Sennebogen Service Center Geotech Report 202308

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

Geotechnical ExploraƟon

Sennebogen Service Center
1957 Sennebogen Trail
Stanley, North Carolina

Prepared for:
S.C. Hondros & Associates, Inc.

August 21, 2023

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

August 21, 2023

Mr. Mark Murray
S.C. Hondros & Associates, Inc.
3309 Washburn Avenue
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28205

Reference: Geotechnical ConsulƟng Services
Sennebogen Service Center
1957 Sennebogen Trail
Stanley, North Carolina

Dear Mr. Murray:

SubmiƩed herewith is the report of our geotechnical exploraƟon for the referenced project. This study was
conducted in accordance with Aardvark Proposal No.: 1396 dated July 18, 2023.
This report contains the generalized results of our findings and an engineering interpretaƟon of these with
respect to the available project characterisƟcs. Also included are recommendaƟons to aid in evaluaƟng the
suitability of the site and idenƟfying possible construcƟon difficulƟes on earth-related phases of this project.

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If we can be of further assistance, or if you
have any quesƟons regarding this report, please contact our office.

Regards,

Kevin C. McTier, P.E.
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
NC RegistraƟon 029409
NC COA C-3319
8/21/2023
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Aardvark Engineers, Inc. has completed the authorized geotechnical exploraƟon of the proposed Sennebogen Service
Center building and demonstraƟon pad area located in Stanley, North Carolina. The following summarizes the findings of
our geotechnical exploraƟon. Please refer to the body of this report for more specific conclusions and recommendaƟons of
this report.
The proposed site is located at 1957 Sennebogen Trail in Stanley, North Carolina. The site is approximately 32-1/2 acres in
size. There is an exisƟng building located to the east of the proposed new building and demonstraƟon pad. The area is
parƟally wooded and currently undergoing clearing and grading processes near the middle of the proposed building
structure. The proposed site slopes downward from the east to the west with an approximate elevaƟon difference of 20
feet. There is a detenƟon basin with an outlet structure along the eastern property boundary of the proposed development.
We understand that the project will consist of a single-story facility with a proposed footprint of approximately 48,000
square feet. A gravel demonstraƟon area on the order of approximately 48,000 square feet is to be constructed to the
west of the proposed building. A retaining wall is anƟcipated for the transiƟon from the new building to the demonstraƟon
area. New parking lots will be constructed to the south of the proposed building. We anƟcipate the structure will be metal
framed with concrete Ɵlt-up walls. The proposed building will have a concrete floor system. Less than 10 feet of cut
(excavaƟon) and fill will be required during grading to establish finished site grades.
A total of twenty (20) hand auger borings were completed within the proposed project site. The conclusions and
recommendaƟons presented in this report have been based on our sampling and are somewhat general in nature. The
sampling revealed the following generalized and limited subsurface profile. Please refer to secƟon Subsurface CondiƟons
for more specific informaƟon regarding the subsurface profile.
Approximately 3 to 6 inches of topsoil were encountered at each test locaƟon. Greater topsoil depths should be
anƟcipated in areas consisƟng of dense trees and brush. It is likely that areas of large root systems and areas of deeper
organic deposits will be encountered during stripping operaƟons.
Below the surface materials, old fill was encountered at thirteen (13) boring locaƟons. The old fill was encountered to
depths ranging from approximately 2 to greater than 10 feet below the exisƟng surface elevaƟon. The old fill typically
consisted of moist soŌ to firm red and tan sandy silt and/or clayey silt. Deleterious material consisƟng of organics and
construcƟon debris were encountered at various depths within the old fill. Boring locaƟon HA-7 was terminated within
the old fill soils at a depth of approximately 10 feet below the exisƟng ground surface. Our limited exploraƟon data
indicate the old fill received a liƩle to marginal compacƟve effort.
Below the old fill and surface materials, residual soils were encountered at the remaining boring locaƟons. The
residual soils typically consist of moist sƟff to very sƟff red and tan sandy and/or clayey micaceous silt transiƟoning
with depth to moist very sƟff gray and tan sandy silt intermixed with fragmented rock. Almost half of our test locaƟons
encountered auger refusal on very dense residual soil at depths ranging from approximately 6 to 8 feet below the
exisƟng ground surface. The remaining boring locaƟons were terminated at a depth of approximately 10 feet below
the exisƟng surface elevaƟon.
Groundwater was encountered within boring locaƟon HA-14 at a depth of approximately 10 feet below the exisƟng
ground surface. It should be recognized that fluctuaƟons in the groundwater level should be expected to occur due to
variaƟons in rainfall and other environmental or physical factors at the Ɵme measurements are made.
Old fill was encountered in more than half of our boring locaƟons. Our limited exploraƟon data indicates the fill is not
well compacted. Deleterious materials consisƟng of organics and construcƟon were encountered at various depths
within the old fill. These materials could be present in other areas of the site. If our data are representaƟve of the fill
mass, there is risk of structurally significant seƩlement and cracking of fill supported foundaƟons and floors. We
recommend that backhoe pits be excavated prior to awarding the construcƟon contract to beƩer assess the extent,
thickness, and quality of old fill. A representaƟve of our firm should be present during the excavaƟons to evaluate the
materials. RecommendaƟons for foundaƟon and floor slab support are presented in the following secƟons.
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Perched groundwater may be encountered during site development especially in areas near the exisƟng drainage
feature. Drainage trenches and/or pumping from shallow sumps may be required for temporary dewatering during
construcƟon.
Auger refusal was encountered within almost half of our test locaƟons. Auger refusal indicates the potenƟal for
difficult excavaƟon. Loosening of weathered rock will likely require use of a large construcƟon equipment. During the
design phase of this project, the finished elevaƟons for foundaƟons and uƟliƟes should be compared by the designer to
our auger refusal elevaƟons. We recommend that backhoe pits be excavated prior to awarding the construcƟon
contract to beƩer assess the extent, thickness, and quality of the potenƟal weathered rock. A representaƟve of our
firm should be present during the excavaƟons to evaluate the materials.
Soil moisture contents of the on site soil could vary considerably with weather condiƟons during construcƟon. Drying
or weƫng of the soils may be necessary to achieve the recommended compacƟon criterion. If grading occurs during
wet weather, these materials likely cannot be dried sufficiently to obtain the recommended degree of compacƟon. As
a pracƟcal consideraƟon, they may have to be wasted in non-structural areas of the site. The potenƟals for
construcƟon difficulƟes for a project of this type are anƟcipated to be less if construcƟon is carried out during the dryer
months of the year.
The onsite, low plasƟcity, silty and sandy soils can be used for structural fill. Moisture adjustment primarily consisƟng
of drying the soils will be required to achieve a saƟsfactory degree of compacƟon. The potenƟals for construcƟon
difficulƟes for a project of this type are anƟcipated to be less if construcƟon is carried out during the dryer months of
the year.
Provided our recommendaƟons are implemented during the design and construcƟon, the proposed structure may be
supported on shallow foundaƟons bearing on low plasƟcity residual soil or properly compacted structural fill. If
unsaƟsfactory soil is encountered within the building area (such soil disturbed during excavaƟon or soils with high
concentraƟons of clay or silt), selecƟve undercuƫng of this material will be required.
The structure’s floor slab may be convenƟonally soil supported on residual soil or new structural fill, provided that the
subsequently discussed site preparaƟon and fill placement recommendaƟons are followed.
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com

ENGINEERS, IN C

Table of Contents

IntroducƟon
Site InformaƟon
Field ExploraƟon
Subsurface CondiƟons
Conclusions
RecommendaƟons
Appendices

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com

ENGINEERS, IN C

IntroducƟon

Geotechnical ExploraƟon

Sennebogen Service Center
1957 Sennebogen Trail
Stanley, North Carolina

Prepared for:
S.C. Hondros & Associates, Inc.

August 21, 2023

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

INTRODUCTION
G›Ä›Ùƒ½
S.C. Hondros & Associates, Inc. is planning for the construcƟon of a proposed building and demonstraƟon pad area located on
the exisƟng Sennebogen facility. The proposed site is located at 1957 Sennebogen Trail in Stanley, North Carolina. The
results of the geotechnical exploraƟon for this project are presented in this report. This study was conducted in accordance
with Aardvark Proposal No.: 1396 dated July 18, 2023.
PçÙÖÊݛ ƒÄ— S‘Ê֛
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the general subsurface condiƟons for the site development. Subsurface
condiƟons at this project site were evaluated by compleƟng a total of twenty (20) hand auger borings at equally spaced
locaƟons across the project site. Also included is an evaluaƟon of the site with respect to general recommendaƟons
regarding foundaƟon construcƟon, general earthwork procedures and potenƟal construcƟon difficulty due to rock and/or
groundwater.
L®Ã®ãƒã®ÊÄÝ Ê¥ Sãç—ù
The recommendaƟons provided herein were developed from the informaƟon obtained in our sampling, which depicts
general subsurface condiƟons only at specific locaƟons. Subsurface condiƟons at other locaƟons may differ from those
occurring at the specific excavaƟon sites.
The nature and extent of variaƟons between sampling locaƟons may not become evident unƟl the course of construcƟon.
If variaƟons then become evident, it will be necessary to re-evaluate the recommendaƟons of this report aŌer performing
on-site observaƟons during the excavaƟon and noƟng the characterisƟcs of any variaƟon.
Our professional services have been performed, findings obtained, and recommendaƟons prepared in accordance with
generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and pracƟces. No warranƟes are either expressed or implied.
Field observaƟons, monitoring, and quality assurance tesƟng during earthwork and foundaƟon installaƟon are an extension
of the geotechnical design. We recommend that the owner retain these services and that we be allowed to conƟnue our
involvement in the project through these phases of construcƟon. Our firm is not responsible for interpretaƟon of the data
contained in this report by others, nor do we accept any responsibility for job site safety which is the sole responsibility of
the contractor.
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com

ENGINEERS, IN C

Site InformaƟon

Geotechnical ExploraƟon

Sennebogen Service Center
1957 Sennebogen Trail
Stanley, North Carolina

Prepared for:
S.C. Hondros & Associates, Inc.

August 21, 2023

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

SITE INFORMATION
Eø®Ýã®Ä¦ CÊė®ã®ÊÄÝ
The proposed site is located at 1957 Sennebogen Trail in Stanley, North Carolina. The site is approximately 32-1/2 acres in
size. There is an exisƟng building located to the east of the proposed new building and demonstraƟon pad. The area is
parƟally wooded and currently undergoing clearing and grading processes near the middle of the proposed building
structure. The proposed site slopes downward from the east to the west with an approximate elevaƟon difference of 20
feet. There is a detenƟon basin with an outlet structure along the eastern property boundary of the proposed development.
PÙÊÖÊݛ— ConstrucƟon
We understand that the project will consist of a single-story facility with a proposed footprint of approximately 48,000
square feet. A gravel demonstraƟon area on the order of approximately 48,000 square feet is to be constructed to the
west of the proposed building. A retaining wall is anƟcipated for the transiƟon from the new building to the demonstraƟon
area. New parking lots will be constructed to the south of the proposed building. We anƟcipate the structure will be metal
framed with concrete Ɵlt-up walls. The proposed building will have a concrete floor system. Less than 10 feet of cut
(excavaƟon) and fill will be required during grading to establish finished site grades.
S®ã› G›Ê½Ê¦ù
The project site is in the CharloƩe Belt of North Carolina’s Piedmont physiographic province. The soil overburden of this
area consists of mostly igneous rock of the Piedmont. They include granite, diorite, and gabbro. A typical upland soil
profile consists of thin topsoil underlain by a few feet of clayey and/or silty soils that transiƟon with increasing depth into
less clayey, coarser grained silts and sands with varying mica content.
SeparaƟng the completely weathered soil overburden from the unaltered parent rock is a transiƟon zone of very high
consistency materials locally referred to as soŌ weathered rock. SoŌ weathered rock retains much of the appearance and
striaƟons of the parent bedrock formaƟons, and may consist of alternaƟng layers of high consistency soil and rock. SoŌ
weathered rock exhibits standard penetraƟon resistances in excess of 100 blows per foot (bpf) and less than 50 blows per
inch. The soŌ weathered rock represents the transiƟon between residual soil and hard weathered rock (SPT N-values > 50
blows per inch) and/or bedrock.
The weathering processes that formed the overburden soils and soŌ weathered rock were extremely variable, depending
on such factors as rock mineralogy, past groundwater condiƟons, and the tectonic history (joints, faults, igneous intrusions,
etc.) of the specific area. DifferenƟal weathering of the rock mass has resulted in erraƟcally varying subsurface condiƟons,
evidenced by abrupt changes in soil type and consistency in relaƟvely short horizontal and verƟcal distances. Furthermore,
depths to rock can be irregular and isolated boulders, disconƟnuous rock layers, or rock pinnacles can be present within
the overburden and transiƟon zones.
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

SITE INFORMATION
NRCS SÊ®½ SçÙò›ù
Soils maps from the United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Recourses ConservaƟon Service, indicate the
following soils are present within the project site. A NRCS Soil Survey Map is included in Appendix A displaying the
approximate soil type locaƟons.
Map Unit: CeB2—Cecil sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, moderately eroded
Component: Cecil, moderately eroded (88%)
The Cecil, moderately eroded component makes up 88 percent of the map unit. Slopes are 2 to 8 percent. This component
is on interfluves, uplands. The parent material consists of saprolite derived from granite and gneiss and/or schist. Depth to
a root restricƟve layer is greater than 60 inches. The natural drainage class is well drained. Water movement in the most
restricƟve layer is moderately high. Available water to a depth of 60 inches (or restricted depth) is moderate. Shrink-swell
potenƟal is low. This soil is not flooded. It is not ponded. There is no zone of water saturaƟon within a depth of 72 inches.
Organic maƩer content in the surface horizon is about 1 percent. This component is in the F136XY820GA Acidic upland
forest, moist ecological site. Nonirrigated land capability classificaƟon is 3e. This soil does not meet hydric criteria.
Map Unit: PeC2—Pacolet sandy clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, moderately eroded
Component: Pacolet, moderately eroded (85%)
The Pacolet, moderately eroded component makes up 85 percent of the map unit. Slopes are 8 to 15 percent. This
component is on hillslopes on ridges, uplands. The parent material consists of saprolite derived from granite and gneiss
and/or schist. Depth to a root restricƟve layer is greater than 60 inches. The natural drainage class is well drained. Water
movement in the most restricƟve layer is moderately high. Available water to a depth of 60 inches (or restricted depth) is
moderate. Shrink-swell potenƟal is low. This soil is not flooded. It is not ponded. There is no zone of water saturaƟon
within a depth of 72 inches. Organic maƩer content in the surface horizon is about 1 percent. This component is in the
F136XY820GA Acidic upland forest, moist ecological site. Nonirrigated land capability classificaƟon is 3e. This soil does not
meet hydric criteria.
Map Unit: WyC—WynoƩ-Winnsboro-Rowan complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes
Component: WynoƩ (35%)
The WynoƩ component makes up 35 percent of the map unit. Slopes are 8 to 15 percent. This component is on interfluves,
uplands. The parent material consists of saprolite derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase and/or gneiss. Depth
to a root restricƟve layer, bedrock, paralithic, is 20 to 40 inches. The natural drainage class is well drained. Water
movement in the most restricƟve layer is very low. Available water to a depth of 60 inches (or restricted depth) is low.
Shrink-swell potenƟal is moderate. This soil is not flooded. It is not ponded. There is no zone of water saturaƟon within a
depth of 72 inches. Organic maƩer content in the surface horizon is about 1 percent. This component is in the
F136XY730SC Basic upland forest, dry ecological site. Nonirrigated land capability classificaƟon is 3e. This soil does not
meet hydric criteria.
Component: Winnsboro (30%)
The Winnsboro component makes up 30 percent of the map unit. Slopes are 8 to 15 percent. This component is on
hillslopes on ridges, uplands. The parent material consists of saprolite derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase
and/or gneiss. Depth to a root restricƟve layer is greater than 60 inches. The natural drainage class is well drained. Water
movement in the most restricƟve layer is moderately low. Available water to a depth of 60 inches (or restricted depth) is
high. Shrink-swell potenƟal is moderate. This soil is not flooded. It is not ponded. There is no zone of water saturaƟon
within a depth of 72 inches. Organic maƩer content in the surface horizon is about 1 percent. This component is in the
F136XY720NC Basic upland forest, moist ecological site. Nonirrigated land capability classificaƟon is 3e. This soil does not
meet hydric criteria.
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

