FINAL-PVMNTReport-NMFTBL2004(2)WildRiver.pdf

FINAL PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT

Wild Rivers Back Country Byway

NM FTBL 2004(2)

Rio Grande del Norte National Monument

Taos County, New Mexico

Yeh Project No.: 221-338

August 14, 2023

Prepared for:

Jacobs Engineering Group

9191 South Jamaica Street

Englewood, Colorado 80112

Attn: Mr. Aaron Swafford, P.E.

Prepared by:

Yeh and Associates, Inc.

570 Turner Dr. Suite D

Durango, CO. 81303

Phone: 970-382-9590

FINAL PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT

NM FTBL 2004(2)

Rio Grande del Norte National Monument

Taos County, New Mexico

Yeh Project No.: 221-338-DRAFT

August 14, 2023

Prepared by: Reviewed by:

Roger K. Southworth, P.E. Samantha C. Sherwood, P.E.

Senior Project Engineer Senior Project Manager

Approved for Distribution:

Shan-Tai Yeh, P.E.

President

3/14/24 i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY

1.1 PURPOSE OF WORK

1.2 SCOPE OF WORK

2.0 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

3.0 PREVIOUS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

3.1 PREVIOUS FIELD EXPLORATION

3.2 PREVIOUS LABORATORY TESTING

4.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION

4.1 FIELD EXPLORATION

4.2 LABORATORY TESTING

5.0 PAVEMENT CONDITION

6.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

6.1 PAVEMENT AND BASE COURSE

6.2 SUBGRADE SOIL

6.3 CLASSIFICATION

6.4 CHEMICAL PROPERTIES

6.5 SWELL/CONSOLIDATION

6.6 R-VALUES

7.0 PAVEMENT DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 DESIGN METHODOLOGY

7.2 PAVEMENT DESIGN ALTERNATIVES

7.3 DESIGN TRAFFIC VOLUME

7.4 STRUCTURAL SECTION

7.5 RECOMMENDED PAVEMENT SECTIONS

7.6 HOT ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT MIX AND BINDER

8.0 ICE HILL EXCAVATION CONSIDERATIONS

9.0 EARTHWORK DESIGN

9.1 GENERAL GRADING

9.2 REUSE OF ON-SITE SOIL AND BEDROCK

9.3 SUBGRADE PREPARATION

9.4 GRADED SLOPE DESIGN

9.5 CORROSION PROPERTIES OF ON-SITE SOILS

10.0 LIMITATIONS

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

List of Figures

FIGURE 1. PROJECT LOCATION MAP

FIGURE 2. PROPOSED PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM

TABLE 2 . SUMMARY OF CURRENT FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX A –BORING LOCATION DIAGRAM, BORING LOGS, AND LEGEND (PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION)

APPENDIX B – LABORATORY TEST RESULTS (PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION)

APPENDIX C – BORING LOCATION DIAGRAM, BORING LOGS, AND LEGEND (CURRENT INVESTIGATION)

APPENDIX D – LABORATORY TEST RESULTS (CURRENT INVESTIGATION)

APPENDIX E – ESAL CALCULATIONS, PAVEMENT DESIGN RESULTS, LTPP BIND RESULTS

APPENDIX F – ROCK CORE PHOTOGRAPHS, UNIAXIAL COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS

Yeh Project No. 221-338

1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY

Yeh and Associates, Inc. (Yeh), was retained as a subconsultant to Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc.

(Jacobs) to provide pavement design recommendations for the proposed rehabilitation of approximately 7.73 miles of roadway within the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) Wild Rivers

Back Country Byway (BCB) in Taos County, New Mexico. The study and recommendations were developed in accordance with the project Scope of Work dated October 2021.

1.1 Purpose of Work

This report presents the results of Yeh’s field investigation and pavement design analysis for use by Jacobs and the project team for proposed improvements to approximately 7.73 miles of the

Wild Rivers BCB within the Wild Rivers Recreation Area, a portion of the Rio Grande del Norte

National Monument administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The project is generally described as a Resurfacing, Rehabilitation and Restoration (3R) project although full roadway construction (4R) is planned in two areas. Resurfacing, realignment, and minor widening are planned, which will result in improved facilities for both automobile and bicycle traffic. The improvements will be designed and implemented in accordance with the Federal Highway

Administration, Central Federal Lands Highway Division (CFLHD) and American Association of

State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Highway Design Standards, in cooperation with the BLM, New Mexico Department of Transportation (NMDOT) and the CFLHD Denver

Service Center.

1.2 Scope of Work

Our scope of work for this phase of the project included the following:

▪ A site reconnaissance by the project geotechnical engineer to observe the condition of the pavement and to stake proposed boring locations.

▪ Reviewing readily available geotechnical information to supplement the information obtained during the field exploration and laboratory testing programs.

▪ Drilling six test borings to depths of approximately 0.75 to 5.0 feet to evaluate the subsurface conditions along the roadway alignment.

▪ Laboratory testing to evaluate the pertinent engineering properties of the samples recovered during the field investigation.

▪ Engineering analysis to develop recommended pavement sections, pavement materials, earthwork, and construction considerations.

2.0 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

The Wild Rivers Back Country Byway (BCB) is located within the Wild Rivers Recreation Area, which is a portion of the Rio Grande del Norte National Monument. The BCB begins near the

Town of Cerro, New Mexico, where State Highway 378 dead-ends to the BCB. The location of the project site is depicted in the following Figure 1.

Figure 1 – Project Location Map

The project is divided into two construction packages, with the first package, NM FTBL 2004(1), constructed in 2021. This first package consisted of reconstructing the 4.75-mile loop road in the southern portion of the Wild Rivers Recreation Area. This package was delivered in two segments.

The first segment consisted of a one-mile, two-way section of roadway that extended from the end of the Entrance Road to the Visitor Center. The second segment consisted of a 3.75-mile, one-way section of roadway for the remainder of the Loop Road. This package also included the following additional improvements:

PROJECT SITE

▪ La Junta Overlook access road

▪ Four campground access roads

▪ Chawalauna Overlook

▪ Visitor Center parking area

▪ Host site access road

▪ Trail realignment

The task order for this second construction package, NM FTBL 2004(2), includes the reconstruction of the 7.73-mile-long main access road to the park, herein referred to as the

Entrance Road. The project begins at Station 10+00 and ends at Station 418+00. The Entrance

Road currently consists of a two-way, two-lane asphalt road that extends from the Wild Rivers entrance at the intersection of NM 378 and County Road B048, south to the top of the Loop Road.

This section of roadway currently has a width of 22 feet with no shoulders and will be upgraded to a width of 30 feet with two 11-foot-wide lanes and four-foot-wide shoulders.

The majority of the reconstructed roadway will follow the alignment of the existing roadway and will utilize full-depth reclamation (FDR) to pulverize the existing pavement and base course. The

FDR material will then be used as aggregate base course for the placement of new asphalt pavement.

