mt-a2013018_Geotechnical_Bridge_Report.pdf

GEOTECHNICAL BRIDGE REPORT

MT Phillips 201(1) Old Highway 2 and Bridge Restoration

IDIQ Contract No. DTFH70-10-D-00016 Task Order No. T-14-005

Project 14-3206G

WFLHD Geotechnical Report 06-16

Submitted by

2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190

Billings, Montana 59108-0910

Prepared for

Federal Highway Administration Western Federal Lands Highway Division

610 E 5th Street Vancouver, Washington 98661

On behalf of

Robert Peccia & Associates P. O. Box 5653

Helena, Montana 59604-5653

May 20, 2015

Table of Contents

Description Page

A. Introduction

A.1. Project Description A.2. Scope of Services and Background

B. Review of Available Information and Reconnaissance

B.1. General Site Topography/Geologic Conditions/Climate B.2. Engineering Reconnaissance B.3. Field Investigation

C. Laboratory Testing Program/Procedures

D. Analysis/Recommendations

D.1. Proposed Construction D.2. Driven Piling D.3. Seismic Design Considerations D.4. Liquefaction D.5. Other Foundations Considered D.6. Abutment Wall Backfill D.7. Testing

E. General Recommendations

E.1. Basis of Recommendations E.2. Review of Design E.3. Groundwater Fluctuations E.4. Use of Report E.5. Level of Care

Tables

1 Test Methods 2 Pile Foundation Recommendations – Modular Steel Alternative

3 Summary of Pile Lateral Load Analysis – Strong Axis 4 Summary of Pile Lateral Load – Weak Axis 5 Pile Foundation Recommendations – Concrete Bulb Tee Alternative

Appendix 1

Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figure 2. Site Location Sketch Figure 3. Geologic Map Preliminary Plan and Profile Sheet with Boring Locations Bridge Layouts by RPA (2 sheets)

Bridge Reconnaissance Photos

Table of Contents (continued)

Appendix 2 Boring Photos Descriptive Terminology – Soil and Rock Log of Boring Sheets ST-12 and ST-13 Rock Core Photos

Appendix 3

GRLWEAP Output Pile Capacity versus Depth Graphs and Tables LPILE Plus 5.0 Output LiquefyPro Output

Appendix 4 Site Class Determination Calculation

Appendix 5 Laboratory Test Results (Gradation, Atterberg Limits, Consolidation, Moisture Content) Summary of Corrosion Test Results

Robert Peccia & Associates May 20, 2015 Project 14-3206G Page 1

A. Introduction

A.1. Project Description The proposed project is intended to reconstruct the bridge crossing the Dodson South Canal along Old Highway 2 approximately 3.2 miles east of the intersection of US Highway 2 and Old Highway 2.

Preliminary plan and profile sheets indicate the bridge begins at Station 176+01 and ends at Station 176+96. The existing bridge is located about 85 feet north of an existing five-span concrete railroad bridge that also crosses the canal. The existing Dodson South Canal Bridge is a five-span timber beam structure built in 1930. This structure is supported on multiple 12-inch diameter timber piles, which were noted as heavily deteriorated. A Vicinity Map is included in Appendix 1.

A.2. Scope of Services and Background A preliminary field reconnaissance was performed by our engineer along the project corridor on April 22 and 23, 2014. The initial fieldwork was limited to visual and geologic assessment of the full project alignment, but no subsurface investigation or testing was performed at that time. Reconnaissance of the Dodson South Canal Bridge was performed to evaluate drill rig access.

After completing the reconnaissance, a Geotechnical Reconnaissance Memorandum dated September 15, 2014, was prepared. The memorandum summarized our findings and preliminary opinions related to rehabilitation of the bridge, replacement of the bridge, and preliminary pile type assumptions. We also provided preliminary opinions related to pile type, estimated driven lengths, and estimated capacities.

A geotechnical investigation plan was submitted on September 15, 2014. After receiving approval, another reconnaissance was performed by our engineers on September 23, 2014. During this trip, the borings were staked, photographed (attached), and GPS coordinates recorded. We also observed pavement conditions along the Bowdoin National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) access road, parking lot, and display pond trail.

A geotechnical drilling program was then performed by SK Geotechnical between the dates of October 9 and 16, 2014. The drilling consisted of performing one soil boring near each bridge abutment. Standard drilling and sampling was performed at each of the borings including rock coring when necessary.

After completing the drilling, the samples were returned to our laboratory for testing. Laboratory testing performed for the bridge consisted of classification tests, including grain size distribution and Atterberg limits tests, time rate consolidation tests, and unconfined compression tests of bedrock samples. After completing the laboratory testing, preliminary geotechnical recommendations containing our preliminary analyses and pile type recommendations were drafted and sent by email. This work is described in further

Project 14-3206G Page 2 detail below and represents a refinement of the preliminary geotechnical bridge recommendations for the project.

B. Review of Available Information and Reconnaissance

B.1. General Site Topography/Geologic Conditions/Climate The bridge structure is located approximately 3.2 miles east of the intersection of US Highway 2 and Old Highway 2 approximately 1 mile east of Malta, Montana. The bridge runs parallel with the existing railroad bridge located approximately 85 feet upstream. The bridge structure is located in relatively flat terrain and is primarily used by local farmers and ranchers as well as visitors to the Bowdoin National Wildlife Refuge. The area surrounding the project typically sees a climate with cold, average moisture winters, and warm, relatively dry summers. The area, on average, receives approximately 13 inches of rain and 26 inches of snowfall per year. The wetter seasons are typically from October to June when snowmelt and spring rains cause snow to melt and run off.

Observations at the site and review of readily available geologic literature indicate the project area is located within a depositional environment including alluvium, colluvium, and glacial deposits with outcrops of glacial ice contact deposits. This portion of Old Highway 2 is situated in the Milk River valley, which is actually the ancient valley of the Missouri River. Continental glaciers during past ice ages actually shifted the Missouri River about 60 miles south to its current location, leaving this broad valley currently occupied by the Milk River. The valley is used for significant agricultural purposes, such as growing alfalfa, hay, wheat, and many other important crops. The following stratigraphic units were identified near the project as noted by the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology Geologic Map. A portion of this map is shown on the Geologic Map in Appendix 1.

Qac: Alluvium-Colluvium, includes deposits and alluvial fans and on alluvial terraces; may include glacial outwash Qg: Glacial Deposits, undivided; possibly the equivalent of the Kintyre Formation of Jensen and Varnes (1964) and Colton and others (1989) and the Glasgow 30' by 60' quadrangle Qgi: Glacial Ice-Contact Deposits Kcl: Claggett Shale, upper Cretaceous

B.2. Engineering Reconnaissance SK Geotechnical attended a kick-off meeting at the headquarters for the Bowdoin NWR on April 22, 2014. The initial field reconnaissance was then performed along the project corridor on April 22 and 23, 2014. The purpose of this reconnaissance was to observe the existing roadway and bridge structure and to comment and delineate geotechnical-related deficiencies along the project.

Project 14-3206G Page 3

Photographs are attached in Appendix 1 showing the existing Dodson South Canal Bridge and the nearby Burlington Northern-Santa Fe (BNSF) railway bridge. The Dodson South Canal Bridge is a 95-foot long, two-lane timber bridge supported on driven timber piling. The bridge is in very poor condition and some of the piling supports are severely deteriorated. Surface water drainage is generally accommodated by drainage openings along the bridge curbs. However, it was noted that gravel buildup has blocked flow of surface water. This likely is causing some damage to other wooden components of the bridge.