SITE INFORMATION
Component: Rowan (25%)
The Rowan component makes up 25 percent of the map unit. Slopes are 8 to 15 percent. This component is on hillslopes
on ridges, uplands. The parent material consists of saprolite derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase and/or
gneiss. Depth to a root restricƟve layer is greater than 60 inches. The natural drainage class is well drained. Water
movement in the most restricƟve layer is moderately high. Available water to a depth of 60 inches (or restricted depth) is
moderate. Shrink-swell potenƟal is low. This soil is not flooded. It is not ponded. There is no zone of water saturaƟon
within a depth of 72 inches. Organic maƩer content in the surface horizon is about 1 percent. This component is in the
F136XY720NC Basic upland forest, moist ecological site. Nonirrigated land capability classificaƟon is 3e. This soil does not
meet hydric criteria.
Map Unit: WyD—WynoƩ-Winnsboro-Rowan complex, 15 to 25 percent slopes
Component: WynoƩ (35%)
The WynoƩ component makes up 35 percent of the map unit. Slopes are 15 to 25 percent. This component is on
interfluves, uplands. The parent material consists of saprolite derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase and/or
gneiss. Depth to a root restricƟve layer, bedrock, paralithic, is 20 to 40 inches. The natural drainage class is well drained.
Water movement in the most restricƟve layer is very low. Available water to a depth of 60 inches (or restricted depth) is
low. Shrink-swell potenƟal is moderate. This soil is not flooded. It is not ponded. There is no zone of water saturaƟon
within a depth of 72 inches. Organic maƩer content in the surface horizon is about 1 percent. This component is in the
F136XY730SC Basic upland forest, dry ecological site. Nonirrigated land capability classificaƟon is 4e. This soil does not
meet hydric criteria.
Component: Winnsboro (30%)
The Winnsboro component makes up 30 percent of the map unit. Slopes are 15 to 25 percent. This component is on
hillslopes on ridges, uplands. The parent material consists of saprolite derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase
and/or gneiss. Depth to a root restricƟve layer is greater than 60 inches. The natural drainage class is well drained. Water
movement in the most restricƟve layer is moderately low. Available water to a depth of 60 inches (or restricted depth) is
high. Shrink-swell potenƟal is moderate. This soil is not flooded. It is not ponded. There is no zone of water saturaƟon
within a depth of 72 inches. Organic maƩer content in the surface horizon is about 1 percent. This component is in the
F136XY720NC Basic upland forest, moist ecological site. Nonirrigated land capability classificaƟon is 4e. This soil does not
meet hydric criteria.
Component: Rowan (25%)
The Rowan component makes up 25 percent of the map unit. Slopes are 15 to 25 percent. This component is on hillslopes
on ridges, uplands. The parent material consists of saprolite derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase and/or
gneiss. Depth to a root restricƟve layer is greater than 60 inches. The natural drainage class is well drained. Water
movement in the most restricƟve layer is moderately high. Available water to a depth of 60 inches (or restricted depth) is
moderate. Shrink-swell potenƟal is low. This soil is not flooded. It is not ponded. There is no zone of water saturaƟon
within a depth of 72 inches. Organic maƩer content in the surface horizon is about 1 percent. This component is in the
F136XY720NC Basic upland forest, moist ecological site. Nonirrigated land capability classificaƟon is 4e. This soil does not
meet hydric criteria.
Soil at the site reportedly does not exhibit characterisƟcs of hydric soils according to records maintained by the NRCS (i.e.,
those soils associated with wetland areas). These soils are generally found on flood plains and are formed in loamy alluvial
deposits. Wetlands are surface areas that are inundated or saturated with water under normal circumstances. Wetlands
support a prevalence of hydrophilic vegetaƟon that are adapted for life in saturated soil condiƟons. Wetlands will generally
be found in floodplains along drainage ways, areas of topographic depression, or around the periphery of lakes. There is an
inherent margin of error with this type of wetlands determinaƟon. Therefore, we recommend contacƟng a local wetlands
environmental consultant to assist in the determinaƟon and delineaƟon of the wetlands site.
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com

ENGINEERS, IN C

Field ExploraƟon

Geotechnical ExploraƟon

Sennebogen Service Center
1957 Sennebogen Trail
Stanley, North Carolina

Prepared for:
S.C. Hondros & Associates, Inc.

August 21, 2023

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

FIELD EXPLORATION
The soil condiƟons at this project site were evaluated by compleƟng a total of twenty (20) hand auger borings at widely
spaced intervals across the project site. Our field services were completed on the period from July 24, 2023 to July 28, 2023.
The approximate test locaƟons are illustrated on the Boring LocaƟon Plan in the Appendix. Due to methods used, the
locaƟon and elevaƟons of the borings should be considered approximate.
The borings were made by twisƟng a post-hole auger into the soil. The auger consisted of either a two curved blades and a
bucket which retains the soil as the auger is advanced or a towable power auger. At regular intervals, the auger was
removed from the boring and dynamic penetraƟon tests were performed. PenetraƟon resistance, when properly
evaluated, is an approximate index to the soil’s strength, compressibility, and density. Water levels were measured upon
compleƟon and the boreholes were backfilled with the auger cuƫngs. Our staff engineer coordinated our field acƟviƟes,
conducted the reconnaissance of the site, and prepared the report of the subsurface condiƟons encountered. Our visual
classificaƟons and the results from our field tesƟng program were used to develop the Soil Test Borings included in the
Appendices.
Logs of each boring have been prepared based upon the field log and visual classificaƟon. The test logs are included in the
Appendix of this report for your review. Indicated on each log are the primary strata encountered, the depth of each
stratum change, depth of sample, standard penetraƟon test results, and groundwater condiƟons. The logs were prepared
for each locaƟon giving the appropriate sample data and the textural descripƟon and classificaƟon. When reviewing these
records, the indicated boundaries between soil strata are approximate and the transiƟons between strata are generally
gradual. Also, variaƟons in subsurface condiƟons from those encountered may exist between sample locaƟons.
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com

ENGINEERS, IN C

Subsurface CondiƟons

Geotechnical ExploraƟon

Sennebogen Service Center
1957 Sennebogen Trail
Stanley, North Carolina

Prepared for:
S.C. Hondros & Associates, Inc.

August 21, 2023

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Our interpretaƟon of the subsurface condiƟons is based upon a review of available published literature and the widely
spaced hand auger borings at the approximate locaƟons shown on the Boring LocaƟon Plan in the Appendix. The following
is a generalized discussion of our findings. For more specific informaƟon, please refer to the Boring Logs presented in the
Appendix.
SçÝçÙ¥ƒ‘› SÊ®½ CÊė®ã®ÊÄÝ
Approximately 3 to 6 inches of topsoil were encountered at each test locaƟon. Greater topsoil depths should be
anƟcipated in areas consisƟng of dense trees and brush. It is likely that areas of large root systems and areas of deeper
organic deposits will be encountered during stripping operaƟons.
Below the surface materials, old fill was encountered at thirteen (13) boring locaƟons. The old fill was encountered to
depths ranging from approximately 2 to greater than 10 feet below the exisƟng surface elevaƟon. The old fill typically
consisted of moist soŌ to firm red and tan sandy silt and/or clayey silt. Deleterious material consisƟng of organics and
construcƟon debris were encountered at various depths within the old fill. Boring locaƟon HA-7 was terminated within the
old fill soils at a depth of approximately 10 feet below the exisƟng ground surface. Our limited exploraƟon data indicate
the old fill received a liƩle to marginal compacƟve effort.
Below the old fill and surface materials, residual soils were encountered at the remaining boring locaƟons. The residual
soils typically consist of moist sƟff to very sƟff red and tan sandy and/or clayey micaceous silt transiƟoning with depth to
moist very sƟff gray and tan sandy silt intermixed with fragmented rock. Almost half of our test loca Ɵons encountered
auger refusal on very dense residual soil at depths ranging from approximately 6 to 8 feet below the exisƟng ground
surface. The remaining boring locaƟons were terminated at a depth of approximately 10 feet below the exisƟng surface
elevaƟon.
GÙÊçėóƒã›Ù CÊė®ã®ÊÄÝ
The term groundwater, for the purpose of this report, pertains to any water that percolates through the naturally occurring
materials found on site. This includes any overland flow that permeates through a given depth of soil, perched water, and
water that occurs below the water table, a zone that remains saturated and water bearing year round.
Groundwater was encountered within boring locaƟon HA-14 at a depth of approximately 10 feet below the exisƟng ground
surface. It should be recognized that fluctuaƟons in the groundwater level should be expected to occur due to variaƟons in
rainfall and other environmental or physical factors at the Ɵme measurements are made.
It should be recognized that fluctuaƟons in the groundwater level should be expected to occur due to variaƟons in rainfall
and other environmental or physical factors at the Ɵme measurements are made. The true staƟc groundwater level can
only be determined through observaƟons made in cased holes over a long period of Ɵme. Slightly elevated groundwater
condiƟons should be expected during weƩer periods of the year.
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com

ENGINEERS, IN C

Conclusions

Geotechnical ExploraƟon

Sennebogen Service Center
1957 Sennebogen Trail
Stanley, North Carolina

Prepared for:
S.C. Hondros & Associates, Inc.

August 21, 2023

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

CONCLUSIONS
The following summarizes the conclusions of our geotechnical exploraƟon:
Old fill was encountered in more than half of our boring locaƟons. Our limited exploraƟon data indicates the fill is not
well compacted. Deleterious materials consisƟng of organics and construcƟon were encountered at various depths
within the old fill. These materials could be present in other areas of the site. If our data are representaƟve of the fill
mass, there is risk of structurally significant seƩlement and cracking of fill supported foundaƟons and floors. We
recommend that backhoe pits be excavated prior to awarding the construcƟon contract to beƩer assess the extent,
thickness, and quality of old fill. A representaƟve of our firm should be present during the excavaƟons to evaluate the
materials. RecommendaƟons for foundaƟon and floor slab support are presented in the following secƟons.
Perched groundwater may be encountered during site development especially in areas near the exisƟng drainage
feature. Drainage trenches and/or pumping from shallow sumps may be required for temporary dewatering during
construcƟon.
Auger refusal was encountered within almost half of our test locaƟons. Auger refusal indicates the potenƟal for
difficult excavaƟon. Loosening of weathered rock will likely require use of a large construcƟon equipment. During the
design phase of this project, the finished elevaƟons for foundaƟons and uƟliƟes should be compared by the designer to
our auger refusal elevaƟons. We recommend that backhoe pits be excavated prior to awarding the construcƟon
contract to beƩer assess the extent, thickness, and quality of the potenƟal weathered rock. A representaƟve of our
firm should be present during the excavaƟons to evaluate the materials.
The onsite, low plasƟcity, silty and sandy soils can be used for structural fill. Moisture adjustment primarily consisƟng
of drying the soils will be required to achieve a saƟsfactory degree of compacƟon. The potenƟals for construcƟon
difficulƟes for a project of this type are anƟcipated to be less if construcƟon is carried out during the dryer months of
the year.
The exposed subgrade soils will likely be very sensiƟve to construcƟon traffic in the presence of excess moisture and
will rapidly soŌen, rut, and require undercuƫng and replacement. The volume of undercut materials will be a funcƟon
of the Ɵme of the year in which the grading occurs. Greater undercuƫng would be expected if grading occurs during
wet winter and spring months.
Soil moisture contents could vary considerably with weather condiƟons during construcƟon. Drying or weƫng of the
soils may be necessary to achieve the recommended compacƟon criterion. If grading occurs during wet weather, these
materials likely cannot be dried sufficiently to obtain the recommended degree of compacƟon. As a pracƟcal
consideraƟon, they may have to be wasted in non-structural areas of the site. The potenƟals for construcƟon
difficulƟes for a project of this type are anƟcipated to be less if construcƟon is carried out during the dryer months of
the year.
Provided our recommendaƟons are implemented during the design and construcƟon, the proposed structures may be
supported on shallow foundaƟons bearing on low plasƟcity residual soil or properly compacted structural fill. If
unsaƟsfactory soil is encountered within the building area (such soil disturbed during excavaƟon or soils with high
concentraƟons of clay or silt), selecƟve undercuƫng of this material will be required.
The structure’s floor slab may be convenƟonally soil supported on residual soil or new structural fill, provided that the
subsequently discussed site preparaƟon and fill placement recommendaƟons are followed.
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com

ENGINEERS, IN C

RecommendaƟons

Geotechnical ExploraƟon

Sennebogen Service Center
1957 Sennebogen Trail
Stanley, North Carolina

Prepared for:
S.C. Hondros & Associates, Inc.

