W911SA-19-B-2006_Geotechnical_Investigation_Report.pdf

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

REPORT

Water Crossing Range 29

Fort McCoy, WI

SOW 0034 Contract No. W911SA-15-D-0016

Prepared For:

Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc.

329 Jay Street, Suite 301

La Crosse, WI 54601

(608) 782-3161

Prepared By:

Himalayan Consultants, LLC

W156 N11357 Pilgrim Road

Germantown, WI 53022

(262) 502-0066

March 9, 2018

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

REPORT

Prepared By:

Himalayan Consultants, LLC

W156 N11357 Pilgrim Road

Germantown, WI 53022

Phone: (262) 502-0066; Fax: (262) 502-0077

Mark Babich, P.E.

Project Engineer

Gopal K. Adhikary, P.E.

Principal / Senior Geotechnical Engineer

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

2.0 INTRODUCTION

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

4.0 REGIONAL GEOLOGY

5.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION AND TESTING

6.0 INVESTIGATION RESULTS

6.1 Field and Laboratory Testing

6.2 Subsurface Conditions

6.2.1 Soil Conditions

6.2.2 Groundwater Conditions

7.0 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 Scour Considerations

7.2 Culvert Foundation Recommendations

7.2.1 Bearing Resistance

7.2.2 Settlement

7.3 Wingwall Foundation Recommendations

7.3.1 Bearing Resistance

7.3.2 Settlement

7.3.3 Lateral Earth Pressure Parameters

8.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

8.1 Site Preparation

8.2 Excavation

8.3 Dewatering and Groundwater Control

8.4 Filling and Backfilling

8.5 Earthwork Operations

8.6 Geotextiles

8.7 Construction Inspection

8.8 Erosion Control

9.0 LIMITATIONS

10.0 REFERENCES

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4-1: Typical Soil Type Profiles 4

Table 5-1: Test Boring Summary 5

Table 7-1: Cut and Fill for Culvert Footing Grades 8

Table 7-2: Lateral Earth Pressure Parameters 10

APPENDICES

Appendix A: Maps and Figures

• Figure 1: Project Location Map

• Figures 2: Boring Location Map

Appendix B: Soil Boring Logs

• Soil Boring Logs

• Symbols and Terminology

• Unified Soil Classification System

Geotechnical Investigation Report

Fort McCoy, Wisconsin 1

SOW 0034

ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND SYMBOLS

ASTM American Society of Testing Materials

SB-X Soil boring identification bgs Below ground surface bpf Blows per foot

CBR California Bearing Ratio

DOSI Depth of Significant Influence

EBS Excavation Below Subgrade

ECRM Erosion Control Revegetative Mat

FI Frost Index

EL Elevation ft Feet

NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service pcf Pounds per cubic foot pci Pounds per cubic inch psi Pounds per square inch qest Unconfined compressive strength

SPT Standard Penetration Test k Modulus of Subgrade Reaction

STA Station

STH State Trunk Highway tsf Tons per square foot

UFC Unified Facilities Criteria

USCS Unified Soil Classification System

USDA United States Department of Agriculture

U.S. DOD United States Department of Defense

WDNR Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

WisDOT Wisconsin Department of Transportation

~ Approximately

Fort McCoy, Wisconsin 2

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Himalayan Consultants, LLC (Himalayan) was contracted by Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc.

(SEH) to perform a geotechnical investigation in connection with the construction of a new crossing structure over Suukjak Sep Creek in Fort McCoy, Wisconsin. The proposed structure will be a 24-foot span by 7-foot high, three-sided, precast reinforced concrete arch culvert. The culvert will also have precast reinforced concrete wingwalls that are expected to be approximately 12 feet long.

The culvert structure and wingwalls will be supported on precast reinforced concrete spread footings, approximately 6-foot wide by 2-foot deep. The footing base elevation for the proposed culvert is anticipated at approximately 897 feet based on top of footing elevation of 899.3 feet.

The maximum design fill height (from top of crown to top of pavement) is estimated to be 3 feet.

Based on the subsurface investigation results, the following is a summary of our conclusions and recommendations:

• Subsurface Conditions o The subgrade soils encountered were predominantly the loess and loamy residuum deposits consisting of fine sands of loose to very dense relative densities (N-values = 4 to >50).

Groundwater was observed in borings at depths ranging from approximately 3 to 8 feet bgs during drilling. See Section 6 for groundwater elevations.

• Foundation Recommendations o The foundation support soils within the Depth of Significant Influence for the proposed culvert and wingwalls consist of fine to medium sands with loose to very loose relative densities. Considering their high compressibility potential and low shear strength, these soils are unsuitable for foundation support. We recommend that these soils encountered within 2 to 4 feet of the footing base elevations be undercut/removed and replaced by structure backfill (granular) for adequate foundation support. See Section 7.2 for details.

o A maximum factored soil bearing resistance of 2,500 psf may be used for design of shallow foundations (spread foundations consisting of continuous strip footings) for the proposed arched culvert and wingwalls bearing on compacted structure backfill placed from a stable subgrade of compacted native soils. See Sections 7.2 and 7.3 for details.

• Lateral Earth Pressure Parameters o Earth pressure parameters for design of wingwalls are presented in Table 7-2. See Section

7.3 for details.

