Report No. 17-03 - BLRI 2A16S.pdf

SOILS AND FOUNDATIONS REPORT

NO. 03-17

PROJECT FTNP -BLRI 2A16

REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGES OVER BRUSH CREEK AND BIG PINE CREEK

STATE ROUTE 103 OVER SPRING BRANCH

BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY

ALLEGHANY COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA

U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division 21400 Ridgetop Circle

Sterling, VA 20166

July, 2017

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

1.2 Project Description

2 GEOLOGIC SETTING

2.1 Regional Geology

2.2 Soil Survey

3 PROCEDURES AND RESULTS

3.1 General

3.2 Sampling

3.3 Data Summary

3.4 Laboratory Testing

3.5 Findings

4 DESIGN ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 General

4.2 Seismic Design Considerations

4.3 Scour

4.4 Foundation Type Considerations

4.4.1 Design Recommendations for the Micropile Foundatioins

4.5 Micropile Load Testing

4.6 Corrosion Protection

5 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

DISCLAIMER/LIMITATIONS CLAUSE

REFERENCES

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A – Figures APPENDIX B – Borings Location Map and Subsurface Profile APPENDIX C – Boring Logs APPENDIX D – Laboratory Test Data APPENDIX E – Typical Details APPENDIX F – Design Computations APPENDIX G – Representative Photographs

Note: Design changes made subsequent to distribution of this report and prior to project advertisement will be documented in a memo inserted after the title page.

SOILS AND FOUNDATIONS

REPORT NO. 03-17

PROJECT FTNP BLRI 2A16

REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGES OVER BRUSH CREEK AND BIG PINE CREEK

BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY

ALLEGHANY COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

This report summarizes the results of the subsurface exploration, laboratory testing, and design analyses and presents our recommendations for the replacement of three bridges along the Blue Ridge Parkway. The bridges are located in the Alleghany County, North Carolina. The site location and vicinity map is presented in Figure 1 in Appendix A.

1.2 Project Description

This project consists of replacement of following structures:

1. Big Pine Creek Bridge #3, Structure No. 5140-077P (MP 223.78)

2. Big Pine Creek Bridge #6, Structure No. 5140-080P (MP 224.7)

3. Brush Creek Bridge #1, Structure No. 5140-081P (MP 227.45)

It should be mentioned that the stone masonry facings for the existing abutments and piers are considered historic. Therefore, the substructures stone facings should be maintained.

The superstructure for Bridge Structures No. 5140-080P and No. 5140-081P will be replaced with precast concrete units with ACP overlay. The masonry stone abutments will remain in place. Micropiles supported stub abutments will be constructed behind the existing abutments to support the new superstructure. The existing pier for Structures No.

5140-080P will be replaced with a new concrete pier with stone masonry facing. Stone from existing pier will be salvaged and reused. The existing pier for Structures No. 5140- 081P is to remain.

The superstructure for Bridge Structure No. 5140-077P will be replaced with precast concrete units with ACP overlay. The masonry stone abutments will remain in place.

Micropiles supported stub abutments will be constructed behind the existing abutments to support the new superstructure. The existing two concrete piers will be replaced with a single concrete pier supported on Micropiles. The existing piers have no stone facings.

Therefore, the new pier will be constructed without stone facing.

Project: FNTP-BLRI 2A16 Soils and Foundations Report Blue Ridge Parkway No. 03-17 Alleghany County, North Carolina

2 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VA

2 GEOLOGIC SETTING

2.1 Regional Geology

According to the Geologic Map of North Carolina (1998)1, the project sites lie within the Alligator Back Formation of the Blue Ridge Physiographic Province with gneiss and mica schist as primary rock type as follows:

• Alligator Back Formation, gneiss - finely laminated to thin layered; locally contains massive Gneiss and micaceous granule conglomerate; includes schist, phyllite, and amphibolite.

• Alligator Back Formation, mica schist and phyllite - laminated to thin layered;

interlayered with minor biotite-muscovite gneiss and amphibolite.

The geologic map for the project sites is provided in Figure 3, Appendix A.

2.2 Soil Survey

According to the United States Department of Agriculture Web Soil Survey2, the soil units that underlain the three bridges sites are as follows:

Brush Creek Bridge #1 This site underlain by the Alluvial land (Nikwasi) and the Chandler silt loam soil units.

The Alluvial land (Nikwasi) unit is described as loamy alluvium over sandy and gravelly alluvium. The Chandler silt loam soil unit is described as creep deposits over residuum weathered from mica schist and/or gneiss and/or micaceous metaphoric rock.

Big Pine Creek Bridge #3 This site is underlain by the Ashe stony fine sandy loam and the Tate loam soil units. The Ashe stony fine sandy loam soil unit is described as creep deposits over residuum weathered from igneous and metamorphic rock. The Tate loam soil unit is described as colluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock.

Big Pine Creek Bridge #6 This site underlain by the Alluvial land (Nikwasi) and the Watauga loam soil units. The Alluvial land (Nikwasi) unit is described as loamy alluvium over sandy and gravelly alluvium. The Watauga loam soil unit is described as creep deposits over residuum weathered from mica schist and/or gneiss and/or micaceous metaphoric rock.

Refer to Figure 3 of Appendix A, for the Soil Survey Map of the project area.

3 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

3 PROCEDURES AND RESULTS

3.1 General

The Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division’s (EFLHD) Subsurface Exploration Team performed the drilling operations for this site from May 10th to 23rd, 2016. A total of seven (7) soil borings were drilled along the proposed alignment. The borings were drilled using a CME 750 all-terrain vehicle (ATV)-mounted rotary drill rig. The borings were laid out by EFLHD field personnel by referencing ground surface topography, measuring distances from existing surface features, and estimating right angles. Due to the field techniques used, the borings location shown in the Borings Location Maps should be considered approximate. Ground surface elevations at the boring locations were determined from topography plans provided by the EFLHD Survey Division and they should also be considered approximate.

3.2 Sampling

Borings were advanced using 3¾- inch (ID) hollow-stem augers. The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) was performed using a 2¼-inch (OD) split-spoon sampler in accordance with AASHTO T 206. SPT samples were recovered by driving the split-spoon sampler a distance of 24 inches, or until refusal, into the soil under the action of a 140-pound automatic hammer free-falling 30 inches. The number of hammer blows required to advance the split-spoon sampler the middle foot of the 24-inch sample is designated as the “Standard Penetration Resistance” or N-Value. The number of blows required to advance the sampler through each 6-in. interval was recorded on field boring logs. Split-spoon refusal is defined by 50 blows per 1 inch or less of penetration of the split-spoon sampler. Representative portions of split-spoon samples were preserved in glass jars and transported to EFLHD’s Materials Testing Laboratory in Sevierville, Tennessee for testing and storage. The sampling sequence and associated jar samples for each boring may be referenced on the boring logs in Appendix C.

