Attachment__1_-_Specifications_dated_30_October_2013_-_Part_1.pdf

PROJECT NO. DKFX 11-1122 A/B

ADD/REPAIR

PASSENGER TERMINAL

BUILDING 164

JOINT BASE CHARLESTON (AIR BASE)

SOUTH CAROLINA

SPECIFICATIONS

100% SUBMITTAL

30 OCTOBER 2013

ARCHITECT: GLICK/BOEHM & ASSOCIATES, INC.

493 King Street, Suite 100 Charleston, SC 29401

ENVIROMENTAL ENGINEER: S&ME

620 Wando Park Blvd Mount Pleasant, SC 29464

CIVIL, LANDSCAPE &

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS:

ADC ENGINEERING

1226 Yeamans Hall Road Hanahan, SC 29406

PLUMBING, MECHANICAL,

ELECTRICAL & FIRE

PROTECTION ENGINEERS:

1009 Anna Knapp Blvd; Suite 202 Mount Pleasant, SC 29464

FA4418-16-R-0002 Add/Repair Passenger Terminal, Bldg 164 Attachment #1

PASSENGER TERMINAL, BLDG. 164 JOINT BASE CHARLESTON

100% SUBMITTAL 30 OCTOBER 2013

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS

DIVISION 00 - PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS

00 01 15 LIST OF DRAWINGS

00 31 26 INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO PROPOSERS

DIVISION 01 - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

01 11 00 SUMMARY OF WORK

01 14 00 WORK RESTRICTIONS

01 30 00 ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS

01 33 00 SUBMITTAL PROCEDURES

01 35 26 GOVERNMENTAL SAFETY REQUIREMENTS

01 35 40.00 20 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

01 42 00 SOURCES FOR REFERENCE PUBLICATIONS

01 45 00 JBC AB CONSTRUCTION QUALITY CONTROL

01 45 35 SPECIAL INSPECTIONS

01 50 00 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION FACILITIES AND CONTROLS

01 50 10 JBC AB ENVIROMENTAL

01 54 00 JBC AB GREEN PROCUREMENT

01 57 19.00 25 JBC TEMPORARY ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS

01 57 20 JBC AB WASTE MANAGEMENT

01 58 00 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION

01 62 35.00 25 JBC RECYCLED / RECOVERED MATERIALS

01 74 19.00 25 JBC CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION WASTE MANAGEMENT

01 78 00 CLOSEOUT SUBMITTALS

01 78 23 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE DATA

DIVISION 02 - EXISTING CONDITIONS

02 41 00 DEMOLITION AND DECONSTRUCTION

02 82 16.00 20 ENGINEERING CONTROL OF ASBESTOS CONTAINING MATERIALS

02 82 33.13 20 REMOVAL/CONTROL AND DISPOSAL OF PAINT WITH LEAD

DIVISION 03 - CONCRETE

03 15 00.00 10 CONCRETE ACCESSORIES

03 20 00.00 10 CONCRETE REINFORCING

03 30 00 CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE

03 30 53 MISCELLANEOUS CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE

03 37 13 SHOTCRETE

DIVISION 04 - MASONRY

04 20 00 MASONRY

DIVISION 05 - METALS

05 05 23 WELDING, STRUCTURAL

05 12 00 STRUCTURAL STEEL

05 30 00 STEEL DECKS

05 40 00 COLD-FORMED METAL FRAMING

05 51 33 METAL LADDERS

DIVISION 06 - WOOD, PLASTICS, AND COMPOSITES

06 10 00 ROUGH CARPENTRY

06 20 00 FINISH CARPENTRY

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1

06 41 16.00 10 LAMINATE CLAD ARCHITECTURAL CASEWORK

06 61 16 SOLID POLYMER (SOLID SURFACING) FABRICATIONS

DIVISION 07 - THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION

07 11 13 BITUMINOUS DAMPPROOFING

07 21 16 MINERAL FIBER BLANKET INSULATION

07 22 00 ROOF AND DECK INSULATION

07 25 00 WEATHER BARRIERS

07 41 13 METAL ROOF and METAL ROOF RETRO-FIT PANELS

07 42 63 INSULATED WALL PANEL ASSEMBLIES

07 60 00 FLASHING AND SHEET METAL

07 92 00 JOINT SEALANTS

DIVISION 08 - OPENINGS

08 11 13 STEEL DOORS AND FRAMES

08 14 00 WOOD DOORS

08 33 23 OVERHEAD COILING DOORS

08 39 54 BLAST RESISTANT DOORS

08 41 13 INTERIOR ALUMINUM-FRAMED STOREFRONTS

08 42 29.43 IMPACT RATED SLIDING AUTOMATIC ENTRANCES

08 42 29.53 BLAST RESISTANT SLIDING AUTOMATIC ENTRANCES

08 43 13 BLAST RESISTANT ALUMINUM-FRAMED ENTRANCES AND STOREFRONTS

08 71 00 DOOR HARDWARE

08 81 00 GLAZING

DIVISION 09 - FINISHES

09 22 00 SUPPORTS FOR GYPSUM BOARD

09 29 00 GYPSUM BOARD

09 30 00 CERAMIC TILE

09 51 00 ACOUSTICAL CEILINGS

09 54 00 3-DIMENSIONAL CURVED SYSTEM ANCILLARY ITEM #1

09 54 23 METAL CEILING PANELS

09 65 00 RESILIENT FLOORING

09 66 23 RESINOUS TERRAZZO FLOORING

09 68 00 CARPET

09 72 00 WALLCOVERINGS

09 83 13 ACOUSTICAL WALL TREATMENT

09 90 00 PAINTS AND COATINGS

09 97 13.00 40 STEEL COATINGS

DIVISION 10 - SPECIALTIES

10 21 13 TOILET COMPARTMENTS

10 22 39 FOLDING PANEL PARTITIONS

10 28 13 TOILET ACCESSORIES

10 44 16 FIRE EXTINGUISHERS

DIVISION 12 - FURNISHINGS

12 36 00 COUNTERTOPS

DIVISION 21 - FIRE SUPPRESSION

21 13 13.00 20 WET PIPE SPRINKLER SYSTEM, FIRE PROTECTION

DIVISION 22 - PLUMBING

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 2

22 00 00 PLUMBING, GENERAL PURPOSE

22 05 48.00 20 MECHANICAL SOUND, VIBRATION, AND SEISMIC CONTROL

22 07 19.00 40 PLUMBING PIPING INSULATION

DIVISION 23 - HEATING, VENTILATING, AND AIR CONDITIONING

23 00 00 AIR SUPPLY, DISTRIBUTION, VENTILATION, AND EXHAUST SYSTEMS

23 03 00.00 20 BASIC MECHANICAL MATERIALS AND METHODS

23 05 15 COMMON PIPING FOR HVAC

23 05 48.00 40 VIBRATION AND SEISMIC CONTROLS FOR HVAC PIPING AND

EQUIPMENT

23 05 93 TESTING, ADJUSTING, AND BALANCING FOR HVAC

23 07 00 THERMAL INSULATION FOR MECHANICAL SYSTEMS

23 08 00.00 10 COMMISSIONING OF HVAC SYSTEMS

23 09 23 BACnet DIRECT DIGITAL CONTROL SYSTEMS for HVAC

23 11 25 FACILITY GAS PIPING

23 25 00 CHEMICAL TREATMENT OF WATER FOR MECHANICAL SYSTEMS

23 64 10 WATER CHILLERS, VAPOR COMPRESSION TYPE

23 64 26 CHILLED, CHILLED-HOT, AND CONDENSER WATER PIPING SYSTEMS

DIVISION 26 - ELECTRICAL

26 00 00.00 20 BASIC ELECTRICAL MATERIALS AND METHODS

26 05 48.00 10 SEISMIC PROTECTION FOR ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT

26 08 00 APPARATUS INSPECTION AND TESTING

26 20 00 INTERIOR DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

26 27 13.10 30 ELECTRIC METERS

26 29 23 VARIABLE FREQUENCY DRIVE SYSTEMS UNDER 600 VOLTS

26 51 00 INTERIOR LIGHTING

26 56 00 EXTERIOR LIGHTING

DIVISION 27 - COMMUNICATIONS

27 05 14.00 10 CABLE TELEVISION PREMISES DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

27 10 00 BUILDING TELECOMMUNICATIONS CABLING SYSTEM

DIVISION 28 - ELECTRONIC SAFETY AND SECURITY

28 20 00.00 20 ELECTRONIC SECURITY SYSTEMS (ESS), COMMERCIAL

28 31 76 INTERIOR FIRE ALARM AND MASS NOTIFICATION SYSTEM

DIVISION 31 - EARTHWORK

31 00 00 EARTHWORK

31 11 00 CLEARING AND GRUBBING

31 25 23 EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS (INCLUSIVE OF STORM

WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN)

DIVISION 32 - EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS

32 01 19 FIELD MOLDED SEALANTS FOR SEALING JOINTS IN RIGID

PAVEMENTS

32 05 33 LANDSCAPE ESTABLISHMENT

32 11 24 GRADED CRUSHED AGGREGATE BASE COURSE FOR PAVEMENT

32 12 10 BITUMINOUS TACK AND PRIME COATS

32 12 16 HOT-MIX ASPHALT (HMA) FOR ROADS

32 13 13.06 PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT FOR ROADS AND SITE

FACILITIES

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 3

32 16 13 CONCRETE SIDEWALKS AND CURBS AND GUTTERS

32 17 23.00 20 PAVEMENT MARKINGS

32 18 16.13 PLAYGROUND PROTECTIVE SURFACING ANCILLARY ITEM #1, BID

OPTION #3

32 31 13 CHAIN LINK FENCES AND GATES

32 92 23 SODDING

32 93 00 EXTERIOR PLANTS

DIVISION 33 - UTILITIES

33 11 00 WATER DISTRIBUTION

33 30 00 SANITARY SEWERS

33 40 00 STORM DRAINAGE UTILITIES

DIVISION 34 - TRANSPORTATION

34 71 13.19 ACTIVE VEHICLE BARRIERS BID OPTION #1

34 77 39.00 10 INBOUND BAGGAGE CONVEYOR SYSTEM ANCILLARY ITEM #2

34 77 39.00 20 OUTBOUND BAGGAGE CONVEYOR SYSTEM ANCILLARY ITEM #2

34 77 39 BAGGAGE CONVEYING SYSTEMS ANCILLARY ITEM #2

-- End of Project Table of Contents --

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 4

DOCUMENT 00 01 15

LIST OF DRAWINGS

02/11

PART 1 GENERAL

1.1 SUMMARY

This section lists the drawings for the project pursuant to contract clause "DFARS 252.236-7001, Contract Drawings, Maps and Specifications."

1.2 CONTRACT DRAWINGS

Contract drawings are as follows:

