20020522 Ver 3_More Info Received_20081118

cv 8 2[IQ?
Geoscience UE?IR - WAS =R QUALM
Group, Inc. WEP ANDS ANO STORMWATER ?kANG 1
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
To: Division of Water Quality
2321 Crabtree Boulevard
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699
Attn: Joseph G amfi
We are sending you: Attached Under separate cover
VIA: ---- Overnight Regular Mail
d _.j 1-7
The following items: e Shop Drawings Prints
Specifications Copy of Letter
Consulting Engineers
DATE: 11.17.08 CH02.0585.CO
TASK:
PHASE:
Morrison Plantation
BMP #3 Modification
F1 Pick-up 0 Hand Delivered/Couriered
Calculations Disks
e Change Order Other
Copies Date No. Description
3 11.14.08 Express Review Stormwater Management Permit Application Form
1 11.14.08 Signed and Notarized Inspection and Maintenance Agreement
3 11.14.08 Wet Detention Basin Supplement
3 11.14.08 Required Items Checklist
1 10.10.08 $500.00 Application Processing Fee
1 11.14.08 Project Narrative
3 sets 11.14.08 Plans/S ecifications
1 11.14.08 Letter from Town of Mooresville
2 11.14.08 Calculations
1 10.7.99 Geotechnical Report
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
T For Approval
For your use
Remarks:
As Requested Returned for Corrections
For Review an
Copy To:
t /,( sS
500 Clanton Road Charlotte, l; Facsimile
Suite K 28217 704.525.2051
f .
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality 401/Wetlands Unit
EXPRESS REVIEW PROGRAM STORMWATER MANAGEMENT APPLICATION FORM
This form may be photocopied for use as an original
1. GENERAL INFORMATION
name (specify the name of the corporation, individual, etc. who o s the project):
9til'N x}- Z/?f V'11 E fl'/.??h?/4L3 1 t /T CRUD, LG-G
2. OwnSigping Official's name and title (person 1
J : Im M I.f Gf,fkwi; zo x? ; PD.C;,
for facility and compliance):
3. Owner Mailing Address for person listed in item 2 above: /?V-o ym"/ /Y
City: 462 ? State: NC Zip: Z$
Phone Number: ft ?7 (IL Fax Number: Email Address;sJ\ nG6i?4.
G?p-sl
4. Project Name (subdivision, facility, or establishment name - should be consistent with project name on
plans, specifications, letters, inspection and maintenance agreements, etc.):
5. Location of project (Street Address): %
knozP ; 4y" P IY174 Mly ftegLt J
City: WVP9R 0e7Vil,1J Count y: 7,'frc90aL
6. Directions to project site (from nearest major intersection)-
A-7- I N T? ? EL7'i21? OF "z)7-/ iy P4?iY7J9 ZAV-/ ,Q° ?/w. *Yo
__lz;?,r_(zl<i % T??M /ZFZa4n . ,, /
7. Latitude:'] N Longitude: 05 I /VV of project
8. Contact person who can answer questions about the project:
Name: 1G4?1-V / /•J 1?f7.D1?1/G2C, Telephone Number: "D Jkt • Z Z 5
Fax Number: 70 5L5-• 7-057 Email Address: U44C4;lWN'GL, 6W!????Yf -LVkV
1/2008 Version 1.0 Page 1 of 5
D @?
UENR 4W ER WA.11"
Y&RAIMS AND STORMWATER IRON

Il. PERMIT INFORMATION
1. Specify whether project is (check one): New Renewal ? Modification
2. If this is anew project, under which local government's jurisdiction does the project fall (e.g. Town of
Cary, City of Raleigh, or Wake County)? -rCW l/ t9P
3. Is there a state-approvedstormwater management program implemented by the local government or state
under any of the following programs (Check all that apply)?
Phase II Post Construction i Water Supply Watershed Neuse or Tar Pamlico NSW
Randleman WSWS USMP Coastal Counties HQW ORW
4. If this application is being submitted for a renewal or modification to an existing permit, list the existing
permit number and its issue date (if known)
5. Specify the type of project' (check one):
Low Density V High Density Redevelopment General Permit Other
6. Additional Project Requirements (check the ones applicable):
CAMA Major Sedimentation/Erosion Control 404/401 Permit /NPDES Stormwater -Other
Information on required state permits can be obtained by contacting the Customer Service Center at
1-877-623-6748
III. PROJECT INFORMATION
I . In the space provided below, summarize how stormwater will be treated. Also attach a detailed narrative
(one to two pages) describing stormwater management for the project.
D+ ih?iFl /97LF9. ? 1
Wts?l' P7NO wiGL Mfj?jI 'OV1 n W67M FROM
14/'(,L 94JIDi/10 ?M /D D/? T/tFi T?? 'DZ.,C" LIIZI'!2•
2. Stormwater runoff from this project drains to the 61f(rl 9.0* ge LG47? River basin.
3. Total Project Area: & 1171 #D acres 4. Project Built Upon Area: 1V %
5. How many drainage areas does the project have?
6. Complete the following information for each drainage area. If there are more than two drainage areas in
the project, attach an additional sheet with the information for each area provided in the same format as
below.
Basin Information
Receiving Stream Name Drainage Area 1
vnr/.!x}M g 7e13, M7nW$ Drainage Area.2
Z? t-kT
Receiving Stream Class h
Drainage Area / 5 6 , 5
Existing Impervious* Area 3 Z q 12
Proposed Impervious*Area q'"j7 l q
% Impervious* Area (total) 1'D
1/2008 Version 1.0 Page 2 of 5
}
Impervious* Surface Area
On-site Buildings Drainage Area,`1 Drainage Area 2
On-site Streets
On-site Parking
On-site Sidewalks
Other on-site
Off-site
Total: 4 T? 9 C Total:
* Impervious area is defined as the built upon area including, but not limited to, buildings, roads, parking
areas, sidewalks, gravel areas, etc.
7. How was the off-site impervious area listed above derived? 4A.
IV. DEED RESTRICTIONS AND PROTECTIVE COVENANTS
The following italicized deed restrictions and protective covenants are required to be recorded for all
subdivisions, outparcels and future development prior to the sale of any lot. If lot sizes vary significantly, a
table listing each lot number, size and the allowable built-upon area for each lot must be provided as an
attachment.
1. The following covenants are intended to ensure ongoing compliance with state riparian buffer
authorization or General Certification numbers as issued by the
Division of Water Quality. These covenants may not be changed or deleted without the consent of the
State.
2. No more than square feet of any lot shall be covered by structures or impervious
materials. Impervious materials include asphalt, gravel, concrete, brick, stone, slate or similar material
but do not include wood decking or the water surface of swimming pools.
3. Swales shall not be filled in, piped, or altered except as necessary to provide driveway crossing.
4. Built-upon area in excess of the permitted amount requires a modified water quality certification prior to
construction.
5. All permitted runofffrom outparcels or future development shall be directed into the permitted stormwater
control system. These connections to the stormwater control system shall be performed in a manner that
maintains the integrity and performance of the system as permitted.
By your signature below, you certify that the recorded deed. restrictions and protective covenants for this
project shall include all the applicable items required above, that the covenants will be binding on all parties
and persons claiming under them, that they will run with the land, that the required covenants cannot be
changed or deleted without concurrence from the State, and that they will be recorded prior to the sale of any
lot.
1/2008 Version 1.0 Page 3 of 5
V. SUPPLEMENT FORMS
The applicable stormwater management supplement form(s) listed below must be submitted for each BMP
specified for this project. The most current form(s) located on the 401/wetlands unit website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/su/binp forms.htm must be used. Please include both the Design Summary and the
Required Items Checklist along with all required items and supporting design calculations.
Bioretention Supplement
Wet Detention Supplement
Dry Detention Supplement
Level Spreader/Filter Strip/Restored Buffer Supplement
Stormwater Wetland Supplement
Grassed Swale Supplement
Sand Filter Supplement
Infiltration Trench Supplement
Infiltration Basin Supplement
Vl. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
Only complete application packages will be accepted and reviewed by the Division of Water Quality (DWQ).
A complete package includes all of the items listed below. The complete application package should be
submitted to the DWQ Central Office.
Please indicate that you have provided the following required information by initialing in the space
provided next to each item. Initials
• Original and two copies of the Express Review Stormwater Management Application
• Signed and Notarized Inspection and Maintenance Agreement
• Three copies of the applicable Supplement Form(s) for each BMP
• Application processing fee (payable to DWQ)
• Detailed narrative description of stormwater treatment/management
• Three copies of plans and specifications, including:
- Development/Project name
l - Engineer and firm
- Legend
- North arrow
- Scale
v a - Revision number & date
- Mean high water line
- Dimensioned property/project boundary
- Location map with named streets or NCSR numbers
- Original contours, proposed contours, spot elevations, finished floor elevations
- Details of roads, drainage features, collection systems, and stormwater control measures
- Wetlands and streams delineated, or a note on plans that none exist
- Existing drainage (including off-site), drainage easements, pipe sizes, runoff calculations
- Drainage areas delineated
- Vegetated buffers (where required)
1/2008 Version 1.0 Page 4 of 5

VII. AGENT AUTHORIZATION
If you wish to designate authority to another individual or firm so that they may provide information on your
behalf, please complete this section.
Designated agent (individual or firm):
Mailing Address:
City: State: Zip:
Phone: Fax: L?
VIII. APPLICANT'S CERTIFICATION
1, (print or type name of person listed in General Information, item 2)
certify that the information included on this application form is, to the best of my knowledge, correct and that
the project will be constructed in conformance with the approved plans, that the required deed restrictions and
protective covenants will be recorded, and that the proposed project complies with the requirements of 15A
NCAC 2H .1000.
Signature: C" tlu*- Date: 11. ( ? a
1/2008 Version 1.0 Page 5 of 5
PROTECT NARRATIVE
BMP #3 in Morrison Plantation will be revised to accommodate an additional 14.5 acres of
development. The total drainage area to the pond will be 156.5 acres and will be developed so
that the impervious area does not exceed 70%. The attached letter from the Town of Mooresville
indicates that development is controlled by the Town and can not exceed 70%
The pond will treat the storm water runoff from the first 1" of runoff from the total drainage area
and is designed to remove 90% of the TSS during the design storm.
METHODOLOGY
The pond was designed using methods outlined in the State's BMP manual.
CONCLUSION
The pond as submitted meets the criteria for a high density development and will remove 90% of
the TSS during the design storm.
Town of Mooresville Planning Department
413 North Main Street Tojept e i "2-7040
Post Office box V8 Fox n04i K2-7039
MocrssviM. NC 28115 USA
November 14, 2008
Kevin S. Caldwell, P.E.
Geoscienc a Group
500-K Clanton Road
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
RE: Morrison Plantation BMP
Mr. Caldwell:
The Town of Mooresville administers the Water Supply Watershed Regulations within the towns
planning jurisdiction. The town uses the State Watershed Ordinance that has been included into the
Town Of Mooresville Zoning Ordinance.
Section 4.2 of the zoning ordinance outlines the regulations for development in the various
watershed areas. Morrison Plantation is located within the WS-IV Catawba-Lake Norman
watershed area. Section 4.2.8 states:
4.2.8 WS-IV-PA ProhmW Area
All development on lots located within the WS4V-PA portion of the Watershed Protection
Overlay District shall comply with the following standards:
(A)L mdscaped Buffer
Ali lots of less than one acre shall maintain a ten-foot-wide landscaped
perimeter buffer around the entire lot (except areas needed for ingress
and egress) unless underlying base zoning district requirements specify a
wider buffer. Lots of one acre in size or larger shall be exempt from this
requirement. Utilities shall be located outside of this buffer to the
maximum extent practicable.
(B)Impervious Surface Cover Options
All new development that includes land disturbing activities affecting an
area of one acre or more in size shall prepare an erosion/sedimentation
control plan consistent with the requirements in the Town's land
development Design Guidelines Manual and shall utiile one of the
following two Impervious surface cover options:
(QIAw Impervious Option
SinplefamHy detached dwellings or duplex uses shall be limited to a
maximum density of two units per acre; and
NI other residential and nonresidential uses shall be developed such that
the area associated with all impervious surfaces shall not exceed
24 percent of the site or project area where they are located.
(D)High Impervious Option
Residential density shall be limited to units permitted by the underlying
base zoning district;
Residential densities shall not exceed that authorized by the underlying
base zoning district;
Norvesidentiai uses shall be developed such that the area associated with
all impervious surfaces shall not exceed 70 percent of the lot, site,
or project area where they are located;
AN development shall utilize engineered stormwater controls (i.e., Best
Management Practices) configured in accordance with the
standards in Section 4.2.10, Stormwater Control Structures, to
control runoff from the first inch of rainfall falling during a storm
event, and direct storm water away from surface waters;
In cases where new development requires an amendment to the Official
Zoning District Map, the development shall obtain a Conditional
Use Permit in accordance with the requirements in Section 23.3,
Conditional Use Permit; and
in cases where the development proposal does not require an
amendment to the Official Zoning Map, a Concept Plan prepared
in accordance with Section 2.3.8. Concept Plan, shall be
approved by the Town Board of Commissioners.
As noted., devdopnieat in this area shall be limited to 70% impervious coverage subject to the
instanation of approprmte BW measures. The town reviews all site plans for compliance to this
regulation. Fiuthavmore, the Town's manual also references General Statute 143-2145, which is the
basis for the watershed regulations in the State of North Carolina. If you have any further questions
or concerns please contact me.

Senior Planner, Town ofMooresville
PO Box 878
Mooresviik NC 28115
[phone]
gg berson ay mo4tmes??rlle-nc.us
Permit No.
(to be ptovalcil by OWUI
III. REQUIRED ITEMS CHECKLIST
Please indicate the page or plan sheet numbers where the supporting documentation can be found. An incomplete submittal package will
result in a request for additional information. This will delay final review and approval of the project. Initial in the space provided to
indicate the following design requirements have been met. If the applicant has designated an agent, the agent may initial below. If a
requirement has not been met, attach justification.
Page/ Plan
ials Sheet No.
_ Sheet 1/1 1. Plans (1" 50' or larger) of the entire site showing:
Design at ultimate build-out,
Off-site drainage (if applicable),____ __ _ --- ------- - --?
?De4+neeted-drainage basins (include Rational C coefficient per basin),

Pretreatment system,
High flow bypass system,
Maintenance access,
Proposed drainage easement and public right of way (ROW),
Overflow device, and
Boundaries of drainage easement.
Sheet 1/1 2. Partial plan (1" = 30' or larger) and details for the wet detention basin showing:
Outlet structure with trash rack or similar,
Maintenance access,
Permanent pool dimensions,
Forebay and main pond with hardened emergency spillway,
Basin cross-section,
Vegetation specification for planting shelf, and
-Filter strip.
Pt/ Sheet 111 3. Section view of the wet detention basin (1" = 20' or larger) showing:
Side slopes, 3:1 or lower,
Pretreatment and treatment areas, and
-Inlet and outlet structures.
Sheet 1/1 4. If the basin is used for sediment and erosion control during construction, clean out of the basin is specified
on the plans prior to use as a wet detention basin.
calculations 5. A table of elevations, areas, incremental volumes & accumulated volumes for overall pond and for forebay,

Sheet 1/1 to verify volume provided.
6. A construction sequence that shows how the wet detention basin will be protected from sediment until the
entire drainage area is stabilized.
calculations 7. The supporting calculations.

attached 8. A copy of the signed and notarized operation and maintenance (0&M) agreement.

na 9. A copy of the deed restrictions (if required).

attached 10. A soils report that is based upon an actual field investigation, soil borings, and infiltration tests. County
soil maps are not an acceptable source of soils information.
Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin-Rev. 5 Part III. Required Items Checklist, Page 1 of 1
Permit No.
(to be pi(wadcrl by 0 WQJ
III. REQUIRED ITEMS' CHECKLIST
Please indicate the page or plan sheet numbers where the supporting documentation can be found. An incomplete submittal package will
result in a request for additional information. This will delay final review and approval of the project. Initial in the space provided to
indicate the following design requirements have been met. if the applicant has designated an agent, the agent may initial below. If a
requirement has not been met, attach justification.
Pagel Plan
ials Sheet No.
Sheet 1/1 1. Plans (1" 50' or larger) of the entire site showing:
Design at ultimate build-out,
Off-site drainage (it applicable),
Delineated drainage basins (include Rational C coefficient per basin),
Basin dimensions,
Pretreatment system,
Nigh flow bypass system,
Maintenance access,
Proposed drainage easement and public right of way (ROW),
Overflow device, and
Boundaries of drainage easement.
Sheet 1/1 2. Partial plan (1" = 30' or larger) and details for the wet detention basin showing:
Outlet structure with trash rack or similar,
Maintenance access,
Permanent pool dimensions,
Forebay and main pond with hardened emergency spillway,
Basin cross-section,
- Vegetation specification for planting shelf, and
Filter strip.
Sheet 1/1 3. Section view of the wet detention basin (1" = 20' or larger) showing:
Side slopes, 3:1 or lower,
Pretreatment and treatment areas, and
?? -Inlet and outlet structures.
- Sheet 1/1 4. If the basin is used for sediment and erosion control during construction, clean out of the basin is specified
on the plans prior to use as a wet detention basin.
?v calculations 5. A table of elevations, areas, incremental volumes & accumulated volumes for overall pond and for forebay,

Sheet 1/1 to verify volume provided.
6. A construction sequence that shows how the wet detention basin will be protected from sediment until the
entire drainage area is stabilized.
calculations 7. The supporting calculations.

attached 6. A copy of the signed and notarized operation and maintenance (0&M) agreement.

na 9. A copy of the deed restrictions (if required).

