Soledad_Canyon_Pavement_Report_20180731.pdf

Pavement Design Report Soledad Canyon Road

Dona Ana County, New Mexico

July 31, 2018

Submitted To:

HDR Engineering, Inc.

1401 E. Trent Ave., Suite 101 Spokane, WA 99202

By:

Shannon & Wilson, Inc.

1321 Bannock Street, Suite 200 Denver, Colorado 80204

23-1-01616-001

1321 BANNOCK STREET, SUITE 200

DENVER, COLORADO 80204-4037

303-825-3800 www.shannonwilson.com 23-1-01616-001

July 31, 2018

HDR Engineering 1401 E. Trent Ave., Suite 101 Spokane, Washington 99202

Attn: Mr. Scott Marshall, PE

RE: PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT, SOLEDAD CANYON ROAD, DONA ANA

COUNTY, NEW MEXICO

We are pleased to submit our geotechnical report for the above-referenced project. The enclosed report summarizes conditions encountered in a subsurface exploration program, laboratory tests, and geotechnical engineering recommendations for the proposed Soledad Canyon Road Project.

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions or require further information, please contact me at 303-825-3800.

Sincerely, SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

Gregory R. Fischer, PhD, PE Senior Vice President

JCG:GRF/jcg

Encl: Pavement Design Report

23-1-01616-001-L1/wp/ksm

01616-001_R1/wp/lmr 23-1-01616-001 i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION

3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING

3.1 Field Investigation

3.2 Geotechnical Laboratory Testing

4.0 REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

4.1 Regional Geology

4.2 Subsurface Conditions

4.3 Groundwater

5.0 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Traffic Loading

5.2 Subgrade Soils

5.3 Pulverized Full Depth Reclamation (FDR)

5.4 Recommended Pavement Sections

6.0 Construction and Materials Specifications

6.1 Site Preparation

6.2 Earthwork

6.2.1 Excavation Potential

6.2.2 Proof Roll and Subgrade Preparation

6.2.3 Fill

6.3 Paving Materials

6.4 Corrosion

7.0 CLOSURE

8.0 REFERENCE

TABLE

1 Recommended Materials for Pavements

TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)

ii

FIGURES

1 Site Vicinity Map 2 Site and Exploration Plan (6 sheets)

APPENDICES

A Subsurface Explorations B Laboratory Test Results C Exploration Photographs D Pavement Design Calculations E Important Information About Your Geotechnical Report

PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT

SOLEDAD CANYON ROAD

DONA ANA COUNTY, NEW MEXICO

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report summarizes the results of our subsurface exploration program and presents pavement design recommendations and construction considerations for the proposed Soledad Canyon Road Project (the Project) in Dona Ana County, New Mexico. Our services were completed in general accordance with our Task Order Agreement No. 001/1000100014407 with HDR Engineering, Inc. (HDR) dated March 1, 2017. Our conclusions and recommendations in this report are based on:

The limitations of our approved scope, schedule, and budget described in our contract;

Our understanding of the Project and information provided by HDR;

Subsurface conditions observed in the borings at the time our explorations were completed; and

The results of testing performed on samples collected from the explorations.

The objective of our geotechnical studies was to provide recommendations and construction considerations, as presented herein, for the proposed roadway reconstruction. The authorized scope of services was based on this objective and this report should not be used for other purposes without Shannon & Wilson’s review. If a service is not specifically indicated in this report, do not assume that it was performed.

2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION

The Project is located east of Las Cruces, New Mexico (Figure 1). Soledad Canyon Road alignment generally traverses residential neighborhoods with the existing road consisting of two travel lanes (a single lane in each direction). Based on preliminary discussions with HDR, we understand the Project will include replacement of the existing Soledad Canyon Road pavement with new hot asphalt concrete pavement (HACP). We understand that the proposed improvements to the alignment include widening the existing roadway to accommodate two 5-foot bike lanes, and an 8-foot wide multi-use path. The proposed improvement section of Soledad Canyon Road extends south from the intersection with Dripping Springs Road for approximately 0.65 mile, continues east for 4.0 miles, and terminates at the cul-de-sac near the

Soledad Canyon Day Use Parking Area. The alignment generally slopes upward in the eastern direction with multiple dry drainage arroyos crossing the roadway.

Currently, Soledad Canyon Road is paved with HACP with the eastern-most 0.45 mile surfaced with aggregate. In general, the condition of the roadway is in poor condition throughout the alignment. Transverse cracking, fatigue cracking, spalling shoulders, and exposed aggregate was observed throughout the alignment, along with periodic potholes exposing the subgrade. The arroyo crossings exhibited severe fatigue cracking along with large patches.

3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING

3.1 Field Investigation

Shannon & Wilson conducted a field exploration program on April 27, 2017 to explore subsurface conditions along the proposed project alignment. The subsurface exploration program consisted of drilling and sampling twelve borings (designated SW-01 through SW-12) along Soledad Canyon Road, as shown in Figure 2. The borings were advanced to about 10 feet below the ground surface. Borings SW-10, SW-11, and SW-12 encountered auger refusal at depths of 7, 1 and 3 feet below the ground surface, respectively.

Appendix A presents a discussion of the drilling and sampling procedures used to complete the borings. Appendix A also presents the individual exploration logs and an explanation of the symbols and terminology used. Photographs of the drilling locations and pavement sections are included as Appendix C.

3.2 Geotechnical Laboratory Testing

Geotechnical laboratory tests were completed on selected samples retrieved from the borings to estimate index and engineering properties. Index tests included natural water content, grain size analysis, and Atterberg limits. Engineering properties tests included corrosion, moisture density relationship (Proctor test) and Hveen Stabilometer (R-value). Laboratory test results and a discussion of the testing procedures are included in Appendix B. The natural water content, fines content, and Atterberg limits are also shown on the individual boring logs included in Appendix A.

4.0 REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

4.1 Regional Geology

The project area is on the western flank of the Organ Mountains, which are characterized by pyroclastic flows and lavas that erupted 33.0 to 33.7 million years (m.y.) ago. The flows dip approximately 35 to 45 degrees to the west and are locally up to 2 miles thick (Seager, 1981). Rock exposures along the eastern third of the project area belong to the Tuff of Squaw Mountain Unit of the Soledad Rhyolite. These rocks are characterized by dark reddish-brown to medium-gray, densely welded pumiceous ash-flow tuff up to 4,600 feet thick (Seager and others, 1987). Overlying, and geographically west of the Tuff of Squaw Mountain Unit are the West- Side Lavas, which include up to 1,000 feet of dark brown to medium gray porphyritic dacite, rhyolite and trachyte flows (Seager and others, 1987).

