The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20061376 Ver 1_Report_20060922NOVARTIS VACCINES & DIAGNOSTICS USFCC HOLLY SPRINGS, NC SOIL REPORT, SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS AND SPECIFICATION Jacobs Job No. 22COl 103 SEPTEMBER 22, 2006 UJACOBS iIMC1 REPORT OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EVALUATION PROPOSED NOVARTIS FACILITY HOLLY SPRINGS, NORTH CAROLINA F&R PROJECT NO. H66-098G Prepared For: TOWN OF HOLLY SPRINGS 128 S. Main Street Holly Springs, North Carolina 27540 Prepared By: FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. 310 Hubert Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 Phone: (919) 828-3441 • Fax: (919) 828-5751 September 19, 2006 SINCE 00o FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" 310 HUBERT STREET. RALEIGH, NC 27603 PHONE: (919) 828-3441 • FAX: (919) 828-5751 1881 WEB SITE: www.FandR.com September 19, 2006 Mr. Daniel Weeks Town of Holly Springs 128 S. Main Street Holly Springs, North Carolina 27540 Re: Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Evluation Proposed Novartis Facility Holly Springs, North Carolina F&R Project No. H66-098G Dear Mr. Weeks: Froehling and Robertson, Inc. (F&R) has completed a subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering evaluation for the proposed Novartis Facility located in Holly Springs, North Carolina. This work was performed in general accordance with F&R's proposal No. 0766-035G (revised) dated July 26, 2006. This report contains a description of the project information provided to F&R, a discussion of the general subsurface conditions revealed during the subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering recommendations for the proposed project. Please contact us if you have any questions regarding this report or if you need additional services. Sincerely, FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. Dyilanr •4nw by Dan Schaefer /J N: cn•Dn Scheel -US. o=Froattlirg AM Robertson, Inc.. u=Raklph Dale: 200&09 20 1717:57 -04'00' Digitally signed by Michael Scarlett DN: cn=Michael Scarlett, C= I. o=Froehling and Robertson, email=MScarlett@fandr.com Date: 2006.09.20 17:17:23 -04'00' Daniel K. Schaefer, P.E. Michael J. Scarlett, P.E. Raleigh Branch Manager Engineering Services Manager HEADQUARTERS: 3015 DUMBARTON ROAD • BOX 27524 • RICHMOND, VA 23261-7524 TELEPHONE: (804) 264-2701 • FAX. (804) 264-1202 sm, OW4 BRANCHES: ASHEVILLE, NC • BALTIMORE, MD CHARLOTTE, NC • CHESAPEAKE, VA CROZET, VA FAYETTEVILLE, NC FREDERICKSBURG, VA • GREENVILLE, SC HICKORY, NC • RALEIGH, NC • ROANOKE, VA • STERLING, VA U."C[ 11 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES ...........................................................................1 1.1 Purpose of Study .......................................................................................................1 1.2 Scope of Services ......................................................................................................1 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION ................................................................................................1 2.1 Site Location .............................................................................................................1 2.2 Proposed Construction .............................................................................................2 3.0 EXPLORATION PROCEDURES .......................................................................................2 3.1 Field .......................................................................................................................2 3.2 Laboratory .................................................................................................................3 4.0 SITE & SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ............................................................................4 4.1 Site Conditions ..........................................................................................................4 4.2 Regional Geology .....................................................................................................4 4.3 Subsurface Conditions ..............................................................................................4 4.4 Groundwater Conditions ..........................................................................................6 5.0 ENGINEERING EVALUATION & RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................6 5.1 General Development Recommendations .............................................................6 5.2 Site Preparation ..................................................................................................... ...6 5.3 Structural Fill Placement and Compaction ......................................................... ...8 5.4 Cut and Fill Slopes ................................................................................................ ...9 5.5 Temorary Excavations .......................................................................................... 10 5.6 Foundations ........................................................................................................... 10 5.7 Floor Slabs ............................................................................................................. 12 5.8 Laterally Loaded Walls ........................................................................................ 12 5.9 Seismic Design Criteria ........................................................................................ 14 5.10 Pavements .............................................................................................................. 14 5.11 Corrosion Potential ............................................................................................... 16 6.0 CONSTRUCTION QUALITY CONTROL ..................................................................... 17 7.0 LIMITATIONS .................................................................................................................. 