SW8081007_HISTORICAL FILE_20140630

STORMWATER DIVISION CODING SHEET
POST -CONSTRUCTION PERMITS
PERMIT NO.
SW8
DOC TYPE
❑ CURRENT PERMIT
❑ APPROVED PLANS
HISTORICAL FILE
❑ COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION
DOC DATE
20\kt Olo o
YYYYMMDD

f A WA
M
NC®ENK
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory
Governor
June 30, 2014
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
Commanding Officer
MCB Camp Lejeune
c/o Neal Paul, Deputy Public Works Officer
1005 Michael Road
Camp Lejeune, NC 28547
Subject: Stormwater Management Permit No. SW8 081007
Camp Johnson M200 Parking Area and Jogging Trail
Overall Low Density Stormwater Project with areas of High Density
Onslow County
Dear Mr. Paul:
Effective August 1, 2013 the State Stormwater program has been transferred from the Division of Water
Quality (DWQ) to the Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources (DEMLR). All previous
references to DWQ will remain in older stormwater permits issued prior to August 1, 2013 until they are
modified. Please note that this permit will now reference DEMLR as the Division responsible for
issuance of the permit.
The Wilmington Regional Office received a complete, modified State Stormwater Management Permit
Application for the M200 Area Parking and Jogging Trail at Camp Johnson on June 19, 2014. Staff
review of the plans and specifications has determined that the project, as proposed, will comply with the
Stormwater Regulations set forth in Session Law 2008-211 and Title 15A NCAC 2H.1000. We are
forwarding modified Permit No. SW8 081007 dated June 30, 2014, for the construction, operation and
maintenance of the BMP's and built -upon area associated with the subject project.
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until December 30, 2021, which includes all of
the available extensions, and shall be subject to the conditions and limitations as specified therein, and
does not supersede any other agency permit or approval that may be required. Please pay special
attention to the conditions listed in this permit regarding the Operation and Maintenance of the BMP(s),
recordation of deed restrictions, procedures for changing ownership, transferring the permit, and
renewing the permit. Failure to establish an adequate system for operation and maintenance of the
stormwater management system, to record deed restrictions, to transfer the permit, or to renew the
permit, will result in future compliance problems
The following modifications are included and covered by this permit:
1. This is a minor modification to the permit as allowed under Section 2.(d)(5) of SL 2008-211.
There is no net increase in built -upon area and Basin #2 is not being enlarged.
2. Basin #1 and its drainage area are being removed from this permit. The parking lot previously
approved to be treated by Basin #1 will be modified and a new BMP will be designed as part of
a concurrent modification to permit number SW8 120101.
3. Within the low density drainage area, 10,290 square feet of jogging trail is removed from this
permit and will be accounted for under a concurrent modification to SW8 120101.
4. Reduces the overall low density project limits to 658,103 square feet.
5. Plan sheets C-2 (site plan) and C-4 (grading) for Basin #2 from the December 12, 2008
approved plan set, have been added to the June 30, 2014 approved plan set.
Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land Resources
Land Quality Section -Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, North Carolina 28405 • [phone] / Fax: [phone]

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW8 081007
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this permit are unacceptable, you have the
right to request an adjudicatory hearing by filing a written petition with the Office of
Administrative Hearings (OAH). The written petition must conform to Chapter 1508 of the North
Carolina General Statutes, and must be filed with the OAH within thirty (30) days of receipt of
this permit. You should contact the OAH with all questions regarding the filing fee (if a filing fee
is required) and/or the details of the filing process at 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC
27699-6714, or via telephone at 919-431-3000, or visit their website at www.NCOAH.com.
Unless such demands are made this permit shall be final and binding.
If you have any questions, or need additional information concerning this matter, please contact
Linda Lewis, at [phone].
Sincerely,
znl—. 4-x�ld
57= Tracy Davis, P.E., Director
Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources
$O'GDS/arl: G:1WQ1Shared\Stormwater\Permits & Projects120081081007 HD12014 06 permit 081007
cc: Vince Chirichella, P.E., Nexsen Pruet
Wilmington Regional Office Stormwater File
Page 2 of 9

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW8 081007
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENERGY, MINERAL AND LAND RESOURCES
STATE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT
OVERALL LOW DENSITY DEVELOPMENT WITH AREAS OF HIGH DENSITY
In accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143, General Statutes of
North Carolina as amended, and other applicable Laws, Rules, and Regulations
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO
USMCB Camp Lejeune
Camp Johnson M200 Parking Area
Taft Road and Coolidge Road, Camp Lejeune, Onslow County
FOR THE
construction, operation and maintenance of a 24% overall low density development with
one (1) infiltration basin treating an area of higher density in compliance with the
provisions of Session Law 2008-211 and 15A NCAC 2H .1000 (hereafter collectively
and separately referred to as the "stormwater rules') and the approved stormwater
management plans and specifications and other supporting data as attached and on file
with and approved by the Division and considered a part of this permit.
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until December 30, 2021, and
shall be subject to the following specified conditions and limitations:
I. DESIGN STANDARDS
1. This permit is effective only with respect to the nature and volume of stormwater
described in the application and other supporting data.
2. The overall tract built -upon area percentage for the project must be maintained at
no more than 24%, as required by the stormwater rules.
3. This permit covers the construction of a total of 117,221 square feet of built -upon
area, with 58,093 sq. ft. allocated to the low density area and 59,128 sq. ft.
allocated to the high density area. Within the untreated low density drainage
area, the 58,093 square feet of proposed BUA includes 8,044 square feet of
future BUA allocation and 9,976 square feet of existing BUA.
4. Within the high density area, an infiltration basin stormwater management
system has been approved for the management of stormwater runoff as
described in Section 1.14 of this permit. The stormwater control, Infiltration Basin
#2, has been designed to handle the runoff from 59,128 square feet of proposed
impervious area. This permit does not provide any allocation of built -upon area
for future development within the high density drainage area.
5. The infiltration basin must be operated with a 50' vegetated filter, designed to
pass the peak flow from the 10 year storm in a diffuse and non -erosive manner.
6. Within the designated low density area, the only runoff conveyance systems
allowed will be vegetated conveyances such as swales with minimum side slopes
of 3:1 (H:V) as defined in the stormwater rules and approved by the Division.
Page 3 of 9

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW8 081007
No piping is allowed within the low density areas except that minimum amount
necessary to direct runoff beneath an impervious surface such as a road (or the
jogging trail) or to provide access.
All stormwater collection and treatment systems must be located in either
dedicated common areas or recorded easements. The final plats for the project
will be recorded showing all such required easements, in accordance with the
approved plans.
The runoff from all built -upon area within the permitted high density drainage
area of this project must be directed into the permitted stormwater control
system.
10. The project shall provide a 50' wide vegetated buffer adjacent surface waters,
measured horizontally from and perpendicular to the normal pool of impounded
structures, the top of bank of both sides of streams and rivers, and the mean high
water line of tidal waters.
11.
All runoff directed into and through the vegetative buffer must flow through the
buffer in a diffuse manner.
12.
All runoff directed into wetlands shall flow into and through the wetlands at a non -
erosive velocity of 2 feet per second or less.
13.
Roof drains must terminate at the outer
edge of the buffer.
14.
The following design criteria have been
permitted for the infiltration basin and
must be provided and maintained at design condition:
Basin 2
a. Drainage Area, acres:
1.81
Onsite, ft2:
78,680
Offsite, ft2:
0
b. Total Impervious Surfaces, ft2:
59,128
Onsite, ft2:
59,128
Offsite, ft2:
0
C. Design Storm, inches:
1.5
d. Basin Depth, feet:
2.30
e. Bottom Elevation, FMSL:
13.70
f. Bottom Surface Area, ft2:
6,490
g. Bypass Weir Elevation, FMSL:
14.80
h. Permitted Storage Volume, ft3:
7,774
i. Predev. 1 yr 24 hr peak flow, cfs:
0.02
k. Type of Soil:
Baymeade
I. Expected Infiltration Rate, in/hr:
3.40
M. Seasonal High Water Table, FMSL:
11.50
n. Time to Draw Down, hours:
4.2
o. Receiving Stream/River Basin:
New River / White Oak
P. Stream Index Number:
19-(11)
q. Classification of Water Body:
"SC HQW NSW'
Page 4 of 9

i
State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW8 081007
II. SCHEDULE OF COMPLIANCE
1. The approved vegetated runoff conveyances shown on the approved plans shall
not be altered, filled in, or piped, except for minimum driveway crossings, unless
and until the permittee shall have submitted a modification to the permit and
received approval from the DEMLR.
2. The stormwater management system shall be constructed in its entirety,
vegetated and operational for its intended use prior to the construction of any
built -upon surface.
3. The permittee shall monitor the project on a routine basis and shall maintain
compliance with the permitted maximum built -upon area limits described on the
application documents.
4. The Director may notify the permittee when the permitted site does not meet one
or more of the minimum requirements of the permit. Within the time frame
specified in the notice, the permittee shall submit a written time schedule to the
Director for modifying the site to meet minimum requirements. The permittee
shall provide copies of revised plans and certification in writing to the Director
that the changes have been made.
5. During construction, erosion shall be kept to a minimum and any eroded areas of
the system will be repaired immediately.
6. The permittee shall at all times provide the operation and maintenance
necessary to assure the permitted stormwater system functions at optimum
efficiency. The approved Operation and Maintenance Plan must be followed in its
entirety and maintenance must occur at the scheduled intervals including, but not
limited to:
a. Semiannual scheduled inspections (every 6 months).
b. Sediment removal.
C. Mowing and revegetation of slopes and the vegetated filter.
d. Immediate repair of eroded areas.
e. Maintenance of all slopes in accordance with approved plans and
specifications.
f. Debris removal and unclogging of bypass structure, infiltration media, flow
spreader, catch basins, piping and vegetated filter.
g. A clear access path to the bypass structure must be available at all times.
7. The facilities shall be constructed in accordance with the conditions of this
permit, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting data.
8. If the stormwater system was used as an Erosion Control device, it must be
restored to design condition prior to operation as a stormwater treatment device,
and prior to occupancy of the facility.
9. A copy of the approved plans and specifications shall be maintained on file by
the Permittee at all times.
10. Records of maintenance activities must be kept for each permitted BMP. The
reports will indicate the date, activity, name of person performing the work and
what actions were taken.
Page 5 of 9

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW8 081007
11. Upon completion of construction, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy,
and prior to operation of this permitted facility, a certification must be received
from an appropriate designer for the system installed certifying that the permitted
facility has been installed in accordance with this permit, the approved plans and
specifications, and other supporting documentation. Any deviations from the
approved plans and specifications must be noted on the Certification. A
modification may be required for those deviations.
12. The permittee shall submit to the Director and shall have received approval for
revised plans, specifications, and calculations prior to construction, for any
modification to the approved plans, including, but not limited to, those listed
below:
a. Any revision to the approved plans, regardless of size.
b. Redesign or addition to the approved amount of built -upon area.
C. Further development, subdivision, acquisition, or sale of the project area,
in whole or in part. The project area is defined as all property owned by
the permittee, for which Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan approval
or a CAMA Major permit was sought.
d. Filling in, altering or piping any vegetative conveyance shown on the
approved plan, except for minimum driveway crossings.
e. Construction of any designated future BUA amounts listed on the
application documents.
13. The Director may notify the permittee when the permitted site does not meet one
or more of the minimum requirements of the permit. Within the time frame
specified in the notice, the permittee shall submit a written time schedule to the
Director for modifying the site to meet minimum requirements. The permittee
shall provide copies of revised plans and certification in writing to the Director
that the changes have been made.
Ill. GENERAL CONDITIONS
Approved plans, application, supplements, and specifications for projects
covered by this permit are incorporated by reference and are enforceable parts of
the permit.
2. This permit is not transferable to any person or entity except after notice to and
approval by the Director. The permittee shall submit a completed and signed
Name/Ownership Change Form, accompanied by the supporting documentation
as listed on the form, to the Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources at
least 60 days prior to any one or more of the following events:
a. An ownership change including the sale or conveyance of the project area in
whole or in part, except in the case of an individual lot sale that is made
subject to the recorded deed restrictions;
b. The sale or conveyance of the common areas to a Homeowner's or Property
Owner's Association, subject to the requirements of Session Law 2011-256;
c. Bankruptcy;
d. Foreclosure;
e. Dissolution of the partnership or corporate entity;
f. A name change of the current permittee;
g. A name change of the project;
h. A mailing address change of the permittee;
The permittee is responsible for compliance with all permit conditions until such
time as the Division approves the transfer request.
Page 6 of 9

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW8 081007
4. Any person or entity found to be in noncompliance with the terms, conditions and
limitations of a stormwater management permit is subject to enforcement action
by the Division in accordance with NCGS 143, Article 21.
5. The issuance of this permit does not preclude the Permittee from complying with
and obtaining any and all permits or approvals as required by any statutes, rules,
regulations, or ordinances, which may be imposed by any other Local, State or
Federal government agency having jurisdiction.
6. In the event that the facilities fail to perform satisfactorily, the Permittee shall take
immediate corrective action, including those as may be required by this Division,
such as the construction of additional or replacement stormwater management
systems.
7. The permittee grants DENR Staff permission to enter the property during normal
business hours for the purpose of inspecting all components of the permitted
stormwater management facility, subject to the Base's Visitor Policy.
8. The permit issued shall continue in force and effect until revoked or terminated.
The permit may be modified, revoked and reissued or terminated for cause. The
filing of a request for a permit modification, revocation and reissuance or
termination does not stay any permit condition.
9. Unless specified elsewhere, permanent seeding requirements for the stormwater
controls must follow the guidelines established in the North Carolina Erosion and
Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual.
10. The issuance of this permit does not prohibit the Director from reopening and
modifying the permit, revoking and reissuing the permit, or terminating the permit
as allowed by the laws, rules and regulations contained in Session Law 2008-
211, Title 15A NCAC 2H.1000, and NCGS 143-215.1 et. al.
11. The permittee shall submit a permit renewal application at least 180 days prior to
the expiration date of this permit. The renewal request must include the
appropriate documentation and the processing fee.
Permit modified and reissued this the 30`" day of June 2014.
NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Page 7 of 9

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW8 081007
Camp Johnson M200 Parking Area and Jogging Trail
Stormwater Permit No. SW8 081007
Onslow County
Designer's Certification
I, , as a duly registered in the
State of North Carolina, having been authorized to observe (periodically/ weekly/ full
time) the construction of the project,
(Project)
for (Project Owner) hereby state that, to the
best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in the observation of the project
construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial
compliance and intent of the approved plans and specifications.
The checklist of items on page 2 of this form is included in the Certification.
Noted deviations from approved plans and specification:
Signature
Registration Number
Date
SEAL
Page 8 of 9

State Stormwater Management Systems 1
Permit No. SW8 081007
Certification Requirements:
1. The drainage area to the system contains approximately the permitted
acreage.
2. The drainage area to the system contains no more than the permitted
amount of built -upon area.
3. All the built -upon area associated with the project is graded such that the
runoff drains to the system.
4. All roof drains are located such that the runoff is directed into the system.
5. The bypass structure weir elevation is per the approved plan.
6. The bypass structure is located per the approved plans.
7. A Trash Rack is provided on the bypass structure.
8. All slopes are grassed with permanent vegetation.
9. Vegetated slopes are no steeper than 3:1.
10. The inlets are located per the approved plans and do not cause short-
circuiting of the system.
11. The permitted amounts of surface area and/or volume have been
provided.
12. All required design depths are provided.
13. All required parts of the system are provided such as the runoff collection
system of pipes, catch basins and swales, and the vegetated filter.
14. The required system dimensions are provided per the approved plans.
cc: NCDENR-DEMLR Regional Office
Page 9 of 9

DEMLR USE ONLY
Date Received
Fee Paid
Permit Number
2iv
7.
Applicable Rules: ❑ Coastal SW -1 95 ❑ Coastal SW - 2008 ❑ Ph II - Post Construction
(select all that apply) ❑ Non -Coastal SW- HQW/ORW Waters ❑ Universal Stormwater Management Plan
❑ Other WQ M mt Plan:
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT APPLICATION FORM
This form nmy be photocopied for use as an original
I. GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Project Name (subdivision, facility, or establishment name - should be consistent with project name on plans,
specifications, letters, operation and maintenance agreements, etc.):
Camp Johnson -M200 Area Parking (Removing Infiltration Basin 4)
2. Location of Project (street address):
City:Camp Lejeune County:Onslow Zip:28547-2539
3. Directions to project (from nearest major intersection):
Intersection of US 17 and NC 24. Take NC 24 East to Montford Rd. Travel on Montford approximately
1.0 miles. Turn right onto Wilson Drive. Travel about 0.15 miles and site is on the right.
4. Latitude:34* 43' 36" N Longitude:77° 24' 51" W of the main entrance to the project.
IL PERMIT INFORMATION: Mfr)W
1. a. Specify whether project is (check one): ❑New ®Modification ❑ Renewal w/ Modificationt
1 Renezoals roith modifications also requires SWU-102 - Renewal Applicatioa Form
b.If this application is being submitted as the result of a modification to an existing permit, list the existing
permit numberSW8 081007 , its issue date (if known)April 17, 2012 and the status of
construction: ❑Not Started ❑Partially Completed* ® Completed* *provide a designer's certification
2. Specify the type of project (check one):
®Low Density ®High Density ❑Drains to an Offsite Stormwater System ❑Other
3. If this application is being submitted as the result of a previously returned application or a letter from
DEMLR requesting a state stormwater management permit application, list the stormwater project number,
if assigned, and the previous name of the project, if different than currently
proposed,
4. a. Additional Project Requirements (check applicable blanks; information on required state permits can be
obtained by contacting the Customer Service Center at 1-877-623-6748):
❑CAMA Major ❑Sedimentation/Erosion Control: ac ofrl�tlP
❑NPDES Industrial Stormwater ❑404/401 Permit: Proposed Impacts
JUIV b.lf any of these permits have already been acquired please provide the Project Name, P ct/Permit Number,
issue date and the type of each permit: BY:
5. Is the project located within 5 miles of a public airport? ®No [-]Yes
If yes, see S.L. 2072-200, Part Vl: httl2://12ortal.ncdenr.org/web/Ir/rules-and-regulations
Fonn SWU-101 Version Oct. 31, 2013 Page 1 of 6

III. • CONTACT INFORMATION
I. a. Print Applicant / Signing Official's name and title (specifically the developer, property owner, lessee,
designated government official, individual, etc. who owns the project):
Applicant/ Organ ization:MCB Camp Lejeune
Signing Official & Title:c/o Neal Paul, Deputy Public Works Officer
b.Contact information for person listed in item I above:
Street Address:Building 1005 Michael Road
City:MCB Camp Lejeune State:NC Zip:28547
Mailing Address (if applicable):
Phone: (910 ) 451-3238
Eniail:[e-mail]
State: Zip:
Fax: ( )
c. Please check the appropriate box. The applicant listed above is:
® The property owner (Skip to Contact Information, item 3a)
❑ Lessee* (Attach a copy of the lease agreement and complete Contact information, item 2a and 2b below)
❑ Purchaser* (Attach a copy of the pending sales agreement and complete Contact Information, item 2a and
2b below)
❑ Developer* (Complete Contact Information, item 2a and 2b below.)
2. a. Print Property Owner's name and title below, if you are the lessee, purchaser or developer. (This is the
person who owns the property that the project is located on):
Property Owner/Organization:
Signing Official & Title:
b.Contact information for person listed in item 2a above:
Street Address:
City: State: Zip:
Mailing Address (if applicable):
City:_
Phone:
Fax: ( )
3. a. (Optional) Print the name and title of another contact such as the project's construction supervisor or other
person who can answer questions about the project:
Other Contact Person/Organiza
Signing Official & Title:
b.Contact information for person listed in item 3a above:
Mailing Add
City:
Phone: (
4. Local jurisdiction for building permits:
Point of
Fax:
Fonn SWU-101 Version Oct. 31, 2013 Page 2 of 6

IV., PROJECT INFORMATION
1. In the space provided below, briefly summarize how the stormwater runoff will be treated.
The permitted parking lot will be treated with the originallypermitted infiltration basin.
2. a. If claiming vested rights, identify the supporting documents provided and the date they were approved:
❑ Approval of a Site Specific Development Plan or PUD Approval Date:
❑ Valid Building Permit Issued Date:
❑ Other: Date:
b.If claiming vested rights, identify the regulation(s) the project has been designed in accordance with:
❑ Coastal SW -1995 ❑ Ph II - Post Construction
3. Stormwater runoff from this project drains to the White Oak River basin.
4. Total Property Area: 15.108 acres
5. Total Coastal Wetlands Area: 0 acres
6. Total Surface Water Area: 0 acres
7. Total Property Area (4) - Total Coastal Wetlands Area (5) - Total Surface Water Area (6) = Total Project
Area':15.108 acres
Total project area shall be calculated to exclude the follooing the normal pool of impounded structures, the area
between the banks of streams and rivers, the area below the Nora al High Water (NHW) line or Mean Hight Water
(MHW) line, and coastal wetlands landward front the NHW (or MHI) line. The resultant project area is used to
calculate overall percent built upon area (BUA). Non -coastal wetlands Imudzoord of thte NHW (or MHW) line tray
be included in the total project area.
8. Project percent of impervious area: (Total Impervious Area / Total Project Area) X 100 = 17.8 %
9. How many drainage areas does the project have?7 (For high density, count 1 for each proposed engineered
stonnwater BMP. For loco density and other projects, use 1 for the whole property area)
10. Complete the following information for each drainage area identified in Project Information item 9. If there
are more than four drainage areas in the project, attach an additional sheet with the information for each area
provided in the same format as below.
I.ovJ Ii EaSufY Tu Tq,
Basin Information
Drainage Area 2
Drainage Area _
Drainage Area _
Drainage Area _
Receiving Stream Name
New River
Northeast Creek
Stream Class *
SC;HQW,NSW
SC -NSW
Stream Index Number *
19-(11)
19-16-(4.5)
Total Drainage Area (so
78,680
579,423
658,103
On -site Drainage Area (so
78,680
579,423
658,103
Off -site Drainage Area (sf)
Proposed Impervious Area** (so
59,128
58,093
117,221
% Impervious Area** total
75.5
10.0
17.8
Impervious** Surface Area
Draina e Area 2
Draina e Area _
Draina e Area _
Draina e Area _
On -site Buildings/Lots (so
On -site Streets (so
On -site Parking (so
On -site Sidewalks (so
1,004
40,073
41,077
Other on -site (so
Future (sf)
8,044
8,044
Off -site (sf)
Existing BUA*** (so
58,124
9,976UTM
Total (so:
59,128
1 58,093
1 W,2211hl 4
n )fllh
Stream Class and Index Number can be determined at: littp.1117ortal.licdepir.orzIll7eH, aliTs7csiu classi crition
Impervious area is defined as the built upon area including, but not limited to, bail t&, roads, parking area.,
sidewalks, gravel areas, etc.
Report only that a count of existing BUA that will remain after development. Do not report any existing BUA that
is to be removed and which will be replaced by new BUA.
Form SWU-101 Version Oct. 31, 2013 Page 3 of 6

11. I -low was the off -site impervious area listed above determined? Provide documentation.
Projects in Union County: Contact DEMLR Central Office staff to check if the project is located within a Threatened &
Endangered Species watershed that atrp+ he subject to more .stringent stormwater requirements as per 15A NCAC 02B .0600.
V. SUPPLEMENT AND O&M FORMS
The applicable state stormwater management permit supplement and operation and maintenance (O&M) forms
must be submitted for each BMP specified for this project. The latest versions of the forms can be downloaded
from http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ws/su/bmp-manual.
VI. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
Only complete application packages will be accepted and reviewed by the Division of Energy, Mineral and
Land Resources (DEMLR). A complete package includes all of the items listed below. A detailed application
instruction sheet and BMP checklists are available from
http•//portal.ncdennorg/web/wg/ws/su/statesw/forms does. The complete application package should be
submitted to the appropriate DEMLR Office. (The appropriate office may be found by locating project on the
interactive online map at ham:/ /portal. ncdenr.org/ web/ wq/ ws/ so / maps.)
Please indicate that the following required information have been provided by initialing in the space provided
for each item. All original documents MUST be signed and initialed in blue ink. Download the latest versions
for each submitted application package from http://portal.ncdennorg/web/wq/ws/so/statesw/forms dots.
Initials
1. Original and one copy of the Stormwater Management Permit Application Form. uSL-
2. Original and one copy of the signed and notarized Deed Restrictions & Protective Covenants
Form. (if required as per Part VII belaia)
3. Original of the applicable Supplement Form(s) (sealed, signed and dated) and O&M
agreement(s) for each BMP.
4. Permit application processing fee of $505 payable to NCDENR. (For an Express review, refer to \JT(-
http:/ / www.envheli).org/ pages/ onestopexpress.litin] for information on the Express program
and the associated fees. Contact the appropriate regional office Express Permit Coordinator for
additional information and to schedule the required application meeting.)
5. A detailed narrative (one to two pages) describing the stormwater treatment/managementfor fit_
the project. This is required in addition to the brief summary provided in the Project
Information, item 1.
6. A USGS map identifying the site location. If the receiving stream is reported as class SA or the VSc-
receiving stream drains to class SA waters within rh mile of the site boundary, include the'h
mile radius on the map.
7. Sealed, signed and dated calculations (one copy). JS�
8. Two sets of plans folded to 8.5" x 14" (sealed, signed, & dated), including: V S�
a. Development/Project name.
b. Engineer and firm.
c. Location map with named streets and NCSR numbers.
d. Legend.
e. North arrow.
I. Scale.
g. Revision number and dates. �� �'` Vp�
It. Identify all surface waters on the plans by delineating the normal pool elev
impounded structures, the banks of streams and rivers, the MHW or NHW a of tidal
waters, and any coastal wetlands landward of the MHW or NHW lines. JUN 19 2014
• Delineate the vegetated buffer landward from the normal pool elevatio impounded
structures, the banks of streams or rivers, and the MHW (or NHW) of ti waters.
i. Dimensioned property/project boundary with bearings & distances.
j. Site Layout with all BUA identified and dimensioned.
k. Existing contours, proposed contours, spot elevations, finished floor elevations.
1. Details of roads, drainage features, collection systems, and stormwater control measures.
m. Wetlands delineated, or a note on the plans that none exist. (Must be delineated by a
qualified person. Provide documentation of qualifications and identify the person who
made the determination on the plans.
n. Existing drainage (including off -site), drainage easements, pipe sizes, runoff calculations.
o. Drainage areas delineated (included in the main set of plans, not as a separate document).
Form SWU-101 Version Oct. 31, 2013 Page of6

p. Vegetated buffers (where required).
9. Copy of any applicable soils report with the associated SH WT elevations (Please identify V3�
elevations in addition to depths) as well as a map of the boring locations with the existing
elevations and boring logs. Include an 8.5"x11" copy of the NRCS County Soils map with the
project area clearly delineated. For projects with infiltration BMPs, the report should also
include the soil type, expected infiltration rate, and the method of determining the infiltration rate.
(Infiltration Devices submitted to WiRO: Schedule a site visit for DEMLR to verify the SHWT prior
to submittal, [phone].)
10. A copy of the most current property deed. Deed book: Page No: "-
11. For corporations and limited liability corporations (LLC): Provide documentation from the NC
Secretary of State or other official documentation, which supports the titles and positions held
by the persons listed in Contact Information, item la, 2a, and/or 3a per 15A NCAC 2H.1003(e).
The corporation or LLC must be listed as an active corporation in good standing with the NC
Secretary of State, otherwise the application will be returned.
http://www.secretary.state.nc.us/Corporatioiis/CSearcli.asl2x
VIL DEED RESTRICTIONS AND PROTECTIVE COVENANTS
For all subdivisions, outparcels, and future development, the appropriate property restrictions and protective
covenants are required to be recorded prior to the sale of any lot. If lot sizes vary significantly or the proposed
BUA allocations vary, a table listing each lot number, lot size, and the allowable built -upon area must be provided
as an attachment to the completed and notarized deed restriction form. The appropriate deed restrictions and
protective covenants forms can be downloaded from ham:///portal�ncdenr.org/web/Ir/state-stormwater-
forms does. Download the latest versions for each submittal.
In the instances where the applicant is different than the property owner, it is the responsibility of the property
owner to sign the deed restrictions and protective covenants form while the applicant is responsible for ensuring
that the deed restrictions are recorded.
By the notarized signature(s) below, the permit holder(s) certify that the recorded property restrictions and
protective covenants for this project, if required, shall include all the items required in the permit and listed
on the forms available on the website, that the covenants will be binding on all parties and persons claiming
under them, that they will run with the land, that the required covenants cannot be changed or deleted
without concurrence from the NC DEMLR, and that they will be recorded prior to the sale of any lot.
VIII. CONSULTANT INFORMATION AND AUTHORIZATION
Applicant: Complete this section if you wish to designate authority to another individual and/or firm (such as a
consulting engineer and/or firm) so that they may provide information on your behalf for this project (such as
addressing requests for additional information).
Consulting Engineer:Vincent Chirichella, PE
Consulting Firm: Clark Nexsen
Mailing Address:333 Fayetteville Street Suite 1000
City:Raleigh State:NC Zip:27601
Phone: (919 ) 828-1876
Email:vchirichellaOclarknexsen.com
Fax: (919 ) 828-1877
IX. PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION (if Con tact Information, item 21as been filler) out, complete this
section)
I, (print or type name of person listed in Contact Information, item 2a) certify that I
own the property identified in this permit application, and thus give permission to (print or type mane of person
listed in Contact Information, itenn ]a) with (print or type name of organization listed in
Contact Information, itenn 1 a) to develop the project as currently proposed. A copy of
the lease agreement or pending property sales contract has been provided with the submittal, which indicates the
party responsible for the operation and maintenance of the stormwater system.
Form SWU-101 Version Oct. 31, 2013
ECEIV11=
JUN 19 2014
5
Page 5 of 6 B'

As the legal property owner I acknowledge, understand, and agree by my signature below, that if my designated
.agent (entity listed in Contact Information, item 1) dissolves their company and/or cancels or defaults on their
lease agreement, or pending sale, responsibility for compliance with the DEMLR Stormwater permit reverts back
to me, the property owner. As the property owner, it is my responsibility to notify DEMLR immediately and
submit a completed Name/Ownership Change Form within 30 days; otherwise I will be operating a stormwater
treatment facility without a valid permit. I understand that the operation of a stormwater treatment facility
without a valid permit is a violation of NC General Statue 143-215.1 and may result in appropriate enforcement
action including the assessment of civil penalties of up to $25,000 per day, pursuant to NCGS 143-215.6.
a Notary Public for the State of County of
do hereby certify that
before me this _ day of
personally appeared
and acknowledge the due execution of the application for
a stormwater permit. Witness my hand and official seal,
SEAL
My commission
X. APPLICANT'S CERTIFICATION
I, (print or hype name of person listed in Contact Information, item 1a) Neal Paid
certify that the information included on this permit application form is, to the best of my knowledge, correct and
that the project will be constructed in conformance with the approved plans, that the required deed restrictions
and protective covenants will be recorded, and that the proposed project complies with the requirements of the
applicable stormwa)Cf)ules under 15A fCAC 21-1.1000 and any other applicable state stormwater requirements.
v l/ Date: &Z1//i{'
Signature.
I, ///1 / l/ 9 a NoLt�ry Public for the State of /✓//�/ �� d , , County of
hC% do hereby certify that ,G�/4a / personally appeared
before me this day of z&l and ackwledg�the due execu on of the application for
a stormwater permit. Witness my hand and official seal, ZZ/K -
Ti'EI=]
JGa
Form SWU-101 Version Oct. 31, 2013
SEAL
My commission expires vas ez�%
ECEIVE
JUN 19 2014
(0 6 BY:
Page)CofX

