50-49500-24-01989_50-49500-24-01989 -Spaceport Geotech Report.pdf.PDF

COZ Engineering, LLC

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

SPACEPORT 150’X 150’ FABRIC HANGAR

SIERRA COUNTY, NEW MEXICO

Project No. 4224073 June 30, 2024

Prepared for:

MOLZEN CORBIN

Las Cruces, New Mexico

Prepared by:

COZ ENGINEERING, LLC

Las Cruces, New Mexico

Spaceport 150’X 150’ Fabric Hangar

COZ Report No. 4224073

Site Investigation: 1

Site Conditions: 1

Planned Construction: 1

Initial Site Grading: 2

Soil Improvements: 2

Fill Material: 3

Compaction Requirements: 3

Foundations: 3

Floor Slabs: 5

Drainage Recommendations: 6

Pavements: 6

Seismic Site Classification: 9

Report Limitations: 9

Appendix:

Site Plan Boring Logs Laboratory Test Results Pavement Design Sheets

Site Investigation:

A subsurface investigation was performed for the proposed hangar to be located at

Spaceport America in Sierra County, New Mexico. Six (6) test borings were advanced within the proposed building footprint and access areas. The borings were terminated at depths of 5 and 20 feet below ground surface (bgs). The test boring logs and location plan are provided in the appendix of this report.

Site Conditions:

The site is currently undeveloped native land located west of the south runway terminus.

The ground surface was observed to be exposed native soils moderately vegetated with native grasses and brush. Site soils are generally comprised of sandy lean clay from the surface to depths of about 10 to 18 feet bgs. The underlying soils consisted of clayey and silty sand extending to the total explored depth of about 20 feet bgs.

The groundwater table was not encountered during the field investigation.

Planned Construction:

Based on the information provided, I understand the proposed development will include a fabric hangar building to house airplanes, paved apron and paved access road to the runway. The single-story structure will be approximately 22,500 square feet in ground contact area. The new structure is assumed to be of steel frame construction supported by spread and continuous footings with slab-on-grade. Structural loading information was not known at the time of this report. However, it is assumed that maximum column loads of

50 kips, maximum wall loads of 3.0 klf and maximum slab loads of 150 psf can be expected for this project. Maximum airplane traffic loads have been estimated as 500 annual departures from a S-12.5 airtcraft (12,500 gross wt. lbs.).

Initial Site Grading:

Areas for planned construction should be clear of debris, vegetation and any oversized or deleterious material prior to grading operations. Fill construction shall not be allowed on surfaces that contain vegetation or rocks larger than four inches in greatest dimension. No fill shall be placed that contains vegetative materials as decomposition of that material can cause voids and possibly result in surface settlement. Voids in the soil matrix created or encountered during grading operations shall be backfilled with approved compacted fill material.

Soil Improvements:

Based on the geotechnical engineering analyses and subsurface exploration, it is my opinion that the proposed structure can be supported by prepared native subgrade soils or engineered fill underlain by prepared native subgrade soils. Subgrade preparation (to be constructed upon and beneath engineered fills) should consist of scarifying the exposed subgrade surface a minimum thickness of 10 inches, moisture conditioning (-1% to +3% of optimum moisture content per ASTM D-698) and compaction to a minimum of 95% of standard Proctor density (per ASTM D-698).

Fill Material:

Engineered fill material for this project (if applicable to achieve site grades) should meet the following gradation criteria:

Sieve % Passing 4” 100 ¾ 70-100 #4 50-100 #200 15-60

The plasticity index of the minus #40 sieve portion should not exceed fifteen (15).

Generally, the on-site soils encountered in the borings either meet the above specifications or are very close to the upper specification limits (max. passing #200 sieve and max.

plasticity index). Imported or on-site soils should be tested for compliance with the above specifications prior to use as engineered fill.

Compaction Requirements:

The maximum thickness of engineered fill lifts should be 10 inches or less in loose thickness. Engineered fill materials should be compacted to a minimum of 98% of standard Proctor density (ASTM D698) at a moisture content within –1% to +3% of optimum moisture (ASTM D698).

