01 99 90 6 Underwood Geotechnical Borings.pdf

AECOM 616.942.9600 tel 5555 Glenwood Hills Pkwy, Suite 300 616.940.4396 fax

Grand Rapids, Michigan 49512

Final Geotechnical Engineering Report

Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigations U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – Detroit District

Delivery Order No.: 0028 Contract No.: W911XK-09-D-0015 AECOM Project No.: 60304884 Date: November 20, 2013

Prepared by:

AECOM

Aaron M. Humphrey, P.E.

Senior Project Engineer

(616) 940-4451

Reviewed by:

AECOM

Paul A. Tarvin, P.E.

Vice President

(414) 944-6080

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 2

Contents

1.0 Introduction

2.0 Authorization and Purpose

3.0 Scope of Services

4.0 Procedures

4.1 Soil Borings

4.2 Borehole Survey

4.3 Laboratory Testing

5.0 Exploration Results

5.1 Area Geology

5.2 Soil Conditions

5.3 Water Conditions

6.0 Engineering Properties

6.1 Engineering Properties UC-01-13

6.2 Engineering Properties UC-02-13

6.3 Engineering Properties UC-03-13, UC-03A-13

6.4 Engineering Properties UC-04-13

6.5 Engineering Properties UC-05-13

6.6 Engineering Properties UC-06-13

7.0 General Qualifications

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 3

TABLES

Table 1: Boring Location Summary

FIGURES

Figure 1: Boring Location Plan

APPENDICES

Appendix A – AECOM General Notes

AECOM Soil Classification System

AECOM Field and Laboratory Procedures

AECOM Standard Boring Log Procedures

Appendix B – Final Boring Logs

Field Boring Logs

Appendix C – Laboratory Summary Sheet

Atterberg Limits Test Results

Gradation Test Results

Specific Gravity Test Results

CU Triaxial Compression Test Results

Appendix D – Photograph Log

Appendix E – Excerpts from EM1110-1-1905

Appendix F - MMSD CT 5/6 Cross Town Collector System Geotechnical Study

Geotechnical Data Table

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 1

60304884 - Underwood Creek FINAL.doc

1.0 Introduction

According to the United States Army Corps of Engineers – Detroit District, the following paragraphs provide background information for the project:

“The Underwood Creek was straightened and lined with concrete in 1971. The channel is trapezoidal with a 40-foot wide bottom and 2:1 bank slopes with an average water depth of 4 to 6 feet. These changes have degraded fish and invertebrate habitat. The proposed project includes concrete removal and channel restoration, to include construction of retaining walls along the channel.

The purpose of the work is to determine the type, nature, engineering properties and the elevation of their occurrence, of the subsurface materials within the Underwood Creek project area. The results will be used for slope stability analysis and/or retaining wall design along the channel banks.

The project site is located on the Underwood Creek between Wee Lane and North 104th Street on the Underwood Creek in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.”

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 2

2.0 Authorization and Purpose

The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) engaged AECOM to perform soil borings and laboratory testing to obtain geotechnical information needed for the design of the project.

The project was presented by USACE to AECOM in a Request for Proposal (RFP) and scope of work dated May 24, 2013. The contract was awarded on July 24, 2013 as task order 0028 under AECOM’s IDIQ contract W911XK-09-D-0015. AECOM subcontracted the drilling services to Subsurface Exploration Services, LLC (SES) out of Green Bay, Wisconsin.

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 3

3.0 Scope of Services

The AECOM services were completed in general accordance with the Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation Scope of Work (SOW) dated May 24, 2013. The Scope of Work included, but was not limited to, the following tasks:

preparing a Quality Control Plan (QCP), and a Hazard Analysis and Accident Prevention Plan (APP);

staking the boring locations in the field;

obtaining utility clearance prior to the performance of the borings;

mobilizing a truck mounted drilling rig (subcontracted to SES) to the project site;

obtaining representative split spoon and relatively undisturbed Shelby tube soil samples generally at continuous intervals in the upper 15 feet of borings and at 2.5-foot intervals at greater depths in general accordance with ASTM standards to approximate depths of 40 feet;

restoring the boring sites to near pre-boring conditions;

recording the location and elevation of the borings using a handheld GPS device;

observing soil and groundwater conditions while drilling and sampling and preparing field logs documenting drilling methods, SPT results, soil condition observations, and other pertinent geotechnical-related observations;

performing laboratory testing on representative samples and preparing final geotechnical boring logs using gINT software;

preparing a draft geotechnical engineering report summarizing the field explorations, soil conditions, laboratory results, and recommended engineering properties; and, preparing this final geotechnical engineering report to reflect comments made to the draft report by USACE.

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 4

4.0 Procedures

4.1 Soil Borings

A total of six (6) soil borings were advanced at the project site by Subsurface Exploration Services (SES) under subcontract to AECOM using a truck mounted Diedrich D-50 rotary drill rig. An AECOM field engineer was on site during the subsurface exploration program to observe the collected samples and log the boreholes.

The project was originally planned to have a total of nine (9) soil borings. Following AECOM’s initial site visit and co-ordination with USACE, it was determined that several of the boring locations were inaccessible. The boring program was then modified by USACE to include six (6) borings which were accessible with drilling equipment and without clearing and grubbing. In addition, the upper portion of boring UC-03-13 was redrilled as boring UC-03-13A to obtain soil samples in the upper 14 feet due to the samples being damaged during relocation of the drill rig to a different boring.

The borings were advanced using solid stem augers to a depth of approximately 10 feet, at which point a 4-inch isolation casing was installed and the borings were continued using a roller bit and rotary wash methods. Representative soil samples were obtained at continuous intervals in the upper 15 feet of the boring and at 2.5-foot intervals below 15 feet in general accordance with ASTM D 1586, "Standard Test Method for Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils" using an automatic hydraulic hammer.

Relatively undisturbed Shelby tube samples were taken in cohesive soils in general accordance with ASTM D1587 “Standard Practice for Thin Walled Tube Sampling”. The borings were advanced using these methods to approximately 14 to 40.5 feet below the ground surface. The soil borings were backfilled with auger cuttings and bentonite pellets upon completion.

