Exhibit A (8) Bldg 14 TO Geotechnical Report.pdf

MIDLANTIC ENGINEERING, INC.

120 COMMERCE ROAD

PITTSTON TOWNSHIP, PA 18640-9552

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

TOBYHANNA ARMY DEPOT

BUILDING 14 & 14A – CANOPY AREAS

TOBYHANNA, PA

(Project #21105)

PREPARED FOR:

BORTON-LAWSON ENGINEERING

3897 ADLER PLACE

BETHLEHEM, PA 18017

JUNE 30, 2021

120 Commerce Road · Pittston Twp., PA 18640-9552 · 570/655-2200 (phone) · midlaneng@aol.com

June 30, 2021

Borton-Lawson Engineering 3897 Adler Place Bethlehem, PA 18017

ATTENTION: Mr. Reginald Miller rmiller@borton-lawson.com

SUBJECT: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT (#21105)

Tobyhanna Army Depot

Building 14 & 14A – Canopy Areas Tobyhanna, PA

Mr. Miller:

Submitted herewith is our geotechnical engineering report for the above referenced project. Our services have been provided in accordance with our proposal/agreement dated December 14, 2020 and your subsequent authorization to proceed with Work Order No. 052 of May 19, 2021.

1. SCOPE OF SERVICES

Services performed included drilling three test borings at the canopy addition areas of

Buildings 14 and 14A. Our geotechnical engineering analysis and report includes the following:

a. Our evaluation of estimated subsurface conditions within the proposed building areas based on the test boring data.

b. Recommended foundation requirements for support of the proposed canopy additions and floor slabs on grade.

c. Recommendations regarding handling of groundwater in design and construction.

d. Recommended earthwork requirements for construction of structural fill and backfill including an assessment of on-site materials to be excavated for use as fill.

e. Seismic design classifications of subgrade conditions per IBC 2009 table 1613.5.2.

f. Comments regarding geotechnical construction methods that should be considered both in the design and in the development of construction plans and specifications.

Services with respect to construction dewatering design, environmental considerations, wetlands investigations, erosion control, pavement designs, stormwater management designs, cost or quantity estimates and construction observation and testing are not included in the scope of services under this phase of our contract.

2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

The development areas addressed in this geotechnical engineering report are adjacent to the existing Buildings 14 and 14A in the Tobyhanna Army Depot, Tobyhanna, Pennsylvania.

The site is bordered on the west by 1st Street and on the north by Signal Drive. The project vicinity is indicated on the USGS map included as Figure No. 1-1 and on a 2020 aerial map included as Figure No. 1-2 in Enclosure (1).

The development site is relatively level with a surface grade of about El 1992. The site slopes gently from 1st Street to Building 14A from about El 1993 to El 1992. The area is generally paved.

Canopies are proposed for three areas; one to the west of Building 14, one between

Buildings 14 and 14A, and one extending west from Building 14A. The canopies are to be steel-framed.

The information listed above was provided to us by your office, was obtained from the preliminary construction plans provided to us, or was obtained during our own site visits.

3. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

In order to evaluate subsurface conditions in the proposed development areas, three test borings were drilled under our supervision on June 18, 2021. The test borings were drilled to depths of about 14 feet to 19 feet each. The results of test borings, the water level observation data, and test boring location plans are included in Enclosure (4).

3.1 Test Boring Data and Stratification

The test borings indicate the following generalized strata underlie the proposed development areas to the depths investigated:

Stratum Depths Description Stratum SF (structural fill) below surface grades and pavements to depths of about 10 to 14 feet brown silty sand with gravel, occasional cobbles

– FILL; compact (N=12 to 50+)

Stratum A below Stratum SF to depths of 14 to 16.5 feet brown silty SAND with gravel (SM); firm (N=6 to 20)

Stratum B below Stratum A to maximum depths sampled brown silty GRAVEL with sand (GM);

very compact (N=45)

Numbers after the description of the soil strata indicate the minimum and maximum penetration resistances, or N values, recorded in each stratum. The N values indicate the penetration resistance in blows per foot of a standard 2 inch O.D., 1⅜ inch I.D. sampling spoon driven with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches per ASTM D- 1586. The sampling spoon is driven an initial depth of 6 inches to assure the sampling spoon is in undisturbed material, and the number of blows required to drive the sampling spoon an additional 12 inches is taken as the N value. The sampling operation is generally terminated in a test interval after a total of 50 hammer blows and the depth of penetration is recorded.