MEMORY TRANSMISSION REPORT
TIME :06-30-2014 14:24
FAX NO.1
NAME
FILENO.
314
DATE
06.30 14:21
TO
e 919104512927
DOCUMENT PAGES
9 --
START TIME
�: j06.36�14:21
END TIME
��/ 06.30 14:24
PAGES SENT
9
STATUS
OK
—SUCCESSFUL TX NOTICE'
���
"CCbER
Nnrth Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat Mccrory John E. Shvarla, III
Governor Secretary
Jun. 30, 2014
Commanaln9 ORlcor
MCn Camp L no
c/o Neel PsuL W.poly Public Works OHlcer
1005 Mlchaal Road
Camp Leleunw, NC 25647
Subject: 8torrrlwater Management Perrnit Me. 811V8 091007
Camp John.an M200 Parking Arse s d Joppping Tr.11
lJvsrall Low Oanslty Storrrlwatsr ProjsO! ' it. areas of High Density
tOnslow County
Owar Mr. P.ulo
1
n.
of W.I.,
they or.
Tha Wilmin fton Roppional Office received a comploto, modlfiod Slate Stormwater Manag nl P.rmit
Applicallon or Ina M200 Area P.rkinB and .IogBInB Trnil at Camp Johnson on Juno 10. 2014. Staff
law of th0 plarlH antl Hp.GII1COtlona hoe detarminatl that lh0 pro eGt. asp paged. will comply with Ina
8tormwater ROQ la6one vet /orth In 8esaon Law 2008-211 antl rule 16A NCAC 2H. 1000. W. aro
forwarding mOry1/10d P.rmlt NO- $Wa 091007 dated Juno 3G, 2014. /Or the conatmCtlan. OpOrallon antl
rnaintananco of 010 BMP'a antl bull[ -upon area associated with the eubl.ct protect.
Th. followlna modiflcwtionH aro inclutlod and oov.rel by thl. porrnlC
1. Thl. 1. a minor motliflcahon to the permit as .11ow.d under Section 2.(d)(5) of SL 200e-211.
Th.rw Ia n.. nal bsroasa In built -upon area and Basin a2 iH not being enlarged.
2. n.aln M1 and Its drainoao area are beimp rsmavadl from this permit. The parking lot praviousl)o
approved to pa troated by Basin 01 will be diflod and a now BMP will be as. gnarl as part f
a concurmnt motliaca0on to permit nombar SWa 1201 Ol.
3. WIO.in lho low density drain. . . 10.290 alqu.ro feet of jogging troll In movod from [his
permit and will be accounted�oreimlfer a cons. rent m.dIn..11an to swa 1200101.
4, Ineducas the ovorall.low density prol.ct limits to 050.103 square feet.
S. Plan shoots C-2 (Site plan) and C-4 ((grading) for B.Hin fit from the Dec.rnber 12, 2008
approved plan Got. have been sad.d to the Juno 30, 2014 approval plan ant.
plvlelon of Enerpy, M.ner., ens Land rtvsonrrns
Lantl (]u.Iitr 9oollon - W11-1.1bn RHBlonel OMce
121 Coranctl Urlw Eztonalon, WllminG(on, Nonn Cerollne 28405 - (910)7Pn-921G / Fnw: (910) 33o-20n4

MEMORY TRANSMISSION REPORT
TIME :06-30-2014 14:28
FAX NO.1
NAME
FILE NO.
DATE
TO
DOCUMENT PAGES
START TIME
END TIME
PAGES SENT
STATUS
315
06.30 14:22
rt 919198281877
9
06.30 14:24
06.30 14:28
9
OK
`SUCCESSFUL TX NOTICE -
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory John E. Shvarla, III
Oovomor Snored.,
Jun. 30. 2014
Cammanaing Omcar
m MCn Cap L
./o N..1 Paul e oputy public Worts OHicor
1005 Full .... I Road
Camp Lejauns. NC 20547
Subject_ 131ormwat.r Manapcement pommit No. SWO 081007 olhammin 2
Overall Low Oe ol[y Stormlwu or Project witM1l a rraae of Hlgh Oen.1ty
On.1ew Ceunty
over Mr. Paul:
Effactiva Augg t 1, 2013 the States Stormwator program has boa. transferred from th. pivislon of Water
Ouallty (CWO)) to the Civlalan of Energy. Minoral and Land Resources (MMMLR). All prevlous
raf.ranc.e to DWq ill In In oldor slormwator permits Issued prior to August 1. 2013 until they or.
modified. Plaaa. note that thin permit will now roforonce IDIEMLR as the Oivlelon rasponalblo for
I..ua.ca of the permit.
with the
an and
Thies permit .hall be off.cliv. from the date of leeuanc. un01 O.r.embmr 30. 2021. whl.h Inclutloa .11 or
tn. availabl. antmnslons, and shall be subject to the conAtlona and limltatlons an sp..ifi.0 thmr.ln, and
d.os not au .r..d. any Other apancy permit or approvnl that may be raqulrod. "loans pay special
.ttontlon to the condition. listed In thfe �].rmIt rapardinp the Oparml.. o Malnt...... or tn. FiMP(s),
racordellon of dead restrictions. Proeed urge ror phanpinp wn ship. transferring th0 permit, and
nowinp the pmmil. Failure to establish 6.... is yyslam for op.,.ti.. and maintenance of the
etormwater mamagg.m.nt rlyetem, to record dead r.atricllo ,.. to transfer the permit, or to renew t".
permit. will result rn future compllmnce pmblama
Th. following morllscatlona arm Included and co,r ... d by this permit:
1 This Isl. no not I .rleIn ol st minor mmolficiation
tothepermit as ollowod under Sactlon 2.(d)(6) of SL 2000-211.
pun area Ono Basin 402 Is not being anlorgtrd.
2. Basin #1 and Its arminage area are bolnyd movOfrom this permit- The pnrkln9 m
lot n-.vI.u.l,
. no
rov.d tot bo t,..tommtibb, perat milbl ber $Wfi 920nd new BMp will bB a.alp ad .a part I
ncu3. Within the low o... ity tlralnaaa are.. 10.290 eaumns fast of jogging trail In removed from this
permit and will be accounted for under a concurrent modticatlon to SWB 120101.
4. Roduc.a the ovormll.low Consity project limits to 658,103 spuar. fast.
5. Plan ."mate C-2 (alto plan) and C-4 (grading for Rosin 02 from the r oacsmbn12. 200B
approved plan cot, have Oman added to the una 30. 2014 appmvad plan sat.
.hd 12n .1Ed
1y. Mineral, and Lond Resources
127 Cardinal OrNs Extension.nW1 meinl9(on. North CeflollnoP >4e6 �(010)) 06-12151 Fea: [phone]

Architecture & Engineering
333 Fayetteville Street, Suite 1000
Raleigh, NC 27601
P. 919.828.1876
F. 919.828.1877
www.clarknexsen.com
transmittal
5yJ8 v8100�
LD
4 DATE: We transmit the following:
June 18, 2014
® Drawings ❑Specifications
PROJECT: ❑ Change Order ❑ Shop Drawings
Staff NCO Academic Facilities
Project ❑ Computer File(s) ❑ Samples
TO:
NCDENR
ATTN: Linda Lewis
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405
FROM:
Vincent Chirichella, PE
❑ Product Literature ® Applications
Conies Description
2
1
1
1
SUBJECT:
Staff NCO Academic Facilities -
Express Stormwater Submittal Remarks:
1
2
3
4
S
6
8
9
10
COMMISSION NUMBER:
4686
VIA:
Mail
ROUTE
CC:
Plans
Original signed Stormwater Management
Permit Application
Original signed Low Density Supplement
Check in amount of $5,500 (applies to SW8
081007, SW8 111207 and SW8 120101)
ECEfVE
JUN 19 2014
BY:
Page 1 of 1

CN Comm. No.: 4686
Camp Johnson, North Carolina
Stuff NCO Academic Building, Supply Building and Hoover Road Realignment
STORMWATER NARRATIVE
19 June 2014
Clark Nexsen
333 Fayetteville Street, Suite 1000
Raleigh, NC 27601
License # C-1028 0-
BY:
lff%o'- /Aivol
Engineer (s): Vincent Chirichella, P.E., LT-_ED AP BD+C
McKenzie Myers, P.E., LEER AP BD+C

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 PROJECT NARRATIVE..............................................................................................1
1.1
GEOTEC14NICAL INVESTIGATION......................................................................................3
2.0
DESIGN APPROACH..................................................................................................3
2.1
SToRM DRAINAGE PIPING................................................................................................3
3.0
WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS..................................................................................4
4.0
WATER QUANTITY ANALYSIS...............................................................................4
4.1
PREDEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS......................................................................................5
4.2
POST DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS....................................................................................5
APPENDIX A: LOCATION AND VICINITY MAPS
APPENDIX B: STORM DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX C: POND ROUTING
APPENDIX D: GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
APPENDIX E: WETLAND DETERMINATION
APPENDIX F: EROSION & SEDIMENTATION CONTROL CALCULATIONS

Staff NCO Academic Building, Supply Building, and Hoover Road Realignment CN Comm. No. 4686
Stormwater Narrative Clark*Nexsen
1.0 PROJECT NARRATIVE
1. General Information
A. Name of Project- Staff NCO Academy Facilities
B. Street Address, City, County- Camp Johnson between Wilson Dr. and Hoover Road,
Onslow County
C. Acres in Tract- 18.11 acres
D. Acres Being Disturbed- 18.11 acres
E. Acres in Wetlands- 0.00 acres
1. Wetlands Must Be Delineated- Wetlands are delineated and the Jurisdictional
Determination (JD) was approved by the Army Corps of Engineers on March
16, 2009, expiring March 16, 2014. See Appendix E for JD submittal.
2. Proposed Wetland Irnpacts Require Permits from Corps & DWQ-'Ihere will be
no disturbance of wetlands.
F. Ownership Information From NC Secretary of State Web Site- Camp Lejeune, NC
G. Description of Development Proposal
The Staff NCO Project includes four separate sites all located on Camp Johnson. The
development proposal will include one Staff Non -Commissioned Officer's (NCO) Academic
Instruction Building; associated parking, parade field, Outdoor Instruction building, one
Supply Building; associated parking and lay down area, Realignment of Hoover Road,
Temporary Gravel Parking lot and sidewalks. Stormwater runoff for the NCO Academic
Instruction Building will be treated by one wet detention basin. Stormwater runoff for die
Supply Building will be treated by one wet detention basin. Stormwater will be conveyed to
the various Stormwater Control Measures (SCMs) by means of grassed swales and storm
drainage pipe networks. The realignment of Hoover road will not require treatment as the
existing road will be removed, resulting in a decrease in BUA. The Temporary Gravel Parking
lot will not require treatment beyond the measures installed for E&SC as the lot will be
removed upon completion of the NCO project. The sidewalks will be treated by sheet flow
through grass.
1. Previous or Existing Permits.
SW8 081007- M200 Area Parking and Jogging Trail Overall Low Density with
Areas of High Density —Area of high density will be removed from permit as
well as a low density jogging trail.

Staff NCO Academic Building, Supply Building, and Hoover Road Realignment CN Comm. No. 4686 /I
Stonnwater Narrative Clark*Nexsen
SW8 111207- Neuse Road Extension Overall Low Density with an Area of High
Density- Adjusting permit boundary and reallocating impervious from Future.
SW8 120101- BEQ Between Wilson Dr and Hoover Road (3-1319)- Adding
NCO Wet pond and Supply Wet pond.
Although areas of sidewalk will only be treated by sheet flow through grass the overall
treatment of BUA will decreased from Pre-existing conditions. Part of the existing parking
lot area South of the NCO was not treated. This project will install a new parking lot in the
same area as the existing and all of that area will be collected and treated.
2. Stormwater Information
Staff NCO Wet Detention
Staff NCO Wet Detention Basin will treat the NCO Academic Building, Outdoor
Instruction Budding, Parade Field, Parking lot and some offsite area. A rainwater cistern will
collect roof runoff from the NCO building for building reuse. The wet detention basin was
designed to accommodate the entire roof area and no credit will be sought for the cistern.
Stormwater is conveyed using Low Impact Development (LID) methods of overland flow
and grassed swales to maximum extent possible.
The basin is drawn down through an orifice in the riser within 2 to 5 days. An emergency
spillway is provided as a drain mechanism during emergency storm events. A minimum of
1-foot of freeboard will be provided above the 100-yr storm and has been designed per
NCDENR Requirements to have a treatment efficiency of 90% TSS Removal for the first
1.5" of runoff.
Supply Building Wet Detention
Supply Building Wet Detention Basin will treat the Supply Building, surrounding parking
and laydown area, and most of the entrance drive. Stormwater is conveyed using Low
Impact Development (LID) methods of overland flow and grassed swales to maximum
extent possible.
The basin is drawn down through an orifice in the riser within 2 to 5 days. An emergency
spillway is provided as a drain mechanism during emergency storm events. A minimum of
1-foot of freeboard will be provided above the 100-yr storm and has been designed per
NCDENR Requirements to have a treatment efficiency of 90% TSS Removal for the first
1.5" of runoff.
2

Staff NCO Academic Building, Supply Building, and Hoover Road Realignment CN Comm. No. 4686
Stormwater Narrative Clark*Nexsen
A. Will All Built Upon Area Be Collected -No.
I. Areas of sidewalk will not be collected for treatment (8,916 sq.ft.).
II. The Supple Building entrance will not be treated (577 sq.ft.) This area will be
incorporated into the low density portion of SW8 111207. Future will be
reallocated as On -Site Streets.
B. Identify Whether or Not the Project Has Buffer Requirements & Whether or Not
Development is Proposed Within A Buffer. NO
C. Disclose Whether or Not Off -Site Runoff Is Coming Onto The Site or Into The
Proposed SCM. Yes- The NCO Wet Pond has been sized to accommodate the
offsite drainage.
D. If An On -Site Evaluation Of The Soils Has Been Done, Discuss Infiltration Rates,
Seasonal High Water Table, etc., and Include Date Of Site Evaluation. -A
geotechnical report was prepared on February 5, 2014. Among other tests, seasonal
high water table (SHWT) testing was completed in the areas of the SCMs. The
Supply Building wet detention basin permanent pool elevation is within 6 inches of
the SHWT. The NCO Building wet detention basin permanent pool is approximately
2.5 feet below the seasonal high water table. As nearby ditches are at elevation 10 to
13 it is not expected that the pond will draw the water table down. The elevation of
the permanent pool was driven by the storm pipes being able to outlet into the pond
while draining the entire site.
3. GEOTECFINICALINVESTIGATION
Geotechnical investigation was performed by ECS Carolinas, LLP. A copy of the
Geotechnical report is included in Appendix D.
2.0 DESIGN APPROACH
2.1 STORM DRAINAGE PIPING
Permanent storm drainage piping systems are designed for a 10-year storm event using the
Rational Method for rainfall analysis. Rainfall intensity values were taken from the NOAA
website. Runoff coefficients are based on the following values:
3

Staff NCO Academic Building, Supply Building, and Hoover Road Realignment CN Comm. No. 4686
Stommater Narrative Clark*Nexsen
Description
Runoff Coefficient, C
Paved and Roof Areas
0.95
Unimproved Areas
0.35
Using Bentley StormCAD V8i, the post -development stormwater collection system was
modeled. An analysis of the hydraulic grade fine for the 10-year design rainfall event found the
existing and proposed structures' rim elevations to be above the water level. See Appendix B for
detailed information of the post -developed analysis.
3.0 WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS
According to the NCDENR Design Guide, the wet detention basin stormwater treatment
system is designed to remove 90 percent of the average annual post development total
suspended solids Cl'SS), 25 percent of the average annual post development total nitrogen (FN),
and 40 percent of the average annual post development total phosphorus (TP), by implementing
these Stormwater Control Measures (SCMs).
4.0 WATER QUANTITY ANALYSIS
The SCM routings were performed using the triangular hydrograph storage estimation method
in the Flydraflow 1-lydrographs 2011 computer program. The analysis indicates that the total site
post development condition peak runoff for the 1-year and 10-year design storms is less than the
predevelopment condition.
rd

Staff NCO Academic Building, Supply Building, and Hoover Road Realignment CN Comm. No. 4686
Sionnwater Narrative Clark*Nexsen
4.1 PREDEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS
The total development area is approximately 18.11 acres. There are two (2) existing SCMs on
site that collect different portions of the developed area. The site ultimately drains to dhe east
into New River of the White Oak River basin. The table below summarizes the
predevelopment conditions peak runoff for the drainage areas.
Predevelopment Condition Peak
Runoff Summary
Drainage Areas
1-year Peak
10-year Peak
Runoff (cfs)
Runoff (cfs)
B
20.79
33.46
C
1.168
1.792
4.2 POST DEVEI.OPMIsNT CONDITIONS
SW8 081007- M200 Area Parking and lon_eing frail:
The modification to this permit includes the removal of a high density parking lot and low
density jogging trail. Post development conditions will be included in SW8 120101 as part
of a high density development treated by a wet detention basin.
SW8 111207- Neuse Road Extension:
Due to the location of the Supply building and driveway entrance being located within the
low density boundary, the boundary was modified to include an equivalent area east of the
Supply building. The area of the Supply driveway which overlaps the low density boundary
will be captured as part of SW8 120101 and treated with a wet detention basin. A small
portion of the driveway entrance and sidewalk additions are included in this Plan Revision
by reallocation of Future Impervious.
SW8 120101- CamR)ohnson BEQ between Wilson Dr and Hoover Rd (P-1319)
Area A:
Post development has been adjusted from pre development conditions by an
increase in drainage area due to site grading conditions. Any additional impervious surface
has been accounted for by reallocation of Future Impervious.
G

Staff NCO Academic Building, Supply Building, and Hoover Road Realignment CN Comm. No. 4686
Slonnwater Narrative Clark+Nexsen
Area B:
The Staff NCO Academic Building, Outdoor Instruction Building, parking, and
walks are included in the post development drainage area. In addition to the new
impervious from this development, existing asphalt jogging trails along the east and west
side of development are being removed from SW8 081007 and captured in the wet
detention basin. Additional offsite area was included in the sizing of the wet detention
pond by topographic survey and field observation. The wet detention basin is located to
the west of the development area across Hoover Road. The basin was designed for 90%
TSS for the first 1.5" of rainfall.
Area C:
Post development includes the Supply building and associated parking and driveway
entrance. All new impervious surfaces for the Supply building will be treated in a wet
detention basin designed for 90% TSS for the first 1.5" of rainfall. See table below for
runoff summary.
Area D:
This drainage area was used to capture all previously unaccounted/untreated
impervious surface. These areas include the portion of Hoover Road included in the
realignment and a parking lot located south of the M200 Parking Area being removed
from SW8 081007. In the post development conditions, new impervious surface for walks
and the relocated Hoover Road are not treated in with a SCM as the total
unaccounted/untreated impervious surface has decreased from pre development
conditions.
Post development Condition Peak
Runoff Summary
Drainage Areas
1-year Peak
10-year Peak
Runoff (cfs)
Runoff (cfs)
B
0.169
0.217
C
0.012
0.015
2

R1[ wuL x \Ai1\ -C6 sux wL lwFn rotil�x[\p�[lym\odl\9omiwb\Nm.l Lea a.4 4�W1 wu[ W [ d uW Rom WMM1. !ury 0. MI. - x:4m VSR. ntwiNY
ep s
41` t 1 I
v
' V,
k'c
----- -- - - - -
I(A
n
�m
5 —NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND —MID-ATLANTIC
P$ppp rases sanori wvu srnnov. wear. mrwu d ¢
UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP JOHNSON, NC
a P-003 STAFF NCO ACADEMY FACILITIES
PRE DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE AREA MAP 4 4 § G !
i

� xWc x \roi�\«es-oe srari xca xm.:w raa.,.\ww�or.\a.i\siom.aiw\owme xw.e.y urp� xwe. wsr w un xonco. uww, w.. aT, ror. - � oro� ussn .wzwa ,
yy
1'C I' l
a�M;�I it
l
B" 4
1 5 \
\
- ,10
_ p
/.
HII
V-1,------------ -1
------------------
n
+
/ oivu+TwTxr os mexw rwvu r.rxiTrservoxEexwecwweo y & } o g °
c NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND — MID -ATLANTIC
y( W.w STATICw W.VKST�TCN.ItlS0.M, WIfwM { >
O ° E UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP JOHNSON, NC
P-003 STAFF NCO ACADEMY FACILITIES r sIry
° POST DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE AREA MAP d A@§g$ Z !
„ r% In
T

2 480 000 FEET
I i_ V Lam , I L/
" M
60 000 FEET
43'00"
i5 000 FEET
3844 M N
SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS (SFHAs) SUBJECT TO
INUNDATION BY THE 1 % ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD
The 1 % annual chance Flood (100-year flood), also known as the base flood, is the flood
that has a 1 % chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. The Special
Flood Hazard Area is the area subject to flooding by the 1% annual chance flood. Areas
of Special Flood Hazard include Zones A, AE, AH, AO, AR, A99, V, and VE. The Base
Flood Elevation is the water -surface elevation of the 1% annual chance flood.
ZONE A No Base Flood Elevations determined.
ZONE AE Base Flood Elevations determined.
ZONE AN Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet (usually areas of pending); Base Flood
Elevations determined.
ZONE AO Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet (usually sheet flow on sloping terrain);
average depths determined. For areas of alluvial fan floodin& velocities
also determined.
ZONE AR Special Flood Hazard Area formerly protected from the 1% annual
chance flood by a flood control system that was subsequently
decertified. Zone AR indicates that the former flood control system is
being restored to provide protection from the 1% annual chance or
greater flood.
ZONE A99 Area to be -protected from 1 % annual chance flood by a Federal
flood protection system under construction; no Base Flood Elevations
determined.
ZONE VE Coastal flood zone with velocity hazard (wave action); Base Flood Elevations
determined.
FLOODWAY AREAS IN ZONE AE
The floodway is the channel of a stream plus any adjacent floodplain areas that must be
kept free of encroachment so that the 1% annual chance flood can be carried without
substantial increases in flood heights.
OTHER FLOOD AREAS
ZONE X Areas of 0.2% annual chance flood; areas of 1% annual chance flood
with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than
1 square mile; and areas protected by levees from 1 % annual chance
flood.
OTHER AREAS
ZONE X Areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain.
ZONE D Areas in which flood hazards are undetermined, but possible.
COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES SYSTEM (CBRS) AREAS
\\ \ OTHERWISE PROTECTED AREAS (OPAs)
CBRS areas and OPAs are normally located within or adjacent to Special Flood Hazard Areas.
1% annual chance floodplain boundary
0.2% annual chance floodplain boundary
— — — — - Floodway boundary
- Zone D Boundary
.....w............• CBRS and OPA boundary
Boundary dividing Special Flood Hazard Areas of different
Base Flood Elevations, flood depths or flood velocities.
1.-"-0

NOAA's National,Weather Servlcb, I.
aBBw Hydrometeorological Design Studies Cente
Precipitation F.requ�ncy) Data, Servep(PFDS
General lot.
Momapege
Current Projects
FAO
Glasea,
Prncipitation
Frequenry(PF)
PF Data Server
PF in GIS Forme,
PF Maps
• Temporal Distr.
• Time Series Dare
• PFDS Perform.
PF Documems
Probable Mosimum
Precipitation (PMP)
PMP Documents
Miscellaneous
Publications
AEP Storm Analysis
Reeertl
Precipitation
Contact Us
Inquiries
Lisl-server
USA -gm_
..nws.rgaa.aov
4t.r4�
Search J16 NWSO All NOAAO�
NOAA ATLAS 14 POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES: NC
DATA DESCRIPTION
Dma type: preoApu(ioninlensity 0 Units: Lnglish • Tme series type: penis, tluratlon
SELECT LOCATION
1. Manually:
a)EMerloutlon(dedmaltlegrms.uw'-'IorSeMW): Iatilutle:(__ J bgilu0e:�-suhmd;:
b) Select ste0on (Dick hero for a liar of ate0ons metl In hpumry analysis for NC): selaG atntion
2. Use map:
POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY (PF) ESTIMATES
Wffll 90% CONFIDENCE IN]ERVALS AND SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 2, Version 3
r-
PF graVh¢al I 5upplmnr;n�rcnalion
PDS-based precipitation frequency estimates with 90 % confidence intervals (in inche51hour)'
Duration Average recurrence latersal(yeare)
1 2 5 10 25 50 100 200 500 1000
5-min
5.IS 586.38)
(641450)
P39.B W)
(0N-g73)
10.30 1210)
110.1'120)
(109- 3.0)
(11P?UO)
(12B 15])
3 1
(133-16.4)
10min
4.70
(4.a4-5.08)
5.54
(5.13-0.00)
9A1
(5.92-6.44)
7.19
NS:s-v.]e)
0.09
(1.42-BJ4)
8.0
(a08-s. u
9.53
(865-10.3)
10.2
agm-tt t)
11.1
(092-12.1)
11.9
(10.5-12.9)
15min
3.92
4.6.1
5.41
6.07
9.84
7.45
B 03
9.80
9.32
9.92
(002-425)
(4.30-5.03)
µw-5e5)
(5se-6m)
(8.20-y.Su
(am -am)
R.2B 0.081
O.76-9.31)
(0.33-10.1)
(678-10.0)
JO+nln
2.0
3.21
3.84
4.40
5.08
5.81
815
B.BB
1.42
B.OJ
1240-2BU
12.9]-34])
43.55.4.16)
(405-4.i0)
I4.&-54T)
(5.12$08)
1558 865)
N.04-L25)
(663-0.05)
(7,11-8.74)
80-min
1.1.1
3.3841
5.86
(LSSBt 02)
n.mQ1e)
12.Y!'3091
128483101
0.096
I4.238500)
(d 5i]01
(510-630)
1.0
.2L34
n
�;�
�(3U-4581
34)p
114.54,
11.I
(2.02�3.41
JB3t]I
12.85-dISBI
(3.41120)
13B
J-0r
10000-0.0011
(003e 00]0)
(1.02423
(132�148
La883]0
(4#�3001
(r00'2407
R.2J-2]5
1383,]20
(2 53]I
B-hr
1040]440!93)
(043-0.598)
(09A-OJ53
10]40-O.B00)
10905001.11
1.oa-l.39)
(1.21,1848)
(1.3)---1,71)
Oat-205)
(t 83235)
0.2B1
0,316
0.401
0.403
0.598
0.704
0.810
Deals1.14
1.J2
12ar
(02b-ON1)
(0280-0352) 11
(036]-0H))
(0434-0538)
I (0534-06m) 11
(0823-0]19)
1 (0I19-0W8)
11 10824-1m) 1
(D9]9-1m)n.11-146
0.102
0105
0.291
0.4I8
0.554
0.908
0.]00
24�r
37 01
a.3>-D 1851
0.18]-0201
(0215-0258
(0.258-0SR
16-0.
(0 ]18-0.365)
58-0,
(0388-0451)
(04b-0525)
(04&-O 60B)
IO 573-0 73B
(0.648-0853)
2day
0.06]
0.108
0.1JS
0.181
0.200
0.235
0.2]]
0.3tB
O.J82
0.430

§|
..�.
.!
.•
.!
,�
�§
.;
(`|
z
�
_
g§.;•;®,.§|.|
\
s
e
s
22/§\t9R!
\/
or.-_
di-n-I
!~4w_
\
15-1
:
..
.,■,:;;;a:,;:!!§
-
-
-
-
s
o
`\\§
|
/
§{
!
/\
!
§�

. .............. |
JeeeaaeGe,i
;:-.at u !\
EGQGSaaGa !
eRGQQBQ\A!t

Label: AS
Al'- A5 -Base
Type: catch easln
ID: 24
16.5
18
_
yoe-Cateh Basin.
ID: 33
Type' Catch Basin
—
17.5
label: AL. _
4abe1:-P3—--_—__.—��
ID:'IS—
Type: outranCatch
Ba:n
I
16
-
_
label; CO-3
� I5
TYPe:{pndvrt
-
4
Y14.5
--�----tabeh'CO-S---t'^
-
---"�—"�"'iYPe
Label: cO-t
C_niU
—J--`
_-_----____-
_ ID: 25
---------
--
_ .y
tI
TYOe: CanduR
ID: 1]
—
_
3.5
-
13
12.5
—
—
---
I
Labal: CO-23-
TYPe;Conduit
ID:89
----
--
— --` -
_�-
J�--
I1.5.
ji
0 50
--
100 150
-
260
250
360
350 '. 400
.50 560
550 600
m\1,ed
3. \coa
n\w-n
17\w-1
xN wa
fink bnpth (h)
93.0
96.0
09.0
237.0
Ms. (In)Wn.n.I
No
2..0\
tJ.P\
slA \Cann,([-,nl..pun)
It... (hB)
0.003
0.411
0.004
-P.001
3p\1.6d
31\•1
33\N
I61q
T
IJ 11u
—I
3. U
—_ —+
Graund lh)
6P0
lJ.tf
16.36
16.9.
19.6
Inv.n/h)
10.
t P.6J
13.6P
I3.x3
t40p
5t.[len th)
0.0
92.0
IM.O
3.1.0
6P..P

- label:
A2 -
-
type catch
eosin
A2 - AIS - Base
-
" -
b I: A]
Label:
YPeCahh
a9
Basin
Lobel: A13 I_
Ty TYpe:CelcTi Besn
ID' 49
-
tD:
R
1 .5 iD]32
jOuda0
TYp D. Ube!:
ID: 91
all Lab I a14 Type C t56 Basin
IDi 56
_I
16
--
- Type;C
[dl,Besin C [Basin
- -
- -
ID.
53 ID: at
15+5
Type. Catch
Basin
Label'
CO-13
-
ID
na
__-
TYpn
Conduit
ID:
53
Label. CD 16
..., 14.5.
—..._-.��_._---_
_ ._
Ube]:
Type: '6t
40
ti Basin --.--•-.___.-.._-
_LAbel_CD-15.
Label_ _-_
-.__�._ — D
label: CO-32
_TYpe l C6ndult
TYpe: Conduit
- ___-._..�.�.___
-�
ID:
95
label: CO-24
Type: Conduit
Conduit
Type: Candw[
ID: 50
label: CO-5
)
Type: Conduit
ID: 55
ID: 5/
14
- .TYpe: <An —.
-----�
--
-
—IDr92—
ID: 30
label:
-
�I
> 13.5.
Type: Conduit
label: CO-26-
label: CO 25
3.
48
ID: a8 -
TYpe Co duii
-
ID: 96
13
jy
12.5.
i_
12-
-
11.5.
10.5.
_-.o---
'�---
—.
50
IDO 150 200
250
360 350 460
45O
500
550 660 650
I' 700 750 860
850 900
NLLabel
34\CO-3
4B\0'11
97\CO-36
9000-33
92\W24
Sf\W-if
54\W f4 - 5)\W1'11]
10\C411
37\W-16
fink 4nPh(M1)
�R.0
]0).0
63.0
N9.p
61A
14.0
14.0 —�H.O
La.b
9].0
Nu (In)\Mrtetld
36A\
39A\
33.0\
33.0\
3a.0\
U.p\
]4.0\
H.p\
U.p\
I5.0\
A- MIA)
22.10 MAI I0A4 11.89 17.03
13.86
I1.13 9d] 6.59 3.67
�—
Slope(h/fi)
-0.00] 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003
-0.003
—
0.003 0.003 0.003 -0.003
N1LeEd
33VA3 l3 AZ 44 A) 93 49 4] 49 9l
4 0 334tl1
fi V41b R13 43 V4It S6 PI3
me.ae
vv 1461 ix)z
1x4z
lsnsn x)1
z4
46z
Im�rt (M1hI)
_]slpa
��uez
Ib.M )p1.60 11.71
.03f
�t
11x31
113
1
—i
514v1on IM1) 0.0 12.0 19 o 361.0 410.0 4jII-A� M.0 Wj .ae].0 MA 'ma

16
15.5
Type: Catch Basing
ID: 33
v
A3 - A6-.Base .-
16
Wbel _CO23 _
Type_ COnd t
ID: 09
240
TY p e' Conduit
D .29_ _
280 300 320 340 360 380 400 Qp 440
28
�95.0
96.p
363.0
16.0\
24.0X
]BA\
]].60
[2.6]
].3]
-0.M
I 0.020
-s.Op6
z9

Wbal.
A2
-
Type: catch
Basin A7 - A19 -Base
'
ID.
33
tY
9ut— -
16
Type: Ca[chBasin Labl>I6 T
M. 44 TYp C Ich Basin
M.
_LeheL.Al)
TyDe'ca4h
1
111___
Basn L b
ID: )6 Yp C
T—
I. A18
[ch Basn
_ ID.']D--
-
_�
___. �_.__...__ IDi
l8
Label
A19
-
TYpa:Catch
Basin
label: CD-5
-
-
Labal:
C
c le-
_ _.__. _—_ --- �
-- -T ^—
roED
_
-- TYPIOt)SEUrc
.ndul
u
m
IDC34�t
label CD-11 Label
'- _ TYp : Condprc _ -y label eD v - -- TYp
Ty
CO
Cpnduit
20 - label: CO-21
Iypa:.Cpnduit__—
> 13.5.
c
.__._
,. ID: 48 TYOe C ndut �',,�`-"v-
_.__
)]I
_
ID: 79
—y
ID )1
13
12.5 -
--
�
12
—
• 11.5 -
—
'
11
10.5.
160 - 150 200
250 360 350
460 450 500
550 600
NWbal
34\CO5
N\W-ll -
]1\c01]
]]\m-2p
]f\c019
_
JA Length(ft)
I 12.0
I 107.0
169.0
t].0
I39.0
99.p
Wu (In)WrtanA
36.01
I 29.0\
34A\
110%
19.0\ _
19.0\
Ra«Ih•/sl
23.60
ME,
13.3I _
llA9
IOA]
1311
slepa(h]h)
O413
f 1.113
-0.003
0.009
-O.00I
-O.00I
NLLabal 33\P]
33\42
w(N
70 \P16)6
Pi] JB
V�AIB ]4\419
4NuvE (fl) l6pp
I]AI
.l9 146]
l
1442
1
1493
1413]3
IIpO
lmen (fi)
iPM 10.67
iQ99 11.ap I1.a9
1L9A 13.,3.13
slnlon lfi) 0.0 92.0 19 0 161.0 39V.0 303.0 602.0

