Cutler Fuel Tank Repl - Geotech Data Report.pdf

westonandsampson.com

55 Walkers Brook Drive, Suite 100 Reading, MA 01867 (HQ)

Tel: 978.532.1900

November 6, 2023

Ms. Kara Holwick, Contract Specialist Department of the Navy NAVFAC Midlant, PWD-Maine B-59, 1st Floor Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Portsmouth, New Hampshire 03804

RE: Geotechnical Data Report

N40085-21-D-0005 | Task Order N40085-23-F-5048

Replace Mission Essential Backup Fuel Tanks

NCTCS Cutler, Maine

INTRODUCTION

Weston & Sampson Engineers, Inc. (Weston & Sampson) is pleased to present our geotechnical data report for the proposed Replacement of Backup Fuel Tanks project in Cutler, Maine. Our geotechnical services were completed in general accordance with our September 6, 2023 proposal and the Soil Investigation Plan, dated August 28, 2023, provided by Naval Facilities Engineering

System Command (NAVFAC).

The Project includes replacing the existing single wall fuel storage tanks in Tank Farm and Transient

Tank Area with new double walled tanks. The Project design is being completed by Naval Facilities

Engineering System Command (NAVFAC). We understand NAVFAC is currently considering two design alternatives for the tank replacements. One alternative proposes reuse existing foundations in the Tank Farm for replacement tanks, while the second involves constructing new foundations for the replacement tanks in the current Transient Tank Area.

Information on the use of this report is provided in the document titled “Important Information about this Geotechnical Engineering Report” by Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA), Inc., as described in the Limitations section of this report and presented as Attachment C.

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

Geologic Setting According to the Maine Geological Survey (MGS) “Surficial Geology of Maine” (Thompson and

Borns, 1985), included below as Plate 1, mapped soils on the Site consist of Glaciomarine deposits

Mr. Casey Halliday Mechanical Engineer NAVFAC Mid-Atlantic PWD Maine, Building 59 Portsmouth, Naval Shipyard Kittery, Maine 03904 comprised of silt, clay, sand and minor amounts of gravel. The map unit includes small areas of till and other units that are not completely covered by marine sediments.

Plate 1 - Mapped Surficial Geology of Site

The MGS “Bedrock Geology of the Machias, Columbia Fall, and Great Wass Island Quadrangles, Maine” (Gates, 1981) indicates a complex structural geology with numerous rock bed folding and faults. Several fault contacts are mapped or approximately and trend in the approximate North 40 degrees East direction. The primary mapped rock unit is the Quoddy Formation of Silurian age, including the Sqs subunit consisting of dark gray to black siliceous argillite, shale and siltstone.

There are also zones of intrusive volcanic rock comprised of Silurian aged diabase (Subunit d).

Subsurface Exploration Subsurface conditions at the site were explored between October 12 and 13, 2023 by advancing three borings (SB-1 through SB-3) as shown in Figure 1 – Soil Investigation Plan. The borings were advanced to depths of up to 19 feet below ground surface (bgs).

The borings were completed by New England Boring Contractors, Inc. of Derry, New Hampshire using an ATV-mounted, Mobile B-53 drill rig and rotary wash or hollow stem auger drilling methods.

The upper 5 feet of the borings were advanced using vacuum excavation to clear for utilities.

Standard penetration tests (SPT) were subsequently conducted at 2 to 5 foot intervals by driving a split spoon sampler with an automatic hammer in general accordance with ASTM D1586. The blow counts for the middle 12-in. of sampler penetration are combined and designated as the SPT blow count, which is correlated to soil consistencies and engineering soil properties.

Drilling refusal was encountered in the borings, as detailed in the boring logs. Refusal is defined as more than 50 hammer blows for less than 6 inches of sampler penetration, or no discernable advancement of the drill bit or augers over a period of approximately 5 minutes. Drill tool grinding indicating the likely presence of cobbles and/or boulders was observed in many of the borings. NQ-sized rock coring, with wet rotary techniques, was completed at SB-1.

Weston & Sampson geotechnical engineering staff monitored the drilling in the field and prepared logs for each boring.

Encountered Subsurface Conditions The subsurface conditions encountered in our geotechnical explorations are generally consistent with the mapped geology (with the exception of fill encountered below the topsoil) and are described in the following sections.

Subsurface conditions described below are based on the three geotechnical borings performed for the proposed project that were observed by Weston & Sampson and observations during the field work. Variations may occur and should be expected outside and between our exploration locations.

The strata boundaries shown in our boring logs are based on our interpretations and the actual transitions may be gradual. Refer to the exploration logs for detailed descriptions of the soil samples collected included in Attachment A – Boring Logs, including their designation in the Unified Soil

Classification System (USCS).

Stratum 1 – Surficial Materials: The borings encountered approximately 4 to 6 inches of topsoil at the ground surface.

Stratum 2 – Fill: Existing fill material between approximately 5 to 9 feet bgs was encountered in the borings. Fill may be present in various thicknesses within the proposed tank footprint. The fill was generally comprised of a heterogenous mixture of gravel, sand, silt, and clay.

Stratum 3 – Buried Organics: Organic soils were encountered below the fill in borings SB-2 and SB-

3 and extended to approximately 6 feet bgs. The organics generally consisted of organic low plasticity FINES, little sand and none to trace gravel (OL). The organic layer was approximately 0.5 to 1.0 feet thick.

Stratum 4 – Sand: Native sand was encountered below the fill in borings SB-1 and SB-2 and below the clay in SB-3. The sand was described as medium dense to very dense (field SPT N values ranging from 25 to 106 blows per foot [bpf] with an average field N value of 57 bpf), fine to coarse sand with little to some non-plastic to low plasticity fines and few to some gravel (SM, SC).

Sample 3 in boring SB-1 was described as having a petroleum-like odor. A soil sample to evaluate potential petroleum contamination was collected for laboratory analysis. The environmental sampling results are provided under separate over.

Stratum 5 – Clay: Native clay was encountered below the sand in boring SB-2 and below the fill in

SB-3. The clay was described as very hard (field SPT N values of 33 bpf), low to medium plasticity clay with some sand and trace to few gravel (CL).

