36C78620B0006-011.pdf

REPORT COVER PAGE

Geotechnical Engineering Report

Fort Smith National Cemetery Burial Expansion Fort Smith, Arkansas

July 23, 2019 Terracon Project No. 04195121

Prepared for:

Cox Design Associates

Austin, TX

Prepared by:

Terracon Consultants, Inc.

Tulsa, Oklahoma

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 1

REPORT TOPICS

INTRODUCTION

SITE CONDITIONS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION

GEOTECHNICAL OVERVIEW

EARTHWORK

SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS

SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS

FLOOR SLABS

PAVEMENTS

SOIL FERTILITY

GENERAL COMMENTS

Note: This report was originally delivered in a web-based format. For more interactive features, please view your project online at client.terracon.com.

ATTACHMENTS

EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES

SITE LOCATION AND EXPLORATION PLANS

EXPLORATION RESULTS

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Note: Refer to each individual Attachment for a listing of contents.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 1

INTRODUC TION

Geotechnical Engineering Report Fort Smith National Cemetery Burial Expansion

522 South 6th Street Fort Smith, Arkansas

Terracon Project No. 04195121 July 23, 2019

INTRODUCTION

This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering services performed for the proposed Burial Expansion planned at the Fort Smith National Cemetery located at 522 South 6th Street in Fort Smith, Arkansas. The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to:

■ Subsurface soil (and rock) conditions ■ Floor slab design and construction

■ Groundwater conditions ■ Seismic site classification per IBC

■ Site preparation and earthwork ■ Pavement section thicknesses

■ Foundation design and construction

The geotechnical engineering Scope of Services for this project included the advancement of five test borings, designated B-1 thru B-3, B-5, and B-6, to depths ranging from approximately 10 to 20 feet below existing site grades. Our original scope of services included seven borings, designated B-1 through B-7. However, two of the borings, B-4 and B-7, were omitted by Cox Design Associates subsequent to their authorization for the project.

Maps showing the site and boring locations are shown 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 logs in the Exploration Results section.

SITE CONDITIONS

The following description of site conditions is derived from our site visit in association with the field exploration and our review of project topographic map.

Item Description

Parcel Information

The project is located at the Fort Smith National Cemetery located at 522 South 6th Street in Fort Smith, Arkansas.

Latitude: 35.380306°, Longitude: -94.428713° (approximate) See Site Location

Fort Smith National Cemetery Burial Expansion ■ Fort Smith, Arkansas July 23, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 04195121

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 2

Item Description Existing Improvements Cemetery and related infrastructure.

Current Ground Cover Grass and shrubs.

Existing Topography Site generally appears to slope up to the approximate center of the expansion area from all directions. Grades vary from 440 to 444.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Our initial understanding of the project was provided in our proposal and was discussed during project planning. A period of collaboration has transpired since the project was initiated, and our final understanding of the project conditions is as follows:

Item Description

Information Provided COX’s emails requesting a quote and outlining scope; aerial maps showing site limits and potential boring locations; a grading plan; and overall master plan.

Project Description The proposed expansion will include burial area additions, the construction of an approximately 10,500 square feet columbarium, and roads. We understand the burial areas will be planted with grass. A soil fertility analysis has been requested.

Maximum Loads (assumed)

■ Columns: 40 to 50 kips

■ Walls: 2 to 3 kips per linear foot (klf)

■ Slabs: 150 pounds per square foot (psf)

Grading/Slopes Based on the grading plan with issue date 5/8/2019, fills up to 3 feet will be required to reach final subgrade elevations for the pavements, columbarium structure and burial areas.

GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION

Subsurface Profile

Subsurface conditions at the boring locations can be generalized as follows:

Description Approximate Depth to Bottom of Stratum Material Encountered Consistency/

Density

Surface 5 to 6 inches Topsoil and Vegetation N/A

July 23, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 04195121

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 3

Description Approximate Depth to Bottom of Stratum Material Encountered Consistency/

Density

Stratum 1 2 to 10 feet

Fill: Silty Clay, Lean Clay, Shaley Lean Clay, Lean to Fat Clay, and Fat Clay with varying amounts of sand, gravel, and asphalt fragments;

Sand with gravel

N/A

Stratum 2 Encountered to 9.5 feet in B-6, and to the termination depth of 10 feet in B-1 thru

B-3, and B-5

Lean Clay, Sandy Lean Clay, Shaley Lean Clay, Shaley Lean to

Fat Clay, and Fat Clay

Medium stiff to very stiff

Stratum 3 Encountered to the termination depth of 20 feet in B-6

Clayey Sand and Sand Loose to medium dense

Conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring logs shown in the Exploration Results section and are attached to this report. Stratification boundaries on the boring logs represent the approximate location of changes in material types; in situ, the transition between materials may be gradual.