Fort McCoy, Wisconsin 3

2.0 INTRODUCTION

Himalayan Consultants, LLC (Himalayan) has performed a geotechnical investigation in connection with the proposed construction of a new crossing structure over Suukjak Sep Creek by

The United States Army Mission and Installation Contracting Command (MICC) -- Fort McCoy in Fort McCoy, Wisconsin (hereafter referred to as the Project Site). See Figure 1, Appendix A for general location of the Project Site.

The purpose of this investigation was to characterize the site soil and groundwater conditions, perform geotechnical analyses, and provide recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed culvert structure. Additional recommendations for potential problems that may be encountered during construction are included in Section 8 of this report.

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The proposed structure is anticipated to be a 24-foot span by 7-foot high, three-sided, precast reinforced concrete arch culvert. The culvert will also have precast reinforced concrete wingwalls that are estimated to be 12-feet long and sit at a 45-degree angle. The culvert structure and wingwalls will be supported on precast reinforced concrete spread footings, approximately 6-foot wide by 2-foot deep. A maximum design fill height of 3 feet (from top of crown to top of pavement) is proposed for the structure

The top of footing for the proposed culvert is expected to be near elevation 899.3 feet and the footing base elevation is anticipated at approximately 897 feet.

The culvert structure is to be designed for a minimum military load class (MLC) of 80 for both wheeled and tracked vehicles for one-way traffic. The AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design

Specifications shall be used for design.

4.0 REGIONAL GEOLOGY

Due to the extensive glacial erosion, the earliest bedrock unit remaining in the area is sandstone / shale rock from the early Cambrian Period (~540-million year old). Most of Monroe County is located on the eastern edge of the Western Upland, a cuesta plateau consisting of complex narrow ridges in the uplands and by valley flats that occur along the major drainage ways and streams.

Shale and sandstone bedrock formations are estimated to be 15 to 30 meters (50 to 100 feet) below ground surface (bgs) at the Project Site [Ref. 1]. The Cambrian bedrock at the Project Site is located in the ‘Driftless Area’ of Wisconsin, where the most recent glacial event about 15,000 years ago did not deposit any glacial material or “drift”.

Fort McCoy, Wisconsin 4

Ground surfaces at the Project Site contain varying thicknesses of loess (wind-blown) deposits and loamy residuum from the local sandstone bedrock (parent material), producing non-stratified layers of sand, silt, and some clay [Ref. 2].

A review of the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey of

Monroe County, Wisconsin indicates that the predominant soils at the project site consist of Tarr sands and Newlang muck [Ref. 3]. Tarr sand is described as sand that is excessively drained with no frequent ponding or flooding, while Newlang muck is described as loamy sand that is poorly drained with occasional ponding and flooding. Depth to the water table ranges from approximately

0 to more than 80 inches ground surface (bgs). These soil types are generally rated as being severely limited to moderately limited for local roads and building foundations, due to wetness and sloping.

A description and typical profile of the soils is outlined in Table 4-1 below:

Table 4-1: NRCS Soil Types and Series Typical Profile

Fort McCoy, WI

SOW 0034 Contract No. W911SA-15-D-0016

Soil Series Type

(Symbol) Depth 2

Typical Soil

Profile

Depth to

Water Table 2

Depth to

Bedrock 2

Tarr sand (561B)1

0 to 6 Sand

> 80 > 80 6 to 34 Sand

34 to 62 Sand

Newlang muck

(569A)1

0 to 3 Muck

0 to 6 > 80 3 to 6 Loamy Sand

6 to 22 Sand

22 to 63 Sand

Notes:

1. Parent material described as sandy residuum and/or alluvium derived from sandstone.

2. Depths are referenced to below ground surface (inches), Water table information consists of seasonal high depths.

5.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION AND TESTING

On November 15, 2017, Chosen Valley Testing, Inc. (CVT), under contract with Himalayan, advanced 2 borings (B-R29-1 and B-R29-2) at the Project Site. The borings were located on the north and south sides of the proposed structure. The borings were placed as close to the location of the proposed structure as possible and as suggested and approved by SEH (see Figure 2, Appendix A for Boring Location Map).

The borings were advanced to depths ranging from approximately 37 to 72 feet bgs until obstruction was encountered.

Fort McCoy, Wisconsin 5

Table 5-1 presents a summary of the boring data results.

Table 5-1: Test Boring Summary

Fort McCoy, WI

SOW 0034 Contract No. W911SA-15-D-0016

Boring

ID

Ground

Elevation 1

Thickness (inches) Boring

Depth 2

(ft)

Depth to

Groundwater 2

(ft)

Approximate

Groundwater

Elevation 1

(ft)

Peat Pavement

B-R29-1 907.69 12 --- 71.5 7.5 900.2

B-R29-2 911.39 -- --- 37.0 3.2 908.2

Notes:

1. Elevations are referenced to the North American Vertical Datum 1988(2007).

2. Depths measured below ground surface.

--- Not encountered during drilling.

The ground surface elevations at boring locations were obtained based on field survey conducted by Himalayan using a survey-grade GPS unit and connecting to the WISCORS (Wisconsin

Continually Operating Reference Station) network for Monroe County. Vertical datum is referenced to the North American Vertical Datum NAVD 88(2007).

The borings were performed with ATV-mounted drilling rig in general accordance with the specifications for the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) ASTM D-1586 (AASHTO T206) [Ref. 4], using hollow stem augers. Soil sampling was performed at every 2.5-foot interval from ground surface to 16 feet and at every 5-foot interval from 16 feet to the boring completion depths (see

Table 5-1), using a two-inch outside diameter by 1.375-inch inside diameter split-spoon sampler.