Stratum 6 – Weathered Rock: Weathered rock was encountered at boring SB-3 below the sand. The weathered rock was described as very dense (field SPT N values of 50 blows for 2 inches), fine to coarse sand with some gravel and some non-plastic fines (SM).

Stratum 7 – Rock – Probable rock was encountered in boring SB-2 at a depth of approximately 15.5 feet bgs. Rock was confirmed by retrieving a rock core in boring SB-1 between the 14 and 19-foot depth intervals. The rock core was described as dark gray, moderately weathered, severely fractured DIABASE with slight silt infill and moderately dipped joints. The recovery and rock quality designation (RQD) of the core run were 93 percent and 23 percent, respectively.

Groundwater – Groundwater was estimated at a depth of approximately 9.0 feet bgs (corresponding to approximately El. 20 to 21 feet) in borings SB-2 and SB-3. Possible perched groundwater was encountered at a depth of approximately 4.2 feet bgs (corresponding to approximately El. 23.8 feet) in boring SB-1.

We anticipate that groundwater levels will fluctuate with the tides, season, variations in precipitation, construction in the area, and other factors. Perched groundwater conditions could exist close to the ground surface, especially during and after extended periods of wet weather.

LIMITATIONS

Variations of Subsurface Conditions and Use of Report

We have prepared this preliminary geotechnical report for use by NAVFAC, members of the design and construction team for the subject project and site, only. The data and report can be used for estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions, and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions and are not applicable to other sites.

Explorations indicate soil conditions only at specific locations and only to the depths penetrated.

They do not necessarily reflect subsurface conditions that may exist outside or between exploration locations. If subsurface conditions differing from those described are noted during the course of excavation and construction, reevaluation will be necessary and we should be consulted.

Site development plans and design details were not provided at the time this report was prepared.

We should be retained to provide conclusions and recommendations based on final design documents. Additional geotechnical engineering analyses and explorations may be necessary.

Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with generally accepted practices in this area at the time this report was prepared. No warranty or other conditions, expressed or implied, is given. For additional information on the use of this report, please refer to the document titled “Important Information about This Geotechnical-

Engineering Report”.

Sincerely, WESTON & SAMPSON ENGINEERS, INC

Hector D. Flores, PE Joseph P. Laird, PE1

Project Manager Senior Project Manager

1 – Not licensed in Maine

Attachments:

Figure 1 – Soil Investigation Plan

Attachment A – Boring Logs

Attachment B – Important Information about This Geotechnical-Engineering Report

HDF: JPL

Offices in MA, CT, NH, VT, NY, NJ, PA, SC & FL

SOMEWHEREVILLE, MA

Figure

Figure 1

Attachment A

Boring Logs

D

EP

TH

B

EL

O

W G

R O

U N

D

SU

R

FA

C E

[V

ER

TI

C

AL

F

T.

SA

M

PL

E

TY

PE

G R

AP

H

IC

G

G

G

G

SA

M

PL

E

ID

N

U M

BE

R

A N

D R

EC

O

VE

R

Y R

AT

IO

[I N

./I N

G-1

G-2

G-3

G-4 S-1

10/24

S-2 8/24

S-3 4/24

RC-1

56/60

SP

T

BL

O

W S

/ 6

IN

O

R

C O

R E

R

AT

E / 1

IN

M

IN

03:04

02:27

02:04

02:45

02:07

PI

D

M

EA

SU

R

EM

EN

T, P

PM

BY

V O

LU

M

E (H

EA

D

SP

AC

E)

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.1

0.4

0.7

185.4

170.0

GEOTECHNICAL

TEST DATA

RQD =

23%

ST

R

AT

IG

R

AP

H Y

LO

G

STRATUM IDENTIFICATION

AND DESCRIPTION

Surface: Grass area.

Topsoil- 4 inches thick.

Silty sand with gravel (SM) - Brown;

moist; some fine to coarse SAND, some fine to coarse gravel, some non plastic fines. [FILL]

Gravelly lean clay (CL) - Brown; moist;

mostly low plasticity FINES, some fine to coarse gravel, few fine to coarse sand;

trace organics (roots). [FILL]

Clayey sand with gravel (SC) - Medium dense; brown to gray; moist to wet; some fine to coarse SAND, some low plasticity fines, little fine to coarse gravel. [FILL]

Poorly graded sand with silt (SP-SM) - Medium dense; gray to brown; wet; mostly medium to coarse SAND, few fine to coarse gravel, few non plastic fines. [FILL] Silty sand (SM) - Mostly medium to coarse SAND, some non plastic fines, trace fine gravel; petroleum-like odor;

frequent debris (woody debris). [FILL] Silty sand (SM) - Dense; gray; mostly fine to medium SAND, some non plastic fines, few fine gravel; petroleum-like odor.

Dark gray, moderately weathered, severely fractured DIABASE with slight silt infill and moderately dipping joints.

EL

EV

AT

IO

N S

C

AL

E

SH

O W

N T

O N

EA

R

ES

T

FT

REMARKS, OTHER TESTS,

AND INSTALLATIONS

Note: Values in brackets preceeding a remark indicate depth below ground surface (in feet) corresponding to the remark.

Depth to groundwater could not be evaluated due to use of rotary wash drilling method.

[0.0 - 4.6] Boring vacuum excavated.

Occasional cobbles/boulders up to 18 inches in diameter removed from excavation. Vacuum excavator refusal on cobbles/boulders at 4.6 ft.

[4.2] Possible perched groundwater.

[12.7 - 14.0] Roller bit grinding into rock.

[14.0] 3" ID casing telescoped to bottom of boring for rock coring.

Exploration ended at 19.0 ft.

Fuel Storage Tank Replacement Project NCTAMS LANT Det, Cutler, ME BORING ID: SB-1

WSE Project: ENG23-0805 Page 1 of 1

CONTRACTOR:

FOREMAN:

LOGGED BY:

CHECKED BY:

EQUIPMENT:

SPT HAMMER:

NE Boring Contractors, Inc.

