Attach H - MCASCP Sites Subsurface Soil Geotech Report.pdf

Report Cover Page

FY 26 USMC Barracks

2030 - MCAS Cherry

Point P292 Site Characterization Report (SCR)

Havelock, NC

February 26, 2026 | Terracon Project No. K625P194

Prepared for:

Clark Nexsen/Michael Baker JV

111 Metropolitan Ave, Suite 333

Charlotte, NC 28204

Delaney, Mike Text Box

Site Characterization Report

FY 26 USMC Barracks 2030 - MCAS Cherry Point P292 | Havelock, NC

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials i

Table of Contents

Introduction Project Description Site Conditions Geotechnical Characterization Geologic Setting Site History Shear Wave Velocity Testing Infiltration Testing Corrosivity Testing Analytical Testing General Comments

Figures Site 1 – GeoModel & Subsurface Profile

Site 2 – GeoModel & Subsurface Profile

Attachments

Exploration and Testing Procedures Site Location and Exploration Plans

Exploration and Laboratory Results

Supporting Information

Note: This report was originally delivered in a web-based format. Blue Bold text in the report indicates a referenced section heading. The PDF version also includes hyperlinks which direct the reader to that section and clicking on the logo will bring you back to this page. For more interactive features, please view your project online at client.terracon.com.

Refer to each individual Attachment for a listing of contents.

http://client.terracon.com/

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials

Introduction

This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration and site characterization services performed for the proposed new Bachelor Enlisted Quarters (BEQ) to be located at Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point in Havelock, NC. The purpose of these services was to provide the following information:

■ A site vicinity map.

■ Location plan showing of all testing and sampling points relative to local site features. Include road names, building numbers, north arrow, etc.

■ Logs of the subsurface explorations performed.

■ Subsurface profiles delineating designated stratigraphy and other pertinent geotechnical data.

■ Description of regional geologic information including descriptions of manmade and naturally deposited geologic formations per the state geological survey and site boring or historical data, and natural geologic hazards (landslide, seismic, etc.).

■ Summary of the site’s history and past development activities based on review of historical data.

■ Detailed description of near surface soil conditions.

■ Field and laboratory test results to include discussion on source of data, delineation of data, and statistical evaluation.

■ Discussion of the current site conditions, ground water elevations including seasonal high water table, interpreted subsurface conditions underlying the project site.

■ Analytical lab results for soil and groundwater.

The subsurface exploration Scope of Services for this project included the advancement of test borings, laboratory testing, and preparation of this SCR.

Drawings showing the site and boring locations are shown on the Site Location and

Exploration Plan, respectively. The results of the laboratory testing performed on soil samples obtained from the site during our field exploration are included on the boring logs, summary of laboratory results, and as separate graphs in the Exploration and

Laboratory Results attachment.

Project Description

Our initial understanding of the project was provided in our proposal and was discussed during project planning. A period of collaboration has transpired since the project was initiated, and our final understanding of the project conditions is as follows:

Item Description

Information

Provided

An email request for proposal was received from Mr. Joe

Blickenderfer of Michael Baker Intl. on 11AUG2025. The request included a description of the project, a preliminary scope request, and NAVFAC SAES Attachments 6, 8, 12, 13 and 14 detailing the project scope and site locations.

Follow-up email correspondence and a telephone conversation occurred between Mr. Joe Blickenderfer and Mr. Marc Nellis on

12AUG2025 to further discuss the project scope and review the entire SAES package.

Multiple meetings occurred between Terracon and Clark

Nexsen/Michael Baker JV (CN/MBJV) after award. These meetings consisted of discussions regarding scope changes, project schedule, and project deliverables.

Terracon was provided with topographic surveys for site 1 and site 2 via email on February 12 and January 6, 2026, respectively.

Project

Description

The project includes developing a Lean Design Build RFP for

MCAS Cherry Point which will include the construction of new barracks building(s) at one of two sites within the base.

Terracon understands that the proposed grading, structural loading, number and footprint of the planned structures has not been determined at this phase of the project.

Terracon should be notified if any of the above information is inconsistent with the planned construction, as modifications to our report may be necessary.

Site Conditions

The following description of site conditions is derived from our site visit in association with the field exploration and our review of publicly available geologic and topographic maps.

Item Description

Parcel

Information

MCAS Cherry Point, Havelock, NC

Site 1: 34.9015° N, 76.9004° W

Site 2: 34.9081° N, 76.9018° W

See Site Location

Existing

Improvements

Site 1 is currently occupied by ten (10) existing barracks buildings with parking lots on the south and southwest sides of the site. Based on historical aerials, these buildings were constructed before 1993. The site is then bordered by 2nd

Avenue to the southwest, E Street to the northwest, and more parking lots to the north- and southeast.

Site 2 currently consists of a parking lot with a recently demolished building on the west side of the site and existing hotel on the east side of the site. Based on historical aerials, the buildings and parking lot were construction before 1993. The site is then bordered by baseball fields to the west, F Street to the south, 5th Avenue to the east, and a creek to the north.

Current Ground

Cover Grass, buildings, recreations fields, and parking lots

Existing

Topography

Based on the project specific topographic survey, the existing grades at both sites range from approximately 20 feet to 25 feet

(NAVD 88).

Geotechnical Characterization

We have developed a general characterization of the subsurface conditions based upon our review of the subsurface exploration, laboratory data, geologic setting and our understanding of the project. This characterization, termed GeoModel, forms the basis of our geotechnical evaluation of the site. Conditions observed at each exploration point are indicated on the individual logs. The individual logs can be found in the Exploration and Laboratory Results and the GeoModel can be found in the Figures attachment of this report.

As part of our analyses, we identified the following model layers within the subsurface profile. For a more detailed view of the model layer depths at each boring location, refer to the GeoModel.

Model

Layer Layer Name

General

Description

1 Surficial Material

1 inch to 8 inches of Surficial, Organic-Laden Soil;

2 inches to 4 inches of Asphalt;

4 inches to 5 inches of Aggregate Base Course (ABC)

POSSIBLE

UNCONTROLLED

FILL MATERIAL

Sampled as SAND with varying amounts of Silt, Clay, and Gravel, variable density

Soft SILT and

CLAY and Very

Loose SAND

Very Soft to Stiff, SILT and CLAY (ML, CL, CH); and Very

Loose to Loose, Silty and Clayey SAND (SM, SP-SM, SC);

trace organics

Loose to Medium

Dense SAND

Loose to Medium Dense, SAND (SP, SP-SM, SM) with varying amounts of Silt, Clay, clay lenses, and organics

Underlying SAND and CLAY

Loose to Very Dense, Silty and Clayey SAND (SP-SM, SM, SC-SM, SC); and Medium Stiff, Sandy CLAY (CL, CH); varying amounts of Gravel consisting of cemented sand and shell fragments occurring in lenses

Groundwater Conditions

Groundwater depth at each exploration location was estimated based on measured water levels, observed moisture condition of soil samples, delayed water readings, as well as

CPT pore pressure and dissipation data.