August 21, 2023

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

RECOMMENDATIONS
BƒÝ®Ý
Subsurface variaƟons that may not be indicated by our dispersed exploratory sampling program can exist on any site. If
such variaƟons or unexpected condiƟons are encountered during construcƟon, or if the project informaƟon is incorrect or
changed, we should be informed immediately since the validity of our recommendaƟons may be affected. Refer to the
Appendix for addiƟonal qualificaƟons of this geotechnical exploraƟon and construcƟon contract consideraƟons.
S®ã› Pٛփكã®ÊÄ
All areas that will support foundaƟons, floors, or newly placed structural fill must be properly prepared. All loose surface
soil, construcƟon debris, topsoil and other unsuitable materials must be removed. Unsuitable materials include: frozen
soil, relaƟvely soŌ material, relaƟvely wet soils or soils near the surface that exhibit a high organic content. In all cases, the
earthwork operaƟons should be performed in a manner consistent with good erosion and sedimentaƟon control pracƟces.
The onsite shallow residual soils encountered at the site are generally considered to be moisture sensiƟve and have the
potenƟal to become unstable and lose some of their strength when simultaneously exposed to wet weather and
construcƟon traffic. Moisture adjustment primarily consisƟng of drying the soils will be required to achieve a saƟsfactory
degree of compacƟon. The potenƟals for construcƟon difficulƟes for a project of this type are anƟcipated to be less if
construcƟon is carried out during the dryer months of the year.
SãÙ®Ö֮Ħ
Approximately 3 to 6 inches of topsoil was encountered within the proposed site. Greater topsoil depths should be
anƟcipated in areas of dense trees and brush due to areas of large root systems and areas of deeper organic deposits.
If grading is begun during or shortly aŌer a period of wet weather, addiƟonal amounts of stripping or undercuƫng may be
required to remove water soŌened soils. The stripped unsuitable material may be stockpiled and used later for
landscaping or other non-structural areas on the site.
PÙÊÊ¥Ùʽ½®Ä¦
Upon the compleƟon of stripping, the at-grade areas or areas that are to receive new structural fill, should be evaluated by
an Aardvark Project Engineer or their representaƟve. The evaluaƟon should include proofrolling of the subgrade and test
pit excavaƟons. If unsuitable materials are encountered, an appropriate remedial measure would be removal of the
unsuitable materials, and replacement in accordance with this sec Ɵon.
Proofrolling should consist of repeated passes of a loaded, pneumaƟc-Ɵred vehicle such as a tandem-axle dump truck or
scraper. An Aardvark Project Engineer or approved representaƟve should observe the proofrolling operaƟons, and the
proofrolling vehicle should be loaded as directed by the engineer or approved representaƟve. Any area judged by the
engineer to rut, pump, or deflect excessively should be compacted in-place or, if necessary, undercut and replaced with
structural fill, compacted as specified below.
Care must be exercised during grading and fill placement operaƟons. The combinaƟon of heavy construcƟon equipment
traffic and excess surface moisture can cause pumping and deterioraƟon of the near surface soils. The severity of this
potenƟal problem depends to a great extent on the weather condiƟons prevailing during construcƟon. The contractor
must exercise discreƟon when selecƟng equipment sizes and also make a concerted effort to control construcƟon traffic
and surface water while the subgrade soils are exposed. It would be prudent to develop conƟngency plans for subgrade
stabilizaƟon or undercuƫng where it is determined by field observaƟon to be necessary.
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

RECOMMENDATIONS
O½— F®½½
Old fill was encountered in almost half of our boring locaƟons. Our limited exploraƟon data indicates the fill is not well
compacted. Deleterious materials consisƟng of organics and construcƟon were encountered at various depths within the
old fill. These materials could be present in other areas of the site. If our data are representaƟve of the fill mass, there is
risk of structurally significant seƩlement and cracking of fill supported foundaƟons and floors.
We recommend that backhoe pits be excavated prior to awarding the construcƟon contract to beƩer assess the extent,
thickness, and quality of old fill. A representaƟve of our firm should be present during the excavaƟons to evaluate the
materials.
The least risk opƟon is complete removal of all old fill and its replacement with new fill compacted to a specified degree.
Qualified personnel must be present to observe that all old fill is removed, and density tesƟng must be preformed as a
check that specified compacƟon is achieved. PorƟons of the excavated old fill may be reused for structural fill whereas the
materials meet the requirements of the subsequent secƟons of this report related to fill placement.
Eø‘ƒòƒã®ÊÄ CÊė®ã®ÊÄÝ
Mass grading with a Caterpillar Model D8K bulldozer/ripper or limited excavaƟon with a Caterpillar Model 977 front-end
loader will typically extend to the auger refusal depths shown on the test pits of the previous geotechnical report. Trench
excavaƟon with a Caterpillar Model 225 backhoe can generally extend to within several feet of the refusal depth. Deeper
excavaƟon typically requires blasƟng or the use of pneumaƟc tools. Because of the geologic condiƟons in this area, it is
possible to encounter large boulders, extensive rock lenses and rock pinnacles between of our borings. These materials may
be too large or competent to be excavated by the previously cited equipment and also may require excavaƟon by blasƟng or
pneumaƟc tools. During the design phase of this project, the finished elevaƟons for foundaƟons and uƟliƟes should be
compared by the designer to our refusal elevaƟons. If blasƟng is required, we recommend the blast depth extend a
minimum of 1 foot below the boƩom elevaƟons for the slab, foundaƟons, and uƟliƟes to facilitate their excavaƟon.
Rock excavaƟon can be defined in many ways. In our opinion, rock excavaƟon should be defined in a method specificaƟon
based on the grading equipment commonly used in the project's area. The Appendix contains a guideline rock excavaƟon
specificaƟon for your review.
S琦ك—› Sバ®½®þƒã®ÊÄ OÖã®ÊÄÝ
The exposed subgrade soil may exhibit instability due to the perched groundwater near the exisƟng detenƟon pond and
drainage feature area. A stone stabilizaƟon blanket placed over a geotexƟle fabric may be necessary to provide a stable
base for placing compacted soil. We suggest the use of washed No. 57 stone or aggregate base course (ABC stone). The
necessary thickness of the crushed-stone blanket must be determined in the field at the Ɵme of construcƟon. The stone
should be dumped in a stable area and then pushed out over the geotexƟle fabric with a light bulldozer. Because
saƟsfactory subgrade performance depends on effecƟve stabilizaƟon, placement of the stone blanket and geotexƟle must
be monitored on a full-Ɵme basis by a representaƟve of our firm.
Depending on the degree of soŌ soils encountered and Ɵme of year for construcƟon, the subgrade soils might be stabilized
with an iniƟal thick, uncompacted soil layer called a “bridging liŌ.” The soils used for the “bridging liŌ” should be near their
opƟmum moisture content. They should be off-loaded in a stable area and then pushed out in a single layer over the
unstable materials with a light bulldozer. The necessary thickness of the “bridging li Ō” should be determined in the field by
a representaƟve of our firm. AŌer a relaƟvely stable mass has been created, the surface of the bridging layer may be
compacted by a light sheep's foot roller. AŌer compacƟng this surface to the highest pracƟcal density, placement and
compacƟon of succeeding thin fill liŌs may begin. Typically, several feet of compacted fill should be placed with light
equipment before allowing dump truck or scraper traffic on the area. Placement of the bridging liŌ and compacƟon of the
fill above it must be monitored on a full-Ɵme basis by a representaƟve of our firm.
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

RECOMMENDATIONS
F®½½ P½ƒ‘›Ã›Äã
AŌer the site is stripped and evaluated, as previously discussed, structural fill should be placed to bring the building pads
and pavement areas to desired grade. Structural fill is defined as soil which is free of organics and deleterious material,
exhibits a plasƟcity index less than 25, has a maximum parƟcle size less than 6 inches, and is compacted to at least 95
percent of the soil’s maximum dry density as determined by the standard Proctor compacƟon test (ASTM D 698). Structural
fill should be placed and compacted in relaƟvely thin (six to eight inch maximum, loose) layers. We recommend compacƟng
the final foot of the building and pavement subgrade to 98 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density.
The on-site soils with high concentraƟons of deleterious materials and construcƟon debris will not be suitable for use as
structural fill nor for foundaƟon, floor slab or pavement support. These soils should be excavated and hauled o ffsite or
placed in nonstructural areas. We recommend that clean structural fill be placed within the proposed building and
pavement areas. The onsite low plasƟcity silty and/or sandy soils can be used for structural fill. Moisture adjustment
primarily consisƟng of drying the soils will be required to achieve a saƟsfactory degree of compacƟon. The potenƟals for
construcƟon difficulƟes for a project of this type are anƟcipated to be less if construcƟon is carried out during the dryer
months of the year.
Fill operaƟons should not begin unƟl representaƟve samples are collected and tested. The test results will be used to
determine whether the proposed fill material meets the criteria above and for quality control during grading. In-place
density tesƟng should be performed by qualified geotechnical personnel from our firm to check that the recommended
compacƟon criterion has been achieved. TesƟng should be performed on a full-Ɵme basis in the building and pavement
areas. For trench fill, a suggested will-call tesƟng frequency is one test for every 100 feet of uƟlity line backfill. Tests should
be performed on at least one foot verƟcal increments.
Excavated weathered rock fragments typically range from fine parƟcles through cobble and boulder size. The degree of
breakdown of the larger fragments during excavaƟon, placement, and compacƟon depends on rock type, degree of
weathering, and joint spacing. Weathered rock should be compacted with a heavy self-propelled sheepsfoot roller such as a
Caterpillar Model 815. This device usually can break down weathered rock to a gradaƟon compaƟble with both the maximum
parƟcle size criterion for structural fill and in-place density tesƟng. Weathered rock should be compacted to at least 95
percent of its standard Proctor maximum dry density.
Weathered rock that breaks into fragments less than about 6 inches in diameter can be used in compacted fill at depths more
than 3 and 5 feet, respecƟvely, beneath floor/pavement subgrades and boƩoms of building foundaƟons. Structural fill should
be placed between the coarse weathered rock and pavement or foundaƟon subgrades. We recommend that any coarse
graded weathered rock be thoroughly choked with graded aggregate before the area is brought to desired grade with
structural fill compacted to the recommended criterion.
Weathered rock that does not break down to 6 inches or less maximum parƟcle size can be used as fill in deeper parts of
pavement area fills or in non-structural areas. A maximum liŌ thickness of 1 foot is recommended for weathered rock with
parƟcles larger than 6 inches. If the weathered rock does not break down to a gradaƟon compaƟble with in-place density
tesƟng, then compacƟve effort should be applied unƟl there is no percepƟble increase in fragmentaƟon of the parƟcles or
observable consolidaƟon of the fill during repeated passes of the compacƟon equipment. Qualified geotechnical personnel
should be present to assess when this condiƟon has been achieved.
We recommend that qualified geotechnical personnel be present during grading to provide guidance for material placement
and to monitor the gradaƟon of weathered rock placed as fill. In some cases, our maximum parƟcle size guidelines can be
relaxed if the material can be compacted into a dense mass free of significant voids.
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

RECOMMENDATIONS
FÊçėƒã®ÊÄÝ
Our exploraƟon data indicates the proposed structures can be supported on convenƟonal shallow spread fooƟngs bearing
in undisturbed low plasƟcity residual soils or compacted structural fill overlaying suitable residual subgrade provided our
recommendaƟons presented in this report are implemented. The fat clay soils are not suitable for support of the proposed
structure. Please refer to the secƟon on expansive soils for further recommendaƟons.
A maximum allowable net soil bearing pressure of 3,000 psf may be used for sizing fooƟngs bearing in uniform foundaƟon
subgrade condiƟons. To provide suitable support for the foundaƟon, the soils at all foundaƟon locaƟons should be
undercut to allow the foundaƟons to bear on the undisturbed low plasƟcity residual soils or compacted structural fill over
suitable residual soils. Weathered rock pinnacles encountered within the foundaƟon excavaƟon should be over excavated
a minimum of 12 inches and backfilled back to the foundaƟon elevaƟon with masonry sand to help reduce the potenƟal for
differenƟal seƩlement. Regardless, the fooƟngs should bear at least 18 inches below exterior grade to extend below the
frost depth of roughly 1½ feet. If necessary, any over-excavaƟon can be backfilled to design bearing elevaƟon using
addiƟonal concrete.
The foundaƟons should be designed and constructed to maintain or promote constant moisture in the foundaƟon soils.
Drainage should be provided by surface grading and subsurface drains. Slopes should be adequate to promote rapid runoff
and to avoid collecƟng, near the structure, ponded water, which could migrate down the foundaƟon/soil interface.
Based on the exploraƟon data and our experience, we esƟmate that the total and differenƟal foundaƟon seƩlement under
similarly loaded foundaƟons should not exceed approximately 1 inch and 1/2 inch, respecƟvely. The majority of the
seƩlement will occur during and shortly aŌer the applicaƟon of the dead load. Careful field control during construcƟon
should reduce the actual seƩlement that occurs.
Even though computed fooƟng dimensions may be less, strip fooƟngs should be at least 18 inches wide and column
fooƟngs should be at least 24 inches wide. These dimensions will facilitate hand cleaning of the fooƟng subgrade and
placement of reinforcing steel. These dimensions also reduce the potenƟal for localized “punching” or shear failure
condiƟons from developing. We recommend selecƟvely removing any disturbed or water-soŌened soils from the fooƟng
excavaƟons before placing reinforcing steel.
All fooƟng excavaƟons must be evaluated by an Aardvark representaƟves prior to concrete placement to observe that the
exposed soils are consistent with the test results and the recommendaƟons already provided. The fooƟng excavaƟon
evaluaƟons are parƟcularly important due to the presence of the potenƟally expansive clay and weathered rock. Hand
auger borings with dynamic cone penetrometer tests should be performed in the fooƟng excavaƟons. If unsaƟsfactory
soils are encountered during the fooƟng evaluaƟons, undercuƫng of this material will be required. We may recommend
that the undercut volumes are backfilled with addiƟonal concrete as indicated above.
FooƟng subgrade soils will soŌen if exposed to weather extremes. If fooƟng concrete cannot be placed the same day as the
excavaƟons are completed and evaluated, the excavaƟons should be covered with polyethylene sheeƟng or a thin concrete
“mud mat” aŌer they have been checked by our personnel. If these protecƟve measures are not implemented, over-
excavaƟon of disturbed soil may be necessary.
S›®Ýî‘ S®ã› C½ƒÝÝ®¥®‘ƒã®ÊÄ
We have reviewed the procedures outlined in Chapter 16 of the 2018 North Carolina Building Code. Based on the
subsurface data obtained by our exploraƟon and our site specific knowledge of the exisƟng geologic condiƟons, the soil
types at this site form a “sƟff” soil profile with an average N of less than 50 blow per foot and a site classificaƟon of “D” can
be assigned to the site for seismic design purposes pursuant to Chapter 16 of the Code.

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

RECOMMENDATIONS
R›ãƒ®Ä®Ä¦ ƒÄ— B›½Êó Gك—› Wƒ½½ PƒÙƒÃ›ã›ÙÝ
We understand that below grade walls and retaining values may be installed and must be capable of resisƟng lateral earth
pressures imposed on them. Lateral earth pressures to be resisted by the wall will be parƟally dependent upon the
method of construcƟon. Where the walls are laterally restrained at the top, we recommend designing them using the at-
rest earth pressure condiƟon. Passive earth pressure of soil adjacent to the fooƟng, as well as soil fricƟon at the fooƟng
base, may be used to resist sliding.
The soil behind the walls is assumed to exert a triangular stress distribuƟon which can be modeled in terms of an
“equivalent fluid” for these earth pressure condiƟons. If a uniform area surcharge acts behind the wall, a porƟon of the
surcharge is transferred to the wall in the form of a uniform or rectangular stress distribu Ɵon. The magnitude of the
surcharge load transferred to the wall is a funcƟon of the soil’s strength and the degree of deflecƟon or rotaƟon
permissible and is computed by mulƟplying the soil’s “earth pressure coefficient” by the magnitude of the surcharge.
The residual soil encountered in the borings (minus organics) appears saƟsfactory for use as wall backfill, although some
moisture adjustment (weƫng or drying) will be required to achieve a saƟsfactory degree of compacƟon. We recommend
that any addiƟonal imported fill to consist of silty sand or sandy silt with a bulk unit weight of approximately 115 pounds
per cubic foot and an angle of internal fricƟon (phi) of at least 26 degrees. Laboratory tesƟng should be performed on the
selected backfill materials to confirm these parameters prior to use.
We have esƟmated earth pressure coefficients (k) and equivalent fluid unit weights of the on site residual soil based on the
results of the soil test borings and the above assumpƟons, and the esƟmated values are contained in the following table.
These recommended design parameters assume that fill behind the walls is horizontal, and that the fill is well drained (to
prevent hydrostaƟc pressures from imposing addiƟonal stress to the wall). These parameters also assume that fill placed
behind the walls is compacted as structural fill (as defined in the above secƟon “Fill Placement”).
Lateral Earth Pressure Parameters