B. Enos S. Wuebbolt, EIT H. Flores, PE Vacuum to ATV Mounted Drill Rig Automatic (140-lb.)

BORING LOCATION:

ADVANCE METHOD:

AUGER DIAMETER:

SUPPORT CASING:

CORING METHOD:

BACKFILL MATERIAL:

See Attached Figure Vacuum to Cased Rotary Wash N/A Driven Flush-Joint (4" ID to 3" ID) NX Conventional Drill Cuttings

DATE START:

DATE FINISH:

GROUND EL:

FINAL DEPTH:

GRID COORDS:

GRID SYSTEM:

October 12, 2023 October 13, 2023

28.0 ± (NAVD88)

19.0 ft.

N:357869.0807 / E:1298045.4842 NAD83 State Plane (ME)

Refer to the attached index sheets for important information about this log including general notes, legends, and guidance on description methods and procedures.

N-Value, Raw (bpf) Organic Content (%)

10 20 30 40

Moisture Content (%) Plastic Limit, PL (%) Liquid Limit, LL (%)

25 50 75 100

TH

B

EL

O

W G

R O

U N

D

SU

R

FA

C E

[V

ER

TI

C

AL

F

T.

SA

M

PL

E

TY

PE

G R

AP

H

IC

G

G

G

G

SA

M

PL

E

ID

N

U M

BE

R

A N

D R

EC

O

VE

R

Y R

AT

IO

[I N

./I N

G-1

G-2

G-3

G-4

S-1 16/24

S-2 17/24

S-3 5/11

S-4 9/24

S-5 15/19

SP

T

BL

O

W S

/ 6

IN

O

R

C O

R E

R

AT

E / 1

IN

M

IN

54/5

50/1

PI

D

M

EA

SU

R

EM

EN

T, P

PM

BY

V O

LU

M

E (H

EA

D

SP

AC

E)

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.2

0.3

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.3

0.2

GEOTECHNICAL

TEST DATA

ST

R

AT

IG

R

AP

H Y

LO

G

STRATUM IDENTIFICATION

AND DESCRIPTION

Surface: Grass area.

Topsoil- 6 inches thick.

Silty sand with gravel (SM) - Brown;

moist; mostly fine to coarse SAND, some fine to coarse gravel, little non plastic fines;

trace organics (roots). [FILL] Silty sand with gravel (SM) - Brown;

moist; mostly fine to coarse SAND, some non plastic fines, little fine to coarse gravel;

trace organics (roots). [FILL] Sandy lean clay with gravel (CL) - Brown; moist; mostly low plasticity FINES, some fine to medium sand, little fine gravel; trace organics (plant fibers). [FILL] Organic soil with sand (OL) - Dark brown; moist to wet; mostly organic low plasticity FINES, little fine sand; organic odor; occasional organics (plant fibers).

Silty sand with gravel (SM) - Medium dense to very dense; gray; moist; some fine to medium SAND, some fine to coarse gravel, little non plastic fines.

Clayey sand (SC) - Brown; moist; mostly fine to medium SAND, some low plasticity fines, few fine to coarse gravel.

[9.9] Rock fragment recovered in split-spoon tip Silty sand with gravel (SM) - Very dense;

light brown; moist to wet; mostly fine to medium SAND, some non plastic fines, little fine to coarse gravel.

Sandy lean clay (CL) - Hard; brown; wet;

mostly low plasticity FINES, some fine to medium sand, few fine to coarse gravel.

Possible rock based on split-spoon refusal and auger grinding

EL

EV

AT

IO

N S

C

AL

E

SH

O W

N T

O N

EA

R

ES

T

FT

REMARKS, OTHER TESTS,

AND INSTALLATIONS

Note: Values in brackets preceeding a remark indicate depth below ground surface (in feet) corresponding to the remark.

[0.0 - 5.0] Boring vacuum excavated.

Occasional cobbles/boulders up to 18 inches in diameter and trace debris (metal, plastic) removed from excavation.

[4.2] Possible perched groundwater level.

[5.0 - 7.0] Auger grinding.

[9.0] Estimated water level at time of drilling based on changes in sample moisture.

[9.5 - 10.4] Auger grinding.

[12.0 - 14.0] Auger grinding.

[15.6 - 16.4] Slow and consistent auger grinding into possible rock.

Auger refusal at 16.6 ft. (exploration ended).

Fuel Storage Tank Replacement Project NCTAMS LANT Det, Cutler, ME BORING ID: SB-2

WSE Project: ENG23-0805 Page 1 of 1

CONTRACTOR:

FOREMAN:

LOGGED BY:

CHECKED BY:

EQUIPMENT:

SPT HAMMER:

NE Boring Contractors, Inc.

B. Enos S. Wuebbolt, EIT H. Flores, PE Vacuum to ATV Mounted Drill Rig Automatic (140-lb.)

BORING LOCATION:

ADVANCE METHOD:

AUGER DIAMETER:

SUPPORT CASING:

CORING METHOD:

BACKFILL MATERIAL:

See Attached Figure Vacuum to Hollow-Stem Auger 2-1/4" ID (Stem), 5-5/8" OD (Flights) N/A N/A Drill Cuttings

DATE START:

DATE FINISH:

GROUND EL:

FINAL DEPTH:

GRID COORDS:

GRID SYSTEM:

October 12, 2023 October 13, 2023

30.0 ± (NAVD88)

16.6 ft. (Refusal) N:357803.9600 / E:1298078.7023 NAD83 State Plane (ME)

Refer to the attached index sheets for important information about this log including general notes, legends, and guidance on description methods and procedures.

N-Value, Raw (bpf) Organic Content (%)

10 20 30 40

Moisture Content (%) Plastic Limit, PL (%)

TH

B

EL

O

W G

R O

U N

D

SU

R

FA

C E

[V

ER

TI

C

AL

F

T.