Labeh CB 3fi
- ryoe carob Bann
label: CB -al
ryoaID: Ba]m
m •
Lek Bottom of Building -Base
label: CB 38
- rraa: came Ba]n
ID�126
_
ID:15
[D:I13O
1
-•
-----
'1sB
---
-'---'-'
—'- -
-—I--tabe CCB--3> --
Tyo ' Catdi Basin
-
----_
I
---------- ---`-
- --.— tabel:'nma --'
18.6
---_
_CM.128—�._..TY016
MIB9ole-leEeR
OF-S
18.4
Ebel- C9=as -
-
TYV_eLIOuHall
18.2 -
-
_
_ Tyo C ndvit
ID 159
__
Lobel: CO a6
_�_
I
._.-.
-
_'
--_
_-ID:I18]-
18
-
I
-
TyOe. Condo,
_ -
--
I tOaO ------
l
--
- ID: 16O I
Lab
TYG Conduit
17.8
-�
17.6
Y
1].2
C
—
a.
F '2'L }: +`_•Y S`l�,
ivoe Conduit
u 1]
.J
y
' Bg' sy4fA. �
+k
- ID: 100
�-
is.
Tn
4.
G
16.2_
i�.s�xq
ab I CO-51
Type conduit
—
---- _
�_.._�I
-
`]fi>_.
i9dys xy'F {RBry
...
ID.190_i
_—
__.__�__�—
.
.. 4
I
B
(
15.6
16
—
1
�.-�z
_. _ _ _-
I ..m.-,....x.,.....n-
-.v--.a.-.sa.—c•.v.�x:.n,--..a.�v�--:.-�{+�a�.-...,mr.�-..t+-sue{
-ae..w .5'
0
S.a 20
30 40
50
60 70 so- 90
160
110 In
13a 1<0
I 150
N\label
u9\cO-as
16B\fA-K
I
m\Tati0
tfie\(9-00
t9o\TAdl
Ilnk tvn9tA (h)
�—
3B'B
91.0
I
SBA
I IB.a
9.0
Wn (inpMrtmd
6.0\
6.0\
_
Si...(M1lh)
a.ola
a.oto
4.BIa
o.oID
a.olo
.iLA.l
]36�®-36
ISB�6B-.3
33B \Cb3J
130\C0 )B IB9 \iMX-a 1B]�OF3
... ... ....-.._...
-t -
-
Gteunllh)
1B.]]
1.11
111.73
1.." 1e.30
16.00
tnv.rt lh)
li.J]
I6.97
16.56
15.98 15.07
1f.98
]la[len lh)
0.0
38.0
1910
]3].0 1.3.0
]31.0

label: CB 30
Type: Catch Basin
ID. 115
Label: CB-31
Type: Catch Basin
ID' 117
Label <B-32
Front of Building Base Tyae; camn Basm
- Label CB 40
Troa' came Basin
ID: 134 el:OF3
ID: 119
- I
-
Type:
140:I140a
ID-
18.60
I
'
Type Band [
J-
-
LabcL CO-35
I
18.00.
17.00
-
_. _...__ _
-
ID. 120 -^-
~- label CO 43
17.60
ll.4p
ID 136
Tvpe eo Eut
17.00
16.80
-"
16.60-
.ry -a+T�$
�_ to i4
16.00
15.60
15.40
15.20
( r
1s.0o.-
0!0
10.0 20.0, 30.0 40.0 50.0
60.0
76.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
120.0 130.0 140.0 150.0 166.0
120.0- 10o.0
196.0
N\Label
lla \ COJ4
I'd kco.35
736 \ CO-43
141 \ CPH
link I.,,h (h)
H 0
47.0
6C.0
11.0
Ms. (in)V ...6.1
6.0 \
I.0 \
SON
Fon lhxp)
0.31
O.S.
1..
3.50
Slope (hJh)
0.010
0__010
d.010 --
0.063
t
m\Label
113\C1Y30
Ill\COdI
119\IC&3]
D4\CB-40 PO\OF3
Ground:,
t&]3
In-nh)
1].i3
1112
sli.15
I1.4] 14.40
5[ atlon (h) p0
.4a
311-0
V5.0 6.0
4

Inbtl: A2
FOOd IO CI$ICpO - Base
Label: 2IB
B
Type: Cat8asin
TYpeCafch Ba 'n -
D' JJ
-
_
ID. 82
- 17.5
1 Label: Al
1
ll
l TYoe.DuHall
t 6.5..
_
16
...
15.5
_.
_ _
_.....
label: -A)—
Type:Catch Basin
—tab"I"A16- L 6 1 A]]
., Type. Catch Bai n'
Label: Ate
�- —_
is
.�
ID: w
TypcCtd�Oasin
ID: )6
Type: Catch Basin
ID -0B
_—
I
14.5
a'r
,
-
0 19
-_ Trpe. lbnemt
-
,---
Label CO 11
_�Y'-
- label:
CO
"'c"
20 lab CO-21
Label CO 22
Type: Co dart
�".'
Y -i �b I CO ll -- _�:j(✓t TYp
C
d t TYve COOdat
Type:
Conduit
13.5
-..
ID. AB �+:e.
.F
T - .- TYOID )Idurt..n. v
ID:
-
—IO
83
I
1]
12.5
12
10.5
0 50
too -
150 200
25 0
360 350
46G 45O
506
Sio
_.
NWbel
39\C03
U\CO-lI
]I\CO-V
])\CO-20
)9\[O-3t
03\CO-2]
ILA 4ngeF (h)
93.p
101.0
I60A
V.0
1I9.0
Q.0
Wu tln)l.etlnel
36A\
29,0\
24.0
19.0\
19d\
UA\
Non the/a)
32.60
10.69
12.32 li.e9
I0.67
1.20 I}-
Sloe th)h)
-0.003
0.001
.a as
IT
321P1
33 4
w1U
)O W16 16
el]
ZD\AIB
92\RO
NLLebel
... ...........
---j1...________..__.—_—_._.__._..___._—._______...1._._._1.__..._—._...--------
.__.._._.___..._..__..}...._____.._—__—..__}__..
G,aund thl
IG00
1].19
1967
le P2 I(33
19. Sl
InNnth)
�
IO.w
1A6J
t
IQ90
11190 I1.�
vll.9e
13.02
Slaalen lfil
0.0
93.0
199.0
367.0 3040
303.0
Sit{9.0

Architecture & Engineering
Project Information
Wet Detention Basin Design
NCO Wet Detention Basin
Project: NCO Facility
Location: Jacksonville, NC
Project Number: 4851
Date: Jun-16-2014
Designed: VJC
Checked: VJC
Site Information
Sub Area Location:
NCO Wet Detention Basin
Drainage Area (DA) =
671,457
sf
Impervious Area (IA) =
244,609
sf (includes 12,500sf of future impervious)
Percent Impervious (1)=
36.4
%
Elevations
Top of Bank Elevation =
16.00
ft
Emergency Elevation =
14.25
ft
Temporary Pool Elevation =
13.10
Permanent Pool Elevation =
12.00
It
Bottom of Pond Elevation =
0.50
ft 60,134
Sediment Cleanout, Bottom Elevation =
1.50
ft
Basin AreaslVolumes
Area of Permanent Pool =
25,765 sf
Area of Bottom of Shelf =
22,402 sf
Area of Bottom of Pond =
6,719 sf
Area of Temporary Pool =
30,591 sf
Volume, main pool =
103,072 cf
Volume, forebay (sum of forebays) =
24,142 cf
Volume, permanent pool =
127,214 cf
Forebay % of permanent pool volume =
19.0 %
Average Depth
Depth of Pond = 10 ft
Average Depth = 6.97 ft
Use Average Depth of = 7.00 ft
A Po,m ,1 (includes main pond & forebays) (Elev = 12.00 )
A e„ ,nau (includes main pond & forebays)
A �, „,� (excluding sediment storage & forebays)
A,,,,, -,„a (includes main pond and forebays) (Elev = 13.10 )
V,,,;,, (from Hydraflow)
V ,.,,(from Hydraflow)
V "(Vm'emr+V--n —1)
OK
Depth joist. btwn. bot. of shelf & btm. of pond, excludes sediment)
Round down to nearest 0.5
Required Surface Area - Wetland
SAfDA = 1.28 (90%TSS Removal via Pond)
Min Req'd Surface Area = 8,595 sf (at Permanent Pool)
Required Storage Volume - Using Simple Method
Design Storm = 1.5 inch (Project Does Not Drain to SA Waters)
Determine Rv Value = 0.05+ 0.009 (1) = 0.38 info
Storage Volume Required = 31,715 cf (above Permanent Pool)
Side Slopes of Pond = 3 :1
Is Permanent Pool Surface Area Sufficient (yes/no)? Yes ( 25765 > 8595 ) sf

Architecture & Engineering
Wet Detention Basin Design
NCO Wet Detention Basin
1.5 inch Volume Elevation
Required Temporary Pool Volume = 31,715 cu ft
Temporary Pool Lower Elevation Bound = 13.00
Temporary Pool Upper Elevation Bound = 14.00
Temporary Pool Lower Volume Bound = 28,664 cu ft
Temporary Pool Upper Volume Bound = 60,134 cu ft
Temporary Pool Elevation= 13.10
Orifice Sizing - Wet Detention
O2 o.,=
0.1835
cis
Oz o.,=
0.0734
cfs
Orifice Size =
3.00
in
Driving Head (H.) =
0.32
ft
O u,,,.=
0.135
cfs
Drawdown Time =
2.7
days
less than 5 days (yes/no) ? Yes
greater than 2 days (yes/no) ? Yes
Anti -Flotation Device
Outside Length =
4.00
it
Outside Width=
4.00
ft
Inside Length =
3.00
ft
Inside Width =
3.00
ft
Bottom Thickness =
0.50
ft
Top of Riser =
13.75
sf
Invert of Riser =
12.00
ft
Area =
16.0
sf
Volume =
36
cf
Weight=
2,246
Ibs
Factor of Safety =
1.20
WT Req'd of Anti -Flotation Device =
2,696
Ibs
Volume of Concrete Req'd =
30.8
cf
Additioal Concrete Req'd =
0.75
ft
Volume Provided =
32.3
cf
WT of Anti -Flotation Device Provided = 2,825 Ibs
Contour
Contour
Area
Incremental Accumulated
Volume Volume, S
Stage, Z
sq ft
cu It
cu ft
ft
12.00
25,766
0
0
0.0
12.50
29,286
13,752
13,752
0.5
13.00
30,372
14,912
28.664
1.0
14.00
32,588
31,470
60,134
2.0
15.00
34,860
33,714
93,848
3.0
16.00
37,189
36,015
129,863
4.0
(Flowrate required for a 2 day drawdown)
(Flowrate required for a 5 day drawdown)
(Diameter)
(Outside Dim. = 4-ft x 4-ft, Inside Dim. = 3-ft x 3-ft)
(Water Displaced - Top of Riser to Invert of Riser)
(Weight Water Displaced)
(Unit WT of Concrete = 150 pcf) Submerged Concrete Unit Weight 87.6 pcf
(441 x 4-ft with solid bottom)
OK

Architecture & Engineering
Wet Detention Basin Design
Supply Wet Detention Basin
Project Information
Project: NCO Facility
Location: Camp
Johnson, NC
Project Number: 4686
Date: Jun-03-2014
Designed: VJC
Checked: VJC
Site Information
Sub Area Location:
Supply
Wet Detention Basin
Drainage Area (DA) =
34,271
sf
Impervious Area (IA)=
21,380
at
Percent Impervious (1) =
6204
%
Elevations
Top of Bank Elevation =
16.50
ft
Emergency Elevation =
15.00
if
Temporary Pool Elevation =
14.60
Permanent Pool Elevation =
14.00
ft
Bottom of Pond Elevation =
7.35
ft
Sediment Cleanout, Bottom Elevation =
12.50
ft
Basin Areas[Volumes
Area of Permanent Pool =
3,674
at
A i (includes main pond & forebays) (Elev = 14.00 )
Area of Bottom of Shelf =
2,570
sf
A, (includes main pond & forebays)
Area of Bottom of Pond =
20
sf
A �, � (excluding sediment storage & forebays)
Area of Temporary Pool =
5,024
at
A,.,,,(includes main pond and forebays) (Elev = 14.60 )
Volume, main pool =
4,956
cf
V man _,(from Hydraflow)
Volume, forebay (sum of forebays) =
1,093
cf
V t.,.., (from Hydra0ow)
Volume, permanent pool =
6,049
cf
V,,,, ' (V,—b., V... ,opI)
Forebay % of permanent pool volume =
18.1
%
OK
Average Depth
Depth of Pond =
5.15
If
Depth (dist. btwn. bot. of shelf & btm. of pond, excludes sediment)
Average Depth =
3.02
ft
Use Average Depth of =
3.00
ft
Round down to nearest 0.5
Required Surface Area - Wetland
SA/DA =
7.20
(90%TSS
Removal via Pond)
Min Req'd Surface Area =
2,468
sf (at
Permanent Pool)
Required Storage Volume - Using Simple Method
Design Stom, = 1.5 inch (Project Does Not Drain to SA Waters)
Determine Rv Value= 0.05 + 0.009 (1) = 0.61 in/In
Storage Volume Required = 2,619 cf (above Permanent Pool)
Side Slopes of Pond = 3 : 1
Is Permenant Pool Surface Area Sufficient (yes/no)? Yes ( 3674 > 2468 ) sf

ray.;. ►o. •►
Architecture & Engineering
Wet Detention Basin Design
Supply Wet Detention Basin
1.5 Inch Volume Elevation
Required Temporary Pool Volume = 2,619 cu ft
Temporary Pool Lower Elevation Bound = 14.50
Temporary Pool Upper Elevation Bound = 15.00
Temporary Pool Lower Volume Bound = 2,143 cu ft
Temporary Pool Upper Volume Bound = 4,710 cu ft
Temporary Pool Elevation = 14.59
Orifice Sizing - Wet Detention
O2 Dal=
0.0152
cfs
Os Dan=
0,0061
cfs
Orifice Size =
1.00
in
Driving Head (Ha) =
0.18
R
O"_=
0.011
cfs
Drawdown Time =
2.7
days
less than 5 days (yes/no) ? Yes
greater than 2 days (yes/no) ? Yes
Anti -Flotation Device
Outside Length =
4.00
ft
Outside Width =
4.00
ft
Inside Length =
3.00
ft
Inside Width=
3.00
ft
Bottom Thickness =
0.50
ft
Top of Riser =
14.60
sf
Invert of Riser =
13.16
cf
Area =
16.0
sf
Volume=
31
cf
Weight=
1,937
Ibs
Factor of Safety =
1.20
WT Req'd of Anti -Flotation Device =
2,324
Ibs
Volume of Concrete Req'd =
26.5
cf
Additioal Concrete Req'd =
0.75
ft
Volume Provided =
30.1
cf
Contour
Contour
Area
Incremental Accumulated
Volume Volume, S
Stage, Z
sq ft
cu It
cu ft
ft
14.00
3,674
0
0
0.0
14.50
4,929
2,143
2,143
0.5
15.00
5,344
2,567
4,710
1.0
15.50
5,766
2,777
7,487
1.5
16.00
6,196
2,990
10,477
2.0
16.50
6,646
3,210
13,687
2.5
(Flowrate required for a 2 day drawdown)
(Flowrate required for a 5 day drawdown)
(Diameter)
(Top of Riser [Elev. 14.60] - Bottom of Riser [Elev. 13.161)
(Outside Dim. = 4-ft x 4-ft, Inside Dim. = 3-ft x 3-ft)
(Water Displaced - Top of Riser to Invert of Riser)
(Weight Water Displaced)
(Unit WT of Concrete = 150 pcf) Submerged Concrete Unit Weight 87.6 pcf
WT of Anti -Flotation Device Provided = 2.635 Ibs OK

Hydrograph Return Period Rep Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD®Civil 3D®2014 by Autodesk, Inc. v10.3
Hyd.
Hydrograph
Inflow
Peak Outflow (cfs)
Hydrograph
No.
type
hyd(s)
Description
(origin)
1-yr
2-yr
3-yr
5-yr
10-yr
25-yr
50-yr
100-yr
1
Rational
------
20.79
-------
-------
-------
33.46
------
------
45.84
NCO Pre
2
Rational
------
47.21
-------
------
-------
73.04
----
-----
97.70
NCO Post
3
Reservoir
2
0.169
----
----
0.217
--
--
0.394
NCO Pond
5
Rational
-----
1.168
-------
----
-----
1.792
-----
------
2.396
Supply Pre
6
Rational
---
3.362
---
----
5.161
----
6.899
Supply Post
7
Reservoir
6
0.012
-----
-------
-----
0.015
------
-----
0.017
Supply Pond
Proj. file: NCO Hydraflow—Site Final.gpw
Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014

Hydrograph Summary Report Hydraflow Hydrogmphs Extension for AutoCAD®Civil 3D®2014 by Autodesk, Inc. v10.3
Hyd.
No.
Hydrograph
type
(origin)
Peak
flow
(cfs)
Time
interval
(min)
Time to
Peak
(min)
Hyd.
volume
(cult)
Inflow
hyd(s)
Maximum
elevation
(ft)
Total
strge used
(cuft)
Hydrograph
Description
1
Rational
20.79
1
20
24,952
---
--
NCO Pre
2
Rational
47.21
1
7
19,830
---
---
NCO Post
3
Reservoir
0.169
1
14
16,389
2
12.70
19,753
NCO Pond
5
Rational
1.168
1
5
350
----
---
----
Supply Pre
6
Rational
3,362
1
5
1,009
---
----
Supply Post
7
Reservoir
0,012
1
10
901
6
14.23
1,005
Supply Pond
NCO Hydraflow_Site Final.gpw
Return Period: 1 Year
Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014

3
Hydrograph
Report
Hydraflm Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. v10.3
Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014
Hyd. No. 1
NCO Pre
Hydrograph type
= Rational
Peak discharge
= 20.79 cfs
Storm frequency
= 1 yrs
Time to peak
= 20 min
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 24,952 cuft
Drainage area
= 14.810 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.41 *
Intensity
= 3.424 in/hr
Tc by User
= 20.00 min
IDF Curve
= Jacksonville. IDF
Asc/Rec limb fact
= 1/1
' Composite (Area/C) _ [(3.440 x 0.95) + (11.370 x 0.25)] / 14.810
NCO Pre
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 1 -- 1 Year Q (cfs)
21.00 21.00
18.00 18.00
15.00 - 15.00
12.00 12.00
9.00 9.00
6.00 - 6.00
3.00 3.00
000 - 000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
Time(min)
Hyd No. 1

4
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADB Civil 3D® 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.3
Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014
Hyd. No. 2
NCO Post
Hydrograph type
= Rational
Peak discharge
= 47.21 cfs
Storm frequency
= 1 yrs
Time to peak
= 7 min
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 19,830 cult
Drainage area
= 15.410 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.57'
Intensity
= 5.375 in/hr
Tc by User
= 7.00 min
IDF Curve
= Jacksonville.IDF
Asc/Rec limb fact
= 1/1
Composite (Area/C) _ [(5.610 x 0.95) + (9.800 x 0.35)] / 15.410
Q (cfs)
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
000
NCO Post ,
Hyd. No. 2 -- 1 Year
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Time (min)
— Hyd No. 2

5
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 31DO 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.3
Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014
Hyd. No. 3
NCO Pond
Hydrograph type
= Reservoir
Peak discharge
= 0.169 cfs
Storm frequency
= 1 yrs
Time to peak
= 14 min
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 16,389 cuft
Inflow hyd. No.
= 2 -NCO Post
Max. Elevation
= 12.70 ft
Reservoir name
= NCO Temporary Pond
Max. Storage
= 19,753 cuft
Storage Indication method used.
Q (cfs)
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
000
NCO Pond
Hyd. No. 3 -- 1 Year
0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 2400 2700 3000 V vv
Time(min)
— Hyd No. 3 —Hyd No. 2 II I I I I I� Total storage used = 19,753 cuff

Pond Report ' 6
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADS Civil 3D® 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. v10.3 Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014
Pond No. 1 - NCO Temporary Pond
Pond Data
Contours -User-defined contour areas. Conic method used for volume calculation. Begining Elevation = 12.00 ft
Stage / Storage Table
Stage (ft)
Elevation (ft)
0.00
12.00
0.50
12.50
1.00
13.00
2.00
14.00
3.00
15.00
4.00
16.00
Contour area (sgft)
25,766
29,286
30,372
32,588
34,860
37,189
Incr. Storage (cult)
0
13,752
14,912
31,470
33,714
36,015
Total storage (cult)
0
13,752
28,664
60,135
93,849
129,864
Culvert / Orifice Structures
Weir Structures
[A]
[B] [C]
[PrfRsr]
[A]
[B]
[C]
[D]
Rise (in)
= 15.00
3.00 4.00
Inactive
Crest Len (ft)
= 9.00
35.00
3.00
Inactive
Span (in)
= 15.00
3.00 4.00
0.00
Crest El. (ft)
= 14.00
14.00
13.70
0.00
No. Barrels
= 1
1 1
0
Weir Coeff.
= 3.33
2.60
3.33
3.33
Invert El. (ft)
= 12.00
12.00 13.10
0.00
Weir Type
= 1
Broad
Rect
---
Length (ft)
= 57.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
Multi -Stage
= Yes
No
Yes
No
Slope (h)
= 0.35
0.00 0.00
n/a
N-Value
= .013
.013 .013
n/a
Orifice Coeff. = 0.60
0.60 0.60
0.60
Exfil.(in/hr)
= 0.000 (by Contour)
Multi -Stage
= n/a
Yes Yes
No
TW Elev. (ft)
= 0.00
Note: CulwiWonfice outflows are analyzed under inlet ic) and outlet (oc) control. Weir nsers checked for orifice conditions(ic) and submergence (s).
Stage / Storage / Discharge Table
Stage
Storage Elevation
Clv A
Clv B
Clv C
f ri Wr A
Wr B
Wr C
Wr D
Exfil User
Total
It
cuft ft
cfs
cis
cfs
cfs cfs
cis
cfs
cis
cis cfs
cfs
0.00
0 12.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-- 0.00
0.00
0.00
--
--- --
0.000
0.50
13,752 12.50
0.15 oc
0.14 is
0.00
-- 0.00
0.00
0.00
---
-- --
0.136
1.00
28,664 13.00
0.22 oc
0.21 is
0.00
--- 0.00
0.00
0.00
---
- ---
0.210
2.00
60,135 14.00
2.26 cc
0.24 is
0.36 is
-- 0.00
0.00
1.64
--
--- ---
2.244
3.00
93,849 15.00
8.18 oc
0.02 is
0.04 is
-- 5.61 s
91.00
2.51 s
--
- --
99.17
4.00
129,864 16.00
10.08 oc
0.01 is
0.02 is
-- 7.18 s
257.39
2.80 s
---
--- --
267.40

7
Hydrograph
Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.3
Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014
Hyd. No. 5
Supply Pre
Hydrograph type
= Rational
Peak discharge
= 1.168 cfs
Storm frequency
= 1 yrs
Time to peak
= 5 min
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 350 cuft
Drainage area
= 0.790 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.25`
Intensity
= 5.912 in/hr
Tc by User
= 5.00 min
OF Curve
= Jacksonville.IDF
Asc/Rec limb fact
= 1/1
Composite (Area/C) = [(0.790 x 0.25)] / 0.790
Q (Cfs)
2.00
1.00
Ad�
Supply Pre
Hyd. No. 5 -- 1 Year
Q (cfs)
2.00
1.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Hyd No. 5 Time (min)

8 ,
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflm Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.3
Tuesday, 06 / 3 12014
Hyd. No. 6
Supply Post
Hydrograph type
= Rational
Peak discharge
= 3.362 cfs
Storm frequency
= 1 yrs
Time to peak
= 5 min
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 1,009 cult
Drainage area
= 0.790 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.72"
Intensity
= 5.912 in/hr
Tc by User
= 5.00 min
OF Curve
= Jacksonville. IDF
Asc/Rec limb fact
= 1/1
' Composite (Area/C) = [(0.490 x 0.95) + (0.300 x 0.35)) / 0.790
Q (cfs)
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
M
Supply Post
Hyd. No. 6 -- 1 Year
i
Q (cfs)
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
IO1[rUl
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time(min)
Hyd No. 6

9
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D®2014 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.3
Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014
Hyd. No. 7
Supply Pond
Hydrograph type
= Reservoir
Peak discharge
= 0.012 cfs
Storm frequency
= 1 yrs
Time to peak
= 10 min
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 901 cuft
Inflow hyd. No.
= 6 -Supply Post
Max. Elevation
= 14.23 ft
Reservoir name
= Supply Temporary Pond
Max. Storage
= 1,005 cuft
Storage Indication method used.
Q (cfs)
4.00
3.00
2.00
r
Supply Pond
Hyd. No. 7 -- 1 Year
Q (cfs;
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 2400 2700 3000
Time (min)
— Hyd No. 7 —Hyd No. 6 ILILLLLII Total storage used = 1,005 cuff

Pond Report
-10 -
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. v10.3
Pond No. 3 - Supply Temporary Pond
Pond Data
Contours -User-defined contour areas. Conic method used for volume calculation. Begining Elevation = 14.00 ft
Stage / Storage Table
Stage (ft)
Elevation (ft)
0.00
14.00
0.50
14.50
1.00
15.00
1.50
15.50
2.00
16.00
2.50
16.50
Contour area (scift)
3,674
4,929
5,344
5,766
6,196
6,646
Incr. Storage (cuft)
0
2,143
2,567
2,777
2,990
3,210
Total storage (cuft)
0
2,143
4,710
7,487
10,476
13,686
Tuesday, 06/3/2014
Culvert / Orifice Structures
Weir Structures
[A]
[B]
[C]
[PrfRsr]
[A]
[B]
[C]
[D]
Rise (in)
= 12.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
Crest Len (ft)
= 9.00
10.00
3.00
0.00
Span (in)
= 12.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
Crest El. (ft)
= 14.85
15.00
14.60
0.00
No. Barrels
= 1
1
0
0
Weir Coeff.
= 3.33
3.33
3.33
3.33
Invert El. (ft)
= 13.16
14.00
0.00
0.00
Weir Type
= 1
Broad
Rect
---
Length (ft)
= 33.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Multi -Stage
= Yes
No
Yes
No
Slope (%a)
= 0.49
0.00
0.00
n/a
N-Value
= .013
.013
.013
n/a
Orifice Coeff.
= 0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
Exfil.(in/hr)
= 0.000 (by Wet area)
Multi -Stage
= n/a
Yes
No
No
TIN Elev.(ft)
= 0.00
Note:CuherfOrifice ouHlows are analyzed under inlet(ic) and butter(oc) control. Weir risers checked for onfice conditions(ic) and submergence(s).
Stage /
Storage / Discharge Table
Stage
Storage
Elevation
CIv A
Clv B Clv C
PrfRsr Wr A
Wr B
Wr C
Wr D Exfil User Total
ft
cuft
ft
cfs
cfs cfs
cfs cfs
cfs
cfs
cis cfs cfs cfs
0.00
0
14.00
0.00
0.00 --
--- 0.00
0.00
0.00
-- -- - 0.000
0.50
2,143
14.50
1.51 oc
0.02 is --
-- 0.00
0.00
0.00
- - - 0.018
1.00
4,710
15.00
3.67 oc
0.01 is --
- 1.74 s
0.00
1.92 s
-- --- --- 3.671
1.50
7,487
15.50
4.85 oc
0.00 is --
- 3.27 s
11.77
1.57 s
-- --- --- 16.62
2.00
10,476
16.00
5.61 oc
0.00 is --
-- 3.94 s
33.30
1.64 s
--- --- --- 38.88
2.50
13,686
16.50
6.27 oc
0.00 is --
--- 4.45 s
61.18
1.73 s
-- -- - 67.36

11
Hyd rog ra p h Summary Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCADO Civil 3D® 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.3
Hyd.
No.
Hydrograph
type
(origin)
Peak
flow
(cfs)
Time
interval
(min)
Time to
Peak
(min)
Hyd.
volume
(cuft)
Inflow
hyd(s)
Maximum
elevation
(ft)
Total
strge used
(cuff)
Hydrograph
Description
1
Rational
33.46
1
20
40,147
-----
-----
----
NCO Pre
2
Rational
73.04
1
7
30,677
--
----
NCO Post
3
Reservoir
0.217
1
14
24,784
2
13.06
30,574
NCO Pond
5
Rational
1.792
1
5
538
------
------
------
Supply Pre
6
Rational
5.161
1
5
1,548
------
-----
------
Supply Post
7
Reservoir
0.015
1
10
1,371
6
14.36
1,543
Supply Pond
NCO Hydraflow_Site Final.gpw
Return Period: 10 Year
Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014

112
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflovv Hydrogmphs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. v10.3
Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014
Hyd. No. 1
NCO Pre
Hydrograph type
= Rational
Peak discharge
= 33.46 cfs
Storm frequency
= 10 yrs
Time to peak
= 20 min
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 40,147 cuft
Drainage area
= 14.810 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.41`
Intensity
= 5.510 in/hr
Tc by User
= 20.00 min
IDF Curve
= Jacksonville. IDF
Asc/Rec limb fact
= 1/1
' Composite (Area/C) _ [(3.440 x 0.95) + (11.370 x 0.25)] / 14.810
NCO Pre
Q (efS) Hyd. No. 1 -- 10 Year Q (cfs)
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0 00
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
Time(min)
— Hyd No. 1

13
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 313®2014 by Autodesk, Inc. v10.3
Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014
Hyd. No. 2
NCO Post
Hydrograph type
= Rational
Peak discharge
= 73.04 cfs
Storm frequency
= 10 yrs
Time to peak
= 7 min
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 30,677 cuft
Drainage area
= 15.410 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.57*
Intensity
= 8.316 in/hr
Tc by User
= 7.00 min
IDF Curve
= Jacksonville. IDF
Asc/Rec limb fact
= 1/1
' Composite (Area/C) _ [(5.610 x 0.95) + (9,800 x 0.35)] / 15.410
NCO Post
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 2 -- 10 Year Q (cfs)
80.00 80.00
70.00 70.00
60.00 60.00
50.00 50.00
40.00 40.00
30.00 30.00
20.00 - - 20.00
10.00 - - 10.00
0 00 000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Hyd No. 2 Time(min)

114
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.3
Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014
Hyd. No. 3
NCO Pond
Hydrograph type
= Reservoir
Peak discharge
= 0.217 cfs
Storm frequency
= 10 yrs
Time to peak
= 14 min
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 24,784 cuft
Inflow hyd. No.
= 2 -NCO Post
Max. Elevation
= 13.06 ft
Reservoir name
= NCO Temporary Pond
Max. Storage
= 30,574 cuft
Storage Indication method used.
NCO Pond
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 3 -- 10 Year Q (cfs:
80.00 80.00
70.00 70.00
60.00 60.00
50.00 50.00
40.00 40.00
30.00 - 30.00
20.00 20.00
10.00 10.00
0 300 600
900 1200
1500 1800 2100 2400 2700
3000
Time(min)
— Hyd No. 3
— Hyd No. 2
[I I I I I I II Total storage used = 30,574 cuff

' 15
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.3
Tuesday, 0613 / 2014
Hyd. No. 5
Supply Pre
Hydrograph type
= Rational
Peak discharge
= 1.792 cfs
Storm frequency
= 10 yrs
Time to peak
= 5 min
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 538 cult
Drainage area
= 0.790 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.25"
Intensity
= 9.074 in/hr
Tc by User
= 5.00 min
OF Curve
= Jacksonville. IDF
Asc/Rec limb fact
= 1/1
' Composite (Area/C) = ((0.790 x 0.25)] / 0.790
Q (cfs)
2.00
1.00
Supply Pre
Hyd. No. 5 -- 10 Year
Q (Cfs)
2.00
MKIIU]
0.00 hr 'I I 1 1 1 1 1 1"- 0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Hyd No. 5 Time(min)

Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.3
Hyd. No. 6
Supply Post
Hydrograph type
= Rational
Storm frequency
= 10 yrs
Time interval
= 1 min
Drainage area
= 0.790 ac
Intensity
= 9.074 in/hr
OF Curve
= Jacksonville. OF
Composite (Area/C) = [(0.490 x 0.95) + (0.300 x 0.35)] / 0.790
Q (cfs)
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
rbTTo
'16
Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014
Peak discharge
= 5.161 cfs
Time to peak
= 5 min
Hyd. volume
= 1,548 cuft
Runoff coeff.
= 0.72"
Tc by User
= 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact
= 1/1
Supply Post
Hyd. No. 6 -- 10 Year
Q (cfs)
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
E f1T17
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time(min)
Hyd No. 6