At site 1, groundwater was estimated to occur between depths of approximately 4.0 feet and 8.5 feet below existing site grade, corresponding to elevations between approximately 11.5 feet to 18 feet (NAVD 88). At site 2, groundwater was estimated to occur between depths of approximately 6.0 feet and 11.5 feet below existing site grade, corresponding to elevations between approximately 11.5 feet to 18.0 feet (NAVD 88).

Temporary groundwater monitoring wells were installed using hollow steam auger drilling techniques to obtain relatively stabilized groundwater reading at locations CP-

P292-S1-SPT-04 and CP-P292-S2-SPT-04. The groundwater information obtained from the monitoring wells is provided in the following table. Further information, including the installation, sampling, and abandonment dates for each well are included on the logs within the Exploration and Laboratory Results attachment to this report.

Temporary

Well

Location

Initial Groundwater

Reading 1

First Groundwater

Reading

Second Groundwater

Reading

Depth

(ft) 2

Elevation

(ft) 3

Depth

(ft) 2

Elevation

(ft) 3

Depth

(ft) 2

Elevation

(ft) 3

CP-P292-S1-

SPT-04

6 4 15 6.4 5 14.6 6.5 6 14.5

CP-P292-S2-

SPT-04

9 7 14 10.2 8 12.8 11.5 9 11.5

1. Based on the relative wetness of the recovered samples at the time of drilling.

2. Depth below existing site grade at the time of exploration at the boring location

3. Elevation Datum: NAVD 88

4. 05JAN2026 (time of drilling)

5. 06JAN2026

6. 07JAN2026

7. 18DEC2025 (time of drilling)

8. 20DEC2025

9. 05JAN2026

The Estimated Seasonal High Water Table (ESHWT) can fluctuate from year to year depending on many factors that include, but are not limited to, natural drainage, man-made drainage, surrounding development, frequency and magnitude of rainfall patterns, and, most specifically for this project site, tidal patterns. Historically, the ESHWT is expected to occur within the “wetter” months of the year, typically November through

April. However, periods of high groundwater tables are expected to occur at other times of the year (usually associated with major weather events). A few indicators of ESHWT include hydric soil indicators (color patterns and shades), variation in density of the soils within the presumed fluctuation zone, and current and historical monitoring well data. Of the three listed, analyzing data obtained from current and historical groundwater monitoring programs tends to be the most reliable indicator of the ESHWT. Soil coloring

(redoximorphic features, mottling, etc.) is the result of saturation cycles over numerous years. Hydric indicators and relying on density variations can lead to false readings as development and added drainage features continue to alter the fluctuation zones.

The ESHWT was evaluated by a North Carolina License Professional by observing variations of soil texture, chroma, and moisture content of the soil profile. The

Stormwater Soil Evaluations Report is included in the Exploration and Laboratory

Results attachment of this report. The ESHWT for the remaining borings was interpreted from the information contained in this report, corroborated with the subsurface conditions observed at each location. The ESHWT depths at each location are shown on the exploration logs.

Groundwater conditions may differ at the time of construction because of seasonal variations in rainfall, runoff, and other conditions not apparent at the time of drilling. We recommend the contractor determine the actual groundwater depths at the time of construction to determine any impact on construction.

Geologic Setting

The project site is located within the Atlantic Coastal Plain physiographic province of

North Carolina. Publicly available studies published by the United States Geological

Survey (USGS) document the geologic formations beneath MCAS Cherry Point to depths of up to approximately 300 feet. The geologic formations beneath this depth can be inferred from nearby USGS studies, as outlined below.

In this area, bedrock of Late Mesozoic age generally occurs at depths greater than 2,000 feet 1 and is overlain by a sequence of Lower and Upper Cretaceous, Tertiary, Pleistocene, and Recent sediments. The Late Cretaceous-aged Black Creek Formation unconformably overlies the basement rock, consists of lignitic sand and clay, and is documented to occur as shallow as 700 feet in New Hanover County 2. The Peedee

Formation conformably overlies the Black Creek Formation with similar age and appearance, consisting of greenish-gray to olive-black, glauconitic and locally fossiliferous sand, clayey sand, and clay.

The Eocene-aged (Tertiary) Castle Hayne Formation then conformably overlies the

Peedee Formation. The upper Castle Hayne Formation generally consists of sand with gravel consisting of cemented sand and shell fragments which typically occur in lenses

(similar to the Oligocene-aged River Bend Formation), gradually forming rigid limestone deposits at the bottom, and southern portion of the formation towards the Cape Fear

Peninsula. Castle Hayne limestone is documented to occur at a depth of approximately

250 feet beneath MCAS Cherry Point, and the River Bend Formation as shallow as 150 feet to 200 feet3,4.

Atop the River Bend Formation, the Miocene-aged (Tertiary) Pungo River Formation forms a transitional layer to the overlying Pliocene-aged (Tertiary) Yorktown Formation

1 North Carolina Geological Survey. (1985). *Geologic map of North Carolina*

(1:500,000) [Map]. North Carolina Geological Survey, Division of Land Resources, Raleigh, NC. https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Prodesc/proddesc_55091.htm 2 Bain, G. L. (1970). *Geology and ground-water resources of New Hanover County, North Carolina* (Ground Water Bulletin No. 17). United States Geological Survey, in cooperation with the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners and the North

Carolina Department of Water and Air Resources.

3 Wrege, B. M., & Jen, P. S. (2004). Data from stratigraphic test holes drilled at the U.S.

Marine Corps Air Station… (Open-File Report 2004-1434). USGS.

https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2004/1434/pdf/report.pdf 4 Rossbach, T. J., & Carter, J. G. (1991). Molluscan biostratigraphy of the lower River

Bend Formation at the Martin Marietta Quarry, New Bern, North Carolina. Journal of

Paleontology, 65(1), 80–118.

https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/paleosoc/jpaleontol/article/65/1/80/82405 and has been documented to occur at depths just beyond 100 feet5,6 beneath MCAS

Cherry Point.