The soil symbols indicated in the stratum descriptions and on the boring logs represent the Unified Soil Classification (ASTM D-2488) group symbols based on visual observation of the specimens recovered. Criteria for visual classification of soil samples are given in Enclosure (4) of this report.

3.2 Site History and Geology

The depot site was graded for development in the 1950s. The construction grades of the primary development areas of the depot were in the range of El 1995 to El 2000 throughout the base. The central areas of the base required cuts of in excess of 20 feet and the perimeter areas of the base development required fills to achieve the site grades.

The depot developments have been overlaid onto the pre-development USGS topography map of 1943, included as Figure No. 2-1 in Enclosure (2). The original site grades in the Building 14 area are estimated in the range of El 1985. The fill materials of Stratum SF, as encountered in the test borings, were placed as part of the original site grading of the depot. These fill materials were graded and compacted under controlled conditions of the original site developments. The existing fill may extend deeper in areas of former utility line or other areas of previous excavations.

The sand and gravel of Stratum A and Stratum B are deposits of glacial till of the

Pleistocene geologic epoch. These deposits are moderately over-consolidated.

The underlying bedrock in the project vicinity generally consists of sandstone and shale sequences. This sedimentary rock belongs to the Catskill formation of the Devonian geologic age. The bedrock geology mapping is included as Figure No. 2-2 in Enclosure (2).

3.3 Groundwater Observations

Groundwater observations were performed during the drilling operations at each of the test boring locations. Groundwater was not encountered to the depths investigated.

The results of water readings are shown on the test boring logs.

Water level readings at the boring locations are considered to be a reliable indication of groundwater conditions at the times indicated. Fluctuations in groundwater levels, as well as perched water, may be expected with variations in precipitation, evaporation, adjacent construction activity, and similar factors.

3.4 Laboratory Test Data

Soil laboratory testing was performed on selected jar samples for classification and assessment purposes. Results of testing are included in Enclosure (3) and are summarized below. The natural moisture content was determined for soil samples, per ASTM D-2216, and are shown on the test boring logs in Enclosure (4).

Soil Classifications Summary

Test Location

Depth/ Elev.

Stratum

Classification (D-2487)

% Moist.

% < No. 200 Sieve Size

LL

PL

PI

B-1 5’ – 7’ El 1985

SF brown silty SAND with gravel (SM) – FILL

7.4% 34% -- -- NP

B-2 5’ – 7’ El 1985

SF silty SAND (SM) –

FILL

12.8% 41% -- -- NP

4. FOUNDATION ENGINEERING ANALYSIS

Our foundation engineering analysis is based upon the subsurface information as developed by the field investigation program, results of laboratory testing, and the site and structural data furnished to us.

The construction elements planned are shallow foundations for canopy support elements.

Light to moderate column loading is expected.

4.1 Spread Footings

The test borings generally indicate compact silty sand and gravel materials of Stratum SF at shallow depths. These materials are generally considered suitable for direct support of shallow spread footings. We recommend a maximum allowable net bearing pressure of 3 ksf for individual column footings and other foundation elements founded on compacted structural fill soil subgrades of Stratum SF.

Estimated footing subgrade elevations for the footings are listed for the test borings in the proposed development areas as follows:

Test Boring

Ex. Surface

Grade

Est. Footing Subgrade Elev.

on Stratum SF for

3 ksf Bearing Capacity B-1 El 1991.8 El 1987

B-2 1991.8 1987 B-3 1992.8 1988

The estimated subgrade elevations indicated herein are for design and construction planning. Final footing subgrades should be observed by a representative of the geotechnical engineer during construction. Any materials considered unsuitable for the recommended design bearing pressure should be undercut to sound bearing natural materials and replaced with compacted coarse aggregate structural fill or with PennDOT class C concrete.

4.2 General Spread Footing Considerations

Settlements of spread footing founded on the compacted structural fill subgrades of Stratum SF are expected to be within tolerable limits, with total settlements for individual column load locations not expected to exceed 1 inch. Differential settlements between adjacent support locations are not expected to exceed ½-inch.

For shear considerations, the continuous wall footings should be constructed to minimum widths of 20 inches and individual column footing constructed to minimum widths of 36 inches.

