25-030B Reference Documents.pdf

Reference Documents

Oil Dock 15 New Mooring Dolphin

The following information is being provided for reference use only.

The Contractor is responsible for verification of all information referenced in these documents.

Professional Service Industries, Inc. • Three Burwood Lane • San Antonio, TX 78216 • Phone 210/342-9377 • Fax 210/342-9401

July 15, 2016

Mr. Sidney A. Faas, P.E.

Vice President CH2M HILL Engineers, Inc.

555 North Carancahua Tower II Ste. 310 Corpus Christi, TX. 78401

RE: Revised Report Geotechnical Engineering Study Proposed Martin Midstream Partners Dock (Dock 15) Port of Corpus Christi, TX PSI Project No.: 0312-1060

Dear Mr. Faas:

Attached please find a copy of the revised report for the referenced project. This revised report supersedes our previous report dated September 2, 2015, and addresses the comments provided by Mr. Nason McCullough received via email on July 8, 12 and 13, 2016.

PSI appreciates the opportunity to perform this Geotechnical Engineering Study and looks forward to continuing participation during the design and construction phases of this project. If you have any questions pertaining to this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact our office.

Respectfully submitted, Professional Service Industries, Inc.

J.R. Eichelberger, III, P.E.

Department Manager Geotechnical Services

For Refe ren ce

O nly ren ce

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page No.

1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

1.1 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION

1.2 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1.3 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES

2.0 SOIL INVESTIGATION

3.0 SITE GEOLOGY

4.0 SOIL CONDITIONS

4.1 GROUNDWATER INFORMATION

5.0 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 AXIAL CAPACITY OF PILES

5.2 AXIAL GROUP ACTION

5.3 SETTLEMENT OF DEEP FOUNDATIONS

5.4 LATERAL CAPACITY OF PILES

5.5 LATERAL GROUP ACTION

5.6 SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS

6.0 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS

7.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS

APPENDIXES

APPENDIX A – BORING LOGS

APPENDIX B – LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

AAPENDIX C – FIELD TEST RESULTS

For Refe ren ce

PROPOSED MARTIN MIDSTREAM PARTNERS DOCK (DOCK 15) PSI PROJECT NO.: 0312-1060

CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC. JULY 15, 2016

CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 2

1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

1.1 Project Authorization

Professional Service Industries, Inc. (PSI) has completed a geotechnical engineering study for the Proposed Martin Midstream Partners Dock (Dock 15), Port of Corpus Christi, Texas. Our services for this project were performed in general accordance with Award/Agreement Number 10381-7- 102531, signed by Ms. Lisa Taylor with CH2M HILL Engineers, Inc. on December 9, 2014.

1.2 Site and Project Description

The subject dock is located within the Corpus Christi Main Turning Basin, east of the Texas Lehigh facility and west of Oil Dock 16, at approximately 27.815095°N latitude and -97.410807°W longitude, as shown on Figure 1.

Figure 1. Approximate Site Location Plan.

The proposed dock is intended to accommodate a ship having a length of approximately 820 feet.

The top of the ship dock access platform will be approximately at elevation +15 feet MLLW. The final design dredge depth in front of the dock will be approximately at elevation -57.5 feet MLLW.

The berthing facility and the breasting/mooring structures are planned to consist of large concrete cylinder piles. There are also a couple of 175 feet by 50 feet dock spacer barges planned to be located behind the breasting line to accommodate cranes and support equipment for the dock operations, as schematically shown in Figure 2.

APPROXIMATE

DOCK

LOCATION

MAIN TURNING

BASIN

NAVIGATION

BLVD.

CORPUS CHRISTI

BAY BRIDGE

For Refe ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 3

Figure 2. Schematic Section of the Dock.

The geotechnical recommendations presented in this report are based on the available project information, the location of the proposed structures, the field and laboratory testing, and the subsurface materials described in this report. If any of the noted information is incorrect, please inform PSI in writing so that the recommendations presented in this report may be amended if appropriate and if desired by the client. PSI will not be responsible for the implementation of its recommendations when it is not notified of changes in the project.

1.3 Purpose and Scope of Services

The purposes of this study were to evaluate the subsurface conditions at the site and develop geotechnical engineering recommendations and guidelines for use in preparing appropriate design and other related construction documents for the proposed project. Our scope of services included the following:

• Drilling three (3) land borings to a depth of approximately 130 feet and three (3) marine borings to a depth of about 150 feet, for a total of 840 feet of drilling and sampling.

• Performing five (5) cone penetrometer tests with pore pressure dissipation (CPTu) on selected land and marine borings.

• Performing four (4) flat plate dilatometer tests (DMT) on selected land and marine borings.

For Refe ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 4

• Performing one (1) electronic field vane shear test.

• Performing selected laboratory tests, including five (5) one-dimensional consolidation tests, five (5) consolidated-undrained (CIU) triaxial tests, soil water content, Atterberg Limits, percent passing the #200 sieve, dry density and unconfined compressive strength.

• Preparing this geotechnical engineering report.

This report briefly outlines the available project information, describes the site and subsurface conditions, and presents our recommendations for the design of concrete cylinder piles for the dock structure. In addition, the stability of proposed slopes for dredging and grading the site was also analyzed.

The scope of services for this project did not include an environmental assessment for determining the presence or absence of hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, surface water, groundwater, or air on or below, or around this site. Any statements in this report or on the boring logs regarding odors, colors, and unusual or suspicious items or conditions are strictly for informational purposes.

2.0 SOIL INVESTIGATION

The subsurface conditions at the project site were explored by drilling three (3) land borings to a depth of approximately 130 feet and three (3) marine borings to a depth of about 150 feet, for a total of 840 feet of drilling and sampling. In addition, five (5) cone penetrometer tests (CPTu), four

(4) flat plate dilatometer tests (DMT) and one (1) electronic field vane shear test were performed on selected land and marine borings, at the locations shown on Figure 3.

ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 5

Figure 3. Approximate Boring Location Plan.

The borings were located by PSI using a handheld GPS unit. The marine borings were drilled using truck-mounted drilling equipment loaded onto a spud barge. Drilling of the borings was performed utilizing solid flight auger and mud-rotary drilling techniques. Selected soil samples obtained during the field exploration were transported to the laboratory where they were reviewed by geotechnical engineering personnel. Representative samples were selected and tested to determine pertinent engineering properties and characteristics for use in our evaluation of the project site.

Drilling and sampling, laboratory testing and soil classification were accomplished in general accordance with applicable ASTM procedures. Results of the laboratory tests are presented in Appendix B. Results from the CPTu, DMT and field vane shear tests are included in Appendix C.

ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 6

3.0 SITE GEOLOGY

As shown on the Geologic Atlas of Texas, Corpus Christi Sheet (1975), the site is located in an area which contains Fill and Spoil, consisting of materials dredged for rising land surface above alluvium and barrier island deposits and for creating land. These materials include clay, silt, sand and shell. Figure 4 shows a detail of the Geological Sheet.

Figure 4. Geologic Atlas of Texas, Corpus Christi Sheet (1975).

ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 7

4.0 SOIL CONDITIONS

Based on the field and laboratory data collected by PSI the general stratigraphy at the site consists of a series of intercalated layers of sand and clay with relative densities and consistencies that tend to improve with depth, from very loose and soft at shallow depths to very dense and hard at the bottom of the test borings. Figures 5 and 6 show schematic geotechnical sections through land and marine borings drilled at both ends of the dock, depicting typical soil layering and average soil properties inferred from the results of laboratory and field tests.

Figure 5. Geotechnical Section through Borings WB-3 and LN-3.

ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 8

Figure 6. Geotechnical Section through Borings WB-1 and LN-1.

The boring logs included in Appendix A should be reviewed for specific borehole information such as soil descriptions, stratifications, penetration resistances, locations of the samples, and laboratory test data. The stratifications shown on each boring log only represent the conditions at that actual boring location and the approximate boundaries between subsurface materials. The actual transitions between strata may be gradual. Variations will occur and should be expected at locations away from the boring locations. The indicated stratum depths are measured from the existing ground or mud line and are estimated to the nearest one-half (½) foot. Portions of any samples that are not altered or consumed by laboratory testing will be retained for 60 days from the date shown on this report and will then be discarded.

4.1 Groundwater Information

The top portion of the land borings were drilled using dry drilling techniques (solid flight auger), enabling the possibility of detection of the presence of groundwater. Groundwater readings were taken routinely during drilling operations, at the end of drilling and 24 hrs. after drilling in boring LB-3. Table 1 summarizes the groundwater readings. At the end of drilling operations the boreholes were backfilled with soil cuttings.

ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 9

Groundwater Readings Boring Elev.

MLLW

(feet)*

Boring Depth (feet)

During Drilling (feet)

At Drilling Completion

(feet)

Delayed Reading

(feet)

LB-1 7.2 130 8 4 --

LB-2 6.4 130 8 1/2 7 --

LB-3 6.7 130 8 1/2 8 5 1/2

*Boring elevations provided by CH2M HILL Table 1. Groundwater Readings on the Land Borings.

Based on the information summarized in Table 1 we understand that the static groundwater elevation is located at or slightly above the mean sea level at the dock area. Groundwater levels are influenced by seasonal, climatic and tidal conditions which generally result in fluctuations in the elevation of the groundwater level over time. Groundwater observations on test boreholes may not provide reliable indications of such groundwater fluctuations due to the short term monitoring periods. Additional water level monitoring over extended periods is required to better define groundwater fluctuations across the site. Therefore, the foundation contractor should check the groundwater conditions just prior to foundation construction activities. Specific information concerning groundwater is noted on each boring log presented in Appendix A of this report.

5.0 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Axial Capacity of Piles

Axial bearing capacity analysis of concrete cylinder piles for the dock were performed with the aid of the computer program APILE v.2014.6.8 by Ensoft, Inc. These calculations were performed at each land and marine boring locations to better account for soil variability across the site. The results of the bearing capacity analysis are summarized in the Ultimate Cumulative Skin Friction and Ultimate Unit End Bearing plots shown on Figures 7 to 10. These plots have been normalized based on the pile diameter and pile toe area, respectively. Considering this, in order to obtain the ultimate skin friction from Figures 7 and 8, the values on these plots must be multiplied by the pile diameter in feet. Similarly, in order to obtain the ultimate end bearing capacity from Figures 9 and 10, the values on these plots must be multiplied by the pile toe area (plugged) in square feet.

ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 10

Figure 7. Ultimate Cumulative Skin Friction of Cylinder Piles (Land Borings).

(Multiply by the pile diameter in feet to obtain Ultimate Cumulative Skin Friction in kips).

POSSIBLE HARD

DRIVING CONDITIONS

For Refe ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 11

Figure 8. Ultimate Cumulative Skin Friction of Cylinder Piles (Marine Borings).

(Multiply by the pile diameter in feet to obtain Ultimate Cumulative Skin Friction in kips). For Refe ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 12

Figure 9. Ultimate End Bearing Capacity of Cylinder Piles (Land Borings).

(Multiply by the pile toe area (plugged) in square feet to obtain Ultimate End Bearing in kips).

For Refe ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 13

Figure 10. Ultimate End Bearing Capacity of Cylinder Piles (Marine Borings).

(Multiply by the pile toe area (plugged) in square feet to obtain Ultimate End Bearing in kips).

The factors of safety (FS) recommended to estimate allowable pile capacities from the ultimate capacity plots from Figures 7 to 10 are summarized in Table 2. For piles in tension, the factor of safety should be applied to the ultimate skin friction capacity only.

ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 14

Axial Load FS Construction Control Method

Compression

2.00 Static load test with wave equation

analysis

2.25 Dynamic testing with wave equation

analysis

2.50 Indicator piles with wave equation

analysis

2.75 Wave equation analysis

3.00 No control method

Tension

2.0 Static Load Test (in Tension)

3.00 No control method

Table 2. Recommended Factors of Safety (FS) Based On Construction Control Method1.

5.2 Axial Group Action

The ultimate axial capacity curves in Figures 7 to 10 were developed considering single isolated piles. The ultimate group capacity of closely spaced piles may, in some cases, be less than the sum of the individual allowable capacities, as the zone of influence from individual piles may intersect with other piles, depending on their spacing. A reduction in the individual capacity of piles, to allow for group effects, is usually not necessary for piles having a center-to center spacing of three

(3) of more pile diameters. The reduction in individual capacity depends on many factors including the configuration of the group, the number of piles in the group, the pile diameter, the depth and the spacing of installation. We recommend piles to be spaced at least three (3) diameters center-to-center to minimize substantial group effects. If piles are spaced less than 3 (three) diameters, we recommend the values shown in Table 3 be used to reduce the available axial capacity on closely spaced piles for preliminary design purposes. Once the final pile layout is defined, we will be pleased to review the design and check to see whether the group capacity is controlled by a block-type failure mode and provide recommendations on axial group effects.

Center to Center Pile Spacing/Pile Diameter

Capacity Reduction Factor

3.0 1.00

2.5 0.90

2.0 0.75

1.5 0.66

Note: If necessary, intermediate values may be interpolated linearly.

Table 3. Reduction Factors for Axial Capacity for Closely Spaced Piles.

1 Design and Construction of Driven Pile Foundations. NHI Courses No. 132021 and 132022. U.S. Department of Transportation. Federal Highway Administration. Publication No. FHWA NHI-05-042. April 2006.

For Refe ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 15

5.3 Settlement of Deep Foundations

A detailed analysis of axial load versus settlement was beyond the scope of this study. However, for piles spaced at least three (3) diameters apart on-center, driven to the pile installation criteria, the post-construction settlement is not anticipated to control the pile design, and it is estimated to be on the order of about one (1) inch. If differential movement is critical for the proposed structure, detailed settlement analysis for piles can be done once the final pile layout and loading conditions are defined.

Groups of deep foundations will likely settle more than individual piles subject to the same load per pile. The settlement of groups is dependent on several variables, including dimensions of the group, pile length, the sustained structural load, and the compressibility properties of the soils.

5.4 Lateral Capacity of Piles

Recommended parameters for lateral analysis of piles are summarized in Tables 4 and 5. This analysis may be performed using computer programs such as LPile v. 2012.3.37 by Ensoft, Inc. or FB-MultiPier v.4.19.3 by Bridge Software Institute (BSI).

ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 16

Table 4. Parameters for Lateral Analysis of Land Piles.

ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 17

Table 5. Parameters for Lateral Analysis of Marine Piles.

ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 18

5.5 Lateral Group Action

It should be noted that L-Pile analyses only covers single piles. Piles spaced about seven (7) diameters generally have limited group effects. However, for closely spaced pile groups, the efficiency of the group may be less than one (1.0) when subjected to lateral loads, due to pile-soil-pile interaction in the group. For this reason, the use of p-multipliers (pm) in the L-Pile program is suggested. Table 6 summarizes the p-multipliers recommended for the different pile rows and loading directions. PSI should be contacted to review the plans, once the pile group orientation, spacing and loading direction is determined, to provide further recommendations on lateral group effects.

Table 6. p-MULTIPLIERS FOR p-y CURVE GENERATION2.

Pile Spacing (in the direction of loading)

Row 1 pm

Row 2 pm

Row 3 and Higher pm 3B 0.8 0.4 0.3 5B 1.0 0.85 0.7 7B 1.0 1.0 1.0

2 AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 2012.

Refe ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 19

5.6 Slope Stability Analysis

Slope stability analyses were carried out to evaluate the overall stability of the proposed dredged slopes. The stability at three (3) sections was evaluated:

• Station 1150+12 – The existing slope was analyzed to calibrate the model and the soil parameters proposed.

• Station 1153+30 (transversal section along borings WB-3 and LB-3) – The existing slope as well as 3(H):1(V), 2.5(H):1(V) and 2(H):1(V) slopes were analyzed.

• Station 1161+34 (transversal section along borings WB-1 and LB-1) – The existing slope as well as 3(H):1(V), 2.5(H):1(V) and 2(H):1(V) slopes were analyzed.

The following scenarios were considered for the slope stability analysis:

• Short-term stability using soil undrained parameters (c and φ)

• Long-term stability considering drained soil parameters (c’ and φ’). Undrained and drained soil parameters were determined based on field and laboratory tests results.

• Static water elevation at 0.0 feet MLLW.

• Rapid drawdown condition at elevation -3.0 feet MLLW.

The results of the slope stability analysis are summarized in Table 7.

Note: Cells highlighted red show FS below recommended values.

Table 7. Slope Stability Analysis Results Summary.

Station Slope Short- Term

Long- Term

Rapid Drawdown

Condition (RDD) to El. -3.0 ft

1150+12 Existing 1.3 -- -- Existing 1.7 2.6 -- 3H:1V 1.4 1.8 1.8 2.5H:1V 1.2 1.6 1.6 2H:1V 1.2 1.5 1.5 Existing 1.4 2.1 -- 3H:1V 1.3 1.7 1.6 2.5H:1V 1.2 1.6 1.5 2H:1V 1.2 1.6 1.6

1153+30

(WB-3)

1161+34

(WB-1)

FS (Bishop Simplified)

For Refe ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 20

The slope stability analyses were performed with the aid of the computer program Slide v. 6.0 by Rocscience. Inc. The target minimum factors of safety (FS) for the slope stability analysis were:

• FS=1.3 for undrained soil parameters (short-term analysis)

• FS=1.5 for drained soil parameters (long-term analysis)

• FS=1.1 for the rapid drawdown condition. The analysis showed that rapid drawdown has minimum effect on slope stability due to the granular nature of the upper sandy soil layers.

Results of the slope stability analysis, as well as slope geometry, soil properties and groundwater elevations are shown on Figures 11 to 27.

For Refe ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 21

Figure 11. Slope Stability Analysis Station 1150+12, Existing Slope (Short Term). For ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 22

Figure 12. Slope Stability Analysis Station 1153+30, Existing Slope (Short Term). For ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 23

Figure 13. Slope Stability Analysis Station 1153+30, Existing Slope (Long Term). For ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 24

Figure 14. Slope Stability Analysis Station 1153+30, 3(H):1(V) (Short Term). For ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 25

Figure 15. Slope Stability Analysis Station 1153+30, 3(H):1(V) (Long Term). For ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 26

Figure 16. Slope Stability Analysis Station 1153+30, 2.5(H):1(V) (Short Term). For ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 27

Figure 17. Slope Stability Analysis Station 1153+30, 2.5(H):1(V) (Long Term). For ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 28

Figure 18. Slope Stability Analysis Station 1153+30, 2(H):1(V) (Short Term). For ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 29

Figure 19. Slope Stability Analysis Station 1153+30, 2(H):1(V) (Long Term). For ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 30

Figure 20 Slope Stability Analysis Station 1161+34, Existing Slope (Short Term). For ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 31

Figure 21 Slope Stability Analysis Station 1161+34, Existing Slope (Long Term). For ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 32

Figure 22 Slope Stability Analysis Station 1161+34, 3(H):1(V) (Short Term). For ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 33

Figure 23 Slope Stability Analysis Station 1161+34, 3(H):1(V) (Long Term). For ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 34

Figure 24 Slope Stability Analysis Station 1161+34, 2.5(H):1(V) (Short Term). For ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 35

Figure 25 Slope Stability Analysis Station 1161+34, 2.5(H):1(V) (Long Term). For ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 36

Figure 26 Slope Stability Analysis Station 1161+34, 2(H):1(V) (Short Term). For ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 37

Figure 27 Slope Stability Analysis Station 1161+34, 2(H):1(V) (Long Term). For ren ce

PROPOSED MARTIN MIDSTREAM PARTNERS DOCK (DOCK 15) PSI PROJECT NO.: 0312-1030

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 38

6.0 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS

For the purposes of seismic design, based on the encountered site conditions and local geology, we interpreted the subsurface conditions to satisfy the Site Class D (Stiff Soil) criteria for use at this site as defined by the International Building Code (IBC). The site class is based on the subsurface conditions encountered at our soil borings, the results of field and laboratory testing and our experience with similar projects in this area. Table 8 provides recommended seismic parameters for the project based on the 2012 edition of the IBC.

Seismic Parameter IBC 2012

0.2 sec (SS) 0.065 g

1.0 sec (S1) 0.021 g

Site Coefficient 0.2sec, Fa 1.6

Site Coefficient 1.0 sec, Fv 2.4

0.2 sec (SDS) 0.070 g

1.0 sec (SD1) 0.034 g

Table 8. Recommended Design Seismic Parameters.

7.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS

The recommendations submitted in this report are based on the available subsurface information obtained by PSI and design details furnished by the client for the proposed project. If there are any revisions to the plans for this project, or if deviations from the subsurface conditions noted in this report are encountered during construction, PSI should be notified immediately to determine if changes in the foundation recommendations are required. If PSI is not notified of such changes, PSI will not be responsible for the impact of those changes on the project.

The Geotechnical Engineer warrants that the findings, recommendations, specifications, or professional advice contained herein have been made in accordance with generally accepted professional Geotechnical Engineering practices in the local area. No other warranties are implied or expressed. This report may not be copied without the expressed written permission of PSI.

