S02 - 815IC3040 - Geotech Report.pdf

EARTHWORK SHORT FORM APPENDIX

GEOTECHNIAL ENGINEERING REPORT

ECS Engineers of New York, PLLC Geotechnical Engineering Report

Long Island National Cemetery

2040 Wellwood Ave Wyandanch, NY 11798

ECS Project Number 95:1020

October 23, 2019

October 23, 2019 Mr. Jason Gerhart, P.E.

Gordon 148 S. Queen Street Suite 201 Martinsburg, WV 25401

ECS Project No. 95:1020

Reference: Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Services

Wyandanch, NY

Dear Mr. Gerhart.

ECS Mid-Atlantic, LLC (ECS) has completed the subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering analyses for the above-referenced project. Our services were performed in general accordance with our Task Order REF:3328-0401 dated July 23, 2019. This report presents our understanding of the geotechnical aspects of the project along with the results of the field exploration, laboratory testing, and our design and construction recommendations.

It has been our pleasure to be of service Gordon during the design phase of this project. We would appreciate the opportunity to remain involved during the continuation of the design phase, and we would like to provide our services during construction phase operations as well to verify the assumptions of subsurface conditions made for this report. Should you have any questions concerning the information contained in this report, or if we can be of further assistance to you, please contact us.

Respectfully submitted, ECS Engineers of New York, PLLC

J. Matthew Carrol, P.E. Salvatore V. Fiorentino, P.E.

Principal Engineer Principal Engineer mcarroll@ecslimited.com sfiorentino@ecslimited.com

Long Island National Cemetery October 23, 2019 ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.0 INTRODUCTION

General Scope of Services Authorization

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

Project Location Proposed Construction

3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION

FIeld Exploration Program

Boring Data Regional/Site Geology Site Physiography Soil Survey Mapping Subsurface Stratigraphy Groundwater Observations

4.0 LABORATORY TESTING

5.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

Foundation Design Floor Slabs Site Retaining Walls Seismic Design Characteristics Site Design Considerations

Pavement Sections Flexible Pavement Design Rigid Pavement

6.0 SITE CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS

Subgrade Preparation

Stripping and Grubbing Proofrolling Subgrade Stabilization

Earthwork Operations Structural Fill Materials Existing Fill Proposed Fill Slopes

Utility Installations General Construction Considerations

7.0 CLOSING

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page ii

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Figures

Site Location Map

Geology Map

Exploration Location Plan

Soil Survey Map

Appendix B – Field Operations

Boring Logs

Boring Log Reference Notes

Appendix C – Laboratory Results

Laboratory Testing Summary

Atterberg Limits

Grain Size Analysis

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The geotechnical exploration was performed for the planned development of two (2) new storage buildings located at the Long Island National Cemetery in Wyandanch, New York. The purpose of this study was to provide geotechnical information for the design of the proposed buildings, associated parking areas, and site work. This exploration was completed by performing a total of five (5) exploratory borings.

Generally, the borings encountered topsoil underlain by fill. The fill encountered ranged in thickness from 4.0 to 20.0 feet when encountered. Alluvial sand was encountered beneath the fill. Auger refusal was not encountered.

The proposed storage buildings can be supported by conventional shallow foundations consisting of column or strip footings bearing on approved existing soils or new structural fill. The foundations can be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 3,000 psf based on anticipated design loads.

Groundwater was not encountered in any of the borings and should not be a concern during construction.

Most of the on-site soils anticipated to be excavated are likely to consist of medium dense to dense alluvial sands with gravel. Some clayey fill material was encountered during the exploration. All fine-grained soils encountered may be sensitive to moisture and will degrade quickly when wet. The excavated soils are anticipated to be suitable for use as structural fill provide they are properly moisture conditioned.

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 2

1.0 INTRODUCTION

GENERAL

The purpose of this study was to provide geotechnical information for the proposed storage facilities, improvements, and repairs at Long Island National Cemetery in Long Island, NY.

The recommendations developed for this report are based on project information supplied by the Department of Veterans Affairs and the National Cemetery Administration. This report contains the results of our subsurface explorations and laboratory testing programs, site characterization, and engineering analyses for the overall site development.

SCOPE OF SERVICES

Characterization of the subsurface conditions at this site is critical to the design development process.

As requested, we have completed testing and exploration for characterization of the site for structural and geotechnical earthwork recommendations. The scope of work for this phase of the project included exploratory borings within the proposed location of the proposed storage facilities.

This report discusses our exploratory and testing procedures, presents our findings and evaluations and includes the following:

A brief review and description of our field and laboratory test procedures and the results of testing conducted.

A review of surface topographical features and site conditions.

A review of area and site geologic conditions.

A review of subsurface soil stratigraphy with pertinent available physical properties.

Final copies of our boring logs.

Recommendations for site preparation and construction of compacted fills, including an evaluation of on-site soils for use as compacted fills.

Recommended allowable bearing pressure(s).

Design and construction recommendations for below-grade wall construction.

Evaluation and recommendations relative to groundwater control.

AUTHORIZATION

Our services were provided in accordance with our Task Order REF:3328-0401 dated July 23, 2019.

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 3

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

PROJECT LOCATION

The project site is located at the approximate physical address 2040 Wellwood Ave, Wyandanch, New York 11798. The site is gently sloping south, with a topographic relief of approximately 25 feet.

Refer to Figure 2.1.A and the Site Location Map in Appendix A for the extents of the project site.

