Sta Ponce-Geo-Env-Final Report.pdf

Subsurface Soil Exploration

Rebuild UPH

Station Ponce de Leon Unit

New Smyrna Beach, Florida

Ardaman & Associates, Inc.

CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS

8008 S. Orange Avenue, Orlando, FL 32809 - Phone: (407) 855-3860 Fax: (407) 859-8121

Branch Office Locations

Florida: Bartow, Cocoa, Fort Myers, Miami, Orlando, Port St. Lucie, Sarasota, Tallahassee, Tampa, West Palm Beach

Louisiana: Baton Rouge, Monroe, New Orleans, Shreveport

MEMBERS:

ASTM International American Concrete Institute

Geoprofessional Business Association Society of American Military Engineers

American Council of Engineering Companies

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Title Page

1.0 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 1

2.0 REVIEW OF SOIL SURVEY MAPS 1

3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM 1

3.1 SPT Borings 1

3.2 Test Locations 2

4.0 LABORATORY PROGRAM 2

4.1 Visual Examination and Classification Testing 2

4.2 California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Tests 3

4.3 Environmental Laboratory Testing 3

5.0 GENERAL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 4

5.1 General Soil Profile 4

5.2 Water Levels 5

6.0 PRELIMINARY SINKHOLE POTENTIAL SURVEY 5

6.1 Survey Approach 5

6.2 Sinkhole Formation 6

6.2.1 Rock-Collapse Sink 6

6.2.2 Solution Sink 6

6.2.3 Erosion Sinkhole 6

6.3 Evaluation of Sinkhole Potential 7

7.0 SEISMIC PARAMETERS AND CLASSIFICATION 9

8.0 CLOSURE 9

List of Tables

1 Summary of CBR Test Results

2 Reference List

List of Figures

1 Site Location Map

2 Boring Location Plan

3 Soil Boring Legend

4 – 8 Soil Boring Profiles

TABLE OF CONTENTS

(continued)

List of Appendices

I Standard Penetration Test Boring Procedure

II Grain Size Distribution Curves

III Standard Proctor and California Bearing Ratio Test Results

IV Laboratory Analytical Results and Chain of Custody Forms

V Selection of Historical Aerial Photographs Obtained From the

University of Florida and Google Earth Pro

VI Sheet 1: Geotechnical Exploration, Boring Location/Profiles

Tetra Tech, Inc.

File No. 19-6455 -1-

1.0 SITE LOCATION AND SITE DESCRIPTION

The site for the proposed improvements is located on the existing Coast Guard Station at Ponce de Leon inlet (Sections 5 and 32, Townships 16 and 17 South, Range 34 East). The general site location is shown superimposed on the New Smyrna, Florida U.S.G.S. quadrangle map presented on Figure 1.

The site is currently developed with the existing Coast Guard Station which consists of several one- to two-story structures, paved parking/drive areas, greenspace areas, a boat ramp, seawall and a dock. The station is bordered by the Indian River to the west and south.

2.0 REVIEW OF SOIL SURVEY MAPS

Based on the 1980 Soil Survey for Volusia County, Florida, as prepared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, the site is located in an area mapped as the “Palm

Beach-Urban land-Paola complex, 0 to 8 percent slopes”, soil series. The “Palm Beach-Urban land-Paola Complex, 0 to 8 percent slopes” soil series consists of Palm Beach and Paola soils and areas of these soils that have been altered for buildings or covered with streets and buildings

(urban land). The internal drainage of the Palm Beach and Paola soils portions of the complex are excessive and the permeability of both is very rapid. According to the Soil Survey, the seasonal high water table for the “Palm Beach-Urban land-Paola Complex, 0 to 8 percent slopes” soil series is typically more than 72 inches from the natural ground surface.

3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM

3.1 SPT Borings

The field exploration program included performing 5 Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings.

The SPT borings were advanced to depths ranging from 75 to 90 feet below the ground or water surface as shown on Figures 4 through 8, using the methodology outlined in ASTM D1586. A summary of this field procedure is included in Appendix I. Borings TH-1 and TH-2 were advanced to 5 feet deep using a hand bucket auger to avoid damage should unknown subsurface utilities or structures have been present at the boring locations. Soil samples recovered during performance of the borings were visually classified in the field and representative portions of the samples were transported to our laboratory in sealed sample jars.

The groundwater level at each of the boring locations was measured during drilling. The borings were backfilled with cement grout upon completion. The following is a table summarizing the borings performed and the depths drilled below the ground or water surface.

File No. 19-6455 -2-

Boring Location

Depth Below Existing

Ground or Water

Surface (feet)

TH-1 75

TH-2 75

TH-3 90

TH-4 90

TH-5 90

3.2 Test Locations

The approximate locations of the borings are schematically illustrated on a site plan shown on

Figure 2. These locations were determined in the field by Global Positioning System (GPS) utilizing hand-held GPS equipment and coordinates obtained from Google Earth V6.1. Boring locations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method of locating used.

The latitude and longitude obtained using hand-held GPS at the boring locations are presented in the following table:

Boring Location Latitude Coordinate

(degrees)

Longitude Coordinate

(degrees)

TH-1 29.064957 -80.914810

TH-2 29.064597 -80.914573

TH-3 29.063414 -80.915732

TH-4 29.063414 -80.915266

TH-5 29.063414 -80.914978

4.0 LABORATORY PROGRAM

4.1 Visual Examination and Classification Testing

Representative soil samples obtained during our field sampling operation were packaged and transferred to our laboratory for further visual examination and classification. The soil samples were visually classified by a geotechnical engineer in general accordance with the Unified Soil

Classification System (ASTM D2488). The resulting soil descriptions are shown on the soil boring profiles presented on Figures 4 through 8.

In addition, we conducted organic content tests (ASTM D2974-87), natural moisture content tests

(ASTM D2216), grain size analyses (ASTM D6913), percent fines analyses (ASTM D1140), and

Atterberg limits tests (ASTM D4318) on selected soil samples obtained from the borings. The

File No. 19-6455 -3-results of these tests are presented adjacent to the sample depth on the boring profiles on Figures

4 through 8. The grain size distribution curves are presented in Appendix II. We note that for the

“Sample Description” written below the graphs of grain size distribution in Appendix II, when referring to particle size such as “fine” sand does not reflect the portion of the sample consisting of larger shell fragments. The grain size distribution of the entire sample, including the shell, often results in a matrix that contains more medium-size to coarse-size particles than fine-size particles.

4.2 California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Tests

California Bearing Ratio (CBR) testing was performed on bulk soil samples obtained from sample locations CBR-1 and CBR-2. These locations are shown on the Boring Location Plan on Figure

2.

The CBR samples were obtained between the depth interval of 1 to 3 feet below the existing ground surface. Standard Proctor (ASTM D1557) and California Bearing Ratio (ASTM D1883) tests were performed on the bulk samples. The CBR values and the Standard Proctor maximum dry densities and optimum moisture contents are shown on Table 1. More detailed results of the

Standard Proctor and CBR tests are presented in Appendix III.

