Transcript of Downsview PDR Appendix F Geotechnical Report - Copy2
Downsview PDR Appendix F_Geotechnical Report - Copy2.pdfCity of
Toronto
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for Downsview Area Long Term
Water Servicing - Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Study
City of Toronto, Ontario
Prepared by: AECOM 105 Commerce Valley Drive West, Floor 7 905 886
7022 tel Markham, ON, Canada L3T 7W3 905 886 9494 fax
www.aecom.com
November, 2017 Project Number: 60491185
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx
Distribution List
Revision History
00 Nov. 11, 2017 S. Shah Draft Report
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
AECOM: 2015-04-13 © 2009-2015 AECOM Canada Ltd. All Rights
Reserved. 60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx
Statement of Qualifications and Limitations
The attached Report (the “Report”) has been prepared by AECOM
Canada Ltd. (“AECOM”) for the benefit of the Client (“Client”) in
accordance with the agreement between AECOM and Client, including
the scope of work detailed therein (the “Agreement”). The
information, data, recommendations and conclusions contained in the
Report (collectively, the “Information”):
is subject to the scope, schedule, and other constraints and
limitations in the Agreement and the qualifications contained in
the Report (the “Limitations”);
represents AECOM’s professional judgement in light of the
Limitations and industry standards for the preparation of similar
reports;
may be based on information provided to AECOM which has not been
independently verified; has not been updated since the date of
issuance of the Report and its accuracy is limited to the time
period and
circumstances in which it was collected, processed, made or issued;
must be read as a whole and sections thereof should not be read out
of such context; was prepared for the specific purposes described
in the Report and the Agreement; and in the case of subsurface,
environmental or geotechnical conditions, may be based on limited
testing and on the
assumption that such conditions are uniform and not variable either
geographically or over time. AECOM shall be entitled to rely upon
the accuracy and completeness of information that was provided to
it and has no obligation to update such information. AECOM accepts
no responsibility for any events or circumstances that may have
occurred since the date on which the Report was prepared and, in
the case of subsurface, environmental or geotechnical conditions,
is not responsible for any variability in such conditions,
geographically or over time. AECOM agrees that the Report
represents its professional judgement as described above and that
the Information has been prepared for the specific purpose and use
described in the Report and the Agreement, but AECOM makes no other
representations, or any guarantees or warranties whatsoever,
whether express or implied, with respect to the Report, the
Information or any part thereof. Without in any way limiting the
generality of the foregoing, any estimates or opinions regarding
probable construction costs or construction schedule provided by
AECOM represent AECOM’s professional judgement in light of its
experience and the knowledge and information available to it at the
time of preparation. Since AECOM has no control over market or
economic conditions, prices for construction labour, equipment or
materials or bidding procedures, AECOM, its directors, officers and
employees are not able to, nor do they, make any representations,
warranties or guarantees whatsoever, whether express or implied,
with respect to such estimates or opinions, or their variance from
actual construction costs or schedules, and accept no
responsibility for any loss or damage arising therefrom or in any
way related thereto. Persons relying on such estimates or opinions
do so at their own risk. Except (1) as agreed to in writing by
AECOM and Client; (2) as required by-law; or (3) to the extent used
by governmental reviewing agencies for the purpose of obtaining
permits or approvals, the Report and the Information may be used
and relied upon only by Client. AECOM accepts no responsibility,
and denies any liability whatsoever, to parties other than Client
who may obtain access to the Report or the Information for any
injury, loss or damage suffered by such parties arising from their
use of, reliance upon, or decisions or actions based on the Report
or any of the Information (“improper use of the Report”), except to
the extent those parties have obtained the prior written consent of
AECOM to use and rely upon the Report and the Information. Any
injury, loss or damages arising from improper use of the Report
shall be borne by the party making such use. This Statement of
Qualifications and Limitations is attached to and forms part of the
Report and any use of the Report is subject to the terms
hereof.
AECOM 105 Commerce Valley Drive West, Floor 7 905 886 7022 tel
Markham, ON, Canada L3T 7W3 905 886 9494 fax www.aecom.com
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx
November 11, 2017 Ms. Dina Kuvandykova, P. Eng. Trunk Sewers and
Transmission Mains Engineering & Construction Services City of
Toronto Metro Hall, 20th Floor 55 John Street Toronto, Ontario M5V
3C6 Dear Ms. Kuvandykova: Project No: 60491185 Regarding:
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for Downsview Area Long Term
Water
Servicing - Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Study City of
Toronto, Ontario
AECOM Canada Ltd. (AECOM) is pleased to submit this draft report to
City of Toronto (the City) providing the findings and
recommendations of our preliminary geotechnical investigation for
the above captioned site, located within City of Toronto, Ontario.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact
the undersigned. Sincerely, AECOM Canada Ltd. Douglas McLachlin,
M.Sc., P.Eng. Geotechnical Practice Area Lead DM:gz Encl. cc:
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx
Quality Information
Geotechnical Engineer
Report Reviewed By:
Geotechnical Practice Area Lead
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx 1
Table of Contents
2. Investigation Procedures
................................................................................................
2
3. Subsurface Conditions
....................................................................................................
5
3.1 Regional Geology
..............................................................................................................
5 3.2 Subsurface Conditions
.......................................................................................................
5
3.2.1 Topsoil
...................................................................................................................
5 3.2.2 Pavement Structure
................................................................................................
5 3.2.3 Fill
..........................................................................................................................
5 3.2.4 Clayey Silt
..............................................................................................................
6 3.2.5 Glacial Till
..............................................................................................................
6
Clayey Silt Till
........................................................................................................................
6 Sandy Silt / Silty Sand Till
......................................................................................................
7
3.2.6 Silty Clay
................................................................................................................
7 3.2.7
Sand.......................................................................................................................
8 3.2.8 Groundwater Conditions
.........................................................................................
8
4. Discussions and Recommendations for Design and Construction
............................ 9
4.1 General Discussions
..........................................................................................................
9 4.2 Recommendations for Design and Construction
................................................................
9
4.2.1 Open Cut Sections
...............................................................................................
10 4.2.2 Pipe Bedding and
Cover.......................................................................................
12 4.2.3 Trench Backfilling
.................................................................................................
12 4.2.4 Trenchless Method
...............................................................................................
12 4.2.5 Groundwater Control and Dewatering
..................................................................
14 4.2.6 Soil Corrosivity
.....................................................................................................
15 4.2.7 Environmental Soil Test Results
...........................................................................
16
5.
Closure............................................................................................................................
16
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx 2
List of Tables Table 1: Summary of Borehole Locations, Depths and
Elevations
.........................................................................
3 Table 2: Summary of Number of Samples and Analytical Parameters
...................................................................
4 Table 3: Groundwater Level Measurements
...........................................................................................................
8 Table 4: Diameter of Proposed Watermain and Thickness of
All-Around Encased Concrete .............................. 10 Table
5: Geotechnical Resistances
.......................................................................................................................
11 Table 6: Geotechnical Design
Parameters............................................................................................................
11 Table 7: Geotechnical Resistances
.......................................................................................................................
13 Appendices Appendix A. Borehole Location Plans and Borehole
Profiles Appendix B. Record of Borehole Sheets Appendix C.
Geotechnical Laboratory Test Results Appendix D. Corrosivity and
Environmental Soil Testing Results Appendix E. Lateral Earth
Pressure Distribution Diagram
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx 1
1. Introduction
AECOM Canada Ltd. (AECOM) was retained by City of Toronto (the
City) to carry out a preliminary geotechnical investigation for the
proposed transmission watermain construction connecting the Keele
Pumping station, located near The Chimneystack Road and Keele
Street to the Downsview Water Distribution System in City of
Toronto, Ontario.
Based on the AECOM’s initial study, the alignment of the
transmission watermain will be running south from Keele Pumping
Station along Keele Street, Tangiers Road, Toro Road, Ceramic Road,
St. Regis Crescent North, St. Regis Crescent South, Tuscan Gate,
and Sheppard Avenue West to Downsview Water Distribution System.
The preliminary investigation field work plan was developed to
support the preliminary design of original alignment.
However, during design progress, an alignment change at the
southern end was proposed and the proposed watermain will be
running along St. Regis Crescent North, then south on Bakersfield
Street, as confirmed in August, 2017. Given the timing of the
alignment change, additional investigations were not included in
this preliminary geotechnical investigation program and report. The
additional investigations should be carried out during the detailed
design stage.