If the wall backfill is not properly placed and compacted as recommended, higher pressures than the recommended soil
pressures might be imposed on the walls. Light, hand-operated compacƟon equipment should be used within 6 feet of the
walls to reduce the risk of overstressing the walls, or the walls must be designed to resist the stresses imposed by large
compacƟon equipment.
An ulƟmate fricƟon coefficient of 0.40 can be assumed between the concrete fooƟng and the underlying residual soils. For
compuƟng soil fricƟon at the fooƟng base, the residual soil placed above the fooƟng as fill can be assumed to have a unit
weight of 115 pcf. We suggest that factor of at least 2 be used to assess wall stability and to calculate restraining forces.
f = 26 EsƟmated Angle of Internal FricƟon
Ko = 0.56 At Rest Earth Pressure Coefficient (Non-yielding Walls)
Ka = 0.39 AcƟve Earth Pressure Coefficient (Yielding Walls)
Kp = 2.56 Passive Earth Pressure Coefficient
Tan d = 0.40 FricƟon Factor for Sliding Resistance
g = 115 Moist Soil Unit Weight
geff = 65 EffecƟve Fluid Unit Weight (At Rest)
geff = 45 EffecƟve Fluid Unit Weight (AcƟve)
geff = 295 EffecƟve Fluid Unit Weight (Passive)
C = 100 EsƟmate of Cohesion (psf)
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

RECOMMENDATIONS
S½ƒÝ-ÊÄ-Gك—›
The floor slab subgrades for the proposed building should be excavated to firm low plasƟcity residual soil or placed on
suitable structural fill. Drainage should be provided by surface grading and subsurface drains. Slopes should be adequate to
promote rapid runoff and to avoid collecƟng, near the structure, ponded water, which could migrate down the foundaƟon/
soil interface.
As previously discussed, no extraordinary performance criteria have been specified for the floor slab. The floor slabs should
be structurally separate from the foundaƟons to reduce the possibility of slab cracking due to minor differenƟal seƩlement.
It is recommended that all floor slabs be designed as "floaƟng," that is, fully ground supported and not structurally
connected to walls or foundaƟons. This is to minimize the possibility of cracking and displacement of the floor slab because
of differenƟal movements between the slab and the foundaƟon. Although the movements are esƟmated to be within the
tolerable limits for structural safety, such movements could be detrimental to the slabs if they were rigidly connected to
the foundaƟons.
Both a granular drainage layer and a vapor barrier are opƟonal; however, there are benefits to this construcƟon pracƟce.
An under slab granular drainage layer may reduce the tendency for disturbance of the subgrade under traffic during slab
construcƟon, and an effecƟve vapor barrier (such as Moistop) will reduce moisture transmission through the slab due to
the natural moisture content of the soil. Also, both ACI and PCA recommend installing a 3 to 4 inch aggregate layer
(compacted graded aggregate base) on top of the vapor barrier to reduce the potenƟal for slab curling.
Pƒò›Ã›ÄãÝ
A detailed design of pavement thicknesses was beyond our authorized scope of services for this project. We would be
pleased to perform addiƟonal tesƟng and analysis to provide pavement thickness recommendaƟons if desired. We
recommend thickness and density tesƟng on the stone base and asphalt pavement during placement to assess whether the
paving secƟons meet specificaƟons.
The pavement subgrades should be excavated to firm low plasƟcity residual soil or suitable structural fill. Drainage should
be provided by surface grading and subsurface drains. Slopes should be adequate to promote rapid runoff and to avoid
collecƟng on the pavements ponded water, which could migrate through the pavements to the soil. The pavements may be
convenƟonally soil supported on low plasƟcity residual soil and/or new structural fill provided that the recommendaƟons
regarding site preparaƟon and fill placement have been followed. The contractor will need to exercise extreme care during
the grading and fill placement acƟviƟes in order to achieve the necessary subgrade soil support for the pavement system.
Experience has shown that most asphalt or crushed stone pavement failures are caused by localized soŌ spots in the
subgrade or inadequate drainage. Proofrolling by the geotechnical engineer will greatly reduce the incidence of weak spots
in the subgrade as discussed earlier. However, the civil design must include proper drainage to reduce so Ōening of the
subgrade, soil migraƟon, and pumping failures. The pavement surface and subgrade should have a minimum slope of 1½
percent. Any isolated areas that experience premature failure should be promptly repaired to prevent widespread
problems from occurring due to loading and water infiltraƟon. The pavement surfaces should be finished and sloped for
posiƟve drainage. Good perimeter drainage around the pavements is also recommended.
Any fill placed in pavement areas should be compacted to the recommended criteria. We recommend that the pavement
subgrades be proofrolled just before pavement construcƟon to help detect any soils disturbed due to weather extremes or
construcƟon acƟviƟes. We also recommend that qualified geotechnical personnel from our firm perform in-place density
tests and check the installed thickness of the aggregate materials. The technician can also monitor the placement and
compacƟon of the asphalƟc concrete and obtain periodic specimens for determinaƟon of the asphalƟc cement content,
aggregate gradaƟon, Marshall Stability and density.

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

RECOMMENDATIONS
S½Ê֛ R›‘ÊÃÛėƒã®ÊÄÝ
Permanent cut and fill slopes should be inclined no steeper than 3H:1V and temporary slopes no steeper than 2H:1V.
These recommendaƟons are based on our experience with similar condiƟons since a detailed stability analysis was not
performed to jusƟfy steeper slopes. FooƟngs on or adjacent to slope surfaces should be founded in material with an
embedment and setback from the slope surface sufficient to provide verƟcal and lateral support for the fooƟng without
detrimental seƩlement in accordance with the North Carolina Building Code. At a minimum, we recommend a building
setback of at least 15 feet from the tops of all slopes or the verƟcal height of the slope, whichever provides the greatest
distance from the top of the slope. We also cauƟon against installing drop inlets, storm sewer lines, roof drains, etc. at the
crest of the slopes, where possible leakage may create maintenance problems or possible slope failure. The crest area
should be sloped to prevent surface water run-off from flowing over the slope face.
It is difficult to construct soil fill slopes to the specified inclinaƟon without creaƟng a loose poorly compacted zone near the
slope face. For this reason, we recommend that the fill slopes be slightly over-built, then cut back to firm, well compacted
soils prior to applying a vegetaƟve cover. If the slopes cannot be slightly over-built and cut back, we recommend that the
finished soil slope be tracked by an end loader parallel to the slope face to reduce, as much as pracƟcal, this soŌ surficial
veneer. Fill placed in embankments should be placed and compacted in similar manner as that recommended in the
secƟon above Ɵtled “Fill Placement”.
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com

ENGINEERS, IN C

Appendices

Site Photographs
Field ExploraƟon
Reference InformaƟon

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com

ENGINEERS, IN C

Site Photographs

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135 Phone [phone]
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211 Fax [phone]
www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

Site Photographs
View of boring locaƟon HA-1
View of boring locaƟon HA-3
View of boring locaƟon HA-2

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135 Phone [phone]
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211 Fax [phone]
www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

Site Photographs
View of boring locaƟon HA-4
View of boring locaƟon HA-6
View of boring locaƟon HA-5

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135 Phone [phone]
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211 Fax [phone]
www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

Site Photographs
View of boring locaƟon HA-7
View of boring locaƟon HA-9
View of boring locaƟon HA-8

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135 Phone [phone]
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211 Fax [phone]
www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

Site Photographs
View of boring locaƟon HA-10
View of boring locaƟon HA-12
View of boring locaƟon HA-11

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135 Phone [phone]
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211 Fax [phone]
www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

Site Photographs
View of boring locaƟon HA-13
View of boring locaƟon HA-15
View of boring locaƟon HA-14

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135 Phone [phone]
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211 Fax [phone]
www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

Site Photographs
View of boring locaƟon HA-16
View of boring locaƟon HA-18
View of boring locaƟon HA-17

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135 Phone [phone]
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211 Fax [phone]
www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

Site Photographs
View of boring locaƟon HA-19
View detenƟon basin located between boring
locaƟons HA-12 and HA-15
View of boring locaƟon HA-20

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135 Phone [phone]
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211 Fax [phone]
www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

Site Photographs
View of exisƟng concrete pad near boring
locaƟons HA-7 and HA-10
Overall view of the area for the proposed building
and demonstraƟon pad
View of exisƟng drainage feature from the
detenƟon basin located near the proposed
demonstraƟon pad
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com

ENGINEERS, IN C

Field ExploraƟon

Boring LocaƟon Plan
PotenƟal Old Fill
Auger Refusal LocaƟons
Boring Logs
NRCS Soil Survey Report

