22271 Addendum 1 Pavement Report.pdf

REPORT OF PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION

NEWBERRY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION

NEWBERRY, MICHIGAN

Prepared For:

BECKETT & RAEDER, INC.

Prepared By:

MATERIALS TESTING CONSULTANTS, INC.

November 2022

MTC Project No. 221427

November 1, 2022

Project No. 221427

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

535 West William Street, Suite 101

Ann Arbor, Michigan 48103

Attention: John Beckett

Reference: Report of Pavement Investigation

Newberry Correctional Facility Pavement Investigation

Newberry, Michigan

Dear Mr. Beckett:

We have completed a pavement investigation for the above-referenced project. The purpose of this investigation has been to perform discrete pavement cores and test borings in the vicinity of the proposed parking lot and road rehabilitation, present the results and to provide recommendations for the design and rehabilitation of pavements. This work has been performed as described in our proposal dated September 2, 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 pavement boring plan showing the requested boring locations provided by Mr. John

Beckett of Beckett and Raeder, Inc. on August 31, 2022.

• Telephone and email correspondence with Mr. John Beckett and Mr. Kristofer Enlow, P.E.

of Beckett and Raeder, Inc. regarding the project details, boring locations and scope of investigation.

Report of Pavement Investigation

Project Scope

The proposed construction will be located in plan as shown on Figure No. 1. The site is located at the existing Newberry Correctional Facility located at address 13747 East County Road 428 in Newberry, Michigan.

The construction will in general consist of pavement rehabilitation to the entrance drives of

1st Street, Center Avenue and State Street, interior and perimeter roads to the facility, parking lots surrounding the correctional facility and recreational lots within the facility. Site improvements are also expected to include the expansion of the central parking lot to the east to State Street and a possible reduction in street width to the three-lane drive between State

Street and 1st Street near the receiving facility. We understand the building shown between the two sections of State Street on existing Google Earth imagery has been demolished and a new pavement section is expected to be constructed to allow State Street to be continuous through the center of the site. We understand the preferred pavement reconstruction would consist of removal of some or all existing HMA or concrete and placement of new pavement over the existing base material.

Traffic is expected to consist of relatively light passenger vehicles for 1st Street and State

Street with only occasional heavier axle wheel loading from trucks for deliveries, refuse pickup, etc. We understand the pavement along 1st Street at the northeast portion of the site and extending south to the receiving facility will experience the majority of the heavier-axle wheel loading as the primary truck route. We have considered that the parking lots and entry drives will experience a design loading of no more than 500 vehicles per day. We have considered that the interior and perimeter roads of the facility will not undergo frequent loading as the roads are typically only used for patrol vehicles. Traffic on the walking track at the north of the site is expected to be limited to pedestrian traffic.

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

INVESTIGATION METHODOLOGY

Pavement cores, hand auger soil borings and sampling along with field engineering reconnaissance were used to investigate the subsurface conditions. Boring locations are shown on Figure No. 1. Investigation procedures, soil classification information and boring logs are provided in the Appendix.

Number of Borings 18

Boring Depth Range, ft. 5.0 - 6.7

One of our engineers staked the approximate boring locations in the field. Boring elevations and coordinates were collected by GPS. The elevations used in this report are given in feet and are based on the NAVD 88 datum, with coordinates given in the Michigan State Plane

North system. Site reconnaissance was performed by our field engineer.

Borings were performed at requested locations through 4-inch diameter cores using a 3 1/4-inch diameter hand auger. Grab samples were recovered from the auger at regular intervals.

The boreholes were backfilled to the original ground surface and patched at the surface with cold patch after drilling completion, where necessary. Recovered samples were sealed, labeled and transported to our laboratory. All soil samples will be discarded after sixty days unless a longer hold time is specifically requested.

Borings were drilled 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.

Soil samples were reviewed by one of our engineers and technically classified according to the methods of ASTM D 2488 "Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-

Manual Procedure)". The ASTM D2488 classifications are included on the boring logs.

INVESTIGATION RESULTS

In general, the pavement sections across the site were observed to be in fair to very poor condition with asphalt thicknesses ranging from 1 to 3 1/2 inches across the site. Concrete pavement was encountered with a thickness of 6 3/4 inches within the footprint of the interior recreational court and ranging from 5 1/2 to 5 3/4 inches along the entrance drive of 1st

Street. Gravel base was encountered in all borings except for Borings B-7 and B-11. The encountered gravel base thicknesses ranged from 4 1/2 to 11 inches. Less than 6 inches of gravel base was encountered in Boring B-13. Based on visual observations, the gravel base encountered in the borings generally appeared to be a natural aggregate, with the exception of Borings B-12 and B-16, which appeared to be a crushed limestone aggregate.

The following table lists the surficial findings at each boring location.

