21._Attachment_G_Geotechnical_Engineering_Report.pdf

I

Attachment G

Medicine Bow Substation Service Building – Geotechnical Engineering Report Dated 04/27/15

DE-SOL-0008566

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page i of iv April 27, 2015 © 2015 Kleinfelder

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

MEDICINE BOW SUBSTATION CONTROL BUILDING

MEDICINE BOW, CARBON COUNTY, WYOMING

PROJECT #: 20155211

April 27, 2015

Copyright 2015 Kleinfelder All Rights Reserved

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

PROJECT FOR WHICH THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED.

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page iii of iv April 27, 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE

1.2 SCOPE OF SERVICES

1.3 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

2 FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING

2.1 GENERAL

2.2 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION

2.3 LABORATORY TESTING

3 SITE CONDITIONS

3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION

3.2 GEOLOGY

3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

3.3.1 Fill

3.3.2 Native Alluvial Soils

3.4 GROUNDWATER

3.5 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS

3.5.1 Seismicity and Ground Shaking

3.5.2 Liquefaction Hazards

4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 GENERAL

4.2 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

4.2.1 Site Preparation and Grading

4.2.2 Excavation Characteristics

4.2.3 Structural Fill and Imported Granular Fill Criteria

4.2.4 Aggregate Base Driving Surfaces

4.2.5 Compaction Requirements

4.2.6 Construction in Wet or Cold Weather

4.2.7 Construction Testing and Observation

4.2.8 Subsurface and Surface Drainage and Landscaping

4.3 FOUNDATIONS

4.3.1 General

4.3.2 Spread Footing Foundation Recommendations

4.4 FLOOR SLABS

4.5 EXTERIOR CONCRETE SLABS-ON-GRADE

5 LIMITATIONS

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page iv of iv April 27, 2015

TABLES

Table 2-1 Summary of Laboratory Testing Program Table 3-1 Summary of Observed Groundwater Table 3-2 Design Acceleration for Short Periods Table 3-3 Design Acceleration for 1-Second Period Table 4-1 Structural Fill Criteria Table 4-2 Compaction Specifications

FIGURES

Figure 1 Site Vicinity and Exploration Location Map

APPENDICES

A Boring Logs B Laboratory Test Results C Important Information About Your Geotechnical-Engineering Report

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page 1 of 17 April 27, 2015 © 2015 Kleinfelder, Inc.

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

MEDICINE BOW SUBSTATION CONTROL BUILDING

MEDICINE BOW, CARBON COUNTY, WYOMING

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this Geotechnical Engineering Report is to provide a summary of geological and geotechnical data obtained from our recent explorations at the proposed Medicine Bow

Substation Control Building Replacement project location and our recommendations regarding foundation design, site grading, and construction. This report includes information obtained from borings as well as results of laboratory testing of the soils encountered. This information will be utilized by the Western Area Power Administration (Western) to facilitate the design and construction of the proposed Medicine Bow Substation Control Building Replacement. The geotechnical data provided in this report is subject to provisions outlined in the Limitations section.

1.2 SCOPE OF SERVICES

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

• Coordination and project kickoff;

• Site characterization including preparation, coordination and execution of a subsurface exploration program;

• Geotechnical laboratory testing;

• Engineering analysis, and

• Preparation of this geotechnical engineering report.

1.3 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

The proposed project is located approximately one mile west of the intersection of US Highways

487 and 287 in the Northwest ¼ of Section 7, Township 22 North, Range 78 West in Carbon

County, Wyoming. The proposed site work covers an area of approximately 6,500 square feet

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page 2 of 17 April 27, 2015 and consists of undeveloped land. The proposed control building is 43 feet by 32 feet and will be either conventional stick-framed construction with masonry veneer or precast concrete tilt-up, set on concrete foundations. Additional site work is understood to consist of concrete aprons surrounding the proposed structure and aggregate base driving surfaces.

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page 3 of 17 April 27, 2015

2 FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING

2.1 GENERAL

The geotechnical field exploration was completed on March 27, 2015. This section provides a summary of the subsurface borings completed as part of this project. Locations of the explorations are presented on Figure 1.

2.2 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION

The geotechnical exploration consisted of two (2) soil borings drilled to a depth of 21.5 feet below ground surface (bgs). The soil borings were drilled within the proposed control building footprint at locations specified by Western and surveyed in the field by Merrick and Company

(Merrick). The borings were drilled by Vine Laboratories of Denver, Colorado using 4-inch, outside diameter (OD) continuous-flight, solid-stem auger (SSA), with a CME-55 truck-mounted drill rig. The latitude and longitude of each boring was surveyed by Merrick and is presented on the individual boring logs in Appendix A and presented graphically on Figure 1.

During drilling, a Kleinfelder geotechnical professional logged the borings by visually identifying and classifying soils in general accordance with ASTM D 2488 and the Unified Soil

Classification System (USCS). Upon completion of laboratory testing, soil classifications were further evaluated in general accordance with ASTM D 2487 and are presented on the boring logs in Appendix A. The lines defining boundaries between soil and/or rock types on the logs are based on drill rig observation and interpolation between samples, and are therefore approximate. The actual transition between soil and/or rock types may be abrupt or may be gradual.

Soil samples in the borings were collected at depths of 1- and 5-feet (SB-1 sampled at 2- and 5-feet) below ground surface (bgs) and at 5-foot intervals thereafter. Soil samples were obtained from the borings using either a Modified California-type Split Spoon sampler (2.5-inch OD), or a

Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Split Spoon sampler (2-inch OD). The sampler was driven into undisturbed soil using an automatic 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches. Blow counts were recorded at 6-inch intervals and are reported on the boring logs. Soil samples obtained from the borings were packaged and sealed in the field to reduce moisture loss and disturbance, and

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page 4 of 17 April 27, 2015 transported to our laboratory for further testing. After completion of drilling, the borings were backfilled with auger cuttings.

