W912LQ12B0002BorrowSitesGeoStudy_(1).pdf

REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION

Proposed Borrow Study

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

Prepared for:

WILLIAMSBURG ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP

Williamsburg, Virginia

Prepared by:

BLUE RIDGE GEOTECHNICAL, LLC

Richmond, Virginia

BRG PROJECT NO. 109

January 7, 2011

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLCBlue Ridge Geotechnical, LLCBlue Ridge Geotechnical, LLCBlue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

PROPOSED BORROW STUDY

Fort Pickett Military Base

BRG No. 109

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction and Authorization……………………………………………………………………………….1

Purpose and Scope of Services……………………………………………………………………

Project Information…………………………………………………………………………………………...1

Site Descriptions……………………………………………………………………………………………...2

Geologic Conditions………………………………………………………………………………

Field Exploration Program………………………………………………………

Laboratory Testing Program………………………………………………………………………………….4

Subsurface Conditions………………………………………………………………………………………..6

Soil Stratigraphy…………………………………………………………………………………….6

Groundwater Observations………………………………………………………………………….7

Discussion of Borrow Sites…………………………………………………………………………………..8

Borrow Site B1……………………………………………………………………………………..8

Borrow Site B2……………………………………………………………………………………..8

Borrow Site B3……………………………………………………………………………………..8

Borrow Site B4……………………………………………………………………………………..9

Borrow Site B5……………………………………………………………………………………..9

Borrow Site B6……………………………………………………………………………………10

Borrow Site B7……………………………………………………………………………………10

Borrow Site B8……………………………………………………………………………………11

Borrow Site B11…………………………………………………………………………………..11

Borrow Site B12…………………………………………………………………………………..12

Borrow Site B13…………………………………………………………………………………..12

Borrow Site B14…………………………………………………………………………………..12

Limitations………………………………………………………………………………………

Acknowledgement…………………………………………………………………………………………..13

References…………………………………………………………………………………………………..14

Appendices:

Appendix A – Figures

Appendix B – Boring Logs

Appendix C – Laboratory Test Results

INTRODUCTION AND AUTHORIZATION

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC (BRG) is pleased to submit this report of the geotechnical exploration program performed for the proposed Borrow Study at the Fort Pickett Military Base in Nottoway County, Virginia. This work was performed in general accordance with our proposal to Williamsburg Environmental Group (WEG) dated August 5, 2010, which was accepted on October 1, 2010.

PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES

The purposes of our involvement on this project were to execute a subsurface exploration program, to evaluate the subsurface conditions at twelve (12) borrow sites within the base, and to prepare this report, which contains our geotechnical recommendations. The tasks that BRG performed are summarized below.

A. Reviewed the available geologic literature of the area.

B. Performed seventeen (17) Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings.

C. Performed laboratory testing on selected soil samples.

D. Evaluated the boring and laboratory data to determine which borrow sites appeared to be acceptable for use as compacted structural fill, and which appeared to be acceptable for basin clay liners and dams/berms.

E. Prepared this report presenting our findings and recommendations.

Our scope of services did not include subsequent site visits, construction observation work, attendance at meetings, preparation of construction cost or quantity estimates, or any other task not explicitly identified herein or in our proposal.

PROJECT INFORMATION

The Fort Pickett Military Base is located in the eastern portion of Nottoway County, Virginia as shown on the Project Location Map (Drawing No. 1) in Appendix A. The twelve (12) borrow sites are contained within an area that measures approximately 6 miles by 10 miles in plan as shown on the General Borrow Location Plan (Drawing No. 2) in Appendix A.

Report of Geotechnical Exploration Page 2 of 14 Borrow Study BRG No. 109 Fort Pickett Military Base January 7, 2011

A summary of the borrow location areas is summarized below:

Borrow Site

Designations

Boring(s)

Drilled General Location

B1 BS-1 West side of Trimble Road (2 acres)

B2 BS-2 Northwest corner of MRTC Road and Upson Road (2 acres)

B3 BS-3

South and West sides of MRTC Road, west of the intersection of MRTC

Road and Poplar Road (2 acres)

B4 BS-4 North side of Archer Road (2 acres)

B5

BS-5

BS-6

East side of Wonju Road (Two parcels: 1.3 acres and 0.7 acres)

B6

BS-7

BS-7A

Southwest side of Pender Road (2 acres)

Southeast side of Wonju Road (2 acres)

B7 BS-8 South side of Butterwood Road (2 acres)

B8

BS-9

BS-10

East side of the intersection of South Shacks Hole Road and Wilcox Road

(4 acres)

B11

BS-11

BS-12

North side of Longstreet Road (Two parcels: 0.5 acres and 1.5 acres)

B12 BS-13 West side of Sweeny Road (2 acres)

B13 BS-14 West side of Old Oak Road (2 acres)

B14

BS-15

BS-16

East side of Range Road (4 acres)

SITE DESCRIPTIONS

A general description of each site is presented in the table below:

Description

B1 Level site; Appears to have been disturbed (cut/filled) in the past.

B2 Level site at boring location, where it appears to have been used as a borrow pit in the past. Other portions of the site rise upward toward the north and west.

B3 Topography slopes downward slightly toward the west. Covered with tall field grass and sporadic brush and bushes. No evidence of past disturbance noted.

B4 Topography slopes upward toward the north. No evidence of past disturbance noted.

B5

0.7-acre parcel is flat and cleared; may have been used for borrow in the past

1.3-acre parcel has a slight upward rise in topography toward the northeast; site is clear, but no real evidence of past disturbance.

B6

Boring BS-7 parcel is on top of a small hill, which is covered with tall field grass and sporadic brush and bushes. Boring BS-7A parcel is clear and has a slight downward sloping topography toward the east.

B7 Level site at boring location, where it appears to have been used as a borrow pit in the past.

B8

Generally level, except for the southern portion, which has a slight downward sloping topography toward the southeast. Covered with tall field grass and sporadic brush and bushes (thick brush in several areas). No evidence of past disturbance noted.

Report of Geotechnical Exploration Page 3 of 14

Description

B11

0.5-acre parcel is level and it appears to have been used as a borrow pit in the past.

1.5-acre parcel is level and at a higher elevation than Longstreet Road; it appears to have been used as a borrow pit in the past.

B12 Generally level; no evidence of past disturbance noted.

B13 Boring placed on a small ridge/mound. No evidence of past disturbance noted.

B14 Generally level; no evidence of past disturbance noted.

GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS

According to the geologic reference cited, the site is located within the southeastern Piedmont

Physiographic Province. The majority of the borrow areas are underlain by gneissic granite and granodiorite (fg). These materials are reported to be “light-gray to white, fine to medium-grained, and massive to foliated, mucovite-biotite gneissic granite to granodiorite containing minor garnet, and xenoliths of biotite gneiss and amphibolite. Several different intrusive phases are present.” Areas B12 and B13 may lie a formation described as “porphyroblastic granite gneiss (pbg).” These materials are described as “light-gray, medium to coarse-grained, compositionally layered, well-foliated, commonly lineated gneiss composed of metamorphosed granite, leucogranite, and granodiorite.”

2003 Digital Representation of the 1993 Geologic Map of Virginia, Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy, Division of Mineral Resources

Report of Geotechnical Exploration Page 4 of 14

FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM

On November 10, 11, and 12, 2010, seventeen (17) Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings were performed at the locations shown on the Approximate Boring Location Plans (Drawing Nos. 2, and 2A through 2L) in Appendix A. The borings (designated BS-1 through BS-16, including BS-

7A) were advanced to depths ranging from 10 to 15 feet below the existing ground surface. They were located in the field using a hand-held GPS unit (Garmin ® E-Trex Legend) and existing site features. The GPS coordinates of each boring location are provided on the boring logs in

Appendix “B” and on the boring location plans.

The borings were performed by Ayers and Ayers, Inc. of Powhatan, Virginia and were advanced using a 4-wheel-drive, truck-mounted, CME 45B drill rig. Hollow-stem augers having an inside diameter of 2¼ inches were used. The SPT, as defined by ASTM D 1586, involves drilling to predetermined depths using hollow-stem augers, removing the center plug, and driving a split-spoon sampler with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches through the hollow-stem augers. The blow counts required to drive the split-spoon sampler are recorded for three successive, 6-inch increments. The last two, 6-inch increments are added together, and this value is referred to as the N-value for that particular sample. The N-value can be used to estimate the relative density of the soil (for granular soils), or the consistency (for fine-grained soils), and can be used to estimate geotechnical engineering properties. A manual hammer was used during the SPT work.

LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM

The soil samples obtained during drilling operations were visually classified in general accordance with ASTM D 2487 (Standard Test Method for Classification of Soils for

Engineering Purposes) and ASTM D 2488 (Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure)). This system is also known as the Unified Soil

Classification System (USCS) and was used to develop the soil descriptions presented on the logs. The logs and supplemental information regarding the USCS procedure are provided in

Appendix “B.”

Selected soil samples were sent to GeoTesting Express in Boxborough, Massachusetts for laboratory testing. The tests performed included Water Content determinations (ASTM D 2216), Atterberg Limits (ASTM D 4318), Grain-size Analyses (ASTM D 422), Standard Proctor compaction tests (ASTM D 698) and Flexible Wall Permeability tests (ASTM D 5084). Detailed laboratory results are included in Appendix “C” of this report and summarized below.

Report of Geotechnical Exploration Page 5 of 14

Summary of Laboratory Tests

(Jar Samples)

Boring Location

(Borrow Area)

Depth

(ft.)

Water

Content

Liquid

Limit

Plasticity

Index

Fines

Content

USCS

BS-1 (B1) 4.0-5.5 17.7 44 14 34.4 SM

BS-2 (B2) 0-1.5 11.2 44 19 31.9 SC

BS-3 (B3) 2.0-3.5 23.7 46 20

56.5

(~25% clay)

CL

BS-3 (B3) 4.0-5.5 19.8 --- --- --- ---

BS-4 (B4) 2.0-3.5 21.5 34 6 56.2 ML

BS-4 (B4) 4.0-5.5 20.4 --- --- --- ---

BS-5 (B5) 2.0-3.5 22.1 --- --- --- ---

BS-6 (B5) 2.0-3.5 17.7 95 44

91.6

(~22% clay)

MH

BS-6 (B5) 7.0-8.5 51.8 76 23 93.8 MH

BS-7 (B6) 2.0-3.5 28.4 59 30

55.6

(~26% clay)

CH

BS-7 (B6) 4.0-5.5 25.1 45 17 57.3 ML

BS-7A (B6) 2.0-3.5 20.8 --- --- --- ---

BS-7A (B6) 4.0-5.5 46.0 45 17

96.7

(~48% clay)

CH

BS-7A (B6) 7.0-8.5 44.5 91 47

96.3

(~35% clay)

MH

BS-8 (B7) 0-1.5 21.3 57 24 51.8 MH

BS-8 (B7) 2.0-3.5 15.9 --- --- --- ---

BS-9 (B8) 2.0-3.5 31.1 69 41

68.4

(~38% clay)

CH

BS-9 (B8) 4.0-5.5 22.6 43 19

50.3

(~15% clay)

CL

BS-10 (B8) 2.0-3.5 22.9 44 24 55.1 CL

BS-10 (B8) 4.0-5.5 28.9 --- --- --- ---

BS-11 (B11) 0-1.5 17.3 --- --- --- ---

BS-12 (B11) 0-1.5 31.8 --- --- --- ---

BS-12 (B11) 2.0-3.5 30.0 52 15

47.3

(~15% clay)

SM

BS-12 (B11) 4.0-5.5 25.5 50 14 45.9 SM

BS-13 (B12) 0-1.5 31.3 --- --- --- ---

BS-13 (B12) 2.0-3.5 24.4 49 14

61.6

(~30% clay)

ML

BS-13 (B12) 4.0-5.5 22.3 60 23 62.6 MH

BS-14 (B13) 0-1.5 20.1 --- --- --- ---

Report of Geotechnical Exploration Page 6 of 14

Boring Location

(Borrow Area)

Depth

(ft.)

Water

Content

Liquid

Limit

Plasticity

Index

Fines

Content

USCS

BS-14 (B13) 2.0-3.5 19.3 --- --- --- ---

BS-14 (B13) 4.0-5.5 15.4 --- --- --- ---

Summary of Laboratory Tests

(Bulk Samples)

Boring Location

(Borrow Area)

Depth

(ft.)

Water

Content

Max. Dry

Density

(pcf)

Opt. Water

Content

Permeability

BS-6 (B5) 2.0-7.0 55.5 83.0 34.5 3.7x10 -6 cm/sec

BS-7 (B6) 2.0-7.0 27.2 102.0 21.5 8.1x10 -6 cm/sec

BS-7A (B6) 1.0-6.0 31.7 96.0 22.5 1.0x10 -7 cm/sec

BS-9 (B8) 2.0-7.0 22.6 100.5 20.5 2.0x10 -6 cm/sec

BS-12 (B11) 2.0-7.0 27.1 97.5 21.5 ---

BS-13 (B12) 2.0-7.0 23.3 101.5 21.0 4.8x10 -7 cm/sec

BS-14 (B13) 2.0-7.0 17.5 110.0 16.0 ---

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

Soil Stratigraphy

Three general soil units were encountered during our subsurface exploration program:

Unit “A” materials: Surficial Materials

Unit “B” soils: Fill and Possible Fill

Unit “C” soils: Residuum

Unit “A” materials consisted of approximately ½ inch to 5 inches of surficial organic soil

(sometimes referred to as “topsoil”). This unit was encountered only at borings BS-3, BS-9, BS-10, BS-11, and BS-14.