The latitude and longitude obtained using hand-held GPS at the bulk soil sample locations are presented in the following table:

Bulk Soil Sample

Location

Latitude Coordinate

(degrees)

Longitude Coordinate

(degrees)

CBR-1 29.063966 -80.914430

CBR-2 29.063665 -80.914756

4.3 Environmental Laboratory Testing

During the performance of Borings TH-1, TH-2 and TH-4, soil samples were obtained via split spoon sampling at intervals of 1 to 3 feet below the ground surface, 4 to 5 feet below the ground surface, and at the subsurface/water table interface. The soil samples were transmitted to a certified chemical laboratory for further analysis. Analyses conducted included:

• Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons – DRO/GRO

• Total 8 RCRA Metals (Arsenic, Barium, Cadmium, Chromium, Lead, Mercury, Selenium, and Silver)

• Chlorinated Pesticides (EPA Method 8081)

• PCBs (EPA Method 8082)

• VOCs (EPA Method 8260)

• Semi-VOCs (EPA Method 8270)

File No. 19-6455 -4-

The complete analytical results and a copy of the chain of custody forms are included in

Appendix IV. The analytical results of analyses that were detected above MDL (Method Detection

Limits) are summarized on pages 5 and 6 of the laboratory report in Appendix IV.

It is noted that sampling locations and depths are referred to as the “Client ID” on the Sample

Detection Summary on pages 5 and 6 of the laboratory report in Appendix IV. For example, Client

ID TH-4 (4-5) refers to a sample obtained from Boring TH-4 at a depth of 4 to 5 feet below the existing ground surface.

5.0 GENERAL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

5.1 General Soil Profile

The results of the field exploration and laboratory programs are graphically summarized on the soil boring profiles presented on Figures 4 through 8. The stratification of the boring profiles represents our interpretation of the field boring logs and the results of laboratory examinations of the recovered samples. The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary between soil types. The actual transitions may be more gradual than implied.

The results of Borings TH-1 and TH-2 that were located on land indicate the following general soil profile:

Depth Below Ground Surface

(feet) Description

From To

0 5 Fine sand (SP), occasional trace shell

5 27½ Medium dense fine sand (SP) and fine sand with silt

(SP-SM), with trace shell

27½ 37½ Medium dense to dense shell fragments with fine sand

(SP)

37½ 42½ to 47½ Dense to very dense fine sand (SP) with varying amounts of shell

42½ to 47½ 57½

Very dense fine sand (SP), loose clayey fine sand (SC), and/or soft sandy clay to clay (CL/CH), with varying amounts of shell

57½ 75

Loose clayey sand (SC) and/or soft to medium stiff sandy clay to clay (CL/CH), with varying amounts of shell

The results of Borings TH-3, TH-4 and TH-5 that were located in the Indian River indicate the following general soil profile:

File No. 19-6455 -5-

Depth Below Water Surface (feet) Description

From To

0 11 to 14 Water

11 to 14 27½ Very loose to medium dense fine sand (SP) and fine sand with silt (SP-SM), with varying amounts of shell

27½ 42½ to 47½ Medium dense to dense fine sand (SP) and fine sand with silt (SP-SM), with varying amounts of shell

42½ to 47½ 87½

Very loose to loose silty sand (SM), silty clayey fine sand (SM/SC) and clayey fine sand (SC) and/or very soft to medium stiff sandy clay to clay (CL/CH), with varying amounts of shell

87½ 90

Very dense fine sand (SP), fine sand with silt (SP-SM), and clayey fine sand (SC), with varying amounts of shell and cemented nodules

The above soil profiles are outlined in general terms only. Please refer to Figures 3 through 8 for soil profile details.

5.2 Water Levels

The groundwater level was measured in Borings TH-1 and TH-2 during drilling. As shown on

Figures 4 and 5, groundwater was encountered in Borings TH-1 and TH-2, which were conducted on land, at depths of 3 and 3½ feet below the existing ground surface on the dates indicated.

As shown on Figures 6 through 8, river water depths at the locations of Borings TH-3, TH-4 and

TH-5 were 11, 12 and 14 feet, respectively, at the time of drilling.

Fluctuation in groundwater and water levels should be anticipated throughout the year primarily due to seasonal variations in rainfall, tides, and other factors that may vary from the time the borings were conducted.

6.0 PRELIMINARY SINKHOLE POTENTIAL SURVEY

6.1 Survey Approach

The potential for sinkholes at the subject site was assessed based on the following: indications of sinkhole activity if encountered in the soil borings performed, observations of the subject site for sinkhole depressions, and review of published literature. Published literature review included the site topography shown on the USGS quadrangle map, the “Map of Sinkhole Type, Development and Distribution in Florida (Map Series 110)” prepared by the Florida Department of

Environmental Protection (FDEP), the “Potentiometric Surface of the Upper Floridian Aquifer in

File No. 19-6455 -6-the St. Johns River Water Management District and Vicinity” map, and historical aerial photographs.

6.2 Sinkhole Formation

There are three distinct types of sinkholes which have developed in Florida and these are discussed below.

6.2.1 Rock-Collapse Sink

The first type of sinkhole is the classical collapse sink which is generally steep-sided and rocky.

It occurs when a cavity can no longer support the weight of the overlying soil and rock. This type of sink generally occurs when the limestone is at or near the surface and solution weathering is still very active.

6.2.2 Solution Sink

The second type of sink is the solution sink or rock-surface doline. There is no physical disturbance of the soluble rock beneath a solution sink. Subsidence of the overlying soil occurs due to gradual lowering of the rock surface as groundwater flows radially to the intersection of vertical joints where the water enters the rock mass. The surface expression of the rock lowering is a shallow depression located over the intersection of the joints. The Florida Geological Survey estimates that this type of subsidence occurs at the rate of one foot every five to six thousand years.

6.2.3 Erosion Sinkhole

Erosion or cover-collapse sinkholes are caused by progressive piping of unconsolidated soils into an underground cavity. For such a sinkhole to develop, an erosion channel (aven) must be present in the confining unit above the limestone aquifer, there must be an open or partially-filled cavity present in the limestone, and a downward hydraulic gradient must exist between the surficial aquifer and the underlying limestone aquifer(s).

Under the above circumstances, water moving down into the limestone may take large amounts of sediment into the cavernous system creating a void in the overlying sediment. When the void in the overlying sediment reaches the size where the roof is no longer stable the overburden suddenly collapses. Ground surface subsidence may be as little as a few feet, or as much as a hundred feet.

File No. 19-6455 -7-

6.3 Evaluation of Sinkhole Potential

While the mechanics of cavity and sinkhole formations are generally understood, the evaluation of a particular site for potential sinkhole development is not yet amenable for precise scientific prediction. Present tools utilized for such evaluation include local experience, review of geological history, assessment of regional surficial and bedrock geology, review of hydrogeological information, and review of aerial photographs and topographic maps. Tools also include geophysical methods such as ground penetrating radar and electrical resistivity surveys. We note, however, that our scope of services only incorporated the results of historic and readily observable surficial evidence and the soil borings conducted by Ardaman & Associates during the 2019 subsurface soil exploration.

The conditions that are conducive to sinkhole occurrences include: (1) cavities or caverns in the limestone through which water is flowing; (2) a connection between these openings in the limestone and the overburden materials, through which the soil particles in the overburden can pass; and (3) water flowing down into the limestone from the overburden.