At the time of developing the investigation program and preparing
the report, the detailed design of the proposed transmission
watermain, including the watermain size, the invert levels and the
detailed watermain alignment (i.e. boulevard, road lane, median,
etc.) had not been finalized. Based on the available information,
it is understood that the construction methods are proposed to be a
combination of open cut and trenchless technologies. The open cut
method for the watermain construction is proposed from the Keele
Pumping Station to approximately 150 m east of the intersection of
Keele Street and Murray Ross Parkway and from the intersection of
Tangiers Road and Toro Road to the Downsview Water Distribution
System. The trenchless method is proposed to be carried out along
Tangiers Road between the entry and exit shafts. The entry and exit
shafts are proposed to be at the north and south ends of Tangiers
Road, however, the depths of the shafts and watermain had not been
finalized at the time of preparing this report.
The purpose of the geotechnical investigation was to obtain
information about the subsurface conditions at the site by means of
advancing boreholes, and to assess the engineering characteristics
of the subsurface soils by means of field and laboratory tests at
the preliminary design stage. This report provides factual
information including subsurface conditions and laboratory test
results, and discussions and recommendations for preliminary design
purposes, and during the construction stage.
A total of ten (10) boreholes, BH 17-1 to BH 17-10 were advanced
along the original proposed watermain alignment. However, due to
the alignment change at the southern end, two (2) boreholes, BH
17-9 and BH 17-10, were no longer applicable to support the new
alignment. As a result, this report will provide the subsurface
information and recommendations for the alignment from Keele
Pumping Station to the intersection of Ceramic Road and St. Regis
Crescent North based on boreholes BH 17-1 to BH 17-8.
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx 2
1.1 Scope of Work
The scope of work includes the following services to be provided by
AECOM to the City of Toronto: Preparing a geotechnical
investigation plan, layout of boreholes, and clearing of
underground utilities; Engaging a drilling sub-contractor,
advancing boreholes to collect soil samples, and installing
monitoring
wells; Laboratory testing of selected soil samples; Completing a
detailed visual analysis of soil samples, preparing borehole logs,
and preparing borehole
location plan; and, Preparing a geotechnical report presenting the
findings of the geotechnical investigation, laboratory test
results and geotechnical recommendations including construction
considerations.
2. Investigation Procedures
The borehole locations are provided in the Site Plan and Borehole
Location Plans, Figures 1.0 to 10.0 in Appendix A.
The borehole locations were established in the field by AECOM
engineering staff in relation to existing features. The underground
utilities at the borehole locations were cleared by the designated
public locate companies through Ontario One Call system and they
were field verified by a private locator, Utility Marx Inc. in
Ontario.
The fieldwork was carried out on July 26 and 31, and August 2 and
8, 2017. It consisted of drilling and sampling ten (10) boreholes
(BHs 17-1 to BH 17-10) that were advanced at the proposed locations
using a truck-mounted CME 75 drilling rig to a depth ranging from
6.2 to 10.5 m below ground surface (bgs), and the monitoring wells
were installed in all ten (10) drilled boreholes.
The boreholes were drilled using continuous flight hollow stem
augers. Both drilling and traffic control services were provided by
Geotech Support Services Inc. based in Markham, Ontario under the
full-time supervision of AECOM engineering staff.
Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) were carried out at selected
intervals to assess the soil strength and to obtain samples for
testing purposes. SPTs were carried out in general accordance with
ASTM D1586. The test consists of freely dropping a 63.5 kg hammer
over a vertical distance of 0.76 m to drive a 51 mm outside
diameter (O.D.) split- barrel (split-spoon) sampler into the
ground. The number of blows of the hammer required to drive the
sampler into the relatively undisturbed ground over a vertical
distance of 0.30 m is recorded as the Standard Penetration
Resistance or the N-value of the soil, which is indicative of the
compactness condition of granular (or cohesionless) soils (gravels,
sands and silts) or the consistency of cohesive soils (clays and
clayey soils).
Monitoring wells were installed in the open boreholes upon
completion of augering in accordance with the requirements
prescribed in R.R.O. 1990, Ontario Regulation 903 “Wells” (as
amended) (Ontario Water Resources Act, 1990), and they were
constructed using 51 mm diameter PVC Schedule 40 well screens and
solid riser pipes. Commercially manufactured well screen pipe with
a standard slot size of 10 were used for these installations.
Monitoring wells were completed using a well point cap that was
threated to the screen bottom. A J-plug was used to cover the top
of the well riser pipe. A filter pack consisting of clean, inert
rounded to sub-rounded 1 to 3 mm
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx 3
diameter silica sand was installed around each well screen, and the
bentonite in pellet (free of chemical additives) was used as an
non-permeable seal within the borehole annulus above the silica
sand. The wells were completed using a flush-mounted steel cap and
a cement mixture. The monitoring wells were tagged in accordance
with O. Reg. 903 (as amended) and a water well record was submitted
by the drilling contractor to the Ministry of Environment and
Climate Change (MOECC).
The groundwater levels were observed in the boreholes upon the
completion of drilling, where encountered, and they will be
measured and monitored in the monitoring wells.
Table 1 below presents a summary of the borehole locations and the
borehole termination depths in meters below the ground surface
(mbgs) and elevations in meters above sea level (mASL).
Table 1: Summary of Borehole Locations, Depths and Elevations
Borehole Number1 Borehole Location2 Ground Surface Elevation
(mASL)
Borehole Depth (mbgs)
Borehole Bottom Elevation (mASL)
BH 17-1 Keele St.
204.6 6.2 198.4 BH 17-2 200.0 6.7 193.3 BH 17-3 198.2 6.7 191.5 BH
17-4
Tangiers Rd. 197.7 9.6 188.1
BH 17-5 197.3 9.8 187.5 BH 17-6 196.4 10.5 185.9 BH 17-7 Ceramic
Rd. 195.2 6.7 188.5 BH 17-8 194.4 6.7 187.7 BH 17-9 St. Regis Cres.
- 6.7 -
BH 17-10 Tuscan Gt. - 6.7 - Notes: 1.BH 17-9 and BH 17-10 are no
longer applicable for the revised alignment, and they were not
surveyed. 2. Borehole locations are presented in Figures 1.0 to
10.0 in Appendix A.
Soil samples were transported to AECOM’s Geotechnical Laboratory in
Etobicoke, Ontario for visual and tactile examination and
classification. Selected soil samples were tested, and the
laboratory testing program consisted of natural moisture content
tests, Grain Size Distribution analyses and Atterberg Limits tests.
All the laboratory tests are in accordance with ASTM Standards.
Selected soil samples were tested at AGAT Laboratories, Ontario for
corrosivity.
Environmental soil sampling program was completed as a part of
geotechnical investigation for evaluating the environmental quality
of fill material and native subsurface soil for the on-site waste
management. The selected soil samples were submitted for chemical
laboratory analysis for general chemistry and inorganic parameters
(including metals, SAR, EC, pH, etc.), Volatile Organic Compounds
(VOCs), Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylenes (BTEX) /
Petroleum Hydrocarbon (PHCs) in fraction F1-F4, Polycylic Aromatic
Hydrocarbons (PAHs), Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) and Toxic
Characteristic Leachate Procedure Testing (TCLP) (including VOC’s,
PAHs, Metals and Inorganics, and PCBs).
All the soil samples selected for testing based on the vapour
readings, visual (i.e. staining, discoloration) and olfactory
observations, and “worst case” soil samples were selected for
subsequent laboratory analysis. In addition, sampling depths and
different soil strata, as well as the depth of the groundwater were
all taken into consideration in selecting soil samples for testing.
No visual aesthetic impacts (i.e. oil staining, odours, unusual
debris, etc.) were observed in any soil sample collected from fill
and native during the sampling events, unless noted in the borehole
logs.
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx 4
For the waste management consideration, one composite soil sample
from soil cutting was collected and labelled as TCLP-1 (worst case
scenario) and submitted to the laboratory toxicity characteristic
leaching procedure (TTCLP- Soil Cutting) for VOCs, Metals and
Inorganics, PAHs, PCBs parameters.
All collected soil samples were submitted to the AGAT Laboratories
of Mississauga, Ontario. AGAT is a member of the Canadian
Association for Laboratory Accreditation Inc. (CALA) and meets the
requirements of Section 47 of O.Reg.153/04 certifying that the
analytical laboratory be accredited in accordance with the
International Standard ISO/IEC 17025 and with standards developed
the Standards Council of Canada.
A total of 26 soil samples were collected during the investigation
event from BH 17-1 to BH 17-8, and submitted for the laboratory
analysis as follows in Table 2.
Table 2: Summary of Number of Samples and Analytical
Parameters
Number of Samples
8
BH 17-8 SS 3, BH 17-5-SS 2, BH 17-7-SS 2, BH 17-6 SS 3,
BH 17-3 SS 3, BH 17-4 SS 11 (Bottom), BH 17-1 SS 3, BH 17-2 SS
4
General Chemistry and Inorganic Parameters (including metals, SAR,
EC, pH etc.)