2.3 LABORATORY TESTING

Laboratory testing was conducted on selected samples collected from the exploratory borings during the field investigation. Samples of representative materials encountered were selected for classification testing and testing to evaluate engineering characteristics.

Table 2-1 summarizes the number and type of tests performed. Laboratory results are presented in Appendix B. Select lab results are also shown on the boring logs in Appendix A.

TABLE 2-1

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM

TEST ASTM NO. NUMBER

OF TESTS

Sieve Analysis (Coarse and Fine) ASTM D 422 4 Atterberg Limits (Plasticity Index) ASTM D 4318 4 Moisture Content ASTM D 4959 5 Moisture Content and Soil Density ASTM D 7263 3 Standard Compaction Characteristics (Proctor) ASTM D 698 1

Hydrometer Analysis ASTM D 422 2 One-Dimensional Swell ASTM D 4516 1

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page 5 of 17 April 27, 2015

3 SITE CONDITIONS

3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION

The site is located adjacent to the existing Western substation approximately one mile west of the intersection of US Highway 487 and 287 in Medicine Bow, Carbon County, Wyoming. The proposed site covers approximately 6,500 square feet located about 400 feet north of US287.

The surrounding area consists primarily of undeveloped land. The existing substation consists of several utility structures and small maintenance buildings. The site is generally flat and bare with some areas of thin grass vegetation.

3.2 GEOLOGY

The geology of the site was evaluated by reviewing published geologic maps, including:

Preliminary Surficial Geologic Map of the Shirley Basin 30' x 60' Quadrangle, Carbon, Natrona, Albany and Converse Counties, Wyoming, Wyoming State Geologic Survey, Hallberg, L.L., Case, J.C., Kirkaldie, 2007. Local geology is mapped as Alluvium deposits with scattered eolian deposits overlying shale bedrock of the Steele Formation. Results of our subsurface exploration generally agreed with the geologic mapping.

3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

The subsurface conditions encountered in the borings were observed to generally consist of alluvial sand and clay underlain by shale. A top layer fill material was observed in the upper approximate 1 ½ feet at each exploration location.

3.3.1 Fill

At each boring location, we encountered fill material similar to the soil that is native to the site.

This material is likely a result of site grading associated with construction of the existing substation. The fill was observed to be brown, sandy lean clay. The fill extended to a depth of about 1-½ feet bgs with the upper 3 to 4 inches containing more silt and organics.

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page 6 of 17 April 27, 2015

3.3.2 Native Alluvial Soils

Alluvial soils were observed below the fill material extending to a depth of 15 feet bgs in both borings. The alluvium was observed to consist of loose, brown, clayey, fine to medium grained sand to a depth of about 10 to 10 ½ feet and underlain by firm to hard, dark brown lean clay.

The sand soils are considered non-expansive. One sample of the clay tested exhibited low swell potential of 0.6 percent after wetting under a 1,000 pounds per square foot pressure.

3.3.3 Shale Bedrock

Shale bedrock locally mapped as the Steele Formation was observed below the alluvial soils.

The shale was observed to be very hard, tan to brown with white mottling, and fissured. The shale was observed to extend the full depth of the explorations (20.5 ft).

More detailed descriptions of subsurface conditions encountered in each of the individual borings are presented on the boring logs included in Appendix A.

3.4 GROUNDWATER

Groundwater was observed during drilling at 9 and 10 feet bgs in borings SB-1 and SB-2 respectively. Groundwater was measured again at the completion of drilling and observed to be at 7 ½ feet bgs at boring SB-1. Groundwater was not observed in boring SB-2 when measured at the completion of drilling. Table 3-1 summarizes the groundwater readings observed:

TABLE 3-1

SUMMARY OF OBSERVED GROUNDWATER

Boring ID Depth to Groundwater- Measured During Drilling (ft)

Depth to Groundwater- Measured After Drilling (ft)

SB-1 9 7.5

SB-2 10 Not Observed

Soil moisture levels and groundwater levels commonly vary over time depending upon seasonal precipitation, irrigation practices, land use and runoff conditions. The soil moisture and groundwater data in this report pertain only to the locations and time at which the borings were performed. The data cannot be extrapolated to other locations and does not reflect seasonal variation.

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page 7 of 17 April 27, 2015

3.5 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS

3.5.1 Seismicity and Ground Shaking

The subsurface materials encountered at the planned structure locations correspond best with

International Building Code (IBC) 2012 Site Class C. The use of the 2012 IBC code was specified in our proposal. Acceleration coefficients based on Site Class C are presented in

Table 3-2 and Table 3-3.

TABLE 3-2

DESIGN ACCELERATION FOR SHORT PERIODS

SS Fa

SMS

(SMS = FaSs)

SDS

(SDS = 2/3 SMS)

0.261 1.2 0.313 0.208

SS = The mapped spectral accelerations for short periods (U.S. Geological Survey Web Page, 2015) Fa = Site coefficient from Table 1613.3.3(1), 2012 IBC SMS = The maximum considered earthquake spectral response accelerations for short periods SDS = 5-percent damped design spectral response acceleration at short periods SS = The mapped spectral accelerations for short periods (U.S. Geological Survey Web Page, 2014)

TABLE 3-3

DESIGN ACCELERATION FOR 1-SECOND PERIOD

S1 Fv

SM1

(SM1 = FvS1)

SD1

(SD1 = 2/3 SM1)

0.072 1.7 0.123 0.082

S1 = The mapped spectral accelerations for 1-second period (U.S. Geological Survey Web Page, 2015)

Fv = Site coefficient from Table 1613.3.3(2), 2012 IBC

SM1 = The maximum considered earthquake spectral response accelerations for 1-second period

SD1 = 5-percent damped design spectral response acceleration at 1-second period

3.5.2 Liquefaction Hazards

Earthquake-induced soil liquefaction can be described as a significant loss of soil strength and stiffness caused by an increase in pore water pressure resulting from cyclic loading during shaking. Liquefaction is most prevalent in loose to medium-dense, sandy and gravelly soils below the groundwater table.

