ACA_soil_report.pdf

April 8, 2013

Rocky Gaal

Project Manager

URS Corporation

Architects, Engineers, Planners

277 Nationwide Boulevard

Columbus, OH 43215

Re: Subsurface Investigation and Foundation Recommendations

Ohio Air National Guard – Toledo ASA Alert Crew Quarters

URS Project #14578136.10072

CCT No.: 106-13003-1

Dear Mr. Gall:

In compliance with your request, Construction Consulting and Testing, CCT, has conducted a geotechnical subsurface investigation for the proposed structure to house the Toledo ASA Alert

Crew Quarters at the Ohio Air National Guard base in Swanton, Ohio.

A geotechnical investigation was performed at the proposed site. Two (2) subsurface borings to depths of 25 feet below existing grade, site reconnaissance, laboratory testing of field samples and engineering evaluation of the site soils were performed. This report contains the general soil conditions and recommendations for foundation bearing capacity, soil properties and construction concerns.

CCT is pleased to have had the opportunity to work with you on this project and looks forward to completing any geotechnical or material engineering services required for this project.

If there are any questions please feel free to contact us.

Sincerely, Construction Consulting & Testing, Inc.

Mitch D. Forst, P.E.

President

Distribution: Rocky Gaal – URS Corporation

Steve Przybylski – Ohio Air National Gaurd

GEOTECHNICAL REPORT

FOR THE PROPOSED

ASA ALERT CREW QUARTERS

OHIO AIR NATIONAL GUARD

TOLEDO/SWANTON OHIO

PREPARED FOR

URS GROUP, INC.

BY

CONSTRUCTION CONSULTING & TESTING, INC.

700 S. RIVER RD., WATERVILLE, OHIO 43566

Ph. (419) 878-7304 Fax. (419) 878-7305

April 8, 2013

ASA Crew Quarters

Ohio Air National Guard - Toledo

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM PAGE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

INTRODUCTION 3

SITE DESCRIPTION 4

FIELD EXPLORATION 5

LABORATORY TESTING 7

PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 8

FOUNDATION DISCUSSION 8

CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 9

LIMITATIONS AND COMMENTS 13

BORING LOCATION PLAN, BORING LOGS & LAB

DATA (APPENDIX)

A

GEOTECHNICAL SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION

AND

FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A subsurface investigation and soils evaluation has been performed for the proposed ASA Crew

Quarters at the Toledo base of the Ohio Air National Guard located at 2660 South Eber Road

Swanton, Ohio. It is understood that the proposed structure will be single story with slab on grade.

Soil borings, selected in-situ testing and laboratory testing have been performed and carefully analyzed in light of the project information provided by the URS Corporation.

The subsurface exploration consisted of two (2) soil borings to a depth of 25 feet below existing grade. Recovered soils were analyzed for physical properties and evaluated for foundation applications. The site was individually analyzed and recommendations contained herein.

Bearing Soils & Recommended Bearing Capacity

The bearing soils & capacity for each of the sites is as follows:

Site Allowable Bearing

Capacity (psf)

Bearing Soil Type Bearing Depth -

Below Ex. Grade

ASA Crew Quarters 2,000 Virgin Fine Sand below topsoil at 4 foot depth

4 – 5 feet

It is recommended that the structures be founded on a shallow foundation system consisting of continuous wall and spread footings at depths of 4 to 5 feet below existing grade on the medium dense, gray, fine sand. Depth shall be compliant with local frost penetration codes.

Groundwater Conditions

Ground water was encountered at six (6) feet below grade in each of the boreholes. For the granular soil type present at this site, it is anticipated that water table elevation will fluctuate on the order of +/- 1 foot depending on the time of year and recent rainfall levels. The sampling for this investigation was conducted in early April 2013, at which time there had been approximately

0.3 inches of precipitation in the prior week.

It is recommended that a drainage system of perforated pipe and sump pit be installed just above the continuous wall footings to allow for drainage of the soils surrounding the footing wall and supporting concrete floor slabs. Weep holes through the footing wall are recommended to allow for adequate drainage on both sides of the wall.

