Geotech_Report _RAFB_Depack_Facility.pdf

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EVALUATION

UHHZ 140006, CONSTRUCT DEPACK FACILITY NEAR B145

ROBINS AIR FORCE BASE

WARNER ROBINS, GEORGIA

GEC PROJECT NO. 150350.210

PREPARED FOR

MR. JACK LEVINE

TOLAND-MIZELL ARCHITECTS, INC.

590 MEANS STREET, SUITE 200

ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30318

PREPARED BY

GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.

514 HILLCREST INDUSTRIAL BLVD.

MACON, GEORGIA 31204

478-757-1606

JUNE 29, 2015

514 Hillcrest Industrial Boulevard, Macon, GA 31204 • Phone: (478) 757-1606 • Fax: (478) 757-1608 5031 Milgen Court, Columbus, GA 31907 • Phone: (706) 569-0008 • Fax: (706) 569-0940

June 29, 2015

Mr. Jack Levine Toland-Mizell Architects, Inc.

590 Means Street, Suite 200 Atlanta, Georgia 30318

SUBJECT: Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation UHHZ 140006, Construct Depack Facility near B145 Robins Air Force Base Warner Robins, Georgia GEC Project No. 150350.210

Dear Mr. Levine:

Geotechnical & Environmental Consultants, Inc. (GEC) is pleased to present this report of our subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering evaluation for the above site. The purpose of this exploration was to obtain data to evaluate the site and subsurface conditions in order to provide recommendations relative to the geotechnical aspects of the project.

We greatly appreciate the opportunity to provide these services to you. If you have any questions, or if we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call.

Sincerely, GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.

Geoffrey A. Madrazo, E.I.T. Thomas E. Driver, P.E.

Project Engineer President Ga. Reg. #17394

GAM/TED/gam

TABLE OF CONTENTS

UHHZ 140006, CONSTRUCT DEPACK FACILITY NEAR B145

ROBINS AIR FORCE BASE

WARNER ROBINS, GEORGIA

GEC PROJECT NO. 150350.210

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

2.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

3.0 METHOD OF EXPLORATION

3.1 Site Reconnaissance

3.2 Soil Test Borings

4.0 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

4.1 Site Description

4.2 Local Geology

4.3 Subsurface Conditions

5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Site and Subgrade Preparation

5.2 Earthwork

5.3 Foundations

5.4 Slab Design

5.5 Slopes

5.6 Seismic Design Criteria

5.7 Geotechnical Controls

5.8 Limitations

APPENDIX

- SITE LOCATION MAP

- BORING LOCATION PLAN

- SOIL TEST BORING PROCEDURES

- SOIL BORING RECORDS

- SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART

- LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS

Report of Subsurface Evaluation June 29, 2015 UHHZ 140006, Construct Depack Facility near B145 Robins Air Force Base

Warner Robins, Georgia GEC Project No. 150350.210

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The following summary highlights our pertinent findings and recommendations concerning this project.

• All soil samples collected in the borings were screened for volatile organics using a Photoionization Detector (PID). No significant vapor indications were recorded. A bulk soil sample was taken from each SPT boring and sent to Analytical Environmental Services, Inc. for contaminate testing, which included flashpoint, pH, TCLP RCRA metals, TCLP volatiles, TCLP semi-volatiles, TCLP pesticides, low-level PAH, and paint filter test.

• Site preparation will include the removal of topsoil in the planned construction areas. All stripped materials and debris should be disposed off-site or in non-structural areas.

• Significantly loose/soft soils were encountered in the near-surface soils extending to a depth of about six (6) feet below the existing ground surface. These soils should be undercut and replaced with structural fill material.

• The on-site materials appear to be suitable for use as structural fill.

• Refusal to the auger process was not encountered within the depths evaluated at the site.

• Groundwater was not encountered within the depths explored, and is not anticipated to impact construction activities.

• We recommend using conventional shallow foundations for support of the proposed building. However, undercutting the near-surface soils and replacing with engineered fill will be required. A uniform net allowable bearing capacity of 3,000 psf should be used for design of shallow foundations bearing on engineered fill.

• The concrete slab-on-grade floor for the proposed building addition may be designed using a modulus of subgrade reaction of 125 pci considering the use of engineered fill to replace the low consistency soils at the site

This executive summary has been prepared solely to provide a general overview of the report.

The executive summary should not be relied upon for any purpose except for a general overview.

Please rely on the full report for information concerning the findings, recommendations and other concerns at the site.

Robins Air Force Base

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

Our understanding of the project is based on conversations with Mr. Jack Levine with Toland- Mizell Architects, Inc. The subject property is located at the east end of First Street at Robins Air Force Base in Warner Robins, Georgia. The project location is shown on the Site Location Map in the Appendix.

We understand the proposed development will consist of a pre-engineered metal building used for storage. All construction will take place on the subject property at the east end of First Street near Building 145 at Robins Air Force Base in Warner Robins, Georgia. The proposed construction areas are shown on the Boring Location Plan in the Appendix.

Structural and grading plans have not been provided to GEC at this time. Based on our site reconnaissance and project information, we anticipate that planned cut and fill sections will be on the order of five (5) feet or less. For the purpose of this report, we assume that the structural loads will be typical for the proposed type of development and that the maximum column loads will not except 100 kips and maximum wall loads will not exceed 2 to 3 kips per linear foot.

3.0 METHOD OF EXPLORATION

3.1

Site Conditions

GEC performed a general review of the proposed project site and surrounding areas on May 15, 2015, prior to the performance of our subsurface exploration activities. The review was performed to evaluate surface conditions that could impact our exploration techniques or the proposed construction.

The locations and depths of the borings were selected by GEC based on the site plans. The boring locations were marked in the field by measuring from existing features.

No site clearing was required for drill rig access.

3.2

Soil Test Borings

A total of two (2) soil test borings were performed at the project site. Borings designated B-1 and B-2 were located within the proposed building area and were extended to a depth of 20 feet below the existing ground surface. The approximate locations of the borings are presented on the Boring Location Plan located in the Appendix.