The Yorktown Formation is the uppermost, well-documented formation beneath MCAS

Cherry Point, and has been mapped extending from North Carolina to Maryland, with an estimated age between approximately 2 million and 5 million years. The Yorktown

Formation is interpreted to have been deposited during three marine transgressive episodes. Its depositional environment was shallow marine, consisting of inner-shelf, barrier-island, estuarine, and lagoonal settings. The Yorktown Formation is a glauconitic, fossiliferous, silty to clayey greenish-gray fine sand that exhibits pre-consolidation due to lowered sea levels at the end of the Tertiary Period and the subsequent erosion of previously overlying sediments.

Based on USGS descriptions, the Yorktown Formation was estimated to occur between depths of 30 feet and 45 feet beneath existing grade during the exploration, as delineated by GeoModel layer 5.

In more recent geological history, the Yorktown Formation is then overlain by recent sediments, the majority of which are believed to have been deposited during the

Pleistocene Epoch.

Site History

Based on a review of historical aerial images and historical topographic maps, the existing infrastructure at each site was constructed before 1992. The structure on the western portion of Site 2 was demolished between 2024 and 2025. Some demolition to the parking lot north of Site 1 was also performed during this timeframe. The project site topography has remained generally consistent to the current elevations from 1952 until present day.

A review of available historical topographic mapping and aerial imagery provides no evidence that the project site is situated within an area of reclaimed or otherwise man-made ground.

5 Wrege, B. M., & Jen, P. S. (2004). Data from stratigraphic test holes drilled at the U.S.

Marine Corps Air Station… (Open-File Report 2004-1434). USGS.

https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2004/1434/pdf/report.pdf 6 Winner, M. D., Jr., & Coble, R. W. (1996). Hydrogeologic framework of the North

Carolina Coastal Plain (USGS Professional Paper 1404-I). U.S. Geological Survey.

https://search.library.wisc.edu/catalog/999791203702121

Shear Wave Velocity Testing

In-situ soil shear wave velocity testing was performed at Cone Penetration Test (CPT) sounding locations CP-P292-S1-CPT-02, CP-P292-S2-CPT-01, and CP-P292-S2-CPT-02.

The shear wave velocity tests were performed at 1-meter intervals to refusal, in accordance with ASTM D7400.

The recorded shear wave velocities ranged from approximately 334 to 1657 feet per second (fps).

The in-situ soil shear wave velocity measurements are shown on the CPT sounding logs within the Exploration and Laboratory Results attachment of this report.

Infiltration Testing

A soil scientist licensed in the State of North Carolina was contracted to evaluate

Seasonal-High Water Table (SHWT) and perform infiltration testing at each piezometer location. Constant-Head Borehole Permeameter Infiltration testing was performed at a depth of approximately two (2) feet above the SHWT at locations CP-P292-S1-SPT-04, CP-P292-S1-SPT-07, and CP-P292-S2-SPT-04.

The testing procedure is outlined in the Exploration and Testing Procedures attachment to this report. The Stormwater Soil Evaluations Report prepared by Terrain

Environmental Consulting is provided in the Exploration and Laboratory Results attachment of this report.

Corrosivity Testing

Composite soil samples were collected from and blended over a depth interval of 1 foot to 6 feet below existing grade at locations CP-P292-S1-SPT-03, CP-P292-S2-SPT-03, and

CP-P292-S2-CPT-03 for analysis regarding soil corrosiveness and aggressiveness potential. The comprehensive soil corrosivity results are provided in the Exploration and Laboratory Results attachment of this report.

Analytical Testing

Per the SAES for this project, composite soil samples, groundwater samples, and solid and liquid Investigation Derived Waste (IDW) were collected and tested as outlined below.

Composite Soil Samples: Five (5) composite soil samples were collected from Site 1 and four (4) composite samples were collected from Site 2 for analytical testing. The composite samples were obtained from (and blended over) depths of 1 foot to 6 feet at the following locations:

◼ CP-P292-S1-SPT-01

◼ CP-P292-S1-SPT-03

◼ CP-P292-S1-CPT-03

◼ CP-P292-S1-CPT-05

◼ CP-P292-S1-SPT-07

◼ CP-P292-S2-SPT-02

◼ CP-P292-S2-SPT-03

◼ CP-P292-S2-SPT-04

◼ CP-P292-S2-SPT-06

The samples were submitted to Pace Analytical to test for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons

(TPH) in Diesel-Range Organics (DRO) and Gasoline-Range Organics (GRO), Per- and

Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS), and TCLP analysis including Volatile Organic

Compounds (VOCs), Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs), pesticides, herbicides, metals, and Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs).

Groundwater Samples: One (1) groundwater sample was collected from the temporary wells installed at each site, corresponding to the following locations:

◼ CP-P292-S1-SPT-04

◼ CP-P292-S2-SPT-04

The groundwater samples were submitted to Pace Analytical to test for TAL metals, TCL

VOCS, TCL SVOCs, TPH-DRO, TPH-GRO, and PFAS.

Investigation Derived Waste (IDW): All excess spoils and drilling fluids generated during the exploration were containerized in 55-gallon drums and transported to designated holding locations in coordination with MCAS Cherry Point EAD. Liquid and solid IDW were containerized separately. In order to characterize the waste for disposal, the solid and liquid IDW were subjected to testing for TPH-DRO, TPH-GRO, BTEX, PFAS, ignitability, reactivity, corrosivity, paint filter, and Full TCLP including VOCs, SVOCs, herbicides, pesticides, RCRA metals, and PCBs.

One (1) solid sample and one (1) liquid sample were collected and tested from the IDW drums generated at Site 1. One (1) solid sample and two (2) liquid samples were collected and tested from the drums generated at Site 2.

These test results are presented in the Exploration and Laboratory Results attachment of this report.

General Comments

Our analyses and opinions are based upon our understanding of the project, the geotechnical conditions in the area, and the data obtained from our site exploration.

Variations will occur between exploration point locations or due to the modifying effects of construction or weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction.

Our Scope of Services does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken.

Our services and any correspondence are intended for the sole benefit and exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and are accomplished in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices with no third-party beneficiaries intended. Any third-party access to services or correspondence is solely for information purposes to support the services provided by Terracon to our client. Reliance upon the services and any work product is limited to our client and is not intended for third parties. Any use or reliance of the provided information by third parties is done solely at their own risk. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made.

