTANTS WITHIN SUBAREA
CAUSING RECEIVING WATER
IMPAIRMENTS
RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS
OF BMP (COLUMN 2) AT
ADDRESSING IDENTIFIED
POLLUTANTS (COLUMN 3)
BMP MEETS
WHICH DESIGN
CRITERIA?
BMP
TRIBUTARY
AREA
(See Table 2) (refer to Table 1) (U, L, M, H/M, H; see Table 2) (identify as VBMP OR QBMP) (nearest 0.1 acre)
See App B
WQMP map
Infiltration
(retention) basin Bacteria / Virus (Pathogen) High / Medium VBMP 245.4
total area treated with site design bmps (nearest 0.1 acre)**
* Site Design BMPs included in this table are those that completely address the Treatment Requirements for their tributary area.
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-17
Justification of infeasibility for sub-areas not addressed with effective Site Design BMPs in Table 4:
N/A
V.1.B TREATMENT CONTROL BMPS
Conventional Treatment Control BMPs shall be implemented to address the project’s Pollutants
of Concern as required in WQMP Section 3.5.1 where, and to the extent that, Section V.1.A has
demonstrated that it is infeasible to meet these requirements through implementation of Site
Design BMPs.
The Site Design BMPs described in Section V.1.A of this project-specific WQMP
completely address the Pollutants of Concern for the entire project site as required in
Section 3.5.1.1 of the WQMP. Supporting documentation for the sizing of these Site
Design BMPs is included in Appendix F. *Section V.1.B need not be completed.
The Site Design BMPs described in Section V.1.A of this project-specific WQMP do NOT
completely address the Pollutants of Concern for the entire project site as required in
Section 3.5.1.1 of the WQMP. *Section V.1.B must be completed.
The Treatment Control BMPs identified in this section are selected, sized and implemented to
address the Pollutants of Concern for all project sub-areas where these pollutants were not fully
addressed with Site Design BMPs. Supporting documentation for the sizing of these Treatment
Control BMPs is included in Appendix F.
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-18
Table 5: Treatment Control BMP Summary
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
DRAINAGE
SUBAREA
ID OR NO.
TREATMENT
CONTROL
BMP TYPE
POLLUTANTS POTENTIALLY
GENERATED WITHIN SUBAREA
CAUSING RECEIVING WATER
IMPAIRMENTS*
RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS
OF BMP (COLUMN 2) AT
ADDRESSING IDENTIFIED
POLLUTANTS (COLUMN 3)
BMP MEETS
WHICH DESIGN
CRITERIA?
BMP
TRIBUTARY
AREA
(SEE TABLE 2) (REFER TO TABLE 1) (U, L, M, H/M, H; SEE TABLE 2) (IDENTIFY AS VBMP OR
QBMP) (NEAREST 0.1
ACRE)
See App B
WQMP map
Hydrodynamic
separator
system (oil water
separator)
Bacteria / Virus (Pathogen) Low QBMP 138.9
TOTAL AREA TREATED WITH TREATMENT CONTROL BMPS (NEAREST 0.1 ACRE)**
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-19
V.1.C MEASUREABLE GOAL SUMMARY
This section documents the extent to which this project meets the measureable goal described
in WQMP Section 3.5.1.1 of addressing all of the projects Treatment Requirements with Site
Design BMPs.
Table 6: Measureable Goal Summary
(1) (2) (3)
Total Area Treated with
Site Design BMPs
Total Area Treated with
Treatment Control BMPs
% of Treatment
Requirement addressed
with Site Design BMPs
245.4 138.9 64%
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-20
V.2 SOURCE CONTROL BMPS
This section identifies and describes the Source Control BMPs applicable and implemented on
this project.
Table 7. Source Control BMPs
BMP Name
Check One If not applicable, state
brief reason Included Not
Applicable
Non-Structural Source Control BMPs
Education for Property Owners, Operators, Tenants,
Occupants, or Employees
Activity Restrictions
Irrigation System and Landscape Maintenance No irrigation system for
this project
Common Area Litter Control
Street Sweeping Private Streets and Parking Lots
Drainage Facility Inspection and Maintenance
Structural Source Control BMPs
MS4 Stenciling and Signage
Landscape and Irrigation System Design No irrigation system for
this project
Protect Slopes and Channels
Existing natural channels
are stable, there are no
slopes in the design
Provide Community Car Wash Racks
No wash racks in this
project area. Aircraft
wash racks are large,
independant systems and
aircraft are not hosed
down like cars
Proper Design*:
Fueling Areas
Fuel storage is
independant and off site.
Fuel trucks deliver to
aircraft and have full fuel
spill containment on-
board
Air/Water Supply Area Drainage No air/water supply areas
Trash Storage Areas The existing trash area is
not being reconstructed
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-21
Loading Docks No elevated or sumped
loading docks
Maintenance Bays No maintenance bays
Vehicle and Equipment Wash Areas No wash areas
Outdoor Material Storage Areas No material storage areas
Outdoor Work Areas or Processing Areas No outdoor
work/processing areas
Provide Wash Water Controls for Food Preparation Areas No food prep areas
*Details demonstrating proper design must be included in Appendix F.
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-22
Following is a brief narrative describing how each included Source Control BMP will be implemented.
-Education for property owners will be provided with standard City, County, and CASQA flyers in
Appendix D. Also included is an excerpt of the Airports Desk Reference document for Water Quality on
airports and CASQA post-construction BMPs indicating proper maintenance techniques for the in-place
BMPs.
-Activities on this project are limited to SIC 4581 - Airports, Flying Fields, and Airport Terminal Services
Establishments primarily engaged in operating and maintaining airports and flying fields; in
servicing, repairing (except on a factory basis), maintaining, and storing aircraft; and in
furnishing coordinated handling services for airfreight or passengers at airports. This industry
also includes private establishments primarily engaged in air traffic control operations.
Government air traffic control operations are classified in Public Administration, Industry 9621.
These activities include: Aircraft cleaning and janitorial service, Aircraft servicing and repairing
(except on a factory basis), Aircraft storage at airports, Aircraft upholstery repair, Airfreight
handling at airports, Airport hangar rental, Airport leasing (if operating airport), Airport terminal
services, Airports, Hangar operation.
-Common area litter control is maintained through several programs. First and foremost, Advisory
Circular 150/5200-18C Airport Safety Inspection mandates an Airport Foreign Object Debris (FOD)
Management plan, per AC 150/5210-24, that keeps any and all trash, rocks, sand, etc. from posing a
threat to aircraft via ingestion and/or blowing. A rigorous program of immediate removal of any trash is
the cornerstone of this system and a requirement for airport certification by the FAA. The Safety
Inspection and the FOD plan ensure minimal large contaminates effect the site. Trash cans underneath
the terminal exist for use by airport staff. A large industrial trash bin exists north of the Bono concourse
next to the Terminal.
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/advisory_circulars/index.cfm/go/document.information/documen
tID/23179
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/advisory_circulars/index.cfm/go/document.information/documen
tID/391902
-A street sweeping program is part of the FOD management plan and is required on a quarterly basis.
Vacuum sweepers are preferred as bristles can become FOD.
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/advisory_circulars/index.cfm/go/document.information/documen
tID/391902
-Drainage system inspection/maintenance is performed yearly. The oil-water-grit separator is maintained
yearly per MP-50 in appendix D. This includes vacuum removal of trapped floatables (oils, trash, etc.) in
the first chamber and settled materials at the bottom of both chambers.
Appendix D includes copies of the educational materials that will be used in implementing this project-
specific WQMP.
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-23
V.3 EQUIVALENT TREATMENT CONTROL ALTERNATIVES
Industrial Permit Sampling (# 7 33I001282) requires the Airport to sample water quality in any qualifying
discharge rain event. This is a method to verify the effectiveness of the Design and Operational BMPs
V.4 REGIONALLY-BASED TREATMENT CONTROL BMPS
Not applicable
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-24
V. Operation and Maintenance Responsibility for
BMPs
Appendix G of this project-specific WQMP includes copies of CC&Rs, Covenant and Agreements,
and/or other mechanisms used to ensure the ongoing operation, maintenance, funding, transfer and
implementation of the project-specific WQMP requirements.
BMP Name O&M Activities Effective Date O&M Frequency Responsible
Party
OWS Remove floatables and grit Maintained under
NFPA requirement
since 1993
Yearly Palm Springs
International
Airport
Retention
Basin
Remove sediment build-up
that impairs infiltration rate
and/or basin capacity.
Remove trash/debris
Maintained under
NFPA requirement
since 1993
Inspect yearly, clean
debris immediately,
remove sediments a
maximum of every 5
years
Palm Springs
International
Airport
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
DATE 1-25
VI. Funding
The funding source for all BMPs comes from the Airport’s Maintenance and Operations budget. This
budget is funded through fees assessed by the airport on Lease Agreements and Terminal use for the
Airlines.
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
Appendix A
Conditions of Approval
Planning Commission Resolution N/A
Dated N/A
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
Appendix B
Vicinity Map, WQMP Site Plan, and Receiving Waters Map
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
Appendix C
Supporting Detail Related to Hydraulic Conditions of Concern
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
Appendix D
Educational Materials
Whatisstormwaterrunoff?
Whyisstormwaterrunoff
aproblem?
Theeffectsofpollution
Stormwater runoff occurs when precipitation
from rain or snowmelt flows over the ground.
Impervious surfaces like driveways, sidewalks,
and streets prevent stormwater from
naturally soaking into the ground.
Stormwater can pick up debris, chemicals, dirt, and other
pollutants and flow into a storm sewer system or directly to
a lake, stream, river, wetland, or coastal water. Anything that
enters a storm sewer system is discharged untreated into
the waterbodies we use for swimming, fishing, and providing
drinking water.
Polluted stormwater runoff can have
many adverse effects on plants, fish,
animals, and people.
Sediment can cloud the water
and make it difficult or
impossible for aquatic plants to
grow. Sediment also can
.destroy aquatic habitats
Excess nutrients can cause
algae blooms. When algae die,
they sink to the bottom and decompose
in a process that removes oxygen from
the water. Fish and other aquatic
organisms can’t exist in water with low
dissolved oxygen levels.
Bacteria and other pathogens can wash
into swimming areas and create health
hazards, often making beach closures
necessary.
Debris—plastic bags, six-pack rings, bottles, and
cigarette butts—washed into waterbodies can choke, suffocate, or
disable aquatic life like ducks, fish, turtles, and birds.
Household hazardous wastes like insecticides, pesticides, paint,
solvents, used motor oil, and other auto fluids can poison aquatic life.
Land animals and people can become sick or die from eating diseased
fish and shellfish or ingesting polluted water.
Polluted stormwater often
affects drinking water
sources. This, in turn, can
affect human health and
increase drinking water
treatment costs.AftertheStormEPA 833-B-03-002January 2003For more information contact:or visitwww.epa.gov/npdes/stormwaterwww.epa.gov/npsACitizen’sGuidetoUnderstandingStormwaterWHEN IT RAINSIT DRAINSWHEN IT RAINSIT DRAINSInternet Address (URL) HTTP://www.epa.govRecycled/Recyclable Printed With VegetableOil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer,Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper●●
Auto care
Washing your car and
degreasing auto parts at home
can send detergents and other
contaminants through the
storm sewer system. Dumping
automotive fluids into storm
drains has the same result as
dumping the materials directly
into a waterbody.
Pet waste
Pet waste can be
a major source of
bacteria and
excess nutrients
in local waters.
When walking
your pet,
remember to pick up the
waste and dispose of it
properly. Flushing pet
waste is the best disposal
method. Leaving pet waste
on the ground increases
public health risks by
allowing harmful bacteria
and nutrients to wash into
the storm drain and
eventually into local
waterbodies.
Septic
systems
Leaking and
poorly
maintained
septic
systems release nutrients and
pathogens (bacteria and
viruses) that can be picked up
by stormwater and discharged
into nearby waterbodies.
Pathogens can cause public
health problems and
environmental concerns.
Lawn care
Excess fertilizers
and pesticides
applied to lawns
and gardens wash
off and pollute
streams. In
addition, yard
clippings and
leaves can wash
into storm drains and contribute
nutrients and organic matter to streams.
Education is essential to changing people's behavior.
Signs and markers near storm drains warn residents
that pollutants entering the drains will be carried
untreated into a local waterbody.Recycle or properly dispose of household products that
contain chemicals, such as insecticides, pesticides, paint,
solvents, and used motor oil and other auto fluids.
Don’t pour them onto the ground or into storm drains.
Use a commercial car wash that treats or
recycles its wastewater, or wash your car on
your yard so the water infiltrates into the
ground.
Repair leaks and dispose of used auto fluids
and batteries at designated drop-off or
recycling locations.
Don’t overwater your lawn. Consider
using a soaker hose instead of a
sprinkler.
