36E77619R0097-0005001.pdf

James C. Fortin

From: Thunberg, Carl W <Carl.Thunberg@terracon.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 7:21 AM To: John D. Kuchinski Cc: James C. Fortin; Richard M. Poulin; Shedd, Wally Subject: Re: 13586 VAMC Providence RI Sterile Core

Categories: Filed by Newforma

Good Morning Everyone, We have re‐examined the boring logs, soil laboratory test results, and the recommendations contained in our 2013 Geotechnical Engineering Report, in light of the premium costs for over‐excavation and underpinning existing foundations, which has been determined to be cost‐prohibitive.

The existing fill consists of medium dense granular materials. Footings bearing on existing fill may be proportioned for a net allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. Footings adjacent to the existing building should be placed at the same elevation as the existing foundations to prevent surcharging existing foundations.

Terracon should be present to inspect the bearing surface of all footing excavations, and to observe proof‐rolling as recommended in our report.

The existing fill should be removed to a depth of 2 feet below floor slabs, proof‐rolled, and replaced with compacted structural fill.

We have re‐examined the frost protection depth for Providence, RI and have determined a frost protection depth of 40 inches is appropriate.

The seismic site class remains unchanged as Site Class D.

We trust this email will give you the information required, so the design may proceed. I’m traveling today and tomorrow. We will formalize these recommendations in the form of an Addendum to the report on Friday.

Carl

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 17, 2018, at 2:05 PM, John D. Kuchinski <jkuchinski@harriman.com> wrote:

CAUTION: Do not click on or open unexpected links or attachments. If unsure this email is legitimate, contact the message sender to verify. Call the Helpdesk at 1‐800‐865‐0306 for further support.

Carl We are looking for written confirmation of the fill soil bearing capacity, any changes to seismic site classification and reevaluation of frost depth. Adjacent building geotechnical reports used 40‐inches for frost and Terracon cited 48‐inches.

Thank you John John D. Kuchinski, PE

Senior Civil Engineer 46 Harriman Drive Auburn, ME 04210 207.784.5100 harriman.com

Geotechnical Engineering Report Providence VA Medical Center Building Addition

Providence, Rhode Island

October 9, 2013

Project No. J1135105

Prepared for:

Harriman Architects & Engineers

Auburn, Maine

Prepared by:

Terracon Consultants, Inc.

Manchester, New Hampshire

Terracon Consultants, Inc. 77 Sundial Avenue, Suite 401W Manchester, NH 03103

P (603) 647 9700 F (603) 647 4432 terracon.com

Harriman Architects & Engineers

46 Harriman Drive

Auburn, ME 04210

Attn: Mr. John D. Kuchinski, PE

P: (207) 784 5100

F: (207) 782 3017

E: jkuchinski@harriman.com

Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report

Providence VA Medical Center Building Addition

830 Chalkstone Avenue

Providence, Rhode Island

Terracon Project No. J1135105

Dear Mr. Kuchinski:

Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon) has completed the geotechnical engineering services for the above-referenced project. Services were performed in general accordance with our proposal

PJ4130004 dated January 9, 2013 and your subsequent authorization. This geotechnical engineering report presents the results of the subsurface exploration and provides geotechnical recommendations concerning earthwork and the design and construction of foundations for the proposed project.

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have questions concerning this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact us.

Sincerely, Terracon Consultants, Inc.

Carl W. Thunberg Lawrence J. Dwyer, PE

Sr. Project Geotechnical Engineer Principal

/cwt

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ I

1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

2.1 Project Description

2.2 Site Location and Description

3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

3.1 Typical Subsurface Profile

3.2 Groundwater

3.3 Laboratory Testing

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

4.1 Geotechnical Considerations

4.2 Earthwork

4.2.1 Site Preparation

4.2.2 Subgrade Preparation

4.2.3 Fill Materials and Placement

4.2.4 Compaction Requirements

4.2.5 Grading and Drainage

4.2.6 Underpinning

4.2.7 General Construction Considerations

4.3 Building Foundations and Floor Slabs

4.3.1 Design Recommendations

4.3.2 Construction Considerations

4.4 Seismic Considerations

4.5 Floor Slabs

4.5.1 Design Recommendations

4.5.2 Construction Considerations

4.6 Lateral Earth Pressures

5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS

APPENDIX A – FIELD EXPLORATION

Exhibit A-1 Site Location Map

Exhibit A-2 Boring Location Plan

Exhibit A-3 Field Exploration Program

Exhibit A-4 to A-11 Borings B-1 to B-9

APPENDIX B – LABORATORY TEST REPORTS

Grain Size Distribution Reports

APPENDIX C – SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

Exhibit C-1 General Notes

Exhibit C-2 Unified Soil Classification

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable i i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Terracon has performed a geotechnical exploration for the proposed building addition at the

Providence Veterans Administration Medical Center at 830 Chalkstone Avenue in Providence, Rhode Island. Terracon’s geotechnical scope of services included advancing eight test borings to depths ranging from approximately 9 to 42 feet below the existing ground surface within the proposed building area. Boring B-4 was eliminated due to underground utilities in the proposed drilling location.