'
Hydrograph
Report
17
Hydraflovv Hydrographs Extension For AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.3
Tuesday, 06 13 / 2014
Hyd. No. 7
Supply Pond
Hydrograph type
= Reservoir
Peak discharge
= 0.015 cfs
Storm frequency
= 10 yrs
Time to peak
= 10 min
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 1,371 cuft
Inflow hyd. No.
= 6 -Supply Post
Max. Elevation
= 14.36 ft
Reservoir name
= Supply Temporary Pond
Max. Storage
= 1,543 cuft
Storage Indication method used
Supply Pond
Q (Cfs) Hyd. No. 7 -- 10 Year Q (cfs;
6.00 6.00
5.00 5.00
4.00 4.00
3.00 - 3.00
2.00 2.00
1.00 1.00
000 000
0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 2400 2700 3000
Time (min)
— Hyd No. 7 —Hyd No. 6 U1111CII Total storage used = 1,543 cuft

18
Hydrograph Summary Re port Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. v10.3
Hyd.
No.
Hydrograph
type
(origin)
Peak
flow
(cfs)
Time
interval
(min)
Timeto
Peak
(min)
Hyd.
volume
(cult)
Inflow
hyd(s)
Maximum
elevation
(fl)
Total
strge used
(cult)
Hydrograph
Description
1
Rational
45.84
1
20
55,010
---
--
NCO Pre
2
Rational
97.70
1
7
41,034
---
-----
---
NCO Post
3
Reservoir
0.394
1
14
31,933
2
13.39
40,887
NCO Pond
5
Rational
2.396
1
5
719
----
--
---
Supply Pre
6
Rational
6.899
1
5
2,070
------
------
-----
Supply Post
7
Reservoir
0.017
1
10
1,805
6
14.48
2,064
Supply Pond
NCO Hydraflow—Site Final.gpw
Return Period: 100 Year
Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014

Hydrograph Report
19
Hydraflm Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. v10.3
Hyd. No. 1
NCO Pre
Hydrograph type
= Rational
Storm frequency
= 100 yrs
Time interval
= 1 min
Drainage area
= 14.810 ac
Intensity
= 7.550 in/hr
IDF Curve
= Jacksonville.IDF
Composite (Area/C) _ [(3.440 x 0.95) + (11.370 x 0.25)] 114.810
Q (cfs)
50.00
rI 16
10.00
r
Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014
Peak discharge
= 45.84 cfs
Time to peak
= 20 min
Hyd. volume
= 55,010 cult
Runoff coeff.
= 0.41'
Tc by User
= 20.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact
= 1/1
NCO Pre
Hyd. No. 1 -- 100 Year
Q (cfs)
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
fflxl1ll>_
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
Time(min)
Hyd No. 1

F
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 31DS 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. v10.3
Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014
Hyd. No. 2
NCO Post
Hydrograph type
= Rational
Peak discharge
= 97.70 cfs
Storm frequency
= 100 yrs
Time to peak
= 7 min
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 41,034 cuft
Drainage area
= 15.410 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.57i
Intensity
= 11.123 in/hr
Tc by User
= 7.00 min
IDF Curve
= Jacksonville. IDF
Asc/Rec limb fact
= 1/1
Composite (Area/C) = [(5.610 x 0.95) + (9,600 x 0.35)] / 15.410
NCO Post
Q (cfs) Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 2 -- 100 Year
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
000
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Hyd No. 2 Time(min)

Hydrograph
Report
21
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.3
Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014
Hyd. No. 3
NCO Pond
Hydrograph type
= Reservoir
Peak discharge
= 0.394 cfs
Storm frequency
= 100 yrs
Time to peak
= 14 min
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 31,933 cuft
Inflow hyd. No.
= 2 - NCO Post
Max. Elevation
= 13.39 ft
Reservoir name
= NCO Temporary Pond
Max. Storage
= 40,887 cuft
Storage Indication method used.
NCO Pond
Q (`fS) Hyd. No. 3 -- 100 Year Q (cfs;
100.00 100.0(
90.00 - - 90.00
80.00 80.00
70.00 70.00
60.00 60.00
50.00 50.00
40.00 - - - - 40.00
30.00 - 30.00
20.00 20.00
10.00 — — -- — -- — — -- 10.00
0 00 — 0.00
0 300 600
900 1200
1500 1800 2100 2400 2700
3000
Time(min)
— Hyd No. 3
— Hyd No. 2
l l_Ll_LLII Total storage used = 40,887 cuft

,22
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.3
Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014
Hyd. No. 5
Supply Pre
Hydrograph type
= Rational
Peak discharge
= 2.396 cfs
Storm frequency
= 100 yrs
Time to peak
= 5 min
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 719 cuft
Drainage area
= 0.790 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.25*
Intensity
= 12.130 in/hr
Tc by User
= 5.00 min
OF Curve
= Jacksonville. OF
Asc/Rec limb fact
= 1/1
Composite (Area/C) = ((0.790 x 0.25)] / 0.790
Q (Cfs)
3.00
2.00
1.00
M
Supply Pre
Hyd. No. 5 -- 100 Year
Q (Cfs)
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time(min)
— Hyd No. 5

23
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.3
Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014
Hyd. No. 6
Supply Post
Hydrograph type
= Rational
Peak discharge
= 6.899 cfs
Storm frequency
= 100 yrs
Time to peak
= 5 min
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 2,070 cult
Drainage area
= 0.790 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.72'
Intensity
= 12.130 in/hr
Tc by User
= 5.00 min
OF Curve
= Jacksonville. IDF
Asc/Rec limb fact
= 1/1
Composite (Area/C) = [(0.490 x 0.95) + (0.300 x 0.35)] 10.790
Q (cfs)
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
000
0 1 2
Hyd No. 6
Supply Post
Hyd. No. 6 -- 100 Year
Q (cfs)
I nA
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time (min)

24
Hydrograph Report
Hydrailm Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D®2014 by Autodesk, Inc. v10.3 Tuesday, 06 / 3 / 2014
Hyd. No. 7
Supply Pond
Hydrograph type
= Reservoir
Peak discharge
= 0.017 cfs
Storm frequency
= 100 yrs
Time to peak
= 10 min
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 1,805 cuft
Inflow hyd. No.
= 6 -Supply Post
Max. Elevation
= 14.48 ft
Reservoir name
= Supply Temporary Pond
Max. Storage
= 2,064 cuft
Storage Indication method used.
Supply Pond
Q (cfS) Hyd. No. 7 -- 100 Year Q (cfs,
7.00 7.00
6.00 6.00
5.00 5.00
3.00 3.00
1.00 - 1.00
0 00 000
0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 2400 2700 3000
Hyd No. 7 — Hyd No. 6 nl[]j3 Total storage used = 2,064 cult Time(min)

Hydraflow Rainfall Report
25
Hydmflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3DO 2014 by Autodesk, Inc. 00.3
Return
Period
Intensity -Duration -Frequency Equation Coefficients (FHA)
(Yrs)
B
D
E
(N/A)
1
77.3751
12.8000
0.8932
--
2
84.8683
12.6000
0.8712
-------
3
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
-------
5
88.0064
12.6000
0.8320
----
10
89.8227
12.4000
0.8025
------
25
80.5482
11.1000
0.7416
-------
50
74.4992
10.1000
0.6977
------
100
69.4670
9.2000
0.6578
---
File name: Jacksonville.IDF
Intensity = B / (Tc + D)"E
Tuesday, 06 / 3 12014
Return
Period
Intensity Values (in/hr)
(Yrs)
5 min
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
1
5.91
4.74
3.97
3.42
3.02
2.70
2.45
2.24
2.06
1.92
1.79
1.68
2
6.98
5.61
4.71
4.08
3.60
3.23
2.93
2.69
2.48
2.31
2.16
2.03
3
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5
8.10
6.57
5.57
4.85
4.30
3.88
3.54
3.26
3.02
2.82
2.64
2.49
10
9.07
7.41
6.30
5.51
4.91
4.44
4.06
3.75
3.48
3.26
3.06
2.89
25
10.26
8.39
7.17
6.30
5.64
5.12
4.70
4.36
4.07
3.82
3.60
3.41
50
11.21
9.18
7.86
6.93
6.22
5.67
5.22
4.85
4.54
4.28
4.04
3.84
100
12.13
9.95
8.54
7.55
6.80
6.22
5.75
5.36
5.03
4.74
4.50
4.28
Tc = time in minutes. Values may exceed 60.
Preci . file name: H:\JOBS\Civil\IDF Curves\Durham.
Storm
Rainfall Precipitation Table (in)
Distribution
1-yr
2-yr
3-yr
5-yr
10-yr
25-yr
50-yr
100-yr
SCS 24-hour
2.93
3.54
1.00
3.73
5.09
6.00
6.72
7.44
SCS 6-Hr
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Huff -1st
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Huff-2nd
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Huff-3rd
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Huff-4th
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Huff-Indy
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Custom
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

Wyatt L. Bone
From: Craig Turner <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2014 3:59 PM
To: Wyatt L. Bone
Subject: RE: NCO Academic Facility Camp Johnson
Wyatt,
The answer to this question depends upon whether you take a short-term approach or a long-term approach. The short-
term explanation is that the existing ditch does have a limited draw -down curve that results in the 40-inch SHWT at
BMP1. If you construct the BMP, as shown, the resulting drawdown curve would lower the SHWT at BMP to the outlet
elevation, 12' msl. The current soil water held between the 40-inch depth and 12 ft. msl would dewater during
construction. The long-term answer is the SHWT has been lowered to the 12' elevation at BMP! therefore, no additional
storage needs to be added to the BMP design volume.
Please let me know if you need additional documentation for your case.
Thank you,
Craig Turner
G. Craig Turner I Soil Scientist
Direct: 452-0001 x 1914 1 Cell: 910.620.1137 1 Fax: [phone]
Email: cturnerro lmgroup.net
Land Management Group, Inc I Environmental Consultants
3805 Wrightsville Ave., Suite 15 1 Wilmington, NC 284031 www.lmgroup.net
From: Wyatt L. Bone rmailto:wbone(a)ClarkNexsen.coml
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 8:04 AM
To: Craig Turner
Cc: ahohmeierCglaetsolutionsinc.com; Schneider, Craig
Subject: NCO Academic Facility Camp Johnson
Craig,
We recently met with NCDENR to go over our stormwater plans for the NCO project. The large pond for the main site
has the permanent pool set at elevation 12. Your report indicates the seasonal high water table for BMP 1 is 40" below
grade. That puts the SHWT at approximately elev. 14.66. We had to set the level of that pond below the SHWT due to
pipe cover issues in the main site. There is an existing ditch north of the pond area with elevations around 12-13. Our
pond will be excavated to 17.5' below grade. Based on the soil profile there is layer of clay 4' below grade extending to
7' below grade. As our pond excavation will extend through that clay layer. We projected the water table would lower

down to that ditch elevation: 12. Would you have the same opinion? If you disagree we will size the pond draw down to
drain the ground water inflow. If you agree, could you provide a memo explaining the reasoning for believing the SWHT
will fall to elevation 12 as a result of the pond excavation. Thank you and feel free to give us a call and discuss further.
Wyatt Bone PE, LEED AP BD+C
Civil Engineer
CLARK NEXSEN
4000 Westchase Boulevard Suite 280
Raleigh, NC 27607
919.828.1876 Office
919.828.1877 Fax
wbone (ac la rknexsen.com
www.clarknexsen.com
# CON FIDENTIALITY NOTE: This e-mall and any files transmitted with it contain privileged and confidential information and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity
to which they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the a -mail to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination or copying of this e-mail or any of its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sending individual or
entity by e-mail and permanently delete the original e-mail and attachments from your computer system.k
Clark Nexsen Email Security: Click here to report this email as spam.

Solutions, Inc.
Geotechnical • Environmental - Testing
REPORT OF SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION AND
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
MCB Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
G E T PROJECT NO: JX13-11OG
February 5, 2014
Prepared for
Whiting -Turner Contracting Co.
300 East Joppa Road
Baltimore, Maryland 21286
ATTN: Mr. Craig Schneider
Prepared by
GET Solutions, Inc.
415 A Western Boulevard, Jacksonville, NC 28546 ♦ Phone [phone] ♦ Fax [phone]
[e-mail]

Soludons, Inc.
February 5, 2014
C whnimf • EffWo eninf • Te Hng
TO: Whiting -Turner Contracting Co.
300 East Joppa Road
Baltimore, Maryland 21286
Attn: Craig Schneider
RE: Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-110G
Dear Mr. Schneider:
In compliance with your instructions, we have completed our Subsurface Investigation and
Geotechnical Engineering Services for the above referenced project. The results of this
study, together with our recommendations, are presented in this report.
Often, because of design and construction details that occur on a project, questions arise
concerning subsurface conditions. G E T Solutions, Inc. would be pleased to continue its
role as Geotechnical Engineer during the project implementation.
Thank you for the opportunity to work with you on this project. We trust that the information
contained herein meets your immediate need, and should you have any questions or if we
could be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Respectfully Submitted,
G E T Solutions, Inc.
Glenn W. Hohmeier, P.E.
Senior Project Engineer
NC Reg. # 033529
Camille A. Kaftan, P.E.
Principal Engineer
NC Reg. # 014103
CAPO"
PE No.
03M29
...........
�o �oFEs,o�.:�� =:
ti.
r4 9'•.
SEAL r'
014103
415-A Western Boulevard • Jacksonville, NC 28546 • Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVESUMMARY.............................................................................................i
1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION..............................................................................1
1.1 Project Authorization ........................................... :.................................. 1
1.2 Project Description.................................................................................1
1.3 Purpose and Scope of Services.............................................................2
2.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY PROCEDURES..................................................3
2.1
Field Exploration....................................................................................3
2.2
Laboratory Testing.................................................................................4
3.0 SITE
AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS........................................................4
3.1
Site Location and Description................................................................4
3.2
Site Geology..........................................................................................
5
3.3
Subsurface Soil Conditions....................................................................5
3.4
Groundwater Information.......................................................................6
4.0 EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................7
4.1
Clearing and Grading.............................................................................7
4.2
Subgrade Preparation............................................................................8
4.3
Structural Fill and Placement.................................................................8
4.4
Suitability of On -site Soils......................................................................
9
4.5
Shallow Foundation Design Recommendations (Outdoor Covered
Classroom and Supply Warehouse Buildings).......................................9
4.6
Shallow Foundation Settlements (Outdoor Covered Classroom
and Supply Warehouse Buildings).......................................................10
4.7
Shallow Foundation Excavations (Outdoor Covered Classroom
and Supply Warehouse Buildings)., ... ........ ........................................
10
4.8
Deep Foundation Design Recommendations (Staff NCO Academy) ...
11
4.8.1 Axial Compression Capacity Recommendations .......................
11
4.8.2 Pile Group Settlement................................................................
13
4.8.3 Test Piles...................................................................................13
4.8.4 Dynamic Testing........................................................................14
4.8.5 Establishing Pile Driving Criteria ................................................
15
4.8.6 Allowable Driving Stresses........................................................15
4.8.7 Hammer Types and Energies ....................................................
16
4.8.8 Driven Pile Installation Monitoring... ...........................................
16
4.8.9 Adjacent Structures....................................................................
17
4.9
Building Floor Slabs.............................................................................18
4.10
Pavement Design................................................................................18
4.11
Design Soil Parameters.......................................................................20
4.12
Seismic Evaluation...............................................................................20
4.13
Soil Permeability..................................................................................20

TABLE OF CONTENTS cost.
5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS.........................................................22
5.1 Drainage and Groundwater Concerns.................................................22
5.2 Site Utility Installation...........................................................................22
5.3 Excavations......................................................................................... 22
6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS.................................................................................23
APPENDIX I
BORING LOCATION PLANS
APPENDIX II
PREVIOUSLY COMPLETED BORINGS ASSOCIATED WITH THE
FEASABILITY STUDY DATED AUGUST 12, 2012 ALONG WITH THE
BORING LOCATION SKETCHES
APPENDIX III
COMPREHENSIVE LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
APPENDIX IV
BORING LOGS
APPENDIX V
GENERALIZED SOIL PROFILE
APPENDIX VI
DCP TEST DATA
APPENDIX VII
CAMP JOHNSON SEASONAL HIGH WATER DETERMINATIONS
REPORT
APPENDIX VIII
HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY WORKSHEETS
APPENDIX IX
L-PILE ANALYSIS
APPENDIX X
CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM FOR SOIL EXPLORATION
i.
Solutions. Inc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-110G
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The project consists of a single contract to design and build a two story 85,498 square
foot Academy Instruction Building to house the Staff NCO Academy at Camp Johnson,
a 43,562 square foot parade and drill field, a 4,000 square foot outdoor covered
classroom area, a minimum 250 space surface parking lot and a one story 5,113 square
foot supply warehouse building, and associated site work.
It is expected that the structures will be of steel frame and/or CMU wall design with brick
veneer exterior walls supported by deep foundations (NCO Academy Instruction
Building) and shallow foundations for the outdoor covered classroom and supply
warehouse buildings. The maximum column and/or wall foundation loads provided by
the client associated with the NCO Academy Instruction building are not expected to
exceed 300 kips and 4 to 5 kips per linear foot, respectively. The maximum column
and/or wall foundation loads provided by the client associated with the one story
Outdoor Covered Classroom and Supply Warehouse buildings are not expected to
exceed 30 kips and 2 to 3 kips per linear foot, respectively. The ground floors are
anticipated to be of slab -on -grade design with the distributed loads estimated at 150
pounds per square foot. The structures' first floor elevation(s) are expected to be
located slightly above existing site grade elevations. Based on the grading plan
provided by the client, the cut and/or fill operations are not anticipated to exceed from
about 1 to 3 feet.
Also, light and heavy duty paved parking and drive lanes and BMP systems are planned
for this development, along with other infrastructure components.
Our field exploration program included twenty six (26) 3 to 80-foot deep Standard
Penetration Test (SPT) and hand auger borings, along with infiltration and CBR testing.
A brief description of the natural subsurface soil conditions is tabulated below:
AVERAGE DEPTH
'
RANGES.OF
(Feet)
STRATUM
DESCRIPTION
SPThI N-
VALUES
0
6 inches of topsoil material was encountered at
to
Sur iicial
the boring locations. 2.5 to 4.75 inches of asphalt
0.21 — 0.5
and 4 to 8.5 inches of Gravel at Al through A-4
boring locations
SAND (SP-SM, SM, SC) with varying amounts of
SAND
0.21 — 0.5
silt and/or clay; interbedded layers of CLAY (CL,
WOH12I to
to
I
CL-CH) ranging from 4 to 18.5 feet below the
100
25 to 80
existing site grade elevations at the location of
A15
borings B-2, 134 through B-6, W-1, W-2 and
2
BMP-1
t
Note (1) SPT = Standard Penetration Test, N-Values in Blows -per -foot
2 WOH = Weight of Hammer
gm
Solut=Inc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-110G
The groundwater level was recorded at the boring locations and as observed through
the wetness of the recovered soil samples during the drilling operations. The initial
groundwater table encountered at the boring locations was measured to occur at a
depth ranging from about 8 to 14 feet below current grades corresponding to elevations
ranging from about 6 to 9 feet MSL. The variation in groundwater depths are anticipated
to have been contributed by the variations in existing site grade elevations and the
associated distance between boring locations. The boreholes were backfilled and
grouted in accordance with DENR requirements upon completion for safety
considerations, thus these readings may not be indicative of the static groundwater
level.
Groundwater was not encountered at boring A-1 through A-4 locations at the time of
drilling to depths explored.
Also, the soils recovered from boring BMP-1 through BMP-10 locations (storm water
management area borings) were visually classified to identify color and texture changes
to aid in indicating the normal estimated Seasonal High Water Table (SHWT). The
results are provided in Appendix VII Camp Johnson Seasonal High Water
Determinations.
The following evaluations and recommendations were developed based on our field
exploration and laboratory -testing program:
• A field testing program is recommended during construction. This testing
program should include as a minimum, subgrade load testing (proofrolling),
compaction testing, and PDA testing and pile installation monitoring.
■ The proposed construction area should be cleared by means of removing the
existing topsoil, stumps, associated root mat and asphalt. It is estimated that a
cut of 2.5 to 4.75 inches in depth will be required to remove the asphalt materials
at boring A-1 through A-4 locations. Based on the SPT borings, it is estimated
that a cut of about 6 inches in depth will be required to remove the topsoil
material; however, a majority of the project sites were previously wooded and is
expected to contain varying amounts of organic laden soils. As such, based on
our experience with similar site conditions (wooded areas) this initial cut to
remove organic laden soils and root mat could extend to 12 to 18 inches. This
cut is expected to extend deeper in isolated areas to remove deeper deposits of
unsuitable material which become evident during the clearing. It is recommended
that the clearing operations extend laterally at least 5 feet beyond the perimeter
of the proposed construction areas.
• Shallow foundations (Outdoor Covered Classroom and Supply Warehouse
structures) designed using a net allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 psf (24-inch
embedment, 24-inch width). Estimated post -construction total and differential
settlements up to 1-inch and'/2-inch, respectively.
ii GET

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-110G
• NCO Academy Instruction Building - deep foundation design comprised of driven,
SPPC piles can be implemented to support the structure's frame. Some design
capacities are presented below.
Allowable
Allowable
Lateral
Lateral
Pile Depth
Compression
Tension
Capacity
Capacity
Pre-Augering
PPile Type
(ft)(I
Capacity
Capacity
Free Head
Fixed Head
Depth
(tons)
(tons)
Condition
tons t
Condition
tons
M
12" SPPC
50 to 60
60 to 70
30
2.5
6.5
10 to 15
"' Depth below the existing site grades at the boring locations. The pile tip depth will vary due to the differing
soil stratigraphy: 50 feet (boring B-1), 55 feet (borings B-2, B-3, B-4, B-5) and 60 feel (borings B-6, B-7, B-8)
locations.
Js) According to the 2009 IBC, Section 1810.3.3.2, the recommended allowable lateral capacity is based on one-
half of the lateral load that produces 1 inch of lateral displacement. Batter piles would enhance lateral
capacity.
• The floor slabs may be constructed as slab -on -grade members provided the
recommended earthwork activities and evaluations are carried out properly.
■ The parking area pavements may be designed using a CBR Value of 17.25.
■ This site is classified as a site Class D, based on which seismic designs should
be incorporated. This recommendation is based on the data obtained from the 25
to 80-foot deep SPT borings, our experience with 100-foot deep CPT soundings
and SPT borings performed within the vicinity of the project site, as well as the
requirements indicated in the North Carolina State Building Code (2009
International Building Code).
This summary briefly discusses some of the major topics mentioned in the attached
report. Accordingly, this report should be read in its entirety to thoroughly evaluate the
contents.
iii GET