Figure 2.1.A – Site Location

PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

It is our understanding that the proposed construction will consist of a new 65’ x31’ material storage building comprised of four (4) bays, two (2) for spoils, one (1) for topsoil, and one (1) for headstone storage with gas and power supply for radiant heat, and a concrete apron around material storage bays.

A new tool storage building, nominally 40’x25’ in size, is proposed to replace the existing storage currently provided by temporary trailers/connex boxes. The storage building will have electric for lighting, no water, and no HVAC. A second site, located on the northeast edge of the cemetery, will be regraded and is scheduled to include a heavy duty drive used for maintenance, storage, and construction lay down area. The ultimate future use will include gravesites. Areas of cut in this location are proposed to be as large as approximately 9 feet in thickness. Areas of fill in this located are proposed to be as large as approximately 3 feet in thickness.

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 4

3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION

FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM

The field exploration was planned with the objective of characterizing the project site in general geotechnical and geological terms and to evaluate field and laboratory data to assist in the design of the foundations for the proposed facility renovations, improvements and repairs.

Boring Data

The subsurface conditions were explored by drilling five (5) test borings. A truck-mounted drill rig was utilized to drill the test borings. The five (5) test borings were planned to be advanced to a depth of 20 feet, or auger refusal, whichever occurred first. Subsurface explorations were completed under the general supervision of an ECS Field Geologist.

Boring locations were identified in the field by ECS utilizing a survey grade Global Positioning System (GPS) with sub-meter accuracy. The approximate as-drilled boring locations are shown on the Exploration Location Plan in Appendix A. Ground surface elevations noted on our boring logs were interpolated from the publically available topographic information.

Standard penetration tests (SPTs) were conducted in the borings at regular intervals in general accordance with ASTM D 1586. Small representative samples were obtained during these tests and were used to classify the soils encountered. The standard penetration resistances obtained provide a general indication of soil shear strength and compressibility

A summary of the boring data is included in the table below.

Table 3.1.1.A – Summary of Boring Data

Boring Location

Surface Elevation

(Feet)1

Drilled Depth

Depth (Feet)

Elev.

(Feet)

B-1 102 20.0 82.0

B-2 103 20.0 83.0

B-3 101 20.0 81.0

B-4 103 20.0 83.0

B-5 97 20.0 77.0

Note1: Elevations were obtained from Google Earth

The results of the subsurface exploration, along with the Exploration Location Plan, are included within the Appendix of this report.

REGIONAL/SITE GEOLOGY

Based on the Geologic Map of New York, provided by the USGS file nygeol.kmz, site consists of the Monmouth Group, Matawan Group and Magothy Formation. The Monmouth Group, Matawan Group and Magothy Formation consists of silty clay, glauconitic sandy clay, sand and gravel.

An overview of the general site geology is illustrated in Figure 3.2.A below.

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 5

Figure 3.2.A

Geologic map for Figure 3.2.A obtained from the Commonwealth of New York Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Interactive Geologic Map website, https://mrdata.usgs.gov/geology/state/state.php?state=NY

SITE PHYSIOGRAPHY

The site is located within the Atlantic Coastal Plain Physiographic Region. According to the NYSDOT Geotechnical Design Manual, the Atlantic Coastal Plain Physiographic Region represents the end or terminal moraines of a glacier and the associated outwash aprons beyond the moraine. The entire province has extremely low relief. On Long Island, the highest elevations are a little more than 400 ft., the lowest at sea level. Bedrock, generally absent from Long Island and is buried under glacial deposits.

SOIL SURVEY MAPPING

Our review of the Soil Survey (USDA - Natural Resources Conservation Service websoilsurvey.ncrs.usda.gov), revealed that the proposed site is mapped as Haven Loam (0-2% slopes), Plymouth Loamy Sand (0-3% slopes) and Riverhead Sandy Loam (0-3% slopes). These soil types are described as having the following properties.

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 6

Table 3.4.A – Soil Mapping Summary

Mapped Soil Unit

Soil Unit

Symbol

Origin/ Type

Depth to Restrictive

Feature

Depth to Water Table

Hydrologic Soil

Group

KSat (in/hr)

Haven Loam (0- 2% slopes)

HaA

Loamy glaciofluvial deposits over sandy and gravelly glaciofluvial deposits

> 80 inches > 80 inches B Moderately high to high (0.20-1.98)

Plymouth Loamy Sand (0-3% slopes) PlA

Acid sandy glaciofluvial or deltaic deposits

> 80 inches > 80 inches A High to very high (5.95-

19.98)

Riverhead Sandy Loam (0-3% slopes) RdA

Loamy glaciofluvial deposits overlying stratified sand and gravel > 80 inches > 80 inches A

High (1.98- 5.95)

Soil mapping of the site vicinity is presented in Appendix A.

SUBSURFACE STRATIGRAPHY

The subsurface conditions encountered were generally consistent with published geological mapping.

The following sections provide generalized characterizations of the soil strata encountered during our subsurface exploration. For subsurface information at a specific location, refer to the Test Boring Logs or the Subsurface Profile in Appendix B.

Table 3.5.A – Subsurface Stratigraphy

GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS

During exploration, groundwater was not encountered, and thus the groundwater table should not be a major concern during construction. Observations for groundwater were performed for each soil boring location during our exploration program. It should be noted that the groundwater elevation will be highly affected by precipitation; therefore, higher or lower groundwater levels may be encountered depending on the time of year and recent precipitation events.