Groundwater Conditions

The boreholes were observed while drilling and immediately after completion for the presence and level of groundwater. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of about 18.5 feet while drilling and after boring completion in boring B-6. Groundwater was not encountered in the remaining borings during our field exploration. However, this does not necessarily mean those borings terminated above groundwater. Due to the low permeability of the soils and rock encountered in the borings, a relatively long period 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.

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. Therefore, groundwater levels during construction or at other times in the life of the structure may be higher or lower than 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.

July 23, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 04195121

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 4

GEOTECHNICAL OVERVIEW

Existing fill was encountered to depths of 2 to 10 feet at our borings. The fill had variable strength and composition across the borings. There is a very high probability that fill exists away from our borings at this site.

The proposed columbarium/building can be supported on shallow footings bearing on the medium stiff to very stiff native clay soils or tested and approved new engineered fill. The Shallow Foundations section addresses the design and construction of footing foundations for the support of the columbarium.

Moderate to high plasticity clay soils were encountered at the boring locations. Because of the volume change potential of the moderate to high plasticity soils with variations in moisture content, we recommend that a minimum thickness of low volume change engineered fill be constructed beneath the slab-on-grade floor. Details regarding this low volume change zone are provided in Floor Slabs.

Constructing footings, floor slabs, and pavements over existing fill is discussed in this report.

Because of the potential for variations in the composition and quality of existing fill away from the borings and potential for unsuitable materials to be buried in existing fills, there is an inherent risk for the owner of unpredictable post-construction settlement of footings, floor slabs, and pavements constructed over the existing fill. This risk cannot be eliminated unless the full-depth of existing fill is removed and replaced with tested and approved, engineered fill. However, the risk can be reduced with thorough observation and testing by the geotechnical engineer during construction.

Expansive soils are present on this site. This report provides recommendations to help mitigate the effects of soil shrinkage and expansion. However, even if these procedures are followed, some movement and cracking in the structure should be anticipated. The severity of cracking and other damage such as uneven floor slabs will probably increase if any modification of the site results in excessive wetting or drying of the expansive soils. Eliminating the risk of movement and distress may not be feasible, but it may be possible to further reduce the risk of movement if significantly more expensive measures are used during construction. We would be pleased to discuss other construction alternatives with you upon request.

The Pavements section addresses the design of pavement systems.

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

July 23, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 04195121

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 5

EARTHWORK

Earthwork is anticipated to include clearing, excavations, and fill placement. The following sections provide recommendations for use in the preparation of specifications for the work.

Recommendations include critical quality criteria, as necessary, to render the site in the state considered in our geotechnical engineering evaluation for foundations, floor slabs, and pavements.

Site Preparation

Areas within the limits of construction should be stripped and cleared of surface vegetation, topsoil, and any other deleterious material.

After stripping and completing necessary cuts, the columbarium/building area should be undercut to at least 36 inches below the final subgrade to allow for construction of the LVC fill layer. The undercut to construct the 36-inch LVC zone should extend at least 5 feet laterally beyond the outside edge of perimeter foundations.

After stripping and completing necessary grading cuts and undercuts, but prior to placing any new fill, the subgrade should be proofrolled to aid in locating soft, unstable areas. Proofrolling should be performed with a loaded tandem axle dump truck weighing at least 25 tons. Areas too small to proofroll should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer. Unstable soils located by proofrolling or subgrade evaluation should be undercut full-depth and replaced with suitable engineered fill.

After completing the proofrolling, and before placing any fill, the exposed subgrade should be scarified to a minimum depth of 9 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted as recommended in Fill Compaction Requirements within Earthwork.

Fill Material Types

Soils used as engineered fill materials should meet the following requirements:

Fill Type 1 USCS Classification Acceptable Location For Placement

Low Volume Change

(LVC) Material 2 CL or SC

(8 ≤ PI ≤ 18)

All locations and elevations.

On-Site Clay Soils CL, CL-CH, CH

Building Area: The on-site clay soils should not be placed within 36 inches of the final building subgrade, unless modified with lime. 3

Pavement Area: Should not be placed within 10 inches of the final pavement subgrade, unless chemically treated as recommended in Pavements.

July 23, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 04195121

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 6

Continued from Page 5

1. Controlled, compacted fill should consist of approved materials that are free of organic matter and debris and contain maximum rock size of 3 inches. Frozen material should not be used, and fill should not be placed on a frozen subgrade. A sample of each material type should be submitted to the geotechnical engineer for evaluation prior to its use.

2. Imported low plasticity cohesive soil having a plasticity index (PI) of 8 to 18 and containing at least 15% fines (material passing the No. 200 sieve, based on dry weight). Alternatively, lime modified on-site clays with a PI≤18 after modification can be used as LVC fill material.