Robins Air Force Base

All borings were backfilled with the auger cuttings prior to site demobilization. No excess auger cuttings were present after drilling; therefore, there were no drummed soils left at the site. The split-spoon samples were returned to our laboratory and were manually and visually examined and classified. The samples were classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Detailed records of the soil test borings, indicating the N-values (blow counts) obtained from the Standard Penetration Testing (SPT) and a more detailed description of the drilling and sampling processes, are presented in the Appendix.

4.0 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

4.1

Site Description

The proposed project is located near Building 145 at the east end of First Street at Robins Air Force Base in Warner Robins, Georgia. The site currently consists of a landscaped area to the east of Building 145. The proposed building area is relatively flat and level.

4.2

Local Geology

The site is located in the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province of Georgia. Soils in the Coastal Plain are the result of the deposition of sediments in a former marine environment. Coastal Plain sedimentary deposits make up about 60 percent of Georgia’s surface area and consist of a southwardly thickening wedge of sediments that are bordered on the north by the parent rocks of the Piedmont Physiographic Province. The border between these provinces is known as the “Fall-Line.” The Coastal Plain sediments range in age from the Cretaceous to the Recent, with the oldest exposed along the “Fall-Line” and the youngest along the coast. Typically, the surface soils consist of complexly interbedded sands, silts, and clays of various mixtures. Sandstones, shales, and limestones comprise the characteristic lithology of the Coastal Plain. These formations are usually found at depths greater than fifty feet but can also be found at or near the ground surface. They are not known to occur near the surface in the site area. Topography in this region of the Coastal Plain is generally flat to gently rolling.

4.3

Subsurface Conditions

Details of the subsurface conditions encountered by the soil test borings are shown on the Soil Boring Records in the Appendix of this report. These records represent an estimate of the subsurface conditions based on our interpretation of the boring data using normally accepted engineering judgment. Stratification lines on the Soil Boring Records represent approximate boundaries between soil types. However, the in-situ transition is typically more gradual.

Although individual test borings are representative of the subsurface conditions at the boring locations on the dates shown, they are not necessarily indicative of the subsurface conditions at other locations or at other times. The general soil conditions and their pertinent characteristics are discussed in the following paragraphs.

Robins Air Force Base

General Stratigraphy

The general subsurface stratigraphy of the site consisted of a layer of topsoil, fill material below, and Coastal Plain Sediment soils extending to the maximum depths explored.

Topsoil

Topsoil was measured at approximately two (2) inches in borings B-1 and B-2. A topsoil depth of three (3) inches is recommended for planning and budgeting purposes.

Fill Material

Fill material was encountered in borings B-1 and B-2 below the topsoil. The fill material generally consisted of very loose to loose sands (SC) with various silt and clay contents, as well as soft sandy clays (CL) with various silt contents. The SPT N-values in these soils ranged from 3 to 10 blows per foot (bpf). All fill soils extended to a depth of approximately six (6) feet below the existing ground surface.

Coastal Plain Sediment Soils

The Coastal Plain Sediment soils encountered below the fill material in borings B-1 and B-2 generally consisted of very firm to dense silty sands (SM) with various clay contents. The SPT N-values in these soils ranged from 15 to 37 blows per foot (bpf).

Groundwater

Groundwater was not encountered in the borings within the depths explored. The presence of groundwater is not expected to impact construction activities.

Environmental Testing

All soil samples collected in both SPT borings were screened for volatile organics using a Photoionization Detector (PID). No significant vapor indications were recorded at the time of drilling. A bulk soil sample was taken from each boring and sent to Analytical Environmental Services, Inc. for contaminate testing, which included flashpoint, pH, TCLP RCRA metals, TCLP volatiles, TCLP semi-volatiles, TCLP pesticides, low-level PAH, and paint filter test. The results of the tests can be found in the Appendix.

Robins Air Force Base

5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1

Site and Subgrade Preparation

The initial step in site preparation should consist of the removal of the topsoil and any soft/loose near-surface soils in the planned construction areas. Any utility lines in the project area should be removed and relocated. Excavations or holes resulting from the removal of utilities should be backfilled with structural fill to the compaction requirements presented in Section 5.2, Earthwork. We estimate that the topsoil thickness at the site, where present, is approximately two (2) inches, and we recommend a depth of three (3) inches for planning purposes. Stripped topsoil should be moved outside of fill areas and may be used as landscaping materials or removed from the site.

Care should be taken with near-surface soils containing fine-grained particles (particles passing the 200 sieve) during grading. When exposed to moisture, the workability and strength of these near-surface soils deteriorates significantly, and the need for undercutting and other construction delays may result. We recommend that construction grades be maintained throughout this project in such a manner so to establish positive drainage away from working surfaces and subgrades.

Significantly loose/soft fill material was encountered near the surface in each boring to a depth of about six (6) feet below the existing ground surface. We recommend that these soils be excavated and replaced. The removed soils appear to be suitable for use as structural fill;

however, they may need to be moisture conditioned for proper compaction. New structural fill materials will be acceptable as well. The loose soils will need to be undercut to a point 10 feet outside of the perimeters of the structural areas. All undercut areas should be backfilled with structural fill as described in Section 5.2, Earthwork, of this report.

5.2

Earthwork

The soil test borings indicate the near-surface soils at the site can be graded with conventional earthmoving equipment such as self-loading or pusher-assisted pans and tracked dozers. The near-surface soils appear to be suitable for use as fill material. Wetting or drying of the soils at the site may be necessary to achieve the required compaction criteria. The contractor should be required to have equipment available on site for both wetting and drying of the soils.

In general, all fill placed at the site, including on-site soils, should not contain rocks or lumps larger than four (4) inches in greatest dimension and contain no more than 15 percent larger than

2.5 inches. Structural fill soils should have a liquid limit less than 50, plastic index less than 30 and a modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D1557) greater than 100 pcf. Generally, soils classified as SP, SM, SC, ML or CL according to the Unified Soil Classification System are considered suitable for fill providing they meet the above criteria.