Stratum Description

Surficial Material

The surficial material is 6 inches of asphalt in B-1 and B-2.

I

Generally, FILL, sampled as LEAN CLAY WITH GRAVEL (CL) (B-1, B-2, B-5)

Varying amounts of sand and silt

Stiff to Very Hard

Moist

Light Brown to Dark Brown

Extended to depths below surficial material to approximately 4 feet to 20 feet below existing grade when encountered.

B-5 was performed in an area that has historically been used as a fill stockpile

II

Generally, (SP) SAND WITH GRAVEL

Varying amounts of silt and clay

Medium Dense to Very Dense

Moist

Brown, Light Brown, White

Extended to 20 feet below existing grade

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 7

4.0 LABORATORY TESTING

The laboratory testing performed by ECS for this project consisted of selected tests performed on samples obtained during our field exploration operations. The following paragraph briefly discusses the laboratory testing program. Classification and index property tests were performed on representative soil samples obtained from the test borings in order to aid in classifying soils according to the Unified Soil Classification System and to quantify and correlate engineering properties.

An experienced field geologist visually classified each soil sample from the test borings on the basis of texture and plasticity in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) and ASTM D-2488 (Description and Identification of Soils-Visual/Manual Procedures). After classification, the Field Geologist grouped the various soil types into the major zones noted on the boring logs in Appendix B.

The group symbols for each soil type are indicated in parentheses following the soil descriptions on the boring logs. The stratification lines designating the interfaces between earth materials on the boring logs are approximate; in situ, the transitions may be gradual.

Laboratory testing performed specifically for this project included moisture content determination, grain size analysis, and Atterberg Limits. A summary of the laboratory testing is located below.

Table 4.A – Summary of Soil Classification Testing Results

Boring Depth (Feet)

USCS

Classification

Water Content

Atterberg Limits Grain Size

Liquid Limit

Plastic Index

%Gravel %Sand %Silt %Clay

B-1 4.0-6.0 SM 5.4 NP NP 29.4 57.8 12.8

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 8

5.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

The following sections provide recommendations for foundation design, soil supported slabs, pavements, and seismic design parameters.

FOUNDATION DESIGN

The two (2) storage buildings are planned to be constructed in the area of borings B-1 and B-2. Provided subgrades and structural fills are prepared as discussed herein, the proposed structures can be supported by conventional shallow foundations consisting of individual column footings and continuous wall footings. The design of the foundation shall utilize the following parameters:

Table 5.1.1.A Foundation Design Parameters Design Parameter Column Footing Wall Footing

Net Allowable Bearing Pressure1 3,000 psf 3,000 psf

Acceptable Bearing Soil Material Stratum II or Structural

Fill Stratum II or Structural

Fill

Minimum Width 24 inches 18 inches

Minimum Footing Embedment Depth (below slab or finished grade)

36 inches 36 inches

Estimated Total Settlement (max.) 1 inch 1 inch

Estimated Differential Settlement Less than 0.5 inches between columns

Less than 0.5 inches over 50 feet

Note1: Net allowable bearing pressure is the applied pressure in excess of the surrounding overburden soils above the base of the foundation.

Most of the soils at the foundation bearing elevation are anticipated to be suitable for support of the proposed structures. If soft or unsuitable soils, such as existing fill, are observed at the footing bearing elevations, the unsuitable soils should be undercut and removed. Existing fill was encountered up to 4 feet in areas explored and some undercutting of the fill soils and footing subgrade should be expected.

Any undercut should be backfilled with compacted MYSDOT Item 4 aggregate to the designed bearing elevation. All foundation undercut excavations should be widened 1 foot on each side for every foot of over excavation (equivalent to a 1(H):1(V) slope for improved bearing area) where overexcavaton exceeds 2 feet in depth. The foundations bearing on suitable material can be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 3,000 psf based on anticipated dead load and design live load.

FLOOR SLABS

It appears that the slabs for the structures will bear on new structural fill material or existing clay material. These soils area anticipated to be suitable for support of slabs-on-grade. Areas of existing unsuitable fill, soft soils, or other unsuitable soils should be removed and replaced with compacted structural fill in accordance with the recommendations included in this report. The slab subgrade should be evaluated by proofrolling in accordance with Section 6.2.2. The following graphic depicts our soil-supported slab recommendations:

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 9

Figure 5.2.A

1. Drainage Layer Thickness: 6 inches minimum

2. Drainage Layer Material: AASHTO #57 Stone

3. Subgrade compacted to 95% maximum dry density per ASTM D698

Subgrade Modulus: Provided the evaluation bearing stratum and Granular Drainage Layer are completed per the recommendations discussed herein, the slab may be designed assuming a modulus of subgrade reaction, k1, of 150 pci (lbs/cu. inch). The modulus of subgrade reaction value is based on a 1 foot by 1 foot plate load test basis.

Slab Isolation: Ground-supported slabs should be isolated from the foundations and foundation-supported elements of the structure so that differential movement between the foundations and slab will not induce excessive shear and bending stresses in the floor slab. Where the structural configuration prevents the use of a free-floating slab, the slab should be designed with suitable reinforcement and load transfer devices to preclude overstressing of the slab.

SITE RETAINING WALLS

We recommend that all below grade and site retaining walls be designed to withstand lateral earth pressures and surcharge loads from soil. To accomplish a drained condition, the walls will need to incorporate appropriate drainage materials including a foundation drain and clean stone (AASHTO #57).