To evaluate the probability of the subject site for sinkhole formation, the following factors were considered:

• Soil Borings Conducted by Ardaman & Associates, 2019 – Based on the results of our subsurface soil exploration, the type of conditions indicative of sinkhole activity that would cause sudden settlement or collapse of the earth at the boring locations were not encountered. Losses of drilling fluid circulation, voids and/or raveled soils were not encountered in any of the soil borings performed. We note that very loose to loose cohesionless (i.e., sandy) soils and/or very soft cohesive (i.e., clayey) soils were encountered in the soil borings performed by Ardaman at depths ranging from around

47½ to 87½ feet below the existing water surface at the boring locations performed in the

Indian River. It is our opinion that these very loose and/or soft soils do not indicate the presence of sinkhole activity and instead are related to the natural cycles of deposition and erosion that occurred during the formation of the land mass.

• Site Topography – Topographic features (i.e., obvious depressions) were not noted on the

New Smyrna, Florida USGS Quadrangle Map.

In addition, Ardaman & Associates engineer, Ms. Virginia Goff, P.E., conducted a site walkover on October 29, 2019. During the site observations, no obvious depressional areas or indications of sinkhole activity were observed on the subject site.

• Past History – Based on review of historical aerial photographs dated between 1943 and

2019 from the University of Florida Digital Collections and Google Earth Pro, no obvious depressions were identifiable within the subject site boundaries or within one mile of the

File No. 19-6455 -8-subject site. A selection of representative historical aerial photographs are shown in

Appendix V.

The “Map of Sinkhole Type, Development and Distribution in Florida (Map Series 110) prepared by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) indicates the most likely type of sinkhole to develop in a given area. The map was based on general hydrogeological data and past sinkhole occurrences in different parts of the state. Review of the map indicates that the subject site is located in a region characterized by a moderate overburden consisting mainly of incohesive and permeable sand. Sinkholes in these areas are few, shallow, of small diameter and develop gradually. The dominant sinkhole type is cover-subsidence.

Based on review of the Subsidence Incident Location Database maintained by FDEP, there have been no sinkholes reported within 1 mile of the subject site.

We are not aware of a sinkhole occurring in recent history on the barrier island on which the Coast Guard Station is located, nor on any other property adjacent to the Indian River in the region of the Coast Guard Station.

• Hydrogeological Factors – According to the “Potentiometric Surface of the Upper Floridian

Aquifer in the St. Johns River Water Management District and Vicinity” map (May, 2009) the site is located in an area where the potentiometric surface elevation of the Floridan aquifer is at approximately +1 feet (NGVD).

Based on review of the “New Smyrna, Florida, USGS Quadrangle Map”, the natural ground surface elevation at the subject site ranges between approximately 0 to 5 feet (NGVD).

According to the “Areas of Natural Recharge to the Floridan Aquifer in Florida” map

(Map Series 98), the site is located in an area of “General No Recharge”. These areas consist of natural discharge areas based on areas of artesian slow. Isolated depressions in potentiometric surface due to concentrated pumpage locally reverses gradient and induces limited local recharge. Typically, areas of high recharge and/or a large difference in elevation between surficial water levels and the potentiometric surface serves as a driving factor in sinkhole formation. We note that the Coast Guard Station is not in an area of high recharge and there is very little difference in the elevation of the surficial water levels and the potentiometric surface of the Floridan Aquifer.

None of the borings performed as part of this study encountering direct indications of sinkhole activity (i.e., rod drops, raveling soils, loss of drilling fluid circulation and use of temporary steel casing) and the site is located in a part of Florida with relatively low sinkhole activity. In addition, there is very little, if any, downward gradient between the surficial aquifer and the Floridan Aquifer;

therefore, the driving force that causes cover-subsidence sinkholes is not significant. As such, the chance of a sinkhole or sinkholes occurring at the subject site within the next 50 years is remote.

File No. 19-6455 -9-

We note that this study did not include any geophysical testing of the site (eg; ground penetrating radar or electrical resistivity) to scan for potential subsurface anomalies. In addition, no deep soil borings were performed to explore deeper subsurface conditions. Therefore, the survey of sinkhole potential presented in this report should be considered limited and preliminary in nature.

7.0 SEISMIC PARAMETERS AND CLASSIFICATION

Ardaman performed a seismic classification analysis for the subject site. Seismic site classifications are intended for the use of determining spectral response accelerations, and are not intended to characterize or preclude development of the site. Based on the International

Building Code 2018, Figure 1613.3.1(1) and Figure 1613.3.1(2), Florida is a low risk-targeted maximum considered earthquake ground motion response acceleration zone.

Figure 1613.3.1(1) and Figure 1613.3.1(2) of the IBC 2018 provide contour maps of spectral acceleration responses for 5% of critical damping at a short period of 0.2-sec, Ss, and long period of 1-sec (S1) for the maximum considered earthquake (MCER). Based on IBC 2018, the mapped spectral accelerations are determined to be Ss=0.08 g and S1=0.04 g.

Based on the results of our subsurface soil exploration, this site is underlain by variable soil profiles consisting mainly of layers of fine sand (SP), fine sand with silt (SP-SM), fine sand with clay (SP-SC), and shell underlain by silty clayey fine sand, clayey fine sand (SC) and/or sandy clay (CH) to the boring termination depths. Based on the USGS slope based VS30 map, the VS30 of the project site is estimated to be approximately 208 m/s, which according to Table 20.3-1 of the ASCE/SEI 7-10 Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, is representative of a stiff soil profile, Site Class D.

8.0 CLOSURE

The information submitted herein is based on the data obtained from the soil borings presented on Figures 4 through 8 and review of the published literature referred to previously. This report does not reflect any variations which may occur adjacent to or between the borings. The nature and extent of the variations between the borings may not become evident until during construction.

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Tetra Tech, Inc. in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices for the purpose of the subject project.

No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made.

TABLE 1

Summary of CBR Test Results Rebuild UPH

Station Ponce de Leon Unit New Smyrna Beach, Florida

Location Sample Description

Standard Proctor Results Soaked CBR Results – 56 Blows

Dry Density (pcf)

Optimum Moisture

Content (%)

Dry Density (pcf)

Moisture Content (%)

Swell Measurement

CBR (%)

CBR-1

Brown fine sand with trace limerock (SP-SM)

100.3 14.9 98.3 20.0 0.4 7

CBR-2

Mixed brown and tan fine sand with trace roots

98.5 15.2 92.8 21.6 0.3 14

Notes:

1- CBR values calculated at 95% of the maximum dry unit weight and optimum water content.

2- Samples surcharged with 10 lbs.

3- Sample obtained from the depth interval of 1 to 3 feet below the existing ground surface at sample locations CBR-1 and CBR-2.