Foundations:

The structure can be supported by a spread and continuous footing foundation system bearing on prepared native subgrade soils or engineered fill underlain by prepared native soils. Design recommendations for foundations are presented in the following table.

* The site should be initially graded to create a relatively level surface to be constructed upon or receive fill. If fill is required to achieve final grade, a relatively uniform thickness of fill should be provided beneath the new foundations and slabs to reduce potential for differential settlement.

The design bearing pressure may be increased by one-third when considering total loads that include wind and seismic conditions.

Uplift resistance of spread footings can be developed from the effective weight of the footing and the overlying soils. The effective weight of the soil prism defined by diagonal planes extending up from the top of the perimeter of the foundation to the ground surface at an angle of 20 degrees from the vertical can be included in uplift resistance. The maximum allowable uplift capacity should be taken as a sum of the effective weight of soil plus the dead weight of the foundation, divided by an appropriate factor of safety. A maximum total unit weight of 115 pcf should be used for the backfill.

Prepared native soils or engineered fill is recommended below new footings. The engineered fill should extend laterally an additional distance of 8 inches for each foot of excavation below the foundation bearing depth (if engineered fill is used).

Element Recommendation

Foundation Spread and Continuous Footings

Bearing Strata Prepared native subgrade soils or engineered fill underlain by prepared native subgrade soils*

Allowable Bearing Pressure 2,000 psf

Minimum Foundation Dimensions Columns: 30 inches in width

Continuous: 18 inches in width

Ultimate Coefficient of Sliding Friction 0.25

Minimum Foundation Embedment 18 inches

Estimated Settlement 1 inch or less

Estimated Differential Settlement 1/2 inch or less

Additional foundation settlements can occur if water from any source infiltrates the foundation soils. Proper drainage should be provided during construction and in the final design.

Foundation excavations should be observed by a geotechnical engineer. If the soil conditions encountered differ significantly from those presented in this report, supplemental recommendations will be required.

Floor Slabs:

Design parameters for floor slab construction are presented below. Attention should be given to provide positive drainage away from the structure.

Floor slabs should be structurally independent of foundations to reduce the potential of floor slab cracking due to differential movement between foundations and slabs.

A vapor retarder should be considered beneath slabs that are planned to be surfaced with moisture sensitive coverings. The slab designer should consult ACI 302 and/or ACI 360 for procedures concerning the use and placement of vapor retarders.

Element Recommendation

Bearing Strata 4 inches of aggregate base course underlain by prepared native subgrade soils or engineered fill.

Modulus of Subgrade Reaction

150 pounds per square inch per inch (psi/in)

Saw-cut control joints should be placed in the slab to control the extent of cracking and location. Joints or cracks that develop should be sealed immediately.

Drainage Recommendations:

In areas where sidewalks or paving (concrete or asphalt surfacing) do not immediately adjoin the structure, it is recommended that finished grade immediately surrounding the structure be sloped away a minimum of 5% grade for a distance of ten (10) feet. Runoff water caused by precipitation should be rapidly concentrated and directed away from the structure. Downspouts or roof drains should discharge into splash blocks when the ground surface beneath such features is not protected by concrete flatwork or paving.

Water cannot be allowed to pond within ten (10) feet of any structure wall. It is recommended that planters and grass lawns not be placed within 5 feet of perimeter foundation elements. Moisture infiltration may cause unsatisfactory foundation performance.

Pavements:

Pavement design for the apron and access road construction has been based on the

FAARFIELD – Airport Pavement Design (v 2.1.1) program. Estimated design aircraft criteria included S-12.5 with 500 departures (12,500 gross wt. lbs.)

A CBR Value of 4 was used for the pavement section design (sandy lean clay encountered in Borings B-1 and B-2).

