S02 VA813-028 IGNC Phase 5 Specs_Appendix A-D1.pdf

INDIANTOWN GAP NATIONAL

CEMETERY

PHASE 5 DEVELOPMENT

LEBANON COUNTY, PA

SPECIFICATIONS

APPENDICES

RFP DOCUMENT SUBMISSION

February 18, 2022

VA Project #813-028

AEW # CFM0-004

Prepared by

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES

Indiantown Gap National Cemetery – Phase 5

East Hanover Township, Annville, PA

Submitted To:

AE Works 209 Sandusky Street

Pittsburgh, PA 15212

Submitted By:

Pennoni Associates Inc.

2041 Avenue C, Suite 100 Bethlehem, PA 18017

Frederick (Rick) A. Brinker, PE Geotechnical Division Manager Associate Vice President

AEWLA20005 May 28, 2021

EBrinker Image

2041 Avenue C Suite 100

Bethlehem, PA 18017 T: 610-231-0600 F: 610-231-2033 www.pennoni.com

May 28, 2021

AEWLA20005

AE Works 209 Sandusky Street Pittsburgh, PA 15212

Attn: Ms. Tiffany Haile, ACIP, LEED AP BD+C Manager, Planning + Strategy

RE: Geotechnical Engineering Services

Indiantown Gap National Cemetery – Phase 5 Project Number 813-028 Annville, PA

Dear Ms. Haile:

We are pleased to submit our geotechnical engineering report for the proposed Indiantown Gap National Cemetery – Phase 5 Project, located in Annville, PA. This geotechnical study was done in general accordance with our proposal dated September 11, 2020, and your subsequent authorization to proceed.

We trust that the information presented in this report is what you require at this time and we thank you for the opportunity to assist you with this project. If you have any questions or need any further assistance with this project, please contact this office at your earliest convenience.

Respectfully yours, PENNONI ASSOCIATES INC.

Elisha G. Brinker Frederick (Rick) A. Brinker, PE Geotechnical Professional Geotechnical Division Manager Associate Vice President

AEWLA20005 May 28, 2020 Indiantown Gap National Cemetery – Phase 5

AE WORKS East Hanover Township, Annville, PA

CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

2. INTRODUCTION 2

2.1. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 2

2.2. OBJECTIVES 3

3. FIELD AND LABORATORY WORK 3

3.1. FIELDWORK 3

3.2. LABORATORY WORK 3

4. SITE CHARACTERISTICS 4

4.1. LOCATION AND SURFACE FEATURES 4

4.2. GEOLOGY 4

4.3. ROCK 5

4.4. SUBSOILS 5

4.5. GROUNDWATER 7

5. ANALYSES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7

5.1. SEISMIC SITE CLASSIFICATION 7

5.2. EARTHWORK 7

5.3. GROUNDWATER AND SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT 9

5.4. FOUNDATIONS 9

5.5. GROUND FLOOR SLABS 11

5.6. SETTLEMENT 12

5.7. PAVEMENT DESIGN PARAMETERS 12

5.8. LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE PARAMETERS 12

5.9. CORROSIVITY 13

5.10. CONSTRUCTION DIFFICULTIES 13

6. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 14

7. LIMITATIONS 14

AEWLA20005 May 28, 2020 Indiantown Gap National Cemetery – Phase 5

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A – Field Data

Site Location Map SK-1 USGS Map SK-2 Geologic Map SK-3 Boring/Test Pit Location Plan Drawing LP-1

Boring Logs B-1 through B-22 Test Pit Logs TP-1A to TP-4A Boring/Test Pit Log Key Sheet

APPENDIX B – Laboratory Data

Summary of Laboratory Test Data Table L-1 Gradation Curves S-1 Liquid and Plastic Limits A-1 Third Party Corrosion Testing Laboratory Testing Procedures

APPENDIX C – Standard Symbols

APPENDIX D – Important Information about this Geotechnical Engineering Report

AEWLA20005 May 28, 2021 Indiantown Gap National Cemetery – Phase 5

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Pennoni has completed our geotechnical study for the Indiantown Gap National Cemetery – Phase 5 Project in Annville, PA. The results of our study are summarized below. The executive summary should be used in conjunction with the body of the report as it details our recommendations below.

Proposed Construction and Site Conditions Section(s)

Proposed Construction

Proposed building construction will consist of a new staff building, open storage building, enclosed storage building, fuel storage, bulk storage bins, for the maintenance area, and a culvert stream crossing, new Honor Guard building, and a pumphouse. The expansion will also consist of six new Internment areas and a Columbarium. Lightly to moderately loaded structures.

2.1

Surface Features

Most of the site is heavily wooded. The proposed Honor Guard location is previously developed and consists of the current Honor Guard Building, pavement, concrete walkways, and landscaped areas. There is an open previously filled area in the center of the site.

4.1

Subsoils

Stratum F (Fill) - Gray to brown fine to coarse Sand and Silt/Clay with traces of fine gravel (20 ft thick) (variable); Stratum 1 – Gray to brown fine to medium to coarse Sand, with varying amounts of silt and varying amounts of fine gravel (2 to 8 ft thick); Stratum 2 – tan coarse to medium to fine sand, varying amounts of fine to medium gravel, varying amounts of silt (2 to 12 ft thick); Stratum 3 - weathered shale layer that was identified generally as a coarse to medium to fine grained Sand and medium to fine grained gravel with varying amounts of silt (1 to 9.5 ft thick).

4.4

Fieldwork 22 SPT borings advanced to 5.5 to 22 ft below grades, sampling in general accordance with ASTM D 1586. 4 test pits were excavated as part of a separate infiltration study.

3.1

Cuts/Fills

Variable across the site. Mainly there are proposed deeper cuts for the maintenance area, varying cuts and fills for the Columbarium and Internment areas, and the Honor Guard Building. Cuts for the pumphouse and fills for the culvert crossing are expected.

5.2

Recommendations Section(s)

Seismic Site Class C – very dense soil and soft rock profile in accordance with IBC 2018 5.1

Lift Thickness and Compaction Requirements

Fine Grained Soil – 8 to 10 in. thick layers loose measure; Granular Soil – 10 to 12 in. thick layers loose measure; Foundations, pavement, and floor slab 98% (standard proctor) or 95% (modified proctor) depending on compaction equipment used.