attached 10. A soils report that is based upon an actual field investigation, soil borings, and infiltration tests. County
soil maps are not an acceptable source of soils information.
Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin-Rev.5 Part III. Required Items Checklist, Page 1 of 1
Permit No
(to be provided by DWQ)
111. REQUIRED ITEMS CHECKLIST
Please indicate the page or plan sheet numbers where the supporting documentation can be found. An incomplete submittal package will
result in a request for additional information. This will delay final review and approval of the project. Initial in the space provided to
indicate the following design requirements have been met. If the applicant has designated an agent, the agent may initial below. If a
requirement has not been met, attach justification.
Page/ Plan
ials Sheet No.
Sheet 1/1 1. Plans (1" 50' or larger) of the entire site showing:
Design at ultimate build-out,
Off-site drainage (if applicable),
Delineated drainage basins (include Rational C coefficient per basin),
Basin dimensions,
Pretreatment system,
High flow bypass system,
Maintenance access,
Proposed drainage easement and public right of way (ROW),
Overflow device, and
Boundaries of drainage easement.
Sheet 1/1 2. Partial plan (1" = 30' or larger) and details for the wet detention basin showing:
Outlet structure with trash rack or similar,
Maintenance access,
Permanent pool dimensions,
Forebay and main pond with hardened emergency spillway,
Basin cross-section,
Vegetation specification for planting shelf, and
-Filter strip.
Sheet 1/1 3. Section view of the wet detention basin (1" = 20' or larger) showing:
Side slopes, 3:1 or lower,
Pretreatment and treatment areas, and

Sh
1/1 -Inlet and outlet structures.
eet 4. If the basin is used for sediment and erosion control during construction, clean out of the basin is specified
on the plans prior to use as a wet detention basin.
calculations 5. A table of elevations, areas, incremental volumes & accumulated volumes for overall pond and for forebay,

h to verify volume provided.
S
eet 1/1 6. A construction sequence that shows how the wet detention basin will be protected from sediment until the
entire drainage area is stabilized.
calculations 7. The supporting calculations.

attached 8. A copy of the signed and notarized operation and maintenance (0&M) agreement.

na 9. A copy of the deed restrictions (if required).

attached 10. A soils report that is based upon an actual field investigation, soil borings, and infiltration tests. County
soil maps are not an acceptable source of soils information.
Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin-Rev.5 Part III. Required Items Checklist, Page 1 of 1

I't-i n i Numb vi
s
(h) hr /anrrrlr,/ ht I t{I OI
Ihainavo- r\tca Ni n?hrt.
Wet Detention Basin Operation and Maintenance /Agreement
I will keep it maintenance record ol? this IMIP. This inainlenante retard twill bt, kept ill a
It) in it knotyrt set lo( alit )n. Alw delicit'nl IMIP t'lt'mt•nls Iwwd in lilt' inspet lion will ht,
corrected, repaired t+r replilt et1 inunedI,Ilely. 'I'hcse dt-IWiencit's can aflecl tilt' int(}grily
of structures, safety of the public, and lilt' removal cllicit'nry of the BM P.
The vvel detention basin sv?sten? iti delined as tht' wet detention basin,
preh-eattnMt includin}; forebovti and the ve);etated filter if ()I)(- I'S provided.
This system (check one):
?A does n does not incorporate: a vegetated filter at the outlet.
This system (che'c'k one):
I I does [? does not incorporate pretreatment other than a forebay.
Important maintcnanrr procedures:
Ilnniedialely after the reel detention basllt is established, tilt' plants on the
vegetated shell and perimeter o) the hasin should be watered twice weekly it
needed, until the plants become established (commonly six weeks).
No portion of the wet detention pond should be fertilized after the first initial
fertilization that is required to establish the plants on the vegetated shelf.
Stable groundcover should be maintained in the drainage area to reduce the
sediment load to the wet detention basin.
If the basin must be drained for an emergt'ncy or to perform maintenance, the
flushing of sediment through the emergency drain should be minimiz.ed to the
maximum extent practical.
Once it year, it dam safety expert should inspect the embankment.
./After the wet detention pond is established, it should be inspected once a month and
within 24 hours afjec,every storm event greater than 1.0 inches (or 1.5 inches if in a
Coastal County.. t,:ords of operation and maintenance should he kept in it known set
location and:'tin4st? (` available upon request.
Inspection *.-tivitles shall be performed as follows. Any problems that are found shall
he repaired imniodiately.
13MPelement: Potential problem: Itow t wilt remediatc the problem:
`the entire BMP Trash/debris is f,res nt. Kenu?ve the trash/debris.
't'he perimeter of the wet Areas of bare soil and/or Kegrade the soil if necessary to
detention basin erosive gullies have lornied. remove the pilly, and then plant a
ground cover and water until it is
established. Provide lime and a
tint -time fertilizer application.
Vegetation is too short or too Maintain vege tatirnt at it height of
tong. ??t,proxlmatcly Six inchcti
htrm S\\1.101 Wel Delei lion Ilwan (MM-Rev. t
Pa,,,c 1 o I'
1

Pt'lnul Nimik-I
(to hr?,r.?rlJ.vl hr 1111
I )lmmwc Aic:1 Nunlbrl
IMP clement: Potential problem: I low I will rertlediate the problem:
The inlet device: I1ipc or I'll(- Pipe is l hit lO}; tlll' till,(- 1 lis)osc of Illy
Swale s(-dno(-nl ()II :,ill'
'I h(- pip(- is l iatkcd m R(-plat (- dlc pip(-
olllert? im. damaged.
1'rosioll is Ill(111'1'111g ill tlic gild(' Illc Swale it ll('( 111
shallc 'AllOoth it over alld provide cr(1S1Oll
(ontl'ol dcVit Y'S sill Il i1S I-villf(1rc(-(1
tort matting of l'IPI'.lp to avold
Illlure problvills with croslon.
The forebay Iledllliell1 hiK h ('11111111aled to Seal'C'h for theStodge(` (A the
a deplll )"re'ller 111,111 the s(-lllllll'llt and 1-cilletiv the probleill it
original dv%ign deptil for po."Sible. Ruillovc Ilic Sedillll'llt and
sedlllll'111 Storage diSpo%c of it ill a lol'atioll 1v11(-rl' It
vcill 11th ('mlm' 1111p,Icts to strl` Ims m
thc
Fl-osion has 0( c11rr(-d. Provide addilional crosion
prott-diun such as Icintort cd 1111'1
Illatting or riprap it needed to
prevent fliturc erosioll prol'1e'111s.
Weeds are I)IVSent. Remove the weeds, preferahly I)v
hand. If pesticide is used, wipe it on
the plants rather than Sprayine'.
The vegetated shelf Best professional practices Prune according to hest professional
show that pruning is needed practices
to maintain optimal plant
health.
Plants are dead, diseased or Determine the source of the
dyinl;. I,roblenl: Soils, hydrolo},y, disease',
etc. Renu•dy the problem and
replace plants. Provide a one-lime
fertilizvr application to establish the
grotnld cover it a soil test indicates
it is necessary.
Weds are present. RCM 1Ve the weeds, prc`fetahly by
hand. If pesticide is used, wipe it Oil
the pants rather than s pr•ayin Z.
The main treatment area Sediment has accumulated to Search for the source of the
a depth greater than the sediment and remedy the problem if
original design Sediment pOSS1ble. RCI11OVC the Sediment and
stol"lge d(`p(h. dispose Of it ill it location lvhere It
will not cause Illlpacts to stl'emilS of.
the 13M1'.
Algal growth covers over Consult a professional to remove
50'%. of the area. and control the algal growth.
Cattails, phragillites or other Remove the plants by wiping them
invasive plants cover 50% of with pesticide (do not spray.
the' hasill st11'ti1ce.
Fmnl SW•401-Wel I)ctcnlion Basin Oc-M-Rev.3
Pa4,C 01 '2
Permit Number:
(to be provided by DWQ)
Drainage Area Number:
BMP element: Potential problem: How I will remediate the problem:
The embankment Shrubs have started to grow Remove shrubs immediately.
on the embankment.
Evidence of muskrat or Use traps to remove muskrats and
beaver activity is present. consult a professional to remove
beavers.
A tree has started to grow on Consult a dam safety specialist to
the embankment. remove the tree.
An annual inspection by an Make all needed repairs.
appropriate professional
shows that the embankment
needs repair. if applicable)
The outlet device Clogging has occurred. Clean out the outlet device. Dispose
of the sediment off-site.
The outlet device is damaged Repair or replace the outlet device.
The receiving water Erosion or other signs of Contact the local NC Division of
damage have occurred at the Water Quality Regional Office, or
outlet. the 401 Oversight Unit at 919-733-
1786.
The measuring device used to determine the sediment elevation shall be such
that it will give an accurate depth reading and not readily penetrate into
accumulated sediments.
When the permanent pool depth reads 776 feet in the main pond, the sediment
shall be removed.
When the permanent pool depth reads 780 feet in the forebay, the sediment
shall be removed.
BASIN DIAGRAM
ill in the blanks)
Sediment Removal
Bottom
Permanent Pool Elevation 786.53
780 Pe nen`?
------------------ Volume
779 -ft Min.
Sediment
Storage
FOREBAY
Pool
-----Sediment Removal Elevation 776 Volume
Bottom Elevation 775 =1-ft
MAIN POND
Storage
Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin O&M-Rev. 3 Page 3 of 3
Permit Number:
(to be provided by DWQ)
I acknowledge and agree by my signature below that I am responsible for the
performance of the maintenance procedures listed above. I agree to notify DWQ of any
problems with the system or prior to any changes to the system or responsible party.
Project name:Morrison Plantation BMP#3
BMP drainage area number: 1-156.5 acres
Print name: Carolina Income Management Group LLC c/o Jimmy Flowers
Title: President
Address: 1400 Hardin¢ Place Suite 100, Charlotte North Carolina 28204
Phone: [phone]
Signature:
.v8
Note: The legally responsible party should not be a homeowners association unless more than 50% of
the lots have been sold and a resident of the subdivision has been named the president.
I, , a Notary Public for the State of
County of , do hereby certify that
personally appeared before me this 4 14
W , and acknowledge the due execution of the
day of&LV47(h?U 01/
forgoing wet detention basin maintenance requirements. Witness my hand and official
seal,
?pP gotY.t6..,,y?°•
: v
SEAL
My commission expires D(r/1O??09
Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin O&M-Rev.3 Page 4 of 4
?.. Permit No.
(to be provided by DWQ)
o??F W ATtc9QG
O <
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT APPLICATION FORM
401 CERTIFICATION APPLICATION FORM
WET DETENTION BASIN SUPPLEMENT
This form must be filled out, printed and submitted.
The Required Items Checklist (Part 111) must be printed, filled out and submitted along with all of the required information.
Project name Morrison Plantation BMPM3
Contact person Kevin Caldwell
Phone number 704.525.2003
Date 11.14.08
Drainage area number 156.5
She Characteristics
Drainage area 6,817,140 ftz
Impervious area, post-development 4,771,998 ft2
% impervious 70.00%
Design rainfall depth 1.0 in
Storage Volume: Non-SA Waters
Minimum volume required 1,462,309 ft3 OK
Volume provided 1,462,309 ff3
OK, volume provided is equal to or in excess of volume required.
Storage Volume: SA Waters
1.5' runoff volume na ff3
Pre-development 1-yr, 24-hr runoff ff3
Post-development 1-yr, 24-hr runoff ff3
Minimum volume required na ft3
Volume provided ff3
Peak Flow Calculations
Is the pre/post control of the 1 yr 24hr storm peak flow required? n (Y or N)
1-yr, 24-hr rainfall depth in
Rational C, pre-development (unitless)
Rational C, post-development (unitless)
Rainfall intensity: l -yr, 24-hr storm in/hr
Pre-development 1-yr, 24-hr peak flow ff3/sec
Post-development 1-yr, 24-hr peak flow ff3/sec
Pre/Post 1-yr, 24-hr peak flow control ff3/sec
Elevations
Temporary pool elevation 788.51 fmsl
Permanent pool elevation 786.53 fmsl
SHWT elevation (approx. at the perm. pool elevation) 786.53 fmsl
Top of 10ff vegetated shelf elevation 787.03 fmsl
Bottom of 10ff vegetated shelf elevation 786.03 fmsl
Sediment cleanout, top elevation (bottom of pond) 776.00 fmsl
Sediment cleanout, bottom elevation 775.00 fmsl
Sediment storage provided 1.00 ft
Is there additional volume stored above the state-required temp. pool? n (Y or N)
Elevation of the top of the additional volume fmsl
Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin-Rev.5 Pans I. & II. Design Summary, Page 1 of 2
A -
Permit No.
(to be provided by DWO)
Surface Areas
Area, temporary pool 203,122 ft2
Area REQUIRED, permanent pool 174,519 ft2
SA/DA ratio 2.56 (unkless)
Area PROVIDED, permanent pool, A,, ,_p., 184,063 ft OK
Area, bottom of 10ft vegetated shelf, Abm_enen 166206 ft
Area, sediment cleanout, top elevation (bottom of pond), A l wd 13,156 ft2
Volumes
Volume, temporary pool 1,462,309 ft3 OK
Volume, permanent pool, Vperrn-pwl 1,075,932 ft3
Volume, forebay (sum of forebays if more than one forebay) 251,677 ft3
Forebay % of permanent pool volume 23.4% % Insufficient forebay volume.
SAMA Table Data
Design TSS removal 90%
Coastal SA/DA Table Used? n (Y or N)
Mountain/Piedmont SA/DA Table Used? y (Y or N)
SA/DA ratio 2.56 (untless)
Average depth (used in SA/DA table):
Calculation option 1 used? (See Figure 10-2b) n (Y or N)
Volume, permanent pool, Vperm_pDo, 1,075,932 ft3 OK
Area provided, permanent pool, Aperm,, 184,063 ft2 OK
Average depth calculated 5.84 It OK
Average depth used in SA/DA, deV, (Round to nearest 0.5ft) 5.8 It OK
Calculation option 2 used? (See Figure 10-2b) n (Y or N)
Area provided, permanent pool, Ap,,_p i 184,063 ft OK
Area, bottom of 1 Oft vegetated shelf, Abot hetl 166,206 ft OK
Area, sediment cleanout, top elevation (bottom of pond), Awond 13,156 ft2 OK
"Depth" (distance b/w bottom of 1 Oft shelf and top of sediment) 10.03 it OK
Average depth calculated 3.30 it OK
Average depth used in SA/DA, deV, (Round to nearest 0.5ft) 5.8 ft OK
Drawdown Calculations
Drawdown through orifice? y (Y or N)
Diameter of orifice (if circular) 7.00 in Enter either diameter of orifice or area of non-circular orifice. Do not enter
Area of orifice (if-non-circular) 0.27 in2 both diameter and area for a circular orifice.
Coefficient of discharge (Co) 0.65 (unitless)
Driving head (Ho) 1.98 it
Drawdown through weir? n (Y or N)
Weir type (unitless)
Coefficient of discharge (Q (unitless)
Length of weir (L) ft
Driving head (H) ft
Pre-development 1-yr, 24-hr peak flow ft3/sec
Post-development 1-yr, 24-hr peak flow ft3/sec
Storage volume discharge rate (through discharge orifice or weir) ft3/sec
OK, draws down in 2-5 days.
Storage volume drawdown time 4.90 days Drawdown time varying from expected value by more than a half day.
Check calculation.
Additional Information
Vegetated side slopes 3 :1 OK
Vegetated shelf slope 10 :1 OK
Vegetated shelf width 10.0 ft OK
Length of flowpath to width ratio 3 :1 OK
Length to width ratio 2.0 :1 OK
Trash rack for overflow & orifice? y (Y or N) OK
Freeboard provided 4 ft OK
Vegetated filter provided? n (Y or N) OK
Recorded drainage easement provided? y (Y or N) OK
Capures all runoff at ultimate build-out? y (Y or N) OK
Drain mechanism for maintenance or emergencies sluice gate
Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin-Rev.5 Parts 1.8 II. Design Summary, Page 2 of 2
Report Of
Subsurface Exploration
Morrison Plantation
Area 3
Iredell County, North Carolina
Geoscience Project No. 19054
Prepared For.
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
428 E. Fourth Street, Suite 302
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202
October 7, 1999
Prepared By:
GEOSCENCE GROUP
500 Clanton Road, Suite K
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
Phone [phone] Facsimile [phone]
p ? °.va
N0? 1 g 2008
DS AND STDRMR?
vr??''

