A06 Attachment 7 Moran Well House Geotech Report.pdf

TABLE OF CONTENTS

GENERAL AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION

SCOPE OF SERVICES

SITE CONDITIONS

SITE DESCRIPTION

GEOLOGIC AND SOIL MAPPING

SEISMIC HAZARD

SITE INVESTIGATIONS

FIELD INVESTIGATION

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

SOIL PROFILES

GROUNDWATER

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

GENERAL

SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS

GROUNDWATER

CONVENTIONAL SPREAD FOOTINGS

LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES

INTERIOR SLABS-ON-GRADE

SIDEWALKS AND EXTERIOR SLABS

DRIVEWAY AND PARKING LOT RECOMMENDATIONS

CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

EARTHWORK AND SITE GRADING

GENERAL COMMENTS

WARRANTY AND LIMITING CONDITIONS

GENERAL AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION

This is the report of a geotechnical investigation for a proposed well house/pump station in Moran Wyoming within Grand Teton National Park. The well house is part of a water system upgrade for the National Park facilities and housing at Moran. Structural plans were not available at the time of this report, slab-on-grade and shallow spread footings are addressed in this report. Geotechnical recommendations in this report are based on a preliminary site plan, survey and project information provided by Grand Teton National Park engineering personnel.

Scope of Services The scope of services for this investigation was to provide geotechnical recommendations based on a subsurface investigation and soils laboratory testing for the proposed well house.

The purpose of the subsurface investigation was to determine soil and groundwater characteristics. The results of the subsurface investigation and subsequent laboratory testing were utilized in engineering analysis for recommendations pertaining to structural foundations, drive and parking areas, retaining walls, and general earthwork. Slope stability analyses were not conducted, as it is our engineering judgment that the existing and proposed slope geometry and composition indicate stability. Specific recommendations for drainage and surface water conveyance are not within the scope of work.

Foundation analysis and resulting recommendations are based on typical loads for the type of structure(s) proposed. Prior to finalization of project plans, foundation plans and loads should be sent to this office for review to ensure compliance with this report.

Recommendations assume foundation elements are not subjected to unusual loading conditions such as eccentric loads or vibratory equipment. Lateral earth pressure recommendations contained herein are general in nature; it is critical that additional retaining wall designs are reviewed by the geotechnical engineer.

SITE CONDITIONS

Site Description Moran, Wyoming is an unincorporated community composed of offices, service facilities, and housing for the National Park Service. The community and the well house are located on a flat alluvial terrace northeast of the confluence of the Snake River and Buffalo Fork. The well house footprint lies partially within a gravel driveway/parking area and partially in a sagebrush meadow. Adjacent to the well house to the southeast is a wood frame and metal roof shed covering the Federal Highway Administration office trailer and to the northwest the Moran teacher’s residence. Access is from Central Street/Moran Court to the southwest.

Site topography is nearly flat with gentle slopes down to the southwest toward the confluence of the Snake River and the Buffalo Fork about 2000 feet to the southwest.

Geologic and Soil Mapping The area’s surface geology is mapped on the USGS "Geologic Map of the Moran Quadrangle, Teton County, Wyoming,” J.D. Love, 2004. Mapped deposits throughout the site are “Qfp – Flood-plain deposits – Sand, silt, clay, and minor lenses of gravel; lesser amount of gravel at surface distinguishes these deposits from alluvium along topographically lower stream valleys.”

The USDA-NRCS Web-based Soil Survey of Teton County has mapped the Tineman gravelly loam throughout the site. Tineman gravelly loam soils are gravelly glaciofluvial deposits located on 0 to 3 percent slopes. The soil is described as very deep, well drained, and composed of gravelly loam, very gravelly sandy loam, and very gravelly sand. Depth to groundwater is indicated to be deeper than 80 inches.

Seismic Hazard Jackson Hole is located within the Intermountain Seismic Belt, a zone extending from southern Utah through eastern Idaho and western Montana, and encompassing western Wyoming and the Teton Range as referenced by Robert B. Smith and Walter J. Arabasz in "Seismicity of the Intermountain Seismic Belt, Neotectonics of North America,” 1991. The USGS Earthquake Hazards Program has mapped Quaternary faults and folds in the United States as displayed on Google Earth. Active faults mapped in the vicinity are the Teton Fault, Baldy Mountain Fault, Togwotee Lodge faults, faults in the boundary region of Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks, and secondary faults within the Jackson Hole Valley. In particular, the Teton Fault is thought to be capable of producing major earthquakes of a magnitude of six or greater. The portion of the Teton Fault mapped as active in the Quaternary is approximately 11.4 miles west/northwest of the site. Multiple minor earthquakes with epicenters near the site have occurred in recent years (USGS Earthquake Database).

