Attachment 02 VA Medical Center Geotechnical Engineering Report 7.24.2023.pdf

1745 Dorsey Road, Suite J, Hanover, MD 21076 ▪ 610-366-7120 ▪ www.kleinfelder.com

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

EHRM INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADE

LOCH RAVEN VA MEDICAL CENTER

BALTIMORE, MARYLAND

PREPARED FOR:

MS. SHANNON A. WILLIAMS, P.E.

PROJECT ENGINEER

ACELA ARCHITECTS + ENGINEERS, P.C.

2633 MORAVIAN AVENUE

ALLENTOWN, PA 18103

PREPARED BY:

MAX ROLANDI, P.E.*, PH.D

*MA, NH, ME, CT, RI, & VT

PRINCIPAL PROFESSIONAL

TRISTRAM MADDEN, P.E.

PRINCIPAL PROFESSIONAL

MD LICENSE NUMBER: 27195

TREVOR DOMBACH

PROGRAM MANAGER

PROJECT NUMBER – 24001247.001A

JULY 24, 2023

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION

3.0 SITE GEOLOGY

4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM

5.0 LABORATORY TESTING

6.0 DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

6.1 SOIL

6.2 AUGER AND SPLIT SPOON REFUSAL

6.3 GROUNDWATER

7.0 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS

7.2 SETTLEMENT

7.3 FLOOR SLABS

7.4 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES AND SLIDING RESISTANCE

7.5 SEISMIC SITE CLASS

8.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

8.1 SITE PREPARATION

8.2 PROOF-ROLLING

8.3 EXCAVATION CONSIDERATIONS

8.4 STRUCTURAL FILL

8.5 REUSE OF ON-SITE MATERIAL

8.6 COMPACTION & PLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS

8.7 FOUNDATION CONSTRUCTION

8.8 GENERAL PAVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS

8.9 SLAB CONSTRUCTION

8.10 WET WEATHER CONSTRUCTION

8.11 CONSTRUCTION DEWATERING

9.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING

10.0 LIMITATIONS

11.0 CLOSING

Appendix

Figure 1 – Topographic Map

Figure 2 – Geologic Map

Figure 3 – Exploration Plan

Figure 4 – Test Boring Profiles

Figure 5 – Graphics Key

Seismic Site Classification

Laboratory Test Results

Test Boring Logs

GBA Advisory

Geotechnical Engineering Report EHRM Infrastructure Upgrade Loch Raven VA Medical Center Baltimore, Maryland Kleinfelder Project Number: 24001247.001A July 24, 2023

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report was prepared by Kleinfelder, Inc. (Kleinfelder), on behalf of Acela Architects + Engineers, P.C., of Allentown, Pennsylvania (Acela, Client), and contains the results of a geotechnical engineering exploration program conducted for the proposed Loch Raven VA Medical Center additions. The purpose of this exploration has been to evaluate the suitability of the existing subsurface conditions to support the proposed improvements. The scope of work for this project included a subsurface exploration, laboratory testing program and geotechnical engineering analysis. This report summarizes the results of the work performed and provides geotechnical engineering and general construction recommendations.

2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The project site currently consists of the existing Loch Raven VA Medical Center located in Baltimore, Maryland. Based on visual observations during our site visits and on aerial photos available online, the topography across the project site is relatively flat with minimal grade variation (±5 feet) across the footprints of the proposed additions. The site is bordered to the north by residential housing, to the southwest by The Alameda, and to the southeast by Loch Raven Blvd. The approximate location of the site in relation to the surrounding area is presented on the Topographic Map (Figure 1) within the Appendix.

According to request for proposal (RFP), the project will include the construction of two new data center additions to Building 1 and Building 5 on the existing medical center campus. An approximately 1,500 square feet (SF) technology room will be added via new construction in select locations and basement, first, and second floor remodeling. Additionally, 180 SF of technology room space will be added to Building

5. The proposed additions are anticipated to be comprised of load-bearing masonry walls with slab-on-grade floor systems matching the adjacent structure.

At the time of this writing, proposed and existing site grades were unknown. However, based on the topography observed in the field, cuts and fills are anticipated to be minimal to reach the proposed finished floor elevations. Maximum proposed wall loads have been noted to be between 2.8 to 7 kips per linear foot, depending on the building size. Additionally, slab loads were unknown at the time of this report, therefore, they have been assumed to range from 250 to 500 psf. Should building loads change, or differ from the assumed slab loads, please notify Kleinfelder immediately.

3.0 SITE GEOLOGY

According to the Maryland Geological Survey (MGS), the project site is underlain by the Cambrian Metagraywacke (geologic symbol wmg) and Setters Formation (geologic sumbol sf). The project site within its geologic setting is presented on the Geologic Map (Figure 2) within the Appendix.

The metagraywacke unit was previously mapped as part of the Wissahickon Formation thought to be late Precambrian in age. The Wissahickon Formation presented in the 1968 Geologic Map of Maryland has subsequently been divided by several authors with various nomenclature. These units are more likely to be Upper Cambrian or Lower Ordovician in age and are described as rhythmically interbedded chlorite-muscovite metagraywacke and fine-grained chlorite-muscovite schist.

The Setters Formation is separated into an upper, middle, and lower member and is describe as feldspathic mica schist and mica gneiss, impure quartzite interstratified with beds of mica schist, and medium-grained feldspathic mica schist locally granitized, respectively.

4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM

To evaluate subsurface conditions across the project site, 4 test borings were completed on June 29, 2023.

Supervision and monitoring of the subsurface exploration were provided by a representative of Kleinfelder, who field located the test locations utilizing a hand-held GPS unit based on RFP, provided by the Client.

The approximate test locations are shown on the Exploration Plan (Figure 3) presented within the Appendix.

