15225023 VA Project 657A5-21-700 EHRM Marion Geotechnical Report.pdf

REPORT C OVER PAGE

Geotechnical Engineering Report

VA Project #657A5-21-700 EHRM Marion

Marion, Illinois

May 24, 2022

Terracon Project No. 15225023

Prepared for:

Spur Design LLC

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

Prepared by:

Terracon Consultants, Inc.

St. Louis, Missouri

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 1

REPORT TOPICS

INTRODUCTION

SITE CONDITIONS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION

GEOTECHNICAL OVERVIEW

FLOOR SLABS

DEEP FOUNDATIONS

LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES

SEISMIC SITE CLASS

GENERAL COMMENTS

ATTACHMENTS

EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES

SITE LOCATION AND EXPLORATION PLANS

EXPLORATION RESULTS

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 1

INTRODUCTION

Geotechnical Engineering Report

VA Project #657A5-21-700 EHRM Marion

2401 W Main St

Marion, Illinois Terracon Project No. 15225023

May 24, 2022

INTRODUCTION

This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering services performed for the proposed EHRM tower addition to be located at 2401 W Main St in

Marion, Illinois. The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to:

■ Subsurface soil (and rock) conditions ■ Foundation design and construction

■ Groundwater conditions ■ Seismic site classification per IBC

■ Floor slab design and construction ■ Lateral earth pressures

The geotechnical engineering scope of services for this project included the advancement of a single boring to a depth of 33.7 feet below the existing grade.

Maps showing the site and boring location are included in the Site Location and Exploration

Plan sections, respectively. The results of the laboratory testing performed on soil samples obtained from the site during the field exploration are included on the boring log in the Exploration

Results section of this report.

The General Comments section provides an understanding of the report limitations.

SITE CONDITIONS

The following description of site conditions is derived from our site visit and our review of publicly available geologic and topographic maps.

Item Description

Parcel Information The project is located at 2401 W Main St in Marion, Illinois.

Latitude: 37.7242ºN, Longitude: 88.9562ºW

Existing

Improvements

The proposed tower addition will be located between the Seismic Tower and

Building 38 and to the south of Building 1 of the existing facility.

Current Ground

Cover

The existing surface in the area of the proposed tower addition is concrete.

The area currently has some canopies that will also need to be removed.

VA Project #657A5-21-700 EHRM Marion ■ Marion, Illinois

May 24, 2022 ■ Terracon Project No. 15225023

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 2

Item Description

Existing Topography The area in between the buildings and the location of the boring appears to be level.

Geology

Based on the Geological Map provided by the United States Geologic Survey

(USGS), the subject site is located over the Carbondale Formation. The

Carbondale Formation consists of primarily shale and limestone with some sandstone and coal.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Item Description

Project Description The project will include the construction of a new five-story communications tower addition.

Proposed Structure

We understand the addition will include structural steel framing supported by deep foundations. We anticipate foundations will consist of either drilled shafts or auger cast in place piles.

Finished Floor

Elevation (FFE) Anticipated to match the existing building’s FFE

Maximum Loads

(provided)

Columns: 100 kips

Slabs: 250 pounds per square foot (estimated by Terracon)

Below-Grade

Structures Adjacent foundations

GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION

Subsurface Profile

Due to site constraints, Terracon was unable to drill a boring at the proposed tower addition location, instead we offset approximately 50 feet to the southwest at an area more accessible.

Therefore, we suggest a contingency for variation of top of bedrock elevation and potential fill material to be encountered should be included in the overall design specifications. Based on our boring we have developed the following estimate of subsurface conditions.

Approximate

Depth (feet) Material General Description

1 Concrete Estimated to be approximately 6 to 12 inches thick at the area of the tower (not present at the boring location)

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 3

Base Rock Estimated to be approximately 6 to 12 inches thick at the area of the tower (not present at the boring location)

2 to 24 Lean Clay Medium stiff to stiff lean clay with trace silt

24 to 28½ Sandstone Highly weathered and weak cementation

Below 28½ Sandstone Slightly weathered and strong cementation

Groundwater Conditions

Groundwater was not observed in the boring prior to introducing water to be used for rock coring.

The overburden soils consist of low permeable soils and therefore, a relatively long period of time may be necessary for a groundwater level to develop and stabilize in a borehole. Long-term observations in piezometers or observation wells sealed from the influence of surface water are often required to define groundwater levels in materials of this type. Publicly available groundwater data indicates seasonally shallow groundwater could be as shallow as 15 inches below the ground surface.