SITE INVESTIGATIONS

Field Investigation On August 2, 2019, two test pits, TP-1 and TP-2, were excavated within and near the proposed well house. Test pit locations are shown on Drawing 2 – Test Pit Location Map in the Appendix. Test pits were approximately located with a handheld Leica Zeno 20 GPS unit. Test pit locations and depths were selected to determine subsurface conditions near and within the proposed improvements. All test pits were backfilled with excavated material after logging was completed.

FC Excavation of Jackson, Wyoming, excavated the test pits with a John Deere 310SJ rubber-tired backhoe. Andy Pruett, a Professional Geologist at Nelson Engineering, logged the test pits and directed the sampling. Soils were classified in the field and logged by the geologist.

The soil classifications, moisture conditions, and presence of organic or other notable features were recorded in the field logs. Bulk samples were sealed in plastic bags and transported to our laboratory for testing and further classification. A relatively undisturbed sample of sand/silty clay was obtained in cylindrical liner for consolidation testing.

Groundwater observations were made at the time of the excavation based on field observations of soil moisture conditions. Field observations are presented on the test pit logs in the Appendix.

The stratification lines shown on the test pit logs represent the approximate boundary between soil types. The actual in-situ transition may be either gradual or abrupt. Due to the nature and depositional characteristics of natural soils and fills, care should be taken in interpolating subsurface conditions beyond the location of the test pits. Soil conditions can change rapidly in both the lateral and vertical directions. Groundwater conditions shown on the logs are only for the dates indicated.

The subsurface conditions were interpreted from the described test pits at the site. The soil properties inferred from the field assessments supported by our experience formed the basis for developing our conclusions and recommendations.

Samples obtained during the field investigation were taken to the laboratory where they were visually classified in accordance with ASTM Test Method D-2487-93, which is based on the Unified Soils Classification System.

The soil samples stored in our laboratory will be discarded after 30 days from the date this report is submitted unless we receive a specific request to retain them.

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

Soil Profiles Somewhat similar soil profiles were found in both test pits. Surficial soils of 0.5 feet thickness were dry, dark brown sandy silt topsoil with moderate roots throughout. Below surficial topsoil to 1.5 feet in TP-1 and 2 feet in TP-2 were dry, hard, brown silty sand/sandy silt with minor fine gravels and minor roots throughout. From 1.5 to 2.75 feet in TP-1 and from 2 to

3.75 feet in TP-2, were dry, medium dense, brown, poorly-graded, fine-grained sand with silt and minor fine gravels. From 2.75 feet to 8.5 feet in TP-1 and from 3.75 feet to test pit bottom at 12 feet in TP-2, were dense flood-plain deposits composed of well-graded gravel with sand and occasional cobbles up to 5-inches maximum dimension with approximately 60 percent round to sub-round gravels and cobbles and 40 percent sand. Below the floodplain deposits in TP-1 from 8.5 feet to test pit bottom at 14 feet were inter-tonguing lenses of moist, gray, poorly-graded fine-grained sand and sandy silty clay. Sands were loose to medium dense and silty clay was stiff with pocket penetrometer readings of 1 to 2 tons per square foot. Minor to moderate caving of test pit walls within the gravels was observed in both test pits. Test pit excavation was characterized by easy digging in both test pits.

TP-2 intersected the northern driveway edge, observed section was 6-inches of crushed base overlying 6-inches of imported pit run gravel with sand overlying native silty sand/sandy silt.

Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered to the 14 plus foot depth of the test pits. Local water levels will be heavily influenced by the flow/water surface elevation in the adjacent Buffalo Fork and Snake Rivers. Levels will fluctuate seasonally with typical peak elevation in late spring or early summer, August is not representative of high-water elevations.

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

General Project plans are in the development phase at the time of this report. Conventional shallow spread footings with stem walls and slab on grade floors or crawlspace are anticipated construction. Finished floor elevations were not available at the time of this report.

Recommendations emphasize concerns at depths at and below the anticipated bottom footing depth in soils influenced by foundation loading.

Seismic Design Parameters The 2015 International Building Code (IBC) designates site class per ASCE 7 Chapter 20. Data obtained in this investigation is not sufficient to determine soil parameters as required by ASCE 7; therefore, the IBC directs that seismic coefficients and design spectra shall be determined using Site Class D and Latitude of 43.842° and Longitude of -110.508°.