Based on the information obtained from our subsurface explorations, the site can be developed for the proposed project. The following geotechnical considerations were identified:

Soil conditions generally consisted of 2.0 to 15.0 feet of fill underlain by a natural glaciofluvial deposit which is, in turn, underlain by glacial till. Groundwater was not encountered in the borings.

The proposed building may be supported by conventional shallow spread footings bearing directly on proof-rolled natural glaciofluvial sand or on compacted structural fill placed above such materials. Existing fill, where encountered at footing subgrade elevation, should be removed to natural glaciofluvial subgrade and compacted structural fill placed to achieve design elevation. Footings should be stepped downward as necessary to match the existing footing elevations where the new addition ties into the existing building.

Although groundwater was not encountered in the borings while drilling, the basement excavation will be depressed and open for a sustained time. Temporary construction dewatering from rainfall, snowmelt, or surface runoff should be anticipated for construction of the basement area. Due to the proposed occupancy, perimeter foundation drains, and basement dampproofing, should be included in the basement design.

Assuming proper site and subgrade preparation, total and differential settlement should be within tolerable limits.

Based on the 2009 International Building Code the seismic site classification is D. The site does not appear to be susceptible to liquefaction in the event of an earthquake.

Terracon should observe and evaluate earthwork on the project. The earthwork evaluation should include observation and testing of compacted fill, subgrade preparation, foundation bearing soils, and other geotechnical conditions exposed during construction.

The geotechnical executive summary should be used in conjunction with the entire report for design and/or construction purposes. It should be recognized that specific details are not included or fully developed in this section, and the report must be read in its entirety for a comprehensive understanding of the items contained herein. The section titled GENERAL COMMENTS should be read for an understanding of the report limitations.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 1

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

PROVIDENCE VA MEDICAL CENTER

PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND

Terracon Project No. J1135105

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering services performed for the proposed building addition at the Providence Veterans Administration Medical Center at 830

Chalkstone Avenue in Providence, Rhode Island. The purpose of our services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to the following:

■ subsurface soil conditions ■ groundwater conditions

■ earthwork ■ foundation design and construction

Our geotechnical engineering scope of services included advancing eight test borings to depths ranging from approximately 9 to 42 feet below the existing ground surface within the proposed building area. The borings are designated as B-1 through B-3 and B-5 through B-9. B-4 was not drilled due to underground utilities at the proposed drilling location. A Site Location Map and a Boring Location Plan are included in Appendix A as Exhibits A-1 and A-2, respectively. Logs of the test borings are also included in Appendix A.

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

2.1 Project Description

Item Description

Site layout See Exhibit A-2, Boring Location Plan.

Structure Three-story, steel framed hospital storage and sterile processing building as an addition to the existing structure.

Maximum Loads (assumed) Columns: 50 kips Slabs: 100 psf max

Grading Minor cuts and fills limited to 2 feet of cut or fill for site grading. Full basement excavation.

Freestanding Retaining Walls Existing site retaining walls to remain. No new retaining walls anticipated

Below Grade Areas Basement

Providence VA Medical Center Building Addition ■ Providence, Rhode Island October 9, 2013 ■ Terracon Project No. J1135105

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 2 2

2.2 Site Location and Description

Location East side of the hospital, adjacent to the existing A-Wing, at 830 Chalkstone Avenue in Providence, Rhode Island.

Existing Improvements

The site is currently developed with existing structures, pavement and landscaped areas as part of the hospital campus. There is an existing approximately 40-foot-tall, several-tier retaining wall to the east of the proposed addition.

Current Ground Cover Predominantly bituminous parking and drive areas, with grass landscaped areas.

Existing Topography 1 Generally sloping downward from west to east from approximately

El 85 feet to El 81 feet in the project area.

1. Elevations are based on contours illustrated on the untitled drawing provided by Harriman.

3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

3.1 Typical Subsurface Profile

Based on the results of the borings, subsurface conditions can be generalized as follows:

Description Approximate Depth to

Bottom of Stratum (feet) Material Encountered

Consistency/ Relative Density

Fill 3.0 to 15.0 Silty Sand with Gravel, brown to dark brown. Roots and Organic Soil at bottom of fill in B-7 and B-8

Loose to Dense

Glaciofluvial Deposit

22.5 to 35 Poorly graded Sand (SP) , trace Silt, trace Gravel, to Poorly graded Sand with Silt and Gravel (SP-SM)

Very Loose to Very Dense

Glacial Till >42 Poorly graded Gravel with Silt (GP- SM) to Poorly graded Sand with Silt and Gravel (SP-SM) Very dense

Visual soil classifications and conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring logs. Stratification boundaries on the boring logs represent the approximate locations of changes in soil types; in-situ, the transition between materials may be gradual. Details of each boring can be found on the boring logs in Appendix A. A discussion of field sampling procedures is included in Appendix A.

3.2 Groundwater

The boreholes were observed during and after drilling for the presence and level of groundwater.

Free groundwater was not encountered in the borings during drilling. Note that the borings were

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 3 3 backfilled immediately upon completion for safety. Groundwater levels observed while drilling may not be representative of long-term equilibrated groundwater levels.