During periods of heavy rainfall is should be anticipated that water seepage will occur during the footing excavation process and means of water removal will be required prior to placement of concrete for footings.

Fill and Topsoil

Dark brown topsoil was encountered at a depth of four (4) feet below grade in each of the boreholes. The organic content of the material was determined to be 4.1% in B-1 and 29.3% in

B-2. This stratum of organic topsoil or fill material above the topsoil is not suitable for the support of shallow foundations and should be excavated prior to construction of the footings.

Foundations should bear on the underlying gray, fine sand or on engineered fill placed on the underlying gray, fine sand. The stratum of topsoil should not cause a settlement concern for the slab on grade and can remain in place in areas other than the foundations.

Interior Slabs on Grade

The existing asphalt pavement and surface topsoil/vegetation should be stripped prior to preparing the subgrade for concrete slabs. Due to the natural moisture contents of the soils it is recommended that the slabs bear on a minimum of 4 inches of free draining sand with a vapor barrier between the sand and concrete.

Detailed findings and recommendations are contained herein.

2.0 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Authorization

This report presents the results of a subsurface soil investigation and foundation analysis for the proposed Toledo ASA Alert Crew Quarters at the Ohio Air National Guard base in Swanton, Ohio.

Authorization to perform this evaluation was in the form of a signed subcontract on April 4, 2013 between URS Group, Inc. and Construction Consulting and Testing, Inc.

2.2 Objectives

The purpose of this investigation is to evaluate the site soil conditions and to provide soil design parameters for structural foundation design at the proposed site. It is also intended to identify potential soil related construction concerns and present their possible solutions.

2.3 Scope

The subsurface investigation was performed at the proposed site of the new ASA Crew Quarters, which is just west of the existing Air Crew Facility (building #601). The scope of work included a review of geological maps of the area, a reconnaissance of the immediate site, two (2) soil borings with split spoon SPT sampling, select field and laboratory testing, engineering analysis and evaluation of soil data for the proposed construction.

2.4 General

The subsurface soil profiles along with the in-situ and laboratory test data obtained in the investigation were sufficient in detail to obtain the site soil design parameters for recommendations on design of a shallow foundation system and pavements/slab on grade.

Upon completion of the design and construction documents, CCT should be provided the opportunity to review the documents to determine if changes in the recommendations are required. If CCT is not retained to perform these functions or if deviations from the subsurface conditions noted in the boring logs are encountered during construction and CCT is not informed, CCT will not be held responsible for the impact of those conditions on the performance of the structure.

The geotechnical engineer warrants that the findings, recommendations, specifications, or professional advice contained herein, have been presented after being prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering practice in the fields of foundation engineering, pavement design, soil mechanics and engineering geology. No other warranties are implied or expressed.

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of URS Group, Inc, the Ohio Air National

Guard and design consultants for the specific application of the proposed structure at this selected building site.

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF SITE

3.1 Site Location

The site for the proposed new ASA Crew Quarters is at the Toledo base of the Ohio Air National

Guard located at 2660 South Eber Road, Swanton, Ohio just west of the existing Air Crew

Facility in building #601.

3.2 Site Topography

The area for the proposed structure is paved with asphalt in the north have of the building foorprint and grass lawn in the south portion of the footprint. The asphalt pavement drains to the south with a gentle slope toward the grass lawn.

An elevation survey was not included as part of this investigation.

3.3 Site Geology

The predominant soil type in the immediate vicinity is typical of the glacial lake plain region in

Lucas County, Ohio. This lake plain is represented by several ancestral lake stages and is represented by the presence of lucustrine clays, silts and sand. The lacustrine clays and silts are generally blue to blue-gray, however at near surface levels it changes to a mottled reddish brown. The lacustrine sands are sporadically distributed and exist as deposits, seams or lenses within the clays and silts. Bedrock in the region typically exists at 10 to 40 feet below surface elevation.

Detail soil profiles are contained herein.