All exterior footings should be placed a minimum of 4.5 feet below adjacent exterior grades for frost protection. Adjacent footings in areas where lowering is required should be stepped in increments not steeper than one horizontal to one vertical (1H:1V).

The site conditions and construction recommendations in this report indicate a seismic design classification of Class C per IBC 2009 table 1613.5.2.

5. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

The following recommendations are provided for construction planning and utilization of the engineering recommendations provided in this report.

5.1 Excavation Areas

Excavations for the proposed foundation areas may require cuts of up to 6 feet to reach the construction subgrades. The excavations will generally be in the fill materials of Stratum SF. Sloping of the excavations should be planned no steeper than 1H:1V.

Areas of temporary excavation slopes should be protected against erosion from surface water by directing water away from excavation slopes and covering with plastic sheets.

All excavations should be completed in accordance with applicable OSHA regulations.

We estimate the excavation materials can be excavated with conventional earthwork excavating equipment. Rock excavation methods may be necessary to excavate to the construction grades at specific locations of the site through dense soils.

Mechanical ripping techniques or excavation by use of ram hoes and jackhammers is expected to be adequate for the materials and quantities to be excavated.

Actual top of rock elevations encountered during excavation may vary from the estimates provided at the test locations. Sudden changes in hardness of the material to be excavated should be expected. Variations in the amount of material that may be excavated by conventional and ripping methods should also be anticipated depending on the type and size of equipment used.

5.2 Construction Dewatering

The static groundwater level is expected to be below the excavation depths.

Perched water levels or surface runoff will still accumulate in the excavation areas.

The perched water volumes to be handled may be significant. The contractor should be prepared to maintain dry conditions by use of sump pumps and/or trenching.

5.3 Foundation Construction

Foundation subgrades for the structural elements will generally be in the compact sand of Stratum SF. Foundation subgrades should be observed and tested by a representative of the project geotechnical engineer to verify that the structures are placed on suitable bearing materials as recommended herein.

Care should be taken during the excavation for all footings to minimize disturbance of the bearing subgrades. All loose and disturbed materials should be removed prior to concrete placement. Any areas requiring over-excavation to reach suitable bearing subgrades should be replaced with compacted structural fill or with concrete.

5.4 Structural Backfill

Soil backfill materials shall consist of materials classified SM, SW, SP, GM, GW, or GP per ASTM D-2487. Backfill soils shall be free of any material designated as deleterious. The fill materials should be placed in shallow horizontal layers of maximum 9 inches loose lift thickness and compacted with the necessary type of compaction equipment to attain at least 97 percent of the maximum dry density per ASTM D-698.

Proposed fill soils should be at a moisture content that will facilitate adequate compaction.

The existing fill materials of Stratum SF are generally clean soils of silty sand and gravel. The fill materials of Stratum SF are considered suitable for re-use as structural fill and backfill. Also, PennDOT type OGS, 2RC, or 2A coarse aggregates are considered suitable as backfill in structural areas.

6. OBSERVATION REQUIREMENTS AND STUDY LIMITATIONS

This report was prepared for use by your office and the design professionals to aid in the design of the subject project. This report should be made available to contractors for their information, and to supply them with facts relative to the subsurface investigation. The opinions and conclusions expressed in this report are those of the geotechnical engineer and represent interpretation of the subsurface conditions and the results of analyses and studies which have been conducted for design purposes.

The analyses and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from test borings at the specific locations indicated on the test location plan. This report does not reflect any variations which may occur between the test locations. The nature and extent of variations may not become evident until the course of construction. It is therefore essential that on-site observation and testing of foundation installation be performed during the construction period to ascertain if re-evaluation of the recommendations of this report must be made.

Allowances should be established to account for possible additional costs that may be required for construction of foundations, subdrainage, and/or excavations as recommended in this report. Additional costs may be incurred for various reasons including variable existing fill depth, problems with groundwater, variable rock grades, disturbances of subgrades, etc.

We recommend that the project specifications contain the following statement:

“A geotechnical engineering report has been prepared for this project by Midlantic Engineering and is included in the project manual to prospective bidders and/or contractors for informational purposes only. This report was prepared for design purposes and may not be sufficient to prepare and accurate bid. The accuracy or completeness of individual test logs is not guaranteed by the geotechnical consultant for bidding purposes. Contractors desiring to conduct additional subsurface investigations prior to bidding should contact the owner for arrangements to enter the project site.”

