WY FLAP NAT 505 BL 6409 Final Pavement Design Report FLAT.pdf

Pavement Design Report

Muddy Mountain Road

WY FLAP NAT 505(1) Casper Mountain Circle Drive & WY BL 6409(1) Muddy Mountain Road

Natrona County, Wyoming

Yeh Project No.: 221-189

November 30, 2022

Prepared for:

Atkins North America, Inc.

7604 Technology Way, Suite 400

Denver, Colorado 80237

Attn: Julian Maskeroni, PE, CCM

Prepared by:

Yeh and Associates, Inc.

2000 Clay Street, Suite 200 Denver, Colorado 80211

Phone: 303-781-9590

Pavement Design Report

Muddy Mountain Road

WY FLAP NAT 505(1) Casper Mountain Circle Drive & WY BL 6409(1) Muddy Mountain Road

Natrona County, Wyoming

Yeh Project No.: 221-189

November 30, 2022

Prepared by: Prepared by:

Robert F. LaForce, P.E. Melissa Boyd Senior Project Manager Project Geologist

Reviewed by:

Todd Schlittenhart, P.E.

Principal Engineer

12/1/2022 i

Final Pavement Design Report YA Project No. 221-189 Casper Mountain Circle Drive & Muddy Mountain Road November 30, 2022

Table of Contents

1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY

2 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

3 SITE CONDITIONS AND GEOLOGIC SETTING

3.1 GEOLOGIC SETTING

3.2 FIELD EXPLORATION

3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

3.4 LABORATORY TESTING

3.5 GROUNDWATER

4 PAVEMENT DESIGN

4.1 TRAFFIC LOADING

4.2 SUBGRADE STRENGTH

4.3 PAVEMENT DESIGN

4.4 ACP MIX AND BINDER RECOMMENDATIONS

5 AGGREGATE SURFACED ROADS

5.1 AGGREGATE FOR SURFACING

5.2 OTHER TREATMENTS CONSIDERED

5.3 BLM SECTION

5.4 MUDDY MOUNTAIN PARK

6 OTHER CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

6.1 CORROSION POTENTIAL

7 LIMITATIONS

8 REFERENCES

ii

List of Figures

List of Tables

List of Appendices

APPENDIX A - BORING LOCATION, LEGEND, AND LOGS

APPENDIX B - GEOLOGY MAP

APPENDIX C - LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

APPENDIX D – PAVEMENT DESIGN CALCULATIONS

APPENDIX E - LTPPBIND OUTPUT

1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY

This report presents the recommendations and preliminary results from our Geotechnical

Investigation and Pavement Design for WY FLAP NAT 505(1) Casper Mountain Circle Drive and WY BL 6409(1) Muddy Mountain Road Projects in Natrona County, Wyoming. This study was performed in general accordance with our Scope of Work dated October 4, 2021. Our work consisted of geotechnical field exploration, laboratory testing, engineering analyses and preparation of this report.

This report includes our recommendations for the geotechnical aspects of pavement design and aggregate surfacing as well as the project soils testing. The conclusions and recommendations stated in this report are based on the conditions found at the location of our exploratory borings at the time our investigation was performed. Our findings, conclusions, and recommendations should not be extrapolated to other areas or used for other projects without our prior review.

Furthermore, they should not be used if the project site has been altered without Yeh and

Associates’ prior review to determine if these recommendations remain valid.

The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the geotechnical characteristics of the subsurface soils for site development and to provide pavement design and aggregate surfacing recommendations addressing a total project length of 12.22 miles.

2 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

The Casper Mountain Circle Drive improvements will address rehabilitation of approximately 5 miles on Circle Mountain Circle Drive where approximately 2.68 miles of deteriorated pavement will receive full depth reclamation of existing pavement and base and the remaining 2.34 miles will receive a new pavement section consisting of new aggregate base and asphalt pavement.

The new asphalt concrete pavement (ACP) on both sections will consist of a new pavement with two 11-foot-wide lanes and one foot shoulders for a total paved width of 24 feet. The work also includes 200 feet of subexcavation, S-curve widening and 800 feet of ditch reconditioning.

The Federal Lands Transportation Program (FLTP) funded Muddy Mountain Road improvements will rehabilitate and resurface 4.55 miles of 2 lane road and 2.38 miles of single lane road with aggregate surfacing. There will also be 4 parking areas, two of which will amend existing parking areas.

Yeh’s scope of work required the following:

A subsurface geotechnical investigation of this project using a truck-mounted drill rig as well as observations of the existing pavement and aggregate surfaced conditions.

Laboratory testing of the soils encountered during field exploration to evaluate relevant physical and engineering properties of the soil.

Recommendations for pavement and base thickness.