Groundwater Groundwater levels in the area will fluctuate seasonally. Water level at the site will closely track the water surface in the nearby Buffalo Fork and Snake Rivers with peak levels occurring the spring and early summer. Groundwater is not expected to rise to the level of planned elevation of shallow footings. A monitoring well was installed in TP-1 to allow for measurement during spring runoff.

Conventional Spread Footings Spread footings bearing on native dense gravels found in the test pits below depths of approximately 0.5 to 2.5 feet are appropriate foundation elements. A net allowable bearing capacity of 2500 PSF is appropriate. Where topsoil, silt, sand, or silty clay stratum are found at bottom of footing elevation, these soils shall be removed until competent dense gravels are revealed. Structural fill shall then be placed as necessary to achieve footing grade.

Existing subgrade shall be compacted to a depth of 8 inches to 95% of maximum density per ASTM D698 (Standard Proctor) beneath all footing and fills below footings.

The net allowable soil pressure includes dead load plus maximum live load. The above analysis assumes a maximum width of 3 feet for continuous footings and a maximum dimension of 6 feet for isolated footings. Construction of large footing sizes can lead to increased settlement as the bearing pressure bulb can extend deeper into the soil profile resulting in settlement of greater than that specified. The net allowable soil pressure includes dead load plus maximum live load. These calculations assume a minimum burial depth of the footing of 36 inches and that a maximum total settlement of 0.5 inches be tolerated on any one footing and the maximum differential settlement between footings that can be tolerated is 0.5 inches.

Bearing capacity values and settlement shall be checked for each combination of load to determine whether settlement or bearing capacity will control the response of the footing.

Construction of large footing sizes can lead to increased settlement as the bearing pressure bulb can extend deeper into the soil profile resulting in settlement of greater than that specified. Foundation elements supporting large concentrated loads should be analyzed on an individual basis to determine settlement and bearing characteristics. Other foundation parameters are given below:

1. A one-third increase in allowable bearing capacity may be used for short duration loads such as wind or seismic.

2. Lateral loads may be resisted by friction between the footing base and supporting soil and lateral bearing pressure against the sides of the footings. Design parameters recommended are a coefficient of friction of 0.45 at the footing base, lateral passive bearing pressure of 350 PSF per foot of depth.

3. Backfill against shallow foundations and stem walls shall conform to Drawing 3 – Foundation Backfill Detail in the Appendix. In no case shall material greater than 6 inches in diameter bear directly on or against foundation elements. Placing oversized material against rigid surfaces can damage the structure and interferes with proper compaction.

Any soil type encountered at the bottom of footing excavations other than the ones described above should be analyzed by Nelson Engineering. Isolated boulders at footing grade should be over excavated and removed unless approved by Nelson Engineering. Any excessively loose material or soft spots encountered in the footing subgrade will require over-excavation and backfilling with structural fill. All footings shall be suitably reinforced to make them as rigid as possible.

Lateral Earth Pressures For this analysis, it is assumed that all stem, basement, and retaining walls will be backfilled with compacted fill per the Foundation Backfill Detail drawing in the Appendix. Sloped backfill will result in higher lateral loading, if sloped fills are planned, lateral loading should be analyzed by this office. Adjacent foundations may affect lateral earth loading dependent on proximity. Lateral earth pressures from adjacent structures is not accounted for here.

Lateral loads may be resisted by friction between the footing base and supporting soil and lateral bearing pressure against the sides of the footings. Design parameters recommended are a coefficient of friction of 0.45 at the footing base, lateral passive bearing pressure of 350 psf per foot of depth.

The Mononobe-Okabe (M-O) equations are often used to estimate dynamic forces against retaining walls. The M-O analysis is theoretically derived using active earth pressure conditions. Although there is debate about the theoretical applicability of this methodology to restrained or rigid walls, the method has been used for many years for the seismic design of such walls. The performance record of underground walls during earthquakes has generally been good. Appropriate parameters for the M-O analysis are: 1) soil unit weight of 135 pounds per cubic foot, and 2) Internal Friction Angle = 35°. The more limiting case, at-rest or active seismic pressure, shall be utilized in the structural design of restrained or rigid retaining walls. For foundation or stem walls restrained from movement such that active earth pressures will not be allowed to develop, an at-rest equivalent fluid pressure of 65 PCF is appropriate.

