WV NP NERI107(3)_GEO_Report_adv.pdf

SOILS AND FOUNDATIONS

REPORT NO. 02-25

PROJECT: WV NP NERI 107(3)

LANDSLIDES REPAIRS

CUNARD RIVER ACCESS ROAD

FAYETTE COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA

US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

22001 LOUDOUN COUNTY PARKWAY, BUILDING E-2, SUITE 200

ASHBURN, VIRGINIA 20147

NOVEMBER 2025

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. General

1.2. Project Location

1.3. Background

2. GEOLOGY

2.1. Regional Geology

3. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM

3.1. Drilling, Sampling, Equipment, and Testing

3.2. Laboratory Testing

4. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

4.1. General Stratification

4.2. Groundwater

5. DESIGN ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. Design Alternatives

5.2. Design Analysis

5.3. Recommendations

6. CONSTRUCTION

7. REFERENCES

8. DISCLAIMER/LIMITATIONS CLAUSE

APPENDICES

Appendix I – Figures

Appendix II – Geotechnical Data Report

Appendix III – Design Analysis

Appendix IV – Site Photographs

Note: Design changes subsequent to publication of this report and prior to the project’s advertisement will be documented by a memo attached after the title page.

LANDSLIDE REPAIRS

NEW RIVER GORGE NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE, WEST VIRGINIA

PAGE 3 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VA

SOILS AND FOUNDATIONS

REPORT NO. 02-25

LANDSLIDES REPAIRS

CUNARD RIVER ACCESS ROAD

FAYETTE COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. General

This report presents the results of the subsurface exploration, laboratory testing, geotechnical analysis, and evaluations and recommendations for the repair of one (1) landslide along Cunard River Access Road (Route 107) in West Virginia.

1.2. Project Location

The site is located within New River Gorge National Park and Preserve. Table No. 1 includes a summary of the sites locations. Vicinity maps and sites location are shown in Figures No. 1 through No. 2 in Appendix I.

Table No. 1: Field Data

WV NP NERI 107(3) Site List

Site ID Description Route Station

107 100+93 to 121+90 Landslide/Embankment Failure

1.3. Background

Cunard Access Road experienced damage from severe storm events. The damage included landslides and embankment failures. This project aims to repair the storm-related damages at the subject site. Site photographs are included in Appendix IV – Site Photographs.

2. GEOLOGY

2.1. Regional Geology

Available geologic information indicates the project sites are located within the Pocahontas, Bluestone and Princetone Formations. The geologic map of the project area is included in Appendix II – Geotechnical Data Report.

NEW RIVER GORGE NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE, WEST VIRGINIA

PAGE 4 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VA

3. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM

3.1. Drilling, Sampling, Equipment, and Testing

A subsurface exploration program consisting of soil borings and rock cores was conducted to characterize subsurface conditions at the subject site. Drilling was performed by Terracon on September 8, 2022. The program consisted of drilling the total of two (2) borings. Detail information of the subsurface exploration, borings location plan, boring logs, and rock cores are included in Appendix II – Geotechnical Data Report.

3.2. Laboratory Testing

A laboratory testing program was conducted on representative soil and rock core samples recovered during the subsurface exploration. The primary purpose of the testing program was to aid in the classification and evaluation of the engineering properties of soils and rock present at the site. Laboratory tests included natural moisture content (AASHTO T-265), Atterberg limits (AASHTO T-89 & T-90), particle size analysis (AASHTO T-88), and classification (AASHTO M-145) on soil samples, and Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) Test (ASTM D 7012) of intact rock core samples. All tests were conducted in accordance with applicable AASHTO/ASTM standard test methods. The results of the laboratory testing program are included in Appendix II – Geotechnical Data Report

4. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

4.1. General Stratification

In general, the soil borings encountered three layers. These were Layer 1 – Existing Fill, Layer 2 – Native Soil, and Layer 3 – Bedrock. A brief description of the soils encountered is presented in Appendix II – Geotechnical Data Report.

It should be noted that the stratification lines designating the interfaces between soil and rock types on the boring logs, represent approximate boundaries. The transition between materials may be gradual. One or more of the units may be absent at specific locations.

Site observations reveal the presence of bedrock outcrops at differents locations along Cunard River Access Road. Coubles, Boulders and shallow Bedrock may be encountered at different depths and locations along and at the site. See Section 6 of the report.

4.2. Groundwater

Groundwater was not encountered in any of the two (2) soil borings. Additional detailed information can be found in Appendix II – Geotechnical Data Report. It must be noted that, changes in groundwater levels could be expected due to seasonal variations, precipitation, evaporation, and surface water runoff.

NEW RIVER GORGE NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE, WEST VIRGINIA

PAGE 5 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VA

5. DESIGN ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. Design Alternatives

Landslides occur as a result of unbalanced pressures along the sloping ground. The presence of water, works as a trigger mechanism by increasing the driving forces and/or reducing the shear strength of the in-situ materials. To mitigate slope stability problems, two general approaches can be used. One approach is to reduce the driving forces and increasing shear strength by lowering the groundwater table by improving the surface and subsurface drainage systems. The second approach is to increase the resisting forces by buttressing the slope, adding a retaining structure, or by reinforcing the embankment fill.

Three alternatives were considered given its feasibility and effectiveness for landslides stabilization, subsurface conditions, constructability, cost, project requirements, and our experience with similar projects.

A brief discussion of each alternative is presented below.

Alternative No. 1 – MSE (Mechanically Stabilized Earth) Retaining Wall with Welded Wire Mesh Facing

This alternative consists of re-establishing the roadway and stabilize the slope by constructing a retaining wall with geosynthetic reinforced soil. MSE walls are constructed using common construction materials, and conventional equipment and techniques, providing an economical and durable structure. It is cost-effective, self-draining, and can tolerate larger differential settlements compared to other repair alternatives.

This alternative will require road closure at all times. These structures can be constructed with a Battered vegetated system that provides the opportunity for vegetation to grow and mimic the surrounding landscape.

Alternative No. 2 – Anchored Soldier Pile Wall

This alternative consists of re-establishing the roadway and stabilize the slope by constructing an Anchored Soldier Pile Wall. This structure is a non-gravity cantilvered wall that relies on permanent ground anchors for additional lateral support and slope stability mitigation measures. This type of wall requires a specialized contractor, equipment and techniques which will be a more costly approach in comparison to MSE and RSS structures.

Alternative No. 3 – Reinforced Soil Slope (RSS)

Reinforced Soil Slope systems are composed of continuoes layers of geogrid laid down alternatively with horizontal layers of compacted select granular backfill or granular backfill (AASHTO # 57 Stone) with a face no steeper than 70° from horizontal. These types of systems are constructed using common construction materials, conventional equipment and techniques, providing an economical and durable structure. It is cost-effective, self-draining, and can tolerate larger differential settlements compared to other repair alternatives. These structures can be constructed with a vegetated system that provides the opportunity for vegetation to grow and mimic the surrounding landscape.