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET ProjectNo: JX13-11OG
1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
1.1 Project Authorization
G E T Solutions, Inc. has completed our subsurface investigation and geotechnical
engineering services for the proposed P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities project located
within the Camp Lejeune military installation in North Carolina. The Geotechnical
Engineering Services were conducted in general accordance with G E T Solutions, Inc.
Proposal No. PJX12-124G (revised 10-9-13). Furthermore, these services were provided in
conjunction with the previously completed feasibility study dated August 21, 2012 (GER
Project No. 110-5980). Authorization to proceed with the Geotechnical Engineering
Services was received from Mr. Craig Schneider of Whiting -Turner Contracting Co.
1.2 Project Description
The project consists of a single contract to design and build a two story 85,498 square foot
Academy Instruction Building to house the Staff NCO Academy at Camp Johnson, a 43,562
square foot parade and drill field, a 4,000 square foot outdoor covered classroom area, a
minimum 250 space surface parking lot and a one story 5,113 square foot supply
warehouse building, and associated site work.
It is expected that the structures will be of steel frame and/or CMU wall design with brick
veneer exterior walls supported by deep foundations (NCO Academy Instruction Building)
and shallow foundations for the outdoor covered classroom and supply warehouse
buildings. The maximum column and/or wall foundation loads provided by the client
associated with the NCO Academy Instruction building are not expected to exceed 300 kips
and 4 to 5 kips per linear foot, respectively. The maximum column and/or wall foundation
loads provided by the client associated with the one story Outdoor Covered Classroom and
Supply Warehouse buildings are not expected to exceed 30 kips and 2 to 3 kips per linear
foot, respectively. The ground floors are anticipated to be of slab -on -grade design with the
distributed loads estimated at 150 pounds per square foot. The structures' first floor
elevation(s) are expected to be located slightly above existing site grade elevations. Based
on the grading plan provided by the client, the cut and/or fill operations are not anticipated
to exceed from about 1 to 3 feet.
Also, light and heavy duty paved parking and drive lanes and BMP systems are planned for
this development, along with other infrastructure components.
If any of the noted information is incorrect or has changed, please inform G E T Solutions,
Inc. so that we may amend the recommendations presented in this report, if appropriate.
Solutions, Inc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-11 OG
1.3 Purpose and Scope of Services
The purpose of this study was to obtain information on the general subsurface conditions at
the proposed project site. The subsurface conditions encountered were then evaluated
with respect to the available project characteristics. In this regard, engineering
assessments for the following items were formulated:
General assessment of the soils revealed by the borings performed at the
proposed development.
2. General location and description of potentially deleterious material
encountered in the borings that may interfere with construction progress or
structure performance, including existing fills, expansive soils, or
surficial/subsurface organics.
3. Soil subgrade preparation, including stripping, grading and compaction.
Engineering criteria for placement and compaction of approved structural fill
material.
4. Construction considerations for fill placement, subgrade preparation, and
foundation excavations.
5. Feasibility of utilizing a shallow foundation system for support of the proposed
Outdoor Covered Classroom and Supply Warehouse structures. Design
parameters required for the foundation system, including foundation sizes,
allowable bearing pressures, foundation levels and expected total and
differential settlements.
6. Feasibility of utilizing deep foundation systems for support of the proposed
NCO Academy Instruction building. Design parameters required for a deep
foundation system including pile types, pile lengths, allowable capacities,
expected total and differential settlements, and pile installation and testing
criteria.
7. Typical parking area pavement sections recommendations based on the
results of our field and laboratory testing program (Dynamic Cone
Penetrometer (DCP) testing) and our experience with similar soil conditions.
8. Permeability (infiltration) values are provided based on the results of in -situ
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity Testing performed within the proposed
storm water management basins as well as our experience with similar soil
conditions. Normal seasonal high groundwater table (SHWT) was also
estimated.
9. Seismic site class determination in accordance with the 2009 International
Building Code.
Solutions. Inc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-11OG
The scope of services did not include an environmental assessment for determining the
presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous or toxic material in the soil, bedrock,
surface water, groundwater or air, on or below or around this site. Prior to development of
this site, an environmental assessment is advisable.
2.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY PROCEDURES
2.1 Field Exploration
In order to explore the general subsurface soil types and to aid in developing associated
foundation parameters, eight (8) 80-foot deep Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings
(designated as B-1 through B-8) and four (4) 25-foot deep Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
borings (designated as C-1, C-2, W-1 and W-2) were drilled within the proposed structures'
footprints.
In order to explore the general subsurface soil types and to aid in developing associated
pavement design parameters, four (4) 3-foot deep hand auger borings (designated as A-1
through A-4) were drilled within the proposed parking and drive lane areas (currently an
existing parking lot to be re -constructed as part of this project).
To aid in developing associated storm water management parameters, nine (9) shallow
hand auger borings (varying depths) were advanced within the proposed storm water
management areas (designated as BMP-2 through BMP-10) and one (1) 14-foot deep hand
auger boring designated as BMP1 were drilled. The purpose of these borings was to
quantify the depth of the seasonal high water table (SHWT). The results are provided in
Appendix VII Camp Johnson Seasonal, High Water Determinations. In addition, nine (9)
saturated hydraulic conductivity tests (in -situ) were completed at these hand auger boring
locations within the proposed stormwater management areas located throughout the
project site.
The SPT borings were performed with the use of rotary wash "mud" drilling procedures in
general accordance with ASTM D 1586. The tests were performed continuously from the
existing ground surface to depths of 10 and 12-feet, and at 5-foot intervals thereafter. The
soil samples were obtained with a standard 1.4" I.D., 2" O.D., 30" long split -spoon sampler.
The sampler was driven with blows of a 140 lb. hammer falling 30 inches, using an
automatic hammer. The number of blows required to drive the sampler each 6-inch
increment of penetration was recorded and is shown on the boring logs. The sum of the
second and third penetration increments is termed the SPT N-value (uncorrected for
automatic hammer). A representative portion of each disturbed split -spoon sample was
collected with each SPT, placed in a glass jar, sealed, labeled, and returned to our
laboratory for review.
The recently completed borings were performed in conjunction with the previously
completed borings associated with the project's feasibility study dated August 21, 2012
(GER Project No. 110-5980). Accordingly, four (4) 80-foot deep SPT borings identified as
B-1 through B-4, one (1) CPT boring identified as SCPTu-1 (Staff NCO Academy building
Solutions, Inc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Leieune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-11OG
borings) and three (3) 15-foot deep SPT parking area borings identified as S-1 through S-3
performed during the initial feasibility study for the proposed project, are included herein in
Appendix II and in our evaluations and recommendations for this project. The remaining
borings performed during the initial feasibility study are not included in this report as these
borings could not be accurately located within the project area.
The boring locations were established and staked in the field by the client. The approximate
boring locations are shown on the attached 'Boring Location Plans" (Appendix 1), which
were reproduced based on the site plans provided by the client. The boring elevations (as
indicated on the logs) were estimated from the General Site Plan and their accuracy is not
warranted.
A boring schedule tabulating the SPT boring depths and locations is presented Appendix IX.
2.2 Laboratory Testing
Representative portions of all soil samples collected during drilling were sealed in glass
jars, labeled and transferred to our laboratory for classification and analysis. The soil
classification was performed by a Geotechnical Engineer in accordance with ASTM D2488.
A total of forty one (41) representative soil samples were selected and subjected to
laboratory testing which included Atterberg Limit and/or natural moisture and 4200 sieve
wash testing and analysis, in order to corroborate the visual classification. These test
results are provided in Appendix III and are also presented on the "Boring Log" sheets in
Appendix IV.
A total of four (4) Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) tests were completed within the area
of the existing asphalt parking lot along with four (4) 3-foot deep hand auger borings. The
results of the field Kessler DCP testing procedures are presented in Appendix VI.
3.0 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
3.1 Site Location and Description
The proposed project sites are generally located within two sections of the Camp Johnson
portion of the MCB Camp Lejeune, NC. The project areas generally consist of recently
timbered open lands and an existing asphalt paved parking lot. These sites are located
between Hoover Road and Wilson Drive (NCO Academy Instruction and the outdoor
covered classroom buildings) and abutting Monford Landing Road (supply warehouse
building). The project sites are bordered in all directions by various MCB Camp Lejeune
facilities. The sites are generally level with existing grade elevations generally ranging from
about 13 to 16 feet MSL (NCO Academy Instruction and the outdoor covered classroom
building areas) and about 17 to 18 feet MSL (supply warehouse building area), as indicated
on the Grading and Drainage Plans provided by the client.
A Ma
Solutions. Inc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-11OG
3.2 Site Geology
The project site lies within a major physiographic province called the Atlantic Coastal Plain.
Numerous transgressions and regressions of the Atlantic Ocean have deposited marine,
lagoonal, and fluvial (stream lain) sediments. The regional geology is very complex, and
generally consists of interbedded layers of varying mixtures of sands, silts and clays.
Based on our review of existing geologic and soil boring data, the geologic stratigraphy
encountered in our subsurface explorations generally consisted of marine deposited sands,
silts and clays. Based on our review of the Geologic Map of North Carolina 1985, the
project area is within the Belgrade formation which consists of oyster mounds in tan and
orange sand with fossiliferous clayey sand.
3.3 Subsurface Soil Conditions
The results of our field exploration indicated the presence of approximately 6 inches of
topsoil material at the boring locations B-1 through B-8, C-1 a, C-2, W-1, W-2 and BMP-1.
The In addition, the results of our field exploration also indicated the presence of
approximately 2.5 to 4.75 inches of asphalt and about 4 to 8.5 inches of gravel materials at
boring locations A-1 through A-4. The topsoil, asphalt and gravel material thicknesses are
expected to vary between boring locations and throughout the sites.
Underlying the topsoil, asphalt and gravel materials and extending to the SPT boring
termination depths, the subsurface soils encountered generally consisted of SAND (SP-SM,
SM, SC) with varying amounts of silt and clay. As an exception, interbedded layers of Clay
(CL, CL-CH) were encountered at boring locations B-2 and B-4 (4 to 6 feet), B-5 (6 to 8
feet), B-6 (6 to 10 feet), W-1 (4 to 8 feet), W-2 (13.5 to 18.5 feet) and BMP-1 (4 to 7 feet).
The (SPT) results, N-values, recorded within the granular soil layer ranged from Weight -of -
Hammer (WOH) to 100 blows -per -foot (BPF) indicating a very loose to very dense relative
density. The N-values, recorded within the cohesive soils ranged from 2 to 15 (BPF),
indicating a very soft to stiff consistency.
The previously completed borings associated with the project's feasibility study dated
August 21, 2012 (GER Project No. 110-5980) indicated similar soil conditions with the
exception of Clay (CH) which was encountered at GER borings B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4 from
depths ranging from about 17 to 24 feet and S-1 from depths ranging from about 4 to 6 feet
Solutions, Inc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-110G
The subsurface description is of a generalized nature provided to highlight the major soil
strata encountered. The records of the subsurface exploration are included on the "Boring
Log" sheets (Appendix IV) and in the "Generalized Soil Profile" (Appendix V), which should
be reviewed for specific information as to the individual borings. The stratifications shown
on the records of the subsurface exploration represent the conditions only at the actual
boring locations. Variations may occur and should be expected between boring locations.
The stratifications represent the approximate boundary between subsurface materials and
the transition may be gradual or occur between sample intervals. It is noted that the topsoil
designation references the presence of surficial organic laden soil, and does not represent
any particular quality specification. This material is to be tested for approval prior to use.
3.4 Groundwater Information
The groundwater level was recorded at the boring locations and as observed through the
wetness of the recovered soil samples during the drilling operations. The initial groundwater
table encountered at the boring locations was measured to occur at a depth ranging from
about 8 to 14 feet below current grades corresponding to elevations ranging from about 6
to 9 feet MSL. The variation in groundwater depths are anticipated to have been
contributed by the variations in existing site grade elevations and the associated distance
between boring locations. The boreholes were backfilled and grouted in accordance with
DENR requirements upon completion for safety considerations, thus these readings may
not be indicative of the static groundwater level.
Groundwater was not encountered at boring A-1 through A4 locations at the time of drilling
to depths explored.
Also, the soils recovered from boring BMP-1 through BMP-10 locations (storm water
management area borings) were visually classified to identify color and texture changes to
aid in indicating the normal estimated Seasonal High Water Table (SHWT). The results are
provided in Appendix VII Camp Johnson Seasonal High Water Determinations completed
by Land Management Group, Inc. dated January 7, 2014.
It should be noted that perched water conditions may occur throughout the site during
periods of heavy precipitation and/or during the wet season. The perched condition is
anticipated to occur in areas where shallow subsurface cohesive soils were encountered.
These soils will act as a restrictive layer allowing excessive moisture to accumulate within
the overlying granular soils.
Groundwater conditions will vary with environmental variations and seasonal conditions,
such as the frequency and magnitude of rainfall patterns, as well as man-made influences,
such as existing swales, drainage ponds, underdrains and areas of covered soil (paved
parking lots, sidewalks, etc.). Seasonal groundwater fluctuations of ± 2 feet (or more) are
common in the project's area; however, greater fluctuations have been documented. We
recommend that the contractor determine the actual groundwater levels at the time of the
construction to determine groundwater impact on the construction procedures.
Val
Solutions. Inc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-11OG
4.0 EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Our recommendations are based on the previously discussed project information, our
interpretation of the soil test borings and laboratory data, and our observations during our
site reconnaissance. If the proposed construction should vary from what was described, we
request the opportunity to review our recommendations and make any necessary changes.
4.1 Clearing and Grading
The proposed construction area should be cleared by means of removing the existing
topsoil, stumps, associated root mat and asphalt. It is estimated that a cut of 2.5 to 4.75
inches in depth will be required to remove the asphalt materials at boring A-1 through A-4
locations. Based on the SPT borings, it is estimated that a cut of about 6 inches in depth
will be required to remove the topsoil material; however, a majority of the project sites were
previously wooded and is expected to contain varying amounts of organic laden soils. As
such, based on our experience with similar site conditions (wooded areas) this initial cut to
remove organic laden soils and root mat could extend to 12 to 18 inches. This cut is
expected to extend deeper in isolated areas to remove deeper deposits of unsuitable
material which become evident during the clearing. It is recommended that the clearing
operations extend laterally at least 5 feet beyond the perimeter of the proposed
construction areas.
Following the initial clearing, the resulting exposed subgrade will generally be comprised of
SAND (SM) and GRAVEL (borings A-1 through A-4. Accordingly, combinations of excess
surface moisture from precipitation ponding on the site and the construction traffic,
including heavy compaction equipment, may create pumping and general deterioration of
the bearing capabilities of the surface soils. Therefore, undercutting to remove loose soils in
isolated areas may be required. The extent of the undercut will be determined in the field
during construction based on the outcome of the field testing procedures (subgrade
proofroll). In this regard, and in order to reduce undercutting, care should be exercised
during the grading and construction operations at the site.
Control of surface water is very important to the successful completion of the proposed
construction. The contractor should plan his grading activities to control surface water and
minimize erosion of exposed cut or fill material. This may include constructing temporary
berms, ditches, flumes and/or slope drains to intercept runoff and discharge it in a
controlled fashion, while complying with state and local regulations.
Solutions. Inc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-110G
4.2 Subgrade Preparation
Following the clearing operation, the exposed subgrade soils should be densified with a
large static drum roller. After the subgrade soils have been densified, they should be
evaluated by G E T Solutions, Inc. for stability. Accordingly, the subgrade soils should be
proofrolled to check for pockets of loose material hidden beneath a crust of better soil.
Several passes should be made by a large rubber -tired roller or loaded dump truck over the
construction areas, with the successive passes aligned perpendicularly. The number of
passes will be determined in the field by the Geotechnical Engineer depending on the soils
conditions. Any pumping and unstable areas observed during proofrolling (beyond the
initial cut) should be undercut and/or stabilized at the directions of the Geotechnical
Engineer.
The prepared subgrade should be sloped to prevent the accumulation and/or ponding of
surface water. If the exposed subgrade becomes wet or frozen, the geotechnical engineer
should be consulted.
Following the proofroll and approval by the engineer, it is recommended that the newly
exposed subgrade soils be compacted to a dry density of at least 95 percent of the
Modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D1557), as tested to a depth of at least 12
inches. The suitability of compacting the natural subgrade soils should be more accurately
determined in the field by the G E T Solutions, Inc. representative at the time of
construction as the compaction operations could deteriorate the subgrade soil conditions.
Accordingly, it is anticipated that this site will require monitoring of the clearing, subgrade
preparation, and fill placement procedures by a G E T Solutions, Inc. representative in
order to minimize potential deterioration of the natural subgrade soils. The compaction
testing of the natural subgrade soils may be waived by the Geotechnical Engineer, where
firm and stable bearing conditions are observed during the proofroll.
4.3 Structural Fill and Placement
Following the approval of the natural subgrade soils by the Geotechnical Engineer, the
placement of the fill required to establish the design grades may begin. Any material to be
used for structural fill should be evaluated and tested by G E T Solutions, Inc. prior to
placement to determine if they are suitable for the intended use. Suitable structural fill
material should consist of sand or gravel containing less than 20% by weight of fines (SP,
SP-SM, SM, SW, SW-SM, GP, GP -GM, GW, GW-GM), having a liquid limit less than 20
and plastic limit less than 6, and should be free of rubble, organics, clay, debris and other
unsuitable material.
Solutions.lnc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-11OG
All structural fill should be compacted to a dry density of at least 95 percent of the Modified
Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D1557). In general, the compaction should be
accomplished by placing the fill in maximum 10-inch loose lifts and mechanically
compacting each lift to at least the specified minimum dry density. A representative of
G E T Solutions, Inc. should perform field density tests on each lift as necessary to assure
that adequate compaction is achieved.
Backfill material in utility trenches within the construction areas should consist of structural
fill (as described above), and should be compacted to at least 95 percent of ASTM D1557.
This fill should be placed in 4 to 6 inch loose lifts when hand compaction equipment is
used. This lift thickness can be increased to 8 to 10 inches if suitably sized compaction
equipment is used to ensure the bottom of the lift is properly compacted.
Care should be used when operating the compactors near existing structures to avoid
transmission of the vibrations that could cause settlement damage or disturb occupants. In
this regard, it is recommended that the vibratory roller remain at least 25 feet away from
existing structures; these areas should be compacted with small, hand -operated
compaction equipment.
4.4 Suitability of On -site Soils
The shallow subsurface soils encountered at the boring locations and classified to consist
of Silty SAND (SM) and SAND (SP-SM) appear to meet the criteria recommended in this
report for reuse as structural fill. Further classification testing (natural moisture content,
gradation analysis, and Proctor testing) should be performed in the field during construction
to evaluate the suitability of excavated soils for reuse as fill within building and pavement
areas. The remaining on -site excavated soils (CLAY (CL, CL-ML) and SAND (SC) are not
anticipated to be suitable for re -use as structural fill but may be used as fill within green
areas.
Non-structural green areas should be compacted to at least 85 percent of ASTM D1557.
4.5 Shallow Foundation Design Recommendations (Outdoor Covered Classroom
and Supply Warehouse structures)
Provided that the construction procedures are properly performed, the proposed structures
can be supported by shallow spread footings bearing upon firm natural soil or well
compacted structural fill material. The footings can be designed using a net allowable soil
pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf). In using net pressures, the weight of the
footings and backfill over the footings, including the weight of the floor slab, need not be
considered. Hence, only loads applied at or above the finished floor need to be used for
dimensioning the footings.
In order to develop the recommended bearing capacity of 2,000 pounds per square foot
(psf), the base of the footings should have an embedment of at least 24 inches beneath
finished grades and wall footings should have a minimum width of 24 inches. In addition,
• Solutions, Inc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-11 OG
isolated square column footings are recommended to be a minimum of 3 feet by 3 feet in
area for bearing capacity consideration. The recommended 24-inch footing embedment is
considered sufficient to provide adequate cover against frost penetration to the bearing
soils.
4.6 Shallow Foundation Settlements - (Outdoor Covered Classroom and Supply
Warehouse structures)
It is estimated that, with proper site preparation including the subsurface improvements
noted above (where required), the maximum resulting post construction total settlement of
the proposed building foundations should be up to 1 inch, as contributed by the foundation
bearing soils. The maximum differential settlement magnitude is expected to be less than /2
-inch between adjacent footings (wall footings and column footings of widely varying
loading conditions), as contributed by the foundation bearing soils. The settlements were
estimated on the basis of the results of the SPT borings. Careful field control will contribute
substantially towards minimizing the settlements.
4.7 Shallow Foundation Excavations (Outdoor Covered Classroom and Supply
Warehouse structures)
In preparation for shallow foundation support, the footing excavations should extend into
firm natural soil or well compacted structural fill. All foundation excavations should be
observed by G E T Solutions, Inc. At that time, the Geotechnical Engineer should also
explore the extent of excessively loose, soft, or otherwise unsuitable material within the
exposed excavations. Also, at the time of footing observations, the Geotechnical Engineer
may find it necessary to make hand auger borings or use a hand penetration device in the
bases of the foundation excavations.
If pockets of unsuitable soils requiring undercut are encountered in the footing excavations,
the proposed footing elevation should be re-established by means of backfilling with
"flowable fill", an open graded washed stone (such as No. 57 stone), or a suitable structural
fill material compacted to a dry density of at least 95 percent of the Modified Proctor
maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557), as described in Section 4.3 of this report, prior to
concrete placement.
Immediately prior to reinforcing steel placement, it is suggested that the bearing surfaces of
all footings be compacted using hand operated mechanical tampers, to a dry density of at
least 95% of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557) as tested to a
depth of 12 inches, for bearing capacity considerations. In this manner, any localized
areas, which have been loosened by excavation operations, should be adequately
recompacted. The compaction testing in the base of the footings may be waived by the
Geotechnical Engineer, where firm bearing soils are observed during the footing
inspections.
Soils exposed in the bases of all satisfactory foundation excavations should be protected
against any detrimental change in condition such as from physical disturbance, rain orfrost.
Solutions. Inc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-11OG
Surface run-off water should be drained away from the excavations and not be allowed to
pond. If possible, all footing concrete should be placed the same day the excavation is
made. If this is not possible, the footing excavations should be adequately protected.
4.8 Deep Foundation Design Recommendations (NCO Academy Instruction
Building)
The following sections describe the pile capacity analyses and provide our
recommendations for static axial compressive pile capacities, pile testing program, and pile
construction criteria. In addition, we have provided estimates of potential settlement.
We evaluated a driven precast prestressed concrete pile deep foundation system to
support the proposed structure's frame. Other means (deep foundation) of supporting the
structure may be considered however it is anticipated that the SPPC pile foundations will be
the most cost effective and practical approach.
4.8.1 Axial Compression Capacity Recommendations
We conducted pile capacity analyses using static formulas with coefficients recommended
by Geoffrey Myerhoff and George Sowers. The analyses include the contributions of shaft
friction and end bearing to the pile capacity. The piles are expected to derive their capacity
from a combination of shaft friction and end bearing in the deeper Sand layers at the depth
presented in the table (Table 1) on the following page.
The soil materials typically exhibit time -dependent strength characteristics; consequently
shaft friction and end bearing support tend to increase from initial installation through a
process termed "soil setup". Essentially, the dynamics of driving piles will cause excess
pore pressures to develop, thereby decreasing driving resistance during initial pile
installation. The pile capacities developed during driving are usually much lower than the
design values. Once driving is complete, the excess pore pressures dissipate with time
(and soil setup occurs) and the bearing capacity of the pile will increase. Based upon our
experience with similar projects in the area, 5 to 7 days is usually required for the full pore
pressures to dissipation and soil setup to occur.
For the reasons previously described, it will not be possible to confirm pile capacities with a
simple driving criterion such as number of hammer blows per foot of advanced pile.
Instead, driving criteria will likely consist of a target tip elevation and/or certain embedded
length in a bearing material with specified driving resistance. The specified driving
resistance should be based on a Wave Equation Analysis of the contractor's selected
hammer.
Solutions, Inc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET ProjectNo: JX13-11OG
Table I provides our recommended pile type for the structure's foundations. The allowable
capacity for the piles includes a safety factor of at least 2.0 to allow for a pile load test
program that relies primarily on dynamic testing. The capacity of a group of piles spaced at
least 3 pile diameters apart, center to center, can be taken as the sum of the individual
capacities with no reduction factor. If closer pile spacing is anticipated, the geotechnical
engineer should be contacted to evaluate the efficiency of the specific pile group. The final
order lengths and tip elevations will be adjusted based on the results of the test piles and
load test programs.
Table I- SPPC Pile Recommendations
Allowable
Allowable
Lateral
Lateral
a
e
Pile Depth
Compression
Tension
Capacity
Capacity
Pre-Augering
PPile Type
(ft
Capacity
Capacity
Free Head
Fixed Head
Depth
(tons)
(tons)
Condition
Condition
(ft)
tons l21
tons t
12" SPPC
50 to 60
60 to 70
30
2.5
6.5
10 to 15
"' Depth below the existing site grades at the boring locations. The pile tip depth will vary due to the differing soil
stratigraphy: 50 feet (boring B-1); 55 feet (borings B-2, B-3, B4, B-5) and 60 feet (borings B-6, B-7, B-8)
locations.
(I) According to the 2009 IBC, Section 1810.3.32, the recommended allowable lateral capacity is based on one-half
of the lateral load that produces 1 inch of lateral displacement. Batter piles would enhance lateral capacity.
The lateral analysis was conducted using L-Pile Plus, a computer software package by
ENSOFT. The software requires as input, quantitative data related to strength and
deformation behavior of the subsurface materials, the structural properties of the pile, and
an understanding of shaft/soil interaction during lateral loading. The program calculates the
lateral deflections, internal moment forces and internal shear forces experienced by a pile
subjected to the specific loading conditions. The program does not analyze whether the
pile is structurally capable of resisting the moments and shear stresses generated. This
analysis should be performed by the project structural engineer. The L-Pile analysis is
attached to this report (Appendix IX).
We recommend pre-augering the pile locations prior to driving to the depth shown in the
table. This is necessary to help in minimizing the effects of vibrations from the driving effort
on adjacent buildings, penetrate fill materials and to reduce the potential for pile breakage.
Following the pre-augering, the piles should be installed and advanced by driving with an
impact hammer to their design tip elevations. If for some reason during construction, pile
driving "capacity" is encountered before the piles reach their design tip elevations, the
Geotechnical Engineer should be retained to review driving records and field reports to
determine whether the pile can adequately support the design loads. If the pile driving
hammer is not properly matched to the pile type, size and subsurface conditions, it may
reach practical refusal before the pile reaches the design tip elevation, or the required
capacity.
Solutions. Inc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-110G
4.8.2 Pile Group Settlement
Based on the results of load tests performed on piles driven in similar soils conditions, it is
anticipated that the total butt settlements (including elastic shortening) will not exceed about
'/z-inch, which is the settlement necessary to mobilize the soil/pile capacity in combination
with the pile group settlements due to the stress increase in the underlying soils.
4.8.3 Test Piles
We recommend that a test pile program be implemented for the purpose of assisting in the
development of final tip elevations and to confirm that the contractor's equipment and
installation methods are acceptable. The test program should involve at least five (5) test
piles to provide an indication of various driving and/or installation conditions. The test pile
locations should be established by the Geotechnical Engineer based on the structural
characteristics. It is important to note the relationship between the required testing and our
design assumptions. We chose safety factors based upon the recommended pile testing
program. We expect that the pile testing program will include primarily dynamic evaluation
with a Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA).
The piles should be driven using the drive system submitted by the contractor and
approved by the geotechnical engineer. Test pile lengths should be at least ten feet longer
than anticipated production pile lengths to ensure that the required capacity is developed,
to allow for refinement of estimated capacities, and for dynamic and static testing reasons.
The indicator piles installed during the Test Pile Program, which satisfy the geotechnical
engineer's requirements for proper installation, may also be used as permanent production
piles.
The contractor should include in his equipment submittal a Wave Equation Analyses (using
GRLWEAPTM software) modeling the behavior of the test piles during driving, or what is
termed by GIRL as a "Drivability Study." The primary intent of the Wave Equation Analyses
is to estimate the feasibility of the contractor's proposed pile driving system with respect to
installing the piles. Since the results of the Wave Equation Analyses are dependent on the
chosen hammer, the pile type and length, and the subsurface conditions, it is likely that at
least one Wave Equation Analysis per hammer will be required.
Solutions. Inc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-110G
Pile driving equipment should not be mobilized for the test piles until the Wave Equation
Analyses have been submitted and approved by the geotechnical engineer. If the
contractor's proposed pile driving system is rejected, subsequent submittals of alternative
drive systems should also include appropriate Wave Equation Analyses that are subject to
the approval of the geotechnical engineer. The Wave Equation Analyses are also used to
estimate:
■ Compressive and tensile stresses experienced by the modeled pile during driving
• The total number of blows required to install the pile
• Driving resistance (in terms of blows per foot) within the various soil strata the pile is
embedded in
• Driving time
The results of the WEAP analyses are highly dependent on the many input parameters
related to the soil conditions, static pile capacity estimates, as well as specific
characteristics associated with different makes and models of pile driving hammers.
4.8.4 Dynamic Testing
Dynamic testing was developed as a method of improving upon the reliability of the wave
equation and other dynamic predictions by actually measuring the acceleration and strain of
a pile during driving. This technique was developed in the mid-1960's and has been
continually refined. The use of dynamic pile testing has permitted the possibility of
checking the driving stresses in the pile and the hammer performance during pile driving. It
is also possible to estimate the static capacity of the pile based upon the strain and
acceleration measurements taken during.pile driving.
The test pile installation should be monitored by the Geotechnical Engineer using the PDA,
an electronic device that records driving stresses and pile/soil interactions, among other
things. The PDA results will confirm that the pile driving system (hammer type/energy,
cushion type/ thickness, etc.) can successfully install the piles without over stressing them
in compression or tension. It is essential the test pile restrikes also be monitored with the
PDA.
No sooner than 7 days after installation, all of the test piles should be re -struck while being
monitored with the PDA. This test establishes the "static capacity' of the pile. The initial
hammer blow during re -strike activities is critical to the quality of dynamic data with respect
to capacity interpretation. The contractor should make every effort to insure an initial high-
energy blow of the hammer. After several blows during re -strike activities, pore pressures
increase, soil setup diminishes, and ultimately pile capacities (as recorded by the PDA)
decrease. Loss of estimated static capacity following repeated hammer blows is the reason
the initial blows are critical.
Solutions. Inc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-110G
The dynamic data recorded by the PDA during restrike testing should be further refined by
using CAPWAP® analysis. CAPWAP® analysis, not the initial assessment of capacity
determined by the PDA, should be the basis of static pile capacity estimates. Interpretation
of CAPWAP® data, in the context of the soils subsurface conditions and previous static pile
capacity estimates, should allow the Geotechnical Engineer to estimate ultimate pile
capacities and recommend appropriate production pile lengths.
Our previous experience with the PDA indicates that a significant cost savings may be
realized if the PDA is properly utilized to monitor the installation of test piles, confirm pile
capacity in production installations, and monitor potentially damaging stresses during
driving. The use of the PDA permits the confirmation of allowable compression and uplift
Capacities and pile integrity on several piles for a cost similar to or less than that of a single
full-scale static load test. We recommended the design builder retain the services of the
Geotechnical Engineer to perform the dynamic testing, not the installation contractor, to
avoid possible conflicts of interest.
4.8.5 Establishing Pile Driving Criteria
Prior to driving production piles, the geotechnical engineer should establish the criteria for
pile installation. The criteria will be based on the data collected during monitoring of the
test pile installation and the subsequent restriking. The intent of establishing driving criteria
is to facilitate installation of the production piles without damage and to provide a means of
establishing when piles have achieved the design capacities. The driving criteria may
include: hammer type, hammer energy, ram weight, pile cushion and thickness, hammer
cushion type and thickness, required tip elevations and driving resistance necessary to
achieve capacities, and possibly predrilling recommendations (if the test pile results warrant
the need).
4.8.6 Allowable Driving Stresses
Guidelines from the Prestressed Concrete Institute (PCI), American Society of Civil
Engineers (ASCE), and the Association of State Highway Transportation Officials
(AASHTO) indicate that maximum compressive stresses, imposed on driven precast
concrete piles during installation, should be less than the following equation: 0.85 x f,
(concrete compressive strength, psi) - fpe (effective pre -stressing after losses from
relaxation). The three groups differ on the maximum tensile stresses. PCI recommends 6
x square root of f', + fpe ; ASHTO and ASCE recommend 3 x square root fC + fPe. We
recommend using the consensus value for the maximum compressive stress, and the
ASCE/AASHTO recommended value for the maximum tensile stress.
Solutions. Inc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-11OG
4.8.7 Hammer Types and Energies
In comparing hammers of equal energy, the Prestressed Concrete Institute (PCI) states
that hammers with heavier rams and lower impact velocities are less likely to cause
damaging stresses in concrete piles. Hammers with proportionally higher ram weights and
short stroke heights (low impact velocities) are usually air, steam and hydraulic driven, and
not diesel fueled. For this project, we recommend that the contractor use a hammer
sufficiently large enough to drive through dense granular soils encountered at several of the
boring locations (typically around elevation 0 MSQ. These granular soils are expected to
undergo densification during pile installation. This densification is expected to be greater in
larger pile caps during the installation of each subsequent pile. It has been our experience
that air, steam and hydraulic hammers are more appropriate for the installation of precast
concrete piles than similarly sized (in terms of energy) diesel hammers. We recommend
that the contractor use an air, steam or hydraulic driven hammer whose ram weight is
roughly equal to 0.5 to 1.0 times the weight of the pile itself. The actual determination of an
acceptable ram weight should be determined through the results of the Test Pile Program.
If the contractor elects to use a diesel hammer, we recommend a critical, detailed review of
the contractor's Wave Equation Analysis prior to driving the test piles.
4.8.8 Driven Pile Installation Monitoring
The geotechnical engineer should observe the installation of the test piles and all
production piles. The purpose of the geotechnical engineer's observations is to determine
if production installations are being performed in accordance with the previously derived
Pile Driving Criteria. Continuous driving and installation records should be maintained for
all driven piles. Production piles should be driven utilizing the approved system established
as a result of the Test Program.
The field duties of the geotechnical engineer (or a qualified engineer's representative)
should include the following:
• Being knowledgeable of the subsurface conditions at the site and the project -specific
Pile Driving Criteria.
• Being aware of aspects of the installation including type of pile driving equipment
and pile installation tolerances.
• Keeping an accurate record of pile installation and driving procedures.
• Documenting that the piles are installed to the proper depth indicative of the
intended bearing stratum. Also documenting that appropriate pile splicing
techniques are used, if necessary.
• Recording the number of hammer blows for each foot of driving.
• Generally confirming that the pile driving equipment is operating as anticipated.
• Solutions.lnc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-110G
• Record the energy rating of the hammer.
• Informing the geotechnical engineer of any unusual subsurface conditions or driving
conditions.
• Notifying the design builder and structural engineer when unanticipated difficulties or
conditions are encountered.
• Confirming from visual appearance that the piles are not damaged during installation
and observing the piles prior to installation for defective workmanship. The
geotechnical engineer should review all driving records prior to pile cap construction.
4.8.9 Adjacent Structures
When considering the suitability of a driven pile foundation, consideration should be given
to the integrity of nearby structures, if applicable. Due to the large amount of energy
required to install driven deep foundations, vibrations of considerable magnitude are
generated. These vibrations may affect nearby structures. These structures can, due to
their proximity, be detrimentally affected by the construction unless proper protection
measures are taken. In addition, experience has shown that these construction features
will often lead adjacent property owners to conclude that damage to their property has
taken place, even though none has occurred. It is therefore recommended that a thorough
survey of the adjacent property be made prior to starting construction. This will help to
better evaluate real claims and refute groundless nuisance claims. The survey should
include, but not be limited to, the following:
Visually inspect adjacent structures, noting and measuring all cracks and
other signs of distress. Take photographs as needed.
2. Visually inspect adjacent pavements, noting and measuring any significant
cracks, depressions, etc. Take photographs as needed.
3. Establish several benchmarks along foundation walls on adjacent structures.
Both vertical and horizontal control should be employed.
4. Determine if equipment in any adjacent building is sensitive to vibration, and
if so, establish proper control and monitoring system.
Solutions. Inc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-11OG
4.9 Building Floor Slabs
The building floor slabs may be constructed as slab -on -grade members provided the
previously recommended earthwork activities and evaluations are carried out properly. It is
recommended that the ground floor slab be directly supported by at least a 4-inch layer of
relatively clean, compacted, poorly graded sand (SP) or gravel (GP) with less than 5%
passing the No. 200 Sieve (0.074 mm). The purpose of the 4-inch layer is to act as a
capillary barrier and equalize moisture conditions beneath the slab. The slabs can be
designed with the use of a subgrade modulus on the order of about 125 psi/in for
compacted structural fill.
It is recommended that all ground floor slabs be "floating". That is, generally ground
supported and not rigidly connected to walls or foundations. This is to minimize the
possibility of cracking and displacement of the floor slabs because of differential
movements between the slab and the foundation.
It is also recommended that the floor slab bearing soils be covered by a vapor barrier or
retarder in order to minimize the potential for floor dampness, which can affect the
performance of glued tile and carpet. Generally, use a vapor retarder for minimal vapor
resistance protection below the slab on grade. When floor finishes, site conditions or other
considerations require greater vapor resistance protection; consideration should be given to
using a vapor barrier. Selection of a vapor retarder or barrier should be made by the
Architect based on project requirements.
4.10 Pavement Design (Parking Area)
The field DCP testing indicated correlated in -place CBR values ranging from 7 to 24 at
depths of about 36 inches below the existing site grade elevations at the A-1 through A-4
parking area boring locations. Therefore, on a preliminary basis, an average CBR value of
17.25 may be used in designing the pavement section thicknesses. At this time our
services did not include an AASHTO pavement design analysis. G E T Solutions, Inc.
would be pleased to provide these services as well as a laboratory CBR analysis as
necessary once the need has been determined.
The results of the field DCP testing procedures are presented in Appendix VI.
Solutions. Inc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-11OG
Typical pavement design recommendations are presented below (Table II).
Table II — Typical Minimum Pavement Sections
Hot Mix Asphalt
Concrete
Aggregate
Surface (SF-
Intermediate
Section
Base"
Subgrade
9.5A or 9.5B)
(1-19B
Standard Duty
2
t3
Firm, Stable and
Asphalt
Compacted
Heavy Duty
2
3
8
Firm, Stable and
Asphalt
Compacted
Rigid
5
5
Firm, Stable and
Standard Du
Com acted
Rigid
6
Firm, Stable and
Compacted
—(HeavyDuty)10
Fire Lane
Firm, Stable and
(Around
8
Compacted
Buildings)***
Concrete minimal compressive strength of 4500 psi at 28 days/flexural strength of 650 psi
NCDOT Type ABC, compacted to a dry density of at least 100% of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density
(ASTM D 1557).
Typically fire lanes are constructed around buildings with a Grass Paver System which is proprietary. Final
design should be provided by system manufacturer to meet H2O load rating once final fire lane alignment has
been determined.
Actual pavement section thickness should be provided by the design civil engineer based
on traffic loads, volume, and the owners design life requirements. The above sections
correspond to thickness representative of typical local construction practices and as such
periodic maintenance should be anticipated. All pavement material and construction
procedures should conform to North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
requirements.
Following pavement rough grading operations, the exposed subgrade should be observed
under proofrolling. This proofrolling should be accomplished with a fully loaded dump truck
or 7 to 10 ton drum roller to check for pockets of soft material hidden beneath a thin crust of
better soil. Any unsuitable materials thus exposed should be removed and replaced with a
well -compacted material. The inspection of these phases should be performed by the
Geotechnical Engineer or his representative. The subgrade soils are likely to be unstable
at the time of construction and some ground improvements are likely. As such, the
project's budget should include a contingency to accommodate the potential ground
improvements.
Where excessively unstable subgrade soils are observed during proofrolling and/or fill
placement, it is expected that these weak areas can be stabilized by means of thickening
the base course layer (i.e. placement of 2 to 4 inches of additional aggregate base) and
Subgrade soils should be lined with the use of a Geotextile fabric (Mirafi HP270 or
equivalent) or Geogrid (such as Tensar TX140 or BX1100 or equivalent). These
alternatives should be addressed by the Geotechnical Engineer during construction, if
necessary, who will recommend the most economical approach at that time.
Solutions, Inc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-11 OG
4.11 Design Soil Parameters
The estimated soil parameters are presented below (Table III).
Table III - Estimated Soil Parameters
SAND
SAND
Soil Type
(SM, SP,
(SM, SC,
CLAY
SP-SM
SP-SM)(CL,
CL-CH)
Stratum
Structural Fill
(upper 50 feet)
Deposits
Average SPT N-value
-
8
8
Total Moist Unit Weight
120
115
115
Friction Angle
32
30
5
degrees
Cohesion (c)
0
0
800
cf
Active Soil Pressure
0.31
0.33
0.84
Ka
At -Rest Soil Pressure
0.47
0.50
0.91
Ko
Passive Soil Pressure
3.25
3.00
1.19
K
Friction Factor
0.39
0.39
0.06
4.12 Seismic Evaluation
It is noted that, in accordance with the NC Building Code; Chapter 16, this site is classified
as a site Class D, based on which seismic designs should be incorporated. This
recommendation is based on the data obtained from the 25 to 80-foot deep SPT borings,
our experience with 100-foot deep CPT soundings and SPT borings performed within the
vicinity of the project site, as well as the requirements indicated in the North Carolina State
Building Code (2009 International Building Code).
4.13 Soil Permeability
Nine (9) infiltration tests were performed at boring locations BMP-1 through BMP-6, BMP-8
through BMP-10 (one test at each location). The tests were performed at depths ranging
from 2 to 2.5 feet below the existing site grade elevations. The boreholes were prepared
utilizing an auger to remove soil clippings from the base. Infiltration testing was then
conducted within the vadose zone utilizing a Precision Permeameter and the following
testing procedures.
Solutions, lnc.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-110G
A support stand was assembled and placed adjacent to each borehole. This stand holds a
calibrated reservoir (2000 ml) and a cable used to raise and lower the water control unit
(WCU). The WCU establishes a constant water head within the borehole during testing by
use of a precision valve and float assembly. The WCU was attached to the flow reservoir
with a 2-meter (6.6 foot) braided PVC hose and then lowered by cable into the borehole to
the test depth elevation. As required by the Glover solution, the WCU was suspended
above the bottom of the borehole at an elevation of approximately 5 times the borehole
diameter. The shut-off valve was then opened allowing water to pass through the WCU to
fill the borehole to the constant water level elevation. The absorption rate slowed as the
soil voids became filled and an equilibrium developed as a wetting bulb developed around
the borehole. Water was continuously added until the flow rate stabilized. The reservoir
was then re -filled in order to begin testing. During testing, as the water drained into the
borehole and surrounding soils, the water level within the calibrated reservoir was recorded
as well as the elapsed time during each interval. The test was continued until relatively
consistent flow rates were documented. During testing the quick release connections and
shutoff valve were monitored to ensure that no leakage occurred. The flow rate (Q), height
of the constant water level (H), and borehole diameter (D) were used to calculate KS
utilizing the Glover Solution.
Based on the field testing and corroborated with laboratory testing results (published values
compared to classification results), the hydraulic conductivity of the shallow soils is
tabulated on the following page (Table IV) and is presented on the "Hydraulic Conductivity
Worksheet" (Appendix VIII), included with this report.
Table IV - Infiltration Test Results
Boring
Boring
depth
ff
Percent Silt
and/or Clay
Ksat
Value
cm/sec
Ksat
Value
in/hr
Ksat Class
BMP-1
2.5
14.8
1.07 x 10
1.515
High
BMP-2
2.0
42.9
1.02 x 104
0.144
Moderate/ High
BMP-3
2.0
33.4
3.94 x 104
0.558
Moderately High
BMP4
2.0
29.8
6.95 x 10
0.985
Moderate/ High
BMP-5
2.0
34.9
2.24 x 10
0.317
Moderate/ High
BMP-6
2.0
46.8
8.99 x 10
0.127
Moderate/ Low
BMP-8
2.0
43.6
9.65 x 10
0.137
Moderate/ Low
BMP-9
2.0
25.0
1.21 x 10'
1.718
High
BMP-10
2.0
32.5
7.94 x 10
1.125
Moderate) Hi h
Solurions, Inc

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET Project No: JX13-11 OG
5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
5.1 Drainage and Groundwater Concerns
It is expected that dewatering may be required for excavations that extend near or below
the existing groundwater table. Dewatering above the groundwater level could probably be
accomplished by pumping from sumps. Dewatering at depths below the groundwater level
may require well pointing.
It would be advantageous to construct all fills early in the construction. If this is not
accomplished, disturbance of the existing site drainage could result in collection of surface
water in some areas, thus rendering these areas wet and very loose. Temporary drainage
ditches should be employed by the contractor to accentuate drainage during construction.
If water collects in foundation excavations, it will be necessary to remove water from the
excavations, remove saturated soils, and re -test the adequacy of the bearing surface soils
to support the design bearing pressure prior to concrete placement.
5.2 Site Utility Installation
The base of the utility trenches should be observed by a qualified inspector prior to the pipe
and structure placements to verify the suitability of the bearing soils. If unstable bearing
soils are encountered during installation some form of stabilization may be required to
provide suitable bedding. This stabilization is typically accomplished by providing additional
bedding materials (NCDOT No. 57 stone). In addition, depending on the depth of the utility
trench excavation, some means of dewatering may be required to facilitate the utility
installation and associated backfilling.
All utility excavations should be backfilled with structural fill, as described in Section 4.3 of
this report.
5.3 Excavations
In Federal Register, Volume 54, No. 209 (October, 1989), the United States Department of
Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) amended its "Construction
Standards for Excavations, 29 CFR, part 1926, Subpart P". This document was issued to
better insure the safety of workmen entering trenches or excavations. It is mandated by
this federal regulation that all excavations, whether they be utility trenches, basement
excavation or footing excavations, be constructed in accordance with the new (OSHA)
guidelines. It is our understanding that these regulations are being strictly enforced and if
they are not closely followed, the owner and the contractor could be liable for substantial
penalties.
Solutions.lnc. '

I
Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services February 5, 2014
P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina
GET ProjectNo: JX13-11OG
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. The contractor's responsible
person, as defined in 29 CFR Part 1926, should evaluate the soil exposed in the
excavations as part of the contractor's safety procedures. In no case should slope height,
slope inclination, or excavation depth, including utility trench excavation depth, exceed
those specified in local, state, and federal safety regulations.
We are providing this information solely as a service to our client. G E T Solutions, Inc. is
not assuming responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor's activities; such
responsibility is not being implied and should not be inferred.
6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS
The recommendations submitted are based on the available soil information obtained by
G E T Solutions, Inc. and the information supplied by the client and their consultants for
the proposed project. If there are any revisions to the plans for this project or if deviations
from the subsurface conditions noted in this report are encountered during construction,
G E T Solutions, Inc. should be notified immediately to determine if changes in the
foundation recommendations are required. If G E T Solutions, Inc. is not retained to
perform these functions, G E T Solutions, Inc. can not be responsible for the impact of
those conditions on the geotechnical recommendations for the project.
The Geotechnical Engineer warrants that the findings, recommendations, specifications or
professional advice contained herein have been made in accordance with generally
accepted professional geotechnical engineering practices in the local area. No other
warranties are implied or expressed.
After the plans and specifications are more complete the Geotechnical Engineer should be
provided the opportunity to review the final design plans and specifications to assure our
engineering recommendations have been properly incorporated into the design documents,
in order that the earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly interpreted
and implemented. At that time, it may be necessary to submit supplementary
recommendations. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the client and
their consultants for the specific application to the proposed P003 Staff NCO Academy
Facilities project located within the Camp Lejeune military installation in North Carolina.
Solutions, Inc.