After the plans and specifications are more complete, the Geotechnical Engineer should be retained and provided the opportunity to review the final design plans and specifications to check that our engineering recommendations have been properly incorporated in the design documents. At this time, it may be necessary to submit supplementary recommendations. If PSI

For Refe ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. PAGE 39

is not retained to perform these functions, PSI will not be responsible for the impact of those conditions on the project.

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of CH2M HILL Engineers, Inc., for specific application to the proposed Martin Midstream Partners Dock (Dock 15), in Corpus Christi, Texas.

ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC.

APPENDIX A

BORING LOGS

ren ce feet meters

For Refe ren ce

O nly

914773 Typewritten Text Boring location and number

914773 Line

914773 Line

914773 Line

914773 Line

914773 Line

914773 Line

914773 Typewritten Text

914773 Rectangle

914773 Line

914773 Line

914773 Line

914773 Line

914773 Line

914773 Line

914773 Line

914773 Line

914773 Line

914773 Line

SAND, fine to medium coarse, trace to little clay, trace shells, gray, moist, loose (SP)

- trace to little gravel, angular, medium dense

SAND, fine, trace to little clay, trace shells and gravel, olive, moist, loose

(SP)

- fine to medium coarse

- brown, medium dense

- olive, loose sandy lean CLAY, fine, trace shell fragments, olive, moist, very soft (CL)

- soft

- medium stiff clayey SAND, fine to medium coarse, olive, moist, medium dense (SC)

- brown, medium coarse

- trave gravel, subangular

- brown and olive

WH

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER

WC

P L

A S

T

IC

L

IM

IT

COMPLETION DEPTH: 130.0 Feet

20 40 60P L

A S

T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D

E X

R

Q D

R

Q D

R

Q D

BORING LB-1

END OF DRILLING (ft.): 4 SEEPAGE (ft.): 8

Elevation: 0.0

LOCATION: See Boring Location Plan

DELAYED WATER LEVEL (FT): N/A

S A

M P

LE

S

DATE: 12/22/14-12/22/14

2.0 4.0 6.0 W

A T

E R

Elevation:

LL

L

IQ

U

ID

L

IM

IT

R

E T

A

IN

E D

D E

P T

H , F

T

R

Q D

M O

IS

T

U R

E C

O N

T E

N T

SOIL DESCRIPTION

P

A S

S

IN

G

R

E C

PL

S Y

M B

O L

Corpus Christi Martin Dock Port of Corpus Christi, Texas

Project No. 0312-1060

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

U N

C O

N F

C

O M

P

(T S

F

U N

IT

D

R Y

W T

(L

B /C

U F

T

UNC CMP (TSF)HAND PEN (TSF)

G E

O T

E S

T S

-1

0.

G P

J R

B E

N N

E T

T G

W .G

D

2/

3/

For Refe ren ce

- dense

Boring terminated at a depth of approximately 130 feet

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER

WC

P L

A S

T

IC

L

IM

IT

COMPLETION DEPTH: 130.0 Feet

20 40 60P L

A S

T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D

E X

R

Q D

R

Q D

R

Q D

BORING LB-1

END OF DRILLING (ft.): 4 SEEPAGE (ft.): 8

LOCATION: See Boring Location Plan S

A M

P

LE

S

DATE: 12/22/14-12/22/14

2.0 4.0 6.0 W

A T

E R

LL

L

IQ

U

ID

L

IM

IT

R

E T

A

IN

E D

D E

P T

H , F

T

R

Q D

M O

IS

T

U R

E C

O N

T E

N T

SOIL DESCRIPTION

P

A S

S

IN

G

R

E C

PL

S Y

M B

O L

Corpus Christi Martin Dock Port of Corpus Christi, Texas

Project No. 0312-1060

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

U N

C O

N F

C

O M

P

(T S

F

U N

IT

D

R Y

W T

(L

B /C

U F

T

UNC CMP (TSF)HAND PEN (TSF)

G E

O T

E S

-1

0.

G P

J R

B E

N N

E T

T G

W .G

For Refe ren ce

- trace organic matter (black)

- loose

- very loose

- trace clay, gray, loose

- trace shell fragments

- loose

- trace to little gravel (angular) and shell fragments

- trace gravel (subangular)

- trace gravel (angular)

- dense

FILL, sand, fine to coarse, trace clay, brown and gray, dense (FILL) clayey SAND, fine, trace gravel (angular), brown and gray, moist, loose (SC) SAND, fine, trace to little clay, gravel (subangular) and shells, olive, moist, very loose (SP) clayey SAND, fine, olive, moist, very loose (SC)

SAND, fine to medium coarse, olive and gray, trace clay, moist, medium dense (SP)

SAND, coarse, gray and brown, trace clay, moist, medium dense (SP) clayey SAND to sandy CLAY, fine, gray and brown, moist, medium dense

(SC)

WH

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER

WC

P L

A S

T

IC

L

IM

IT

COMPLETION DEPTH: 130.0 Feet

20 40 60P L

A S

T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D

E X

R

Q D

R

Q D

R

Q D

BORING LB-2

END OF DRILLING (ft.): 7 SEEPAGE (ft.): 8.5

Elevation: 0.0

LOCATION: See Boring Location Plan

DELAYED WATER LEVEL (FT): N/A

S A

M P

LE

S

DATE: 12/9/14-12/9/14

2.0 4.0 6.0 W

A T

E R

Elevation:

LL

L

IQ

U

ID

L

IM

IT

R

E T

A

IN

E D

D E

P T

H , F

T

R

Q D

M O

IS

T

U R

E C

O N

T E

N T

SOIL DESCRIPTION

P

A S

S

IN

G

R

E C

PL

S Y

M B

O L

Corpus Christi Martin Dock Port of Corpus Christi, Texas

Project No. 0312-1060

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

U N

C O

N F

C

O M

P

(T S

F

U N

IT

D

R Y

W T

(L

B /C

U F

T

UNC CMP (TSF)HAND PEN (TSF)

G E

O T

E S

-1

0.

G P

J R

B E

N N

E T

T G

W .G

For Refe ren ce

- very dense

- fine to medium coarse

SAND, fine, gray, trace clay, moist, dense (SP)

Boring terminated at a depth of approximately 130 feet

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER

WC

P L

A S

T

IC

L

IM

IT

COMPLETION DEPTH: 130.0 Feet

20 40 60P L

A S

T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D

E X

R

Q D

R

Q D

R

Q D

BORING LB-2

END OF DRILLING (ft.): 7 SEEPAGE (ft.): 8.5

LOCATION: See Boring Location Plan S

A M

P

LE

S

DATE: 12/9/14-12/9/14

2.0 4.0 6.0 W

A T

E R

LL

L

IQ

U

ID

L

IM

IT

R

E T

A

IN

E D

D E

P T

H , F

T

R

Q D

M O

IS

T

U R

E C

O N

T E

N T

SOIL DESCRIPTION

P

A S

S

IN

G

R

E C

PL

S Y

M B

O L

Corpus Christi Martin Dock Port of Corpus Christi, Texas

Project No. 0312-1060

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

U N

C O

N F

C

O M

P

(T S

F

U N

IT

D

R Y

W T

(L

B /C

U F

T

UNC CMP (TSF)HAND PEN (TSF)

G E

O T

E S

-1

0.