It should be noted that both alternatives No. 1 and No. 3 will require a significantly much larger footprint for construction.

Our recommendation is listed below:

NEW RIVER GORGE NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE, WEST VIRGINIA

PAGE 6 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VA

Alternative No. 2 - Anchored Soldier Pile Wall.

Alternative No. 1 and No 3 are not recommended due to constructability challenges (excavation), environmental impact (excessive LOD), substantial negative effects on the park’s aesthetics, which would persist until trees and vegetation are able to grow.

5.2. Design Analysis

The design of the structures was conducted using limit equilibrium methodology, in general accordance with the design concepts and procedures presented in FHWA Publication FHWA-IF-99-015, “Geotechnical Engineer Circular No. 4 – Ground Anchors and Anchored Systems”, and following “AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 9th Ed.” (2020) November 2021 Errata design requirements. A summary of soil engineering parameters assumed in the external, internal, and global stability analyses are presented in Table No. 2 and Table No. 3.

Table No. 2: Summary of assumed engineering properties for analysis and design of structures.

Material Type Unit Weight

(pcf) Cohesion

(psf)

Internal Friction Angle ϕ (°) Aggregate Base Course 120 – 130 0.0 34 – 38

Layer 1 95 – 120 0.0 28 – 34 Layer 2 100 – 120 0.0 22 – 36 Bedrock 155 – 165 500 – 1,000 38 – 45

Table No. 3: Presumptive ultimate unit bond strength of gravity grouted permanent ground anchors.

Material Type qBond (ksf) Silty Sand and Gravel soils 1.5 – 3.0

Silstone and Sandstone 14.0 – 28.0

The selected load factors and combinations are presented in Table No. 4. The factors follow (AASHTO- LRFD, 2020). The resistance factor used for design are presented inTable No. 5.

Table No. 4: Retaining walls design load factors and combinations.

Load Combination EH EV ES LS Strength I (Max) 1.50 1.35 1.50 1.75 Strength I (Min) 0.90 1.00 0.75 1.75

Service I 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Extreme Event I 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 or 0.50

Table No. 5: Anchored Soldier Pile wall design resistance factors.

Analysis Resistance Factor Axial Compressive Resistance of Vertical Elements Φ: 0.50

Side Resistance in Sand β-method Φ: 0.55 Passive Resistance of Vertical Elements Φ: 0.75

Anchor Pullout Resistance Φ: 0.65 Anchor Tensile Resistance Φ: 0.80

Pile Shear Resistance Φ: 1.00 Overall/Global Φ: 0.65 (FS:1.5)

NEW RIVER GORGE NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE, WEST VIRGINIA

PAGE 7 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VA

Analysis Resistance Factor Overall/Global Extreme Event I Φ: 0.9 (FS:1.1)

A uniform distributed live surcharge load of 250 psf was applied along the travelway to account for traffic loading following (AASHTO-LRFD, 2020)– Section 3.11.6.4 requirements.

External and internal stability analysis computations were performed using PTC Mathcad Prime v. 10.0 software program by Computer Software Company (PTC) Inc, and global/overall stability analysis using the computer program SLIDE2 v. 9.038 and RSPile v. 3.022 by Rocscience, Inc. Design calculations and computer output files are included in Appendix III – Design Analysis.

According to AASHTO 11.5.4.2, a seismic design shall not be considered mandatory for walls located in Seismic Zones 1 through 3, or for walls at Sites where the site adjusted peak ground acceleration is less than or equal to 0.4g, unless one or more of the following is true:

Liquefaction induced lateral spreading or slope failure, or seismically induced slope failure, due to the presence of sensitive clays that lose strength during the seismic shaking, may impact the stability of the wall for the design earthquake.

The wall supports another structure that is required, based on the applicable design code or specification for the supporting structure, to be designed for seismic loading and poor seismic performance of the wall could impact the seismic performance of that structure.

In addition, according to C11.5.4.2, paragraph 7, a seismic analysis should be considered mandatory if the wall is located in seismic zone 2 or higher, and if either of the following is greater than 30 feet:

The exposed wall height plus the average depth over the width of the wall of any soil surcharge present.

For tiered walls, the sum of the exposed height of all the tiers plus the average soil surcharge depth.

Based on the above listed criteria, it was concluded that the retaining structure along Route 107 do not require an external or internal seismic evaluation, as applicable, due to an adjusted PGA less than 0.4g, and the retaining structures are in Seismic Zone 1 to 3. However, an Extreme Event I Overall Stability Analysis is required. For this analysis, it was assumed an allowable lateral deformation based on the flexible nature of the types of structure. See the evaluation calculations in Appendix III – Design Analysis for details.

5.3. Recommendations

The Anchored Soldier Pile wall system must have a maximum wall height of 19 feet, minimum drilled shaft embedment depth of 27 feet, with H-Pile spaced horizontally by 6.0 feet, and with H-Pile tip elevation of 1065 feet or deeper. A minimum of three (3) rows of permanent ground anchores is required. The anchors must have a minimum unbonded and bonded lengths of 20 feet and 30 feet respectively, and a minimum anchors tensile and pullout resistance of 45,000 lb. The maximum embankment height behind the wall must be 5.0 ft with a slope no steeper than 1V:2H.

NEW RIVER GORGE NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE, WEST VIRGINIA

PAGE 8 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VA

5.3.1. Underdrain System

The Anchored Soldier Pile Wall must include a subsurface water drainage system composed of granular backfill and a minimum 6 inch diameter pipe. The drainage pipes must be surrounded by a filter fabric to prevent the migration of fines. The perforated pipe will drain subsurface water into a minimum 6 inch non-perforated outlet pipe located at the lowest point in front of the wall and at a maximum spacing of 75 feet.

To keep wildlife out of the retaining wall drainage system a 1/4” mesh should be installed to cover the non-perforated pipe outlet.

6. CONSTRUCTION

The contractor attention is drawn to the fact, site observations and the subsurface exploration reveal the presence of bedrock at the site location. Coubles, Boulders and Shallow Bedrock shall be anticipated at different depths and locations. It is responsibility of the contractor to determine the means and methods of, but not limited to, drilled shaft construction, permanent ground anchor drilling and installation, and excavation.

NEW RIVER GORGE NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE, WEST VIRGINIA

PAGE 9 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VA

7. REFERENCES

AASHTO-LRFD. (2020). AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification (9th ed.). Washington, D.C.:

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

Berg, R., Christopher, B., & Samtani, N. (2009). Design of Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls and Reinforced Soil Slopes (Vol. I & II). Washington, D.C.: National Highway Institute (NHI), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), U.S. DOT.