SA

M

PL

E

TY

PE

G R

AP

H

IC

G

G

G

G

SA

M

PL

E

ID

N

U M

BE

R

A N

D R

EC

O

VE

R

Y R

AT

IO

[I N

./I N

G-1

G-2

G-3

G-4

S-1 8/24

S-2 20/24

S-3 19/24

S-4 2/2

SP

T

BL

O

W S

/ 6

IN

O

R

C O

R E

R

AT

E / 1

IN

M

IN

50/2

PI

D

M

EA

SU

R

EM

EN

T, P

PM

BY

V O

LU

M

E (H

EA

D

SP

AC

E)

0.0

0.1

0.0

0.2

1.6

0.1

0.4

0.4

GEOTECHNICAL

TEST DATA

ST

R

AT

IG

R

AP

H Y

LO

G

STRATUM IDENTIFICATION

AND DESCRIPTION

Surface: Grass area.

Topsoil- 6 inches thick.

Silty sand with gravel (SM) - Brown;

moist; mostly fine to coarse SAND, some fine to coarse gravel, little non plastic fines;

trace organics (roots). [FILL]

Silty gravel with sand (GM) - Brown;

moist; mostly fine to coarse GRAVEL, some fine to coarse sand, little non plastic fines. [FILL] Sandy lean clay with gravel (CL) - Gray with brown; moist; mostly low plasticity FINES, some fine to medium sand, little fine gravel. [FILL] Organic soil with sand (OL) - Dark brown; moist; mostly organic low plasticity FINES, little fine to medium sand, trace fine gravel.

Sandy lean clay (CL) - Hard; brown;

moist; mostly medium plasticity FINES, some fine to medium sand, trace fine gravel.

Clayey sand with gravel (SC) - Medium dense; brown with gray; wet; mostly fine to medium SAND, some low plasticity fines, little fine to coarse gravel.

Silty sand with gravel (SM) - Some fine to coarse SAND, some fine and coarse gravel, some non plastic fines.

[WEATHERED ROCK]

EL

EV

AT

IO

N S

C

AL

E

SH

O W

N T

O N

EA

R

ES

T

FT

REMARKS, OTHER TESTS,

AND INSTALLATIONS

Note: Values in brackets preceeding a remark indicate depth below ground surface (in feet) corresponding to the remark.

[0.0 - 5.0] Boring vacuum excavated.

Occasional cobbles/boulders up to 18 inches in diameter and trace debris (metal) removed from excavation.

[9.0] Estimated water level at time of drilling based on changes in sample moisture.

[10.0 - 11.0] Auger grinding.

[13.3 - 14.8] Slow and consistent auger grinding into possible rock.

Auger refusal at 14.8 ft. (exploration ended).

Fuel Storage Tank Replacement Project NCTAMS LANT Det, Cutler, ME BORING ID: SB-3

WSE Project: ENG23-0805 Page 1 of 1

CONTRACTOR:

FOREMAN:

LOGGED BY:

CHECKED BY:

EQUIPMENT:

SPT HAMMER:

NE Boring Contractors, Inc.

B. Enos S. Wuebbolt, EIT H. Flores, PE Vacuum to ATV Mounted Drill Rig Automatic (140-lb.)

BORING LOCATION:

ADVANCE METHOD:

AUGER DIAMETER:

SUPPORT CASING:

CORING METHOD:

BACKFILL MATERIAL:

See Attached Figure Vacuum to Hollow-Stem Auger 2-1/4" ID (Stem), 5-5/8" OD (Flights) N/A N/A Drill Cuttings

DATE START:

DATE FINISH:

GROUND EL:

FINAL DEPTH:

GRID COORDS:

GRID SYSTEM:

October 12, 2023 October 13, 2023

29.0 ± (NAVD88)

14.8 ft. (Refusal) N:357830.8279 / E:1298059.2260 NAD83 State Plane (ME)

Refer to the attached index sheets for important information about this log including general notes, legends, and guidance on description methods and procedures.

N-Value, Raw (bpf) Organic Content (%)

10 20 30 40

Moisture Content (%) Plastic Limit, PL (%)

GUIDE TO SUBSURFACE

EXPLORATION LOGS

INDEX SHEET 1

GENERAL INFORMATION

GENERAL NOTES AND USE OF LOGS

1.) Explorations were made by ordinary and conventional methods and with care adequate for Weston & Sampson's study and/or design purposes. The exploration logs are part of a specific report prepared by Weston & Sampson for the referenced project and client, and are an integral part of that report.

Information and interpretations are subject to the explanations and limitations stated in the report. Weston & Sampson is not responsible for any interpretations, assumptions, projections, or interpolations made by others.

2.) Exploration logs represent general conditions observed at the point of exploration on the date(s) stated. Boundary lines separating soil and rock layers (strata) represent approximate boundaries only and are shown as solid lines where observed and dashed lines where inferred based on drilling action.

Actual transitions may be gradual and changes may occur over time.

3.) Soil and rock descriptions are based on visual-manual examination of recovered samples, direct observation in test pits (when permissible), and laboratory testing (when conducted).

4.) Water level observations were made at the times and under the conditions stated. Fluctuations should be be expected to vary with seasons and other factors. Use of fluids during drilling may affect water level observations. The absence of water level observations does not necessarily mean the exploration was dry or that subsurface water will not be encountered during construction.

5.) Standard split spoon samplers may not recover particles with any dimension larger than 1-3/8 inches. Reported gravel conditions or poor sample recovery may not reflect actual in-situ conditions.

6.) Sections of this guide provide a general overview of Weston & Sampson's practices and procedures for identifying and describing soil and rock. These procedures are predominantly based on ASTM D2488, Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedures), the International Society of Rock Mechanics (ISRM) standards, and the Engineering Geology Field Manual published by the Bureau of Reclamation.

Not all aspects of this guide relating to description and identification procedures of soil and rock may be applicable in all circumstances.

Sample Recovery Ratio - The length of material recovered in a drive or push type sampler over the length of sampler penetration, in inches (e.g. 18/24).

Standard Penetration Test (SPT ) - An in-situ test where a standard split-spoon sampler is driven a distance of 12 or 18 inches (after an initial 6-inch seating interval) using a 140-lb. hammer falling 30 inches for each blow.

SPT Blows - The number of hammer blows required to drive a split-spoon sampler each consecutive 6-inch interval during a Standard Penetration Test.

If no discernable advancement of a split spoon sampler is made after 50 consecutive hammer blows, 50/X indicates sampler refusal and is the number of blows required to drive the sampler X inches.

