Geotech Report_Teterboro Airport1.pdf

Geotechnical Engineering Study Report

Proposed Galvanized Steel Communication Towers

Teterboro Airport

Teterboro, New Jersey

Langan Project No. 100683201

20 December 2017

Page i of iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page No.

INTRODUCTION

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Existing Conditions

Proposed Construction

REVIEW OF AVAILABLE INFORMATION

Historic Aerial Photographs

Historic Topographic Maps

Soil Survey

Regional Geology

Flood Maps

SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION

Borings

Laboratory Testing

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

Topsoil

Fill

Sand

Clay

Decomposed Rock

Bedrock

Groundwater

Corrosion Test Results

EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Site Preparation

Subgrade Preparation

Engineered Fill Reuse of Existing On-site Soils Imported Fill Fill Placement and Compaction

Deep Foundations

Teterboro Airport

Teterboro, New Jersey

Langan Project No. 100683201

Page ii of iii

(Continued)

Uplift Anchors

Structure Settlements

Seismicity

Below-Grade Utilities

Groundwater Control During Construction

Evaluation of Corrosion Protection

CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND INSPECTION / QUALITY ASSURANCE

CLOSURE/LIMITATIONS

Teterboro Airport

Teterboro, New Jersey

Langan Project No. 100683201

Page iii of iii

(Continued)

FIGURES

Figure 1 Site Location Map

Figure 2 Location Plan

Figure 3 Soil Survey Map

Figure 4 Surficial Geology Map

Figure 5 Bedrock Map

Figure 6 Flood Map

Figure 7 Subsurface Profile A-A

APPENDICES

Appendix A Historic Aerial Photographs

Appendix B Historic Topographic Maps

Appendix C Boring Logs

Appendix D Laboratory Test Results

Teterboro Airport

Teterboro, New Jersey

Langan Project No. 100683201

INTRODUCTION

At your request, we have completed our geotechnical engineering study performed for the proposed galvanized steel communication towers for the Teterboro Airport project in

Teterboro, Bergen County, New Jersey. The purposes of this study were to: 1) research and review available site information; 2) obtain subsurface information by drilling borings; and 3) provide recommendations for foundation design and other geotechnical aspects of future construction at the site.

No environmental investigations or sampling were performed as part of this work.

All elevations given in this report are referenced to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD29), unless otherwise noted.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Existing Conditions

The site is located in Teterboro, New Jersey and is bordered by wooded areas and

Redneck Avenue to the east, and wooded areas to the north, west and south; see

Figure 1. There is an existing 1-story masonry building at the center of the site and 2 steel communication towers at the northeast and southwest portions of the site. Each existing communication tower is anchored at 3 locations with two 3/8-inch EHS guy wires.

According to the 08 April 2014 RTR Site Plan prepared by the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), the existing building has a finished floor elevation el 10.5. Grades within the fenced portion of the site were observed to range from approx. el 8.5 to el

10. Grades outside of the fenced area of the site are typically 2 to 3 feet lower than site grades.

Proposed Construction

The proposed construction will consist of the following:

Demolition of the two existing steel communication towers;

Construction of two self-supporting 100-foot-tall galvanized steel communication towers at the west and northeast sides of the site. The towers will have four legs each with antenna platforms and antennas on the tops of the towers.

At the time of this report, we have not been provided information regarding the proposed structural loads. Once it becomes available, we should review the final

Teterboro Airport

Teterboro, New Jersey

Langan Project No. 100683201 structural loading information and associated deflection criteria for the towers so that we may evaluate and modify, if necessary, the recommendations provided herein.

REVIEW OF AVAILABLE INFORMATION

We reviewed available historic aerial photographs, historic topographic maps, soil surveys, regional geologic information, and the Federal Emergency Management

Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for the site vicinity. Pertinent information obtained from the above documents is summarized in the following paragraphs.

Historic Aerial Photographs

We reviewed historic aerial photographs dated 1931, 1940, 1951, 1954, 1961, 1966, 1970, 1974, 1985, 1991, 1995, 2006, 2008, and 2010; see Appendix A.

The 1931 through 1951 photographs depict the site as being primarily undeveloped farmland. The site is unoccupied with small structures along Redneck Road. The site is bounded by Redneck Road to the east, wooded areas to the west and vacant land to the north and south.

Additional structures appear along the south and west sides of the site in the 1954 through 1961 photographs. The 1966 through 1974 photographs depict the site conditions as similar to present day conditions with the current building at the center of the site. The extent of wooded areas appears to increase from the 1985 through 2010 photographs.

Historic Topographic Maps

We reviewed available historic United States Geological Survey (USGS) Topographic

Maps for the site dated 1888, 1898, 1900, 1903, 1905, 1935, 1940, 1943, 1947, 1967, 1981, 1995, and 2014; see Appendix B.

The 1888 through 1905 maps depict the subject property as being located within historic marshland. The current Redneck Road is shown to the east of the site. The

1935 through 1947 maps show the site as vacant and no longer classified as marshland.

Subsequent maps depict the subject property conditions as similar to present day conditions with the current building at the center of the site, shown as a radio facility.

Soil Survey

We reviewed the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resource

Conservation Service soil survey map for Bergen County, New Jersey; see Figure 3.

Teterboro Airport

Teterboro, New Jersey

Langan Project No. 100683201

Based on this survey, the site is located in an area consisting of urban land. A brief description of the nearby soil types is provided below:

Urban Land (UR) – Surface covered by pavement, concrete, buildings, and other structures underlain by disturbed and natural soil material.

Westbrook, Ipswich, and Sandyhook soils (TrkAv) – Partial-decomposed herbaceous organic material over loamy mineral material and sandy marine deposits, very frequently flooded

Udorthents, wet substratum (Udwb) – loamy lateral spread deposits, moderately well drained

Regional Geology

We reviewed the USGS Open File Map (OFM) 13 soil survey map entitled “Surficial

Geology of the Weehawken and Central Park Quadrangles, Bergen, Hudson, and

Passaic Counties, New Jersey”; see Figure 4. According to this map, the site is underlain by the following soil type:

Moonachie Terrace Deposit (Qmt) – Sand and minor pebble gravel and silt, very pale brown to yellowish brown. Deposits can be as much as 20 feet thick.

Top of bedrock elevation is between el 0 and el -50.

The generalized 1994 Bedrock Geologic Map of Northern New Jersey published by the

USGS and the New Jersey Geological Survey characterizes the underlying geology in the region as conglomeratic sandstone interbedded grayish-red to brownish-red, medium to fine-grained, medium to thick-bedded as part of the Passaic Formation; see

Figure 5.

Flood Maps

According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map

Number 34003C0256G dated September 30, 2005, the site is located within areas determined to be outside of the 100-year floodplain (Zone AE) and the 500-year floodplain (Zone X); see Figure 6.

SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION

The geotechnical field investigation consisted of drilling 2 borings (identified as borings

LB-1 and LB-2) within the proposed tower locations; see Figure 2.

Permission to access the site was obtained from Ocean Construction and the FAA before beginning work. The One-Call utility mark-out request was performed by our

Teterboro Airport

Teterboro, New Jersey

Langan Project No. 100683201 drilling subcontractor prior to performing field work. In addition, a private utility mark-out company, Precision GPR, performed a utility mark-out and cleared the boring locations of utilities.

The borings were completed under the full-time inspection of a field engineer from our office and with the direct supervision of our project Professional Engineer. Our field engineer maintained logs of all explorations, classified encountered soil conditions, and obtained representative material samples.

Surface elevations at the boring locations were inferred from drawing entitled “Site

Plan, Teterboro Airport” dated 8 April 2017, which is referenced to the National

Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD29).

Borings

The borings for our investigation were drilled by Craig Geotechnical Drilling Co., Inc. on

28 and 29 November 2017 using a CME 75 truck-mounted drill rig. The borings were advanced between approximately 50 and 60 feet below existing grades using mud rotary drilling techniques and an NQ2-size rock core barrel. The upper 6 feet of each boring was hand-augered.

A standard 2-inch-outer-diameter split-spoon sampler was used to obtain samples of the underlying soil strata. The Standard Penetration Test (SPT)1 was accomplished as part of the sampling procedure (in accordance with ASTM D-1586) and the SPT results were recorded by our inspecting engineer. A safety hammer was used as part of the SPT test for all sampling in the borings.

Pocket penetrometer testing of selected disturbed cohesive soil samples was performed and the measured unconfined compressive strengths were recorded on the boring logs. Groundwater levels were recorded when first observed within each boring.

Boreholes were grouted upon completion.

The individual boring logs are provided in Appendix C.

The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) is a measure of the soil density and consistency. The SPT N-value is defined as the number of blows required to drive a 2-inch O.D. split-barrel sampler 12 inches, after an initial penetration of 6 inches using a 140 pound safety hammer falling freely for 30 inches.

Teterboro Airport

Teterboro, New Jersey

Langan Project No. 100683201

Laboratory Testing

Soil samples were visually examined in the field, and classifications were confirmed by re-examination in our New Jersey office. Selected soil samples were sent to a specialty testing laboratory where the following tests were performed:

Grain Size Distributions

Moisture Content

Atterberg Limits (cohesive samples)

Corrosion Testing (including resistivity, redox potential, sulfide, sulfate, chloride, pH, water content)

The laboratory test results are provided in Appendix D.

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

Based on the results of the borings performed for this study, the subsurface conditions generally consisted of a surface layer of topsoil overlying fill and then successive natural strata consisting of sand, clay, decomposed rock and bedrock. A generalized subsurface profile is shown in Figure 7 and the following sections describe the encountered subsurface conditions.

Topsoil

A 3-inch-thick to 5-inch-thick surface layer of topsoil was encountered in both borings.

The topsoil generally consisted of dark brown fine to medium sand with varying proportions of silt, fine gravel and roots.

Fill

Fill generally consisting of brown to gray fine to coarse sand with varying amounts of silt, fine to coarse gravel, clay, roots, asphalt and brick was encountered beneath the topsoil layer in both borings. No SPT N-values were recorded in the fill layer because each boring was hand augered to a depth of 6 feet below surrounding grades. The fill was found to range in thickness from 4 to 6 feet.

Sand

Brown to reddish-brown fine to medium sand with varying amounts of coarse sand, silt, fine to coarse gravel, cobbles and clay was encountered beneath the fill layer in both borings. The sand was found to be medium dense as evidenced by SPT N-values ranging from 10 to 16 blows/foot. The sand stratum was found to be approximately 2 to

4 feet thick.

Teterboro Airport

Teterboro, New Jersey

Langan Project No. 100683201

A 2-foot-thick sandy silt layer was encountered below the sand stratum in boring LB-2.

Clay

Brownish-gray to gray clay with varying amounts of silt and fine to medium sand was encountered beneath the sand layer in both borings. The clay was first encountered at approximately 8 to 10 feet below existing grades, or at approximate el 2 to el -0.5. The clay was typically found to be soft to very stiff as evidenced by SPT N-values ranging from 3 to 20 blows/foot (average SPT N-value of 7 blows/foot). Unconfined compressive strength as measured in the field with the pocket penetrometer ranged from 0.2 to

4 tons/ft2. The clay layer was found to range in thickness from 22 to 30 feet.

Decomposed Rock

Decomposed rock in the form of reddish-brown silt with varying amounts of clay, fine to coarse sand and fine to coarse gravel was encountered beneath the clay layer in both borings. The decomposed rock was first encountered at approximately 30 to 40 feet below existing grades, or at approximate el -20 to el -30.5. The decomposed rock was typically found to be medium dense to very dense as evidenced by SPT N-values ranging from 28 blows/foot to refusal (greater than 100 blows/foot) of the split spoon sampler. The decomposed rock layer was found to range in thickness from 9 to 10 feet.

Bedrock

Bedrock consisting of reddish-brown shale was encountered in both borings. Core recoveries ranged from 79% to 100% with an average of 91%. RQD values, a rough measure of the degree of jointing or fracturing in a rock mass, ranged from 65% to 92% with an average of 77%, indicating generally good quality rock. Bedrock was first encountered approximately 40 to 49 feet below existing grades, or at approximate el -30 to el -39.5.

Groundwater

Groundwater was first encountered in the borings at depths approximately 6 feet below existing grades, or at approximate el 3.5 to el 4. The groundwater level in the borings was inferred based on the moisture content of the soil samples.

Corrosion Test Results

A composite sample was taken from the fill layer from both borings. The results of the corrosion testing are shown in the table below:

Teterboro Airport

Teterboro, New Jersey

Langan Project No. 100683201

Parameter Boring LB-1 and LB-2

Composite Sample

(2’-4’ below grade)

Test Result pH 7.1

Resistivity 6,700 Ω-cm

Redox

Potential

492 mV

Chloride 8.1 ppm

Sulfide 3.9 ppm

Sulfate 25.8 ppm

EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The fill and clay soils are expected to settle and compress and will provide insufficient uplift and overturning resistance under the loads associated with the new communication towers. The proposed tower loads will need to be transferred to bedrock using deep foundations consisting of either driven pile or drilled caisson foundations. The following sections provide detailed recommendations for site preparation, subgrade preparation, engineered fill, foundation support, seismic design parameters, below-grade utilities, groundwater control during construction and protection of adjacent structures.

