W912PM-24-R-0004_SPECS_VOL2_AMD2.pdf

Fort Liberty, North Carolina

Solicitation Number

W912PM-24-R-0004

USASOC - Yarborough Q4 Barracks Replacement Volume 2 of 2: Appendices

PN 92062

February 2024

U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, SAVANNAH

CORPS OF ENGINEERS

100 WEST OGLETHORPE AVENUE

SAVANNAH, GEORGIA 31401-3640

US Army Corps Of Engineers Savannah District

USASOC - Yarborough Q4 Barracks Replacement 24R0004 Fort Liberty, North Carolina

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS

DI VI SI ON 00 - PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTI NG REQUI REMENTS

00 01 15 LIST OF DRAWINGS

DI VI SI ON 01 - GENERAL REQUI REMENTS

*3

01 00 60.40 USASOC SECURITY PROCEDURES GUIDE

01 10 00 STATEMENT OF WORK

01 14 00 WORK RESTRICTIONS

01 20 00 PRICE AND PAYMENT PROCEDURES

01 30 00 ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS

01 32 01.00 10 PROJECT SCHEDULE

01 33 00 SUBMITTAL PROCEDURES

01 33 16.00 10 DESIGN DATA (DESIGN AFTER AWARD)

01 33 29 SUSTAINABILITY REQUIREMENTS AND REPORTING

01 35 26 GOVERNMENTAL SAFETY REQUIREMENTS

01 42 00 SOURCES FOR REFERENCE PUBLICATIONS

01 45 00.00 10 QUALITY CONTROL

01 45 00.00 20 QUALITY CONTROL

01 45 00.15 10 RESIDENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM CONTRACTOR MODE (RMS CM)

01 50 00 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION FACILITIES AND CONTROLS

01 57 19 TEMPORARY ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS

01 58 00 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION

01 74 19 CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSAL

01 78 00 CLOSEOUT SUBMITTALS

01 78 23 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE DATA

01 78 24.00 10 FACILITY DATA REQUIREMENTS

01 91 00.15 BUILDING COMMISSIONING

01 91 19 BUILDING ENCLOSURE COMMISSIONING

DI VI SI ON 23 - HEATI NG, VENTI LATI NG, AND AI R CONDI TI ONI NG ( HVAC)

23 08 00 COMMISSIONING OF MECHANICAL AND PLUMBING SYSTEMS

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A NOT USED

APPENDIX B PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT

APPENDIX C PAVEMENT DESIGN

APPENDIX D FIRE FLOW TESTS RESULTS

APPENDIX E ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION

APPENDIX F CONCEPTUAL AESTHETIC CONSIDERATIONS

APPENDIX G GENERAL FINISHES

APPENDIX H ARMY LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID) PLANNING AND COST TOOL

REPORT

APPENDIX I ACCEPTABLE PLANT LIST

APPENDIX J DRAWINGS (UNDER SEPARATE COVER)

APPENDIX K LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS (LCCA) / BUILDING LIFE CYCLE COST

(BLCC)

APPENDIX L ARCHITECTURE & MECHANICAL LIFE-CYCLE COST ANALYSIS

NARRATIVE

APPENDIX M OWNER'S PROJECT REQUIREMENTS

APPENDIX N LEED V4 CREDIT CHECKLIST

APPENDIX O FORT BRAGG INSTALLATION DESIGN GUIDE

APPENDIX P ANTITERRORISM

APPENDIX Q INSTALLATION DESIGN CRITERIA FOR FT BRAGG SPECIFIC

COMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS

DOCUMENT PROJECT Page 1 (Revised By Amendment 0003)

USASOC - Yarborough Q4 Barracks Replacement 24R0004 Fort Liberty, North Carolina

-- End of Project Table of Contents --

DOCUMENT PROJECT Page 2 (Revised By Amendment 0003)

APPENDIX A

NOT USED

APPENDIX B

PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT

PRELIMINARY

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION

AND

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

USASOC- Yarborough Barracks Replacement

PN 92062, FY-22

Fort Bragg, North Carolina

By Soils Section

Geotechnical & HTRW Branch U.S. Army Engineer District, Savannah

May 2022

This report was prepared by the Savannah District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The initials or signatures and registration designation of individuals appear on these documents within the scope of their employment as required by the Engineer Regulation 1110-1-8152.

Date: 20 May 2022

Brent A. Schrader, P.E.

Pennsylvania License No. PE088806 Expiration Date: 30 September 2023

Leland H. Schuman, P.E.

Georgia License No. 25134 Expiration Date: 31 December 2022

Table of Contents

Section Page

1. PURPOSE

2. QUALIFICATION OF REPORT

3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

4. EXPLORATION PROCEDURES

a. Site Reconnaissance

b. Field Exploration

c. Laboratory Testing

d. Soil Infiltration Testing

e. USDA Custom Soil Resource Report

5. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

a. Site Description

b. Regional and Site Geology

c. Subsurface Conditions

d. Groundwater Conditions

e. Infiltration Rates

6. ENGINEERING EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

a. General

b. Site Preparation

c. Foundation Design and Construction

d. Seismic Design

e. Concrete Slabs-On-Grade

f. Pavement Design

g. Groundwater and Surface-Water Considerations

h. Structural Fill

i. Construction Quality Control Testing

j. Drawings

k. Specifications

7. FINAL GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT

ATTACHMENT A: Soil Boring Location Plan ATTACHMENT B: Soil Boring Logs ATTACHMENT C: Soil Laboratory Testing ATTACHMENT D: Infiltration Test Data ATTACHMENT E: USDA NRCS Soils Report

PRELIMINARY

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

USASOC

Yarborough Barracks Replacement

PN 92062, FY-22

Fort Bragg, North Carolina

1. PURPOSE

As part of the Design-Build Request for Proposal (D/B RFP) the Government has conducted a preliminary geotechnical investigation for the proposed barracks within the US Army Special Operations Command (USASOC) Yarborough Complex. This report provides a general overview of the site conditions, including subsurface soil and groundwater conditions. Preliminary recommendations are also provided with respect to the geotechnical design and construction of the project.

