SD FLAP CS23A(1) Final Pavments Report.pdf

SUBMITTED TO:

HDR Engineering, Inc.

1670 Broadway, Ste. 3400 Denver, Colorado 80202

BY:

Shannon & Wilson 1321 Bannock St., Ste. 200 Denver, Colorado 80204

(303) 825-3800 www.shannonwilson.com

PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT

SD FLAP CS23A (1)

Delta-01 Access Road

JACKSON COUNTY, SOUTH DAKOTA

August 2022

Shannon & Wilson No: 104537-001

Pavement Design Report

104537-001 August 2022 ii

CO

NT

EN

TS

CONTENTS

1 Introduction

2 Project and Site Description

3 Geotechnical Investigation Program

3.1 Subsurface Investigation

3.2 Geotechnical Laboratory Testing

3.3 Aggregate Surfacing Condition

4 Subsurface Conditions

5 Pavement Design Recommendations

5.1 Design Subgrade R-Value

5.2 Traffic Loading

5.3 Recommended Pavement Sections

6 Additional Considerations

6.1 Expansive Subgrade Potential

6.1.1 PDDM Subexcavation Requirements

6.1.2 Recommended Subgrade Treatment

6.2 Frost Damage

6.3 Sulfates Testing

7 Construction and Material Specifications

7.1 Site Preparation

7.2 Earthwork

7.2.1 General

7.2.2 Subgrade Preparation and Fill Placement

7.2.3 Soft Subgrade

7.3 Paving Materials

8 Closure

9 References

Exhibits Exhibit 3-1: Typical aggregate surfacing distress Exhibit 5-1: Recommended Cs 23A Pavement Sections Exhibit 7-1: Recommended Materials for Pavements iii

CO

NT

EN

Figures Figure 1: Vicinity Map Figure 2: Site and Exploration Plan

Appendices Appendix A: Subsurface Explorations Appendix B: Laboratory Test Results Appendix C: Drilling Photographs Appendix D: Pavement Design Calculations Important Information

Pavement Design Report

104537-001 August 2022

1 INTRODUCTION

This report summarizes the results of our subsurface exploration and laboratory testing program and presents pavement design recommendations and construction considerations for the proposed improvements to Cs 23A as part of the Central Federal Lands Highway Division (CFLHD) project SD FLAP Cs 23A Delta-01 Access Road (the Project) located in Jackson County, South Dakota. Our scope of services was specified in Task Order 004/1000100069552 of Contract Number 1000100065069 with HDR Engineering, Inc. (HDR) dated January 21, 2022. Our conclusions and recommendations in this report are based on:

The limitations of our approved scope, schedule, and budget described in our contract;

Our understanding of the Project and information provided by HDR;

Subsurface conditions observed in the borings at the time our explorations were completed; and

The results of testing performed on samples collected from the explorations.

The objective of our geotechnical studies was to provide recommendations and construction considerations, as presented herein, for the proposed roadway reconstruction. The authorized scope of services was based on this objective and this report should not be used for other purposes without Shannon & Wilson’s review. If a service is not specifically indicated in this report, do not assume that it was performed.

2 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION

The Project is located in Jackson County, South Dakota, approximately 16 miles southeast of Wall, South Dakota (Figure 1). Cs 23A intersects I-90 at mile marker 127.73 (Exit 127). The southern extent of the improvement area is located approximately 900 feet north of the intersection of the westbound entrance and exit ramp and extends approximately 3,100 feet north to the Delta-01 Launch Control Facility visitor parking access. The existing Jackson County Road Cs 23A is approximately 18 to 20 feet wide and provides the sole access to the Minuteman Missile National Historic Delta-01 Launch Control Facility.

The existing aggregate surfaced (AS) roadway was observed to have signs of distress (refer to Section 3.3). The proposed improvements consist of clearing and grubbing, rehabilitation, widening to a 24-foot-wide cross section, and paving with asphalt cement pavement (ACP). We understand that roadway grades cannot be raised due to right-of-way constraints.

Pavement Design Report

104537-001 August 2022

3 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROGRAM

3.1 Subsurface Investigation

Shannon & Wilson conducted a field exploration program on March 15, 2022, to explore subsurface conditions along the proposed roadway alignment. The subsurface exploration program consisted of drilling and sampling three borings along Cs 23A designated as borings SW-01 through SW-03. Refer to Figure 2 for the approximate boring locations. The borings were advanced to an approximate depth of 5.5 feet below the existing aggregate roadway.

Appendix A presents a discussion of the drilling and sampling procedures used to complete the borings. Appendix A also presents the individual exploration logs and an explanation of the symbols and terminology used.

3.2 Geotechnical Laboratory Testing

We completed geotechnical laboratory tests on selected samples retrieved from the borings to estimate index and engineering properties. The index tests included natural water content, grain size analysis, and Atterberg limits. The engineering property tests included corrosion and Hveem stabilometer (R-value). The laboratory test results, as well as a discussion of the testing procedures, are included in Appendix B. The natural water content, fines content, and Atterberg limits are also shown on the individual boring logs included in Appendix A.

3.3 Aggregate Surfacing Condition

A Shannon & Wilson field representative observed the following AS distress along the project alignment: (a) corrugation (washboarding), (b) minor rutting, and (c) loose or unbound aggregate. Refer to Exhibit 3-1 for photos of typical AS distress.

Pavement Design Report

Exhibit 3-1: Typical aggregate surfacing distress.

Left: Accumulation of fines at the crown of roadway.

Right: Corrugation (washboarding) and loose gravel.

4 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

The thickness of AS observed in Cs 23A was 4 inches at each boring location. Subsurface conditions below aggregate surfacing generally consisted of stiff to very stiff lean clay with varying percentages of sand and gravel [AASHTO classification A-6 and A-7-6 soils]. The exception was boring SW-01, which encountered approximately 10 inches of medium dense, clayey sand with gravel (AASHTO A-2-6 soil) below the AS. The soils were identified as fill to depths of 2.8, 5.5, and 2.0 feet in borings SW-01 through SW-03, respectively.

