221564 Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility Improvements.pdf

GEOTECHNICAL REPORT

BELLAMY CREEK CORRECTIONAL FACILITY PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS

IONIA, MICHIGAN

Prepared For:

BELLAMY CREEK CORRECTIONAL FACILITY c/o BECKETT&RAEDER, INC.

ANN ARBOR, MI

Prepared By:

MATERIALS TESTING CONSULTANTS, INC.

February 2023

MTC Project No. 221564

February 7, 2023 Project No. 221564

Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility c/o Beckett&Raeder, Inc.

535 West William St, Suite 101 Ann Arbor, Michigan 48103

Attention: Mr. Kristofer Enlow, P.E., Partner

Reference: Report of Pavement Investigation Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility Pavement Improvements Ionia, Michigan

Dear Mr. Enlow:

We have completed a pavement investigation for the above-referenced project. The purpose of this investigation has been to identify the general pavement section and near surface soil conditions within existing pavement areas, analyze the conditions relative to the planned construction, and to provide recommendations for the rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing asphalt pavements. This work has been performed as described in our revised proposal (16816R) dated November 8, 2022.

Presented herein are descriptions of our understanding of the design considerations, the geotechnical investigation, encountered conditions and engineering recommendations. The Appendix contains the report limitations and data collected during this investigation.

DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

Available Information

We have been provided the following documents and information for use in this investigation:

A Soil Boring Map provided by Mr. Kristofer Enlow, P.E. of Beckett&Raeder, Inc. via email received on November 5, 2022, showing proposed coring locations within the Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility parking lots, perimeter road, various locations inside the fence, and the adjacent facility to the east.

Email correspondence and telephone call with Mr. Kristofer Enlow, P.E. of Beckett&Raeder, Inc. discussing initial project scope and subsequent revisions.

Report of Pavement Investigation

February 7, 2023

Location and Type of Construction

We understand the intent of the project is to reconstruct the various existing HMA parking lots, drive areas, and other HMA and concrete pathways at the Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility as shown in Figure 1. The exact project scope has not been determined but could consist of a full reconstruction or rehabilitation of the existing pavements depending on risk tolerance and project funding.

The Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility is located at 1727 Bluewater Highway in Ionia, Michigan. The facility has one main parking lot on the west side of the facility, a perimeter road, various interior pathways, and adjacent dormitory facility. These areas were the focus of the investigation as shown on Figure Nos. 1 through 3. Although design traffic data is not available, traffic is expected to consist of relatively light passenger vehicles with only occasional heavier axle wheel loading from trucks for deliveries, refuse pickup, etc.

We understand that the existing facility was built around 2001 and expect that most if not all of the pavements under consideration were built at that time.

We should be informed of any changes between the actual design conditions and those described herein as this information may affect our recommendations.

We have divided the investigation into four different areas of focus including the parking lot and entrance drive, perimeter road, paths and routes inside the fence, and adjacent dormitory facility. The investigation areas are as shown in Figure No. 1.

INVESTIGATION METHODOLOGY

Pavement core borings along with field engineering reconnaissance were used to investigate the subsurface conditions. Pavement core and boring locations are shown on Figure Nos. 2 and 3. Investigation procedures, soil classification information and boring logs are provided in the Appendix.

Number of Borings 14 Depth Range, ft. 1.8 to 5

Pavement cores and hand auger borings were performed, and other sampling was conducted solely to obtain indications of subsurface conditions as part of a geotechnical exploration program. No services were performed to evaluate subsurface environmental conditions.

February 7, 2023

INVESTIGATION RESULTS

Visible Pavement Condition

Parking Lots and Entrance Drive

Surface defects consisting of moderate raveling were observed over the majority of the pavement surface at the time of our investigation. Widely spaced block cracking was common over a large portion of the pavement surface, with alligator cracking present in some localized areas along secondary cracks. Multiple generations of patching and potholes were evident especially within the entrance area where the drive splits north of the grassy island. Some past overband crack sealing was noted; however, most existing open cracks have not been sealed or the sealant has deteriorated. There was no evidence of recent seal coating present at the time of our investigation. An area of possible de-bonding or missing pavement was present near the southwest catch basin. Standing water was observed in the vicinity of the catch basin south of the grassy island along the entrance drive. The pictures provided herein exhibit the representative condition of the pavement surface.

C-4, Entrance Drive, looking west

C-1, southern portion of lot, looking east

South of grass island south of entrance road, looking west towards maintenance

North of grass island south of entrance road, looking southwest towards maintenance

Southwest corner of lot, looking southwest

Generally, surface water appeared to flow in a westerly direction in the main lot as it sloped to the west. Two stormwater catch basins were observed at the time of our site visit. One near the northern portion of the lot by the south end of the grassy island and the other in the far southwestern area of the lot in the vicinity of Boring C-1. The entrance road appeared relatively flat with water draining to the edges.

The Pavement Surface Evaluation and Rating (PASER), developed by the University of Wisconsin, provides a systematic method for rating roadway pavement on a 1 to 10 scale.

While developed with roadway pavement in mind, the concept is also useful in assessing the condition of HMA parking lots. Based on the visual condition following our inspection we estimate a PASER rating of 2 to 4 is warranted for different areas of the parking lots and entrance road.

Perimeter Road

Surface defects consisting of moderate raveling were observed over the majority of the pavement surface. Block cracking was common with localized zones of secondary cracking and areas of more advanced pavement raveling and alligator cracking were also observed.

Multiple generations of patching and potholes were observed near the eastern corners of the perimeter road. Some past overband crack sealing was noted; however, most existing open cracks have not been sealed or the sealant has deteriorated. There was no evidence of recent

February 7, 2023 seal coating present at the time of our investigation. The pictures provided herein illustrate the representative condition of the pavement surface.

C-3, perimeter road, looking west

Northeast corner, perimeter road, looking west

C-13, perimeter road, looking northeast

Southeast corner, perimeter road, looking northeast

Based on the visual condition following our inspection we estimate a PASER rating of 3 to 4 is warranted for different areas of the perimeter road.

