EE095086_CNC_Pond-Area_Report - GEO Tech.pdf

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

REPORT

National Cemetery

Section “L” – Additional Columbariums

Chattanooga, Tennessee

December 22, 2009

PREPARED FOR:

Anderson Engineering of Minnesota, LLC 13605 1st Avenue North Suite 100 Plymouth, Minnesota 55441

PREPARED BY:

AQUATERRA ENGINEERING, LLC

A TERRACON COMPANY

Scottie L. Barrentine, P.E.

Project Engineer

Derek L. Hodnett, P.E., P.G.

Senior Geotechnical Engineer

Aquaterra File No. EE095086

Aquaterra Engineering, LLC · 4521 Bonny Oaks Drive · Chattanooga, TN 37416

Tel. 423.499.6111 · Fax 423.499.8099

P.O. Box 22575 Chattanooga, Tennessee 37422 ● 4521 Bonny Oaks Drive Chattanooga, Tennessee 37416 Office: 423.499.6111 ● Fax: 423.499.8099 ● Web: www.aquaterraeng.com

Atlanta, GA 770.924.9799

Baton Rouge, LA 225.344.6052

Chattanooga, TN 423.499.6111

Jackson, MS 601.956.4467

Mobile, AL 251.443.5374

EE095086

December 22, 2009

Mr. Michael B. Brandvold, P.E.

Anderson Engineering of Minnesota, LLC 13605 1st Avenue North Suite 100 Plymouth, Minnesota 55441

RE: Geotechnical Engineering Report National Cemetery – Section “L” – Additional Columbariums

Dear Mr. Brandvold:

We have completed the geotechnical investigation of the National Cemetery - section “L” in Chattanooga, Tennessee. This work was authorized by approval of our proposal dated November 6, 2009.

The attached report provides detailed discussion of the proposed additional columbariums construction. Section “L” is addressed within the report in regards to the results of our field and laboratory explorations and evaluation of the subsurface conditions, with respect to available project characteristics.

We appreciate the opportunity to assist you with this project. Please call if you have any questions or if we can assist you in any way.

Sincerely, AQUATERRA ENGINEERING, LLC

Scottie L. Barrentine, P.E. Derek L. Hodnett, P.E., P.G.

Project Engineer Senior Geotechnical Engineer slbarrentine@terracon.com dlhodnett@terracon.com

Geotechnical Engineering Report National Cemetery – Section L Columbariums

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Scope

1.2 Procedures

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

3.0 SITE CONDITIONS

3.1 Physical Setting

3.2 Geologic Setting

3.3 Soil Conditions

3.4 Bedrock Conditions

3.5 Groundwater Conditions

4.0 SECTION DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS

4.1 Construction Considerations

4.2 Karst Activity Considerations

5.0 SITE PREPARATION

5.1 Clearing and Stripping

5.2 Planning and Drainage Control

5.3 Proof-Rolling and Expected Mitigation of Unsuitable Materials

5.4 Fill Materials, Placement and Compaction

5.5 Protection of Bearing Surfaces

5.6 Excavations

6.0 FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Shallow Foundations

6.1.1 Bearing Stratum/Depth

6.1.2 Bearing Capacities

6.1.3 Expected Movements

6.2 Slab on Grade

7.0 QUALITY CONSIDERATIONS

7.1 Review of Plans and Specifications

7.2 Geotechnical Engineer-of-Record

7.3 Construction Quality Testing and Consulting

8.0 LIMITATIONS

FIGURES

Figure 1 – Topographic Site Plan Figure 2 - Boring Location Plan – Section “L” Figure 3 - Foundation Design and Construction – Columbariums

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Description of Field and Laboratory Procedures Soil Boring Logs Soil Boring Log Legend and Terms

Appendix B - Laboratory Data

Chattanooga, Tennessee

EE095086

1.0 INTRODUCTION

In an effort to facilitate planning and design efforts for new columbariums for the National Cemetery in Chattanooga, Tennessee, Anderson Engineering of Minnesota retained Aquaterra Engineering, LLC (Aquaterra) to provide a geotechnical investigation of the proposed site to explore the subsurface conditions.

This report provides a description of the information obtained during the exploration, results of laboratory testing, and our recommendations for foundation design and site preparation.

The property is shown on Figure 1, Site Vicinity Plan.

1.1 Scope

The scope of this geotechnical investigation is based upon our understanding of the possible future construction as described by Mr. Michael Brandvold, P.E. with Anderson Engineering of Minnesota and our general knowledge of subsurface conditions in the area. The purpose of this geotechnical investigation was to develop an understanding of the subsurface conditions to facilitate site planning, site preparation, and foundation recommendations. The geotechnical investigation conducted for this project included:

• visiting the project site and documenting physical conditions pertinent to the geotechnical exploration;

• drilling and sampling thirteen (13) soil borings by standard penetration tests (SPT) (approximate boring locations are shown on Figure 2, Boring Location Plan);

• determining index and engineering properties of selected soil samples by means of geotechnical laboratory testing; and

• preparing this report to present our findings of the investigation, along with preliminary recommendations for site suitability and site preparation.

1.2 Procedures

The investigation followed procedures established by our firm as routine for geotechnical studies of this nature. Sampling and analyses conducted in general accordance with relevant guidelines by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) with exceptions provided in Appendix A. Appendix A describes the field and laboratory procedures followed during this geotechnical study.

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

The following paragraphs present the project information that was made available to us at the time this report was prepared. If the information herein is incorrect or if the columbarium design or location changes significantly, please contact the project geotechnical engineer (signatory) so that our analysis and recommendations can be re-evaluated.

Based on the information provided by Anderson Engineering of Minnesota, the project will consist of the addition of columbariums for columbarium niches. Columbarium construction will likely consist of free standing, precast reinforced concrete units with heights not exceeding 6.5 feet and widths of approximately 3.5 feet. The design of the Columbariums requires cast in place concrete foundations. Very little grading activity is anticipated during the construction of the columbariums.

Attached Figure 1 provides an aerial view of the section layout for the national cemetery site.

The highlighted section “L” is being considered for columbarium locations.

3.0 SITE CONDITIONS

The highlighted section “L”, as represented in Figure 2, is proposed for the construction of columbariums. The following sections summarize our findings and observations relative to this section.

3.1 Physical Setting

The topography of the section at the time of the investigation was relatively level with a gentle slope to the southwest. At the time of the investigation, the section was covered with mown grass, sparse trees and foliage. The majority of the section was open, grassed space.