5.2

Foundations Series of Shallow spread footings on native soils and structural fills.

Bearing capacities from 3,000 psf up to 8,000 psf.

5.4

Settlement Basis of design - Total ½ in., differential ¼ in. 5.5

Frost Depth 40 inches below finished exterior grades 5.4

Special Considerations

A CBR value of 10% is assumed for Flexible Pavements Design, soils have low potential to be corrosive, and rock is anticipated in excavations on the northern portion of the maintenance area and the culvert.

5.7, 5.9, 5.10

2. INTRODUCTION

2.1. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

Based on the most recent MP-1 plans and design documents at the time of this report, we understand that Phase 5 Development will consist of multiple structures. Proposed building construction will consist of a new staff building, open storage building, enclosed storage building, fuel storage, bulk storage bins, a culvert, a new Honor Guard building, and a pump house.

The staff building and 2 storage buildings will serve as the new maintenance area; building sizes will be 3,500 SF and 4,500 SF (each), respectively. The staff building will be constructed as an occupancy structure using materials such as metal siding with rigid and batt insulation on the exterior. A concrete masonry unit (CMU) veneer will serve as the building base and have a slab on grade. The storage buildings will be constructed using pre-engineered metal that will be prefabricated and assembled such that the structure will allow for clear spans and high inside clearance. The enclosed storage will have a façade including full overhead doors at the front of the building to allow access for maintenance vehicles. The open storage will not have doors. From a foundation standpoint, the sheds are assumed to be built on concrete foundations with foundation walls that will extend 3 ft up from the base of each shed. The bulk storage bins will also be constructed with an area of 1,472 SF and built using concrete walls and a metal-framed enclosure above. The bins will be located in the maintenance area, will be constructed in a configuration that will such that there will allow for three bays to store soils, gravel, mulch, etc.

Covered fuel tanks will be constructed above grade in the maintenance area as well to avoid any special below-grade construction. The size of the fuel storage will be approximately 700 SF with a cover above the fuel storage tanks. A pumphouse will be built northwest of the maintenance area and will be above grade as well. The pumphouse will be approximately 320 SF in size.

The new Honor Guard Building will be constructed using an exposed stone veneer base with metal framing, siding, and metal roofing. This is based on the configuration of the existing Honor Guard building. The building will be built on a slab on grade. Exterior wall construction will consist of metal studs with rigid and batt insulation. Exterior sheathing, air barrier, and cladding will be applied to the exterior façade. The stone veneer will be constructed at the base of the building consistent with existing committal shelters. The proposed footprint will be 1,817 SF. All structures, excluding the tanks, bins, and pumping stations, will be accessible via the new bituminous concrete paved roads and parking lots.

Part of the proposed construction includes new Internment areas and a Columbarium as well; the plot sizes will differ depending on the plot type. The Cremains Sites will be 3 ft by 3 ft, Crypts will be 3 ft by 8 ft and 4 ft by 10 ft, and vaults will be 4 ft by 10 ft. The proposed "Road A," and proposed new loop road will make it so all of these Plots are easily accessible for entrance and exit.

A culvert is proposed along the existing stream and will rest within the existing stream bed that runs northwest to southeast. It will be located between the maintenance area and the Columbarium/ Internment area. The length of the 84 in. diameter, reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) will be on the order 95 ft, with inverts from the northwest to the southeast on the order of Elev. 421.9 to Elev. 418.1, respectively. Headwalls, Wingwalls, and Riprap are proposed to be placed at both ends of the culvert. Fill will also be placed above the structure in order to build up the roadway that will consist of standard duty asphalt pavement. Storm drains will be located within the roadway as well and connections will most likely tie to the outflow of the culvert.

We understand that most of these structures will require utilities that will likely include gravity lines for drainage and sewer, water lines, electrical lines, telecommunications, and HVAC.

2.2. OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this geotechnical study were to determine subsurface conditions at the project site, evaluate these conditions with respect to the proposed construction, and present our conclusions and recommendations regarding:

• foundation design, including discussion of alternate solutions if applicable, allowable bearing capacity, and anticipated total and differential settlements;

• design frost depth;

• Seismic Site Classification in accordance with applicable sections of the International Building Code;

• evaluation and determination of the earthwork requirements, including material selection and placement operations;

• groundwater conditions;

• corrosion potential of the soils to metal and concrete;

• pavement design parameters;

• lateral earth design parameters;

• floor slab design parameters, including subgrade preparation and modulus of subgrade reaction;

• suitability of on‐site material for re‐use as fill for the project;

• removal or treatment of objectionable material; and

• quality assurance, field-testing, and observations during construction.

3. FIELD AND LABORATORY WORK

3.1. FIELDWORK

On April 15 through April 19, 2021, 22 Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings were drilled by Eichelbergers, Inc. Representative soil samples were obtained in general accordance with ASTM D 1586 methods. Additionally, 4 test pits were excavated for a separate infiltration study. The boring locations were selected and established in the field by Pennoni personnel. The test pit locations were chosen by Honor Engineers and set in the field by Pennoni personnel. Appendix A includes the boring and test pit logs and the location plan, Drawing LP-1.

Our F. Brinker, PE, and M. Morykin, PG directed the fieldwork; our N. Rex and E. Brinker provided a full-time observation of the field operations.

3.2. LABORATORY WORK

Following conclusion of the SPT drilling, the soil samples were delivered to our laboratory for testing. The geotechnical laboratory program consisted of the following:

• Moisture Content (ASTM D2216) 10 tests

• Sieve Analysis (w/out hydrometer, ASTM D422) 7 tests

• Plasticity Analysis (ASTM D4318) 7 tests

• Corrosive Potential (ASTM D2974, CATM 643) 2 tests

• Water Soluble Sulfates (ASTM C1580) 2 tests

• Water Soluble Chlorides (AASHTO T291) 2 tests

• Volumetric Properties (ASTM D7263) 4 tests

Appendix B includes the laboratory test results.

