GUIS 15(4) - Final Geotechnical Report.pdf

SOILS AND FOUNDATIONS REPORT

REPORT NO. 05-23

PROJECT: REPLACEMENT OF PEDESTRIAN BOARDWALKS AND A

CULVERT

GULF ISLANDS NATIONAL SEASHORE

GUIS 15(4)

JACKSON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

22001 LOUDON COUNTY PARKWAY

BUILDING E-2, SUITE 200

ASHBURN, VA 20147

JUNE 2024

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

1.2 Project Description

2. GEOLOGIC SETTING

1.3 Regional Geology

1.4 Soil Survey

3. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM

4. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

5. ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 General

5.2 Structural Loads

5.3 Analysis and Recommendations

5.3.1 Geotechnical Resistance

5.4 Corrosion Protection

6. DISCLAIMER/LIMITATIONS CLAUSE

REFERENCES

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Figures Appendix B – Geotechnical Data Report and 2017 Boring Logs Appendix C – Analysis Results Appendix D – Selected Photographs

Note: Design changes subsequent to publication of this report and prior to the project’s advertisement will be documented by a memo attached after the title page.

PROJECT: GUIS 15(4)

REPLACEMENT OF PEDESTRIAN BOARDWALKS AND A CULVERT

GULF ISLANDS NATIONAL SEASHORE

JACKSON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

PAGE 3 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VA

SOILS AND FOUNDATIONS REPORT

REPORT NO. 05-23

PROJECT: REPLACEMENT OF PEDESTRIAN BOARDWALKS AND A CULVERT

GULF ISLANDS NATIONAL SEASHORE, GUIS 15(4)

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

This report presents our preliminary evaluations and recommendations for the replacement of a 24-inch culvert by a culvert bridge and replacement/addition of pedestrian boardwalks along Park Road within the Davis Bayou Area of the Gulf Islands National Seashore, in the city of Ocean Springs, Jackson County, Mississippi. The site location is shown in Figure 1, Appendix A.

1.2 Project Description

Culvert replacement is proposed to restore water flow to wetlands upstream and east of the Park Road causeway culvert.

The damaged timber pedestrian bridge will be replaced by Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) pedestrian bridge. In addition, two (2) new FRP pedestrian bridges will be constructed along Park Road. The proposed pedestrian bridges will provide safe access for pedestrian and bicycle use adjacent to the road from Robert McGhee Road to the Visitor Center (0.5 miles) along Park Road (Route 15).

2. GEOLOGIC SETTING

1.3 Regional Geology

Available geologic information indicates that the site is physiographically situated within the Gulf Coast Lowlands Section of the Outer Gulf Coastal Plain Province. This area is characterized as a flat, weakly dissected alluvial plain of marine and terrestrial deposits (McNab, 2007). The general Geologic Map of the site is shown on Figure 2 in Appendix A. Site Geology is addressed in more detail in the Geotechnical Data Report, Appendix B.

1.4 Soil Survey

According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) “Web Soil Survey of Shelby County, Illinois”, the surficial soils at the project site consist of the following units:

• Escambia very fine sandy loam, (Soil unit # 33)

• Handsboro mucky silt loam (Soil unit # 96)

• Harleston fine sandy loam (Soil unit # 329)

GULF ISLANDS NATIONAL SEASHORE

JACKSON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

PAGE 4 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VA

3. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM

A subsurface exploration program consisting of two (2) Piezocone Penetrometer Test (CPTu) soundings under the supervision of HDR, Inc. was performed on September 15, 2022. Piezocone Penetrometer (CPTu) soundings CPTu22-01 and CPTu22-02 were terminated at depths of 49 feet and 55 feet below existing site grades, respectively due to probe refusal. Detailed information of the subsurface exploration, equipment used, exploration location plan, and logs are included in the Geotechnical Data Report in Appendix B. A subsurface exploration program consisting of drilling four (4) soil borings was conducted in 2017. The borings location plan and the boring logs are included in Appendix B.

4. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

A brief description of the soil conditions encountered during the subsurface exploration is presented below. The stratification lines designating the interfaces between soil types on the boring logs represent approximate boundaries. Subsurface conditions may vary between and beyond the boring locations. The subsurface layers encountered were as follows:

Embankment Fill

The CPTu soundings encountered 2 to 3 feet thick layer of fill that consisted primarily of clay, and silty sand.

Alluvial Deposits

Underneath the fill layer, Alluvial deposits of the Pamlico Sand was encountered. This stratum ranged from a thin margin to approximately 10 feet in thickness.

Deltaic Sediments

Underlying the alluvial deposits, Deltaic sediments of the Citronelle Formation consisting mostly of clay and fine sand with lenses of silt and coarse sand were encountered. The thickness of this layer ranged from 35 to 42 feet.

Graham Ferry Formation

The Graham Ferry Formation was likely penetrated near depths of approximately 44 to 48 feet, characterized with dense sands and thin lenses of clay and silt.

Groundwater

Subsurface groundwater was encountered in both CPTu soundings at an approximate depth of 3 feet below existing site grades. It should be noted that fluctuations in the groundwater conditions due to seasonal weather changes should be anticipated.

The CPTu logs and cross-sections are included in Appendix B.

GULF ISLANDS NATIONAL SEASHORE

JACKSON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

PAGE 5 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VA

5. ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 General

Foundation design was performed in general accordance with AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 9th Edition, 2020 and applicable Helical Anchor Design guidelines.

5.2 Structural Loads

Structural loads provided by EFLHD Bridge Branch are summarized in Table 1 below:

Table 1 - Structural Loads

Structure Culvert

Foundation Boardwalks

STRENGTH LIMIT STATE, Load (Kips) Max axial (STR) - Single pile 127.4 11.0 Lateral (STR) – Single pile 4.6 4.1 Torsion (STR) - Single pile 5.0 (kips-ft) 4.0 (kips-ft)

SERVICE LIMIT STATE, Load (Kips) Max axial (SER) - Single pile 104.8 9.0 Lateral (SER) – Single pile 2.6 2.3

5.3 Analysis and Recommendations

Culvert Replacement

Based on the subsurface profile encountered during our subsurface exploration, it is our opinion that shallow footings are not suitable to support the new structure since they are likely to exhibit excessive settlements (total and differential). Also, the presence of shallow groundwater may require the installation of a comprehensive and expensive drainage system.

A deep foundation system consisting of 18-inch square pre-stressed reinforced concrete piles was chosen to support the new culvert bridge. The decision for selection of this foundation alternative was based on consideration of cost, constructability, environmental impacts, limits of disturbance, and familiarity with similar projects and soil profiles.

Pedestrian Bridges

Considering the subsurface conditions encountered and anticipated structural loads, it is our opinion that the proposed concrete and timber pedestrian bridges can be supported on a system of galvanized steel helical piles. Helical piles are generally not labor intensive, do not require special construction equipment for installation, and generate minimum or no spoils. They also provide pile capacity verification means during installation.

GULF ISLANDS NATIONAL SEASHORE

JACKSON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

PAGE 6 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VA

The soil properties presented in Table 2 below were assumed based on empirical correlations using field soil classification.

Table 2 – Soil Parameters for Design

Soil Type

Depth, below

Existing Grade

(ft) Unit Weight, γ

(pcf)

Friction Angle, Φ

(deg.)

