S02 Geotechnical Report 11-30-15.pdf

435 Independence Avenue, Suite C, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 ▪ 717-458-0800 ▪ www.advantageengineers.com

FINAL GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

VAMC WILKES-BARRE PARKING STRUCTURE

WILKES-BARRE, LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

PREPARED FOR:

MR. JOSHUA BOWER

QUALITY ASSURANCE PLUS, INC.

401 EAST WINDING HILL ROAD, SUITE 210

MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055

PREPARED BY:

DAVID J. BUCKWALTER

SENIOR PROJECT MANAGER

MARK GIUNTA, P.E.

SENIOR PROJECT MANAGER

PROJECT NUMBER - 150002002

NOVEMBER 30, 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION

3.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION PROGRAM

4.0 LABORATORY TESTING

5.0 DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

5.1 GEOLOGY

5.2 SOIL

5.3 BEDROCK

5.4 GROUNDWATER

6.0 SITE DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS

6.1 SITE PREPARATION

6.2 PROOF-ROLLING

6.3 EXCAVATION CONSIDERATIONS

7.0 STRUCTURAL FILL

7.1 IMPORTED FILL

7.2 REUSE OF ON-SITE SOILS

7.3 PLACEMENT & COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS

8.0 FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1 DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATIONS

8.2 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS ON BEDROCK

8.3 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS ON SOIL

8.4 SETTLEMENT

8.5 EXCAVATION SUPPORT

8.6 SEISMIC SITE CLASS

9.0 GROUND FLOOR SUPPORT

10.0 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES

11.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING

12.0 LIMITATIONS

Appendix

Topographic Map

Geologic Map

Test Boring Location Plan

Test Boring Profiles

Laboratory Test Results

Test Boring Logs

Attachments

Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report

Geotechnical Engineering Report VAMC Wilkes-Barre Parking Structure Wilkes-Barre, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania Advantage Project Number: 150002001

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report was prepared by Advantage Engineers, LLC (Advantage), on behalf of Quality Assurance Plus, Inc. of Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, and contains the results of a geotechnical engineering investigation conducted at the site of the proposed multi-story parking structure to be located north of the existing Wilkes-Barre VA Medical Center in Wilkes-Barre, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania. The purpose of this investigation has been to define the stratification of subsurface materials and the engineering properties of these materials beneath the footprint of the proposed structure. Based on the results of our field investigation and laboratory analyses, foundation design and construction recommendations have been formulated.

The scope of work for this project included completion of subsurface field investigations, a laboratory testing program, and geotechnical engineering analysis. This report summarizes the results of the work performed and provides recommendations regarding foundation design, soil strength conditions, and general construction criteria.

2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The project site currently consists of the existing VAMC campus located in Wilkes-Barre, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania. The property is bordered to the north by woods and Valley Crest Boulevard, to the south by the existing hospital, to the west by an existing parking lot, and to the east by woods and an existing access road. Topography across the construction area slopes down gradient away from the existing hospital resulting in approximately 32 feet of grade variation across the footprint of the proposed parking structure. The approximate location of the site in relation to the surrounding area is depicted on the attached Topographic Map (Dwg. No.: 150002002-A-100).

Based on plans provided by the client, the project will consist of constructing a new 4 level parking structure. The proposed parking garage will measure approximately 35,815 square feet in plan area. The ground level elevations will range from 848’ to 859’-4”. The third level entry/exit point will be at the main service road north of the hospital at elevation 881’-2”. The slope of the proposed garage floor will be at 5.5%.

3.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION PROGRAM

Advantage completed a “Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report” (Preliminary Report), dated March 25, 2015, for the proposed site improvements. Data taken from the Preliminary Report was used during preparation of this Final Geotechnical Engineering Report.

In an effort to evaluate subsurface conditions across the footprint of the proposed structure, 8 standard earth borings were conducted. Supervision and monitoring of the field investigation were provided by a representative of Advantage, who located the test borings in the field based on plans provided by the client. The approximate locations of the test borings, designated as B-1 through B-8, are shown on the Test Boring Location Plan (Dwg. No.: 150002002-A-102), presented in the Appendix.

The test borings were advanced using a truck-mounted drill rig equipped with hollow-stem augers.

Split-spoon samples, conducted in accordance with ASTM standard D1586, were taken at suitable intervals throughout the entire depth of the borings and the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) values were recorded for each sample obtained. The SPT values, which are a measure of relative density or consistency, are the number of blows required to drive a 2-inch (outer-diameter), split-barrel sampler 2 feet using a 140-pound weight dropped 30 inches. The number of blows required to advance the sampler over the 12-inch interval from 6 to 18 inches is considered the "N" value. It should be noted test borings B-1 and B-2 were completed with rotary wash drilling equipment, using similar sampling methods.

Bedrock core samples were recovered from 7 of the 8 test borings completed with Nx-sized coring equipment. Following each coring run, the character, competency, percent recovery and Rock Quality Designation (RQD) were determined for each sample recovered.

Data pertaining to the subsurface investigation was documented in the field and is presented in detail on the Test Boring Profiles and Test Boring Logs, presented within the Appendix. The Test Boring Profiles (Dwg. Nos.: 150002001-A-103 and 150002002-B-103) depict cross-sections of the subsurface conditions encountered within each test boring, including: soil and rock types, depths of individual strata, recorded “N” values, percent recoveries and RQD. The Test Boring Logs contain general information about the subsurface program and specific data regarding each test boring, including: sample depths, blow counts per 6 inches of penetration, and detailed characterizations of the subsurface materials encountered.

4.0 LABORATORY TESTING

All soils encountered at the site were visually reviewed and classified by Advantage personnel. Three (3) representative soil samples were subjected to laboratory analyses, in an effort to verify visual classification and to establish the engineering parameters required for foundation design analysis. The laboratory testing conducted on the samples consisted of standard classification testing, completed in accordance with ASTM standard D2487. The tests performed included Natural Moisture Content (ASTM D2216), Sieve Analysis (ASTM D422), and Atterberg Limits Determination (ASTM D4318).

Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) Group Symbols and ASTM Group Names have been assigned to the soils analyzed. Graphical depictions of the particle size analyses are presented in the Appendix.

A summary of the results of the testing conducted are presented below in Table I.