TABLE 2

Test References Rebuild UPH

Station Ponce de Leon Unit New Smyrna Beach, Florida

Reference Name

ASTM D1586 Standard Method for Standard Penetration Test (SPT) and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils

ASTM D2488 Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure)

ASTM D2974-87 Standard Test Methods for Moisture, Ash, and Organic Matter of Peat and Other Organic Soisl

ASTM D2216 Standard Test Method for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass

ASTM D6913 Standard Test Methods for Particle-Size Distribution (Gradation) of Soils Using Sieve Analysis

ASTM D1140 Standard Test Methods for Amount of Material in Soils Finer than the No. 200 Sieve

ASTM D4318 Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils

ASTM D-1557 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort

ASTM D1883 Standard Method for CBR (California Bearing Ratio) or Laboratory-Compacted Soils

EPA Method 8015C Nonhalogenated Organics using GC/FID (GRO/DRO)

EPA Method 7471 Mercury in Solid or Semisolid Waster

EPA Method 6010 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Optical Emission Spectrometry (for RCRA Metals Arsenic, Barium, Cadmium, Chromium, Lead, Selenium, Silver)

EPA Method 8081 Organochlorine Pesticides by Gas Chromatography

EPA Method 8082 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) by Gas Chromatography

EPA Method 8260 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) by Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry

EPA Method 8270 Semivolatile Organic Compounds (Semi VOCs) by Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry

OBTAINED FROM U.S.G.S. QUAD MAP: NEW SMYRNA, FLORIDA 1956

(REVISED 1993)

SECTIONS 5 & 32

RANGE 34 EAST

TOWNSHIPS 16 & 17 SOUTH

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION

AutoCAD SHX Text

CD

AutoCAD SHX Text 19-6455

AutoCAD SHX Text

FILE NO.

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRAWN BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text Materials Consultants

AutoCAD SHX Text Geotechnical, Environmental and

AutoCAD SHX Text Ardaman & Associates, Inc.

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPROVED BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text

CHECKED BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text 02/04/20

AutoCAD SHX Text

FIGURE:

AutoCAD SHX Text

DATE:

AutoCAD SHX Text 2000'

AutoCAD SHX Text 1000'

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text 500'

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text S

AutoCAD SHX Text E

AutoCAD SHX Text T

AutoCAD SHX Text A

AutoCAD SHX Text T

AutoCAD SHX Text S

AutoCAD SHX Text D

AutoCAD SHX Text E

AutoCAD SHX Text T

AutoCAD SHX Text I

AutoCAD SHX Text N

AutoCAD SHX Text U

AutoCAD SHX Text D

AutoCAD SHX Text R

AutoCAD SHX Text A

AutoCAD SHX Text U

AutoCAD SHX Text G

AutoCAD SHX Text T

AutoCAD SHX Text S

AutoCAD SHX Text A

AutoCAD SHX Text O

AutoCAD SHX Text C

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text N

AutoCAD SHX Text SUBSURFACE SOIL EXPLORATION REBUILD UPH STATION PONCE DE LEON INLET NEW SMYRNA BEACH, FLORIDA

AutoCAD SHX Text

SITE LOCATION MAP

STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (SPT) BORING LOCATION

CBR LOCATION

LEGEND

AutoCAD SHX Text

TH-1

AutoCAD SHX Text

TH-2

AutoCAD SHX Text

TH-3

AutoCAD SHX Text

TH-4

AutoCAD SHX Text

TH-5

AutoCAD SHX Text

CBR-1

AutoCAD SHX Text

CBR-2

AutoCAD SHX Text

CD

AutoCAD SHX Text 19-6455

AutoCAD SHX Text

FILE NO.

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRAWN BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text Materials Consultants

AutoCAD SHX Text Geotechnical, Environmental and

AutoCAD SHX Text Ardaman & Associates, Inc.

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPROVED BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text

CHECKED BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text 02/04/20

AutoCAD SHX Text

FIGURE:

AutoCAD SHX Text

DATE:

AutoCAD SHX Text 200'

AutoCAD SHX Text 100'

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text 50'

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text S

AutoCAD SHX Text E

AutoCAD SHX Text T

AutoCAD SHX Text A

AutoCAD SHX Text T

AutoCAD SHX Text S

AutoCAD SHX Text D

AutoCAD SHX Text E

AutoCAD SHX Text T

AutoCAD SHX Text I

AutoCAD SHX Text N

AutoCAD SHX Text U

AutoCAD SHX Text D

AutoCAD SHX Text R

AutoCAD SHX Text A

AutoCAD SHX Text U

AutoCAD SHX Text G

AutoCAD SHX Text T

AutoCAD SHX Text S

AutoCAD SHX Text A

AutoCAD SHX Text O

AutoCAD SHX Text C

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text N

AutoCAD SHX Text SUBSURFACE SOIL EXPLORATION REBUILD UPH STATION PONCE DE LEON INLET NEW SMYRNA BEACH, FLORIDA

AutoCAD SHX Text

BORING LOCATION PLAN

AutoCAD SHX Text

TH

CBR

4. THE SITE PLAN FOR THE BORING LOCATION PLAN WAS OBTAINED FROM THE CLIENT

AND IS TITLED "CM1 CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN", DATED OCTOBER, 2019.

-200 PERCENT PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE SIZE (PERCENT FINES)(ASTM D-1140)

STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE IN BLOWS PER FOOT

NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT IN PERCENT (ASTM D-2216)

PLASTICITY INDEX (ASTM D-4318)

GROUNDWATER LEVEL MEASURED ON DATE DRILLED

SAMPLER ADVANCED BY STATIC WEIGHT OF HAMMER AND RODS ONLY

50 BLOWS FOR 3-INCHES PENETRATION INTO SOIL

ORGANIC CONTENT IN PERCENT (ASTM D-2974)

WOH

LIQUID LIMIT (ASTM D-4318)

PI

50/3

LL

NM

OC

N

SILTY CLAYEY FINE SAND (SM/SC)

FINE SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM)

CLAYEY FINE SAND (SC)

SILTY FINE SAND (SM)

SANDY CLAY TO CLAY (CL/CH)

ORGANIC MUCK (OH)

LIGHT GRAY TO GRAY

LIGHT BROWN TO BROWN

GRAY TO GREENISH GRAY

D

B

C

SOIL DESCRIPTIONS

FINE SAND (SP)

COLORS

A

I COHESIONLESS SOILS

II COHESIVE SOILS

UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE

STRENGTH, QU, TSF

STIFF

VERY STIFF

HARD

VERY SOFT

MEDIUM STIFF

DESCRIPTION

SOFT

VERY LOOSE

MEDIUM DENSE

VERY DENSE

DESCRIPTION

LOOSE

DENSE

8 TO 151 TO 2

2 TO 4

>4

15 TO 30

>30

>50

BLOW COUNT "N"

30 TO 50

10 TO 30

4 TO 10

<4

1/2 TO 1

1/4 TO 1/2

<1/4

2 TO 4

BLOW COUNT "N"

<2

4 TO 8

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM D-2487)

ENGINEERING CLASSIFICATION

NOTES: 1.

SP,SP-SM

SM,SC,CH

3 1/2-INCH DIAMETER TEMPORARY STEEL CASING

CONTENT

TRACE: <5%

FEW: 5 TO 10%

LITTLE: 15 TO 25%

SOME: 30 TO 45%

MOSTLY: 50 TO 100%

UPON COMPLETION OF EACH SPT BORING, THE BOREHOLE WAS GROUTED

WITH CEMENT-BENTONITE SLURRY.

2. ALL SPT BORINGS WERE PERFORMED USING AN AUTOMATIC HAMMER TO THE

BORING TERMINATION DEPTH. AUTOMATIC HAMMER N-VALUES MAY BE

CONVERTED TO EQUIVALENT SAFETY HAMMER N-VALUES BY MULTIPLYING BY 1.24.