Cohesion, c

(psf) Fill Soil 3 115 32 0

Pamlico Sand 8 52.6* 30 0 Loose to Medium Dense

Sand (Interbedded in Citronelle Formation)

22 to 30 52.6* 25 0

Citronelle Formation 45 57.6* 0 725 Graham Ferry Formation 56 52.6* 37 0

* Bouyant unit weight used below the groundwater

The nominal bearing capacity of a single pile was evaluated in accordance with Section 10 of AASHTO (2020), LRFD Bridge Design Specifications and applicable Helical Anchors Design guidelines.

Table 3 below provides a summary of design properties considered for each pile foundation system.

Table 3 – Pile Design Properties

Property Structure

Culvert Foundation, Precast Concrete Boardwalks, Helical Piles

Estimated Pile depth, (ft.) 55 30*, 50** Foundation Dimension (in.) 18, Square 5.5, Round Shaft Wall Thickness (in.) - 0.361 Pile Batter Angle (deg.) 0 0 *Southbound boardwalk Sta. 4000+14 to Sta. 4004+80, Northbound boardwalk **Southbound boardwalk Sta. 4004+80 to Sta. 4008+10.25, Alligator pond boardwalk

GULF ISLANDS NATIONAL SEASHORE

JACKSON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

PAGE 7 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VA

5.3.1 Geotechnical Resistance

Precast- Prestressed Concrete (PSC)

Factored maximum geotechnical resistances (Rr) was calculated using the static analysis method.

Consequently, a geotechnical resistance factor of 0.35 for clays and 0.45 for sands were used according to AASHTO, Table 10.5.5.2.3-1. Our analyses indicate that the PSC pile will result in the factored geotechnical resistance provided in Table 4 below.

Table 4 – Precast- Prestressed Concrete (PSC) Pile Geotechnical Resistance

Site

Pile Type - Size Factored Axial Geotechnical

Resistance (Rr) (Kips)

Estimated Embedded

Length, below culvert

(ft)

Open Bottom Culvert PSC - 18 inch 150 55

We recommend a minimum center-to-center pile spacing of three (3)-times the pile width.

Helical Piles

Helical Pile capacities shall be verified during installation using the capacity to torque load correlations.

Our analyses indicate that such a system will result in the factored geotechnical resistance provided in Table 5 below. A bearing resistance factor of 0.45 was used, AASHTO 2020, ASCE (2009).

Table 5 – Helical Pile Geotechnical Resistance

Site Pile Type - Size Factored Axial

Geotechnical Resistance (Rr)

(Kips)

Estimated Length, (ft)

1. Southbound boardwalk Sta.

4000+14 to Sta. 4004+80,

2. Northbound boardwalk

Helical Shaft –

5.5 inch 11 30

3. Southbound boardwalk Sta.

4004+80 to Sta. 4008+10.25,

4. Alligator pond boardwalk

Helical Shaft –

5.5 inch 25 50

We recommend that a helical pile torque/anchor capacity relationship analysis be performed by the successful bidder prior to mobilization of the equipment to the site. The proposed mounted torque motor(s) should have adequate energy to efficiently install the piles to the specified capacities without inducing excessive stresses on the helical piles.

GULF ISLANDS NATIONAL SEASHORE

JACKSON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

PAGE 8 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VA

5.4 Corrosion Protection

The chemical properties of the site soils shown on the USDA Web Soil Survey indicate corrosion potential. Corrosion protected or stainless steel helical piles should be used.

6. DISCLAIMER/LIMITATIONS CLAUSE

The subsurface explorations and tests described in this report have been conducted in accordance with standard practices and procedures (except as specifically noted). The results of these exploration and tests represent conditions at the specific locations, to the depths explored, and on the dates indicated.

Subsurface conditions below the depths explored, between and beyond the boring locations may vary. The Geotechnical Evaluation and Recommendations Sections of this report include interpretations and recommendations developed by the Government in the process of preparing the design. These interpretations are not intended as a substitute for the personal investigation, independent interpretation, and judgment of the Contractor.

Prepared by:

Girmay Weldegiorgis, P.E.

Geotechnical Engineer

Reviewed by:

Mounir Abouzakhm, P.E.

Division Geotechnical Engineer

P ROJECT: GUIS 15(4)

PAGE 9 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VA

REFERENCES

AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 2020, 9th Ed., Washington, D.C. American Association of State Highway and Transportation officials.

FHWA. (2014). Standard Specifications for Construction of Roads and Bridges on Federal Highway Projects (FP-14). US Department of Transportation. Washington D.C.: US Department of Transportation.

FHWA. (2015). Strength Characterization of Open-Graded Aggregates for Structural Backfills - FHWA-HRT-15-034. McLean: FHWA.

Helical Anchors Inc. (2014), Helical Anchors Design Manual. Helical Anchors Inc. Minneapolis, MN http://www.helicalanchorsinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/HAI-Engineering-Manual.pdf

Helical Foundation Systems Engineering Reference Manual by MacLean Dixie HFS

LRFD for Helical Anchors: An Overview: International Foundation Congress and Equipment Expo 2009, Published by ASCE

Helical Pile Foundation Design Guide, Helical Piles and Tiebacks Committee of Deep Foundation Institute (DFI), 2019

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Web Soil Survey of Jackson County, Mississippi

P ROJECT: GUIS 15(4)

PAGE 10 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VA

APPENDICES

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

APPENDIX A – FIGURES

MS

SHEET

NO. PROJECT TOTAL

SHEETS

FIGURE 1

SITE LOCATION MAP

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VIRGINIA

STATEREG

MS NP GUIS 15(4)

Project : MS NP GUIS 15(4)

Legend:

Source:

Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality, Office of Geology: https://www.mdeq.ms.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/MS_Geology1969.pdf https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Prodesc/proddesc_16555.htm Reference: David E. Thompson, RPG - September 2011 (after Alvin R. Bicker, Jr., 1969)

MS

FIGURE 2

GEOLOGIC MAP

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION REG

FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STATE TOTAL

SHEETS

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

MS NP GUIS 15(4)

SHEET

NO. PROJECT

ASHBURN, VIRGINIA

Project: MS NP GUIS 15(4) https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Prodesc/proddesc_16555.htm

APPENDIX B – GEOTECHNICAL DATA REPORT

Geotechnical Data Report Subsurface Exploration in Gulf Island National Seashore

EFLHD Project No.: MS NP GUIS 15(4) Ocean Springs, Jackson County, Mississippi

October 27, 2022 i

CONTENTS

1.0 AUTHORIZATION

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

3.0 SITE CONDITIONS

4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS

4.1 Subsurface Explorations

4.2 CPTu Sounding Equipment

5.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

5.1 Geology

5.2 Generalized Subsurface Conditions

5.3 Summary of Correlated Parameters

6.0 LIMITATIONS

7.0 REFERENCES

Attachments

Attachment 1 – Site Vicinity Map Attachment 2 – Subsurface Exploration Location Plan Attachment 3 – CPTu Sounding Logs and Correlations Attachment 4 – Subsurface Fence Diagram Attachment 5 – Site Photographs of CPTu Equipment

EFLHD Project No.: MS NP GUIS 15(4)

1.0 AUTHORIZATION

HDR Engineering, Inc. (HDR) is pleased to submit this Geotechnical Data Report to the Federal

Highway Administration, Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division (EFLHD) for the Subsurface

Exploration in Gulf Island National Seashore. HDR completed its geotechnical investigation and

Draft Geotechnical Data Report in accordance with the provided scope of work and our price proposal, dated July 29, 2022.

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

To assist EFLHD with developing engineering parameters along Park Road within the Davis

Bayou Area of the Gulf Islands National Seashore, in the city of Ocean Springs, Jackson, County, Mississippi, HDR completed a subsurface exploration program. HDR’s subsurface exploration program consisted of two Piezocone Penetrometer (CPTu) soundings.