Recommended flexible pavement is as follows:

Traffic Area

PCC

Surface (P-501)

Asphalt Concrete Surface

(P-401/P-403)

Aggregate Base

Course (P-209)

Prepared Subgrade

Total

Apron and Access Road

-- 4” 6” 10” 20”

5” -- 6” 10” 21”

Aggregate base course should consist of a blend of sand and gravel that meets strict specifications for quality and gradation. Use of materials meeting FAA Type P-209 crushed aggregate specifications is recommended. Aggregate base course material should be tested to determine compliance with these specifications prior to importation to the site.

Aggregate base course should be placed in lifts not exceeding six inches and should be compacted to a minimum of 100% Standard Proctor Density (ASTM D-698) within a moisture content range of +/-2% of optimum moisture content.

Asphalt concrete should be obtained from an approved mix design stating the Marshall or

Hveem properties, optimum asphalt content, job mix formula, and recommended mixing and placing temperatures. An asphalt mix design meeting FAA Type P-401/P-403 is recommended. The mix design should be submitted prior to construction to verify its adequacy. The asphalt materials should be placed in maximum 3.0-inch lifts and should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent Marshall or Hveem density (ASTM D1559).

Portland cement concrete (PCC) should meet FAA Type P-501 specifications.

Recommendations for pavement construction presented depend upon compliance with recommended material specifications. Observation and testing should be performed under the direction of a geotechnical engineer.

Pavement design methods are intended to provide structural sections with adequate thickness over a particular subgrade such that wheel loads are reduced to a level the subgrade can support. The support characteristics of the subgrade for pavement design do not account for settlement or heave induced movements of subgrade such as the soils encountered on this project. Thus, the pavement may be adequate from a structural standpoint, yet still experience deformation due to settlement or heave related movement of the subgrade. It is, therefore, important to minimize moisture changes in the subgrade to reduce settlement or heave.

Minimizing subgrade saturation is an important factor in maintaining subgrade strength and stability. Some distress of pavements is possible due to the subgrade soils. Water allowed to pond on or adjacent to pavements could saturate the subgrade and cause premature pavement deterioration. The pavement should be sloped to provide rapid surface drainage and positive surface drainage should be maintained away from the edge of the paved areas.

Periodic maintenance should be planned and provided throughout the life of the pavement. Maintenance consists of localized (crack and joint sealing and patching) and global (surface sealing). Even with maintenance, movements and cracking may still occur and repairs may be required.

Seismic Site Classification:

The seismic site classification is based upon the soil profile in the upper 100 feet as defined by the weighted average of standard penetration blow-counts or shear wave velocity in accordance with Section 20.4 of the ASCE 7 and the International Building Code (IBC).

Based upon my field investigation, it is my opinion that the Seismic Site Classification is C

(“Very Dense Soil or Soft Rock”). The maximum depth of the borings advanced at the site was 20 feet. Therefore, soil properties below the maximum boring depth to 100 feet were estimated based on my experience with the general area. Deeper borings or geophysical testing would be required to confirm the conditions below the current boring depth.

Report Limitations:

The conclusions, recommendations and opinions presented herein are:

1) Based upon evaluation and interpretation of the findings of the field and laboratory program.

2) Based upon an interpolation of soil conditions between and beyond the explorations.

3) Subject to confirmation of the conditions encountered during construction.

4) Based upon the assumption that sufficient observation and testing will be provided during construction.

There is no other warranty, either express or implied. Any person using this report for bidding or construction purposes should perform such independent investigation as he deems necessary to satisfy himself as to the surface and subsurface conditions to be encountered and the procedures to be used in the performance of work on this project. If conditions are encountered during construction that appear to differ from those indicated in this report, I should be notified immediately.

BORING LOCATION PLAN

Sierra County, NM

PO Box 13331

Las Cruces, NM 88013

4224073

DC

B-2

B-1

N

DC COZ Engineering, LLC

DC

DC

AS SHOWN

Figures

6-29-24

Scale:

Exhibit Project Manager:

Drawn by:

Checked by:

Approved by:

Project No.