We recommend that walls that are restrained from movement at the top be designed for a linearly increasing lateral earth pressure.

The engineering soil parameters below can be used for the design of these walls assuming positive foundation drainage is provided to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressure. The table also assumes that the walls will be backfilled with Structural fill materials brought in from off-site. The fills should be granular materials that classify as Silty SAND (SM) or more granular soil types having an internal angle of friction of 30 degrees and a unit weight of 120 pcf. Wall backfill should not consist of clayey soil types.

The majority of the on-site soils will not be suitable for wall backfil

Table 5.3.A – Engineering Soil Parameters

Parameter Structural Fill

Moist unit weight (pcf) 120

Friction angle (degrees) 30

Cohesion (psf) 0

Active Earth Pressure Coefficient, Ka 0.33

At-Rest Earth Pressure Coefficient, Ko 0.50

Concrete Slab Vapor Barrier

Granular Capillary Break/Drainage Layer

Compacted Subgrade

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 10

Parameter Structural Fill

Passive Earth Pressure Coefficient, Kp 3.00

Coefficient of Friction for Sliding 0.30

The following Figure depicts the suggested lateral earth pressure condition for a “drained” wall condition with restrained wall tops:

Figure 5.3.A – Retained Earth Diagram

Any surcharge loads imposed within a 45 degree slope of the base of the wall should be considered in the below grade wall design.

Backfill of foundation walls and retaining walls should consist of granular material. The backfill materials should be placed in 8-inch thick loose layers and compacted to 95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density. We recommend that backfill directly behind the walls be compacted with hand-held compactors. Heavy compactors and grading equipment should not be allowed to operate within 10 feet of the wall during backfilling to avoid developing excessive temporary or long-term lateral soil pressures. We recommend that a representative of the geotechnical engineer be present to monitor

H (feet)

Surcharge Load (psf)

Lateral Earth Pressure = 60 H psf (For below grade walls restrained from movement at top and bottom, drained conditions presumed;

Internal angle of friction of 30 degrees and a unit weight of 120 pcf.

This diagram is not suitable for the design of Support of Excavation or temporary shoring systems.

Horizontal Pressure from Surcharge = 0.5 x Vertical Surcharge

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 11 foundation excavations and fill placement. Below grade walls should also be designed to resist adjoining surcharge loads from foundations, equipment, and/or vehicle traffic located in the zone of influence of the wall.

SEISMIC DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS

Seismic Site Classification: The International Building Code (IBC) requires site classification for seismic design based on the upper 100 feet of a soil profile. Where site specific data are not available to a depth of 100 ft, appropriate soil properties are permitted to be estimated by the registered design professional preparing the soils report based on known geologic conditions. Three (3) methods are utilized in classifying sites, namely the shear wave velocity (vs) method; the undrained shear strength (su) method;

and the Standard Penetration Resistance (N-value) method.

The seismic site class definitions for the weighted average of shear wave velocity or SPT N-value in the upper 100 feet of the soil profile are shown in the following table:

Table 5.4.A – Seismic Site Classification Site

Class Soil Profile Name

Shear Wave Velocity, Vs, (ft./s)

N value (bpf)

A Hard Rock Vs > 5,000 fps N/A

B Rock 2,500 < Vs ≤ 5,000 fps N/A

C Very dense soil and soft rock 1,200 < Vs ≤ 2,500 fps >50

D Stiff Soil Profile 600 ≤ Vs ≤ 1,200 fps 15 to 60

E Soft Soil Profile Vs < 600 fps <15

The subsurface exploration at this site included drilling borings to depths of 20.0 feet below the existing site grades. The International Building Code (IBC) 2012/15 requires site classification for seismic design based on the upper 100 ft of a soil profile. Where site specific data are not available to a depth of 100 ft, appropriate soil properties are permitted to be estimated by the registered design professional preparing the soils report based on known geologic conditions.

Based on our interpretation of International Building Code and the uninterrupted transfer of loads to competent bedrock, the site soils can be characterized as Site Class D. It is feasible that the site class may be able to achieve a higher classification if it is determined to be economically beneficial to the project. However, additional site testing could be required to measure actual shear wave velocities, such as ReMi test methods or equivalent, along with a site specific analysis. ECS can provide additional consultation upon request.

Liquefaction: The subsurface profile consists primarily of residual soils derived from the in-place weathering of the underlying bedrock. The subsurface conditions do not appear to exhibit liquefaction potential; therefore, it is our opinion that additional investigation regarding liquefaction potential is not necessary.

Ground Motion Parameters: In addition to the seismic site classification noted above, ECS has determined the design spectral response acceleration parameters following the IBC 2015 methodology. The Mapped Reponses were estimated from the free seismic design maps available from Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC) (http://seismicmaps.org). The design responses

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 12 for the short (0.2 sec, SDS) and 1-second period (SD1) are noted in bold at the far right end of the following table.