Boring

HMA

Thickness (in)

Concrete

Thickness (in)

Gravel Base

Thickness (in)

B-1 3 - 8

B-2 1 3/4 - 3 1/2

B-3 - - 8

B-4 2 - 11

B-5 2 1/2 - 11

B-6 3 1/4 - 7

B-7 - 6 3/4 -

B-8 3 1/2 - 5

November 1, 2022

Boring

HMA

Thickness (in)

Concrete

Thickness (in)

Gravel Base

Thickness (in)

B-9 3 1/2 - 8

B-10 3 - 10

B-11 9" Sandy Topsoil

B-12 2 1/4 5 1/2 6

B-13 1 3/4 - 5

B-14 1 5 3/4 7

B-15 1 1/2 - 9

B-16 1 1/4 5 1/2 4 1/2

B-17 3 1/4 - 8

B-18 2 - 8

Beneath the pavement sections or surficial material, the subgrade generally consisted of poorly graded sand with varying amounts of silty fines (SP, SP-SM, SM) to the explored depths of 5.0 to 6.7 ft (els 871.5 to 893.6 ft). Listed below are summaries of the encountered subsurface conditions, as well as pavement observations, within each area of the site. The boring logs located in the Appendix should be reviewed for detailed soil descriptions. Some variation between boring locations is to be expected.

Surface drainage throughout the site appeared to be facilitated through positive drainage to outer pavement edges. No curb and gutter were observed along the pavement edges. The pavement surfaces appeared to be relatively flat, with only minimal site grading to promote drainage to the outer grass areas. Depressions in the pavement were observed in areas where block, edge and alligator cracking has occurred, creating low areas for water to accumulate. Original design plans were not provided for the site.

Perimeter Roads/Trails – Borings B-1, B-3 and B-5

Borings B-1 and B-5 generally encountered 2 1/2 to 3 inches of HMA, while Boring B-3 did not encounter any

HMA.

Borings B-1, B-3, and B-5 generally encountered 8 to 11 inches of gravel or gravel base and poorly graded sand with varying amounts of silty fines (SP, SP-SM) to the explored depths of 5.0 ft (els 887.4 to 893.6 ft).

Pedestrian Trail – Boring B-2

Boring B-2 encountered 1 3/4 inches of HMA and 3 1/2 inches of gravel base at the surface.

Beneath the pavement section, Boring B-2 encountered poorly graded sand (SP) to the explored depth of 5.0 ft (el 892.9 ft).

Perimeter Road near Boring B-5

Interior Service Road – Borings B-4, B-6 and B-9

Borings B-4, B-6 and B-9 generally encountered 2 to 3 1/2 inches of HMA and 7 to 11 inches of gravel base at the surface. Boring B-9 encountered possible fill, consisting of poorly graded sand with silt (SP-SM), to a depth of 2.3 ft (el 890.1 ft). Beneath the surficial fill and pavement section, the borings generally encountered poorly graded sand with varying amounts of silty fines (SP, SP-SM) to the explored depths of 5.0 ft (els 887.4 to 890.2 ft).

Interior Recreational Courts – Borings B-7 and B-8

Boring B-7 was drilled with the footprint of the northern interior recreational area and encountered 6 3/4 inches of concrete at the surface. Boring B-8, drilled within the footprint of the southern interior recreational area, encountered 3 1/2 inches of HMA and 5 inches of gravel base. Boring B-8 encountered fill, consisting of poorly graded sand with varying amounts of silty fines (SP, SP-SM), to a depth of 2.2 ft (el 893.8 ft). The fill appeared to contain brick debris. Due to the debris encountered, we have considered that this fill was likely placed in an uncontrolled manner.

Beneath the surficial material and pavement sections, Borings B-7 and B-8 generally encountered poorly graded sand with varying amounts of silty fines (SP, SP-SM) to the explored depths of 5.0 ft (els 888.7 to 890.0 ft).

Employee Parking Lot (Central) – Borings B-10 and B-11

Boring B-10 was drilled within the footprint of the existing employee parking lot and encountered 3 inches of HMA and

10 inches of gravel base at the surface. Boring B-10 encountered fill, consisting of dark brown silty sand (SM) and appearing to contain occasional asphalt debris, to a depth of

1.7 ft (el 890.0 ft). Due to the debris encountered, we have considered that this fill was likely placed in an uncontrolled manner.

Boring B-11, drilled within the proposed expansion area of the employee parking lot, encountered 9 inches of sandy topsoil at the surface. Beneath the surficial materials and fill, Borings B-10 and B-11 generally encountered poorly graded sand (SP) to the explored depths of 5.0 ft (els 886.1 to 886.7 ft). Boring

B-11 encountered occasional root fragments at depths ranging from 0.8 to

1.5 ft (els 889.6 to 890.3 ft).

Proposed Expansion Area (B-11)

Employee Parking Lot (B-10)

Receiving Area – Borings B-12, B-14 and B-16

Borings B-12, B-14 and B-16 generally encountered 1 to 2 1/4 inches of HMA, 5 1/2 to 5 3/4 inches of concrete and 4 1/2 to 7 inches of gravel base. Boring B-12 encountered 6 inches of crushed gravel base at the surface. Boring B-14 encountered a 3/8-inch reinforcement bar at 4 inches below the pavement surface. Borings B-14 and B-16 generally encountered fill, consisting of dark brown poorly graded sand with varying amounts of silty fines and gravel

(SP, SP-SM), to depths ranging from 1.4 to 2.7 ft (els 875.1 to 884.3 ft). The fill in Boring B-

16 appeared to contain glass debris. Due to the glass debris encountered in Boring B-16, we have considered that this fill was likely placed in an uncontrolled manner.