File Name:

Date:

Approximate Boring Location

B-3

B-5 B-4

B-6

Project: Spaceport 150'X150' Fabric Hangar

Project Location: Sierra County, NM

Project Number: 4224073

Log of Boring B-1

Date(s) Drilled 5-31-24

Drilling Method hollow-stem auger

Drill Rig Type CME-75

Groundwater Level and Date Measured not encountered

Borehole Backfill cuttings

Logged By OOZ

Drill Bit Size/Type

Drilling Contractor Southlands

Sampling Method(s) Grab

Location see boring plan

Checked By COZ

Total Depth of Borehole 5 feet bgs

Approximate Surface Elevation

Hammer Data

M at er ia l T yp e

CL

LL

P I, P er ce nt

F in es

54.1

G ra ph ic

L og

W at er C on te nt

6.1

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

SANDY LEAN CLAY: brown, dry

Bottom of Boring

D ep th fe et

S am pl e

N um be r

S am pl e

T yp e

S am pl in g R es is ta nc e, bl ow s/ ft

E le va tio n (f ee t)

C :\U se rs

\th ec o\ A pp D at a\

Lo ca l\T em p\ bo rin gs

_t em p\ tm pf ile

.b gs

[C O

Z E ng in ee rin g 1.

tp l]

Sheet 1 of 1

Project Number: 4224073

Log of Boring B-2

Date(s) Drilled 5-31-24

Drilling Method hollow-stem auger

Drill Rig Type CME-75

Groundwater Level and Date Measured not encountered

Borehole Backfill cuttings

Logged By OOZ

Drill Bit Size/Type

Drilling Contractor Southlands

Sampling Method(s) Grab

Location see boring plan

Checked By COZ

Total Depth of Borehole 5 feet bgs

Approximate Surface Elevation

Hammer Data

M at er ia l T yp e

CL

LL

P I, P er ce nt

F in es

64.8

G ra ph ic

L og

W at er C on te nt

9.4

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

SANDY LEAN CLAY: brown, dry

Bottom of Boring

D ep th fe et

S am pl e

N um be r

S am pl e

T yp e

S am pl in g R es is ta s/ ft

E le va tio n (f ee t)

C :\U se rs

\th ec o\ A pp D at a\

Lo ca l\T em p\ bo rin gs

_t em p\ tm pf ile

.b gs

[C O

Z E ng in ee rin g 1.

tp

Project Number: 4224073

Log of Boring B-3

Date(s) Drilled 5-31-24

Drilling Method hollow-stem auger

Drill Rig Type CME-75

Groundwater Level and Date Measured not encountered

Borehole Backfill cuttings

Logged By OOZ

Drill Bit Size/Type

Drilling Contractor Southlands

Sampling Method(s) SPT

Location see boring plan

Checked By COZ

Total Depth of Borehole 21.5 feet bgs

Approximate Surface Elevation

Hammer Data

M at er ia l T yp e

CL

SM

LL

P I, P er ce nt

F in es

60.6

G ra ph ic

L og

W at er C on te nt

7.4

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

SANDY LEAN CLAY: brown, dry, hard white, carbonate staining red brown

SILTY SAND: brown, dry, dense

Bottom of Boring

D ep th fe et

S am pl e

N um be r

S am pl e

T yp e

S am pl in g R es is ta s/ ft

8\21\24

15\20\22

20\28\31

16\20\24

12\18\18

E le va tio n (f ee t)

C :\U se rs

\th ec o\ A pp D at a\

Lo ca l\T em p\ bo rin gs

_t em p\ tm pf ile

.b gs

[C O

Z E ng in ee rin g 1.