Loch Raven VA Medical Center Baltimore, Maryland Kleinfelder Project Number: 24001247.001A July 24, 2023

The test borings were advanced using a track-mounted CME drill rig equipped with an automatic hammer and hollow-stem augers. Split-spoon samples, conducted in accordance with ASTM standard D1586, were taken at suitable intervals throughout the entire depth of the borings and the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) blow counts were recorded for each sample obtained. The SPT blow counts, which are a measure of soil density or consistency, is the number of blows required to drive a 2-inch (outer-diameter) split-barrel sampler 2 feet using a 140-pound weight dropped freely over a depth of 30 inches. The number of blows required to advance the sampler over the middle 12-inch interval from 6 to 18 inches is considered the "N" value.

Data pertaining to the subsurface exploration was documented in the field and is presented in detail on the Test Boring Profiles (Figure 4), and Test Boring Logs presented in the Appendix. The Test Boring Profiles depict cross-sections of the subsurface conditions encountered within each test boring, including: soil types, depths of individual strata and recorded “N” values. The Test Boring Logs contain general information about the subsurface program and specific data regarding each test boring, including sample depths, blow counts per 6 inches of penetration and visual classifications of the subsurface materials encountered. Additional information relating to the graphic symbols used within the Test Boring Logs is depicted on the Graphics Key (Figure 5) presented within the Appendix.

5.0 LABORATORY TESTING

Soil samples retrieved from the site were visually reviewed and classified by Kleinfelder. Representative soil samples were subjected to geotechnical laboratory testing to verify visual classifications and aid in establishing the engineering parameters for foundation design in accordance with the following schedule:

▪ Natural Moisture Content (ASTM D2216)

▪ Sieve Analysis (ASTM D422)

▪ Atterberg Limits Determination (ASTM D4318)

A Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) Group Symbol and ASTM Group Name has been assigned to the soil tested. The results of the testing conducted is presented in the table below and graphical depictions of the laboratory testing completed is presented within the Appendix.

STANDARD CLASSIFICATION RESULTS

Location Depth

(ft) Soil Type

Gravel

Sand

Fines

USCS

Group

Symbol

ASTM Group Name

SB-2 6 – 10 Stratum II 37.9 43.9 18.2 SM Silty SAND w/

Gravel

SB-3 2 – 6

Fill/

Stratum I

37.2 50.3 19.3 SM

Silty SAND w/ Gravel

LL-Liquid Limit; PL-Plastic Limit; PI-Plasticity Index

Note: The two soil samples that were tested for Atterberg limits (LL, PL, PI) resulted to be non-plastic. See lab test result sheets for further details.

6.0 DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

A general description of the conditions encountered in the borings performed at the site is provided below.

The generalized subsurface conditions (soil stratigraphy) described below summarize trends observed in the borings. Actual subsurface conditions between borings could be more variable. The boundaries between soil strata presented in the boring logs are based on observations during drilling and on widely spaced soil samples and should be considered approximate.

Loch Raven VA Medical Center Baltimore, Maryland Kleinfelder Project Number: 24001247.001A July 24, 2023

6.1 SOIL

Fill/Stratum I – Light Gray Silty SAND with Gravel

Existing Fill was encountered within each of the test borings and extended to depths ranging from approximately 2 to 6 feet below existing site grades. The “N” values, recorded within this soil ranged from 2 to 41 blows per foot (bpf), corresponding to very loose to very dense material. Upon review, the Fill was found to be moderately graded, non-plastic, and predominantly comprised of SAND with Gravel and Silt. According to the USCS, the Fill consists of Silty SAND with Gravel

(SM).

The existing Fill was found to contain varying amounts of potentially deleterious materials in the form of organic material and brick/building fragments. However, these samples were taken from discrete locations and the extent of deleterious materials present in unexplored portions of the site is unknown.

Stratum II – White and Light Brown Silty SAND with Gravel

Stratum II was encountered within each test boring and extended to their termination depths of approximately 30 feet below existing site grades. The “N” values, recorded within this soil ranged from 12 bpf to 50 blows over 1 inch and show Stratum II to range from medium dense to very dense in density.

Laboratory testing conducted on a representative sample of Stratum II shows this soil to be moderately graded and non-plastic. According to the USCS, the Stratum II soil consists of Silty

SAND (SM).

6.2 AUGER AND SPLIT SPOON REFUSAL

Auger and split spoon refusal was encountered within test boring SB-3 at approximately 26 feet below ground surface. The auger and split spoon refusal were interpreted to be on possible bedrock or on top of a possible boulder withing the Stratum II.

6.3 GROUNDWATER

Groundwater was measured during or after the end of drilling within test borings SB-1, SB-2, and SB-3 at a depth of approximately 26.5, 26.8, and 15 feet below the existing site grade, respectively.

The groundwater measurements presented in this report only represent the conditions encountered at the location and time indicated. It should be noted that water was introduced in the borehole during drilling. Therefore, the collected groundwater measurements may not be representative of actual groundwater conditions. Furthermore, groundwater levels fluctuate due to local and regional factors including, but not limited to, site topography, seasonal changes, well pumping, and periods of wet or dry weather, nearby construction, or other below grade activities, such as excavation, dewatering, infiltration basins, etc.

7.0 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

Our geotechnical recommendations are provided in the following sections. The analyses and recommendations included in this report are based on the data obtained from the relatively widely spaced borings and our understanding of the proposed project. The nature and extent of variations between explorations may not become evident until construction. If significant variations from the subsurface conditions observed in the borings appear during construction, or if changes occur in the design of the proposed structures, it will be necessary to re-evaluate these recommendations.

Loch Raven VA Medical Center Baltimore, Maryland Kleinfelder Project Number: 24001247.001A July 24, 2023

The recommendations in this report are in general accordance with the provision of the Maryland Building Code, which is based on the International Building Code (IBC) of 2021 (the Code). This report is subject to the Limitations included herein and at the Limitations Section included at the end of this report.

