FtLee_TSF_Geotech_Report_April_2016.pdf

REPORT OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EVALUATION

FOR

Training Support Facility

Fort Lee Petersburg, Virginia

PREPARED BY:

Geo Environmental Section, Norfolk District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Fort Norfolk, 803 Front Street

Norfolk, VA 23510

February 2016 Revised: April 2016

Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Training Support Facility Fort Lee, Petersburg, Virginia

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

2. PROJECT INFORMATION

2.1. Site Description

2.2. Proposed Project Description

3. SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION

3.1. Subsurface Exploration

3.2. Laboratory Testing

4. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

4.1. Regional Geology

4.2. Subsurface Stratigraphy

4.3. Groundwater

5. GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION

6. GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1. Foundation Design

6.2. Ground Floor Slab-on-Grade

6.3. Pavement Design Recommendations

6.4. Seismic Site Classification

7. CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1. Site Preparation

7.2. Foundation Subgrade Preparation

7.3. Controlled Structural Fill

7.4. Suitability of On-Site Material

7.5. Compaction Requirements

Appendix A – Site Location Appendix B – SPT Boring Logs Appendix C – Soil Stratigraphy Appendix D – Conetec Report of Investigation Appendix E – DMT Data (NAB) Appendix F – Laboratory Data Appendix G – GER Report

1. INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this report is to summarize the results of the US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Norfolk District, Geo-Environmental Section’s geotechnical engineering study for the proposed Fort Lee Training Support Facility. The Fort Lee Training Support Facility (TSF) project’s overall plan includes development of a primarily wooded site, construction of a 120,000 SF high bay structure and the associated utilities and site work at Ft. Lee Army Base near Petersburg, Virginia. The scope of this study included a subsurface exploration program, laboratory testing, and geotechnical analysis and evaluation of the subsurface conditions in regards to the proposed development. Our findings and recommendations are presented herein.

2. PROJECT INFORMATION

2.1. Site Description

The site for the proposed structure is bound to the north by VA State Route 36, to the west by Lee Avenue and to the south and east by Shop Road. The site is primarily wooded with a clearing towards the north west end of the proposed building footprint. The site accessibility degrades with rain events as evidenced during the drilling operations. The site grades are generally lower than the surrounding areas of the base, and portions of the property collects, maintains, and slowly discharges surface runoff during rain events. This causes the site to pond water and prevents good positive drainage across the site. Based on our field visits, portions of the site are generally poorly drained and collect water from a large area of the developed portion of the base. Old drainage ditches were observed in areas of the site, apparently as a means to formerly drain the area. These ditches appear to be constructed prior to the tree growth that is on the site. The site grade varies from approximately 122’ to 108’. A steep drop in elevation occurs abruptly at a swale that enters the site from the north east, trends in an arc in the proposed building center and exits towards Route 36 towards the north-northwest. The swale invert maintains an elevation of approximately 110’ and the adjacent grades on the south side of the swale are approximately elevation 117 feet. North of the swale the grades are generally at elevation 111 feet. The remains of an old pipe outfall were observed entering the swale from the south. An area of the site generally south of the the swale and within the swale was identified as a wetland area. Site grades were provided just after the 35% design. Above ground power lines traverse the site from the north east towards the south west. It is our understanding that these lines will be moved out of the building area and placed underground during construction. Valves for possible underground water lines were also observed in center of the site. Other utilities across the site will be relocated and/or abandoned. Old drawings (USGS Quadrangle Maps, dated 1981) indicate old structures once occupied the northeast corner of the site and the east end of the site.

Although not observed, the remains of the old foundations and underground utilities may still exist across the proposed building area.

2.2. Proposed Project Description

This project consists of construction a 120,214 SF, one story high bay building as part of the proposed TSF. The anticipated work will include clearing and grubbing the site of all trees and vegetation and the demolition of a small parking area. The proposed building will consist of a high bay, one story facility with a large macro storage space encompassing the vast majority of the footprint. The building will have a proposed finished floor elevation of 118’. According to information obtained in Project Delivery Team (PDT) Meetings the floor slab is required to maintain an extremely tight tolerances and no differential cracks or joints are acceptable due to the specialized equipment required to be used within the building (Macro Area). Administrative space and training rooms as well as mechanical spaces occupy the northern and eastern lengths. The building has large spans between columns to increase storage space within the macro storage area. Information obtained from the structural designers the maximum column loads are estimated to be 250 kips near the center of the large storage area, 125 kips at the edge of the storage and 55 kips at other locations. Based on the current site topography, fill up to approximately 7 feet will be required to raise the building area to the finished floor subgrade. The site will require extensive site preparation to facilitate a flat building pad and proper draining from the building and, subsequently, off site. Construction efforts will be hampered by rain events if surface water is not properly managed during early phases of the project.

3. SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION

3.1. Subsurface Exploration

In 2008, an engineering consultant, GER, performed a Preliminary Geotechnical Study which included eleven (11) Cone Penetration Tests (CPT) and 3 soil borings with Standard Penetration Tests (refer to appendix I). In September 2015, the Norfolk District, contracted with a testing firm (GET) to perform eight (8) soil borings with Standard Penetration Tests (SPT), five (5) Dilatometer Tests (DMT), 23 Cone Penetration Tests (CPT) and 2 seismic cone penetration tests (SCPTu). Pore pressure dissipation (PPD) tests were generally performed in each CPT sounding at specific depth which generally ranged from 35 feet to 50 feet bgs. The DMT, CPT and SCPTu soundings and the PPD tests were performed by a subcontractor (ContTec) to GET.

The SPT borings were performed in accordance with ASTM D 1586 and the drill holes were advanced using a 2 ¼ inch inside diameter continuous flight hollow stem auger to a depth of approximate 10 feet and then mud rotary drilling operations were utilized.

Drilling was performed utilizing a CME 550 ATV drill rig. Soil samples were obtained using a standard 2-inch outer diameter and 24 inch long split spoon sampler, driven with a 140 pound automatic hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler for each six (6) inch penetration increment was recorded. The recovered soil samples were visually classified in the field in general accordance with ASTM D 2488.