Site Preparation

Prior to commencement of grading or foundation construction, any miscellaneous debris, or other unsuitable materials should be removed from the tower footprints. All debris and trees/vegetation should be properly disposed off-site in accordance with applicable regulations.

Topsoil should be stripped from all proposed footprint areas, and should be stockpiled and protected from erosion. Any active existing utilities that are encountered in the proposed foundation areas should be re-routed. Utilities designated for removal should be completely removed within the proposed tower footprints.

Excavations made to remove utilities and foundation components associated with the towers to be demolished should be backfilled with approved compacted fill in accordance with the Engineered Fill section of this report and any environmental requirements.

Teterboro Airport

Teterboro, New Jersey

Langan Project No. 100683201

All site demolition and site preparation work should be performed in accordance with any environmental regulations and requirements established for the site as well as all

Local, State, and Federal regulations.

All work should be performed so as not to adversely impact the existing building, roadways, off-site structures, or utilities. Protection of these elements should be provided as necessary during the course of all construction activities at the site.

Subgrade Preparation

After performing the aforementioned site preparation work and prior to construction of finished surface construction surrounding the new tower footprint areas, all site soils within the proposed surrounding finished surface areas disturbed during tower construction should be proofrolled with six (6) overlapping coverages of a vibratory roller having a minimum static drum weight of 5 tons. Additional proofrolling coverages should be performed in any areas deemed necessary based on observations made by a qualified inspecting geotechnical engineer. Soft areas identified during proofrolling should be excavated and replaced with approved, compacted fill.

Engineered Fill

Reuse of Existing On-site Soils

The on-site soils having a maximum particle size of 6 inches in diameter can be used as compacted fill to raise grades or backfill foundation and utility excavations. The use of larger aggregate should only be done as approved by a qualified geotechnical engineer based on inspection of conditions encountered during construction.

The reuse of on-site soils should be performed in accordance with all environmental requirements established for the Site, including any restrictions on the reuse of excavation fill material due to concerns regarding contamination.

Imported Fill

Imported fill, if any is required, should consist of a relatively well-graded mixture of sand and gravel with not more than 15 percent (by weight) finer than the No. 200 sieve and having a maximum particle size of no more than 4 inches. The use of any imported fill containing a higher percentage of fines would need to be evaluated by a qualified geotechnical engineer during construction.

Suitable fill should be free of organics and other deleterious materials. The fill should be environmentally clean. “Clean fill” means material to be used in a remedial action that meets all soil remediation standards, site-specific alternative standards, or site-specific

Teterboro Airport

Teterboro, New Jersey

Langan Project No. 100683201 interim standards, does not contain extraneous debris or solid waste, and does not contain free liquids. This also includes any material that meets all criteria or action levels for contaminants without standards, available on the NJDEP’s website at www.nj.gov/dep/srp.

Grain size distribution and Modified Proctor compaction tests (ASTM D1557) should be performed on representative samples of the backfill and imported fill material proposed by the Contractor to import. The Contractor should provide the results of the testing to the Owner and Geotechnical Engineer for approval not less than two weeks prior to its delivery to the Site and intended use.

Fill Placement and Compaction

All fill should be placed in uniform lifts and compacted to at least 95 percent of the material’s maximum dry density as determined by the Modified Proctor Compaction

Test (ASTM D1557). The water content at the time of compaction should be within

3 percentage points of the optimum water content. Silt and clay soils should be placed in 8-inch-thick loose lifts and compacted using a sheep’s-foot roller. On-site granular soils and imported select fill can be placed in 12-inch-thick loose lifts and compacted using a smooth drum roller. The sheep’s-foot and smooth drum rollers should have a minimum static drum weight of 5 tons.

Smaller compaction equipment (i.e. walk-behind trench roller or jumping jack compactor) and thinner lifts (6 to 8 inches) will be necessary in areas of limited maneuverability.

All fill placement should be subject to inspection and testing by a qualified geotechnical engineer. No fill material should be placed on areas where free water is standing, on frozen subgrade areas, or on surfaces which have not been approved by a qualified geotechnical engineer.

Deep Foundations

Due to the presence of compressible soils beneath the tower locations, we recommend that the proposed communication towers be supported on deep foundations consisting of either driven piles or drilled caissons. Recommendations for both deep foundation options are provided herein.

Driven Piles

The proposed towers can be supported on closed-end pipe piles driven to or into the underlying bedrock and filled with concrete. We expect a 14-inch-dia Grade 3 (Modified

50 ksi) steel closed-end pipe pile having a 0.5 inch wall thickness driven to or into the rock and filled with concrete having a 28-day compressive strength of 4,000 lbs/in2 can

Teterboro Airport

Teterboro, New Jersey

Langan Project No. 100683201 i^kd^k= be a suitable pile type to achieve a 125 ton compression design capacity. If available, more economical and generally equivalent 13.3751inch1dia by 0.481inch wall thickness new secondary oil casing pipe piles can be utilized as a substitute for the 141inch1dia pile identified above. We anticipate the 141inch1dia pile or equivalent oil casing pipe pile can sustain an uplift design capacity of 15 tons, and a lateral design capacity of 4.5 tons at a limiting lateral deflection of 0.75 inches or less.

Smaller diameter closed1end pipe piles driven to or into the bedrock and filled with concrete can be used if piles having capacities lower than the 125 ton pile recommended above are preferred. We expect a 9 5/81inch1dia Grade 3 steel pipe pile having a 0.395 inch wall thickness can be a suitable pile type to achieve a 75 ton design capacity, respectively. This pile type should be filled with concrete having a 281day compressive strength of 4,000 lbs/in2. We estimate that the 9 5/81inch1dia piles can achieve an uplift design capacity of 10 tons, and a lateral design capacity of 1.5 tons at a limiting lateral deflection of 0.75 inches or less.

The minimum pile center1to1center spacing should be 3 feet. Piles battered as steep as

6V:1H can be used to resist lateral loads, if necessary.

Pile load tests are necessary to confirm pile capacity, length, and final driving criteria.

This pile testing should consist of dynamic testing using a Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA) on the initial day of pile installation to measure pile stresses during driving, to estimate pile capacities, and to finalize driving criteria.

Care should be taken when driving piles near existing structures and utilities, so as not to adversely affect these elements. Proposed pile locations can be predrilled, if necessary, in order to reduce the impact to adjacent structures and utilities due to vibrations induced during pile driving.

Drilled Caissons

Alternatively, if higher capacities are required beneath the proposed towers, we recommend foundation support consisting of drilled caissons socketed into rock. A properly reinforced and socketed 1313/81inch diameter drilled caisson can provide an individual design compression capacity of 300 tons. The caisson shell, reinforcing, grout fill, and socket should be designed in accordance with the New Jersey International

Building Code (NJIBC) allowable stress requirements. A caisson socketed a minimum

15 feet into rock, constructed using a 1313/81inch outer diameter steel casing with a

0.41inch1thick wall, reinforced with three #18 grade 75 bars, and completely filled with

5,000 psi grout or concrete would satisfy the minimum code requirements.

