Attachment_1A_Bombay_Hook_New_MPF_Specifications.pdf

Beardsley #19130

64 South Street

Auburn, New York 13021

Telephone: (315) 253-7301

Fax: (315) 253-7306

Email: bda@beardsley.com

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

FOR

New Multi-Purpose Facility

US FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE

BOMBAY HOOK NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE

2591 Whitehall Neck Road, Smyrna, Delaware

Phase #1 & Phase #2

100% Revised Construction Documents Submission

Date: May 11, 2021

Bombay Hook National Wildlife Refuge Beardsley #19130

New Multipurpose Facility

TABLE OF CONTENTS - 1

SECTION 00 01 10

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS

DIVISION 00 -- PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS

00 00 00 PROJECT TITLE PAGE

00 01 10 TABLE OF CONTENTS

00 01 15 LIST OF DRAWING SHEETS

00 31 00 AVAILABLE PROJECT INFORMATION

SPECIFICATIONS

DIVISION 01 -- GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

01 10 00 SUMMARY

01 23 00 ADDITIVES

01 40 00 QUALITY REQUIREMENTS

01 41 00 SPECIAL INSPECTIONS AND STRUCTURAL TESTS

01 74 19 CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSAL

01 79 00 DEMONSTRATION AND TRAINING

01 81 13.14 SUSTAINABLE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS – LEED V4 BD+C, NEW CONSTRUCTION

01 91 13 GENERAL COMMISSIONING REQUIREMENTS

01 91 19.43 EXTERIOR ENCLOSURE COMMISSIONING

DIVISION 02 -- DEMOLITION

NOT USED

DIVISION 03 -- CONCRETE

03 10 00 CONCRETE FORMING AND ACCESSORIES

03 20 00 CONCRETE REINFORCING

03 30 00 CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE

03 35 43 POLISHED CONCRETE FINISHING

DIVISION 04 -- MASONRY

04 05 13 MORTAR AND MASONRY GROUT

04 21 13 BRICK MASONRY

DIVISION 05 -- METALS

05 50 00 METAL FABRICATIONS

TABLE OF CONTENTS - 2

DIVISION 06 -- WOOD, PLASTICS, AND COMPOSITES

06 10 00 ROUGH CARPENTRY

06 16 00 SHEATHING

06 16 13 INSULATING SHEATHING

06 17 53 SHOP-FABRICATED WOOD TRUSSES

06 20 00 FINISH CARPENTRY

06 20 23 INTERIOR FINISH CARPENTRY

06 41 00 ARCHITECTURAL WOOD CASEWORK

DIVISION 07 -- THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION

07 21 00 THERMAL INSULATION

07 21 26 BLOWN INSULATION

07 25 00 VAPOR BARRIERS

07 26 00 VAPOR RETARDER UNDER SLAB ON GRADE

` 07 40 00 ICE AND WATER SHIELD

07 41 00 METAL ROOFING

07 46 00 SIDING

07 46 43 COMPOSITION SIDING

07 62 00 SHEET METAL FLASHING AND TRIM

07 71 23 GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS

07 84 00 FIRESTOPPING

07 92 00 JOINT SEALANTS

DIVISION 08 -- OPENINGS

08 11 13 HOLLOW METAL DOORS AND FRAMES

08 14 16 WOOD DOORS

08 31 00 ACCESS DOORS AND PANELS

08 43 13 ALUMINUM FRAMED ENTRANCES AND STOREFRONTS

08 52 00 WOOD WINDOWS

08 71 00 DOOR HARDWARE

08 80 00 GLAZING

08 91 00 LOUVERS

DIVISION 09 -- FINISHES

09 29 00 GYPSUM BOARD

09 30 00 TILING

09 51 00 SUSPENDED ACOUSTIC CEILING

09 65 00 RESILIENT BASE

09 68 13 TILE CARPETING

09 90 00 PAINTING AND COATING

09 91 13 EXTERIOR PAINTING

TABLE OF CONTENTS - 3

09 93 00 STAINING AND TRANSPARENT FINISHING

DIVISION 10 -- SPECIALTIES

10 14 00 SIGNAGE

10 21 13.19 PLASTIC TOILET COMPARTMENTS

10 28 00 TOILET AND BATH ACCESSORIES

10 28 14 ELECTRIC HAND DRYERS

10 44 00 FIRE PROTECTION SPECIALTIES

10 51 00 LOCKERS

10 75 16 GROUND SET FLAGPOLES

DIVISION 11 -- EQUIPMENT

NOT USED

DIVISION 12 -- FURNISHINGS

12 21 13 HORIZONTAL LOUVER BLINDS

12 36 61 SOLID SURFACE FABRICATION

12 59 00 FURNITURE SYSTEMS

DIVISION 22 -- PLUMBING

22 05 17 SLEEVES AND SLEEVE SEALS FOR PLUMBING PIPING

22 05 18 ESCUTCHEONS FOR PLUMBING PIPING

22 05 19 METERS AND GAUGES FOR PLUMBING PIPING

22 05 23.12 BALL VALVES FOR PLUMBING PIPING

22 05 23.14 CHECK VALVES FOR PLUMBING PIPING

22 05 29 HANGERS AND SUPPORTS FOR PLUMBING PIPING AND EQUIPMENT

22 05 53 IDENTIFICATION FOR PLUMBING PIPING AND EQUIPMENT

22 07 19 PLUMBING PIPING INSULATION

22 08 00 COMMISSIONING OF PLUMBING

22 11 16 DOMESTIC WATER PIPING

22 11 19 DOMESTIC WATER PIPING SPECIALTIES

22 11 23 DOMESTIC-WATER PUMPS

22 11 26 FACILITY LIQUEFIED-PETROLEUM GAS PIPING

22 13 16 SANITARY WASTE AND VENT PIPING

22 13 19 SANITARY WASTE PIPING SPECIALTIES

22 33 00 ELECTRIC, DOMESTIC–WATER HEATERS

22 41 00 RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING FIXTURES

22 42 13.13 COMMERCIAL WATER CLOSETS

22 42 13.16 COMMERCIAL URINALS

22 42 16.13 COMMERCIAL LAVATORIES

22 42 16.16 COMMERCIAL SINKS

TABLE OF CONTENTS - 4

22 47 16 PRESSURE WATER COOLERS

DIVISION 23 -- HEATING, VENTILATING, AND AIR-CONDITIONING (HVAC)

