RSFP_TI_Final_Geotech_Roadway_Report.pdf

98468\TEMP10R033 Page ii of iv June 22, 2010 Copyright 2010 Kleinfelder

June 22, 2010 File No.: 98468 (1)

J.J. Liu, PE Arizona Department of Transportation Highways Division - Materials/Geotechnical Services 1221 North 21st Avenue, 068R Phoenix, Arizona 85009-3740

SUBJECT: Draft Geotechnical Report – Roadway I-40 Rancho Santa Fe Parkway Traffic Interchange ECS Contract No. 03-23, Task No. 18 Project No. 40 MO 057 TRACS No. H6814O1G Kingman, Mohave County, Arizona

Dear Mr. Liu:

Kleinfelder is pleased to present this Draft Geotechnical Report – Roadway to the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT), for the proposed Interstate 40 (I-40) Rancho Santa Fe Parkway Traffic Interchange (TI), located in Kingman, Arizona. The report presents our recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of roadway design and construction. Geotechnical recommendations for bridge and retaining wall foundations are presented in the “Draft Geotechnical Report - Foundations,” submitted by Kleinfelder under separate cover.

Based on the explorations and our experience in the general area, the alignment may be constructed as planned using conventional grading and foundation construction techniques. Recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of roadway design and construction are presented in the following report.

Recommendations provided in this report are contingent on the provisions outlined in the Additional Services and Limitations sections of this report. ADOT and design consultants should become familiar with these provisions in order to assess further involvement by Kleinfelder and other potential impacts to the proposed project.

98468\TEMP10R033 Page iv of iv June 22, 2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

1.2 Proposed Construction

1.3 Purpose and Scope of Services

2 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING

2.1 Subsurface Exploration

2.2 Laboratory Testing

3 SITE CONDITIONS

3.1 Geologic Setting

3.2 Site Surface Conditions

3.3 Subsurface Conditions

3.3.1 Rancho Santa Fe Parkway

3.3.2 Rancho Santa Fe Parkway TI

3.3.3 Rattlesnake Wash Bridge Widening

3.4 Groundwater Conditions

4 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 Grading

4.1.1 Permanent Slopes

4.1.2 Clearing and Grubbing

4.1.3 Earthwork

4.1.3.1 Fill Materials

4.1.3.2 Fill Placement and Compaction

4.1.4 Settlement

4.1.5 Shrink/Swell Evaluation

4.1.6 Water Requirements

4.2 Corrosion Potential

4.3 Pavements

5 CLOSURE

5.1 Limitations

5.2 Additional Services

6 REFERENCES

FIGURES

Figures 1 through 10 - Field Exploration Site Plans

APPENDICES

Appendix A - Field Study Appendix B - Laboratory Testing

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 1 of 20 June 22, 2010

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

This report presents the results of the geotechnical study for the proposed I-40 Rancho

Santa Fe Parkway TI project in Kingman, Arizona. This report provides geotechnical recommendations for design and construction of the roadway and drainage structures.

A separate report was prepared by Kleinfelder to address the geotechnical recommendations for design and construction of foundations for the new TI bridge structures and the widening of the Rattlesnake Wash Bridges.

1.2 Proposed Construction

Our understanding of the proposed construction described below is based on the Stage

III Submittal Project Plans, dated November 16, 2009, that were provided to us, and on information provided through correspondence and project progress meetings.

The I-40 Rancho Santa Fe Parkway TI project generally consists of construction of an approximately 3.7-mile length of new street named Rancho Santa Fe Parkway, and a new traffic interchange where the new street cross I-40, at approximately at milepost

56.6. The proposed Rancho Santa Fe Parkway will be a four- and six-lane arterial extending from Louise Avenue to Industrial Boulevard. Portland cement concrete pavement will be used Rancho Santa Fe Parkway at the TI, and at the ends of the ramps at Rancho Santa Fe Parkway.

The plan and profile sheets in the Stage III Submittal Project Plans indicate grading for the ramps will require cuts and fills in the range of approximately 15 to 22 feet and 3 to

5 feet, respectively. For Rancho Santa Fe Parkway, grading from Louise Avenue to approximately Sta. 212+00 (1200 feet north of the TI) will require cuts ranging from nil to approximately 27 feet, and north of Sta. 212+00 to the end of the project fills generally ranging from approximately 2 to 7 feet.

Four bridge structures will be constructed for the project: two I-40 bridges over Rancho

Santa Fe Parkway, and widening of the two existing I-40 bridges over Rattlesnake

Wash to accommodate the increased roadway width required for the new ramps on the

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 2 of 20 June 22, 2010 east side of the TI. The two bridges over Rancho Santa Fe Parkway will each have single 166-foot spans and will have cast-in-place, post-tensioned box girders. The grades of Rancho Santa Fe Parkway will be approximately 25 feet below the deck of the new bridges, which will have essentially the same elevation as the existing I-40.

The new structures for the widening of the existing I-40 bridges over Rattlesnake Wash will be five-span, cast-in-place, continuous slab structures, each with total lengths of approximately 164 feet, matching the geometry of the existing bridges. The eastbound

I-40 bridge will be widened approximately 12 to 16 feet to the south, and the westbound bridge will be widened approximately 25 to 35 feet to the north.

1.3 Purpose and Scope of Services

The purpose of our study was to obtain information on the subsurface conditions within the project limits and to develop recommendations related to the geotechnical aspects of roadway design and construction for the project. The scope of our services was outlined in our Scope of Services and Cost Estimate Contract dated September 15, 2008, and subsequent contract modifications, and included the following:

Vicinity map and site plan showing the boring locations;

Discussion of regional and local geology;

Logs of borings and test pits;

Results of laboratory tests;

Discussion of general subsurface conditions, as encountered in the field explorations;

Construction considerations; and

Recommendations for subgrade preparation, including earthwork, earthwork shrink/swell factors, suitability of on-site soils as structural fill, and/or alternatives including replacement with higher quality material, and compaction specifications.

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 3 of 20 June 22, 2010

2 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING

2.1 Subsurface Exploration

The subsurface exploration program consisted of excavating a total of 60 test pits to depths ranging from 3 to 16 feet and drilling 33 exploratory borings to depths ranging from approximately 20 to 82 feet. The test pits were excavated and logged by ADOT personnel from July 6 through August 12, 2009. In addition, ADOT partially completed one boring on April 20, 2009, but did not complete it because of a rig breakdown.