Beneath the surficial material and fill, Borings B-12, B-14 and B-16 generally encountered brown poorly graded sand with varying amounts of silty fines (SP, SP-SM) to the explored depths ranging from 5.0 to 6.7 ft (els 871.5 to 882.0 ft). Boring B-12 encountered occasional root fragments at depths ranging from 4.5 to 5.5 ft (els 881.3 to 882.3 ft).

South Parking Lots – Borings B-13 and B-15

Borings B-13 and B-15 generally encountered

1 1/2 to 1 3/4 inches of HMA and 5 to 9 inches of gravel base at the surface. Borings

B-13 and B-15 encountered fill, consisting of brown to dark brown poorly graded sand with varying amounts of silty fines (SP, SP-SM), to depths ranging from 2.0 to 5.7 ft (els 881.0 to 885.6 ft). The fill appeared to contain occasional brick and frequent slag debris.

Due to the debris encountered, we have considered that this fill was likely placed in an uncontrolled manner.

1st Street Receiving Area (B-16) View East near Boring B-12

View West near Boring B-13

Beneath the surficial material and uncontrolled fill, Borings B-13 and B-15 encountered brown poorly graded sand with varying amounts of silty fines (SP, SP-SM) to the explored depths of

5.0 to 6.0 ft (els 880.7 to 882.6 ft).

State Street – Borings B-17 and B-18

Borings B-17 and B-18 generally encountered 2 to 3 1/4 inches of HMA and 8 inches of gravel base at the surface. Boring B-18 encountered possible fill, consisting of poorly graded sand

(SP) to a depth of 1.5 ft (el 889.9 ft).

Beneath the fill and surficial materials, Borings B-17 and B-18 generally encountered brown poorly graded sand (SP) to the explored depths of 5.0 ft (els 885.8 to 886.4 ft).

Groundwater was not encountered during the drilling activities. 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.

PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

During our investigation, pavement in fair to very poor condition was encountered throughout the site. Along 1st Street at the northeast portion of the site and extending south to the receiving facility, cracks generally originated on a transverse pattern, which we expect are related to reflective cracking from the joints in the underlying concrete and potentially due to age related distress due to long-term oxidation of the HMA overlay. Frequent potholes and pothole patches were observed, particularly near lane extents. Rutting observed near the location of Boring B-15, located within the southernmost parking lot, appeared to be due to inadequate pavement thickness. The pavement deterioration observed through other areas of the site appears to be primarily due to the age of the pavements.

Due to the existing pavement conditions and considering long term pavement performance is desired (15 to 25 years), a full-depth asphalt replacement is recommended. Full depth rotomilling of the existing asphalt should be performed until the gravel base is exposed. Prior to placing new asphalt, the existing gravel base should be inspected, with any areas of less than the recommended amount of gravel thickness augmented with MDOT 21AA aggregate.

The aggregate base should be compacted and proof-rolled as described in the “Site and

Subgrade Preparation” section of this report. Following aggregate compaction, the new HMA pavement should be installed.

Given the minimal observed premature deterioration of the pavement sections, we have considered the existing aggregate base will be largely suitable for re-use. Re-use of the existing aggregate base does present some risk of premature pavement deterioration due to potential variations in the aggregate. If the owner can accept no risk of premature pavement deterioration, we recommend removal of existing aggregate base and replacement with MDOT

21AA aggregate. If poor quality aggregate base is suspected based on visual inspection or proof roll results after the HMA surface is removed, we recommend stockpiling and testing the material to determine the material’s gradation and suitability for re-use.

The pavement sections encountered in our investigation were variable between the sampling locations. If a pavement section is encountered during construction that is thinner than anticipated, pavement reconstruction may be required.

Pavement rehabilitation options such as a partial depth asphalt mill and overlay, chip sealing or any other nonstructural overlay are not expected to provide significant extension of the pavement life in areas of poor to very poor pavement condition. There is not expected to be sufficient pavement integrity in areas with less than 2 inches of existing asphalt to support a partial-depth asphalt mill and replacement. In addition, for any overlay, the cracking in pavement that is left in place would be expected to reflect upward through the overlay.

Borings B-10 and B-14 generally encountered silty sand (SM) at depths ranging from 1.1 to

2.7 ft (els 884.3 to 890.6 ft), which may potentially adversely affect pavement performance through expansion and contraction during freeze-thaw cycles. If frost susceptible subgrade soil is encountered, we recommend removal of this soil to a depth below frost penetration (42 inches) and replacement with MDOT Class II engineered fill. Further discussion on remediation of unsuitable subgrade conditions is contained within the following sections.

Our recommended options for addressing the primary deficiencies of the existing pavement section are described below, along with discussion of alternate options which will present varying degrees of pavement life. We have also included information for the design of a concrete pavement option below as requested.

It is important that the recommendations of this report, in particular those pertaining to subgrade preparation, construction observation and testing, be implemented during design and construction.

Recommended Option: Reuse of Existing Aggregate Base

Should the Owner accept the risk of possible poor performance of the pavement section due to variations in the existing aggregate base, the existing aggregate base may be used with the parameters of the following defined full-depth pavement section. If this option is selected, full depth rotomilling of the existing asphalt should be performed until the gravel base is exposed. The existing asphalt may be removed, or a crush-and-shape may be performed whereby the asphalt millings are mixed into the existing gravel in accordance with MDOT specifications. Prior to placing new asphalt, the existing gravel base should be inspected, with any areas of less than the recommended amount of gravel thickness augmented with MDOT

21AA aggregate. The aggregate base should be compacted and proof-rolled as described in the “Site and Subgrade Preparation” section of this report. Following aggregate compaction, the new HMA pavement should be installed.

