260074-Addendum-1.pdf

ESSEX COUNTY

OFFICE OF THE MANAGER

7551 Court Street · P.O. Box 217 · Elizabethtown, New York 12932 Telephone (518) 873-3332 · Fax (518) 873-3339

Michael Mascarenas Linda M. Wolf County Manager Purchasing Agent

TO: All Bidders

FROM: Linda Wolf, CPA, Purchasing Agent

DATE: August 24, 2026

SUBJECT: Addendum #1 Bid for RIVER ROAD (CR 18) OVER TRIBUTARY TO

FRANKLIN FALLS FLOW CULVERT REPLACEMENT PROJECT

This Addendum, issued to bid document holders of record, indicates changes to the bid documents for the RIVER ROAD (CR 18) OVER TRIBUTARY TO FRANKLIN FALLS FLOW CULVERT REPLACEMENT PROJECT bid opening August 27, 2026.

PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS & ANSWERS:

Question: Is there any flow rates from the steam to the Pond?

Answer: Please see the attached stream stats report (Attachment #1)

Question: Were any test bores taken? Could there be rock where the sheeting is to be located?

Answer: Please see the attached Subsurface Investigation & Geotechnical Evaluation (Attachment #2)

Question: By scale the existing pipe appears to be 6’ diameter. Is that RCP or CMP?

Answer: The existing pipe is CMP

END OF ADDENDUM # 1

ATTACHMENT #1

CR18 STREAM STATS REPORT

StreamStats Report

Collapse All

Basin Characteristics

Parameter Code Parameter Description Value Unit

DRNAREA Area that drains to a point on a stream 1.37 square miles

Bankfull Statistics

Bankfull Statistics Parameters [Bankfull Regions 1 and 2 SIR2009 5144]

Parameter Code Parameter Name Value Units Min Limit Max Limit

DRNAREA Drainage Area 1.37 square miles 0.52 396

Bankfull Statistics Parameters [Appalachian Highlands D Bieger 2015]

Parameter Code Parameter Name Value Units Min Limit Max Limit

DRNAREA Drainage Area 1.37 square miles 0.07722 940.1535

Region ID: NY Workspace ID: NY20240920180710222000 Clicked Point (Latitude, Longitude): 44.41633, -74.00253 Time: 2024-09-20 14:07:57 -0400

9/20/24, 2:11 PM StreamStats https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/ 1/3

Bankfull Statistics Parameters [USA Bieger 2015]

Parameter Code Parameter Name Value Units Min Limit Max Limit

DRNAREA Drainage Area 1.37 square miles 0.07722 59927.7393

Bankfull Statistics Flow Report [Bankfull Regions 1 and 2 SIR2009 5144]

PIL: Lower 90% Prediction Interval, PIU: Upper 90% Prediction Interval, ASEp: Average Standard Error of Prediction, SE: Standard Error, PC: Percent Correct, RMSE: Root Mean Squared Error, PseudoR^2: Pseudo R Squared (other --see report)

Statistic Value Unit PIL PIU

Bankfull Area 27.7 ft^2 10.4 73.7

Bankfull Depth 1.18 ft 0.443 3.14

Bankfull Streamflow 64.8 ft^3/s 9.15 459

Bankfull Width 24.1 ft 8.81 65.9

Bankfull Statistics Flow Report [Appalachian Highlands D Bieger 2015]

Statistic Value Unit

Bieger_D_channel_width 17.3 ft

Bieger_D_channel_depth 1.23 ft

Bieger_D_channel_cross_sectional_area 21.5 ft^2

Bankfull Statistics Flow Report [USA Bieger 2015]

Statistic Value Unit

Bieger_USA_channel_width 13.8 ft

Bieger_USA_channel_depth 1.29 ft

Bieger_USA_channel_cross_sectional_area 20.3 ft^2

Bankfull Statistics Flow Report [Area-Averaged]

PIL: Lower 90% Prediction Interval, PIU: Upper 90% Prediction Interval, ASEp: Average Standard Error of Prediction, SE: Standard Error, PC: Percent Correct, RMSE: Root Mean Squared Error, PseudoR^2: Pseudo R Squared (other --see report)

Statistic Value Unit PIL PIU

Bankfull Area 27.7 ft^2 10.4 73.7

Bankfull Depth 1.18 ft 0.443 3.14

Bankfull Streamflow 64.8 ft^3/s 9.15 459

Bankfull Width 24.1 ft 8.81 65.9

Bieger_D_channel_width 17.3 ft

Bieger_D_channel_depth 1.23 ft

Bieger_D_channel_cross_sectional_area 21.5 ft^2

Bieger_USA_channel_width 13.8 ft

Bieger_USA_channel_depth 1.29 ft https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/ 2/3

Statistic Value Unit PIL PIU

Bieger_USA_channel_cross_sectional_area 20.3 ft^2

Bankfull Statistics Citations

Mulvihill, C.I., Baldigo, B.P., Miller, S.J. , and DeKoskie, Douglas,2009, Bankfull Discharge and Channel Characteristics of Streams in New York State: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2009-5144, 51 p. (http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2009/5144/) Bieger, Katrin; Rathjens, Hendrik; Allen, Peter M.; and Arnold, Jeffrey G.,2015, Development and Evaluation of Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for the Physiographic Regions of the United States, Publications from USDA-ARS / UNL Faculty, 17p. (https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usdaarsfacpub/1515?