4.0 FIELD EXPLORATION

4.1 Scope

The field exploration for this project was performed on April 5, 2013 by Stock Drilling, Inc. A representative of CCT collected the SPT split-spoon samples and boring logs after completion of the drilling. A total of two (2) soils borings to a depth of 25 feet below existing grade were performed. During drilling operations a continuous soil profile was recorded along with obtaining split spoon soil samples.

All borehole locations were located by a representative of the Ohio Air National Guard at the locations provided by URS Corporation. The boreholes were backfilled with auger spoils upon completion of boring.

Spit-spoon sampling was performed continuously with Standard Penetration Testing (SPT), ASTM D 1586, performed every 2.5 feet for the full depth of the borehole. The SPT number, N, is the number of blows of a 140 lb. hammer dropped from a height of 30 inches required to drive a 2 inch O.D. sampling spoon the final 12 inches during an 18 inch penetration into the stratum .

The hammer used on this project was an automatic drop hammer. Samples obtained by the split-spoon were contained in air tight jars and delivered to CCT’s lab for testing and analysis.

4.2 Soil Conditions

Based on the borings, a general soil profile for the sites is as follows.

Proposed ASA Alert Crew Quarters – The existing surface within the proposed building foot print is split with the north half being 8 inches of asphalt underlain by 4 inches of crushed limestone and the south half being a surface of grass lawn with approximately 6 inches of topsoil. The proposed site is adjacent to the flight line pavement and has received 3 to 4 feet of fill, most likely when the flight line pavement was constructed. The fill is a brown, fine to medium sand that is underlain by a strutum of dark brown, topsoil at 3.5 to 4.5 feet below existing grade. The topsoil is underlain by a stratum of medium dense, gray, fine sand extending to the bottom of the borehole at 25 feet below grade. A silt seam approximately 1 foot thick was encountered at 14 feet in both of the boreholes. The groundwater table was at 6 feet below grade in each of the boreholes.

Boring logs of each of the soil borings are contained in the appendix.

4.3 Groundwater and Moisture Conditions

Near surface static water levels were encountered at 6 feet below grade in both boreholes at the time of the investigation. The sandy, non-cohesive soils of the site are relatively good draining soils and the water content will vary significantly dependent on the time of year and recent precipitation levels.

If excavations are to be performed during periods of high water tables or recent heavy rains, it should be anticipated that water seepage will occur into the foundation excavations and that excavation cave-ins may occur in the non-cohesive soils. Removal of any standing water and/or loose or softened soils in the bottom of footings should be performed prior to placing concrete.

5.0 LABORATORY TESTING

5.1 Laboratory Testing

Laboratory testing of soil samples were conducted at CCT’s lab in Waterville, Ohio. The physical tests performed were selected for in-place material properties for use in engineering analysis and construction considerations. The following tests were conducted on some or all of the samples:

Soil Tests:

- visual classification (ASTM D 2488)

- moisture content determination (ASTM D 2216)

- organic content (ASTM D 2974)

Actual lab test results are reported on the boring logs in Appendix A.

The physical properties of the in-place soils may differ slightly from the tested values due to disturbance of soils during sampling and handling. Allowance for this is taken into consideration when interpreting the data and applying standard factors of safety for soils engineering.

5.2 Soil Properties

The foundation bearing strata at this site is the medium dense, gray, fine sand at approximately 4 to 5 feet below existing grade. The bearing strata is the virgin fine sand below the existing fill and topsoil. These soils will be suitable for the proposed structures supported by a shallow depth foundation system of continuous wall and spread footings, recommended bearing values are as follows:

Site Allowable Bearing

Capacity (psf)

Bearing Soil Type Bearing Depth -

Below Ex. Grade

ASA Crew Quarters 2,000 Virgin Fine Sand below topsoil at 4 foot depth

4 – 5 feet

The upper layer of fill below the asphalt pavement and grass lawn consists of a loose, brown, fine to medium sand. This material is suitable for the support of the slab on grade and pavement providing the upper 1 foot of material is compacted to a minimum of 98% of ASTM D 698. A subgrade CBR value for use in pavement design, for subgrade compacted to a minimum of 98% of ASTM D 698, is estimated at 5.0 for this site.