G P

J R

B E

N N

E T

T G

W .G

For Refe ren ce

FILL, clay, sand and concrete fragments, brown and gray, moist, medium stiff and very dense (FILL) sandy CLAY, little to some gravel (angular) and shell fragments, brown and gray, moist, medium stiff (SC)

SAND, fine, some clay, trace shell fragments, olive, very loose (SC)

- trace gravel (angular)

SAND, fine, trace clay, olive, moist, trace shell fragments, loose (SP)

- little to some clay

- trace clay

CLAY, little fine sand, brown, moist, stiff (CH)

- very stiff

- hard

50/5

WH

1.1

0.5

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER

WC

P L

A S

T

IC

L

IM

IT

COMPLETION DEPTH: 130.0 Feet

20 40 60P L

A S

T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D

E X

R

Q D

R

Q D

R

Q D

BORING LB-3

END OF DRILLING (ft.): 7.8 SEEPAGE (ft.): 8.5

Elevation: 0.0

LOCATION: See Boring Location Plan

DELAYED WATER LEVEL (FT): 5.6

S A

M P

LE

S

DATE: 12/8/14-12/8/14

2.0 4.0 6.0 W

A T

E R

Elevation:

LL

L

IQ

U

ID

L

IM

IT

R

E T

A

IN

E D

D E

P T

H , F

T

R

Q D

M O

IS

T

U R

E C

O N

T E

N T

SOIL DESCRIPTION

P

A S

S

IN

G

R

E C

PL

S Y

M B

O L

Corpus Christi Martin Dock Port of Corpus Christi, Texas

Project No. 0312-1060

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

U N

C O

N F

C

O M

P

(T S

F

U N

IT

D

R Y

W T

(L

B /C

U F

T

UNC CMP (TSF)HAND PEN (TSF)

G E

O T

E S

-1

0.

G P

J R

B E

N N

E T

T G

W .G

For Refe ren ce

SAND, fine, gray and brown, little clay, moist, medium dense (SC)

- dense

- very dense clayey SAND, fine, gray and brown, moist, hard (SC)

Boring terminated at a depth of approximately 130 feet

1.3

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER

WC

P L

A S

T

IC

L

IM

IT

COMPLETION DEPTH: 130.0 Feet

20 40 60P L

A S

T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D

E X

R

Q D

R

Q D

R

Q D

BORING LB-3

END OF DRILLING (ft.): 7.8 SEEPAGE (ft.): 8.5

LOCATION: See Boring Location Plan S

A M

P

LE

S

DATE: 12/8/14-12/8/14

2.0 4.0 6.0 W

A T

E R

LL

L

IQ

U

ID

L

IM

IT

R

E T

A

IN

E D

D E

P T

H , F

T

R

Q D

M O

IS

T

U R

E C

O N

T E

N T

SOIL DESCRIPTION

P

A S

S

IN

G

R

E C

PL

S Y

M B

O L

Corpus Christi Martin Dock Port of Corpus Christi, Texas

Project No. 0312-1060

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

U N

C O

N F

C

O M

P

(T S

F

U N

IT

D

R Y

W T

(L

B /C

U F

T

UNC CMP (TSF)HAND PEN (TSF)

G E

O T

E S

-1

0.

G P

J R

B E

N N

E T

T G

W .G

For Refe ren ce clayey SAND, fine to medium coarse, olive, trace gravel (angular) and shell fragments, moist, very loose (SC)

- loose

- very loose

- loose

- very loose

- loose

SAND, fine, trace to little clay, brown, moist, medium dense (SP)

- dense

- medium dense

WH

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER

WC

P L

A S

T

IC

L

IM

IT

COMPLETION DEPTH: 150.0 Feet

20 40 60P L

A S

T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D

E X

R

Q D

R

Q D

R

Q D

BORING WB-1

END OF DRILLING (ft.): NONE OBSERVED SEEPAGE (ft.): NONE ENCOUNTERED

Elevation: 0.0

LOCATION: See Boring Location Plan

DELAYED WATER LEVEL (FT): N/A

S A

M P

LE

S

DATE:

2.0 4.0 6.0 W

A T

E R

Elevation:

LL

L

IQ

U

ID

L

IM

IT

R

E T

A

IN

E D

D E

P T

H , F

T

R

Q D

M O

IS

T

U R

E C

O N

T E

N T

SOIL DESCRIPTION

P

A S

S

IN

G

R

E C

PL

S Y

M B

O L

Corpus Christi Martin Dock Port of Corpus Christi, Texas

Project No. 0312-1060

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

U N

C O

N F

C

O M

P

(T S

F

U N

IT

D

R Y

W T

(L

B /C

U F

T

UNC CMP (TSF)HAND PEN (TSF)

G E

O T

E S

-1

0.

G P

J R

B E

N N

E T

T G

W .G

For Refe ren ce

- dense

- trace gravel, subrounded

- very dense

- dense

- very dense clayey SAND, fine, brown and olive, moist, very dense (SC)

- brown and gray

Boring terminated at a depth of approximately 150 feet

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER

WC

P L

A S

T

IC

L

IM

IT

COMPLETION DEPTH: 150.0 Feet

20 40 60P L

A S

T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D

E X

R

Q D

R

Q D

R

Q D

BORING WB-1

END OF DRILLING (ft.): NONE OBSERVED SEEPAGE (ft.): NONE ENCOUNTERED

LOCATION: See Boring Location Plan S

A M

P

LE

S

DATE:

2.0 4.0 6.0 W

A T

E R

LL

L

IQ

U

ID

L

IM

IT

R

E T

A

IN

E D

D E

P T

H , F

T

R

Q D

M O

IS

T

U R

E C

O N

T E

N T

SOIL DESCRIPTION

P

A S

S

IN

G

R

E C

PL

S Y

M B

O L

Corpus Christi Martin Dock Port of Corpus Christi, Texas

Project No. 0312-1060

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

U N

C O

N F

C

O M

P

(T S

F

U N

IT

D

R Y

W T

(L

B /C

U F

T

UNC CMP (TSF)HAND PEN (TSF)

G E

O T

E S

-1

0.

G P

J R

B E

N N

E T

T G

W .G

For Refe ren ce

83113

SAND, fine to medium coarse, trace to little clay, trace shells and gravel (angular), olive and brown, moist, loose (SP)

- medium dense clayey SAND, fine, trace shells, olive, moist, very loose (SC)

- loose

- medium dense SAND, trace clay, fine, olive, moist, medium dense (SP)

- trace gravel (subangular) and shells clayey SAND, fine, olive, moist, medium dense (SC)

- loose

- medium dense

SAND, trace clay, fine to medium coarse, brown and gray, medium dense, moist (SP)

- trace gravel sandy CLAY to clayey SAND, fine to coarse, trace gravel (angular), brown and gray, moist, very stiff to hard (SC)

SAND, medium coarse, trace clay, brown and gray, dense (SP)

- very dense

.9181

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER

WC

P L

A S

T

IC

L

IM

IT

COMPLETION DEPTH: 150.0 Feet

20 40 60P L

A S

T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D

E X

R

Q D

R

Q D

R

Q D

BORING WB-2

END OF DRILLING (ft.): NONE OBSERVED SEEPAGE (ft.):

Elevation: 0.0

LOCATION: See Boring Location Plan

DELAYED WATER LEVEL (FT): N/A

S A

M P

LE

S

DATE:

2.0 4.0 6.0 W

A T

E R

Elevation:

LL

L

IQ

U

ID

L

IM

IT

R

E T

A

IN

E D

D E

P T

H , F

T

R

Q D

M O

IS

T

U R

E C

O N

T E

N T

SOIL DESCRIPTION

P

A S

S

IN

G

R

E C

PL

S Y

M B

O L

Corpus Christi Martin Dock Port of Corpus Christi, Texas

Project No. 0312-1060

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

U N

C O

N F

C

O M

P

(T S

F

U N

IT

D

R Y

W T

(L

B /C

U F

T

UNC CMP (TSF)HAND PEN (TSF)

G E

O T

E S

-1

0.