The perimeter road appeared to be relatively flat with water draining to the edges.

Paths and Routes Inside Fence

Surface defects consisting of moderate raveling were present over much of the pavement surface. Moderately to widely spaced (10-20 ft) block cracking was present with areas of secondary cracking. Alligator cracking was present, especially along secondary cracks in the vicinity of Borings C-9 and C-6. The most deteriorated sections of existing pavement were observed from the sally port at the entrance, extending to the east, and around the corner stretching past the loading dock. An area was observed within a high traffic zone associated with the trash compactor that appeared to exhibit a full depth failure which extended through the aggregate base in some areas. Standing water was commonly observed on the pavement surface and in the greenspace areas from the sally port to the trash compactor.

HMA pavement was not observed at location C-10. The pathway at that location is currently a concrete walkway. Visible transverse, longitudinal, and meander cracking was present in localized areas near the vicinity of our boring location. Locally, these cracks converged and appeared as multiple crack patterns, especially near the corners forming small to medium sized triangle sections of pavement.

Generally, in existing HMA pavement, some past overband crack sealing was noted; however, most existing open cracks have not been sealed or the sealant has deteriorated. No evidence of previous seal coating was visible at the time of our investigation. No photos were taken inside the fence at the time of our investigation due to cell phone restrictions at the facility.

The Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility maintenance staff were able to provide photos of selected areas (see below) of the most heavily deteriorated pavement areas inside the fence and areas that could benefit from additional site-specific usage considerations.

Pavement at the loading dock in front of trash compactor, looking east

Main drive turnaround inside fence between two main buildings in the northwest, looking southeast

Main drive turnaround inside fence between two main buildings in the northwest, looking northeast

Based on the visual condition following our inspection we estimate a PASER rating of 2 to 4 is warranted for different areas of the main drive and pathways within the fenced area of the facility.

The interior routes and paths appeared to be generally flat with water draining to the edges.

Generally, there was standing water observed in the greenspace areas in the vicinity of our boring locations within the fence.

Adjacent Dormitory Facility and Drive

Surface defects consisting of moderate raveling were observed over the majority of the pavement surface. Widely spaced block cracking was present with localized zones of secondary cracking. An area of potholing and patching was observed in the entrance drive near Wall Street. Generally, some past overband crack sealing was noted; however, most existing open cracks have not been sealed or the sealant has deteriorated. No evidence of previous seal coating was visible at the time of our investigation. The pictures below exhibit the representative condition of the pavement surface.

February 7, 2023

C-8, adjacent dormitory facility entrance, looking east

C-7, adjacent dormitory facility lot, looking northeast

Based on the visual condition following our inspection we estimate a PASER rating of 4 is warranted for different areas of the parking lot and entrance drive of the adjacent dormitory facility.

The pavement surface at the adjacent dormitory facility has a perimeter curb. One catch basin was observed on the south side of the entrance drive approximately 150 feet from Wall Street.

Stormwater appeared to drain on the parking lot to the south and east as the lot is sloped in that direction.

Subsurface Conditions

The investigation at our core locations generally encountered between 2 ¼ and 5 ½ inches of HMA and 4 ¾ inches of concrete (at one location), overlying 5 ¼ to 14 inches of gravel base, overlying sand subbase 3 ¼ to 24+ inches (where present). A summary table presenting each boring and whether the subbase present may or likely does not meet MDOT Class II grading requirements based upon visual classification is provided at the end of this section. The subgrade within our investigation area was observed to vary, consisting of granular soil (with or without silt), gravel, silt, clayey sand, and clay. Additional variability generally should be expected between our boring locations. Boring logs, provided in the Appendix, should be reviewed for more detailed subsurface conditions encountered.

February 7, 2023

Parking Lot and Entrance Drive (C-1, C-2, and C-4):

Parking lot Borings C-1 and C-2 generally encountered 3 inches of HMA overlying 10 to 14 inches of gravel base. Below the gravel base, a silty sand (SM) or a clayey sand (SC) overlying a silty sand (SM) was encountered to explored depths of 3.8 feet in Boring C-1 and 4.2 feet in Boring C-2. Based upon visual description, the clayey sand and silty sand in these borings likely does not meet MDOT Class II grading requirements.

Boring C-4, in the entrance drive, encountered 3 ½ inches of HMA, overlying 11 ½ inches of gravel base. Below the gravel base, poorly graded sand (SP) subbase was encountered from 14 inches to 2.3 feet. Poorly graded gravel (GP) was encountered from 2.3 feet to auger refusal at 2.5 feet. Based upon the visual description, the poorly graded sand (SP) subbase in Boring C-4 may meet MDOT Class II grading requirements. No water was encountered in the parking lot and entrance drive borings at the time of our investigation.

Perimeter Road (C-3, C-12 through C-14):

Perimeter road borings generally encountered 2 ¼ to 3 inches of HMA overlying 9 ½ to 12 inches of gravel base. Below the gravel base 7 ½ to 24+ inches of poorly graded sand (SP) subbase was encountered (if present). Boring C-12 encountered poorly graded gravel (GP) below the gravel base. Subgrade encountered in Boring C-3 consisted of lean clay (CL) over silt (ML) to the end of exploration at 4.4 feet. Based upon the visual description, the poorly graded sand (SP) subbase in borings C-3, C-13, and C-14 may meet MDOT Class II grading requirements. Groundwater was encountered at 4.9 feet in Boring C-13 at the time of our investigation.

Paths and Routes Inside the Fence (C-5, C-6, C-9 through C-11):

The core locations in the paths and routes inside the fence generally encountered between 2 ½ to 3 ¼ inches of HMA overlying 5 ¼ to 12 inches of gravel base. Beneath the gravel base, variable granular subbase conditions were encountered. Generally, the gravel base overlaid 12 ½ to 24+ inches of poorly graded sand to silty sand (SP to SM). Based upon the visual description, the subbase in Borings C-6 and C-11 may meet MDOT Class II grading requirements. However, the subbase in Borings C-5 and C-9 would likely not meet MDOT Class II grading requirements. Groundwater was encountered in Boring C-11 at 3.5 feet below ground surface.