Recommendations for refreshing the existing aggregate roadways and treating new areas with aggregate surfacing.

Preparation of preliminary geotechnical report and address comments prior to the final report.

Assisting Atkins and CFL staff with project specifications.

3 SITE CONDITIONS AND GEOLOGIC SETTING

Casper Mountain Circle Drive and Muddy Mountain Road are in central Wyoming approximately

12 miles south of Casper, Wyoming in Natrona County. The existing pavement has extensive fatigue cracking in addition to extensive thermal and other linear cracking. The pavement is near the end of the serviceable life. The condition of the aggregate surfaced portion varies from recently re-graveled in the county road portion to an almost complete loss of aggregate surfacing in much of the BLM portion.

3.1 Geologic Setting

In general, the geology mapped along Muddy Mountain Road goes from older to younger formations as one drives south. The northern end of the project roadway is mapped as Archean age serpentinite intrusive rocks (Asp) and metasedimentary rocks (As). The metasedimentary rocks are generally gneisses with variable amounts of the minerals biotite, quartz, plagioclase, and microcline. A short stretch of roadway is mapped as Flathead Sandstone (_f) of Middle

Cambrian age. This sandstone is reddish gray to light brown, can be crossbedded, and contains local beds of siltstone and conglomerate.

Continuing south, the road lies on mapped Madison Limestone (Mm) of Upper and Lower

Mississippian age which consists of interelayered tan to gray cherty limestone and dolomite.

Some bluish gray limestone with a karst surface is present in the upper section. The lower section is mostly dolomite and dolomitic limestone. The entire formation is fossiliferous, and the total formation thickness is approximately 600 to 1100 feet thick. The next unit encountered is the Casper Formation (P*c) of Lower Permian and Upper and Middle Pennsylvanian age. Red and white crossbedded sandstone interlayered with gray to pink fossiliferous limestone and red shale and siltstone, approximately 600 to 1100 feet thick.

The Triassic and Permian Goose Egg Formation (^Pg) consists of dark red to reddish orange shale and siltstone. Gypsum, algal limestone, and dolomite beds are common, especially in the lower portion. This formation is approximately 200 to 300 feet thick. Next, the road traverses the Upper and Lower Triassic Chugwater Group (^c). This is a group of rocks including the

Popo Agie Formation, Crow Mountain Sandstone, Alcova Limestone, and the Red Peak

Formation. As a group, these rocks include purple and gray limestones, ocher and purple mudstones, reddish-orange sandstone (also known as the Jelm Formation), red shale, and red siltstone. The combined thickness ranges from approximately 300 to 1000 feet.

The Upper Jurassic Morrison Formation and the Upper and Middle Jurassic Sundance

Formation are mapped as a single undivided unit (Jms). The Morrison Formation consists of interbedded claystones and silty sandstones. The claystones can be pale, olive, or blue green to maroon, and white variegated and are calcareous and bentonitic. The silty sandstones are generally light gray, fine grained, friable, and cross bedded. Dinosaur bones and fragments are commonly found in the upper section. The Morrison Formation alone is generally 100 to 300 feet thick. The Sundance Formation consists of gray to greenish gray glauconitic shale in the upper part. The upper layer is a slabby shale with a calcareous and slightly glauconitic sandstone that weathers brown. The middle section consists of red and gray sandstone and shale with thin gypsum and limestone beds and is nonglauconitic. The lower section is a thickly bedded, gray to pink sandstone. Total thickness of the Sundance Formation alone is about 550 feet.

The south and southeast portion of the roadway is mapped as the Lower Cretaceous Cloverly

Formation (Kcv). The Cloverly Formation consists of three unique parts. The upper part is often referred to as the “Rusty Beds” and consists of gray to brown, fine to coarse grained, resistant slabby sandstone and siltstone. The middle part consists of purple and buff-colored and variegated claystones with thin black shale beds. The lower part consists of locally crossbedded, tan to white sandstone and chert pebble conglomerate. The combined thickness of the three parts of this formation is about 100 to 300 feet.

Other geologic units are mapped nearby, including Holocene and Pleistocene landslide deposits

(Qls) and the undivided Mowry Shale, Muddle Sandstone, and Thermopolis Shale (Kmt) of

Upper and Lower Cretaceous age.

Geology Maps are presented in Appendix B.

3.2 Field Exploration

Yeh’s subcontractor, Inberg-Miller Engineers, drilled forty-three (43) borings (YA-MM1 through

YA-MM43 with a truck-mounted Mobile 57 drill rig equipped with an automatic (i.e., hydraulic) hammer. Inberg- Miller supplied drilling from their Casper office. The borings were advanced with 4-inch diameter, continuous-flight, solid-stem auger between October 18, 2021 and

October 28, 2021. Traffic control for the drilling was provided by Roadworx Industries Inc. of

Casper, Wyoming.