Section K borders the section to the east and an existing pond borders the section to the west. Surface water drainage was generally fair to good across the area.

3.2 Geologic Setting

The Chattanooga area is located within the Valley and Ridge physiographic province. The province is comprised of sedimentary sequences that were deposited and faulted wholly within the Paleozoic Era. According to the publication Geologic Map of the Chattanooga Quadrangle, published by the Tennessee Department of Environmental and Conservation Division of Geology in 1964, the geologic underlying formation is Cambrian and Ordovician aged Knox Group, Undifferentiated. This geologic formation consists of dolomite and minor limestone, very siliceous, light to dark gray, fine to coarse-grained and thin to thickly bedded, weathering to cherty rubble.

Limestone rock outcroppings north of section L, indicate that severe differential weathering and karst activity has likely taken place within the geologic formation. This weathering and karst activity has resulted in deep slots within the bedrock and pinnacle formations.

3.3 Soil Conditions

The thirteen (13) SPT borings performed for the exploration in section “L” encountered fairly consistent conditions. Borings L-1, L-4, L-5, L-6 and L-11 generally encountered brown silty clay (USCS Classification – CL) with chert and limestone gravel from the existing ground surface until boring termination at 10 feet below the existing ground surface (bgs). However, boring L-4 encountered approximately 2.5 feet of light gray limestone and chert gravel from

3.5 feet bgs to 6 feet bgs. Borings L-2, L-8, L-9, L-10, L-12 and L-13 generally encountered 2.5 feet to 7.5 feet of brown silty clay (CL) with chert underlain by brown clay (CH) with chert gravel until boring termination at 10 feet bgs. Borings L-3 and L-7 encountered 3.5 feet to 5 feet of brown clay (CH) underlain by brown silty clay (CL) with limestone gravel to boring termination at 10 feet bgs. The soil boring logs, provided in Appendix A, provide details of the conditions encountered and selected field and selected laboratory data collected. Appendix B provides details of the laboratory data collected.

3.4 Bedrock Conditions

Bedrock was not encountered in any of the thirteen borings for section “L”; however, based on observance of bedrock and borings performed in adjacent sections, bedrock in section “L” likely consists of pinnacle formations. Due to the nature of the geology, steep pinnacles could be located in any portion of the section.

3.5 Groundwater Conditions

As described in Appendix A, the soil borings were augered without introduction of drilling fluid. Groundwater was encountered in test boring L-4 at a depth of 8 feet bgs. Temporary piezometers were installed in borings L-1, L-4, L-5, L-7 and L-9 to allow sufficient time for the groundwater to stabilize. Following a 24 hour stabilization period the depth to groundwater was measured in each of the five borings. Depth to groundwater ranged from 6.3 feet in L-4 to 8.29 feet in L-1.

Groundwater is not expected to impact excavations and fill operations; however it should be noted that groundwater levels will vary with changes in rainfall and other seasonal variations.

Depth to groundwater should be verified prior to excavation in these areas.

4.0 SECTION DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS

The following paragraphs summarize items to be considered in the development of section “L” for columbarium design and construction.

4.1 Construction Considerations

Excavation for the columbarium construction and foundation installations would not necessarily be expected based on the results of the exploration in this area. Although bedrock was not encountered in any of the thirteen borings performed in section “L”, observed conditions and experience with this geologic formation have shown the surface of the rock to be irregular. Consequently, pinnacles and boulders could be encountered in areas between boring locations. Hard rock removal techniques would likely be required for excavation of bedrock if encountered. It is recommended a small contingency be made for hard rock excavation.

The excavations required for this project will stand for a short period of time, but will deteriorate. All excavations should be made and kept in compliance with the U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations (29 CFR Part 1926).

4.2 Karst Activity Considerations

As discussed in the geologic conditions, the parent bedrock material underlying the site is comprised of sedimentary carbonate rock; therefore, there exists a risk of future sinkhole activity at the site. Previous topographic surveys from 1994 of the site indicate an ‘active area” in the southeast corner of the section. Borings in the vicinity of the indicated area did not encounter any apparent void areas or collapse soils zones. With excavations for columbarium construction, existing soil arches could be exposed or weakened until failure occurs. Further examination of the area for karst activity potential could be evaluated by geophysical means if the karst risk is desired to be further determined.

5.0 SITE PREPARATION

Proper site preparation is critical to the performance of the foundation system and for the overall facility. This section provides recommendations for site drainage, clearing, excavations and fill placement that could be needed to complete site earthwork.

5.1 Clearing and Stripping

The majority of the site was covered by grass and slight topsoil. Topsoil and other soils containing objectionable materials should be stripped prior to construction. Loose/soft soil present during stripping should also be removed. Objectionable materials should not be reused as backfill within structural fill areas. The stripping of soils should be documented during the construction.

5.2 Planning and Drainage Control

The soils at the site rapidly lose strength with increasing moisture content. The soils at the proposed bearing elevation will be highly sensitive to moisture changes. Proper site drainage should be maintained during construction and repeated wheel loadings during wet periods should be avoided. Repeated wheel loading should be avoided on the subgrade elevation of the building and could result in unwanted undercutting of the building pad.

If possible, the site work should take place during the dry season of the year to reduce the potential for construction problems associated with increased soil moisture content and surface water drainage. Regardless of the weather, proper drainage should be established and maintained during and after earthwork operations to minimize wet weather delays and to reduce accumulation of moisture in the soils. Proper surface water drainage should be provided for and maintained after construction to rapidly remove stormwater from the site.

Protection of the site should include the construction of temporary ditches, berms or other surface water diversion devices in order to divert water away from and not across the construction area. All water diversions away from the site should comply with applicable ordinances and stormwater pollution prevention plans (SWPPP).

5.3 Proof-Rolling and Expected Mitigation of Unsuitable Materials

The areas of the proposed construction should be proof-rolled after completion of any clearing and stripping and prior to the placement of new fill material. This proof-rolling should be accomplished with a loaded, tandem-axle dump truck with a total weight of between 15 and 20 tons. After each pass, the truck should be repositioned laterally about ½-truck width before making the next pass. After the proof-rolling, repeated subgrade exposure to heavy truck traffic should be avoided. The geotechnical engineer or his representative should be present during proof-rolling to delineate areas of soft or yielding soil.