Robins Air Force Base

Structural fill should be moisture-conditioned to slightly above the optimum moisture content, spread in relatively thin lifts (8-inch maximum loose lifts) and methodically compacted with heavy compaction equipment to at least 92 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D1557). The upper one-foot of fill material should be compacted to a 95 percent compaction criterion. Additionally, the upper one-foot of material in areas at-grade or cut surfaces should be scarified and compacted to the 95 percent criteria.

Utility trenches should be backfilled with materials satisfying the criteria described above for general fill, placed in lifts of approximately eight (8) inches in uncompacted thickness.

However, thicker lifts may be used provided the method of compaction is approved by the project geotechnical engineer and the required minimum degree of compaction is achieved.

5.3

Foundations

The proposed building can be constructed on conventional shallow foundations bearing on structural fill meeting the compaction requirements of Section 5.2, Earthwork. A uniform net allowable soil bearing pressure of 3,000 psf is recommended for design of shallow foundation systems for the building bearing on new compacted fill. Exterior foundations should bear at a minimum of 18 inches below external grades to preclude damage due to frost penetration.

Using assumed structural loads, we estimate that total post-construction settlement of up to one

(1) inch may occur. Differential settlement should be approximately 50% of the total settlement over a distance of 30 feet. Individual spread footings should have a minimum dimension of 24 inches and strip footings should have a minimum lateral dimension of 20 inches.

A Geotechnical Engineer or his representative should examine footing subgrades immediately prior to rebar placement to confirm that the foundation conditions are as anticipated and the design bearing pressure is available. Auger and hand-held dynamic cone penetrometer testing, augmented by hand probing, should be used to determine whether conditions within these areas are consistent with those encountered by the borings.

5.4

Slab Design

Assuming that the undercutting is performed and the upper 12 inches of subgrade consist of properly compacted and proofrolled existing soil or newly installed fill material compacted to a minimum of 95% of Modified Proctor maximum dry density, concrete slab-on-grade floors for the proposed building may be designed using a modulus of subgrade reaction of 125 pci. A modulus of subgrade reaction of 200 pci may be used if at least 6 inches of No. 57 stone or compacted graded aggregate base is provided below the slab. A durable vapor barrier should be provided beneath soil supported slabs to reduce dampness due to soil moisture.

Robins Air Force Base

5.5

Slopes

Based on our experience with soils similar to those encountered during our exploration, we recommend excavated slopes less than 10 feet be laid back at least to a 2H:1V (Horizontal to Vertical) slope. Permanent fill slopes placed on suitable subgrade may be constructed at 2.5:1 or flatter. All fill slopes should be adequately compacted as recommended in this report.

Permanent slopes of 3:1 or flatter may be used to facilitate mowing. All sloped surfaces should be protected from erosion by grassing or other means. All confined excavations should conform to the latest OSHA Regulations.

5.6

Seismic Design Criteria

The seismic site classification for the proposed project was evaluated using the criteria given in the 2012 International Building Code (IBC 2012) section 1613. Based on the project information and soil test borings, we recommend the following parameters be used in design:

• Site Classification Class D

• Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) spectral response acceleration for short period SMS = 0.244 g

• MCE spectral response acceleration for 1-second period SM1 = 0.190 g

• Design spectral response acceleration for short period SDS = 0.163 g

• Design spectral response acceleration for 1-second SD1 = 0.126 g

5.7

Geotechnical Controls

1. The Geotechnical Engineer should be provided the opportunity for a general review of the final design documents in order to assess proper interpretation of the earthwork and foundation recommendations.

2. The Geotechnical Engineer, or his qualified representative, should observe undercutting and proofrolling operations.

3. A qualified engineering technician, under the supervision of the Geotechnical Engineer, should observe fill operations and perform a minimum of one field density test per 2,500 square feet of area for each one-foot thickness of fill.

4. The Geotechnical Engineer, or his qualified representative, should check each foundation excavation utilizing hand probing and auger and dynamic cone penetrometer testing.

This will reduce the risk of unsuitable or soft materials directly underlying the footings, which may be detrimental to the integrity of the structures.

Robins Air Force Base

5.8

Limitations

This report is for the exclusive use of Toland-Mizell Architects, Inc., the owner, contractor, and subcontractors for the project described herein, and may only be applied to this specific project.

The analyses, conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the preceding project information, and the results of this evaluation. Conditions may vary from those observed in the borings.

If it becomes apparent during construction that soil conditions differing from those discussed in this report are encountered, Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants, Inc. should be notified at once so that the effects may be determined and any remedial measures necessary may be prescribed.

This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted standards of geotechnical engineering practice in the State of Georgia. No other warranty is expressed or implied. Our firm is not responsible for conclusions, opinions or recommendations of others.

The right to rely upon this report and the data within may not be assigned without the written permission of Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants, Inc. If the design or location of the structure is changed, the recommendations contained herein must be considered invalid, unless our firm reviews changes and our recommendations are either verified or modified in writing.

When design is complete, we should be given the opportunity to review the foundation plans, grading plans and applicable portions of the specifications to determine if they are consistent with the intent of our recommendations.

APPENDIX

SOIL TEST BORING PROCEDURES

The borings were advanced by a hollow-stem auger process. At the desired depth in all borings, the borehole was cleaned out and the sample tools inserted through the auger stems. At assigned intervals, soil samples were obtained with a standard 1.4-inch inside diameter, 2-inch outside diameter split tube sampler. The sampler was first seated six inches to penetrate any loose cuttings; then driven an additional foot with blows of a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the final foot was recorded and is designated as the standard penetration resistance (N-value). The penetration resistance, when properly evaluated, may be used as an index to the soil strength and foundation support capability. Soil sampling and penetration testing were performed in general accordance with ASTM D 1586.