However, two segments of the roadway will be realigned and will require full construction (4R).

The first realignment section, herein referred to as the Reverse Curve realignment, will extend between Stations 214+00 and 225+00. The second realignment section, herein referred to as the

Ice Hill realignment, will extend between Stations 248+50 and 269+60.

One segment of the roadway, herein referred to as Ice Hill, typically freezes during the winter making it difficult to traverse the roadway. This section of the roadway was cut into an existing hillside and is shaded from direct sunlight. As a result, the pavement in this area typically freezes during the winter making driving conditions difficult. The cut banks in this area will likely be laid back to allow sunlight to reach the roadway pavement and the grades will be cut to reduce the gradient of the roadway. Figure 2 depicts the Entrance Road, the two sections of proposed realignment, and Ice Hill.

Figure 2 – Proposed Project Improvements

3.0 PREVIOUS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

Yeh previously completed a Final Pavement Report for the entire 12.5 miles of the Wild Rivers

BCB (Yeh Project No. 219-237 dated August 24, 2020). This investigation included test borings, laboratory testing, and geotechnical engineering analysis to provide pavement design recommendations for the park’s Entrance Road and Loop Road. Information from this previous investigation was used to supplement the information obtained for this phase of the project and to develop the recommendations presented herein. A description of the previous field exploration and laboratory testing programs a provided below.

3.1 Previous Field Exploration

The previous exploration included drilling sixteen soil borings to depths of approximately 3 to

10½ feet along the 7.73-mile section of roadway that is part of this second construction package.

The approximate boring locations from the previous exploration are shown on the Boring

Location Diagram attached in Appendix A. A summary of the field exploration program from this previous investigation is provided in the following Table 1.

Table 1 - Summary of Previous Field Exploration Program

Boring No.

Boring

Depth (feet) Asphalt Thickness

(inches) Base Course

Thickness (inches) Combined

Thickness (inches)

WR-1 5.0 6.0 10.0 16.0

WR-2 6.0 6.0 4.0 10.0

WR-3 5.0 5.0 4.0 9.0

WR-4 6.5 6.0 3.0 9.0

WR-5 5.0 6.0 4.0 10.0

WR-6 5.0 5.5 6.0 11.5

WR-7 6.5 6.0 5.0 11.0

WR-8 5.0 4.0 6.0 10.0

WR-9 5.0 5.5 5.0 10.5

WR-10 5.0 5.0 5.0 10.0

WR-11 2.5 4.5 5.0 9.5

WR-12 6.5 4.5 5.0 9.5

WR-13 3.0 4.0 8.0 12.0

WR-14 5.0 3.0 4.0 7.0

WR-15 5.0 4.5 5.0 9.5

WR-16 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

WR-17 5.0 5.0 5.0 10.0

The approximate boring locations from this previous exploration are indicated on the Boring

Location Diagram attached in Appendix C. Copies of the boring logs from this previous exploration are also attached in Appendix A.

3.2 Previous Laboratory Testing

Laboratory tests were performed on select soil samples from the previous exploration to evaluate the pertinent engineering properties of the soil. Laboratory tests included the following:

▪ Moisture Content

▪ Grain Size Distribution

▪ Liquid and Plastic Limits

▪ Swell/Compression

▪ R-Value

▪ pH and Resistivity

▪ Total Sulfates and Chlorides

The results of the previous laboratory testing program are presented on the boring logs and summarized on the laboratory summary sheets attached in Appendix B.

4.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION

4.1 Field Exploration

Six borings were drilled for this phase of the project to nominal depths of approximately 0.75 to

5.0 feet. The borings were advanced using a trailer-mounted hydraulic power auger equipped with a 6-inch-diameter auger. The approximate boring locations are indicated on the Boring

Location Diagram attached in Appendix C. A summary of the field exploration is presented in the following Table 2.

Table 2 – Summary of Current Field Exploration Program

Proposed Improvement Boring No. Boring Depth

Reverse Curve Realignment B-1 5.0 feet

B-2 5.0 feet

Ice Hill Realignment B-3 5.0 feet

Ice Hill Rock Excavation B-4 1.5 feet

B-5 0.75 feet

Chiflo Day Use Parking Lot B-6 5.0 feet

Bulk samples of the subsurface materials were obtained from the auger cuttings as the borings were advanced. In addition, three boulder samples of the bedrock along Ice Hill were obtained for classification and uniaxial compression testing to assist in evaluating the rippability of the bedrock. The samples were transported to our laboratory where they were examined by the project geotechnical engineer and a program of laboratory testing was prepared.

Water levels were recorded in each boring at completion of the drilling operations. The water level readings are presented on the boring logs. The borings were then backfilled to the original ground surface elevation with the excavation spoil.

The drilling operations were monitored by a Yeh and Associates geotechnical engineer. The engineer prepared field logs documenting the soil conditions encountered, groundwater levels, sampling intervals, and types of samples obtained. The field logs were used to aid in the preparation of the final boring logs. The boring logs are presented in Appendix C.

4.2 Laboratory Testing

The recovered soil samples were classified by the project geotechnical engineer in accordance with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and the

Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Laboratory tests were then performed on select samples to evaluate the pertinent engineering properties of the soil. The laboratory testing was performed in general accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) test procedures. The following laboratory tests were performed for this evaluation:

▪ Water Content

▪ Liquid and Plastic Limits

▪ Grain Size Distribution

▪ R-Values

▪ Uniaxial Compressive Strength

The laboratory test results are presented on the boring logs and on the laboratory summary sheets attached in Appendix D.

5.0 PAVEMENT CONDITION

The Wild Rivers BCB pavement was previously examined as part of Yeh’s Final Pavement Design report to determine the types and severities of pavement distresses that are present. The Federal

Highway Administration’s Distress Identification Manual for the Long-Term Pavement

Performance Program (Miller, et al, 2003) was used as a reference for describing the observed distress.

The asphalt exhibits transverse or “thermal” cracking throughout the length of the project. The crack spacing was generally between 10 and 20 feet, with severity levels of low (<¼ inch), medium

(¼ inch > ¾ inch) and high (>¾ inch) being observed. A portion of the cracks were previously sealed, primarily those in the northern ¾ mile of the roadway. Newer, low severity transverse cracks were generally not filled. Wider transverse cracks often had adjacent low to medium severity random cracking.

Block cracking was also present within the project area. In addition, longitudinal cracking was identified within the project area, both within and outside of the wheel path. These cracks had generally not been sealed. Cracking along the centerline joint, at low to medium severity, was nearly continuous throughout the length of the project. Intermittent occurrences of low to medium severity longitudinal cracking between the wheel paths were observed. Cracks within the wheel paths are discussed under fatigue cracking, below. Scattered incidences of low-severity fatigue or “alligator” cracking were also observed.