23 05 13 COMMON MOTOR REQUIREMENTS FOR HVAC EQUIPMENT

23 05 29 HANGERS AND SUPPORTS FOR HVAC PIPING AND EQUIPMENT

23 05 48.13 VIBRATION CONTROLS FOR HVAC

23 05 53 IDENTIFICATION FOR HVAC PIPING AND EQUIPMENT

23 05 93 TESTING, ADJUSTING AND BALANCING FOR HVAC

23 07 13 DUCT INSULATION

23 08 00 COMMISSIONING OF HVAC

23 23 00 REFRIGERANT PIPING

23 31 13 METAL DUCTS

23 33 00 AIR DUCT ACCESSORIES

23 37 13.13 AIR DIFFUSERS

23 37 13.23 REGISTERS AND GRILLES

23 81 29 VARIABLE-REFRIGERANT-FLOW HVAC SYSTEMS

DIVISION 26 -- ELECTRICAL

26 05 19 LOW-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL POWER CONDUCTORS AND CABLES

26 05 23 CONTROL-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL POWER CABLES

26 05 26 GROUNDING AND BONDING FOR ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS

26 05 29 HANGERS AND SUPPORTS FOR ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS

26 05 33 RACEWAY AND BOXES FOR ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS

26 05 44 SLEEVES AND SLEEVE SEALS FOR ELECTRICAL RACEWAYS AND CABLING

26 05 53 IDENTIFICATION FOR ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS

26 08 00 COMMISSIONING OF ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS

26 09 23 LIGHTING CONTROL DEVICES

26 24 16 PANELBOARDS

26 27 26 WIRING DEVICES

26 27 43 ELECTRIC VEHICLE SERVICE EQUIPMENT – LEVEL 2

26 28 13 FUSES

26 28 16 ENCLOSED SWITCHES AND CIRCUIT BREAKERS

26 29 13.03 MANUAL AND MAGNETIC MOTOR CONTROLLERS

26 31 00 PHOTOVOLTAIC COLLECTORS

26 32.13.17 GASEOUS ENGINE GENERATORS

26 36 00 TRANSFER SWITCHES

26 41 13 LIGHTNING PROTECTION FOR STRUCTURES

26 51 19 LIGHT EMITTING DIODE (LED) INTERIOR LIGHTING

26 52 13 EMERGENCY AND EXIT LIGHTING

26 56 19 LED EXTERIOR LIGHTING

TABLE OF CONTENTS - 5

DIVISION 27 -- COMMUNICATIONS

27 05 26 GROUNDING AND BONDING FOR COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS

27 11 00 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ROOM FITTINGS

27 11 16 COMMUNICATIONS RACKS, FRAMES, AND ENCLOSURES

27 15 00 COMMUNICATIONS HORIZONTAL CABLING

27 51 16 AUDIO VISUAL AND INTERPRETIVE DISPLAY SYSTEMS

DIVISION 28 -- ELECTRONIC SAFETY AND SECURITY

28 13 00 ACCESS CONTROL SYSTEM

28 15 00 ACCESS CONTROL HARDWARE DEVICES

28 20 00 VIDEO SURVEILLANCE

28 31 00 INTRUSION DETECTION

28 46 21.11 ADDRESSABLE FIRE-ALARM SYSTEMS

DIVISION 31 -- EARTHWORK

31 10 00 SITE CLEARING

31 20 00 EARTH MOVING

DIVISION 32 -- EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS

32 12 16 ASPHALT PAVING

32 13 13 CONCRETE PAVING

32 33 00 SITE FURNISHINGS

32 92 00 TURF AND GRASSES

DIVISION 33 -- UTILITIES

33 10 00 FACILITY WATER DISTRIBUTION PIPING

33 34 00 ONSITE WASTEWATER DISPOSAL

33 41 00 STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM

DIVISION 34 -- TRANSPORTATION

34 41 13 TRAFFIC SIGNS

34 71 15 STEEL PIPE BOLLARDS

END OF SECTION

Phase #1 & 2 LIST OF DRAWING SHEETS 00 01 15 - 1

SECTION 00 01 15

LIST OF DRAWING SHEETS

Drawings Dated: May 11, 2021 (100% Design Submission, rev 1)