4. SITE CHARACTERISTICS

4.1. LOCATION AND SURFACE FEATURES

The Phase 5 project site is located within the eastern portion of the existing Indiantown Gap National Cemetery in Annville, Pennsylvania. The proposed construction is located in the wooded area east of the current burial Sections 50 to 54. An existing maintenance area containing sheds and storage for equipment borders the site to the north, the existing cemetery and stormwater basin to the west, Old Cumberland Road to the south, and an extensive wooded area to the east. A cleared ancillary maintenance area currently occupies the central portion of the proposed improvement area. It appears to be used to place and spread excess fills. The exact amount of fill that is spread throughout this area is unknown. However, one of our borings was performed in this area and disclosed 20 ft of fill. Access roads are present throughout the site from Old Cumberland Road and the existing cemetery roads and traverse through the woods to the maintenance areas. A stream is located east of the ancillary maintenance area and flows south towards Old Cumberland Road.

The ground cover of the site is moderately to heavily wooded with some cleared areas. Site topography varies and generally slopes west to east, towards the stream, with an approximate change in elevation of Elev. 491.0 to Elev. 425.0. On the north/northwest side of the stream, the topography generally slopes south to north with a slight downslope in the site's northeast corner. The approximate change in elevation ranges from approximately Elev. 435.0 to Elev. 480.0.

The Honor Guard Building is located at the northmost section of the Cemetery north of burial Section 32 and south of the existing Committal Shelter No. 1. The current Honor Guard building area is currently bound by a paved parking lot and lightly landscaped areas with access drives to the northeast and south.

The area is relatively sloped downward from south to north with a change in grade of approximately 10 ft over a distance of 150 ft. Drawings SK-1 and SK-2 outline the specific and general site locations, in Appendix A, respectively.

4.2. GEOLOGY

Reviews of the Pennsylvania State Geologic Mapping (Drawing SK-3 in Appendix A), indicate the site is located in the Great Valley section of the Ridge and Valley Physiographic Province of Pennsylvania, which is characterized by broad, gently rolling hills and valleys with low to moderate relief. Much of the terrain is weathered with faulting and folding.

Available geological data indicates that the Hamburg Sequence of Rocks underlies the site. The rocks belonging to the Hamburg Sequence are generally comprised of a gray/greenish, maroon shale, dark gray sandstone, limestone, and shaly limestone. Locally, the shale was observed. The shale is moderately well-bedded and has a seamy to platy, well-developed, and highly abundant fracture pattern. The rock is considered moderately resistant to weathering; generally, small flat rectangular fragments result from the weathering process. The soil mantle is considered thin. The overburden soils were consistent with residual soil derived from shale bedrock and contained shale rock fragments.

4.3. ROCK

Refusal of the drilling equipment was encountered at a majority of the boring locations (except for borings B-5, B-9, B-12, and B-16) between depths from 5.5 ft to 22 ft below the existing ground surfaces.

Refusal of drilling equipment is typically inferred to as top of rock. Elevations where rock was encountered in the borings are summarized in the Table 1, below.

Table 1. Depth and Elevation to Top of Rock

*N/E – Top of rock was not encountered.

** Ground surface elevations were interpolated from project topographic maps.

1- Indicates that rock may be encountered above the proposed invert elevations for the culvert in some areas.

4.4. SUBSOILS

Soil samples encountered in the test borings and test pits are categorized into four strata based on their engineering properties. Generally, the near-surface soils consisted of fine to coarse grained Sand, varying amounts of silt and gravel fragments grading to bedrock. Boring B-22 located at the proposed Honor Guard Building disclosed 6 inches of asphalt at the surface followed by fine to coarse Sand and Gravel.

Test pits disclosed a varying topsoil layer ranging from 0.5 to 1.3 ft thick.

Boring Proposed Improvement

Existing

Ground

Surface

(Elev.)**

Depth to Rock

(ft)*

Top of Rock

(Elev.)*

B-1 Section 58 480.0 9.2 470.8

B-2 Section 58 480.0 5.5 474.5

B-3 Section 57 483.0 8.7 474.3

B-4 Columbarium 490.0 22 468.0

B-5 Columbarium 491.0 N/E N/E

B-6 Columbarium 465.0 14.5 450.5

B-7 Section 59 483.0 10.5 472.5

B-8 Section 60 481.0 15.5 465.5

B-9 Section 60/61 480.0 N/E N/E

B-10 Section 61 462.0 19.0 443.0

B-11 Section 57 491.0 13.5 477.5

B-12 Section 59 481.0 N/E N/E

B-13 Section 56 488.0 10.0 478.0

B-14 Culvert 425.0 14.0 411.0

B-15 Culvert 435.0 9.5 425.51

B-16 Storage Buildings 456.0 N/E N/E

B-17 Staff Parking/Building 451.0 16.5 434.5

B-18 Storage Buildings 460.0 14.5 445.5

B-19 Storage Bins/Staff Building 455.0 11.5 443.5

B-20 Storage Buildings/Fuel Storage 462.0 12.0 450.0

B-21 Pumphouse 480.0 16.5 463.5

B-22 Honor Guard Building 506.0 9.0 497.0

Stratum F (Fill)

The Fill soils identified in boring B-4 generally consisted of a gray to brown fine to coarse Sand and Silt/Clay with traces of fine gravel. This boring was conducted within the cleared area as mention in the site location and surface features. Our laboratory testing indicates that this soils appropriate USCS classification is SC representing a clayey sand or sandy clay. Stratum F was disclosed to be 20 ft thick and contained a soft black clayey silt layer from 18 to 20 ft below existing grade. The thickness of this layer in the clearing is unknown as only one boring was performed. The moisture content of the fill ranges from 20.1% to 28.0% and a moist unit weight of 112.9 pcf with a void ratio of 0.89.

The relative densities based on the SPT N-values generally ranged from medium to soft. However, in general, the Stratum F be medium.

Stratum 1

Soils identified as Stratum 1 generally consist of a tan to brown or gray to brown fine to medium to coarse Sand, with varying amounts of silt and varying amounts of fine gravel. Our laboratory tests indicate that the appropriate USCS classification for this soil is SM representing silty sands. Stratum 1 generally started at the ground surfaces and varied in thickness from 2 to 8 ft. Elevations of the bottom of Stratum 1 will vary due to the variable changes in grade throughout the site. The moisture content of these near-surface soils was tested as 8.5% with a moist unit weight of 125 and a void ratio of 0.49 can be considered.