The soil samples were returned to the AECOM laboratory in Vernon Hills, Illinois for testing as described later in this report. The results of these observations are shown on the final boring logs that are included in Appendix B. A copy of the AECOM Standard Boring Log, Field, and Laboratory Procedures are included in Appendix A. Photographs of the boring locations are included in Appendix D.

An AECOM field engineer was present during the drilling activities to prepare field logs documenting drilling methods, SPT results, soil conditions, groundwater measurements, and other pertinent geotechnical-related observations. It is important to note that the information included on the field logs is based on the initial interpretations of the soil conditions and soil types by the AECOM field representative.

These field logs were then used along with additional visual observations and the results of laboratory testing and laboratory classification for completing the final boring logs.

4.2 Borehole Survey

The USACE provided AECOM with a location map and coordinates of the original nine (and revised six) proposed soil boring locations. AECOM located the borings prior to drilling based on review of the figures.

Following the performance of the soil borings, AECOM use a hand-held GPS device to survey the final boring locations.

The soil boring locations are presented on Figure 1 and the coordinates are provided on Table 1.

4.3 Laboratory Testing

Laboratory strength and index tests were completed on selected soil samples to characterize the physical properties of the soils encountered in the soil borings. The table below outlines the laboratory tests and corresponding ASTM designation completed by AECOM:

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 5

Laboratory Testing Program Summary

Test Name Designation Proposed Number of

Tests

Completed Number of Tests

Visual Classification ASTM D 2488 60 103

Moisture Content ASTM D 2216 128 98

Atterberg Limits ASTM D 4318 16 17

Combined Analysis ASTM D 422 16 16

Specific Gravity ASTM D 854 9 10

CU Triaxial Test ASTM D4767

9 12

The laboratory testing results are included in Appendix C.

In conjunction with the laboratory testing program, all of the samples were classified in the field in general accordance with the AECOM Soil Classification System. These descriptions and estimated group symbols are in general conformance with the Unified Soil Classification System which serves as the basis for the AECOM Soil Classification System, and are included on the soil boring logs. A brief explanation of the classification of soil samples is included in the Appendix A. The laboratory test results are included within Appendix C of this report.

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 6

5.0 Exploration Results

5.1 Area Geology

The soil deposits in the Milwaukee area have been studied extensively and have been published in numerous reports prepared on behalf of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) for their deep tunnel project. These studies were commissioned in the 1980s and 1990s. One such study for the Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) characterizes the site geology as follows:

“The soil deposits overlying bedrock in Milwaukee County range from a few to over 250 feet in thickness.

In general, these deposits can be differentiated into soils formed by continental glaciation and soils formed by recent fluvial deposition. The glacial soils were deposited by a series of glaciers that advanced out of the Lake Michigan basin, and in the proglacial lakes and streams associated with the glaciers.

These soils were deposited about 13,000 to 15,000 years ago and are present throughout the CSO study area. The postglacial soils were deposited in streams and shallow estuaries during a major fluctuation in the water level of ancestral Lake Michigan. These soils were deposited within the last 6,000 years and are present in the downstream reaches of the major river valleys in the CSO study area.

In general, the glacial soils consist predominately of till and proglacial lake sediment….Till 2 is the most common till. It is the surficial soil in most places within the CSO study area and present in the subsurface throughout.

Lacustrine sand and silt and outwash are the more common proglacial lake sediments in the subsurface along the lower Menomonee River valley and in the harbor area. Lacustrine silt and clay is more common in most other areas.

Postglacial soil units are found only along the major rivers in the CSO study area….Alluvial soils are present in the upper parts of the river valleys, as the surficial soil, and below and within the estuarine soil in the lower parts of the valley. Along the Milwaukee and Menomonee Rivers, the alluvial soils are present in the lower reaches of the river and are obscured by channelization in the middle and upstream reaches of the study area….The soil materials that make up the alluvial unit were deposited in stream channels as point-bar and channel-lag deposits. They consist of very loose to medium dense, brown to gray, well to poorly graded, silt and sandy silt, to silty sand and gravel. When directly overlying glacial soils, alluvial deposits tend to be quite gravelly.”

The upper portion of the bedrock in the area of the subject site is typically a Silurian Age Dolomite of the Racine Formation. “The Racine Formation is a uniform, light gray, dense dolomite with bedding plane spacings that range from close to medium. There are occasional zones of very closely spaced thin shaly partings and finely vuggy rock.”

5.2 Soil Conditions

A generalized summary of the subsurface conditions encountered during the subsurface exploration program is discussed below. The geologic descriptions provided below are generalized and brief;

individual soil boring logs in Appendix B should be reviewed to determine the actual subsurface conditions at the individual boring locations. The conditions encountered are consistent with the previous regional studies described above.

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 7

Ground Surface Boring UC-03-13 had approximately twelve inches of topsoil beginning at the ground surface and boring UC-02-13 had approximately 10 inches of concrete at the ground surface. The other borings had exposed soil beginning at the ground surface.

Fill Soils All of the soil borings encountered fill deposits near the ground surface. These fill soils consisted of a mixture of sandy and clayey soils and contained varying amounts of limestone fragments and concrete.

These soils are highly erratic in both composition and relative density. The following table provides a summary of the thicknesses and bottom elevation of fill deposits encountered:

Fill Thickness Summary

Boring Depth to Bottom of Fill (feet)

Elevation of

Bottom of Fill

(feet)

UC-01-13 4 671.7

UC-02-13 4.5 672.0

UC-03-13 8 661.3

UC-03A-13 6 663.3

UC-04-13 9 673.8

UC-05-13 9 676.5

UC-06-13 4 678.3

Silty Clay Silty clay with trace to little amounts of fine to coarse sand and fine to coarse gravel (USCS: CL) is a primary deposit at the site. These soils are proglacial lake sediments. The thickness, depth, and consistency of this deposit were highly erratic and no discernible trends in these variables are readily identifiable, as shown on the boring logs in Appendix B. These soils had layers of sandy soils of variable thickness and at variable depths within the overall soil matrix. These cohesive soils ranged in consistency from medium to hard with calibrated penetrometer readings ranging from 0.5 to greater than

4.5 tons per square foot (tsf). In general, these soils were very stiff with average calibrated penetrometer readings between 2 and 3 tons per square foot (tsf).