Rock coring was performed in all borings upon encountering auger refusal. Rock coring was performed using rotary drilling techniques and samples were retrieved using a double-walled NQ wire line core barrel. Rock core samples were preserved in wooden boxes. The sampling sequence and associated jar sample description for each boring are presented on the boring logs. The borings were backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion of the drilling. Borings Location Maps are provided in Appendix B.

All samples were later transported to EFLHD’s Materials Testing Facility in Sevierville, TN for laboratory testing and storage. A field description by color and texture was made for each recovered soil sample and are included in the boring logs.

4 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

3.3 Data Summary

The results of the field tests and measurements were recorded on the driller’s logs and appropriate data sheets in the field. These data sheets and logs contain information concerning the boring methods, samples attempted and recovered, indications of the presence of various material such as gravel, pebbles, organic matter, etc. and observations of groundwater. They also contain interpretations by the exploration foreman of the subsurface conditions based on the performance of the equipment and cuttings brought to the surface by the drilling tools; therefore, the field data represents both factual and interpretative information.

The boring logs represent an interpretation of field data and description of the soil samples by a geotechnical engineer. These records occasionally do not include all data recorded on driller’s logs and field data sheets, but do include all information considered relevant to the design and preparation of this memorandum.

Groundwater level readings were made at the time of drilling and are included in the boring logs. Fluctuations in groundwater level due to seasonal variations, rainfall, temperature, and other factors not evident at the time measurements were made should be expected.

3.4 Laboratory Testing

A laboratory testing program was conducted on representative soil samples recovered during the subsurface exploration. The main purpose of the testing program was to aid in classification and evaluation of the engineering properties of subsurface soils at the site.

Laboratory testing included gradation analysis by sieve (AASHTO T 11/T 27), natural moisture content (AASHTO T 265), Atterberg limits (AASHTO T 89/T 90). Unconfined compressive strength (ASTM D 7012) testing was assigned for selected rock samples.

The results of the soil laboratory testing are presented in Appendix D and are summarized in Table 1. The results of the unconfined compressive strength conducted on selected rock samples are presented in Appendix D and summarized in Table 2.

5 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Table 1 - Summary of Soil Laboratory Tests Results B ri dg e St ru ct ur e

N o.

B or in g

Sa m pl e

D ep th

(f t)

M C

PL

L L

PI

Fi ne s, D es cr ip tio n

A A

SH

T

O

-0

P

B-01 J-3 5-7 21.9 NP NP NP 36.6 Silty sand A-2-4

J-4 10-12 10.5 NP NP NP 4.5 Poorly graded sand with gravel A-1-b

B-02 J-2 3-5 18.0 NP NP NP 13.5 Silty sand with gravel A-1-b J-4 10-12 17.7 NP NP NP 25.4 Silty sand with gravel A-1-b

-0

P B-01 J-2 5-7 9.2 NP NP NP 13.0 Silty sand with gravel A-1-b J-5 10-12 15.7 NP NP NP 12.8 Silty sand with gravel A-1-b

B-02 J-2 3-5 11.1 NP NP NP 13.6 Silty sand with gravel A-1-b J-5 15-17 14.8 NP NP NP 14.1 Silty sand A-2-4

-0

P B-01

J-5 15-17 24.2 NP NP NP 19.5 Silty sand A-2-4

J-6 20-22 15.3 NP NP NP 10.4 Poorly graded sand with silt and gravel A-1-b

B-02 J-3 5-7 36.5 NP NP NP 38.7 Silty sand A-2-4

J-6 13-15 18.3 NP NP NP 6.4 Poorly graded sand with silt and gravel A-1-b

J = Jar sample; NV = not determined; NP = non-plastic

Table 2 – Summary of Laboratory Results Bridge Structure No. Boring

No.

Sample

No.

Depth

(ft) Recovery

RQD

UCS

(psi)

5140-081P B-1 R-1 30.5-34.0 100 100 10,775 B-1 R-3 39.0-44.0 76 74 470 B-2A R-7 54.8-59.8 74 61 930

5140-080P B-1 R-2 13.9-18.9 100 96 5,875 B-2 R-4 24.5-29.5 100 80 6,100 B-2 R-6 34.5-39.5 100 100 4,630

RQD=Rock Quality Designation; UCS=Unconfined compressive strength.

6 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

3.5 Findings

This section provides a brief description of the soil conditions encountered during our drilling operation. The stratification lines designating the interfaces between soil types on the boring logs in Appendix C represent approximate boundaries. The transition between materials may be gradual. It should be noted that one or more of the units may be absent at specific locations.

Asphalt Pavement and Base Layer – Asphalt pavement and sublayers ranging from 0.9 to 1.7 ft was encountered in 6 borings.

Fill – Fill, likely associated with the construction of the existing bridges, was encountered in all borings. The average thickness of the fill material encountered at Bridge Structures No. 5140-077P, 5140-080P, and 5140-081was 9 ft, 6.5 ft, and 17 ft, respectively. The fill consisted primarily of silty sand and sandy silt with various amounts of gravel. SPT N-values in this layer ranged from weight of hammer (WOH) to 21 blow-counts per foot (bpf).

Sandy Gravel –Medium dense to very dense but mostly very dense sandy gravel was encountered underneath the fill in all the borings. These natural deposits appeared to originate from surrounding parent rock, and had N-values ranging from 16 to greater than 50 bpf, but mostly greater than 50 bpf.

Bed Bedrock – Bedrock consisting of gneiss, quartzite, and/or mica schist encountered at the different sites. Table 3 presents information regarding depth to bedrock, estimated bedrock elevations and rock type. It should be noted that the estimated bedrock elevations listed in Table 3 are based on the soil profile encountered in the soil borings, and the depth of auger refusal at each location. Actual depth to bedrock is expected to vary across the sites.

Table 3 –Bedrock Description and Elevation Bridge

Structure No.

Depth to Bedrock

(ft)

Ground Surface Elevation

(ft)

Bedrock Elevation

(ft)

Rock Type RQD

5140-077P 24 to 26 2653 2628 Garnet-Gneiss & Quartzite 50-91

5140-080P 10-13 2613 2604-2600 Gneiss & Quartzite 78-96

5140-081P 30 2604 2574 Mica Schist 0-100

7 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Groundwater – The highest groundwater table was encountered in borings drilled for Structure No. 5140-077P at depths of 16.5 to 23 ft below existing site grades.

Groundwater level was measured in the boreholes at the times and under the conditions stated in the boring logs. However, fluctuations in groundwater level due to seasonal variations, rainfall, temperature, and other factors not evident at the time measurements were made should be expected.

4 DESIGN ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 General

Foundation design was performed in general accordance with AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications3 (AASHTO).