Portions of the recovered soil were placed in sealed glass jars and returned to the Norfolk

Fort Lee, Petersburg, Virginia

District Office for review. Select samples were then returned to GET for laboratory sampling. Boring logs are included in Appendix B. The CPT, SCPTu and DMT soundings were advanced utilizing a specialized 20 Ton CPT track rig. All testing was performed in general accordance with current ASTM standards, ASTM D 5778 and

ASTM D 6635

During the subsurface exploration phase, several changes in the program occurred as a result of several soundings (DMT or CPT) encountering refusal (unable to penetrate the subsurface conditions to the intended depth). Also, initial evaluations of the test results indicated that a very soft layer was encountered especially in the southeast corner of the proposed building. Three (3) additional DMT soundings were added to this area of site to better define the underlying conditions and their effect on the proposed building. These DMTs were started at a depth greater than 15 feet bgs with the intent to evaluate the underlying soft layer. DMT no. 15DMT002 was not performed because the probe was not able to penetrate the upper surface soils. CPT soundings extended from depths of 1.1 feet to 55.6 feet below ground surface (bgs); the DMT soundings extended to depths of 26 to 40 ft bgs. After consultation with the Geotechnical Section at Baltimore District (NAB), it was determined that the initial DMTs may have been performed at a too rapid of a rate in the very soft soils which caused overly conservative results. Based on discussion with NAB, six (6) additional DMT soundings were performed by NAB Geology and Investigations Section to further evaluate the soil layers underlying the site.

A CME 550 ATV drill rig was utilized to push the DMT probe. The new DMT soundings extended to depths ranging from approximately 30 to 40 feet bgs. Two (2) SPT borings were also performed to extend to deeper depths of approximately 70 feet bgs. The location of the borings and soundings were selected by engineering staff from NAO, Geotechnical Section to obtain a relatively even distribution of in-situ tests across the building area. Initial locations were surveyed in the field by a surveying subcontractor working for GET. Ground surface elevations at each location was field determined. Locations for later testing performed by NAB was field located based on the initial field surveyed information. The locations and elevations are only accurate to the degree implied by the method used for their determination. The pertinent information is tabulated below for each boring and sounding. All data from subsurface exploration is shown in the appendices.

3.2. Laboratory Testing

Laboratory testing consisted of 15 samples for gradations, moisture content, and Atterberg limits. Samples were selected from material collected in the split spoon sampler.

Additionally, two one-dimensional consolidation tests were performed on “undisturbed” samples. Bulk samples were taken at two locations to perform California Bearing Ratio testing. In addition, pH and resistivity testing was performed on two samples. Results of the laboratory samples are enclosed.

4. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

4.1. Regional Geology

Available geologic references report that the project site lies within the very western edge of the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province of Virginia. The topography of the Coastal Plain is a terraced landscape that stair-steps down to the coast and to the major rivers. The risers (scarps) are former shorelines and the treads (flat parts) are emergent bay and river bottoms.

The higher, older plains in the western part of the Coastal Plain are more dissected by stream erosion than the lower, younger terrace treads. This landscape was formed over the last few million years as sea level rose and fell in response to the repeated melting and growth of large continental glaciers and as the Coastal Plain slowly uplifted. Based on our review of existing geologic and soil boring data, the geologic stratigraphy encountered in our subsurface explorations generally consists of several deposits and formations. These deposits and formations include the Potomac Formation (pebbly, poorly sorted quartzo-feldspathic sand interbedded with sandy clay and silt, minor organic-rich clay and silt), the Windsor Formation (interbedded gravel, sand, silt, and clay; at altitudes to 85-95 feet), the Bacons Castle Formation (gravel grading upward into sand and sandy clayey silt), and soils of the the Chesapeake Group (fine to coarse-grained sand, silt, clay, variable shelly and diatomaceous, may include the following formations; Chowan River, Yorktown, Eastover, St. Marys, Choptank, and Calvert).

4.2. Subsurface Stratigraphy

The subsurface conditions discussed in the following section and those shown on the boring test logs represent interpretations of the boring data and are for information only.

The lines designating strata breaks on the boring logs and those indicated below represent approximate boundaries between soil types, as the transition may be gradual or may occur between samples. The generalized subsurface stratigraphy is our interpretation of the soil stratigraphy and subsurface condition at the project site based on our subsurface exploration and available information. The interpretation necessarily assumes uniform subsurface conditions across the site, which is probably, but not necessarily, correct. The general descriptions, below, should not be considered as a substitute for the boring logs.

Generalized subsurface profiles for the site are also included in Appendix D of this report. The Stratum are defined in the following paragraphs with the site stratigraphy described in follow-on paragraphs.

The majority of the test borings were drilled within a wooded site. An upper heavily organic layer of 5 to 8 inches thick can be anticipated; however, root matter was found within the soil samples 2.0 to 4.0 feet bgs in several borings. However, in Boring 15DH- 002 trace roots were noted to a depth of 8.0 feet and boring 15DH-006 to a depth of 6 feet. An upper layer of fill, or possible fill was noted in borings, 15DH-002 (1.3 ft), 15DH-003 (4.0 ft) and 15DH-004 (0,6 ft).

4.2.1. Stratum I: Loose to Medium Dense Clayey Sand

This stratum extends from the top of ground surface to depths ranging from approximately 10 to 20 feet below ground surface. Gravel was reported in some samples. Auger drilling was required to advance DMT probe 15DMT-002a because of refusal at a depth of 4.5 to 8.5 ft bgs. The CPT sounding CPT 15CPT-019 could not be advance because of refusal. This is in the location of boring 15DH-003 where possible fill was encountered to approximately 4 ft bgs.

CPT sounding 15CPT-014 also encountered refusal at a shallow depth. The test was offset and was able to be performed. SPT N-Values ranged from 3 to 34 blows per foot (bpf) and averaged at 16 bpf. The upper surface (approximately

2.0 ft) of this stratum was observed to be very loose to loose in several borings.

At boring 15DH-008, the upper stratum was identified as a stiff low plasticity clay (CL) to a depth of 8 ft bgs. The soil profile as estimated from the CPT soundings generally identifies the upper stratum as sandy or clayey silts. The classification was based on correlations with published documents.