7
BH 17-5 SS 9A, BH 17-7 SS 6, BH 17-6 SS 6, BH 17-3 SS 5,
BH 17-4 SS 7, BH 17-1 SS 4, BH 17-2 SS 6
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
3 BH 17-8 SS 1B, BH 17-4 SS 1 (Bottom),
BH 17-1 SS 3
F1-F4
4 BH 17-5 SS 2, BH 17-6 SS 4, BH 17-4 SS 2
BH 17-2 SS 5 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)
3 BH 17-6 SS 5, BH 17-4 SS 5, BH 17-1 SS 5 Polychlorinated
Biphenyls (PCBs)
1 TCLP-Soil Cutting
(Including VOC’s, PAHs, Metals and inorganics, PCBs)
Note: Results of selected samples from BH 17-9 and BH 17-10 are not
included as these 2 boreholes are on the initial alignment.
The Borehole Location Plan and Borehole Profiles are presented in
Appendix A. The Record of Borehole Sheets is included in Appendix
B. The results of the laboratory tests are presented on the
borehole logs in Appendix B, and the test results including the
Grain Size Distribution Analysis and Atterberg limit tests in
Appendix C. Corrosivity and environmental soil testing results are
presented in Appendix D.
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx 5
3. Subsurface Conditions
3.1 Regional Geology
The project site is located within the physiographic region known
as the Peel Plain (Chapman and Putnam 1984), and most of the plain
area consists of glacial till partly modified by the former
presence of shallow glacial lakes or post-glacial erosion features.
The till in the project site is mapped as Halton Till, which is
generally considered as a fine-grained deposit with minor
fine-grained lacustrine sediments. The Halton Till is typically
stiff to hard in consistency, and weathering near the ground
surface can result it in it being degraded to consistencies from
soft to firm. Cobbles and boulders are contained in the Halton
Till.
The surface topography of the plain is characterized by a gradual
and fairly uniform slope toward Lake Ontario.
3.2 Subsurface Conditions
In general, the subsurface conditions at all borehole locations
consist of topsoil or pavement structure overlying various fill
materials, which is underlain by clayey silt overlying glacial till
deposits. Underneath the glacial till deposit, granular layers were
encountered in BH 17-4 and BH 17-6, while silty clay layer was
encountered in BH 17-5 and BH 17-7. The records of Borehole Logs
are presented in Appendix B.
3.2.1 Topsoil
A 130 to 175 mm thick layer of topsoil was encountered at the
surface in boreholes BH 17-1 to BH 17-4 and BH 17-6 to BH
17-8.
3.2.2 Pavement Structure
A pavement structure with 130 mm thick asphalt and 0.6 m thick
pavement granular fill was encountered at the surface in borehole
BH 17-5.
3.2.3 Fill
A 0.3 to 2.1 m thick layer of fill was encountered in all boreholes
below topsoil, except BH 17-5. The fill extended to the depths
ranging from 0.5 to 2.3 mbgs (Elevation 192.9 to 203.1 m). Various
amounts of clay, silt, sand and gravel with inclusions of organics
and rootlets were encountered in the fill materials. N-values
ranged between 6 and 43 blows per 30 cm penetration.
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx 6
The natural moisture contents measured within the fill materials
ranged from 3 to 24%.
3.2.4 Clayey Silt
A 0.6 to 1.8 m thick brown to grey clayey silt layer was
encountered in all boreholes below pavement structure or fill
materials at the depth ranging from 0.5 to 1.7 mbgs (Elevation
193.5 to 199.2 m), except BH 17-1 and BH 17-7, and it extended to
depths ranging from 1.7 to 2.7 mbgs (Elevation 191.7 to 197.6 m).
N-values ranged from 8 to 24 blows per 30 cm penetration,
indicating the clayey silt has a firm to very stiff
consistency.
The natural moisture contents measured within the fill materials
ranged from 12 to 29%.
3.2.5 Glacial Till
Glacial till deposits consisting of clayey silt and sandy silt to
silty sand were encountered in all boreholes. It should be noted
that based on resistance encountered during auger
advancement/grinding, cobbles and boulders are likely present
within the glacial till deposit.
Clayey Silt Till
With the exception of BH 17-7, a 2.8 to 5.0 m thick brown to grey
clayey silt till deposit was encountered in all boreholes below
fill or clayey silt at the depths ranging from 1.5 to 2.7 mbgs
(Elevation 191.7 to 203.1 m), and it extended to the depths ranging
from 4.5 to 7.0 mbgs (Elevation 190.3 to 198.8 m). BH 17-8 was
terminated within clayey silt till. N-values ranged from 9 to 50
blows per 30 cm penetration, indicating the deposit has a stiff to
hard consistency.
The grain size distribution results of three (3) selected clayey
silt till samples are presented in Figure GSD-1 in Appendix C. The
grain size distribution is as follows:
Grave Sized Particles: 1 to 2 %
Sand Sized Particles: 30 to 37 %
Silt Sized Particles: 35 %
Clay Sized Particles: 26 to 34 %
The corresponding Atterberg limits results of the selected samples
are given in Figure AL-1, Appendix C and are summarized
below:
Liquid Limit: 17 to 22 %
Plastic Limit: 12 to 15 %
Plasticity Index: 5 to 7 %
The natural moisture contents measured within the clayey silt till
samples were 7 and 18%.
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx 7
Sandy Silt / Silty Sand Till
A 0.3 to 3.3 m thick light brown to grey sandy silt to silty sand
till deposit was encountered below the fill or clayey silt till at
depths ranging from 2.3 to 9.3 mbgs (Elevation 188.4 to 198.8 m) in
all boreholes except BH 17-8, and it extended to 5.6 to 9.6 mbgs
(Elevation 187.9 to 189.6 m). BH 17-1 and BH 17-3 were terminated
within this till deposits. A 0.5 m thick sand layer was also
encountered at depth 8.8 mbgs (Elevation 188.9 m) within sandy silt
to silty sand till deposit in BH 17-4. The SPT N-value was 26 to in
excess of 100 blows per 30 cm penetration, indicating the deposit
has compact to very dense relative density.
The grain size distribution results of one (1) selected samples are
presented in Figure GSD-2 in Appendix C. The grain size
distribution is as follows:
Grave Sized Particles: 2 %
Sand Sized Particles: 43 %
Silt Sized Particles: 36 %
Clay Sized Particles: 19 %
The natural moisture contents measured within the silty sand to
sandy silt till samples were 6% and 15%.
3.2.6 Silty Clay
In two of the boreholes (BH 17-5 and BH 17-7), a 0.4 and 1.1 m
thick grey silty clay was encountered below the sandy silt till
deposit at the depths ranging from 5.6 to 9.4 mbgs (Elevation 187.9
to 189.6 m). Both boreholes were terminated within this deposit at
depths ranging from 6.7 to 9.8 mbgs (Elevation 187.5 to 188.5 m).
N-values were 31 and 48 per 30 cm penetration, indicating the
deposit has a hard consistency.
The grain size distribution results of one (1) selected silty clay
sample are presented in Figure GSD-3 in Appendix C. The grain size
distribution is as follows:
Grave Sized Particles: 0 %
Sand Sized Particles: 7 %
Silt Sized Particles: 37 %
Clay Sized Particles: 56 %
The corresponding Atterberg limits results of the selected sample
are given in Figure AL-2, Appendix C and are summarized
below:
Liquid Limit: 33 %
Plastic Limit: 21 %
Plasticity Index: 12 %
The natural moisture contents measured within the silty clay
samples were 15%.
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx 8
3.2.7 Sand
A 0.2 and 0.5 m thick brown to grey sand layer was encountered
within the glacial till deposit at 8.8 and 4.5 mbgs (Elevation
188.9 to 191.9 m), and it extended to 9.3 and 4.7 mbgs (Elevation
188.4 and 191.7 m) in boreholes BH 17-4 and BH 17-6,
respectively.
A 2.9 m thick lower sand layer was encountered below the sandy silt
to silty sand till in BH 17-6 at the depth of 7.6 mbgs (Elevation
188.8 m), and it extended to the borehole termination depth of 10.5
mbgs (Elevation 185.9 m).
In general, N-values were 21 to 97 blows per 30 cm penetration,
indicating the sand has a compact to very dense relative density. A
low N-value of 8 blows per 30 cm penetration was encountered
locally in BH 17-6, and this was likely due to possible hydraulic
disturbance.
The grain size distribution results of one (1) selected sand sample
are presented in Figure GSD-4 in Appendix C. The grain size
distribution is as follows:
Grave Sized Particles: 5 %
Sand Sized Particles: 78 %
Silt Sized Particles: 9 %
Clay Sized Particles: 8 %
The natural moisture contents measured within the sand samples were
8 and 17%.