The split-spoon sampler was driven 18 inches into the soil using a 140-pound hammer. The blow counts were recorded for every six inches of penetration. The SPT Standard Penetration Resistance

(N-value), which is the total number of blows required to penetrate the last 12 inches, was recorded for each sample interval throughout the borings. The N value is an indication of the relative density of the soil.

During field activities, CVT visually classified the soils and prepared a field log of each boring.

The acquired soil samples were taken to Himalayan’s office for further examination and testing, where. each sample was examined and classified by Himalayan in accordance with the Unified

Soil Classification System (USCS).

Water level readings were obtained during drilling, immediately following completion of the boring. The water level readings are shown on the individual boring logs.

Upon completion of sampling and water level observations, all boreholes were properly abandoned

/ backfilled per the Wis. Adm. Code NR 141 [Ref. 5].

Fort McCoy, Wisconsin 6

Laboratory testing for natural water content determination was performed on all samples in accordance with ASTM Standard D-2216.

6.0 INVESTIGATION RESULTS

6.1 Field and Laboratory Testing

Soils obtained from the subsurface investigation consisted predominantly of cohesionless soils.

The SPT N-values for all soil samples were recorded during drilling and ranged from 4 to > 50.

The natural water content (w) for all soil samples ranged from 2 to 21 percent.

Refer to the Soil Boring Logs in Appendix B for field and laboratory testing results.

6.2 Subsurface Conditions

6.2.1 Soil Conditions

Based on the test borings, the subgrade soils encountered in the Project Area consisted mainly of the loess and loamy residuum deposits. A more detailed description of subsurface conditions encountered at each boring location is provided in Soil Boring Logs presented in Appendix B.

Below is a generalized description of soil conditions in the Project Area based on the soil types observed:

Peat: Peat was encountered in boring B-R29-1. The thickness of the peat was approximately 12 inches (see Table 5-1).

Loess and residuum: Present in both borings. The soils formed in loess and in sand or loamy residuum weathered from the underlying sandstone. The loess and loamy residuum deposits encountered in the borings generally consisted of fine sands of loose to very dense relative densities (N-values = 4 to >50).

Obstruction (auger/spoon refusal) was encountered in both borings at depths ranging from 37 to

71.5 feet bgs potentially due to bedrock (possible sandstone).

Generally, the soil survey data from the USDA-NRCS Web Soil Survey correlated very well with the predominant native soils (sands) encountered during this investigation.

Fort McCoy, Wisconsin 7

6.2.2 Groundwater Conditions

Groundwater was observed in both borings at depths ranging from approximately 3 to 8 feet bgs

(Elevations 908.2 to 900.2 feet) during drilling (see Table 5-1). The cave-in depths measured in borings immediately upon completion of drilling were from approximately 5 feet bgs, which is potentially the average depth of groundwater at the time of drilling.

It should be noted that the depth to groundwater can vary throughout the year, depending on several environmental factors that include seasonal variations in precipitation, infiltration, surface runoff and fluctuations in water levels associated with Suukjak Sep Creek.

7.0 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Himalayan has performed bearing resistance and settlement analysis (Load and Resistance Factor

Design) for the proposed precast reinforced concrete arch culvert structure. The results of our geotechnical analysis and recommendation are provided in the following sections:

7.1 Scour Considerations

The foundation for the new structure should be located at elevations below the maximum scour depth identified based on hydraulic analysis with the bottom of the footing placed at the minimum standard depth of 4 feet below the channel flow line elevation [Ref. 6, 7]. Based on the proposed plans, steel sheet piles will be used on the front side of the culvert foundations during excavation to reduce wetland/stream impacts and then left in place for scour protection.

7.2 Culvert Foundation Recommendations

Considering the proposed footing base elevation (approximately 897 feet) and subsurface soils data from borings, the foundation support soils within the Depth of Significant Influence (depth below the base of footing to which significant applied stresses are experienced by the soil) consist of very loose to loose sands. Considering their high compressibility potential and low shear strength, these soils are considered unsuitable for foundation support. It is recommended that these soils be undercut and replaced with compacted structure fill.

The following earthwork involving both cut and fill is anticipated for reestablishment of the footing grades and to construct a foundation pad area that is stable and is most likely to settle uniformly:

• Both soil excavation and backfill will be needed in and around borings B-R29-1 and B-

R29-1.

Fort McCoy, Wisconsin 8

• We recommend that the loose to very loose sands encountered within 2 to 4 feet of the estimated footing base elevations be undercut/removed and replaced by compacted structure (granular) backfill for adequate foundation support. See Section 8.4 for guidance on compacted structure backfill.

Table 7-1 summarizes the estimated depths of cut and fill anticipated for reestablishment of the footing grades for support of the proposed culvert:

Table 7-1: Cut and Fill for Footing Grades

Test

Boring

Approximate

Ground Surface

Elevation

(ft)

Estimated

Footing Base

Elevation

(ft)

Approximate

Remedial

Excavation Base

Elevation

(ft)1

Estimated Cut and Fill for Establishment of

Footing Grades

(ft)

Cut Fill

B-R29-1 907.7 897.0

895.0 2 2

B-R29-2 911.4 893.0 4 4

Notes:

1. Actual footing base elevations must be verified for proper bearing during construction.

It is recommended that the compacted structure backfill or other equivalent engineer-approved materials) be used directly below the elevation of the bottom of the footings as sub-foundation course/granular sub-footing. The backfill material should be compacted to provide uniform support over the full length and width of the footing. This will provide a consistent and stable working platform and will also avoid/minimize the potential for any differential settlement. See

Section 8.4 for guidance on structure backfill.

