S02_Attachment - Specs Volume 3 832CM3036 Biloxi.pdf

NCA MASTER SPECIFICATIONS

VOLUME 3

(Appendices)

Biloxi National Cemetery Gravesite Expansion & FCA Deficiencies Biloxi, MS

Project Specifications – Volume 3 Project Number: 832CM3036

Prepared for:

US Department of Veterans Affairs National Cemetery Administration 425 I Street, NW Washington DC, 20001

Prepared by

ECS Southeast, LLC Geotechnical Engineering Report Biloxi National Cemetery Expansion

400 Veterans Ave.

Biloxi, Harrison County, Mississippi

ECS Project No. 65:1896

August 28, 2025

August 28, 2025

Mr. Benjamin Svedlow Integrity Federal Services 148 South Queen Street Suite 201 Martinsburg, WV 25401

ECS Project No. 65:1896

Reference: Geotechnical Engineering Report Biloxi National Cemetery Expansion 400 Veterans Ave.

Biloxi, Harrison County, Mississippi

Mr. Svedlow, ECS Southeast, LLC (ECS) has completed the subsurface exploration, laboratory testing, and geotechnical engineering analyses for the Biloxi National Cemetery Expansion project in Biloxi, MS. Our services were performed in accordance with our agreed to scope of work. This report presents our geotechnical analysis of the project along with the results of the field exploration and laboratory testing conducted, and our design and construction recommendations.

It has been our pleasure to be of service to Integrity Federal Services 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 evaluate subsurface conditions assumed 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 feel free to contact us.

Respectfully submitted, ECS Southeast, LLC

Nathan Burke, P.E.

Geotechnical Project Manager NBurke@ecslimited.com

Sarah Berman, P.E. Joe Cobena, P.E.

Geotechnical Department Manager Office Manager/Associate Principal Engineer SBerman@ecslimited.com JCobena@ecslimited.com

08/28/2025 mailto:NBurke@ecslimited.com mailto:SBerman@ecslimited.com

Biloxi National Cemetery Expansion – Biloxi, MS August 28, 2025 ECS Project No. 65:1896 Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

2.1 Project Location/Current Site Use/Past Site Use

2.2 Proposed Construction

3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING

3.1 Field Exploration Program

3.1.1 Test Borings

3.2 Subsurface Characterization

3.3 Groundwater Observations

3.4 Laboratory Testing

4.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 Geotechnical Considerations

4.1.1 Presence of Expansive Soils

4.1.2 Perimeter Conditions

4.2 Shallow Foundations

4.2.1 Considerations for Existing Foundations of Adjacent Structures

4.3 Slabs On Grade

4.4 Seismic Design Considerations

5.0 SITE CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Subgrade Preparation

5.1.1 Stripping and Grubbing

5.1.2 Proofrolling

5.2 Earthwork Operations

5.2.1 Subgrade Stabilization

5.2.2 Probable Fill

5.2.3 Engineered Fill

5.3 Foundation and Slab Observations

5.4 Utility Installations

6.0 CLOSING

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Drawings & Reports

• Site Location Diagram

• Boring Location Diagram

Appendix B – Field Operations

• Reference Notes for Boring Logs

• Boring Logs B-1 to B-18

Appendix C – Laboratory Testing

• Laboratory Testing Results Summary

ECS Project No. 65:1896 Page 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The following summarizes the main findings of the exploration, particularly those that may have a cost impact on the planned development. Further, our principal foundation recommendations are summarized. Information gleaned from the Executive Summary should not be utilized in lieu of reading the entire geotechnical report.

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING:

• Structure Information: Approximate 680 square foot building addition, new crypts

• Considerations: High groundwater table, proximity to existing structures

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS:

• Surface Material: Topsoil, approximately 6 inches

• Probable Fill: Refer to Section 5.2.2

• Potential Undercuts: Approximately 6 inches to remove topsoil

• Natural Material: Brown and Gray Silty Sand (SM), Brown and Gray Poorly Graded Sand with Silt (SP-SM), Gray and Tan Poorly Graded Sand (SP)

• Swell Potential (PVR): Low

• Groundwater: Groundwater was encountered at depths ranging from approximately 6 to 8 feet below existing grades across the site during drilling operations

DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS:

• Shallow foundations o Max. Net Allow. Bearing Pressure 2,100 psf for spread footings o Min. Exterior Footing Depth = 24 inches o Min. Interior Footing Depth = Per structural design

• Slab-on-Grade: Modulus of Subgrade Reaction of 100 pci

• Seismic Design: IBC Site Class “D”

ECS should be retained to review all project documents to confirm conformance with our recommendations, and to perform CMT testing for earthwork and foundation construction activities to document that our recommendations are strictly followed. This also allows us to quickly provide recommendations for remedial activities, where necessary.

ECS Project No. 65:1896 Page 2

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to provide geotechnical information for the expansion project at the Biloxi National Cemetery in Biloxi, MS. The project will include a single-story, slab-on-grade building addition, new crypts, and site grading. We anticipate the plan area of the building addition to encompass approximately 680 square feet. The recommendations developed for this report are based on project information supplied in a May 20, 2025, email from Ben Svedlow of Integrity Federal Services.

Our services were provided in accordance with Proposal No. 65:3063-GP REV.01, dated May 22, 2025, as authorized by Mark Dyck of Integrity Federal Services on June 26, 2025, which included our terms and conditions of service.

This report contains the procedures and results of our subsurface exploration and laboratory testing programs, review of existing site conditions, engineering analyses, and recommendations for the design and construction of the project.

The report includes the following items:

• Observations from our site reconnaissance including current site conditions and surface topographic conditions.

• Description of the field exploration and laboratory tests performed.

• Final logs of soil test borings and records of the field exploration and laboratory tests in accordance with the standard practice of geotechnical engineers. This includes a location diagram.