ALL CONTRACTS

Cover Sheet

Survey – Map Showing Existing Topography

CIVIL DRAWINGS

C-001 – Code Compliance Site Plan

C-002 – Notes, Legend and Abbreviations

C-101 – Removal Plan

C-102 - Layout and Improvements Plan

C-103 – Grading and Drainage Plan

C-104 – Erosion Control Plan

C-105 – Utility Plan

C-106 – Sanitary Wastewater Plan

C-401 – Enlarged Plaza Plans and Details

C-402 – Enlarged PV Array Plan and Details

C-501 – Site Improvement Details

C-502 – Site Improvement Details

C-503 – Drainage and Utility Details

C-504 – Erosion Control Details

C-505 – Erosion Control Details

C-506 – Utility Details

C-507 – Sanitary Wastewater Details

STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS

S-001 – Special Inspections & General Notes

S-101 – Foundation Plan

S-102 – Wall Framing Plan, Notes & Details

S-103 – Roof Framing Plan, Notes & Details

S-401 – Truss Profiles & Details

S-501 – Foundation Details

Phase #1 & 2 LIST OF DRAWING SHEETS 00 01 15 - 2

ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS

F&LS – Fire and Life Safety Plan

A-100 – General Symbols and Abbreviations

A-101 – Floor Plan

A-102 – Upper Floor Plan

A-103 – Reflected Ceiling Plan

A-104 – Roof Plan

A-201 – Exterior Elevations

A-202 – Exterior Elevations

A-301 – Building Sections

A-302 – Wall Sections

A-303 - Details

A-401 – Enlarged Plans

A-402 – Accessible Mounting Heights and Details

A-403 – Enlarged Plans and Interior Elevations

A-404 – Enlarged Plans and Interior Elevations

A-601 – Window Elevations

A-602 – Door Elevations and Schedule

A-603 – Window Details

A-604 – Door Details

A-605 – Signage Plan & Details

A-606 – Furniture Plan

PLUMBING DRAWINGS

P-001 - Abbreviation and Symbols

P-101 - Underslab Waste Piping Plan

P-102 – Above Slab Waste and Venting Piping Plan

P-103 – Domestic Piping Plan

P-501 – Details and Schedules

P-601 – Piping Schematics

P-602 – Piping Schematics

Phase #1 & 2 LIST OF DRAWING SHEETS 00 01 15 - 3

MECHANICAL DRAWINGS

M-001 – Abbreviations, Legend and General Notes

M-101 – HVAC Floor Plan

M-401 – Enlarged Attic Floor Plan

M-402 – HVAC Sections

M-403 – HVAC Isometrics

M-404 – HVAC Isometrics

M-501 – Details

M-502 – Details

M-601 – Schedules

M-602 – Schedules

M-801 – VRF Piping and Wiring Schematics

M-802 – VRF Piping and Wiring Schematics

M-803 – VRF Piping and Wiring Schematics

M-804 – Outdoor Air and Piping Wiring Schematics

ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS

E-001 – Abbreviations and Symbols

E-101 – Power Plan

E-102 – Low Voltage Power System Plan

E-103 – Lighting Plan

E-501 – Details

E-601 – Schedules

E-602 – Schedules

E-603 – Schedules

E-604 – One-Line Diagram

E-605 – Light Fixture Schedule

Phase #1 & 2 AVAILABLE PROJECT INFORMATION 00 31 00 - 1

SECTION 00 31 00

AVAILABLE PROJECT INFORMATION

PART 1 - GENERAL

1.1 EXISTING REPORTS AND SURVEYS

A. General:

1. Prior to Bidding, Bidders may, at their expense, make their own investigations to satisfy themselves as to site conditions, but such investigations will be performed only under time schedules and arrangements approved in advance by the Contracting Officer. Proposed location, type of samples, and method of sampling must be approved by the Contracting Officer.

2. Information described below is exclusively for use on this specific Project.

B. Subsurface Investigation Report:

1. A copy of a Geotechnical report with respect to the building site is included with the document Contract Documents:

a. The title of the report is “Geotechnical Explorations, Testing, and Recommendations, Multi-Purpose Facility, Bombay Hook National Wildlife Refuge” dated February 20, 2020, and prepared by GEI Consultants.

b. This report identifies properties of below grade conditions and offers recommendations for the design of foundations, prepared primarily for the use of the Architect/Engineer.

c. The recommendations described shall not be construed as a requirement of this Contract, unless specifically referenced in the Contract Documents.

d. This report, by its nature, cannot reveal all conditions that exist on the site. Should subsurface conditions be found to vary substantially from this report, changes in the design and construction of foundations will be made, with resulting credits or expenditures to the Contract Sum accruing to the Contracting Officer.

C. Topographic Survey:

1. A copy of a topographic survey with respect to the Project site is included with the Contract Documents.

a. The title of the survey is “Map Showing Existing Topography, Proposed Headquarters Building, Bombay Hook National Wildlife Refuge”, dated 12-20-2019, and prepared by Thew Associates Land Surveyors.

b. This survey identifies grade elevations, surface features, and utilities and is prepared primarily for the use of the Architect/Engineer.

D. Domestic Water Sampling Results:

Phase #1 & 2 AVAILABLE PROJECT INFORMATION 00 31 00 - 2

1. A copy of laboratory testing of raw water from the existing drilled well is provided accompanying this section for use in delegated design of the public water service disinfection system. Refer to Plumbing Drawings for requirements.

PART 2 - GENERAL (NOT USED)

PART 3 - GENERAL (NOT USED)

Geotechnical Explorations, Testing, and Recommendations

Multi-Purpose Facility Bombay Hook National Wildlife Refuge Smyrna, Delaware

Submitted to:

Beardsley Architects and Engineers 5789 Widewaters Parkway DeWitt, NY 13214

Submitted by:

GEI Consultants, Inc.

18000 Horizon Way, Suite 200 Mount Laurel, NJ 08054 856-608-6860

February 26, 2020 Project 1906014

Tyler Schott, P.E. (DE) Project Manager

Francis D. Leathers, P.E. (DE) Senior Geotechnical Consultant

Consulting

Engineers and

Scientists

Geotechnical Explorations, Testing, and Recommendations February 26, 2020 Multi-Purpose Facility Bombay Hook National Wildlife Refuge

GEI Consultants, Inc. i

Table of Contents

Table of Contents i

Executive Summary iii

1. Introduction 1

1.1 Project Description 1

1.2 Scope of Work 1

1.3 Authorization 2

1.4 Project Personnel 2

1.5 Coordinates and Datum 2

2. Subsurface Conditions 3

2.1 Geologic Setting 3

2.2 Borings 3

2.3 Test Pits 3

2.4 Subsurface Conditions 4

2.5 Groundwater 5

2.6 Wastewater Treatment System Site Evaluation 5

3. Geotechnical Laboratory Testing 6

4. Geotechnical Evaluations and Recommendations 7

4.1 General 7

4.2 Building and Slab Foundations 7

4.3 Settlement and Compaction Criteria 7

4.4 Seismic Design 8

4.5 Lateral Earth Pressures 8

4.6 Excavations and Subgrade Preparation 9

4.7 Dewatering and Groundwater Control 11

4.8 Foundation Drainage, Damp Proofing and Waterproofing 11

4.9 Fill and Backfill 12

4.10 Road Subbase 12

4.11 Freezing Conditions 13

4.12 Wastewater Treatment System Design 13

5. Limitations and Recommendations for Future Services 15

Figures

1. Site Location Map

2. Site Plan Depicting Boring and Test Pit Locations

Bombay Hook National Wildlife Refuge

GEI Consultants, Inc. ii

Appendices A. Boring Logs B. Test Pit Logs C. Laboratory Results D. Site Evaluation Report

\\geiconsultants.com\data\Data_Storage\Working\BEARDSLEY A&E\1906014 USDWS Bombay Hook\08_GEI Report\Draft Geotechnical Report - Bombay Hook Multi-Purpose Facility - FDL-ELS.docx

GEI Consultants, Inc. iii

Executive Summary

This report presents the results of subsurface explorations at the US Fish and Wildlife Bombay Hook National Wildlife Refuge in Smyrna, Delaware. Subsurface work was performed to develop geotechnical design recommendations for the proposed multi-purpose facility and roadway improvements. Additionally, the site was evaluated with respect to installation of a new wastewater treatment system and design recommendations are provided herein.