18 '}INCf 1 tl APPENDIX A ASFE PHAMPLET SITE VICINTY PLAN, FIGURE NO. I BORING LOCATION PLAN, FIGURE NO. 2 SUBSURFACE PROFILE, FIGURES 3-9 APPENDIX B KEY TO SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART BORING LOGS APPENDIX C LABORATORY TEST RESULTS SLOPE STABILITY SLOPE DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS S?NCf 1 ??1 1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES 1.1 PURPOSE OF STUDY The purpose of the preliminary subsurface exploration was to explore the subsurface conditions by performing thirty-seven moderately-spaced soil test borings and provide geotechnical engineering recommendations regarding the suitability of the site for the proposed development. 1.2 SCOPE OF SERVICES F&R's scope of services included the following: • Description of the proposed construction; • Description of the regional geology; • Descriptions of the site subsurface conditions including the preparation of typed Boring Logs and Subsurface Profiles; • Descriptions of the site groundwater conditions and recommendations for management of groundwater during construction and the life of the structure and pavements; • Site preparation and earthwork construction recommendations including evaluation of site soils for use as structural fill, and soil compaction requirements for fill and backfill; • Foundation recommendations including evaluation of different foundation systems, design parameters (e.g., frost penetration depths/effects, bearing capacity, bearing elevation, seismic site classification), total and differential settlement estimates and construction procedures; • Lateral earth pressure design parameters and recommendations for design of below grade walls including backfill and drainage recommendations; • Recommendations for temporary and permanent slopes stability; • Pavement design and construction recommendations; • Recommendations for quality control and materials testing. 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 2.1 SITE LOCATION The site is located west of NC Highway 55 Bypass and southwest of the end of Thomas Mill Road in Holly Springs, North Carolina (see Site Vicinity Map, Figure 1 in Appendix A). Town of Holly Springs 1 F&R Project No. H66-098C Proposed Novartis Facility, Holy Springs. NC September 19, 2006 ""CE ttl 2.2 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION F&R understands that the proposed development will consist of constructing 7 buildings with associated parking and drive areas. Support structures such as a tank farm/utility yard and pipe racks are planned as well. The buildings will be steel framed with slab-on-grade construction (specific information regarding the proposed buildings is tabulated below) with a planned Finished Floor Elevation (FFE) of 340 feet. Typical wall loads will range from 3 to 6 kips per linear foot and first floor loads are on the order of 400 psf. We anticipate that there will be retaining walls associated with loading dock areas and pits, however, no other walls were identified. Two steepened slopes are planned to the north and south side of the project site and we assume other slopes will be constructed. Once final grading plans are available, we would like an opportunity to review them with respect to our recommendations. We anticipate that maximum cut and fills across the site are not anticipated to exceed ± 20 to 30 feet from existing grades. Structure No. of Stories Max. Column Load (kips) Bulk Manufacturing Bid. 4 1,400 Fill Finish Building 2 375 Packaging Building 1 85 Warehouse Building 1 205 Facility Operations Building 1 275 Admin. / QO Building 3 470 Spine 1 100 The recommendations in this report apply to the structures that will be built initially in Phase 1. We recommend that additional borings be performed in the vicinity of the future buildings planned in this phase as well as for Phases 2 and 3 prior to design of structures in those areas. 3.0 EXPLORATION PROCEDURES 3.1 FIELD Thirty-seven (37) soil test borings (B-1 through B-36 and boring B-21A) were advanced as part of this exploration (see boring locations on Figure No. 2 in Appendix A). The test borings were advanced to depths ranging from approximately 10 to 53.5 feet below the existing ground surface. Representatives of Bass Nixon and Kennedy established the boring locations in the field by surveying and provided the ground surface elevations at each of the boring locations. Town of Holly Springs 2 F&R Proiecr Yo. H66-098G ProposedNovarris Facility, Holly Springs, NC September 19, 2006 SING[ :k 111 The test borings were advanced by an ATV mounted drill rig using 2-1/4" inside diameter (I.D.) hollow stem augers for borehole stabilization. Representative soil samples were obtained using a standard two-inch outside diameter (O.D.) split barrel sampler in general accordance with ASTM D 1586, Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils (Standard Penetration Test). The number of blows required to drive the split barrel sampler three consecutive 6-inch increments is recorded and the blows of the last two 6-inch increments are added to obtain the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N-values representing the penetration resistance of the soil. Standard Penetration Tests were performed almost continuously to a depth of 10 feet and at a nominal interval of approximately 5 feet thereafter. Water level measurements were attempted at the termination of drilling and at select locations after a 24-hour stabilization period. The borings were backfilled with auger cuttings. A representative portion of the soil was obtained from each SPT sample, sealed in an eight-ounce glass jar, labeled and transported to our laboratory for final classification and analysis by a geotechnical engineer. The soil samples were classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS), using visual-manual identification procedures (ASTM D 2488). A Boring Log for each test boring is presented in Appendix B. Subsurface profiles, Figures 3 through 9, are located in Appendix A. 3.2 LABORATORY Several soil samples were subjected to routine geotechnical index testing consisting of moisture content, grain size distribution and Atterberg Limits determinations. Standard Proctor compaction and California Bearing Ratio (CBR) testing was performed on four bulk samples obtained to aid in pavement design. Triaxial testing was performed on two undisturbed samples and