Wranglers Campground Appendices A-D.030210.pdf

Appendix A Soil Evaluation

Appendix B Geotechnical Report

REPORT OF

PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION

Proposed Wranglers Campground Wastewater Treatment -

Package Plant Design

Land Between The Lakes NRA

Golden Pond, Kentucky

Prepared for:

US Forest Service

100 Van Morgan Drive

Golden Pond, Kentucky 42211

Prepared by:

URS Corporation

400 Northpark Town Center

1000 Abernathy Road NE, Suite 900

Atlanta, Georgia 30328

Phone (678) 808-8800/Fax (678) 808-8400

January 22, 2010

Revision: March 2, 2010

REPORT

PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION

PROPOSED WRANGLERS CAMPGROUND WASTEWATER TREATMENT -

PACKAGE PLANT DESIGN

LAND BETWEEN THE LAKES NRA

GOLDEN POND, KENTUCKY

Table of Contents

1.0 SUMMARY

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

3.0 OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE

4.0 FIELD EXPLORATION

5.0 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

6.0 PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS

7.0 LIMITATIONS

List of Appendices

Appendix A Boring Location Plan

Appendix B Boring Logs

L:\Projects\15261608\WATER\Scope of Work\March 2 Note Revisions\Appendix B Geotech.030210.doc 1

Report Of

Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation

Proposed Wranglers Campground Wastewater Treatment –

Package Plant Design

Golden Pond, Kentucky

1.0 SUMMARY

URS Corporation (URS) completed a preliminary geotechnical exploration at the proposed Wranglers

Campground Wastewater Treatment site (hereinafter “Site”) at the Land Between The Lakes (LBL)

National Recreation Area (NRA), Golden Pond, Kentucky. The exploration was performed on January

15, 2010 and was authorized under Contract No. AG-43ZP-C-07-0003 with the US Forest Service

(hereinafter “Forest Service”). The fieldwork consisted of drilling five (5) soil test borings (SBTs), each

10-ft. deep, along the proposed sewer alignment and two SBTs, one to a depth of 15-ft and the other to a depth of 25-ft., in the area of the proposed wastewater treatment structures.

The subsurface conditions penetrated by the five sewer STBs generally consisted of silty clays, clayey silts and Chert gravel. The consistency of the fine-grained soils varied from medium stiff to very stiff, while the compactness of the gravel ranged from medium dense to very dense. No groundwater or bedrock was encountered by any of the five (5) STBs.

The two deeper STBs in the proposed wastewater treatment area penetrated similar soils and associated consistency/compactness. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 15-ft. 7-in. at boring SB-1 in the clayey gravel layer. The clayey gravel layer extended to the termination depth of 25-ft. below existing ground surface. No bedrock was encountered by either of the two borings.

Detailed design information for the proposed wastewater treatment structures have not yet been developed, such as the foundation elevations and loading; however, based on the subsurface conditions encountered, URS is of the opinion that suitable foundation systems could be adequately supported by the fine grained soils with a stiff to very stiff consistency. These soils were found generally at 3 feet to 4 feet below existing ground surface. The excavations for the proposed sewer could be performed using conventional excavating equipment, however, the production rate could be expected to decrease in areas of dense to very dense gravel (Chert), as such materials are typically more difficult to excavate.

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

2.1 Site Description

2.1.1 Location

Situated in the Land Between The Lakes, National Recreational Area, The Wranglers Campground is located in southwestern Kentucky in Trigg County. The recreational area is currently managed by the US

Forest Service. According to the Land Between The Lakes website, approximately 2 million visitors utilize the 170,000 acre facility each year.

L:\Projects\15261608\WATER\Scope of Work\March 2 Note Revisions\Appendix B Geotech.030210.doc 2

2.1.2 Surface Features

The Wranglers Campground has 213 camp sites available to visitors, 18 of which are presently served by direct connections to the sewer system. The balance of camp sites share common shower buildings that are accessible within the individual camp areas. The campground also includes an outpost (restaurant), dump station, a horse rental facility, 5 horse wash locations, a maintenance building, and a gatehouse.