A representative from Yeh marked the boring locations in the field several weeks prior to drilling for utility location clearances and was present during drilling to log the subsurface conditions encountered in the borings. The approximate boring locations were determined using a handheld Garmin GPSMAP 64s. Figure 1 presents a map of the project location.

Figure 1 – Project Location

We recorded penetration resistance measurements during drilling by driving Modified California

(MC) and standard split-spoon (SPT) samplers into subsurface materials at approximate 2 to 5-feet intervals. The MC sampler is a 2.5-inch outer-diameter (O.D.), 2.0-inch inner-diameter (I.D.)

split-barrel sampler that contains 1.95-inch inner-diameter brass liners, similar to ASTM D3550.

The MC sampler was driven 12 inches for each sample. The SPT sampler has an O.D. of 2.0 inches and an I.D. of 1.375 inches. The SPT sampler was driven 18 inches for each sample, per

ASTM D3550. The samplers were advanced by an automatic 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. We also collected bulk samples of auger cuttings in each boring.

The number of blows required to drive the MC sampler 12 inches or the SPT sampler 18 inches, or fractions thereof, constitutes the penetration resistance value (N) as shown on the boring logs. The penetration resistance value is a useful index to evaluate the consistency and relative density, or hardness of the subsurface materials encountered.

3.3 Subsurface Conditions

Borings YA-MM1 through YA-MM10 were taken through the existing pavement on Casper Circle

Drive. The borings were advanced to depths of 5 to 10 feet, except for Boring YA-MM3 which was terminated at 3 feet because of auger refusal caused by cobbles. Table 1 presents a summary of the asphalt concrete pavement (ACP) and aggregate base course (ABC) thickness measurements. All boring locations are marked on the plan and profile sheets.

Table 1 - Pavement and Base Measurements

Boring No. ACP (in.) ABC (in.) Approximate Station

YA-MM1 5 6 102+50

YA-MM2 7 11 119+20

YA-MM3 7 12 134+70

YA-MM4 7 Cobbles 152+00

YA-MM5 7 None 161+60

YA-MM6 7 Gravel 176+70

YA-MM7 6 12 195+20

YA-MM8 4.5 18.5 212+70

YA-MM9 7 12 229+50

YA-MM10 4 None 246+80

Average 6.2 11.9 -

The soils under the ABC in the area of existing pavement were granular for the first mile

(Borings YA-MM1 to YA-MM3) with classifications of A-1-b(0) and A-2. The soils for the remainder of this pavement section were classified as either A-4 or A-6 using AASHTO M45.

The two classifications were almost evenly split. The USCS classifications ranging from clay

(CL) to silt (ML). These soils all contained some gravel. The R-value of the A-6 soils in segment was 17 and the plastic indices (PI) ranged from non-plastic to a PI of 35. Swell / Consolidation tests on selected samples from this area were -0.1 percent and 0.9 percent using a loading of

200 psf.

Boring YA-MM11 through YA-MM16 are in the Circle Drive portion which is currently aggregate surfaced and will be paved using ABC and ACP. The subgrade soil classifications from the borings resulted in four A-6 soils and two A-4 soils with Plastic Indices (PI) ranging from 7 to 21 and the R-value for A-6 soils in this area was 20.

The soils in the area to receive aggregate surfacing were classified as A-6 and A-4 from borings

YA-MM17 to YA-MM23, approximately two miles. The PI of these soils ranged from 8 to 21.

From that point through the parking and camping areas, the soils were primarily granular with classifications of A-1-b or A-2. In this portion, the plastic indices ranged from non-plastic to 23 with one PI of 48 in the clay sample YA-MM38.

Boring YA-MM38 had soil with a classification to A-7-6(26) and a PI of 49. The R-value of this soil was 6. This boring appears to be a pocket of highly plastic clay near one of the parking areas. If any problems are encountered in this area, we recommend removal to a depth 9 inches and replacement with surfacing aggregate. Swell/Consolidation measurements using soils in the camping and parking areas were 1.3 percent and 1.7 percent using a loading of 200 psf.

Appendix A presents a Google map of the boring locations, a table with approximate boring stations, and complete boring logs.

3.4 Laboratory Testing

Selected soil and bedrock samples were tested in the laboratory to determine the classification and engineering properties of the materials encountered in the borings. The testing was conducted in general accordance with recognized test procedures, primarily those of the

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). The following tests were performed in general accordance with locally recognized standards:

Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure) Moisture Determination Unit Weight

Sieve Analysis Atterberg limits

One Dimensional Swell-Consolidation Water Soluble Sulfates Resistivity Chlorides pH R-Value

We performed sieve analysis tests and Atterberg limits on forty-five (45) samples obtained from the borings.