G P

J R

B E

N N

E T

T G

W .G

For Refe ren ce

- gray

- medium dense

- very dense, trace to little clay

- trace gravel (angular)

Boring terminated at a depth of approximately 150 feet

50/3"

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER

WC

P L

A S

T

IC

L

IM

IT

COMPLETION DEPTH: 150.0 Feet

20 40 60P L

A S

T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D

E X

R

Q D

R

Q D

R

Q D

BORING WB-2

END OF DRILLING (ft.): NONE OBSERVED SEEPAGE (ft.):

LOCATION: See Boring Location Plan S

A M

P

LE

S

DATE:

2.0 4.0 6.0 W

A T

E R

LL

L

IQ

U

ID

L

IM

IT

R

E T

A

IN

E D

D E

P T

H , F

T

R

Q D

M O

IS

T

U R

E C

O N

T E

N T

SOIL DESCRIPTION

P

A S

S

IN

G

R

E C

PL

S Y

M B

O L

Corpus Christi Martin Dock Port of Corpus Christi, Texas

Project No. 0312-1060

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

U N

C O

N F

C

O M

P

(T S

F

U N

IT

D

R Y

W T

(L

B /C

U F

T

UNC CMP (TSF)HAND PEN (TSF)

G E

O T

E S

-1

0.

G P

J R

B E

N N

E T

T G

W .G

For Refe ren ce

-wet

- fine, trace to little silt

- fine to coarse

- soft

- soft to medium stiff

- medium stiff

- little fine sand

- fine to coarse, olive and brown, medium dense

- trace gravel, angular, dense

- little to some clay, brown, medium dense

- trace to little clay, olive and gray

SAND, fine to coarse, trace silt, brown and olive, moist, medium dense (SP)

FAT CLAY, trace fine sand, olive, moist, very soft (CH)

SAND, fine to coarse, trace to little clay, olive, moist, dense (SP)

FAT CLAY, some sand, fine, brown, moist, stiff (CH)

0.6

0.9

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER

WC

P L

A S

T

IC

L

IM

IT

COMPLETION DEPTH: 150.0 Feet

20 40 60P L

A S

T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D

E X

R

Q D

R

Q D

R

Q D

BORING WB-3

END OF DRILLING (ft.): NONE OBSERVED SEEPAGE (ft.): 4

Elevation: 0.0

LOCATION: See Boring Location Plan

DELAYED WATER LEVEL (FT): N/A

S A

M P

LE

S

DATE:

2.0 4.0 6.0 W

A T

E R

Elevation:

LL

L

IQ

U

ID

L

IM

IT

R

E T

A

IN

E D

D E

P T

H , F

T

R

Q D

M O

IS

T

U R

E C

O N

T E

N T

SOIL DESCRIPTION

P

A S

S

IN

G

R

E C

PL

S Y

M B

O L

Corpus Christi Martin Dock Port of Corpus Christi, Texas

Project No. 0312-1060

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

U N

C O

N F

C

O M

P

(T S

F

U N

IT

D

R Y

W T

(L

B /C

U F

T

UNC CMP (TSF)HAND PEN (TSF)

G E

O T

E S

-1

0.

G P

J R

B E

N N

E T

T G

W .G

For Refe ren ce

- very stiff

- hard, olive

- trace gravel, angular, dense, some clay

- medium dense, little to some silt

- dense

SAND, fine to medium coarse, trace to little clay, olive and gray, moist, medium dense (SP)

Boring terminated at a depth of approximately 150 feet

1.2065

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER

WC

P L

A S

T

IC

L

IM

IT

COMPLETION DEPTH: 150.0 Feet

20 40 60P L

A S

T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D

E X

R

Q D

R

Q D

R

Q D

BORING WB-3

END OF DRILLING (ft.): NONE OBSERVED SEEPAGE (ft.): 4

LOCATION: See Boring Location Plan S

A M

P

LE

S

DATE:

2.0 4.0 6.0 W

A T

E R

LL

L

IQ

U

ID

L

IM

IT

R

E T

A

IN

E D

D E

P T

H , F

T

R

Q D

M O

IS

T

U R

E C

O N

T E

N T

SOIL DESCRIPTION

P

A S

S

IN

G

R

E C

PL

S Y

M B

O L

Corpus Christi Martin Dock Port of Corpus Christi, Texas

Project No. 0312-1060

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

S P

T

N

T

C P

T

V

A L

U E

S

U N

C O

N F

C

O M

P

(T S

F

U N

IT

D

R Y

W T

(L

B /C

U F

T

UNC CMP (TSF)HAND PEN (TSF)

G E

O T

E S

-1

0.

G P

J R

B E

N N

E T

T G

W .G

For Refe ren ce

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC.

APPENDIX B

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

ren ce

3801 Doris Lane Round Rock, TX 78664 Phone: (512) 992-2087

Client: Professional Service Industries, Inc. Project No.

Project: C.C. Martin Dock (0312-1060) Test Method: ASTM D 422 Sample: LB-1, S-19 (63-65 ft) Test Date:

Notes:

No. 100 (150 m) No. 200 (75 m)

69.0

Plastic Limit 14 Plastic Index 24

Liquid Limit

The results shown on this report are for the exclusive use of the client for whom they were obtained and apply only to the sample tested and / or inspected. They are not intended to be indicative of qualities of apparently identical products. The use of our name must recieve prior written approval. Reports must be reproduced in their entirety. Unauthorized use or copying of this document is strictly prohibited by anyone other than the client for the specific project.

No. 60 (250 m)

Tested by: T.W & T.V.

Olga Vasquez, 01/13/15 Quality Review/Date

54.2 33.6

3/4 in.

87.1

73.6

Plastic Index (ASTM D 4318) Results

100.0 100.0

Sieve Analysis

No. 10 (2.0 mm)

1.5 in. 100.0

100.0

No. 4 (4.75 mm) 78.3

01/13/15

Notes: Specimen was air dried, 3 point Liquid Limit procedure was used.

Particle Size Analysis for Soils

3 in.

2 in.

1 in.

100.0

3/8 in.

1412527

Sieve Size Percentage Passing

64.4

71.3No. 20 (850 m) No. 40 (450 m)

Soil classifies as a Clayey Sand with Gravel (SC) in accordance with ASTM D 2487.