Soil properties used for engineering calculations have been determined based on actual laboratory testing and estimated values based on soil types, conditions and experience.

6.0 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

This geotechnical investigation has been performed for the purpose of identifying soil design parameters for the design and construction of a foundation system for the proposed single story structure at this site.

The above information has been provided by the URS Corporation. Any deviations from these plans should be brought to the attention of CCT for verification of the suitability of the soil recommendations.

At the time of this report, CCT has not been provided with the anticipated structural loads. It is typical for structures of this nature to have wall bearing loads on the order of 1,000 to 2,000 plf.

7.0 FOUNDATION DISCUSSION

7.1 Foundation Types

Standard foundation systems consist of conventional spread footings, continuous wall footing and mat type foundations for shallow foundations and a variety of piles and caissons for deep foundations. In general, shallow foundations are more economical when the near surface soils are suitable for the applicable loads.

7.2 Foundation Recommendations

It is recommended that the proposed structures be founded on shallow foundations consisting of conventional spread footings and continuous wall footings bearing in the stratum of virgin fine sand at approximate depths of 4 to 5 feet below existing grade. Exterior footings should bear at depths below the frost penetration line. The foundation systems may be designed with bearing pressures up to 2,000 psf. These soils are suitable for the listed bearing capacity under all combinations of load – live, dead, and wind, without undergoing significant differential settlement consolidation or bearing failure. Soils below the anticipated bearing elevations continue to increase in strength within the influence of the increased soil pressures.

Interior footings may be placed at shallower depths providing the stratum of topsoil is excavated prior to placing engineered fill and/or concrete. Continuous wall footings should be designed with top and bottom reinforcement.

Bottoms of footings should be cleaned of all loose, disturbed and water-softened soil and should be inspected for proper bearing conditions just prior to placing concrete. If unsuitable bearing soils are encountered, it may be necessary to alter the foundation dimensions. At this site an over-excavation of soft soils at shallow depths will not result in a significant increase in soil strength.

During foundation construction groundwater or surface water levels should be kept sufficiently below the level of excavation in order to maintain a firm working surface. If pumping is used as part of the water removal process, it should be done from a confined, stone filled sump outside and below the footing area. Means should be taken to limit the amount of soil fines pumped from the sump.

8.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

8.1 Groundwater

The presence of water during foundation excavation may occur during periods of heavy rainfall or seasonally high water tables. During these periods means to pump or gravity drain water should be anticipated to maintain a firm surface for placement of concrete.

8.1.1 Foundation Drainage: Due to water content fluctuations resulting from precipitation events it is strongly recommended that a foundation drain tile and sump pump system be installed to control the volume of water adjacent to the footing wall and below floor slabs. It is recommended that a perforated pipe be placed just above the footing around the perimeter of the structure, furthermore periodic weep holes or other means to transfer water through the footing wall to the drain pipe should be installed to facilitate drainage of the soils within the interior of the building.

It is recommended that the site be graded and sealed to drain rainfall away from all structures and excavations during construction operations. The site soils are relatively permeable and should remain stable if properly drained. In the event the soils become unstable due to standing water, efforts will need to be taken to insure that the subgrade is in stable condition prior to the placement of fills, slabs and pavements. Excessively moist subgrade soils will need to be dried and recompacted or removed and replaced with an engineered fill.

8.2 Earthwork

Based on our findings and site reconnaissance, stripping of topsoil will be necessary at all footing locations at a depth of 4 to 5 feet below grade and from the surface in the grass area in the south half of the building footprint. Should any fills, pavements or structures be exposed during earthwork/construction, they should be removed from the structure and pavement areas or further addressed by the geotechnical and structural engineer(s).

Prior to placement of fills, bases, slabs and pavements the area should be proofrolled to inspect for soft or yielding subgrade conditions. Areas of soft or yielding subgrade should either be removed and replaced with an engineered fill, reworked and recompacted, or stabilized by others means such as chemical stabilization or use of geosynthetics with engineered fill.