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.

3.3 Laboratory Testing

Laboratory testing was performed on soil samples obtained from the test borings to assist in classification and to evaluate relative engineering parameters. Grain-size analyses and moisture content were performed on select samples from the site investigation. Results of the tests are included in Appendix B and are summarized below:

Sample Identification

Depth (feet)

USCS

Gravel

Sand

Fines

Moisture Content

B-1, S-3 5 - 7 SM 22 62 16 6.5

B-5, S-3 5 – 7 SM 21 54 25 7.0

B-7, S-3 5 – 7 GM 46 41 13 2.8

B-9, S-7 20 - 22 SP 10 87 3 1.6

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

4.1 Geotechnical Considerations

The project includes demolishing a portion of the existing emergency care unit and constructing a 25,000-SF single-story addition with a 5,000-SF basement area. At this time, survey data are not available regarding the existing basement grade elevation. The proposed basement floor grade is presumed to match the existing basement elevation.

We recommend supporting the proposed building on shallow spread footings bearing directly on the glaciofluvial deposits or on structural fill placed on proofrolled glaciofluvial deposits. Borings encountered fill at approximately 15 feet below existing grade in B-2. Due to the proposed basement, the majority of the existing fill is expected to be removed as part of bulk excavation to basement floor slab subgrades.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 4 4

The existing fill is considered unsuitable for support of foundations and floor slabs due to the uncontrolled nature of its placment and the presence of organic soils observed in some of the borings. Existing fill is not suitable for foundation support and should be replaced with compacted structural fill within the entire building footprint, extending to include the foundation bearing zone. Floor slabs may be supported on the natural glaciofluvial deposit, or on compacted structural fill placed above the above these materials.

Construction of foundations for the proposed basement area may require underpinning of existing foundations, depending on final building layout. Where excavations will disturb the foundation bearing zone (defined as the area beneath a line extending horizontally 12 inches, and downward and outward at 1 horizontal to 1 vertical [1H:1V] from the footing edges), underpinning will be required to prevent undermining existing foundations.

Though groundwater was not encountered in the borings while drilling, the basement excavation will be depressed and open for a sustained time. Temporary construction dewatering from rainfall, snowmelt, or surface runoff should be anticipated for construction of the basement area.

Due to the proposed occupancy, perimeter foundation drains, and basement dampproofing, should be included in the basement design.

Geotechnical engineering recommendations for foundation systems and other earth-connected phases of the project are outlined below. The recommendations contained in this report are based upon the results of field testing, engineering analyses, and our current understanding of the proposed improvements at the site.

4.2 Earthwork

The following presents recommendations for site preparation, excavation, subgrade preparation, and placement of fill for the project. The recommendations presented for design and construction of earth supported elements including foundations and pavements are contingent upon following the recommendations outlined in this section.

Terracon representatives should observe and evaluate the earthwork on the project. The earthwork evaluation should include observing and testing engineered fill, subgrade preparation, foundation bearing soils, and other geotechnical conditions exposed during construction.

4.2.1 Site Preparation

The project area is currently developed, with paved parking and drive areas, a retaining wall, and landscaped traffic islands. Existing site improvements, pavements, and underground utilities should be re-located or removed from within the proposed building area.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 5 5

Existing fill, where encountered at footing subgrade elevation, should be removed to natural glaciofluvial subgrade and compacted structural fill placed to achieve design elevation. Due to the proposed basement construction, it is anticipated that the majority of existing fill materials will be removed during the course of normal bulk excavation for basement construction.

Existing utility piping more than 4 inches in diameter below proposed pavement areas, not intended to remain in-service, should be removed or abandoned in-place by filling with grout.

Where utilities and pavements are removed, disturbed soil should be undercut and the excavations should be backfilled in compacted lifts. Fill materials and compaction efforts should be consistent with the intended future use.

4.2.2 Subgrade Preparation

Following the required stripping, excavation to rough grade, and before placing new fill or constructing foundations, soil subgrades should be proofrolled with at least six passes in perpendicular directions of a minimum 10-ton vibratory roller in open areas, or a 1-ton vibratory roller or large plate compactor in trenches. The geotechnical engineer, or his/her representative, should review the subgrade during the proofrolling process. Soft/unstable zones, as well as unsuitable materials identified by the geotechnical engineer, should be overexcavated from the slab and footing bearing zones to competent material and replaced with compacted structural fill, as necessary. Overexcavation efforts should be accomplished in accordance with the recommendations presented in Section 4.3.2 Construction

Considerations.

Following proofrolling, structural fill may be placed and compacted to achieve design footing subgrade. Where subgrades become wet, unstable, and/or difficult to proofroll, the use of crushed stone should be considered in lieu of structural fill. Crushed stone, when used, should be underlain with a geotextile separation fabric, such as Mirafi 140N or equivalent.

4.2.3 Fill Materials and Placement

Excavated on-site soils are anticipated to consist primarily of existing granular fill or glaciofluvial deposits. Based on visual classifications and results of gradation analyses, excavated on-site soils are anticipated to be suitable for reuse as structural fill and common fill, provided they are free of deleterious material, are stable and can be adequately compacted. Fill should meet the following material property requirements:

Fill Type

USCS Classification Acceptable Location For Placement

Structural Fill

GW, GP, SW, SP, GW-GM,

GP-GM, SW-SM, SP-SM

All locations and elevations.