SHELL FRAGMENTS TO 1-INCH SIZE

3. SHELL TO 1/2-INCH SIZE UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE ON THE BORING PROFILE.

WHILE THE BORINGS ARE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT THEIR

RESPECTIVE LOCATIONS AND FOR THEIR RESPECTIVE VERTICAL REACHES, LOCAL VARIATIONS

CHARACTERISTIC OF THE SUBSURFACE MATERIALS OF THE REGION ARE ANTICIPATED AND MAY

BE ENCOUNTERED. THE BORING LOGS AND RELATED INFORMATION ARE BASED ON THE

DRILLER'S LOGS AND VISUAL EXAMINATION OF SELECTED SAMPLES IN THE LABORATORY. THE

DELINEATION BETWEEN SOIL TYPES SHOWN ON THE LOGS IS APPROXIMATE AND THE

DESCRIPTION REPRESENTS OUR INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT THE

DESIGNATED BORING LOCATIONS ON THE PARTICULAR DATE DRILLED.

GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THE BORING LOGS REPRESENT GROUNDWATER

SURFACES ENCOUNTERED ON THE DATES SHOWN. FLUCTUATIONS IN WATER TABLE LEVELS

SHOULD BE ANTICIPATED THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.

DARK GRAY OR DARK BROWN

STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (SPT) BORING

AutoCAD SHX Text

CD

AutoCAD SHX Text 19-6455

AutoCAD SHX Text

FILE NO.

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRAWN BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text Materials Consultants

AutoCAD SHX Text Geotechnical, Environmental and

AutoCAD SHX Text Ardaman & Associates, Inc.

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPROVED BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text

CHECKED BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text 02/04/20

AutoCAD SHX Text

FIGURE:

AutoCAD SHX Text

DATE:

AutoCAD SHX Text SUBSURFACE SOIL EXPLORATION REBUILD UPH STATION PONCE DE LEON INLET NEW SMYRNA BEACH, FLORIDA

AutoCAD SHX Text

SOIL BORING LEGEND

TH

11/08/19

N

1A

D E

P T

H

F E

E T

HAND

AUGER

1B

1B

6B

1B

5C

6C

5B

WITH TRACE SHELL

TO 1/8-INCH SIZE

WITH LITTLE SHELL

WITH TRACE SHELL

WITH SOME SHELL

WITH

1B

-200: 1

NM: 19

-200: 13

NM: 31

-200: 2

NM: 23

-200: 34

NM: 27

-200: 22

NM: 35

-200: 94

NM: 60

LL: 83

PI: 57

D E

P T

H F

E E

T

NOTE: PLEASE REFER TO FIGURE 3 FOR THE SOIL BORING LEGEND.

AutoCAD SHX Text

TH-1

AutoCAD SHX Text

CD

AutoCAD SHX Text 19-6455

AutoCAD SHX Text

FILE NO.

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRAWN BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text Materials Consultants

AutoCAD SHX Text Geotechnical, Environmental and

AutoCAD SHX Text Ardaman & Associates, Inc.

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPROVED BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text

CHECKED BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text 02/04/20

AutoCAD SHX Text

FIGURE:

AutoCAD SHX Text

DATE:

AutoCAD SHX Text SUBSURFACE SOIL EXPLORATION REBUILD UPH STATION PONCE DE LEON INLET NEW SMYRNA BEACH, FLORIDA

SOIL BORING PROFILE

11/08/19

N

1A

HAND

AUGER

WITH TRACE SHELL

TO 1/8-INCH SIZE

1B

1B

6C

5C

6B

5B

WITH

1B

WITH

1B

WITH

5B

WITH SOME SHELL

WITH SOME SHELL

WITH TRACE SHELL

-200: 2

NM: 27

-200: 8

NM: 26

-200: 3

NM: 23

2B

-200: 93

NM: 64

LL: 93

PI: 63

-200: 57

NM: 50

-200: 21

NM: 37

D E

P T

H

F E

E T

D E

P T

H F

E E

T

NOTE: PLEASE REFER TO FIGURE 3 FOR THE SOIL BORING LEGEND.

AutoCAD SHX Text

TH-2

AutoCAD SHX Text

CD

AutoCAD SHX Text 19-6455

AutoCAD SHX Text

FILE NO.

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRAWN BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text Materials Consultants

AutoCAD SHX Text Geotechnical, Environmental and

AutoCAD SHX Text Ardaman & Associates, Inc.

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPROVED BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text

CHECKED BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text 02/04/20

AutoCAD SHX Text

FIGURE:

AutoCAD SHX Text

DATE:

AutoCAD SHX Text SUBSURFACE SOIL EXPLORATION REBUILD UPH STATION PONCE DE LEON INLET NEW SMYRNA BEACH, FLORIDA

11/06/19

WOH

N

50/5

1B

5A

5B

6C

5B

4C

1B

WATER

WITH TRACE SHELL

WITH FEW SHELL

WITH TRACE SHELL

TO 1-INCH SIZE

WITH SOME SHELL

MOSTLY CEMENTED

NODULES WITH SHELL

WITH SOME SHELL

WITH TRACE SHELL

NO RECOVERY,

ASSUME SILTY

CLAYEY FINE SAND

WITH LITTLE SHELL

CASING TO 25 FEET

1D

2D

2B

WITH TRACE SHELL

-200: 4

NM: 32

OC: 1

-200: 5

NM: 29

-200: 6

NM: 27

-200: 12

NM: 29

-200: 86

NM: 50

-200: 46

NM: 39

LL: 53

PI: 34

D E

P T

H F

E E

T

D E

P T

H

F E

E T

NOTE: PLEASE REFER TO FIGURE 3 FOR

THE SOIL BORING LEGEND.

AutoCAD SHX Text

TH-3

AutoCAD SHX Text

CD

AutoCAD SHX Text 19-6455

AutoCAD SHX Text

FILE NO.

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRAWN BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text Materials Consultants

AutoCAD SHX Text Geotechnical, Environmental and

AutoCAD SHX Text Ardaman & Associates, Inc.

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPROVED BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text

CHECKED BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text 02/04/20

AutoCAD SHX Text

FIGURE:

AutoCAD SHX Text

DATE:

AutoCAD SHX Text SUBSURFACE SOIL EXPLORATION REBUILD UPH STATION PONCE DE LEON INLET NEW SMYRNA BEACH, FLORIDA

11/05/19

N

1D

50/5

1B

2B

6C

3B

4C

6C

4C

5B

2A

WATER

WITH

1B

WITH LITTLE SHELL

WITH SOME SHELL

TO 1-INCH SIZE

WITH TRACE

AND SHELL

WITH SOME SHELL

WITH TRACE SHELL

WITH LITTLE SHELL

WITH SOME SHELL

WITH TRACE SHELL

8D

CEMENTED WITH LENSES

AND TRACE SHELL

5B

CASING TO 25 FEET

-200: 5

NM: 18

OC: 2

-200: 3

NM: 20

-200: 5

NM: 29

-200: 18

NM: 42

-200: 92

NM: 69

-200: 43

NM: 33

LL: 49

PI: 29

D E

P T

H F

E E

T

D E

P T

H

F E

E T

NOTE: PLEASE REFER TO FIGURE 3 FOR

THE SOIL BORING LEGEND.

AutoCAD SHX Text

TH-4

AutoCAD SHX Text

CD

AutoCAD SHX Text 19-6455

AutoCAD SHX Text

FILE NO.