For foundation or stem walls with active earth pressure loading, an equivalent fluid pressure of 45 PCF is appropriate.

Interior Slabs-On-Grade For interior slab areas, a minimum of 1.5 feet of surface soil shall be excavated and removed.

Interior slabs shall be founded upon the following from top to bottom: 1) a leveling course mat 4 inches in thickness composed of a ¾-inch minus free draining material (WYDOT Grade GR or equivalent) compacted to a minimum of 95% of maximum density as determined by ASTM D 1557, 2) 8 inches of compacted structural fill, and 3) Mirafi 140N nonwoven geotextile or approved equivalent placed native subgrade soils compacted to a minimum of 95% density as determined by ASTM D 698. Where Nelson Engineering determines subgrade is composed of dense gravels, structural fill and geotextile may be omitted.

Any excessively loose material or soft spots encountered in slab subgrade will require over-excavation and backfilling with structural fill.

All slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick. A moisture retardant barrier can be placed beneath all floor slabs to minimize potential ground moisture effects on floor coverings and to minimize the potential for radon infiltration.

Concrete slab-on-grade control joints should be saw-cut as early as possible. Nelson Engineering recommends the use of a soft cut system, which allows saw cutting as soon as the concrete can support foot traffic. Successful crack control is dependent upon proper joint spacing. Control joints should be placed in accordance with current Portland Cement Concrete Paving Association guidelines.

Sidewalks and Exterior Slabs Sidewalks and exterior concrete slabs for pedestrian traffic shall be placed upon a minimum 4-inch thickness of ¾-inch minus crushed gravel placed on 8 inches of compacted structural fill placed upon native subgrade compacted to a minimum of 95% of maximum dry density per ASTM D698 to 8-inch depth. Any fill required to increase the elevation of the slab should meet the requirements for structural fill. Any excessively loose material or soft spots encountered in slab subgrade will require over-excavation and backfilling with structural fill. All fill material within 2 feet of the slabs must be compacted to a minimum 95% of the maximum density as determined by ASTM D698. Where Nelson Engineering determines subgrade is composed of dense gravels structural fill may be omitted.

Driveway and Parking Lot Recommendations Recommended road and parking lot sections are given in the table below based on construction traffic loading and conservative estimates of long-term traffic counts. Traffic information was not available for long term design nor was desired design. Proper drainage is essential for satisfactory road and parking area performance.

Drive and Parking Area Section Paved Gravel Surfaced

Asphaltic Concrete 2 inches ¾ inches Minus Crushed Aggregate 6 inches 6 inches

Structural Fill 8 inches 8 inches

Compacted Subgrade Upper 8 inches of native in-place material compacted to 95% of the maximum density determined by ASTM D698.

Any excessively loose material or soft spots encountered in the subgrade will require over-excavation and backfilling with structural fill as directed by Nelson Engineering.

CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

Earthwork and Site Grading Excavation work and heavy equipment access will be difficult when wet conditions exist. A protracted period of wet conditions can be expected during and after seasonal snowmelt.

Placement of gravel surfacing and/or free-draining native material supported by geotextiles may be required to provide construction access. Shallower groundwater may be encountered during spring runoff and irrigation season, generally from late May through September. General recommendations for earthwork suitability, placement, and compaction procedures are provided below:

• Within building footprints, paved, and hardscape areas, all organic material, deleterious undocumented fill, and debris should be stripped and removed. Loose and disturbed native soils should be scarified, moisture-conditioned, and compacted.

Finish surfaces shall be sloped away from foundations.

• Surficial silt and sand soils forming slab, driveway, and parking area subgrades will exhibit undesirable engineering properties when wetted. If moisture has been allowed to infiltrate these subgrades in any fashion, filling and excavation operations should not resume until this office Engineer approves the moisture and density conditions of the subgrade soils. Fill materials shall not be placed, spread, or compacted while the ground is frozen or during unfavorable weather conditions. Fill materials should be at the proper moisture content prior to compaction and should contain no frozen soil.

• Structural Fill shall consist of imported or site gravels (USCS classification GW or GP) with the following characteristics: 6-inch maximum particle size with no more than 40% oversize (greater than ¾") and no more than 5% fines passing the #200 sieve.