TABLE I

LABORATORY RESULTS

Boring Number B-3 B-6 B-4

Sample Number S2 & S3 S4 & S5 S6 & S7

Sample Depths (ft.) 2’ – 6’ 6’ – 10’ 13’ – 20’

Soil Type Fill Stratum I Stratum II

Particle Size Distribution (Percent)

Gravel 75.3 9.4 46.3

Sand 19.4 24.1 33.8

Silt/Clay 5.3 66.5 19.9

Atterberg Limits

Liquid Limit NP 24 27

Plastic Limit NP 21 19

Plasticity Index NP 3 8

Natural Moisture Content 2.9% 17.7% 2.8%

USCS Group Symbol GP - GM ML GC

ASTM Group Name Poorly Graded GRAVEL with Silt and Sand

Sandy

SILT

Clayey

GRAVEL

with Sand

Additional standard classification tests were completed during the Preliminary Report and are found within the “Attachments”.

5.0 DESCRIPTION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

5.1 GEOLOGY

According to the Pennsylvania Geologic Survey's Atlas of Preliminary Geologic Quadrangles, Fourth Series, 1981, the project site is situated in the Pennsylvanian Llewellyn Formation (geologic symbol Pl). The project site within its geologic setting is presented on the Geologic Map (Dwg. No.: 150002002-A-101), found within the Appendix.

The Pennsylvania Geologic Survey publication, The Engineering Characteristics of the Rocks of Pennsylvania, Second Edition, 1982, describes the rock in this formation as consisting of interbedded layers of sandstone, siltstone and conglomerate; which range from medium- to coarse-grained; light gray to brown, with numerous anthracite coal and dark-gray to black shales.

The sandstone in this formation is well bedded and thick to massive, while the coal and shale beds are relatively thin. Fractures are moderately developed and moderately distributed. Joints are moderately spaced, open, and steeply dipping. The rock is slightly to moderately weathered to a shallow or moderate depth, dependent on the local lithology. The resulting soil mantle is thin to moderately thick. This formation is difficult to excavate with a fast or slow drilling rate, again dependent on the specific rock type encountered.

5.2 SOIL

The surfaces of the test borings were covered by asphalt ranging from 4 to 6 inches in thickness, immediately followed by 3 to 4 inches of stone subbase, or covered by topsoil ranging from 2 to 6 inches in thickness. Beneath the surficial elements, subsurface conditions were generally uniform, consisting of an existing Fill layer, followed by 2, naturally-occurring soil strata, referenced herein as Stratum I and Stratum II. A general description of the soils encountered at the site is as follows:

Fill – Brown to grey GRAVEL with Sand and varying amounts of Silt

Fill was encountered immediately beneath the surficial elements in all test borings, with the exception of test boring B-8, and extended to depths ranging from approximately 2 to 13 feet below existing site grades. The “N” values, recorded within this soil, ranged from 5 blows per foot to 50 blows per 3 inches, and show Fill to range from medium dense to very dense in relative density.

Laboratory testing conducted on representative samples of the existing Fill, show this soil to be well graded and slightly plastic to non-plastic, with natural moisture contents of 2.9% to 6.6%.

The Fill tested is described under the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) as Poorly Graded GRAVEL with Silt and Sand and Silty GRAVEL with Sand, with the accompanying group symbols of GP-GM and GM, respectively.

Stratum I – Yellow to brown SAND and SILT with varying amounts of Gravel

Stratum I was encountered immediately beneath the existing Fill, and extended to depths ranging from approximately 6.0 to 18.0 feet below existing site grades. The “N” values, recorded within this soil, ranged from 5 to 44 blows per foot, and show Stratum I to range from medium dense to very dense in relative density.

Laboratory testing conducted on representative samples of Stratum I, show this soil to be moderately well graded and of plasticity, with natural moisture contents ranging from 10.7% to 17.7% in the samples tested. Stratum I is described under the Unified Soil Classification System

(USCS) as Sandy SILT and Silty SAND with Gravel, with the accompanying group symbols of ML and SM, respectively.

Stratum II – Grey Clayey GRAVEL with Sand (highly weathered bedrock)

Stratum II was encountered within each of the test borings completed, and extended to depths ranging from approximately 9.8 to 24 feet below existing site grades. The “N” values, recorded within this soil, ranged from 80 blows per 8 inches to 50 blows per 1 inch, and show this stratum to be very dense in relative density.

Laboratory testing conducted on a representative sample of Stratum II, shows this soil to be well-graded and slightly plastic, with a natural moisture content of 2.8%. Stratum II is described under the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) as Clayey GRAVEL with Sand, with the accompanying group symbol of GC. This soil is representative of the highly weathered surface of the underlying parent bedrock formation.

5.3 BEDROCK

The competent bedrock surface was encountered at depths ranging from approximately 9.8 to 24 feet below existing site grades. These depths correspond to bedrock surface elevations ranging from approximately 825.5 to 859.5 feet. The bedrock surface was defined as the depth at which the auger refusal was encountered. A summary of the depths and corresponding elevations where the bedrock surface was encountered in each of the test borings is presented below in Table II.

TABLE II

Bedrock cores were obtained from the test borings with the use of Nx-size coring equipment. The Percent Recovery (REC) and Rock Quality Designation (RQD) were recorded for each core sample recovered. Percent recovery is calculated by dividing the total length of the bedrock obtained in the core barrel by the total length of the core run and multiplying by 100. RQD is determined by summing all the rock fragments obtained in the coring run which are 4 inches or greater in length, dividing by the total length of the run, and multiplying by 100.

BEDROCK DEPTHS AND ELEVATIONS

Test Boring/Run #

Approx. Bedrock Core Sample (ft)

Length of Core (ft)

Percent Recovery (%)

RQD Value

B-1/R1 18.5 - 25 6.5 93 10

B-1/R2 25 - 35 10 100 34

B-1/R3 35 - 45 10 100 90

B-1/R4 45 - 55 10 98 93

B-2/R1 18.5 - 28 9.5 74 22

B-3/R1 23 - 28 5 98 53

B-4/R1 23.5 – 28.5 5 96 70

B-5/R1 18.8 – 23.8 5 100 17

B-6/R1 24 - 29 5 92 38

B-7/R1 23 - 28 5 85 73

The bedrock cores recovered from the test borings consisted of medium hard, slightly weathered, slightly to highly fractured, grey sandstone.

Additionally, six (6) Unconfined Compressive Strength tests were performed on representative rock core samples in general accordance with ASTM D7012. The results of the testing conducted are presented below in Table III.