Use pesticides and fertilizers
sparingly. When use is necessary, use
these chemicals in the recommended
amounts. Use organic mulch or safer
pest control methods whenever
possible.
Compost or mulch yard waste. Don’t
leave it in the street or sweep it into
storm drains or streams.
Cover piles of dirt or mulch being
used in landscaping projects.
Inspect your system every
3 years and pump your
tank as necessary (every 3
to 5 years).
Don't dispose of
household hazardous
waste in sinks or toilets.
Dirt, oil, and debris that collect in
parking lots and paved areas can be
washed into the storm sewer system
and eventually enter local
waterbodies.
Sweep up litter and debris from
sidewalks, driveways and parking lots,
especially around storm drains.
Cover grease storage and dumpsters
and keep them clean to avoid leaks.
Report any chemical spill to the local
hazardous waste cleanup team.
They’ll know the best way to keep
spills from harming the environment.
Erosion controls that aren’t maintained can cause
excessive amounts of sediment and debris to be
carried into the stormwater system. Construction
vehicles can leak fuel, oil, and other harmful fluids
that can be picked up by stormwater and
deposited into local waterbodies.
Divert stormwater away from disturbed or
exposed areas of the construction site.
Install silt fences, vehicle mud removal areas,
vegetative cover, and other sediment and
erosion controls and properly maintain them,
especially after rainstorms.
Prevent soil erosion by minimizing disturbed
areas during construction projects, and seed
and mulch bare areas as soon as possible.
Uncovered fueling stations allow spills to be
washed into storm drains. Cars waiting to be
repaired can leak fuel, oil, and other harmful
fluids that can be picked up by stormwater.
Clean up spills immediately and properly
dispose of cleanup materials.
Provide cover over fueling stations and
design or retrofit facilities for spill
containment.
Properly maintain fleet vehicles to prevent
oil, gas, and other discharges from being
washed into local waterbodies.
Install and maintain oil/water separators.
Lack of vegetation on streambanks can lead to erosion. Overgrazed pastures can also
contribute excessive amounts of sediment to local waterbodies. Excess fertilizers and
pesticides can poison aquatic animals and lead to destructive algae blooms. Livestock in
streams can contaminate waterways with bacteria, making them unsafe for human contact.
Keep livestock away from streambanks and provide
them a water source away from waterbodies.
Store and apply manure away from waterbodies and in
accordance with a nutrient management plan.
Vegetate riparian areas along waterways.
Rotate animal grazing to prevent soil erosion in fields.
Apply fertilizers and pesticides according to label
instructions to save money and minimize pollution.
Permeable Pavement
Rain Barrels
Rain Gardens and
Grassy Swales
Vegetated Filter Strips
—Traditional concrete and
asphalt don’t allow water to soak into the ground.
Instead these surfaces rely on storm drains to
divert unwanted water. Permeable pavement
systems allow rain and snowmelt to soak through,
decreasing stormwater runoff.
—You can
collect rainwater from
rooftops in mosquito-
proof containers. The
water can be used later on
lawn or garden areas.
—Specially
designed areas planted
with native plants can provide natural places for
rainwater to collect
and soak into the
ground. Rain from
rooftop areas or paved
areas can be diverted
into these areas rather
than into storm drains.
—Filter strips are areas of
native grass or plants created along roadways or
streams. They trap the pollutants stormwater
picks up as it flows across driveways and streets.
Residential landscaping
Improperly managed logging operations can result in erosion and
sedimentation.
Conduct preharvest planning to prevent erosion and lower costs.
Use logging methods and equipment that minimize soil disturbance.
Plan and design skid trails, yard areas, and truck access roads to
minimize stream crossings and avoid disturbing the forest floor.
Construct stream crossings so that they minimize erosion and physical
changes to streams.
Expedite revegetation of cleared areas.
Commercial
StormwaterPollutionSolutions
Construction
Agriculture Automotive
Facilities
Forestry
AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE WATER QUALITY
CHAPTER 20. WATER QUALITY
1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS.
a. General. Many of the nation’s airports are located near waterways. This is
because years ago when many airports were built, the cheapest, flattest, and most desirable
lands suitable for airports were located near waterways. As a consequence, today’s airport
activities may cause water quality impacts due to their proximity to waterways. In particular,
construction activities or seasonal airport anti-icing/deicing activities are major concerns.
Construction often causes sediment-laden runoff to enter waterways. Biological and
chemical breakdown of deicing chemicals in airport runoff can cause severe dissolved
oxygen demands on receiving waters. Operations or maintenance are other activities that
may affect water quality. Airport-related water quality impacts can occur from both point
and non-point sources at airports. If not properly controlled, the resultant water quality
impacts may adversely affect animal, plant, or human populations. Therefore, FAA must
evaluate project-related discharges, especially those having the potential to affect navigable
waterways, municipal drinking water supplies, important sole-source aquifers, or protected
groundwater supplies.
b. Point sources. These are stormwater or other types of discharges from
wastewater treatment plants, sanitary sewer systems, collection basins, or other water
collection devices that flow through a conveyance (pipe) and discharge to a waterway. The
states and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issue National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits authorizing point source discharges into
navigable waters of the United States under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33
USC Section 1342).
c. Non-point sources. These include stormwater runoff from runways, taxiways,
aprons, outdoor storage areas, or construction areas that do not flow through conveyance
systems. Federal permits are not necessary for non-point source discharges.
d. Runoff pollutants. Point source and non-point source runoff may contain
pollutants such as metals, oils, greases, hazardous materials, solids, hydrocarbons,
pesticides, and herbicides. During dry weather, pollutants can accumulate on impermeable
surfaces, but during storms they are washed into creeks, streams, lakes, or other waters
causing potential water quality impacts.
2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.
a. General. The principal statutory framework for considering water quality in
Federal decisions is contained in the CWA. The following chart provides information on this
and other important laws that protect surface water, groundwater, and aquatic systems:
Chap. 20 Page 1
AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE WATER QUALITY
APPLICABLE STATUTES AND
IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OVERSIGHT AGENCY
Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
as amended by the Clean Water
Floodplains and Floodways Act of
1977 (CWA), 33 USC Chapter 26
Chapter 26 provides Congress’ mandate
for developing comprehensive solutions
to prevent, reduce, or remove pollution
in waters of the United States. Section
401 of the Clean Water Act, 33 USC
Section 1341, addresses state issuance
of water quality certificates. Section 402
of the Clean Water Act, 33 USC
Section 1342, addresses issuance of
NDPES permits, while Section 404 of the
Act, 33 USC Section 1344, focuses on
dredge and fill permits in navigable
waterways including wetlands.
EPA or
State or tribal water
quality agencies
CWA, Section 311, as amended by
the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, 33 USC
Section 1252 et seq.
Requires owners or operators of above
ground facilities storing oil or oil-based
products to prepare spill response plans.
EPA
Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended
(SDWA), 42 USC Section 300.f, et
seq., also known as the Public Health
Service Act
Prohibits Federal agencies from funding
actions that would contaminate a sole
source aquifer or its recharge area.
EPA
40 CFR Parts 142 and 149
Part 142 provides regulations
addressing national primary drinking
water supplies. Part 149 provides
regulations addressing sole source
aquifers.
EPA
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of
1980, 16 USC Section 661, et seq.
Requires Federal agencies to consult
with the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
for any action that would alter (impound,
divert, drain, or control) a stream or
other body of water.
FWS
3. APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. Building airport facilities may
temporarily or permanently affect surface waters, groundwater, or drinking water supplies.
As a result, when an airport sponsor requests FAA action to support an airport development
project, FAA must evaluate the proposed project’s potential water quality impacts. Examples
of airside airfield development projects that may cause water quality impacts include
building or expanding terminals or hangars, building new or extended runways and taxiways,
and installing navigational aids (NAVAIDS). Landside development that may alter water
quality includes building or moving airport access roads, remote parking facilities, and rental
car lots.
Chap. 20 Page 2
AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE WATER QUALITY
4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS.
a. General. There are various water quality permits, certifications, and approvals
that may be required to build and operate airport projects. The responsible FAA official must
ensure the water quality chapter of the environmental document discloses any known
problems in obtaining them.
b. Water quality certificates (WQC). Airport sponsors needing the authorizations or
permits noted in subsections 4.b(1) and (2) below must obtain a water quality certificate
(WQC). The responsible FAA official must ensure the environmental document prepared for
any action involving those authorizations or permits contains information about the status
of, and any known problems in obtaining, the WQC. That information is an indicator of
potential concerns about WQC issuance that may require further airport sponsor and/or FAA
effort to mitigate adverse water quality effects to obtain the certificate. A WQC is required
for:
(1) An airport sponsor seeking an NPDES permit from the EPA or a state under
Section 402 of the CWA; and
(2) An airport sponsor seeking a permit under Section 404 of the CWA from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) or a state authorized to issue this permit for filling or
dredging navigable waters, including jurisdictional wetlands (See Chapter 21 of this Desk
Reference.
c. NPDES permits. The environmental document prepared for any proposed airport
action having a point source discharge to a navigable waterway or that would disturb at least
1 acre should include information on the status of the NPDES permit needed for that action,
as described above in section 4.a of this chapter. It should also include any comments the
permit-issuing agency provides. A copy of the NPDES permit is not needed for FAA’s
approval of an airport layout plan or grant, but the environmental document prepared for the
action should discuss any difficulties the issuing agency may have noted about permit
issuance. An appendix to the environmental document should contain a copy of the letter
from the permit agency or a copy of the permit, if the permit is issued before the document
is completed.
Note: 40 CFR Sections 122 through 124 provide more details on NPDES stormwater permits. See Chapter 6,
of this Desk Reference (Construction Impacts) for a discussion on stormwater permits and construction
activity.
d. Agency opinions on safe drinking water supplies. An airport action has the
potential to affect a public drinking water supply, a sole source aquifer, or a Comprehensive
State Groundwater Protection Program (CSGWPP). To comply with Section 1424(e) of the
Safe Drinking Water Act, the approving FAA official may not approve funds for any action if
the EPA Administrator determines the action would contaminate a sole source aquifer. As a
result, the environmental document should summarize important opinions from EPA and the
state, local, or tribal water quality agencies regarding these impacts and cross-reference the
appendix containing the correspondence the agencies or tribe provide.
Chap. 20 Page 3
AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE WATER QUALITY
e. Oil response plan. Environmental documents addressing airport actions having
above ground facilities to store or handle oil or oil-based products should include
information on the status of an oil recovery response plan. See Section 112(a)(2) of the Oil
Pollution Act) for more information, if needed.
f. Other information. The environmental document should contain information from
agencies having expertise on water quality issues. This includes comments on the adequacy
of proposed mitigation measures, best available technologies (BATs), and best management
practices (BMPs). The environmental document should summarize important information
these letters contain and cross-reference the appendix and pages where the letters
discussing the particular information may be found.
Note: BATs and BMPs typically are parts of the NPDES permit process. BATs refer to the best technology
available to minimize water quality impacts resulting from point source discharges. Bacterial decomposition of
glycol in stormwater runoff is an example of a BAT. BMPs are schedules of activities, maintenance procedures,
and management practices implemented to minimize point source discharge impacts. Examples include using
good housekeeping procedures, training personnel in the proper use and handling of chemicals, or using high-
pressure water to remove paint from an aircraft instead of solvent-based paint removers.
5. PROCEDURES FOR COMPLIANCE WITH STATUTORY, REGULATORY AND OTHER
REQUIREMENTS -ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.
a. Required consultation. Congress has delegated to each state the primary
responsibility for protecting and managing water quality within a state’s legal boundaries.
Early consultation concerning the topics noted below will improve FAA’s evaluation of an
action's water quality impacts and identify any additional information necessary to make
judgments about the significance of impacts. It will also ensure the environmental
document addresses agency concerns and avoid delays due to the lack of that information.
The environmental document’s water quality chapter shall reflect the results of consultation
with regulating and permitting agencies and with agencies that must review permit
applications, such as the FWS, which may have specific concerns. It should also summarize
and appropriately address agency concerns or comments and cross reference pertinent
material in the appendix.
(1) Water quality standard concerns. Contact the state agency having the
authority to enforce water quality standards and/or issue WQCs.
(2) NPDES permit concerns. When an airport action would involve a point source
discharge, a point source stormwater discharge, or disturb at least 1 acre, contact the state
agency or EPA regional office responsible for issuing NPDES permits.
(3) Groundwater protection. When an action may affect a sole source aquifer,
contact the state, tribal and local government agencies responsible for developing and
managing a Comprehensive State Groundwater Protection Program (CSGWPP) and the EPA
regional office responsible for reviewing that program.
(4) Aquatic populations or communities. When an action would affect fish,
shellfish, or wildlife populations, contact the FWS and the respective state fishery or wildlife
agency.