utm_source=digitalcommons.unl.edu%2Fusdaarsfacpub%2F1515&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

Maximum Probable Flood Statistics

Maximum Probable Flood Statistics Parameters [Crippen Bue Region 4]

Parameter Code Parameter Name Value Units Min Limit Max Limit

DRNAREA Drainage Area 1.37 square miles 0.1 10000

Maximum Probable Flood Statistics Flow Report [Crippen Bue Region 4]

Statistic Value Unit

Maximum Flood Crippen Bue Regional 5120 ft^3/s

Maximum Probable Flood Statistics Citations

Crippen, J.R. and Bue, Conrad D.1977, Maximum Floodflows in the Conterminous United States, Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1887, 52p. (https://pubs.usgs.gov/wsp/1887/report.pdf)

USGS Data Disclaimer: Unless otherwise stated, all data, metadata and related materials are considered to satisfy the quality standards relative to the purpose for which the data were collected. Although these data and associated metadata have been reviewed for accuracy and completeness and approved for release by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), no warranty expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data for other purposes, nor on all computer systems, nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty.

USGS Software Disclaimer: This software has been approved for release by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Although the software has been subjected to rigorous review, the USGS reserves the right to update the software as needed pursuant to further analysis and review. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made by the USGS or the U.S. Government as to the functionality of the software and related material nor shall the fact of release constitute any such warranty. Furthermore, the software is released on condition that neither the USGS nor the U.S. Government shall be held liable for any damages resulting from its authorized or unauthorized use.

USGS Product Names Disclaimer: Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the

U.S. Government.

Application Version: 4.24.0

StreamStats Services Version: 1.2.22

NSS Services Version: 2.2.1 https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/ 3/3 http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2009/5144/ http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2009/5144/ http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2009/5144/ https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usdaarsfacpub/1515?utm_source=digitalcommons.unl.edu%2Fusdaarsfacpub%2F1515&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usdaarsfacpub/1515?utm_source=digitalcommons.unl.edu%2Fusdaarsfacpub%2F1515&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usdaarsfacpub/1515?utm_source=digitalcommons.unl.edu%2Fusdaarsfacpub%2F1515&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usdaarsfacpub/1515?utm_source=digitalcommons.unl.edu%2Fusdaarsfacpub%2F1515&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages https://pubs.usgs.gov/wsp/1887/report.pdf https://pubs.usgs.gov/wsp/1887/report.pdf

ATTACHMENT #2

SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION &

GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION

Albany ♦ Binghamton♦ Buffalo ♦ Elmira ♦ Plattsburgh ♦ Poughkeepsie ♦ Rochester ♦ Syracuse ♦ Utica ♦ Watertown

January 19, 2026

Essex County Department of Public Works 8053 U.S. Route 9 Elizabethtown, New York 12932

Attn: Gary Rancour Jr.

Re: Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Evaluation Services County Route 18 over Tributary to Franklin Falls Pond Bloomindale, Essex County, New York ATL Report No. CD11076E-01-10-25

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Enclosed is one digital copy of the referenced report. ATL appreciates the opportunity to provide geotechnical services for your project.

Please note that upon completion of the subsurface investigation the boreholes were backfilled with on-site soils and the asphalt was patched with asphalt cold patch. It is important that the backfilled borings be monitored for settlement or subsidence. This will be the responsibility of Essex County Department of Public Works. ATL assumes no liability for borehole settlement.

The soil samples obtained during this investigation will be retained for a period of six months and subsequently discarded, unless otherwise instructed.

Please contact our office should you have any questions or comments on this information, or if we may be of further service. We look forward to our continued association to obtain a successful completion of this project.

Sincerely, ATLANTIC TESTING LABORATORIES, Limited

Adam J. Schneider, P.E.

Senior Engineer

AJS/ /npm

Enclosures

SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION

AND

PROPOSED CULVERT REPLACEMENT

COUNTY ROUTE 18 (RIVER ROAD) OVER TRIBUTARY

TO FRANKLIN FALL POND/SARANAC RIVER

BLOOMINGDALE, ESSEX COUNTY, NEW YORK

ESSEX COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC

WORKS

PREPARED FOR: Essex County Department of Public Works 8053 U.S. Route 9

Elizabethtown, New York 12932

PREPARED BY: Atlantic Testing Laboratories, Limited 6431 U.S. Highway 11 Canton, NY 13617

ATL Report No. CD11076E-01-10-25

January 19, 2026

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

NUMBER

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1

3.0 SITE CONDITIONS & GEOLOGY 2

4.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION & SAMPLING METHODOLOGY 2