4.2.2. Stratum II: Very Loose Clayey Sand/Very Soft Sandy Clay

Underlying Stratum I was generally a layer of very soft to soft clay (CL or CH) or very loose to loose clayey sand (SC). The stratum extends to a depth ranging between 32 to 42 feet bgs. SPT N values generally ranged from 2 to 5; however at 15DH-008 weight of hammer (WHO) was recorded at a depth of 23 to 25 feet bgs. .

4.2.3. Stratum III: Dense Gravelly Sand

Beneath Stratum II is a dense gravelly sand identified as Stratum III. The stratum extends to beneath our target depths and was shown to begin at approximate elevation +80’. SPT N values ranged from 12 bpf to refusal (50 blows over 6 inches). Due to the dense nature of Statum III CPT and DMT soundings could not penetrate this layer

4.2.4. General Soil Data Table (based on average values)

Stratum USCS Avg. N

Liquid Limit

Plastic Limit

Plasticity Index

Natural Moisture Content

I SC 16 33 15 18 18

II SC/CL 3 46 19 27 40

III SC/GC 31 25 16 9 17

4.3. Groundwater

Depths to groundwater at the time of our subsurface exploration were estimated to be between 6 to 10-ft bgs. This estimate was based on visual observations of saturated soil samples collected during the drilling. It should be noted the mud rotary drilling operations were utilized for advancing the SPTs. Long term subsurface water measurements were not obtained. The depth to groundwater is expected to fluctuate with variations of rainfall, perched water conditions, and other similar factors.

The clay sand or sandy clay soils encountered in the borings can cause perched groundwater conditions resulting in groundwater being found close to the ground surface during periods of excessive precipitation. Perched groundwater conditions occur when surface or subsurface water is prevented from draining into the subsurface by the layers of clay which are relatively impermeable. These perched groundwater conditions can cause significant setbacks during construction if not properly managed. It should be noted that a portion of the site was designated as a wetland area. During drilling operations, large ruts and ponding water accumulated in many areas of the site due to the poor site drainage conditions.

5. GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION

Based on the subsurface exploration and our site visits, several issues were identified at this site which will need to be addressed to allow for the proper construction. These issues consist of the poor site drainage conditions, fill soils encountered and the very soft clay or loose clayey sand layer encountered at an approximate depth of 10 to 20 feet below the ground surface (approximate elevation of 100 ft). The soft layer extends to a depth of approximately 32 to 42 feet bgs (approximate elevation 80 ft).

The parameters developed by the DMT soundings were used to evaluate the settlement of the building foundations, and settlement calculations utilized methods consistent with Schmertmann (1970) and EM 1110-1-1904. A spreadsheet developed by NAB was then used to calculate the total settlement. The settlement was calculated at several DMT soundings and the appropriate column load and fill depth was considered at the location. Based on the results, it was estimated that total settlement would generally be less than 1 inch. In the building area where the finished floor is raised to elevation 123.5, it is recommended that expanded polystyrene blocks (i.e Geofoam) be used to raise the exiting grades to minimize settlements of the building area.

Foundations shall be placed on natural or compacted controlled fill.

According to old maps, the area planned for development previously contained a couple of buildings which since have been removed. The possibility remains that portions of the foundations or building may still exist beneath the existing ground surface. Old piping was observed in the center of the proposed building along with water line valves. The subsurface exploration indicated some boring contained fill or possible fill to depths of four feet. Man placed uncontrolled fill is unsuitable to support the structure and it shall be removed along with any old building or construction material.

6. GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

The following findings and recommendations are based on our observations at the site, interpretation of the field and laboratory data obtained during our subsurface investigation, our experience with similar subsurface conditions and projects, and the project information available at the time this report was prepared.

6.1. Foundation Design

Based on our evaluations, the proposed building may be supported on a conventional shallow foundation system (column and strip footings) on approved in-situ soils or properly compacted structural fill. We recommend that footings be sized using an allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds-per-square-foot (psf). Total and differential anticipated settlements under the provided maximum service loads are expected to be less than 1-inch and ¾-inch, respectively.

Anticipated settlements should be reevaluated if subsurface conditions encountered during construction are different from the ones described in this report and/or if the actual loads differ from the maximum load used in the current settlement analysis.

Lightly loaded continuous foundations should have a minimum width of 24 inches and independent column foundations should have a minimum width of 48 inches to reduce the possibility of a ‘punching’ shear failure. The structural elements should be centered on the foundation element to provide uniform load transfer, unless the foundations are proportioned for eccentric loads. Eccentric loadings will require further analysis and must be approved by the geotechnical designer of record.

The exterior footings should bear at a minimum depth of 3-ft below the finished site grade.

Alternately, bottom of the exterior footings may be placed at a depth of 2-ft over a 1-ft thick layer of lean concrete. This depth will prevent frost from affecting the footing as well as will ensure the footing bears on suitable material.

6.2. Ground Floor Slab-on-Grade

The ground floor slabs-on-grade for the proposed building may be supported by properly compacted controlled structural fill per the site recommendations above. A standard modulus of subgrade reaction (“k”) of 100 pci may be used for the design of the floor slabs.

A six-inch thick granular base layer consisting of open-graded crushed stone (VDOT #57 crushed stone) should be placed beneath the floor slabs. This granular base would function as a leveling and load distributing material for the slab and provide a capillary break beneath the slab.

A vapor barrier should be used beneath ground floor slabs that will be covered by tile, wood, carpet, impermeable floor coatings, and/or if other moisture-sensitive equipment or materials will be in contact with the floor. It is noted that the use of vapor retarders may result in excessive curling of floor slabs during curing. Please refer to ACI 320.1R-96, Section 4.1.5 and 11.11, for information on lessening the potential of curling and shrinkage of floor slabs

Fort Lee, Petersburg, Virginia with vapor retarders. Utility and other excavations within the subgrade of the floor slabs shall be backfilled with properly compacted structural fill or flowable lean concrete in accordance with the project specifications to provide uniform floor slab support.