Unit “B” soils (fill and possible fill) were encountered only at borings BS-1 (upper 4 ft.)

and BS-9 (upper 2 ft.). These soils consisted predominantly of clayey SILT with sand and silty SAND. Varying quantities of organic matter was noted within the samples.

Unit “C” soils (residuum) were encountered below the Unit “A” materials and Unit “B” soils (where encountered), extended to the planned boring termination depths of 10 to 15

ft. The only exception to this occurred at boring BS-11, where auger refusal was encountered at 8 ft. These soils, which are weathered from the parent bedrock or the

Report of Geotechnical Exploration Page 7 of 14 igneous intrusions, consisted predominantly of sandy SILT (ML), silty SAND (SM), silty

CLAY (CL/CH), and clayey SILT (ML/MH). Occasional strata of clayey SAND (SC), sandy CLAY (CL) and partially weathered rock were encountered.

A detailed description of the soils encountered at each boring is presented on the boring logs provided in Appendix “B.” Although the delineations between these units, as well as the delineations between the various soil strata within each unit, are depicted as a solid line on the boring logs, the transition between strata may be gradual or abrupt. BRG will retain the soil samples for 60 days, unless it is requested that they be kept for a longer period of time.

Groundwater Observations

The groundwater was not encountered within the depths explored. However, at boring

BS-6, the tip of the sample from 13.5 to 15.0 ft. appeared to be “wet.”

It should be noted that the central Virginia region received below-average rainfall for the months preceding this investigation, which may have affected the groundwater conditions at the site.

Long-term groundwater measurements using piezometers were not obtained. Unless long-term groundwater measurements are made over a long period of time, it is difficult to know precisely where the static groundwater table is located. The groundwater table may not simply be the point at which the soil samples have a “wet” appearance. The actual groundwater table elevation (which, in engineering terms, is the elevation at which the effective stress of a soil is equal the total stress) may be lower than the point at which

“wet” soils are encountered. This is due to the presence of a saturated capillary fringe zone above the actual water table, especially common in fine-grained soils. Additionally, the soil augers typically alter the sides of the borehole (smear the sidewalls of the hole), which inhibits groundwater recharge, resulting in possible erroneous readings when taken immediately upon completion of the boring. In some cases, the groundwater that is encountered during drilling is not a static phreatic surface, but rather is under artesian pressure. Alternatively, subsurface water may be “perched” on top of an impervious stratum. Seasonal fluctuations and extended periods of drought or rain can also significantly affect the groundwater level.

Report of Geotechnical Exploration Page 8 of 14

DISCUSSION OF BORROW SITES

Borrow Site B1 (Boring BS-1)

Based on boring BS-1, Borrow Site B1 appeared to contain approximately 4 feet of fill that classified as clayey SILT with sand. The fill also contained varying quantities of wood fragments and organics and therefore appears questionable for use as compacted structural fill. The residual soil between the depths of 4 ft. and 10 ft. (boring termination depth) classified as silty SAND

(SM) with varying amounts of clay. The residual soil is expected to be suitable for use as compacted structural fill below structures and roadways. Due to the coarse-grained nature of the residuum, however, the hydraulic conductivity of this material is likely relatively high, and therefore, does not appear suitable for use as a basin liner or a stormwater berm/dam.

If this site is ultimately determined to be an important borrow source for Fort Pickett, the existing fill soils can be further evaluated using a series of shallow test pits. The organic material and other deleterious material that may be in the fill can be better quantified using test pits, and the pits will likely provide a better indication as to the material’s quality for reuse as fill.

Borrow Site B2 (Boring BS-2)

Boring BS-2 was drilled within a level, clear area near the central portion of the site. This area of

B2 appears to have been previously mined for borrow material, as the ground surface elevations are significantly higher than the areas surrounding the excavated area. The 10-foot-deep boring encountered clayey SAND (SC) and silty SAND (SM), which is expected to be suitable for use as compacted structural fill below structures and roadways. Below a depth of approximately 5 ft. in the boring, spoon refusal (> 50 blows per foot) was encountered; therefore, the material below this depth may be difficult to excavate with common earthmoving equipment. The surrounding higher ground, most of which was inaccessible to a drill rig, may also prove to be a good source for borrow. Test pits may be a valuable technique for evaluating the higher areas.

Borrow Site B3 (Boring BS-3)

The upper 2 feet of Boring BS-3 encountered clayey SAND (SC), which is expected to be suitable for use as compacted structural fill. Between depths of 2 ft. and 4 ft., clayey SILT/silty

CLAY (ML/CH) was encountered, which may be suitable for use as a basin liner or a stormwater berm/dam. Below 4 ft., sandy SILT (ML) with trace mica extends to boring termination depth of

10 ft. Sandy SILT can be considered to be of moderate quality for use as structural fill, but is not considered suitable for use as a basin liner or a stormwater berm/dam. The quantity of high-

Report of Geotechnical Exploration Page 9 of 14 quality structural fill and low permeability soil appears to be limited at Borrow Site B3. On the other hand, the quantity of moderate-quality structural fill appears to be high.

Borrow Site B4 (Boring BS-4)

The material encountered within the limits of Boring BS-4 appeared to be predominantly coarse-grained (silty SAND (SM)). In some cases, the samples became predominantly fine-grained

(sandy SILT (ML)); however, unlike Borrow Site B3, the presence of mica was not observed in the samples. This material is expected to be suitable for use as compacted structural fill, but does not appear suitable for use as a basin liner or as a stormwater berm/dam.

Based on the Standard Proctor tests performed on similar soil within the facility, specifically at borings BS-12 and BS-14, the optimum water content is expected to be between 16% and 21%.

The natural water content values of the samples tested where 20.4% and 21.5%. Based on these results, little, if any, drying of the soil prior to compaction is anticipated.

Borrow Site B5 (Borings BS-5 and BS-6)

Borrow Site B5 consists of two small parcels, a 1.3-acre parcel represented by boring BS-5 and a

0.7-acre parcel represented by boring BS-6. The material in the upper 15-feet of the 1.3-acre site consisted predominantly of clayey SILT (ML) and sandy SILT (ML), which can be considered

“poor to moderate” for use as a compacted structural fill. This soil is not expected to be suitable for use as a basin liner or a stormwater berm/dam.