Chap. 20 Page 4
AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE WATER QUALITY
Note: Consult the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) regional office for actions that may affect
anadromous fish or marine mammals. Anadromous fish are fish that live in the ocean but spawn in freshwater
(e.g., salmon, shad).
6. DETERMINING IMPACTS.
a. General. Determine if building, operating, or maintaining the proposed airport
development action would affect project area surface water, groundwater, or drinking water
sources. The responsible FAA official should pay particular attention to potential physical
(e.g., temperature changes, siltation, and turbidity) and chemical (e.g., changes in oxygen or
nitrogen levels, pH, etc.) impacts associated with the proposed action.
b. Potential impacts. Actions, such as aircraft and runway deicing/anti-icing,
storage tank operation, or firefighting training activities have the potential to chemically
affect the project area’s water quality. As needed, describe impacts addressing the
following issues:
(1) violations of conditions or terms contained in an existing WQC or existing
NPDES permit;
(2) adverse effects on the water quality of sensitive aquatic habitats, including
but not limited to, wetlands or critical habitats for Federally or state-protected species;
(3) threats to the integrity of public drinking water supplies; and
(4) other areas of concern that water quality agencies identify.
7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE.
a. General. After completing the analysis discussed in earlier paragraphs, use the
findings to determine the proposed action’s degree of impact. For most airport actions,
significant impacts can be avoided by design considerations, controls during construction,
and other mitigation measures. When the environmental document and appropriate
consultation demonstrate that water quality standards can be met, no special water quality
problem exists, and no difficulty is anticipated in obtaining permits, it may be assumed that
there would be no significant impact on water quality. The responsible FAA official should
consider the following factors in consultation with agencies having jurisdiction or special
expertise on water quality effects.
ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD FACTORS TO CONSIDER
When an action has the potential to exceed water
quality standards, there are water quality
problems that cannot be avoided or satisfactorily
mitigated, or there would be difficulty in obtaining
a permit or authorization, there may be a
significant impact.
The responsible FAA official should also consider
if a proposed action or a reasonable alternative
would adversely affect a public drinking water
supply, sole source aquifer, or waters of national
significance (e.g., wild and scenic rivers, national
refuges, etc.).
From: Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B.
Chap. 20 Page 5
AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE WATER QUALITY
b. Mitigation. During the environmental review process, Federal, state, tribal, or
local agencies having permitting or regulatory authority over water quality issues sometimes
provide letters addressing those issues. Those letters include measures recommended to
mitigate water quality effects for purposes of NEPA that are not required for the certificate or
permit. The environmental document should summarize the most important information in
those letters and accurately cross-reference the appendix and pages in that appendix for
further information. If the FAA of the sponsor does not adopt any recommended mitigation,
the environmental document should clearly explain why. In addition, the environmental
document should clearly describe the measures the sponsor will carry out to:
(1) meet WQC terms or the conditions of any applicable NPDES permits;
(2) protect public drinking water supplies or comply with applicable CSGWPPs;
(3) develop oil response plans designed to contain any potential spills of oil or oil-
based products associated with the proposed action;
(4) meet any other substantial water quality concerns that water quality agencies
identify; or
(5) use BMPs or BATs.
Note: 40 CFR Section 112 and 40 CFR Section 112.20(h) present regulations for oil pollution prevention and
the contents of a facility response plan, respectively.
8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.
a. General. FAA must prepare an EIS if mitigation will not reduce water quality
impacts below the significance impact threshold in paragraph 7 above. In addition to the
information discussed above, to the extent possible the EIS should contain the following
information.
(1) The results of added, project-specific, water quality studies FAA and Federal,
state, or local water quality agencies agree on during EIS scoping or during the EIS process.
(2) A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Department of
Transportation (DOT) and the Department of the Army (Army) contains a provision for
elevating disputes concerning dredge and fill permit applications (“Section 404 permit
applications”) with the Army. Use of this provision typically occurs when an Army District
Engineer is considering denial of a Section 404 permit or requiring conditions that would
cause substantial, unacceptable conditions to DOT agencies (e.g., habitat attractive to
wildlife hazardous to aviation). Therefore, if an airport action involves a Section 404 permit
process that requires the responsible FAA official to elevate permit decisions to Army
headquarters, contact the Airport Planning and Environmental Division (APP-400). APP-400
will help the responsible FAA official comply with the provisions of the MOA. APP-400 will
also provide the follow-up actions that may be needed at the Washington, D.C.,
headquarters level to resolve differences. The EIS should contain the results of any dispute
resolution process.
Chap. 20 Page 6
AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE WATER QUALITY
b. Mitigation. The EIS should identify and describe any mitigation measures that
Federal, state, tribal, or local agencies having permitting or regulatory authority over water
quality issues recommend for purposes of NEPA in addition to those required as a condition
on any water quality permit or license. FAA and the airport sponsor should fully consider the
recommended mitigation and balance its benefits against those of the proposed action. The
document should explain why the sponsor or FAA has not adopted any mitigation agencies
have recommended. If feasible, the EIS should include an estimated schedule for the
airport sponsor to undertake accepted mitigation.
Chap. 20 Page 7
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
Appendix E
Soils Report
P
P
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
nternational Air
rhoff
rport Terminal A
PA
TERM
AT PAL
Apron Area and
AVEMENT IN
MINAL APRO
LM SPRINGS
PALM
pr
Parson
451 E. Vand
San Bern
Janu
d Taxiway G
NVESTIGATION
FOR
ON AREA AND
INTERNATIO
M SPRINGS, C
repared for
ns Brinckerho
erbilt Way, S
ardino, CA 9
uary 23, 2013
12-872-01
GEO
N REPORT
D TAXIWAY G
ONAL AIRPOR
CA
off
Suite 200
92408
OTECHNICA
G
RT
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
121
J
P
4
S
A
S
M
I
r
t
T
c
W
p
R
R
S
V
G
130 Santa Mar
January 23, 20
Parsons Brinc
451 E. Vander
San Bernardin
Attention: Mr
Subject: P
T
P
P
Mr. McCorm
In accordance
report address
the existing as
The results of
conditions, re
We appreciate
please do not
Respectfully s
RMA Group
Slawek Dyme
Vice President
GE 2764
garita Court R
013
ckerhoff
rbilt Way, Su
no, CA 92408
r. Chuck McC
avement Inve
Terminal Apro
alm Springs I
alm Springs,
ick:
e with your re
ses the geotec
sphalt at the t
f the investig
sults of our fi
e this opportu
hesitate to co
submitted,
erski, PE|GE
t
Rancho Cucamo
ite 200
Cormick
estigation Rep
on Area and T
International
CA
equest, a pave
chnical condit
erminal apron
gation are pre
ield exploratio
unity to be of
ontact us at yo
onga, CA 9173
port
Taxiway G
Airport
ement investig
tions at the sit
n area and at
esented in the
on and labora
f continued se
our convenien
30 | T: 909.989
gation has bee
te and present
Taxiway G.
e accompany
atory testing,
ervice to you.
nce.
GEO
9.1751 | F: 909.
en completed
nts design reco
ying report, w
conclusions a
If you have
OTECHNICA
.989.4287 | ww
RMA Gro
d for the abov
ommendation
which include
and recomme
any question
AL CONSU
ww.rmacompan
oup Job No.:
ve-referenced
ns for reconstr
es a descripti
endations.
ns regarding th
LTANTS
nies.com
12-872-01
site. This
ruction of
ion of site
his report,
P
P
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
SECTION
1.00 IN
1.01 P
1.02 Sc
1.03 Si
1.04 P
1.05 In
2.00 F
2.01 P
2.02 Su
2.03 E
3.00 C
3.01 G
3.02 R
3.03 R
4.00 C
FIGURES
Figure 1
APPEND
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix
nternational Air
rhoff
N
NTRODUCTIO
urpose
cope of Invest
ite Location a
revious Repo
nvestigation M
FINDINGS
avement and
urface and Gr
Existing Pavem
CONCLUSION
General Concl
Recommended
Recommended
CLOSURE
S AND TABLE
Boring
DICES
x A Fiel
x B Lab
x C Refe
rport Terminal A
T
ON
tigation
and Descriptio
orts
Methods
Earth Materi
roundwater C
ment Sections
NS AND RECO
lusion
d Pavement Se
d Vehicular P
ES
Location Ma
d Investigatio
oratory Tests
erences
Apron Area and
TABLE OF C
on
ials
Conditions
OMMENDATIO
ection Design
avement Sect
ap
on
s
d Taxiway G
CONTENTS
ONS
n Criteria
tion
GEO
S
OTECHNICAAL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
Pa
PAGE
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
5
A1
B1
C1
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
age i of 34
P
P
1
A
a
i
p
1
T
O
m
1
T
a
t
B
e
a
1
A
f
i
f
c
a
i
i
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
1.01 Purpo
A pavement e
and Taxiway
nvestigation w
pavement reco
1.02 Scope
The general sc
• Recon
• Loggi
differe
• Samp
analys
• Labor
• Geote
• Prepa
Our scope of
materials onsi
1.03 Site L
The site is loc
and surround
terminal and t
Boring Locati
existing comm
asphalt pavem
1.04 Previ
As part of the
for Palm Spr
ndicate that s
from 41 to 5
condition wit
area is classifie
n that report
ncluding: cra
nternational Air
rhoff
ose
evaluation has
y G at Palm
was to summ
onstruction, a
e of the Inves
cope of this in
nnaissance of
ing, sampling
ent locations
ling of 4 asp
sis of existing
ratory testing
echnical evalu
aration of this
f work did n
ite.
Location and
cated in the C
ds the main t
the air traffic
ion Map (Fig
mercial runw
ment on aggreg
ious Reports
e preparation
ings Internat
sections of Ta
5. This repo
h PCI’s rangi
ed as either p
t it was recom
ack sealing, p
rport Terminal A
s been compl
m Springs Int
arize geotech
and to develop
stigation
nvestigation in
the site and n
and backfilli
on the termin
phalt cores on
g pavement co
g of representa
uation of the c
s report presen
not include a
Description
City of Palm
terminal and
control towe
gure 1). Palm
way and one
gate base, wh
of this repor
ional Airpor
axiway G wer
ort also indic
ing from 26 t
oor or very p
mmended tha
patching, slab
Apron Area and
1.00 INTRO
leted for the p
ternational A
nical conditio
p geotechnica
ncluded the fo
nearby vicinit
ing of 10 expl
nal apron area
n the termin
onditions.
ative soil samp
compiled data
nting our find
a Phase I en
Springs, Calif
d adjoining co
er. The appro
m Springs Inte
existing gene
ile Taxiway G
rt, we were fu
t prepared by
re identified a
cated that th
to 85. Howe
poor with PC
at the pavem
b repair/joint
d Taxiway G
ODUCTION
proposed pav
Airport in P
ons at the site
al design para
ollowing:
ty.
loratory borin
a and 4 additi
al apron area
ples.
a.
dings, conclus
vironmental
fornia. The t
oncrete slab.
oximate locat
ernational Ai
eral aviation
G consists of a
urnished the P
y RS and H
s having a po
e terminal ap
ever, the vast
CI’s ranging fr
ment for both
t sealing, fog
GEO
vement recons
Palm Springs,
e, to assess the
ameters and re
ngs drilled w
ional explorat
a and 2 asph
sions and reco
site assessme
terminal apro
Taxiway G
ion of the site
irport is a com
runway. Th
asphalt pavem
Pavement M
H and dated O
oor pavement
pron area pa
majority of t
rom 26 to 55.
h areas underg
g seals, slurry
OTECHNICA
struction of t
, California.
eir potential im
ecommended
with an 8-inch
tory borings o
halt cores on
ommendation
ent for the p
on area is sou
is located n
e is illustrated
mmercial avi
he terminal
ment on alluv
anagement P
October, 2009
condition ind
avement was
the pavement
. Based on th
go routine an
y seals, and r
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
he terminal a
The purpos
mpact on the
pavement th
flight auger d
on Taxiway G
Taxiway G
ns.
potential of h
uthwest of the
northwest of
d on the accom
ation airport
apron area c
vial soil.
rogram – Fin
9. In the re
dex with PCI
in very poor
t in the termi
he conditions
nd global ma
rejuvenators
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page 1
apron area
se of this
e proposed
hicknesses.
drill rig at
G.
for visual
hazardous
e runways
the main
mpanying
with one
consists of
nal Report
eport they
I’s ranging
r to good
inal apron
identified
aintenance
to extend
P
P
p
n
a
o
je
a
1
O
a
T
a
D
T
m
A
A
2
O
g
p
T
i
t
l
w
a
T
S
n
1
I
l
T
i
T
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
pavement life
not given for
association fo
of asphalt for
et traffic area
aggregate base
1.05 Inves
Our investiga
and preparatio
This report ha
and has incor
Definitions of
Technical sup
methods and
Appendix B c
Appendix C.
