Geotechnical Report.pdf

Geotechnical Engineering Report NYANG – Gabreski ANGB

Westhampton, New York

August 28, 2017

Revised August 30, 2017

Terracon Project No. J6165176

Prepared for:

POND

Norcross, Georgia

Prepared by:

Terracon Consultants - NY, Inc.

South Plainfield, New Jersey

Terracon Consultants - NY, Inc. 4081 Hadley Road, Unit B South Plainfield, NJ 07080

P (908) 546 6161 F (908) 546 6160 terracon.com

August 28, 2017

Rivised August 30, 2017

POND

3500 Parkway Lane, Suite 600

Norcross, Georgia 30092

Attn: Mr. Gary Kerr, PMP, CEM

P: (678) 336-7740

E: KerrG@pondco.com

Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report

NYANG – Gabreski ANGB

Westhampton, New York

Terracon Project No. J6165176

Dear Mr. Kerr:

We have completed the geotechnical engineering services for the above-referenced project. This work was performed in accordance with our proposal number PJ6165176 dated September 14, 2016.

This report presents the findings of the subsurface exploration and provides geotechnical recommendations concerning earthwork and the design and construction of foundations, slabs, and pavements for the proposed project.

We should collaborate with you as you finalize the designs. We should also review the pertinent aspects of the plans and specifications and provide construction materials and engineering testing services when the project moves into construction.

Sincerely, Terracon Consultants - NY, Inc.

Alex Kavaleuski Steven D. Thorne, P.E., D.GE, F.ASCE

Project Manager Principal/ Office Manager

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ i

INTRODUCTION

PROJECT INFORMATION

2.1 Site Location

2.2 Project Description

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS AND CONDITIONS

3.1 Subsurface Soil Strata

3.2 Groundwater

3.3 Infiltration Testing

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

4.1 Geotechnical Considerations

4.2 Shallow Foundations

4.2.1 Design Recommendations

4.2.2 Shallow Foundation Construction Considerations

4.3 Floor Slabs

4.3.1 Floor Slab Design Parameters

4.3.2 Floor Slab Construction Considerations

4.4 Seismic Considerations

4.5 Earthwork

4.5.1 Demolition, Clearing, Stripping, and Fill Soil Removal

4.5.2 Subgrade Preparation and Protection

4.5.3 Excavation Safety

4.5.4 Reuse of Materials

4.5.5 Imported Fill Materials

4.5.6 Structural Fill Placement

4.6 Pavements

4.6.1 Pavement Subgrade Preparation

4.6.2 Design Considerations

4.6.3 Asphaltic Cement Concrete (ACC) Thickness

4.6.4 Pavement Maintenance

GENERAL COMMENTS

APPENDIX A – FIELD EXPLORATION

Exhibit A-1 Site Location Map Exhibit A-2 Exploration Location Diagram Exhibit A-3 Field Exploration Description Exhibits A-4 through A-12 Boring Logs Exhibits A-13 and A-14 Test Pit Logs

APPENDIX B – LABORATORY TESTING

Exhibit B-1 Laboratory Testing Summary Exhibits B-2 Gradation Curves

APPENDIX C – SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

Exhibit C-1 General Notes Exhibit C-2 Unified Soils Classification System

NYANG – Gabreski ANGB ■ Westhampton, New York

August 28, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. J6165176

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This geotechnical engineering report has been completed for a new Security Forces and

Communications Flight Training Facility building planned within Francis S. Gabreski airport in

Westhampton, New York. Nine soil borings were drilled within the proposed building area to depths ranging from approximately 10 to 102 feet below the existing ground surface. In addition, two test pits were excavated to a depth of approximately 8 feet within anticipated location of a detention pond for infiltration testing.

Subsurface conditions at the explored locations generally consist of silty sand fill materials over natural deposits of medium dense to very dense sand containing varying amounts of gravel. The fill materials generally extended to depths ranging from 1 to 6 feet below existing site grade.

However, the fill at one of the borings conducted in a proposed parking area in the western corner of the site extended to a depth of 26 feet.

The following geotechnical considerations for project design and construction were identified and are discussed in this report:

In our opinion, the proposed building may be supported on a conventional shallow foundation system with a slab-on-grade bearing on the native silty sand materials, or on structural fill placed above these materials.

The uncontrolled fill materials encountered at the site are unsuitable in their current condition for direct support of the proposed building foundations and slab due to the risk of greater than normal settlements associated with inherent variations in the nature and consistency of the fill.

We recommend removal of the existing uncontrolled fill from the proposed building area and replacement with structural fill. Based on the available topographic information and fill thickness observed in our borings, we estimate that the native subgrade soils will be encountered approximately between Elevations +43 feet and +46 feet.

We anticipate that the soils excavated on-site will be suitable for reuse as structural fill, provided they are maintained at moisture contents suitable for compaction and any deleterious materials, if present, are segregated prior to reuse.

Complete removal of all existing fill within the proposed pavement areas may be cost prohibitive, particularly in the area where it was 26 feet deep. However, leaving it all in place would result in an increased risk of greater than normal settlements and long-term

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable ii pavement maintenance. Accordingly, methods to help reduce these risks (e.g., partial removal/replacement, near-surface densification, etc.) are discussed in this report.

Infiltration tests conducted in two locations southeast of the proposed building at a depth of approximately 4 feet below grade indicated infiltration rate greater than 24 inches per hour.

Close monitoring of the construction operations including removal of uncontrolled fill material and placement of structural fill discussed herein will be critical in achieving the design subgrade support. We therefore recommend that Terracon be retained to monitor this portion of the work.