4.2 Seismic Design Considerations

Based on the criteria contained within AASHTO Table 3.10.3.1-1, and the results of our subsurface exploration, the project site can be classified as Seismic Site Class D. The USGS Seismic Design Maps web application4 was used to determine the Seismic Site Coefficients. The corresponding horizontal response spectral acceleration coefficient (SD1) at 1-Second was 0.129g. The project site is considered in Seismic Zone 1 (i.e., SD1 ≤ 0 .15) in accordance with AASHTO Table 3.10.6-1.

4.3 Scour

Information regarding scour depths and elevations for the subject bridge structures for the 100-Year and 200-Year flood was provided by EFL Hydraulics team. Table 4 presents a summary of the scour information.

Table 4 - Scour Analyses Results Bridge

Structure No.

Contraction Scour

(ft)

Pier Scour (ft)

Scour Elevation (ft)

100-Yrs

200-Yr 100-Yr

200-Yr 100-Yr

200-Yr

5140-077P 0 0 3.55 3.65 2640.2 2640.1

5140-080P 1.27 1.37 7.57 7.81 2592.7 2592.3

5140-081P 2.23 2.76 5.9 6.11 2576.4 2575.6

8 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

4.4 Foundation Type Considerations

As indicated in the Project Description Section, the proposed construction for the three bridges consists of a full replacement for the superstructures and rehabilitation of the foundations and substructures. Micropile foundations were selected to provide the axial capacity required to carry the vertical structure loads for the abutments of Structure No.

5140-077P, 5140-080P, and 5140-081 and the pier for structure No. 5140-077P, while maintaining the historic features of the bridge. The Micropiles will be installed through the existing abutments into the bedrock. Grouted bond zone will be used to provides a positive connection between the foundation and bedrock.

Table 5 provides a summary of Micropile design properties and assumption considered for design. Core steel reinforcing bar should extend the full height of the micropile, from the top anchor plate completely through the 10-ft minimum length competent rock bond zone. Steel casing should extend from the pier cap to the top of bedrock.

Table 5 – General Micropile Design Assumptions for All Bridges Description Value

Micropile Outside Diameter (in.) 7.0

Micropile Insider Diameter (in.) 6.0

Wall Thickness (in.) 0.5

Micropile Yield Stress, fy.casing (ksi) 80

Reinforcing Bar Diameter (in.)/Size 2.5/#20

Reinforcing Bar Yield Stress, fy.bar (ksi) 75

Grout Unconfined Compressive Strength, f’c (ksi) 5.0

4.4.1 Design Recommendations for the Micropile Foundatioins

The Micropile foundation design was evaluated in general accordance with AASHTO, Section 10.9 and the FHWA “Micropile Design and Construction Reference Manual” (2005)5. A resistance factor for compression resistance of a single Micropile (φstat) of 0.55 was utilized for side resistance in the bond zone, as listed in AASHTO Table 10.5.5.2.5-

1. A summary with recommendations for the Micropile foundations including factored geotechnical resistance, for all the bridge structures, is provided in Table 6. The bearing resistance calculations and computer output is included in Appendix F.

9 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Table 6 – Recommendations for the Micropile Foundations

Description

Structure No. 5140-077P

Structure No. 5140-

080P Abutments

C & D

Structure No. 5140-

081P Abutments

E & F Abutments

A & B Pier

Number of Rows of Micropiles 1 2 1 1 Number of Columns of Micropiles 6 6 5 5 Total Number of Micropiles per Substructure 6 12 5 5

Micropile Row Center-to-Center Spacing, (in.) - 36 - -

Micropile Column Center-to-Center Spacing, (in.) 78 78 65 70

Minimum Bond length (Rock Embedment), (ft) 10.0 10.0 10.0 12.5

Grout-to-Ground Bond Value, (psi) 120 120 120 100

Factored Geotechnical Resistance, (kips)1 149 149 149 155

1 The side resistance along the cased length of micropiles and tip resistance along the uncased length of micropiles were not considered for the determination of compression resistances.

4.5 Micropile Load Testing

Micropile verification and proof load testing should be performed in accordance with Subsection 567.06 of the FP-14. At least one proof load testing should be performed at each substructure where Micropiles are installed.

4.6 Corrosion Protection

Provide corrosion protection of the Micropile elements as described in Table 7 and in accordance with the Corrosion Protection Guidelines5.

Table 7 – Corrosion Protection Recommendations for Micropiles Micropile Element Description

Casing None

Core Steel Reinforcing Bar Cement Grout Cover1

1 Minimum 1-inch in soil and 0.5 inches in rock. If protective coatings (epoxy, galvanization, or encapsulation) are provided in compression, minimum cover may be 0.25 inches in soil or rock.

10 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

5 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

Excavations: All excavations should be performed in accordance with applicable Federal, state, local, and OSHA standards and in accordance with Section 204 of the FP-14 Specifications.

Micropile Casing Termination at Bedrock: Drilling methods proposed by the Contractor should ensure that an adequate seal is achieved between the Micropile casing and the top of bedrock (top of bond zone) to ensure borehole stability during Micropile excavation and grout placement, in accordance with Subsection 567.04(l)of the FP-14 Specifications.

Careful observation of drilling tools and response during drilling will be required to determine the depths the top of bedrock at each Mmicropile location, to determine the required depth of installation. Casing may extend beyond the top of bedrock (to lower elevations).

Grout Placement in Bond Zone/Bedrock: Contamination of the bond zone due to ingress of soils should be prevented. Investigation of the bottom of the excavated hole prior to grout placement should be completed using mechanical probing devices or other suitable electronic methods. The excavated hole should be cleared of any contaminants that would negatively impact the required grout-to-rock bond strength. Grout levels in Micropiles should be carefully observed following initial grouting to determine if any grout loss is occurring at any location along the Micropile. Contractor submittals should include a remedial plan in the event that grout losses or leakage are observed during grouting.

The minimum bond length is based on nominal grout-to-grout as described in Table 6 that is to be confirmed by field load testing. The bond length may be adjusted based on the results of the load tests.

Micropile Construction Tolerance: Micropile construction tolerance including center of Micropile, pile-hole alignment, top elevation and center of reinforcing steel should be within allowable construction tolerance stated in Table 567-1 of the FP-14. Any deviation outside the tolerances provided in the FP-14 specifications should be viewed as a design change and the contractor must notify the Contractor Officer (CO).

11 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

DISCLAIMER/LIMITATIONS CLAUSE

The subsurface explorations and tests described in the section on Procedures and Results have been conducted in accordance with standard practices and procedures (except as specifically noted). The results of these explorations and tests represent conditions at the specific locations indicated. Subsurface conditions between these locations may vary.

The Design Analysis and Recommendations provided in this report include interpretations and recommendations developed by the Government in the process of preparing the design. These interpretations are not intended as a substitute for the personal investigation, independent interpretation, and judgment of the Contractor.

Prepared by:

Mohammed Elias, PhD, PE Senior Geotechnical Engineer

Reviewed by:

Mounir Abouzakhm, P.E.