Teterboro Airport

Teterboro, New Jersey

Langan Project No. 100683201

We recommend that one full/scale compression load test be performed on each caisson type. The basic allowable uplift load for the 300 ton caissons is 100 tons. The basic allowable lateral load for the caisson is 4.5 tons.

We will need to review the above recommendations after caisson layout and design capacity requirements are finalized, so we can provide supplemental recommendations regarding additional reinforcement and embedment, or alternate higher/lower capacity caissons, if necessary.

Uplift Anchors

Should individual foundation elements be subjected to uplift loads, additional resistance can be provided by using tie/down anchors socketed into bedrock. We expect a double corrosion protected, 17/8/inch diameter, Grade 150 steel threadbar tie/down anchor embedded at least 30 feet (minimum 15/foot free stressing length and a 15/foot bond length) into sound bedrock can provide a design uplift capacity of 240 kips per anchor.

This value is based on anchors being tested to 133% of the design load and locked/off at the design load. The minimum center to center spacing of the anchors should not be less than 5 feet. Langan should review the proposed foundation plans once final anchor loads and locations are determined.

Structure Settlements

The total settlements are estimated to be less than 1 inch and the differential settlements to be less than ¾ inch.

Seismicity

Based on the New Jersey Edition of the International Building Code (NJIBC 2015) and the United States Geological Survey, the proposed towers should be designed using the following seismic parameters.

• Risk Category = IV, Essential Facilities

• Site Class = E

• Maximum Considered Earthquake Ground Motions:

- 0.2 Second Spectral Response Acceleration, %g: Ss = 28.2

- 1.0 Second Spectral Response Acceleration, %g: S1 = 7.3

The above ground motions should be adjusted for site class effects using coefficients

Fa = 2.4 and Fv = 3.5.

Teterboro Airport

Teterboro, New Jersey

Langan Project No. 100683201

Based on the high fines content of the subsurface soils, liquefaction is considered to be unlikely.

Below-Grade Utilities

Excavations will be required for the installation of any proposed below-grade utilities and associated structures. All excavations should be properly sloped and/or braced in conformance with applicable OSHA regulations including, but not limited to, temporary shoring, utilizing trench boxes and/or proper benching.

Prior to construction, we recommend field locating any existing utilities that are to remain or that must be temporarily maintained during construction. Existing utilities within or immediately adjacent to the excavation areas should be relocated prior to excavation work.

We expect site excavations for proposed utilities to be constructed in existing fill or natural soils. Exposed utility trenches in soil should be proofrolled with at least six overlapping coverages of a double-drum walk-behind vibratory compactor such as a

Wacker RT 82-SC or equivalent. Any soft or unstable areas identified by the proofrolling should be removed and replaced with compacted fill. Backfill in utility excavations should meet the previously discussed requirements for engineered fill, with fill placement and compaction performed as previously discussed.

Groundwater Control During Construction

Based on existing grades, we anticipate that the excavations for the proposed site utilities are above the measured groundwater levels. However, perched water may be encountered. Groundwater can also be expected to fluctuate with weather, seasonal conditions, construction activity, or groundwater pumping. We anticipate that collected storm water runoff and groundwater seepage can be controlled using conventional submersible pumps in conjunction with gravel sumps.

If deeper utilities are required, we anticipate that excavations will extend below the groundwater table. Multiple sump pits or well points are expected to be necessary. The pumps should remain active to facilitate utility placement and backfilling in the dry.

Dewatering should be performed so as not to adversely impact adjacent structures, utilities, or roadways. The pumping, handling and discharge of all dewatering effluent should be performed in accordance with all applicable regulations and any environmental requirements for the site.

Teterboro Airport

Teterboro, New Jersey

Langan Project No. 100683201

Evaluation of Corrosion Protection

A sample of the site soils has been evaluated for the potential for corrosion of concrete structures and ductile/cast iron pipe utilizing the laboratory testing results. One composite sample, taken from 2 locations, of the fill layer was tested for pH measurement, redox potential, and soil resistivity testing, along with sulfide, sulfate, and chloride content. The results of the soil testing are summarized in Appendix D of this report

Based on the laboratory testing results, the composite sample of site soil was not considered to be corrosive to gray or ductile iron pipe or Type I Portland Cement.

CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND INSPECTION / QUALITY ASSURANCE

The foundation recommendations given herein should be included in the structural drawings for the project. In addition, our firm should be provided with and review any

Contractor submittals related to foundation work, site preparation, and soil importation for conformance with the recommendations given in this report.

During construction, it is critical that all geotechnical related work be performed under qualified geotechnical engineering inspection/monitoring/testing in order to ensure proper and timely implementation of the recommendations given in this report. We recommend that Langan perform this work to verify proper implementation of our recommendations and to maintain continuity of our responsibility for this project. Our field engineer would be able to immediately address unexpected or unusual conditions that may be encountered and provide remedial recommendations. This work includes:

foundation construction, site preparation, compacted fill placement, pile driving and utility construction and backfill placement.

CLOSURE/LIMITATIONS

This report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was performed.

The findings and conclusions of this report may be affected by the passage of time, by manmade events such as construction on or adjacent to the site, or by natural events such as floods, earthquakes, slope instability, or groundwater fluctuations. Our interpretation of subsurface conditions are based on field observations from widely spaced sampling locations at the site. Site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken.

Langan reviewed field and laboratory data and then applied our professional judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Our report, conclusions, and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. If during construction, different subsurface conditions from those

Teterboro Airport

Teterboro, New Jersey

Langan Project No. 100683201 encountered in our borings are observed, we must be advised immediately so that we can review these conditions and reconsider our recommendations where necessary.

This report presents our recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of design and construction for the proposed galvanized steel communication towers in Teterboro, Bergen County, New Jersey. These recommendations are based on the site subsurface investigation performed by Langan and design development plans prepared by others.

Recommendations given are contingent upon one another and no recommendation should be followed independent of the others. This report has been prepared to assist the Site/Civil Engineer and the Structural Engineer in their design. Any changes in structures, locations, or loading information should be brought to our attention so that we may determine how such changes may affect our recommendations. Langan

Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc. cannot assume responsibility for the use of this report to generate foundation design for any other structures than at the specific site addressed in this report.