Kleinfelder completed the balance of the drilling program between November 17, 2009 and January 14, 2010. Bulk samples were obtained from the test pits and test borings.

Disturbed samples were obtained using a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) split-spoon sampler and relatively undisturbed ring samples were obtained using a California ring sampler.

The locations of the borings and test pits are shown on the Site Plans on Figures 1 through 10. A detailed description of the subsurface exploration program and the logs of the exploratory borings are presented in Appendix A.

2.2 Laboratory Testing

A laboratory testing program was completed on the soil samples obtained from the borings to obtain information on their classification and engineering properties. The laboratory testing program included the following tests:

Sieve analysis;

Atterberg limits;

Standard Proctor;

Sulfate and chloride content;

pH and resistivity;

Direct shear;

Expansion/Swell;

Compression;

R-Value; and

Moisture/Density.

A detailed description of the laboratory testing program and the laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B.

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 4 of 20 June 22, 2010

3 SITE CONDITIONS

3.1 Geologic Setting

The site is located within the Basin and Range Physiographic province of Arizona. The

Basin and Range Province is characterized by elongated northwest-southeast trending mountains separated by broad, alluvial basins. The mountains consist of Precambrian, Paleozoic, Mesozoic, and Cenozoic rocks that have been moderately to severely eroded. The basins have been filled with hundreds of feet of volcanic, alluvial, and lacustrine deposits. The basement rocks that comprise the floor of the valleys and the surrounding mountains consist of granites, schists and gneiss, as well as younger sedimentary and volcanic formations.

The site is located in the Hualapai Valley in northwestern Arizona and is bounded to the west by the Cerbat Mountains, east by the Peacock Mountains and south by the

Hualapai Mountains. The site has been mapped as underlain primarily by early

Pleistocene to late Pliocene surficial alluvial deposits (Reynolds, et al, 2000). These coarse-grained deposits are relicts of alluvial fans that generally form rounded ridges or flat surfaces that are deeply incised by streams. The deposits typically contain weak to strong cementation, and are composed of coarser grained sediment derived from the erosion of the surrounding mountain ranges. The geologic materials encountered during our geotechnical field study are consistent with the regionally mapped geology.

3.2 Site Surface Conditions

At the time of our field exploration, the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Parkway consisted of a graded dirt road and native desert. The ground surface along the proposed

Rancho Santa Fe Parkway was generally flat with a very gentle slope down towards the north. The alignment crosses Rattlesnake Wash at approximately Sta. 241. The banks of the wash were very steep to near vertical and approximately 8 to 10 feet high.

Vegetation along the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Parkway generally consisted of a sparse to moderate growth grass, weeds and bushes. Vegetation along the graded dirt road was generally cleared and non-existent.

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 5 of 20 June 22, 2010

The area of the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Parkway TI bridges is occupied by the existing four-lane, asphalt-paved I-40 on an approximately 10- to 15-foot-high fill embankment, approximately at the location of a shallow drainage that crosses the I-40 alignment. The highway at the TI bridge site appears to be on an approximately 10- to

15-foot fill embankment. Vegetation on the side slopes of the embankment and on the adjoining natural ground consisted of sparse grasses, weeds, cactus and small coniferous trees or shrubs.

The existing Rattlesnake Wash bridges are of cast-in-place concrete construction. The deck of the bridges appears to be approximately 6 to 10 feet above the bottom of

Rattlesnake Wash. The banks of the wash adjoining the bridge are protected with gabion baskets. Under the bridge, the banks are covered with shotcrete. The wash was dry at the time of our field observations. Cobbles and occasional boulders were present in the bottom of the wash. The bottom of the wash and adjoining areas outside the wash are sparsely vegetated with grasses, weeds, brush, and scattered small trees.

3.3 Subsurface Conditions

Presented below is a brief description of the subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings and test pits. The logs of the individual borings and pits are presented in Appendix A and should be viewed for detailed information on the conditions encountered.

3.3.1 Rancho Santa Fe Parkway

Test Pits 1 through 4, 9 through 16, 18, 20 through 32, 36 through 42, 50 through 52, 55 through 59, and 70 through 87; and Borings 5 through 8, 17, 19, 34, 35, 44 through

47, and 53 were excavated or drilled along the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Parkway and along the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Parkway TI on and off ramps. The test pits extended to depths ranging from approximately 3 to 16 feet; and the borings extended to depths ranging from approximately 20 to 31 feet. The subsurface conditions encountered in the test pits and borings generally consisted of silty sands, clayey sands, silty clayey sands, well graded sands, and occasional occurrences of sandy silty clays, sandy clays and gravels. The soils contained variable amounts of gravel and cobbles.

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 6 of 20 June 22, 2010

3.3.2 Rancho Santa Fe Parkway TI

Borings 60 through 65 were drilled through the I-40 roadway embankment at the proposed site of the Rancho Santa Fe Parkway TI. Embankment fill consisting of clayey and silty sand was encountered in the borings to depths ranging from approximately 10 to

15 feet. Sampler penetration tests in the fill suggest it is compact. Our borings did not determine the exact lateral or vertical extent of the embankment fill.

The fill was underlain by native granular soils consisting of silty sand, poorly- to well-graded sand with silt, silty clayey sand and clayey sand encountered to the maximum drilled depth of approximately 80 feet. Most of the sands contained varying amounts of gravel and were weakly cemented. Possible cobbles were noted in the deeper portions of the borings. Sampler penetration tests indicate the sands are medium dense to very dense.

3.3.3 Rattlesnake Wash Bridge Widening

Borings 66 through 69 and 88 through 95 were drilled at the proposed site of the

Rattlesnake Wash bridge widening. The subsurface conditions encountered in the borings drilled at the Rattlesnake Wash site predominantly consisted of silty sand, poorly to well graded sand with silt, silty clayey sand, clayey sand, and well graded gravel encountered to the maximum drilled depths of 40 to 50 feet. The soils contained occasional layers of cobbles and boulders. Cobble-size concrete rubble was encountered within the upper 5 feet of Borings 90 and 92. Practical auger refusal was encountered on the cobbles and/or concrete rubble in eight of the borings: within the upper 10 feet in Borings 67, 68, 88, 90 and 92 through 95, and at depths in the range of

27 to 40 feet in Borings 67, 89, 90 and 92.