TABLE III

5.4 GROUNDWATER

Groundwater was not encountered in any of the test borings completed. These observations were made at the time of the field operations and groundwater elevations will vary with daily, seasonal, and climatological variations, as well as anthropogenic activity.

6.0 SITE DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS

6.1 SITE PREPARATION

At the outset of the project, all pavement and topsoil should be stripped from all structural areas.

Structural areas are defined as those areas to be covered by the proposed parking structure, extending to a minimum of 5 feet beyond all proposed foundation lines, and any portion of the site to be covered by asphalt or concrete pavements.

The existing pavement may be processed for reuse as structural fill. The millings should be processed such that the material generated meets the requirements specified in Section 7.2 of this report.

6.2 PROOF-ROLLING

Following removal of the surficial elements, required excavation to reach proposed subgrade elevations, and prior to the placement of structural fill or construction of foundation elements, all structural areas should be compacted using a steel-drum, vibratory roller, having a minimum static weight of 10 tons. A minimum of 5 overlapping passes of the roller should be completed across the entirety of the building pad and other structural areas. Following the compaction procedures, proof-rolling should be performed using the roller specified above or with a loaded, tandem-axle dump truck under the direction of a qualified Geotechnical Engineer. Proof-rolling and compaction procedures are necessary to compact and verify the integrity of the upper zones of the soils and allow for a uniform distribution of loads. Any loose or unstable areas encountered during proof-

UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS

Test Boring/Run #

Sample Depth (feet)

Unconfined Compressive Strength (psi)

B-1/R3 35 - 45 8,235

B-1/R4 45 - 55 10,040

B-2/R1 18.5 - 28 7,535

B-4/R1 23.5 - 28.5 12,140

B-5/R1 18.8 - 23.8 6,463

B-7/R1 23 - 28 11,295 rolling and compaction should be compacted in place or removed and replaced with structural fill, as outlined below in Section 7.0 of this report.

In areas of the site where a cut or removal of soil is necessary to achieve the required soil subgrade elevation, proof-rolling of the surface may be waived until the proposed subgrade elevation is achieved.

6.3 EXCAVATION CONSIDERATIONS

Excavation during construction of the parking deck will take place within the existing Fill, the naturally-occurring soils of Stratum I and Stratum II, and the underlying bedrock. The Fill and Stratum I soils will present little difficulty using conventional earth moving equipment and techniques. However, due to slow auger advancement and high SPT values, it is anticipated that excavation of Stratum II soils will be very difficult. Hydraulic/pneumatic hammering may be required during excavation within less weathered portions of Stratum II.

Based on existing and anticipated site grades and the data obtained, bedrock excavation will be required during construction. Bedrock excavation will require the use of hydraulic/pneumatic hammering or blasting for removal. Due to the proximity of existing structures and infrastructure care must be used by the excavation contractor to limit the generation of vibrations which could be detrimental to existing buildings and subsurface utilities.

Based on existing site elevations and the reported lower level elevation of the parking structure (858 feet), portions of the southern wall of the structure will be retaining more than approximately 20 feet of soil at completion. Due to proximity of existing infrastructure, a temporary excavation support system should be provided by the Contractor, and the Structural Engineer and Geotechnical Engineer should be consulted prior to implementation of any temporary support system.

All excavations should be adequately sloped, benched, or supported to minimize collapse and protect personnel. All excavations should be completed in accordance with OSHA requirements.

Care should be exercised to ensure that excavated spoils are stockpiled an adequate distance (minimum of 1x maximum excavation depth) from the edge of the excavation to minimize the effect of any surcharge loads on the temporary slopes.

7.0 STRUCTURAL FILL

7.1 IMPORTED FILL

Imported structural fill should meet the following criteria:

free of organic matter, ash, slag, cinders, trash, demolition debris or other unsuitable materials particle size distribution that is well-graded plasticity index less than 10; liquid limit less than 30 less than 15 percent by weight rock fragments larger than 3" with no particle size exceeding 6”, less than 30 percent by weight larger than the 3/4" and less than 30 percent smaller than the no. 200 sieve

Alternate soils proposed for use which differ from those specified above should be evaluated by the Geotechnical Engineer of Record regarding their suitability prior to placement at the site.

7.2 REUSE OF ON-SITE SOILS

Comments regarding the suitability of the on-site soil for use as structural fill are provided below.

Pavement Millings – Milled asphalt pavement may be reused as structural fill, provided the materials are processed to be a generally well-graded mixture having a maximum particle size of 6 inches.

Fill - The Fill was found to be generally well graded, of variable plasticity, and consist predominantly of GRAVEL with secondary amounts of silt and sand. Based on this information, this soil is considered to be suitable for use as structural fill. Any and all deleterious and unsuitable materials should be discarded prior to placement.

Stratum I - This soil was found to be poorly to moderately well-graded, slightly plastic, and to consist of SILT and SAND. Based on this information, this soil is considered to be suitable for use as structural fill. Due to the high amounts of fines (silt), this soil will be moisture sensitive and difficult to place during periods of adverse weather.

Stratum II - This weathered bedrock of Stratum II was found to be well-graded, plastic, and consist of clayey Gravel with sand and will be well-suited for use as structural fill.

Excavated Bedrock - The use of the excavated bedrock as structural fill should be considered provided the rock is processed (crushed and screened) to a well graded mixture with a maximum particle size of 6 inches.

Our analysis of the suitability of the on-site soil for use as structural fill is based on data collected from the test borings completed at the site. Suitability should be confirmed in the field by the Geotechnical Engineer of Record during construction.

7.3 PLACEMENT & COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS

Structural fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 10 inches in loose thickness and compacted with a vibratory roller having a minimum static weight of 10 tons. Structural fill placed in areas where hand-operated compaction equipment will be required, a maximum loose lift thickness of 4 inches is recommended. The optimum lift thickness and number of repetitive passes with compaction equipment necessary to achieve the required percentage compaction values should be determined in the field with test passes of the chosen compaction equipment.

All fill should be placed at, or deviate nominally from (±2%) the optimum moisture content as determined in accordance with ASTM D698 and compacted to the minimum percentages of the soils’ maximum dry density as indicated in Table IV.