We have prepared this report in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices, and make no other warranties, either expressed or implied, as to the professional services provided under the terms of the agreement and included in this report.

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you for this project. Please do not hesitate to contact us for further clarification of any aspect of this study.

Sincerely, MIDLANTIC ENGINEERING, INC.

Timothy Burns, P.E.

President

Encls:

(1) Project Vicinity Plans

- Project Vicinity Plan – 1999 USGS Topo Map, Figure No. 1-1

- Project Vicinity Plan – 2020 Aerial, Figure No. 1-2

(2) Historic and Geologic Mapping Data

- Project Vicinity Plan – 1943 USGS Topo Map, Figure No. 2-1

- Bedrock Geology Map, Figure No. 2-2

(3) Soil Laboratory Test Data

- Soil Classifications Summary

- Gradation and Classifications (2 Sheets)

(4) Subsurface Investigation Report

- General Notes

- Identification of Soils

- Test Boring Location Plan – Aerial, Figure No. 4-1

- Test Boring Location Plan/Proposed Development, Figure No. 4-2

- Test Boring Logs (B-1 through B-3) cc: Mr. Ryan Harting, P.E.

rharting@borton-lawson.com

Enclosure (1) Figure No. 1-1

Drawing Title:

Project Vicinity Plan – 1999 USGS Topo Map Tobyhanna Army Depot Building 14 & 14A – Canopy Areas, Tobyhanna, PA

120 Commerce Road • Pittston Township, PA 18640-9552

Drawn By:

LJ

Checked By:

TB

Scale:

1”=1,000’

570/655-2200 (phone) • 570/655-2212 (fax) Date:

06/30/2021

Project No.:

21105

Sheet No.

Project Vicinity

N

20 Foot Contour Interval

Enclosure (1)

Project Vicinity Plan – Aerial 2020

Building 14 & 14A – Canopy Areas, Tobyhanna, PA

LJ

Checked By:

TB

Scale:

1” = 100’

570/655-2200 (phone) • midlaneng@aol.com Date:

06/30/2021

Project No.:

21105

Figure No. 1-2

Project Vicinity

Area 3

Area 1

Area 2

Enclosure (2) Figure No. 2-1

Project Vicinity Plan – 1943 USGS Topo Map

Building 14 & 14A– Canopy Areas, Tobyhanna, PA

LJ

Checked By:

TB

Scale:

1”=1,000’

570/655-2200 (phone) • 570/655-2212 (fax) Date:

06/30/2021

Project No.:

21105

Contour 2000

Overlay of Buildings From 1999 USGS Topo Map

20 Foot Contour Interval

Enclosure (2)

Bedrock Geology Mapping

Building 14 & 14A– Canopy Areas, Tobyhanna, PA

LJ

Checked By:

TB

Scale:

1” = 4,500’±

570/655-2200 (phone) • midlaneng@aol.com Date:

06/30/2021

Project No.:

21105

Legend:

Poplar Gap Member – Catskill Formation

The Poplar Gap Member of the Catskill Formation consists of member-gray and light-olive-gray, fine-to coarse-grained sandstone and conglomerate with interbedded shale.

Dcpp

Figure No. 2-2

Dcpp

MIDLANTIC ENGINEERING INC.

120 Commerce Road • Pittston Twp., PA 18640-9552 570/655-2200 (phone) • midlaneng@aol.com

LABORATORY TEST DATA

- Soil Classifications Summary

- Gradation and Classifications (2 Sheets)

SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS SUMMARY

Results of testing are summarized in the following table, and the individual gradation and classification curves are included within this enclosure.

Test

Location

Depth/ Elev.

Stratum

Classification (D-2487)

% Moist.

% < No. 200 Sieve Size

LL

PL

PI

B-1 5’ – 7’ El 1985

SF brown silty SAND with gravel (SM) – FILL

7.4% 34% -- -- NP

B-2 5’ – 7’ El 1985

SF silty SAND (SM) –

FILL

12.8% 41% -- -- NP

Enclosure (3)

Enclosure (4) Contract #21105

SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION REPORT

- General Notes

- Identification of Soils

- Test Boring Location Plan – Aerial, Figure No. 4-1

- Test Boring Location Plan/Proposed Development, Figure No. 4-2

- Test Boring Logs (B-1 through B-3)

GENERAL NOTES

1. The test boring surface elevations were estimated based on site grade data provided to us.

2. Numbers in the sampling data column indicate the number of blows required to drive a 2-inch O.D., 1⅜-inch I.D. sampling spoon through three 6-inch intervals, or as indicated, using a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches, according to ASTM D-1586.