Groundwater level fluctuations occur due to seasonal variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff, and other factors not evident at the time the borings were performed. In addition, perched water can develop over low permeability soil and rock strata. Therefore, groundwater levels during construction or at other times in the life of the structures may be different from the levels indicated on the boring logs. The possibility of groundwater level fluctuations should be considered when developing the design and construction plans for the project.

GEOTECHNICAL OVERVIEW

Existing Fill

Some existing fill is likely to be encountered adjacent to the existing building where the new tower will be located. It is our recommendation that existing fill, if encountered, be removed and replaced within 24 inches below the new floor slab. Care should be taken during removal of the fill as to not disrupt the existing building foundations.

Bedrock

The depth to intact bedrock is the biggest unknown variable due to being unable to drill a boring at the tower addition location. Based on our boring at the project site, it is anticipated the top of weathered sandstone will be approximately 24 feet below the existing grade, and intact sandstone at approximately 28½ feet below the existing grade. Any existing as-built information from the adjacent buildings could help with estimating the approximate depth. Otherwise, we recommend assuming a certain rock depth/elevation and requesting add/deduct rates as part of the project bidding process that would apply to actual bedrock-depth variations.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 4

Construction Adjacent to Existing Building

Care should be taken to not disturb the bearing soils beneath the existing building foundations and slabs. It is our understanding the existing structures in each direction of the planned tower addition have basement levels; therefore, we do not anticipate undermining should be an issue.

However, if excavations do extend below the existing foundations or floor slabs, it is recommended, where possible, that excavations below these elements not extend below an imaginary plane extending out and down from the outside edge of existing footings, grade beams, and/or floor slabs at a slope of approximately 2H:1V. Even with these criteria, excavations that extend below the level of existing structures should be backfilled the same day they are excavated. Where this is impractical, shoring or underpinning of existing foundations may be required to resist undermining or movement of the existing structures.

Underpinning of the structural elements is also recommended where excavations will extend below bearing elevations of foundations or floor slabs to further secure the existing foundations and preventing potential movement caused by installation operations. Connections between the new and existing structures should be designed to allow for the anticipated differential movement.

Differential settlement between new and existing structures may approach the estimated total settlement, unless the foundations are structurally tied together.

FLOOR SLABS

At minimum, the 2 feet below the floor slab should be evaluated by a Geotechnical Engineer once the site has been prepared and any existing concrete/asphalt has been removed. Specific attention should be given to positive drainage away from the structure and positive drainage of the aggregate base beneath the floor slab.

Floor Slab Design Parameters

Item Description

Floor Slab Support Use 6 inches base course meeting material specifications of ACI 302

Estimated Modulus of

Subgrade Reaction

100 pounds per square inch per inch (psi/in) for point loads

1. Floor slabs should be structurally independent of building foundations or walls to reduce the possibility of floor slab cracking caused by differential movements between the slab and foundation.

2. Modulus of subgrade reaction is an estimated value based upon our experience with the subgrade condition, the requirements noted in Earthwork, and the floor slab support as noted in this table. It is provided for point loads. For large area loads the modulus of subgrade reaction would be lower.

The use of a vapor retarder should be considered beneath concrete slabs on grade covered with wood, tile, carpet, or other moisture sensitive or impervious coverings, when the project includes

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 5 humidity-controlled areas, or when the slab will support equipment sensitive to moisture. When conditions warrant the use of a vapor retarder, the slab designer should refer to ACI 302 and/or

ACI 360 for procedures and cautions regarding the use and placement of a vapor retarder.

Saw-cut contraction joints should be placed in the slab to help control the location and extent of cracking. For additional recommendations, refer to the ACI Design Manual. Joints or cracks should be sealed with a water-proof, non-extruding compressible compound specifically recommended for heavy duty concrete pavement and wet environments.

Where floor slabs are tied to perimeter walls or turn-down slabs to meet structural or other construction objectives, our experience indicates differential movement between the walls and slabs will likely be observed in adjacent slab expansion joints or floor slab cracks beyond the length of the structural dowels. The Structural Engineer should account for potential differential settlement through use of sufficient control joints, appropriate reinforcing, or other means.

Floor Slab Construction Considerations

Finished subgrade, within and for at least 10 feet beyond the floor slab, should be protected from traffic, rutting, or other disturbance and maintained in a relatively moist condition until floor slabs are constructed. If the subgrade should become damaged or desiccated prior to construction of floor slabs, the affected material should be removed, and structural fill should be added to replace the resulting excavation. Final conditioning of the finished subgrade should be performed immediately prior to placement of the floor slab support course.