Any areas that yield or “pump” under the proof-rolling or under subsequent construction traffic should be mitigated prior to placement of controlled fill or pavement materials. The type of mitigation will be based on the severity of the condition and its position relative to the final grade. Should mitigation be required, the project geotechnical engineer should prescribe and direct appropriate mitigation. Possible mitigation techniques could include:

• Processing to Remove Excess Moisture. With this technique, the upper 6 to 12 inches of soil is disked or aerated to process the soil and lower the moisture content. The soil is aerated by opening the ground surface and turning the soil several times a day with construction equipment.

Generally, several days will be required to reduce the moisture content. Care must be taken to seal the surface in the event inclement weather is forecast.

• Overexcavation and Backfill. With this technique, the wet, unstable soils are removed and replaced with relatively select fill material that is properly placed and compacted. Where soft soil persists to a depth greater than 3 feet below the planned subgrade elevation, other mitigation measures can be considered to create a stable subgrade for paving.

• Geosynthetics Reinforcement. If unsuitable soil is found across a wide area to be paved, it could be economical to use a geotextile or geogrid to stabilize the subgrade.

These would allow for lesser amounts of undercutting and or base stone. The engineer should be consulted prior to implementing a stabilization program.

Based on the conditions observed in the borings, widespread mitigation of unsuitable soils is not anticipated. Overexcavation should be directed by a representative of this firm working under the direction of the project geotechnical engineer.

5.4 Fill Materials, Placement and Compaction

Soil fill materials imported to the site for use as fill should consist of lean clay (CL), or clayey sand (SC) soils, free of excessive organics or other deleterious matter. The fill should be placed in lifts, graded to provide a uniform loose lift not exceeding a thickness of 8 inches.

The surface of each preceding, compacted lift should be lightly scarified to provide adequate bonding between lifts. Sheepsfoot compaction equipment should be used in the compaction effort. Off-site materials should have a maximum dry density as determined by Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Standard Effort, ASTM D 698, or “Standard Proctor” of at least 95 pounds per cubic foot, a plasticity index less than 30, and a soaked California Bearing Ratio (CBR) value of at least 5.

The moisture content during compaction should be maintained within two percent of its optimum as determined by the Standard Proctor. The minimum compaction requirements are a function of the future use of the area. These requirements are as follows:

• Structural Fill: (beneath footings, building pads, or parking/driveway areas) at least 95 percent of its maximum density as determined by the Standard Proctor, except that the upper 1-ft should be compacted to at least 98 percent of the same standard, and

• Grading Fill: (outside of the areas listed above) at least 90 percent of its maximum density as determined by the Standard Proctor.

5.5 Protection of Bearing Surfaces

The bearing surface should be protected against water infiltration by maintaining surface water drainage away from the building pad. A thin layer of lean concrete can be used to form a “mud mat” to protect the foundation bearing surface if the excavations will be left open for an extended period of time or during wet weather conditions. Footing excavations should be checked for bearing capacity prior to placement of the mud mat.

Depending on bearing elevations, the soils at the bearing elevation of the buildings will be very susceptible to moisture-induced movements and water softening. Care must be taken to protect the bearing surface.

5.6 Excavations

The excavations required for this project will stand for a short period of time, but will deteriorate rapidly. All excavations should be made and kept in compliance with the U.S.

Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations (29 CFR Part 1926).

6.0 FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

The following sections provide information on geotechnical related elements necessary for design. These elements include foundations, seismic, and other considerations necessary for successful project design.

6.1 Shallow Foundations

The loadings for the proposed building structure should be sufficiently supported by a shallow foundation system when the site is prepared in accordance with Section 5 of this report. The following paragraphs provide recommendations for shallow foundation construction.

Additional design information is provided on Figure 3.

6.1.1 Bearing Stratum/Depth

The foundations for the proposed structure may bear entirely within the onsite soils visually identified as stiff to very stiff, silty clay, or new controlled fill. Controlled fill must be placed in accordance with the recommendations of Section 5 of this report in order to achieve the required bearing capacity.

In addition to the proper bearing materials, minimum footing depths are recommended.

Footings should bear at least 18 inches below finished exterior grade or at least 18 inches below the base of the finished floor slab (whichever is the lowest elevation) when bearing in the stiff to very stiff onsite soils or engineered fill.

The soils which form the bearing stratum are susceptible to softening when exposed to water.

The provisions for site drainage which are cited in Section 5 of this report must be followed to maintain existing shear strength conditions.

6.1.2 Bearing Capacities

Footings constructed in the onsite residual soils, when prepared in accordance with the provisions of Section 6.1.1, should be sized based upon the allowable bearing capacities as follows for the various bearing conditions:

ALLOWABLE BEARING CAPACITIES

Foundation Type Allowable Bearing Capacity (psf)

Individual Footings 3,500

Continuous Footings 3,000

The bearing values provided include an adequate factor of safety against bearing capacity failure and take into consideration the weight of concrete and soil below grade. In designs for very transient conditions, the allowable bearing capacity values, as provided, can be increased by 33%.

Minimum footing widths are recommended to reduce the potential for localized shear failure and to accommodate minor inconsistencies in the soil. Continuous footings and square footings should be at least 24 inches wide.

Soils encountered not meeting the required bearing capacity should be undercut and over-poured with concrete or flowable fill (lean concrete), or backfilled with compacted, dense-graded base stone.

6.1.3 Expected Movements

Even when designed with adequate safety factors against bearing capacity failure, foundation and floor slab movements will occur as a result of elastic strain and consolidation of the underlying clayey soils. Settlements result from immediate deflection (essentially, upon load application) and consolidation (over an extended time period) in response to stress increase.

In addition, swelling and shrinkage of plastic soils can occur as the moisture content of the soils increase and decrease, respectively.

With increased structural loads and fill soil loads, total settlement is expected to be less than 1 inch, and differential settlements are not expected to exceed ½-inch. Proper construction joint spacing is essential for masonry walls and concrete slabs. The settlement estimates herein are contingent upon the site being prepared as described in Section 5 of this report.

Continuous footings should contain adequate reinforcing steel to allow for differences in bearing materials and consistencies.

6.2 Slab on Grade

Soil supported concrete slabs-on-grade may be designed based on a modulus of subgrade reaction (K) of 125 pci for bearing on stiff, silty or sandy clay. A gravel layer at least 4 inches thick should be placed immediately below the slab. A vapor barrier should be used where finished interiors will be constructed.

7.0 QUALITY CONSIDERATIONS

This report is issued as a design tool. Subsequent designs may alter the current assumptions regarding the site construction and the recommendations provided in this report may not be applicable. This report contains recommendations for design and construction practices related to site preparation, shallow foundations, and pavement construction. A number of recommendations have been made in this report, which assume that the conditions required for the design have been provided. Certain quality considerations are essential to the satisfactory construction and performance of this project.