The site was originally developed in the 1970’s. Substantial improvements were made in the mid-1990s to expand the campsite to the present-day 213 sites and current wastewater system. Potable water at the campsite is provided by an existing on-site well. Currently, wastewater is collected at each building and is treated through septic tanks and leach fields that were installed as part of the mid-1990 upgrades. In general, it appears that the existing system has exceeded its capacity and needs additional capacity to serve the anticipated peak attendance at the campground.

2.2 Proposed Development

2.2.1 Consideration of Feasible Alternatives

The Forest Service has contracted URS to develop feasible alternatives and propose recommendations for new wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal facilities to serve the Wranglers Campground.

Currently, the campground operates and maintains a collection system which conveys sewage to a leach field on the northern side of the facility. The capacity of the leach field is well under the daily flow which has resulted in the system failing and sewage seeping through the ground and creating sink holes and related sanitary and safety issues.

2.2.2 Structural

No design information is currently available and will depend on the development alternative selected by the Forest Service The preliminary subsurface exploration performed will provide some input in the type of alternative selected, as it pertains to groundwater and bedrock elevations.

2.2.3 Earthwork

As noted above, site development plans are not yet finalized. However, based on the relatively flat grade of the site in relation to the surrounding areas, it is anticipated that earthwork will not be significant for the wastewater treatment facilities, unless the alternative selected will have a below grade level. Most of the required earthwork should center on the excavations for the sewer.

3.0 OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE

3.1 Objective

The objective of the work reported herein was to perform a preliminary evaluation of the subsurface conditions and to identify any potential constraints to the proposed project such as a high groundwater table and/or the presence of bedrock near the existing ground surface.

3.2 Scope

To accomplish the objective of this work, the following were undertaken:

L:\Projects\15261608\WATER\Scope of Work\March 2 Note Revisions\Appendix B Geotech.030210.doc 3

1. Drilling of five STBs along the proposed sewer alignment and two STBs in the area of the proposed wastewater treatment facilities.

2. Evaluation of the subsurface data collected; and,

3. Preparation of this preliminary geotechnical report that includes the items listed below:

a) A drawing showing the location of the soil test borings.

b) Logs of the borings.

c) A description of subsurface conditions encountered.

d) Evaluation of the data and preliminary recommendations for foundation design parameters.

4.0 FIELD EXPLORATION

Subsurface soil conditions at the Site were explored by drilling seven STBs (referenced as Borings SB-1 to SB-7) on January 15, 2010. The STBs were drilled by Tri-State Drilling, LLC, URS’ drilling sub-contractor, based in Chattanooga, TN. The approximate boring locations are shown on the Boring

Location Plan contained in Appendix A.

Five of the STBs were drilled to a depth of 10-ft. below existing grade along the proposed sewer alignment. The other two STBs were drilled in the area of the proposed wastewater treatment site near the proposed leach fields. One of the STBs was advanced to a depth of 25-ft while the other one was terminated at 15-ft below existing ground surface. The total drilling footage was therefore 90-ft.

A hollow stem continuous flight auger-drilling rig was used to advance the borings. Continuous soil sampling via the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) method in accordance with ASTM D-1586 was done over the first 10-ft for each STB and at selected intervals thereafter in the two deeper STBs. Disturbed samples of soils were recovered using a split spoon sampler. The SPT blowcounts were recorded for each

6-in. penetration of the sampler into the soils. The “N-Value”, which provides an index of the strength and consistency of the subsurface materials, is determined from the cumulative sum of the blowcounts, after the initial 6-in penetration of the sampler.

A URS field engineer prepared field logs of each boring. These logs included visual classifications of the materials encountered during drilling, the SPT N-Value, as well as the field engineer's interpretation of the changes in subsurface materials. Descriptions presented on the boring logs are taken from the field drilling logs. It should be noted that the changes in subsurface materials shown in the logs are gradual and approximate and actual conditions exposed at the time of construction might vary. The boring logs are presented in Appendix A.

It should be noted that all borings were advanced from the ground surface elevations as they existed at the time of drilling. Any cutting or filling of the site during site construction activities would likely affect the recommendations found in this report.