5.0 SITE SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 2

5.1 Soil Borings

5.2 Groundwater

6.0 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS 4

7.0 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATIONS 4

7.1 Site Work

7.2 Structure Foundations

7.3 Frost Protection

7.4 Seismic Considerations

7.5 Backfill and Compaction Recommendations

7.6 Dewatering

7.7 Testing and Inspection

8.0 LIMITATIONS 8

APPENDICES

A. Site Location Plan B. Boring Location Plan C. Subsurface Investigation Logs D. Laboratory Test Reports

SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION

AND

PROPOSED CULVERT REPLACEMENT

COUNTY ROUTE 18 (RIVER ROAD) OVER TRIBUTARY

TO FRANKLIN FALL POND/SARANAC RIVER

BLOOMINGDALE, ESSEX COUNTY, NEW YORK

ESSEX COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC

WORKS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

At the request of Gary Rancour Jr. representing Essex County Department of Public Works (Essex County) and in accordance with our proposal (ATL File No. CD998-969-04-25, dated April 8, 2025), Atlantic Testing Laboratories, Limited (ATL) performed a subsurface investigation and geotechnical evaluation for the referenced project. The subsurface investigation program, consisting of two (2) soil borings, was conducted on June 25 and 26, 2025.

The purpose of the investigation was to ascertain the general subsurface soil, bedrock and groundwater conditions at the site, to evaluate the engineering significance of these findings, and to provide recommendations related to the proposed culvert replacement structure foundation design and construction.

The proposed project is located on County Route 18/River Road in Bloomingdale, Essex County, New York. The approximate project coordinates are N 44°24'58" latitude and W 74°0'9" longitude.

A Site Location Plan is included in Appendix A. All dimensions and elevations referenced in this report are in units of feet, unless otherwise noted.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

According to information provided by Essex County, it is our understanding that the proposed project will consist of the complete replacement of the existing culvert. The proposed culvert type and design scour depths were not provided prior to the completion of this report.

Essex County DPW Page 2 of 9 ATL No. CD11076E-01-10-25 January 19, 2026

3.0 SITE CONDITIONS & GEOLOGY

The existing culvert is located along County Route 18 at an inlet for a tributary to Franklin Falls Pond. The crossing is approximately 2.4 miles south of the Franklin Falls Road intersection. The project site is surrounded by heavily wooded land to the west and Franklin Falls Pond to the east.

The County Route 18 crossing is currently an asphalt paved, two-lane crossing over the unnamed tributary inlet.

The site is located in the Adirondack Mountain Physiographic Province of New York State. Based on the Surficial Geologic Map of New York State, Adirondack Sheet, the project area is generally mantled with glacial till. Based on the New York State Geologic Map, Adirondack Sheet, the project area is generally underlain by gneiss bedrock.

4.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION & SAMPLING METHODOLOGY

Two (2) soil boring locations were selected by representatives of Essex County and staked in the field by ATL. The boring surface elevations were not provided to ATL. The approximate soil boring locations are depicted on the provided Boring Location Plan included in Appendix B.

The soil borings were performed with a truck mounted CME-75 drill rig, advancing HW (4-inch) flush joint casing and a 3-7/8-inch tri-cone roller bit using water as the drilling fluid. Soil sampling and Standard Penetration Testing was performed utilizing a 2-inch outside diameter split spoon sampler and automatic drop hammer in accordance with ASTM D 1586. Soil sampling was performed continuously to a depth of 12 feet and at 4 to 5 feet intervals thereafter to bedrock at depths of 22 to 23 feet below the surface. Bedrock was cored for 10 feet using an NX size, double-tube core barrel in each boring.

The recovered soil samples were visually classified in the laboratory by an engineering technician in general accordance with the Burmister Soil Classification System. The split spoon sampler does not recover material larger than 1⅜-inch in nominal dimension; therefore, the soil classifications may not be representative of the entire soil matrix. The visual classifications and the standard penetration test results are presented on the Subsurface Investigation Logs included in Appendix C.

The boreholes were backfilled with on-site soil upon completion, and the asphalt was patched with asphalt cold patch. It is important that the backfilled boreholes be monitored for settlement or subsidence. This will be the responsibility of Essex County and/or their client. ATL assumes no liability for loss or damage resulting from borehole settlement.

5.0 SITE SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

The following description of subsurface conditions is based on the soil, bedrock, and groundwater conditions encountered during this subsurface investigation. Actual subsurface conditions may vary across the site in both the horizontal and vertical dimensions. Detailed subsurface descriptions are provided on the Subsurface Investigation Logs.

Essex County DPW Page 3 of 9

5.1 Soil Borings

5.1.1 North Boring (Boring B-1)

Boring B-1 encountered approximately 6 inches of asphalt pavement at the surface underlain by compact (SPT N-values 20 to 50) sand with little amounts of silt and trace amounts of gravel that extended to a depth of 2 feet below the surface. The compact sand was underlain by very loose (SPT N-values less than 4) to medium compact (SPT N-values 10 to 30) sand with varying proportions of silt and gravel that extended to possible weathered bedrock at a depth of 15 feet below the surface. A tri-cone roller bit was advanced through the possible weathered bedrock to a depth of 22 feet below the surface where bedrock was cored for 10 feet. The following table summarizes the recovered rock cores.