Based on GEI’s review of the 33% Design Submission for the Site provided by Beardsley Architects and Engineers (Beardsley) dated January 20, 2020, the proposed project involves improvements to the existing roadways and parking lot, installation of a new wastewater treatment system and construction of a new multi-purpose facility with entrance plaza. The proposed multi-purpose facility is to be constructed with conventional wood framing and masonry methods with a concrete slab on-grade foundation. The proposed finished floor elevation of the new structure is approximately El. 11.50 (North American Vertical Datum

1988, NAVD 88).

Subsurface investigation activities generally consisted of the installation of six soil borings and excavation of three test pits at the site. Two representative soil samples were collected for geotechnical laboratory analysis by Earth Engineering Inc. of West Berlin, NJ. The test pitting work was performed under the direction of a certified soil scientist qualified to design wastewater treatment systems in the state of Delaware.

The soils encountered at the site consisted of about 1 to 3 feet of fill or topsoil, underlain by orange brown, yellow brown and gray, medium dense fine to coarse sand with little to trace silt and gravel (Stratum I) extending to at least the bottom of the explorations at 10 to 20 feet, except in B-3 where the bottom of Stratum I was encountered at a depth of 39 feet. Below Stratum I, a layer of medium dense to dense, gray and green fine to medium sand with little to trace silt (Stratum II) was found. The depth to ground water observed in the borings and test pits was about 6 feet below ground surface.

The soils of Stratum I are suitable for support of the proposed multi-purpose facility utilizing shallow foundations and slab on grade. The building area should be stripped of all topsoil and fill, and the Stratum I subgrade should be compacted with at least 4 coverages of a vibratory roller. Foundation elements should be designed for a maximum allowable bearing capacity of 3,000 pounds per square foot. The minimum width of strip footings should be 2 feet and the minimum dimension of column footings should be 3 feet. The proposed design and construction sequence contained in the 33% design documents are in general accordance with GEI’s recommendations and findings from the subsurface investigations.

GEI Consultants, Inc. iv

The existing gravel fill and Stratum I soils are suitable to support the proposed roadways and parking areas. All subgrades should be proof-rolled to detect local areas of soft subgrade.

Any soft areas should be over-excavated and replaced with compacted Structural Fill.

Subgrades should be graded to promote drainage and surface runoff.

The proposed leaching field site was evaluated by Mr. Russell Losco of Lanchester Soil Consultants, Inc., a licensed Delaware soil evaluator. Mottling and redoximorphic features indicating a seasonal high-water table on site soils were observed between 20 inches and 50 inches depth The current groundwater level was observed consistently at approximately 6.0 feet depth. The soils observed in the test pits indicated deep moderately well drained soils of the Manokin series. Permeability of these soils is estimated by Mr. Losco to be 30 minutes per inch. Mr. Losco recommends the installation of a sand lined elevated Sand Mound system (excavated and lined with sand to a depth of 36 inches) based upon these findings.

Additional discussion and recommendations are provided in Section 4 of this report.

GEI Consultants, Inc. 1

1. Introduction

1.1 Project Description

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) plans to construct a new multi-purpose facility at the Bombay Hook National Wildlife Refuge in Smyrna, DE. The proposed facility is located to the east of the existing visitor’s center which will be demolished. The multi-purpose facility is planned to be a single-story structure constructed using conventional wood framing and masonry methods situated on a concrete slab on-grade and shallow foundations.

Additional improvements at the site are proposed to include installation of a new wastewater treatment system and regrading and paving of the roadways and parking lot.

Based on GEI’s review of the 33% Design Submission for the site provided by Beardsley Architects and Engineers (Beardsley) dated January 20, 2020, the new facility will have a finished floor elevation of El. 11.50 feet NAVD 88, which is several feet above existing site grade. This elevation has been determined based upon the 100-year flood (base flood) elevation of El, 10 feet. The top of the proposed reinforced concrete foundation wall footing will be 4 feet below the top of concrete slab. The footing is anticipated to be approximately 1 foot thick. The top of the concrete slab on grade is proposed at an elevation of 11.50 feet with a 6-inch minimum subbase, 2-inch rigid insulation and 10-mil vapor barrier.This proposed construction sequence is in general accordance with GEI recommendations and findings of the subsurface investigations as described herein.

1.2 Scope of Work

We performed the following scope of work:

• Coordinated with Beardsley and the USFWS to determine the locations of borings and test pits.

• Engaged subcontractor to drill six (6) borings and excavate three (3) test pits and perform limited geotechnical testing of soil samples.

• Engaged subcontractor to conduct a site evaluation and provide recommendations for the proposed on-site wastewater treatment system in accordance with the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) requirements and permitting process.

• Provided field geologist to observe and document the borings and test pits.

• Evaluated subsurface conditions and developed foundation recommendations for the building and roadways.

GEI Consultants, Inc. 2

• Prepared this geotechnical report containing the results of the explorations and testing and presenting our recommendations for design and construction of the proposed facilities.

1.3 Authorization

Our work was authorized by Beardsley Design Associates Architecture, Engineering, Landscape Architecture, D.P.C. of Auburn, New York via Architect-Engineer Contract No.

F17PC00095 dated June 22, 2017 and approval of our proposal dated December 6, 201

1.4 Project Personnel

Tyler Schott, P.E. (DE) was the GEI Project Manager, and Francis D. Leathers, P.E. (DE) was the GEI Senior Geotechnical Consultant and In-House Reviewer. Emily Shaw was the GEI project geologist and field representative during the drilling and test pit excavation and preparation of this report.

1.5 Coordinates and Datum

The approximate site coordinates and elevation datum are as follows:

Latitude: 39.259794°

Longitude: -75.473108°

Elevation Datum: Approximately 7 feet above mean sea level (North American Vertical Datum 1988, NAVD 88).

GEI Consultants, Inc. 3

2. Subsurface Conditions

2.1 Geologic Setting

Geologic and subsurface mapping performed by the Delaware Geologic Survey indicates the site is underlain the Tertiary aged Calvert Formation (Geologic Symbol – Tc) of the Coastal Plain Units Chesapeake Group. The formation is described by the Delaware Geologic Survey as primarily a silty clay material and is interpreted as a marine deposit. Findings of the subsurface exploration indicate a potential transitional zone between coastal and marine due to the presence of thick sand units (typical of coastal deposits) with silt lenses or mixing (typical of marine deposits). The silt observed at the site appears to be consistent with the mapped Calvert Formation.