Division Geotechnical Engineer

12 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

REFERENCES

1 The North Carolina Dept. of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of Land Resources, NC Geological Survey, in cooperation with the NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis, 1998, Geology - North Carolina (1:250,000), https://mrdata.usgs.gov/geology/state/state.php?state=NC

2 Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Web Soil Survey. Available online at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/.

3 AASHTO (2014). LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, Customary U.S. Units, 7th Edition, with 2016-Interim, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C. .

4 US Seismic Design Maps, https://earthquake.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/application.php

5 Sabatini, P.J., Tanyu, B., Armour, T., Groneck, P., and Keeley, J. (2005). Report No.

FHWA-NHI-05-039: Micropile Design and Construction, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C.

http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/

Appendix A

Figures

FIGURE 1

Site Location and Vicinity Map

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA

STATE

NC

PROJECT

FTNP BLRI 2A16

STATE

NC

PROJECT

FTNP BLRI 2A16

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA

FIGURE 2

GEOLOGIC MAP

Zabg: Alligator Back Formation; Gneiss (Late Proterozoic), Gneiss ‐ finely laminated to thin layered; locally contains massive gneiss and micaceous granule conglomerate; includes schist, phyllite, and

Zabs: Alligator Back Formation; Mica schist and phyllite (Late Proterozoic), Mica schist and phyllite ‐ laminated to thin layered; interlayered with minor biotite‐muscovite gneiss and amphibolite.

Structure No. 5140‐077P Blue Ridge Bridge #3 over Big Pine Creek

Structure No. 5140‐081P Brush Creek Bridge #1

Structure No. 5140‐080P Blue Ridge Bridge #6 over Big Pine Creek

Source: The North Carolina Dept. of Environment, Health, and Natural

Resources, Division of Land Resources, NC Geological Survey, in cooperation with the NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis, 1998, Geology ‐ North Carolina (1:250,000), https://mrdata.usgs.gov/geology/state/state.php?state=NC

Ad-Alluvial land, wet (Nikwasi) Parent material: Loamy alluvium over sandy and gravelly alluvium Typical profile

A - 0 to 26 inches: fine sandy loam Cg - 26 to 80 inches: extremely gravelly coarse sand

WaF—Watauga loam, 25 to 45 percent slopes Parent material: Creep deposits over residuum weathered from mica schist k and/or gneiss and/or micaeous metamorphic rock Typical profile

A - 0 to 8 inches: loam

Bt - 8 to 28 inches: sandy clay loam C - 28 to 80 inches: sandy loam ClF—Chester stony loam, 15 to 45 percent slopes (Evard)

Parent material: Creep deposits over residuum weathered from igneous and metamorphic rock

Typical profile

A - 0 to 5 inches: gravelly loam Bt - 5 to 29 inches: sandy clay loam BC - 29 to 37 inches: sandy loam C - 37 to 80 inches: sandy loam

Ad-Alluvial land, wet (Nikwasi) Parent material: Loamy alluvium over sandy and gravelly alluvium Typical profile

A - 0 to 26 inches: fine sandy loam Cg - 26 to 80 inches: extremely gravelly coarse sand CaF—Chandler silt loam, 25 to 45 percent slopes Parent material: Creep deposits over residuum weathered from mica schist and/or gneiss and/or micaeous metamorphic rock Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: silt loam Bw - 5 to 80 inches: fine sandy loam CeE—Chester loam, 10 to 25 percent slopes Parent material: Creep deposits over residuum weathered from igneous and metamorphic rock Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: loam Bt - 5 to 21 inches: clay loam BC - 21 to 29 inches: fine sandy loam C - 29 to 80 inches: sandy loam

AsG-Ashe stony fine sandy loam, 45 to 65 percent slopes Parent material: Creep deposits over residuum weathered from igneous and metamorphic rock Typical profile A - 0 to 7 inches: stony sandy loam Bw - 7 to 25 inches: gravelly sandy loam C - 25 to 30 inches: gravelly sandy loam R - 30 to 80 inches: unweathered bedrock Ad-Alluvial land, wet (Nikwasi) Parent material: Loamy alluvium over sandy and gravelly alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 26 inches: fine sandy loam Cg - 26 to 80 inches: extremely gravelly coarse sand TaD-Tate loam, 10 to 15 percent slopes

Parent material: Colluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock

Typical profile Ap - 0 to 7 inches: loam Bt - 7 to 46 inches: clay loam C - 46 to 80 inches: fine sandy loam

STATE

NC

PROJECT

FTNP BLRI 2A16

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA

FIGURE 3

SOIL SURVEY MAP

Source: Available Soil Survey Data, USDA Natural Resources Conservation

Appendix B

Boring Location Map and Subsurface Profile

W

ATE

RW

AY

NAI

L

Wooden Guardrail li ar dr au

G ne do o

W

PK

PK 40+00PK 40+00

B-2

Big Pine Creek #3 - Structure No. 5140-077P

B-1

AIL

NAIL

NAIL

TBAR

TBAR

B-1

Big Pine Creek #6 - Structure No. 5140-080P

B-2

N

AI

L

NAI

L2

B-2

BRUSH

CREEK

TBAR

PK 25+00PK 25+00

B-1

B-2A

Brush Creek #1 - Structure No. 5140-081P

2,610

2,615

2,620

2,625

2,630

2,635

2,640

2,645

2,650

2,655

2,610

2,615

2,620

2,625

2,630

2,635

2,640

2,645

2,650

2,655

0.9

26.4

28.4

33.4

38.4

43.4

Depth (ft) N

B-1 Rec.

28.8

33.8

38.8

Depth (ft) N

B-2 Rec.

LEGEND

N

SUBSURFACE PROFILE

SHEET NO.

E le v a ti o n f t)

Groundwater depth encountered during drilling.

Rec.

STATE PROJECT

Rock Quality Designation (%)

E le v a ti o n f t)

Recovery (ft)

RQD

Standard Penetration Test

Resistance in Blows per Foot

B-1B-2

Groundwater depth at boring completion. ASPHALT FILL

SILTY

SAND

DECOMPOSED

ROCK

GNEISS

THE BORING LOGS ON THIS SHEET REPRESENT THE SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED

AT THE BORING LOCATIONS SHOWN. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY VARY BETWEEN THESE LOCATIONS.

Groundwater depth monitored after boring completion.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA

BLRI 2A16

Structure No 5140-077P

2,565

2,570

2,575

2,580

2,585

2,590

2,595

2,600

2,605

2,610

2,615

2,565

2,570

2,575

2,580

2,585

2,590

2,595

2,600

2,605

2,610

2,615

0.9

0.4

1.5

0.9

13.3

13.9

18.9

23.9

Depth (ft) N

B-1 Rec.

1.4

0.8

1.0

0.1

1.3

10.1

14.5

19.5

24.5

29.5

34.5

39.5

44.5

Depth (ft) N

B-2 Rec.