October 7, 1999
Consulting Engineers
GEOSCIENCE Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
GROUP 428 E. Fourth Street, Suite 302
' Charlotte, North Carolina 28202
' Attention: Mr. Scott Ritchie
Reference: Report Of Subsurface Exploration
Morrison Plantation
' Area 3
Iredell County, North Carolina
Geoscience Project No. 19054
Geoscience Group, Inc. (Geoscience) has completed the subsurface exploration and
' geotechnical evaluation for the referenced project. This work was performed at the location of
the proposed earthen embankment dam in Area 3 of the Morrison Plantation development in
Iredell County, North Carolina (see Vicinity Map, Drawing No. 19054-3-1). The purpose of
this exploration was to evaluate the general subsurface conditions with regard to foundation
support, provide the necessary geotechnical parameters for design of the proposed
embankment dam, and determine the suitability of the onsite borrow areas for use in
construction of the earth dam. The following sections of this report present the findings along
with our conclusions and recommendations for design and construction of the project.
' SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION
Field Exploration: The subsurface exploration for Area 3 included the execution of ten (10)
soil test borings (3-A through 3-H, 3-H2 and 3-G2) at the approximate locations shown on the
Boring Location Diagram, Drawing No. 19054-3-2, included in the Appendix. At the time our
' field services were performed, the approximate centerline of the proposed roadways for the
Morrison Plantation development were surveyed and staked in 50 feet intervals. The boring
locations were then established in the field by an engineer from Geoscience using this survey
' information as reference. The borings were extended to depths ranging between 15 and 70
feet below the ground surface using continuous-flight, hollow-stem augers. Drilling fluid was
not used in this process.
Standard Penetration Tests were performed in the soil test borings at designated intervals in
general accordance with ASTM D 1586-84. The Standard Penetration Test is used to provide
' an index for estimating soil strength and density. In conjunction with the penetration testing,
split-barrel soil samples were recovered at each test depth. Also, bulk samples of the auger
cuttings were obtained from borings 3-E, 3-F and 3-H. All soil samples obtained during the
' subsurface exploration were returned to our laboratory for soil classification and potential
laboratory tests. Elevations shown on the Test Boring Records and referenced within this
1 500 Clanton Road Charlotte, North Carolina Telephone Facsimile
Suite K 28217 704.525.2003 704.525.2051
Mr. Scott Ritchie
Geoscience Project No. 19054
' October 7, 1999
Page 2

report were interpolated from a September 10, 1998, project drawing entitled "Morrison
Plantation" prepared by LandDesign, Inc. and the roadway profile drawings prepared by the
civil department of Geoscience Group, Inc.
' Laboratory Services: The laboratory services included visual classification of the soil samples
by the project engineer. The color, texture and plasticity characteristics were used to identify
each soil sample in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS).
The results of the visual classifications are presented on the Test Boring Records included in
the Appendix.
Similar subsurface conditions were encountered within the proposed borrow areas and existing
foundation soils and representative samples of these materials were selected for Standard
Proctor compaction tests, permeability tests, Atterberg Limits tests, natural moisture content
determinations, grain size distributions, hydrometer analysis and triaxial shear tests. The
purpose of these laboratory tests was to determine the geotechnical properties of these
i materials for use in the engineering analyses of the proposed earthen embankment, and to
determine the suitability of the potential borrow soils for use as structural fill during
construction of the earthen embankment. Brief descriptions of the laboratory tests and the
results obtained are included in the Appendix.
1 SITE AND SUBSURFACE FINDINGS
Site: The Morrison Plantation development, as shown on the Vicinity Map, Drawing No.
19054-3-1, is located on the west side of Williamson Road, between Highway 150 and
Brawley School Road in Iredell County, North Carolina. The site for the proposed earthen
embankment dam for Area 3 is located in the southern portion of the Morrison Plantation
development. At the time of our site reconnaissance, clearing operations were in progress in
the northern portion of Area 3. The central and southern portions of Area 3 were undeveloped,
' with the groundcover consisting of field grass, brush and intermittent wooded areas. In
addition, an existing stream extended in an approximate east-west direction through the central
portion of Area 3.
The topography across Area 3 is characterized by the above referenced stream. Generally, the
ground surface slopes downward moderately from the north and steeply from the south
towards the existing stream. Based on the topographic information provided to us, high
elevations of approximately 813 and 835 feet (MSL) are present in the northern and southern
portions of Area 3, respectively. A low elevation of approximately 770 feet (MSL) is present
in the flow channel of the existing stream.
Area Geology: The Morrison Plantation development lies within the Charlotte Belt of the
Piedmont Physiographic Province. Based on review of the published information pertaining to
the geology in North Carolina, the parent bedrock underlying the Morrison Plantation

Mr. Scott Ritchie
Geoscience Project No. 19054
October 7, 1999
Page 3

development generally consists of a foliated biotite gneiss. Also present in close proximity to
the subject property is a granitic rock and a mafic metavolcanic rock comprised of
metamorphosed basaltic to andesitic tuffs and flows. Due to these local geologic conditions,
very erratic soil profiles are common.
Subsurface: The subsurface conditions at Area 3, as indicated by the borings, generally
consist of a residual soil profile which has formed from the in-place weathering of the
underlying parent bedrock. However, up to 6 feet of alluvial soils were encountered in borings
3-C and 3-1); for engineering purposes, alluvial soils are considered to be those soils which
1 have been deposited by water. The generalized subsurface conditions are described below and
illustrated on the Generalized Subsurface Profiles, Drawing Nos. 19054-3-3, 19054-3 -4 and
19054-3-5, included in the Appendix. For soil descriptions and general stratification at a
particular boring location, the respective Test Boring Record should be reviewed.
A surficial layer of topsoil and roots is present to depths ranging from approximately 1/4 to '/2
' foot in all the borings performed in Area 3, except 3-E. The absence of topsoil in boring 3-E is
attributed to the clearing operations required to access this testing location. We would
anticipate the deeper topsoil thicknesses to be present in the more heavily vegetated and/or
1 wooded areas of the site. In addition, the root system of large trees can be quite extensive and
normally extends a minimum of 2 to 3 feet below the ground surface.
' Underlying the topsoil in borings 3-C and 3-D, alluvial soils are present to depths of
approximately 3 and 6 feet, respectively. When sampled, the alluvial soils generally consist of
sandy SILTs, clayey SANDs and silty SANDs. The Standard Penetration Test results within
these alluvial soils range from 4 to 8 blows per foot (bpf).
Commencing at the ground surface in boring 3-E, and subjacent to the topsoil in borings 3-G
and 3-H2, residual very clayey SILTs are present to a depth of approximately 3 feet. The
Standard Penetration Resistance values exhibited by these residual very clayey SILTs range
from 13 to 30 bpf.
' Residual micaceous sandy SILTs and silty SANDs, with varying amounts of clay, are present
beneath the topsoil, alluvial soils and/or residual very clayey SILTs in all the borings
performed in Area 3. These residual SILTs and SANDs extend to the respective boring
termination depth. The Standard Penetration Test results within these residual SILTs and
SANDs range from 1 to 65 bpf, with the preponderance of values in the 2 to 18 bpf range.
However, it should be noted that the lower resistance values appear to have been influenced by
' the high moisture conditions and mica content present within these residual soils.
Groundwater Observations: Groundwater measurements were attempted at the completion of
' each boring and again at least 24 hours later. Groundwater was observed in borings 3-A, 3-B,
3-C, 3-D and 3-E at depths ranging from approximately 4 to 26 feet below the existing ground
surface. Based on the topographic information provided to us, these depths to groundwater
correspond to elevations ranging from approximately 772 to 776 feet (MSL). No measurable
groundwater was observed in borings 3-F, 3-G, 3-G2, 3-H and 3-H2.

L

1

Mr. Scott Ritchie
Geoscience Project No. 19054
October 7, 1999
Page 4
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project will consist of a storm water detention reservoir (130 acres)
impounded by an earthen embankment dam located in Area 3. Under the North Carolina
Administrative Code, Title 15A, Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources, Subchapter 2K, Dam Safety, the proposed earthen embankment dam is classified
as a small-high hazard dam (Class C). The proposed earth dam is planned to be a
homogeneous embankment, with the long axis of the dam oriented in an approximate north-
south direction. The embankment will be approximately 450 feet in length and will have a
crest width of approximately 120 feet (right-of-way width of surface roadway crossing).
Based on review of the previously referenced roadway profile drawings, the dam will be
approximately 20 feet in height at the maximum section.
A reservoir intake structure (riserlbarrel type) will be located on the upstream face of the
dam embankment to maintain the normal pool elevation at approximately 3 to 4 feet below
the crest elevation. In addition, a 72-inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) will be connected
to the riser pipe and will extend through the dam to function as the primary outlet.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The conclusions and recommendations outlined herein are based on the project description
outlined above and on the data obtained from our field and laboratory testing programs. The
exploration activities, testing procedures and evaluative approach utilized in this investigation
are in accordance with the guidelines set forth in the above referenced North Carolina
Administrative Code. However, it should be noted that changes in the subsurface conditions
can occur over relatively short distances that could affect the overall performance of the
proposed earthen embankment and appurtenant structures. Therefore, appropriate engineering
observations should be made during construction to confirm the data obtained from the
borings. Qualified engineering services during project design and construction, with post-
construction checks, constitute the owner's best source for minimizing and identifying
potential problems in the early stages before they become critical.
EARTHEN EMBANKMENT
The information outlined in this report should be used to assist in the final design of the
embankment dam and appurtenant structures in Area 3 of the Morrison Plantation
development. The following sections identify the suitability of the onsite soils, address
various construction considerations and present the results of the analyses performed on the
critical cross-section(s) of the proposed embankment.
Foundation Support: Within the area of the proposed embankment, it is recommended that all
topsoil, organic material, alluvial soils and otherwise soft or unsuitable material be removed to
a minimum of 10 feet horizontally outside the proposed embankment limits. However,
dewatering measures will likely be required during these stripping operations in the vicinity of
t

1

Mr. Scott Ritchie
Geoscience Project No. 19054
October 7, 1999
Page 5
the existing stream and borings 3-C and 3-D. Construction recommendations with regard to
groundwater control are presented in the "Groundwater" section of this report. After the
stripping operations have been performed, the exposed subgrades should be inspected by an
experienced geotechnical engineer, or his authorized representative, to determine if unsuitable
materials are still present within the foundation limits of the embankment dam. Further
recommendations with regard to the inspection of the exposed foundation soils are presented
in the "Site Preparation" section of this report.
To account for the potential settlement of the foundation, we recommend that the embankment
be constructed with a minimum 6 inch camber. In addition, the crest should be crowned a
minimum of 3 inches towards the upstream face for positive surface drainage.
Slope Stability: Slope stability analyses were performed for the critical cross-section shown
on Drawing No. 19054-3-6, entitled "Embankment Cross Section." The soil strength
parameters used in the analysis are based on the triaxial shear tests performed on remolded
samples of the proposed borrow soils, and on representative "undisturbed" samples of the
existing foundation soils. The slope stability analyses were performed with the STABL
computer program. This program provides for the general solution of slope stability problems
by a 2-dimensional limiting equilibrium method. Calculation of the factor of safety against
slope instability is performed by the method of slices. The particular method in this version of
the STABL program consists of the modified Bishop's method.
1 The results of the analyses indicate that the factor of safety against long term slope instability
(consolidated-drained analysis) for a downstream slope of 3(H):I(V) meets or exceeds the
required factor of safety of 1.5 as prescribed in the previously referenced North Carolina
Administrative Code. In addition, the factor of safety against a rapid draw-down condition
(consolidated-undrained) for an upstream slope of 2'/z(H): l (V) meets or exceeds the
required factor of safety of 1.25 as prescribed in the North Carolina Administrative Code.
Care should be taken to ensure that the upstream slope of the dam is properly protected
against erosion at the permanent water line and in the zone of anticipated water level
fluctuations.
1 The stability analyses performed on the critical cross-section of the dam also included
calculations against overturning and sliding base failures. The results of these analyses
1 indicated factors of safety against overturning and sliding base failures greater than the 2.0
prescribed in the North Carolina Administrative Code.
1 Seepage: The results of the permeability test performed on a remolded sample of the proposed
borrow materials indicates a permeability of approximately 7.8 x 10-8 cm/sec, for the onsite
clayey to very clayey SILTS. In addition, the results of the permeability test performed on a
' representative "undisturbed" sample of the foundation soils indicates a permeability of
approximately 3.9 x 10' cm/sec, for the onsite silty SANDs. Generally, those soil types with
higher sand concentrations will exhibit higher permeabilities and experience larger seepage
losses.

Mr. Scott Ritchie
Geoscience Project No. 19054
October 7, 1999
Page 6

' A composite flow net was generated for a homogeneous earth dam with a more pervious
foundation. The flow net illustrated on Drawing No. 19054-3-7 is a graphical representation
of the flow of water through a representative cross-section of the dam and foundation soils.
Based on the results of the permeability testing, the magnitude of seepage loss for the
1 representative cross-section of the dam and foundation soils is estimated to be on the order of
5.0 W/day, per linear foot of embankment. The results of this analysis indicate that the
majority of the seepage losses will occur through the sandier foundation soils. However, as
the bottom of the reservoir fills with sediment, these seepage losses will likely reduce over
time.
' As required by the previously referenced North Carolina Administrative Code, piezometers
must be installed to confirm the location of the phreatic surface estimated for the seepage and
slope stability analyses. The design, depths and locations of these piezometers will be
provided by the civil department of Geoscience Group, Inc.
Borrow Source: The proposed borrow sources for the earthen embankment dam in Area 3 are
1 located on the north and south sides of the proposed dam, in the vicinity of borings 3-F, 3-G,
3-G2, 3-H and 3-H2. Based on the results of our visual classifications and laboratory testing, it
appears that the proposed borrow materials generally consist of clayey to very clayey SILTs
and clayey sandy SILTs to depths ranging from approximately 3 to 6 feet below the ground
1 surface. The Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) symbols assigned to these soil types
are ML and MH. According to our evaluation of these materials, it appears that these near-
surface clayey to very clayey SILTs and clayey sandy SILTs will be suitable for use in
' constructing the earthen embankment dam.
Beneath the clayey to very clayey SILTs and clayey sandy SILTs, very sandy SILTs and silty
I SANDs are present to the boring termination depth of 15 feet. The Unified Soil Classification
System (USCS) assigned to these soil types is SM. Due to the higher permeabilities associated
with a sandier composition, special considerations with regard to the use of these materials are
1 warranted. If the magnitude of seepage loss is critical to the dam, then these sandy soils are
generally unsuitable for use in constructing the earthen embankment. However, if required,
these materials would be suitable for use as an outer shell material in a zoned embankment.
It should be noted that we do not recommend that the alluvial soils encountered in borings 3-C
and 3-D be used as structural fill for the earthen embankment. Also, if rip-rap is to be placed
along the upstream slope or at the outlet structure to protect against erosion, an offsite borrow
source will be required. In addition, an offsite borrow source will be necessary to provide
suitable materials for the construction of the toe drain, as referenced later in this report.
' Conduits: Conduits which penetrate the embankment materials should be properly designed to
control the seepage forces which may result in the migration of fine-grained materials into and
along the conduit. Seepage forces can generally be controlled by using anti-seep collars or
' stone diaphragms at the conduit joints, or by placing a properly graded filter material
immediately adjacent to the conduit. If a soil backfill is used for bedding around the conduit,
care should be taken to ensure that the bedding materials are properly compacted; particular
emphasis should be placed on obtaining compaction adjacent to the lower one-third of the
conduit.

Mr. Scott Ritchie
Geoscience Project No. 19054
October 7, 1999
Page 7
Since the proposed embankment will experience some settlement, we have estimated the
required joint extensibility for the proposed 72-inch diameter RCP which will extend through
the dam. Based on articulated segments approximately 8 feet in length, the required joint
extensibility, or maximum probable joint opening, would be on the order of 3 inches.
Primary Spillway Intake And Outlet Structure: It is our understanding that a riser section will
be positioned near the upstream toe of the embankment to maintain the water quality pool
elevation at approximately 3 to 4 feet below the crest elevation. In addition, the riser
section will be hydraulically connected to a 72-inch diameter RCP conduit that extends
through the dam and terminates into a concrete headwall positioned near the downstream
heel of the embankment. Based on the results of our subsurface investigation, the proposed
riser section and concrete headwall can be adequately supported on a shallow foundation
system consisting of spread footings bearing on suitable residual soils or on new, properly
compacted structural fill. Depending on the location of the proposed spillway intake and
outlet structure, some minor undercutting may be required to penetrate the alluvial soils
encountered in borings 3-C and 3-D.
A net allowable bearing pressure of up to 2,500 pounds per square foot (PSF) can be used for
1 design of the foundations. These exterior foundations should be designed to bear at least 18
inches below finished grades for frost protection. Also, the proposed intake and outlet
structures should be designed to withstand lateral earth pressures resulting from hydrostatic
forces and the weight of any backfill. The soil parameters outlined in the "Lateral Earth
Pressures" section of this report can be used to compute the appropriate lateral forces.

1
1

Toe Drain: To aid in controlling the seepage forces associated with a homogeneous
embankment, a filtered trench drain should be installed at the downstream toe of the dam. The
toe drain should consist of a minimum 4-inch diameter perforated PVC pipe imbedded in a
granular backfill (NCDOT No. 57 stone or equivalent) wrapped in a filter fabric (Mirafi 140N
or equivalent) as shown in Drawing No. 19054-3-6. Also, the toe drain should be positively
graded to facilitate proper drainage and discharged to a suitable outlet area. We recommend
that the installation of the toe drain be performed when the depth of fill on the downstream
slope is equal to the proposed height of the drain.
Lateral Earth Pressures: All below-grade walls, headwalls and intake structures (riser pipe)
should be designed to withstand lateral earth pressures resulting from the hydrostatic forces
and the weight of the backfill or supported soils. Additionally, the walls/structures should be
designed to resist the lateral components of surcharge loads occurring within a zone defined by
a plane extending up at a 45 degree angle from the base of the wall/structure. The following
soil parameters are recommended for a level backfill or for the upstream and downstream
embankment slopes of 21/2(H):1(V) and 3(H):I(V), respectively, consisting of the onsite soils
encountered in the borings:
1
1 Mr. Scott Ritchie
Geoscience Project No. 19054
' October 7, 1999
Page 8

1
1
Soil Type Sand SILTs or Silty SANDs Clayey To Very Clayey SILTS
Level Backfill
0.48 0.29
0.32 0.17
115 lb/ft3 120 lb/ft3
Downstream Slope Of 3(H): I V
0.33 0.20
0.38 0.19
115 lb/ft3 1201b/ft3
Upstream Slope Of 2'2(H): I V
0.30 0.18
0.41 0.20
115 lb/ft3 120 lb/ft3
1 For the structures designed to withstand lateral earth pressures, a sliding resistance on the base
of the footing can be calculated using the friction factor, Tan S = 0.35.
Cut And Fill Slopes: All excavations should conform to applicable OSHA regulations.
Permanent cut and fill slopes associated with the reservoir basin and other affiliated areas
should be no steeper than 2'/2(H):1(V), and should be properly seeded to minimize erosion.
This recommendation does not pertain to the upstream or downstream fill slopes of the earthen
' embankment dam. For maintenance purposes, the permanent slopes may need to be flattened
to allow access to mowing equipment. Temporary slopes within undisturbed residual soils,
above the groundwater level, should perform satisfactorily at inclinations of l(H):l(V).
However, if groundwater or soft/saturated alluvial soils are encountered within the
excavations, then temporary dewatering and/or flatter slopes will be required.
PROJECT CONSTRUCTION
Site Preparation: The embankment foundation, and at least 10 feet horizontally outside the
1 proposed embankment limits, should be stripped of all topsoil, organic material, alluvial soils
and other soft or unsuitable material. It should be noted that dewatering measures will likely
be required during these stripping operations in the vicinity of the existing stream. Further
' recommendations in this regard are presented in the "Groundwater" section of this report.
Any resulting excavations should be backfilled with suitable fill material. Upon completion of
these stripping operations, the exposed subgrades within the proposed embankment limits
1 should be proofrolled, where possible, with a loaded dump truck or similar pneumatic-tired
vehicle having a loaded weight of approximately 25 tons. The proofrolling operations should
be performed under the observation of a geotechnical engineer or his authorized representative
from Geoscience. The proofrolling should consist of two (2) complete passes of the exposed
areas, with each pass being in a direction perpendicular to the preceding one. Any areas which
deflect, rut or pump during the proofrolling, and fail to be remedied with successive passes,
' should be undercut to suitable soils and backfilled with compacted fill.
1
Mr. Scott Ritchie
Geoscience Project No. 19054
October 7, 1999
Page 9