Structural fill shall be placed in layers of not more than 8 inches in thickness. Each layer of structural fill should be moisture conditioned to within 2% of optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum density of 95% of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Designation D 698. The maximum density of material containing more than 30% oversize (greater than ¾" diameter) cannot be determined by use of the ASTM Designation D 698. In this case, a field maximum density may be determined by a test strip method. The material shall be compacted at or near optimum moisture content and a field density test shall be taken after each pass of the compaction equipment. This sequence shall continue until the maximum field density is achieved. This maximum field density shall be used for subsequent field compaction tests. Enough density tests should be taken to monitor proper compaction.

• Safety of construction personnel including safe trenches and excavations are the responsibility of the contractor. Excavations for retaining walls and foundations shall conform to the applicable OSHA and Wyoming safety standards. Excavations and utility trenches shall be laid back to safe slopes or properly shored. Excavations and shoring operations shall be conducted in accordance with the most recent versions of the OSHA Construction Standards for Excavations, Part 1926, Subpart P and Wyoming Public Works Standard Specifications. Excavations for utilities shall be shored if the proper slope cannot be maintained.

• During earthwork phases of the project, a representative of Nelson Engineering shall be present to observe exposed native soils and fill materials for suitability and consistency. A documented testing program should be conducted to determine that soil compaction is in accordance with requirements.

• Backfill placed against structures (i.e., pipes and walls) shall be of a character and in a manner that will not damage that structure. In no case shall material greater than 6 inches in diameter bear directly on or against these structures. Placing oversized material against rigid surfaces can damage the structure and interferes with proper compaction.

GENERAL COMMENTS

It is critical that the structural engineer and other project designers review this report. When project plans and specifications are complete, a consultation with this office should be arranged to ensure compliance with this report. Additional or supplementary recommendations concerning foundations and earthwork may be required at this time.

Monitoring and testing should also be performed to verify that suitable materials are used for structural fills and backfills and that fills are properly placed and compacted. Concrete testing and special inspections should be performed prior to and during placement of all concrete to ensure concrete and reinforcing steel bar comply with project plans and specifications.

WARRANTY AND LIMITING CONDITIONS

The field observations and research reported herein are considered sufficient in detail and scope to form a reasonable basis for the purposes cited above. Nelson Engineering warrants that the findings and conclusions contained herein have been promulgated in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering practice in the fields of foundation engineering, soil mechanics, and engineering geology, only for the site described in this report. No other warranties are implied or expressed.

These engineering methods have been developed to provide the client with information regarding apparent or potential engineering conditions relating to the subject property within the scope cited above and are limited to the conditions observed at the time of the site visit and research. There is a distinct possibility that conditions may exist which could not be identified within the scope of the investigation or which were not apparent during the site investigation. The report is also limited to the information available at the time it was prepared. In the event additional information is provided to Nelson Engineering following this report, it will be forwarded to the client in the form received for evaluation by the client.

This report was prepared for use by Grand Teton National Park (“Client”) and the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the agreed-upon scope of work outlined in the report and the contract for professional services between Client and Nelson Engineering (“Consultant”). Use or misuse of this report, or reliance upon the findings hereof by any parties other than the Client, is at their own risk. Neither the Client nor Consultant may make any representation of warranty to such other parties as to the accuracy or completeness of this report or the suitability of its use by such other parties for any purpose whatsoever, known or unknown, to the Client or Consultant. Neither Grand Teton National Park nor Nelson Engineering shall have any liability to, or indemnifies or holds harmless third parties for any losses incurred, by the actual or purported use or misuse of this report. No other warranties are implied or expressed.

APPENDIX

DRAWINGS

AutoCAD SHX Text

REV.

AutoCAD SHX Text

SURVEYED

AutoCAD SHX Text

DATE

AutoCAD SHX Text

CHECKED

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRAWN

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPROVED

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRAWING NO

AutoCAD SHX Text

TITLE

AutoCAD SHX Text

JOB NO

AutoCAD SHX Text

P.O. BOX 1599, JACKSON WYOMING (307) 733-2087

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text 19-208-01

AutoCAD SHX Text

MORAN WELL HOUSE

AutoCAD SHX Text

GRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK

AutoCAD SHX Text

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

AutoCAD SHX Text 8/6/2019

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AP

AutoCAD SHX Text

PG

AutoCAD SHX Text

PG

AutoCAD SHX Text N

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

SITE VICINITY MAP

AutoCAD SHX Text

PROJECT LOCATION

AutoCAD SHX Text

GRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK

AutoCAD SHX Text

N HIGHWAY 89

HIGHWAY 89, 191, 287

ELSON

NGINEERING

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRAWING NO

AutoCAD SHX Text

JOB NO

AutoCAD SHX Text

TITLE

AutoCAD SHX Text

P.O. BOX 1599, JACKSON WYOMING (307) 733-2087

AutoCAD SHX Text

REV.