6.3. Pavement Design Recommendations

Two California Bearing Ratio (CBR) tests were performed on a bulk sample that was collected during the field investigation. Based on the results of these tests, the design CBR value of 3 should be used for the roadways and parking lot pavement design. Proper subgrade, subbase and base course design will be required to ensure an adequate pavement design. Proper drainage needs to be maintained on site to facilitate construction as the subgrade material may become unstable during the wet weather. In addition, perched groundwater may be encountered during excavations.

6.4. Seismic Site Classification

Based on ASCE 7-10, Ch. 20 Site Class E should be used for all seismic design. While the shear wave velocities, Vs, are acceptable for Site Class D, the thick soft clay layer underlying the site could have a serious influence on the structure and therefore, we recommend the classification to be Class E.

7. CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1. Site Preparation

Project site preparation should include removal of the existing trees, underbrush, and all “topsoil” layers as well as parking lots to the underlying soils. Due to the poor soil conditions near the surface, potential for deep root matter and possible fill material across the site, it is recommended that a minimum of two vertical feet of the existing surface soils shall be removed from the entire building foot print extending five feet out from the building perimeter. We also recommend that after this operation is completed, that the contractor and their geotechnical engineer excavate a minimum of six (6) test pits across the site to verify that all man placed fill and building remains have been removed. All existing underground utilities and its associated appurtenances within the building and foundation footprint should be removed/relocated and the areas be properly backfilled and compacted. These underground structures may include but are not limited to existing drain pipes, catch basins, old foundation elements, and any object that are greater than 3-inches in size. The proper backfill materials and compaction recommendations are described in later sections of this report.

Areas of construction should also be free of soft, wet, or disturbed soils. Should these areas be encountered during site preparation, these areas shall be over-excavated to the depth deemed appropriate by the geotechnical engineer where the unsuitable material is no longer present.

Over-excavated areas should be backfilled with properly compacted suitable fill. During the site preparation operations, positive surface drainage should be maintained to prevent the accumulation of water. The existing drainage swale which crosses the center of the proposed building shall be over excavated of all soft material. Once soft material is removed, a “French” drain system shall be constructed within the old swale beneath the proposed building area. The “French” drain shall be a minimum of 30 inches wide by 30 inches high, and consist of open graded aggregate such as VDOT no. 57. The aggregate shall be completely wrapped with a geotextile. .

After removal of all surficial materials, the exposed subgrade soils in the areas of development should be proof rolled with a 20 to 30-ton loaded dump truck or other pneumatic-tired vehicle of similar size and weight. Proof rolling should be observed by a geotechnical engineer and the Contracting Officer. Proof rolling should be performed during a time of good weather and not while the site is wet, frozen, above planned grade, or severely desiccated. Any unsuitable materials that are observed to yield or rut noticeably during proof rolling should be undercut and replaced with compacted imported controlled structural fill or stabilized in-place as recommended by the geotechnical engineer and approved by the Contracting Officer.

The near surface subgrade soils are moisture sensitive and will lose stability if they become wet and are subjected to construction traffic. As a result, site preparation should be performed during an extended period of dry weather and the construction traffic be limited within the footprint of the proposed structures once the site has been properly prepared. Any fill materials, aggregates, and/or concrete should be placed as soon as possible over the approved subgrade in order to reduce exposure of the subgrade to weather and construction activity.

It is recommended that a geotechnical engineer be retained to provide soil engineering services during the actual site preparation and foundation construction phase of the project to perform appropriate evaluations to help assure that conditions encountered during construction are similar to the conditions encountered in the borings. The geotechnical engineer can also assist in interpretation of differing subsurface conditions that may by encountered and recommend remedial work, if needed.

7.2. Foundation Subgrade Preparation

Foundation subgrades should be observed, evaluated, and verified for the design bearing pressure by a geotechnical engineer after excavation and prior to reinforcement steel placement.

If soft, unsuitable soils, or deleterious materials are encountered during foundation construction, localized undercutting of foundation subgrades will be required. The need for, and extent of, undercutting should be based on field observations made by a geotechnical engineer at the time of construction. Any over excavation under the proposed footings should be backfilled with an approved backfill material or lean concrete to the planned foundation bearing level.

Excavations for foundations should be made in such a way to provide bearing surfaces that are firm and free of loose, soft, wet, or otherwise disturbed soils. Foundation concrete should not be placed on frozen or saturated subgrades. If such materials are allowed to remain below foundations, settlements will increase. Foundation excavations should be concreted as soon as practical after they are excavated. If an excavation is left open for an extended period, a thin mat of lean concrete should be placed over the bottom to minimize damage to the bearing surface from weather or construction activities. Water should not be allowed to pond in any excavation.

7.3. Controlled Structural Fill

Controlled structural fill material under buildings should be non-expansive and free of organic matter, debris, and particles larger than 3-inches in size. Proposed fill materials should be subjected to laboratory tests consisting of, but not necessarily limited to, moisture density determinations, Atterberg limits, and sieve analysis. Controlled structural fill should classify per USCS as SW, SP, SP-SM, or SM with a maximum of 30 percent fines passing the No. 200 sieve.

7.4. Suitability of On-Site Material

Near surface soils are not suitable for reuse as structural fill under the proposed structures, roadways, and parking lot because this material does not meet the criteria recommended in this report. The on-site material may be used in the green area depending on organics content (e.g. roots, root mats, other organic debris).

7.5. Compaction Requirements

The contractor shall provide proper compaction equipment to meet compaction requirements based on the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557 (modified proctor). The in-situ moisture content of the subsurface material is expected to be higher than the optimum moisture content determined by ASTM D 1557. The contractor should be prepared to adequately dry the in-situ soils prior to placement as backfill. The compaction requirements for this project are listed below:

- Beneath Structures, Foundations, and Concrete Slabs: Compact subgrade using approved fill materials to at least 95-percent of maximum density per ASTM D 1557

- Beneath Roads, Parking Areas, and Utility Trenches: Compact subgrade using approved fill materials to at least 95-percent of maximum density per ASTM D 1557

- In Green Areas: Compact to at least 85 percent of maximum density per ASTM D

The moisture of the compacted material should be maintained within three percent of the optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM D 1557 (modified proctor). Compaction requirements may be reduced by 5 percent for approved cohesive material, defined as material containing more than 35 percent fines (materials passing the No. 200 sieve.)