FHWA. (2024). Standard Specifications For Construction of Roads and Bridges on Federal Highway Projects (FP-24). US Department of Transportation. Washington D.C.: US Department of Transportation.

FHWA. (2015). Strength Characterization of Open-Graded Aggregates for Structural Backfills - FHWA- HRT-15-034. McLean: FHWA.

NEW RIVER GORGE NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE, WEST VIRGINIA

PAGE 10 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VA

8. DISCLAIMER/LIMITATIONS CLAUSE

The subsurface explorations and tests described in this report have been conducted in accordance with standard practices and procedures (except as specifically noted). The results of these exploration and tests represent conditions at the specific locations and dates indicated. Subsurface conditions between these locations may vary. The Geotechnical Design Analyses and Recommendations Sections of this report are based on subsurface exploration data and subsurface profiles provided by others, and include interpretations and recommendations developed by the Government in the process of preparing the design. These interpretations are not intended as a substitute for the personal investigation, independent interpretation, and judgment of the Contractor.

Prepared by:

Jonathan Herrera-Roldán, P.E.

Sr. Geotechnical Engineer

Reviewed by:

Mounir Abouzakhm, P.E.

Division Geotechnical Engineer

NEW RIVER GORGE NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE, WEST VIRGINIA

PAGE 11 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VA

APPENDICES

NEW RIVER GORGE NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE, WEST VIRGINIA

PAGE A - 12 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Appendix I – Figures

PROJECT: NP WV NERI 107(3)

NEW RIVER GORGE NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE, WEST VIRGINIA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VA

Figure No. 1

Figure No. 2

PAGE A - 13

NEW RIVER GORGE NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE, WEST VIRGINIA

PAGE A - 14 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Appendix II – Geotechnical Data Report aecom.com Our Reference 60691052 EFL New River Geotech

1/1

Mr. Jonathan Herrera-Roldan Contractoing Officers Representative Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division 220001 Loudoun County arkway Building E-2, Suite 200 Ashburn, Virginia 20147

AECOM

150 Clay Street, Suite 430 Morgantown, WV 26501 aecom.com

December 1, 2022

Your Reference Contract No. 693C7321D000003, Task Order 693C7322F00101N

Our Reference 60691052 EFL New River Geotech

RE: NERI 107(2) Subsurface Exploration and Laboratory Testing in New River Gorge National Park Fayette County, West Virginia

Dear Mr. Herrera-Roldan

We are pleased to submit the attached final geotechnical report (Revision 1, dated 01 DEC 2022) and review comment status in accordance with; Contract No. 693C7321D000003, Task Order 693C7322F00101N, Highway and/or Bridge Design and Engineering Services Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity Contracts (IDIQC), Project:

NERI 107(2) - Subsurface Exploration and Laboratory Testing in New River Gorge National Park Fayette County, West Virginia.

The AECOM team, AECOM and partner Terracon, completed eight (8) borings in the New River Gorge National Park, six (6) along Cunard Road and two (2) along Glade Creek Road and laboratory testing to assist EFLHD in development of engineering parameters for the remediation of subsurface conditions at the site. All borings were advanced with a track-mounted, rotary drill rig using continuous flight hollow stem augers. A split-barrel sampling spoon was utilized to collect samples and to provide the data for the Standard Penetration Test (SPT).

All bore holes were observed by a Geotechnical Inspector and logs maintained. Samples were transported to the laboratory where the Moisture Content, Grain Size Distribution, Unconfined Compression, and Atterberg Limits were determined. The attached final Geotechnical Report provides the in-depth information for this project for your use.

Thank you for the opportunity. Please feel free to reach out with any questions or concerns.

Kind regards, Chris Channell, PE Project Manager

AECOM

T: 304-381-9267 M: 304-290-8127 E: Brian.Channell1@AECOM.com

PAGE A - 15

December 1, 2022 PAGE A - 16

PAGE A - 17

i

PAGE A - 18

i

PAGE A - 19

PAGE A - 20

PAGE A - 21

PAGE A - 22

PAGE A - 23

PAGE A - 24

PAGE A - 25

PAGE A - 26

PAGE A - 27

NP

Rec. = 1.3 ft RQD = 0.4 ft

Rec. = 4.0 ft RQD = 1.2 ft

Rec. = 5.0 ft RQD = 4.0 ft

PAGE A - 28

NP

Rec. = 3.4 ft RQD = 1.1 ft

NP

Rec. = 2.0 ft RQD = 2.1 ft

Rec. = 1.0 ft, RQD = 0.0 ft

Rec. = 5.0 ft, RQD = 0.4 ft

PAGE A - 29

PAGE A - 30

PAGE A - 31

PAGE A - 32

PAGE A - 33

PAGE A - 34

PAGE A - 35

PAGE A - 36

PAGE A - 37

PAGE A - 38

PAGE A - 39

PAGE A - 40

PAGE A - 41

PAGE A - 42

PAGE A - 43

PAGE A - 44

PAGE A - 45

PAGE A - 46

PAGE A - 47

PAGE A - 48

PAGE A - 49

PAGE A - 50

PAGE A - 51

PAGE A - 52

PAGE A - 53

PAGE A - 54

PAGE A - 55

PAGE A - 56

PAGE A - 57

PAGE A - 58

PAGE A - 59

PAGE A - 60

PAGE A - 61

PAGE A - 62

PAGE A - 63

PAGE A - 64

PAGE A - 65

PAGE A - 66

PAGE A - 67

912 Morris Street Charleston, WV 25301

(304) 344-0821

Client: AECOM Design Morgantown, WV Boring No:

Project: NERI 107(2) New River Gorge National Park Depth (ft): 23.8

Project No: N2225050 Test Date: 10/13/2022

Avg. Specimen Diameter (in.): 1.960 Deformation Load Strain Stress Strength Area (in.²): 3.02 (in.) (lbs.) (%) (psi) (tsf)

Avg. Specimen Length (in.): 3.980 0.000 0 0.000 0 0 L/D Ratio: 2.0 0.003 190 0.075 63 5

Natural Density, lb/ft³ 157.1 0.005 600 0.126 199 14

0.008 1240 0.201 411 30

Total Load (lbf.): 34650 0.010 1700 0.251 563 41 Rate of Loading (lbs/sec): 80 0.013 2180 0.327 722 52

Rate of Deformation (in/min): 0.006 0.015 2500 0.377 828 60 Break Time (minutes): 10.00 0.018 3100 0.452 1026 74

0.020 3840 0.503 1272 92 Compressive Strength (psi): 11474 0.023 4600 0.578 1523 110 Compressive Strength (psf): 1652185 0.025 5400 0.628 1788 129 Compressive Strength (tsf): 826 0.028 6450 0.704 2136 154

0.030 7600 0.754 2517 181 Moisture Content (%): 0.02 0.035 10150 0.879 3361 242

0.040 12870 1.005 4262 307 Failure Photograph: 0.045 16000 1.131 5298 381

0.050 21480 1.256 7113 512

0.060 34650 1.508 11474 826

Test sample prepared in general accordance to ASTM D4543

Straightness: Procedure S1 Parallelism: Procedure FP2

Flatness: Procedure FP2 Perpendicularity: Procedure P2

Unconfined Compression Test of Intact Rock Core Report ASTM D 7012 Method C

The tests were performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM, AASHTO, or DOT test methods. This report is exclusively for the use of client indicated above and shall not be reproduced except in full without the written consent of our company. Test results transmitted herein are only applicableto the actual samples tested at the location(s) referenced and are not necessarily indicative of the properties of other apparently similar or identical materials.