3. Soil strata descriptions are based on visual inspection and are in accordance with the

Unified Soil Classification System per ASTM D-2488. Rock strata descriptions are based on the Engineering Description of Rocks.

4. Key to abbreviations and symbols:

Ý = No sample recovery NX = Rock Core Size M% = Moisture Content Rec. = Rock Core Recovery ¢ = Area of Sample RQD = Rock Quality Designation

5. The boring logs and related information depict subsurface conditions at these specific locations and at the particular time when drilled. Soil conditions at other locations may differ from conditions occurring at these boring locations. Also, the passage of time may result in a change in the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions at these boring locations.

6. The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary between soils and/or rock types as determined in the drilling and sampling operation. Some variation may be expected vertically between samples taken. The soil profile, water level observations and penetration resistances presented on these boring logs have been made with reasonable care and accuracy and must be considered only an approximate representation of subsurface conditions to be encountered at the particular location.

7. Estimated groundwater levels are indicated on the logs. These are only estimates from available data and may vary with precipitation, porosity of the soil, site topography, and similar factors.

MIDLANTIC ENGINEERING INC.

120 Commerce Road • Pittston Twp., PA 18640-9552 570/655-2200 (phone) • midlaneng@aol.com

IDENTIFICATION OF SOILS

I. Definition of Soil Group Names – ASTM D-2487-11 Symbol Group Name

Coarse-Grained Soils More than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve

Gravels – More than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve

Coarse, ¾” to 3" Fine, No. 4 to ¾"

Clean Gravels Less than 5% fines

GW well-graded gravel GP poorly graded gravel

Gravels with Fines More than 12% fines

GM silty gravel GC clayey gravel

Sands – 50% or more of coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve

Coarse: No. 10 to No. 4 Medium: No. 40 to No. 10 Fine: No. 200 to No. 40

Clean Sands Less than 5% fines

SW well-graded sand SP poorly graded sand

Sands with Fines More than 12% fines

SM silty sand

SC clayey sand

Fine-Grained Soils 50% or more passes the No. 200 sieve

Silts and Clays – Liquid Limit less than 50 Low to medium plasticity

Inorganic CL lean clay ML silt

Organic OL organic clay organic silt

Silts and Clays – Liquid Limit 50 or more Medium to high plasticity

Inorganic CH fat clay MH elastic silt

Organic OH organic clay organic silt

Highly Organic Soils Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT peat

II. Definition of Minor Component Proportions Approximate Percentage of Fraction by Weight adjective form gravelly, sandy 30% or more coarse grained with sand, gravel 15% or more coarse grained silt, clay 5% to 12% fine grained trace sand, gravel Less than 15% coarse grained silt, clay Less than 5% fine grained

III. Glossary of Miscellaneous Terms symbols Unified Soil Classification Symbols are shown above as group symbols. Use a Line Chart for laboratory identification.

Dual symbols are used for borderline classifications.

boulders & cobbles Boulders are considered rounded pieces of rock larger than 12 inches, while cobbles range from 3 to 12 inch size.

disintegrated rock Very generally defined as residual rock material with a standard penetration resistance (SPT) of more than 50 blows per foot, and less than refusal. Refusal is defined as a SPT of 100 blows for 2" or less penetration.

rock fragments Angular pieces of rock, distinguished from transported gravel, which have separated from original vein or strata and are present in a soil matrix.

quartz A hard silica mineral often found in residual soils ironite Iron oxide deposited within a soil layer forming cemented deposits cemented sand Usually localized rock-like deposits within a soil stratum composed of sand grains cemented by calcium carbonate or other materials.

mica A soft plate of silica mineral found in many rocks, and in residual or transported soil derived therefrom.

organic materials (excluding peat)

Topsoil: Surface soils that support plant life and which contain considerable amounts of organic matter;

Organic Matter: Soil containing organic colloids throughout its structure;

Lignite: Hard, brittle decomposed organic matter with low fixed carbon content (a low grade of coal).