Groundwater: Due to the presence of near-surface groundwater in borings 3-C and 3-I),
temporary dewatering will be required during the site preparation activities. In addition, the
existing stream flow will have to be diverted or controlled during construction. Several
' methods for controlling this groundwater would include the used of closed conduits (pipes),
diversion trenches, blanket drains and/or filtered gravity drains that discharge to suitable outlet
areas.
Difficult Excavation: The results of the borings indicate that the onsite soils in Area 3 can be
excavated with conventional construction equipment. Although there can be changes in the
subsurface conditions over relatively short distances, problems associated with excavating
very dense soils and/or rock are not anticipated during construction of the proposed earthen
embankment dam.
' Fill Material And Placement: All fill used for the project should be free of organic matter and
debris with a low to moderate plasticity (Plasticity Index less than 30). The fill should exhibit
a maximum dry density of at least 95 pounds per cubic foot, as determined by a Standard
I Proctor compaction test (ASTM D 698). Moisture control limits of -1 and +2 percent of the
optimum moisture content should be used for optimum placement of project fill, with the
added requirement that fill soils placed wet of optimum remain stable under heavy pneumatic-
tired construction traffic.
As mentioned previously, our visual observation of the soil samples and the results of the
laboratory testing indicate that the majority of the near-surface onsite soils are suitable for use
' in constructing the proposed embankment. However, the laboratory test results indicate that
the natural moisture contents of these soils range from approximately 15'/4 percent below to
4'/2 percent above the optimum moisture content conducive for placement. As a result, drying
' and/or wetting of the onsite soils will be required. The extent of the required moisture
modification will depend upon the weather conditions and the time of year during which site
grading is performed.
' All fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding twelve (12) inches loose thickness and should
be compacted with an adequately sized roller to at least 95 percent of its Standard Proctor
1 maximum dry density. Where the fill is to be placed over the undisturbed residual soils, the
underlying materials should be scarified to a depth of at least 6 inches prior to the placement of
the first fill lift. In addition, fill placed in sloping areas should be properly benched into the
adjacent soils. For isolated excavations around the footing locations, behind below-grade
walls or along the proposed conduits, a hand tamper or walk-behind roller will likely be
required. While using a hand tamper or walk-behind roller, the maximum lift thickness (loose)
should not exceed 5 inches. We recommend that field density tests be performed on the fill as
' it is being placed, at a frequency determined by an experienced geotechnical engineer, to
verify that proper compaction is achieved.
' Footing: Observations: The footing excavations associated with the intake structure or conduit
pipe should be observed by an experience geotechnical engineer or his authorized
representative to verify that suitable soils are present at, and below, the proposed bearing
' elevation. If soft or unsuitable materials are encountered, they may need to be undercut and
replaced with properly compacted fill.
1
Mr. Scott Ritchie
Geoscience Project No. 19054 Consulting Engineers
' October 7, 1999
Page 10
Bearing surfaces for foundations should not be disturbed or left exposed during inclement
weather; saturation of the onsite soils can cause a loss of strength and increased
GEQSC1ENCE compressibility. If construction occurs during inclement weather, and concreting of the
GROUP foundation is not possible at the time it is excavated, a layer of lean concrete should be placed
' on the bearing surface for protection. Also, concrete should not be placed on frozen
subgrades.
CLOSURE
Geoscience appreciates having had the opportunity to assist you during this phase of the
project. Environmental concerns at the site were beyond the scope of services provided by
Geoscience for this phase of the project. If you have a need for environmental services or
have any questions concerning this report, please contact us.
' Respectfully,
GEOSCIENC ROUP, INC.
••, N CA
• • Qi
an ' f'rojfct E
to C ro ma o.24977
E.
Chief Engin er
' North Caroli License No. 11453
DAM/WJS
' Enclosures
File: Gt9054-3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
APPENDIX
Vicinity Map (Drawing No. 19054-3-1)
Boring Location Diagram (Drawing No. 19054-3-2)
Generalized Subsurface Profiles (Drawing Nos. 19054-3-3, 19054-3-4 And 19054-3-5)
Embankment Cross-Section (Drawing No. 19054-3-6)
Flow Net For Embankment Cross-Section (Drawing No. 19054-3-7)
Investigative Procedures
Test Boring Records (3-A Through 3-H, 3-G2 And 3-H2)
Summary Of Laboratory Test Data (Representative Borrow Soils And Foundation Soils)
Laboratory Test Results (Representative Borrow Soils And Foundation Soils)
Summary Of Laboratory Test Data (Area 3 Bulk Samples And Split-Spoon Samples)
Laboratory Test Results (Area 3 Bulk Samples)
ati
4
A vi
0
ago c7 Q,`
> z
A c
?a z?
° G
v H F*
c
W o 44
4
V o W O
0 0.
q• g R
w
W t O
? 8• ; U''\??? .?,? ?? "? `.fit ? v? (a
02I moswyI'I'IIM
`
0° .,• Sri `FUG ?i-\ ?, i, ?._ '
O U
.
0
z
\gal

1
1
1
z
O O lT Lf? N O
m uU N O) Ll Ct -1 Cl) LO n M N N
III
W
O m
(h o C) 00
2 O C l)' c? r-: N N L` r O
M ?t It LO CO
r
z
O n Cl) 00
m W -t Cl) N -t CO Lo Lo 00 - N
h III
o
°
M m
L` OOMCO r, N N n N O
N M Cl) ?t LO
3zz
O O 00 (O O O N M
m L) n NNN N (O co co N
h III
M I ~
0 00
C? lz?
OOM n N n n N r, 6
N N Lo (D O n
3 z _
0 0
m y d'N- M N M ? N
III
.a
yS m
b
C; ?
i- O m
OON(ooo N N N r-? O
N M ct ? LO
F
w
3 z I
O p O Cl) Lo 0
m U (O M' It r O CO M (O
III ??
w
Q ? ?SO
q M o 0 0 <°O ppwF
t~
OOM(= N n N N O r U
N It LO O.Z.O
[a
3P
w
z
O 000 (D Rt 0N O
00 n n n n r`

V o
S
N
U)
J
V

w
> N
~
2
a
~
OZ
N_
0
O
S ¢ M
W M
m
z p
(9 0)
Z

Q
o[

-
Z M z

^ Lu Q)
cc
t Q
Q
?
O z
ti
o
O
E
O Z R
Z
W ati ?
W
p V J

° N m

En
a w

W

Oz a
Q
? w
o
W? N
J
V

Z
n m uj
N
co
z
? w
?
Q
O ?

2

N

H
N
N

J
_
U) II

H
J_ C
M U)

N > Z > 10
. (n c
0 _
U > n o E
cc: >
N y
N H
0 > U U)
CD
Q rn
E C
p 7 7 7 LO 0
N > U)

a
:3
N
N
N m
°
H ¢ cr Ir ¢ z

m
1
1
Z
O 0 M 00
m U ' Q)
N L1J
H
= 0p C7
M 0 (w) w O Z
LO
00 M (O 06 N
O 7 ^ ?}
Jm 0 ? 07 r
N LLJ
F-
? 00 C7
M 0 Z
Co M co 00 C4 LO
z
00 p
m v N I?
W
LL ? 3
M t0 C7
0 Z
co M (O 00 N LO

U Z

O Z

m
Q
J
U

w
m
1
.

Q
H
Z
N

o
a
¢
w
m
Z p

Z v-
3
z ?z
?
?° a
Q
V

Z C
O O
0 Z
LAJ

V J V

W a Z Q

'
?
oa
a o
^?1 V N
r J
V
LLJ
Z
a cy) LQ
} rn
N
m
Z m

cr Q

M 0
J N

? C
J
(CO
U
in to c

U)
O

o

Q T

c0

U
T
f0

>

T
f0
Z
Q

U)
A
l0 O
(a

C
E

5 111

(0
3
v
(D
o
to
a >
v
N >
v
N >
v
N o
m O
Z
O N N N ?
H Qr 0: cr LLI

m z
O LA O LO O LLB O LO O
O O rn rn co 00 r? rl
00 00 co r? rl ? r- r" r-

u
a?
d
0
°Q ?c
a m c? ?
A `?
1 A
a 7Q
?, Q O

^ o z
? o
O U H H z

? 4 0
?' z
w
N Z
V
w
zH
?

>
Wo A
z
°
o
v
a
rT)
>
O
?
O a
?? H
a
U d q ?
a W
x
z

o ? d
o W
0
ui
a H
Q
?
a y
a
w z
zz

m a
0
z

? 0
o
b

4. Q.
80
0
•?
? II II `n ? o
-? -? II II II
c? U U ?B
..d
a Q
zz
H

E' F
a W
w
a
V7
AID >
a CL
far O y., v
0 0. (1

m ti
a g
°
v,'E
a
0
Cl)
O 00
'"" O N
II p v?
c
?z Eg
?s "?
U
O a II II II
U U ?
M
? a
i
v U
W
H
a
F ?
C7
?
i
4. ?
O
u

Z

N?
II II oo

F
y e
c+ C-) II II
U ?-
W N a W
A Wg
hs
3?u
Q
W
O
H

0

GEOSCIENCE GROUP, INC.
' INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURES
Morrison Plantation
Area 3
' Geoscience Project No. 19054
Page 1 Of 2
' FIELD
Soil Test Borings: Ten (10) soil test borings (3-A through 3-H, 3-G2 and 3-H2) were drilled at the
' approximate locations shown on the attached Boring Location Diagram, Drawing No. 19054-3-2. Soil
sampling and penetration testing were performed in accordance with ASTM D 1586-84.
' The borings were advanced with hollow-stem, continuous-flight augers and, at standard intervals, soil
samples were obtained with a standard 1.4-inch (3.6cm) I.D., 2-inch (5.lcm) O.D., split-tube sampler. The
sampler was first seated 6 inches (15.2cm) to penetrate any loose cuttings, then driven an additional 12
' inches (30.5cm) with blows of a 140 pound (63.5kg) hammer falling 30 inches (76.2cm). The number of
hammer blows required to drive the sampler the final 12 inches (30.5cm) was recorded and is designated
the "Standard Penetration Resistance" (N-Value). The Standard Penetration Resistance, when properly
' evaluated, is an index to soil strength, density and ability to support foundations.
Representative portions of each soil sample were placed in glass jars and taken to our laboratory. The
samples were then examined by an engineer to verify the driller's field classifications. Test Boring Records
' are attached indicating the soil descriptions and Standard Penetration Resistances.
LABORATORY
Moisture Content: The moisture content is the ratio, expressed as a percentage, of the weight of the water
in a given mass of soil to the weight of the solid particles. These tests were conducted in accordance with
' ASTM Designation D 2216-66. The test results are presented on the attached sheets.
Soil Plasticity Test (Atterberg Limits Test): Representative samples of the onsite borrow soils were
' selected for Atterberg Limits testing to determine the soil's plasticity characteristics. The Plasticity Index
(PI) is representative of this characteristic and is bracketed by the Liquid Limit (LL) and the Plastic Limit
(PL). The Liquid Limit is the moisture content at which the soil will flow as a heavy viscous fluid and is
determined in accordance with ASTM D 423. The Plastic Limit is the moisture content at which the soil
begins to lose its plasticity and is determined in accordance with ASTM D 424. The data obtained is
presented on the attached sheets.
' Compaction Test: Representative samples of the onsite borrow soils were obtained from auger cuttings to
determine their suitability as fill material. Standard Proctor Compaction Tests (ASTM D 698) were
performed on these soils to determine its compaction characteristics, including maximum dry density and
' optimum moisture content. The test results are presented on the attached sheets.
Permeability: The permeability of a soil indicates the ease with which a fluid will flow through the soil. In
the laboratory, soil permeability is assessed by measuring the time it takes for water to pass through the soil
sample. This is done by either a constant head test or variable head test. In the constant head test, a
column of water of a certain height is kept above the sample throughout the test. The rate at which water
' must be added to compensate for that which flows through the sample is measured. Using this data and
data on the sample size, the approximate hydraulic conductivity is calculated.

' GEOSCIENCE GROUP, INC.
INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURES
' Morrison Plantation
Area 3
Geoscience Project No. 19054
' Page 2 Of 2
(Continued)
Constant head permeability tests were performed on representative remolded samples of the onsite borrow
soils and "undisturbed" samples of the foundation soils. The remolded samples were prepared to near 98
' percent compaction on the wet side of the optimum moisture content as determined by the Standard Proctor
compaction test (ASTM D 698).
' Grain Size Test: Grain size tests were performed to determine the particle size and distribution of
representative samples of the onsite borrow soils. The grain size distribution of soils coarser than a No. 200
sieve was determined by passing the samples through a standard set of nested sieves. This test is similar to
' that described by ASTM D 421 and D 422. The results are presented on the attached sheets.
Hydrometer Analysis: A hydrometer analysis is used to determine the particle size and distribution of
' those particles that pass the No. 200 sieve. The hydrometer method is based on Stoke's equation for the
terminal velocity of a falling sphere. The percentage of soil, by weight, passing the No. 200 sieve is
dispersed into a solution, and the rate at which the individual particles fall out of suspension is recorded.
This test was conducted in accordance with ASTM D 421 and D 422.
Triaxial Test: Representative soils samples of the borrow soils and foundation soils were used in the
' triaxial testing. Remolded samples were compacted to near 98 percent compaction as determined by the
Standard Proctor compaction test (ASTM D 698). The samples were then confined with a rubber
membrane and placed in a triaxial chamber filled with fluid. The fluid is pressurized to a specific confining
' pressure and the sample is sheared, in accordance with ASTM D 2850, by applying an axial load. Pore
pressure measurements are taken during the shearing process and the total and effective stress/strength
parameters are calculated.

?I

1
BORING N-(
DATE DRIL
'. I)R LUNG i

' . PROJECT N
PJ CT:...:
DEPTH, FT
? nn
X99 ?? - TEST
QA: Arerlnli% BORING GEOSCIENCE
r? - RECORD GROUP, INC.
)N*PI A.NTATION - AREA 3_
DESCRIPTION Elev. Blow • PENETRATION - BLOW COUNT"
7RR n+ r-.,t r in 9n qn an Fn Ro inn
Topsoil And Roots ? _
Stiff Brown And Tan Slightly Micaceous
Medium To Fine Sandy Clayey SILT -
14
Residual 7

Firm Brown And Tan Slightly Micaceous
Fine Very Sandy SILT

782.0
Very Loose Brown And Tan Slightly
Micaceous Very Silty Fine SAND
780.0 3
Very Loose Brown, Grey And White
Slightly Micaceous Very Silty Fine SAND
Note: Sample Moist 4

776.0
Very Loose Brown, Grey And White
Slightly Micaceous Silty Medium To Fine
SAND
l
V
M
i
N
t
S
t
ery
e:
amp
e
o
s
o 4

771.0
Very Loose Brown, Grey And White
Slightly Micaceous Silty Medium To Fine
SAND
4

766.0
Loose Brown, Grey And White Slightly
Micaceous Silty Medium To Fine SAND
7

6

8

10
14.6'
uontmueo Next
B(3RI1
DATE
DRIL
PRO]
DEPT
40.0
42.0
r
50.C
1
1
1
JG NO
DRILL
_ING C
CT N(
3C T:
H, FT.
DESCRIPTION Elev. Blow • PENETRATION - BLOW COUNT*
(continued) _ 748.0±count 5 _-_10 20 30 .40 .-so 80 100
Loose Brown, Grey And White Slightly
Micaceous Silty Medium To Fine SAND
746.0
Dense To Very Dense Brown, Grey And
White Slightly Micaceous Silty Medium To
Fine SAND
33 -- -
---- ----------------------------------------------- 738.0 65
Boring Terminated

E
PROJECTN

DEPTH, FT
00
' 0.5
' 2.5
6.0
' 8.0
' 22.0
' 32.0
C(3RU?:
3-B- - -- TEST
sD 7/21199
NTRACTOR: AmetiDrill BORING GEOSGIENCE
a a a -- RECORD GROUP, INC.
LflM- -9QN. ?'LANTATIQN - AREA .3..
DESCRIPTION Elev. Blow • PENETRATION - BLOW COUNT*
7RR n+ r--t r in ?n in An An Rn 1nn
Topsoil And Roots ---
Firm Reddish-Brown, Brown And Grey Silty
Clayey Medium To Fine SAND - Residual
780.5 12
Soft Brown And Tan Slightly Micaceous
Fine Sandy SILT
Note: Sample Moist

777.0
Very Loose Brown, Grey And White
Slightly Micaceous Very Silty Fine SAND
Note: Sample Very Moist
775.0 2

No Sample Recovery Due To Very Loose
And Saturated Soil Conditions
1
-
3

2

761.0
Very Loose Brown, Grey And White
Slightly Micaceous Silty Fine SAND
3

4

751.0
Firm Brown, Tan And Grey Slightly
Micaceous Silty Medium To Fine SAND
14

12
Next
10.4'
'

E

' .PROJECT-
FT
DEPTH,
' 40.0 (continued) 743.0±_ Count51020. 30 40 _ _60_ _801_C
Firm Brown, Tan And Grey Slightly
Micaceous Silty Medium To Fine SAND
42.0 741.0 Very Firm Brown, Grey And White Slightly
Micaceous Silty Medium To Fine SAND
t 21 - - - - -- - - -
47.0 736.0
Firm Brown, Grey And White Slightly
' Micaceous Silty Medium To Fine SAND
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1/99 TEST
OR: AmeriDMII BORING GEOSCIENCE
..? _ RECORD GROUP, INC.
WPLANTATION AREA 3'
DESCRIPTION Elev. Blow • PENETRATION - BLOW COUNT"
50.
14 --
-----------------------------------------------
Boring Terminated
0
' BORING NO.:
I3A1'L DRILLE]
DRILI;ING CO?