Alternative Option: Full-Depth Reconstruction of Asphalt Pavement Section and Construction of New Pavements

Full-depth reconstruction involves removal of existing asphalt and aggregate base and replacement of the entire pavement section. Subgrade preparation in reconstructed and proposed pavement areas should be as described in the "Site and Subgrade Preparation" section of this report.

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

The design recommendations provided are based on the following:

Flexible Pavement Basis of Design

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:

Flexible Pavement Section

Traffic Condition Standard Duty Heavy Duty

Sand subbase thickness, inches 10 12

Aggregate base thickness, inches 6 10

Bituminous leveling course thickness, inches 2.0 3.0

Bituminous wearing course thickness, inches 1.5 2.0

The following materials are recommended:

Flexible Pavement Materials

Material Standard Duty Heavy Duty

Sand subbase MDOT Class II granular MDOT Class II granular

Aggregate base MDOT 21AA MDOT 21AA

Bituminous leveling MDOT 13A MDOT 3C

Bituminous wearing MDOT 36A MDOT 4C

November 1, 2022

Sand subbase material should be laboratory tested to confirm MDOT Class II grading requirement. The binder grade should be a minimum PG 58-34. MDOT standard specifications for materials and placement should be observed.

It is recommended that cracks that may develop in the pavement be quickly and properly sealed through a regular maintenance program. Also, 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.

Alternative Option: Partial-Depth Replacement of Asphalt Pavement Section

We understand that an option for partial-depth replacement of the asphalt has been requested; however, we do not anticipate the pavement remaining after milling will have sufficient integrity to provide a stable base prior to application of the overlay. In most areas of the site, due to the existing pavement thicknesses and the poor to very poor condition of several pavement areas, a partial-depth replacement is not recommended. For portions of the site with more than 2 inches of existing asphalt and where pavement is in fair condition, it may be possible to utilize a partial-depth replacement of the existing asphalt, should a shorter pavement life span than our recommended section be acceptable to the Owner.

If partial depth replacement is selected for pavement in fair condition, we recommend replacing at least 1.5 inches of existing asphalt with an MDOT 36A wearing course with binder grade a minimum of PG 58-34. The wearing course lift should be placed and compacted in order to match the existing grades of the adjacent pavement surfaces.

Alternate Option: Asphalt Overlay or Chip Seal

We understand that an option for an asphalt overlay may be considered; however, it is not recommended as it is expected that an asphalt overlay will undergo early deterioration due to the poor to very poor condition of the existing pavement. Reflective cracking from the cracks already existing in the pavement is anticipated to appear within the overlay within 1 to 3 years after application.

Chip sealing is a type of overlay that involves placement of aggregate onto the pavement surface after it has been prepared with liquid asphalt binder. On a pavement in good to fair condition, a chip seal may extend the pavement life by 3 to 5 years; however, it is expected to have significantly less utility on pavements in poor to very poor condition such as those generally encountered in this investigation.

Rigid Pavement

Subgrade preparation should be as described in the “Site and Subgrade Preparation” section of this report. For design of rigid pavements supported on-grade, a modulus of subgrade reaction value, K30, of 100 psi/inch is recommended. A minimum concrete thickness of 5.5 inches is recommended. A plain jointed (unreinforced) concrete pavement with proper spacing of control joints is recommended. Load transfer devices (dowel bars) are not expected to be necessary given the expected axle loadings from primarily passenger vehicles.

A minimum 6-in base of MDOT Class II sand should be placed underneath the concrete. The concrete strength should be designed for a minimum modulus of rupture, S'c, of 600 psi and the concrete should be air-entrained. The pavement should be properly jointed (sawcut) with the joints sealed. A jointing plan should be prepared as part of the design. Typically, joints are placed every 12 to 15 ft with the sawcut extending approximately 1/4 of the pavement depth.

Site and Subgrade Preparation

All topsoil, vegetation, roots and any other miscellaneous debris should be removed from within the proposed construction areas. The limits of the proposed construction area, prior to the placement of any structures or engineered fill material, should be proof-rolled by the contractor and, where granular soil is present, compacted to at least 95 percent of the soil's maximum ASTM D1557 dry density. Proof-rolling is defined as the passing of relatively heavy construction equipment over the soil subgrade under observation by the Geotechnical

Engineer. The response of the soil, when subjected to the applied load, is subjectively evaluated by qualified geotechnical personnel with respect to its ability to support the overlying soil or structure. In areas where excessive deflection is observed, special subgrade preparation measures may be recommended to provide an acceptable subgrade condition.

These measures may consist of compaction of the subgrade at moisture contents close to the optimum value, undercutting affected areas and replacing with engineered fill, use of a geotextile separation fabric or some combination of these measures.