3.4 Groundwater Conditions

Groundwater was not encountered in the test borings during the field exploration.

Regional groundwater maps indicate that the depth to groundwater ranged from approximately 131 to 328 feet below ground surface in the vicinity of the site according to the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) Hydrologic Map Report No. 21 dated June 1990 by S.J. Rascona. Based on available data from wells in the vicinity of the site, the depth to groundwater in recent years (from 1992 to 2006) was on the order

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 7 of 20 June 22, 2010 of approximately 480 to 670 feet below the ground surface. However, temporary perched groundwater levels may develop during periods of sustained precipitation or storm water runoff.

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 8 of 20 June 22, 2010

4 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of the roadway design and construction are presented below.

4.1 Grading

4.1.1 Permanent Slopes

We recommend that permanent unprotected cut and fill slopes be constructed at a gradient no steeper than 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). For cut and fill slopes with slope paving (protected), we recommend they be constructed at a gradient no steeper than

1.75:1. To reduce the potential for surface erosion, a berm or "V" ditch should be located at the top of slopes subject to significant overland water flows in order to intercept and redirect surface runoff.

The following table summarizes the slope recommendations presented above.

ROADWAY

FROM

(STATION)

TO

(STATION)

CUT AND FILL

SLOPES

(H:V)

PROTECTED CUT

AND FILL SLOPES

(H:V)

I-40 2920+00 2995+00 2:1 1.75:1

Rancho Santa Fe Parkway

182+00 377+00 2:1 1.75:1

4.1.2 Clearing and Grubbing

Prior to commencement of cutting and filling, the project limits should be cleared and grubbed per the requirements of Section 201 of the ADOT Standard Specifications.

Significant topsoil was not encountered during the subsurface exploration. However, any areas of topsoil containing should be removed. Cavities resulting from clearing and grubbing should be backfilled with suitable material compacted in accordance with the recommendations in this report.

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 9 of 20 June 22, 2010

4.1.3 Earthwork

All earthwork shall comply with Section 203 of ADOT Standard Specifications, and as discussed in the following report sections.

4.1.3.1 Fill Materials

General

All embankment fill placed within the project limits shall satisfy the requirements of

Section 203-10 of the ADOT Specifications. Fill placed within 3 feet below finished pavement subgrade elevation should have a resilient modulus value equal to or greater than the design resilient modulus value for the pavement structure.

Structure Backfill

Structural backfill should be used behind abutment walls and concrete retaining walls.

Structure backfill should consist of materials meeting the requirements of Section 203-

5.03(B)(1) of the ADOT Standard Specifications. The well graded sand encountered in

Borings 60 and 63A at the Rancho Santa Fe Parkway TI site will meet the specification for structure backfill; however, it appears to occur in isolated layers that may be difficult to separate at the time of excavation. At the Rattlesnake Wash site, the poorly to well graded sand with silt and well graded gravel encountered within the upper 15 feet of

Borings 66, 89, and 92 through 95 satisfy the specification for structure backfill.

4.1.3.2 Fill Placement and Compaction

For new fills placed on hillsides or against existing sloping embankment surfaces, the sloping areas should be benched as recommended in the ADOT Standard

Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction, Section 203-10.03(A).

Embankment fill materials should be uniformly moisture-conditioned to within 2 percentage points of the optimum moisture content, placed in horizontal lifts no greater than 8 inches in loose thickness, and compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density. Optimum moisture and maximum dry density should be determined in accordance with ARIZ 225a.

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 10 of 20 June 22, 2010

4.1.4 Settlement

Settlement of the embankment fills, using available site soils, should be in the order of about 1 percent of the embankment height. The majority of this settlement will occur during construction of the fill. However, if the embankments are placed below optimum moisture content and the embankments become saturated, post-construction settlements could be on the order of 2 to 3 percent of the embankment height.

4.1.5 Shrink/Swell Evaluation

Shrink swell calculations were performed from a correlation of in-situ dry density tests and laboratory tested maximum dry density results. The in-situ dry density test results were collected from nuclear density tests performed in the test pits during the field study and the maximum dry density results were calculated from standard proctor tests performed on the field collected bulk samples. An overall shrink factor of 15 percent can be used for the project.

To be consistent with the ADOT Roadway Group practice, ground compaction factors should not be applied in areas of overexcavation below new embankments. However, a ground compaction factor of 0.15 feet be applied for portions of new embankments placed outside the areas of overexcavation.

The following table summarizes the shrink/swell recommendations presented above.

ROADWAY

FROM

(STATION)

TO

(STATION)

GROUND

COMPACTION

(FT)

SHRINK

SWELL

I-40 2920+00 2995+00 0.15 15 n/a

Rancho Santa Fe Parkway

182+00 377+00 0.15 15 n/a

4.1.6 Water Requirements

Approximately 70 gallons of water per cubic yard should be estimated for compaction of base materials. Approximately 90 gallons of water per cubic yard should be estimated for compaction of subgrade materials.

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 11 of 20 June 22, 2010

The application of water estimated for subgrade materials is based on experience with similar material types as those anticipated for the project. The estimate includes a conservative overrun for losses due to seepage, evaporation, inadequate mixing, spillage, etc. Precipitation during and/or before construction may reduce the required amount of water.

4.2 Corrosion Potential

Laboratory resistivity tests were performed to provide information to evaluate the corrosivity of the on-site soils. A commonly accepted correlation between soil resistivity and corrosivity towards ferrous metals is provided below.

Resistivity in ohm-centimeters Corrosivity Category

0 to 1,000 severely corrosive 1,000 to 2,000 corrosive

2,000 to 10,000 moderately corrosive over 10,000 mildly corrosive

The minimum resistivities measured in the lab ranged from 805 to 9394 ohm-cm, indicating the on-site soils would be categorized as severely corrosive to moderately corrosive toward ferrous metals.

Protection from corrosion may be necessary for metallic conduits. While in dry field conditions of our arid environments, these soils may not contribute to significant corrosion; however, increases in soil moisture will generally result in reduced resistivities, and an increased the potential for corrosion. According to ADOT’s MPE&D

Manual the following types of culvert pipe may be used for various resistivity ranges:

For resistivities greater than 2000 ohm-cm, galvanized-coated steel AASHTO M-36, aluminum coated steel AASHTO M-36, aluminum alloy AASHTO M-196 or bituminous-coated AASHTO M-190 pipe should be used.