This summary should be used in conjunction with the entire report. Details are not included or fully developed in this summary; the report must be read in its entirety of a comprehensive understanding of the information contained herein. The section titled GENERAL COMMENTS should be read for an understanding of the report limitations.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 1

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

NYANG – GABRESKI ANGB

WESTHAMPTON, NEW YORK

Terracon Project No. J6165176

August 28, 2017

INTRODUCTION

This geotechnical engineering report for a new Security Forces and Communications Flight

Training Facility building planned within Francis S. Gabreski airport in Westhampton, New York

(see Exhibit A-1, Site Location Map) has been completed. Nine soil borings (B-1 through B-9) were drilled to depths of approximately 10 to 102 feet below the existing ground surface. In addition, two test pits (TP-1 and TP-2) were excavated for infiltration testing to a depth of approximately 8 feet southeast of the proposed building within anticipated location of a detention pond. Individual test pit and boring logs and an Exploration Location Diagram (Exhibit A-2) are included in Appendix A.

The purpose of this study is to provide subsurface information and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to:

subsurface soil conditions foundation design and construction groundwater conditions slab design and construction earthwork seismic considerations pavement design and construction

PROJECT INFORMATION

The following summaries of site conditions and the proposed development are based on our observations at the site as well as on our understanding of plans and information provided to us. If any of the information summarized below is incorrect, please let us know so that we can review the applicability of our conclusions and recommendations to the correct project details.

2.1 Site Location

Item Description

Location

North quadrant of the intersection of Rust Avenue and Smith Lane within Francis

S. Gabreski airport in Westhampton, New York.

Approximate Latitude 40.8387°, Longitude -72.6439°

Site History Google EarthTM historic aerial images indicate that the parking lot currently located within the proposed building location has been in place since at least 1994.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 2

Existing

Improvements

Parking lot surrounded by landscaped area.

Current Ground

Cover

Asphalt, grass

Existing

Topography

Based on Existing Conditions Plan (Sheet C-100), the ground surface within the site generally slopes from approximate Elevation +50 feet within the west portion of the site to approximate Elevation +45 feet near the southeast property boundary.

2.2 Project Description

Structures Two story building with approximate footprint of approximately 16,000 square feet, with associated paved parking.

Retaining Walls None

Finished Floor

Elevation (FFE)

Not provided. This report assumes that it will be established at approximately

Elevation +50 feet.

Site Grading

Based on the existing grades and anticipated FFE, we anticipate that up to 2 feet of additional fill may be required at the site to reach planned slab and pavement subgrades.

Pavement

Loading

Driveway:

Aerial Fire Truck (P-23 Crash Truck/Fire Truck) = 300 passes over design life

Fork Lift (CMP 60 Forklift) = 26,000 passes over design life

Parking Lot:

Passenger Cars = 310,250 passes over design life

Large SUV = 310,250 passes over design life

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS AND CONDITIONS

3.1 Subsurface Soil Strata

Based on the results of the explorations and observations at the time of drilling, subsurface conditions on the project site can be generalized as follows:

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 3

Stratum Approximate Depth to

Bottom of Stratum (feet) Material Encountered 1,2 Consistency / Density

1 1.5 – 63 Uncontrolled Fill: Silty sand, silty sand with gravel Variable

2 not encountered (>102) Poorly Graded Sand, Poorly

Graded Sand with Gravel (SP) Loose to Very Dense4

1. Approximately 2 inches of topsoil was encountered in the borings performed within landscaped areas.

2. Approximately 6 to 8 inches of asphalt was encountered in the borings performed within the existing paved parking.

3. In Boring B-7 performed within the proposed pavement location uncontrolled fill extended to a depth of 26 feet below the existing site grades.

4. These materials were typically medium dense in most of the borings (which did not extend below a depth of 27 feet). Occasional thin loose zones were encountered at the top of this stratum at the fill-native sand interface. Dense to very dense soils were only encountered below a depth of 35 feet in the one deep boring (B-5).

Conditions encountered at the exploration locations and further details of the explorations can be found on the exploration logs in Appendix A of this report. Stratification boundaries on the exploration logs represent the approximate location of changes in soil types; in situ, the transition between materials may be gradual.

3.2 Groundwater

Groundwater was not encountered in the borings, with exception of boring B-5 were groundwater was encountered at a depth of approximately 19.5 feet at time of drilling and at a depth of approximately 38 feet approximately 24 hours after completion of drilling. It should be noted that fluctuations in the groundwater level may occur because of seasonal variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff, and other factors that may differ from those present at the time the explorations were performed. Additionally, grade adjustments on and around the site, as well as surrounding drainage improvements, may affect the water table. The possibility of groundwater level fluctuations should be considered when developing the design and construction plans for the project.

3.3 Infiltration Testing

Double-ring infiltrometer tests were conducted in two test pits (TP-1 and TP-2) performed southeast of the proposed building at a depth of approximately 4 feet below grade to provide preliminary information regarding potential infiltration rates at these locations. The results of the testing are tabulated below.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 4

Test Pit ID Sample Depth, in feet Infiltration Rate (in/hr)

TP-1 4 >24

TP-2 4 >24

Please note that the test results are only valid for the specific conditions noted above. It should be expected that infiltration rates at the site will vary with depth and location primarily due to changes in soil texture.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

4.1 Geotechnical Considerations

The key geotechnical consideration impacting the proposed construction is the presence of uncontrolled fill at the site. In our opinion, these materials are unsuitable in their current condition for direct support of the proposed building foundations and slab due to the risk of greater than normal settlements associated with inherent variations in the nature and consistency of the fill.

The underlying native sand materials are, in our opinion, suitable for foundation support.