Common Fill Varies

Common fill may be used for site grading.

Common fill should not be used under settlement sensitive structures.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 6 6

Crushed Stone

GP

¾-inch crushed stone meeting the criteria in Rhode Island DOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction M.02.03.

1. Compacted fill should consist of approved materials that are free of organic matter and debris.

Frozen material should not be used. Fill should not be placed on a frozen subgrade.

2. Imported structural fill should meet the following gradation:

Sieve Size Percent Passing by Weight

6” 100

3” 70 – 100*

¾” 45 – 95

No. 4 30 – 90

No. 10 25 – 80

No. 40 10 – 50

No. 200 0 – 10

* Maximum 2-inch particle size within 12 inches of the underside of footings or slabs

3. Common fill should have a maximum particle size of 6 inches and no more than 25 percent by weight passing the US No. 200 sieve.

4. Crushed stone should be underlain with a geotextile filter fabric such as Mirafi 140N, or equivalent.

4.2.4 Compaction Requirements

Fill Lift Thickness 8 inches or less in loose thickness.

Compaction Requirements

95% Modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D1557, Method C)

Moisture Content – Granular Material +/-3% of optimum

1. We recommend testing engineered fill for moisture content and compaction during placement. If in-place density test results 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.

4.2.5 Grading and Drainage

Positive drainage should be provided during construction and maintained throughout the life of the development. Infiltration of water into utility trenches or foundation excavations should be prevented during construction.

Though groundwater was not encountered in the borings while drilling, the proposed basement occupancy will require wall finishes and floor coatings that are highly sensitive to moisture damage. In order to maintain the below grade space in a dry state, perimeter foundation drains are recommended around building foundations. Drains should consist of a minimum 4-inch diameter, Schedule 40 perforated PVC pipe or Advanced Drainage Systems™ drain pipe. The pipe should be surrounded by a minimum of 4 inches of ¾-inch crushed stone containing not

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 7 7 more than 10 percent material that passes the No. 4 sieve. The crushed stone should be encapsulated with a geotextile such as Mirafi 140N or equivalent. Drains should be sloped to allow for gravity flow and may discharge to daylight or an approved storm drain system.

Below grade foundation walls should be protected from water intrusion by the application of a damp-proofing barrier such as bituthene® or approved equivalent.

4.2.6 Underpinning

The proposed basement floor is presumed to match the existing basement floor grade.

Underpinning is not anticipated to be required. Localized underpinning may potentially be required for utilities, elevator pits or other structures. Based on the subsurface conditions and anticipated excavation depths, we recommend jet grouting, or conventional cast-in-place concrete underpinning pits, if underpinning is required. An underpinning method that induces vibration, such as sheet pile installation and extraction, may cause localized settlement in the relatively clean sand deposit. We can provide the names of local underpinning contractors upon request.

4.2.7 General Construction Considerations

The individual contractor(s) is responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations, as required, to maintain stability of the excavation sides and the excavation bottom. Instability in the form of slope raveling, caving, and sloughing should be expected in all excavations and trenches that extend into the granular materials with little to no cohesion.

Excavations should be sloped or shored in the interest of safety following local and federal regulations, including current OSHA excavation and trench safety standards.

Based upon the encountered subsurface conditions, subgrade soils exposed during construction are anticipated to be relatively stable. However, the subgrade stability may be affected by precipitation, repetitive construction traffic, or other factors. If unstable conditions develop, replacement with granular materials may be necessary.

If construction dewatering should become necessary, the contractor should select a dewatering method to lower groundwater at least 2 feet below the excavation subgrade in order to minimize bearing surface disturbance during construction of footings and utilities.

Efforts should be made to prevent surface water runoff from collecting in excavations.

Subgrade soils that become unstable should be replaced with compacted structural fill or crushed stone, as necessary. Crushed stone, if used, should be underlain with a geotextile filter fabric such as Mirafi 140N, or equivalent.

4.3 Building Foundations and Floor Slabs

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 8 8

The proposed building can be supported by conventional shallow spread footings bearing directly on proofrolled natural glaciofluvial deposits or on compacted structural fill placed above the proofrolled natural subgrade. Design recommendations for the proposed structure are presented in the following paragraphs. Footings from the new addition should be stepped downward as necessary to match the existing footing grade where it joins the existing basement, in order to prevent surcharging or imparting lateral loads from one structure to the other.

4.3.1 Design Recommendations

Description Value

Foundation type Conventional shallow spread footings

Bearing material Proof-rolled glaciofluvial deposits or compacted structural fill placed above proof-rolled sand.

Net allowable bearing pressure 5,000 psf

Minimum strip footing width 16 inches

Minimum isolated spread footing width 24 inches

Minimum footing embedment below finished grade for frost protection

2 48 inches

Total estimated settlement <1 inch

Estimated differential settlement Half the total settlement

1. The recommended net allowable bearing pressure is the pressure in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure at the footing base elevation. Assumes unsuitable fill or unstable soils, where present, will be replaced with compacted structural fill or crushed stone.