The western approximately two-thirds of the project area are underlain by mixed piedmont slope, alluvial fan, and arroyo-channel deposits. This thick sequence of sediments shed from the Organ Mountains have accumulated since Pliocene time (approximately 5 m.y. ago) to present day. The deposits include unconsolidated to moderately cemented gravelly loam to boulder gravel with localized horizons of soil carbonate. The deposits are described as grading laterally, with coarser materials proximal to the mountain range and finer materials extending westward away from the mountains (Seager and others, 1987).

4.2 Subsurface Conditions

HACP pavement was measured at each of the boring locations, except for boring SW-12, and ranged from about 1 to 2.5 inches in thickness. An aggregate road surfacing was encountered at boring SW-12 and was 2 inches thick. A summary table of the existing asphalt thickness at each boring location is provided in Appendix A. Beneath the asphalt pavement and gravel surfacing, the borings generally encountered medium dense to very dense silty to clayey gravel with sand to the maximum depth of each exploration (AASHTO soil classification A-1-a, A-2-4, and A-2-6).

Borings SW-10, SW-11, and SW-12 encountered practical auger refusal on rhyolitic bedrock.

Our observations are specific to the locations, depths, and dates noted on the exploration logs in Appendix A and may not be applicable to all areas of the site. While the subsurface conditions were relatively consistent, there is no amount of explorations or laboratory testing that can precisely predict the characteristics, quality, or distribution of subsurface conditions at every location throughout the site. Variations in the subsurface conditions may occur between and below the borings. Also, the passage of time or intervening causes (natural and manmade) may result in changes to the conditions of the site and subsurface conditions.

Our explorations did not encounter deleterious materials or any other unusual soil characteristics.

4.3 Groundwater

Groundwater was not encountered in any of our borings, however, fluctuations of groundwater levels at the site are likely and will depend on many factors, including seasonal variations, local precipitation, and flood events. Groundwater is not anticipated to affect the design or construction of the project.

5.0 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

Performance of a pavement system depends on the pavement material and thicknesses, subgrade strength, traffic loads and repetitions, design life, and subgrade drainage characteristics. The following sections discuss each of these aspects as they relate to the Soledad Canyon Road pavement rehabilitation.

Our pavement design and results are based on the design procedures presented in the 1993 AASHTO Guide for the Design of Pavement Structures (AGDPS), with guidance from the U.S.

Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Federal Lands Highway Project Development and Design Manual (PDDM), dated March 2008. Pavement design inputs and calculations are presented in Appendix D.

5.1 Traffic Loading

The traffic study for Soledad Canyon Road was provided to us by HDR and consisted of a nine-day-average of traffic counts for two locations along the alignment. The traffic study indicates that the 2017 average daily traffic (ADT) volume of 540 and 1,718 vehicles per day. Based on discussions with HDR, one pavement section will be utilized for the entirety of the alignment.

Therefore, we used the higher ADT values for our analysis. The traffic study also provided the following FHWA vehicle class distributions observed over the study period:

Class 1: 1.9 percent motorcycles;

Class 2: 75.3 percent passenger cars;

Class 3: 17.3 percent pickup trucks or vans;

Class 4: 0.4 percent buses;

Class 5: 4.8 percent 2-axle single-unit trucks;

Class 6: 0.2 percent 3-axle single-unit trucks; and Class 9: 0.1 percent single trailer trucks.

Using the mean value of the flexible pavement equivalency factors provided in the PDDM for each vehicle class, a 20-year design life as indicated for a 3R project, and assuming a 1 percent compounded growth rate, we estimated an 18 kip equivalent single axle loading (ESAL) of approximately 282,000 for each traffic lane. Our estimated ESAL calculations are provided in Appendix D.

5.2 Subgrade Soils

As discussed in Section 4.0, the subsurface explorations completed along the 5.1 miles of roadway generally consisted of silty and clayey gravel with sand (A-1-a, A-2-4, and A-2-6). To estimate the strength of the subgrade materials, we collected bulk samples from the borings and three R-value tests were completed. Laboratory index testing indicated the bulk samples consisted of AASHTO classification A-1-a and A-2-4. R-value test results ranged from 58 to 83, with an average value of about 72. For the design subgrade strength, we used an AASHTO correlation between R-value and resilient modulus. We then used the mean resilient modulus value of approximately 27,200 pounds per square inch (psi) in accordance with PDDM design procedures.

5.3 Pulverized Full Depth Reclamation (FDR)

We understand that a pulverized full depth reclamation (FDR) is being considered for rehabilitation of the existing roadway pavement sections. The process involves pulverizing and mixing the existing asphalt with the underlying layers to create a uniformly blended, homogeneous material that will be incorporated into the proposed pavement section as a base course. The benefit of the FDR process is that it allows the existing material to be recycled in place and eliminates the expense to export the material offsite. The requirements in the PDDM indicate a minimum R-value of 70 percent for the pulverized FDR. In our opinion, a blended material of pulverized asphalt and existing native soil will likely exceed this requirement. For our analysis, we assumed a resilient modulus of 32,000 psi for the pulverized FDR base course.

The PDDM also indicates that pulverized FDR can be utilized in roadway widening projects.

The FDR process can accommodate approximately up to 2 feet of roadway widening with the pulverization process. Areas where the roadway is anticipated to be widened greater than 2 feet will require import fill or stockpiling and placing excess pulverized based course from other areas of the project.

5.4 Recommended Pavement Sections

Using the PDDM procedures and the parameters outlined in Appendix D, we recommend the following pavement sections for Soledad Canyon Road:

3.5 inches of HACP overlying 4 inches of Pulverized FDR

3.5 inches of HACP overlying 4 inches of UTBC

In areas where FDR is not being utilized, it may be feasible to eliminate the UTBC section because of the high strength of the existing subgrade.

We understand that Continuously Reinforced Concrete Pavement (CRCP) sections may be constructed at the arroyo crossings throughout the project. Based on guidance from the Continuously Reinforced Concrete Pavement Manual (USDOT, 2016) and AGDPS (1993) we recommend a 7inch thick CRCP section over 4 inches of UTBC. We recommend between 0.6 percent and 0.7 percent steel of the cross-sectional area in the longitudinal direction and 0.1 percent steel of the cross-sectional area in the transverse direction. Considering the potential for water infiltrating the CRCP cracks at the low water crossing we recommend epoxy coated deformed bars. This reinforcement assumes subgrade support beneath the slab. Additional reinforcement could be considered by the design team (by treating the slab as a structural element instead of a pavement) if scour and partial loss of subgrade support is possible.