The soil in the upper 9 feet of the 0.7-acre site classified as clayey SILT/silty CLAY (MH/CH).

This soil is typically a poor material for compacted structural fill; however, it does appear suitable for use as a basin liner or a stormwater berm/dam. The saturated hydraulic conductivity

(permeability) of the bulk sample tested in boring BS-6 was 3.7x10 -6 cm/sec, which is outside the criterion of 1x10 -6 cm/sec. However, for the samples tested, the fines content was very high

(greater than 90%). Subsequent permeability testing may indicate that the aforementioned criterion can be achieved; however, this material can likely be judged to be essentially

“impermeable” for stormwater basin applications.

The water content of the soil from approximately 4 ft. to 9 ft. appears to be significantly higher

(51.8%) than the optimum water content (34.5%) based on the Standard Proctor. Therefore, the soil within this range of depths will likely require significant drying prior to compaction. The use of lime or other additive to the soil to facilitate compaction will likely increase the soil’s permeability; therefore, if this action is considered, permeability testing of the treated soil is highly recommended.

Report of Geotechnical Exploration Page 10 of 14

Borrow Site B6 (Borings BS-7 and BS-7A)

Borrow Site B6 consists of two parcels, a 2-acre parcel represented by boring BS-7 and a 2.8-acre parcel represented by boring BS-7A. The material in the upper 6 feet of the 2-acre site consisted of silty CLAY (CH/CL), clayey SILT/silty CLAY (MH/CH) with some sand and clayey SILT

(ML) with some sand. This soil is judged to be a poor material for compacted structural fill. The saturated hydraulic conductivity of the sample tested in boring BS-7 was 8.1x10 -6 cm/sec, which is does not meet the criterion of 1x10 -6 cm/sec. Additionally, the fines content of this material is approximately 55% to 60%, meaning the coarse fraction of the soil is 40% to 45%. Therefore, except for the upper 2-foot portion of the profile, this material likely does not meet the requirements for a basin liner or a stormwater dam/berm. Below a depth of 6 feet, the material classified as silty SAND (SM) with clay, which should be adequate for use as compacted structural fill.

The upper 6 feet of the 2.8-acre site classified as silty CLAY (CL/CH), with the exception of the material between 2 ft. and 4 ft., which appeared to be a sandy CLAY (CL). This soil is typically poor to moderate quality material for compacted structural fill; however, the saturated hydraulic conductivity (permeability) of the bulk sample testing in boring BS-7A was 1.0x10 -7 cm/sec, which meets the criterion of 1x10 -6 cm/sec. The soil between 6 ft. and 10 ft. (boring termination) classified as clayey SILT (ML/MH), with a high fines content (93%) and a relatively high clay content (35%). Therefore, the soil within the entire depth sampled is expected to acceptable for use as a basin liner or a stormwater dam/berm.

The water content of the samples tested where 20.8%, 31.7%, 44.5% and 46.0%. Except for the near surface soils, the natural water content appears to be significantly higher than the optimum water content (22.5%) based on the Standard Proctor. Therefore, these soils will likely require significant reduction of moisture prior to compaction. As previously indicated, the use of lime or other soil additives to facilitate compaction will likely increase the soil’s permeability; therefore, if this is being considered, permeability tests on the treated soil is highly recommended.

Borrow Site B7 (Boring BS-8)

The material in the upper 4 feet of borrow site B7 consisted predominantly of clayey SILT (ML) with sand, which can be considered “poor to moderate” for use as a compacted structural fill.

Additionally, this soil is likely not suitable for use as a basin liner or a stormwater berm/dam.

The soil below a depth of 4 feet, however, appears to be predominantly silty SAND (SM), which is expected to be suitable for use as compacted structural fill.

Report of Geotechnical Exploration Page 11 of 14

Borrow Site B8 (Borings BS-9 and BS-10)

In boring BS-9, the material between 2 ft. and 6 ft. classified as silty CLAY (CH) and silty

CLAY/clayey SILT (CL/ML) with some sand. In spite of the high sand content, this material had a saturated hydraulic conductivity value of 2.0x10 -6 cm/sec. Although this value is slightly outside the criterion of 1x10 -6 cm/sec, this soil can likely be judged to be essentially

“impermeable” for use in a stormwater basin. The remaining soil within boring BS-9 and the soil within boring BS-10 appears to be of moderate quality for use as compacted structural fill.

Borrow Site B11 (Borings BS-11 and BS-12)

Borrow Site B11 consists of two small parcels, a 0.5-acre parcel represented by boring BS-11 and a 1.5-acre parcel represented by boring BS-12. The material in the upper 2-feet of the 0.5-acre site consisted predominantly of silty CLAY (CL), which is underlain by sandy SILT (ML) between depths of 2 ft. and 4 ft. Below a depth of 4 ft., partially weathered rock having spoon refusal blow counts (N >50 bpf) was encountered to a depth of approximately 8 ft., where auger refusal was encountered. This parcel appears to have been previously mined for borrow material.

The remaining material available does not appear to be suitable for use as a basin liner or stormwater dam/berm, except for possibly a small quantity of material near the surface.

Additionally, the majority of the material (partially weathered rock) will likely be difficult to excavate with common earthmoving equipment as indicated by the high blow counts. Therefore, this site does not appear to be a desirable borrow source.

The 1.5-acre parcel also appears to have been excavated previously for borrow; however, the majority of this site lies at a higher elevation than the 0.5-acre site and the roadway. The upper 4 feet of BS-12 consisted of silty CLAY/clayey SILT (CL/ML) with bands of sand. This material is expected to be poor to moderate as a compacted structural fill, and its sand and silt content may result in permeability values that are significantly higher than what is typically required for stormwater basins. Between 4 ft. and 10 ft. (boring termination), the soil was predominantly sandy SILT/silty SAND (ML/SM) with mica, and is expected to be of moderate quality use as compacted structural fill. The natural water content value of the ML/SM appears to be approximately 25%, which is 3 to 4 percentage points above the optimum water content value of

21.5% based on the Standard Proctor. Therefore, little, if any, drying of the soil is anticipated prior to compaction.

Report of Geotechnical Exploration Page 12 of 14

Borrow Site B12 (Boring BS-13)

The upper 8 feet of boring BS-13 classified as silty CLAY (CL/CH) to clayey SILT/silty CLAY

(MH/CH). In spite of the relatively high sand content (37% to 38%), the saturated hydraulic conductivity of the sample tested was 4.8x10 -7 cm/sec, which exceeds the criterion of 1x10 -6 cm/sec. Therefore, the soil within approximately the upper 8 ft. of the site appears acceptable for use as a basin liner or stormwater dam/berm. Between 8 ft. and 10 ft. (boring termination), the soil classified as sandy SILT/silty SAND (ML/SM), which would make it of moderate quality for use as compacted structural fill.