B.3. Field Investigation

B.3.a. Drilling. Borings ST-12 and ST-13 were performed for the bridge structure as shown on the plan and profile sheet in Appendix 1. Borings ST-12 and ST-13 were extended to the depths of 120 and 120 1/2 feet, respectively. Thin-walled tube samples, HQ rock core samples, split-soon samples, and California samples were obtained and returned to our laboratory for testing. These borings were performed to determine the suitability of the underlying soil and bedrock stratum to support the proposed bridge structure.

B.3.b. Drilling Procedures/Equipment/Sampling. The borings were performed on the dates indicated on the boring logs with a truck-mounted core and auger CME 75HT drill rig. Boring ST-12 was extended to a total depth of 120 feet using hollow-stem auger and HQ rock coring techniques. Penetration tests were performed at 2 1/2-foot intervals to a depth of 15 feet then 5-foot intervals to a depth of 99 feet. HQ wireline rock coring was then performed to the boring termination depth of 120 feet. Boring ST-13 was extended to a total depth of 120 1/2 feet using hollow-stem auger techniques. Penetration tests were performed at 2 1/2-foot intervals to a depth of 15 feet and then 5-foot intervals to a depth of 120 1/2 feet.

A total of four thin-walled tube samples, one modified California sample, and 21 feet of HQ bedrock sample were recovered from the borings.

B.3.c. Results.

B.3.c.1. General. Two soil borings were performed to evaluate subsurface soil conditions for the bridge structure. Boring ST-12 was performed near the west bridge end and Boring ST-13 was performed near the east bridge end. These borings were extended to depths of about 120 feet below existing grades.

B.3.c.2. General Soil Profile. The general soil profile encountered by the borings was mixed fine-grained sandy soils, sandy silts, and silty and clayey sands to depths ranging from about 69 1/2 feet in Boring ST-12 to 70 feet in Boring ST-13. Silty gravel with sand was then encountered to depths ranging from 96 1/2 feet in Boring ST-12 and to 106 feet in Boring ST-13. Beneath the

Project 14-3206G Page 4 gravels, claystone bedrock was encountered to the termination depth of Boring ST-12 of 120 feet and Boring ST-13 of 120 1/2 feet.

Penetration resistances recorded in the fine-grained alluvial clays and silts ranged from weight-of-hammer to 24 blows per foot (BPF), but generally ranged from weight-of-hammer to 4 BPF, indicating the clays are primarily very soft to soft. Penetration resistances recorded in the alluvial sands ranged from weight-of-hammer to 39 BPF, but primarily ranged from weight-of-hammer to 15 BPF, indicating the sands are primarily very loose to medium dense. Penetration resistances recorded in the alluvial gravels ranged from 28 BPF to 50 blows for 3 inches of penetration.

These values indicate the gravel alluvium was medium dense to very dense, but primarily dense to very dense. It should be noted, the penetration resistances can be greatly affected by the larger gravels and/or cobbles, if present. Penetration resistances recorded in the claystone bedrock ranged from 47 to 75 BPF, indicating the bedrock is very soft by bedrock hardness standards.

Rock core samples obtained from Boring ST-12 also indicated the bedrock was very soft and highly weathered to decomposed in nature.

B.3.c.3. Groundwater Observations. Groundwater was encountered in Borings ST-12 and ST- 13 at depths of 11 1/2 and 8 feet, respectively, at the time of drilling. Fluctuation of groundwater levels can and will occur in the project area, especially when considering spring run-off, snow fall, and irrigation of local agricultural lands.

C. Laboratory Testing Program/Procedures After completion of the drilling and sampling, the samples were returned to our material testing laboratory. Laboratory tests were performed per AASHTO standards. Laboratory tests were performed on split-spoon, Shelby tube, modified California sampler, and HQ rock core samples. Representative samples were chosen for our laboratory testing program. Atterberg limits, moisture content, sieve analysis, corrosion, consolidation/swell, and unconfined compressive strength tests were performed on representative samples. The complete laboratory test results performed for the bridge are included in Appendix 5. The test methods are outlined in Table 1.

Project 14-3206G Page 5

Table 1. Test Methods Test Name AASHTO Standard

Particle Size Analysis to 0.02 mm T88 Atterberg Limits T89/T90 Specific Gravity T100

Soil Classification M145 Sieve Analysis T11/T27

Natural Moisture Content T265 pH of Soil T289

Unconfined Compressive Strength T208

D. Analysis/Recommendations

D.1. Proposed Construction A single span modular steel bridge alternative and a single span pre-cast concrete bulb tee bridge alternative are being considered at this time. It is planned that both structures will have an overall length of 90 feet with a bridge deck elevation of approximately 2265. For the modular steel bridge alternative, preliminary design indicates the structure will have four piles per abutment which will result in a strength load of 228.3 kips per pile. We calculated the minimum capacity required during driving will be 351.2 kips. This assumes dynamic pile testing will be performed at the time of construction and allows the use of a higher resistance factor of 0.65. If not, additional analyses and recommendations will be required.

For the pre-cast concrete bulb tee alternative, preliminary design indicates the structure will have a four pile per abutment which will result in a strength load of 305.3 kips per pile and a minimum ultimate capacity during driving of 469.7 kips per pile. This value also assumes dynamic pile testing will be performed during construction to allow for the use of the higher resistance factor.

D.2. Driven Piling

D.2.a. General. Based on the preliminary design and loading conditions provided by RPA, it is our opinion the best method of foundation support would be a driven pile deep foundation system. We analyzed multiple sizes of both H-piling and pipe piling for both axial capacity and lateral loading for both types of bridge alternatives. The recommended pile types are discussed below. Other foundations and pile types considered are discussed in Section D.5 of this report. Due to the nature of the soils at the site, we also analyzed liquefaction potential of the soils near the bridge.

Project 14-3206G Page 6

D.2.b. Modular Steel Bridge Alternative.

D.2.b.1. Piling. Preliminary design indicates the structure will have four pile per abutment which will result in a minimum capacity required during driving of 351.2 kips. This assumes dynamic pile testing will be performed at the time of construction, which allows the use of a higher resistance factor. For the modular steel bridge alternative, we recommend using HP 14 x 89 steel H-pile fitted with driving points. It is our opinion this pile alternative is the most cost effective and will be best suited to drive through the dense gravel stratum and penetrate into the underlying claystone bedrock. The Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) website bid tabs indicate the cost per foot (furnished and driving) averaged $55.50 in 2013. The cost for the 14 x 89 steel H-pile was about $20 per foot cheaper than other suitable pipe piling. Table 2 below outlines our pile foundation recommendations. Capacity versus depth graphs and tables are included in Appendix 3. The depths shown on the graphs and tables are referenced to the boring surface elevations.

Table 2. Pile Foundation Recommendations – Modular Steel Alternative

Bent Pile Type

Bottom-of-Cap Eleva-tion

Top-of- Pile

Eleva-tion

Pile Cap

Embed-ment

Nominal Pile

Capacity (kips)

Factored Resistance*

(kips)

Design Tip

Eleva-tion

Estimated Length (feet)

Recommended Furnished

Length (feet)

1 14 x 89 H-Pile 2257.6 2259.1 1.5 351.2 228.3 2149 110 115

2 14 x 89 H-Pile 2257.6 2259.1 1.5 351.2 228.3 2144 115 120

*Includes a resistance factor of 0.65 for dynamic pile testing per AASHTO LRFD 2012.

