GEOTECHNICAL_ENGINEERING_REPORT_ROCKY_MOUNTAIN_ARSENAL_FINAL_.pdf

Geotechnical Engineering Report

Proposed Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge Administration Building

Prepared for:

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Prepared by:

Brian Francis, P.E.

December 21, 2016

ADDENDUM 00002 Issued 28JULY 2017

Revision Description Author Quality Check Independent Review

This document entitled Geotechnical Engineering Report – Proposed Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge Administration Building was prepared in partial fulfillment of Task Order F16PD01334 between the US Fish and Wildlife Service and MWH. Any reliance on this document by any third party is strictly prohibited. The material in it reflects MWH’s professional judgment in light of the scope, schedule and other limitations stated in the document and in the contract between MWH and the US Fish and Wildlife Service. The opinions in the document are based on conditions and information existing at the time the document was published and do not take into account any subsequent changes. In preparing the document, MWH did not verify information supplied to it by others. Any use which a third party makes of this document is the responsibility of such third party. Such third party agrees that MWH shall not be responsible for costs or damages of any kind, if any, suffered by it or any other third party as a result of decisions made or actions taken based on this document.

Prepared by

(signature) Brian Francis, P.E.

Reviewed by

John Worthen, P.E.

Approved by

Charles Cutting, P.E.

ii

Table of Contents

PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF WORK

PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

SITE CONDITIONS

GEOLOGIC SETTINGS

FIELD EXPLORATION

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

LABORATORY TESTING

SIESMIC DESIGN CRITERIA

FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS

FLOOR SLABS

WATER SOLUBLE SULFATES

SURFACE DRAINAGE

SITE GRADING

PAVEMENT DESIGN

LIMITATIONS

LIST OF APPENDICES

A.1 LOGS OF EXPLORATORY TEST HOLES

A.2 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF WORK

This report presents the results of a geotechnical engineering study for the proposed Rocky Mountain

Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge (RMANWR) administration building to be constructed on a site located northwest of the current RMANWR visitor center at 6550 Gateway Road in Commerce City, Colorado.

The study was conducted for the purpose of developing foundation, floor slab, and pavement thickness recommendations. The project site is shown on Figure 1. The study was conducted in general accordance with the scope of our work described in the following paragraphs.

A field exploration program consisting of test holes was conducted to obtain information on subsurface conditions at the proposed building, parking areas, and new roadways. Samples of the soils obtained during the field exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine their classification and engineering characteristics. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for foundation types, depths and allowable bearing pressures for the proposed building foundations, seismic design criteria, and pavement design recommendations. The results of the field exploration and laboratory testing are presented herein.

This report has been prepared to summarize the data obtained during this study and to present our conclusions and recommendations based on the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions encountered. Design parameters and a discussion of geotechnical engineering considerations related to construction of the proposed buildings, parking areas, and roadways are included in the report.

PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

The proposed facility will consist of a 4,200 square-foot administrative office building and an adjoining

1,000 square-foot multi-purpose building as shown in Figure 1. The structures will be single-story, lightly-loaded buildings with slabs on grade, without a subgrade basement level. Sidewalks and a patio area will be constructed around the proposed structures. Site grading will include approximately 1 to 3 feet of fill placed beneath the footprint of the buildings and portions of the associated parking areas. No earth retaining structures are planned. The RMANWR administrative building will have a paved parking area and access lanes near the buildings to accommodate passenger vehicles and bus parking. A two-lane access road will extend approximately 900 feet from Gateway Road (at the visitor center) to the proposed parking area and buildings; approximately 900 feet of 64th Avenue will also be rerouted from Gateway

Road.

If the proposed construction varies significantly from that described above or depicted in this report, we should be notified to reevaluate the recommendations provided in this report.

SITE CONDITIONS

The site is located northeast of the intersection of East 64th Avenue and Gateway Road at the RMANWR in Denver, Colorado. The approximate location of the project site is shown on Figure 1.

The area of the proposed structures, parking areas, access roads, and the re-routed portion of 64th

Avenue is currently vacant but previously had nearby infrastructure associated with the United States

Army Rocky Mountain Arsenal that used to occupy the site. We reviewed aerial images of the site dating back to 1993 available from Google Earth in addition to several images dating back to 1937 that were provided by the US Army. Based on these images, the area of the proposed structures, parking areas, and access roads used to be a rail yard. We understand that the railroad ballast material was removed in

2006 and was graded to its current topography in 2008. There were two buildings located to the west of the current visitor center as shown in Figure 2 that were removed between 2008 and 2010. Currently, there is a road base stockpile located at the northwest end of the proposed parking lot. The site is vegetated with native grasses and weeds.

The site is at an average approximate elevation of 5,015 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) and the topography is nearly level to gently sloping. The site slopes from approximately 5,017 feet AMSL on the east side of the parking area down to approximately 5,012 feet AMSL on the west side of the buildings.

GEOLOGIC SETTINGS

The site is located approximately 20 miles east of the southern Rocky Mountains, within the Colorado

Piedmont section of the Great Plains Physiographic Province. The Golden Fault, a high-angle reverse fault, trends northward along the front of the mountain range separating the Rocky Mountains from the

Great Plains region. The City of Denver is located within a large north-south trending structural basin called the Denver Basin. The Denver Basin formed during the Laramide Orogeny that uplifted the Rocky

Mountains during the late Cretaceous and early Tertiary.

The surficial geology of the site consists of lower Holocene to upper Pleistocene windblown and alluvial deposits. The deposits consist of fine to medium grained, silty and clayey sands overlying medium to coarse grained poorly graded sands.

FIELD EXPLORATION

The field exploration for the project was conducted on August 2, 2016. Eight test holes were advanced at the locations shown on Figure 1 to explore subsurface conditions. Five of the test holes were shallow auger holes advanced to obtain bulk samples for pavement design recommendations. Approximate locations of the test holes were provided by a hand held GPS unit and approximate elevations were selected by comparing the approximate locations with existing contour data.

The test holes were advanced through the overburden soils with both 4-inch diameter solid stem continuous flight augers and 7-inch diameter hollow stem augers. The test holes were logged by a representative of MWH.