Groundwater was not encountered in any of our borings; however, fluctuations of groundwater levels at the site are possible and will depend on many factors, including seasonal variations, local precipitation, and flood events. Nevertheless, groundwater is not anticipated to affect the design or construction of the Project.

Our observations are specific to the locations, depths, and dates noted on the exploration logs in Appendix A and may not be applicable to all areas of the site. There is no amount of explorations or laboratory testing that can precisely predict the characteristics, quality, or distribution of subsurface conditions at every location throughout the site. Variations in the subsurface conditions may occur between and below the borings. Also, the passage of time

Pavement Design Report

104537-001 August 2022 or intervening causes (natural and manmade) may result in changes to the conditions of the site and subsurface conditions.

5 PAVEMENT DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

Performance of a pavement system depends on the pavement material and thicknesses, subgrade strength, traffic loads and repetitions, and design life. The following sections discuss each of these aspects as they relate to the Project.

Our pavement design and results are based on the design procedures presented in the AASHTO Guide for the Design of Pavement Structures (1993) with guidance from the U.S.

Department of Transportation (USDOT) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Federal Lands Highway Project Development and Design Manual (PDDM) (2008).

Pavement design inputs and calculations are presented in Appendix D.

5.1 Design Subgrade R-Value

The subsurface explorations completed along the roadway primarily consisted of clayey sand and lean clay subgrade. We performed a single R-value test on the subgrade material encountered in boring SW-03 consisting of AASHTO A-6 material. The R-value test result indicated a value of 2.8; however, we used an R-value of 5 for design (which is the minimum value used by CFLHD). For our pavement analysis, we used an AASHTO correlation between R-value and resilient modulus, which calculates a resilient modulus value of approximately 3,775 pounds per square inch (psi).

5.2 Traffic Loading

Based on discussions with HDR, traffic counts for the roadway will be approximately 48 vehicles per day, primarily consisting of passenger cars, pickups and vans, and occasional motorhomes. For design of the roadway, we assumed an equivalent single axle loading (ESAL) of 50,000 based on the minimum recommend ESAL in the PDDM.

5.3 Recommended Pavement Sections

Refer to Exhibit 5-1 for the recommended pavement section alternatives. Refer to Appendix D for our design calculations.

Pavement Design Report

104537-001 August 2022

Exhibit 5-1: Recommended Cs 23A Pavement Sections

Paving Alternative

Recommended Pavement Section

Alt. 1 4.5 in. ACP over 7 in. CAB

Alt. 2 4.0 in. ACP over 7 in. CAB with biaxial geogrid

NOTE:

ACP = Asphalt Concrete Pavement; AS = Aggregate Surfacing; CAB = crushed aggregate base; in.= inches

The above pavement sections represent optimized sections with CAB thickness rounded to the nearest whole inch. We recommend that all CAB be daylighted to avoid cumulation of water in the subgrade.

6 ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

6.1 Expansive Subgrade Potential

Certain soil formations in South Dakota are susceptible to volume change by swelling and/or shrinking. This geologic phenomenon has the potential to cause substantial damage to lightly loaded structures, such as pavements, when exposed to water. To provide an indication of the swell potential of near surface soils at the site, we performed Atterberg limits, grain size distributions, and moisture contents on soil samples encountered in our explorations. Based on testing of cohesive subgrade samples from the project site, the Plasticity Index (PI) ranged from 23 to 30, and the Liquid Limit (LL) ranged from 35 to 43.

6.1.1 PDDM Subexcavation Requirements

To mitigate against potential constructability issues (pumping subgrade and difficulty achieving compaction of subgrade), as well as reducing long-term swell potential, guidance from Section 11.3.2.1.3 of the PDDM indicates:

2 feet of subexcavation (overexcavation and removal of excavated material from the site) for subgrades with a PI ranging from 15 to 25, 2 to 4 feet of subexcavation for subgrades with a PI ranging from 25 to 35 or a LL ranging from 50 to 60, and

4 to 6 feet of subexcavation for subgrades with a PI greater than 35 or a LL greater than 60.

Based on the laboratory testing completed for the Project, the required subexcavation depth would be between 2 to 4 feet.

Pavement Design Report

104537-001 August 2022

The PDDM notes that the subexcavation requirements should account for the traffic volume and project significance when selecting a subexcavation depth. Based on our experience on past similar CFLHD projects, we understand it is typically cost prohibitive to provide subgrade mitigation in the form of overexcavation. However, if 2 feet of overexcavation is selected for the Project, there could be other savings in that a thinner pavement section could be designed based on the import material.

6.1.2 Recommended Subgrade Treatment

Provided that CFLHD is willing to accept a risk of constructability issues and a low risk of swell related movement and elects to forgo the subexcavation, we recommend the following mitigation options:

If an alternative where the existing aggregate will remain in place is selected, we recommend scarifying to a depth matching the existing aggregate road surfacing thickness (about 4 inches), recompact, proof roll and place the pavement on the existing prepared aggregate surface.

If the existing aggregate will be removed, we recommend scarifying to a depth of 8 inches below final top of subgrade, moisture conditioning, recompacting, proof rolling, and placing the new pavement section.

Although the PI is a good indication of potential volume change as discussed in Section 6.1.1, it does not consider the current moisture regime within the existing embankment that have been in place for a number of years. In our experience, one indication of swell potential is to compare the in-situ moisture content of the subgrade to the plastic limit (PL) in each test. Generally, for clayey soils (AASHTO A-6 and A-7-6 soils), if the in-situ moisture content is near or greater than the PL, the subgrade likely has a lower swell susceptibility.

In addition, the elevated road section and existing drainage ditches located along the alignment allow for drainage and reduce the potential for water infiltrating into the subgrade. Further, there are no plans to change the surface water or groundwater conditions for the Project (such as adding vegetation or irrigation systems). As such, if the subgrade is left in place and not allowed to dry during construction or rehabilitation, the subgrade is likely to have a low volume change.