0.000 0.200 0.400 0.600 0.800 1.000 1.200 1.400 1.600

U ni t S tr es s

(ts f)

Unit Strain (%)

BH22-02

PAGE A - 68

(304) 344-0821

Client: AECOM Design Morgantown, WV Boring No:

Project: NERI 107(2) New River Gorge National Park Depth (ft): 25.2

Project No: N2225050 Test Date: 10/13/2022

Avg. Specimen Diameter (in.): 1.960 Deformation Load Strain Stress Strength Area (in.²): 3.02 (in.) (lbs.) (%) (psi) (tsf)

Avg. Specimen Length (in.): 4.000 0.000 0 0.000 0 0 L/D Ratio: 2.0 0.003 190 0.075 63 5

Natural Density, lb/ft³ 165.7 0.005 410 0.125 136 10

0.008 700 0.200 232 17

Total Load (lbf.): 23940 0.010 1070 0.250 354 25 Rate of Loading (lbs/sec): 80 0.013 1570 0.325 520 37

Rate of Deformation (in/min): 0.005 0.015 2350 0.375 778 56 Break Time (minutes): 10.00 0.018 3280 0.450 1086 78

0.020 4270 0.500 1414 102 Compressive Strength (psi): 7927 0.023 5430 0.575 1798 129 Compressive Strength (psf): 1141510 0.025 6780 0.625 2245 162 Compressive Strength (tsf): 571 0.028 8650 0.700 2864 206

0.030 10180 0.750 3371 243 Moisture Content (%): 0.03 0.035 14380 0.875 4762 343

0.040 19000 1.000 6291 453 Failure Photograph: 0.045 23940 1.125 7927 571

Test sample prepared in general accordance to ASTM D4543

Straightness: Procedure S1 Parallelism: Procedure FP2

Flatness: Procedure FP2 Perpendicularity: Procedure P2

Unconfined Compression Test of Intact Rock Core Report ASTM D 7012 Method C

The tests were performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM, AASHTO, or DOT test methods. This report is exclusively for the use of client indicated above and shall not be reproduced except in full without the written consent of our company. Test results transmitted herein are only applicableto the actual samples tested at the location(s) referenced and are not necessarily indicative of the properties of other apparently similar or identical materials.

0.000 0.200 0.400 0.600 0.800 1.000 1.200

U ni t S tr es s

(ts f)

Unit Strain (%)

BH22-02

PAGE A - 69

(304) 344-0821

Client: AECOM Design Morgantown, WV Boring No:

Project: NERI 107(2) New River Gorge National Park Depth (ft): 20

Project No: N2225050 Test Date: 10/13/2022

Avg. Specimen Diameter (in.): 1.960 Deformation Load Strain Stress Strength Area (in.²): 3.02 (in.) (lbs.) (%) (psi) (tsf)

Avg. Specimen Length (in.): 3.990 0.000 0 0.000 0 0 L/D Ratio: 2.0 0.003 390 0.075 129 9

Natural Density, lb/ft³ 165.7 0.005 910 0.125 301 22

0.008 1460 0.201 483 35

Total Load (lbf.): 41210 0.010 2040 0.251 675 49 Rate of Loading (lbs/sec): 110 0.013 2730 0.326 904 65

Rate of Deformation (in/min): 0.009 0.015 3500 0.376 1159 83 Break Time (minutes): 7.00 0.018 4310 0.451 1427 103

0.020 5300 0.501 1755 126 Compressive Strength (psi): 13646 0.023 6390 0.576 2116 152 Compressive Strength (psf): 1964980 0.025 7500 0.627 2483 179 Compressive Strength (tsf): 983 0.028 8740 0.702 2894 208

0.030 10250 0.752 3394 244 Moisture Content (%): 0.01 0.035 13780 0.877 4563 329

0.040 19150 1.003 6341 457 Failure Photograph: 0.045 25350 1.128 8394 604

0.050 31990 1.253 10593 763

0.060 41210 1.504 13646 983

Test sample prepared in general accordance to ASTM D4543

Straightness: Procedure S1 Parallelism: Procedure FP2

Flatness: Procedure FP2 Perpendicularity: Procedure P2

Unconfined Compression Test of Intact Rock Core Report ASTM D 7012 Method C

The tests were performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM, AASHTO, or DOT test methods. This report is exclusively for the use of client indicated above and shall not be reproduced except in full without the written consent of our company. Test results transmitted herein are only applicableto the actual samples tested at the location(s) referenced and are not necessarily indicative of the properties of other apparently similar or identical materials.

0.000 0.200 0.400 0.600 0.800 1.000 1.200 1.400 1.600

U ni t S tr es s

(ts f)

Unit Strain (%)

BH22-03

PAGE A - 70

(304) 344-0821

Client: AECOM Design Morgantown, WV Boring No:

Project: NERI 107(2) New River Gorge National Park Depth (ft): 23

Project No: N2225050 Test Date: 10/13/2022

Avg. Specimen Diameter (in.): 1.960 Deformation Load Strain Stress Strength Area (in.²): 3.02 (in.) (lbs.) (%) (psi) (tsf)

Avg. Specimen Length (in.): 4.000 0.000 0 0.000 0 0 L/D Ratio: 2.0 0.003 320 0.075 106 8

Natural Density, lb/ft³ 171.4 0.005 900 0.125 298 21

0.008 1650 0.200 546 39

Total Load (lbf.): 41020 0.010 2500 0.250 828 60 Rate of Loading (lbs/sec): 110 0.013 3730 0.325 1235 89

Rate of Deformation (in/min): 0.008 0.015 4990 0.375 1652 119 Break Time (minutes): 6.10 0.018 6380 0.450 2113 152

0.020 8050 0.500 2666 192 Compressive Strength (psi): 13583 0.023 10080 0.575 3338 240 Compressive Strength (psf): 1955921 0.025 11620 0.625 3848 277 Compressive Strength (tsf): 978 0.028 14150 0.700 4685 337

0.030 17070 0.750 5652 407 Moisture Content (%): 0.02 0.035 23700 0.875 7848 565

0.040 30380 1.000 10060 724 Failure Photograph: 0.045 35000 1.125 11589 834

0.050 41020 1.250 13583 978

Test sample prepared in general accordance to ASTM D4543

Straightness: Procedure S1 Parallelism: Procedure FP2

Flatness: Procedure FP2 Perpendicularity: Procedure P2

Unconfined Compression Test of Intact Rock Core Report ASTM D 7012 Method C

The tests were performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM, AASHTO, or DOT test methods. This report is exclusively for the use of client indicated above and shall not be reproduced except in full without the written consent of our company. Test results transmitted herein are only applicableto the actual samples tested at the location(s) referenced and are not necessarily indicative of the properties of other apparently similar or identical materials.