L:\Projects\15261608\WATER\Scope of Work\March 2 Note Revisions\Appendix B Geotech.030210.doc 4

5.0 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

5.1 Site Conditions

5.1.1 Topography

The Site is gently sloping from approximately west to east in the eastern half, while more significant topographic relief is found in the western sections. The areas where the subsurface exploration was performed was generally cleared picnic areas, except in the vicinity of SB-6 and SB-7 where there are some trees and the ground surface is also steeper.

Rainfall is expected to infiltrate very slowly into the ground due to the low permeability of the near-surface fine-grained soils and as a result, groundwater recharge will be correspondingly slow. Any runoff will generally flow towards the north and northeast, except in areas on the west side of the site where the flow will vary according to the steeper topographies.

5.1.2 Subsurface

Based on an examination of the soil samples collected in the field, the following preliminary assessment of the subsurface conditions is presented:

(a) The five (5) STBs [SB-3 through SB-7] along the proposed sewer alignment encountered primarily silty clays and clayey silts, except at SB-5 and SB-7 where Chert gravel was also encountered. The consistency of the fine-grained soils was generally medium stiff to very stiff, while the Chert gravel was found to be very dense at SB-7 and medium dense at SB-5. In addition, at SB-5 there was no recovery from the gravel layer and a loose zone at a depth of 6-ft was encountered in this layer. No groundwater or bedrock was encountered in any of these five (5) STBs.

(b) The two (2) STBs [SB-1 and SB-2] drilled in the proposed wastewater treatment site encountered fine grained soils consisting of Clay/silty Clay down to a depth of about 6-ft. The consistency of these materials ranged from medium stiff to very stiff. Chert gravel with silty clay underlies the silty Clay at SB-1 with a compactness ranging from medium dense to very dense at 23-ft to the termination depth of 25-ft below existing ground surface. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 15.5-ft in

SB-1. No bedrock was encountered at SB-1.

Underlying the silty Clay at SB-2 is a 2-ft layer of dense silty Chert gravel, which in turn is underlain by very stiff clayey Silt down to the termination depth of 15-ft. Neither groundwater nor bedrock was encountered at SB-2.

5.1.3 Groundwater

Groundwater was encountered only at SB-1 at a depth of 15-ft 7-in below existing ground surface at the time of drilling. We note that fluctuations in the groundwater level may occur due to seasonal variations in rainfall, evaporation, construction activity, surface runoff, and other site-specific factors. Consequently, the actual groundwater level at the time of construction may vary from that measured during our preliminary geotechnical exploration.

5.1.4 Surface Water

No evidence of on-site surface water was observed at the time of this exploration.

L:\Projects\15261608\WATER\Scope of Work\March 2 Note Revisions\Appendix B Geotech.030210.doc 5

6.0 PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Wastewater Treatment Structures Foundation System

The soils encountered by SB-1 and SB-2 at a depth of 3 – 4 feet below the existing ground surface have a consistency of stiff to very stiff. The bearing capacities of the materials also tend to increase with depth, as indicated by the N-values presented in the boring logs in Appendix B. Therefore, depending on the foundation elevations for the wastewater treatment structures, adequate allowable soil bearing capacities for shallow foundations could be available to support the applied loadings with tolerable settlements. A final determination of bearing capacities and settlements would have to be performed when more detailed design information is available, such as foundation loading and elevation. Also, additional subsurface exploration may be required within the footprint of the structures to confirm the preliminary findings.

6.2 Sewer Excavations

The excavations for the proposed sewer could be accomplished with conventional excavating equipment.

However, the production rate could be expected to decrease in the areas of dense to very dense gravel

(Chert), as such materials are typically more difficult to excavate.

6.3 Supplemental Geotechnical Exploration

Once the layout and foundation elevations of the wastewater treatment structures have been finalized, URS recommends that a supplemental geotechnical exploration be conducted within the footprints of these proposed structures. The objective would be to collect data to supplement the preliminary subsurface information presented herein and which would be used in developing design parameters for suitable foundation systems to support the structures.

URS anticipates that the supplemental exploration would consist of soil test borings distributed in the footprints of the structures and a moderate laboratory testing program to determine the physical and engineering properties of representative soil samples collected from the borings.

6.4 Final Report

A final geotechnical report should be prepared that incorporates the results of the preliminary exploration and would include the following:

� A brief review of our test procedures and the results of all testing conducted.