Proper compaction equipment should be utilized by the contractor to achieve the required compaction. The structural fill and/or trench backfill lift thickness should not exceed 8-inches in loose thickness. For areas which do not permit the use of heavy compaction equipment (utility trenches and near existing structures) lift thickness may need to be reduced to 6-inches.

During fill operations, positive surface drainage should be maintained to prevent the accumulation of water. Each lift of fill should be tested in order to confirm that the degree of compaction is attained. Field density tests to verify fill compaction should be as required by the earthwork specification.

7.6. Special Foundation Recommendations

7.6.1. Due to the possibility of excessive differential settlement, slabs used to support the substantial display equipment shall be independent of the main building slab. This slab shall be structurally rigid with respect to the expected loadings. Due to the expected increase in thickness, independent slabs shall not be allowed to rest on or come to within one foot of independent footings for the main structural system. For the purposes of this paragraph, substantial display equipment shall be defined by any equipment that exceeds the bearing pressure of 200 pounds per square foot or a point load of greater than 3,000 pounds.

7.6.2. Due to the floor system requirements for flatness, it is also suggested that the building slab be poured as the last feasible step in the construction sequence. This will allow settlement to occur before slab placement thus reducing the slab settlement.

7.6.3. Under all portions of the building with a floor elevation of 123.5’ expanded polystyrene

(EPS) shall be used as structural fill except for the replaced subgrade but no more than two feet. EPS specifications shall be submitted by the contractor and approved by government. Specifications shall be submitted before ordering EPS and at least 30 days before placement. EPS shall conform to manufactures product and placement recommendations as well as the contractor’s geotechnical engineer’s guidance.

Appendix A – Site Location

Site Plan

1000 ft N

N © 2016 Google

© 2016 Google

© 2016 Google

E4TSCJCP

Oval

Appendix B – SPT Boring Logs

0.3 0.6

2.0

4.0

5.5

6.0

8.0

10.0

17.0

22.0

[TOPSOIL] Light Brown, Orangish Brown, and Tan Clayey Fine SAND, moist, roots [FILL] Gravel [SC] Medium Dense, Orangish Brown, Yellowish Brown and Gray Clayey Fine SAND with roots, moist [SC] Medium Dense, Orangish Brown, Yellowish Brown, Gray Clayey Fine to Medium SAND with roots, moist

[SC] Medium Dense, Gray mottled Reddish Orange, Orangish Brown, and Yellowish Brow Clayey Fine to Coarse SAND, moist

[SC] Medium Dense, Orangish Brown and Yellowish Brown Clayey Fine to Medium SAND, moist [SC] Dense, Gray, Orangish Brown, and Yellowish Brown Clayey Fine to Coarse SAND with trace gravel, moist

[SC] Medium Dense, Orangish Brown, Yellowish Brown, and Gray Clayey Fine to Coarse SAND with some gravel, moist

[CL] Very Stiff to Stiff, Orangish Brown, Gray, Reddish Brown, and Yellowish Brown CLAY with some fine sand, moist

[SC] Loose, Yellowish Brown and Black Clayey Fine SAND, wet, Gray and Orangish Brown Clay seams

+110.2 +109.9

+108.5

+106.5

+105.0

+104.5

+102.5

+100.5

+93.5

+88.5

SS-1

0' to 2'

SS-2

2' to 4'

SS-3

4' to 6'

SS-4

6' to 8'

SS-5

8' to 10'

SS-6

10' to 12'

SS-7

13' to 15'

SS-8

18' to 20'

After 6'-8' sample collected, mud rotary casing installed

Ground Water depth at 10.34 feet below ground surface on 10/21/15 at 1215 after casing removal

Ground Water depth at 12 feet below ground surface on 10/22/15 at 1150

Cave-in depth at 20.7 feet below ground suface on 10/21/15 at 1212 after casing removal

6-7-7-9 N=14

10-12-15-15 N=27

7-12-14-14 N=26

10-15-18-15 N=33

7-9-10-15 N=19

10-12-15-15 N=27

2-5-6-6 N=11

2-2-3-2 N=5

REMARKS

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

LEGEND

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

ELEVATION DEPTH

a fc eb gd

SAMPLE

DEPTH

(feet)

SAMPLE

BLOWS

98.5

3" Roller Cone

INSTALLATION SHEET

Craig Steward

Jennifer Spitz52.5

7. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN

8. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK

9. TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE

17. ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE

15. ELEVATION GROUND WATER

SHEETS

STARTED COMPLETED

Hole No. 15DH-001

Fort Lee

11. DATUM FOR ELEVATION SHOWN (TBM or MSL)

DISTURBED

1. PROJECT

+110.5

GET Solutions UNDISTURBED13. TOTAL NO. OF OVERBURDEN

SAMPLES TAKEN

18. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING

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)

14. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES

16. DATE HOLE

DIVISION

10/21/2015---

12. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL

OF

15DH-001

10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT

Fort Lee, Virginia N 3,614,542.3 E 11,817,871.5

2. LOCATION (Coordinates or Station)

19. GEOLOGIST

CME-550

VERTICAL INCLINED

Training Support Facility

10/21/2015

DRILLING LOG 3

Hole No. 15DH-001

/2 3/

PROJECT HOLE NO.

Training Support Facility 15DH-001PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE.1836

MAR 71

ENG FORM

27.0

32.0

37.0

[CH] Firm, Dark Gray and Bluish Gray CLAY with some Silt, moist

[CH] Soft, Dark Gray and Bluish Gray CLAY with some Silt and little Fine Sand, trace pea gravel, moist

[GC] Medium Dense, Dark Gray and Greenish Gray Clayey GRAVEL with some Fine to Coarse Sand, wet

[SP-SC] Medium Dense, Gray and Tan Clayey Fine to Coarse SAND with little gravel, wet

+83.5

+78.5

+73.5

SS-9

23' to 25'

SS-10

28' to 30'

SS-11

33' to 35'

SS-12

38' to 40'

SS-13

43' to 45'

SS-14

48' to 50'

2-2-3-3 N=5

1-2-2-3 N=4

7-11-15-14 N=26

11-11-12-13 N=23

6-8-17-50/5" N=25

7-8-8-9 N=16

REMARKS

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

LEGEND

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

ELEVATION DEPTH

a fc eb gd

SAMPLE

DEPTH

(feet)

SAMPLE

BLOWS

3 SHEETS

PROJECT 2INSTALLATION

Fort Lee

DRILLING LOG (Cont Sheet)

ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE

110.5 Hole No. 15DH-001

Training Support Facility

SHEET

OF

Hole No. 15DH-001

/2 3/

PROJECT HOLE NO.