one remolded sample to aid in evaluation of proposed slopes. Additional laboratory tests were performed to evaluate the resistivity and corrosion potential of the on-site soils. The purpose of the laboratory testing was to aid in our classification of the soil samples and development of engineering recommendations. The laboratory testing was performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM standards, and the results are included in Appendix C. Town of Holly Springs 3 F&R Project No. H66-098G Proposed Novartis Facility, Holly Springs, NC September 19, 2006 a1Mcr 4.0 SITE & SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 4.1 SITE CONDITIONS The project site is approximately 160 acres in size (approximately 1/4 to 1/3 will be used for Phase I) and is light to heavily wooded with pine and hardwood trees. Immediately prior to drilling, the Phase I portion of the site was timbered. The higher elevations generally occur in the central portion of the site (approximate elevation 359) and descends in all directions. Wet weather drainage features are located on the east and west sides of the Phase I area and drain towards the south and there is a creek located to the north of Phase I. There is approximately 50 feet of relief across the Phase I portion of the site. 4.2 REGIONAL GEOLOGY The project area is located in the Deep River Triassic Basin (Chatham Group) consisting of Triassic Age deposits. The deposits consist of maroon to gray arkosic sandstones, siltstones, shales, and fanglomerates. The Triassic Deposits typically dip to the southeast at approximately 15° and are bounded on the southeast by the Jonesboro fault. Triassic deposits are frequently intruded by diabase dikes (hard rock formations), although none were encountered in our borings. Rock outcrops were not present at or in the immediate vicinity of the project site. It should be noted that it is always a possibility that excavations may encounter diabase dikes (which may require blasting or jack hammering for removal), even though we did not encounter diabase in our borings. 4.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions, as indicated by the borings, generally consist of organic laden soils and rootmat underlain by Triassic soils. The Triassic soils are sedimentary deposits formed from the weathering, water transport and consolidation of the bordering residual soils. Triassic soils generally transition with depth into Partially Weathered Rock (PWR). Strata breaks designated on the Boring Logs and Subsurface Profiles represent approximate boundaries between soil types. The actual transition from one soil type to another may be gradual or occur between soil samples. General subsurface conditions encountered during our subsurface exploration are described below. For more detailed soil descriptions and stratifications at the Town of Holly Springs 4 F&R Project No. H66-098G Proposed Novnrtis Facility, 11o11v .Springs, NC September 19, 2006 SI.Cr I1?1 boring locations, the attached "Boring Logs" and "Subsurface Profiles" should be reviewed. Surface: An organic laden soil layer of approximately 2 to 6 inches in thickness was observed at many of the boring locations. The organic laden soils generally consist of silty sand and sandy silt with rootmat. Organic laden soils were observed in the vicinity of most of the borings but is not noted on the boring logs due to surficial disturbance (timbering) at most of boring locations or the borings were located within dirt/gravel roads. Based on our past experience, the organic laden soil layer thickness can vary dramatically in wooded areas. We estimate stripping depths to be between 6 to 12 inches thick and in isolated areas may reach as much as 24 inches. Triassic Soils: Underlying the organic laden soils and at the surface at the boring locations that were disturbed or in dirt roads, Triassic soils were encountered. The Triassic soils generally consist of firm to very hard sandy silt, clayey silt, sandy clay (USCS - ML & CL) and loose to very dense clayey sand and silty sand (USCS - SC & SM). At isolated areas, high plastic clays and silts were observed (USCS CH& MH) in the upper 10 feet of the soil profile. Borings B-3, 13-16 through B-24, B-26, B-28, B-30 and B-36 were terminated in the Triassic deposit at depths ranging between 10 and 30 feet below the existing ground surface. Standard Penetration Resistances (N-values) obtained in the Triassic deposit ranged from 4 to 80 blows per foot (bpf). The moisture condition of the soils was observed to be dry to moist. Partially Weathered Rock: Partially Weathered Rock (PWR) was encountered at depths ranging from approximately 3 to 35 feet below the existing ground surface. PWR is defined as soils exhibiting N-values in excess of 100 blows per foot (bpo or harder than 50 blows per 6 inches. Standard Penetration resistances (N-values) obtained in the PWR ranged from 50 blows per 4 inches of penetration to 50 blows per 2 inches of penetration. These borings were terminated in PWR at depths ranging from 12 to 53.5 feet below the existing ground surface. Borings B-8 through B-15, B-21A, B-25, B-27, B-29 and B-33 were terminated in PWR upon auger refusal at depths ranging from 12 to 53.5 feet below the existing ground surface. Auger refusal is defined as material that could not be penetrated with the drill rig equipment used on the project. Auger refusal material may consist of large boulders, rock ledges, lenses, seams or the top of bedrock. Core drilling techniques would be required to evaluate the character and continuity of the refusal material. Town ojHolly Springs 5 MR Project No. 1166-0986 Proposed Novartis Facility, Hollv Springs, NC September 19, 2006 rCsi xcc 1 4.4 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS In general, a majority of soils recovered from the test borings were dry to moist. Groundwater was not encountered in the test borings immediately after drilling (IAD) or after a 24-hour period except in boring B-9 where water was observed at a depth of 38 feet. We do not anticipate that groundwater will be encountered within the proposed cut depths. The borings were backfilled with auger cuttings. It should be noted that groundwater elevations vary depending upon seasonal factors such as precipitation and temperature. Due to the shallow depth that PWR was encountered and the presence of relatively impermeable silts and clays, perched water conditions should be anticipated following rain events and during seasonally wet periods. As such, groundwater conditions at other times may vary or be different from those described in this report. 