GRS-IBS_Laguna_Atascosa_Geotech_Report.pdf

20151778/CSP14R03764 Page 1 of 1 October 17, 2014 © 2014 Kleinfelder.

4815 List Drive, Unit 115 Colorado Springs, CO 80919-3340 719.632.3593 fax 719.632.2648

October 17, 2014 Project No: 20151778

Phil Hahn, PE HDR Engineering, Inc.

1670 Broadway, Suite 3400 Denver, Colorado 80202

SUBJECT: Geotechnical Evaluation Report GRS-IBS Laguna Atascosa

TX FTFW LAAT 10(2)

Bayside Wildlife Drive and Buena Vista Road Laguna Atascosa Wildlife Refuge Los Fresnos, Texas

Dear Mr. Hahn:

The attached report presents the results of Kleinfelder’s Geotechnical Evaluation performed for the proposed GRS-IBS Laguna Atascosa project located in the vicinity of the intersection of Bayside Wildlife Drive and Buena Vista Road in Los Fresnos, Texas. Our work consisted of a subsurface exploration, laboratory testing, engineering evaluations, and preparation of this report. This report presents geotechnical data that will be used for design of the Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil-Integrated Bridge System (GRS-IBS) abutments that are being prepared by Kleinfelder under separate cover.

We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you, and look forward to future endeavors. If you have any questions regarding this report or need additional information or services, please contact our office at (719) 632-3593.

Respectfully submitted, KLEINFELDER CENTRAL, INC.

Texas Registered Engineering Firm F-5592

Nicholas J. Farny, GIT William J. Barreire, PE (Colorado) Staff Engineering Geologist Senior Geotechnical Engineer

Hai Ming Lim, PE (Oklahoma) Senior Professional

Enclosures

20151778/CSP14R007446 Page i of iii October 17, 2014 @ 2014 Kleinfelder

GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT

GRS-IBS LAGUNA ATASCOSA

TX FTFW LAAT 10(2)

BAYSIDE WILDLIFE DRIVE AND BUENA VISTA ROAD

LAGUNA ATASCOSA WILDLIFE REFUGE

LOS FRESNOS, TEXAS

OCTOBER 17, 2014

Copyright 2014 Kleinfelder

All Rights Reserved

ONLY THE CLIENT OR ITS DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES MAY USE THIS DOCUMENT AND ONLY FOR THE SPECIFIC

PROJECT FOR WHICH THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED.

20151778/CSP14R007446 Page ii of iii October 17, 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 GENERAL

1.2 PROJECT INFORMATION

1.3 SCOPE OF SERVICES

2 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING

2.1 FIELD EXPLORATION

2.2 LABORATORY TESTING

2.2.1 Geotechnical Laboratory Testing

2.2.2 Analytical Laboratory Testing

3 SITE CONDITIONS

3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION

3.2 GENERAL SITE GEOLOGY

3.2.1 Seismicity

3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

3.4 GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS

4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 GENERAL

4.2 SITE PREPARATION

4.2.1 Demolition

4.2.2 Stripping and Tree Removal

4.2.3 Undercutting

4.2.4 Scarification, Moisture Conditioning and Compaction

4.2.5 Proofrolling

4.2.6 Climatic Conditions

4.3 TEMPORARY EXCAVATIONS

4.3.1 General

4.3.2 Excavation Slopes

4.4 GRS-IBS STRUCTURE DESIGN

4.4.1 Overburden Material Properties

4.4.2 Construction Materials Criteria

4.4.2.1 Compaction Criteria

4.4.3 Bridge Design

4.4.4 Settlement

4.4.5 MSE Walls

4.5 PLAN/SPECIFICATION REVIEW

5 LIMITATIONS

20151778/CSP14R007446 Page iii of iii October 17, 2014

APPENDICES

A Exploration Location Plan and Vicinity Map B Logs of Exploratory Borings C Laboratory Test Results D Site Photos E Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report

20151778/CSP14R07446 Page 1 of 19 October 17, 2014

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 GENERAL

Kleinfelder has completed the authorized subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering evaluation for the proposed Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil - Integrated Bridge System (GRS-IBS)

Laguna Atascosa TX FTFP LAAT 10(2) project located in the vicinity of the intersection of

Bayside Wildlife Drive and Buena Vista Road in Los Fresnos, Texas. This report includes our recommendations related to the geotechnical aspects of the project design and construction.

Conclusions and recommendations presented in the report are based on the subsurface information encountered at the locations of our explorations and the provisions and requirements outlined in the LIMITATIONS section of this report. In addition, an article prepared by The Association of Engineering Firms Practicing in the Geosciences (ASFE), Important

Information about Your Geotechnical Engineering Report, has been included in APPENDIX E.

1.2 PROJECT INFORMATION

The Central Federals Lands Highway Division (CFLHD) of the Federal Highway Administration

(FHWA) has proposed the construction of Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil – Integrated Bridge

System (GRS-IBS) wildlife crossings in the vicinity of the intersection of Bayside Wildlife Drive and Buena Vista Road, in Laguna Atascosa National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) in Los Fresnos, Texas.

Buena Vista Road begins at the terminus of General Brant Road and proceeds northward for

1.81 miles through the Laguna Atascosa NWR. Buena Vista continues north out of the refuge, however the project area terminates at the refuge boundary. Bayside Wildlife Drive begins at the intersection with Buena Vista Road and runs southerly 13.24 miles in a loop back to the

Buena Vista Road. These routes are entirely in Federal land and are maintained by Laguna

Atascosa NWR.

Based on the information provided, we understand that the proposed project will include raising the road to facilitate the construction of two GRS-IBS structures to create grade separated crossings for the endangered Ocelot.

20151778/CSP14R07446 Page 2 of 19 October 17, 2014

1.3 SCOPE OF SERVICES

The scope of services performed for this project included the following:

• Gather information related to the project, including archived report/files, as-builts, scoping reports, and any other relevant information;

• Development of a final geotechnical field investigation plan;

• Subsurface field investigation preparation, coordination, and execution;

• Laboratory testing of soil samples;

• Preparation of interim geotechnical memorandums as necessary to discuss preliminary boring logs, laboratory testing, and proposed design of the GRS-IBS, and;

• Preparation of this report.

20151778/CSP14R07446 Page 3 of 19 October 17, 2014

2 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING

2.1 FIELD EXPLORATION

Our geotechnical exploration program was performed on July 31 and August 1, 2014 and included excavating the following test pits at the approximate locations indicated on Plate A-1, Exploration Location Plan and Vicinity Map. The test pits were excavated to the north and south of Bayside Wildlife Drive at the approximate locations of the proposed Ocelot crossings. The approximate latitude and longitude of each test pit is presented below as well as on the individual logs in Appendix B. The longitude and latitude of the test pits were obtained by Kleinfelder field personnel with a hand held GPS with an accuracy of approximately 10 feet.