Due to the low magnitude of seismic ground motions, the largely unsaturated nature of the native sand soils, and the presence of firm to very hard underlying clays, the soil observed at site does not exhibit characteristics consistent with a liquefiable soil and it is our opinion that the liquefaction hazard is low.

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page 8 of 17 April 27, 2015

4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 GENERAL

Based on the subsurface conditions encountered in the borings and our experience with similar projects, it is Kleinfelder’s opinion that development of the site as planned is geotechnically feasible, provided that the recommendations in this report are incorporated in the design and construction of the project.

Our geotechnical design and construction recommendations for site preparation, foundations, and other related construction topics are provided in the following sections.

4.2 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

4.2.1 Site Preparation and Grading

All site preparation and earthwork operations should be performed in accordance with applicable codes, safety regulations and other local, state or federal guidelines. Begin site work by stripping any topsoil, vegetation, existing fill soils and other deleterious materials now present at the ground surface within the subject site. This applies both to areas to be filled and areas to be cut. Remove the stripped materials for offsite disposal in accordance with local laws and regulations or, if appropriate, stockpile them for later use. Areas to receive fill should be stripped of soft earth materials until a firm unyielding subgrade is exposed as evaluated by the geotechnical engineer.

Prior to placement of structural fill, processing of the subgrade should be performed. This should include scarifying the subgrade to a depth of at least 8 inches and compacting as recommended in Section 4.2.5. All prepared subgrade for foundations and slabs should be proof-rolled to visually inspect for yielding soils. Where yielding soils are observed during proof-rolling, these areas should be over excavated to expose medium dense soil and then backfilled and compacted as described above.

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page 9 of 17 April 27, 2015

4.2.2 Excavation Characteristics

We anticipate that excavation of the soils encountered in the borings can be performed with standard heavy-duty earthmoving equipment.

All excavations must comply with the applicable local, state, and federal safety regulations, and particularly with the excavation standards of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration

(OSHA). Construction site safety, including excavation safety, is the sole responsibility of the

Contractor as part of its overall responsibility for the means, methods and sequencing of construction operations. Kleinfelder’s recommendations for excavation support are intended for the Client’s use in planning the project, and in no way relieve the Contractor of its responsibility to construct, support and maintain safe slopes. Under no circumstances should the following recommendations be interpreted to mean that Kleinfelder is assuming responsibility for either construction site safety or the Contractor’s activities.

We believe that the soils on this site classify as Type C materials using OSHA criteria. OSHA requires that unsupported cuts be sloped to inclinations no steeper than 1½H:1V (horizontal to vertical) for cuts up to 20-feet in height. In general, we believe that this inclination will be temporarily stable under unsaturated conditions. If infiltration occurs, flatter slopes may be appropriate. Please note that the actual determination of soil type and allowable sloping must be made in the field by the contractor’s OSHA “competent person”.

4.2.3 Structural Fill and Imported Granular Fill Criteria

The on-site sand soils or imported granular fill soils may be used as structural fill as long as they achieve the structural fill criteria presented below. Fill from on-site materials and any imported fill should consist of a non-expansive, mainly granular material as specified below:

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page 10 of 17 April 27, 2015

TABLE 4-1

STRUCTURAL FILL CRITERIA

A sample of any imported fill material should be submitted to the geotechnical engineer for approval and testing at least one week prior to stockpiling at the site. Structural fill should be placed according to the recommendations in Section 4.2.5 of this report.

4.2.4 Aggregate Base Driving Surfaces

Where aggregate base driving surfaces are to be constructed, the ground surface should be prepared as described in Section 4.2.1. Proposed traffic information was not provided. We have assumed a low volume of pick-up truck traffic and occasional large truck traffic (less than one per day). Based on assumed strength values from soil classifications and assumed traffic, we estimate that a minimum aggregate base thickness of 6 inches will be sufficient. Frequent maintenance should be expected for aggregate base driving surfaces. Roads should be designed and constructed to drain well by directing runoff away from the gravel surface and into ditches, culverts, etc. Poor drainage will result in subgrade failure.

The aggregate base should meet the requirements for WyDOT Crushed Base, Grading GR.

Base should be placed and compacted to the recommendations in Section 4.2.5.

4.2.5 Compaction Requirements

All fill should be moisture conditioned, placed in thin lifts of 8 inches or less thick, and compacted to the following specifications:

GRADATION REQUIREMENTS

Standard Sieve Size Percent Passing

3/4-inch 100 No. 200 10 - 35

PLASTICITY REQUIREMENTS (ATTERBERG LIMITS)

Liquid Limit 30 or less Plasticity Index 12 or less

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page 11 of 17 April 27, 2015

TABLE 4-2

COMPACTION SPECIFICATIONS

Fill Location Material Type Percent

Compaction(1)

(ASTM Method) Moisture

Content %

Subgrade Preparation (after clearing, grubbing, excavation, and prior to placement of new fill and/or structural elements)

On-Site Clay Soils 95 minimum

(ASTM D698)

0% to +3% of optimum

Site Grading Fill

On-Site Clay Soils 95 minimum

(ASTM D698)

0% to +3% of

Structural Fill

(See Section 4.2.3)

Granular Fill 95 minimum

(ASTM D698)

-2% to +2% of optimum

Aggregate Base Driving Surfaces (See Section 4.2.4)

Aggregate Base Course

95 minimum

(ASTM D1557)

-2% to +2% of

* In non-structural and non-traffic areas, the compaction specification may be reduced to 90 percent.