For resistivities between 500 and 1999 ohm-cm, aluminum alloy AASHTO M-196 or bituminous-coated AASHTO M-190 pipe should be used.

For resistivities less than 500 ohm-cm bituminous coated AASHTO M-190 pipe should be used.

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 12 of 20 June 22, 2010

The above-recommended culvert types are applicable for soils with a pH in the range of

5.0 to 9.0. Laboratory tests indicate pH values varied between 6.9 and 8.8.

Laboratory tests showed chloride contents between 0 ppm and 190 ppm indicating a low corrosion potential.

With the exception of one sample from Boring 19, the laboratory results for sulfate

(SO4) contents varied between 10 ppm and 100 ppm indicating a negligible potential exposure of Portland cement concrete to sulfates. The sulfate contents from the sample tested at Boring 19 was 220 ppm, which indicates a moderate potential exposure of Portland cement concrete to sulfates.

A summary of corrosion test results is presented below:

TEST

PIT/BORING

DEPTH

(feet)

STATION &

OFFSET

(I-40) pH

RESISTIVITY

(OHM-CM)

CHLORIDE

(PPM)

SULFATE

(PPM)

24 0.0 - 3.0 WB2915+00,100L 7.6 3,623 170 20

26 0.0 - 3.0 WB2923+57,81L 7.7 9,394 20 20

27 0.0 - 3.0 WB2934+00,100L 7.3 8,723 110 10

28 0.0 - 3.0 WB2937+20,100L 7.3 2,885 40 60

30 0.0 - 5.0 WB2943+84,94L 7.7 2,416 10 20

32 0.0 - 5.0 WB2950+00,140L 8.1 1,946 10 60

37 0.0 - 3.0 EB2926+75,100R 7.2 1,342 0 30

39 0.0 - 3.0 EB2943+30,100R 7.3 1,678 0 20

55 0.0 - 3.0 EB2968+25,160R 7.6 5,771 80 20

59 0.0 - 3.0 EB2992+00,100R 7.2 2,751 0 40

89 0.0 - 5.0 Rattlesnake Wash 8.1 7,582 0 10

95 5.0 - 9.0 Rattlesnake Wash 8.2 8,790 0 10

TEST

PIT/BORING

DEPTH

(feet)

STATION &

OFFSET

(Rancho Santa Fe Parkway) pH

RESISTIVITY

(OHM-CM)

CHLORIDE

(PPM)

SULFATE

(PPM)

13 0.0 - 3.0 NB215+60,0 7.3 7,381 10 20

17 0.0 - 5.0 240+20,15L 7.8 2,147 0 10

18 0.0 - 15.0 NB241+00,0 7.3 2,013 50 30

19 5.0 - 10.0 241+50,15R 8.0 805 190 220

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 13 of 20 June 22, 2010

TEST

PIT/BORING

DEPTH

(feet)

STATION &

OFFSET

(Rancho Santa Fe Parkway) pH

RESISTIVITY

(OHM-CM)

CHLORIDE

(PPM)

SULFATE

(PPM)

23 0.0 - 5.0 NB260+00,0 7.9 1,745 0 30

75 0.0 - 3.0 NB300+51,0 7.0 1,610 30 90

80 0.0 - 3.0 NB331+41,0 6.9 1,946 20 80

84 0.0 - 4.0 NB363+00,0 7.4 2,080 70 100

85 0.0 - 3.0 NB364+00,0 7.7 2,349 0 90

If corrugated metal pipe culverts are to be used, then the type of metal pipe and coating should be determined by the pH and resistivity of in-place materials listed above. The type of pipe and coating used should be based on the actual bedding and backfill soils around the pipe. Specific testing of particular pipe installations and pipe backfill was not performed.

4.3 Pavements

The ADOT Materials Pavement Design group will design the pavement sections for the proposed project. Our study for the pavement design was limited to providing the R-value test results and necessary compaction and earthwork factors for the roadway construction.

A summary of the correlated R-values and laboratory tested R-values for the project is presented in Appendix B. Sieve analyses and plasticity indices were conducted on the majority of the samples obtained from the site during the field explorations. R-value correlations were calculated for the majority of the surface and near surface samples.

The correlated R-values ranged from 15 to 97. Laboratory R-value tests were performed on 19 samples obtained from the test pits and borings conducted for the project. With the exception one test, ADOT performed the R-value tests for the project.

Kleinfelder performed one R-value test from a bulk surface sample from Boring 67.

The laboratory R-value test results ranged from 12 to 79.

We understand that based on review of the test results presented herein, the ADOT

Pavement Design Section has chosen a control R-value of 30 for the project.

Correlated R-values less than the control R-value, ranging from 15 to 25, were obtained

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 14 of 20 June 22, 2010 at Test Pits 37, 39, 58 and 84. Laboratory R-values of less than 30, ranging from 12 to

23, were obtained at the location of Test Pits/Borings 16, 25, 34, 46 and 59.

The laboratory test results of the sample obtained from 0 to 5 feet below the existing ground surface (bgs) at Test Pit 16 indicate a correlated R-value of 45 and a tested R-value of 19. At Test Pit 84, the laboratory test results of the sample obtained from 0 to

5 feet bgs indicate a correlated R-value of 25. Based on information provided by URS, Test Pit 16 is located at approximately Station NB235+00,0 and Test Pit 84 is located at approximately Station NB363+00,0. The existing grade at the locations of Test Pits 16 and 84 ranges between approximately 4 and 5 feet below the finished profile grade;

therefore, the R-values at the location of Test Pits 16 and 84 may be neglected provided the fill placed within the upper 3 feet of finished subgrade meets the ADOT specifications for this project including an R-value above 30.

The laboratory test results of the sample obtained from 0 to 5 feet bgs at Test Pit 25 indicate a correlated R-value of 32 and a tested R-value of 21. Based on information provided by URS, Test Pit 25 is located at approximately Station WB2918+00,81L.

However, the west end of the project is at Station 2920+00, which is 200 feet east of

Test Pit 25. The next pit to the east is Test Pit 26 at approximately Station

WB2923+57,81L, where the laboratory test results indicate a correlated R-value of 90.

Therefore, we recommend that it be assumed that no overexcavation will be required at the west end of westbound I-40.