• Recommendations for allowable bearing pressure for conventional shallow foundation systems and estimates of total and differential foundation settlement. This will include specific project information and design loads assumed by ECS.

• Recommendations for floor slab construction, including recommendations for subgrade modulus and subgrade improvements.

• Evaluation of the on-site soil characteristics encountered in the soil boring. Specifically, we will discuss the suitability of the on-site materials for reuse as engineered fill to support ground slabs.

• A discussion of groundwater and its potential impact on structures and project construction.

• Recommendations regarding seismic site classification for this project site, in accordance with IBC

2021 and ASCE 7-16.

• Recommendations regarding site preparation and construction observations and testing.

ECS Project No. 65:1896 Page 3

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

2.1 PROJECT LOCATION/CURRENT SITE USE/PAST SITE USE

The project is located at 400 Veterans Ave. in Biloxi, Harrison County, Mississippi. The site is an existing national cemetery with maintained grass and asphalt surfaced pavements. Historical imagery obtained from Google Earth© appears to show the site has remained in the same general condition since 2004. The topography of the site varies slightly with surface elevations ranging from approximately +20 feet to +27 feet MSL. The elevations and topographic variations were obtained from Google-Earth©. The location is depicted in Figure 2.1.1 shown below:

Figure 2.1.1: General Site Location Outlined in Red

ECS Project No. 65:1896 Page 4

2.2 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

The following information explains our understanding of the planned development including proposed buildings and related infrastructure. If ECS’s understanding of the project is not correct, especially if the structural loads or elevations are different, please contact ECS so that we may review these changes and revise our recommendations, as appropriate.

SUBJECT DESIGN INFORMATION / ASSUMPTIONS

Building Footprint Approximately 680 Square Feet Number of Stories Single-Story

Usage Unknown Anticipated Framing Metal

Anticipated Column Loads 25 kips Maximum Anticipated Wall Loads 2 Kips Per Linear Foot (klf) Maximum

Anticipated Finish Floor Elevation EL. 24 ft MSL (Less than 2 feet above present site grades)

3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING

3.1 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 subsequent field and laboratory data to assist in the determination of geotechnical recommendations.

3.1.1 Test Borings

Our scope of work included drilling a total of eighteen (18) soil test borings. One (1) test boring located in the footprint of the proposed building addition was advanced to a depth of approximately 25 feet below the existing site grades. Ten (10) test borings were drilled in the crypt’s footprint to a depth of approximately 10 feet below the existing site grades. Also, seven (7) test borings were drilled in the areas of proposed site grading. Our borings were located with a handheld GPS unit, and their approximate locations are shown on the Boring Location Diagram in Appendix A. The approximate ground surface elevations noted in this report were estimated from Google-Earth©.

Representative soil samples were obtained by means of Standard Penetration Test (SPT) procedures in accordance with ASTM Specifications D-1586 in granular soils. SPT sampling is performed by driving a split-barrel sampler into the soil in 1.5-foot intervals with a 140-lb hammer and measures the resistance of the soil to penetration of the 2-inch diameter sampler.

Field logs of the soils encountered in the borings were maintained by ECS’s field engineer. After recovery, each geotechnical soil sample was removed for the sampler and visually classified. Representative portions of each soil sample were then wrapped in plastic and transported to our laboratory for further visual examination and laboratory testing. After completion of the drilling operations, the boreholes were backfilled with cuttings to the existing ground surface.

ECS Project No. 65:1896 Page 5

3.2 SUBSURFACE CHARACTERIZATION

The following text provides generalized characterizations of the soil strata encountered during our subsurface exploration. For subsurface information specific information, please refer to the Boring Logs in Appendix B:

GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

Approximate

Depth (ft) Stratum

No. Soil Description

0 – 0.5 - TOPSOIL, APPROXIMTELY 6 INCHES

0.5 – 4.5 I POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), Brown, Very Loose to Loose

4.5 – 23.5 II POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), Gray, Medium Dense to Very Dense

23.5 – 25.0 III SILTY SAND (SM), Gray, Very Loose

Notes:

(1) Soil descriptions show generalized strata to 25’. Strata in the borings vary with depth, please see attached Boring Logs in

Appendix B.

Please refer to the attached boring logs and laboratory data summary for this field exploration for a more detailed description of the subsurface conditions encountered in the borings as the stratification descriptions above are generalized for presentation purposes.

3.3 GROUNDWATER OBSERVATIONS

Groundwater levels, if observed, were made in the borings during drilling operations. In auger drilling operations, water is not introduced into the borehole and the groundwater position can often be evaluated by observing water flowing into and out of the excavation. Furthermore, visual observation of soil samples retrieved can often be used in evaluating the groundwater conditions.

Groundwater was encountered at depths ranging from approximately 6 to 8 feet below existing grade across the site during drilling operations.

The highest groundwater observations are normally encountered in the late winter or early spring or following seasonal heavy rainfall events. Fluctuations in the location of the long-term water table may occur due to changes in precipitation, evaporation, surface water runoff and other factors not immediately apparent at the time of his investigation. Therefore, the groundwater conditions at this site are expected to be significantly influenced by surface water runoff and seasonal rainfall.

ECS Project No. 65:1896 Page 6

3.4 LABORATORY TESTING

The laboratory testing consisted of selected tests performed on samples obtained during our field exploration operations. Classification and index property tests were performed on representative soil samples. The soil samples were tested for Moisture Content (ASTM D2216), Atterberg Limits (ASTM D4318), and Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve (ASTM D1140).

Each sample was visually classified based on texture and plasticity in accordance with ASTM D2488 Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedures) and including USCS classification symbols. After classification, the samples were grouped in the major zones noted on the boring logs in Appendix B. The group symbols for each soil type are indicated in parentheses along with the soil descriptions. The stratification lines between strata on the logs are approximate; in situ, the transitions may be gradual.

The soil samples will be retained in our laboratory for a period of 60 days, after which, they will be discarded unless other instructions are received as to their disposition.