Boring C-10 encountered 4 ¾ inches of concrete overlying 3 ¼ inches of poorly graded sand (SP). Subgrade soils consisted of silty sand (SM) from 8 inches to the end of exploration at

2.5 feet. Groundwater was encountered just below the end of the concrete at 0.5 feet below the ground surface.

February 7, 2023

Adjacent Dormitory Facility (C-7 and C-8):

The core locations at the adjacent facility generally encountered 3 ¼ to 5 ½ inches of HMA overlying 5 ¾ to 8 inches of gravel base. Beneath the gravel base, 13 to 24+ inches of poorly graded sand (SP) or poorly graded sand with silt (SP-SM) subbase was encountered. Subgrade soils consisted of silty sand (SM), encountered in Boring C-7 from 26 ½ inches to the end of exploration at 5.0 feet. Based upon the visual description the subbase may meet MDOT Class II grading requirements. No groundwater was encountered at the time of our investigation.

Location Boring Subbase Visual Classification May Meet MDOT Class II Requirements

Likely Does Not Meet MDOT Class II Requirements

Parking and Entrance Drive

C-1 Silty Sand (SM) X C-2 Clayey Sand (SC) X C-4 Poorly Graded Sand (SP) X

Perimeter Road

C-3 Poorly Graded Sand (SP) X C-12 Poorly Graded Gravel (GP) X C-13 Poorly Graded Sand (SP) X C-14 Poorly Graded Sand (SP) X

Pathways and Routes Inside Fence

C-5 Silty Sand (SM) X

C-6 Poorly Graded Sand with Silt

(SP-SM)

X

C-9 Silty Sand (SM) X C-10 Poorly Graded Sand (SP) X C-11 Poorly Graded Sand (SP) X

Adjacent Dormitory Facility

C-7 Poorly Graded Sand with Silt

(SP-SM)

X

C-8 Poorly Graded Sand (SP) X Summary table showing subbase visual classification and whether it may or likely does not meet MDOT Class II grading requirements.

Groundwater levels may fluctuate due to seasonal variations such as precipitation, snowmelt, nearby river or lake levels and other factors that may not be evident at the time of measurement. Groundwater levels may be different at the time of construction.

This section has provided a generalized description of the encountered subsurface soil conditions. The boring logs located in the Appendix should be reviewed for detailed soil descriptions. Some variation between boring locations may be expected.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Overall, the existing pavement is at or nearing the end of its service life in most areas but appears to be performing reasonably well given the age with a few exceptions. Notable areas

February 7, 2023 of pavement failure were observed within the parking lot and entrance drive, main drive into the fenced area of the facility, areas on the pathways within the fence, and localized zones around the perimeter road. Although primarily age related, the presences of variable and sometimes frost susceptible subbase and subgrade as well as a variable and sometimes thin pavement section have likely exacerbated failures in some areas. Site specific usage, i.e., placing heavy loads on HMA pavement has likely contributed to premature pavement failure in isolated areas and use of concrete pavement may be warranted in these areas as part of a repair.

The marginal existing stormwater management as evidenced by the frequent areas of ponded water, along with the presence of frost susceptible subbase and subgrade materials, present a particular concern in regard to drainage and freeze/thaw impacts to the pavement and have likely negatively impacted pavement performance in some areas. Correction of these issues in many areas is largely outside of the scope of pavement rehabilitation but should be considered. Correction may require regrading of parking lots, installation of ditches or placement of new catch basins. A key aspect of full depth reconstruction is to provide for drainage within the sand subbase. Without proper drainage, i.e., installation of underdrains, catch basins and a place for the water to migrate properly away from the pavement section, the sand subbase may accumulate water, particularly in areas where clay subgrade is present, resulting in decreased pavement performance over time relative to areas possessing adequate pavement section drainage.

We have addressed two options to accomplish the proposed pavement rehabilitation including a full reconstruction and a partial-depth rehabilitation including the replacement of the HMA only with minimal improvements or hybrid approach to improving the aggregate base and sand subbase. The design life and minimum pavement section recommendations provided for both options consider adequate pavement section drainage is provided.

Full reconstruction has the benefit of removing the variable aggregate base and sand subbase to construct a new, consistent section with the required thickness of acceptable materials as well as minimizing the risk of water accumulation through construction of an appropriate underdrain system. Full-depth reconstruction would also allow for reconfiguration of the lots and more extensive improvements to the stormwater collection system should this be desired.

Option 1 – Full Reconstruction

The pavement sections recommended in this section are based on procedures contained in the 1993 AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures.

February 7, 2023

The design recommendations provided are based on the following:

AASHTO design method Low volume roads Level of reliability 75 percent Analysis period 15 to 25 years Low traffic level, no. 18-kip ESAL 50,000 to 300,000 Number of rehabilitation periods during analysis period 1

The following flexible pavement sections are recommended:

Traffic Condition Standard Duty Heavy Duty Sand subbase thickness, inches 10 12 Aggregate base thickness, inches 6 8 Bituminous leveling course thickness, inches 2.0 2.5 Bituminous wearing course thickness, inches 1.5 1.5

The following materials are recommended:

Sand subbase MDOT Class II granular Aggregate base MDOT 21AA Bituminous leveling MDOT 13A Bituminous wearing MDOT 36A

Sand subbase material should be laboratory tested to confirm MDOT Class II grading requirements. Based on the visual description, the existing sand subbase likely does not consistently meet MDOT Class II grading requirements and significant importation of sand subbase should be expected should full-depth replacement be desired. The binder grade should be a minimum PG 58-28. MDOT standard specifications for materials and placement should be observed. We recommend a maximum of 17 percent Recycled Content (Tier 1) be considered for new HMA materials.

Industry best practices for longitudinal joint construction should be followed in order to optimize long-term joint performance. Premature joint failures are the result of a combination of low asphalt density, asphalt mix segregation, high permeability and a lack of tensile strength at the joint interface.