Pavement edge cracking and shoulder drop-off conditions were observed at several locations along the project alignment. In addition, rectangular patched areas were present at scattered locations. The patches were constructed using perimeter saw cuts and were filled with asphalt mix that has not performed quite as well as the surrounding pavement. Minor raveling was present and cracks have propagated away from the sawed edges of the patches, but the patching material did not appear to have settled.

A Draft Scoping Trip Report issued for this project in July 2014 reports that, per the BLM, the last rehabilitation occurred in 2002 and consisted of rubblizing the old pavement, mixing it with the previous base material to establish a new base, and paving with 6 inches of new asphalt. Prior to paving operations, areas where pavement failures had occurred were identified. The Contractor removed the failed areas to depths of approximately 2 to 4 feet and patched the areas with select fill and asphalt. Saturated lenses of clay were encountered in many of the areas excavated for repairs.

6.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

A description of the subsurface conditions encountered in the borings drilled for the current and previous investigations and the results of the laboratory testing are presented below.

6.1 Pavement and Base Course

The pavement thickness at the boring locations ranged from approximately 3 to 6 inches, with an average thickness of 5 inches. The asphalt was underlain by aggregate base course (ABC), consisting of reclaimed pavement and imported aggregates, with a thickness ranging from approximately 3 to 10 inches and an average thickness of approximately 5.3 inches.

Classification tests were performed on samples of the ABC collected from two of the borings.

Gradation test results show the ABC to have 12 and 14 percent fines (passing the No. 200 sieve), with 45 and 49 percent sand and 41 and 47 percent gravel (retained on the #4 standard sieve).

Atterberg limits testing determined the ABC samples had Plasticity Indices (PI) of 5 and 13, and

Liquid Limits (LL) of 27 and 31 percent. The ABC classified as A-2-6 (0) and A-1-a (0) under the

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) classification system. The ABC classified as GP-GC (poorly graded gravel with clay and sand) and GM (silty gravel with sand) under the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Because the ABC consisted of rubblized pavement and base course processed together by full depth reclamation (FDR) in 2002, the ABC is darker than base course would generally be if it consisted solely of imported aggregate.

6.2 Subgrade Soil

The borings typically encountered medium plasticity clay, with some proportion of sand, and clayey sand and gravel to the boring termination depths. Groundwater was not encountered in the borings although native soils were generally moist. The in-situ moisture contents of the fine-grained soil ranged from 13.8 to 28.6 percent. The fine-grained soils were encountered to the maximum depths explored in Borings WR-01 through WR-04, WR-08, WR-12, WR-14, WR-15, and

WR-17. Weakly cemented sand was encountered at a depth of about 2.5 feet in Borings WR-05 and WR-06, north and south of the Guadalupe Trail pullout, respectively. No coring was performed, and the HSA was able to drill through the cemented material to a depth of 5.0 feet below the surface. Gravel or cemented material was encountered in Borings WR-07, WR-09 through WR-11, WR-13, and WR-16. Auger refusal in basalt bedrock was encountered in Borings

B-4 and B-5, which were drilled along the proposed Ice Hill Realignment, at respective depths of approximately 1.5 and 0.75 feet.

6.3 Classification

Classification tests were performed on nine samples of subgrade soils obtained from depths of less than 5 feet below the ground surface. Gradation test results show the soils to have between

12 and 73 percent fines. The sand content ranged from 22 to 52 percent and the gravel content ranged from 1 to 47 percent. The Atterberg limits tests resulted in LL values of 26 to 48 percent and PI values ranging from 5 to 29. One sample, from boring WR-06, was non plastic. The soils were classified as A-1-a (0), A-2-4 (0), A-2-6 (0), A-2-7 (3), A-4 (0), A-6 with group indices of (4), (13), and (16), and A-7-6 with group indices of (11), (16), and (20) under the AASHTO classification system.

6.4 Chemical Properties

Chemical properties were measured for three samples of the subgrade soil. The pH was mildly alkaline and ranged from 7.4 to 7.5. Water-soluble sulfates were low, ranging from 0.001 to 0.015 percent. Water-soluble chlorides were less than 0.001 percent. Resistivity values of 1,600 and

3,400 ohm-cm were measured for two samples.

6.5 Swell/Consolidation

Swell/consolidation tests were performed on three subgrade samples obtained using the modified California sampler. Two of the samples experienced consolidation of 0.2 and 0.4 percent when the samples were wetted under an applied pressure of 500 pounds per square foot

(psf). The third sample exhibited consolidation of 5.3 percent when wetted under an applied pressure of 500 psf.

6.6 R-Values

R-value tests were performed on four samples of the subgrade soils: two from the previous investigation and two from this current investigation. R-values of 7 were recorded for samples obtained from Boring B-2 (current investigation) and WR-03 (previous investigation). An R-value of 10 was recorded for tests performed on a sample obtained from Boring WR-08 (previous investigation) and an R-value of 12 was obtained from a composite sample obtained from Borings

B-4 and B-5 (current investigation).

7.0 PAVEMENT DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 Design Methodology

Pavement designs for the Wild Rivers BCB were performed in accordance with methods outlined in Chapter 11 of the FLH Project Development and Design Manual (PDDM) and the 1993 AASHTO

Guide for the Design of Pavement Structures (AGDPS). The recommendations presented in this report assume that the grading, fill materials, aggregate base course, full-depth recycling, and pavement will be placed and constructed in accordance with the FHWA’s Standard Specifications for Construction of Roads and Bridges on Federal Highway Projects (FP-14). Compliance with these specifications is required for the recommendations presented in this report to remain applicable.

7.2 Pavement Design Alternatives

Two rehabilitation alternatives were originally considered for the project: (1) widening and overlaying the existing pavement and (2) using full-depth reclamation (FDR) to pulverize the existing pavement and base course, and then using the resulting FDR material as aggregate base course for the placement of new hot asphaltic concrete pavement (HACP). Widening the roadway

4 feet on each side of the existing roadway would achieve the desired pavement width and has the advantage of retaining the existing pavement structure. However, the apparent age of the existing pavement (an estimated 21 years) and the cumulative impacts of the distresses observed combine to make this segment a poor candidate for an HACP overlay. The transverse cracks can be expected to propagate outward through the widened section; all cracks would be likely to reflect upward through the overlay; the need to saw-cut the existing edge of pavement to create a butt joint for widening may result in that joint being in the new wheel path; and it is challenging to achieve the necessary surface course compaction in a narrow-widened strip. The roadway is therefore considered to be a poor candidate for placement of an HACP overlay. Full-depth reclamation of the existing pavement is therefore recommended.