LEGEND

N

SUBSURFACE PROFILE

SHEET NO.

E le v a ti o n f t)

Groundwater depth encountered during drilling.

Rec.

STATE PROJECT

Rock Quality Designation (%)

E le v a ti o n f t)

Recovery (ft)

RQD

Standard Penetration Test

Resistance in Blows per Foot

B-1B-2

Groundwater depth at boring completion. ASPHALT FILL

DECOMPOSED

ROCK GNEISS QUARTZITE

THE BORING LOGS ON THIS SHEET REPRESENT THE SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED

AT THE BORING LOCATIONS SHOWN. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY VARY BETWEEN THESE LOCATIONS.

Groundwater depth monitored after boring completion.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA

BLRI 2A16

Structure No 5140-080P

2,535

2,540

2,545

2,550

2,555

2,560

2,565

2,570

2,575

2,580

2,585

2,590

2,595

2,600

2,605

2,535

2,540

2,545

2,550

2,555

2,560

2,565

2,570

2,575

2,580

2,585

2,590

2,595

2,600

2,605

1.2

0.9

1.5

0.7

1.1

0.6

0.6

0.2

1.7

30.5

Depth (ft) N

B-1 Rec.

1.3

0.5

1.3

1.5

1.9

1.8

0.8

0.3

18.8

23.8

28.8

33.8

38.8

Depth (ft)

B-2 Rec.

29.8

34.8

39.8

44.8

49.8

54.8

59.8

64.8

Depth (ft)

B-2A

LEGEND

N

SUBSURFACE PROFILE

SHEET NO.

E le v a ti o n f t)

Groundwater depth encountered during drilling.

Rec.

STATE PROJECT

Rock Quality Designation (%)

E le v a ti o n f t)

Recovery (ft)

RQD

Standard Penetration Test

Resistance in Blows per Foot

B-1 B-2

B-2A

Groundwater depth at boring completion.

ASPHALT FILL

DECOMPOSED

ROCK

MICA SCHIST TOPSOIL

BLDRCBBL CONCRETE

THE BORING LOGS ON THIS SHEET REPRESENT THE SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED

AT THE BORING LOCATIONS SHOWN. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY VARY BETWEEN THESE LOCATIONS.

Groundwater depth monitored after boring completion.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

STERLING, VIRGINIA

BLRI 2A16

Structure No 5140-081P

Appendix C

Boring Logs

SOIL BORING GENERAL NOTES

Drilling and Sampling Symbols

SS: Split Spoon - 1 3/8” I.D., 2” O.D., except where noted ST: Shelby Tube - 2” O.D., except where noted PA: Power Auger Sample

Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the boring at the times indicated. In pervious soils, the indicated elevations are considered reliable ground water levels. In impervious soils, the accurate determination of ground water elevations is not possible, even after several days, and additional evidence on ground water elevations must be sought.

VISUAL METHODS FOR SOILS CLASSIFICATION

Component Distinguishing Features

Boulders Larger than 12” (300 mm)

Cobbles 3” to 12” (75 mm to 12 mm)

Gravel Larger than No. 4 sieve and smaller than a 3” sieve, described with any of the following terms (or any combination):

Coarse 3” to 3/4” (75 mm to 19 mm) sieve Medium 3/4” to 3/8” (19 mm to 9.5 mm) sieve Fine 3/8” to No. 4 (9.5 mm to 4.75 mm) sieve

Sand The finest sand grains are just visible to the naked eye, while the largest would pass a No. 4

(4.75mm) sieve (pinhead size). Described with any of the following terms (or any combination):

Coarse No. 4 to No. 10 (4.75 mm to 2.0 mm) sieve Medium No. 10 to No. 40 (2.0 mm to 0.42 mm) sieve Fine No. 40 to No. 200 (0.42 mm to 0.075 mm) sieve

Silt 1. Lumps are easily crumbled when are-dried.

2. Feels gritty between the teeth.

3. A moist pat when shaken in the palm of the hand will appear shiny and wet. When squeezed it will appear dry and dull.

Clay 1. Lumps are comparatively hard when air-dried.

2. Threads (1/8” diameter) of considerable length will support their own weight when held by one end.

3. A moist pat will appear the same whether shaken in the palm of the hand or squeezed.

Order of Description

1. Soil Density (or consistency) – see table below

2. Color

3. Major Grain Size – Composes more than 50% of the sample

4. Modifying Term – “and” : 40% to 50% of the minor grain size

“some” : 30% to 40% “little” : 10% to 30%

“trace” : 10% or less

5. Minor Grain Size(s)

6. Other (plasticity, etc.)

7. Moisture Content (by field test) – “dry” : Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch “moist” : Damp but no visible water

“wet” : Visible free water, usually soil is below water table

8. General Classification – Fill, Residual Soil, Weathered Rock

SOIL DENSITY (OR CONSISTENCY) TABLE

Coarse-Grained Soil (Gravel, Sand) Fine-Grained Soil (Clay, Silt)

Apparent Density SPT (# blows / ft) Consistency SPT (# blows / ft) Very loose 0-4 Very soft 0-2

Loose 5-10 Soft 3-4 Medium dense 11-30 Medium stiff 5-8

Dense 31-50 Stiff 9-15 Very dense >50 Very stiff 16-30

Hard >30

Examples:

1. Dense to very dense, brown to light brown, SILTY SAND, some gravel [A-7-6(10)]

(Moist)

-FILL-

Criteria for Describing Soil Structure

Description Criteria

Bed A sedimentary layer bounded by depositional surfaces.

Blocky A characteristic in which cohesive soil can be broken down into small angular lumps which resist further breakdown.

Bonded Attached or adhering.

Fissured Broken along definite planes of fracture.

Foliated Planar arrangement of textural or structural features.

Frequent More than one per foot of thickness.

Homogeneous Same color and appearance throughout.

Interbedded Alternating soil layers of different composition.

Laminae A very thin cohesive layer.

Layer A general term for material lying essentially parallel to the surfaces against which it was formed.

Lens A lenticular deposit, larger than a pocket.

Occasional One or less per foot of thickness.

Parting A very thin granular layer.

Pocket Small erratic deposits less than 12” in thickness.

Seam A thin layer separating two distinctive layers of different composition or greater magnitude.

Stratified Alternating layers of varying material or color.

Stratum A stratigraphic unit.

Varve A cyclic sedimentary couplet consisting of a coarser and a finer layer representing the variation in depositional energy resulting from the annual freeze-thaw cycle typically found in glaciolacustrine environments.

ROCK CORING GENERAL NOTES

Depth and Elevation: Use large marks as 1’ (300mm) increments. Record proper elevations.

Core: Draw sketch of core breaks as it is oriented in the core box (align all core breaks so they fit together properly before drawing sketch). Starting at the top of core measure each piece of core down its centerline to 1/100 of a foot. Record this measurement along the left side of the core sketch at the break.