7.1 Review of Plans and Specifications

During the final design, questions may arise which require further review of the site conditions, clarification of the recommendations provided in this report, or the development of more specific recommendations. We are available to resolve any questions that may arise or provide clarifications of the recommendations that are presented in this report.

Aquaterra should be provided with a copy of the final plans and specifications prior to bidding so that the project geotechnical engineer can review the construction documents. This review will ensure that the recommendations of this report have been properly reflected in the design documents.

7.2 Geotechnical Engineer-of-Record

The construction process is an integral design component with respect to the geotechnical aspects of the project. Because geotechnical engineering is an inexact science due to the variability of the natural processes and because we sample only a small portion of the soils affecting the performance of the proposed structure, unanticipated or changed conditions can be disclosed during grading and foundation construction. Proper geotechnical observation and testing during construction is required to allow the geotechnical engineer the opportunity to verify assumptions that were made during the design process. Therefore, Aquaterra should be retained during the construction to observe compliance with design concepts and geotechnical recommendations and to recommend design changes in the event that the subsurface conditions or methods of construction differ from those assumed during the preparation of this report.

Should testing and observation services or additional recommendations be provided by others during the construction phase, Aquaterra will cease to be the Geotechnical Engineer-of- Record.

7.3 Construction Quality Testing and Consulting

This report contains recommendations for construction practices related to site preparation, and shallow foundations. Failure to comply with the recommendations provided in this report could create conditions which are detrimental to the success of the project and could result in an inferior product. Therefore, documentation of the contractors’ compliance with these practices is a necessity.

Construction Quality Control (the collection of field and laboratory data to document conformance with specifications) and Quality Assurance (the collection and evaluation of test results and frequencies to confirm that the objectives of the construction are being met) are an integral part of the successful construction project. These quality control and assurance functions must be provided by Aquaterra as the Geotechnical Engineer-of Record.

Subsequent to our review of the project plans and specifications, Aquaterra should provide a construction quality-testing plan. This plan would address testing types, methodologies, frequencies and quality assurance activities.

8.0 LIMITATIONS

The analyses and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the assumption that the soil borings made for this investigation represent the soil and groundwater conditions throughout the site. Variations in soil or groundwater conditions may occur between or away from the boring locations. If conditions different from those described in Section 3 are encountered or are expected, this office should be promptly notified so that the effects of the varying conditions can be determined, and any necessary changes to these analyses and recommendations can be made.

This investigation program and these recommendations are intended for specific application to the project generally described in Section 2 at the site described in Section 3. The data or the analyses and recommendations presented in this report are not necessarily applicable for any other project or location. If the nature of the project should change from the descriptions provided in Section 2, these recommendations should be reevaluated.

The only warranty made in connection with the services provided is that we have used that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar conditions by reputable members of our profession practicing in the same or similar locality. No other warranty is expressed or implied.

FIGURES

Site Location t et

B ro ad S tr ee t

M ar ke t S tr ee

Topographic Site PlanUSGS Topographic Note:

This figure copied from USGS 7 5 minute Quadrangle Maps:

Quadrangle Location

N Figure No.Engineer: SLB

Drawn: JCS

Proj. No.: 0340900086 1

Chattanooga National Cemetery 1200 Bailey Avenue

Chattanooga, Tennessee

7.5 minute Quadrangle Maps:

Chattanooga, Tennessee Scale: 1” = 2,000’ USGS DOQQ Note:

This figure copied from USGS:

Scale: NTS

Square Continuous

Summary of Bearing Capacity 3,500 psf 3,000 psf

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

A llo w ab le B ea rin g C ap ac ity (p sf

Ratio of Footing Length, L to Width, B (L/B)

Compressive Load, Pc

Backfill Thickness

Tb (ft)

Footing Thickness

Tf (ft)

Backfill Soils

Footing Depth (Df) (ft)

Footing Width, B (ft)

Uplift Load, Pu

Backfill Thickness

Tb (ft)

Footing Thickness

Tf (ft)

Backfill Soils

Footing Depth (Df) (ft)

Footing Width, B (ft) αs

Notes Regarding Bearing Stratum and Depth In order to achieve the bearing capacity values noted on the adjacent chart, the footings should bear within residual stiff to very stiff silty clay (CL) or fill soils placed in accordance with Section 5.0 of the report. Mixed rock/ soil bearing conditions should not be used within an individual columbarium unit.

Footings should bear at a depth of at least 18 inches below finished grade.

The following precautions are recommended to protect the bearing surfaces from degradation:

Verify that the excavations are completely within the material described above as the bearing stratum and remove and replace any unacceptable soils .

Provide positive drainage away from the foundations, both during and after construction, Avoid excavations during inclement weather and place concrete within the excavations within 24 hours after completion of the excavations, Remove any free water in the excavation prior to placing concrete, Place a “mudmat” of lean concrete to seal the bearing stratum in the event wet conditions are experienced or expected and

Minimize traffic in excavations to only that necessary to place the steel and concrete for the footings.

Shallow Foundation Settlements Foundations that are designed for the construction type noted in Section 2, and proportioned for the bearing at pressures as noted on the adjacent graph, are expected to settle on the order of one inch total. Differential movements on the order of 3/4-inch over 50 feet are possible.

This estimate of settlement is approximate based upon our experience with

Concrete Footing

Concrete Footing

Allowable Uplift Resistance qu (lbs) = W + αs W = Weight of soil and concrete W = B2 x (Tf x 83 + Tb x 58) αs: Adhesion along perimeter of footing αs = 4B x Tf x 500

Passive Pressure Component, Pp (lbs) = σp x Tf x L where:

Adhesion Component, αb

= B x L x 500

NOTE: αb = 0 if uplift loading is present

Engr: SLB Fig. No.