ENGINEERS, IN C
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
DATE:
SHEET:
SCALE:
DRAWN BY:
BORING LOCATION PLAN
SENNEBOGEN SERVICE CENTER
1957 SENNEBOGEN TRAIL
STANLEY, NORTH CAROLINA
7/27/2023
WJS
N.T.S.
G-1
Approximate Hand Auger Boring LocaƟon
REFERENCE: This plan was prepared using the architectural site layout provided by S.C. Hondros & Associates dated 5/22/2023.
LEGEND
N
HA-2 HA-1
HA-3
HA-5
HA-4
HA-12
HA-20
HA-11
HA-6 HA-7
HA-10
HA-13
HA-8 HA-9
HA-17
HA-16 HA-15 HA-14
HA-19 HA-18
ENGINEERS, IN C
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
DATE:
SHEET:
SCALE:
DRAWN BY:
POTENTIAL OLD FILL
SENNEBOGEN SERVICE CENTER
1957 SENNEBOGEN TRAIL
STANLEY, NORTH CAROLINA
8/14/2023
KCM
N.T.S.
G-2
Approximate Hand Auger Boring LocaƟon
REFERENCE: This plan was prepared using the architectural site layout provided by S.C. Hondros & Associates dated 5/22/2023.
LEGEND
N
HA-2 HA-1
HA-3
HA-5
HA-4
HA-12
HA-20
HA-11
HA-6 HA-7
HA-10
HA-13
HA-8 HA-9
HA-17
HA-16 HA-15 HA-14
HA-19 HA-18
Approximate Old Fill LocaƟon
ENGINEERS, IN C
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
DATE:
SHEET:
SCALE:
DRAWN BY:
AUGER REFUSAL LOCATIONS
SENNEBOGEN SERVICE CENTER
1957 SENNEBOGEN TRAIL
STANLEY, NORTH CAROLINA
8/14/2023
KCM
N.T.S.
G-3
Approximate Hand Auger Boring LocaƟon
REFERENCE: This plan was prepared using the architectural site layout provided by S.C. Hondros & Associates dated 5/22/2023.
LEGEND
N
HA-2 HA-1
HA-3
HA-5
HA-4
HA-12
HA-20
HA-11
HA-6 HA-7
HA-10
HA-13
HA-8 HA-9
HA-17
HA-16 HA-15 HA-14
HA-19 HA-18
Approximate Auger Refusal LocaƟons
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
OL 1 100 3 - 2 - 2 2
2 100 4 - 4 - 4 4
3 100 4 - 5 - 8 6
4 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
5 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
(Page 1 of 1)
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: Not Encountered
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
After Drilling
DESCRIPTIONDe
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Sample Type
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
00 TOPSOIL (Approximately 4 inches)
5-5
OLD FILL - Moist very loose tan and gray silty
coarse to fine SAND
OLD FILL - Moist very loose gray and tan silty
coarse to fine SAND with rock fragments
OLD FILL - Wet firm tan and gray sandy SILT
SM
ML
SM
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135 HAND AUGER HA-1
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
P: [phone] F: [phone]
15 -15
10 -10
RESIDUAL - Moist very stiff gray and tan
sandy SILT with fragmented rock
ML
AUGER REFUSAL ON DENSE RESIDUAL SOIL
Bottom of borehole at 8 feet
ENGINEERS, IN C
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
OL 1 100 5 - 9 - 13 11
2 100 20 - 25 - 25 25
3 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
4 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
5 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
(Page 1 of 1)
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: Not Encountered
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
After Drilling
DESCRIPTIONDe
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Sample Type
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
5-5
AUGER REFUSAL ON DENSE RESIDUAL SOIL
00 TOPSOIL (Approximately 6 inches)
ML
RESIDUAL - Moist stiff to very stiff tan and
gray sandy SILT with fragmented rock
Moist very stiff gray and tan sandy SILT with
fragmented rock
ML
10 -10
15 -15
HAND AUGER HA-2
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
P: [phone] F: [phone]
Bottom of borehole at 8 feet
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
ENGINEERS, IN C
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
OL 1 100 9 - 8 - 8 8
2 100 3 - 2 - 4 3
3 100 5 - 6 - 7 6
4 100 20 - 21 - 23 22
5 100 21 - 25 - 25 25
6 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
(Page 1 of 1)
HAND AUGER HA-3
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
P: [phone] F: [phone]
OLD FILL - Moist firm to soft tan and red
sandy SILT
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
OLD FILL - Moist firm tan and red sandy SILT
with organics
ML
BORING TERMINATED
Bottom of borehole at 10 feet
15 -15
5
10 -10
ML
00 TOPSOIL (Approximately 4 inches)
-5
ML
RESIDUAL - Moist very stiff tan and red sandy
SILT
ML
Moist very stiff tan and gray sandy SILT
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
After Drilling
DESCRIPTION
Sample Type
De
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: Not Encountered
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
ENGINEERS, IN C
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
1 100 16 - 16 - 17 16
2 100 7 - 6 - 8 7
3 100 11 - 14 - 13 13
4 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
5 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
6 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
(Page 1 of 1)
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: Not Encountered
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
After Drilling
DESCRIPTIONDe
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Sample Type
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
HAND AUGER HA-4
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
00 OLD FILL - Moist very stiff red and gray sandy
SILT with organics
ML
RESIDUAL - Moist very stiff red and tan sandy
micaceous SILT with fragmented rock
OLD FILL - Moist firm to stiff red and tan
clayey SILT with trace construction debris
ML
ML
P: [phone] F: [phone]
5-5
10 -10 BORING TERMINATED
Bottom of borehole at 10 feet
15 -15
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
ENGINEERS, IN C
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
OL 1 100 16 - 14 - 17 15
2 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
3 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
4 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
5 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
(Page 1 of 1)
HAND AUGER HA-5
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
P: [phone] F: [phone]
ML
RESIDUAL - Moist stiff red and tan sandy SILT
Bottom of borehole at 8 feet
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
10 -10
15 -15
5-5
AUGER REFUSAL ON DENSE RESIDUAL SOIL
Moist very stiff gray and tan sandy SILT with
fragmented rock
ML
00 TOPSOIL (Approximately 4 inches)
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
After Drilling
DESCRIPTION
Sample Type
De
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: Not Encountered
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
ENGINEERS, IN C
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
OL 1 100 5 - 5 - 6 5
2 100 4 - 3 - 4 3
3 100 3 - 2 - 4 3
4 100 4 - 3 - 3 3
5 100 16 - 17 - 18 17
6 100 14 - 15 - 14 14
(Page 1 of 1)
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: Not Encountered
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
After Drilling
DESCRIPTIONDe
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Sample Type
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
00 TOPSOIL (Approximately 3 inches)
ML
OLD FILL - Moist firm brown and red sandy
SILT
Bottom of borehole at 10 feet
ML
OLD FILL - Moist soft red and tan clayey SILT
ML
OLD FILL - Very moist soft gray and tan sandy
SILT with organics
5-5
10 -10 BORING TERMINATED
OLD FILL - Moist very stiff red and gray clayey
SILT with organics
RESIDUAL - Moist stiff red and tan clayey SILT
ML
ML
15 -15
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135 HAND AUGER HA-6
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
P: [phone] F: [phone]
ENGINEERS, IN C
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
OL 1 100 3 - 2 - 3 2
2 100 2 - 1 - 2 1
3 100 1 - 1 - 2 1
4 100 4 - 2 - 5 3
5 100 4 - 5 - 4 4
6 100 3 - 3 - 5 4
(Page 1 of 1)
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: Not Encountered
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
De
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
After Drilling
DESCRIPTION
Sample Type
00 TOPSOIL (Approximately 7 inches)
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
HAND AUGER HA-7
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
P: [phone] F: [phone]
5-5
10 -10 BORING TERMINATED
OLD FILL - Very moist soft tan and red clayey
SILT with trace organics
Bottom of borehole at 10 feet
15 -15
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
ML
OLD FILL - Very moist soft red and tan clayey
SILT
ML
OLD FILL - Very moist soft to very soft red and
tan clayey SILT with rock fragments and trace
organics
ML
ENGINEERS, IN C
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
OL 1 100 21 - 23 - 25 24
2 100 20 - 25 - 25 25
3 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
4 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
5 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
(Page 1 of 1)
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: Not Encountered
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
After Drilling
DESCRIPTIONDe
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Sample Type
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
AUGER REFUSAL ON DENSE RESIDUAL SOIL
00 TOPSOIL (Approximately 2 inches)
ML
RESIDUAL - Moist very stiff red and tan sandy
SILT
ML
Moist very stiff tan and gray sandy SILT with
fragmented rock
5-5
10 -10
15 -15
HAND AUGER HA-8
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
P: [phone] F: [phone]
Bottom of borehole at 8 feet
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
ENGINEERS, IN C
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
OL 1 100 19 - 25 - 25 25
2 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
3 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
4 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
5 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
(Page 1 of 1)
HAND AUGER HA-9
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
P: [phone] F: [phone]
Bottom of borehole at 8 feet
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
10 -10
15 -15
AUGER REFUSAL ON DENSE RESIDUAL SOIL
00 TOPSOIL (Approximately 4 inches)
ML
RESIDUAL - Moist very stiff tan and red sandy
SILT
ML
Moist very stiff tan and gray sandy SILT with
fragmented rock
5-5
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
After Drilling
DESCRIPTIONDe
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Sample Type
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: Not Encountered
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
ENGINEERS, IN C
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
OL 1 100 7 - 8 - 10 9
2 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
3 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
4 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
5 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
6 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
(Page 1 of 1)
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: Not Encountered
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
After Drilling
DESCRIPTIONDe
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Sample Type
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
ML
00 TOPSOIL (Approximately 1 inch)
ML
OLD FILL - Moist stiff gray and red sandy SILT
with rock fragments
HAND AUGER HA-10
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
P: [phone] F: [phone]
RESIDUAL - Moist very stiff gray and tan
sandy SILT with fragmented rock
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
BORING TERMINATED
Bottom of borehole at 10 feet
15 -15
5-5
10 -10
ENGINEERS, IN C
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
OL 1 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
2 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
3 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
4 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
(Page 1 of 1)
HAND AUGER HA-11
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
P: [phone] F: [phone]
Bottom of borehole at 6 feet
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
10 -10
15 -15
AUGER REFUSAL ON DENSE RESIDUAL SOIL
00 TOPSOIL (Approximately 4 inches)
ML
RESIDUAL - Moist very stiff tan and red sandy
SILT with fragmented rock
ML
Moist very stiff gray and tan sandy SILT with
fragmented rock
5-5
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
After Drilling
DESCRIPTIONDe
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Sample Type
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: Not Encountered
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
ENGINEERS, IN C
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
OL 1 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
2 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
3 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
4 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
5 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
(Page 1 of 1)
HAND AUGER HA-12
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
P: [phone] F: [phone]
Bottom of borehole at 8 feet
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
10 -10
15 -15
AUGER REFUSAL ON DENSE RESIDUAL SOIL
00 TOPSOIL (Approximately 4 inches)
ML
RESIDUAL - Moist very stiff tan and red sandy
SILT with fragmented rock
ML
Moist very stiff tan and gray sandy SILT
5-5
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
After Drilling
DESCRIPTIONDe
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Sample Type
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: Not Encountered
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
ENGINEERS, IN C
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
OL 1 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
2 100 20 - 25 - 25 25
3 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
4 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
5 100 20 - 19 - 21 20
(Page 1 of 1)
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: Not Encountered
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
After Drilling
DESCRIPTIONDe
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Sample Type
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
AUGER REFUSAL ON DENSE RESIDUAL SOIL
00 TOPSOIL (Approximately 6 inches)
ML
RESIDUAL - Moist very stiff tan and red sandy
SILT
ML
Moist very stiff tan and gray sandy SILT with
fragmented rock
5-5
10 -10
15 -15
HAND AUGER HA-13
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
P: [phone] F: [phone]
Bottom of borehole at 8 feet
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
ENGINEERS, IN C
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
OL 1 100 14 - 8 - 5 6
2 100 4 - 4 - 4 4
3 100 6 - 5 - 4 4
4 100 10 - 11 - 11 11
5 100 10 - 11 - 11 11
6 100 10 - 10 - 12 11
(Page 1 of 1)
HAND AUGER HA-14
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
P: [phone] F: [phone]
ML
RESIDUAL - Very moist stiff red and tan sandy
micaceous SILT
BORING TERMINATED
Bottom of borehole at 10 feet
15 -15
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
5-5
10 -10
ML
OLD FILL - Wet soft gray and tan sandy SILT
ML
OLD FILL - Very moist soft red and tan clayey
SILT with rock fragments
00 TOPSOIL (Approximately 2 inches)
ML
OLD FILL - Moist firm red and tan sandy SILT
with trace organics
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
After Drilling
DESCRIPTIONDe
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Sample Type
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: 10 feet
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
ENGINEERS, IN C
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
OL 1 100 13 - 14 - 15 14
2 100 9 - 12 - 12 12
3 100 14 - 15 - 14 14
4 100 15 - 14 - 13 13
5 100 12 - 11 - 13 12
6 100 11 - 11 - 12 11
(Page 1 of 1)
HAND AUGER HA-15
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
P: [phone] F: [phone]
OLD FILL - Moist stiff red and tan sandy SILT
with rock fragments and trace organics
RESIDUAL - Moist stiff red and tan sandy
micaceous SILT
BORING TERMINATED
Bottom of borehole at 10 feet
15 -15
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
5-5
ML
Moist stiff tan and red sandy micaceous SILT
10 -10
ML
ML
00 TOPSOIL (Approximately 2 inches)
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
After Drilling
DESCRIPTIONDe
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Sample Type
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: Not Encountered
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
ENGINEERS, IN C
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
OL 1 100 13 - 11 - 14 12
2 100 17 - 19 - 10 14
3 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
4 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
(Page 1 of 1)
HAND AUGER HA-16
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
P: [phone] F: [phone]
OLD FILL - Moist stiff tan and red sandy SILT
RESIDUAL - Moist very stiff red and tan sandy
SILT
Bottom of borehole at 6 feet
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
10 -10
15 -15
5-5
AUGER REFUSAL ON DENSE RESIDUAL SOIL
ML
ML
00 TOPSOIL (Approximately 3 inches)
ML
OLD FILL - Moist stiff red and tan sandy SILT
with rock fragments and trace organics
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
After Drilling
DESCRIPTIONDe
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Sample Type
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: Not Encountered
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
ENGINEERS, IN C
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
1 100 6 - 4 - 5 4
2 100 11 - 11 - 13 12
3 100 15 - 16 - 18 17
4 100 15 - 16 - 17 16
5 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
6 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
(Page 1 of 1)
ML
RESIDUAL - Moist very stiff red and tan sandy
micaceous SILT with fragmented rock
ML
HAND AUGER HA-17
P: [phone] F: [phone]
OLD FILL - Wet stiff red and tan clayey
micaceous SILT with organics
BORING TERMINATED
Bottom of borehole at 10 feet
15 -15
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
5-5
10 -10
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
00
ML
OLD FILL - Very moist soft gray and red sandy
SILT with organics
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
After Drilling
DESCRIPTIONDe
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Sample Type
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: Not Encountered
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
ENGINEERS, IN C
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
1 100 6 - 8 - 12 10
2 100 15 - 25 - 25 25
3 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
4 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
5 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
6 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
(Page 1 of 1)
15 -15
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135 HAND AUGER HA-18
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
P: [phone] F: [phone]
5-5
10 -10 BORING TERMINATED
Bottom of borehole at 10 feet
ML
RESIDUAL - Moist very stiff red and tan clayey
SILT
ML
Moist very stiff red and black clayey SILT
00
ML
OLD FILL - Moist soft gray and tan sandy SILT
with organics
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
After Drilling
DESCRIPTIONDe
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Sample Type
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: Not Encountered
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
ENGINEERS, IN C
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
1 100 16 - 16 - 16 16
2 100 16 - 18 - 19 18
3 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
4 100 18 - 20 - 25 22
5 100 21 - 25 - 25 25
6 100 25 - 25 - 25 25
(Page 1 of 1)
15 -15
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135 HAND AUGER HA-19
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
P: [phone] F: [phone]
Bottom of borehole at 10 feet
RESIDUAL - Moist very stiff red and tan clayey
SILT
ML
00
ML
OLD FILL - Moist very stiff red and tan sandy
SILT with organics
5-5
10 -10 BORING TERMINATED
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
After Drilling
DESCRIPTIONDe
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Sample Type
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: Not Encountered
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
ENGINEERS, IN C
Split Spoon
Auger Probe
Undisturbed
Rock Core
0 10 20 30
OL 1 100 13 - 13 - 15 14
2 100 18 - 20 - 20 20
3 100 16 - 18 - 17 17
4 100 18 - 16 - 18 17
5 100 15 - 16 - 17 16
6 100 15 - 16 - 17 16
(Page 1 of 1)
HAND AUGER HA-20
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
P: [phone] F: [phone]
BORING TERMINATED
Bottom of borehole at 10 feet
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
5-5
ML
Moist very stiff red and black clayey SILT
10 -10
RESIDUAL - Moist very stiff red and tan clayey
SILT
ML
15 -15
00 TOPSOIL (Approximately 3 inches)
ML
OLD FILL - Moist stiff tan and red sandy SILT
Blow Count
Graph
At Time of Drilling
At End of Drilling
Water Levels
Sa
m
p
l
e

N
u
m
b
e
r
Sa
m
p
l
e

T
y
p
e
Sa
m
p
l
e

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
Blow Counts N
V
a
l
u
e
After Drilling
DESCRIPTIONDe
p
t
h

i
n

F
e
e
t
Su
r
f
a
c
e

E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Wa
t
e
r

L
e
v
e
l
US
C
S
GR
A
P
H
I
C
Sample Type
Logged By J. Sipe After Drilling
: Not Encountered
Checked By K. McTier Caved Depth
: Not Encountered
Drilling Method Hand Auger At Time of Drilling
: Not Encountered
At End of Drilling : Not Encountered
Drilling Contractor Aardvark Engineers
Drilling Rig Hand Auger Ground Water Levels
Depth Below Surface
Client S.C. Hondros & Associates Date Started 7/24/2023
Project Name Sennebogen Service Date Completed 7/28/2023
Project Location Stanley, North Carolina Auger Diameter
3"
Notes Elev. are approximate
ENGINEERS, IN C
United States
Department of
Agriculture
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Lincoln County,
North Carolina
1957 Stennebogen Trail
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
July 17, 2023
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.
They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information
about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for
many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban
planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.
Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste
disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand,
protect, or enhance the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil
properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.
The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of
soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for
identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some
cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/
portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering
applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center
(https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil
Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/?
cid=nrcs142p2_053951).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as
septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to
basements or underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States
Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its
programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability,
and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion,
sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a
part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not
all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require
2
alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print,
audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at [phone] (voice
and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of
Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or
call [phone] (voice) or [phone] (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity
provider and employer.
3
Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2
How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5
Soil Map..................................................................................................................8
Soil Map................................................................................................................9
Legend................................................................................................................10
Map Unit Legend................................................................................................11
Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11
Lincoln County, North Carolina.......................................................................13
CeB2—Cecil sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, moderately eroded..13
PeC2—Pacolet sandy clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, moderately
eroded...................................................................................................14
WyC—Wynott-Winnsboro-Rowan complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes...........15
WyD—Wynott-Winnsboro-Rowan complex, 15 to 25 percent slopes.........17
Soil Information for All Uses...............................................................................20
Soil Reports........................................................................................................20
AOI Inventory..................................................................................................20
Map Unit Description (Brief, Generated).....................................................20
Land Classifications........................................................................................23
Taxonomic Classification of the Soils..........................................................23
Soil Physical Properties..................................................................................25
Engineering Properties................................................................................25
References............................................................................................................34
4
How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous
areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous
areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and
limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length,
and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and
native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil
profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The
profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the
soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is
devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other
biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource
areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that
share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water
resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey
areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that
is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the
area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind
of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and
miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific
segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they
were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict
with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a
specific location on the landscape.
Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their
characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil
scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only
a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented
by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to
verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They
noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock
fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them
to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their
properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil
characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for
comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic
classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character
of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil
5
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the
individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that
they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and
research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the
objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that
have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a
unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable
proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components
of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way
diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such
landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite
investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of
mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape,
and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the
soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at
specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller
number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.
These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color,
depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for
content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil
typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of
characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct
measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit
component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other
properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally
are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists
interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed
characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the
soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through
observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.
Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new
interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other
sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of
specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management
are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same
kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on
such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over
long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example,
soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will
have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict
that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the
survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and
Custom Soil Resource Report
6
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings,
fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.
Custom Soil Resource Report
7
Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of
soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
8
9
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
39
1
9
5
6
0
39
1
9
6
2
0
39
1
9
6
8
0
39
1
9
7
4
0
39
1
9
8
0
0
39
1
9
8
6
0
39
1
9
9
2
0
39
1
9
5
6
0
39
1
9
6
2
0
39
1
9
6
8
0
39
1
9
7
4
0
39
1
9
8
0
0
39
1
9
8
6
0
39
1
9
9
2
0
498080 498140 498200 498260 498320 498380 498440 498500 498560 498620 498680
498080 498140 498200 498260 498320 498380 498440 498500 498560 498620 498680
35° 25' 22'' N
81
°

1
'

1
7
'
'

W
35° 25' 22'' N
81
°

0
'

5
1
'
'

W
35° 25' 9'' N
81
°

1
'

1
7
'
'

W
35° 25' 9'' N
81
°

0
'

5
1
'
'