All fill and backfill should be placed in loose, uniform, horizontal layers not exceeding eight (8) inches. Each layer should be compacted to a minimum dry density of 95% of the maximum dry density as determined from a modified proctor, ASTM D 1557. Compaction should be performed at a moisture content within three (3) percent of the optimum moisture content. Soils that are prone to yielding above optimum should be compacted at less than optimum. Cohesive soils should be compacted using a sheepsfoot roller and granular soils should be compacted using a smooth drum roller. At the end of each days work, areas of fill should be shaped and sealed to allow for positive drainage away from work areas.

8.3 Excavations

The contractor is solely responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations and should shore, slope or bench the sides of the excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should comply with applicable local, state and federal safety regulations including the current OSHA Excavation and Trench Safety

Standards.

Materials removed from the excavation should not be stockpiled immediately adjacent to the excavation, as the load may cause a sudden collapse of the embankment. A slope stability analysis should be performed to determine the factor of safety for cut or fill slopes. CCT has not performed trenching or slope stability analysis for this site.

9.0 Slabs on Grade

Prior to placing the slab on grade, the subgrade should be uniformly compacted to 98% of the maximum dry density as determined by the modified proctor, ASTM D 698, and proofrolled until the grade offers a relatively unyielding surface.

A granular mat should be provided between interior slabs and subgrade soil. For this project this layer will serve as a drainage layer and should be sloped to drain to the footing tile drainage system. It should have a minimum thickness of four (4) inches and be properly compacted to a minimum of 95% of the maximum dry density as determined by the modified proctor, ASTM D

1557. A vapor barrier between the granular mat and concrete is recommended.

An aggregate base should be provided between exterior slabs and subgrade soil. It should have a minimum thickness of eight (8) inches and be properly compacted to a minimum of 95% of the maximum dry density as determined by the modified proctor, ASTM D 1557.

Concrete slabs should be suitably reinforced to make it as rigid as practical. Proper joints should be provided at the junctions of the slab and foundation system so that a small amount of independent movement can occur without causing damage.

10.0 Pavements

10.1 Subgrade

The upper strata of non-cohesive fill sand soils on this site are relatively good materials for the support of pavements. When properly compacted to 98% of ASTM D 698, a Subgrade CBR value of 5.0 will be suitable for design considerations.

It may be necessary to limit the types and weight of trucks and equipment used to construct the pavement on this subgrade.

10.2 Pavement Structure

Pavement structures should be designed for the specific loading applications anticipated for the pavement. This information has not been provided to CCT. General pavement recommendations are contained herein.

10.2.1 Aggregate Base

It is recommended that an ODOT 304 aggregate base be placed for support of pavements.

Thickness should be based on pavement loading and design. All aggregate base should be placed in lifts not to exceed 6 inches and be compacted to a minimum of 95% of ASTM D 1557.

Material should be placed to avoid segregation of fine and coarse aggregate.

An aggregate base is recommended for both flexible and rigid pavements on the type of subgrade soils present at this site.

10.2.2 Flexible Pavements

Asphalt pavement thickness should be based on a structural pavement design. In general light duty pavements are on the order of 3 to 4 inches in thickness and heavy duty pavements are on the order of 6 to 12 inches in thickness. Use of geogrid reinforcement below the aggregate base may be of value in the structural design process.

In general, asphalt lift thickness should be set at 3 to 5 times the maximum nominal particle size of the mix to be placed.

LIMITATIONS AND COMMENTS

The above considerations are based on the split spoon soil samples and data generated from field and laboratory testing. The assumption was made that the material encountered in the test borings is representative of that on the entire site and does not vary substantially between points explored. The above assumptions should be verified in the field at the beginning of earthwork operations and throughout foundation construction. It is recommended that a qualified soils technician perform monitoring and testing to verify suitable materials are in place and that fill and backfill is properly placed and compacted.

Any changes in the development plans or the materials encountered from those shown or described in the report should be brought to our attention so that we may review and revise our recommendations as necessary.