VISUAL METHODS FOR ROCK IDENTIFICATION

Description: 1. Draw a heavy line through description at depth to which core run penetrated.

2. Describe the rock type.

3. Note the condition of the core break on the right side of the core sketch

Mud seam (MS); Sand seam (SS); Weathered surface (WS); Fresh break (FB)

4. Record coring time in minutes.

5. Record to nearest 1/100 foot the core recovered (after alignment in core box). Discard any debris at top of core, which obviously fill into the core hole.

6. Calculate per cent core recovery and record: CR = Ufeet of core recoveredU feet cored

Color: Wet the rock with water and describe the color including the color of any unusual or reoccurring markings on the core (i.e. light green with dark green bands, foliation lines).

Foliation: Foliation planes are parallel planes of different minerals forming a banded appearance on the rock.

The foliation planes are usually of a different color than the surrounding rock. Also the rock shears along the foliation planes if struck with a hammer. Record the following:

Close spaced (CS) – 1/8” (3mm) or closer; Medium spaced (MS) – 1/8” to 1/4” (3mm to 6mm);

Open spaced (OS) – 1/4” (6mm) or larger

The angle to the horizontal should be measured (with a protractor) and recorded for the rock core.

(Several different angles can be found in each 5’ to 10’ core.)

Hardness: Very Soft (VS) – Can be deformed or crumbled by hand; Soft (S) – Can be scratched with a fingernail Moderately Hard (MH) – Can be scratched easily with a knife; Hard (H) – Can be scratched with difficulty with a knife; Very hard (VH) – Cannot be scratched with a knife

Weathering: Use the proper number 1 through 5.

1. UUnweathered:U No evidence of any mechanical or chemical alteration along discoloration evidenced.

2. USlightly weatheredU: Discoloration is evident, on surface, slight alteration no discontinuities, less than 10% of the volume is altered, strength is substantially unaffected.

3. UModerately weathered:U Discoloring is evident, surface is pitted and altered with alteration penetrating will below rock surfaces, weathering "halos” evident, 10% to 50% of the rock is altered, strength is noticeably less than fresh rock.

4. UHighly weathered: UEntire mass is discolored; alteration pervades nearly all of the rock with some pockets of slightly weathered rock noticeable, some minerals leached away, retains only a fraction of original strength (with wet strength usually lower than dry strength).

5. UDecomposed:U Rock is reduced to a soil with relict rock structure (saprolite), can be generally molded and crumbled by hand.

Rock Quality Designation (RQD) = UΣ[Lengths of all pieces of the core ≥ 4” (100mm)]U x 100 Total length of core run

Soundness: Use the proper number 1 through 5

1. Weathered RQD = 0% to 25%

2. Highly jointed to Jointed RQD = 25% to 50%

3. Jointed to Relatively sound RQD = 50% to 75%

4. Relatively sound to Sound RQD = 75% to 100%

Rock Quality: Use the proper number 1 through 5

1. Very Poor RQD = 0% to 25%

2. Poor RQD = 25% to 50%

3. Fair RQD = 50% to 75%

4. Good RQD = 75% to 90%

5. Excellent RQD = 90% to 100%

Order of Description

1. Hardness

2. Color

3. Soundness (a.k.a. Weathering and Rock Quality)

4. Main Rock Formation – Composes more than 50% of the core run

5. Texture – Very Fine (VF), Fine (F), Medium (M), and Coarse (C)

6. Modifying Term – “and” : 40% to 50% of the core run “some” : 30% to 40% “little” : 10% to 30%

“trace” : 10% or less

7. Minor Rock Type(s)

8. Other (Foliation angle, etc.)

UExamples:U

1. Moderately hard, blue-gray to gray, weathered BIOTITE GNEISS BOULDER, medium texture

Recovery = 24%

RQD = 17%

2. Very hard, gray and white, relatively sound to sound BIOTITE GNEISS, medium to fine texture, some quartz veins, foliation angle = 20 degrees

Recovery = 100%

RQD = 100%

-Fresh break @ approximately 47’

100.0

Asphalt pavement (0.9 ft)

SILTY SAND with some gravel, medium dense, gray, moist. Fill

SANDY SILT , stiff, tan, moist. Fill

SANDY SILT, very soft, tan brown and gray, moist to wet. Fill

SILTY SAND, medium dense, tan, moist.

SANDY GRAVEL, very dense, tan, moist (becomes wet at 25 ft). Residual soils. Auger refusal at 26.4 ft.

GARNET GNEISS, gray and reddish brown , fine grained, moderately weathered. Discontinuities are closely spaced , CR = 100%, RQD = 50% (first core run 2 ft)

CR = 94%, RQD = 50%

J-1

J-2

J-3

J-4

J-5

J-6

J-7

J-8

J-9

R-1

R-2

0.9

3.0

5.0

10.0

13.0

26.4

28.4

8-8-9-9

7-5-5-3

0-1-1-1

0-0-1-2

0-8-8-22

50/3"

50/1"

50/1"

11-50

N o.

Blue Ridge Parkway, Big Pine Creek Bridge #3

E le va tio n (f ee t)

3.75 in.

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

30 in.

140 lbs/Automatic

Penetrometer (PP in tsf)

Water Content %

Project Location:

Encountered at:

After

Northing: 1422585.36 Easting: 1005532.269

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Rock Core (RQD in %)

Standard Penetration Test Data

Project Datum:

(Blows / ft)

2654.2 ft

Undisturbed (UD)

5/18/16

R ec ft)

Project Name:

Surface Elevation:

Boring Location:

La ye r

D ep th ft)

Boring Began:

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Liquid Limit

SPT

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

At Completion:

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

HSA/NQ

B-1

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Overcast / 57 F

T yp e

Weather:

SAMPLE

Plastic Limit

Upon completion of drilling operation, boring was backfilled with auger cuttings and gravels and cold-patched with asphalt.

Inspector:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Boring No.:

Groundwater Depth:

Sample Types:

BORING LOG

2 in.

5/18/16 M. Elias

M. MastersOperator:

Abutment 1 (Northbound) hrs

21.3 ft

Remarks:

Auger Cuttings

G ra ph ic

L og

BLRI 2A16

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

D ep th S ca le ft)

R Q

D

S P

T b lo w s pe r in

B O

R

IN

G L

O G

/2 6/

5:

M

P

R O

JE

C

T S

\B

LR

I\ 2A

\T

E C

H S

E R

V \G

E O

T E

C H

\S U

B S

U R

F A

C E

I N

V E

S T

IG

A

T

IO

N \B

O R

IN

G

L O

G S

\B

LR

I 2A

_B

P C

#3 _1

.G P

J

2653.3

2651.2

2649.2

2644.2

2641.2

2627.8

2625.8

Sheet: 1 of 2

3"

1"

1" girmay.weldegiorgis Text Box -077

94.0

100.0

CR = 94%, RQD = 50% (Continued)

CR = 100%, RQD = 87%

CR = 100%, RQD = 91%

0.45 ft of white QUARTZITE at depth of 40.1 ft

Bottom of borehole at 43.4 ft

R-2

R-3

R-4

33.4

38.4

43.4

N o.