7.3 Design Traffic Volume

The design traffic volume was estimated using the average annual daily traffic (AADT), determined from data provided by Jacobs via an email dated March 29, 2023. In the email, the

BLM reported that the Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 continuous traffic count (2 directions) for the Wild

Rivers BCB was 33,938 vehicles. This data was used to estimate the number of 18-kip equivalent single axle loads (ESALs) based on a design life of 20 years, an annual growth factor of 2%, and a project completion date of 2024. It was estimated that the traffic would consist of 85% cars, 10% pickup trucks and vans, 3% trucks and RVs, and 2% buses. The resulting 20-year design ESAL value was 26,449. Subsection 11.2.1.2 of the PDDM directs, “If (the) design traffic ESALs is calculated to be less than 50,000, use 50,000 ESALs for design purposes when designing paved roads.” A design value of 50,000 ESALs was used for this project. ESALs calculations are included in

Appendix E preceding the pavement design printouts.

7.4 Structural Section

The borings indicated that the existing asphalt thickness ranged from 3 to 6 inches, with an average thickness of 5 inches. The ABC thickness ranged from 3 to 10 inches with an average thickness of 5.3 inches. The pavement subgrade generally consists of clayey sand and sandy lean clay.

Alternate designs for the rehabilitation of the Wild Rivers BCB were developed using PAVEXpress, an online software program based upon the 1993 AGDPS for flexible pavements. The pavement design variables, determined in accordance with Section 11.2 of the FLH PDDM are as follows:

▪ Serviceability: Initial = 4.2 (flexible pavement); Terminal = 2.0 (roadways with <500 ADT)

▪ Design Period: 20 years (3R project, rehabilitation)

▪ Design ESALs (W18) = 50,000

▪ R = 7; MR = 4,900 psi

▪ Reliability Level (R): 75 (roadways with <2,500 ADT)

▪ Combined Standard Error (SO): 0.49

Measured Hveem Resistance “R” values for the subgrade were low, with R-values of 7, 10, and

12. An R-value of 7 was used for design. The design resilient modulus (MR) was calculated using

Equation 1.5.3 from the AGDPS, which is applicable for R-values less than 20. The resulting MR was 4,900 psi based upon an R-value of 7.

MR = 1,000 + (555)(R-value) Equation 1.5.3

The resulting minimum required Structural Numbers (SN), using the above input parameters, is

2.30. Structural coefficients for each surfacing material were assigned based on values provided in the FLH PDDM Exhibit 11.2-C, Layer Types and Coefficients. A layer coefficient of 0.12 was used in our analysis. Exhibit 11.2-C specifies a range of 0.40 to 0.44 for HACP Item(s) 401 and 402. A coefficient of 0.44 was assigned to all new HACP. The resulting design, presented in Appendix E, achieves the required SN.

7.5 Recommended Pavement Sections

We recommend using the FDR alternative for the Entrance Road. Our investigation indicates that the existing roadway has a minimum thickness of 9 inches of combined asphalt and base course present throughout the length of the project. Two alternate FDR designs were considered.

1) Alternate 1 accomplishes widening of the roadway template through the addition of an 8 inch thickness of imported aggregate base course (ABC). The existing pavement and base course are pulverized together in-place to a depth of 8 inches and the entire section is paved with 3 inches of HACP. For this option, 3 inches of HACP paved in two 1.5-inch lifts will achieve the required Structural Number (SN) of 2.30.

2) Alternate 2 includes pulverizing 9 inches of existing pavement and base course from 22 feet of existing roadway template and redistributing that material to a thickness of 5.5 inches across an estimated 34 feet of roadbed. With this alternate, 4 inches of HACP paved in two 2-inch lifts will achieve the required Structural Number (SN) of 2.30.

Our analyses did not consider stabilization of the FDR with Portland or asphaltic cement. These methods would have limited impact on the allowable minimum thicknesses of the FDR (4 inches) and HACP (3 inches) while increasing the complexity of the project and extending the time required for construction.

Both options will result in construction of a consistent section across the full width of the roadway and enable the roadway to age in a uniform manner. However, Alternate 1 is recommended for the following reasons:

• the depth of pulverization is less, and FDR at 8 rather than 9 inches reduces the chance of incorporating clayey subgrade soils into the FDR process, thereby contaminating the base.

• the thickness of HACP is reduced from 4 to 3 inches, resulting in a net decrease of approximately 8,500 tons of HACP; and

• The cost of importing and placing an estimated 26,000 tons of ABC is anticipated to be less than the cost of increasing the HACP thickness from 3 inches to the 4 inches thickness required for Alternate 2.

The PAVEXpress outputs for Alternates 1 and 2 are attached in Appendix E.

The realignment sections of the roadway are also recommended to consist of 3 inches of HACP placed over 8 inches of aggregate base course. The pulverized asphalt may be used as ABC for the realignment sections if desired. The roadway embankment fill should have a minimum R-value of 7 and the embankment construction should be constructed in accordance with the requirements of FB-14.

7.6 Hot Asphalt Concrete Pavement Mix and Binder

We recommend a ½ inch (12.5 mm) Nominal Maximum Size Aggregate gyratory asphalt concrete mix design, conforming to FP-14 Table 401-1 for this project with a Design ESAL less than 0.3 million. We understand that the CFL prefers the Section 401 SCR, which requires a Design ESAL level of 0.3 to <3 million. Aggregates should meet the requirements presented in subsection

703.07 and Table 703-4 of FP-14.

The preferred asphalt binder for all lifts is PG 58-28, as recommended by the NMDOT pavement design guidance for Taos County. The LTPPBind program indicates that PG 52-28 is acceptable for the project area. Printouts of the NMDOT reference and the LTPPBind data are presented in

Appendix E following the pavement design printouts.

8.0 ICE HILL EXCAVATION CONSIDERATIONS

The roadway along Ice Hill was cut into bedrock, with bedrock exposed at the ground surface and in the cut face of the roadway. The exposed bedrock is highly fractured and jointed, forming boulders in excess of 5 feet in diameter. The site grades along Ice Hill will be altered to reduce the roadway gradient and the cut slopes will be laid back to increase the amount of sunlight able to reach the roadway, thereby reducing the potential for ice forming on the pavement.

Three boulder samples of the basalt bedrock were obtained from the banks of the Ice Hill slope to assist in evaluating the strength characteristics and rippability of the bedrock. The boulders were brought to the Yeh laboratory and cored using a 4-inch-diameter carbide-tip rock core barrel. Photographs of the cores are attached in Appendix F. Uniaxial compressive strength tests were then performed on each core. The test results indicated uniaxial compressive strengths ranging from 7,620 to 14,250 pounds per square inch (psi) with an average uniaxial compressive strength of 10,330 psi.

On the basis of the type and strength of the exposed bedrock and the joint and fracture spacing observed at the surface, the use of conventional heavy-duty excavation equipment, such as track hoes equipped with rock teeth, hydraulic rock breakers, or bulldozers equipped with ripping attachments may be suitable for rock excavation. Blasting may be required in localized areas depending on the depth of the cut and geologic conditions that may vary from those observed at the surface. The contractor should be prepared to utilize blasting techniques for rock excavation.

It is recommended that blasting be considered as a necessary excavation method in conjunction with conventional heavy-duty excavation methods. Blasting should be performed in accordance with Section 205 – Rock Blasting of FP-14.