The Geotechnical Engineer should observe the condition of the floor slab subgrades immediately prior to placement of the floor slab support course, reinforcing steel, and concrete. Attention should be paid to high traffic areas that were rutted and disturbed earlier, and to areas where backfilled trenches are located.

DEEP FOUNDATIONS

Drilled Shaft & Augered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) Pile Design Parameters

Soil design parameters are provided below in the Design Summary table for the design of drilled shaft or ACIP pile foundations. The values presented for allowable side friction and end bearing include a factor of safety.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 6

Design Summary

Elevation

(feet) Material

Allowable Skin

Friction

(psf)

Allowable End

Bearing Pressure

(psf)

468 – 444 Clay 300 0

444 – 439 Weathered Sandstone 1,200 12,000

Below 439 Sandstone 2,500 25,000

1. Design capacities are dependent upon the method of installation and quality control parameters. The values provided are estimates and should be verified when installation protocol have been finalized.

2. Applicable for compressive loading only. Reduce to 2/3 of values shown for uplift loading. Effective weight of shaft can be added to uplift load capacity.

3. Shafts should extend at least one diameter into the bearing stratum for end bearing to be considered.

Shafts/piles should be adequately reinforced as designed by the Structural Engineer for both tension and shear to sufficient depths. Shaft depths may be required to extend length for overall uplift. Buoyant unit weights of the soil and concrete should be used in the calculations below the highest anticipated groundwater elevation.

Drilled shafts and ACIP piles should have a minimum (center-to-center) spacing of three diameters. Closer spacing may require a reduction in axial load capacity. Axial capacity reduction can be determined by comparing the allowable axial capacity determined from the sum of individual piles in a group versus the capacity calculated using the perimeter and base of the pile group acting as a unit. The lesser of the two capacities should be used in design.

Post-construction settlements of drilled shafts and ACIP piles designed and constructed as described in this report are estimated to range from about ½ to ¾ inch. Differential settlement between individual shafts/piles is expected to be ½ to ⅔ of the total settlement.

Drilled Shaft & ACIP Piles Lateral Loading

The following table lists input values for use in LPILE analyses. Modern versions of LPILE provide estimated default values of kh and E50 based on strength and are recommended for the project.

Since deflection or a service limit criterion will most likely control lateral capacity design, no safety/resistance factor is included with the parameters.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 7

Stratigraphy1 L-Pile Soil

Model

Su

(psf)2

(pcf)2 ε50

K

(pci)

Elevation Material Static Cyclic

468 – 444 Clay

Stiff Clay w/o

Free Water 900 --- 110 Use Default Value

444 – 439

Weathered

Sandstone Weak Rock --- 35° 135 Use Default Value

Below 439 Sandstone Strong Rock --- --- 145 Use Default Value

1. See Subsurface Profile in Geotechnical Characterization for more details on Stratigraphy.

2. Definition of Terms:

Su: Undrained shear strength

: Internal friction angle

’: Effective unit weight

When shafts/piles are used in groups, the lateral capacities of the shafts/piles in the second, third, and subsequent rows of the group should be reduced as compared to the capacity of a single, independent shaft/pile. Guidance for applying p-multiplier factors to the p values in the p-y curves for each row of pile foundations within a pile group are as follows:

Center to Center Pile Spacing 1,2

P-Multiplier, Pm

Front Row Second Row Third and

Subsequent Rows

3B 0.8 0.4 0.3

4B 0.9 0.65 0.5

5B 1.0 0.85 0.7

6B 1.0 1.0 1.0

1. Spacing in the direction of loading. B = pile diameter

2. For the case of a single row of piles supporting a laterally loaded grade beam, group action for lateral resistance of piles would need be considered when spacing is less than three pile diameters

(measured center-to-center).

3. See adjacent figure for definition of front, second and third rows.

Spacing closer than 3D (where D is the diameter of the shaft) is not recommended without additional geotechnical consultation due to potential for the installation of a new shaft/pile disturbing an adjacent installed shaft likely resulting in axial capacity reduction.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 8

The shafts/piles should be spaced at least three shaft diameters apart (center-to-center) if they will be used to resist lateral loads. Pile caps and/or grade beams could be subject to uplift loading due to frost action; thus, perimeter foundation elements beneath unheated areas should extend at least 4 feet below the lowest adjacent finished grade for frost protection.