Samples of the overburden soils were obtained using a 2-inch I.D. modified California sampler and 1.4-inch I.D. split spoon sampler. The sampler was driven into the various strata with blows from a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The test is similar to the standard penetration test described by ASTM Method

D 1586. Penetration resistance values, when properly evaluated, indicate the relative density or consistency of the soils. Depths at which the samples were taken and the penetration resistance values are shown on the logs of test holes presented in Appendix A.

Measurements of the water level were made in test holes DH-16-1, DH-16-2, and DH-16-3 by lowering a weighted tape measure into the open holes shortly after completion of drilling and one day after completion. No water was observed in the test holes during drilling, and no water was observed in the three test holes that were left open for 24 hours after completion (DH-16-1, DH-16-2, and DH-16-3). The holes were backfilled with soil cuttings after water level measurements were made.

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

Three test holes (DH-16-1, DH-16-2, and DH-16-3) were advanced to 40 feet below ground surface (bgs) within the proposed building footprint areas. One test hole (DH-16-4) was advanced 5 feet bgs in the parking area and three test holes (DH-16-5, DH-16-6, and DH-16-7) were advanced 5 feet bgs for the near the proposed access road. Test hole DH-16-8 was advanced 5 feet at a preliminary location of where 64th Avenue was to be re-routed; however the alignment for this road was changed since the time of drilling. The approximate test hole locations are shown on Figure 1. In addition to the test holes performed by MWH, the locations of test holes performed in 2009 by Ninyo & Moore for the design of the recently constructed visitor center are included in Figure 1. The 2009 Ninyo and Moore test holes are shown since geotechnical information was obtained in the vicinity of the south end of the access road currently planned alignment for re-routed 64th Avenue.

Laboratory tests were performed on selected samples obtained from the test holes to classify the soils based on the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) and to evaluate general engineering properties.

Logs of test holes are presented in Appendix A with laboratory tests results. Laboratory test results are also included on the test hole logs and are summarized in Table 1 of this report.

Subsurface conditions encountered generally consisted of fine to medium grained, silty sands (SM or SP-

SM) and sandy silt (ML) overlying medium to coarse grained, poorly graded sands (SP or SP-SM). The silty sands (SM or SP-SM) and sandy silt (ML) encountered were 8 to 10 feet thick. The medium to coarse grained, poorly graded sands (SP or SP-SM) were encountered to the maximum depth explored

(40 feet bgs). Pockets of clayey sand (SC) were encountered in test holes DH-16-1 and DH-16-3 at depths of 28 feet and 39 feet bgs, respectively. Bedrock and groundwater were not encountered during the field exploration.

LABORATORY TESTING

Samples obtained from the test holes were visually classified by the project engineer and samples were selected for laboratory testing. Laboratory testing included index property tests, such as moisture content

(ASTM D 2216), dry unit weight, grain size analysis (ASTM D 422) and liquid and plastic limits (ASTM D

4318). Swell-consolidation test (ASTM D 4546) were conducted on ten samples of the windblown and alluvial materials to estimate the compressibility or swell characteristics under loading and when submerged in water.

Results of the laboratory testing program are included in Appendix A and in the Summary of Laboratory

Test Results, Table 1. The laboratory testing was conducted in general accordance with applicable ASTM standards.

Ten swell-consolidation tests were performed on samples of silty sand (SM and SP-SM), sandy silt (ML), sandy silty clay (CL-ML), and clayey sand (SC). The results range from no movement upon wetting to

2.5% compression upon wetting. These results indicate that the on-site soils have a negligible to low risk of hydro-collapse in the event the soils become saturated at a later date.

Table 1: Summary of Laboratory Results

SAMPLE

LOCATION NATURAL

MOISTURE

CONTENT

NATURAL

DRY

DENSITY

(pcf)

PERCENT

PASSING

No. 200

SIEVE

ATTERBERG LIMITS

SWELL/

CONSOLIDATION

WATER

SOLUBLE

SULFATES

R-

VALUE

300 psi

USCS Classification

LIQUID

LIMIT

PLASTICITY

INDEX (%)

TEST

HOLE

DEPTH

(feet)

DH-16-1 1 3.1 102.2 13 NV NP -1.5

Silty Sand (SM)

DH-16-1 4 8.0 97.5 26 NV NP -0.5 <0.01

DH-16-2 1 2.4 106.3 13 NV NP -2.3

DH-16-2 4 3.1 99.0 12 NV NP -2.5

Poorly Graded Sand with Silt (SP-SM)

DH-16-2 9 10.0 100.9 27 NV NP -1.0

DH-16-3 4 14.0 98.1 57 20 NP -0.5 <0.01

Sandy Silt (ML)

DH-16-3 9 4.7 102.3 8 NV NP -1.0

Poorly Graded Sand with Silt (SP-SM)

DH-16-5 4 17.6 103.9 66 24 7 0.0

Sandy Silty Clay (CL-ML)

DH-16-8 0.5'-4.0'

13 Silty Sand (SM)

DH-16-8 1 7.7 118.9 29 21 1 1

Clayey Sand (SC)

DH-16-8 4 14.0 111.2 49 28 15

Clayey Sand (SC)

NV=No Value NP=Non-Plastic

SIESMIC DESIGN CRITERIA

The Colorado Front Range is located in a low seismic activity area. The soil profile below the proposed structures generally consists of granular soils with N values ranging between 5 and greater than 50 within the explored depths of 40 feet. Bedrock was not encountered during drilling. Based on our local experience in the vicinity of the site, claystone bedrock could be present at depths less than 100 feet;

however for the purpose of assigning a seismic site classification, it was assumed that the soils below 40 feet likely have an average N value of 15 or greater.

The weighted average N value for the site indicates an IBC design Site Class D “Stiff Soil”.

FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS

Considering the subsurface conditions encountered in the test holes and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend that the two proposed buildings both be founded on a spread footing foundation systems placed on undisturbed natural soils and/or properly compacted structural fill. We understand from the preliminary grading plan that up to two feet of structural fill material may need to be placed beneath the finish floor elevation of the structures

The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a spread footing foundation system. The construction details should be considered when preparing project documents.

1. Footings placed on the undisturbed natural soils and/or properly compacted structural fill material should be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,500 psf.