Site characteristics as provided are for design purposes and not to estimate excavation cost. Any use of our report in that regard is done at the sole risk of the excavating cost estimator as there may be variations on the site that are not apparent in the data which could significantly affect excavation cost. Any parties charged with estimating excavation costs should seek their own site characterization for specific purposes to obtain the specific level of detail necessary for costing. Site safety and cost estimating including excavation support and dewatering requirements/design are the responsibility of others.

Construction and site development have the potential to affect adjacent properties. Such impacts can include damage due to vibration, modification of groundwater/surface water flow during construction, foundation movement due to undermining or subsidence from excavation, as well as noise or air quality concerns. Evaluation of these items on nearby properties are commonly associated with contractor means and methods and are not addressed in this report. The owner and contractor should consider a preconstruction/precondition survey of surrounding development. If changes in the nature, design, or location of the project are planned, our conclusions and recommendations shall not be considered valid unless we review the changes and either verify or modify our conclusions in writing.

Figures

Contents:

Site 1:

-GeoModel

-Subsurface Profile

Site 2:

-GeoModel

-Subsurface Profile

Site 1 Figures

-80

-70

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

Layering shown on this figure has been developed by the geotechnical engineer for purposes of modeling the subsurface conditions as required for the subsequent geotechnical engineering for this project.

Numbers adjacent to soil column indicate depth below ground surface.

NOTES:

CP-P292-S1-SPT-02CP-P292-S1-SPT-03 CP-P292-S1-CPT-01CP-P292-S1-CPT-02

Legend

This is not a cross section. This is intended to display the Geotechnical Model only. See individual logs for more detailed conditions.

Site 1 GeoModel

MCAS Cherry Point | Havelock, NC

Terracon Project No. K625P194

FY26 USMC Barracks 2030 - P292

2108 Capital Dr, Ste 103

Wilmington, NC

Third Water Observation Second Water Observation First Water Observation

Groundwater levels are temporal. The levels shown are representative of the date and time of our exploration. Significant changes are possible over time.

Water levels shown are as measured during and/or after drilling. In some cases, boring advancement methods mask the presence/absence of groundwater. See individual logs for details.

Topsoil Silty Sand

Poorly-graded Sand with Silt Clayey Sand

Sandy Silt Poorly-graded Sand with Silt and Gravel

Soil Behavior Type (SBT)

8 Very stiff sand to clayey sand7 Gravelly sand to dense sand

1 Sensitive, fine grained

4 Silt mixtures - clayey silt to silty clay 5 Sand mixtures - silty sand to sandy silt

2 Organic soils - clay

9 Very stiff fine grained

6 Sands - clean sand to silty sand

3 Clay - silty clay to clay

Model Layer Layer Name General Description

1 inch to 8 inches of Surficial, Organic-Laden Soil;

2 inches to 4 inches of Asphalt;

4 inches to 5 inches of Aggregate Base Course (ABC)

Very Soft to Stiff, SILT and CLAY (ML, CL, CH); and Very Loose to Loose, Silty and Clayey SAND (SM, SP-SM, SC);

trace organics

4 Loose to Medium Dense, SAND (SP, SP-SM, SM) with varying amounts of Silt, Clay, clay lenses, and organics

2 Sampled as SAND with varying amounts of Silt, Clay, and Gravel, variable density

CPT Assumed Water Depth

Surface Materials

Soft SILT and CLAY and Very Loose

SAND

Loose to Medium Dense SAND

POSSIBLE

UNCONTROLLED

FILL MATERIAL

8 8

16.5

26.5

31.5

36.5

6 6

16.5

26.5

1.8

37.5 38.7

6 6

16.5

26.5

32.9

E L E V

A T

IO

N

N A

V D

(f e e t)

Loose to Very Dense, Silty and Clayey SAND (SP-SM, SM, SC-SM, SC); and Medium Stiff, Sandy CLAY (CL, CH);

varying amounts of Gravel consisting of cemented sand and shell fragments occurring in lenses

Underlying SAND and CLAY

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

Layering shown on this figure has been developed by the geotechnical engineer for purposes of modeling the subsurface conditions as required for the subsequent geotechnical engineering for this project.

Numbers adjacent to soil column indicate depth below ground surface.

NOTES:

CP-P292-S1-SPT-06CP-P292-S1-CPT-03 CP-P292-S1-CPT-04

CP-P292-S1-CPT-05

Legend

This is not a cross section. This is intended to display the Geotechnical Model only. See individual logs for more detailed conditions.

MCAS Cherry Point | Havelock, NC

Terracon Project No. K625P194

FY26 USMC Barracks 2030 - P292

2108 Capital Dr, Ste 103

Wilmington, NC

Third Water Observation Second Water Observation First Water Observation

Groundwater levels are temporal. The levels shown are representative of the date and time of our exploration. Significant changes are possible over time.

Water levels shown are as measured during and/or after drilling. In some cases, boring advancement methods mask the presence/absence of groundwater. See individual logs for details.

Silty Sand Clayey Sand

Sandy Silt Poorly-graded Sand with Silt

Poorly-graded Sand

Soil Behavior Type (SBT)

8 Very stiff sand to clayey sand7 Gravelly sand to dense sand

1 Sensitive, fine grained

4 Silt mixtures - clayey silt to silty clay 5 Sand mixtures - silty sand to sandy silt

2 Organic soils - clay

9 Very stiff fine grained

6 Sands - clean sand to silty sand

3 Clay - silty clay to clay

Model Layer Layer Name General Description

1 inch to 8 inches of Surficial, Organic-Laden Soil;

2 inches to 4 inches of Asphalt;

4 inches to 5 inches of Aggregate Base Course (ABC)

Very Soft to Stiff, SILT and CLAY (ML, CL, CH); and Very Loose to Loose, Silty and Clayey SAND (SM, SP-SM, SC);

trace organics

4 Loose to Medium Dense, SAND (SP, SP-SM, SM) with varying amounts of Silt, Clay, clay lenses, and organics

2 Sampled as SAND with varying amounts of Silt, Clay, and Gravel, variable density

CPT Assumed Water Depth

Surface Materials

Soft SILT and CLAY and Very Loose

SAND

Loose to Medium Dense SAND

POSSIBLE

UNCONTROLLED

FILL MATERIAL

21.5

44.9

1.5

22.5

33.6

8.5

1.2

3.2

7.5

42.5 43.8

8.5

3.8

6.5

41.7

E L E V

A T

IO

N

N A

V D

(f e e t)

Loose to Very Dense, Silty and Clayey SAND (SP-SM, SM, SC-SM, SC); and Medium Stiff, Sandy CLAY (CL, CH);

varying amounts of Gravel consisting of cemented sand and shell fragments occurring in lenses

Underlying SAND

Site 1 GeoModel

Layering shown on this figure has been developed by the geotechnical engineer for purposes of modeling the subsurface conditions as required for the subsequent geotechnical engineering for this project.