AutoCAD SHX Text

SURVEYED

AutoCAD SHX Text

DATE

AutoCAD SHX Text

CHECKED

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRAWN

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPROVED

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text 19-208

AutoCAD SHX Text

MORAN WELLHOUSE

AutoCAD SHX Text

GEOTECHNCAL REPORT

AutoCAD SHX Text

FOUNDATION BACKFILL TYPICAL

AutoCAD SHX Text 8/7/19

AutoCAD SHX Text N/A

AutoCAD SHX Text

PG

AutoCAD SHX Text

PG

AutoCAD SHX Text

PG

AutoCAD SHX Text

FOOTING STEM/RETAINING WALL BY OTHERS

AutoCAD SHX Text

FINISHED GRADE

AutoCAD SHX Text LAWN AND LANDSCAPE AREAS 8" TO 10" FINE-GRAINED SOILS (SILTS AND CLAYS) COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM OF 90% PER ASTM D-698, SLOPED TO DRAIN STRUCTURAL FILL SHALL BE USED TO SUPPORT ALL HARDSCAPES, SLABS, AND ROADWAYS ADJACENT TO STEM AND RETAINING WALLS .

AutoCAD SHX Text

STRUCTURAL FILL

AutoCAD SHX Text

GRADE AWAY FROM STRUCTURES 5% MINIMUM FOR 10' OR PER APPROVED DRAINAGE PLAN

AutoCAD SHX Text

FOUNDATION BACKFILL TYPICAL NOT TO SCALE

AutoCAD SHX Text

COMPACTED NATIVE SUBGRADE OR STRUCTURAL FILL PER RECOMMENDATIONS IN REPORT

EXCAVATION FACE TYP. FOLLOW OSHA REGULATIONS

M

AutoCAD SHX Text

REV.

AutoCAD SHX Text

SURVEYED

AutoCAD SHX Text

DATE

AutoCAD SHX Text

CHECKED

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRAWN

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPROVED

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRAWING NO

AutoCAD SHX Text

TITLE

AutoCAD SHX Text

JOB NO

AutoCAD SHX Text

P.O. BOX 1599, JACKSON WYOMING (307) 733-2087

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text 19-208-01

AutoCAD SHX Text

MORAN WELL HOUSE

AutoCAD SHX Text

GRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK

AutoCAD SHX Text

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

AutoCAD SHX Text 8/7/2019

AutoCAD SHX Text

GTNP

AutoCAD SHX Text

AP

AutoCAD SHX Text

PG

AutoCAD SHX Text

PG

AutoCAD SHX Text

515 MORAN COURT

AutoCAD SHX Text

TP-2

AutoCAD SHX Text

TP-1

AutoCAD SHX Text

PROPOSED WELL HOUSE

AutoCAD SHX Text

PROPOSED WATER MAINS

AutoCAD SHX Text

PROPOSED WATER SERVICES

AutoCAD SHX Text

EDGE OF ASPHALT, TYP.

AutoCAD SHX Text

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION TRAILER AND COVERED STORAGE

AutoCAD SHX Text N

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

WATER SYSTEM SITE PLAN AND SURVEY SUPPLIED BY GRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK. TEST PITS LOCATED WITHIN ±3FEET USING HANDHELD GPS UNIT. MONITORING WELL INSTALLED IN TP-1.

TEST PIT LOGS

GEOTECHNICAL GENERAL NOTES

i

CORRECTED SPT: Standard Penetration Test values corrected to 60% of the theoretical free-fall hammer energy and for corrected for overburden pressure per AASHTO LRFD 6th ED Article 10.4.6.2.4.

DRILLING, SAMPLING, AND SOIL PROPERTIES ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS

N: Standard Penetration Test Uc: Unconfined compressive strength, Pounds/ft2 (PSF) Pp: Pocket Penetrometer values, Ton/ft2 (TSF) FILGC: Fragments indicate gravels and cobbles larger than split spoon diameter.

w: Water content, % LL: Liquid limit, % PI: Plasticity index, % gd: In-situ dry density, lbs/ft3 (PCF) : Ground water level SS: Split-Spoon Sample ST: Shelby Tube Sampler CS: Cylindrical Brass Lined Sample