APPENDIX A

Boring Location Plan

Boring Logs w/ Laboratory Test Data

Particle Size Distribution Data

NEW

AIRCREW FACILITY

30.00

EX. AIRCREW

FACILTY

(BLDG 601)

EX. BUILDING 127

71.2572.50

21.76

14578136

KTH

drawn by

URS project no.

Type A Services

Copyright © 2009 URS Corporation, All Rights Reserved

ASA Alert Crew Quarters/ASA O&M Facility file no.

Site Boring Plan

0 20 40 60

Mitch Text Box B-1

Mitch Text Box B-2

Project: ASA Alert Crew Quarters Boring No.:

Ohioi Air Nat'l Guard

Sheet 1 of 2

Drilling Date: Drilling Co.:

Surface Elev.: Surface Type: Asphalt

Sample Blows wn g Organic USCS PI

Soil Description Type/# (N Value) (%) (pcf) (%) Class.

8" Asphalt

4" Crushed Limestone

FILL - brown, fine to medium , sand, loose, moist SS 4-5-5 100 11.7 SP NP

Black TOPSOIL, moist

SS 5-6-6 100 16.3 4.1

5 Gray fine Sand, medium dense, 11 wet q - Water Table

SS 5-6-10 100 24.4 SP NP

SS 5-6-11 100 22.7

10 17

SS 3-4-7 100 24.1

Gray SILTwith some sand, SS 5-7-10 100 27.0

15 medium dense, wet 17

Gray fine Sand, medium dense, wet

SS 6-6-18 100 17.4

SS 3-7-10 100 19.1

20 17

Sample Type: Legend: NP - Non-Plastic

SS - Split Spoon wn - Moisture Content HP - Hand Penetrometer

ST - Shelby Tube g - Unit Weight PI - Plasticity Index

A - Auger qu - Unconfined Compressive Strength q - Water Table

GP- Geo-Probe Water: encountered at 6' below existing surface

R e c o v e ry

CONSTRUCTION CONSULTING & TESTING, INC.

BORING LOG

SB # 1

Stock Drilling04/05/13

Swanton, Ohio

Continued on sheet 2

Not Provided

D e p th ft

G ra p h ic L o g

Sheet 2 of 2

Drilling Date: Drilling Co.:

Surface Elev.: Surface Type: Asphalt

Sample Blows wn g qu HP PI

Soil Description Type/# (N Value) (%) (pcf) (psf) (tsf)

Gray fine Sand, medium dense, wet

22.3

Gray SILTwith some sand, SS 3-7-8 100 medium dense, wet 15

Gray fine Sand, medium dense, wet

SS 3-3-6 100 21.4

25 9

EOB Sample Type: Legend:

25' SS - Split Spoon wn - Moisture Content HP - Hand Penetrometer

ST - Shelby Tube g - Unit Weight PI - Plasticity Index

A - Auger qu - Unconfined Compressive Strength q - Water Table

GP- Geo-Probe Water:

END OF BORING 25'

04/05/13 Stock Drilling

Not Provided

D e p th ft

G ra p h ic L o g

R e c o v e ry

CONSTRUCTION CONSULTING & TESTING, INC.

BORING LOG

SB # 1

Swanton, Ohio

Sheet 1 of 2

Drilling Date: Drilling Co.:

Surface Elev.: Surface Type: Asphalt

Sample Blows wn g Organic USCS PI

Soil Description Type/# (N Value) (%) (pcf) (%) Class.