Given this, we recommend removal and replacement of the existing uncontrolled fill prior to construction of the building. Based on the available topographic information and fill thickness observed at the site we estimate that the native subgrade soils can be encountered at approximate Elevations +43 feet to +46 feet. Based on the available data, we anticipate that the soils excavated as part of this removal process will be suitable for replacement as structural fill, provided they are maintained at moisture contents suitable for compaction and deleterious materials, if present, are segregated prior to reuse. Following removal and replacement in accordance with the recommendations provided in the subsequent sections of this report, the building may be supported on conventional shallow foundations with a slab-on-grade.

Complete removal of all existing fill within the proposed pavement areas may be cost prohibitive, particularly in the area where it was 26 feet deep. However, leaving it all in place would result in increased risks of greater than normal settlements and long-term pavement maintenance. To help reduce these risks, we recommend implementing a limited undercut and densification program to achieve a more uniform and dense subgrade support condition for the pavement.

Details of this program are provided in Section 4.5.2, below. It must be recognized, though, that this program will not completely eliminate these risks, and future planning for the development should include a higher than normal budget for maintenance and repair of the pavement. In addition, it may be prudent to excavate shallow test pits prior to final design to further assess the extent of the deep fill materials and develop a better understanding of the potential risks.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 5

Since portions of the existing fill materials are very similar to the underlying native soils, Terracon should be retained to observe the removal of uncontrolled fill to confirm that the unsuitable materials have been removed and to assist the contractor in avoiding unnecessary removal of the native materials. We should also observe the subgrade preparation procedures to confirm that the native subgrades are suitable for fill placement and consequent foundation support, and observe and test structural fill placement.

4.2 Shallow Foundations

This section addresses recommendations for support of the proposed building on conventional shallow foundations.

4.2.1 Design Recommendations

The following recommendations are contingent upon the completion of the fill removal and subgrade preparation procedures described in Sections 4.5.1 and 4.5.2, below.

Description Value

Net allowable bearing pressure 1 3,000 psf

Minimum embedment below finished grade for frost protection 42 inches

Approximate total settlement 2 1 inch

1. The recommended net allowable bearing pressure is the pressure in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure at the footing base elevation.

2. Foundation settlement will depend upon the variations within the subsurface soil profile, the structural loading conditions, the embedment depth of the footing, the thickness of compacted fill, and the quality of the subgrade preparation and earthwork operations.

Exterior foundations should be established a minimum of 42 inches below the proposed adjacent exterior grades, or deeper if required by the local building official, to provide protection from frost penetration.

4.2.2 Shallow Foundation Construction Considerations

The uncontrolled silty sand and silty sand with gravel fill soils are not suitable for direct support of the shallow foundations in their present condition. These materials should be addressed as discussed in Section 4.5.1, below prior to spread foundation construction. The base of foundation excavations should be free of water and loose soil before placing concrete. Concrete should be placed soon after excavating to reduce bearing soil disturbance. Should the soils at the bearing level become wet, disturbed, or frozen prior to the placement of the crushed stone, or if unsuitable bearing soils are encountered at planned subgrade levels, the materials should be removed prior to placing concrete. As discussed above, Terracon should be retained to observe the subgrade

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 6 preparation activities, to provide guidance regarding remedial earthwork required, and to evaluate the suitability of the subgrades to support the design foundation loads.

4.3 Floor Slabs

Design parameters for floor slabs assume the requirements presented in Section 4.5 have been followed.

4.3.1 Floor Slab Design Parameters

Floor Slab Support 1 6-inch-thick layer of imported granular fill (see Section 4.5.5)

Estimated Modulus of

Subgrade Reaction 2 175 pounds per square inch per inch (psi/in) for point loads

1. Floor slabs should be structurally independent of building footings or walls to reduce the possibility of floor slab cracking caused by differential movements between the slab and foundation.

2. Modulus of subgrade reaction is an estimated value based upon our experience with the subgrade condition, the requirements noted in Section 4.5 and the floor slab support as noted in this table. It is provided for point loads. For large area loads the modulus of subgrade reaction would be lower.

The use of a vapor retarder should be considered beneath concrete slabs on grade covered with wood, tile, carpet, or other moisture sensitive or impervious coverings, or when the slab will support equipment sensitive to moisture. When conditions warrant the use of a vapor retarder, the slab designer should refer to ACI 302 and/or ACI 360 for procedures and cautions regarding the use and placement of a vapor retarder.

4.3.2 Floor Slab Construction Considerations

On most project sites, the site grading is generally accomplished early in the construction phase, and this report assumes that the general slab area will be prepared in accordance with our recommendations in Section 4.5. However, as construction proceeds, the subgrade may be disturbed because of utility excavations, construction traffic, precipitation, etc. As a result, the floor slab subgrade may not be suitable for placement of granular base and concrete, and corrective action will be required.

Therefore, immediately prior to placement of the granular base and concrete, we recommend the area underlying the floor slab be proofrolled again with at least six passes of a minimum 4-ton

(static weight) vibratory roller compactor. In areas with limited access, a double-drum walk-behind compactor may be used. Particular attention should be paid to high traffic areas that were rutted and disturbed earlier and to areas where backfilled trenches are located, and manual probes should be performed by Terracon to confirm the stability of these areas. Areas with unsuitable conditions should be repaired by removing and replacing the affected material with properly compacted fill.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 7

We estimate that floor slabs supported by the subgrade soils and/or controlled compacted fill prepared in accordance with the recommendations presented in this report will experience post construction settlement on the order of 1/2-inch or less. The majority of this movement will occur during initial load application.

4.4 Seismic Considerations

Based on our evaluation of the subsurface conditions identified in our test borings, we recommend that Site Class D be adopted for seismic design purposes in accordance with the 2015

International Building Code.