W
N
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 17N WGS84
0 100 200 400 600
Feet
0 40 80 160 240
Meters
Map Scale: 1:2,950 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.
Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Lincoln County, North Carolina
Survey Area Data: Version 27, Sep 12, 2022
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Apr 22, 2022—May
10, 2022
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Custom Soil Resource Report
10
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
CeB2 Cecil sandy clay loam, 2 to 8
percent slopes, moderately
eroded
16.0 50.2%
PeC2 Pacolet sandy clay loam, 8 to
15 percent slopes,
moderately eroded
7.3 23.0%
WyC Wynott-Winnsboro-Rowan
complex, 8 to 15 percent
slopes
6.1 19.0%
WyD Wynott-Winnsboro-Rowan
complex, 15 to 25 percent
slopes
2.5 7.8%
Totals for Area of Interest 31.9 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along
with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They
generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the
scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas
are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a
given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit
descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor
components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not
mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it
Custom Soil Resource Report
11
was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and
miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the
usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate
pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or
landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The
delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however,
onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous
areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil
properties and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major
horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness,
salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the
basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas
shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase
commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha
silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.
The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar
in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present
or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered
practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The
pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat
similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas
that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion
of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can
be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made
up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil
material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
Custom Soil Resource Report
12
Lincoln County, North Carolina
CeB2—Cecil sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, moderately eroded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2mw6d
Elevation: 200 to 1,400 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 37 to 60 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 66 degrees F
Frost-free period: 200 to 240 days
Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Cecil, moderately eroded, and similar soils:88 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Cecil, Moderately Eroded
Setting
Landform:Interfluves
Landform position (two-dimensional):Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional):Interfluve
Down-slope shape:Convex
Across-slope shape:Convex
Parent material:Saprolite derived from granite and gneiss and/or schist
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 6 inches: sandy clay loam
Bt - 6 to 40 inches: clay
BC - 40 to 48 inches: clay loam
C - 48 to 80 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope:2 to 8 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: F136XY820GA - Acidic upland forest, moist
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
13
PeC2—Pacolet sandy clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, moderately
eroded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2mw6n
Elevation: 200 to 1,400 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 37 to 60 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 66 degrees F
Frost-free period: 200 to 240 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance
Map Unit Composition
Pacolet, moderately eroded, and similar soils:85 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Pacolet, Moderately Eroded
Setting
Landform:Hillslopes on ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional):Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional):Side slope
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Convex
Parent material:Saprolite derived from granite and gneiss and/or schist
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 7 inches: sandy clay loam
Bt - 7 to 24 inches: clay
B - 24 to 33 inches: sandy clay loam
C - 33 to 80 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope:8 to 15 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.5 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: F136XY820GA - Acidic upland forest, moist
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
14
WyC—Wynott-Winnsboro-Rowan complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2mdlb
Elevation: 200 to 1,400 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 37 to 60 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 66 degrees F
Frost-free period: 200 to 240 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance
Map Unit Composition
Wynott and similar soils:35 percent
Winnsboro and similar soils:30 percent
Rowan and similar soils:25 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Wynott
Setting
Landform:Interfluves
Landform position (two-dimensional):Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional):Interfluve
Down-slope shape:Convex
Across-slope shape:Convex
Parent material:Saprolite derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase
and/or gneiss
Typical profile
A - 0 to 4 inches: sandy loam
E - 4 to 14 inches: sandy loam
Bt - 14 to 24 inches: clay
BC - 24 to 28 inches: sandy clay loam
Cr - 28 to 80 inches: weathered bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope:8 to 15 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Very low to moderately
high (0.00 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Ecological site: F136XY730SC - Basic upland forest, dry
Custom Soil Resource Report
15
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Winnsboro
Setting
Landform:Hillslopes on ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional):Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional):Side slope
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Convex
Parent material:Saprolite derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase
and/or gneiss
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 8 inches: fine sandy loam
BA - 8 to 11 inches: clay loam
Bt - 11 to 32 inches: clay
C/Bt - 32 to 37 inches: clay loam
C - 37 to 60 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope:8 to 15 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately low to
moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: F136XY720NC - Basic upland forest, moist
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Rowan
Setting
Landform:Hillslopes on ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional):Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional):Side slope
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Convex
Parent material:Saprolite derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase
and/or gneiss
Typical profile
A - 0 to 6 inches: sandy loam
Bt - 6 to 20 inches: clay loam
BC - 20 to 25 inches: sandy loam
C - 25 to 80 inches: loamy sand
Properties and qualities
Slope:8 to 15 percent
Custom Soil Resource Report
16
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.6 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: F136XY720NC - Basic upland forest, moist
Hydric soil rating: No
WyD—Wynott-Winnsboro-Rowan complex, 15 to 25 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2mdlc
Elevation: 200 to 1,400 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 37 to 60 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 66 degrees F
Frost-free period: 200 to 240 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Wynott and similar soils:35 percent
Winnsboro and similar soils:30 percent
Rowan and similar soils:25 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Wynott
Setting
Landform:Interfluves
Landform position (two-dimensional):Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional):Interfluve
Down-slope shape:Convex
Across-slope shape:Convex
Parent material:Saprolite derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase
and/or gneiss
Typical profile
A - 0 to 4 inches: sandy loam
E - 4 to 14 inches: sandy loam
Bt - 14 to 24 inches: clay
BC - 24 to 28 inches: sandy clay loam
Custom Soil Resource Report
17
Cr - 28 to 80 inches: weathered bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope:15 to 25 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Very low to moderately
high (0.00 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Ecological site: F136XY730SC - Basic upland forest, dry
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Winnsboro
Setting
Landform:Hillslopes on ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional):Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional):Side slope
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Convex
Parent material:Saprolite derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase
and/or gneiss
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 8 inches: fine sandy loam
BA - 8 to 11 inches: clay loam
Bt - 11 to 32 inches: clay
C/Bt - 32 to 37 inches: clay loam
C - 37 to 60 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope:15 to 25 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately low to
moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: F136XY720NC - Basic upland forest, moist
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
18
Description of Rowan
Setting
Landform:Hillslopes on ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional):Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional):Side slope
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Convex
Parent material:Saprolite derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase
and/or gneiss
Typical profile
A - 0 to 6 inches: sandy loam
Bt - 6 to 20 inches: clay loam
BC - 20 to 25 inches: sandy loam
C - 25 to 80 inches: loamy sand
Properties and qualities
Slope:15 to 25 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.6 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: F136XY720NC - Basic upland forest, moist
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
19
Soil Information for All Uses
Soil Reports
The Soil Reports section includes various formatted tabular and narrative reports
(tables) containing data for each selected soil map unit and each component of
each unit. No aggregation of data has occurred as is done in reports in the Soil
Properties and Qualities and Suitabilities and Limitations sections.
The reports contain soil interpretive information as well as basic soil properties and
qualities. A description of each report (table) is included.
AOI Inventory
This folder contains a collection of tabular reports that present a variety of soil
information. Included are various map unit description reports, special soil
interpretation reports, and data summary reports.
Map Unit Description (Brief, Generated)
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions in this
report, along with the maps, provide information on the composition of map units
and properties of their components.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
The Map Unit Description (Brief, Generated) report displays a generated description
of the major soils that occur in a map unit. Descriptions of non-soil (miscellaneous
areas) and minor map unit components are not included. This description is
generated from the underlying soil attribute data.
20
Additional information about the map units described in this report is available in
other Soil Data Mart reports, which give properties of the soils and the limitations,
capabilities, and potentials for many uses. Also, the narratives that accompany the
Soil Data Mart reports define some of the properties included in the map unit
descriptions.
Report—Map Unit Description (Brief, Generated)
Lincoln County, North Carolina
Map Unit: CeB2—Cecil sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, moderately eroded
Component: Cecil, moderately eroded (88%)
The Cecil, moderately eroded component makes up 88 percent of the map unit.
Slopes are 2 to 8 percent. This component is on interfluves, uplands. The parent
material consists of saprolite derived from granite and gneiss and/or schist. Depth to
a root restrictive layer is greater than 60 inches. The natural drainage class is well
drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is moderately high. Available
water to a depth of 60 inches (or restricted depth) is moderate. Shrink-swell
potential is low. This soil is not flooded. It is not ponded. There is no zone of water
saturation within a depth of 72 inches. Organic matter content in the surface horizon
is about 1 percent. This component is in the F136XY820GA Acidic upland forest,
moist ecological site. Nonirrigated land capability classification is 3e. This soil does
not meet hydric criteria.
Map Unit: PeC2—Pacolet sandy clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, moderately
eroded
Component: Pacolet, moderately eroded (85%)
The Pacolet, moderately eroded component makes up 85 percent of the map unit.
Slopes are 8 to 15 percent. This component is on hillslopes on ridges, uplands. The
parent material consists of saprolite derived from granite and gneiss and/or schist.
Depth to a root restrictive layer is greater than 60 inches. The natural drainage class
is well drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is moderately high.
Available water to a depth of 60 inches (or restricted depth) is moderate. Shrink-
swell potential is low. This soil is not flooded. It is not ponded. There is no zone of
water saturation within a depth of 72 inches. Organic matter content in the surface
horizon is about 1 percent. This component is in the F136XY820GA Acidic upland
forest, moist ecological site. Nonirrigated land capability classification is 3e. This soil
does not meet hydric criteria.
Map Unit: WyC—Wynott-Winnsboro-Rowan complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes
Component: Wynott (35%)
The Wynott component makes up 35 percent of the map unit. Slopes are 8 to 15
percent. This component is on interfluves, uplands. The parent material consists of
Custom Soil Resource Report
21
saprolite derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase and/or gneiss. Depth to
a root restrictive layer, bedrock, paralithic, is 20 to 40 inches. The natural drainage
class is well drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is very low.
Available water to a depth of 60 inches (or restricted depth) is low. Shrink-swell
potential is moderate. This soil is not flooded. It is not ponded. There is no zone of
water saturation within a depth of 72 inches. Organic matter content in the surface
horizon is about 1 percent. This component is in the F136XY730SC Basic upland
forest, dry ecological site. Nonirrigated land capability classification is 3e. This soil
does not meet hydric criteria.
Component: Winnsboro (30%)
The Winnsboro component makes up 30 percent of the map unit. Slopes are 8 to 15
percent. This component is on hillslopes on ridges, uplands. The parent material
consists of saprolite derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase and/or
gneiss. Depth to a root restrictive layer is greater than 60 inches. The natural
drainage class is well drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is
moderately low. Available water to a depth of 60 inches (or restricted depth) is high.
Shrink-swell potential is moderate. This soil is not flooded. It is not ponded. There is
no zone of water saturation within a depth of 72 inches. Organic matter content in
the surface horizon is about 1 percent. This component is in the F136XY720NC
Basic upland forest, moist ecological site. Nonirrigated land capability classification
is 3e. This soil does not meet hydric criteria.
Component: Rowan (25%)
The Rowan component makes up 25 percent of the map unit. Slopes are 8 to 15
percent. This component is on hillslopes on ridges, uplands. The parent material
consists of saprolite derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase and/or
gneiss. Depth to a root restrictive layer is greater than 60 inches. The natural
drainage class is well drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is
moderately high. Available water to a depth of 60 inches (or restricted depth) is
moderate. Shrink-swell potential is low. This soil is not flooded. It is not ponded.
There is no zone of water saturation within a depth of 72 inches. Organic matter
content in the surface horizon is about 1 percent. This component is in the
F136XY720NC Basic upland forest, moist ecological site. Nonirrigated land
capability classification is 3e. This soil does not meet hydric criteria.
Map Unit: WyD—Wynott-Winnsboro-Rowan complex, 15 to 25 percent slopes
Component: Wynott (35%)
The Wynott component makes up 35 percent of the map unit. Slopes are 15 to 25
percent. This component is on interfluves, uplands. The parent material consists of
saprolite derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase and/or gneiss. Depth to
a root restrictive layer, bedrock, paralithic, is 20 to 40 inches. The natural drainage
class is well drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is very low.
Available water to a depth of 60 inches (or restricted depth) is low. Shrink-swell
potential is moderate. This soil is not flooded. It is not ponded. There is no zone of
water saturation within a depth of 72 inches. Organic matter content in the surface
horizon is about 1 percent. This component is in the F136XY730SC Basic upland
Custom Soil Resource Report
22
forest, dry ecological site. Nonirrigated land capability classification is 4e. This soil
does not meet hydric criteria.
Component: Winnsboro (30%)
The Winnsboro component makes up 30 percent of the map unit. Slopes are 15 to
25 percent. This component is on hillslopes on ridges, uplands. The parent material
consists of saprolite derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase and/or
gneiss. Depth to a root restrictive layer is greater than 60 inches. The natural
drainage class is well drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is
moderately low. Available water to a depth of 60 inches (or restricted depth) is high.
Shrink-swell potential is moderate. This soil is not flooded. It is not ponded. There is
no zone of water saturation within a depth of 72 inches. Organic matter content in
the surface horizon is about 1 percent. This component is in the F136XY720NC
Basic upland forest, moist ecological site. Nonirrigated land capability classification
is 4e. This soil does not meet hydric criteria.
Component: Rowan (25%)
The Rowan component makes up 25 percent of the map unit. Slopes are 15 to 25
percent. This component is on hillslopes on ridges, uplands. The parent material
consists of saprolite derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase and/or
gneiss. Depth to a root restrictive layer is greater than 60 inches. The natural
drainage class is well drained. Water movement in the most restrictive layer is
moderately high. Available water to a depth of 60 inches (or restricted depth) is
moderate. Shrink-swell potential is low. This soil is not flooded. It is not ponded.
There is no zone of water saturation within a depth of 72 inches. Organic matter
content in the surface horizon is about 1 percent. This component is in the
F136XY720NC Basic upland forest, moist ecological site. Nonirrigated land
capability classification is 4e. This soil does not meet hydric criteria.