6.2 Frost Damage

Frost susceptible soils can lead to pavement performance issues due to heaving or deformation from ice lenses in the underlying soil and pavement fatigue damage due to thaw-weakened subgrade of the springtime freeze-thaw cycle (USDOT, FHWA, 2008). Frost

Pavement Design Report

104537-001 August 2022 susceptible soils typically include fine-grained soils such as silts and clays. In accordance with the PDDM, typical treatment for frost susceptible soils consists of assuring there is an adequate pavement layer structure to account for the loss of bearing capacity during the spring thaw and removing or replacing highly frost susceptible soil for a portion of the expected frost depth. Based on our experience on past CFLHD projects, we understand it is cost prohibitive to provide protection against frost heave on such projects. If this is not the case, we recommend partial removal and replacement (up to about 70% of the frost depth of 42 inches) and we should be contacted to provided alternative pavement sections based on the import material. Similar to swell mitigation, if frost mitigation is included, there would be some savings resulting from a reduced pavement section.

6.3 Sulfates Testing

To assist in estimating the corrosion potential at the site, a sample was tested for water soluble sulfates. The results are presented in Table B-1 in Appendix B. The concentration of water-soluble sulfates measured in the sample was measured to be 0.02% by weight. Based on classifications as defined by the American Concrete Institute ACI-318-19 (ACI, 2019), these test results suggest a negligible degree of sulfate attack on concrete exposed to site soils (exposure class S0).

7 CONSTRUCTION AND MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS

The applicability of the design parameters in Section 5 is contingent on good construction practice. Poor construction techniques may alter conditions from those upon which our recommendations are based, and therefore result in poor performance. Our analyses assumed that this Project is constructed according to FP-14 U.S. Customary Units (USDOT and FHWA, 2014) construction standards. The following sections provide additional construction considerations for this Project.

7.1 Site Preparation

All surface and subsurface structures associated with current development of the site, including utility poles, fence poles, underground utilities, and other deleterious material, should be removed. Any existing surficial topsoil and soil containing visible organics should be stripped and removed from all areas to be paved.

Pavement Design Report

104537-001 August 2022

7.2 Earthwork

7.2.1 General

Earthwork, including placement of fill and subgrade preparation, should conform to the requirements provided in the FP-14 U.S. Customary Units, (USDOT and FHWA, 2014) and the recommendations provided in the following sections.

7.2.2 Subgrade Preparation and Fill Placement

Proper subgrade preparation is required for adequate pavement performance. Areas of exposed subgrade should be prepared in accordance with FP-14 Section 204.11. The pavement subgrade should be prepared as discussed in Section 6.1.2. The existing AS was measured as approximately 4 inches in each of our borings; however, there may be variable depths across the Project and the depth of scarification may need to be adjusted to avoid fouling the aggregate surfacing with the underlying clays.

All exposed subgrade material and fill should be compacted to a dense/firm and unyielding condition. On-site subgrade and fill materials should be compacted to at least 95% maximum density, as determined by AASHTO T 180 or T 99, as presented in FP-14 Section

204. Fill should be placed in uniform, horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness for heavy, self-propelled compactors, or 4 inches for hand-operated mechanical compactors. The appropriate lift thickness will depend on the contractor’s equipment as well as the moisture content and quality of the fill material.

7.2.3 Soft Subgrade

As discussed above, the subgrade should be prepared in accordance with FP-14 Section 204.11, which includes the use of vibratory or compression-type rollers. While it is important to place clayey material above the optimum moisture content to control swell, material placed wet of optimum is prone to pumping and yielding from construction activities. The contractor will need to carefully control the movement of equipment around the site and minimize the passage of equipment over any over-excavated areas. Even with these precautions, compaction of the material will be difficult and extra working time should be anticipated. Placement and compaction testing should be monitored on a full-time basis to assist in this process.

We recommend proof-rolling or probing any exposed subgrade or widening areas to determine suitability of the subgrade. Areas that are identified as being loose, soft, or yielding should be recompacted in place, removed and reconditioned, or overexcavated to a depth of 24 inches and replaced with granular fill such as Select Borrow (FP-14 704.07) or

Pavement Design Report

104537-001 August 2022

Unclassified Borrow (FP-14 704.06) with the additional requirement of a maximum particle size of 3 inches. If granular fill is used, the base of the subexcavation must be daylighted. If daylighting the subexcavation is not feasible or is cost prohibitive alternative fill materials should be considered. If loose, soft, or yielding soils are encountered after over-excavating 2 feet, a geogrid (FP-14 Section 714.03) should be installed at the base of the excavation before backfilling with granular fill.

7.3 Paving Materials

The following Exhibit 7-1 below summarizes our recommendations for pavement material selection. All specification sections reference the FP-14 U.S. Customary Units, (USDOT and

FHWA, 2014).

Exhibit 7-1: Recommended Materials for Pavements

Material Specification Additional Requirements/Comments

CAB Section 302 Use Gradation C, D, or E

ACP Section 403 PG Binder: PG 64-28 Gyratory Number (N): 60

Geogrid Section 714.03 Tensar BX-1200 or equivalent product

NOTES:

ACP = Asphalt Concrete Pavement; CAB = Crushed Aggregate Base; PG = performance grade

The binder selection procedure is based on the anticipated pavement temperatures, traffic patterns, and local availability. The PDDM specifies the use of software developed by the FHWA Long Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) Bind (2008) to determine an appropriate binder for a 95% reliability performance for both high and low temperature ranges.

Appendix C provides the output from the LTPP Bind software which indicates that a performance grade (PG) 64-28 binder is appropriate for all lifts of ACP at the required reliability. Based on binder availability according to the South Dakota Department of Transportation Standard Specification for Roads and Bridges (2015) PG 64-28 is available in South Dakota.

We recommend ACP lift thicknesses range between 1½ and 3 inches for 1/2-inch nominal maximum aggregate size. A tack coat should be placed between subsequent lifts if the underlying lift is left uncovered for greater than 24 hours.

8 CLOSURE

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of HDR and the Central Federal Lands Highway Division for the purpose of providing pavement recommendations for the Cs 23A

Pavement Design Report

104537-001 August 2022

Delta-01 Access Road. This pavement design report should not be used without our approval if any of the following occurs:

Assumptions stated in this report have changed.