3. The on-site clays generally have a PI greater than 18. On-site clays could be used as Low Volume Change (LVC) fill within 36 inches of the building subgrade, if they are effectively modified with lime to reduce the PI of the soils to 18 or less. We estimate a minimum of approximately 5 to 7 percent hydrated lime, based on the soil’s compacted dry weight, will be required to reduce the PI of the on-site soils to 18 or less. The actual amounts of lime should be determined in the field as the amount required to reduce the PI of the soil to a value of 18 or less.

Fill Compaction Requirements

The compacted subgrade and fill should be moisture conditioned and compacted in accordance with the following recommendations:

Item Description

Subgrade Scarification Depth 9 inches

Maximum Lift Thickness 1 9 inches or less in loose thickness

Minimum Compaction Requirements 2

At least 95% of the material’s maximum standard Proctor dry density

(ASTM D-698)

Moisture Content -1 to +3% of the material’s optimum moisture content

1. Thinner lifts are recommended in confined areas or when hand-operated compaction equipment is used.

2. We recommend that engineered fill (including scarified compacted subgrade) be tested for moisture content and compaction during placement. Should the results of the in-place density tests indicate the specified moisture or compaction limits have not been met, the area represented by the test should be reworked and retested as required until the specified moisture and compaction requirements are achieved.

Utility Trench Backfill

Utility trenches are a common source of water infiltration and migration. Utility trenches penetrating beneath the building should be effectively sealed to restrict water intrusion and flow through the trenches, which could migrate below the building. The trench should provide an effective trench plug that extends at least 5 feet from the face of the building exterior. The plug material should consist of cementitious flowable fill or low permeability clay. The trench plug material should be placed to surround the utility line. If used, the clay trench plug material should be placed and compacted to comply with the water content and compaction recommendations for structural fill stated previously in this report.

July 23, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 04195121

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 7

Grading and Drainage

All grades must provide effective drainage away from the structure during and after construction.

Water permitted to pond next to the structure can result in greater soil movements than those discussed in this report. These greater movements can result in unacceptable differential floor slab movements, cracked slabs and walls, and roof leaks. Estimated movements described in this report are based on effective drainage for the life of the structure and cannot be relied upon if effective drainage is not maintained.

Exposed ground should be constructed at a slope of at least 5 percent away from the structure for at least 10 feet beyond the perimeter of the structure. Locally, flatter grades may be necessary to transition ADA access requirements for flatwork. After building construction and landscaping, we recommend verifying final grades to document that effective drainage has been achieved. Grades around the structure should also be periodically inspected and adjusted as necessary, as part of the structure’s maintenance program.

Planters located within 10 feet of the structure should be self-contained to prevent water accessing the subgrade soils. Sprinkler mains and spray heads should be located at least 5 feet away from the structure lines. Roof runoff should be collected in drains or gutters. Roof drains and downspouts should be discharged onto pavements which slope away from the structure or extend down spouts at least 10 feet away from the structure.

Earthwork Construction Considerations

The surficial silty clay and lean clay soils are moisture sensitive and subject to disturbance and instability when they experience increases in moisture content. If wet conditions exist during construction, equipment mobility will be hindered and the extent of unstable subgrade will be exacerbated.

Upon completion of filling and grading, care should be taken to maintain the subgrade water content prior to construction of floor slabs. Construction traffic over the completed subgrades should be avoided. The site should also be graded to prevent ponding of surface water on the prepared subgrades or in excavations. Water collecting over, or adjacent to, construction areas should be removed. If the subgrade freezes, desiccates, saturates, or is disturbed, the affected material should be removed, or the materials should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and recompacted, prior to floor slab construction.

As a minimum, all temporary excavations should be sloped or braced as required by Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) regulations to provide stability and safe working conditions. Temporary excavations will probably be required during grading operations. The grading contractor, by his contract, is usually responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations and should shore, slope or bench the sides of the excavations as required, July 23, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 04195121

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 8 to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should comply with applicable local, state and federal safety regulations, including the current OSHA Excavation and Trench Safety Standards.

Construction Observation and Testing

The earthwork efforts should be monitored under the direction of the Geotechnical Engineer.

Monitoring should include documentation of adequate removal of vegetation and topsoil, proofrolling, and mitigation of areas delineated by the proofroll to require mitigation.

Each lift of compacted fill should be tested, evaluated, and reworked as necessary until approved by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to placement of additional lifts. Each lift of fill should be tested for density and water content at a frequency of at least one test for every 2,500 square feet of compacted fill in the building areas and 5,000 square feet in pavement areas, with at least two tests per lift. One density and water content test should be performed for each lift for every 100 linear feet of compacted utility trench backfill, with at least two tests per lift.

In areas of foundation excavations, the bearing subgrade should be evaluated under the direction of the Geotechnical Engineer. If unanticipated conditions are encountered, the Geotechnical Engineer should prescribe mitigation options.

In addition to the documentation of the essential parameters necessary for construction, the continuation of the Geotechnical Engineer into the construction phase of the project provides the continuity to maintain the Geotechnical Engineer’s evaluation of subsurface conditions, including assessing variations and associated design changes.

SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS

The proposed columbarium can be supported by footing foundations bearing in the native medium stiff to very stiff clays or tested and approved new engineered fill. Design recommendations for footing foundations are presented in the following paragraphs.

Design Parameters

Description Design Parameters

Net allowable bearing pressure 1 2,000 psf

Bearing material Medium stiff to very stiff, native clays; or tested and approved new engineered fill

Minimum width Columns: 30 inches

Walls: 16 inches

July 23, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 04195121

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 9

Description Design Parameters Minimum depth (below lowest finished exterior grade) 24 inches 2

Estimated total movement 1 inch Estimated differential movement ≤ ¾ inch Allowable passive pressure (rectangular pressure distribution) 3, 5 750 psf

Allowable coefficient of sliding friction 4, 5 0.15

1. The net allowable bearing pressure is the pressure in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure at the footing base elevation.

2. Minimum depth applies to both perimeter footings and footings in unheated areas. Minimum depth will provide frost protection.

3. Allowable passive pressure value considers a factor of safety of about 2. Passive pressure value applies to tested and approved new engineered fill or undisturbed medium stiff to very stiff native clay. Passive resistance should be neglected for the upper 2 feet of the soil below the final adjacent grade due to strength loss from freeze-thaw and moisture changes.

4. Allowable coefficient of friction value considers a factor of safety of about 2.

5. Some lateral movement will be required to mobilize the passive and frictional resistance.

Foundation Construction Considerations

Footing excavations should be free of loose or disturbed material and water when concrete is placed. Concrete should be placed as soon as possible after excavation is completed to reduce the potential for wetting, drying, or disturbance of the bearing materials.

To verify that suitable bearing materials are encountered, we recommend the base of all foundation excavations be observed and evaluated by the geotechnical engineer prior to placing reinforcing steel and concrete.

If unsuitable bearing soils are encountered in footing excavations, the excavations should be extended deeper to suitable soils and the footings could bear directly on these soils at the lower level or on lean concrete backfill placed in the excavations as shown in Figure 1 below. The footings could also bear on properly compacted engineered fill extending down to the suitable soils. Overexcavation for compacted backfill placement below footings should extend laterally beyond all edges of the footings at least 8 inches per foot of overexcavation depth below footing base elevation. The overexcavation should then be backfilled up to the footing base elevation with approved engineered fill material. The overexcavation and backfill procedure is shown in Figure 2 below.

July 23, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 04195121

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 10

Figure 1 Figure 2

SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS

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 properties encountered at the site and as described on the exploration logs and results, it is our professional opinion that the Seismic Site Classification is D. Subsurface explorations at this site were extended to a maximum depth of 20 feet. The site properties below the boring depth to 100 feet were estimated based on our experience and knowledge of geologic conditions of the general area. Additional deeper borings or geophysical testing may be performed to confirm the conditions below the current boring depth.

FLOOR SLABS

Design parameters for floor slabs assume the requirements for Earthwork have been followed.

Specific attention should be given to positive drainage away from the structure.

July 23, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 04195121

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 11

Floor Slab Design Parameters

Item Description Floor slab support 36-inch Low Volume Change (LVC) fill zone 1

1. Because of the volume change potential of the moderate to high plasticity clay subgrade soils with variations in moisture content, we recommend a Low Volume Change (LVC) fill layer of at least 36 inches thick be constructed below building floor slabs. LVC fill material should consist of approved materials conforming to the recommendations presented Fill Material Types within Earthwork. The thickness of the LVC fill zone does not include the thickness of any granular leveling material below the floor slab.

By constructing an LVC fill zone beneath the slabs, closely controlling the moisture and density of the scarified soils and controlling the potential for moisture migration beneath the slabs, the potential for large floor slab movements should be reduced. However, because of the remaining thickness of moderate to high plasticity soils, the potential for some future movement still exists.

Based on constructing the recommended LVC fill layer beneath the floor slab, we anticipate potential vertical rise of the slab could be approximately ¾ inch. This magnitude of slab movement could occur differentially. To further reduce the potential for slab movements, a greater thickness of LVC fill could be placed beneath the slabs.

It should be noted that non-load bearing or lightly loaded walls supported on the floor slab could experience total and differential movements similar to that of the floor slab. Therefore, we recommend that a void space be constructed above the non-load bearing partition walls placed on the floor slab. Special framing details should be provided at doorjambs and frames within partition walls to avoid potential distortion. Joints should be placed in the partition walls to help tolerate the effects of differential movements. Partition walls should be isolated from suspended ceilings.

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, 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.