� Area and site geologic conditions.

� Surface topographic features and site conditions.

� General subsurface soil and groundwater conditions

� Recommendations for foundation design and construction, including allowable bearing capacities and estimated settlements as well as any soil-supported floor slabs.

� Recommendations for site preparation and suitability of cut for use as structural fill.

� Anticipation of and guidelines for management of groundwater/surface run-off

� Recommendations for any cast in-place concrete below grade walls, including earth pressures and coefficient of sliding friction for use by the design engineer.

� Discussion of other potential design and/or construction problems and site development constraints as indicated by the exploration.

L:\Projects\15261608\WATER\Scope of Work\March 2 Note Revisions\Appendix B Geotech.030210.doc 6

7.0 LIMITATIONS

The evaluations and recommendations presented in this preliminary geotechnical report (report) are based upon the data obtained from the borings performed at the indicated locations and from any other information discussed in this report. This report does not reflect any variations which may occur between borings or across the site. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until at the time of construction. If variations appear evident, it will be necessary to re-evaluate the recommendations in this report.

After the final geotechnical report is prepared and submitted, it is recommended that URS be retained to review the plans and specifications so that comments can be provided regarding the interpretation and implementation of the geotechnical recommendations in the design and specifications. It is further recommended that URS be retained for construction material testing and observation during earthwork and foundation construction phases to help evaluate that the design requirements are fulfilled.

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No warranty, express or implied, is provided. In the event that any changes in the nature, design or location of the project as outlined in this report are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed and the conclusions of this report modified or verified in writing by URS.

- Soil Boring Location

SB-1

SB-2

SB-3

SB-4

SB-5

SB-6

SB-7

CL

ML

CASING TYPE/DIAMETER

GC

B O

R

IN

G _W

E

LL

W R

A N

G

LE

S E

D

IT

.G P

J D

M _A

TL

N

T.

G

D T

/2

7/

SPT (ASTM 1556)

Hollow Stem Auger

TOP OF CASING

GROUND ELEVATION

GC

CL

ML

50/5"

REMARKS

wet at 15 feet 7 inches

Boring terminated at a depth of 25 feet bgs and backfilled with soil cuttings.

Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 15' 7" bgs at the time of drilling.

SPT

dense at 18 feet bgs

SPT

CLAYEY GRAVEL - very dense, poorly graded, chert, fine to coarse, weathered, with silty clay, moist

SILTY CLAY - brown, very stiff, medium plasticity, moist

CLAYEY GRAVEL - medium dense, poorly graded, chert, fine to coarse, weathered, with silty clay, moist grades with fine to coarse chert gravel at 5.5 feet bgs very stiff at 4 feet bgs

SILTY CLAY - brown, medium stiff, low to medium plasticity, moist Topsoil very dense at 23 feet bgs

SPT

SPT

SPT

SPT

SPT

SPT

PROJECT NUMBER

BORING/WELL NUMBER

N

V A

LU

E

URS

1/15/10

LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION

PROJECT NAME

E

LE

V A

TI

O

N (fe et

D E

P

TH

(ft . B

G L)

15261607

DATE DRILLED

U .S

.C .S

BORING/WELL CONSTRUCTION LOG

SB-1

LOCATION

S A

M P

LE

ID

D. Biddle N/A

Wranglers Campground - Land Between The Lakes NRA

15.50

N/A N/A

DEPTH TO WATER

GROUT TYPE/QUANTITY

GRAVEL PACK TYPE

SCREEN TYPE/SLOT

GROUND WATER ELEVATION

Geotechnical Investigation

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

IN

TE

R V

A L

R E

C O

V E

R Y

(in ch es

No elevations recorded. All borings backfilled after completion.

LOGGED BY

P

ID

(p pm

SAMPLING METHOD

DRILLING METHOD

N/A

GROUT TYPE/QUANTITY

ML

GM

CH

27 24

CL

ML

SPT (ASTM 1556) GRAVEL PACK TYPE

SCREEN TYPE/SLOT

B O

R

IN

G _W

E

LL

W R

A N

G

LE

S E

D

IT

.G P

J D

M _A

TL

N

T.