SPT N-Value (N) - The uncorrected blow count representation of a soil's penetration resistance over a 12-inch interval after an initial 6-in. seating interval, reported in blows per foot (bpf). The N-value is correlated to soil engineering properties.

Auger Refusal - No discernable advancement of the auger over a period of 5 minutes with full rig down pressure applied.

Casing Refusal (Driven) - Casing penetration of less than 6 inches after a minimum 50 blows of a drop hammer weighing 300 lbs. or a minimum 100 blows of a drop hammer weighing 140 lbs.

PID Measurement - A measurement (electronic reading) taken in the field using a photoionization detector (PID) to detect the presence of volatile organic compounds in a soil sample. Values are reported as benzene equivalent units in parts per million (ppm) unless noted otherwise.

Rock Quality Designation (RQD) - A qualitative index measure of the degree of jointing and fracture of a rock core taken from a borehole. The RQD is defined as the sum length of solid core pieces 4 inches or longer divided by the run (cored) length, expressed as a percentage. Higher RQD values may indicate fewer joints and fractures in the rock mass.

Fill (Made Ground) - A deposit of soil and/or artificial waste materials that has been placed or altered by human processes.

DEFINITIONS OF COMMON TERMS

Cement concrete seal around casing or riser pipe

SAMPLER GRAPHICS

Split Spoon (Standard)

2" OD, 1-3/8" ID

Shelby or Piston Tube

3" OD, 2-7/8" ID

Double-Tube Rock Core Barrel 2" Core Diameter

Grab Sample (manual, from discrete point)

Direct Push with Acetate Liner Various Liner Sizes

G

WELL GRAPHICS

Split Spoon (Oversize)

3" OD, 2-3/8" ID

Composite Sample (multiple grab samples)C

Auger Sample (from cuttings or hand auger)A

KEY TO WATER LEVELSCAVING / SEEPAGE TERMS

Bentonite seal around casing or riser pipe

Soil backfill around riser pipe or beneath screen Gravel backfill around screen or riser pipe Sand backfill around screen or riser pipe (filter sand) Solid-wall riser; Sch. 40 PVC, 1" ID unless noted otherwise Slotted screen; Sch. 40 PVC, 1" ID with machined slots

Cement grout seal around casing or riser pipe

Observed in exploration during advancement.

Measured in exploration at completion, prior to backfilling or well installation.

Measured in exploration after the stated stabilization period, prior to backfilling, or in well installation if noted.

MC.......................... Moisture Content OC............................Organic Content PL....................................Plastic Limit LL..................................... Liquid Limit GC..............................Gravel Content SC................................ Sand Content FC................................ Fines Content DS.................................. Direct Shear

Caving Term Criteria Minor................... less than 1 cubic ft.

Moderate...................... 1 to 3 cubic ft.

Severe............ greater than 3 cubic ft.

Seepage Term Criteria Slow.......................... less than 1 gpm Moderate........................... 1 to 3 gpm Fast...................... greater than 3 gpm

LABORATORY TESTS AND FIELD MEASUREMENTS

IC......... 1D Incremental Consolidation VS................. Laboratory Vane Shear US.............. Unconfined Compression TC.....................Triaxial Compression PP........ Pocket (Hand) Penetrometer TV.................... Torvane (Hand Vane) PID.............. Photoionization Detector FID............ Flame Ionization Detector

Hollow-Stem Auger Drilling - Utilizes continuous flight auger sections with hollow stems to advance the borehole. Drill rods and a plug are inserted into the auger stem to prevent the entrance of soil cuttings into the augers.

Rotary Wash Drilling - Utilizes downward pressure and rotary action applied to a non-coring bit while washing the cuttings to the surface using a circulating fluid injected down the drill rods. The borehole is supported with either steel casing or the drilling fluid. Where a casing is used, the borehole is advanced sequentially by driving the casing to the desired depth and then cleaning out the casing. The process of driving and cleaning the casing is commonly referred to as the 'drive-and-wash' technique.

Continuous Sampling - Includes a variety of methods and procedures during which the borehole is advanced via continuous recovery of soil samples. Direct Push sampling is a common method that uses static downward pressure combined with percussive energy to drive a steel mandrel into the ground at continuous intervals while recovering soil samples in disposable acetate liners.

Rock Coring - Utilizes downward pressure and rotary action applied to a core barrel equipped with a diamond-set or tungsten carbide coring bit. During conventional coring, the entire barrel is retrieved from the hole upon completion of a core run. Wireline coring allows for removal of the inner barrel assembly containing the actual core while the the drill rods and outer barrel remain in the hole. Various types and sizes of core barrels and bits are used.

BORING ADVANCEMENT METHODS

The following caving and/or seepage terms may appear on a test pit log.

WSE Exploration Log Index - Sheet 1 - General - Rev. Date 04.17.20

Plasticity Criteria

Dry Strength

Coarse Fraction S = Sand, G = Gravel

Group Symbol

Group Name (1)

Medium Medium to high

< 15% S + G CL Lean clay ≥ 30% S + G

% S ≥ % G CL Sandy lean clay % S < % G CL Gravelly lean clay

Non-plastic

None to low

< 15% S + G ML Silt ≥ 30% S + G

% S ≥ % G ML Sandy silt % S < % G ML Gravelly silt

High High to very high

< 15% S + G CH Fat clay ≥ 30% S + G

% S ≥ % G CH Sandy fat clay % S < % G CH Gravelly fat clay

Low to Medium

Low to medium

< 15% S + G MH Elastic silt ≥ 30% S + G

% S ≥ % G MH Sandy elastic silt % S < % G MH Gravelly elastic silt

GUIDE TO SUBSURFACE

EXPLORATION LOGS

INDEX SHEET 2

SOIL DESCRIPTION

SOIL DESCRIPTION

SPT N-VALUE CORRELATIONS

0 - 2 2 - 4 4 - 8

8 - 15 15 - 30

> 30

0 - 5 5 - 10

10 - 30 30 - 50

> 50

SOIL MOISTURE

Dry............................... Apparent absence of moisture; dry to the touch.

Moist............................Damp but no visible water.