Numbers adjacent to soil column indicate depth below ground surface.

NOTES:

CP-P292-S1-SPT-01

CP-P292-S1-SPT-04CP-P292-S1-SPT-05 CP-P292-S1-SPT-07

CP-P292-S1-SPT-08

Legend

This is not a cross section. This is intended to display the Geotechnical Model only. See individual logs for more detailed conditions.

MCAS Cherry Point | Havelock, NC

Terracon Project No. K625P194

FY26 USMC Barracks 2030 - P292

2108 Capital Dr, Ste 103

Wilmington, NC

Third Water Observation Second Water Observation First Water Observation

Groundwater levels are temporal. The levels shown are representative of the date and time of our exploration. Significant changes are possible over time.

Water levels shown are as measured during and/or after drilling. In some cases, boring advancement methods mask the presence/absence of groundwater. See individual logs for details.

Topsoil Clayey Sand

Poorly-graded Sand with Silt Silty Sand

Sandy Lean Clay

Asphalt

Model Layer Layer Name General Description

1 inch to 8 inches of Surficial, Organic-Laden Soil;

2 inches to 4 inches of Asphalt;

4 inches to 5 inches of Aggregate Base Course (ABC)

Very Soft to Stiff, SILT and CLAY (ML, CL, CH); and Very Loose to Loose, Silty and Clayey SAND (SM, SP-SM, SC);

trace organics

4 Loose to Medium Dense, SAND (SP, SP-SM, SM) with varying amounts of Silt, Clay, clay lenses, and organics

2 Sampled as SAND with varying amounts of Silt, Clay, and Gravel, variable density

Surface Materials

Soft SILT and CLAY and Very Loose

SAND

Loose to Medium Dense SAND

POSSIBLE

UNCONTROLLED

FILL MATERIAL

4 4

6.5

6.4

E L E V

A T

IO

N

N A

V D

(f e e t)

Loose to Very Dense, Silty and Clayey SAND (SP-SM, SM, SC-SM, SC); and Medium Stiff, Sandy CLAY (CL, CH);

varying amounts of Gravel consisting of cemented sand and shell fragments occurring in lenses

Underlying SAND

Site 1 GeoModel

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

-80

-70

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

N=13 N=12 N=5 N=5 N=2 N=2

BT-12.0 Ft.

CP-P292-S1-SPT-01

N=8 N=10 N=8 N=7 N=1 N=3

N=1

N=14

N=10

N=0

N=7

N=42

N=70 BT-45.0 Ft.

CP-P292-S1-SPT-02

N=12 N=11 N=7 N=2 N=0 N=0

N=3

N=11

N=7

N=0

N=3

N=41

N=72

N=7

N=9

N=11

N=48

N=15

N=22

N=25

N=51

N=20 BT-100.0 Ft.

CP-P292-S1-SPT-03

N=12 N=10 N=7 N=1 N=1 N=5

AR-18.5 Ft.

CP-P292-S1-SPT-04

N=13 N=1 N=2 N=2 N=0

N=10 BT-12.0 Ft.

CP-P292-S1-SPT-05

AR-38.7 Ft.

CP-P292-S1-CPT-01

AR-32.9 Ft.

CP-P292-S1-CPT-02

AR-33.6 Ft.

CP-P292-S1-CPT-03

Subsurface Profile

A West

A' East

A p p ro x im a te

E le v a ti o n

F e e t)

El ev at io n D at um

N

A V D

Site 1 Section A-A'

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials

Topsoil Clayey Sand Poorly-graded Sand with Silt Silty Sand Sandy Lean

Clay

Sandy Silt Poorly-graded Sand with Silt and Gravel

Terracon Project No. K625P194

Notes

Sampling (See General Notes)

See Exploration Plan for orientation of soil profile.

See General Notes in Supporting Information for symbols and soil classifications.

Soils profile provided for illustration purposes only.

Soils between borings may differ AR - Auger Refusal BT - Boring Termination

Water Level Reading at time of drilling.

Water Level Reading after drilling.

Water Level Observations

Moisture Content

%w

CP-P292-S1-SPT-01

Borehole Lithology

Borehole Termination Type

Explanation

Borehole Number

Liquid and Plastic Limits

AR

BT

LL PL

FY26 USMC Barracks 2030 - P292

Wilmington, NC

2108 Capital Dr, Ste 103

MCAS Cherry Point | Havelock, NC

7 Gravelly sand to dense sand 8 Very stiff sand to clayey sand 9 Very stiff fine grained

4 Silt mixtures - clayey silt to silty clay 5 Sand mixtures - silty sand to sandy silt 6 Sands - clean sand to silty sand

1 Sensitive, fine grained 2 Organic soils - clay 3 Clay - silty clay to clay

CPT Soil Classification Graphic Color CodeMaterial Legend

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

N=12

N=7

N=8

N=5

N=1

N=0

N=0

N=0

N=6

N=10

N=13

N=11

N=78

BT-44.9 Ft.

CP-P292-S1-SPT-06

N=6

N=10

N=6

N=1

N=1

N=3

BT-12.0 Ft.

CP-P292-S1-SPT-07

N=25

N=6

N=5

N=7

N=4

N=1

BT-12.0 Ft.

CP-P292-S1-SPT-08

AR-33.6 Ft.

CP-P292-S1-CPT-03

AR-43.8 Ft.

CP-P292-S1-CPT-04

AR-41.7 Ft.

CP-P292-S1-CPT-05

Subsurface Profile

B West

B' East

Site 1 Section B-B'

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials

Silty Sand Clayey Sand Sandy Silt Poorly-graded Sand with Silt

Poorly-graded Sand

Topsoil Asphalt

Terracon Project No. K625P194

Notes

Sampling (See General Notes)

See Exploration Plan for orientation of soil profile.

See General Notes in Supporting Information for symbols and soil classifications.

Soils profile provided for illustration purposes only.

Soils between borings may differ AR - Auger Refusal BT - Boring Termination

Water Level Reading at time of drilling.