2. QUALIFICATION OF REPORT

The field exploration performed for this report was made to determine the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions and was not intended to serve as an assessment of site wetlands, environmental, or contaminant conditions. No effort was made to define, delineate, or designate any areas of environmental concern or of contamination. The design-build contractor’s team shall include a licensed geotechnical engineer to interpret the report and develop foundation and earthwork recommendations and design parameters on which to base the contractor’s proposal. Any additional subsurface investigations and laboratory analyses conducted to better characterize the site and to develop the final design shall be performed under the direction of a licensed geotechnical engineer and shall be the full responsibility of the contractor. A final geotechnical evaluation report shall be prepared by the licensed geotechnical engineer and submitted along with the first design submittal.

3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The proposed USASOC Barracks project consists of the addition of an Unaccompanied Enlisted Personnel House Facility within the Yarborough Complex. Primary facilities include living and sleeping quarters, storage, service areas, information systems, fire protection and alarm systems, Physical Access Control Systems (PACS) installation, and Energy Monitoring Control Systems (EMCS) connection. Sustainability and energy measures are included. Supporting facilities include site development, utilities and utility connections, exterior lighting, paving, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, storm drainage, landscaping, pedestrian crosswalks, and signage. Since the project will be constructed under a design-build contract, detailed site design and structural information is not yet available.

Preliminary Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Report USASOC- Yarborough Barracks

PN 92062, FY-22

Fort Bragg, North Carolina

4. EXPLORATION PROCEDURES

a. Site Reconnaissance

Prior to the field explorations, the proposed project site and surrounding areas were visually inspected by a geotechnical engineer. The observations were used in planning the exploration, in determining areas of special interest, and in relating site conditions to known geologic conditions in the area.

b. Field Exploration

(1) Subsurface conditions at the project site were explored by eleven (11) soil borings B-1 through B-11. The explorations were performed at the approximate locations shown on the Boring Location Plan included in Attachment A. The borings were drilled to depths ranging from 10 feet to 60.5 feet below ground surface (bgs.) within the footprint of the proposed barracks and pavement areas.

(2) Boring locations were established in the field by an engineer using visual means. Since the measurements were not precise, the locations shown on the boring location plans and the locations indicated on the boring logs should be considered approximate. The ground surface elevation at each boring location was determined by interpolation from the site topography survey; therefore, the elevations shown on the boring logs should be considered approximate.

(3) The soil test borings were drilled by Savannah District using a Mobile B-60 truck mounted drill rig utilizing an automatic hammer. The soil test borings were advanced through the soils by dry mechanical drilling procedures, using 4¼-inch inside diameter (I.D.) hollow stem augers. Split-barrel sampling with standard penetration testing was performed at intervals shown on the boring logs. All soil sampling and SPT borings were in general accordance with ASTM D 1586. In standard penetration test (SPT) borings, a soil sample (split-spoon sample) is obtained with a standard 1 3/8-inch I.D. by 2-inch outside diameter (O.D.) split-barrel sampler. The sampler is first seated 6 inches and then driven an additional 12 inches with blows from a 140 lb. hammer falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the final 12 inches is recorded and is termed the “standard penetration resistance,” or the “N-value.”

Penetration resistance, when properly evaluated, is an index of the soil’s strength, density, and foundation support capability.

(4) Soil classifications shown on the boring logs were determined in the field by a geologist.

Classification of the soil samples was performed in general accordance with ASTM D 2488 (Visual-Manual Procedure for Descriptions of Soils). The soil classifications include the use of the Unified Soil Classification System described in ASTM D 2487 (Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes). Since the soil descriptions and classifications are based on visual examination, they should be considered approximate, except where the samples were subject to laboratory testing as described below. Logs of the soil borings graphically depicting soil descriptions, N-values, and observed groundwater levels are included in Attachment B of this report.

(5) Ground water levels were observed during drilling by means of inspection or immediately after drilling was completed. Ground water was observed at depths of 31.3 feet bgs corresponding to

USASOC- Yarborough Barracks

PN 92062, FY-22

Fort Bragg, North Carolina elevation 216.7 feet NAVD88 and 31.6 feet bgs corresponding to elevation 216.9 ft NVAD88 in borings B-3 and B-6, respectively. Groundwater was not encountered in any of the other borings. No long-term water readings were obtained.

c. Laboratory Testing

(1) Laboratory testing was performed on five (5) representative soil samples. This testing was performed by the Corps of Engineers Environmental and Materials Unit laboratory in Marietta, Georgia. The purpose of the laboratory testing was to aid in the evaluation of the subsurface soils and confirm the field classifications. Testing consisted of grain-size distribution (ASTM D422), Atterberg Limits (ASTM D4318), and Moisture Content (ASTM D2216). Results of the laboratory testing are shown in Attachment C.

d. Soil Infiltration Testing

(1) Soil permeability information for infiltration rate determination was obtained from four (4) borehole percolation tests PT-1 through PT-4. The locations of the percolation tests are shown on the Boring Location Plan in Attachment A. The percolation tests were done in accordance with USACE SAD DM 110-1-1 July 1983 chapter 20. The percolation rates from the field tests were used to estimate infiltration rates using the LID Manual for Michigan-Appendix E, Soil Infiltration Testing Protocol.

(2) The Michigan method uses an area reduction factor (R to account for the exfiltration occurring through the sides of a percolation hole. It assumes that the percolation rate is affected by the depth of water in the hole and that the percolating surface of the hole is in uniform soil. The Michigan method could thus be used to convert soil percolation rates to infiltration rates as follows:

infiltration rate =

Where reduction factor (R is given by: R 1

And:

d1 = initial water depth (in.)

Δd = average/final water level drop (in.)

DIA = diameter of the percolation hole (in.)

(3) Results of the soil percolation tests and the computed infiltration rates are included in Attachment D.

e. USDA Custom Soil Resource Report

A soil survey for Cumberland County, North Carolina was obtained from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) website. The report was used to obtain an overview of possible soil series located within the project area, and it is included as Attachment E of this report.