D.2.b.2. Lateral Load Analysis. We performed a lateral load analysis on the HP 14 x 89 H-pile for the strong and weak directions with a fixed head connection using LPILE Plus 5.0 program.

For the strong direction, we estimate up to 0.4 inches of lateral deflection could occur with an applied lateral load of 17.8 kips and an axial load of 228.3 kips. For the weak direction, we estimate up to 0.65 inches of lateral deflection could occur with an applied lateral load of 15.7 kips and an axial load of 228.3 kips.

Deflections at 1/4-, 1/2-, 3/4-, and 1-inch were then evaluated to determine the horizontal load required to generate the different deflections. These deflections are at bottom-of-cap elevation and are based on a fixed head connection. Tables 3 and 4 below summarize our analyses for the strong and weak direction.

Project 14-3206G Page 7

Table 3. Summary of Pile Lateral Load Analysis – Strong Axis

Pile Type Limit State

Applied Forces Calculated Reactions

Deflection (inches)

Axial (kips)

Slope (radius)

Maximum Stress (ksi)

Maximum Moment (kip-feet)

Maximum Shear (kips)

HP

14 x 89

Strength

0.25 228.3 0 8.2 -82.3 13.3

0.50 228.3 0 14.3 -144.2 20.9

0.75 228.3 0 20.2 -203.1 27.8

1.0 228.3 0 25.9 -260.5 34.4

Table 4. Summary of Pile Lateral Load Analysis – Weak Axis

Pile Type Limit State

Applied Forces Calculated Reactions

Deflection (inches)

Axial (kips)

Slope (radius)

Maximum Stress (ksi)

Maximum Moment (kip-feet)

Maximum Shear (kips)

HP

14 x 89

Strength

0.25 228.3 0 11.4 -44.9 9.2

0.50 228.3 0 18.9 -74.3 13.6

0.75 228.3 0 25.7 -101.0 17.3

1.0 228.3 0 32.2 -126.5 20.7

Copies of our lateral load analyses are included in Appendix 3.

D.2.c. Pre-Cast Concrete Bulb Tee Alternative.

D.2.c.1. Piling. Preliminary design indicates the structure will have four pile per abutment which will result in a minimum ultimate capacity during driving of 469.7 kips. This also assumes dynamic pile testing will be performed during construction, which allows the use of a higher resistance factor. We analyzed multiple pile alternatives including both H pile and pipe pile for axial capacity and lateral loading. We recommend using HP 14 x 89 steel H-pile driven into the underlying claystone bedrock. However, due to the very soft and decomposed nature of the bedrock, it is our opinion 469.7 kips will not be obtained above the termination depth of our borings of 120 feet. Therefore, it is our opinion the bridge should be supported on five pile per abutment to reduce the overall load per pile. Using five pile per abutment, we calculate a strength load of 245 kips per pile, which results in a minimum ultimate capacity of 377 kips per pile. For the five pile alternative, we recommend using HP 14 x 89 steel H-pile with driving points. It is our opinion this pile alternative is best suited and is the most cost effective when compared to other suitable pile alternatives. Table 5 below outlines our pile foundation recommendations for the pre-cast concrete bridge bulb tee alternative. Capacity versus depth graphs are included in

Project 14-3206G Page 8

Appendix 3. The depths shown on the graphs and tables are referenced to the boring surface elevations.

Table 5. Pile Foundation Recommendations – Pre-Cast Concrete Bridge Alternative

A bu tm en t

Pi le

T yp e

B ot to m

-o f-C ap

E va tio n

T op

-o f-P ile va tio n

Pi le

C m be dm en t

N om in al

P ile

C ac ity F iv e

B en t A lte rn at iv e (k ip s)

Fa ct or ed

R es is ta nc e*

(k ip s)

D es ig n

Ti p

E le va tio n

E st im at ed

L en gt h

(fe et

R ec om m en de d Fu rn is he d

L en gt h

(fe et

(West)

14 x 89 H-Pile 2257.6 2259.1 1.5 377.0 245 2147 112 115

(East)

14 x 89 H-Pile 2257.6 2259.1 1.5 377.0 245 2142 117 120

*Includes a resistance factor of 0.65 for dynamic pile testing per AASHTO LRFD 2012.

D.2.c.2. Lateral Load Considerations. Lateral loading conditions for the pre-cast concrete bulb tee alternative will be similar to, or lower, than the modular steel alternative. Therefore, the results shown in Tables 3 and 4 can also be used for the concrete alternative.

D.3. Seismic Design Considerations We calculated the average standard penetration test blow count and weighted the blow counts based on estimated stratum thickness. The average weighted blow count for the upper 100 feet of our boring was 31 BPF. Therefore, we recommend using a "Stiff Soil Profile, Site Class D," as defined by the 2012 International Building Code (IBC) for design.

D.4. Liquefaction To evaluate the potential for liquefaction near the bridge, we performed a liquefaction analysis using the LiquefyPro program developed by CivilTech Software. AASHTO LRFD 2012 Figure 3.10.2.1-1 indicates maximum peak ground acceleration (PGA) is approximately 2 percent of gravity. This is based on Site Class B soil profile. The PGA value was then factored. The PGA was then amplified by a factor of 1.6 for Site Class D conditions per AASHTO 2012 Table 3.1.3.2-1. Therefore, we used a factored PGA of 3.1 percent of gravity for our analysis. Based on our analysis, it is our opinion a factor of safety in excess of 3.0 will be provided against liquefaction. Our analysis further indicates seismic-induced settlement will be less than 1/4 inch under the anticipated seismic forces.

D.5. Other Foundations Considered We also considered a shallow-spread footing system, a geosynthetics reinforced soil integrated bridge system (GRS-IBS), and a larger closed end pipe pile terminating in the shallower gravels. It is our opinion supporting this structure on either the shallow-spread footing or GRS-IBS systems will result in

Project 14-3206G Page 9 excessive settlement due to the very soft nature and depth of the upper fine-grained alluvial sands and clays. These systems will also require dewatering and significant earthwork, which will offset the costs of a deep foundation system. Additional analyses would also be required to evaluate slope stability.

We also considered closed end pipe piling terminating in the dense to very dense gravels. We wish to point out that driving pile into gravels are often unpredictable and sometimes "run" in the gravels.

Essentially, the pile penetrate the gravels with little change in capacity with depth. This can result in change orders and higher costs during construction due to splicing, construction delays, and additional pile length. Pipe piling is also generally significantly more expensive than H-piling. We compared costs of alternative 12.75-, 16-, and 20-inch pipe piling and found the HP 14 x 89 steel H-pile driven into the claystone bedrock was more economical than the closed end pile driven into the dense gravel stratum.

Therefore, it is our opinion HP 14 x 89 H-pile driven into claystone bedrock is the best alternative and the most cost effective pile type to support the proposed structure.

D.6. Abutment Wall Backfill To reduce lateral earth pressures on abutment walls and to reduce frost action, we recommend providing a material meeting the gradation requirements of Standard Specifications for Construction of Roads and Bridges on Federal Highway Projects FP-14, Section 704.07 for Select Borrow. The material should be placed in conformance with moisture and density requirements of FP-14, Section 204. We recommend the lateral earth pressure values in Table 6 below for design.