9.0 EARTHWORK DESIGN

9.1 General Grading

All site grading should conform to the applicable sections of FP-14. Fill materials should not contain organic matter or other deleterious material. Excess fill or cut material should be hauled offsite for proper disposal unless an onsite location has been specifically identified for placement of excess fill on the project plans. Temporary excavations should conform to OSHA requirements.

9.2 Reuse of On-site Soil and Bedrock

On-site soil free of topsoil, organics, and other deleterious materials can be reused as embankment fill and unclassified borrow. Moisture conditioning of the excavated soil will likely be necessary prior to compaction operations.

The bedrock excavated from Ice Hill can be reused as engineered fill provided it is processed, placed, and compacted in accordance with the criteria presented in FP-14. The bedrock is also expected to be suitable for use as riprap and/or crushed for use as aggregate base course (ABC).

However, laboratory tests should be performed by the contractor to confirm that the rock meets the durability requirements presented in FP-14.

The pulverized asphalt is considered to be suitable for use as embankment fill and/or as aggregate base course in pavement reconstruction areas.

9.3 Subgrade Preparation

The roadway subgrade should be prepared for placement of aggregate base course or embankment fill in accordance with FP-14. Prior to placing fill or base course materials, the subgrade should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, moisture-conditioned as required, and compacted in accordance with the requirements presented in FP-14. The subgrade should be observed following the initial excavation to evaluate whether or not additional unsuitable soft or compressible soil is present. If needed, subexcavation should be performed to remove soft or compressible soil prior to placing the embankment fill.

9.4 Graded Slope Design

The proposed improvements will include embankment construction, excavation for cuts, and widening of existing cuts and embankment slopes through undulating terrain with intervening drainages. Fill slopes through soil should be designed at grades of 1 vertical to 3 horizontal

(1V:3H) or flatter. Cut slopes through soil should be designed to 1V:2H or flatter.

Cuts in the rock should not exceed 1.0 vertical to 0.5 horizontal (1V:0.5H). In more fractured areas, it may be necessary to remove loose material and/or flatten the slope to reduce the potential for instability. Rock scaling should be performed to remove any loose or unstable material.

9.5 Corrosion Properties of On-site Soils

The chemical properties of on-site soils may make them unacceptable for use as Structural

Backfill in contact with unprotected steel structures. Water-soluble sulfate and chloride levels measured in the Yeh and Green Analytical laboratories were low. However, the low resistivity level (1600 Ohm-cm) measured in a sample from Boring WR-03 should be taken into consideration, as this is an indication of high soil corrosivity. NRCS Soils Maps and maps addressing Corrosion of Steel and Concrete are provided in Appendix E of the previously completed Final Pavement Report. The maps indicate that all the soil map units are rated “Low” for risk of corrosion of concrete. For steel, however, corrosion risk is predicted to be “Moderate” and “High.”

When applicable, a layer of Structural Backfill or aggregate base course should be used as a separator between steel and native material. Other options for corrosion mitigation could include sacrificial metal (heavier gauge construction material) in design of structural elements and use of materials resistant to corrosion such as galvanized or epoxy coatings or cathodic protection systems. A qualified corrosion engineer should review this data to evaluate the appropriate level of corrosion protection for subgrade utilities and buried metal and concrete structures proposed for the area.

10.0 LIMITATIONS

The recommendations in this report are based on our field observations, laboratory testing, and our present understanding of the proposed construction. It is possible that subsurface conditions can vary beyond the point explored. If the conditions found during construction differ from those described in this report, please notify us immediately so that we can review our report in light of those conditions and provide supplemental recommendations, as necessary. We should also review this report if the scope of the proposed construction, including the proposed loads or structure locations, changes from that described in this report.

The scope of services for this project did not include, specifically or by implication, any environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, and bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, or conditions or biological conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination, conditions or pollution, other studies should be undertaken and a professional in that field should be consulted.

Yeh and Associates has prepared this report for the exclusive use of Jacobs and FHWA Central

Federal Lands personnel. This report was prepared in substantial accordance with the generally accepted standards of practice for geotechnical engineering as they exist in the site area at the time of our investigation. No warranty is expressed or implied. The recommendations in this report are based on the assumption that Yeh and Associates will conduct an adequate program of construction testing and observation to evaluate compliance with our recommendations.

APPENDIX A

PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION

BORING LOCATION PLAN

BORING LOGS

LEGEND

Figure A-1 - Boring Locations – WR-01 through WR-11

Figure A-2 - Boring Locations WR-11 through WR-23

3-3-2

0.0 - 0.5 ft. 6 inches asphalt.

0.5 - 1.3 ft. 10 inches Aggregate Base Course.

1.3 - 5.0 ft. sandy SILT, reddish brown, moist, medium stiff.

Bottom of Hole at 5.0 ft.

Total Depth: 5.0 ft Ground Elevation:

Coordinates: N: E:

Location: Sta. 23+50, 8' R

Groundwater Levels:

Logged By: B. Bunker

Final By: B. Bunker

Symbol Depth Date

Weather Notes:

Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical

Night Work:

Boring Began: 11/14/2019 Boring Completed: 11/14/2019 Drilling Method(s): Hollow-Stem Auger

Driller: Enviro-Drill, Inc.

Drill Rig: CME 75

Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER: %

Project Name:

PAGE

AASHTO

& USCS

Classifi-cations

Fi ne s C on te nt

Pl as tic ity

In de x

Project Number: 219-237C o n s u l t i n g E n g i n e e r s & S c i e n t i s t s

Li qu id Li m it

Field Notes and

Other Lab Tests

NM FTBL 2004 (1) Wild Rivers BCB

Atterberg Limits

Boring No.: WR-01 Yeh and Associates, Inc.

El ev at io n (fe et

D ep th (fe et

Sa m pl e

Ty pe

Ad va nc em en t M et ho d

BO

R

IN

G

L O

G

- S

PT

C D

O T

ST

YL

E

-2

B

LM

W

IL

D

R

IV

ER

S.

G

PJ

YE

H A

SS

O

C

IA

TE

S

TE

M

PL

AT

E.

G

D T

LI

BR

AR

Y.

G

LB

/2 /2

M oi st ur e C on te nt

D ry D en si ty (p cf )Blows per 6 in Li th ol og y

Soil Samples

Material Description

Pe ne tra tio n R es is ta nc e

A-6 (13)

CL73 204025214.3

7-8

0.0 - 0.5 ft. 6 inches asphalt.

0.5 - 0.9 ft. 4 inches Aggregate base Course, blended with native clay.

0.9 - 6.0 ft. CLAY with sand, reddish brown, medium plasticity, moist, stiff.

Bottom of Hole at 6.0 ft.