340900086 3

Chattanooga, Tennessee

Design and Construction Shallow Foundations

National Cemetary - Section L σp = 58(Tb+Tf /2)+1000 L = Footing Length (ft)

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

A llo w ab le B ea rin g C ap ac ity (p sf

Ratio of Footing Length, L to Width, B (L/B)

Compressive Load, Pc

Backfill Thickness

Tb (ft)

Footing Thickness

Tf (ft)

Backfill Soils

Footing Depth (Df) (ft)

Footing Width, B (ft)

Uplift Load, Pu

Backfill Thickness

Tb (ft)

Footing Thickness

Tf (ft)

Backfill Soils

Footing Depth (Df) (ft)

Footing Width, B (ft) αs

Backfill Thickness

Tb (ft)

Footing Thickness

Tf (ft)

Backfill Soils

Footing Depth (Df) (ft)

Footing Width, B (ft)

Lateral Load, PL σp αb

Notes Regarding Bearing Stratum and Depth In order to achieve the bearing capacity values noted on the adjacent chart, the footings should bear within residual stiff to very stiff silty clay (CL) or fill soils placed in accordance with Section 5.0 of the report. Mixed rock/ soil bearing conditions should not be used within an individual columbarium unit.

Footings should bear at a depth of at least 18 inches below finished grade.

The following precautions are recommended to protect the bearing surfaces from degradation:

Verify that the excavations are completely within the material described above as the bearing stratum and remove and replace any unacceptable soils .

Provide positive drainage away from the foundations, both during and after construction, Avoid excavations during inclement weather and place concrete within the excavations within 24 hours after completion of the excavations, Remove any free water in the excavation prior to placing concrete, Place a “mudmat” of lean concrete to seal the bearing stratum in the event wet conditions are experienced or expected and

Minimize traffic in excavations to only that necessary to place the steel and concrete for the footings.

Shallow Foundation Settlements Foundations that are designed for the construction type noted in Section 2, and proportioned for the bearing at pressures as noted on the adjacent graph, are expected to settle on the order of one inch total. Differential movements on the order of 3/4-inch over 50 feet are possible.

This estimate of settlement is approximate, based upon our experience with similar soils in this geologic setting. A more detailed calculation of settlements using consolidation test data would be necessary to more accurately predict the settlements that will occur.

Shrink/Swell Potential The soils that form the bearing stratum are moderately plastic clays. Movements due to the shrink/swell potential is expected to be slight.

This estimate of shrink/swell is approximate based upon our experience with similar soils in this geologic setting. A more detailed calculation of shrink/swell using swell test data would be necessary to more accurately predict the movements that will occur.

Concrete Footing

Concrete Footing

Concrete Footing

APPENDIX A

DESCRIPTION OF FIELD AND LABORATORY PROCEDURES

SOIL BORING LOGS

SOIL BORING LOG LEGEND AND TERMS

APPENDIX A

DESCRIPTION OF FIELD AND LABORATORY PROCEDURES

This geotechnical exploration was conducted utilizing standard procedures developed by Aquaterra Engineering, LLC for studies of this nature. The following paragraphs describe the field and laboratory procedures utilized. Soil boring logs that provide data collected and a description of soil and groundwater conditions are also included. The appendix also provides legends that describe the terms and symbols used in the boring logs.

FIELD INVESTIGATION

The field investigation was conducted on from November 12, 2009. It included a site reconnaissance to document site characteristics pertinent to the geotechnical investigation and to conduct a soil exploration program. The senior field crew representative documented the information collected during the field investigation

Site Reconnaissance

The field crew walked the project site and documented observations that are of significance to the geotechnical investigation. Such observations include: topography, vegetation, trees, drainage, other structures, surface soil conditions, and trafficability.

These observations were reported to the project engineer in the form of field notes. The project engineer reviewed the results of the field reconnaissance with the drill crew subsequent to the field exploration.

Soil Borings

Thirteen soil borings were advanced using a track-mounted soil boring rig at the locations shown on Figure 2. The locations of the borings were determined by measurement from physical features at the site

Soil Boring Advancement. The soil borings were advanced by direct push utilizing Macro-Core 4 foot samplers and 2 ¼ inch hollow stem auger with the drilling rig, removing the auger from the boring and cleaning the cuttings from the auger before sampling or reinserting the auger into the boring. This technique allowed for the observation of soil cuttings and description of soil conditions encountered. This dry auger technique also allowed detection of free groundwater within the boring.

Soil Sampling. The soil sampling program included the collection of disturbed soil samples.

The standard penetration test (SPT) was performed with an automatic drop hammer to collect distributed samples. By driving a 2-in OD split spoon sampler a distance of 18-inches into the soil with blows from a 140 lb hammer falling a distance of 30 inches. (ASTM D 1586). Depths at which split-spoon samples were taken are indicated by two crossed slashes in the "Samples" column of the boring logs. The number of blows required to drive the sampler for each 6-inch increment was recorded. The penetration resistance is the number of blows required to drive the split-spoon sampler the final 12 inches of penetration. Information related to the penetration resistance is presented in the "Field Test Results" column of the boring logs as the number of blows per ft (b/f). These N-values were corrected to the normalized N60 values to account for the efficiencies of the automatic drop hammer.

Groundwater Observations. During the soil boring advancement and sampling operation, observations for free groundwater were made. Information regarding water level observations is recorded in the “groundwater” column on the soil boring logs. Where free water was encountered, the depth of this observation is noted in that column as an open triangle. After encountering free water, boring operations were suspended for several minutes to allow the

National Cemetery – Section L Columbarium water level to rise and stabilize in the bore hole. The water level was again recorded and is illustrated on the attached boring logs as a triangle containing a vertical line.

Boring Abandonment. Upon completion of the field exploration phase of this study, the borings were sealed by backfilling with sand.

4-7-4 11 b/ft

2-3-4 7 b/ft

6-7-6 13 b/ft

7-6-5 8 b/ft

6" TOPSOIL

Stiff, brown SILTY CLAY (CL), with limestone gravel

-- firm with chert below 3.5'

-- stiff below 6'

Boring Terminated at 10 feet

0.5

10.0

Location: See Figure 2

Notes

CLIENT:

STRATA BOUNDARIES MAY NOT BE EXACT

Anderson Engineering

Plymouth, MN

No free water encountered upon drilling.

