S02 - Attachment 6 - 613-126 Martinsburg - GEOTECH_17-04-21.pdf

Shad E. Hoover, P.E.

Principal

GEOTECHNICAL REPORT

VA Medical Center Building 502A Addition City of Martinsburg, Berkeley County, West Virginia

CMT Laboratories File No. 1605501

Prepared for:

PennTerra Engineering, Inc.

3075 Enterprise Drive

Suite 100 State College, PA 16801

Prepared by:

CMT Laboratories, Inc.

2701 Carolean Industrial Drive

July 28, 2016

2701 Carolean Industrial Drive, State College, PA 16801 ■ Phone: 814-231-8845 ■ Fax: 814-231-8846

GEOTECHNICAL REPORT

VA Medical Center Building 502A Addition City of Martinsburg, Berkeley County, West Virginia

CMT Laboratories File No. 1605501

Prepared for:

3075 Enterprise Drive

Suite 100

Prepared by:

2701 Carolean Industrial Drive

July 28, 2016 ii

INDEX

Page

LIST OF TABLES..................................................................................................................... iii

1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 PROJECT AND SITE INFORMATION

3.0 GENERAL

4.0 GEOLOGIC INFORMATION

5.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION

5.1 Groundwater Conditions

6.0 LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM

7.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1 Cold/Wet Weather Earthmoving Considerations

8.2 General Site Preparation

8.3 Structural Fill Placement

8.4 Groundwater Control

8.5 Drainage

8.6 Foundation Recommendations

8.7 Underpinning

8.8 Lateral Earth Pressures

8.9 Grade Slabs

8.10 Seismic Considerations

9.0 EXCAVATIONS

10.0 COMMENTS

APPENDIX:

A. USGS Project Location Map B. Geology Map C. Test Boring Location Plan D. General Geotechnical Notes E. Test Boring Logs F. Laboratory Testing Data G. Bibliography iii

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 2.1 Loading and Foundation Parameters

Table 6.1 Moisture-Plasticity Characteristics, Particle-Size and Standard Proctor

Test Results

Table 8.1 Geotechnical Recommendations

Table 8.2 Geotechnical Parameters for Permanent Retaining Structures

Geotechnical Report July 28, 2016 VA Medical Center 1 CMT File No. 1605501

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report presents the results of a subsurface exploration and foundation analysis for the VA Medical Center Building 502A Addition project located in the City of

Martinsburg, Berkeley County, West Virginia. Our services for this project were performed in accordance with CMT Proposal No. 1605501, dated October 23, 2015.

Authorization to perform the requested services was given in the form of a verbal notice-to-proceed by Mr. Jeffrey Sherry of PennTerra Engineering, Inc.

The purpose of the subsurface exploration program was to determine the pertinent subsurface conditions and to obtain information on which to base recommendations regarding foundation design and general site preparation. The scope of services for this report does not include an environmental assessment for the presence or absence of wetlands, hazardous, radioactive or toxic materials in the soil, surface water, groundwater, or air on, below or around the site. Any statements in this report or on the

Test Boring Logs regarding odors, colors or unusual or suspicious items are strictly for the information of the client.

2.0 PROJECT AND SITE INFORMATION

The project is located at the existing Building 502A at the VA Medical Center in the City of Martinsburg, Berkeley County, West Virginia. Specifically, the proposed additions are located at the northern and southern corners of Building 502A. The location of the site is shown on the Project Location Map presented in Appendix A.

The surface of the site at the proposed construction consists of the existing

Building 502A, light vegetation, and a few mature trees. Surface drainage appears to be moderate with runoff down slope towards the existing storm sewer system.

Topographic information was not provided; however, the site appears relatively level, with a maximum difference in elevation of approximately 3 feet throughout the areas of the proposed additions.

General building information was provided by PennTerra Engineering, Inc. and loading information was provided by Miller-Remick, LLC. The proposed construction

VA Medical Center 2 CMT File No. 1605501 will consist of two (2) single-story additions to the existing Building 502A, each measuring approximately 1,000 square feet, in plan area. The following table provides information utilized by CMT in order to generate appropriate geotechnical recommendations:

Table 2.1 Loading and Foundation Parameters

Assumed Maximum Tolerable Settlement

Foundation Type(s)

Maximum Unfactored

Foundation Loads Total Differential

Wall Footings 1.7 klf 0.50 in 0.0008 in/in

Floor 200 psf --- ---

The above information was utilized in our geotechnical analysis. Therefore, if any of this information has changed, is incorrect or becomes available, please inform

CMT so that we may amend the recommendations presented in this report, if appropriate.