tp

Project Number: 4224073

Log of Boring B-4

Date(s) Drilled 5-31-24

Drilling Method hollow-stem auger

Drill Rig Type CME-75

Groundwater Level and Date Measured not encountered

Borehole Backfill cuttings

Logged By OOZ

Drill Bit Size/Type

Drilling Contractor Southlands

Sampling Method(s) SPT

Location see boring plan

Checked By COZ

Total Depth of Borehole 21.5 feet bgs

Approximate Surface Elevation

Hammer Data

M at er ia l T yp e

CL

SM

CL

SM

LL

P I, NP

P er ce nt

F in es

61.8

14.5

G ra ph ic

L og

W at er C on te nt

7.7

1.6

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

SANDY LEAN CLAY: brown to white, dry, hard, carbonate indurated

SILTY SAND: brown, dry, dense

SANDY LEAN CLAY: red brown to white, dry, hard, carbonate cemented

SILTY SAND: brown, dry, dense

Bottom of Boring

D ep th fe et

S am pl e

N um be r

S am pl e

T yp e

S am pl in g R es is ta s/ ft

21\24\25

16\18\19

12\16\15

15\16\20

E le va tio n (f ee t)

C :\U se rs

\th ec o\ A pp D at a\

Lo ca l\T em p\ bo rin gs

_t em p\ tm pf ile

.b gs

[C O

Z E ng in ee rin g 1.

tp

Project Number: 4224073

Log of Boring B-5

Date(s) Drilled 5-31-24

Drilling Method hollow-stem auger

Drill Rig Type CME-75

Groundwater Level and Date Measured not encountered

Borehole Backfill cuttings

Logged By OOZ

Drill Bit Size/Type

Drilling Contractor Southlands

Sampling Method(s) SPT

Location see boring plan

Checked By COZ

Total Depth of Borehole 21.5 feet bgs

Approximate Surface Elevation

Hammer Data

M at er ia l T yp e

CL

SC

SM

LL

P I, P er ce nt

F in es

45.7

G ra ph ic

L og

W at er C on te nt

4.5

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

SANDY LEAN CLAY: brown, dry, hard, carbonate indurated

CLAYEY SAND: brown, dry, very dense

SILTY SAND: brown, dry, very dense

Bottom of Boring

D ep th fe et

S am pl e

N um be r

S am pl e

T yp e

S am pl in g R es is ta s/ ft

21\24\28

17\20\22

16\22\28

16\24\32

25\32\38

E le va tio n (f ee t)

C :\U se rs

\th ec o\ A pp D at a\

Lo ca l\T em p\ bo rin gs

_t em p\ tm pf ile

.b gs

[C O

Z E ng in ee rin g 1.

tp

Project Number: 4224073

Log of Boring B-6

Date(s) Drilled 5-31-24

Drilling Method hollow-stem auger

Drill Rig Type CME-75

Groundwater Level and Date Measured not encountered

Borehole Backfill cuttings

Logged By OOZ

Drill Bit Size/Type

Drilling Contractor Southlands

Sampling Method(s) SPT

Location see boring plan

Checked By COZ

Total Depth of Borehole 21.5 feet bgs

Approximate Surface Elevation

Hammer Data

M at er ia l T yp e

CL

SM

CL

SC

LL

P I, P er ce nt

F in es

G ra ph ic

L og

W at er C on te nt

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

SANDY LEAN CLAY: brown, dry, hard, carbonate indurated

SILTY SAND: brown, dry, dense

SANDY LEAN CLAY: red brown, dry, hard

CLAYEY SAND: brown, dry, very dense

Bottom of Boring

D ep th fe et

S am pl e

N um be r

S am pl e

T yp e

S am pl in g R es is ta s/ ft

23\24\24

22\22\30

13\20\17

16\35\50

17\28\31

E le va tio n (f ee t)

C :\U se rs

\th ec o\ A pp D at a\

Lo ca l\T em p\ bo rin gs

_t em p\ tm pf ile

.b gs

[C O

Z E ng in ee rin g 1.

tp

Project Number: 4224073

Key to Log of Boring

M at er ia l T yp e

LL

P I, P er ce nt

F in es

G ra ph ic

L og

W at er C on te nt

MATERIAL DESCRIPTIOND

ep th fe et

S am pl e

N um be r

S am pl e

T yp e

S am pl in g R es is ta s/ ft

E le va tio n (f ee t)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

COLUMN DESCRIPTIONS

1 Elevation (feet): Elevation (MSL, feet).

2 Depth (feet): Depth in feet below the ground surface.

3 Sample Type: Type of soil sample collected at the depth interval shown.

4 Sample Number: Sample identification number.

5 Sampling Resistance, blows/ft: Number of blows to advance driven sampler one foot (or distance shown) beyond seating interval using the hammer identified on the boring log.