Training Support Facility 15DH-0011836-A

JUN 67

52.5

[SP-SC] Medium Dense, Gray and Tan Clayey Fine to Coarse SAND with little gravel, wet (continued)

Boring terminated at 52.5 feet belw ground surface.

+58.0 Rock in Shoe at 52.5 feet below grownd surface

REMARKS

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

LEGEND

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

ELEVATION DEPTH

a fc eb gd

SAMPLE

DEPTH

(feet)

SAMPLE

BLOWS

3 SHEETS

PROJECT 3INSTALLATION

Fort Lee

DRILLING LOG (Cont Sheet)

ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE

110.5 Hole No. 15DH-001

Training Support Facility

SHEET

OF

Hole No. 15DH-001

/2 3/

PROJECT HOLE NO.

Training Support Facility 15DH-0011836-A

1.3 1.3 2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.6 15.0

22.0

[TOPSOIL] Light Brown and Black Silty Fine SAND with organics and little gravel, moist [SM] Medium Dense, Light Brown, Yellowish Brown and Black Silty Fine SAND with FILL and gravel, moist

[GRAVEL]

[SM] Medium Dense, Light Brown Silty Fine SAND with roots, moist [SC] Medium Dense, Orangish Brown, Yellowish Brown, and Tan Clayey Fine to Medium SAND with roots, moist [SC] Medium Dense, Reddish Orange, Orangish Brown, Yellowish Brown, and Tan Clayey Fine to Medium SAND with roots, moist

[SC] Medium Dense, Orangish Brown mottled Reddish Orange, Yellowish Brown, and Gray Clayey Fine to Medium SAND with trace gravel, roots, moist

[CL] Firm, Gray, Yellowish Brown, and Reddish Brown fine to coarse sandy CLAY, wet

[SC] Dense, Orangish Brown and Gray Clayey Fine to Coarse SAND with little gravel, wet

[SC] Medium Dense, Reddish Brown, Orangish Brown, and Gray Clayey Fine to Coarse SAND with GRAVEL, wet

[CL] Very Stiff, Orangish Brown, Yellowish Brown, and Gray CLAY with some fine Sand, wet [SC] Loose, Orangish Brown, Yellowish Brown, and Gray Clayey Fine SAND, wet

+116.3

+115.4 +115.3 +114.6

+112.6

+110.6

+108.6

+106.6

+104.6

+102.0 +101.6

+94.6

SS-1

0' to 2'

SS-2

2' to 4'

SS-3

4' to 6'

SS-4

6' to 8'

SS-5

8' to 10'

SS-6

10' to 12'

SS-7

13' to 15'

SS-8

18' to 20'

After 6'-8' sample collected, mud rotary casing installed

Ground Water depth at 9.75 feet below ground surface on 10/22/15 at 1145

Ground Water depth at 13.2 feet below ground surface on 10/21/15 at 1700 after casing removal

Cave-in depth at 16.5 feet below ground suface on 10/21/15 at 1655 after casing removal

3-11-12-8 N=23

6-7-9-12 N=16

9-11-11-12 N=22

10-12-13-14 N=25

5-8-15-15 N=23

10-17-17-15 N=34

6-7-10-11 N=17

2-3-4-5 N=7

REMARKS

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

LEGEND

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

ELEVATION DEPTH

a fc eb gd

SAMPLE

DEPTH

(feet)

SAMPLE

BLOWS

106.9

3" Roller Cone

INSTALLATION SHEET

Craig Steward

Jennifer Spitz58.3

7. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN

8. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK

9. TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE

17. ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE

15. ELEVATION GROUND WATER

SHEETS

STARTED COMPLETED

Hole No. 15DH-002

Fort Lee

11. DATUM FOR ELEVATION SHOWN (TBM or MSL)

DISTURBED

1. PROJECT

+116.6

GET Solutions UNDISTURBED13. TOTAL NO. OF OVERBURDEN

SAMPLES TAKEN

18. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING

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)

14. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES

16. DATE HOLE

DIVISION

10/21/2015---

12. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL

OF

15DH-002

10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT

Fort Lee, Virginia N 3,614,340.6 E 11,817,868.1

2. LOCATION (Coordinates or Station)

19. GEOLOGIST

CME-550

VERTICAL INCLINED

Training Support Facility

10/21/2015

DRILLING LOG 3

Hole No. 15DH-002

/2 3/

PROJECT HOLE NO.

Training Support Facility 15DH-002PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE.1836

37.0

40.0

47.0

[SC] Very Loose, Light Brown Clayey Fine SAND, wet

[CL] Firm, Dark Gray and Bluish Gray CLAY with some Silt, moist to wet

[CL] Soft, Dark Gray and Bluish Gray CLAY with some Silt and little fine Sand, wet

[SC] Dense to Medium Dense, Dark Gray and Greenish Gray Clayey SAND with Gravel, wet

[GC] Dense to Medium Dense, Dark Gray and Greenish Gray Clayey GRAVEL with some fine to coarse SAND, wet

[SP-SC] Medium Dense to Very Dense, Gray and Tan Clayey Fine to Coarse SAND with gravel, wet

+89.6

+84.6

+79.6

+76.6

+69.6

SS-9

23' to 25'

SS-10

28' to 30'

SS-11

33' to 35'

SS-12

38' to 40'

SS-13

43' to 45'

SS-14

48' to 50'

1-2-2-2 N=4

1-3-3-3 N=6

1-2-1-3 N=3

11-17-18-29 N=35

7-8-10-19 N=18

12-11-18-24 N=29

REMARKS

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

LEGEND

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

ELEVATION DEPTH

a fc eb gd

SAMPLE

DEPTH

(feet)

SAMPLE

BLOWS

3 SHEETS

PROJECT 2INSTALLATION

Fort Lee

DRILLING LOG (Cont Sheet)

ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE

116.6 Hole No. 15DH-002

Training Support Facility

SHEET

OF

Hole No. 15DH-002

/2 3/

PROJECT HOLE NO.