Wet.............................. Visible free water; saturated.

SOIL CONSTITUENTS

Gravel (Coarse) 3/4 in. - 3 in. 3/4 - 3 Gravel (Fine) No. 4 - 3/4 in. 1/5 - 3/4 Sand (Coarse) No. 10 - No. 40 1/16 - 1/5 Sand (Medium) No. 40 - No. 10 1/64 - 1/16 Sand (Fine) No. 200 - No. 40 1/300 - 1/64 Fines (Silt or Clay) Smaller than No. 200 Less than 1/300

Constituent U.S. Sieve Size Observed Size (in.)

Very soft Soft Medium stiff Stiff Very stiff Hard

Consistency SPT N-Value Very loose Loose Medium dense Dense Very dense

Apparent Density SPT N-Value

(1) Group Name and Group Symbol

Soils are described in the following general sequence. Deviations may occur in some instances.

PLASTICITY (FINES ONLY)

Non-plastic..................Dry specimen ball falls apart easily. Cannot be rolled into thread at any moisture content.

Low.............................. Dry specimen ball easily crushed with fingers. Can be rolled into 1/8-in. thread with some difficulty.

Medium........................Difficult to crush dry specimen ball with fingers.

Easily rolled into 1/8-in. thread.

High............................. Cannot crush dry specimen ball with fingers. Easily rolled and re-rolled into 1/8-in. thread.

PROPORTIONS / PERCENTAGES

Proportions of gravel, sand, and fines (excluding cobbles, boulders, and other constituents) are stated in the following terms indicating a range of percentages by weight (to nearest 5%) of the minus 3-in. soil fraction and add up to 100%.

Mostly ..................... 50% - 100% Some ....................... 30% - 45% Little ........................ 15% - 25% Few .......................... 5% - 10% Trace........................ Less than 5%

Proportions of cobbles, boulders, and other non-matrix soil materials including artificial debris, roots, plant fibers, etc. are stated in the following terms indicating a range of percentages by volume (to the nearest 5%) of the total soil.

Numerous ............... 40% - 50% Common ................. 25% - 35% Occasional ............. 10% - 20% Trace........................ Less than 5%

(2) Consistency (Fine-Grained) or Apparent Density (Coarse-Grained)

(3) Color (note, the term "to" may be used to indicate a gradational change)

(4) Soil Moisture

(5) Matrix Soil Constituents (Gravel, Sand, Fines)

Proportion (by weight), particle size, plasticity of fines, angularity, etc.

(6) Non-Matrix Soil Materials and Proportions (by volume)

(7) Other Descriptive Information (Unusual Odor, Structure, Texture, etc.)

(8) [Geologic Formation Name or Soil Survey Unit]

Identification Components

Description Components

Primary Constituent

Fines Percent

Type of Fines and Gradation

Group Symbol

Group Name (1)

GRAVEL

% gravel % sand

≤ 5% well graded GW Well graded gravel poorly graded GP Poorly graded gravel

10% clayey fines well graded GW-GC Well graded gravel with clay poorly graded GP-GC Poorly graded gravel with clay silty fines well graded GW-GM Well graded gravel wth silt poorly graded GP-GM Poorly graded gravel with silt

15% to 45% clay fines GC Clayey gravel silt fines GM Silty gravel

SAND

% sand % gravel

≤ 5% well graded SW Well graded sand poorly graded SP Poorly graded sand

10% clayey fines well graded SW-SC Well graded sand with clay poorly graded SP-SC Poorly graded sand with clay silty fines well graded SW-SM Well graded sand with silt poorly graded SP-SM Poorly graded sand with silt

15% to 45% clay fines SC Clayey sand silt fines SM Silty sand

SOIL IDENTIFICATION

Coarse-Grained Soil - Coarse-grained soils contain fewer than 50% fines and are identified based on the following table.

Inorganic Fine-Grained Soil - Fine-grained soils contain 50% or more fines and are identified based on the following table.

(1) If soil is a gravel and contains 15% or more sand, add "with sand" to the group name. If soil is a sand and contains 15% of more gravel, add "with gravel" to the group name.

(1) If soil contains 15% to 25% sand or gravel, add "with sand" or "with gravel" to the group name.

Highly Organic Soil (Peat) - Soils composed primarily of plant remains in various stages of decomposition are identified as Peat and given the group symbol PT. Peat usually has an organic odor, a dark brown to black color, and a texture ranging from fibrous (original plant structure intact or mostly intact) to amorphous (plant structure decomposed to fine particles).

Soil identification refers to the grouping of soils with similar physical characteristics into a category defined by a group name and corresponding group symbol based on estimation of the matrix soil constituents to the nearest 5% and simple manual tests. Proportions of cobbles, boulders, and other non-matrix soil materials are not considered during this procedure but are included in the overall soil description if observed or thought to be present.

Refer to the following descriptions and tables adapted from ASTM D2488.

Naturally occurring soils consist of one or more of the following matrix constituents defined in terms of particle size.

Organic Fine-Grained Soil - Fine-grained soils that contain enough organic particles to influence the soil properties are identified as Organic Soil and assigned the group symbol OL or OH.

COBBLES AND BOULDERS

Cobbles - Particles of rock that will pass a 12-in. square opening and be retained on a 3-in. sieve.

Boulders - Particles of rock that will not pass a 12-in. square opening.

Note: Where the percentage (by volume) of cobbles and/or boulders cannot be accurately or reliably estimated, the terms "with cobbles", "with boulders", or "with cobbles and boulders" may be used to indicate observed or inferred presence.

WSE Exploration Log Index - Sheet 2 - Soil - Rev. Date 04.17.20

ROCK IDENTIFICATION

Rock is identified by a combination of rock type (igneous, metamorphic, or sedimentary) followed by the the rock name (e.g. granite, schist, sandstone).

ROCK DESCRIPTION

Rock descriptions are presented in the following general sequence. The detail of description is dictated by the complexity and objectives of the project.