Table 5.4.B – Ground Motion Parameters (IBC 2015 Method)

Period (sec)

Mapped Spectral Response

Accelerations (g)

Values of Site Coefficient for Site Class

Maximum Spectral Response Acceleration Adjusted for Site Class

(g)

Design Spectral Response

Acceleration (g)

IBC

Reference

Figures 1613.3.1

(1) & (2)

Tables 1613.3.3

(1) & (2)

Eqs. 16-37 & 16-38

Eqs. 16-39 & 16-40

0.2 SS 0.115 Fa 2.5 SMS=FaSs 0.288 SDS=2/3 SMS 0.192

1.0 S1 0.050 Fv 3.5 SM1=FvS1 0.176 SD1=2/3 SM1 0.117

The Site Class definition should not be confused with the Seismic Design Category designation, which the Structural Engineer typically assesses. If a higher site classification is beneficial to the project, ECS would be pleased to discuss additional testing capabilities in this regard.

SITE DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

Pavement Sections

Subgrade Characteristics: Based on the results of our subsurface exploration, it appears that the soils that will comprise pavement subgrades, exposed in cuts and placed as fill, will consist mainly of existing fine-grained material or new structural fill. These soil will provide poor to fair pavement support. We did not perform CBR testing on the soils expected at pavement subgrade levels, but these soils typically demonstrate a minimum CBR value on the order of 3. For design purposes, a CBR value of 3 has been selected. The pavement design assumes subgrades consist of suitable materials evaluated by ECS and placed and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by the Standard Proctor test (ASTM D 698) in accordance with the project specifications.

Flexible Pavement Design

The recommended pavement thicknesses presented in this report section are considered typical and minimum for the assumed parameters in the general site area. We understand that budgetary considerations sometimes warrant thinner pavement sections than those presented. However, the client, the owner, and the project designers should be aware that thinner pavement sections may result in increased maintenance costs and lower than anticipated pavement life.

Because of the anticipated use of the planned pavement areas associated with the storage facilities as well as the planned uses for the northeast portion of the project, we have assumed that light and heavy duty pavement sections will be required. The light duty pavement section will be utilized in the parking areas that will support primarily passenger vehicle traffic and occasional light maintenance vehicle traffic, while the heavy duty section will be utilized in the driveway entrances and drive aisles where traffic will consist of local delivery, trash removal, and maintenance vehicle traffic. The pavement design for the light and heavy duty sections will be based on maximum traffic loads of 12,000 and 100,000 equivalent single axle loads (ESALs), respectively, initial serviceability of 4.2, terminal serviceability of 2.2, a reliability of 90 percent, a standard deviation of 0.45 for flexible pavements, and a design life of 20 years. The design analyses for pavements have been based on methodology from the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials’ (AASHTO) Guide of Design of Pavement

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 13

Structures, 1993. The following pavement design assumes a stable and yielding subgrade at the time of the subbase and asphalt placement.

We have estimated the subgrade soils will be prepared to achieve a minimum CBR of 3. Making this assumption, it is possible to use typical pavement sections consisting of the following:

Table 5.5.2.A – Asphalt Pavement Sections

Recommended Minimum Thickness (Inches)

Pavement Materials Light Duty Heavy Duty

Asphalt Surface Course (SUPERPAVE 9.5mm) 1.5 1.5

Asphaltic Base Course (SUPERPAVE 19mm Base Course)

2.0 3.0

Asphaltic Base Course (SUPERPAVE 25mm Base Course)

- 3.0

Crushed Stone Base 6.0 12.0

Rigid Pavement

Rigid concrete pavement may be used instead of flexible pavement. The typical rigid pavement sections are listed below. Rigid pavement is recommended to be used where trash dumpsters or large trucks are to be parked on the pavement. This should provide better distribution of surface loads to the sub grade without causing surficial deformation.

Table 5.6.3.A – Concrete Pavement Sections

Rigid Pavement Recommended Thickness (Inches)

Pavement Materials Trash Pad

Reinforcement WWF6x6-W6xW6

Dowels at Joints 7/8” diameter x 18” long

@ 12” c-c

Portland Cement Concrete f’c=4000 psi

Crushed Stone Base 6

The above sections represent minimum thickness representative of typical local construction practices and periodic maintenance should be anticipated. Pavement may be placed after the subgrade has been properly compacted, fine graded and proof rolled as recommended earlier in this report. It should be noted that undercutting of some areas of soft soils or existing fill may be necessary, based on the results of the test borings. Actual pavement section thickness and joint spacing, if applicable, should be determined by the design civil engineer or geotechnical engineer based on traffic loads, volume, and the owner’s design life requirements.

An important consideration with the design and construction of pavements is surface and subsurface drainage. Where standing water develops, either on the pavement surface or within the base course layer, softening of the subgrade and other problems related to the deterioration of the pavement can be expected. Sealing of saw cut and construction joints will be critical to the long term success of the

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 14 pavement. Failure to do so or to maintain this seal can result in failure of the concrete joint.

Furthermore, good drainage should reduce the possibility of the subgrade materials becoming saturated over a long period of time. We would be pleased to be of further assistance to you in the design of the project pavements by providing additional recommendations during construction of the project.

Weather Restrictions: In this region, asphalt plants may close during the months of December, January, and/or February if particularly cold weather conditions prevail. However, this can change based on year to year temperature fluctuations. Daily temperatures from December to February will often stay below 40°F, limiting the days that asphalt placement can occur. Asphalt and concrete should not be placed on exposed subbase that has been exposed to freezing temperatures until it is confirmed that no frost is in the subbase or subgrade. Failure to do so can result in unacceptable frost heaving and settlement.