0.000 0.200 0.400 0.600 0.800 1.000 1.200 1.400

U ni t S tr es s

(ts f)

Unit Strain (%)

BH22-05

PAGE A - 71

(304) 344-0821

Client: AECOM Design Morgantown, WV Boring No:

Project: NERI 107(2) New River Gorge National Park Depth (ft): 18

Project No: N2225050 Test Date: 10/13/2022

Avg. Specimen Diameter (in.): 1.960 Deformation Load Strain Stress Strength Area (in.²): 3.02 (in.) (lbs.) (%) (psi) (tsf)

Avg. Specimen Length (in.): 4.010 0.000 0 0.000 0 0 L/D Ratio: 2.1 0.003 220 0.075 73 5

Natural Density, lb/ft³ 171.4 0.005 350 0.125 116 8

0.008 770 0.200 255 18

Total Load (lbf.): 11180 0.010 990 0.249 328 24 Rate of Loading (lbs/sec): 110 0.013 1200 0.324 397 29

Rate of Deformation (in/min): 0.019 0.015 1500 0.374 497 36 Break Time (minutes): 3.15 0.018 1800 0.449 596 43

0.020 2230 0.499 738 53 Compressive Strength (psi): 3702 0.023 2600 0.574 861 62 Compressive Strength (psf): 533086 0.025 3000 0.623 993 71 Compressive Strength (tsf): 267 0.028 3470 0.698 1149 83

0.030 4000 0.748 1325 95 Moisture Content (%): 0.02 0.035 5090 0.873 1685 121

0.040 6350 0.998 2103 151 Failure Photograph: 0.045 7670 1.122 2540 183

0.050 9020 1.247 2987 215

0.060 11180 1.496 3702 267

Test sample prepared in general accordance to ASTM D4543

Straightness: Procedure S1 Parallelism: Procedure FP2

Flatness: Procedure FP2 Perpendicularity: Procedure P2

Unconfined Compression Test of Intact Rock Core Report ASTM D 7012 Method C

The tests were performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM, AASHTO, or DOT test methods. This report is exclusively for the use of client indicated above and shall not be reproduced except in full without the written consent of our company. Test results transmitted herein are only applicableto the actual samples tested at the location(s) referenced and are not necessarily indicative of the properties of other apparently similar or identical materials.

0.000 0.200 0.400 0.600 0.800 1.000 1.200 1.400 1.600

U ni t S tr es s

(ts f)

Unit Strain (%)

BH22-06

PAGE A - 72

PAGE A - 73

PAGE A - 74

DxD

)(D

PAGE A - 75

PAGE A - 76

NEW RIVER GORGE NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE, WEST VIRGINIA

PAGE A - 77 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

Appendix III – Design Analysis

NEW RIVER GORGE NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE, WEST VIRGINIA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

ASHBURN, VA

Overall Global Stability Analysis Report

WV NP NERI 107(3)

FHWA – EFLHD

SLIDE2

Software Version: 9.038

PAGE A - 78

Table of Contents Project Summary

Currently Open Scenarios

General Settings

Analysis Options

All Open Scenarios

Groundwater Analysis

All Open Scenarios

Random Numbers

All Open Scenarios

Surface Options

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Static (C)

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Static (NC)

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Seismic (C)

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Seismic (NC)

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Ky

Seismic Loading

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Seismic (C)

All other Scenarios

Loading

All other Scenarios

Materials

Materials In Use

Support

Probabilistic Input Data

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Ky

General Settings

Variables

Global Minimums

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Static (C)

Method: spencer

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Static (NC)

Method: spencer

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Seismic (C)

Method: spencer

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Seismic (NC)

Method: spencer

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Ky

Method: spencer

Global Minimum Support Data

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Static (C)

Method: spencer

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Static (NC)

2/22

PAGE A - 79

Method: spencer

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Seismic (C)

Method: spencer

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Seismic (NC)

Method: spencer

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Ky

Method: spencer

3/22

PAGE A - 80

Slide2 Analysis Information

WV NP NERI 107(3), 95% PS&E - Overall Stability Analysis

Project Summary

File Name:

WV NP NERI 107(3), 95% PS&E - Overall Stability Analysis.slmd

Slide2 Modeler Version: 9.038 Project Title: WV NP NERI 107(3) Author: J. Herrera-Roldan Company: FHWA - EFLHD Date Created: 2/5/2024, 4:38:06 PM

Currently Open Scenarios

Group Name Scenario Name Global Minimum Compute Time Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) Static (C)

Spencer: 1.872500 00h:00m:33.40s

Static (NC) Spencer: 1.597290 00h:01m:49.331s Seismic (C) Spencer: 1.389510 00h:00m:35.410s Seismic (NC) Spencer: 1.226220 00h:01m:37.442s Ky Spencer: 1.226220 00h:01m:35.221s

4/22

PAGE A - 81

General Settings Units of Measurement: Imperial Units Time Units: days Permeability Units: feet/second Data Output: Standard Failure Direction: Right to Left

5/22

PAGE A - 82

Analysis Options All Open Scenarios

Slices Type: Vertical Analysis Methods Used

Spencer Number of slices: 100 Tolerance: 0.001 Maximum number of iterations: 100 Check malpha < 0.2: Yes

Create Interslice boundaries at intersections with water tables and piezos:

Yes

Initial trial value of FS: 1 Steffensen Iteration: Yes

6/22

PAGE A - 83

Groundwater Analysis

Groundwater Method: Water Surfaces Pore Fluid Unit Weight [lbs/ft3]: 62.4 Advanced Groundwater Method: None

7/22

PAGE A - 84

Random Numbers

Pseudo-random Seed: 10116 Random Number Generation Method: Park and Miller v.3

8/22

PAGE A - 85

Surface Options Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Static (C)

Surface Type: Circular Search Method: Grid Search Radius Increment: 10 Composite Surfaces: Enabled Reverse Curvature: Invalid Surfaces Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Static (NC)