Floor Slab Construction Considerations

We recommend that the subgrade be maintained in a relatively moist condition until the floor slab is constructed. Upon completion of grading operations in the building area, care should be taken to maintain the recommended subgrade moisture content and density prior to construction of the building floor slab. If the subgrade should become excessively wetted or dried, or otherwise disturbed prior to construction of the floor slab, the affected material should be removed or the materials scarified, moisture conditioned, and recompacted.

July 23, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 04195121

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 12

PAVEMENTS

Pavement Design Parameters

We recommend that subgrade improvement be accomplished by constructing a minimum 10-inch thick layer of select fill beneath the pavement section. The on-site subgrade soils should be overexcavated sufficiently to construct the 10-inch thick layer of select fill below the pavement section. The select fill should meet the criteria for Low Volume Change (LVC) material stated in section Fill Material Types within Earthwork.

Alternatively, subgrade improvement can be accomplished by treating the upper 8 inches of the pavement subgrade with hydrated lime at a minimum application rate of 5 to 7 percent, based on the material’s compacted dry unit weight. Lime treatment should be performed according to the ADOT Specifications.

Typical, minimum alternative pavement sections are outlined in the section below. The pavement sections assume that the pavements will be traveled by truck traffic as follows.

- 1 package delivery truck per day having a gross weight of 18,000 pounds;

- 1 garbage/dumpster truck per day having a gross weight of 55,000 pounds;

- 3 dump trucks per day having a gross weight of 68,000 pounds; or equivalent trafficking.

Occasional 80,000-pound semi-trucks and mini excavators (assumed to use the roads once per month) have been considered in the design of the pavement sections provided below.

The recommended pavement sections are adequate for a 20-year traffic life.

If heavier or more frequent truck traffic is expected, Terracon should be contacted to review the pavements sections and, if necessary, to modify the section thickness. Periodic maintenance should be planned to extend the pavement life. Other pavement sections could be considered.

Pavement Section Thicknesses

The following table provides options for AC and PCC Sections:

July 23, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 04195121

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 13

Pavement Drainage

Pavements should be sloped to provide rapid drainage of surface water. Water allowed to pond on or adjacent to the pavements could saturate the subgrade and contribute to premature pavement deterioration.

Pavement Maintenance

The pavement sections represent minimum recommended thicknesses and, as such, periodic maintenance should be anticipated. Therefore, preventive maintenance should be planned and provided for through an on-going pavement management program. Maintenance activities are intended to slow the rate of pavement deterioration and to preserve the pavement investment.

Maintenance consists of both localized maintenance (e.g. crack and joint sealing and patching) and global maintenance (e.g. surface sealing). Preventive maintenance is usually the priority when implementing a pavement maintenance program. Additional engineering observation is recommended to determine the type and extent of a cost-effective program. Even with periodic maintenance, some movements and related cracking may still occur and repairs may be required.

MINIMUM PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

Drive Lanes Automobile Parking

Pavement Section I Asphaltic Concrete Over Aggregate Base Over Select Fill or Treated Subgrade

2.0” Type 12.5 mm HMAC 1 3.0” Type 12.5 mm HMAC 1

2.5” Type 25 mm HMAC 1 6.0” Class 7 Aggregate Base 1

6.0” Class 7 Aggregate Base 1 10.0’’ Select Fill or

8.0” Treated Subgrade 1

10.0’’ Select Fill or

8.0” Treated Subgrade 1

Pavement Section II 3,500 psi Air Entrained Portland Cement Concrete Over Select Fill or Treated Subgrade

6.0" Concrete 5.0" Concrete

10.0’’ Select Fill or

8.0” Treated Subgrade 1 10.0’’ Select Fill or

8.0” Treated Subgrade 1

1. Arkansas Department of Transportation Standard Specifications NOTE: We recommend that 7-inch thick reinforced concrete pads be provided in front of and beneath trash receptacles. The dumpster trucks should be parked on the rigid concrete pavement when the trash receptacles are lifted. The concrete pads should be supported on at least 4 inches of Class 7 aggregate base over 10 inches of select fill or 8 inches of lime treated subgrade.

July 23, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 04195121

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 14

Pavement performance is affected by its surroundings. In addition to providing preventive maintenance, the civil engineer should consider the following recommendations in the design and layout of pavements:

■ Final grade adjacent to paved areas should slope down from the edges at a minimum 2%.

■ Subgrade and pavement surfaces should have a minimum 2% slope to promote proper surface drainage.

■ Install below pavement drainage systems surrounding areas anticipated for frequent wetting.

■ Install joint sealant and seal cracks immediately.

■ Seal all landscaped areas in or adjacent to pavements to reduce moisture migration to subgrade soils.

■ Place compacted, low permeability backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter.

■ Place curb, gutter and/or sidewalk directly on clay subgrade soils rather than on unbound granular base course materials.

SOIL FERTILITY

Soil fertility test results will be submitted at a later date as an addendum to this report.