Project details change or new information becomes available such that our analyses and recommendations may be affected.

A substantial period of time has passed since the date of this report.

If any of these occur, we should be retained to review the applicability of our analyses and recommendations.

Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, the analyses, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report were prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional geotechnical and geological principles and practice in this area at the time this report was prepared. We make no other warranty, either express or implied.

Shannon & Wilson has prepared “Important Information about Your Pavement Design Report,” to assist you and others in understanding the use and limitations of our reports.

Pavement Design Report

104537-001 August 2022

9 REFERENCES

American Concrete Institute (ACI), 2019, Building code requirements for structural concrete and commentary, Farmington Hills, Mich., ACI 318-19.

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 1993, AASHTO guide for design of pavement structures: Washington, D.C., AASHTO, 2 v.

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 2008, LTPPBind 3.0/3.1; available:

https://infopave.fhwa.dot.gov/Page/Index/LTPP_BIND

South Dakota Department of Transportation, Standard Specifications for Roads and Bridges, 2015.

U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 2008, Federal Lands Highway project development and design manual (PDDM):

U.S. Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration.

Available from: http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/manuals/pddm/.

U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), Federal Highway Administration, 2014, Federal standard specifications for construction of roads and bridges on Federal Highway projects, FP-14 English Units: U.S. Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration, available from http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/pse/specs/.

http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/manuals/pddm/ http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/pse/specs/

South Dakota Game Fish and Parks, Esri Canada, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, EPA, NPS, USDA, Earthstar GeographicsC o u n ty R o ad

C H

Rapid City Wall

Pierre

Sioux Falls

Aberdeen

Project Location

0 1 2

Scale in Miles

SD FLAP CS23A (1)

Delta-01 Access Road

Jackson County, South Dakota

August 2022

VICINITY MAP

FIG. 1

104537-001

N

SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants

To Wall

To Kadoka

Delta-01 Launch Control Facility

Site Location

Cs 23A

C s

A

County Road CH12

County Road CH11

SW-01

SW-02

SW-03

Maxar, Microsoft

SD FLAP CS23A (1)

Delta-01 Access Road

Jackson County, South Dakota

August 2022

SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN

104537-001

SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants

C s

A

C s

A

Begin Project

End Asphalt Road

Boring Designation and Approximate Location&<

Legend

0 500 1,000

Approximate Scale In Feet

1. Boring locations were measured using recreational grade GPS and should be considered approximate.

NOTES

Delta-01 Facility

FIG. 2

N

End Project

Pavement Design Report

104537-001 August 2022 8/16/2022-104537-001_AA.docx A-i

AP

PE

ND

IX

A : S

UB

SU

RF

AC

E

EX

PL

OR

AT

IO

NS

Appendix A: Subsurface Ex plorations

Appendix A

Subsurface Explorations

CONTENTS

A.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... A-1

A.2 Explorations ........................................................................................................................... A-1

A.2.1 Soil and Rock Classification System ...................................................................... A-1

A.2.2 Standard Penetration Test (SPT) ............................................................................ A-1

A.2.3 Bulk Sampling .......................................................................................................... A-2

A.2.4 Pocket Penetrometer ................................................................................................ A-2

Figures Figure A-1: Soil Description and Log Key Figure A-2 to A-4: Log of Boring SW-01 to SW-03

A-1

AP

PE

ND

IX

A : S

UB

SU

RF

AC

E

EX

PL

OR

AT

A.1 INTRODUCTION

The field exploration program for the SD FLAP Cs 23A (1) Delta-01 Access Road project was conducted on March 15, 2022. The subsurface exploration program consisted of three borings, designated SW-01 through SW-03. The boring locations are shown on Figure 2. A representative from Shannon & Wilson observed the drilling and sampling, retrieved representative samples for laboratory testing, and prepared a descriptive field log of the borings. The methods used to conduct the field exploration program are described below.

A.2 EXPLORATIONS

The drilling was coordinated (including site access, subcontractor coordination and utility locates) and observed by our field representative. The individual boring logs are presented on Figures A-2 through A-4 and represent our interpretation of the subsurface conditions encountered at the time of drilling and the results of laboratory testing. The coordinates of the explorations were produced by a recreational-grade GPS handheld device.

The borings were drilled by Aaron Swan & Associates, Inc. of Rapid City, South Dakota under subcontract to Shannon & Wilson using a CME 55 truck-mounted rig. The borings were advanced with a 7-inch outer diameter, hollow stem auger (HSA) to depths of 5.5 feet.

On completion of the drilling, the borings were backfilled with drill cuttings.

A.2.1 Soil and Rock Classification System

During drilling, the Shannon & Wilson representative collected soil samples and prepared a field log of each boring. Soil classifications were based on ASTM International (ASTM) Designation: D2487, Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System), and ASTM Designation: D2488, Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure). Soils were also classified using the AASHTO Soil Classification System based on AASHTO Standard M 145. The Unified Soil Classification System is summarized in Figure A-1.

A.2.2 Standard Penetration Test (SPT)

Disturbed samples were obtained in the borings in general accordance with the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) (ASTM Designation: D1586). The SPT consists of driving a 2-inch outside diameter, 1.375-inch inside diameter split-spoon sampler a distance of 18 inches with a 140-pound hammer free-falling a distance of 30 inches. An automatic hammer

Pavement Design Report

104537-001 August 2022 A-2

AP

PE

ND

IX

A : S

UB

SU

RF

AC

E

EX

PL

OR

AT

system was used to advance the samplers. During sampling, the Shannon & Wilson field representative recorded the number of blows for each 6-inch increment of penetration and summed the blow counts for the last two 6-inch increments. This sum is recorded as the penetration resistance number, or N-value. If high penetration resistance prevented driving the entire 18 inches, the Shannon & Wilson field representative recorded the partial penetration depth and blow count. The N-values provide a means for evaluating the relative density or compactness of cohesionless (granular) soils and consistency or stiffness of cohesive (fine-grained) soils (see Figure A-1). The raw N-values are shown on the individual boring logs. Representative portions of the split-spoon sample obtained in conjunction with the SPT were placed in a screw-top plastic jar and transported to our laboratory.