Training Support Facility 15DH-0021836-A

58.3

[SP-SC] Medium Dense to Very Dense, Gray and Tan Clayey Fine to Coarse SAND with gravel, wet (continued)

Boring terminated at 58.25 feet belw ground surface.

+58.4

SS-15

53' to 55'

SS-16

58' to 60'

Sample at 58'-60' low recovery

14-11-27-20 N=38

50/3"--- N>50+

REMARKS

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

LEGEND

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

ELEVATION DEPTH

a fc eb gd

SAMPLE

DEPTH

(feet)

SAMPLE

BLOWS

3 SHEETS

PROJECT 3INSTALLATION

Fort Lee

DRILLING LOG (Cont Sheet)

ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE

116.6 Hole No. 15DH-002

Training Support Facility

SHEET

OF

Hole No. 15DH-002

/2 3/

PROJECT HOLE NO.

Training Support Facility 15DH-0021836-A

0.5

1.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

11.0

12.0

17.0

22.0

[FILL] Black FILL with gravel, some fine to coarse sand, dry [SC] Medium Dense, Orangish Brown and Gray Clayey Fine to Coarse SAND, moist [SM] Dense, Light Brown Silty Fine to Medium SAND, moist [SM] Very Dense, Tan and Black Silty Fine to Coarse SAND with gravel and possible Fill material, low recovery, moist

[SC] Medium Dense, Gray and Yellowish Brown Clayey Fine to Coarse SAND with gravel, moist

[SC] Medium Dense, Gray and Yellowish Brown Clayey Fine to Coarse SAND with little gravel, moist

[SC] Medium Dense, Gray, Black, and Reddish Brown Clayey Fine to Coarse SAND with little gravel, wet

[CL] Stiff, Orangish Brown, Yellowish Brown, and Gray CLAY with some fine Sand, moist

[CL] Soft, Orangish Brown, Yellowish Brown, Gray, and Black CLAY with some fine Sand, moist

[CL] Very Soft, Yellowish Brown, Orangish Brown, and Gray fine sandy CLAY, wet

+111.2

+110.7

+109.7

+107.7

+105.7

+103.7

+100.7

+99.7

+94.7

+89.7

SS-1

0' to 2'

SS-2

2' to 4'

SS-3

4' to 6'

SS-4

6' to 8'

SS-5

8' to 10'

SS-6

10' to 12'

SS-7

13' to 15'

SS-8

18' to 20'

Quartz rock at 6 inches below ground surface

After 2'-4' sample collected, mud rotary casing installed, had to install casing due to fill material and gravel

Ground Water depth at 5.90 feet below ground surface on 10/21/15 at 1730

Ground Water depth at 8.23 feet below ground surface on 10/20/15 at 1050 after casing removal

3-9-11-38 N=20

50/5"--- N>50+

1-4-10-10 N=14

4-4-8-11 N=12

3-4-5-6 N=9

9-8-7-6 N=15

1-2-2-3 N=4

1-1-1-3 N=2

REMARKS

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

LEGEND

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

ELEVATION DEPTH

a fc eb gd

SAMPLE

DEPTH

(feet)

SAMPLE

BLOWS

105.8

3" Roller Cone

INSTALLATION SHEET

Craig Steward

Jennifer Spitz50.0

7. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN

8. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK

9. TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE

17. ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE

15. ELEVATION GROUND WATER

SHEETS

STARTED COMPLETED

Hole No. 15DH-003

Fort Lee

11. DATUM FOR ELEVATION SHOWN (TBM or MSL)

DISTURBED

1. PROJECT

+111.7

GET Solutions UNDISTURBED13. TOTAL NO. OF OVERBURDEN

SAMPLES TAKEN

18. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING

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)

14. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES

16. DATE HOLE

DIVISION

10/20/2015---

12. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL

OF

15DH-003

10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT

Fort Lee, Virginia N 3,614,607.5 E 11,818,079.6

2. LOCATION (Coordinates or Station)

19. GEOLOGIST

CME-550

VERTICAL INCLINED

Training Support Facility

10/20/2015

DRILLING LOG 3

Hole No. 15DH-003

/2 3/

PROJECT HOLE NO.

Training Support Facility 15DH-003PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE.1836

37.0

42.0

50.0

[CL] Soft, Dark Gray and Bluish Gray CLAY with some Silt, moist

[SC] Loose, Dark Gray and Bluish Gray clayey fine SAND with some Silt, moist

[GC] Medium Dense, Dark Gray and Greenish Gray Clayey GRAVEL with some fine to coarse Sand, wet, low recovery

[GC] Medium Dense, Dark Gray and Greenish Gray Clayey GRAVEL with some fine to coarse Sand, wet, low recovery

[GC] Medium Dense to Dense, Dark Gray and Greenish Gray, and Gray Clayey GRAVEL with some fine to coarse Sand, wet, low recovery

+84.7

+79.7

+74.7

+69.7

+61.7

SS-9

23' to 25'

SS-10

28' to 30'

SS-11

33' to 35'

SS-12

38' to 40'

SS-13

43' to 45'

SS-14

48' to 50'

Cave-in depth at 21.75 feet below ground suface on 10/20/15 at 1048 after casing removal

1-2-2-3 N=4

1-2-2-3 N=4

8-6-6-8 N=12

10-13-17-16 N=30

5-12-11-8 N=23

11-17-24-37 N=41

REMARKS

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

LEGEND

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

ELEVATION DEPTH

a fc eb gd

SAMPLE

DEPTH

(feet)

SAMPLE

BLOWS

3 SHEETS

PROJECT 2INSTALLATION

Fort Lee

DRILLING LOG (Cont Sheet)

ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE

111.7 Hole No. 15DH-003

Training Support Facility

SHEET

OF

Hole No. 15DH-003

/2 3/

PROJECT HOLE NO.

Training Support Facility 15DH-0031836-A

Boring terminated at 50 feet belw ground surface.