4.2.6 Construction in Wet or Cold Weather

During construction, grade the site such that surface water can drain readily away from the structural and pavement areas. Promptly pump out or otherwise remove any water that may accumulate in excavations or on subgrade surfaces, and allow these areas to dry before resuming construction. The use of berms, ditches, and similar means may be used to prevent storm water from entering the work area and to convey any water off site efficiently.

If soft and/or wet areas are exposed during the excavation process, they may need to be stabilized prior to placement of new fill to create a stable construction platform. The method and extent of stabilization will depend on the actual conditions encountered, and the more appropriate method of stabilization will likely be best determined in the field at the time of excavation, by Kleinfelder representatives.

If earthwork is performed during the winter months when freezing is a factor, no grading, fill, structural fill or other fill should be placed on frosted or frozen ground, nor should frozen material be placed as fill. Frozen ground should be allowed to thaw or be completely removed prior to placement of fill. A good practice is to cover the compacted fill with a “blanket” of loose fill to help prevent compacted fill or subgrade from freezing.

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page 12 of 17 April 27, 2015

If the structures are erected during cold weather, foundations, concrete slabs-on-grade, or other concrete elements should not be constructed on frozen soil. Frozen soil should be completely removed from beneath the concrete elements, or thawed, scarified and re-compacted. The amount of time passing between excavation or subgrade preparation and placing concrete should be minimized during freezing conditions to prevent the prepared soils from freezing.

Blankets, soil cover or heating as required may be utilized to prevent the subgrade from freezing.

4.2.7 Construction Testing and Observation

Testing and construction observation should take place under the direction of Kleinfelder to support our professional opinion as to whether the earthwork does or does not substantially conform to the recommendations in this report. Furthermore, the opinions and conclusions of a geotechnical report are based on the interpretation of a limited amount of information obtained from the field exploration. It is therefore not uncommon to find that actual site conditions differ somewhat from those indicated in the report. Kleinfelder should remain involved throughout the project to evaluate such differing conditions as they appear, and to modify or add to the geotechnical recommendations as necessary.

4.2.8 Subsurface and Surface Drainage and Landscaping

Positive surface drainage away from the structures is essential to the performance of foundations and flatwork, and should be provided during the life of the structures. Surface drainage should be created such that water is diverted off the site and away from backfill areas of adjacent buildings. Landscape areas within 5 feet of the structures should slope away at a minimum of 8 percent. Areas where pavements or slabs are constructed adjacent to the structures should slope away at a minimum grade of 2 percent. Landscaping improvements that require supplemental watering are not recommended adjacent to improved areas including foundations, pavements or slabs.

4.3 FOUNDATIONS

4.3.1 General

We anticipate that the control building can be supported on spread footings. The geotechnical considerations at the site do not require a drilled pier foundation system.

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page 13 of 17 April 27, 2015

4.3.2 Spread Footing Foundation Recommendations

Based on the results of the field exploration, laboratory testing, our engineering analysis and our experience with similar projects in the area, shallow foundations may be constructed on undisturbed native sand soil or compacted structural fill. Existing fill was encountered in both borings to about 1.5 feet bgs. All existing fill within the building footprint should be removed, and no foundation should be placed on existing fill. The lateral extent of the fill removed area should be at least 5 feet beyond the limits of the foundation. Structural fill should be prepared as recommended in Section 4.2.

The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed.

• Foundations should be constructed on native soils or on properly placed and compacted structural fill, as described above.

• Footings should have a minimum dimension of at least 18 inches wide. Footings embedded a minimum of 36 inches below the ground surface may be designed for a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf). The allowable bearing pressure may be increased by 250 psf for each additional foot of width up to a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf.

• The friction acting along the base of the foundation may be computed using an allowable coefficient of friction of 0.38.

• An allowable passive earth pressure may be computed using an equivalent fluid density of

200 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) for the sides of foundations cast against undisturbed soil or backfilled with properly placed and compacted structural fill. Passive pressure in the upper foot should be neglected unless confined by concrete slab-on-grade.

• We estimate that the potential movement of the spread footing foundation, designed and constructed in accordance with recommendations provided in this report, will be approximately 1-inch or less.

• Footings should have at least 36 inches of cover above the bearing elevation for frost protection or that required by the local building code, whichever is greater.

• Footing excavations should be observed by the geotechnical engineer to confirm the subsurface conditions and foundation recommendations.

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page 14 of 17 April 27, 2015

4.4 FLOOR SLABS

Floor slabs should not be supported by the on-site clay fill soils. Fill soils should be completely removed within the footprint of the proposed structure. We recommend that the floor slab be constructed on a minimum of 18 inches of structural fill meeting the requirements of Section

4.2.3 or aggregate base meeting the requirements of Section 4.2.4. With this preparation, a modulus of subgrade reaction of 100 pounds per cubic inch can be used in floor slab designs.

All floor slabs should be isolated from bearing walls, grade beams, or support columns to permit differential movement between floor slabs and structures.

Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. Control joint spacing is a function of slab thickness, aggregate size, slump and curing conditions. The requirements for concrete slab thickness, joint spacing, and reinforcement should be established by the designer, based on experience, ACI design guidelines and the intended slab use. Placement and curing conditions will have a strong impact on the final concrete slab integrity.

If vibrating machinery will be installed in the building, the machine foundations should be physically isolated from other foundations and slabs to reduce vibration damage. The design of such foundations requires special analysis that is beyond the scope of this investigation. Please contact Kleinfelder for additional analysis and recommendations if machine vibration will be a design requirement.