The relative densities based on the SPT N-values generally ranged from loose to very dense. However, in general, the Stratum 1 soils can be considered to be medium dense.

Stratum 2

Stratum 2 is described generally as a gray, brown, and tan coarse to medium to fine sand, varying amounts of fine to medium gravel, varying amounts of silt, and on rare occasions clay/silt. Our laboratory tests indicate that SM and SC representing a silty sand or clayey sand with gravel. Stratum 2 soils were encountered 2 to 6 ft below existing grades and varied in thickness from 2 to 12 ft. The moisture content of this Stratum ranged from 8.5% to 12.8%. Soil samples from this Stratum were also tested for volumetric properties. Moist unit weights from representative soil samples range between 123.3 to 131.0 pcf and had void ratios of 0.41 to 0.49.

N-values indicated the relative density of Stratum 2 generally ranged from medium dense to very dense.

However, in general, the Stratum 2 soils can generally be considered in a dense state.

Stratum 3

Soils of stratum 3 consist of a weathered shale layer that was identified generally as a coarse to medium to fine grained Sand and medium to fine grained gravel with varying amounts of silt. These soils can be considered as a gravelly sand (SPG or SWG). Soils of Stratum 3 were encountered from 0 to 18 ft below existing grades and vary in thickness from 1 to 9.5 ft thick. The moisture content of this Stratum was tested at 10.4% and a moist unit weight of 130.7 pcf was recorded. A void ratio of 0.41 can be considered as well

N-values indicated that the relative density of Stratum 3 is generally very dense.

4.5. GROUNDWATER

Observations for groundwater were made in the borings and test pits during and after they were completed. No groundwater was observed in any of the borings and test pits. Groundwater observations are for the times and locations noted and may not be indicative of seasonal or daily fluctuations in the groundwater levels.

5. ANALYSES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. SEISMIC SITE CLASSIFICATION

The borings disclosed subsurface conditions generally described according to the Table 20.3-1 of ASCE 7 and referenced in Section 1613.3 of the 2018 International Building Code (IBC) as having a soil-profile corresponding to Site Class C – very dense soil and soft rock. Site Class determination is based on the properties in the upper 100 feet of the ground surface. The borings were advanced to a maximum depth of 22 feet. Values beyond 22 feet were estimated based on our local experience in this area.

5.2. EARTHWORK

A comparison of the existing grades with the finished grade elevations of the proposed construction areas indicates that cuts and fill are variable across the site. Table 2 below outlines the proposed finished floor or final grading schematics compared to the existing site grades and a range of the required cuts and fills required to attain the proposed elevations.

Table 2. Required Cuts and Fills for Proposed Improvement(s)

Before the placement of new fills, and construction of foundations, ground slab, and pavement areas, all existing topsoil, existing asphalt, and vegetation located within the proposed footprint should be removed. Any existing utilities located within the proposed construction areas should be abandoned and

Proposed

Improvement(s)

Range of Existing

Grade(s) (Elev.)

Proposed Finished

Grade(s) (Elev.)

Anticipated Cut (ft) Anticipated Fill (ft)

Section 56 484.0 to 491.0 484.0 to 491.0 >1 >1

Section 57 483.0 to 491.0 483.0 to 491.5 >1 >1

Section 58 480.0 to 481.0 480.0 to 481.0 1-3 1-6

Section 59 483.0 to 486.0 470.0 to 488.0 1-13 0

Section 60 474.0 to 481.0 472.0 to 477.0 1-4 >1

Section 61 462.0 to 480.0 462.0 to 470.0 1-10 >1

Columbarium 460.0 to 492.0 473.0 to 480.0 1-12 1-13

Culvert 418.0 to 445.0 441.0 to 443.0 1-2 1-25

Staff Building 449.0 to 457.0 448.0 1-9 0

Storage Buildings 454.0 to 461.0 448.0 6-13 0

Storage Bins 442.0 to 451.0 448.0 1-3 1-9

Fuel Storage 460.0 to 464.0 447.0 13-17 0

Pumphouse 480.0 477.0 3 0

Honor Guard Building 505.0 to 511.0 509.0 1-2 1-4 relocated outside the proposed building footprint. Any existing utility line abandoned in-place should be grouted, or the line should be removed from the trench and appropriately backfilled.

The native soils encountered in the test borings were disclosed to be variable consisting of a mixture of sands and silts with fines contents that vary from 14.5% to 26.6%. Our experience indicates that soils of Stratum 1, 2, and 3 can be reused as compacted load-bearing structural fill. Clean/inert, granular portions of the on-site soils can be reused for earthwork construction, provided all material larger than 3 inches in its greatest dimension be removed before reuse. It should be noted that the contractor should actively try to separate granular portions from the fine-grained portions during earthwork operations and have two separate stockpiles during construction. Laboratory test results indicate that the moisture contents of Stratum 1, 2 and 3 ranged from 8.5% to 12.8% and are below to within the optimum moisture content generally associated with these soils to achieve the desired degree of compaction. Drying "wet" soil is difficult during wet periods and lower temperatures. Stratum F soils contained fines consisting of 45% to 46% fines and moisture contents from 20.1% to 28.0%. The soils in Stratum F and native fine-grained soils can be difficult to work with, are sensitive to moisture, and may require wetting or drying prior to compaction. Along with the amount of variability that comes along with fill soils, we do not recommend that Stratum F soils be reused for structural back fill and that they be removed from the site during excavations or reused for landscaping purposes. Provisions for importing structural fill should be included in the contract documents.

If necessary, imported structural fill should be selected from suitable borrow sources and be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer well in advance of fill construction. Granular fill should ideally consist of well-graded material with not more than 20 percent passing the No. 200 sieve and have a plasticity index not greater than 8 percent. PennDOT 2A processed aggregate or recycled concrete with a gradation similar to that described with a maximum particle size of 3 in. can be considered. Other gradations can be considered based on laboratory testing and at the discretion of the Geotechnical Engineer.