4.5 Earthwork

4.5.1 Demolition, Clearing, Stripping, and Fill Soil Removal

Prior to any earthwork operations, any subsurface utilities and abandoned subsurface structures that are in conflict with the new construction should be relocated and/or removed from the proposed construction area. The topsoil and asphalt encountered within the construction area should be stripped within, as well as five feet beyond the limits of the proposed construction after the removal and relocation of utilities. The asphalt and topsoil are not suitable for reuse as structural fill/backfill and should be disposed in a suitable manner. As an alternative, the topsoil could be reused in landscaped areas. The uncontrolled fill identified in our study should then be removed in its entirety from within and at least 5 feet beyond the limits of the proposed building where encountered.

4.5.2 Subgrade Preparation and Protection

Following removal of uncontrolled fill soil, the exposed subgrades should be proofrolled to a dense and stable consistency with at least 10 passes of a self-propelled, vibratory compactor with a static drum weight of at least 12,000 pounds. Any areas that show signs of instability under the proofrolling equipment should be selectively overexcavated to a suitable bearing layer, as determined by our engineer. The proofrolling should be performed after a suitable period of dry weather to reduce the amount of undercutting/remedial work that may be required.

Assuming the risks associated with leaving existing fill in place within the proposed pavement areas are acceptable to the client, we recommend the following limited undercut and densification program to help reduce these risks. First we recommend that any fill present at pavement subgrade levels should be undercut 2 feet below the proposed pavement section bottom.

Following undercutting, the exposed subgrade should be uniformly densified/compacted with at least 10 passes of the large, self-propelled vibratory compactor referenced above. Any areas showing signs of instability should be addressed as discussed above.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 8

As discussed in Section 4.1, we recommend that all fill removal and proofrolling/densification activities be observed and evaluated by our engineer.

Following proofrolling and/or densification, structural fill could then be placed to design subgrade elevations as needed per our recommendations below. However, prepared subgrades will still be susceptible to disturbance from construction traffic and inclement weather and should be protected by the Contractor prior to the placement of any structural fill. Construction traffic over completed subgrades should be avoided to the extent practical. The site should also be graded to prevent ponding of surface water on the prepared subgrades or in excavations. If any subgrades should become frozen, wet, or disturbed, the affected materials should be removed to the surface of stable soils and replaced with controlled compacted fill, or if conditions permit may be scarified, moisture conditioned as necessary, and recompacted in place under the observation of the geotechnical engineer.

4.5.3 Excavation Safety

As a minimum, temporary excavations should be sloped or braced, as required by Occupational

Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) regulations, to provide stability and safe working conditions. The contractor should shore, slope or bench the sides of all temporary excavations, as required, to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should comply with applicable local, State and federal safety regulations, including the current OSHA

Excavation and Trench Safety Standards.

4.5.4 Reuse of Materials

Materials generated during the fill removal and subgrade preparation activities are expected to consist of silty sand and silty sand with gravel soils. In our opinion, these soils will be suitable for reuse as structural fill provided that they are maintained at a moisture content suitable for compaction and deleterious materials are segregated prior to reuse.

4.5.5 Imported Fill Materials

In the event that imported fill is needed to complete the backfill or site grading, we recommend that the material consist of inorganic, readily compactable, well-graded granular soils with no more than 15 percent fines (no more than 15 percent passing the No. 200 sieve). Additionally, we recommend excluding gradations greater than 6 inches. The moisture content of the fill material should be controlled to within approximately 2 to 3 percent of the optimum moisture content by wetting, aeration, or blending, as necessary to achieve the required compaction.

4.5.6 Structural Fill Placement

Structural fill within the proposed building and pavement areas should be installed in controlled layers uniformly compacted to at least 95 percent of the fill material’s maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557 test procedures. The layer thickness should be adjusted as needed depending on the type of compaction equipment used and the condition of the fill materials at the

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 9 time of construction, but should be no greater than 12 inches in loose thickness. It should be expected that thinner lifts will be required to achieve the required compaction in confined areas where portable compaction equipment is used.

4.6 Pavements

Support of the pavement section on or above existing fill is possible for this project. However, even with the recommended subgrade densification, construction testing and observation services, there is an inherent risk for the owner that compressible or unsuitable material within or buried by the surficial soils will not be discovered. This risk of unforeseen conditions cannot be eliminated without completely removing the existing fill, but can be reduced by performing the recommended densification and testing discussed in Section 4.5.2.

4.6.1 Pavement Subgrade Preparation

Pavement subgrades should be prepared in accordance with the recommendations provided in

Section 4.5.2, above. However, on most project sites, the site grading is accomplished relatively early in the construction phase. Pavement subgrades should therefore be carefully evaluated for disturbance or softening from construction activities or weather as the time for pavement construction approaches. Unless the procedures recommended above are conducted immediately prior to paving, the subgrades should be rechecked and proofrolled prior to placing the pavement base course with a loaded tandem-axle dump truck. Particular attention should be paid to high traffic areas that were rutted and disturbed, to areas where backfilled trenches are located, and to areas of in-situ fill materials or other site improvements. Areas where unsuitable conditions are located should be repaired by replacing the materials with properly compacted fill.

When proofrolling has been completed to the satisfaction of the geotechnical engineer, base may be placed.

4.6.2 Design Considerations

Pavement sections are provided for the pavement life of 25 years and traffic conditions as noted in Project Description. Provided that the pavement subgrade is prepared in accordance with the recommendations provided above, we designed the parking lot and drive lane pavement section using a preliminary CBR value of 8. Designs for minimum thicknesses for new pavement sections for this project have been performed utilizing PCASE 2.09.03 program by US Army Corps of

Engineers. Pavement design methods are intended to provide structural sections with adequate thickness over a particular subgrade such that wheel loads are reduced to a level the subgrade can support.