GENERAL COMMENTS

Our analysis and opinions are based upon our understanding of the project, the geotechnical conditions in the area, and the data obtained from our site exploration. Natural variations will 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 this report, to provide observation and testing services during pertinent construction phases. 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

July 23, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 04195121

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 15 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 cost. 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 cost. 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, and cost estimating including, excavation support, and dewatering requirements/design are the responsibility of others. If changes in the nature, design, or location of the project are planned, 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

July 23, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 04195121

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES 1 of 2

EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES

Field Exploration

Number of Borings Boring Depth (feet) Planned Location

(B-1 thru B-3, and B-5)

Planned roadway and burial expansion area

(B-6)

20 Planned columbarium area

Our original scope of services included seven borings, designated B-1 through B-7. However, two of the borings, B-4 and B-7, were omitted by Cox Design Associates subsequent to their authorization for the project.

Boring Layout and Elevations: Terracon personnel staked the boring locations in the field.

Coordinates of the boring locations were obtained with a handheld GPS unit (estimated horizontal accuracy of about ±10 feet). Terracon determines relative elevations of the borings if clear sight lines exist between borings. Elevations are also approximate and are generally obtained using an engineer’s level from a convenient reference point. For this exploration, the boring surface elevations were referenced to the top of a fire hydrant located west of the site, which was assumed to have an arbitrary elevation of 100.0 feet. The locations and elevations of the borings should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by these methods.

Subsurface Exploration Procedures: We advance the borings with an ATV-mounted rotary drill rig using continuous flight augers (solid stem and/or hollow stem as necessary depending on soil conditions). Four samples are obtained in the upper 10 feet of each boring and at intervals of 5 feet thereafter. In the split-barrel sampling procedure, a standard 2-inch outer diameter split-barrel sampling spoon is driven into the ground by a 140-pound automatic hammer falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows required to advance the sampling spoon the last 12 inches of a normal 18-inch penetration is recorded as the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) resistance value. The SPT resistance values, also referred to as N-values, are indicated on the boring logs at the test depths.

Additionally, topsoil samples were collected from the upper 6 inches of the boring locations and the vicinity of the boring locations for soil fertility tests.

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 field boring logs as part of the drilling operations. These field logs included visual classifications of the materials encountered during drilling and our interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples. Final boring logs were prepared from the field logs. The final boring logs represent the

July 23, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 04195121

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES 2 of 2

Geotechnical Engineer's interpretation of the field logs and include 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 to understand the engineering properties of the various soil and rock strata, as necessary, for this project.

Procedural standards noted below are for reference to methodology in general. In some cases, variations to methods were applied because of local practice or professional judgment. Standards noted below include reference to other, related standards. Such references are not necessarily applicable to describe the specific test performed.

■ ASTM D2216 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass

■ ASTM D4318 Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils

■ Soil fertility analysis as follows:

o Routine fertility test to include content of Nitrogen, Phosphorous and Potassium o Organic content o pH

Soil fertility tests are being performed by Oklahoma State University County Extension in Tulsa.

The results of the tests will be submitted at a later date as an addendum to this report.

The laboratory testing program often included examination of soil samples by an engineer. Based on the material’s texture and plasticity, we described and classified the soil samples in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable

SITE LOCATION AND EXPLORATION PLANS

Contents:

Site Location Plan Exploration Plans (2 pages) n Exploration Plan with Aerial Image n Exploration Plan with Project Overlay

Note: All attachments are one page unless noted above.

SITE LOCATION

July 23, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 04195121

Note to Preparer: This is a large table with outside borders. Just click inside the table above this text box, then paste your GIS Toolbox image.

When paragraph markers are turned on you may notice a line of hidden text above and outside the table – please leave that alone. Limit editing to inside the table.

The line at the bottom about the general location is a separate table line. You can edit it as desired, but try to keep to a single line of text to avoid reformatting the page.

MAP 1 PORTRA IT

DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES MAP PROVIDED BY MICROSOFT BING MAPS

EXPLORATION PLAN

July 23, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 04195121

Note to Preparer: This is a large table with outside borders. Just click inside the table above this text box, then paste your GIS Toolbox image.

When paragraph markers are turned on you may notice a line of hidden text above and outside the table – please leave that alone. Limit editing to inside the table.

The line at the bottom about the general location is a separate table line. You can edit it as desired, but try to keep to a single line of text to avoid reformatting the page.

MAP 2 PORTRA IT

DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES MAP PROVIDED BY COX DESIGN sgebretsadik Text Box BM: Top of Fire Hydrant Elevation =100.0 FT sgebretsadik Polygon Line

EXPLORATION PLAN

July 23, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 04195121

Note to Preparer: This is a large table with outside borders. Just click inside the table above this text box, then paste your GIS Toolbox image.

When paragraph markers are turned on you may notice a line of hidden text above and outside the table – please leave that alone. Limit editing to inside the table.