The drilling method is not capable of penetrating material designated as “refusal materials.” Refusal, thus indicated, may result from hard cemented soil, soft weathered rock, coarse gravel or boulders, thin rock seams, or the upper surface of sound continuous rock. Core boring procedures are required to determine the character and continuity of refusal materials.

Representative portions of the split tube samples were placed in sample containers and transported to our laboratory.

In the laboratory, the samples were examined and the visual classification was confirmed by a geotechnical engineer or geologist.

The final boring records represent our interpretation of the contents of the field records based on the results of the engineering examinations and testing of selected field samples. These records depict subsurface conditions at the specific locations and at the particular time drilled. Soil conditions at other locations may differ from conditions occurring at these boring locations. Also, the passage of time may result in changes in the ground water conditions at these boring locations. The lines designating the interface between strata on the re3cords and on profiles represent approximate boundaries. The transition between materials may be gradual. The final boring records are included with this report.

A record of the sampling operations and the descriptions of the soils encountered in each boring are shown on the following Soil Boring Record sheets.

CORRELATION OF PENETRATION RESISTANCE

WITH RELATIVE DENSITY AND CONSISTENCY

1 Standard Penetration Resistance blow count, N, which is equal to the sum of the second and third six-inch increments of the SPT test.

SOIL TYPE BLOWS PER FOOT

(bpf)1

RELATIVE DENSITY / CONSISTENCY

DESCRIPTION

SANDS

and

GRAVELS

0 – 4 Very Loose 5 - 10 Loose

11 - 20 Firm 21 - 30 Very Firm 31-50 Dense

Over 50 Very Dense

SILTS

and

CLAYS

0 – 1 Very Soft 2 – 4 Soft 5 – 8 Firm 9 - 15 Stiff 16-30 Very Stiff 31-50 Hard

Over 50 Very Hard

LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES

SOIL CLASSIFICATION

Soil classifications provide a general guide to the engineering properties of various soil types and enable the engineer to apply his past experience to current problems. In our evaluations, samples obtained during drilling operations are examined in our laboratory and visually classified by an engineer or geologist. The soils are classified according to consistency (based on number of blows from standard penetration tests), color and texture. These classification descriptions are included on our “Soil Boring” records.

The classification system discussed above is primarily qualitative. For detailed soil classification, two laboratory tests are routinely performed: grain size tests and Atterberg limits tests. Using these test results, the soil can be classified according to the AASHTO or Unified Classification Systems (ASTM D-2487). Each of these classification systems and the in-place physical soil properties provides an index for estimating the soil's behavior. The soil classification and physical properties obtained are presented in the report.

WATER LEVEL READINGS

Water table readings are normally taken in conjunction with borings and are recorded on the "Soil Boring Records". These readings indicate the approximate location of the hydrostatic water table at the time of our field exploration. Where relatively impervious soils (clayey soils) are encountered, the amount of water seepage into the boring is small, and it is generally not possible to establish the location of the hydrostatic water table through water level readings. The ground water table may also be dependent upon the amount of precipitation at the site during a particular period of time. Fluctuations in the water table should be expected with variations in precipitation, surface run-off, evaporation and other factors.

The time of boring (TOB) water level reported on the boring records is determined by field crews immediately after drilling. Additional water table readings may be obtained at least 24 hours after the borings are completed. The time lag of at least 24 hours is used to permit stabilization of the ground water table which has been disrupted by the drilling operations. The readings are taken by dropping a weighted line down the boring or using an electrical probe to detect the water level surface.

Occasionally, the borings will cave-in, preventing water level readings from being obtained or trapping drilling water above the caved-in zone. The cave-in depth is often measured and recorded on the boring records.

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

SS-6

TOPSOIL

Approx. 2" topsoil

FILL

very loose, tan-brown, medium to fine, silty SAND (SM); clayey, with small rocks very loose, tan-brown, medium to fine, clayey SAND (SC); silty

COASTAL PLAIN SEDIMENTS

firm to very firm, tan, coarse to fine, silty SAND (SM) very firm, white, coarse to fine, silty SAND (SM); clayey, with some mica dense, white, coarse to fine, silty SAND (SM); micaceous

BORING TERMINATED AT 20.0 ft

Standard Penetration Test Data (blows/ft)

10 20 80

Soil Description

0 30 60

SOIL BORING RECORD

Boring No:

N -V al ue

S am pl e

T yp e

Project No:

GS Elevation:

Drilling Date:

Engineer/Geologist:

NOTES: PID - 1.0 ppm

514 Hillcrest Industrial Blvd, Macon, GA 31204 5031 Milgen Court, Columbus , GA 31907

B-1 150350.210

June 7, 2015

· Boring and sampling performed in accordance with ASTM D 1586.

· Depths are measured from existing ground surface at time of drilling.

· Depths are shown to illustrate general arrangements of the strata encountered at the boring location.

· Do not use depths for determinations of quantities or distances.

Project: UHHZ 140006 Construct Depack Facility near B145 Robins AFB, Warner Robins, Georgia

Location: See Boring Location Plan Driller/Equipment: J. Daniel/ G. Madrazo/ CME 55, 2.25" HSA Water Level: NGWE at time of boring

G E

O T

E C

H

.2

U

H H

Z

C

O N

S T

R U

C T

D E

P A

C K

F A

C

IL

IT

Y

N E

A R

B

5.