Water Level Reading after drilling.

Water Level Observations

Moisture Content

%w

CP-P292-S1-SPT-06

Borehole Lithology

Borehole Termination Type

Explanation

Borehole Number

Liquid and Plastic Limits

AR

BT

LL PL

FY26 USMC Barracks 2030 - P292

Wilmington, NC

2108 Capital Dr, Ste 103

MCAS Cherry Point | Havelock, NC

7 Gravelly sand to dense sand 8 Very stiff sand to clayey sand 9 Very stiff fine grained

4 Silt mixtures - clayey silt to silty clay 5 Sand mixtures - silty sand to sandy silt 6 Sands - clean sand to silty sand

1 Sensitive, fine grained 2 Organic soils - clay 3 Clay - silty clay to clay

CPT Soil Classification Graphic Color CodeMaterial Legend

A p p ro x im a te

E le v a ti o n

F e e t)

El ev at io n D at um

N

A V D

Site 2 Figures

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

Layering shown on this figure has been developed by the geotechnical engineer for purposes of modeling the subsurface conditions as required for the subsequent geotechnical engineering for this project.

Numbers adjacent to soil column indicate depth below ground surface.

NOTES:

CP-P292-S2-SPT-01CP-P292-S2-SPT-03 CP-P292-S2-CPT-01 CP-P292-S2-CPT-04CP-P292-S2-CPT-05CP-P292-S2-CPT-06

Legend

This is not a cross section. This is intended to display the Geotechnical Model only. See individual logs for more detailed conditions.

MCAS Cherry Point | Havelock, NC

Terracon Project No. K625P194

FY26 USMC Barracks 2030 - P292

2108 Capital Dr, Ste 103

Wilmington, NC

Third Water Observation Second Water Observation First Water Observation

Groundwater levels are temporal. The levels shown are representative of the date and time of our exploration. Significant changes are possible over time.

Water levels shown are as measured during and/or after drilling. In some cases, boring advancement methods mask the presence/absence of groundwater. See individual logs for details.

Topsoil Silty Sand

Clayey Sand Sandy Lean Clay

Silty Sand with Gravel Lean Clay with Sand

Poorly-graded Sand with Silt Sandy Fat Clay

Soil Behavior Type (SBT)

8 Very stiff sand to clayey sand7 Gravelly sand to dense sand

1 Sensitive, fine grained

4 Silt mixtures - clayey silt to silty clay 5 Sand mixtures - silty sand to sandy silt

2 Organic soils - clay

9 Very stiff fine grained

6 Sands - clean sand to silty sand

3 Clay - silty clay to clay

Model Layer Layer Name General Description

1 inch to 8 inches of Surficial, Organic-Laden Soil;

2 inches to 4 inches of Asphalt;

4 inches to 5 inches of Aggregate Base Course (ABC)

Very Soft to Stiff, SILT and CLAY (ML, CL, CH); and Very Loose to Loose, Silty and Clayey SAND (SM, SP-SM, SC);

trace organics

4 Loose to Medium Dense, SAND (SP, SP-SM, SM) with varying amounts of Silt, Clay, clay lenses, and organics

2 Sampled as SAND with varying amounts of Silt, Clay, and Gravel, variable density

CPT Assumed Water Depth

Surface Materials

Soft SILT and CLAY and Very Loose

SAND

Loose to Medium Dense SAND

POSSIBLE

UNCONTROLLED

FILL MATERIAL

98.4

12.5

31.5

36.5

62.7

3.8

62.2

3.5

1.5

47.2

E L E V

A T

IO

N

N A

V D

(f e e t)

Loose to Very Dense, Silty and Clayey SAND (SP-SM, SM, SC-SM, SC); and Medium Stiff, Sandy CLAY (CL, CH);

varying amounts of Gravel consisting of cemented sand and shell fragments occurring in lenses

Underlying SAND

Site 2 GeoModel

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

Layering shown on this figure has been developed by the geotechnical engineer for purposes of modeling the subsurface conditions as required for the subsequent geotechnical engineering for this project.

Numbers adjacent to soil column indicate depth below ground surface.

NOTES:

CP-P292-S2-SPT-07 CP-P292-S2-CPT-02 CP-P292-S2-CPT-03

Legend

This is not a cross section. This is intended to display the Geotechnical Model only. See individual logs for more detailed conditions.

MCAS Cherry Point | Havelock, NC

Terracon Project No. K625P194

FY26 USMC Barracks 2030 - P292

2108 Capital Dr, Ste 103

Wilmington, NC

Third Water Observation Second Water Observation First Water Observation

Groundwater levels are temporal. The levels shown are representative of the date and time of our exploration. Significant changes are possible over time.

Water levels shown are as measured during and/or after drilling. In some cases, boring advancement methods mask the presence/absence of groundwater. See individual logs for details.

Topsoil Poorly-graded Sand with Silt

Sandy Lean Clay Clayey Sand

Silty Sand Silty Clayey Sand

Silty Sand with Gravel

Poorly-graded Sand with Silt and Gravel

Soil Behavior Type (SBT)

8 Very stiff sand to clayey sand7 Gravelly sand to dense sand

1 Sensitive, fine grained

4 Silt mixtures - clayey silt to silty clay 5 Sand mixtures - silty sand to sandy silt

2 Organic soils - clay

9 Very stiff fine grained

6 Sands - clean sand to silty sand

3 Clay - silty clay to clay

Model Layer Layer Name General Description

1 inch to 8 inches of Surficial, Organic-Laden Soil;

2 inches to 4 inches of Asphalt;

4 inches to 5 inches of Aggregate Base Course (ABC)

Very Soft to Stiff, SILT and CLAY (ML, CL, CH); and Very Loose to Loose, Silty and Clayey SAND (SM, SP-SM, SC);

trace organics

4 Loose to Medium Dense, SAND (SP, SP-SM, SM) with varying amounts of Silt, Clay, clay lenses, and organics

2 Sampled as SAND with varying amounts of Silt, Clay, and Gravel, variable density

CPT Assumed Water Depth

Surface Materials

Soft SILT and CLAY and Very Loose

SAND

Loose to Medium Dense SAND

POSSIBLE

UNCONTROLLED

FILL MATERIAL

12.5

12.5

69.4

1.7

77.6

E L E V

A T

IO

N

N A

V D

(f e e t)

Loose to Very Dense, Silty and Clayey SAND (SP-SM, SM, SC-SM, SC); and Medium Stiff, Sandy CLAY (CL, CH);

varying amounts of Gravel consisting of cemented sand and shell fragments occurring in lenses

Underlying SAND

Layering shown on this figure has been developed by the geotechnical engineer for purposes of modeling the subsurface conditions as required for the subsequent geotechnical engineering for this project.