2. Based on experience with similar granular soils, we estimate total settlement for footings designed and constructed as discussed in this section will be approximately 1 inch or less. Due to the granular nature of the supporting soils, we anticipate that a majority of the settlement will occur during construction and initial loading.

3. Spread footings should have a minimum footing width of 16 inches for continuous footings and a minimum width of 36 inches for isolated pads. If the structural engineer requires a minimum isolated pad width of 24 inches (instead of 36 inches), then an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf for the isolated pads should be used.

4. Exterior footings and footings in unheated areas should be provided with adequate soil cover above their bearing elevation for frost protection. Placement of foundations at least 36 inches below the exterior grade is typically in Commerce City, Colorado.

5. Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and bottom to span an unsupported length of at least 10 feet.

6. The lateral resistance of a spread footing placed on the natural soils or properly compacted structural fill will be a combination of the sliding resistance of the footing on the foundation materials and passive earth pressure against the side of the footing. Resistance to sliding at the bottoms of the footings can be calculated based on a coefficient of friction of 0.33. Passive pressure against the sides of the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 160 pcf. The above values for coefficient of friction and passive pressures are working values.

Compacted fill placed against the sides of the footings to resist lateral loads should consist of structural fill placed and compacted to at least 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum.

7. Areas of loose material, if encountered within the foundation excavation, should be removed and footings extended to adequate natural bearing material. As an alternate, the loose material may be removed and replaced with structural fill material compacted to 98% of the maximum standard

Proctor density at a moisture content within 2 percentage points of the optimum moisture content.

New fill should extend down from the edges of the footings at a 1 horizontal to 1 vertical projection.

8. Granular foundation soils should be densified with a smooth drum vibratory compactor prior to placement of concrete.

FLOOR SLABS

To mitigate the potential risk of hydrocollapse and settlement of the underlying silty sand soils, we recommend that the floor slab subgrade be prepared as recommended in the “Site Grading” section and

“Surface Drainage” section recommendations be developed into the design. We recommend the following precautions be observed for slab-on-grade construction.

1. Floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints that allow unrestrained vertical movement.

2. Interior non-bearing partitions resting on floor slabs should be provided with slip joints so that, if the slabs move, the movement cannot be transmitted to the upper structure. This detail is also important for wallboards, stairways and door frames. Slip joints that will allow at least 2 inches of vertical movement are recommended.

3. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. Joint spacing is dependent on slab thickness, concrete aggregate size, and slump, and should be consistent with recognized guidelines such as those of the Portland Cement Association (PCA) or

American Concrete Institute (ACI). The joint spacing and slab reinforcement should be established by the designer based on experience and the intended slab use.

4. A minimum 4-inch layer of free-draining gravel placed beneath the slabs is not required due to the granular nature of the subgrade soils and the lack of shallow groundwater. However, this layer may be desirable for ease of construction, and would reduce slab curling due to differential cure.

If used, this material should consist of minus 2-inch aggregate with less than 30% passing the

No. 4 sieve and less than 5% passing the No. 200 sieve.

5. If moisture sensitive floor coverings will be used, additional mitigation of moisture penetration into the slabs, such as by use of a vapor barrier, may be required. If an impervious vapor barrier membrane is used, special precautions will be required to prevent differential curing problems which could cause the slabs to warp. A minimum 2-inch sand layer between the concrete and the vapor barrier is sometimes used for this purpose.

6. All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be placed and compacted according to the criteria presented in “Site Grading.” The suitability of the on-site soils for use as underslab fill is also discussed in “Site Grading.”

7. The geotechnical engineer should evaluate the suitability of proposed fill materials prior to use. Fill should be placed and compacted to at least 98% of the ASTM D 698 (standard proctor) maximum dry density with 2 percentage points of the optimum moisture content.

8. Where plumbing lines enter through the floor, a positive bond break should be provided. Flexible connections should be provided for slab-bearing mechanical equipment. All plumbing lines should be tested before operation.

The precautions and recommendations itemized above will not prevent the movement of floor slabs if the underlying materials are subjected to wetting conditions. However, the precautions should reduce the damage if such movement occurs.

WATER SOLUBLE SULFATES

The concentration of water soluble sulfates measured in two samples obtained from the test holes at elevations near the proposed spread footings were less than 0.01%. This concentration of water soluble sulfates represents a negligible risk of sulfate attack on concrete exposed to these materials. The degree of attack is based on a range of negligible, positive, severe, and very severe as presented in the U.S.

Bureau of Reclamation Concrete Manual. Based on this information, we believe that special sulfate resistant cement will not be required for concrete exposed to the on-site soils.

SURFACE DRAINAGE

Proper surface drainage is very important for acceptable performance of the buildings during construction and after the construction has been completed. As mentioned earlier in this report, the supporting soils of the proposed structures have low risk or hydrocollapse upon wetting; measures to reduce the risk of the soils becoming saturated during the design life of the structure should be included in the design.

Drainage recommendations provided by local, state and national entities should be followed based on the intended use of the building. The following recommendations should be used as guidelines and changes should be made only after consultation with the geotechnical engineer.

1. Excessive wetting or drying of the foundation and slab subgrades should be avoided during construction.

2. Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture content (generally ±2% of optimum unless indicated otherwise in the report) and compacted to at least 95% of the standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) in landscaped areas.

3. Care should be taken when compacting around the foundation walls to avoid damage to the structure. Hand compaction procedures, if necessary, should be used to prevent lateral pressures from exceeding the design values.

4. The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We recommend a minimum slope of 12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved areas. Site drainage beyond the 10-foot zone should be designed to promote runoff and reduce infiltration. A minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet is recommended in the paved areas adjacent to the buildings. These slopes may be changed as required for handicap access points in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

5. The upper 1 to 1.5 feet of the backfill adjacent to the buildings (within a 10 foot distance of the buildings) should be relatively impervious material compacted as above to limit infiltration of surface runoff. This material may need to be imported to the site, since the majority of the soils at the site are granular in nature and would not constitute relatively impervious material.

6. Ponding of water should not be allowed in backfill material or in a zone within 10 feet of the foundation walls, whichever is greater.

7. Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill.