7.1 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS

Based on the data obtained from the test locations completed, the existing Fill extended to depths ranging from approximately 2 to 6 feet below existing site grades. However, the existing Fill may be deeper at locations that were not investigated. Therefore, portions of the proposed additions may be underlain by existing Fill.

Support of the proposed additions on conventional shallow foundations bearing directly on the existing, unimproved existing Fill is not recommended due to excessive post-construction settlement. Therefore, if encountered at the excavation subgrade, it is recommended that the existing Fill be overexcavated and replaced under supervision of a Geotechnical engineer. Details concerning the removal and replacement of the Fill are presented below.

▪ If existing Fill – or any other unsuitable organic, loose/soft or frozen soil - is present at the foundation excavation subgrade, the existing Fill should be removed from within the zone of influence of the footings, to the top of the naturally deposited soils. The zone of influence is the volume of soil underneath footings is defined by a 1-horizontal to 1-vertical (1H:1V) plane extending down and out from one foot beyond the edge of the footings.

▪ The footings excavation subgrade should be thoroughly proof-compacted utilizing appropriate equipment and reviewed by a qualified geotechnical professional.

▪ Following proof-compaction, the excavation may be backfilled to the prevailing subgrade elevations with structural fill. The placement and compaction of structural fill should be completed in accordance with this report.

▪ Consideration to removing the existing Fill within its entirety may allow for efficiencies to be gained in the schedule and budget.

Provided the removal and replacement of Fill procedure is satisfactorily completed, our foundation recommendations are provided as follows:

1. Firm and stable naturally occurring materials and/or properly placed structural fill may be utilized for support of the proposed additions on conventional strip and/or spread footings.

2. A maximum allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf) should be considered in design of the foundation of the proposed additions.

3. To protect against frost heave, exterior spread footing foundations, and interior footings in unheated areas, should extend to below the frost depth. The recommended frost depth for the proposed additions is 30 inches.

4. Foundation bottoms should be free of loose material or debris immediately prior to the placement of concrete.

5. Concrete should be placed in excavated foundation areas as quickly as possible to minimize degradation to the foundation subgrade due to exposure.

6. The suitability of the materials encountered at the proposed foundation subgrade elevations should be confirmed during construction by a registered Professional Engineer.

Loch Raven VA Medical Center Baltimore, Maryland Kleinfelder Project Number: 24001247.001A July 24, 2023

7. Column and wall foundations should be a minimum of 3.0 and 1.5 feet in width, respectively.

8. The existing foundation subgrade elevation, foundation type and condition are unknown. The excavation for the proposed building additions should not extend below the footings and wall of the existing buildings to be improved. If excavations for the proposed additions foundations must extend below existing footings, existing footings must be properly supported by means of shoring or underpinning.

9. If encountered, the bedrock surface should be over-excavated a minimum of 6 inches below the foundation subgrade elevation and be backfilled with crushed stone.

Proceeding in this manner will minimize the potential for point loading and allows for a uniform distribution of loads.

7.2 SETTLEMENT

At the time of this report, column and wall loads for the proposed additions were not known. Therefore, for analysis purposes, maximum building loads are anticipated to be no greater than 7 kips per linear foot,. Based on these loads, the maximum bearing pressure recommended and our settlement analyses, maximum post-construction foundation settlement is expected to be about 1-inch and differential settlement between adjacent foundations may approach half the maximum value. If adjacent foundations are supported on rock and soil, respectively, the magnitude of differential settlement may approach total settlement estimates.

Should the structural loads exceed those presented above, please contact Kleinfelder so that settlement estimates may be re-evaluated.

7.3 FLOOR SLABS

The floors of the proposed additions may be constructed as a conventional slab-on-grade and may be supported on properly placed and compacted structural fill or firm and stable existing naturally deposited soils. These soils are expected to exhibit a modulus of subgrade reaction of approximately 150 pounds per cubic inch, provided they are compacted as described in the construction consideration section of this report.

Additional design recommendations for the grade slabs are provided below:

▪ The grade slabs should be supported on a minimum 12-inch thick compacted layer of free-draining, granular structural fill subbase to distribute the concentrated loads, enhance drainage, and reduce degradation of the prepared subgrade during construction. The granular subbase should be compacted to a firm and stable subgrade with a 15-ton vibratory roller.

▪ The grade slabs should be jointed around columns and along footing-supported walls so that the grade slabs and foundations can settle differentially without damage.

▪ Joints containing smooth dowels or keys may be used in the slabs to permit rotational movement between parts of the slabs without sharp vertical displacements or cracking.

7.4 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES AND SLIDING RESISTANCE

The following data is provided for the design of below grade structures which may be constructed at the site. The data presented is based on the use of the on-site soils placed under engineering control for backfill of all below grade walls.

Loch Raven VA Medical Center Baltimore, Maryland Kleinfelder Project Number: 24001247.001A July 24, 2023

EARTH PRESSURE DESIGN DATA – REUSED ON SITE SOIL

Parameter On Site Soil

Angle of Internal Friction (degrees) 32

Unit Weight of Soil (pounds per cubic foot, pcf) 120

Coefficient of Active Earth Pressure 0.31

Coefficient of Passive Earth Pressure 3.25

Coefficient of At-Rest Earth Pressure 0.47

Cohesion (psf) 0

EARTH PRESSURE DESIGN DATA – STRUCTURAL FILL

Parameter Structural Fill

Angle of Internal Friction (degrees) 36

Unit Weight of Soil (pounds per cubic foot, pcf) 130

Coefficient of Active Earth Pressure 0.26

Coefficient of Passive Earth Pressure 3.85

Coefficient of At-Rest Earth Pressure 0.41

Cohesion (psf) 0

Adequate drainage must be maintained adjacent to all below grade walls to minimize the buildup of hydrostatic pressure on the structures. At a minimum, a drainage blanket consisting of clean, crushed aggregate should be placed behind the walls. The drainage blanket should be connected to a drain at the base of the wall with all water directed to dedicated stormwater channels.

