SW8090810_HISTORICAL FILE_20090904

STORMWATER DIVISION CODING SHEET
POST -CONSTRUCTION PERMITS
PERMIT NO.
SW8 ()gU81U
DOC TYPE
❑ CURRENT PERMIT
❑ APPROVED PLANS
Q HISTORICAL FILE
❑ COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION
DOC DATE
o0�
YYYYMMDD

ar�WA
r
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
September 4, 2009
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins
Director
Carl Baker, Deputy Public Works Officer
Commanding Officer, Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune
1005 Michael Road
Camp Lejeune, NC 28542
Subject: State Stormwater Management Permit No. SW8 090810
NAMTRA MARU Facility P-648
High Density Project
Onslow, County
Dear Mr. Baker:
Dee Freeman
Secretary
The Wilmington Regional Office received a Stormwater Management Permit Application for
NAMTRA MARU Facility P-648 on August 25, 2009 with additional information submitted on September 2,
3, and 4, 2009. Staff review of the plans and specifications has determined that the project, as proposed,
will comply with the Stormwater Regulations set forth in Title 15A NCAC 21-1.1000. We are forwarding
Permit No. SW8 090810 dated September 4, 2009, for the construction of the subject project.
This permit shall be effective .from the date of issuance until September 4, 2019, and shall be
subject to the conditions and limitations as specified therein. Please pay special attention to the Operation
and Maintenance requirements in this permit. Failure to establish an adequate system for operation and
maintenance of the stormwater management system will result in future compliance problems.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this permit are unacceptable, you have the
right to request an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30) days following receipt of this
permit. This request must be in the form of a written petition, conforming to Chapter 150E of the North
Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Drawer 27447,
Raleigh, NC 27611-7447. Unless such demands are made this permit shall be final and binding.
If you have any questions please contact M.J. Naugle, or me at [phone],
Sincerely,
Rick Shiver
Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
RS/ min: S:\WQS\STORMWATER\PERMIT\090810 sep09
cc: Douglas M. Will, P.E., MSA, PC, 757-490-9264, fax: 0634
Wilmington Regional Office
Central Files
M.J. Naugle
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
Phone: [phone] FAX [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748
Internet: www.ncwaterqualiry.org
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer
NorthCarolina
Aaturally

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW8 090810
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
STATE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT
HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT
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
Commanding Officer, Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune
NAMTRA MARU Facility, P-648
Davis Street, Camp Lejeune, Onslow County
FOR THE
Construction, operation and maintenance of five (5) bio-retention basins in compliance with the
provisions of 15A NCAC 2H .1000 (hereafter 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 of Water Quality and considered a part of
this permit.
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until September 4, 2019, and shall be
subject to the following specified conditions and limitations:
I. DESIGN STANDARDS
This permit is effective only with respect to the nature and volume of stormwater
described in the application and other supporting data.
2. This stormwater system has been approved for the management of stormwater runoff as
described in Section 1.7 on page 3 of this permit. The stormwater control has been
designed to handle the runoff from 130,008 square feet of impervious area.
3. The tract will be limited to the amount of built -upon area indicated on page 3 of this
permit, and per approved plans. There is no built -upon area allocated for the future
development. Additional BUA requires approval of a permit modification.
4. 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.
5. The runoff from all built -upon area within the permitted drainage area(s) of this project
must be directed into the permitted stormwater control system.
Page 2 of 7

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW8 090810
6. The following design criteria have been provided in the bio-retention basins and must be
maintained at design condition:
BA-1 A
BA-1 C
BA-2
BA-3
BA4
a. Drainage Area, Onsite, ftz:
90,953
27,878
35,232
10,979
11,993
b. Total Impervious, , ft2:
59,111
21,484
29,185
9,773
10,454
c. Design Storm, inches:
1
1
1
1
1
d. Basin Depth, feet:
1
1
1
1
1
e. Temporary Pool Elevation, fmsl:
12.13
15.09
18.49
15.99
16.07
f. Planting Elevation, fmsl:
11.13
14.09
17.49
14.99
15.07
9. Bottom Elevation, fmsl:
9.13
12.09
15.49
12.99
13.07
h. SHWT elevation, fmsl:
8.61
11
12.5
12.5
13
i. Permitted Storage Volume, ft3:
5,464
2,093
2,378
995
1,052
j. Required number of Plantings
Shrubs
Trees
125
116
9
48
68
3
55
156
6
23
61
3
24
74
3
. Receiving Stream/ River Basin
Stick Creek / White Oak
k. Stream Index Number
19-15
I. Classification of Water Body
SC;HQW,NSW
II. SCHEDULE OF COMPLIANCE
1. 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.
2. During construction, erosion shall be kept to a minimum and any eroded areas of the
system will be repaired immediately.
3. The permittee shall at all time 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 re -vegetation 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 outlet structure, orifice device, flow spreader,
catch basins and piping.
g. Access to the outlet structure must be available at all times.
4. Records of maintenance activities must be kept and made available upon request to
authorized personnel of DWQ. The records will indicate the date, activity, name of
person performing the work and what actions were taken.
5. The facilities shall be constructed as shown on the approved plans. This permit shall
become void unless the facilities are constructed in accordance with the conditions of
this permit, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting data.
6. 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.
Page 3 of 7

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW8 090810
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.
8. Access to the stormwater facilities for inspection and maintenance shall be maintained
via appropriate recorded easements at all times.
9. 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 any item shown on the approved plans, including the stormwater
management measures, built -upon area, details, etc.
b. Project name change.
C. Transfer of ownership.
d. Redesign or addition to the approved amount of built -upon area or to the
drainage area.
e. Further subdivision, acquisition, lease or sale of all or part of the project area.
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.
f. Filling in, altering, or piping of any vegetative conveyance shown on the
approved plan.
10. Prior to the construction of any permitted future areas shown on the approved plans, the
permittee shall submit final site layout and grading plans to the Division for approval.
11. The Permittee shall maintain a copy of the approved plans and specifications on file at
all times. At the time the permit is transferred to a new owner, the permittee shall
forward the approved plans to the new owner.
12. 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.
III. GENERAL CONDITIONS
This permit is not transferable except after notice to and approval by the Director. In the
event of an owner name change, a project name change, a mailing address change, or
the sale of the project or a transfer of ownership, the permittee must submit a completed
and signed Name/Ownership Change Form to the Division of Water Quality at least 30
days prior to making such changes. The Name/Ownership Change form must be
accompanied by the supporting documentation as listed on the form. The approval of
this request will be considered on its merits and may or may not be approved.
2. The permittee is responsible for compliance with all permit conditions until such time as
the Division approves the transfer request.
3. Failure to abide by the conditions and limitations contained in this permit may subject the
Permittee to enforcement action by the Division of Water Quality, in accordance with
North Carolina General Statute 143-215.6A to 143-215.6C.
4. The issuance of this permit does not preclude the Permittee from complying with any
and all statutes, rules, regulations, or ordinances, which may be imposed by other
government agencies (local, state, and federal) having jurisdiction.
Page 4 of 7

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW8 090810
5. In the event that the facilities fail to perform satisfactorily, including the creation of
nuisance conditions, 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.
6. 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. .
7. The permit remains in force and effect until modified, revoked, terminated or renewed.
The permit may be modified, revoked and reissued or terminated for cause. The filing of
a request for a permit modification, revocation and re -issuance or termination does not
stay any permit condition.
8. Unless specified elsewhere, permanent seeding requirements for the stormwater control
must follow the guidelines established in the North Carolina Erosion and Sediment
Control Planning and Design Manual.
9. Approved plans and specifications for this project are incorporated by reference and are
enforceable parts of the permit.
10. The permittee shall submit a permit renewal request 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 issued this the fourth day of September 2009.
NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
oleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Page 5 of 7

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW8 090810
NAMTRA MARU Facility P-648 at Camp Lejeune Page 1 of 2
Stormwater Permit No. SW8 090810
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 specifications:
Signature
Registration Number
Date
SEAL
Page 6 of 7
Page 2 of 2

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW8 090810
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 outlet structure elevations are per the approved plan.
6. The outlet structure is located per the approved plans.
7. Trash rack is provided on the outlet 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. Required draw down devices are correctly sized and located per the approved
plans.
13. All required design depths are provided.
14. All required parts of the system are provided, such as a vegetated shelf, and a
forebay.
15. The required system dimensions are provided per the approved plans.
16. All components of the stormwater BMP are located in either recorded common
areas, or recorded easements.
cc: NCDENR-DWQ Regional Office
Carl Baker, Public Works Officer for the Commanding Officer, MCB Camp Lejeune
Page 7 of 7

I
Applicable Rules: ❑ Coastal SW -1995 ❑ Coastal SW - 2008 ❑ Ph II - Post Construction
(select all that apply) ❑ Non -Coastal SW- HQW/ORW Waters ❑ Universal Stormwater Management Plan
❑ Other WQ Nigmt Plan:
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resour:277
Division of Water Quality STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT APPLICATI
This form may 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, operahu!: an:. ... ..
P-648 Construct NAMTRA MARU Facility
2. Location of Project (street address):
Intersection of Davis Street and Campbell Street
City:lacksonviHe County:Onslow Zip:28542
3. Directions to project (from nearest major intersection):
From Curtis Road, turn onto MCAyoy Street (south), turn onto Campbell Street (west), turn onto Davis Street
4. Latitude:34° 44' 00" N Loneitude:77* 2700" W of the main entrance to the project.
II. PERMIT INFORMATION:
1. a. Specify whether project is (check one): ®New ❑Modification
b.If this application is being submitted as the result of a modification to an existing permit, list the existing
permit number , its issue date (if known) , 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 DWQ
requesting a state stormwater management permit application, list the stormwater project number, if
assigned, SW8 050635 KEf rR QED and the previous name of the project, if different than currently
proposed, TANzo�'%
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: _
❑NPDES Industrial Stormwater 0404/401 Permit: Proposed Impacts
ac of Disturbed Area
b.If any of these permits have already been acquired please provide the Project Name, Project/Permit Number,
issue date and the type of each permit:NAMTRA MARU P-648, Onslow-2005-303, May 23, 2005,
sedimentation/Erosion Control
Form SWU-101 Version 07July2009
Page 1 of 6

RRCFxVV.
409
III.. CONTACT INFORMATION
1. a. Print Applicant / Signing Official's name and title (specifically the developer, prLLn
designatedgovernment official, individual, etc. who owns the project):
Applicant/Organization:Commancline Officer Marine Corps Base Camp Leieune
Signing Official & Title:Carl Baker, Deputy Public Works Officer
b.Contact information for person listed in item 1a above:
Street Address:1005 Michael Road
City:MCB Camp Lejuene
Mailing Address (if applicable):
Phone:
Email:
State:NC Zip:28542
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)
0 Developer* (Complete Contact hnfmmation; 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/,
Signing Official &
b. Contact information for person listed in item 2a above:
Street Address:
City: State: Zip:
Mailing Address (if applicable):
City: State: Zip:
Phone: ( ) Fax: ( )
Email:
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/Organization: Michael D. Hess E.I.T. / MSA. P.C.
Signing Official & Title:
b. Contact information for person listed in item 3a above:
Mailing Address:5033 Rouse Drive
City:Viryinia Beach State:VA Zip:23462
Phone: (757 ) 490-9264 Fax: (757 ) 490-0634
Emaihmike [e-mail]
4. Local jurisdiction for building permits: Camp Lejuene
Point of Contact:Carl Baker Phone #:
Form SWU-101 Version 07July2009 Page 2 of 6

FIVLe_
; PROJECT INFORMATION AUG 5 009is In the space provided below, briefly summarize how the stormwater runoff will bed.
Stornrwater will be treated by bioretention basins
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.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: 4.064 acres
5. Total Coastal Wetlands Area: 0 a eL
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':4.064 acres
Total project area shall be calculates! to exclude the follozing the nornml yool of impounded structures, the area
bet veers the banks of strearns and rivers, the area below the Normal High Water (NHMN line or Mean High Water
(MHW) line, and coastal wetlands landward from the NHW (or MHW) line. The resultant project area is used to
caudate overall percent built upon area (BUA). Noru-coastal wetlands landward of the NHW (or Mr-IW) line stay
be included in the total project area.
8, Project percent of impervious area: (Total Irnpervious Area / Total Project Area) X 100 = 73 %
9. How many drainage areas does the project have?5 (For high density, count 1 for each proposed engineered
stormwater BMP. For low 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.
B.asm Inforrpatron
Drainage Area .
BA=1A : •
. Dramage Area
BA-iC• S
Drama ge Area
' BA 2
Drautiage Area
Receiving Stream Name
Stick Creek
Stick Creek
Stick Creek
Stick Creek
Stream Class *
SC;HQW,NSW
SC;HQW,NSW
SC;HQW,NSW
SC;HQW,NSW
Stream Index Number *
19 -15
19 -15
19 -15
19 -15
Total Drainage Area (sf)
90,953
27,878
35,232
10,979
On -site Drainage Area (so
I
---
Off-site Drainage Area (sf)
---
---
---
Proposed Impervious Area** s
59,111
21,484
29,185
9,773
% Impervious Area`* total
65
77
83
89
On -site Buildings/Lots (so
31,453.71
6,344.03
On -site Streets (so
---
5,511.53
---
---
On-site Parking (so
15,099.77
---
29,185.20
9,773.00
On -site Sidewalks (so
2,070.31
---
Other on -site (so
10,487.00
9,628.47
---
Future (so
-
---
---
Off-site (so
-
---
---
Existuw BUA*** (sf)
---
—
---
Total (so: 59 e95c60— 1 21,484.03 1 29,185.20 1 9,773.00
Stream Class and Index Number can a determined at: irttp:117r2o enr state )Ic nsPoiuu/reports ?-eportsWB litud
5-1111
Form SWU-101 Version 07Ju1y2009 Page 3 of 6

=25
IV., PROJECT INFORMATION 1. In the space provided below, briefly summarize how the stormwater runoff will be tr
Stornrwater will be heated by bioretention basins
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.ldentify 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.
htl Dxopexly Area: 4.064 acres ... 5. Tctnl Coastal Wetlands Area: D _acres
CP�� 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+:4.064 acres
Total project area shall be calculated to exclude the following: the normal pool of imppounded structures, the area
behuecu the banks of strew n; and rivers, the area below the Normal High Water (NHV� line or Mean High Water
(MFIW) line, and coastal wetlands landward from the NHW (or MHW) line. The resultant project area is used to
calculate overall percent built upon area (BLIA). Nou-coastal wetlands landward of the NHW (or MHIM litte umy
be included in the total project area.
B. Project percent of impervious area: (Total Impervious Area / Total Project Area) X 100 = 73 %
9. How many drainage areas does the project have?5 (For high density, count 1 for each proposed engineered
stormwater BMP. For low 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.
Basin_ hrforatahon
t
Drainage Area
Dramage,Aiea
Draurage Area
Drainage Area
Receiving Stream Name
Stick Creek
Stream Class *
SC;HQW,NSW
Stream Index Number *
19 -15
Total Drainage Area (so
11,993
On -site Drainage Area (so
Off -site Drainage Area (so
Proposed Impervious Area** (so
10,454
% Impervious Area** total
87
Impervrous. Surface Area
Dramage Area
_Draurage Aiea
'Drainage Area'
Drarage Area ..
On -site Buildings/ Lots (so
--
On-site Streets (so
-
On -site Parking (so
10,454
On -site Sidewalks (so
--
Other on -site (so
-
Future (so
---
Off-site (SO
---
Existing BUA*** (so
--
Total (so:
10,454
" Stream Class and Index Number can be determined at: luttp://h2o.enr.state.nc.ns/bims/renorts/renortsWB htnd
Form SWU-101 Version 07Ju1y2009 Page 3 of

:sparMling
Imppervious area is defined as the built upon area including, but not limited to, buildings, roa areas,sidetoalks, gravel areas, etc.
'Report only that amount of existing BUA thatmill remain afterdevelopment. Do notreportstinA BUA that
is to be removed and which will be replaced by new BUA.
11. How was the off -site impervious area listed above determined? Provide documentation. N/A
Projects in Union County: Contact DWQ Central Office staffto check ifthe project is located within a Threatened &
Endangered Species watershed that may be subject to more stringent stornnvater requirements as per 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
fromhttp://h2o.enrstate.nc.us/su/bmp forms.htm.
VL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
Only complete application packages will be accepted and reviewed by the Division of Water Quality (DWQ).
A complete package includes all of the items listed below. A detailed application instruction sheet and BMP
checklists are available from http://h2o.enr.state.ncus/su/bmp forms.htm. The complete application
package should be submitted to the appropriate DWQ Office. (The appropriate office may be found by locating
project on the interactive online map athttp://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/su/nisi maps.htm.)
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 litq2://h2o.eiir.sttte.iic.us/stp/briip forms.htm.
Initials
1. Original and one copy of the Stormwater Management Permit Application Form. l7 M W
2. Original and one copy of the signed and notarized Deed Restrictions & Protective Covenants !l/, A,
Form. (if required as per Part VII below)
3. Original of the applicable Supplement Form(s) (sealed, signed and dated) and O&M 1t1 14/
agreenrent(s) for each BMP.
4. Permit application processing fee of $505 payable to NCDENR. (For an Express review, refer to n M W
htt wivw,envhelp.org/pages/onestopexpress.h ten 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 treahrient/managementfor 0/t9 W
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 )JIt? W
receiving stream drains to class SA waters within 1/2 mile of the site boundary, include the 1/2
mile radius on the map.
7. Sealed, signed and dated calculations. L1 /t-i W
8. Two sets of plans folded to 8.5" x 14" (sealed, signed, & dated), including: p M W
a. Development/Project name.
b. Engineer and firm.
c. Location map with named streets and NCSR numbers.
d. Legend.
e. North arrow.
f. Scale.
g. Revision number and dates.
h. Identify all surface waters on the plans by delineating the normal pool elevation of
impounded structures, the banks of streams and rivers, the MHW or NHW line of tidal
waters, and any coastal wetlands landward of the MHW or NHW lines.
• Delineate the vegetated buffer landward from the normal pool elevation of impounded
structures, the banks of streams or rivers, and the MHW (or NHW) of tidal waters.
L 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.
Form SWU-101 Version 07July2009 Pa.-e 4 of 6

m. Wetlands delineated, or a note on the plans that none exist. (Must be delineated by a RECJ.
qualified person. Provide documentation of qualifications and identify the person who ^IJ I., § �oo�
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 BY:
p. Vegetated buffers (where required).
9. Copy of any applicable soils report with the associated SHWT elevations (Please identify
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"xll" 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 DWQ to verifij the SHWT prior
to submittal, [phone].)
10. A copy of the most current property deed. Deed book: Page No: N A.
11. For corporations and limited liability corporations (LLC): Provide documentation from the NC / W
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 NCAC 2H.1003(e). The
arpe:a5on or Li_C must be listed as an active corporation in goo('. standing .vith the NC _-• >
Secretary of State, otherwise the application will be returned.
hLtp://www.secreta[y.state.nc-us/Corporatioiis/CSearch.asl)x
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...IfJot 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
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/suibmp forms.htm#deed restrictions. 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 therm, that they will run with the land, that the required covenants cannot be changed or deleted
without concurrence from the NC DWQ 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:Douglas M. Will, P.E.
Consulting Firm: MSA, PC
Mailing Address:5033 Rouse Drive
City:Virpinia Beach State:VA Zip:23462
Phone: (757 ) 490-9264
EmailAcnig will©msaonline.com
Fax: (757 ) 490-0634
IX. PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION (if Contact Information, item 2 has been filled out, complete this
section)
I, (print or hjpe name of person listed in Contact information, iteru 2a) certify that I
own the property identified in this permit application, and thus give permission to (print or hjpe name of person
listed in Contact Infornmtion, item ln) with (print or hjpe name of organization listed in
Contact Information, item lb) 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 stonnwater system.
Form SWU-101 Version 07July2009 Page 5 of

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 DWQ Stormwater permit reverts back to
me, the property owner. As the property owner, it is my responsibility to notify DWQ 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.
I,a Notary Public for the State of . County of
do hereby certify that
personally appeared
before me this _ day of 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
7AUG7522'JI-9
BY:
1, (print or type name of person listed in Contact Information, item 2) Carl Baker
certify that the information included on this permit application form is, to the best of my knowledge, correct and
that the project wilt 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 storrrrW'�ter rules u6r 'i5AAICAC 2H .1000, SL 2006-246 (Ph.11- Post Construction) or SL 2008-211,
Date: F r
3,"4 ' a Notar Publics forr the State of /i'r`17 /'e/4✓ iru Countyof
C�1V�LJ . do her by certify that 11 personally appeared
before me this��day of 01409 , and acknoo edge
the due execution of the application for
a stormwater permit. Witness my hand and official seal, /G=CAI
MICE A EONNETTE
Notary hmic
Omlow County
8taro of North Carolina
201
SEAL
My commission expires D� 0 /'
Form S WU-101 Version 07July2009 Page 6 of 6

W COwu14nl0u Esther Oct 37' MO
E1010 04 140t11+ CotollO
Ou:loM ConulA
00101A bnDliC
vrlCE Y QOWELE

Bioretention Basin Design
File Name:
S:\WQS\STORMWATER\excel
spreadsheets\BIORETENTION\090810.WK1
built prior to 2008 without permit issued
Project Number: SW8
090810
Date
4-Sep-2009
Project Name:
NAMTRA MARU p-648
Receiving Stream:
stick creek
Classification:
SC;HQW;NSW
Drainage Basin:
white oak
Index Number: 19-15
Minimum Surface Area
c=.95 for BUA, c=.25 for
grass
Minimum
Provided
Basin # DA
BUA
Sum C x A
BR Area
Area
BA-1A 90953
59111
61160.40
4281
5464
sf
BA-1C 27878
21484
20934.10
1465
2093
sf
BA-2 35232
29185
27778.25
1944
2378
sf
BA-3 10,979
9,773
9097.20
637
995
sf
BA-4 11,993
10,454
9793.35
686
1052
sf
Volume Required
Percent
Required
Basin # BUA
Design Storm
Rv Value
Volume
BA-1A 64.99%
1
0.63
4812
BA-1C 77.06%
1
0.74
1727
BA-2 82.84%
1
0.80
2336
BA-3 89.02%
1
0.85
779
BA-4 87.17%
1
0.83
834
Volume Provided
Bottom
Bottom
Top
Top
Volume Prov.
Req. Vol. Met
Basin # Area
Elevation
Area
Elevation
@Top
@ elev.
BA-1A 5464
11.130
5464.00
12.13
5464
12.01 ft
BA-1 C 2093
14.090
2093.00
15.09
2093
14.92 ft
BA-2 2378
17.490
2378.00
18.49
2378
18.47 ft
BA-3 995
14.990
995.00
15.99
995
15.77 ft
BA-4 1052
15.070
1052.00
16.07
1052
15.86 ft
Planting Guidelines
Basin # Min. # Plants
Prov. # Trees
Prov. # Shrubs
BA-1A 125
9
`116
BA-1C 48
3
68
BA-2 55
6
156,
BA-3 23
3
61
BA-4 24
3
74
Comments