3.0 GENERAL

The following recommendations are based on general subsurface information shown on the Test Boring Logs provided in Appendix E. The descriptions shown on these logs represent the conditions only at the individual testing locations and variations may occur and should be expected between the testing locations. Conditions encountered during excavation procedures may not reflect the conditions presented on the boring logs.

Therefore, it is imperative that a representative of CMT be present during excavation operations so that any variations may be presented to the geotechnical engineer. The geotechnical engineer may decide that the variations warrant a change to the recommendations presented in this report.

VA Medical Center 3 CMT File No. 1605501

4.0 GEOLOGIC INFORMATION

According to the Department of Environmental Resources, Office of Resources

Management, Bureau of Topographic and Geologic Survey (1982), the bedrock formation at the proposed area is classified as the Martinsburg Formation, as shown on the Geology Map, provided in Appendix B.

The bedrock consists of dark gray shale, thin interbeds of siltstone, and fine-grained sandstone. Medium-grained sandstone containing shale and siltstone interbeds occurs in the middle of the formation, with silty limestone towards the base. The bedrock is moderately weathered to a moderate depth and excavation is moderately easy in shale, moderately difficult in limestone, and difficult in sandstone. Cut slope stability is fair in shale and limestone, and good in sandstone. Foundation stability is typically good, provided it is excavated to sound material and limestone is investigated for solution openings.

5.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION

Prior to commencement of field operations, the project was registered with the

West Virginia 811 services, and this phase of the project was assigned Serial No.

1619081142. We recommend that the contractors verify the locations of any utilities prior to commencement of construction activities.

A total of four (4) test borings were drilled for this project and were extended to depths of 20 feet below the existing surface grades. The test borings were located in the field by others. The elevations on the Test Boring Logs were estimated from elevations shown on the utilities plan provided. The approximate locations of the test borings are shown on the Test Boring Location Plan provided in Appendix C.

The soil sampling was performed in accordance with ASTM D1586. All sampling intervals and Standard Penetration Test values were recorded and are shown on the Test Boring Logs. The results of the Standard Penetration Tests indicate the relative density and comparative consistency of the soils and thereby provide a basis for estimating the relative strength and compressibility of the soil profile components.

VA Medical Center 4 CMT File No. 1605501

The stratifications shown on the Test Boring Logs represent the conditions only at the actual boring locations. Variations should be expected between the boring locations.

In addition, the Test Boring Logs show the approximate boundaries between subsurface materials. Actual transitions between subsurface materials may be gradual or abrupt.

5.1 Groundwater Conditions

Groundwater was not encountered within either of the test boring at the time of drilling activities. Note that groundwater levels fluctuate seasonally as a function of rainfall and the permeability of the soil/bedrock. A perched groundwater table may have an effect on the excavation procedures during construction. We recommend evaluation of any perched conditions by the geotechnical engineer at the time of construction.

6.0 LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM

The samples obtained during the drilling operation were sealed in labeled containers and transported to our laboratory for inspection, testing and classification.

Remaining samples will be retained for a minimum of one (1) year for future reference.

In addition to the visual classification of the soil samples, moisture content determination tests were performed on representative split-spoon samples. The moisture content is the ratio of the weight of the water in the sample to the dry weight of the sample. This test was performed in general compliance with ASTM D2216.

Several test procedures were performed on composite soil samples taken from the site. A general description of each test is provided in the following paragraphs.

Moisture-plasticity characteristics of one (1) composite soil sample (CMT I.D.

No. 14301) were determined by means of the Atterberg Limit test. The test determines the moisture content at which the soil begins to act as a viscous liquid (Liquid Limit –

LL) and the moisture content at which the soil changes from a plastic state to a semi-solid state (Plastic Limit – PL). The difference between the Liquid Limit and the Plastic Limit is the Plasticity Index (PI). The test procedures were performed in compliance with

ASTM D4318.

VA Medical Center 5 CMT File No. 1605501

Particle-size analyses were performed on the same composite soil sample in compliance with ASTM D422. The analysis includes a sieve analysis for particle sizes greater than the #200 sieve and a hydrometer analysis for particle sizes finer than the

#200 sieve. Using this information, the sample was classified using the Unified Soil

Classification System (USCS), ASTM D2487.