' PROJECT NO,-
PROJECT: M?
DEPTH, FT.
0.0
0.3
¦
3.0
17.C
22.0
t
27.C
' ..
??O
.....
H'1
:?CI11
- TEST
/99
OR; AmeriDrill ;.BORING GEOSCIENCE
W _
WPI,A.NTATION - AREA 3 RECORD GROUP, INC.
DESCRIPTION Elev. Blow • PENETRATION - BLOW COUNT"
-7A0 n+ r--t ? to )n an An An An inn
topsoil And Roots f -
Firm Tan And Grey Slightly Micaceous
Silty Clayey Medium To Fine SAND -
7
Alluvial 777. _
Soft Brown, Tan And White Slightly
Micaceous Fine Very Sandy SILT -
2
Residual - - -- - -
2 4 0
2

2

763.0
Firm Brown, Tan And White Slightly
Micaceous Very Silty Fine SAND
14
758.0
Loose Brown, Grey And White Slightly
Micaceous Very Silty Fine SAND
6

753.0
Firm Brown, Grey And White Slightly
Micaceous Silty To Very Silty Medium To
Fine SAND
11

18

15
t,onunueu rvexi
4.2'
I BORING NO,
DATE DKiLLI
n1? M
PR©JECT NO
C
PRIDJ ECT:
DEPTH, FT.
40 0
1 ?!
1
1
? I
1
? ,o
1
? ,o
1
' ,o
70.0
1
1
1
C I 1p SE.
1
1
r_ TEST
2/99
'OR Am?1lln?1 BORING GEOSCIENCE
-3 - RECORD GROUP, INC.
EJN PLANTATION _ AREA 3
DESCRIPTION Elev. Blow • PENETRATION - BLOW COUNT"
(continued) 740.0± Count 5 10 20 30 40 60 80 100
Firm Brown, Grey And White Slightly
Micaceous Silty To Very Silty Medium To
Fine SAND
16
16 - - -
--
11

723.0
Very Firm Brown, Tan And Grey Slightly
Micaceous Silty Medium To Fine SAND
30

718.0
Dense Brown, Tan And White Slightly
Micaceous Silty Medium To Fine SAND
32

713.0
Very Firm Brown, Tan And White Slightly
Micaceous Silty Medium To Fine SAND
----------------
-------------------
710.0
29
----
--
Boring Terminated

BORING NO.: 3-D TEST
DATE DRILL-J); 7/Z l99
-
_ T
T 1 ILLING CON FR.CTOR: Ameril) 11 _ BORING GEDSCIENCE

' FR?)JECTNOo? RECORD GROUP, INC.
J'ROJECT: l €JR ON..PI,ANCATIONM -AREA .3._.
DEPTH, FT. DESCRIPTION Elev. Blow • PENETRATION - BLOW COUNT"
778.0± Count 5 10 20 30 40 60 80 100
' 0.0
0.3
t 3.0
6.0

17.(

22.(
i
' 32.1
' 37.

Topsoil And Roots f ?- "" --
Firm Brown And Grey Slightly Clayey
Medium To Fine Very Sandy SILT - Alluvial

8
J
775.
Soft Brown And Grey Slightly Micaceous
Silty Coarse To Fine SAND - Alluvial
4
-
772.0
Very Loose Brown, Grey And White
Slightly Micaceous Very Silty Fine SAND -
Residual 3
2

4

761.0
Very Loose Brown, Grey And White
Slightly Micaceous Very Silty Medium To
Fine SAND
3
756.0 L
Loose Brown, Grey And White Slightly
Micaceous Silty Medium To Fine SAND
5

5

746.0
Firm Brown, Grey And White Slightly
Micaceous Silty Medium To Fine SAND
13

741.0
Loose Brown, Grey And White Slightly
Micaceous Silty Medium To Fine SAND
8
Continued Next

4.6'

E
PROJECT
'
DEPTH, FT
' 40
42
50
T _ . _- TEST
1/99
I
JR_AmeriDrill BORING GEOSGIENCE
RECORD GROUP, INC.
)N. PLANTATION AREA 3.. .
DESCRIPTION Elev. Blow • PENETRATION - BLOW COUNT"
BORING NO
I3AT1 DRILI
DRILLING C
' PROJECT N(
PROJECT:
DEPTH, FT.
00
' 3.0
' 6.0
8.0
' 12.0
1
' 17.0
' 32.0
1
1
E TEST
7122194
RACTOR' Amer,Di it BORING GEOSCIENCE
1.9054-3 _ RECORD GROUP, INC.
S . ON PLANTATION AREA ,3
DESCRIPTION Elev. Blow • PENETRATION - BLOW COUNT"
79R n+ (---t F, ,n gn 'an an sn Rn inn
Very Stiff Reddish-Brown Fine Sandy Very
Clayey SILT With Fine Roots - Residual
19

Very Stiff Reddish-Brown, Brown And Tan
Slightly Micaceous Medium To Fine Sandy
Clayey SILT 21

792.0
Stiff Reddish-Brown, Brown And Tan
Slightly Micaceous Medium To Fine Sandy
SILT
790.0 15

Stiff Reddish-Brown, Brown And Tan
Slightly Micaceous Fine Very Sandy SILT
9

786.0
Firm Brown, Tan And Grey Slightly
Micaceous Fine Very Sandy SILT
7

781.0
Soft Brown, Grey And White Slightly
Micaceous Fine Very Sandy SILT
Note: Sample Moist
4

4

3

766.0
Loose Brown, Tan And White Slightly
Micaceous Very Silty Fine SAND
5

7
nuea Next
26.3'
BORING SIC
DATE DRJf
DRILLING
PROJECT N
X -
PROJECI
DEPTH, FT

' 40.0
42.0
47.0

57.(

DESCRIPTION
.J1
Loose Brown, Tan And White Slightly

Micaceous Very Silty Fine SAND
756.0
Very Loose Tan, Grey And White Slightly
Micaceous Very Silty Fine SAND

3
751.0
Firm To Very Firm Grey And White Slightly
Micaceous Silty Medium To Fine SAND

13
22
741.0
Firm Brown, Grey And White Slightly
Micaceous Silty Medium To Fine SAND

738.0

20
----- -- ------------------------------------
Boring Terminated
Note: Bulk Sample Of Auger Cuttings
Obtained From 0 To 10 Feet

BORING NO.: 3,
DATE DRILLED?
DRILLING CONT
PROJECT NO.:
.
PRaJECT: MOB
DEPTH, FT.
0.0
0.4
? 3
0
? so
? ao
? ,o
? „o
1
1
?9v, TEST
`OR: Amer7t _ BORING GEOSMENCE
N-.W - -
)N PLANT .A,TION-m-AREA 3 RECORD GROUP, INC.
DESCRIPTION Elev. Blow • PENETRATION - BLOW COUNT*
804.0± Count 5 10 20 30 40 60 80 100
Topsoil And Roots _ _ l -------
Very Stiff Reddish-Brown And Brown
Medium To Fine Sandy Clayey SILT - 17
Residual 801.0
Very Stiff Reddish-Brown, Brown And Tan
Clayey Medium To Fine Sandy SILT
20 --
- - - -
798.0
Stiff Reddish-Brown, Brown And Tan Fine
Very Sandy SILT
796.0 11 10
Firm Reddish-Brown, Tan And White Silty
Coarse To Fine SAND With CLAY Seams
11

792.0
_
Loose Brown, Tan And Grey Slightly
Micaceous Very Silty Fine SAND
789.0 7
Boring Terminated
No Groundwater Encountered
Note: Bulk Sample Of Auger Cuttings
Obtained From 1 To 10 Feet

E
PROJECT

DEPTH, FT.
0.0 __
0.4
3.0
6.0
' 8.0
1 12.C
15.10
1
1

1

TEST
712ZI99
ACTOR:' An?erillrill , BORING GEOSCIENCE
054-3 RECORD GROUP, INC.
??c?ON PLANTATION AREA 3
DESCRIPTION Elev. Blow • PENETRATION - BLOW COUNT*
812.0± Count 5 10 20 30 40 60 80 100
Topsoil And Roots F --
Very Stiff Reddish-Brown Slightly
Micaceous Medium To Fine Sandy Very
30
Clayey SILT - Residual 09.Q
Very Stiff Reddish-Brown Slightly
Micaceous Medium To Fine Sandy Clayey
SILT
17
-
-
- -
-
--
-
-
_ 806.0
Very Stiff Reddish-Brown And Brown
Slightly Micaceous Clayey Medium To Fine
Sandy SILT
804.0 16
1
Stiff Reddish-Brown, Brown And Tan
Slightly Micaceous Fine Very Sandy SILT 11

800.0
_
Loose Tan, Grey And White Slightly
Micaceous Very Silty Fine SAND
797.0 g
Boring Terminated
No Groundwater Encountered

BORING NO'; 3-
' BATE DRILLED:
DRILLING CONT'
PROJECT NO.:
PROJECT: M©F
DEPTH, FT.
0.0
0.3
? 6.0
? as
? ,o
? ,o
1
1
Topsoil And Roots -
Very Stiff Reddish-Brown Slightly
Micaceous Medium To Fine Sandy Clayey
19
SILT - Residual
20 --- ---
4
-
0
----

-
824.0

Firm Reddish-Brown, Brown And Tan _ _
Slightly Micaceous Clayey Medium To Fine
Sandy SILT
822.0 8

Stiff Reddish-Brown, Brown And Tan
Slightly Micaceous Slightly Clayey Medium
To Fine Sandy SILT
9
-------
-
--
--
--
-
-
818.0
Dense Grey And White Slightly Micaceous
Silty Coarse To Fine SAND
-------------------------------------------
- 815.0 44
----
---
Boring Terminated
No Groundwater Encountered
Note: Bulk Sample Of Auger Cuttings
Obtained From 0 To 10 Feet

_ TEST
l?9
OR: AmeriDriil_ BORING GEOSCIEINCE
- RECORD GROUP, INC.
)N PLANTATION - AREA 3
DESCRIPTION Elev. Blow • PENETRATION - BLOW COUNT*
830,0± _ Count _ _5 10 20 30 40 60 80 100

BORING NO:
DATE DRILL
bRiLLING CC
PROJECT N
PROJECT: 1V
DEPTH, FT.
0.0
0.4
0
? 3
? sa
? ao
12.0
1 1=a
1
1
1
1

3-G2
TEST
D: 7/-21.199
NT'RACTOR; AmeriDrill:- _ BORING G'EOSCIEN'CE
19054-3
RECORD G'ROUP', INC.
aRI.tTSUI?T PLANTATION., AREA 3_. .
DESCRIPTION Elev. Blow • PENETRATION - BLOW COUNT"
800.0± Count 5 10 20 30 40 60 80 l on
Topsoil And Roots
Very Stiff Reddish-Brown And Brown
Slightly Micaceous Clayey Medium To Fine 17
Sandy SILT - Residual 797.0
Stiff Reddish-Brown And Brown Slightly
Micaceous Slightly Clayey Medium To Fine
Sandy SILT 14 --- --- --- --- -- -- - - -
794.0
Stiff Reddish-Brown, Brown And Tan
Slightly Micaceous Medium To Fine Very
Sandy SILT
792.0 11
Firm Reddish-Brown, Brown And Tan
Slightly Micaceous Fine Very Sandy SILT
8

788.0
Loose Brown, Tan And White Slightly
Micaceous Very Silty Fine SAND
-------------------------------------------- 785.0 7
Boring Terminated
No Groundwater Encountered

BOTRlNG NO-',
' DA 'TB DRILL
TRILLING CC
PROJECT N(O
' I?Rflr?cT: n
DEPTH, FT.
0.0
0.4
' 3.0
' 6.0
8.0
' 12.0
15.0
1
1
1
1
TEST
21/99
C TOR: me>Einr >t BORING G'EOSCIENCE
54-3 RECORD GROUP, INC.
SON. PLANTATION -, AREA 3
DESCRIPTION Elev. Blow • PENETRATION - BLOW COUNT*
795.0± Count 5 10 20 30 40 so e0 100
-Topsoil And Roots -
Stiff Reddish-Brown Medium To Fine
Sandy Very Clayey SILT - Residual 13
792.
Very Stiff Reddish-Brown, Brown And Tan
Slightly Micaceous Slightly Clayey Fine
Sandy SILT 18
789.0
Stiff Brown And Tan Slightly Micaceous
Fine Very Sandy SILT
787.0 9
_
Firm Brown, Tan And White Slightly
Micaceous Very Silty Fine SAND

783.0
Loose Grey And White Slightly Micaceous
Silty Medium To Fine SAND
780.0 9
Boring Terminated
No Groundwater Encountered

w

1
1
1
1

d ?
A o
' H c
?. c w°
O ? d
a o •o
O C °"n
? 0 3
t
LT, ? Cq
>

1

0.

a
ra N
a
Q
_

? w o 0
a
c
0
N

O _
.?
N
r

0
U F
G
N
CL ,?
id U
bD

N
? q
O

y "'
C x
M
= i

o ° x
U y 00

N C O
O O
? U V
N M
N

C o V N O
Z O U `-' M N M
O
G ON
O
O
6x O O 00
oz
d ?'? ?n O

U
4.)
Ol 00
C,
.G

?w
U
IL)
cd >1

_ O O
O
O
¢ N
0. y N O O
Q v O O
N ,-., O O
cu N a a
0 Q
x w -,
O
M Z
N N N
zz °?
H
~ ?.a y ai
QI Q L O ? ? a
AG V v
?x
wH
W ?
O E..i
V O
x
U
T
0 7
7 ti
y
? o
a w
o0
h
ti In
'?
Y r.
? ? Gl Ca
N_ v N
n O
N C1
G
J
C N
? F O A
O
.Q
J U E
MOHR DIAGRAM
6
L
U
C
f9
7
Q
N
?a 4
N
C
7
O
C1
N
ti
d
(n 2
co
N
L
U)
Normal Stress (pounds per square inch)
STRESS-STRAIN CURVE
2
U
C
f0
7
d
a
N
.a
C
7
O
a
N
d
Lo
X
Q
a?

60

30

00 5 10 15 20 25 30
Axial Strain (percent)
20 psi - - - 30 psi
BORING NUMBER: 24 / 2-K SAMPLE DEPTH: 0'- 10'/ 0'- 10'
WATER CONTENT: 24.7% SATURATION: 90.5%
VOID RATIO: 0.74 DRY UNIT WEIGHT: 96.9 pcf
PHI ANGLE (degrees): 14.0 COHESION: 1872 psf
DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION
Reddish-Brown And Brown Slightly Micaceous Medium To Fine Sandy
Clayey To Very Clayey SILT (MH)
•• - •• - •• 40psi
TRIAXIAL TEST
TOTAL STRESS
JOB NO. 19054
GEOSCIENCE
GROUP, INC.
MOHR DIAGRAM
60
L
U
C
c0
7
Q'
y
N
a 40
cn
C
0
O.
cn
a?
2
0
m
L
U)
0

1

I LA

1 1

I 1 1 .00 1 FT - r-

44,

I

0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Normal Stress (pounds per square inch)
4
L
U
C
cc
D
O'
N
d
CL
h
'D
C
7
O
_Q
N
C 1
N
N
O
L
a
0
`0
a
STRESS-STRAIN CURVE fill

0
I - T'
_ J _j

5 I

00 5 10 1 5 20 2 5 3
30
Axial Strain (percent)
20 psi - - - 30 psi - • • - • • - • • 40 psi
BORING NUMBER: 24 / 2-K SAMPLE DEPTH: 0' - 10' / 0' - 10' TRIAMAL TEST
WATER CONTENT: 24.7% SATURATION: 90.5%
VOID RATIO: 0.74 DRY UNIT WEIGHT: 96.9 pcf EFFECTIVE STRESS
PHI ANGLE (degrees): 45.0 COHESION: 0 psf
JOB NO. 19054
DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION
Reddish-Brown And Brown Slightly Micaceous Medium To Fine Sandy GEOSCIENCE
Clayey To Very Clayey SILT (MH) GROUP, INC.
60
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
L
U
' C
N
f9
7
------------
N
' a 40
N
C
7
' O
n
N
N
N
it
t N 20
1 ;0
N
L
00 20
MOHR DIAGRAM

'
L
V
C

7
y f

O
a
N
'
C
7
O
CL

3

Ta
woo
,
X
Q

Normal Stress (pounds per square inch)
Axial Strain (percent)
' 15 psi - .- - 30 psi
BORING NUMBER: 1-HAP / 2-EAP SAMPLE DEPTH: 20'- 22' / 17'- 19'
WATER CONTENT: 34.0% SATURATION: 96.1 %
VOID RATIO: 0.96 DRY UNIT WEIGHT: 86.6 pcf
PHI ANGLE (degrees): 11.0 COHESION: 1728 psf
' DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION
Brown, Grey And White Slightly Micaceous Silty Medium To Fine SAND
• • • • 60 psi
TRIAXIAL TEST
TOTAL STRESS
JOB NO. 19054
GEOSCIENCE
GROUP, INC.
STRESS-STRAIN CURVE
MOHR DIAGRAM
r
C
co
Cr
N
N
CL
N
C
D
O
_G
N
N
N
Y
V
M
L
Normal Stress (pounds per square inch)
STRESS-STRAIN CURVE
0
L
V
C
f0
D
Cr
N
N
CL
N
C
7
O
Q
d
D 1
N
N
N
CL
N
0
a

0

1 1 4: F
0

0

0
0 5 1 0 1 ? 3
i JV
Axial Strain (percent)
15 psi - - - 30 psi - - • - 60 psi
BORING NUMBER: 1-HAP / 2-EAP SAMPLE DEPTH: 20'- 22'/ 17'- 19'
WATER CONTENT: 34.0% SATURATION: 96.1 % T?axi? TEST
VOID RATIO: 0.96 DRY UNIT WEIGHT: 86.6 pcf EFFECTIVE STRESS
PHI ANGLE (degrees): 31.0 COHESION: 504 psf
DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION JOB NO. 19054
Brown, Grey And White Slightly Micaceous Silty Medium To Fine SAND GEOSCIENCE
GROUP, INC.