Table 6. Select Borrow Lateral Earth Pressures

Parameter/Material Abutment Wall Backfill (Select Borrow)

Internal Friction Angle, degrees 35 Active Equivalent Fluid Pressure, psf/ft 37* Passive Equivalent Fluid Pressure, psf/ft n/a Coefficient of Friction n/a *Note: values are ultimate values and have not been factored. Appropriate factors of safety should be provided to limit movement.

We recommend placing Select Borrow from bottom-of-cap elevation extending back, horizontally a minimum of 5 feet beyond the wall and then up at a slope of 0.5V:1.0H to the bottom of the pavement structure. We also recommend placing a minimum of 2 feet of backfill above the bottom-of-pile cap on the front side of the abutment wall. Riprap should also be placed to prevent scouring of the soils in front of the abutment wall.

Project 14-3206G Page 10

D.7. Testing We recommend a minimum of one dynamic load test be completed at Abutment 2 at the onset of construction to evaluate capacities during construction as well as to establish an appropriate driving criteria for the remaining production pile. The pile will primarily be driven through clayey soils, and the pile capacity will be lower during the initial drive as excess pore pressures are developed. If the specified capacity is not obtained during the initial drive, we recommend redriving the pile a minimum of 24 hours later.

E. General Recommendations

E.1. Basis of Recommendations The analyses and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the soil borings performed at the locations indicated. Often, variations occur between these borings, the nature and extent of which do not become evident until additional exploration or construction is conducted. A reevaluation of the recommendations in this report should be made after performing on-site observations during construction to note the characteristics of any variations. The variations may result in additional foundation costs, and it is suggested a contingency be provided for this purpose.

It is recommended we be retained to perform the observation and testing program for the site preparation phase of this project. This will allow correlation of the soil conditions encountered during construction to the soil borings, and will provide continuity of professional responsibility.

E.2. Review of Design This report is based on the design of the proposed structure as related to us for preparation of this report.

It is recommended we be retained to review the geotechnical aspects of the designs and specifications.

With the review, we will evaluate whether any changes in design have affected the validity of the recommendations, and whether our recommendations have been correctly interpreted and implemented in the design and specifications.

E.3. Groundwater Fluctuations We made water level observations in the borings at the times and under the conditions stated on the boring logs. These data were interpreted in the text of this report. The period of observation was relatively short, and fluctuation in the groundwater level may occur due to rainfall, flooding, irrigation, spring thaw, drainage, and other seasonal and annual factors not evident at the time the observations were made. Design drawings and specifications and construction planning should recognize the possibility of fluctuations.

Project 14-3206G Page 11

E.4. Use of Report This report is for the exclusive use of Robert Peccia & Associates and the FHWA to use to design the proposed structure and prepare construction documents. In the absence of our written approval, we make no representation and assume no responsibility to other parties regarding this report. The data, analyses, and recommendations may not be appropriate for other structures or purposes. We recommend parties contemplating other structures or purposes contact us.

E.5. Level of Care Services performed by SK Geotechnical Corporation personnel for this project have been conducted with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing in this area under similar budget and time restraints. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made.

Appendix 1

VICINITY MAP

Geotechnical Evaluation

Dodson South Canal Bridge Old Highway 2 and Bridge Restoration

Malta, Phillips County, Montana

Drawn by: DPH/SKG, Google Earth Date 1/15/2015

Project: 14-3206G

Scale: NTS FIGURE

Sheet 1 of 1

North

Dodson South Canal Bridge

SITE LOCATION SKETCH

Bridge Report

MT Phillips 201(1), Old Highway 2 and Bridge Restoration Malta, Phillips County, Montana

Drawn by: DPH/SKG, Google Earth Date 1/5/2015

Project: 14-3206G

Dodson South Canal Bridge

GEOLOGIC MAP

Geotechnical Evaluation

Dodson South Canal Bridge Old Highway 2 and Bridge Restoration

Malta, Phillips County, Montana

Drawn by: DPH/SKG Date 1/15/2015

Project: 14-3206G

Dodson South Canal Bridge

Qac = Alluvium – Colluvium Qg = Glacial Deposits Qgi = Glacial Ice-Contact Deposits Kcl = Claggett Shale

Reference: Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology, Geologic Map of the Malta 30' x 60' Quadrangle, Northeast Montana, Robert N. Bergantino, 1999

Dodson South Canal Bridge looking north. BNSF Bridge about 85 feet upstream of Dodson South Canal Bridge.

Dodson South Canal Bridge looking west at west bank. Dodson South Canal Bridge looking south.

Appendix 2

Boring ST-12, looking north. Boring ST-12, looking south.

Boring ST-13, looking south. Boring ST-13, looking west.

12/06/12

Order of Descriptors

Criteria For Descriptors

- Angularity of coarse grained soils

Consistency of Fine Grained Soils

Very Stiff 16 - 30

Apparent Density of Coarse Grained Soils

Loose 4 - 10

Dense 31 - 50

Dry -Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch.

Moist -Damp, but no visible water.

Angularity of Coarse-Grained Particles

Moisture Condition

- Other relevant notes

Medium Dense 11 - 30 plane sides with unpolished surfaces.

but have rounded edges.

well-rounded corners and edges.

Rounded -Particles have smoothly curved sides and no edges.

Definition of Particle Size Ranges

Boulder

Cobble

Gravel

Sand

Silt

Clay between silt and clay.

> 12 in (300 mm)

3 in (75 mm) - 12 in (300 mm)

No. 4 Sieve (4.75 mm) to 3 in (75 mm)

No. 200 (0.075 mm) to No. 4 Sieves (4.75 mm)

< No. 200 Sieve (0.075 mm)*

< No. 200 Sieve (0.075 mm)* grained soils only)

Consistency N-Value (uncorrected)

Soil Component Size Range

Subrounded-Particles have nearly plane sides, but have

Subangular -Particles are similar to angular description, Angular -Particles have sharp edges and relative

Very Loose < 4

Very Dense > 50

Very Soft < 2

Soft 2 - 4

Medium Stiff 5 - 8

Stiff 9 - 15

Hard > 30

Relative Density N-Value (uncorrected)

- Group Name

- Consistency or Relative Density

- Moisture Condition

- Color

- Particle size descriptor(s) (coarse

Wet -Visible free water.

Soil Classifications are Based on the Unified Soil

Classification System, ASTM D2487 and D2488.

Also included are the AASHTO group classifications (M145).

Descriptions are based on visual observation, except where they have been modified to reflect results of laboratory tests as deemed appropriate.

*Atterberg limits and chart below to differentiate

Example soil description: Sandy FAT CLAY (CH), soft, wet, brown. (A-7)

SPT (Standard Penetration Test-ASTM D1586):

The number of blows of a 140 lb (63.6 kg) hammer falling 2.5 ft (750 mm) used to drive a 2 in (50 mm)

O.D. Split Spoon sampler for a total of 1.5 ft (0.45 m) of penetration.

Written as follows:

first 0.5 ft (0.15 m) - second 0.5 ft (0.15 m) - third 0.5 ft (0.15 m)

(ex: 1-3-9)

Note: if the number of blows exceeds 50 before 0.5 ft

(0.15 m) of penetration is achieved, the actual penetration rounded to the nearest 0.1 ft (0.03 m) follows the number of blows in parentheses (ex: 12-24-50 (0.09 m), 34-50 (0.4 ft), or 100 (0.3 ft)).WR denotes a zero blow count with the weight of the rods only.