2.2 Borings

GEI engaged Earth Engineering Inc. (EEI) of West Berlin, NJ to perform and create log of six (6) standard test borings, B-1 through B-6, on December 30, 2019. EEI hired a licensed driller, F.M. & W. Drilling Inc., of Bellmawr, NJ, to perform the drilling of each soil boring.

The three borings in the building area, B-1 through B-3, were drilled to depths of 20, 20 and 50 feet respectively using hollow stem augers, with water introduced as a drilling fluid below a depth of 10 feet. The borings in the roadway, B-4 through B-6, were drilled to depths of 10 feet using hollow stem augers without drilling fluid. Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) with split spoon samples were performed continuously to a depth of 10 feet, and then at 5-foot intervals below 10 feet in each boring. A GEI field representative was on site to coordinate the drilling, log the test borings, and describe the soil samples. The soils were visually classified in the field by EEI’s inspector and GEI’s geologist based on the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D2487). The boring logs are included in Appendix A. Subsurface profiles in the building and roadway areas are also shown in Appendix A.

Ground water level was measured in each borehole upon completion of drilling. Holes were backfilled with cuttings. Borings in paved areas were finished with asphalt cold patch to match road conditions.

2.3 Test Pits

Three test pits were excavated to depths of 5 to 6 feet in the proposed leaching field area using a small track mounted backhoe. The test pit logs are shown in Appendix B. The test pits were backfilled with the excavated soil, tamped in layers.

GEI Consultants, Inc. 4

GEI engaged Lanchester Soil Consultants of West Grove, PA to observe the test pits and perform a site evaluation for the installation of a wastewater treatment system. The site evaluation was performed by Mr. Russell Losco, a Delaware Class D licensed Soil Scientist on January 22, 2020. A GEI field representative was onsite to coordinate the performance of three (3) test pits and note initial findings of the evaluation.

Mr. Losco observed varying degrees of loam, silt and sand across three to five horizons. In all test pits, redoximorphic features indicating seasonal high ground water level were observed between 20 and 50 inches below the existing ground surface. The soils observed were consistent with the mapped soil series Manokin with an estimated permeability of 30 minutes per inch. Additional detail including USDA soil classifications are available in Test Pit Logs provided in Appendix B.

2.4 Subsurface Conditions

The soil layers encountered in the borings and test pits are described below, beginning at the ground surface. The subsurface profiles are based on the explorations preformed for this study. The soil conditions are known only at the boring locations. Conditions between borings may differ significantly from those shown in the Appendix A and described below.

Fill (only observed in B-4, B-5, and B-6) – Two to three feet of fill soils were encountered below the existing crushed aggregate ground cover in the parking lot and roadway of borings B-4 through B-6. Fill soils generally consisted of medium dense, gray to orange brown or brown fine to coarse sand, some to trace silt and gravel. SPT N-values in the fill were 22 to 24 blows per foot.

Topsoil (only observed in B-1, B-2 and B-3) – Less than one foot of topsoil was observed in borings B-1 through B-3. Topsoil generally consisted of loose to very loose brown silt, trace sand.

Stratum I – In all borings (below either fill or topsoil, dependent upon location) a layer of silty sand was encountered. This soil consisted primarily of medium dense, orange brown to yellowish brown or gray fine to coarse sand with little to trace silt and gravel. In general, groundwater and mottling were observed within this stratum.

SPT N-values ranged from 5 to 41 blows per foot.

Stratum II – Below the orange brown silty sand stratum in boring B-3 only, a layer of gray soil was encountered at approximately 39 feet below existing ground surface and extending to the bottom of the boring at 50 feet. This soil consisted of medium dense to dense gray fine to medium sand with little to trace silt, trace to no shell fragments.

SPT N-values ranged from 17 to 32 blows per foot.

GEI Consultants, Inc. 5

2.5 Groundwater

Groundwater observed in all borings and test pits to be approximately 6.0 feet below the existing ground surface.

Groundwater levels are expected to fluctuate with season, precipitation, temperature, construction activity in the area, and other factors. Groundwater level measurements represent conditions at the times and locations when the measurements were made. The groundwater elevations are likely to vary at other times and locations.

2.6 Wastewater Treatment System Site Evaluation

Russell Losco, M.A., Certified Professional Soil Scientist (CPSS) and Delaware Class C Licensed Soil Scientist performed a site evaluation for the proposed installation of a wastewater treatment system. Three (3) test pits were excavated to approximately 6 feet below ground surface, two (2) in the vicinity of the proposed primary wastewater treatment system location and one (1) an alternative wastewater treatment system location.

Limiting features were observed in all test pits, including redoximorphic features (visual features associated with water saturation and the reduction and oxidation of iron and manganese compounds in the soil), and groundwater. Redoximorphic features were observed between 20 and 50 inches below the existing ground surface. Groundwater was observed at a consistent elevation as measured in the soil borings performed previously at approximately 6.0 feet below the existing ground surface.

In general, soils were observed to be deep moderately well drained soils of the Manokin series. Permeability of these soils is estimated to be 30 minutes per inch. Mr. Losco recommends the installation of a sand lined elevated Sand Mound system (excavated and lined with sand to a depth of 36 inches) based upon these findings.

GEI Consultants, Inc. 6

3. Geotechnical Laboratory Testing

Two (2) representative soil samples were selected for laboratory analysis in the Earth Engineering geotechnical laboratory in West Berlin, NJ to confirm soil classifications and to estimate engineering properties. The laboratory analysis included:

• Particle Size Analysis (ASTM D 422)

• Atterberg Limits Determination (ASTM D 4318)

• Natural Moisture Content (ASTM D 2216)

Generally sample analysis from the Fill and Stratum I stratums of the borings indicated a medium to coarse grained, subangular to sub rounded, non-plastic tan silty sand. Soils contained between 9.7% and 19.6% natural moisture content. Results of the geotechnical laboratory testing have been incorporated into the soil descriptions on the boring logs in Appendix A. Geotechnical laboratory testing results are included in Appendix C and summarized in Table 1 below.