Table 1. Summary of Field Exploration Program

Test Pit Designation

Approximate Latitude

(degrees N)

Approximate Longitude

(degrees W)

Approximate Depth of Boring Exploration

(feet, bgs1)

B-1 26.21600 -97.32825 7

B-2 26.21608 -97.32817 7

B-3 26.21658 -97.32622 8

B-4 26.21647 -97.32825 8

1) bgs = below ground surface

The test pits were excavated using a Bobcat backhoe. Subsurface soil samples were obtained during exploration by bulk methods, as well as Shelby tube samplers (2.0-inch outside diameter). Field shear strength readings of soil samples were taken with a pocket-type soil penetrometer. In addition to the soil samples, a dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) was used to perform penetration tests. The DCP drives a shaft ending in a pointed tip into soil driven with blows from a 17.6-pound hammer. The penetration rate can be used to estimate the California Bearing Ratio (CBR), shear strength of strata, and other material characteristics.

A Kleinfelder technician observed excavation operations, logged the soil encountered, retrieved samples, and recorded other pertinent information. Samples were placed in sealed containers, labeled, and returned to Kleinfelder’s laboratory for further examination and testing.

20151778/CSP14R07446 Page 4 of 19 October 17, 2014

Appendix B to this report includes the individual boring logs describing the subsurface conditions encountered within our borings at the site. The lines defining boundaries between soil types on the logs are based upon visual observations during excavation and interpolation between samples and are approximate. Therefore, the transition between soil types may be abrupt or may be gradual.

2.2 LABORATORY TESTING

2.2.1 Geotechnical Laboratory Testing

Geotechnical laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples to estimate their relative engineering properties. The following tests were performed in general accordance with recognized standards:

• Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure);

• Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes;

• Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregates Test;

• Natural Density and Moisture Content Test;

• One-Dimensional Consolidation Test;

• Unconfined Compressive Strength Test; and

• Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index Test.

2.2.2 Analytical Laboratory Testing

A summary of test methods and results of the analytical laboratory testing are presented in Appendix C of this report. Analytical testing included.

• pH test;

• Resistivity;

• Water Soluble Chlorides, and;

• Water Soluble Sulfates.

Results of the Analytical testing are summarized in Table 2.

20151778/CSP14R07446 Page 5 of 19 October 17, 2014

Table 2. Analytical Laboratory Testing Results

SAMPLE

LOCATION

SAMPLE

ID

PH

VALUE

RESISTIVITY

(OHM-CM)

WATER

SOLUBLE

SULFATES

(PPM)

WATER

SOLUBLE

CHLORIDE

(PPM)

B-2 0-5.5 8.95 373.6 2340 2120

B-3 0-5.5 8.73 354.4 2400 1680

Kleinfelder has completed laboratory testing to provide data regarding corrosivity of on-site soils. Our scope of services does not include corrosion engineering and, therefore, a detailed analysis of the corrosion test results is not included in this report. A qualified corrosion engineer should be retained to review the test results and design protective systems that may be required. Kleinfelder may be able to provide those services.

20151778/CSP14R07446 Page 6 of 19 October 17, 2014

3 SITE CONDITIONS

3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION

The general site location is northeast of Los Fresnos, Texas in the vicinity of the intersection of

Bayside Wildlife Drive and Buena Vista Road, as shown on Plate A-1, Exploration Location Plan and Vicinity Map. The existing Bayside Wildlife Drive alignment is a two-lane asphalt road with no shoulder that is generally aligned in a west – east direction. The road alignment in the project area is located on generally flat topography, with weed-covered and wooded areas to the north and south of the roadway. No cut section was observed within the existing road alignment.

3.2 GENERAL SITE GEOLOGY

The “Preliminary Geologic Map of southernmost Texas, United States, and parts of Tamaulipas and Nuevo Leon, Mexico; environmental health investigations in the United States-Mexico border region” by Page, V.R., VanSistine, D.P., and Turner, K.J. and from the U.S. Geologic Survey, 2005, were reviewed for information relating to surficial geology along the proposed alignment. A portion of the Texas Preliminary Geologic Map is presented below.

20151778/CSP14R07446 Page 7 of 19 October 17, 2014

Figure 1: Geologic Map

Based on the geologic mapping and the borings, surficial deposits in the project area include the Holocene-age muddy flood-plain Alluvium (Qam) and silty and sandy flood-plain alluvium (Qas).

Both of these units are comprised of sand, silt, and clay deposits. Samples collected during the subsurface investigation generally agree with the published geologic mapping.

Project Area

20151778/CSP14R07446 Page 8 of 19 October 17, 2014

3.2.1 Seismicity

Based on the geologic setting, subsurface soil conditions, and low seismic activity in this region, liquefaction is not expected to be a hazard at the site. The test pits were terminated at approximately 7 to 8 feet below ground surface and no drilled boring was performed.

Conservatively, the site is assumed to be Site Class E. The following seismic parameters are based on 2009 AASHTO Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design.

Table 3. Seismic Parameters

Parameter Value1)

Peak Seismic Ground Acceleration, (PGA) 0.009 g Peak Seismic Ground Acceleration Coefficient, (As) 0.014 g

Horizontal Response Spectral Acceleration at Period of 0.2 sec, (SDs) 0.033 g Horizontal Response Spectral Acceleration at Period of 1.0 sec, (SD1) 0.016 g

Mapped Spectral Acceleration at Period of 0.2 sec, (Ss) 0.021 g Mapped Spectral Acceleration at Period of 1.0 sec, (S1) 0.006 g

Site Factor at Zero-Period of Acceleration Spectrum, (Fpga) 1.6 Site Factor at Short-Period Range of Acceleration Spectrum, (Fa) 1.6 Site Factor at Long-Period Range of Acceleration Spectrum, (Fv) 2.4

1) Per the U.S. Geological Survey Web Page, 2014

3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

As determined by visual observation, subsurface exploration, and supplementary laboratory testing, the soils on this site consisted predominantly of native alluvial clay and sand. The subsurface conditions encountered at the project site our described in more detail below:

Alluvial Clay and Sand: Native alluvial deposits comprised of lean clay with various amounts of sand, fat clay, and clayey sand were encountered at the ground surface of all excavations to the termination of the excavation at depths of 7- to 8-feet below the ground surface. Field pocket penetrometer testing indicated the consistency of the native clay soil was generally firm to hard (2.5 to greater than 4.5 tsf). The native soils were generally dry to very moist.

20151778/CSP14R07446 Page 9 of 19 October 17, 2014

More detailed descriptions of subsurface conditions encountered at individual exploration locations are presented on the exploratory test pit logs included in Appendix B. Additional lab test results are presented in Appendix C.