2.01 Pavem
Our subsurfa
generally und
poorly graded
The artificial f
n thickness a
the apron are
ongitudinal c
weathering.
alligator and b
The alluvial so
SP-SM in acco
negligible amo
14 borings, wi
In general, the
ikely due to
Taxiway G w
nvestigation.
The soils enco
nternational Air
rhoff
. Specific rec
r the individ
r rehabilitatio
overlay in jet
as as 9 inches
e for general a
stigation Met
ation consisted
on of this rep
as been prepa
rporated code
f technical ter
pporting data
equipment
contains a de
ment and Ear
ce investigati
derlain by arti
d sands with s
fill soils encou
nd the aggreg
ea appeared
cracking, cra
The asphalt e
block crackin
oils encounter
ordance with
ounts of sulfa
ith the except
e upper 3 to
compaction
were general
ountered in o
rport Terminal A
ommendation
dual sections
on of the sect
t traffic areas,
s of asphalt o
aviation areas.
thods
d of office re
ort.
ared in a mann
es, ordinance
rms and symb
a are presente
used in perf
escription of
rth Materials
ion and revie
ificial fill and
ilt and silty sa
untered consi
gate base rang
to be in fair
acking along
encountered
g, rutting and
red during ou
h the Unified
ates and are n
tion that som
5 feet of the
of the soil du
lly medium
our investigat
Apron Area and
ns for overlay
of pavemen
tions of pavem
, 2 inches of a
over 10 inche
. It does not a
esearch, field
ner consistent
s, regulations
bols used in th
ed in the atta
forming the
our laborato
2.00
s
ew of previou
alluvium. Lo
ands with trac
isted of aspha
ged from 3 to
r to poor co
utility trenc
at Taxiway G
d weathering.
ur investigatio
Soils Classifi
non-expansive
me locations ha
alluvial soils
uring constru
dense. No
tion were tes
d Taxiway G
y and/or rem
t. General
ment. Gener
asphalt for gen
es of aggregat
appear that th
exploration,
t with genera
s and laws th
his report incl
ached append
field explora
ory testing an
0 FINDINGS
us geotechnic
ocally the soi
ces of gravel.
alt and aggreg
o 8 inches in t
ondition with
ches, rutting,
G was genera
on were relati
ication System
in nature. Th
ad traces of gr
around the t
uction of the
oversized m
sted to determ
GEO
move and repla
recommenda
ral recommen
neral aviation
te base and 2
he sections ut
laboratory te
ally accepted e
hat, in our p
lude those of
dices. Append
ation and log
nd the test re
cal reports re
ils encountere
gate base. The
thickness. In
h low to me
, erosion, ex
ally in poor
ively coarse-gr
m. These soil
he soils appea
ravel while ot
erminal apro
terminal apr
materials wer
mine the Cali
OTECHNICA
acement of th
ations were g
ndations utiliz
n areas. Full d
2 inches of as
tilized soil CB
esting, review
engineering p
professional o
the ASTM In
dix A contain
gs of our su
esults. Refer
evealed that t
ed in our inve
e asphalt rang
general, the
edium severit
xposed aggreg
condition wi
rained and we
ls are not cor
ared to be co
thers did not.
on appear den
ron. The nea
re encounter
ifornia Bearin
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
he existing asp
given for gen
zed sections o
depth section
sphalt over 6
BR values.
w of the comp
principles and
opinion, are a
nternational.
ns a descripti
ubsurface exp
rences are pre
the airport pr
estigations co
ged from 4 to
asphalt encou
y alligator, b
gate and rav
ith moderate
ere classified a
rrosive to me
nsistent throu
nse to very de
ar surface soil
red in our s
ng Ratio (CB
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page 2
phalt were
neral cost
of 3 inches
s were for
inches of
piled data,
d practices,
applicable.
ion of the
plorations.
esented in
roperty is
onsisted of
12 inches
untered in
block and
veling and
to severe
as SM and
etals, have
ughout all
ense, most
ls beneath
subsurface
BR) in our
P
P
l
p
c
o
2
N
n
2
E
T
T
3
B
g
o
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
aboratory at
pavement. S
classification,
on ASTM D2
2.02 Surfa
No areas of p
natural seepag
2.03 Exist
Existing pave
Table below:
THICKNESS
(Test
B
3.01 Gene
Based on site-
general experi
overlay opera
nternational Air
rhoff
remolded d
Samples of th
grain size and
2937.
ace and Grou
ponding or st
ge were found
ting Pavemen
ment section
S OF COMPA
Method: AS
Boring
No.
B-1
B-2
B-3
B-4
B-5
B-6
B-7
B-8
B-9
B-10
B-11
B-12
B-13
B-14
eral Conclusi
-specific data
ience in geote
ation will rem
rport Terminal A
densities to re
he materials
d sand equiva
undwater Con
tanding water
d and no grou
nt Sections
encountered
ACTED BIT
STM D3549)
Asphalt C
Thickn
(inche
5” AC
10” AC
10” AC
10” AC
10” AC
9” AC
4” AC
11” AC
10” AC
9” AC
9” AC
10” AC
9” AC
12” AC
3.00 CO
on
and informa
echnical engin
medy the pave
Apron Area and
epresent the
most likely
alent value. T
nditions
r were presen
undwater was
d in our borin
UMINOUS
Core
ness
s)
A
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
ONCLUSIONS
ation contain
neering, it is o
ement withou
d Taxiway G
compacted s
to yield the
The samples w
nt at the time
encountered
ng and core l
PAVING MI
Aggregate Bas
Thickness
(inches)
6” AB
6” AB
7” AB
6” AB
3” AB
7” AB
8” AB
5” AB
5” AB
0” AB
0” AB
0” AB
0” AB
0” AB
S AND RECOM
ed in this rep
our profession
ut having to r
GEO
subgrade for
lowest stren
were then rem
e of our stud
during our su
locations are
IXTURES SP
se
MMENDATIO
port, our un
nal judgment
remove and r
OTECHNICA
the propose
ngth were sel
molded to the
dy. Further,
ubsurface exp
located in A
PECIMENS
ONS
nderstanding o
that an aspha
replace the en
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
ed apron and
lected based
e selected den
no springs o
ploration.
Appendix A a
of the projec
alt pavement
ntire existing
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page 3
d taxiway
on visual
nsity based
or areas of
and in the
t and our
grind and
structural
P
P
s
s
u
3
O
a
d
1
T
a
m
u
a
A
r
P
P
S
F
3
A
w
S
i
u
p
l
l
D
h
d
p
i
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
section. Based
subgrade failu
usage of the p
3.02 Recom
Our recomme
and testing, la
determined ut
150/5320-6E a
The structura
are designed a
must be of su
utilizes the C
asphalt overla
Advisory Cir
recommend th
Pavement des
Pavement De
Subgrade com
Flexible Pavem
3.03 Vehic
As part of our
which is not s
Sand equivale
nformation o
using the pro
procedure use
oad from the
oads do not e
Development
however, our
delivery vehic
pavement stru
nvestigation.
nternational Air
rhoff
d on the blow
ure or weakne
avements.
mmended Pa
endation for
aboratory tes
tilizing the F
and the FAAR
l adequacy of
and construct
uch quality an
CBR and equiv
ay course, sur
rcular 150/53
he following
Condition
Remove and
Grind and ov
Grind and ov
sign and const
esign and Ev
mpaction shou
ments in FAA
cular Paveme
r investigatio
subject to airc
ent and R-val
on their soil p
cedures outlin
es the princip
e design traffi
exceed the stre
of the desig
experience in
cle traffic. W
uctural sectio
Recommend
rport Terminal A
w counts ob
ess. In our op
avement Sect
pavement de
sting and gen
AA Guidelin
RFIELD - Ai
f runways and
ted to provide
nd thickness t
valency ratio
rfacing course
320-6E as one
CBR’s for the
replace of Ap
verlay of Apr
verlay of Taxi
truction meth
valuation, and
uld be comple
A Advisory C
ent Sections
n we were as
craft traffic.
lue tests were
properties for
ned in Chapt
ple that the pa
ic index (TI)
ength of the s
gn traffic ind
ndicates that a
We have provid
on should be
ded structural
Apron Area and
served and th
pinion the ob
tion Design C
sign CBR is
nerally accept
nes for the Fl
rport Paveme
d taxiways at
e adequate su
that it will no
os for the var
e, and base c
e standard de
e various pave
pron and Tax
on asphalt pa
iway G aspha
hods should b
d 150/5370-1
eted in accord
Circular 150/5
sked to provid
e performed
r design of pav
ter 630 of the
avement struc
to the subgra
soil (R-value).
dexes on the
a traffic index
ded alternate
based on ec
l sections are a
d Taxiway G
he results of
served distres
Criteria
based on our
ted engineerin
exible Pavem
ent Design (V
airports are b
upport for the
ot fail under t
ious material
ourse. Our
eviation belo
ement repair
xiway G asph
avement
alt pavement
be based on F
0F on Stand
dance with Ta
5320-6E.
de vehicular p
on anticipate
vement struc
e California H
ctural section
ade soils in su
basis of a tr
x of 5 is typica
structural sec
conomic cons
as follows:
GEO
our laborato
ss is likely du
r analysis of t
ng principals
ment Design c
Version 1.305,
based on the p
e loads impos
the load imp
ls utilized in
recommende
ow the mean
conditions:
halt pavement
FAA Advisor
dards for Spe
able 3-4 Subg
pavement sec
ed subgrade s
ctural sections
Highway Des
n must be of
uch a manne
raffic study is
al for light au
ctions for each
siderations w
OTECHNICA
ory testing th
ue to general f
the results of
s. The recom
contained wit
dated Septem
principle that
sed by the air
osed by the a
the structura
ed design CBR
of all CBR
Desig
t 2
1
1
ry Circular 15
ecifying Con
grade Compac
ctions for the
soils at the si
s. Structural
sign Manual
adequate thic
er that the str
s beyond the
uto traffic and
h traffic index
which are bey
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
here is no ev
fatigue throug
our field inv
mmended secti
thin Advisory
mber 28, 2009
t the airport p
rcrafts. The
aircrafts. Thi
al section to d
Rs were calcu
values obtai
gn CBR
27
19
10
50/5320-6E o
nstruction of
ction Require
baggage hand
te in order t
sections were
(Caltrans, 20
ckness to dist
resses from th
e scope of th
d 6 is typical fo
x. Selection o
yond the scop
LTANTS
ry 24, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page 4
vidence of
gh normal
vestigation
ions were
y Circular
9).
pavements
pavement
is method
design the
ulated per
ined. We
n Airport
Airports.
ements for
dling area,
o provide
e designed
012). This
ribute the
he applied
his report;
or heavier
of the final
pe of this
P
P
L
H
I
c
P
m
a
T
a
T
r
s
T
c
n
i
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
Light auto tra
3.0
4.0
Heavy deliver
3.5
4.0
In areas with
cement concre
Prior to pavin
moisture cont
aggregate base
The findings,
accepted engin
This report h
report for any
subsurface con
The geotechn
compliance w
needed. Shou
n this report,
nternational Air
rhoff
affic (TI=5.0,
0 inches of asp
0 inches of cru
ry truck traffi
5 inches of asp
0 inches of cru
traffic loads,
ete on 4.0 inc
ng, the subgr
tent. The su
e courses shou
, conclusions
neering and g
as been prepa
y other purp
nditions.
nical consulta
with the desi
uld subsurface
this office sh
rport Terminal A
R-Value=64)
phaltic concre
ushed aggrega
ic (TI=6.0, R-
phaltic concre
ushed aggrega
PCC paveme
ches of crushe
rade soils sho
ubgrade soils
uld be compac
s and recomm
geologic princ
ared for Parso
ose must dra
ant should b
gn concepts
e conditions b
hould be notif
Apron Area and
):
ete over
ate base
-Value=64):
ete over
ate base
ents should be
d aggregate b
uld be scarifi
should be c
cted to a mini
4.0
mendations i
ciples and pra
ons Brinkerh
aw their own
be retained d
and recomm
be encountere
fied immediat
d Taxiway G
e designed for
ase.
ied and the m
ompacted to
imum of 95%
0 CLOSURE
in this repor
actices. No oth
hoff, to be use
conclusions
during the c
mendations, a
ed during con
tely so that ou
GEO
r a minimum
moisture adju
a minimum
% relative com
rt were prepa
her warranty
ed solely for
regarding req
construction
and to provi
nstruction tha
ur recommen
OTECHNICA
m thickness of
usted to withi
m of 90% rela
mpaction.
ared in acco
y, either expre
design purpo
quired constr
phase of th
ide additiona
at are differen
ndations may
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
f 6.0 inches of
in 2% of the
ative compact
ordance with
ess or implied
oses. Anyone
ruction proce
he project to
l recommend
nt from those
be re-evaluate
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page 5
f Portland
optimum
tion. All
generally
d, is made.
using this
edures and
o monitor
dations as
described
ed.