Consideration may also be given to placing a non-woven geotextile filter fabric between the drainage blanket and on-site soil backfill to minimize potential clogging and sedimentation of the drainage blanket.

The parameters recommended above are based upon: 1) adequate drainage to prevent the accumulation and flow of water, 2) horizontal select granular backfill capped with an impervious layer such as the finished floor The effects of surcharge loadings should be included as warranted. Care should be exercised so that heavy compaction equipment does not damage the walls. Having foundation walls braced during backfilling may be prudent, and it is the Contractor’s responsibility.

For the sliding resistance analysis, a coefficient of friction equal to 0.5 should be used for concrete foundations on naturally deposited soil or on structural fill.

7.5 SEISMIC SITE CLASS

Based on our review of the data and the soil descriptions provided in the International Building Code, latest Edition, it is our opinion the subsurface conditions encountered at the site can be classified as Site Class C. Lastly, the Seismic Site Classification criteria is provided in the Appendix.

8.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

Based on the results of our geotechnical exploration and our experience with similar project sites, we have developed the following site-specific recommendations for construction of the proposed site improvements.

8.1 SITE PREPARATION

At the outset of the project, all surficial materials should be stripped from all structural areas.

Structural areas are defined as those areas to be covered by the proposed additions, extending to a minimum of 5 feet beyond all foundation lines and any portion of the site to be covered by asphalt

Loch Raven VA Medical Center Baltimore, Maryland Kleinfelder Project Number: 24001247.001A July 24, 2023 or concrete pavements. Unstable or deleterious materials, as defined herein, if encountered, should also be removed in their entirety.

Topsoil will not be suitable for use as structural fill during construction. Any topsoil encountered may be stockpiled on site for future use in landscaped areas or as general fill material in non-structural portions of the site (i.e. landscaping berms, curbed islands, etc.).

8.2 PROOF-ROLLING

Following removal of the surficial materials, required excavation to reach proposed subgrade elevations, and prior to the placement of structural fill or construction of foundation elements, structural areas should be compacted using a steel-drum, vibratory roller, having a minimum static weight of 15 tons. A minimum of 5 overlapping passes of the roller should be completed across the entirety of the addition footprints and other structural areas.

Following the compaction procedures, proof-rolling should be performed using a loaded, tandem-axle dump truck under the direction of Kleinfelder. Proof-rolling and compaction procedures are necessary to compact and verify the integrity of the upper zones of the soils and allow for a uniform distribution of loads. Loose or unstable areas encountered during proof-rolling and compaction should be compacted in place or removed and replaced with structural fill placed in accordance with the recommendations provided in this report.

In areas of the site where a cut or removal of soil is necessary to achieve the required soil subgrade elevation, proof-rolling of the surface may be waived until the proposed subgrade elevation is achieved.

The project site is underlain by existing Fill. Proof-rolling of the project site is an integral part of the foundation design criteria for the project. Proof-rolling will allow for a final evaluation of subgrade conditions for indications of loose/soft soil conditions and conditions associated with improper or undocumented Fill placement. Proof-rolling should be carried out as specified above under the direction of Kleinfelder.

8.3 EXCAVATION CONSIDERATIONS

The test borings completed for the proposed improvements indicate construction of the project will take place within the existing Fill and naturally occurring soils of Stratum II, which may be removed using conventional earth moving equipment and techniques.

Care must be exercised to provide adequate temporary support to existing foundations and subsurface utilities as necessary. This may be accomplished with shoring, bracing, or underpinning. The Structural Engineer and Kleinfelder should be consulted prior to implementation of any temporary foundation support system.

All excavations should be adequately sloped, benched, or supported to minimize collapse and protect personnel. All excavations should be completed in accordance with OSHA requirements.

8.4 STRUCTURAL FILL

Our recommendations regarding suitable imported backfill (structural fill or crushed stone) and the reuse of on-site soils as structural fill are provided below.

▪ Free of organic matter, ash, cinders, trash, or other unsuitable or deleterious materials

▪ Particle size distribution that is well-graded, per USCS guidelines

▪ Non-plastic fines

Loch Raven VA Medical Center Baltimore, Maryland Kleinfelder Project Number: 24001247.001A July 24, 2023

▪ Up to 10 percent by weight rock fragments larger than 2" with no particle size exceeding 6”, between 20 percent to 65 percent by weight of particles retained on the standard No.4 sieve and up to 20 percent smaller than the standard No. 200 sieve.

Alternate soils proposed for use which differ from those specified above should be evaluated by the Geotechnical Engineer of Record regarding their suitability prior to placement at the site.

8.5 REUSE OF ON-SITE MATERIAL

The existing Fill is likely not suitable for reuse as structural fill. The soils in Stratum II were found to be moderately graded, non-plastic, and predominantly comprised of Sand with secondary amounts of Silt and Gravel. These soils are considered to be marginally suitable for reuse as structural fill, provided any deleterious material, is removed prior to placement.

Our analysis of the suitability of the on-site soil for use as structural fill is based on data collected from the test locations completed at the site. Soil suitability should be confirmed in the field by Kleinfelder during construction.

8.6 COMPACTION & PLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS

Structural fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 12 inches in loose thickness where heavy compaction equipment can be utilized and 6 inches in loose thickness where hand-operated equipment is necessary. Only hand-operated tampers should be used immediately behind below-grade and retaining walls during backfilling unless permission is granted by the Structural Engineer to utilize heavy compaction equipment.