Total Depth: 6.0 ft Ground Elevation:

Coordinates: N: E:

Location: Sta. 40+07, 8' R

Groundwater Levels:

Logged By: B. Bunker

Final By: B. Bunker

Symbol Depth Date

Weather Notes:

Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical

Night Work:

Boring Began: 11/14/2019 Boring Completed: 11/14/2019 Drilling Method(s): Hollow-Stem Auger

Driller: Enviro-Drill, Inc.

Drill Rig: CME 75

Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER: %

Project Name:

PAGE

AASHTO

& USCS

Classifi-cations

Fi ne s C on te nt

Pl as tic ity

In de x

Project Number: 219-237C o n s u l t i n g E n g i n e e r s & S c i e n t i s t s

Li qu id Li m it

Field Notes and

Other Lab Tests

NM FTBL 2004 (1) Wild Rivers BCB

Atterberg Limits

Boring No.: WR-02 Yeh and Associates, Inc.

El ev at io n (fe et

D ep th (fe et

Sa m pl e

Ty pe

Ad va nc em en t M et ho d

BO

R

IN

G

L O

G

- S

PT

C D

O T

ST

YL

E

-2

B

LM

W

IL

D

R

IV

ER

S.

G

PJ

YE

H A

SS

O

C

IA

TE

S

TE

M

PL

AT

E.

G

D T

LI

BR

AR

Y.

G

LB

/2 /2

Sa nd

C on te nt

G ra ve l C on te nt

M oi st ur e C on te nt

D ry D en si ty (p cf )Blows per 6 in Li th ol og y

Soil Samples

Material Description

Pe ne tra tio n R es is ta

A-2-6 (0)

GP-GC

A-6 (13)

CL

pH=7.4 S=0.016% R-Value=7 Re=1600ohm·cm

3.6

4.7

3-4

0.0 - 0.4 ft. 5 inches asphalt.

0.4 - 0.8 ft. 4 inches Aggregate Base Course.

0.8 - 5.0 ft. sandy CLAY, brown, medium plasticity, moist, medium stiff.

Bottom of Hole at 5.0 ft.

Total Depth: 5.0 ft Ground Elevation:

Coordinates: N: E:

Location: Sta. 89+37, 6' R

Groundwater Levels:

Logged By: B. Bunker

Final By: B. Bunker

Symbol Depth Date

Weather Notes:

Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical

Night Work:

Boring Began: 11/14/2019 Boring Completed: 11/14/2019 Drilling Method(s): Hollow-Stem Auger

Driller: Enviro-Drill, Inc.

Drill Rig: CME 75

Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER: %

Project Name:

PAGE

AASHTO

& USCS

Classifi-cations

Fi ne s C on te nt

Pl as tic ity

In de x

Project Number: 219-237C o n s u l t i n g E n g i n e e r s & S c i e n t i s t s

Li qu id Li m it

Field Notes and

Other Lab Tests

NM FTBL 2004 (1) Wild Rivers BCB

Atterberg Limits

Boring No.: WR-03 Yeh and Associates, Inc.

El ev at io n (fe et

D ep th (fe et

Sa m pl e

Ty pe

Ad va nc em en t M et ho d

BO

R

IN

G

L O

G

- S

PT

C D

O T

ST

YL

E

-2

B

LM

W

IL

D

R

IV

ER

S.

G

PJ

YE

H A

SS

O

C

IA

TE

S

TE

M

PL

AT

E.

G

D T

LI

BR

AR

Y.

G

LB

/2 /2

Sa nd

C on te nt

G ra ve l C on te nt

M oi st ur e C on te nt

D ry D en si ty (p cf )Blows per 6 in Li th ol og y

Soil Samples

Material Description

Pe ne tra tio n R es is ta

6-8-8

0.5 - 0.8 ft. 3 inches Aggregate Base Course, Blended with native clay.

0.8 - 6.5 ft. sandy CLAY, brown, moist, very stiff.

Bottom of Hole at 6.5 ft.

Total Depth: 6.5 ft Ground Elevation:

Coordinates: N: E:

Location: Sta. 120+09, 6' L

Groundwater Levels:

Logged By: B. Bunker

Final By: B. Bunker

Symbol Depth Date

Weather Notes:

Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical

Night Work:

Boring Began: 11/14/2019 Boring Completed: 11/14/2019 Drilling Method(s): Hollow-Stem Auger

Driller: Enviro-Drill, Inc.

Drill Rig: CME 75

Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER: %

Project Name:

PAGE

AASHTO

& USCS

Classifi-cations

Fi ne s C on te nt

Pl as tic ity

In de x

Project Number: 219-237C o n s u l t i n g E n g i n e e r s & S c i e n t i s t s

Li qu id Li m it

Field Notes and

Other Lab Tests

NM FTBL 2004 (1) Wild Rivers BCB

Atterberg Limits

Boring No.: WR-04 Yeh and Associates, Inc.

El ev at io n (fe et

D ep th (fe et

Sa m pl e

Ty pe

Ad va nc em en t M et ho d

BO

R

IN

G

L O

G

- S

PT

C D

O T

ST

YL

E

-2

B

LM

W

IL

D

R

IV

ER

S.

G

PJ

YE

H A

SS

O

C

IA

TE

S

TE

M

PL

AT

E.

G

D T

LI

BR

AR

Y.

G

LB

/2 /2

M oi st ur e C on te nt

D ry D en si ty (p cf )Blows per 6 in Li th ol og y

Soil Samples

Material Description

Pe ne tra tio n R es is ta

A-7-6 (20) CL77 2648 pH=7.4

S=0.001%

S/C=-0.2%

Material encountered below 2 feet is possibly weathered bedrock

22110.6

28.6 89.88-28

0.0 - 0.5 ft. 6 inches asphalt.

0.5 - 0.8 ft. 4 inches Aggregate Base Course.

0.8 - 2.5 ft. CLAY with sand, tan, medium plasticity, moist, stiff.

2.5 - 5.0 ft. Cemented Sand, tan, dry to damp, dense.

Bottom of Hole at 5.0 ft.

Total Depth: 5.0 ft Ground Elevation:

Coordinates: N: E:

Location: Sta. 154+19, 6' L

Groundwater Levels:

Logged By: B. Bunker

Final By: B. Bunker

Symbol Depth Date

Weather Notes:

Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical

Night Work:

Boring Began: 11/14/2019 Boring Completed: 11/14/2019 Drilling Method(s): Hollow-Stem Auger

Driller: Enviro-Drill, Inc.

Drill Rig: CME 75

Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER: %

Project Name:

PAGE

AASHTO

& USCS

Classifi-cations

Fi ne s C on te nt

Pl as tic ity

In de x

Project Number: 219-237C o n s u l t i n g E n g i n e e r s & S c i e n t i s t s

Li qu id Li m it

Field Notes and

Other Lab Tests

NM FTBL 2004 (1) Wild Rivers BCB

Atterberg Limits

Boring No.: WR-05 Yeh and Associates, Inc.