February 7, 2023

Because of the tendency of a clayey subgrade to soften with an increase in moisture, even though it may be relatively stiff in a dry state, and the presence of other frost susceptible soils in the subgrade, it is recommended that cracks that may develop in the pavement be quickly and properly sealed through a regular maintenance program. The subgrade should be sufficiently sloped (2 percent minimum) to provide drainage within the sand subbase and underdrains should be provided within the subbase, around catch basins and pavement edges, to facilitate drainage. At each catch basin, four underdrains with a watertight connection should extend out radially at least 20 ft. A suitable rubberized asphalt sealant should be placed between all concrete curb/HMA joints immediately after paving.

After removal of the pavement, the exposed subgrade should be proof-rolled and, where granular, compacted in the upper 12 inches using suitable compaction equipment to at least 95 percent of the soil's maximum ASTM D1557 dry density by the contractor. Proof-rolling is defined as the passing of relatively heavy construction equipment (typically a loaded dump truck) over the gravel base under observation by the Geotechnical Engineer. The response of the subgrade, when subjected to the applied load, is subjectively evaluated by our staff with respect to its ability to support the overlying pavement. In areas where excessive deflection is observed, special subgrade preparation measures may be recommended to provide an acceptable subgrade condition. Subgrade improvement is likely to consist of undercutting of affected areas to an approved subgrade and replacement with engineered fill. Engineered fill should consist of approved on-site or imported soil meeting MDOT Class II grading requirements placed in uniform layers up to 9 inches thick and compacted to 95 percent of the soils maximum ASTM D1557 dry density by the contractor.

Consideration should be given to removing frost susceptible subgrade soils including silts and silty sands to 42 inches below grade where this can be accomplished given project budget, existing utilities and other factors. Frost susceptible soil left in place will present a risk of future frost related deterioration, particularly when combined with areas of deficient storm-water management and ponding of surface water. Areas of undercut should be backfilled with engineered fill and suitable subgrade under drains should be provided, as needed, to prevent water accumulation within the depth of frost penetration.

Considering the variable subgrade including cohesive and granular soil, although feasible to construct the project in the spring and fall, there is an anticipated significant benefit to performing work in the summer months during periods of comparatively dry, warm weather as well as benefit to completing work in an expeditious manner wherein the exposed subgrade is evaluated and covered as soon as possible. Exposed subgrade consisting primarily of clay or granular soil with elevated silty and clayey fines is typically sensitive to traffic and changes in moisture precipitation and, once disturbed, additional overexcavation often may be required to remove disturbed subgrade.

February 7, 2023

Option 2 – Full-Depth Mill and Repave Over Existing Aggregate Base

As a higher risk alternative to full-depth replacement, the existing HMA pavement could be removed and replaced over the existing gravel base and sand subbase (where present).

Benefits of this method include significantly lower cost and shorter construction duration.

Expected service life of the replacement pavement is difficult to estimate; however, pavement life may be on the order of 10-15 years with long term performance similar to the existing pavement over time, assuming similar traffic and moisture conditions. Although not the ideal thickness or recommended materials, the existing aggregate base and sand subbase (where present) do have value and retaining these features may be a savings compared to a complete replacement provided the additional risk can be tolerated.

Considering notable areas of pavement failure within the parking lot and entrance drive, main drive into the fenced area of the facility, areas on the pathways within the fence, and localized zones around the perimeter road a partial depth repair is likely not feasible and isolated full reconstruction should be planned to restore the failed base conditions.

As an alternate option to removal of the existing HMA pavement, a crush and shape may be a viable option for the roadways and pathways throughout the facility where grades are not fixed.

A crush and shape involves pulverizing the existing HMA layers while blending with the underlying aggregate base to create a new stable base for construction of HMA layers. A common downside of base crushing and shaping is that it will add thickness to the pavement section and cause a grade raise. In this situation, outside of a few areas with curb and gutter, the grade raise may be beneficial such that it will raise the pavement above the surrounding grade and provide material for adjusting of grades to eliminate ponding of water. Crush and shape construction often requires specialty equipment which will sometimes make the work infeasible for smaller projects. Considering the size of this project (particularly if the work can be bundled with the work at the adjacent Handlon Correctional Facility) this appears to be a relatively low risk. While likely beneficial, a crush and shape will not correct the encountered variable and sometimes frost susceptible subgrade. HMA base crushing and shaping should be completed following Section 305 of the 2020 MDOT Standard Specifications.

After the removal of the existing pavement, the exposed aggregate base should be proof rolled as described in Option 1. Following the proof roll, the aggregate base should be graded to the required profile and compacted in the upper 12 inches using suitable compaction equipment to at least 95 percent of the soil's maximum ASTM D1557 dry density by the contractor.

Following base preparation, a new HMA section consisting of the recommended leveling and wearing courses in Option 1 could then be constructed.

Although always important, considering the marginal drainage of the existing subgrade, adequate maintenance will be important to maximizing the life of the replacement pavement.

Maintenance is expected to consist of overband crack sealing beginning relatively early in the pavement life as block cracks begin to appear with periodic seal coating.

February 7, 2023

Additional consideration for vehicle types and axle loading along the main road inside the fence from the sally port to around the corner near the trash compactor may be warranted.

Flexible pavements generally do not do well in areas with large static loading from dumpsters, stockpiled material, etc. Should concrete rigid pavement be on option for these areas, we can provide further design guidance if desired.

CLOSURE

In this report, descriptions of the geotechnical investigation, encountered conditions and recommendations for the design of rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing pavements have been presented. The limitations of this study are described in the Appendix.

The recommendations presented in this report are based upon a limited number of subsurface samples obtained from various sampling locations. The samples may not fully indicate the nature and extent of the variations that actually exist between sampling locations. For that reason, among others, we strongly recommend that a qualified geotechnical firm be retained to observe earthwork construction. If variations or other latent conditions become evident during construction, it will be necessary for us to review these conditions and our recommendations as appropriate.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide this service to you on this project. Should you have any questions or require further assistance, please contact our office.