Sand/Silt/Gravel In addition to the silty clay stratum discussed above, there were various seams and layers of granular material encountered throughout the borings. The soils are alluvial deposits. These deposits ranged from primarily silty soils (USCS: ML), primarily sandy soils (USCS: SP, SM, SP-SM), and primarily gravelly soils (USCS: GP, GP-GM). The relative density of these soils ranged from very loose to very dense based on SPT-N values. In general, the soils were primarily sandy (USCS: SP, SM) and were typically medium dense. The boring logs in Appendix B should be consulted to evaluate the variability in these strata.

Bedrock/Boulder Bedrock was not cored in any of the borings; however, borings UC-05-13 and UC-06-13 encountered a boulder or possible bedrock at a depth of approximately 35.7 feet (elevation 649.8 feet) and 37.4 feet (elevation 644.9 feet), respectively. The boreholes were advanced approximately 1.3 to 1.5 feet through

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 8 the boulder or bedrock using a rock bit, but no coring was performed to evaluate the quality or composition of the rock.

5.3 Water Conditions

Groundwater was encountered before the start of wash rotary drilling methods at a depth of 3.1 feet in boring UC-02-13 to approximately 11.3 to 13.9 feet in borings UC-01-13, UC-04-13, and UC-05-13. No groundwater was observed in the other borings. These water level measurements were made under short term conditions and therefore may not be representative of the long term position of the groundwater table. Observation wells would need to be installed and monitored over a period of several weeks in order to determine the long term position of the water table. Additionally, both seasonal and annual fluctuations in groundwater levels will likely occur.

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 9

6.0 Engineering Properties

AECOM understands that the USACE intends to use the soil boring and laboratory testing data obtained from the investigation described in this report to perform slope stability and/or bearing capacity analyses at the project site. Given the large degree of variability in soil conditions observed in both the borings and the laboratory testing, AECOM recommends that the USACE use appropriate factors of safety to account for variability in the selection of soil properties.

A table summarizing the typical range in soil index and strength properties from the MMSD CT 5/6 Cross Town Collector System Geotechnical Study is provided in Appendix F. The following section provides AECOM’s recommendations for soil properties based on the results of the soil borings and the laboratory testing, and comparison with the CT 5/6 soil test program. The three primary material types are outlined below along with a discussion of methodologies used to establish soil properties for each boring profile. In general, strata changes of one‐foot thickness or less were omitted from the engineering property tabulations. The recommended properties at each of the boring locations are provided in the following subsections. In general, strata changes of one‐foot thickness or less were omitted from the engineering property tabulations.

Fill Soils: At the request of USACE, estimates of the strength of the fill soils have been made using the methods outlined below for Granular/Cohesionless soils and for cohesive soils, and adjusted to account for inherent variability in the fill deposits, where appropriate. We have provided estimates which we believe are conservative; however, caution must be used in the use of the soil properties and the actual soil conditions must be carefully observed during construction to evaluate the appropriateness of these recommendations.

Granular/Cohesionless Soils: The engineering properties of granular soils were primarily derived from SPT tests performed in the field and a limited amount of laboratory testing for moisture content and soil density. SPT‐N values which were obtained in the field were corrected to N60 values in general accordance with procedures outlined in manual EM 1110‐1‐1905 (30 October 1992) “Bearing Capacity of Soils”. This conversion was performed with the assumption that the automatic hammer used in the field had an efficiency of approximately 85% for the rod energy correction and the overburden correction was made in accordance with correction factors derived by Tokimatsu and Seed (1984).

Once N60 was obtained, the relative density (Dr) for each sample was estimated using the method of Gibbs and Holtz (1957). This estimation was performed using the field SPT‐N value corrected for energy, but without the overburden correction applied in accordance with the method. Using the relative density estimation, friction angles were estimated using the Peck, Hanson, and Thornburn (1974) correlations as outlined on Table 3‐1B of EM 1110‐1‐1905. Excerpts from EM 1110‐1‐1905 are included in Appendix E at the end of this report.

Unless otherwise noted, soil unit weights were estimated using engineering judgment and commonly observed values of unit weights for similar soils. Engineering judgment and engineering experience were used in recommendations for soil friction angle.

Cohesive Soils: The engineering properties of cohesive soils were primarily derived from the laboratory strength and index testing which was performed as well as field testing. The properties of cohesive soil deposits which were not subjected to laboratory testing are not presented.

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 10

6.1 Engineering Properties UC-01-13

The following properties are recommended for use in analyses at this location.

Layer Name/Depth

Elevation (ft) Recommended Engineering Properties

Notes

Top Bottom

Fill

USCS: SM

(0’‐4)

675.7 671.7 '= 30°

Estimated from empirical correlations based on SPT‐N values and engineering judgment. Note the fill soil is reported to contain concrete.

tot = 134 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table (Appendix F) for Fill Soil Deposits

Cohesionless Soils

USCS: SM,

ML, SP

(4’‐10’)

671.7 665.7 '= 36° tot = 138 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table (Appendix F) for Lacustrine Sand & Silt Deposits

USCS: SM,

ML, SP

(10’‐14’)

665.7 661.7 '= 31° tot = 138 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table

USCS: CL

(14’‐40.5’)

661.7 635.2 Avgtot = 132 pcf These parameters are based on average values from 4 CU Triaxial tests (12 points) conducted on silty clay samples throughout the project borings.

Effective Stress Envelope c’ = 437 psf

’= 29.3° Total Stress Envelope c = 710 psf

= 15.6°

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 11

6.2 Engineering Properties UC-02-13

Layer Name/Depth

Elevation (ft) Recommended Engineering Properties

Notes

Top Bottom

Fill (0’‐4.5’)

676.5 672 '= 33° and engineering judgment. Note the fill soil is reported to contain concrete.

tot = 134 pcf Estimated from engineering

USCS: SM

(4.5’‐7’)

672 669.5 '= 36° tot = 138 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table

(7’‐27.5’)

669.5 649 Avgtot = 132 pcf These parameters are based on average values from 4 CU Triaxial tests (12 points) conducted on silty clay samples throughout the project borings.