WH denotes a zero blow count with the weight of the rods plus the weight of the hammer.

MC=Moisture Content, LL=Liquid limit, PL=Plastic Limit

-200%=percent soil passing 200 sieve, DD=Dry Density

See Soil Boring Information Special Provision.

SK

Symbol Rock Type

Argillite

Basalt

Bedrock

Breccia

Claystone

Conglomerate

Dolomite

Gneiss

Granitic

Limestone

Quartzite

Rhyolite

Sandstone

Schist

Shale Siltstone

Symbol Rock Type

Symbol Rock Type Order of Descriptors

- Other relevant notes

- Color

- Rock Type

Criteria For Descriptors

Coarse Grained

Fine Grained

-Individual grains can be easily distinguished by eye

- Stratification/Foliation (as applicable)

Thickly Bedded

Medium Bedded

Soft

Moderately hard

Hard

Very Hard

-Individual grains can be dis-tinguished with difficulty

(other)

Concrete

Asphalt

Water

Coal

Fill

Topsoil

Boulders and Cobbles

Explanation of Text Fields in Boring Logs:

Material Description: Lithologic Description of soil or rock encountered.

Remarks: Comments on drilling, including method, bit type, and problems encountered.

General Notes

- Water level observations apply only at the specific boring, and at the time the

- Descriptions on these boring logs apply only at the specific boring, and at the time borings were made. Due to the variability of groundwater measurements given times.

Very Soft -Can be carved with knife. Can be excavated readily with point of rock hammer. Can be scratched readily by fingernail.

Medium

-Can be grooved or gouged 0.05 in (2 mm) deep by firm pressure of knife or rock hammer point. Can be excavated in small chips to pieces about 1 in (25 mm) maximum size by hard blows of the point of a rock hammer.

-Can be scratched with knife or pick. Gouges or grooves to 0.25 in (6 mm) can be excavated by hard blow of rock hammer. Hand specimen can be detached by moderate blows.

blows of a rock hammer.

Millings

Notes:

3-10 ft (1-3 m)

Thinly Bedded

2-12 in (50-300 mm)

1-3 ft (300 mm - 1 m)

Very Thinly Bedded < 2 in (50 mm) the time the borings were made. These logs are not warranted to be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations or times.

the type of drilling used, and the stratification of the soil in the boring, these logs are not warranted to be representative of groundwater conditions at other locations or

- Other terms may be used as descriptors, as defined by the profession.

Description Characteristic

- Field Hardness chips to several inches in size by moderate blows of the point of a rock hammer.

- Grain size (if applicable)

-Soil and Rock descriptions are based on visual observation, except where they have been modified to reflect results of laboratory tests as deemed appropriate.

UCS = Unconfined Compressive Strength obtained from laboratory testing at the given depth.

Unless stated on logs as being surveyed by district survey, all locations are considered approximate.

-Can be grooved or gouged readily by knife or point of rock hammer. Can be excavated in fragments from

-Can be scratched with knife or pick only with difficulty. Hard hammer blows required to detach hand specimen.

-Cannot be scratched with knife or sharp rock hammer point. Breaking of hand specimens requires several hard

See Soil Boring Information Special Provision.

12/06/12

SK

891631

Pen: < ¼ tsf

Pen: < ¼ tsf

Pen: < ¼ tsf

Pen: 2¼ tsf

2 - 2 - 2

2 - 1 - 1

1 - 1 - 1

WH - WH - WH

WH - WH - 1

WH - WH - WH

WH - 1 - 1

WH - WH - WH

1 - 2 - 4

WR - WH - 2

TOPSOIL, 5" topsoil and root zone.

Lean CLAY with sand (CL), soft, brown, wet, low plasticity. trace roots. (Alluvium).

Sandy Lean CLAY (CL), soft, brown, wet, low plasticity. (Alluvium).

Lean CLAY with sand (CL), soft, brown, wet, low plasticity. seams sand. (Alluvium).

Sandy Lean CLAY (CL), very soft, brown, wet, low plasticity. (Alluvium).

Clayey SAND (SC), very loose, brown, wet, fine to coarse grained, subrounded. (Alluvium).

Lean CLAY with sand (CL), soft, brown, wet, low plasticity. seam clayey sand at 15'. (Alluvium).

Sandy SILT (ML), very loose, brown, wet. (Alluvium).

Fat CLAY (CH), medium stiff, brown, wet, high plasticity. seam sand. (Alluvium).

Silty SAND (SM), very loose, brown, wet, fine to coarse grained, subrounded. (Alluvium).

0.4 2261.4

2.0 2259.8

3.5 2258.3

6.0 2255.8

11.0 2250.8

13.5 2248.3

17.5 2244.3

21.0 2240.8

27.5 2234.3

Township, Range, and Section:

30N 30E 13 - BAB

LOG OF BORING

L it h o lo g y

(p cf

O pe ra tio n

Sa m pl e

Ty pe

R ec ov er y

D D

-2

P L

L L

M C

) Remarks and

Other Tests

B lo w C o u n t

R Q

D

Location Source:

RPA Survey

Material Description

Depth (ft)

Elev.

(ft)

2256.8

2251.8

2246.8

2241.8

2236.8

2231.8

Depth (ft)

Elev.

(ft)

(2

M D

T L

O G

O F

B O

R

IN

G

M D

T _R

E V

IS

E

D _2

9+

(C P

T _I

M P

O R

T

G D

T

/1

/1

4:

C

:\U S

E R

S \P

U B

LI

C

\D O

C U

M E

N T

S \B

E N

T

LE

Y \G

IN

T

\P R

O

JE

C T

S \3

1-

\3

6.

G

P J

Logger: D. Hutzenbiler

Datum: NAD83

Sheet 1 of 4

Station:

Offset:

175 + 99 28 ft R

System: MT S.P. (E)

Driller: C. Larsen

Project:

Elevation Source:

RPA Survey

Date Started:

10/9/14

Project Number:

14-3206G

UPN:

Date Finished:

10/14/14

Rig: CME 75HT Hammer: Auto Boring Diameter:

9"

Drilling Fluid:

None Abandonment Method:

Backfilled with Cuttings

Old Highway 2 - Malta Boring Location Coordinates

N: 1505099.907 ft E: 2388324.786 ft

Top of Boring Elevation: 2261.8 ft

After Drilling: 11.5 ft (2250.3 ft), Augers Out

Water Level Observations Remarks:

After Drilling: 26.5 ft (2235.3 ft), Augers In

During Drilling: 14.0 ft (2247.8 ft)

Boring ST-12

WH - WH - WH

WH - WH - 4

WH - 1 - 3

WH - 1 - 2

8 - 18 - 21

2 - 10 - 17

Silty SAND with gravel (SM), very loose, brown, wet, fine to coarse grained, subrounded. (Alluvium).

Lean CLAY with sand (CL), soft, brown, wet, low plasticity. (Alluvium).

Silty SAND (SM), very loose to dense, brown, wet, fine to coarse grained, subrounded. (Alluvium).

32.5 2229.3

37.5 2224.3

47.5 2214.3

Township, Range, and Section:

30N 30E 13 - BAB

LOG OF BORING

L it h o lo g y

(p cf

O pe ra tio n

Sa m pl e

Ty pe

R ec ov er y

D D

-2

P L

L L

M C

) Remarks and

Other Tests

B lo w C o u n t

R Q

D

Location Source:

RPA Survey

Material Description

Depth (ft)

Elev.