North Boring Rock Core Descriptions (Boring B-1) Run No.

Rock Type

Depth (ft.)

Recovery

RQD

Description of Rock Quality (1)

1 Gneiss 22 - 27 78 23 Very Poor 2 Gneiss 27 - 32 95 60 Fair

(1)Based on the NYSDOT Geotechnical Design Manual, Chapter 6, Table 6.12.3

Trace amounts of organic material consisting of wood fragments were encountered at depths of 10 to 12 feet below the surface. The upper 12 feet of soil may be fill material placed during construction of the existing culvert.

5.1.2 South Boring (Boring B-2)

Boring B-2 encountered approximately 6 inches of asphalt pavement at the ground surface underlain by compact sand with little amounts of silt and trace amounts of gravel that extended to a depth of approximately 2 feet. The compact sand was underlain by very loose to medium compact sand with varying proportions of silt and gravel that extended to a depth of approximately 13 feet below the surface. The very loose to medium compact sand was underlain by compact to very compact sand and gravel with trace amounts of silt that extended to possible weathered bedrock at a depth of 19 feet below the surface. A tri-cone roller bit was advanced through the possible weathered bedrock to a depth of 23 feet below the surface where bedrock was cored for 10 feet. The following table summarizes the recovered rock cores.

South Boring Rock Core Descriptions (Boring B-2) Run No.

Rock Type

Depth (ft.)

Recovery

RQD

Description of Rock Quality (1)

1 Gneiss 23 - 28 80 72 Fair 2 Gneiss 28 - 33 88 73 Fair

(1)Based on the NYSDOT Geotechnical Design Manual, Chapter 6, Table 6.12.3

Essex County DPW Page 4 of 9

5.2 Groundwater

Groundwater measurements were performed during the subsurface investigation within the cased and open boreholes. The soil samples were also classified for coloration and relative moisture conditions.

Freestanding water was recorded at depths ranging from 5.1 to 7 feet below the surface at the time of borehole advancement; however, the groundwater readings were affected by water utilized to advance the boreholes and are not considered a reliable indicator of the true groundwater depths. Boring B-1 and B-2 caved at depths of 12.2 and 7.8 feet below the surface, respectively. The borings were backfilled with on-site soil immediately upon completion;

therefore, the water levels did not have sufficient time to stabilize in the open boreholes.

Fluctuations in water levels may occur due to seasonal and climatic variations, changes in surface runoff patterns, construction activity, water surface variations of Franklin Falls Pond and subsequent development of the site along with other interrelated factors.

6.0 LABORATORY ANALYSES

Select soil and rock core samples were submitted to ATL’s geotechnical laboratory for the following physical analyses:

♦ Eight (8) Water Content Determination of Soil (ASTM D 2216) ♦ Two (2) Particle Size Analysis without Hydrometer (ASTM D 422)

The laboratory test results are included in Appendix D, Laboratory Test Reports.

7.0 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DISCUSSION

The Geotechnical Engineering Discussion is based on information provided by Essex County, our understanding of the project, and the subsurface conditions outlined in this report.

The following recommendations are presented as the minimum requirements for the design, planning, and construction of the proposed structure foundations. The concepts and geotechnical engineering considerations presented should be considered in project design and construction.

These concepts may require alterations to meet the specific design and economic considerations for this project.

Based on the very loose to loose sand soils and the wood fragments encountered in the borings, we believe that man placed fill associated with the construction of the existing culvert may be present to a depth of up to approximately 13 feet below the surface.

The proposed culvert replacement structure type and elevations were not provided prior to the preparation of this report. Based on the soil conditions encountered in the borings, it is recommended that the replacement structure be supported by either a foundation system bearing on compact sand and gravel soils at a depth of 13 feet below the existing roadway surface or a deep foundation system consisting of drilled micro-piles bearing in the gneiss bedrock encountered at a depth of 22 to 23 feet below the surface.

Essex County DPW Page 5 of 9

Excavations for shallow foundations should be advanced to stable native soils, below the design scour and frost depths. Foundations planned above the design scour depth should have alternate scour protection provided.

Driven piles will likely not achieve the required penetration depth for scour protection, lateral and uplift resistance due to the relatively shallow weathered and competent bedrock.

7.1 Site Work

Site work will require the removal of any asphalt pavement, man placed fill, topsoil and organic material, and the existing culvert structure within the footprint of the proposed structure.

The excavations for the proposed structure may extend below groundwater and tributary water levels. Shoring or other acceptable excavation stabilizing methods and dewatering may be required to provide a dry, stable work area. The on-site granular soils will be susceptible to sidewall sloughing in open excavations, especially below the water levels. The contractor should develop an excavation stabilization and dewatering plan for review by the owner and engineer prior to beginning the excavations.

Compact granular soil, weathered bedrock, and competent gneiss bedrock was encountered in the soil borings that may be encountered in foundation excavations.

The contractor must follow excavation safety practices as mandated by 29 CFR Part 1926 (OSHA) and by applicable state regulations.