3.2.8 Groundwater Conditions
Groundwater was observed upon the completion of the drilling in the
boreholes BH 17-2 to BH 17-6. Monitoring wells were installed with
51 mm PVC risers and screens in all the boreholes. The groundwater
levels were measured upon the completion of drilling and in the
monitoring wells (before well development), and these are presented
in Table 3 below.
Table 3: Groundwater Level Measurements
Borehole Number Borehole Location1
(not stabilized)
(before well development)
Depth (mbgs) Elevation (mASL) Depth (mbgs) Elevation (mASL) BH 17-1
Keele St. - - 4.2 200.4 BH 17-2 4.5 195.5 2.9 197.1 BH 17-3 5.6
192.6 2.1 196.1 BH 17-4 Tangiers Rd. 6.1 191.6 2.2 195.5 BH 17-5
7.7 189.6 6.3 191.0 BH 17-6 Toro Rd. 4.6 191.8 2.8 193.6 BH 17-7
Ceramic Rd. - - 2.0 193.2 BH 17-8 - - 2.1 192.3
Note: 1.The borehole locations are presented in Figures 1.0 to 10.0
in Appendix A.
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx 9
It should be noted that the groundwater levels from the monitoring
wells were measured before well development. The static groundwater
levels are reported in a separate hydrogeology addendum. It should
also be noted that the groundwater levels are subject to seasonal
fluctuations.
4. Discussions and Recommendations for Design and
Construction
4.1 General Discussions
The transmission watermain is proposed to be constructed to connect
the Keele Pumping Station and Downsview Water Distribution System
in City of Toronto, Ontario. The original proposed alignment runs
south along Keele Street, Tangiers Road, Toro Road, Ceramic Road,
St. Regis Crescent North, St. Regis Crescent South, Tuscan Gate,
and Sheppard Avenue West. However, due to an alignment change at
the south end connecting to the Downsview Water Distribution System
in August 2017, this report provides the findings of the subsurface
conditions and general recommendations for construction for the
alignment from Keele Pumping Station to the intersection of St.
Regis Crescent North and Ceramic Road only. It is noted that an
additional investigation for the revised southern alignment along
St. Regis Crescent North and Bakersfield Street should be carried
out during the detailed design stage.
It is understood that the open cut construction method will be
implemented for the stretch between Keele Pumping Station to
approximately 150 m east of the intersection of Keele Street and
Tangiers Road and from the intersection of Tangiers Road and Toro
Road to Downsview Water Distribution System. It is also understood
that the trenchless methods together with shafts excavation (at
both ends) will be adopted for the watermain construction along
Tangiers Road. However, the details of the proposed watermain,
including the watermain size, invert depth, shaft depths, and the
detailed watermain alignment (i.e. boulevard, road lane, median
etc.) had not been finalized at the time of preparing this report.
Therefore, it is assumed that the invert depth of the watermain
along the open cut section may be between 2.0 and 5.0 m below the
existing surface grade, and the invert depth along the trenchless
section may be about 7.0 m to 10.0 m below the existing surface
grade.
The subsurface conditions at the borehole locations generally
consists of topsoil or pavement structure overlying various fill
materials, and this is further underlain by clayey silt overlying
glacial till deposits. Compact to very dense sand layers were
encountered in boreholes BH 17-4 and BH 17-6, and a hard silty clay
was encountered in BH 17- 5 and BH 17-7.
Groundwater was observed at the depths ranging from 4.5 to 7.7 mbgs
upon completion of drilling in five (5) boreholes. Based on a
single set of monitoring well readings (before well development) in
all the boreholes, the groundwater depth ranged from 2.0 to 6.3
mbgs.
4.2 Recommendations for Design and Construction
The following recommendations are for preliminary design purposes
only, and further detailed investigation may be required during the
detailed design stages, when more design details of the proposed
watermain become available.
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx 10
4.2.1 Open Cut Sections
The open cut method was proposed for the watermain construction
from the Keele Pumping Station to north shaft of trenchless
(approximately 150 m east of the intersection of Keele Street and
Murray Ross Parkway) and from the south shaft of the trenchless
section (the intersection of Tangiers Road and Toro Road) to the
Downsview Water Distribution System.
At the time of preparation of this report, no information was
available on the invert level/depth of the proposed watermain and
it was therefore assumed that the invert level of watermain, in the
open cut section will be at approximately 2.0 to 5.0 m below
existing grade. Based on this assumption, it is anticipated that
the proposed watermain would be supported on native clayey silt or
clayey silt till or sand or sandy silt till. It is noted that at
Borehole (BH 17-7), fill was encountered to a depth of 2.3 m and it
is recommended that the fill be removed and replaced with
engineered fill in the vicinity of BH 17-7.
From the available information, it is understood that the proposed
transmission watermain pipe material will be steel, and it will be
encased with concrete as per City Standards. The steel pipe
material and welding joints related requirements shall conform to
City Standard TS-1802 and OPSS 1802. The encasement material should
be minimum 20 MPa Reinforced Concrete as per City Standard Drawing
T-1110.01-10. The width of the all-around encased concrete should
be between 150 mm and 300 mm, depending on diameter of proposed
watermain, as shown below (Table 4):
Table 4: Diameter of Proposed Watermain and Thickness of All-Around
Encased Concrete
Diameter of Proposed Watermain (Welded Steel Pipe) (mm)
Thickness of All-Around Encased Concrete (mm)
750 – 1500 150
1550 – 1900 200
>1900 300
The width of the trench should be a minimum of 800 mm plus the
width of encasement block (for example: if 1600 mm diameter pipe
will be proposed, the concrete encasement block will be 2.0 m wide
and the trench width should not be less than 2.8 m), as required by
the City of Toronto Standard Drawing.
Temporary excavations within the open cut sections should be
carried out in accordance with Occupational Health and Safety Act
(OHSA) regulations. The excavation zones along the proposed
alignment based on the borehole information will be in fill
materials above groundwater table, which can be classified as Type
3 soils and in clayey silt and clayey silt till above groundwater
table, which can be classified as Type 2 soils. The soils below
groundwater table can be classified as Type 4. The temporary
excavation slopes should be battered not steeper than 1H:1V for
Type 1, 2 and 3 soils. For Type 4 soils, the excavation slopes
should be battered not steeper than 3H:1V, unless a shoring/support
of excavation is included in the design. OPSD 802 series should be
referenced for excavations in each type of soil.
Temporary excavation support (i.e. shoring) will be required in
areas where sufficient space is not available to use open cut
methods and/or in other areas where existing features and
facilities (i.e. existing underground utilities) require
protection. The apparent lateral earth pressure distribution
diagram is represented in Appendix E. The temporary excavation
support may consist of multiple trench boxes, sheet piling, and
timber shoring system or
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx 11
equivalent. The design and construction of the temporary excavation
support system should follow OPSS.MUNI 539 (Construction
Specification for Temporary Protection Systems).
The surcharge loading such as vehicular traffic movement,
construction equipment or material should not be allowed within
safe horizontal distance of 1H:2V line for excavation up to 3.0 m
depth or horizontal distance of 1H:1V line for excavation exceeding
3.0 m depth. The line measurements should be projected from the
dredge line at the face of the protection system to the roadway
surface as per OPSS MUNI 539. In the planning of trench shoring and
excavation, the presence of adjacent existing utilities and
structures should be considered including their stability, and they
must be maintained without detrimental settlements/movements.
For preliminary design purposes, the geotechnical resistance at
Ultimate Limit State (ULS) and geotechnical reaction at
Serviceability Limit State (SLS) of the undisturbed native soil at
the anticipated invert depth of the watermain based on the borehole
information and the geotechnical design parameters, including
coefficient of friction and friction angles, are provided in Table
5 and Table 6 below, respectively. Further investigation and
engineering assessment will be required during the final
design.
Table 5: Geotechnical Resistances
(kPa)
Geotechnical Reaction at SLS** (kPa)
2.0 to 5.0 mbgs Native stiff to hard clayey silt till / dense to
very dense sandy silt till
250 175
Notes: * The invert depth of the watermain along the open cut
section was assumed to be between 2.0 to 5.0 mbgs. Near Borehole
BH17-7, the fill material up to 2.3 m depth should be replaced if
the invert level is above that depth. **Bearing capacities are
estimated based on SPT N-values.
Table 6: Geotechnical Design Parameters
Materials Unit Weight (kN/m3)
Undrained Shear Strength (kPa)
Granular 'A' and 'B' Type II
22 - 35 0.27 3.70 0.43
Stiff Clayey Silt 19 50 26** 0.39 2.56 0.56
Stiff to very Stiff Clayey Silt Till
21 100 30** 0.33 3.69 0.50 – 0.80
Sandy Silt Till 21 - 34 0.28 3.54 0.44 – 0.80
Sand 19 - 30 - 33 0.33 3.69 0.45 - 0.50
Notes: * Coefficients of lateral earth pressure were calculated
based on Canadian Foundation Engineering Manual (CFEM), 4th
Edition. ** Effective friction angles for cohesive soils are for
long term (i.e. drained) conditions.