G

P J

G E

C .G

D T

/2

8/

D ep th f t)

S oi l S ym bo l

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

SS-6

TOPSOIL

Approx. 2" topsoil

FILL

loose, brownish-tan, medium to fine, clayey SAND (SC); silty, with small rocks soft, reddish-tan, medium to fine, sandy CLAY (CL); silty, with small rocks

COASTAL PLAIN SEDIMENTS

very firm, tan-orange, coarse to fine, silty SAND (SM); with rock fragments very firm, reddish-white, coarse to fine, silty SAND (SM); micaceous very firm, tan, coarse to fine, silty SAND (SM); clayey, with some mica

BORING TERMINATED AT 20.0 ft

Standard Penetration Test Data (blows/ft)

10 20 80

Soil Description

0 30 60

SOIL BORING RECORD

Boring No:

N -V al ue

S am pl e

T yp e

Project No:

GS Elevation:

Drilling Date:

Engineer/Geologist:

NOTES: PID - 0.0 ppm

514 Hillcrest Industrial Blvd, Macon, GA 31204 5031 Milgen Court, Columbus , GA 31907

B-2 150350.210

June 7, 2015

· Boring and sampling performed in accordance with ASTM D 1586.

· Depths are measured from existing ground surface at time of drilling.

· Depths are shown to illustrate general arrangements of the strata encountered at the boring location.

· Do not use depths for determinations of quantities or distances.

Project: UHHZ 140006 Construct Depack Facility near B145 Robins AFB, Warner Robins, Georgia

Location: See Boring Location Plan Driller/Equipment: J. Daniel/ G. Madrazo/ CME 55, 2.25" HSA Water Level: NGWE at time of boring

G E

O T

E C

H

.2

U

H H

Z

C

O N

S T

R U

C T

D E

P A

C K

F A

C

IL

IT

Y

N E

A R

B

5.

G

P J

G E

C .G

D T

/2

8/

D ep th f t)

S oi l S ym bo l

GRAVEL

AND

GRAVELLY

SOILS

CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -

CLAY MIXTURES

WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY

SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES

POORLY-GRADED SANDS,

GRAVELLY SAND, LITTLE OR NO

FINES

SILTY SANDS, SAND - SILT

MIXTURES

CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAY

MIXTURES

INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE

SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR

CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY

SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY

INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO

MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY

CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY

CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS

ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC

SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY

INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR

DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR

SILTY SOILS

INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH

PLASTICITY

SILTS

AND

CLAYS

MORE THAN 50%

OF MATERIAL IS

LARGER THAN

NO. 200 SIEVE

SIZE

MORE THAN 50%

OF MATERIAL IS

SMALLER THAN

NO. 200 SIEVE

SIZE

MORE THAN 50%

OF COARSE

FRACTION

PASSING ON NO.

4 SIEVE

MORE THAN 50%

OF COARSE

FRACTION

RETAINED ON NO.

4 SIEVE

SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART

(APPRECIABLE

AMOUNT OF FINES)

(APPRECIABLE

AMOUNT OF FINES)

(LITTLE OR NO FINES)

FINE

GRAINED

SOILS

SAND

AND

SANDY

SOILS

SILTS

AND

CLAYS

ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO

HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS

PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH

HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS

LETTERGRAPH

SYMBOLS

MAJOR DIVISIONS

COARSE

GRAINED

SOILS

TYPICAL

DESCRIPTIONS

WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -

SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO

FINES

POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS,

GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE

OR NO FINES

SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -

SILT MIXTURES

CLEAN

GRAVELS

GRAVELS WITH

FINES

CLEAN SANDS

(LITTLE OR NO FINES)

SANDS WITH

FINES

LIQUID LIMIT

LESS THAN 50

LIQUID LIMIT

GREATER THAN 50

HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS

NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS

GW

GP

GM

GC

SW

SP

SM

SC

ML

CL

OL

MH

CH

OH

PT

June 19, 2015

Dear Order No:

RE:

Analytical Environmental Services, Inc. received samples on for the analyses presented in following report.

FAX:

TEL:

No problems were encountered during the analyses. Additionally, all results for the associated

Quality Control samples were within EPA and/or AES established limits. Any discrepancies associated with the analyses contained herein will be noted and submitted in the form of a project Case Narrative.

AES’ certifications are as follows:

-NELAC/Florida Certification number E87582 for analysis of Environmental Water, soil/hazardous waste, and Drinking Water Microbiology, effective 07/01/14-06/30/15.

-AIHA-LAP, LLC Laboratory ID: 100671 for Industrial Hygiene samples (Organics, Inorganics), Environmental Lead (Paint, Soil, Dust Wipes, Air), and Environmental

Microbiology (Fungal) Direct Examination, effective until 09/01/15.

These results relate only to the items tested. This report may only be reproduced in full.

If you have any questions regarding these test results, please feel free to call.

(478) 757-1606

(478) 757-1608

Project Manager

1506C64

Geoffrey Madrazo GeoTechnical & Env. Consultants, Inc.

514 Hillcrest Industrial Blvd.

Macon GA 31204

RAFB Depack Facility

Chantelle Kanhai

6/11/2015 10:40:00 AM

Geoffrey Madrazo:

1506C64-001

19-Jun-15Date:Analytical Environmental Services, Inc

Analyses Date Analyzed Dilution

Factor BatchIDUnitsQual

Reporting

Limit Result

Client:

Soil

6/8/2015 10:30:00 AM

B-1

Matrix:

Collection Date:

Client Sample ID:

RAFB Depack Facility

GeoTechnical & Env. Consultants, Inc.

Lab ID:

Project Name:

Analyst

(SW5030B)VOLATILES, TCLP SW1311/8260B

1,1-Dichloroethene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:27 TH

1,2-Dichloroethane BRL 0.10 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:27 TH

2-Butanone BRL 0.20 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:27 TH

Benzene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:27 TH

Carbon tetrachloride BRL 0.10 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:27 TH

Chlorobenzene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:27 TH

Chloroform BRL 0.10 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:27 TH

Tetrachloroethene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:27 TH

Trichloroethene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:27 TH

Vinyl chloride BRL 0.040 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:27 TH

Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 80.3 68.7-127 %REC 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:27 TH

Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 118 77.4-121 %REC 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:27 TH

Surr: Toluene-d8 95.1 79.2-120 %REC 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:27 TH

(SW3550C)SIM Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons SW8270D

1-Methylnaphthalene BRL 23 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 16:38 YH