The optimum lift thickness and number of repetitive passes with compaction equipment necessary to achieve the required percentage compaction values should be determined in the field with test passes of the chosen compaction equipment. New structural fill should be placed at or deviate nominally from ±2% of the optimum moisture content as determined in accordance with ASTM D698 or ASTM D1557 and compacted to the minimum percentages of maximum dry density as indicated below.

COMPACTION CRITERIA

Fill Area Percent of Maximum Dry

Density per Standard Proctor (ASTM D698)

Percent of Maximum Dry Density per Modified

Proctor (ASTM D1557)

Foundation Support Fill 98 95

Foundation Backfill 98 95

Slab-On-Grade, Parking Areas 98 95

Non-Structural Areas, Green Areas 92 90

8.7 FOUNDATION CONSTRUCTION

Prior to the placement of concrete, the foundation subgrade should be densified and compacted using a walk-behind vibratory roller, gas-powered automatic tamper, or similar equipment.

Densification should be performed to provide uniform density of the foundation subgrade and allow for proper distribution of loads. Proper compaction and densification of the foundation subgrade should be verified by Kleinfelder prior to placement of concrete.

It is emphasized that caution should be exercised to not disturb foundation subgrade soils. Should the subgrade be disturbed, the soil should be compacted in place or removed until firm soil is

Loch Raven VA Medical Center Baltimore, Maryland Kleinfelder Project Number: 24001247.001A July 24, 2023 encountered, and the resulting excavation backfilled with concrete or controlled structural fill as described above. It is recommended that footing excavation and placement of concrete be performed on the same day.

8.8 GENERAL PAVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS

Areas to be paved should be thoroughly proof-rolled and compacted to a minimum of 98% of the soil’s maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D698 or a minimum of 95% of the soil’s maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557 prior to the placement of subbase materials.

The extent and magnitude of undercutting, if required, should be determined in the field by Kleinfelder during proof-rolling of the site. If, at the time of construction, the pavement subgrade is found to be excessively wet, soft or yielding, it may be possible to stabilize the subgrade soils by disking, aerating, removal and replacement, or chemical stabilization; and then subsequently re-compacting the subgrade soils.

We recommend the subbase be placed as soon as possible after the subgrade has been approved.

The pavement system should also be placed as soon as possible after the subbase has been tested and approved. These recommendations are provided in an effort to help prevent the subgrade and the subbase from being disturbed by weather and construction traffic.

Proper drainage will be an important consideration for the overall performance of the pavement.

We have assumed that proper grading to provide suitable runoff from the pavement surface and beyond the limits of the paved areas will be provided.

As minor cracking in the pavement section occurs with age, and if water is allowed to pond on the surface, seepage into the subbase material may weaken the subgrade, which can enhance degradation of the pavement section. Maintenance of this pavement will be critical to limiting its strength loss over the life of the pavement.

8.9 SLAB CONSTRUCTION

Prior to the placement of the slab base course, Kleinfelder should review slab subgrade conditions prior to grade slab construction and provide recommendations for any unsuitable or unstable conditions identified. The subgrade should be proof-rolled with a loaded dump truck or by other approved methods to detect any excessively yielding subgrade conditions.

Depending upon grading requirements and seasonal conditions, slab subgrades in some areas may be wet, soft or yielding at the time of construction. If, at the time of construction, the slab subgrade is found to be excessively wet, soft or yielding, it may be possible to stabilize the subgrade soils by disking, aerating, removal and replacement, or chemical stabilization; and then subsequently re-compacting the subgrade soils. However, if it is not possible to improve the subgrade soils in this manner because of weather conditions, scheduling or other conditions, it is recommended that the subgrade soils may need to be improved or modified. The preferred method for stabilizing the slab subgrade should be determined in the field at the time of construction based upon the actual field conditions in conjunction with the specific soil type encountered at the locations requiring stabilization, the size of the areas requiring stabilization and the construction schedule.

8.10 WET WEATHER CONSTRUCTION

Construction during extended wet weather periods could create the need to over-excavate exposed soils if they become disturbed and cannot be recompacted due to elevated moisture content and/or weather conditions. The need for over-excavation should be confirmed through continuous observation and testing by a qualified geotechnical representative. Selective drying and re-compaction of unsuitable subgrades may be accomplished by scarifying or windrowing surficial material during extended periods of dry and warm weather. Otherwise, the use of imported material could become necessary at an additional cost. The need for subgrade over-excavation and/or

Loch Raven VA Medical Center Baltimore, Maryland Kleinfelder Project Number: 24001247.001A July 24, 2023 stabilization will be dependent, in part, on the subgrade protection effort exercised by the contractor. Similar subgrade stability problems may develop after completion of subgrade preparation due to weather and construction traffic effects, requiring stabilization prior to floor slab and pavement construction.

8.11 CONSTRUCTION DEWATERING

Groundwater was encountered during the subsurface exploration within test boring SB-1, 2, and 3 at a depth of 13, 20, and 15 feet below existing site grade. Based upon this finding, groundwater is not anticipated to be an issue during construction. However, consideration should be given to implementing a dewatering specification should groundwater and/or perched water be encountered during construction. A dewatering specification should require the contractor to provide an adequate dewatering system capable of maintaining the groundwater table a minimum of 2 feet below subgrade elevations during earthwork, foundation construction, concrete placement, and backfilling operations. The specifications should also require that the dewatering system be designed such that adjacent structures will not be impacted.

9.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING

At the time of this report, Kleinfelder is the Geotechnical Engineer of Record for this project. Regardless of the thoroughness of a geotechnical engineering exploration, there is always a possibility that conditions between the test locations and below the depths explored may be different from those encountered, that conditions are not as anticipated by the designers, or that the construction process has altered the subsurface conditions. Kleinfelder should be retained to provide foundation inspection and materials testing and observation services during construction to ensure continuation of geotechnical interpretation and to verify that the recommendations prepared for geotechnical aspects of site development are adhered to during construction.