Monitoring Well, diagonal hatching indicates screen and sand packed interval

SOIL RELATIVE DENSITY AND CONSISTENCY CLASSIFICATION

Non-Cohesive Soils

Standard Penetration Resistance Cohesive Soils Pp-(tons/ft2)

Very Loose 0 - 4 Very Soft 0 - 0.25 Loose 4 - 10 Soft 0.25 - 0.50

Slightly Compact 8 - 15 Firm (Medium) 0.50 - 1.00 Medium Dense 10 - 30 Stiff 1.00 - 2.00

Dense 30 - 50 Very Stiff 2.00 - 4.00 Very Dense 50+ Hard 4.00+

PARTICLE SIZE

Boulders:

12 in.+

Coarse Sand:

5 mm(#4)-2 mm(#10)

Silts and Clays:

<#200

Cobbles:

12 in.-3in.

Medium Sand:

2 mm(#10)-0.4mm(#40)

Gravel:

3in.-5mm(#4)

Fine Sand:

0.4mm(#40)- 0.075mm(#200)

AutoCAD SHX Text

UNDISTURBED

AutoCAD SHX Text

SAMPLES

AutoCAD SHX Text

SAMPLE ID

AutoCAD SHX Text

REMARKS

AutoCAD SHX Text

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

AutoCAD SHX Text This log is part of a report prepared by Nelson Engineering for this project and should be read with the report. This summary applies only at the location of the test pit and at the time of the excavation. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and may change at this location with passage of time. The data presented is a simplification of actual conditions encountered.

AutoCAD SHX Text

BULK

AutoCAD SHX Text

LIQUID LIMIT

AutoCAD SHX Text

PLASTIC LIMIT

AutoCAD SHX Text

MOISTURE (%)

AutoCAD SHX Text

WELL LOG

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRY DENSITY (PCF)

AutoCAD SHX Text

DEPTH (FT)

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

GRAPHICS LOG

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

CLIENT:

AutoCAD SHX Text

P.O. BOX 1599, JACKSON WYOMING (307) 733-2087

AutoCAD SHX Text

PROJECT NAME:

AutoCAD SHX Text

DATE STARTED / FINISHED:

AutoCAD SHX Text

LOGGED BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text

BOREHOLE LOCATION/ELEVATION:

AutoCAD SHX Text TEST PIT No.

AutoCAD SHX Text

EXCAVATOR TYPE:

AutoCAD SHX Text

PAGE:

AutoCAD SHX Text

OPERATOR:

AutoCAD SHX Text

GRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK

AutoCAD SHX Text

MORAN, WYOMING

AutoCAD SHX Text

MORAN WELL HOUSE

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text 8/2/2019

AutoCAD SHX Text

ANDY PRUETT

AutoCAD SHX Text

SEE TEST PIT LOCATION MAP

AutoCAD SHX Text

FC EXCAVATION

AutoCAD SHX Text

JOHN DEERE 310SJ BACKHOE

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

JOB NO.

AutoCAD SHX Text 19-208-01

AutoCAD SHX Text ~15' EAST OF LOCATED SILVER STAR FIBER LINE WITHIN GRASS AND SAGEBRUSH FIELD EASY DIGGING THROUGHOUT MINOR CAVING OF GRAVEL ALLUVIUM

AutoCAD SHX Text 0'-0.5' DRY, DK BROWN SANDY SILT TOPSOIL, MODERATE ROOTS DRY, DK BROWN SANDY SILT TOPSOIL, MODERATE ROOTS THROUGHOUT

AutoCAD SHX Text

TP1-1

AutoCAD SHX Text 0.5'-1.5'

AutoCAD SHX Text

BOP=14.0' NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTEREDNO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED

AutoCAD SHX Text MONITORING WELL INSTALLED: 16' OF 1.5" SCHEDULE 40 PVCSLOTTED EVERY 6" FROM 5.5'-13.5' DEPTH STICK UP = 2.5'

AutoCAD SHX Text 2.75'-8.5' DRY TO MOIST, BROWN, WELL-GRADED GRAVEL WITH DRY TO MOIST, BROWN, WELL-GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND OCCASIONAL COBBLES UP TO 5" MAXIMUM DIMENSION, ~60% ROUND AND SUB-ROUND GRAVELS AND COBBLES, ~40% SAND, DENSE

AutoCAD SHX Text

TP1-2

AutoCAD SHX Text 9'-10'

AutoCAD SHX Text 0.5'-1.5' DRY, BROWN SILTY SAND/SANDY SILT WITH MINOR DRY, BROWN SILTY SAND/SANDY SILT WITH MINOR FINE-GRAVELS, MINOR ROOTS THROUGHOUT, PP>4.0 TSF, HARD