5.0 ENGINEERING EVALUATION & RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based upon the data obtained from the 37 test borings performed, laboratory testing, our past experience with similar type soils and information provided regarding the proposed development. It is our opinion that the subsurface conditions encountered on the project site project site are suitable for the proposed development provided the recommendations presented in subsequent sections of this report are followed throughout the design and construction phases of this project. If structural loading, geometry, alignment or elevation of the structures differ from those outlined herein, or if the conditions encountered during construction differ from those encountered at the soil test borings performed by F&R, then F&R requests the opportunity to review the recommendations presented herein based on the new information and make any necessary changes. 5.2 SITE PREPARATION After clearing and grubbing, the entire building and pavement areas should be stripped of all organic laden soils, high plasticity near-surface soils (if encountered), trash, debris and other organic materials to a minimum of 10 feet beyond the structural and pavement limits including beneath proposed slopes. Upon the completion of the stripping operations, the exposed subgrade Town of Holly Springs 6 F&R Project No. H66-0986 Proposed Novartis Facility, Holly Springs, NC September 19, 2006 RING( 111 in areas to receive fill should be proofrolled with a loaded dump truck or similar pneumatic tired vehicle with a minimum loaded weight of 20 tons. The geotechnical engineer or his/her qualified representative should observe the proofrolling operation. Any areas that deflect, rut or pump excessively during the proofrolling or fail to improve sufficiently after successive passes they should be repaired as directed by the geotechnical engineer. Methods of repair may include scarifying, drying and re-compacting, undercutting and replacement with approved structural fill, and the use of geo-grid or other geotextile stabilization methods. After excavation of the site has been completed, the exposed subgrade in cut areas should also be proofrolled. F&R recommends that site grades be maintained to promote surface drainage away from structural and paved areas and to reduce the potential for ponding water. Should the exposed subgrade soils become excessively wet, our geotechnical engineer should be consulted for guidance. Proofrolling should not be performed on saturated or frozen subgrades, or during inclement weather conditions. Based on the results of the soil test borings, we anticipate loose to very dense and stiff to very hard Triassic soils will be encountered during general site grading as well as installation of foundations and utilities for the proposed structures and parking and drive areas. We anticipate that these soils can be excavated using pans, scrapers, backhoes and front-end loaders. It is also anticipated that PWR or very hard materials will be encountered during site grading, foundation construction or utility installation. The extent of PWR will depend on final site grades. Thirty of the borings encountered PWR at depths varying from 3 to 35 feet below the surface. Heavy excavating equipment with ripping tools (e.g., D-8 dozer with single shank ripper) is typically effective in removing the softer PWR (i.e., PWR with SPT blow counts of 50/3" to 50/6") during mass grading activities. Removal of harder PWR (i. e., PWR with SPT blow counts of 50/1" to 50/3") during mass grading in open areas will not likely be possible with ripping equipment and may require hammering, chipping or blasting. Removal of PWR from confined excavations (e.g., utility or foundation excavations) is typically more difficult than from large open mass excavations. Removal of softer PWR, (i.e., PWR with N-values of (50/3" to 50/6") from confined excavations (e.g., utility excavations) may be possible using a large track hoe (e.g., CAT 330 with rock teeth); however, excavation will likely be slow and light blasting is typically performed to pre-loosen the Town of Holly Springs 7 F&R Project No. H66-098G Proposed Novnrtis Facility, Holly Springs, NC September / 9, 2006 41NCf 1??1 PWR. Removal of harder PWR, (i.e., PWR with N-values of 5010" to 50/3") in confined excavations will likely require blasting. The speed and ease of PWR excavation will depend upon the equipment utilized, experience of the equipment operators and geologic structure of the PWR. It should be noted that areas of difficult excavation materials might exist intermediate of the test boring locations. 5.3 STRUCTURAL FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION Based on the results of our soil test borings, the on-site Triassic soils (ML, CL, SC and SM) may be used as structural fill, providing these soils are at a moisture content that allow for "proper" placement and compaction as recommended in this report. Material to be used as structural fill should be tested prior to its use, to evaluate its suitability and compaction characteristics. If blasting is required and the larger pieces of Triassic rock cannot be crushed with on-site compaction equipment, then a rock crusher will need to be brought to the site. The crushed material should not exceed 3 inches in size and should not contain more than 20 percent by volume particles greater than 2 inches. The remaining soil portion of the crushed material shall have a gradation similar to the over burden soils that are excavatable. Structural fill should be free of organic material and other deleterious material. In general, soils comprising the following ASTM classifications and having a Plasticity Index (PI) of less than 25 can be used for structural fill: GW (well-graded gravels), GP (poorly-graded gravels), GM (silty gravels), GC (clayey gravels), SW (well-graded sands or gravelly sands), SP (poorly-graded sands or gravelly sands), SC (clayey sands), SM (silty sands), CL (sandy or lean clays), or ML (sandy silts). Soils of high plasticity (CH clays & MH silts) should be used in non- structural areas or in deep fills (greater than 5 feet) in parking and drive areas. Representative samples of each engineered fill material should be returned to our laboratory and tested to establish the material's moisture-density characteristics including, maximum dry density, optimum moisture content, and plasticity index. Results from these tests will be utilized during quality control of the structural fill and to determine if the fill material meets project specification requirements. Backfill in structural areas should contain no more than 5 percent (by weight) of organic material and should have a standard Proctor maximum dry density not less than 90 pounds per cubic foot as determined by ASTM D 698. Soils not meeting these criteria may be used in Town of Holly Springs s F&R Project No. H66-098G Proposed Novartis Facilitv, Holly Springs, NC September 19, 2006 sixcr F& m landscaped or non-structural areas. The overburden soils on this site consist predominantly low to moderately plasticity silts and clays. Based on our past experience, these soil types are generally considered to be fair to well suited for use as structural fill material. However, these soils have sufficient silt and clay content to render them moisture sensitive. These soil types can become unstable during normal construction traffic and activities when wet. Ideally, earthwork operations should be performed during the seasonally drier months (typically May to October) when the weather will generally be more conducive to controlling and modifying the moisture content of the on-site soils. However, we understand that earthwork construction may begin in October 2006 and extend through the seasonally wet times of the year (typically November to April) which may result in difficulties in properly placing and compacting the on-site soils, soft subgrade conditions, and possible undercutting in excess than would otherwise be expected. Once fill placement begins, F&R's personnel should perform field density tests to document the degree of compaction obtained in the field by the contractor. Fill material should be placed in loose lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness. The moisture content of the fill soils should be within f3 percent of the fill's optimum moisture content. The in-place dry density of the compacted fill should be at least 95 percent of soil's maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 698, unless otherwise specified. However, the upper 12 inches of finished subgrades within structural and paved areas should be compacted to 100 percent of the same index. Monitoring of site preparation, including fill placement and density testing by our engineering technician, is essential in verifying that adequate compaction is being achieved by the contractor. 5.4 CUT AND FILL SLOPES In general, permanent project slopes should be designed at 3 horizontal to 1 vertical (3H: IV) or flatter. Steeper slopes may require reinforcement for stability purposes. The tops and bases of all slopes should be located a minimum of 10 feet from structural limits. The fill slopes should be adequately compacted, as outlined in this report, and all slopes should be seeded and maintained after construction. If sloughing or erosion occurs, the use of a vegetation mat or geotextile and large stone may be required to stabilize the slopes. A swale or ditch should be constructed near the top of slopes to redirect surficial runoff away from the slope face. Town of 11olly Springs 9 F&R Project No. 1166-0986 Proposed Novartis Facility, holly Springs, NC September l9, 2006 i1NCf M tttl It is F&R's understanding that 2H:1 V slopes are being considered on the north and south side of the project site and may have a maximum height of 27 feet. F&R has evaluated a 30-foot high 2H:1 V fill slope (north side of site) using on-site soils and soil strength parameters derived from triaxial testing. Based on slope stability analyses (see Appendix C for analysis), a minimum factor of safety of 1.6 was derived and geotextile reinforcement is not required to maintain stability. F&R has provided a wrapped face design to reduce the potential for erosion of the slope face and possible sloughing. The design and construction recommendations are included in Appendix C. 5.5 TEMPORARY EXCAVATIONS Mass excavations and other excavations required for construction of this project must be performed in accordance with the United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) guidelines (29 CFR 1926, Subpart P, Excavations) or other applicable jurisdictional codes for permissible temporary side-slope ratios and/or shoring requirements. The OSHA guidelines require daily inspections of excavations, adjacent areas and protective systems by a "competent person" for evidence of situations that could result in cave-ins, indications of failure of a protective system, or other hazardous conditions. All excavated soils, equipment, building supplies, etc., should be placed away from the edges of the excavation at a distance equaling or exceeding the depth of the excavation. 