Borrow Site B13 (Boring BS-14)

The material between depths of 2 ft. and 10 ft. (boring termination) of boring BS-14 classified as clayey SAND (SC) and silty SAND (SM), which should make it adequate for use as compacted structural fill. The natural water content values of the soil tested in this material were 15.4% and

19.3%. The optimum water content based on the Standard Proctor was 16.0%; therefore, little, if any, modification to the soil’s water content is anticipated prior to compaction. The upper 2 ft.

layer classified as silty CLAY (CL), with little sand. This clay may be acceptable for use as a basin liner or stormwater dam/berm; however, the quantity of acceptable material for this application may be limited.

Borrow Site B14 (Borings BS-15 and BS-16)

The material in the upper 7 feet of BS-15 classified as sandy SILT/silty SAND (ML/SM) with trace to little mica, which would make it of moderate-quality for use as compacted structural fill.

Between 8 ft. and 10 ft. (boring termination), the soil was classified as silty SAND (SM), which would make it adequate for use as a compacted structural fill. The soil within the entire 10 ft.

depth of boring BS-16 classified as silty SAND (SM), which would make it adequate for use as a compacted structural fill.

Report of Geotechnical Exploration Page 13 of 14

LIMITATIONS

This report has been prepared specifically for Williamsburg Environmental Group, or their authorized representatives, for the proposed Borrow Study at the Fort Pickett Military Base in

Nottoway County, Virginia.

The recommendations contained herein are based on the information obtained during our subsurface exploration program and our understanding of the project. If the details of this project differ from those described herein, or if any details of this project change after the date of this report, we should be contacted. Our recommendations may have to be amended as a result of the project modifications.

It is important to realize that subsurface conditions can vary (sometimes significantly) from those encountered during the subsurface exploration program. If, during construction operations, site conditions appear different than those described herein, we should be contacted. Again, our recommendations may have to be amended as a result of the conditions revealed during construction.

The report should be made available to other designers involved with the project, as well as perspective contractors bidding on the project. However, it should be known that this report is

“for information only” and should not be considered part of the Contract Documents. This report was intended to provide recommendations for design only. The recommendations contained herein represent our opinions and interpretations; no other warranty, explicit or implicit, is made.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We appreciate the opportunity to serve as your geotechnical engineering consultant on this project. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at 804/357-4157 or

BlueRidgeGeotech@comcast.net.

Respectfully Submitted, Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

J. Michael Hall, P.E.

Geotechnical Engineer/Founder

Report of Geotechnical Exploration Page 14 of 14

REFERENCES

Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy, Division of

Mineral Resources, Publication 174, Digital Representation of the 1993 Geologic Map of

Virginia, Expanded Explanation, 2003

APPENDICES

� Appendix A (Figures)

Project Location Map (Drawing No. 1)

Approximate Borrow Location Plan (Drawing No. 2)

Approximate Boring Location Plans (Drawing Nos. 2A through 2L)

� Appendix B (Boring Logs)

Boring Logs B-1 through B-16 (inclusive), and B-7A

Boring Log Interpretation (2 sheets)

� Appendix C (Laboratory Test Results)

Appendix “A”

Figures

* Map obtained from Virginia Department of Transportation website

Drawing No. 1

Borrow Study

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

PPPPROJECT ROJECT ROJECT ROJECT LLLLOCATION OCATION OCATION OCATION MMMMAPAPAPAP

WILLIAMSBURG ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP

Williamsburg, Virginia

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

BRG No. 109

December 2010

Drawn by: JMH *

Scale: n/a

12817 Church Road, Richmond, VA 23233 BlueRidgeGeotech@comcast.net

804/357-4157

12817 Church Road, Richmond, Virginia

804/357-4157

* Adapted from the satellite image developed and provided by Williamsburg Environmental Group

Drawing No. 2

GGGGENERAL ENERAL ENERAL ENERAL BBBBORROWORROWORROWORROW

LLLLOCATION OCATION OCATION OCATION PPPPLANLANLANLAN

WILLIAMSBURG ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP

Williamsburg, Virginia

BRG No. 109

December 2010

Drawn by: JMH *

Scale: Unknown

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

Borrow Study

Fort Pickett Military Base

NNNN

804/357-4157

* Adapted from plans developed and provided by Williamsburg Environmental Group (dated October 28, 2010)

Drawing No. 2A

AAAAPPROXIMAPPROXIMAPPROXIMAPPROXIMATE TE TE TE BBBBORINGORINGORINGORING

LLLLOCATION OCATION OCATION OCATION PPPPLANLANLANLAN

(B(B(B(BORROW ORROW ORROW ORROW SSSSITE ITE ITE ITE B1)B1)B1)B1)

WILLIAMSBURG ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP

Williamsburg, Virginia

BRG No. 109

December 2010

Scale: As Noted.

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

Boring BS-1

N 37˚02.642'

W 077˚55.720'

804/357-4157

* Adapted from plans developed and provided by Williamsburg Environmental Group (dated October 28, 2010)

Drawing No. 2B

AAAAPPROXIMAPPROXIMAPPROXIMAPPROXIMATE TE TE TE BBBBORINGORINGORINGORING

LLLLOCATION OCATION OCATION OCATION PPPPLANLANLANLAN

(B(B(B(BORROW ORROW ORROW ORROW SSSSITE ITE ITE ITE BBBB2222))))

WILLIAMSBURG ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP

Williamsburg, Virginia

BRG No. 109

December 2010

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

Boring BS-2

N 37˚05.542'

W 077˚55.922'

804/357-4157

* Adapted from plans developed and provided by Williamsburg Environmental Group (dated October 28, 2010)

Drawing No. 2C

AAAAPPROXIMAPPROXIMAPPROXIMAPPROXIMATE TE TE TE BBBBORINGORINGORINGORING

LLLLOCATION OCATION OCATION OCATION PPPPLANLANLANLAN

(B(B(B(BORROW ORROW ORROW ORROW SSSSITE ITE ITE ITE BBBB3333))))

WILLIAMSBURG ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP

Williamsburg, Virginia

BRG No. 109

December 2010

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

Boring BS-3

N 37˚05.998'

W 077˚55.788'

804/357-4157

* Adapted from plans developed and provided by Williamsburg Environmental Group (dated October 28, 2010)

Drawing No. 2D

AAAAPPROXIMAPPROXIMAPPROXIMAPPROXIMATE TE TE TE BBBBORINGORINGORINGORING

LLLLOCATION OCATION OCATION OCATION PPPPLANLANLANLAN

(B(B(B(BORROW ORROW ORROW ORROW SSSSITE ITE ITE ITE BBBB4444))))