K.9 P-t �D DMZ
Naugle, Maryjt —
From: Naugle, Mary 577-
Sent: Friday, September 04, 2009 11:47 AM
To: 'Mike Hess'
Attachments: Bioretention.xls
Steve;
Please provide the
planting numbers for
each bmp. Although
the supplement does
state species, we
need to verify the
number of plants for
each surface area in
the bmp.
Planting Guidelines
Basin #
Min. #
Plants
Ratio of
Prov. # Prov. # Shrubs/Trees
Trees Shrubs
1
0
#DIV/0!
(must be 2-
3)
2
0
#DIV/0!
(must be 2-
3)
3
0
#DIV/0!
(must be 2-
3)
4
0
#DIV/0!
(must be 2-
3)
5
0
#DIV/0!
(must be 2-
3)
Mary lean Naugle
NC DENR Express Permitting
NC Division of Water Quality
127Cardinal Drive Ext.
Wilmington, NC 28405
910-796-7215
910-796-7303
910-350-2004 fax
many nauale@ncdenr. ao v
Please note: E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records
Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
1

RECEIVED
1S F P 0 3 2009
BY:5Lt)B 0�:f0810
BIO-RETENTION BASIN CALCULATIONS
FOR
FY'05 MCON P-648
CONSTRUCT NAMTRA MARU FACILITY
MCAS NEW RIVER
JACKSONVILLE, NC
September 2, 2009
MSA# 03222A
CA&o -
s••
S L
• �3� 325 =
MSA, P.C.
5033 Rouse Drive
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462
Telephone [phone]
Fax Number [phone]

SFP 0 3 2009
Bioretention Basin Calculations
P-648 Construct NAMTRA MARU Facility
MCAS New River
Jacksonville, NC
MSA Project No. 03222A
Design Criteria: Capture and treat volume for first 1" of runoff from drainage area at
85% TSS removal rate.
Using the simple method to determine the volume of runoff that must be controlled we
have:
V = Volume of runoff = 3,630 - Ro * Rv * A
Rp = Design storm rainfall depth = 1-inch
A = Watershed Area (ac)
Rv = 0.05 + 0.9' IA where Rv = Runoff coefficient
IA = Impervious fraction

Bioretention Basin BA-1A:
Drainage Area Information:
Total Area = 90,953.28 ftz = 2.088 ac
Impervious Area = 59,110.92 ftz= 1.357 ac
Pervious Area = 31,842.36 ftz = 0.731 ac
Determine the runoff coefficient Rv;
Rv = 0.05 + 0.9 * IA where
0.05 + 0.9 (0.650)
0.635
Determine the volume of runoff V.
REC�IVEI�
S F P 0 3 2009
BY:
IA = 1.357/2.088
= 0.650
V = 3,630 * Rp * Rv * A where RD= 1-inch
(3,630) (1) (0.635) (2.088) = 4,812.94 ft3
Determine Actual Storage provided @ 1 ft depth
= 4,872.63 + [394.27' x 0.5' (avg depth of slope) x 3.0' (width of slope)]
= 4,872.63 + 591.40 = 5,464.03 ft3 > 4,812.94 ft3 ... OK
Assuming one foot of ponding the minimum surface area required = 4,812.94 ftz
Actual surface area = 5,464.03 ftz > 4,812.94 OK

INFILTRATION CALCUATIONS: Time to Reach 2' Below Surface
Dist. From Surface to WT = 2.52 ft
RECEIVED
SFP 0 3 2009
BY:
Basin ID: BA-1A
Ksat = 5 ft/day
Hydraulic Head in
Hydraulic
Gradient
Head Drop [rate]
(ft/day) (day/ft)
Head Drop
[length]
Time for Head Drop
From BMP Adjusted to
time step time step cumulative
bottom Datum
ft/ft
(ft)
(day) (hr) (hr)
12 42
1.40
6.98 0.143
0.00
0.0000 0.00
0
6 36
1.20
5.99 0.167
0.50
0.0716 1.72
1.72
0 30
1.00
5.00 0.200
0.50
0.0834 2.00
3.72
-6 24
0.80
4.01 0.250
0.50
0.1000 2.40
6.12
-12 18
0.60
3.02 0.3321
0.501
0.1248 2.99
9.11
-18 12
0.40
2.02 0.494
0.50
0.1658 3.98
13.09
-24 6
0.21
1.03 0.969
0.50
0.2471 5.93
19.02
45
40
35
30
c 25
v
m
20
xd
15
10
5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time (hrs)

Bioretention Basin BA-1C:
Drainage Area Information:
Total Area = 27,878.00 ft2 = 0.640 ac
Impervious Area = 21,484.03 ft2 = 0.493 ac
Pervious Area = 6,393.97 ft2 = 0.147 ac
Determine the runoff coefficient Rv:
RV = 0.05 + 0.9 ` IA where
= 0.05 + (0.9) (0.771)
= 0.744
Determine the volume of runoff V.
IA = 0.493/0.640
= 0.771
V = 3,630' Ro ` Rv. A where RD= 1-inch
= 3,630 (1) (0.744) (0.640) = 1,727.46 ft3
Determine Actual Storage provided @ 1 ft depth
2009
YCF.IVED
P 0 3
= 1,798 + [196.85' x 0.5' (avg depth of slope) x 3.0' (width of slope)]
= 1,798 + 295.28 = 2,093.28 ft3 > 1,727.46 ft3 .-. OK
Assuming one foot of ponding the minimum surface area required = 1,727.46 ft2
Actual surface area = 2,093.28 ft2 > 1,727.46 •'• OK

INFILTRATION CALCLATIONS: Time to Reach 2' Below Surface
Dist. From Surface to WT = 3.09 ft
RECEIVED
SEP 0 3 2009
BY:
Basin ID: BA-1C
Ksat = 5 ft/day
Hydraulic Head in
Hydraulic
Gradient
Head Drop [rate]
(ft/day) (day/ft)
Head Drop
[length]
Time for Head Drop
From BMP Adjusted to
time step time step cumulative
bottom Datum
ft/ft
(ft)
(day) (hr) (hr)
12 48
1.32
6.62 0.151
0.00
0.0000 0.00
0
6 42
1.16
5.81 0.172
0.50
0.0756 1.81
1.81
0 36
1.00
5.00 0.200
0.50
0.0861 2.07
3.88
-6 30
0.84
4.19 0.239
0.50
0.1000 2.40
6.28
-12 24
0.68
3.38 0.296
0.50
0.1193 2.86
9.14
-18 18
0.51
2.57 0.389
0.50
0.1478 3.55
12.69
-24 12
0.35
1.76 0.567
0.50
0.1943 4.66
17.35
60
50
40
v 30
m
x
20
10
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time (hrs)

SEP 3 2009
Bioretention Basin BA-2:
Drainage Area Information:
Total Area = 35,232.00 ft2 = 0.809 ac
Impervious Area = 29,185.20 ft2 = 0.670 ac
Pervious Area = 6,046.80 ft2 = 0.138 ac
Determine the runoff coefficient Rv.
RV = 0.05 + 0.9 * IA where
0.05 + 0.9 (0.828)
= 0.795
Determine the volume of runoff V
V = 3,630 * Rp * Rv * A where
= 3,630 (1) (0.795) (0.809)
IA = 0.670/0.809
= 0.828
RD= 1-inch
= 2,334.65 ft3
Determine Actual Storage provided @ 1 ft depth
= 2,041.57 + [224.27' x 0.5' (avg depth of slope) x 3.0' (width of slope)]
= 2,041.57 + 336.41 = 2,377.98 ft3 > 2,334.65 ft3 .'. OK
Assuming one foot of ponding the minimum surface area required = 2,334.65 ft2
Actual surface area = 2377.98 ft2 > 2334.65 ft2 •.. OK

EP03VBY-
INFILTRATION CALCUATIONS: Time to Reach 2' Below Surface Basin ID: BA-2
Dist. From Surface to WT = 3.44 ft Ksat = 5 ft/day
Hydraulic Head in
Hydraulic
Gradient
Head Drop [rate]
(ft/day) (day/ft)
Head Drop
[length]
Time for Head Drop
From BMP Adjusted to
time step time step cumulative
bottom Datum
ft/ft
(ft)
(day) (hr) (hr)
12 54
1.29
6.45 0.155
0.00
0.0000 0.00
0
6 48
1.15
5.73 0.175
0.50
0.0775 1.86
1.86
0 42
1.00
5.00 0.200
0.50
0.0873 2.10
3.95
-6 36
0.85
4.27 0.234
0.50
0.1000 2.40
6.35
-12 30
0.71
3.55 0.282
0.50
0.1170 2.81
9.16
-18 24
0.56
2.82 0.355
0.50
0.1410 3.38
12.55
-24 18
0.42
2.09 0.478
0.50
0.1773 4.26
16.80
60
50
40
..
-
30
0 -
A
w
x
20
10
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Time (hrs)

Bioretention Basin BA-3:
Drainage Area Information:
Total Area = 10,979.00 ft2 = 0.252 ac
Impervious Area = 9,773.00 ft2 = 0.224 ac
Pervious Area = 1,206.00 ft2 = 0.028 ac
Determine the runoff coefficient Rv;
Rv = 0.05 + 0.9 " IA where
= 0.05 + 0.9 (0.889)
= 0.85
Determine the volume of runoff V.
V = 3,630 * RD * Rv - A
3,630 (1) (0.85) (0.252)
Actual Storage provided @ 1 ft depth
IA =
= 777.55 ft3
0.224/0.252
0.889
SPP 0 3 2009
= 798.12 + [131.20' x 0.5' (avg depth of slope) x 3.0' (width of slope)]
= 798.12 + 196.8 = 994.92 ft3 > 777.55 ft3 ... OK
Assuming one foot of ponding the minimum surface area required = 777.55 ft2
Surface area provided = 994.92 ft2 > 777.55 ft2 OK

INFILTRATION CALCUATIONS: Time to Reach 2' Below Surface
Dist. From Surface to WT = 2.49 ft
RECEIVED
SEP 0 3 2009
BY:
Basin ID: BA-3
Ksat = 5 May
Hydraulic Head in
Hydraulic
Gradient
Head Drop [rate]
(ft/day) (day/ft)
Head Drop
[length]
Time for Head Drop
From BMP Adjusted to
time step time step cumulative
bottom Datum
ft/ft
(ft)
(day) (hr) (hr)
12 42
1.40
7.01 0.143
0.00
0.0000 0.00
0
6 36
1.20
6.00 0.167
0.50
0.0713 1.71
1.71
0 30
1.00
5.00 0.200
0.50
0.0833 2.00
3.71
-6 24
0.80
4.00 0.250
0.50
0.1000 2.40
6.11
-12 18
0.60
2.99 0.334
0.501
0.1251 3.00
9.11
-18 12
0.40
1.99 0.503
0.501
0.1671 4.01
13.12
24 6
0.20
0.98 1.016
0.501
0.2515 6.04
19.16
45
40
35
30
25
v
= 20
15-
10
_
5
-
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (hrs)

Bioretention Basin BA-4:
Drainage Area Information:
Total Area = 11,993.00 ft2 = 0.275 ac
Impervious Area = 10,454.00 ft2 = 0.240 ac
Pervious Area = 1,539.00 ft2 = 0.035 ac
Determine the runoff coefficient Rv.
RV = 0.05 + 0.9 * IA where
0.05 + 0.9 (0.873)
= 0.835
Determine the volume of runoff V.
RECEIVED
C F P 0 3 2009
BY:�_
IA = 0.240/0.275
= 0.873
V = 3,630 * Rp * Rv * A
3,630 * (1) * (0.835) (0.275) = 833.54 ft3
Actual Storage provided @ 1 ft depth
_ [144.35' x 0.5' (avg depth of slope) x 3.0' (width of slope)] + 835.31
= 216.53 + 835.31 = 1,051.94 ft3 > 833.54 ft3 .•. OK
Assuming one foot of ponding the minimum surface area required = 833.54 ft2
Surface area provided = 1,051.94 ft2 > 833.54 ft2 OK

SEP 0 3 2009
INFILTRATION CALCUATIONS: Time to Reach 2' Below Surface Basin ID: BA-4
Dist. From Surface to W T = 2.09 ft Ksat = 5 ft/day
Hydraulic Head in
Hydraulic
Gradient
Head Drop [rate]
(ft/day) (day/ft)
Head Drop
[length]
Time for Head Drop
From BMP Adjusted to
time step time step cumulative
bottom Datum
ft/ft
(ft)
(day) (hr) (hr)
12 36
1.48
7.39 0.135
0.00
0.0000 0.00
0.00
6 30
1.24
6.20 0.161
0.50
0.0676 1.62
1.62
0 24
1.00
5.00 0.200
0.50
0.0807 1.94
3.56
-6 18
0.76
3.80 0.263
0.50
0.1000 2.40
5.96
-12 12
0.52
2.61 0.383
0.50
0.1314 3.15
9.11
-18 6
0.28
1.41 0.708
0.50
0.1917 4.60
13.72
40
35
30
25
c
v 20
m
v
2
15
10
5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time (hrs)

MSA, P.C.
Environmental Sciences Planning Surveying
5033 Rouse Drive , Virginia Beach, VA 23462-3708
[phone] Office
[phone] Fax
CEIVED
SEP 0 � 2009
Civil & Environm ntal E in rin an ca e Architecture
BY: stville, VA 23347
P.O. Box 246, Eastville, VA 23347
Office [phone]
Fax [phone]
m—
;Project Number,' , ' ,y ' s^" i i"-"'. Si xerE
Mary Jean Naugle 09/02/2009 03222A
North Carolina Dept. of
Environmental and Natural Resources
Wilmington Regional Office -
Division of Water Quality
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
,Wilmington, NC 28405
We are sending you the following items:
MCON P648 NAMTRA MARU FACILITY
Copies
Date
Description
2
09/02/2009
Revised Calculations
4:.
n For your use
❑ As requested
❑ For review & comment
❑ Approved as noted
❑ Other
❑ For recordation
❑ For signature
❑ For signature and notarization
❑ Response required
❑ Email
❑ Mail
❑ Deliver
❑ Pickup
n Overnight UPS-Ovemight
❑Via Fax#
etuatl�s F, � .
Copy To::
File
By: Michael D. Hess, E.I.T.
Titic: Project En incer III
Office: Virginia Beach
J

Naugle, Mary
From: Mike Hess [mike [e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 5:12 PM
To: Naugle, Mary
Cc: david
Subject: Re: NAMTRA-Addtitional Info
Mary,
I have only sent you what was required to be revised. You should have or will receive the following:
By SNAIL MAIL (9/2/09)
V= Revised Plans (only those sheets requiring revisions)
Revised Calculations (please disregard as they do not include the most comprehensive set of draw down calcs)
,; Responses to your comments.
By EMAIL today (9/2/09)
BMP Supplement Forms (the most current one from you website)
/ Checklist (from the supplement form file)
Revised digital copy of the Calculations (to replace the hard copy package received via snail mail 9/2/09)
By SNAIL MAIL tomorrow (9/3/09)1d1,tQ-7-
wl Revised hard copy of the Calculations sent via email on 9/2/09
From David
,//- Signed and notarized copies of the O&M's
I hope this helps clarify any confusion. Please let me know if there is anything else I can do to assist you.
Regards,
Michael D. Hess, FIT, NSPE, Project Engineer III
MSA, P.C.
Environmental Sciences • Planning • Surveying
Civil & Environmental Engineering • Landscape Architecture
757-490-9264 [Ofe] 757-490-0634 [Fax]
Offices in Hampton Roads and Virginia's Eastern Shore
http://www.msaonline.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mary Naugle" <[e-mail]>
To: "Mike Hess" <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 2, 2009 3:08:30 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: FW: NAMTRA - Addtitional Info
Mike;
Did you send a complete set in the paper mail, so that I know which one to use ?

Thank you
Mary Jean Naugle
NC DEAR Express Permitting
NC Division of Water Quality
127Cardinal Drive Ext.
Wilmington, NC 28405
910-796-7215
910-796-7303
910-350-2004 fax
mare. naualeencdenr. go v
Please note: E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records
Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Naugle, Mary
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 2:13 PM
To: 'Mike Hess'
Cc: david
Subject: RE: NAMTRA - Addtitional Info
Mike;
I will look for the ad info in the paper mail Thursday based on this e-mail and your phone message.
Thank you,
Mary Jean Naugle
NC DENR Express Permitting
NC Division of Water Quality
127Cardmal Drive Ext.
Wilmington, NC 28405
910-796-7215
910-796-7303
910-350-2004 fax
mart' nougle @ncdenr. go v
Please note: E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records
Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Mike Hess[ma !Ito:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 11:57 AM
To: Naugle, Mary
Cc: david
Subject:'NAMTRA - Addtitional Info
Mary,
Attached are the new supplement forms and checklist. You should be receiving hard copies of the revised plan
sheets and calculations today. l have since revised the calculations to show the drawdown to 24" below the
surface. Because of this please disregard the hard copy of the calcs you will receive today as I will be sending a
revised more comprehensive via overnight mail. The attached a digital copy of the calcs is what you will be
receiving tomorrow in the mail. Also, David has the O&M's. You should receive these with the required

signatures shortly.
If you have any questions feel free to contact me.
Michael D. Hess, EIT, NSPE, Project Engineer III
MSA, P.C.
Environmental Sciences • Planning Surveying
Civil & Environmental Engineering Landscape Architecture
757-490-9264[Ofc] 757-490-0634[Fax]
Offices in Hampton Roads and Virginia's Eastern Shore
http://www.msaonline.com
Michael D. Hess, FIT, NSPE, Project Engineer III
MSA, P.C.
Environmental Sciences • Planning Surveying
Civil & Environmental Engineering Landscape Architecture
757-490-9264 [Ofc] 757-490-0634[Fax]
Offices in Hampton Roads and Virginia's Eastern Shore
http://www.msaonline.com
3

Naugle, Mary
From:
Mike Hess [mike [e-mail]]
Sent:
Wednesday, September 02, 2009 11:57 AM
To:
Naugle, Mary
Cc:
david
Subject:
NAMTRA - Addtitional Info
Attachments:
Calculations.tif; Project Checklist.tif; 03222a - Supplement Forms - 09.02.09.pdf
Mary,
Attached are the new supplement forms and checklist. You should be receiving hard copies of the revised plan
sheets and calculations today. I have since revised the calculations to show the drawdown to 24" below the
surface. Because of this please disregard the hard copy of the calcs you will receive today as I will be sending a
revised more comprehensive via overnight mail. "rhe attached a digital copy of the calcs is what you will be
receiving tomorrow in the mail. Also, David has the O&M's. You should receive these with the required
signatures shortly.
If you have any questions feel free to contact me.
Michael D. Hess, Err, NSPE, Project Engineer III
MSA, P.C.
Environmental Sciences • Planning • Surveying
Civil & Environmental Engineering • Landscape Architecture
757-490-9264 [Ofc] 757-490-0634[Fax]
Offices in Hampton Roads and Virginia's Eastern Shore
http://www.msaonline.com

CET
PE 'II►�',I I�� DISA, PC. SEp 0 ! 200�
5033 Rouse Drive, Virginia Beach, VA 23462-3708
lQ':�i Officc 757-490-9264 • Far 757-490-0634
wmlv.msaouli ic.coni
Environmental Sciences • Planning • Surveying • Civil &- F,mironmenttd Engince,ing • lamd>cape Areluteciure
September I, 2009
Mary Jean Naugle
North Carolina Dept. of Environmental and Natural Resources
Wilmington Regional Office - Division of Water Quality
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405
RE: NAMTRA MARU Facility — P-648, Onslow County
Stormwater #SW8 090810; MSA #03222A
Dear Ms. Naugle:
Enclosed,for your review and approval is the revised application package fer the abw rr. lerenced
project. Each of your comments dated August 26, 2009 have been addressed' as follow'§:
Please provide design information on the current supplements for bioretention basins. "i'he
current supplements are on the state stormwater website at:
littp:Hli2o.eiir.sUite.nc.us/su/biiip forms.hi m. Previous scope meeting.; with Linda LCWis
outlined requirements to use the current forms. Information is needed on the supplemrni for
ponding depths, length and width of ponding areas, surface areas, etc.. as outlined cn they
supplement.
Response: Please see attached BMP supplemental form. All data from the old BLVIT� 1 �
supplemental form has been transposed onto the new forms.
2. Please clarify the soil permeability for each basin. For example, the supplement for Bann 4F3A-
IA reports in -situ soil rate of 0 in/hr with a planting soil rate of 2.5 in/hr, and the calculations
report I ft/hr within the facility. An example was given here for one basin; please verify eael of
the five basins.
Response: An acceptable soil permeability for the in -situ soil has been indicated in the
supplemental form attached. In order to gain access to these permeable soils undercutting
will be required in addition to that needed for the storage volume and media thickness for
the proposed BA -I A. It should be noted this was also required for the basins that have
already been constructed. All existing unpermitted basins are currently operating
effectively without any standing water. It is to be assumed these basins were excavated to
suitable soils and backfilled with clean washed sand. Please see below for the depth of
undercut needed in order for these basins to function properly. Additionally, the
infiltration rate of the proposed planting media is 2.5 in/hr which equated to 0.208 ft/hr.
This was misrepresented in the calculations as the hydraulic gradient. The nomenclature in
the calculations has been revised to eliminate this confusion.
Basin
Additional
Undercut
BA-1A
2.5 ft
BA-1 C
5 ft
BA-2
6 ft
BA-3
4 ft
BA-4
4 ft
Making Clients Successful Since 1973