AutoCAD SHX Text 1.5'-2.75' DRY, BROWN POORLY-GRADED FINE-GRAINED SAND WITH DRY, BROWN POORLY-GRADED FINE-GRAINED SAND WITH SILT AND MINOR FINE GRAVELS, MEDIUM DENSE

8.5'-BOP MOIST, GRAY INTER-TONGUING POORLY-GRADED MOIST, GRAY INTER-TONGUING POORLY-GRADED FINE-GRAINED SAND AND SANDY SILT CLAY, SAND IS LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, SANDY SILTY CLAY IS STIFF, PP=1-2 TSF

AutoCAD SHX Text

UNDISTURBED

AutoCAD SHX Text

SAMPLES

AutoCAD SHX Text

SAMPLE ID

AutoCAD SHX Text

REMARKS

AutoCAD SHX Text

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

AutoCAD SHX Text This log is part of a report prepared by Nelson Engineering for this project and should be read with the report. This summary applies only at the location of the test pit and at the time of the excavation. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and may change at this location with passage of time. The data presented is a simplification of actual conditions encountered.

AutoCAD SHX Text

BULK

AutoCAD SHX Text

LIQUID LIMIT

AutoCAD SHX Text

PLASTIC LIMIT

AutoCAD SHX Text

MOISTURE (%)

AutoCAD SHX Text

WELL LOG

AutoCAD SHX Text

DRY DENSITY (PCF)

AutoCAD SHX Text

DEPTH (FT)

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

GRAPHICS LOG

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

CLIENT:

AutoCAD SHX Text

P.O. BOX 1599, JACKSON WYOMING (307) 733-2087

AutoCAD SHX Text

PROJECT NAME:

AutoCAD SHX Text

DATE STARTED / FINISHED:

AutoCAD SHX Text

LOGGED BY:

AutoCAD SHX Text

BOREHOLE LOCATION/ELEVATION:

AutoCAD SHX Text TEST PIT No.

AutoCAD SHX Text

EXCAVATOR TYPE:

AutoCAD SHX Text

PAGE:

AutoCAD SHX Text

OPERATOR:

AutoCAD SHX Text

GRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK

AutoCAD SHX Text

MORAN, WYOMING

AutoCAD SHX Text

MORAN WELL HOUSE

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text 8/2/2019

AutoCAD SHX Text

ANDY PRUETT

AutoCAD SHX Text

SEE TEST PIT LOCATION MAP

AutoCAD SHX Text

FC EXCAVATION

AutoCAD SHX Text

JOHN DEERE 310SJ BACKHOE

AutoCAD SHX Text

AutoCAD SHX Text

JOB NO.

AutoCAD SHX Text 19-208-01

AutoCAD SHX Text EDGE OF GRAVEL DRIVEWAY AND NATURAL LAWN AREA NORTH EDGE OF DRIVEWAY SECTION IS 6" CRUSHED BASE OVERLYING 6" OF PIT RUN GRAVEL WITH SAND FILL EASY DIGGING THROUGHOUT MODERATE CAVING OF GRAVELS FROM 3.75'-BOP

AutoCAD SHX Text 0'-0.5' DRY, DK BROWN SANDY SILT TOPSOIL, MODERATE ROOTS DRY, DK BROWN SANDY SILT TOPSOIL, MODERATE ROOTS THROUGHOUT

AutoCAD SHX Text

BOP=12.0' NO GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED

AutoCAD SHX Text 3.75'-BOP DRY TO MOIST, BROWN, WELL-GRADED GRAVEL WITH DRY TO MOIST, BROWN, WELL-GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND AND OCCASIONAL COBBLES UP TO 5" MAXIMUM DIMENSION, ~60% ROUND AND SUB-ROUND GRAVELS AND COBBLES, ~40% SAND, DENSE

AutoCAD SHX Text 0.5'-2.0' DRY, BROWN SILTY SAND/SANDY SILT WITH MINOR DRY, BROWN SILTY SAND/SANDY SILT WITH MINOR FINE-GRAVELS, MINOR ROOTS THROUGHOUT, PP>4.0 TSF, HARD

2.0'-3.75' DRY, BROWN POORLY-GRADED FINE-GRAINED SAND WITH DRY, BROWN POORLY-GRADED FINE-GRAINED SAND WITH SILT AND MINOR FINE GRAVELS, MEDIUM DENSE