APPENDICES
BORING LOCATION PLANS
II PREVIOUSLY COMPLETED BORINGS ASSOCIATED WITH
THE FEASABILITY STUDY DATED AUGUST 12, 2012
ALONG WITH THE BORING LOCATION SKETCHES
III COMPREHENSIVE LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
IV BORING LOGS
V GENERALIZED SOIL PROFILE
VI DCP TEST DATA
VII CAMP JOHNSON SEASONAL HIGH WATER TABLE
DETERMINATIONS REPORT
VIII HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY WORKSHEETS
IX L-PILE ANALYSIS
X CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM FOR SOIL EXPLORATION

� A G
i
I L �
DRAINAGE NOTES
J f- - T
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET CG101 ®DsoR —
88 LF - 36 RCP A4 I7 203 LF - 30' RCP- _ _ _ _ _ 103 LF - 24" RCP Alb
I 0 0.50z ____ _ _ ______ _ O_050z AS `•• :'/ /,,'�;
�y
---- _ ,i
_
47;NFORCED CONCRETE 74 LF - 30" RCP _•01�.5Oz
0 0.50% ____ , _________
fi e�d A7 s
y_$ _ �•
o ______ ______ 16- ' l�j"'--_ ------ _ ---- A11
_ __ ._____
A-2 ___ ______
75 LF - 18' RCP
0 0.51%
------' 75 LF - 24- RCP
I• 0 O,51%
I! BMP-8
__—_----- —_16
I'— _ _
7 `
A6 _ ___ _16 Al2
I' > A-1 810-REiEN710N AREA /3 — — — + n
j SOIL MEDIA DEPTH = 3 FT
3-6' HDPE UNDERDRAIN PIPES
E, r pK 17 —17 KN
®� D
810-RETENTION AREA 12
w SOIL MEDIA DEPTH = kFf........ 77.-
wI' 3-6' HOPE UNDERDRAIN PIPES
; _e
MP-9
WI; _ _______ _1_____— --__ A73
Wit
Cl) AB 17__
W it A 3 s
18 73'LF--13'4RCP
=I! $ 1 Op 7J 0 0.51z
a f o
MJB Y iNh
r D, -
E:ei. = n5+ BOORETENTION AREA it SOIL MEDIA DEPTH = 3 FT
3-6' HOPE UNDERDRAN PIPES
'>>
- ---- ---- 9
---
_ _;
_______-___' -_ ___- UMIT OF OISWRBANCE
I�
-------------------------
I. r ._____
-_—__
.._________I__ _ ' _______ , _ ______________F
-77_____________ ___ _-------
17 _____ _______________
r
I'
I
it I I
z A
1,,,ull:
PRELIMINARY
M
FT
Lions NOT FOR
CONS'rRUC'nON
C
cations
iA
3
Z
A,
E
�Q
€ W
3v�
0 H
v
Y J
g
'
z
<
j <
LL
w
t0
z
O
W
<
0
a
j
z
a
Q
U
z
Q
<
0
u
z
Z
w
Z
o
i I=
p LL
€Jt
z Q
LL
O'
9 <
oz,
7
HHH-IFI-/IN
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 3D' so' 20'
CG102
-30,

C
,
DRAINAGE NOTES
t 4 °
I
l MR OF DISIIRBANCE
1� NO VERTICAL•,,.PXTA PROVIDED FOR SIDEWALK
2
\6 '
� ------------
NR1'Fs'i'C
�0 BB 15 B7 BB ___ .
PRELIMINARY
l9
,^ 98 LF - 24- RCP O 0.48% 99 lF,- 16- RCP O 0.50% 0 4 --- ------------_ -_ coNNOTSiROOR
CTION
NJ
_ ____ .17-----------
C-Z .�. C
1a e
-------`---------- --- - ------ — ---
-
B5
Il tie � � ,y
9. 84 69 O _ - - _ ° 17/12/12
�, ---- ---------- _
1611
_ -
, p oxlmate Re g � -A r cen G T o n Lo a s
5._yyyy
Ap______ _____ __ ___ !oxlmate revious 3ER ring ocations
__
_
l A _
B-y / 9ca w E
3 B-4 _ Z
Bs NCO ACADEMIC J m
Q, o W
- B-4 INSTRUCTION BUILDING BMP 13 Q J Z
- 5
-_ o
a
- FF 17.3 - _ - gz
E u-
w
- —
r—
b n I SCPTu-1 -
A77 ��; � � Z
U
Z Q
a _
Q Q
B / Z
{ e l= B. B-t --- ---- B 8 Z a
ll
of ^e
l^
,
,
17
zR a
- A — �bI2lENIpN ARPA 14 _ — . / A . — . — . — . — . �' •,'� ,t�%' - 0 2 v
( B2 /-�• - -- _ _ Sal �27_ _________ I ____- _ AIS _ ____ _ _ _ . -�'�� -
{ -_ _ _____ _ - -- - -
'f, I47s(`�y A14 15��/]� I -
_?__�I _ BMP-S —_----_11 14—
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET CG102 GRAPHIC SCALE
0 30' 60' 120' w� CG101
1-=30'

H:\2012\4686—DB SIOH NCO Academy Facilities\Phase II\CAD\CML\Shee,s\CGl03.d,g Mon, 17 Dec 2012 — 11:34am alile
I
C
/ a 1
_, ------\--- `-- — — — — —----�---
-----I
— — -- — — — — --
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
r — —
39"
r
r
Cy
Vie, ,••` •n�f,L ���� ��o��
oa _ 1.
\ /' <-- Is
i I 7 e 9_ ;
B S
fl 3 'off
Ad
_ rJf ---�J •
G/ 7 B a"rgC'p
®0 *BR r9
16
1 n
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET CG1O2
11
7 n
E$
py
d K
NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND <«AGENCY»
«COYMHFM HWE»
CAMP JOHNSON JACKSONVILLE, NC
55
O 9
"
!
STAFF NCO ACADEMY FACILITIES
GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN
F

C
L J T
�\ DRAINAGE NOTES )I €
BIO-REFFMpN AREA 15
3-6' HOPE uNDERORUNs C� it - p
Ij
�`o`g
17
_ 7q III -JL
R E
�,
� 03FAA-OUTLET
I RIP PROlECTI011, \ \
CLA S A-9TONE- v--,ram_ `o\�
,WIDTH;A)`OUTLET 6.0 4-`7,; .�„
18 WIDTH,'AT-ED OF PAD 15.2';11 \o:� •, ��.
D Rk = 9' _ ' ' 7 NPUFAiC GRADE Df[CH,713_NOTFOR
`•�\\; + ��
BIO-REiFNIIQLi.'ys `\�'. Y ., PRELIMINARY
-___- �� CONSTRUCTION
,
,
8
e
,
,
,
--------------
Iiy
\- ,,•� RIP RAP OUTLET PROTECTION wziF
.°, 17/72/12
I - ` CLASS A STONE
�SUPP�Y WAR L' �1. •„;p WIDTH AT END OF - 6.0'
E17 , I' WIDTH AT END OF PAD = 15.2'
W-1 FFE �V m 38 LF - 24' RCP 0 2.16% 5'r � LENGTH = 8.0'
n; >C
-...Li E
3 Z. J U)
Z
- GRADE DNCH TO \�o�` v H
B10-RETFMION \ �0
610-RETEMION AREA 16 `' > C I a U g
IT 3-6'IHDPE UNDER DRAINS
LIMN OF DISTURBANCE J
O z
z 0
• 0 LLcl
I7 0 F o
a a
GRAPHIC SCALE 0 30-
' 60' 120' �, W� CG104

n:\2012\46e6-Da Stall NCO bcueemy Fucalres\Phase 11\CAD\CML\Sheet5\C0105.Ovg uoq n Dec 2012 - 11:300m Elite
r
it
p f F t A DPW of ili raw ruvu FSFaunLs Dwirv[uaxc couuwlo ¢ pp g ppg q$ 2 4 gg d
56
NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND - «AGENCY»
«CMMNCW NWE»CO
CAMP JOHNSON JACKSONVILLE, NC
p� o- STAFF NCO ACADEMY FACILITIES
fi §1
GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN g
T

APPENDIX II
PREVIOUSLY COMPLETED BORINGS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FEASABILITY
STUDY DATED AUGUST 12, 2012 ALONG WITH THE BORING LOCATION
SKETCHES

RT OF
RELIMINARY
OTECHNICAL
UDY
Staff NCO Training Academy
and CIF Warehouse
Camp Johnson, MCB Camp Lejuene
Jacksonville, NC
A/E Contract N62470-12-D-2003, WE10
GER Project No. 110-5980
Envirwn nlal • Groundwater • Hazardous Matenals
prepared for
NAVFAC Mid -Atlantic
Norfolk, Virginia
August 21 , 2012
2712 Southern Boulevard, Suite 101
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23452
Fax [phone] www.geronline.com

Vx
r
s ,
x
�JY�F� I� �j; f11 �•
T ♦ � �'y zY� + � 1 tL Sljj +
$
�.� 711--tIl
�

LMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP
Environmental Consultants
January 7, 2014
Glenn W. Hohmeier,
GET Solutions, Inc.
415A Western Blvd.
Jacksonville, NC
28546
Re: Camp Johnson Seasonal High Water Table
Determinations.
Glenn,
On Monday, December 30, 2013 Land Management Group, Inc. evaluated
ten proposed stormwater basin areas for Camp Johnson, Camp, MCAS, Onslow
County. The site located on the southeast side of US 17 and adjacent to New
River within the confines of Camp Lejeune, MCAS, Jacksonville, NC. The purpose
of the evaluation was, to quantify the depth to the seasonal high water table
(SHWT) for the project engineer. Selected sites are shown in Figure One.
The soils on this site are mapped as the Baymeade fine sand and
Baymeade-Urban Land Complex in the Soil Survey of Onslow County (USDA,
1990). The pre -selected sites were cleared, staked and numbered for ease of
location. LMG collected soils data at staked location. Results of the borings are
shown in Table One.
TARI F ONF -
CAMP JOHNSON SOILBORINGS
i�3�711iS��iL�l
• �
amm
iruo��
The seasonal high water table (SHWT) is normally evident by observation of
redoximorphic features suggesting past conditions of saturation and reduction. There
is evidence of relict redoximorphic features at depth in all borings. From
observation of historic and regional drainage of the lands surrounding the site

and based on soil morphological features we have estimated the contemporary SHWT.
In summary, this site has areas that are proposed for stormwater basin
placement. These areas have soils with contemporary seasonal high water tables
from 16" in boring 3 to a depth of 65" in boring 9 from the soil surface as shown in
Table 1. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions with this
report or if you wish for LMG to perform any additional site specific studies in
accordance with the NC DENR DWQ guidance memo. If you have any questions about
this report or need any additional information I may be reached at 910-452-0001, 910-
620-1137 or at [e-mail].
Sincerely,
. , If l -�
G. Craig Turner Vice
President
Land Management Group, Inc 3805
Wrightsville Ave., Suite 15
Wilmington, NC28403
910-452-0001: Office
910-452-0060: FAX
910-620-1137: Cell
cturner@ Imgroup.net
N.C. Licensed Soil Scientist, #1091
S.0 Certification
Number 57
www.lmgroup.net • [e-mail] • Phone:[phone] • Fax:
910.452.0060 3805 Wrightsville Ave., Suite 15, Wilmington, NC 28403

-Head Borehole Permeameter Test
Analytical Method: Glover Solution
GETConstant
On
Project Name......: Staff NCO Training Academy -
Boring No...........: BMP-1
Investigators.......: J. Huber; L. Brown
Project No......: JX13-11OG
Proj. Location...: MCB Camp Lejeune, NC
Date ..................: 12/31/2013
Terminology and Solution (R. E. Glover Solution
Ksata: (Coefficient of Permeability) @ Base Tmp. TB (°C) 14
Q: Rate of flow of water from the borehole
Boring Depth......: 2.5 (m, cm, ft, in)
Boring Diameter..: 8.3 cm
Boring Radius r... : 4.15 cm
Soil/Water Tmp. T: 11 oC
Dyn. Visc. @ T °C.: 0.001271 kg/m•s
WCU Base Ht. h: 15.0 cm
WCU Susp. Ht. S: 6.4 cm
Const. Wtr. Ht. H: 21.4 cm
H/r.. 5.2
....................
Dyn. Visc. @ TB°C.: 0.001170 kg/m•s
H: Constant height of water in the borehole
r: Radius of the cylindrical borehole
V: Dyn. Visc. of water @ Tmp. T "C/Dyn. Visc. of water @ Ta
Ksat =Q[sinh*t H r rz Hz+1 "s+r H 2nHz
( / 1- ( / ) / 1/( 1 [Basic Glover Solu.]
Ksata= QV[sinh-t(H/r) - (r2/H2+1)'s+ r/H]/(2nH2) [Tmp. Correction]
VOLUME
ml
Volme Out
uml
TIME
h:mm:ss A P
Interval Elapsed Time
Flow Rate Q
ml min
------------- Ksata Equivalent Values ----------------
hr:min:sec min
cm min cm sec cm da in hr ft da
3,000
11,24,21 AM
2,900
100
11:24:57 AM
0:00:361
0.60
166.67
0.096
1.59E-03
137.5
2.256
4.51
2,800
100
11:25:39 AM
0:00:42
0.70
142.86
0.082
1.36E-03
117.9
1.934
3.8
2,700
100
11:26:23 AM
0:00A4
0.73
136.36
0.078
1.30E-03
112.5
1.846
3.69
2,600
100
11:27:12 AM
0:00:49
0.82
122.45
0.070
1.17E-03
101.1
1.658
3.32
2,500
100
11:28:07 AM
0:00:55
0.92
109.09
0.063
1.04E-03
90.0
1.477
2.95
2,400
100
11:29:01 AM
0:00:54
0.90
111.11
0.064
1.06E-03
91.7
1.504
3.01
2,300
100
11:29:56 AM
0:00:55
0.92
109.09
0.0631
1.04E-03
90.0
1,477
2.95
2,200
100
11:30:51 AM
0:00:55
0.92
109.09
0.063
1.04E-03
90.01
1.477
2.95
2,100
100
11:31:42 AM
0:00:51
0.85
117.65
0.067
1.12E-03
97.1
1.593
3.19
2,000
100
11:32:34 AM
0:00:52
0.87
115.38
0.066
1.10E-03
95.2
1.562
3.12
Natural Moisture......: 12.6
lConsistency ...............: Loose
Field -Estimated Ksat:
0.0641
1.07E-03
92.3
1.5151
3.03
USDA Txt./USCS Class: SM
lWater Table Depth ... 8.0
Notes: Estimated field Ksat is determined by averaging and/or rounding of test results for the final three or four
stabilized values and analyzing the graph.
truct./%Pass. g200.: 14.8
linit. Saturation Time.: 11:24,00 AM
Glover, R. E. 1953. Flow from a test -hole located above groundwater level, pp. 69-71. in: Theory and Problems of Water Percolation. (C. N. Zanger. ed.). USER. The condition for this solution exists
when the distance from the bottom of the borehole to the water table or an impervious layer is at least twice the depth of the water in the welCH/r>5 to >10 Johnson Permeameter, LLC Revised 11/29/13

Particle Size Distribution Report
�_ G. o ry00y0 0p oeo
100
90
80
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
70
I
I
z 60
LL
I
z
so
I
I
I
v
w 40
a
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
20
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
10
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
p
I
I
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
% +3„
01. Gravel
% Sand
% Fines
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
Silt Clay
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
2.0
83.1
14.8
SIEVE
PERCENT
SPEC."
PASS?

Constant -Head Borehole Permeameter Test
Analytical Method: Glover Solution
GE®
Project Name......: Staff NCO Training Academy
Boring No...........: BMP-2
Investigators .......: J. Huber; L. Brown
Project No......: JX13-110G
Proj. Location...: MCB Camp Lejeune, NC
Date ..................: 1/6/14
Terminology and Solution (R. E. Glover Solution)
KsatB: (Coefficient of Permeability) @ Base Tmp. TB (°C) 14
Q: Rate of flow of water from the borehole
Boring Depth......: 2 (m, cm, ft, in)
Boring Diameter..: 8.3 cm
Boring Radius r... : 4.15 cm
Soil/Water Tmp. T: 11 oC
Dyn. Visc. @ T *C.: 0.001271 kg/m•s
WCU Base Ht. h: 15.0 cm
WCU Susp. Ht. S: 6.4 cm
Const. Wtr. Ht. H: 21.4 cm
H/r..................... : 5.2
Dyn. C.@ TB°C.: 0.001170 kg/m•s
H: Constant height of water in the borehole
r: Radius of the cylindrical borehole
V: Dyn. Visc. of water @ Tmp. T "C/Dyn. Visc. of water @ Ta
Ksat = Q[sinh"(H/r) - (r2/H'+1)s+ r/H]/(2nH2) [Basic Glover Solu.]
KsatB= QV[sinh-'(H/r) - (r'/H'+1)s+ r/H]/(2nH') [Tmp. Correction]
VOLUME
ml
Volume Out
ml
TIME
h:mm:ssA P
Interval Elapsed Time
Flow Rate Q
ml min
---------------- Ksats Equivalent Values------------
hr:min:sec min
cm min cm sec cm da in hr ft da
120
8:00:19 AM
115
5
8:00:40 AM
0:00:21
0.35
14.29
0.008
1.36E-04
11.8
0.193
0.39
110
5
8:01:01 AM
0:00:21
0.35
14.29
0.008
1.36E-04
11.8
0.193
0.3
105
5
8:01:25 AM
0:00:24
0.40
12.50
0.007
1.19E-04
10.3
0.169
0.34
100
5
8:01:51 AM
0:00:26
0.43
11.54
0.007
1.10E-04
9.5
0.156
0.31
95
5
8:02:17 AM
0:00:26
0.43
11.54
0.007
1.10E-04
9.5
0.156
0.31
90
5
8:02:44 AM
0:00:27
0.45
11.11
0.006
1.06E-04
9.2
0.150
0.30
85
5
8:03:10 AM
0:00:261
0.431
11.54
0.0071
1.10E-04
9.51
0,156
0.31
80
5
8:03:37 AM
0:00:271
0.45
11.11
0.0061
1.06E-04
9.2
0.150
0.30
75
5
8:04:08 AM
0:00:31
0.52
9.68
0.006
9.24E-05
8.0
0.131
0.26
70
5
8:04:37 AM
0:00:29
0.48
10.34
0.006
9.88E-05
8.51
0.140
0.28
65
5
8:05:09 AM
0:00:32
0.53
9.38
0.005
8.95E-05
7.71
0.127
0.25
60
5
8:05:42 AM
0:00:33
0.55
9.09
0.005
8.68E-05
7.5
0.123
0.25
55
5
8:06:14 AM
0:00:32
0.53
9.38
0.005
8.95E-05
7.7
0.127
0.25
Natural Moisture......: 15.9
lConsistency ...............: Loose
Field -Estimated Ksat:1
0.0061
1.02E-041
8.81
0.1441
0.29
USDA TM./USCS Class: SM
lWater Table Depth ... 8.0
Notes: Estimated field Ksat is determined by averaging and/or rounding of test results for the final three or four
stabilized values and analyzing the graph.
tract./% Pass. M200.: 42.9
linit. Saturation Time.: 8:00:00 AM
Glover, R. E. 1953. Flow from a test -hole located above groundwater level, pp. 69-71. in: Theory and Problems of Water Percolation. C. N. ganger. ed.). USBR. The condition for this solution exists
when the distance from the bottom of the borehole to the water table or an impervious layer is at least twice the depth of the water in the welCH/r>5 to>10 Johnson Permeameter, LLC Revised 11/29/13

100
90
80
70
x
Z 60
LL
Z 50
W
U
W 40
a
ct(
20
10
% +3"
Particle Size Distribution Report
0.0 1 0.1
SIEVE
SIZE
PERCENT
FINER
SPEC!
PERCENT
PASS?
(X=NO)
1.5"
100.0
1"
100.0
.5"
100.0
.375"
100.0
#4
100.0
#8
99.9
#10
99.9
#16
99.8
#40
98.4
#100
55.3
#200
42.9
(no specification providcd)
Sample Number: BMP-2
GET
SOLUTIONS, INC.
Jacksonville North Car
V SIZE - mm.
% Sand % Fines
Wium Fine Silt
1.5 1 55.5 42.9
Material Description
Atterbera Limits
PL= LL= PI=
Coefficients
D90= 0.3302 D85= 0.2938 D60= 0.1703
D50= 0.1232 Dgp= D15=
D10= Cu= Cc=
Classification
USCS= AASHTO=
Remarks
Client: Whiting -Turner Construction Co.
Project: P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Date:

Constant -Head Borehole Permeameter Test
Analytical Method: Glover Solution
GE®
Project Name......: Staff NCO Training Academy
Boring No...........: BMP-3
Investigators.......: J. Huber; L. Brown
Project No......: JX13-110G
Proj. Location...: MCB Camp Lejeune, NC
Date ..................: 1/6/14
Terminology and Solution (R. E. Glover Solution)
Ksat.: (Coefficient of Permeability) @ Base Tmp. Te (°C) 14
Q: Rate of flow of water from the borehole
Boring Depth......: 2 (m, cm, ft, in)
Boring Diameter..: 8.3 cm
Boring Radius r... : 4.15 cm
Soil/Water Tmp. T: 11 oC
Dyn. Visc. @ T *C.: 0.001271 kg/m•s
WCU Base Ht. h: 15.0 cm
WCU Susp. Ht. S: 6.4 cm
Const. Wtr. Ht. H: 21.4 cm
H/r**...................: 5.2
Dyn. Visc. @ TeeC.: 0.001170 kg/m•s
H: Constant height of water in the borehole
r: Radius of the cylindrical borehole
V: Dyn. Visc. of water @ Tmp. T °C/Dyn. Visc. of water @ TB
Ksat =Qfsinh'(H/r)-(rz/Hz+1)'s+r/H]/(2nHz) [Basic Glover Solu.]
KsatB= QV[sinh B(H/r) - (rz/H2+1) s+ r/H]/(2nH2) [Tmp. Correction]
VOLUME
ml
Volume Out
ml
TIME
h:mm:ssA P
Interval Elapsed Time
Flow Rate Q
ml min
---------- Ksate Equivalent Values - - - - - - - - - - - -
hr:min:sec min
cm min cm sec cm da in hr ft ayL
120
8,40,12 AM
115
51
8:40:21 AM
0:00:091
0.15
33.33
0.019
3.18E-04
27.5
0.451
0.90
110
5
8:40:30 AM
0:00:09
0.15
33.33
0.019
3.18E-04
27.5
0.451
0.9
105
5
8:40:38 AM
0:00:08
0.13
37.50
0.021
3.58E-04
30.9
0.508
1.02
100
5
8:40:46 AM
0:00:08
0.13
37.50
0.021
3.58E-04
30.9
0.508
1.02
95
5
8:40:55 AM
0:00:09
0.15
33.33
0.019
3.18E-04
27.5
0.451
0.90
90
5
8:41:01 AM
0:00:06
0A0
50.00
0.029
4.78E-04
41.3
0.677
1.35
85
5
8:41:07 AM
0:00:06
0.10
50.00
0.0291
4.78E-04
41.3
0.677
1.35
80
5
8:41:13 AM
0:00:06
0.10
50.00
0.029
4.78E-04
41.31
0.677
1.35
75
5
8:41:20 AM
0:00:07
0.12
42.86
0.025
4.09E-04
35.4
0.580
1.16
70
5
8:41:27 AM
0:00:07
0.12
42.86
0.025
4.09E-04
35.4
0.580
1.16
65
5
8:41:34 AM
0:00:07
0.12
42.86
0.025
4.09E-04
35.41
0.5801
1.16
Natural Moisture......: 18.9
lConsistency ...............: Loose
Field -Estimated Ksat:
J 0.0241
3.94E-041
34.01
0.5581
1.12
USDA TM./USCS Class: SM
lWater Table Depth ... 8.0
Notes: Estimated field Ksat is determined by averaging and/or rounding of test results for the final three or four
stabilized values and analyzing the graph.
truct./% Pass. #200.: 33.4
linit. Saturation Time.: 8:40:00 AM
Glover, R. E. 1953. Flow from a test -hole located above groundwater level, pp. 69-71. in: Theory and Problems of Water Percolation. (C. N. Zanger. ed.). USSR. The condition for this solution exists
when the distance from the bottom of the borehole to the water table or an impervious layer is at least twice the depth of the water in the welCH/r>5 to>10 Johnson Permeameter, LLC Revised 11/29/13

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Particle Size Distribution Report
%+3„ %Gravel
Coarse Fin,
0.0 0.0 0.1
SIEVE
SIZE
PERCENT
FINER
SPEC!
PERCENT
PASS?
(X=NO)
1.5"
100.0
1"
100.0
.5"
100.0
.375"
100.0
#4
99.9
#8
99.5
#10
99.4
#16
99.2
#40
96.5
#100
46.2
4200
33.4
(no specification provided)
Sample Number: BMP-3
GET
SOLUTIONS, INC.
Jacksonville North Carolina
Silt
Material Description
Atterbera Limits
PL= LL= P1=
Coefficients
D90= 0.3563 D85= 0.3201 D60= 0.2021
D50= 0.1648 D30= D15=
D10= Cu= Cc
Classification
USCS= AASHTO=
Remarks
Client: Whiting-TumerConsimction Co.
Project: P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Project No: JX13-I IOG
Date:

Constant -Head Borehole Permeameter Test
Analytical Method: Glover Solution
GE®
Project Name......: Staff NCO Training Academy
Boring No...........: BMP-4
Investigators.......: J. Huber; L. Brown
Project No......: JX13-11OG
Proj. Location...: MCB Camp Lejeune, NC
Date ..................: 1/6/14
Terminology and Solution (R. E. Glover Solution)
Ksats: (Coefficient of Permeability) @ Base Tmp. T. (°C) 14
Q: Rate of flow of water from the borehole
Boring Depth....... 2 (m, cm, ft, in)
Boring Diameter..: 8.3 cm
Boring Radius r... : 4.15 cm
Soil/Water Tmp. T: 11 'C
Dyn. Visc. @ T °C.: 0.001271 kg/m•s
WCU Base Ht. h: 15.0 cm
WCU Susp. Ht. S: 6.4 cm
Const. Wtr. Ht. H: 21.4 cm
H/r**...................: 5.2
Dyn. Visc. @ Ta°C.: 0.001170 kg/m•s
H: Constant height of water in the borehole
r: Radius of the cylindrical borehole
V: Dyn. Visc. of water @ Tmp. T "C/Dyn. Visc. of water @ T8
Ksat = Q[sinh*'(H/r) - (r2/H2+1)s + r/H]/(2nH2) [Basic Glover Solu.]
Ksata= QV[sinh-'(H/r) - (r'/Hz+1).s+ r/H]/(2nHz) [Tmp. Correction]
VOLUME
ml
Volume Out
ml
TIME
h:mm:ssA P
Interval Elapsed Time
Flow Rate Q
ml min
---------- Ksats Equivalent Values------------
hr:min:Sec min
cm min cm sec cm da in hr ftda
2,400
9:05:35 AM
2,3001
100
9:06:28 AM
0:00:53
0.88
11 1.21
0.065
1.08E-03
93.4
1.533
3.07
2,2001
100
9:07:31 AM
0:01:03
1.05
95.241
0.055
9.10E-04
78.6
1.289
2.5
2,100
100
9:08:49 AM
0:01:18
1.30
76.92
0.044
7.35E-04
63.5
1.041
2.08
2,000
100
9:10:10 AM
0:01:21
1.35
74.07
0.042
7.08E-04
61.1
1.003
2.01
1,900
100
9:11:27 AM
0:01:17
1.28
77.92
0.045
7.44E-04
64.3
1.055
2.11
1,800
100
9:12:52 AM
0:01:25
1.42
70.59
0.040
6.74E-04
58.3
0,956
1.91
1,700
100
9:14:09 AM
0:01:17
1.28
77.92
0.0451
7.44E-04
64.31
1.055
2.11
1,600
100
9:15:34 AM
0:01:25
1.42
70.59
0.040
6.74E-04
58.3
0.956
1.91
1,500
100
9:17:12 AM
0:01:38
- 1.63
61.22
0.035
5.85E-04
50.5
0.829
1.66
Natural Moisture......: 11.6
lConsistency ...............: Loose
Field -Estimated Ksat:
0.0421
6.95E-04
60.01
0.9851
1.97
USDA Tct./USCS Class: SM
lWater Table Depth ... 8.0
Notes: Estimated field Ksat is determined by averaging and/or rounding of test results for the final three or four
stabilized values and analyzing the graph.
truct./%Pass. p200.: 29.8
11nit. Saturation Time.: 9:05:00 AM
Glover, R. E. 1953. Flow from a test -hole located above groundwater level, pp. 69-71. in: Theory and Problems of Water Percolation. (C. N. Zanger. ed.). USBR. The condition for this solution exists
when the distance from the bottom of the borehole to the water table or an impervious layer is at least twice the depth of the water in the welCH/r>5 to >10 Johnson Permeameter, LLC Revised 11/29/13