Please note, however, that CBR values are highly dependent on the final subgrade material and condition of the subgrade at the time of construction. A Terracon geotechnical engineer should evaluate the subgrade and, if necessary, perform CBR testing on the final subgrade materials at the time of construction to confirm these preliminary design recommendations.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 10

In addition, pavement performance is affected by its surroundings especially by presence of water. Pavements should be sloped to provide rapid drainage of surface water. Water allowed to pond on or adjacent to the pavements could saturate the subgrade and contribute to premature pavement deterioration. The civil engineer should consider the following drainage recommendations in the design and layout of pavements:

Final grade adjacent to paved areas should slope down from the edges at a minimum 2%;

The subgrade and pavement surface should have a minimum 2% slope to promote proper surface drainage;

Install below pavement drainage systems surrounding areas anticipated for frequent wetting;

Install joint sealant and seal cracks immediately;

Seal all landscaped areas in or adjacent to pavements to reduce moisture migration to subgrade soils;

4.6.3 Asphaltic Cement Concrete (ACC) Thickness

Minimum ACC Pavement Section (inches)

Traffic Area Asphalt

Surface1 Asphalt Binder1

NYDOT Type II

Aggregate Base

Course2

Light Duty

(Car Parking) 1-1/2 2-1/2 6

Standard Duty

(Driveway) 2 4 10

1. Design and construction of asphaltic or bituminous concrete should be in accordance with New York

Department of Transportation (NYDOT) Standard Specifications.

2. NYDOT Type II aggregate base course or similarly graded recycled concrete compacted to 100% of its max dry density as determined by ASTM D-698, Standard Proctor Test with stability present.

4.6.4 Pavement Maintenance

Preventative maintenance should be planned and provided through an on-going pavement management program in order to enhance future pavement performance, slow the rate of pavement deterioration, and preserve the pavement investment. Preventative maintenance, which consists of both localized maintenance, e.g., crack and joint sealing and patching, and global maintenance, e.g., surface sealing, is usually the first priority when implementing a planned pavement maintenance program, and provides the highest return on investment for pavements.

Prior to implementing such a program, additional engineering observation is recommended to assess the type and extent of preventative maintenance.

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 11

GENERAL COMMENTS

Terracon should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications, so comments can be made regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendations in the design and specifications. Terracon also should be retained to provide observation and testing services during excavation phases of the project.

The recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained from nine borings and two test pit explorations performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed in this report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur between explorations, across the site, or due to the modifying effects of weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction. If variations appear, we should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental recommendations can be provided.

The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination of pollution, other studies should be undertaken.

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made. Site safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In the event that changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless

Terracon reviews the changes and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this report in writing.

APPENDIX A

FIELD EXPLORATION

SITE LOCATION MAP

NYANG - Francis S. Gabreskie Airport S. Perimeter Road

Westhampton, NY

TOPOGRAPHIC MAP IMAGE COURTESY OF THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

QUADRANGLES INCLUDE: EASTPORT, NY (1/1/1956) and QUOGUE, NY (1/1/1956).

4081 Hadley Rd Ste B

South Plainfield, NJ 07080-1114

J6165176 Project Manager:

Drawn by:

Checked by:

Approved by:

KP

ACK

SDT

1”=2,000’

J6165176 PL

8/25/2017

Project No.

Scale:

File Name:

Date:

A-1

Exhibit

ACK

SITE

EXPLORATION LOCATION DIAGRAM

NYANG - Francis S. Gabreskie Airport S. Perimeter Road

Westhampton, NY

4081 Hadley Rd Ste B

South Plainfield, NJ 07080-1114

DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS

NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES

J6165176

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY PROVIDED

BY MICROSOFT BING MAPS

KP

ACK

SDT

NTS

J6165176 PL

8/25/2017

Scale:

A-2

Exhibit Project Manager:

Drawn by:

Checked by:

Approved by:

Project No.

File Name:

Date:

ACK

Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable Exhibit A-3

Field Exploration Description

The test pit and boring locations, which are shown on Exhibit A-2, were located in the field by measurement from existing features and recorded using a hand-held GPS unit. The accuracy of the exploration points recorded with GPS unit is usually within 20 feet of the noted location. The elevations were obtained from the available Existing Conditions Plan based on the boring locations. The locations and elevations of the explorations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used to define them.

Terracon coordinated the advancement of nine test borings (B-1 and B-9) on August 8 through

August 10, 2017 and test pits with infiltration testing on August 16, 2017. The borings were advanced using a truck-mounted drill rig, owned and operated by Granese Drilling Inc. located in Shrewsbury, NJ. The borings were advanced using hollow stem auger drilling. The borings terminated in the underlying natural soils at depths of approximately 10 to 100 feet.

In the split-barrel sampling procedure, the number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch

O.D. split-barrel sampler typically the bottom 12 inches of the total 18-inch penetration by means of a 140-pound safety hammer with a free fall of 30 inches is the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) resistance value “N”. This “N” value is used to estimate the in-situ relative density of cohesionless soils and consistency of cohesive soils.

The soil samples were placed in labeled glass jars and transported to our laboratory for further review and classification by a Terracon geotechnical engineer. Information provided on the boring logs attached to this report includes soil descriptions, relative density and/or consistency evaluations, boring depths, sampling intervals, and groundwater conditions. The borings were backfilled with soil cuttings prior to the drill crews leaving the site.

Field logs of the explorations were prepared during drilling operations. These logs included visual classifications of the materials encountered during drilling as well as interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples. Final exploration logs included with this report represent further interpretation by the geotechnical engineer of the field logs and incorporate, where appropriate, modifications based on laboratory classification of the samples.