TABLE IV

COMPACTION CRITERIA

Fill Area Percent of Maximum Dry Density as per

ASTM D698

Foundation Support Fill 98%

Foundation Backfill 98%

Slab-On-Grade 98%

Non-Structural Areas 92%

8.0 FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

Column loads provided by Tim Haahs range from 800 kips to 1850 kips. Based on these loads, we recommend the foundation system transfer loads to the competent sandstone bedrock underlying the site. We evaluated several options including driven H-Piles, Augered, Cast-in-place (ACIP) piles and drilled shafts.

Based on the anticipated loads and construction methods, existing and proposed site grades, and subsurface conditions encountered, we recommend a foundation system consisting of both drilled shafts bearing within the competent sandstone bedrock and conventional shallow foundations bearing on bedrock. It is anticipated that the northern portion of the proposed parking structure will be supported on drilled shafts while the southern portion may include drilled shafts or shallow foundations on bedrock.

Furthermore, for drilled shaft foundations, it is anticipated that a single element support each load bearing column. The final type, size, location and extent of the proposed foundation should be determined based on project economics. Details regarding each of these foundation types are presented below.

8.1 DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATIONS

Straight, cast-in-place, drilled shafts (caissons) extending to rock auger refusal on bedrock provide a suitable method to carry the loads associated with the proposed parking deck. Rock auger refusal is defined herein as material with a penetration rate of less than 6 inches per 15 minutes utilizing foundation drilling rigs applying a minimum of 30,000 pounds of down force (crowd) and 80,000 foot-pounds of torque on a rock auger, or as otherwise determined by the geotechnical engineer of record. Final determination of the tip elevation of the drilled shafts will be provided by a representative of the geotechnical engineer during construction.

The drilled shafts may be designed based upon an allowable end bearing capacity of 50 tsf. Due to the varying thickness of individual soil types and the varying depth to competent rock, we offer the following values, presented in Table V, to be used for each corresponding soil stratum.

TABLE V

* - Upper 5 feet should be neglected ** - per square foot of soil/concrete interface or rock/concrete interface

A preliminary lateral capacity analysis using a 60 inch diameter shaft, 24 feet deep in conditions similar to test boring B-6, results in capacities on the order of 85 kips and 280 kips for free-head and fixed-head conditions, respectively.

The drilled shaft excavations may be lined with temporary steel casing in order to prevent soil intrusion or collapse during excavation, cleaning, inspection, and concrete placement, and to help control any water encountered. Should groundwater be encountered in the excavation, it should be controlled by pumping so that not more than 2 inches of water is present at the beginning of concrete placement. A drop chute shall be used to prevent the concrete from contacting the rebar cage or sidewalls and to minimize aggregate segregation. All casing should be removed during

ULTIMATE FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE

Compression

(psf)** Tension (psf)**

Fill/Stratum I 400 280

Stratum II 1800 1200

Bedrock 5000 5000 or immediately following placement of concrete. While removing the casing, a sufficient head of concrete inside the casing must be maintained to prevent intrusion of soil and any water.

As an alternative to casing, drilling fluid may be used to stabilize the shaft sidewalls and prevent water intrusion. Placement of concrete should be performed with the use of tremie pipe if drilling fluid is used.

A minimum caisson diameter of 5 feet should be considered to facilitate cleaning and inspection operations. Project specifications should require that the caisson contractor provide and man all necessary equipment to safely place workmen and/or inspectors into the caisson excavations in compliance with local, state, and federal regulations. There is no intention to routinely enter the drilled shaft excavations, but the geotechnical engineer must be provided the opportunity to do so safely if conditions warrant inspections.

The drilled shafts should be designed for minimum tolerances of 2 inches in horizontal location and ±1 percent plumb. All design and construction should be completed in general accordance with applicable design specifications and current industry standards.

8.2 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS ON BEDROCK

As previously discussed, the southern extent of the proposed parking structure will require excavations greater than approximately 20 feet in order to reach the proposed ground tier base elevation. Our test boring data indicates that the competent bedrock will be encountered during excavation to achieve this elevation; therefore, in these areas, typical spread and strip foundations can bear directly on the bedrock. For design purposes, an allowable bearing capacity of 10 ksf can be considered for conventional shallow foundations bearing on rock. If tension resistance is required, rock anchors can be considered to tie the footing to the rock.

Provided the site development considerations are followed, the competent bedrock surface may be utilized for support of the proposed parking structure’s shallow foundation elements. The following conclusions and engineering recommendations are provided regarding the proposed structure’s foundation system.

1. A foundation system consisting of strip and/or spread footings is recommended for support of the southern portion of the proposed structure.

2. The competent bedrock surface may be utilized for support of the foundation elements. Competent bedrock should be defined during excavation as material which cannot be excavated with a CAT 300 model excavator or equivalent and as confirmed by the Geotechnical Engineer during construction.

3. All foundation bottoms should be completely cleaned of loose material or debris immediately prior to the placement of concrete.

4. Concrete should be placed in excavated foundation areas as quickly as possible to minimize degradation to the foundation subgrade due to exposure.

5. The actual bearing conditions of the soil at the foundation subgrade elevation should be confirmed in the field during excavation by inspection under the supervision of a Professional Engineer qualified in Geotechnical Engineering.

6. Column and wall foundations should be a minimum of 3.0 and 1.5 feet in width, respectively.

7. Clean crushed stone, such as AASHTO No. 57, should be used to provide a level bearing surface or to backfill any over-excavation below planned foundation subgrades required to reach competent bedrock.

Prior to the placement of concrete, all foundation bottoms should be densified and compacted using a vibratory plate or similar equipment. Proper compaction and densification of the foundation soils should be verified by a qualified geotechnical engineer prior to placement of concrete.

Every effort should be made to prevent water from entering open foundation excavations. Any water which may accumulate in the bottoms of the excavations should be removed immediately.

It is recommended that foundation excavation and placement of concrete be performed on the same day and during fair weather conditions. Installation of the foundations should be carried out in accordance with applicable ACI guidelines, and under the direction of a licensed Professional Engineer.

8.3 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS ON SOIL

Should non-loading bearing walls exist, for design purposes an allowable bearing capacity of 4 ksf can be considered for conventional shallow foundations bearing on soil, provided the recommendations in Section 8.2 are followed.

8.4 SETTLEMENT

Post construction settlement of the drilled shafts and conventional shallow foundations bearing on rock is expected to be negligible. Post construction settlement of non-loading bearing walls situated on soil is also expected to be negligible.