8. Landscaping which requires relatively heavy irrigation should be avoided. Landscaping which requires relatively heavy irrigation and lawn sprinkler heads should be located at least 10 feet from foundation walls. Irrigation schemes are available which allow placement of lightly irrigated landscape near foundation walls in moisture sensitive soil areas. Drip irrigation heads with main lines located at least 10 feet from the foundation walls are acceptable provided irrigation quantities are limited.

SITE GRADING

Fill material used inside building limits should consist of natural, on-site nonexpansive, granular material.

Fill should be placed and compacted to at least 98% of the maximum standard Proctor density within 2 percentage points of the optimum moisture content. Fill should not contain concentrations of organic matter or other deleterious substances. The geotechnical engineer should evaluate the suitability of proposed fill materials prior to placement. In fill areas, the natural soils should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, adjusted to a moisture content near optimum and compacted to 98% of the maximum standard

Proctor density to provide a uniform base for fill placement.

The natural soils encountered at shallow depths are suitable for use in compacted fills beneath building areas or directly beneath pavement areas. The existing stockpile of asphalt millings located at the north end of the proposed parking area is not suitable fill material for use. This stockpile should be referenced in the site grading plan to indicate its complete removal from the site.

Site grading should be planned to provide positive drainage away from all buildings and parking areas.

The buildings and parking areas should be placed as high as possible on the site so that positive drainage away from these features can be provided. Surface diversion features should be provided around parking areas to prevent surface runoff from flowing across the paved surfaces.

PAVEMENT DESIGN

The following pavement recommendations are based on the traffic estimates provided by The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). The following sections provide recommendations for both Portland cement concrete and asphalt pavement.

Based on our knowledge of the proposed development and recommendations from USFWS we have assumed that the average daily traffic is approximately 800 vehicles plus 8 heavy trucks and 8 fully-loaded tour buses. We also assumed a growth factor of 2 percent.

The subgrade soils encountered in our test holes typically consisted of clayey or silty sands and occasional clay. We utilized a design R-value of 13 for the pavement subgrade soils for the project based on a laboratory test result from test hole DH-16-8. For purposed of new construction, it is assumed that soils placed within 3 feet of the finished pavement subgrade will exhibit an average R-value of 15 or more. If during construction, the subgrade is found to vary from the expected soil conditions, we should be contacted so we may re-evaluate the recommended R-value.

The design of flexible pavements is based on the following input parameters:

Design Period: 20 years

Estimated Average Daily Traffic: 800 plus 8 trucks and 8 buses

Assumed Annual Growth: 2 percent

Approximate 20-year ESALs: 140,000

Reliability: 85 percent

Overall Deviation: 0.40

Resilient Modulus: 8,500 psi

Initial Serviceability: 4.5

Terminal Serviceability: 2.5

A pavement section is a layered system designed to distribute concentrated traffic loads to the subgrade.

Performance of the pavement structure is directly related to the physical properties of the subgrade soils and the traffic loadings. Based on the above-mentioned input parameters, and following the AASHTO

1993 Pavement Design Method, we recommend that all of the drive lanes, parking areas, be constructed with 4 inches of asphalt overlaying 5 inches of aggregate base course. The re-routed portion of 64th

Avenue is recommended to have 4 inches of asphalt overlaying 6 inches of aggregate base course.

Truck loading docks and other areas where truck turning movements are concentrated should be paved with 8 inches of Portland cement concrete. The concrete pavement should contain sawed or formed joints to ¼ of the depth of the slab at a maximum distance of 15 feet on center. Thickened edges should be used along outside edges of concrete pavements. Edge thickness should be 2 inches or more than the concrete pavement thickness and taper to the actual concrete pavement thickness over 36 inches inward.

Integral curbs may be used in lieu of thickened edges.

Subgrade Preparation: Prior to placing the pavement section, the entire subgrade area should be scarified to a depth of 8 inches, adjusted to a moisture content near optimum and compacted to 95% of the maximum standard Proctor density. The pavement subgrade should be proof rolled with a heavily loaded pneumatic-tired vehicle, such as a loaded dump truck or water truck. Pavement design procedures assume a stable subgrade. Areas which deform excessively under heavy wheel loads are not stable and should be removed and replaced to achieve a stable subgrade prior to paving.

Drainage: The collection and diversion of surface drainage away from paved areas is extremely important to the satisfactory performance of pavement. Drainage design should provide for the removal of water from paved areas and prevent the wetting of the subgrade soils.

LIMITATIONS

Collapsible soils occur at this site. These soils are stable at the natural moisture content but are compressible with the addition of moisture. The collapse potential of any particular site can change erratically both in lateral and vertical extent. Moisture changes also occur erratically, resulting in conditions which cannot always be predicted. The recommendations presented in this report are based on the current state-of-art for foundations and floor slabs on moisture sensitive soils. The owner should be aware that there is a risk in construction on these types of soils.

Performance of the buildings will depend on following the design and construction recommendations and on proper maintenance after construction is complete. Since water is the main cause of volume change of these soils, it is necessary that the changes in moisture content be kept to a minimum. This requires judicious irrigation and providing positive surface drainage away from the building. Any distress noted in the building should be brought to the attention of a professional.

This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in this area for exclusive use by the client for design purposes. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the test holes at the locations indicated on

Figure 1, and the proposed type of construction. This report may not reflect subsurface variations that occur between the test holes, and the nature and extent of variations across the site may not become evident until site grading and excavations are performed. If during construction, fill, soil, rock or water conditions appear to be different from those described herein, MWH should be advised at once so that a re-evaluation of the recommendations presented in this report can be made. MWH is not responsible for liability associated with interpretation of subsurface data by others.