-- S
Ms. Mary Jean Naugle
September 1, 2009
Project #SW8090810;MSA#03222A SEP 0 9 2009
Page 2
BY:
Please clarify the method for draining the cell(s). The permeability of the planting media is
greater than the permeability of the in -situ soil. The supplement on page 2 states that the system
"does not" incorporate the use of an under -drain.
Response: The cells will drain via infiltration. Corrections have been made to the
permeability of the in -situ soils within the supplement forms. Please see the supplement
forms. Dll fC-e &3L-4 0.3 OP-0 Cites+ 'Z,sj W11-0 I cS SUP nn,1r^L
Please clarify the ponding depth of water.
Response: Please see the attached supplement form for ponding depths.
Please provide information regarding the excess volume. Does volume in excess of the design
volume bypass the bioretention cell? Does volume in excess of the design volmme Flow evenly
distributed through a vegetated filter? What is the length of the vegetated filter? Does the design
use a levei spreader to evenly distribute flow? If other mechanism please specify. Please locate
bypass on plans with details, as well as information on the supplements. The excess storm should
bypass the bioretention basins to a. vegetated area to avoid damage to the system. A splitter type
inlet box may be used on each basin to route the excess design storm around the basin to '
vegetation.
Response: The plans have been revised to incorporate the ability to bypas excess flow.
Excess flow from basin BA-1A will discharge through an overflow weir and w li be
conveyed to an existing grass swale via a proposed grass Swale. Basin BA-lt: currently
indicates a drop inlet with the intent it would be used as a device to convey excess tlon prior
to the runoff entering the basin. To more clearly depict this a swale line has been she.vn oil
the plans indicating the intent of the bypass structure. Basin BA-2 is currently designed
with the. ability to bypass a cess runoff. At the point where this basin reaches caI),;1&y
excess -runoff will continue to now down the curb line and enter the curb inletonthu East.
side of the basin. The plans have been revised to make BA-3 and BA-4 function like BA-1,
In an effort to minimize site impact while still providing treatment to previously mltreated
imperviousness the bypass structures for bioretention basins BA -IC, BA-2, BA-3, and BA-4'
discharge to an existing storm sewer system therefore eliminating the possibility for a
vegetated filter or level spreader-. The proposed BA -IA does discharge to a proposed grass
Swale which connects to an existing grassed swale. Plans and details have been revised to
indicate what has been described above. A note on Sheet C-804 under the curb inlet and
drop inlet detail has been placed indicating which inlets will be utilized as bypass structures.
Should you have any questions or concerns please contact me at 757-490-9264 or email me at
mike [e-mail].
Sincerely,
Michael D. Hess, E.I.T.
Project Engineer III
MDH/cag
Cc: Carl Baker— Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune

ILIFFAA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
August 26, 2009
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins
Director
Carl Baker, Deputy Public Works Officer
Commanding Officer, Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune
1005 Michael Road
Camp Lejeune, NC 28542
Subject: Request for Additional Information
Stormwater Project No. SW8 090810
NAMTRA MARU Facility — P-648
Onslow County
Dear Mr. Baker:
Dee Freeman
Secretary
The Wilmington Regional Office received an Express Stormwater Management Permit Application for NAMTRA
MARU Facility P-648 on August 25, 2009. A preliminary review of that information has determined that the application
is not complete. The following information is needed to continue the stormwater review:
1. Please provide design information on the current supplements for bioretention basins. The current
supplements are on the state stormwater website at: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/su/bmp forms.htm.
Previous scope meetings with Linda Lewis outlined requirements to use the current forms.
Information is needed on the supplement for ponding depths, length and width of ponding areas,
surface areas, etc... as outlined on the supplement.
2. Please clarify the soil permeability for each basin. For example, the supplement for Basin #BA-1A
reports in -situ soil rate of 0 Whir with a planting soil rate of 2.5 in/hr. and the calculations report 1
ft/hr within the facility. An example was given here for one basin; please verify each of the five
basins.
3. Please clarify the method for draining the cell(s). The permeability of the planting media is greater
than the permeability of the in -situ soil. The supplement on page 2 states that the system "does
not" incorporate the use of an under -drain.
4. Please clarify the ponding depth of water.
5. Please provide information regarding the excess volume. Does volume in excess of the design
volume bypass the bioretention cell? Does volume in excess of the design volume flow evenly
distributed through a vegetated filter? What is the length of the vegetated filter? Does the design
use a level spreader to evenly distribute flow? If other mechanism please specify. Please locate
bypass on plans with details, as well as information on the supplements. The excess storm should
bypass the bioretention basins to a vegetated area to avoid damage to the system. A splitter type
inlet box may be used on each basin to route the excess design storm around the basin to
vegetation.
Please note that this request for additional information is in response to a preliminary review. The
requested information should be received in this Office prior to September 3, 2009, or the application will
be returned as incomplete. The return of a project will necessitate re -submittal of all required items,
including the application fee.
If you need additional time to submit the information, please mail, email or fax your request for a
time extension to the Division at the address and fax number at the bottom of this letter. Please note that a
second significant request for additional information may result in the return of the project or additional
information fees. If that occurs, you will need to reschedule'the project through the Express coordinator for
the next available review date, and resubmit all of the required items, including the application fee.
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
One
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748
North Carolina
Internet: w .nmaterquality.org
LL {4L si"
��/�J►� turn l y
An Equal Opportunity\ Affirmative Action Employer

The construction of any impervious surfaces, other than a construction entrance under an approved
Sedimentation Erosion Control Plan, is a violation of NCGS 143-215.1 and is subject to enforcement action
pursuant to NCGS 143-215.6A.
Please label all packages and cover letters as "Express" and reference the project name and
State assigned project number on all correspondence. If you have any questions concerning this matter
please feel free to call me at [phone] or email me at [e-mail].
Sincerely,
w
Manin augle
GDS/mjn: S:\WQS\STORMWATER\ADDINFO\2009\090810 aug09
cc: Michael D. Hess, EIT, MSA, PC, 757-490-9264, fax: 0634
M.J. Naugle
Page 2 of 2

TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT
TIME
: 08/26/2009 12:20
NAME
: NCDENR
FAX
: 9103502018
TEL
: 9167967215
DATE,TIME
08/26 12:19
FAX NO./NAME
917574900634
DURATION
00:00:57
PAGE(S)
03
RESULT
OK
MODE
STANDARD
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Wilmington Regional Office
Beverly Eaves Perdue, Governor
Date: -4 }
To: s S
Co: 1
Fax: '/. J /
Re:
FAX COVER SHEET
3
Hard Cony to follow w
Dee Freeman, Secretary
No. Pages (excl. cover): Z
Express Permitting
From: Sandra Exum
Phone(910),796-7265
Fax: (2](1) 350-2004
�y dui
127 Cardinal Drive Extension. Wilmington, NC 28405 • [phone] • An Equal Opportunity Affinaativc Action Employer

TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT
TIME
: ee/26/2009 12:18
NAME
: NCDENR
FAX
: 9103502018
TEL
: 9107967215
DATE,TIME
08/26 12:18
FAX NO./NAME
919104512927
DURATION
00:00:52
PAGE(S)
03
RESULT
OK
MODE
STANDARD
ECM
State of North Carolina
Department. of Environment and Natural Resources
Wilmington Regional Office Dee Freeman, Secretary
cleverly Eaves Perdue, Governor FAX COVER Si%FET
No. Pages (excl. cover):
Express Permitting
From: Samba Exum
Phone: (91(D 796-7265
Fax: L 0 1 50-2004
Hard couv to follow
127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, NC 28405 • [phone] • An Equal Upporttmity Affirmative Action Employer

cr�r✓�'�,�-vGn o-v�
VA
�I" Tel
act (q Wcj
� ( 0,6)
s k)TT
U1rciQ1'-� p �
L
jo 1W��dd
c�ac�-�,� °�SC�2�► -� ��

wQ� Lk ` B c7Pl
MOM

State Stormwater Management
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11
12
13
14
The drainage�rea to he system contains approximately the permitted acreage.
The drainage aL to the system contains no more than the permitted amount of
built -upon area. \
All the built -upon area associated with the project is graded such that the runoff
drains to the system`
All roof drains are located such that the runoff is directed into the system.
The bypass struct a We\ elevation is per the approved plan.
The bypass structure is located per the approved plans.
A Trash Rack is provided `n\he bypass structure.
All slopes are grassed with permanent vegetation.
Vegetated slopes are no steeper than 3:1.
The inlets are located per the approved plans and do not cause short-circuiting of
the system.
The permitted amounts of surface\
All required designidepths are provid
All required parts ofIthe system are K
The required system dimensions are
cc: NCDENR-DWQ Regional Office
Brunswick County Building Inspections
Page 7 of 7
and/or volume have been provided.
per the approved plans.

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY TELEPHONE NO:
NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND (757) 322-4I58
ATLANTIC
6506 HAMPTON BLVD IN asnLv DEFER M.
=BY:
NORFOLK VA 23508-1278 N62430.05-C-2040
OPCkQ2: CNG
08 June 2005
L.C. Gaskins Construction Co., Inc. and C Constriction Co., Inc. A Joint Venture
7016 Davis Creek Road
Jacksonville, Florida 32256
RE: CONTRACT N62470A5-C-2040, NAMTRA MARU MAINTENANCE
TRAINING FACILITY, MARINE CORPS AIR STATION, NEW RIVER,
JACSKONVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA
Gentlemen:
Enclosed is your copy of Standard Form 33, "Solicitation, Offer and Award" for contract
N62470-05-C-2040, dated 08 June 2005.
Subject to receipt and approval of acceptable performance and payment bonds, you are hereby
directed to proceed with the work under the authority of this notice.
Please contact the office shown in Block 24, within 10 days after the date of this letter, for the
purpose of arranging a precwnstruction meeting with, Assistant Resident Officer/Engineer in Charge
of Construction. The purpose of this meeting is to review various base regulations and contract
administrative procedures.
Sincerely,
SHARON A. TAYLOR
Construction Contracts Division
Contracting Officer
By direction of the Commander
End:
(1) SF 33 N6247"S-C-2040
Copy to: ROICC Camp Lejeune, NC
Quality Performance ... Quality Results

14,
7REC� �-
�UG ? 5 2009
BY �Q
Stormwater Management Narrative
P-648 NAMTRA MARU Facility
MCB Camp Lejeune
Onslow, NC
MSA Project No. 03222A
Existing Conditions:
The purpose of this project is for the development and redevelopment of three (3) treks of land
within the immediate vicinity of each other. The areas to be disturbed consist of 4.06 acres
located to the north and south of Campbell Street and in-between Bancroft Street and McAvory
Street on the New River Marine Corps Air Station. The sites are situated just north of the
northern most tarmac. An existing parking lot to the north of Campbell Street is to be
demolished to allow for the construction of a training facility and a small improved parking lot.
An existing parking lot to the south of Campbell Street will be retrofitted by reducing the use of
curb and gutter and utilizing a bioretention basin to improve stormwater quality. An existing
grassed area to the south of Campbell Street will be developed into a parking lot. The sites are
generally flat sloping gradually to the north where an existing system of swales and ditches
ultimately conveys all runoff to the White Oak River Basin via the Stick Creek. No evidence of
wetlands has been observed onsite. Consequently, a wetland delineation was not performed.
Proposed Conditions:
Five (5) bioretention basins will be implemented to reduce runoff and improve the stormwater
quality for this high density development. Site impact has been minimized by using the existing
storm sewer system and on site swales to convey runoff to and from the basins. Excess runoff
will be conveyed through the use of existing and proposed storm sewer system. The basins will
treat the first 1" of runoff for the 2.98 acres of proposed impervious area. Calculations for which
are included with this submittal package. This 2.98 acres of impervious area equates to a 73%
impervious coverage for the project. Seasonal high water tables were determined from the soil
borings performed by GER. A copy of this soils report has also been included with this
submittal. It should be noted the purpose of this soils report was to facilitate in the design of the
foundation and pavement sections. Due to the methods used to obtain the logs and the
locations of the borings the SHWT indicated for the BMPs are approximations. Additionally,
there is a fairly consistent layer of fat clay with a layer of sand lying beneath it. Due to these
factors a note has been placed on the plans indicating the need for a field inspector to verify if
the in-suti soils have a suitable infiltration rate prior to the construction of the bioretention
basins. This project will not impact any buffers of any kind.

7G121)
9�_
Project History:
Prior to this submittal this project had gone through extensive review and unfortunately, for
reasons that have not been determined, the process stopped in early 2006. Prior to that
engineers from out company and reviewing agents from your organization made great strides in
progressing this project to a approvable status. As of the last comment letter the revisions that
were requested were fairly minor. The most significant of which was the addition of bioretention
basin BA-1 A. This was added to treat impervious area that had gone untreated in previous
submittals. This firm has used that comment letter as a bench mark to progress forward in an
effort to achieve a permit. A copy of which, as well as this firm's responses has been included
for your reference. It should also be noted this plan set was approved by the Navy on June 8,
2005 in the form of an Award Letter. A copy of this letter has been included with this narrative.
Due to this, all previous work, as well as the most recent changes, have been made in
accordance to the old regulations.
Stormwater Management Narrative for P-648 NAMTRA MARU Facility

*Gut
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
GeoEnvironmental Resources, Inc.
Environmental • Groundwater • Haurdous Matenals -Geotechnical • Industnal
HBA
One Columbus Center, Suite 1000
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462
Attention: Mr. Joe Bovee, AIA
Subject: Report of Geotechnical Exploration
P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility
MCAS New River
Jacksonville, North Carolina
A&E Contract No. N62470-03-D-1137
HBA Project No. 03127.1
GER Project No. 110-3528
�2EC 13
-'v'
AUG ^ � 2009
BY:___
Wednesday, 14 July 2004
GeoEnvironmental Resources, Inc. is pleased to present this report of geotechnical exploration for the
proposed NAMTRA-MARU Facility, Marine Corps Air Station, New River, Jacksonville, North Carolina.
These services were performed in accordance with our fee proposal dated December 31, 2003 and
authorized by Mr. Bovee of HBA.
We appreciate the opportunity to serve as your geotechnical consultant on this project and trust that you
will contact us at your convenience with any questions you may have concerning this report or the project
in general.
Sincerely,
GeoEnvironmental Resources, Inc.
Charles F. P. Crawley, III, P.E. Lip 9
Senior Engineer = OL EAL rt J
028246 _
Scott A. Barnhill, P.E.
Vice President ,rrrt uP111" O
SOUThERN PROfESSIONAI CENTER 1 271 2 SOUThERN BOUIEVARd, SUITE 101 V1RQN1A BEACH, ViRg1NIA 23452
[phone] FAX (.757) 463.3080 gERMAiI@gERON[iNE.COM

EcEry ,� A) "' , 0I�
AUG ^ 5 2000 �r1(lt�
��u3kUgUkt- N �P'
REPORT OF
GEOTECHNICAL
P-648 NAMTRA-MARU FAdhTy
MARINE CORPS AIR STATION NEW RIVER
JACI<SONVil[E, NORTh CAROhNA
prepared for
HBA Architects
Virginia Beach, Virginia
14 July 2004
o '
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
GeoEnvironmental Resources, Inc.
Environmental • Groundwater • Hazardous Materials • Geotechnical • Industrial
SOUThERN PROIESSiONAI CENTER.1
2712 SOUTHERN BOUIEVARd, SUITE 101
ViRgiNiA BEACh, ViRGiniA 23452
[phone] Fax [phone] E•MAil [e-mail]

AUG 3 5 2009
CONTENTS
Southern Professional Center 1
2712 Southern Boulevard, Suite 101
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23452
[phone] Fax [phone] [e-mail]
Environmental Groundwater Hazardous Materials Geotechnical Industrial
Section 1
Report
Section 2
Drawings
Section 3
Test Boring Data
Section 4
Laboratory Test Data
Section 5
Procedures

RECEWE D
AUG 3 5 2009
BY:
REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION
P-648 NAMTRA-MARU FACiliTy
MCAS NEW RIVER, NORTH CAROIINA
GER Project 110-3528
14 July 2004
Executive Summary
❑ The subsurface soils encountered in the borings were composed of five general stratigraphic layers of
North Carolina's Atlantic Coastal Plain geologic province. They include:
Sl - Loose to firm clayey silty SAND mixed with fill and clay to depths of about 0.3 to 1.2 m (1 to 4 ft)
S2 - Stiff to very soft silty CLAY to depths of about 2.4 to 3.5 m (8 to 11.5 ft)
S3 - Very loose to dense silty to clean SAND with traces of organics to depths of about 5.2 to 6.7 m (17
to 22 ft)
S4 - Very loose to firm clayey and silty SAND to depths of about 8.5 to 9.8 m (28 to 32 ft)
S5 - Firm to very dense silty SAND and SHELL to the maximum exploration depth of 30.5 m (100 ft)
❑ The anticipated structural loads combined with differential filling of the site is expected to result in
intolerable settlement of conventional spread footings. Pile foundations driven into the fifth stratum are
recommended for supporting the structural framing. Estimated lengths and capacities for driven
prestressed concrete and timber piles are provided.
❑ The average 1 meter ( 3.3 ft) grade increase at the north end of the building is expected to settle up to
40 mm (1.5 in) under fill and floor loads and may create download on pile foundations in this area. A
conventional slab -on -grade floor slab may be used for the project after preloading with surcharge at
the northern end of the site. Otherwise, a structural supported floor slab should be considered.
❑ Groundwater was encountered in the borings at a depth of about 1 to 2 m (3 to 6 ft) below the ground
surface during the exploration. Groundwater may impact excavations for some foundations. Dewatering
by ditching and sump pumping along with the aid of crushed aggregate may be required.
❑ The majority of excavated soils from the site are not recommended for reuse as fill in the building and
pavement areas.
❑ A design CBR value of 4 was determined for compacted Stratum 1 subgrade soils based on laboratory
testing. Use of typical light duty asphalt pavements are appropriate for automobile parking.
❑ Seismic Site Class D was determined for the site.
❑ Pockets of uncontrolled fill and buried structures may be encountered on the site, particularly the
proposed parking areas.
GER

AUG ^•, 5 7009
P-648 NAMTRA-MARU FAcilily
Purpose of Exploration
110.3528
The purpose of this exploration was to evaluate
general subsurface conditions in the planned
building and paving areas. Geotechnical
recommendations for design and construction of
the project foundations and pavements are
provided based on analysis of the field and
laboratory data obtained.
Project Information
The proposed project is an approximate 3716
square meter (40,000 sf) aircraft maintenance
training facility at the Marine Corps Air Station, New
River in Jacksonville, North Carolina. The site
location is shown in Figure 1 and Drawing 1. We
understand the facility will include a single -story
classroom/training/administration building and a
10.7 m (35 ft) high bay hangar. Construction is
anticipated to consist of structural steel framing,
brick masonry exterior, concrete floor slab and pile
supported foundation. Anticipated structural loads
were provided as 1300 kN (300 kips) or less for
columns and 7 kPa (150 psf) for floor loading. The
proposed building floor elevation is 5.33 m (17.5
ft). The project will also include 3 paved parking
lots for light duty vehicles and associated
underground utilities and stormwater management.
Site Conditions
The project site is currently composed of asphalt
pavements, open grass areas, several trees, ditches
and underground utilities. Recent site photographs
are shown in Figure 2 and Drawing 2. The ground
surface is mostly flat with the lowest area at the
north end of the proposed building. Ground
elevations range from about 4.0 to 5.5 m (13 to 18
ft) above mean sea level (NGVD29) based on the
site topographical drawing furnished to us.
Subsurface Conditions
The subsurface conditions were explored with six
standard soil test borings drilled to a depth of 15.2
to 30.5 m (50 to 100 ft) below the ground surface
in the planned building area, and three borings to a
depth of 3 m (10 ft) in proposed pavement areas.
In addition, three bulk soil samples were collected
from the pavement area borings. The boring
locations, shown in Figure 3 and Drawing 3, were
selected and field located by GER. These locations
C` K 1S.,i : O N:`' V` [ ' 1
� (SITE
Figure 1. Site Location
(a) 2000Aerial Photograph
(b) Building Site Photograph
Figure 2. Site Conditions
GER

AUG A,, 5 2000
P-648 NAMTRA-MARU FAciliry
110.3528
shall be considered approximate. Drilling and
sampling was conducted in accordance with the
procedures in Section 5 of this report.
The subsurface conditions encountered at the
boring locations are shown on the test boring
records in Section 3 of this report. The test boring
records represent our interpretation of the
subsurface conditions based on visual examination
of field samples obtained and selected laboratory
classification testing. The lines designating the
interface between various strata on the boring
records represent the approximate interface
location. In addition, the transition between strata
may be gradual. Water levels shown on the boring
records represent the conditions only at the time of
the field exploration. Elevations shown . on the
boring records were estimated using topographic
data furnished to us and are approximate.
Standard penetration tests were
conducted in the borings at discreet 0
intervals in accordance with ASTM D
1586. Small disturbed samples were 2
obtained during the test and were
used to classify the soil. The 4
resistances also provide a general 6
indication of soil strength and
compressibility. Results are indicated E 8
in Figure 4. a
c 16
Surface Materials
The ground surface at the boring 12
locations was composed of about 100 14
to 200 mm (4 to 8 in) of topsoil, and
approximately 60 to 75 mm (2.5 to 3 16
in) of asphalt over 150 mm (6 in)
crushed shell aggregate in existing
paved areas. These materials will
likely vary in thickness and composition
across the project area.
PAGE
Figure 3. Building Site Boring Locations
: k
W• - "ar' • B-1
B-z
f' ♦ - 7 B-4
♦: ♦ :. a B-5
8.6
—Mean
• Y--' - - ...... Minimum
-- - • —Maximum
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Standard Penetration Resistance (blows/0.3 m)
Figure 4. Standard Penetration Test Resistances
Groundwater
Groundwater was encountered in the borings at a
depth of about 1 to 2 m (3 to 6 ft) below the
ground surface during the exploration. This
corresponds to a groundwater elevation of about 3
to 3.5 m (10 to 11 ft), msl. Groundwater may
seasonally fluctuate by about 0.6 m (2 ft) between
extreme high and low conditions of early spring and
early fall. Fluctuations may also occur due to
stratioraahv
The subsurface conditions encountered in the
borings were composed of five generalized soil
strata. Figure 5 and Drawing 4 show a
representation of the subsurface conditions
encountered at the building location. Variations
between this estimated profile and actual
subsurface conditions can be expected.
variations in rainfall, construction activity, tides, STRATUM 1 was encountered beneath topsoil and
surface runoff and other factors. pavement to a depth of about 0.3 to 1.2 m (1 to 4
ft) in the borings. It consisted of loose to firm, tan,
GER