PN 92062, FY-22

5. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

a. Site Description

(1) The proposed barracks will be located north and west of Air Defense Loop and south of Spartan Way on the existing parade field within the Yarborough Complex, Fort Bragg, NC. The site has been raised approximately 6 feet in conjunction with other projects within the Yarborough Complex. The raised pad is generally flat except at the fill slopes located near the edge of the parade field. Elevations range from 244 ft to 249 ft NAVD88. The site is covered by mowed grass and sporadic small trees near the north and south edges of the parade field. The topography of the site is characterized as gently sloping generally to the west.

b. Regional and Site Geology

(1) Fort Bragg is situated in the Sand Hills area of the Coastal Plain physiographic province of North Carolina. The Coastal Plain extends westward from the Atlantic Ocean to the Fall Line, a distance of about 130 miles. The Fall Line is the boundary between the Coastal Plain and the Piedmont physiographic provinces.

(2) Geologic units in the area, ranging from oldest to youngest, include the Carolina Slate Belt rocks, which are the basement rocks, the Cape Fear Formation, and the Middendorf Formation.

The Cape Fear and Middendorf Formations overlie the basement rock and are part of the generally southeastward-dipping and thickening wedge of sediments that constitute the Atlantic Coastal Plain deposits.

(3) The Middendorf Formation is exposed at land surface throughout the area. The formation is composed of tan, cross-bedded, medium and fine-grained, micaceous quartz sand and clayey sand interbedded with clay or sandy clay lenses or layers. Layers of hematite-cemented sandstone occur locally throughout the Middendorf Formation as do thin layers of hard kaolin and kaolin-cemented sandstone. Below the water table, these units are generally friable or plastic. In places, the Middendorf Formation is a mottled orange, gray, and tan color with streaks and laminae of red and purple hematite and manganese oxide stains.

c. Subsurface Conditions

(1) Soil samples obtained from borings drilled at the project site indicate the area’s subsurface to be comprised of both coarse- and fine-grained soils. The coarse-grained soils were field classified as silty sand (SM) and clayey sand (SC). Fine-grained soils were field classified as fat clay (CH) or lean clay (CL).

(2) Structural Borings B-1 though B-8 were located within the footprint of the proposed barracks.

Borings B-9 through B-11 were drilled in the proposed pavement areas around the proposed barracks. Approximately 9 to 12 inches of topsoil was encountered at the surface followed by fill that classified as either loose to medium dense dark brownish gray to dark gray silty sand (SM) or very loose to medium dense red brown clayey fine to medium sand (SC) and extends to depths ranging from 1 foot to 6 feet bgs. Underlying the fill were layers of sand and clay to the termination depths of the borings. The termination depths range from 10 ft. to 60.3 ft. The sand layers classify

PN 92062, FY-22

Fort Bragg, North Carolina as either red brown clayey fine to medium sand (SC) or light brown to reddish brown, light brown to brown, or light brown to light gray silty sand (SM) and have a relative density ranging from loose to dense, mostly medium dense. The clay (CL or CH) layers have consistencies from very soft to hard but are generally stiff to very stiff.

(3) The above subsurface description is of a generalized nature to highlight the major subsurface stratification features and material characteristics. The boring logs should be reviewed for specific information at individual boring locations. The stratifications shown on the boring logs represent the conditions only at the actual boring locations. Variations are expected between boring locations. The stratification lines shown on the boring logs represent the approximate boundaries between the subsurface materials; the actual transitions are typically more gradual.

d. Groundwater Conditions

(1) Water levels were measured in all the boreholes during drilling and at the completion of drilling. Ground water was observed at depths of 31.3 feet bgs corresponding to elevation 216.7 feet NAVD88 and 31.6 feet bgs corresponding to elevation 216.9 ft NAVD88 in borings B-3 and B-6, respectively. Groundwater was not encountered in any of the other borings. No long-term water readings were obtained.

(2) A perched-water condition occurs when water seeping downward is slowed by a low permeability soil layer, such as silt or clay, and saturates the more permeable soil above it. The perched-water level can be any number of feet above the true groundwater level. Due to the prevalence of interbedded sands and clays at the project site, the successful design-build contractor should expect to encounter perched water during construction.

(3) It should be noted that groundwater conditions vary during periods of prolonged drought and excessive rainfall as well as seasonally. Therefore, fluctuations in the elevation of the groundwater should be anticipated with changing climatic and rainfall conditions.

e. Infiltration Rates

Percolation test locations were selected based on information provided from by the site designers. The percolation tests were performed below the proposed storm water management structures in soil layers anticipated to provide suitable infiltration rates. The percolation rates from the field tests were used to estimate infiltration rates using the previously described Michigan Method. The infiltration rates and test depths are shown in Table 1 Infiltraion Rates, below. For specific information on estimated infiltration rates see Attachment D, Infiltration Test Data.

PN 92062, FY-22

Table 1

Infiltration Rates

Location Percolation

Test ID Test Depth

(ft) Soil Classification at depth

Infiltration Rate (in/hr)

See Attachment A

PT-1 5.0

Reddish brown clayey fine to medium Sand 0.00

PT-2 5.0

Reddish brown clayey fine to medium Sand 0.06

PT-3 5.0

Reddish brown clayey fine to medium Sand 0.01

PT-4 5.0

Reddish brown clayey fine to medium Sand 0.21

6. ENGINEERING EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

a. General

The following evaluations and recommendations are based on the information available on the proposed structures, observations made at the project site, interpretation of the data obtained from the soil test borings, and previous experience with soils and subsurface conditions similar to those encountered at the site. It is emphasized that the preliminary findings and evaluation presented in this report are based on widely spaced explorations performed at the project site. Additional subsurface investigations and/or laboratory analyses, if required to determine site soil conditions and develop the final design, shall be performed under the direction of a licensed geotechnical engineer and shall be the full responsibility of the contractor.

b. Site Preparation

(1) Following demolition, clearing, and removal of structures, surface vegetation, pavement, etc., the construction area should be grubbed and stripped of all topsoil, organics, and other deleterious materials. It is recommended that the zone of stripping and demolition extend a minimum of 10 feet beyond the outer edges of structures and pavements. Any utilities in the project area should be located and rerouted or properly abandoned, as necessary.