F
FIGURE
GEOOTECHNICAAL CONSU
LTANTS
F
APPEN
FIELD INVE
NDIX A
ESTIGATION
GEO
N
OTECHNICAAL CONSULTANTS
P
P
A
O
A
E
c
w
c
A
A
L
i
r
s
a
I
p
d
c
w
t
A
T
D
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
A-1.01 Numb
Our subsurfac
A-1.02 Locati
Exploratory b
characteristics
with cracked
considered acc
A Boring Loc
A-1.03 Loggin
Logs of borin
nformation a
represent the
subsurface con
at other locati
Identification
procedure of
definitions us
compaction, c
were obtained
the exploratio
A-1.04 Thickn
The measurem
D3549 test me
nternational Air
rhoff
ber of Boring
ce investigatio
ion of Boring
borings were
s. Borings w
pavement an
curate only to
ation Map sh
ng of Boring
ngs were prep
and interpret
approximate
nditions at th
ions and time
of the soils e
the Unified
sed in this cl
consistency or
d for laborato
on was determ
ness Measure
ments of the
ethod and are
rport Terminal A
gs
on consisted o
gs
located by vi
ere performe
nd at location
o the scale and
howing the ap
gs
pared by one
tation of sub
e boundary b
he dates and lo
s.
encountered
d Soils Classi
lassification s
r firmness of
ory inspection
mined.
ements
thickness of
e presented he
Apron Area and
AP
FIELD I
A-1.00 FIE
of 14 borings
isually exami
ed at intervals
ns with pave
d detail of the
pproximate lo
e of our staff
bsurface cond
between earth
ocations indic
during the su
fication Syste
system and a
the soil are at
n and testing,
the existing
erein.
d Taxiway G
PPENDIX A
INVESTIGATI
ELD EXPLORA
as shown on
ining the asph
s on the term
ement that ap
e plan utilized
cations of the
and are atta
ditions betwee
h units and
cated, and ma
ubsurface exp
em (ASTM
a legend defi
ttached in thi
, and the in-p
asphalt and c
GEO
ION
ATION
Figure 1.
halt pavemen
minal apron a
ppeared to be
d.
e borings and
ached in this
en samples.
the transition
ay not be rep
ploration was
D2488). A l
ining the term
s appendix. B
place density o
concrete pave
OTECHNICA
nt for areas w
area and on T
e sound. Ea
cores are pre
appendix. Th
The strata in
n may be gr
presentative of
s made using
legend indica
ms used in d
Bag samples o
of the variou
ements were
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
with different
Taxiway G at
ach location s
esented as Figu
he logs conta
ndicated on t
radual. The l
f subsurface c
the field iden
ating the sym
describing th
of the major e
s strata encou
made utilizin
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page A1
pavement
t locations
should be
ure 1.
ain factual
these logs
logs show
conditions
ntification
mbols and
he relative
earth units
untered in
ng ASTM
P
P
T
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
THICKNESS
(Test
B
nternational Air
rhoff
S OF COMPA
Method: AS
Boring
No.
B-1
B-2
B-3
B-4
B-5
B-6
B-7
B-8
B-9
B-10
B-11
B-12
B-13
B-14
rport Terminal A
ACTED BIT
STM D3549)
Asphalt C
Thickn
(inche
5” AC
10” AC
10” AC
10” AC
10” AC
9” AC
4” AC
11” AC
10” AC
9” AC
9” AC
10” AC
9” AC
12” AC
Apron Area and
UMINOUS
Core
ness
s)
A
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
d Taxiway G
PAVING MI
Aggregate Bas
Thickness
(inches)
6” AB
6” AB
7” AB
6” AB
3” AB
7” AB
8” AB
5” AB
5” AB
0” AB
0” AB
0” AB
0” AB
0” AB
GEO
IXTURES SP
se
OTECHNICA
PECIMENS
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page A2
P
P
PARTICLE SIZE LIMITS
Palm Springs In
Parsons BrinkerP A R T I C L E S I Z E L I M I T SSILT OR CLAYSAND GRAVELCOBBLES BOULDERSU. S. S T A N D A R D S I E V E S I Z EFINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSENo. 200 No. 40 No. 10 No. 4 3/4 in. 3 in. 12 in.
nternational Air
rhoff
BOU
M
COARSE
GRAINED
SOILS
FINE
GRAINE
SOILS
(More than 50% of
material is LARGER
than No. 200 sieve
size)
(More than 50% of
material is SMALLER
than No. 200 sieve
size)
rport Terminal A
UNDARY CLASSIFICATIO
MAJOR DIVISION
GRAVEL
D
SANDS
SILTS
SILTS
ED
S
HIGHLY OR
(More than 50% of
coarse fraction is
LARGER than the
No. 4 sieve size.
(More than 50% of
coarse fraction is
SMALLER than the
No. 4 sieve size)
R
(Liquid limit L
(Liquid limit G
UN
Apron Area and
ONS: Soils possessing cha
NS
CLEAN
GRAVE
GRAVEL
WITH FIN
LS
CLEAN
SANDS
SANDS
WITH FIN
AND CLAYS
AND CLAYS
RGANIC SOILS
f
(Appreciable
amount of fines)
(Little or no fines)
(Appreciable amt.
of fines)
(Little or no fines)
LESS than 50)
GREATER than 50)
NIFIED SOIL C
d Taxiway G
aracteristics of two groups
P
O
C
M
O
C
M
S
S
S
S
G
G
G
G
GROUP
SYMBOLS
N
ELS
LS
ES
NES
.
CLASSIFICATI
GEO
Well graded grave
Poorly graded gra
Silty gravels, grav
Clayey gravels, gr
Well graded sand
Poorly graded san
Inorganic silts and
silty or clayey fine
Inorganic clays of
gravelly clays, sa
Organic silts and
Inorganic silts, mi
fine sandy or silty
Inorganic clays of
Organic clays of m
s are designated by combi
Pt
OH
CH
MH
OL
CL
ML
SC
SM
SP
SW
GC
GM
GP
GW
S TYP
little or no fines.
little or no fines.
no fines.
or no fines.
Silty sands, sand-
Clayey sands, san
with slight plastici
clays.
plasticity.
organic silts.
Peat and other hig
ION SYSTEM
OTECHNICA
el, gravel-sand mixtures.
avel or gravel-sand mixtures,
vel-sand-silt mixtures.
ravel-sand-clay mixtures.
ds, gravelly sands, little or
nds or gravelly sands, little
d very fine sands, rock flour
e sands or clayey silts
f low to medium plasticity,
andy clays, silty clays, lean
organic silty clays of low
icaceous or diatamaceous
y soils, elastic silts.
f high plasticity, fat clays.
medium to high plasticity,
inations of group symbols.
PICAL NAMES
-silt mixtures.
nd-clay mixtures.
city
ghly organic soils.
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
.
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page A3
P
P
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
I. SOIL
Penet
N = Nu
B
%
II. SOI
nternational Air
rhoff
L STRENGT
BASED ON
Comp
tration Resista
(blows/F
0-4
4-10
10-30
30-50
>50
umber of blow
BASED ON
Comp
% Compactio
<75
75-83
83-90
>90
L MOISTUR
Mois
% Moisture
<5%
5-12%
>12%
rport Terminal A
TH/DENSIT
N STANDAR
actness of san
ance N
Ft)
C
V
L
M
D
V
ws of 140 lb. w
N RELATIVE
actness of san
on C
L
M
D
V
RE
sture of sands
e D
D
M
V
Apron Area and
Y
RD PENETR
nd
Compactness
Very Loose
Loose
Medium Den
Dense
Very Dense
weight falling
E COMPACT
nd
Compactness
Loose
Medium Den
Dense
Very Dense
s
Description
Dry
Moist
Very Moist
SOIL DESC
d Taxiway G
RATION TE
Pene
se
g 30 in. to dri
TION
se
CRIPTION LE
GEO
ESTS
Con
etration Resis
(blow
<2
2-4
4-8
8-15
15-30
>30
ive 2-in OD s
Con
% Compact
<80
80-85
85-90
>90
Mo
% Moistur
<12%
12-20%
>20%
EGEND
OTECHNICA
nsistency of cl
stance N
ws/ft)
sampler 1 ft.
nsistency of cl
tion
oisture of clay
re
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
ay
Consistency
Very Soft
Soft
Medium Stif
Stiff
Very Stiff
Hard
ay
Consistency
Soft
Medium Stif
Stiff
Very Stiff
ys
Description
Dry
Moist
Very Moist,
wet
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page A4
y
ff
y
ff
,
Palm Springs International Airport RMA Job No.:12-872-01
Parsons Brinckerhoff
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Boring No.Exploratory Boring Log
Material DescriptionSamples
Depth(ft)SampleTypeBlows(blows/ft)BulkSampleMoistureContent(%)Dry Density(pcf)USCSGraphicSymbolThis log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the
samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and
the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated,
and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
- Ring Sample
- Tube Sample
- Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
- SPT SampleS
Sheet 1 of 1
11-19-12
510WSC
CME-55
8"
140 lbs.See Boring Location Map
5
10
15
20
25
Drop:30"
- Groundwater
- End of Boring
R
R
R
R
58
20
26
26
B-1
SM
Total depth 16.5'
No ground water encountered
Hole backfilled with cuttings and patched with rapid setting grout
Gray-brown silty sand with occasional gravel, moist then dry, de nse.
Page A-5
R
24
5" AC / 6" AB
5.3 119.8
2.1 105.7
2.3 110.3
1.5 114.8
3.4 109.4
Medium dense
Palm Springs International Airport RMA Job No.:12-872-01
Parsons Brinckerhoff
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Boring No.Exploratory Boring Log
Material DescriptionSamples
Depth(ft)SampleTypeBlows(blows/ft)BulkSampleMoistureContent(%)Dry Density(pcf)USCSGraphicSymbolThis log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the
samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and
the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated,
and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
- Ring Sample
- Tube Sample
- Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
- SPT SampleS
Sheet 1 of 1
11-19-12
510WSC
CME-55
8"
140 lbs.See Boring Location Map
5
10
15
20
25
Drop:30"
- Groundwater
- End of Boring
R
R
R
69
41
B-2
SM
Total depth 10'
No ground water encountered
Hole backfilled with cuttings and patched with rapid setting grout
Gray-brown silty sand with occasional gravel, dry, very d ense.
Page A-6
23
10" AC / 6" AB
2.7 117.6
1.8 117.1
1.4 104.2 Medium dense
Palm Springs International Airport RMA Job No.:12-872-01
Parsons Brinckerhoff
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Boring No.Exploratory Boring Log
Material DescriptionSamples
Depth(ft)SampleTypeBlows(blows/ft)BulkSampleMoistureContent(%)Dry Density(pcf)USCSGraphicSymbolThis log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the
samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and
the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated,
and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
- Ring Sample
- Tube Sample
- Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
- SPT SampleS
Sheet 1 of 1
11-19-12
510WSC
CME-55
8"
140 lbs.See Boring Location Map
5
10
15
20
25
Drop:30"
- Groundwater
- End of Boring
R
R
R
59
29
B-3
SP-SM
Total depth 10.5'
No ground water encountered
Hole backfilled with cuttings and patched with rapid setting grout
Gray-brown poorly graded sand with silt to silty sand with occasional gr avel,
dry, medium dense to dense.
Page A-7
27
10" AC / 7" AB
3.9 108.7
2.2 103.7
2.4 101.4
Palm Springs International Airport RMA Job No.:12-872-01
Parsons Brinckerhoff
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Boring No.Exploratory Boring Log
Material DescriptionSamples
Depth(ft)SampleTypeBlows(blows/ft)BulkSampleMoistureContent(%)Dry Density(pcf)USCSGraphicSymbolThis log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the
samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and
the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated,
and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
- Ring Sample
- Tube Sample
- Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
- SPT SampleS
Sheet 1 of 1
11-19-12
510WSC
CME-55
8"
140 lbs.See Boring Location Map
5
10
15
20
25
Drop:30"
- Groundwater
- End of Boring
R
R
47
18
B-4
SP-SM
Total depth 11.5'
No ground water encountered
Hole backfilled with cuttings and patched with rapid setting grout
Gray-brown poorly graded sand with silt to silty sand with occasional gr avel,
dry, dense.