Borings B-10 and B-14 generally encountered silty sand (SM) at depths ranging from 1.1 to

2.7 ft (els 884.3 to 890.6 ft). Silty sand (SM) is considered potentially frost susceptible. Frost susceptible soil may adversely affect pavement performance through expansion and contraction during freeze-thaw cycles (frost heave). Per the MDOT Geotechnical Manual, frost susceptible soil is composed of silts, fine silty sand and clays with a high percentage of silt particles. Frost susceptible soil is defined as soil with 50 percent silt particles or more and a plasticity index less than 10. Subgrades consisting of silty sand, as encountered in Borings

B-10 and B-14, present a potential frost susceptibility risk, depending on its silt content. If frost susceptible subgrade soil is encountered, we recommend removal of this soil to a depth below frost penetration (42 inches) and replacement with MDOT Class II engineered fill if the

Owner is unwilling to accept risk associated with potential premature pavement distress.

Borings B-8 to B-10, B-13 to B-16 and B-18 generally encountered fill, or possible fill, to depths ranging from 1.4 to 2.7 ft (els 875.1 to 893.8 ft), with the exception of Boring B-15 which encountered fill to a depth of 5.7 ft (el 881.0 ft). Due to the miscellaneous fill conditions encountered in the field investigation, including possible fill and uncontrolled urban fill, and due to variations that may exist between borings, it is possible that some form of subgrade improvement may be required. Fill material may be acceptable to be left in place provided it is sufficiently stable during proof rolling and is free of large debris and significant organic material.

Engineered fill is approved on-site or imported soil placed in uniform layers and compacted to a minimum required density. Generally, on-site soil with group symbols of SP or SP-SM are expected to be suitable for engineered fill. Imported fill should meet the requirements for

MDOT Class II granular material.

Granular engineered fill and backfill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the soil's maximum dry density as determined by the Modified Proctor test (ASTM D 1557). Vibratory compaction methods are typically found to be most effective in granular soils.

The fill should be placed and compacted in horizontal layers not exceeding 9 inches. Field density tests (ASTM D 2922) should be taken on each lift, as the fill is being placed, to verify compliance with compaction specifications. If the earthwork takes place during winter months, fill must not be placed on frozen ground and fill with frozen conglomerations of soil must not be used.

Because the site has been previously developed, there may be buried items not encountered in our borings, such as a utility conduit, which may cause settlement problems. The contract documents should reflect that it is necessary to remove or relocate such structures and to fill the excavation with engineered fill. Large roots should also be removed from beneath new pavements, where encountered.

Groundwater

Groundwater was generally not encountered in the borings during drilling operations.

Because groundwater was not encountered, the control of groundwater is not expected to be of significant concern on this project.

CLOSURE

In this report, descriptions of the geotechnical investigation, encountered conditions and recommendations for pavement reconstruction 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.

Ryan D. Starcher, E.I.T.

Project Engineer

Robert J. Warren, P.E.

Project Manager

Attachments: Figure No. 1 - Boring Location Plan

Appendix

- Limitations

- Test Drilling and Sampling Procedures

- Boring Log Terminology and Classification Outline

- Boring Logs

- Core Photo Logs

TITLE: BORING LOCATION PLAN PROJECT: NEWBERRY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION

SCALE: AS SHOWN DATE: 11/1/2022 PROJECT NO.: 221427

FIG. NO.: 1 DR. BY: RS REV. BY: RW

LEGEND

BORING LOCATION (TYP)

NOTE: AERIAL IMAGE FROM GOOGLE EARTH

B-1

NEWBERRY CORRECTIONAL

FACILITY

13747 CO RD 428

NEWBERRY, MI 49868

B-2

B-5

B-6

B-4

B-9

B-8

B-7

B-10 B-11

B-18

B-13

B-15

B-14

B-12

B-3

B-17

B-16

E WILLOW ST

1ST ST

S

T S

T

N E

W B

E R

R Y

A V

E N

E W

B E

R R

Y A

V E

N PRISON RD

CENTER AVE

C E

N T

E R

A V

E

S T

A T

E S

T

APPENDIX

• Limitations

• Test Drilling and Sampling Procedures

• Boring Log Terminology and Classification Outline

• Boring Logs

• Core Photo Logs

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 Core/Hand Auger

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)

X Grab Samples

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:

CME 55 LC (ATV)

CME 750 Rubber tired (ATV)

CME 95 Truck

Geoprobe Direct Push

Geoprobe Rotary Sonic

Boreholes Backfilled With:

X Excavated soil

Cement bentonite grout

Piezometer or Monitoring Well (see notes on logs)

X Concrete or asphalt patch where appropriate

Sample Handling and Disposition:

X Samples labeled, placed in jars, 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

0.3

0.9

5.0

3" HMA

8" Gravel Base

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

End of Boring

A-1

SP

3 1/4" During

DateElevation: NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Plugging Record: Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

09/28/2022

Type

End

Tube

Sampler

Hand Auger

Location:

NA

Dia. Groundwater, ft.

Depth, ft.

Notes:

Datum:

Drill Type:

Crew Chief:

Project:

Depth Drilled: 5.0 ft.

Seepage

Date Begin:

Core

Newberry, Michigan

Casing

Tooling

Coordinates:

898.6 ft

Client:

SPT Hammer

None

Date End: 09/28/2022

Hand Auger

Field Eng.: JS Rev. By: RS N=568266.6 E=26623598.5 (MI South ift)

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Newberry Correctional Facility Pavement Investigation

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100% QP = Calibrated Penetrometer (tons/sq. ft.)