8" Asphalt

4" Crushed Limestone

FILL - dark brown, fine to medium , sand, loose, moist SS 7-4-5 100 9.8 SP NP

Black TOPSOIL, moist

SS 2-2-2 100 24.4 29.3

5 Gray fine Sand, medium dense, 4 wet q - Water Table

SS 10-4-6 100 21.9 SP-SM NP

SS 3-7-12 100 22.0

10 19

SS 5-6-8 100 21.9

Gray SILTwith some sand, SS 3-5-5 100 8.2

15 medium dense, wet 10

Gray fine Sand, medium dense, wet

SS 5-5-10 100 30.8

SS 10-8-10 100 16.4

20 18

Sample Type: Legend: NP - Non-Plastic

SS - Split Spoon wn - Moisture Content HP - Hand Penetrometer

ST - Shelby Tube g - Unit Weight PI - Plasticity Index

A - Auger qu - Unconfined Compressive Strength q - Water Table

GP- Geo-Probe Water: encountered at 6' below existing surface

Continued on sheet 2

04/05/13 Stock Drilling

Not Provided

D e p th ft

G ra p h ic L o g

R e c o v e ry

CONSTRUCTION CONSULTING & TESTING, INC.

BORING LOG

SB # 2

Sheet 2 of 2

Drilling Date: Drilling Co.:

Surface Elev.: Surface Type: Asphalt

Sample Blows wn g qu HP PI

Soil Description Type/# (N Value) (%) (pcf) (psf) (tsf)

Gray fine Sand, medium dense, wet

SS 3-5-12 100 19.4

SS 4-5-5 100 16.4

25 10

EOB Sample Type: Legend:

25' SS - Split Spoon wn - Moisture Content HP - Hand Penetrometer

ST - Shelby Tube g - Unit Weight PI - Plasticity Index

A - Auger qu - Unconfined Compressive Strength q - Water Table

GP- Geo-Probe Water:

END OF BORING 25'

04/05/13 Stock Drilling

Not Provided

D e p th ft

G ra p h ic L o g

R e c o v e ry

CONSTRUCTION CONSULTING & TESTING, INC.

BORING LOG

SB # 2

Client: URS Group, Inc. Project: Subsurface Investigation

7650 W. Courtney Campbell Causeway Toledo ASA Alert Crew Qtrs

Tampa, Florida 33607-1462 OANG

Lab No.: L13065

Date: CCT No.: 106-13003-1

STANDARD SIEVE SIZES Sample ID: SB-1

Size (mm) % Passing Std Sieve Size (mm) 1.5' to 2.5' below grade

9.5

4.75

2.36 100 Sample Date: 4/5/2013

1.18 98

0.6 85 1" 25.0 Visual Class: FILL - brown, fine to medium

0.3 64 3/4" 19.0 sand

0.15 29 1/2" 12.5 Liquid Limit:

0.075 2.2 3/8" 9.5 Plastic Limit: Non-Plastic

0.030 #4 4.75 Plasticity Index:

0.019 #8 2.36

0.012 #16 1.18 As Rcv'd Moisture: 11.7

0.008 #30 0.6

0.006 #50 0.3 USCS: SP : poorly graded sand

0.003 #100 0.15

0.001 #200 0.075 AASHTO: ---

Grp Ind

Reviewed By:

Mitch D. Forst, P.E.

CONSTRUCTION CONSULTING & TESTING, INC.

TOLEDO OFFICE - 700 S. River Road * Waterville, Ohio 43566 * Ph.: (419) 878-7304

DETROIT OFFICE - 35410 Mound Rd. * Sterling Hts., Michigan 48310 * Ph.: (586) 795-2877

July 14, 2010

Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (USCS) - ASTM D 2487

PERCENT PASSING

4.75 2.36 1.18 0.6 0.3 0.15 0.075

0.0010.010.1110

P e rc e n t

P a s s in

Particle Size (mm) - Log Scale

PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION

standard sieves (mm)

Tampa, Florida 33607-1462 OANG

Lab No.: L13065

Date: CCT No.: 106-13003-1

STANDARD SIEVE SIZES Sample ID: SB-1

Size (mm) % Passing Std Sieve Size (mm) 6' to 7' below grade

9.5

4.75

2.36 Sample Date: 4/5/2013

1.18

0.6 100 1" 25.0 Visual Class: gray, fine SAND

0.3 96 3/4" 19.0

0.15 29 1/2" 12.5 Liquid Limit:

0.075 4.9 3/8" 9.5 Plastic Limit: Non-Plastic

0.030 #4 4.75 Plasticity Index:

0.019 #8 2.36

0.012 #16 1.18 As Rcv'd Moisture: 24.4

0.008 #30 0.6

0.006 #50 0.3 USCS: SP : poorly graded sand

0.003 #100 0.15

0.001 #200 0.075 AASHTO: ---

Grp Ind

Reviewed By:

Mitch D. Forst, P.E.