8.5 EXCAVATION SUPPORT

The south side of the garage, closest to the existing hospital, will have a ground tier base elevation significantly lower (ranging from approximately 16 to 21 feet below grade) than the existing access road. A temporary shoring system will be required to support the existing access road and other site infrastructures if the excavation slope exceeds an inclination of 1H:1V. The Structural Engineer and Geotechnical Engineer should be consulted prior to implementation of any temporary support system.

8.6 SEISMIC SITE CLASS

According to Table 1613.5.2 - Site Class Definitions of the 2009 International Building Code, the stratigraphic profile underlying the proposed construction area meets the characteristics of Site Class C, Very dense soil and soft rock.

9.0 GROUND FLOOR SUPPORT

The floor of the proposed addition may be constructed as a conventional slab-on-grade and may be supported on properly placed structural fill or firm and stable existing soils. These soils are expected to exhibit a modulus of subgrade reaction of approximately 150 psi/in provided they are compacted to a minimum of 98% of their maximum standard dry densities as determined by ASTM D698.

The floor slab should be underlain by a layer of granular fill to provide a capillary break. The granular fill should have a minimum thickness of 4 inches and should be free-draining and compactable, with a maximum of 30% by weight passing the No. 100 sieve. The granular fill should be compacted to a minimum of 98% of its maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698.

10.0 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES

The following data is provided for the design of temporary or permanent below grade structures including footings, piers, retaining walls and/or excavation support systems, etc. which may be constructed at the site. The data presented is based on the use of the existing Fill and naturally-occurring soils of Stratum I and II placed under engineering control for backfill. Should different soil be used, design data should be re-evaluated and changed according to the specific material. Table VI, provides the Earth Pressure Design Data for the use of the above referenced soils.

TABLE VI

Based on the earth pressures that will be imposed on the southern-most retaining wall, consideration may be given to using tiebacks (i.e. soil nails) to reduce over-turning and sliding forces at the foundation.

Adequate drainage must be maintained adjacent to all earth retaining walls in an effort to minimize the buildup of hydrostatic pressures on the structures. At a minimum, a drainage blanket consisting of clean, crushed aggregate should be placed behind the retaining wall. The drainage blanket should be connected to a drain at the base of the retaining wall with all water directed to dedicated stormwater channels.

Groundwater was not encountered during completion of the test borings; however, groundwater seeps or “perched” or trapped surface water may be encountered during excavation of the proposed southern retaining wall. Additional drainage considerations (chimney drains, heel drains, etc.) should be considered in design where seeps occur and as necessary to minimize saturation of the soils behind the wall.

11.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING

Regardless of the thoroughness of a geotechnical engineering exploration, there is always a possibility that conditions between the test borings, and below the depths explored, may be different from those encountered, that conditions are not as anticipated by the designers, or that the construction process has altered the subsurface conditions. Therefore, geotechnical engineering construction observation should be performed under the supervision of the Geotechnical Engineer who is familiar with the intent of the recommendations presented herein. Construction observation is recommended to evaluate whether the conditions anticipated in the design actually exist or whether the recommendations presented herein should be modified where necessary.

EARTH PRESSURE DESIGN DATA

Parameter Fill/Stratum II Stratum I

Angle of Internal Friction 30º 25º

Unit Weight of Soil 125 pcf 115 pcf

Coefficient of Active Earth Pressure 0.33 0.41

Coefficient of Passive Earth Pressure 3.00 2.46

Coefficient of At-Rest Earth Pressure 0.50 0.58

Cohesion 0.0 psf 0.0 psf

Coefficient of Friction 22.5º 19º

Friction Factor 0.41 0.34

12.0 LIMITATIONS

This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical design practices for specific application to this project. This report has been based on assumed conditions and characteristics of the proposed development where specific information was not available.

The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based upon the subsurface data obtained during this investigation and on details stated in this report. The validity of the projections, conclusions and recommendations contained in this report is necessarily limited by the scope of field investigation and by the number of test borings that were made. It is understood that the scope of the field investigation was consistent with good engineering practice but, given the nature of subsurface conditions, there is a possibility that actual conditions encountered may differ significantly from those projected in this report. Should conditions arise which differ from those described in this report, Advantage should be notified immediately and provided with all available information regarding subsurface conditions.

Our recommendations are based upon the assumption that the services of a qualified Geotechnical Engineer will be retained for observation of the proof-rolling procedures, structural fill placement, drilled shaft review, foundation subgrade review, and all critical earthwork operations. Advantage has the capability of providing these services and would be pleased to present a proposal to perform the on-site quality control observation on the Owner’s behalf.

The scope of this investigation was limited to the evaluation of the load-carrying capabilities and load stability of the subsoils. Oil, hazardous waste, radioactivity, irritants, pollutants, radon or other dangerous substances and conditions were not the subject of this study. Their presence and/or absence are not implied, inferred or suggested by this report or results of this study.

APPENDIX

TOPOGRAPHIC MAP

GEOLOGIC MAP

TEST BORING LOCATION PLAN

TEST BORING PROFILES

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

TEST BORING LOGS

ATTACHMENTS

PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed

VAMC WILKES-BARRE PARKING STRUCTURE

PREPARED FOR

WILKES-BARRE LUZERNE COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA

SCALE: DRAWING NUMBER:

DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY:

APPROVED BY: DATE:

AS SHOWN 150002002-A-100

C. WEEMS D. BUCKWALTER

M. GIUNTA 10/13/2015

1,500 0 1,500750 Feet

*Source - USGS 15 - Minute Topographic Quadrangle, Provided by ESRI

Legend

N

Site

435 INDEPENDENCE AVE., SUITE C

MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055

PH (717) 458-0800

FAX (717)458-0801

Pl

Pp Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community

GEOLOGIC MAP

VAMC WILKES-BARRE PARKING STRUCTURE

PREPARED FOR

WILKES-BARRE LUZERNE COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA

SCALE: DRAWING NUMBER:

DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY:

APPROVED BY: DATE:

AS SHOWN 150002002-A-101

C. WEEMS D. BUCKWALTER

M. GIUNTA 10-13-2015

1,000 0 1,000500 Feet

*Source - Map 61 - Atlas of Preliminary Geologic Quadrangle Maps of Pennsylvania, 1981, Pa Geological Survey

Legend

N

Roads StreamsLlewellyn Formation

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

ÇÇ

Ç

Ç Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

ÇÇ

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç Ç

Ç Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

ÇÇ

ÇÇÇ

Ç

Ç

Ç

ÇÇ

Ç Ç

Ç

Ç

Ç

ÇÇ

Ç

Ç Ç

ÇÇPl Site

435 INDEPENDENCE AVE., SUITE C

MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055

A

A

A

A

A A

A

AA'

B-

B-

B-

B-

B-

B- 3 B-

B-

TE

ST

BO

RI

NG

LO

CA

TIO

N

PL

AN

VA

MC

W

ILK

ES

-B

AR

RE

PA

RK

IN

G

ST

RU

CT

UR

E

PR

EP

AR

ED

FO

R

WI

LK

ES

-B

AR

RE

LU

ZE

RN

E C

OU

NT

Y

PE

NN

SY

LV

AN

IA

SC

AL

E:

DR

AW

IN

G

NU

MB

ER

DR

AW

N

BY

CH

EC

KE

D

BY

AP

PR

OV

ED

BY

DA

TE

AS

S

HO

WN

2-A -10

J.