F

I

1

z
w

_ Z
.? N Z
H W _
m N

O
J IL) (L
O
W
cc
? ? C7 C7
A °

w N

H
H
.r LL w
B
H
y
m
F
J
H
N

O

N j N

O >
-
m
8
N zz V _
U
m
.? H U
m
N g
W _. _.. _. ._. ._.._ ._.._ ._.._ .._.. _.. _.. _. W
z U
U. L O
a-. f
N W H H 2)

H p
H
LL
N T
(n N
_.. ?. ?.. ?.. _. ._.._ ._.._ ._.._ .. ?.. .. _.. ._.. .?. w Q
C co
w H
J J
U 3 U
H H ? m "O
N E O O C
z ¢
r z c cn
Q
H fn - O O
Q p
Q N H C C

W _
LL
N
CL
0
z w s E
p N W M 7
Q O
d J
O C7 N
w m
¢
O

v U

H M
'-
a
w
W z
c7 ? H
N .. .. ..... .... . . . ... .. ... .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. .. ?.. ...
J
a

?
J
W
e _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
? J (O
O
W
N
w U
3
?

O N
N V Q N
z

m
m N 2 O
W
J H
a ?-
?
m
m
O w
O
O
U
J
7 Vl ?
z
m
m m
0 m
I m m
? t
o I m m
A R m
m m
N m m O W
O
Z
H N
1 HOI3M AS N 3NId 1N33N 3d Ge
O
CO
r
c
c
N
W
N
H
C4 a
W
W
H ?
y
a'
¢ n
z
H
y
y
M
I
a
iv
'v
N
N
iv
Z
)
U
W C
-? N z z
m H
m y Z LU
? m o va
Q

'
U 00
~
W Cc
C7 0

o
?, W

/ w
N
H
LL W QC
v,
? H

/ H
OF

I
N

m

' - - - - Z aOiU v a
E
E H y

....
..._. _. ._.._ ._.._ ._.._ .._.. _.. H O d
> E

W
H
H O O O V
{? O y w C
_.. _.. _.. W y 9 00
y
+ y
±
E ¢ >
_
N
N C N
0
J U _
C U m N 0
3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - J
H
a ?. 3 U
0,0 a+ O
_
Z ?
Z O 0
m C y >, O
N m

Z
¢
Z 0- y
'C
H N
O O h
C

-0

_ .. _.. ? H w H C LL E V
O
y
N E U O H =`00 N f0 t0
Z 0 m E? ?'y O L
H W L 7 --=
C
¢ ? C M .
y
U
O J d 1 L
m y 70 F

¢
0 cr z
U

H c0
a
w
m z
„y H
.._. _....

w
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
C7
J
LO
W
y
U
3 n
0 O
U F-
¢ co
Z

m
B
., y
O
w
J a
m
m W
?
O
0
U
J V) C

9 m

9 0
m

m
m

1?
m

D
m
0
m
m
m
m ?

O of

W Z

ti l N Q N ti m ? O Y

1
HOI3M
A9 N3
NId 1
N3ON3
d
- Z
m N
0
90
140
135
130
125
120
0
U
115
U
N
II.
'G
7
O
110
U
W
105
A
' 100
' 95
90
' 85
80
0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
WATER CONTENT (percent of dry weight)
140
1
' 135
130
1
125
' 120
' o
40.
U
= 115
U
N
G
C
7
O
t °' 110
H
x
W
105
r-
C]
' 100
' 95
90
1
' 85

80
0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
WATER CONTENT (percent of dry weight)
a

.a

oq -?
a

Q

? w
a w
G
0
.N
o ?
U O
F
o^ w
U H_
?
N
w .d

a?i G is
5 Q °
F

U .0
N O

x

o
?
U

E
E o v v
O O
U N N
O
5,
,
-' y c
O
O
a,
N
r
Oo
is

is
0
N
N
N
N
N
z
U O
O O
G'
.
N
W O
oz
(] «?. O N N

y 0
Q O o O
O
CO N
U

U

Ln N V) U)
? F- m w w
y^ O O O p O O O O
0. Yn"' N
U ?
' ? N
A ? ? N
A h
A N
1 V1
A
v
Q O p V to L V
V) p ,? O M O) O M O M
W
.?A w
M w w w x x x x x
O
z M M M M M M
a; p s "
O?
?x a
wH
V 9
zo
wz
U W
O F.,
w0
C7
x
V
cd
O
ca ?
G
0 3
U o
oow Oo?
•G y
o ? q O
cl,
a G d
G ? CL
O G CIS Cn
C7 G N
O
a 0 ,y
U 4 O
G
?, LL
c? LI)
a
140
135
130
125
120
0
U
115
U
L
Q?
N
b
O
110
E-'
0
W
3
F
105
Q
100

' 95

90

85
'

'
80
0

5 10 15 20 25 30
WATER CONTENT (percent of dry weight)
35 40
140
135
130
125
120
0
U
115
U
L
N
O
Q 110
F-'
x
w
3
105
rx
Q
100
95
90
11 85

80
0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
WATER CONTENT (percent of dry weight)
140
135
130
125
120
0
w
U
0 115
U
F.
GJ
II.
b
G
O
110
E-
x
w
3
H
z 105
a
x
0
100
95
90
85
80
0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
WATER CONTENT (percent of dry weight)

'
AREA 3
' ESTIMATE OF LINE OF SEEPAGE
SLIDING/OVERTURNING/JOINT EXTENSIBILITY CALCULATIONS
SEEPAGE CALCULATIONS
T FILE/PROFILE
P
FI
E/
TP
RAPID DRAWDOWN STABILITY IN
UT
L
OU
U
' LONG-TERM STABILITY INPUT FILE/OUTPUT FILE/PROFILE

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
E
0
u
O
LO y
to C
z6 w
0
r, I
R
I'
7

1 L

1
1 C t

t

f.

t
r

? i R
1

?l! y 111
i-V 1
I

Ur

r4'
S

rr s ?`
?
t
I, 11

rr

X?
- 1
t
IN

X

T

1?
X v - ul u

E
0
U
? L
O y
U) y
t0 .=
Z W
0
z n u,
iu Q; J L. U
t
I u1 Cam! j- Gl T
-,N '? J O
i
d ?1 ON
+ i T
h
O
r?
y
= 7,
Y
d
S

L? -a S
j u
N
0
- + K
7
it
?1 S
f-

r
r

y 'Z
iU Q
F U

u f* N
,. n

co
a
c
0
co
a
0
U
to
U) 1
0
C
? C
Z W
0

o?
'i
3 i
V
C
- S
ti' J
Z
T ? ?4 0
,il N
r- .ti o a
I+ C,
- ? N li a II

II ? ;v
'' 11
F
Iv.
L
v

u?

F o N ? _

G

a
V
J
?1 Q I (? "N U
-

3
:r
, J J
J
0 =
J
J
o i F1
4 ?
h J
3
h
S L
0
I.
41a?
I
N
F
v
a
r
C-
r
i
I
,.? Ill e .tee i ,
c
r;
F '
?j
I Z
n
Y' I .1 c? I
w ' ?2
7
? r
I
C ?
f
(L N
/ W
w In r
m
o ,T
a, In UI
O%
p n (P
0 1.,
S
N
C
LL
V)
J

A
OU
W0
z
W H '~
°
r-n O o °
a
CJ U
o
M C
w
,...1 w
u a
rn a
?-4-
y' T
?I
T I;
raj
k
c
?C t j w ?
?t
X 4
-+ J; O
L L
Y r?
11
s
f
f'I
!ll
N
N
t I ?
7
X s
3 I

4

I

h _
rn

<
y J d
r
rl rl (q O ?."

L C M Ln

_Q
n
u
II
7 01 L

lG_
w c+1
O
C7 ?
7 rl
z 3
o °
z?
U
?a a
az z
o, ?z
oo
?a wv
a a?
A4 ?'
? H
W
z
3
rO
1?1
,T
? I r
tP
t
r
C:
J"
? tl
T
N
d3 +
S
(a
f•
0
-'p o
1
N
r+

** PCSTABL4 **
by
Purdue University
1
--Slope Stability Analysis--
Simplified Janbu Method of Slices
or Simplified Bishop Method
1
1
Run Date:
Time of Run:
Run By:
Input Data Filename:
Output Filename:
Plotted Output Filen,
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
dam
190543rd.in
190543rd.out
sme: 190543rd.plt
19054-DAM 3-UPSTREAM RAPID DRAW DOWN (2.
5:1)
BOUNDARY COORDINATES
7 Top Boundaries
11 Total Boundaries
Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soi l Type
No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd
1 .00 58.00 40.00 58.00 2
2 40.00 58.00 61.90 58.00 1
3 61.90 58.00 104.40 75.00 4
4 104.40 75.00 104.50 75.00 4
5 104.50 75.00 112.00 78.00 1
6 112.00 78.00 232.00 78.00 1
7 232.00 78.00 237.00 76.00 1
8 61.90 58.00 62.00 58.00 1
9 62.00 58.00 104.50 75.00 1
10 40.00 58.00 52.00 52.00 2
11 52.00 52.00 237.00 52.00 3
ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETE RS
4 Type (s) of Soil
Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez.
Type Unit Wt . Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface
No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No.
1 121.0 130.0 1872.0 14.0 .00 .0 1
2 105.0 110.0 75.0 8.0 .00 .0 1
3 114.0 120.0 1728.0 11.0 .00 .0 1
4 121.0 130.0 1872.0 14.0 .00 .0 1
2 PIEZOMETR IC SURFACE(S) HAVE BEEN SPECIFIED
Unit Weight of Water = 62.40

Piezometric Surface No. 1 Specified by 9 Coordinate Points
Point X-Water Y-Water
' No. (ft) (ft)
1 .00 58.00
2 62.00 58.00
3 104.50 75.00
4 105.00 74.50
5 117.00 73.80
6 167.00 70.90
7 192.00 69.20
8 217.00 67.20
9 237.00 65.10
Piezometric Surface No
2 S
ecifi
d b
10 C
di
t
P
i
.
p
e
y oor
na
e
o
nts
Point X-Water Y-Water
' No. (ft) (ft)
1 .00 58.00
2 61.90 58.00
' 3 104.40 75.00
4 104.50 75.00
5 105.00 74.50
' 6 117.00 73.80
7 167.00 70.90
8 192.00 69.20
9 217.00 67.20
' 10 237.00 65.10
A Horizontal Earthquake Loading Coefficient
' Of .100 Has Been Assigned
A Vertical Earthquake Loading Coefficient
' Of .100 Has Been Assigned
Cavitation Pressure = .0 psf
1
' A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random
Technique For Generating Circular Surfaces, Has Been Specified.
' 50 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated.
5 Surfaces Initiate From Each Of 10 Point s Equally Spaced
Along The Ground Surface Between X = 10.00 ft.
' and X = 30.00 ft.
Each Surface Terminates Between X = 75.00 ft.
and X = 110.00 ft.
Unless Further Limitations Were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation
At Which A Surface Extends Is Y = .00 ft.
' 3.00 ft. Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface.
Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial
' Failure Surfaces Examined. They Are Ordered - Most Critical

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
First.
* * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Bishop Method
Failure Surface Specified By 41 Coordinate Points
Point X-Surf Y-Surf
No. (ft) (ft)
1 10.00 58.00
2 12.17 55.93
3 14.44 53.97
4 16.81 52.12
5 19.26 50.40
6 21.80 48.79
7 24.41 47.32
8 27.09 45.97
9 29.83 44.76
10 32.63 43.68
11 35.48 42.75
12 38.38 41.95
13 41.30 41.30
14 44.26 40.79
15 47.24 40.43
16 50.23 40.22
17 53.23 40.16
18 56.23 40.24
19 59.22 40.47
20 62.20 40.85
21 65.15 41.37
22 68.08 42.04
23 70.96 42.85
24 73.81 43.81
25 76.60 44.90
26 79.34 46.13
27 82.01 47.49
28 84.61 48.99
29 87.14 50.61
30 89.58 52.35
31 91.93 54.21
32 94.19 56.18
33 96.35 58.27
34 98.41 60.45
35 100.35 62.74
36 102.18 65.12
37 103.89 67.58
38 105.47 70.13
39 106.93 72.75
40 108.26 75.44
41 108.81 76.73
Circle Center At X = 53.0 ; Y = 101.0 and Radius, 60.8
*** 3.630 ***
Y A X I S F T
.00 29.63 59.25 88.88 118.50 148.13
X .00 +---------+---------*---------+---------+---------+
- 11
- 123
- 11256
- 125.8
29.63 + 125877
- 11587.
- 1287..*
- 157...
- 16....
- 17..*.
A 59.25 + 17....
- 15....*
- 12.....
- 1.....
- 11.....
- 11......
X 88.88 + 11.....
- 114....
- 2113...
- 7111*.
- 7211

I 118.50 + W
S 148.13 +
- W
177.75 +
- W
F 207.38 +
- W

T 237.00 + * W
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

PROFIL
19054-DAM 3-UPSTREAM RAPID DRAW DOWN (2.5:1)
11 7
0. 58. 40. 58. 2
40. 58. 61.9 58. 1
61.9 58. 104.4 75. 4
104.4 75. 104.5 75. 4
104.5 75. 112. 78. 1
112. 78. 232. 78. 1
232. 78. 237. 76. 1
61.9 58. 62. 58. 1
62. 58. 104.5 75. 1
40. 58. 52. 52. 2
52. 52. 237. 52. 3
SOIL
4
121. 130. 1872. 14. 0. 0. 1 E +Lti ; ?. >? c
105. 110. 75. 8. 0. 0. 1 4li?AV?? ?a+??
114. 120. 1728. 11. 0. 0. 1 uNr:/•' .J S<;,
121. 130. 1872. 14. 0. 0. 1
WATER
2 62.4
9
0. 58.
62. 58.
104.5 75.
105. 74.5
117. 73.8
167. 70.9
192. 69.2
217. 67.2
237. 65.1
10
0. 58.
61.9 58.
104.4 75.
104.5 75.
105. 74.5
117. 73.8
167. 70.9
192. 69.2
217. 67.2
237. 65.1
EQUAKE
0.1 0.1 0.
CIRCL2
10 5
10. 30. 75. 110.
0. 3. 0. 0.
X= 53.c
G S = _.. c, ? c
E
O
U
U.) 1
O ()
U-) O
tU C
QI
O
Z W
0
v?
T
i
a
N
u^
[4
a
t
K °
3 Z
a
Q t
.f
T
J S ,'
V
CL
C
O
E
O
U
Q)
L 1
O ?
LO .?
O C
Z w
0
4
d
w..

vJ
R
?
3

0
Fl
s .F
P
?
A

1
1
1
1
1
1
** PCSTABL4 **
by
Purdue University
--Slope Stability Analysis--
Simplified Janbu Method of Slices
or Simplified Bishop Method
Run Date:
Time of Run:
Run By: dam
Input Data Filename: 1905431t.in
Output Filename: 1905431t.out
Plotted Output Filename: 1905431t.plt
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 19054-DAM 3-DOWNSTREAM LONG TERM (2.5:1)
BOUNDARY COORDINATES
5 Top Boundaries
14 Total Boundaries
Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type
No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd
1 .00 58.00 28.00 58.00 2
2 28.00 58.00 50.00 58.00 1
3 50.00 58.00 100.00 78.00 1
4 100.00 78.00 220.00 78.00 1
5 220.00 78.00 227.50 75.00 1
6 50.00 58.00 63.80 58.00 1
7 63.80 58.00 64.00 63.00 4
8 64.00 63.00 66.00 63.00 4
9 66.00 63.00 66.20 58.00 4
10 66.20 58.00 227.50 58.00 1
11 63.80 58.00 66.20 58.00 1
12 28.00 58.00 40.00 52.00 2
13 40.00 52.00 227.50 52.00 3
14 .00 52.00 40.00 52.00 3
ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS
4 Type(s) of Soil
Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez.
Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface
No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No.
1 121.0 130.0 .0 45.0 .00 .0 1
2 105.0 110.0 50.0 15.0 .00 .0 1
3 114.0 120.0 500.0 31.0 .00 .0 1
4 140.0 145.0 .0 35.0 .00 .0 1
1
1
1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) HAVE BEEN SPECIFIED
Unit Weight of Water = 62.40
Piezometric Surface No. 1 Specified by 11 Coordinate Points
Point X-Water Y-Water
No. (ft) (ft)
1 .00 58.00
2 65.00 58.00
3 70.00 61.00
4 75.00 62.20
5 95.00 65.10
6 115.00 67.20
7 140.00 69.20
8 165.00 70.90
9 215.00 73.80
10 225.00 74.50
11 227.50 75.00
A Horizontal Earthquake Loading Coefficient
Of .100 Has Been Assigned
A Vertical Earthquake Loading Coefficient
Of .100 Has Been Assigned
Cavitation Pressure = .0 psf
A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random
Technique For Generating Circular Surfaces, Has Been Specified.
50 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated.
5 Surfaces Initiate From Each Of 10 Points Equally Spaced
Along The Ground Surface Between X = 10.00 ft.
and X = 30.00 ft.
Each Surface Terminates Between X = 75.00 ft.
and X = 110.00 ft.
Unless Further Limitations Were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation
At Which A Surface Extends Is Y = .00 ft.
3.00 ft. Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface.
Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial
Failure Surfaces Examined. They Are Ordered - Most Critical
First.
* * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Bishop Method
Failure Surface Specified By 33 Coordinate Points
Point X-Surf Y-Surf
No. (ft) (ft)
1 21.11 58.00
2 23.92 56.95
3 26.77 56.01
4 29.65 55.18
5 32.57 54.46
6 35.50 53.85
7 38.46 53.35
8 41.44 52.96
9 44.42 52.69
10 47.42 52.53
11 50.42 52.48
12 53.42 52.54
13 56.41 52.72
14 59.40 53.02
15 62.37 53.42
16 65.33 53.94
17 68.26 54.57
18 71.17 55.31
19 74.05 56.15
20 76.89 57.11
21 79.69 58.17
22 82.46 59.34
23 85.17 60.61
24 87.84 61.99
25 90.45 63.46
26 93.01 65.03
27 95.50 66.70
28 97.93 68.46
29 100.29 70.31
30 102.58 72.25
31 104.80 74.28
32 106.93 76.38
33 108.45 78.00
Circle Center At X = 50.2 ; Y = 131.8 and Radius,
*** 1.869 ***
79.3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Y A X I S F T
.00 28.44 56.88 85.31 113.75 142.19
X .00 +---------+-------*-*---------+---------+---------+
- 6
- .6
- ..1
- ..61
28.44 + ...1*
- ....12
- ...*12
- ....01.
- ....12.
- 12*.
A 56.88 + ...0216.
- 031*..
- ...01*7*
- ...014W..
- ...0214W8.
- ...011468.
X 85.31 + ...314468.
- ..0214466
- ..02W5466
- ...0114*
- .0112
- .01
I 113.75 + W
S 142.19 + W
- W
170.63 +
F 199.06 +
- W

- W
T 227.50 +
1

F

1
1

1
1

1

1
1
PROFIL
19054-DAM 3-DOWNSTREAM LONG TERM (2.5:1)
14 5
0. 58. 28. 58. 2
28. 58. 50. 58. 1
50. 58. 100. 78. 1
100. 78. 220. 78. 1
220. 78. 227.5 75. 1
50. 58. 63.8 58. 1
63.8 58. 64. 63. 4
64. 63. 66. 63. 4
66. 63. 66.2 58. 4
66.2 58. 227.5 58. 1
63.8 58. 66.2 58. 1
28. 58. 40. 52. 2
40. 52. 227.5 52. 3
0. 52. 40. 52. 3
SOIL
4
121. 130. 0. 45. 0. 0. 1 EM6q ?r r
105. 110. 50. 15. 0. 0. 1
114. 120. 500. 31. 0. 0. 1 nv,?P,-• s t
140. 145. 0. 35. 0. 0. 1 T ;rF ,
WATER
1 62.4
11
0. 58.
65. 58.
70. 61.
75. 62.2
95. 65.1
115. 67.2
140. 69.2
165. 70.9
215. 73.8
225. 74.5
227.5 75.
EQUAKE
0.1 0.1 0.
CIRCL2
10 5
10. 30. 75. 110.
0. 3. 0. 0.
x = Sc,,2
=i?3
?- S ' 18,9
1
E
0
U
0 c
Z W
Q
co
a
c
0
ca
CL
E
0
U
LL
0 0
L m
,n c
m
Zw
0
J

s

r.

yl ^
.r , 4
i

d
i
dC r.
H ?