6.0 CONSTRUCTION AND MATERIALS SPECIFICATIONS

The applicability of the design parameters in Section 5.0 is contingent on good construction practice. Poor construction techniques may alter conditions from those upon which our recommendations are based, and therefore result in poor performance. Our analyses assumed that this project is constructed according to FP-14 U.S. Customary Units (USDOT and FHWA, 2014) construction standards. The following sections provide additional construction considerations for this project.

6.1 Site Preparation

In widening areas, we recommend that brush and other vegetation be cleared and roots and stumps be removed from all areas to be graded in accordance with FP-14 Sections 201 and 203.

All surface and subsurface structures associated with current development of the site, including pavements (if a FDR process is not selected), utility poles, fence poles, underground utilities and other deleterious material, should also be removed. Any existing surficial topsoil and soil containing visible organics should be stripped and removed from all areas. The depth of this removal is anticipated to vary, but generally be less than 3 inches for estimating purposes.

6.2 Earthwork

6.2.1 Excavation Potential

Borings SW-11 and SW-12 encountered relatively shallow bedrock, at depths of 1 and 3 feet below the ground surface, respectively. We understand that excavation of shallow bedrock layers will not be required, however, if necessary excavation in bedrock could be difficult, necessitating the use of hydraulic excavators and dozers with ripper attachments. If deeper excavations are required in the rhyolitic bedrock, we anticipate blasting may be required.

6.2.2 Proof Roll and Subgrade Preparation

In areas where FDR is not performed, the subgrade should be prepared in accordance with FP-14 Section 204.11.

6.2.3 Fill

Granular fill should consist of onsite soils that are free of organics, contaminants, debris, rock fragments larger than 3 inches and should contain less than 20 percent fines. It should be noted that as the amount of fines increases (portion of soil particles passing a U.S. Standard No.

200 sieve), soil becomes more sensitive to small changes in moisture content, and adequate compaction becomes more difficult to achieve. We anticipate that on-site soil may need to be screened to remove over-sized particles in order to meet these criteria. Import fill should consist of Backfill Material (FP 704.03) with a minimum R-value of 72.

All fill should be compacted to a dense/firm and unyielding condition in accordance with FP-14 Section 204.11. Fill materials should be moisture conditioned to at or above optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95-percent maximum density, as determined by AASHTO T180 or T99 as presented in FP-14 Section 204.

6.3 Paving Materials

The following table summarizes our recommendations for pavement material selection. All specification sections reference the FP-14 U.S. Customary Units, (USDOT and FHWA, 2014).

TABLE 1

RECOMMENDED MATERIALS FOR PAVEMENTS

Material Specification Additional Requirements/Comments

UTBC Section 301 • Use Gradation C, D, or E

Pulverized FDR Section 304 • Minimum R-value of 70

• Compact according to Section 204.11

HACP Section 403

• Aggregate must meet requirements for ESAL values less than 300,000

• ¾-inch Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size

Rigid Pavement Section 501

Reinforcing Steel Section 554 and 709

• Specify Grade 60 epoxy coated deformed bars (Section 709.1(b)

Regarding the asphalt binder for HACP, the PDDM requires SuperPave performance grade (PG) binders. The PG binders are chosen based on local weather and anticipated traffic level conditions. Using the PDDM guidelines, a minimum of 95 percent reliability is required in terms of binder performance. Using a binder within an appropriate temperature and traffic loading range allows for a higher strength and better durability, and improved cohesion will translate into improved long term performance. To determine the recommended SuperPave Binder we used the LTPP Bind Version 3.1Beta. We recommend using a PG 70-22 or PG 70-28 binder for the HACP.

6.4 Corrosion

To assist in estimating the corrosion potential at the site, samples were tested for pH, resistivity, water soluble sulfates, and chlorides. The results are presented in Table B-1 in Appendix B.

The resistivity measured in the samples was 990 and 5,500 ohm-cm. Based on correlations developed by Roberge (2012), these values suggest a moderately corrosive to extremely corrosive subsurface.

The concentration of water soluble sulfates measured in the samples was 0.270 to 0.020 percent by weight. Based on classifications as defined by ACI-318-14 (ACI, 2014), these test results suggest a moderate to severe degree of sulfate attack on concrete exposed to site soils (exposure class S1 and S2).

7.0 CLOSURE

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of HDR and Central Federal Lands Highway Division for the purpose of providing pavement recommendations for the Soledad Canyon Road project. This pavement design report should not be used without our approval if any of the following occurs:

Assumptions stated in this report have changed.

Project details change or new information becomes available such that our analyses and recommendations may be affected.

A substantial period of time has passed since the date of this report.

If any of these occur, we should be retained to review the applicability of our analyses and recommendations.

Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, the analyses, conclusions and recommendations presented in this report were prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional geotechnical and geological principles and practice in this area at the time this report was prepared. We make no other warranty, either express or implied.

8.0 REFERENCE

American Concrete Institute (ACI), 2014, Building code requirements for structural concrete and commentary, Farmington Hills, Mich., ACI 318-14.

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 1993, AASHTO guide for design of pavement structures: Washington, D.C., AASHTO, 2 v.

Federal Highway Administration Central Federal Lands Highway Division (FHWA-CFLHD), 2016, Federal Lands access program scoping report: Bureau of Land Management NM FLAP Soledad.

Roberge, P.R., 2012, Handbook of corrosion engineering (2nd ed.): N. Y., McGraw-Hill, 1078 p.

Seager, W.R., 1981, Geology of Organ Mountains and southern San Andres Mountains, New Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of Mines & Mineral Resources, Memoir 36, 97 p.

Seager, W.R., Hawley, J.R., Kottlowski, F.E., and Kelley, S.A., 1987, Geology of east half of Las Cruces and northeast El Paso 1 x 2 sheet, New Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and

Mineral Resources, Geologic Map 57, scale 1:125,000.

U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 2008, Federal Lands Highway project development and design manual (PDDM): U.S.

Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration. Available from:

http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/manuals/pddm/.

U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), Federal Highway Administration, 2014, Federal standard specifications for construction of roads and bridges on Federal Highway projects, FP-14 English Units: U.S. Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration, available from http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/pse/specs/.

U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), Federal Highway Administration, 2016, Continuously Reinforced Concrete Pavement Manual, Guidelines for Design, Construction, Maintenance, and Rehabilitation, August, 2016. FHWA-HI-16-026. Available at:

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pavement/concrete/pubs/hif16026.pdf http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/manuals/pddm/ https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pavement/concrete/pubs/hif16026.pdf

SH 3

SH 1

SH 4

S H

S

H

SH 2

Map adapted from aerial imagery provided by

Google Earth Pro, reproduced by permission granted by Google Earth ™ Mapping Service.