A Standard Proctor (ASTM D698) was performed on the one (1) composite soil sample.

A summary of the moisture-plasticity characteristics, particles-size and standard proctor test results are shown on the following table.

Table 6.1 Moisture-Plasticity Characteristics, Particle-Size and Standard Proctor Test Results

CMT

Sample Number

Test Boring

Depth (ft)

Liquid Limit

(LL)

Plasticity Index

(PI) USCS

Maximum Dry

Density (pcf)

Optimum Moisture Content

14301 B-4 1.0 – 5.0 46 17 ML 105.7 14.0

A more detailed analysis of all laboratory testing is presented in Appendix F of this report.

7.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

Details of the subsurface conditions encountered in our field exploration are shown on the Test Boring Logs, included in Appendix E. A brief description of the materials encountered is presented in the following subsections.

The surface of the site, at all test boring locations, consists of a layer of topsoil which measures approximately 5 to 7 inches in thickness. The topsoil contains organic matter due to the decay of vegetation and natural weathering processes and should be considered highly compressible. The intent of the test boring program was not to determine topsoil depths for cut/fill calculations and should not be referenced for estimating or bidding purposes.

VA Medical Center 6 CMT File No. 1605501

Underlying the topsoil, at all test boring locations, is a layer of natural silty soil which extends to approximate depths ranging between 5 and 7 feet below the existing surface grades. The natural soils consist primarily of silt-sized particles and decomposed shale. CMT Sample Number 14301 is representative of this material and was classified as sandy silt (USCS Classification ML). The natural soils have moisture contents ranging between 10 and 21 percent and generally exhibited a medium dense to very dense relative density based on the Standard Penetration Tests.

Underlying the natural silty soil, is a layer of weathered shale bedrock which extends to the boring termination depths of 20 feet below the existing surface grades.

The weathered shale consists primarily of decomposed to weathered shale bedrock, with varying amounts of silt. The weathered shale has moisture contents ranging between 6 and 27 percent and generally exhibited a medium dense to very dense relative density based on the Standard Penetration Tests.

8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the data obtained from the field exploration and laboratory testing programs, information regarding the proposed construction and our knowledge of geomechanics. The subject site is considered suitable for the proposed construction, provided the geotechnical recommendations and suggested guidelines presented in this report are utilized in both the design and construction phases of this project.

Specific and detailed recommendations for the proposed construction are provided in the following sections.

8.1 Cold/Wet Weather Earthmoving Considerations

In order to facilitate construction of a balanced site during late fall, winter and early spring, special considerations should be recognized. Specifically, “cold weather” and “wet weather” can significantly reduce the potential to practically lower the soil moisture content to optimum compaction levels. “Cold weather” is when temperatures

VA Medical Center 7 CMT File No. 1605501 drop below freezing at any time or when temperatures are consistently sustained below

40°F. “Wet weather” is any period of time of increased precipitation and can occur during any time of the year. The following considerations are offered if cut/fill operations are anticipated during the aforementioned difficult conditions:

1. The natural moisture contents of the in-situ soils and fill materials are typically above optimum percentages. The moisture content is typically lowered by spreading out the wet soils in thin layers and discing with agricultural equipment in order to facilitate evaporation. This methodology becomes less practical during “wet weather” and “cold weather” conditions.

2. The in-situ and compacted structural fill materials should be positively graded away from the construction site and sealed with a smooth-drum roller as soon as practical after achieving finished grade or immediately prior to any anticipated rain event. These measures will help to reduce the potential for rutting and pumping of the subgrade and pooling of undrained water.

3. Stabilization of poor subgrade conditions during cold and wet weather can also be achieved with geogrid reinforcement. Implementation of geogrid stabilization should be directed by the geotechnical engineer-of-record.

The geotechnical engineer should review all design and construction operations that specifically address earthwork in “cold weather” and “wet weather” conditions.

8.2 General Site Preparation

Site preparation will include the removal of topsoil, organics, loose fill materials and any soft/wet/frozen soils. Removal and/or relocation of subsurface utilities may be required. Any excavations associated with removal or relocations of utility lines below the proposed subgrade elevation should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer or designated representative and backfilled according to Section 8.3 of this report.