Elev.

FT. MST

REMARKS

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

DD

pcf

Boring No.:

B-1

QP

tsf

Project No.:LOG

OF

BORING Sheet:

*DESCRIPTION

Sample

Number

Recov.

FT.

Dyn. Cone

Eq. "N":

ASTM STP 399

*USCS

Group

Symbol

221427

Depth

FT.

898.4

898.1

897.9

897.6

897.4

897.1

896.9

896.6

896.4

896.1

895.9

895.6

895.4

895.1

894.9

894.6

894.4

894.1

893.9

893.6

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

2.25

2.50

2.75

3.00

3.25

3.50

3.75

4.00

4.25

4.50

4.75

5.00

0.1

0.4

5.0

1 3/4" HMA

3 1/2" Gravel Base

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

End of Boring

A-1

SP

3 1/4" During

DateElevation: NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Plugging Record: Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

09/27/2022

Type

End

Tube

Sampler

Hand Auger

Location:

NA

Dia. Groundwater, ft.

Depth, ft.

Notes:

Datum:

Drill Type:

Crew Chief:

Project:

Depth Drilled: 5.0 ft.

Seepage

Date Begin:

Core

Newberry, Michigan

Casing

Tooling

Coordinates:

897.9 ft

Client:

SPT Hammer

None

Date End: 09/27/2022

Hand Auger

Field Eng.: JS Rev. By: RS N=568194.8 E=26623560.7 (MI South ift)

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Newberry Correctional Facility Pavement Investigation

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100% QP = Calibrated Penetrometer (tons/sq. ft.)

Elev.

FT. MST

REMARKS

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

DD

pcf

Boring No.:

B-2

QP

tsf

Project No.:LOG

OF

BORING Sheet:

*DESCRIPTION

Sample

Number

Recov.

FT.

Dyn. Cone

Eq. "N":

ASTM STP 399

*USCS

Group

Symbol

221427

Depth

FT.

897.7

897.4

897.2

896.9

896.7

896.4

896.2

895.9

895.7

895.4

895.2

894.9

894.7

894.4

894.2

893.9

893.7

893.4

893.2

892.9

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

2.25

2.50

2.75

3.00

3.25

3.50

3.75

4.00

4.25

4.50

0.7

1.6

5.0

8" Gravel

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

End of Boring

A-1

A-2

A-3

SP-SM

SP

3 1/4" During

DateElevation: NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Plugging Record: Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings.

09/28/2022

Type

End

Tube

Sampler

Hand Auger

Location:

NA

Dia. Groundwater, ft.

Depth, ft.

Notes:

Datum:

Drill Type:

Crew Chief:

Project:

Depth Drilled: 5.0 ft.

Seepage

Date Begin:

Core

Newberry, Michigan

Casing

Tooling

Coordinates:

894.2 ft

Client:

SPT Hammer

None

Date End: 09/28/2022

Hand Auger

Field Eng.: JS Rev. By: RS N=567934.4 E=26624104.3 (MI South ift)

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Newberry Correctional Facility Pavement Investigation

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100% QP = Calibrated Penetrometer (tons/sq. ft.)

Elev.

FT. MST

REMARKS

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

DD

pcf

Boring No.:

B-3

QP

tsf

Project No.:LOG

OF

BORING Sheet:

*DESCRIPTION

Sample

Number

Recov.

FT.

Dyn. Cone

Eq. "N":

ASTM STP 399

*USCS

Group

Symbol

221427

Depth

FT.

894.0

893.7

893.5

893.2

893.0

892.7

892.5

892.2

892.0

891.7

891.5

891.2

891.0

890.7

890.5

890.2

890.0

889.7

889.5

889.2

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

2.25

2.50

2.75

3.00

3.25

3.50

3.75

4.00

4.25

4.50

4.75

5.00

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

0.2

1.1

1.9

5.0

2" HMA

11" Gravel Base

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

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

Grades with clay seams at 4.8'

End of Boring

A-1

A-2

SP-SM

SP

3 1/4" During

DateElevation: NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Plugging Record: Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

09/27/2022

Type

End

Tube

Sampler

Hand Auger

Location:

NA

Dia. Groundwater, ft.

Depth, ft.

Notes:

Datum:

Drill Type:

Crew Chief:

Project:

Depth Drilled: 5.0 ft.

Seepage

Date Begin:

Core

Newberry, Michigan

Casing

Tooling

Coordinates:

895.2 ft

Client:

SPT Hammer

None

Date End: 09/27/2022

Hand Auger

Field Eng.: JS Rev. By: RS N=567820.9 E=26623552.6 (MI South ift)

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Newberry Correctional Facility Pavement Investigation

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100% QP = Calibrated Penetrometer (tons/sq. ft.)

Elev.

FT. MST

REMARKS

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

DD

pcf

Boring No.:

B-4

QP

tsf

Project No.:LOG

OF

BORING Sheet:

*DESCRIPTION

Sample

Number

Recov.

FT.

Dyn. Cone

Eq. "N":

ASTM STP 399

*USCS

Group

Symbol

221427

Depth

FT.