45+/-

23+/-

4-5-9-9 N=14

8-10-8-10 N=18

5-6-6-5 N=12

3-3-4-4 N=7

5-6-6-7 N=12

6-7-7-9 N=14

8-10-13-14 N=23

7-11-10-13 N=21

7-14-15-17 N=29

5.0

27.0

FILL - , Silty sand with gravel, with building material, brown

SP - POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), brown to light brown, loose to medium dense

Boring Terminated at 27 Feet

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

Hammer Type: Safety HammerStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

T H

IS

B

O R

IN

G

L O

G

IS

N O

T V

A

LI

D

IF

S E

P A

R A

T E

D F

R O

M O

R

IG

IN

A

L R

E P

O R

T

G E

O S

M A

R T

L O

G -N

O W

E

LL

J

N

Y A

N G

F

R A

N C

IS

S

.G P

J T

E R

R A

C O

N _D

A T

A T

E M

P

LA

T E

.G D

T

/2

/1

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

ELEVATION (Ft.)

Approximate Surface Elev: +50 (Ft.) +/-

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

D E

P T

H

F t.)

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

S. Perimeter Road Westhampton, NY

SITE:

Advancement Method:

Mud Rotary

Abandonment Method:

Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: J6165176

Drill Rig: Mobile B-61

Boring Started: 08-09-2017

BORING LOG NO. B-1

Pond & CompanyCLIENT:

Norcross, GA

Driller: Mike Granese

Boring Completed: 08-09-2017

Exhibit: A-4

See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures.

See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations.

PROJECT: NYANG - Francis S. Gabreskie Airport

4081 Hadley Rd Ste B South Plainfield, NJ

Groundwater not encountered

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

DEPTH

LOCATION

Latitude: 40.8388° Longitude: -72.644°

See Exhibit A-2

49+/-

43+/-

22+/-

2-3-6-6 N=9

6-7-8-8 N=15

6-6-8-12 N=14

14-10-12-12 N=22

10-11-9-11 N=20

11-10-11-12 N=21

7-13-16-18 N=29

7-9-13-14 N=22

10-13-10-11 N=23

0.2

6.0

27.0

TOPSOIL, 2" topsoil FILL - , Silty sand, with building material, brown to dark brown

SP - POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), light brown, medium dense

Boring Terminated at 27 Feet

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

Hammer Type: Safety HammerStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

T H

IS

B

O R

IN

G

L O

G

IS

N O

T V

A

LI

D

IF

S E

P A

R A

T E

D F

R O

M O

R

IG

IN

A

L R

E P

O R

T

G E

O S

M A

R T

L O

G -N

O W

E

LL

J

N

Y A

N G

F

R A

N C

IS

S

.G P

J T

E R

R A

C O

N _D

A T

A T

E M

P

LA

T E

.G D

T

/2

/1

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

ELEVATION (Ft.)

Approximate Surface Elev: +49 (Ft.) +/-

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

D E

P T

H

F t.)

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

S. Perimeter Road Westhampton, NY

SITE:

Advancement Method:

Mud Rotary

Abandonment Method:

Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: J6165176

Drill Rig: Mobile B-61

Boring Started: 08-09-2017

BORING LOG NO. B-2

Pond & CompanyCLIENT:

Norcross, GA

Driller: Mike Granese

Boring Completed: 08-09-2017

Exhibit: A-5

See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures.

See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations.

PROJECT: NYANG - Francis S. Gabreskie Airport

4081 Hadley Rd Ste B South Plainfield, NJ

Groundwater not encountered

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

DEPTH

LOCATION

Latitude: 40.8386° Longitude: -72.6437°

48+/-

46.5+/-

21+/-

3-7-8-7 N=15

4-4-5-5 N=9

4-6-6-9 N=12

4-6-9-6 N=15

6-7-9-10 N=16

10-10-13-12 N=23

8-12-14-4 N=26

7-10-10-9 N=20

8-11-15-15 N=26

0.2

1.5

27.0

TOPSOIL, 2" topsoil FILL - , Silty sand, with building material, brown to dark brown

SP - POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), light brown, loose to medium dense

Boring Terminated at 27 Feet

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

Hammer Type: Safety HammerStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

T H

IS

B

O R

IN

G

L O

G

IS

N O

T V

A

LI

D

IF

S E

P A

R A

T E

D F

R O

M O

R

IG

IN

A

L R

E P

O R

T

G E

O S

M A

R T

L O

G -N

O W

E

LL

J

N

Y A

N G

F

R A

N C

IS

S

.G P

J T

E R

R A

C O

N _D

A T

A T

E M

P

LA

T E

.G D

T

/2

/1

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

ELEVATION (Ft.)

Approximate Surface Elev: +48 (Ft.) +/-

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

D E

P T

H

F t.)

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

S. Perimeter Road Westhampton, NY

SITE:

Advancement Method:

Mud Rotary

Abandonment Method:

Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: J6165176

Drill Rig: Mobile B-61

Boring Started: 08-10-2017

BORING LOG NO. B-3

Pond & CompanyCLIENT:

Norcross, GA

Driller: Mike Granese

Boring Completed: 08-10-2017

Exhibit: A-6

See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures.

See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations.

PROJECT: NYANG - Francis S. Gabreskie Airport

4081 Hadley Rd Ste B South Plainfield, NJ

Groundwater not encountered

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

DEPTH

LOCATION

Latitude: 40.8384° Longitude: -72.6434°

44+/-

23+/-

3-4-10-15 N=14

13-15-15-14 N=30

13-11-8-7 N=19

6-5-4-4 N=9

2-2-1-3 N=3

2-2-2-2 N=4

4-5-5-6 N=10

5-6-6-5 N=12

5-6-12-11 N=18

6.0

27.0

FILL - , Silty sand, with building material, light brown to gray brown

SP - POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), orange brown to light brown, loose to medium dense

Boring Terminated at 27 Feet

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

Hammer Type: Safety HammerStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

T H

IS

B

O R

IN

G

L O

G

IS

N O

T V

A

LI

D

IF

S E

P A

R A

T E

D F

R O

M O

R

IG

IN

A

L R

E P

O R

T

G E

O S

M A

R T

L O

G -N

O W

E

LL

J

N

Y A

N G

F

R A

N C

IS

S

.G P

J T

E R

R A

C O

N _D

A T

A T

E M

P

LA

T E

.G D

T

/2

/1

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

ELEVATION (Ft.)