4.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommendations have been developed based on Sections 2 and 3. If there are any changes to the project characteristics or if different subsurface conditions are encountered during construction, ECS should be consulted so that the recommendations of this report can be reviewed.

4.1 GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Based on the subsurface conditions encountered in the borings, anticipated fill heights, the anticipated loading conditions and the lowest level bearing elevation, the site appears suited for the proposed development provided the recommendations herein are strictly adhered to. The following sections detail our recommendations for the proposed development regarding foundation and below grade work.

For this project, we anticipate that the building addition can be supported with shallow foundations on conventional continuous or spread footings. The Shallow Foundations Section (4.2) provides recommendations for the support of the proposed building bearing on medium dense native sands or properly compacted engineered fill material.

4.1.1 Presence of Expansive Soils

Based on the laboratory test results, some of the near surface soils encountered within the building pad and pavement areas consist of sands which can generally have a low swelling potential. Soils with swelling potential located above the water table and within depths that are subject to changes in moisture are expected to experience volume change and were considered in our potential vertical rise (PVR) estimation. The potential vertical rise (PVR) is estimated to be less than 1 inch using an applied load of

1.0 psi.

Generally, one (1) inch of PVR is acceptable as the maximum allowable value used for design and construction. However, the structural engineer must confirm if these PVR values are within acceptable

ECS Project No. 65:1896 Page 7 limits for the specific project. These PVR estimations assume that the soils are allowed to increase/decrease in moisture content from a relatively dry condition to a relatively wet condition over a depth of approximately 10 feet from the existing ground surface at the time of field exploration.

4.1.2 Perimeter Conditions

The existing soils are moisture sensitive and will become inadequate when above their optimum moisture content as evaluated by ASTM D698. Positive drainage away from the structure should be provided during construction and maintained throughout the life of the proposed project. Water should not be allowed to infiltrate into the excavations during construction. Foundation soils should not be allowed to become wet.

Grades must be sloped to provide effective drainage away from the building during and after construction.

Adjacent concrete sidewalks and pavements should be sloped to provide drainage away from the building, and joints should be sealed; close attention should be paid to those directly abutting the building.

Roof runoff and surface drainage should be collected and discharged away from the structure to prevent wetting of the foundation soils. Roof gutters should be installed and connected to downspouts and pipes directing roof runoff into stormwater collection systems or discharged onto positively sloped pavements.

4.2 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS

For structures with maximum column loads of 25 kips or less and provided subgrades and engineered fills are prepared as recommended in this report, the proposed structure can be supported by shallow foundations. For column loads greater than 25 kips, ECS should be consulted to provide additional recommendations. We recommend that the foundation design use the following parameters:

Design Parameter Column Footing Wall Footing Net Allowable Bearing Pressure (1) 2,100 psf

Acceptable Bearing Soil Material Compacted Engineered Fill or Medium Dense Native Sands

Minimum Width 24 inches 18 inches Minimum Footing Embedment Depth (below slab or finished grade) (2) 24 inches 24 inches

Estimated Total Settlement (3) Less than 1- inch Less than 1- inch

Estimated Differential Settlement (4) Less than 1/2 inches between columns Less than 1/2 inches

Notes:

(1) Net allowable bearing pressure is the applied pressure in excess of the surrounding overburden soils above the base of the foundation.

(2) For bearing considerations and expansive soil concerns.

(3) The estimated total settlement is for up to a 3.5 ft x 3.5 ft square footing at a maximum imposed bearing pressure of

2,100 psf. If final column loads are greater than 25 kips, ECS must be contacted to approve foundation recommendations and update settlement calculations, if needed.

(4) Based on maximum column/wall loads and variability in borings. Differential settlement can be re-evaluated once the foundation plans are more complete.

Potential Undercuts: Very loose silty soils were encountered in the upper 2 feet in the building addition footprint and should be remediated as described in Section 5.2.1. If soft or loose soils are observed during footing observations, the footings should be extended to adequate bearing soils. Undercut areas should be backfilled with compacted engineered fill or lean concrete (f’c ≥ 1,000 psi at 28 days) to the

ECS Project No. 65:1896 Page 8 original design bottom of footing elevation; the original footing should be constructed on top of the hardened lean concrete or engineered fill. If engineered fill is used to backfill the undercut footing, the over-excavated footings should be widened accordingly on all sides for each one (1) foot of over excavation as detailed in Figure 4.2.1 below. If lean concrete is used for backfill, the over-excavation does not require widening.

Figure 4.2.1: Backfill Detail

The net allowable soil bearing pressure refers to that pressure which may be transmitted to the foundation bearing soils in excess of the final minimum surrounding overburden pressure. The final footing elevation should be evaluated by ECS’s geotechnical engineering personnel to evaluate that the bearing soils are capable of supporting the recommended net allowable bearing pressure and adequate for foundation construction. These evaluations should include visual observations using a T-probe or static cone penetrometer, or with the use of a Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP), if necessary. Evaluations should be performed within each column footing excavation (minimum of 2 tests per column footing) and at intervals not greater than 25 feet in continuous footings. The DCP testing should extend at least 2 feet below the final foundation subgrade. A minimum DCP value of 10 blows should be used for the evaluation of the foundations.

The settlement of a structure is a function of the compressibility of the bearing materials, bearing pressure, actual structural loads, fill depths, and the bearing elevation of footings with respect to the final ground surface elevation. Estimates of settlement for foundations bearing on engineered or non-engineered fills are strongly dependent on the quality of fill placed. Factors that may affect the quality of fill include maximum loose lift thickness of the fills placed and the amount of compactive effort placed on each lift. If the recommendations outlined in this report are followed, we expect total settlements for the proposed construction to be in the range of 1 inch or less, while the differential settlement will be approximately half of the anticipated total settlement. This evaluation is based on our engineering experience and the anticipated loadings for this type of structure and is intended to aid the structural engineer with the design.