3.4 GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS

All excavations remained dry at the time of excavation and no water seepage was observed at completion of excavation operations. Fluctuations of groundwater levels can occur due to seasonal variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff, and other factors not evident at the time the excavations were performed. The possibility of groundwater level fluctuations should be considered when developing the design and construction plans for the project. Piezometers were not installed at the site during this subsurface exploration. Long-term monitoring with piezometers generally provides a more representative reflection of the potential range of groundwater conditions.

20151778/CSP14R07446 Page 10 of 19 October 17, 2014

4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 GENERAL

The recommendations submitted herein are based, in part, upon data obtained from our subsurface exploration for the proposed GRS-IBS wildlife crossings. It is our understanding that the existing roadway will be raised in the vicinity of the proposed crossings. The recommendations provided in this report apply to the GRS-IBS only. Evaluation of the roadway approaches is beyond the scope of this report.

The nature and extent of subsurface variations that may exist at the proposed project site will not become evident until construction. If variations appear evident, then the recommendations presented in this report should be evaluated. In the event that any changes in the nature, design, location or elevations of the proposed GRS-IBS wildlife crossings are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report will not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed and our recommendations modified in writing.

4.2 SITE PREPARATION

4.2.1 Demolition

We anticipate that the existing pavement structure will be demolished for the construction of the proposed GRS-IBS wildlife crossings. Areas disturbed during demolition of the pavement should be thoroughly evaluated by the geotechnical engineer prior to paving. Unless provisions have been made for proper re-use of existing materials through the design of this project, debris from the demolition of these areas should be removed from the site.

4.2.2 Stripping and Tree Removal

The areas outside the existing roadway are covered with trees and vegetation. Site preparation, as necessary, in these areas should commence with stripping of all vegetation and topsoil from the construction areas. Stripping depths required will likely vary and should be adjusted to remove all vegetation, root systems, and organic soils. Stripping operations should be monitored to observe that all unsuitable materials have been removed. Care should be exercised to separate these materials to avoid incorporation of the organic matter in Retained

20151778/CSP14R07446 Page 11 of 19 October 17, 2014

Fill and Foundation Soil Fill (see Section 4.4.2). Construction estimates should include additional undercutting in existing ditches and drainage ways to remove soft, surficial material.

Any required tree removal should also be accomplished at this time. Care should be taken to thoroughly remove all root systems. Materials disturbed during removal of stumps should be undercut and replaced with Foundation Soil Fill in accordance with the recommendations presented in Section 4.4.2.

4.2.3 Undercutting

Based on our subsurface exploration, we do not anticipate additional undercut below the GRS-

IBS foundation. However, based on the geology in the area, it is not uncommon to find sporadic areas of soft, wet and unstable soils. If encountered, undercutting may be required in these areas. In these events, the proper stabilization options can only be determined when the conditions are observed, but may include deeper Foundation Soil Fill sections (potentially in combination with geo-grid placement) or chemical stabilization options. Kleinfelder should be notified to observe soft and wet conditions and provide stabilization recommendations, if encountered.

4.2.4 Scarification, Moisture Conditioning and Compaction

Following stripping and any required undercutting, it is recommended that all areas to receive fill or to be used for support of the bridge structure be moisture conditioned and compacted to a depth of 6 inches. Section 4.4.2 of this report provides the recommended degree of compaction and the moisture content at the time of compaction.

4.2.5 Proofrolling

Following moisture conditioning, it is recommended that the exposed grade in fill and undercut areas be proofrolled. Proofrolling evaluates the stability of the prepared subgrade prior to the placement of structural fill and aids in identifying soft or disturbed areas. Unsuitable areas identified by the proofrolling operation should be undercut and replaced with suitable Foundation Soil Fill. Proofrolling can be accomplished through use of a fully-loaded, tandem-axle dump truck or similar equipment providing an equivalent subgrade loading.

20151778/CSP14R07446 Page 12 of 19 October 17, 2014

4.2.6 Climatic Conditions

Weather conditions will influence the site preparation required. Following periods of rainfall, the moisture content of the near-surface soils may be significantly above the optimum moisture content. Excessive moisture could seriously impede grading by causing an unstable subgrade condition. Typical remedial measures include aerating the wet subgrade, removal of the wet materials and replacing them with materials at near optimum moisture, or treating the material with lime, cement or fly ash.

If site grading commences during dry periods, moisture contents may be low and typical discing and moisture conditioning of the exposed subgrade materials will suffice.

4.3 TEMPORARY EXCAVATIONS

4.3.1 General

It is anticipated that excavations will be in native clay and sand soils. Excavation of the soils should be possible with conventional excavation equipment such as backhoes, loaders, etc.

Sandy soils in excavations may experience unstable conditions such as sloughing of the side walls. While not anticipated based on our understanding of the project and the subsurface conditions encountered during our field investigation, deeper excavations could extend below the groundwater level and require dewatering systems.

4.3.2 Excavation Slopes

The contractor is responsible for the design of any excavation slopes or temporary sheeting or shoring, including any imposed surface surcharges. Construction site safety generally is the sole responsibility of the contractor, who shall also be solely responsible for the means, methods, and sequencing of construction operations. The contractor should also be aware that slope height, slope inclination, surcharges or excavation depths (including utility trench excavations) should in no case exceed those specified in local, state and/or federal safety regulations, such as OSHA Health and Safety Standard for Excavations, 29 CFR Part 1926, or successor regulations.

20151778/CSP14R07446 Page 13 of 19 October 17, 2014

We estimate that the existing subgrade soils on this site will classify as Type C materials using

OSHA criteria. OSHA requires that unsupported cuts in Type C materials be laid back to ratios no steeper than 1½H:1V (horizontal to vertical) for unsupported cuts up to 20-feet in height. Shoring, bracing or underpinning, may be required to provide structural stability and to protect personnel working within the excavation. Excavation slopes and heights, shoring, bracing or underpinning required for the project (if any) should be designed in accordance with local, state and/or federal safety regulations requirements by a professional engineer registered in the State of Texas.

4.4 GRS-IBS STRUCTURE DESIGN

The bridge structures for the wildlife crossings should be designed and constructed in accordance with “Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil – Integrated Bridge System Synthesis Report” by FHWA Publication No. FHWA-HRT-11-026 (June 2012). The following includes our geotechnical conclusions and recommendations for the construction of the GRS-IBS bridge abutments. HDR will provide the details of the bridge structural design, and Kleinfelder will provide the details of the GRS-IBS design plans and specifications, which will be provided separately from this report.

It is our understanding that the wall face at the bridge abutments will be a minimum of 3.5-feet high, with a 12-inch deep TxDOT Standard Girder PSB-4SB12, for a total abutment structure height of approximately 4.5-feet above the existing grade. Approximately 1000-feet of the existing roadway will be raised to this new grade to facilitate the construction of these wildlife crossings. The proposed bridges will have a 25-foot (out-to-out of girder) span consisting of a prestressed concrete slab beam. The total design width of the bridges including concrete barrier guardrail is 32-feet 1½-inches (30-feet total roadway width).