Approximate Surface Elev: +50 (Ft.) +/-

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

D E

P T

H

F t.)

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

S. Perimeter Road Westhampton, NY

SITE:

Advancement Method:

Mud Rotary

Abandonment Method:

Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: J6165176

Drill Rig: Mobile B-61

Boring Started: 08-09-2017

BORING LOG NO. B-4

Pond & CompanyCLIENT:

Norcross, GA

Driller: Mike Granese

Boring Completed: 08-09-2017

Exhibit: A-7

See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures.

See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations.

PROJECT: NYANG - Francis S. Gabreskie Airport

4081 Hadley Rd Ste B South Plainfield, NJ

Groundwater not encountered

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

DEPTH

LOCATION

Latitude: 40.8386° Longitude: -72.6442°

49+/-

44.5+/-

34.5+/-

24.5+/-

9.5+/-

-0.5+/-

16-26-24-19 N=50

10-10-8-8 N=18

9-11-12-12 N=23

9-10-10-10 N=20

5-9-9-10 N=18

10-7-11-15 N=18

11-12-10-12 N=22

8-7-12-13 N=19

11-7-6-10 N=13

15-26-28-27 N=54

14-14-14-16 N=28

14-15-24-26 N=39

17-19-14-15 N=33

0.6

5.0

15.0

25.0

40.0

50.0

ASPHALT, 7" asphalt FILL - , Silty sand, with building material, brown

SP - POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), orange brown to light brown, medium dense

SP - POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP), light brown, medium dense

SP - POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), light brown, medium dense to very dense

SP - POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP), light brown to gray brown, medium dense to dense

SP - POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), light brown, medium dense to very dense

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

Hammer Type: Safety HammerStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

T H

IS

B

O R

IN

G

L O

G

IS

N O

T V

A

LI

D

IF

S E

P A

R A

T E

D F

R O

M O

R

IG

IN

A

L R

E P

O R

T

G E

O S

M A

R T

L O

G -N

O W

E

LL

J

N

Y A

N G

F

R A

N C

IS

S

.G P

J T

E R

R A

C O

N _D

A T

A T

E M

P

LA

T E

.G D

T

/2

/1

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

ELEVATION (Ft.)

Approximate Surface Elev: +49.5 (Ft.) +/-

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

D E

P T

H

F t.)

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

S. Perimeter Road Westhampton, NY

SITE:

Advancement Method:

Mud Rotary

Abandonment Method:

Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: J6165176

Drill Rig: Mobile B-61

Boring Started: 08-08-2017

BORING LOG NO. B-5

Pond & CompanyCLIENT:

Norcross, GA

Driller: Mike Granese

Boring Completed: 08-08-2017

Exhibit: A-8

See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures.

See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations.

PROJECT: NYANG - Francis S. Gabreskie Airport

4081 Hadley Rd Ste B South Plainfield, NJ

While drilling

After 24 hours

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

DEPTH

LOCATION

Latitude: 40.8384° Longitude: -72.6439°

-52.5+/-

9-11-12-13 N=23

16-15-8-6 N=23

18-16-21-21 N=37

16-15-24-31 N=39

13-15-14-20 N=29

18-24-43-42 N=67

18-20-37-31 N=57

19-19-35-36 N=54

19-20-25-27 N=45

22-23-37-29 N=60

102.0

SP - POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), light brown, medium dense to very dense (continued)

Boring Terminated at 102 Feet

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

Hammer Type: Safety HammerStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

T H

IS

B

O R

IN

G

L O

G

IS

N O

T V

A

LI

D

IF

S E

P A

R A

T E

D F

R O

M O

R

IG

IN

A

L R

E P

O R

T

G E

O S

M A

R T

L O

G -N

O W

E

LL

J

N

Y A

N G

F

R A

N C

IS

S

.G P

J T

E R

R A

C O

N _D

A T

A T

E M

P

LA

T E

.G D

T

/2

/1

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

ELEVATION (Ft.)

Approximate Surface Elev: +49.5 (Ft.) +/-

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

D E

P T

H

F t.)

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

S. Perimeter Road Westhampton, NY

SITE:

Advancement Method:

Mud Rotary

Abandonment Method:

Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: J6165176

Drill Rig: Mobile B-61

Boring Started: 08-08-2017

BORING LOG NO. B-5

Pond & CompanyCLIENT:

Norcross, GA

Driller: Mike Granese

Boring Completed: 08-08-2017

Exhibit: A-8

See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures.

See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations.

PROJECT: NYANG - Francis S. Gabreskie Airport

4081 Hadley Rd Ste B South Plainfield, NJ

While drilling

After 24 hours

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

DEPTH

LOCATION

Latitude: 40.8384° Longitude: -72.6439°

48.5+/-

47+/-

22+/-

11-13-17-15 N=30

17-17-13-13 N=30

5-8-11-13 N=19

12-12-13-15 N=25

5-9-10-12 N=19

6-7-7-8 N=14

16-16-17-17 N=33

9-11-16-14 N=27

0.5

2.0

27.0

ASPHALT, 6" asphalt FILL - , Silty sand, with building material, brown

SP - POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), light brown, medium dense to dense

Boring Terminated at 27 Feet

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

Hammer Type: Safety HammerStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

T H

IS

B

O R

IN

G

L O

G

IS

N O

T V

A

LI

D

IF

S E

P A

R A

T E

D F

R O

M O

R

IG

IN

A

L R

E P

O R

T

G E

O S

M A

R T

L O

G -N

O W

E

LL

J

N

Y A

N G

F

R A

N C

IS

S

.G P

J T

E R

R A

C O

N _D

A T

A T

E M

P

LA

T E

.G D

T

/2

/1

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

ELEVATION (Ft.)