Page A-8
23
10" AC / 6" AB
1.3 113.2
2.4 102.1
Nr
Medium dense
Palm Springs International Airport RMA Job No.:12-872-01
Parsons Brinckerhoff
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Boring No.Exploratory Boring Log
Material DescriptionSamples
Depth(ft)SampleTypeBlows(blows/ft)BulkSampleMoistureContent(%)Dry Density(pcf)USCSGraphicSymbolThis log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the
samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and
the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated,
and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
- Ring Sample
- Tube Sample
- Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
- SPT SampleS
Sheet 1 of 1
11-19-12
510WSC
CME-55
8"
140 lbs.See Boring Location Map
5
10
15
20
25
Drop:30"
- Groundwater
- End of Boring
R
R
R
63
34
B-5
SP-SM
Total depth 11.5'
No ground water encountered
Hole backfilled with cuttings and patched with rapid setting grout
Gray-brown poorly graded sand with silt to silty sand with occassional gr avel,
moist, dense.
Page A-9
25
10" AC / 3" AB
R
22
3.2 112.8
2.1 115.6
1.9 107.8
1.5 112.1
Medium dense
Palm Springs International Airport RMA Job No.:12-872-01
Parsons Brinckerhoff
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Boring No.Exploratory Boring Log
Material DescriptionSamples
Depth(ft)SampleTypeBlows(blows/ft)BulkSampleMoistureContent(%)Dry Density(pcf)USCSGraphicSymbolThis log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the
samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and
the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated,
and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
- Ring Sample
- Tube Sample
- Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
- SPT SampleS
Sheet 1 of 1
11-19-12
510WSC
CME-55
8"
140 lbs.See Boring Location Map
5
10
15
20
25
Drop:30"
- Groundwater
- End of Boring
R
R
R
59
24
B-6
Total depth 13.5'
No ground water encountered
Hole backfilled with cuttings and patched with rapid setting grout
Page A-10
21
9" AC / 7" AB
R
23
SP-SM Gray-brown poorly graded sand with silt to silty sand with occassional gr avel,
moist, dense to very dense.
4.1 119.1
2.0 109.6
2.1 103.3
2.4 100.3
Medium dense
Palm Springs International Airport RMA Job No.:12-872-01
Parsons Brinckerhoff
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Boring No.Exploratory Boring Log
Material DescriptionSamples
Depth(ft)SampleTypeBlows(blows/ft)BulkSampleMoistureContent(%)Dry Density(pcf)USCSGraphicSymbolThis log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the
samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and
the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated,
and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
- Ring Sample
- Tube Sample
- Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
- SPT SampleS
Sheet 1 of 1
11-19-12
510WSC
CME-55
8"
140 lbs.See Boring Location Map
5
10
15
20
25
Drop:30"
- Groundwater
- End of Boring
R
R
R
12
15
B-7
Total depth 11.5'
No ground water encountered
Hole backfilled with cuttings and patched with rapid setting grout
Page A-11
4" AC / 8" AB
29
SM Gray-brown silty fine to medium sand with occasional gravel, slightly moist
medium dense.
3.1 104.7
1.9 109.6
1.4 117.9
Palm Springs International Airport RMA Job No.:12-872-01
Parsons Brinckerhoff
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Boring No.Exploratory Boring Log
Material DescriptionSamples
Depth(ft)SampleTypeBlows(blows/ft)BulkSampleMoistureContent(%)Dry Density(pcf)USCSGraphicSymbolThis log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the
samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and
the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated,
and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
- Ring Sample
- Tube Sample
- Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
- SPT SampleS
Sheet 1 of 1
11-19-12
510WSC
CME-55
8"
140 lbs.See Boring Location Map
5
10
15
20
25
Drop:30"
- Groundwater
- End of Boring
R
R
R
70
52
B-8
Total depth 9.5'
No ground water encountered
Hole backfilled with cuttings and patched with rapid setting grout
Page A-12
11" AC / 5" AB
21
SP-SM Gray-brown poorly graded sand with silt to silty sand, moist, medium de nse to
dense.
4.4 114.4
3.3 113.6
2.9 106.1
Palm Springs International Airport RMA Job No.:12-872-01
Parsons Brinckerhoff
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Boring No.Exploratory Boring Log
Material DescriptionSamples
Depth(ft)SampleTypeBlows(blows/ft)BulkSampleMoistureContent(%)Dry Density(pcf)USCSGraphicSymbolThis log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the
samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and
the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated,
and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
- Ring Sample
- Tube Sample
- Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
- SPT SampleS
Sheet 1 of 1
11-19-12
510WSC
CME-55
8"
140 lbs.See Boring Location Map
5
10
15
20
25
Drop:30"
- Groundwater
- End of Boring
R
R
R
42
21
B-9
Total depth 10.5'
No ground water encountered
Hole backfilled with cuttings and patched with rapid setting grout
Page A-13
10" AC / 5" AB
17
SP-SM Gray-brown poorly graded sand with silt to silty sand, moist, medium de nse to
dense.3.4 112.8
2.5 106.3
7.8 98.1
Palm Springs International Airport RMA Job No.:12-872-01
Parsons Brinckerhoff
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Boring No.Exploratory Boring Log
Material DescriptionSamples
Depth(ft)SampleTypeBlows(blows/ft)BulkSampleMoistureContent(%)Dry Density(pcf)USCSGraphicSymbolThis log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the
samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and
the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated,
and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
- Ring Sample
- Tube Sample
- Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
- SPT SampleS
Sheet 1 of 1
11-20-12
510WSC
CME-55
8"
140 lbs.See Boring Location Map
5
10
15
20
25
Drop:30"
- Groundwater
- End of Boring
R
R
R
11
19
B-10
Total depth 10.5'
No ground water encountered
Hole backfilled with cuttings and patched with rapid setting grout
Page A-14
9" AC / 0" AB
26/6"
SP-SM Gray-brown poorly graded sand with silt to silty sand, moist, medium de nse to
dense.
3.8 103.2
1.8 115.4
1.8 110.0
Palm Springs International Airport RMA Job No.:12-872-01
Parsons Brinckerhoff
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Boring No.Exploratory Boring Log
Material DescriptionSamples
Depth(ft)SampleTypeBlows(blows/ft)BulkSampleMoistureContent(%)Dry Density(pcf)USCSGraphicSymbolThis log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the
samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and
the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated,
and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
- Ring Sample
- Tube Sample
- Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
- SPT SampleS
Sheet 1 of 1
11-20-12
510WSC
CME-55
8"
140 lbs.See Boring Location Map
5
10
15
20
25
Drop:30"
- Groundwater
- End of Boring
R
R
R
16
15
B-11
Total depth 16.5'
No ground water encountered
Hole backfilled with cuttings and patched with rapid setting grout
Page A-15
9" AC / 0" AB
42
SP-SM Gray-brown poorly graded sand with silt to silty sand, moist, medium de nse to
dense.
R 44
2.1 105.3
6.0 101.5
2.0 127.6
2.4 114.0
Palm Springs International Airport RMA Job No.:12-872-01
Parsons Brinckerhoff
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Boring No.Exploratory Boring Log
Material DescriptionSamples
Depth(ft)SampleTypeBlows(blows/ft)BulkSampleMoistureContent(%)Dry Density(pcf)USCSGraphicSymbolThis log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the
samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and
the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated,
and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
- Ring Sample
- Tube Sample
- Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
- SPT SampleS
Sheet 1 of 1
11-20-12
510WSC
CME-55
8"
140 lbs.See Boring Location Map
5
10
15
20
25
Drop:30"
- Groundwater
- End of Boring
R
R
R
20
15
B-12
Total depth 9.5'
No ground water encountered
Hole backfilled with cuttings and patched with rapid setting grout
Page A-16
10" AC / 0" AB
23
SP-SM Gray-brown poorly graded sand with silt to silty sand, moist, medium de nse to
dense.
1.4 108.0
2.2 106.8
201 108.2
Palm Springs International Airport RMA Job No.:12-872-01
Parsons Brinckerhoff
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Boring No.Exploratory Boring Log
Material DescriptionSamples
Depth(ft)SampleTypeBlows(blows/ft)BulkSampleMoistureContent(%)Dry Density(pcf)USCSGraphicSymbolThis log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the
samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and
the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated,
and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
- Ring Sample
- Tube Sample
- Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
- SPT SampleS
Sheet 1 of 1
11-20-12
510WSC
CME-55
8"
140 lbs.See Boring Location Map
5
10
15
20
25
Drop:30"
- Groundwater
- End of Boring
R
R
R
16
15
B-13
Total depth 10.5'
No ground water encountered
Hole backfilled with cuttings and patched with rapid setting grout
Page A-17
9" AC / 0" AB
20
SP-SM Gray-brown poorly graded sand with silt to silty sand, moist, medium de nse to
dense.1.5 105.5
2.0 106.8
1.8 120.4
Palm Springs International Airport RMA Job No.:12-872-01
Parsons Brinckerhoff
Date Drilled:
Logged By:
Location:
Drilling Equipment:
Boring Hole Diameter:
Drive Weights:
Boring No.Exploratory Boring Log
Material DescriptionSamples
Depth(ft)SampleTypeBlows(blows/ft)BulkSampleMoistureContent(%)Dry Density(pcf)USCSGraphicSymbolThis log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the
samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and
the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated,
and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.
R
T
- Ring Sample
- Tube Sample
- Bulk Sample
Sample Types:
- SPT SampleS
Sheet 1 of 1
11-20-12
510WSC
CME-55
8"
140 lbs.See Boring Location Map
5
10
15
20
25
Drop:30"
- Groundwater
- End of Boring
R
R
R
16
38
B-14
Total depth 11.5'
No ground water encountered
Hole backfilled with cuttings and patched with rapid setting grout
Page A-18
12" AC / 0" AB
24
SP-SM Gray-brown poorly graded sand with silt to silty sand, moist, medium dense
to dense.
1.7 105.0
0.9 113.0
2.8 102.5
AP
LABOR
PPENDIX B
RATORY TE
GEO
ESTS
OTECHNICAAL CONSULTANTS
P
P
B
P
h
p
B
M
e
B
I
w
B
S
C
B
E
m
B
T
4
B
T
s
B
R
t
B
T
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
B-1.01 Particl
Particle size a
holes in acco
procedure was
B-1.02 Maxim
Maximum de
exploration w
B-1.03 In-plac
In-place densi
with ASTM D
B-1.04 Sand E
San equivalen
California Bea
B-1.05 Expan
Expansion ind
methods outli
B-1.06 Solubl
Testing was p
4327 (Standard
B-1.07 Califo
Test specimen
soaked for fou
B-1.08 R-Valu
Resistance V
test methods
B-1.09 Test R
Test results fo
nternational Air
rhoff
le Size Analy
analysis was p
ordance to th
s not perform
mum Density
ensity - optim
were performe
ce Density, D
ties were dete
D2937.
Equivalent
nts were dete
aring Ratio te
nsion Tests
dex tests were
ined in ASTM
le Sulfates an
performed on
d Test Metho
rnia Bearing
ns were remo
ur days after m
ue
Value tests we
outlined in C
Results
or all laborato
rport Terminal A
ysis
performed on
he standard te
med and the m
y
mum moistu
ed in the labor
Drive Cylind
ermined usin
ermined for a
esting. Sand e
e performed
M D4829.
nd Chlorides
n representativ
od for Anions
g Ratio (CBR
olded to the in
molding and b
ere performe
California 30
ory tests perfo
Apron Area and
AP
B-1.00 LA
n representati
est methods
material retain
ure relationsh
ratory using t
der
g drive cylind
all samples to
equivalent test
on representa
ve samples en
s in Water by
R)
n-place densit
before testing
ed on represe
01.
ormed on the
d Taxiway G
PPENDIX B
ABORATORY T
ive samples o
of ASTM D
ned on the #20
hips for the
the standard p
der samples t
o identify wh
ts were perfor
ative samples
ncountered du
Suppressed Io
ty as determin
g.
entative samp
subject projec
GEO
TESTS
of the major
D422. The hy
00 screen was
major soil ty
procedures of
taken from ea
hich samples
rmed using te
s of the major
during the inv
on Chromato
ned by ASTM
ples of the m
ct are present
OTECHNICA
soils types e
ydrometer po
washed.
ypes encount
f ASTM D155
ach boring an
s would be th
est method A
r soil types en
vestigation us
ography).
M D2937. Th
major soil type
ted in this app
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
encountered i
ortion of the
tered during
57.
nd tested in a
he most ben
STM D2419.
ncountered b
sing the test m
he test specim
es encounter
pendix.