4.5 EXTERIOR CONCRETE SLABS-ON-GRADE

Exterior concrete slabs and aprons will be subject to environmental factors including freezing, with associated frost heave risk, and variations in soil moisture with the risk of heave or settlements.

Some movement of slabs should be anticipated and is normally accepted in this area and climate.

Differential movement and cracking of the concrete aprons may occur.

While it is not likely that the concrete aprons can be economically protected from distress, several techniques are available to reduce the potential long-term movement of the slabs, including:

• Avoidance of landscape irrigation watering adjacent to slabs and good drainage to direct water away from slabs.

• Thicken or structurally reinforce slabs.

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page 15 of 17 April 27, 2015

These additional measures should be considered based on the owner’s adversity to risk of movement. Aprons and exterior slabs should be isolated from structures to move independently.

Exterior slabs should slope away from the building at a minimum 2 percent slope. Routine maintenance may be required to adjust slabs if movement occurs.

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page 16 of 17 April 27, 2015

5 LIMITATIONS

This work was performed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of Kleinfelder’s’ profession practicing in the same locality, under similar conditions and at the date the services are provided. Our conclusions, opinions, and recommendations are based on a limited number of observations and data. The scope of services was limited to two exploratory borings drilled to approximately 20 feet, field resistivity measurements, laboratory testing, analysis, and preparation of this report. It is likely that conditions could vary between or beyond the data evaluated. It should be recognized that definition and evaluation of subsurface conditions is difficult. Judgments leading to conclusions and recommendations are generally made with incomplete knowledge of the subsurface conditions present due to the limitations of data from field studies. Kleinfelder makes no other representation, guarantee, or warranty, express or implied, regarding the services, communication (oral or written), report, opinion, or instrument of service provided.

Kleinfelder offers various levels of investigative and engineering services to suit the varying needs of different clients. Although risk can never be eliminated, more detailed and extensive studies yield more information, which may help understand and manage the level of risk. Since detailed study and analysis involves greater expense, our clients participate in determining levels of service, which provide information for their purposes at acceptable levels of risk. The client and key members of the design team should discuss the issues covered in this report with

Kleinfelder, so that the issues are understood and applied in a manner consistent with the owner’s budget, tolerance of risk and expectations for future performance and maintenance.

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

It is possible that soil, rock, or groundwater conditions could vary between or beyond the points explored. If soil, rock, or groundwater conditions are encountered during construction that differ from those described herein, the client is responsible for ensuring that Kleinfelder is notified immediately so that we may reevaluate the recommendations of this report. If the scope of the proposed construction changes from that described in this report, the conclusions and

20155211/DEN15R18217 Page 17 of 17 April 27, 2015 recommendations contained in this report are not considered valid unless the changes are reviewed, and the conclusions of this report are modified or approved in writing by Kleinfelder.

As the geotechnical engineering firm that performed the geotechnical evaluation for this project, Kleinfelder should be retained to confirm that the recommendations of this report are properly incorporated in the design of this project, and properly implemented during construction. This may avoid misinterpretation of the information by other parties and will allow us to review and modify our recommendations if variations in the soil conditions are encountered. Kleinfelder cannot be responsible for interpretation by others of this report.

The scope of services for this subsurface exploration and geotechnical report did not include environmental assessments or evaluations regarding the presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous substances in the soil, surface water, or groundwater at this site.

This report may be used only by the Client and the registered design professional in responsible charge and only for the purposes stated for this specific engagement within a reasonable time from its issuance, but in no event later than two (2) years from the date of the report.

20155211/DEN15R18217 April 27, 2015

FIGURES

SB-1

SB-2

Site Vicinity and Exploration Location Map

Medicine Bow Substation Control Building Replacement

Medicine Bow, WY

20155211 4/14/2015 J. Weber

D. Robbins

BoringLocations.mxd

The information included on this graphic representation has been compiled from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. Kleinfelder makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. This document is not intended for use as a land survey product nor is it designed or intended as a construction design document. The use or misuse of the information contained on this graphic representation is at the sole risk of the party using or misusing the information.

FIGUREPROJECT NO.

DRAWN:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

FILE NAME:www.kleinfelder.com

Legend Soil Boring

0 80 16040 Feet

Project Location

Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, USGS, Intermap, increment P Corp., NRCAN, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri (Thailand), TomTom, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community

US 287

Proposed Control Building

SB-1

APPENDIX A

BORING LOGS

Medicine Bow Substation Control Building Replacement

Medicine Bow, WY

KLEINFELDER - 1801 California Street, Suite 1100 | Denver, CO 80202 | PH: 303.297.5774 | FAX: 303.237.6602 | www.kleinfelder.com

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

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

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

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

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

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

If sampler is not able to be driven at least 6 inches then 50/X indicates number of blows required to drive the identified sampler X inches with a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches.

SILTY SANDS, SAND-GRAVEL-SILT

MIXTURES

CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-GRAVEL-CLAY

MIXTURES

SW-SM

CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-SILT-CLAY

MIXTURES

CL

CL-ML

SANDS

WITH

5% TO

12%

FINES

SANDS

WITH >

12%

FINES

S A

N D

S

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

#4 s ie ve

WELL-GRADED SANDS, SAND-GRAVEL

MIXTURES WITH LITTLE FINES

Cu 4 and/ or 1 Cc 3>

CLEAN

GRAVEL

WITH

<5%

FINES

GRAVELS

WITH

5% TO

12%

FINES

OL

CH

CLAYEY GRAVELS,

GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY MIXTURES

GRAVELS

WITH >

12%

FINES

Cu 4 and 1 Cc 3

MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLER

(2 or 2-1/2 in. (50.8 or 63.5 mm.) outer diameter)

STANDARD PENETRATION SPLIT SPOON SAMPLER

(2 in. (50.8 mm.) outer diameter and 1-3/8 in. (34.9 mm.) inner diameter)