3.0 SITE CONDITIONS

The project is located along Park Road, between approximately 700 feet south of its intersection with Robert Mghee Rd and 700 feet north of its intersection with Eagle Point Rd. Park Road runs north south and consists of a single lane of traffic in both directions. Wetland features of the

Halstead Bayou are adjacent to both sides of Park Road. A site vicinity map is provided as

Attachment 1.

4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS

4.1 Subsurface Explorations

Walker-Hill Environmental (WHE) completed two Piezocone Penetrometer (CPTu) soundings on

September 15, 2022. Table 4-1 summarizes the completed CPTu soundings. A subsurface exploration location plan is provided in Attachment 2. CPTu sounding logs are provided in

Attachment 3.

Table 4-1 – Summary of CPTu Soundings

Exploration

Designation

Approximate

Sounding Depth (ft) Latitude Longitude Surface Elevation (ft)

CPTu22-01 49 30.394181 -88.788164 8.9

CPTu22-02 55 30.393149 -88.788111 6.1

Note: Initial attempt at CPTu22-01 was performed at 30.394185, -88.788164

Both soundings were proposed to a depth of 100 feet but encountered probe refusal at the termination depths shown in Table 4-1. An initial push was attempted at CPTu22-01 but was terminated at a depth of 5 feet and offset after discovering the equipment software setting was incorrect. Soundings were advanced through the existing pavement layer and subbase materials utilizing a dummy cone tip. CPTu soundings were backfilled with grout and patched with

Aquaphalt upon completion. Location information was collected utilizing a Trimble DA1 Catalyst

EFLHD Project No.: MS NP GUIS 15(4)

GNSS System with an accuracy of approximately +/- .1 feet in both the vertical and horizontal direction. Surface elevations are referenced to the North American Vertical Datum 1988 (NAVD-

88).

Total Safety US, inc. provided traffic control consisting of a flagging operation to allow access to the subsurface exploration locations.

4.2 CPTu Sounding Equipment

Table 4-2 summarizes the CPTu sounding equipment utilized for this project. Attachment 4 provides site photographs of the equipment along Park Road during the exploration event.

Table 4-2 – Summary of CPTu Sounding Equipment

Rig Description Deployment

System

Cone

Description

Cone

Number

Cross Sectional

Area

(cm2)

Sleeve

Area

(cm2)

Capacity (MPA)

Tip Sleeve Pore

Pressure

20-Ton Track Rig Geoprobe2060CPT Nova Cone 5618 15 225 100 1.5 5

5.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

5.1 Geology

The project area is physiographically situated within the Gulf Coast Lowlands Section of the Outer

Gulf Coastal Plain Province. This area is characterized as a flat, weakly dissected alluvial plain of marine and terrestrial deposits (McNab, 2007).

Surficial alluvial deposits at the project area are mapped as the Pamlico Sand of Pleistocene age and are characterized as fossiliferous gray and tan sand with minor clay and silt and include fluvial deposits near the mouths of the Pearl and Pascagoula Rivers. Mapped thicknesses range between 1 to 75 feet.

The Pamlico Sand is mapped as being supported by the Citronelle Formation of Pliocene to

Pleistocene age and is characterized with various shades of red sands and local lenses of clay and tan, gray chert gravel and unconformably overlies both Miocene and Oligocene deposits.

The Citronelle Formation is mapped as being supported by the Graham Ferry Formation of

Pliocene age and is composed of a series of deltaic sediments comprised of dark fossiliferous clays, sands, and shale. Maximum thickness in Jackson County, Mississippi is recorded at 113 feet and overlies the Pascagoula Formation of Miocene age. The Pascagoula consists of green, gray, and blue clays which are locally calcareous and fossiliferous, interbedded with green and gray sands. The unit is subdivided into two members – the Fort Adams and the Homochitto.

Mapped thicknesses range over 1,000 feet (Childress, 1973).

EFLHD Project No.: MS NP GUIS 15(4)

5.2 Generalized Subsurface Conditions

An interpretation of the completed CPTu soundings estimates embankment fill thicknesses of 2 to 4 feet, supported by alluvial deposits of the Pamlico Sand, which ranged from a thin margin to approximately 8 to 10 feet in thickness. Deltaic sediments of the Citronelle Formation underlaid the Pamlico Sands and consisted mostly of clay and fine sand with lenses of silt and coarse sand.

The Graham Ferry Formation was likely penetrated near depths of approximately 44 to 48 feet, characterized with dense sands and thin lenses of clay and silt. A subsurface fence diagram along

Park Road is provided as Attachment 5.

Subsurface groundwater was encountered in both CPTu soundings at an approximate depth of 3 feet below ground surface.

5.3 Summary of Correlated Parameters

WHE utilized the software CPeT-IT to analyze and provide correlations to engineering parameters based upon the raw CPTu sounding data collected by WHE. Table 5-1 summarizes common engineering parameters (SPT N60, friction angle, and undrained shear strength) of the subsurface stratigraphy encountered. Plots of these parameters and additional engineering parameter correlations are provided in Attachment 3.

Table 5-1 – Summary of Correlated Parameters

Stratigraphic Layer

Typical

Soil Behavior

Type

Observed 1

SPT N60

Range (bpf) 2

Friction Angle (°)

Range 3

Undrained

Shear Strength (tsf)

Range 4

Embankment Fill 5, 6 5 to 40 38 to 48 --

Pamlico Sand (Alluvium) 4, 5, 6 5 to 19 36 to 40 --

Citronelle Formation 3, 4 2 to 35 -- 0.25 to 1.0

Graham Ferry Formation 6 20 to >50 40 to 45 --

1 (Robertson 1990) 2 Based on IC and qt (Lunne et. al. 1997) 3 Based on Qt, only applicable for SBTn 5, 6, 7, & 8 (Kulhawy & Mayne 1990) 4 Based on qt, σv0, and Nkt, applicable only for SBTn 1, 2, 3, 4, & 9; an Nkt of 14 was assumed, however Nkt can generally vary from 10 to 20 for soft intact clays (Lunne et. al. 1997)

6.0 LIMITATIONS

The data included in this report depicts the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions at the specific locations where the soundings were performed, at the time of the subsurface explorations. These conditions may vary at other locations beyond, or between, these specific locations. Accordingly, HDR does not warrant or guarantee that the information provided on the sounding logs, or in this report, can be projected as indicative of conditions beyond the limits of the soundings, and any such projection is purely interpretive. In addition, the ground water levels recorded on the CPTu soundings indicate the ground water conditions that existed at the time of the investigation. Ground water levels may vary considerably over time according to prevailing climate, rainfall, surface run-off, evaporation, construction, and other factors.

EFLHD Project No.: MS NP GUIS 15(4)

HDR has endeavored to complete the services identified herein in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing in the same locality and under similar conditions as this project.

7.0 REFERENCES

AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 9th Ed. (2020) with November 2021 Errata.

Childress, S.C. (1973). “Bulletin 118: Mississippi Geologic Names”. Mississippi Geological, Economic, and Topographical Survey.

Federal Lands Highway – Project Development and Design Manual (PDDM).

Harvey, E.J., Golden, H.G., and Jeffery, H.G. (1965). “Water Resources of the Pascagoula area, Mississippi”. US Geological Survey. Water-Supply Paper 1763. 1965. Map scaled

1:62,000.