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page B1
in the test
e standard
the field
ccordance
neficial for
by the test
method D
mens were
red by the
P
P
S
M
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
SAMPLE INF
Sa
Nu
MAXIMUM
(Test
Sa
Nu
nternational Air
rhoff
FORMATIO
ample
umber
Sam
De
1 Gra
2 Gra
3 Gra
4 Gra
5 Gra
6 Gra
7 Gra
8 Gra
9 Gra
10 Gra
11 Gra
12 Gra
13 Gra
14 Gra
DENSITY - O
Method: AST
ample
umber
1
2
3
6
7
8
10
12
13
14
rport Terminal A
ON
mple
scription
ay-brown silt
ay-brown silt
ay-brown silt
ay-brown silt
ay-brown poo
ay-brown silt
ay-brown silt
ay-brown poo
ay-brown poo
ay-brown poo
ay-brown poo
ay-brown poo
ay-brown poo
ay-brown poo
OPTIMUM M
TM D1557)
Optimum M
(Percen
9.0
11.5
6.0
8.5
11.1
8.7
10.2
10.2
10.5
11.0
Apron Area and
ty sand (SM)
ty sand (SM)
ty sand (SM)
ty sand (SM)
orly graded sa
ty sand (SM)
ty sand (SM)
orly graded sa
orly graded sa
orly graded sa
orly graded sa
orly graded sa
orly graded sa
orly graded sa
MOISTURE
Moisture
nt)
d Taxiway G
and with silt (
and with silt (
and with silt (
and with silt (
and with silt (
and with silt (
and with silt (
and with silt (
RELATION
Maximu
Density
(lbs/ft3)
116.5
116.5
118.0
120.5
113.6
120.1
113.0
114.0
116.0
112.0
GEO
B
(SP-SM)
(SP-SM)
(SP-SM)
(SP-SM)
(SP-SM)
(SP-SM)
(SP-SM)
(SP-SM)
NSHIPS
um
y
3)
OTECHNICA
Sample Lo
Boring No.
B-1
B-2
B-3
B-4
B-5
B-6
B-7
B-8
B-9
B-10
B-11
B-12
B-13
B-14
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
ocation
Depth (ft)
1-4
1-4
2-5
2-5
2-5
2-5
2-5
2-5
2-5
2-5
2-5
2-5
2-5
2-5
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page B2
P
P
E
S
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
EXPANSION
(Test
Sam
Num
1
1
1
SAND EQUI
(Test
S
N
nternational Air
rhoff
N TEST
Method: AST
mple
mber
M
Mo
Co
(Pe
1
2
8
10
12
14
IVALENT
Method: AS
Sample
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
rport Terminal A
TM D4829)
Molding
oisture
ontent
ercent)
9.1
9.7
8.8
10.4
9.4
9.1
TM D2419)
Sand
Apron Area and
Final
Moisture
Content
(Percent)
15.9
15.5
14.1
15.9
15.3
16.7
d Equivalent
47
42
43
59
60
59
59
55
62
63
64
59
53
62
d Taxiway G
Initial
Dry
Density
(lbs/ft3)
108.0
107.9
109.5
105.4
107.5
106.2
GEO
Expan
Inde
0
0
0
0
0
0
OTECHNICA
nsion
ex
E
Cl
V
V
V
V
V
V
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
Expansion
lassification
Very Low
Very Low
Very Low
Very Low
Very Low
Very Low
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page B3
P
P
S
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
SOLUBLE SU
(Test
S
N
nternational Air
rhoff
ULFATES AN
Method: AS
Sample
Number
1
6
8
12
rport Terminal A
ND CHLOR
TM D4327)
Solu
Apron Area and
RIDES
uble Sulfate
(ppm)
7.4
35
5.6
15
d Taxiway G
GEO
Chloride
(ppm)
0.9
5.1
1.4
1.4
OTECHNICAAL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page B4
P
P
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
PARTIC
ASTM D4
Sample
nternational Air
rhoff
CLE SIZE
422
e ID: 1
Fraction
Fraction
Frac
Frac
100
rport Terminal A
ANALYS
n A: Dry Net W
n B: Dry Net W
Scre
ction A:
1-
3
3
Scre
ction B:
#
#
#
#
#
10
Apron Area and
SIS
Weight (g): 432
Weight (g): 501
N
een Size W
3"
-1/2"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
#4
N
een Size W
#8
#16
#30
#50
100
200
Grain
d Taxiway G
2.5
.9
Net Retained
Weight (g)
0
0
0
0
0
16
Net Retained
Weight (g)
21.6
27.9
82.1
182.0
321.3
425.3
1
Size (mm)
GEO
Net Passing
Weight (g)
432.5
432.5
432.5
432.5
432.5
416.5
Net Passing
Weight (g)
480.3
474.0
419.8
319.9
180.6
76.6
0.1
OTECHNICA
% Passing
100
100
100
100
100
96
% Passing
92
91
81
61
35
15
0
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
g
g
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
.01 % PassingLTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page B5
P
P
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
PARTIC
ASTM D4
Sampl
nternational Air
rhoff
CLE SIZE
422
le ID: 3
Fraction
Fraction
Frac
Frac
100
rport Terminal A
ANALYS
n A: Dry Net W
n B: Dry Net W
Scre
ction A:
1-
3
3
Scre
ction B:
#
#
#
#
#
10
Apron Area and
SIS
Weight (g): 445
Weight (g): 503
N
een Size W
3"
-1/2"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
#4
N
een Size W
#8
#16
#30
#50
#100
#200
Grain S
d Taxiway G
.7
.5
Net Retained
Weight (g)
0
0
0
0
0
21.9
Net Retained
Weight (g)
27.3
34.0
92.4
199.4
341.0
439.0
1
Size (mm)
GEO
Net Passing
Weight (g)
445.7
445.7
445.7
445.7
445.7
423.8
Net Passing
Weight (g)
476.2
469.5
411.1
304.1
162.5
64.5
0.1
OTECHNICA
% Passing
100
100
100
100
100
95
% Passing
90
89
78
57
31
12
0.0
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1 % PassingLTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page B6
P
P
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
PARTIC
ASTM D4
Sampl
nternational Air
rhoff
CLE SIZE
422
le ID: 6
Fraction
Fraction
Frac
Frac
100
rport Terminal A
ANALYS
n A: Dry Net W
n B: Dry Net W
Scre
ction A:
1-
3
3
Scre
ction B:
#
#
#
#
#
10
Apron Area and
SIS
Weight (g): 5482
Weight (g): 524.
Ne
een Size W
3"
-1/2"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
#4
Ne
een Size W
#8
#16
#30
#50
100
200
Grain S
d Taxiway G
2
.5
et Retained
Weight (g)
0
0
29
147
238
428
et Retained
Weight (g)
13.4
29.1
68.1
191.7
343.7
449.8
1
Size (mm)
GEO
Net Passing
Weight (g)
5482
5482
5453
5335
5244
5054
Net Passing
Weight (g)
511.1
495.4
456.4
332.8
180.8
74.7
0.1
OTECHNICA
% Passing
100
100
99
97
96
92
% Passing
90
87
80
58
32
13
0.01
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1 % PassingLTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page B7
P
P
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
PARTIC
ASTM D4
Sample
nternational Air
rhoff
CLE SIZE
422
e ID: 10
Fraction
Fraction
Frac
Frac
100
rport Terminal A
ANALYSI
n A: Dry Net We
n B: Dry Net We
Scre
ction A:
1-
3
1
3
Scre
ction B:
#
#
#
#1
#2
10
Apron Area and
IS
eight (g): 1138
eight (g): 1138
Ne
en Size W
3"
1/2"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
#4
Ne
en Size W
#8
#16
#30
#50
100
200
Grain S
d Taxiway G
8.1
8.1
et Retained
Weight (g)
0
0
0
0
0
3.1
et Retained
Weight (g)
7.6
16.2
92.2
352.5
742.7
1019.6
1
Size (mm)
GEO
Net Passing
Weight (g)
1138.1
1138.1
1138.1
1138.1
1138.1
1135
Net Passing
Weight (g)
1130.5
1121.9
1045.9
785.6
395.4
118.5
0.1
OTECHNICA
% Passing
100
100
100
100
100
100
% Passing
99
98
92
69
35
10
0.01
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
% PassingLTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page B8
P
P
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
PARTIC
ASTM D4
Sampl
nternational Air
rhoff
CLE SIZE
422
e ID: 12
Fraction
Fraction
Frac
Frac
100
rport Terminal A
ANALYS
n A: Dry Net W
n B: Dry Net W
Scre
ction A:
1-
3
1
3
Scre
ction B:
#
#
#
#
#2
10
Apron Area and
IS
Weight (g): 1089
Weight (g): 1089
Ne
een Size W
3"
1/2"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
#4
Ne
een Size W
#8
#16
#30
#50
100
200
Grain S
d Taxiway G
9.6
9.6
et Retained
Weight (g)
0
0
0
0
8.1
16.9
et Retained
Weight (g)
28.7
44.4
157.1
428.5
757.0
986.7
1
Size (mm)
GEO
Net Passing
Weight (g)
1089.6
1089.6
1089.6
1089.6
1081.5
1072.7
Net Passing
Weight (g)
1060.9
1045.2
932.5
661.1
332.6
102.9
0.1
OTECHNICA
% Passing
100
100
100
100
99
98
% Passing
96
94
84
60
30
9
0.01
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1 % PassingLTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page B9
P
P
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
PARTIC
ASTM D4
Sample
nternational Air
rhoff
CLE SIZE
422
e ID: 14
Fraction
Fraction
Fract
Frac
100
rport Terminal A
ANALYSI
A: Dry Net We
B: Dry Net We
Scree
tion A:
1-1
3
1
3
#
Scree
tion B: #
#
#
#
#1
#2
10
Apron Area and
IS
eight (g): 5394
eight (g): 523.5
Ne
en Size W
3"
1/2"
3/4"
/2"
3/8"
#4
Ne
en Size W
#8
#16
#30
#50
100
200
Grain S
d Taxiway G
4
5
et Retained
Weight (g)
0
0
0
35
55
118
et Retained
Weight (g)
5.0
11.4
43.6
189.3
362.6
477.2
1
ize (mm)
GEO
Net Passing
Weight (g)
5394
5394
5394
5359
5339
5276
Net Passing
Weight (g)
518.5
512.1
479.9
334.2
160.9
46.3
0.1
OTECHNICA
% Passing
100
100
100
99
99
98
% Passing
97
96
90
62
30
9
0
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0.01
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
% PassingLTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page B10
P
P
C
A
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
CALIFORN
ASTM D188
Specimen
No.
A
B
0
250
500
750
1000
1250
1500
0.000Stress (PSI)nternational Air
rhoff
NIA BEARIN
83
Sample ID:
No. of
Blows
25
12
Corrected
Penetration
(inches)
0.000
0.025
0.050
0.075
0.100
0.200
0.300
0.400
0.500
0.050
Specim
Correc
Specim
Correc
rport Terminal A
NG RATIO
2
Remolded
Dry Density
(pcf)
114.3
110.4
Load
(lbs)
0
120
320
560
750
1550
2200
3100
3690
Specim
0.100 0.150
Lo
men A
cted A
men B
cted B
Apron Area and
TEST
Initial
Moisture
(%)
11.1
10.4
Stress
(psi)
0
40
107
187
250
517
734
1034
1231
men A
0 0.200
Penetra
oad Penetra
d Taxiway G
P
Final
Moisture
(%)
14.3
15.9
Load
(lbs)
0
90
230
330
440
920
1400
1840
2270
Speci
0.250 0.30
ation (in)
ation Curve
GEO
Maximum
Optimum M
Penetration Pis
Surcharge L
CBR
0.1 inch
Penetration
30
17
Stress
(psi)
0
30
77
110
147
307
467
614
757
imen B
00 0.350
e
OTECHNICA
Density (pcf):
Moisture (%):
ston Area (in2)
Load (pounds)
CBR
0.2 inch
Penetration
37
22
0.400 0.4
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
116.5
11.5
: 2.997
:70
Percent
Compaction
98%
94%
450 0.500
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page B11
n
P
P
C
A
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
CALIFORN
ASTM D188
Specimen
No.
A
B
0
250
500
750
1000
1250
1500
0.000Stress (PSI)nternational Air
rhoff
NIA BEARIN
83
Sample ID:
No. of
Blows
25
60
Corrected
Penetration
(inches)
0.000
0.025
0.050
0.075
0.100
0.200
0.300
0.400
0.500
0.050
Specim
Correc
Specim
Correc
rport Terminal A
NG RATIO
3
Remolded
Dry Density
(pcf)
112.1
115.8
Load
(lbs)
0
130
270
430
590
1260
1840
2360
2780
Specim
0.100 0.150
Lo
men A
cted A
men B
cted B
Apron Area and
TEST
Initial
Moisture
(%)
6.6
6.8
Stress
(psi)
0
43
89
143
196
418
610
782
921
men A
0 0.200
Penetra
oad Penetra
d Taxiway G
P
Final
Moisture
(%)
14.9
13.8
Load
(lbs)
0
310
570
870
1170
2330
2760
3760
3780
Speci
0.250 0.30
ation (in)
ation Curve
GEO
Maximum
Optimum M
Penetration Pis
Surcharge L
CBR
0.1 inch
Penetration
22
40
Stress
(psi)
0
103
189
288
388
772
915
1246
1253
imen B
00 0.350
e
OTECHNICA
Density (pcf):
Moisture (%):
ston Area (in2)
Load (pounds)
CBR
0.2 inch
Penetration
29
52
0.400 0.4
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
118.0
6.0
: 3.017
:70
Percent
Compaction
94%
97%
450 0.500
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page B12
n
P
P
C
A
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
CALIFORN
ASTM D188
Specimen
No.