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 15

6.0 SITE CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS

SUBGRADE PREPARATION

Stripping and Grubbing

The subgrade preparation for slabs, pavement, and new structural fill should consist of stripping all unsuitable existing fill, asphalt, and any other soft or unsuitable materials. The suitability of any fill materials should be evaluated at the time of site preparation for its suitability for support of the floor slab and pavement areas. Select undercutting of soft, wet, or otherwise deleterious materials may be required. ECS should be called on to verify that unsuitable surficial and existing fill materials have been completely removed prior to the placement of Structural Fill or construction of structures.

Proofrolling

After removing all unsuitable surface materials, cutting to the proposed grade, and prior to the placement of any structural fill or other construction materials, the exposed subgrade should be examined by the Geotechnical Engineer or authorized representative. The exposed subgrade should be thoroughly proofrolled with previously approved construction equipment having a minimum axle load of 10 tons (e.g. fully loaded tandem-axle dump truck). The areas subject to proofrolling should be traversed by the equipment in two perpendicular (orthogonal) directions with overlapping passes of the vehicle under the observation of the Geotechnical Engineer or authorized representative. This procedure is intended to assist in identifying localized yielding materials. In the event that unstable or “pumping” subgrade is identified by the proofrolling, those areas should be marked for repair prior to the placement of any subsequent structural fill or other construction materials. Methods of repair of unstable subgrade, such as undercutting, moisture conditioning, or chemical stabilization, should be discussed with the Geotechnical Engineer to determine the appropriate procedure with regard to the existing conditions causing the instability. A test pit(s) may be excavated to explore the shallow subsurface materials in the area of the instability to help in determined the cause of the observed unstable materials and to assist in the evaluation of the appropriate remedial action to stabilize the subgrade.

Subgrade Stabilization

Subgrade Benching: Fill should not be placed on ground with a slope steeper than 5H:1V, unless the fill is confined by an opposing slope, such as in a ravine. Otherwise, where steeper slopes exist, the ground should be benched so as to allow for fill placement on a horizontal surface.

Subgrade Compaction: Upon completion of subgrade documentation, the exposed subgrade within the 10-foot expanded building and 5-foot expanded pavement and embankment limits should be moisture conditioned to within -1 and +3 % of the soil’s optimum moisture content and be compacted with suitable equipment (minimum 10-ton roller) to a depth of 10 inches. Subgrade compaction within the expanded building, pavement, and embankment limits should be to a dry density of at least 95% of the Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D698). ECS should be called on to document that proper subgrade compaction has been achieved.

Subgrade Compaction Control: The expanded limits of the proposed construction areas should be well defined, including the limits for buildings, pavements, fills, and slopes, etc. Field density testing of subgrades will be performed at frequencies in Table 6.2.1.A.

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 16

Subgrade Stabilization: Is some areas, particularly low-lying, wet areas of the site, undercutting of excessively soft materials may be considered inefficient. In such areas the use of a reinforcing geotextile or geogrid might be employed, under the advisement of ECS. Suitable stabilization materials may include medium duty woven geotextile fabrics or geogrids. The suitability and employment of reinforcing or stabilization products should be determined in the field by ECS personnel, in accordance with project specifications.

EARTHWORK OPERATIONS

Structural Fill Materials

After subgrade preparation and observation has been completed and a stable subgrade exists, fill placement may begin. Structural fill materials should not be placed on frozen or frost-heaved soils or soils which have been moisture conditioned to acceptable levels. Borrow fill materials, if necessary, should not contain wet or frozen materials at the time of placement. Wet or frost-heaved soils should be removed prior to the placement of engineered fill, granular sub-base materials, foundation/slab concrete, or paving materials.

Materials satisfactory for use as Structural Fill should consist of inorganic soils classified as CL, ML, SM, SC, SW, SP, GW, GP, GM and GC, or a combination of these group symbols, per ASTM D 2487. The materials should be free of organic matter, debris, and should contain no particle sizes greater than 4 inches in the largest dimension. Open graded materials, such as Gravels (GW and GP), which contain void space in their mass should not be used in structural fills unless properly encapsulated with filter fabric. Unsatisfactory structural fill materials include materials which do not satisfy the requirements for suitable materials, as well as topsoil and organic materials (OH, OL), elastic Silt (MH), and high plasticity Clay (CH).

Near surface materials may be wet and require moisture conditioning (drying) prior to their reuse as engineered fill. In some cases, the materials might not be suitable and should be placed in non-structural areas only. We recommend that evaluation and laboratory testing be performed prior to placement as fill, to further explore the site conditions. Prior to placement of structural fill, representative bulk samples should be submitted to the Geotechnical Engineer of Record for acceptance which will include Atterberg limits, natural moisture content, grain-size analysis, and moisture-density relationships (Proctor) for compaction. Based on the limited laboratory testing, the on-site materials appear to be suitable for reuse as structural fil. Import materials should be tested prior to being hauled to the site to determine if they meet project specifications.

Structural Fill within the expanded building and pavement limits should be placed in maximum 12-inch loose lifts, moisture conditioned as necessary to within ±3% of the soil’s optimum moisture content, and be compacted with suitable equipment to a dry density of at least 95% of the Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D698). ECS should be called on to document that proper fill compaction has been achieved.

The expanded limits of the proposed construction areas should be well defined, including the limits of the fill zones for buildings, pavements, and slopes, etc., at the time of fill placement. Grade controls should be maintained throughout the filling operations. All filling operations should be observed on a full-time basis by a qualified representative of the construction testing laboratory to determine that the

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 17 minimum compaction requirements are being achieved. Field density testing of fills should be performed at the frequencies shown in Table 6.2.1, but not less than 1 test per lift.