Effective Stress Envelope c’ = 437 psf

’= 29.3° Total Stress Envelope c = 710 psf

= 15.6°

Cohesionless Soils

USCS: CL‐ML,

SP, GP‐GC

(27.5’‐35’)

649 641.5 '= 38° tot = 138 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table

Silt Deposits.

(35’‐39.5’)

641.5 637 Avgtot = 132 pcf These parameters are based on average values from 4 CU Triaxial tests (12 points) conducted on silty clay samples throughout the project borings.

Effective Stress Envelope c’ = 437 psf

’= 29.3° Total Stress Envelope

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 12

6.3 Engineering Properties UC-03-13, UC-03A-13

Layer Name/Depth

Elevation (ft) Recommended Engineering Properties

Notes

Top Bottom

Fill

USCS: SP

(0’‐4’)

669.3 665.3 '= 33° and engineering judgment. Note the fill soil is reported to contain concrete.

tot = 134 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table (Appendix F) for Fill Soil Deposits

Fill

USCS: CL

(4’‐7’) (average)

665.3 662.3 '= 30° Su = 1000 psf

This parameter is estimated from empirical correlations for friction angle and engineering judgement, since the samples were too disturbed for calibrated penetrometer measurements. Note the fill soil is not reported to contain deleterious material.

tot = 134 pcf Estimated from engineering

USCS: SM

(7’‐10’)

662.3 659.3 '= 31° tot = 138 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table

(10’‐16.5’)

659.3 652.8 Avgtot = 132 pcf These parameters are based on average values from 4 CU Triaxial tests (12 points) conducted on silty clay samples throughout the project borings.

Effective Stress Envelope c’ = 437 psf

’= 29.3° Total Stress Envelope

(16.5’‐19’)

652.8 650.3 Avgtot = 125 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table (Appendix F) for Lacustrine Silt and Clay Deposits. Note this soil has extremely low blow counts and low Qp values. Values were selected from review of MMSD table by taking average values minus 1 standard deviation. Additional

Effective Stress Envelope c’ = 0 psf

’= 24°

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 13 testing may be needed to fully characterize this soil.

Total Stress Envelope c = 250 psf

= 0

Estimated from 1 calibrated penetrometer test.

USCS: ML

(19’‐24’)

650.3 645.3 '= 26° tot = 125 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table

(24’‐40.5’)

645.3 628.8 Avgtot = 132 pcf These parameters are based on average values from 4 CU Triaxial tests (12 points) conducted on silty clay samples throughout the project borings.

Effective Stress Envelope c’ = 437 psf

’= 29.3° Total Stress Envelope

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 14

6.4 Engineering Properties UC-04-13

Layer Name/Depth

Elevation (ft) Recommended Engineering Properties

Notes

Top Bottom

Fill

USCS: CL

(0’‐4’)

682.8 678.8 '= 30° Su = 1500 psf

Estimated from empirical correlations based on SPT‐N values and engineering judgment, since calibrated penetrometer values were not available due to sample disturbance. Note the fill soil was not observed to contain deleterious material.

tot = 134 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table (Appendix F) for Fill Soil Deposits

FILL

USCS: SM

(4’‐8’)

678.8 674.8 '= 33° correlations based on SPT‐N values and engineering judgment. Note the fill soil was not observed to contain deleterious material.

tot = 134 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table (Appendix F) for Fill Soil Deposits

Fill

USCS: CL

(8’‐9’)

674.8 673.8 '= 30° Su = 1500 psf

This parameter is estimated from empirical correlations for friction angle and measurements. Note the fill soil was not observed to contain deleterious material.

tot = 134 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table (Appendix F) for Fill Soil Deposits

Cohesionless Soils

USCS: SM, SP‐SM

(9’‐12’)

673.8 670.8 '= 38° values tot = 133 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table (Appendix F) for Alluvial

670.8 658.8 Avgtot = 132 pcf These parameters are based on average values from 4 CU Effective Stress Envelope

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 15

(12’‐24’) c’ = 437 psf

’= 29.3° Triaxial tests (12 points) conducted on silty clay samples throughout the project borings. Total Stress Envelope

USCS: SM, SP‐SM,

ML

(24’‐31.5’)

658.8 651.3 '= 28° values tot = 130 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table (Appendix F) for Lacustrine Sand & Silt Deposits

(31.5’‐37.5’)

651.3 645.3 Avgtot = 132 pcf These parameters are based on average values from 4 CU Triaxial tests (12 points) conducted on silty clay samples throughout the project borings.

Effective Stress Envelope c’ = 437 psf

’= 29.3° Total Stress Envelope

USCS: GP, SP‐SM

(37.5’‐40.5’)

645.3 642.3 '= 38° values tot = 138 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 16

6.5 Engineering Properties UC-05-13

Layer Name/Depth

Elevation (ft) Recommended Engineering Properties

Notes

Top Bottom

Fill

USCS: CL

(0’‐4’)

685.8 681.8 '= 32° Su = 2000 psf (from 1 pt)

Estimated from empirical correlations based on SPT‐N values and calibrated penetrometer values. Note the fill soil was not observed to contain deleterious material.

tot = 134 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table (Appendix F) for Fill Soil Deposits

Fill

USCS: SM

(4’‐9’)

681.8 676.8 '= 33° values and engineering judgment. Note the fill soil was not observed to contain deleterious material.

tot = 134 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table

(9’‐21.5’)

676.8 664.3 Avgtot = 132 pcf These parameters are based on average values from 4 CU Triaxial tests (12 points) conducted on silty clay samples throughout the project borings.

Effective Stress Envelope c’ = 437 psf

’= 29.3° Total Stress Envelope

USCS: SM

(21.5’‐24’)

664.3 661.8 '= 28° values tot = 125 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table (Appendix F) for Lacustrine Sand & Silt Deposits

(24’‐26.5’)

661.8 659.3 Avgtot = 132 pcf These parameters are based on average values from 4 CU Triaxial tests (12 points) conducted on silty clay samples throughout the project borings.