McNab, W.H., et al (2007). “Ecological Subregions: Sections and Subsections of the

Conterminous United States”. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2007. General

Technical Report WO-76B & Map Scaled 1:3,500,000.

Attachment 1

Site Vicinity Map

Hanley Rd

G o llo tt

R d

Conley Cir

McIlwain Dr

Breezy Hill Ln

P ar k Rd

G o v ernm ent St

G o llo tt

R d

E a g le

P o in t

R d

Eagle Nest Rd

PATH: \\CLTSMAIN\GIS_DATA\GIS\PROJECTS\3188_FHWA-EFLHD\10354241_GULFISLANDSNATLSEASHORE\7.2_WORK_IN_PROGRESS\MAP_DOCS\APRX\20221210\20221210.APRX - USER: MFONG - DATE: 10/12/2022

PROJECT LOCATION

FIGURE 1

GULF ISLANDS NATIONAL SEASHORE

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION

0 700 FeetOProject Location

Mississippi Nat'l Wildlife Refuge

Gulf Park Estates

Ocean Springs

PROJECT LOCATION

ATTACHMENT 1

SITE VICINITY MAP

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION IN GULF

ISLAND NATIONAL SEASHORESITE VICINITY MAP

ATTACHMENT 1

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION IN GULF ISLAND NATIONAL SEASHORE

EFLHD Project No. MS NP GUIS 15(4)

Attachment 2

Subsurface Exploration Location Plan

P a rk R d

CPTu22-01

CPTu22-02

PATH: \\CLTSMAIN\GIS_DATA\GIS\PROJECTS\3188_FHWA-EFLHD\10354241_GULFISLANDSNATLSEASHORE\7.2_WORK_IN_PROGRESS\MAP_DOCS\APRX\20221210\20221210.APRX - USER: MFONG - DATE: 10/27/2022

EXPLORATION PLAN

FIGURE 2

GULF ISLANDS NATIONAL SEASHORE

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION

0 60 FeetOExplorations SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOCATION PLAN

ATTACHMENT 2

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION IN GULF ISLAND NATIONAL SEASHORE

EFLHD Project No. MS NP GUIS 15(4)

Attachment 3

CPTu Sounding Logs and Correlations

Project: HDR

Walker-Hill Environmental Chris Hayslip chris@whenv.com www.whenv.com

Total depth: 49.15 ft, Date: 9/15/2022

Ocean Springs

Cone Type: NOVA 15

Cone Operator: Jack Womble

CPT: CPTu22-01

Location:

Cone resistance

Tip resistance (tsf)

D e p th ft

Cone resistance Pore pressure

Pressure (psi) 100500

D e p th ft

Pore pressureSleeve friction

Friction (tsf) 21.510.5

D e p th ft

Sleeve friction

Cross correlation between qc & fs

20181614121086420-2-4-6-8-10-12-14-16-18-20

1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

-0.2

-0.4

-0.6

-0.8

-1

-1.2

Cross correlation between qc & fs

The plot below presents the cross correlation coeficient between the raw qc and fs values (as measured on the field). X axes presents the lag distance (one lag is the distance between two sucessive CPT measurements).

CPeT-IT v.3.0.3.2 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 10/12/2022, 2:14:00 PM 1 Project file: \\gla-srv01\JOBS\GEOTECH\Projects\EFLHD\GUIS 15(4) - Ocean Springs, MS\Data from WHE\Ocean Springs.cpt

Latitude: 30.394181, -88.788164 Longitude: 30.393149, -88.78811 Surface Elevation: 8.9 ft

Chris Hayslip chris@whenv.com www.whenv.com

Total depth: 49.15 ft, Date: 9/15/2022

Ocean Springs

Cone Type: NOVA 15

Cone Operator: Jack Womble

CPT: CPTu22-01

Location:

SBT Index

Ic SBT

D e p th ft

4 8

SBT IndexCone resistance qt

Tip resistance (tsf)

D e p th ft

4 8

Cone resistance qt Pore pressure u

Pressure (psi) 100500

D e p th ft

4 8

Pore pressure u

SBT legend

1. Sensitive fine grained

2. Organic material

3. Clay to silty clay

4. Clayey silt to silty clay

5. Silty sand to sandy silt

6. Clean sand to silty sand

7. Gravely sand to sand

8. Very stiff sand to clayey sand

9. Very stiff fine grained

Friction ratio

Rf (%) 1086420

D e p th ft

4 8

Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type

SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420

D e p th ft

Soil Behaviour Type

Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay

Clay & silty clay

Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay

Clay

Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Silty sand & sandy silt

Clay

Clay & silty clay

Sand & silty sand Clay & silty clay

Clay & silty clay

Clay

Clay & silty clay

Clay & silty clay

Clay

Clay & silty clay Clay

Sand & silty sand

CPeT-IT v.3.0.3.2 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 10/12/2022, 2:14:00 PM 2 Project file: \\gla-srv01\JOBS\GEOTECH\Projects\EFLHD\GUIS 15(4) - Ocean Springs, MS\Data from WHE\Ocean Springs.cpt

Chris Hayslip chris@whenv.com www.whenv.com

Total depth: 49.15 ft, Date: 9/15/2022

Ocean Springs

Cone Type: NOVA 15

Cone Operator: Jack Womble

CPT: CPTu22-01

Location:

Permeability

Ksbt (ft/s) 1x10

-9 1x10

-6 1x10

-3 1x10

+0

D e p th ft

Permeability Young's modulus (E25)

Es (tsf) 1 ,0000

D e p th ft

Young's modulus (E25)SPT N60

N60 (blows/ft) 50403020100

D e p th ft

SPT N60 Relative density

Dr (%) 100806040200

D e p th ft

Relative density

Calculation parameters Relative density constant, CDr: 350.0Permeability: Based on SBTn

SPT N60: Based on Ic and qt

Young’s modulus: Based on variable alpha using Ic (Robertson, 2009) Phi: Based on Kulhawy & Mayne (1990)

User defined estimation data

Friction angle φ (degrees) 5045403530

D e p th ft

Friction angle

CPeT-IT v.3.0.3.2 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 10/12/2022, 2:14:00 PM 3 Project file: \\gla-srv01\JOBS\GEOTECH\Projects\EFLHD\GUIS 15(4) - Ocean Springs, MS\Data from WHE\Ocean Springs.cpt

Chris Hayslip chris@whenv.com www.whenv.com

Total depth: 49.15 ft, Date: 9/15/2022

Ocean Springs

Cone Type: NOVA 15

Cone Operator: Jack Womble

CPT: CPTu22-01

Location:

Constrained Modulus

M(CPT) (tsf) 2 ,0000

D e p th ft

Constrained Modulus Shear strength

Su (tsf)

D e p th ft

Su peak Su remolded

Shear strengthShear modulus

Go (tsf) 2 ,0001,000

D e p th ft

Shear modulus Undrained strength ratio

Su/σ',v 43210

D e p th ft

Undrained strength ratio OCR

OCR

20151050

D e p th ft

OCR

Calculation parameters

Undrained shear strength cone factor for clays, Nkt: 14

OCR factor for clays, Nkt: 0.33 Go: Based on variable alpha using Ic (Robertson, 2009) Constrained modulus: Based on variable alpha using Ic and Qtn (Robertson, 2009)

User defined estimation data Flat Dilatometer Test data

CPeT-IT v.3.0.3.2 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 10/12/2022, 2:14:00 PM 4 Project file: \\gla-srv01\JOBS\GEOTECH\Projects\EFLHD\GUIS 15(4) - Ocean Springs, MS\Data from WHE\Ocean Springs.cpt

Chris Hayslip chris@whenv.com www.whenv.com

Total depth: 54.99 ft, Date: 9/15/2022

Ocean Springs

Cone Type: NOVA 15

Cone Operator: Jack Womble

CPT: CPTu22-02

Location:

Cone resistance

Tip resistance (tsf) 4002000

D e p th ft

Cone resistance Pore pressure

Pressure (psi)

D e p th ft

Pore pressureSleeve friction

Friction (tsf)

D e p th ft

Sleeve friction

Cross correlation between qc & fs

20181614121086420-2-4-6-8-10-12-14-16-18-20

1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

-0.2

-0.4

-0.6

-0.8

-1

-1.2

Cross correlation between qc & fs

The plot below presents the cross correlation coeficient between the raw qc and fs values (as measured on the field). X axes presents the lag distance (one lag is the distance between two sucessive CPT measurements).