Search Method: Auto Refine Search Divisions along slope: 20 Circles per division: 10 Number of iterations: 10 Divisions to use in next iteration: 50% Number of vertices per surface: 12 Optimize Surfaces: Enabled Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Seismic (C)

Surface Type: Circular Search Method: Grid Search Radius Increment: 10 Composite Surfaces: Enabled Reverse Curvature: Invalid Surfaces Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Seismic (NC)

9/22

PAGE A - 86

Search Method: Auto Refine Search Divisions along slope: 20 Circles per division: 10 Number of iterations: 10 Divisions to use in next iteration: 50% Number of vertices per surface: 12 Optimize Surfaces: Enabled Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Ky

Search Method: Auto Refine Search Divisions along slope: 20 Circles per division: 10 Number of iterations: 10 Divisions to use in next iteration: 50% Number of vertices per surface: 12 Optimize Surfaces: Enabled Minimum Elevation: Not Defined Minimum Depth: Not Defined Minimum Area: Not Defined Minimum Weight: Not Defined

10/22

PAGE A - 87

Seismic Loading Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Seismic (C)

Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No Seismic Load Coefficient (Horizontal): 0.071

All other Scenarios

Advanced seismic analysis: No Staged pseudostatic analysis: No

11/22

PAGE A - 88

Loading All other Scenarios

&nbsp;

Distribution: Constant Magnitude [psf]: 250 Orientation: Vertical

12/22

PAGE A - 89

Materials

Aggregate Base Course

Color

Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight 125 lbs/ft3 Cohesion 0 psf Phi 36 ° Water Surface Assigned per scenario Hu Type Custom Hu 0 Specify alternate strength type above water surface No

Fill - Silty Sand with Gravel (SM)

Color

Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight 115 lbs/ft3 Cohesion 0 psf Phi 34 ° Water Surface Assigned per scenario Hu Type Custom Hu 1 Specify alternate strength type above water surface No

Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) and Clayey Sand (SC)

Color

Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight 105 lbs/ft3 Cohesion 0 psf Phi 26 ° Water Surface Assigned per scenario Hu Type Custom Hu 1 Specify alternate strength type above water surface No

Silty Gravel with Sand (GM)

Color

Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight 115 lbs/ft3 Cohesion 0 psf Phi 30 ° Water Surface Assigned per scenario Hu Type Custom Hu 1 Specify alternate strength type above water surface No

13/22

PAGE A - 90

Silty Sand with Gravel (SM)

Color

Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight 105 lbs/ft3 Cohesion 0 psf Phi 28 ° Water Surface Assigned per scenario Hu Type Custom Hu 1 Specify alternate strength type above water surface No

Weathered Silstone

Color

Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight 130 lbs/ft3 Cohesion 0 psf Phi 36 ° Water Surface Assigned per scenario Hu Type Custom Hu 1 Specify alternate strength type above water surface No

Interbeded Clay

Color

Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight 100 lbs/ft3 Cohesion 0 psf Phi 22 ° Water Surface Assigned per scenario Hu Type Custom Hu 1 Specify alternate strength type above water surface No

Siltstone

Color

Strength Type Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight 165 lbs/ft3 Cohesion 500 psf Phi 45 ° Water Surface Assigned per scenario Hu Type Custom Hu 1 Specify alternate strength type above water surface No

Materials In Use

14/22

PAGE A - 91

Material Static (C) Static (NC) Seismic (C) Seismic (NC) Ky Aggregate Base Course Fill - Silty Sand with Gravel

(SM)

Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) and Clayey Sand (SC) Silty Gravel with Sand (GM) Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) Weathered Silstone Interbeded Clay Siltstone

15/22

PAGE A - 92

Support

Ground Anchor

Color

Type Grouted Tieback Force Application Active (Method A) Force Orientation Parallel to Reinforcement Out-Of-Plane Spacing 6 ft Tensile Capacity 45000 lbs Plate Capacity 45000 lbs Bond Strength 4000 lbs/ft Material Dependent No Bond Length 30 ft

HP16X88 (RSPile)

Color

Type RSPile Force Application Active (Method A) Out-Of-Plane Spacing 6 ft Apply Batter and Ground Slope Modifiers Yes Ground Slope and Batter Values Calculate from Slide2 model Soil Displacement Type Maximum Soil Displacement 1 in Lateral Shear Direction Along X' in RSPile

16/22

PAGE A - 93

Probabilistic Input Data Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Ky

General Settings

Sensitivity Analysis: On Probabilistic Analysis: Off Spatial Variability Analysis: Off

Variables

Seismic Coefficient

Property Distribution Mean Min Max

Horizontal Seismic Coefficient

Normal 0.071 0.011 0.371

Vertical Seismic Coefficient

17/22

PAGE A - 94

Global Minimums

Method: spencer

FS 1.872500

Center: -94.456, 1274.502 Radius: 212.507 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: -129.398, 1064.887 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 43.241, 1112.642 Resisting Moment: 2.46122e+07 lb-ft Driving Moment: 1.3144e+07 lb-ft Resisting Horizontal Force: 110646 lb Driving Horizontal Force: 59089.7 lb Active Support Moment: -6.60467e+06 lb-ft Active Horizontal Support Force: -34177.3 lb Maximum Single Support Force: 15433 lb Total Support Force: 37933 lb Total Slice Area: 3055.57 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 172.638 ft Surface Average Height: 17.6993 ft

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Static (NC)

Method: spencer

FS 1.597290

Axis Location: -94.842, 1278.747 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: -131.692, 1063.801 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 55.006, 1120.299 Left Slope Intercept: -131.692 1063.803 Right Slope Intercept: 55.006 1120.299 Resisting Moment: 2.37159e+07 lb-ft Driving Moment: 1.48476e+07 lb-ft Resisting Horizontal Force: 105331 lb Driving Horizontal Force: 65943.8 lb Active Support Moment: -6.61055e+06 lb-ft Active Horizontal Support Force: -34720.1 lb Maximum Single Support Force: 14056.1 lb Total Support Force: 36556.1 lb Total Slice Area: 2963.88 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 186.697 ft Surface Average Height: 15.8754 ft

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Seismic (C)

Method: spencer

18/22

PAGE A - 95

FS 1.389510

Center: -94.456, 1274.502 Radius: 212.507 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: -129.398, 1064.887 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 43.241, 1112.642 Resisting Moment: 2.35583e+07 lb-ft Driving Moment: 1.69545e+07 lb-ft Resisting Horizontal Force: 106317 lb Driving Horizontal Force: 76514.2 lb Active Support Moment: -6.60467e+06 lb-ft Active Horizontal Support Force: -34177.3 lb Maximum Single Support Force: 15433 lb Total Support Force: 37933 lb Total Slice Area: 3055.57 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 172.638 ft Surface Average Height: 17.6993 ft