Fine-grained and granular fills should be placed in layers not exceeding 8 to 10 in. and 10 to 12 in. loose thickness, respectively. This criterion might be adjusted by the geotechnical engineer in the field depending on the conditions present at the time of construction, on the compaction equipment used, and on the fill materials selected. Fills for support of foundations, ground floor slab, and pavements should be compacted to at least 98 percent, and 95 percent, respectively, of the laboratory determined dry density, ASTM D 698, when small, hand-operated compaction equipment is used, and to at least 95 percent and 93 percent, respectively, of the laboratory determined maximum dry density, ASTM D 1557, when self-propelled, heavy-duty construction equipment is used. Fills should extend a minimum of 5 ft beyond the exterior edge of a loaded area and have side slopes not steeper than 2 horizontal to 1 vertical.

Specifications should indicate that the percentage of maximum dry density attained in the field is not the only criteria to be used for assessing fill compaction. Observation of the behavior of the fill under the loads of construction equipment should also be used. If the test results indicate that the percentage of compaction is being achieved, but the soil mass is moving under the equipment, placement of additional fill should not be continued until the movement is stabilized. Otherwise, settlement of the fill may occur.

Exposed subgrades should be thoroughly proof-rolled in the presence of a representative from Pennoni using a loaded dump truck or a minimum 10-ton vibratory roller. Where space is limited subgrade soils should be manually probed in an attempt to disclose unstable surface areas. Any unstable surface areas (soft, yielding, etc.) found should be stabilized by excavating and replacing those soils with suitable soil that is adequately compacted. This can be accomplished by properly adjusting the moisture content of the subgrade soils and compacting them, or by other methods (placing a geotextile and stone layer, etc.

or soil exchange).

We recommend that all site preparation and earthwork operations be carried out in the full-time presence of a qualified representative of the Geotechnical Engineer.

5.3. GROUNDWATER AND SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT

Observations for groundwater were made during and after each boring and test pit, and groundwater was not encountered. Surface runoff should be prevented from entering or ponding in excavations by creating soil berms or diversion swales along the excavation perimeter that will be left open for an extended period. Where ponding does occur, the water should be removed immediately by pumping.

Grades should then be established to prevent further ponding.

Waterproofing/draining systems are recommended if below-grade and/or underground structures such as basements are proposed. However, because no shallow groundwater was observed in the borings and test pits and the proposed construction does not include an underground structure, we believe there is no need for waterproofing/hydrostatic design requirements. All retaining walls should have a drainage system incorporated into the design regardless of the presence of shallow groundwater.

5.4. FOUNDATIONS

Based on the boring data and our experience, our professional opinion is that the proposed structures can be supported on shallow spread footings bearing on newly placed load-bearing fill or firm/dense native soils. This foundation section provides different allowable bearing capacities for each general proposed construction area.

Columbarium/Internment Areas

A comparison of existing grades and proposed construction indicate that cuts and fills will vary greatly for support of the Columbarium and Internment areas. The proposed cuts indicate that foundations will bear in a combination of medium dense/dense portions of Stratum 1, 2 and 3. Structural fills will most likely be used to reach parts of the site that require higher finished grade elevations. Therefore, this portion of the site can be supported on shallow foundations designed with an allowable bearing capacity of 3,000 psf as long as subgrades and fills are placed and compacted as outlined in the Earthwork Section.

Boring B-4 indicated the potential for soft loose fill soils below the anticipated footing elevation of Elev. 477.0. Therefore, we recommend this material be removed and replaced (soil exchange) with competent on-site soils or imported fill, this would cause an approximate undercut of 7 ft below the anticipated footing bottom to Elev. 470.0 where dense soils of Stratum 2 were encountered. Soils should be densified prior to new fills, placed, and compacted as outlined in the Earthwork section.

Honor Guard Building

The Honor Guard Building will require cuts on the order of 1 to 2 ft and fills on the order of 1 to 4 ft.

Therefore, portions of the building will bear in Stratum 1 and structural fills; the building can be supported on shallow foundations designed with an allowable bearing capacity of 3,000 psf as long as subgrades and fills are placed and compacted as outlined in the Earthwork Section.

Culvert

It is our understanding that significant fills will be required to reach final grades for the culvert. Fills up to 23 ft will be required to reach the roadway subgrade elevation immediately above the culvert crossing.

Review of the available documents indicated that the proposed inverts of the culvert will be on the order of Elev. 421.9 to Elev. 418.10 from the northwest headwall to the southeast headwall, respectively. Table 3 below outlines the culvert units, applicable borings, foundation type, and the bearing Stratum footings are anticipated to bear on.

Table 3. Anticipated Foundation Type and Bearing Stratum for Culvert

Culvert Unit Applicable

Boring Foundation Type Bearing Stratum

Northwest Headwall and Wing sections

B-14/B-15

Spread Footings Stratum 2/Stratum 3 Southeast Headwall and Wing Sections

B-14/B-15

We anticipate the proposed culvert will consist of a 84 in. diameter, reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) on the order 95 ft long, with inverts from the northwest to the southeast of Elev. 421.9 to Elev. 418.1, respectively. Headwalls, Wingwalls, and Riprap are proposed to be placed at both ends of the culvert.

Table 4 below presents design parameters that can be used for this structure.

Table 4. General Design Parameters for the Culvert Wingwall and Headwall Sections

Parameter Stratum 2 Values Stratum 3 Values

Coeff. of Friction between Soil and Footing

0.42 0.52

Moist Density (pcf) 130 135 Effective Friction Angle, ɸ(°) 32 38

Qallow (psf) 4,000 8,000 Estimated Settlement (in.) ½ ¼

Foundations must bear 40 in. below existing grades to protect against frost. Foundation subgrades must be checked by a geotechnical representative to ensure the correct bearing Stratum. Subgrades must be densified prior to placement of reinforcing steel and concrete. Spread footings may be ordered by the geotechnical engineer to a lower elevation if necessary. All surface runoffs should be diverted away from the excavation. Groundwater and water from the stream are expected to be encountered in the excavations, therefore the contractor is expected to provide sufficient dewatering so that excavations are dry enough for inspection and construction. Do not exceed a 2 ft difference in fill elevation on the sides during placement of backfill. Back fill should be placed in accordance with the Earthwork section of this report. Riprap scour protection is recommended .