A
B
0
250
500
750
1000
1250
0.000Stress (PSI)nternational Air
rhoff
NIA BEARIN
83
Sample ID:
No. of
Blows
25
56
Corrected
Penetration
(inches)
0.000
0.025
0.050
0.075
0.100
0.200
0.300
0.400
0.500
0.050 0
Specim
Correc
Specim
Correc
rport Terminal A
NG RATIO T
7
Remolded
Dry Density
(pcf)
106.8
108.1
Load
(lbs)
0
170
310
460
610
1050
1420
1790
2100
Specim
0.100 0.150
Lo
men A
cted A
men B
cted B
Apron Area and
TEST
Initial
Moisture
(%)
12.5
14.4
Stress
(psi)
0
56
103
152
202
348
471
593
696
men A
0 0.200
Penetra
oad Penetra
d Taxiway G
Pe
Final
Moisture
(%)
17.0
16.4
Load
(lbs)
0
210
470
600
760
1400
1980
2500
2910
Specim
0.250 0.30
tion (in)
ation Curve
GEO
Maximum D
Optimum M
enetration Pist
Surcharge L
CBR
0.1 inch
Penetration
21
28
Stress
(psi)
0
70
156
199
252
464
656
829
965
men B
00 0.350
e
OTECHNICA
Density (pcf):
Moisture (%):
ton Area (in2):
Load (pounds):
CBR
0.2 inch
Penetration
23
33
0.400 0.4
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
113.6
11.1
: 3.017
:70
Percent
Compaction
93%
94%
450 0.500
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page B13
n
P
P
C
A
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
CALIFORN
ASTM D188
Specimen
No.
A
B
0
250
500
750
1000
1250
1500
1750
0.000Stress (PSI)nternational Air
rhoff
NIA BEARIN
83
Sample ID:
No. of
Blows
25
56
Corrected
Penetration
(inches)
0.000
0.025
0.050
0.075
0.100
0.200
0.300
0.400
0.500
0.050 0
Specim
Correc
Specim
Correc
rport Terminal A
NG RATIO T
8
Remolded
Dry Density
(pcf)
115.1
120.3
Load
(lbs)
0
100
260
440
640
1450
2170
2880
3530
Specim
0.100 0.150
Lo
men A
ted A
men B
ted B
Apron Area and
TEST
Initial
Moisture
(%)
8.7
8.6
Stress
(psi)
0
33
86
146
212
481
719
955
1170
men A
0 0.200
Penetrat
oad Penetra
d Taxiway G
Pe
Final
Moisture
(%)
14.3
12.7
Load
(lbs)
0
100
390
700
980
2230
3280
4280
4780
Specim
0.250 0.30
tion (in)
ation Curve
GEO
Maximum D
Optimum M
enetration Pist
Surcharge L
CBR
0.1 inch
Penetration
27
41
Stress
(psi)
0
33
129
232
325
739
1087
1419
1584
men B
00 0.350
e
OTECHNICA
Density (pcf):
Moisture (%):
ton Area (in2):
Load (pounds):
CBR
0.2 inch
Penetration
35
54
0.400 0.4
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
120.1
8.7
3.017
70
Percent
Compaction
94%
98%
50 0.500
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page B14
P
P
C
A
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
CALIFORN
ASTM D188
Specimen
No.
A
B
0
250
500
750
1000
1250
1500
0.000Stress (PSI)nternational Air
rhoff
NIA BEARIN
83
Sample ID:
No. of
Blows
25
56
Corrected
Penetration
(inches)
0.000
0.025
0.050
0.075
0.100
0.200
0.300
0.400
0.500
0.050 0
Specim
Correc
Specim
Correc
rport Terminal A
NG RATIO T
10
Remolded
Dry Density
(pcf)
107.7
110.8
Load
(lbs)
0
80
220
350
500
1090
1580
1960
2240
Specim
0.100 0.150
Lo
men A
cted A
men B
cted B
Apron Area and
TEST
Initial
Moisture
(%)
8.5
10.8
Stress
(psi)
0
27
73
116
166
361
524
650
742
men A
0 0.200
Penetra
oad Penetra
d Taxiway G
Pe
Final
Moisture
(%)
17.1
14.9
Load
(lbs)
0
100
240
420
630
1600
2510
3220
3820
Specim
0.250 0.30
tion (in)
ation Curve
GEO
Maximum D
Optimum M
enetration Pist
Surcharge L
CBR
0.1 inch
Penetration
19
32
Stress
(psi)
0
33
80
139
209
530
832
1067
1266
men B
00 0.350
e
OTECHNICA
Density (pcf):
Moisture (%):
ton Area (in2):
Load (pounds):
CBR
0.2 inch
Penetration
26
42
0.400 0.4
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
113.0
10.2
: 3.017
:40
Percent
Compaction
95%
98%
450 0.500
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page B15
n
P
P
C
A
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
CALIFORN
ASTM D188
Specimen
No.
A
B
P
0
250
500
750
1000
1250
0.000Stress (PSI)nternational Air
rhoff
NIA BEARIN
83
Sample ID:
No. of
Blows
25
56
Corrected
Penetration
(inches)
0.000
0.025
0.050
0.075
0.100
0.200
0.300
0.400
0.500
0.050 0
Specim
Correct
Specim
Correct
rport Terminal A
NG RATIO T
13
Remolded
Dry Density
(pcf)
110.6
112.3
Load
(lbs)
0
180
320
480
650
1340
1880
2300
2580
Specim
0.100 0.150
Lo
men A
ted A
men B
ted B
Apron Area and
TEST
Initial
Moisture
(%)
10.3
10.8
Stress
(psi)
0
60
106
159
215
444
623
762
855
men A
0 0.200
Penetrat
oad Penetra
d Taxiway G
Pe
Final
Moisture
(%)
15.7
15.0
Load
(lbs)
0
130
260
430
640
1550
2330
2860
3400
Specim
0.250 0.300
tion (in)
ation Curve
GEO
Maximum D
Optimum M
enetration Pisto
Surcharge Lo
CBR
0.1 inch
Penetration
23
30
Stress
(psi)
0
43
86
143
212
514
772
948
1127
men B
0 0.350
e
OTECHNICA
Density (pcf):
Moisture (%):
on Area (in2):
oad (pounds):
CBR
0.2 inch
Penetration
30
39
0.400 0.45
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
116.0
10.5
3.017
40
Percent
Compaction
95%
96%
500.500
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page B16
P
P
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
CT M
Samp
Speci
Mois
Dry D
Exud
Stabi
Expa
Use:
Thic k
Thic k
Equil
Equil
Exud
Expa
Thic k
Thic kCover Thickness by Stabilometer (ft)nternational Air
rhoff
M 301 - DETE R
SUBB A
ple ID:
imen No
ture Content (%
Density (pcf)
dation Pressure (
ilometer R Value
ansion Pressure D
Traffic Index
kness by Expans
kness by Stabilo
librium Thick (f
librium Pressure
dation Pressure R
ansion Pressur
kness of AC (ft)=
kness of Aggregate
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
0.00 0
Cover Thic
E
rport Terminal A
RMINATION
ASES, AND BA
4
%)
(psi)
e
Dial
= 5.0 Gravel
sion (ft)
meter (ft)
ft)
e R Value
R Value @ 300
re R-Value is ba
e Base (ft)=
0.50 1.00
ckness by Expa
Expansion Pre
Apron Area and
OF RESISTAN
ASEMENT SO
A
16.9
107.2
656
76
55
Factor = 1.00
1.83
0.38
psi
ased on the fol
0.25
0.33
1.50
nsion Pressure
essures
d Taxiway G
NCE " R" VAL
OILS BY THE
B
17.9
105.1
317
64
38
1.27
0.58
-
n/a
64
llowing structu
Gf(ac) =
Gf(base) =
Gf(avg) =
U
2.00
e (ft)Stabilometer R ValueGEO
LUE OF TRE A
STABILOME
C
18.5
106.8
112
58
27
0.90
0.67
ural section:
2.50 W
1.10 W
1.70 W
Use Exudation R
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0100
OTECHNICA
ATED AND U
TER
W(ac) = 145
W(base) =130
W(avg) = 136
R Value
200 300 400
Exudation Pre
Exudation P
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
UNTREATED
5
0
6
0 500 600 70
essure (psi)
Pressures
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page B17
BASES,
00800
AP
REF
PENDIX C
FERENCES
GEO
OTECHNICAAL CONSULTANTS
P
P
Palm Springs In
Parsons Brinker
1. Feder
Evalu
2. Feder
Const
3. Feder
4. RS&H
Repor
nternational Air
rhoff
ral Aviation
uation, date of
ral Aviation
truction of A
ral Aviation A
H California
rt, October 2
rport Terminal A
Administrat
f publication
n Administra
Airports, date
Administratio
, Inc., Pavem
2009
Apron Area and
APPEN
REFER
tion, Adviso
September 30
ation, Advis
of publication
on, FAARFIE
ment Manage
d Taxiway G
NDIX C
RENCES
ry Circular
0, 2009.
sory Circul
n September
ELD compute
ement Progra
GEO
150/5320-6E
lar 150/5370
30, 2011.
er program, v
am: Palm Sp
OTECHNICA
E, Airport P
0-10F, Stand
version 1.305,
prings Intern
AL CONSU
Januar
RMA Job No.
Pavement De
dards for S
, September 2
ational Airpo
LTANTS
ry 23, 2013
: 12-872-01
Page C1
esign and
Specifying
28, 2010.
ort, Final
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
Appendix F
Site Design and Treatment Control BMP Sizing Calculations
and Design Details
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
Appendix G
AGREEMENTS – CC&RS, COVENANT AND AGREEMENTS AND/OR
OTHER MECHANISMS FOR ENSURING ONGOING
OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, FUNDING AND TRANSFER
OF REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS PROJECT-SPECIFIC
WQMP-N/A
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
Appendix H
PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT – SUMMARY OF SITE
REMEDIATION CONDUCTED AND USE RESTRICTIONS - N/A
Whitewater River Region WQMP
Palm Springs Apron Reconstruction
Appendix I
PROJECT-SPECIFIC WQMP SUMMARY DATA FORM
Project-Specific WQMP Summary Data Form
Applicant Information
Name and Title Palm Springs International Airport (PSP)
Company Palm Springs International Airport
Phone 760-778-5600
Email
Project Information
Project Name
(as shown on project application/project-specific WQMP) Terminal Apron and Taxiway “G” rehabilitation project
Street Address 3400 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, CA
Nearest Cross Streets S. Farrell Dr, El Cielo Rd
Municipality
(City or Unincorporated County) Palm Springs
Zip Code 92262
Tract Number(s) and/or Assessor Parcel Number(s) 677270019, 677270020, 677270030, 677280040, 677280010
Other
(other information to help identify location of project) The site is an Airport
Watershed White Water River Region
Indicate type of project. Priority Development Projects (Use an “X” in cell preceding project type):
SF hillside residence; impervious area 10,000 sq. ft.; Slope 25%
SF hillside residence; impervious area 10,000 sq. ft.; Slope 10% & erosive soils
X Commercial or Industrial 100,000 sq. ft.
Automotive repair shop
Retail Gasoline Outlet disturbing > 5,000 sq. ft.
Restaurant disturbing > 5,000 sq. ft.
Home subdivision 10 housing units
Parking lot 5,000 sq. ft. or 25 parking spaces
Date Project-Specific WQMP Submitted 3/11/2013
Size of Project Area (nearest 0.1 acre) 245.4
Project Area managed with Site Design or Low
Impact Development (LID) BMPs (nearest 0.1 acre) 245.4
Is the project subject to onsite retention by
ordinance or policy?
Yes
Are Treatment Control BMPs required? Yes
Name of the entity will implement, operate, and
maintain the post-construction BMPs Palm Springs Airport
Contact Name Thomas Nolan
Street or Mailing Address 3400 E Tahquitz Canyon Way
City Palm Springs
Zip Code 92262
Phone 760-778-5600
Space Below for Use by City/County Staff Only
Preceding Information Verified by
(consistent with information in project-specific WQMP)
Name:
Date:
Date Project-Specific WQMP Approved:
Data Entered by Name:
Date:
Other Comments