6 Material Type: Type of material encountered.

7 Graphic Log: Graphic depiction of the subsurface material encountered.

8 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION: Description of material encountered.

May include consistency, moisture, color, and other descriptive text.

9 Water Content, %: Water content of the soil sample, expressed as percentage of dry weight of sample.

10 Percent Fines: The percent fines (soil passing the No. 200 Sieve) in the sample. WA indicates a Wash Sieve, SA indicates a Sieve Analysis.

11 LL, %: Liquid Limit, expressed as a water content.

12 PI, %: Plasticity Index, expressed as a water content.

FIELD AND LABORATORY TEST ABBREVIATIONS

CHEM: Chemical tests to assess corrosivity COMP: Compaction test CONS: One-dimensional consolidation test LL: Liquid Limit, percent

PI: Plasticity Index, percent SA: Sieve analysis (percent passing No. 200 Sieve) UC: Unconfined compressive strength test, Qu, in ksf WA: Wash sieve (percent passing No. 200 Sieve)

MATERIAL GRAPHIC SYMBOLS

Lean CLAY, CLAY w/SAND, SANDY CLAY (CL) Clayey SAND (SC)

Silty SAND (SM)

TYPICAL SAMPLER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS

Auger sampler

Bulk Sample

3-inch-OD California w/ brass rings

CME Sampler

Grab Sample

2.5-inch-OD Modified California w/ brass liners

Pitcher Sample

2-inch-OD unlined split spoon (SPT)

Shelby Tube (Thin-walled, fixed head)

OTHER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS

Water level (at time of drilling, ATD)

Water level (after waiting)

Minor change in material properties within a stratum

Inferred/gradational contact between strata

? Queried contact between strata

GENERAL NOTES

1: Soil classifications are based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive, and actual lithologic changes may be gradual. Field descriptions may have been modified to reflect results of lab tests.

2: Descriptions on these logs apply only at the specific boring locations and at the time the borings were advanced. They are not warranted to be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations or times.

C :\U se rs

\th ec o\ A pp D at a\

Lo ca l\T em p\ bo rin gs

_t em p\ tm pf ile

.b gs

[C O

Z E ng in ee rin g 1.

tp l]

Figure B-1

Sieve Size 1 1/2" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #10 #40 #100 #200

% Passing (Cumulative) 100% 100% 100% 99% 98% 94% 64% 54.1%

Specification

% GRAVEL = 1% D85 = 0.2 D15 =

% SAND = 45% D60 = 0.1 D10 =

% SILT & CLAY = 54% D50 = CU =

D30 = CC =

Sample Date: 5/31/24

Project No.: 4224073

Project Name: Spaceport 150’X 150’ Fabric Hangar

Report Date: 6/29/24

Sample Location: B-1 at 0-5'

Liquid Limit: 31 14 USCS Classification: CL

Material Description: Sandy Lean Clay Moisture Content: 6.1%

TEST SUMMARY (ASTM C136)

(575) 642-7671

COZ Engineering, LLC

PO Box 13331

Las Cruces, NM 88013

Plasticity Index:

GRAIN SIZE - mm

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION GRAPH

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.010.11101001000

P E

R C

E N

T F

IN

E

R in

1.