Table 6.2.1.A – Frequency of Compaction Tests in Fill Areas Table

Location Frequency of Tests

Expanded Building Limits 1 test per 2,500 sq. ft. per lift

Pavement Areas 1 test per 10,000 sq. ft. per lift

Retaining Walls 1 test per 100 linear ft. per lift

All Other Non-Critical Areas 1 test per 10,000 sq. ft. per lift

Utility Trenches 1 test per 200 linear ft. per lift

Compaction equipment suitable to the soil type being compacted should be used to compact the subgrades and fill materials. Sheepsfoot compaction equipment should be suitable for the fine-grained soils (Clays and Silts). A vibratory smooth drum roller should be used for compaction of coarse-grained soils (Sands) as well as for sealing compacted surfaces. Smooth drum roller should not be used for the first pass of compaction of fine-grained soils. In confined areas such as utility trenches, portable compaction equipment and thin lifts of 3 inches to 4 inches may be required to achieve specified degrees of compaction.

It should be noted that the on-site soils are likely moisture and disturbance sensitive. Due to the nature of the soils on site, approved fills or prepared subgrades should be protected from construction traffic.

Previously stable subgrades will quickly degrade if exposed to moisture or construction traffic.

Furthermore, at the end of each work day, all fill areas should be graded to facilitate drainage of any precipitation and the surface should be sealed by use of a smooth-drum roller to limit infiltration of surface water. During placement and compaction of new fill at the beginning of each workday, the Contractor may need to scarify existing subgrades to a depth on the order of 4 inches so that a weak plane will not be formed between the new fill and the existing subgrade soils.

Because of the fine-grained and cohesive nature of the soils, it is recommended that the earthwork operations be performed during the warmer and dryer (i.e. late spring, summer, early fall) periods of the year, as drying and compaction of wet soils is typically difficult during the cold, winter months. We recommend that the grading contractor have equipment on site during earthwork for both drying and wetting fill soils. In the event that the earthwork operations are accomplished during the cooler and wetter periods of the year or even during the warmer periods where rainfall has occurred, delays, and/or additional costs should be anticipated. Proper drainage should be maintained during the earthwork phases of construction to prevent ponding of water which has a tendency to degrade subgrade soils. Alternatively, if these soils cannot be stabilized by conventional methods as previously discussed, additional modifications to the subgrade soils such as lime or cement stabilization may be utilized to adjust the moisture content. If lime or cement are utilized to control moisture contents and/or for stabilization, Quick Lime, Calciment® or regular Type I/II cement can be used. The construction testing laboratory should evaluate proposed lime or cement soil modification procedures, such as quantity of additive and mixing and curing procedures, before implementation. The contractor should be required to minimize dusting or implement dust control measures, as required. It should be noted that the application of agricultural lime would not be suitable for this application.

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 18

Existing Fill

Up to approximately 20 feet of possible fill was noted in boring B-5. This location (borings B-3, B-4, and B-5) is currently used for soils storage, and as such multiple fill piles are located in the area. This material is suitable for use as fill provided it is placed adhering to the guidelines outlined in Section 6.3.1. Some moisture conditioning of the materials may be necessary to achieve compaction.

Proposed Fill Slopes

Slopes comprised of engineered fill may be constructed at a slope of 3:1 or flatter. Slopes steeper than 3:1 should be evaluated by the Geotechnical Engineer. All slopes should be properly vegetated to reduce the likelihood of surficial erosion and sloughing.

UTILITY INSTALLATIONS

Utility Subgrades: The soils encountered in our exploration are expected to be generally suitable for support of utility pipes. The pipe subgrade should be observed and probed for stability by ECS to evaluate the suitability of the materials encountered. Any loose or unsuitable materials encountered at the utility pipe subgrade elevation should be removed and replaced with suitable compacted Structural Fill or pipe bedding material.

Utility Backfilling: The granular bedding material should be at least 4 inches thick, but not less than that specified by the project drawings and specifications. Fill placed for support of the utilities, as well as backfill over the utilities, should satisfy the requirements for Structural Fill given in this report.

Compacted backfill should be free of topsoil, roots, ice, or any other material designated by ECS as unsuitable. The backfill should be moisture conditioned, placed, and compacted in accordance with the recommendations of this report.

Utility Excavation Dewatering: It is possible that perched water may be encountered by utility excavations which extend below existing grades. It is expected that removal of perched water which seeps into excavations could be accomplished by pumping from sumps excavated in the trench bottom and which are backfilled with AASHTO No. 57 Stone or open graded bedding material. Should water conditions beyond the capability of sump pumping be encountered, the contractor should submit a Dewatering Plan in accordance with project specifications.

Excavation Safety: All excavations and slopes should be made and maintained in accordance with OSHA excavation safety standards. The contractor is solely responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations and slopes and should shore, slope, or bench the sides of the excavations and slopes as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. The contractor’s responsible person, as defined in 29 CFR Part 1926, should evaluate the soil exposed in the excavations as part of the contractor’s safety procedures. In no case should slope height, slope inclination, or excavation depth, including utility trench excavation depth, exceed those specified in local, state, and federal safety regulations. ECS is providing this information solely as a service to our client. ECS is not assuming responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor’s activities; such responsibility is not being implied and should not be inferred.