4.4.1 Overburden Material Properties

Overburden material properties were estimated for bridge foundation and abutments based on observations and geology, field investigation, laboratory test results, and known empirical strength characteristics of similar materials. The encountered overburden soil (foundation soil) was estimated to have a unit weight (γ) of 125 pounds per cubic foot (pcf), an effective stress

(long term) friction angle (φ) of 28 degrees and a cohesion of 50 pounds per square foot (psf), and a total stress (end of construction) friction angle of 0 degrees and cohesion of 1000 psf.

Note that the long term cohesion should only be used for the foundation soils and cohesion

20151778/CSP14R07446 Page 14 of 19 October 17, 2014 should be neglected for the retained soils for the design analysis. Table 4 provides a summary of the estimated overburden soil properties that were utilized for design purposes.

Table 4. Foundation Soil Properties for Design Purposes

Material Description

Total Unit

Weight (pcf)

End of Construction

Cohesion (psf)

End of Construction

Angle (degrees)

Long Term

Cohesion (psf)

Long Term

Friction Angle

(degrees)

Overburden/Foundation soil (CL, SC, and CH) 125 1000 0 50* 28

*For foundation soils only. Cohesion should be neglected for retained soils.

4.4.2 Construction Materials Criteria

The GRS bridge abutments are generally designed and constructed of a properly compacted granular fill internally reinforced at a maximum reinforcement spacing of 12-inches and faced with Concrete Modular Unit blocks (CMU). The GRS-IBS should be designed in accordance with FHWA GRS-IBS guidelines, Publication No. FHWA-HRT-11-026, dated June 2012. The guideline limits the height of the GRS to 30 feet, with the bridge seat bearing pressure of 4,000 psf at each abutment, neither of which will be exceeded for this project. The following are descriptions of each GRS component:

• GRS Backfill materials are designed to support the applied loads and therefore considered a structural element of the GRS structure. These materials should be open-graded backfill that meet the requirements of Table 2 in the FHWA guidelines. The backfill materials should consist of clean, crushed angular gravels with a maximum plasticity index of 6, a maximum particle size of 0.5 inches and, less than 5 percent passing the number 50 sieve. The backfill should be substantially free of shale or other poor durability particles, have a magnesium sulfate loss of less than 30 percent after four cycles or a sodium value of less than 15 percent after five cycles. Backfill materials should have a friction angle of 38 degrees as determined by a direct shear test or approved equal.

20151778/CSP14R07446 Page 15 of 19 October 17, 2014

• Reinforced Foundation Soils (RFS) are placed above the foundation soils to provide good bearing base for the GRS abutments. The materials used for RFS should be well-graded materials that meet the requirement of Table 1 in FHWA guidelines. The RFS materials should consists of clean, of clean, well-graded gravels with a maximum plasticity index of 6, a maximum particle size of 2 inches, and 6 to 12 percent passing the number 200 sieve. The shear strength of these materials should be a minimum of 38 degrees. The backfill should be substantially free of shale or other poor durability particles, have a magnesium sulfate loss of less than 30 percent after four cycles or a sodium value of less than 15 percent after five cycles

• The RFS will be placed on the existing subgrade soils (foundation soils). It is estimated that materials used to raise the roadway grading will be similar to the existing foundation soils. The materials used to raise the roadway grading will be the retained soils behind the GRS abutment structures. This should be verified during construction, and

Kleinfelder should be notified to review our design if different materials are planned to be used for the proposed GRS abutments.

• A diagram of the GRS abutment and each component are presented in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Typical GRS-IBS Abutment

• The geosynthetic reinforcements should be biaxial woven polypropylene geotextile with a minimum ultimate tensile strength of 4,800 pounds per foot. Limiting the maximum

20151778/CSP14R07446 Page 16 of 19 October 17, 2014 required reinforcement strength at 2 percent strain improves long-term performance of the reinforcement. The type of geotextile used is dependent on the reinforcement spacing, connection capacity, and backfill material properties.

• The CMU blocks are readily available as a hollow or solid core with flat or cut face and the following standard dimensions: length = 15⅝ inches, width = 7⅝ inches and, height

= 7⅝ inches. The blocks should have a minimum compressive strength of 4,000 pounds per square inch and a water absorption limit of 5 percent. The blocks are connected to the reinforcement layers through friction developed between the blocks. Facing blocks are not considered structural elements and will not resist any bridge imposed loads.

• Design details for the wall should include drainage options behind the wall face and appropriate non-woven filter fabric at transitions of material gradations (i.e. between the retained backfill and the GRS backfill). As an alternate to filter fabric at the transition of the retained backfill and the GRS backfill, the GRS backfill can be extended into the area noted as a 1:1 wedge behind the GRS backfill in Figure 2.

4.4.2.1 Compaction Criteria

Fill materials should be compacted according to the criteria presented in Table 5.

Table 5. Compaction Specifications

Material Material Source Percent

Compaction

Moisture

Content %

Retained fill, Subgrade Preparation

(after clearing, grubbing, excavation, and prior to fill placement)

On-site Soils 95 minimum

(AASHTO T99)

-2% to +2% of optimum

GRS Backfill (wall height less than 5 feet)

Imported 100 minimum

(AASHTO T99)

-2% to +2% of optimum

RFS Imported 95 minimum

(AASHTO T99)

-2% to +2% of optimum

4.4.3 Bridge Design

The factored service limit loading conditions per abutment for the new bridge as provided by

HDR, Inc., are 80 kips for dead load and 137 kips live load. The AASHTO load resistance

20151778/CSP14R07446 Page 17 of 19 October 17, 2014 factored design (LRFD) guidelines provided in “Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil – Integrated

Bridge System Synthesis Report” by FHWA Publication No. FHWA-HRT-11-026 (June, 2012) were used to design the bridge abutments.

Internal and external stability analyses were conducted to determine the stability of the GRS abutment. Table 6 provides a summary of the design parameters used for the GRS abutment design, internal, and external stability analyses.

Table 6. Design Parameters for the GRS-IBS Abutment.

Material Properties

Foundation Soil Properties (Existing On-site Soils)

Unit weight 125 pcf

Undrained Friction Angle 0 deg

Undrained Cohesion 1,000 psf

Drained Friction Angle 28 deg

Drained Cohesion 50 psf

Retained Fill Properties (On-site Soils)

Effective unit weight 125 pcf

Undrained Friction Angle N/A deg

Undrained Cohesion 1,000 psf

Drained Friction Angle 28 deg

Drained Cohesion 50* psf

GRS and RFS Backfill Properties (Imported Materials, Section 4.4.2)

Effective unit weight 115/135 pcf

Drained and Undrained Friction angle 38 deg

Drained and Undrained Cohesion 0 psf

* Only used for global stability analysis

4.4.4 Settlement

The consolidation test results of the foundation soils are presented in Appendix C. The settlement of the foundation soils at the location of the proposed GRS abutments are estimated

20151778/CSP14R07446 Page 18 of 19 October 17, 2014 based on the consolidation test results, and SHANSEP empirical theory that correlated the shear strength, stress history and in-situ pressure of the soils. Based on the laboratory test results, and empirical theory, the total settlement of the foundation soils under the abutment load is estimated to be less than 1 inch. The differential settlement between each abutment is estimated to be less than 0.5 inch.