2. Perimeter footing and footings beneath unheated areas. Minimum recommended embedment for interior footings beneath heated areas is 18 inches below finished grade.

3. Foundation settlement will depend upon the variations within the subsurface soil profile, the structural loading conditions, the embedment depth of the footing, the thickness of compacted fill, and the quality of the earthwork operations

The allowable foundation bearing pressures apply to dead loads plus design live load conditions. The design bearing pressure may be increased by one-third when considering total loads that include wind or seismic conditions. The weight of the foundation concrete below grade may be neglected in dead-load computations.

4.3.2 Construction Considerations

Foundations for the proposed building and related structural elements should bear on natural glaciofluvial deposits, lean concrete, or compacted structural fill placed above such materials.

Overexcavation for compacted backfill placement below footings should extend laterally beyond all edges of the footings at least 8 inches per foot of depth below the footings. Soil subgrades should be reviewed and prepared as described in Section 4.2.2 Subgrade Preparation of this report. The overexcavation should then be backfilled up to the footing base elevation with lean concrete or structural fill as described in Section 4.2.3 Fill Materials and Placement. Lean

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 9 9 concrete may be the preferred backfill method in tightly constrained areas adjacent to existing structures, or in areas sensitive to vibration such as operating rooms.

The geotechnical engineer should observe foundation excavation. If the soil conditions encountered differ significantly from those presented in this report, supplemental recommendations will be required.

4.4 Seismic Considerations

Code Used 2009 International Building Code (IBC)

Site Class D

Maximum considered earthquake ground motions (5 percent damping)

0.370g (SMS - 0.2 second spectral response acceleration)

0.150g (SM1 - 1.0 second spectral response acceleration)

Liquefaction Potential Not considered susceptible to liquefaction within limits of drilling

1. Currently the State of Rhode Island uses the 2009 International Building Code (IBC), Site Class is based on the average characteristics of the upper 100 feet of the subsurface profile. The current scope requested does not include the required 100-foot soil profile determination. Borings extended to a maximum depth of 42 feet and this seismic site class definition considers that similar conditions continue below the maximum depth of the subsurface explorations.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 10 10

4.5 Floor Slabs

4.5.1 Design Recommendations

Floor Slab support

Proofrolled natural glaciofluvial deposits or a minimum 8-inch-thick layer of compacted structural fill or crushed stone placed above existing granular fill for the first-floor level, proofrolled as discussed in Section 4.2 Earthwork. Provide a minimum 12-inch-thick layer of compacted structural fill or crushed stone beneath the basement-level slab.

Modulus of subgrade reaction (k) 150 pounds per square inch per inch (psi/in)

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

The use of a vapor retarder/barrier should be considered beneath concrete slabs on grade that will be 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/barrier, the slab designer and slab contractor should refer to ACI 302 and ACI

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

Additional floor slab design and construction recommendations are as follows:

Positive separations and/or isolation joints should be provided between slabs and all foundations, columns or utility lines to allow independent movement.

Control joints should be provided in slabs to control the location and extent of cracking.

Other design and construction considerations, as outlined in the ACI Design Manual, Section 302.1R are recommended.

4.5.2 Construction Considerations

The natural glaciofluvial deposit subgrade should be reviewed and proofrolled with a minimum

10-ton vibratory roller as described in Section 4.2 Earthwork. Following proofrolling, compacted structural fill may be placed as necessary to achieve slab subgrade.

4.6 Lateral Earth Pressures

The lateral earth pressure recommendations given in the following paragraphs are applicable to the design of rigid retaining walls subject to slight rotation, such as cantilever, or gravity type concrete walls. These recommendations are not applicable to the design of modular block - geogrid reinforced backfill walls.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 11 11

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

EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS

Earth Pressure Conditions

Coefficient for Backfill Type

Equivalent Fluid Density (pcf)

Surcharge Pressure, p1

(psf)

Earth Pressure, p2 (psf)

Active (Ka) Granular - 0.33 40 (0.33)S (40)H

At-Rest (Ko) Granular - 0.50 60 (0.50)S (60)H

Passive (Kp) Granular - 3.00 360 --- ---

Applicable conditions to the above include:

For active earth pressure, wall must rotate about base, with top lateral movements of about 0.002 H to 0.004 H, where H is wall height

For passive earth pressure to develop, wall must move horizontally to mobilize resistance

In-situ soil backfill weight a maximum of 125 pcf

Loading from heavy compaction equipment not included

No hydrostatic pressures acting on wall

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 12 12

No dynamic loading

Ignore passive pressure in frost zone

Equivalent fluid densities do not include a factor of safety

S is the surcharge in pounds per square foot

Backfill placed against structures should consist of granular soils. For the granular values to be valid, the granular backfill must extend out from the base of the wall at angles of at least 45 and 60 degrees from vertical for the active and passive cases, respectively. To calculate the resistance to sliding, a value of 0.50 should be used as the ultimate coefficient of friction between the footing and compacted structural fill or crushed stone.