Exposure to the environment may weaken the soils at the foundation bearing level if the foundation excavations remain exposed during periods of inclement weather. Therefore, foundation concrete should be placed the same day that final excavation is achieved, and the design bearing pressure verified. If the bearing soils are softened by surface water absorption or exposure to the environment, the softened soils must be removed from the foundation excavation bottom immediately prior to placement of concrete. If the foundation excavation must remain open overnight, or if rainfall is apparent while the bearing soils

Lean Concrete Backfill Engineered Fill Backfill

ECS Project No. 65:1896 Page 9 are exposed, we recommend that a 1 to 3-inch thick "mud mat" of "lean" concrete be placed over the exposed bearing soils before the placement of reinforcing steel.

4.2.1 Considerations for Existing Foundations of Adjacent Structures

At a minimum, new foundations should be placed at least 5 footing widths from any existing foundations.

Overlapping stresses between the new and existing foundations may cause unanticipated settlement and potentially damage both structures. Once foundation plans are finalized, ECS should be contacted to review the plans and make additional recommendations as necessary.

Due to the presence of existing structures, caution should be exercised when performing undercut operations adjacent to the existing foundations. Prior to performing undercutting, ECS should be contacted to review the planned undercut and make recommendations to limit the potential for undermining adjacent existing foundations.

New buildings that will be structurally attached to existing buildings should be designed to allow for differential movement between the two buildings of up to one (1) inch.

4.3 SLABS ON GRADE

Provided subgrades and engineered fills are prepared as discussed herein, the proposed floor slabs can be constructed as Ground Supported Slabs (or Slab-On-Grade) on lean natural soils, newly placed fill soils or lime treated soils. Based on the assumed finished floor elevation, it appears that the slabs will bear on native sand material or newly placed engineered fill. The following graphic depicts our soil-supported slab recommendations:

1. Drainage Layer Thickness: 4 inches

2. Drainage Layer Material: GRAVEL (GP, GW), SAND (SP, SW)

Soft or yielding soils may be encountered in some areas. Those soils should be removed and replaced with compacted engineered fill in accordance with the recommendations included in this report.

Subgrade Modulus: Provided the engineered fill and 4-inch granular drainage layer are constructed in accordance with our recommendations, the slab may be designed assuming a modulus of subgrade reaction, k1 of 100 pci (lbs./cu. inch). The modulus of subgrade reaction value is based on a 1 ft by 1 ft plate load test basis.

Vapor Barrier: Before the placement of concrete, a vapor barrier may be placed on top of the granular drainage layer to provide additional protection against moisture penetration through the floor slab. When

Concrete Slab Vapor Barrier

Granular Capillary Break/Drainage Layer

Compacted Subgrade

ECS Project No. 65:1896 Page 10 a vapor barrier is used, special attention should be given to surface curing of the slab to reduce the potential for uneven drying, curling and/or cracking of the slab. Depending on proposed flooring material types, the structural engineer and/or the architect may choose to eliminate the vapor barrier.

Slab Isolation: Soil-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 such as in a drop-down footing/monolithic slab configuration, the slab should be designed with adequate reinforcement and load transfer devices to reduce risk of overstressing of the slab.

4.4 SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

Seismic Site Classification: The International Building Code (IBC) 2021 requires site classification for seismic design based on the upper 100 feet of a soil profile. The 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 Standard Penetration Resistance (N-value) method was used in classifying this site.

SEISMIC SITE CLASSIFICATION

Site Class Soil Profile Name Shear Wave Velocity, Vs, (ft./s)

Standard Penetration Resistance (N-value)

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 N > 50 D Stiff Soil Profile 600 ≤ Vs ≤ 1,200 fps 15 ≤ N ≤ 50 E Soft Soil Profile Vs < 600 fps N < 15

Based upon our interpretation of the subsurface conditions, the expected Seismic Site Classification is “D” as shown in the preceding Table.

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, we can provide additional testing methods that may yield more favorable results.

5.0 SITE CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 SUBGRADE PREPARATION

The existing soils are moisture sensitive and will become inadequate when above their optimum moisture content as evaluated by ASTM D698. Effective site drainage should be implemented at the beginning of and maintained throughout construction activities. Care should be taken to keep construction traffic to a minimum during and immediately after times of inclement weather.

ECS Project No. 65:1896 Page 11

ECS should be on-site full-time during earthwork and foundation construction activities to document that our recommendations are strictly followed and to provide recommendations for remedial activities, if necessary.

5.1.1 Stripping and Grubbing

The subgrade preparation should consist of undercutting up to 6 inches of topsoil, debris, and utilities and soft or yielding materials from the 10-foot expanded building limits, and 5 feet beyond the toe of engineered fills.

Note: Following stripping and grubbing the entire construction area should be proofrolled as outlined in Section 5.1.2 of this report. Soils observed to rut or deflect greater than an inch in depth should be undercut and replaced or otherwise mitigated.

Deeper topsoil or organic laden soils may be present in wet, low-lying, and poorly drained areas. In wooded areas, the root balls may extend as deep as about 2 feet and will require additional localized stripping depth to completely remove the organics. ECS should be retained to evaluate that topsoil and poor surficial materials have been removed prior to the placement of engineered fill or construction of structures.

5.1.2 Proofrolling

Following clearing activities and prior to fill placement or other construction on subgrades, the subgrades should be evaluated by an ECS field technician. The exposed subgrade should be thoroughly proofrolled with a half loaded tandem-axle dump truck or similar construction equipment weighing a minimum of 15 tons. Proofrolling should be traversed in two perpendicular directions with overlapping passes of the vehicle under the observation of an ECS technician. This procedure is intended to assist in identifying localized yielding materials.

Where proofrolling identifies areas of yielding or “pumping” subgrade those areas should be repaired prior to the placement of subsequent engineered fill or other construction materials. Observations of yielding or “pumping” should be addressed with ECS to establish the appropriate remediation as outlined in Section 5.2.1.