CONSTRUCTION CONSULTING & TESTING, INC.

TOLEDO OFFICE - 700 S. River Road * Waterville, Ohio 43566 * Ph.: (419) 878-7304

DETROIT OFFICE - 35410 Mound Rd. * Sterling Hts., Michigan 48310 * Ph.: (586) 795-2877

July 14, 2010

Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (USCS) - ASTM D 2487

PERCENT PASSING

4.75 2.36 1.18 0.6 0.3 0.15 0.075

0.0010.010.1110

P e rc e n t

P a s s

Tampa, Florida 33607-1462 OANG

Lab No.: L13065

Date: CCT No.: 106-13003-1

STANDARD SIEVE SIZES Sample ID: SB-2

Size (mm) % Passing Std Sieve Size (mm) 1.5' to 2.5' below grade

9.5

4.75

2.36 100 Sample Date: 4/5/2013

1.18 99

0.6 87 1" 25.0 Visual Class: FILL - brown, fine to medium

0.3 66 3/4" 19.0 sand

0.15 31 1/2" 12.5 Liquid Limit:

0.075 1.3 3/8" 9.5 Plastic Limit: Non-Plastic

0.030 #4 4.75 Plasticity Index:

0.019 #8 2.36

0.012 #16 1.18 As Rcv'd Moisture: 9.8

0.008 #30 0.6

0.006 #50 0.3 USCS: SP : poorly graded sand

0.003 #100 0.15

0.001 #200 0.075 AASHTO: ---

Grp Ind

Reviewed By:

Mitch D. Forst, P.E.

CONSTRUCTION CONSULTING & TESTING, INC.

TOLEDO OFFICE - 700 S. River Road * Waterville, Ohio 43566 * Ph.: (419) 878-7304

DETROIT OFFICE - 35410 Mound Rd. * Sterling Hts., Michigan 48310 * Ph.: (586) 795-2877

July 14, 2010

Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (USCS) - ASTM D 2487

PERCENT PASSING

4.75 2.36 1.18 0.6 0.3 0.15 0.075

0.0010.010.1110

P e rc e n t

P a s s

Tampa, Florida 33607-1462 OANG

Lab No.: L13065

Date: CCT No.: 106-13003-1

STANDARD SIEVE SIZES Sample ID: SB-2

Size (mm) % Passing Std Sieve Size (mm) 6' to 7' below grade

9.5

4.75

2.36 Sample Date: 4/5/2013

1.18

0.6 100 1" 25.0 Visual Class: gray, fine SAND

0.3 98 3/4" 19.0

0.15 41 1/2" 12.5 Liquid Limit:

0.075 6.6 3/8" 9.5 Plastic Limit: Non-Plastic

0.030 #4 4.75 Plasticity Index:

0.019 #8 2.36

0.012 #16 1.18 As Rcv'd Moisture: 21.9

0.008 #30 0.6

0.006 #50 0.3 USCS: SP-SM : poorly graded sand

0.003 #100 0.15 with sillt

0.001 #200 0.075 AASHTO: ---

Grp Ind

Reviewed By:

Mitch D. Forst, P.E.

CONSTRUCTION CONSULTING & TESTING, INC.

TOLEDO OFFICE - 700 S. River Road * Waterville, Ohio 43566 * Ph.: (419) 878-7304

DETROIT OFFICE - 35410 Mound Rd. * Sterling Hts., Michigan 48310 * Ph.: (586) 795-2877

July 14, 2010

Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (USCS) - ASTM D 2487

PERCENT PASSING

4.75 2.36 1.18 0.6 0.3 0.15 0.075

0.0010.010.1110

P e rc e n t

P a s s