Table 1 - Geotechnical Laboratory Testing Results Boring Location B-4; B-5 B-1; B-2; B-3 Sample Number S-1 & S-1 S-4, S-4; & S-5

Sample Depths 0.7’-2.0’ 6.0’-8.0’ & 8.0’- 10.0’

Stratum Fill Stratum I Particle Size Distribution 1.5" 100 100 3/4" 100 100 3/8" 97.8 99.7 No. 4 93.5 99.3 No. 10 89.3 98.3 No. 40 41.6 65.7 No. 100 20 14.7 No. 200 17.2 13.3 Atterberg Limits Liquid Limit Non-Plastic Non-Plastic Plastic Limit Non-Plastic Non-Plastic Plasticity Index Non-Plastic Non-Plastic Natural Moisture Content (%) 9.7 19.6 Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) Symbol SM SM ASTM Group Name Silty Sand Silty Sand

GEI Consultants, Inc. 7

4. Geotechnical Evaluations and Recommendations

4.1 General

The recommendations provided herein are based upon findings of the geotechnical explorations and testing and GEI’s current understanding of the proposed site improvements.

In general, Stratum I was found to be suitable for support of the proposed multi-purpose facility utilizing a shallow foundation system provided foundation subgrades are densified in-place.

4.2 Building and Slab Foundations

Spread foundation elements bearing on Stratum I soils or Structural Fill should be designed for a maximum allowable bearing capacity of 3,000 pounds per square foot. The minimum width of strip footings should be 2 feet and the minimum dimension of column footings should be 3 feet. All foundations should bear at a depth of at least 3 feet below finished exterior grade. The concrete slab on grade elements for the multi-purpose facility can be supported by the existing in-situ soils in Stratum I and newly placed Structural Fill.

The Stratum I subgrade below the concrete slab should be compacted and proof-rolled with a fully loaded tri-axle dump truck to verify a stable subgrade prior to placement of the slab or structural fill. Any subgrade soils containing non-soil debris should be removed and replaced with controlled, compacted lifts of Structural Fill. Field inspection of proof-rolling and subsequent fill placement should be performed by a qualified representative of the Geotechnical Engineer of Record.

Following successful confirmation of a stable and suitable subgrade via proof-rolling, the concrete floor slab may be supported on a minimum 4-inch thick layer of clean stone (i.e.

2B/AASHTO #57 or equivalent). The slab can be designed using a modulus of subgrade reaction of approximately 150 psi/inch provided that the soils are compacted to a minimum of 95% of the soils maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557 (Modified) in fill areas.

4.3 Settlement and Compaction Criteria

Based on experience, we estimate that the foundations and slab will experience total settlements of about ¾-inch or less, and differential settlement of about ½-inch or less provided the subgrades are prepared and any Structural Fill is placed as described below and in Section 4. Structural fill should be placed in horizontal 10-inch loose lifts and compacted with a minimum 10-ton steel-drum, smooth-barrel vibratory roller. In areas where utilization

GEI Consultants, Inc. 8 of a 10-ton steel drum roller is not possible, fill material should be placed in horizontal 6-inch loose lifts and compacted with hand operated vibratory equipment. The number of overpasses and repetitions necessary to achieve the required compaction percentage values should be determined in the field. All fill material should remain in accordance with the optimum moisture content of ±3% in accordance with ASTM 15 modified D1557 and compacted to a minimum percentage of the maximum dry density for the appropriate location, as indicated in Table 2 provided above.

Table 2 - Compaction Criteria

Site Region Percent of Maximum Dry Density

(ASTM D1557 Modified) Foundation and Slab On-Grade 95

Pavements 95 Non-Structural/Green Space 92

4.4 Seismic Design

According to the 2012 International Building Code IBC Section 1613 Site Class Definitions, and findings of the subsurface exploration, the properties of soils observed and evaluated correspond to Site Class D. Site Class D is characterized by the following:

• Stiff soils

• Soil Shear Wave Velocity (ft/sec): 600 – 1,200

• Standard Penetration Resistance or N-value (blows/foot): 15 –50

• Undrained Shear Strength (psf): 1,000 – 2,000

4.5 Lateral Earth Pressures

The lateral earth pressures that may be used for design purposes of retaining walls or walls constructed below grade are shown in Table 3 below. Retaining walls which are restrained from deflection such as the proposed concrete foundation wall, or other structure walls, should be designed for the at rest (Ko) condition. Retaining walls which are free to deflect such as landscaped walls should be designed for the active (Ka) condition.

The data for the natural soils was determined based upon standard classification testing and/or visual classification of the site soil samples compared to generally accepted published values for the various properties. It is recommended that a drainage system be installed for the proposed concrete foundation wall and any other walls constructed below grade. The

GEI Consultants, Inc. 9 presence of a drainage system will serve to minimize hydrostatic pressures caused by water trapped against the walls.

Table 3 - Soil Properties for Computation of Lateral Loads Soil Property Fill Stratum I Stratum II

Effective Stress Angle of Internal Friction 30.0o 30.0o 32.0o

Rankine Coefficient of Active Earth Pressure - Ka 0.33 0.33 0.31

Rankine Coefficient of Passive Earth Pressure - Kp 3.00 3.00 3.25

Rankine Coefficient of At Rest Earth Pressure - Ko 0.5 0.5 0.47 Coefficient of Sliding, Soil to Mass Concrete - μ 0.38 0.38 0.42 Moist Unit Weight (pcf) 120 120 120 Submerged Unit Weight (pcf) 57.6 57.6 57.6

4.6 Excavations and Subgrade Preparation

According to the January 20, 2020, 33% Design Submission any excavation of the existing site topography required for the proposed improvements is anticipated to occur with the fill or Stratum I materials or will involve placement of imported structural fill. Existing site soils will be easily excavated with conventional equipment. Bedrock was not encountered during the subsurface exploration and rock cutting is not anticipated to be necessary.

Excavation trenches are to be sloped, benched or shored to prevent collapse during excavation and testing activities. Sloping, benching, or shoring of is to be conducted in accordance with 29 CFR 1926, Subpart P. A competent person as defined by this regulatory document is required to confirm the stability of all excavations during construction. The wall slopes, benching, or shoring should be field determined and based on the required depth of excavations and the subsurface conditions encountered. Given the 33% Design Submission drawings, excavation and cuts into the existing grade are anticipated to be minimal due to proposed addition of structural fill.