The laboratory test results of the sample obtained from 0 to 5 feet bgs at the location of

Boring 34 indicate a correlated R-value of 32 and a tested R-value of 17. Based on information provided by URS, Boring 34 is located at approximately Station

2955+85,199L, which is approximately Station 28+00 on Ramp A (westbound I-40 entrance ramp). At the location of Boring 34, the existing ground is approximately 14 feet above finished profile grade; therefore, the referenced correlated and tested R-values are for soils 10 feet above the subgrade elevation. The correlated R-values of subsurface samples from depths of 10 and 20 feet in Boring 34 are 70 and 78, respectively. Because these samples were approximately 5 feet above and below the subgrade elevation and had correlated R-values significantly higher than the sample above, we recommend that it be assumed no overexcavation of the subgrade will be required in the area of Boring 34.

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 15 of 20 June 22, 2010

The laboratory test results of the sample obtained from 0 to 3 feet bgs at the location of

Test Pit 37 indicate a correlated R-value of 22. Based on information provided by URS, Test Pit 37 is located at approximately Station EB2926+75,100R and ground elevation at the location is at 3614 feet. This elevation is approximately 4 feet below the adjacent road grade. Therefore, we recommend it be assumed that no overexcavation will be required in the vicinity of Test Pit 37 provided the fill placed within the upper 3 feet of finished subgrade meets the ADOT specifications for this project including an R-value above 30.

The laboratory test results of the sample obtained from 0 to 3 feet bgs at the location of

Test Pit 39 indicate a correlated R-value of 22. Based on information provided by URS, Test Pit 39 is located at approximately Station EB2943+30,100R, which is approximately Station 17+00 on Ramp B (eastbound I-40 exit ramp). The existing grade at the location of Test Pit 39 is approximately 3 feet below the finished profile grade. Test Pit 38 is located at approximately Station EB2936+23,75R (or approximately Ramp B Station 10+00) and the laboratory test results of Test Pit 38 indicate a correlated R-value of 44. On Ramp B, Test Pits 40, 41 and 42 at approximately Stations 18+80, 22+00 and 24+00, respectively, follow Test Pit 39. The laboratory test results of the samples from Test Pits 40, 41 and 42 indicate correlated

R-values ranging from 42 to 66. We recommend overexcavating to remove the unsuitable materials within the upper 3 feet beneath finished subgrade along Ramp B from Stations 10+00 to 18+00. Additional sampling and testing may be conducted in order to further characterize the site soils and better identify the extent of the unsuitable materials and possibly reduce the area of overexcavation.

The laboratory test results of the sample obtained from 5 to 10 feet bgs at the location of Boring 46 indicate a correlated R-value of 66 and a tested R-value of 23. The correlated R-value was obtained based on a percent passing the sieve #200 of approximately 13 and a Plastic Index of 6. Based on information provided by URS, Boring 46 is located at approximately Station 2961+15,231L, which is approximately

Station 12+00 on Ramp C (westbound I-40 exit ramp). At the location of Boring 46, the existing ground is approximately 17 feet above finished profile grade; therefore, the referenced correlated and tested R-values are for soils approximately 12 feet above the subgrade elevation. Laboratory testing conducted on subsurface samples at depths of

15 and 23 feet at the location of Boring 46 indicate percent passing the sieve #200 raging from 30 to 36 percent and Plastic Indexes of 4. Correlated R-values for these

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 16 of 20 June 22, 2010 subsurface soils are approximately 52 and 56, which are above the design R-value of

30; however, we point out that the percent fines and plastic indexes of the tested R-value sample and the deeper samples are similar; therefore, we recommend over-excavating to remove unsuitable materials within the upper 3 feet beneath finished subgrade of the proposed new construction along Ramp C from approximately Station

10+00 to 15+00. Additional sampling and testing can be conducted in order to further characterize the site soils, better identify the extent of the unsuitable materials, and possibly reduce the area of over-excavation.

The laboratory test results of the surface samples (0 to 1 and 0 to 3 feet bgs) obtained at the location of Test Pits 58 and 59 indicate correlated R-values of 15 and 36, respectively, and a tested R-value of 12 for Test Pit 59. Based on information provided by URS, Test Pit 58 is located at approximately Station EB2989+00,78R; and Test Pit

59 is located at approximately Station 2992+00,100R. The existing grade at the location of Test Pits 58 and 59 appear to be at roughly the same as the finished profile grade. The test location adjacent to Test Pit 58 is Test Pit 57, and Test Pit 59 is the east-most test pit conducted during the field exploration. Test Pit 57 is located at approximately Station EB2981+69,78R and the laboratory test results of Test Pit 57 indicate a correlated R-value of 93. We recommend over-excavating to remove the unsuitable materials within the upper 3 feet beneath finished subgrade of proposed new construction adjacent to the southern edge of eastbound lanes of I-40 from approximately Station 2985+00 to 2995+00. We point out that this horizontal extent of removal is roughly half way to next location with an R-value greater than 30 from Test

Pit 58. If unsuitable soils extend past these limits, then the area of removal should extend further to remove other unsuitable soils. Additional sampling and testing can be conducted in order to further characterize the site soils, better identify the extent of the unsuitable materials, and possibly reduce the area of over-excavation.

As approved by the Engineer, the subgrade material that does not meet the subgrade acceptance chart at the locations listed in the following table over excavated to a depth of

3 feet below finished subgrade elevation and replaced with suitable material in accordance with the requirement of Section 203 “EARTHWORK” of the Arizona

Department Standard Specifications for road and bridge construction. By removing these materials, the design and construction control R-values can be kept uniform throughout the roadway length, and the potential for future moisture related subgrade and pavement failures is greatly reduced.

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 17 of 20 June 22, 2010

Due to the variations of the existing subgrade soils, it is recommended that the frequency of subgrade testing during construction be increased to at least one test for every 200 lineal feet in order to delineate the poor subgrade materials.