4.4.5 MSE Walls

Mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls are planned to support the approach embankment and should be designed to resist earth pressures and to protect against erosion. The MSE walls can be constructed using the same materials as the GRS abutment and can therefore be designed utilizing the same material properties as presented in Table 5. The design of the MSE walls is beyond Kleinfelder Scope of Work.

4.5 PLAN/SPECIFICATION REVIEW

Involvement of the design geotechnical engineer during finalization of the construction documents for the project is an important part of the design process. The final plans and specifications should be provided for our review to verify that our recommendations have been interpreted as intended.

20151778/CSP14R07446 Page 19 of 19 October 17, 2014

5 LIMITATIONS

Recommendations contained in this report are based on our field observations and subsurface explorations, limited laboratory tests, and our present knowledge of the proposed construction.

It is possible that subsurface conditions could vary between or beyond the points explored. If subsurface conditions are encountered during construction that differ from those described herein, we should be notified immediately in order that a review may be made and any supplemental recommendations provided. If the scope of the proposed construction, including the proposed loads or structural locations, changes from that described in this report, our recommendations should also be reviewed.

We have prepared this report in substantial accordance with the generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice as it exists in the site area at the time of our study. No warranty is expressed or implied. The recommendations provided in this report are based on the assumption that an adequate program of tests and observations will be conducted by

Kleinfelder during the construction phase in order to evaluate compliance with our recommendations. The scope of our services did not include any environmental assessment or exploration for the presence of hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, surface water, groundwater or air, on, below or around this site.

This report may be used only by the client and only for the purposes stated, within a reasonable time from its issuance, but in no event later than three years from the date of report. Land use, site conditions (on-site and off-site), regulations, or other factors may change over time, and additional work may be required with the passage of time. Any party other than the client who wishes to use this report shall notify Kleinfelder of such intended use. Based on the intended use of the report, Kleinfelder may require that additional work be performed and that an updated report be issued. Non-compliance with any of these requirements by the client or anyone else will release Kleinfelder from any liability resulting from the use of this report by any unauthorized party and client agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Kleinfelder from any claim or liability associated with such unauthorized or non-compliance.

20151665/CSP14R07446 October 17, 2014

APPENDIX A

EXPLORATION LOCATION PLAN AND VICINITY MAP

APPENDIX B

LOGS OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS

PLATE

B-1GRS-IBS Laguna Atascosa Bayside Wildlife Drive and Buena Vista Road

Laguna Atascosa Wildlife Refuge Los Fresnos, Texas

The report and graphics key are an integral part of these logs. All data and interpretations in this log are subject to the explanations and limitations stated in the report.

Lines separating strata on the logs represent approximate boundaries only. Actual transitions may be gradual or differ from those shown.

No warranty is provided as to the continuity of soil or rock conditions between individual sample locations.

Logs represent general soil or rock conditions observed at the point of exploration on the date indicated.

In general, Unified Soil Classification System designations presented on the logs were based on visual classification in the field and were modified where appropriate based on gradation and index property testing.

Fine grained soils that plot within the hatched area on the Plasticity Chart, and coarse grained soils with between 5% and 12% passing the No. 200 sieve require dual USCS symbols, ie., GW-GM, GP-GM, GW-GC, GP-GC, GC-GM, SW-SM, SP-SM, SW-SC, SP-SC, SC-SM.

If sampler is not able to be driven at least 6 inches a 3 inches diameter by 2.5 inches inch long 60 degree conical point driven with a 170 ±2 pound hammer dropped 24 ±0.5 inches.

SILTY SANDS, SAND-GRAVEL-SILT

MIXTURES

CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-GRAVEL-CLAY

MIXTURES

SW-SM

CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-SILT-CLAY

MIXTURES

CL

CL-ML

SANDS

WITH

5% TO

12%

FINES

SANDS

WITH >

12%

FINES

S A

N D

S

M or e th an h al f o f c oa rs e fr ac tio n is s m al le r th an th e

#4 s ie ve

WELL-GRADED SANDS, SAND-GRAVEL

MIXTURES WITH LITTLE FINES

Cu 4 and/ or 1 Cc 3>

CLEAN

GRAVEL

WITH

<5%

FINES

GRAVELS

WITH

5% TO

12%

FINES

OL

CH

CLAYEY GRAVELS,

GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY MIXTURES

GRAVELS

WITH >

12%

FINES

Cu 4 and 1 Cc 3

BULK SAMPLE

SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER

GM

GC

GW

GP

GW-GM

GW-GC

INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY

CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS

GRAPHICS KEY

SAMPLE/SAMPLER TYPE GRAPHICS

CLEAN

SANDS

WITH

<5%

FINES

G R

A V

E L

S

M or e th an h al f o f c oa rs e fr ac tio n is la rg er th an th e

#4 s ie ve

Cu 6 and/ or 1 Cc 3

Cu 6 and/ or 1 Cc 3

Cu 6 and 1 Cc 3

SC-SM

Cu 4 and 1 Cc 3

ORGANIC SILTS & ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS

OF LOW PLASTICITY

SILTS AND CLAYS

(Liquid Limit less than 50)

SILTS AND CLAYS

(Liquid Limit greater than 50)

WELL-GRADED SANDS, SAND-GRAVEL

MIXTURES WITH LITTLE OR NO FINES

POORLY GRADED SANDS,

SAND-GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH

LITTLE OR NO FINES

MH

OH

ML

GC-GM

C O

A R

S E

G R

A

IN

E D

S O

IL

S

M or e th an h al f o f m at er ia l i s la rg er th an th e

#2 s ie ve

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM D 2487)