Following the subgrade densification process, properly placed structural fill and/or suitably dense natural soil will be capable of supporting the proposed structure utilizing a shallow foundation system. In the event that weak saturated or unstable soils are encountered during foundation installation, GEI recommends the use of undercuts or extension of the foundation bottom elevation to a more table soil stratum. The recommended process for undercutting is as follows:

GEI Consultants, Inc. 10

1. Over excavation: Remove all unsuitable soils by conventional excavation methods. A Geotechnical Engineer of Record is required to verify any cuts under buildings or existing ground surface features.

2. Backfill: Place controlled lifts of structural fill of up to the 10-inch loose lifts and compacted in accordance with the previously described settlement and compaction criteria (see section 4.3 of this report).

The following recommendations assume that the site preparation procedures stated within, and specifications presented below, are followed.

1. A foundation system consisting of strip and/or spread footings featuring a slab on grade is recommended for support of the proposed residential building.

2. The base of the foundations should be situated within the suitably dense natural soils of Stratum I and/or structural fill placed and compacted as detailed in the section 4.3 of this report. Existing loose or unstable natural soils encountered at the footing bottom elevation should be undercut and replaced with compacted lifts of structural fill. Alternately, the foundation base can be lowered to the approved natural soil bearing elevation. Foundations shall not bear on or above any weak or unstable soil.

3. Supported on the suitably dense natural soil and/or properly placed structural fill, the foundation elements should be designed for a maximum allowable bearing capacity of 3,000 pounds per square foot. This recommendation is provided with the assumption that foundation subgrades are densified in-place prior to the placement of any reinforcing steel and/or concrete. Regardless of the load criteria, a minimum 24-inch wide strip footing, and 36-inch spread footing should be utilized.

4. Total foundation settlement is estimated not to exceed 1.0 inch. Differential settlement is estimated not to exceed 0.50 inch. These settlements were calculated using a bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot and anticipated maximum column loads of 50 kips and maximum wall loads of 2.0 kips/ft. Should the anticipated loads be different, GEI should be notified so that our recommendations can be reviewed and revised, if necessary.

5. The bottom of exterior footings and footings in unheated areas should be placed at least 3 feet below the final exterior grade for protection from frost heave.

6. All footing bottoms should be completely cleaned of loose material or debris immediately prior to the placement of concrete.

7. The actual bearing conditions of the soil at the footing bottom elevation should be confirmed in the field during excavation, by inspection under the supervision of a qualified Professional Engineer.

GEI Consultants, Inc. 11

4.7 Dewatering and Groundwater Control

Dewatering will likely be required during foundation and utility constructed due to the seasonal high-water table observed during the subsurface exploration. Groundwater infiltration at the foundation construction elevation will likely cause softening of the bearing surface and result in necessary subgrade stabilization.

If stabilization is required, it is expected to consist of a 1- to 2-foot over-excavation of soft/loose and saturated soil, or more, depending on conditions, see Section 4.6 of this report for over excavation methods.

It is recommended that the final selection of the dewatering system for this project be made by the contractor, subject to approval by the Geotechnical Engineer of Record. Water produced during the dewatering operation should be discharged into appropriate storm water channels in accordance with applicable statutes and regulations.

Construction during warm and dry summer months may reduce the scope of any temporary groundwater control measures. The appropriate measures to be taken for groundwater control are the responsibilities of the contractor and should be determined prior to construction and verified at the time of excavation. The contractor should be advised that additional investigations can be conducted to gather more information regarding groundwater conditions to further evaluate the proposed construction methods and costs.

4.8 Foundation Drainage, Damp Proofing and Waterproofing

The contractor should also be prepared to immediately place clean aggregate at the base of excavations where infiltrating water is encountered. A base layer of clean aggregate (AASHTO #57 or equivalent) will serve to provide a stable, non-saturating material on which the foundations may be placed and from which groundwater can be readily removed from the excavation.

GEI’s review of the 33% Design Submission indicates the foundation design is in general accordance with these foundation drainage and waterproofing recommendations provided the following details are maintained in the final design submission:

• 2-inch rigid insulation of the exterior of the concrete foundation wall,

• 6-inch minimum subbase of clean aggregate below the concrete slab on-grade foundation,

• 10-mil vapor barrier placed on the clean aggregate subbase, and

• 10-mil vapor barrier installed above the 2-inch rigid insulation.

GEI Consultants, Inc. 12

4.9 Fill and Backfill

We recommend that all fill and backfill below and within the zone of influence of footings, slabs on grade, sidewalks and road pavement consist of Structural Fill that meets the following gradation requirements:

Sieve Size Percent Passing by Weight

3 inches 100

3/4 inch 50 to 95

No. 4 30 to 85

No. 40 10 to 50

No. 200 (fines) 0 to 8

Structural Fill should be compacted in maximum 9-inch-thick loose lifts to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined in accordance with ASTM D 1557 (Modified AASHTO Compaction). The moisture content at time of compaction should be within a range of -3% to +1% of optimum moisture content (as determined by ASTM D 1557).

Fill and backfill for general site grading should be Ordinary Borrow, consisting of sand, gravelly sand or silty sand with maximum particle size of 3 inches and less than 20% non-plastic fines. Ordinary Borrow should be placed in 12-inch thick loose lifts and compacted to at least 92% maximum dry density determined in accordance with ASTM D 1557.

On-site excavated soil will not be suitable for Structural Fill but will be useable as Ordinary Borrow.

4.10 Road Subbase

Proposed site improvements include regrading and tar and chip installation of existing roadways and parking lots. Borings B-4 through B-6 were performed in the existing gravel-covered areas. Findings of the subsurface exploration in these areas has indicated that the existing fill and Stratum I soils are suitable for pavement support. All proposed paved areas should be proof rolled under the observation of a qualified representative of the Geotechnical Engineer of Record prior to the placement of structural fill and pavement.

Any loose or unstable soil encountered during proof-rolling should be compacted in place or removed and replaced with structural fill, as indicated in section 4.3 of this report. Loose/soft and unstable zones of soil may be encountered during proof-rolling operations as portions of the Fill and Stratum I soils may be weak in density. Any loose or soft materials may be densified in-place. Furthermore, any unstable areas resulting from excessive moisture (more than 3% above the optimum moisture content) can be aerated and dried in-place. Following adequate drying time, these soils also can be densified in-place, weather permitting. Loose

GEI Consultants, Inc. 13 or soft portions of on-site soils within the construction area that cannot be aerated, dried, and densified in-place should be removed and replaced with structural fill as indicated in Section

4.3 of this report.