(ft)

2226.8

2221.8

2216.8

2211.8

2206.8

2201.8

Depth (ft)

Elev.

(ft)

(2

M D

T L

O G

O F

B O

R

IN

G

M D

T _R

E V

IS

E

D _2

9+

(C P

T _I

M P

O R

T

G D

T

/1

/1

4:

C

:\U S

E R

S \P

U B

LI

C

\D O

C U

M E

N T

S \B

E N

T

LE

Y \G

IN

T

\P R

O

JE

C T

S \3

1-

\3

6.

G

P J

Logger: D. Hutzenbiler

Datum: NAD83

Sheet 2 of 4

Station:

Offset:

175 + 99 28 ft R

System: MT S.P. (E)

Driller: C. Larsen

Project:

Elevation Source:

RPA Survey

Date Started:

10/9/14

Project Number:

14-3206G

UPN:

Date Finished:

10/14/14

Rig: CME 75HT Hammer: Auto Boring Diameter:

9"

Drilling Fluid:

None Abandonment Method:

Backfilled with Cuttings

Old Highway 2 - Malta Boring Location Coordinates

N: 1505099.907 ft E: 2388324.786 ft

Top of Boring Elevation: 2261.8 ft

After Drilling: 11.5 ft (2250.3 ft), Augers Out

Water Level Observations Remarks:

After Drilling: 26.5 ft (2235.3 ft), Augers In

During

4 - 7 - 11

13 - 27 - 30

28 - 50/0.5ft

15 - 37 - 24

9 - 14 - 27

15 - 21 - 20

20 - 26 - 26

Silty SAND continued.

Silty GRAVEL with sand (GM), dense to very dense, brown, wet, fine to coarse grained, subrounded.

(Alluvium).

70.0 2191.8

Township, Range, and Section:

30N 30E 13 - BAB

LOG OF BORING

L it h o lo g y

(p cf

O pe ra tio n

Sa m pl e

Ty pe

R ec ov er y

D D

-2

P L

L L

M C

) Remarks and

Other Tests

B lo w C o u n t

R Q

D

Location Source:

RPA Survey

Material Description

Depth (ft)

Elev.

(ft)

2196.8

2191.8

2186.8

2181.8

2176.8

2171.8

2166.8

Depth (ft)

Elev.

(ft)

(2

M D

T L

O G

O F

B O

R

IN

G

M D

T _R

E V

IS

E

D _2

9+

(C P

T _I

M P

O R

T

G D

T

/1

/1

4:

C

:\U S

E R

S \P

U B

LI

C

\D O

C U

M E

N T

S \B

E N

T

LE

Y \G

IN

T

\P R

O

JE

C T

S \3

1-

\3

6.

G

P J

Logger: D. Hutzenbiler

Datum: NAD83

Sheet 3 of 4

Station:

Offset:

175 + 99 28 ft R

System: MT S.P. (E)

Driller: C. Larsen

Project:

Elevation Source:

RPA Survey

Date Started:

10/9/14

Project Number:

14-3206G

UPN:

Date Finished:

10/14/14

Rig: CME 75HT Hammer: Auto Boring Diameter:

9"

Drilling Fluid:

None Abandonment Method:

Backfilled with Cuttings

Old Highway 2 - Malta Boring Location Coordinates

N: 1505099.907 ft E: 2388324.786 ft

Top of Boring Elevation: 2261.8 ft

After Drilling: 11.5 ft (2250.3 ft), Augers Out

Water Level Observations Remarks:

After Drilling: 26.5 ft (2235.3 ft), Augers In

During

Switch to HQ core bit at 99'.

UCS: 23.3 psi

UCS: 18.1 psi

UCS: 61.2 psi

UCS: 105.6 psi

12 - 19 - 280

CLAYSTONE, dark gray, fine grained, thinly bedded, very soft field hardness. moderately to highly weathered.

Boring Depth: 120.0 ft, Elevation: 2141.8 ft

96.5 2165.3

120.0 2141.8

Township, Range, and Section:

30N 30E 13 - BAB

LOG OF BORING

L it h o lo g y

(p cf

O pe ra tio n

Sa m pl e

Ty pe

R ec ov er y

D D

-2

P L

L L

M C

) Remarks and

Other Tests

B lo w C o u n t

R Q

D

Location Source:

RPA Survey

Material Description

Depth (ft)

Elev.

(ft)

2161.8

2156.8

2151.8

2146.8

2141.8

Depth (ft)

Elev.

(ft)

(2

M D

T L

O G

O F

B O

R

IN

G

M D

T _R

E V

IS

E

D _2

9+

(C P

T _I

M P

O R

T

G D

T

/1

/1

4:

C

:\U S

E R

S \P

U B

LI

C

\D O

C U

M E

N T

S \B

E N

T

LE

Y \G

IN

T

\P R

O

JE

C T

S \3

1-

\3

6.

G

P J

Logger: D. Hutzenbiler

Datum: NAD83

Sheet 4 of 4

Station:

Offset:

175 + 99 28 ft R

System: MT S.P. (E)

Driller: C. Larsen

Project:

Elevation Source:

RPA Survey

Date Started:

10/9/14

Project Number:

14-3206G

UPN:

Date Finished:

10/14/14

Rig: CME 75HT Hammer: Auto Boring Diameter:

9"

Drilling Fluid:

None Abandonment Method:

Backfilled with Cuttings

Old Highway 2 - Malta Boring Location Coordinates

N: 1505099.907 ft E: 2388324.786 ft

Top of Boring Elevation: 2261.8 ft

After Drilling: 11.5 ft (2250.3 ft), Augers Out

Water Level Observations Remarks:

After Drilling: 26.5 ft (2235.3 ft), Augers In

During

Pen: 3 tsf

Pen: ¾ tsf

Pen: < ¼ tsf

Pen: ¼ tsf

4 - 3 - 3

4 - 3 - 2

WH - WH - WH

WH - WH - WH

WH - WH - WH

WH - WH - 1

WH - WH - WH

WH - WH - 2

WH - 3 - 4

1 - 2 - 5

TOPSOIL, Topsoil and root zone.

FILL, Clayey GRAVEL with sand (GC), loose, brown, moist, fine to coarse grained.

Lean CLAY with sand (CL), soft to medium stiff, brown, moist to wet, low plasticity. trace organics and coal. (Alluvium).

Sandy Lean CLAY (CL), very soft, brown, wet, low plasticity. seams of sandy silt. (Alluvium).

Lean CLAY (CL), very soft, brown, wet, medium plasticity. seams sand. (Alluvium).

Sandy, Silty CLAY (CL-ML), very soft, brown, wet, low plasticity. seams sand. (Alluvium).

Lean CLAY (CL), medium stiff, brown, wet, low plasticity. trace sands. (Alluvium).

Silty SAND (SM), loose, brown, wet, fine to coarse grained, subrounded. trace FeOx. (Alluvium).

0.2 2261.4

1.2 2260.4

6.0 2255.6

11.0 2250.6

17.5 2244.1

21.0 2240.6

27.5 2234.1

Township, Range, and Section:

30N 30E 12 - CDC

LOG OF BORING

L it h o lo g y

(p cf

O pe ra tio n

Sa m pl e

Ty pe

R ec ov er y

D D

-2

P L

L L

M C

) Remarks and

Other Tests

B lo w C o u n t

R Q

D

Location Source:

RPA Survey

Material Description

Depth (ft)

Elev.