#4

#2

% Passing (Cumulative) 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 96% 75% 64.8%

Specification

% GRAVEL = 0% D85 = 0.2 D15 =

% SAND = 35% D60 = D10 =

% SILT & CLAY = 65% D50 = CU =

D30 = CC =

Sample Date: 5/31/24

Project No.: 4224073

Project Name: Spaceport 150’X 150’ Fabric Hangar

Report Date: 6/29/24

Sample Location: B-2 at 0-5'

Liquid Limit: 40 25 USCS Classification: CL

Material Description: Sandy Lean Clay Moisture Content: 9.4%

TEST SUMMARY (ASTM C136)

(575) 642-7671

COZ Engineering, LLC

PO Box 13331

Las Cruces, NM 88013

Plasticity Index:

GRAIN SIZE - mm

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION GRAPH

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.010.11101001000

P E

R C

E N

T F

IN

% Passing (Cumulative) 100% 100% 100% 100% 98% 91% 69% 60.6%

Specification

% GRAVEL = 0% D85 = 0.2 D15 =

% SAND = 39% D60 = D10 =

% SILT & CLAY = 61% D50 = CU =

D30 = CC =

Sample Date: 5/31/24

Project No.: 4224073

Project Name: Spaceport 150’X 150’ Fabric Hangar

Report Date: 6/29/24

Sample Location: B-3 at 10'

Liquid Limit: 32 16 USCS Classification: CL

Material Description: Sandy Lean Clay Moisture Content: 7.4%

TEST SUMMARY (ASTM C136)

(575) 642-7671

COZ Engineering, LLC

PO Box 13331

Las Cruces, NM 88013

Plasticity Index:

GRAIN SIZE - mm

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION GRAPH

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.010.11101001000

P E

R C

E N

T F

IN

% Passing (Cumulative) 100% 100% 100% 100% 99% 91% 67% 61.8%

Specification

% GRAVEL = 0% D85 = 0.3 D15 =

% SAND = 38% D60 = D10 =

% SILT & CLAY = 62% D50 = CU =

D30 = CC =

Sample Date: 5/31/24

Project No.: 4224073

Project Name: Spaceport 150’X 150’ Fabric Hangar

Report Date: 6/29/24

Sample Location: B-4 at 2.5'

Liquid Limit: 37 20 USCS Classification: CL

Material Description: Sandy Lean Clay Moisture Content: 7.7%

TEST SUMMARY (ASTM C136)

(575) 642-7671

COZ Engineering, LLC

PO Box 13331

Las Cruces, NM 88013

Plasticity Index:

GRAIN SIZE - mm

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION GRAPH

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.010.11101001000

P E

R C

E N

T F

IN

% Passing (Cumulative) 100% 100% 91% 87% 82% 58% 20% 14.5%

Specification

% GRAVEL = 13% D85 = 3.4 D15 = 0.1

% SAND = 73% D60 = 0.4 D10 =

% SILT & CLAY = 15% D50 = 0.3 CU =

D30 = 0.2 CC =

Sample Date: 5/31/24

Project No.: 4224073

Project Name: Spaceport 150’X 150’ Fabric Hangar

Report Date: 6/29/24

Sample Location: B-4 at 10'

Liquid Limit: NP USCS Classification: SM

Material Description: Silty Sand Moisture Content: 1.6%

TEST SUMMARY (ASTM C136)

(575) 642-7671

COZ Engineering, LLC

PO Box 13331

Las Cruces, NM 88013

Plasticity Index:

GRAIN SIZE - mm

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION GRAPH

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.010.11101001000

P E

R C

E N

T F

IN

% Passing (Cumulative) 100% 100% 100% 100% 99% 93% 55% 45.7%

Specification

% GRAVEL = 0% D85 = 0.3 D15 =

% SAND = 54% D60 = 0.2 D10 =

% SILT & CLAY = 46% D50 = 0.1 CU =

D30 = CC =

Sample Date: 5/31/24

Project No.: 4224073

Project Name: Spaceport 150’X 150’ Fabric Hangar

Report Date: 6/29/24

Sample Location: B-5 at 15'

Liquid Limit: 27 15 USCS Classification: SC

Material Description: Clayey Sand Moisture Content: 4.5%

TEST SUMMARY (ASTM C136)

(575) 642-7671

COZ Engineering, LLC

PO Box 13331

Las Cruces, NM 88013

Plasticity Index:

GRAIN SIZE - mm

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION GRAPH

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.010.11101001000

P E

R C

E N

T F

IN

Federal Aviation Administration FAARFIELD 2.1 Structure Report

FAARFIELD 2.1.1 (Build 12/21/2023)

Job Name: Spaceport Hangar

Structure: Apron

Analysis Type: HMA on Aggregate

Last Run: Thickness Design 2024‐06‐30 13:12:48

Design Life = 20 Years

Total thickness to the top of the subgrade = 10.0in.