If an outside firm is selected to provide foundation inspection and/or construction materials testing and observation services for this project, the engaged firm should prepare a letter indicating their intent to assume the responsibility as Geotechnical Engineer of Record. The selected firm should also provide a written acknowledgement of their concurrence with the recommendations presented in our report or revised recommendations concerning the geotechnical aspects of the proposed development. Additional soil and foundation engineering, testing, and consulting services recommended for this project are summarized below:

• Review of Final Project Plans and Specifications: As finalized project documents were not available at the time of this report, we recommend that Kleinfelder be engaged to review the final project plans and specifications to ensure that our recommendations are appropriately incorporated into the project documents.

• Special Inspections/Fill Placement and Compaction: An experienced and appropriately-certified soils engineering technician should witness any required filling and wall backfilling operations and should perform sufficient in place density tests to verify that the specified degree of compaction is achieved. The technician should also evaluate borrow materials used and determine if their existing moisture contents are suitable.

• Foundation Excavation Examination and Testing: The Geotechnical Engineer or an experienced and appropriately-qualified soils engineering technician should examine all foundation excavations. Significant differences between field observations and our test location records should be brought to the attention of the Owner's representative along with appropriate recommendations.

Loch Raven VA Medical Center Baltimore, Maryland Kleinfelder Project Number: 24001247.001A July 24, 2023

10.0 LIMITATIONS

This work was performed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of Kleinfelder’s profession practicing in the same locality, under similar conditions and at the date the services are provided. Our conclusions, opinions, and recommendations are based on a limited number of observations and data. It is possible that conditions could vary between or beyond the data evaluated. Kleinfelder makes no other representation, guarantee, or warranty, express or implied, regarding the services, communication (oral or written), report, opinion, or instrument of service provided. This report may be used only by the Client and the registered design professional in responsible charge and only for the purposes stated for this specific engagement within a reasonable time from its issuance, but in no event later than two (2) years from the date of the report.

Kleinfelder offers various levels of investigative and engineering services to suit the varying needs of our clients. Although risk can never be eliminated, more detailed and extensive studies yield more information, which may help understand and manage the level of risk. Since detailed study and analysis involves greater expense, our clients participate in determining levels of service, which provide information for their purposes at acceptable levels of risk. Client and key members of the design team should discuss the issues addressed in this report with Kleinfelder, so that the issues are understood and applied in a manner consistent with the Client’s budget, tolerance of risk and expectations for future performance and maintenance.

The varied nature of carbonate geology precludes absolute certainty in assessing karst formations.

Therefore, the Client/Owner should be aware that conditions could be encountered during construction that would require modifications to our recommendations. Kleinfelder makes no warranty or guarantee with regard to the development of sinkholes on the project site. The Client/Owner must recognize the risks associated with development in areas underlain by karst geologic formations. Contingencies should be made in the construction schedule and budget for the repair of sinkholes and unstable soil conditions encountered during development of the site.

This report, and any future addenda or reports regarding this site, may be made available to bidders to supply them with only the data contained in the report regarding subsurface conditions and laboratory test results at the point and time noted. Bidders may not rely on interpretations, opinion, recommendations, or conclusions contained in the report. Further, Kleinfelder assumes no liability for interpolation of data between the specific testing locations discussed herein. Because of the limited nature of any subsurface study, the contractor may encounter conditions during construction which differ from those presented in this report. In such event, the contractor should promptly notify the owner so that Kleinfelder’s geotechnical engineer can be contacted to confirm those conditions. We recommend the contractor describe the nature and extent of the differing conditions in writing and that the construction contract include provisions for dealing with differing conditions. Contingency funds should be reserved for potential problems during earthwork and foundation construction.

The work performed was based on project information provided by the Client. If there are any changes in the field to the plans and specifications, the Client must obtain written approval from Kleinfelder’s engineer that such changes do not affect our recommendations. Failure to do so will vitiate Kleinfelder’s recommendations.

11.0 CLOSING

We thank you for the opportunity to work on this project with you. Should you have any questions or require any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us.

APPENDIX

FIGURE 1 – TOPOGRAPHIC MAP

FIGURE 2 – GEOLOGIC MAP

FIGURE 3 – EXPLORATION PLAN

FIGURE 4 – TEST BORING PROFILES

FIGURE 5 – GRAPHICS KEY

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

TEST BORING LOGS

GBA ADVISORY

FIGURES 1 – 5

LABORATORY TEST

RESULTS

TEST BORING LOGS

GBA ADVISORY

TOPOGRAPHIC MAP

EHRM INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADE

LOCH RAVEN VA MEDICAL CENTER

BALTIMORE

MARYLAND

BW

The information included on this graphic representation has been compiled from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. Kleinfelder makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. This document is not intended for use as a land survey product nor is it designed or intended as a construction design document. The use or misuse of the information contained on this graphic representation is at the sole risk of the party using or misusing the information.

FIGUREPROJECT NO.

CREATED:

CREATED BY:

CHECKED BY:

FILE NAME:

www.kleinfelder.com

24001247.001A

7/18/2023

ANull topo map - Loch Raven.mxd

0 2,000 4,0001,000

Feet

Approximate Project Boundary

LEGEND Service Layer Credits: Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed

Approximate Project Boundary

Kp

Kp sf wmg

Kp sf sf

Ql

Pzgg

Pzgg

Pzgg

Pzgg

GEOLOGIC MAP

EHRM INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADE

LOCH RAVEN VA MEDICAL CENTER

BALTIMORE

MARYLAND

BW

The information included on this g raphic represen tat ion has been com piled from a var iety o f sources and is sub ject to change without not ice. Klein felde r m akes no rep resenta tions or wa rran ti es, express o r implied, as to accuracy, comple teness, ti meliness, or r ights to the use of such inform ation. This documen t is not intended for use as a land survey product nor is it designed or in tended as a construction desi gn documen t. The use or misuse of the information contained on this graph ic representat ion is a t the so le risk of the party using o r m isusing the info rm ation .