5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS

Terracon should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications, so comments can be made regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendations in the design and specifications. Terracon also should be retained to provide observation and testing services during grading, excavation, foundation construction, and other earth-related construction phases of the project.

The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained from the explorations performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed in this report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur between explorations, across the site, or due to the modifying effects of weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction. If variations appear, we should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental recommendations can be provided.

The scope of services for this project 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.

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made. Site safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In the event that changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless Terracon reviews the changes and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this report in writing.

APPENDIX A

FIELD EXPLORATION

SITE

A-1

CWT

MCR

CWT

LJD

AS SHOWN

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Approved By:

Project Mngr:

File No.

Date:

Scale:

Project No.

EXHIBIT

J1135105.dwg

N

October 2013

J1135105

QUADRANGLE LOCATION

SOURCE:

USGS PROVIDENCE, RI

77 Sundial Ave. Manchester, NH 03103

PH. (603) 647 9700 FAX (603) 647 4432

VETERANS ADMINISTRATION

HOSPITAL BUILDING ADDITION

830 CHALKSTONE AVENUE

PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND

B-1

B-2

B-5

B-3

B-6

B-7

B-8

B-9

CWT

MCR

CWT

LJD

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Approved By:

Project Mngr:

File No.

Date:

Scale:

Project No.

A-2

J1135105.dwg

EXHIBIT

N

October 2013

1" = 30'

VETERANS ADMINISTRATION

HOSPITAL BUILDING ADDITION

830 CHALKSTONE AVENUE

PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND77 Sundial Ave. Manchester, NH 03103

PH. (603) 647 9700 FAX (603) 647 4432

B-1

J1135105

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable Exhibit A-3

Field Exploration Description

Eight test borings (B-1 through B-3 and B-5 through B-9) were drilled to depths ranging from approximately 9 to 42 feet below the ground surface at the site on August 12 and 13, 2013. B-4 was eliminated due to underground utilities at the proposed drilling location. Explorations were advanced at the approximate locations shown on the attached Boring Location Plan (Exhibit A-

2).

Geosearch, Inc. of Fitchburg, Massachusetts advanced the test borings using an ATV-mounted drill rig and 4.25-inch-inside-diameter hollow-stem augers. Borings were located in the field by tape measurement from existing site features. The accuracy of boring locations should only be assumed to the level implied by the method used to define them.

Generally, samples were obtained nearly continuously in the upper 10 feet, and at 5-foot intervals thereafter using a standard 2-inch-outside-diameter split-barrel sampler. Standard

Penetration Tests (SPTs) were performed in general accordance with industry standards.

Density of soil samples are based on N-values, which is determined by the number of hammer blows required to drive the sampler from 6 to 18 inches.

An automatic SPT hammer was used to advance the split-barrel sampler in the borings performed on this site. A greater efficiency is typically achieved with the automatic hammer compared to the conventional safety hammer operated with a cathead and rope. Published correlations between the SPT values and soil properties are based on the lower efficiency cathead and rope method. This higher efficiency affects the standard penetration resistance blow count (N) value by increasing the penetration per hammer blow over what would obtained using the cathead and rope method. The effect of the automatic hammer's efficiency has been considered in the interpretation and analysis of the subsurface information for this report.

Groundwater conditions were measured in each boring at the time of drilling. Visual classification of soils and observed groundwater levels are shown on test boring logs included in

Appendix A.

0.3

9.0

4-inches topsoil FILL - SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL , brown, medium dense to loose

Blue warning tape in auger cuttings, abandoned boring Boring Terminated at 9 Feet

83.5

4-10-18-14 N=28

8-4-4-9 N=8

1-7-6-8 N=13

11-11-13-14 N=24

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G See Exhibit A-2

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

LOCATION

DEPTH

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

J

.G P

J

Exhibit:

PROJECT: Veterans Administration Hospital Building Addition

830 Chalkstone Avenue Providence, Rhode Island

SITE:

No free water observed

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Advancement Method:

4.25" Hollow stem augers

Abandonment Method:

Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: J1135105

Drill Rig: CME550 ATV

Boring Started: 8/12/2013

A-4

BORING LOG NO. B-1

HarrimanCLIENT:

Auburn, ME

Driller: Jay

Boring Completed: 8/12/2013

See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures.

See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations.

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

ELEVATION (Ft.)

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

Surface Elev.: 84 (Ft.) D E

P T

H

F t.)

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

0.5

15.0

6-inches topsoil/grass Hand dug to 1 foot FILL - SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL , dark brown, medium dense to dense

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), trace gravel and silt, brown, medium dense, (GLACIOFLUVIAL)

83.5

9-13-11-11 N=24

18-22-21-24 N=43

7-12-11-8 N=23

6-9-9-5 N=18

11-8-4-5 N=12

14-13-9-9 N=22

3-7-7-9 N=14

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G See Exhibit A-2

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

LOCATION

DEPTH

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

O

S M

A R

T L

O G

-N O

W E

LL

J

.G P

J

Exhibit:

PROJECT: Veterans Administration Hospital Building Addition

830 Chalkstone Avenue Providence, Rhode Island

SITE:

No free water observed

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Advancement Method:

4.25" Hollow stem augers

Abandonment Method:

Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: J1135105

Drill Rig: CME550 ATV

Boring Started: 8/12/2013

A-5

BORING LOG NO. B-2

HarrimanCLIENT:

Auburn, ME

Driller: Jay

Boring Completed: 8/12/2013

See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures.