W G 3 5 2009
P-648 NAMTRA-MARU FAciliry
black, brown and gray, clayey,
silty and slightly silty fine to
medium grained SAND (SC, SM,
SP-SM). Some of this layer is FILL
and contains shells, organics and
other minor debris. In two borings
it was interlayered with a stiff silty a
sandy CLAY (CL). Standard ft
penetration test (SPT) resistances
ranged from 8 to 21 blows per 0.3
in (blows per foot) and averaged
about 13 blows. Angle of internal
friction is estimated at 300 to 330
for this layer with cohesion
assumed to be zero.
1 10.3528
PAge 4
51 S.1W SAND&FILL-.—Psemenl ClrLmc-
F ,.1
fj
si 'sDX to Wry sort CLAY
��
—
sl-wry Lee«D._
sAxu
U.V.q
FNm cup,
SAND
'
M1Si� 55. Flnnbwn 0<n,
nC SHELL
STRATUM 2 was encountered 11
below Stratum 1 to a depth of Fi
about 2.4 to 3.5 m (8 to 11.5 ft)
below the ground surface in the
borings. It consisted of stiff to very soft, gray
mottled with brown, orange and tan, low to high
plasticity, silty CLAY (CL, CH). It is partially to fully
saturated. SPT resistances ranged from 2 to 11
blows/0.3 m and averaged about 5. SPT resistance
generally decreased toward the bottom of this
layer. Undrained strength of this layer is estimated
at about 14 to 72 kPa (300 to 1,500 psf) based on
SPT resistances and laboratory tests with an
average of about 36 kPa (750 psf). Angle of internal
friction is zero.
STRATUM 3 was composed of very loose to dense,
grey, white and green, fine to medium, silty to
relatively clean SAND (SM, SP-SM, SP) with traces
of organics. A thin organic clay layer was
encountered in one boring. SPT resistances ranged
from 2 to 32 blows/0.3 m and averaged about 15.
Angle of internal friction is estimated at 290 to 360
for this layer with an average of about 320 and no
cohesion.
gure 6. Estimated Subsurface Conditions
STRATUM 4 was encountered below Stratum 3
and extended to a depth of about 8.5 to 9.8 m (28
to 32 ft) below the ground surface in the borings. It
was composed of very loose to firm, grey and
green, fine to medium silty and clayey SAND (SM,
5C)with traces of shell and gravel. SPT resistances
ranged from 0 to 18 blows with an average of 5.
Angle of internal friction is estimated at 280 to 320
for this layer. It is assumed to be cohesionless.
15.2 to 30.5 m (50 to 100 ft) below the ground
surface. It was composed of firm to very dense silty
SAND (SM) and SHELL. Shell content was greatest
in the upper 8 m (26 ft) of this layer. SPT
resistances ranged from 18 to more than 100 blows
with an overall average greater than 50. Angle of
internal friction is estimated at 340 to more than 450
for this layer. It is assumed to be cohesionless.
Laboratory Ana/yses
Selected samples recovered from the borings were
tested in the laboratory for natural moisture
content, grain size, plasticity, unconfined
compressive strength, consolidation, moisture -
density relationship and California Bearing Ratio
(CBR). Complete results of all laboratory testing
conducted are included in Section 4 of this report.
A summary of the CBR test results is shown in
Table 1 below.
Subsurface Conditions and
Foundations
The site, subsurface conditions and project
STRATUM 5 was encountered below Stratum 4 information described in the previous sections have
and extended to the maximum exploration depth of been evaluated with regard to constructing the
GER

AU6 P 5 ?[1t�
P-648 NAMTRA-MARU FA011TY
110.3528
project using various foundation °
alternatives. Of primary concern for
supporting the proposed structure is the °
soft, compressible Stratum 2 clays with
respect to support of shallow foundations °
L yer Boun°ary
and differential filling across the building '
area. yer � LaMbm°t
12
The saturated Stratum 2 clays in their ; ,o ? I I —
current condition have relatively low shear a
strength which would permit soil bearing a -'
pressures in the range of 72 to 96 kPa
(1500 to 2000 psf) using spread footings
for the project. Although consolidation
testing indicates the clay stratum is
preconsolidated to 2 or more times the
current overburden stress, large footings °
0 AOwould be expected to generate in excess '° 60 T,, D.,) 100 "° ° 10
of 50 mm (2 in) of total settlement under
maximum column loads, much of which Figure 7. Estimated Pore Pressure Dissipation
may be post -construction.
Existing grades at the northern third of the building
area are about 0.9 to 1.3 m (3 to 4.5 ft) below the
planned finished floor elevation, while the southern
2/3 of the building area currently exists very close
to the final grade. This creates a differential
condition for support of both footings and the floor
slab, particularly if the northern end is filled. Placing
an average of 1 meter (3.3 ft) of conventional soil
fill is estimated to generate approximately 40 mm
(1.5 in) of settlement.
Alternatives considered for improving support of the
structure and floor slab with respect to total and
differential settlement include:
❑ Using pile foundations to support the structural
frame and entire floor slab
❑ Preloading the entire site using 2 to 3 meters (6
to 10 ft) of fill and surcharge for an estimated 4
to 6 months
❑ Supporting the frame on pile foundations and
the entire floor slab on -grade after preloading
the northern end of the site with structural fill
plus 750 mm of surcharge for 2 months
Evaluation of these alternatives suggests that the
latter option would likely be most economical. It is ❑ Conventional impact driven precast/prestressed
particularly advantageous to eliminate numerous concrete and round timber piles are expected to
floor slab piles which may be subject to downdrag if be the most feasible pile types for the project.
fill will be placed. Estimated lengths and capacities calculated for
these alternatives are presented in Table 2. The
The Stratum 2 clay has a very low permeability and
its rate of consolidation is expected to be slow and
remain fairly constant no matter how much
surcharge is added. Figure 7 shows the estimated
pore pressures with time for consolidation to occur
in Stratum 2. However, adding a minimum 750 mm
(2.5 ft) surcharge over the northern end is
expected to increase the magnitude of settlement
sufficiently to reduce this preload duration by
approximately one half. To preload the entire
building area in order to use shallow footings, much
greater surcharge thickness is necessary to achieve
this objective.
Recommendations
Based on the subsurface data obtained from the
site and engineering analysis of subsurface
conditions and project information, the following
recommendations are provided.
Budding Foundations
❑ Pile foundations driven into the Stratum 5
sand/shell layer should be used for supporting
the structure frame. Piles may also be used to
support the floor slab if the northern end of the
site is not preloaded as recommended herein.
► -ALJ

AUG 5 2009
P-648 NAMTRA-MARU FAciliry
110.3528
axial capacity factor of safety is on the order of
2 and neglects pile self weight. Lateral deflection
is less than 25 mm (1 in).
*Piles which are subject to downdrag should be designed for
80% of the compressive capacities provided.
❑ Piles should be driven after preloading the site if
performed to maximize working capacity.
Otherwise, piles should be designed for the
downdrag capacities.
❑ All piles should achieve the required bearing
stratum and tip elevation with sufficient driving
resistance to produce the required working
capacity. Preliminary driving criteria is practical
refusal. Final driving criteria is to be determined
by the Engineer during the test pile program.
❑ Approximately 2 meters (6.5 ft) of variation in
pile lengths are anticipated across the site in
order to reach the intended bearing stratum.
❑ Piles should be spaced at least 3 pile diameters
center -to -center. A group efficiency of 100% has
been incorporated into the individual pile
capacities provided. Estimated settlement of pile
groups is anticipated to be about 12 mm (1/2 in)
or less under maximum column loads.
❑ Hard driving is expected to occur between
elevations of about 0 to +2 m (0 to +7 ft). Piles
should be driven without preaugering if possible
to maximize side friction. Preaugering should
only be permitted if performed and evaluated
during the test pile program.
❑ Static load testing is the best means for
verifying individual pile capacity and is required
by building code for compressive loads of 350
kN (40 tons) or more. Static load testing should
be performed on a pile selected by the Engineer
during the tes gram. The load test
should be performed in accordance with AS -M D
1143, with test loads carried to at least 2 times
the design working load.
❑ If the project budget prohibits static load
testing, pile capacity should be estimated based
on test pile installation using appropriate
dynamic or static analyses. An increased factor
of safety on service loads may be prudent.
❑ After completion of a successful test pile
program, installation of production piles should
be monitored for any indication of problems by
an experienced field inspector. Piles which fail to
achieve the specified tip elevation or driving
resistance may be subject to rejection unless
they are evaluated and determined to be
acceptable by the Engineer.
❑ Compatibility of the pile type and installation
equipment is essential to produce a foundation
that performs satisfactorily. Prior to installing
piles, the piling contractor should submit data
sheets on the proposed equipment and
installation procedures to the Engineer for
evaluation.
❑ Restriking piles after one or more days may be
required to verify soil strength gain and/or soil
relaxation after initial driving.
❑ If the soil conditions encountered are different
from those described in this report, or if driving
characteristics are vastly different from that
anticipated, the geotechnical engineer should be
contacted.
Building Subgrade Preparation
❑ Prior to filling, the ground surface in the building
area should be cleared and stripped of all
vegetation, asphalt surface, topsoil, root balls
and debris to reach firm soils. This work should
be performed during a period of dry weather to
avoid excessive deterioration of the exposed
subgrade. Aggregate base below pavement may
be left in place.
❑ The anticipated average stripping depth of
topsoil is 150 mm (6 in) and average asphalt
depth is 75 mm (3 in) based on the borings. It is
likely that this thickness varies across the site
and removal of uncontrolled fill, buried
structures and other unsuitable material will
require more excavation.
GER

WG 12 5 2009
P•b48 NAMTRA-MARU FAcility
110.3528
❑ Topsoil, pavement and unsuitable material
encountered should be removed to at least 1.5
m (5 ft) beyond the outside of building lines.
Existing underground utilities in the planned
building area should be excavated and rerouted
to avoid conflicts with the foundations and to
avoid damage to new structures should the
utilities leak or require future repairs.
❑ The subgrade should be rough graded and
receive several passes by a non -vibrating
smooth drum roller to compact the surface soils.
The exposed subgrade should then be
proofrolled to check for pockets of soft soils
prior to filling and foundation and slab
construction. Proofrolling should be conducted
with a loaded dump truck or other rubber tired
construction equipment.
❑ Site stripping, grading and proofrolling should be
observed by a field inspector. If unsuitable soil
conditions are observed, they should be
corrected by excavating and replacement with
structural fill or improved by other methods that
are acceptable to the Contracting Officer and
geotechnical engineer.
Building Preloading
❑ Unless the building floor slab will be pile
supported, the northern 1/3 of the building area
should be preloaded after subgrade preparation
and prior to pile installation. Preloading should
consist of compacted structural fill placed to the
final subgrade elevation (bottom of slab) and a
minimum 750 mm (2.5 ft) thickness of soil
surcharge having an in -place wet density of 18.9
kN/mz (120 pcf).
❑ The crest of the surcharge material should
extend at least 1.5 m (5 ft) beyond exterior
building lines. The surcharge should slope to
existing ground at a ratio of 2H:1V or flatter.
❑ Estimated settlement is on the order of 50 mm
(2 in) on average for a time duration of 60 days
after fill placement.
PAGE 1
❑ Upon s pre oa ing of the site as
determined by evaluation of the settlement plate
readings by the Engineer, the surcharge portion
can be removed along with the crust of fill
contaminated with the surcharge material.
Foundation construction can then commence.
Ground Floor Slabs
❑ A conventional ground supported concrete floor
slab may be used for the project after site
preloading as specified. The slab should be
jointed at column lines and along load bearing
walls so that foundations and the slab can settle
differentially without damage.
Cl Subgrade modulus for the existing Stratum 1
subgrade soils is estimated at 27 MPa/m (100
psi/in).
❑ A minimum 100 mm (4 in) thick layer of porous
gravel or clean sand fill should be used directly
beneath the slab for lateral drainage of
moisture. If sand is chosen, it should conform to
ASTM C 33 Fine Aggregate. The porous fill layer
should be covered with an impermeable
membrane sheeting to prevent clogging during
concrete placement.
Seismic Properties
❑ The following dynamic parameters are estimated
to be most appropriate for the site:
2000 FEMA 368 / TI 809-04 / 2000 IBC
Site Class ......................
D
Spectral Response S. .............
0.20
Spectral Response Sr .............
0.09
Site Coefficient Fa ................
1.6
Site Coefficient F. ................
2.4
❑ Site class determination was based on the
following in the upper 100 feet of the profile:
• Estimated Average Vs > 180 m/s but < 360 m/s
• Average Nw > 15 but < 50
• Less than 3m with Su < 50 kPa
❑ Ground movements should be field monitored Pavements
with instrumentation. Vertical movement should ❑ A design CBR value of 4 was determined for
be monitored using a minimum of 3 settlement compacted subgrade soils in the planned
plates at locations selected by the Engineer. pavement areas. This value corresponds to
Settlement plates should be installed on the approximately 2/3 of the average CBR values
prepared subgrade prior to fill and surcharge determined from laboratory testing. Existing
placement. Details for settlement plate soils may require aeration and compaction to
fabrication and monitoring are provided on achieve this level of support.
Drawing 5 in Section 2.
GER

P-648 NAMTRA-MARU FAciliry
110.3528 I AUG 2) 5 2009
Pace 8
❑ Pavement section thickness will depend on the
intended use and design traffic levels. A
preliminary minimum flexible pavement design
for anticipated light duty traffic would be 75 mm
(3 in) of asphalt surface over 150 mm (6 in) of
compacted aggregate base material. Pavement
materials and construction should conform with
North Carolina DOT specifications.
❑ Pavement construction is best suited for the
traditionally drier summer and fall months to
minimize deterioration of the subgrade soils. A
geotextile fabric can be used beneath the
pavement to provide separation between wet or
fine-grained soils and granular fill. Geotextile
fabric should consist of Amoco 2002 or approved
equivalent. Geotextile products should be
installed after installation of all underground
utilities.
❑ Topsoil, vegetation, debris and otherwise
unsuitable soils should be removed from the
pavement areas. During initial grading, positive
surface drainage should be maintained to
prevent water accumulation. Dewatering
trenches along the edges of the pavement may
be necessary to reduce subgrade water content.
❑ After completion of rough grading, the exposed
subgrade should be proofrolled to detect
pockets of soft or otherwise unsuitable material.
Proofrolling should be conducted after a suitable
period of dry weather to avoid degrading an
otherwise acceptable subgrade. A loaded dump
truck or similar rubber tired construction
equipment should be used for proofrolling.
❑ Prior to paving, a second proofroll should be
performed on the aggregate base material to
determine if localized areas have degraded due
to construction traffic or moisture problems.
Fill & BaCA-rill
❑ Representative samples of each proposed fill
material should be collected before filling
operations begin and tested to determine
maximum dry density, optimum moisture
content, natural moisture content, gradation and
plasticity. These tests are needed for quality
control during construction and to determine if
the fill material is acceptable.
finer th pening by ASTM D
1140. Acceptable soil classifications include GW,
GP, GM, SW, SP, SP-SM and some SM soils by
ASTM D 2487.
❑ The majority of soils excavated from the site are
not expected to meet this criteria. An off -site
borrow source should be identified.
❑ Fill and backfill soils should be spread in thin,
even layers not exceeding 300 mm (12 in) loose
thickness prior to compaction. Each layer of soil
in building and pavement areas should be
compacted to achieve no less than 95 percent of
the laboratory maximum dry density as
determined by ASTM D 1557 (modified Proctor).
❑ The moisture content of fill soils should be
maintained within f3 percentage points of the
optimum moisture content determined from the
laboratory Proctor density test. Fills should be
free of debris and deleterious materials and
have a maximum particle size diameter less than
50 mm (2 in).
❑ The following properties may be assumed for fill
and backfill soils when placed and compacted
properly:
Angle of Internal Friction, 0 (deg.) ......
30
Soil -Concrete Coefficient of Friction (tan 6)
. 0.35
Cohesion / Adhesion, cn (kPa) .........
0
Moist Unit Weight, y (kN/m') ..........
18.5
Active Pressure Coefficient, Ka .........
0.33
At -Rest Pressure Coefficient, Ko ........
0.50
Passive Pressure Coefficient, Kip ........
3.00
❑ The fill surface must be adequately maintained
during fill construction. The fill surface should be
rolled with steel drummed equipment and
properly graded to improve surface runoff while
construction is temporarily halted. Excavations
to receive backfill should not be left open for
extended periods.
❑ Where backfill is required in excavations that
penetrate the groundwater table, an initial 300
mm (12 in) layer of #57 aggregate should be
used to serve as a stable base for compaction of
subsequent lifts of soil fill. Groundwater should
be lowered below the crushed stone elevation
by pumping prior to compacting the soil.
❑ Fill and backfill soil used in building and ❑ Fill should not be placed on wet or frozen
pavement areas should consist of non plastic ground. Fill which becomes softened from
sand having a maximum of 25 percent material excess moisture should be aerated and
►�j

AUG 2 5 2009
P-648 NAMTRA-MARU FAciliry 1 10.3528 Pace 9
RY:
recompacted to acceptable levels, removed and
replaced with new compacted fill, or as
otherwise directed by the Contracting Officer.
Bidding & Specifications Criteria
❑ We recommend that language similar to the
following statements be included in the contract
documents:
Soil material character and stratum thickness
indicated on the boring logs represent the
conditions encountered at the specific boring
locations at the time explorations were made
and do not necessarily represent the soil
conditions over the entire construction area.
Groundwater levels indicated on the boring
logs were those encountered at the time
explorations were made and do not
necessarily represent the groundwater
conditions that will be encountered during
construction.
Basis For Recommendations
The recommendations provided are based in part
on project information provided to us. They only
apply to the specific project and site discussed in
this report. If the project information section in this
report contains incorrect information or if additional
information is available, you should convey the
correct or additional information to us and retain us
to review our recommendations.
Regardless of the thoroughness of a geotechnical
exploration, there is always a possibility that
conditions between borings will be different from
those at specific boring locations and that
conditions will not be as anticipated by the
designers or contractors. In addition, the
construction process may itself alter soil conditions.
Unanticipated conditions should be reported to the
design team along with timely recommendations to
solve the problems created.
GER

'Nr- :.•a L i•-i :L-elll Ir�l I 'I• I �,.�,. f •, 1C! •^_`•-.` "L. PROJECT
CATIO
..,I' � __ -�:�—� :. J �T"onk I __ I � �`- -( -'-- }P■ LdE1 ' :i' LO
J
G
f'"
r,.
"_�
17
tft,f qµ, � (trial
i
OcjL-AUi,lf �.
`I l
f •C}SB.Z
M a'7 ''�. �k4,
:I. � `"• .tom a � �. r '- ,, '�t
W r 1'•�E 4r 4 `y
el E 1G.1 ti..l
i _SITE },. 4L
' I•i
-�.,,; ., , r-'i ♦: it � : ,�
� 4 N
FETE-*P�JINI I'ICG ','.GLIDER BASE // � iultFl�
I
Z a
RIC
r� 11 rY
VICINITY
MAP
SOURCE:
Jacksonville South, NC
USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic
Quadrangle Map 1952
Photorevised 1988
(not to scale)
C
CONSULTING ENGINEERS `+
GeoEnvironmental Resources, Inc.
1112 SUM. SW—,, 5o1110,
:'quoa 8-0 Vn IM52
SITE LOCATION PLAN
P-648 NAMTRA MARU Facility
MICAS New River North Carolina
GA LCT WUGER IMA'AwliM11RFR-
110-3528 1 1

Photograph 1
Proposed Building Site Looking North
Currently Asphalt Surfaced Parking Lot
6/30/04
I
Photograph 3
Proposed Parking Lot Southwest of Building
Site Looking West
6/30/04
JML
j
fliva
a.� .Yq'�Yl'MX• i� �£ f1P� •t y��.' l�' SI
^�2...eeccl��.�itLr�'L°��?t��"�4...-u-tt�•, '" '�
Photograph 2
Proposed Building Site Looking West
Existing Ground Elevation Difference
6/30/04
Photograph 4
Proposed Parking Lot Southeast of Building
Site Looking East
6/30/04
2000 AERIAL PH01
NOT TO SCALE
conditions shown
of photograph
fitions may be dil
nt as of
J. site'
timeoA
kJ
Vt
*)OE1t
GeoEnvironmental Resources, Inc.
2712 5aLh<rn ODLIM Ple, 5m1e 101
Yr9inin U.0 VA 2b53
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility
MCAS New River, North Carolina
vmmcT xm.se1 oxnmixn xuueen
-- 110-3528 — --2 --

I
, y
I
l
- l
I
Fi
I
a
,
ly r
II �
'I
III -
I
illll
�.
-
�
I'
1151
I
1 I
I
I
li
II I
Y,
III
I �
I III
, 3_.y
'� ' ''. I t_T
I
,_.
',
' •-......,
—: �( I ICJ.
_ -._
... ..
I r J -
Tc[FT
--__
c
SCALE: 1:1000 -1 1�,�
Approx. a
NOTES:
The boring locations were not
surveyed and may be several meters
from the locations indicated on this
drawing. Boring locations fffr15—e
considered approxim a J
Site plan courtesyof
W[
= Et
'CONSlll TING
GeoEnvironmental Resources, Inc. i
1112 &-.c Bm,IcaN SVae 101
VV .B... VAIN51
11 P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility
j; MCAS New River, North Carolina
vR!, [CIVIIEfR CPpAVG N1111EfR
110-3528 1 3A

ith
- C rkgf r rr.
- - — A,,i P 3
-,I of •t __ /
- — — SCALE: 1:1000 i :\
J Approx. 1 i
i i' � II I11I _1 it I
I.I.-I li',e I, I 1i I II?III i' II II
... _- It
JI
The boring locations were not
I surveyed and may be several meters
I I I � from the locations Indicated on this
at_. I II
f I 1 I I drawing Boring locations
c+r 1 1 I It II I 1 - ,I considered approximate.
I Site plan courtesy ofMSA,P. -° C
I ,
II 1 it -'I I I I ill. II I i , 1- _ {'i(ZAE
CO N I_SULTIYG ENGINEER$
GeoEnvironmental Resources, Inc.
,I .- I z+u s.um:��ea„k.'a,e.sinelal
wginia BcacI�JA L.W53
I
SOIL BORING LOCATION PLAN
�i P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility
MCAS New River, North Carolina
I. vvvecrwuc[n I oAnxwGuuueca ','
110 3528 3B

f —
7
SCALE: 1:800
LL
------- -
Approx.
-------------
NOTES
M,I
The boring locations were not
surveyed and may be several meters
from the locations indicated on this
i drawing. Boring locations shall be
tA
considered approximate.
Site plan courtesy of IMSA . Rc1-01
1�
30
_
I
A.
1
1! GeoEnvironmental Resources, Inc.
SOIL BORING LOCATION PLAN
P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility
MCAS New River, North Carolina
I. %Y ECTNUER I
110-3528 1 3C