GM

GC

GW

GP

GW-GM

GW-GC

INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY

CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS

GRAPHICS KEY

SAMPLE/SAMPLER TYPE GRAPHICS

CLEAN

SANDS

WITH

<5%

FINES

G R

A V

E L

S

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

#4 s ie ve

Cu 6 and/ or 1 Cc 3

Cu 6 and/ or 1 Cc 3

Cu 6 and 1 Cc 3

SC-SM

Cu 4 and 1 Cc 3

ORGANIC SILTS & ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS

OF LOW PLASTICITY

SILTS AND CLAYS

(Liquid Limit less than 50)

SILTS AND CLAYS

(Liquid Limit greater than 50)

WELL-GRADED SANDS, SAND-GRAVEL

MIXTURES WITH LITTLE OR NO FINES

POORLY GRADED SANDS,

SAND-GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH

LITTLE OR NO FINES

MH

OH

ML

GC-GM

C O

A R

S E

G R

A

IN

E D

S O

IL

S

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

#2 s ie ve

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM D 2487)

Cu 6 and 1 Cc 3

GP-GM

GP-GC

SP

SP-SM

SP-SC

SM

SC

WELL-GRADED GRAVELS,

GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES WITH

LITTLE OR NO FINES

POORLY GRADED GRAVELS,

GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES WITH

LITTLE OR NO FINES

WELL-GRADED GRAVELS,

GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES WITH

LITTLE FINES

WELL-GRADED GRAVELS,

GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES WITH

LITTLE CLAY FINES

POORLY GRADED GRAVELS,

GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES WITH

LITTLE FINES

POORLY GRADED GRAVELS,

GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES WITH

LITTLE CLAY FINES

SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SILT-SAND

MIXTURES

CLAYEY GRAVELS,

GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY-SILT MIXTURES

WELL-GRADED SANDS, SAND-GRAVEL

MIXTURES WITH LITTLE CLAY FINES

POORLY GRADED SANDS,

SAND-GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH

LITTLE CLAY FINES

SW

SW-SC

POORLY GRADED SANDS,

SAND-GRAVEL MIXTURES WITH

LITTLE FINES

Cu 4 and/ or 1 Cc 3>

F

IN

E G

R A

IN

E

D S

O

IL

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

#2 s ie ve

INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, SILTY OR

CLAYEY FINE SANDS, SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY

ORGANIC CLAYS & ORGANIC SILTS OF

MEDIUM-TO-HIGH PLASTICITY

INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY,

FAT CLAYS

INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR

DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SILT

INORGANIC CLAYS-SILTS OF LOW PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY

CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS

GROUND WATER GRAPHICS

OBSERVED SEEPAGE

WATER LEVEL (level after exploration completion)

WATER LEVEL (level where first observed)

WATER LEVEL (additional levels after exploration)

NOTES

FIGURE

A1

REVISED: -

P

LO

T T

E D

/1 6/

:4

A

M B

Y

D R ob bi ns

PROJECT NO.: 20155211

gI N

T F

IL

E

P

R O

JE

C

T W

IS

E

: 2

.0 a

M ed ic in e B ow .g pj gI N

T T

E M

P

LA

T E

P

R O

JE

C

T W

IS

E

: K

LF

S

T A

N D

A R

D _G

IN

T

_L

IB

R A

R Y

_2

5.

G

LB

[G E

O -L

E G

E N

D

G

R A

P H

IC

S

K E

Y

W

IT

H U

S C

S

DRAWN BY: JTM

CHECKED BY: DFR

DATE: 4/10/2015

Fill Sandy Lean CLAY: fine-grained sand, medium plasticity, brown, moist

Alluvium Clayey SAND (SC): fine-grained, medium plasticity, brown, moist, loose

Lean CLAY (CL): medium plasticity, brown to dark brown, wet, firm to hard

Steele Formation SHALE: low to medium plasticity, tan to brown, moist, very hard, fissured, with white mottling

The boring was terminated at approximately 20.5 ft.

below ground surface. The exploration was backfilled with auger cuttings on March 27, 2015.

Stratigraphic boundary observed within sample at

10.5 feet.

Drilling resistance increases at 15 feet.

12"

8"

12"

5"

5"

CL

CL

CL

11.0

11.9

11.6

110.5

133.0

99 54

94.9

GROUNDWATER LEVEL INFORMATION:

Groundwater was observed at approximately 9 ft. below ground surface during drilling.

Groundwater was observed at approximately 7.5 ft. below ground surface at the end of drilling.

BC=3

BC=4

BC=9

BC=28

50/5"

BC=50/5"

LABORATORY RESULTS

Lithologic Description

PAGE:

FIELD EXPLORATION

BORING LOG SB-1

BORING LOG SB-1

SB-1

Latitude: 41.89751° N Longitude: 106.22096° W

Surface Condition: Bare Earth and Grass

Logged By:

Date Begin - End:

Hor.-Vert. Datum:

Weather:

Drill Crew:

Hammer Type - Drop:Not Available CME-55

Alex

Vine Laboratories

140 lb. Auto - 30 in.

-90 degreesPlunge:

Drilling Company:

Drilling Method:

Drilling Equipment:

3/27/2015

4 in. O.D.Sunny, 45 °F Auger Diameter:

JTM

Solid Stem Auger

A dd iti on a l T es ts

R em ar ks

D ep th fe et

G ra p hi ca l L og

R ec ov er y (N

R

N o

R ec ov er y)

U S

C S

S ym bo l

W at er C on te nt

D ry

U ni t W t.