GUIDE TO SUBSURFACE

EXPLORATION LOGS

INDEX SHEET 3

ROCK DESCRIPTION

(1) Rock Type and Name

(2) Rock Grain Size (for clastic sedimentary rock)

(3) Crystal Size (for igneous and metamorphic rock)

(4) Bedding Spacing (for sedimentary rock)

(5) Color

(6) Hardness and Weathering Descriptors

(7) Fracture Density

(8) [Geologic Formation Name]

Identification Components

Description Components

ROCK DEFINITION

Where reported on an exploration log, rock is defined as any naturally formed aggregate of mineral matter occurring in larges masses or fragments. This definition of rock should not be taken as a replacement for any definitions relating to rock and/or rock excavation defined in construction documents.

Intensely weathered or decomposed rock that is friable and can be reduced to gravel size particles or smaller by normal hand pressure is identified and described as soil. Poorly indurated formational materials which display both rock-like and soil-like properties are identified and described as rock followed by the soil description. In such cases, the term "poorly indurated" or "weakly cemented" is added to the rock name (e.g. weakly cemented sandstone).

GRAIN / CRYSTAL SIZE

Grain Size Description Average Crystal Size (in.)

Very coarse grained (pegmatitic) Greater than or equal to 3/8 Coarse-grained Between 3/16 and 3/8 Medium-grained Between 1/32 and 3/16 Fine-grained Between 1/250 and 1/32 Aphanitic Less than or equal to 1/250

Crystal Size for Igneous and Metamorphic Rock

BEDDING SPACING

Bedding Description Thickness / Spacing Massive Less than 10 ft.

Very thickly bedded 3 ft. to 10 ft.

Thickly bedded 1 ft. to 3 ft.

Moderately bedded 4 in. to 1 ft.

Thinly bedded 1 in. to 4 in.

Very thinly bedded 1/4 in. to 1 in.

Laminated Less than 1/4 in.

WEATHERING (INTACT ROCK)

Weathering Description

Discoloration and/or Oxidation

General Characteristics

Fresh Body of rock and fracture surfaces are not discolored or oxidized.

Rock texture unchanged.

Hammer rings when crystalline rocks are struck.

Slightly weathered

Discoloration or oxidation limited to surface of, or short distance from, fractures. Most surfaces exhibit minor to complete discoloration.

Rock texture preserved.

Hammer rings when crystalline rocks are struck. Body of rock not weakened.

Moderately weathered

Discoloration or oxidation extends usually throughout.

Fe-Mg minerals appear rusty.

All fracture surfaces are discolored or oxidized.

Rock texture generally preserved. Hammer does not ring when rock is struck. Body of rock slightly weakened.

Intensely weathered

Discoloration or oxidation throughout. Feldspar and Fe-Mg minerals altered to clay to some extent. All fracture surfaces are discolored or oxidized and friable.

Rock texture altered by chemical disintegration. Can usually be broken with moderate to heavy manual pressure or by light hammer blow . Body of rock is significantly weakened.

Decomposed Discoloration or oxidation throughout but resistant minerals such as quartz may be unaltered. All feldspar and Fe-Mg minerals are completely altered to clay.

Resembles a soil; partial or complete remnant rock structure may be preserved.

Can be granulated by hand.

Resistant minerals may present as stringers or dikes.

HARDNESS

Hardness Criteria Extremely hard

Cannot be scratched with a pocketknife or sharp pick. Can only be chipped with repeated heavy hammer blows.

Very hard Cannot be scratched with a pocketknife or sharp pick with difficulty. Breaks with repeated heavy hammer blows.

Hard Can be scratched with with a pocketknife or sharp pick with difficulty. Breaks with heavy hammer blows.

Moderately hard

Can be scratched with a pocketknife or sharp pick with light or moderate pressure. Breaks with moderate hammer blows.

Moderately soft

Can be grooved 1/16 in. deep with a pocketknife or sharp pick with moderate or heavy pressure. Breaks with light hammer blow or heavy manual pressure.

Soft Can be grooved or gouged easily with a pocketknife or sharp pick. Breaks with light to moderate manual pressure.

Very soft Can be readily indented, grooved, or gouged with fingernail, or carved with a pocketknife. Breaks with light manual pressure.

FRACTURE DENSITY

Description Observed Fracture Density Unfractured No fractures Very slightly fractured Core lengths greater than 3 ft.

Slightly fractured Core lengths mostly from 1 ft. to 3 ft.

Moderately fractured Core lengths mostly from 4 in. to 1 ft.

Intensely fractured Core lengths mostly from 1 in. to 4 in.

Very intensely fractured Mostly chips and fragments

Note: Fracture density is based on the fracture spacing in recovered core, measured along the core axis (excluding mechanical breaks).

Grain Size for Clastic Sedimentary Rock The names of clastic sedimentary rocks are generally based on their predominant clast or grain size (e.g. fine sandstone, medium sandstone, coarse gravel conglomerate, cobble conglomerate, siltstone, claystone).

ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION

RQD (%) = Σ Length of intact core pieces ≥ 4 inches x 100Total length of core run (inches)

The RQD should correlate with the fracture density in most cases. Higher RDQ values generally indicate fewer joints and fractures.

Note: Bedding is generally only applicable to sedimentary or bedded volcanic rocks.

WSE Exploration Log Index - Sheet 3 - Rock - Rev. Date 04.17.20

Attachment B

Important Information about This Geotechnical-Engineering Report

Geotechnical-Engineering Report Important Information about This

Subsurface problems are a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes.

While you cannot eliminate all such risks, you can manage them. The following information is provided to help.

The Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA) has prepared this advisory to help you – assumedly a client representative – interpret and apply this geotechnical-engineering report as effectively as possible. In that way, you can benefit from a lowered exposure to problems associated with subsurface conditions at project sites and development of them that, for decades, have been a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. If you have questions or want more information about any of the issues discussed herein, contact your GBA-member geotechnical engineer.

Active engagement in GBA exposes geotechnical engineers to a wide array of risk-confrontation techniques that can be of genuine benefit for everyone involved with a construction project.