6
S1 -Silty SAND 8 FILL —\ Pavement Clay Lens —�
Topsoil
\ B
'—
B 2
b L--�5-'—'—�—iF""
as
\
&6
!•
I6
✓`
S2 $tiff to Very Soft CLAYY=�
/ 3s
s
zs
u
� °�
zz I
�,
F° d,
16
S3 - Very Loos .Dense
SAND
' P
:5 a"
12
13
b
IB
6 b
�1
—
�l
ij
s•
— 4S
_G
d
pI
S4 -Very Loos o
Firm Clayey
jT
1
SAND
F + .nve
�"
IB
p4u
28
yaJ
II
14+
35
4�
$r y
- j
_
01
a
25
21
^.9
20
t9
S5 - Firm to Very Dense S
and SHELL
1
y.
`�.'16
�1
$1
44
17
L-.—__—
J 21
G
-a•v
24
o to 20
ao 4o w w
/a eo
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (Nelan)
Lithology Graphics
Tapsd
1 SYIY sand y jj� Lean tlaY. Byv IB nq'10"aleRURNRY
Fat my, hqh pbtlbty
Vi:
bosae�
clean. DDDrIY'esea sard
% J Clam,santl b b` SihY Sand and Starts
®ASDnan
claao OaVal
L�Salg
4�nly slllY Vwrlypratlxtl
a s+trcar'Mlnasasu
Ngn DlaauotY asan,c.on
NOTE
The subsurface conditions presented are based on the data collected at specific boring locations only. Actual subsurface conditions will
likely vary Dan those indicated.
Elevations shall beconsidered approximate.
y= .
i�
i
N
i
N
!r
4
yu-3
2
Ate Rloo tN..l r9Wo1
0
Explanation
B 1 —
ea.aae
mb
r mnv--
La
u
l� Level ReaGxl
aarmg.
t Nev4a,
. VNIN, Level Reanvg
6
after arAnsr,
a
R 15
10
Nawml.M SF" an)
L J
Ver AF,pp uar?9
2
c^
90 100 era.
�a- E
fgN$IILTING EHGINEEfi$
GeoEnvi,onmental Resources, Inc.
.IPSovrMm BxM�Q SCL IGI
wpna OnM, VAi1:5]
ESTIMATED SUBSURFACE PROFILE
P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility
MCAS New River, NC
rowan we a
110-3528 — 4

MAINTAIN 300 mm TO
1200 mm ABOVE
5URFACE —i—
_FILL/5UKCHAP_GE SURFACE_____
75mm TO 100mm PROTECTIVE
CASING, PVC OR STEEL PIPE
SECTIONS, RESTING L005E ON
TOP OF STEEL PLATE
STANDARD PIPE COUPLING
WELDED TO PLATE
TOP CAP
38mm PIA. STEEL PIPE
5ECTION5, THREADED BOTH
ENDS
COUPLINGS AS KEOU
600mm 5QUARE x 6.5mm
THICK STEEL PLATE
INSTALL PLATE ON
FIRM SUPGRADE
NOTES:
OBTAIN INITIAL READING5 13Y
5UKVEY LEVELING
IMMEDIATELY AFrEP. PLATE
IN5TALI ATION AND PRIOR TO
FILL PLACEMENT. READ TOP
OF INNER PIPE AND RECORD
PIPE LENGTH ABOVE PLATE.
06TAIN READING5 EVEKY W/0
DAYS DURING FILL
CONSTRUCTION AND WEEKLY
THEREAFTER. REFERENCE
BENCH MARK 5HALL REMAIN
UNDI5TUR6ED THROUGHOUT
MONITOPING PERIOD. EXTEND
PIPE AND PPOTECTWE CASING
A5 FILL OR 5UPCI-IARGE
SURFACE INCKEA5E5 U51NG
COUPLING5 AND ADDITIONAL
SECTIONS OF PIPE A5
NECE55APY PROVIDE
t3APPICAOE5 AROUND PWE5
FOP PROTECTION DURING
CON5TRUCTION.
a El
GeoEnvironmental Resources, Inc.
2712 S-1 Bailowre, Sane :01
Vwgnia Bead, VA 2.NR
SETTLEMENT PLATE DETAIL
P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility
II MCAS New River, North Carolina
I MP MM.UR I
110-3528 1 5

�C
AUG ? 5 2009
BY:-_
TEST BORING RECORDS
The enclosed test boring records represent our interpretation of the subsurface conditions
encountered at the specific boring locations based on visual examination of the field samples
obtained and selected laboratory classification testing if performed. The lines designating the
interface between various strata on the boring records represent the approximate interface
location. In addition, the transition between strata may be more gradual than indicated. Water
levels shown represent the conditions only at the time of the field exploration. It is possible that
soil and groundwater conditions between the individual boring locations will be different from
those indicated. Boring elevations, if shown, shall be considered approximate and are
referenced to project datum unless noted otherwise.

BORING LOG LEGEND
KEY TO DRILLING SYMBOLS
Split Spoon Sample (ASTM D 1586) = Water Table at Time of Drilling
V Water Table after 24 hrs.
Undisturbed Sample (ASTM D 1587) , Boring Cave In
Rock Coring (ASTM D 2113)
Roller Cone Advanced
Seepage into Borehole
Loss of Drilling Fluid
_i- Auger Refusal
�► Roller Cone Refusal
Approximate Strata Change Depth
Different Soil Types
WG 2 5 2009
H.S.A.
Hollow Stem Auger Drilling
M.R.
Mud Rotary Wash Drilling
PP
Pocket Penetrometer (tsf)
REC
Core Recovery (%)
RQD
Rock Quality Designator ( % )
SCR
Solid Core Recovery (% )
Approximate Strata Change Depth
Similar Soil Types
CORRELATION OF RELATIVE DENSITY AND CONSISTENCY
WITH STANDARD
PENETRATION TEST RESISTANCE (ASTM D 1586)§
SPT RESISTANCE IN) IN BLOWS PER
FOOT
SPT
RELATIVE DENSITYt SPT
CONSISTENCY'
N
SAND & GRAVEL N
SILT & CLAY
0-4
Very Loose 0-2
Very Soft
5-10
Loose 3-4
Soft
11 - 30
Firm 5-8
Firm
31 - 50
Dense 9 - 15
Stiff
51 +
Very Dense 16 - 30
Very Stiff
31 - 50
Hard
51 +
Very Hard
ROCK QUALITY'
FRACTURES, JOINT SPACING AND BEDDING
DIAGNOSTIC
ROCK PARAMETER
ROD l
DESCRIPTION
FIELD/1-AB RATIO
SPACING
JOINTS
BEDDING
0 - 25
Very Poor
0.15
Less than 2"
Very Close
Very Thin
25 - 50
Poor
0.20
2" to 1'
Close
Thin
50 - 75
Fair
0.25
1'to 3'
Moderately Close
Medium
75 - 90
Good
0.30 to 0.70
3' to 10'
Wide
Thick
90 - 100
Excellent
0.70 to 1.00
More than 10'
Very Wide
Very Thick
HARDNESS
Ve,ry.Hard - Breaking specimens requires several hard hammer blows
Hard - Hard hammer blow required to detach specimens
Moderately Her - Light hammer blow required to detach specimens
Medium - May be scratched 1116' deep by a knife or nail, breaks into several
pieces by light hammer blow
Soft - Can be gouged readily by knife or nail, corners and edges broken by
finger pressure
Very Soft - May be carved with a knife and readily broken by finger pressure
WEATHERING
Fresh - Fresh rock, bright crystals, no staining
Slioht - Minimum stainaing and discoloration, open joints contain clay
Moderate - Significant portions of rock shows staining and discoloration, strong
rock fragments
Severe -AII rock shows staining, rock fabric evident but reduced strength
Very -Severe - All rock shows staining. rock mass effectively reduced to soil
with strong rock fragments remaining
Complete - Rock reduced to soil with rock fabric not discernable
§Resistance of a standard 2-inch O.D.. 1.375-inch I.D. split spoon samplerdriven by a 140 pound hammer free -falling 30 inches.
'after Terzaghi and Peck, 1968 .
GEZ

SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART (ASTM D 2487) 1 AUG In 5 2009
SYMHBOLS
TYPICAL
MAJOR DIVISIONS
R GAP
LETTER I
DES 1%Y.
CLEAN
GW
WELL -GRADED GRAVELS,
GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES.
GRAVEL
GRAVELS
r',0 V9�Ac„
LITTLE OR NO FINES
AND
GRAVELLY
(LITTLE OR NO
-
GP
POORLY -GRADED GRAVELS.
GRAVEL- SAND MIXTURES,
SOILS
FINES)
rc
LITTLE OR NO FINES
MORE THAN 50 %
COARSE
OF COARSE
GRAVELS
r_'
?-'�"—._
IF
f<.
h_
GM
SILTY GRAVELS. GRAVEL -
GRAINED
FRACTION
WITH FINEST-+'�
SAND - SILT MIXTURES
SOILS
RETAINED ON
I,.
-
NO.4 SIEVE
(APPRECIABLE
/�✓,^J°^��
f'=�'
GC
CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL -
AMOUNT OFFIN ESJ
SAND - CLAY MIXTURES
"
SW
WELL -GRADED SANDS,
CLEAN SANDS
+
GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR
SAND
NO FINES
MORE THAN 50''/o
AND
(LITTLE OR NO
MATERIAL
FINES)
SP
POORLY -GRADED SANDS,
IS LARGER
S
SANDY
_
GRAVELLY SAND. LITTLE OR
THAN NO. 200
SOILS
NO FINES
SIEVE SIZE
MORE THAN 50%
SANDS WITH
SM
SILTY SANDS. SAND - SILT
OF COARSE
FINES
MIXTURES
FRACTION
PASSING ON
NO.4 SIEVE
(APPRECIABLE
AMOUNT OF FINES)
'
Sc
SANDS, SAND - CLAY
CLMIXT
�'�%�
"
UR
INORGANIC SILTS, CLAYEY SILTS.
ML
SILT -VERY FINE SAND MIXTURES.
ROCK FLOUR
LOW PLASTICITY
INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO
LIQUID LIMIT
- ' / /
CL
MEDIUM PLASTICITY,
FINE
LESS THAN
'
�'
GRAVELLY, SANDY, SILTY, &
50
% /
LEAN CLAYS
GRAINED
SOILS
OL
ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC
SILTS
t
CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY
AND
CLAYS
INORGANIC SILTSAND MICACEOUS,
MH
DIATOMACEOUS AND ELASTIC
MORE THAN 50 %
SILTY SOILS
OF MATERIAL
IS SMALLER
THAN N 200
HIGH PLASTICITY
LIQUID LIMIT
CH
INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH
Z E
SIEVE SIZ
GREATER THAN
PLASTICITY. FAT CLAYS
50
—/
OH
ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO
HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC
_
SILTS
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
- -- -- —
PT
PEAT. HUMUS, MUCK, SWAMP SOILS
WITH VERY HIGH ORGANIC
CONTENTS
OTHER
DISTURBED SOILS WITH POSSIBLE DEBRIS
SOILS
UNCONTROLLED FILLS
!4•''!�',+ri"i`I`A
AND RUBBLE, OLD CONSTRUCTION
{Lyxeti*"x"^.I
WASTES, NON -ENGINEERED BACKFILLS
/'a,
DECOMPOSED OR PARTIALLY
G. s
TRANSITIONAL MATERIAL BETWEEN SOIL AND
WEATHERED ROCK
- -
ROCK WHICH MAY RETAIN THE RELICT
Y-21
STRUCTURE OF THE PARENT ROCK
Atterlderg Limits
PARTICLE SIZE IDENTIFICATION
Low Plasticity Soils High Plasticity Soils
BOULDERS: Greater than 300 man (12 in.)
�It
COBBLES: 75 mm to 300 mm (3 - 12 In.)
60
50
40
9
30
rt
M N
sty"
I
I Y
II
�wrt.wry
I"
•qn
I
anlb
Y�
—1
Net
I /
ICX)
t vuttle
il'Y
atitrcllY
i
I
I
GRAVEL: Coarse-
19.0 mm to 75 mm (0,75 - 3 im)
Fine-
4.75 man to 19.0 mm(n4-075 in.)
SANDS: Coarse-
2.Oemmto4l5mm
Medium-
OA25 mm to 2.00 mm
Fine-
0.075 man to 0425 mm
SILTS 8 CLAYS:
Less Nan 0,075 mm
PLASTICITY INDEX (PI)8 SHRINKS_V/Ell POTENTIAL
0.4
None
4-15
Slight or Low
15-30
Medium to High
31+
High to Very High
ADDITIONAL RELATIVE DESCRIPTIVE VALUES
0

P"F+'iCE+ IV�.�
TEST BORING RECORD Irav QUG 125 2009
Hazardous Materials,
GeoEnvironmental Resources Inc. Environmental, Industrial Engineering
� Geotechnical8lndustrial Engineering Consultants
Boring No. B-1
Sheet No. 1 of 1
Project: P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility
GER Project Number: 110-3528
Location: WAS New River, NC
Driller: Fishburne
Date Drilled: 6/8/2004
Depth (m): 16.8
Elevation (m): 4.42
Client: HBA Architects
Drill Method: 75 mm Mud Rotary
Elevation
Depth
Lith-
Material Description
Ground
Comments
Penetration Resistance
(blows/0.3 m)
ft.
m
ft.
m
ology
Water
p
25
13
50
4
Topsoil - 200mm
_
Silty SAND (SM)
Firm black fine trace of organics
5 'yJ.-
Sandy, Low Plasticity CLAY'CL)
Firm oran a-li ht ra marled
1
Silly, High Plasticity CLAY (CH)
10
3
5
_
2-
Soft, orange to gray, trace of sand
~
4..
5
-
Siltv SAND (SM)--
10
3—Firm,
light gray, fine, trace of wood
7-7 �,-
0
0
4
_
-2p0
_,,:` •';_:
Clean SAND(SP)
Firm, whitc, fine
15
_
Silty SAND (SM)
-1
6�
Loose to very loose, gray and tan, fine, trace
-
-5
20
of clay and fine gravel
-
--i
-2
7
_• rlF
-
,-
25
-q
Clayey SAND (SC)
Very loose, gray, fine to medium
-15
30
9
10
} J-
_
-- -
I _
Q-O
SHELL and Silty SAND
Dense to firm, tan, gray and white, fine to
-20
-6
35
°.
coarse, trace of clay
7
.,.
,f-i
-...
19t.
_25
40
12
q:--
0.0
---._ -
° 0
.
\30 .:.. i -j-
--30
-9
45
-10
•�,.
1.21_
__
-35
50-
IS
0:0
- �=
-- ,—
-I I
Q:O
—
— - -
-12
16
°
:�
--
-
40
nil
55
17
Boring terminated at 16.76 meters.
f-
_
-13
-- (-1-f
--_ -.-
!--
4
F -

71nX7.
EIVED
5 2009
TEST BORING RECORD
Inc. Environmental, Groundwater, Hazardous Materials,
GeoEnvironmental Resources, Geolechnical8lndustrial Engineering Consultants Boring No. -2
Project: P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility GER Project Number: 110-3528 Sheet No. 1 of 1
Location: MCAS New River, NC
Driller: Fishburne
Date Drilled: 6/8/2004
Depth (m): 16.8
Elevation (m): 5.33
Client: HBA Architects
Drill Method: 75 rum Mud Rotary
Elevation
ft.
m
Depth
ft.
m
Lith-
ology
Material Description
Ground
Water
Comments
p
Penetration Resistance
25
T 18_;�_
(blows/0.3 m )
50
-
15
5
I
Pavement
75mm asphalt &
150mm crushed
shellrock (approx)
Slightly Silty SAND (SP-SM)
Firm tan tine with shells a[ bottom fill
-
10
Silty, Low Plasticity CLAY (CL)
10
5T
4
2
I
5
10
15
-
-
2
3
4
Stiff to firm, dark brown and gray, trace to
some roots/or anics
_ -5": .-
< 1--11--�-
Silty, High Plasticity CLAY (CH)
Soft, mottled orange -gray
_
Slightly Silly SAND (SP-SM)
Firm, light gmy, fine, trace of fine gravel
2
12
- • -+
-•- -i-.=
i__
Clean SAND (SP)
Firm, white, fine to medium
0
0
----=13--
-----
Slightly Siltv SAND (SP-SM)
Firm, gray -green, fine
_......:._;
-5
-2
20
25
6
7
.�.......
24-
- - 1 -4
-
-� --- I
Silty SAND (SM)
Very loose, greenish -gray, fine, trace of clay
I
_10
-3
8
I -
i
I - -
F
d
0
:0�
�
OO.
.Q
0
SHELL and Silty SAND—�
Firm, white, gray and tan, tine to coarse,+
trace of clay
1 fff
I--
- S
--zo
-4
-7
10
35
40
g
10
12�-
�_
:+
J -r
28:
21-
—
—
-25
-
� 35
_g
0
45
50
13
14
15
16
Silty SAND (SD1) _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _
Finn, tan and white, fine to coarse, some
shell
_______
SHELL and Silty SAND
Firm, white, fine to coarse
'
18.T
•.,._I
.... i._I_
0 .
0
0 Q-
po
D
o Q
C=1 1
23
I '
I_!
{ -
—` —
--
29 -
o
1. 0 O .
0
55
17
Bo ring terminated at 16.76 meters.
--- -;-}
-'-L- --{-

RECFIV]ED
AUG 2 5 2009
TEST BORING RECORD
GeoEnvlronmental Resources Inc. Environmental, ndundwaEegneeringus sultans,
� Geotechniral 8lndustdal Engineering Consultants
Boring No. B-3
8
Sheet No. 1 of 2
Project: P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility
GER Project Number: 110-3528
Location: WAS New River, NC
Driller: Fishburne
Date Drilled: 7/6/2004
Depth (m): 30.5
Elevation (m): 4.08
Client: HBA Architects
Drill Method: 100 ram Mud Rotary
Elevation
It.
m
Depth
ft.
m
Lith-
ology
Material Description
Ground
Water
Comments
0
Penetration Resistance
? t 16 25
(blows/0.3 m)
50
"
1 -
I p
5
3
2
5
to -
-_
1
2_
Topsoil - 150 mm
tree roots
Silly, High Plasticity CLAY (CH)
Firm to very soft, mottled grey with orange--5-!:!
to grey, trace fine sand
2
Silty Silty SAND (SM)
Firrn, grey, fine to medium
H _
I
}�
T�
0
5
0
I $
Q
5
-
t..
Slightly Silty SAND (SP-SM)
Firm to loose, light grey, fine to medium
--r
ii
7 _T
_
1
Silty SAND (SM)
-to
7
I�- _
3'
r L_
-15
-5
25
30
9
IT
!
33_:
0 °
0
SHELL and Siltv SAND
Dense to firm, white & light grey, fine to
coarse, with trace to little clay
-20
-
25
-30
-g
-7
-9
_10
35
40
45
10.E
110
13
14
.0
O
�y1�
p
1-
t r
37..7
—
_
...-i
--r
_
_4l":
1 ?_
-35
-40
12
-13
55
17
D o .
33
Silly SAND (SM)
Frrm [o very dense, grey, fine to medium,
with little to some shell fragments
_
45

BUG 12 5 2009
GeoEnvironmentai Resources Inc. Environmental,
Boring No. B-3
EGroundwater,EngineHazaering
Industrial
� Geotechnical 8lndustrial Engineering Consultants
Consultants
Project: P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facilitv
GER Project Number: 110-3528
Sheet No. 2 of 2
Location:
MCAS New River, NC
Driller: Fishburne
Date Drilled: 7/6/2004
Depth (m):
30.5
Elevation (m): 4.08
Client: HBA Architects
Drill Method: 100 mm Mud Rotary
Elevation
Depth
Lith-
Material Description
Ground
Comments
Penetration Resistance (blows/0.3 m)
ft. m
ft. m
ology
Water
0 25 50
Silly SAND (SM)
--- --
_
Firm to very dense, grey, fine to medium,
-15
19
with little to some shell fragments
- - ---
- -
-50
(continued)
-16
65
20
--- -
-- --
-
-
-55
21
-
33�-,--
17
- -
—
70-
_18
22
-60-
-19
75
23
.65
-20
24
--
- �-
80
-
-- -
-21
25
_70
z
--- -
--
22
85
26
-- -
-- --
'75
-23
Z.
27
— -
38
24
28
=
-5
_>
25
95
29
-85
-26
301,���.�
_._
.3 .-
31

FURECEIVEX)G ? 5 2009
TEST BORING RECORD
GeoEnvironmental Resources Inc. Environmental, Groundwater, Hazardous Materials,
, Geotechnica181ndusVial Engineering Consultants
Boring NO. B-4
Sheet No. 1 of 1
Project: P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility
GER Project Number: 110-3528
Location: MCAS New River, NC
Driller: Fishburne
Date Drilled: 7/6/2004
Depth (m): 15.2
Elevation (m): 5.36
Client: HBA Architects,
Drill Method: 75 mm Mud Rotary
Elevation
ft.
m
Depth
ft.
m
I ith-
ology
Material Description
Ground
Water
Comments
p
Penetration Resistance (blows/0.3 m)
_ 25 50
' 21-
15
10
5
-0
5
4
3
0
5
IS
20
2
_
4
5-
Pavement
�7
1
75 man asphalt &
150 rum crushed
shellrock (approz
Silty SAND (SM)
Firm, dark brown, fine, trace clay and grove
_-
f:
Sandy, Low Plasticity CLAY (CL)
Firm, brown to dark brown, trace of organics
5
3P
Very Silty SAND (SM-ML)
Loose, dark brown to black, fine
Silty, High Plasticity CLAY (CH)
Soft, mottled grey with tan, with trace ofto-3 sand and organics
'---
Slightly Silty SAND (SP-SM)
Firm, light grey to light green, fine to
medium
--- -
18r.
.5
-10
15
-20
-25
-30
-2
-3
4
-5D
-7
25
30
35
40
7
g
9
10
12
130y10.
2_
�I
T-
-r--
- +}
_ !_
Silty SAND (SM)
Very loose to loose, greenish -grey to grey,
fine to medium, with little clay
- - -
32-- I .-
0 °
-
.0.0r-{-
01
0
00
SHELL and Silty SAND
Dense to firm, light grey, fine to coarse, with
trace to little clay
_
,... ,. ..--
-
---+
I_-23
i-
-10
50
Boring terminated at 15.24 meters.
-- -!--!-
--_ --
ll
-35
16==r-�---
171
I
i
-40
12

7RECFT'MF-5
AUG _11 S 7-009
TEST BORING RECORD
Environmental, Groundwater, Hazardous Materials,
GeoEnvironmental Resources, Inc. Geotechnical8 Industrial Engineering Consultants
ormg—No S
Sheet No. 1 of 1
Project: P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facilitv
GER Project Number: 110-3528
Location: MCAS New River, NC
Driller: Fishburne
Date Drilled: 7/6/2004
Depth (m): 15.2
Elevation (m): 5.21 Client: HBA Architects
Drill Method: 75 mat Mud Rotary
Elevation
ft.
m
Depth
f.
m
Lill
olo gy
Material Description
Ground
Water
Comments
0
Penetration Resistance (blows/0.3 m)
g 25 50
T
IS
-
-10
5
4
3
5
I
2
Pavement
1
60 mot asphalt &
I50 ram crushed
shellrock (approx.)
Sandy, Low Plasticity CLAY (CL)
Stiff brown with gr,-ilh little or anics
Silty SAND ISM)
Finn re to black fine to medium
-
Silty, High Plasticity CLAY (CH)
Stiff to firm, mottled grey with orange, with
trace of sand and organics
1
6J��:T
14 -
Silty SAND ISM)
2
10
3
Loose to for, grey, fine to medium, with
trace organics
5.
1
Slightly Silty SAND (SP-SM)
Dense to for, light grey, fine to medium
-
I S
—o
0
s
-I
20
G
-� ®:T
Silty SAND ISM)
Firm, greenish -grey to grey, fine to medium,
with trace of shell fragments
5
7
15
25
_-_ _ _
:__�-- _r
-
-
-q
30
8
9
-
- :-
- \\5
0 °
p. 0
SHELL and Silty SAND
Very dense to firm, light grey, fine to coarse,
1 with trace of clay
—�
-
--2s
_
-5
-7
8
35
40
45
n
13
D
.0
o
Qi
2�1
o
p '0
—
_
— —
` \
-
----t i l - :J25 - -_
-_I
=
-10
50
14730-
I5
.:
---r-- ..�
• - -
JBoring
terminated at 15.24 meters.
-35
16
12
55
17
---i -i-
--- -
-
-_ -
18