The structure backfill should be placed from an exposed subgrade consisting of stable native sands compacted to at least 95% of the modified Proctor density (ASTM D1557).

The actual vertical and lateral extent of undercut/removal and replacement (remedial treatment) needed below the footing base elevations (footing grades) should be verified by proof-rolling.

7.2.1 Bearing Resistance

A maximum factored bearing resistance of 2,500 psf can be used for design of shallow foundation

(spread foundation consisting of continuous strip footing) for the proposed arch culvert bearing on compacted structure fill placed from a stable subgrade of compacted native sands. The value of qR is based on a geotechnical resistance factor of 0.55 per AASHTO Table 11.5.7-1 [Ref. 8].

Fort McCoy, Wisconsin 9

A value of 0.45 may be used for the coefficient of sliding friction between concrete base of the culvert footing and granular soils consisting of structure backfill.

7.2.2 Settlement

After the remedial treatment of unsuitable soils as described in Section 7.2, the differential settlement of the foundation soils along the new culvert is anticipated to be 0.5 inches or less. We estimate the settlement is suitable for the construction of the proposed culvert structure.

It is recommended that the walls of the proposed structure be designed to include properly spaced vertical control joints to minimize the effects of differential settlement.

7.3 Wingwall Foundation Recommendations

Based on the design plans and cross section drawings provided by SEH, it is our understanding that the wingwalls are soil dependent (supported independently from the proposed three-sided structure). The wingwalls will be supported on spread footings (continuous strip footings) consisting of precast concrete foundations.

7.3.1 Bearing Resistance

It is anticipated that the wingwall footings would be laid out to be constructed on the same plane as the proposed arch culvert footings. Therefore, the footing base elevations for the proposed arch culvert and wingwalls are anticipated to be at approximately the same elevations and below the maximum scour depth (see Section 7-1).

The estimated depths of cut and fill anticipated for reestablishment of the footing grades provided in Table 7-1 for support of the culvert can be used to achieve the footing grades for wingwalls support.

A maximum factored bearing resistance of 2,500 psf can be used for design of spread footings

(continuous strip footings) for wingwalls bearing on compacted structure fill placed from a stable subgrade of compacted native sands (based on a geotechnical resistance factor of 0.55 per

AASHTO Table 11.5.7-1 [Ref. 8].

7.3.2 Settlement

Provided the remedial treatments are performed as indicated in this report, the total post-construction settlement and total differential settlement for wingwalls are not expected to exceed

2 inches and 1:500 (inch/inch), respectively. We estimate the settlement is suitable for construction of the precast wingwalls.

Fort McCoy, Wisconsin 10

7.3.3 Lateral Earth Pressure Parameters

The load combinations and load factors for use in the design of wingwalls should be in accordance with LRFD AASHTO Tables 3.4.1-1 and 3.4.1-2) [Ref. 8].

According to WisDOT Bridge Manual, the culvert wingwalls are designed using a 1 foot surcharge height, a backfill unit weight of 120 pcf, and the coefficient of lateral earth pressure used in design of wingwalls should be based on an at rest condition (K0) [Ref. 6].

Table 7-2 provides soil parameters that may be used for earth pressure calculations on wingwalls with a level backfill surface backfilled with structure (granular) material (see Section 8.4).

Table 7-2: Lateral Earth Pressure Parameters

Fort McCoy, WI

SOW 0034 Contract No. W911SA-15-D-0016

Parameters c

(psf) ϕ

(deg.)

γ

(pcf) K0 Ka Kp

Structure Backfill 0 30 120 0.50 0.33 3.00

Notes:

c = cohesion; ϕ = angle of internal friction; γ = Moist Unit Weight, K0 = At-Rest Earth Pressure Coefficient; Ka = Active Earth

Pressure Coefficient; Kp = Passive Earth Pressure Coefficient

A value of 0.45 may be used for the coefficient of sliding friction between concrete base of wingwalls and granular soils consisting of structure fill described in Section 8.4) [Ref. 9].

A perimeter drainage system consisting of pipe wrapped underdrain should be provided at the base of the wingwalls in order to prevent/alleviate the buildup of potential excessive hydrostatic pressures and frost pressures. The underdrain should have a minimum slope of 0.5% and should discharge to Suukjak Sep Creek. The final site grades should be sloped to permanently direct any collected rain water, groundwater, or surface run off away from the back of the wingwalls.

8.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

8.1 Site Preparation

Vegetation, peat, surface topsoil including any existing marshy marginal soils and existing debris should be cleared and stripped where the proposed culvert and wingwalls will be placed. The site should be prepared in accordance with Section 201 of the WisDOT Standard Specifications for

Highway and Structure Construction (Standard Specifications) [Ref. 10]. Any unstable or unsuitable materials should be removed and replaced as described in Sections 7.2 and 7.3.