G001 COVER SHEET 1

G002 SHEET INDEX 2

G003 MAPS & NOTES 3

G110 BUILDING CODE INFORMATION 4

G111 PROJECT INFORMATION 5

G112 LIFE SAFETY PLAN 6

V100 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY 7

C001 PRELIMINARY CONTRACTOR LAYDOWN AREA 8

C002 SITEWORK PROJECT BREAKDOWN PLAN 9

C100 DEMOLITION PLAN - BASE BID 10

C101 DEMOLITION PLAN - BID ALTERNATE 11

C200 SITE PLAN - BASE BID 12

C201 SITE PLAN - BID ALTERNATE 13

C300 GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN - BASE BID 14

C301 GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN - BID ALTERNATE 15

C310 DRAINAGE AREAS PLAN - BID ALTERNATE 16

C400 SITE UTILITY PLAN - BASE BID 17

C401 SITE UTILITY PLAN - BID ALTERNATE 18

C620 CIVIL DETAILS - SITE 19

C621 CIVIL DETAILS - SITE 20

C622 CIVIL DETAILS - SITE 21

C630 CIVIL DETAILS - STORM WATER 22

C631 CIVIL DETAILS - STORM WATER 23

C640 CIVIL DETAILS - WATER 24

C641 CIVIL DETAILS - SEWER 25

C700 EROSION CONTROL PLAN PHASE I - BASE BID 26

C701 EROSION CONTROL PLAN PHASE II - BASE BID 27

C710 EROSION CONTROL PLAN PHASE I - BID ALTERNATE 28

C711 EROSION CONTROL PLAN PHASE II - BID ALTERNATE 29

C720 CIVIL DETAILS - EROSION CONTROL 30

DOCUMENT 00 01 15 Page 1

C721 CIVIL DETAILS - EROSION CONTROL 31

L100 OVERALL SITE PLAN - BASE BID 32

L101 OVERALL SITE PLAN - BID ALTERNATE 33

L102 ENLARGED SITE PLAN - BASE BID 34

L103 ENLARGED SITE PLAN - BID ALTERNATE 35

L200 LANDSCAPE PLAN - BASE BID 36

L201 LANDSCAPE PLAN - BID ALTERNATE 37

L500 LANDSCAPE DETAILS 38

S000 GENERAL NOTES 39

S001 FOUNDATION DEMOLITION PLAN 40

S031 ROOF FRAMING DEMOLITION PLAN (NORTH) 41

S032 ROOF FRAMING DEMOLITION PLAN (SOUTH) 42

S040 HIGH ROOF DEMOLITION PLAN 43

S101 NEW & EXISTING FOUNDATION PLAN (NORTH) 44

S102 NEW & EXISTING FOUNDATION PLAN (SOUTH) 45

S103 GROUND FLOOR SLAB PLAN 46

S111 WALL PLAN (NORTH) 47

S112 WALL PLAN (SOUTH) 48

S131 ROOF FRAMING PLAN (NORTH) 49

S132 ROOF FRAMING PLAN (SOUTH) 50

S140 CANOPY AND HIGH ROOF FRAMING PLANS 51

S200 SCHEDULES 52

S301 TRUSS ELEVATIONS 53

S302 TRUSS ELEVATIONS 54

S303 TRUSS & FRAMING ELEVATIONS 55

S304 TRUSS & FRAMING ELEVATIONS 56

S501 TYPICAL FOUNDATION DETAILS 57

S502 TYPICAL FOUNDATION DETAILS 58

S503 TYPICAL FOUNDATION DETAILS 59

S511 TYPICAL NEW CMU WALL DETAILS 60

S512 TYPICAL NEW CMU WALL DETAILS 61

S513 TYPICAL RETROFIT CMU WALL DETAILS 62

S514 TYPICAL METAL STUD WALL DETAILS 63

S521 TYPICAL FRAMING DETAILS 64

S611 WALL SECTIONS 65

S612 WALL SECTIONS 66

S631 MAIN ROOF SECTIONS 67

S632 MAIN ROOF SECTIONS 68

S641 HIGH ROOF SECTIONS 69

S642 HIGH ROOF SECTIONS 70

H001 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 71

A000 GENERAL NOTES, SYMBOLS & ABBREVIATIONS 72

A001 EXISTING FLOOR PLAN 73

DOCUMENT 00 01 15 Page 2

A002 EXISTING ROOF PLAN 74

A003 DEMOLITION PLAN - NORTH SIDE 75

A004 DEMOLITION PLAN - SOUTH SIDE 76

A020 DEMOLITION CEILING PLAN - NORTH SIDE 77

A021 DEMOLITION CEILING PLAN - SOUTH SIDE 78

A030 DEMOLITION ROOF PLAN - NORTH SIDE 79

A031 DEMOLITION ROOF PLAN - SOUTH SIDE 80

A040 DEMOLITION ELEVATIONS 81

A050 DEMOLITION WALL SECTIONS 82

A051 DEMOLITION WALL SECTIONS 83

A101 OVERALL ARCHITECTURAL FLOOR PLAN 84

A102 ARCHITECTURAL FLOOR PLAN - NORTH SIDE 85

A103 ARCHITECTURAL FIRST FLOOR PLAN -SOUTH SIDE 86

A110 OVERALL DIMENSION FLOOR PLAN 87

A111 DIMENSION PLAN - NORTH SIDE 88

A112 DIMENSION PLAN - SOUTH SIDE 89

A120 REFLECTED CEILING PLAN - NORTH SIDE 90

A121 REFLECTED CEILING PLAN -SOUTH SIDE 91

A122 ENLARGED REFLECTED CEILING PLAN 92

A130 ROOF PLAN - NORTH SIDE 93

A131 ROOF PLAN - SOUTH SIDE 94

A201 EXTERIOR BUILDING ELEVATIONS 95

A202 EXTERIOR BUILDING ELEVATIONS 96

A301 BUILDING SECTIONS 97

A302 BUILDING SECTIONS 98

A310 WALL SECTIONS 99

A311 WALL SECTIONS 100

A312 WALL SECTIONS 101

A313 WALL SECTIONS 102

A314 WALL SECTIONS 103

A401 ENLARGED PLANS - RESTROOMS 104

A402 ENLARGED PLANS - RESTROOMS 105

A403 ENLARGED PLANS & ELEVATIONS - RESTROOMS 106

A404 ENLARGED ELEVATIONS - RESTROOMS 107

A405 ENLARGED ELEVATIONS - RESTROOMS 108

A406 ENLARGED ELEVATIONS - RESTROOMS 109

A407 ENLARGED ELEVATIONS - RESTROOMS 110

A408 ENLARGED ELEVATIONS - RESTROOMS 111

A410 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS 112

A411 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS 113

A412 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS 114

A413 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS 115

A414 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS 116

DOCUMENT 00 01 15 Page 3

A415 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS 117

A416 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS 118

A422 ENLARGED PLANS 119

A501 WALL TYPES & TYPICAL WALL DETAILS 120

A502 MASONRY COLUMN PLANS/SECTIONS & DETAILS 121

A503 EXTERIOR WALL PLAN DETAILS 122

A504 INTERIOR WALL PLAN DETAILS 123

A511 METAL ROOFING DETAILS 124

A512 METAL ROOFING DETAILS 125

A513 METAL ROOFING DETAILS 126

A514 METAL ROOFING DETAILS 127

A551 INTERIOR COLUMN PLAN/SECTION DETAILS 128

A552 INTERIOR DETAILS 129

A571 ACOUSTIC CEILING TILE SEISMIC DETAILS 130

A572 CEILING DETAILS 131

A573 CEILING DETAILS 132

A600 ROOM FINISH SCHEDULE 133

A601 FLOOR FINISH PLAN 134

A602 ENLARGED FLOOR FINISH PLAN 135

A610 DOOR SCHEDULE 136

A611 DOOR DETAILS 137

A612 DOOR DETAILS 138

A613 DOOR DETAILS 139

A620 STOREFRONT ELEVATIONS & NOTES 140

A621 EXTERIOR STOREFRONT DETAILS 141

A622 EXTERIOR STOREFRONT DETAILS 142

A623 EXTERIOR/INTERIOR STOREFRONT DETAILS 143

A624 INTERIOR STOREFRONT DETAILS 144

A625 FLASHING INSTALLATION SEQUENCE 145

A641 SIGNAGE SCHEDULE + LEGEND 146

A642 FLOOR PLAN SIGNAGE LOCATION 147

A701 CASEWORK DETAILS 148

A702 CASEWORK DETAILS 149

A703 CASEWORK DETAILS 150

A704 CASEWORK DETAILS 151

A705 CASEWORK DETAILS 152

FP001 FIRE PROTECTION NOTES, LEGENDS & DETAILS 153

FP101 FIRST FLOOR FIRE PROTECTION PLAN 154

FP102 ATTIC FIRE PROTECTION PLAN 155

P001 PLUMBING NOTES, LEGENDS & SCHEDULES 156

P002 PLUMBING DETAILS 157

P050 PLUMBING DEMOLITION PLAN - NORTH SIDE 158

P051 PLUMBING DEMOLITION PLAN - SOUTH SIDE 159

DOCUMENT 00 01 15 Page 4

P101 DOMESTIC PLUMBING RENOVATION PLAN - NORTH SIDE 160

P102 DOMESTIC PLUMBING RENOVATION PLAN - SOUTH SIDE 161

P103 SANITARY PLUMBING RENOVATION PLAN - NORTH SIDE 162

P104 SANITARY PLUMBING RENOVATION PLAN - SOUTH SIDE 163

P105 PLUMBING ROOF PLAN - NORTH SIDE 164

P106 PLUMBING ROOF PLAN - SOUTH SIDE 165

M001 MECHANICAL NOTES, LEGENDS & SCHEDULES 166

M002 MECHANICAL DETAILS 167

M003 MECHANICAL DETAILS 168

M010 MECHANICAL CONTROLS 169

M050 MECHANICAL DEMOLITION PLAN - NORTH PLAN 170

M051 MECHANICAL DEMOLITION PLAN - SOUTH PLAN 171

M101 MECHANICAL RENOVATION PLAN - NORTH PLAN 172

M102 MECHANICAL RENOVATION PLAN - SOUTH PLAN 173

M103 MECHANICAL ROOF PLAN - NORTH PLAN 174

M104 MECHANICAL ROOF PLAN - SOUTH PLAN 175

M111 MECHANICAL AIR DISTRIBUTION PLAN - NORTH SIDE 176

M112 MECHANICAL AIR DISTRIBUTION PLAN - SOUTH SIDE 177

M201 MECHANICAL PIPING RENOVATION PLAN - NORTH PLAN 178

M202 MECHANICAL PIPING RENOVATION PLAN - SOUTH PLAN 179

E001 ELECTRICAL NOTES, LEGENDS & SCHEDULES 180

E002 LIGHTING SCHEDULES, DETAILS & NOTES 181

E003 ELECTRICAL DETAILS 182

E010 POWER SINGLE-LINE DIAGRAM 183

E020 ELECTRICAL PANEL SCHEDULES 1 184

E021 ELECTRICAL PANEL SCHEDULES 2 185

E050 ELECTRICAL DEMOLITION PLAN 186

E100 ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN 187

E101 ELECTRICAL POWER & SIGNAL PLAN - NORTH SIDE 188

E102 ELECTRICAL POWER & SIGNAL PLAN - SOUTH SIDE 189

E103 ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT POWER PLAN - NORTH SIDE 190