Maintenance Area Structures

The grading plan drafted by the LA Group on February 8, 2021, indicates that the finished floor elevations (FFE) will generally be on the order of Elev. 447.0 to 448.0. These FFE's for the staff building, storage buildings, and fuel tanks will generally require cuts. Therefore, most shallow foundations will bear in the very dense portions of Stratum 2. In general, the footings can be designed using an allowable bearing capacity of 4,000 psf for the maintenance area. Areas in the northwest portion of the proposed maintenance area where footings will be embedded into weathered shale (boring areas B-18 and B-20) can be designed using a bearing capacity of up to 8,000 psf, if needed.

Grading plans also indicate fills on the order of 1 to 9 ft may be required to reach finished grades in the northeastern corner of the maintenance area. The proposed storage bins will generally be located in this area, therefore the bins will most likely be supported on shallow foundations bearing in densified structural fill. Fills are to be placed and compacted as specified in the Earthwork Section, an allowable bearing capacity of 3,000 psf can be used for design.

Pumphouse

The proposed FFE of the Pump Station FFE is Elev. 477.0, therefore, shallow foundations would bear on the dense layers of Stratum 2. Therefore, foundations for this area can be designed using an allowable bearing capacity of 4,000 psf.

General Shallow Foundation Requirements

We recommend that unsuitable existing fill soil if encountered and existing remnant construction materials be removed to a minimum depth of 3 ft below new foundations and the floor slab subgrade elevations. The width of the excavation bottoms must be equal to the width of the footing plus 1 ft for every 1 ft excavated below the bottom of the proposed footing subgrade elevation. The excavation should then be backfilled to the proposed bottom of footing elevation using suitable on-site soils or an approved imported processed aggregate in accordance with the compaction recommendations presented herein. Before the backfill placement, reinforcing steel, or concrete, the exposed excavated subgrades should be densified with vibratory compaction equipment and the subgrades checked for loose or unstable conditions.

Continuous and isolated footings should be at least 2 ft wide and 3 ft square, respectively, to prevent localized shear failure in soil. The subgrade of all exterior footings and any other foundation exposed to freezing temperatures during construction and/or the life of the structure should be established at least 40 in. below adjacent exposed grades or otherwise protected against frost action. A representative of Pennoni should check foundation subgrades to confirm conditions suitable for support of the design bearing pressure. Where an area is questionable, it should be further explored and/or remedied by removing and replacing unsuitable material.

5.5. GROUND FLOOR SLABS

Ground floor slabs and concrete sidewalks can be supported on finial finish grades on densified structural fill and native soils and/or newly compacted load-bearing fill. Before construction, exposed subgrades should be densified as outlined in Section 5.2 of this report. The ground floor slab can be designed using a modulus of subgrade reaction of 175 pci for newly compacted fills and Stratum 1, and 250 pci for Stratum 2/3.

A reinforced slab-on-grade can be considered for the proposed construction with a free-draining granular base course beneath the slab. A 6 in. thick free-draining granular base course should be placed beneath the floor slab to provide a uniform bearing surface and aid in the proper curing of the floor slab concrete.

At least 6 in. should be maintained between the bottom of the floor slab and the tops of the foundations to minimize the potential for floor slab cracking at the foundation edges or the slabs should be designed accordingly to minimize cracking. The floor slab should be isolated from other structural elements of the building to allow for independent movements.

5.6. SETTLEMENT

Settlement of a soil mass is a function of the characteristics of the supporting soils (type of soil, void ratio, pre-consolidation, etc.), the thickness of the layer(s), and the stresses imposed on the soils by an applied load (fill, shallow foundations, floor slab, etc.). The stresses affecting subsoils generally decrease with increasing depth and are variable based on the magnitude and area of applied loading.

Provided that the subsurface conditions are improved as recommended in Section 5.2 and 5.4, immediate and differential settlements are expected to be less than ½ in. and ¼ in., respectively, and detrimental post-construction settlement are not expected if the recommendations presented herein are followed.

5.7. PAVEMENT DESIGN PARAMETERS

In the areas of proposed new pavements, a flexible (bituminous) type of pavement is recommended. The preparation of the pavement subgrades and placement of any required fill should be done as recommended under Section 5.2. of this report.

We recommend that the pavement surface course (wearing and binder) be underlain by a crushed stone or coarse gravel base course at least 4 in. thick. A California Bearing Ratio (CBR) between 5% to 20% is the typical range for soils of stratum be considered for the soils of Stratum 1 and 2. The soils encountered on-site were predominately fine-grained and moisture sensitive. In our opinion a CBR of 10% is recommended for the soils.

5.8. LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE PARAMETERS

The soil parameters presented in Table 5 can be used to estimate lateral earth pressures to design below grade structures and temporary shoring. If the top of the structure is restrained from movement, thereby preventing the mobilization of active soil pressures, the structure should be designed using the at-rest pressure coefficient, ko.

The earth pressure coefficients are based on the assumption of vertical walls, horizontal backfill, no surcharges, no wall friction, and a safety factor of 1.0. Hydrostatic pressures associated with seepage must also be considered in the design unless a drain and drainage stone layer are provided behind the wall.

TABLE 5. Lateral Earth Pressure Parameters

Parameter Stratum F Stratum 1 Stratum 2 Stratum 3

Engineered Granular Fill

(PennDOT 2A)

Unit Weight, pcf 115 125 130 135 135

Angle of Internal Friction, degrees

24 28 32 38 40

Cohesion, psf 0 0 0 0 0

Friction Factor (concrete)

0.30 0.35 0.42 0.52 0.60 ka 0.42 0.36 0.31 0.24 0.22 ko 0.59 0.53 0.47 0.38 0.36 kp 2.37 2.77 3.25 4.20 4.60

If the contractor is responsible for the design of temporary or permanent retaining structures, then the contract documents should clearly require that a competent registered engineer performs the design and that the responsibility for satisfactory earth support is solely the contractor's. Furthermore, the contract documents should require the contractor to notify the engineer immediately if differing or unforeseen subsurface conditions are encountered during construction.

5.9. CORROSIVITY

Corrosion of below-grade concrete foundations can be caused by high levels of moisture, sulfate, sulfide, chlorides, and acidity in the soils. Corrosion of below-grade steel construction materials can be caused by high levels of moisture, acidity, electrical conductivity, and particle size distribution. We have tested representative samples of the on-site soil to determine the corrosion potential to subsurface structures.

Table 6 below presents the typical values that laboratory results are compared to with ranges of corrosion potential.