The 3-foot over-excavation areas described above are summarized in the following table:

REFERENCE

TEST PIT/BORING

I-40

LOCATION

FROM

(STATION)

TO

(STATION)

39 Ramp B 10+00 18+00

46 Ramp C 10+00 15+00

58 & 59 Eastbound - South Side 2985+00 2995+00

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 18 of 20 June 22, 2010

5 CLOSURE

5.1 Limitations

The recommendations contained in this report are based on our field explorations, laboratory tests, and our understanding of the proposed construction. The subsurface data used in the preparation of this report were obtained from the borings drilled during the field study. It is anticipated that some variations in the soil conditions will exist between the points explored. The nature and extent of variations may not be evident until construction occurs. If any conditions are encountered at this site that are different from those described in this report, our firm should be immediately notified so that we may make any necessary revisions to the recommendations contained in this report. In addition, if the scope of the proposed construction changes from that described in this report, our firm should also be notified. This report was prepared in accordance with the generally accepted standard of practice in Arizona at the time the report was written. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. It is the Client's responsibility to see that all parties to the project including the Designer, Contractor, Subcontractors, etc. are made aware of this report in its entirety. The use of information contained in this report for bidding purposes should be done at the Contractor's option and risk.

This report may be used only by the client and only for the purposes stated, within a reasonable time from its issuance, but in no event later than three years from the date of the report. Land or facility use, on and off-site conditions, regulations, or other factors may change over time, and additional work may be required with the passage of time. Based on the intended use of the report, Kleinfelder may require that additional work be performed and that an updated report be issued. Non-compliance with any of these requirements by the client or anyone else will release Kleinfelder from any liability resulting from the use of this report by any unauthorized party and client agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless Kleinfelder from any claim or liability associated with such unauthorized use or non-compliance.

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 19 of 20 June 22, 2010

5.2 Additional Services

The recommendations provided in this report are based on the assumption that an adequate program of tests and observations will be performed during the construction to verify compliance with these recommendations. These tests and observations should include, but are not necessarily limited to observations and testing during site preparation and earthwork and consultation as may be required during construction.

We also recommend that we review project plans and specifications to verify compatibility with our conclusions and recommendations. Additional information concerning the scope and cost of these services can be obtained from our office.

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 20 of 20 June 22, 2010

6 REFERENCES

Arizona Department of Transportation, 2008, Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction, Publication No. 31-066

Arizona Department of Transportation, Materials, Preliminary Engineering and Design Manual, Third Edition – March 1989; 1991 revisions.

Richard, S.M., Reynolds, S.J., Spencer, J.E., and Pearthree, P.A., comps., 2000, Geologic Map of Arizona: Arizona Geological Survey Map M-35, 1 sheet, scale 1:1,000,000, www.azgs.state.az.us/services_azgeomap.shtml

USGS, 2006, USGS Surface Water Data Annual Statistics for Arizona, http://waterdata.usgs.gov/az/nwis/sw.

FIGURES

APPENDIX A

Field Exploration

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 1 of 2 June 22, 2010

APPENDIX A

FIELD STUDY

A total of 59 test pits and 31 borings were drilled for the project. Under our original scope of work, ADOT was to perform the subsurface exploration with their drill rig and crew. After partial completion of Boring 63 (now designated 63A) on April 20, 2009, the rig experienced a mechanical breakdown. Because of drilling schedule conflicts that developed from the resulting delay, Kleinfelder was requested to complete the exploratory drilling program for the project. The locations of borings shown on Figures 1 through 10 were located by surveyors and by pacing from existing site features and, therefore, should be considered approximate.

The test pit excavation program was completed by ADOT from July 6, 2009 to August 12, 2009. The test pits were excavated to depths ranging from 3 to 16 feet with a CAT- 420E Rubber Tire Backhoe.

Kleinfelder performed the test boring drilling program beginning on November 17 and ending on January 17, 2010. The borings were advanced utilizing hollow stem auger and a CME-75, CME-80 and D-120 drill rigs subcontracted from Yellow Jacket Drilling and D&S Drilling. A total of 31 borings were advanced to depths ranging from 19.5 to

81.5 feet.

Borings 66 through 69 and 88 through 95 were drilled for the Rattlesnake Wash bridges. The borings were initially drilled using 8-inch hollow-stem auger by Yellow Jacket Drilling between November 30 and December 8, 2009. However, Borings 88, 89, 90, 93, 94 and 95 encountered practical auger refusal on cobbles and boulders at depths significantly shallower than their 50-foot planned depth. These borings were subsequently completed to their planned 50-foot depth by D&S Drilling Company using percussion drilling (Odex) techniques between January 11 and 17, 2010.

Relatively undisturbed samples of the subsurface materials were obtained using a California sampler with a 2.5-inch inside diameter (I.D.) and a 3.0-inch outside diameter (O.D.). Disturbed samples of soils were obtained using a split spoon Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler with a 1-3/8-inch inside diameter (I.D.) and a 2.0-inch outside diameter (O.D.), and as bulk samples of drill cuttings. The California and the SPT samplers were driven 12 and 18 inches, respectively, using a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The blow counts for successive 6-inch penetration intervals were recorded. The typical sampling interval was five feet. After the sampler was withdrawn from the boring, the recovered samples were removed, sealed to minimize moisture loss, and submitted to the laboratory.

A Kleinfelder Staff Professional continuously monitored all field study activities, visually classified the soils encountered in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS), prepared boring logs, and collected samples for laboratory examination and testing.

98468\TEMP10R033 Page 2 of 2 June 22, 2010

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

The following plates are attached and complete this appendix:

A1 Unified Soil Classification System A2 Log Key A3 Charts & Definitions A4 Terminology Used to Describe Soils A5 through A64 Logs of Borings and Test Pits

(Liquid limit greater than 50) between 5% and 12% passing No. 200 sieve require dual USCS symbols. (See KEY A-3 if provided)

SILTS AND CLAYS

OF MEDIUM-TO-HIGH PLASTICITY

ORGANIC CLAYS & ORGANIC SILTSOH

FAT CLAYS

INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY,

GRAVELS

GRAVELS WITH

OVER 12% PASSING

NO. 200 SIEVE

is larger than of material

GW

the #4 sieve) is larger than

(More than half of

DESCRIPTIONS

ORGANIC SILTS & ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS

coarse fraction

CH

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

A1

FIGURE

98468

I-40 Rancho Santa Fe TI/Rattlesnake Wash Arizona Department of Transportation ADOT Project No. I040-M0-56 Kingman, Arizona

WELL-GRADED SANDS, SAND-GRAVEL

SOILS

INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM

INORGANIC SILTS & VERY FINE SANDS,

FINE

(Liquid limit less than 50)

CLAYEY SANDS,

POORLY-GRADED SANDS, SAND-GRAVEL

MH

CLEAN GRAVELS

WITH LESS THAN 5%

PASSING NO. 200

SIEVE

SILTY SANDS,

SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS

SAND-GRAVEL-SILT MIXTURES

CLEAN SANDS WITH

LESS THAN 5%

PASSING NO. 200

SIEVE

TYPICAL

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SILT

INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR

is smaller than

GRAINED

the #4 sieve)

PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY CLAYS,CL

CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY

SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS,

SILTS AND CLAYS

SAND-GRAVEL-CLAY MIXTURES

COARSE

OF LOW PLASTICITY

Mar 2010

Reviewed By:

G E

O -K

E Y

_A 1_

S O

IL

R A

TT

LE

S N

A K

E W

A S

H T

I.G P

J

3/

/1

Copyright Kleinfelder, Inc. 2010 coarse fraction

SP

RP

the #200 sieve)

SANDS WITH OVER

12% PASSING NO.