E104 ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT POWER PLAN - SOUTH SIDE 191

E201 ELECTRICAL LIGHTING PLAN - NORTH SIDE 192

E202 ELECTRICAL LIGHTING PLAN - SOUTH SIDE 193

E301 ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS PLAN - NORTH SIDE 194

E302 ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS PLAN - SOUTH SIDE 195

I101 FURNITURE PLAN - AI #1 196

I102 ARTWORK PLACEMENT PLAN - AI #1 197

I103 ARTWORK ELEVATIONS - AI #1 198

BHE01 BAGGAGE CONVEYOR - AI #2 199

IDS01 INTRUSION DETECTION PLAN - NORTH SIDE - AI #3 200

IDS02 INTRUSION DETECTION PLAN - SOUTH SIDE - AI #3 201

IDS03 CCTV DETAILS AND NOTES - AI #3 202

DOCUMENT 00 01 15 Page 5

AVS01 AUDIO & VISUAL SYTEM PLANS - AI #4 203

WF01 PUBLIC WIFI SYSTEM - NORTH PLAN - AI #5 204

WF02 PUBLIC WIFI SYSTEM - SOUTH PLAN - AI #5 205

-- End of Document --

DOCUMENT 00 01 15 Page 6

GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION

PASSENGER TERMINAL BUILDING 164

JOINT BASE CHARLESTON (AIR BASE)

NORTH CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA

S&ME PROJECT NO. 1131-12-403

Prepared for:

Glick/Boehm & Associates, Inc.

493 King Street, Suite 100

Charleston, South Carolina 29403

Prepared by:

620 Wando Park Boulevard Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina 29464

September 27, 2012

September 27, 2012

Glick/Boehm & Associates, Inc.

493 King Street, Suite 100 Charleston, South Carolina 29403

Attention: Mr. Gary Boehm, AIA, CSI, LEED AP

Reference: GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION Passenger Terminal Building 164 Joint Base Charleston (Air Base) North Charleston, South Carolina S&ME Project No. 1131-12-403

Dear Mr. Boehm:

We have completed our geotechnical exploration for the proposed additions and rehabilitation of the existing passenger terminal (Building 164) at the Joint Base Charleston (JBC) Air Base in North Charleston, South Carolina. Our services were performed pursuant to our proposal No. 31-12-155 dated June 7, 2012. The purpose of our services was to explore the site subsurface conditions, evaluate those conditions, and provide recommendations for site preparation and structural and pavement support. This report presents our understanding of the proposed construction, the site and subsurface conditions, and our conclusions and recommendations.

PROJECT INFORMATION

We understand the existing passenger terminal at the JBC Air Base will be upgraded to provide a modern state-of-the-art facility. The original 20,335-sq-ft building was constructed in 1956, and additions totaling 15, 073 sq ft have been added over the years. We understand the existing building is a single-story, masonry structure with a metal roof structure and a soil-supported concrete floor slab. The building is supported on shallow foundations.

Plans are preliminary at this time. Potential addition areas may include new facades to the front (west side) and back (east side) of the existing building. We understand the existing building will undergo renovations, and a seismic evaluation pursuant to ASCE 31 is required to help evaluate what structural upgrades will be necessary to meet current seismic code requirements.

We understand the project will be designed in accordance with the 2006 edition of the International Building Code (IBC 2006).

Structural and grading information were not provided. Based on our experience with similar structures, we assume maximum column and wall loading will be on the order of 75 kips and 3 kips/ft, respectively. We assume new fill heights of 1 ft or less will be required to grade potential addition areas.

S&ME, INC. / 620 Wando Park Blvd, Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 / p 843.884.0005 / f 843.881.6149 / www.smeinc.com

Geotechnical Exploration S&ME Project No. 1131-12-403 Passenger Terminal Building 164 JBC (Air Base) September 27, 2012 North Charleston, South Carolina

Pavements on the east (flight line), north, and south sides of the existing building are in poor condition. The project will include repair of these pavements as needed to support the project.

This project information was provided in an email from Mr. Gary Boehm to Ms. Angela Musselwhite with S&ME on June 1, 2012. Additional information was provided by Mr. Rob Still with ADC Engineering in emails to Mr. Michael Ulmer with S&ME on June 4 and 5, 2012.

METHODS OF EXPLORATION

Subsurface conditions on the perimeter of the existing building were explored by performing two cone penetrometer test (CPT) soundings and one seismic cone penetrometer test (SCPT) sounding to depths of 36 to 60 ft below the existing ground surface. The near-surface soils were further evaluated with a 4-ft deep hand-auger boring at each sounding location. Prior to performing the soundings and borings in paved areas, the pavement was cored with a 4-in.

diameter core bit.

In a CPT sounding (ASTM D 5778), an electronically instrumented cone penetrometer is hydraulically pushed through the soil to measure point stress, pore water pressure, and sleeve friction. The CPT data is used to determine soil stratigraphy and to estimate soil parameters such as preconsolidation stress, friction angle, and undrained shear strength. In a SCPT sounding, the travel times of shear waves generated by an impulsive force applied to the ground surface are measured by geophones mounted within the cone penetrometer. For each measurement, the distance traveled and travel time of the first shear wave arrival was determined. Interval velocities were calculated by dividing the distance between adjacent depths by the difference in travel times.

Subsurface conditions in pavement areas were evaluated by performing six, 4-ft-deep hand-auger borings with dynamic-cone-penetration (DCP) testing. The DCP testing was performed at 2-in.

depth increments using a Kessler DCP to a depth of approximately 3 ft below the existing pavement. The hand-auger borings were performed by manually turning a steel auger into the ground, and the soils encountered were visually classified in the field by a Geotechnical Professional using the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Upon completion of the soundings and borings, each bore-hole was backfilled with soil cuttings and core-holes were patched with cold-patch asphalt.

The test locations were established in the field by S&ME personnel estimating distances and right angles from existing site features. The test locations were limited due to the presence of the existing building and subsurface utilities. The approximate test locations are shown on the Test Location Plan (Figure 1) in the Appendix. A more detailed description of our field testing procedures, the CPT Logs, the Hand-Auger Boring Logs, and the DCP data sheets are included in the Appendix.

North Charleston, South Carolina

SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

Site Conditions

The site is located at 105 South Bates Street on the JBC Air Base in North Charleston. The site is bordered by Air Base facility buildings to the north and south, the Air Base flight line to the east, and South Bates Street to the west. At the time of the exploration, the site contained the existing Passenger Terminal building, which has grassed areas adjacent to the west and southwest sides of the building and asphalt pavements adjacent to the remaining sides of the building. The majority of the asphalt pavements appeared to show signs of distress with significant cracking and weathering. The pavement appeared to have been repaired or patched in several areas, and standing water from recent rain was observed in pavement areas between the existing building and the road that parallels the flight line. Numerous underground utilities are located throughout the project area.