Understand the Geotechnical-Engineering Services Provided for this Report Geotechnical-engineering services typically include the planning, collection, interpretation, and analysis of exploratory data from widely spaced borings and/or test pits. Field data are combined with results from laboratory tests of soil and rock samples obtained from field exploration (if applicable), observations made during site reconnaissance, and historical information to form one or more models of the expected subsurface conditions beneath the site. Local geology and alterations of the site surface and subsurface by previous and proposed construction are also important considerations. Geotechnical engineers apply their engineering training, experience, and judgment to adapt the requirements of the prospective project to the subsurface model(s). Estimates are made of the subsurface conditions that will likely be exposed during construction as well as the expected performance of foundations and other structures being planned and/or affected by construction activities.

The culmination of these geotechnical-engineering services is typically a geotechnical-engineering report providing the data obtained, a discussion of the subsurface model(s), the engineering and geologic engineering assessments and analyses made, and the recommendations developed to satisfy the given requirements of the project. These reports may be titled investigations, explorations, studies, assessments, or evaluations.

Regardless of the title used, the geotechnical-engineering report is an engineering interpretation of the subsurface conditions within the context of the project and does not represent a close examination, systematic inquiry, or thorough investigation of all site and subsurface conditions.

Geotechnical-Engineering Services are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects, and At Specific Times Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs, goals, and risk management preferences of their clients. A geotechnical-engineering study conducted for a given civil engineer will not likely meet the needs of a civil-works constructor or even a different civil engineer. Because each geotechnical-engineering study is unique, each geotechnical-engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client.

Likewise, geotechnical-engineering services are performed for a specific project and purpose. For example, it is unlikely that a geotechnical-engineering study for a refrigerated warehouse will be the same as one prepared for a parking garage; and a few borings drilled during a preliminary study to evaluate site feasibility will not be adequate to develop geotechnical design recommendations for the project.

Do not rely on this report if your geotechnical engineer prepared it:

• for a different client;

• for a different project or purpose;

• for a different site (that may or may not include all or a portion of the original site); or

• before important events occurred at the site or adjacent to it;

e.g., man-made events like construction or environmental remediation, or natural events like floods, droughts, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations.

Note, too, the reliability of a geotechnical-engineering report can be affected by the passage of time, because of factors like changed subsurface conditions; new or modified codes, standards, or regulations; or new techniques or tools. If you are the least bit uncertain about the continued reliability of this report, contact your geotechnical engineer before applying the recommendations in it. A minor amount of additional testing or analysis after the passage of time – if any is required at all – could prevent major problems.

Read this Report in Full Costly problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical-engineering report did not read the report in its entirety. Do not rely on an executive summary. Do not read selective elements only. Read and refer to the report in full.

You Need to Inform Your Geotechnical Engineer About Change Your geotechnical engineer considered unique, project-specific factors when developing the scope of study behind this report and developing the confirmation-dependent recommendations the report conveys.

Typical changes that could erode the reliability of this report include those that affect:

• the site’s size or shape;

• the elevation, configuration, location, orientation, function or weight of the proposed structure and the desired performance criteria;

• the composition of the design team; or

• project ownership.

As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project or site changes – even minor ones – and request an assessment of their impact. The geotechnical engineer who prepared this report cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems that arise because the geotechnical engineer was not informed about developments the engineer otherwise would have considered.

Most of the “Findings” Related in This Report Are Professional Opinions Before construction begins, geotechnical engineers explore a site’s subsurface using various sampling and testing procedures. Geotechnical engineers can observe actual subsurface conditions only at those specific locations where sampling and testing is performed. The data derived from that sampling and testing were reviewed by your geotechnical engineer, who then applied professional judgement to form opinions about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual sitewide-subsurface conditions may differ – maybe significantly – from those indicated in this report. Confront that risk by retaining your geotechnical engineer to serve on the design team through project completion to obtain informed guidance quickly, whenever needed.

This Report’s Recommendations Are Confirmation-Dependent The recommendations included in this report – including any options or alternatives – are confirmation-dependent. In other words, they are not final, because the geotechnical engineer who developed them relied heavily on judgement and opinion to do so. Your geotechnical engineer can finalize the recommendations only after observing actual subsurface conditions exposed during construction. If through observation your geotechnical engineer confirms that the conditions assumed to exist actually do exist, the recommendations can be relied upon, assuming no other changes have occurred. The geotechnical engineer who prepared this report cannot assume responsibility or liability for confirmation-dependent recommendations if you fail to retain that engineer to perform construction observation.

This Report Could Be Misinterpreted Other design professionals’ misinterpretation of geotechnical-engineering reports has resulted in costly problems. Confront that risk by having your geotechnical engineer serve as a continuing member of the design team, to:

• confer with other design-team members;

• help develop specifications;

• review pertinent elements of other design professionals’ plans and specifications; and

• be available whenever geotechnical-engineering guidance is needed.

You should also confront the risk of constructors misinterpreting this report. Do so by retaining your geotechnical engineer to participate in prebid and preconstruction conferences and to perform construction-phase observations.

Give Constructors a Complete Report and Guidance Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can shift unanticipated-subsurface-conditions liability to constructors by limiting the information they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent the costly, contentious problems this practice has caused, include the complete geotechnical-engineering report, along with any attachments or appendices, with your contract documents, but be certain to note conspicuously that you’ve included the material for information purposes only. To avoid misunderstanding, you may also want to note that “informational purposes” means constructors have no right to rely on the interpretations, opinions, conclusions, or recommendations in the report. Be certain that constructors know they may learn about specific project requirements, including options selected from the report, only from the design drawings and specifications. Remind constructors that they may perform their own studies if they want to, and be sure to allow enough time to permit them to do so. Only then might you be in a position to give constructors the information available to you, while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions. Conducting prebid and preconstruction conferences can also be valuable in this respect.

Read Responsibility Provisions Closely Some client representatives, design professionals, and constructors do not realize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disciplines. This happens in part because soil and rock on project sites are typically heterogeneous and not manufactured materials with well-defined engineering properties like steel and concrete. That lack of understanding has nurtured unrealistic expectations that have resulted in disappointments, delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes.

To confront that risk, geotechnical engineers commonly include explanatory provisions in their reports. Sometimes labeled “limitations,” many of these provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers’ responsibilities begin and end, to help others recognize their own responsibilities and risks. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions.

Y…