The material descriptions and laboratory test results were used for the geotechnical engineering analyses and the development of pavement structure recommendations. Complete laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C, and they have been integrated with the investigation logs in Appendix A.

3.5 Groundwater

We did not encounter groundwater during this investigation. Groundwater levels may fluctuate with varying seasonal and weather conditions. We drilled in October at the end of a dry summer and fall. Based on photos of the spring scoping trip, areas with intermittent water levels may cause problems during construction. Drainage improvements are planned for select locations.

4 PAVEMENT DESIGN

4.1 Traffic Loading

Traffic information used for the design of pavement on this project was based on the volumes presented by Natrona County, and by the Muddy Mountain visitor records and are reported in the scoping documents. We used the higher of the projected volumes and assumed a typical distribution of vehicle types for the loading calculations. Table 2 shows a summary of the projected 20-Year traffic volume and traffic loading.

Table 2 - Design Traffic Loading

The Central Federal Lands Project Development and Design Manual (PDDM) states that if the projected ESAL loading for the design period is less than 50,000, then an ESAL value of 50,000 will be used for the calculation of the pavement thickness. The complete calculation of the traffic volumes and traffic loading is presented in Appendix D.

4.2 Subgrade Strength

We measured R-values ranging from 6 to 20, with the single A-7-6 soil yielding R-value of 6.

The A-6 soils had R-values ranging from 12 to 24 and the A-1-b(0) and A-2-4(0) granular soils had R-values ranging from 25 to 50. We selected an R-value of 12 to represent the subgrade

Year Volume

(ADT)

Design Volume

(ADT)

Calculated Total 20-Year Loading

(ESAL)

CFLHD Minimum Design 20-Year Loading (ESAL)

2022 540 670 49,221 50,000 2043 800 - - -strength in the area to receive the full depth reclamation treatment and for the section of new

ACP. The R-value of 12 was used to calculate a subgrade resilient modulus of 7,660 psi as an input to the pavement design program using Equation 1.5.3 from the AASHTO 1993 Pavement

Design Guide.

An R-value of 12 was also used for the design input for the subgrade in the area to receive a new pavement constructed using ABC and new ACP.

In the aggregate surfacing segments of the project, R-values ranged from YA-MM13 to YA-

MM16. For the BLM segment from Boring YA-MM17 (Station 370+20, Junction of Road 505) to

Boring YA-MM23 (Sta. 454+50) the gravel road recommendations will be based on poor soils and for the top of the hill for the area represented by Borings YA-MM24 to YA-MM44,(Sta.

472+00 to 717+20), the subgrades soil will be listed as good based on Exhibit 11.4.2.B of

CFLHD Supplement 11.4.2-1 Guidance for Aggregate Surfaced Roads.

4.3 Pavement Design

The strength coefficients presented in PDDM Exhibit 11.2.C as well as other criteria from the

PDDM were used to design the pavement sections. The design parameters are summarized in

Table 3.

Table 3 - Design Parameters- FDR Section

Based on our calculations using Equation 1.2.1 from the 1993 AASHTO Pavement Design

Guide and the design parameters summarized in Table 3, we recommend a minimum of 3 inches of new Asphalt Concrete Pavement (ACP) be placed over a minimum thickness of either

Design Parameter Parameter Value Design Parameter Parameter Value

Hot Asphalt Concrete Pavement (ACP) 0.44/inch Reliability 75%

Full-Depth Reclamation (FDR) - Pulverizing 0.10/inch Initial Serviceability 4.2

R-Value 12 Terminal Serviceability 2.0

Resilient Modulus 7,660 psi Overall Deviation 0.49

Resulting Minimum Structural Number (SN) = 1.88

Minimum ACP (inch) 3.0 Min. FDR (inch) 6.0

Design Structural Number (SN) = 1.92

6 inches of a pulverized full-depth reclamation (FDR) base layer or 6 inches of imported aggregate base course (ABC) for widening areas and new lanes.

For the segment with new pavement, we recommend a similar treatment thickness consisting of

3 inches of ACP over 6 inches of aggregate base course (ABC).Table 4 presents the design parameters and design results for the new pavement section. Design calculation program outputs are presented in Appendix E.

Table 4 - Design Parameters – ABC Section

Prior to fill placement for widening areas or turn lanes, existing fill, debris, vegetation, organics, and other deleterious material should be substantially removed and the surface should be scarified at least 8 inches, moisture-conditioned, and compacted. Fill should then be placed in thin loose lifts (not to exceed 8 inches), moisture-conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content for sand and 4 percent above optimum for clay and compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698.