G

D T

/2

7/

Topsoil

TOP OF CASING

GROUND ELEVATION

REMARKS

CASING TYPE/DIAMETER

Boring terminated at a depth of 15 feet bgs and backfilled with soil cuttings.

Groundwater was not encountered at the time of drilling.

SPT

SPT

SPT

grades brown with weathered rock at 13 feet bgs

CLAYEY SILT - brown/gray/tan, very stiff, low plasticity, moist

SILTY GRAVEL - dense, poorly graded, fine to coarse, weathered, with sandy silt, moist grades light brown to brown, low to medium plasticity with fine to coarse chert gravel at 3 feet bgs

SILTY CLAY - dark brown, stiff, medium to high plasticity, moist

CLAY - brown, medium stiff, high plasticity, moist

SPT

SPT

SPT

DATE DRILLED

N

V A

LU

E

SB-2

Hollow Stem Auger

BORING/WELL NUMBER

Geotechnical Investigation

15261607

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT NUMBER

URS BORING/WELL CONSTRUCTION LOG

1/15/10

N/A

SAMPLING METHOD

No elevations recorded. All borings backfilled after completion.

N/A R

E C

O V

E R

Y (in ch es

N/A

D. Biddle

P

ID

(p pm

N/A

LOGGED BY

DRILLING METHOD

N/A

U .S

.C .S

LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION

DEPTH TO WATER

E

LE

V A

TI

O

N (fe et

LOCATION

D E

P

TH

(ft . B

G L)

IN

TE

R V

A L

S A

M P

LE

ID

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

GROUND WATER ELEVATION

Wranglers Campground - Land Between The Lakes NRA

CASING TYPE/DIAMETER

CH

REMARKS

GROUND ELEVATION

TOP OF CASING

Hollow Stem Auger Wranglers Campground - Land Between The Lakes NRA

SCREEN TYPE/SLOT

GRAVEL PACK TYPE

Topsoil

B O

R

IN

G _W

E

LL

W R

A N

G

LE

S E

D

IT

.G P

J D

M _A

TL

N

T.

G

D T

/2

7/

LOCATION

GROUND WATER ELEVATION

SPT (ASTM 1556)

SILTY CLAY - light brown, medium stiff, medium plasticity, trace gravel, moist

CLAY - light brown, stiff, high plasticity, moist grades with fine to medium gravel at 6 feet bgs

Boring terminated at a depth of 10 feet bgs and backfilled with soil cuttings.

Groundwater was not encountered at the time of drilling.

SPT

SPT

SPT

SPT

SPT

CL

ML

DEPTH TO WATERN/A

GROUT TYPE/QUANTITY

BORING/WELL CONSTRUCTION LOG

1/15/10

BORING/WELL NUMBER

URS

PROJECT NUMBER

PROJECT NAME

15261607

Geotechnical Investigation

SB-3

SAMPLING METHOD

DATE DRILLED

DRILLING METHOD

IN

TE

R V

A L

N/A

LOGGED BY

N/A

R E

C O

V E

R Y

(in ch es

N/A

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

No elevations recorded. All borings backfilled after completion.

U

.S .C

.S

D. Biddle

S A

M P

LE

ID

D E

P

TH

(ft . B

G L)

E

LE

V A

TI

O

N (fe et

LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION

P

ID

(p pm

N V

A

LU

E

TOP OF CASING

CL

ML

GC

CL

ML

REMARKS

Hollow Stem Auger

SPT (ASTM 1556)

CASING TYPE/DIAMETER

Topsoil

B O

R

IN

G _W

E

LL

W R

A N

G

LE

S E

D

IT

.G P

J D

M _A

TL

N

T.

G

D T

/2

7/

GROUT TYPE/QUANTITY

DEPTH TO WATER

LOCATION

GROUND ELEVATION

SPT

SILTY CLAY - light brown to dark brown, medium stiff, medium plasticity, with fine to coarse gravel, moist CLAYEY GRAVEL - light brown, medium dense, fine to coarse, low plasticity clay, moist

SILTY CLAY - light brown, medium stiff, medium plasticity, with fine rock fragments, moist stiff at 6 feet bgs soft at 8 feet bgs wet at 9.5 feet bgs Boring terminated at a depth of 10 feet bgs and backfilled with soil cuttings.