After achieving finished subgrade in the disturbed areas, and prior to placing structural fill in areas below finished subgrade, we recommend that the exposed subgrade

VA Medical Center 8 CMT File No. 1605501 be evaluated to confirm that all unsuitable or unstable materials have been removed.

Where practical, those areas that are at finished subgrade or those areas that are to receive structural fill should be proofrolled with an appropriately loaded, tandem-axle dump truck or similar pneumatic-tire equipment. Proofrolling will help to reveal the presence of unstable materials that were not identified during our test boring program. We recommend that a representative of CMT observe all proofrolling activities. Loose, frozen or unstable soils should be removed prior to construction activities.

In areas where proofrolling is not practical, such as in below-grade excavations, we recommend that the project’s geotechnical engineer or designated representative visually inspect and manually probe the subgrade materials.

8.3 Structural Fill Placement

Structural fill is defined as all fill placed under and around foundations, utilities, floor slabs, sidewalks, roadways and parking lots. Suitability of backfill material should be evaluated during construction, based upon its intended use.

The on-site natural silty soils should not be considered for use as structural fill.

Any borrow material utilized as fill should not contain rock greater than 3 inches in diameter, and should not contain more than 1 percent (by weight) of organic matter or other deleterious material. Unified Soils Classifications of GW, GM, GC, SW, SM, SC and combinations thereof are considered suitable for use as structural fill. Lateral confinement of poorly-graded sand and gravel will be required in order to limit horizontal movement and subsequent settlement or instability of the structural fill. Uniformly graded materials, such as PennDOT 2B or AASHTO #57 stone, can only be utilized as structural fill with the permission of the geotechnical engineer.

Potentially expansive materials such as mine tailings, pyritic shale and slag should not be used as structural fill. Any fill or aggregate containing more than 0.1% total sulfur by weight as determined by ASTM D4239 should be evaluated by Wet-Dry Durability testing in accordance with PennDOT Test Method No. 519 in order to determine the potential for expansion by sulfide to sulfate conversion. The interpretation of the expansive shale test results should be conducted by a qualified geotechnical engineer or

VA Medical Center 9 CMT File No. 1605501 engineering geologist. Other materials should be considered on a case-by-case basis;

alternate materials should be approved by the project’s geotechnical engineer.

All structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness and within 2 percent of optimum moisture for compaction. The fill should be compacted to 100 percent of maximum dry density as determined by the

Standard Proctor method (ASTM D698). Fill materials placed in non-structural areas should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density.

We recommend that the placement and compaction of fill be monitored by a soils technician, working under the direction of the project’s geotechnical engineer, to confirm that the specified degree of compaction is being obtained. The frequency of testing should be related to the work conditions during earthmoving and the type and location of the fill or backfill.

8.4 Groundwater Control

Although a groundwater table was not encountered within the proposed excavation depths, perched or trapped groundwater may be encountered. If groundwater is encountered, it should be maintained a minimum of 2 feet below the bottom of all excavations. Conventional dewatering procedures, such as open pumping and gravity drainage, should be sufficient for temporary removal. Every effort should be made to keep the excavations dry.

8.5 Drainage

Proper site drainage should be maintained during earthwork operations to minimize wet weather delays and reduce accumulation of additional moisture. If the surficial soils become softened during wet weather or frozen, these soils may need to be scarified and recompacted or removed before additional fill is placed. Also, the ground surface in the vicinity of the site should be graded so that surface water flows away from the construction areas.

VA Medical Center 10 CMT File No. 1605501

We recommend that in the design and construction phases certain precautions should be taken relative to drainage. Final design plans should include precautions to reduce water infiltration into the subsoils in order to decrease excessive erosion. These would include providing watertight storm drains and manholes, roof drains that tie directly into storm drainage systems, and utility lines that do not coincide with footings.

8.6 Foundation Recommendations

Based on the subsurface conditions encountered during our field exploration program and the loading conditions and assumed settlement tolerances outlined in Table

2.1, conventional shallow foundations are considered appropriate for this project. Table

8.1 outlines the specific geotechnical criteria for the structure:

Table 8.1 Geotechnical Recommendations

Estimated Settlement

Foundation Type(s)

Maximum Net Allowable Bearing Capacity

(psf) Total Differential

Wall Footings 2,500 psf <0.5 in. <0.0008 in.