Topographic information was not provided; however, the site appeared to be relatively flat with the exception of the grassed areas. These areas appeared to gently slope downward away from the building.

Subsurface Conditions

Details of the subsurface conditions encountered by the soundings and borings are shown on the logs in the Appendix. These logs represent our interpretation of the subsurface conditions based upon field data. Stratification lines on the logs represent approximate boundaries between soil behavior types1; however, the actual transition may be gradual. The general subsurface conditions and their pertinent characteristics are discussed in the following paragraphs.

The majority of the soundings and borings were located in pavement areas. The cores initially encountered approximately 2 to 6 in. of asphalt underlain by 5 to 6 in. of concrete or 4 to 7½ in.

of crushed stone. The asphalt, concrete, and base course thicknesses are presented in Table 1.

Test location C-1 was located in a grassed area and initially encountered approximately 2 in. of organic-laden topsoil. Beneath the pavement materials and topsoil, the exploration encountered sandy fill to depths of approximately 2½ to 5 ft below the existing ground surface. The fill soils predominately consist of relatively “clean” sand (i.e. low percentage of silt and clay content), and based on the sounding and DCP data, the fill appears to be well-compacted.

1 Soil Behavior Type is calculated based on empirical correlations with tip resistance, sleeve friction, and pore pressure. A CPT may define a soil based on its behavior as one type while its grain size and plasticity, the traditional basis for soil classification, may define it as a different type.

North Charleston, South Carolina

Table 1 – Existing Pavement Thicknesses

Test Location

Pavement Thickness (in.)

Asphalt Concrete Base Course

B-1 3 - 4

B-2 2 - 4

B-3 2½ - 7½

B-4 6 6 -

B-5 6 6 -

B-6 2½ - 4½

C-1 - - -

C-2 6 5 -

C-3 2 - 5

Beneath the fill, the exploration encountered very loose to dense sands to depths of approximately 31 to 33 ft. These sands were underlain by stiff clays to the top of the Cooper Marl2. Marl was encountered at depths of approximately 35 to 36 ft and continued to the deepest explored depth of 60 ft.

Subsurface water

Subsurface water was measured upon completion of the soundings at depth of approximately 6 ft below the existing ground surface. Subsurface water levels at the site will fluctuate during the year due to such things as seasonal and climatic variations and with construction activity in the area.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The exploration indicates the site is adaptable for the proposed construction. Our analysis indicates building foundations can designed as conventional shallow foundations bearing in well-compacted controlled fill. The primary geotechnical considerations will be site preparation, fill placement and compaction, and subgrade and foundation evaluation during construction.

The following presents our geotechnical recommendations regarding site grading and geotechnical considerations for the proposed structures. During review of these recommendations, it should be kept in mind that with any previously developed site, unexpected subsurface conditions will be encountered. These could include such things as poorly compacted fill deposits or buried debris. These unexpected conditions can normally be handled during construction by field engineering.

2 The Cooper Group Marl, locally referred to as “marl”, is a relatively incompressible, thick ( 200 ft) stratum which underlies the area, and is typically the bearing stratum for deep foundations in the Charleston area.

North Charleston, South Carolina

Seismic Considerations

A liquefaction3 analysis was performed based on the design earthquake4 prescribed by the 2006 edition of IBC 2006 and the “simplified procedure” as presented in Youd et al. (2001). An age correction factor, which increases the liquefaction resistance of older sand deposits of the type that were encountered at this site, was also applied.5 This analysis indicates the isolated sand layers between depths of approximately 7 to 28 ft below the existing ground surface have the potential to liquefy during the design seismic event.

To help evaluate the consequences of liquefaction, the Liquefaction Potential Index (LPI), which is an empirical tool used to evaluate the site liquefaction hazard and the potential for liquefaction-induced damages6, was computed. The LPI considers the factor of safety against liquefaction, the depth to the liquefiable soils, and the thickness of the liquefiable soils to compute an index that ranges from 0 to 100. An LPI of 0 means there is no risk of liquefaction;

an LPI of 100 means the entire profile is expected to liquefy. The level of risk is generally defined as:

LPI < 5 – surface manifestation and liquefaction-induced damage not expected.

5 ≤ LPI ≤ 15 – moderate liquefaction with some surface manifestation possible.

LPI > 15 – severe liquefaction and foundation damage is likely.

The LPI for this site is approximately 7, which indicates the liquefaction risk is moderate and some foundation damage and surface manifestations are possible due to the design earthquake.

Surface manifestations may result in bearing capacity loss, and we predict approximately 2 in. or less of liquefaction-induced settlement are possible.

Seismic Site-Specific Response Analyses

Based on an average shear-wave velocity of 867 ft/sec, a seismic Site Class D designation is appropriate using the IBC 2006 general procedure. However, Section 1613.5.5 of IBC 2006 classifies sites with the potential for liquefaction as a Site Class F and section ASCE 31-03 Section 3.5.2.3.1 indicates that a Site Class E should be used for soil profiles that classify as a Site Class F when performing a Tier 1 Evaluation.

3 Liquefaction, the loss of a soil’s shear strength due to the increase in porewater pressure resulting from seismic vibrations, is always a potential concern in coastal South Carolina.

4 The IBC design earthquake has a 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years. This is statistically equivalent to an event that occurs about once every 2,500 years. Our liquefaction analysis was based on an earthquake with a magnitude of 7.3 and ground surface acceleration of 0.51g.

5 Hayati & Andrus (2008), Andrus et al (2009), Hayati & Andrus (2009).

6 Iwasaki et al. 1982, Toprak & Holzer (2003).

North Charleston, South Carolina

A seismic site-specific response analyses (SSRA) has been performed to evaluate the response of the site soils during the IBC 2006 design earthquake. The computer program SHAKE 20007 was used to perform the site response analyses. SHAKE 2000 computes the response of a horizontally layered soil system subjected to a horizontal acceleration time history. Required input includes acceleration time histories and soil profiles (layer thicknesses, shear wave velocities, modulus reduction and damping curves). The soil profile or horizontally layered system was based on our interpretation of the sounding data and the input acceleration time histories were synthetically generated using a United States Geologic Survey (USGS) website.

The synthetic time histories, which correspond to a uniform hazard of 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years, were matched at a spectral acceleration (Sa) frequency of 5.0 Hz

The USGS web application generates six acceleration time histories at once. We used all six in our seismic site response analysis and varied the depth of input (i.e., the thickness of the soil column above rock) and the soil properties (i.e., shear wave velocity, modulus and damping reduction curves). A ground surface response spectrum was computed for each varied model, and the site-specific response spectrum was determined.

The general procedure for a seismic Site Class D and Site Class E and site specific design response spectra with the imposed IBC 2006 and ASCE 31-03 limitations are plotted in Figure 2.

The limitations include a reduction of not less than 70% (ASCE 31-03) of the Site Class E general procedure spectrum and a design short period spectral response acceleration (SDS) not less than 90% of the peak acceleration along the spectrum. In addition to the permissible 70% general procedure reduction, the design 1-second period spectral response acceleration (SD1) must be greater than two times the spectral acceleration at a period of 2.0 seconds.