(ft)

2256.6

2251.6

2246.6

2241.6

2236.6

2231.6

Depth (ft)

Elev.

(ft)

(2

M D

T L

O G

O F

B O

R

IN

G

M D

T _R

E V

IS

E

D _2

9+

(C P

T _I

M P

O R

T

G D

T

/1

/1

4:

C

:\U S

E R

S \P

U B

LI

C

\D O

C U

M E

N T

S \B

E N

T

LE

Y \G

IN

T

\P R

O

JE

C T

S \3

1-

\3

6.

G

P J

Logger: D. Hutzenbiler

Datum: NAD83

Sheet 1 of 4

Station:

Offset:

177 + 00 33 ft L

System: MT S.P. (E)

Driller: C. Larsen

Project:

Elevation Source:

RPA Survey

Date Started:

10/14/14

Project Number:

14-3206G

UPN:

Date Finished:

10/16/14

Rig: CME 75HT Hammer: Auto Boring Diameter:

9"

Drilling Fluid:

None Abandonment Method:

Backfilled with Cuttings

Old Highway 2 - Malta Boring Location Coordinates

N: 1505182.203 ft E: 2388409.746 ft

Top of Boring Elevation: 2261.6 ft

After Drilling: 8.5 ft (2253.1 ft), Augers Out

Water Level Observations Remarks:

After Drilling: 8.0 ft (2253.6 ft), Augers In

During Drilling: 14.0 ft (2247.6 ft)

Boring ST-13

1 - 3 - 3

5 - 5 - 10

4 - 4 - 6

1 - 2 - 4

5 - 10 - 16

5 - 10 - 14

Silty SAND continued.

Sandy SILT with clay (ML), loose, brown, wet, slightly plastic. trace FeOx. (Alluvium).

Poorly-Graded SAND with gravel (SP), medium dense, brown, wet, fine to coarse grained, subrounded. (Alluvium).

Sandy Lean CLAY with gravel (CL), stiff, brown, wet, low plasticity. (Alluvium).

SILT with sand and clay (ML), loose, brown, wet, slightly plastic. trace FeOx. (Alluvium).

Silty SAND (SM), medium dense, brown, wet, fine to coarse grained, subrounded. trace FeOx. (Alluvium).

Sandy, Silty CLAY (CL-ML), very stiff, brown, wet, slightly plastic. trace FeOx. (Alluvium).

Lean CLAY with sand (CL), soft, gray, wet, low plasticity. trace gravels. (Alluvium).

35.0 2226.6

39.5 2222.1

42.5 2219.1

47.5 2214.1

52.5 2209.1

57.5 2204.1

62.5 2199.1

Township, Range, and Section:

30N 30E 12 - CDC

LOG OF BORING

L it h o lo g y

(p cf

O pe ra tio n

Sa m pl e

Ty pe

R ec ov er y

D D

-2

P L

L L

M C

) Remarks and

Other Tests

B lo w C o u n t

R Q

D

Location Source:

RPA Survey

Material Description

Depth (ft)

Elev.

(ft)

2226.6

2221.6

2216.6

2211.6

2206.6

2201.6

Depth (ft)

Elev.

(ft)

(2

M D

T L

O G

O F

B O

R

IN

G

M D

T _R

E V

IS

E

D _2

9+

(C P

T _I

M P

O R

T

G D

T

/1

/1

4:

C

:\U S

E R

S \P

U B

LI

C

\D O

C U

M E

N T

S \B

E N

T

LE

Y \G

IN

T

\P R

O

JE

C T

S \3

1-

\3

6.

G

P J

Logger: D. Hutzenbiler

Datum: NAD83

Sheet 2 of 4

Station:

Offset:

177 + 00 33 ft L

System: MT S.P. (E)

Driller: C. Larsen

Project:

Elevation Source:

RPA Survey

Date Started:

10/14/14

Project Number:

14-3206G

UPN:

Date Finished:

10/16/14

Rig: CME 75HT Hammer: Auto Boring Diameter:

9"

Drilling Fluid:

None Abandonment Method:

Backfilled with Cuttings

Old Highway 2 - Malta Boring Location Coordinates

N: 1505182.203 ft E: 2388409.746 ft

Top of Boring Elevation: 2261.6 ft

After Drilling: 8.5 ft (2253.1 ft), Augers Out

Water Level Observations Remarks:

After Drilling: 8.0 ft (2253.6 ft), Augers In

During

WH - 2 - 2

20 - 25 - 21

15 - 19 - 40

15 - 33 - 33

13 - 21 - 26

24 - 28 - 33

24 - 50 - 20

Lean CLAY with sand continued.

Silty GRAVEL with sand (GM), medium dense to very dense, brown to dark gray, wet, fine to coarse grained, subrounded to rounded. trace coal.

(Alluvium).

69.5 2192.1

Township, Range, and Section:

30N 30E 12 - CDC

LOG OF BORING

L it h o lo g y

(p cf

O pe ra tio n

Sa m pl e

Ty pe

R ec ov er y

D D

-2

P L

L L

M C

) Remarks and

Other Tests

B lo w C o u n t

R Q

D

Location Source:

RPA Survey

Material Description

Depth (ft)

Elev.

(ft)

2196.6

2191.6

2186.6

2181.6

2176.6

2171.6

2166.6

Depth (ft)

Elev.

(ft)

(2

M D

T L

O G

O F

B O

R

IN

G

M D

T _R

E V

IS

E

D _2

9+

(C P

T _I

M P

O R

T

G D

T

/1

/1

4:

C

:\U S

E R

S \P

U B

LI

C

\D O

C U

M E

N T

S \B

E N

T

LE

Y \G

IN

T

\P R

O

JE

C T

S \3

1-

\3

6.

G

P J

Logger: D. Hutzenbiler

Datum: NAD83

Sheet 3 of 4

Station:

Offset:

177 + 00 33 ft L

System: MT S.P. (E)

Driller: C. Larsen

Project:

Elevation Source:

RPA Survey

Date Started:

10/14/14

Project Number:

14-3206G

UPN:

Date Finished:

10/16/14

Rig: CME 75HT Hammer: Auto Boring Diameter:

9"

Drilling Fluid:

None Abandonment Method:

Backfilled with Cuttings

Old Highway 2 - Malta Boring Location Coordinates

N: 1505182.203 ft E: 2388409.746 ft

Top of Boring Elevation: 2261.6 ft

After Drilling: 8.5 ft (2253.1 ft), Augers Out

Water Level Observations Remarks:

After Drilling: 8.0 ft (2253.6 ft), Augers In

During

1022254

UCS: 42.6 psi

14 - 15 - 13

36 - 50/0.3ft

13 - 30 - 43

10 - 19 - 29

10 - 23 - 29

17 - 30 - 45

Silty GRAVEL with sand continued.

CLAYSTONE, dark gray, fine grained, thinly bedded, very soft field hardness. moderately to highly weathered.

Boring Depth: 120.5 ft, Elevation: 2141.1 ft

106.0 2155.6

120.5 2141.1

Township, Range, and Section:

30N 30E 12 - CDC

LOG OF BORING

L it h o lo g y

(p cf

O pe ra tio n

Sa m pl e

Ty pe

R ec ov er y

D D

-2

P L

L L

M C

) Remarks and

Other Tests

B lo w C o u n t

R Q

D

Location Source:

RPA Survey

Material Description

Depth (ft)

Elev.