\\langan.com\data\PAR\data2\100683201\Project Data\_Discipline\Geotechnical\Reports\2017012020 Geotech Report_Teterboro Airport.docx

FIGURES

Figure 1 Site Location Map

Figure 2 Location Plan

Figure 3 Soil Survey Map

Figure 4 Bedrock Map

Figure 5 Flood Map

Figure 7 Subsurface Profile

Figure 6 Preliminary Flood Map (2015)

FIGURES

Figure 1 Site Location Map Figure 2 Location Plan Figure 3 Soil Survey Map Figure 4 Regional Geology Map Figure 5 Bedrock Map Figure 6 Flood Map Figure 7 Subsurface Profile A-A

SITE

Filename: \\langan.com\data\PAR\data2\100683201\Project Data\CAD\Geotech\Figure 1 - Site Location Map.dwg Date: 12/11/2017 Time: 14:59 User: vrhodes Style Table: Langan.stb Layout: ANSIA-BP

300 Kimball Drive Parsippany, NJ 07054

T: 973.560.4900 F: 973.560.4901 www.langan.com

NJ CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION No. 24GA27996400 ©

La ng an

12/20/2017

Filename: \\langan.com\data\PAR\data2\100683201\Project Data\CAD\01\SheetFiles\GEOTECH\100683201-BL101-0101.dwg Date: 12/12/2017 Time: 11:14 User: vrhodes Style Table: Langan.stb Layout: ARCHC-BL

NJ CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION No. 24GA27996400

300 Kimball Drive, Parsippany, NJ 07054 T: 973.560.4900 F: 973.560.4901 www.langan.com

La ng an

30'

4'

17'

17'

LB-1

LB-2

Filename: \\langan.com\data\PAR\data2\100683201\Project Data\CAD\Geotech\Figure 3 - Soil Survey Map.dwg Date: 12/11/2017 Time: 15:05 User: vrhodes Style Table: Langan.stb Layout: ANSIA-BP

300 Kimball Drive Parsippany, NJ 07054

T: 973.560.4900 F: 973.560.4901 www.langan.com

NJ CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION No. 24GA27996400 ©

La ng an

Filename: \\langan.com\data\PAR\data2\100683201\Project Data\CAD\Geotech\Figure 4 - Surficial Geology Map.dwg Date: 12/11/2017 Time: 15:07 User: vrhodes Style Table: Langan.stb Layout: ANSIA-BP

Parsippany, NJ 07054

T: 973.560.4900 F: 973.560.4901 www.langan.com

NJ CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION No. 24GA27996400 ©

La ng an

Filename: \\langan.com\data\PAR\data2\100683201\Project Data\CAD\Geotech\Figure 5 - Bedrock Map.dwg Date: 12/11/2017 Time: 15:11 User: vrhodes Style Table: Langan.stb Layout: ANSIA-BP

Parsippany, NJ 07054

T: 973.560.4900 F: 973.560.4901 www.langan.com

NJ CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION No. 24GA27996400 ©

La ng an

Filename: \\langan.com\data\PAR\data2\100683201\Project Data\CAD\Geotech\Figure 6 - Flood Map (2005).dwg Date: 12/20/2017 Time: 12:07 User: mkoch Style Table: Langan.stb Layout: ANSIA-BP

Parsippany, NJ 07054

T: 973.560.4900 F: 973.560.4901 www.langan.com

NJ CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION No. 24GA27996400 ©

La ng an

LIMITS OF

WESTERN

FENCE

SECTION A-A

FACING NORTH

VERTICAL SCALE: 1" = 6'

HORIZONTAL SCALE: N.T.S.

LIMITS OF

EASTERN

FENCE

Filename: \\langan.com\data\PAR\data2\100683201\Project Data\CAD\01\SheetFiles\100689101-BF201-0101.dwg Date: 12/12/2017 Time: 11:29 User: vrhodes Style Table: Langan.stb Layout: ARCHC-BL

1. THIS PROFILE REPRESENTS A GENERALIZED SOIL CROSS SECTION

INTERPRETED FROM WIDELY-SPACED BORINGS. SOIL AND GROUNDWATER

MAY VARY IN TYPE, LOCATION, ELEVATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL AND

ENGINEERING PROPERTIES BETWEEN POINTS OF EXPLORATION. VARIATIONS

IN SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOULD BE EXPECTED BETWEEN BORINGS.

2. BORINGS LB-1 AND LB-2 WERE PERFORMED ON 28 AND 29 NOVEMBER 2017

BY CRAIG GEOTECHNICAL DRILLING CO., INC. UNDER THE FULL-TIME

SPECIAL INSPECTION OF LANGAN.

3. ALL BORING LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE.

4. ALL ELEVATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE AND ARE IN REFERENCE TO THE

NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 (NGVD29) UNLESS

OTHERWISE NOTED.

5. SEE APPENDIX C FOR BORING LOGS.

NOTES:

NJ CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION No. 24GA27996400

300 Kimball Drive, Parsippany, NJ 07054 T: 973.560.4900 F: 973.560.4901 www.langan.com

La ng an

APPENDIX A

Historic Aerial Photographs

5127117.9

= 500'

APPENDIX B

Historic Topographic Maps

Historical Topo Map page

SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the following map sheet(s).

EW

SW S SE

NW N NE

0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5

Teterboro Airport - Communications Tower 152 Union Avenue Moonachie, NJ 07074 Langan Engineering

TP, Paterson, 1888, 15-minute

5127117 4 19

SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the following map sheet(s).

EW

SW S SE

NW N NE

0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5

Teterboro Airport - Communications Tower 152 Union Avenue Moonachie, NJ 07074 Langan Engineering

TP, Paterson, 1898, 15-minute

5127117 4 18

SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the following map sheet(s).

EW

SW S SE

NW N NE

0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5

Teterboro Airport - Communications Tower 152 Union Avenue Moonachie, NJ 07074 Langan Engineering

TP, Paterson, 1900, 15-minute

5127117 4 17

SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the following map sheet(s).

EW

SW S SE

NW N NE

0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5

Teterboro Airport - Communications Tower 152 Union Avenue Moonachie, NJ 07074 Langan Engineering

TP, Paterson, 1903, 15-minute

5127117 4 16

SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the following map sheet(s).

EW

SW S SE

NW N NE

0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5

Teterboro Airport - Communications Tower 152 Union Avenue Moonachie, NJ 07074 Langan Engineering

TP, Passaic, 1905, 30-minute

5127117 4 15

SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the following map sheet(s).

EW

SW S SE

NW N NE

0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5

Teterboro Airport - Communications Tower 152 Union Avenue Moonachie, NJ 07074 Langan Engineering

TP, Weehawken, 1935, 7.5-minute

5127117 4 14

SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the following map sheet(s).