NOTE

F i l e n a m e

I E

F

D

E N s

S o l e d a d

C a n y o n

P a v e m e n t

D e s D r a f t i n g F i g

S i t e

V i c i n i t y d w g

D a t e

L o g i n j c g

MT

1 2

Approximate Scale in Miles SITE VICINITY MAP

23-1-01616-001July 2018

Soledad Canyon Road

Dona Ana County, New Mexico

FIG. 1

D ri p p in g

S p ri n g s R o a d

Las

Cruces

SANTA

FE

Project

Location

Las Cruces

Albuquerque

Soledad Canyon Road

Figure 2 Index Map and Reference Sheet Number

LEGEND

SH 1

SW-01

S 0° 20' 52" W

T a l a v e r

R a d

H e m b r i l l

P s a d

D r i p p i n p r i n a d

W i n d

D a n c e r

T r a i l

Soledad Canyon Road

F i l e n a m e

I E

F

D

E N s

S o l e d a d

C a n y o n

P a v e m e n t

D e s D r a f t i n g F i g

S i t e

E x p l o r a t i o n d t e g i n j c g

23-1-01616-001

Soledad Canyon Road

Dona Ana County, New Mexico

July 2018

SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN

Sheet 1 of 6

FIG. 2

200 400

Scale in Feet

SW-01

Boring Designation and Approximate Location

LEGEND

1. Map adapted from aerial imagery provided by Google Earth Pro, reproduced with permission granted by Google Earth Mapping

Service.

NOTES

MT

TM

M a t c h l i n e

S h e e t

SW-02

125+00

130+00

Soledad Canyon Court

SW-03

S o l e d a d

C a n y o n

R o a d

A c h e n b a c h

C a n y o n

R o a d

B l u e s t o n e

T r a i l

Soledad Canyon Road

F i l e n a m e

I E

F

D

E N s

S o l e d a d

C a n y o n

P a v e m e n t

D e s D r a f t i n g F i g

S i t e

E x p l o r a t i o n d t e g i n j c g

SW-02

MT

23-1-01616-001

Soledad Canyon Road

Dona Ana County, New Mexico

July 2018

SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN

Sheet 2 of 6

FIG. 2

200 400

Scale in Feet

Boring Designation and Approximate Location

LEGEND

1. Map adapted from aerial imagery provided by Google Earth Pro, reproduced with permission granted by Google Earth Mapping

Service.

NOTES

TM

Matchline Sheet 1

M a t c h l i n e

S h e e

SW-04

SW-05

A l m a

R o a d

C a t a m o u i v e

C h a p a r r i

C u r t

C a m i n o

L e o n

C o u r t

C h i p p e

T a i l

Soledad Canyon Road

SW-06

N 89° 48' 50 " E

M o d o c

R o a d

C u e v a

M i n e

R o a d

C h i p p e w a

T r a i l

A l a m o

M i n e

T r a i l

L o s t

P a d r e

M i n e

R o a d

Soledad Canyon Road

F i l e n a m e

I E

F

D

E N s

S o l e d a d

C a n y o n

P a v e m e n t

D e s D r a f t i n g F i g

S i t e

E x p l o r a t i o n d t e g i n j c g

SW-04

M a t c h l i n e

S h e e t

M a t c h l i n e

B e l o w

M a t c h l i n e

A b o v e

23-1-01616-001

Soledad Canyon Road

Dona Ana County, New Mexico

July 2018

SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN

Sheet 3 of 6

FIG. 2

200 400

Scale in Feet

Boring Designation and Approximate Location

LEGEND

1. Map adapted from aerial imagery provided by Google Earth Pro, reproduced with permission granted by Google Earth Mapping

Service.

NOTES

TM

M a t c h l i n e

S h e e

SW-07

N 89° 48' 50 " E

M i n n i e c

R o a d

A p e x

M i n e

R o a d

R o c k h o u e a d

H e

M n e

R o a d

S i l v e r

K i n g

R o a d

L o s t

P a d

M n e

R o a d

Soledad Canyon Road

SW-08

S 89° 50' 55" E

S 89° 50' 55" E

S i l v e r

K i n g

R o a d

A n a z a s i

T r a i l

R u b y

M i n e

R o a d

C r i p p e k a d

D i a m o n d

M i n e

R o a d

Soledad Canyon Road

F i l e n a m e

I E

F

D

E N s

S o l e d a d

C a n y o n

P a v e m e n t

D e s D r a f t i n g F i g

S i t e

E x p l o r a t i o n d t e g i n j c g

SW-07

M a t c h l i n e

S h e e t

M a t c h l i n e

B e l o w

M a t c h l i n e

A b o v e

23-1-01616-001

Soledad Canyon Road

Dona Ana County, New Mexico

July 2018

SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN

Sheet 4 of 6

FIG. 2

200 400

Scale in Feet

Boring Designation and Approximate Location

LEGEND

1. Map adapted from aerial imagery provided by Google Earth Pro, reproduced with permission granted by Google Earth Mapping

Service.

NOTES

TM

M a t c h l i n e

S h e e

SW-09

S 89° 52' 02" E

R u b y

M i n e

R o a d

B l a c k

Q u a r t z

R o a d

C o p p e r

B a r

R o a d

V e n t a n a

V i e w

R o a d

R u b y

H o r a d

T i e r

B a n c a d

Soledad Canyon Road

SW-10

N 7 8° 2

7' 4 1" E

N

E

V e r g r a d o

L a d e n y a d

Soledad Canyon Road

F i l e n a m e

I E

F

D

E N s

S o l e d a d

C a n y o n

P a v e m e n t

D e s D r a f t i n g F i g

S i t e

E x p l o r a t i o n d t e g i n j c g

SW-09

M a t c h l i n e

B e l o w

23-1-01616-001

Soledad Canyon Road

Dona Ana County, New Mexico

July 2018

SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN

Sheet 5 of 6

FIG. 2

200 400

Scale in Feet

Boring Designation and Approximate Location

LEGEND

1. Map adapted from aerial imagery provided by Google Earth Pro, reproduced with permission granted by Google Earth Mapping

Service.