5.6 FOUNDATIONS Based on the results of our soil test borings, the proposed structures can be supported on the low- plasticity undisturbed Triassic soils or on newly placed structural fill, provided the recommendations outlined in this report are implemented. A net allowable bearing pressure of up to 3,000 pounds per square foot (pso can be used for design of the foundations bearing on the low-plasticity undisturbed Triassic soils, or on structural fill compacted to at least 95 percent of its Standard Proctor Maximum Dry Density (ASTM D 698). If the foundation bearing elevation for the Bulk Manufacturing Building 41 and the Finish/Fill Building #1 can be lowered to at least elevation 335 feet, then a net allowable bearing pressure of 4,000 psf may be used for design of those two structures. Some undercutting may be required in some of the foundation excavations if incompetent bearing soils are encountered. Should a mat foundation system be chosen for support, a modulus of subgrade reaction of 20 pci should be used for the bearing soils in conjunction with Town of Holly Springs 10 F&R Project No. H66-093G Proposed Novnrtis Facility, HollY Springs, NC September l9, ?006 iINCr J I??I the above net allowable bearing pressures. Exterior foundations should extend to a minimum depth of 18 inches below external grade for frost protection. Deeper embedment depths may be required if unsuitable subgrade bearing material is encountered once foundation construction begins. In addition, regardless of loading, continuous wall and column footings should have minimum widths of 24 and 36 inches, respectively. Adequately spaced control joints should be incorporated in the design of footings and masonry walls at locations where any transition occurs between cut and fill areas. Other design considerations should be dictated by building loads and local building code requirements. Triassic soils are characteristically very susceptible to deterioration when exposed to the elements. The foundation-bearing surface should be level or suitable benched and free of loose soil, ponded water, and debris. If the bearing soils are softened by surface water intrusion or exposure, the softened soils must be removed from the foundation excavation bottom immediately prior to placement of concrete. Foundation excavations should be maintained in a dry condition throughout the foundation construction process. We recommend that the bearing surfaces be evaluated by F&R's geotechnical staff professional prior to foundation installation. This evaluation may consist of performing hand auger borings with Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) testing equipment or other suitable methods. Unsuitable soils detected during this evaluation should be undercut as directed by our geotechnical engineer. If the foundation excavations remain open for long periods of time, or during inclement weather, re- evaluation of the subgrade materials by our geotechnical staff professional should be performed prior to steel, concrete, or stone placement. We recommend that individual foundations be concreted as soon after the evaluation as possible to minimize potential disturbance of the bearing soils. If it becomes apparent that the foundation bearing soils will be exposed to inclement weather, we recommend that the footings are over excavated 2 to 4 inches and a "mud seal" of lean concrete is poured over the surface of the bearing material to prevent entry of rainfall and runoff water. Based on the general stratigraphy in the proposed structural areas, our past experience with similar projects, and the anticipated magnitude of the structural loads, F&R has estimated that maximum total settlement of the proposed buildings will be less than approximately 1 to 1 '/4 inches and differential settlements to be on the order of 1/2 to 1/4 inches if the recommendations presented herein Town of Holly Springs 1 l MR Project No. H66-098G Proposed Novnrtis Fncilily, Holly Springs, NC September 19, '006 11NC! 1??1 are implemented and followed. Variations in the consistency of the soil will contribute to some differential settlement of the foundations. 5.7 FLOOR SLABS The building ground floors may be designed as a slab-on-grade. We recommend that a modulus of subgrade reaction (k) of 175 pounds per cubic inch (pci) be used for slab design (structural slabs should use k=20 pci). The subgrade soils for support of floor slabs should be prepared as outlined in previous sections of this report. Utility and other construction excavations performed in the prepared floor slab subgrade should be backfilled in accordance with previously referenced structural fill criteria to aid in providing uniform floor support. The floor slab should be supported on at least 4 inches of NCDOT No. 57 washed stone to provide a uniformly well- compacted material immediately beneath the slab. All floor slabs should be underlain by a vapor barrier to reduce the potential for floor slab dampness; all vapor barrier construction should be performed in accordance with applicable ACI guidelines. Floor slab design and construction should incorporate isolation joints around columns, utility penetrations, and along bearing walls to allow for differential movement to occur without damage to the floor. 5.8 LATERALLY LOADED WALLS It is our understanding that, laterally loaded dock retaining walls and pits are planned for this project; however, all wall locations were not available at the time of this report. It is F&R's understanding that these walls will be conventional cantilever walls constructed of cast-in-place concrete. Foundation construction for the retaining walls should be in accordance with the previous foundation recommendations. The proposed cantilever retaining walls should be designed such that the maximum foundation edge pressure does not exceed the previously recommended allowable bearing capacity of 3,000 psf. The composition of the cut soils on this site varies considerably. F&R recommends that the retaining walls be backfilled with silty/clayey sand (SM and SC soils) or low plasticity sandy silts and clays (CL and ML soils). F&R does not recommend that the retaining walls be backfilled Town of Holly Springs 12 F&R Proiect No. H66-0986 Proposed Novartis Facility, Holly ,Springs, NC September 19, 2006 SINC[ It11 with highly plastic clays or silts (CH and MH soils). Laterally loaded walls that are permitted to rotate at the top, such as free-standing walls, may be designed to resist active earth pressures using an active earth pressure coefficient (Ka) of 0.35. F&R recommends that an active earth pressure EFW of 42 pcf be used in design if above recommended soils are used for wall backfill. For sliding resistance along the base of the foundation, a friction factor (tan 5) of 0.30 should be utilized. For cases where passive earth pressure resisting forces are present, a passive earth pressure coefficient (Kp) of 1.35 can be used in design where foundation faces bear directly against undisturbed stiff native soils or well compacted structural fill; this coefficient incorporates a factor of safety of 2.0 to limit the amount of