Table 2 presents the SDS and the SD1 spectral response accelerations for the site-specific and general procedures. A two-thirds reduction has been applied to these design accelerations.

Table 2 - Summary of Site-Specific Response Results IBC 2006 Design Response Accelerations

Site-Specific Procedure General Procedure

SDS (g) SD1 (g) Site Class D Site Class E

SDS (g) SD1 (g) SDs (g) SD1 (g)

1.61 0.55 1.28 0.49 1.15 0.78

Site Preparation

Site preparation in building areas should begin with removing old foundations and concrete slabs, pavements, subsurface utilities, and buried debris. Site preparation should continue with clearing and grubbing any vegetation and roots, stripping any organic laden topsoil, and

7 SHAKE 2000 is a one-dimensional, equivalent linear software package the estimates the response of a soil column to a vertically propagating shear wave (copyright 2007 Gustavo A. Ordonez). The program consists of pre- and post-processors integrated with the UC Berkeley code SHAKE (Seed et al) and SHAKE91.

North Charleston, South Carolina undercutting unsuitable surface soils. Voids created by removing utilities, debris, or buried structures should be cleaned and backfilled with well-compacted controlled fill.

The demolition process will disturb the surface soils. The disturbed subgrade should be densified to a more uniform consistency by making six to eight perpendicular passes with a vibratory roller. Following densification, the subgrade should be evaluated by proofrolling with a heavily-loaded tandem-axle dump truck or similar rubber-tired equipment under the observation of the Geotechnical Engineer. Areas that pump or rut excessively should be densified in place or undercut as directed by the Geotechnical Engineer. In areas were proofrolling cannot be performed, the subgrade should be evaluated by probing, hand-auger borings, and dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) testing.

The site has been previously developed and fill soils are present. Thorough proofrolling will be very important and some localized, shallow undercutting or densification may be necessary. If the existing fill soils are determined stable by the Geotechnical Engineer, the fill may remain in place.

Controlled Fill

Controlled fill material should be cohesionless soil containing no more than 15% fines (material passing the No. 200 sieve) by weight, having a maximum dry density of at least 100 pcf as determined by a laboratory modified Proctor compaction test (ASTM D 1557). The soil should be relatively free of organics, deleterious matter, and elongated or flat particles susceptible to degradation. All fill should be placed in uniform lifts of 10 in. or less (loose measure) and compacted to at least 95% of the modified Proctor maximum dry density.

Fill placement should be observed by a qualified Engineering Technician working under the direction of the Geotechnical Engineer. In addition to this visual evaluation, the Technician should perform a sufficient number of in-place field density tests to confirm the contractor’s equipment and methods are capable of achieving the required degree of compaction.

Shallow Foundation Recommendations

Shallow foundations may be designed for a maximum allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. This recommendation assumes fill heights and building loads are no greater than those assumed in this report and site preparation and fill placement and compaction are completed as recommended. Building foundations should bear a minimum depth of 18 in. below finished exterior grades to develop the design bearing pressure. Wall and column footings should be a minimum of 18 and 24 in. wide, respectively. This recommendation is made to help prevent a "localized" or "punching" shear failure condition, which could exist with very narrow footings.

North Charleston, South Carolina

All foundation excavation bottoms must be evaluated by a representative of the Geotechnical Engineer prior to steel and concrete placement. This evaluation should include probing, hand-auger borings, and dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) testing. This evaluation will help determine if individual footings are directly underlain by suitable bearing material. Any loose material should be properly compacted or undercut and replaced with well-compacted controlled fill or crushed aggregate such as No. 57 stone. If practical, concrete placement should be completed the same day as the footing excavation. Slag is not recommended as backfill due to its potentially expansive nature.

Our analysis indicates post-construction static (not seismically-induced) settlement due to the assumed building loads will be 1 in. or less. Differential settlement is typically assumed to be about half of the total settlement. If actual building loads will be greater than those assumed in this report, we should be provided with this information so that we can reevaluate settlement.

Construction Adjacent to Existing Building

Care should be used during construction adjacent to the existing building, particularly during excavation. In no case should the existing foundations be undermined, unless approved by the Structural Engineer.

The loads from additions will create some additional stresses beneath the existing foundations and possibly cause some settlement. Our past experience indicates that this settlement should not adversely affect the performance of the structure. However, with any construction adjacent to existing building, there is always the potential that some small cracks could develop in masonry walls.

Floor Slabs

Building floor slabs may be soil-supported provided our site preparation and fill placement and compaction recommendations are followed. A subgrade modulus (k) of 180 pci is available for design. This recommended modulus is representative of a 30-in. diameter plate load test and is only applicable for light point loads. This modulus must be reduced for wide area loads.

If moisture sensitive floor coverings will be used, a vapor barrier should be included in the floor slab design. The design of the vapor barrier should be in accordance with American Concrete Institute (ACI) guidelines. Also, the slab should be designed with proper joints to keep stresses within the appropriate limits, achieve adequate load transfer across joints, and reduce the potential for irregular crack formation. Details regarding proper backfill of utility trenches below the building floor slab should be planned. Suitable granular material should be used as backfill materials. The backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with the "Controlled Fill" recommendations discussed previously.

North Charleston, South Carolina

Excavation

Foundation and utility excavations may encounter subsurface water. If encountered, the water level should be maintained at least 1 ft below excavations to help maintain bottom stability.

Water can probably be controlled at the site by pumping from sumps located within the excavation or well point systems. The effects of dewatering on nearby structures should be evaluated and are the responsibility of the designer of the dewatering system.

All excavations should be sloped or shored in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations, including OSHA (29 CFR Part 1926) excavation trench safety standards. The contractor is usually solely responsible for site safety. This information is provided only as a service, and under no circumstances should S&ME be assumed to be responsible for construction site safety.

Pavement Recommendations

Pavement Overlay

The cores extracted from pavements located between of the existing building and flight line roadway (east side of building) indicate the asphalt pavement is approximately 6 in. thick. We anticipate this relatively thick pavement section can be milled and resurfaced. We recommend the pavement be milled 1½ in., the condition of the exposed asphalt surface be evaluated by the Geotechnical Engineer, and the pavement be overlaid with 1½ in. of SCDOT surface course Type C.

Our experience indicates the relatively thin, weathered pavements on the north and south sides of the building cannot be milled effectively; therefore, these areas will require full depth pavement section replacement. The limits of the pavement overlay area and full depth pavement replacement areas are not clearly defined. The interface between the overlay and full depth pavement replacement areas should be located and established prior to milling and overlay operations to determining what pavement option (overlay or full depth replacement) should be used.

New Pavement Section

We have evaluated new asphalt pavements using the AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures and associated literature. Traffic loading data was not provided; therefore, we assume standard-duty pavement will be subjected to cars, light trucks, and some heavy truck traffic.

Based on the in situ DCP data and our experience, the existing subgrade soils at this site will provide a CBR of at least 10%. The CBR values should be confirmed during grading by engineering evaluation and field and laboratory testing. Table 3 presents our recommendations for minimum pavement sections for the north and south pavement areas.

North Charleston, South Carolina

Table 3 – Minimum Recommended Pavement Sections

Material

Minimum Section

Thickness

Asphaltic Concrete Surface Course (SCDOT Type C)

3 in.

Graded Aggregate Base Course 8 in.