The load capacities provided herein are based on the stresses induced in the supporting soil/rock strata. The structural capacity of the shafts/piles should be checked to assure they can safely accommodate the combined stresses induced by axial and lateral forces. Lateral deflections of shafts/piles should be evaluated using an appropriate analysis method, and will depend upon the pile’s diameter, length, configuration, stiffness and “fixed head” or “free head” condition. We can provide additional analyses and estimates of lateral deflections for specific loading conditions upon request. The load-carrying capacity of shafts/piles may be improved by increasing the diameter and possibly the length.

Drilled Shaft Construction Considerations

The drilling contractor should be experienced in the subsurface conditions observed at the site, and the excavations should be performed with equipment capable of providing a clean bearing surface. The drilled straight-shaft foundation system should be installed in general accordance with the procedures presented in "Standard Specification for the Construction of Drilled Piers", ACI Publication No. 336.1-01.

The contractor is generally expected to use conventional “dry” techniques for installation of the drilled shaft. Subsurface water was not encountered in boring during the drilling activities.

Subsurface water levels are influenced by seasonal and climatic conditions, which result in fluctuations in subsurface water elevations. Additionally, it is common for water to be present after periods of significant rainfall. Casing or slurry drilling procedures could be required in soils zones of higher sand content to reduce the potential for excavation sidewall collapse.

The drilling contractor should remove all soft and disturbed soils and soil-like material from the base of the drilled pier prior to placing concrete. The drilled shaft installation process should be performed under the observation of the Geotechnical Engineer. The Geotechnical Engineer should document the shaft installation process including soil/rock and groundwater conditions observed, consistency with expected conditions, and details of the installed shaft.

The drilled shaft installation process should be performed under the observation of the

Geotechnical Engineer. The Geotechnical Engineer should document the shaft installation process including soil/rock and groundwater conditions observed, consistency with expected conditions, and details of the installed shaft.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 9

ACIP Construction Considerations

Installation of adjacent piles with a clear distance spacing of less than ten pile diameters should be delayed until grout in the initial pile has set to avoid possible grout intrusion between the piles which could jeopardize pile integrity.

Proper ACIP installation is highly operator-dependent and requires a greater than average dependence on quality workmanship and quality control monitoring. In addition, the successful

ACIP completion largely depends on the equipment and installation procedures. The auger should be withdrawn in a controlled manner and a sufficient head of grout should always be maintained in the augers to prevent necking of fluid grout due to hydrostatic pressures.

If practical drilling refusal is experienced above the planned termination depth, then a boulder or other obstruction may be present, and a replacement pile should be installed. The situation should be evaluated by the Geotechnical Engineer and the Structural Engineer prior to the foundation contractor demobilizing form the site. Continued “hard” drilling to attempt to extend through an obstruction should not be performed due to the possibility of excessive soil removal.

The ACIP installation process should be performed under observation of the Geotechnical

Engineer. The Geotechnical Engineer should document the pile installation process including soil/rock and groundwater conditions observed, consistency with expected conditions, and details of the pile installation process.

LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES

Lateral Earth Pressure Design Parameters

Rigid below-grade structures with unbalanced backfill levels on opposite sides, such as reinforced concrete walls, should be designed for earth pressures at least equal to those indicated in the following table. Earth pressures will be influenced by structural design of the walls, conditions of wall restraint, methods of construction and/or compaction, and the strength of the materials being restrained. Two wall restraint conditions are shown. Active earth pressure is commonly used for design of free-standing cantilever retaining walls and assumes wall movement. The "at-rest" condition assumes no wall movement and is commonly used for basement walls, loading dock walls, or other walls restrained at the top. The recommended design lateral earth pressures do not include a factor of safety and do not provide for possible hydrostatic pressure on the walls.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 10

Lateral Earth Pressure Design Parameters

Earth Pressure

Condition 1

Coefficient for Backfill Type

Minimum Φ Angle

(degrees)

Equivalent Fluid Density

(pcf)

Surcharge Pressure, p1

(psf)

Earth Pressure, p2 (psf)

Active (Ka) Granular - 0.33

Lean Clay - 0.39

(0.33)S

(0.39)S

(40)H

(50)H

At-Rest (Ko) Granular - 0.50

Lean Clay - 0.56

(0.50)S

(0.56)S

(60)H

(70)H

Passive (Kp) Granular - 3.0

Lean Clay - 2.5

Applicable conditions to the above include:

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 11

■ For active earth pressure, wall must rotate about base, with top lateral movements as indicated in the above tables

■ For passive earth pressure to develop, wall must move horizontally to mobilize resistance as indicated in the above tables

■ Uniform surcharge, where S is surcharge pressure

■ Horizontal backfill, compacted at 95 to 98 percent of its standard Proctor maximum dry density

■ Loading from heavy compaction equipment not included

■ No hydrostatic pressures acting on wall

■ No dynamic loading

■ No safety factor included in soil parameters

■ Ignore passive pressure in frost zone

Backfill placed against structures should consist of granular soils or low plasticity cohesive soils

(i.e., fat clay is not acceptable backfill material). For the granular values to be valid, the granular backfill must extend out from the base of the wall at an angle of at least 45, 45 and 60 degrees from vertical for the active, at-rest and passive cases, respectively. To calculate the resistance to sliding, a value of 0.30 should be used as the ultimate coefficient of friction between the footing and the underlying soil.