CPeT-IT v.3.0.3.2 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 10/12/2022, 2:14:00 PM 6 Project file: \\gla-srv01\JOBS\GEOTECH\Projects\EFLHD\GUIS 15(4) - Ocean Springs, MS\Data from WHE\Ocean Springs.cpt

Latitude: 30.394181, -88.788164 Longitude: 30.393149, -88.78811 Surface Elevation: 8.9 ft

Chris Hayslip chris@whenv.com www.whenv.com

Total depth: 54.99 ft, Date: 9/15/2022

Ocean Springs

Cone Type: NOVA 15

Cone Operator: Jack Womble

CPT: CPTu22-02

Location:

SBT Index

Ic SBT

D e p th ft

5 4

SBT IndexCone resistance qt

Tip resistance (tsf)

D e p th ft

5 4

Cone resistance qt Pore pressure u

Pressure (psi)

D e p th ft

5 4

Pore pressure u

SBT legend

1. Sensitive fine grained

2. Organic material

3. Clay to silty clay

4. Clayey silt to silty clay

5. Silty sand to sandy silt

6. Clean sand to silty sand

7. Gravely sand to sand

8. Very stiff sand to clayey sand

9. Very stiff fine grained

Friction ratio

Rf (%) 1086420

D e p th ft

5 4

Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type

SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420

D e p th ft

Soil Behaviour Type

Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt

Clay

Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Clay & silty clay

Clay & silty clay

Clay

Clay & silty clay

Clay & silty clay

Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay

Clay & silty clay

Silty sand & sandy silt

Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt

Sand & silty sand

Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt

CPeT-IT v.3.0.3.2 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 10/12/2022, 2:14:00 PM 7 Project file: \\gla-srv01\JOBS\GEOTECH\Projects\EFLHD\GUIS 15(4) - Ocean Springs, MS\Data from WHE\Ocean Springs.cpt

Chris Hayslip chris@whenv.com www.whenv.com

Total depth: 54.99 ft, Date: 9/15/2022

Ocean Springs

Cone Type: NOVA 15

Cone Operator: Jack Womble

CPT: CPTu22-02

Location:

Permeability

Ksbt (ft/s) 1x10

-9 1x10

-6 1x10

-3 1x10

+0

D e p th ft

Permeability Young's modulus (E25)

Es (tsf) 2 ,0001,0000

D e p th ft

Young's modulus (E25)SPT N60

N60 (blows/ft) 50403020100

D e p th ft

SPT N60 Relative density

Dr (%) 100806040200

D e p th ft

Relative density

Calculation parameters Relative density constant, CDr: 350.0Permeability: Based on SBTn

SPT N60: Based on Ic and qt

Young’s modulus: Based on variable alpha using Ic (Robertson, 2009) Phi: Based on Kulhawy & Mayne (1990)

User defined estimation data

Friction angle φ (degrees) 5045403530

D e p th ft

Friction angle

CPeT-IT v.3.0.3.2 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 10/12/2022, 2:14:00 PM 8 Project file: \\gla-srv01\JOBS\GEOTECH\Projects\EFLHD\GUIS 15(4) - Ocean Springs, MS\Data from WHE\Ocean Springs.cpt

Chris Hayslip chris@whenv.com www.whenv.com

Total depth: 54.99 ft, Date: 9/15/2022

Ocean Springs

Cone Type: NOVA 15

Cone Operator: Jack Womble

CPT: CPTu22-02

Location:

Constrained Modulus

M(CPT) (tsf) 4 ,0002,0000

D e p th ft

Constrained Modulus Shear strength

Su (tsf)

D e p th ft

Su peak Su remolded

Shear strengthShear modulus

Go (tsf) 2 ,0001,000

D e p th ft

Shear modulus Undrained strength ratio

Su/σ',v 43210

D e p th ft

Undrained strength ratio OCR

OCR

20151050

D e p th ft

OCR

Calculation parameters

Undrained shear strength cone factor for clays, Nkt: 14

OCR factor for clays, Nkt: 0.33 Go: Based on variable alpha using Ic (Robertson, 2009) Constrained modulus: Based on variable alpha using Ic and Qtn (Robertson, 2009)

User defined estimation data Flat Dilatometer Test data

CPeT-IT v.3.0.3.2 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 10/12/2022, 2:14:00 PM 9 Project file: \\gla-srv01\JOBS\GEOTECH\Projects\EFLHD\GUIS 15(4) - Ocean Springs, MS\Data from WHE\Ocean Springs.cpt

Attachment 4

Subsurface Fence Diagram

-50

-45

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

-50

-45

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

10400 200 0 3 6 9(tsf)

400 200 0 3 6 9(tsf)

E

LE

V A

T

IO

N ft

S P

T _C

P T

_F E

N C

E

:O C

E A

N C

IT

Y

.G P

J:

S

P T

_C P

T

.G D

T : L ib v er si on

: g

IN

T v er si o n

.0 2.

.0

/2

7/

H

D R

10339325

ENGINEERING GEOLOGY

NORMALIZED SOIL BEHAVIOR TYPE

(Robertson, 2009)

1 Sensitive, fine grained 2 Organic soils - clay 3 Clays - silty clay to clay 4 Silt mixtures - clayey silt to silty clay 5 Sand mixtures - silty sand to sandy silt 6 Sands - clean sand to silty sand 7 Gravelly sand to dense sand 8 Very stiff sand to clayey sand 9 Very stiff, fine grained

The subsurface information shown on the cone penetrometer test logs (CPT) in these plans was obtained with reasonable care and recorded in good faith solely for use by the Department in establishing design controls for the project. The Department has no reason to suspect that such information is not reasonably accurate as an approximate indication of the subsurface conditions at the sites where the borings were taken. The Department does not in any way warrant or guarantee that such data can be projected as indicative of conditions beyond the limits of the borings shown; and any such projections by bidders are purely interpretive and altogether speculative. Further, the Department does not in any way guarantee, either expressly or by implication, the sufficiency of the information for bid purposes.

The CPT logs are made available to bidders in order that they may have access to subsurface data identical to that which is possessed by the Department, and are not intended as a substitute for personal investigation, interpretation and judgment by the bidders.

Checked:

No. Description Date

Revisions

Date Plan No. Sheet No.

FHWA

REGION STATE

ROUTE

FEDERAL AID

PROJECT ROUTE

VA.

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

MATERIALS DIVISION

STATE

PROJECT

SHEET

NO.

Notes: See borehole logs for complete data.

See Material and Sample Symbols List.