]REC3rJVE�
TEST BORING RECORD NIJG g _UU©
us Consultants,
GeoEnvlronmental Resources Inc. Environmental, Groundwater, E HazaEngineering
� Geotechnical 8lndusVial Engineering Consultants
$
_0.
Sheet No. 1 of 1
Project: P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility
GER Project Number: 110-3528
Location: WAS New River, NC
Driller: Fishburne
Date Drilled: 7/6/2004
Depth (m): 15.2
Elevation (m): 5.33
Client: HBA Architects
Drill Method: 75 rum Mud Rotary
Elevation
fi.
m
Depth
ft.
m
Lith-
elegyWater
Material Description
Ground
Comments
p
Penetration Resistance
18_25
(blows/0.3 m)
T 50
_ _J �.
15
_
5
q
5-
I
Pavement
75 man asphalt &
150 man crushed
shellrock (approx.)j-
Silty SAND (SM)
Finn tan to black fine with shells fill
Silty, Low Plasticity CLAY (CL)
Stiff dark re
Silty SAND (SM)
6/ -, -
IO
3
2-
Firm tan and black fine to medium
Silty, High Plasticity CLAY (CH)
Stiff to soft, mottled grey -orange -brown
-
-
-5
-
-
2
I
0
I5
3
4
-�— - -—`11
3
I
p
"I
--;-�--)-
Silly SAND (SM)
Very loose, dark grey, fine, with some clay
Organic Silty CLAY (OH)--f---
Very soft, dark brown, trace of sand and peat
-0
0
Silty SAND (SM),�
Firm, greenish -grey, fine, with trace of wood
It:
--5
-
_
--to
2
-3
25
7
8
Silty SAND(SM)---- - - - - --
Very loose, grey -green to dark grey, fine to
medium
t
-
-- -� '-
-
--IS
_
-4
"5
35
10
22.
I
0
0
SHELL and Siltv SAND
Firm to dense, white & light grey, fine to
coarse, with trace of clay
`y:
-r I _ -_- r '-
-
_-
\29 I
r
zo
--25
-
-30
-6
8
4s
12
13
14
15-.00
0:
p
.0 0
°
0_Q
r-
-_—_�_fi__
__i_{.
i'--i-�-
--35
-10
50
16
Boring terminated at 15.24 meters.
-
�-- ---
r -
-
-
55—Ir-
17
I
- -40
12
18
-.4—_--

DECEIVED
AUG ^ 5 2009
TEST BORING RECORD
GeoEnviron mental Resources Inc. Environmental, Groundwater, Engineering
e Geotechnical8 Industrial Engineering Consultants
Consultants
1
-Boring No. BR 1
Sheet No. 1 of 1
Project: P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility
GER Project Number: 110-3528
Location: MCAS New River, NC
Driller: Fishburne
Date Drilled: 7/7/2004
Depth (m): 3.0
Elevation (m): 4.48
Client: HBA Architects
Drill Method: 57 mm ID HSA
Elevation
Depth
Lith-
olo
Material Description
Ground
Water
Comments
Penetration
Resistance
(blows/0.3
m)
ft.
m
ft.
m
gY
0
25
!
!
50
Topsoil - 150 mm
I
16
Clavey SAND (SC)
Finn, orange, fine to medium
I
I O
l
',-
4
—�
Silty SAND (SM)
Finn, orange & white, fine to medium, with
trace clay
Sity, High Plasticity CLAY
_ 10
3
Stiff to soft, mottled grey w h tan
5
2
-"7_
IL
5
t0
3-
-
Boring terminated at 3.05 meters.
I
I
ii
i�
1
4
0
0
IS
i
.5
G
--
! •. i-
1
20
3
E
I!i
�i
-!
=i
i -10
-3
--- 1!
-
-- --I
II

RECEIVED
AUG .2 5 2009
TEST BORING RECORD
EnvironGeoEnvironmental Resources Inc. Geolecrnental, Groundwater, Hazardous Materials, Boring No.
� Geolechniral 8lndustrial Engineering Consultants g 'Z
Project: P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility GER Project Number: 110-3528 Sheet No. 1 of 1
Location: WAS New River, NC Driller: Fishburne Date Drilled: 7/7/2004
Depth (m): 3.0 Elevation (m): 5.79 Client: HBA Architects Drill Method: 57 mm ID HSA
Elevation Depth Lith- Ground Penetration Resistance (blows/0.3 m)
ft. m fl. m elegy Material Description Silly SAND (SM) Water Comments 0 25 51
Loose, brown, fine to medium, with broken !
concrete pieces (fill) 01 1 !
i
Clayey SAND (SC) !
Loose, dark grey, fine to medium, with trace - --
t to little organics (possible fill)
15
grey with orange, with trace of
2 SZ
Silty SAND (SN) 4 ! I -
Very loose to loose, light grey, fine to -
medium
—t-
,1
0 3
to-3
[Boring terminated at 3.05 meters.
—Ifs fi
mm

FFCFYVE7
TEST BORING RECORD BUG " 5 2009
GeoEnvironmental Resources Inc. Environmental, Groundwater, Hazardous Materials,
e 6eotechnira18Industrial Engineering Consultants
7Shect
_
No. 1 of 1
Project: P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility
GER Project Number: 110-3528
Location: MCAS New River, NC
Driller: Fishburne
Date Drilled: 7/7/2004
Depth (m): 3.0
Elevation (m): 5.18
Client: HRA Architects
Drill Method: 57 mm ID HSA
Elevation
Depth
Lith-
ology
Material Description
Ground
Water
Comments
Penetration
Resistance
(blows/0.3 m)
ft.
m
ft,
m
0
_
25
T _ 50
_Topsoil - 100 mm
5
Silty SAND (SM)
1
Firm, brown, fine to medium, trace of gravel
I O j
(possible fill)
.-!
-
4
/
�
Silty, High Plasticity CLAY (CH)
Firm to soft: mottled grey with brown
I i j
I I I
10
2
—
3L_-_-
.I
III —
!
III Ili
! l I
Silty SAND (S:M)
3—
Very loose, light grey, fine to medium
1
l i l
2
to—
-Boring
terminated at 3.05 meters.
II! I
-
.—�--
III
I
4
! I I
'Ili it
I �ii
IS
I
-- - I rj I I-
' - -
5
0
0
I I �
II II
I I
I
20
7
I
-2
i
III I
r.

YIL-
AUG5 2009
LABORATORY TESTING
The enclosed laboratory results represent the subsurface soil properties encountered at the
specific boring locations based on the laboratory testing performed. It is possible that soil
properties and conditions between the individual boring locations and depths will be different
from those indicated.

SOIL LABORATORY DATA SUMMARY
Project: P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility
MCAS New River, NC
Number: 110-3528
Date: 07/12/04
SAMPLE
NUMBER
DEPTH
(meters)
SAMPLE
TYPE
CLASS.
MOISTURE
CONTENT
M
FINES
LL
PL
PI
MAXIMUM
DRY
DENSITY
(kglm')
OPTIMUM
MOISTURE
(%)
SOAKED
CBR
SWELL
M
*OTHER
TESTS
B-1
0.3
SS
SM
21.1
40.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
B-2
1.5
SS
CL
35.0
81.3
48
19
29
-
-
-
-
U.C.
B-3
1.8
LID
CH
64.0
94.9
79
24
55
-
-
-
-
CONSO.
B-3
2.1
SS
CH
75.1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
U.C.
B-3
8.8
SS
SM
22.2
19.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
SIEVE
B-4
2.7
SS
CH
51.1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
B-5
2.7
SS
SM
18.9
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
B-6
2.1
SS
CH
40.7
87.2
62
24
38
-
-
-
-
U.C.
B-6
4.6
SS
OH
72.9
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
CBR-1
0.6 to 0.9
BULK
SC
17.3
48.7
-
-
-
1786.0
15.6
4.2
0.4
-
CBR-2
0.6 to 0.9
BULK
SC
20.5
45.3
1882.1
13.0
6.1
0.1
CBR-3
0.6 to 0.9
BULK
SM
17.5
39.5
-
-
-
1846.9
13.6
6.6
0.1
-
Tests performed in accordance with applicable ASTM Standards.
*CONSO. = CONSOLIDATION TEST
*U.C. = UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
v
c
c�
an

One Dimensional Consolidation Test
Stress Versus Strain Plot
10
15-
c
N
20-
25
30
35
1 10 100 1000
Stress (kPa)
Compression Index, Cc: 0.849 Estimated Preconsolidation Pressure, P'c (kPa): 86.2
Recompression Index, Cr: 0.079 Estimated Effective Overburden Pressure, P'o (kPa): 35.9 Estimated OCR: 2.4
Initial Wet Unit Weight (kNlm3) = 15.2 Project: P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility ^�
Initial Dry Unit Weight (kN/m') = 11.4 Project #: 110-3528
- �"
Initial Water Content I%) = 63.9 Location: MCAS New River, INC t'
¢,'.
Initial Saturation I%) = 100.6 Client: HBA Architects ff
�'''�w;N•"'
EL
Specific Gravity = 2.682 Sample Classification: CLAY (CH), gray, trace sand and silt
Initial Void Ratio= 1.704 Boring: B-3 COVILL1M ENfINEER(
Liquid Limit = 79 Sample Depth: 1.83 m GeoEavimiunenta] Resow ces, 11rc.
Plastic Limit= 24 Report Date: 7/1212004 E.�:n mat•c„��..�.,.x,,.,e,�.Mv,dm.-c.m.:n..",

J
100
Si =
1/24max
90
80
ti
70
q
6
60
bo
Cr
rn
50
'
�.r
CO
040
..
...
4.
A
O
30
d
,
20
j
.m .
B-2 @ 1.5
a
B-3 @ 2.1 m
10
u B-6 @ 2.1 m
j
0,
0%
5% 10% 15%
20% 25%
Strain, %
Boring B-2 B-3 S-6 Unconfined Compression Tests
Sample Depth 1.5 m 2.1 m 2.1 m
Classification Symbol CL CH CH ASTM D 2166
Initial Water Content (%) 35.0 75.1 40.7 Project: P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility
Liquid Limit 48 79 62 Location: MCAS New River, INC
Plasticity Index 29 55 38 Number: 110.3528
Initial Void Ratio 0.94 2.03 1.09 Date: 7/12/2004
Specific Gravity est. 2.68 2.72 2.70
Initial Saturation (%) 99.8 1 100.6 100.8
Wet Density kN/m2) 17.6 1 15.2 16.7 - -
Dry Density (kN/m2) 13.1 8.7 11.8 -
TestT pe UC UC UC .^
ConfiningPressure kPa N/A N/A N/A �- E!mk
Effective Friction Angle 0' (empirical) N/A N/A N/A'7
Undrained Shear Strength, Su (kPa) 43.7 15.8 35.2 CONSI ILTING ENGINEERS
Normally Consolidated Su/P 0.22 0.31 0.25 GeoEi1VirolIIiletital Resomees, hic.
Overconsolidated Su/P N/A N/A N/A Env 'rtnmantal• Grwnd,aw- azvduuc Kbts,W,- GrottOnicaI

Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc.
611AT/M_10/a1A'Mi6
Project Name: P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility, MCAS New River, NC
GER Project Number: 110-3528
Number: 3314-110
Sample Number: B-3
Sample Depth: 8.84 meters
Sample Description: Silty SAND (SM), Light Gray, Fine to Coarse, with Partly
Cemented Shell Fragments
Test Method: ASTM D 422
Sieve Analysis Data
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
SIEVE
NO.
PERCENT
PASSING
25mm
100.0
19mm
100.0
12.5mm
98.6
9.5mm
96.0
4
87.5
10
69.8
20
56.7
40
49.0
60
36.9
100
28.0
200
19.5
g�ECEIVED
AUG W 5 2009
BY:_ - -
� ��� III�rII1bil�Ill���I�III ���I�III���IIIII���I�III���
III III1,��IIIIII1,III'I'■�III'I1,�I'1'I1,�I�II11,■
IIIIII1�1�1111111� �IIIIII■�IIIII11��111111��111111��
III IIII�I�IIIIIII���I;111■�IIIIIII■�IIII11��111111�■
III III1�1�1111111��11111 ���IIIII11��111111��111111��
III III1�1�1111111��11111IL�IIIII11��111111��111111��
III III1�1�1111111��111111■i�lllllll��llllll��llllll�■
III II11�1�1111111��111111■�li�llll��llllll��llllll�■
III I111■I�IIIIIII■�IIII11■�IIIII11��111111��111111■�
100.000 10.000 1.000 0.100
Grain Size (mm)
0.010 0.001 0.000

Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc.
CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST
]RECEIV
Project Name: P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility, MCAS New River, NC �U6 5 2009
GER Project Number: 110-3528
BY:
Number: 3364-110
Sample Number: CBR-1
Sample Depth: 0.61 to 0.91 m
Sample Description: Clayey SAND (SC), Tan, Brown and Yellow, Fine to Medium, with Silt
Test Method: ASTM D 1883
Maximum Dry Density (kg/m') 1786.0 Blows Per Layer: 30
Optimum Moisture (%): 15.6 Surcharge Weight (kg.): 4.5
In Situ Moisture (%): 17.3 Compaction Before Soaking (%): 95.6
Compaction After Soaking (%): 95.3
Unsoaked CBR Value: N/A
Soaked CBR Value: 4.2
Swell (%): 0.4
0.7
MR
MW
a
0.4
z
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0.000
eeeeeeeeee
eeeeme
®
mmmm
m
N
w
@@m@@fib
@I
1p
®..o..®mu.�
ems'
M6@6a'Mllmgl
@
'
eeeeee::ee�....n..
o:a
@@@@@@@@@@@@M®
m...ME
�a........mo
.m...r
®m......mao
@@°meNUM—W,
e°@@@°11=111
2.000 4.000 6.000 8.000 10.000 12.000
PENETRATION IN MILLIMETERS
a Soaked CBR

Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc.
Project Name:
GER Project Number:
Number:
Sample Number:
Sample Depth:
Sample Description:
Test Method:
MOISTURE -DENSITY RELATIONSHIP
EBY:—
ED
2009
P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility, MCAS New River, N
110-3528
3364-110
CBR-1
0.61 to 0.91 m
Clayey SAND (SC), Tan, Brown and Yellow, Fine to Medium, with Silt
ASTM D 698A
Maximum Dry Density (kg/m'): 1786.0
Optimum Moisture (%): 15.6
2100.0
2000.0
1900.0
1800.0
E
0
1700.0
to
w 1600.0
O
0 1500.0
1400.0
1300.0
1200.0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0
MOISTURE CONTENT (%)
20.0 25.0

]IECF,WED
,BUG 11 5 2009
Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc.
BY:
CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST
Project Name: P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility, MCAS New River, NC
GER Project Number: 110-3528
Number: 3364-110
Sample Number: CBR-2
Sample Depth: 0.61 to 0.91 m
Sample Description: Clayey SAND (SC), Tan and Brown, Fine to Medium, with Silt, Fine
Gravel and Shell Fragments
Test Method: ASTM D 1883
Maximum Dry Density (kg/m') 1882.1 Blows Per Layer: 30
Optimum Moisture (%): 13.0 Surcharge Weight (kg.): 4.5
In Situ Moisture (%): 20.5 Compaction Before Soaking (%): 95.8
Compaction After Soaking (%): 95.7
Unsoaked CBR Value: N/A
Soaked CBR Value: 6.1
Swell (%): 0.1
1.2
0.8
IL
0 0.6
a
O
J
0.4
0.2
i7
®mmm:mm®mm:mmmmm®
�mmmmmm�mmmmmm���
�e�me>�.mmmmm��moB.�
�mmmmmmm�.9
.:::::�:�m::::'.
�mmmmmm��ommm:m®
lml�
m�
®Wllli
0.000 2.000 4.000 6.000 8.000 10.000 12.000
PENETRATION IN MILLIMETERS
—a—Soaked CBR

7RFCETVR
Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc. AIJG 5 2009
MOISTURE -DENSITY RELATIONSHIP BY.
Project Name: P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility, MCAS New River, NC
GER Project Number: 110-3528
Number: 3364-110
Sample Number: CBR-2
Sample Depth: 0.61 to 0.91m
Sample Description: Clayey SAND (SC), Tan and Brown, Fine to Medium, with Silt, Fine
Gravel and Shell Fragments
Test Method: ASTM D 698A
Maximum Dry Density (kg/m'): 1882.1
Optimum Moisture (%): 13.0
2100.0
2000.0
1900.0
1800.0
E
M
1700.0
N
wo 1600.0
0 1500.0
1400.0
1300.0
1200.0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0
MOISTURE CONTENT (%)
25.0

Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc.
CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST
Project Name: P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility, MCAS New River, N !�RcErvFm
GER Project Number: 110-3528 MIS ° 5 2009
Number: 3364-110
Sample Number: CBR-3 BY:
Sample Depth: 0.61 to 0.91m
Sample Description: Silty SAND (SM), Brown, Fine to Medium, with Clay
Test Method: ASTM D 1883
Maximum Dry Density (kg/m') 1846.9 Blows Per Layer: 30
Optimum Moisture (%): 13.6 Surcharge Weight (kg.): 4.5
In Situ Moisture (%): 17.5 Compaction Before Soaking (%): 96.9
Compaction After Soaking (%): 96.8
Unsoaked CBR Value: N/A
Soaked CBR Value: 6.6
Swell (%): 0.1
1.2
0.8
a
z 0.6
0
Q
0
J
0.4
0.2
an
�aamlaaa
WIMOMM
molommil�all"
■O
E=EM■
E
■E■
m
aaaaaa
r5
llll
®aa
MEN
lmommo�mmm
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaao®
®mmaaa
aaaaINNER
IMM
®a-aaaaaaaaa
�a
aaME
aaaaaaa�.'�
paEp
0
MEN
�aaCaaa®aaaa:aa■..oa
aaaaaa�aaaCCCa
aa®aa®aaaaaa®
0.000 2.000 4.000 6.000 8.000 10.000 12.000
PENETRATION IN MILLIMETERS
a Soaked CBR

Engineering and Testing Consultants, Inc.
MOISTURE -DENSITY RELATIONSHIP
Project Name:
P-648 NAMTRA-MARU Facility, MCAS New I
GER Project Number:
110-3528
Number:
3364-110
Sample Number:
CBR-3
Sample Depth:
0.61 to 0.91 m
Sample Description:
Silty SAND (SM), Brown, Fine to Medium, with
Test Method:
ASTM D 698A
Maximum Dry Density (kg/m'):
1846.9
Optimum Moisture (%):
13.6
2100.0
2000.0
1900.0
1800.0
of
Y
1700.0
rn
w
1600.0
0
0
1500.0
1400.0
1300.0
1200.0
C
'EC_FT VE
° 5 2009
AUG
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0
MOISTURE CONTENT (%)

- - El
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION PROCEDURES
The general field investigation procedures employed by GeoEnvironmental Resources, Inc. for
geotechnical engineering studies are included in ASTM D 420-93, entitled Standard Guide to Site
Characterization for Engineering, Design and Construction Purposes. This recommended practice
lists various recognized methods and ASTM standards by which soil, rock and groundwater
conditions may be determined. These methods include geophysical and in -situ testing as well as
boring and sampling methods. Note that more than one investigative method may pehrerM
IVE
for a particular project and the type and extent of the methods used will vary bettyprojects and consulting engineering firms. 12 5 2009
Boring, Sampling & Standard Penetration Testino gy;
Soil test borings with incremental soil sampling is the most widely used method o su su ace
exploration in the local industry today. On our projects, advancement of borings to obtain
subsurface samples is typically performed using one of the following techniques depending on
the anticipated subsurface conditions, desired depth and information required.
Method
Open hole rotary drilling
with mud slurry
ASTM D 5183
Through soil in any geologic region, normally used locally
for boring depths of 20 feet or more
Continuous flight hollow
stem auger drilling
ASTM D 5784
Typically used for shallow Coastal Plain soil borings or in
Piedmont eolo • ideal for installing monitoring wells
Diamond core drilling
ASTM D 2113
For penetrating rock concrete and dense cemented soils
Hand auger boring
ASTM D 4700
For shallow soils above the groundwater table
Excavation
ASTM D 4700
For soil and aggregates above the groundwater table
Penetration or in -situ tests normally accompany boring and sampling operations on geotechnical
explorations since borings alone usually do not provide adequate information concerning the
type, strength and compressibility properties of the subsurface soils. The standard penetration
test (SPIT) has become the most widely used procedure in the industry to obtain subsurface
data and samples. Although it is a relatively crude test, it can provide a general indication of soil
strength and compressibility while simultaneously sampling the soil.
Standard penetration testing and split barrel sampling are conducted at regular intervals in a
borehole in accordance with ASTM D 1586. Standard practice on most GER projects is to
perform this testing and sampling continuously within the upper 10 feet of the subsurface, and
then at maximum 5-foot center -to -center intervals thereafter. At the desired test depth, the
drilling tools are removed and a split barrel sampler is connected to the drilling rods and
lowered back into the borehole. The sampler is first seated six inches into the bottom of the
hole to penetrate any loose cuttings from the drilling operations. It is then driven an additional
12 inches by the impact of a 140 pound hammer free -falling 30 inches. The number of hammer
blows required to drive the sampler for each 6-inch interval is recorded. The combined number
of blows required to drive the sampler the final 12 inches is designated standard penetration
resistance or N-value. Representative portions of soil from each split barrel sample are placed in
air tight glass jars or plastic bags and transported to a laboratory.