(ft)

2161.6

2156.6

2151.6

2146.6

2141.6

Depth (ft)

Elev.

(ft)

(2

M D

T L

O G

O F

B O

R

IN

G

M D

T _R

E V

IS

E

D _2

9+

(C P

T _I

M P

O R

T

G D

T

/1

/1

4:

C

:\U S

E R

S \P

U B

LI

C

\D O

C U

M E

N T

S \B

E N

T

LE

Y \G

IN

T

\P R

O

JE

C T

S \3

1-

\3

6.

G

P J

Logger: D. Hutzenbiler

Datum: NAD83

Sheet 4 of 4

Station:

Offset:

177 + 00 33 ft L

System: MT S.P. (E)

Driller: C. Larsen

Project:

Elevation Source:

RPA Survey

Date Started:

10/14/14

Project Number:

14-3206G

UPN:

Date Finished:

10/16/14

Rig: CME 75HT Hammer: Auto Boring Diameter:

9"

Drilling Fluid:

None Abandonment Method:

Backfilled with Cuttings

Old Highway 2 - Malta Boring Location Coordinates

N: 1505182.203 ft E: 2388409.746 ft

Top of Boring Elevation: 2261.6 ft

After Drilling: 8.5 ft (2253.1 ft), Augers Out

Water Level Observations Remarks:

After Drilling: 8.0 ft (2253.6 ft), Augers In

During

Boring ST-12, bedrock core 99.0' to 100.5' Boring ST-12, bedrock core 100.5' to 105.5'

Boring ST-12, bedrock core 105.5' to 110' Boring ST-12, bedrock core 105.5' to 118.5'

Boring ST-12, bedrock core 118.5' to 120.5'

Appendix 3

SK Geotechnical Corp Jan 16 2015 Old Hwy 2-Malta, HP 14x89, Abutment 1

Gain/Loss 1 at Shaft and Toe 1.000 / 1.000 GRLWEAP Version 2010

D ep th (f t)

0 100 200 300 400

Blow Count (blows/ft)

D ep th (f t)

0 120 240 360 480

Ult. Capacity (kips)

0 10 20 30 40

Tension (ksi)

0 10 20 30 40

Comp. Stress (ksi)

0 4 8 12 16

Stroke (ft)

0 5 10 15 20

ENTHRU (kips-ft)

GRLWEAP Version 2010Old Hwy 2-Malta, HP 14x89, Abutment 1

Gain/Loss 1 at Shaft and Toe 1.000 / 1.000

Ultimate End Blow Comp. Tension Depth Capacity Friction Bearing Count Stress Stress Stroke ENTHRU ft kips kips kips blows/ft ksi ksi ft kips-ft

5.0 3.6 0.4 3.2 0.0 0.000 0.000 10.27 0.0

10.0 4.8 1.6 3.2 0.0 0.000 0.000 10.27 0.0

15.0 6.7 3.5 3.2 0.0 0.000 0.000 10.27 0.0

20.0 30.1 7.1 23.0 2.2 10.491 -3.034 6.73 18.0

25.0 21.1 11.6 9.6 1.5 4.559 -0.620 6.19 17.4

30.0 29.9 18.1 11.8 2.3 10.452 -2.953 6.72 17.6

35.0 38.1 26.3 11.8 3.3 13.369 -4.484 7.10 16.8

40.0 40.3 33.9 6.4 3.7 14.205 -5.017 7.22 16.7

45.0 47.2 40.8 6.4 4.6 15.693 -5.597 7.48 16.4

50.0 65.4 47.7 17.7 7.1 17.796 -5.483 7.94 15.4

55.0 219.1 54.0 165.1 39.9 24.579 -1.643 9.77 15.1

60.0 226.6 61.5 165.1 42.2 24.670 -1.573 9.80 15.1

65.0 235.6 70.5 165.1 44.9 24.775 -1.399 9.84 15.0

70.0 246.3 81.2 165.1 48.1 24.897 -1.051 9.89 15.1

75.0 278.8 101.9 176.9 58.7 25.308 -0.886 10.08 15.5

80.0 302.4 125.6 176.9 67.3 25.770 -0.783 10.27 15.9

85.0 274.1 153.2 120.8 60.0 25.276 -0.686 10.10 15.3

90.0 303.6 182.8 120.8 72.2 25.702 -0.308 10.27 15.7

95.0 367.7 214.4 153.3 109.3 25.936 -0.226 10.38 16.0

100.0 252.7 231.1 21.6 55.2 25.073 -1.980 10.04 14.9

101.0 254.6 233.0 21.6 56.1 25.054 -2.349 10.04 14.8

102.0 251.2 234.7 16.5 54.7 25.004 -3.178 10.03 14.8

103.0 252.6 236.1 16.5 54.7 25.031 -3.649 10.04 14.9

104.0 254.0 237.5 16.5 55.1 25.022 -4.042 10.04 14.8

105.0 255.5 238.9 16.5 55.1 25.017 -4.482 10.05 14.8

106.0 256.9 240.4 16.5 55.1 25.052 -4.891 10.05 14.9

107.0 299.6 243.7 55.9 72.2 25.295 -1.595 10.17 15.2

108.0 304.8 248.9 55.9 73.6 25.502 -1.576 10.27 15.5

109.0 310.0 254.2 55.9 76.2 25.514 -1.546 10.27 15.5

110.0 315.3 259.4 55.9 79.1 25.512 -1.478 10.27 15.4

111.0 320.5 264.6 55.9 82.2 25.507 -1.168 10.27 15.4

112.0 368.3 271.7 96.5 117.9 25.466 -0.829 10.27 15.4

113.0 377.3 280.8 96.5 127.5 25.460 -0.805 10.27 15.4

114.0 386.3 289.8 96.5 137.9 25.467 -0.767 10.27 15.4

115.0 395.4 298.8 96.5 149.5 25.426 -0.711 10.27 15.4

116.0 404.4 307.9 96.5 162.7 25.418 -0.642 10.27 15.4

117.0 413.4 316.9 96.5 177.6 25.423 -0.576 10.27 15.4

118.0 422.5 325.9 96.5 195.0 25.401 -0.535 10.27 15.4

119.0 431.5 335.0 96.5 214.3 25.364 -0.534 10.27 15.4

120.0 440.5 344.0 96.5 236.9 25.352 -0.522 10.27 15.4

Total Continuous Driving Time 138.00 minutes; Total Number of Blows 5120

Old Highway 2,HP14x89, Abutment 2

Gain/Loss 1 at Shaft and Toe 1.000 / 1.000 GRLWEAP Version 2010

D ep th (f t)

0 40 80 120 160

Blow Count (blows/ft)

D ep th (f t)

0 100 200 300 400

Ult. Capacity (kips)

0 10 20 30 40

Tension (ksi)

0 10 20 30 40

Comp. Stress (ksi)

0 4 8 12 16

Stroke (ft)

0 5 10 15 20

ENTHRU (kips-ft)

GRLWEAP Version 2010Old Highway 2,HP14x89, Abutment 2

Gain/Loss 1 at Shaft and Toe 1.000 / 1.000

Ultimate End Blow Comp. Tension Depth Capacity Friction Bearing Count Stress Stress Stroke…