movement needed to mobilize the passive resistance. Assuming an in-situ density of approximately 110 pcf for native undisturbed soils, the passive earth pressure EFW would be 162 pcf. If the walls are not permitted to rotate at the top (like basement walls), Then the at rest earth pressure coefficient (Ka) of 0.5 should be used resulting in an EFW of 60 pcf. Lateral earth pressures arising from surcharge loading, foundations in the backfill zone, earthquake loading and groundwater should be added to the above soil earth pressures to determine the total lateral earth pressure, which the walls must resist. In addition, transient loads imposed on the walls by construction equipment during backfilling should be taken into account during design. Compaction of backfill behind the walls should be on the order of 95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density in structural areas. In non-structural areas, backfill compaction can be reduced to 92 percent. Excessive compaction may cause damage to the walls. Walls should be adequately braced during compaction of the wall backfill. Heavy compaction equipment should not be allowed within 5 feet of the walls. We recommend that laterally loaded walls be provided with a drainage system to maintain the wall backfill in a drained condition at all times such that the walls are not subject to hydrostatic pressures. We recommend that a one-foot wide zone of free draining washed stone be constructed adjacent to the back of the walls and extend down to a foundation drain (perforated drain pipe). A geotextile filter fabric (Mirafi 140N or equivalent) should be placed between the washed stone Town of Holly Springs 13 F&R Project No. H66-098G Proposed Novartis Facility, Holly Springs, NC September 19, 2006 SING( M 1111 drainage layer and the remaining backfill material. The foundation drain should be positively graded to allow drainage of any water that may collect in the wall backfill. An alternative to using a stone drainage layer would be to use a geo-composite drainage material such as Miradrain 6000. The drainage material should extend along the full height of the wall and down to the foundation drain. 5.9 SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERIA F&R has evaluated the data obtained from the soil test borings performed with regard to the International Building Code (IBC) for assignment of Seismic Site Classification of this site. A weighted average of the conditions in the upper 100 feet of the site was performed with the assumption that hard to very hard and dense to very dense soils (50 < N < 100 blows per foot or better) are present below the depth of our exploration. Based upon the subsurface conditions encountered and proposed grades, The Bulk Manufacturing Building #1, Fill/Finish Building #1 and the Lab immediately north of those two structures has an IBC Site Classification of C and all remaining structures have a Site Classification of D. 5.10 PAVEMENTS Subgrade preparation in paved areas should also be performed as outlined in previous sections of this report, including proofrolling of subgrade and base course materials. Exposed pavement subgrades should be re-compacted to at least 100 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density just prior to base stone placement. To provide a better estimate of soil subgrade support, four representative bulk samples of near- surface soil were obtained from the project site and subjected to standard Proctor and CBR testing (see laboratory testing results in Appendix Q. The samples consisted of low plasticity silts and clays with varying amounts of sand (USCS - CL and ML soils). Typical published CBR values for these materials range from 5 to 15. It has been F&R's experience that CBR values of less than 5 to 8 are typical in this area for these soils types. The laboratory testing indicated CBR values of 0.2 to 4.9, which is in the lower range of values for these soil types. Based on the results of the laboratory testing and our experience with similar soils on many projects, F&R recommends that a CBR value of 3 be used for pavement design. Town of Holly Springs 14 F&R Project No. H66-0986 Proposed Novartis Facility. Holly Springs, NC September 19, 2006 ^.IMCf For the purpose of evaluating the proposed pavement sections on the project, a traffic volume equal to approximately 87.5 daily 18-kip equivalent single axle loads (ESALs) was used for the site roads, which is based on a traffic volume of 50 trucks per day per lane (AASHTO H20-S16 tandem axle loads). A traffic volume of 1 ESAL was used for the parking lots, which is based on 1000 cars per day and no truck traffic. As requested, F&R's pavement design evaluation was based on a 10-year design life. Based on the traffic volume and design life information provided by Jacobs and subgrade support conditions, we recommend the following flexible pavement sections over a prepared subgrade: ASPHALT PAVEMENT DESIGN NCDOT NCDOT Asphalt NCDOT NCDOT TRAFFIC CONDITION Asphalt Concrete Concrete Asphalt ABC Stone Total Concrete Binder, Base, Type Base Thickness Surface Type B25.OB Course I19.OB Light Duty 2.5"* - - 8" 10.5" (car parking lots, no truck traffic) Heavy Duty 2"* 3.5" 3" 8" 16.5" (roads with truck traffic) * Use NCDOT Asphalt surface type SF9.5A for Light Duty and S9.513 for Heavy Duty The geotechnical investigation requirements provided by Jacobs requested that the geotechnical engineer identify areas that would require soil stabilization to improve the CBR, if the CBR is 4 or less. Since the borings were relatively widely spaced and the specific subgrade conditions are not known at this time, it is F&R's opinion that a majority of the on-site soils will on average have CBR values of less than 4. In this area, pavement subgrade stabilization could be performed by lime or cement stabilization of the upper 8 inches of the subgrade. The method of stabilization (cement or lime) should be determined once the specific subgrade materials are known. If pavement subgrade stabilization is pursued, F&R can provide revised pavement section designs. We recommend that rigid concrete pavement be utilized in loading dock areas, dumpster areas or other area subjected to concentrated loading. The