Effective Stress Envelope c’ = 437 psf

’= 29.3° Total Stress Envelope

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 17

USCS: SM, SP‐SM,

GP

(26.5’‐35.7’)

659.3 650.1 '= 34° values tot = 138 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 18

6.6 Engineering Properties UC-06-13

Layer Name/Depth

Elevation (ft) Recommended Engineering Properties

Notes

Top Bottom

Fill

USCS: CL

(0’‐4’)

682.3 678.3 '= 32° Su = 2000 psf

Estimated from empirical correlations based on SPT‐N values and engineering judgement since calibrated penetrometer values were not available. Note the fill soil was not observed to contain deleterious material.

tot = 134 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table

USCS: ML, SM, SP‐

SM

(4’‐9’)

678.3 673.3 '= 36° values tot = 134 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table

(9’‐18.5’)

673.3

663.8

Avgtot = 132 pcf These parameters are based on average values from 4 CU Triaxial tests (12 points) conducted on silty clay samples throughout the project borings.

Effective Stress Envelope c’ = 437 psf

’= 29.3° Total Stress Envelope

USCS: ML, SM

(18.5’‐26’)

663.8 656.3 '= 28° values tot = 134 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table

(26‐29.5’)

656.3

652.8

Avgtot = 132 pcf These parameters are based on average values from 4 CU Triaxial tests (12 points) conducted on silty clay samples throughout the project borings.

Effective Stress Envelope c’ = 437 psf

’= 29.3° Total Stress Envelope

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 19

USCS: SP, GP

(29.5’‐37.4’)

652.8 644.9 '= 36° values tot = 134 pcf Estimated from engineering judgment and MMSD Table

AECOM Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation 20

7.0 General Qualifications

The information presented in this report is based on data obtained from soil borings and laboratory testing completed. Variations can occur between borings, the nature and extent of which may not become evident until after construction. If variations are encountered, it may be necessary reevaluate the information contained in this report with respect to the design and construction.

This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices to aid in the evaluation of this property, and to assist in the design of this project. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. The scope of this report is limited to the specific project and location described herein, and our description of the project represents our understanding of the significant aspects relevant to soil characteristics.

TABLES

Table 1: Boring Location Summary

Underwood Creek

Milwaukee, WI

AECOM Project #: 60304884

Table 1: Boring Location Summary

Northing (ft) Easting (ft)

UC‐01‐13 391877.5 2493596.7 675.72 40.5 SES 8/12/2013 Grouted

UC‐02‐13 391973.2 2493301.4 676.55 39.5 SES 8/12/2013 Grouted

UC‐03‐13 391897.7 2493419.5 669.33 40.5 SES 8/13/2013 Grouted

UC‐03‐13A 391897.7 2493419.5 669.33 14 SES 8/19/2013 Grouted

UC‐04‐13 391968.5 2492570.4 682.84 40.5 SES 8/20/2013 Grouted

UC‐05‐13 391947.6 2491966.0 685.47 37 SES 8/19/2013 Grouted

UC‐06‐13 391800.7 2491820.8 682.32 38.9 SES 8/14/2013 Grouted

*: Based on NAD 83, Wisconsin State Plane South Co-ordinates **: Ground surface elevation based on NAVD88

Boring Drilling

Firm Date

Drilled Borehole

Status

Coordinates* Ground Surface

Elevation (ft)**

Boring

Depth (ft)

FIGURES

Figure 1: Boring Location Plan

!A

!A !A!A

!A!A

!A

UC-06-13

UC-05-13 UC-04-13

UC-03-13

UC-02-13

UC-01-13

UC-03-13A

Drawn:

Scale:

Approved:

PROJECT

NUMBER

FIGURE

NUMBER

JW 10/2/2013

60304884

AH

0 150 300

Feet q 10/2/2013

AS SHOWN

www.aecom.com Copyright ©2013 By: AECOM

O:\Projects\60304884_Menominee\Fig2_underwood_borings.mxd

AERIAL PHOTO SOURCE: ESRI 4/29/2011

Legend !A Boring

UNDERWOOD BORING LOCATIONS

MILWAUKEE COUNTY, WISCONSIN

APPENDIX A

AECOM Standard Documents

AECOM General Notes

Drilling and Sampling Symbols:

SS : Split Spoon - 1-3/8" I.D. 2" O.D. (Unless otherwise noted) HS : Hollow Stem Auger ST : Shelby Tube-2" O.D. (Unless otherwise noted) WS : Wash Sample PA : Power Auger FT : Fish Tail DB : Diamond Bit-NX, BX, AX RB : Rock Bit AS : Auger Sample BS : Bulk Sample JS : Jar Sample PM : Pressuremeter Test VS : Vane Shear GS : Giddings Sampler OS : Osterberg Sampler

Standard "N" Penetration: Blows per foot of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on a 2 inch O.D. split spoon sampler, except where otherwise noted.

Water Level Measurement Symbols:

WL : Water Level WCI : Wet Cave In WS : While Sampling DCI : Dry Cave In WD : While Drilling BCR : Before Casing Removal AB : After Boring ACR : After Casing Removal

Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the boring at the time indicated. In pervious soils, the indicated elevations are considered reliable groundwater levels. In impervious soils, the accurate determination of groundwater elevations may not be possible, even after several days of observations; additional evidence of groundwater elevations must be sought.

Gradation Description and Terminology:

Coarse grained or granular soils have more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are described as boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine grained soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are described as clay or clayey silt if they are cohesive and silt if they are non-cohesive. In addition to gradation, granular soils are defined on the basis of their relative in-place density and fine grained soils on the basis of their strength or consistency and their plasticity.

Major Component of Sample

Size Range Description of Other

Components Present in Sample

Percent Dry Weight

Boulders Over 8 in. (200 mm) Trace 1-9

Cobbles 8 inches to 3 inches (200 mm to 75 mm)

Little 10-19

Gravel 3 inches to #4 sieve (75 mm to 4.76 mm)

Some 20-34

Sand #4 to #200 sieve

(4.76 mm to 0.074 mm) And 35-50

Silt Passing #200 sieve

(0.074 mm to 0.005 mm)

Clay Smaller than 0.005 mm

Consistency of Cohesive Soils: Relative Density of Granular Soils:

Unconfined Compressive Strength, Qu, tsf

Consistency N-Blows per foot Relative Density

<0.25 Very Soft 0 - 3 Very Loose

0.25 - 0.49 Soft 4 - 9 Loose

0.50 - 0.99 Medium (firm) 10 - 29 Medium Dense

1.00 - 1.99 Stiff 30 - 49 Dense

2.00 - 3.99 Very Stiff 50 - 80 Very Dense

4.00 - 8.00 Hard >80 Extremely Dense

>8.00 Very Hard

AECOM Soil Classification System (1)

1. See AECOM General Notes for component gradation terminology, consistency of cohesive soils and relative density of granular soils.