All bearing materials should be closely monitored and tested during construction.

Techniques would include rod probing, visual observation, or additional exploration. If, during foundation excavation, soils are encountered that are not indicative of those described in this report, the geotechnical engineer should be consulted for guidance on how to proceed with the excavation.

For protection against frost damage, all exterior foundations should be placed at least 30 inches below final grade. Concrete should be placed in the foundation as soon as practical after excavation to minimize the possibility of water and/or debris entering and collecting within the open excavations. If this is not possible, the foundations should be left at least 6 inches high and excavated to final grade immediately prior to concrete placement.

VA Medical Center 11 CMT File No. 1605501

8.7 Underpinning

Foundations and floor slabs can be placed adjacent to and at the same elevation of the existing footings and slab-on-grade; however, any foundations or floor slabs placed below existing bearing elevations may require underpinning techniques. Additionally, underpinning may be required if overexcavation and replacement is necessary. All underpinning design methods should be reviewed by the geotechnical engineer prior to construction.

8.8 Lateral Earth Pressures

We recommend the use of a well-graded granular material directly behind retaining structures.

The following geotechnical parameters can be utilized to design the lateral pressure distribution behind any permanent retaining walls:

Table 8.2 Geotechnical Parameters for Permanent Retaining Structures

Material Type

Moist Unit

Weight (pcf)

Drained Angle of Internal Friction (degrees)

Cohesion (psf)

At-Rest Earth

Pressure Coefficient

(Ko)

Active Earth

Pressure Coefficient

(KA)

Passive Earth

Pressure Coefficient

(KP)

Well-Graded Stone (GW) 140 38 0 0.38 0.24 4.20

We recommend that the base of the proposed retaining walls consist of drainpipes designed to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressures. The drainage pipes should direct any water immediately away from the base of the structure and into the permanent storm water diversion system. The drainpipes should be backfilled with AASHTO #57 stone to a thickness of at least twelve (12) inches above the top of the pipe. The

AASHTO #57 stone should be surrounded by a geotextile separation fabric to prevent the migration of fines into the drainpipe.

VA Medical Center 12 CMT File No. 1605501

8.9 Grade Slabs

The subgrade will consist of materials placed and evaluated according to the specifications outlined in Sections 8.2 and 8.3 of this report. A modulus of subgrade reaction of 100 pounds per square inch/inch (psi/inch) can be utilized in the design of grade slabs provided that a minimum of 6 inches of compacted PennDOT 2A stone be placed between grade slabs and the underlying subgrade. The stone will provide a uniform bearing surface and will act as a drainage course for any moisture below the slab.

8.10 Seismic

According to the 2012 International Building Code, Section 1613.3.2 (Chapter 20 of ASCE 7), seismic Site Class C should be specified for this project.

9.0 EXCAVATIONS

The contractor is responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations and should shore, slope or bench the sides of the excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. The contractor is responsible for following the guidelines presented in the current version of the United States

Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Part

1926, Subpart P, titled “Excavations.” This information is presented solely for the information of the client, and in no way is CMT Laboratories, Inc. responsible for the construction site safety or the Contractor’s activities.

10.0 COMMENTS

This report has been prepared to assist in the design of foundations and to aid in the general site preparation for the proposed VA Medical Center Building 502A Addition project located in the City of Martinsburg, Berkeley County, West Virginia. The recommendations presented in this report are based on the subsurface information

VA Medical Center 13 CMT File No. 1605501 obtained by CMT and the general project information provided by others. The importance of inspection, consultation and testing during construction cannot be overemphasized.

We request that this office be consulted if, during design or construction, conditions are encountered which differ from those contained herein, thereby warranting a review of our recommendations. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of

APPENDIX A

USGS PROJECT LOCATION MAP

wgreenawalt Rectangle wgreenawalt Callout Project Site Location

APPENDIX B

GEOLOGY MAP

wgreenawalt Rectangle wgreenawalt Callout Project Site Location wgreenawalt Stamp wgreenawalt Text Box VA Medical Center Building 502A Addition Geology Map

APPENDIX C

TEST BORING LOCATION PLAN

APPENDIX D

GENERAL GEOTECHNICAL NOTES

General Geotechnical Notes

SOIL DESCRIPTION

The Unified Soil Classification System is used to identify the soil unless otherwise noted.