The lateral extent, depth, and method of remediation will be contingent of onsite conditions at the time of construction and should be determined by a qualified representative of the Geotechnical Engineer of Record. The need to excavate and replace soft/moist materials will be reduced if development of the site occurs during periods of dry and warm conditions, such as the summer months of the year. During these periods, scarifying and aeration will be greatly enhanced while reducing the need to over-excavate and replace soft soils.

It is noted that the effectiveness of the aeration and drying process is highly dependent on temperature and precipitation and should be performed during a forecasted period of dry weather. If this site is developed in the fall, winter or spring months, significant cost and time contingencies should be provided in the project budget for pavement subgrade stabilization. Any materials that are considered unsuitable for structural support or for reuse as structural fill should be removed from site or placed in non-structural areas.

Due to large amounts of finer-grained secondary constituents present within the Fill and Stratum I soil, repeated construction traffic across the site will lead to instabilities and should therefore be limited. The site should be graded during development to convey surface runoff away from construction. The work areas should be sealed by rolling daily to promote runoff.

Careful grading and management of surface water runoff will help minimize disturbance of the subgrade. Furthermore, it is recommended that all construction areas be proof rolled immediately prior to the placement of the subbase stone section and again before the concrete/asphalt installation. This will allow for soft and weak areas to be observed and remediated prior to the slab/pavement construction. Periodic maintenance, such as patching and sealing, should also be performed at regular intervals.

4.11 Freezing Conditions

All finished excavation subgrades and backfill surfaces should be protected from freezing. If the subgrade or backfill surface becomes frozen, the frozen material should be removed and replaced with compacted borrow soils. All soils placed as backfill or embankment fill should be free of frozen material before placement and should be placed and compacted when temperatures are above freezing.

4.12 Wastewater Treatment System Design

As discussed in section 2.6 of this report, Russell Losco, M.A., CPSS and DE Class C Licensed Soil Scientist has provided a complete Site Evaluation in accordance with DNREC regulations. The Site Evaluation is provided in Appendix D. Due to the findings of the Site

GEI Consultants, Inc. 14

Evaluation, GEI provides the following general recommendations for septic system configuration and design.

An above ground Sand Mound is recommended to be installed in approximate location of the originally proposed system oriented between TP-1 and TP-2. Test pit locations are provided in Figure 2. General recommended design elements include excavation of the existing ground surface to a depth of 36 inches. Following excavation, the wastewater treatment system base would remain scarified and uncompacted. An unconsolidated sand fill mound would then be constructed above the excavation along with piping and subsurface appurtenances.

If Beardsley concurs with the wastewater treatment system design recommendations, GEI recommends submission of the attached Site Evaluation document to the DNREC for approval of the proposed system type. A complete system design is recommended following the submission of the Site Evaluation. Design efforts may begin immediately following the submission since conditions provided in the Site Evaluation are in accordance with requirements for above ground septic systems. Upon submission, DNREC will typically provide a response within 7 to 10 business days.

GEI Consultants, Inc. 15

5. Limitations and Recommendations for Future Services

Our recommendations are based on the project information provided to us at the time of this report and may require modification if there are any changes in the nature, design, or location of the proposed construction. We recommend that GEI be engaged to review the final plans and specifications to evaluate whether changes in the project affect the validity of our recommendations and whether our recommendations have been properly implemented in the design.

The recommendations in this report are based in part on the data obtained from the borings.

The nature and extent of variations between borings may not become evident until construction. If variations from the anticipated conditions are encountered, it may be necessary to revise the recommendations in this report. Therefore, we recommend that GEI be engaged to make site visits during construction to: a) check that the subsurface conditions exposed during construction are in general conformance with our design assumptions and

b) ascertain that, in general, the geotechnical aspects of the work are being performed in compliance with the contract documents.

Our professional services for this project have been performed in accordance with generally accepted engineering practices; no warranty, express or implied, is made.

GEI Consultants, Inc.

Figures

\\mtl1v-fs01\ \\mtl1v-fs01\Data\Tech\Project\Beardsley Architects & Engineers\1906014 USFWS Bombay Hook Geotechnical\CAD\Revised Boring Location Plan.dwg -

1/8/2020

Fig. 1

Geotechnical Explorations, Testing and Recommendations

Bombay Hook National Wildlife Refuge

Smyrna, Delaware

Beardsley Architects and Engineers

DeWitt, New York

SITE LOCATION MAP

February 20201906014

Consultants

SOURCE: BOMBAY HOOK ISLAND QUADRANGLE, DELAWARE-NEW JERSEY

7.5-MINUTE SERIES, US DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR US GEOLOGICAL

SURVEY (USGS), US TOPO, DATED 2019.

SITE

SCALE:

2000 4000

1" = 2000'

B-2

B-1

TP-1

TP-2

TP-3

B-3

B-5

B-6

B-4

EXISTING

BUILDING TO BE

REMOVED

WASTEWATER

TREATMENT

PROPOSED

MULTIPURPOSE

FACILITY

Consultants

LEGEND:

BORING

TEST PIT

CONTRACT LIMIT LINE

SCALE:

120 240

1" = 120'

B-#

TP-#

\\mtl1v-fs01\ \\mtl1v-fs01\Data\Tech\Project\Beardsley Architects & Engineers\1906014 USFWS Bombay Hook Geotechnical\CAD\Revised Boring Location Plan.dwg - 1/8/2020

Fig. 2

Geotechnical Explorations, Testing and Recommendations

Bombay Hook National Wildlife Refuge

Smyrna, Delaware

Beardsley Architects and Engineers

DeWitt, New York

SITE PLAN DEPICTING BORING

AND TEST PIT LOCATIONS

February 2020Project 1906014

NOTES:

1. BORING LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE AND BASED UPON FIEAD MEASUREMENTS.

SOURCE:

1. PLAN BASED ON 33% DESIGN SUBMISSION PREPARED BY BEARDSLEY ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS.

DRAFT, DATED JANUARY 20, 2020.

2.…