200 SIEVE

Date:

is smaller than

SC

MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOL

OL

GP

of material (More than half

SOILS

ML

(More than half of the #200 sieve)

Project Number:

Note: Fine grained soils that plot within the hatched area on the Plasticity Chart, and coarse grained soils with

SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SILT-SAND

MIXTURES WITH LITTLE OR NO FINES

SM

SANDS

MIXTURES WITH LITTLE OR NO FINESSW

MIXTURES

USCS

MIXTURES

GRAINED

MIXTURES WITH LITTLE OR NO FINES

POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND

(More than half

MIXTURES WITH LITTLE OR NO FINES

WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND

GC

GM

CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY

Date:

Project Number:

Mar 2010

Reviewed By:

G E

O -K

E Y

_A 2_

LO

G

R

A

TT

LE

S

N A

K E

W A

S H

T I.G

P J

3/

/1

I-40 Rancho Santa Fe TI/Rattlesnake Wash Arizona Department of Transportation ADOT Project No. I040-M0-56 Kingman, Arizona

Copyright Kleinfelder, Inc. 2010

RP

LOG KEY

A2

FIGURE

98468

(1.4 inch inside diameter)

4. In general, Unified Soil Classification designations presented on the logs were evaluated by visual methods only. Therefore, actual designations (based on laboratory tests) may vary.

3. Logs represent general soil or rock conditions observed at the point of exploration on the date indicated.

2. No warranty is provided as to the continuity of soil or rock conditions between individual sample locations.

1. Lines separating strata on the logs represent approximate boundaries only. Actual transitions may be gradual.

GENERAL NOTES

(level where first encountered)

WATER LEVEL

(level after completion)

WATER LEVEL

(2.4 inch inside diameter)

HQ-3 SIZE CORE BARREL

SHELBY TUBE

SPLIT SPOON SAMPLER

STANDARD PENETRATION

(2-1/2 inch inside diameter)

RING (PORTER) SAMPLER

(2 inch inside diameter)

MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLER

BULK / GRAB SAMPLE

LOG SYMBOLS

5. NA = Not Analyzed

(3 inch outside diameter)

SM & SC -

REFER TO

PLASTICITY CHART

20 40 60 70 80 90

GM & GC -

REFER TO

PLASTICITY CHART

BORDERLINE - REQUIRES DUAL SYMBOLS BORDERLINE - REQUIRES DUAL SYMBOLS

GW AND GP - REFER TO CC AND CU SW AND SP - REFER TO CC AND CU

10 20 40 50 70 80 90

I-40 Rancho Santa Fe TI/Rattlesnake Wash Arizona Department of Transportation ADOT Project No. I040-M0-56 Kingman, Arizona

G E

O -K

E Y

_A 3_

C H

A R

T

R A

TT

LE

S N

A K

E W

A S

H T

I.G P

J

3/

/1

98468

FIGURE

A3

CHARTS & DEFINITIONS

RP

Date:

Reviewed By:

Mar 2010

Project Number:

ML or OL

Copyright Kleinfelder, Inc. 2010

No. 10 sieve to No. 40 sieve

SOIL FRACTION

Cobbles Coarse Gravel Fine Gravel Coarse Sand Medium Sand Fine Sand Fines

PARTICLE SIZE RANGE

300mm to 75mm (12in. to 3in.)

75mm to 19mm (3in. to 3/4in.)

LIQUID LIMIT

No. 4 sieve to No. 10 sieve

No. 40 sieve to No. 200 sieve less than No. 200 sieve

19mm (3/4in.) to No. 4 sieve

SILTS AND CLAYS - REFER TO PLASTICITY CHART

P

LA

S

TI

C

IT

Y

IN

D E

X

Boulders Greater than 300mm (12in.)

CL

CH

OH or MH

CL-ML

10 30 50 100

DEFINITIONS OF SOIL FRACTIONS

GRADATION CHART

P E

R C

E N

T P

A S

S

IN

G

S

IE

V E 50

30 60 100

PERCENT PASSING #4 SIEVE

PLASTICITY CHART

I-40 Rancho Santa Fe TI/Rattlesnake Wash Arizona Department of Transportation ADOT Project No. I040-M0-56 Kingman, Arizona

Project Number:

Mar 2010

Reviewed By:

G E

O -K

E Y

_A 4_

S O

IL

-T

E R

M

IN

O

LO

G Y

R

A

TT

LE

S

N A

K E

W A

S H

T I.G

P J

3/

/1

Copyright Kleinfelder, Inc. 2010

RP

TERMINOLOGY USED TO DESCRIBE SOILS

A4

FIGURE

98468Date:

0 - 4

5 - 8

9 - 15

16 - 30

31 - 50

51+

0 - 2

3 - 4

5 - 8

9 - 15

16 - 30

31+

Relative ConsistencyN

3. Terms for description of clays which are saturated or near saturation.

Very loose

Loose

Medium dense

Dense

Very dense

0 - 4

5 - 10

11 - 30

31 - 50

51+

Relative DensityN

Very soft soft

Moderately firm

Firm

Very firm

Hard

Very soft soft

Moderately stiff

Stiff

Very Stiff

Hard

Relative FirmnessN

1. Terms for description of partially saturated and/or cemented soils including clays, cemented granular materials, silts and silty and clayey granular soils.

The standard penetration resistance (N) in blows per foot is obtained by the ASTM D1586 procedure using 2" O.D., 1 3/8" I.D. samplers.