TABLE 6. Corrosion Laboratory Testing Ranges

PARAMETER TESTED BORINGS

B-5 B-15

Water Soluble Chloride (%)

As Tested 0.002 0.006

Potential Range 0.05 or higher

Water Soluble Sulfate (%)

As Tested 0.005 0.001

Potential Range 0.20 or higher

Resistivity (ohm-cm)

As Tested 3,261 1,519

Potential Range 1,500 or less pH As Tested 6.4 (H20)/ 6.1(CaCl2) 6.4 (H20)/ 6.1(CaCl2)

Potential Range 5.5 or less

The corrosive potential ranges presented above are typical for this type of soil. It is our professional opinion that the potential risk for corrosion of below-grade structures is low.

5.10. CONSTRUCTION DIFFICULTIES

Comparison of the estimated top of rock elevations to finished grades of the project site indicate that rock conditions could impact site grading, general excavations, and foundation construction in the northern portion of the maintenance area and culvert construction. The shale geology encountered is often dense but fairly rippable when using heavy-duty power equipment; the extent of the rippability will be dependent on the density and fracturing in the shale. Typically, it can be expected that rippability will decrease in narrow excavations (i.e. utility trenches, etc.). The use of a hoe-ram may be required to excavate in this formation.

Additionally, encountering remnants of previous foundations or shoring systems may be discovered during site excavation for the new Honor Guard Building, not for the remainder of the undeveloped site.

If remnant construction debris is still present, they should be removed to a depth of 18 in. below the bottom of the new ground floor slab or base of the footing. Existing structural elements encountered below new foundations should be evaluated individually.

6. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES

Our experience on numerous construction projects is that the interests of the project team are best served by retaining the Geotechnical Engineer to provide construction observations during earthwork and foundation construction operations. To determine if soils, other materials, and groundwater conditions encountered during construction are similar to those encountered in the borings, and that they have comparable engineering properties or influences on the design of the structure, we recommend that Pennoni should provide field observation services during excavation; preparation of foundation subgrades; and installation/construction of foundations. Pennoni's Geotechnical Technology should review specifications for earthwork and foundation design/construction when they are prepared.

7. LIMITATIONS

This work has been done in accordance with our authorized scope of work and in accordance with generally accepted professional practice in the fields of geotechnical and foundation engineering. This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties either expressed or implied. Our conclusions and recommendations are based on the data revealed by this exploration. We are not responsible for any conclusions or opinions drawn from the data included herein, other than those specifically stated, nor are the recommendations presented in this report intended for direct use as construction specifications. This report is intended for use with regard to the specific project described herein; any changes in loads, structures, or locations should be brought to our attention so that we may determine how they may affect our conclusions. An attempt has been made to provide for normal contingencies, but the possibility remains that unexpected conditions may be encountered during construction. If this should occur, or if additional or contradictory data are revealed in the future, we should be notified so that modifications to this report can be made, if necessary. If we do not review relevant construction documents and witness the relevant construction operations, then we cannot be responsible for any problems that may result from misinterpretation or misunderstanding of this report or failure to comply with our recommendations.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A – FIELD DATA

ALL DOCUMENTS PREPARED BY PENNONI ASSOCIATES ARE

INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE IN RESPECT OF THE PROJECT.

THEY ARE NOT INTENDED OR REPRESENTED TO BE

SUITABLE FOR REUSE BY OWNER OR OTHERS ON

EXTENSIONS OF THE PROJECT OR ON ANY OTHER PROJECT.

ANY REUSE WITHOUT WRITTEN VERIFICATION OR

ADAPTATION BY PENNONI ASSOCIATES FOR THE SPECIFIC

PURPOSE INTENDED WILL BE AT OWNERS SOLE RISK AND

WITHOUT LIABILITY OR LEGAL EXPOSURE TO PENNONI

ASSOCIATES; AND OWNER SHALL INDEMNIFY AND HOLD

HARMLESS PENNONI ASSOCIATES FROM ALL CLAIMS,

DAMAGES, LOSSES, AND EXPENSES ARISING OUT OF OR

RESULTING THEREFROM.

VA Indiantown Gap Cemetery Project Area Map

Figure: Project Number:

AEWLA 20005

Drawn By:

N. Rex

Approved By:

M. Morykin

Scale:

NTS

Date:

5/25/2021

SK-1

LEGEND

PROPOSED PHASE 5 AREA

Pennoni Associates Inc

THEY ARE NOT INTENDED OR REPRESENTED TO BE

SUITABLE FOR REUSE BY OWNER OR OTHERS ON

EXTENSIONS OF THE PROJECT OR ON ANY OTHER

PROJECT. ANY REUSE WITHOUT WRITTEN VERIFICATION OR

ADAPTATION BY PENNONI ASSOCIATES FOR THE SPECIFIC

PURPOSE INTENDED WILL BE AT OWNERS SOLE RISK AND

WITHOUT LIABILITY OR LEGAL EXPOSURE TO PENNONI

ASSOCIATES; AND OWNER SHALL INDEMNIFY AND HOLD

HARMLESS PENNONI ASSOCIATES FROM ALL CLAIMS,

DAMAGES, LOSSES, AND EXPENSES ARISING OUT OF OR

RESULTING THEREFROM.

Pennoni Associates Inc 5072 Ritter Road, Suite 102 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055

VA Indiantown Gap Cemetery USGS Map

Figure: Project Number:

AEWLA 20005

Drawn By:

N. Rex

Approved By:

M. Morykin

Scale:

NTS

Date:

5/25/2021

▄▄OP

█n

█n

F

F

F

F

500 500

Dee Jay Airport

Muir Army Airfield (Fort

Indiantown Gap)