The recommendations for groundwater control and dewatering are
provided in Section 4.2.5 of this report.
Concrete for thrust blocks shall be placed against undisturbed
soil. The bearing resistance at SLS of 100 kPa and factored bearing
resistance at ULS of 150 kPa can be used for stiff to very stiff
clayey silt. A bearing resistance at SLS of about 150 kPa and a
factored bearing resistance at ULS 225 kPa may be used for clayey
silt till.
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx 12
4.2.2 Pipe Bedding and Cover
The bedding of the watermain should be compatible with the type and
the class of the pipe, the surrounding subsoil and anticipated
loading conditions and should be designed in accordance with the
Standard Specifications of City of Toronto, TS-401 (amendment to
OPSS.MUNI 401), and the bedding materials should be Granular A or
Granular A RCM (Recycled Concrete Material) conforming to TS-1010
(amendment to POSS.MUNI 1010). Cover materials may be considered as
Granular A, or Granular B Type II as per OPSS.MUNI 401. All bedding
and cover materials shall be placed in maximum 200 mm thick uniform
loose layers, and each layer shall be compacted to at least 98% of
the materials’ Standard Proctor Maximum Dry Density (SPMDD)
according to TS-501. Bedding and cover on each side of the pipe
shall be completed simultaneously, and at no time are the levels on
each side to differ by more than 300 mm.
4.2.3 Trench Backfilling
The selection and placement of the backfill material should be in
accordance with Standard Specifications of City of Toronto, TS-401
(amendment to OPSS.MUNI 401). The backfill material should be
Granular A or Granular A RCM as per TS 1010 or unshrinkable fill.
The trench backfill shall be placed in maximum 300 mm thick lifts
for the full width of the trench and compacted to 95% of SPMDD in
accordance to TS-501. It is recommended that the upper 1.0 m zone
of the trench backfill under the proposed road pavement should be
compacted to at least 98% of the SPMDD. The operations of
backfilling and compaction should be monitored by qualified
geotechnical personnel.
It is recommended that the trench backfilling should be carried out
as soon as possible following excavation and service
installation.
The trench support system such as trench boxes or equivalent should
be removed gradually as the trench is being backfilled. The
supporting system should not be removed until the excavation is
backfilled, and the area behind the supporting system should be
carefully backfilled to ensure that all voids are completely
filled.
4.2.4 Trenchless Method
Trenchless construction methods were proposed for the construction
along Tangiers Road, from approximately 150 m east of Keel Street
to the intersection of Tangiers Road and Toro Road.
This section of the report is based on the information available at
the time the report was prepared and only addresses general aspects
of typical trenchless methods for the watermain installation.
Further geotechnical investigation and engineering assessment
should be carried out when the preferred method and more design
data including vertical alignment are available. At this time, the
invert level along the trenchless section is assumed between about
7.0 m to 10.0 m below the existing surface grade. Based on this
assumption, it is anticipated that the proposed trenchless system
will be in native dense to very dense sandy silt to silty sand till
and hard silty clay. At the southern limit of the proposed
trenchless system, a layer of sand having a compact relative
density was encountered at about 7.6 m depth from existing grade
(Elevation 188.8 m). Therefore it is recommended to investigate the
lateral extent of this layer during detailed design stage and also
should be considered in final design of invert levels within the
lateral extent of this deposit.
Based on subsurface and groundwater conditions encountered in the
boreholes, microtunnelling is considered more feasible and safer.
Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) may also be considered based
on final alignment and invert levels. However, the contractor will
be fully responsible for the selection of the trenchless technology
which
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx 13
best fits the contract requirements based on his experience, and
the availability of trained staff and equipment. All the trenchless
work should be carried out by an experienced specialist contractor
employing only qualified workers skilled in their trade under the
direction of an experienced foreman. The contractor’s work plan
should include a provision for grouting should the need arise. It
is recommended that the geotechnical aspects of the contractor’s
work plan for the trenchless method be reviewed by a qualified and
experienced geotechnical engineer prior to construction.
Typically, a minimum earth cover thickness of about three times the
tunnel diameter should be considered for most tunnelling
methods.
For preliminary design purposes, the geotechnical resistance at
Ultimate Limit State (ULS) and geotechnical reaction at
Serviceability Limit State (SLS) of the undisturbed native soil at
the anticipated invert depth of the watermain are provided in Table
7. Further investigation and engineering assessment will be
required for the final design.
Table 7: Geotechnical Resistances
(kPa)
7.0 to 10.0 mbgs Native compact to very dense
sand/sandy silt to silty sand till / hard silty clay
250 175
Notes: * The invert level of watermain along trenchless section was
assumed to be between 7.0 and 10.0 mbgs. **Bearing capacities are
estimated based on SPT N-values.
Microtunnelling is an improvement on the use of pipe jacking and it
uses a laser guided Micro-Tunnelling Boring Machine (MTBM). It is a
remotely controlled, guided pipe-jacking process that provided
continuous support to the excavation face. The guidance system
usually consists of a GPS mount in the drive shaft, communicating a
reference line to a target mounted inside the tunnelling machine.
This technique provides an ability to control the excavation face
stability by applying mechanical or fluid pressure to
counterbalance the earth and hydrostatic pressures. Therefore, no
dewatering may be required between the shafts as it is a closed
system operation for the entire tunnel alignment. Dewatering will
likely be required at the entry and exit shafts depending on the
shaft construction method. The main advantage of this technique is
that construction typically is faster than other methods, and the
project will be completed faster. Care should be taken to minimize
the vibration created by the TBM and thereby minimize the
deformation of granular soils below groundwater. The main
disadvantage of this technology is the relatively higher cost, but
it involves comparatively less risk.
Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) is becoming more popular for
the installation of pipes, conduits and cables along a desired
profile using a surface-launched drilling rig. The first step is to
set up the launch site. A drilling rig is established which
supplies the rotation and thrust to the drill. Additional lengths
of drilling rod are than added as the drilling progresses through
the bore. The drill bit should be chosen based on the type of soil
to provide the most efficient progress possible as it cuts through
the ground. The horizontal drilling is performed by fluid-assisted
mechanical action of the cutter head. Once the drill reaches the
destination point, the first phase is completed and the next step
is to enlarge the bore size by pulling a reamer back through the
tunnel. A drill bit is removed from the end of the drill string and
is replaced with a reaming tool. A number of reaming passes may be
required to open the diameter of the bore to approximately 1.5
times the diameter of proposed watermain. The pipe is pulled back
through the bore in the same way as the reaming tool was used. A
pulling head and swivel is then attached to the
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx 14
end of the drill string. The pipe is attached to the pulling head
and slowly pulled back through the bore. The main advantage of this
technique is that it can be suited to most soil conditions with
minimal ground disturbance. The improvements to the technique are
continuously in progress. The disadvantage of the techniques is
that it can have potential to blow out. It is difficult to maintain
the alignment when used in ground having a significant number of
cobbles/boulders. The drilling fluid to be used for the drilling
should be environmental friendly.
It should be noted that cobbles and boulders may be encountered in
the glacial till deposit. Therefore, the selection of cutting tools
and methods should be compatible with the subsurface conditions at
this site. The rock cutter discs should be properly selected to
break cobbles and boulders at the face into sufficiently smaller
fragments. Some MTBMs can incorporate a crushing head to crush the
cobbles and boulders while the bore is being advanced. However, due
to the unknown numbers or sizes of cobbles and boulders, the MTBM
may be fully obstructed. If the obstruction cannot be cleared or
ingested by the machine, the alignment may have to be abandoned or
a rescue shaft may be advanced to free the MTBM and remove the
obstructions.
Once the excavation extends to the final grade of the shaft, it is
recommended that the exposed soils should be covered with 19 mm
clear crushed stone or equivalent. The clear crushed stone base
should be immediately covered with a 100 mm thick concrete mud slab
to protect the subgrade from disturbance from construction
activities. A layer of filter fabric should be used between the
subsoil and the crushed stone base to prevent erosion at the
interface and ingress of fine soil particles into the crushed
stone.
All construction work should be carried in accordance with the OHSA
and Ontario Regulation 213/91 for Construction Projects and with
local regulations.
4.2.5 Groundwater Control and Dewatering
Based on the available information from the boreholes, groundwater
levels were encountered above the anticipated invert level of the
pipe along proposed open cut and trenchless sections. The
anticipated pipe invert depth is between 2.0 to 5.0 m below the
existing surface grade for open cut section and between 7.0 to 10.0
m below the existing surface grade for trenchless section.
Therefore, a groundwater control plan is required for the open cut
section, including pumping from sumps. The groundwater should be
lowered to a minimum of 0.5 m below the base of excavation for dry
construction conditions.