SAMPLE TYPES

SS Split Spoon - 1 3/8" I.D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted.

ST Shelby Tube - 3" O.D., unless otherwise noted.

GS Grab Sample (Bulk sample from auger cuttings).

NQ Rock Core Sampled with Q Wireline Diamond Bit - 2" I.D.

SOIL PROPERTY SYMBOLS

N Standard Penetration Resistance - Blows per foot of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on a 2" O.D.

split-spoon sampler.

qp Pocket Penetrometer measurement of unconfined compressive strength - tsf Mc Soil Moisture Content - %.

GR Graphical Representation of the soil strata (see below).

LL Liquid Limit - %.

PI Plasticity Index - %.

Rec Percent Core Recovery - Ratio of the length of rock core obtained, to the core interval.

RQD Rock Quality Designation - Ratio of the sum of core segments greater than 4", to the core interval.

Apparent groundwater level.

CONSISTENCY AND RELATIVE DENSITY CLASSIFICATION RELATIVE PROPORTIONS

Cohesive Soils qp - (tsf) Granular Soils SPT "N" Value Descriptive Term Percent

Very Soft 0.00 – 0.25 Loose 0 – 4 Trace 1 – 10 Soft 0.25 – 0.50 Loose 5 – 10 Little 11 – 20 Firm (Medium) 0.50 – 1.00 Slightly Compact 11 – 20 Some 21 – 35 Stiff 1.00 – 2.00 Medium Dense 21 – 30 And 36 – 50 Very Stiff 2.00 – 4.00 Dense 31 – 50 Hard 4.00+ Very Dense 50+

SOIL/ROCK STRATA LEGEND ROCK QUALITY DESCRIPTION

RQD Rock Quality Clays Dolomite/Limestone 0 - 25% Very Poor

Silts Shale 25 - 50% Poor

Sands & Gravels Sandstone 50 - 75% Fair

Organic Materials Siltstone 75 - 90% Good

Fill Materials Cobbles/Boulders 90 - 100% Excellent

PARTICLE SIZE

Boulders 12 in + Coarse Sand 5 mm - 0.6 mm Silt 0.074 mm - 0.002 mm Cobbles 12 in - 3 in Medium Sand 0.6 mm - 0.2 mm Clay 0.002 mm - Gravel 3 in - 5 mm Fine Sand 0.2 mm - 0.074 mm

CMT Laboratories, Inc. ■ 2701 Carolean Industrial Drive ■ State College, PA 16801 ■ Phone: (814) 231-8845

APPENDIX E

TEST BORING LOGS

Test Boring Log Boring: B-1

Project Name: VA Medical Center Building 502A Addition Date of Work: 7/13/2016 Site: Martinsburg, West Virginia File No.: 1605501 Driller/helper: M. Rager/G. Eckess Drill Rig: Mobile B-40 (ATV) Core Bit: N/A Auger Type: 3-1/4" HSA Sampling Type: ASTM D-1586 Elevation: 507' +/-

Depth Sample Blow "N" qp Mc GR Description (ft) Type Counts Value (tsf) (%) Remarks

5" TOPSOIL SS-1 6-9-17 26 --- 15.8

Light brown SILT and decomposed SHALE; medium dense to very dense, SS-2 19-24-32 56 --- 17.3 damp

Light brown weathered SHALE; very SS-3 50/0.2 --- --- 8.0 dense, dry

SS-4 50/0.1 --- --- 6.1

Brown decomposed to weathered SHALE; SS-5 23-50/0.4 50/0.4 --- 15.7 very dense, damp

End of Boring - 20.0' No Groundwater Table Encountered

CMT Laboratories, Inc. ■ 2701 Carolean Industrial Drive ■ State College, PA 16801 ■ Phone: (814) 231-8845

Boring: B-2

Project Name: VA Medical Center Building 502A Addition Date of Work: 7/13/2016 Site: Martinsburg, West Virginia File No.: 1605501 Driller/helper: M. Rager/G. Eckess Drill Rig: Mobile B-40 (ATV) Core Bit: N/A Auger Type: 3-1/4" HSA Sampling Type: ASTM D-1586 Elevation: 507' +/-

Depth Sample Blow "N" qp Mc GR Description (ft) Type Counts Value (tsf) (%) Remarks

5" TOPSOIL SS-1 5-10-14 24 --- 10.2

Light brown SILT and decomposed SHALE; medium dense to very dense, SS-2 21-21-40 61 --- 15.7