Land Classifications
This folder contains a collection of tabular reports that present a variety of soil
groupings. The reports (tables) include all selected map units and components for
each map unit. Land classifications are specified land use and management
groupings that are assigned to soil areas because combinations of soil have similar
behavior for specified practices. Most are based on soil properties and other factors
that directly influence the specific use of the soil. Example classifications include
ecological site classification, farmland classification, irrigated and nonirrigated land
capability classification, and hydric rating.
Taxonomic Classification of the Soils
The system of soil classification used by the National Cooperative Soil Survey has
six categories (Soil Survey Staff, 1999 and 2003). Beginning with the broadest,
these categories are the order, suborder, great group, subgroup, family, and series.
Classification is based on soil properties observed in the field or inferred from those
observations or from laboratory measurements. This table shows the classification
Custom Soil Resource Report
23
of the soils in the survey area. The categories are defined in the following
paragraphs.
ORDER. Twelve soil orders are recognized. The differences among orders reflect
the dominant soil-forming processes and the degree of soil formation. Each order is
identified by a word ending in sol. An example is Alfisols.
SUBORDER. Each order is divided into suborders primarily on the basis of
properties that influence soil genesis and are important to plant growth or properties
that reflect the most important variables within the orders. The last syllable in the
name of a suborder indicates the order. An example is Udalfs (Ud, meaning humid,
plus alfs, from Alfisols).
GREAT GROUP. Each suborder is divided into great groups on the basis of close
similarities in kind, arrangement, and degree of development of pedogenic horizons;
soil moisture and temperature regimes; type of saturation; and base status. Each
great group is identified by the name of a suborder and by a prefix that indicates a
property of the soil. An example is Hapludalfs (Hapl, meaning minimal horizonation,
plus udalfs, the suborder of the Alfisols that has a udic moisture regime).
SUBGROUP. Each great group has a typic subgroup. Other subgroups are
intergrades or extragrades. The typic subgroup is the central concept of the great
group; it is not necessarily the most extensive. Intergrades are transitions to other
orders, suborders, or great groups. Extragrades have some properties that are not
representative of the great group but do not indicate transitions to any other
taxonomic class. Each subgroup is identified by one or more adjectives preceding
the name of the great group. The adjective Typic identifies the subgroup that typifies
the great group. An example is Typic Hapludalfs.
FAMILY. Families are established within a subgroup on the basis of physical and
chemical properties and other characteristics that affect management. Generally,
the properties are those of horizons below plow depth where there is much
biological activity. Among the properties and characteristics considered are particle-
size class, mineralogy class, cation-exchange activity class, soil temperature
regime, soil depth, and reaction class. A family name consists of the name of a
subgroup preceded by terms that indicate soil properties. An example is fine-loamy,
mixed, active, mesic Typic Hapludalfs.
SERIES. The series consists of soils within a family that have horizons similar in
color, texture, structure, reaction, consistence, mineral and chemical composition,
and arrangement in the profile.
References:
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for
making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation
Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436.
Soil Survey Staff. 2006. Keys to soil taxonomy. 10th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. (The soils in a given survey
area may have been classified according to earlier editions of this publication.)
Report—Taxonomic Classification of the Soils
[An asterisk by the soil name indicates a taxadjunct to the series]
Custom Soil Resource Report
24
Taxonomic Classification of the Soils–Lincoln County, North Carolina
Soil name Family or higher taxonomic classification
Cecil Fine, kaolinitic, thermic Typic Kanhapludults
Pacolet Fine, kaolinitic, thermic Typic Kanhapludults
Rowan Fine-loamy, mixed, active, thermic Typic Hapludalfs
Winnsboro*Fine, mixed, active, thermic Typic Hapludalfs
Wynott Fine, mixed, active, thermic Typic Hapludalfs
Soil Physical Properties
This folder contains a collection of tabular reports that present soil physical
properties. The reports (tables) include all selected map units and components for
each map unit. Soil physical properties are measured or inferred from direct
observations in the field or laboratory. Examples of soil physical properties include
percent clay, organic matter, saturated hydraulic conductivity, available water
capacity, and bulk density.
Engineering Properties
This table gives the engineering classifications and the range of engineering
properties for the layers of each soil in the survey area.
Hydrologic soil group is a group of soils having similar runoff potential under similar
storm and cover conditions. The criteria for determining Hydrologic soil group is
found in the National Engineering Handbook, Chapter 7 issued May 2007(http://
directives.sc.egov.usda.gov/OpenNonWebContent.aspx?content=17757.wba).
Listing HSGs by soil map unit component and not by soil series is a new concept for
the engineers. Past engineering references contained lists of HSGs by soil series.
Soil series are continually being defined and redefined, and the list of soil series
names changes so frequently as to make the task of maintaining a single national
list virtually impossible. Therefore, the criteria is now used to calculate the HSG
using the component soil properties and no such national series lists will be
maintained. All such references are obsolete and their use should be discontinued.
Soil properties that influence runoff potential are those that influence the minimum
rate of infiltration for a bare soil after prolonged wetting and when not frozen. These
properties are depth to a seasonal high water table, saturated hydraulic conductivity
after prolonged wetting, and depth to a layer with a very slow water transmission
rate. Changes in soil properties caused by land management or climate changes
also cause the hydrologic soil group to change. The influence of ground cover is
treated independently. There are four hydrologic soil groups, A, B, C, and D, and
three dual groups, A/D, B/D, and C/D. In the dual groups, the first letter is for
drained areas and the second letter is for undrained areas.
The four hydrologic soil groups are described in the following paragraphs:
Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly
wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or
gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission.
Custom Soil Resource Report
25
Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These
consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained
soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils
have a moderate rate of water transmission.
Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist
chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or
soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water
transmission.
Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when
thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell
potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at
or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material.
These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission.
Depth to the upper and lower boundaries of each layer is indicated.
Texture is given in the standard terms used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
These terms are defined according to percentages of sand, silt, and clay in the
fraction of the soil that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter. "Loam," for example, is
soil that is 7 to 27 percent clay, 28 to 50 percent silt, and less than 52 percent sand.
If the content of particles coarser than sand is 15 percent or more, an appropriate
modifier is added, for example, "gravelly."
Classification of the soils is determined according to the Unified soil classification
system (ASTM, 2005) and the system adopted by the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO, 2004).
The Unified system classifies soils according to properties that affect their use as
construction material. Soils are classified according to particle-size distribution of
the fraction less than 3 inches in diameter and according to plasticity index, liquid
limit, and organic matter content. Sandy and gravelly soils are identified as GW, GP,
GM, GC, SW, SP, SM, and SC; silty and clayey soils as ML, CL, OL, MH, CH, and
OH; and highly organic soils as PT. Soils exhibiting engineering properties of two
groups can have a dual classification, for example, CL-ML.
The AASHTO system classifies soils according to those properties that affect
roadway construction and maintenance. In this system, the fraction of a mineral soil
that is less than 3 inches in diameter is classified in one of seven groups from A-1
through A-7 on the basis of particle-size distribution, liquid limit, and plasticity index.
Soils in group A-1 are coarse grained and low in content of fines (silt and clay). At
the other extreme, soils in group A-7 are fine grained. Highly organic soils are
classified in group A-8 on the basis of visual inspection.
If laboratory data are available, the A-1, A-2, and A-7 groups are further classified
as A-1-a, A-1-b, A-2-4, A-2-5, A-2-6, A-2-7, A-7-5, or A-7-6. As an additional
refinement, the suitability of a soil as subgrade material can be indicated by a group
index number. Group index numbers range from 0 for the best subgrade material to
20 or higher for the poorest.
Percentage of rock fragments larger than 10 inches in diameter and 3 to 10 inches
in diameter are indicated as a percentage of the total soil on a dry-weight basis. The
percentages are estimates determined mainly by converting volume percentage in
the field to weight percentage. Three values are provided to identify the expected
Low (L), Representative Value (R), and High (H).
Percentage (of soil particles) passing designated sieves is the percentage of the soil
fraction less than 3 inches in diameter based on an ovendry weight. The sieves,
Custom Soil Resource Report
26
numbers 4, 10, 40, and 200 (USA Standard Series), have openings of 4.76, 2.00,
0.420, and 0.074 millimeters, respectively. Estimates are based on laboratory tests
of soils sampled in the survey area and in nearby areas and on estimates made in
the field. Three values are provided to identify the expected Low (L), Representative
Value (R), and High (H).
Liquid limit and plasticity index (Atterberg limits) indicate the plasticity
characteristics of a soil. The estimates are based on test data from the survey area
or from nearby areas and on field examination. Three values are provided to identify
the expected Low (L), Representative Value (R), and High (H).
References:
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling
and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Custom Soil Resource Report
27
Absence of an entry indicates that the data were not estimated. The asterisk '*' denotes the representative texture; other
possible textures follow the dash. The criteria for determining the hydrologic soil group for individual soil components is
found in the National Engineering Handbook, Chapter 7 issued May 2007(http://directives.sc.egov.usda.gov/
OpenNonWebContent.aspx?content=17757.wba). Three values are provided to identify the expected Low (L),
Representative Value (R), and High (H).
Engineering Properties–Lincoln County, North Carolina
Map unit symbol and
soil name
Pct. of
map
unit
Hydrolo
gic
group
Depth USDA texture Classification Pct Fragments Percentage passing sieve number—Liquid
limit
Plasticit
y index
Unified AASHTO >10
inches
3-10
inches
4 10 40 200
In L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H
CeB2—Cecil sandy
clay loam, 2 to 8
percent slopes,
moderately eroded
Cecil, moderately
eroded
88 B 0-6 Sandy clay loam,
clay loam, sandy
loam
CL, ML,
SC, SM
A-4, A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 1- 3 95-97-1
00
73-85-1
00
57-74-1
00
30-43-
64
21-30
-40
3-10-17
6-40 Sandy clay, clay,
clay loam
MH, ML A-5, A-7-5 0- 0- 0 0- 3- 5 96-98-1
00
89-94-1
00
65-85-1
00
46-65-
87
38-60
-80
9-23-37
40-48 Clay loam, sandy
clay loam, loam
CL, ML,
SC, SM
A-4, A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 1 93-96-1
00
82-91-1
00
65-81-
94
44-58-
68
20-28
-40
3-10-17
48-80 Sandy loam, fine
sandy loam, loam,
gravelly sandy
loam
CL-ML,
CL
A-4 0- 1- 1 0- 1- 1 89-95-1
00
73-86-1
00
57-74-
93
36-49-
64
14-20
-29
2-6 -12
Custom Soil Resource Report
28
Engineering Properties–Lincoln County, North Carolina
Map unit symbol and
soil name
Pct. of
map
unit
Hydrolo
gic
group
Depth USDA texture Classification Pct Fragments Percentage passing sieve number—Liquid
limit
Plasticit
y index
Unified AASHTO >10
inches
3-10
inches
4 10 40 200
In L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H
PeC2—Pacolet sandy
clay loam, 8 to 15
percent slopes,
moderately eroded
Pacolet, moderately
eroded
85 B 0-7 Sandy clay loam,
clay loam, sandy
loam
SC-SM,
SC
A-4, A-6 0- 0- 1 0- 0- 1 95-96-1
00
84-91-1
00
65-79-
94
35-46-
59
20-30
-40
4-11-17
7-24 Clay, clay loam,
sandy clay
CL, MH,
ML
A-6,
A-7-5,
A-7-6
0- 0- 1 0- 0- 1 83-95-1
00
67-87-1
00
52-81-1
00
44-71-
96
38-52
-65
11-22-3
3
24-33 Sandy clay loam,
clay loam, sandy
loam, loam
CL-ML,
SC-SM,
CL, SC
A-1-b,
A-2-4,
A-4
0- 0- 1 0- 1- 1 83-93-1
00
56-83-1
00
41-73-
94
21-43-
59
20-28
-35
5-10-15
33-80 Sandy loam, fine
sandy loam, loam
SC-SM,
SM
A-2-4, A-4 0- 1- 1 0- 1- 1 87-93-1
00
61-78-1
00
48-67-
94
31-45-
65
10-14
-28
NP-3 -6
Custom Soil Resource Report
29
Engineering Properties–Lincoln County, North Carolina
Map unit symbol and
soil name
Pct. of
map
unit
Hydrolo
gic
group
Depth USDA texture Classification Pct Fragments Percentage passing sieve number—Liquid
limit
Plasticit
y index
Unified AASHTO >10
inches
3-10
inches
4 10 40 200
In L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H
WyC—Wynott-
Winnsboro-Rowan
complex, 8 to 15
percent slopes
Wynott 35 D 0-4 Sandy loam, fine
sandy loam
SC-SM,
SC, SM
A-2-4, A-4 0- 0- 0 0- 3- 4 86-92-1
00
71-83-1
00
49-64-
84
22-32-
46
15-23
-30
NP-5
-10
4-14 Loam, sandy loam,
fine sandy loam
SC-SM,
SC, SM
A-2-4, A-4 0- 0- 0 0- 3- 4 86-92-1
00
71-83-1
00
49-64-
84
22-32-
46
15-23
-30
NP-5
-10
14-24 Clay, clay loam, silty
clay
CH, CL A-7-6 0- 0- 0 0- 3- 5 85-91-1
00
69-82-1
00
54-76-1
00
46-66-
96
40-65
-90
25-45-6
5
24-28 Sandy clay, sandy
clay loam, clay
loam
CL, SC A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 3- 4 85-91-1
00
70-82-1
00
51-71-
99
28-43-
65
25-38
-50
7-16-25
28-80 Weathered bedrock ——————————
Winnsboro 30 C 0-8 Fine sandy loam ML, SM A-2-4, A-4 0- 0- 0 0- 3- 4 90-95-1
00
77-88-1
00
66-80-
96
30-39-
49
10-23
-35
NP-4 -8
8-11 Clay loam, sandy
clay loam, loam,
sandy loam,
gravelly sandy
loam
ML, SM A-2-4,
A-4,
A-6,
A-7-5
0- 3- 4 0- 1- 2 90-91-1
00
59-81-1
00
44-73-
95
31-55-
73
25-37
-48
3-9 -15
11-32 Clay, clay loam CH A-7-5,
A-7-6
0- 3- 5 0- 1- 3 89-94-1
00
74-87-1
00
59-80-1
00
50-69-1
00
51-72
-92
25-40-5
5
32-37 Loam, sandy clay
loam, sandy loam,
gravelly sandy
loam, clay loam
ML, SM A-2-4,
A-4,
A-6,
A-7-5
0- 3- 4 0- 1- 2 90-91-1
00
59-81-1
00
44-73-
95
31-55-
73
25-37
-48
3-9 -15
37-60 Loam, sandy clay
loam, sandy loam,
gravelly sandy
loam
ML, SM A-2-4,
A-4,
A-6,
A-7-5
0- 3- 4 0- 1- 2 90-91-1
00
59-81-1
00
47-73-1
00
34-55-
78
25-37
-48
3-9 -15
Custom Soil Resource Report
30
Engineering Properties–Lincoln County, North Carolina
Map unit symbol and
soil name
Pct. of
map
unit
Hydrolo
gic
group
Depth USDA texture Classification Pct Fragments Percentage passing sieve number—Liquid
limit
Plasticit
y index
Unified AASHTO >10
inches
3-10
inches
4 10 40 200
In L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H
Rowan 25 B 0-6 Sandy loam, fine
sandy loam, loam
CL-ML,
SC-SM,
ML, SM
A-2-4, A-4 0- 0- 0 0- 1- 3 90-95-1
00
76-88-1
00
54-67-
83
25-34-
45
15-20
-25
NP-4 -7
6-20 Loam, sandy clay
loam, clay loam
CL, SC A-6, A-7-6 0- 0- 0 0- 1- 3 90-95-1
00
76-88-1
00
60-79-
95
43-60-
73
29-37
-45
11-16-2
0
20-25 Sandy loam, fine
sandy loam, loam
SC-SM,
CL, ML,
SC
A-2-4,
A-2-6,
A-4
0- 0- 0 0- 1- 3 90-95-1
00
77-88-1
00
58-68-
85
30-36-
49
20-28
-35
NP-6
-12
25-80 Loamy sand, sandy
loam, loam
SC-SM,
CL, ML,
SM
A-2-4,
A-2-6,
A-4
0- 0- 0 0- 3- 4 87-93-1
00
70-83-1
00
51-68-
90
9-18- 30 15-22
-30
NP-5
-11
Custom Soil Resource Report
31
Engineering Properties–Lincoln County, North Carolina
Map unit symbol and
soil name
Pct. of
map
unit
Hydrolo
gic
group
Depth USDA texture Classification Pct Fragments Percentage passing sieve number—Liquid
limit
Plasticit
y index
Unified AASHTO >10
inches
3-10
inches
4 10 40 200
In L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H
WyD—Wynott-
Winnsboro-Rowan
complex, 15 to 25
percent slopes
Wynott 35 D 0-4 Sandy loam, fine
sandy loam
SC-SM,
SC, SM
A-2-4, A-4 0- 0- 0 0- 3- 4 86-92-1
00
71-83-1
00
49-64-
84
22-32-
46
15-23
-30
NP-5
-10
4-14 Loam, sandy loam,
fine sandy loam
SC-SM,
SC, SM
A-2-4, A-4 0- 0- 0 0- 3- 4 86-92-1
00
71-83-1
00
49-64-
84
22-32-
46
15-23
-30
NP-5
-10
14-24 Clay, clay loam, silty
clay
CH, CL A-7-6 0- 0- 0 0- 3- 5 85-91-1
00
69-82-1
00
54-76-1
00
46-66-
96
40-65
-90
25-45-6
5
24-28 Sandy clay, sandy
clay loam, clay
loam
CL, SC A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 3- 4 85-91-1
00
70-82-1
00
51-71-
99
28-43-
65
25-38
-50
7-16-25
28-80 Weathered bedrock ——————————
Winnsboro 30 C 0-8 Fine sandy loam ML, SM A-2-4, A-4 0- 0- 0 0- 3- 4 90-95-1
00
77-88-1
00
66-80-
96
30-39-
49
10-23
-35
NP-4 -8
8-11 Clay loam, sandy
clay loam, loam,
sandy loam,
gravelly sandy
loam
ML, SM A-2-4,
A-4,
A-6,
A-7-5
0- 3- 4 0- 1- 2 90-91-1
00
59-81-1
00
44-73-
95
31-55-
73
25-37
-48
3-9 -15
11-32 Clay, clay loam CH A-7-5,
A-7-6
0- 3- 5 0- 1- 3 89-94-1
00
74-87-1
00
59-80-1
00
50-69-1
00
51-72
-92
25-40-5
5
32-37 Loam, sandy clay
loam, sandy loam,
gravelly sandy
loam, clay loam
ML, SM A-2-4,
A-4,
A-6,
A-7-5
0- 3- 4 0- 1- 2 90-91-1
00
59-81-1
00
44-73-
95
31-55-
73
25-37
-48
3-9 -15
37-60 Loam, sandy clay
loam, sandy loam,
gravelly sandy
loam
ML, SM A-2-4,
A-4,
A-6,
A-7-5
0- 3- 4 0- 1- 2 90-91-1
00
59-81-1
00
47-73-1
00
34-55-
78
25-37
-48
3-9 -15
Custom Soil Resource Report
32
Engineering Properties–Lincoln County, North Carolina
Map unit symbol and
soil name
Pct. of
map
unit
Hydrolo
gic
group
Depth USDA texture Classification Pct Fragments Percentage passing sieve number—Liquid
limit
Plasticit
y index
Unified AASHTO >10
inches
3-10
inches
4 10 40 200
In L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H
Rowan 25 B 0-6 Sandy loam, fine
sandy loam, loam
CL-ML,
SC-SM,
ML, SM
A-2-4, A-4 0- 0- 0 0- 1- 3 90-95-1
00
76-88-1
00
54-67-
83
25-34-
45
15-20
-25
NP-4 -7
6-20 Loam, sandy clay
loam, clay loam
CL, SC A-6, A-7-6 0- 0- 0 0- 1- 3 90-95-1
00
76-88-1
00
60-79-
95
43-60-
73
29-37
-45
11-16-2
0
20-25 Sandy loam, fine
sandy loam, loam
SC-SM,
CL, ML,
SC
A-2-4,
A-2-6,
A-4
0- 0- 0 0- 1- 3 90-95-1
00
77-88-1
00
58-68-
85
30-36-
49
20-28
-35
NP-6
-12
25-80 Loamy sand, sandy
loam, loam
SC-SM,
CL, ML,
SM
A-2-4,
A-2-6,
A-4
0- 0- 0 0- 3- 4 87-93-1
00
70-83-1
00
51-68-
90
9-18- 30 15-22
-30
NP-5
-11
Custom Soil Resource Report
33
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling
and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric
soils in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for
making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577
Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/
home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/
detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084
34
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States,
the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook
296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?
cid=nrcs142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf
Custom Soil Resource Report
35
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com