2-Methylnaphthalene BRL 23 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 16:38 YH

Acenaphthene BRL 23 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 16:38 YH

Acenaphthylene BRL 44 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 16:38 YH

Anthracene BRL 2.3 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 16:38 YH

Benz(a)anthracene 11 2.3 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 16:38 YH

Benzo(a)pyrene 9.6 2.3 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 16:38 YH

Benzo(b)fluoranthene 17 4.4 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 16:38 YH

Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 7.0 4.4 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 16:38 YH

Benzo(k)fluoranthene 6.3 2.3 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 16:38 YH

Chrysene 12 2.3 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 16:38 YH

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene BRL 4.4 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 16:38 YH

Fluoranthene 19 4.4 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 16:38 YH

Fluorene BRL 4.4 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 16:38 YH

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 6.0 2.3 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 16:38 YH

Naphthalene BRL 23 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 16:38 YH

Phenanthrene 9.3 2.3 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 16:38 YH

Pyrene 15 2.3 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 16:38 YH

Surr: 4-Terphenyl-d14 90.1 42-124 %REC 208912 1 06/17/2015 16:38 YH

(SW3510C)SEMIVOLATILES ORGANICS, TCLP SW1311/8270D

1,4-Dichlorobenzene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:12 YH

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:12 YH

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:12 YH

2,4-Dinitrotoluene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:12 YH

Hexachlorobenzene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:12 YH

Qualifiers: * Value exceeds maximum contaminant level

BRL Below reporting limit

H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded

N Analyte not NELAC certified

B Analyte detected in the associated method blank

E Estimated (value above quantitation range)

S Spike Recovery outside limits due to matrix

Narr See case narrative

NC Not confirmed

< Less than Result value

> Greater than Result value J Estimated value detected below Reporting Limit

Analyses Date Analyzed Dilution

Factor BatchIDUnitsQual

Reporting

Limit Result

Client:

Soil

6/8/2015 10:30:00 AM

B-1

Matrix:

Collection Date:

Client Sample ID:

RAFB Depack Facility

GeoTechnical & Env. Consultants, Inc.

Lab ID:

Project Name:

Analyst

(SW3510C)SEMIVOLATILES ORGANICS, TCLP SW1311/8270D

Hexachlorobutadiene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:12 YH

Hexachloroethane BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:12 YH m,p-Cresol BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:12 YH

Nitrobenzene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:12 YH o-Cresol BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:12 YH

Pentachlorophenol BRL 0.50 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:12 YH

Pyridine BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:12 YH

Cresols, Total BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:12 YH

Surr: 2,4,6-Tribromophenol 84.8 52.5-139 %REC 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:12 YH

Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 88.3 56-128 %REC 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:12 YH

Surr: 2-Fluorophenol 87.1 49.4-119 %REC 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:12 YH

Surr: 4-Terphenyl-d14 87.3 58.7-137 %REC 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:12 YH

Surr: Nitrobenzene-d5 80.6 49.8-126 %REC 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:12 YH

Surr: Phenol-d5 92.3 46-121 %REC 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:12 YH

(SW3510C)PESTICIDES, TCLP SW1311/8081B

Chlordane BRL 0.0050 mg/L 208906 1 06/17/2015 20:57 SH

Endrin BRL 0.0010 mg/L 208906 1 06/17/2015 20:57 SH gamma-BHC BRL 0.00050 mg/L 208906 1 06/17/2015 20:57 SH

Heptachlor BRL 0.00050 mg/L 208906 1 06/17/2015 20:57 SH

Heptachlor epoxide BRL 0.00050 mg/L 208906 1 06/17/2015 20:57 SH

Methoxychlor BRL 0.0050 mg/L 208906 1 06/17/2015 20:57 SH

Toxaphene BRL 0.050 mg/L 208906 1 06/17/2015 20:57 SH

Surr: Decachlorobiphenyl 106 31.9-136 %REC 208906 1 06/17/2015 20:57 SH

Surr: Tetrachloro-m-xylene 89.9 32.7-110 %REC 208906 1 06/17/2015 20:57 SH

Paint Filter Liquids Test E9095B

Free Liquid NEGATIVE 0 ml R293999 1 06/16/2015 14:00 OM

(SW7470A)MERCURY, TCLP SW1311/7470A

Mercury BRL 0.00400 mg/L 208928 1 06/17/2015 14:17 TA

(SW9045D)Laboratory Hydrogen Ion (pH) SW9045D pH 6.00 0.01 H pH Units 208886 1 06/16/2015 10:05 JS

Ignitability SW1010A

Ignitability 180 0 > °F R294048 1 06/16/2015 12:00 JC

(SW3010A)ICP METALS, TCLP SW1311/6010C

Arsenic BRL 0.250 mg/L 208856 1 06/16/2015 14:13 IO

Barium BRL 0.500 mg/L 208856 1 06/16/2015 14:13 IO

Qualifiers: * Value exceeds maximum contaminant level

BRL Below reporting limit

H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded

N Analyte not NELAC certified

B Analyte detected in the associated method blank

E Estimated (value above quantitation range)

S Spike Recovery outside limits due to matrix

Narr See case narrative

NC Not confirmed

< Less than Result value

Analyses Date Analyzed Dilution

Factor BatchIDUnitsQual

Reporting

Limit Result

Client:

Soil

6/8/2015 10:30:00 AM

B-1

Matrix:

Collection Date:

Client Sample ID:

RAFB Depack Facility

GeoTechnical & Env. Consultants, Inc.