i EiZ
AUG n 5 2009
Undisturbed Sampling
Split barrel samples are used for visual examination and simple laboratory classification tests;
however, they are disturbed and not sufficiently intact for quantitative laboratory testing such as
strength or consolidation. When such laboratory testing is desired, relatively undisturbed
samples are obtained by slowly pushing a 3-inch diameter, thin -walled (16 gauge) galvanized
steel tube into the soil at desired sampling depths. This is followed by carefully removing the
soil -filled tube from the borehole and sealing the ends to prevent moisture loss. The procedure
is described in ASTM D 1587. Undisturbed tube samples are most frequently used for sampling
cohesive soils (clay and silt), but may be used to sample fine grained cohesionless soils with the
aid of a piston sampling head.
Excavation
When explorations do not require machine -drilled borings, excavations, test pits, hand auger
borings and other means described in ASTM D 4700 may be used to observe shallow subsurface
conditions and to collect soil samples. The maximum depth of these methods is generally limited
by the depth of groundwater. These methods are useful in obtaining bulk samples for laboratory
classification, compaction and other remolded tests.
Rock Coring
Core drilling methods described in ASTM D 2113 are used to advance boreholes into rock or
extremely dense soils which are not penetrable by conventional boring methods and typically
exhibit more than 100 blows per foot by ASTM D 1586. Core drilling methods employed by GER
use double tube swivel -type designed equipment with a drilling fluid, in which an outer tube
rotates and performs the cutting while the inner tube remains stationary and collects a
continuous sample of rock.
In -Situ Methods
In -situ tests are sometimes used on projects to obtain additional subsurface data. These
methods provide direct and empirical measurement of various soil properties without collection
of actual samples. Because samples are not collected, it is not common practice in the U. S. to
utilize in -situ tests alone to accomplish geotechnical investigations. On projects where in -situ
testing is used, it is customary to perform them in conjunction with borings. A list of several
in -situ tests that are sometimes used in this locality is shown below.
Method
Static Cone ASTM D 3441 Semiempirical estimate of soil shear strength, empirical
Penetrometer estimate of elastic and lateral soil properties, continuous
profile, limited in dense soil and rock
Flat Blade Marchetti Semiempirical estimate of lateral and elastic soil properties,
Dilatometer continuous profile, limited in dense soil and rock
Pressuremeter ASTM D 4719 Semiempirical estimate of lateral and elastic soil properties,
used inside a borehole
Electrical Resistivity ASTM G 57 Geophysical method for estimating corrosion potential,
profiling anomolies and dense soil and rock
Data Logging & Qua ft Control
A geotechnical engineer from our office supervises all drilling and sampling activities by the
boring subcontractor and records the subsurface conditions encountered on field boring logs.
These records contain pertinent information concerning the method of boring, samples
U
4
6
N
U
O
v
N
73
N
W
O
U

1 <LI`i �I$ V JO
LAUG ? 5 ?009
=EZ sY:
attempted and recovered, indications of anomolies, observations of groundwater and types of
materials encountered such as sands, clays, silts, gravel, weathered rock, etc. Interpretation of
the soil conditions is made between samples; therefore, the boring records contain both factual
and interpretive information.
The geotechnical engineer visually observes each of the soil samples obtained and estimates
their classification in general accordance with ASTM D 2487, Standard Classification of Soils for
Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System). Where rock samples are obtained,
samples are classified in accordance with ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice,
No. SM6 (1972) & No. 56 (1976). Classifications are recorded on the field logs.
Final test boring records are constructed and submitted with reports. These records represent
our interpretation of the subsurface conditions encountered based on engineering examination
and laboratory tests of selected field samples. They depict subsurface conditions at specific
boring locations and at the particular time of the field investigation. Soil conditions at other
locations may differ from conditions at these boring locations. Also, the passage of time may
result in a change in the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions at the boring locations. The
lines designating interfaces between soil strata on the test boring records and on subsurface
profiles represent approximate boundaries. The transition between soil materials is likely to be
more gradual than indicated.
The general procedures most commonly practiced by GER for typical geotechnical exploration
projects are summarized below:
Description
1 Project Setup
Plan the exploration program, obtain necessary permits and property
access rights, schedule start and completion dates for the work.
2 Testing Layout
Stakeout proposed testing and sampling locations based on scaled
drawings furnished by the client and using reference landmarks at the
site. Shift locations to avoid utilities and other site constraints.
3 Utility Clearance
Notify appropriate utility locating company of proposed testing and
sampling locations so that existing utilities can be marked. State law
normally requires notification at least 48 hours prior to starting work.
4 Field Investigation
Document pertinent site features, supervise testing procedures and
collection of samples, visually classify and containerize soil samples,
record groundwater conditions construct logs of field data.
5 Laboratory Program
Assign laboratory tests on selected soil samples recovered from the
site tabulate and evaluate the results.
6 Engineering Evaluation
Develop a subsurface profile using available field and laboratory data,
perform engineering analysis of subsurface conditions encountered,
develop appropriate design and construction recommendations for the
project.
Quality control is maintained at all levels throughout a project by carefully reviewing
recommendations, reports and test procedures and results. Discussions that summarize
laboratory tests conducted on samples recovered from projects sites are noted on the
subsequent pages.
U
4
N

LBY:
BUG 35 2009
EiZ
Soil Classification
Soil classification tests provide a general guide to the engineering properties of various soil
types. Samples obtained during drilling operations are examined and visually classified by an
engineer or geologist according to consistency, color and texture. These classification
descriptions are included on the boring records. The classification system is primarily qualitative
and for detailed soil classification, two laboratory tests are necessary; grain size tests and
plasticity tests. Using these test results, the soil can be classified according to the AASHTO or
Unified Classification System (ASTM D 2487). Each of these classification. systems and the
in -place physical soil properties provides an index for estimating the soil's behavior. The soil
classification and physical properties obtained are presented on the following sheets.
Grain Size Tests
Grain size tests are performed to determine the soil classification and the grain size distribution.
The soil samples are prepared for testing according to ASTM D 421 (dry preparation) or ASTM D
2217 (wet preparation). The grain size distribution of soils coarser than the #200 U.S. Standard
Sieve (0.074 mm opening) is determined by passing the samples through a standard set of
nested sieves. Materials passing the No. 200 sieve are suspended in water and the grain size
distribution calculated from the measured settlement rate. These tests are conducted in
accordance with ASTM D 422.
Plasticity Tests
Plasticity tests are performed to determine the soil classification and plasticity characteristics.
The soil plasticity characteristics are defined by the Plastic Index (PI) and the Liquid Limit (LL).
The PI is related to the volume changes which occur in confined soils beneath foundations. The
PI and LL are determined in accordance with ASTM D 4318.
Physical Properties
The in -place physical properties are described by the specific gravity, wet unit weight, moisture
content, dry unit weight, void ratio and percent saturation of the soil. The specific gravity and
moisture content are determined by ASTM D 854 and D 2216, respectively. The wet unit weight
is found by obtaining a known volume of soil and dividing the wet sample weight by the known
volume. The dry unit weight, void ratio and percent saturation are calculated values.
California Bearing Ratio
The California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test is a comparative measure of the shearing resistance of a
soil. It is used with empirical curves to design asphalt pavement structures. The test is
performed in accordance with ASTM D 1883 or Virginia Test Method Designation VTM-8. A
representative bulk sample is compacted in a six-inch diameter CBR mold in five (5) equal
layers, using 45 evenly spaced blows per layer with a 5.5 lb. hammer falling 12 inches. CBR
tests may be run on the compacted samples in either soaked or unsoaked conditions, with
samples penetrated at the rate of .05 inches per minute to a depth of 0.5 inches. The CBR
value is the percentage of the load it takes to penetrate the soil to a specified depth compared
to the load it takes to penetrate a standard crushed stone to the same depth.
Consolidation Tests
Consolidation tests determine the change in height of a soil sample with increasing load. The
results of these tests are used to estimate the settlement and time rate of settlement of
structures constructed on similar soils. The test is run in accordance with ASTM D 2435 on a
single element of an extruded undisturbed sample. The test sample is trimmed into a disk
U

,BUG 21 5 2009
BY: ----
approximately 21/2 inches in diameter and one inch thick. The disk is confined in a stainless steel
ring and sandwiched between porous plates and subjected to incrementally increasing vertical
loads, with the resulting deformations measured with micrometer dial gauges. Void ratios and
percent strain deformation are then calculated from these readings. The test results are
presented in the form of a stress -strain or vertical pressure versus void ratio curve.
Triaxial Shear Tests
Triaxial shear tests are used to determine the strength characteristics and elastic properties of a
soil sample. Triaxial shear tests are conducted either on relatively undisturbed samples of virgin
material or on remolded -compacted samples of representative site materials. The samples are
then trimmed into cylinders and encased in rubber membranes. Each is then placed into a
compression chamber and confined by hydrostatic cell pressure. An axial load is applied until
the sample fails in shear. Test results are presented in the form of stress -strain curves and
stress paths to failure.
V
Various types of triaxial tests may be performed. The most suitable type of triaxial test is
determined by the loading conditions imposed on the soil in the field and by drainage
characteristics of the site. Types of triaxial tests normally performed include: u
to
• Consolidated-Isotropic-Undrained (CIU test)
• Consolidated-Anisotropic-Undrained (CK.0 test) 0
• Consolidated -Isotropic -Drained (CID test)
• Consolidated-Anisotropic-Drained (CK D test)
• Unconsolidated-Undrained (UU test)

For DENR Use ONLY
North Carolina Department of Environment and Reviewer.
submit:
�•1 Natural Resources
NCDENR Request for Express Permit Review Time:
Confirm:
FILL-IN all the information below and CHECK the Permit(s) you are requesting for express review. FAX or Email the completed form to Express
Coordinator along with a completed DETAILED narrative site plan (PDF file) and vicinity map (same items expected in the application package
of the project location. Please include this form in the application package.
• Asheville Region -Alison Davidson 828.296.4698;alison.davidson(a.ncmail.net
• Fayetteville or Raleigh Region -David Lee 919-791-4203; david.lee(a)ncmail.net
• Mooresville & -Patrick Grogan 704-663.3772 or patrick.grogan(a)ncmail.net
• Washington Region -Lyn Hardison 252-946-9215 or Iyn.hardison(a)ncmail.net
• Wilmington Region -Janet Russell910-350.2004 oral net.russell(alncmail.net
NOTE: Project application received after 12 noon will be stamped in the following work day
Permits of request
SW 101
SW 108
SW
SW
SW
Project Name: P-648 NAMTRA MARU FACILITY County: ONSLOW
Applicant: CARL BAKER Company: CAMP LEJUENE PUBLIC WORKS
Address: 1005 MICHAEL ROAD City: MCB CAMP LEJUENE, State: NC Zip: 28547-2521
Phone: [phone], Fax: _ _ _, Email: [e-mail]
Physical Location: INTERSECTION OF DAVIS STREET AND CAMPBELL STREET ON THE NEW RIVER MARINE CORPS AIR STATION
Project Drains into SC waters — Water classification _ (for classification see-http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/bims/reports/reportsWB.html)
Project Located in WHITE OAK River Basin. Is project draining to class ORIN waters? N , within Y22 mile and draining to class SA waters N or within 1 mile
and draining to class HQW waters? Y
Engineer/Consultant: MICHAEL D. HESSCompany: MSA, P.C.
Address: 5033 ROUSE DRIVE City: VIRGINIA BEACH, State: VA Zip: 23462-3708
Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone], Email: mike [e-mail]
SECTION ONE: REQUESTING A SCOPING MEETING 014LY
❑ Scoping Meeting ONLY ❑ DWQ, ❑ DCM, ❑ DLR, ❑ OTHER:
SECTIO14 TWO: CHECK ONLY THE PROGRAM (S) YOU ARE REQUESTING FOR EXPRESS PERMITTING
❑ 401 Unit ❑ Stream Origin Determination: _ # of stream calls — Please attach TOPO map marking the areas in questions
❑ Intermittent/Perennial Determination: _ # of stream calls — Please attach TOPO map marking the areas in questions
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification ❑ Isolated Wetland (_linear ft or _acres)
❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization El Minor Variance ❑ Major General Variance
® State Stormwater ❑ General ❑ SFR, ❑ SFR < 1 ac. ❑Bkhd & Bt Rmp, ❑ Clear & Grub, ❑ Utility ❑ Other
❑ Low Density ❑ Low Density -Curb & Gutter _ # Curb Outlet Swales ❑ Off -site [SW _ (Provide permit #)]
❑ High Density -Detention Pond _ # Treatment Systems ❑ High Density -Infiltration _ #Treatment Systems
❑ High Density -Bio-Retention _ # Treatment Systems ❑ High Density —SW Wetlands _ # Treatment Systems
® High Density -Other 5 # Treatment Systems / ❑ MOD: [I Major ❑ Minor ® Plan Revision ❑ Redev. Exclusion SW (Provide pen it#)
❑ Coastal Management ❑ Excavation & Fill ❑ Bridges & Culverts ❑ Structures Information
❑ Upland Development ❑ Marina Development ❑ Urban Waterfront
❑ Land Quality ❑ Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan with _ acres to be disturbed.(CK It (for DENR use))
SECTION THREE — PLEASE CHECK ALL THAT IS APPLICABLE TO YOUR PROJECT (for both scopinq and express meetina reauest
Wetlands on Site ❑ Yes ® No Buffer Impacts: ® No ❑ YES: _acre(s)
Wetlands Delineation has been completed: ❑ Yes ® No Isolated wetland on Property ❑ Yes ® No
US ACOE Approval of Delineation completed: ❑ Yes ® No 404 Application in Process w/ US ACOE: ❑ Yes ® No Permit
Received from US ACOE ❑ Yes ® No
RR. RR4444R44444LR4LY.C4444p4444tP#4t444::'iv I4L#C4 :%}444KK44':4r: (11' DENR use oniY4P :}444Rrtc:}::SPPCPt:}:•L:•R4LILL:+5:4444.::t4.:}4P4{.4F44t .v`R4:}44LRP4:t
Fee Split for multiple permits: (Check# 1 TnrarFmAmn,,.t t
SUBMITTAL DATES
Fee
SUBMITTAL DATES
Fee
CAMA
1 $
Variance (❑ Mal; ❑ Min)
$
SW (❑ HD, ❑ LD, ❑Gen)I
$
401:
$
LQS
I $
Stream Deter,_
$
NCDENR EXPRESS March 2009

I
•,y`T Jr�ARI MrNT_ JM '.-Hr, 11\—ET(!O7 UNUen STA M!,, - ;ACXRLDNVIU:: SOUTIT uUADRAN(:I:r,
- CUM50WAL j!lR Q DZIAUP.BY cc CGbMG. .< N, -Ti CAQJ UA ^.NrL'JM' lG
R Y ( �• [ ifi .4 (o lrtmt: Lugo LY VJ UI-E SIM- E Il i 1
'F:^r.+P''�y'C� ' s_I'
L S S d I L r i .n ev T r y �'. "�, L Ly -,.: z 1 w� r J,. i••.
�. 1 ) L J..� _ t,�yz: ^>3 r. rs r� v'•6gj1A.�l. < i'� -
. ♦ ,/. r, _
i Ldr. i x r� ir'''3AL�1ti•'.L:10.au R 'I%v:• �l� "a
'Vi'3
nr�
.J .x �../ .A� ♦ LiM kL � �'Z�F JJ .;` �1' � V'ftrov [._�IJ / 4'L Yi
rr001.— A r pLr /
° s'f i; , 1 J+><'•C'. I V
~ Ir_ * �rlll tt5 FF -Op r j L.r 'F
�1'SP'I eit J V '1 A. M1`
li., .SI tN //[/ k4 (S L i ' / `�' E Y ,n L .•`I } \r It � ,t1 1 3 '�: t .:
Y.fA JI,_
MIA
`fern. ,
y h
w
A '
q t s
Ar4
x. l � � I c.r 5� .t '� tx♦ �^% I �' �v �s %r - >J a,yi t .IL.
,��
I.v�. s r
i.`z. k I //! ?�,. I(I A4 Il. ! t, h \ 1l z
_�
Iz.iz
"O 1 4.1 lid Z T h Sr ry L r- I i i S a 1
;n'.Yi L r \ ,- !J i r ,.,.i i1 :s ✓ .. ..: , tj/! (R 4it
en>,ca�-i
L-
' i I i � ° y.7t ' �ht � { �,fr� ♦. ` it `-Y'
' n, ... 1 C!'..�i �.... .. S Ir. '....:... SLG:.�`�..•.' :,�r.. ._.. k: tE" .�.Y.?I, ,F�, -.r _:.�4 _ ..... . ..� .♦\, ::._na e. .._.. ..Y ... ._ `J:I

TOWNE$ANK 42086
MSA, P.C. a-eM su
Euvimamental Sciences, CeoSciences Planning, Surveying, Engineering & Landscape Architecture
5033 Rouse Drive, Virginia Beach, VA 23462-3708
PAY Four Thousand and 00/100 Dollars
TO NCDENR
1614 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1612

CHECK DAIS
August 24, 2009
a
n
AMOUNT $4,000.00 0
2m,._
lb
ALTMORIZED SIGNATURE
Invoice Number
Date
Voucher
Amount
Discounts
Previous Pay
Net Amount
REVIEW FEE
8120/09
0047553
4,000.00
4,000.00
NCOENR Totals
4,000.00
00.00�
4�0�__
1 1
-AUG 5 2009

Hydraflow Plan View
Ofnfatl
j
C
G7
lJ
C1t
N
0
0
cv
Project file: POV NAMTRA MARU.stm No. Lines: 1 03-10-2005
Hydaflow Slom Sewers 2003

Storm Sewer Tabulation
Page 1
Station
Len
Dmg Area
Rnoff
Area x C
Tc
Rain
Total
Cap
Val
Pipe
Invert Elev
HGL Elev
Grnd / Rim Elev
Line ID
coeff
(1)
flow
full
Line
To
-
Incr-
Total
Inca
Total
Inlet
Syst
Size
Slope
Up
Dn
Up
Dn
Up
Dn
Line
(ft)
(ac)
(ac)
(C)
(min)
(min)
(in/hr)
(cfs)
(cfs)
(ft/s)
(in)
(%)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
1
End
16.5
0.28
0.28
0.88
0.25
0.25
5.0
5.0
7.0
1.71
2.75
3.13
15
0.18
12.14
12.11
12.77
12.63
13.75
13.12
i
c
C71
tv
0
0
�n
I
Project File: POV NAMTRA MARU.stm
Number of lines: 1
Run Date: 03-10-2005
NOTES: Intensity = 201.00 / (Inlet time + 23.90) ^ 1.00; Return period = 10 Yrs.
Hydra0ow Storm Sev ,s 2003

Hydraflow Plan View
OutfaE /I
Project file: NAMTRA MARU Yard Pipe.stm I No. Lines: 1 03-10-2005
MydM low Slort sewers 2003

Storm Sewer Tabulation
Page 1
Station
Len
Drng Area
Rnoff
coeff
Area x C
Tc
Rain
(1)
Total
flow
Cap
full
Val
Pipe _
Invert Elev
HGL Elev
Grnd / Rim Elev
Line ID
Line
To
Incr
Total
Incr
Total
Inlet
Syst
Size
Slope
Dn
Up
Dn
Up
Dn
Up
Line
(ft)
(ac)
(ac)
(C)
(min)
(min)
(in/hr)
(cfs)
(cfs)
(ft/s)
(in)
(%)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
1
End
49
0.99
0.99
0.63
0.62
0.62
15.0
15.0
5.2
3.22
0.88
4.56
12
0.06
12.11
12.14
12.87
13.44
14.17
14.17
C
G� 0
Ve
ry
0
0
cu
Project File: NAMTRA MARU Yard Pipe.stm
Number of lines: 1
Run Date: 08-20-2009
NOTES: Intensity = 201.00 / (Inlet time + 23.90) ^ 1.00; Return period = 10 Yrs. c = cir e = ellip b = box
Hydra0ow Storm Sewers Extension v .052

Hydraflow Plan View '
Oul(atl 4k
p 8 20 22
19 21
4 0 23
5 4
6
7
8 25
9
1
1
6
13
1
15
1
17
C
G�
El
o �
o Icv
Project file: NAMTRA MARU Roof Drain.stm No. Lines: 26 03-09-2005
Hydrafim Stw Sewers 2003

Storm Sewer Tabulation
Page 1
Station
Len
Drng Area
Rnoff
Area x C
Tc
Rain
Total
Cap
Vel
Pipe
Invert Elev
HGL Elev
Gmcl I Rim Elev
Line ID
coeff
(I)
flow
fu_I_I
Line
To
Incr
Total
Incr
Total
Inlet
Syst
Size
Slope
Up
Dn
Up
Dn
Up
Dn
Line
(ft)
(ac)
(ac)
(C)
(min)
(min)
(inlhr)
(cfs)
(cfs)
(ft/s)
(in)
(%)
(it)
(ft)
(ft)
(k)
(ft)
(ft)
1
End
114.0
0.03
0.60
0.40
0.01
0.58
10.0
10.0
5.9
3.45
7.68
4.18
18
0.54
12.09
11.48
12.80
12.19
14.59
12.35
2
1
21.0
0.00
0.52
0.00
0.00
0.52
0.0
6.5
6.6
3.44
3.39
4.38
12
0.90
12.28
12.09
13.40
13.21
15.44
14.59
3
2
6.5
0.00
0.52
0.00
0.00
0.52
0.0
6.4
6.6
3.44
2.42
4.39
12
0.46
12.31
12.28
13.69
13.63
16.11
15.44
4
3
18.0
0.02
0.02
1.00
0.02
0.02
5.0
5.0
7.0
0.14
1.39
0.40
8
1.33
12.55
12.31
13.99
13.99
17.68
16.11
5
3
44.3
0.00
0.50
0.00
0.00
0.50
0.0
6.3
6.7
3.33
2.51
4.24
12
0.50
12.53
12.31
14.38
13.99
16.42
16.11
6
5
18.0
0.06
0.06
1.00
0.06
0.06
5.0
5.0
7.0
0.42
1.21
1.20
8
1.00
12.71
12.53
14.68
14.66
17.68
16.42
7
5
45.0
0.00
0.44
0.00
0.00
0.44
0.0
6.1
6.7
2.95
2.55
3.76
12
0.51
12.76
12.53
14.96
14.66
16.77
16.42
8
7
18.0
0.08
0.08
1.00
0.08
0.08
5.0
5.0
7.0
0.56
1.24
1.59
8
1.06
12.95
12.76
15.22
15.18
17.68
16.77
9
7
37.8
0.00
0.36
0.00
0.00
0.36
0.0
5.9
6.8
2.43
2.46
3.09
12
0.48
12.94
12.76
15.36
15.18
17.07
16.77
10
9
18.0
0.07
0.07
1.00
0.07
0.07
5.0
5.0
7.0
0.49
1.51
1.39
8
1.56
13.22
12.94
15.54
15.51
17.68
17.07
11
9
3.3
0.00
0.29
0.00
0.00
0.29
0.0
5.8
6.8
1.96
2.77
2.50
12
0.61
12.96
12.94
15.52
15.51
17.07
17.07
12
11
28.5
0.06
0.05
1.00
0.05
0.05
5.0
5.0
7.0
0.35
1.22
1.00
8
1.02
13.25
12.96
15.64
15.62
17.68
17.07
13
11
32.8
0.00
0.24
0.00
0.00
0.24
0.0
5.6
6.8
1.64
2.49
2.08
12
0.49
13.12
12.96
15.68
15.62
17.22
17.07
14
13
28.3
0.07
0.07
1.00
0.07
0.07
5.0
5.0
7.0
0.49
0.88
1.39
8
0.53
13.27
13.12
15.80
15.75
17.68
17.22
15
13
37.4
0.00
0.17
0.00
0.00
0.17
0.0
5.2
6.9
1.18
2.47
1.50
12
0.48
13.30
13.12
15.79
15.75
17.37
17.22
16
15
28.5
0.14
0.14
1.00
0.14
0.14
5.0
5.0
7.0
0.97
1.22
2.79
8
1.02
13.59
13.30
16.01
15.83
17.68
17.37
17
15
2.4
0.03
M�J
0.03
1.00
0.03
0.03
5.0
5.0
7.0
0.21
1.56
0.60
8
1.67
13.34
13.30
15.83
15.83
17.68
17.37
,�r
...1
18
1
63.8
0.00
0.05
0.00
0.00
0.05
0.0
6.4
6.6
0.33
2.48
2.19
12
0.49
13.27
12.96
13.52
13.21
16.41
14.59
r`j ry
19
18
12.0
0.01
0.01
1.00
0.01
0.01
5.0
5.0
7.0
0.07
1.26
0.63
8
1.08
13.40
13.27
13.59
13.59
17.68
16.41
to
20
18
23.0
0.00
0.04
0.00
0.00
0.04
0.0
6.1
6.7
0.27
2.57
1.61
12
0.52
13.39
13.27
13.62
13.59
16.22
16.41
tsa M
21
20
12.0
0.02
0.02
1.00
0.02
0.02
5.0
5.0
7.0
0.14
1.71
1.42
8
2.00
13.63
13.39
13.81
13.68
17.68
16.22
r.a
m
Project File: NAMTRA MARU Roof Drain.stm
Number of lines: 26
Run Date: 03-09-2005
NOTES: Intensity = 201.00 / (Inlet time + 23.90) ^ 1.00; Return period = 10 Yrs.
Hydranow Storm Sewers 2003