Z
Z
LL
F
Z
w
U
w
W
a-
Particle Size Distribution Report
% +3"
SIEVE
SIZE
PERCENT
FINER
SPEC.`
PERCENT
`PASS?
(X=NO)
1.5"
100.0
V
100.0
.5"
100.0
.375"
100.0
#4
99.9
#8
99.8
#10
99.8
#16
99.5
#40
98.1
#100
65.2
#200
29.8
(no specification provided)
Sample Number: BMP4
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
PL=
LL=
Pl=
Coefficients
D90= 0.2888
D85= 0.2454
D60= 0.1343
D50= 0.1099
D30= 0.0753
D15=
D10=
Cu=
Cc=
Classification
USCS=
AASHTO=
Remarks
Date:
GET Client: Whiting-TumerConstmetion Co.
SOLUTIONS, INC. Project: P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Jacksonville North Carolina Project No: JX13-IIOG Figure

Constant -Head Borehole Permeameter Test
Analytical Method: Glover Solution
GE®
Project Name......: Staff NCO Training Academy
Boring No...........: BMP-5
Investigators.......: J. Huber; L. Brown
Project No......: JX13-110G
Proj. Location...: MCB Camp Lejeune, NC
Date ..................: 1/6/14
Terminology and Solution (R. E. Glover Solution)
Ksata: (Coefficient of Permeability) @ Base Tmp. Ta (°C) 14
Q: Rate of flow of water from the borehole
Boring Depth......: 2 (m, cm, ft, in)
Boring Diameter..: 8.3 cm
Boring Radius r...: 4.15 cm
Soil/Water Tmp. T: 11 oC
Dyn. Visc. @ T'C.: 0.001271 kg/m.s
WCU Base Ht. h: 15.0 cm
WCU Susp. Ht. S: 6.4 cm
Const. Wtr. Ht. H: 21.4 cm
H/r **........... .......: 5.2
Dyn. Visc. @ To" 0.001170 kg/m•s
H: Constant height of water in the borehole
r: Radius of the cylindrical borehole
V: Dyn. Visc. of water @ Tmp. T °C/Dyn. Visc. of water @ Tg
Ksat = Q[sinh-t(H/r) - (r2/H2+1)'s+ r/H]/(2nH2) [Basic Glover Solu.]
Ksata= QV[sinh-1(H/r) - (rz/Hz+1)'s + r/H]/(2nHz) [Tmp. Correction]
VOLUME
ml
Volume Out
ml
TIME
h:mm:ssA P
Intel Elapsed Time
rva
Flow Rate Q
ml min
1 Ksata Equivalent Values -----------------
hr:min:sec min
cm min cm sec cm da in hr ftda
120
9:30:00 AM
110
10
9:30:14 AM
0:00:14
0.23
42.86
0.02SI
4.09E-04
35.4
0.580
1.16
100
10
9:30:31 AM
0:00:17
0.281
35.29
0.020
3.37E-04
29.1
0.478
0.9
90
10
9:30:49 AM
0:00:181
0.30
33.33
0.019
3.18E-04
27.5
0.451
0.90
80
10
9:31:04 AM
0:00:15
0.25
40.00
0.023
3.82E-04
33.0
0.542
1.08
70
10
9:31:21 AM
0:00:17
0.28
35.29
0.020
3.37E-04
29.1
0.478
0.96
60
10
9:31:40 AM
0:00:19
0.32
31.58
0.018
3.02E-04
26.1
0.428
0.86
50
10
9:31:58 AM
0:00:18
0.30
33.33
0.019
3.18E-04
27.5
0.451
0.90
40
10
9:32:20 AM
0:00:22
0.37
27.27
0.0161
2.60E-04
22.5
0.369
0.74
. 30
10
9:32:44 AM
0:00:24
0.40
25.00
0.014
2.39E-04
20.6
0.338
0.68
20
10
9:33:13 AM
0:00:29
0.48
20.69
0.012
1.98E-04
17.1
0.280
0.56
10
10
9:33:42 AM
0:00:29
0.48
20.69
0.012
1.98E-04
17.1
0.280
0.56
Natural Moisture......: 15.1
Consistency ...............: Loose
Field -Estimated Ksat:
0.0131
2.24E-041
19.31
0.3171
0.63
USDA TM./USCS Class: SM
lWate, Table Depth ... 8.0
Notes: Estimated field Ksat is determined by averaging and/or rounding of test results for the final three or four
stabilized values and analyzing the graph.
trust./%Pass. p200.: 34.9
11nit. Saturation Time.: 9:30:00 AM
Glover, R. E. 1953. Flow from a test -hole located above groundwater level, pp. 69-71. in: Theory and Problems of Water Percolation. (C. N. Zanger. ed.). USBR. The condition for this solution exists
when the distance from the bottom of the borehole to the water table or an impervious layer is at least twice the depth of the water in the welICH/r>5 to>10 Johnson Permeameter, LLC Revised 11/29/13

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Particle Size Distribution Report
,ICI
%+3.1
- "
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
Silt I Clay
0.0
1 0.0
0.0
0.2
1.2
63.7
34.9
SIEVE
SIZE
PERCENT
FINER
SPEC.*
PERCENT
PASS?
(X=NO)
1.5"
100.0
V.
100.0
.5"
100.0
.375"
100.0
#4
100.0
#8
99.9
#10
99.8
#16
99.7
#40
98.6
#100
60.9
#200
34.9
(no specification provided)
Sample Number: BMP-5
GET
SOLUTIONS, INC.
Jacksonville North Carolina
Material Description
Atterbera Limits
PL= LL= Pl=
Coefficients
Dgo= 0.3078 D85= 0.2678 D80= 0.1467
D50= 0.1136 D30= D15=
D10= Cu= Cc
Classification
USCS= AASHTO=
Remarks
Client: Whiting-TumerConstmction Co.
Project: P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Project No: JX13-110G
Date:

Constant -Head Borehole Permeameter Test
Analytical Method: Glover Solution
GE®
Project Name......: Staff NCO Training Academy
Boring No...........: BMP-6
Investigators.......: J. Huber; L. Brown
Project No......: JX13-11OG
Proj. Location...: MCB Camp Lejeune, NC
Date ..................: 12/31/13
Terminology and Solution (R. E. Glover Solution)
Ksats: (Coefficient of Permeability) @ Base Tmp. Ta (°C) 14
Q: Rate of flow of water from the borehole
Boring Depth......: 2 (m, cm, ft, in)
Boring Diameter..: 8.3 cm
Boring Radius r... : 4.15 cm
Soil/Water Tmp. T: 11 oC
Dyn. Visc. @ T *C.: 0.001271 kg/m•s
WCU Base Ht. h: 15.0 cm
WCU Susp. Ht. S: 6.4 cm
Const. Wtr. Ht. H: 21.4 cm
H/r**...................: 5.2
Dyn. Visc. @ T.°C.: 0.001170 kg/m•s
H: Constant height of water in the borehole
r: Radius of the cylindrical borehole
V: Dyn. Visc. of water @ Tmp. T °C/Dyn. Visc. of water @ Ts
Ksat =Q[sinh"(H/r)-(r'/Hz+1)'s+r/H]/(2nH') [Basic Glover Solu.]
I Ksata= QV[sinh-t(H/r) - (r'/H'+1)'s+ r/H]/(2nH') [Tmp. Correction]
VOLUME
ml
Volume Out
ml
TIME
h:mm:ss A P
Interval Elapsed Time
Flow Rate Q
ml min
-------------- Ksats Equivalent Values -------------------
hr:min:sec min
cm min cm sec(cm/day)in hr ft da
120
1
9:10:19 AM
110
10
9:10:44 AM
0:00:25
0.42
24.00
0.014
2.29E-04
19.8
0.325
0.65
100
10
9:12:19 AM
0:01:35
1.58
6.32
0.004
6.03E-05
5.2
0.086
0.1
90
10
9:13:30 AM
0:01:11
1.18
8.45
0.005
8.07E-05
7.0
0.114
0.23
80
10
9:14:51 AM
0:01:21
1.35
7.41
0.004
7.08E-05
6.1
0.100
0.20
75
5
9:15:22 AM
0:00:31
0.52
9.68
0.006
9.24E-05
8.0
0,131
0.26
70
5
9:15:50 AM
0:00:28
0.47
10.71
0.006
1.02E-04
8.8
0.145
0.29
65
5
9:16:23 AM
0:00:33
0.55
9.09
0.0051
8.68E-05
7.51
0.123
0.25
60
5
9:16:48 AM
0:00:25
0.42
12.00
0.007
1.15E-04
9.9
0.162
0.32
55
5
9:17:16 AM
0:00:281
0.47
10.71
0.006
1.02E-04
8.8
0.145
0.29
50
5
9:17:45 AM
0:00:29
0.48
10.34
0.006
9.88E-05
8.5
0.140
0.28
Natural Moisture......; 14.0
lConsistency ...............: Loose
Field -Estimated Ksat:
0.005
8.99E-05
7.8
0.127
0.25
USDA TKt./USCS Class: SM
lWater Table Depth ... 8.0
Notes: Estimated field Ksat is determined by averaging and/or rounding of test results for the final three or four
stabilized values and analyzing the graph.
truct./% Pass. #200.: 46.8
linit. Saturation Time.: 9:10:00 AM
Glover, R. E. 1953. Flow from a test -hole located above groundwater level, pp. 69-71. in: Theory and Problems of Water Percolation. (C. N. Zanger. ed.). USBR. The condition for this solution exists
when the distance from the bottom of the borehole to the water table or an impervious layer is at least twice the depth of the water in the welICH/r>5 to>10 Johnson Permeameter, LLC Revised 11/29/13

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Particle Size Distribution Report
�I
�II■�1■1
1
Coarse Medium Fine
0.0 1.3 51.9
SIEVE
SIZE
PERCENT
FINER
SPEC!
PERCENT
PASS?
(X=NO)
1.5"
100.0
V
100.0
.5"
100.0
.375"
100.0
#4
100.0
#8
100.0
#10
100.0
#16
99.8
#40
98.7
#100
71.0
#200
46.8
(no specification provided)
Sample Number: BMP-6
GET
SOLUTIONS, INC.
Jacksonville North Carolina
Silt
46.8
Material Description
Atterbera Limits
PL= LL= PI=
Coefficients
D90= 0.2744 D85= 0.2299 D60= 0.1092
D50= 0.0821 D30= D15=
D10= Cu= Cc=
Classification
USCS= AASHTO=
Remarks
Date:
Client: Whiting -Tumor Construction Co.
Project: P003 Staff NCO Academy Facilities
Project No: JX13-110G Figure

Constant -Head Borehole Permeameter Test
Analytical Method: Glover Solution
GE®
Project Name......: Staff NCO Training Academy
Boring No...........: BMP-8
Investigators.......: J. Huber; L. Brown
Project No......: JX13-11OG
Proj. Location...: MCB Camp Lejeune, NC
Date ..................: 12/31/13
Terminology and Solution (R. E. Glover Solutionf
Ksate: (Coefficient of Permeability) @ Base Tmp. T. (°C) 14
Q: Rate of flow of water from the borehole
Boring Depth......: 2 (m, cm, ft, in)
Boring Diameter..: 8.3 cm
Boring Radius r... : 4.15 cm
Soil/Water Tmp. T: 11 oC
Dyn. Visc. @T°C.: 0.001271 kg/m•s
WCU Base Ht. h: 15.0 cm
WCU Susp. Ht. S: 6.4 cm
Const. Wtr. Ht. H: 21.4 cm
H/r **...................: 5.2
Dyn. Visc. @Ta°C.: 0.001170 kg/m•s
H: Constant height of water in the borehole
r: Radius of the cylindrical borehole
V: Dyn. Visc. of water @ Tmp. T °C/Dyn. Visc. of water @ Ta
Ksat=Q[sinh-t(H/r)-(rz/Hz+1)'s+r/H]/(2nHz) [Basic Glover Solu.]
Ksata=QV[smt(H/r)-(rz/Hz+1)s+r/H]/(2nHz)[Tmp. Correction]
VOLUME
ml
Volume Out
ml
TIME
h:mm:ssA P
Interval Elapsed Time
Flow Rate Q
ml min
----------- Ksata Equivalent Values------------
hr:min:sec min
cm min cm sec cm da in hr ft da
120
9:50:10 AM
-
110
10
9:50:23 AM
0:00:13
0.22
46.15
0.026
4.41E-04
38.1
0.625
1.25
100
10
9:50:45 AM
0:00:221
0.37
27.27
0.016
2.60E-04
22.51
0.369
0.7
90
10
9:51:15 AM
0:00:30
0.50
20.00
0,011
1.91E-04
16.5
0.271
0.54
80
10
9:51:52 AM
0:00:37
0.62
16.22
0.009
1.55E-04
13.4
0.220
0.44
70
10
9:52:39 AM
0:00:47
0.78
12.77
0.007
1.22E-04
10.5
0.173
0.35
60
10
9:53:28 AM
0:00:49
0.82
12.24
0.007
1.17E-04
10.1
0.166
0.33
50
10
9:54:28 AM
0:01:00
1.00
10.00
0.006
9.55E-05
8.3
0.135
0.27
40
10
9:55:33 AM
0:01:05
1.08
9.23
0.005
8.82E-05
7.6
0.125
0.25
30
10
9:56:40 AM
0:01:071
1.12
8.96
0.005
8.55E-05
7.4
0.121
0.24
Natural Moisture......: 12.4
lConsistency ...............: Loose
Field -Estimated Ksat:1
0.0061
9.65E-05
8.3
0.1371
0.27
USDA TXt./USCS Class: SM
lWater Table Depth ... 8.0
Notes: Estimated field Ksat is determined by averaging and/or rounding of test results for the final three or four
stabilized values and analyzing the graph.
truct./% Pass. f1200.: 43.6
11nit. Saturation Time.: 9:50:00 AM
Glover, R. E. 1953. Flow from a test -hole located above groundwater level, pp. 69-71. in: Theory and Problems of Water Percolation. (C. N. Zanger. ed.). USBR. The condition for this solution exists
when the distance from the bottom of the borehole to the water table or an impervious layer is at least twice the depth of the water in the welICH/r>5 to >10 Johnson Permeameter, LLC Revised 11/29/13

Particle Size Distribution Report
ooa
!O CJ N \ n \ h # A # # # A
100
90
80
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
70
I
I
Z so
I
I
I
I
I
LL
I
I
z
50
I
I
I
U
I
I
w ao
a
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
3o
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
20
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
to
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
0
I
I
I
too 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
% +3„
%, Gravel
% Sand
% Fines
Coarse
Fine
Coarse Medium
Fine
Slit Clay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 2.0
54.4 1
43.6
SIEVE
PERCENT
SPECS
PASS?

Constant -Head Borehole Permeameter Test
Analytical Method: Glover Solution
GE®
Project Name......: Staff NCO Training Academy
Boring No...........: BMP-9
Investigators.......: J. Huber; L. Brown
Project No......: JX13-11OG
Proj. Location...: MCB Camp Lejeune, NC
Date ..................: 12/31/13
Terminology and Solution [R. E. Glover Solutionf
Ksata: (Coefficient of Permeability) @ Base Tmp. T. (°C) 14
Q: Rate of flow of water from the borehole
Boring Depth......: 2 (m, cm, ft, in)
Boring Diameter..: 8.3 cm
Boring Radius r... : 4.15 cm
Soil/Water Tmp. T: 11 eC
Dyn. Visc. @ T °C.: 0.001271 kg/m•s
WCU Base Ht. h: 15.0 cm
WCU Susp. Ht. S: 6.4 cm
Const. Wtr. Ht. H: 21.4 cm
H/r....................... 5.2
Dyn. Visc. @ TO°C.: 0.001170 kg/m•s
H: Constant height of water in the borehole
r: Radius of the cylindrical borehole
V: Dyn. Visc. of water @ Tmp. T °C/Dyn. Visc. of water @ Ta
Ksat = Q[sinh-'(H/r) - (r'/H'+1)'s+ r/H)/(2nH2) [Basic Glover Solu.]
Ksata= QV[sinli'(H/r) - (r'/H'+1)5+ r/H]/(2nHz) [Tmp. Correction]
VOLUME
ml
Volume Out
ml
TIME
h:mm:ss A P
Interval Elapsed Time
Flow Rate Q
ml min
I ----------- Ksata Equivalent Values-------------
hr:min:sec min
cm min (cm/sec cm da in hr ftda
1,500
10:22:14 AM
-
1,4001
100
10:22:41 AM
0:00:27
0.45
222.22
0.1271
2.12E-03
183.4
3.008
6.02
1,3001
100
10:23:12 AM
0:00:31
0.52
193.551
0.1111
1.85E-03
159.7
2.620
5.2
1,200
100
10:23:53 AM
0:00:41
0.68
146.34
0.084
1.40E-03
120.8
1.981
3.96
1,100
100
10:24:34 AM
0:00:41
0.68
146.34
0.084
1.40E-03
120.8
1.981
3.96
1,000
100
1015:15 AM
0:00:41
0.68
146.34
0.084
1.40E-03
120.8
1.981
3.96
900
100
10:25:59 AM
0:00:44
0.73
136.36
0.078
1.30E-03
112.5
1.846
3.69
800
100
10:26:48 AM
0:00:491
0.82
122,45
0.070
1.17E-031
101.1
1.658
3.32
700
100
10:27:33 AM
0:00:45
0.75
133.33
0.076
1.27E-03
110.0
1.805
3.61
600
100
10:28:25 AM
0:00:52
0.87
115.38
0.066
1.10E-03
95.2
1.562
3.12
Natural Moisture......: 11.7
lConsistency ...............: Loose
Field -Estimated Ksat:
1 0.0731
1.21E-031
104.71
1.7181
3.44
USDA Tzt./USCS Class: SM
Water Table Depth ... 8.0
Notes: Estimated field Ksat is determined by averaging and/or rounding of test results for the final three or four
stabilized values and analyzing the graph.
tract./% Pass. #200.: 25.0
linit. Saturation Time.: 10:22:00 AM
Glover, R. E. 1953. Flow from a test -hole located above groundwater level, pp. 69-71. in: Theory and Problems of Water Percolation. (C. N. Zanger. ed.). USBR. The condition for this solution exists
hen the distance from the bottom of the borehole to the water table or an impervious layer is at least twice the depth of the water in the we11.*H/n5 to >10 Johnson Permeameter, LLC Revised 11/29/13

Particle Size Distribution Report
(O (7 N \ n '1Z
100
90
I
I
I
I
I
I
80
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
70
so
I
I
I
z
I
I
I
LL
I
I
I
I
z so
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
v
w
ao
I
I
w
CL
I
I
3o
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
20
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
10
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
0
I
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
% +3„
°/, Gravel
% Sand
% Fines
Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Medium
Fine
Silt Clay
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.4
2.2
71.8
25.0
SIEVE
PERCENT
SPEC.'
PASS?

Constant -Head Borehole Permeameter Test
Analytical Method: Glover Solution
GE®
Project Name......: Staff NCO Training Academy
Boring No...........: BMP-10
Investigators.......: J. Huber; L. Brown
Project No......: JX13-11OG
Proj. Location...: MCB Camp Lejeune, NC
Date ..................: 12/31/13
Terminology and Solution (R. E. Glover Solutionf
Ksata: (Coefficient of Permeability) @ Base Tmp. TB (°C) 14
Q: Rate of flow of water from the borehole
Boring Depth......: 2 (m, cm, ft, in)
Boring Diameter..: 8.3 cm
Boring Radius r... : 4.15 cm
oil/Water Tmp.T: 11 °C
Dyn. Visc. @ T °C.: 0.001271 kg/m-s IDyn.
WCU Base Ht. h: 15.0 cm
WCU Susp. Ht. S: 6.4 cm
Const. Wtr. Ht. H: 21.4 cm
H/r**...................: 5.2
Visc. @ Ta °C.: 0.001170 kg/m-s
H: Constant height of water in the borehole
r: Radius of the cylindrical borehole
V: Dyn. Visc. of water @ Tmp. T "C/Dyn. Visc. of water @ TB
Ksat=Q(sinh'(H/r)-(r2/H'+1)'s+r/H]/(2nH2) [Basic Glover Solu.]
Ksata= QV[sinli t(H/r) - (r2/H'+1)�s+ r/H]/(2nH2) [Tmp. Correction]
VOLUME
ml
Volume Out
ml
TIME
h:mm:ssA P
Interval Elapsed Time
Flow Rate Q
ml min(cm/min)
------------ Ksata Equivalent Values--------------
hr:min:sec min
n cm sec cm da in hr ft da
3,100
10:43:40 AM
3,000
100
10:44:25 AM
0:00:45
0.75
133.33
0.076
1.27E-03
110.0
1.805
3.61
2,900
100
10:45:26 AM
0:01:01
1.02
98.36
0.056
9.39E-04
81.2
1.332
2.6
2,800
100
10:46:22 AM
0:00:561
0.93
107.14
0.061
1.02E-03
88.4
1.450
2.90
2,700
100
10:47:29 AM
0:01:07
1.12
89.55
0.051
8.55E-04
73.9
1.212
2.42
2,600
100
10:48:40 AM
0:01:11
1.18
84.51
0.048
8.07E-04
69.7
1.144
2.29
2,500
100
10:49:59 AM
0:01:19
1.32
75.95
0.044
7.25E-04
62.7
1.028
2.06
2,400
100
10:51:13 AM
0:01:14
1.23
81.08
0,0461
7.74E-04
66.91
1,098
2.20
2,300
100
10:52:22 AM
0:01:09
1.15
86.96
0,050
8.31E-04
71.8
1.177
2.35
2,200
100
10:53:32 AM
0:01:10
1.17
85.71
0.049
8.19E-04
70.7
1.160
2.32
2,100
100
10:54:42 AM
0:01:101
1.17
85.71
0.049
8.19E-04
70.7
1.160
2.32
Natural Moisture......: 18.3
lConsistency ...............: Loose
Field -Estimated Ksat:1
0.0481
7.94E-041
68.61
1.1251
2.25
USDA Tnt./USCS Class: SM
lWater Table Depth ... 8.0
Notes: Estimated field Ksat is determined by averaging and/or rounding of test results for the final three or four
stabilized values and analyzing the graph.
truct./% Pass. N200.: 32.5
linit. Saturation Time.: 10:43:00 AM
Glover, R. E. 1953. Flow from a test -hole located above groundwater level, pp. 69-71. in: Theory and Problems of Water Percolation. (C. N. Zanger. ed.). USBR. The condition for this solution exists
when the distance from the bottom of the borehole to the water table or an impervious layer is at least twice the depth of the water in the welICH/r>5 to>10 Johnson Permeameter, LLC Revised 11/29/13

Particle Size Distribution Report
100
I I I I I I I I I I I I
90
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
so
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
70
Of
I
I
I
I
I
Z so
I
I
ILLI
I
I
I
z so
I
I
I
v
w
I
I
w ao
a
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
3o
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
20
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
to
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
0
I
100 10 1 Ql 0.01 0.001
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
%+3"
% Gravel
% Sand
% Fines
Coarse
Fine
Coarse Medium
Fine
Silt Clay
0.0
0.0
0.0 1
0.7 6.1
60.7 1
32.5
SIEVE
PERCENT
SPEC.'
PASS?

GET
uvua"wt . Emrmnmmmm . rruaq
Virginia Beach Office
204 Grayson Road
Virginia Beach, VA 23462
[phone]
Williamsburg Office
1592 Penniman Rd. Suite E
Williamsburg, Virginia 23185
[phone]
CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM FOR SOIL EXPLORATION
Elizabeth City Office
504 East Elizabeth St. Suite 2
Elizabeth City, NC 27909
[phone]
Standard Penetration Test (SPT), N-value
Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) were performed in the field in general accordance with ASTM D 1586. The soil samples were obtained with a
standard 1.4" I.D., 2" O.D., 30" long split -spoon sampler. The sampler was driven with blows of a 140 Ib. hammer falling 30 inches. The number of
blows required to drive the sampler each 6-inch increment (4 increments for each soil sample) of penetration was recorded and is shown on the
boring logs. The sum of the second and third penetration increments is termed the SPT N-value.
NON COHESIVE SOUS
(SILT, SAND, GRAVEL and Combinations)
Relative Density
Very Loose 4 blows/ft. or less
Loose 5 to 10 blows/ft.
Medium Dense I to 30 blows/ft.
Dense 31 to 50 blows/ft.
Very Dense 51 blows/ft. or more
Particle
Size Identification
Boulders
8 inch diameter or more
Cobbles
3 to 8 inch diameter
Gravel
Coarse
1 to 3 inch diameter
Medium
1/2 to 1 inch diameter
Fine
1/q to 1/r inch diameter
Sand
Coarse
2.00 mm to 1/a inch
(diameter of pencil lead)
Medium
0.42 to 2.00 min
(diameter of broom straw)
Fine
0.074 to 0.42 mm
(diameter of human hair)
Silt
0.002 to 0.074 min
(cannot see particles)
CLASSIFICATION SYMBOLS (ASTM D 2487 and D 2488)
Costae Grained Soils
More than 50%retained on No. 200 sieve
GW - Well -graded Gravel
GP - Poorly graded Gravel
GW-GM - Well -graded Gravel w/Silt
GW-GC - Well -graded Gravel w/Clay
GP -GM - Poorly graded Gravel w/Silt
GP -GC - Poorly graded Gravel w/Clay
GM - Silty Gravel
GC - Clayey Gravel
GC -GM - Silty, Clayey Gravel
SW - Well -graded Sand
SP - Poorly graded Sand
SW-SM - Well -graded Sand w/Silt
SW -SC - Well -graded Sand w/Clay
SP-SM - Poorly graded Sand w/Silt
SIP -SC - Poorly graded Sand ve/Clay
SM - Silty Sand
SC - Clayey Sand
SC-SM - Silty, Clayey Sand
Fine -Grained Soils
50% or more passes the No. 200 sieve
CL - Lean Clay
CL-ML - Silty Clay
ML - Silt
OL - Organic Clay/Silt
Liquid Limit 50%or greater
CH - Fat Clay
MH - Elastic Silt
OH - Organic Clay/Silt
Highly Organic Soils
PT - Peat
COHESIVE SOILS
(CLAY, SILT and Combinations)
Consistency
Very Soft
2 blows/ft. or less
Soft
3 to 4 blows/ft.
Medium Stiff
5 to 8 blows/ft.
Stiff
9 to 15 blows/ft.
Very Stiff
16 to 30 blows/ft.
Hard
31 blows/ft. or more
Relative
Pro_nortions
Descriptive Term Percent
Trace
0-5
Few
5-10
Little
15-25
Some
30-45
Mostly
50-100
Strata ChaneeS
In the column "Description" on the boring log, the horizontal
lines represent approximate strata changes.
roundwater Readin
Groundwater conditions will vary with environmental
variations and seasonal conditions, such as the frequency and
magnitude of rainfall patterns, as well as tidal influences and
man-made influences, such as existing swales, drainage
ponds, underdmins and areas of covered soil (paved parking
lots, side walks, etc.).
Depending on percentage of fines (fraction smaller than No
200 sieve size), coarse -grained soils are classified as follows:
Less than 5 percent GW, GP, SW,SP
More than 12 percent GM, GC, SM, SC
5 to 12 percent Borderline cases requiring dual
.symbols
Plasticity Chart
60
50
6
X 40
w
30
20
5 10
a
0
CH
0
Pape 1 of 1
GET Revision 12 12107
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
LIQUID LIMB (LL) (%)

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. 2008 2570 County: Onslow-U.S.G.S. Quad: Camp Leieune
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner/Agent: USNIC- CanmLelcune Consultant: Geo=i\imiire'•[ncm•noraled
Address: attn: IYlarty Korenck alto: Jef DeBerry
PSC Box 20004 2713 Maeruder, Blvd, Suite D
Camp Leieune, NC 28542 Hamilton, VA 23666
Property description
Size (acres) + 2000 acres Nearest Town Camp Lcleune
Nearest Waterway Northeast and New River Watersheds River Basin White Oak
USGS HUC 0303000/ Coordinates N 34.7247 W 71.3770
Location description The review area Is located withhn Canto Lcleune specifically within Camp J
Indicate'Which of the Following ADO :
A. Preliminary Determination
Based on preliminary information, there may be wctlands'ou the above described properly. We strongly suggest you have
this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA) jurisdiction. To be considered final, a
jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action_
under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process ( Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
B. Approved Determination
There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is a change in the law or
our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
X There are wetlands on the above described property subject to the permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our -published regulations, this determination may be
relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
We strongly suggest you have the wetlands on your property delineated. Due to the size of your property and/or our
present workload, file Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner. For a more timely
delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant. To be considered final, any delineation must be. verified by the Corps.
_ The wetland on your property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the Corps. We strongly
suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by lire Corps.
Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property
which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for aperiod not to exceed
five years.
The wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps
Regulatory Official identified below on 3/16/2009. Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may he relied upon for a period not to exceed five yeas from fine date of this notification.
_ "There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on file above described properly which are 'subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of file Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years, from the date'of this
notification.
The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Commies -subject to regulation under tine Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Washington, NC, at [phone] to determine
their requirements.
Page 1 of 2

Action ID:
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). If you have any questions regarding this
determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Brad Shaver at 910-251-4611.
C. Basis For Determination
The subject area exhibits wetland criteria asdescribed fit the 1987 Corns Delineation Manual and Is abutting or
represented by relatively nermaneat walerbodies which ultimately flow Into the Northeast Creek and New River, both
traditional navigable waters of the US.
D. Remarks
The site was field verified by Emily Hughes and Brad Shaver on 5/27108, 6/24/08, 7/29/08, 8/12/08, 8/19/08, 8126/08
9/9/08, nntl 9/16/08.
E. Appeals Infot•mation (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as Indicated In
B. above)
This correspondence'constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. IFyou request to appeal this
deterniinalion you must submit a completed RFA form to the Following address:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
Atin: Brad Shaver, Project Manager,
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
69 Darlington Ave
Wilmington,.North Carolina 28402-1890
A.
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for
appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it his been received by the District Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP.
Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at rho above address by 5/16/2009.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the District Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence.**
Corps Regulatory Official: _ id. l d.'t'
Date 3/16/2009
Expiration Date 3/16/2014
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to
do so, please complete the attached customer Satisfaction Survey or visit
littl):Hhvww.saw.tis,ice.army.mil/WETLANDS/index html to complete, the survey online.
Copy furnished:
Charles F. Riggs & Associates; Inc. attic Charles Riggs, P.L.S P.O. Box 1570 Jacksonville, NC 28541
Page 2 of 2

U.S MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP JOHNSON
WETLANDS SURVEY
PROJECT AREA - ONSLUW COUNTY
MAP DATE- SEPTEMBER 18, ZOOS
DATA ANALSIS BASED ON
HAD 1983 UTH ISN BASE GRID INFORMATION
WETLANDS DELINEATED BY
JEFFREY W. DEBERRY, PVS
GEO-MARINE, INC.
L713 MAGRUDER BOULEVARD, SUITE D
HAMPTON, VA. L3666
TEL, [phone]
FAX, [phone]
SURVEYED AND PREARED BY
JOHN L. PIERCE 6 ASSOCIATES
405'JOHNSON BOULEVARD
JACKSONVILLE, N.C. 28340
TEL, [phone]
FAX- [phone] '
UNDER THE DIRECTION OF
JOHN L. PIERCE ,
PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR, L-2596
NERAL NOTES,
ALL DISTANCES SHOWN ARE GROUND HORIZONTAL,
THIS SURVEY IS TIED TO GRID AND THE DATUM IS -
RAO-83.
THIS SURVEY IS SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS, r
AGREEMENTS AND RIGHT-OF-VAY OF RECORD PRIOR TO
THE DATE OF THE SURVEY.
THIS SURVEY IS OF WETLANDS BOUNDARIES OF 170AND
36 PROJECT AREA CAMPJOHNSDN BY GEOiIARINE AND F
6. THIS IA A CLASS •A• DGPS. SURVEY.
THIS NM IS A CERTIFIED SURVEY BUT HAS NOT BEEN
REVIEWED BY A LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGENCY FOR
COMPLIANCEWITH ANY APPLICABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS AND THEREFORE DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM
STANDARDSFI3R RECORDING
.,WUUnq)lie. ,
i
BILE Cct Alaw0rc A -
DATE 3'(d'z0°l
1AALY ACnDN 0 LSO 0