Fort McCoy, Wisconsin 11

8.2 Excavation

The excavations should be performed in accordance with local, state and federal regulations. If excavations are ≥ 4 feet, the slopes should be graded, benched or braced in accordance with the latest Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) safety standards and requirements for temporary side slopes. Allowances should be made for any surcharge loads adjacent to the excavation areas. Movement of adjacent soils near the edge of and into excavation areas should be prevented and the potential effects of ground movements upon nearby utilities (if any) should be considered during construction.

The contractor is solely responsible for designing and constructing stable excavations. The temporary soil retention system shall be designed by the Contractor (or as directed by the

Engineer). The information provided in this section should not be interpreted to mean that

Himalayan is assuming responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor’s activities.

Construction site safety is the sole responsibility of the contractor, who should also be solely responsible for the means, methods, and sequencing of construction operations.

8.3 Dewatering and Groundwater Control

Free water was encountered in test borings at approximately 3 to 8 feet bgs. Considering the shallow groundwater (Elevations 908.2 to 900.2 feet), the footing/remedial trench bottom elevations (897 to 893 feet), sandy soils and stream conditions, water should be anticipated in foundation excavations during construction. Temporary dewatering systems consisting of sump and pump systems can be utilized to remove water from excavations. This type of groundwater control should include consideration of a filter to prevent migration of fines and possible development of piping in the soil being drained. This method is generally effective where the groundwater head must be lowered by no more than a few feet [Ref. 11].

Where excavations penetrate to water bearing granular soils and adjacent to lower lying stream channel areas more extensive dewatering should be anticipated. Well points should be considered where lowering of the groundwater table is required or desirable to a greater degree.

Positive site drainage should be maintained to reduce infiltration of surface water around the excavation perimeter. The site grades should be sloped to direct any collected rain water, groundwater, or surface run off away from the construction areas.

8.4 Filling and Backfilling

The fill material should be free of organic matter and debris and should be compacted in accordance with the requirements of Section 207 of the Standard Specifications. The structure fill

Fort McCoy, Wisconsin 12 utilized to attain the final design elevations should satisfy the requirements of Section 210 of the

Standard Specifications. The backfill materials should be as per the Standard Specifications.

The lateral extent of the over-excavation of any poor soil and subsequent placement and compaction of structure backfill should be at least equal to or greater than the depth of over-excavation below the finished subgrade. The native sands present below the structure backfill

(foundation subgrade) should be scarified to at least 1 foot and compacted to at least 95% of the

Modified Proctor density (ASTM D1557) prior to the placement of structure backfill.

8.5 Earthwork Operations

The required earthwork can be accomplished with conventional equipment. Moisture and traffic will cause deterioration of exposed subgrade soils. The construction contractor should take measures to prevent erosion of the exposed subgrade due to water or surface runoff. A compacted subgrade will minimize water runoff erosion.

The fine sandy soils encountered at the Project Site are relatively sensitive to disturbances caused by construction traffic and changes in moisture content. Increases in the moisture content of the soil can cause significant reduction in soil strength and bearing resistance. Additionally, soils that become wet may be slow to dry causing significant delays of the grading and compaction activities.

Therefore, consideration should be given to perform earthwork and foundation activities during dry weather. Earth moving operations should be scheduled to not coincide with excessive cold or wet weather (early spring, late fall or winter). Any soil allowed to freeze or soften due to standing water should be removed. Wet weather can cause problems with subgrade compaction.

8.6 Geotextiles

A geotextile fabric having the minimum physical properties of WisDOT designated Type SAS

(Subgrade Aggregate Separator) as outlined in Section 645 of the Standard Specifications may be used (optional) on top of the exposed subgrade to separate the structural backfill from the underlying subgrade of loose sands. Construction traffic should not be allowed directly over these soils. The structure backfill should be placed over the geotextile and compacted thus providing a compact and stable working platform for the construction equipment. The geotextile fabric should be wrapped around the structural backfill to prevent/minimize potential contamination by fines from the side walls.

8.7 Construction Inspection

It will be important to observe the soils exposed during construction to determine the actual extent of the undercutting and backfill that will be needed. Soils should be verified in the field at the time of construction and the actual extents of any remedial treatment will be determined at this time. If

Fort McCoy, Wisconsin 13 soils with less than adequate bearing strength are noted at the foundation level during construction, the weaker soils encountered at the base of the footings should be undercut to reach suitable bearing soils, and the undercut area filled with an approved compacted structural backfill material

(see Section 8.4).

It is recommended that a qualified soils engineer or representative be retained to inspect the exposed subgrade, verify soils in the field, inspect/approve footing excavations monitor earthwork operations, and provide material inspection services during construction. The footing trenches should be observed, the support soils tested and approved, and the foundations constructed as soon as possible to avoid exposing the supporting soils to wetting and drying. All footings must be adequately protected from adverse weather conditions during construction.

It should be noted that the foundation support soils within the depth of significant influence (DOSI) for the culvert structure and wingwalls must be tested/approved prior to foundation construction to ensure that soils can support the design loads and are consistent with the soils discussed in this report

8.8 Erosion Control

Vegetation should be established as soon as possible following excavation, grading, and compaction in order to obtain temporary and permanent stabilization of the project sites during and after construction. Erosion control methods should be implemented according to WisDOT guidelines and WDNR Conservation Practice Standards.