Numbers adjacent to soil column indicate depth below ground surface.

NOTES:

CP-P292-S2-SPT-02

CP-P292-S2-SPT-04

CP-P292-S2-SPT-05 CP-P292-S2-SPT-06

Legend

This is not a cross section. This is intended to display the Geotechnical Model only. See individual logs for more detailed conditions.

MCAS Cherry Point | Havelock, NC

Terracon Project No. K625P194

FY26 USMC Barracks 2030 - P292

2108 Capital Dr, Ste 103

Wilmington, NC

Third Water Observation Second Water Observation First Water Observation

Groundwater levels are temporal. The levels shown are representative of the date and time of our exploration. Significant changes are possible over time.

Water levels shown are as measured during and/or after drilling. In some cases, boring advancement methods mask the presence/absence of groundwater. See individual logs for details.

Topsoil Clayey Sand

Silty Sand Poorly-graded Sand with Silt

Sandy Lean Clay

Model Layer Layer Name General Description

1 inch to 8 inches of Surficial, Organic-Laden Soil;

2 inches to 4 inches of Asphalt;

4 inches to 5 inches of Aggregate Base Course (ABC)

Very Soft to Stiff, SILT and CLAY (ML, CL, CH); and Very Loose to Loose, Silty and Clayey SAND (SM, SP-SM, SC);

trace organics

4 Loose to Medium Dense, SAND (SP, SP-SM, SM) with varying amounts of Silt, Clay, clay lenses, and organics

2 Sampled as SAND with varying amounts of Silt, Clay, and Gravel, variable density

Loose to Very Dense, Silty and Clayey SAND (SP-SM, SM, SC-SM, SC); and Medium Stiff, Sandy CLAY (CL, CH);

varying amounts of Gravel consisting of cemented sand and shell fragments occurring in lenses

Surface Materials

Soft SILT and CLAY and Very Loose

SAND

Loose to Medium Dense SAND

POSSIBLE

UNCONTROLLED

FILL MATERIAL

Underlying SAND and CLAY

10.2

11.5

8 8

E L E V

A T

IO

N

N A

V D

(f e e t)

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

-80

-70

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

N=9 N=13 N=11 N=8 N=2

N=10

N=2

N=5

N=12

N=9

N=8

N=5

N=5

N=10

N=6

N=8

N=61

N=30

N=20

N=41

N=26

N=22

BT-98.4 Ft.

CP-P292-S2-SPT-01

N=8 N=5 N=8

N=13 N=4 N=9

AR-18.8 Ft.

CP-P292-S2-SPT-04

N=8

N=15 N=10 N=8 N=0

N=13 BT-12.0 Ft.

CP-P292-S2-SPT-05

N=44 N=12 N=5 N=7 N=2

N=15 BT-12.0 Ft.

CP-P292-S2-SPT-06

AR-62.7 Ft.

CP-P292-S2-CPT-01

AR-77.6 Ft.

CP-P292-S2-CPT-03

AR-47.2 Ft.

CP-P292-S2-CPT-06

Subsurface Profile

A West

A' East

Site 2 Section A-A'

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials

Topsoil Silty Sand Clayey Sand Sandy Lean Clay

Silty Sand with Gravel

Poorly-graded Sand with Silt

Terracon Project No. K625P194

Notes

Sampling (See General Notes)

See Exploration Plan for orientation of soil profile.

See General Notes in Supporting Information for symbols and soil classifications.

Soils profile provided for illustration purposes only.

Soils between borings may differ AR - Auger Refusal BT - Boring Termination

Water Level Reading at time of drilling.

Water Level Reading after drilling.

Water Level Observations

Moisture Content

%w

CP-P292-S2-SPT-01

Borehole Lithology

Borehole Termination Type

Explanation

Borehole Number

Liquid and Plastic Limits

AR

BT

LL PL

FY26 USMC Barracks 2030 - P292

Wilmington, NC

2108 Capital Dr, Ste 103

MCAS Cherry Point | Havelock, NC

7 Gravelly sand to dense sand 8 Very stiff sand to clayey sand 9 Very stiff fine grained

4 Silt mixtures - clayey silt to silty clay 5 Sand mixtures - silty sand to sandy silt 6 Sands - clean sand to silty sand

1 Sensitive, fine grained 2 Organic soils - clay 3 Clay - silty clay to clay

CPT Soil Classification Graphic Color CodeMaterial Legend

A p p ro x im a te

E le v a ti o n

F e e t)

El ev at io n D at um

N

A V D

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

-80

-70

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

N=8 N=6 N=3 N=9

AR-8.0 Ft.

CP-P292-S2-SPT-02

N=7 N=10 N=10 N=7 N=4 N=6

N=6

N=3

N=8

N=7

N=0

N=27

N=6 BT-45.0 Ft.

CP-P292-S2-SPT-03

N=12 N=7 N=7 N=8 N=2 N=9

N=3

N=2

N=1

N=3

N=3

N=2

N=24

N=9

N=10

N=5

N=19

N=21

N=6

N=21

N=32

N=14 BT-100.0 Ft.

CP-P292-S2-SPT-07

AR-69.4 Ft.

CP-P292-S2-CPT-02

AR-62.2 Ft.

CP-P292-S2-CPT-04

AR-62.0 Ft.

CP-P292-S2-CPT-05

AR-47.2 Ft.

CP-P292-S2-CPT-06

Subsurface Profile

B West

B' East

Site 2 Section B-B'

Facilities | Environmental | Geotechnical | Materials

Topsoil Clayey Sand Silty Sand Poorly-graded Sand with Silt

Sandy Lean Clay

Lean Clay with Sand Sandy Fat Clay Silty Clayey

Sand Silty Sand with Gravel

Poorly-graded Sand with Silt and Gravel

Terracon Project No. K625P194

Notes

Sampling (See General Notes)

See Exploration Plan for orientation of soil profile.

See General Notes in Supporting Information for symbols and soil classifications.

Soils profile provided for illustration purposes only.

Soils between borings may differ AR - Auger Refusal BT - Boring Termination

Water Level Reading at time of drilling.

Water Level Reading after drilling.