Pavement Structure Information by Layer

No. Type Thickness (in.)

Modulus (psi)

CBR

Poisson's Ratio

Strength R (psi)

1 P‐401/P‐403 HMA Surface 4.0 200,000 0 0.35 0

2 P‐209 Crushed Aggregate 6.0 19,837 0 0.35 0

3 Subgrade 0 6,000 4 0.35 0

Airplane Information

No. Name Gross Wt.

(lbs)

Annual Departures

% Annual Growth

1 S‐12.5 12,500 500 0

Additional Airplane Information

Subgrade CDF

No. Name

CDF

Contribution

CDF Max for Airplane

P/C Ratio

1 S‐12.5 0.08 0.08 3.99

NOTE:

User is responsible for checking frost protection requirements.

Job Name: Spaceport Hangar

Structure: Apron

Analysis Type: HMA on Aggregate

Last Run: Thickness Design 2024‐06‐30 13:12:48

Design Life = 20 Years

Total thickness to the top of the subgrade = 10.0in.

Pavement Structure Information by Layer

No. Type Thickness (in.)

Modulus (psi)

CBR

Poisson's Ratio

Strength R (psi)

1 P‐401/P‐403 HMA Surface 4.0 200,000 0 0.35 0

2 P‐209 Crushed Aggregate 6.0 19,837 0 0.35 0

3 Subgrade 0 6,000 4 0.35 0

Airplane Information

No. Name Gross Wt.

(lbs)

Annual Departures

% Annual Growth

1 S‐12.5 12,500 500 0

Additional Airplane Information

Subgrade CDF

No. Name

CDF

Contribution

CDF Max for Airplane

P/C Ratio

1 S‐12.5 0.08 0.08 3.99

Job Name: Spaceport Hangar

Structure: Apron

Analysis Type: New Rigid

Last Run: Thickness Design 2024‐06‐30 13:16:53

Design Life = 20 Years

Total thickness to the top of the subgrade = 11.0in.

Pavement Structure Information by Layer

No. Type Thickness (in.)

Modulus (psi) k (pci) Poisson's Ratio

Strength R (psi)

1 P‐501 PCC Surface 5.0 4,000,000 0 0.15 650

2 P‐209 Crushed Aggregate 6.0 16,706 0 0.35 0

3 Subgrade 0 6,000 84.5 0.4 0

Airplane Information

No. Name Gross Wt.

(lbs)

Annual Departures

% Annual Growth

1 S‐12.5 12,500 500 0

Additional Airplane Information

No. Name

CDF

Contribution

CDF Max for Airplane

P/C Ratio

1 S‐12.5 0.00 0.00 7.99

Job Name: Spaceport Hangar

Structure: Apron

Analysis Type: New Rigid

Last Run: Thickness Design 2024‐06‐30 13:16:53

Design Life = 20 Years

Total thickness to the top of the subgrade = 11.0in.

Pavement Structure Information by Layer

No. Type Thickness (in.)

Modulus (psi) k (pci) Poisson's Ratio

Strength R (psi)

1 P‐501 PCC Surface 5.0 4,000,000 0 0.15 650

2 P‐209 Crushed Aggregate 6.0 16,706 0 0.35 0

3 Subgrade 0 6,000 84.5 0.4 0

Airplane Information

No. Name Gross Wt.

(lbs)

Annual Departures

% Annual Growth

1 S‐12.5 12,500 500 0

Additional Airplane Information

No. Name

CDF

Contribution

CDF Max for Airplane

P/C Ratio

1 S‐12.5 0.00 0.00 7.99