WILLIAMSBURG ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP

Williamsburg, Virginia

BRG No. 109

December 2010

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

Boring BS-4

N 37˚05.706'

W 077˚53.266'

804/357-4157

* Adapted from plans developed and provided by Williamsburg Environmental Group (dated October 28, 2010)

Drawing No. 2E

AAAAPPROXIMATE PPROXIMATE PPROXIMATE PPROXIMATE BBBBORINGORINGORINGORING

LLLLOCATION OCATION OCATION OCATION PPPPLANLANLANLAN

(B(B(B(BORROW ORROW ORROW ORROW SSSSITE ITE ITE ITE BBBB5555))))

WILLIAMSBURG ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP

Williamsburg, Virginia

BRG No. 109

December 2010

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

Boring BS-5

N 37˚05.667'

W 077˚52.590'

Boring BS-6

N 37˚05.583'

W 077˚52.531'

804/357-4157

* Adapted from plans developed and provided by Williamsburg Environmental Group (dated October 28, 2010)

Drawing No. 2F

AAAAPPROXIMATE PPROXIMATE PPROXIMATE PPROXIMATE BBBBORINGORINGORINGORING

LLLLOCATION OCATION OCATION OCATION PPPPLANLANLANLAN

(B(B(B(BORROW ORROW ORROW ORROW SSSSITE ITE ITE ITE BBBB6666))))

WILLIAMSBURG ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP

Williamsburg, Virginia

BRG No. 109

December 2010

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

Boring BS-7A

N 37˚05.213'

W 077˚52.484'

Boring BS-7

N 37˚05.051'

W 077˚52.228'

804/357-4157

* Adapted from plans developed and provided by Williamsburg Environmental Group (dated October 28, 2010)

Drawing No. 2G

AAAAPPROXIMAPPROXIMAPPROXIMAPPROXIMATE TE TE TE BBBBORINGORINGORINGORING

LLLLOCATION OCATION OCATION OCATION PPPPLANLANLANLAN

(B(B(B(BORROW ORROW ORROW ORROW SSSSITE ITE ITE ITE BBBB7777))))

WILLIAMSBURG ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP

Williamsburg, Virginia

BRG No. 109

December 2010

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

Boring BS-8

N 37˚04.356'

W 077˚52.365'

804/357-4157

* Adapted from plans developed and provided by Williamsburg Environmental Group (dated October 28, 2010)

Drawing No. 2H

AAAAPPROXIMATE PPROXIMATE PPROXIMATE PPROXIMATE BBBBORINGORINGORINGORING

LLLLOCATION OCATION OCATION OCATION PPPPLANLANLANLAN

(B(B(B(BORROW ORROW ORROW ORROW SSSSITE ITE ITE ITE BBBB8888))))

WILLIAMSBURG ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP

Williamsburg, Virginia

BRG No. 109

December 2010

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

Boring BS-10

N 37˚00.007'

W 077˚51.541'

Boring BS-9

N 37˚00.045'

W 077˚51.532'

804/357-4157

* Adapted from plans developed and provided by Williamsburg Environmental Group (dated October 28, 2010)

Drawing No. 2I

AAAAPPROXIMATE PPROXIMATE PPROXIMATE PPROXIMATE BBBBORINGORINGORINGORING

LLLLOCATION OCATION OCATION OCATION PPPPLANLANLANLAN

(B(B(B(BORROW ORROW ORROW ORROW SSSSITE ITE ITE ITE BBBB11111111))))

WILLIAMSBURG ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP

Williamsburg, Virginia

BRG No. 109

December 2010

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

Boring BS-12

N 36˚58.282'

W 077˚56.814' Boring BS-11

N 36˚58.235'

W 077˚56.518'

804/357-4157

* Adapted from plans developed and provided by Williamsburg Environmental Group (dated October 28, 2010)

Drawing No. 2J

AAAAPPROXIMPPROXIMPPROXIMPPROXIMATE ATE ATE ATE BBBBORINGORINGORINGORING

LLLLOCATION OCATION OCATION OCATION PPPPLANLANLANLAN

(B(B(B(BORROW ORROW ORROW ORROW SSSSITE ITE ITE ITE BBBB12121212))))

WILLIAMSBURG ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP

Williamsburg, Virginia

BRG No. 109

December 2010

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

Boring BS-13

N 36˚58.712'

W 077˚57.486'

804/357-4157

* Adapted from plans developed and provided by Williamsburg Environmental Group (dated October 28, 2010)

Drawing No. 2K

AAAAPPROXIMPPROXIMPPROXIMPPROXIMATE ATE ATE ATE BBBBORINGORINGORINGORING

LLLLOCATION OCATION OCATION OCATION PPPPLANLANLANLAN

(B(B(B(BORROW ORROW ORROW ORROW SSSSITE ITE ITE ITE BBBB11113333))))

WILLIAMSBURG ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP

Williamsburg, Virginia

BRG No. 109

December 2010

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

Boring BS-14

N 37˚00.466'

W 077˚56.651'

804/357-4157

* Adapted from plans developed and provided by Williamsburg Environmental Group (dated October 28, 2010)

Drawing No. 2L

AAAAPPROXIMATE PPROXIMATE PPROXIMATE PPROXIMATE BBBBORINGORINGORINGORING

LLLLOCATION OCATION OCATION OCATION PPPPLANLANLANLAN

(B(B(B(BORROW ORROW ORROW ORROW SSSSITE ITE ITE ITE BBBB14141414))))

WILLIAMSBURG ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP

Williamsburg, Virginia

BRG No. 109

December 2010

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

Boring BS-15

N 37˚00.821'

W 077˚55.809'

Boring BS-16

N 37˚00.869'

W 077˚55.780'

Appendix “B”

Boring Logs

Boring Log

BS-1BS-1BS-1BS-1 (Sht. 1 of 1)

Project: Drilling Contractor: Ayers & Ayers, Inc.

Drilling Method/Equip: HSA, 2-1/4" ID, CME 45 B

Hammer Type: Manual

Drill Date: 11/11/10

BRG Project No.: 109 GS EL.: Not provided

Boring Location: See Boring Location Plan

Client: Williamsburg Environmental Group Boring Coordinates: N 37 ˚ 02.642' W 077˚55.720'

Blows

6" 6" 6"

9 14

(ML)

17 37

10 18

(SM)

14 22

22 36

E le v

(f t.

U S

C S

80 100 N -v a lu e

20 40 60D e p th ft

S a m p le

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

0.0

1.5

2.0

3.5

Material

Description Remarks

Borrow Study

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

SPT N-value (bpf)

Water Content

Atterberg Limits

PL LL

Topsoil ~ 0"

4.0

5.5

7.0

8.5

10.0

Boring Terminated at 10.0 ft.