Brown decomposed to weathered SHALE, SS-3 18-50/0.4 50/0.4 --- 13.5 little silt; dense to very dense, damp to moist

SS-4 10-23-23 46 --- 17.5

SS-5 39-50/0.4 50/0.4 --- 26.1

SS-6 50/0.1 ---

End of Boring - 20.0' No Groundwater Table Encountered

CMT Laboratories, Inc. ■ 2701 Carolean Industrial Drive ■ State College, PA 16801 ■ Phone: (814) 231-8845

No Recovery

Boring: B-3

Project Name: VA Medical Center Building 502A Addition Date of Work: 7/13/2016 Site: Martinsburg, West Virginia File No.: 1605501 Driller/helper: M. Rager/G. Eckess Drill Rig: Mobile B-40 (ATV) Core Bit: N/A Auger Type: 3-1/4" HSA Sampling Type: ASTM D-1586 Elevation: 508' +/-

Depth Sample Blow "N" qp Mc GR Description (ft) Type Counts Value (tsf) (%) Remarks

6" TOPSOIL SS-1 6-10-14 24 --- 17.4

Light brown SILT and decomposed SHALE; medium dense to very dense, SS-2 18-16-24 40 --- 20.8 damp to moist

SS-3 18-29-44 73 --- 17.4

Light brown decomposed to weathered SS-4 50/0.3 --- --- 16.4 SHALE, little silt; medium dense, damp

Light brown clayey SILT; medium dense, SS-5 7-6-21 27 --- 38.5 wet Light brown decomposed to weathered SS-6 50/0.3 --- --- 16.7 SHALE, little silt; very dense, damp

Brown decomposed to weathered SHALE; SS-7 18-50/0.3 50/0.3 --- 11.9 very dense, damp

End of Boring - 20.0' No Groundwater Table Encountered

CMT Laboratories, Inc. ■ 2701 Carolean Industrial Drive ■ State College, PA 16801 ■ Phone: (814) 231-8845

Boring: B-4

Project Name: VA Medical Center Building 502A Addition Date of Work: 7/12/2016 Site: Martinsburg, West Virginia File No.: 1605501 Driller/helper: M. Rager/G. Eckess Drill Rig: Mobile B-40 (ATV) Core Bit: N/A Auger Type: 3-1/4" HSA Sampling Type: ASTM D-1586 Elevation: 507' +/-

Depth Sample Blow "N" qp Mc GR Description (ft) Type Counts Value (tsf) (%) Remarks

7" TOPSOIL SS-1 6-12-12 24 --- 13.7

Light brown SILT and decomposed SHALE; medium dense to very dense, SS-2 15-14-20 34 --- 18.6

SS-3 14-20-31 51 --- 18.3

Brown decomposed to weathered SHALE, SS-4 42-47-50/0.4 97/0.9 --- 17.7 little silt; very dense, damp

SS-5 16-33-50/0.3 83/0.8 --- 17.0

Dark brown decomposed to weathered SS-6 24-50/0.3 50/0.3 --- 15.4 SHALE, little silt; very dense, damp

End of Boring - 20.0' No Groundwater Table Encountered

CMT Laboratories, Inc. ■ 2701 Carolean Industrial Drive ■ State College, PA 16801 ■ Phone: (814) 231-8845

APPENDIX F

LABORATORY TESTING DATA

APPENDIX G

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). Annual Book of Standards – Soil and Rock, Volume 04.08, ASTM, West Conshohocken, PA, 2006.

Bowles, Joseph E. Foundation Analysis and Design, Fifth Edition, The McGraw-Hill

Companies, Inc., New York, 1996.

Coduto, Donald P. Foundation Design – Principles and Practices, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1994.

Das, Braja M. Principles of Geotechnical Engineering, Sixth Edition, PWS Publishing

Company, Boston, 2006.

Geyer, A. R., and Wilshusen, J. P. Environmental Geology Report 1 – Engineering

Characteristics of the Rocks of Pennsylvania, Second Edition, Pennsylvania Geological Survey, 1982.

International Code Council, Inc. International Building Code. 2012.

Pennsylvania Department of Transportation. Specifications, PennDOT Pub. 408, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Harrisburg, 2007.

PennTerra Engineering, Inc. Site Plan Drawings.