(2) Areas to receive fill and excavated subgrade areas of buildings and pavements should be prepared as follows. Surface areas containing coarse grained soils such as silty sand (SM) should be densified by compaction of a vibratory roller weighing at least 7 tons. Areas of cohesive soils such as clayey sands (SC) and clays (CL, CH) or silts (ML) should be proof rolled with a loaded tandem-axle dump truck or similar rubber-tired equipment. Soils which are observed to rut or

PN 92062, FY-22

deflect excessively under the moving loads should be undercut to firm soil and backfilled with properly compacted, suitable soils. The proof rolling should be performed only during and following a period of dry weather.

c. Foundation Design and Construction

(1) The contractor’s consulting geotechnical engineer shall determine the appropriate foundation system and ground improvements, if required, for the proposed structure and evaluate any impacts of the soils encountered at the site. The foundation design shall provide an adequate level of protection against structural failure due to uniform and/or differential foundation settlement or general shear. Based on the soil test boring results at borings B-1, B-3, B-9 and generally the northern half of the proposed site it is anticipated that loose to very loose consistency in-place fill materials from previous site developments are present beneath the proposed structure to depths of approximately 3.5 feet beneath existing grades.

(2) Assuming shallow foundations are feasible, it is recommended that all load-bearing wall footings and column footings have a minimum width of 24 inches and a minimum depth of 24 inches, as measured from finish floor or finish grade, whichever is lower, to the bottom of the footing. For all other wall footings, the recommended minimum width is 18 inches and the recommended minimum depth is 18 inches, as measured from finish floor or finish grade, whichever is lower, to the bottom of the footing.

(3) Foundation excavations should be concreted as soon as practical following excavation. Exposure to the environment could weaken the soils at the footing bearing level should the foundation excavations remain open for an extended period of time. Bottoms of foundation excavations should be inspected immediately prior to placement of reinforcing steel and concrete to verify that adequate bearing soils are present and that all debris, mud, loose, frozen, or water-softened soils are removed.

If the bearing surface soils have been softened by surface-water intrusion or by exposure, the softened soils must be removed to firm bearing and replaced with additional concrete during the concreting or replaced to design subgrade with No. 57 or No. 67 stone, compacted to a non-yielding condition. To minimize exposure, the final excavation (4 to 6 inches) to design subgrade could be delayed until just prior to placement of reinforcing steel and concrete.

d. Seismic Design

Seismic loads should be computed in accordance with the 2021 International Building Code (IBC 2021). Seismic site class should be evaluated using the criteria given in the ASCE Standard 7-16

- Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures - Chapter 20. The contractor’s consulting geotechnical engineer shall make the final determination of the mapped acceleration parameters, the site class, the site coefficients and adjusted maximum considered earthquake spectral response acceleration parameters, the design spectral response acceleration parameters, and the seismic design category to be used for seismic design of the project.

e. Concrete Slabs-On-Grade

(1) Concrete floor slabs can be supported on imported structural fill placed and compacted in accordance with the recommendations presented in this report or on the compacted in-situ soils.

PN 92062, FY-22

(2) Floor slab design should include a capillary break, comprised of free draining, compacted, granular material, at least 4-inches thick. Free-draining granular material should have less than 5 percent fines (material passing the #200 sieve). Other design considerations such as cold temperatures and condensation development could warrant more extensive design provisions.

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

(4) Floor slab design and construction should incorporate isolation joints around columns, utility penetrations, and along bearing walls to allow for differential movement to occur without damaging the floor.

(5) Construction activities and exposure to the environment often cause deterioration of the prepared slab-on-grade subgrade. Therefore, the slab subgrade soil shall be inspected and evaluated immediately prior to floor slab construction. The evaluation might include a combination of visual observations, hand rod probing, and field density tests to verify that the subgrade has been properly prepared. If unstable soil is revealed, the affected soil should be removed and replaced or improved by suitable, long-term means. If unstable soil is removed and replaced, the affected soil should be removed to firm bearing. The unstable soil shall then be replaced to design subgrade with suitable structural fill placed and compacted as recommended or replaced with additional capillary water barrier or concrete.

f. Pavement Design

(1) The contractor’s consulting geotechnical engineer must determine the appropriate California Bearing Ratio (CBR) and modulus to be utilized in the design of pavements. The contractor’s consulting geotechnical engineer shall also provide recommendations in regards to the handling of plastic soils that could be encountered in the subgrades of pavements.

(2) Pavements should be sloped to provide rapid drainage of surface water. Water allowed to pond on or adjacent to the pavements could saturate the subgrade and contribute to premature pavement deterioration. In addition, the pavement subgrade should be graded to provide positive drainage within the granular base section. Appropriate sub-drainage or connection to a suitable daylight outlet should be provided to remove water from the granular subbase.

(3) Pavement curbing should be full depth. Use of extruded curb sections which lie on top of asphalt surface courses can allow migration of water between the surface and base courses, leading to rippling and pavement deterioration.

(4) Concrete pavement sections should include adequate details for joint spacing, joint reinforcement, and joint sealing prepared in accordance with the American Concrete

PN 92062, FY-22

Institute (ACI 330R-01 and ACI 325R.9-91).

g. Groundwater and Surface-Water Considerations

Due to the presence of silt and clay layers in the subsurface soils at the project site, perched-water conditions could be encountered, and the accumulation of run-off water or seepage at the base of excavations may occur during foundation construction and site work. Water should not be allowed to collect near the foundation or on floor slab areas of the building either during or after construction. Undercut or excavated areas should be sloped toward one corner to facilitate removal of any collected rainwater, groundwater, or surface runoff. Positive site drainage should be provided to reduce infiltration of surface water around the perimeter of the building and beneath floor slabs.

h. Structural Fill

In order to achieve high density structural fill, the following evaluations and recommendations are offered:

(1) Based on the soil test borings, excavated on-site soils (excluding any organics/topsoil, fat clay, and debris) can be used as structural fill. Some moisture content adjustment will probably be necessary to achieve proper compaction. If water must be added, it should be uniformly applied and thoroughly mixed into the soil by discing. It is recommended that the contractor have appropriate disc harrows on site during earthwork for mixing, drying, and wetting of the soils.