ENGINEERS, IN C

Reference InformaƟon

Soil Boring Log Notes
Soil ClassificaƟon Fact Sheet
General Test Procedures
Rock ExcavaƟon ClassificaƟon
General QualificaƟons and LimitaƟons

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

Typical Order of Soil DescripƟons:
Origin, Moisture, Soil Density/Consistency, Color, Secondary Soil Type, PRIMARY SOIL TYPE, DescripƟve Terms
Non-Cohesive Soils:
(Silt, Sand, Gravel and CombinaƟons) SYMBOLS
Drilling and Sampling
Term RelaƟve Density “N” Value
Very Loose ..................... .0 to 4 blows/Ō
Loose ............................ 5 to 10 blows/Ō
Firm ............................ 11 to 20 blows/Ō
Very Firm .................... 21 to 30 blows/Ō
Dense .......................... 31 to 50 blows/Ō
Very Dense.................. 51 to 99 blows/Ō
ParƟcle Size IdenƟficaƟon
Boulders ...................................... 8 inch diameter or more
Cobles ......................................... 3 to 8 inch diameter
Gravel .......................................... Coarse: 1 to 3 inch
Medium: ½ to 1 inch
Fine: ¼ to ½ inch
Sand: .......................................... Coarse: 6mm to ¼ inch
(dia. of pencil led)
Fine: 0.05mm to 0.2mm
(dia. of human hair)
Fines ............................................ Silt: 0.06 to 0.002mm
(cannot see parƟcle)
AS
BS
C
COA
CS
CW
DC
DM
FA
FT
HA
HSA
NR
PMT
PT
PTS
RB
RC
REC
RQD
RS
S
SS
2ST
3ST
VS
WPT

Auger sample
Bag Sample
Casing: Size 64 mm, NW; 100 mm, HW
ConƟnuous Sampling
Clear Water
Driven Casing
Drilling Mud
Flight Auger
Fish Tail
Hand Auger
Hollow Stem Auger
Hollow Stem Auger
No Recovery
Borehole Pressure meter Test
75 mm OD Piston Tube Sample
Peat Sample
Rock Bit
Rock Coring
Recovery
Rock Quality DesignaƟon
Rock Sounding
Soil Sounding
50 mm OD Split-Barrel Sample
50 mm OD Thin-Walled Tube Sample
75 mm OD Thin-Walled Tube Sample
Vane Shear Test
Water Pressure Test
RelaƟve ProporƟons
DescripƟve Term Permit
Trace ........................................... 1-10
LiƩle .......................................... 11-20
Some ......................................... 21-35
And ........................................... 46-50
Cohesive Soils
(Clay, Silt and CombinaƟons)
ParƟcle Size less than 0.06 mm
Consistency “ N” value Approx. Unconfined
(blows/Ō) Compressive
Strength
(tons/sq.Ō.)
Very soŌ ................. 0 to 1 Less than 0.25
SoŌ ......................... 2 to 4 Less than 0.5
Firm ........................ 5 to 8 0.5-1.0
SƟff ......................... 9 to 15 1.0-2.0
Very SƟff ................. 16 to 30 2.0-3.0
Hard ........................ 31 to 50 3.0-4.0
Very Hard ................ 51 to 99 Over 4.0
PlasƟcity RelaƟve PorƟons
Term PlasƟc
Index
(PI)

None to Slight ..... 0-4
Slight .................. 5-7
Medium ............ 8-25
High/Very High .. 25+

trace ............... 1-10%
LiƩle ............. 11-20%
Some ............ 21-35%
And .............. 26-50%

Qp
Qu
W
LL
PL
PI
SL
LIO
gd
pH
Laboratory Tests

Penetrometer Reading
Unconfined Strength
Moisture Content, %
Liquid Limit, %
PlasƟc Limit, %
PlasƟcity Index
Shrinkage Limit, %
Loss on IgniƟon, %
Dry Unit Weight
Measure of Soil Alkalinity/Acidity
Other Notes
ParƟally Weathered Rock – ParƟally weathered rock retains much of the appearance of the parent rock and is charac-
terized by standard penetraƟon resistances in excess of 100 blows per foot (bpf). (SCDOT)
SoŌ Weathered Rock – Broken and parƟally weathered rock with Standard PenetraƟon resistance (ASTM D 1586)
between 50 blows per six inches and 50 blows per inch. (NC Building Code 2006)
Hard Weathered Rock – Broken and parƟally weathered rock of sufficient hardness to refuse soil sampling tools; nor-
mally has Standard PenetraƟon resistance (ASTM D 1586) in excess of 50 blows per inch. (NC Building Code 2006).
ClassificaƟon – Boring log classificaƟon is made by visual inspecƟon.
Standard PenetraƟon Test – Driving a 2.0” O.D., 1 3/8” I.D., sampler a distance of 1.0 foot into undisturbed soil with a
140 pound hammer free falling a distance of 30 inches. It is customary for Aardvark’s drillers to drive the spoon a few
inches to seat into undisturbed soil, then perform the test. Upon seaƟng the spoon, the number of hammer blows for
each 6 inches of penetraƟon are recorded on the drill log (Example – 6/8/9). The Standard PenetraƟon Test results (N-
value) can be obtained by adding the last two figures (i.e. 8+9 = 17 blows/Ō.) (Compliant with ASTM D 1586)
Strata Changes – In the column “Soil DescripƟons” on the drill log the horizontal lines represent strata changes. A solid
line (_____) represents an actually observed change, a dashed line ( - - - - - ) represents an esƟmated change.
Ground Water – ObservaƟons were made at the Ɵmes indicated. Porosity of soil strata, weather condiƟons, site topog-
raphy, etc., may cause changes in the water levels indicated on the logs.
Groundwater Symbols:

SOIL TEST BORING NOTES
Observed groundwater elevaƟon, encountered
during drilling
Observed groundwater elevaƟon several hours upon compleƟon of
boring

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

SOIL CLASSIFICATION FACT SHEET

338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

GENERAL TEST PROCEDURES
Aardvark Engineers performs tests in general accordance with the American Society for TesƟng and Materials (ASTM) or
the United States Army Corps of Engineers procedures. These procedures are generally recognized as the basis for
uniformity and consistency of test results in the geotechnical engineering profession. All work is iniƟated and supervised
by qualified engineers. Our tests are performed by skilled technicians trained in either ASTM or Corps procedures.
Subsequent porƟons of this Appendix present briefly describe of our tesƟng procedures. Where applicable, we have
referenced these procedures to either ASTM or the Corps of Engineers standards which contain specific descripƟons of
apparatus, procedures, reporƟng, etc.
Annual Book of ASTM Standards, SecƟon 4, Volumes 4.08 and 4.09: Soil and Rock. American Society for TesƟng and
Materials, Latest EdiƟon
EM 1110-2-1803. Subsurface InvesƟgaƟons, Soils, Chapter 3. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1972.
EM 1110-1-1801, Geological InvesƟgaƟons. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1978.
EM 1110-2-1907, Soil Sampling. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1972.
EM 1110-1-1802, Geophysical ExploraƟon. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1979.
EM 1110-2-1906, Laboratory Soils TesƟng. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1970.

HƒÄ— A禛٠BÊÙ®Ä¦Ý ó®ã« PÊÙバ½› CÊě P›Ä›ãÙÊÛã›Ù T›ÝãÝ
The borings were made by manually twisƟng a post-hole auger into the soil. The auger consists of a two curved blades and
a bucket which retains the soil as the auger is advanced. At regular intervals, the hand auger was removed from the boring
and cone penetrometer soundings were performed with a dynamic portable cone penetrometer. The device has a 1.5-inch
diameter, 45-degree cone point with a surface area of 3.9 inches which is driven with a 15-pound steel weight on a guide
rod.
AŌer the cone point was completely embedded at the test depth it was driven an addiƟonal 13/4 inches by the steel weight
falling 20 inches onto a steel anvil. The number of hammer blows required to drive the cone the 13/4-inch increment was
recorded as the "penetraƟon resistance" in units of blows per increment. PenetraƟon resistance, when properly
evaluated, is an index to the soil's strength, compressibility, and density.
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

ROCK EXCAVATION CLASSIFICATION
Rʑ» D›¥®Ä®ã®ÊÄ
We suggest that Rock be defined as the following:
General ExcavaƟon:
Any material which cannot be excavated with a single-tooth ripper drawn by a crawler tractor having a draw bar pull rated
at not less than 56,000 pounds (Caterpillar D8K or equivalent) or excavated by a front-end loader with a minimum bucket
breakout force of 25,600 pounds (Caterpillar 977 or equivalent).
Trench ExcavaƟon:
Any material which cannot be excavated with a backhoe having a bucket curling force rated at not less than 33,000 pounds
(Caterpillar 225B or equivalent).
338 South Sharon Amity Road #135
CharloƩe, North Carolina 28211
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]

www.aardvarkengineers.com
ENGINEERS, IN C

GENERAL QUALIFICATIONS
GENERAL QUALIFICATIONS

This report has been prepared at the request of our client for their use on this project. The work, including the field work, laboratory
tesƟng, and engineering analysis, was performed in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundaƟon engineering pracƟces. This
warranty is in lieu of all other warranƟes either expressed or implied.

This report may not contain sufficient informaƟon for purposes of other parƟes or other uses. Should there be any sufficient
differences in structural arrangement, loading or locaƟon of the structure, our analysis should be reviewed.

The analysis, conclusions, and recommendaƟons contained in our report are based on site condiƟons as they existed at the Ɵme of our
exploraƟon and further assume that the borings are representaƟve of the subsurface condiƟons throughout the site.

If during construcƟon, different subsurface condiƟons from those encountered during our exploraƟons are observed or appear to be
present beneath excavaƟons, we must be advised promptly so that we can review these condiƟons and reconsider our
recommendaƟons where necessary.

If there is a substanƟal lapse of Ɵme between the submission of our report and the start of work at the site, or if condiƟons have
changed due to natural causes or construcƟon operaƟons at or adjacent to the site, we urge that our report be reviewed to determine
the applicability of the conclusions and recommendaƟons considering the changed condiƟons and Ɵme lapse.

We urge that we be retained to review those porƟons of the plans and specificaƟons that pertain to earthwork and foundaƟons to
determine whether they are consistent with our recommendaƟons. In addiƟon, we are available to observe construcƟon, parƟcularly
the compacƟon of structural backfill and preparaƟon of the foundaƟons, and such other field observaƟons as may be necessary.

In order to fairly consider changed or unexpected condiƟons that might arise during construcƟon, we recommend the following
verbiage (Standard Clause for UnanƟcipated Subsurface CondiƟons) be included in the project contract.

STANDARD CLAUSE FOR UNANTICIPATED SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

“The owner has had a subsurface exploraƟon performed by a soils consultant, the results of which are contained in the consultant’s
report. The consultant’s report represents their conclusions on the subsurface condiƟons based on their interpretaƟons of the data
obtained in the exploraƟon. The contractor acknowledges that they have reviewed the consultant's report and any addenda thereto,
and that their bid for earthwork operaƟons is based on the subsurface condiƟons as described in that report. It is recognized that a
subsurface exploraƟon may not disclose all condiƟons as they actually exist and further, condiƟons may change, parƟcularly
groundwater condiƟons, between the Ɵme of a subsurface exploraƟon and the Ɵme of earthwork operaƟons. In recogniƟon of these
facts, this clause is entered in the contract to provide a means of equitable addiƟonal compensaƟon for the contractor if adverse
unanƟcipated condiƟons are encountered and to provide a means of rebate to the owner if the condiƟons are more favorable than
anƟcipated.

At anyƟme during construcƟon operaƟons that the contractor encounters condiƟons that are different than those anƟcipated by the
soils consultant’s report, they shall immediately (within 24 hours) bring this fact to the owner’s aƩenƟon. If the owner’s representaƟve
on the construcƟon site observes subsurface condiƟons which are different than those anƟcipated by the consultant’s report, they shall
immediately (within 24 hours) bring this fact to the contractor’s aƩenƟon. Once a fact of unanƟcipated condiƟons has been brought to
the aƩenƟon of either the owner or the contractor, and the consultant has concurred, immediate negoƟaƟons will be undertaken
between the owner and the contractor, to arrive at a change in contract price for addiƟonal work or reducƟon in work because of the
unanƟcipated condiƟons. The contractor agrees that the following unit prices would apply for addiƟonal or reduced work under the
contract. For changed condiƟons for which unit prices are not provided, the addiƟonal work shall be paid for on a Ɵme and materials
basis.”

Another example of a changed condiƟons clause can be found in paper No. 4035 by Robert F. Borg, published in ASCE ConstrucƟon
Division Journal, No. CO2, September 1964, page 37.