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Seismic (NC)

Method: spencer

FS 1.226220

Axis Location: -94.842, 1278.747 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: -131.692, 1063.801 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 55.006, 1120.299 Left Slope Intercept: -131.692 1063.803 Right Slope Intercept: 55.006 1120.299 Resisting Moment: 2.3343e+07 lb-ft Driving Moment: 1.90365e+07 lb-ft Resisting Horizontal Force: 103588 lb Driving Horizontal Force: 84477.1 lb Active Support Moment: -6.72873e+06 lb-ft Active Horizontal Support Force: -34702 lb Maximum Single Support Force: 14794.7 lb Total Support Force: 37294.7 lb Total Slice Area: 3062.03 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 186.697 ft Surface Average Height: 16.4011 ft

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Ky

Method: spencer

19/22

PAGE A - 96

FS 1.226220

Axis Location: -94.842, 1278.747 Left Slip Surface Endpoint: -131.692, 1063.801 Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 55.006, 1120.299 Left Slope Intercept: -131.692 1063.803 Right Slope Intercept: 55.006 1120.299 Resisting Moment: 2.3343e+07 lb-ft Driving Moment: 1.90365e+07 lb-ft Resisting Horizontal Force: 103588 lb Driving Horizontal Force: 84477.1 lb Active Support Moment: -6.72873e+06 lb-ft Active Horizontal Support Force: -34702 lb Maximum Single Support Force: 14794.7 lb Total Support Force: 37294.7 lb Total Slice Area: 3062.03 ft2 Surface Horizontal Width: 186.697 ft Surface Average Height: 16.4011 ft

20/22

PAGE A - 97

Global Minimum Support Data

Method: spencer

Number of Supports: 4 Ground Anchor

Support Type: Grouted Tieback

Start (x, y) Length (ft) L Inside SS

(ft) L Outside SS

(ft) Li (ft) Lo (ft) Force (lb)

-24.9672, 1106.16

46 32.4819 13.5181 32.4819 13.5181 15433

-24.9672, 1096.16

50 28.1135 21.8865 8.11352 21.8865 7500

-24.9672, 1101.16

50 34.1526 15.8474 14.1526 15.8474 7500

-24.9672, 1091.16

50 22.0789 27.9211 2.0789 27.9211 7500

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Static (NC)

Method: spencer

Number of Supports: 4 Ground Anchor

Support Type: Grouted Tieback

Start (x, y) Length (ft) L Inside SS

(ft) L Outside SS

(ft) Li (ft) Lo (ft) Force (lb)

-24.9672, 1106.16

46 33.2743 12.7257 33.2743 12.7257 14056.1

-24.9672, 1096.16

50 28.1135 21.8865 8.11352 21.8865 7500

-24.9672, 1101.16

50 34.1526 15.8474 14.1526 15.8474 7500

-24.9672, 1091.16

50 22.0789 27.9211 2.0789 27.9211 7500

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Seismic (C)

Method: spencer

21/22

PAGE A - 98

Number of Supports: 4 Ground Anchor

Support Type: Grouted Tieback

Start (x, y) Length (ft) L Inside SS

(ft) L Outside SS

(ft) Li (ft) Lo (ft) Force (lb)

-24.9672, 1106.16

46 32.4819 13.5181 32.4819 13.5181 15433

-24.9672, 1096.16

50 28.1135 21.8865 8.11352 21.8865 7500

-24.9672, 1101.16

50 34.1526 15.8474 14.1526 15.8474 7500

-24.9672, 1091.16

50 22.0789 27.9211 2.0789 27.9211 7500

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Seismic (NC)

Method: spencer

Number of Supports: 4 Ground Anchor

Support Type: Grouted Tieback

Start (x, y) Length (ft) L Inside SS

(ft) L Outside SS

(ft) Li (ft) Lo (ft) Force (lb)

-24.9672, 1106.16

46 33.285 12.715 33.285 12.715 14794.7

-24.9672, 1096.16

50 28.1135 21.8865 8.11352 21.8865 7500

-24.9672, 1101.16

50 34.1526 15.8474 14.1526 15.8474 7500

-24.9672, 1091.16

50 22.0789 27.9211 2.0789 27.9211 7500

Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile) - Ky

Method: spencer

Number of Supports: 4 Ground Anchor

Support Type: Grouted Tieback

Start (x, y) Length (ft) L Inside SS

(ft) L Outside SS

(ft) Li (ft) Lo (ft) Force (lb)

-24.9672, 1106.16

46 33.285 12.715 33.285 12.715 14794.7

-24.9672, 1096.16

50 28.1135 21.8865 8.11352 21.8865 7500

-24.9672, 1101.16

50 34.1526 15.8474 14.1526 15.8474 7500

-24.9672, 1091.16

50 22.0789 27.9211 2.0789 27.9211 7500

22/22

PAGE A - 99

1.871.87

W

W

250.00 lbs/ft2

1.871.87

Phi (°)Cohesion (psf)Unit Weight (lbs/ft3)ColorMaterial Name 360125Aggregate Base Course

340115Fill - Silty Sand with Gravel (SM)

260105Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) and Clayey Sand (SC)

300115Silty Gravel with Sand (GM)

280105Silty Sand with Gravel (SM)

360130Weathered Silstone

220100Interbeded Clay

45500165Siltstone

Resistance Type

Lateral Shear Direction

Ground Slope and Batter Values

Apply Batter and Ground Slope Modifiers

Soil Displacement

(in)

Soil Displacement

Type Out-Of-Plane Spacing (ft)

Force ApplicationTypeColorSupport

Name

Axial and LateralAlong X' in RSPileCalculate from Slide2 modelYes1Maximum6Active (Method A)RSPileHP16X88

(RSPile)

Force Orientation

Bond Strength (lbs/ ft)

Bond Length (ft)

Plate Capacity

(lbs)

Tensile Capacity

(lbs)

Out-Of-Plane Spacing (ft)

Force ApplicationTypeColorSupport

Name

Parallel to Reinforcement40003045000450006Active

(Method A) Grouted Tieback

Ground Anchor

Safety Factor 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 3.25 3.50 3.75 4.00 4.25 4.50 4.75 5.00 5.25 5.50 5.75 6.00+

-300 -250 -200 -150 -100 -50 0 50

SCENARIO: Static (C) SITE: Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile)

DATE: 7/25/2025 By: J. Herrera-Roldan

SCALE: 1:500

PAGE A - 100

1.601.60

W

W

250.00 lbs/ft2

1.601.60

Phi (°)Cohesion (psf)Unit Weight (lbs/ft3)ColorMaterial Name 360125Aggregate Base Course

340115Fill - Silty Sand with Gravel (SM)