Groundwater was not encountered at the time of drilling.

SPT

SPT

GRAVEL PACK TYPE

SPT

SPT

GROUND WATER ELEVATION

SCREEN TYPE/SLOT

DATE DRILLED

URS

Geotechnical Investigation

15261607

PROJECT NAME

BORING/WELL CONSTRUCTION LOG

SB-4BORING/WELL NUMBER

1/15/10

PROJECT NUMBER

LOGGED BY

SAMPLING METHOD

DRILLING METHOD

IN

TE

R V

A L

N/A N/A

N/A R

E C

O V

E R

Y (in ch es

No elevations recorded. All borings backfilled after completion.

D. Biddle

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

N/A

U .S

.C .S

Wranglers Campground - Land Between The Lakes NRA

S A

M P

LE

ID

D E

P

TH

(ft . B

G L)

E

LE

V A

TI

O

N (fe et

LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION

P

ID

(p pm

N V

A

LU

REMARKS

GROUND ELEVATION

TOP OF CASING

Hollow Stem Auger

SPT (ASTM 1556)

CASING TYPE/DIAMETER

D. Biddle

SCREEN TYPE/SLOT

GC

GRAVEL PACK TYPE

GROUT TYPE/QUANTITY

DEPTH TO WATER

Topsoil

B O

R

IN

G _W

E

LL

W R

A N

G

LE

S E

D

IT

.G P

J D

M _A

TL

N

T.

G

D T

/2

7/

Wranglers Campground - Land Between The Lakes NRA

N/A

CLAYEY GRAVEL - dark brown, medium dense, fine to medium, with silty clay.

moist loose at 6 feet bgs medium dense at 8 feet bgs

Boring terminated at a depth of 10 feet bgs and backfilled with soil cuttings.

Groundwater was not encountered at the time of drilling.

SPT

SPT

SPT

SPT

SPT

19 10

GROUND WATER ELEVATION

No elevations recorded. All borings backfilled after completion.

DATE DRILLED

LOCATION

BORING/WELL CONSTRUCTION LOG

1/15/10

BORING/WELL NUMBER

URS

PROJECT NUMBER

PROJECT NAME

15261607

Geotechnical Investigation

SB-5

N/A

LOGGED BY

R E

C O

V E

R Y

(in ch es

SAMPLING METHOD

DRILLING METHOD

N/A

IN

TE

R

V A

L

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

N/A

U .S

.C .S

N/A

S A

M P

LE

ID

D E

P

TH

(ft . B

G L)

E

LE

V A

TI

O

N (fe et

LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION

P

ID

(p pm

N V

A

LU

SCREEN TYPE/SLOT

D. Biddle

REMARKS

GROUND ELEVATION

TOP OF CASING

Hollow Stem Auger

SPT (ASTM 1556)

ML

GRAVEL PACK TYPE

GROUT TYPE/QUANTITY

Topsoil

LOCATION

B O

R

IN

G _W

E

LL

W R

A N

G

LE

S E

D

IT

.G P

J D

M _A

TL

N

T.

G

D T

/2

7/

GROUND WATER ELEVATION

Wranglers Campground - Land Between The Lakes NRA

N/A

CASING TYPE/DIAMETER

CLAYEY SILT - dark brown, medium stiff, low plasticity, with chert fragments, moist stiff and grades light brown/dark brown at 4 feet bgs very stiff with increased plasticity at 6 feet bgs grades with fine gravel at 8 feet bgs

Boring terminated at a depth of 10 feet bgs and backfilled with soil cuttings.

Groundwater was not encountered at the time of drilling.

SPT

SPT

SPT

SPT

24 SPT

No elevations recorded. All borings backfilled after completion.