Water level on 11/17/09 8.2' Water level on 11/30/09 7.9'

Advancement Method

FIELD DATA LABORATORY DATA

S am pl es

G ro un dw at er

Le ve l

Field Test

Results

SHEET 1 OF 1

Groundwater Level Data

No. L- 1

Geotechnical Investigation

Chattanooga National Cemetery

Chattanooga, Tennessee

PROJECT:

Abandonment Method

DESCRIPTION S

tr at a

B re ak D ep th

S oi l T yp e

SOIL BORING LOG

Temporary Piezometer

0-10' 4" Continuous Flight Auger

Depth

(feet)

EE095086

11/12/09

C. Penton

P. Davis

S. Barrentine

FILE:

DATE:

DRILLER:

LOGGED BY:

ENGINEER:

A Q

L O

G E

E

_N A

T

IO

N A

L_ C

E M

E T

E R

Y .G

P J

G O

O G

LE

_A

Q U

A T

E R

R A

_T E

N N

E S

S E

E _W

IT

H

_P H

O T

O S

.G D

T

2/

/0

Undrained Shear

Strength (ksf)

Unit Weight (pcf)

Moist Dry

PI

P la st ic ity In de x

Natural Moisture Content and Atterberg Limits

Moisture Content

Plastic Limit

Liquid Limit

20 40 60 80

19 45

2-3-5 8 b/ft

2-5-7 12 b/ft

4-6-11 17 b/ft

6-10-7 17 b/ft

6" TOPSOIL

Stiff, brown SILTY CLAY (CL), with trace chert

-- with chert gravel below 3.5'

Very stiff, brown CLAY (CH), with chert gravel

Boring Terminated at 10 feet

0.5

5.0

10.0

Location: See Figure 2

Notes

CLIENT:

STRATA BOUNDARIES MAY NOT BE EXACT

Anderson Engineering

Plymouth, MN

No free water encountered upon drilling.

Advancement Method

FIELD DATA LABORATORY DATA

S am pl es

G ro un dw at er

Le ve l

Field Test

Results

SHEET 1 OF 1

Groundwater Level Data

No. L- 2

Geotechnical Investigation

Chattanooga National Cemetery

Chattanooga, Tennessee

PROJECT:

Abandonment Method

DESCRIPTION S

tr at a

B re ak D ep th

S oi l T yp e

SOIL BORING LOG

Backfilled with cuttings and bentonite upon completion

0-10' 4" Continuous Flight Auger

Depth

(feet)

EE095086

11/12/09

C. Penton

P. Davis

S. Barrentine

FILE:

DATE:

DRILLER:

LOGGED BY:

ENGINEER:

A Q

L O

G E

E

_N A

T

IO

N A

L_ C

E M

E T

E R

Y .G

P J

G O

O G

LE

_A

Q U

A T

E R

R A

_T E

N N

E S

S E

E _W

IT

H

_P H

O T

O S

.G D

T

2/

/0

Undrained Shear

Strength (ksf)

Unit Weight (pcf)

Moist Dry

PI

P la st ic ity In de x

Natural Moisture Content and Atterberg Limits

Moisture Content

Plastic Limit

Liquid Limit

20 40 60 80

20 55

5-6-11 17 b/ft

5-11-10 21 b/ft

9-5-3 8 b/ft

6-4-9 13 b/ft

6" TOPSOIL

Very stiff, brown SILTY CLAY (CL), with chert gravel

-- with limestone gravel below 3.5'

-- stiff below 6'

-- with limestone gravel below 8.5'

Boring Terminated at 10 feet

0.5

10.0

Location: See Figure 2

Notes

CLIENT:

STRATA BOUNDARIES MAY NOT BE EXACT

Anderson Engineering

Plymouth, MN

No free water encountered upon drilling.

Advancement Method

FIELD DATA LABORATORY DATA

S am pl es

G ro un dw at er

Le ve l

Field Test

Results

SHEET 1 OF 1

Groundwater Level Data

No. L- 3

Geotechnical Investigation

Chattanooga National Cemetery

Chattanooga, Tennessee

PROJECT:

Abandonment Method

DESCRIPTION S

tr at a

B re ak D ep th

S oi l T yp e

SOIL BORING LOG

Backfilled with cuttings and bentonite upon completion

0-10' 4" Continuous Flight Auger

Depth

(feet)

EE095086

11/12/09

C. Penton

P. Davis

S. Barrentine

FILE:

DATE:

DRILLER:

LOGGED BY:

ENGINEER:

A Q

L O

G E

E

_N A

T

IO

N A

L_ C

E M

E T

E R

Y .G

P J

G O

O G

LE

_A

Q U

A T

E R

R A

_T E

N N

E S

S E

E _W

IT

H

_P H

O T

O S

.G D

T

2/

/0

Undrained Shear

Strength (ksf)

Unit Weight (pcf)

Moist Dry

PI

P la st ic ity In de x

Natural Moisture Content and Atterberg Limits

Moisture Content

Plastic Limit

Liquid Limit

20 40 60 80

6-12-13 25 b/ft

10-9-5 14 b/ft

5-7-5 12 b/ft

4-5-3 8 b/ft

6" TOPSOIL

Very stiff, brown SILTY CLAY (CL), with chert gravel

Medium dense, light gray LIMESTONE AND

CHERT GRAVEL

Stiff, brown SILTY CLAY (CL), with limestone gravel

-- with limestone and chert gravel

Boring Terminated at 10 feet

0.5

3.5

6.0

10.0

Location: See Figure 2

Notes

CLIENT:

STRATA BOUNDARIES MAY NOT BE EXACT

Anderson Engineering

Plymouth, MN

Water level upon drilling 8' Water level on 11/17/09 6.54' Water level on 11/30/09 6.81'

Advancement Method

FIELD DATA LABORATORY DATA

S am pl es

G ro un dw at er

Le ve l

Field Test

Results

SHEET 1 OF 1

Groundwater Level Data

No. L- 4

Geotechnical Investigation

Chattanooga National Cemetery

Chattanooga, Tennessee

PROJECT:

Abandonment Method

DESCRIPTION S

tr at a

B re ak D ep th

S oi l T yp e

SOIL BORING LOG

Temporary Piezometer

0-10' 4" Continuous Flight Auger

Depth

(feet)

EE095086

11/12/09

C. Penton

P. Davis

S. Barrentine

FILE:

DATE:

DRILLER:

LOGGED BY:

ENGINEER:

A Q

L O

G E

E

_N A

T

IO

N A

L_ C

E M

E T

E R

Y .G

P J

G O

O G

LE

_A

Q U

A T

E R

R A

_T E

N N

E S

S E

E _W

IT

H

_P H

O T

O S

.G D

T

2/

/0

Undrained Shear

Strength (ksf)

Unit Weight (pcf)

Moist Dry

PI

P la st ic ity In de x

Natural Moisture Content and Atterberg Limits

Moisture Content

Plastic Limit

Liquid Limit

20 40 60 80

20 46

25 47

3-3-4 7 b/ft

2-6-6 12 b/ft

5-4-6 10 b/ft

5-4-7 11 b/ft

6" TOPSOIL

Firm, brown SILTY CLAY (CL), with trace chert

-- stiff with chert gravel below 3.5'

-- with trace chert and limestone fragments below 6'

-- with trace chert below 8.5'

Boring Terminated at 10 feet

0.5

10.0

Location: See Figure 2

Notes

CLIENT:

STRATA BOUNDARIES MAY NOT BE EXACT

Anderson Engineering

Plymouth, MN

No free water encountered upon drilling.