DESIGNED DRAWN CHECKED DATE

FIGUREROCKY MOUNTAIN ARSENAL NWR

ADMINISTRATION AND MULTIPURPOSE BUILDING

TEST HOLE LOCATIONS 1

09/28/2016JJWCAMBRF

DESIGNED DRAWN CHECKED DATE

FIGUREROCKY MOUNTAIN ARSENAL NWR

ADMINISTRATION AND MULTIPURPOSE BUILDING

09/28/2016JWCAMBRF

APPENDIX A

TEST HOLE LOG LEGEND

Well-graded◊ gravels, gravel-sand mixtures with few, trace or no fines Poorly-graded◊ gravels, gravel-sand mixtures with few, trace or no fines Silty gravels, poorly-graded◊ gravel-sand-silt mixtures Clayey gravels, poorly-graded◊ gravel-sand-clay mixtures Well-graded◊ sands, gravelly sands with few, trace or no fines Poorly-graded◊ sands, gravelly sands with few, trace or no fines Silty sands, poorly-graded◊ sand-gravel-silt mixtures Clayey sands, poorly-graded◊ sand-gravel-clay mixtures Inorganic silts/very-fine sands, silts with slight plasticity Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays Organic silts and clays of low plasticity Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sand or silt Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays Organic silts and clays of medium to high plasticity Peat, humus, swamp soils with high organic content

GW

GP

GM

GC

SW

SP

SM

SC

ML

CL

OL

MH

CH

OH

PT

GRAVELS

<50% coarse fraction passes #4 sieve

SANDS

<50% coarse fraction passes

#4 sieve

SANDS

with <15% fines

SANDS

with >15% fines

GRAVELS

with <15% fines

GRAVELS

with >15% fines

SILTS AND CLAYS

liquid limit <50

SILTS AND CLAYS

liquid limit >50

C O

A R

SE

-G

R A

IN

ED

S O

IL

S

<5 0% p as se s

#2 s ie ve

FI

N E-

G R

A

IN

ED

S

O

IL

S >5

0% p as se s #2 s ie ve

HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS ◊ N

ote

: W ell

-gr ad ed po orl y s ort ed

- P oo rly

-gr ad ed we ll s ort ed

Borderline Symbol—A borderline symbol is two symbols separated by a slash, for example, CL/CH, GM/SM, CL/ML. A borderline symbol should be used to indicate that the soil has been identified as having properties that do not distinctly place the soil into a specific group. (ASTM D2488)

Percentages of gravel, sand, and fines may be stated in terms indicating a range of percentages as below:

Term % Trace <5 Few 5-15 Little 15-25 Some 30-45 Mostly 50-100SO

IL

T

YP

E

M O

DI

FI

ER

S

5%

10%

20%

25%

30%

40%

50%

* = 140 pound hammer dropped 30 inches very soft 0-2 0-2 0-2 <0.25 tsf Easily penetrated several inches by thumb; extrudes when squeezed soft 2-4 2-4 2-4 0.25-0.50 tsf Easily penetrated one inch by thumb; molded by light pressure medium stiff 4-8 4-8 4-8 0.50-1.00 tsf Penetrated > 1/2” by thumb with moderate effort; molded with strong pressure stiff 8-15 9-17 9-18 1.00-2.00 tsf Redily Indented by thumb but penetrated with great effort very stiff 15-30 17-39 18-42 2.00-4.00 tsf Readily indented by thumbnail hard 30-60 39-78 42-85 >4.00 tsf Indented with difficulty by thumbnail very hard >60 >78 >85 Thumbnail will not indent soil

1.4”ID 2.0”ID 2.5”ID Field Test (when blow counts not available)

Unconfined Compresive

Strength Term

Blows/ft* (N) (SPT) (modCAL)

CONSISTENCY of FINE GRAINED SOILS (Silts and Clays)

1.4”ID 2.0”ID 2.5”ID

Relative Density

Blows/ft* very loose 0-4 0-5 0-7 loose 4-10 5-12 7-18 medium dense 10-29 12-37 18-51 dense 30-49 37-60 51-86 very dense >49 >60 >86

D

EN

SITY

(C oarse G rained

S oils**)

(SPT) (modCAL)

M O

IS

TU

R E Term Field Test

Dry Absence of moisture, dry to touch Slightly Moist Below optimum moisture content Moist Near optimum moisture content Very Moist Over optimum moisture content Wet Visible Free Water

Italics = geotech G R

A

IN

S

IZ

E

Term Size (mm) Size (inches) Scale size Boulders >300 >12 Larger than basketball Cobbles 75 to 300 3 to 12 Fist to basketball Coarse gravel 19 to 75 3 to 3/4 Thumb to fist Fine gravel 4.75 to 19 3/16 to 3/4 Pea to thumb Coarse sand 2.0 to 4.75 1/16 to 3/16 Rock-salt to pea Medium sand 0.425 to 2.0 1/64 to 1/16 Sugar to rock-salt Fine sand 0.075 to 0.425 0.003 to 1/64 Flour to sugar Silt / clay (fines) <0.075 <0.003 Smaller than flour

C

EM

EN

TA

TI

O

N Term Field Test Weak Crumbles or breaks with handling or slight finger pressure Moderate Crumbles or breaks with considerable finger pressure Strong Will not crumble or break with finger pressure

PL

A

ST

IC

IT

Y

Term Field Test Nonplastic Thread (1/8” or 3mm) cannot be rolled at any water content Low Thread can barely be rolled. Lump cannot be formed when drier than plastic limit.

Medium Thread is easy to roll and not much time is required to reach the plastic limit. Thread cannot be rerolled after reaching the plastic limit.

Lump crumbles when drier than plastic limit.

High Takes considerable time rolling and kneading to reach the plastic limit.

Thread can be rerolled several times after reaching the plastic limit.

Lump can be formed without crumbling when drier than the plastic limit.

TOUGHNESS

Low Slight pressure required to roll thread near plastic limit.

Thread and lump are weak and soft Medium Medium pressure required to roll thread near plastic limit.

Thread and lump have medium stiffness High Considerable pressure required to roll thread to near the plastic limit. Thread and lump have very high stiffnessM

IS

C

EL

LA

N

EO

U

S Fill or native material (e.g. soil, alluvium, bedrock) Stratigraphic unit (if known) Organics, carbon, vegetation, debris Structure (e.g. layering, stratified, blocky, lenses) Coloration (e.g. staining, mottling, oxidation) Lithology (e.g. quartz, mafic minerals) Degree of rounding/angularity Odor (e.g. earthy, vegetative, hydro carbon)

D R

IL

LI

N G

N

O

TE

S

Drilling rate Rig behavior (chatter) Heaving sands Loss of drilling fluid Caving / sloughing Sudden drops / rate changes

Depth to first water (time and date)

Depth to water after drilling (time and date)

AN

G

UL

AR

IT

Y

Angular

Rounded

Sub- Angular

Sub- Rounded

USCS Dilatancy ‡Dry Strength Toughness ML Slow to rapid None to low Low/no thread CL None to slow Medium to high Medium MH Low to medium None to slow Low to medium CH None High to v. High High

IDENTIFICATION CRITERIA FOR FINE-GRAINED SOILS

‡DRY STRENGTH

Very low sample crumbles with minor handling Low sample crumbles to powder with little finger pressure Medium breaks into pieces / crumbles with considerable pressure High sample breaks to pieces but does not crush to powder Very high cannot break between thumb and hard surface

‡1/2 in. (12 mm) molded ball of material, dried, and crushed between fingers

DILATANCY

Fast, distinctive reaction

= clean very fine sand Rapid, moderate reaction

= inorganic silt No reaction

= plastic clay 1/2 in. (12 mm) ball of molded material with soft, not sticky consistency (water added if necessary), smoothed in palm of hand. Shake horizontally striking side of hand. Note reaction of water appearing on surface.