7.2 Structure Foundations

7.2.1 Cast-in-Place Concrete Footings

Culvert footing excavations should be advanced to compact, native sand and gravel soils utilizing excavation techniques to minimize subgrade disturbance. All foundation excavations should be continuously monitored by a Geotechnical Engineer to verify subgrade stability and to ensure that adequate soil bearing capacity is obtained. Any deleterious fill or organic material encountered at the proposed foundation subgrade elevation, should be over-excavated and replaced with compacted Granular Fill, under the direction of the Geotechnical Engineer.

A 12-inch leveling pad consisting of NYSDOT Number 2, crushed stone should be placed and compacted directly beneath the proposed footings. The Number 2, crushed stone should be compacted with four passes of a dual-drum walk-behind vibratory roller; a Wacker DPU 6055 vibrating plate tamper; or equivalent, under the direction of a Geotechnical Engineer. The Number 2 crushed stone will provide a stable working surface and dewatering media if ground or surface water enters the culvert excavations.

Crushed stone layers should be wrapped in a non-woven geotextile (Mirafi 160N or equivalent) to limit the migration of native soils into the crushed stone.

The proposed structure foundations supported on NYSDOT Number 2, crushed stone underlain by the compact soil could be designed utilizing an allowable soil bearing capacity of 4000 psf, provided the recommendations contained in this report are followed.

Essex County DPW Page 6 of 9

An ultimate coefficient of sliding friction value of 0.45 may be used for cast-in-place concrete founded on NYSDOT Number 2 stone that overlies stable native soils.

7.2.2 Drilled Micro-Piles

Micro-piles will derive their capacity from the grout to rock bond of the gneiss bedrock encountered at depths below 22 to 23 feet in the soil borings.

The effective bond zone should extend into the gneiss bedrock a depth sufficient to provide the required axial, lateral, and uplift resistance. Micro-piles should be advanced a minimum of 10 feet below the design scour elevation. Permanent steel casing should be installed to the design scour elevation.

Based on gneiss bedrock encountered during this subsurface investigation an ultimate grout-to-rock bond strength value of 30 ksf is recommended for grouted micro-piles (TYPE A micro-pile), for preliminary design purposes. Grout should have a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 4000 psi.

Individual micro-pile spacing (center to center) should be greater than 3 times the piles largest cross sectional dimension and not less than 30 inches. The pile spacing should be measured center to center at the cut off elevation.

The final micro-pile design should be provided by a qualified specialty contractor. The means and methods of the micro-pile installations should be the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should prepare a “Micro-pile Design and Installation Plan” and submit it to the engineer and owner. The installation of the micro-piles should be continuously monitored by a Geotechnical Engineer familiar with the subsurface conditions present at the site and the micro-pile procedures utilized by the contractor. It is recommended that at least one static pile load test be performed for each micro-pile type utilized at the project site.

Non-plastic granular soils, groundwater, weathered bedrock, and competent gneiss bedrock should be anticipated during micro-pile installations.

7.3 Frost Protection

Shallow foundations requiring frost protection should be founded a minimum of 5 feet below final exterior grade.

7.4 Seismic Considerations

Based on the average field standard penetration test results and subsurface soil conditions, a seismic site classification of C has been determined for the project.

7.5 Backfill and Compaction Recommendations

The culvert should be backfilled with Common Fill below the water level in the tributary. Rip-rap and/or geotextiles should be placed on the backfill slopes to provide erosion protection.

All controlled fill and backfill should be placed and compacted in lifts not exceeding eight inches in loose thickness, at a moisture content of ± 2% of the Optimum Moisture Content, and to densities in excess of 95%, as determined by ASTM D1557, or as directed by the Geotechnical Engineer.

Essex County DPW Page 7 of 9

Compaction should be performed with vibratory rollers unless there is concern for damage to adjacent structures or underground utilities.

Common Fill should be relatively impervious, exhibiting a coefficient of permeability in the range of 1x10-3 to 1x10-5 cm/sec. The Common Fill should conform to the following gradation:

Sieve Size

*Percent Passing

3” 100 ¼” 35 - 70

#200 15 - 30 *Other material gradations may be acceptable for common fill.

Granular Fill should consist of a clean, screened, crushed, or bank-run gravel conforming to the following gradation:

Sieve Size

Percent Passing

4” 100 ¼” 35-65

#200 0-10

The empirical soil parameters presented in the following table may be used for the following backfill materials.

Table of Soil Properties

Soil Property Common Fill

Granular Fill

Angle of Internal Friction (°) 28 32 Active Earth Coefficient (Ka)* 0.36 0.31 At Rest Earth Coefficient (Ko)* 0.53 0.47 Passive Earth Coefficient (Kp)* 2.77 3.25 Moist Unit Weight (pcf) 120-130 130-140

*The Rankine earth pressure coefficients (ultimate values) are for level backfill placed in a fully drained condition.

Essex County DPW Page 8 of 9

7.6 Dewatering

The contractor should anticipate that groundwater may be encountered in shallow foundation and utility excavations, especially during wetter periods of the year. Excavations may extend below groundwater and tributary water levels.