MI

LL

ER

D.

BU

CK

WA

LT

ER

M.

G

IU

NT

A 9/2

9/2

Ba se pla n T itle : S ite Pl an , P rep are d B y:

Tim Ha ah s E ng ine ers

Ar ch ite cts

, 6 /3/

N

5 I nd ep en de nc e A ve nu e, Su ite C

Me ch an ics bu rg, PA

Of fic e (

7)

8-0

Fa x (

7)

8-0

Fe et

Le ge nd

A

Ini tia l G eo tec h A pp rox im ate

Te st

Bo rin g L oc ati on s

A

Su pp lem en tal G eo tec h A pp rox im ate Te st Bo rin g L oc ati on s

Ap pro xim ate

C ros s S ec tio n L oc ati on

Soil Classification ReportSoil Classification ReportSoil Classification ReportSoil Classification Report Per ASTM Designations D 2487 - 00 and D 2488 - 00

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.0100.1001.00010.000100.000

P e rc e n t

F in e r

P e rc e n t

F in e r

P e rc e n t

F in e r

P e rc e n t

F in e r

Sieve Opening, mmSieve Opening, mmSieve Opening, mmSieve Opening, mm

Particle Size Analysis of SoilsParticle Size Analysis of SoilsParticle Size Analysis of SoilsParticle Size Analysis of Soils

1-1/2" 3/4" 3/8" No.4 No.10 No.40 No.100 No.200 Silt Clay

As-Received Moisture: As-Received Moisture: As-Received Moisture: As-Received Moisture:2.9%

Gravel: Gravel: Gravel: Gravel: Coarse:Coarse:Coarse:Coarse: 24.1% Fine:Fine:Fine:Fine: 51.2%

Sand: Sand: Sand: Sand: Coarse:Coarse:Coarse:Coarse: 9.5% Medium:Medium:Medium:Medium: 5.5% Fine:Fine:Fine:Fine: 4.4%

Fines: Fines: Fines: Fines: Silt:Silt:Silt:Silt: Fine

Sand Description: Sand Description: Sand Description: Sand Description:

Consistency: Consistency: Consistency: Consistency: Dry Strength:Dry Strength:Dry Strength:Dry Strength:

Dilatancy: Dilatancy: Dilatancy: Dilatancy: Toughness:Toughness:Toughness:Toughness:

Structure: Structure: Structure: Structure: Cementation:Cementation:Cementation:Cementation:

D60: 14 D30: 5.6 D10: 0.45 Cu: 31 Cc: 4.98

Boring: Boring: Boring: Boring: LL:LL:LL:LL: NP PL:PL:PL:PL: NP PI:PI:PI:PI: NP

Sample: Sample: Sample: Sample: Depth:Depth:Depth:Depth:

Project: Project: Project: Project:

Client: Client: Client: Client:

Fill

150002002

Poorly-Graded GRAVEL with Silt and Sand (GP - GM)

Description: Description: Description: Description:

Remarks: Remarks: Remarks: Remarks:

Report Date: Report Date: Report Date: Report Date: October 14, 2015

Quality Assurance Plus

VAMC Wilkes-Barre Parking Structure

0.001

9.7%

7.2%

5.3%

Clay Size

Atterberg Limits Atterberg Limits Atterberg Limits Atterberg Limits

Sub-Angular

4.75

100.0%

75.9%

B-3

N/A

Weak

48.1%

Brown to grey

No. 40 0.425

0.150

0.075No. 200

No. 100

1-1/2"

3/4"

3/8"

No. 4 24.7%

0.005

38.0

19.0

15.1%

9.50

US Standard Sieve Size Opening (mm) %Finer

Medium

Silt Size

2.00No. 10

Hydrometer

Analysis

SAND SAND SAND SAND

Fine

Advantage Project Number: Advantage Project Number: Advantage Project Number: Advantage Project Number:

N/A

Angular

Homogeneous

Coarse

GRAVEL GRAVEL GRAVEL GRAVEL

Coarse

N/A

N/A

S2 & S3 2' - 6'

Particle Size DistributionParticle Size DistributionParticle Size DistributionParticle Size Distribution

5.3% Clay:Clay:Clay:Clay:

75.3%

USCS Classification: USCS Classification: USCS Classification: USCS Classification:

19.4%

Gravel Description: Gravel Description: Gravel Description: Gravel Description:

Sieve Opening, mmSieve Opening, mmSieve Opening, mmSieve Opening, mm

Soil Classification ReportSoil Classification ReportSoil Classification ReportSoil Classification Report

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.0100.1001.00010.000100.000

P e rc e n t

F in e r

P e rc e n t

F in e r

P e rc e n t

F in e r

P e rc e n t

F in e r

Sieve Opening, mmSieve Opening, mmSieve Opening, mmSieve Opening, mm

Particle Size Analysis of SoilsParticle Size Analysis of SoilsParticle Size Analysis of SoilsParticle Size Analysis of Soils

1-1/2" 3/4" 3/8" No.4 No.10 No.40 No.100 No.200 Silt Clay

As-Received Moisture: As-Received Moisture: As-Received Moisture: As-Received Moisture:17.7%

Gravel: Gravel: Gravel: Gravel: Coarse:Coarse:Coarse:Coarse: 0.0% Fine:Fine:Fine:Fine: 9.4%

Sand: Sand: Sand: Sand: Coarse:Coarse:Coarse:Coarse: 4.7% Medium:Medium:Medium:Medium: 8.6% Fine:Fine:Fine:Fine: 10.7%