4.4 ACP Mix and Binder Recommendations

The Long-Term Pavement Performance Program LTPPBind recommends using a PG 58-34 asphalt binder at the two closest weather stations, Pathfinder Dam and Casper, Wyoming.

Based on our discussion with Wyoming DOT personnel, gyratory mixes and design are being implemented in Wyoming and are available from contractors in the Casper area. We recommend that a 75-gyration mix meeting the gradation requirements from Table 703-4 of FP-

14 for either a nominal ¾ inch or ½ inch mix be used for this project. A copy of the LTPPBind print-out for this project is presented in Appendix E following the pavement design information.

Design Parameter Parameter Value Design Parameter Parameter Value

Hot Asphalt Concrete Pavement (ACP) 0.44/inch Reliability 75%

ABC 0.12/inch Initial Serviceability 4.2

R-Value 12 Terminal Serviceability 2.0

Resilient Modulus 7,660 psi Overall Deviation 0.49

Resulting Minimum Structural Number (SN) = 1.88

Minimum ACP (inch) 3.0 Min. ABC (inch) 6.0

Design Structural Number (SN) = 2.04

5 AGGREGATE SURFACED ROADS

5.1 Aggregate for Surfacing

After discussion with the design team members, in addition to the meeting the requirements from Section 703.05, the aggregate for surfacing will be required to meet the plastic indices (PI) requirements of PI = 10 +/- 3 in accordance with Section 703.05(c) of FP-14.and will need to be treated if locally supplied surfacing aggregate does not meet those requirements. This will be the minimum treatment for aggregate surfacing.

5.2 Other Treatments Considered

For the steep grade section and the approach to the sharp switchback turn, approximately Sta.

363+84 to 409+74 and Sta. 456+41 to 481+72, special treatments have been discussed and considered to prevent the rapid loss of surfacing aggregate.

In addition to the gradation and PI requirements, the areas with the steep grade and the switchback area, the surfacing aggregate could be treated full depth with calcium chloride in accordance with Section 311 of FP 14 or Magnesium Chloride in accordance with Section 312.

These treatments are to help prevent surfacing aggregate loss and wash boarding caused by traffic accelerating while climbing the hill or braking for either down-hill driving or slowing for the switchback.

Another treatment considered is to pave the sections using 2 inches of asphalt concrete pavement (ACP) over 4 inches of aggregate base course (ABC). This treatment has been successful on projects with similar grade and aggregate retention problems. The additional cost for the pavement may be partially addressed since standard ABC will be used. The recommended ACP will be the same as the new pavement section.

5.3 BLM Section

In accordance with CFLHD Supplement 11.4.2-1, Aggregate Surfacing Design Standards and

Guidance, from the end of the new pavement (Jct. Rte. 505) to Boring YA-MM24 (Station 364 to

Station 472), about two miles. This segment falls into the category of Low Volume, Dry Freeze with Spring Thaw and Poor Soils because the soils predominately have an AASHTO

Classification of A-6 plastic indices ranging from 8 to 24. The FHWA guidelines for aggregate surfacing would be for low strength subgrade and recommend a minimum of nine (9) inches of aggregate. This recommendation has been lowered by the design team to a minimum of six to seven (6 to 7) inches because of seasonal closures, local experience, and the aggregate treatment.

In addition, as noted above, the long grade and one switchback that tends to washboard soon after regrading because of both accelerating on the grade or braking coming down the hill or slowing for the switchback will receive special treatment.

5.4 Muddy Mountain Park

From the location where the clay and silt subgrade end (YA-MM24) (Station 472) for the remainder of the project, the subgrade is good to very good and a minimum of six (6) inches of aggregate surfacing is recommended because the strong subgrade with a low traffic loading.

For the isolated clay section at approximately Station 663+90, Boring YA-MM-38, if problems are encountered, we recommend that the existing surface soils be removed to a depth of 9 inches to allow for placement of 9 inches of surfacing aggregate as previously mentioned in

Section 3.3.

For this section, the PI requirements from Section 703.05(c) of FP-14 will be required for all surfacing aggregates.

6 OTHER CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

6.1 Corrosion Potential

We submitted ten samples for chemical testing to document water-soluble sulfates and chlorides, pH, and resistivity. The pH ranged from of 6.8 to 8.7. The water-soluble sulfate concentrations ranged from 0.002 percent to 0.007 percent and the water-soluble chloride concentrations ranged from 0.0002 percent to 0.0220 percent. The resistivity for the ten samples ranged from 975 ohm-cm to 5,432 ohm-cm.

The concentrations of water-soluble sulfates measured on these samples from this site indicate

Class 0 (negligible) degree of sulfate attack on concrete exposed to these geologic materials.