It will be the contractor’s responsibility to maintain adequate water control at all times. Project specifications should clearly indicate that standing water, and/or saturated, unstable soil conditions will not be tolerated in areas to receive foundations or utilities. The project specifications should state that the contractor will not be reimbursed for extras related to the control of water.

All dewatering activities should comply with New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) storm water discharge requirements and/or local regulations for construction.

7.7 Testing and Inspection

The final site grading and foundation plans and project specifications should be reviewed by ATL, as the Geotechnical Engineer of Record, to verify that there has not been a misinterpretation of this report and/or ATL’s understanding of the project.

We recommend that ATL, as the Geotechnical Engineer of Record, be retained to perform applicable monitoring and inspection activities during site earthwork and foundation installations.

An ATL geotechnical representative familiar with the findings and recommendations of this report will be able to assess the subsurface conditions encountered during construction, provide necessary remedial recommendations, and verify that adequate bearing capacities and proper foundation installation requirements are achieved.

All foundation construction and backfilling should be monitored and tested by an Independent Testing Agency, conforming to ASTM E-329, “Standard Specification for Agencies Engaged in Construction Inspection, Testing, or Special Inspection.” ATL conforms to ASTM E-329 and can be retained to perform required construction phase monitoring and testing services, including applicable Special Inspections and Structural Tests in accordance with the Building Code of New York State.

8.0 LIMITATIONS

The subsurface investigation logs and this report in its entirety should be provided to the contractors for information and interpretation. The subsurface investigation logs may not be representative of the entire site subsurface condition, but only what was encountered at the individual test location at the time of the investigation. The subsurface soil, bedrock, and groundwater conditions may be different from those described on the subsurface investigation logs and summarized in this report.

Essex County DPW Page 9 of 9

This report was prepared to present the findings of our subsurface investigation and engineering evaluation, and to outline concepts to be utilized in foundation design and construction. These concepts may require alterations to meet the specific design and economic considerations for this project.

Prepared by: Reviewed by:

Adam J. Schneider, P.E. Brian T. Barnes, PE Senior Engineer Senior Engineer

AJS/BTB/npm

APPENDIX A

SITE LOCATION PLAN

Site Location Map Drawn by:

NM

Scale:

Not to scale

Project No.:

CD11076

Date:

October 2025

Proposed Culvert/Bridge Replacement County Route 18 over

Tributary to Franklin Falls Pond Bloomindale, New York

Albany, NY Canton, NY

Poughkeepsie, NY Utica, NY

Binghamton, NY Elmira, NY

Syracuse, NY Watertown, NY

Buffalo, NY Plattsburgh, NY Rochester, NY

North

APPENDIX B

BORING LOCATION PLAN

Boring Location Plan Drawn by:

NM

Scale:

Not to scale

Project No.:

CD11076

Date:

October 2025

Proposed Culvert/Bridge Replacement County Route 18 over

Tributary to Franklin Falls Pond Bloomindale, New York

Albany, NY Canton, NY

Poughkeepsie, NY Utica, NY

Binghamton, NY Elmira, NY

Syracuse, NY Watertown, NY

Buffalo, NY Plattsburgh, NY Rochester, NY

CD-05

pdrive:Forms\CD-Subsurface\Boring Location Plan rev 2: 2-22-.22

North

APPENDIX C

SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION LOGS

RUN 1

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

NX

C A S I N G

NX

C O R E

0.5

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

14.0

22.0

WH

50/5"

6" ASPHALT PAVEMENT

Brown cmf SAND; little Silt; trace f Gravel (moist, non-plastic)

Light Brown cmf SAND; little cf Gravel; little Silt (moist, non-plastic) w = 4%

Brown cmf SAND; some f Gravel; trace Silt (wet, non-plastic)

Brown cmf SAND; and cf Gravel; trace Silt (wet, non-plastic) w = 7%

NO RECOVERY

Brown cmf SAND; some Silt; little f Gravel; trace Organic Material

(wood fragments) (wet, non-plastic) w = 21%

Brown cmf SAND; and cf Gravel; trace Silt (wet, non-plastic) w = 15%

Encountered possible WEATHERED BEDROCK at 15.4 feet.

Advanced 3 7/8" tri-cone roller bit to 22.0 feet and began coring.

Blackish-Grey GNEISS

47" or 78% Recovery

2 Pieces (14") - 33% Chips and Fragments

2 Pieces longer than 4" (14") - RQD = 23%

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

15.4

27.0

0.5

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

15.4

S A

M P

L E

T Y

P E

DEPTH

OF

SAMPLE

trace

Subsurface Investigation

Groundwater Observations

6/26/2025 PM

littlem

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIAL

some

CAVED

Split Spoon Sample

DepthDate

Start Date:

Boring Location:

6/26/2025

Weight:

c fine

ATLANTIC TESTING LABORATORIES, Limited

CD11076E-01-08-25

CR 18 River Road over Trib to Franklin Falls Pond/Saranac River

Project:

Finish Date:6/26/2025

S A

M P

L E

N O

SS

M E

T H

O D

O F

A D

V A

N C

E

From

Drillers:

Estimated Groundwater

NX

D E

P T

H O

F C

H A

N G

E

Borehole caved at 12.2 feet.