Dewatering will also be required for the construction of entry and
exit shafts, based on the groundwater levels encountered in
boreholes BH 17-4 and BH 17-6, which were advanced at the
approximate shaft locations. The impact of dewatering activities to
the surrounding structures should be further evaluated during the
detailed design stage. A Permit To Take Water (PTTW) from the MOECC
is required when dewatering activities result in groundwater
extraction in excess of 50,000 L/day.
Surficial water seepage into the excavations should be expected and
will be heavier during periods of sustained precipitation. Pumping
from properly filtered sumps located at the base of the excavations
may be required to provide additional groundwater control. Sumps
should be maintained outside of the actual excavation limits.
Surface water runoff should be directed away from the excavations
at all times.
For more details on groundwater levels and management, please refer
to the Hydrogeology Assessment Report from AECOM. A detailed
dewatering assessment and dewatering plan should be prepared /
reviewed by the dewatering expert or experienced hydrogeologist,
during the detailed design stage.
The water shall be disposed of so as not to be injurious to public
health and safety. Dewatering operations shall be directed to a
sediment control device prior to discharge.
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx 15
4.2.6 Soil Corrosivity
The sulphate (SO4) resistance of concrete in contact with the soils
was evaluated by performing water-soluble sulphate test on the
three (3) selected samples from BH 17-1 SS 6, BH 17-4 SS 8 and BH
17-7 SS 5. The tests indicated that the sulphate concentrations in
the soil samples were between 6 and 68 μg/g or between 0.6 and
6.8%. Compared with Table 3 specified in the Canadian Standard
Association (CSA) specification CSA A23.1-14, the test results show
that the water-soluble sulphate content of the tested soil samples
are above 0.2%, which indicated that the classes of exposure are
S-1 and S-2 (severe to very severe degree of exposure). Reference
should be made to the above mentioned CSA specifications for
appropriate cement type. The corrosivity results are provided by
AGAT Laboratories and presented in Appendix D.
The following table summarizes the soil corrosivity evaluation
according to the ANSI/AWWA C105 Standard (American Water Works
Association (AWWA) Standards approved by American National
Standards Institute (ANSI)) for the potential of corrosion for
buried grey or ductile cast iron pipe. A score of 10 points or more
indicates potential for corrosion.
According to the ANSI/AWWA rating system, the soils in the vicinity
of boreholes BH 17-1, BH 17-4, and BH 17-7 at the tested sample
depths are considered to be not corrosive for cast iron or ductile
iron pipes (3.5 to 8.5 points).
City of Toronto Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing - Municipal Class
Environmental Assessment Study City of Toronto, Ontario
60491185_Draft Premilinary Geotechnical Invesetigation
Report_20171108.Docx 16
4.2.7 Environmental Soil Test Results
The laboratory test results for the selected soil samples can be
found in Appendix D.
The results of the analysis were compared with the MOECC Table 3
Full Depth Generic Condition Standards (SCS) for
industrial/commercial/community property use, in a Non-Potable
Groundwater Condition for fine to medium textured soil type.
The results of soil samples analyzed indicated that the
concentration of all analyzed parameters met the applicable MOECC
Table 3 Standards except Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) value was
above the MOECC Table 3 SCS in soil sample BH 17-5 SS 2.
Based on Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP)
analytical results, the collected composite soil sample TCLP-1
could be classified as non-hazardous material and dispose off-site
at licensed facility.
5. Closure
This report is for the preliminary geotechnical investigation and
to provide preliminary geotechnical recommendations only based on
the subsurface conditions encountered during the geotechnical
investigation at the Project location. When the design of the
watermain is finalized, the information in this report should be
reviewed, and additional investigations should be carried
out.
Appendix A Borehole Location Plans and Borehole Profiles
M E
TR O
LI N
X B
A R
R IE
G O
C O
R R
ID O
Distribution System
Keele Street Watermain Upgrade Not Required for Alternative 2A Long
Transmission Watermain
Keele Reservoir
Fl in
d
Bratty Rd
Bowsfield Rd
Meters
Downsview Area Long Term Water Servicing Municipal Class EA
Study
Geotechnical, Hydrogeological and Environ- mental
Investigations
Oct,2017 1:12,500
Datum: MTM 3 Tran.Mer. Source: City of Toronto
This drawing has been prepared for the use of AECOM's client and
may not be used, reproduced or relied upon by third parties, except
as agreed by AECOM and its client, as required by law or for use by
governmental reviewing
agencies. AECOM accepts no responsibility, and denies any liability
whatsoever, to any party that modifies this drawing w thout AECOM's
express written consent.
N
Region of York
Y O R K R E G I O NY O R K R E G I O N
Long Transmission Watermain - Routing Options
Legend
TERMINOLOGY USED IN BOREHOLE LOGS
Topsoil: Mixture of soil and humus capable of supporting good
vegetative growth.
Peat: A mass of organic matter usually fibrous in texture in
various stages of decomposition, generally dark brown to black in
colour and of spongy consistency.
Fill: The term fill has been used to describe materials which have
been placed by non-natural processes. Fills can often be
heterogeneous in nature and those relying on this report should
expect them to contain deleterious materials. Such materials can
include wood, bricks, slag, porcelain, organics, and obstructions
such as scrap metal, storage tanks, and abandoned concrete/steel
structures.
Due to the uncertainty of the placement method of the material, the
boring samples obtained for this report are not expected to
represent other materials at any horizontal or vertical distance
from where the sample was obtained.
Fill material may be contaminated by toxic/hazardous waste that
renders it unacceptable for deposition in any but designated land
fill site. Unless specifically stated, the fill on this site has
not been tested for contaminants that can be considered toxic or
hazardous. Testing to determine the toxicity of fill materials can
be conducted, if requested.
Till: The term till on the borehole logs indicates that the
material originates from a geological process associated with
glaciation. Till must be considered heterogeneous in composition
and containing pockets and/or seams of material such as sand,
gravel, silt or clay. Till often contains cobbles (60 to 200 mm)
and boulders (over 200 mm). Contractors may therefore encounter
cobbles and boulders during excavation, even if they are not
indicated by the logs. It should be appreciated that normal
sampling equipment cannot differentiate the size or type of any
obstruction. Due to the horizontal and vertical variability of
till, the sample description may be applicable to a very limited
zone. Caution is essential when dealing with sensitive excavations
or dewatering programs in till materials.
Desiccated: having visible signs of weathering by oxidization of
clay minerals, shrinkage cracks, etc.
Stratified: alternating layers of varying material or color with
the layers greater than 6 mm thick.
Laminated: alternating layers of varying material or color with the
layers less than 6 mm thick.
Fissured: material breaks along plane of fracture.
Varved: composed of regular alternating layers of silt and
clay.
Slickensided: fracture planes appear polished or glossy, sometimes
striated.
Blocky: cohesive soil that can be broken down into small angular
lumps which resist further breakdown.
Lensed: inclusion of small pockets of different soil, such as small
lenses of sand scattered through a mass of clay; not
thickness.
Seam: a thin, confined layer of soil having different particle
size, texture, or color from materials above and below.
Homogeneous: same color and appearance throughout.
Well Graded: having wide range in grain sized and substantial
amounts of all predominantly on grain size.
Uniformly Graded: predominantly on grain size.
Residual: completed weathered sedimentary rock mixed with native
soils.
Terminology describing soil structure
All soil sample descriptions included in this report generally
follow the Canadian Foundations Engineering Manual and the Unified
Soil Classification System. These systems follow the standard
proposed by the International Society for Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering. Laboratory grain size analyses provided by
AECOM follow the same system. Note that, with exception of those
samples where a grain size distribution analysis has been
completed, all samples have been classified by visual inspection.
Visual inspection classification is not sufficient to provide exact
gain sizing.
ISSMFE / USCS SOIL CLASSIFICATION
CLAY SILT SAND GRAVEL COBBLES BOULDERS F NE MEDIUM COARSE FINE
COARSE
0 002 0 075 0.475 2.0 4.75 26.5 75 200
EQUIVALENT GRAIN DIAMETER IN MILLIMETRES
The standard terminology to describe cohesive soils includes
consistency, which is based on undrained shear strength as measured
by in-situ vane tests, penetrometer tests, unconfined compression
tests or similar field and laboratory analysis. Standard
Penetration Test ‘N’ values can also be used to provide an
approximate indication of the consistency and shear strength of
fine grained, cohesive soils.
The standard terminology to describe cohesionless soils includes
the compactness condition as determined by the Standard Penetration
Test ‘N’ value.