Sincerely, MATERIALS TESTING CONSULTANTS, INC.

Mark DeHoog, E.I.T.

Staff Engineer

Jonathan E. O’Brock, P.E.

Project Manager

Attachments: Figure Nos. 1 through 3 - Boring Location Plans Appendix

- Limitations

- Test Drilling and Sampling Procedures

- Boring Log Terminology and Classification Outline

- Boring Logs

TITLE: BORING LOCATION PLAN PROJECT: BELLAMY CREEK CORRECTIONAL FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS.

SCALE: NOT TO SCALE DATE: 01/18/2023 PROJECT NO.: 221564

FIG. NO.: 1 DR. BY: MD REV. BY: JO

LEGEND

PARKING LOT & DRIVE

PERIMETER ROAD

PATHS AND ROUTES INSIDE FENCE

ADJACENT DORMITORY FACILITY & DRIVE

NOTE: AERIAL IMAGERY OBTAINED FROM GOOGLE EARTH SITE VICINITY MAP

NOT TO SCALE

SCALE: NOT TO SCALE DATE: 01/11/2023 PROJECT NO.: 221564

FIG. NO.: 2 DR. BY: MD REV. BY: JO

BORING LOCATION (TYP)

NOTE: AERIAL IMAGERY OBTAINED FROM GOOGLE EARTH

SITE VICINITY MAP

NOT TO SCALE

C-1

C-2

C-3

C-4

C-5

C-6

C-9

C-10

C-11

C-12

C-13

C-14

SCALE: NOT TO SCALE DATE: 01/11/2023 PROJECT NO.: 221564

FIG. NO.: 3 DR. BY: MD REV. BY: JO

BORING LOCATION (TYP)

NOTE: AERIAL IMAGERY OBTAINED FROM GOOGLE EARTH

SITE VICINITY MAP

NOT TO SCALE

C-7

C-8

APPENDIX

• Limitations

• Test Drilling and Sampling Procedures

• Boring Log Terminology and Classification Outline

• Boring Logs

LIMITATIONS

Soil Variations

The recommendations in this report are based upon the data obtained from the soil borings.

This report does not reflect variations which may occur between these borings, and which would not become evident until construction. If variations then become evident, it would be necessary for a re-evaluation of recommendations of this report, after performing on-site observations.

Warranties

We have prepared this report in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices. We make no other warranties, either expressed or implied, as to the professional advice provided under the terms of our agreement and included in this report.

This report is prepared exclusively for our client and may not be relied upon by other parties without written consent from our office.

Boring Logs

In the process of obtaining and testing samples and preparing this report, we follow reasonable and accepted practice in the field of soil engineering. Field logs maintained during drilling describe field occurrences, sampling locations, and other information. The samples obtained in the field are subjected to additional testing in the laboratory and differences may exist between the field logs and the final logs. The engineer reviews the field logs and laboratory test data, and then prepares the final boring logs. Our recommendations are based on the contents of the final logs.

Review of Design Plans and Specifications

In the event that any changes in the design of the building or the location, however slight, are planned, our recommendations shall not be considered valid unless modified or approved in writing by our office. We recommend that we be provided the opportunity to review the final design and specifications in order to determine whether changes in the original concept may have affected the validity of our recommendations, and whether our recommendations have, in fact, been implemented in the design and specifications.

TEST DRILLING AND SAMPLING PROCEDURES

Test Drilling Methods:

Hollow stem auger, ASTM D6151 Mud rotary, ASTM D5783 Casing advancer, ASTM D5872 Rock coring, ASTM D2113

X Hand Auger X 4-inch Portable Pavement Core Drill

Note: Cone penetration test data can be used to interpret subsurface stratigraphy and can provide data on engineering properties of soils. The ASTM procedure does not include a procedure for determining soil classification from CPT testing. Soil classifications shown on CPT logs are based on published procedures and are not based on physical ASTM soil classification tests.

Sampling Methods:

SPT, ASTM D1586, Auto hammer (140 lb., 30" drop, 2" OD split spoon sampler) Thin-walled tube sampler (Shelby), ASTM D1587

Note: The number of hammer blows required to drive the SPT sampler 12 inches, after seating 6 inches, is termed the soil N-value and provides an indication of the soil's relative density and strength parameters at the sample location. SPT blow counts in 6 inch increments are recorded on the boring logs.

Drill Rig:

Acker Renegade (ATV)

CME 55 (ATV)

CME 45 Truck Geoprobe 7822 Geoprobe Rotary Sonic

Boreholes Backfilled With:

X Excavated soil X Cold patch at surface in HMA roadway/parking lot Cement bentonite grout Piezometer or Monitoring Well (see notes on logs) Concrete or asphalt patch where appropriate

Sample Handling and Disposition:

X Samples labeled, placed in sample bags, returned to MTC Laboratory X Discard after 60 days

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 1100

FOR CLARIFICATION OF FINE-GRAINED SOIL AND

FINE-GRAINED FRACTION OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS

< 5 5 to 10 10 to 30 30 to 50 > 50

Relative Density SPT Blow CountDescriptive Terms

0 to 15 % 15 to 35 % 35 to 65 % 65 to 85 % 85 to 100 %

GENERAL NOTES

Very loose Loose Medium dense Dense Very dense

ORGANIC SILTS OR CLAYS OF

HIGH PLASTICITY WITH OR

WITHOUT SAND OR GRAVEL

CLAYEY SANDS WITH OR

WITHOUT GRAVEL

Plasticity Chart

GRAIN SIZE

Less than 5%

5 to 10%

15 to 25%

30 to 40%

50 to 100%

MINOR COMPONENT QUANTIFYING TERMS

COARSE-GRAINED SOILS (major portions retained on No. 200 sieve): includes (1) clean gravel and sands and (2) silty or clayey gravels and sands. Condition is rated according to relative density as determined by laboratory tests or standard penetration resistance tests.