U.S. MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP JOHNS13N
WETLANDS SURVEY
PROJECT AREA - ONSLOW COUNTY
MAP DATE, SEPTEMBER IS, 2008
DATA ANALSIS BASED ON
NAB 1983 UTM IBM BASE GRID INFORMATION
WETLANDS DELINEATED BY
JEFFREY W. DEBERRY, PWS
GED-MARINE, INC.
2713 MAGRUDER BOULEVARD, SUITE D
HAMPTON, VA. 23666
TEL, [phone]
FAX- [phone]
SURVEYED AND PREARED BY
JOHN L. PIERCE 6 ASSOCIATES
405 JOHNSON BOULEVARD
JACKSONVILLE, N.C. 28540
TEL, [phone]
FAX, (910) 346-12I0
UNDER THE DIRECTION [IF
JOHN L. PIERCE
PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR, L-2596
NERAL NOTES,
ALL DISTANCES SHOWN ARE GROUND HORIZONTAL.
THIS SURVEY IS TIED TO GRID AND THE DATUM IS
NAD-83.
THIS SURVEY IS PREARED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A
TITLE REPORT AND MAY NOT INDICATE ALL ENCU14BRANC
ON THE PROPERTY.
THIS SURVEY IS SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS,
AGREEMENTS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY OF RECORD PRIOR TO
THE DATE OF THE SURVEY.
THIS SURVEY IS OF WETLANDS BOUNDARIES OF I7097-1
36 PROJECT AREA CAMP JOHNSON BY GEO-MARINE AND
SURVEYED BY JOHN L. PIERCE 6 ASSOCIATES.
TA A CLASS 'A' DGPS SURVEY.
THIS MAP IS A CERTIFIED SURVEY BUT HAS NOT BEEN
REVIEWED BY A LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGENCY FOR
COMPLIANCEWITH ANY APPLICABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS AND THEREFORE DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM
STANDARDS FOR RECORDING,
THIS IS TO
WITNESS NY HAND L SEAL
I!0_. n
FOR THE ORIGINS OF INTERMITTENT AND PERENNIAL STREAMS (VERSION
al) AND ARE ACCURATELY IDENTIi1ED ON THIS COPY OF THIS PUT.
UNLESS MERE IS A CHARGE IN ME LAW OR OUR PUBLISHED
REGULATIONS, THIS DETERMINADON MAY BE RELIED UPON FOR A PERIOD
NOT TO EXCEED FIVE YEARS FROM THIS OATS'
REGULATORY OfFlaAL 13i " /'
TITLE ^lec�..,�qp �'
DATE 3I6.1"'I
USAGE ACTION ID ZA LSj,9

N.
WETLANDS-
ARKING AREA 'A'
!at
t
tt
CT Lit
J.j
y
hm
DISTURBANCE`LIMITS OF
PARKING AREA BT-\ o0c/s;
Z�
4
d f
A. .. . ... ....
t I
if
%
;ETt 4 NOS VVITHIN,PRWE-T UMrr$'.-
it I
DRANAGEAR I
4,
------ Jol
4x. ... .... ..
iq 71 j DECISZUUR
1
ef "J
Raleih. NC00
75 2 G-3
L
Wt/
PIROPOPE INFILTRAWIN BAS
IN'S'- 't.
- - � � il; ;. —.<'! r�l/ I/�'� � 1%�, EARTH TECH AECOM 919-8g54-02
ah�--
t MARINE CORPS BASE
,aal,
X. BRPE E
t BRP�E
t 9r" M200 AREA PARKNG
SITE 0VE11\`IIM

A, fin
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory John E. Skvarla, III
Governor Secretary
April 03, 2014
LETTER OF APPROVAL WITH MODIFICATIONS AND
PERFORMANCE RESERVATIONS
MCB-Camp Lejeune
ATTN: Neal Paul, Deputy Public Works Officer
1005 Michael Road
Camp Lejeune, NC 28547
RE: Project Name: Staff NCO Academic Facilities -EXPRESS
Project ID: ONSLO-2014-076 Acres Approved: 17.89
County: Onslow, Hoover Road and Wilson Drive, Camp Johnson
River Basin: White Oak Stream Classification: Other
Submitted By: Wyatt L. Bone, PE, Clark Nexsen
Date Received by LOS: April 2, 2014
Plan Type: New
Dear Mr. Paul:
This office has reviewed the subject erosion and sedimentation control plan and hereby issues this
Letter of Approval with Modifications and Performance Reservations. A list of the modifications
and reservations is attached. This plan approval shall expire three (3) years following the date of
approval, if no land -disturbing activity has been undertaken, as is required by Title 15A NCAC 4B
. 129. Should the plan not perform adequately, a revised plan will be required (G.S.
113A-54.1)(b).
Please be aware that your project will be covered by the enclosed NPDES Construction Stormwater
General Permit NCG010000. Please become familiar with all the requirements and conditions of
this permit in order to achieve compliance.
Please he advised that Title 15A NCAC 4B .01 18(a) requires that a copy of the approved erosion
control plan be on file at the job site. Also, you should consider this letter to give the Notice
required by G.S. 1 13A-61.1(a) of our right of periodic inspection to ensure compliance with the
approved plan.
Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land Resources
Land Quality Section —Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, North Carolina 29405 • [phone] / Fax: [phone]
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer • 30% Post Consumer Paper - Internet: http:/Ipo0al.ncdenr.oLg/web/Ir/

Letter of Approval with Modifications and Performance Reservations
Project :- Staff NCO Academic Facilities
April 03, 2014
Page 2 of 4
North Carolina's Sedimentation Pollution Control Program is performance -oriented, requiring
protection of existing natural resources and adjoining properties. If, following the commencement
of this project, it is determined that the erosion and sedimentation control plan is inadequate to meet
the requirements of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (North Carolina General
Statute 1 13A-51 thru 66), this office may require revisions to the plan and implementation of the
revisions to ensure compliance with the Act.
Acceptance and approval of this plan is conditioned upon your compliance with Federal and State
water quality laws, regulations, and rules. In addition, local city or county ordinances or rules may
also apply to this land -disturbing activity. This approval does not supersede any other permit or
approval.
Please note that this approval is based in part on the accuracy of the information provided in the
Financial Responsibility Form, which you have provided. You are requested to file an amended
form if there is any change in the information included on the form. In addition, it would be helpful
if you notify this office of the proposed starting date for this project. Please notify us if you plan to
have a preconstruction conference.
Your cooperation is appreciated.
Sincerely,
% ,%kJA
Rhonda Hall
Assistant Regional Engineer
Land Quality Section
Enclosures: Certificate of Approval
Modifications and Performance Reservations
NPDES Permit
cc: Wyatt L. Bone, PE, Clark Nexsen
DWQ Regional Supervisor

Letter of Approval with Modifications and Performance Reservations
Project :- Staff NCO Academic Facilities
April 03, 2014
Page 3 of 4
MODIFICATIONS AND PERFORMANCE RESERVATIONS
Project Name: Staff NCO Academic Facilities
Project ID: ONSLO-2014-076
County: Onslow
1. This plan approval shall expire three (3) years following the date of approval, if no land
disturbing activity has been undertaken, as is required by Title 15A NCAC 4B .0129.
2. The developer is responsible for the control of sediment on -site. If the approved
erosion and sedimentation control measures prove insufficient, the developer must
take those additional steps necessary to stop sediment from leaving this site. Each
sediment storage device must be inspected after each storm event. Maintenance
and/or clean out is necessary anytime the device is at 50% capacity. All sediment
storage measures will remain on site and functional until all grading and final
landscaping of the project is complete.
3. Any and all existing ditches on this project site are assumed to be left undisturbed by
the proposed development unless otherwise noted. The removal of vegetation within
any existing ditch or channel is prohibited unless the ditch or channel is to be regarded
with side slopes of 2 horizontal to 1 vertical or less steep. Bank slopes may be
mowed, but stripping of vegetation is considered new earth work and is subject to the
same erosion control requirements as new ditches.
4. The developer is responsible for obtaining any and all permits and approvals
necessary for the development of this project prior to the commencement of this land
disturbing activity. This could include our agency's Stormwater regulations and the
Division of Water Resources' enforcement requirements within Section 401 of the
Clean Water Act, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' jurisdiction of Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act, the Division of Coastal Management's CAMA requirements, the
Division of Solid Waste Management's landfill regulations, the Environmental
Protection Agency and/or The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction of the Clean
Water Act, local County or Municipalities' ordinances, or others that may be required.
This approval cannot supersede any other permit or approval; however, in the case of
a Cease and Desist Order from the Corps of Engineers, that Order would only apply to
wetland areas. All highland would still have to be in compliance with the N.C.
Sedimentation Pollution Control Act.
5. If any area on site falls within the jurisdiction of Section 401 or 404 of the Clean Water
Act, the developer is responsible for compliance with the requirements of the Division
of Water Resources (DWR), the Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) respectively. Any erosion control measures that fall within jurisdictional
wetland areas must be approved by the aforementioned agencies prior to installation.
The Land Quality Section must be notified of a relocation of the measures in question
to the transition point between the wetlands and the uplands to assure that the
migration of sediment will not occur. If that relocation presents a problem or
contradicts any requirements of either DWR, the Corps, or the EPA, it is the
responsibility of the developer to inform the Land Quality Section regional office so that
an adequate contingency plan can be made to assure sufficient erosion control
remains on site. Failure to do so will be considered a violation of this approval.

Letter of Approval with Modifications and Performance Reservations
Project :- Staff NCO Academic Facilities
April 03, 2014
Page 4 of 4
6. Any borrow material brought onto this site must be from a legally operated mine or
other approved source. Any soil waste that leaves this site can be transported to a
permitted mine or separately permitted construction sites without additional permits.
Disposal at any other location would have to be included as a permit revision for this
approval.
7. This permit allows for a land disturbance, as called for on the application plan, not to
exceed 17.89 acres. Exceeding that acreage will be a violation of this permit and
would requi e a revised plan and additional application fee. Any addition in
impervious surface, over that already noted on the approved plan, would also require
a revised plan to verify the appropriateness of the erosion control measures and
stormwater retention measures.
8. The construction detail for the proposed silt fence requires reinforcing wire and steel
posts a maximum of eight (8) feet apart. Omission of the reinforcing wire is a
construction change that necessitates more posts for support, i.e., the spacing
distance needs to be reduced to no greater than six (6) feet apart.
9. Because the sediment traps and basins are shown on the Plan as the primary
sedimentation and erosion control devices on this project, it is necessary that the
traps and basins and their collection systems be installed before any other grading
takes place on site, and that every structure that receives more than one acre of
drainage is built so that each dewaters only from the surface. If that proves to be
impractical, a revised plan must be submitted and approved that addresses erosion
and sediment control needs during the interim period until the traps and basins are
fully functioning.
10. A graveled construction entrance must be located at each point of access and egress
available to construction vehicles during the grading and construction phases of this
project. Access and egress from the project site at a point without a graveled
entrance will be considered a violation of this approval. Routine maintenance of the
entrances is critical.
11. As a condition of the provided NPDES General Stormwater Permit, groundcover
stabilization must meet specific time frames. Slopes (including cuts, fills, and ditch
banks) that are steeper than 3 horizontal to 1 vertical left exposed will, within seven
(7) calendar days after completion of any phase of grading, be provided with
groundcover. Slopes that are 3 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter will be provided with
groundcover within fourteen (14) calendar days.
12. As a part of routine monitoring of the approved land -disturbing activity, the financially
responsible party shall assure inspections of the area covered by the approved plan
after each phase of the plan has been completed and after establishment of
temporary ground cover in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 113A
54.1(e).

The posting of this certificate certifies that an erosion and sedimentation control plan has been
approved for this project by the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 113A — 57 (4) and 113A — 54 (d) (4) and
North Carolina Administrative Code, Title 15A, Chapter 413.0107 (c). This certificate must be
posted at the primary entrance of the job site before construction begins and until establishment of
permanent groundcover as required by North Carolina Administrative Code, Title 15A, Chapter
413.0127 (b).
Date of Plan Approval
Staff NCO Academic Facilities
Project Name and Location
AAr
�'
NCDENR
clla�ou
Assistant Regional Engineer

Architecture & Engineering
Channel Design
TRAPEZOIDAL/TRIANGULAR SHAPE
h- T
Channel Location: Ditch 1A
Estimate 10-yr Peak Runoff:
Rational C
0.50
Intensity in/hr
9.00
Drainage Area
0.52
ac
Qio
2.35
cfs
Additional Flow
cfs
QIo Total, Qdeslgn
2.35
cfs
Channel Information:
Channel Bottom Width, b
2.0 ft/ft
Side Slope x:1
3.0
Channel Slope, S
0.011 ft/ft
Flow Depth, d
0.60 ft
Selected Channel Lining:
Selected Channel Linin Jute Net
Maximum Permissible Velocity max s
4
Permissible Shear Stress t (sf
0.45
Calculations:
e
1.8
ft
Side Sloe Length, m
1.9
ft
Top Width, T
5.6
ft
Channel Area, A
2.28
sq ft
Wetted Perimeter, Pw
5.79
ft
Hydraulic Radius, Rh
0.39
ft
Mannin s "n"
0.078
Calculated Flow Rate, Qmin
2.45
cfs
Calculated Velocity, Vcaic
1.08
fps
Calculated Shear Stress, tcalo
0.41
psf
Q calc _> Q design?
yes
V calc 5 V max?
yes
t calc 5 t p?
yes

Architecture & Engineering
Channel Design
TRAPEZOIDAL/TRIANGULAR SHAPE
T
Channel Location: Ditch 1B
Estimate 10-yr Peak Runoff:
Rational C
0.50
Intensity in/hr
9.00
Drainage Area
0.22
ac
QIo
0.99
cfs
Additional Flow
cfs
Qm Total, Qdesign
6.99
cfs
Channel Information:
Channel Bottom Width, b
2.0 ft/ft
Side Slope x:1
3.0
Channel Slope, S
0.019 ft/ft
Flow Depth, d
0.35 ft '
Selected Channel Lining:
Selected Channel Linin Jute Net
Maximum Permissible VelocityVmax (fps)
4
Permissible Shear Stress t (sf)
1 0.45
Calculations:
e
1.1
ft
Side Sloe Length, m
1.1
ft
Top Width, T
4.1
ft
Channel Area, A
1.07
sq ft
Wetted Perimeter, Pw
4.21
ft
Hydraulic Radius, Rh
0.25
ft
Mannin s "n"
0.078
Calculated Flow Rate, Qcalc
1.12
cfs
Calculated Velocity, Vcaic
1.05
fps
Calculated Shear Stress, tcalc
0.41
psf
Q calc >_ Q design? yes
V calc 5 V max? yes
t talc 5 t P? yes

Architecture & Engineering
Channel Design
TRAPEZOIDAL/TRIANGULAR SHAPE
h _/I T
Channel Location: Ditch 1C
Estimate 10-vr Peak Runoff:
Rational C
0:50
Intensity in/hr
9.00
Drainage Area
0.25
ac
Q10
1.13
cfs
Additional Flow
cfs
Q10 Total, Qdesign
1.13
cfs
Channel Information:
Channel Bottom Width, b
2.0 ft/ft
Side Slope x:1
3.0
Channel Slope, S
0.020 ft/ft
Flow Depth, d
0.35 ft
Selected Channel Lining:
Selected Channel LiningJute Net
Maximum Permissible Velocity max (fps)
4
Permissible Shear Stress {tp} ( sf
0.45
Calculations:
e
1.1
ft
Side Sloe Length, m
1.1
ft
Top Width, T
4.1
ft
Channel Area, A
1.07
sq ft
Wetted Perimeter, Pw
4.21
ft
Hydraulic Radius, Rh
0.25
ft
Mannin s "n"
0.078
Calculated Flow Rate, Qcaic
1.15
cfs
Calculated Velocity, Vcalc
1.08
fps
Calculated Shear Stress, teak
0.44
psf
Q talc > Q design?
yes
V talc 5 V max?
yes
t talc 5 t p?
yes

Architecture & Engineering
Channel Design
TRAPEZOIDAL/TRIANGULAR SHAPE
T
Channel Location: Ditch 1D
Estimate 10-vr Peak Runoff:
Rational C
0.50
Intensity in/hr
9.00
Drainage Area
0.63
ac
Q10
2.84
cfs
Additional Flow
cfs
Q10 Total, Qdesign
2.84
cfs
Channel Information:
Channel Bottom Width, b
2.0 ft/ft
Side Slope x:1
3.0
Channel Slope, S
0.011 Wit
Flow Depth, d
0.65 ft
Selected Channel Lininq:
Selected Channel Linin Jute Net
Maximum Permissible Velocity max (fps)
4
Permissible Shear Stress {tp} (psf)
0.45
Calculations:
e
2.0
ft
Side Sloe Length, m
2.1
ft
Top Width, T
5.9
ft
Channel Area, A
2.57
sq ft
Wetted Perimeter, Pw
6.11
ft
Hydraulic Radius, Rh
0.42
ft
Mannin s "n"
0.078
Calculated Flow Rate, Qcaic
2.89
cfs
Calculated Velocity, Vcaic
1.12
fps
Calculated Shear Stress, tcaic
0.45
psf
Q calc ? Q design? yes
V calc 5 V max? yes
t calc 5 t P? yes

rA ► \ffD\
Architecture & Engineering
Channel Design
TRAPEZOIDAL/TRIANGULAR SHAPE
T
Channel Location: Ditch 1E
Estimate 10-yr Peak Runoff:
Rational C
0.50
Intensity in/hr
9.00
Drainage Area
0.35
ac
Q10
1.58
cfs
Additional Flow
cfs
Qio Total, Qdesign
1.58
cfs
Channel Information:
Channel Bottom Width, b
0.0 ft/ft
Side Slope x:1
3.0
Channel Slope, S
0.005 ft/ft
Flow Depth, d
0.85 ft
Selected Channel Linina:
Selected Channel Linin Jute Net
Maximum Penmissible Velocity max (fps)
4
Permissible Shear Stress (t (psf)
0.45
Calculations:
e
2.6
ft
Side Sloe Length, m
2.7
ft
Top Width, T
5.1
ft
Channel Area, A
2.17
sq ft
Wetted Perimeter, Pw
5.38
ft
Hydraulic Radius, Rh
0.40
ft
Mannin s "n"
0.078
Calculated Flow Rate, Qcaic
1.60
cfs
Calculated Velocity, Vcaic
0.74
fps
Calculated Shear Stress, tcaic
0.27
psf
Q calc >_ Q design? yes
V calc 5 V max? yes
t calc 5 t P? yes

Architecture & Engineering
Channel Design
L TRAPEZOIDAL/TRIANGULAR SHAPE
T
Channel Location: Ditch 1F
Estimate 10-vr Peak Runoff:
Rational C
0.50
Intensity in/hr
9.00
Drainage Area
0.35
ac
Q10
1.58
cfs
Additional Flow
cfs
QIo Total, Qdesign
1.58
cfs
Channel Information:
Channel Bottom Width, b
0.0 ft/ft
Side Slope x:1
3.0
Channel Slope, S
0.005 fUft
Flow Depth, d
0.85 ft
Selected Channel Linin :
Selected Channel LInin5 I Jute Net
Maximum Permissible Velocity max (fps)
4
Permissible Shear Stress tp (psf)
0.45
Calculations:
e
2.6
ft
Side Slope Length, m
2.7
ft
Top Width, T
5.1
ft
Channel Area, A
2.17
sq ft
Wetted Perimeter, Pw
5.38
ft
Hydraulic Radius, Rh
0.40
ft
Mannin s "n"
0.078
Calculated Flow Rate, Qcalc
1.60
cfs
Calculated Velocity, Vcalc
0.74
fps
Calculated Shear Stress, tcaic
0.27
psf
Q calc > Q design?
yes
V calc 5 V max?
yes
t calc 5 t P?
yes

Architecture & Engineering
Channel Design
TRAPEZOIDAL/TRIANGULAR SHAPE
+— T
m �rb T I e
Channel Location: Channel 2A
Estimate 10-vr Peak Runoff:
Rational C
0.50
Intensity in/hr
9.00
Drainage Area
0.14
ac
Qio
0.64
cfs.
Additional Flow
cfs
Qio Total, Qdesign
0.64
cfs
Channel Information:
Channel Bottom Width, b
2.0 fUft
Side Slope x:1
3.0
Channel Slope, S
0.010 ft/ft
Flow Depth, d
0.35 ft
Selected Channel Lining:
Selected Channel Lining Cenit ede
Maximum Permissible Velocity max s
4
Permissible Shear Stress {tp} (psf)
1 0.60
Calculations:
e
1.1
ft
Side Slope Length, m
1.1
ft
Top Width, T
4.1
ft
Channel Area, A
1.07
sq ft
Wetted Perimeter, Pw
4.21
ft
Hydraulic Radius, Rh
0.25
ft
Mannin s "n"
0.078
Calculated Flow Rate, Qcalc
0.82
cfs
Calculated Velocity, Vcaic
0.76
fps
Calculated Shear Stress, tease
0.22
psf
Q calc a Q design?
yes
V calc 5 V max?
yes
t calc 5 t p?
yes

Architecture & Engineering
Channel Design
TRAPEZEI➢AL/TRIANGULAR SHAPE
T
Channel Location: Channel 2B
Estimate 10- r Peak Runoff:
Rational C
0.35
Intensity in/hr
9.00
Drainage Area
0.20
ac
010
0.62
Us
Additional Flow
cfs
Qi0 Total, Qdesign
0.62
cfs
Channel Information:
Channel Bottom Width, b
2.0 ft/ft
Side Slope x:1
3.0
Channel Slope, S
0.021 ft/ft
Flow Depth, d
0.30 ft
Selected Channel Linin :
Selected Channel Linin Cenitpede
Maximum Permissible Velocity max s 4
Permissible Shear Stress {tp} (psf) 0.60
Calculations:
e
0.9
ft
Side Slope Length, m
0.9
ft
Top Width, T
3.8
ft
Channel Area, A
0.87
sq ft
Wetted Perimeter, Pw
3.90
ft
Hydraulic Radius, Rh
0.22
ft
Mannin s "n"
0.078
Calculated Flow Rate, Qcalc
0.89
cfs
Calculated Velocity, Vcaic
1.02
fps
Calculated Shear Stress, tcalc
0.39
psf
Q calc >_ Q design?
yes
V calc 5 V max?
yes
t calc 5 t PZ
yes

Architecture & Engineering
Channel Design
TRAPEZOIDAL/TRIANGULAR SHAPE
h- T
Channel Location: Channel 2C
Estimate 10-vr Peak Runoff:
Rational C
0.35
Intensity in/hr
9.00
Drainage Area
0.04
ac
Qm
0.11
cfs
Additional Flow
0.62
cfs
Qio Total, Qdealgn
0.74
cfs
Channel Information:
Channel Bottom Width, b
2.0 ft/ft
Side Sloe x:1
3.0
Channel Slope, S
0.005 ft/ft
Flow Depth, d
0.40 ft
Selected Channel Lining:
Selected ChanneLl-ining I Cenitpede
Maximum Permissible Velocity max (fps)
4
Permissible Shear Stress t) (psf)
0.60
Calculations:
e
1.2
ft
Side Sloe Length, m
1.3
ft
Top Width, T
4.4
ft
Channel Area, A
1.28
sq ft
Wetted Perimeter, Pw
4.53
ft
Hydraulic Radius, Rh
0.28
ft
Mannin s "n"
0.078
Calculated Flow Rate, Qcalc
0.74
cfs
Calculated Velocity, Waic
0.58
fps
Calculated Shear Stress, tcalc
0.12
psf
Q calc >_ Q design? yes
V calc 5 V max? yes
t calc 5 t P? yes

Architecture & Engineering
Channel Design
TRAPEZOI➢AL/TRIANGULAR SHAPE
f- T
Channel Location: Channel 2D
Estimate 10-yr Peak Runoff:
Rational C
0.80
Intensity in/hr
9.00
Drainage Area
0.16
ac
Q10
1.18
cfs
Additional Flow
cfs
Qi0 Total, Qdeslgn
1.18
cfs
Channel Information:
Channel Bottom Width, b
3.0 ft/ft
Side Slope x:1
3.0
Channel Slope, S
0.020 ft/ft
Flow Depth, d
0.30 ft
Selected Channel Lininq:
Selected Channel Linin Cenitpede
Maximum Permissible VelocityVmax(fps)4
Permissible Shear Stress t sf
0.60
Calculations:
e
0.9
ft
Side Sloe Length, m
0.9
ft
Top Width, T
4.8
ft
Channel Area, A
1.17
sq ft
Wetted Perimeter, Pw
4.90
ft
Hydraulic Radius, Rh
0.24
ft
Mannin s "n"
0.078
Calculated Flow Rate, Qcalc
1.22
cfs
Calculated Velocity, Vcaic
1.04
fps
Calculated Shear Stress, tcalc
0.37
psf
Q calc > Q design?
yes
V calc 5 V max?
yes
t talc 5 t P?
yes

Architecture & Engineering
Channel Design
TRAPEZE]IDAL/TRIANGULAR SHAPE
Channel Location: Channel 2E
Estimate 10-vr Peak Runoff:
Rational C
0:95
Intensity in/hr
9.00
Drainage Area
0.15
ac
Q10
1.31
cfs
Additional Flow
cfs
Qio Total, Qdesign
1.31
cfs
Channel Information:
Channel Bottom Width, b
2.0 ft/ft
Side Slope x:1
3.0
Channel Slope, S
0.020 ft/ft
Flow Depth, d
0.40 ft
Selected Channel Lining:
Selected Channel LiningCenitpede
Maximum Permissible Velocity max (fps)
4
Permissible Shear Stress (t psf
0.60
Calculations:
e
1.2
ft
Side Slope Length, m
1.3
ft
Top Width, T
4.4
ft
Channel Area, A
1.28
sq ft
Wetted Perimeter, Pw
4.53
ft
Hydraulic Radius, Rh
0.28
ft
Mannin s "n"
0.078
Calculated Flow Rate, Qcalc
1.49
cfs
Calculated Velocity, Vcalc
1.16
fps
Calculated Shear Stress, halo
0.50
psf
Q calc >_ Q design? yes
V calc 5 V max? yes
t calc 5 t P? yes

Architecture & Engineering
Manning's Roughness Coefficient, n
Manning's Roughness Coefficient for Temporary Lining Materials:
Table 8.05e from Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual
Lining Type
0-0.6 ft
0.5-2.0 ft
>2.0 ft
Woven Paper Net
0.016
0.015
0.015
Jute Net
0.028
0.022
0.019
Fiberglass Roving
0.028
0.021
0.019
Straw with Net
0.065
0.033
0.025
Curled Wood Mat
0.066
0.035
0.028
Synthetic Mat
0.036
0.025
0.021
Manning's Roughness Coefficient:
Table 8.05f from Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual
Lining Category
Lining Type
0-0.5 ft
0.5-2.0 ft
>2.0 ft
Rigid
Concrete
0.015
0.013
0.013
Grouted Riprap
0.04
0.03
0.028
Stone Masonry
0.042
0.032
0.03
Soil Cement
0.025
0.022
0.02
Asphalt
0.018
0.016
0.016
Unlined
Bare Soil
0.023
0.02
0.02
Rock Cut
0.045
0.035
0.025
Gravel Riprap '
1-inch D50
0.044
0.033
0.03
2-inch D50
0.066
0.041
0.034
Rock Riprap
6-inch D50
0.104
0.069
0.035
9-inch D50 (Class B)
0.11
0.074
0.038
12-inch D50 (Class 1)
0.115
0.078
0.04
15-inch D50 Class II
0.12
1 0.082
1 0.042

Architecture & Engineering
Maximum Permissible Velocities
Maximum Permissible Velocities:
Table 8.05d from Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual
Maximum
Permissible
Velocities (fp:
Sand (noncolloidal) 2.5
d Loam (noncolloidal) 2.5
Loam (noncolloidal) 3
inary Firm Loam 3.5
Fine Gravel
5
Stiff Clay (very colloidal)
5
Graded, Loam to Cobbles (noncolloidal)
5
Graded, Silt to Cobbles (colloidal)
5.5
Alluvial Silts (noncolloidal)
3.5
Alluvial Silts (colloidal)
5
Coarse Gravel (noncolloidal)
6
Cobbles and Shingles
5.5
Maximum Permissible Velocities:
Hydrology and Urbam Water systems by Dr. Rooney Malcom
Maximum
Permissible
Materials
Velocities (fps)
Grass - Uncertain Maintenance
4
Grass - Good Cover, Proper Maintenance
5

FORD, M=
Architecture & Engineering
Maximum Permissible Shear Stress
Permissible Shear Stresses for Riprap and Temporary Liners:
Table 8.05g from Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual
Lining Category
Lining Type
Permissible
Unit Shear
Stress Td
(psf)
Temporary
Woven Paper Net
0.15
Jute Net
0.45
Fiberglass Roving:
Single
0.60
Double
0.85
Straw with Net
1.45
Curled Wood Mat
1.60
Synthetic Mat
2.00
d50 Stone Sizes in
Gravel Riprap
1
0.33
2
0.67
Rock Riprap
6
2.00
9 (Class B)
3.00
12 (Class 1)
4.00
15 (Class 11)
5.00
18
6.00
21
7.80
24
8.00
Permissible Shear Stresses for Vegetation:
Table 2 from HEC 15: Design of Roadside Channels with Flexible Linings
Permissible
Unit Shear
Stress Td
Lining Category
Lining Type
(psf)
Vegetation
Class A
3.70
Class B
2.10
Class C
1.00
Class D
0.60
Class E
0.35
*See attached table for classifications.

Permissible Shear Stresses for Bare Soil:
Table 2.3 from HEC15: Design of Roadside Channels with Flexible Linings
Lining Category
Lining Type
Permissible
Unit Shear
Stress Td
s
Cohesive Bare Soil
Clayey Sands
0.037-0.095
Cohesive Bare Soil
Inorganic Silts
0.027-0.11
Cohesive Bare Soil
Silty Sands
0.024-0.072
Cohesive Bare Soil
Inorganic Clays
0.14
Classification of Vegetal Covers:
Table 1 from HEC 15: Design of Roadside Channels with Flexible Linings
Retardance Class
Cover
Condition
A
Weeping lovegrass
Excellent stand, tall(average 30")(76cm)
Yellow bluestem
Excellent stand, tall avers a 36" 91cm
B
Kudzu
Very dense growth, uncut
Bermuda grass
Good stand, tall (avg. 12")(30cm)
Native grass mixture
Good stand, unmowed
Weeping lovegrass
Good stand, tall (avg. 24")(61cm)
Lespedeza sericea
Good stand, not woody, tall (avg. 19")(48cm)
Alfalfa
Good stand, uncut (avg. 13")(33cm)
Weeping lovegrass
Good stand, unmowed (avg. 13")(33cm)
Kudzu
Dense growth, uncut
Blue gamma
Good stand, uncut (avg. 13" 28cm
C
Crabgrass
Fair stand, uncut (10 to 48")(25 to 120cm)
Bermuda grass
Good stand, mowed (avg. 6")(15cm)
Common lespedeza
Good stand, uncut (avg. 11")(28cm)
Grass -legume mixture
Good stand, uncut (6 to 8")(15 to 20cm)
Centipede grass
Very dense cover (avg. 6")(15cm)
Kentucky bluegrass
Good stand, headed 6 to 12" 15 to 30cm
D
Bermuda grass
Good stand, cut (2.5")(6cm)
Common lespedeza
Excellent stand, uncut (avg. 4.5")(11cm)
Buffalo grass
Good stand, uncut (3 to 6")(8 to 15cm)
Grass -legume mixture
Good stand, uncut (4 to 5")(10 to 13cm)
Les edeza sericea
After cuttin to 2" 5cm , Very good stand before
E
Bermuda grass
Good stand (1.5")(4cm)
Bermuda grass
Burned stubble

COASTAL SITE DESIGN, PC
PO Box 4041
Wilmington, NC 28406
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
License N C-2710
May 7, 2014
Christine Nelson
Express Review Permitting
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405
Re: Engineer's Certification
M200 Area Parking and Jogging Trail
CSD Project No. I 1-0239CJ
Stormwater Project No. SW8 081007
Dear Christine:
Enclosed please find the following items for the referenced project:
ECEIVIG
MAY 0 8 2014
BY:
- two (2) copies of the surveyor's certification of the adjusted weir crest elevations
- one (1) original Designer's Certification
We appreciate your assistance in this matter. Please call if you require any additional information.
Sincerely,
Howard Resnik, PE
Encl.: As noted above
MAY 0 8 2014

I
Professional
Land"S,urveyors
Y
604E Cedar Point B(V, Cedar point, NC 28584
'
e
" (252) 393-6I01 fax [phone]
d
,
„
r n x
M&ch•24, 2014'-
{
X6A P 1319 Camp Johnson=
t
" I, Cyrus Alan Bell, Professional=Landry Sueyor; d'
�h'- certify that I'personally _°
venfiedon this date that the weir crest elevation for
a
S WP 178(Pondasbee A) hn adjusted,"�
to 15 50' and the,wen uest:elevation'for SWp;177(PondlB) has Been adjustadao 14 80'f
Elevatonsareielative
aNA'UD`1988.'
h.
C/A
aQPOF E
�
C Al 11, �° T'
L S
P
eli& Phillips Surveying, PLLC ° r L 2fi�gx r
x
- S,
t
s f
r
:
}
i 1 1 r ry
r,
-
-
I
y
,
i n
-
y
w
r
,