5.2 EARTHWORK OPERATIONS

5.2.1 Subgrade Stabilization

Methods of stabilization include densification, undercutting, moisture conditioning, or chemical stabilization. Test pits may be excavated to explore the shallow subsurface materials to help in determining the cause of the observed inadequate materials, and to assist in the evaluation of appropriate remedial actions to stabilize the subgrade. Anticipated methods of subgrade stabilization of the near surface soils are provided below:

ECS Project No. 65:1896 Page 12

Moisture Conditioning: If it is established that high moisture content is the cause of the inadequate subgrade, the geotechnical engineer may require the earthwork contractor process the upper 12 to 18 inches of in-situ subgrade by windrowing with a dozer or plowing with a set of heavy-duty disk harrows until soil moisture is observed to be within 2 percent of its optimum moisture content as evaluated by ASTM D698 to improve subgrade conditions before consideration other mitigation approaches. The drying effort should begin after the exposed subgrade is free of standing water and the windrowing/disking should be continuous during a period of dry weather. ECS should be onsite to periodically perform soil moisture testing. The processed areas should be sealed with compaction equipment and a flat drum roller or dozer blade at the end of the day in case of overnight rain. If weather conditions do not allow appropriate time to dry the native subgrade, the geotechnical engineer may recommend chemical treatment with cement in order to provide an adequate working surface for fill placement.

Subgrade Densification: After completing the clearing and stripping operations and installing temporary groundwater control measures (if required), the exposed surface should be compacted with a heavy vibratory roller having a minimum static, at-drum weight on the order of 10 to 12 tons. Because of the relatively dry condition of the surficial fine sands, these soils may need to be wetted to increase their moisture content nearer to their optimum value that will best facilitate compaction. Typically, the material should exhibit moisture contents within ±2 percentage points of the modified Proctor optimum moisture content (ASTM D 1557) during the compaction operations. Considering the dry nature of the surficial fine sandy soils, dozer equipment should be anticipated to assist the rollers in traversing the site during the compaction operations. With the soils properly moisture conditioned, our experience indicates that at least eight overlapping passes in each direction of the vibratory roller should achieve the desired densification of the surficial very loose fine sands to depths of 3 to 4 feet or more.

Compaction should continue until densities of at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557) have been achieved within the upper one foot of the compacted natural soils at the site. Dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) soundings, performed by hand, should also be performed subsequent to the surface soil heavy compaction operations to confirm densification of the very loose soils within the upper 2 feet of the existing grade.

Should the bearing level soils experience pumping and soil strength loss during the compaction operations, compaction work should be immediately terminated, and (1) the disturbed soils should be removed and backfilled with compacted engineered fill, or (2) the excess moisture content within the disturbed soils should be allowed to dissipate before recompacting.

Care should be exercised to avoid damaging any nearby structures while the compaction operation is underway. Prior to commencing compaction, occupants of adjacent structures should be notified, and the existing conditions of the structures should be documented with photographs and survey (if deemed necessary). Compaction should cease if deemed detrimental to adjacent structures, and ECS should be contacted immediately. We recommend the vibratory roller remain a minimum of 50 feet from existing structures. Within this zone, use of a track-mounted bulldozer, or a vibratory roller operating in the static mode, is recommended.

Undercut and Replace: If other means of soil stabilization are not practical, the undercutting or removal of the inadequate subsurface material may be required. The undercutting of such material will be conducted, inspected, and tested in accordance with Section 5.1.

ECS Project No. 65:1896 Page 13

Lime Stabilization: We do not anticipate lime treatment of the onsite sandy soils; however, lime stabilization may be used to modify onsite clay soils to achieve an adequate working surface and achieve PIs less than 20 for reuse as engineered fill. The amount of lime necessary to achieve lime stabilization will vary depending on the clay mineral, plasticity and type of lime used for stabilization. For estimating purposes 4 to 6% percent of lime by volume should be used; however, a laboratory lime series should be performed at the time of construction to establish the optimum lime content. Surficial samples should be collected from across the site and testing should be conducted on the composite sample. Lime treatment should conform to MDOT Division 300 (Bases) – Section 200. An ECS Field Engineer or Senior Technician should be present during lime treatment activities to observe lime quantities and document that treated areas are in conformance with the project requirements. Please note that caution should be used when powdered lime in used in closely populated areas. To control dust, a lime slurry or pelletized lime may be used where dust must be controlled. In addition, pelletized lime will generally require 2 to 3 times the effort to properly pulverize and mix into the clay soils than a powder or slurry.

5.2.2 Probable Fill

Fill or deleterious material/debris was not encountered in the soil borings but may be encountered between or beyond our borings due to past development of existing structures nearby. If encountered, ECS recommends removing the existing fill and debris in its entirety and replacing it with well compacted engineered fill meeting the parameters outlined in Section 5.2.3.

5.2.3 Engineered Fill

Prior to placement of engineered fill, representative bulk samples (approximately 50 pounds) of on-site and/or off-site borrow should be submitted to ECS for laboratory testing, which will typically include Atterberg limits, natural moisture content, grain-size distribution, and moisture-density relationships (i.e., Proctors) for compaction. Import materials should be tested prior to being hauled to the site to evaluate if they meet project specifications. Alternatively, Proctor data from other accredited laboratories can be submitted if the test results are within the last 90 days.

Satisfactory Engineered Fill Materials: Materials satisfactory for use as Engineered Fill should consist of inorganic soils with the following engineering properties and compaction requirements.

ENGINEERED FILL INDEX PROPERTIES

Soil Type USCS Classification Property

Imported Fill CL, SC, SM, SP, SP-SM, SP-SC LL < 40, PI < 20, Fines Content < 25%

Aggregate Base GP MDOT Division 703 (Aggregates) crushed limestone or similarly graded recycled aggregates

On-Site Soils SM/SP-SM The native soils in the upper 4 feet appear to meet the requirements for reuse as engineered fill.