Dry upon completion.

Borehole backfilled upon completion.

Dry to moist, stiff to hard, brown, clayey SILT, little sand, trace wood and organics

Cave-in at 6'

Moist, medium dense to dense, yellow brown, silty fine to coarse SAND, trace clay

Groundwater during drilling

Groundwater upon completion (thru HSA)

Groundwater upon completion (after

HSA removal)

4.0 - 5.5 ft.

LL = 44 PI = 14

FC = 34.4%

wc = 17.7%

(Fill)

(Residuum)

(Zones of silty SAND below 2 ft.)

(No clay, trace manganese stains below 7 ft.)

BS-2BS-2BS-2BS-2 (Sht. 1 of 1)

Project: Drilling Contractor: Ayers & Ayers, Inc.

Drilling Method/Equip: HSA, 2-1/4" ID, CME 45 B

Hammer Type: Manual

Drill Date: 11/11/10

BRG Project No.: 109 GS EL.: Not provided

Boring Location: See Boring Location Plan

Client: Williamsburg Environmental Group Boring Coordinates: N 37 ˚ 05.542' W 077˚55.922'

Blows

6" 6" 6"

(SC) 13

23 36

(SM) 19 34

(SM)

E le v

(f t.

U S

C S

80 100 N -v a lu e

20 40 60D e p th ft

S a m p le

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

0.0

1.5

2.0

3.5

Material

Description Remarks

Borrow Study

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

SPT N-value (bpf)

Water Content

Atterberg Limits

PL LL

Topsoil ~ 0"

4.0

5.5

7.0

8.5

10.0

Boring Terminated at 10.0 ft.

Dry upon completion.

Borehole backfilled upon completion.

Dry to moist, dense, brown with red br. zones, clayey fine to medium SAND*

Dry to moist, dense to very dense, yellow brown to tan, silty fine to coarse SAND, trace manganese stains, trace mica, relic structure apparent

Groundwater during drilling

Groundwater upon completion (thru HSA)

Groundwater upon completion (after

HSA removal)

0 - 1.5 ft.

LL = 44 PI = 19

FC = 31.9%

wc = 11.2%

* (Trace manganese stains, relic structure apparent, trace mica -

Residuum)

(Residuum)

2" >50

4" >50

4" >50

Dry, very dense, tan, silty fine to medium SAND

(Residuum)

BS-3BS-3BS-3BS-3 (Sht. 1 of 1)

Project: Drilling Contractor: Ayers & Ayers, Inc.

Drilling Method/Equip: HSA, 2-1/4" ID, CME 45 B

Hammer Type: Manual

Drill Date: 11/11/10

BRG Project No.: 109 GS EL.: Not provided

Boring Location: See Boring Location Plan

Client: Williamsburg Environmental Group Boring Coordinates: N 37 ˚ 05.998' W 077˚55.788'

Blows

6" 6" 6"

(SC) 4

3 7

(ML/ 7

CL) 9 16

(ML) 10 17

9 17

8 14

E le v

(f t.

U S

C S

80 100 N -v a lu e

20 40 60D e p th ft

S a m p le

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

0.0

1.5

2.0

3.5

Material

Description Remarks

Borrow Study

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

SPT N-value (bpf)

Water Content

Atterberg Limits

PL LL

Topsoil ~ 5"

4.0

5.5

7.0

8.5

10.0

Boring Terminated at 10.0 ft.

Dry upon completion.

Borehole backfilled upon completion.

Moist, loose, light brown, clayey fine SAND

Groundwater during drilling

Groundwater upon completion (thru HSA)

Groundwater upon completion (after

HSA removal)

2.0 - 3.5 ft.

LL = 46 PI = 20

FC = 56.5%

(~25% clay) wc = 23.7%

4.0 - 5.5 ft.

wc = 19.8%

(Trace manganese stains, relic structure apparent below 6 ft., bands of silty f-c. SAND below 8.5 ft.)

(Residuum)

Moist, medium dense, red brown/yellow brown, fine sandy SILT, trace mica

(Residuum)

Moist, very stiff, red brown, clayey SILT/silty CLAY, some sand (Residuum)

BS-4BS-4BS-4BS-4 (Sht. 1 of 1)

Project: Drilling Contractor: Ayers & Ayers, Inc.

Drilling Method/Equip: HSA, 2-1/4" ID, CME 45 B

Hammer Type: Manual

Drill Date: 11/11/10

BRG Project No.: 109 GS EL.: Not provided

Boring Location: See Boring Location Plan

Client: Williamsburg Environmental Group Boring Coordinates: N 37 ˚ 05.706' W 077˚53.266'

Blows

6" 6" 6"

(SM) 6

8 14

(SM/ 7 12

ML)

7 11

7 12

(SM) 6

8 14

D e p th ft

S a m p le

80 100 N -v a lu e

20 40 60 E le v

(f t.

U S

C S

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

0.0

1.5

2.0

3.5

Material

Description Remarks

Borrow Study

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

SPT N-value (bpf)

Water Content

Atterberg Limits

PL LL

Topsoil ~ 0"

4.0

5.5

7.0

8.5

10.0

Boring Terminated at 10.0 ft.

Dry upon completion.

Borehole backfilled upon completion.

Dry to moist, medium dense, red br./yel. br., silty f. SAND, trace zones of clay*

Groundwater during drilling

Groundwater upon completion (thru HSA)

Groundwater upon completion (after

HSA removal)

2.0'-3.5'

LL = 34 PI = 6

FC = 56.2%

wc = 21.5%

4.0 - 5.5 ft.

wc = 20.4%

** (Manganese stains -

Residuum)

Dry to moist, medium dense, tan, silty f-m. SAND **

* (Residuum)

Dry to moist, medium dense, tan, silty fine SAND/fine sandy SILT

BS-5BS-5BS-5BS-5 (Sht. 1 of 1)

Project: Drilling Contractor: Ayers & Ayers, Inc.

Drilling Method/Equip: HSA, 2-1/4" ID, CME 45 B

Hammer Type: Manual

Drill Date: 11/11/10

BRG Project No.: 109 GS EL.: Not provided

Boring Location: See Boring Location Plan

Client: Williamsburg Environmental Group Boring Coordinates: N 37 ˚ 05.667' W 077˚52.590'

Blows

6" 6" 6"

13 21

(ML)

14 23

(ML) 6

8 14

(SM/ 6

ML) 6

8 14

(ML) 7 13

(ML)

9 15

E le v

(f t.

U S

C S

80 100 N -v a lu e

20 40 60D e p th ft

S a m p le

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

0.0

1.5

2.0

3.5

Material

Description Remarks

Borrow Study

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

SPT N-value (bpf)

Water Content

Atterberg Limits

PL LL

Topsoil ~ 0"

4.0

5.5

7.0

8.5

10.5

Boring Terminated at 15.0 ft.