895.0

894.7

894.5

894.2

894.0

893.7

893.5

893.2

893.0

892.7

892.5

892.2

892.0

891.7

891.5

891.2

891.0

890.7

890.5

890.2

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

2.25

2.50

2.75

3.00

3.25

3.50

3.75

4.00

4.25

4.50

1.9

2.4

5.0

2 1/2" HMA

11" Gravel Base

Gray poorly graded SAND; mostly medium to fine sand, trace silty fines, moist

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

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

End of Boring

A-1

A-2

A-3

A-4

SP

SP-SM

SP

3 1/4" During

DateElevation: NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Plugging Record: Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

09/28/2022

Type

End

Tube

Sampler

Hand Auger

Location:

NA

Dia. Groundwater, ft.

Depth, ft.

Notes:

Datum:

Drill Type:

Crew Chief:

Project:

Depth Drilled: 5.0 ft.

Seepage

Date Begin:

Core

Newberry, Michigan

Casing

Tooling

Coordinates:

892.4 ft

Client:

SPT Hammer

None

Date End: 09/28/2022

Hand Auger

Field Eng.: JS Rev. By: RS N=567682.3 E=26623235.4 (MI South ift)

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Newberry Correctional Facility Pavement Investigation

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100% QP = Calibrated Penetrometer (tons/sq. ft.)

Elev.

FT. MST

REMARKS

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

DD

pcf

Boring No.:

B-5

QP

tsf

Project No.:LOG

OF

BORING Sheet:

*DESCRIPTION

Sample

Number

Recov.

FT.

Dyn. Cone

Eq. "N":

ASTM STP 399

*USCS

Group

Symbol

221427

Depth

FT.

892.2

891.9

891.7

891.4

891.2

890.9

890.7

890.4

890.2

889.9

889.7

889.4

889.2

888.9

888.7

888.4

888.2

887.9

887.7

887.4

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

2.25

2.50

2.75

3.00

3.25

3.50

3.75

4.00

4.25

4.50

1.9

5.0

3 1/4" HMA

7" Gravel Base

Dark brown poorly graded SAND with silt;

mostly fine sand, few silty fines, moist

Grades brown

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

End of Boring

A-1

A-2

SP-SM

SP

3 1/4" During

DateElevation: NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Plugging Record: Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

09/27/2022

Type

End

Tube

Sampler

Hand Auger

Location:

NA

Dia. Groundwater, ft.

Depth, ft.

Notes:

Datum:

Drill Type:

Crew Chief:

Project:

Depth Drilled: 5.0 ft.

Seepage

Date Begin:

Core

Newberry, Michigan

Casing

Tooling

Coordinates:

892.7 ft

Client:

SPT Hammer

None

Date End: 09/27/2022

Hand Auger

Field Eng.: JS Rev. By: RS N=567511.3 E=26623334.2 (MI South ift)

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Newberry Correctional Facility Pavement Investigation

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100% QP = Calibrated Penetrometer (tons/sq. ft.)

Elev.

FT. MST

REMARKS

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

DD

pcf

Boring No.:

B-6

QP

tsf

Project No.:LOG

OF

BORING Sheet:

*DESCRIPTION

Sample

Number

Recov.

FT.

Dyn. Cone

Eq. "N":

ASTM STP 399

*USCS

Group

Symbol

221427

Depth

FT.

892.5

892.2

892.0

891.7

891.5

891.2

891.0

890.7

890.5

890.2

890.0

889.7

889.5

889.2

889.0

888.7

888.5

888.2

888.0

887.7

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

2.25

2.50

2.75

3.00

3.25

3.50

3.75

4.00

4.25

4.50

0.6

1.7

5.0

6 3/4" Concrete

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

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

Grades with coarse to fine sand, trace coarse to fine gravel

End of Boring

A-1

A-2

SP-SM

SP

3 1/4" During

DateElevation: NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Plugging Record: Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

09/27/2022

Type

End

Tube

Sampler

Hand Auger

Location:

NA

Dia. Groundwater, ft.

Depth, ft.

Notes:

Datum:

Drill Type:

Crew Chief:

Project:

Depth Drilled: 5.0 ft.

Seepage

Date Begin:

Core

Newberry, Michigan

Casing

Tooling

Coordinates:

893.7 ft

Client:

SPT Hammer

None

Date End: 09/27/2022

Hand Auger

Field Eng.: JS Rev. By: RS N=567601.4 E=26623708.2 (MI South ift)

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Newberry Correctional Facility Pavement Investigation

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100% QP = Calibrated Penetrometer (tons/sq. ft.)

Elev.

FT. MST

REMARKS

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

DD

pcf

Boring No.:

B-7

QP

tsf

Project No.:LOG

OF

BORING Sheet:

*DESCRIPTION

Sample

Number

Recov.

FT.

Dyn. Cone

Eq. "N":

ASTM STP 399

*USCS

Group

Symbol

221427

Depth

FT.

893.5

893.2

893.0

892.7

892.5

892.2

892.0

891.7

891.5

891.2

891.0

890.7

890.5

890.2

890.0

889.7

889.5

889.2

889.0

888.7

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

2.25

2.50

2.75

3.00

3.25

3.50

3.75

4.00

4.25

4.50

0.7

1.5

2.2

4.5

5.0

Fill: 0' to 2.2'3 1/2" HMA

5" Gravel Base

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

Brown poorly graded SAND with silt; mostly coarse to fine sand, few silty fines, moist, Fill with brick debris

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

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

End of Boring

A-1

A-2

A-3

SP

SP-SM

SP-SM

SP

3 1/4" During

DateElevation: NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Plugging Record: Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

09/27/2022

Type

End

Tube

Sampler

Hand Auger

Location:

NA

Dia. Groundwater, ft.