A.2.3 Bulk Sampling

Bulk soil samples were obtained by collecting the drill cuttings from select borings.

Approximately 30 pounds of cuttings were placed in a sealed plastic bag, where sampled.

The samples were transported to our laboratory for further analysis and testing.

A.2.4 Pocket Penetrometer

Select cohesive soil samples were also tested in the field using a pocket penetrometer. The penetrometer estimates the unconfined compressive strength of clay soil samples by penetrating the clay with a one-quarter-inch diameter cylindrical penetrometer and measuring the resistance (in units of tons per square foot [tsf]) with a calibrated spring.

Measurements can be taken to the nearest 0.25 tsf increment. The field measurements from the pocket penetrometer are listed on the boring logs.

Jackson County, South Dakota

104537-001August 2022

COBBLES

GRAVEL

FINES

SAND

Sheet 1 of 3

S&W INORGANIC SOIL CONSTITUENT DEFINITIONS

CONSTITUENT2

COHESIONLESS SOILS

Silt, Lean Clay, Elastic Silt, or

Fat Clay 3

PERCENTAGES TERMS 1, 2

Trace

Few

Little

Some

Mostly

WELL AND BACKFILL SYMBOLS

Bentonite Cement Grout

Bentonite Grout

Bentonite Chips

Silica Sand

Perforated or Screened Casing

SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants

Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch

Damp but no visible water

Visible free water, from below water table

FIG. A-1

Shannon & Wilson, Inc. (S&W), uses a soil identification system modified from the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Elements of the USCS and other definitions are provided on this and the following pages. Soil descriptions are based on visual-manual procedures (ASTM D2488) and laboratory testing procedures (ASTM D2487), if performed.

STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (SPT)

SPECIFICATIONS

Hammer:

Sampler:

N-Value:

Dry

Moist

Wet

MOISTURE CONTENT TERMS

Modifying (Secondary)

Precedes major constituent

Major

Minor Follows major constituent

1All percentages are by weight of total specimen passing a 3-inch sieve.

2The order of terms is: Modifying Major with Minor.

3Determined based on behavior.

4Determined based on which constituent comprises a larger percentage.

5Whichever is the lesser constituent.

COARSE-GRAINED

SOILS

(less than 50% fines)1

NOTE: Penetration resistances (N-values) shown on boring logs are as recorded in the field and have not been corrected for hammer efficiency, overburden, or other factors.

PARTICLE SIZE DEFINITIONS

RELATIVE DENSITY / CONSISTENCY

Sand or Gravel 4

30% or more coarse-grained:

Sandy or Gravelly 4

More than 12% fine-grained:

Silty or Clayey 3

15% to 30% coarse-grained:

with Sand or with Gravel 4

30% or more total coarse-grained and lesser coarse-grained constituent is 15% or more:

with Sand or with Gravel 5

Very soft Soft Medium stiff Stiff Very stiff Hard

Very loose Loose Medium dense Dense Very dense

RELATIVE

DENSITY

FINE-GRAINED SOILS

(50% or more fines)1

COHESIVE SOILS

< 2 2 - 4 4 - 8

8 - 15 15 - 30

> 30

1Gravel, sand, and fines estimated by mass. Other constituents, such as organics, cobbles, and boulders, estimated by volume.

2Reprinted, with permission, from ASTM D2488 - 09a Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure), copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428. A copy of the complete standard may be obtained from ASTM International, www.astm.org.

140 pounds with a 30-inch free fall.

Rope on 6- to 10-inch-diam. cathead 2-1/4 rope turns, > 100 rpm

NOTE: If automatic hammers are used, blow counts shown on boring logs should be adjusted to account for efficiency of hammer.

10 to 30 inches long Shoe I.D. = 1.375 inches Barrel I.D. = 1.5 inches Barrel O.D. = 2 inches

Sum blow counts for second and third 6-inch increments.

Refusal: 50 blows for 6 inches or less; 10 blows for 0 inches.

RELATIVE

CONSISTENCY

N, SPT,

BLOWS/FT.

5% to 12% fine-grained:

with Silt or with Clay 3

15% or more of a second coarse-grained constituent:

with Sand or with Gravel 5

< 5%

5 to 10%

15 to 25%

30 to 45%

50 to 100%

Surface Cement Seal

Asphalt or Cap

Slough

Inclinometer or Non-perforated Casing

Vibrating Wire Piezometer

N, SPT,

BLOWS/FT.

< 4 4 - 10

10 - 30 30 - 50

> 50

DESCRIPTION

< #200 (0.075 mm = 0.003 in.)

#200 to #40 (0.075 to 0.4 mm; 0.003 to 0.02 in.)

#40 to #10 (0.4 to 2 mm; 0.02 to 0.08 in.)

#10 to #4 (2 to 4.75 mm; 0.08 to 0.187 in.)

SIEVE NUMBER AND/OR APPROXIMATE SIZE

#4 to 3/4 in. (4.75 to 19 mm; 0.187 to 0.75 in.)

3/4 to 3 in. (19 to 76 mm)

3 to 12 in. (76 to 305 mm)

> 12 in. (305 mm)

Fine Coarse

Fine Medium Coarse

BOULDERS

SOIL CLASSIFICATION

AND LOG KEY

_B O

R

IN

G _C

LA

S

S

S

D D

E

LT

A -0

1.

G

P J

S W

N E

W .G

D T

/1

/2

104537-001

Delta-01 Access Road

Jackson County, South Dakota

August 2022

GC

SC

Inorganic

Organic

(more than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve)

MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP/GRAPHIC

SYMBOL

CH

OH

ML

CL

TYPICAL IDENTIFICATIONS

Gravel

Sand

Silty Sand; Silty Sand with Gravel

Clayey Sand; Clayey Sand with Gravel

Clayey Gravel; Clayey Gravel with Sand

Sheet 2 of 3

Gravels

Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor

SW

(more than 12% fines)

Silts and Clays

Silts and Clays

(more than 50% retained on No.