2. Reference: Unified Soil Classification Systems

3. Borderline classifications, used for soils possessing characteristics of two groups, are designated by combinations of group symbols. For example: GW-GC, well-graded gravel-sand mixture with clay binder.

AECOM Field and Laboratory Procedures Subsurface Exploration Procedures

Hand-Auger Drilling (HA) In this procedure, a sampling device is driven into the soil by repeated blows of a sledge hammer or a drop hammer. When the sampler is driven to the desired sample depth, the soil sample is retrieved. The hole is then advanced by manually turning the hand auger until the next sampling depth increment is reached. The hand auger drilling between sampling intervals also helps to clean and enlarge the borehole in preparation for obtaining the next sample.

Power Auger Drilling (PA) In this type of drilling procedure, continuous flight augers are used to advance the boreholes. They are turned and hydraulically advanced by a truck, trailer or track-mounted unit as site accessibility dictates. In auger drilling, casing and drilling mud are not required to maintain open boreholes.

Hollow Stem Auger Drilling (HS) In this drilling procedure, continuous flight augers having open stems are used to advance the boreholes.

The open stem allows the sampling tool to be used without removing the augers from the borehole.

Hollow stem augers thus provide support to the sides of the borehole during the sampling operations.

Rotary Drilling (RB) In employing rotary drilling methods, various cutting bits are used to advance the boreholes. In this process, surface casing and/or drilling fluids are used to maintain open boreholes.

Diamond Core Drilling (DB) Diamond core drilling is used to sample cemented formations. In this procedure, a double tube (or triple tube) core barrel with a diamond bit cuts an annular space around a cylindrical prism of the material sampled. The sample is retrieved by a catcher just above the bit. Samples recovered by this procedure are placed in sturdy containers in sequential order.

AECOM Field and Laboratory Procedures Field Sampling Procedures

Auger Sampling (AS) In this procedure, soil samples are collected from cuttings off of the auger flights as they are removed from the ground. Such samples provide a general indication of subsurface conditions; however, they do not provide undisturbed samples, nor do they provide samples from discrete depths.

Split-Barrel Sampling (SS) - (ASTM Standard D-1586-99) In the split-barrel sampling procedure, a 2-inch O.D. split barrel sampler is driven into the soil a distance of 18 inches by means of a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The value of the Standard Penetration Resistance is obtained by counting the number of blows of the hammer over the final 12 inches of driving.

This value provides a qualitative indication of the in-place relative density of cohesionless soils. The indication is qualitative only, however, since many factors can significantly affect the Standard Penetration Resistance Value, and direct correlation of results obtained by drill crews using different rigs, drilling procedures, and hammer-rod-spoon assemblies should not be made. A portion of the recovered sample is placed in a sample jar and returned to the laboratory for further analysis and testing.

Shelby Tube Sampling Procedure (ST) - ASTM Standard D-1587-94 In the Shelby tube sampling procedure, a thin-walled steel seamless tube with a sharp cutting edge is pushed hydraulically into the soil and a relatively undisturbed sample is obtained. This procedure is generally employed in cohesive soils. The tubes are identified, sealed and carefully handled in the field to avoid excessive disturbance and are returned to the laboratory for extrusion and further analysis and testing.

Giddings Sampler (GS) This type of sampling device consists of 5-foot sections of thin-wall tubing which are capable of retrieving continuous columns of soil in 5-foot maximum increments. Because of a continuous slot in the sampling tubes, the sampler allows field determination of stratification boundaries and containerization of soil samples from any sampling depth within the 5-foot interval.

AECOM Laboratory Procedures

Water Content (Wc) The water content of a soil is the ratio of the weight of water in a given soil mass to the weight of the dry soil. Water content is generally expressed as a percentage.

Hand Penetrometer (Qp) In the hand penetrometer test, the unconfined compressive strength of a soil is determined, to a maximum value of 4.5 tons per square foot (tsf) or 7.0 tsf depending on the testing device utilized, by measuring the resistance of the soil sample to penetration by a small, spring-calibrated cylinder. The hand penetrometer test has been carefully correlated with unconfined compressive strength tests, and thereby provides a useful and a relatively simple testing procedure in which soil strength can be quickly and easily estimated.

Unconfined Compression Tests (Qu) In the unconfined compression strength test, an undisturbed prism of soil is loaded axially until failure or until 20% strain has been reached, whichever occurs first.

Dry Density (γd) The dry density is a measure of the amount of solids in a unit volume of soil. Use of this value is often made when measuring the degree of compaction of a soil.

Classification of Samples In conjunction with the sample testing program, all soil samples are examined in our laboratory and visually classified on the basis of their texture and plasticity in accordance with the AECOM Soil Classification System which is described on a separate sheet. The soil descriptions on the boring logs are derived from this system as well as the component gradation terminology, consistency of cohesive soils and relative density of granular soils as described on a separate sheet entitled "AECOM General Notes". The estimated group symbols included in parentheses following the soil descriptions on the boring logs are in general conformance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) which serves as the basis of the AECOM Soil Classification System.

AECOM Standard Boring Log Procedures

In the process of obtaining and testing samples and preparing this report, standard procedures are followed regarding field logs, laboratory data sheets and samples.

Field logs are prepared during performance of the drilling and sampling operations and are intended to essentially portray field occurrences, sampling locations and procedures.