The degree of attack is based on a range of Class 0 (negligible) to Class 3 (very severe) as described in the American Concrete Institute (ACI) Standard 201.2R, “Guide to Durable

Concrete”. Based on the sulfate test results, a Class 0 severity of concrete exposure is appropriate for all concrete on site

The resistivity values indicate moderate corrosion potential. The corrosion potential measurements should be used to help determine the type of culvert materials to be used in contact with soils on this project. A qualified corrosion engineer should review this data to determine the appropriate level of corrosion protection.

7 LIMITATIONS

The recommendations in this report are based on our field observations, laboratory testing, and present understanding of the proposed construction. It is possible that subsurface conditions can vary beyond what we encountered in our widely spaced borings. If the conditions found during construction differ from those described in this report, please notify us immediately so that we can review our report considering those conditions and provide supplemental recommendations, as necessary. We should also review this report if the scope of the proposed construction changes from that described in this report.

Yeh and Associates has prepared this report for the exclusive use of Atkins North America, Inc.

for the proposed rehabilitation of Casper Mountain Circle Drive and Muddy Mountain Road in

Natrona County, Wyoming. This report was prepared in substantial accordance with the generally accepted standards of practice for geotechnical engineering as exist in the site area at the time of our investigation. No warranty is expressed or implied. The recommendations in this report are based on the assumption that an adequate program of construction testing and observation to evaluate compliance with our recommendations will be conducted.

8 REFERENCES

Hunter, John, Ver Ploeg, A.J., and Boyd, C.S., "Geologic Map of Casper 30’ x 60’.”

Wyoming State Geological Survey, Map Series MS-65, scale 1:100,000, 2005.

Jones, N.R., and Gregory, R.W., “Preliminary Geologic Map of the Shirley Basin 30’ x 60’

Quadrangle, Carbon, Natrona, Albany, and Converse Counties, Wyoming.” Wyoming State Geological Survey, Open File Report 11-8, scale 1:100,000, 2011.

“AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures.” American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 1993.

“Federal Lands Highway Project Development and Design Manual.” U.S. Department of

Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 2018.

Federal Lands Highway Division, CFLHD, Supplement 11.4.2-1, Aggregate Surfacing Design Standards and Guidance, November 2010.

Draft Pavement Design Report YA Project No. 221-189 Casper Mountain Circle Drive & Muddy Mountain Road January 27, 2022

Appendix A

BORING LOCATIONS, LEGEND, AND LOGS

Muddy Mountain Yeh No. 221-189 Boring Locations

Appendix B

GEOLOGY MAP

Muddy Mountain & Casper Mountain Circle Drive Yeh No. 221-189

Geology Maps

Muddy Mountain & Casper Mountain Circle Drive Yeh No. 221-189

Geology Maps

Appendix C

LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

Project No: Casper Mountain Circle Drive - Muddy Mountain Road Date: 11/11/2021

Gradation Atterberg Chloride

YA-MM1 1-5 Bulk 3.4

8 75 17 NV NP NP

A-1-b ( 0 ) SM

YA-MM2 2-5 Bulk 12.3

24 44 32 55 20 35

A-2-7 ( 3 ) SC

YA-MM4 0.7-5 Bulk 12.3

51 28 21 40 16 24

A-2-6 ( 0 ) GC

YA-MM5 0.6-5 Bulk 12.0

36 25 39 27 20 7

A-4 ( 0 ) GM-GC

YA-MM6 0.5-5 Bulk 11.0

10 43 47 28 16 12

A-6 ( 2 ) SC

YA-MM6 2 CA 16.2 112.3 4 30 66 36 17 19

-0.1(0.2ksf)

A-6 ( 10 ) CL

YA-MM7 1.5-5 Bulk 17.2

9 32 59 36 14 22

A-6 ( 2 ) CL

YA-MM8 2.3-5 Bulk 13.4

9 39 52 NV NP NP

A-4 ( 0 ) ML

YA-MM9 1.7-5 Bulk 12.3

6 49 45 NV NP NP

A-4 ( 0 ) SM

YA-MM10 0.3-5 Bulk 20.2

12 24 64 40 21 19

A-6 ( 10 ) CL

YA-MM11 1-5 Bulk 3.2

29 34 37 21 14 7

A-4 ( 0 ) SM-SC

YA-MM12 1-5 Bulk 8.9

3 25 72 30 16 14

A-6 ( 8 ) CL

YA-MM12 2 CA 8.9 126.4 6 35 59 33 16 17

0.9 (0.2ksf)