(2) Materials selected for use as structural fill should be free from roots and other organic matter, trash, debris, frozen soil, and stones larger than 3 inches in any dimension, and in general, should have a liquid limit less than 50 percent and a plasticity index of less than 30. The following soils represented by their Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) (ASTM D 2487) group symbols will be suitable for use as structural fill: GP, GW, GC, GM, SP, SP-SM, SP-SC, SW, SC, SM, SM-SC, CL, and ML. The following soil types are considered unsuitable: Pt, OH, OL, CH, and

MH.

(3) Suitable fill soils should be placed in lifts of maximum eight inches loose measurement. The soil should be compacted by mechanical means such as steel drum, sheepsfoot, tamping, or rubber-tired rollers. Compaction of clays is best accomplished with a sheepsfoot or tamping roller.

Periodically rolling with heavily loaded, rubber-tired equipment may be desirable to seal the surface of the compacted fill, thus reducing the potential for absorption of surface water following a rain. This sealing operation is particularly important at the end of the workday and at the end of the week. Within confined areas or foundation excavations, we recommend the use of manually operated, internal combustion activated compactors (“whacker packers” or sled tamps). The compactors should have sufficient weight and striking power to produce the same degree of compaction that is obtained on the other portions of the fill by the rolling equipment as specified.

Where hand operated equipment is used, the soils should be placed in lifts of maximum four inches loose measurement.

PN 92062, FY-22

(4) Cut or fill slopes should not be steeper than 3.0H:1.0V. Fill slopes should be compacted in horizontal lifts not to exceed 8 inches in loose thickness as fill is placed.

(5) It is recommended that materials to be utilized as structural fill and subgrades be compacted to minimum dry densities corresponding to 92% of the maximum dry density and moisture contents within +/- 2% of the optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM (modified proctor). The top two feet of all areas to receive pavement or structures should be compacted to 95% of its modified proctor value. The base course beneath paved areas should be compacted to 100% of ASTM D1557 maximum dry density.

i. Construction Quality Control Testing

(1) Prior to initiating any structural fill placement and/or compaction operations, it is recommended that representative samples of the soils which will be used as structural fill or subgrade, both suitable on-site soils and off-site soils (borrow), be obtained and tested to determine their classification and compaction characteristics. The samples should be carefully selected to represent the full range of soil types to be used. The moisture content, maximum dry density, optimum moisture content, grain-size, and plasticity characteristics should be determined.

These tests are required to determine if the fill and subgrade soils are acceptable and for compaction quality control of the subgrades and structural fill. Tests for the above soil properties should be in accordance with the following:

Moisture Content ASTM D 2216 Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture ASTM D 1557 Grain-Size (Wash No. 200, less hydrometer) ASTM D 422 and D 1140 Plasticity ASTM D 4318

(2) A representative number of in-place field density tests should be performed in the subgrade of compacted on-site soils and in the structural fill and backfill to confirm that the required degree of compaction has been obtained. In-place density tests should be performed in accordance with the sand cone method prescribed in ASTM D 1556. The use of ASTM D6938- Standard Test Method for In-Place Density and Water Content of soil and Soil-Aggregate by Nuclear Methods is authorized provided the test results are checked for accuracy at a minimum rate of one ASTM D 1556 for every ten ASTM D6938 tests in the same material. It is recommended to perform at least one density test for each 5,000 square feet and 12,500 square feet, or portion thereof, for buildings and pavements, respectively, of compacted native soil subgrade and in each lift of compacted structural fill. It is also recommended that at least one density test be performed for each 100 linear feet in the bearing level soils of continuous footings. Density tests should be performed at 100-foot intervals along roadway subgrades. In addition, a density test should be performed for each 100 linear feet of backfill placed per foot of depth in trenches for utilities systems. Where other areas are compacted separately by manually operated compactors, a minimum of one density test should be performed for every 250 square feet, or portion thereof, of fill placed per foot of depth.

PN 92062, FY-22

(3) Compaction control of soils requires the comparison of fill water content and dry density values obtained in the field density tests with optimum water content and maximum dry density determined in a laboratory compaction test performed on the same soil. It is, however, not feasible to do this as the testing could not keep pace with fill construction. It is, therefore, recommended that compaction control of the earthwork construction be performed using a “family” of compaction curves and the one-point or two-point compaction methods.

(4) Any area that does not meet the required compaction criteria should be reworked and retested.

If the moisture content of the soil is within the recommended range, additional compaction may be all that is necessary to increase the density. If the moisture content is not within the recommended range, the moisture content should be adjusted to within the range and the area recompacted.

(5) All laboratory and field density testing shall be performed by a commercial testing laboratory that has been validated by the Engineer Research and Development Center Materials Testing Center (MTC) under the Corps of Engineers laboratory inspection and validation program.

j. Drawings

The exploration locations shown in ATTACHMENT A and the soil test boring logs in ATTACHMENT B shall be shown on the final design and on the project as-built drawings completed by the design-build contractor. In addition, the selected design-build contractor shall show all additional soil boring logs, records of additional alternative subsurface investigations, and laboratory soils test data on the final design drawings and on the as-built drawings.

k. Specifications

It is recommended that the design-build contractor use the Unified Facilities Guide Specifications EARTHWORK specification 31 00 00 and CHEMICAL TERMITE CONTROL Specification 31 31 16.13 when editing the specifications for this project.

7. FINAL GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT

A final geotechnical evaluation report shall be prepared by the contractor’s licensed geotechnical engineer and submitted along with the first foundation design submittal. The geotechnical report shall summarize the subsurface conditions and provide recommendations for the design of appropriate foundations, floor slabs, retaining walls, embankments, roadways, and pavements as necessary. The report shall recommend the type of foundation system to be used, lateral load resistance capacities for foundation systems, and allowable bearing elevations for footings, grade beams, slabs, etc. An assessment of post-construction settlement potential including total and differential shall be provided. Recommendations regarding lateral earth pressures (active, at-rest, and passive) to be used in the design of retaining walls shall be provided. The report shall include the recommended spectral accelerations and Site Class for seismic design along with an evaluation of any seismic hazards and recommendations for mitigation, if required. Calculations shall be included to support the recommendations for bearing capacity, settlement, and pavement sections.