Samples obtained in the field are frequently subjected to additional testing and reclassification in the laboratory by experienced geotechnical engineers, and as such, differences between the field logs and the final logs may exist. The engineer preparing the report reviews the field logs, laboratory test data and classifications, and using judgment and experience in interpreting this data, may make further changes. It is common practice in the geotechnical engineering profession not to include field logs and laboratory data sheets in engineering reports, because they do not represent the engineer's final opinions as to appropriate descriptions for conditions encountered in the exploration and testing work. Results of laboratory tests are generally shown on the boring logs or are described in the text of the report, as appropriate.

Samples taken in the field, some of which are later subjected to laboratory tests, are retained in our laboratory for sixty days and are then discarded unless special disposition is requested by our client.

Samples retained over a long period of time, even in sealed jars, are subject to moisture loss which changes the apparent strength of cohesive soil, generally increasing the strength from what was originally encountered in the field. Since they are then no longer representative of the moisture conditions initially encountered, observers of these samples should recognize this factor.

APPENDIX B

Final Boring Logs

Field Boring Logs

FILL: Silty fine to coarse sand, little fine to coarse gravel, with concrete and limestone noted

- brown - loose - moist (FILL: SM)

Fine to coarse sand, trace to litttle fine to coarse gravel, trace silt, with layers of silt and brown clay noted - brown - loose - moist (SP)

Silt, trace to little clay, trace fine sand, layers of clay noted - gray - loose - moist (ML)

Fine to coarse sand, some silt, trace fine gravel, trace clay - gray - loose - moist to wet (SM)

Silty clay, trace fine to coarse sand, trace fine gravel, trace shale - gray -stiff to very stiff (CL)

S1 0.0 2.0

S2 2.0 4.0

S3 4.0 6.0

S4 6.0 8.0

S5 8.0 10.0

S6 10.0 12.0

S7 12.0 14.0

S8 14.0 16.0

S9 16.5 18.5

S10 19.0 21.0

S11 21.5 23.5

S12 24.0 26.0

8, 5, 4, 4 N = 9

3, 2, 4, 5 N = 6 w = 8.8%

4, 4, 4, 3 N = 8 w = 3.5%

3, 2, 6, 12 N = 8 w = 6.1%

3, 4, 5, 3 N = 9 w = 19.8%

3, 2, 3, 3 N = 5 w = 18.4%

3, 3, 2, 4 N = 5 w = 21.2%

4, 6, 6, 7 N = 12 Qp = 1.75 tsf w = 10.9%

3" Shelby Tube Qp = 2.0 tsf

10, 9, 10, 11 N = 19 Qp = 1.5 tsf w = 13.0%

4, 5, 7, 8 N = 12 Qp = 2.5 tsf

3" Shelby Tube Qp = 2.25 tsf w = 19.5%

671.7

667.7

663.7

661.7

REMARKS

(Drilling time, water loss, depth weathering, etc., if significant)

BOX OR

SAMPLE

NO.

LEGEND

% CORE

RECOV-

ERY

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

ELEVATION DEPTH

a fc eb gd

3" SSA/3-7/8" RB

Great Lakes and Ohio River

INSTALLATION SHEET

SHEETS

STARTED COMPLETED

Hole No. UC-01-13

Detroit District

8/12/2013---

12. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL

OF

UC-01-13 0

DRILLING LOG 2

3. DRILLING AGENCY

5. NAME OF DRILLER

6. DIRECTION OF HOLE

DEG. FROM VERT.

4. HOLE NO. (As shown on drawing title and file number)

19. GEOLOGIST

Milwaukee, WI N 391,877.5 E 2,493,596.7

11. DATUM FOR ELEVATION SHOWN (TBM or MSL)

DISTURBED

John Denneau

10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT

14. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES

16. DATE HOLE

DIVISION

2. LOCATION (Coordinates or Station)

J. Toonen40.5

7. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN

8. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK

9. TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE

17. ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE

15. ELEVATION GROUND WATER

1. PROJECT

NAD 83 (horiz) IGLD 85 (vert)

+675.7

SES UNDISTURBED13. TOTAL NO. OF OVERBURDEN

SAMPLES TAKEN

18. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING

+675.7 0.0

D-50

VERTICAL INCLINED

Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation

8/12/2013

662.218

PROJECT HOLE NO.

UC-01-13PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE.1836

MAR 71

ENG FORM

Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation

Silty clay, trace fine to coarse sand, trace fine gravel, trace shale - gray -stiff to very stiff (CL) (continued)

Silty clay, trace fine to coarse sand, trace fine gravel, trace shale - gray - hard (CL) Possible boulder from 31.8'-32.6'

Silty clay, trace fine to caorse sand, trace fine gravel, trace shale - gray - very stiff to stiff - hard

(CL)

End of borehole at 40.5 ft.

S13 26.5 28.5

S14 29.0 31.0

S15 31.5 31.8

S16 34.0 36.0

S17 36.5 38.5

S18 39.0 40.5

5, 5, 10 10 N = 15 Qp = 2.5 tsf w = 12.6%

6, 10, 13, 17 N = 23 Qp = 3.0 tsf w = 11.4%

50/3" N = 100+* Qp = 4.5 tsf

7, 6, 8, 10 N = 14 Qp = 3.5 tsf w = 13.3%

4, 6, 8, 10 N = 14 Qp = 2.75 tsf w = 13.0%

5, 8, 10 N = 18 Qp = 1.25 tsf w = 15.5%

SPT Sampling with 140 lb. Auto Hammer 30" of Fall 2" O.D. Split Spoon Sampler *: SPT-N value based on 6" or less of penetration w = moisture content

Boring advanced with SSA to 10 feet 4" HW casing installed to 8.5 feet Boring advanced with 3-7/8" RB to 39 feet.

W.L. @ 13.5 ft W.S.

644.2

641.7

635.2

REMARKS

(Drilling time, water loss, depth weathering, etc., if significant)

BOX OR

SAMPLE

NO.

LEGEND

% CORE

RECOV-

ERY

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

ELEVATION DEPTH

a fc eb gd

2 SHEETS

PROJECT 2INSTALLATION

Detroit District

DRILLING LOG (Cont Sheet)

ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE

675.7 Hole No. UC-01-13

Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation

SHEET

OF

PROJECT HOLE NO.