PM

B-1

Fall:

Hammer Type:

Client:

7.0'

Ground Elev.:

35-50%

Bloomingdale, New York

Sheet

Casing

Automatic

Boring No.:

medium coarse of

Inspector:

5.1'

0-10%

6/26/2025

Time

BLOWS ON

SAMPLER

PER 6"

2" O.D.

SAMPLER

Coordinates

HW (4") Casing

R ec o ve ry (I n ch es in.

Report No.:

Boring Advance By:

140140140

Undisturbed Sample (Shelby Tube)

24.0'

Essex County DPW

To 10-20%

Subsurface Investigation and

Longitude

Rock Core lbs.

f

Sampler Hammer

See Boring Location Plan

D E

P T

H

SH

Mark Childs; Josh Hargett

20-35%

Latitude

A T

L-

LO

G

LL

C D

E

S S

E X

C O

U N

T Y

B

LO

O

M

IN

G D

A

LE

.G P

J A

T L4

-0 8.

G D

T

/9 /2

RUN 2NX

(WET)

Boring terminated at 32.0 feet.

Notes:

1. Borehole backfilled with on-site soils and patched at the surface with asphalt cold patch.

27.0 57Blackish-Grey GNEISS

57" or 95% Recovery

2 Pieces (38") - 33% Chips and Fragments

1 Piece longer than 4" (36") - RQD = 60%

32.0 27.0

32.0 and little

From To of

R E

C O

V E

R Y

(i n ch es some

ATLANTIC TESTING LABORATORIES, Limited

CD11076E-01-08-25

DEPTH

OF

SAMPLE

S A

M P

L E

T Y

P E

BLOWS ON

SAMPLER

PER 6"

2" O.D.

SAMPLER

fine medium course

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIAL

D E

P T

H O

F C

H A

N G

E

35-50% trace m f

Boring No.:

Sheet c

S A

M P

L E

N O

20-35%

0-10%

B-1

D E

P T

H Subsurface Investigation

2Report No.:

M E

T H

O D

O F

A D

V A

N C

E

10-20%

A T

L-

LO

G

E

S S

E X

C O

U N

T Y

B

LO

O

M

IN

G D

A

LE

.G P

J A

T L4

-0 8.

G D

T

/9

50/2"

RUN 1

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

NX

C A S I N G

NX

C O

0.5

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

14.0

19.0

23.0

WH

6" ASPHALT PAVEMENT

Brown cmf SAND; little Silt; trace f Gravel; trace Organic Material

(grass) (wet, non-plastic)

Brown cmf SAND; little cf Gravel; trace Silt (moist, non-plastic)

Brown cmf SAND; some f Gravel; trace Silt (wet, non-plastic) w = 10%

Brown cmf SAND; little f Gravel; trace Silt (wet, non-plastic)

Brown cmf SAND; some f Gravel; trace Silt (wet, non-plastic) w = 6%

Brownish-Grey cmf SAND; little cf Gravel; trace Silt (saturated, non-plastic) w = 14%

Brown cf GRAVEL; and cmf Sand; trace Silt (wet, non-plastic) w = 10%

Light Brown cmf SAND; some f Gravel; trace Silt (wet, non-plastic)

Encountered possible WEATHERED BEDROCK at 19.2 feet.

Advanced 3 7/8" tri-cone roller bit to 23.0 feet and began coring.

Blackish-Grey GNEISS

48" or 80% Recovery

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

16.0

19.2

28.0

0.5

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

16.0

19.2

S A

M P

L E

T Y

P E

DEPTH

OF

SAMPLE

trace

Subsurface Investigation

Groundwater Observations

6/25/2025 PM

littlem

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIAL

some

CAVED

Split Spoon Sample

DepthDate

Start Date:

Boring Location:

6/25/2025

Weight:

c fine

ATLANTIC TESTING LABORATORIES, Limited

CD11076E-01-08-25

CR 18 River Road over Trib to Franklin Falls Pond/Saranac River

Project:

Finish Date:6/25/2025

S A

M P

L E

N O

SS

M E

T H

O D

O F

A D

V A

N C

E

From

Drillers:

Estimated Groundwater

NX

D E

P T

H O

F C

H A

N G

E

Borehole caved at 7.8 feet.

PM

B-2

Fall:

Hammer Type:

Client:

6.8'

Ground Elev.:

35-50%

Bloomingdale, New York

Sheet

Casing

Automatic

Boring No.:

medium coarse of

Inspector:

5.5'

0-10%

6/25/2025

Time

BLOWS ON

SAMPLER

PER 6"

2" O.D.

SAMPLER

Coordinates

HW (4") Casing

R ec o ve ry (I n ch es in.