Copyright 2022, Commonwealth of Virginia

Drilled:

Logged:

CPTu22-01

CONE RESISTANCE SOIL BEHAVIOR TYPE

CPTu22-02

CONE RESISTANCE SOIL BEHAVIOR TYPE

Attachment 4 - Subsurface Fence Diagram

Embankment Fill

Palico Sand

Citronelle Formation

Graham Ferry Formation

* Interpretation lines are approximate only and are shown for presentation purposes. Interpretations should be confirmed for final design purposes.

Attachment 5

Site Photographs of CPTu Equipment

Facing South Rig tracking to

CPT-01

Approximate location of CPT-01

North

CPT-01 Boring CPT-01 Abandoned Boring

CPT-01 Boring

CPT-01 Abandoned Boring

CPT rig set up on CPT-02 facing North

Approximate location of CPT-02

CPT-02

CPT-02

girmay.weldegiorgis Text Box

BORING LOGS FROM 2017

17BH-3

17BH-2

17BH-4

17BH-1

Visitor center

Boardwalk/ culvert Site

Project GUIS 15(3) - Boring Location Map for the Boardwalk/Culvert Structures

1.8

1.3

1.3

0.3

1.1

2.0

2.0

2.2

1.0

6-7-4-4

0-1-2-2

0-1-2-30/5"

0-0-0-2

0-5-4-4

0-0-0-0

0-0-0-0

0-0-0-2

Asphalt Pavement

Very loose to medium dense, gray, SILTY SAND to FINE

SAND, [A-2-4(0)].

(Moist to wet)

- FILL -

Trace clay between 3 to 5 feet.

Tace wood from 5 to 7 feet.

Very soft, gray, CLAY, [A-6].

(Moist)

- COASTAL DEPOSITS -

Very loose, white to gray, COARSE SAND, [A-3].

(Moist to wet)

Bottom of boring at 25 ft

0.5

J-1

J-2

J-3

J-4

J-5

J-6

J-7

J-8

0.6

12.5

20.0

25.0

Project Location:

Encountered at:

After

Northing: 324855.514 Easting: 998519.009

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Rock Core (RQD in %) hrs

Remarks:

Auger Cuttings

G ra ph ic

L og

Gulf Islands National Seashore - MS GUIS 15(3) SISTER 2

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

D ep th S ca le ft)

Inspector:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Boring No.:

Groundwater Depth:

Sample Types:

BORING LOG

9/12/17 M. Elias

D. HutchinsOperator:

T yp e

Weather:

SAMPLE

Plastic Limit Standard Penetration Test Data

Project Datum:

25.0 ft

(Blows / ft)

6.4 ft

Undisturbed (UD)

9/12/17

R ec ft)

Project Name:

Surface Elevation:

Boring Location:

La ye r

D ep th ft)

Boring Began:

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Liquid Limit

SPT

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

At Completion:

Completed:

N o.

Jackson County, MS

E le va tio n (f ee t)

3 3/4" Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

30 in.

140 lbs/Automatic

Penetrometer (PP in tsf)

Water Content %

Hole Diameter:

NAD83

HSA

17BH-1

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Sunny

S P

T B lo w s pe r in

P P

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

/2

6/

:4

M

:\P R

O

JE

C T

S \G

U

IS

\1 5(

3) \T

E C

H S

E R

V \G

E O

T E

C H

\S U

B S

U R

F A

C E

I N

V E

S T

IG

A

T

IO

N \B

O R

IN

G

L O

G S

\G U

IS

5( 3)

.G P

J

5.8

-6.1

-13.6

-18.6

Sheet: 1 of 1

1.1

0.5

NR

0.4

1.6

1.2

1.3

1.6

1.5

2.0

7-10-6-6

1-5-5-4

2-1-0-1

0-4-3-1

0-0-0-0

0-4-7-9

0-7-7-5

0-1-2-2

2-2-2-2

0-0-0-0

Asphalt Pavement

Medium dense, gray to tan, WELL-GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT AND SAND, [A-1-a].

(Dry)

- FILL-

Loose, gray, SAND WITH GRAVEL.

(Wet)

Loose, gray, SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL, wood in bottom of sampler.

(Wet)

- COASTAL DEPOSITS -

Very soft, dark gray, CLAY, with Peat moss.

(Wet)

Medium dense, gray, FINE SAND, trace silt.

(Wet)

Very loose, gray, SILTY SAND.

(Wet)

Soft, gray, CLAY.

(Wet)

Very loose, gray, CLAYEY SAND .

(Wet)

Very soft to soft, dark gray, SILTY CLAY.

(Wet)

.5

J-1

J-2

J-3

J-4

J-5

J-6

J-7

J-8

J-9

J-10

J-11

0.5

3.0

7.5

10.0

12.5

17.5

18.9

21.5

23.0

Project Location:

Encountered at:

After

Northing: 325035.391 Easting: 998511.216

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Rock Core (RQD in %) hrs

3.0 ft

Remarks:

Auger Cuttings

G ra ph ic

L og

Gulf Islands National Seashore - MS GUIS 15(3) SISTER 2

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

D ep th S ca le ft)

Inspector:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Boring No.:

Groundwater Depth:

Sample Types:

BORING LOG

9/13/17 D. Hutchins G. MoodyOperator:

T yp e

Weather:

SAMPLE

Plastic Limit Standard Penetration Test Data

Project Datum:

52.0 ft

(Blows / ft)

5.1 ft

Undisturbed (UD)

9/13/17

R ec ft)

Project Name:

Surface Elevation:

Boring Location:

La ye r

D ep th ft)

Boring Began:

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Liquid Limit

SPT

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

At Completion:

Completed:

N o.

Jackson County, MS

E le va tio n (f ee t)

3 3/4" Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

30 in.

140 lbs/Automatic

Penetrometer (PP in tsf)

Water Content %

Hole Diameter:

NAD83

HSA

17BH-2

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Clear 78F

S P

T B lo w s pe r in

P P

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

/2

6/

:4

M

:\P R

O

JE

C T

S \G

U

IS

\1 5(

3) \T

E C

H S

E R

V \G

E O

T E

C H

\S U

B S

U R

F A

C E

I N

V E

S T

IG

A

T

IO

N \B

O R

IN

G

L O

G S

\G U

IS

5( 3)

.G P

J

4.6

2.1

-2.4

-4.9

-7.4

-12.4

-13.8

-16.4

-17.9

Sheet: 1 of 2

2.0

1.8

1.4

NR

0-0-0-0

1-3-6-6

0-1-2-11

0-0-4-11

4-5-8-20

Very soft to soft, dark gray, SILTY CLAY.

(Wet) (Continued)

Loose, gray, SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL, [A-2-4].

(Wet)

Very loose to loose, light gray, POORLY GRADED

SAND WITH SILT,[A-3].

(Wet)

Bottom of boring at 52.0 ft

J-12

J-13

J-14

J-15

J-15

36.5

41.3

52.0

Project Location:

Encountered at:

After

Northing: 325035.391 Easting: 998511.216

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Rock Core (RQD in %) hrs

3.0 ft

Remarks:

Auger Cuttings

G ra ph ic

L og

Gulf Islands National Seashore - MS GUIS 15(3) SISTER 2

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

D ep th S ca le ft)

Inspector:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Boring No.:

Groundwater Depth:

Sample Types:

BORING LOG

9/13/17 D. Hutchins G. MoodyOperator:

T yp e

Weather:

SAMPLE

Plastic Limit Standard Penetration Test Data

Project Datum:

52.0 ft

(Blows / ft)

5.1 ft

Undisturbed (UD)

9/13/17

R ec ft)

Project Name:

Surface Elevation:

Boring Location:

La ye r

D ep th ft)

Boring Began:

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Liquid Limit

SPT

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

At Completion:

Completed:

N o.