S rd
.J

i
1
?r
'1 •;
- S
i
1 iN
\ s:
?j
- 1 ?
O
N
? M• r
i
.l
i
?i
r-
t
l?

i
i
i
i
i
1
1
1
Morrison Plantation
Mooresville, North Carolina
BMP #3 Modifications
PROJECT
CALCULATIONS
Geoscience
10725
d m
C 1
Novem?# a 1 ?1
02.0585. CO

2008
%
D
.. NOV ? g ?p08
Prepared By: „Y
DENS ? T?M?? Rg?DN
500 Clanton Road, Suite K wEj`?'"DJ AND s
GEQSCIENCE GROUP
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
Phone [phone] Facsimile [phone]

1

1

-11
cn, Fan .
v l i ter 4
I
KAki e ptf1
?X4 AL
-1,0-T4L 1- 1%, t5l

1 _
V kc At- .
1 12
G' ?4'?t f - ? , ?? ?t rFr'
i

1
1
1
1

-r- 4(;, ?vv4L = Z+.. fi ?,?2"I 33, 5 Ac - oor-,

? ? ?i rte( 't'1?M
(? gym L

I ?sk??ii~ t? C ^L. V'v- I t,

??

_-

-r??- T 1 - c-? 2

L. i
-72
c

77
-------- ---- 2 X 2-7 62 ca
l ,z p ? = 1,

G f
77

r

M
Iculate Post Tc
-
F' st 100'

---
Head=
4 ft
mannings= 0.011
P2= 3.12 in

r manning's n_for sheet flow(table
smooth surfaces(conc.,asphalt,

Fallow(no residue)

Cultivated Soils 3.1 TR-55)
gravel, or b
are soil)
0.011

0.05
length= 100 ft
- - - - - Residue cover <20%
Residue cover>20% 0.06
0.17
-H/L= 0.040 ft/ft

Eqn 3.3 TR55 -
0.007(nL)^0.8/P^.5*So^.4
-- Grass
Short grass praire
Dense grass _
0.15
0.24
Tt= 0.02 Hr
? Bermudagrass
j
0.41

L= 380
-- ft

- Range 0.13
h 5 ft - _
s- 0.013 ft/ft Woods
I
l
V=16.1345(s)^0.5 Light underbrush 0.4
V='': 1.851 fps Dense underbrush 0.8
L/(3600V) (3.15)= 0.057 hr.
Wallow Concentrat ed Flow - -
mainin 2000 ft (channel w ill remain u ndisturbed)
i
ayze c annel from Williamson
- Road to p ond 1
i I
-
s
3.5 %

-

-
assume depth of 1 ft and solve channel for Discharge
w Area= 10 sq.ft.
11e
ted P= 18.2 ft. - ----- -- --
i
0.55

mannings n= 0.045
[1.49*r^2/3*s^1/2]/n= 4.16 fps
i
=L/(3600V)= 0.13 Hr.
=Tt+T 0.21 H r.

0
Page 1

1

1

Morrison Plantation
- - -
BMP 3
Stage-Storage

Combined Volume (main pond + forebay)
Elevation Area eta o ume - o ume verage
-- o ume
-
-
(ft3) (ft3) Depth (ft) (ac-ft)
13,156 - - _ .__. -
- - 69,772
- - _ --
-
- _
778 56,616 66.7
72 1.23 1.60
144,228
_
780 87,612 214,000 2.44 4.91
407,568
782 122,700
265,518 407,568 3.32 9.36
784 142,818 673,086 4.71 15.45
309,740
---
- -
786 166,922 984826 5.89 2256
93,011
_
786.53 184,063 1,075,837 5.84 24.70
281,929
788 -
_ 199,514 ---- 1,357,766 - 6.81 31.17
413,461
790 213,947 1,771,227 8.28 40.66
441,673
792 227,726 2,212,900 912 50.80
471,248
794 243,522 2,684,148 - 11.02 61.62-
502,257
796 258,735 3,186,405 12.32 73.15

Forebay Volume -
Elevation Area Delta Volume F
( 3) (3)
780 1,626 -
29193 - -- -- ---
27,567 29193 - - - -
_ 74067

784
46,500
103260 _
112230
786 65, 730 215490
36187.34
786.53 70,826 251677

WQ Volume -
Elevation Area Delta Volume olume Volume
(ft3) (ft3) (ac-ft)

786.53
184,063
0
0 _
281,929
788 199,514 281,929 6.47 --
413,461
790 213,947 695,390 15.96
441,673
792 227,726 1,137,063 26.10
471,248
794 243,522 1,608, 311 36.92
502,257
796 258,735 2,110,568 48.45

i
i
C
U
1 ?I C
d
L
a
C
' C
C
U)
(D
N
N
cq
co
00
N
W
> ?U7
w oO
h
(0
N
E
N
U
CO
G8
O A?
0
rn
L
U
N
o
N
' n 0
cn IV:
QI
+
I- O O O O O O o 0 0 0 o
W r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~ I? ? OD co O O N M 4 O O
+ I? O OO O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

u
O I? O U) g N O m I- (D U') M
L O O O O U1 O U) m Iq m - m
" O U) U) U7 (D (D 0 t-. f- w w
O (D W W M N tt U) I? O O
t ? O O M (h ao ? O '?t CA ?t CA U)
O V t1') U1 t(') (D (D f? I? OO CO ?
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
? O ? 0 0 ? O ('7 N N f? (D Q)
C? V O (D '- ? ? (D a0 O O ao ? (I)
O Il- O O N (D OO O N tD
'IT O U) U) U) U) 0 0 0 0 0
cn
(D

N O
0) 00
N
> W W
W O E E
0
w
d CO
>
G
_ N (D
M
N ?
E E
m
M ? t t
C ? N
J 0
w ?
N
0
LO LO
M M
(.D r_: (r
(,
Oi ? r
Q
W C
E U.
o a
.? C
N a
7
N
(Js
O E
(N r
f? y
L
C U)
.°'
? C
C
m m

G
`
lO

m

(O

r

?-

4
O
O
I
CO
0
O
W
O
N
O
0)
N
?
M

? p O O 00
-
M
N
E O T- T- ti (D h 0 t?
O X V- N It
`?
U ?
a)
C
d
O O H
N O 00
O 00
N O N
O O
T- N
CA O)
N r
M
O O d' N O 4 O N 6 1` O N
C m O V-
M M
M Mt
M V
M O
M I
M O
M O
? T-
et M
'et
O
U
C
O
U
E U-
0 co
O
O 0
?t 0
O 0
O 0
?t 0
0) 0
M 0
N 0
N 0
I- CO
(D 0
O)
C
3 O (D r- , ct (D O O) O O I? U)
0
N
W b O I?
v O
U) O
U) N
U) IT
U> (D
U) co
U> O
(D N
(D ?
(D (D
(D
? c
M W
O
(J>
m
N
w
N
(D
q,
O
CO
CO
O
N
M
N
M
M N O N "T O ? O N M

O O O N O) cY w N Jc) r O N

m m
M r
M M
M
M
M (D
M 1`
M O
C7 O
? ?-
? m
? Iq
?
M

c
r o (Jo ? o) 1?
LL X
p o
o 0)
?
?
00
'?
00• oo 0
ti 0
i 0
o 0
? ?
o
_
(Q m 0 0 ? ? 0 0
~ (Io f` r
O (
O c
le 0
r N qt 'et to W
H
C
-
?
O N M O r- C) LO
E
C O
O O
O O
O O
O
M
O CO U) N ? O

C,L
0
0
0
0
?
6 LO
0 M
1-- 0j
m N
w N
-T O
m
U O
N
M
?
U)
U>

C
US C

c?

O
8
4
m N C7
CO O
O r-
N ?
`T ,t
O

C
0
0
0
0
(wD
N
M QQ
u.%
c s
00
CD
O

? C
M
00
00
(-
0
0
E 8 8 pp
0 0 p
Q
9 1-
6 (D
- OO N - O
U
.C
O
O
O
O
O
O
N .
-
M M
? N
CO N
s? (A
O
.` N M V V 1A O
N O
U

C
O
O
O
oo 8 0)
V LO
CO r-
? I?
It v
I- 0
0) N
N
O 0 ci C-4 N N M Cr> vi C6
> c 8 8 ? 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8

W ?
pp
O
CO
OD
O Q
?>
M
O
R
M
»
M ?
pp
0
>
00
O
O
N
_O
C
O
f4
3
JS
O
rn
c
c
C N
N C
O r?
?. fp
? U (^ 1 ?i
?
ca
? N (`J

N N
0 °

O) _O
?
t0 ?
O
? Y
W
Jn
to
tiQ
CA
0
J
N

U ?
? L
X
v?
C
.u O
m> II
E X v
in N
JJ ?
N
C M
O
3 M? O
? M
W ? 1? II
?.J F
U 11
(O N
M
N

N
w
O

?
o V II I
.N
m I I ? ?
LINE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
lil•? • i 1 rai?lrr
ID....... 7........2.......t ........ ......5.......r......... 7.......ls....... ' ....10
ID MORRISON PLANTATION 13MP 3 2008 REVISIONS
ID 1/3 PMP YEAR
II-) GEOSCIENCE GROUP, INC.
IT 3 0 0 .1800
IO 5
JR PRE:C 10
PG 1 I
IN 6
PC 0 0.009 0.018 0.02 0.026 0.035 0.045 0.0114 0.06'1 0.072
PC 0.082 0.1 0.109 0.126 0.137 0.159 0.181 0.204 0.238 0.292
PC 0.366 0.447 0.52 0.593 0.625 0.652 0.673 0.691 0.709 0.727
PC 0.745 0.762 0.772 0.799 0.816 0.827 0.836 0.845 0.859 0.874
PC 0.883 0.692 0.901 0.91 0.919 0.928 0.937 0.946 0.954 0.96
PC 0.966 0.973 0.982 0.991 1 1 1 1 I 1
IN ,
KK DRAINAGE AREA
KO 21
KM REVISED DRAINAGE: AREA ADDING 14.5 ACRES TOTAL AREA = 156.5
BA 0.245
PR 1
LS 0 87
UD 0.126
KK ROUTE
KO 21
RS 1 ELEV 786.53
SV 0 6.47 15.96 26.1 36.92 48.45
SE 786.53 788 790 792 794 796
SQ 0 1.51 16.47 78.88 167.87 277 403.06 417.92 430.29 442.31
SE 786.53 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796
KM TOP OF DAM
KO 21
ST 797.25 1 3 1.5
ZZ
*****************************************

* FLOOD HYDROGRAPH PACKAGE (HEC-1)
* JUN 1998
* VERSION 4.1
*
R
* UN DATE 10NOV08 TIME 15:38:58
**** *************************************

MORRISON PLANTATION - BMP 3 - 2008 REVISIONS
' 1/3 PMP YEAR
GEOSCIENCE GROUP, INC.
5 IO OUTPUT CONTROL VARIABLES
' IPRNT 5 PRINT CONTROL
IPLOT 0 PLOT CONTROL
QSCAL 0. HYDROGRAPH PLOT SCALE
' IT HYDROGRAPH TIME DATA
NMIN 3 MINUTES IN COMPUTATION INTERVAL
IDATE 1 0 STARTING DATE
ITIME 0000 STARTING TIME
NQ 1800 NUMBER OF HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES
NDDATE 4 0 ENDING DATE
NDTIME 1757 ENDING TIME
ICENT 19 CENTURY MARK
COMPUTATION INTERVAL .05 HOURS
TOTAL TIME BASE 89.95 HOURS
ENGLISH UNITS
DRAINAGE AREA SQUARE MILES
PRECIPITATION DEPTH INCHES
LENGTH, ELEVATION FEET
FLOW CUBIC FEET PER SECOND
STORAGE VOLUME ACRE-FEET
SURFACE AREA ACRES
TEMPERATURE DEGREES FAHRENHEIT
JP MULTI-PLAN OPTION
NPLAN 1 NUMBER OF PLANS
JR MULTI-RATIO OPTION
' RATIOS OF PRECIPITATION
10.00
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*
* U.S. ARMY
* HYDROLOGIC
* 609
* DAVIS,
* (91
*
***************
1* *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
**************
*

16 KK *
* DRAINA *
GE AREA
* *
**************
17 KO OUTPUT CONTROL VARIABLES
IPRNT 5 PRINT CONTROL
IPLOT 0 PLOT CONTROL
' QSCAL 0. HYDROGRAPH PLOT SCALE
IPNCH 0 PUNCH COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH
IOUT 21 SAVE HYDROGRAPH ON THIS UNIT
ISAV1
ISAV2 1
1800 FIRST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
LAST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
TIMINT .050 TIME INTERVAL IN HOURS

* *
3 KK * ROUTE
* *
? **************
4 KO OUTPUT CONTROL VARIABLES
? IPRNT 5 PRINT CONTROL
IPLOT 0 PLOT CONTROL
QSCAL 0. HYDROGRAPH PLOT SCALE
IPNCH 0 PUNCH COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH
' IOUT 21 SAVE HYDROGRAPH ON THIS UNIT
ISAV1 1 FIRST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
ISAV2 1800 LAST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
TIMINT .050 TIME INTERVAL IN HOURS

**************

?3 KK * *
* ROUTE
* *
**************
?l KO OUTPUT CONTROL VARIABLES
IPRNT 5 PRINT CONTROL
IPLOT 0 PLOT CONTROL
QSCAL 0. HYDROGRAPH PLOT SCALE
IPNCH 0 PUNCH COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH
' IOUT 21 SAVE HYDROGRAPH ON THIS UNIT
ISAV1 1 FIRST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
ISAV2 1800 LAST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
' TIMINT .050 TIME INTERVAL IN HOURS

OPERATION
11ROGRAPH AT
RITED TO
i
1
1
1

PEAK FLOW AND STAGE (END-OF-PERIOD) SUMMARY FOR MULTIPLE PLAN-RATIO ECONOMIC COMPUTATIONS
FLOWS IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND, AREA IN SQUARE MILES
TIME TO PEAK IN HOURS
RATIOS APPLIED TO PRECIPITATION
STATION AREA PLAN RATIO 1
10.00
DRAINA .25 1 FLOW 1087.
TIME 2.30
ROUTE .25 1 FLOW 433.
TIME 2.65
** PEAK STAGES IN FEET **
1 STAGE 795.24
TIME 2.65
SUMMARY OF' DAM OVERTOPPING/RRE'ACH ANALYSIS F'OR ;,TA'J'I(')N ROUTE
(PEAKS SHOWN ARE FOR INTERNAL. TIME STEP USED DU RING BREACH FORMATION)
PLAN 1 ............... INITIAL VALUE SPILLWAY CREST TOP OF DAM
ELEVATION
STORAGE 786.53
0. 797.25
56. 797.25
56.
OUTFLOW 0. 457. 457.
RATIO MAXIMUM MAXIMUM MAXIMUM MAXIMUM DURATION TIME OF TIME
' OF RESERVOIR DEPTH STORAGE OUTFLOW OVER TOP MAX OUTFLOW FAILL
PMF W.S.ELEV OVER DAM AC-FT CFS HOURS HOURS HOUF
' 10.00 795.24 .00 44. 433. .00 2.65 C
* NORMAL END OF HEC-1 ***