Water Level Observations

Moisture Content

%w

CP-P292-S2-SPT-02

Borehole Lithology

Borehole Termination Type

Explanation

Borehole Number

Liquid and Plastic Limits

AR

BT

LL PL

FY26 USMC Barracks 2030 - P292

Wilmington, NC

2108 Capital Dr, Ste 103

MCAS Cherry Point | Havelock, NC

7 Gravelly sand to dense sand 8 Very stiff sand to clayey sand 9 Very stiff fine grained

4 Silt mixtures - clayey silt to silty clay 5 Sand mixtures - silty sand to sandy silt 6 Sands - clean sand to silty sand

1 Sensitive, fine grained 2 Organic soils - clay 3 Clay - silty clay to clay

CPT Soil Classification Graphic Color CodeMaterial Legend

A p p ro x im a te

E le v a ti o n

F e e t)

El ev at io n D at um

N

A V D

Attachments

Exploration and Laboratory Testing Procedures

Site Location and Exploration Plans

Exploration and Laboratory Results

Supporting Information

Exploration and Testing Procedures

Field Exploration

Site Exploration ID Exploration

Method

Approximate

Boring Depth

(feet)

P-292 Site 1

CP-P292-S1-SPT-01 through

CP-P292-S1-SPT-08

SPT 12 to 100

CP-P292-S1-CPT-01 through

CP-P292-S1-CPT-05

CPT 32.9 to 43.8

CP-P292-S1-SPT-04

SPT / Temporary

Monitoring Well 15 / 12

P-292 Site 2

CP-P292-S1-SPT-01 through

CP-P292-S1-SPT-07

SPT 8 to 100

CP-P292-S1-CPT-01 through

CP-P292-S1-CPT-06

CPT 47.2 to 77.6

CP-P292-S2-SPT-04

SPT / Temporary

Monitoring Well 15 / 12

Exploration Layout and Elevations: The exploration locations were established by

Terracon and confirmed with the Client and NAVFAC prior to mobilizing to the project site. Terracon personnel provided the exploration layout using handheld GPS equipment and referencing existing site features. The coordinates for exploration locations that were adjusted in the field due to utility conflicts or field obstructions were captured in the field using a handheld GPS and updated on the exploration logs. The approximate exploration locations are shown in the Site Location and Exploration Plans attachment.

Prior to mobilization, utility clearance was obtained at each location through NC811 and using a Terracon private subsurface utility locator utilizing Ground Penetrating Radar

(GPR), Electromagnetic (EM) locating, and metal detecting. All existing subsurface utilities were marked within a 25-foot radius of each proposed field exploration location.

No subsurface explorations were conducted within 5 feet (horizontal distance) of existing utility lines or site environmental monitoring wells. The private utility locator competency letter, photo-documentation, and subsurface utility plan is provided in the

Supporting Information attachment.

Approximate ground surface elevations for site 2 were obtained by interpolation from the project specific topographic survey to the nearest 0.5 feet. At the time of this report, no topographic survey has been provided for site 1. Exploration elevations for site 1 were estimated using Google Earth ProTM (WGS84). All location coordinates were recorded in

WGS 84 latitude and longitude to the accuracy available to the handheld GPS. The completed locations coordinates were converted to state Plane northing and easting US

Survey feet.

Subsurface Exploration Procedures: The SPT borings were performed using a track-mounted rotary drill rig with the use of rotary wash “mud” or continuous flight augers

(hollow stem, for the temporary well locations) drilling procedures in general accordance with ASTM D 1586. The tests were performed continuously from the existing ground surface to a depth of 12 feet and at intervals of 5 feet, starting at a depth of 13 feet The soil samples were obtained with a standard 1.4” I.D., 2” O.D., 30” long split-spoon sampler. The sampler was driven into the ground 24 inches with blows of a 140 lb.

hammer falling 30 inches, using an automatic hammer. The number of blows required to drive the sampler each 6-inch increment of penetration was recorded and is shown on the boring logs. The sum of the second and third penetration increments is termed the

SPT N-value (uncorrected for automatic hammer and overburden). A representative portion of each disturbed split-spoon sample was collected for each boring, placed in a glass jar, sealed, labeled, and returned to our laboratory for review and testing.

Additionally, each soil interval was screened in the field for organic vapors using a photo-ionization detector (PID).

We also observed the boreholes while drilling and at the completion of dril ling for the presence of groundwater. The observed groundwater levels are shown on the attached boring logs. All boreholes were backfilled upon completion with the soil cutting mixed with bentonite grout using the tremie method in general accordance with the industry standard of care. The surplus soil cuttings, decontamination water, purged groundwater, and slurry (Investigation Derived Waste – IDW) were containerized within DOT-approved

55-gallos, chemical resistant drums, and were properly labeled and temporary stored at

NAVFAC pre-approved staging area. Boring performed within existing pavement areas were patched with either quick-set sack mix concrete or asphalt cold patch.

All soil boring and sampling operations were monitored and logged on-site by a full-time experienced Geotechnical Engineer who prepared field boring logs as part of the field operations. The sampling depths, penetration distances, and other sampling information

(PP, PID, and groundwater depths) were recorded on the field boring logs. These field logs included visual classifications of the materials observed during drilling and our interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples. Final boring logs were prepared from the field logs. The final boring logs represent the Geotechnical Engineer's interpretation of the field logs and include modifications based on observations and tests of the samples in our laboratory.

In addition to the SPT testing the following additional field activities were performed:

Hand Penetrometer: Hand Penetrometer (HP) testing was performed on split spoon samples obtained from the SPT borings in accordance with ASTM D4648. This test involves pressing a calibrated penetrometer into the soil sample to measure its resistance and provide estimates of soil cohesion in fine-grained soils.

Undisturbed Shelby Tubes: Undisturbed Shelby Tube samples were collected (3” diameter thin-walled tubes) from the soft clay layers encountered at the site, and returned to our laboratory for extrusion and one dimensional consolidation testing. The

Shelby tube samples were hydraulically pushed into the soil with the SPT rig.

Bulk Soil Sampling: Bulk soil samples were obtained from the existing subgrade soils at depths ranging from 1 to 3 feet below existing grades, depending on surficial material thicknesses. The samples were manually excavated, containerized, and transported to our laboratory where they were subjected to California Bearing Ratio testing, Standard

Proctor testing, and grain size analysis.

Investigation Derived Waste (IDW): Solid and liquid IDW generated from the drilling process was containerized separately, in 55-gallon drums.