TERMS DESCRIBING CONSISTENCY OR CONDITION

POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS

WITH OR WITHOUT SAND

SILTY GRAVELS WITH OR

WITHOUT SAND

WELL-GRADED SANDS WITH OR

WITHOUT GRAVEL

POORLY-GRADED SANDS WITH

SILT WITH OR WITHOUT

GRAVEL

CLEAN

SANDS WITH

LESS THAN

15% FINES

SANDS WITH

15% OR

MORE FINES

POORLY-GRADED SANDS WITH

OR WITHOUT GRAVEL

WELL-GRADED GRAVELS WITH

OR WITHOUT SAND

CLAYEY GRAVELS WITH OR

WITHOUT SAND

TYPICAL NAMES

CLEAN

GRAVELS

WITH LESS

THAN 15%

FINES

GRAVELS

WITH 15%

OR MORE

FINES

GRAVELS

MORE THAN

HALF

COARSE

FRACTION IS

LARGER

THAN NO. 4

SIEVE

SANDS

MORE THAN

HALF

COARSE

FRACTION IS

FINER THAN

NO. 4 SIEVE

SIZE

C O

A R

S E

-G R

A

IN

E D

S O

IL

S

M O

R E

T H

A N

H A

LF

IS

C O

A R

S E

R T

H A

N N

O . 2

S

IE

V

E

MAJOR DIVISIONS

GW

GP

GM

GC

SW

SP

SP-SM

SM

SC

ML

CL

OL

MH

CH

OH

PT/OL

INORGANIC SILTS OF LOW TO

MEDIUM PLASTICITY WITH OR

WITHOUT SAND OR GRAVEL

INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO

MEDIUM PLASTICITY WITH OR

WITHOUT SAND OR GRAVEL

ORGANIC SILTS OR CLAYS OF

LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY

WITH OR WITHOUT SAND OR

GRAVEL

INORGANIC SILTS OF HIGH

PLASTICITY WITH OR WITHOUT

SAND OR GRAVEL

INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH

PLASTICITY WITH OR WITHOUT

SAND OR GRAVEL

SILTY SANDS WITH OR

WITHOUT GRAVEL

PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY

ORGANIC SOILS

F

IN

E -G

R A

IN

E

D S

O

IL

S M

O R

E T

H A

N H

A

LF

IS

F

IN

E

R T

H A

N N

O . 2

S

IE

V

E

SILTS AND CLAYS

LIQUID LIMIT 50% OR LESS

SILTS AND CLAYS

LIQUID LIMIT GREATER

THAN 50%

HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS

3. Preserved soil samples will be discarded after 60 days unless alternate arrangements have been made.

2. "Grades with" or "Grades without" may be used to describe soil when characteristics vary within a stratum.

SPT Blow CountDescriptive Terms

< 2 2 to 4 4 to 8 8 to 15 15 to 30 > 30

< 0.25

0.25 to 0.5

0.5 to 1.0

1.0 to 2.0

2.0 to 4.0 > 4.0

Very soft Soft Medium stiff Stiff Very stiff Hard

Unconfined Compressive

TRACE

FEW

LITTLE

SOME

MOSTLY

LIQUID LIMIT (LL)

P

LA

S T

IC

IT

Y I

N D

E X

P

I)

SAMPLE TYPES AND NUMBERING

U Shelby tube sample, ASTM D1587

R Rock core run

1. Classifications are based on the United Soil Classification System and include consistency, moisture, and color. Field descriptions have been modified to reflect results of laboratory tests where deemed appropriate.

S Other than 2" split barrel sample

L SPT with liner, ASTM D1586

A Auger cuttings

G Geoprobe liner

C U

D

FINE-GRAINED SOILS (major portions passing on No. 200 sieve): includes (1) inorganic and organic silts and clays, (2) gravelly, sandy, or silty clays, and (3) clayey silts. Consistency is rated according to shearing strength, as indicated by penetrometer readings, SPT blow count, or unconfined compression tests.

>12"

12" to 3"

3" to 0.75"

0.75" to No. 4

No. 4 to No. 10

No. 10 to No.40

No. 40 to No. 200

60D greater than 4; between 1 and 3 between 1 and 3

D 10 x D60

30D C

C

60Dx10D

10D 60D

C C

( D 30 )2 greater than 6;=C U

( )2

S SPT, split barrel sample, ASTM D1586

Per ASTM D2487, the following conditions must be met based on laboratory testing to justify the label 'well graded' in a soil description.

Gravel:

Sand:

BOULDER

COBBLE

COARSE GRAVEL

FINE GRAVEL

COARSE SAND

MEDIUM SAND

FINE SAND

BORING LOG TERMINOLOGY AND ASTM D 2488

CLASSIFICATION OUTLINE

During - indicates water level encountered during the boring End- indicates water level immediately after drilling Date and Depth - Measurements at indicated date

GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS:

ML OL

OR

ORCL

OL

MH OH

OR

CL-ML

"A " L

IN

E"U

" L

IN

E

CH

OH

OR

Strength TSF

3" HMA

10" Gravel Base

Light brown silty SAND with gravel; mostly fine sand, some silty fines, little fine gravel, moist

Grades without gravel at 2.0'

End of Boring

3"

13"

3.8'

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100%

Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

766.3 ft

N=538956.2 E=12924660.9 (MI South ift)

Notes:

Datum:

Depth Drilled: 3.8 ft.

Location:

NA

Tooling Type Dia.

Core

Auger

Diamond 4"

Hand 3 1/4"JO

Date: 12/28/2022

Rev. By:

Plugging Record:

Elevation:

Gravel Base

Concrete

HMA

NAMD

Client:

Coordinates:

Subbase

Performed By:

NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Core/Hand AugerDrill Type:

Project:

Ionia, Michigan

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility Improvements

Pavement Section (in)

None

HMA core in poor condition with vertical crack running through entire core, partial horizontal at 1.5"delamination.

Auger refusal at 3.8' due to possible coarse gravel / COBBLE. Frost to 1.3'

C-1

LOG

OF

Core Photograph

Project No.:

Boring No.:

Sheet:

* Visual estimate following ASTM D 2488 unless laboratory testing has been performed. Stratification changes are approximated between samples.