Report No.:

Boring Advance By:

140140140

Undisturbed Sample (Shelby Tube)

19.0'

Essex County DPW

To 10-20%

Subsurface Investigation and

Longitude

Rock Core lbs.

f

Sampler Hammer

See Boring Location Plan

D E

P T

H

SH

Mark Childs; Josh Hargett

20-35%

Latitude

A T

L-

LO

G

E

S S

E X

C O

U N

T Y

B

LO

O

M

IN

G D

A

LE

.G P

J A

T L4

-0 8.

G D

T

/9

RUN 2NX

R E

(WET)

Boring terminated at 33.0 feet.

Notes:

1. Borehole backfilled with on-site soils and patched at the surface with asphalt cold patch.

28.0 53

7 Pieces (43") - 10% Chips and Fragments

7 Pieces longer than 4" (43") - RQD = 72%

Blackish-Grey GNEISS

53" or 88% Recovery

7 Pieces (48") - 9.4% Chips and Fragments

5 Pieces longer than 4" (44") - RQD = 73%

33.0 28.0

33.0 and little

From To of

R E

C O

V E

R Y

(i n ch es some

ATLANTIC TESTING LABORATORIES, Limited

CD11076E-01-08-25

DEPTH

OF

SAMPLE

S A

M P

L E

T Y

P E

BLOWS ON

SAMPLER

PER 6"

2" O.D.

SAMPLER

fine medium course

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIAL

D E

P T

H O

F C

H A

N G

E

35-50% trace m f

Boring No.:

Sheet c

S A

M P

L E

N O

20-35%

0-10%

B-2

D E

P T

H Subsurface Investigation

2Report No.:

M E

T H

O D

O F

A D

V A

N C

E

10-20%

A T

L-

LO

G

E

S S

E X

C O

U N

T Y

B

LO

O

M

IN

G D

A

LE

.G P

J A

T L4

-0 8.

G D

T

/9

APPENDIX D

LABORATORY TEST REPORTS

Client: ATL Report No.:

Project: Report Date:

Date Received:

Boring

No.

Moisture

Content (%)

B-1 S - 2 1 0.0 - 2.0 4

S - 4 1 6.0 - 8.0 7

S - 6 10.0 - 12.0 21

S - 7 1 14.0 - 16.0 15

B-2 S - 3 4.0 - 6.0 10

S - 5 8.0 - 10.0 6

S - 6 1 10.0 - 12.0 14 S - 7

1 14.0 - 16.0 10

1.

Date:

REMARKS

Sample mass was less than the minimum mass outlined in the referenced test method.

Reviewed By:

Sample

No.

Depth

(ft)

LABORATORY DETERMINATION OF MOISTURE CONTENT OF SOILS

Essex County DPW

TEST DATA

July 7, 2025

PROJECT INFORMATION

ASTM D 2216

CD11076CSL-01-07-25

July 28, 2025CR18 River Road

ATLANTIC TESTING LABORATORIES

7/28/2025

Fine

4"

3" 2"

1" LL= PI=

3/4" 1/2" #4 D30= D10= 0.236

#10 Cc=

#40 #200

5% Gravel % Sand

Reviewed by: Date:

Remarks

ATLANTIC TESTING LABORITORIES, LIMITED

USCS=

7%

Cu=

Coefficients63

D60= 5.84 1.199

24.746 1.04342

Classification

AASHTO=

Moisture Content =

SPEC.

PERCENT

OUT OF

SPEC.

Soil Description Brown cmf SAND; and cf Gravel; trace Silt

Sample No:

Location:

Silt

28 19 11 21

Boring Sample

6-8'

SIEVE

SIZE

PERCENT

FINER

Source of Sample:

In-place Elev./Depth (ft):

Particle Size Distribution Report

ASTM D 422

Project: CR18 River Road Report No.: CD11076CSL-01-07-25

Client: Test Date: 7/17/2025Essex County DPW

Atterburg Limits100

PL=

B-1, S-4

% Cobbles % Fines

Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Clay

0.0010.010.1110100

P

ER

C

EN

T

FI

N

ER

GRAIN SIZE- mm

/4

#4 #1

#4

#2

Fine

4"

3" 2"

1" LL= PI=

3/4" 1/2" #4 D30= D10= 0.183

#10 Cc=

#40 #200

7% Gravel % Sand

Reviewed by: Date:

Remarks

ATLANTIC TESTING LABORITORIES, LIMITED

USCS=

11%

Cu=

Coefficients70

D60= 5.521 1.356

30.169 1.8238

Classification

AASHTO=

Moisture Content =

SPEC.

PERCENT

OUT OF

SPEC.

Soil Description Brown cf GRAVEL; and cmf Sand; trace Silt

Sample No:

Location:

Silt

11 39 12 17

Boring Sample

14-16'

SIEVE

SIZE

PERCENT

FINER

Source of Sample:

In-place Elev./Depth (ft):

Particle Size Distribution Report

ASTM D 422

Project: CR18 River Road Report No.: CD11076CSL-01-07-25

Client: Test Date: 7/17/2025Essex County DPW

Atterburg Limits

PL=

B-2, S-7

% Cobbles % Fines

Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Clay

0.0010.010.1110100

P

ER

C

EN

T

FI

N

ER

GRAIN SIZE- mm

/4

#4 #1

#4

#2