Supporting documentation shall be included for all recommended design parameters such as Site

PN 92062, FY-22

Class, shear strength, earth pressure coefficients, friction factors, subgrade modulus, California Bearing Ratio (CBR), etc. In addition, the report shall provide earthwork recommendations, expected frost penetration, seasonal high water table levels, soil infiltration rates, expected groundwater levels, and recommendations for dewatering and groundwater control. The report must also identify the possible presence of any surface or subsurface features that may affect the construction of the project such as sinkholes, boulders, shallow rock, undocumented fill, old structures, soft areas, or unusual soil conditions.

ATTACHMENT A

Soil Boring Location Plan

B-1 B-2

B-3

B-4

B-5

B-6

B-7

B-8

B-9

B-10

B-11

B-2

W W

W W

W W

W W

W W

W W

W W

W W

W W

W W

W W

W W

W W

W W

W W

W

E E

E

E E

E E

E

E

E

E

E E

E E

E E

E

E E

E E

E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E E

E

COMx COMx

COMx COMx

COMx COMx

COMx COMx

COMx COMx

COMx COMx

COMx COMx

COMx COMx

COMx COMx

COMx COMx

COMx COMx

COMx

PT-2

PT-3

PT-4

PT-1

SCALE: 1" = 20'

20' 40'0' B-101

B.

S

C H

R

AD

ER

L.

D

U D

LE

Y

L.

S

C H

U M

AN

BO

R

IN

G

L O

C

AT

IO

N

P

LA

N

LEGEND

BORING LOCATION

GENERAL NOTES

1.) B-X = BORING LOCATION

2.) HORIZONTAL DATUM: NORTH AMERICAN OF 1983 NORTH

CAROLINA STATE PLANES FEET

3.) AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS MADE 2021

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

L

M

N

P

SU

BM

IT

TE

D B

Y:

C H

EC

KE

D B

Y:

D R

AW

N

B Y:

D

ES

IG

N

ED

B

Y:

C O

N

TR

AC

T

N O

SO

LI

C

IT

AT

IO

N N

O

IS

SU

E D

AT

E:

SI

ZE

M

AR

K

D

ES

C R

IP

TI

O N

D

AT

E

SHEET ID

SA

VA

N N

AH

D

IS

TR

IC

T

W . O

G

LE

TH

O

R

PE

A

VE

SA

VA

N N

AH

, G

A

-JU

N

E

C

AT

EG

O

R Y

C O

D E:

FI

LE

N

AM

E:

AN

SI

D

FO

R

T

BR

AG

G

, N O

R

TH

C

AR

O

LI

N A

U

SA

SO

C

YA

R

BO

R O

U G

H Q

BA

R R

AC

KS

R

EP

LA

C

EM

EN

T

FY

, P

N

FI

N

AL

R

FP

(N

O T

FO

R

C O

N

ST

R U

C

TI

O N

\\S

AS

-N

ET

AP

P2 .S

AS

.D

S.

U

SA

C

E.

AR

M Y.

M

IL

\F

IL

E_

SH

AR

E\

EN

D

AT

A\

BI

M

\C

IV

IL

3D

P R

O

JE

C

TS

\B R

A1

3\

_G

EO

TE

C

H \C

AD

\P

LA

N

S H

EE

TS

\X

PN

2_ B-

1.

D W

G 9:

:4

AM

/2

/2

K6

EN

G

LR

D

1-

-4

R . R

U

PP

E

US Army Corps of Engineers

U .S

. A R

M Y

C O

R

PS

O F

EN

G

IN

EE

R S

PERC. TEST LOCATION

ATTACHMENT B

Soil Boring Logs

Water Level Data Reading Depth Notes

247.5

245.0

243.0

231.7

223.0

After drilling Not Encountered

2.0 ft - 3.5 ft blow counts: WOH, WOH, 1 approx. 5 to 6 ft of fill

PP: 3.0 tsf

1.0

3.5

5.5

16.8

25.5

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

Topsoil (approx. 9 to 12 inches).

CLAYEY SAND (SC), light brown to light reddish brown, moist, very loose, mostly fine to medium sand, some clay, few silt, iron concretions.

SILTY SAND (SM), dark grayish brown to dark gray, moist, medium dense, mostly fine to medium sand, little silt.

CLAYEY SAND (SC), reddish brown to brown, moist, medium dense, mostly fine to medium sand, some clay, few silt.

CLAY WITH SAND (CL), reddish gray to light brown, moist, stiff, mostly clay, little fine to medium sand, few silt.

BORING TERMINATED AT 25.5 ft

Ft. Bragg

DISTURBED

6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN

7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK

8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING

STARTEDVERTICAL

1. PROJECT

UNDISTURBED

NAVD88

2. HOLE NUMBER

18. SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF INSPECTOR

Mobile B-60

BEARING

Mark Seiler

17. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING

4/20/22

SHEETSDRILLING LOG

12. TOTAL SAMPLES

13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES

B-1

DIVISION

11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL

South Atlantic

See Remarks

4/20/22

N/A

14. ELEVATION GROUND WATER

SHEET

3. DRILLING AGENCY

OF

COMPLETED

15. DATE BORING

DEG FROM

VERTICAL

HORIZONTAL

4 1/4 in Auger

INSTALLATION

8 0

INCLINED

4. NAME OF DRILLER

5. DIRECTION OF BORING

9. COORDINATE SYSTEM

10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT

NAD83USASOC Barracks

N 480442.786 E 1991725.677

LOCATION COORDINATES

16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING

VERTICAL

Travis Vaughn, Geologist

248.5'

State Plane - North Carolina

>25.5'

25.5'

Boring Designation B-1

Boring Designation B-1 SHEET 1 of 1

R Q

D

REC

FEB 08

ELEV

LE

G

E N

D

SAS FORM 1836-A

REMARKSDEPTH

N -V al ue

B lo w s/

0.

ft

S am p N o.

FIELD CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

Notes:

1. Soils are field visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soils Classification System.

2. Soil component percentages: Mostly - 50-100%, Some - 30-45%, Little - 15-25%, Few - 5-10%, Trace - <5%.

3. N-Value: Total blows over last 1.0 foot of 1.5-foot driven interval, unless otherwise indicated, using a 1 3/8 inch ID spit spoon with 140-pound hammer falling 30-inches.