Blue Ridge Parkway, Big Pine Creek Bridge #3

E le va tio n (f ee t)

3.75 in.

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

30 in.

140 lbs/Automatic

Penetrometer (PP in tsf)

Water Content %

Project Location:

Encountered at:

After

Northing: 1422585.36 Easting: 1005532.269

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Rock Core (RQD in %)

Standard Penetration Test Data

Project Datum:

(Blows / ft)

2654.2 ft

Undisturbed (UD)

5/18/16

R ec ft)

Project Name:

Surface Elevation:

Boring Location:

La ye r

D ep th ft)

Boring Began:

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Liquid Limit

SPT

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

At Completion:

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

HSA/NQ

B-1

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Overcast / 57 F

T yp e

Weather:

SAMPLE

Plastic Limit

Upon completion of drilling operation, boring was backfilled with auger cuttings and gravels and cold-patched with asphalt.

Inspector:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Boring No.:

Groundwater Depth:

Sample Types:

BORING LOG

2 in.

5/18/16 M. Elias

M. MastersOperator:

Abutment 1 (Northbound) hrs

21.3 ft

Remarks:

Auger Cuttings

G ra ph ic

L og

BLRI 2A16

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

D ep th S ca le ft)

R Q

D

S P

T b lo w s pe r in

B O

R

IN

G L

O

/2 6/

5:

M

P

R O

JE

C

T S

\B

LR

I\ 2A

\T

E C

H S

E R

V \G

E O

T E

C H

\S U

B S

U R

F A

C E

I N

V E

S T

IG

A

T

IO

N \B

O R

IN

G

L O

G S

\B

LR

I 2A

_B

P C

#3 _1

.G P

J

2620.8

2615.8

2610.8

Sheet: 2 of 2 girmay.weldegiorgis

Asphalt pavement and sublayers (1.0 ft)

SILTY SAND with some gravel, medium dense, gray and brown, moist. Fill

SILTY SAND with trace gravel, very loose to loose , brown, moist. Fill

SAND and GRAVEL, medium dense to very dense, tan and gray, moist to wet. Driller remakrs hard auger from 11 ft and auger refusal at 24 ft. Residual soils.

GARNET GNEISS and QUARTZITE, gray and reddish brown , fine grained, moderately weathered.

Discontinuities are closely to moderately spaced , CR = 100%, RQD = 49% (first core run 4.8 ft)

CR = 100%, RQD = 80%

J-1

J-2

J-3

J-4

J-5

J-6

R-1

R-2

1.0

3.0

10.0

24.0

28.8

2-7-6-5

3-3-3-5

1-1-1-1

3-8-8-7

10-14-36-30

32-50/3"

N o.

Blue Ridge Parkway, Big Pine Creek Bridge #3

E le va tio n (f ee t)

3.75 in.

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

30 in.

140 lbs/Automatic

Penetrometer (PP in tsf)

Water Content %

Project Location:

Encountered at:

After

Northing: 1422493.9 Easting: 1005566.435

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Rock Core (RQD in %)

Standard Penetration Test Data

Project Datum:

(Blows / ft)

2653.2 ft

Undisturbed (UD)

5/19/16

R ec ft)

Project Name:

Surface Elevation:

Boring Location:

La ye r

D ep th ft)

Boring Began:

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Liquid Limit

SPT

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

At Completion:

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

HSA/NQ

B-2

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Overcast /54 F

T yp e

Weather:

SAMPLE

Plastic Limit

Upon completion of drilling operation, boring was backfilled with auger cuttings and gravels and cold-patched with asphalt.

Inspector:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Boring No.:

Groundwater Depth:

Sample Types:

BORING LOG

2 in.

5/19/16 D. Hutchins M. MastersOperator:

Abutment 2 (Southbound) hrs

16.5 ft

Remarks:

Auger Cuttings

G ra ph ic

L og

BLRI 2A16

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

D ep th S ca le ft)

R Q

D

S P

T b lo w s pe r in

B O

R

IN

G L

O

/2 6/

5:

M

P

R O

JE

C

T S

\B

LR

I\ 2A

\T

E C

H S

E R

V \G

E O

T E

C H

\S U

B S

U R

F A

C E

I N

V E

S T

IG

A

T

IO

N \B

O R

IN

G

L O

G S

\B

LR

I 2A

_B

P C

#3 _1

.G P

J

2652.2

2650.2

2643.2

2629.2

2624.4

Sheet: 1 of 2

3" girmay.weldegiorgis

CR = 100%, RQD = 80% (Continued)

CR = 100%, RQD = 78%

Bottom of borehole at 38.8 ft

R-2

R-3

33.8

38.8 N

o.

Blue Ridge Parkway, Big Pine Creek Bridge #3

E le va tio n (f ee t)

3.75 in.

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

30 in.

140 lbs/Automatic

Penetrometer (PP in tsf)

Water Content %

Project Location:

Encountered at:

After

Northing: 1422493.9 Easting: 1005566.435

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Rock Core (RQD in %)

Standard Penetration Test Data

Project Datum:

(Blows / ft)

2653.2 ft

Undisturbed (UD)

5/19/16

R ec ft)

Project Name:

Surface Elevation:

Boring Location:

La ye r

D ep th ft)

Boring Began:

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Liquid Limit

SPT

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

At Completion:

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

HSA/NQ

B-2

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Overcast /54 F

T yp e

Weather:

SAMPLE

Plastic Limit

Upon completion of drilling operation, boring was backfilled with auger cuttings and gravels and cold-patched with asphalt.

Inspector:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Boring No.:

Groundwater Depth:

Sample Types:

BORING LOG

2 in.

5/19/16 D. Hutchins M. MastersOperator:

Abutment 2 (Southbound) hrs

16.5 ft

Remarks:

Auger Cuttings

G ra ph ic

L og

BLRI 2A16

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

D ep th S ca le ft)

R Q

D

S P

T b lo w s pe r in

B O

R

IN

G L

O

/2 6/

5:

M

P

R O

JE

C

T S

\B

LR

I\ 2A

\T

E C

H S

E R

V \G

E O

T E

C H

\S U

B S

U R

F A

C E

I N

V E

S T

IG

A

T

IO

N \B

O R

IN

G

L O

G S

\B

LR

I 2A

_B

P C

#3 _1

.G P

J

2619.4

2614.4

Sheet: 2 of 2 girmay.weldegiorgis

0.9

0.4

1.5

0.9

Asphalt pavement and sublayers(1.0 ft)

SILTY SAND with some gravel, loose, tan and gray, moist. Fill

SILTY SAND with some organics , very loose, gray and black, wet. Fill

SAND and GRAVEL, medium dense, redish tan and gray, wet. Driller remarks hard augering from 12.5 ft , auger refusal at 13.3 ft.