(p cf

P as si ng

P as si ng

Li qu id L im it

P la st ic ity In de x

(N P

N on P la st ic

Medicine Bow Substation Control Building Replacement

Medicine Bow, WY

KLEINFELDER - 1801 California Street, Suite 1100 | Denver, CO 80202 | PH: 303.297.5774 | FAX: 303.237.6602 | www.kleinfelder.com

B lo w C ou nt s( B

C

U nc or r.

B lo w s/ in

BORING

17.2

SB-1 & SB-2 0'-5' Composite Sample

CHECKED BY: DFR

DATE: 4/10/2015

DRAWN BY: JTM

REVISED: -

gI N

T F

IL

E

P

R O

JE

C

T W

IS

E

: 2

.0 a

M ed ic in e B ow .g pj gI N

T T

E M

P

LA

T E

P

R O

JE

C

T W

IS

E

: K

LF

S

T A

N D

A R

D _G

IN

T

_L

IB

R A

R Y

_2

5.

[K

LF

_B O

R

IN

G /T

E S

T P

IT

S

O

IL

L O

G

P

LO

T T

E D

/1 6/

:0

A

M B

Y

D R ob bi ns

PROJECT NO.: 20155211

S am pl e

T yp e

Fill Sandy Lean CLAY: fine-grained sand, medium plasticity, brown, moist

Alluvium Clayey SAND (SC): fine-grained, medium plasticity, brown, moist, loose

Lean CLAY (CL): medium plasticity, brown to dark brown, wet, firm to hard

Steele Formation SHALE: low to medium plasticity, tan to brown, moist, very hard, fissured, white mottling

The boring was terminated at approximately 20.5 ft.

below ground surface. The exploration was backfilled with auger cuttings on March 27, 2015.

Drilling resistance increases at 15 feet.

3"

7"

12"

10"

4"

CL

CL 11.2

13.0

16.6

11.4

115.3

99 54

60.5

GROUNDWATER LEVEL INFORMATION:

Groundwater observed at approximately 10 ft. below ground surface during drilling Groundwater was not observed approximately 30 minutes after completion of drilling.

BC=10

BC=3

BC=6

BC=30

50/4"

BC=50/5"

LABORATORY RESULTS

Lithologic Description

PAGE:

FIELD EXPLORATION

BORING LOG SB-2

BORING LOG SB-2

SB-2

Latitude: 41.89756° N Longitude: 106.22084° W

Surface Condition: Bare Earth and Grass

Logged By:

Date Begin - End:

Hor.-Vert. Datum:

Weather:

Drill Crew:

Hammer Type - Drop:Not Available CME-55

Alex

Vine Laboratories

140 lb. Auto - 30 in.

-90 degreesPlunge:

Drilling Company:

Drilling Method:

Drilling Equipment:

3/27/2015

4 in. O.D.Sunny, 45 °F Auger Diameter:

JTM

Solid Stem Auger

A dd iti on a l T es ts

R em ar ks

D ep th fe et

G ra p hi ca l L og

R ec ov er y (N

R

N o

R ec ov er y)

U S

C S

S ym bo l

W at er C on te nt

D ry

U ni t W t.

(p cf

P as si ng

P as si ng

Li qu id L im it

P la st ic ity In de x

(N P

N on P la st ic

Medicine Bow Substation Control Building Replacement

Medicine Bow, WY

KLEINFELDER - 1801 California Street, Suite 1100 | Denver, CO 80202 | PH: 303.297.5774 | FAX: 303.237.6602 | www.kleinfelder.com

B lo w C ou nt s( B

C

U nc or r.

B lo w s/ in

BORING

SB-1 & SB-2 0'-5' Composite Sample

CHECKED BY: DFR

DATE: 4/10/2015

DRAWN BY: JTM

REVISED: -

gI N

T F

IL

E

P

R O

JE

C

T W

IS

E

: 2

.0 a

M ed ic in e B ow .g pj gI N

T T

E M

P

LA

T E

P

R O

JE

C

T W

IS

E

: K

LF

S

T A

N D

A R

D _G

IN

T

_L

IB

R A

R Y

_2

5.

_B O

R

IN

G /T

E S

T P

IT

S

O

IL

L O

G

P

LO

T T

E D

/1 6/

:0

A

M B

Y

D R ob bi ns

PROJECT NO.: 20155211

S am pl e

T yp e

APPENDIX B

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

ATTERBERG LIMITS

LL PL PIPassing #200Exploration ID Depth (ft.)

94.9

60.5

0 - 5

CL-ML

LIQUID LIMIT (LL)

P

LA

S T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D E

X

P I)

CL or O L

"U " L

IN

E

ML or OL4

MH or OH

"A " L

IN

E

CH or O H

Testing perfomed in general accordance with ASTM D4318.

NP = Nonplastic NM = Not Measured

Sample Description

SB-1

SB-1

SB-2

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)

LEAN CLAY (CL)

LEAN CLAY (CL)

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)

Medicine Bow Substation Control Building Replacement

Medicine Bow, WY

KLEINFELDER - 1801 California Street, Suite 1100 | Denver, CO 80202 | PH: 303.297.5774 | FAX: 303.237.6602 | www.kleinfelder.com

FIGURE

B-1

SB-1 & SB-2 COMPOSITE

Chart Reference: ASTM D2487

CHECKED BY: DFR

DATE: 4/10/2015

DRAWN BY: JTM

REVISED: -

gI N

T F

IL

E

P

R O

JE

C

T W

IS

E

: 2

.0 a

M ed ic in e B ow .g pj gI N

T T

E M

P

LA

T E

P

R O

JE

C

T W

IS

E

: K

LF

S

T A

N D

A R

D _G

IN

T

_L

IB

R A

R Y

_2

5.

_A T

T E

R B

E R

G

A S

T M

P

LO

T

T E

D

/1

6/

:0

A M

B Y

D

R ob bi ns

PROJECT NO.: 20155211

For classification of fine-grained soils and fine-grained fraction of coarse-grained soils.