1

HF('-l INPUT
LINE ID ....... 1....... 2....... 3....... 4... .... 5 ....... 6 ....... 7....... 8....... 9...... 10
1 ID
2 ID POST DEVELOPMENT 10 YEAR 6 HOUR S TORM
3 ID GEOSCIENCE GROUP, INC.
4 IT 1 0 0 2000
5 IO 5 0 0
6 KK RUNOFF FROM AREA
7 KM 1 YEAR 24 HOUR STORM
8 KM 0 0 0.36 0.69 1.19 1.43 1.59 1.86 2.2 2.58
9 KM 2 YEAR 6 HOUR STORM
10 KM 0 0 0.42 0.83 1.45 1.76 1.95 2.28
11 KM 10 YEAR 6 HOUR STORM
12 PH 0 0 0.59 1.26 2.36 2.9 3.21 3.72
13 KM 25 YEAR 6 HOUR STORM
14 KM 0 0 0.68 1.47 2.76 3.4 3.75 4.38
15 KM 50 YEAR 6 HOUR STORM
16 KM 0 0 0.75 1.62 3.05 3.78 4.2 4.92
17 KM 100 YEAR 6 HOUR STORM
18 KM 0 0 0.83 1.78 3.34 4.12 4.56 5.34
19 KO 21
20 KM ON SITE DRAINAGE AREA
21 BA 0.245
22 LS 0 87
23 UD 0.126
24 KO 21
25 KK Routed
26 KO 21
27 RS 1 ELEV 786.53
28 SV 0 6.47 15.96 26.1 36.92 48.45
29 SE 786.53 788 790 792 794 796
30 SQ 0 1.51 16.47 788.88 1 67.87 277 403.06 417.92 430.29 442.31
31 SE 786.53 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796
32 ST 797.25 1 3 1.5
33 ZZ
*****************************************
* FLOOD HYDROGRAPH PACKAGE (HEC-1)
* JUN 1998
* VERSION 4.1
*
RUN DATE 10NOV08 TIME 15:43:20
*
*****************************************
1
POST DEVELOPMENT 10 YEAR 6 HOUR STORM
GEOSCIENCE GROUP, INC.
S IO OUTPUT CONTROL VARIABLES
' IPRNT 5 PRINT CONTROL
IPLOT 0 PLOT CONTROL
QSCAL 0. HYDROGRAPH PLOT SCALE
' IT HYDROGRAPH TIME DATA
NMIN 1 MINUTES IN COMPUTATION INTERVAL
IDATE 1 0 STARTING DATE
ITIME 0000 STARTING TIME
' NQ 2000 NUMBER OF HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES
NDDATE 2 0 ENDING DATE
NDTIME 0919 ENDING TIME
ICENT 19 CENTURY MARK
' COMPUTATION INTE RVAL .02 HOURS
TOTAL TIME BASE 33.32 HOURS
ENGLISH UNITS
DRAINAGE AREA SQUARE MILES
PRECIPITATION DEPTH INCHES
LENGTH, ELEVATION FEET
FLOW CUBIC FEET PER SECOND
STORAGE VOLUME ACRE-FEET
SURFACE AREA ACRES
TEMPERATURE DEGREES FAHRENHEIT
* U.S. AKKY
* HYDROLOGIC
* 609
* DAVIS,
* (91
*

* *
6 KK * RUNOFF * FROM AREA
* *
**************
19 KO OUTPUT CONTROL VARIABLES
IPRNT 5 PRINT CONTROL
IPLOT 0 PLOT CONTROL
QSCAL 0. HYDROGRAPH PLOT SCALE
IPNCH 0 PUNCH COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH
IOUT 21 SAVE HYDROGRAPH ON THIS UNIT
' ISAV1 1 FIRST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
ISAV2 2000 LAST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
TIMINT .017 TIME INTERVAL IN HOURS
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **#
* *
' 6 KK * RUNOFF * FROM AREA
* *
**************
,24 KO OUTPUT CONTROL VARIABLES
IPRNT 5 PRINT CONTROL
IPLOT 0 PLOT CONTROL
QSCAL 0. HYDROGRAPH PLOT SCALE
IPNCH 0 PUNCH COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH
IOUT 21 SAVE HYDROGRAPH ON THIS UNIT
ISAV1 1 FIRST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
ISAV2 2000 LAST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
' TIMINT .017 TIME INTERVAL IN HOURS
VJUE EXCEEDS TABLE IN LOGLOG .01667 .01667 6.00000

**************

?5 KK * *
* Routed
* *
**************
6 KO OUTPUT CONTROL VARIABLES
? IPRNT 5 PRINT CONTROL
IPLOT 0 PLOT CONTROL
QSCAL 0. HYDROGRAPH PLOT SCALE
IPNCH 0 PUNCH COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH
' IOUT 21 SAVE HYDROGRAPH ON THIS UNIT
ISAV1 1 FIRST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
ISAV2 2000 LAST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
TIMINT .017 TIME INTERVAL IN HOURS
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
RUNOFF SUMMARY
FLOW IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND
TIME IN HOURS, AREA IN SQUARE MILES
PEAK TIME OF AVERAGE FLOW FOR MAXIMUM PERIOD BASIN MAC
OPERATION STATION FLOW PEAK 6-HOUR 24-HOUR 72-HOUR AREA S'
HYDROGRAPH AT RUNOFF 619. 3.15 63. 16. 11. .25
ROUTED TO Routed 388. 3.30 46. 13. 10. .25 7E
PLAN 1 ...............
RATIO
OF
PMF
1.00
NORMAL END OF HEC-1 ***
1
SUMMARY OF DAM OVERTOPPING/AREACH ANALYSTS FOR STATION R()uled
(PEAKS SHOWN ARE FOR INTERNAL TIME STEP USED DURING BREACH I'Of:MA'I'ION)
INITIAL VALUE SPILLWAY CREST `POI? OF DAM
ELEVATION 786 .53 797.25 797.25
STORAGE 0. 56. 56.
OUTFLOW 0. 457. 457.
MAXIMUM MAXIMUM MAXIMUM MAXIMUM DURATION TIME OF TIME
RESERVOIR DEPTH STORAGE OUTFLOW OVER TOP MAX OUTFLOW FAILt
W.S.ELEV OVER DAM AC-FT CFS HOURS HOURS HOUF
789.48 .00 13. 388. .00 3.30 C
IIEC-1 INPUT
LINE ID ....... 1....... 2.. ..... 3.. ..... 4.. ...... .. ..... 6 ....... 7....... 8. ...... 9. ..... 10
1 ID
2 ID POST DEVELOPMENT 100 YEAR 24 HOUR STORM
3 ID GEOSCIENCE GROUP, INC.
4 ID PRECIPITATION DATA FROM NOAA ATLAS 14 NC 35 .573N 80.797W
5 IT 1 0 0 1800
6 IO 5 0 0
7 KK RUNOFF FROM AREA
8 KM 100 YEAR 24 HOUR STORM
9 PH 0 0 0.73 1.47 3.09 3.74 4.14 5.13 6.25 7.35
10 KO 21
11 KM ON SITE DRAINAGE AREA
12 BA 0.245
13 LS 0 87
14 UD 0.126
15 KO 21
16 KK Routed
17 KO 21
18 RS 1 ELEV 786.53
19 SV 0 6.47 15.96 26.1 36.92 48.45
20 SE 786.53 788 790 792 794 796
21 SQ 0 1.51 16.47 788.88 167.87 277 403.06 417.92 430.29 442.31
22 SE 786.53 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796
23 ST 797.25 1 3 1.5
24 ZZ
*****************************************
* FLOOD HYDROGRAPH PACKAGE (HEC-1)
* JUN 1998
* VERSION 4.1
*
RUN DATE 11NOV08 TIME 14:06:58
*
*****************************************
1
' POST DEVELOPMENT 100 YEAR 24 HOUR STORM
GEOSCIENCE GROUP, INC.
PRECIPITATION DATA FROM NOAA ATLAS 14 NC 35.573N 80.797W
' 6 IC) OUTPUT CONTROL VARIABLES
IPRNT 5 PRINT CONTROL
IPLOT 0 PLOT CONTROL
' QSCAL 0. HYDROGRAPH PLOT SCALE
IT HYDROGRAPH TIME DATA
NMIN 1 MINUTES IN COMPUTATION INTERVAL
IDATE 1 0 STARTING DATE
ITIME 0000 STARTING TIME
NQ 1800 NUMBER OF HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES
NDDATE 2 0 ENDING DATE
NDTIME 0559 ENDING TIME
' ICENT 19 CENTURY MARK
COMPUTATION INTERVAL .02 HOURS
TOTAL TIME BASE 29.98 HOURS
' ENGLISH UNITS
DRAINAGE AREA SQUARE MILES
PRECIPITATION DEPTH INCHES
LENGTH, ELEVATION FEET
FLOW CUBIC FEET PER SECOND
STORAGE VOLUME ACRE-FEET
SURFACE AREA ACRES
TEMPERATURE DEGREES FAHRENHEIT
* U. S. AkMY
* HYDROLOGIC
* (09
* DAVIS,
* (91
*
**************%
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
**************

7 KK * *
* RUNOFF *
* *
FROM
AREA
**************
0 KO OUTPUT CONTROL VARIABLES
? IPRNT 5 PRINT CONTROL
IPLOT 0 PLOT CONTROL
QSCAL 0. HYDROGRAPH PLOT SCALE
IPNCH 0 PUNCH COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH
IOUT 21 SAVE HYDROGRAPH ON THIS UNIT
ISAV1 1 FIRST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
ISAV2 1800 LAST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
' TIMINT .017 TIME INTERVAL IN HOURS
f *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
**************
* *
7 KK * RUNOFF * FROM AREA
* *
**************
,15 KO OUTPUT CONTROL VARIABLES
IPRNT 5 PRINT CONTROL
IPLOT 0 PLOT CONTROL
' QSCAL 0. HYDROGRAPH PLOT SCALE
IPNCH 0 PUNCH COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH
IOUT 21 SAVE HYDROGRAPH ON THIS UNIT
' ISAV1
ISAV2 1
1800 FIRST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
LAST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
TIMINT .017 TIME INTERVAL IN HOURS
V?UE EXCEEDS TABLE IN LOGLOG .01667 .01667 24.00000

**************
* *
?6 KK * Routed
* *
**************
?7 KO OUTPUT CONTROL VARIABLES
IPRNT 5 PRINT CONTROL
IPLOT 0 PLOT CONTROL
QSCAL 0. HYDROGRAPH PLOT SCALE
' IPNCH 0 PUNCH COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH
IOUT 21 SAVE HYDROGRAPH ON THIS UNIT
ISAV1 1 FIRST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
ISAV2 1800 LAST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
' TIMINT .017 TIME INTERVAL IN HOURS

t

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
RUNOFF SUMMARY
FLOW IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND
TIME IN HOURS, AREA IN SQUARE MILES
PEAK TIME OF AVERAGE FLOW FOR MAXIMUM PERIOD BASIN MAC
OPERATION STATION FLOW PEAK 6-HOUR 24-HOUR 72-HOUR AREA sl
HYDROGRAPH AT RUNOFF 896. 12.15 118. 38. 31. .25
ROUTED TO Routed 788. 12.23 112. 35. 28. .25 7S
SUMMARY OF I)AM UVF;R'I'UI'1'1NC?1?RhF.CII ANAI,Y:?i:: I'!?I: ;;'I'7,'I'I?!F1 I•',?iI?J
(PEAKS SHOWN ARFI POP 1ITEPNAL TIM E ::'I'II,{' USF;D I?ll l•'IN?, I',I.I;IU'll FOPMAT'I(fN)
PLAN 7 ............... INITIAL, VALUE; SPILLWAY CRES T TOP OF DAM
' ELEVATION
STORAGE 786.53
0. 797.25
56. 737 .2!,
56.
OUTFLOW 0. 457. 4 '> "/ .
' RATIO MAXIMUM MAXIMUM MAXIMUM MAXIMUM DURATION `DIME: OF TIME
OF RESERVOIR DEPTH STORAGE OUTFLOW OVER TOP M AX OUTFLOW FAILL
PMF W.S.ELEV OVER DAM AC-FT CFS HOURS HOURS 1 10UF
' 1.00 790.01 .00 16. 788. .00 12.23 C
NORMAL END OF HEC-1 ***

1

t

BEC-1 INPUT
' LINE ID.. ..... 1....... 2....... 3....... 4....... 5....... 6....... 7....... 8....... 9...... 10
1 ID
' 2
3 ID
ID POST DEVELOPMENT 2 YEAR 6 HOUR STORM, NO CONTROLS
GEOSCIENCE GROUP, INC.
4 IT 1 0 0 2000
5 IO 5 0 0
' 6 KK RUNOFF FROM AREA
7 KM 1 YEAR 24 HOUR STORM
8 KM 0 0 0.36 0.69 1.19 1.43 1.59 1.86 2.2 2.58
9 KM 2 YEAR 6 HOUR STORM
10 PH 0 0 0.42 0.83 1.45 1.76 1.95 2.28
11 KM 10 YEAR 6 HOUR STORM
12 KM 0 0 0.59 1.26 2.36 2.9 3.21 3.72
13 KM 25 YEAR 6 HOUR STORM
14 KM 0 0 0.68 1.47 2.76 3.4 3.75 4.38
15 KM 50 YEAR 6 HOUR STORM
16 KM 0 0 0.75 1.62 3.05 3.78 4.2 4.92
17 KM 100 YEAR 6 HOUR STORM
' 18
19 KM
KO 0 0 0.83 1.78 3.34 4.12 4.56 5.34
21
20 KM ON SITE DRAINAGE AREA
21 BA 0.245
' 22
23 LS
UD 87
0.126 6
24 KO 21
25 ZZ

t

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

* FLOOD HY DROGRAPH PACKAGE (HEC-1)
* JUN 1998
* VERSION 4.1
*
RUN DATE
* 10NOV08 TIME 16:17:21
************ *****************************

' POST DEVELOPMENT 2 YEAR 6 HOUR STORM, NO CONTROLS
GEOSCIENCE GROUP, INC.
5 IO OUTPUT CONTROL VARIABLES
t IPRNT 5 PRINT CONTROL
IPLOT 0 PLOT CONTROL
QSCAL 0. HYDROGRAPH PLOT SCALE
t IT HYDROGRAPH TIME DATA
NMIN 1 MINUTES IN COMPUTATION INTERVAL
IDATE 1 0 STARTING DATE
ITIME 0000 STARTING TIME
' NQ 2000 NUMBER OF HYDROGRAPH ORDINATES
NDDATE 2 0 ENDING DATE
NDTIME 0919 ENDING TIME
ICENT 19 CENTURY MARK
' COMPUTATION INTERVAL .02 HOURS
TOTAL TIME BASE 33.32 HOURS
ENGLISH UNITS
DRAINAGE AREA SQUARE MILES
PRECIPITATION DEPTH INCHES
LENGTH, ELEVATION FEET
' FLOW CUBIC FEET PER SECOND
STORAGE VOLUME ACRE-FEET
SURFACE AREA ACRES
TEMPERATURE DEGREES FAHRENHEIT
A * * M * * * * * * * * * * *
*
* U.S. ARMY
* HYDROLOGIC
* 609
* DAVIS,
* (91
*
***************
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
**************
* *
6 KK * RUNOFF * FROM AREA
* *
**************
19 KO OUTPUT CONTROL VARIABLES
IPRNT 5 PRINT CONTROL
' IPLOT 0 PLOT CONTROL
QSCAL 0. HYDROGRAPH PLOT SCALE
IPNCH 0 PUNCH COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH
IOUT 21 SAVE HYDROGRAPH ON THIS UNIT
' ISAV1 1 FIRST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
ISAV2 2000 LAST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
TIMINT .017 TIME INTERVAL IN HOURS
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
**************
* *
' 6 KK * RUNOFF * FROM AREA
* *
**************
24 KO OUTPUT CONTROL VARIABLES
IPRNT 5 PRINT CONTROL
IPLOT
QSCAL
' IPNCH
IOUT
ISAV1
ISAV2
' TIMINT
V?UE EXCEEDS TABLE IN LOGLOG

t

1
1

0 PLOT CONTROL
0. HYDROGRAPH PLOT SCALE
0 PUNCH COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH
21 SAVE HYDROGRAPH ON THIS UNIT
1 FIRST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
2000 LAST ORDINATE PUNCHED OR SAVED
.017 TIME INTERVAL IN HOURS
01667 .01667 6.00000
' RUNOFF SUMMARY
FLOW IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND
TIME IN HOURS, AREA IN SQUARE MILES
' PEAK TIME OF AVERAGE FLOW FOR MAXIMUM PERIOD BASIN
OPERATION STATION FLOW PEAK 6-HOUR 24-HOUR 72-HOUR AREA
HYDROGRAPH AT RUNOFF 320. 3.15 30. 7. 5. .25
* NORMAL END OF HEC-1 ***
1
1
1
1
1
MAC
S?
i ^oh' J.3A?Ins line-Sd
2 O ?? aaaaya?crYeeee??? ?
Q b N?j pj ` VNI108VO HAON AINnoo 11303dl
?`,aaa •????S Q`t?'"??''??
%
W -? 2 0 ? ? ' _ 0 :, ? - ? co d • r
o ??? o W ON 3??IAS3d?IOW
i44Q W y 0 #aNOd NOIlblNd?d NOSIdOW P.'
>a O ONI 'dnodo .1183dO8d 3W00NI VNIIOdVO 2103 038Vd38d
}
0
z
0
m
0
w
F
w
U
Q
H
O
Z
N

n

N

S I
I
I
I
I ?
I ? I
I
I
I
I
I
n ^
I I
o? I
J
W ?
I
I e? I
I
< n I

x
? -
-

w C4 T
T
; a
6 n
z
ui
o _

z

O
Z
0
O
CL
6

\

1?
<U
UQi
/ \

\
\
4
I ,

n
IN
z Gi

i I
I
?. ?
I

m
J
N
X(4
con _
x?
i
i
i
i
r
It
N
i1
N

i
i
i

W<
N
Ell
F
9i i
!s-an
w
U
L?
O
J
Q
3

I
z
0
F
0
z
0
z
w
bi
0
3
5
J
<
i-r
9
t
0
0
0
0
O
0
I

IL
4z
9
CA
A
01,