Sample at 48'-50' low recovery, gravel material

REMARKS

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

LEGEND

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

ELEVATION DEPTH

a fc eb gd

SAMPLE

DEPTH

(feet)

SAMPLE

BLOWS

3 SHEETS

PROJECT 3INSTALLATION

Fort Lee

DRILLING LOG (Cont Sheet)

ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE

111.7 Hole No. 15DH-003

Training Support Facility

SHEET

OF

Hole No. 15DH-003

/2 3/

PROJECT HOLE NO.

Training Support Facility 15DH-0031836-A

0.6

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

11.5

17.0

22.0

[TOPSOIL] Dark Brown and Black Silty Fine SAND with organics and gravel rock, moist [FILL] Black FILL with gravel, dry [SC] Medium Dense, Orangish Brown, Yellowish Brown, and Gray Clayey Fine to Coarse SAND with some gravel rock, moist [SC] Medium Dense, Orangish Brown, Yellowish Brown, Tan, and Gray Clayey Fine to Medium SAND, moist

[SC] Medium Dense, Orangish Brown, Reddish Brown, Yellowish Brown, and Gray Clayey Fine to Coarse SAND with trace gravel, moist

[SC] Dense, Orangish Brown, Reddish Brown, Yellowish Brown, and Gray Clayey Fine to Coarse SAND with gravel, moist

[SC] Loose, Orangish Brown, Yellowish Brown, Reddish Brown, and Gray Clayey Fine to Coarse SAND with trace gravel, moist to wet

[SC] Loose, Orangish Brown, Yellowish Brown, Black and Gray clayey fine to coarse SAND, wet

[SC] Very Loose, Orangish Brown, Yellowish Brown, Gray, and Black Clayey Fine SAND, wet

+111.3 +110.9

+109.5

+107.5

+105.5

+103.5

+100.0

+94.5

+89.5

SS-1

0' to 2'

SS-2

2' to 4'

SS-3

4' to 6'

SS-4

6' to 8'

SS-5

8' to 10'

SS-6

10' to 12'

SS-7

13' to 15'

SS-8

18' to 20'

No Reading for Ground Water depth on10/22/15 due to hole being filled with water

Ground Water depth at 7.63 feet below ground surface on 10/21/15 at 0909 after casing removal After 6'-8' sample collected, mud rotary casing installed

1-2-14-8 N=16

4-9-10-11 N=19

6-11-11-13 N=22

11-16-18-15 N=34

2-5-3-5 N=8

4-5-4-6 N=9

2-1-2-2 N=3

1-1-1-2 N=2

REMARKS

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

LEGEND

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

ELEVATION DEPTH

a fc eb gd

SAMPLE

DEPTH

(feet)

SAMPLE

BLOWS

0.0

3" Roller Cone

INSTALLATION SHEET

Craig Steward

Jennifer Spitz52.5

7. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN

8. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK

9. TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE

17. ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE

15. ELEVATION GROUND WATER

SHEETS

STARTED COMPLETED

Hole No. 15DH-004

Fort Lee

11. DATUM FOR ELEVATION SHOWN (TBM or MSL)

DISTURBED

1. PROJECT

+111.5

GET Solutions UNDISTURBED13. TOTAL NO. OF OVERBURDEN

SAMPLES TAKEN

18. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING

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)

14. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES

16. DATE HOLE

DIVISION

10/20/2015---

12. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL

OF

15DH-004

10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT

Fort Lee, Virginia N 3,614,459.3 E 11,818,079.4

2. LOCATION (Coordinates or Station)

19. GEOLOGIST

CME-550

VERTICAL INCLINED

Training Support Facility

10/21/2015

DRILLING LOG 3

Hole No. 15DH-004

/2 3/

PROJECT HOLE NO.

Training Support Facility 15DH-004PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE.1836

37.0

42.0

47.0

[CL] Soft to Firm, Dark Gray and Bluish Gray CLAY with some silt, wet

[GC] Medium Dense, Dark Gray Clayey GRAVEL with some fine to coarse Sand, wet

[GC] Medium Dense, Dark Gray and Greenish Gray Clayey GRAVEL with some fine to coarse Sand, wet

[SP-SC] Medium Dense, Gray and Dark Gray Fine to Medium Clayey SAND, wet

[SP-SC] Very Dense, Gray and Dark Gray Fine to Coarse Clayey SAND with some gravel, wet

+79.5

+74.5

+69.5

+64.5

SS-9

23' to 25'

SS-10

28' to 30'

SS-11

33' to 35'

SS-12

38' to 40'

SS-13

43' to 45'

SS-14

48' to 50'

1-2-2-3 N=4

1-2-3-3 N=5

9-8-11-15 N=19

5-11-12-13 N=23

10-15-12-20 N=27

25-29-39-37 N=68

REMARKS

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

LEGEND

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

ELEVATION DEPTH

a fc eb gd

SAMPLE

DEPTH

(feet)

SAMPLE

BLOWS

3 SHEETS

PROJECT 2INSTALLATION

Fort Lee

DRILLING LOG (Cont Sheet)

ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE

111.5 Hole No. 15DH-004

Training Support Facility

SHEET

OF

Hole No. 15DH-004

/2 3/

PROJECT HOLE NO.

Training Support Facility 15DH-0041836-A

52.5

[SP-SC] Very Dense, Gray and Dark Gray Fine to Coarse Clayey SAND with some gravel, wet (continued)

Boring terminated at 52.5 feet belw ground surface.

+59.0

Cave-in depth at 51.45 feet below ground suface on 10/21/15 at 0907 after casing removal Attempted to advance to 53 feet but was not able to do so. End of boring at 52.5 feet

REMARKS

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

LEGEND

CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

ELEVATION DEPTH

a fc eb gd

SAMPLE

DEPTH

(feet)

SAMPLE

BLOWS

3 SHEETS

PROJECT 3INSTALLATION

Fort Lee

DRILLING LOG (Cont Sheet)

ELEVATION TOP OF HOLE

111.5 Hole No. 15DH-004

Training Support Facility

SHEET

OF

Hole No. 15DH-004

/2 3/

PROJECT HOLE NO.

Training…