ECS Project No. 65:1896 Page 14

ENGINEERED FILL COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS

Subject Requirement

Compaction Standard Standard Proctor, ASTM D698

Required Compaction 95% of Maximum Dry Density

Moisture Content Optimum to +3 % Points of the Soil’s Optimum Value

Loose Thickness 8 Inches Prior to Compaction

Fill Placement: Excessively wet fill soils or aggregates should be scarified, aerated, and moisture conditioned prior to compaction.

On-Site Borrow Suitability: Natural deposits of soils that meet the definition above may be used as engineered fill on the site.

5.3 FOUNDATION AND SLAB OBSERVATIONS

Protection of Foundation Excavations: Exposure to the environment may weaken the soils at the footing bearing level if the foundation excavations remain open; therefore, foundation concrete should be placed the same day that excavations are made. Bearing soils that are weakened by surface water intrusion or exposure must be removed from the foundation excavation bottom immediately prior to placement of concrete. If the excavation must remain open overnight, or if rainfall becomes imminent while the bearing soils are exposed, a 1 to 3-inch thick “mud mat” of “lean” concrete should be placed on the bearing soils before the placement of reinforcing steel.

Footing Subgrade Observations: The soils at the foundation bearing elevation are anticipated to be adequate for support of the proposed structure if foundations bear in medium dense sands or properly compacted engineered fill material. ECS should observe the foundation subgrade prior to placing foundation concrete, to confirm the bearing soils are as recommended.

Slab Subgrade Verification: Prior to placement of a drainage layer, the subgrade should be prepared in accordance with the recommendations found in Section 5.1.

5.4 UTILITY INSTALLATIONS

Utility Subgrades: The soils encountered in our exploration are expected to be generally adequate for support of utility pipes. The pipe subgrades should be observed and probed for stability by ECS. Loose or inadequate materials encountered should be removed and replaced with adequate compacted Engineered Fill, or pipe stone bedding material.

Utility Backfilling: The granular bedding material (often AASHTO #57 stone) should be at least 4 inches thick, but not less than that specified by the civil engineer’s project drawings and specifications. We recommend that the bedding materials be placed up to the springline of the pipe. Fill placed for support of the utilities, as well as backfill over the utilities, should conform to Section 5.2.

Excavation Safety: Excavations and slopes should be constructed and maintained in accordance with OSHA excavation safety standards. The contractor is solely responsible for designing, constructing, and maintaining adequate excavations and slopes. The contractor’s responsible person, as defined in 29 CFR

ECS Project No. 65:1896 Page 15

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.

6.0 CLOSING

ECS has prepared this report to guide the geotechnical-related design and construction aspects of the project. We performed these services in accordance with the standard of care expected of professionals in the industry performing similar services on projects of like size and complexity at this time in the region.

No other representation expressed or implied, and no warranty or guarantee is included or intended in this report.

The description of the proposed project is based on information provided to ECS by Integrity Federal Services. If any of this information is inaccurate or changes, either because of our interpretation of the documents provided or site or design changes that may occur later, ECS should be contacted so we can review our recommendations and provide additional or alternate recommendations that reflect the proposed construction.

We recommend that ECS review the project plans and specifications so we can confirm that those plans/specifications are in accordance with the recommendations of this geotechnical report.

Field observations, and quality assurance testing during earthwork and foundation installation are an extension of, and integral to, the geotechnical design. We recommend that ECS be retained to apply our expertise throughout the geotechnical phases of construction, and to provide consultation and recommendation should issues arise. ECS is not responsible for the conclusions, opinions, or recommendations of others based on the data in this report.

Appendix A - Drawings and Reports Site Location Diagram Boring Location Diagram(s)

8/25/2025

Service Layer Credits: World Boundaries and Places: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, ©

²

ENGINEER

SCALE

PROJECT NO.

SHEET

DATE

65:1896

1" = 600'

JCC3

Integrity Federal Services 400 Veterans Ave., Biloxi, Mississippi

Biloxi National Cemetery Expansion

SITE LOCATION DIAGRAM

8/25/2025

Service Layer Credits: World Boundaries and Places: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, ©

²

ENGINEER

SCALE

PROJECT NO.

SHEET

DATE

65:1896

1" = 300'

JCC3

Integrity Federal Services 400 Veterans Ave., Biloxi, Mississippi

Biloxi National Cemetery Expansion

BORING LOCATION DIAGRAM

Appendix B – Field Operations Reference Notes Boring Logs

REFERENCE NOTES FOR BORING LOGS

MATERIAL1,2

1Classifications and symbols per ASTM D 2488-17 (Visual-Manual Procedure) unless noted otherwise.

2To be consistent with general practice, “POORLY GRADED” has been removed from GP, GP-GM, GP-GC, SP, SP-SM, SP-SC soil types on the boring logs.

3Non-ASTM designations are included in soil descriptions and symbols along with ASTM symbol [Ex: (SM-FILL)].

4Typically estimated via pocket penetrometer or Torvane shear test and expressed in tons per square foot (tsf).

5Standard Penetration Test (SPT) refers to the number of hammer blows (blow count) of a 140 lb. hammer falling 30 inches on a 2 inch OD split spoon sampler required to drive the sampler 12 inches (ASTM D 1586). “N-value” is another term for “blow count” and is expressed in blows per foot (bpf). SPT correlations per 7.4.2 Method B and need to be corrected if using an auto hammer.

6The water levels are those levels actually measured in the borehole at the times indicated by the symbol. The measurements are relatively reliable when augering, without adding fluids, in granular soils. In clay and cohesive silts, the determination of water levels may require several days for the water level to stabilize. In such cases, additional methods of measurement are generally employed.

7Minor deviation from ASTM D 2488-17 Note 14.

8Percentages are estimated to the nearest 5% per ASTM D 2488-17.