NOTES

TM

M a t c h l i n e

S h e e t

M a t c h l i

A b o v e

M a t c h l i h e

F l e n a m e

I E

F

D

E N s

S o l e d a d

C a n y o n

P a v e m e n t

D e s D r a f t i n g F i g

S i t e

E x p l o r a t i o n d t e g i n j c g

SW-11

M a t c h l i n e

B e l o w

23-1-01616-001

Soledad Canyon Road

Dona Ana County, New Mexico

July 2018

SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN

Sheet 6 of 6

FIG. 2

200 400

Scale in Feet

Boring Designation and Approximate Location

LEGEND

1. Map adapted from aerial imagery provided by Google Earth Pro, reproduced with permission granted by Google Earth Mapping

Service.

NOTES

TM

M a t c h l i n e

S h e e t

M a t c h l i b o v

APPENDIX A

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS

01616-001_R1_AA/wp/lmr 23-1-01616-001 A-i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

A.1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... A-1

A.2 EXPLORATIONS .......................................................................................................... A-1 A.2.1 Soil Classification System ................................................................................ A-1 A.2.2 Standard Penetration Test (SPT) ...................................................................... A-2 A.2.3 Bulk Samples .................................................................................................... A-2

A-1 Summary of Existing Asphalt Thickness

A-1 Soil Classification and Log Key (3 sheets) A-2 Rock Log Key (2 Sheets) A-3 Log of Boring SW-01 A-4 Log of Boring SW-02 A-5 Log of Boring SW-03 A-6 Log of Boring SW-04 A-7 Log of Boring SW-05 A-8 Log of Boring SW-06 A-9 Log of Boring SW-07 A-10 Log of Boring SW-08 A-11 Log of Boring SW-09 A-12 Log of Boring SW-10 A-13 Log of Boring SW-11 A-14 Log of Boring SW-12

A-1

A.1 INTRODUCTION

Shannon & Wilson’s field exploration program was conducted on April 27, 2017 and consisted of drilling twelve borings designated SW-01 through SW-12 at the locations shown on Figure 2.

Photographs of boring locations are provided in Appendix C. The methods used to conduct the field exploration program are described below.

A.2 EXPLORATIONS

The borings were coordinated (including subcontractor coordination, street occupancy permits, utility locates, and traffic control) and observed by Shannon & Wilson. Individual boring logs are presented in Figures A-3 through A-14. These exploration logs represent our interpretation of the contents of the field logs and select results of laboratory testing. The borings were drilled by Tierra Drilling, Inc. of El Paso, Texas (under subcontract to Shannon & Wilson) using a truck-mounted CME 75 drill rig.

The borings were advanced through the existing pavement to an approximate depth of 10 feet, except for borings that encountered auger refusal (borings SW-10 through SW-12). All borings were advanced using 8-inch diameter hollow-stem-auger drilling techniques. On completion of drilling, the borings were backfilled with cuttings and repairs to the existing pavement were made with cold-patch asphalt.

A.2.1 Soil Classification System

During exploration, our representative collected samples and prepared field logs of the explorations. Soil classification for this project was based on ASTM International (ASTM) Designation: D 2487, Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System), and ASTM Designation: D 2488, Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure). The Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) is summarized in Figure A-1. In addition, samples were classified based on AASHTO Designation M-145, Standard Specification for Classification of Soils and Soil-Aggregate Mixtures for Highway Construction Purposes.

A-2

A.2.2 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)

Disturbed samples were obtained in general accordance with the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) (ASTM Designation: D 1586). The SPT consists of driving a 2-inch outside diameter (O.D.), 1.375-inch inside diameter (I.D.) split-spoon sampler a distance of 18 inches with a 140-pound hammer free-falling a distance of 30 inches. An automatic hammer system was used to advance the samplers. During sampling, the Shannon & Wilson field representative recorded the number of blows for each 6-inch increment of penetration and summed the blow counts for the last two 6-inch increments. This sum is recorded as the penetration resistance number, or N-value. If high penetration resistance prevented driving the total length of the sampler, the Shannon & Wilson field representative recorded the partial penetration depth and blow count. The N-values provide a means for evaluating the relative density or compactness of cohesionless (granular) soils and consistency or stiffness of cohesive (fine-grained) soils (see Figure A-1). The N-values are shown in the individual boring logs. Representative portions of the split-spoon sample obtained in conjunction with the SPT were placed in a screw-top plastic jar and transported to our laboratory.

A.2.3 Bulk Samples

Bulk soil samples were obtained by collecting the drill cuttings from the upper 5 feet of select borings. Approximately 20 to 30 pounds of cuttings were placed in a plastic bag and transported to our laboratory for further analysis and testing.

SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

01616-001_TA1/wp/lmr Sheet 1 of 1 23-1-01616-001

Boring Station Pavement Thickness

(in)

SW-01 104+60 2.0

SW-02 129+00 2.0

SW-03 138+80 2.5

SW-04 165+80 2.0

SW-05 184+00 2.0

SW-06 210+25 2.5

SW-07 236+25 1.0

SW-08 261+10 1.0

SW-09 287+50 1.0

SW-10 314+50 2.0

SW-11 339+50 1.0

SW-12 365+25

2 inches of gravel surface course

TABLE A-1

SUMMARY OF EXISTING ASPHALT THICKNESS

23-1-01616-001July 2018

Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants

Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch

Damp but no visible water

Visible free water, from below water table

FIG. A-1

Shannon & Wilson, Inc. (S&W), uses a soil identification system modified from the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Elements of the USCS and other definitions are provided on this and the following pages. Soil descriptions are based on visual-manual procedures (ASTM D2488) and laboratory testing procedures (ASTM D2487), if performed.

STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (SPT)

SPECIFICATIONS

Hammer:

Sampler:

N-Value:

Dry

Moist

Wet

MOISTURE CONTENT TERMS

Modifying (Secondary)

Precedes major constituent

Major

Minor Follows major constituent

1All percentages are by weight of total specimen passing a 3-inch sieve.

2The order of terms is: Modifying Major with Minor.

3Determined based on behavior.

4Determined based on which constituent comprises a larger percentage.

5Whichever is the lesser constituent.

COARSE-GRAINED

SOILS

(less than 50% fines)1

NOTE: Penetration resistances (N-values) shown on boring logs are as recorded in the field and have not been corrected for hammer efficiency, overburden, or other factors.

PARTICLE SIZE DEFINITIONS

RELATIVE DENSITY / CONSISTENCY

Sand or Gravel 4

30% or more coarse-grained:

Sandy or Gravelly 4

More than 12% fine-grained:

Silty or Clayey 3

15% to 30% coarse-grained:

with Sand or with Gravel 4

30% or more total coarse-grained and lesser coarse-grained constituent is 15% or more:

with Sand or with Gravel 5

Very soft Soft Medium stiff Stiff Very stiff Hard

Very loose Loose Medium dense Dense Very dense

RELATIVE

DENSITY

FINE-GRAINED SOILS

(50% or more fines)1

COHESIVE SOILS

< 2 2 - 4 4 - 8

8 - 15 15 - 30

> 30

1Gravel, sand, and fines estimated by mass. Other constituents, such as organics, cobbles, and boulders, estimated by volume.