GENERAL CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

Moisture Conditioning: During the cooler and wetter periods of the year, delays and additional costs should be anticipated. At these times, reduction of soil moisture may need to be accomplished by a

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 19 combination of mechanical manipulation and the use of chemical additives, such as lime or cement, in order to lower moisture contents to levels appropriate for compaction. Alternatively, during the drier times of the year, such as the summer months, moisture may need to be added to the soil to provide adequate moisture for successful compaction according to the project requirements.

Subgrade Protection: Measures should also be taken to limit site disturbance, especially from rubber-tired heavy construction equipment, and to control and remove surface water from development areas, including structural and pavement areas. It would be advisable to designate a haul road and construction staging area to limit the areas of disturbance and to prevent construction traffic from excessively degrading sensitive subgrade soils and existing pavement areas. Haul roads and construction staging areas could be covered with excess depths of aggregate to protect those subgrades. The aggregate can later be removed and used in pavement areas.

Surface Drainage: Surface drainage conditions should be properly maintained. Surface water should be directed away from the construction area, and the work area should be sloped away from the construction area at a gradient of 1 percent or greater to reduce the potential of ponding water and the subsequent saturation of the surface soils. At the end of each work day, the subgrade soils should be sealed by rolling the surface with a smooth drum roller to minimize infiltration of surface water.

Erosion Control: The surface soils may be erodible. Therefore, the Contractor should provide and maintain good site drainage during earthwork operations to maintain the integrity of the surface soils.

All erosion and sedimentation controls should be in accordance with sound engineering practices and local requirements.

ECS Project No. 95:1020 Page 20

7.0 CLOSING

ECS has prepared this report of findings, evaluations, and recommendations to guide geotechnical-related design and construction aspects of the project.

The description of the proposed project is based on information provided to ECS by Gordon. If any of this information is inaccurate, either due to our interpretation of the documents provided or if the site’s design changed, ECS should be contacted immediately to review the report in light of the changes and provide additional or alternate recommendations as required to reflect the proposed construction.

We recommend that ECS be allowed to review project plans and specifications, so we may evaluate consistency of those plans/specifications with our geotechnical report.

Field observations, monitoring, and quality assurance testing during earthwork and foundation installation are an extension of and integral to the geotechnical design recommendation. We recommend that the owner retain these quality assurance services and that ECS be allowed to continue our involvement throughout these critical phases of construction to provide general consultation as issues arise. ECS is not responsible for the conclusions, opinions, or recommendations of others based on the data in this report.

APPENDIX A – Figures

Site Location Map Geology Map Exploration Location Plan Soil Survey Map

SOURCE

DATE

10/23/2019

Google Earth

PROJECT NO.

SCALE

NTS

95:1020

Exploration Location Plan

LONG ISLAND NATIONAL

CEMETERY

WELLWOOD AVENUE, WYANDANCH, NEW YORK

GORDON

DRAFTER

DGR

10/23/2019

Google Earth

PROJECT NO.

SCALE

NTS

95:1020

Exploration Location Plan

LONG ISLAND NATIONAL

CEMETERY

WELLWOOD AVENUE, WYANDANCH, NEW YORK

GORDON

DGR

8/2 2/2

Se rvi ce La ye r C red its

: E sri

, H

ER

E, Ga rm in, (c ) O pe nS tre etM ap co ntr ibu tor s

²

EN

GI

NE

ER

SC

AL

E

1 O F 1

PR

OJ

EC

T

NO

:10

SH

EE

T

DA

TEJM

C2

GO

RD

ON

LO

NG

IS

LA

ND

N

AT

IO

NA

L C

EM

ET

ER

Y

WE

LL

W

OO

D

AV

EN

UE

, W

YA

ND

AN

CH

, N

EW

YO

RK

Sit e L oc ati on M ap

3,0

1,5

Fe et

1 "

8/21/2019

PA DCNR Geologic Map http://www.gis.dcnr.state.pa.us

SCALE

NTS

PROJECT NO.

95:1020

Geology Map

LONG ISLAND NATIONAL

CEMETERY

WELLWOOD AVENUE, WYANDANCH, NY

GORDON

DRAFTER

GMW

Monmouth Group, Matawan

Group and Magothy Formation

Main Rock Type: Silty clay, glauconitic sandy clay, sand, gravel.

8/22/2019

Web Soil Survey https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov

SCALE

NTS

PROJECT NO.

95:1020

Soil Survey Map

LONG ISLAND NATIONAL

CEMETERY

WELLWOOD AVENUE, WYANDANCH, NY

GORDON

GMW

APPENDIX B – Field Operations

Boring Logs Boring Log Reference Notes

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

Asphalt Thickness [6.00"] (SP FILL) SAND WITH GRAVEL, brown, gray, moist, dense, Alluvium (CL FILL) LEAN CLAY WITH GRAVEL, brown, moist, stiff

(SM) SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL, brown- light brown, white, moist, medium dense to very dense, Alluvium

END OF BORING @ 20.0'

50/4

50/5

343.6

19.0

5.4

1.1

50/51.4

252.4

CLIENT

ECS New York PLLC

JOB #

95:1020

BORING #

B-1

SHEET

PROJECT NAME

Long Island National Cemetery

ARCHITECT-ENGINEER

SITE LOCATION

Wellwood Avenue, Wyandanch, Sullivan County, NY

THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN-SITU 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

WL N/E WS WD BORING STARTED…