Jackson County, MS

E le va tio n (f ee t)

3 3/4" Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

30 in.

140 lbs/Automatic

Penetrometer (PP in tsf)

Water Content %

Hole Diameter:

NAD83

HSA

17BH-2

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Clear 78F

S P

T B lo w s pe r in

P P

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

/2

6/

:4

M

:\P R

O

JE

C T

S \G

U

IS

\1 5(

3) \T

E C

H S

E R

V \G

E O

T E

C H

\S U

B S

U R

F A

C E

I N

V E

S T

IG

A

T

IO

N \B

O R

IN

G

L O

G S

\G U

IS

5( 3)

.G P

J

-31.4

-36.2

-46.9

Sheet: 2 of 2

1.9

1.5

1.6

1.5

1.3

1.9

2.0

2.0

0.4

2.0

5-8-6-5

3-2-2-2

1-0-1-0

0-0-0-0

0-1-3-3

2-2-2-3

0-2-2-3

0-0-0-2

2-1-0-1

Asphalt Pavement

Very loose to medium dense, brown to tan, SILTY

SAND, [A-2-4 (0)].

(Moist)

- FILL -

Very loose, gray, SILTY SAND, bottom 0.3 with Peat and wood pieces.

(Wet)

Very loose, gray to tan, CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL, trace clay.

(Wet)

- COASTAL DEPOSITS -

Very loose, gray, CLAYEY SAND WITH GRAVEL, [A-2-7].

(Wet)

Soft, gray to brown, FAT CLAY.

(Wet)

Very loose, gray, FINE SAND.

(Wet)

Very soft, gray, CLAY.

(Wet)

J-1

J-2

J-3

J-4

J-5

J-6

J-7

J-8

J-9

J-10

0.5

5.0

7.5

12.5

15.0

19.5

26.5

Project Location:

Encountered at:

After

Northing: 325112.494 Easting: 998507.233

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Rock Core (RQD in %) hrs

12.0 ft

Remarks:

Auger Cuttings

G ra ph ic

L og

Gulf Islands National Seashore - MS GUIS 15(3) SISTER 2

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

D ep th S ca le ft)

Inspector:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Boring No.:

Groundwater Depth:

Sample Types:

BORING LOG

9/14/17 D. Hutchins

J. FarlyOperator:

T yp e

Weather:

SAMPLE

Plastic Limit Standard Penetration Test Data

Project Datum:

50.0 ft

(Blows / ft)

4.7 ft

Undisturbed (UD)

9/14/17

R ec ft)

Project Name:

Surface Elevation:

Boring Location:

La ye r

D ep th ft)

Boring Began:

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Liquid Limit

SPT

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

At Completion:

Completed:

N o.

Jackson County, MS

E le va tio n (f ee t)

3 3/4" Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

30 in.

140 lbs/Automatic

Penetrometer (PP in tsf)

Water Content %

Hole Diameter:

NAD83

HSA

17BH-3

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Clear 80F

S P

T B lo w s pe r in

P P

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

/2

6/

:4

M

:\P R

O

JE

C T

S \G

U

IS

\1 5(

3) \T

E C

H S

E R

V \G

E O

T E

C H

\S U

B S

U R

F A

C E

I N

V E

S T

IG

A

T

IO

N \B

O R

IN

G

L O

G S

\G U

IS

5( 3)

.G P

J

4.2

-0.3

-2.8

-7.8

-10.3

-14.8

-21.8

Sheet: 1 of 2

1.3

0.7

0-0-0-0

0-2-3-2

1-3-3-4

0-0-0-2

Very soft, gray, CLAY.

(Wet) (Continued)

Trace fine Sand.

Loose, gray, FINE SAND .

(Wet)

Soft, gray, SILTY CLAY.

(Wet)

Very loose, gray, SILTY SAND, [A-2-4].

(Wet)

Very loose, gray, POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT, [A-3].

(Wet)

Bottom of boring at 50.0 ft

.5

.5

J-11

J-12

J-13

J-14

33.5

36.3

38.5

43.5

50.0

Project Location:

Encountered at:

After

Northing: 325112.494 Easting: 998507.233

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Rock Core (RQD in %) hrs

12.0 ft

Remarks:

Auger Cuttings

G ra ph ic

L og

Gulf Islands National Seashore - MS GUIS 15(3) SISTER 2

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

D ep th S ca le ft)

Inspector:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Boring No.:

Groundwater Depth:

Sample Types:

BORING LOG

9/14/17 D. Hutchins

J. FarlyOperator:

T yp e

Weather:

SAMPLE

Plastic Limit Standard Penetration Test Data

Project Datum:

50.0 ft

(Blows / ft)

4.7 ft

Undisturbed (UD)

9/14/17

R ec ft)

Project Name:

Surface Elevation:

Boring Location:

La ye r

D ep th ft)

Boring Began:

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Liquid Limit

SPT

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

At Completion:

Completed:

N o.

Jackson County, MS

E le va tio n (f ee t)

3 3/4" Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

30 in.

140 lbs/Automatic

Penetrometer (PP in tsf)

Water Content %

Hole Diameter:

NAD83

HSA

17BH-3

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Clear 80F

S P

T B lo w s pe r in

P P

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

/2

6/

:4

M

:\P R

O

JE

C T

S \G

U

IS

\1 5(

3) \T

E C

H S

E R

V \G

E O

T E

C H

\S U

B S

U R

F A

C E

I N

V E

S T

IG

A

T

IO

N \B

O R

IN

G

L O

G S

\G U

IS

5( 3)

.G P

J

-28.8

-31.6

-33.8

-38.8

-45.3

Sheet: 2 of 2

1.9

1.8

1.6

0.1

1.0

1.6

2.0

2.0

6-6-6-6

4-2-1-1

1-2-3-5

0-0-0-0

0-0-0-0

3-4-3-3

1-1-1-3

0-1-5-7

Asphalt Pavement

Very loose to medium dense, brown, tan to gray, SILTY

SAND, [A-2-4 (0)].

(Moist to wet)

- FILL -

Loose, tan, FINE SAND.

(Wet)

Very loose, gray to tan, SILTY SAND, [A-2-4(0)].

(Wet)

- COASTAL DEPOSITS -

Very soft, gray, SILTY CLAY.

(Moist)

Loose, gray to tan, SILTY SAND, [A-2-4(0)].

(Wet)

Very loose, gray, FINE SAND.

(Wet)

Bottom of boring at 20.0 ft

J-1

J-2

J-3

J-4

J-5

J-6

J-7

J-8

0.4

5.8

7.5

15.8

17.5

19.3

20.0

Project Location:

Encountered at:

After

Northing: 325048.572 Easting: 998495.064

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Rock Core (RQD in %) hrs

Remarks:

Auger Cuttings

G ra ph ic

L og

Gulf Islands National Seashore - MS GUIS 15(3) SISTER 2

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

D ep th S ca le ft)

Inspector:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Boring No.:

Groundwater Depth:

Sample Types:

BORING LOG

9/15/17 D. Hutchins G. MoodyOperator:

T yp e

Weather:

SAMPLE

Plastic Limit Standard Penetration Test Data

Project Datum:

(Blows / ft)

5.1 ft

Undisturbed (UD)

9/15/17

R ec ft)

Project Name:

Surface Elevation:

Boring Location:

La ye r

D ep th ft)

Boring Began:

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Liquid Limit

SPT

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

At Completion:

Completed:

N o.