Fines: Fines: Fines: Fines: Silt:Silt:Silt:Silt: Fine

Sand Description: Sand Description: Sand Description: Sand Description:

Consistency: Consistency: Consistency: Consistency: Dry Strength:Dry Strength:Dry Strength:Dry Strength:

Dilatancy: Dilatancy: Dilatancy: Dilatancy: Toughness:Toughness:Toughness:Toughness:

Structure: Structure: Structure: Structure: Cementation:Cementation:Cementation:Cementation:

D60: D30: D10: Cu: Cc:

Boring: Boring: Boring: Boring: LL:LL:LL:LL: 24 PL:PL:PL:PL: 21 PI:PI:PI:PI: 3

Sample: Sample: Sample: Sample: Depth:Depth:Depth:Depth:

Project: Project: Project: Project:

Client: Client: Client: Client:

Stratum I

150002002

Sandy SILT (ML)

Description: Description: Description: Description:

Remarks: Remarks: Remarks: Remarks:

Report Date: Report Date: Report Date: Report Date: October 14, 2015

Quality Assurance Plus

VAMC Wilkes-Barre Parking Structure

0.001

77.2%

70.1%

66.5%

Clay Size

Atterberg Limits Atterberg Limits Atterberg Limits Atterberg Limits

Sub-Angular

4.75

100.0%

100.0%

B-6

Medium

Moderate

95.5%

Yellow to brown

No. 40 0.425

0.150

0.075No. 200

No. 100

1-1/2"

3/4"

3/8"

No. 4 90.6%

0.005

38.0

19.0

85.9%

9.50

US Standard Sieve Size Opening (mm) %Finer

Medium

Silt Size

2.00No. 10

Hydrometer

Analysis

SAND SAND SAND SAND

Fine

Advantage Project Number: Advantage Project Number: Advantage Project Number: Advantage Project Number:

Firm

Angular

Homogeneous

Coarse

GRAVEL GRAVEL GRAVEL GRAVEL

Coarse

Rapid

Medium

S4 & S5 6' - 10'

Particle Size DistributionParticle Size DistributionParticle Size DistributionParticle Size Distribution

66.5% Clay:Clay:Clay:Clay:

9.4%

USCS Classification: USCS Classification: USCS Classification: USCS Classification:

24.1%

Soil Classification ReportSoil Classification ReportSoil Classification ReportSoil Classification Report

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.0100.1001.00010.000100.000

P e rc e n t

F in e r

P e rc e n t

F in e r

P e rc e n t

F in e r

P e rc e n t

F in e r

Sieve Opening, mmSieve Opening, mmSieve Opening, mmSieve Opening, mm

Particle Size Analysis of SoilsParticle Size Analysis of SoilsParticle Size Analysis of SoilsParticle Size Analysis of Soils

1-1/2" 3/4" 3/8" No.4 No.10 No.40 No.100 No.200 Silt Clay

As-Received Moisture: As-Received Moisture: As-Received Moisture: As-Received Moisture:2.8%

Gravel: Gravel: Gravel: Gravel: Coarse:Coarse:Coarse:Coarse: 8.2% Fine:Fine:Fine:Fine: 38.1%

Sand: Sand: Sand: Sand: Coarse:Coarse:Coarse:Coarse: 12.2% Medium:Medium:Medium:Medium: 13.2% Fine:Fine:Fine:Fine: 8.4%

Fines: Fines: Fines: Fines: Silt:Silt:Silt:Silt: Fine

Sand Description: Sand Description: Sand Description: Sand Description:

Consistency: Consistency: Consistency: Consistency: Dry Strength:Dry Strength:Dry Strength:Dry Strength:

Dilatancy: Dilatancy: Dilatancy: Dilatancy: Toughness:Toughness:Toughness:Toughness:

Structure: Structure: Structure: Structure: Cementation:Cementation:Cementation:Cementation:

D60: D30: D10: Cu: Cc:

Boring: Boring: Boring: Boring: LL:LL:LL:LL: 27 PL:PL:PL:PL: 19 PI:PI:PI:PI: 8

Sample: Sample: Sample: Sample: Depth:Depth:Depth:Depth:

Project: Project: Project: Project:

Client: Client: Client: Client:

Stratum II

150002002

Clayey GRAVEL with Sand (GC)

Description: Description: Description: Description:

Remarks: Remarks: Remarks: Remarks:

Report Date: Report Date: Report Date: Report Date: October 14, 2015

Quality Assurance Plus

VAMC Wilkes-Barre Parking Structure

0.001

28.3%

22.9%

19.9%

Clay Size

Atterberg Limits Atterberg Limits Atterberg Limits Atterberg Limits

Angular

4.75

100.0%

91.8%

B-4

Low

Weak

71.2%

Grey

No. 40 0.425

0.150

0.075No. 200

No. 100

1-1/2"

3/4"

3/8"

No. 4 53.7%

0.005

38.0

19.0

41.5%

9.50

US Standard Sieve Size Opening (mm) %Finer

Medium

Silt Size

2.00No. 10

Hydrometer

Analysis

SAND SAND SAND SAND

Fine

Advantage Project Number: Advantage Project Number: Advantage Project Number: Advantage Project Number:

Very Hard

Angular

Homogeneous

Coarse

GRAVEL GRAVEL GRAVEL GRAVEL

Coarse

Slow

None

S6 & S7 13' - 20'

Particle Size DistributionParticle Size DistributionParticle Size DistributionParticle Size Distribution

19.9% Clay:Clay:Clay:Clay:

46.3%

USCS Classification: USCS Classification: USCS Classification: USCS Classification:

33.8%

Reviewed By:

Location

Date Sampled:

B-4; 23.5' - 28.5' B-5; 18.8' - 23.8'

Height/Diameter Ratio

Capped Height (in)

Diameter (in)

Area (in²) 3.08

19900

4.10

1.98

4.00

1.98

37380

Client:

October 19, 2015

Quality Assurance Plus

Date:

12140

2.07

2.02

Corrected Compressive Strength (MPa)

3.08

Corrected Compressive Strength (psi)

Total Load (psi)

Compressive Strength (psi)

The results stated on this report relate only to the material specifically identified.

This test report shall not be reproduced except in full, without written approval from Advantage Engineers.