9.0 LIMITATIONS

Himalayan prepared this report for Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. to use as part of the evaluation of subsurface conditions in the Project Site. This report was prepared in accordance with the existing U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) guidelines and currently accepted geotechnical engineering practices as conducted within the site region by similar qualified consultants. The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained from the soil borings performed at the indicated locations and from any other information discussed in this report. This report does not reflect any variations that may occur between borings or across the site. In addition, the soil samples cannot be relied on to accurately reflect the strata variations that usually exist between sampling locations. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until construction. If variations appear evident, it will be necessary to reevaluate the recommendations of the report. In addition, it is recommended that Himalayan Consultants, LLC be retained to perform construction observation and thereby provide a complete professional geotechnical engineering service through the observational method.

Fort McCoy, Wisconsin 14

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No other warranties, either expressed or implied, are intended or made. In the event that any 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 the changes are reviewed, and the conclusions of this report modified or verified in writing by the geotechnical engineer. Also note that Himalayan Consultants, LLC is not responsible for any claims, damages, or liability associated with any other party’s interpretation of this report’s subsurface data or reuse of the report’s subsurface data or engineering analyses without the express written authorization of Himalayan Consultants, LLC.

10.0 REFERENCES

1. B. A. Brown (1988) Bedrock Geology of Wisconsin – West Central Sheet. Wisconsin

Geological and Natural History Survey Map 88-7.

2. D. M. Mickelson; J. C. Knox; L. Clayton (May 1982). Glaciation of the Driftless Area: An

Evaluation of the Evidence. University of Wisconsin. Field Trip Guide – Quarternary History of the Driftless Area.

3. United States Department of Agriculture - Natural Resources Conservation Service. Web Soil

Survey of Monroe County, Wisconsin.

URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx

4. ASTM International (2011). ASTM D1586 - Standard Test Method for Standard Penetration

Test (SPT) and Split Barrel Sampling of Soils.

5. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (March 2011). Wisconsin Administrative Code

NR 141.

6. Wisconsin Department of Transportation Bridge Manual (July 2017). Chapter 36-Box

Culverts.

7. Wisconsin Department of Transportation Bridge Manual (July 2017). Chapter 14-Retaining

Walls.

8. AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (2016). Section 11-Walls, Abutments and

Piers.

9. United States Navy Naval Facilities Engineering Command (1986). Foundations and

Structures.

http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx

Fort McCoy, Wisconsin 15

10. Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Standard Specifications for Highway and Structure

Construction, 2018 Edition.

11. U. S. Department of Defense - United Facilities Criteria (January 2004). Dewatering and

Groundwater Control.

APPENDICES

Appendix A Figures

• Figure 1: Project Area Location Map

• Figure 2: Boring Location Map

Appendix B Soil Boring Logs

• Unified Soil Classification System

• Symbols and Terminology

APPENDIX A

MAPS AND FIGURES

Figure

Himalayan Consultants, LLC Engineers and Hydrogeologists W156 N11357 Pilgrim Road Germantown, Wisconsin 53022 Phone: (262) 502-0066 Fax: (262) 502-0066

Boring Location Map SOW Contract No:

W911SA-15-D-0016

Water Crossing Range 29

Graphic Scale

1 inch = 200 feet

Proposed Structure

New Segment

Suukjak Sep Creek

Range29 Acce ss R oad

Range29 Maintenance Road

Proposed Stream Crossing

Figure

Himalayan Consultants, LLC Engineers and Hydrogeologists W156 N11357 Pilgrim Road Germantown, Wisconsin 53022 Phone: (262) 502-0066 Fax: (262) 502-0066

Boring Location Map SOW Contract No:

W911SA-15-D-0016

Water Crossing Range 29

Graphic Scale

1 inch = 200 feet

LEGEND

Boring (B-X)

B-R29-1

B-R29-2

New Segment

Suukjak Sep Creek

Range29 Acce ss R oad

Range29 Maintenance Road

Proposed Stream Crossing

APPENDIX B

SOIL BORING LOGS

AUGER

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

1.0

6-4-5 (9)

3-3-3 (6)

4-4-5 (9)

4-5-5 (10)

3-3-4 (7)

3-4-3 (7)

12" Peat

SAND: Loose to very dense, gray to brown, moist to wet, fine to medium, trace silt, trace gravel

906.7

NW123W

Water Crossing Range 29

11/15/17

COUNTY:

DRILLING CONTRACTOR PROJECT NO:

DRILL RIG:

1/4 SECTION: 1/4 1/4 SECTION: SURFACE ELEVATION:

STREAMBED ELEVATION:

LATITUDE:

COORDINATE SYSTEM:

LONGITUDE:

VERTICAL DATUM:

18N

11/15/17

Monroe

TOWNSHIP:OFFSET

Choosen Valley Testing

CME-550

3.25 in

907.7 ft

Automatic

418200.3904 661873.2534

CONSULTANT PROJECT NO:CONSULTANT:

ROADWAY NAME:

DATE STARTED:

LOG QC BY:

LOGGED BY:

CREW CHIEF:

DRILLING CONTRACTOR:

HOLE SIZE:

HAMMER TYPE:

SECTION:

NORTHING:

SE

DATE COMPLETED:

Himalayan Consultants, LLC 17021.044

HORIZONTAL DATUM:

EASTING:

RANGE:STATION

NA

PROJECT NAME:

WATER LEVEL AT COMPLETION: NMR CAVE - IN DEPTH AFTER 0 HOURS: NMR

NOTES: 1) Stratification lines between soil types represent the approximate boundary; gradual transition between in-situ soil layers should be expected.