Cohesionless Soils Cohesive Soils Composition
Compactness Condition
Undrained Shear
(blows per 0.3 m) Term Criteria
Very loose 0 – 4 Very soft < 12 < 2 Trace 1% - 10% Loose 4 –
10 Soft 12 - 25 2 – 4 Some 10% - 20%
Compact 10 – 30 Firm 25 – 50 4 – 8 Adjective 20% - 35% Dense 30 –
50 Stiff 50 – 100 8 – 15 And > 35%
Very Dense > 50 Very Stiff 100 - 200 15 – 30 Noun > 35% &
largest fraction Hard > 200 > 30
Standard Penetration Test (SPT):
The number of blows required to drive a 50 mm (2 in.) open split
spoon sampler from a depth of 150 mm (6 in.) to 450 mm (18 in.) in
undisturbed soil. Each blow is driven by a 63.6 kg (140 lb.) hammer
free falling a distance of 0.76 m (30 in.).
Sample & Soil Abbreviations Contaminant Abbreviations
CORE Rock core sample BNAE base/neutral/acid extractables AS Auger
sample BTEX benzene, toluene,
ethylbenzene, xylenes FV Field vane OCP organochlorine
pesticides
PP Pocket penetrometer MI metals & inorganics SG Specific
Gravity PAH polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons GS Grab sample PCB polychlorinated biphenyls
SS Split spoon sample PHC CCME petroleum hydrocarbons (fractions 1
– 4)
DCPT Dynamic cone penetration test VOC volatile organic compounds
(includes BTEX)
GR Gravel Plasticity Description
SI Silt Medium 30 < wl < 50
CL Clay High 50 < wl
Strata/Graphic Plot
Explanatory Sheet To Rock Core Log
Column No. Description 1. Elevation and Depth of Geotechnical
Boundary in Borehole 2. Drilling Method Used 3. General Description
of Geotechnical Unit: Quantitative description including rock type
(s), percentage of rock
types, frequency and sizes of interbeds, colour, texture,
weathering, strength and general joint spacing Hardness H1
Extremely Hard Cannot be scratched with a pocket knife or sharp
pick. Can only be
chipped with repeated heavy hammer blows H2 Very Hard Cannot be
scratched with a pocket knife or sharp pick. Breaks with
repeated heavy hammer blows H3 Hard Can be scratched with a pocket
knife or sharp pick with difficulty (heavy
pressure) Breaks with heavy hammer blows H4 Moderately Hard Can be
scratched with a pocket knife or sharp pick with light or
moderate
pressure. Breaks with moderate hammer blows H5 Moderately
Soft
Can be grooved 1.6 mm (1/16 in) with a pocket knife or sharp
pick
H6 Soft Can be grooved or gouged easily with a pocket knife or
sharp pick with slight pressure, can be scratech with a finger
nail. Breaks with light or moderate manual pressure
H7 Very Soft Can readily be indented, grooved or gouged with a
finger nail, or Carved with pocket knife. Breaks with light manual
pressure
Strength (from ISRM) Approx UCS Svh Very High Strength
>200 MPa
Sh High Strength 50 to 200 MPa Sm Medium Strength 15 to 50 MPa Sl
Low Strength 4 to 15 MPa Svl Very Low Strength
1 to 4 MPa
4 Geological Symbol for Rock or Soil Material 5. Elevation of
Geotechnical Boundary 6. Run Number: Drill run number 7.
Penetration Rate: meters per min 8. Colour & Return Percentage:
9. Core Recovery: Core recovery is the total length of core pieces,
irrespective of their individual lengths, obtained in a
core run and expressed as a percentage of the length of that core
run. 10. Rock Quality Designation (RQD): The total length of those
pieces of sound core which are 10 cm (4 inches) or
greater in length in a core run expressed as a percentage of the
total length of that core run. Sound pieces of rack are those
pieces separated by natural breaks and not machine breaks or
subsequent artificial breaks. 0 - 25 percent Very Poor Quality 25 -
40 percent Poor Quality 40 - 75 percent Fair Quality 75 - 90
percent Good Quality 90 - 100 percent Very Good Quality
11. Fracturing: Fu Unfractured No Fractures Fvs Very Slightly
Fractured Core length greater than 0.9 m (3 ft) Fsl Slightly
Fractured Core length from 0.3 to 0.9 m (1 to 3 ft) Fm Moderately
Fractured Core length from 0.1 to 0.3 m (4 in. to 1 ft) Fi
Intensely Fractured Core lengths from 0.25 to 0.1 m (1 in. to 4
in.) Fvi Very Intensely Fractured Mostly chips and fragments
12. Degreed of dip of discontinuity measured from the axis of rock
core.
13. Discontinuity Description Fracture Width (FW) FWt Tight No
visible separation FWs Slightly Open FW< 0.8 mm (1/32 in.) FWm
Moderately Open 0.8 mm (1/32 in.)≤FW<3.2 mm (1/8 in.) FWo Open
3.2 mm (1/8 in.) ≤FW<9.7 mm (3/8 in.) FWmw Moderatley Wide 9.7
mm(3/8 in.) ≤FW<25.4 mm (1 in.) FWw Wide FW≥25.4 mm(1 in.)
Fracture Filling or Coating Thickness(FF) FFc Clean No film coating
FFvt Very Thin FF< 0.8 mm (1/32 in.) FFm Moderately Thin 0.8 mm
(1/32 in.)≤FF<3.2 mm (1/8 in.) FFt Thin 3.2 mm (1/8 in.)
≤FF<9.7 mm (3/8 in.) FFmt Moderately Thick 9.7 mm(3/8 in.)
≤FF<25.4 mm (1 in.) FFw Thick FF≥25.4 mm(1 in.) Roughness Rst
Stepped Near normal steps and ridges occur on the fracture surface
Rr Rough Large angular asperities can be seen Rm Moderately Rough
Asperities are cleanly visible and fracture surface feels abrasive
Rs Slightly Rough Small asperities on the fracture surface are
visible and can be felt Rsm Smooth No asperities, smooth to the
touch Bedding Spacing (Sb) Bm Massive ≤Sb > 3 m (10 ft) Bvt Very
Thickly Bedded 0.9 m (3 ft) ≤ Sb ≤ 3 m (10 ft) Bt Thickly Bedded
0.3 m (1 ft) ≤ Sb ≤ 0.9 m (3 ft) Bm Moderately Bedded 0.1 m (4 in.)
≤ Sb ≤ 0.3 m (1 ft) Bt Thinly Bedded 25 mm (1 in.) ≤ Sb ≤ 0.1 m (4
in.) Bvt Very Thinly Bedded 6 mm (1/4 in.) ≤ Sb ≤ 25 mm (1 in.) Bl
Laminated SB ≤ 6 mm (1/4 in.) Orientation Of Flat = 0 - 20o Od
Dipping = 20 - 50o
Ov Vertical = 50 - 90o
Surface Shape Planar Flat surface Wavy Undulating surface Fracture
Type: B Bedding J Fault C Joint F Foliation S Shear Plane M
Mechanical Breaks
14. Hydraulic Conductivity (cm/sec)
!" $
+?@[]
^`]
]?{|}
~ ~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
$ $! ! " ! ! ! ! ! " ! ! $ ! $ $! ! ! " ! !
! ! !$ " " $! !
!! !
! $ " " $ ! ! ! ! ! |" ! ! $$!! " ! ! $ ! " " " ! " ! ! `
^ ^
+|++| `
+|
|] `
| | ` +| `
| ` ||^|
` ]^` ]`]| `+
]`+ |^` ]`]| `+
`
+ |
`
` ` | `
| ? | `
|]` | |]|
| | ]
`{`||@]`]{@`@{|`{
|| `
`|] !" " `] ` ` ]`` | | +
|
^
|
]
] | ] $ |]`+`|] || ` | ++| `
`
+ |
|
]` ] ` " !
||^
|
`|
]|]|
| ]|
|
]
| +
|
|
~
`]| ~
`
`
^
|
+
` ~[
+?@
^`]
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
! $! ! " $ !
! " ! $ !
! ! " !! ! ! ! " $! !
!$ $ !
$ " $ ! ! ! ! |" ! ! $$!! " ! ! ! ! ! " " " ! " ! ! `
^ ^
+|++| `
+|
|] `
| | ` +| `
| ` ||^|
` ]^` ]`]| `+
]`+ |^` ]`]| `+
`
+ |
`
` ` | `
| ? | `
|]` | |]|
| | ]
`{`||@]`]{@`@{|`{
|| `
`|] !" " `] ` ` ]`` | | +
|
^
|
]
] | ] $ |]`+`|] || ` | ++| `
`
+ |
|
]` ] ` " !
||^
|
`|
]|]|
| ]| +
|
]
| +
|
|
~
`]| ~
`
`
^
|
+
` ~[
~[
+?@
^`]
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
! $! !$! ! $ ! " ! !
! " !
! ! !$ " ! " $! !
$
! $ " ! $ !