0.0010.010.1110100

Sample Description LL PL PI

%SiltCu %ClayCcExploration ID Depth (ft.)

SIEVE ANALYSIS

HYDROMETERU.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS

1403 4 20 40

B O

U L

D E

R

6 601.5 8 143/4 1/212 3/8 3 10024 16 301 2006 10

Sieve Analysis and Hydrometer Analysis testing performed in general accordance with ASTM D422.

NP = Nonplastic NM = Not Measured

D60 D30 D10D100 Passing

3/4" Passing

#4 Passing

#200

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

0.002

0.002

NM

NM

NM

NM

0 - 5

9912.5

2.36

NM

NM

40.1

38.8

NM

NM

54.8

21.7

Exploration ID Depth (ft.)

P E

R C

E N

T F

IN

E

R B

Y W

E

IG

H T

GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS

medium fine

GRAVEL SAND

COBBLE

coarse coarse

CLAYSILT

fine

Coefficients of Uniformity - Cu = D60 / D10

Coefficients of Curvature - CC = (D30) 2 / D60 D10

D60 = Grain diameter at 60% passing

D30 = Grain diameter at 30% passing

D10 = Grain diameter at 10% passing

94.9

60.5

0 - 5

SB-1

SB-1

SB-2

SB-1

SB-1

SB-1

SB-2

0.109

0.177

0.022

0.072

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)

LEAN CLAY (CL)

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

Medicine Bow Substation Control Building Replacement

Medicine Bow, WY

KLEINFELDER - 1801 California Street, Suite 1100 | Denver, CO 80202 | PH: 303.297.5774 | FAX: 303.237.6602 | www.kleinfelder.com

FIGURE

B-2

SB-1 & SB-2 COMPOSITE

CLAYEY SAND (SC)

CHECKED BY: DFR

DATE: 4/10/2015

DRAWN BY: JTM

REVISED: -

gI N

T F

IL

E

P

R O

JE

C

T W

IS

E

: 2

.0 a

M ed ic in e B ow .g pj gI N

T T

E M

P

LA

T E

P

R O

JE

C

T W

IS

E

: K

LF

S

T A

N D

A R

D _G

IN

T

_L

IB

R A

R Y

_2

5.

_S

IE

V E

A N

A

LY

S

IS

P

LO

T

T E

D

/1

6/

:1

A M

B Y

D

R ob bi ns

PROJECT NO.: 20155211

-5.0

-4.5

-4.0

-3.5

-3.0

-2.5

-2.0

-1.5

-1.0

-0.5

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

0.1 1 10

ONE-DIMENSIONAL EXPANSION OR

COMPRESSION OF COHESIVE SOILS

Testing perfomed in general accordance with ASTM D4546 Method C.

17.2 133.0

Initial Water

Content

Initial Dry Unit

Wt.

(pcf)

Final Water

Content

Final Dry Unit

Wt.

(pcf)

18.7 133.5

Sample Description

SB-1 LEAN CLAY (CL)10

STRESS (ksf)

Exploration ID Depth (ft.)

E X

P A

N S

IO

N

/C O

M P

R E

S S

IO

N

Medicine Bow Substation Control Building Replacement

Medicine Bow, WY

KLEINFELDER - 1801 California Street, Suite 1100 | Denver, CO 80202 | PH: 303.297.5774 | FAX: 303.237.6602 | www.kleinfelder.com

FIGURE

B-3

Expansion= 0.6% under 1 ksf when wetted.

CHECKED BY: DFR

DATE: 4/10/2015

DRAWN BY: JTM

REVISED: -

gI N

T F

IL

E

P

R O

JE

C

T W

IS

E

: 2

.0 a

M ed ic in e B ow .g pj gI N

T T

E M

P

LA

T E

P

R O

JE

C

T W

IS

E

: K

LF

S

T A

N D

A R

D _G

IN

T

_L

IB

R A

R Y

_2

5.

_E X

P A

N S

IO

N

/C O

M P

R E

S S

IO

N

S

IN

G

LE

P

LO

T T

E D

/1 6/

:1

A

M B

Y

D R ob bi

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Curves of 100% Saturation for Specific Gravity

COMPACTION CURVE

WATER CONTENT (%)

2.80

2.70

2.60

Testing perfomed in general accordance with ASTM D698 Method A.

NP = Nonplastic NM = Not Measured

D R

Y U

N

IT

W E

IG

H

T pc f)

0 - 5

Sample Description

NM 14.6

Passing 3/4" Optimum Water Content (%)LL PL PIPassing

#200 Passing

#4 Maximum Dry Unit Weight (pcf)

Exploration ID Depth (ft.)

115.029 13 1699 54

SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL)

Medicine Bow Substation Control Building Replacement

Medicine Bow, WY

KLEINFELDER - 1801 California Street, Suite 1100 | Denver, CO 80202 | PH: 303.297.5774 | FAX: 303.237.6602 | www.kleinfelder.com

FIGURE

B-4

SB-1 & SB-2 COMPOSITE

CHECKED BY: DFR

DATE: 4/10/2015

DRAWN BY: JTM

REVISED: -

gI N

T F

IL

E

P

R O

JE

C

T W

IS

E

: 2

.0 a

M ed ic in e B ow .g pj gI N

T T

E M

P

LA

T E

P

R O

JE

C

T W

IS

E

: K

LF

S

T A

N D

A R

D _G

IN

T

_L

IB

R A

R Y

_2

5.

_C O

M P

A C

T

IO

N C

U R

V E

2.

2.

A V

P

LO

T

T E

D

/1

6/

:1

A M

B Y

D

R ob bi

APPENDIX C

IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR GEOTECHNICAL-ENGINEERING REPORT

5 LIMITATIONS