Lab ID:

Project Name:

Analyst

(SW3010A)ICP METALS, TCLP SW1311/6010C

Cadmium BRL 0.0250 mg/L 208856 1 06/16/2015 14:13 IO

Chromium BRL 0.0500 mg/L 208856 1 06/16/2015 14:13 IO

Lead BRL 0.0500 mg/L 208856 1 06/16/2015 14:13 IO

Selenium BRL 0.100 mg/L 208856 1 06/16/2015 14:13 IO

Silver BRL 0.0250 mg/L 208856 1 06/16/2015 14:13 IO

PERCENT MOISTURE D2216

Percent Moisture 25.5 0 wt% R294110 1 06/17/2015 11:00 PF

Qualifiers: * Value exceeds maximum contaminant level

BRL Below reporting limit

H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded

N Analyte not NELAC certified

B Analyte detected in the associated method blank

E Estimated (value above quantitation range)

S Spike Recovery outside limits due to matrix

Narr See case narrative

NC Not confirmed

< Less than Result value

1506C64-002

Analyses Date Analyzed Dilution

Factor BatchIDUnitsQual

Reporting

Limit Result

Client:

Soil

6/8/2015 11:30:00 AM

B-2

Matrix:

Collection Date:

Client Sample ID:

RAFB Depack Facility

GeoTechnical & Env. Consultants, Inc.

Lab ID:

Project Name:

Analyst

(SW5030B)VOLATILES, TCLP SW1311/8260B

1,1-Dichloroethene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:51 TH

1,2-Dichloroethane BRL 0.10 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:51 TH

2-Butanone BRL 0.20 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:51 TH

Benzene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:51 TH

Carbon tetrachloride BRL 0.10 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:51 TH

Chlorobenzene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:51 TH

Chloroform BRL 0.10 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:51 TH

Tetrachloroethene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:51 TH

Trichloroethene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:51 TH

Vinyl chloride BRL 0.040 mg/L 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:51 TH

Surr: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 77.9 68.7-127 %REC 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:51 TH

Surr: Dibromofluoromethane 121 77.4-121 %REC 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:51 TH

Surr: Toluene-d8 92.9 79.2-120 %REC 208850 20 06/15/2015 23:51 TH

(SW3550C)SIM Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons SW8270D

1-Methylnaphthalene BRL 21 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 17:05 YH

2-Methylnaphthalene BRL 21 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 17:05 YH

Acenaphthene BRL 21 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 17:05 YH

Acenaphthylene BRL 40 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 17:05 YH

Anthracene BRL 2.1 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 17:05 YH

Benz(a)anthracene 7.5 2.1 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 17:05 YH

Benzo(a)pyrene 6.3 2.1 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 17:05 YH

Benzo(b)fluoranthene 13 4.0 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 17:05 YH

Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 8.5 4.0 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 17:05 YH

Benzo(k)fluoranthene 6.6 2.1 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 17:05 YH

Chrysene 8.2 2.1 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 17:05 YH

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene BRL 4.0 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 17:05 YH

Fluoranthene 13 4.0 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 17:05 YH

Fluorene BRL 4.0 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 17:05 YH

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 6.9 2.1 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 17:05 YH

Naphthalene BRL 21 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 17:05 YH

Phenanthrene 6.0 2.1 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 17:05 YH

Pyrene 10 2.1 ug/Kg-dry 208912 1 06/17/2015 17:05 YH

Surr: 4-Terphenyl-d14 101 42-124 %REC 208912 1 06/17/2015 17:05 YH

(SW3510C)SEMIVOLATILES ORGANICS, TCLP SW1311/8270D

1,4-Dichlorobenzene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:40 YH

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:40 YH

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:40 YH

2,4-Dinitrotoluene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:40 YH

Hexachlorobenzene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:40 YH

Qualifiers: * Value exceeds maximum contaminant level

BRL Below reporting limit

H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded

N Analyte not NELAC certified

B Analyte detected in the associated method blank

E Estimated (value above quantitation range)

S Spike Recovery outside limits due to matrix

Narr See case narrative

NC Not confirmed

< Less than Result value

Analyses Date Analyzed Dilution

Factor BatchIDUnitsQual

Reporting

Limit Result

Client:

Soil

6/8/2015 11:30:00 AM

B-2

Matrix:

Collection Date:

Client Sample ID:

RAFB Depack Facility

GeoTechnical & Env. Consultants, Inc.

Lab ID:

Project Name:

Analyst

(SW3510C)SEMIVOLATILES ORGANICS, TCLP SW1311/8270D

Hexachlorobutadiene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:40 YH

Hexachloroethane BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:40 YH m,p-Cresol BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:40 YH

Nitrobenzene BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:40 YH o-Cresol BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:40 YH

Pentachlorophenol BRL 0.50 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:40 YH

Pyridine BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:40 YH

Cresols, Total BRL 0.10 mg/L 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:40 YH

Surr: 2,4,6-Tribromophenol 95.5 52.5-139 %REC 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:40 YH

Surr: 2-Fluorobiphenyl 88.3 56-128 %REC 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:40 YH

Surr: 2-Fluorophenol 89.2 49.4-119 %REC 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:40 YH

Surr: 4-Terphenyl-d14 86.8 58.7-137 %REC 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:40 YH

Surr: Nitrobenzene-d5 105 49.8-126 %REC 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:40 YH

Surr: Phenol-d5 94.6 46-121 %REC 208900 1 06/17/2015 16:40 YH

(SW3510C)PESTICIDES, TCLP SW1311/8081B

Chlordane BRL 0.0050 mg/L 208906 1 06/17/2015 20:24 SH

Endrin BRL 0.0010 mg/L 208906 1 06/17/2015 20:24 SH gamma-BHC BRL 0.00050 mg/L 208906 1 06/17/2015 20:24 SH

Heptachlor BRL 0.00050 mg/L 208906 1 06/17/2015 20:24 SH

Heptachlor epoxide BRL 0.00050 mg/L 208906 1 06/17/2015 20:24 SH

Methoxychlor BRL 0.0050 mg/L 208906 1 06/17/2015 20:24 SH

Toxaphene BRL 0.050 mg/L 208906 1 06/17/2015 20:24 SH

Surr: Decachlorobiphenyl 90.4 31.9-136 %REC 208906 1 06/17/2015 20:24 SH

Surr: Tetrachloro-m-xylene 95.4 32.7-110 %REC 208906 1 06/17/2015 20:24 SH

Paint Filter Liquids Test E9095B

Free Liquid NEGATIVE 0 ml R293999 1 06/16/2015 14:00 OM

(SW7470A)MERCURY, TCLP SW1311/7470A

Mercury BRL 0.00400 mg/L 208928 1 06/17/2015 14:24 TA

(SW9045D)Laboratory Hydrogen Ion (pH) SW9045D pH 5.43 0.01 H pH Units 208886 1 06/16/2015 10:05 JS