fill Man made deposit containing soil, rock and often foreign matter probable fill Soils which contain no visually detected foreign matter but which are suspect with regard to origin lenses 0 to 2 inch seam of minor soil component layers 2 to 12 inch seam of minor soil component pocket Discontinuous body of minor soil component color shades Light to dark to indicate substantial difference in color moisture conditions Wet, moist, or dry to indicate visual appearance of specimen

Test Boring Location Plan Tobyhanna Army Depot – Bldg 14 & 14A Canopy Areas, Tobyhanna, PA Project:

21105 Date:

06/30/2021 Scale:

1” = 50’

N

Enclosure (4) Figure No. 4-1

B-3

B-1

B-2

Legend

= Test Boring Location

Test Boring Location Plan/Proposed Dev.

Tobyhanna Army Depot – Building 14 & 14A Canopy Areas, Tobyhanna, PA Project:

21105 Date:

06/30/2021 Scale:

1” = 30’

Enclosure (4) Figure No. 4-2

LEGEND

= Test Boring Location

Building 14A FF El 1991.75±

Building 14 FF El 1992.75±

Building 14 FF El 1991.75±

TEST BORING LOG

Project: Tobyhanna Army Depot – Building 14 & 14A Test Loc. No.: B-1 Canopy Areas, Tobyhanna, PA Contract No.: 21105 ME, Inc. Rep.: JG Groundwater Observations Date Drilled: 06/18/21 Date Time Depth Equip. Used: Diedrich D-50 Encountered: 06/18/21 none Surface Elev.: 1991.8 Completion: 06/18/21 dry

Depth (ft.) Strata Description Class. Str’m Elev. InSitu Testing M

(%) Remarks Depth Test Data 12” surface pavement

1 and subbase 1 8+7+

2 2 10+14 8.4

3 3 brown silty SAND with gravel – SM SF 12+12+

4 FILL 4 20+12

5 5 12+26+

6 6 30+14 7.4

7 7 8+11+

8 8 49+44

9 9

10 10 12+18+

11 11 23+22 8.1

12 12 14+13+

13 1978.8 13 6+7 brown silty SAND with gravel SM A

14 1977.8 14 Bottom of Boring at 14.0 feet

15 15

16 16

17 17

18 18

19 19

20 20

Comments: Backfilled upon completion.

Project: Tobyhanna Army Depot – Building 14 & 14A Test Loc. No.: B-2 Canopy Areas, Tobyhanna, PA Contract No.: 21105 ME, Inc. Rep.: JG Groundwater Observations Date Drilled: 06/18/21 Date Time Depth

Surface Elev.: 1991.8 Completion: 06/18/21 dry

(%) Remarks Depth Test Data 12” surface pavement

1 and subbase 1 3+5+

2 2 7+8 9.9

3 3 brown silty SAND with gravel – SM SF 3+4+

4 FILL 4 20+42 10.2

21+22+

6 6 10+19 12.8

@ 7’-9’: with cobbles 50/5”

8 8 15+21+ 7.0

9 9 92

10 1981.8 10 brown silty SAND with gravel SM A 1+1+

11 11 5+7 13.2

13+9+

13 13 11+12 10.4

14 14

15 15 4+4+

16 16 5+42 10.6 1975.3

17 brown silty GRAVEL with sand GM B 17 19+22+

18 18 23+21 8.1

19 1972.8 19 Bottom of Boring at 19.0 feet

Project: Tobyhanna Army Depot – Building 14 & 14A Test Loc. No.: B-3 Canopy Areas, Tobyhanna, PA Contract No.: 21105 ME, Inc. Rep.: JG Groundwater Observations Date Drilled: 06/18/21 Date Time Depth

Surface Elev.: 1992.8 Completion: 06/18/21 dry

(%) Remarks Depth Test Data 12” grading FILL 2+5+

1 1 10+8 9.4

2 2 brown silty SAND with gravel – SM SF 6+7+

3 FILL 3 7+16 11.4

4 4

11+35+

6 6 24+12 7.3

5+9+

8 8 12+9 13.4

9 9

10 10 6+15+

11 11 15+15 8.2

13+50/4”

13 @ 12.5’-14’: with cobbles 13

14 1978.8 14 Auger Refusal at 14.0 feet

15 Bottom of Boring at 14.0 feet 15

16 16

17 17

18 18

19 19