El ev at io n (fe et

D ep th (fe et

Sa m pl e

Ty pe

Ad va nc em en t M et ho d

BO

R

IN

G

L O

G

- S

PT

C D

O T

ST

YL

E

-2

B

LM

W

IL

D

R

IV

ER

S.

G

PJ

YE

H A

SS

O

C

IA

TE

S

TE

M

PL

AT

E.

G

D T

LI

BR

AR

Y.

G

LB

/2 /2

Sa nd

C on te nt

G ra ve l C on te nt

M oi st ur e C on te nt

D ry D en si ty (p cf )Blows per 6 in Li th ol og y

Soil Samples

Material Description

Pe ne tra tio n R es is ta

A-4 (0)

SM43 NPNV

Material encountered below

2.5 feet is possibly weathered bedrock

44139.2

11-20-28

0.0 - 0.5 ft. 5.5 inches asphalt.

0.5 - 1.0 ft. 6 inches Aggregate Base Course.

1.0 - 2.5 ft. silty SAND, reddish brown, moist, stiff to very stiff.

2.5 - 5.0 ft. Cemented Sand, tan-brown, dry to damp, dense to very dense.

Bottom of Hole at 5.0 ft.

Total Depth: 5.0 ft Ground Elevation:

Coordinates: N: E:

Location: Sta. 175+87, 6' L

Groundwater Levels:

Logged By: B. Bunker

Final By: B. Bunker

Symbol Depth Date

Weather Notes:

Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical

Night Work:

Boring Began: 11/14/2019 Boring Completed: 11/14/2019 Drilling Method(s): Hollow-Stem Auger

Driller: Enviro-Drill, Inc.

Drill Rig: CME 75

Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER: %

Project Name:

PAGE

AASHTO

& USCS

Classifi-cations

Fi ne s C on te nt

Pl as tic ity

In de x

Project Number: 219-237C o n s u l t i n g E n g i n e e r s & S c i e n t i s t s

Li qu id Li m it

Field Notes and

Other Lab Tests

NM FTBL 2004 (1) Wild Rivers BCB

Atterberg Limits

Boring No.: WR-06 Yeh and Associates, Inc.

El ev at io n (fe et

D ep th (fe et

Sa m pl e

Ty pe

Ad va nc em en t M et ho d

BO

R

IN

G

L O

G

- S

PT

C D

O T

ST

YL

E

-2

B

LM

W

IL

D

R

IV

ER

S.

G

PJ

YE

H A

SS

O

C

IA

TE

S

TE

M

PL

AT

E.

G

D T

LI

BR

AR

Y.

G

LB

/2 /2

Sa nd

C on te nt

G ra ve l C on te nt

M oi st ur e C on te nt

D ry D en si ty (p cf )Blows per 6 in Li th ol og y

Soil Samples

Material Description

Pe ne tra tio n R es is ta

7-13-9

0.5 - 0.9 ft. 5 inches Aggregate Base Course.

0.9 - 3.0 ft. sandy CLAY, brown, moist, stiff, Fill.

3.0 - 4.0 ft. sandy GRAVEL and cobbles, multi-colored, dry to damp, dense, Fill.

4.0 - 6.5 ft. sandy CLAY, brown, moist, very stiff, Fill.

Bottom of Hole at 6.5 ft.

Total Depth: 6.5 ft Ground Elevation:

Coordinates: N: E:

Location: Sta. 190+93, 7' R

Groundwater Levels:

Logged By: B. Bunker

Final By: B. Bunker

Symbol Depth Date

Weather Notes:

Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical

Night Work:

Boring Began: 11/14/2019 Boring Completed: 11/14/2019 Drilling Method(s): Hollow-Stem Auger

Driller: Enviro-Drill, Inc.

Drill Rig: CME 75

Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER: %

Project Name:

PAGE

AASHTO

& USCS

Classifi-cations

Fi ne s C on te nt

Pl as tic ity

In de x

Project Number: 219-237C o n s u l t i n g E n g i n e e r s & S c i e n t i s t s

Li qu id Li m it

Field Notes and

Other Lab Tests

NM FTBL 2004 (1) Wild Rivers BCB

Atterberg Limits

Boring No.: WR-07 Yeh and Associates, Inc.

El ev at io n (fe et

D ep th (fe et

Sa m pl e

Ty pe

Ad va nc em en t M et ho d

BO

R

IN

G

L O

G

- S

PT

C D

O T

ST

YL

E

-2

B

LM

W

IL

D

R

IV

ER

S.

G

PJ

YE

H A

SS

O

C

IA

TE

S

TE

M

PL

AT

E.

G

D T

LI

BR

AR

Y.

G

LB

/2 /2

M oi st ur e C on te nt

D ry D en si ty (p cf )Blows per 6 in Li th ol og y

Soil Samples

Material Description

Pe ne tra tio n R es is ta

A-6 (4) CL51 1429 R-Value=10

S/C=-5.3%

29200.9

13.8 78.04-6

0.0 - 0.3 ft. 4 inches asphalt.

0.3 - 0.8 ft. 6 inches Aggregate Base Course.

0.8 - 2.0 ft. sandy CLAY with gravel, tan-brown, moist, medium dense, Embankment Fill.

2.0 - 5.0 ft. sandy CLAY, moist, medium stiff to stiff.

Bottom of Hole at 5.0 ft.

Total Depth: 5.0 ft Ground Elevation:

Coordinates: N: E:

Location: Sta. 218+98, 6' R

Groundwater Levels:

Logged By: B. Bunker

Final By: B. Bunker

Symbol Depth Date

Weather Notes:

Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical

Night Work:

Boring Began: 11/14/2019 Boring Completed: 11/14/2019 Drilling Method(s): Hollow-Stem Auger

Driller: Enviro-Drill, Inc.

Drill Rig: CME 75

Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER: %

Project Name:

PAGE

AASHTO

& USCS

Classifi-cations

Fi ne s C on te nt

Pl as tic ity

In de x

Project Number: 219-237C o n s u l t i n g E n g i n e e r s & S c i e n t i s t s

Li qu id Li m it

Field Notes and

Other Lab Tests

NM FTBL 2004 (1) Wild Rivers BCB

Atterberg Limits

Boring No.: WR-08 Yeh and Associates, Inc.

El ev at io n (fe et

D ep th (fe et

Sa m pl e

Ty pe

Ad va nc em en t M et ho d

BO

R

IN

G

L O

G

- S

PT

C D

O T

ST

YL

E

-2

B

LM

W

IL

D

R

IV

ER

S.

G

PJ

YE

H A

SS

O

C

IA

TE

S

TE

M

PL

AT

E.

G

D T

LI

BR

AR

Y.

G

LB

/2 /2

Sa nd

C on te nt

G ra ve l C on te nt

M oi st ur e C on te nt

D ry D en si ty (p cf )Blows per 6 in Li th ol og y

Soil Samples

Material Description

Pe ne tra tio n R es is ta

A-2-6 (0)

SC27 1329522124.3

4-7-15

0.0 - 0.5 ft. 5.5 inches asphalt.