Reference Notes for Boring Logs (03-24-2021).doc © 2021 ECS Corporate Services, LLC. All Rights Reserved

COHESIVE SILTS & CLAYS

UNCONFINED

COMPRESSIVE

STRENGTH, QP4

<0.25

0.25 - <0.50

0.50 - <1.00

1.00 - <2.00

2.00 - <4.00

4.00 - 8.00

>8.00

SPT5

(BPF)

CONSISTENCY7

(COHESIVE)

GRAVELS, SANDS & NON-COHESIVE SILTS

SPT5

DENSITY

<5 5 - 10

11 - 30 31 - 50

>50

Very Loose Loose

Medium Dense Dense

Very Dense

WATER LEVELS6

RELATIVE

AMOUNT7

Trace

With

Adjective (ex: “Silty”)

COARSE

GRAINED

(%)8

<5

FINE

GRAINED

(%)8

<5

DRILLING SAMPLING SYMBOLS & ABBREVIATIONS

PARTICLE SIZE IDENTIFICATION

DESIGNATION PARTICLE SIZES

Hollow Stem Auger Power Auger (no sample) Bulk Sample of Cuttings Wash Sample Shelby Tube Sampler Split Spoon Sampler

Rock Quality Designation % Rock Sample Recovery % Rock Core, NX, BX, AX Rock Bit Drilling Pressuremeter TestSS

ST

WS

BS

PA

HSA

RQD

PM

RD

RC

REC

Boulders Cobbles

Gravel:

Sand:

Silt & Clay (“Fines”) Fine Medium

Coarse Fine Coarse

0.074 mm to 0.425 mm (No. 200 to No. 40 sieve) <0.074 mm (smaller than a No. 200 sieve)

0.425 mm to 2.00 mm (No. 40 to No. 10 sieve)

2.00 mm to 4.75 mm (No. 10 to No. 4 sieve)

4.75 mm to 19 mm (No. 4 sieve to ¾ inch) ¾ inch to 3 inches (19 mm to 75 mm) 3 inches to 12 inches (75 mm to 300 mm) 12 inches (300 mm) or larger

>50 31 - 50 16 - 30

9 - 15 5 - 8 3 - 4 <2

Very Hard Hard

Very Stiff

Stiff Firm Soft

Very Soft

ASPHALT

CONCRETE

GRAVEL

TOPSOIL

VOID

BRICK

AGGREGATE BASE COURSE

GW

GP

GM

GC

SW

SP

SM

SC

ML

MH

CL

CH

OL

OH

PT

WELL-GRADED GRAVEL

gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines

POORLY-GRADED GRAVEL

gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines

SILTY GRAVEL

gravel-sand-silt mixtures

CLAYEY GRAVEL

gravel-sand-clay mixtures

WELL-GRADED SAND

gravelly sand, little or no fines

POORLY-GRADED SAND

gravelly sand, little or no fines

SILTY SAND

sand-silt mixtures

CLAYEY SAND

sand-clay mixtures

SILT

non-plastic to medium plasticity

ELASTIC SILT

high plasticity

LEAN CLAY

low to medium plasticity

FAT CLAY

high plasticity

ORGANIC SILT or CLAY non-plastic to low plasticity

ORGANIC SILT or CLAY high plasticity

PEAT

highly organic soils

WL (First Encountered)

WL (Completion)

WL (Seasonal High Water)

WL (Stabilized)

FILL POSSIBLE FILL PROBABLE FILL ROCK

FILL AND ROCK

25 - 45

10 - 20

30 - 45

10 - 25

CLIENT:

PROJECT NO.:

65:1896

BORING NO.:

B-01

SHEET:

PROJECT NAME:

Biloxi National Cemetery Expansion

DRILLER/CONTRACTOR:

ECS

SITE LOCATION:

400 Veterans Ave., Biloxi, Mississippi, 39531 LOSS OF CIRCULATION

LATITUDE:

30.411584

LONGITUDE:

-88.942746

STRUCTURE:

Building Addition

SURFACE ELEVATION:

23 BOTTOM OF CASING

D

EP

TH

(F

T)

SA

M

PL

E

N U

M

BE

R

SA

M

PL

E

TY

PE

SA

M

PL

E

D

IS

TA

N

C E

SA

M

PL

E

R

EC

O

VE

R Y

(IN

DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL

ST

R

AT

IG

R

AP

H Y

EL

EV

AT

IO

N (F

T)

W

AT

ER

L

EV

EL

S

BL

O

W S/

6" (T

C P/

M C

/S

PT

N

VA

LU

E)

0 20 40 60 80 100 Rec % RQD %

0 10 20 30 40 50 SPT TCP ModCal

LI

Q

U

ID

L

IM

IT

PL

AS

TI

C

IT

Y

IN

D

EX

M O

IS

TU

E C

O N

TE

N

T

Q P

(T

SF

FI

N

ES

C

O N

TE

N

T

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

END OF BORING AT 25 Ft

Topsoil [Thickness=6"].

(SP-SM) POORLY GRADED SAND

WITH SILT-brown, very loose to loose.

(SP) POORLY GRADED SAND-gray, medium dense.

(SP) POORLY GRADED SAND-gray, very dense.

(SP) POORLY GRADED SAND-gray, medium dense.

(SM) SILTY SAND-gray, very loose.