GNEISS and QUARTZITE, gray and white , fine grained, moderately weathered. Discontinuities are closely to moderately spaced , CR = 100% (first core run 0.6 ft)

CR = 100%, RQD = 96%

UCS=5,875 psi

CR = 100%, RQD =78%

Bottom of borehole at 23.9 ft

J-1

J-2

J-3

J-4

R-1

R-2

R-3

1.0

5.0

7.0

13.3 13.9

18.9

23.9

4-3-3-5

4-5-3-3

1-1-2-2

5-12-14-8

N o.

Blue Ridge Parkway, Big Pine Creek Bridge #6

E le va tio n (f ee t)

3.75 in.

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

30 in.

140 lbs/Automatic

Penetrometer (PP in tsf)

Water Content %

Project Location:

Encountered at:

After

Northing: 1419480.809 Easting: 1002143.93

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Rock Core (RQD in %)

Standard Penetration Test Data

Project Datum:

(Blows / ft)

2613.1 ft

Undisturbed (UD)

5/20/16

R ec ft)

Project Name:

Surface Elevation:

Boring Location:

La ye r

D ep th ft)

Boring Began:

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Liquid Limit

SPT

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

At Completion:

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

HSA/NQ

B-1

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Overcast / 54 F

T yp e

Weather:

SAMPLE

Plastic Limit

Upon completion of drilling operation, boring was backfilled with auger cuttings and gravels and cold-patched with asphalt.

Inspector:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Boring No.:

Groundwater Depth:

Sample Types:

BORING LOG

2 in.

5/20/16 D. Hutchins M. MastersOperator:

North Abutment hrs

Remarks:

Auger Cuttings

G ra ph ic

L og

BLRI 2A16

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

D ep th S ca le ft)

R Q

D

S P

T b lo w s pe r in

B O

R

IN

G L

O

/2 6/

5:

M

P

R O

JE

C

T S

\B

LR

I\ 2A

\T

E C

H S

E R

V \G

E O

T E

C H

\S U

B S

U R

F A

C E

I N

V E

S T

IG

A

T

IO

N \B

O R

IN

G

L O

G S

\B

LR

I 2A

_B

P C

#6 .G

P J

2612.1

2608.1

2606.1

2599.8 2599.2

2594.2

2589.2

Sheet: 1 of 1 girmay.weldegiorgis

-080

1.4

0.8

1.0

0.1

Asphalt pavement and sublayers (1.3 ft)

SILTY SAND with some gravel, very loose to loose, tan and gray, moist. Fill

SAND and GRAVEL, very dense, tan and gray, moist.

Driller remarks hard augering from 9 ft, auger refusal at

10.1 ft. Residual soils.

GNEISS and QUARTZITE, gray and white , fine grained, moderately weathered. Discontinuities are closely to moderately spaced , CR = 80%, RQD = 74% (first core run 4.4 ft)

CR = 100%, RQD = 76%, RCT = 30 minutes

CR = 100%, RQD = 83%, RCT = 20 minutes

QUARTZITE, gray and white , fine grained, moderately weathered. Discontinuities are closely to moderately spaced CR = 100%, RQD = 80%, RCT = 23 minutes UCS=6,100 psi

J-1

J-2

J-3

J-4

R-1

R-2

R-3

R-4

R-5

1.3

9.0

10.1

14.5

19.5

24.5

29.5

6-6-4-3

1-1-3-1

1-3-6-7

50/1"

N o.

Blue Ridge Parkway, Big Pine Creek Bridge #6

E le va tio n (f ee t)

3.75 in.

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

30 in.

140 lbs/Automatic

Penetrometer (PP in tsf)

Water Content %

Project Location:

Encountered at:

After

Northing: 1419400.166 Easting: 1002103.392

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Rock Core (RQD in %)

Standard Penetration Test Data

Project Datum:

(Blows / ft)

2613.8 ft

Undisturbed (UD)

5/21/16

R ec ft)

Project Name:

Surface Elevation:

Boring Location:

La ye r

D ep th ft)

Boring Began:

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Liquid Limit

SPT

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

At Completion:

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

HSA/NQ

B-2

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Overcast / 54 F

T yp e

Weather:

SAMPLE

Plastic Limit

Upon completion of drilling operation, boring was backfilled with auger cuttings and gravels and cold-patched with asphalt.

Inspector:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Boring No.:

Groundwater Depth:

Sample Types:

BORING LOG

2 in.

5/21/16 D. Hutchins W. EnglandOperator:

South Abutment hrs

Remarks:

Auger Cuttings

G ra ph ic

L og

BLRI 2A16

Density, Color, Plasticity, Size, Proportions, Moisture

D ep th S ca le ft)

R Q

D

S P

T b lo w s pe r in

B O

R

IN

G L

O

/2 6/

5:

M

P

R O

JE

C

T S

\B

LR

I\ 2A

\T

E C

H S

E R

V \G

E O

T E

C H

\S U

B S

U R

F A

C E

I N

V E

S T

IG

A

T

IO

N \B

O R

IN

G

L O

G S

\B

LR

I 2A

_B

P C

#6 .G

P J

2612.5

2604.8

2603.7

2599.3

2594.3

2589.3

2584.3

Sheet: 1 of 2

1" girmay.weldegiorgis

CR = 69%, RQD = 22%, RCT = 28 minutes (Continued)

GNEISS with QUARTZITE seams, gray and white , fine grained, slightly weathered. Discontinuities are widley spaced CR = 100%, RQD = 100%, RCT = 34 minutes UCS=4,630 psi

CR = 100%, RQD = 98%

Bottom of borehole at 44.5 ft

R-5

R-6

R-7

34.5

39.5

44.5

N o.

Blue Ridge Parkway, Big Pine Creek Bridge #6

E le va tio n (f ee t)

3.75 in.

Boring Method:

Rock Core Diam:

Vane Shear

30 in.

140 lbs/Automatic

Penetrometer (PP in tsf)

Water Content %

Project Location:

Encountered at:

After

Northing: 1419400.166 Easting: 1002103.392

Caved at:

Hammer Drop:

Rock Core (RQD in %)

Standard Penetration Test Data

Project Datum:

(Blows / ft)

2613.8 ft

Undisturbed (UD)

5/21/16

R ec ft)

Project Name:

Surface Elevation:

Boring Location:

La ye r

D ep th ft)

Boring Began:

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Liquid Limit

SPT

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

At Completion:

Completed:

Hole Diameter:

HSA/NQ

B-2

Hammer Wt. & Type:

Overcast / 54 F

T yp e

Weather:

SAMPLE

Plastic Limit

Upon completion of drilling operation, boring was backfilled with auger cuttings and gravels and cold-patched with asphalt.

Inspector:

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Boring No.:

Groundwater Depth:

Sample Types:

BORING LOG