Cu 6 and 1 Cc 3

GP-GM

GP-GC

SP

SP-SM

SP-SC

SM

SC

WELL-GRADED GRAVELS,

GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES WITH

LITTLE OR NO FINES

POORLY GRADED GRAVELS,

GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES WITH

LITTLE OR NO FINES

WELL-GRADED GRAVELS,

GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES WITH

LITTLE FINES

WELL-GRADED GRAVELS,

GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES WITH

LITTLE CLAY FINES

POORLY GRADED GRAVELS,

GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES WITH

LITTLE FINES

POORLY GRADED GRAVELS,

GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES WITH

LITTLE CLAY FINES

SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SILT-SAND

MIXTURES

CLAYEY GRAVELS,

GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY-SILT MIXTURES

WELL-GRADED SANDS, SAND-GRAVEL

MIXTURES WITH LITTLE CLAY FINES

POORLY GRADED SANDS,

SAND-GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH

LITTLE CLAY FINES

SW

SW-SC

POORLY GRADED SANDS,

SAND-GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH

LITTLE FINES

Cu 4 and/ or 1 Cc 3>

F

IN

E G

R A

IN

E

D S

O

IL

S (M or e th an h al f o f m at er ia l is s m al le r th an th e

#2 s ie ve

INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, SILTY OR

CLAYEY FINE SANDS, SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY

ORGANIC CLAYS & ORGANIC SILTS OF

MEDIUM-TO-HIGH PLASTICITY

INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY,

FAT CLAYS

INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR

DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SILT

INORGANIC CLAYS-SILTS OF LOW PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY

CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS

GROUND WATER GRAPHICS

OBSERVED SEEPAGE

WATER LEVEL (level after exploration completion)

WATER LEVEL (level where first observed)

WATER LEVEL (additional levels after exploration)

NOTES

PROJECT NO.: 20151778

DRAWN BY: NJF

CHECKED BY: HML

DATE: 8/15/2014

REVISED: -

P

LO

T T

E D

/1 4/

:0

P

M B

Y

N F ar n y gI N

T F

IL

E

\\c sp ri ng s\ cs pr in gs

-D at a\ w or ki ng \2

G rs

-I bs

L ag un a

A ta sc os a\ 2.

T e ch ni ca l I nf or m at io n\

2.

T ec hn ic al

C ad d

F ig ur es

\g in t\2

L a gu na A ta sc os a

M as te r

D at ab as e.

gp j gI N

T T

E M

P

LA

T E

R

:K

LF

S

T A

N D

A R

D _G

IN

T

_L

IB

R A

R Y

_2

4.

G

LB

[G E

O -L

E G

E N

D

G

R A

P H

IC

S

K E

Y

W

IT

H U

S C

S

(# blows/ft) (# blows/ft)

(# blows/ft)

B-2GRS-IBS Laguna Atascosa Bayside Wildlife Drive and Buena Vista Road

Laguna Atascosa Wildlife Refuge Los Fresnos, Texas

0.079 - 0.19 in. (2 - 4.9 mm.)

SPT-N60

Thumb will not indent soil but readily indented with thumbnail

Very Dense Dense

Medium Dense

FIELD TEST

NP

< 30

> 50

<0.0029 in. (<0.07 mm.)

rerolled several times after reaching the plastic

The thread is easy to roll and not much time

5 - 12

A 1/8-in. (3 mm.) thread cannot be rolled at

5 - 15

15 - 40 40 - 70

35 - 65

15 - 35

>70

Damp but no visible water

Visible free water, usually soil is below water table

Cohesive soil that can be broken down into small angular

DENSITY

0 - 15 crumbling when drier than the plastic limit lumps which resist further breakdown

Fracture planes appear polished or glossy, sometimes striated

Breaks along definite planes of fracture with little resistance

APPARENT

10 - 30 30 - 50

>50 less than 1/4-in. thick, note thickness

> 8000

Firm

Hard

Very Hard

Non-plastic

Low (L)

Medium (M)

High (H)

NOTE: AFTER TERZAGHI AND PECK, 1948

<4

65 - 85

Boulders

Green Yellow Green

Blue Green Blue

Purple Blue Purple

Red Purple

4000 - 8000

Weakly

Moderately

Strongly

FIELD TESTDESCRIPTION

It takes considerable time rolling and kneading coarse

ABBR

R

Y

GY

G

BG

Red Yellow Red

Yellow

<5

SAMPLER

or thread cannot be formed when drier than the any water content.

The thread can barely be rolled and the lump when drier than the plastic limit

FIELD TEST

Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch

SubangularRounded Angular

CRITERIA

Very Soft

Soft

Subrounded

Gravel

Sand

Fines

Thumb will penetrate soil more than 1 in. (25 mm.)

Wet fine coarse fine

#10 - #4

GRAIN

SIZE

>12 in. (304.8 mm.)

3/4 -3 in. (19 - 76.2 mm.)

0.19 - 0.75 in. (4.8 - 19 mm.)

< 1000

SOIL DESCRIPTION KEY

FIELD TESTDESCRIPTION

plastic limit.

the plastic limit. The lump or thread crumbles limit. The lump or thread can be formed without

Same color and appearance throughout

DESCRIPTION

Inclusion of small pockets of different soils, such as small lenses

CRITERIA

Alternating layers of varying material or color with the layer

0.0029 - 0.017 in. (0.07 - 0.43 mm.)

0.017 - 0.079 in. (0.43 - 2 mm.)

to reach the plastic limit. The thread can be

Lensed

Blocky

Slickensided

Fissured

Laminated

Stratified

DESCRIPTION

None

Strong

Rounded

DESCRIPTION

Cobbles

Thumbnail will not indent soil

Thumb will penetrate soil about 1 in. (25 mm.)

CRITERIA

No visible reaction

Some reaction, with bubbles forming slowly

Violent reaction, with bubbles forming immediately

Weak

SubroundedParticles have smoothly curved sides and no edges

Particles have nearly plane sides but have well-rounded corners and edges

Particles are similar to angular description but have of sand scattered through a mass of clay; note thickness

Thumb will indent soil about 1/4-in. (6 mm.)

to fracturing

Alternating layers of varying material or color with layers

Angular

Subangular

LL

30 - 50

Particles have sharp edges and relatively plane sides with unpolished surfaces rounded edges at least 1/4-in. thick, note thickness

CONSISTENCY

medium

Loose

Very Loose

DENSITY

1000 - 2000

Homogeneous

DESCRIPTION

Dry

Moist is required to reach the plastic limit.

The thread cannot be rerolled after reaching

>60 35 - 60

CALIFORNIA

4 - 10

NAME

YR

B

PB

P

RP

#40 - #10

#200 - #10

Passing #200

3 - 12 in. (76.2 - 304.8 mm.)

3/4 -3 in. (19 - 76.2 mm.)

#4 - 3/4 in. (#4 - 19 mm.)

SIEVE

SIZE

>12 in. (304.8 mm.)

3 - 12 in. (76.2 - 304.8 mm.)