See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations.

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

ELEVATION (Ft.)

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

Surface Elev.: 84 (Ft.) D E

P T

H

F t.)

S A

M P

LE

T

Y

35.0

42.0

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), trace gravel and silt, brown, medium dense, (GLACIOFLUVIAL) (continued)

POORLY GRADED GRAVEL (GP), with silt, brown, medium dense to dense, (GLACIAL

TILL)

Boring Terminated at 42 Feet

24-13-10-14 N=23

10-9-8-9 N=17

16-14-12-14 N=26

25-23-25-18 N=48

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G See Exhibit A-2

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

LOCATION

DEPTH

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

O

S M

A R

T L

O G

-N O

W E

LL

J

.G P

J

Exhibit:

PROJECT: Veterans Administration Hospital Building Addition

830 Chalkstone Avenue Providence, Rhode Island

SITE:

No free water observed

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Advancement Method:

4.25" Hollow stem augers

Abandonment Method:

Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: J1135105

Drill Rig: CME550 ATV

Boring Started: 8/12/2013

A-5

BORING LOG NO. B-2

HarrimanCLIENT:

Auburn, ME

Driller: Jay

Boring Completed: 8/12/2013

See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures.

See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations.

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

ELEVATION (Ft.)

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

Surface Elev.: 84 (Ft.) D E

P T

H

F t.)

S A

M P

LE

T

Y

1.5

3.0

10.0

3-inches bituminous concrete pavement pavement base: poorly graded sand with silt, brown, medium dense

FILL - POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT , trace gravel, brown, medium dense

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), trace gravel, (GLACIOFLUVIAL)

Poorly graded gravel, brown , medium dense

Rock stuck in sampler tip

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), with silt and gravel, brown, medium dense to dense, (GLACIOFLUVIAL)

78.5

71.5

5-13-21-27 N=34

9-12-17-14 N=29

12-14-15-19 N=29

23-16-14-41 N=30

12-17-19-14 N=36

8-10-12-14 N=22

4-7-8-10 N=15

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G See Exhibit A-2

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

LOCATION

DEPTH

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

O

S M

A R

T L

O G

-N O

W E

LL

J

.G P

J

Exhibit:

PROJECT: Veterans Administration Hospital Building Addition

830 Chalkstone Avenue Providence, Rhode Island

SITE:

No free water observed

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Advancement Method:

4.25" Hollow stem augers

Abandonment Method:

Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: J1135105

Drill Rig: CME550 ATV

Boring Started: 8/12/2013

A-6

BORING LOG NO. B-3

HarrimanCLIENT:

Auburn, ME

Driller: Jay

Boring Completed: 8/12/2013

See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures.

See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations.

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

ELEVATION (Ft.)

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

Surface Elev.: 81.5 (Ft.) D E

P T

H

F t.)

S A

M P

LE

T

Y

30.0

32.0

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), with silt and gravel, brown, medium dense to dense, (GLACIOFLUVIAL) (continued)

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), and gravel, (GLACIAL TILL)

Boring Terminated at 32 Feet

51.5

49.5

4-12-19-19 N=31

9-45-16-12 N=61

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G See Exhibit A-2

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

LOCATION

DEPTH

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

O

S M

A R

T L

O G

-N O

W E

LL

J

.G P

J

Exhibit:

PROJECT: Veterans Administration Hospital Building Addition

830 Chalkstone Avenue Providence, Rhode Island

SITE:

No free water observed

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Advancement Method:

4.25" Hollow stem augers

Abandonment Method:

Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: J1135105

Drill Rig: CME550 ATV

Boring Started: 8/12/2013

A-6

BORING LOG NO. B-3

HarrimanCLIENT:

Auburn, ME

Driller: Jay

Boring Completed: 8/12/2013

See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures.

See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations.

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

ELEVATION (Ft.)

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

Surface Elev.: 81.5 (Ft.) D E

P T

H

F t.)

S A

M P

LE

T

Y

1.0

7.5

22.5

24.5

12-inches crushed stone

FILL - SILTY SAND , brown, medium dense

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), and gravel, brown, medium dense, (GLACIOFLUVIAL)

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), and gravel, brown, dense, (GLACIAL TILL)

Boring Terminated at 24.5 Feet

74.5

59.5

57.5

6-9-8-6 N=17

15-14-15-12 N=29

33-15-19-21 N=34

10-11-11-13 N=22

5-14-11-10 N=25

8-13-10-15 N=23

18-12-14-15 N=26

43-21-14-18 N=35

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G See Exhibit A-2

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

LOCATION

DEPTH

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

O

S M

A R

T L

O G

-N O

W E

LL

J

.G P

J

Exhibit:

PROJECT: Veterans Administration Hospital Building Addition

830 Chalkstone Avenue Providence, Rhode Island

SITE:

No free water observed

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Advancement Method:

4.25" Hollow stem augers

Abandonment Method:

Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: J1135105

Drill Rig: CME550 ATV

Boring Started: 8/12/2013

A-7

BORING LOG NO. B-5

HarrimanCLIENT:

Auburn, ME

Driller: Jay

Boring Completed: 8/12/2013

See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures.