FIGUREPROJECT NO.

CREATED:

CREATED BY:

CHECKED BY:

FILE NAME:

www.kleinfelder.com

24001247.001A

7/18/2023

ANull geo map - Loch Raven.mxd

0 1,000 2,000500

Feet

Approximate Project Boundary

LEGEND

Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, Maxar, Earthstar Geographics, and the GIS User Community

Roads

Streams

Approximate Project Boundary Kp

Pzgg

Ql sf wmg

Potomac Group

Gunpowder Granite

Lowland Deposits

Setters Formation

Metagraywacke

A

A

A

B-2

B-1

B-4

B-3

EXPLORATION PLAN

EHRM INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADE

LOCH RAVEN VA MEDICAL CENTER

BALTIMORE

MARYLAND

BW

The information included on this graphic representation has been compiled from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. Kleinfelder makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. This document is not intended for use as a land survey product nor is it designed or intended as a construction design document. The use or misuse of the information contained on this graphic representation is at the sole risk of the party using or misusing the information.

FIGUREPROJECT NO.

CREATED:

CREATED BY:

CHECKED BY:

FILE NAME:

www.kleinfelder.com

24001247.001A

7/18/2023

ANull exp plan - Loch Raven.mxd

0 50 10025

Feet

LEGEND

A Approximate Boring Location

Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, Maxar, Earthstar Geographics, and the GIS User Community

NOTE:

REFER TO INDIVIDUAL LOGS FOR DETAILED

INFORMATION AND THE GRAPHIC LEGEND KEYS

FOR GRAPHICAL SYMBOL INFORMATION.

D E

P T

H fe et

D E

P T

H fe et

FIGURE

TEST BORING PROFILES

gINT FILE: Klf_gint_master_2024 PROJECT NUMBER: 24001247.001A OFFICE FILTER: ALLENTOWN gINT TEMPLATE: E:KLF_STANDARD_GINT_LIBRARY_2024.GLB [_8.5X11 PROFILE] PLOTTED: 07/21/2023 09:12 AM BY: ANull

Acela EHRM Infrastructure Upgrade Loch Raven VA Medical Center

3901 Loch Raven Boulevard VA Medical Center Baltimore, Maryland

N= 15

N= 41

N= 83

N= 48

N= 54

N= 50/9""

N= 50/5.5""

N= 50/2""

N= 50/2.5""

- End of Boring at 30 Feet -

SB-1

El. 220.0

N= 18

N= 27

N= 4

N= 48

N= 15

N= 50/4.5""

N= 50/1""

N= 50/2""

N= 50/2""

N= 50/5""

- End of Boring at 30 Feet -

SB-2

El. 224.0

N= 6

N= 2

N= 2

N= 34

N= 42

N= 71

N= 50/3""

N= 50/4""

N= 50/1""

- Practical Auger Refusal at 26 Feet -

- End of Boring at 26 Feet -

SB-3

El. 190.0

N= 9

N= 23

N= 20

N= 16

N= 13

N= 28

N= 12

N= 10

N= 16

- End of Boring at 30 Feet -

SB-4

El. 184.0

PROJECT NO.:

DATE: 7/18/2023

24001247.001A

DRAWN BY: ALN

CHECKED BY: TD

GRAPHICS KEY

Acela EHRM Infrastructure Upgrade Loch Raven VA Medical Center

3901 Loch Raven Boulevard VA Medical Center Baltimore, Maryland

The report and graphics key are an integral part of these logs. All data and interpretations in this log are subject to the explanations and limitations stated in the report.

Solid lines separating strata on the logs represent approximate boundaries only, dashed lines are inferred or extrapolated boundaries.

Actual transitions may be gradual or differ from those represented.

No warranty is provided as to the continuity of soil or rock conditions between individual sample locations.

Logs represent general soil or rock conditions observed at the point of exploration on the date indicated.

In general, Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D2488/D2487) designations presented on the logs were based on visual classification in the field and were modified where appropriate based on gradation and index property testing.

Fine grained soils that plot within the hatched area on the Plasticity Chart, and coarse grained soils with between 5% and 12% passing the No.

200 sieve require dual USCS symbols, ie., CL-ML, GW-GM, GP-GM, GW-GC, GP-GC, GC-GM, SW-SM, SP-SM, SW-SC, SP-SC, SC-SM.

If sampler is not able to be driven at least 6 inches then 50/X indicates number of blows required to drive the identified sampler X inches with a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches.

ABBREVIATIONS

Cu - Coefficients of Uniformity CC - Coefficients of Curvature WOH - Weight of Hammer WOR - Weight of Rod

REFERENCES

1. American Society for Materials and Testing (ASTM), 2011, ASTM D2487: Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System).