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRAWN BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text Materials Consultants

AutoCAD SHX Text Geotechnical, Environmental and

AutoCAD SHX Text Ardaman & Associates, Inc.

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPROVED BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text

CHECKED BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text 02/04/20

AutoCAD SHX Text

FIGURE:

AutoCAD SHX Text

DATE:

AutoCAD SHX Text SUBSURFACE SOIL EXPLORATION REBUILD UPH STATION PONCE DE LEON INLET NEW SMYRNA BEACH, FLORIDA

D E

P T

H F

E E

T

11/05/19

N

8D

WITH TRACE SHELL

50/0.5

WATER

5B

1B

1B

6C

5B

6C

5C

5A

1B

WITH

1B

WITH

1B

WITH LITTLE SHELL

WITH TRACE SHELL

WITH LITTLE SHELL

WITH CEMENTED

NODULES

WITH SOME SHELL

WITH TRACE SHELL

WITH

1B

-200: 98

NM: 72

LL: 109

PI: 72

-200: 58

NM: 36

-200: 48

NM: 32

CASING TO 25 FEET

-200: 84

NM: 55

-200: 51

NM: 98

OC: 4

-200: 2

NM: 23

D E

P T

H

F E

E T

NOTE: PLEASE REFER TO FIGURE 3 FOR

THE SOIL BORING LEGEND.

AutoCAD SHX Text

TH-5

AutoCAD SHX Text

CD

AutoCAD SHX Text 19-6455

AutoCAD SHX Text

FILE NO.

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRAWN BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text Materials Consultants

AutoCAD SHX Text Geotechnical, Environmental and

AutoCAD SHX Text Ardaman & Associates, Inc.

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPROVED BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text

CHECKED BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text 02/04/20

AutoCAD SHX Text

FIGURE:

AutoCAD SHX Text

DATE:

AutoCAD SHX Text SUBSURFACE SOIL EXPLORATION REBUILD UPH STATION PONCE DE LEON INLET NEW SMYRNA BEACH, FLORIDA

APPENDIX I

Standard Penetration Test Boring Procedure

STANDARD PENETRATION TEST

The standard penetration test is a widely accepted test method of in situ testing of foundation soils (ASTM D 1586). A 2-foot long, 2-inch O.D. split-barrel sampler attached to the end of a string of drilling rods is driven 18 inches into the ground by successive blows of a 140-pound hammer freely dropping 30 inches. The number of blows needed for each 6 inches of penetration is recorded. The sum of the blows required for penetration of the second and third 6-inch increments of penetration constitutes the test result or N-value. After the test, the sampler is extracted from the ground and opened to allow visual examination and classification of the retained soil sample. The N-value has been empirically correlated with various soil properties allowing a conservative estimate of the behavior of soils under load.

The tests are usually performed at 5-foot intervals. The test holes are advanced to the test elevations by rotary drilling with a cutting bit, using circulating fluid to remove the cuttings and hold the fine grains in suspension. The circulating fluid, which is a bentonitic drilling mud, is also used to keep the hole open below the water table by maintaining an excess hydrostatic pressure inside the hole. In some soil deposits, particularly highly pervious ones, NX-size flush-coupled casing must be driven to just above the testing depth to keep the hole open and/or prevent the loss of circulating fluid.

Representative split-spoon samples from the soils are brought to our laboratory in air-tight jars for further evaluation and testing, if necessary. Samples not used in testing are stored for 30 days prior to being discarded.

APPENDIX II

Grain Size Distribution Curves

Project Name:

Project Location:

Client Name:

Sample No.: Sample Location:

Sample Description: - Shell with Light Gray to Gray Fine Sand

Percent Passing No. 200 = LL: PL: PI: 1.9% Not TestedNot Tested

Rebuild UPH

Station Ponce De Leon Inlet

Tetra Tech, Inc.

Not Tested

113-19-60-6455

TH-1 30'

ARDAMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

A&A File Number:

Geotechnical, Environmental and

Materials Consultants

/2

/2

/4

/2

/8

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.010.1110100

P e rc e n t

P a s s in g

Grain Size (mm)

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVE

GRAVEL

SAND

Coarse to Medium Fine

SILT CLAY

Client Name:

Sample No.: Sample Location:

Sample Description: - Gray to Greenish Gray Clayey Fine Sand with Some Shell

Percent Passing No. 200 = LL: PL: PI: 22.0% Not TestedNot Tested

Rebuild UPH

Station Ponce De Leon Inlet

Tetra Tech, Inc.

Not Tested

SC

113-19-60-6455

TH-1 60'

ARDAMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

A&A File Number:

Geotechnical, Environmental and

Materials Consultants

/2

/2

/4

/2

/8

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.010.1110100

P e rc e n t

P a s s in g

Grain Size (mm)

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVE

GRAVEL

SAND

Client Name:

Sample No.: Sample Location:

Sample Description: - Shell with Light Gray to Gray Fine Sand

Percent Passing No. 200 = LL: PL: PI:

A&A File Number:

Geotechnical, Environmental and

Materials Consultants

113-19-60-6455

TH-2 35'

ARDAMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

3.4% Not TestedNot Tested

Rebuild UPH

Station Ponce De Leon Inlet

Tetra Tech, Inc.

Not Tested

/2

/2

/4

/2

/8

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.010.1110100

P e rc e n t

P a s s in g

Grain Size (mm)

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVE

GRAVEL

SAND

Client Name:

Sample No.: Sample Location:

Sample Description: - Light Gray to Gray Sandy Clay to Clay with Some Shell

Percent Passing No. 200 = LL: PL: PI:

A&A File Number:

Geotechnical, Environmental and

Materials Consultants

113-19-60-6455

TH-2 65'

ARDAMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

56.7% Not TestedNot Tested

Rebuild UPH

Station Ponce De Leon Inlet

Tetra Tech, Inc.

Not Tested

CL/CH

/2

/2

/4

/2

/8

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.010.1110100

P e rc e n t

P a s s in g

Grain Size (mm)

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVE

GRAVEL

SAND

Client Name:

Sample No.: Sample Location:

Sample Description: - Shell with Lgiht Gray to Gray Clayey Fine Sand

Percent Passing No. 200 = LL: PL: PI:

A&A File Number:

Geotechnical, Environmental and

Materials Consultants

113-19-60-6455

TH-2 75'

ARDAMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

21.4% Not TestedNot Tested

Rebuild UPH

Station Ponce De Leon Inlet

Tetra Tech, Inc.

Not Tested

/2

/2

/4

/2

/8

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.010.1110100

P e rc e n t

P a s s in g

Grain Size (mm)

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVE

GRAVEL

SAND

Client Name:

Sample No.: Sample Location:

Sample Description: - Dark Brown Fine Sand with Silt

Percent Passing No. 200 = LL: PL: PI:

A&A File Number:

Geotechnical, Environmental and

Materials Consultants

113-19-60-6455

TH-3 17'

ARDAMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

5.1% Not TestedNot Tested

Rebuild UPH

Station Ponce De Leon Inlet

Tetra Tech, Inc.

Not Tested

SP-SM

/2

/2

/4

/2

/8

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.010.1110100

P e rc e n t

P a s s in g

Grain Size (mm)

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVE

GRAVEL

SAND

Client Name:

Sample No.: Sample Location:

Sample Description: - Gray to Greenish Gray Silty Clayey Fine Sand with Some Shell

Percent Passing No. 200 = LL: PL: PI:

A&A File Number:

Geotechnical, Environmental and

Materials Consultants

113-19-60-6455

TH-3 85'

ARDAMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

46.3% Not TestedNot Tested

Rebuild UPH

Station Ponce De Leon Inlet

Tetra Tech, Inc.