UC-01-131836-A

JUN 67

ENG FORM

Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation

Concrete (10") coarse gravel, with concrete and limestone noted

- brownish gray - medium dense - moist (FILL:

SM)

FILL: Fine to coarse sand, little fine gravel, trace silt - brown - medium dense - moist to wet (FILL:

SP)

Silty clay, little fine to coarse sand, trace fine gravel - gray (CL) Fine to coarse sand and fine to coarse gravel, little silt, trace clay - gray - medium dense - wet

(SM)

Silty clay, trace fine to coarse sand, trace fine gravel, trace shale - gray - very stiff to hard (CL)

Fine to coarse sand, little silt, trace clay - gray -very dense - wet (SM)

Silty clay, trace fine to coarse sand, trace fine gravel, trace shale, with occasional silt layers noted - gray - hard (CL)

S1 1.0 3.0

S2 3.0 4.5

S2A 4.5 5.0 S3 5.0 7.0

S4 7.0 9.0

S5 9.0 11.0

S6 11.0 13.0

S7 13.0 15.0

S8 15.0 16.5

S8A 16.5 17.0

S9 17.5 19.5

S10 20.0 22.0

S11 22.5 24.5

9, 10, 13, 12 N = 23

5, 7, 6 N = 13 w = 17.0%

3/6" N = 6* w = 15.3% Too disturbed for Qp measurement.

2, 6, 12, 9 N = 18 w = 15.4%

2, 3, 5, 7 N = 8 Qp = 2.0 tsf w = 11.8%

2, 4, 5, 5 N = 9 Qp = 2.0 tsf w = 12.2%

3" Shelby Tube Qp = 3.75 tsf w = 10.2%

13, 21, 25, 26 N = 46 Qp = 4.5+ tsf

16, 21, 31 N = 52 w = 9.9% Too disturbed for Qp measurement.

37/6" N = 74* w = 15.9%

20, 25, 24, 27 N = 49 Qp = 4.5+ tsf w = 11.5%

20, 28, 29, 26 N = 57 Qp = 4.5+ tsf w = 12.8%

13, 19, 25, 30 N = 44 Qp = 4.5+ tsf

675.7

673.5

672.0

671.5

669.5

660.0

659.0

REMARKS

(Drilling time, water loss, depth weathering, etc., if significant)

BOX OR

SAMPLE

NO.

LEGEND

% CORE

RECOV-

ERY

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

ELEVATION DEPTH

a fc eb gd

3" SSA/3-7/8" RB

Great Lakes and Ohio River

INSTALLATION SHEET

SHEETS

STARTED COMPLETED

Hole No. UC-02-13

Detroit District

8/12/2013---

12. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL

OF

UC-02-13 0

DRILLING LOG 2

3. DRILLING AGENCY

5. NAME OF DRILLER

6. DIRECTION OF HOLE

DEG. FROM VERT.

4. HOLE NO. (As shown on drawing title and file number)

19. GEOLOGIST

Milwaukee, WI N 391,973.2 E 2,493,301.4

11. DATUM FOR ELEVATION SHOWN (TBM or MSL)

DISTURBED

John Denneau

10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT

14. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES

16. DATE HOLE

DIVISION

2. LOCATION (Coordinates or Station)

J. Toonen39.5

7. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN

8. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK

9. TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE

17. ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE

15. ELEVATION GROUND WATER

1. PROJECT

NAD 83 (horiz) IGLD 85 (vert)

+676.5

SES UNDISTURBED13. TOTAL NO. OF OVERBURDEN

SAMPLES TAKEN

18. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING

+676.5 0.0

D-50

VERTICAL INCLINED

Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation

8/13/2013

673.448

PROJECT HOLE NO.

UC-02-13PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE.1836

MAR 71

ENG FORM

Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation gravel, trace shale, with occasional silt layers noted - gray - hard (CL) (continued)

Clayey silt, some fine to coarse sand with stone fragments noted - gray - dense - wet (CL-ML)

Silty clay, trace fine to coarse sand, trace fine gravel, trace shale with seams and layers of gray sand and gravel noted - gray - hard (CL)

Fine to coarse sand, trace fine gravel, trace silt -gray - dense - wet (SP)

Fine to coarse gravel, some fine to coarse sand, trace silt, trace clay - gray - dense - wet

(GP-GM)

Silty clay, trace fine to coarse sand, trace fine gravel, trace shale, with occasional pockets of sand and silt seams noted - gray - very stiff to hard (CL)

End of borehole at 39.5 feet.

S12 25.0 27.0

S13 27.5 29.5

S14 30.0 31.0

S14A 31.0 32.0

S15 32.5 34.5

S16 35.0 37.0

S17 37.5 39.5

12, 17, 22, 30 N = 39 Qp = 4.5+ tsf w = 11.2%

10, 12, 20 N = 32 w = 11.2%

25, 17/6" N = 34" Qp = 4.5+ tsf w = 12.1% 18, 19 N = 37 w = 12.8%

11, 15, 22, 20 N = 37 w = 11.4%

4, 11, 7, 10 N = 18 Qp = 3.75 tsf w = 22.7%

8, 11, 15, 18 N = 26 Qp = 4.25 tsf w = 26.5%

SPT Sampling with 140 lb. Auto Hammer 30" of Fall 2" O.D. Split Spoon Sampler *: SPT-N value based on 6" or less of penetration w = moisture content

Boring advanced with SSA to 7 feet 4" HW casing installed to 8 feet Boring advanced with 3-7/8" RB to 37.5 feet.

W.L. @ 3.1 ft W.S.

649.0

646.5

645.5

644.0

641.5

637.0

REMARKS

(Drilling time, water loss, depth weathering, etc., if significant)

BOX OR

SAMPLE

NO.

LEGEND

% CORE

RECOV-

ERY

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

ELEVATION DEPTH

a fc eb gd

2 SHEETS

PROJECT 2INSTALLATION

Detroit District

DRILLING LOG (Cont Sheet)

ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE

676.5 Hole No. UC-02-13

Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation

SHEET

OF

PROJECT HOLE NO.

UC-02-131836-A

JUN 67

ENG FORM

Underwood Creek Geotechnical Investigation

Topsoil (12")

FILL: Fine to coarse sand, little fine to coarse gravel, trace silt - brown - dense…