EW

SW S SE

NW N NE

0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5

Teterboro Airport - Communications Tower 152 Union Avenue Moonachie, NJ 07074 Langan Engineering

TP, Weehawken, 1940, 7.5-minute

5127117 4 13

SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the following map sheet(s).

EW

SW S SE

NW N NE

0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5

Teterboro Airport - Communications Tower 152 Union Avenue Moonachie, NJ 07074 Langan Engineering

TP, Weehawken, 1943, 7.5-minute

5127117 4 12

SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the following map sheet(s).

EW

SW S SE

NW N NE

0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5

Teterboro Airport - Communications Tower 152 Union Avenue Moonachie, NJ 07074 Langan Engineering

TP, Weehawken, 1947, 7.5-minute

5127117 4 11

SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the following map sheet(s).

EW

SW S SE

NW N NE

0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5

Teterboro Airport - Communications Tower 152 Union Avenue Moonachie, NJ 07074 Langan Engineering

TP, Weehawken, 1967, 7.5-minute

5127117 4 10

SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the following map sheet(s).

EW

SW S SE

NW N NE

0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5

Teterboro Airport - Communications Tower 152 Union Avenue Moonachie, NJ 07074 Langan Engineering

TP, Weehawken, 1981, 7.5-minute

5127117 4 9

SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the following map sheet(s).

EW

SW S SE

NW N NE

0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5

Teterboro Airport - Communications Tower 152 Union Avenue Moonachie, NJ 07074 Langan Engineering

TP, Weehawken, 1995, 7.5-minute

5127117 4 8

SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This report includes information from the following map sheet(s).

EW

SW S SE

NW N NE

0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5

Teterboro Airport - Communications Tower 152 Union Avenue Moonachie, NJ 07074 Langan Engineering

TP, Weehawken, 2014, 7.5-minute

5127117 4 7

APPENDIX C

Boring Logs

S -1

S -2

S -3

S -4

S -5

S -6

S -7

Dark brown Silty f-m SAND, trace fine gravel, trace silt (moist) [4 to 5 inches thick] [TOPSOIL] Brown f-c SAND, some silt, some cobbles, some f-c gravel, trace roots (moist) [FILL]

Brown f-c SAND, some f-c gravel, trace silt (moist)

[FILL]

Brown to gray f-m SAND, some silt, some f-c gravel, trace silt, trace roots (moist) [FILL]

Brown f-m SAND, some silt, trace clay lenses (wet)

Reddish-brown Silty f-m SAND (wet)

Brownish-gray CLAY, some silt, trace fine sand (wet)

Brownish-gray CLAY, some silt, some f-m sand (wet)

G R

AB

G

R

AB

G R

AB

S

S S

S S

S S

S

WOH

+9.2

+3.5

-0.5

Started Drilling at 11/28/2017

11:30 AM

Hand augered to 6 ft.

Platey shale pieces up to 2 ft long from 1 ft to 4 ft below grade.

Faint mottling 5 ft to 6 ft

Drill to 6.0ft.

S-4 at 6ft

S-5 at 8ft.

Drive casing to 8.0ft

Drill to 10.0ft.

S-6 at 10ft qu = 0.5 tsf (PP)

Drive casing to 13.0ft

Drill to 15.0ft. Return Water brownish-gray.

S-7 at 15ft qu = 0.21 tsf (PP)

N um be r

P en et r.

re si st B

L/ 6i n

Ty pe

R ec ov

(in

Number of Samples

Drop (in)

11/28/17

60 ft

Field Engineer

Date Started

Casing Diameter (in)

CME75 Truck Mounted Drill Rig

24 HR.

Safety

Core

Weight (lbs)

Water Level (ft.)

Completion

Sampler Hammer

Date Finished

Undisturbed

Automatic Drilling Foreman

6 -

11/29/17 Drilling Company

3-7/8in Tricone Roller Bit Casing Depth (ft)

Keith Parent

49 ft

First

Disturbed

2-inch-diameter split spoon

Craig Geotechnical Drilling Co., Inc.

30140

Drilling Equipment Rock Depth

Casing Hammer

Victoria Rhodes

Completion Depth

Size and Type of Bit

Drop (in)

Sampler

Weight (lbs)

4 ID steel

Location

Project No.

Approx. el 9.5 (NGVD 29) of 3

M A

TE

R

IA

L

S Y

M B

O L

Sample Description Depth Scale

Elevation and Datum

Project

N-Value (Blows/ft)

10 20 30 40

LB-1

Communication Towers

Teterboro Airport

100683201

Log of Boring Sheet 1

\\L A

N G

AN

.C

O M

\D

AT

A \P

AR

\D

AT

A

2\

1\

P R

O

JE

C T

D A

TA

D

IS

C

IP

LI

N

E \G

EO

TE

C H

N

IC

AL

\G

IN

TL

O G

S \1

_E N

TE

R

P R

IS

E.

G P

J

2/

/2

:1

0:

A M

. R ep or t:

Lo g

- L

A N

G

AN

C or in g

(m in

Elev.

(ft) +9.5

(Drilling Fluid, Depth of Casing, Fluid Loss, Drilling Resistance, etc.)

Remarks

Sample Data

-8

S -9

S -1

S

-1

S -1

Brownish-gray CLAY, some silt (wet)

Brownish-gray CLAY, some silt (wet)

Brownish-gray CLAY, some silt (wet)

Brownish-gray CLAY, some silt (wet)

Reddish-brown SILT, some clay, some coarse gravel, trace fine sand (wet) [DECOMPOSED ROCK]

S S

S S

S S

S S

S S

WOH

-30.5

Drill to 20.0ft. Brownish-gray Return Water.

S-8 at 20ft qu = 0.5 tsf (PP)

Drill to 25.0ft. Brownish-gray Return Water.

S-9 at 25ft qu = 0.5 tsf (PP)

Drill to 30.0ft. Gray Return Water.

S-10 at 30ft qu = 0.6 tsf (PP)

Stopped Drilling for the day at 11/28/2017 2:15 PM Started Drilling for the day at

11/29/2017 7:58 AM

Drill to 35.0ft.

S-11 at 35ft

Drill to 40.0ft. Brownish-gray Return Water.

S-12 at 40ft Rod Chattering at 41 ft.

Rod Chattering at 44 ft.

N um be r

P en et r.

re si st B

L/ 6i n

Ty pe

R ec ov

(in

Location

Project No.

Approx. el 9.5 (NGVD 29) of 3

M A

TE

R

IA

L

S Y

M B

O L

Sample Description Depth Scale

Elevation and Datum

Project

N-Value (Blows/ft)

10 20 30 40

LB-1

Communication Towers

Teterboro Airport

100683201

Log of Boring Sheet 2

\\L A

N G

AN

.C

O M

\D

AT

A \P

AR

\D

AT

A

2\

1\

P R

O

JE

C T

D A

TA

D

IS

C

IP

LI

N

E \G

EO

TE

C H

N

IC

AL

\G

IN

TL

O G

S \1

_E N

TE

R

P R

IS

E.