Ignitability SW1010A

Ignitability 180 0 > °F R294048 1 06/16/2015 12:00 JC

(SW3010A)ICP METALS, TCLP SW1311/6010C

Arsenic BRL 0.250 mg/L 208856 1 06/17/2015 12:58 IO

Barium BRL 0.500 mg/L 208856 1 06/17/2015 12:58 IO

Qualifiers: * Value exceeds maximum contaminant level

BRL Below reporting limit

H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded

N Analyte not NELAC certified

B Analyte detected in the associated method blank

E Estimated (value above quantitation range)

S Spike Recovery outside limits due to matrix

Narr See case narrative

NC Not confirmed

< Less than Result value

Analyses Date Analyzed Dilution

Factor BatchIDUnitsQual

Reporting

Limit Result

Client:

Soil

6/8/2015 11:30:00 AM

B-2

Matrix:

Collection Date:

Client Sample ID:

RAFB Depack Facility

GeoTechnical & Env. Consultants, Inc.

Lab ID:

Project Name:

Analyst

(SW3010A)ICP METALS, TCLP SW1311/6010C

Cadmium BRL 0.0250 mg/L 208856 1 06/17/2015 12:58 IO

Chromium BRL 0.0500 mg/L 208856 1 06/17/2015 12:58 IO

Lead BRL 0.0500 mg/L 208856 1 06/17/2015 12:58 IO

Selenium BRL 0.100 mg/L 208856 1 06/17/2015 12:58 IO

Silver BRL 0.0250 mg/L 208856 1 06/17/2015 12:58 IO

PERCENT MOISTURE D2216

Percent Moisture 17.8 0 wt% R294110 1 06/17/2015 11:00 PF

Qualifiers: * Value exceeds maximum contaminant level

BRL Below reporting limit

H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded

N Analyte not NELAC certified

B Analyte detected in the associated method blank

E Estimated (value above quantitation range)

S Spike Recovery outside limits due to matrix

Narr See case narrative

NC Not confirmed

< Less than Result value

23-Jun-15Date:Analytical Environmental Services, Inc

Client:

Dates Report Lab Order:

Project Name:

Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Test NameCollection Date Matrix TCLP Date Prep Date Analysis Date

1506C64

RAFB Depack Facility

GeoTechnical & Env. Consultants, Inc.

1506C64-001B B-1 6/8/2015 10:30:00AM Soil VOLATILES, TCLP Leached 06/15/2015 6/15/2015 3:21:00PM 06/15/2015

1506C64-001C B-1 6/8/2015 10:30:00AM Soil IGNITABILITY 06/16/2015

1506C64-001C B-1 6/8/2015 10:30:00AM Soil TCLP SEMIVOLATILES ORGANICS 06/12/2015 6/17/2015 11:00:00AM 06/17/2015

1506C64-001C B-1 6/8/2015 10:30:00AM Soil MERCURY, TCLP Leached 06/12/2015 6/17/2015 10:15:00AM 06/17/2015

1506C64-001C B-1 6/8/2015 10:30:00AM Soil ICP METALS, TCLP Leached 06/12/2015 6/16/2015 11:37:00AM 06/16/2015

1506C64-001C B-1 6/8/2015 10:30:00AM Soil PESTICIDES, TCLP Leached 06/12/2015 6/17/2015 2:00:00PM 06/17/2015

1506C64-001C B-1 6/8/2015 10:30:00AM Soil Laboratory Hydrogen Ion (pH) 6/16/2015 10:05:00AM 06/16/2015

1506C64-001C B-1 6/8/2015 10:30:00AM Soil Paint Filter Liquids Test 06/16/2015

1506C64-001D B-1 6/8/2015 10:30:00AM Soil Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons 6/17/2015 1:00:00PM 06/17/2015

1506C64-001D B-1 6/8/2015 10:30:00AM Soil PERCENT MOISTURE 06/17/2015

1506C64-002B B-2 6/8/2015 11:30:00AM Soil VOLATILES, TCLP Leached 06/15/2015 6/15/2015 3:21:00PM 06/15/2015

1506C64-002C B-2 6/8/2015 11:30:00AM Soil IGNITABILITY 06/16/2015

1506C64-002C B-2 6/8/2015 11:30:00AM Soil TCLP SEMIVOLATILES ORGANICS 06/12/2015 6/17/2015 11:00:00AM 06/17/2015

1506C64-002C B-2 6/8/2015 11:30:00AM Soil MERCURY, TCLP Leached 06/12/2015 6/17/2015 10:15:00AM 06/17/2015

1506C64-002C B-2 6/8/2015 11:30:00AM Soil ICP METALS, TCLP Leached 06/12/2015 6/16/2015 11:37:00AM 06/17/2015

1506C64-002C B-2 6/8/2015 11:30:00AM Soil PESTICIDES, TCLP Leached 06/12/2015 6/17/2015 2:00:00PM 06/17/2015

1506C64-002C B-2 6/8/2015 11:30:00AM Soil Laboratory Hydrogen Ion (pH) 6/16/2015 10:05:00AM 06/16/2015

1506C64-002C B-2 6/8/2015 11:30:00AM Soil Paint Filter Liquids Test 06/16/2015

1506C64-002D B-2 6/8/2015 11:30:00AM Soil Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons 6/17/2015 1:00:00PM 06/17/2015

1506C64-002D B-2 6/8/2015 11:30:00AM Soil PERCENT MOISTURE 06/17/2015