Squeeze sample by pinching between fingers, note speed of water absorption into soil.

Unified Soil Classification System - ASTM D2487, ASTM D2488, USBR-5000, USBR-5001, USBR-3900

Example soil descriptions:

Poorly-graded sand with gravel (SP), light brown (7.5YR,6/4), loose, moist, predomi-nantly fine sand (75%), trace medium sand (5%), fine gravel (20%), hydro carbon odor and staining

Lean clay with sand (CL), olive brown (2.5Y,4/4), medium stiff, moist, trace medium sand (5%), coarse sand (15%), fine gravel (5%), weakly cemented, low plasticity

LIQUID LIMIT (LL)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

(PI > 7)

< 0.75

(PI < 4)

(4 PI 7)

P

LA

S

TI

C

IT

Y

IN

D E

X (P

I) LL (oven dried) LL (not dried)

ORGANIC CLAY OR SILT

(OH, OL) if:

CL-ML

(L L

(L

L

0)

"A" L

INE

(below "A " lin e)

(at o r a bove "A " lin e)

ML

CL

CH

MH

**Soils consisting of gravel and sand, either separately or in combination possessing no characteris-tics of plasticity, and exhibiting drained behavior.

ORDER OF

DESCRIPTION

1. Soil type

2. USCS Symbol

3. Color (Munsell I.D.)

4. Consistancy/Density

5. Moisture

6. Grain size (% each)

7. Cementation

8. Plasticity (clays)

9. Miscellaneous

Lean clay Lean clay with sand Lean clay with gravel Sandy lean clay Sandy lean clay with gravel Gravelly lean clay Gravelly lean clay with sand Silt Silt with sand Silt with gravel Sandy silt Sandy silt with gravel Gravelly silt Gravelly silt with sand Fat clay Fay clay with sand Fat clay with gravel Sandy fat clay Sandy fat clay with gravel Gravelly fat clay Gravelly fat clay with sand Elastic silt Elastic silt with sand Elastic silt with gravel Sandy elastic silt Sandy elastic silt with gravel Gravelly elastic silt Gravelly elastic silt with sand

% sand ≥ % gravel % sand < % gravel < 15% gravel ≥ 15% gravel < 15% sand ≥ 15% sand

% sand ≥ % gravel % sand < % gravel < 15% gravel ≥ 15% gravel < 15% sand ≥ 15% sand

% sand ≥ % gravel % sand < % gravel < 15% gravel ≥ 15% gravel < 15% sand ≥ 15% sand

% sand ≥ % gravel % sand < % gravel < 15% gravel ≥ 15% gravel < 15% sand ≥ 15% sand

< 15% plus No. 200 15-29% plus No. 200

% sand ≥ % gravel

% sand < % gravel

< 15% plus No. 200 15-29% plus No. 200

% sand ≥ % gravel

% sand < % gravel

< 15% plus No. 200 15-29% plus No. 200

% sand ≥ % gravel

% sand < % gravel

< 15% plus No. 200 15-29% plus No. 200

% sand ≥ % gravel

% sand < % gravel

< 30% plus No. 200

≥ 30% plus No. 200

< 30% plus No. 200

≥ 30% plus No. 200

< 30% plus No. 200

≥ 30% plus No. 200

< 30% plus No. 200

≥ 30% plus No. 200

CL

ML

CH

MH

G R

AV

EL

g ra ve l > s an d

≤ 5% fines well-graded fines = ML or MH

GW

GP

GM

GC

GW-GM

GW-GC

GP-GM

GP-GC

fines = CL or CH fines = ML or MH fines = CL or CH fines = ML or MH fines = CL or CH poorly-graded well-graded poorly-graded

≥ 15% fines

> 5% - < 15% fines

Well-graded gravel Well-graded gravel with sand Poorly-graded gravel Poorly-graded gravel with sand Well-graded gravel with silt Well-graded gravel with silt and sand Well-graded gravel with clay Well-graded gravel with clay and sand Poorly-graded gravel with silt Poorly-graded gravel with silt and sand Poorly-graded gravel with clay Poorly-graded gravel with clay and sand Silty gravel Silty gravel with sand Clayey gravel Clayey gravel with sand

< 15% sand ≥ 15% sand < 15% sand ≥ 15% sand < 15% sand ≥ 15% sand < 15% sand ≥ 15% sand < 15% sand ≥ 15% sand < 15% sand ≥ 15% sand < 15% sand ≥ 15% sand < 15% sand ≥ 15% sand

SA

N

D s an d g ra ve l

≤ 5% fines well-graded fines = ML or MH

SW

SP

SM

SC

SW-SM

SW-SC

SP-SM

SP-SC

fines = CL or CH fines = ML or MH fines = CL or CH fines = ML or MH fines = CL or CH poorly-graded well-graded poorly-graded

≥ 15% fines

> 5% - < 15% fines

Well-graded sand Well-graded sand with gravel Poorly-graded sand Poorly-graded sand with gravel Well-graded sand with silt Well-graded sand with silt and gravel Well-graded sand with clay Well-graded sand with clay and gravel Poorly-graded sand with silt Poorly-graded sand with silt and gravel Poorly-graded sand with clay Poorly-graded sandwith clay and gravel Silty sand Silty sand with gravel Clayey sand Clayey sand with gravel

< 15% gravel ≥ 15% gravel < 15% gravel ≥ 15% gravel < 15% gravel ≥ 15% gravel < 15% gravel ≥ 15% gravel < 15% gravel ≥ 15% gravel < 15% gravel ≥ 15% gravel < 15% gravel ≥ 15% gravel < 15% gravel ≥ 15% gravel

TEST HOLE LOG LEGEND Cont.