200 sieve)

(50% or more of coarse fraction passes the No. 4 sieve)

(liquid limit less than 50)

(liquid limit 50 or more)

Organic

Inorganic

FINE-GRAINED

SOILS

SM

Sands

Silty or Clayey Gravel

Silt; Silt with Sand or Gravel; Sandy or Gravelly Silt

Organic Silt or Clay; Organic Silt or Clay with Sand or Gravel; Sandy or Gravelly Organic Silt or Clay

HIGHLY-

ORGANIC SOILS

COARSE-

GRAINED

SOILS

GW

Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants

SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

(less than 5% fines)

PT

(more than 12% fines)

MH

SP

GP

GM

Silty or Clayey Sand

Silty Gravel; Silty Gravel with Sand

(50% or more passes the No. 200 sieve) Elastic Silt; Elastic Silt with Sand or Gravel; Sandy or Gravelly Elastic Silt

Fat Clay; Fat Clay with Sand or Gravel;

Sandy or Gravelly Fat Clay

Organic Silt or Clay; Organic Silt or Clay with Sand or Gravel; Sandy or Gravelly Organic Silt or Clay

Poorly Graded Sand; Poorly Graded Sand with Gravel

Well-Graded Sand; Well-Graded Sand with Gravel

Well-Graded Gravel; Well-Graded Gravel with Sand

Poorly Graded Gravel; Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand

Lean Clay; Lean Clay with Sand or Gravel; Sandy or Gravelly Lean Clay

Peat or other highly organic soils (see

ASTM D4427)

FIG. A-1

OL

(less than 5% fines)

NOTES

1. Dual symbols (symbols separated by a hyphen, i.e., SP-SM, Sand with

Silt) are used for soils with between 5% and 12% fines or when the liquid limit and plasticity index values plot in the CL-ML area of the plasticity chart. Graphics shown on the logs for these soil types are a combination of the two graphic symbols (e.g., SP and SM).

2. Borderline symbols (symbols separated by a slash, i.e., CL/ML, Lean Clay to Silt; SP-SM/SM, Sand with Silt to Silty Sand) indicate that the soil properties are close to the defining boundary between two groups.

SOIL CLASSIFICATION

AND LOG KEY

_B O

R

IN

G _C

LA

S

S

S

D D

E

LT

A -0

1.

G

P J

S W

N E

W .G

D T

/1

/2

NOTE: No. 4 size = 4.75 mm = 0.187 in.; No. 200 size = 0.075 mm = 0.003 in.

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (USCS)

(Modified From USACE Tech Memo 3-357, ASTM D2487, and ASTM D2488)

Delta-01 Access Road

Jackson County, South Dakota

August 2022

Weak

Moderate

Strong

VISUAL-MANUAL CRITERIA

A 1/8-in. thread cannot be rolled at any water content.

A thread can barely be rolled and a lump cannot be formed when drier than the plastic limit.

A thread is easy to roll and not much time is required to reach the plastic limit. The thread cannot be rerolled after reaching the plastic limit. A lump crumbles when drier than the plastic limit.

It take considerable time rolling and kneading to reach the plastic limit.

A thread can be rerolled several times after reaching the plastic limit. A lump can be formed without crumbling when drier than the plastic limit.

SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants Sheet 3 of 3

Interbedded

Laminated

Fissured

Slickensided

Blocky

Lensed

Homogeneous

Alternating layers of varying material or color with layers at least 1/4-inch thick; singular: bed.

Alternating layers of varying material or color with layers less than 1/4-inch thick; singular:

lamination.

Breaks along definite planes or fractures with little resistance.

Fracture planes appear polished or glossy;

sometimes striated.

Cohesive soil that can be broken down into small angular lumps that resist further breakdown.

Inclusion of small pockets of different soils, such as small lenses of sand scattered through a mass of clay.

Same color and appearance throughout.

At Time of Drilling Diameter Elevation Feet Iron Oxide Gallons Horizontal Hollow Stem Auger Inside Diameter Inches Pounds Magnesium Oxide Millimeter Manganese Oxide Not Applicable or Not Available Nonplastic Outside Diameter Observation Well Pounds per Cubic Foot Photo-Ionization Detector Pressuremeter Test Parts per Million Pounds per Square Inch Polyvinyl Chloride Rotations per Minute Standard Penetration Test Unified Soil Classification System Unconfined Compressive Strength Vibrating Wire Piezometer Vertical Weight of Hammer Weight of Rods Weight

ATD

Diam.

Elev.

ft.

FeO gal.

Horiz.

HSA

I.D.

in.

lbs.

MgO mm

MnO

NA

NP

O.D.

OW

pcf

PID

PMT

ppm psi

PVC

rpm

SPT

USCS

qu

VWP

Vert.

WOH

WOR

Wt.

STRUCTURE TERMS1

1Reprinted, with permission, from ASTM D2488 - 09a Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure), copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428. A copy of the complete standard may be obtained from ASTM International, www.astm.org.

2Adapted, with permission, from ASTM D2488 - 09a Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure), copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428. A copy of the complete standard may be obtained from ASTM International, www.astm.org.

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Poorly Graded

Well-Graded

Irregular patches of different colors.

Soil disturbance or mixing by plants or animals.

Nonsorted sediment; sand and gravel in silt and/or clay matrix.

Material brought to surface by drilling.

Material that caved from sides of borehole.

Disturbed texture, mix of strengths.

Mottled

Bioturbated

Diamict

Cuttings

Slough

Sheared

DESCRIPTION

Nonplastic

Low

Medium

High

ADDITIONAL TERMS

PLASTICITY2

CEMENTATION TERMS1

GRADATION TERMS

APPROX.

PLASITICTY

INDEX

RANGE

< 4

4 to 10

10 to 20

> 20

PARTICLE ANGULARITY AND SHAPE TERMS1

FIG. A-1

Angular

Subangular

Subrounded

Rounded

Flat

Elongated

Sharp edges and unpolished planar surfaces.