The specific gravity of soil solids at 20°C was 2.674 as determined by ASTM D 854, Method A.

0.010.1110100

P er ce n t F in er

Particle Size (mm)

Sieve Sizes 3" 2" 3/4" 3/8" 4 10 20 40 60 100 200

For Refe ren ce

Phone: (512) 992-2087

Client: Professional Service Industries, Inc. Project No.

Project: C.C. Martin Dock (0312-1060) Test Method: ASTM D 422 Sample: LB-2, S-4 (6-8 ft) Test Date:

Notes:

No. 100 (150 m) No. 200 (75 m)

85.7

Plastic Limit 15 Plastic Index 25

Liquid Limit

The results shown on this report are for the exclusive use of the client for whom they were obtained and apply only to the sample tested and / or inspected. They are not intended to be indicative of qualities of apparently identical products. The use of our name must recieve prior written approval. Reports must be reproduced in their entirety. Unauthorized use or copying of this document is strictly prohibited by anyone other than the client for the specific project.

No. 60 (250 m)

Tested by: T.W & T.V.

Olga Vasquez, 01/08/15 Quality Review/Date

77.5 66.9

3/4 in.

99.2

91.5

Plastic Index (ASTM D 4318) Results

100.0 100.0

Sieve Analysis

No. 10 (2.0 mm)

1.5 in. 100.0

100.0

No. 4 (4.75 mm) 95.3

01/02/15

Notes: Specimen was air dried, 3 point Liquid Limit procedure was used.

Particle Size Analysis for Soils

3 in.

2 in.

1 in.

100.0

3/8 in.

1412527

Sieve Size Percentage Passing

82.1

88.2No. 20 (850 m) No. 40 (450 m)

Soil classifies as a Sandy Lean Clay (CL) in accordance with ASTM D 2487.

was 2.476 as determined by ASTM D 854, Method A.

0.010.1110100

P er ce n t F in er

Particle Size (mm)

Sieve Sizes 3" 2" 3/4" 3/8" 4 10 20 40 60 100 200

For Refe ren ce

Phone: (512) 992-2087

Client: Professional Service Industries, Inc. Project No.

Project: C.C. Martin Dock (0312-1060) Test Method: ASTM D 422 Sample: LB-2, S-19 (78-80 ft) Test Date:

Notes:

No. 100 (150 m) No. 200 (75 m)

Soil classifies as a Fat Clay with Sand (CH) in accordance with ASTM D 2487.

was 2.733 as determined by ASTM D 854, Method A.

01/02/15

Notes: Specimen was air dried, 3 point Liquid Limit procedure was used.

Particle Size Analysis for Soils

3 in.

2 in.

1 in.

100.0

3/8 in.

1412527

Sieve Size Percentage Passing

93.2

96.3No. 20 (850 m) No. 40 (450 m)

3/4 in.

100.0

97.2

Plastic Index (ASTM D 4318) Results

100.0 100.0

Sieve Analysis

No. 10 (2.0 mm)

1.5 in. 100.0

100.0

No. 4 (4.75 mm) 98.1

The results shown on this report are for the exclusive use of the client for whom they were obtained and apply only to the sample tested and / or inspected. They are not intended to be indicative of qualities of apparently identical products. The use of our name must recieve prior written approval. Reports must be reproduced in their entirety. Unauthorized use or copying of this document is strictly prohibited by anyone other than the client for the specific project.

No. 60 (250 m)

Tested by: T.W & T.V.

Olga Vasquez, 01/05/15 Quality Review/Date

90.0 81.8

95.2

Plastic Limit 25 Plastic Index 49

Liquid Limit

0.010.1110100

P er ce n t F in er

Particle Size (mm)

Sieve Sizes 3" 2" 3/4" 3/8" 4 10 20 40 60 100 200

For Refe ren ce

Phone: (512) 992-2087

Client: Professional Service Industries, Inc. Project No.

Project: C.C. Martin Dock (0312-1060) Test Method: ASTM D 422 Sample: LB-3, S-12 (43-45 ft) Test Date:

Notes:

No. 100 (150 m) No. 200 (75 m)

99.9

Plastic Limit 26 Plastic Index 56

Liquid Limit

The results shown on this report are for the exclusive use of the client for whom they were obtained and apply only to the sample tested and / or inspected. They are not intended to be indicative of qualities of apparently identical products. The use of our name must recieve prior written approval. Reports must be reproduced in their entirety. Unauthorized use or copying of this document is strictly prohibited by anyone other than the client for the specific project.

No. 60 (250 m)

Tested by: T.W & T.V.

Olga Vasquez, 01/05/15 Quality Review/Date

99.1 96.8

3/4 in.

100.0

100.0

Plastic Index (ASTM D 4318) Results

100.0 100.0

Sieve Analysis

No. 10 (2.0 mm)

1.5 in. 100.0

100.0

No. 4 (4.75 mm) 100.0

Soil classifies as a Fat Clay (CH) in was 2.728 as determined by ASTM D 854, Method A.

01/02/15

Notes: Specimen was air dried, 3 point Liquid Limit procedure was used.

Particle Size Analysis for Soils

3 in.

2 in.

1 in.

100.0

3/8 in.

1412527

Sieve Size Percentage Passing

99.5

99.9No. 20 (850 m) No. 40 (450 m)

0.010.1110100

P er ce n t F in er

Particle Size (mm)

Sieve Sizes 3" 2" 3/4" 3/8" 4 10 20 40 60 100 200

For Refe ren ce

Phone: (512) 992-2087

Client: Professional Service Industries, Inc. Project No.

Project: C.C. Martin Dock (0312-1060) Test Method: ASTM D 422 Sample: LB-3, S-21 (88-90 ft) Test Date:

Notes:

No. 100 (150 m) No. 200 (75 m)

01/13/15

Notes: Specimen was air dried, 3 point Liquid Limit procedure was used.

Particle Size Analysis for Soils

3 in.

2 in.

1 in.

100.0

3/8 in.

1412527

Sieve Size Percentage Passing

93.2

95.8No. 20 (850 m) No. 40 (450 m) was 2.774 as determined by ASTM D 854, Method A.

3/4 in.

100.0

96.7

Plastic Index (ASTM D 4318) Results

100.0 100.0

Sieve Analysis

No. 10 (2.0 mm)

1.5 in. 100.0

100.0

No. 4 (4.75 mm) 98.7

The results shown on this report are for the exclusive use of the client for whom they were obtained and apply only to the sample tested and / or inspected. They are not intended to be indicative of qualities of apparently identical products. The use of our name must recieve prior written approval. Reports must be reproduced in their entirety. Unauthorized use or copying of this document is strictly prohibited by anyone other than the client for the specific project.

No. 60 (250 m)

Tested by: T.W & T.V.

Olga Vasquez, 01/13/15 Quality Review/Date

90.6 85.1

95.0

Plastic Limit 34 Plastic Index 57

Liquid Limit

0.010.1110100

P er ce n t F in er

Particle Size (mm)

Sieve Sizes 3" 2" 3/4" 3/8" 4 10 20 40 60 100 200

For Refe ren ce

Phone: (512) 992-2087

Client: Professional Service Industries, Inc. Project No.