Storm Sewer Tabulation
Page 2
Station
Len
Drng Area
Rnoff
Area x C
Tc
Rain
Pipe
Invert Elev
HGL Elev
Grnd I Rim Elev
Line ID
-
coeff
(1)
7ap
Line
To
Incr
Total
Incr
Total
Inlet
SystSize
Slope
Up
Dn
Up
Dn
Line
(k)
(ac)
(ac)
(C)
(min)
(min)
(in/hr)
(
(In)
(%)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
(ft)
22
20
11.0
0.00
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.0
5.9
6.7
0.13
2.63
0.85
12
0.55
13.45
13.39
T13.7013.70
15.78
16.22
23
22
13.0
0.00
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.0
5.7
6.8
0.14
2.42
1.10
12
0.46
13.51
13.45
16.26
15.78
24
23
10.0
0.01
0.01
1.00
0.01
0.01
5.0
5.0
7.0
0.07
1.32
1.11
8
1.20
13.63
13.51
13.76
13.73
17.68
16.26
25
23
36.1
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.0
5.1
6.9
0.07
2.51
0.98
12
0.50
13.69
13.51
13.80
13.73
16.99
16.26
26
25
10.0
0.01
0.01
1.00
0.01
0.01
5.0
5.0
7.0
0.07
1.21
1.39
8
1.00
13.79
13.69
13.92
13.83
17.68
16.99
rJ
O
u
co
Project File: NAMTRA MARU Roof Drain.sim
Number of lines: 26
Run Date: 03-09-2005
NOTES: Intensity = 201.00 / (Inlet time + 23.90) ^ 1.00; Return period = 10 Yrs.
Hyd. lm Slortn Sewers 2W3

I
.^.
J
II '�
I
I �
II
� I ,
I� P
I�
I
i
1 III
d— — —
DAVIS-- ---,,STREET
" � 450---------
il� a
T
jll�l _
LJ
LJ
I 1 _
I
Fill--
o i I,�� LJ I
,I I
Ali
II ✓�- IF
9A;IC I -- -----'-I-�——�'I=-----
MATCHLINE-SEE SHEET C-403
7 A
!1
�2EC]F:SIVE_sS,
�2EC]F:SIVE_sS,
AUG s
BY.pN
'.FII1 P SVV:
..-
1 :300
I'
z
0
2
0
7
:l

]R
I
•Ilan' - ��' �h- Ott
"p
BA -)A
1Ii A
'I"
TW' 41480 lag
•e5o,
t' er - . - -\ 0 y1
7 6° T et) •5 y
h
j11 `P1 TC 5.479u e08 $ n
5 j1b MG .5T1g 5.1801 n o
,5 GR
1� 5.440 •575b h1OUND' zoo
GROUND 118T 5.
TW 5.392 po ,yS TW 5.360
h
te1 5p61 .� 5t1'� .5
• yo5g ' S y.�5
1W}'T00
)W(��!��
' 1' IL I
KEYPLAN
NTS
MATCHLINE-SEE
C- 0
,50
L J
s � f�
It 4
�,•',��y,�p�py t p�
TC 4.580
!. TC .760 :u$
Tc 4.500 is 4.720 S TC 4780� °bt ' a
+ 4.800 I Pm.s1s�
TC 4.497 ,egP L ih. -72 .740 PAVT I /urtr xrv=1J4G(N,�
TC 4.700 .� PtF.' II /mv.JJ9D's/,
TC 4.578 qh e5 §) I I I165 p /Nv-J+Jqw)
RC 4.33$. 1 e¢119"0 Ih I 1 ° !
' TC 4.280'�'h) 4.490 CBR-1 TC 4.T1 5 ITC 4.620 ! b1
_ EP TC 4-790 eb g I
o`�c TC M530 p 6 T 4.�70
5 TW 4 350 e t 'S i 4. 94 1
IC 4.842 ^A
;3/,� 0 TC 4 750 T MG 1 L7 EP 4.842 �t p
sl
651 1 II wv=JJ95/N/
TC 4.499 v-J s16/C/
'' " M
-i' 1 TO 4.4G 7
sr-
qg
•4
-�$300$f 441
6TJR
!11
5.185
200I
p15
e ))S 5.235 e1`
I
4.000
,SEE DETAIL 'A' THIS SHEET
Igo
GROUND
}1h
1 1ep
111 5.185 1
!
5.185 et�e B-3
�q
Y !M1� plat . t`1
1
_ +W -' --I--
- -
B-5 - .5'q1
5,ot TRAININg1 FACILITY CONc �I
FF`=5.388 .5)j1 p1
SEE MCMhCiURTL RPNS FIXt
ExRCT gMEx90NS 9g
DA-WA 2.088 AC,Seb)
'SIW 5.375 Rw-0.635 5eM1°
.5j1S 0 5)51 �v.� 5e16
DA-lC=0.640 AC
Rr0.790 9 g
.h1� ,51b B_6
TW ,.7 0 49}b iC 4.7118 I EP 4A69 M�q
TC 4.953 ebig EP _7V
Q e
1 C4. 4 I }°
'e TC 4.838 °�) nOFI
F Sig qa
9�
`, 15 15t e59p TC 4.818 II!9(�b0� Ifir U� -a.50- 11p
4.722 ,y0q I9B eylp
1 rp 4.570 MG, s
/ .J �)1551 51 'Y1 VIS-- jby TC 4.58D C .566 b 1 .�� ° 1 a 50.�.
EP 4 580 MG I 4 60 MG
8 eM1i , 4 0
6
i E MG/'i viB9 r roi
4997 e 9
I
-- (-_-7 /
\ / / OUTFALL
WEIR
I
C401
BA -IA
/
d li II 4 19 ` °!SRA4Y
30Gr ff
El MG /AS-157 L
9 fT=49+ �e19
e,93-
'� �j1h I t Je. 9p115 'ti I,g1t e: gp 19 t t gp e9)1 19 pM1 ,. 9 IN /
plb .h10`l
qql 1 I CClnw 9t
avGeClLb� e' 1gg 4q
e 1 `P
+� ie eel I 0 9e5
[j-yam-
tip�qi1 I ylp� 5,`1 pgVIKRNCnB Wi
.5
_ f .703� [15 I t I BrRwv+a
E + P A P MG.KC'
.ie� i5 .H l
1 , / g4 11 � t55 )) an
Ib)` ,III1 `9g;yey�i htgbst 11a
q s
SrO r
\ 1 /ns-1iB I _ / SrA4Y Et e
a � CQVC to �� FF a.90 FRAIK �, ti
t .;ex gx 25
ONC 19 3`g� 1 "L egab! E'P, ta)
..1 . I. .840`
9 a-vl P MG III MRD FC \ 4 hlti �'�
I )
r
d Ca,YBtrC 9
u l PRKNCNI I / 9b?Y S� o e p 1 5 Y
4.900 ,O,,I( rPaue s�� `g'gE1 11� I a
w nTW 5220 OUND i"1i1 7°q J/��5 3 I .hg+b t I /As ,
un1. 01 q; 1
to ,91a T SEE DETAIL 'B' SHEET_ 403
'I , `Shr( r
' •+�__ MIXtl OFq'SRJPY FRAUC fi S\)) I Spg51
/ srocra u
MATCHLINE-SEE SHEET C-403
7
-4
J
sr_
= Dacus _
''.��f4Cixft0. ��wv�:• I
DETAIL "A'
w.snc sc.lE
0. Innis) urz
5 0 2 5 10 a 20 25 Art w
i :zso LPD.
p2N//✓WS DMW aer
CCY✓CRCIC RECET Y-,Gc.V'\ JDB
ao �m
AUG 3 5 2009 ^�
7l � �4q� mox
�x J e
,`7�15\50� h1'jb�ltlg9g BY: � OC6, E
•J � � S�iS�51
ilgbD hilfi �
.h01 I 510
)pl
Z
'0
151ga a
f ae o
GRAPHIC SCALE
1 :300
ao(
452
C-
■m
3

J
C
A
1 2 3 4 5
L TCHLINE-SEE SHEET C-401
Ljj 11� I RF
w �r
�
/.\ ✓ ., � PAIfMCN�/ \�R-/u•/ -00 �-WV=o-/IO
d)uwiNdS
I BY: 5
CAMPBELL STREET EP MG
PMG EPMG
-� O - -- -
� �-5.00-�----E_I r-------s. /00Nv=/sw
----_-ODS- J
1 Q ( / ________S yp_, 5.814OOS-TC 5.771 TC- 5.678-
14
' m
1
1
1 /r
1 E
,
X
5.855
, GROUND
1
C 6.115
\ C 5.4 4
' 1 EP 5.494 M
1
1
1111 1
111� 1
II
' S59
6 6
VG '15�
5'gS1h o3 5.445
N hb EP MG
I
i
0Ts T'
55 gpg9 '.
1 llf
i
I 5J
A - dE
L--1-L----j
KEYPLAN
NTS
¢ 1
i-�
I
0 - _ _ EP_M_G _ P 5.771 MG EP 5 "a MG .wv=190/ TC 5.447
i930 P 5.441 MG,� L�
EP MG OND SVP 15 [eur3 0S S__ _ -__ .p
- AND SUPPp4/3 ` - - _ - ' � OKRxf,�J S1CAu <aVl3
Rl
L �
w=/Bss 1
TC 6.115
I
n I `-ems
m2Flll \
1 � PAKufN!
1
1
5.915 ,
' EP MG
I
I
PAWVFN/
V
2
CdXFrIC / EP MG
,
EP MG
5.765 �
i
5.755
CBR-2 C402 CB03 5.639
C 5.715
5.885
EP 5.565
f(fvA
T
= e EP
5.773
5.621
E
==1
Kl
5.756
(II 5.333 i I `1
ca+ar/r
PAKUCN!
5.86s DA-2=0.809 AC B -
/
III �2
Rv=-0.795
5 486
EP 5.565Ep
RIM=5.637
FL=5.485 TC
5.800 TC
885
5.715
5.675
6
INV=4.597
5.491
_5
C402 C891
EP MG5.617
EP MG
5.497.765
5//
5.715
EP MG
5.925
5.765
TC 5.800
HP
5.805
.R
HP
HP
5.675
5.538
5.669
,'
EP MG
EP MG
9
6/
, ,
5. i
3 ) 4
CONNECT Kw 4sn PIPP
TO EXISTING CROP INLET
INV=4.099(S)
P d
I ' mw-aeaa
nv=aa� I MSA. P.C.
� lNw,o9,/wJy YDI6WIA
lNv-sav/ I nmxDrm�
� \\ I t�ap0{C55,DN9`Nyq
C(�KAfll ssu
TC 5.3} ' I PAKurrv/ I ' = °'07 '
EP 1 G 5.130 C
5421 ' EP MG '�'F�.clxe'•?,,.•``
E MG KRxrAU s/rAu [/Nr�l Au
Atl SI/PPo?/S rviPo2D
TC 5.723
EP MG � 511
15 5.313 0' ' II i 'vwmco
EP MG e� llll
LL
5.342
MG 5. ' fl U
5.359 w
EP MG ro
n m ww
LLJ
4 .ST 44 cal I, I= ..oaclw.
5.339 DI u I N
RIM=5.340
EP MG INV=4.399 I I LLJLli
n
5.395 f1 o I I N u B
( o
EP MC
Z Z
5.562 b � Q S
IU aZ v Q c5
N Of ZZ_
5.702 ® 1� U ZU
5.696 TC 51.676 (�
/rt wx II I F- < U'
F 161/ ORa=310 19 00' g U Z
H
5.310 ,e Q N
EP MC ,nu=sa/3 I w `C Z r
wv-s1+//rJ I II k z g O vI
Il1iy' I A
scc GRAPHIC648
o
GRAPHIC SCALE I P
��05-0 --2
0
IN n.rts) man.
>o I N62470-02-R-2040
1 :300 ' c 4530548
am ,1 rc 2,
5

I Z- I I I
MATCHLINE-SEE SHEET C-401
r
t
q9 a
e y0
q
— a
e
.�—EP MG I
_. ..._ �.
I y
wv=ealXs/ .
nvv=l9:r/q
I`c 5heg9
55
I S5.
�s1156nnr hhe
Ru=sr c ofl
.wv=rpfNs/
CV I` e avv=ra:?py
O S5 �p v+v=ryvJ(f/
� 5e
2� Ih
N I � RYM=5166
W I WY=rIBr/5/
w I NV-U69/N/
cn
II �
Ida l �---
RN=Si
MV=r X19/rv/
wv-rlsy(N/
IAYV=r1P.XSI
III
3
III
III
C
Rw-s 107
' wwr aryx/
f hb5,
F.INYP4MEF G 5ee0 �
0efRNEA0 STAM [1NE5 — -
- — —_ — .WO sUP is
I�
.AUG
Ww1m
YIYA(N
/i/eb06p'
1
—
r
a00 mm
—NEW
�y
,fra- 11'
i vµ-- 5 �
CONNECT PIPE TO
EXISTING DROP INLET Rfwu m
A eff
INV=3.752(SW) 'A fVrNf
/NV=i. ;T'sw/
'
— �7/_
Riv=rya SOO nrnr
_ 1Nv ler�'Zo
—
MM=re;1
KEYPLAN
NTS
GRAPHIC SCALE
( IN uCIEpS )
6.
1 300
':,�"'yYFNt INCEY:
..iiu —
-11 �-1
rsp
ME
Z
a 5
o � a
w
Z Q Q
g > z
ZU
ZQ�ZQ U LZ Z
z) V
Z
O n
RL
3
■

� H I VIP
i! t,
Jr^ 61 mr.NT C1M Mr' 111:E6 07 JNTJ tl 0 BTA 1 1-3 mr
ue YOGK..r r"RY7- e=x. fraEv ar _w,mc c_ , . ,•JPy r.arJua us�_r: _�
'.3fi- v iFnr *1 � Ct,LT Jt,e ^rtils ^Ji .:y'ya ,
I T' "—
iY� ` { , f , t y '"'� - r _ r aiv tlx\z � �Yp- �rQlk'. s,�,'* � r �� ,,— � i.•.
V.
11 ^ .r ;' • 4 Fi.+ {S.W' rfj rr, ai a .\'�f,'.�iq r z$ y t`/
�i�•F-li'c.
`
�r`� ...t t i{ t u* f y;. ew. r ✓ _8 _ :;J..,, ^'^, M1 t t £ !• xr
C T4l, F•
Nl
Je! 1. i'�t s: r� f' rR`�' { ^:`£ }"' x*, i_'g ;•x ,.y. �v�'�_,
`� � ,�.: •. `'.,y �' �\`r._, t , i��� �� _tt'':rK ''' id+� p'". r,,a... x�
6
>ktfi '�' 8 i S t ,'D,f j�' ., {
i Y.. i.. x,T •; ty
f,'.
•iTrs, i•i X.. r� h•...
�\• .:�..
3`v `•'Y.`\ y t ..:r {* i^ F '.� x .. �.��'":" �s\� "'�• r'*s �,
4.vt;
Il 17 E
t l 4 F ✓ .
,
u r 'K%:- r'\ I°✓ .. w� t /i 6 '+, i+ .r ,. \ ' l 7' •- ° R A r.
t..,i`*' 7•.. \ k /F;` W f
'a} r""} %r r K'� I s.;i .+ Fyr'�'.a sr�' \ q ✓..f ,\ ^}ra: �x c.
!w
.."
i is t
� a?t ,,."�P , a..'�..i ,y,�' C-' 4yT gp,� 7 1{},.,�. a* >{ }�''•�< L~�t�P : •'.� F' arr 'ti.
: � �.y+ `tr"f r � � 1 ki/ t� <<,� ✓ \ .a r yt4: `i b ' �y: At ��xGh� '
i sh r i { sf C it 8
Ik�2W
7 Y
-:�" ' �'+. '`� .., ,, � ry{1 f ;,.Y ��;,,., • iY,;.,;•, i } et Ar ."s k' �'` "19 •'.
' ,' yt'. : ]•,. � ..•i� IAf,i�' , ... _ err: .. .: � +X `rr i� r� \ ..... _ _ �+-u - `. � ., I

June 24, 2009
Ms. Linda Lewis
Environmental Engineer
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405-3845
RE: Stormwater Project No. SW8 050635
P-648 NAMTRA MARU Facility
Contract No. N62470-02-R-0240
Onslow County
MSA 403222A
Dear Ms. Lewis:
�Ecp
,BUG ^ 5 2009
BY:__
Enclosed please find one (1) set of the revised site plans for the above referenced project. Each of
comments dated May 8, 2006 have been addressed as follows:
As was indicated in my previous letter dated August 11, 2005, it appears that a majority of the
runoff fiom the new Training Facility is still being collected via piping and discharged with no
treatment. This was not addressed in either the September 26, 2005, submittal, or in this
submittal. Please provide an engineered sormwater treatment facility for ALL of the runoff from
the proposed Training Facility. This will require a revised drainage area map and calculations.
Response: Two bioretention basins, BA-1A and BA-lB, have been indicated on sheet C-
401R. Calculations and revised drainage area maps have been included with this submittal
as well.
2. Revised storage volume calculations were submitted only for BA-3 and BA-4. Please provide
similar revised volume calculations for Basins BA-1 & BA-2, per my letter dated November 30,
2005. Per the table on Sheet C-803R, there is 1 foot of difference (0.3084 meters) between the
bottom and storage elevations for each basin, however the current volume calculations for basins
I & 2, received on September 26, 2005, provide only 0.5' of difference.
Response: Revised calculations for BA-1C, formally BA-1, BA-2, BA-3, and BA-4 have
been included with this submittal. The deep of storage has been changed from 0.5' to 1.0'
3. Part of the confusion regarding these plans is that the section view of the basin on Sheet C-803R
has no corresponding table to identify the specific elevations for each of the identified elements,
such as the "Max. Ponded Water Depth" and the "Finished Grade of Basin". Please either
provide a separate table for the elevations in the basin section view, or call the elevations by a
common name and use the one table to specify the required elevations for both the outlet
structures and the basins. For example, you could label the overflow elevation as the "Rim
(Overflow) Elevation & Max. Ponded Water Depth' and the bottom elevation as the "Finished
Grade of Basin & Proposed Grade". It doesn't really matter what you call it as long as it's
consistent between the two.

Linda Lewis
June 24, 2009
VISA 463222A
Page 2
R-E FUV
,SDWG ^ 5 9009
BY:
Response: A table with the overflow elevation, proposed grade (bottom grade), and area of
each bioretention basin has been indicated on sheet C403R
4. Please provide another copy of the revised plan sheets. Only one set was submitted.
Response: Two copies of the plan set have been included with this submittal.
Should you have questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 757-490-9264 or by email
Mike Hess0z)onsaonline com
Sincerely,
Michael D. Hess, E.I.T., NSPE
Project Engineer III
Enclosures
MDH/cag
cc: Commander Lawrence Redal, USN, OICC
Jim Donahue. HBA

TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT
TIME : 09/08/2009 08:12
NAME : NCDENR
FAX : [phone]
TEL : [phone]
DATE,TIME
09/08 08:09
FAX NO./NAME
919104512927
DURATION
00:02:18
PAGE(S)
08
T
OK
MODDE
STANDARD
ECM
gaze oT r4orin "rotma
Department of Environment and Natural Resource;
Wilmington Regional Office
Nererl; &'eves Perdue, Governor
FAX COVER SHEET
Date: -1-07
"
Fox:
Rc:
Dee Freeman, Secretary
No. Pages (excl. cover): %
Express Permitting
From: Sandra E;xum
Phone L910'Z796-7265
Pax: `(g9(1,0) 350-2004
Hord C'tp- to follow
127 Ci rdinnl Drivc HslcnSion. Wilmington. NC 28405 • (910) 7990215 • An liquid Opportunity Aftirinutivu Action Enlplo.vwr
I

TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT
TIME 09/08/2009 08:08
NAME NCDENR
FAX [phone]
TEL [phone]
DATE,TIME
09/08 08:06
FAX NO./NAME
917574900634
DURATION
00:02:34
PAGE(S)
08
RESULT
OK
MODE
STANDARD
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Wilmington Regional Office
Beverly Eaves Perdue- Governor
FAX COVER SHEET
Date;
To: �I�uSL,
Co: J
Fay:
Rc:
Lard k_opy to follow
Dee Freeman, Secretor."
No. Pages (t;scl. cover):
Express Permitting
From; Sandra Exum
Phone: L101796-7265
Fax:
127 Corrdinal I)rivc F,xtcnsion, Wilmington. NC 2g405 • [phone] • An Gqual Opportunity AI rnititivu Action Employer