Depth, ft.

Notes:

Datum:

Drill Type:

Crew Chief:

Project:

Depth Drilled: 5.0 ft.

Seepage

Date Begin:

Core

Newberry, Michigan

Casing

Tooling

Coordinates:

895.0 ft

Client:

SPT Hammer

None

Date End: 09/27/2022

Hand Auger

Field Eng.: JS Rev. By: RS N=567440.8 E=26623644.8 (MI South ift)

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Newberry Correctional Facility Pavement Investigation

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100% QP = Calibrated Penetrometer (tons/sq. ft.)

Elev.

FT. MST

REMARKS

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

DD

pcf

Boring No.:

B-8

QP

tsf

Project No.:LOG

OF

BORING Sheet:

*DESCRIPTION

Sample

Number

Recov.

FT.

Dyn. Cone

Eq. "N":

ASTM STP 399

*USCS

Group

Symbol

221427

Depth

FT.

894.8

894.5

894.3

894.0

893.8

893.5

893.3

893.0

892.8

892.5

892.3

892.0

891.8

891.5

891.3

891.0

890.8

890.5

890.3

890.0

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

2.25

2.50

2.75

3.00

3.25

3.50

3.75

4.00

4.25

4.50

1.0

2.3

5.0

Possible Fill: 0' to 2.3'3 1/2" HMA

8" Gravel Base

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

Grades dark brown

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

End of Boring

A-1

A-2

SP-SM

SP

3 1/4" During

DateElevation:

N=567163.7 E=26623630.0 (MI South ift)

892.4 ft Datum: NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Plugging Record: Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

09/27/2022

Type

End

Tube

Sampler

Hand Auger

Location:

NA

Dia. Groundwater, ft.

Depth, ft.

Notes:

Drill Type:

Crew Chief:

Project:

Depth Drilled: 5.0 ft.

Seepage

Date Begin:

Core

Newberry, Michigan

Casing

Tooling

Coordinates:

Client:

SPT Hammer

None

Date End: 09/27/2022

Hand Auger

Field Eng.: JS Rev. By: RS

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Newberry Correctional Facility Pavement Investigation

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100% QP = Calibrated Penetrometer (tons/sq. ft.)

Elev.

FT. MST

REMARKS

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

DD

pcf

Boring No.:

B-9

QP

tsf

Project No.:LOG

OF

BORING Sheet:

*DESCRIPTION

Sample

Number

Recov.

FT.

Dyn. Cone

Eq. "N":

ASTM STP 399

*USCS

Group

Symbol

221427

Depth

FT.

892.2

891.9

891.7

891.4

891.2

890.9

890.7

890.4

890.2

889.9

889.7

889.4

889.2

888.9

888.7

888.4

888.2

887.9

887.7

887.4

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

2.25

2.50

2.75

3.00

3.25

3.50

3.75

4.00

4.25

4.50

1.7

5.0

Fill: 0' to 1.7'3" HMA

10" Gravel Base

Dark brown silty SAND; mostly medium to fine sand, few fine gravel, few silty fines, moist, Fill with occasional brick debris

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

Grades with clay lens at 3.5'

End of Boring

A-1

A-2

SM

SP

3 1/4" During

DateElevation: NAVD 88 (GPS Observation)

Plugging Record: Backfilled borehole with compacted cuttings, patched pavement with cold patch.

09/27/2022

Type

End

Tube

Sampler

Hand Auger

Location:

NA

Dia. Groundwater, ft.

Depth, ft.

Notes:

Datum:

Drill Type:

Crew Chief:

Project:

Depth Drilled: 5.0 ft.

Seepage

Date Begin:

Core

Newberry, Michigan

Casing

Tooling

Coordinates:

891.7 ft

Client:

SPT Hammer

None

Date End: 09/27/2022

Hand Auger

Field Eng.: JS Rev. By: RS N=567441.4 E=26624232.9 (MI South ift)

Beckett & Raeder, Inc.

Newberry Correctional Facility Pavement Investigation

Component Percentages: Trace < 5%, Few 5-10%, Little 15-25%, Some 30-45%, Mostly 50-100% QP = Calibrated Penetrometer (tons/sq. ft.)

Elev.

FT. MST

REMARKS

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

DD

pcf

Boring No.:

B-10

QP

tsf

Project No.:LOG

OF

BORING Sheet:

*DESCRIPTION

Sample

Number

Recov.

FT.

Dyn. Cone

Eq. "N":

ASTM STP 399

*USCS

Group

Symbol

221427

Depth

FT.

891.5

891.2

891.0

890.7

890.5

890.2

890.0

889.7

889.5

889.2

889.0

888.7

888.5

888.2

888.0

887.7

887.5

887.2

887.0

886.7

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

2.25

2.50

2.75

3.00

3.25

3.50

3.75

4.00

4.25

4.50

0.8

5.0

9" Sandy Topsoil

Brown poorly graded SAND; mostly medium to fine sand, trace silty fines, moist with occasional roots

Grades without roots at 1.5'

End of…