Advancement Method

FIELD DATA LABORATORY DATA

S am pl es

G ro un dw at er

Le ve l

Field Test

Results

SHEET 1 OF 1

Groundwater Level Data

No. L- 5

Geotechnical Investigation

Chattanooga National Cemetery

Chattanooga, Tennessee

PROJECT:

Abandonment Method

DESCRIPTION S

tr at a

B re ak D ep th

S oi l T yp e

SOIL BORING LOG

Backfilled with cuttings and bentonite upon completion

0-10' 4" Continuous Flight Auger

Depth

(feet)

EE095086

11/12/09

C. Penton

P. Davis

S. Barrentine

FILE:

DATE:

DRILLER:

LOGGED BY:

ENGINEER:

A Q

L O

G E

E

_N A

T

IO

N A

L_ C

E M

E T

E R

Y .G

P J

G O

O G

LE

_A

Q U

A T

E R

R A

_T E

N N

E S

S E

E _W

IT

H

_P H

O T

O S

.G D

T

2/

/0

Undrained Shear

Strength (ksf)

Unit Weight (pcf)

Moist Dry

PI

P la st ic ity In de x

Natural Moisture Content and Atterberg Limits

Moisture Content

Plastic Limit

Liquid

3-4-2 6 b/ft

2-4-8 12 b/ft

9-7-6 13 b/ft

3-6-10 16 b/ft

6" TOPSOIL

Firm, brown SILTY CLAY (CL), with trace chert

-- stiff, with chert gravel below 3.5'

-- with limestone fragments below 8.5'

Boring Terminated at 10 feet

0.5

10.0

Location: See Figure 2

Notes

CLIENT:

STRATA BOUNDARIES MAY NOT BE EXACT

Anderson Engineering

Plymouth, MN

No free water encountered upon drilling.

Advancement Method

FIELD DATA LABORATORY DATA

S am pl es

G ro un dw at er

Le ve l

Field Test

Results

SHEET 1 OF 1

Groundwater Level Data

No. L- 6

Geotechnical Investigation

Chattanooga National Cemetery

Chattanooga, Tennessee

PROJECT:

Abandonment Method

DESCRIPTION S

tr at a

B re ak D ep th

S oi l T yp e

SOIL BORING LOG

Backfilled with cuttings and bentonite upon completion

0-10' 4" Continuous Flight Auger

Depth

(feet)

EE095086

11/12/09

C. Penton

P. Davis

S. Barrentine

FILE:

DATE:

DRILLER:

LOGGED BY:

ENGINEER:

A Q

L O

G E

E

_N A

T

IO

N A

L_ C

E M

E T

E R

Y .G

P J

G O

O G

LE

_A

Q U

A T

E R

R A

_T E

N N

E S

S E

E _W

IT

H

_P H

O T

O S

.G D

T

2/

/0

Undrained Shear

Strength (ksf)

Unit Weight (pcf)

Moist Dry

PI

P la st ic ity In de x

Natural Moisture Content and Atterberg Limits

Moisture Content

Plastic Limit

Liquid Limit

20 40 60 80

2-2-11 13 b/ft

6-4-5 9 b/ft

3-9-10 19 b/ft

4-4-7 11 b/ft

6" TOPSOIL

Stiff, brown CLAY (CH), slightly silty

Stiff, brown SILTY CLAY (CL)<<B>

-- with chert gravel below 6'

Stiff, brown CLAY (CH)

Boring Terminated at 10 feet

0.5

3.5

8.5

10.0

Location: See Figure 2

Notes

CLIENT:

STRATA BOUNDARIES MAY NOT BE EXACT

Anderson Engineering

Plymouth, MN

No free water encountered upon drilling.

Water level on 11/17/09 8.01' Water level on 11/30/09 6.37'

Advancement Method

FIELD DATA LABORATORY DATA

S am pl es

G ro un dw at er

Le ve l

Field Test

Results

SHEET 1 OF 1

Groundwater Level Data

No. L- 7

Geotechnical Investigation

Chattanooga National Cemetery

Chattanooga, Tennessee

PROJECT:

Abandonment Method

DESCRIPTION S

tr at a

B re ak D ep th

S oi l T yp e

SOIL BORING LOG

Temporary Piezometer

0-10' 4" Continuous Flight Auger

Depth

(feet)

EE095086

11/12/09

C. Penton

P. Davis

S. Barrentine

FILE:

DATE:

DRILLER:

LOGGED BY:

ENGINEER:

A Q

L O

G E

E

_N A

T

IO

N A

L_ C

E M

E T

E R

Y .G

P J

G O

O G

LE

_A

Q U

A T

E R

R A

_T E

N N

E S

S E

E _W

IT

H

_P H

O T

O S

.G D

T

2/

/0

Undrained Shear

Strength (ksf)

Unit Weight (pcf)

Moist Dry

PI

P la st ic ity In de x

Natural Moisture Content and Atterberg Limits

Moisture Content

Plastic Limit

Liquid

3-3-3 6 b/ft

5-6-8 14 b/ft

5-7-9 16 b/ft

3-4-6 10 b/ft

6" TOPSOIL

Firm, brown SILTY CLAY (CL)

Stiff, brown CLAY (CH), slightly silty, with chert fragments

-- firm below 8.5'

Boring Terminated at 10 feet

0.5

3.5

10.0

Location: See Figure 2

Notes

CLIENT:

STRATA BOUNDARIES MAY NOT BE EXACT

Anderson Engineering

Plymouth, MN

No free water encountered upon drilling.