A-6 ( 7 ) CL

YA-MM13 1-5 Bulk 30.3

3 14 83 38 17 21

A-6 ( 17 ) CL

YA-MM14 1-5 Bulk 11.8

29 14 57 35 18 17

A-6 ( 7 ) CL

YA-MM15 1-5 Bulk 8.0

10 32 58 23 14 9

A-4 ( 2 ) CL

YA-MM15 5 CA 4.7

32 51 17 NV NP NP

A-1-b ( 0 ) SM

YA-MM16 1-5 Bulk 13.1

4 29 67 37 16 21

A-6 ( 12 ) CL

YA-MM17 1-5 Bulk 9.1

33 20 47 27 18 9

A-4 ( 1 ) GC

YA-MM18 1-5 Bulk 10.4

19 21 60 28 18 10

A-4 ( 3 ) CL

YA-MM19 1-5 Bulk 7.7

29 32 39 28 20 8

A-4 ( 0 ) SC

LL PL PI

AASHTO USCS

% Swell (+) / Consoli-dation (-)

R-Value

CLASSIFICATION

Resistivity ohm.cm

Fines < #200

Summary of Laboratory Test Results

221-189 Project Name:

Sample Location Natural Moisture Content

Natural Dry

Density (pcf)

PH

Water

Soluble Sulfate %Boring No. (final) Depth (ft)

Sample Type

Gravel > #4

Sand

Rev 2 - 8/02 Page 1 of 1

Chloride

YA-MM21 5 CA 13.5 119.7 0 15 85 32 16 16

1.3 (0.2ksf)

A-6 ( 12 ) CL

YA-MM22 1-5 Bulk 14.3

9 27 64 38 17 21

A-6 ( 11 ) CL

YA-MM23 1-5 Bulk 7.3

33 23 44 28 17 11

A-6 ( 2 ) GC

YA-MM24 1-5 Bulk 6.6

27 46 27 NV NP NP

A-2-4 ( 0 ) SM

YA-MM25 1-5 Bulk 7.3

24 57 19 NV NP NP

A-2-4 ( 0 ) SM

YA-MM26 1-5 Bulk 8.8

24 52 24 NV NP NP

A-2-4 ( 0 ) SM

YA-MM27 1-5 Bulk 7.4

23 52 25 22 15 7

A-2-4 ( 0 ) SM-SC

YA-MM28 1-5 Bulk 3.7

33 54 13 NV NP NP

A-1-b ( 0 ) SM

YA-MM29 1-5 Bulk 7.3

31 48 21 NV NP NP

A-1-b ( 0 ) SM

YA-MM31 2-5 Bulk 4.5

30 57 13 NV NP NP

A-1-b ( 0 ) SM

YA-MM32 1-5 Bulk 4.4

27 54 19 NV NP NP

A-1-b ( 0 ) SM

YA-MM33 1-5 Bulk 4.6

36 47 17 NV NP NP

A-1-b ( 0 ) SM

YA-MM34 1-5 Bulk 7.5

39 40 21 30 16 14

A-2-6 ( 0 ) SC

YA-MM35 0-5 Bulk 8.3

26 55 19 46 18 20

A-2-7 ( 0 ) SC

YA-MM36 0-5 Bulk 7.1

29 57 14 NV NP NP

A-1-b ( 0 ) SM

YA-MM37 2-5 Bulk 8.3

39 38 23 26 15 11

A-2-6 ( 0 ) GC

YA-MM38 2 CA 25.3 100.4 0 24 76 45 17 28

1.7 (0.2ksf)

A-7-6 ( 20 ) CL

YA-MM38 2-5 Bulk 15.4

11 28 61 65 16 49

A-7-6 ( 26 ) CH

YA-MM39 0-5 Bulk 15.3

22 35 43 26 18 8

A-4 ( 0 ) SC

YA-MM41 1-5 Bulk 11.1

33 32 45 NV NP NP

A-4 ( 0 ) SM

YA-MM42 1-5 Bulk 6.1

17 60 23 NV NP NP

A-2-4 ( 0 ) SM

Summary of Laboratory Test Results

221-189 Project Name:

Sample Location Natural Moisture Content

Natural Dry

Density (pcf)

PH

Water

Soluble Sulfate %

Resistivity ohm.cmBoring No. (final) Depth (ft)

Sample Type USCS

% Swell (+) / Consoli-dation (-)