The line at the bottom about the general location is a separate table line. You can edit it as desired, but try to keep to a single line of text to avoid reformatting the page.

MAP 2 LANDSCAPE

DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES MAP PROVIDED BY MICROSOFT BING MAPS sgebretsadik Text Box BM: Top of Fire Hydrant Elevation =100.0 FT

EXPLORATION RESULTS

Contents:

Boring Logs (B1 through B-3, B-5, and B-6) Atterberg Limits

4-5-4 N=9

3-4-3 N=7

2-3-4 N=7

5-8-10 N=18

42-14-28

5" Topsoil FILL - SILTY CLAY , with sand and gravel, brown FILL - SHALEY LEAN CLAY , with gravel; trace asphalt fragments, tan and reddish brown LEAN CLAY (CL), tan and orangish brown, medium stiff

FAT CLAY (CH), gray with orangish brown, medium stiff

SHALEY LEAN CLAY (CL), reddish brown, very stiff

Boring Terminated at 10 Feet

1.0

2.0

5.0

8.5

10.0

100.5

99.5

96.5

91.5

Hammer Type: Automatic +Classification estimated from disturbed samples. Core samples and petrographic analysis may reveal other rock types.

Stratification 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

F

O R

T S

M

IT

H N

A T

IO

N

.G P

J M

O D

E

LL

A Y

E R

.G P

J

/2 3/

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

D E

P T

H

F t.)

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

P E

R C

E N

T F

IN

E

S

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

ATTERBERG

LIMITS

LL-PL-PI

LOCATION See Exploration Plan

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.)

Surface Elev.: 101.5 (Ft.)

Advancement Method:

Power Auger

Abandonment Method:

9522 E 47th Pl, Ste D Tulsa, OK

Notes:

Project No.: 04195121

Drill Rig: ATV 970E

BORING LOG NO. B-1

Cox Design AssociatesCLIENT:

Evanston, IL

Driller: PH

Boring Completed: 07-02-2019

PROJECT: Fort Smith National Cemetery Burial Expansion

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.

522 South 6th Street Fort Smith, AR

SITE:

Boring Started: 07-02-2019 Not Encountered While Drilling

Not Encountered After Boring

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E

4-13-13 N=26

3-3-3 N=6

3-4-4 N=8

3-6-7 N=13

23-19-4

5" Topsoil FILL - SILTY CLAY , brown with tan

FAT CLAY (CH), orangish brown and gray, medium stiff

LEAN CLAY (CL), gray, stiff

SHALEY LEAN TO FAT CLAY (CL/CH), reddish brown; trace black, stiff

Boring Terminated at 10 Feet

2.0

5.5

8.5

10.0

98.5

90.5

Hammer Type: Automatic +Classification estimated from disturbed samples. Core samples and petrographic analysis may reveal other rock types.

Stratification 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

F

O R

T S

M

IT

H N

A T

IO

N

.G P

J M

O D

E

LL

A Y

E R

.G P

J

/2 3/

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

D E

P T

H

F t.)

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

P E

R C

E N

T F

IN

E

S

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

ATTERBERG

LIMITS

LL-PL-PI

LOCATION See Exploration Plan

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.)

Surface Elev.: 100.5 (Ft.)

Advancement Method:

Power Auger

Abandonment Method:

9522 E 47th Pl, Ste D Tulsa, OK

Notes:

Project No.: 04195121

Drill Rig: ATV 970E

BORING LOG NO. B-2

Cox Design AssociatesCLIENT:

Evanston, IL

Driller: PH

Boring Completed: 07-02-2019

PROJECT: Fort Smith National Cemetery Burial Expansion

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.

522 South 6th Street Fort Smith, AR

SITE:

Boring Started: 07-02-2019 Not Encountered While Drilling

Not Encountered After Boring

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

S A

M P

LE

T

Y

3-3-4 N=7

4-6-9 N=15

3-5-7 N=12

4-6-9 N=15

5" Topsoil FILL - LEAN CLAY/FAT CLAY , trace gravel and stiff shaley zones, yellowish brown with reddish brown

LEAN CLAY (CL), brown with light brown, very stiff

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), yellowish brown with gray, stiff

SHALEY LEAN CLAY (CL), reddish brown, very stiff

Boring Terminated at 10 Feet

2.5

5.5

9.0

10.0

99.5

96.5

Hammer Type: Automatic +Classification estimated from disturbed samples. Core samples and petrographic analysis may reveal other rock types.

Stratification 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

F

O R

T S

M

IT

H N

A T

IO

N

.G P

J M

O D

E

LL

A Y

E R

.G P

J

/2 3/

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

D E

P T

H

F t.)

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

P E

R C

E N

T F

IN

E

S

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

ATTERBERG

LIMITS

LL-PL-PI

LOCATION See Exploration Plan

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.)

Surface Elev.: 102.0 (Ft.)