Pea-sized to thumb-sized

Thumb-sized to fist-sized

Larger than basketball-sized

Fist-sized to basketball-sized

Flour-sized and smaller

Rock salt-sized to pea-sized

Sugar-sized to rock salt-sized

Flour-sized to sugar-sized

SIZE

APPROXIMATE

RELATIVE

85 - 100

<4

MODIFIED CA

SAMPLER

DESCRIPTION

12 - 35

Crumbles or breaks with handling or slight

Crumbles or breaks with considerable

Will not crumble or break with finger pressure finger pressure finger pressure

Black N

2000 - 4000

UNCONFINED

COMPRESSIVE

STRENGTH (qu)(psf)

STRUCTURE

CONSISTENCY - FINE-GRAINED SOIL

MOISTURE CONTENT

APPARENT / RELATIVE DENSITY - COARSE-GRAINED SOIL

CEMENTATION

Munsell Color

PLASTICITY

REACTION WITH HYDROCHLORIC ACID

GRAIN SIZE

ANGULARITY

PROJECT NO.: 20151778

DRAWN BY: NJF

CHECKED BY: HML

DATE: 8/15/2014

REVISED: -

P

LO

T T

E D

/1 4/

:0

P

M B

Y

N F ar n y gI N

T F

IL

E

\\c sp ri ng s\ cs pr in gs

-D at a\ w or ki ng \2

G rs

-I bs

L ag un a

A ta sc os a\ 2.

T e ch ni ca l I nf or m at io n\

2.

T ec hn ic al

C ad d

F ig ur es

\g in t\2

L a gu na A ta sc os a

M as te r

D at ab as e.

gp j gI N

T T

E M

P

LA

T E

R

:K

LF

S

T A

N D

A R

D _G

IN

T

_L

IB

R A

R Y

_2

4.

[G E

O -L

E G

E N

D

S

O

IL

D E

S C

R

IP

T

IO

N K

E Y

GROUNDWATER LEVEL INFORMATION:

Groundwater was not encountered during drilling or after completion.

GENERAL NOTES:

Sandy Lean CLAY (CL): tan to reddish, dry to slightly

Clayey SAND (SC): reddish tan,dry to moist

Lean CLAY (CL): reddish tan, soft to firm, moist

Fat CLAY (CH): reddish tan, soft to firm, moist

The exploration was terminated at approximately 7 ft.

below ground surface. The exploration was backfilled with excavated material on July 31, 2014.

PP=4.5

PP=4.5

PP=2.25

PP=2.5

PP=2.5

CL 22.6 99.4 98 44 25

TEST PIT LOG B-1

TEST PIT LOG B-1

B-3

PLATE

LABORATORY RESULTS

Lithologic Description

PAGE:

FIELD EXPLORATION

GRS-IBS Laguna Atascosa Bayside Wildlife Drive and Buena Vista Road

Laguna Atascosa Wildlife Refuge Los Fresnos, Texas

Latitude: 26.21600° N Longitude: 97.32825° W

Ground Surface Elevation Not Available Surface Condition: Bare Earth and Weeds

J. GonzalezLogged By:

Date Begin - End:

Hor.-Vert. Datum:

Weather: Warm, Sunny

Excavation Crew:

Not Applicable Bobcat Backhoe

Rudy

Not Applicable Plunge:

Excavation Company:Wildlife Refuge Personnel

Excav. Dimensions: Approx. 2.5 x 7 x 5 ft. (W x D x L)

Excavation Equip.:

7/31/2014

A dd iti on a l T es ts

R em ar ks

B lo w C ou nt s( B

C

U nc or r.

B lo w s/ in

P us h T ub e(

P T p si

P oc ke t P en (P

P t sf

D ep th fe et

G ra p hi ca l L og

R ec ov er y (N

R

N o

R ec ov er y)

U S

C S

S ym bo l

W at er C on te nt

D ry

U ni t W t.

(p cf

P as si ng

P as si ng

Li qu id L im it

P la st ic ity In de x

(N P

N on P la st ic

PROJECT NO.: 20151778

CHECKED BY: HML

DATE: 8/15/2014

DRAWN BY: NJF

REVISED: -

gI N

T F

IL

E

\\c sp ri ng s\ cs pr in gs

-D at a\ w or ki ng \2

G rs

-I bs

L ag un a

A ta sc os a\ 2.

T e ch ni ca l I nf or m at io n\

2.

T ec hn ic al

C ad d

F ig ur es

\g in t\2

L a gu na A ta sc os a

M as te r

D at ab as e.

gp j gI N

T T

E M

P

LA

T E

R

:K

LF

S

T A

N D

A R

D _G

IN

T

_L

IB

R A

R Y

_2

4.

[K

LF

_B O

R

IN

G /T

E S

T P

IT

S

O

IL

L O

G

P

LO

T T

E D

/1 4/

:0

P

M B

Y

N F ar n y

S am pl e

T yp e

NFarny Text Box (W x D x L)

NFarny Text Box moist, firm to hard

NFarny Text Box Surface Condition: Bare Earth and Weeds completion.

GENERAL NOTES:

Sandy Lean CLAY (CL): gray, dry to slightly moist, Clayey SAND (SC): reddish tan, dry to moist

Sandy Lean CLAY (CL): tan to reddish tan, firm, dry to

- layer of tan sand at 5.5 feet

Lean CLAY (CL): tan to reddish tan, soft to firm, moist

The exploration was terminated at approximately 7 ft.

below ground surface. The exploration was backfilled with excavated material on July 31, 2014.

Unc. Comp. Str.= qu: 0.938 tsf

PP=> 4.5

PP=3

PP=2.5 CL

16.0

21.4

99.3

95 46 28

TEST PIT LOG B-2

TEST PIT LOG B-2

B-4

PLATE

LABORATORY RESULTS

Lithologic Description

PAGE:

FIELD EXPLORATION

GRS-IBS Laguna Atascosa Bayside Wildlife Drive and Buena Vista Road

Laguna Atascosa Wildlife Refuge Los Fresnos, Texas

Latitude: 26.21608° N Longitude: 97.32817° W

Ground Surface Elevation Not Available Surface Condition: Bare Earth and Weeds

J. GonzalezLogged By:

Date Begin - End:

Hor.-Vert. Datum:

Weather:

Excavation Crew:

Not Applicable Bobcat Backhoe

Rudy

Wildlife Refuge Personnel

Not Applicable

Warm, Sunny

Plunge:

Excavation Company:

Excav. Dimensions: Approx. 2.5 x 7 x 5 ft. (W x D x L)

Excavation Equip.:

7/31/2014

A dd iti on a l T es ts

R em ar ks

B lo w C ou nt s( B

C

U nc or r.

B lo w s/ in

P us h T ub e(

P T p si

P oc ke t P en (P

P t sf

D ep th fe et

G ra p hi ca l L og

R ec ov er y (N

R

N o

R ec ov er y)

U S

C S

S ym bo l

W at er C on te nt

D ry

U ni t W t.

(p cf

P as si ng

P as si ng

Li qu id L im it

P la st ic ity In de x

(N P

N on P la st ic

PROJECT NO.: 20151778

CHECKED BY: HML

DATE: 8/15/2014

DRAWN BY: NJF

REVISED: -

gI N

T F

IL

E

\\c sp ri ng s\ cs pr in gs

-D at a\ w or ki ng \2

G rs

-I bs

L ag un a

A ta sc os a\ 2.