G P

J

2/

/2

:1

0:

A M

. R ep or t:

Lo g

- L

A N

G

AN

C or in g

(m in

Elev.

(ft) -10.5

(Drilling Fluid, Depth of Casing, Fluid Loss, Drilling Resistance, etc.)

Remarks

C

-1 C

-2

Reddish-brown SILT, some clay, some fine sand, trace f-c gravel (wet) [DECOMPOSED ROCK]

Reddish-brown SHALE

Reddish-brown SHALE

End of Boring at 60 ft.

S S

N Q

N

Q

R

E C

=5 4'

'/6 0'

R

E C

=6 0'

'/6 0'

0%

100/5

R Q

D =3

9' '/6

0'

R Q

D =5

0' '/6

0'

5:16

5:02

4:19

4:36

4:32

4:36

5:07

4:46

5:48

8:18

-39.5

-50.5

Drill to 45.0ft. Reddish brown Return Water.

S-13 at 45ft

Slight Rod Chattering at 48 ft.

Smooth at 49 ft. Possible top of rock.

Drill to 50.0ft.

Began core run C-1 at 50ft at

9:25 AM.

Smooth coring with fluid return.

Finished core run C-1 at 55 ft at 10:00 AM.

Began core run C-2 at 55 ft at 10:02 AM.

Smooth coring with fluid return.

Finished core run C-2 at 60ft at 10:30 AM.

Bottom of boring at

11/29/2017 10:32 AM.

N um be r

P en et r.

re si st B

L/ 6i n

Ty pe

R ec ov

(in

Location

Project No.

Approx. el 9.5 (NGVD 29) of 3

M A

TE

R

IA

L

S Y

M B

O L

Sample Description Depth Scale

Elevation and Datum

Project

N-Value (Blows/ft)

10 20 30 40

LB-1

Communication Towers

Teterboro Airport

100683201

Log of Boring Sheet 3

\\L A

N G

AN

.C

O M

\D

AT

A \P

AR

\D

AT

A

2\

1\

P R

O

JE

C T

D A

TA

D

IS

C

IP

LI

N

E \G

EO

TE

C H

N

IC

AL

\G

IN

TL

O G

S \1

_E N

TE

R

P R

IS

E.

G P

J

2/

/2

:1

0:

A M

. R ep or t:

Lo g

- L

A N

G

AN

C or in g

(m in

Elev.

(ft) -35.5

(Drilling Fluid, Depth of Casing, Fluid Loss, Drilling Resistance, etc.)

Remarks

100/5

S -2

S -3

S -4

S -5

S -6

S -7

Dark brown f-m SAND, some silt, trace roots (moist) [3 to 4 inches thick] [TOPSOIL] Brown f-m SAND, some silt, trace f-c gravel, trace clay (moist) [FILL]

Brown f-m SAND, some silt, some asphalt, some f-c gravel, trace brick, trace roots (moist) [FILL]

Brown f-c SAND, some f-c gravel, some cobbles, trace silt with mottles (moist)

Grayish-brown Sandy SILT, trace clay (wet)

Gray CLAY, some silt, trace fine sand (wet)

Gray Silty CLAY, trace fine sand (wet)

Gray CLAY, some silt (wet)

G R

AB

G

R

AB

G R

AB

S

S S

S S

S S

S

+9.8

+6.0

+4.0

+2.0

Started Drilling at 11/28/2017

7:44 AM.

Hand augered to 6 ft.

Drill to 6.0ft. Clean out cobbles.

S-4 at 6ft

Drive casing to 8.0ft S-5 at 8ft.

qu = 1.5 tsf (PP)

Drill to 10.0ft. Return Water grayish-brown.

S-6 at 10ft qu = 4.0 tsf (PP)

Drill to 15.0ft. Return Water gray.

S-7 at 15ft qu = 1.8 tsf (PP)

N um be r

P en et r.

re si st B

L/ 6i n

Ty pe

R ec ov

(in

Number of Samples

Drop (in)

11/28/17

50 ft

Field Engineer

Date Started

Casing Diameter (in)

CME75 Truck Mounted Drill Rig

24 HR.

Safety

Core

Weight (lbs)

Water Level (ft.)

Completion

Sampler Hammer

Date Finished

Undisturbed

Automatic Drilling Foreman

6 -

11/28/17 Drilling Company

3-7/8in Tricone Roller Bit Casing Depth (ft)

Keith Parent

40 ft

First

Disturbed

2-inch-diameter split spoon

Craig Geotechnical Drilling Co., Inc.

30140

Drilling Equipment Rock Depth

Casing Hammer

Victoria Rhodes

Completion Depth

Size and Type of Bit

Drop (in)

Sampler

Weight (lbs)

4 ID steel

Location

Project No.

Approx. el 10 (NGVD 29) of 3

M A

TE

R

IA

L

S Y

M B

O L

Sample Description Depth Scale

Elevation and Datum

Project

N-Value (Blows/ft)

10 20 30 40

LB-2

Communication Towers

Teterboro Airport

100683201

Log of Boring Sheet 1

\\L A

N G

AN

.C

O M

\D

AT

A \P

AR

\D

AT

A

2\

1\

P R

O

JE

C T

D A

TA

D

IS

C

IP

LI

N

E \G

EO

TE

C H

N

IC

AL

\G

IN

TL

O G

S \1

_E N

TE

R

P R

IS

E.

G P

J

2/

/2

:1

0:

A M

. R ep or t:

Lo g

- L

A N

G

AN

C or in g

(m in

Elev.

(ft)

+10.0

(Drilling Fluid, Depth of Casing, Fluid Loss, Drilling Resistance, etc.)

Remarks

-8

S -9

S -1

C

-1

Brownish-gray CLAY, some silt, trace fine sand (wet)

Brownish-gray CLAY, some silt (wet)

Reddish-brown SILT, some f-c gravel, some clay, trace fine sand (wet) [DECOMPOSED ROCK]

Reddish brown SILT, some clay, trace f-c gravel, trace fine sand (wet) [DECOMPOSED ROCK]

Reddish-brown SHALE

S S

S S

S S

N Q

R

E C

=5 9'

'/6 0'

R

Q D

=5 5'

'/6 0'

1 50/3S-11SS

3:04

1:35

1:34

1:36

1:08

-20.0

-30.0

Drill to 20.0ft. Return Water gray.

S-8 at 20ft qu = 1.0 tsf (PP)

Drill to 25.0ft. Return Water gray.

S-9 at 25ft qu = 1.2 tsf (PP)

Rod Chattering at 29 ft.