M

IS

C

EL

LA

N

EO

U S Fill or native material (e.g. soil, alluvium, bedrock)

Stratigraphic unit (if known) Organics, carbon, vegetation, debris Structure (e.g. layering, stratified, blocky, lenses) Coloration (e.g. staining, mottling, oxidation) Lithology (e.g. quartz, mafic minerals) Degree of rounding/angularity Odor (e.g. earthy, vegetative, hydro carbon)

Low Plasticity Clay (CL)

Poorly Graded Sand (SP)

Low Plasticity Silt (ML)

Poorly Graded Silty Sand (SP-SM)

Clayey Sand (SC)

LITHOLOGY

PATTERNS

Gravels or sands with 5% to 12% fines require dual symbols (GW-GM, GW-GC, GP-GM, GP-GC, SW-SM, SW-SC, SP-SM, SP-SC) and add "with clay" or "with silt" to group name. If fines classify as CL-ML for GM or SM, use dual symbol GC-GM or SC-SM. DX%) s soil particle diameter where X% is % finer. Optional Abbeviations: Lower case "s" after USCS group symbol denotes either "sandy" or "with sand" while "g" denotes either "gravelly" or "with gravel"

SS SPT Sampler (2” OD, 140 lb hammer) CA Modified California Sampler (2" ID 140 lb typ.)

GS Grab Sample (Bulk) C Core Sample (Rock) CC Continuous Core (Soil) TW Thin Walled Sample Tube (Shelby)

SAMPLER ABBREVIATIONS

STRUCTURE (FABRIC)

Stratified Alternating layers of varying materials or color; note thicknesses Laminated1 Alternating layers of varying material or color with layers less than 6 mm thick; note thicknesses Fissured1 Breaks along definite planes with little resistance to fracturing Slickensided1 Fracture planes appear polished or glossy, sometimes striated Blocky1 Cohesive soil that can be broken into small angular lumps which resist further breakdown Lenses Inclusion of small pockets of different soils such as small lenses of sand scattered through a mass of clay; note thicknesses

Homogeneous Same color and textural or structural appearance throughout

1Do not use for coarse grained soils with the exception of fine sands which can be laminated

REACTION WITH HCL

None No visible reaction Weak Some reaction, with bubbles forming slowly Strong Violent reaction, with bubbles forming immediately

Poorly-graded sand with silt to silty sand, light brown to brown, medium dense, dry, mostly fine to medium grained sand, few to little silty fines, non-plastic.

Poorly-graded sand, brown, medium dense, moist, mostly medium to coarse grained sand, trace silty fines, non-plastic.

SM

SP

Solid-stem augers used for

DH-16-1

Lab Testing (DH-16-1 @1'):

Moisture Content - 3.1% Dry Density - 102.2 pcf Percent Fines - 13% Liquid Limit - NV Plastic Limit - NP

USCS: SM

Lab Testing (DH-16-1 @4'):

Moisture Content - 8.0% Dry Density - 97.5 pcf Percent Fines - 26% Liquid Limit - NV Plastic Limit - NP

USCS: SM

Water Soluable Sulfates - <0.01

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

C A

S S

C A

S S

C A

C A

C A

Comments

Northing: 14460416.14 / Easting: 1673615.86

U S

C S

SOIL LOG DH-16-1

Total Depth: 40.0 feet

S am pl e

N um be r

D ep th , f t Description

Inclination: -90

PROJECT: RMA National Wildlife Refuge Administration Building

Drilling Co.: Dakota Drilling

Azimuth: N/ACore Size: N/A

Drill Rig: CME 55

Prepared By: B. Francis

PROJECT NO. 10509390

N v al ue

R ec ov er y

Logged By: J. Worthen

Checked By: J. Worthen

Bottom Elevation: 5167 feet AMSL

E le va tio n, ft

A M

S L

Driller: R. Rodriguez

G ra ph ic

L og

B lo w C ou nt s P er in

Sheet No. 1 of 2Surface Elevation: 5207 feet AMSL

S am pl e

M et ho d

Location: RMA National Wildlife Refuge

MWH

Groundwater Data: None encountered during drilling

Date Start: 8/2/2016 End: 8/2/2016

Poorly-graded sand (continued)

Clayey sand, brown mottled black and white, medium dense, moist, trace fine grained gravel, little clayey fines, low plasticity.

Poorly-graded sand, light brown, very dense, moist, trace fine grained gravel, trace silty fines, non-plastic.

SC

SP

Caved at 29ft (measured on 8/3/16 at 7pm)

0%

0%

0%

0%

C A

C A

C A

C A

BOTTOM OF HOLE AT 40FT

/1

0"

/8

0/

0/

8"

Comments

Northing: 14460416.14 / Easting: 1673615.86

U S

C S

SOIL LOG DH-16-1

Total Depth: 40.0 feet

S am pl e

N um be r

D ep th , f t Description

Inclination: -90

PROJECT: RMA National Wildlife Refuge Administration Building

Drilling Co.: Dakota Drilling

Azimuth: N/ACore Size: N/A

Drill Rig: CME 55

Prepared By: B. Francis

PROJECT NO. 10509390

N v al ue

R ec ov er y

Logged By: J. Worthen

Checked By: J. Worthen

Bottom Elevation: 5167 feet AMSL

E le va tio n, ft

A M

S L

Driller: R. Rodriguez

G ra ph ic

L og

B lo w C ou nt s P er in

Sheet No. 2 of 2Surface Elevation: 5207 feet AMSL

S am pl e

M et ho d

Location: RMA National Wildlife Refuge

MWH

Groundwater Data: None encountered during drilling

Date Start: 8/2/2016 End: 8/2/2016

Poorly-graded sand with silt to silty sand, brown, loose to medium dense, dry to moist, mostly fine to medium grained sand, few to little silty fines, non-plastic.