DATE DRILLED

DEPTH TO WATER

BORING/WELL CONSTRUCTION LOG

1/15/10

BORING/WELL NUMBER

URS

PROJECT NUMBER

PROJECT NAME

15261607

Geotechnical Investigation

SB-6

N/A

R E

C O

V E

R Y

(in ch es

LOGGED BY

IN

TE

R V

A L

SAMPLING METHOD

DRILLING METHOD

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

N/A

U .S

.C .S

N/A S

A M

P

LE

ID

N/A

D E

P

TH

(ft . B

G L)

E

LE

V A

TI

O

N (fe et

LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION

P

ID

(p pm

N V

A

CH

GC

50/5"

50/4"

REMARKS

GROUND ELEVATION

TOP OF CASING

SPT (ASTM 1556)

CASING TYPE/DIAMETER

SCREEN TYPE/SLOT

GRAVEL PACK TYPE

GRAVEL

GROUT TYPE/QUANTITY

B O

R

IN

G _W

E

LL

W R

A N

G

LE

S E

D

IT

.G P

J D

M _A

TL

N

T.

G

D T

/2

7/

DEPTH TO WATER

LOCATION

GROUND WATER ELEVATION

Hollow Stem Auger

CLAY - light brown, very stiff, high plasticity, with medium rock fragments, moist

GRAVEL - very dense, fine to coarse, chert, with clayey silt, moist grades tan/red/gray, with sand silt at 6 feet bgs medium dense and red/tan at 8 feet bgs

Boring terminated at a depth of 10 feet bgs and backfilled with soil cuttings.

Groundwater was not encountered at the time of drilling.

SPT

SPT

SPT

SPT

GP18

SPT

Wranglers Campground - Land Between The Lakes NRA

DATE DRILLED

SB-7

1/15/10

BORING/WELL NUMBER

URS

PROJECT NUMBER

PROJECT NAME

15261607

Geotechnical Investigation

BORING/WELL CONSTRUCTION LOG

No elevations recorded. All borings backfilled after completion.

LOGGED BY

SAMPLING METHOD

DRILLING METHOD

N/A

IN

TE

R

V A

L

N/A N/A

N/A R

E C

O V

E R

Y (in ch es

D. Biddle

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

N/A

U .S

.C .S

S A

M P

LE

ID

D E

P

TH

(ft . B

G L)

E

LE

V A

TI

O

N (fe et

LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION

P

ID

(p pm

N V

A

Appendix C ARRA Signage Criteria

4/2/2009

PROJECT FUNDING SOURCE SIGN ASSEMBLY

AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT

SIGN LAYOUT DETAILS

for use on

USFS PROJECTS

PROJECT FUNDING SOURCE

SIGN ASSEMBLY

Forest Service Supplemental Specifications - Sign Detail

REQUIRED SIGN SIZE SHOWN WITH DARKENED BORDER

Project Funding Source Sign Assembly American Recovery And Reinvestment Act

Sign Layout Details USFS Projects

FOR USE ON HIGH SPEED ROADS

PROJECT FUNDING SOURCE SIGN

OTE: SIGN SHALL NOT BE INSTALLED WITHOUT PROJECT FUNDING SOURCE PLAQUE (SEE SHEET 3). N

A B C D E F G H J K L M N P

120 72 1.5 3.756 5 D 4.5 8 D* 6D*(4.5 L.C.) NA NA 27.917 5 10.831

84 54 1 5 4 C 3.5 6 C* 3 4 D*(3 L.C.) NA NA 19.047 4 7.362

C Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA BB C DD

14.087 8.106 11.556 49.42 2.742 5.258 46.904 6.812 46.76 22.472 8 16.288 4 21

9.484 5.162 7.763 31.722 2.415 3.585 30.552 4.542 30.911 14.737 6 10.175 3 15

*** See Pictograph page 7

BACKGROUND — GREEN (RETROREFLECTIVE)

G * Increase character spacing 50% ** See Pictograph page 6

EE FF G

8 3 3

COLORS: LEGEND, BORDER — WHITE (RETROREFLECTIVE)

6 2.25 2.25

American Recovery And Reinvestment Act

Sign Layout Details USFS Projects

FOR USE ON HIGH SPEED ROADS

PROJECT FUNDING SOURCE PLAQUE

NOTE: SIGN SHALL NOT BE INSTALLED * See Standard Highway Signs WITHOUT SIGN (SEE SHEET 2). Page 6-59 for symbol design