Water Level During Drilling:

Pavement Condition:

Laboratory Results:

Remarks:

221564

CORING

14" Gravel Base

Brown clayey SAND; mostly fine sand, some clayey fines, trace fine gravel, moist

Brown silty SAND; mostly fine sand, some silty fines, few fine gravel, moist

End of Boring

3"

17"

3.0'

4.2'

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100%

Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

764.9 ft

N=539251 E=12924713.2 (MI South ift)

Notes:

Datum:

Depth Drilled: 4.2 ft.

Location:

NA

Tooling Type Dia.

Core

Auger

Diamond 4"

Hand 3 1/4"JO

Date: 12/28/2022

Rev. By:

Plugging Record:

Elevation:

Gravel Base

Concrete

HMA

NAMD

Client:

Coordinates:

Subbase

Performed By:

NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Core/Hand AugerDrill Type:

Project:

Ionia, Michigan

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility Improvements

Pavement Section (in)

None

HMA core in good condition.

Auger refusal at 4.2' due to possible coarse gravel / COBBLE. Frost to 1.4'

C-2

LOG

OF

Core Photograph

Project No.:

Boring No.:

Sheet:

* Visual estimate following ASTM D 2488 unless laboratory testing has been performed. Stratification changes are approximated between samples.

Water Level During Drilling:

Pavement Condition:

Laboratory Results:

Remarks:

2 1/2" HMA

10 1/2" Gravel Base

Light brown poorly graded SAND; mostly medium to fine sand, trace silty fines, trace fine gravel, moist Brown lean CLAY with sand; mostly clayey fines, little fine sand, trace fine gravel, moist

Light brown sandy SILT; mostly silty fines, some fine sand, few fine gravel, moist

End of Boring

2.5"

13"

20.5"

3.7'

4.4'

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100%

Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

765.0 ft

N=539780.6 E=12925073.4 (MI South ift)

Notes:

Datum:

Depth Drilled: 4.4 ft.

Location:

10 1/2

2 1/2

7 1/2

Tooling Type Dia.

Core

Auger

Diamond 4"

Hand 3 1/4"JO

Date: 12/29/2022

Rev. By:

Plugging Record:

Elevation:

Gravel Base

Concrete

HMA

NAMD

Client:

Coordinates:

Subbase

Performed By:

NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Core/Hand AugerDrill Type:

Project:

Ionia, Michigan

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility Improvements

Pavement Section (in)

None

HMA core in good conditon.

Auger refusal at 4.4' due to possible coarse gravel / COBBLE. Frost to 1.1'

C-3

LOG

OF

Core Photograph

Project No.:

Boring No.:

Sheet:

* Visual estimate following ASTM D 2488 unless laboratory testing has been performed. Stratification changes are approximated between samples.

Water Level During Drilling:

Pavement Condition:

Laboratory Results:

Remarks:

3 1/2" HMA

11 1/2" Gravel Base

Light brown poorly graded SAND; mostly coarse to fine sand, trace silty fines, few fine gravel, moist

Gray brown poorly graded GRAVEL; mostly coarse to fine gravel, few coarse to fine sand, moist End of Boring

3.5"

14"

28.5" 2.5'

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100%

Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

761.6 ft

N=539945.6 E=12925272.8 (MI South ift)

Notes:

Datum:

Depth Drilled: 2.5 ft.

Location:

11 1/2

3 1/2

13 1/2

Tooling Type Dia.

Core

Auger

Diamond 4"

Hand 3 1/4"JO

Date: 12/28/2022

Rev. By:

Plugging Record:

Elevation:

Gravel Base

Concrete

HMA

NAMD

Client:

Coordinates:

Subbase

Performed By:

NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Core/Hand AugerDrill Type:

Project:

Ionia, Michigan

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility Improvements

Pavement Section (in)

None

HMA core in good condition.

Auger refusal at 2.5' due to possible coarse gravel / COBBLE. Frost to 1.6'

C-4

LOG

OF

Core Photograph

Project No.:

Boring No.:

Sheet:

* Visual estimate following ASTM D 2488 unless laboratory testing has been performed. Stratification changes are approximated between samples.

Water Level During Drilling:

Pavement Condition:

Laboratory Results:

Remarks:

3 1/4" HMA

9 3/4" Gravel Base

Light brown silty SAND; mostly fine sand, some silty fines, few fine gravel, moist

End of Boring

3.3"

13"

2.2'

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100%

Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

763.9 ft

N=539819.4 E=12925498.9 (MI South ift)

Notes:

Datum:

Depth Drilled: 2.2 ft.

Location:

9 3/4

3 1/4

NA

Tooling Type Dia.

Core

Auger

Diamond 4"

Hand 3 1/4"JO

Date: 01/04/2023

Rev. By:

Plugging Record:

Elevation:

Gravel Base

Concrete

HMA

NAMD

Client:

Coordinates:

Subbase

Performed By:

NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Core/Hand AugerDrill Type:

Project:

Ionia, Michigan

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility Improvements

Pavement Section (in)

None

HMA core in poor condition, core broke apart during coring.

Auger refusal at 2.2' due to possible coarse gravel / COBBLE.

C-5

LOG

OF

Core Photograph

Project No.:

Boring No.:

Sheet:

* Visual estimate following ASTM D 2488 unless laboratory testing has been performed. Stratification changes are approximated between samples.

Water Level During Drilling:

Pavement Condition:

Laboratory Results:

Remarks:

2 3/4" HMA

10 1/4" Gravel Base

Light brown poorly graded SAND with silt;

mostly fine sand, few silty fines, moist

End of Boring

2.8"

13"

5.0'

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100%

Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

762.2 ft

N=539591 E=12925830.7 (MI South ift)

Notes:

Datum:

Depth Drilled: 5.0 ft.

Location:

10 1/4

2 3/4

24+

Tooling Type Dia.