0.5 - 0.9 ft. 5 inches Aggregate Base Course.

0.9 - 3.5 ft. clayey SAND with gravel, light brown, damp, stiff.

3.5 - 5.0 ft. clayey GRAVEL with sand, brown, moist, medium dense.

Bottom of Hole at 5.0 ft.

Total Depth: 5.0 ft Ground Elevation:

Coordinates: N: E:

Location: Sta. 254+55, 9' R

Groundwater Levels:

Logged By: B. Bunker

Final By: B. Bunker

Symbol Depth Date

Weather Notes:

Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical

Night Work:

Boring Began: 11/14/2019 Boring Completed: 11/14/2019 Drilling Method(s): Hollow-Stem Auger

Driller: Enviro-Drill, Inc.

Drill Rig: CME 75

Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER: %

Project Name:

PAGE

AASHTO

& USCS

Classifi-cations

Fi ne s C on te nt

Pl as tic ity

In de x

Project Number: 219-237C o n s u l t i n g E n g i n e e r s & S c i e n t i s t s

Li qu id Li m it

Field Notes and

Other Lab Tests

NM FTBL 2004 (1) Wild Rivers BCB

Atterberg Limits

Boring No.: WR-09 Yeh and Associates, Inc.

El ev at io n (fe et

D ep th (fe et

Sa m pl e

Ty pe

Ad va nc em en t M et ho d

BO

R

IN

G

L O

G

- S

PT

C D

O T

ST

YL

E

-2

B

LM

W

IL

D

R

IV

ER

S.

G

PJ

YE

H A

SS

O

C

IA

TE

S

TE

M

PL

AT

E.

G

D T

LI

BR

AR

Y.

G

LB

/2 /2

Sa nd

C on te nt

G ra ve l C on te nt

M oi st ur e C on te nt

D ry D en si ty (p cf )Blows per 6 in Li th ol og y

Soil Samples

Material Description

Pe ne tra tio n R es is ta

A-2-4 (0)

GC24 102636403.0

32-17-26

0.0 - 0.4 ft. 5 inches asphalt.

0.4 - 0.8 ft. 5 inches Aggregate Base Course.

0.8 - 5.0 ft. clayey GRAVEL with sand, dark brown, damp, dense.

Bottom of Hole at 5.0 ft.

Total Depth: 5.0 ft Ground Elevation:

Coordinates: N: E:

Location: Sta. 260+86, 9' L

Groundwater Levels:

Logged By: B. Bunker

Final By: B. Bunker

Symbol Depth Date

Weather Notes:

Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical

Night Work:

Boring Began: 11/14/2019 Boring Completed: 11/14/2019 Drilling Method(s): Hollow-Stem Auger

Driller: Enviro-Drill, Inc.

Drill Rig: CME 75

Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER: %

Project Name:

PAGE

AASHTO

& USCS

Classifi-cations

Fi ne s C on te nt

Pl as tic ity

In de x

Project Number: 219-237C o n s u l t i n g E n g i n e e r s & S c i e n t i s t s

Li qu id Li m it

Field Notes and

Other Lab Tests

NM FTBL 2004 (1) Wild Rivers BCB

Atterberg Limits

Boring No.: WR-10 Yeh and Associates, Inc.

El ev at io n (fe et

D ep th (fe et

Sa m pl e

Ty pe

Ad va nc em en t M et ho d

BO

R

IN

G

L O

G

- S

PT

C D

O T

ST

YL

E

-2

B

LM

W

IL

D

R

IV

ER

S.

G

PJ

YE

H A

SS

O

C

IA

TE

S

TE

M

PL

AT

E.

G

D T

LI

BR

AR

Y.

G

LB

/2 /2

Sa nd

C on te nt

G ra ve l C on te nt

M oi st ur e C on te nt

D ry D en si ty (p cf )Blows per 6 in Li th ol og y

Soil Samples

Material Description

Pe ne tra tio n R es is ta

0.0 - 0.4 ft. 4.5 inches asphalt.

0.4 - 0.8 ft. 5 inches Aggregate Base Course.

0.8 - 2.5 ft. silty GRAVEL with sand, brown, dry to damp, dense to very dense, Auger Refusal at 2.5 feet.

Bottom of Hole at 2.5 ft.

Total Depth: 2.5 ft Ground Elevation:

Coordinates: N: E:

Location: Sta. 269+06, 8' R

Groundwater Levels:

Logged By: B. Bunker

Final By: B. Bunker

Symbol Depth Date

Weather Notes:

Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical

Night Work:

Boring Began: 11/14/2019 Boring Completed: 11/14/2019 Drilling Method(s): Hollow-Stem Auger

Driller: Enviro-Drill, Inc.

Drill Rig: CME 75

Hammer: Automatic (hydraulic), ER: %

Project Name:

PAGE

AASHTO

& USCS

Classifi-cations

Fi ne s C on te nt

Pl as tic ity

In de x

Project Number: 219-237C o n s u l t i n g E n g i n e e r s & S c i e n t i s t s

Li qu id Li m it

Field Notes and

Other Lab Tests

NM FTBL 2004 (1) Wild Rivers BCB

Atterberg Limits

Boring No.: WR-11 Yeh and Associates, Inc.

El ev at io n (fe et

D ep th (fe et

Sa m pl e

Ty pe

Ad va nc em en t M et ho d

BO

R

IN

G

L O

G

- S

PT

C D

O T

ST

YL

E

-2

B

LM

W

IL

D

R

IV

ER

S.

G

PJ

YE

H A

SS

O

C

IA

TE

S

TE

M

PL

AT

E.

G

D T

LI

BR

AR

Y.

G

LB

/2 /2

M oi st ur e C on te nt

D ry D en si ty (p cf )Blows per 6 in Li th ol og y

Soil Samples

Material Description

Pe ne tra tio n R es is ta

A-1-a (0)

GM14 527

Hard piece of caliche in bottom of sampler. Minimal sample returned

41453.6

4-5-5

0.0 - 0.4 ft. 4.5 inches asphalt.

0.4 - 0.8 ft. 5 inches Aggregate Base Course.

0.8 - 2.5 ft. sandy CLAY with caliche deposits, brown, moist, stiff.

2.5 - 6.5 ft. color change at 2.5', tan.

Bottom of Hole at 6.5 ft.

Total Depth: 6.5 ft Ground Elevation:

Coordinates: N: E:

Location: Sta. 294+25, 5' L

Groundwater Levels:

Logged By: B. Bunker

Final By: B. Bunker

Symbol Depth Date

Weather Notes:

Inclination from Horiz.: Vertical

Night Work:

Boring Began: 11/14/2019 Boring Completed: 11/14/2019 Drilling Method(s): Hollow-Stem Auger

Driller: Enviro-Drill, Inc.

Drill Rig: CME 75