T e ch ni ca l I nf or m at io n\

2.

T ec hn ic al

C ad d

F ig ur es

\g in t\2

L a gu na A ta sc os a

M as te r

D at ab as e.

gp j gI N

T T

E M

P

LA

T E

R

:K

LF

S

T A

N D

A R

D _G

IN

T

_L

IB

R A

R Y

_2

4.

_B O

R

IN

G /T

E S

T P

IT

S

O

IL

L O

G

P

LO

T T

E D

/1 4/

:0

P

M B

Y

N F ar n y

S am pl e

T yp e

NFarny Text Box firm to hard

NFarny Text Box (W x D x L)

NFarny Text Box moist

NFarny completion.

GENERAL NOTES:

Lean CLAY (CL): gray to reddish tan, firm to hard, dry

Clayey SAND (SC): tan, dry to moist

The exploration was terminated at approximately 8 ft.

below ground surface. The exploration was backfilled with excavated material on August 01, 2014.

Unc. Comp. Str.= qu: 1.846 tsf

PP=> 4.5

PP=> 4.5

PP=> 4.5

PP=2.25

PP=2.5

CL 10.3

17.5

113.2 98 37 18

TEST PIT LOG B-3

TEST PIT LOG B-3

B-5

PLATE

LABORATORY RESULTS

Lithologic Description

PAGE:

FIELD EXPLORATION

GRS-IBS Laguna Atascosa Bayside Wildlife Drive and Buena Vista Road

Laguna Atascosa Wildlife Refuge Los Fresnos, Texas

Latitude: 26.21658° N Longitude: 97.32622° W

Ground Surface Elevation Not Available Surface Condition: Bare Earth and Weeds

J. GonzalezLogged By:

Date Begin - End:

Hor.-Vert. Datum:

Weather:

Excavation Crew:

Not Applicable

Approx. 2.5 x 8 x 6 ft.

Bobcat Backhoe

Rudy

Wildlife Refuge Personnel

Not Applicable

Warm, Cloudy

Plunge:

Excavation Company:

Excav. Dimensions:

Excavation Equip.:

8/01/2014

A dd iti on a l T es ts

R em ar ks

B lo w C ou nt s( B

C

U nc or r.

B lo w s/ in

P us h T ub e(

P T p si

P oc ke t P en (P

P t sf

D ep th fe et

G ra p hi ca l L og

R ec ov er y (N

R

N o

R ec ov er y)

U S

C S

S ym bo l

W at er C on te nt

D ry

U ni t W t.

(p cf

P as si ng

P as si ng

Li qu id L im it

P la st ic ity In de x

(N P

N on P la st ic

PROJECT NO.: 20151778

CHECKED BY: HML

DATE: 8/15/2014

DRAWN BY: NJF

REVISED: -

gI N

T F

IL

E

\\c sp ri ng s\ cs pr in gs

-D at a\ w or ki ng \2

G rs

-I bs

L ag un a

A ta sc os a\ 2.

T e ch ni ca l I nf or m at io n\

2.

T ec hn ic al

C ad d

F ig ur es

\g in t\2

L a gu na A ta sc os a

M as te r

D at ab as e.

gp j gI N

T T

E M

P

LA

T E

R

:K

LF

S

T A

N D

A R

D _G

IN

T

_L

IB

R A

R Y

_2

4.

_B O

R

IN

G /T

E S

T P

IT

S

O

IL

L O

G

P

LO

T T

E D

/1 4/

:0

P

M B

Y

N F ar n y

S am pl e

T yp e

NFarny Text Box (W x D x L)

NFarny Text Box to slightly moist

NFarny completion.

GENERAL NOTES:

Sandy Lean CLAY (CL): gray to reddish tan, dry

- layers of clayey sand below 3 feet

Lean CLAY (CL): reddish tan, moist, soft to firm

The exploration was terminated at approximately 8 ft.

below ground surface. The exploration was backfilled with excavated material on August 01, 2014.

Unc. Comp. Str.= qu: 3.682 tsf

PP=> 4.5

PP=4.5

PP=2.5

PP=3.5

CL

14.2

22.6

114.0

96 43 27

TEST PIT LOG B-4

TEST PIT LOG B-4

B-6

PLATE

LABORATORY RESULTS

Lithologic Description

PAGE:

FIELD EXPLORATION

GRS-IBS Laguna Atascosa Bayside Wildlife Drive and Buena Vista Road

Laguna Atascosa Wildlife Refuge Los Fresnos, Texas

Latitude: 26.21647° N Longitude: 97.32625° W

Ground Surface Elevation Not Available `Surface Condition: Bare Earth and Weeds

J. GonzalezLogged By:

Date Begin - End:

Hor.-Vert. Datum:

Weather:

Excavation Crew:

Not Applicable

Approx. 2.5 x 8 x 6 ft.

Bobcat Backhoe

Rudy

Wildlife Refuge Personnel

Not Applicable

Warm, Cloudy

Plunge:

Excavation Company:

Excav. Dimensions:

Excavation Equip.:

8/01/2014

A dd iti on a l T es ts

R em ar ks

B lo w C ou nt s( B

C

U nc or r.

B lo w s/ in

P us h T ub e(

P T p si

P oc ke t P en (P

P t sf

D ep th fe et

G ra p hi ca l L og

R ec ov er y (N

R

N o

R ec ov er y)

U S

C S

S ym bo l

W at er C on te nt

D ry

U ni t W t.

(p cf

P as si ng

P as si ng

Li qu id L im it

P la st ic ity In de x

(N P

N on P la st ic

PROJECT NO.: 20151778

CHECKED BY: HML

DATE: 8/15/2014

DRAWN BY: NJF

REVISED: -

gI N

T F

IL

E

\\c sp ri ng s\ cs pr in gs

-D at a\ w or ki ng \2

G rs

-I bs

L ag un a

A ta sc os a\ 2.

T e ch ni ca l I nf or m at io n\

2.

T ec hn ic al

C ad d

F ig ur es

\g in t\2

L a gu na A ta sc os a

M as te r

D at ab as e.

gp j gI N

T T

E M

P

LA

T E

R

:K

LF

S

T A

N D

A R

D _G

IN

T

_L

IB

R A

R Y

_2

4.

_B O

R

IN

G /T

E S

T P

IT

S

O

IL

L O

G

P

LO

T T

E D

/1 4/

:0

P

M B

Y

N F ar n y

S am pl e

T yp e

NFarny Text Box (W x D x L)

NFarny Text Box Surface Condition: Bare Earth and Weeds

NFarny to slightly moist, firm to hard

APPENDIX C

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

B-1 5.0 LEAN CLAY (CL) 22.6 99.4 98 44 19 25

B-2 0.0 pH= 8.95

Resistivity= 373.6

B-2…