Similar to angular, but with rounded edges.

Nearly planar sides with well-rounded edges.

Smoothly curved sides with no edges.

Width/thickness ratio > 3.

Length/width ratio > 3.

Narrow range of grain sizes present or, within the range of grain sizes present, one or more sizes are missing (Gap Graded). Meets criteria in ASTM D2487, if tested.

Full range and even distribution of grain sizes present. Meets criteria in ASTM D2487, if tested.

Crumbles or breaks with handling or slight finger pressure Crumbles or breaks with considerable finger pressure Will not crumble or break with finger pressure

SOIL CLASSIFICATION

AND LOG KEY

_B O

R

IN

G _C

LA

S

S

S

D D

E

LT

A -0

1.

G

P J

S W

N E

W .G

D T

/1

/2

G ro un dw at er

N ot

E nc ou nt e re d D ur in g D ri lli ng4 inches of aggregate surfacing.

Medium dense, brown, Clayey Sand with Gravel (SC); moist. [A-2-6] Fill

Stiff, brown, Lean Clay with Sand (CL); moist;

trace gravel; occasional calcium carbonate stringers. [A-7-6] Fill

Very stiff, red-brown, Lean Clay with Sand (CL);

moist; trace gravel; iron oxide staining;

occasional gypsum stringers. [A-7-6]

BOTTOM OF BORING

COMPLETELED ON 03/15/2022

S -1

S -2

0.3

1.2

2.8

5.5

FIG. A-2

S am pl es

7 in.

AWJ

Automatic

20 40 60

0 60

Total Depth:

Top Elevation:

Vert. Datum:

Horiz. Datum:

Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants

SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

104537-001

5.5 ft.

20 40

Hollow-Stem Auger Aaron Swan & Assoc.

CME 55 Truck Rig

LEGEND

Drilling Method:

Drilling Company:

Drill Rig Equipment:

Other Comments:

LOG OF BORING SW-01

Sample Not Recovered

Hole Diam.:

Rod Type.:

Hammer Type:

G ro un d

W at er

D ep th , f t.

Standard Penetration Test

S ym bo l

Refer to the report text for a proper understanding of the subsurface materials and drilling methods. The stratification lines indicated below represent the approximate boundaries between material types, and the transition may be gradual.

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Northing:

Easting:

Station:

Offset:

NOTES

1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols, codes, abbreviations and definitions.

2. The stratification lines represent the approximate boundaries between soil types, and the transition may be gradual.

3. The discussion in the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of the nature of the subsurface materials.

4. Groundwater level, if indicated above, is for the date specified and may vary.

5. USCS designation is based on visual-manual classification and selected lab testing.

6. The hole location was measured from existing site features and should be considered approximate.

SD FLAP CS23A (1)

Delta-01 Access Road

Jackson County, South Dakota

August 2022

D ep th , f t.

FINAL

M A

S T

E R

_L O

G _E

_P O

C K

E T

P E

N

_S

D D

E

LT

A -0

1.

G

P J

D E

N V

E R

1.

G

D T

/1

/2

PENETRATION RESISTANCE

Hammer Wt. & Drop: 140 lbs / 30 inches

(blows/foot)

(<0.075mm)

Liquid Limit Natural Water Content

% Fines % Water Content

Plastic Limit un dw at er

N ot

E nc ou nt e re d D ur in g D ri lli ng

2.5

2.75

4 inches of aggregate surfacing.

Stiff to very stiff, brown, Sandy Lean Clay (CL); moist; few gravel. [A-6] Fill

Very stiff, red-brown to dark gray, Lean Clay (CL) to Sandy Lean Clay with Gravel (CL);

moist; occasional calcium carbonate stringers; occasional iron oxide staining.

[A-6] Fill -Culvert encountered at 5 feet.

BOTTOM OF BORING

COMPLETELED ON 03/15/2022

G -1

S -1

B -1

S -2

0.3

1.0

5.5

FIG. A-3

S am pl es

7 in.

AWJ

Automatic

20 40 60

0 60

Total Depth:

Top Elevation:

Vert. Datum:

Horiz. Datum:

Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants

SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

104537-001

5.5 ft.

20 40

Hollow-Stem Auger Aaron Swan & Assoc.

CME 55 Truck Rig

LEGEND

Drilling Method:

Drilling Company:

Drill Rig Equipment:

Other Comments:

LOG OF BORING SW-02

Sample Not Recovered

Hole Diam.:

Rod Type.:

Hammer Type:

G ro un d

W at er

D ep th , f t.

Grab Sample

Standard Penetration Test

P oc ke t

P en ts f

S ym bo l

Refer to the report text for a proper understanding of the subsurface materials and drilling methods. The stratification lines indicated below represent the approximate boundaries between material types, and the transition may be gradual.

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Northing:

Easting:

Station:

Offset:

NOTES

1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols, codes, abbreviations and definitions.

2. The stratification lines represent the approximate boundaries between soil types, and the transition may be gradual.

3. The discussion in the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of the nature of the subsurface materials.

4. Groundwater level, if indicated above, is for the date specified and may vary.

5. USCS designation is based on visual-manual classification and selected lab testing.

6. The hole location was measured from existing site features and should be considered approximate.

SD FLAP CS23A (1)

Delta-01 Access Road

Jackson County, South Dakota

August 2022

D ep th , f t.

FINAL

M A

S T

E R

_L O

G _E

_P O

C K

E T

P E

N

_S

D D

E

LT

A -0

1.

G

P J

D E

N V

E R

1.

G

D T

/1

/2

PENETRATION RESISTANCE

Hammer Wt. & Drop: 140 lbs / 30 inches

(blows/foot)

(<0.075mm)

Liquid Limit Natural Water Content

% Fines % Water Content un dw at er

N ot

E nc ou nt e re d D ur in g D ri lli ng

3.5

4 inches of aggregate surfacing.