4. The CME-850 XR drilling rig utilizes an automatic trip hammer. The hammer efficiency correction is 1.6.

5. Pocket Penetrometer (PP) readings are an approximation of fine grained soil's unconfined compressive strength.

6. Weight of Hammer (WOH) - A weight of hammer event occurs during standard penetration testing when the hammer and drill string (drilling rod and split spoon sampler) are allowed to rest on the bottom of the borehole and they sink under their own weight.

Water Level Data Reading Depth Notes

246.0

243.5

241.2

235.2

228.0

222.0

After drilling Not Encountered approx. 5 to 6 ft of fill

1.0

3.5

5.8

11.8

19.0

25.0

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

Topsoil (approx. 9 to 12 inches).

CLAYEY SAND (SC), light brown to light reddish brown, moist, medium dense, mostly fine to medium sand, some clay, few silt, iron concretions.

SILTY SAND (SM), dark grayish brown to dark gray, moist, medium dense, moslty fine to medium sand, little silt.

CLAYEY SAND (SC), light brown to light reddish brown, moist, medium dense, mostly fine to medium sand, some clay, few silt, iron concretions.

CLAY WITH SAND (CL), light brown, moist, stiff, mostly clay, little fine to medium sand, few silt.

SILTY SAND (SM), light brown, moist, loose to dense, mostly fine sand, little silt, trace clay.

Becoming fine to medium sand.

BORING TERMINATED AT 25.0 ft

Ft. Bragg

DISTURBED

6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN

7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK

8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING

STARTEDVERTICAL

1. PROJECT

UNDISTURBED

NAVD88

2. HOLE NUMBER

18. SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF INSPECTOR

Mobile B-60

BEARING

Mark Seiler

17. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING

4/20/22

SHEETSDRILLING LOG

12. TOTAL SAMPLES

13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES

B-2

DIVISION

11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL

South Atlantic

See Remarks

4/20/22

N/A

14. ELEVATION GROUND WATER

SHEET

3. DRILLING AGENCY

OF

COMPLETED

15. DATE BORING

DEG FROM

VERTICAL

HORIZONTAL

4 1/4 in Auger

INSTALLATION

8 0

INCLINED

4. NAME OF DRILLER

5. DIRECTION OF BORING

9. COORDINATE SYSTEM

10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT

NAD83USASOC Barracks

N 480379.822 E 1991737.03

LOCATION COORDINATES

16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING

VERTICAL

Travis Vaughn, Geologist

247'

State Plane - North Carolina

>25'

25'

Boring Designation B-2

Boring Designation B-2 SHEET 1 of 1

R Q

D

REC

FEB 08

ELEV

LE

G

E N

D

SAS FORM 1836-A

REMARKSDEPTH

N -V al ue

B lo w s/

0.

ft

S am p N o.

FIELD CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

Notes:

1. Soils are field visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soils Classification System.

2. Soil component percentages: Mostly - 50-100%, Some - 30-45%, Little - 15-25%, Few - 5-10%, Trace - <5%.

3. N-Value: Total blows over last 1.0 foot of 1.5-foot driven interval, unless otherwise indicated, using a 1 3/8 inch ID spit spoon with 140-pound hammer falling 30-inches.

4. The CME-850 XR drilling rig utilizes an automatic trip hammer. The hammer efficiency correction is 1.6.

247.0

244.0

242.2

236.0

230.8

225.8 approx. 5 to 6 ft of fill

PP: 1.0 tsf

PP: 3.0 tsf

1.0

4.0

5.8

12.0

17.3

22.3

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

S-9

S-10

Topsoil (approx. 9 to 12 inches).

CLAYEY SAND (SC), reddish brown to brown, moist, very loose, mostly fine to medium sand, some clay, few silt.

SILTY SAND (SM), dark grayish brown to dark gray, moist, loose, mostly fine to medium sand, some silt.

FAT CLAY (CH), reddish brown to brown, moist, stiff to very stiff, mostly clay, some fine to medium sand, few silt, trace fine gravel.

CLAYEY SAND (SC), light brown to reddish brown, moist, dense, mostly fine to medium sand, little clay.

LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), light gray to light brown, moist, very stiff, mostly clay, some fine to medium sand, few silt.

SILTY SAND (SM), brown to reddish brown, moist to wet, loose, mostly fine to medium sand, little silt.

- becoming dense.

Ft. Bragg

DISTURBED

6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN

7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK

8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING

STARTEDVERTICAL

1. PROJECT

UNDISTURBED

NAVD88

2. HOLE NUMBER

18. SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF INSPECTOR

Mobile B-60

BEARING

Mark Seiler

17. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING

4/21/22

SHEETSDRILLING LOG

12. TOTAL SAMPLES

13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES

B-3

DIVISION

11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL

South Atlantic

See Remarks

4/21/22

N/A

14. ELEVATION GROUND WATER

SHEET

3. DRILLING AGENCY

OF

COMPLETED

15. DATE BORING

DEG FROM

VERTICAL

HORIZONTAL

4 1/4 in Auger

INSTALLATION

15 0

INCLINED

4. NAME OF DRILLER

5. DIRECTION OF BORING

9. COORDINATE SYSTEM

10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT

NAD83USASOC Barracks

N 480423.116 E 1991788.805

LOCATION COORDINATES

16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING

VERTICAL

Travis Vaughn, Geologist

248'

State Plane - North Carolina

>60.3'

60.3'

Boring Designation B-3

Boring Designation B-3 SHEET 1 of 2

R Q

D

REC

FEB 08

ELEV

LE

G

E N

D

SAS FORM 1836-A

REMARKSDEPTH

N -V al ue

B lo w s/

0.

ft

S am p N o.

FIELD CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

Water Level Data Reading Depth Notes

209.0 208.5

188.5

187.5

After drilling 31.3 4/21/2022

PP: 2.0 tsf 39.0 39.5

59.5

60.5

50/0.3

S-11

S-12

S-13

S-14

S-15

SILTY SAND (SM), brown to reddish brown, moist to wet, loose, mostly fine to medium sand, little silt.