Dry upon completion.

Borehole backfilled upon completion.

Dry to moist, very stiff, red brown/yellow brown

(speckled), clayey SILT, little fine sand, trace mica

Groundwater during drilling

Groundwater upon completion (thru HSA)

Groundwater upon completion (after

HSA removal)

2.0 - 3.5 ft.

wc = 22.1%

(Red brown/gray - speckled below 2')

Moist, stiff, brown, clayey

SILT, trace manganese stains

* trace clay, trace mica

Dry to moist, medium dense, brown/gray (speckled), fine sandy SILT *

(Residuum)

Cave-In = 10'

9.0

15.0

13.5

(Residuum)

Dry to moist, medium dense, tan, silty fine SAND/fine sandy SILT, trace mica

(Residuum)

Moist, medium dense, tan, fine sandy SILT, trace mica

BS-6BS-6BS-6BS-6 (Sht. 1 of 1)

Project: Drilling Contractor: Ayers & Ayers, Inc.

Drilling Method/Equip: HSA, 2-1/4" ID, CME 45 B

Hammer Type: Manual

Drill Date: 11/11/10

BRG Project No.: 109 GS EL.: Not provided

Boring Location: See Boring Location Plan

Client: Williamsburg Environmental Group Boring Coordinates: N 37 ˚ 05.583' W 077˚52.531'

Blows

6" 6" 6"

7 12

(MH/

CH) 3

6 10

6 9

7 12

6 11

(ML)

7 13

D e p th ft

S a m p le

80 100 N -v a lu e

20 40 60 E le v

(f t.

U S

C S

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

0.0

1.5

2.0

3.5

Material

Description Remarks

Borrow Study

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

SPT N-value (bpf)

Water Content

Atterberg Limits

PL LL

Topsoil ~ 0"

4.0

5.5

7.0

8.5

10.5

Boring Terminated at 15.0 ft.

Dry upon completion.

Borehole backfilled upon completion.

Moist to very moist, stiff, red brown, clayey SILT/silty

CLAY, trace fine sand, trace mica

Groundwater during drilling

Groundwater upon completion (thru HSA)

Groundwater upon completion (after

HSA removal)

Bulk Sample (2.0'-7.0') wc = 55.5%

MDD= 83.0 pcf

OMC= 34.5%

Perm = 3.7e-6 cm/s

2.0 - 3.5 ft.

LL = 95 PI = 44

FC = 91.6%

(~22% clay) wc = 17.7%

Moist, stiff, brown, clayey

SILT, trace manganese stains

(Red brown with tan speckles, no sand, no mica below 2 ft.)

9.0

15.0

13.5

(Residuum)

13.5' - 15.0':

Wet at tip of sample

(Red brown over brown, trace fine sand below 7 ft.)

(Brown/Tan (speckled), trace fine sand, trace manganese stains below 12 ft.)

(Residuum)

7.0 - 8.5 ft.

LL = 76 PI = 23

FC = 93.8%

wc = 51.8%

BS-7BS-7BS-7BS-7 (Sht. 1 of 1)

Project: Drilling Contractor: Ayers & Ayers, Inc.

Drilling Method/Equip: HSA, 2-1/4" ID, CME 45 B

Hammer Type: Manual

Drill Date: 11/10/10

BRG Project No.: 109 GS EL.: Not provided

Boring Location: See Boring Location Plan

Client: Williamsburg Environmental Group Boring Coordinates: N 37 ˚ 05.051' W 077˚52.228'

Blows

6" 6" 6"

(CH/ 6

CL) 7 13

(MH/ 6

CH) 8 14

(ML) 8

10 18

(SM) 10 27

5 10

7 12

E le v

(f t.

U S

C S

80 100 N -v a lu e

20 40 60D e p th ft

S a m p le

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

0.0

1.5

2.0

3.5

Material

Description Remarks

Borrow Study

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

SPT N-value (bpf)

Water Content

Atterberg Limits

PL LL

Topsoil ~ 0"

4.0

5.5

7.0

8.5

10.5

Boring Terminated at 15.0 ft.

Dry upon completion.

Borehole backfilled upon completion.

Moist, stiff, red brown, silty

CLAY, manganese stains

Groundwater during drilling

Groundwater upon completion (thru HSA)

Groundwater upon completion (after

HSA removal)

Bulk Sample (2.0'-7.0') wc = 27.2%

MDD= 102.0 pcf

OMC= 21.5%

Perm = 8.1e-6 cm/s

2.0 - 3.5 ft.

LL = 59 PI = 30

FC = 55.6%

(~26% clay) wc = 28.4%

Dry to moist, medium dense, red brown w/ white speckles, silty fine to medium SAND, trace clay

9.0

15.0

13.5

(Residuum)

(Zones of red brown sandy

CLAY below 7 ft.)

Cave-in at 11 ft.

(Residuum)

Moist, stiff, red brown, clayey

SILT/silty CLAY, some sand

(Residuum)

("Loose, yellow brown" below 9 ft.)

("Medium dense, yellow brown" below 12 ft.)

4.0 - 5.5 ft.

LL = 45 PI = 17

FC = 57.3%

wc = 25.1%

Moist, very stiff, red brown, clayey SILT, some sand

BS-7ABS-7ABS-7ABS-7A (Sht. 1 of 1)

Project: Drilling Contractor: Ayers & Ayers, Inc.

Drilling Method/Equip: HSA, 2-1/4" ID, CME 45 B

Hammer Type: Manual

Drill Date: 11/10/10

BRG Project No.: 109 GS EL.: Not provided

Boring Location: See Boring Location Plan

Client: Williamsburg Environmental Group Boring Coordinates: N 37 ˚ 05.213' W 077˚52.484'

Blows

6" 6" 6"

(CL/ 8

CH) 9 17

(CL) 8

13 21

(CH) 7

8 15

(ML/ 4

MH) 4

5 9

7 13

E le v

(f t.

U S

C S

80 100 N -v a lu e

20 40 60D e p th ft

S a m p le

Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC Blue Ridge Geotechnical, LLC

0.0

1.5

2.0

3.5

Material

Description Remarks

Borrow Study

Fort Pickett Military Base

Nottoway County, Virginia

SPT N-value (bpf)

Water Content

Atterberg Limits

PL LL

Topsoil ~ 0"

4.0

5.5

7.0

8.5

10.0

Boring Terminated at 10.0 ft.

Dry upon completion.

Borehole backfilled upon completion.

Moist, very stiff, red brown (w/ wht. speckles), silty CLAY, trace sand

Groundwater during drilling

Groundwater upon completion…