Core

Auger

Diamond 4"

Hand 3 1/4"JO

Date: 01/04/2023

Rev. By:

Plugging Record:

Elevation:

Gravel Base

Concrete

HMA

NAMD

Client:

Coordinates:

Subbase

Performed By:

NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Core/Hand AugerDrill Type:

Project:

Ionia, Michigan

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility Improvements

Pavement Section (in)

None

HMA core in good condition.

C-6

LOG

OF

Core Photograph

Project No.:

Boring No.:

Sheet:

* Visual estimate following ASTM D 2488 unless laboratory testing has been performed. Stratification changes are approximated between samples.

Water Level During Drilling:

Pavement Condition:

Laboratory Results:

Remarks:

5 1/2" HMA

8" Gravel Base

Brown poorly graded SAND with silt; mostly fine sand, few silty fines, moist

Brown silty SAND; mostly fine sand, some silty fines, moist with occasional coarse gravel and clayey lenses

Grades dark brown at 3.3'

Grades brown at 4.0'

End of Boring

5.5"

13.5"

26.5"

5.0'

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100%

Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

704.0 ft

N=539625.2 E=12927503 (MI South ift)

Notes:

Datum:

Depth Drilled: 5.0 ft.

Location:

5 1/2

Tooling Type Dia.

Core

Auger

Diamond 4"

Hand 3 1/4"JO

Date: 12/29/2022

Rev. By:

Plugging Record:

Elevation:

Gravel Base

Concrete

HMA

NAMD

Client:

Coordinates:

Subbase

Performed By:

NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Core/Hand AugerDrill Type:

Project:

Ionia, Michigan

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility Improvements

Pavement Section (in)

None

HMA core in good condition.

C-7

LOG

OF

Core Photograph

Project No.:

Boring No.:

Sheet:

* Visual estimate following ASTM D 2488 unless laboratory testing has been performed. Stratification changes are approximated between samples.

Water Level During Drilling:

Pavement Condition:

Laboratory Results:

Remarks:

3 1/4" HMA

5 3/4" Gravel Base

Brown poorly graded SAND; mostly coarse to fine sand, trace silty fines, trace fine gravel, moist

Grades with few fine gravel

Grades with little fine gravel

End of Boring

3.3"

9"

5.0'

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100%

Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

689.9 ft

N=539425 E=12927967.4 (MI South ift)

Notes:

Datum:

Depth Drilled: 5.0 ft.

Location:

5 3/4

3 1/4

24+

Tooling Type Dia.

Core

Auger

Diamond 4"

Hand 3 1/4"JO

Date: 12/29/2022

Rev. By:

Plugging Record:

Elevation:

Gravel Base

Concrete

HMA

NAMD

Client:

Coordinates:

Subbase

Performed By:

NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Core/Hand AugerDrill Type:

Project:

Ionia, Michigan

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility Improvements

Pavement Section (in)

None

HMA core in good condition.

Frost to 1.6'

C-8

LOG

OF

Core Photograph

Project No.:

Boring No.:

Sheet:

* Visual estimate following ASTM D 2488 unless laboratory testing has been performed. Stratification changes are approximated between samples.

Water Level During Drilling:

Pavement Condition:

Laboratory Results:

Remarks:

2 1/2" HMA

12" Gravel Base

Brown silty SAND; mostly fine sand, some silty fines, few fine gravel, moist

End of Boring

2.5"

14.5"

3.5'

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100%

Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

764.8 ft

N=539405.9 E=12925356.1 (MI South ift)

Notes:

Datum:

Depth Drilled: 3.5 ft.

Location:

2 1/2

NA

Tooling Type Dia.

Core

Auger

Diamond 4"

Hand 3 1/4"JO

Date: 01/04/2023

Rev. By:

Plugging Record:

Elevation:

Gravel Base

Concrete

HMA

NAMD

Client:

Coordinates:

Subbase

Performed By:

NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Core/Hand AugerDrill Type:

Project:

Ionia, Michigan

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility Improvements

Pavement Section (in)

None

HMA core in poor condition, with vertical crack through entire core and moderate to severe pitting throughout

Auger refusal at 3.5' due to possible coarse gravel / COBBLE.

C-9

LOG

OF

Core Photograph

Project No.:

Boring No.:

Sheet:

* Visual estimate following ASTM D 2488 unless laboratory testing has been performed. Stratification changes are approximated between samples.

Water Level During Drilling:

Pavement Condition:

Laboratory Results:

Remarks:

4 3/4" Concrete

Brown poorly graded SAND; mostly coarse to fine sand, trace silty fines, trace fine gravel, wet Light brown silty SAND; mostly fine sand, some silty fines, wet

End of Boring

4.8" 8"

2.5'

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100%

Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

759.8 ft

N=539235.7 E=12926116.9 (MI South ift)

Notes:

Datum:

Depth Drilled: 2.5 ft.

Location:

NA

NA

3 1/4

Tooling Type Dia.

Core

Auger

Diamond 4"

Hand 3 1/4"JO

Date: 01/04/2023

Rev. By:

Plugging Record:

Elevation:

Gravel Base

Concrete

HMA

4 3/4MD

Client:

Coordinates:

Subbase

Performed By:

NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Core/Hand AugerDrill Type:

Project:

Ionia, Michigan

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility Improvements

Pavement Section (in)

0.5'

Concrete core in good condition.

Auger refusal at 2.5' due to possible coarse gravel / COBBLE.

C-10

LOG

OF

Core Photograph

Project No.:

Boring No.:

Sheet:

* Visual estimate following ASTM D 2488 unless laboratory testing has been performed. Stratification changes are approximated between samples.

Water Level During Drilling:

Pavement Condition:

Laboratory Results:

Remarks:

2 3/4" HMA

5 1/4" Gravel Base

Brown poorly graded SAND; mostly medium to fine sand, few fine gravel, trace silty fines, moist

Brown silty SAND; mostly fine sand, some silty fine, few fine gravel, moist

Grades wet at 3.5 End of Boring

2.8"

8"

20"

3.5'

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100%

Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

762.7 ft

N=539093.7 E=12925833.6 (MI South ift)

Notes:

Datum:

Depth Drilled: 3.5…