1.00

12140

83.7

11295

77.944.6

1.00

1.00Height/Diameter Factor

David J. Buckwalter

Bedrock Laboratory Test Report Compressive Strength of Bedrock

Materials Tested Using Procedures Compliant With ASTM Designations C 42/C 42 M - 04 and C 174/C 174 M - 06

R-004 R-005

VAMC Wilkes-Barre Parking Structure

150002002

Project:

Project Number:

October 5, 2015

Sample ID

3.08

34780

11296

2.02

R-006

B-7; 23' - 28'

4.00

1.98

TEST BORING LOG SHEET 1 OF 1

PROJECT NAME:

PROJECT NUMBER:

LOCATION:

FIELD SURVEYED X TOPO ESTIMATE

SOIL DESCRIPTION

See Test Boring Location Plan (150002002-A-102) GROUNDWATER DATA: Dry

DEPTH: Not Encountered Time: Completion

VAMC Wilkes-Barre Parking Structure BORING NO.: B-3

150002002 CLIENT: Quality Assurance Plus, Inc. TOP OF GROUND: ±875

Very dense brown to gray GRAVEL with silt and sand

Topsoil

S1 0' - 2' 4-13-12-13 0.2' - 13.0' Very dense brown to gray silty GRAVEL with sand

0.0' - 0.2' Dark brown silty sand with organic debris

S2 2' - 2.7' 19-50/3"

Dense brown to gray silty GRAVEL with sand

S3 4' - 6' 10-17-15-10 Very dense brown to gray GRAVEL with silt and sand

S4 6' - 8' 7-8-9-12

10 S5 8' - 10' 12-12-10-7 Dense brown to gray silty GRAVEL with sand

DEPTH

(feet)

S A

M P

L E

N U

M B

E R

R E

C O

V E

R Y

)SAMPLE

DEPTH

(feet)

BLOWS

PER 6"

Fill

Very dense grey silty GRAVEL with sand

S6 13' - 13.3' 50/3" 13.0' - 23.0'

Very dense grey silty GRAVEL with sandS7 18' - 18.3' 50/4"

Stratum II

-Auger Refusal at 23.0 Feet-

Medium hard, slightly weathered, moderately fractured, grey SANDSTONE

-End of Boring at 28.0 Feet-

REC: 98%

RQD: 53%

R1 23' - 28' Run #1 Bedrock

DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Augers

RIG TYPE: Truck-Mounted CME 55

ADVANTAGE REPRESENTATIVE: D Buckwalter

435 Independence Avenue, Suite C, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055

Office: (717) 458-0800 Fax: (717) 458-0801 www.advantageengineers.com

DATE DRILLED: October 5, 2015

DRAWN/COMPILED BY: D. Buckwalter

PROJECT NUMBER:

LOCATION:

FIELD SURVEYED X TOPO ESTIMATE

SOIL DESCRIPTION

See Test Boring Location Plan (150002002-A-102) GROUNDWATER DATA: Dry

DEPTH: Not Encountered Time: Completion

VAMC Wilkes-Barre Parking Structure BORING NO.: B-4

150002002 CLIENT: Quality Assurance Plus, Inc. TOP OF GROUND: ±879

Pavement

S1 0.5' - 2' 10-11-15 0.7' - 13.0' Very dense gray to brown silty SAND with gravel

0.0' - 0.7' 6" Bituminous concrete and 3" gravel subbase

Dense gray to brown silty SAND with gravel

S3 4' - 6' 11-8-10-13

S2 2' - 4' 12-8-12-13

Very dense gray to brown silty SAND with gravel

Dense gray to brown silty SAND with gravel

S4 6' - 8' 11-8-7-6

10 S5 8' - 10' 5-4-3-2 Medium dense gray to brown silty SAND with gravel

DEPTH

(feet)

S A

M P

L E

N U

M B

E R

R E

C O

V E

R Y

)SAMPLE

DEPTH

(feet)

BLOWS

PER 6"

Fill

Very dense grey clayey GRAVEL with sand

S6 13' - 13.3' 50/4" 13.0' - 23.5'

S7 18' - 18.2' 50/2" Very dense grey clayey GRAVEL with sand

Medium hard, slightly weathered and fractured, grey

SANDSTONE

S8 23' - 23.1' 50/1" -Auger Refusal at 23.5 Feet-

Bedrock R1 23.5' - 28.5' Run #1

Stratum II

REC: 96%

RQD: 70%

RIG TYPE: Truck-Mounted CME 55

DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Augers

ADVANTAGE REPRESENTATIVE: D Buckwalter

-End of Boring at 28.5 Feet-

435 Independence Avenue, Suite C, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055

Office: (717) 458-0800 Fax: (717) 458-0801 www.advantageengineers.com

PROJECT NUMBER:

LOCATION:

FIELD SURVEYED X TOPO ESTIMATE

S3 4' - 6' 4-3-2-16

S5 8' - 8.4' 50/5"

Very dense brown to gray silty GRAVEL with sand

Dense dark brown silty SAND S2 2' - 4' 9-9-4-3

Medium dense brown silty SAND Stratum I

S4 6' - 6.3' 50/4" 6.0' - 18.8' Very dense brown to gray silty GRAVEL with sand

Topsoil

S1 0' - 2' 2-5-3-4 0.5' - 2.0' Medium dense brown silty SAND Fill

0.0' - 0.5' 6" Dark brown silty sand with organic debris

2.0' - 6.0'

SOIL DESCRIPTION

See Test Boring Location Plan (150002002-A-102) GROUNDWATER DATA: Dry

DEPTH: Not Encountered Time: Completion

VAMC Wilkes-Barre Parking Structure BORING NO.: B-5

CLIENT: TOP OF GROUND: ±851Quality Assurance Plus, Inc.150002002

DEPTH

(feet)

S A

M P

L E

N U

M B

E R

R E

C O

V E

R Y

)SAMPLE

DEPTH

(feet)

BLOWS

PER 6"

RIG TYPE: Truck-Mounted CME 55

DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Augers

ADVANTAGE REPRESENTATIVE: D Buckwalter

Medium hard, slightly weathered, highly fractured, grey

SANDSTONE

-End of Test Boring at 23.8 Feet-

REC: 100%

RQD: 17%

Bedrock

R1 Run #118.8' - 23.8'

-Auger Refusal at 18.8 Feet-

Stratum II

S6 13' - 13.1' 50/1"

Very dense brown to gray silty GRAVEL with sand

[pulverized rock fragments]

435 Independence Avenue, Suite C, Mechanicsburg,…