A perforated rigid plastic or metal drain line installed behind the base of walls that extend below adjacent grade is recommended to limit hydrostatic loading on the walls. The invert of a drain line around a below-grade wall should be placed near foundation bearing level. The drain line should be sloped to provide positive gravity drainage or to a sump pit and pump. The drain line should be surrounded by clean, free-draining granular material having less than 5 percent (by weight) passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve. The free-draining aggregate should be encapsulated in a filter fabric. The granular fill should extend to within 2 feet of final grade, where it should be capped with compacted cohesive fill to reduce infiltration of surface water into the drain system.

SEISMIC SITE CLASS

The seismic design requirements for buildings and other structures are based on Seismic Design

Category. Site Classification is required to determine the Seismic Design Category for a structure.

The Site Classification is based on the upper 100 feet of the site profile defined by a weighted average value of either shear wave velocity, standard penetration resistance, or undrained shear strength in accordance with Section 20.4 of ASCE 7 and the International Building Code (IBC).

Based on the soil/bedrock properties observed at the site and as described on the exploration logs and results, our professional opinion is for that a Seismic Site Classification of D be considered for the project. Subsurface explorations at this site were extended to a maximum depth of 33.7 feet. The site properties below the boring depth to 100 feet were estimated based

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 12 on our experience and knowledge of geologic conditions of the general area. Geophysical testing is an option to potentially achieve a seismic site class C.

GENERAL COMMENTS

Our services are conducted with the understanding of the project as described in the proposal, and incorporate collaboration with the design team as we complete our services. The design team should collaborate with Terracon to confirm these assumptions and to prepare the final design plans and specifications. Any information conveyed prior to the final report is for informational purposes only and should not be considered or used for decision-making purposes.

Our analysis and opinions are based upon our understanding of the project, the geotechnical conditions in the area, and the data obtained from the referenced site exploration. Natural variations may occur between exploration point locations or due to the modifying effects of construction or weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction. Terracon should be retained as the Geotechnical Engineer, where noted in the final report, to provide observation and testing services during construction. If variations appear, we can provide further evaluation and supplemental recommendations. If variations are noted in the absence of our observation and testing services on-site, we should be immediately notified so that we can provide evaluation and supplemental recommendations.

Our scope of services does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken.

Our services and any correspondence or collaboration through this system are intended for the sole benefit and exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and are accomplished in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices with no third party beneficiaries intended. Any third party access to services or correspondence is solely for information purposes to support the services provided by Terracon to our client. Reliance upon the services and any work product is limited to our client, and is not intended for third parties.

Any use or reliance of the provided information by third parties is done solely at their own risk. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made.

Site characteristics as provided are for design purposes and not to estimate excavation costs.

Any use of our report in that regard is done at the sole risk of the excavating cost estimator as there may be variations on the site that are not apparent in the data that could significantly impact excavation costs. Any parties charged with estimating excavation costs should seek their own site characterization for specific purposes to obtain the specific level of detail necessary for costing. Site safety, cost estimating, excavation support, and dewatering requirements/design are the responsibility of others. If changes in the nature, design, or location of the project are planned, Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 13 our conclusions and recommendations shall not be considered valid unless we review the changes and either verify or modify our conclusions in writing.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable

ATTACHMENTS

EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES

Field Exploration

Number of Borings Approximate Boring Depth

(feet) Location

1 33.7 Approximately 50 feet southwest of the proposed tower location

Boring Layout and Elevations: Terracon personnel provided the boring layout using handheld

GPS equipment (estimated horizontal accuracy of about ±10 feet) and referencing existing site features. Approximate ground surface elevation was estimated using Google Earth.

Subsurface Exploration Procedures: We advanced the boring using a rotary drill rig with hollow-stem augers. Four samples were obtained in the upper 10 feet of the boring and at intervals of 5 feet thereafter. The boring was advanced using NQ2 rock coring below a depth of 28.7 feet.