R-Value

CLASSIFICATION

Gravel > #4

LL PL PI

AASHTO

Sand

Fines < #200

Chloride

YA-MM43 1-5 Bulk 5.8

27 46 27 32 16 16

A-2-6 ( 0 ) SC

YA-MM44 1-5 Bulk 11.1

11 65 24 35 12 23

A-2-6 ( 0 ) SC

YA-MM5+MM8 (R-1) 0.6-5 Bulk

8.1 0.003 2966 0.0090

YA-MM6+MM7 (R-2) Bulk

7.9 0.008 975 0.0220

YA-MM10+MM16 (R-3) 0.3-5 Bulk 7.3

6 28 66 38 19 19 8.2 0.003 2001 0.0019

17 A-6 ( 10 ) CL

YA-MM11+MM15 (R-4) Bulk 8.7 0.003 4072 0.0018

YA-MM12 + MM14 (R-5) 1-5 Bulk

8.5 0.002 1859 0.0011

YA-MM17+MM18 (R-6) Bulk

8.3 0.004 2993 0.0002

YA-MM22+MM23 (R-7) Bulk

8.2 0.005 2466 0.0004

YA-MM25+MM26 (R-8) Bulk

8.1 0.002 5432 0.0002

YA-MM28 to MM36 1-5 Bulk 4.5

29 53 18 NV NP NP

134.8 pcf @ 6.2% A-1-b ( 0 ) SM

YA-MM31+MM32 (R-9) Bulk

8.2 0.007 4733 0.0003 53

YA-MM38 (R-10) 2-5 Bulk 15.4

11 28 61 65 16 49 6.8 0.006 3885 0.0009 6 A-7-6 ( 26 ) CH

YA-MM6,7,10,12,13,14,16 Bulk

112.7 pcf @ 13.5 A-6

YA-MM8,9,11,15,17 Bulk

116.3 pcf @ 10.0 A-4

AASHTO USCS

Modified proctor

T180 ( C ) R-Value

CLASSIFICATION

LL PL PI

Sand

Fines < #200

Summary of Laboratory Test Results

221-189 Project Name:

Sample Location Natural Moisture Content

Natural Dry

Density (pcf)

PH

Water

Soluble Sulfate %

Resistivity ohm.cm

Standard proctor T99

( C )Boring No. (final) Depth (ft) Sample

Type

Gravel > #4

Appendix D

TRAFFIC LOADING

Wyoming Federal Lands Access Program: Proposed Project Background

BACKGROUND DATA

1. Agency with Title to Facility:

2a) Agency with Maintenance Responsibility

2b) Describe how the maintenance responsibility is provisioned.

Include details for each portion of the project (e.g. roadways, parking lots).

3. Project Length:

Provide length in miles

4. Existing Roadway Width

(outside shoulder to shoulder) :

Provide average width in feet

5. Existing Posted Speed Limit:

6. Existing Bridge Information:

Provide known data for all bridge structures within the project limits.

Refer to the link below for guidance:

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/nbi.cfm

National Bridge

Inventory Structure #

Bridge

Length (ft.)

Bridge

Width (ft.)

Bridge

Area (Sq. Ft)

Bridge

Sufficiency

Rating

7. Functional Classification:

Check those that apply.

National Highway System Arterial Local Road

Major Collector Minor Collector

Refer to the link for guidance: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/processes/statewide/related/highway_functional_classifications/

8. Traffic Volumes:

Provide any available traffic data from recent counts or other documented sources.

Note: If no data (i.e., counts) are available, please estimate range ( < 200, 200 - 500, 500, 500 - 1000, > 1000 vehicles per day)

Current 20-Year

Projection Data Source / Methodology

Average Daily Traffic (ADT)

Seasonal Average Daily Traffic

Estimate % of above ADT that accesses the Federal lands

9. Safety History:

Describe site(s) including the number, rate and type of crash as well as the user type(s) that have occurred within the project limits and the source of this information (reports or anecdotal). If available provide site specific crash data for last three years.

10. Projects in Proximity:

Describe other current or previously funded Federal Lands project(s) adjacent to or in proximity to this project.

Attach available ROW documentation and/or maintenance agreements.

Attach inspection reports if available.

Natrona County

Natrona County

Natrona County has a 66' right of way easement from the start of the project to the intersection of

Muddy Mountain Road.

5 24 3 0 n/a

53 74 Data provided by the BLM

53 74 Data provided by the BLM

100 100 Data provided by the BLM

The major portion of the traffic that uses this roadway is of the recreational type. RV Camping type , 4x4 used to haul ATV's or to hunt from and some SUV types. There is a minimal residential traffic use on the first portion of the roadway near the project start line and there is some logging truck activity from time to time. I do not have an accident report however; the type of driving that takes place on the roadway does not lend itself to accidents. Most people are driving slow and enjoying the views and wildlife that area. WYDOT has traffic counts on State Highway 251 of 900 - 1000 ADT.

None Noted

Appendix E

PAVEMENT DESIGN PROGRAM OUTPUTS

AND ASPHALT BINDER RECOMMENDATIONS

Casper Mountain Circle Drive and Muddy Road Yeh No. 221-189

Recommended Asphalt Binder

Recommended Asphalt Binder => PG 58-34