Poorly-graded sand, light brown, medium dense dense, moist, mostly medium to coarse sand, little fine sand, few fine gravel, trace silty fines, non-plastic.

SP-SM

Hollow-stem augers used for

DH-16-2

Lab Testing (DH-16-2 @1'):

Moisture Content - 2.4% Dry Density - 106.3 pcf Percent Fines - 13% Liquid Limit - NV Plastic Limit - NP

USCS: SM

Lab Testing (DH-16-2 @4'):

Moisture Content - 3.1% Dry Density - 99.0 pcf Percent Fines - 12% Liquid Limit - NV Plastic Limit - NP

USCS: SP-SM

Lab Testing (DH-16-2 @9'):

Moisture Content - 10.0% Dry Density - 100.9 pcf Percent Fines - 27% Liquid Limit - NV Plastic Limit - NP

USCS: SM

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

C A

C A

C A

C A

C A

Comments

Northing: 14460324.99 / Easting: 1673527.06

U S

C S

SOIL LOG DH-16-2

Total Depth: 40.0 feet

S am pl e

N um be r

D ep th , f t Description

Inclination: -90

PROJECT: RMA National Wildlife Refuge Administration Building

Drilling Co.: Dakota Drilling

Azimuth: N/ACore Size: N/A

Drill Rig: CME 55

Prepared By: B. Francis

PROJECT NO. 10509390

N v al ue

R ec ov er y

Logged By: J. Worthen

Checked By: J. Worthen

Bottom Elevation: 5168 feet AMSL

E le va tio n, ft

A M

S L

Driller: R. Rodriguez

G ra ph ic

L og

B lo w C ou nt s P er in

Sheet No. 1 of 2Surface Elevation: 5208 feet AMSL

S am pl e

M et ho d

Location: RMA National Wildlife Refuge

MWH

Groundwater Data: None encountered during drilling

Date Start: 8/2/2016 End: 8/2/2016

Poorly-graded sand (continued)

SP

Dry hole to 39.5ft no caving (measured on 8/3/16 at 7:15pm)

0%

0%

0%

0%

C A

C A

C A

C A

BOTTOM OF HOLE AT 40FT

Comments

Northing: 14460324.99 / Easting: 1673527.06

U S

C S

SOIL LOG DH-16-2

Total Depth: 40.0 feet

S am pl e

N um be r

D ep th , f t Description

Inclination: -90

PROJECT: RMA National Wildlife Refuge Administration Building

Drilling Co.: Dakota Drilling

Azimuth: N/ACore Size: N/A

Drill Rig: CME 55

Prepared By: B. Francis

PROJECT NO. 10509390

N v al ue

R ec ov er y

Logged By: J. Worthen

Checked By: J. Worthen

Bottom Elevation: 5168 feet AMSL

E le va tio n, ft

A M

S L

Driller: R. Rodriguez

G ra ph ic

L og

B lo w C ou nt s P er in

Sheet No. 2 of 2Surface Elevation: 5208 feet AMSL

S am pl e

M et ho d

Location: RMA National Wildlife Refuge

MWH

Groundwater Data: None encountered during drilling

Date Start: 8/2/2016 End: 8/2/2016

Poorly-graded sand, brown, medium dense, moist, mostly medium grained sand, few fine sand, trace silty fines, non-plastic.

Sandy silt, brown to dark brown, medium stiff to stiff, moist, few to some medium grained sand, non-plastic.

Poorly-graded sand with silt, brown to light brown, medium dense to dense, moist, mostly medium to coarse grained sand, trace to few fine gravel, trace silty fines, non-plastic.

SP

ML

Solid-stem augers used for

DH-16-3

Lab Testing (DH-16-3 @4'):

Moisture Content - 14.0% Dry Density - 98.1 pcf Percent Fines - 57% Liquid Limit - 20 Plastic Limit - NP

USCS: ML

Water Soluable Sulfates - <0.01

Lab Testing (DH-16-3 @9'):

Moisture Content - 4.7% Dry Density - 102.3 pcf Percent Fines - 8% Liquid Limit - NV Plastic Limit - NP

USCS: SP-SM

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

C A

S S

C A

S S

C A

C A

C A

Comments

Northing: 14460300.8 / Easting: 1673587.93

U S

C S

SOIL LOG DH-16-3

Total Depth: 40.0 feet

S am pl e

N um be r

D ep th , f t Description

Inclination: -90

PROJECT: RMA National Wildlife Refuge Administration Building

Drilling Co.: Dakota Drilling

Azimuth: N/ACore Size: N/A

Drill Rig: CME 55

Prepared By: B. Francis

PROJECT NO. 10509390

N v al ue

R ec ov er y

Logged By: J. Worthen/J. Wolicki

Checked By: J. Worthen

Bottom Elevation: 5169 feet AMSL

E le va tio n, ft

A M

S L

Driller: R. Rodriguez

G ra ph ic

L og

B lo w C ou nt s P er in

Sheet No. 1 of 2Surface Elevation: 5209 feet AMSL

S am pl e

M et ho d

Location: RMA National Wildlife Refuge

MWH

Groundwater Data: None encountered during drilling

Date Start: 8/2/2016 End: 8/2/2016

Poorly-graded sand with silt (continued)

Clayey sand, brown, medium dense, moist, mosly fine to medium sand, few to little clayey fine, low plasticity.

SP-SM

SC

Caved at 29ft (measured on 8/3/16 at 6:45pm)

0%

0%

0%

0%

C A

C A

C A

C A

BOTTOM OF HOLE AT 40FT

Comments

Northing: 14460300.8 / Easting: 1673587.93

U S

C S

SOIL LOG DH-16-3

Total Depth: 40.0 feet

S am pl e

N um be r

D ep th , f t Description

Inclination: -90

PROJECT: RMA National Wildlife Refuge Administration Building

Drilling Co.: Dakota Drilling

Azimuth: N/ACore Size: N/A

Drill Rig: CME 55

Prepared By: B. Francis

PROJECT NO. 10509390

N v al ue

R ec ov er y

Logged By: J. Worthen/J. Wolicki

Checked By: J. Worthen

Bottom Elevation: 5169 feet AMSL

E le va tio n, ft

A M

S L

Driller: R. Rodriguez

G ra ph ic

L og

B lo w C ou nt s P er in

Sheet No.