Project: C.C. Martin Dock (0312-1060) Test Method: ASTM D 422 Sample: LB-3, S-24 (103-105 ft) Test Date:

Notes:

No. 100 (150 m) No. 200 (75 m) was 2.790 as determined by ASTM D 854, Method A.

01/02/15

Notes: Specimen was air dried, 3 point Liquid Limit procedure was used.

Particle Size Analysis for Soils

3 in.

2 in.

1 in.

100.0

3/8 in.

1412527

Sieve Size Percentage Passing

96.9

98.1No. 20 (850 m) No. 40 (450 m)

3/4 in.

100.0

98.8

Plastic Index (ASTM D 4318) Results

100.0 100.0

Sieve Analysis

No. 10 (2.0 mm)

1.5 in. 100.0

100.0

No. 4 (4.75 mm) 99.7

The results shown on this report are for the exclusive use of the client for whom they were obtained and apply only to the sample tested and / or inspected. They are not intended to be indicative of qualities of apparently identical products. The use of our name must recieve prior written approval. Reports must be reproduced in their entirety. Unauthorized use or copying of this document is strictly prohibited by anyone other than the client for the specific project.

No. 60 (250 m)

Tested by: T.W & T.V.

Olga Vasquez, 01/07/15 Quality Review/Date

96.1 94.4

97.5

Plastic Limit 33 Plastic Index 70

Liquid Limit

0.010.1110100

P er ce n t F in er

Particle Size (mm)

Sieve Sizes 3" 2" 3/4" 3/8" 4 10 20 40 60 100 200

For Refe ren ce

Phone: (512) 992-2087

Client: Professional Service Industries, Inc. Project No.

Project: C.C. Martin Dock (0312-1060) Test Method: ASTM D 422 Sample: LB-3, S-29 (128-130 ft) Test Date:

Notes:

No. 100 (150 m) No. 200 (75 m)

97.4

Plastic Limit 17 Plastic Index 14

Liquid Limit

The results shown on this report are for the exclusive use of the client for whom they were obtained and apply only to the sample tested and / or inspected. They are not intended to be indicative of qualities of apparently identical products. The use of our name must recieve prior written approval. Reports must be reproduced in their entirety. Unauthorized use or copying of this document is strictly prohibited by anyone other than the client for the specific project.

No. 60 (250 m)

Tested by: T.W & T.V.

Olga Vasquez, 01/05/15 Quality Review/Date

76.7 41.3

3/4 in.

100.0

99.0

Plastic Index (ASTM D 4318) Results

100.0 100.0

Sieve Analysis

No. 10 (2.0 mm)

1.5 in. 100.0

100.0

No. 4 (4.75 mm) 99.8

Soil classifies as a Clayey Sand (SC) in was 2.730 as determined by ASTM D 854, Method A.

01/02/15

Notes: Specimen was air dried, 3 point Liquid Limit procedure was used.

Particle Size Analysis for Soils

3 in.

2 in.

1 in.

100.0

3/8 in.

1412527

Sieve Size Percentage Passing

94.2

98.2No. 20 (850 m) No. 40 (450 m)

0.010.1110100

P er ce n t F in er

Particle Size (mm)

Sieve Sizes 3" 2" 3/4" 3/8" 4 10 20 40 60 100 200

For Refe ren ce

Phone: (512) 992-2087

Client: Sample ID.:

Type of Specimen: Shelby Tube

Project: Type of Test: CU R-bar, Multi-stage

Strain Rate (%/hr): 0.5 % / hr

Test Method: RRC PN:

Test Date:

2500 4500 7000

63-65 - - - - Avg. Diameter (in) Do 2.77 2.77 2.77 Avg. Height (in) Ho 5.67 5.50 5.32 Avg. Water Content (%) wo 16.6 - - - - Total Unit Weight (pcf) total 135.5 139.5 144.3 Dry Unit Weight (pcf) dry 116.1 - - - - Saturation (%) Sr 100 - - - - Void Ratio eo 0.44 - - - - Specific Gravity (Measured) Gs 2.674 - - - - B-Coefficient B 0.95 - - - -

Void Ratio ec - - - - 0.39

Area (in2) A1 6.02 5.99 6.00 Saturation (%) Sr - - - - - - Avg. Water Content (%) wf - - - - - -

22.4 41.8 67.5

39.8 73.0 116.1

17.4 31.2 48.6

30.0 57.9 100.8

7.6 16.1 33.3

27.6

1 (psi)

Cohesion, c' (psi):

LB-1, S-19

Specimen Conditions after Consolidation

Eff. Consolidation Stress (psf) Specimen ID.

3.4

3 (psi) Effective Stresses at Failure

Specimen prepared by: Caleb McCord Analysis & Quality Review/Date

'3 (psi)

'1 (psi)

The results shown on this report are for the exclusive use of the client for whom they were obtained and apply only to the sample tested and / or inspected. They are not intended to be indicative of qualities of apparently identical products. The use of our name must recieve prior written approval. Reports must be reproduced in their entirety. Unauthorized use or copying of this document is strictly prohibited by anyone other than the client for the specific project.

Cheng-Wei Chen, Ph.D. 01/14/15

Triaxial Compression Test Report (Multi-stage test on single specimen)

Total Stresses

Effective Stresses

Friction Angle, (o): 24.5

0.0

ASTM D 4767-

Modified

LB-1, S-19 (63-65 ft)

Initial Specimen Conditions

Total Stresses at Failure

C.C. Martin Dock (0312- 1060)

1412527

Note: Specimen was mounted in the triaxial cells using the back-pressure saturation method. Failure was determined at the maximum deviator stress or deviator stress at 15% axial strain, which ever is obtained first.

Cohesion, c (psi):

Deviator Stress (psi)

Professional Service Industries, Inc.

Friction Angle, ' (o):

Peak Stresses at Failure

01/05/15

Depth (ft) y = 1.0947x + 7.1097 R² = 0.9951

0 20 40 60 80

D ev ia to r S tr es s, ' 1

(p si

('1 + 2'3)/3 (psi) p'-q

2500 psf 4500 psf 7000 psf Max. Deviator Stresses

-10

0 5 10 15 20

D ev ia to r S tr

(p si

C h an ge i n P or e

P re ss u re u p si

Axial Strain (%)

Deviator Stress and Pore Pressure versus Axial Strain

2500 psf 4500 psf 7000 psf Pore Pressure for 2500 psf Pore Pressure for 4500 psf Pore Pressure for 7000 psf

For Refe ren ce

Phone: (512) 992-2087

Client: Professional Service Industries, Inc. RRC Project No.: 1412527 Project: C.C. Martin Dock (0312-1060) Test Method: ASTM D 4767-Modified Specimen: LB-1, S-19 (63-65 ft) Test Date: 01/04/15

(a) Before

(b) Post-Test

The results shown on this report are for the exclusive use of the client for whom they were obtained and apply only to the sample tested and / or inspected. They are not intended to be indicative of qualities of apparently identical products. The use of our name must recieve prior written approval. Reports must be reproduced in their entirety. Unauthorized use or copying of this document is strictly prohibited by anyone other than the client for the specific project.

Sample ID.: LB-1, S-19 (63-65 ft)

Multi-Stage CU…