We did not observe any groundwater during the drilling operations. For safety purposes, the boring was backfilled with auger cuttings and capped with asphalt after completion.

The sampling depths, penetration distances, and other sampling information was recorded on the field boring logs. The samples were placed in appropriate containers and taken to our soil laboratory for testing and classification by a Geotechnical Engineer. Our exploration team prepared a field boring log as part of the drilling operations. The field log included visual classifications of the materials observed during drilling and our interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples. A final boring log was prepared from the field log. The final boring log represents the

Geotechnical Engineer's interpretation of the field log and includes modifications based on observations and tests of the samples in our laboratory.

Laboratory Testing

The project engineer reviewed the field data and assigned laboratory tests. The laboratory testing program included the following types of tests:

■ Moisture Content

■ Atterberg Limits

■ Unconfined Compression Strength

The laboratory testing program often included examination of soil samples by an engineer. Based on the results of our field and laboratory programs, we described and classified the soil samples in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System.

Rock classification was conducted using locally accepted practices for engineering purposes;

petrographic analysis may reveal other rock types. Boring log rock classification was determined using the Description of Rock Properties.

SITE LOCATION AND EXPLORATION PLANS

Contents:

Site Location Plan

Exploration Plan

Note: All attachments are one page unless noted above.

SITE LOCATION

VA Project #657A5-21-700 EHRM Marion ■ Marion, IL

TOPOGRAPHIC MAP IMAGE COURTESY OF THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

QUADRANGLES INCLUDE: MARION, IL (1/1/1996).

DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS

NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES

SITE

EXPLORATION PLAN

VA Project #657A5-21-700 EHRM Marion ■ Marion, IL

DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS

NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY PROVIDED

BY MICROSOFT BING MAPS

EXPLORATION RESULTS

Boring Log

Rock Core Photo

2-3-4 N=7

4500 (HP)

2-3-4 N=7

4000 (HP)

2-4-4 N=8

3500 (HP)

2-3-4 N=7

4000 (HP)

2-3-4 N=7

2000 (HP)

6-7-8 N=15

6000 (HP)

6-27-37 N=64

50/2"

REC = 97%

RQD = 97%

25.7

19.9

20.9

22.9

21.9

18.8

11.7

9.7

2" Asphalt LEAN CLAY (CL), trace silt, brown and gray, medium stiff to stiff

SANDSTONE, brown, weak cementation, highly weathered

SANDSTONE, brown, strong cementation, slightly weathered

Boring Terminated at 33.7 Feet

0.2

24.0

28.7

33.7

468+/-

444+/-

439.5+/-

434.5+/-

Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

T H

IS

B

O R

IN

G

L O

G

IS

N O

T V

A

LI

D

IF

S E

P A

R A

T E

D F

R O

M O

R

IG

IN

A

L R

E P

O R

T

G E

O S

M A

R T

L O

G -N

O W

E

LL

V

A P

R O

JE

C

T

7A

5.

G

P J

T E

R R

A C

O N

_D A

T A

T E

M P

LA

T

E .G

D T

/2

/2

D E

P T

H

F t.)

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

)LOCATION See Exploration Plan

Latitude: 37.7242° Longitude: -88.9562°

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.)

Approximate Surface Elev.: 468 (Ft.) +/-

Advancement Method:

Hollow-Stem Auger and NQ2 Rock Core

Abandonment Method:

Boring backfilled with Auger Cuttings and/or Bentonite Surface Capped with Asphalt

Notes:

Project No.: 15225023

Drill Rig:

BORING LOG NO. B-1

Spur Design LLCCLIENT:

Oklahoma City, OK

Driller: HR

Boring Completed: 04-28-2022

PROJECT: VA Project #657A5-21-700 EHRM Marion

Elevation estimated using Google Earth Pro

See Exploration and Testing Procedures for a description of field and laboratory procedures used and additional data (If any).

See Supporting Information for explanation of symbols and abbreviations.

2401 W Main St Marion, IL

SITE:

Boring Started: 04-28-2022

11600 Lilburn Park Rd Saint Louis, MO

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Groundwater not encountered

R E

C O

V E

R Y

S A

M P

LE

N

U M

B E

R

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E

ROCK CORE PHOTOGRAPH Project Manager:

Drawn by:

Checked by:

Approved by:

TJK

JMK

Project No.