! ! ! ! |" ! ! $$!! " ! ! ! ! ! " " " ! " ! ! `
^ ^
+|++| `
+|
|] `
| | ` +| `
| ` ||^|
` ]^` ]`]| `+
]`+ |^` ]`]| `+
`
+ |
`
` ` | `
| ? | `
|]` | |]|
| | ]
`{`||@]`]{@`@{|`{
|| `
`|] !" " `] ` ` ]`` | | +
|
^
|
]
] | ] $ |]`+`|] || ` | ++| `
`
+ |
|
]` ] ` " !
||^
|
`|
]|]|
| ]| +
|
]
| +
|
|
~
`]| ~
`
`
^
|
+
` ~[
~[
!" $
]
]?{|}
^`]
+?@
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
!" ! $ $! ! ! " !! ! !
! ! ! ! ! $ ! ! ! " ! $ !
! ! !$ " ! " $! !
$
! $ " ! " $ ! $ !
" $ ! " $ ! $
! $ " " $ ! $ !
^ ^
+|++| `
+|
|] `
| | ` +| `
| ` ||^|
` ]^` ]`]| `+
]`+ |^` ]`]| `+
`
+ |
`
` ` | `
| ? | `
|]` | |]|
| | ]
`{`||@]`]{@`@{|`{
|| `
`|] !" " `] ` ` ]`` | | +
|
^
|
]
] | ] $ |]`+`|] || ` | ++| `
`
+ |
|
]` ] ` " !
||^
|
`|
]|]|
| ]| +
|
]
| +
|
|
~
`]| ~
`
`
^
|
+
` ~[
~[
! ! ! |" ! ! $$!! " ! ! ! ! ! " " " ! " ! ! `
^ ^
+|++| `
+|
|] `
| | ` +| `
| ` ||^|
` ]^` ]`]| `+
]`+ |^` ]`]| `+
`
+ |
`
` ` | `
| ? | `
|]` | |]|
| | ]
`{`||@]`]{@`@{|`{
|| `
`|] !" " `] ` ` ]`` | | +
|
^
|
]
] | ] $ |]`+`|] || ` | ++| `
`
+ |
|
]` ] ` " !
||^
|
`|
]|]|
| ]| +
|
]
| +
|
|
]`{@|`+|^@`|
`
`
^
|
+
[+?@
^`]
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
!"$"! ! "
! ! " ! !
! ! !$ " ! !
$
! $ " " $ ! $ !
!! !
! $
^ ^
+|++| `
+|
|] `
%
| | ` +| `
| ` ||^|
` ]^` ]`]| `+
]`+ |^` ]`]| `+
`
+ |
`
` ` | `
| ? | `
|]` | |]|
| | ]
`{`||@]`]{@`@{|`{
|| `
`|] !" " `] ` ` ]`` | | +
|
^
|
]
] | ] $ |]`+`|] || ` | ++| `
`
+ |
|
]` ] ` " !
||^
|
`|
]|]|
| ]|
|
]
| +
|
|
~
`]| ~
`
`
^
|
+
` ~[
~[
! ! ! ! |" ! ! $$!! " ! ! ! ! ! " " " ! " ! ! `
^ ^
+|++| `
+|
|] `
%
| | ` +| `
| ` ||^|
` ]^` ]`]| `+
]`+ |^` ]`]| `+
`
+ |
`
` ` | `
| ? | `
|]` | |]|
| | ]
`{`||@]`]{@`@{|`{
|| `
`|] !" " `] ` ` ]`` | | +
|
^
|
]
] | ] $ |]`+`|] || ` | ++| `
`
+ |
|
]` ] ` " !
||^
|
`|
]|]|
| ]|
|
]
| +
|
|
]`{@|`+|^@`|
`
`
^
|
+
+?@
]?{|}
^`]
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
$ $! ! " !! ! ! ! ! " ! " $! !
! ! !$ " ! " $! $
$ ! " " $ ! ! $ " " $ ! $ !
$ ! ! " ! $ ! ! $
^ ^
+|++| `
+|
|] `
+
| | ` +| `
| ` ||^|
` ]^` ]`]| `+
]`+ |^` ]`]| `+
`
+ |
`
` ` | `
| ? | `
|]` | |]|
| | ]
`{`||@]`]{@`@{|`{
|| `
`|] !" " `] ` ` ]`` | | +
|
^
|
]
] | ] $ |]`+`|] || ` | ++| `
`
+ |
|
]` ] ` " !
||^
|
`|
]|]|
| ]|
|
]
| +
|
|
~
`]| ~
`
`
^
|
+
` ~[
~[
~ ~
! ! ! ! |" ! ! $$!! " ! ! ! ! ! " " " ! " ! ! `
" $ $ !
^ ^
+|++| `
+|
|] `
+
| | ` +| `
| ` ||^|
` ]^` ]`]| `+
]`+ |^` ]`]| `+
`
+ |
`
` ` | `
| ? | `
|]` | |]|
| | ]
`{`||@]`]{@`@{|`{
|| `
`|] !" " `] ` ` ]`` | | +
|
^
|
]
] | ] $ |]`+`|] || ` | ++| `
`
+ |
|
]` ] ` " !
||^
|
`|
]|]|
| ]|
|
]
| +
|
|
]`{@|`+|^@`|
`
`
^
|
+
!" $
+?@
^`]
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
$ $! ! " ! ! !! $ !
!$! ! $ " ! $ !
! $$ ! ! $ ! ! $ " ! " $ ! $ !
!!
! " $
! ! ! ! |" ! ! $$!! " ! ! $ ! " " " ! " ! ! `
^ ^
+|++| `
+|
|] `
| | ` +| `
| ` ||^|
` ]^` ]`]| `+
]`+ |^` ]`]| `+
`
+ |
`
` ` | `
| ? | `
|]` | |]|
| | ]
`{`||@]`]{@`@{|`{
|| `
`|] !" " `] ` ` ]`` | | +
|
^
|
]
] | ] $ |]`+`|] || ` | ++| `
`
+ |
|
]` ] ` " !
||^
|
`|
]|]|
| ]|
|
]
| +
|
|
~
`]| ~
`
`
^
|
+
` ~[
]
+?@
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
$ $! ! ! " !
! ! " ! !
! ! !$ " ! " $!
$
! ! ! ! |" ! ! $$!! " ! ! $ ! " " " ! " ! ! `
^ ^
+|++| `
+|
|] `
,
| | ` +| `
| ` ||^|
` ]^` ]`]| `+
]`+ |^` ]`]| `+
`
+ |
`
` ` | `
| ? | `
|]` | |]|
| | ]
`{`||@]`]{@`@{|`{
|| `
`|] !" " `] ` ` ]`` | | +
|
^
|
]
] | ] $ |]`+`|] || ` | ++| `
`
+ |
|
]` ] ` " !
||^
|
`|
]|]|
| ]|
|
]
| +
|
|
~
`]| ~
`
`
^
|
+
` ~[
C lie
nt Pr
oj ec
Appendix D Corrosivity and Environmental Soil Testing Results
CLIENT NAME: AECOM CANADA LTD 5080 COMMERCE BLVD MISSISSAUGA, ON
L4W4P2 (905) 238-0007
5835 COOPERS AVENUE MISSISSAUGA, ONTARIO
CANADA L4Z 1Y2 TEL (905)712-5100 FAX (905)712-5122
http://www.agatlabs.com
DATE REPORTED:
VERSION*: 1
Should you require any information regarding this analysis please
contact your client services representative at (905) 712-5100
17T248892AGAT WORK ORDER:
Laboratories (V1) Page 1 of 5
All samples will be disposed of within 30 days following analysis.
Please contact the lab if you require additional sample storage
time.
AGAT Laboratories is accredited to ISO/IEC 17025 by the Canadian
Association for Laboratory Accreditation Inc. (CALA) and/or
Standards Council of Canada (SCC) for specific tests listed on the
scope of accreditation. AGAT Laboratories (Mississauga) is also
accredited by the Canadian Association for Laboratory Accreditation
Inc. (CALA) for specific drinking water tests. Accreditations are
location and parameter specific. A complete listing of parameters
for each location is available from www.cala.ca and/or www.scc.ca.
The tests in his report may not necessarily be included in the
scope of accredita ion.
Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta
(APEGA) Western Enviro-Agricultural Laboratory Association (WEALA)
Environmental Services Association of Alberta (ESAA)
Member of:
*NOTES
Results relate only to the items tested and to all the items tested
All reportable information as specified by ISO 17025:2005 is
available from AGAT Laboratories upon request
B H
-1 7-
9 SS
5 B
H -1
7- 7
SS 5
B H
-1 7-
1 SS
6 B
H 17
-4 S
S8 SA
M PL
E D
ES C
R IP
TI O
5
Corrosivity Package Sulfide (S2-) 8638269 8638269 0.16 0.16 NA