2) NE = Not Encountered; NMR = No Measurement Recorded

WATER ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING: 7.5ft. WET

DRY

WET

DRY

CAVE - IN DEPTH AT COMPLETION: 5.1ft.

WATER LEVEL & CAVE-IN OBSERVATION DATA

B ou ld er s

Notes

D ril lin g

M et ho d

P la st ic ity In de x

Li qu id L im it

M oi st ur e

G ra ph ic

R E

C O

V E

R Y in

(R

Q D

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E N

U M

B E

R

D ep th (f t)

S tr en gt h Q p (t sf

B

LO

W C

O U

N T

S (N

V A

LU

E

Soil / Rock Description and Geological Origin for

Each Major Unit / Comments

B-R29-1BORING ID:

WISDOT PROJECT ID:

PAGE NO:WISDOT STRUCTURE ID:

Himalayan Consultants, LLC W156 N11357 Pilgrim Road Germantown, WI 53022

Y

P R

O

JE

C T

S \2

7\

1.

F

O R

T M

C C

O Y

B R

ID

G

E S

S

E H

G

E O

T E

C H

\G

IN

T \F

O R

T M

C C

O Y

B R

ID

G

E S

R

A N

G E

9.

G P

J

W at er C ro ss in g

R an ge

/8 /1

U S

C S

A

A S

H T

O

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

4-6-6 (12)

4-5-9 (14)

3-4-6 (10)

4-6-10 (16)

4-7-11 (18)

3-4-10 (14)

SAND: Loose to very dense, gray to brown, moist to wet, fine to medium, trace silt, trace gravel

B ou ld er s

Notes

D ril lin g

M et ho d

P la st ic ity In de x

Li qu id L im it

M oi st ur e

G ra ph ic

R E

C O

V E

R Y in

(R

Q D

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E N

U M

B E

R

D ep th (f t)

S tr en gt h Q p (t sf

B

LO

W C

O U

N T

S (N

V A

LU

E

Soil / Rock Description and Geological Origin for

Each Major Unit / Comments

B-R29-1BORING ID:

WISDOT PROJECT ID:

PAGE NO:WISDOT STRUCTURE ID:

Himalayan Consultants, LLC W156 N11357 Pilgrim Road Germantown, WI 53022

Y

P R

O

JE

C T

S \2

7\

1.

F

O R

T M

C C

O Y

B R

ID

G

E S

S

E H

G

E O

T E

C H

\G

IN

T \F

O R

T M

C C

O Y

B R

ID

G

E S

R

A N

G E

9.

G er C ro ss in g

R an ge

/8 /1

U S

C S

A

A S

H

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

68.0

71.5

4-5-11 (16)

4-8-17 (25)

11-17-20 (37)

4-10-11 (21)

21-50

SAND: Loose to very dense, gray to brown, moist to wet, fine to medium, trace silt, trace gravel

SANDSTONE: Very dense, light gray, moist

End of Boring at 71.5 ft.

839.7

836.2

B ou ld er s

Notes

D ril lin g

M et ho d

P la st ic ity In de x

Li qu id L im it

M oi st ur e

G ra ph ic

R E

C O

V E

R Y in

(R

Q D

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E N

U M

B E

R

D ep th (f t)

S tr en gt h Q p (t sf

B

LO

W C

O U

N T

S (N

V A

LU

E

Soil / Rock Description and Geological Origin for

Each Major Unit / Comments

B-R29-1BORING ID:

WISDOT PROJECT ID:

PAGE NO:WISDOT STRUCTURE ID:

Himalayan Consultants, LLC W156 N11357 Pilgrim Road Germantown, WI 53022

Y

P R

O

JE

C T

S \2

7\

1.

F

O R

T M

C C

O Y

B R

ID

G

E S

S

E H

G

E O

T E

C H

\G

IN

T \F

O R

T M

C C

O Y

B R

ID

G

E S

R

A N

G E

9.

G er C ro ss in g

R an ge

/8 /1

U S

C S

A

A S

H

AUGER

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

20.0

2-3-4 (7)

4-5-5 (10)

4-6-5 (11)

5-4-7 (11)

3-4-4 (8)

2-2-2 (4)

SAND: Loose to medium dense, gray to brown, moist to wet, fine to medium, trace silt, trace gravel

891.4

NW123W

Water Crossing Range 29

11/15/17

COUNTY:

DRILLING CONTRACTOR PROJECT NO:

DRILL RIG:

1/4 SECTION: 1/4 1/4 SECTION: SURFACE ELEVATION:

STREAMBED ELEVATION:

LATITUDE:

COORDINATE SYSTEM:

LONGITUDE:

VERTICAL DATUM:

18N

11/15/17

Monroe

TOWNSHIP:OFFSET

Choosen Valley Testing

CME-550

3.25 in

911.39 ft

Automatic

417974.7443 661895.3974

CONSULTANT PROJECT NO:CONSULTANT:

ROADWAY NAME:

DATE STARTED:

LOG QC BY:

LOGGED BY:

CREW CHIEF:

DRILLING CONTRACTOR:

HOLE SIZE:

HAMMER TYPE:

SECTION:

NORTHING:

SE

DATE COMPLETED:

Himalayan Consultants, LLC 17021.044

HORIZONTAL DATUM:

EASTING:

RANGE:STATION

NA

PROJECT NAME:

WATER LEVEL AT COMPLETION: NMR CAVE - IN DEPTH AFTER 0 HOURS: NMR

NOTES: 1) Stratification lines between soil types represent the approximate boundary; gradual transition between in-situ soil layers should be expected.