Drill to 30.0ft. Return Water grayish brown.

S-10 at 30ft

Drill to 35.0ft. Return Water light reddish-brown. Loss of Water.

S-11 at 35ft Split spoon bouncing.

Drive casing to 36 ft.

Drill to 36.0ft

Drill to 40ft.

Began core run C-1 at 40ft at

10:00 AM.

Loss of water at 40.5ft.

N um be r

P en et r.

re si st B

L/ 6i n

Ty pe

R ec ov

(in

Location

Project No.

Approx. el 10 (NGVD 29) of 3

M A

TE

R

IA

L

S Y

M B

O L

Sample Description Depth Scale

Elevation and Datum

Project

N-Value (Blows/ft)

10 20 30 40

LB-2

Communication Towers

Teterboro Airport

100683201

Log of Boring Sheet 2

\\L A

N G

AN

.C

O M

\D

AT

A \P

AR

\D

AT

A

2\

1\

P R

O

JE

C T

D A

TA

D

IS

C

IP

LI

N

E \G

EO

TE

C H

N

IC

AL

\G

IN

TL

O G

S \1

_E N

TE

R

P R

IS

E.

G P

J

2/

/2

:1

0:

A M

. R ep or t:

Lo g

- L

A N

G

AN

C or in g

(m in

Elev.

(ft) -10.0

(Drilling Fluid, Depth of Casing, Fluid Loss, Drilling Resistance, etc.)

Remarks

50/3

C -2

Reddish-brown SHALE

End of Boring at 50 ft.

N Q

R E

C =4

5' '/6

0'

R Q

D =4

1.

5'

'/6 0'

1:14

2:26

1:07

1:42

2:51 -40.0

Finished core run C-1 at 45ft at 10:10 AM.

Began core run C-2 at 45ft at

10:20 AM.

Rods jamming at 48 ft.

Finished core run C-2 at 50ft

10:30 AM.

Taped hole to 49ft. Bottom 1ft of core not recovered.

Bottom of boring at

11/28/2017 10:48 AM.

N um be r

P en et r.

re si st B

L/ 6i n

Ty pe

R ec ov

(in

Location

Project No.

Approx. el 10 (NGVD 29) of 3

M A

TE

R

IA

L

S Y

M B

O L

Sample Description Depth Scale

Elevation and Datum

Project

N-Value (Blows/ft)

10 20 30 40

LB-2

Communication Towers

Teterboro Airport

100683201

Log of Boring Sheet 3

\\L A

N G

AN

.C

O M

\D

AT

A \P

AR

\D

AT

A

2\

1\

P R

O

JE

C T

D A

TA

D

IS

C

IP

LI

N

E \G

EO

TE

C H

N

IC

AL

\G

IN

TL

O G

S \1

_E N

TE

R

P R

IS

E.

G P

J

2/

/2

:1

0:

A M

. R ep or t:

Lo g

- L

A N

G

AN

C or in g

(m in

Elev.

(ft) -35.0

(Drilling Fluid, Depth of Casing, Fluid Loss, Drilling Resistance, etc.)

Remarks

APPENDIX D

Laboratory Test Results

SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS

TestAmerica Laboratories, Inc. - 460-146231-1

Sample ID B-1/2 S-2 B-1/2 S-2

Lab Sample Number 460-146231-1 460-146231-1

Sampling Date 11/28/2017 00:00:00 11/28/2017 00:00:00

Matrix Solid Solid

Dilution Factor

Units

Low Soluble Low

Wet Chemistry

Chloride - mg/L 8.1 NR Oxidation Reduction Potential -millivolts NR 492

Percent Moisture - % 12.5 NR Resistivity - Mohm-cm NR 0.00670 Sulfate - mg/L 25.8 B ^ NR Sulfide - mg/Kg 3.9 U H NR Corrosivity - SU 7.1 HF NR Percent Solids - % 87.5 NR

^ : Instrument related QC is outside acceptance limits.

B : Compound was found in the blank and sample.

H : Sample was prepped or analyzed beyond the specified holding time HF : Field parameter with a holding time of 15 minutes. Test performed by laboratory at client's request.

U : Indicates the analyte was analyzed for but not detected.

CORROSION POTENTIAL EVALUATION

Project: Teterboro Airport Boring: LB-1/2

Location: Teterboro, New Jersey Sample: S-2

Job Number: 100683201 Depth: 2 - 4'

CORROSION POTENTIAL FOR GRAY & DUCTILE CAST IRON-PIPE

Ref: ANSI/AWWA C105-72 (R77) 1 megaohm-cm= 1,000,000 ohm-cm

Soil Characterisitics Laboratory Test Results Points

Resistivity (ohm-cm) 6700 0 10 if <700; 8 if 700 to 1000; 5 if 1000 to 1200; 2 if 1200 to 1500; 1 if 1500 to 2000; 0 if >2000 pH 7.1 3 5 if 0 to 2; 3 if 2 to 4; 0 if 4 to 6.5; 0 if 6.5 to 7.5 (3 if sulfides are present and if low or neg Redox results); 0 if 7.5 to 8.5; 3 if >8.5

Redox Potential (mV) 492 0 0 if >+100; 3.5 if +50 to +100; 4 if 0 to +50; 5 if negative

Sulfides (Positive, Trace, Negative) 3.9 3.5 3.5 if Positive; 2 if Trace; 0 if ND

Moisture (Poor, Fair, or Good) fair 1 2 if Poor, continuously wet; 1 if Fair, generally moist; 0 if Good, generally dry

Total Points: 7.5 TO GRAY OR DUCTILE CAST-IRON PIPE total points > 10 corrrosive total points < 10 non-corrrosive

CONCRETE REQUIREMENTS

Ref 1: ACI 318, Part 3, Chapter 4 Ref 2: NAVFAC DM 7.2 pg 146

25.8 0.00258 Negligible to convert mg/kg (ppm) to weight ratio divide by 1,000,000 and to obtain % ratio multiply by 100

Ref 1: ACI 318, Part 3, Chapter 4 Ref 2: NAVFAC DM 7.2 pg 146

0.00 to 0.10, Negligible and Type I Cement

0.10 to 0.20, Moderate, and Type II Cement (typical for seawater)

0.20 to 2.00, Severe, and Type V Cement over 2.00, Very Severe, and Type V Cement with pozzolan

CRITICAL VALUES FOR GROUND AGGRESSIVENESS

Ref: FHWA DP-68-IR, as summarized in Fang (1991)

Test Laboratory Test Results

Reference

Standard Critical?

Resistivity 6700 ASTM G57 NO pH 7.1 ASTM G51 NO

Sulfate 25.8 CalDOT 407 NO

Chlorides 8.1…