2Reprinted, with permission, from ASTM D2488 - 09a Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure), copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428.

A copy of the complete standard may be obtained from ASTM International, www.astm.org.

140 pounds with a 30-inch free fall.

Rope on 6- to 10-inch-diam. cathead 2-1/4 rope turns, > 100 rpm

NOTE: If automatic hammers are used, blow counts shown on boring logs should be adjusted to account for efficiency of hammer.

10 to 30 inches long Shoe I.D. = 1.375 inches Barrel I.D. = 1.5 inches Barrel O.D. = 2 inches

Sum blow counts for second and third 6-inch increments.

Refusal: 50 blows for 6 inches or less; 10 blows for 0 inches.

RELATIVE

CONSISTENCY

N, SPT,

BLOWS/FT.

5% to 12% fine-grained:

with Silt or with Clay 3

15% or more of a second coarse-grained constituent:

with Sand or with Gravel 5

< 5%

5 to 10%

15 to 25%

30 to 45%

50 to 100%

Surface Cement Seal

Asphalt or Cap

Slough

Inclinometer or Non-perforated Casing

Vibrating Wire Piezometer

N, SPT,

BLOWS/FT.

< 4 4 - 10

10 - 30 30 - 50

> 50

DESCRIPTION

< #200 (0.075 mm = 0.003 in.)

#200 to #40 (0.075 to 0.4 mm; 0.003 to 0.02 in.)

#40 to #10 (0.4 to 2 mm; 0.02 to 0.08 in.)

#10 to #4 (2 to 4.75 mm; 0.08 to 0.187 in.)

SIEVE NUMBER AND/OR APPROXIMATE SIZE

#4 to 3/4 in. (4.75 to 19 mm; 0.187 to 0.75 in.)

3/4 to 3 in. (19 to 76 mm)

3 to 12 in. (76 to 305 mm)

> 12 in. (305 mm)

Fine Coarse

Fine Medium Coarse

BOULDERS

COBBLES

GRAVEL

FINES

SAND

Sheet 1 of 3

S&W INORGANIC SOIL CONSTITUENT DEFINITIONS

CONSTITUENT2

COHESIONLESS SOILS

Silt, Lean Clay, Elastic Silt, or

Fat Clay 3

PERCENTAGES TERMS 1, 2

Trace

Few

Little

Some

Mostly

WELL AND BACKFILL SYMBOLS

Bentonite Cement Grout

Bentonite Grout

Bentonite Chips

Silica Sand

Perforated or Screened Casing

SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

SOIL DESCRIPTION

AND LOG KEY

_B O

R

IN

G _C

LA

S

S

-1 -0

-0

S O

LE

D

A D

C A

N Y

O N

.G P

J S

W N

E W

.G D

T

/2 8/

Dona Ana County, New Mexico

July 2018

GC

SC

Inorganic

Organic

(more than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve)

MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP/GRAPHIC

SYMBOL

CH

OH

ML

CL

TYPICAL IDENTIFICATIONS

Gravel

Sand

Silty Sand; Silty Sand with Gravel

Clayey Sand; Clayey Sand with Gravel

Clayey Gravel; Clayey Gravel with Sand

Sheet 2 of 3

Gravels

Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor

SW

(more than 12% fines)

Silts and Clays

Silts and Clays

(more than 50% retained on No.

200 sieve)

(50% or more of coarse fraction passes the No. 4 sieve)

(liquid limit less than 50)

(liquid limit 50 or more)

Organic

Inorganic

FINE-GRAINED

SOILS

SM

Sands

Silty or Clayey Gravel

Silt; Silt with Sand or Gravel; Sandy or Gravelly Silt

Organic Silt or Clay; Organic Silt or Clay with Sand or Gravel; Sandy or Gravelly Organic Silt or Clay

HIGHLY-

ORGANIC

SOILS

COARSE-

GRAINED

SOILS

GW

Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants

SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

(less than 5% fines)

PT

(more than 12% fines)

MH

SP

GP

GM

Silty or Clayey Sand

Silty Gravel; Silty Gravel with Sand

(50% or more passes the No.

200 sieve)

SOIL DESCRIPTION

AND LOG KEY

Elastic Silt; Elastic Silt with Sand or Gravel; Sandy or Gravelly Elastic Silt

Fat Clay; Fat Clay with Sand or Gravel;

Sandy or Gravelly Fat Clay

Organic Silt or Clay; Organic Silt or Clay with Sand or Gravel; Sandy or Gravelly Organic Silt or Clay

Poorly Graded Sand; Poorly Graded Sand with Gravel

Well-Graded Sand; Well-Graded Sand with Gravel

Well-Graded Gravel; Well-Graded Gravel with Sand

Poorly Graded Gravel; Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand

Lean Clay; Lean Clay with Sand or Gravel; Sandy or Gravelly Lean Clay

NOTES

1. Dual symbols (symbols separated by a hyphen, i.e., SP-SM, Sand with Silt) are used for soils with between 5% and 12% fines or when the liquid limit and plasticity index values plot in the CL-ML area of the plasticity chart. Graphics shown on the logs for these soil types are a combination of the two graphic symbols (e.g., SP and SM).

2. Borderline symbols (symbols separated by a slash, i.e., CL/ML, Lean Clay to Silt; SP-SM/SM, Sand with Silt to Silty Sand) indicate that the soil properties are close to the defining boundary between two groups.

Peat or other highly organic soils (see

ASTM D4427)

FIG. A-1

OL

(less than 5% fines)

_B O

R

IN

G _C

LA

S

S

-1 -0

-0

S O

LE

D

A D

C A

N Y

O N

.G P

J S

W N

E W

.G D

T

/2 8/

NOTE: No. 4 size = 4.75 mm = 0.187 in.; No. 200 size = 0.075 mm = 0.003 in.

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (USCS)

(Modified From USACE Tech Memo 3-357, ASTM D2487, and ASTM D2488)

Dona Ana County, New Mexico

July 2018

Angular

Subangular

Subrounded

Rounded

Flat

Elongated

Sharp edges and unpolished planar surfaces.

Similar to angular, but with rounded edges.

Nearly planar sides with well-rounded edges.

Smoothly curved sides with no edges.

Width/thickness ratio > 3.

Length/width ratio > 3.

Narrow range of grain sizes present or, within the range of grain sizes present, one or more sizes are missing (Gap Graded). Meets criteria in ASTM D2487, if tested.