Our analyses indicate the asphalt pavement section has an allowable traffic volume of about 1,900,000 ESALs8 over a 15-year design life. Construction traffic has not been included in our analysis, and construction traffic should be restricted from prepared subgrades and new pavements. If pavements must support construction traffic, stage construction or a thicker asphalt section will be required.

All materials and workmanship should be in accordance with the South Carolina Department of Transportation’s Standard Specifications for Highway Construction, 2007 Edition.

A stable subgrade is very important to pavement performance. Immediately prior to paving, the subgrade should be proofrolled, and any unstable areas should be repaired. The base course should be compacted to at least 100% of the maximum dry density as determined by the modified Proctor compaction test (ASTM D 1557). In-place field density tests should be performed by a qualified Materials Technician, and the area should be methodically proofrolled under their evaluation to confirm that the base course has been uniformly compacted. The thickness should not be deficient in any area by more than ½ in. The asphalt pavement thickness should not be deficient by more than ¼ in. in any area.

The performance of asphalt pavements will be dependent upon a number of factors including subgrade conditions at the time of paving, drainage, and traffic. We note standing water was observed in existing pavement areas during our exploration. The geometric design should provide positive drainage for the pavement surface and subgrades.

Pavement design typically has relatively low factors of safety; therefore, it will be very important that the specifications are followed closely during pavement construction. As previously stated, our analysis was based on a 15-year design life; however, some isolated areas could require repair in a shorter period of time.

8 Equivalent 18-kip single axle load (ESAL). For example, a legally-loaded tandem axle tractor-trailer has an ESAL of up to 2.5, while a passenger car has an ESAL of approximately 0.0002.

North Charleston, South Carolina

LIMITATIONS OF REPORT

This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice for specific application to this project. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based upon applicable standards of our practice in this geographic area at the time this report was prepared. No other warranty, express or implied, is made.

The analyses and recommendations submitted in this report are based, in part, upon data obtained from our subsurface exploration. The nature and extent of subsurface variations will not become evident until construction. If variations appear evident, then we should be given the opportunity to re-evaluate the recommendations of this report. In the event that any changes in the nature, design, or location of the proposed construction are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report will not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed and conclusions modified or verified in writing.

We recommend that S&ME be retained to review the final design plans and specifications to confirm that earthwork and foundation recommendations are properly interpreted and implemented.

CLOSURE

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. If you have any questions concerning this preliminary report, please call.

Sincerely, S&ME, Inc.

Ronald C. Boller, E.I.T. Michael S. Ulmer, P.E.

Geotechnical Professional Senior Engineer

RCB/MSU/sln

APPENDIX

Test Location Plan (Figure 1)

Site-Specific Response Acceleration Spectrum (Figure 2)

CPT Sounding Logs

Hand-Auger Logs

DCP Data Sheets

Field Testing Procedures

Project No.

1131-12-403

This Charleston County GIS aerial photograph was adapted by S&ME, Inc., and test locations are approximate. This test location plan should not be used for design or construction.

C-2

C-1

C-3

B-1 B-2

B-4

B-3

B-6 B-5 Approximate CPT Sounding / Not to Scale

September 2012 Hand-Auger Boring Location

Boring Location Figure

TEST LOCATION PLAN

Passenger Terminal Building 164

JBC Air Base Approximate DCP / Hand-Auger North Charleston, South Carolina

Figure

Date: 2

Project No.: 1131-12-403 2% Probability of Exceedance in 50 Years

Passenger Terminal Building 164- Charleston AFB

North Charleston, South Carolina

Acceleration Response Spectra, 5% Damping

September

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

1.10

1.20

1.30

1.40

1.50

1.60

1.70

1.80

1.90

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00

S p e c te ra l A c c e le ra ti o n g

Period (sec)

Site-Specific ARS SDS = 1.61g SD1 = 0.55g

General Procedure ARS Site Class D SDS = 1.28g SD1 = 0.49g

Design Response Spectra with ASCE 31-03 and IBC 2006 Limitations Passenger Terminal Building 164 - Charleston AFB

North Charleston, South Carolina

General Procedure ARS Site Class E SDS = 1.15g SD1 = 0.78g

Sands-Clean Sand to Silty Sand

Sands-Clean Sand to Silty Sand

Sands-Clean Sand to Silty Sand

Silt Mixtures-Clay Silt to Silty Clay

Sand Mixtures-Silty Sand to Sandy Silt

Electronic Filename: G17S1207C.ECP

Depth (ft)

Tip Resistance qt

(tsf) 40 80 120 160

1.75 6 ft

Cone Size:

SBTFr

MAI = 5

Sleeve Friction fs

(tsf) 1 2 3 4 0 20 40 60

Pore Pressure u2

(tsf) 0 20 40 60 u0

Friction Ratio Rf

2 4 6 8

C P

T R

E P

O R

T

S T

A N

D A

R D

S

B T

F R

1-

-4

C P

T .G

P J

S

M E

.G D

T

/2 6/

Sep. 17, 2012

Marooka / M. Cox

Total Depth:

Termination Criteria:

Date:

Estimated Water Depth:

Rig/Operator:

S&ME Project No: 1131-12-403

Passenger Terminal Building 164 (JBC Air Base) North Charleston, South Carolina

C-1

39.4 ft Target Depth

Depth (ft)

101 100

Equivalent N60

Cone Penetration Test C-1

Sands-Clean Sand to Silty Sand

Sand Mixtures-Silty Sand to Sandy Silt

Sand Mixtures-Silty Sand to Sandy Silt

Sand Mixtures-Silty Sand to Sandy Silt

Sand Mixtures-Silty Sand to Sandy Silt

Sands-Clean Sand to Silty Sand

Sand Mixtures-Silty Sand to Sandy Silt

Electronic Filename: G17S1205C.ECP

Depth (ft)

Tip Resistance qt

(tsf) 40 80 120 160

1.75 6 ft

Cone Size:

SBTFr

MAI = 5

Sleeve Friction fs

(tsf) 1 2 3 4 0 20 40 60

Pore Pressure u2

(tsf) 0 20 40 60 u0

Friction Ratio Rf

2 4 6 8

C P

T R

E P

O R

T

S T

A N

D A

R D

S

B T

F R

1-

-4

C P

T .G

P J

S

M E

.G D

T

/2 6/

Sep. 17, 2012

Marooka / M. Cox

Total Depth:

Termination Criteria:

Date:

Estimated Water Depth:

Rig/Operator:

S&ME Project No: 1131-12-403

Passenger Terminal Building 164 (JBC Air Base) North Charleston, South Carolina

C-2

60.2 ft Target Depth

Depth (ft)

Shear Wave Velocity Vs

(ft/sec) 800 1600 2400 3200

Cone Penetration Test C-2

Clays-Clay to Silty Clay

Silt Mixtures-Clay Silt to Silty Clay

Sand Mixtures-Silty Sand to Sandy Silt

Electronic Filename: G17S1204C.ECP

Depth (ft)

Tip Resistance qt

(tsf) 40 80 120 160

1.75 6 ft

Cone Size:

SBTFr

MAI = 5

Sleeve Friction fs

(tsf) 1 2 3 4 0 20 40 60

Pore Pressure u2

(tsf) 0 20 40 60 u0

Friction Ratio Rf

2 4 6 8

C P

T R

E P

O R

T

S T

A N

D A

R D

S

B T

F R

1-

-4

C P

T .G

P J

S

M E

.G D

T

/2 6/

Sep. 17, 2012

Marooka / M. Cox

Total Depth:

Termination Criteria:

Date:

Estimated Water Depth:

Rig/Operator:

S&ME Project No: 1131-12-403

Passenger Terminal Building 164 (JBC Air Base) North Charleston, South Carolina

C-3

35.9 ft Target Depth

Depth (ft)

101 100

Equivalent N60

Cone Penetration Test C-3

ASPHALT = 3 INCHES

CRUSHED STONE = 4 INCHES

FILL: SLIGHTLY SILTY SAND (SP-SM)

brown to grayish brown, fine, moist, trace stone

- - - Gray to brownish gray, trace pieces roots

Boring terminated at 4 ft

HAND AUGER BORING LOG: B-1

1. PENETRATION RESISTANCE IS THE NUMBER OF BLOWS OF A 10.1 LB

HAMMER FALLING 22.6 IN., DRIVING A 0.79 IN. O.D. 60 DEGREE CONE 1.75 IN.

DATE FINISHED:

1131-12-403

DATE STARTED:

North Charleston, South Carolina

9/18/12 9/18/12

Ron Boller

Groundwater not encountered at time of boring

Hand-Auger

WATER LEVEL:

Passenger Terminal Building 164 (JBC Air Base)

SAMPLING METHOD:

PROJECT:

PERFORMED BY:

NOTES:

G R

A P

H

IC

LO

G

D ep th (f ee t)

W A

T E

R

LE

V E

L

E

LE

V A

T

IO

N (f ee t)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

ASPHALT = 2 INCHES

CRUSHED STONE = 4 INCHES

FILL: SLIGHTLY SILTY SAND (SP-SM)

brown to yellowish brown, fine, moist

FILL: SLIGHTLY CLAYEY SAND (SP-SC)

yellowish brown to grayish brown, fine, moist, with clay pieces

Boring terminated at 4 ft

HAND AUGER BORING LOG: B-2

1. PENETRATION RESISTANCE IS THE NUMBER OF BLOWS OF A 10.1 LB

HAMMER FALLING 22.6 IN., DRIVING A 0.79 IN. O.D. 60 DEGREE CONE 1.75 IN.

DATE FINISHED:

1131-12-403

DATE STARTED:

North Charleston, South Carolina

9/18/12 9/18/12

Ron Boller

Groundwater not encountered at time of boring

Hand-Auger

WATER LEVEL:

Passenger Terminal Building 164 (JBC Air Base)

SAMPLING METHOD:

PROJECT:

PERFORMED BY:

NOTES:

G R

A P

H

IC

LO

G

D ep th (f ee t)

W A

T E

R

LE

V E

L

E

LE

V A

T

IO

N (f ee

ASPHALT = 2.5 INCHES

CRUSHED STONE = 7.5 INCHES

FILL: SLIGHTLY SILTY SAND (SP-SM)

light brown, fine, moist, with stone pieces

- - - Light brown to yellowish brown

- - - Light brown to grayish brown

Boring terminated at 4 ft

HAND AUGER BORING LOG: B-3

1. PENETRATION RESISTANCE IS THE NUMBER OF BLOWS OF A 10.1 LB

HAMMER FALLING 22.6 IN., DRIVING A 0.79 IN. O.D. 60 DEGREE CONE 1.75 IN.

DATE FINISHED:

1131-12-403

DATE STARTED:

North Charleston, South Carolina

9/18/12 9/18/12

Ron Boller

Groundwater not encountered at time of boring

Hand-Auger

WATER LEVEL:

Passenger Terminal Building 164 (JBC Air Base)

SAMPLING METHOD:

PROJECT:

PERFORMED BY:

NOTES:

G R

A P

H

IC

LO

G

D ep th (f ee t)

W A

T E

R

LE

V E

L

E

LE

V A

T

IO

N (f ee

ASPHALT = 6 INCHES

CONCRETE = 6 INCHES

FILL: SLIGHTLY SILTY SAND (SP-SM)

brown to yellowish brown, fine, moist

- - - Brown

- - - Brown to grayish brown

Boring terminated at 4 ft

HAND AUGER BORING LOG: B-4

1. PENETRATION RESISTANCE IS THE NUMBER OF BLOWS OF A 10.1 LB

HAMMER FALLING 22.6 IN., DRIVING A 0.79 IN. O.D. 60 DEGREE CONE 1.75 IN.

DATE FINISHED:

1131-12-403

DATE STARTED:

North Charleston, South Carolina

9/18/12 9/18/12

Ron Boller

Groundwater not encountered at time of boring

Hand-Auger

WATER LEVEL:

Passenger Terminal Building 164 (JBC Air Base)

SAMPLING METHOD:

PROJECT:

PERFORMED BY:

NOTES:

G R

A P

H

IC

LO

G

D ep th (f ee t)

W A

T E

R

LE

V E

L

E

LE

V A

T

IO

N (f ee

CONCRETE = 6 INCHES

FILL: SLIGHTLY SILTY SAND (SP-SM)

light brown to yellowish brown, fine, moist

- - - Trace stone pieces

FILL: SLIGHTLY CLAYEY SAND (SP-SC)

brown to grayish brown, fine, moist

- - - Brown to yellowish brown

Boring terminated at 4 ft

HAND AUGER BORING LOG: B-5

1. PENETRATION RESISTANCE IS THE NUMBER OF BLOWS OF A 10.1 LB

HAMMER FALLING 22.6 IN., DRIVING A 0.79 IN. O.D. 60 DEGREE CONE 1.75 IN.

DATE FINISHED:

1131-12-403

DATE STARTED:

North Charleston, South Carolina

9/18/12 9/18/12

Ron Boller

Groundwater not encountered at time of boring

Hand-Auger

WATER LEVEL:

Passenger Terminal Building 164 (JBC Air Base)

SAMPLING METHOD:

PROJECT:

PERFORMED BY:

NOTES:

G R

A P

H

IC

LO

G

D ep th (f ee t)

W A

T E

R

LE

V E

L

E

LE

V A

T

IO

N (f ee

ASPHALT = 2.5 INCHES

CRUSHED STONE = 4.5 INCHES

FILL: SLIGHTLY SILTY SAND (SP-SM)

brown to yellowish brown, fine, moist

- - - Yellowish brown to grayish brown

- - - Brown to gray

Boring terminated at 4 ft

HAND AUGER BORING LOG: B-6

1. PENETRATION RESISTANCE IS THE NUMBER OF BLOWS OF A 10.1 LB

HAMMER FALLING 22.6 IN., DRIVING A 0.79 IN. O.D. 60 DEGREE CONE 1.75 IN.

DATE FINISHED:

1131-12-403

DATE STARTED:

North Charleston, South Carolina

9/18/12 9/18/12

Ron Boller

Groundwater not encountered at time of boring

Hand-Auger

WATER LEVEL:

Passenger Terminal Building 164 (JBC Air Base)

SAMPLING METHOD:

PROJECT:

PERFORMED BY:

NOTES:

G R

A P

H

IC

LO

G

D ep th (f ee t)

W A

T E

R

LE

V E

L

E

LE

V A

T

IO

N (f ee

TOP…