2) NE = Not Encountered; NMR = No Measurement Recorded

WATER ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING: 3.2ft. WET

DRY

WET

DRY

CAVE - IN DEPTH AT COMPLETION: 5.1ft.

WATER LEVEL & CAVE-IN OBSERVATION DATA

B ou ld er s

Notes

D ril lin g

M et ho d

P la st ic ity In de x

Li qu id L im it

M oi st ur e

G ra ph ic

R E

C O

V E

R Y in

(R

Q D

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E N

U M

B E

R

D ep th (f t)

S tr en gt h Q p (t sf

B

LO

W C

O U

N T

S (N

V A

LU

E

Soil / Rock Description and Geological Origin for

Each Major Unit / Comments

B-R29-2BORING ID:

WISDOT PROJECT ID:

PAGE NO:WISDOT STRUCTURE ID:

Himalayan Consultants, LLC W156 N11357 Pilgrim Road Germantown, WI 53022

Y

P R

O

JE

C T

S \2

7\

1.

F

O R

T M

C C

O Y

B R

ID

G

E S

S

E H

G

E O

T E

C H

\G

IN

T \F

O R

T M

C C

O Y

B R

ID

G

E S

R

A N

G E

9.

G er C ro ss in g

R an ge

/8 /1

U S

C S

A

A S

H

SS

SS

SS

SS

SS

30.0

35.0

37.0

2-3-4 (7)

4-6-7 (13)

4-7-11 (18)

50/0"

CLAYEY SAND: Loose, brown, wet, trace gravel

SAND: Medium dense, brown, wet, fine to medium, trace gravel

SANDSTONE: Very dense, light gray, moist

End of Boring at 37.0 ft.

881.4

876.4

874.4

B ou ld er s

Notes

D ril lin g

M et ho d

P la st ic ity In de x

Li qu id L im it

M oi st ur e

G ra ph ic

R E

C O

V E

R Y in

(R

Q D

S A

M P

LE

T

Y P

E N

U M

B E

R

D ep th (f t)

S tr en gt h Q p (t sf

B

LO

W C

O U

N T

S (N

V A

LU

E

Soil / Rock Description and Geological Origin for

Each Major Unit / Comments

B-R29-2BORING ID:

WISDOT PROJECT ID:

PAGE NO:WISDOT STRUCTURE ID:

Himalayan Consultants, LLC W156 N11357 Pilgrim Road Germantown, WI 53022

Y

P R

O

JE

C T

S \2

7\

1.

F

O R

T M

C C

O Y

B R

ID

G

E S

S

E H

G

E O

T E

C H

\G

IN

T \F

O R

T M

C C

O Y

B R

ID

G

E S

R

A N

G E

9.

G er C ro ss in g

R an ge

/8 /1

U S

C S

A

A S

H

Symbols and Terminology

Symbols

Drilling and Sampling Field and Laboratory Tests

HAS = Hollow Stem Auger

HA = Hand Auger

SS = Split Spoon Sampler

2ST = 2” diameter Thin-Walled Tube Sample

3ST = 3” diameter Thin-Walled Tube Sample

NX = Rock Core 2-1/8” diameter

AS = Auger Sample

WS = Wash Sample

PTS = Peat Sample

PS = Pitcher Sample

NR = No Recovery

PMT = Borehole Pressuremeter Test

VS = Vane Shear Test

WPT = Water Pressure Test

WOH = Weight of Hammer

WOR = Weight of Rod

= Water Level

NW = No Water Encountered

PID = Photo-Ionization Reading, parts per million qest = Pocket Penetrometer Reading, tons/sq.ft.

W = Moisture Content, %

LL = Liquid Limit, %

PL = Plastic Limit, %

SL = Shrinkage Limit, %

LI = Loss on Ignition, %

DD = Dry Unit Weight, lbs/cu.ft.

pH = Measure of Alkalinity or Acidity

FS = Free Swell, % γ = Moist Unit Weight, lbs/cu.ft.

Terminology

Grain Size Relative Proportion

Soil Fraction Size Range Proportional Term % by Weight

Boulders > 12” Trace 0% - 5%

Cobbles 3” – 12” Little 5% - 12%

Gravel Some 12% - 35%

Coarse 3/4” – 3” And 35% - 50%

Fine #4 Sieve 3/4” Plasticity

Sand Term Plasticity Index

Coarse #4 - #10 Sieve None to Slight 0 – 4

Medium #10 - #40 Sieve Slight 5 – 7

Fine #40 - #200 Sieve Medium 8 – 22

Silt 100% passing #200 Sieve & > 0.005 mm Medium to Very High Over 22

Clay 100 % passing #200 Sieve & < 0.005 mm

Relative Density Consistency

Term “N” Value Term qest – tons/sq.ft.

Very Loose 0-4 Very Soft 0.00 – 0.25

Loose 4-10 Soft 0.25 – 0.50

Medium Dense 10-30 Medium 0.50 – 1.00

Dense 30-50 Stiff 1.00 – 2.00

Very Dense Over 50 Very Stiff 2.00 – 4.00

Hard Over 4.00