Advancement Method:

Power Auger

Abandonment Method:

9522 E 47th Pl, Ste D Tulsa, OK

Notes:

Project No.: 04195121

Drill Rig: ATV 970E

BORING LOG NO. B-3

Cox Design AssociatesCLIENT:

Evanston, IL

Driller: PH

Boring Completed: 07-02-2019

PROJECT: Fort Smith National Cemetery Burial Expansion

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.

522 South 6th Street Fort Smith, AR

SITE:

Boring Started: 07-02-2019 Not Encountered While Drilling

Not Encountered After Boring

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

S A

M P

LE

T

Y

6-5-6 N=11

5-9-6 N=15

31-7-7 N=14

2-1-2 N=3

6" Topsoil FILL - LEAN CLAY , with sand and silty clay zones, tan and orangish brown

FILL - SANDY LEAN CLAY , yellowish brown with reddish brown

FILL - SAND , with gravel, brown

FILL - FAT CLAY , with sand and gravel, gray and orangish brown

Boring Terminated at 10 Feet

2.5

5.0

8.5

10.0

95.5

90.5

Hammer Type: Automatic +Classification estimated from disturbed samples. Core samples and petrographic analysis may reveal other rock types.

Stratification 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

F

O R

T S

M

IT

H N

A T

IO

N

.G P

J M

O D

E

LL

A Y

E R

.G P

J

/2 3/

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

D E

P T

H

F t.)

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

P E

R C

E N

T F

IN

E

S

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

ATTERBERG

LIMITS

LL-PL-PI

LOCATION See Exploration Plan

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.)

Surface Elev.: 100.5 (Ft.)

Advancement Method:

Power Auger

Abandonment Method:

9522 E 47th Pl, Ste D Tulsa, OK

Notes:

Project No.: 04195121

Drill Rig: ATV 970E

BORING LOG NO. B-5

Cox Design AssociatesCLIENT:

Evanston, IL

Driller: PH

Boring Completed: 07-02-2019

PROJECT: Fort Smith National Cemetery Burial Expansion

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.

522 South 6th Street Fort Smith, AR

SITE:

Boring Started: 07-02-2019 Not Encountered While Drilling

Not Encountered After Boring

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

S A

M P

LE

T

Y

4-6-6 N=12

4-7-18 N=25

2-3-2 N=5

6-8-10 N=18

2-4-5 N=9

4-4-5 N=9

48-16-32

67-19-48

6" Topsoil FILL - LEAN CLAY/FAT CLAY , with sand, reddish brown and gray

FILL - SANDY LEAN CLAY , with gravel and boulders; trace asphalt fragments, brown

FAT CLAY (CH), gray, medium stiff

SHALEY LEAN CLAY (CL), grayish brown, stiff

CLAYEY SAND (SC), reddish brown, medium dense

SAND (SP), reddish brown, loose

Boring Terminated at 20 Feet

2.0

5.5

8.5

9.5

13.5

20.0

95.5

92.5

91.5

87.5

Hammer Type: Automatic +Classification estimated from disturbed samples. Core samples and petrographic analysis may reveal other rock types.

Stratification 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

F

O R

T S

M

IT

H N

A T

IO

N

.G P

J M

O D

E

LL

A Y

E R

.G P

J

/2 3/

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

D E

P T

H

F t.)

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

P E

R C

E N

T F

IN

E

S

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

ATTERBERG

LIMITS

LL-PL-PI

LOCATION See Exploration Plan

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.)

Surface Elev.: 101.0 (Ft.)

Advancement Method:

Power Auger

Abandonment Method:

9522 E 47th Pl, Ste D Tulsa, OK

Notes:

Project No.: 04195121

Drill Rig: ATV 970E

BORING LOG NO. B-6

Cox Design AssociatesCLIENT:

Evanston, IL

Driller: PH

Boring Completed: 07-02-2019

PROJECT: Fort Smith National Cemetery Burial Expansion

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.

522 South 6th Street Fort Smith, AR

SITE:

Boring Started: 07-02-2019

18.5 Feet While Drilling

18.5 Feet After Boring

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

S A

M P

LE

T

Y

0 20 40 60 80 100

CH

o r

OH

CL

o r

OL

ML or OL

MH or OH

"U " L ine

"A " L ine

ATTERBERG LIMITS RESULTS

ASTM D4318

P L A S T I C I T Y

I N D E X

LIQUID LIMIT

PROJECT NUMBER: 04195121

SITE: 522 South 6th Street Fort Smith, AR

PROJECT: Fort Smith National Cemetery Burial Expansion

CLIENT: Cox Design Associates Evanston, IL

9522 E 47th Pl, Ste D Tulsa, OK

LA

B

O R

A T

O R

Y T

E S

T S

A R

E 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

A T

T E

R B

E R

G L

IM

IT

S

F O

R T

S M

IT

H

N A

T

IO

N .G

P J

T…