(continued)

LEAN CLAY (CL), light brown to light grayish brown, moist, stiff to very stiff, mostly clay, some fine to medium sand, few silt.

SILTY SAND (SM), light brown to brown, wet, dense, moslty medium to coarse sand, little silt.

- becoming loose.

LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), dark gray, moist, hard, moslty clay, some silt, little fine to medium sand.

BORING TERMINATED AT 60.3 ft

USASOC Barracks

SHEETS

HORIZONTAL VERTICALPROJECT

ELEVATION TOP OF BORINGLOCATION COORDINATES

DRILLING LOG (Cont Sheet)

NAD83

N 480423.116 E 1991788.805

INSTALLATION

248'

SHEET

OFFt. Bragg

COORDINATE SYSTEM

State Plane NAVD88

Boring Designation B-3

Boring Designation B-3 SHEET 2 of 2

R Q

D

REC

FEB 08

ELEV

LE

G

E N

D

SAS FORM 1836-A

REMARKSDEPTH

N -V al ue

B lo w s/

0.

ft

S am p N o.

FIELD CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

Notes:

1. Soils are field visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soils Classification System.

2. Soil component percentages: Mostly - 50-100%, Some - 30-45%, Little - 15-25%, Few - 5-10%, Trace - <5%.

3. N-Value: Total blows over last 1.0 foot of 1.5-foot driven interval, unless otherwise indicated, using a 1 3/8 inch ID spitspoon with 140-pound hammer falling 30-inches.

4. The CME-850 XR drilling rig utilizes an automatic trip hammer. The hammer efficiency correction is 1.6.

5. Pocket Penetrometer (PP) readings are an approximation of fine grained soil's unconfined compressive strength.

Water Level Data Reading Depth Notes

273.5

268.7

257.2

249.0

After drilling Not Encountered

2.0 ft - 3.5 ft blow counts: WOH, WOH, 5 approx. 5 to 6 ft of fill

1.0

5.8

17.3

25.5

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

Topsoil.

CLAYEY SAND (SC), reddish brown to brown, moist, loose to medium dense, mostly fine to medium sand, some clay, few silt.

CLAYEY SAND (SC), reddish brown to brown, moist, medium dense, mostly fine to medium sand, some clay, few silt.

SILTY SAND (SM), light brown to reddish brown, moist, medium dense, mostly fine to medium sand, little silt.

BORING TERMINATED AT 25.5 ft

Ft. Bragg

DISTURBED

6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN

7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK

8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING

STARTEDVERTICAL

1. PROJECT

UNDISTURBED

NAVD88

2. HOLE NUMBER

18. SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF INSPECTOR

Mobile B-60

BEARING

Mark Seiler

17. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING

4/20/22

SHEETSDRILLING LOG

12. TOTAL SAMPLES

13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES

B-4

DIVISION

11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL

South Atlantic

See Remarks

4/20/22

N/A

14. ELEVATION GROUND WATER

SHEET

3. DRILLING AGENCY

OF

COMPLETED

15. DATE BORING

DEG FROM

VERTICAL

HORIZONTAL

4 1/4 in Auger

INSTALLATION

8 0

INCLINED

4. NAME OF DRILLER

5. DIRECTION OF BORING

9. COORDINATE SYSTEM

10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT

NAD83USASOC Barracks

N 480402.347 E 1991878.263

LOCATION COORDINATES

16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING

VERTICAL

Travis Vaughn, Geologist

274.5'

State Plane - North Carolina

>25.5'

25.5'

Boring Designation B-4

Boring Designation B-4 SHEET 1 of 1

R Q

D

REC

FEB 08

ELEV

LE

G

E N

D

SAS FORM 1836-A

REMARKSDEPTH

N -V al ue

B lo w s/

0.

ft

S am p N o.

FIELD CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

Notes:

1. Soils are field visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soils Classification System.

2. Soil component percentages: Mostly - 50-100%, Some - 30-45%, Little - 15-25%, Few - 5-10%, Trace - <5%.

3. N-Value: Total blows over last 1.0 foot of 1.5-foot driven interval, unless otherwise indicated, using a 1 3/8 inch ID.

4. The CME-850 XR drilling rig utilizes an automatic trip hammer. The hammer efficiency correction is 1.6.

5. Weight of Hammer (WOH) - A weight of hammer event occurs during standard penetration testing when the hammer and drill string (drilling rod and split spoon sampler) are allowed to rest on the bottom of the borehole and they sink under their own weight.

Water Level Data Reading Depth Notes

247.5

242.7

236.3

231.3

223.0

After drilling Not Encountered approx. 5 to 6 ft of fill

1.0

5.8

12.3

17.3

25.5

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

Topsoil (approx. 9 to 12 inches).

SILTY SAND (SM), dark grayish brown to dark gray, moist, loose to medium dense, mostly fine to medium sand, little silt.

CLAYEY SAND (SC), reddish brown to brown, moist, medium dense, mostly fine to medium sand, little clay, few silt.

LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), light gray and light brown, moist, very stiff, mostly clay, little fine to medium sand, few silt.

SILTY SAND (SM), reddish brown to brown, moist, medium dense, mostly fine to medium sand, little silt.

BORING TERMINATED AT 25.5 ft compressive strength.

Ft. Bragg

DISTURBED

6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN

7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK

8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING

STARTEDVERTICAL

1. PROJECT

UNDISTURBED

NAVD88

2. HOLE NUMBER

18. SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF INSPECTOR

Mobile B-60

BEARING

Mark Seiler

17. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING

4/20/22

SHEETSDRILLING LOG

12. TOTAL SAMPLES

13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES

B-5

DIVISION

11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL

South Atlantic

See Remarks

4/20/22

N/A

14. ELEVATION GROUND WATER

SHEET

3. DRILLING AGENCY

OF

COMPLETED

15. DATE BORING

DEG FROM

VERTICAL

HORIZONTAL

4 1/4 in Auger

INSTALLATION

8 0

INCLINED

4. NAME OF DRILLER

5. DIRECTION OF BORING

9. COORDINATE SYSTEM

10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT

NAD83USASOC Barracks

N 480473.317 E 1991869.306

LOCATION COORDINATES

16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING

VERTICAL

Travis Vaughn,…