A B C D E F G H J K L M N P

120 24 0.625 0.875 4 6 D 22.349 20.370 17.281 13.28 6 34.22 6.5 8.765

84 18 0.375 0.625 3.5 4 D 16.607 15.686 9.707 10.667 4 22.813 5 5.843

Q R S T U V W X Y Z

21.013 3 24 0.375 0.625 1.5 11 8 1.5 12

14.009 2.25 18 0.375 0.625 1 7 6 1.5 9

COLORS: LEGEND, BORDER — BLACK

BACKGROUND — ORANGE (RETROREFLECTIVE)

American Recovery And Reinvestment Act

Sign Layout Details USFS Projects

FOR USE ON LOW SPEED ROADS OR NON-ROAD PROJECTS

PROJECT FUNDING SOURCE SIGN

OTE: SIGN SHALL NOT BE INSTALLED WITHOUT PROJECT FUNDING SOURCE PLAQUE (SEE SHEET 5). N

A B C D E F G H J K L M N P

60 36 0.75 3 3 C 2.25 4 C 1 1 .625 3 C* NA NA 4.393 3 5.416

42 27 0.5 2.5 2 C 1.75 3 C 1.5 2 C* NA NA 9.60 2 3.681

C Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA BB C DD

7.044 4.02 5.78 24.71 1.371 2.629 23.452 3.406 23.38 11.236 4 8.144 2 10

4.742 2.68 3.85 15.861 1.207 1.792 15.276 2.271 15.455 7.369 3 5.0875 1.5 7

*** See Pictograph page 7

BACKGROUND — GREEN (RETROREFLECTIVE)

* Increase character spacing 50% ** See Pictograph page 6

EE FF GG

4 1.5 1.5

COLORS: LEGEND, BORDER — WHITE (RETROREFLECTIVE)

3 1.125 1.125

American Recovery And Reinvestment Act

Sign Layout Details USFS Projects

FOR USE ON LOW SPEED ROADS OR NON-ROAD PROJECTS

PROJECT FUNDING SOURCE PLAQUE

ALLED *

ITHOUT SIGN (SEE SHEET 4). Page 6-59 for symbol design

NOTE: SIGN SHALL NOT BE INST See Standard Highway Signs W

A B C D E F G H J K L M N P

60 12 0.312 0.437 2 3 C 11.174 10.185 8.640 6.64 3 17.11 3.25 4.3825

42 9 0.187 0.312 1.67 2 C 8.303 7.843 4.853 5.334 2 11.406 2.5 2.922

Q R S T U V W X Y Z

10.507 1.5 12 0.375 0.5 0.75 5.5 4 1.5 6

7.005 1.125 9 0.375 0.5 0.5 3.5 3 1.5 4.5

COLORS:

BACKGROUND — ORANGE (RETROREFLECTIVE)

LEGEND, BORDER — BLACK

American Recovery And Reinvestment Act

Sign Layout Details USFS Projects

RECOVERY

Vector-Based, Vinyl-Ready Pictograph

COLORS: LEGEND, OUTLINE — WHITE (RETROREFLECTIVE)

BORDER — BLUE (RETROREFLECTIVE)

BACKGROUND (UPPER) — BLUE (RETROREFLECTIVE)

BACKGROUND (LOWER RIGHT) — RED (RETROREFLECTIVE)

BACKGROUND (LOWER LEFT) — GREEN (RETROREFLECTIVE)

American Recovery And Reinvestment Act

Sign Layout Details USFS Projects

FOREST SERVICE SHIELD

NOTE: Shield artwork supplied by Government.

Shield is also available in decals sizes 2, 2 ½, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8 inches.

COLORS: LEGEND, OUTLINE — WHITE (RETROREFLECTIVE)

BORDER — WHITE (RETROREFLECTIVE)

BACKGROUND — BROWN (RETROREFLECTIVE)

American Recovery And Reinvestment Act

Sign Layout Details USFS Projects

The Forest Service Shield is fully detailed in EM 7100-15, Sign and Poster Guidelines for the Forest Service.

Sign Layout Details are based on FHWA guidance for an MUTCD compliant construction sign to use to on ARRA projects. Additional information may be found at the links below http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/economicrecovery/arrasignguidance.htm http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/economicrecovery/arrasigndetail.pdf

Appendix D Concept Drawings