Full range and even distribution of grain sizes present. Meets criteria in ASTM D2487, if tested.

Crumbles or breaks with handling or slight finger pressure Crumbles or breaks with considerable finger pressure Will not crumble or break with finger pressure

Weak

Moderate

Strong

VISUAL-MANUAL CRITERIA

A 1/8-in. thread cannot be rolled at any water content.

A thread can barely be rolled and a lump cannot be formed when drier than the plastic limit.

A thread is easy to roll and not much time is required to reach the plastic limit. The thread cannot be rerolled after reaching the plastic limit. A lump crumbles when drier than the plastic limit.

It take considerable time rolling and kneading to reach the plastic limit. A thread can be rerolled several times after reaching the plastic limit. A lump can be formed without crumbling when drier than the plastic limit.

SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants Sheet 3 of 3

Interbedded

Laminated

Fissured

Slickensided

Blocky

Lensed

Homogeneous

Alternating layers of varying material or color with layers at least 1/4-inch thick; singular: bed.

Alternating layers of varying material or color with layers less than 1/4-inch thick; singular:

lamination.

Breaks along definite planes or fractures with little resistance.

Fracture planes appear polished or glossy;

sometimes striated.

Cohesive soil that can be broken down into small angular lumps that resist further breakdown.

Inclusion of small pockets of different soils, such as small lenses of sand scattered through a mass of clay.

Same color and appearance throughout.

At Time of Drilling Diameter Elevation Feet Iron Oxide Gallons Horizontal Hollow Stem Auger Inside Diameter Inches Pounds Magnesium Oxide Millimeter Manganese Oxide Not Applicable or Not Available Nonplastic Outside Diameter Observation Well Pounds per Cubic Foot Photo-Ionization Detector Pressuremeter Test Parts per Million Pounds per Square Inch Polyvinyl Chloride Rotations per Minute Standard Penetration Test Unified Soil Classification System Unconfined Compressive Strength Vibrating Wire Piezometer Vertical Weight of Hammer Weight of Rods Weight

ATD

Diam.

Elev.

ft.

FeO gal.

Horiz.

HSA

I.D.

in.

lbs.

MgO mm

MnO

NA

NP

O.D.

OW

pcf

PID

PMT

ppm psi

PVC

rpm

SPT

USCS

qu

VWP

Vert.

WOH

WOR

Wt.

STRUCTURE TERMS1

SOIL DESCRIPTION

AND LOG KEY

1Reprinted, with permission, from ASTM D2488 - 09a Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure), copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428. A copy of the complete standard may be obtained from ASTM International, www.astm.org.

2Adapted, with permission, from ASTM D2488 - 09a Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure), copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428. A copy of the complete standard may be obtained from ASTM International, www.astm.org.

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Poorly Graded

Well-Graded

Irregular patches of different colors.

Soil disturbance or mixing by plants or animals.

Nonsorted sediment; sand and gravel in silt and/or clay matrix.

Material brought to surface by drilling.

Material that caved from sides of borehole.

Disturbed texture, mix of strengths.

Mottled

Bioturbated

Diamict

Cuttings

Slough

Sheared

DESCRIPTION

Nonplastic

Low

Medium

High

ADDITIONAL TERMS

PLASTICITY2

CEMENTATION TERMS1

GRADATION TERMS

APPROX.

PLASITICTY

INDEX

RANGE

< 4

4 to 10

10 to 20

> 20

PARTICLE ANGULARITY AND SHAPE TERMS1

FIG. A-1

_B O

R

IN

G _C

LA

S

S

-1 -0

-0

S O

LE

D

A D

C A

N Y

O N

.G P

J S

W N

E W

.G D

T

/2 8/

ROCK CLASSIFICATION

AND LOG KEY

SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

TERM

APPROX. UCS

(psi x 1000)

Very Low

Low

Moderate

Medium High

High

Very High

<0.7

0.7 to 4

4 to 7

7 to 15

15 to 36

>36

COEFFICIENT

14 to 20

10 to 14

6 to 10

2 to 6

0 to 2

VERY ROUGH: Near vertical edges evident

ROUGH: Smooth ridges, surface abrasion

SLIGHTLY ROUGH: Asperities on surface can be felt

SMOOTH: Appears and feels smooth

SLICKENSIDED: Visible polishing, striated surface

JOINT ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENT (JRC)

STRENGTH

DESCRIPTION

Very Wide

Wide

Moderately Close

Close

Very Close

>10 ft.

3 to 10 ft.

1 to 3 ft.

2 in. to 1 ft.

<2 in.

DISCONTINUITY DATA

SPACING

TERM SPACING

Very Tight

Tight

Partly Open

Open

Moderately Wide

Wide

Very Wide

Extremely Wide

Cavernous

<0.1mm

0.1 to 0.25mm

0.25 to 0.5mm

0.5 to 2.5mm

2.5 to 10mm

10mm to 1cm

1 to 10cm

10 to 100cm

>1m

APERTURE WIDTH

TERM SPACING

TERM

Fresh

Slightly

Moderately

Highly

Completely

No evidence of alteration

Slight discoloration on surface

Discoloring evident;

Alteration penetrating well below rock surface

Entire rock mass discolored

Rock reduced to a soil with relict rock texture

WEATHERING OR ALTERATION

DESCRIPTION

FRACTURE - Collective term for any natural break excluding shears, shear zones, and faults

JOINT (JT) - Planar break with little or no displacement

FOLIATION JOINT (FJ) or BEDDING JOINT (BJ) - Joint along foliation or bedding

INCIPIENT JOINT (IJ) or INCIPIENT FRACTURE (IF) -

Joint or fracture not evident until wetted and dried;

breaks along existing surface

RANDOM FRACTURE (RF) - Natural, very irregular fracture that does not belong to a set

BEDDING PLANE SEPARATION or PARTING - A separation along bedding after extraction from stress relief or slaking

FRACTURE ZONE (FZ) - Planar zone of broken rock without gouge

MECHANICAL BREAK (MB) - Breaks due to drilling or handling; drilling break (DB), hammer break (HB)

SHEAR (SH) - Surface of differential movement evident by presence of slickensides, striations, or polishing

SHEAR ZONE (SZ) - Zone of gouge and rock fragments bounded by planar shear surfaces