GRAVELS

WITH >

12%

FINES

SILTS AND CLAYS

(Liquid Limit less than 50)

WELL-GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT,

WELL-GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND

POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY (OR SILTY

CLAY), POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND

(OR SILTY CLAY AND SAND)

SILTY GRAVEL,

SILTY GRAVEL WITH SAND

CLAYEY GRAVEL,

CLAYEY GRAVEL WITH SAND

POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT,

POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND

SP

CLEAN

SANDS

WITH

<5%

FINES

SILT, SILT WITH SAND, SILT WITH GRAVELML

CL

ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC CLAY WITH SAND, ORGANIC CLAY WITH GRAVEL,

ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC SILT WITH SAND, ORGANIC SILT WITH GRAVEL

ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC CLAY WITH SAND, ORGANIC CLAY WITH GRAVEL,

ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC SILT WITH SAND, ORGANIC SILT WITH GRAVEL

CL-ML

WELL-GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY (OR SILTY

CLAY), WELL-GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY AND

SAND (OR SILT CLAY AND SAND)

SILTY CLAY, SILTY CLAY WITH SAND, SILTY CLAY WITH GRAVEL

ELASTIC SILT. ELASTIC SILT WITH SAND, ELASTIC SILT WITH GRAVEL

FAT CLAY, FAT CLAY WITH SAND, FAT CLAY WITH GRAVEL

OL

SANDS

WITH >

12%

FINES

CLEAN

GRAVEL

WITH

<5%

FINES

GRAVELS

WITH

5% TO

12%

FINES

SW

SW-SC

SW-SM

SC-SM

GP-GM

SILTY, CLAYEY GRAVEL

SILTY, CLAYEY GRAVEL WITH SAND

WELL-GRADED SAND,

WELL-GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL

POORLY GRADED SAND,

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL

WELL-GRADED SAND WITH SILT,

WELL-GRADED SAND WITH SILT AND GRAVEL

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT,

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT AND GRAVEL

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH CLAY,

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH CLAY AND GRAVEL

(OR SILTY CLAY AND GRAVEL)

SILTY SAND,

SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL

GP-GC

GC-GM

F

IN

E G

R A

IN

E

D S

O

IL

S (5

0% o r m or e pa ss es th e N o.

si ev e)

WELL-GRADED GRAVEL,

WELL-GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND

POORLY GRADED GRAVEL,

POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND

WELL-GRADED SAND WITH CLAY (OR SILTY CLAY),

WELL-GRADED SAND WITH CLAY AND GRAVEL

(OR SILTY CLAY AND GRAVEL)

CLAYEY SAND,

CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL

C O

A R

S E

G R

A

IN

E D

S O

IL

S

M or e th an

0% r et ai ne d on

N o.

S ie ve

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND,

SILTY, CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL

LEAN CLAY, LEAN CLAY WITH SAND, LEAN CLAY WITH GRAVEL

SILTS AND CLAYS

(Liquid Limit 50 or greater)

NOTE: USE MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ON THE LOG TO DEFINE A GRAPHIC THAT MAY NOT BE

PROVIDED ON THIS LEGEND.

MH

CH

OH

STANDARD PENETRATION SPLIT SPOON SAMPLER

(2 in. (50.8 mm.) outer diameter and 1-3/8 in. (34.9 mm.) inner diameter)

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM1

SP-SM

SP-SC

SM

SC

SANDS

WITH

5% TO

12%

FINES

GM

GC

GW

GP

GW-GM

GW-GC

S A

N D

S o r m or e of c oa rs e fr ac tio n pa ss es th e N o.

S ie ve

G R

A V

E L

S

M or e th an

0% o f c oa rs e fr ac tio n re ta in ed o n

N o.

S ie ve

DRILLING METHOD/SAMPLER TYPE GRAPHICS

NOTES

GROUND WATER GRAPHICS

OBSERVED SEEPAGE

WATER LEVEL (level where first observed)

WATER LEVEL (additional levels after exploration)

WATER LEVEL (level after stabilizing period) gI N

T F

IL

E

K lf_ gi nt _m as te r_

P

R O

JE

C

T N

U M

B E

R

.0

O

F F

IC

E

F

IL

T E

R

A

LL

E N

T O

W N gI N

T T

E M

P

LA

T E

E

:K

LF

_S T

A N

D A

R D

_G

IN

T _L

IB

R

A R

Y _2

.G

LB

_K

LF

_G E

O _L

E G

1_ G

R A

P H

IC

S

_K E

Y _W

_U S

C S

P

LO

T

T E

D

/1

8/

:2

P M

B Y

A

N ul l

DATE:

CHECKED BY:

DRAWN BY: ALN

24001247.001A

PROJECT NO.:

$%&'()*+,-.'/&01., 233'%445 6789������:�;���<�;�=�<�� �>� �=�?@�"9"9A=�B��

C..'31,&0%45 67�66D7EF6=�! D�E76 8A

GH%I&01.,5 "69�

J1/%40&/K5 "8"6!8 !"F�9FL9"L68� D M

N&O&'3*JPK%5 ����>��

Q%-%'%,(%*R.(S/%,05 ���� !9D

Q14T*C&0%U.'P5 VW

$10%*CH&445 �

XCGQ*N.'1O.,0&H*Q%4K.,4%*$K%(0'S/ R%41U,*N.'1O.,0&H*Q%4K.,4%*$K%(0'S/

Y&41(*Z&'&/%0%'4

[&/% \&HS% R%4('1K01.,

�� 8�9F6 ?��:�] ���_8�"�̀

�9 8�8F6 ?��:�] ���_9�8�̀

�?� 8�9AD �� �!>���

�?9 8�8DE �� �!>���

�@� 8�9"F a�>� �������>�������]��;������ �8�"����

�@9 8�8F6 a�>� �������>�������]��;������ �9�8���� b233101.,&H*+,-.'/&01., [&/% \&HS% R%4('1K01.,

�:� 8�7FF ���

����̂8�"�̀

�:9 8�7"7 ���

����̂9�8�̀

�c� 8�8 D ?��c������]

�c�? 8�87A �� ��>���

�� D ���]!��

��:� 8�9F6 �

��B� 8�9E9 #�� �

�e������������E8����

�9:� 8�8F6 �

�9B� 8�8F #�� �

�e������������E8���� fghijk lmnopmqmorstsuovwwxyz

8�8 9�8 "�8 6�8 F�8 E�8 D�8 �8 Z%'1.3*{4|

8�88

8�8E

8�98

8�9E

$&{U|

8�8 9�8 "�8 6�8 F�8 E�8 D�8 �8…