260105Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) and Clayey Sand (SC)

300115Silty Gravel with Sand (GM)

280105Silty Sand with Gravel (SM)

360130Weathered Silstone

220100Interbeded Clay

45500165Siltstone

Resistance Type

Lateral Shear Direction

Ground Slope and Batter Values

Apply Batter and Ground Slope Modifiers

Soil Displacement

(in)

Soil Displacement

Type Out-Of-Plane Spacing (ft)

Force ApplicationTypeColorSupport

Name

Axial and LateralAlong X' in RSPileCalculate from Slide2 modelYes1Maximum6Active (Method A)RSPileHP16X88

(RSPile)

Force Orientation

Bond Strength (lbs/ ft)

Bond Length (ft)

Plate Capacity

(lbs)

Tensile Capacity

(lbs)

Out-Of-Plane Spacing (ft)

Force ApplicationTypeColorSupport

Name

Parallel to Reinforcement40003045000450006Active

(Method A) Grouted Tieback

Ground Anchor

Safety Factor 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 3.25 3.50 3.75 4.00 4.25 4.50 4.75 5.00 5.25 5.50 5.75 6.00+

-300 -250 -200 -150 -100 -50 0 50

SCENARIO: Static (NC) SITE: Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile)

DATE: 7/25/2025 By: J. Herrera-Roldan

SCALE: 1:500

PAGE A - 101

1.391.39

W

W

1.391.39

Phi (°)Cohesion (psf)Unit Weight (lbs/ft3)ColorMaterial Name 360125Aggregate Base Course

340115Fill - Silty Sand with Gravel (SM)

260105Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) and Clayey Sand (SC)

300115Silty Gravel with Sand (GM)

280105Silty Sand with Gravel (SM)

360130Weathered Silstone

220100Interbeded Clay

45500165Siltstone

Resistance Type

Lateral Shear Direction

Ground Slope and Batter Values

Apply Batter and Ground Slope Modifiers

Soil Displacement

(in)

Soil Displacement

Type Out-Of-Plane Spacing (ft)

Force ApplicationTypeColorSupport

Name

Axial and LateralAlong X' in RSPileCalculate from Slide2 modelYes1Maximum6Active (Method A)RSPileHP16X88

(RSPile)

Force Orientation

Bond Strength (lbs/ ft)

Bond Length (ft)

Plate Capacity

(lbs)

Tensile Capacity

(lbs)

Out-Of-Plane Spacing (ft)

Force ApplicationTypeColorSupport

Name

Parallel to Reinforcement40003045000450006Active

(Method A) Grouted Tieback

Ground Anchor

0.071

Safety Factor 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 3.25 3.50 3.75 4.00 4.25 4.50 4.75 5.00 5.25 5.50 5.75 6.00+

-300 -250 -200 -150 -100 -50 0 50

SCENARIO: Seismic (C) SITE: Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile)

DATE: 7/25/2025 By: J. Herrera-Roldan

SCALE: 1:500

PAGE A - 102

1.231.23

W

W

1.231.23

Phi (°)Cohesion (psf)Unit Weight (lbs/ft3)ColorMaterial Name 360125Aggregate Base Course

340115Fill - Silty Sand with Gravel (SM)

260105Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) and Clayey Sand (SC)

300115Silty Gravel with Sand (GM)

280105Silty Sand with Gravel (SM)

360130Weathered Silstone

220100Interbeded Clay

45500165Siltstone

Resistance Type

Lateral Shear Direction

Ground Slope and Batter Values

Apply Batter and Ground Slope Modifiers

Soil Displacement

(in)

Soil Displacement

Type Out-Of-Plane Spacing (ft)

Force ApplicationTypeColorSupport

Name

Axial and LateralAlong X' in RSPileCalculate from Slide2 modelYes1Maximum6Active (Method A)RSPileHP16X88

(RSPile)

Force Orientation

Bond Strength (lbs/ ft)

Bond Length (ft)

Plate Capacity

(lbs)

Tensile Capacity

(lbs)

Out-Of-Plane Spacing (ft)

Force ApplicationTypeColorSupport

Name

Parallel to Reinforcement40003045000450006Active

(Method A) Grouted Tieback

Ground Anchor

0.071

Safety Factor 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 3.25 3.50 3.75 4.00 4.25 4.50 4.75 5.00 5.25 5.50 5.75 6.00+

-300 -250 -200 -150 -100 -50 0 50

SCENARIO: Seismic (NC) SITE: Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile)

DATE: 7/25/2025 By: J. Herrera-Roldan

SCALE: 1:500

PAGE A - 103

1.231.23

W

W

1.231.23

Phi (°)Cohesion (psf)Unit Weight (lbs/ft3)ColorMaterial Name 360125Aggregate Base Course

340115Fill - Silty Sand with Gravel (SM)

260105Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) and Clayey Sand (SC)

300115Silty Gravel with Sand (GM)

280105Silty Sand with Gravel (SM)

360130Weathered Silstone

220100Interbeded Clay

45500165Siltstone

Resistance Type

Lateral Shear Direction

Ground Slope and Batter Values

Apply Batter and Ground Slope Modifiers

Soil Displacement

(in)

Soil Displacement

Type Out-Of-Plane Spacing (ft)

Force ApplicationTypeColorSupport

Name

Axial and LateralAlong X' in RSPileCalculate from Slide2 modelYes1Maximum6Active (Method A)RSPileHP16X88

(RSPile)

Force Orientation

Bond Strength (lbs/ ft)

Bond Length (ft)

Plate Capacity

(lbs)

Tensile Capacity

(lbs)

Out-Of-Plane Spacing (ft)

Force ApplicationTypeColorSupport

Name

Parallel to Reinforcement40003045000450006Active

(Method A) Grouted Tieback

Ground Anchor

0.071 ±

-300 -250 -200 -150 -100 -50 0 50

SCENARIO: Ky SITE: Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile)

DATE: 7/25/2025 By: J. Herrera-Roldan

SCALE: 1:500

PAGE A - 104

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

Fa ct or o f S af et y

- s pe nc er

Seismic Coefficient Horizontal

Yield Horizontal Seismic Coefficient

Seismic Coefficient Horizontal

Factor of Safety - spencer: 0.999785 Seismic Coefficient Horizontal: 0.134736

SCENARIO: Ky SITE: Site No. 5 & 6 (RSPile)

DATE: 7/25/2025 By: J. Herrera-Roldan

SCALE:

PAGE A - 105

United States Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division (EFLHD) Technical Services - Geotechnical Project: WV NP NERI 107(3) - Anchored Soldier Pile Wall Geotechnical Analysis and Design - STA 115+00

=RBH

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Extreme Event I, No Analysis Evaluation Requirements

According to AASHTO 11.5.4.2, a…