See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations.

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

ELEVATION (Ft.)

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

Surface Elev.: 82 (Ft.) D E

P T

H

F t.)

S A

M P

LE

T

Y

2.0

20.0

25.0

3/4" crushed stone FILL - SILTY SAND , with gravel, brown, medium dense

SILTY SAND (SM), with cobbles, brown, medium dense, (GLACIOFLUVIAL)

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP), with gravel, trace silt, light brown, medium dense, (GLACIOFLUVIAL)

81.5

6-8-14-20 N=22

12-12-15-21 N=27

4-8-12-50/4" N=20

3-9-10-11 N=19

4-14-22-22 N=36

1-7-11-15 N=18

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G See Exhibit A-2

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

LOCATION

DEPTH

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

O

S M

A R

T L

O G

-N O

W E

LL

J

.G P

J

Exhibit:

PROJECT: Veterans Administration Hospital Building Addition

830 Chalkstone Avenue Providence, Rhode Island

SITE:

No free water observed

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Advancement Method:

4.25" Hollow stem augers

Abandonment Method:

Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: J1135105

Drill Rig: CME550 ATV

Boring Started: 8/13/2013

A-8

BORING LOG NO. B-6

HarrimanCLIENT:

Auburn, ME

Driller: Jay

Boring Completed: 8/13/2013

See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures.

See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations.

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

ELEVATION (Ft.)

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

Surface Elev.: 82 (Ft.) D E

P T

H

F t.)

S A

M P

LE

T

Y

32.0

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), trace gravel, gray, medium dense, (GLACIOFLUVIAL)

Boring Terminated at 32 Feet

2-8-19-28 N=27

10-18-16-22 N=34

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G See Exhibit A-2

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

LOCATION

DEPTH

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

O

S M

A R

T L

O G

-N O

W E

LL

J

.G P

J

Exhibit:

PROJECT: Veterans Administration Hospital Building Addition

830 Chalkstone Avenue Providence, Rhode Island

SITE:

No free water observed

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Advancement Method:

4.25" Hollow stem augers

Abandonment Method:

Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: J1135105

Drill Rig: CME550 ATV

Boring Started: 8/13/2013

A-8

BORING LOG NO. B-6

HarrimanCLIENT:

Auburn, ME

Driller: Jay

Boring Completed: 8/13/2013

See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures.

See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations.

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

ELEVATION (Ft.)

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

Surface Elev.: 82 (Ft.) D E

P T

H

F t.)

S A

M P

LE

T

Y

12.0

20.0

4-inches topsoil and roots FILL - SILTY GRAVEL , brown, medium dense

Note: Boulder at 9 feet, offset 5 feet to the south

Trace roots in 10-12 foot sample

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), with silt and gravel, brown, medium dense, (GLACIOFLUVIAL)

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), and gravel, brown, medium dense to loose, (GLACIOFLUVIAL)

81.5

14-15-18-17 N=33

20-100 N=

18-15-18-28 N=33

44-49-50/1" N=50/1"

4-4-9-13 N=13

4-11-17-14 N=28

3-8-11-10 N=19

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G See Exhibit A-2

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

LOCATION

DEPTH

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

O

S M

A R

T L

O G

-N O

W E

LL

J

.G P

J

Exhibit:

PROJECT: Veterans Administration Hospital Building Addition

830 Chalkstone Avenue Providence, Rhode Island

SITE:

No free water observed

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Advancement Method:

4.25" Hollow stem augers

Abandonment Method:

Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: J1135105

Drill Rig: CME550 ATV

Boring Started: 8/13/2013

A-9

BORING LOG NO. B-7

HarrimanCLIENT:

Auburn, ME

Driller: Jay

Boring Completed: 8/13/2013

See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures.

See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations.

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

ELEVATION (Ft.)

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

Surface Elev.: 82 (Ft.) D E

P T

H

F t.)

S A

M P

LE

T

Y

27.0

POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), and gravel, brown, medium dense to loose, (GLACIOFLUVIAL) (continued)

Boring Terminated at 27 Feet

4-5-6-9 N=11

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G See Exhibit A-2

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

LOCATION

DEPTH

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

O

S M

A R

T L

O G

-N O

W E

LL

J

.G P

J

Exhibit:

PROJECT: Veterans Administration Hospital Building Addition

830 Chalkstone Avenue Providence, Rhode Island

SITE:

No free water observed

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

Advancement Method:

4.25" Hollow stem augers

Abandonment Method:

Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: J1135105

Drill Rig: CME550 ATV

Boring Started: 8/13/2013

A-9

BORING LOG NO. B-7

HarrimanCLIENT:

Auburn, ME

Driller: Jay

Boring Completed: 8/13/2013

See Exhibit A-3 for…