Jackson County, MS

E le va tio n (f ee t)

3 3/4" Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

30 in.

140 lbs/Automatic

Penetrometer (PP in tsf)

Water Content %

Hole Diameter:

NAD83

HSA

17BH-4

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Mostly Cloudy 87F

S P

T B lo w s pe r in

P P

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

/2

6/

:4

M

:\P R

O

JE

C T

S \G

U

IS

\1 5(

3) \T

E C

H S

E R

V \G

E O

T E

C H

\S U

B S

U R

F A

C E

I N

V E

S T

IG

A

T

IO

N \B

O R

IN

G

L O

G S

\G U

IS

5( 3)

.G P

J

4.7

-0.7

-2.4

-10.7

-12.4

-14.2

-14.9

Sheet: 1 of 1

APPENDIX C – ANALYSIS RESULTS

GUIS 15(4) Axial Capacity of 18” x 18” Precast Piles – Using ALLPile

Factored Axial Capacity for 45’ pile = 470x0.40 = 188 kips

0 0

90 90

180 180

270 270

360 360

450 450

540 540

630 630

720 720

810 810

900 900

0 010 1020 2030 3040 4050 5060 6070 7080 8090 90100 100

Foundation Depth, L -ft Foundation Depth, L -ft

C om pr es si on

C ap ac ity

Q dw -k p

U pl ift C ap ac ity

Q up

-k p

ULTIMATE CAPACITY vs FOUNDATION DEPTH

ALL-PILE CivilTech Software www.civiltech.com Licensed to FHWA-EFL

CivilTech Software

GUIS 15(4) - Culvert Foundation - Axial Capacity 18" x 18" Precast Concrete

Depth (Zp) from

Pile Top -ft

Elevation from Pile Top-ft

0 -4

10 -14

20 -24

30 -34

40 -44

50 -54

60 -64

Ground

Pile Tip Top Vertical Stress=0.000 Max. Vertical Stress=1.577

0-2.00 +2.00

Max. Side Resistance=1.00

Up 0 Down-2.00 +2.00 Up 0 Down-1000 +1000

Top Uplift=269.7 Top DownWard=570.4

G-lb/f3 Phi C-kp/f2 k-lb/i3 e50 %

52.6 0.0 1 1367.1 0.45 Citronelle Formation

52.6 37.0 0.00 197.0 Graham Ferry Formation

Atip=324-in

Vertical Stress -kp/f2 Side Resistance-kp/f2 Axial Force -kp

Based on Ultimate Load Condition SOIL STRESS, SIDE RESISTANCE, & AXIAL FORCE vs DEPTH

ALL-PILE CivilTech Software www.civiltech.com Licensed to FHWA-EFL

CivilTech Software

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0

Total Side Tip

Total Settlement, X -in

C om pr es si on

L oa d, Q dw -k p Vertical Load vs. Total Settlement

ALL-PILE CivilTech Software www.civiltech.com Licensed to FHWA-EFL

CivilTech Software

GUIS 15(4) Lateral Analysis of 18” x 18” Precast Piles

Lateral Load = 4.6kips; Lateral Deflection = 0.5 inches

Pile Top-ft

Elevation from Pile Top-ft

0 -4

10 -14

20 -24

30 -34

40 -44

50 -54

60 -64

Ground

Tip yt=0E+0 Top yt=4.99E-1 Max. yt=4.99E-1 Top St=-3.91E-3

0-0.50 +0.50 yt=0 at 17.2-ft

St=0 at 19.9-ft

Top Moment=5.1 Max. Moment=57.5

0-100 +100

Top Shear=4.6 Max. Shear=8.8

0-10 +10 γ φ-lb/f3 C-kp/f2 k-lb/i3 e50 %

52.6 0.0 1 1367.1 0.45 Citronelle Formation

E -kp/i2=3000 I'-in4=8748

52.6 37.0 0.00 197.0 Graham Ferry Formation

E -kp/i2=3000 I'-in4=8748

DEFLECTION, yt -in MOMENT -kp-f SHEAR -kp

Single Pile, Khead=1, Kbc=1 PILE DEFLECTION & FORCE vs DEPTH

ALL-PILE Version 6 CivilTech Software www.civiltech.com Licensed to FHWA-EFL

FHWA - EFL GUIS 15(4) - Culvert Foundation - Lateral Analysis

FRP Boardwalk, concrete at culvert

Service Limit State, Lateral Deflection = 0.444 inches

Pile Top-ft

Elevation from Pile Top-ft

0 14

10 4

20 -6

30 -16

40 -26

50 -36

60 -46

Ground

Tip yt=6.39E-15 Top yt=4.44E-1 Max. yt=4.44E-1 Top St=4.58E-18

0-0.50 +0.50 yt=0 at 10.0-ft

St=0 at 11.5-ft

Top Moment=-10.4 Max. Moment=10.4

0-20 +20

Top Shear=2.3 Max. Shear=2.4

0-5 +5

G-lb/f3 Phi C-kp/f2 k-lb/i3 e50 %

131.8 31.6 0.94 554.4 0.68 Silt (Phi + C)

69.5 31.6 0.94 559.4 0.68 Silt (Phi + C)

56.8 27.6 0.31 95.5 1.33 Silt (Phi + C)

59.0 36.5 0.00 67.5 Sand/Gravel

56.8 27.6 0.31 95.5 1.33 Silt (Phi + C)

62.7 39.0 0.00 122.2 Sand/Gravel

Last Section: E -kp/i2=29000 Last Section: I'-in4=20

DEFLECTION, yt -in MOMENT -kp-f SHEAR -kp

Single Pile, Khead=5, Kbc=2 PILE DEFLECTION & FORCE vs DEPTH

ALL-PILE CivilTech Software www.civiltech.com Licensed to FHWA-EFL

CivilTech Software

GUIS 15(4) - FRP Boardwalk - Service Limit State

5.5 in. outer diameter - Round Shaft

FRP Boardwalk, concrete at culvert

Extreme Limit State

Pile Top-ft

Elevation from Pile Top-ft

0 14

10 4

20 -6

30 -16

40 -26

50 -36

60 -46

Ground

Tip yt=1.03E-14 Top yt=8.94E-1 Max. yt=8.94E-1 Top St=0E+0

0-1.00 +1.00 yt=0 at 10.4-ft

St=0 at 11.9-ft

Top Moment=-19.3 Max. Moment=19.3

0-20 +20

Top Shear=4.1 Max. Shear=4.2

0-5 +5

G-lb/f3 Phi C-kp/f2 k-lb/i3 e50 %

131.8 31.6 0.94 554.4 0.68 Silt (Phi + C)

69.5 31.6 0.94 559.4 0.68 Silt (Phi + C)

56.8 27.6 0.31 95.5 1.33 Silt (Phi + C)

59.0 36.5 0.00 67.5 Sand/Gravel

56.8 27.6 0.31 95.5 1.33 Silt (Phi + C)

62.7 39.0 0.00 122.2 Sand/Gravel

Last Section: E -kp/i2=29000 Last Section: I'-in4=20

DEFLECTION, yt -in MOMENT -kp-f SHEAR -kp

Single Pile, Khead=5, Kbc=2 PILE DEFLECTION & FORCE vs DEPTH

ALL-PILE CivilTech Software www.civiltech.com Licensed to FHWA-EFL

CivilTech Software

GUIS 15(4) - FRP Boardwalk - Extreme Limit State

5.5 in outer diameter - Round Shaft

APPENDIX D – SELECTED PHOTOGRAPHS

Photo No. 1: Overview of Park Road, in the vicinity of the…