FAULT (FT) - Shear zone of significant extent;

differentiation from shear zone may be site-specific

DISCONTINUITY TERMS

F i l e n a m e

I E

F

N s l e d a d

C a n y o n v e m e n t

D e s D e l i v e r a b l e s A p p e n d i x o g s R o c k

L

K y s d t e g i n j c g

Sheet 1 of 2

FIG. A-2

July 2018 23-1-01616-001

ROCK CLASSIFICATION SYMBOLS

BEDROCK TYPE ROCK NAME

Clastic

Sedimentary

Rocks

Breccia

Conglomerate

Sandstone

Siltstone

Claystone

Shale

Coal

Limestone

Dolomite

Coral

Gypsum

Halite

Calcite

Tuff

Rhyolite

Dacite

Andesite

Basalt

Granite

Grano-diorite

Diorite

Gabbro

Marble

Quartzite

Slate

Phyllite

Schist

Gneiss

GRAPHIC

SYMBOL

Carbonate

Sedimentary

Rocks

Evaporite

Rocks

Extrusive

Igneous

Rocks

Intrusive

Igneous

Rocks

Metamorphic

Rocks

F i l e n a m e

I E

F

N s l e d a d

C a n y o n v e m e n t

D e s D e l i v e r a b l e s A p p e n d i x o g s R o c k

L

K y s d t e g i n j c g

SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

Sheet 2 of 2

FIG. A-2

ROCK CLASSIFICATION

AND LOG KEY

July 2018 23-1-01616-001

2 inches of asphalt.

Medium dense to very dense, red-brown, Clayey Gravel with Sand (GC); dry.

[A-2-6]

BOTTOM OF BORING

COMPLETED ON 4/27/2017

S -1

S -2

S -3

G ro un dw at er

N ot

E nc ou nt er ed

D ur in g

D ril lin g.

0.2

10.5

SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

10.5 ft.

REV 3

FIG. A-3

S am pl es

8 in.

NW

Automatic

S ym bo l

Refer to the report text for a proper understanding of the subsurface materials and drilling methods. The stratification lines indicated below represent the approximate boundaries between material types, and the transition may be gradual.

SOIL DESCRIPTION

NOTES

1. Refer to Figure A-1 and A-2 for explanation of symbols, codes, abbreviations and definitions.

2. The discussion in the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of the nature of the subsurface materials.

3. Groundwater level, if indicated above, is for the date specified and may vary.

4. USCS designation is based on visual-manual classification and selected lab testing.

Soledad Canyon Road Dona Ana County, New Mexico

0 60

Total Depth:

Top Elevation:

Vert. Datum:

Horiz. Datum:

20 40

Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants

23-1-01616-001

Hollow-Stem Auger Tierra Drilling CME 75 Truck Drilled in south-bound lane.

LEGEND

Drilling Method:

Drilling Company:

Drill Rig Equipment:

Other Comments:

LOG OF BORING SW-01

July 2018

Sample Not Recovered

Hole Diam.:

Rod Type.:

Hammer Type:

G ro un d

W at er

D ep th , f t.

Standard Penetration Test

D ep th , f t.

Latitude:

Longitude:

Station:

Offset:

20 40

~ 32.30159° ~ -106.66587°

M A

S T

E R

_L O

G _E

_P O

C K

E T

P E

N _L

A T

LO

N G

3-

1-

-0

S

O

LE

D A

D C

A N

Y O

N .G

P J

/2

8/

PENETRATION RESISTANCE

Hammer Wt. & Drop: 140 lbs / 30 inches

(blows/foot)

Plastic Limit

(<0.075mm)

Liquid Limit Natural Water Content

% Fines % Water Content

Medium dense to dense, red-brown, Poorly Graded Gravel with Silty, Clay and Sand (GP-GC); dry.

[A-1-a]

BOTTOM OF BORING

COMPLETED ON 4/27/2017

S -1

G -1

S -2

S -3

G ro un dw at er

N ot

E nc ou nt er ed

D ur in g

D ril lin g.

0.2

10.5

SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

10.5 ft.

REV 3

FIG. A-4

S am pl es

8 in.

NW

Automatic

S ym bo l

Refer to the report text for a proper understanding of the subsurface materials and drilling methods. The stratification lines indicated below represent the approximate boundaries between material types, and the transition may be gradual.

SOIL DESCRIPTION

NOTES

1. Refer to Figure A-1 and A-2 for explanation of symbols, codes, abbreviations and definitions.

2. The discussion in the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of the nature of the subsurface materials.

3. Groundwater level, if indicated above, is for the date specified and may vary.

4. USCS designation is based on visual-manual classification and selected lab testing.

Soledad Canyon Road Dona Ana County, New Mexico

0 60

Total Depth:

Top Elevation:

Vert. Datum:

Horiz. Datum:

20 40

Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants

23-1-01616-001

Hollow-Stem Auger Tierra Drilling CME 75 Truck Drilled in north-bound lane.

LEGEND

Drilling Method:

Drilling Company:

Drill Rig Equipment:

Other Comments:

LOG OF BORING SW-02

July 2018

Sample Not Recovered

Hole Diam.:

Rod Type.:

Hammer Type:

G ro un d

W at er

D ep th , f t.

Standard Penetration Test

Grab Sample

D ep th , f t.

Latitude:

Longitude:

Station:

Offset:

20 40

~ 32.2949° ~ -106.66584°

M A

S T

E R

_L O

G _E

_P O

C K

E T

P E

N _L

A T

LO

N G

3-

1-

-0

S

O

LE

D A

D C

A N

Y O

N .G

P J

/2

8/

PENETRATION RESISTANCE

Hammer Wt. & Drop: 140 lbs / 30 inches

(blows/foot)

Plastic Limit

(<0.075mm)

Liquid Limit Natural Water Content

% Fines

2.5 inches of asphalt.

Clayey Gravel with Sand (GC); dry.

[A-2-6]

- 6 inch silty sand lens at 5 feet.

BOTTOM OF BORING

COMPLETED ON 4/27/2017

S -1

S -2

S -3

G ro un dw at er

N ot

E nc ou nt er ed

D ur in g

D ril lin g.

0.2

10.5

SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

10.5 ft.

REV 3

FIG. A-5

S am pl es

8 in.

NW

Automatic

S ym bo l

Refer to the report text for a proper understanding of the subsurface materials and drilling methods. The stratification lines indicated below represent the approximate boundaries between material types, and the transition may be gradual.

SOIL DESCRIPTION

NOTES

1. Refer to Figure A-1 and A-2 for explanation of symbols, codes, abbreviations and definitions.

2. The discussion in the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of the nature of the subsurface materials.

3. Groundwater level, if indicated above, is for the date specified and may vary.

4. USCS designation is based on visual-manual classification and selected lab testing.

Soledad Canyon Road Dona Ana County, New Mexico

0 60

Total Depth:

Top…