3-2-2 N = 4

3-3-3 N = 6

2-4-7 N = 11

2-7-

N = 17

1-15-

N = 51

2-8-

N = 20

8-12-

N = 28

2-1-3 N = 4

3.9

11.5

20.8

25.0

32.5

21.4

22.0

25.2

9.9

0.8

1.4

48.9

THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL

WL (First Encountered): 6 FT BORING STARTED: 07/15/2025 CAVE IN DEPTH: Not Observed

WL (Completion): BORING COMPLETED: 07/15/2025 HAMMER TYPE: Automatic

WL (Seasonal High Water): EQUIPMENT: LOGGED BY: DRILLING METHOD:

WL (Stabilized): ATV AD Hollow Stem Auger (0'-10'), Wet Rotary (10'-25')

GEOTECHNICAL BOREHOLE LOG

PROJECT NO.:

65:1896

BORING NO.:

B-02

SHEET:

PROJECT NAME:

Biloxi National Cemetery Expansion

DRILLER/CONTRACTOR:

ECS

SITE LOCATION:

400 Veterans Ave., Biloxi, Mississippi, 39531 LOSS OF CIRCULATION

LATITUDE:

30.412704

LONGITUDE:

-88.941715

STRUCTURE:

Crypt

SURFACE ELEVATION:

24 BOTTOM OF CASING

D

EP

TH

(F

T)

SA

M

PL

E

N U

M

BE

R

SA

M

PL

E

TY

PE

SA

M

PL

E

D

IS

TA

N

C E

SA

M

PL

E

R

EC

O

VE

R Y

(IN

DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL

ST

R

AT

IG

R

AP

H Y

EL

EV

AT

IO

N (F

T)

W

AT

ER

L

EV

EL

S

BL

O

W S/

6" (T

C P/

M C

/S

PT

N

VA

LU

E)

0 20 40 60 80 100 Rec % RQD %

0 10 20 30 40 50 SPT TCP ModCal

LI

Q

U

ID

L

IM

IT

PL

AS

TI

C

IT

Y

IN

D

EX

M O

IS

TU

E C

O N

TE

N

T

Q P

(T

SF

FI

N

ES

C

O N

TE

N

T

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

END OF BORING AT 10 Ft

Topsoil [Thickness=6"].

(SP-SM) POORLY GRADED SAND

WITH SILT-brown, very loose to loose.

(SP) POORLY GRADED SAND-tan, very loose to loose.

1-2-2 N = 4

1-1-2 N = 3

1-3-2 N = 5

1-2-2 N = 4

1-2-5 N = 7

3.2 7.3

THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL

WL (First Encountered): BORING STARTED: 07/15/2025 CAVE IN DEPTH: Not Observed

WL (Completion): BORING COMPLETED: 07/15/2025 HAMMER TYPE: Automatic

WL (Seasonal High Water): EQUIPMENT: LOGGED BY: DRILLING METHOD:

WL (Stabilized): ATV AD Hollow Stem Auger (0'-10')

PROJECT NO.:

65:1896

BORING NO.:

B-03

SHEET:

PROJECT NAME:

Biloxi National Cemetery Expansion

DRILLER/CONTRACTOR:

ECS

SITE LOCATION:

400 Veterans Ave., Biloxi, Mississippi, 39531 LOSS OF CIRCULATION

LATITUDE:

30.412721

LONGITUDE:

-88.942609

STRUCTURE:

Crypt

SURFACE ELEVATION:

27 BOTTOM OF CASING

D

EP

TH

(F

T)

SA

M

PL

E

N U

M

BE

R

SA

M

PL

E

TY

PE

SA

M

PL

E

D

IS

TA

N

C E

SA

M

PL

E

R

EC

O

VE

R Y

(IN

DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL

ST

R

AT

IG

R

AP

H Y

EL

EV

AT

IO

N (F

T)

W

AT

ER

L

EV

EL

S

BL

O

W S/

6" (T

C P/

M C

/S

PT

N

VA

LU

E)

0 20 40 60 80 100 Rec % RQD %

0 10 20 30 40 50 SPT TCP ModCal

LI

Q

U

ID

L

IM

IT

PL

AS

TI

C

IT

Y

IN

D

EX

M O

IS

TU

E C

O N

TE

N

T

Q P

(T

SF

FI

N

ES

C

O N

TE

N

T

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

END OF BORING AT 10 Ft

Topsoil [Thickness=6"].

(SP-SM) POORLY GRADED SAND

WITH SILT-brown, very loose to loose.

2-6-2 N = 8

4-4-4 N = 8

2-2-2 N = 4

1-1-2 N = 3

2-4-3 N = 7

6.2

THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL

WL (First Encountered): BORING STARTED: 07/15/2025 CAVE IN DEPTH: Not Observed

WL (Completion): BORING COMPLETED: 07/15/2025 HAMMER TYPE: Automatic

WL (Seasonal High Water): EQUIPMENT: LOGGED BY: DRILLING METHOD:

PROJECT NO.:

65:1896

BORING NO.:

B-04

SHEET:

PROJECT NAME:

Biloxi National Cemetery Expansion

DRILLER/CONTRACTOR:

ECS

SITE LOCATION:

400 Veterans Ave., Biloxi, Mississippi, 39531 LOSS OF CIRCULATION

LATITUDE:

30.412735

LONGITUDE:

-88.943329

STRUCTURE:

Crypt

SURFACE ELEVATION:

25 BOTTOM OF CASING

D

EP

TH

(F

T)

SA

M

PL

E

N U

M

BE

R

SA

M

PL

E

TY

PE

SA

M

PL

E

D

IS

TA

N

C E

SA

M

PL

E

R

EC

O

VE

R Y

(IN

DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL

ST

R

AT

IG

R

AP

H Y

EL

EV

AT

IO

N (F

T)

W

AT

ER

L

EV

EL

S

BL

O

W S/

6" (T

C P/

M C

/S

PT

N

VA

LU

E)

0 20 40 60 80 100 Rec % RQD %

0 10 20 30 40 50 SPT TCP ModCal

LI

Q

U

ID

L

IM

IT

PL

AS

TI

C

IT

Y

IN

D

EX

M O

IS

TU

E C

O N

TE

N

T

Q P

(T

SF

FI

N

ES

C

O N

TE

N

T

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

END OF BORING AT 10 Ft

Topsoil [Thickness=6"].

(SP-SM) POORLY GRADED SAND

WITH SILT-brown, very loose to loose.

(SP) POORLY GRADED SAND-gray, loose to medium dense.

1-3-3 N = 6