Advancement Method

FIELD DATA LABORATORY DATA

S am pl es

G ro un dw at er

Le ve l

Field Test

Results

SHEET 1 OF 1

Groundwater Level Data

No. L- 8

Geotechnical Investigation

Chattanooga National Cemetery

Chattanooga, Tennessee

PROJECT:

Abandonment Method

DESCRIPTION S

tr at a

B re ak D ep th

S oi l T yp e

SOIL BORING LOG

Backfilled with cuttings and bentonite upon completion

0-10' 4" Continuous Flight Auger

Depth

(feet)

EE095086

11/12/09

C. Penton

P. Davis

S. Barrentine

FILE:

DATE:

DRILLER:

LOGGED BY:

ENGINEER:

A Q

L O

G E

E

_N A

T

IO

N A

L_ C

E M

E T

E R

Y .G

P J

G O

O G

LE

_A

Q U

A T

E R

R A

_T E

N N

E S

S E

E _W

IT

H

_P H

O T

O S

.G D

T

2/

/0

Undrained Shear

Strength (ksf)

Unit Weight (pcf)

Moist Dry

PI

P la st ic ity In de x

Natural Moisture Content and Atterberg Limits

Moisture Content

Plastic Limit

Liquid Limit

20 40 60 80

21 51

6-6-5 11 b/ft

4-4-9 13 b/ft

6-4-5 9 b/ft

5-4-6 10 b/ft

6" TOPSOIL

Stiff, brown SILTY CLAY (CL), with chert fragments

-- with chert gravel below 3.5'

Stiff, brown CLAY (CH), with trace chert fragments

Boring Terminated at 10 feet

0.5

8.5

10.0

Location: See Figure 2

Notes

CLIENT:

STRATA BOUNDARIES MAY NOT BE EXACT

Anderson Engineering

Plymouth, MN

No free water encountered upon drilling.

Water level on 11/17/09 6.69' Water level on 11/30/09 6.35'

Advancement Method

FIELD DATA LABORATORY DATA

S am pl es

G ro un dw at er

Le ve l

Field Test

Results

SHEET 1 OF 1

Groundwater Level Data

No. L- 9

Geotechnical Investigation

Chattanooga National Cemetery

Chattanooga, Tennessee

PROJECT:

Abandonment Method

DESCRIPTION S

tr at a

B re ak D ep th

S oi l T yp e

SOIL BORING LOG

Temporary Piezometer

0-10' 4" Continuous Flight Auger

Depth

(feet)

EE095086

11/12/09

C. Penton

P. Davis

S. Barrentine

FILE:

DATE:

DRILLER:

LOGGED BY:

ENGINEER:

A Q

L O

G E

E

_N A

T

IO

N A

L_ C

E M

E T

E R

Y .G

P J

G O

O G

LE

_A

Q U

A T

E R

R A

_T E

N N

E S

S E

E _W

IT

H

_P H

O T

O S

.G D

T

2/

/0

Undrained Shear

Strength (ksf)

Unit Weight (pcf)

Moist Dry

PI

P la st ic ity In de x

Natural Moisture Content and Atterberg Limits

Moisture Content

Plastic Limit

Liquid

3-4-6 10 b/ft

4-19-13 32 b/ft

7-8-6 14 b/ft

3-5-8 13 b/ft

6" TOPSOIL

Stiff, brown SILTY CLAY (CL), with chert gravel and fragments

-- very stiff, light gray with limestone and chert below 3.5'

-- stiff with chert fragments and gravel below 6'

Stiff, brown CLAY (CH), slightly silty with chert fragments

Boring Terminated at 10 feet

0.5

8.5

10.0

Location: See Figure 2

Notes

CLIENT:

STRATA BOUNDARIES MAY NOT BE EXACT

Anderson Engineering

Plymouth, MN

No free water encountered upon drilling.

Advancement Method

FIELD DATA LABORATORY DATA

S am pl es

G ro un dw at er

Le ve l

Field Test

Results

SHEET 1 OF 1

Groundwater Level Data

No. L-10

Geotechnical Investigation

Chattanooga National Cemetery

Chattanooga, Tennessee

PROJECT:

Abandonment Method

DESCRIPTION S

tr at a

B re ak D ep th

S oi l T yp e

SOIL BORING LOG

Backfilled with cuttings and bentonite upon completion

0-10' 4" Continuous Flight Auger

Depth

(feet)

EE095086

11/12/09

C. Penton

P. Davis

S. Barrentine

FILE:

DATE:

DRILLER:

LOGGED BY:

ENGINEER:

A Q

L O

G E

E

_N A

T

IO

N A

L_ C

E M

E T

E R

Y .G

P J

G O

O G

LE

_A

Q U

A T

E R

R A

_T E

N N

E S

S E

E _W

IT

H

_P H

O T

O S

.G D

T

2/

/0

Undrained Shear

Strength (ksf)

Unit Weight (pcf)

Moist Dry

PI

P la st ic ity In de x

Natural Moisture Content and Atterberg Limits

Moisture Content

Plastic Limit

Liquid Limit

20 40 60 80

4-8-7 15 b/ft

3-6-10 16 b/ft

5-8-4 12 b/ft

4-9-8 17 b/ft

6" TOPSOIL

Stiff, brown CLAY (CH), with chert gravel

Very stiff, brown SILTY CLAY (CL), with chert fragments

-- with chert gravel below 6'

-- with chert fragments below 8.5'

Boring Terminated at 10 feet

0.5

2.0

10.0

Location: See Figure 2

Notes

CLIENT:

STRATA BOUNDARIES MAY NOT BE EXACT

Anderson Engineering

Plymouth, MN

No free water encountered upon drilling.

Advancement Method

FIELD DATA LABORATORY DATA

S am pl es

G ro un dw at er

Le ve l

Field Test

Results

SHEET 1 OF 1

Groundwater Level Data

No. L-11

Geotechnical Investigation

Chattanooga National Cemetery

Chattanooga, Tennessee

PROJECT:

Abandonment Method

DESCRIPTION S

tr at a

B re ak D ep th

S oi l T yp e

SOIL BORING LOG

Backfilled with cuttings and bentonite upon completion

0-10' 4" Continuous Flight Auger

Depth

(feet)

EE095086

11/12/09

C. Penton

P. Davis

S. Barrentine

FILE:

DATE:

DRILLER:

LOGGED BY:

ENGINEER:

A Q

L O

G E

E

_N A

T

IO

N A

L_ C

E M

E T

E R

Y .G

P J

G O

O G

LE

_A

Q U

A T

E R

R A

_T E

N N

E S

S E

E _W

IT

H

_P H

O T

O S

.G D

T

2/

/0

Undrained Shear

Strength (ksf)

Unit Weight (pcf)

Moist Dry

PI

P la st ic ity In de x

Natural Moisture Content and Atterberg Limits

Moisture Content

Plastic Limit

Liquid

2-3-4

3-6-7 13 b/ft

3-6-7 13 b/ft

3-9-8 17 b/ft

6" TOPSOIL

Firm, brown SILTY CLAY (CL)

Stiff, brown CLAY (CH)

-- with trace chert below 6'

Bor…