TERMINOLOGY USED ON THE BORING LOGS TO DESCRIBE

THE FIRMNESS, DENSITY, OR CONSISTENCY OF SOILS

2. Terms for description of cohesionless, uncemented sands and sand-gravel mixtures.

D E

P

TH

(f t)

D ry

D en si ty

(p cf

S am pl e

In te rv al

P la st ic ity In de x

Li qu id L im it

DESCRIPTION

#2

S ie ve

98468

Elevation (ft):

Boring Location:

E

LE

V A

TI

O

N (f

t) Drilling Company:

21.6

G ra ph ic al L og

23 SC-SM

Te st s

4 89

Stopped excavating at about 5.0 feet.

No groundwater encountered in test pit.

Silty Clayey Sand, cobbles observed, some gravel, tan, dry, low plasticity, firm, moderately cemented.

U S

C S

C la ss ifi ca tio n

P as si ng

C on tin uo us P en

FIELD

M oi st ur e

R es is ta nc e

(b pf

B lo w C ou nt

0.0 to 5.0 feet

#4 S ie ve

LABORATORY

P as si ng

O th er

C on te nt

LOG OF TEST PIT 1

24" wide bucket

FIGURE

A5

Copyright Kleinfelder, Inc. 2010

Project Number:

I-40 Rancho Santa Fe TI/Rattlesnake Wash Arizona Department of Transportation ADOT Project No. I040-M0-56 Kingman, ArizonaMar 2010

Reviewed By: RP

Date:

G E

O _A

D O

T_ E

W /E

L_ R

R

A

TT

LE

S

N A

K E

W A

S H

T I.G

P J rk at ak o@ kl ei nf el de r.c om

/2 9/

7/21/2009

Dir/Station & Offset:

Struckmeyer BackhoeHole Diameter (in):

Groundwater (ft):

5.0

Date Completed:

NB 182+00,0

Date Started:

3,699.83

7/21/2009

Total Depth (ft):

Equipment:

No Free Groundwater Encountered n/aHammer Type:

ADOT

Drilling Method:

Logged By:CAT 420E

P

TH

(f t)

D ry

D en si ty

(p cf

S am pl e

In te rv al

P la st ic ity In de x

Li qu id L im it

DESCRIPTION

#2

S ie ve

98468

24" wide bucket Elevation (ft):

Boring Location:

Drilling Company:

P as si ng

20.0

0.0 to 5.0 feet

28 SM

R es is ta nc e (b pf

Te st s

Stopped excavating at about 5.0 feet.

No groundwater encountered in test pit.

Silty Sand, cobbles observed, some gravel, tan, dry, firm, low plasticity, moderately cemented.

R-value at 300 psi = 62

#4 S ie ve

C on tin uo us P en

FIELD

M oi st ur e C on te nt

G ra ph ic al L og

U S

C S

C la ss ifi ca tio n

E

LE

V A

TI

O

N (f t)

LABORATORY

P as si ng

O th er

B lo w C ou nt

FIGURE

RP

Copyright Kleinfelder, Inc. 2010

Project Number:

I-40 Rancho Santa Fe TI/Rattlesnake Wash Arizona Department of Transportation ADOT Project No. I040-M0-56 Kingman, ArizonaMar 2010

Reviewed By:

A6

Date:

G E

O _A

D O

T_ E

W /E

L_ R

R

A

TT

LE

S

N A

K E

W A

S H

T I.G

P J rk at ak o@ kl ei nf el de r.c om

/2 9/

5.0

No Free Groundwater Encountered

LOG OF TEST PIT 2

Struckmeyer Backhoe

7/21/2009

7/21/2009Date Completed:

NB 184+00,0

Date Started:

3,695.05 Hole Diameter (in):

Total Depth (ft):

Equipment:

n/a

Dir/Station & Offset:

Groundwater (ft):

ADOT

Drilling Method:

Hammer Type:

P as si ng

S am pl e

In te rv al

D en si ty

(p cf

D ry

D E

P

TH

(f t)

Li qu id L im it

E

LE

V A

TI

O

N (f t)

DESCRIPTION

C on tin uo us P en

FIELD

M oi st ur e C on te nt

B lo w C ou nt

U S

C S

C la ss ifi ca tio n

0.0 to 8.0 feet

98468

P la st ic ity In de x

P as si ng

#2

S ie ve

17.5 35.9

853.698.7

#4 S ie ve

Max Dry Den=118.0pcf Opt Moist = 12.1%

Stopped excavating at about 8.0 feet.

No groundwater encountered in test pit.

Silty Sand, cobbles observed, with gravel, tan, dry, firm, low plasticity, moderately cemented.

Clayey Sand, with cobbles, with gravel, light tan, dry, soft, medium plasticity, moderately cemented.

O th er Te st s

G ra ph ic al L og

SM

SC

LABORATORY

R es is ta nc e

(b pf

FIGURE

RP

LOG OF TEST PIT 3

Drilling Company:

Date:

Project Number:

I-40 Rancho Santa Fe TI/Rattlesnake Wash Arizona Department of Transportation ADOT Project No. I040-M0-56 Kingman, ArizonaMar 2010

Reviewed By:

G E

O _A

D O

T_ E

W /E

L_ R

R

A

TT

LE

S

N A

K E

W A

S H

T I.G

P J rk at ak o@ kl ei nf el de r.c om

/2 9/

Copyright Kleinfelder, Inc. 2010

A7

Total Depth (ft):

Date Completed:

NB 185+00,0

7/21/2009

3,692.23 Hole Diameter (in): 24" wide bucket

Elevation (ft):

Boring Location: Date Started:

Equipment:ADOT Drilling Method:

8.0n/a

Logged By:CAT 420E

Hammer Type:

Groundwater (ft): 7/21/2009No Free Groundwater Encountered Dir/Station & Offset:

Struckmeyer Backhoe

0.0 to 16.0 feet

B lo w C ou nt

Li qu id L im it

P la st ic ity In de x

S am pl e

In te rv al

D en si ty

(p cf

D ry

#2

S ie ve

E

LE

V A

TI

O

N (f t)

P as si ng

C on tin uo us P en

FIELD

M oi st ur e

Boring Location:

D E

P

TH

(f t)

Drilling Company:

98468

DESCRIPTION

U S

C S

C la ss ifi ca tio n

C on te nt

3.1

14.9

Stopped excavating at about 16.0 feet.

No groundwater encountered in test pit.

Well-Graded Sand,…