A2

Appalachian National Scenic Trail

Appalachian National Scenic Trail

A1

Appalac hian National Scenic Trail

Appalachian National Scenic Trail

§̈¦81

§̈¦81

§̈¦81

§̈¦78

§̈¦81

§̈¦81

§̈¦81

£¤22

£¤22

£¤22

£¤22

¬«443

¬«72

¬«443

¬«443

¬«934

¬«443

¬«72

¬«72

SHIRK'S

CHURCH RD

T3

AMMO RD

BLACKS BRIDGE RD

LO

GA

N

RD

CLEMENT AVE

UT

ILI

TY

RD

WHITE TAIL LN

INDIANTOWN

GAP RD

LYNCH RD

1ST ST

SEALER CREEK RD

2ND ST

HARTRANFT RD

ACORN RD

BORDNERSVILLE RD

AWOL RD

CA

MP

ME

ET

ING

RD

CEMETARY RD

WEBSTER SCHOOL RD

ZION CHURCH RD

FIRE LN

CHURCH

LN

LAKOTA LN

BRO

OKSI

DE

JONESTOWN RD

HAWKINS RD

CHAPE L DR

ON

O

RD

BATZ LN

ORCHARD DR

MA

PL

E L N

TYS

ON LN

MO

NR

OE

VA

LL

EY

DR

COLDSPRING RD

COON CREEK RD

JONESTOWN RD

MILL RD

WEBSTER SCHOOL RD

KLETZLY AVE

ASHER MINER RD

RIDGE RD

SERVICE RD

RICHARDS RD

SMOKEYS LN

LIGHTNER RD

BIDDLE RD

GREENPOINT SCHOOL RD

SWATA

RA

DR

CAVALRY RD

BLA

CKSMITH LN

HILL DR

CAMP MEETING RD

HUCKLEBERRY RD

LIT

TL

E M

OU

NT

AI

N R D

PAR

K D

R

WOLF LN

TOMSTOWN RD

HARRISON SCHOOL RD

HOSPITAL RD

MANADA ST

WHITAKER AVE

CHESTNUT RD

COULTER RD

DEA

D END RD

MCGILLSTOWN RD

FETZER RD

RACEHORSE DR

AIRPORT WAY

BORDNERSVILLE RD

TH

OM

PS

ON

AVE

JONESTOWN RD

DU

NLO

P RD

BU

CK

LN

LA

KE

RD

NEUINS LA

PICNIC WOODS RD

HO

WI

TZ

ER

RD

SCHOOL HOUSE RD

WILEY RD

SMATHERS RD

JOHNSON TRL

YO

RD

YS

BR

IDG

E R

D

ANDERSON RD

LINCOLN SCHOOL RD

VALLEY DR

MON

ROE VALLEY RD

DARKE

S RD

LICKDALE RD

HUCKLEBERRY RD

BU

LL

FR

OG

RD

17TH ST

T362

MACLUSKIE AVE

RANGE RD

AR

TIL

LE

RY

RD

ACORN RD

OLD CANAL DR

BIDDLE DR

CA

NDY

LN

FORT SWATARA RD

HOOVER DR

FT

SW

AT

AR

A

DR

SH

IRK

'S

CH

UR

CH

RD

OLD

RR BED

LINDLEY

MURRAY RD

T360

MEM

ORIA

L LAK

E RD

REED'S CREEK RD

QUARTERMASTER RD

YORK RD

OLD

STATE RD

HEILMANDALE RD

SILVERTOWN RD

PIN

E T

RE

E R

D

DARKES RD

BULLFROG

RD

WOOD RD

SHERK

S C

HURCH

RD

BOUNDARY RD

FIS

HE

R AVE

BLACKS BRIDGE RD

RUDY LN

GREENPOINT SCHOOL RD

TH

OM

PS

ON

AV

E

EA

SY

LN

ALLENTOWN BLVD

ALLE

NTOWN BLVD

ALLENTOWN BLVD

FORT

INDIANTOWN GAP

FIG

APPALACHIAN NATIONAL

SCENIC TRAIL

APPALACHIAN NATIONAL

SCENIC TRAIL

INDIANTOWN GAP

NATIONAL CEMETERY

LEBANON CO

Saint Joseph Springs

Raccoon Cr Indiantown Run

Ve sle

Ru n

Forge Cr

Raccoon Cr

In dia nto wn

Ru n

Trout Run

Stony Cr

Woods Cr

Reed s Cr

Air es

Ru n

Aires Run

Qure g Run

Raccoon Cr

Rausch Cr

In dia nt ow n R un

Rausch Cr

Trout Run

Reeds Cr

Swatara Creek

Swatara Creek

Sw ata ra Cr eek

Swatara Creek

Swatara Creek

Sw ata ra Cree k

Sw ata ra Cree k

Swatara Creek

Marquette Lake

Dresden Lake

Shuey Lake

Stouffer Lake

Bordnersville

East Hanover

McGillstown

Fort Indiantown Gap

Indiantown

Green Point

Murray

West Jonestown

Harper Tavern

West Jonestown

Ono

Inwood

M o n ro e

V a ll e y

Blue Mountain

Second Mountain

Indiantown Gap

Swatara Gap

76°

FEET

3 67

32'

40°

27'

FEET

64 2 290

30" 70 3

E

25'

76°

63 E 64 3 68

30"

30'

30'40°

30'

30"

000m

65 3 FEET

76°

30'

25'

3 3

35'

32'

40°

30"

30"

N

30"

30" 000m

35'

66 70

40°

22'

37'

37'

65 3

69 71 2

000m

FEET

000mN

3 67

76°

27'

22'30"

PENNSYLVANIA

QUADRANGLE LOCATION

INDIANTOWN GAP QUADRANGLE

PENNSYLVANIA-LEBANON CO.

7.5-MINUTE SERIES

INDIANTOWN GAP, PA

Expressway Local Connector

ROAD CLASSIFICATION

Ramp 4WD Secondary Hwy Local Road

Interstate Route State RouteUS RouteWX ./ H

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

1 Lykens

8 Lebanon

2 Tower City 3 Pine Grove 4 Grantville 5 Fredericksburg 6 Hershey 7 Palmyra

ADJOINING QUADRANGLES

1 2 3

4 5

6 7 8

This map was produced to conform with the National Geospatial Program US Topo Product Standard, 2011.

A metadata file associated with this product is draft version 0.6.19

CONTOUR INTERVAL 20 FEET

NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988

SCALE 1:24 000

1000 500 0 METERS 1000 2000

21KILOMETERS00.51

1 0.5 0

MILES

1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

FEET

Imagery..................................................NAIP, June 2013 Roads................................ U.S. Census Bureau, 2015 - 2016 Names..........................................................GNIS, 2016 Hydrography....................National Hydrography Dataset, 2013…