Stiff, brown, Sandy Lean Clay (CL); moist;

few gravel. [A-6] Fill

Stiff, brown, Sandy Lean Clay (CL); moist;

few gravel; occasional calcium carbonate stringers. [A-6]

BOTTOM OF BORING

COMPLETELED ON 03/15/2022

G -1

S -1

B -1

S -2

0.3

2.0

5.5

FIG. A-4

S am pl es

7 in.

AWJ

Automatic

20 40 60

0 60

Total Depth:

Top Elevation:

Vert. Datum:

Horiz. Datum:

Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants

SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

104537-001

5.5 ft.

20 40

Hollow-Stem Auger Aaron Swan & Assoc.

CME 55 Truck Rig

LEGEND

Drilling Method:

Drilling Company:

Drill Rig Equipment:

Other Comments:

LOG OF BORING SW-03

Sample Not Recovered

Hole Diam.:

Rod Type.:

Hammer Type:

G ro un d

W at er

D ep th , f t.

Grab Sample

Standard Penetration Test

P oc ke t

P en ts f

S ym bo l

Refer to the report text for a proper understanding of the subsurface materials and drilling methods. The stratification lines indicated below represent the approximate boundaries between material types, and the transition may be gradual.

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Northing:

Easting:

Station:

Offset:

NOTES

1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of symbols, codes, abbreviations and definitions.

2. The stratification lines represent the approximate boundaries between soil types, and the transition may be gradual.

3. The discussion in the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of the nature of the subsurface materials.

4. Groundwater level, if indicated above, is for the date specified and may vary.

5. USCS designation is based on visual-manual classification and selected lab testing.

6. The hole location was measured from existing site features and should be considered approximate.

SD FLAP CS23A (1)

Delta-01 Access Road

Jackson County, South Dakota

August 2022

D ep th , f t.

FINAL

M A

S T

E R

_L O

G _E

_P O

C K

E T

P E

N

_S

D D

E

LT

A -0

1.

G

P J

D E

N V

E R

1.

G

D T

/1

/2

PENETRATION RESISTANCE

Hammer Wt. & Drop: 140 lbs / 30 inches

(blows/foot)

(<0.075mm)

Liquid Limit Natural Water Content

% Fines % Water Content

8/16/2022-104537-001_AB.docx B-i

AP

PE

ND

IX

B : L

AB

OR

AT

OR

Y

TE

ST

R

ES

UL

Appendix B: Laboratory Test Results

Appendix B

Laboratory Test Results

CONTENTS

B.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ B-1

B.2 Geotechnical Index Tests ....................................................................................................... B-1

B.2.1 Water Content ............................................................................................................ B-1

B.2.2 Grain Size Distribution ............................................................................................. B-1

B.2.3 Atterberg Limits ........................................................................................................ B-1

B.3 Geotechnical Property Tests ................................................................................................. B-2

B.3.1 R-Value ....................................................................................................................... B-2

B.3.2 Corrosion – Sulfate Content ..................................................................................... B-2

Tables Table B-1: Summary of Laboratory Test Results by Boring

Figures Figure B-1: Grain Size Distribution Figure B-2: Plasticity Chart Figure B-3: R-Value Test Report, SW-03, Sample B-1

B-1

AP

PE

ND

IX

B : L

AB

OR

AT

OR

Y

TE

ST

R

ES

B.1 INTRODUCTION

Laboratory tests were completed on soil samples retrieved from the borings in general accordance with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and the American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM) testing methods. The laboratory testing program was performed to classify the materials into similar geologic groups and provide data that can be used for design of the project. The geotechnical laboratory testing was performed at our laboratory in Denver, Colorado and at Vine Laboratories, Inc. in Commerce City, Colorado. A summary of the laboratory test results is presented in Table B-1. The following sections describe the laboratory testing procedures.

B.2 GEOTECHNICAL INDEX TESTS

B.2.1 Water Content

Water content was determined for selected samples in general accordance with AASHTO T265, Laboratory Determination of Moisture Content in Soils. To perform this test, a sample was weighed before and after oven-drying, and the water content was calculated. Water content determinations are shown graphically on the boring logs and are also summarized in Table B-1.

B.2.2 Grain Size Distribution

The grain size distribution of selected samples was determined in general accordance with AASHTO T88, Standard method of Test for Particle Size Analysis of Soils. Results of these analyses are presented as grain size distribution curves in Figure B-1 and summarized in Table B-1. Selected samples were also tested for the percentage of material passing the No.

200 sieve in general accordance with ASTM D1140, Standard Test Method for Determining the Amount of Material Finer than 75-µm (No. 200) Sieve in Soils by Washing. The percent fines (silt- and clay-sized particles passing the No. 200 sieve) are shown graphically in the boring logs in Appendix A and are also summarized in Table B-1.

B.2.3 Atterberg Limits

Soil plasticity was determined by performing Atterberg limits tests on selected fine-grained samples. The tests were completed in general accordance with AASHTO T89, Standard Test Method for Determining the Liquid Limit of Soils and AASHTO T90, Standard Test Method for Determining the Plastic Limit and Plasticity Index of Soils. The Atterberg limits include liquid limit (LL), plastic limit (PL), and plasticity index (PI equals LL minus PL) and are

B-2

AP

PE

ND

IX

B : L

AB

OR

AT

OR

Y

TE

ST

R

ES

generally used to assist in classification of soils, to indicate soil consistency (when compared to natural water content), and to provide correlation to soil properties. The results of the Atterberg limits tests are plotted on a plasticity chart in Figure B-2, shown graphically in the boring logs in Appendix A, and summarized in Table B-1.

B.3 GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTY TESTS

B.3.1 R-Value

One Hveem Staboilometer (R-value) test was completed by Vine Laboratories. A bulk sample was collected from boring SW-03 for R-value testing. The test was completed in general accordance with AASHTO T190, Standard Method of Test for Resistance R-value and Expansion Pressure of Compacted Soils. The R-value test result is presented in Table B- 1 and on Figure B-3.

B.3.2 Corrosion – Sulfate Content

Corrosion testing was performed by Vine Laboratories, Inc. for sulfate content.