Scale:

File Name:

Date:

15225023

As shown

Rock Core Photo

05/24/2022JMK

VA Project #657A5-21-700 EHRM Marion

Marion, Illinois

BORING B-1 SCALE

INCHES

START

R1 28.7’

SCALE

INCHES

11600 Lilburn Park Rd.

St. Louis, MO 63146

TJK

Unconfined Compression Test Resultpsi

END R1

33.7’

2,860

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

General Notes

Unified Soil Classification System

Description of Rock Properties

VA Project #657A5-21-700 EHRM Marion Marion, IL Terracon Project No. 15225023

3.5 to 7.0

> 55.5

28.0 to 55.5

14.0 to 28.0

7.0 to 14.0 less than 3.50

Unconfined Compressive Strength Qu, (psi)

Rock Core Split Spoon

N

(HP)

(T)

(DCP)

UC

(PID)

(OVA)

Standard Penetration Test Resistance (Blows/Ft.)

Hand Penetrometer

Torvane

Dynamic Cone Penetrometer

Unconfined Compressive Strength

Photo-Ionization Detector

Organic Vapor Analyzer

SAMPLING WATER LEVEL FIELD TESTS

GENERAL NOTES

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Water levels indicated on the soil boring logs are the levels measured in the borehole at the times indicated. Groundwater level variations will occur over time. In low permeability soils, accurate determination of groundwater levels is not possible with short term water level observations.

Water Initially Encountered

Water Level After a Specified Period of Time

Water Level After a Specified Period of Time

Cave In Encountered

Exploration point locations as shown on the Exploration Plan and as noted on the soil boring logs in the form of Latitude and Longitude are approximate. See Exploration and Testing Procedures in the report for the methods used to locate the exploration points for this project. Surface elevation data annotated with +/- indicates that no actual topographical survey was conducted to confirm the surface elevation. Instead, the surface elevation was approximately determined from topographic maps of the area.

LOCATION AND ELEVATION NOTES

Soil classification as noted on the soil boring logs is based Unified Soil Classification System. Where sufficient laboratory data exist to classify the soils consistent with ASTM D2487 "Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes" this procedure is used. ASTM D2488 "Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure)" is also used to classify the soils, particularly where insufficient laboratory data exist to classify the soils in accordance with ASTM D2487.

In addition to USCS classification, coarse grained soils are classified on the basis of their in-place relative density, and fine-grained soils are classified on the basis of their consistency. See "Strength Terms" table below for details. The ASTM standards noted above are for reference to methodology in general. In some cases, variations to methods are applied as a result of local practice or professional judgment.

DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION

The soil boring logs contained within this document are intended for application to the project as described in this document. Use of these soil boring logs for any other purpose may not be appropriate.

RELEVANCE OF SOIL BORING LOG

STRENGTH TERMS

Standard Penetration or N-Value

Blows/Ft.

Descriptive Term (Density)

Hard

15 - 30Very Stiff> 50Very Dense

8 - 15Stiff30 - 50Dense

4 - 8Medium Stiff10 - 29Medium Dense

2 - 4Soft4 - 9Loose

0 - 1Very Soft0 - 3Very Loose

(50% or more passing the No. 200 sieve.)

Consistency determined by laboratory shear strength testing, field visual-manual procedures or standard penetration resistance

> 30

Descriptive Term (Consistency)

Standard Penetration or N-Value

Blows/Ft.

(More than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve.)

Density determined by Standard Penetration Resistance

CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILSRELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

UNIFIED SOIL C LASSIFICA TION SYSTEM

Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests A

Soil Classification

Group

Symbol Group Name B

Coarse-Grained Soils:

More than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve

Gravels:

More than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve

Clean Gravels:

Less than 5% fines C

Cu 4 and 1 Cc 3 E GW Well-graded gravel F

Cu 4 and/or [Cc<1 or Cc>3.0] E GP Poorly graded gravel F

Gravels with Fines:

More than 12% fines C

Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel F, G, H

Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel F, G, H

Sands:

50% or more of coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve

Clean Sands:

Less than 5% fines D

Cu 6 and 1 Cc 3 E SW Well-graded sand I

Cu 6 and/or [Cc<1 or Cc>3.0] E SP Poorly graded sand I

Sands with Fines:

More than 12% fines D

Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand G, H, I

Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand G, H, I

Fine-Grained Soils:

50% or more passes the

No. 200 sieve

Silts and Clays:

Liquid limit less than 50

Inorganic: PI 7 and plots on or above “A” line J

CL Lean clay K, L, M

PI 4 or plots below “A” line J ML Silt K, L, M

Organic: Liquid limit - oven dried 0.75 OL Organic clay K, L, M, N

Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K, L, M, O

Silts and Clays:

Liquid limit 50 or more

Inorganic: PI plots on or above “A” line CH Fat clay K, L, M

PI plots below “A” line MH Elastic Silt K, L, M

Organic: Liquid limit - oven dried 0.75 OH Organic clay K, L, M, P

Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K, L, M, Q

Highly organic soils: Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat

A Based on the material passing the 3-inch (75-mm) sieve

B If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add “with cobbles or boulders, or both” to group name.

C Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded gravel with silt, GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay, GP-GM poorly graded gravel with silt, GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay.

D Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded sand with silt, SW-SC well-graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay

E Cu = D60/D10 Cc =

DxD

)(D

F If soil contains 15% sand, add “with sand” to group name.

G If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM.

H If fines are organic, add “with organic fines” to group name.

I If soil contains 15% gravel, add “with gravel” to group name.

J If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay.

K If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add “with sand” or “with gravel,” whichever is predominant.

L If soil contains 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add

“sandy” to group name.

M If soil contains 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add

“gravelly” to group name.

N PI 4 and plots on or above “A” line.

O PI 4 or plots below “A” line.

P PI plots on or above “A” line.

Q PI plots below “A” line.

DESCRIPTION OF ROCK PROPERTIES

ROCK VER SION 1

WEATHERING

Term Description

Unweathered No visible sign of rock material weathering, perhaps slight discoloration on major discontinuity surfaces.

Slightly weathered

Discoloration indicates weathering of rock material and discontinuity surfaces. All the rock material may be discolored by weathering and may be somewhat weaker externally than in its fresh condition.

Moderately weathered

Less than half of the rock material is decomposed and/or disintegrated to a soil. Fresh or discolored rock is present either as a continuous framework or as corestones.

Highly weathered

More than half of the rock material is decomposed and/or disintegrated to a soil. Fresh or discolored rock is present either as a discontinuous framework or as corestones.

Completely weathered

All rock material is decomposed and/or disintegrated to soil. The original mass structure is still largely intact.

Residual soil All rock material is converted to soil. The mass structure and material fabric are destroyed. There is a large change in volume, but the soil has not been significantly transported.

STRENGTH OR HARDNESS

Description Field Identification Uniaxial Compressive Strength, psi (MPa)

Extremely weak Indented by thumbnail 40-150 (0.3-1)

Very weak Crumbles under firm blows with point of geological hammer, can be peeled by a pocket knife

150-700 (1-5)

Weak rock Can be peeled by a pocket knife with difficulty, shallow indentations made by firm blow with point of geological hammer

700-4,000 (5-30)

Medium strong Cannot be scraped or peeled with a pocket knife, specimen can be fractured with single firm blow of geological hammer

4,000-7,000 (30-50)

Strong rock Specimen requires more than one blow of geological hammer to fracture it

7,000-15,000 (50-100)

Very strong Specimen requires many blows of geological hammer to fracture it 15,000-36,000 (100-250)

Extremely strong Specimen can only be chipped with geological hammer >36,000 (>250)

DISCONTINUITY DESCRIPTION

Fracture Spacing (Joints, Faults, Other Fractures) Bedding Spacing (May Include Foliation or Banding)

Description Spacing Description Spacing

Extremely close < ¾ in (<19 mm) Laminated < ½ in (<12 mm)

Very close ¾ in – 2-1/2 in (19 - 60 mm) Very thin ½ in – 2 in (12 – 50 mm)

Close 2-1/2 in – 8 in (60 – 200 mm) Thin 2 in – 1 ft. (50 – 300 mm)

Moderate 8 in – 2 ft. (200 – 600 mm) Medium 1 ft. – 3 ft. (300 – 900 mm)

Wide 2 ft. – 6 ft. (600 mm – 2.0 m) Thick 3 ft. – 10 ft. (900 mm – 3 m)

Very Wide 6 ft. – 20 ft. (2.0 – 6 m) Massive > 10 ft. (3 m)

Discontinuity Orientation (Angle): Measure the angle of discontinuity relative to a plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the core. (For most cases, the core axis is vertical; therefore, the plane perpendicular to the core axis is horizontal.) For example, a horizontal bedding plane would have a 0-degree angle.

ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION (RQD) 1

Description RQD Value (%)

Very Poor 0 - 25

Poor 25 – 50

Fair 50 – 75

Good 75 – 90

Excellent 90 - 100

5. The combined length of all sound and intact core segments equal to or greater than 4 inches in length, expressed as a percentage of the total core run length.

Reference: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Publication No FHWA-NHI-10-034, December 2009 Technical Manual for Design and Construction of Road Tunnels – Civil Elements