Not Tested

SM/SC

/2

/2

/4

/2

/8

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.010.1110100

P e rc e n t

P a s s in g

Grain Size (mm)

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVE

GRAVEL

SAND

Client Name:

Sample No.: Sample Location:

Sample Description: - Shell with Light Gray to Gray Fine Sand

Percent Passing No. 200 = LL: PL: PI:

A&A File Number:

Geotechnical, Environmental and

Materials Consultants

113-19-60-6455

TH-4 30'

ARDAMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

3.2% Not TestedNot Tested

Rebuild UPH

Station Ponce De Leon Inlet

Tetra Tech, Inc.

Not Tested

/2

/2

/4

/2

/8

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.010.1110100

P e rc e n t

P a s s in g

Grain Size (mm)

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVE

GRAVEL

SAND

Client Name:

Sample No.: Sample Location:

Sample Description: - Light Gray to Gray Clayey Fine Sand with Some Shell

Percent Passing No. 200 = LL: PL: PI:

A&A File Number:

Geotechnical, Environmental and

Materials Consultants

113-19-60-6455

TH-4 80'

ARDAMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

42.8% Not TestedNot Tested

Rebuild UPH

Station Ponce De Leon Inlet

Tetra Tech, Inc.

Not Tested

SC

/2

/2

/4

/2

/8

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.010.1110100

P e rc e n t

P a s s in g

Grain Size (mm)

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVE

GRAVEL

SAND

Client Name:

Sample No.: Sample Location:

Sample Description: - Shell with Light Gray to Gray Fine Sand

Percent Passing No. 200 = LL: PL: PI:

A&A File Number:

Geotechnical, Environmental and

Materials Consultants

113-19-60-6455

TH-5 26'

ARDAMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.

2.2% Not TestedNot Tested

Rebuild UPH

Station Ponce De Leon Inlet

Tetra Tech, Inc.

Not Tested

/2

/2

/4

/2

/8

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

N o

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.010.1110100

P e rc e n t

P a s s in g

Grain Size (mm)

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVE

GRAVEL

SAND

APPENDIX III

Standard Proctor and California Bearing Ratio Test Results

APPENDIX IV

Laboratory Analytical Results and Chain of Custody Forms

Note that the analytical results of analytes that were detected above MDL (Method Detection

Limits) are summarized on pages 5 and 6 of the laboratory report contained in Appendix IV.

10775 Central Port Drive

Orlando FL, 32824

407.826.5314 407.850.6945Phone: FAX:

ENCO Workorder(s): AC07534,AC07873,AC08006

Orlando, FL 32809

Unless otherwise noted in an attached project narrative, all samples were received in acceptable condition and processed in accordance with the referenced methods/procedures.

Results for these procedures apply only to the samples as submitted.

The analytical results contained in this report are in compliance with NELAC standards, except as noted in the project narrative if applicable. This report shall not be reproduced except in full, without the written approval of the Laboratory.

This report contains only those analyses performed by Environmental Conservation

Laboratories. Unless otherwise noted, all analyses were performed at ENCO Orlando. Data from outside organizations will be reported under separate cover.

If you have any questions or require further information, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely, Enclosure(s)

Project Number: [none], Project Name/Desc: Rebuild UPH

Attn: Ginny Goff

Ardaman & Associates (AR001)

8008 S Orange Ave

Ryya B Kumm For Kaitlin Dylnicki

Project Manager

Tuesday, December 3, 2019

RE: Laboratory Results for

Dear Ginny Goff, Enclosed is a copy of your laboratory report for test samples received by our laboratory between Thursday, November 7, 2019 and Tuesday, November 19, 2019.

Enclosure(s)

Page 1 of 72This report relates only to the sample as received by the laboratory, and may only be reproduced in full.FINAL www.encolabs.com

SAMPLE SUMMARY/LABORATORY CHRONICLE

TH-4-0 AC07534-01 Sampled: 11/05/19 12:41 Received: 11/07/19 08:19Client ID: Lab ID:

Prep Date/Time(s)Hold Date/Time(s)Parameter Analysis Date/Time(s)Preparation

EPA 6010D 05/03/20 11/12/19 08:57 11/14/19 10:32EPA 3050B

EPA 7471B 12/03/19 11/08/19 15:33 11/11/19 09:12EPA 7471B

EPA 8015C 11/19/19 11/11/19 10:16 11/11/19 15:47EPA 5035

EPA 8260D 11/19/19 11/13/19 10:10 11/13/19 14:43EPA 5035_MS

EPA 8270E 11/19/19 11/11/19 14:00 11/12/19 15:1612/21/19EPA 3550C_MS

TH-4-0 AC07534-01RE1 Sampled: 11/05/19 12:41 Received: 11/07/19 08:19Client ID: Lab ID:

Prep Date/Time(s)Hold Date/Time(s)Parameter Analysis Date/Time(s)Preparation

EPA 8015C 11/19/19 11/12/19 08:55 11/14/19 10:3812/22/19SOP EXSV-33

EPA 8081B 11/19/19 11/09/19 08:00 11/11/19 16:2112/19/19EPA 3550C

EPA 8082A 11/04/20 11/13/19 09:30 11/18/19 12:5211/04/20EPA 3550C

TH-4 (1-3) AC07534-02 Sampled: 11/05/19 12:50 Received: 11/07/19 08:19Client ID: Lab ID:

Prep Date/Time(s)Hold Date/Time(s)Parameter Analysis Date/Time(s)Preparation

EPA 6010D 05/03/20 11/12/19 08:57 11/14/19 10:34EPA 3050B

EPA 7471B 12/03/19 11/08/19 15:33 11/11/19 09:22EPA 7471B

EPA 8015C 11/19/19 11/11/19 10:16 11/11/19 16:36EPA 5035

EPA 8260D 11/19/19 11/13/19 10:10 11/13/19 15:12EPA 5035_MS

EPA 8270E 11/19/19 11/11/19 14:00 11/12/19 16:4612/21/19EPA 3550C_MS

TH-4 (1-3) AC07534-02RE1 Sampled: 11/05/19 12:50 Received: 11/07/19 08:19Client ID: Lab ID:

Prep Date/Time(s)Hold Date/Time(s)Parameter Analysis Date/Time(s)Preparation

EPA 8015C 11/19/19 11/12/19 08:55 11/14/19 11:0712/22/19SOP EXSV-33

EPA 8081B 11/19/19 11/09/19 08:00 11/11/19 16:3312/19/19EPA 3550C

EPA 8082A 11/04/20 11/13/19 09:30 11/18/19 13:0311/04/20EPA 3550C

TH-4 (4-5) AC07534-03 Sampled: 11/05/19 13:00 Received: 11/07/19 08:19Client ID: Lab ID:

Prep Date/Time(s)Hold Date/Time(s)Parameter Analysis Date/Time(s)Preparation

EPA 6010D 05/03/20 11/12/19 08:57 11/14/19 10:36EPA 3050B

EPA 7471B 12/03/19 11/08/19 15:33 11/11/19 09:25EPA 7471B

EPA 8015C 11/19/19 11/11/19 10:16 11/11/19 17:09EPA 5035

EPA 8260D 11/19/19 11/13/19 10:10 11/13/19 15:42EPA 5035_MS

TH-4 (4-5) AC07534-03RE1 Sampled: 11/05/19 13:00 Received: 11/07/19 08:19Client ID: Lab ID:

Prep Date/Time(s)Hold Date/Time(s)Parameter Analysis Date/Time(s)Preparation

EPA 8015C 11/19/19 11/12/19 08:55 11/14/19 11:3712/22/19SOP EXSV-33

EPA 8081B 11/19/19 11/09/19 08:00 11/11/19 16:4512/19/19EPA 3550C

EPA 8082A 11/04/20 11/13/19 09:30 11/18/19 13:1511/04/20EPA 3550C

EPA 8270E 11/19/19 11/13/19 12:30 11/15/19 14:4612/23/19EPA 3550C_MS

TH-1 (1-3) AC07873-01 Sampled: 11/08/19 09:00 Received: 11/08/19 12:15Client ID: Lab ID:

Prep Date/Time(s)Hold Date/Time(s)Parameter Analysis Date/Time(s)Preparation

EPA 6010D 05/06/20 11/13/19 09:01 11/14/19 11:42EPA 3050B

EPA 7471B 12/06/19 11/13/19 15:07 11/14/19 10:09EPA 7471B

EPA 8015C 11/22/19 11/14/19 08:48 11/15/19 15:3912/24/19SOP EXSV-33

EPA 8081B 11/22/19 11/09/19 08:00 11/11/19 18:0012/19/19EPA 3550C

EPA 8260D 11/22/19 11/13/19 10:10 11/13/19 17:08EPA 5035_MS

EPA 8270E 11/22/19 11/11/19 14:00 11/12/19 12:1712/21/19EPA 3550C_MS

TH-1 (1-3) AC07873-01RE1 Sampled: 11/08/19 09:00 Received: 11/08/19 12:15Client ID: Lab ID:

Prep Date/Time(s)Hold Date/Time(s)Parameter Analysis Date/Time(s)Preparation

EPA 8082A 11/07/20 11/13/19 09:30 11/18/19 12:4011/07/20EPA 3550C

Page 2 of 72This report relates only to the sample as received by the laboratory, and may only be reproduced in full.FINAL

TH-1 -3.5 AC07873-02 Sampled: 11/08/19 09:20 Received: 11/08/19 12:15Client ID: Lab ID:

Prep Date/Time(s)Hold Date/Time(s)Parameter Analysis Date/Time(s)Preparation

EPA 6010D 05/06/20 11/13/19 09:01 11/14/19 11:44EPA 3050B

EPA 7471B 12/06/19 11/13/19 15:07 11/14/19 10:22EPA 7471B

EPA 8015C 11/22/19 11/14/19 08:48 11/15/19 16:0912/24/19SOP EXSV-33

EPA 8081B 11/22/19 11/09/19 08:00 11/11/19 18:1212/19/19EPA 3550C

EPA 8260D 11/22/19 11/13/19 10:10 11/13/19 17:37EPA 5035_MS

EPA 8270E 11/22/19 11/11/19 14:00 11/12/19 13:1612/21/19EPA 3550C_MS

TH-1 -3.5 AC07873-02RE1 Sampled: 11/08/19 09:20 Received: 11/08/19 12:15Client ID: Lab ID:

Prep Date/Time(s)Hold Date/Time(s)Parameter Analysis Date/Time(s)Preparation

EPA 8082A 11/07/20 11/13/19 09:30 11/18/19 13:2711/07/20EPA 3550C

TH-1 (4-5) AC07873-03 Sampled: 11/08/19 09:40 Received: 11/08/19 12:15Client ID: Lab ID:

Prep Date/Time(s)Hold Date/Time(s)Parameter Analysis Date/Time(s)Preparation

EPA 6010D 05/06/20 11/13/19 09:01 11/14/19 11:46EPA 3050B

EPA 7471B 12/06/19 11/13/19 15:07 11/14/19 10:25EPA 7471B

EPA 8015C 11/22/19 11/12/19 11:40 11/12/19 19:07EPA 5035

EPA 8015C 11/22/19 11/14/19 08:48 11/15/19 16:3812/24/19SOP EXSV-33

EPA 8081B 11/22/19 11/09/19 08:00 11/11/19 18:2412/19/19EPA 3550C

EPA 8260D 11/22/19 11/13/19 10:10 11/13/19 18:06EPA 5035_MS

EPA 8270E 11/22/19 11/11/19 14:00 11/12/19 13:4712/21/19EPA 3550C_MS

TH-1 (4-5) AC07873-03RE1 Sampled: 11/08/19 09:40 Received: 11/08/19 12:15Client ID: Lab ID:

Prep Date/Time(s)Hold Date/Time(s)Parameter Analysis Date/Time(s)Preparation

EPA 8082A 11/07/20 11/13/19 09:30 11/18/19 13:3911/07/20EPA 3550C

TH-2 (1-3) AC07873-04 Sampled: 11/08/19 09:55 Received: 11/08/19 12:15Client ID: Lab ID:

Prep Date/Time(s)Hold Date/Time(s)Parameter Analysis Date/Time(s)Preparation

EPA 6010D 05/06/20 11/13/19 09:01 11/14/19 11:48EPA 3050B

EPA 7471B 12/06/19 11/13/19 15:07 11/14/19 10:28EPA 7471B

EPA 8015C 11/22/19 11/12/19 11:40 11/12/19 19:40EPA 5035

EPA 8081B 11/22/19 11/09/19 08:00 11/11/19 18:3712/19/19EPA 3550C

EPA 8260D 11/22/19 11/13/19 10:10 11/13/19 18:35EPA 5035_MS

EPA 8270E 11/22/19 11/11/19 14:00 11/12/19 17:4612/21/19EPA 3550C_MS

TH-2 (1-3) AC07873-04RE1 Sampled: 11/08/19 09:55 Received: 11/08/19 12:15Client ID: Lab ID:

Prep Date/Time(s)Hold Date/Time(s)Parameter Analysis Date/Time(s)Preparation

EPA 8015C 11/22/19 11/14/19 08:48 11/17/19 08:2812/24/19SOP EXSV-33

EPA 8082A 11/07/20 11/13/19 09:30 11/18/19 14:1511/07/20EPA 3550C

TH-2 -3.5 AC07873-05 Sampled: 11/08/19 10:10 Received: 11/08/19 12:15Client ID: Lab ID:

Prep Date/Time(s)Hold Date/Time(s)Parameter Analysis Date/Time(s)Preparation

EPA 6010D 05/06/20 11/13/19 09:01 11/14/19 11:50EPA 3050B

EPA 7471B 12/06/19 11/13/19 15:07 11/14/19 10:31EPA 7471B

EPA 8015C 11/22/19 11/14/19 08:48 11/15/19 17:3912/24/19SOP EXSV-33

EPA 8081B 11/22/19 11/09/19 08:00 11/11/19 18:4912/19/19EPA 3550C

EPA 8260D 11/22/19 11/13/19 10:10 11/13/19 19:04EPA 5035_MS

TH-2 -3.5 AC07873-05RE1 Sampled: 11/08/19…