Approximate Surface Elev: +49 (Ft.) +/-

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

D E

P T

H

F t.)

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

S. Perimeter Road Westhampton, NY

SITE:

Advancement Method:

Mud Rotary

Abandonment Method:

Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: J6165176

Drill Rig: Mobile B-61

Boring Started: 08-10-2017

BORING LOG NO. B-6

Pond & CompanyCLIENT:

Norcross, GA

Driller: Mike Granese

Boring Completed: 08-10-2017

Exhibit: A-9

See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures.

See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations.

PROJECT: NYANG - Francis S. Gabreskie Airport

4081 Hadley Rd Ste B South Plainfield, NJ

Groundwater not encountered

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

DEPTH

LOCATION

Latitude: 40.8382° Longitude: -72.6437°

50+/-

24+/-

21+/-

7-5-5-4 N=10

4-3-2-2 N=5

2-1-2-1 N=3

2-1-1-1 N=2

2-1-1-2 N=2

2-1-1-1 N=2

1-1-1-1 N=2

3-2-1-1 N=3

2-1-1-4 N=2

4-7-9-10 N=16

0.2

26.0

29.0

TOPSOIL, 2" topsoil FILL - , Silty sand, with building material, dark brown to light brown

SP - POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), light brown, medium dense

Boring Terminated at 29 Feet

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

Hammer Type: Safety HammerStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

T H

IS

B

O R

IN

G

L O

G

IS

N O

T V

A

LI

D

IF

S E

P A

R A

T E

D F

R O

M O

R

IG

IN

A

L R

E P

O R

T

G E

O S

M A

R T

L O

G -N

O W

E

LL

J

N

Y A

N G

F

R A

N C

IS

S

.G P

J T

E R

R A

C O

N _D

A T

A T

E M

P

LA

T E

.G D

T

/2

/1

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

ELEVATION (Ft.)

Approximate Surface Elev: +50 (Ft.) +/-

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

D E

P T

H

F t.)

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

S. Perimeter Road Westhampton, NY

SITE:

Advancement Method:

Mud Rotary

Abandonment Method:

Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: J6165176

Drill Rig: Mobile B-61

Boring Started: 08-09-2017

BORING LOG NO. B-7

Pond & CompanyCLIENT:

Norcross, GA

Driller: Mike Granese

Boring Completed: 08-09-2017

Exhibit: A-10

See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures.

See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations.

PROJECT: NYANG - Francis S. Gabreskie Airport

4081 Hadley Rd Ste B South Plainfield, NJ

Groundwater not encountered

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

DEPTH

LOCATION

Latitude: 40.8385° Longitude: -72.6443°

48+/-

45+/-

38+/-

2-10-13-15 N=23

15-17-14-12 N=31

7-8-8-8 N=16

5-5-7-7 N=12

6-7-8-10 N=15

0.2

3.0

10.0

TOPSOIL, 2" topsoil FILL - , Silty sand, with building material, brown

SP - POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), light brown, medium dense to dense

Boring Terminated at 10 Feet

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

Hammer Type: Safety HammerStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

T H

IS

B

O R

IN

G

L O

G

IS

N O

T V

A

LI

D

IF

S E

P A

R A

T E

D F

R O

M O

R

IG

IN

A

L R

E P

O R

T

G E

O S

M A

R T

L O

G -N

O W

E

LL

J

N

Y A

N G

F

R A

N C

IS

S

.G P

J T

E R

R A

C O

N _D

A T

A T

E M

P

LA

T E

.G D

T

/2

/1

W A

T E

R C

O N

T E

N T

ELEVATION (Ft.)

Approximate Surface Elev: +48 (Ft.) +/-

W A

T E

R L

E V

E L

O B

S E

R V

A T

IO

N

S

D E

P T

H

F t.)

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E

F

IE

LD

T

E S

T R

E S

U

LT

S

R E

C O

V E

R Y

In

S. Perimeter Road Westhampton, NY

SITE:

Advancement Method:

Mud Rotary

Abandonment Method:

Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.

Notes:

Project No.: J6165176

Drill Rig: Mobile B-61

Boring Started: 08-09-2017

BORING LOG NO. B-8

Pond & CompanyCLIENT:

Norcross, GA

Driller: Mike Granese

Boring Completed: 08-09-2017

Exhibit: A-11

See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures.

See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any).

See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations.

PROJECT: NYANG - Francis S. Gabreskie Airport

4081 Hadley Rd Ste B South Plainfield, NJ

Groundwater not encountered

WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

DEPTH

LOCATION

Latitude: 40.8383° Longitude: -72.6441°

44+/-

19+/-

2-5-7-6 N=12

6-8-8-9 N=16

8-14-14-13 N=28

10-12-11-12 N=23

8-9-10-13 N=19

11-13-14-12 N=27

6-7-6-8 N=13

7-8-8-7 N=16

8-12-17-17 N=29

2.0

27.0

FILL - , Silty sand, with building material, brown

SP - POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), light brown, medium dense

Boring Terminated at 27 Feet

G R

A P

H

IC

L O

G

Hammer Type: Safety HammerStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.

T H

IS

B

O R

IN

G

L O

G

IS

N O

T V

A

LI

D

IF

S E

P A

R A

T E

D F

R O

M O

R

IG

IN

A

L…