concrete pavement should consist of at least 7 Town of Holly Springs 15 MR Project No. 1166-0986 Proposed Novartis Facility, Holly .Springs, NC September 19, 2006 :IFCf fi It?l inches of 4,000 psi air-entrained concrete overlying a 6 inch thick base course of compacted ABC stone. We emphasize that good base course drainage is essential for successful pavement performance. The ABC stone should be maintained in a drained condition at all times. Water build-up in the base course could result in premature failures. Proper drainage may be aided by grading the site such that surface water is directed away from pavements and construction of swales adjacent to pavements. All pavements should be graded such that surface water is directed towards the outer limits of the paved area or to catch basins located such that surface water does not remain on the pavement. Flexible asphalt pavements, concrete pavements, and bases should be constructed in accordance with the guidelines of the latest applicable North Carolina Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures. Materials, weather limitations, placement and compaction are specified under appropriate sections of this publication. Concrete pavement design and construction should be in accordance with applicable American Concrete Institute (ACI) guidelines. 5.11 CORROSION POTENTIAL F&R performed a preliminary evaluation of soil corrosivity at this project site with respect to potential effect on underground utilities and concrete. F&R subjected four representative soils samples to pH, Chloride, Resistivity and Sulfate analysis. The results are presented in the following table and are included in Appendix C. Town of Holly Springs 16 F&R Project No. H66-098G Proposed Novnrtis Facilitv, Holly Springs, NC September 19, 2006 11MCC ?k 1?M1 Boring Sample Depth (feet) Chloride (ppm) pH Resistivity (ohm-cm) Sulfate (ppm) B-5 3-4.5 31 4.45 41,800 70 B-8 23.5 - 25 16 5.35 67,900 86 B-21A 3-4.5 18 4.51 64,900 105 B-25 1.5 - 3 22 4.86 90,600 62 AVERAGE 22 4.79 66,300 81 Based on the results of the laboratory testing and comparison with the 10-point scale to determine the corrosion potential to steel pipe (as presented in the Handbook of Ductile Iron Pipe), it does not appear that corrosion protection is necessary for underground steel piping at the project site. This is based primarily on the relatively neutral pH, high resistivity and good overall site drainage that will be present at the site. Based on the relatively low sulfate concentrations and comparison with PCA guidelines, the soils on this site appear to pose a low risk for sulfate attack of buried concrete. Overall, it is F&R's opinion that this site has a low potential for corrosion of buried utilities and concrete. It should be noted that F&R evaluation does not consider stray electrical currents or certain industrial processes that could affect soils corrosivity potential. 6.0 CONSTRUCTION QUALITY CONTROL As previously discussed, the Geotechnical Engineer of record should be retained to monitor and test earthwork activities, and subgrade preparations for foundations, floor slabs and pavements. It should be noted that the actual soil conditions at the various subgrade levels and footing bearing grades will vary across this site and thus the presence of the Geotechnical Engineer and/or his representative during construction will serve to validate the subsurface conditions and recommendations presented in this report. We also stress the importance of conducting hand auger and DCP testing in the footing excavations in order to confirm the anticipated subsurface conditions and define footings that should be undercut and repaired as outlined in this report. Town of Holly Springs 17 F&R Prgject No. 1166-0986 Proposed Novartis Facility, Holly Springs, NC September 19. 2006 since T 1??I We recommend that F&R be employed to monitor the earthwork and foundation construction, and to report that the recommendations contained in this report are completed in a satisfactory manner. Our continued involvement on the project will aid in the proper implementation of the recommendations discussed herein. The following is a recommended scope of services: • Review of project plans and construction specifications to verify that the recommendations presented in this report have been properly interpreted and implemented; • Observe the earthwork process to document that subsurface conditions encountered during construction are consistent with the conditions anticipated in this report; • Observe the subgrade conditions before placing structural fill including proofroll observations; • Observe the placement and compaction of any structural fill and backfill, and perform laboratory and field compaction testing of the fill; • Observe all foundation excavations and footing bearing grades for compliance with the recommended design soil bearing capacity. 7.0 LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of The Town of Holly Springs for specific application to the referenced project in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. These conclusions and recommendations do not reflect variations in subsurface conditions that could exist intermediate of the boring locations or in unexplored areas of the site. Should such variations become apparent during construction, we reserve the right to re-evaluate our conclusions and recommendations based upon on-site observations of the conditions. In the event chances are made in the proposed construction, the recommendations presented in this report shall not be considered valid unless reviewed by our firm and conclusions of this report modified or verified in writing. Town of Holly Springs 18 F&R Project No. H66-098G Proposed Novartis Facility, Holly Springs, NC September 19, 2006 SINCE R% l eei APPENDIX A ASFE PAMPHLET SITEVICINTY PLAN, FIGURE NO.1 BORING LOCATION PLAN, FIGURE NO.2 SUBSURFACE PROFILES, FIGURES 3-9 Geolechnical Engineering Report Geotechnical Services Are PeMormed for SpecMc Purposes, Persons, and Projects Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the spe- ctftc needs of their clients. A geotechnlcal engineering study con- ducted for a civil engfineer may not fulfill the needs of a oonstruc- tion contractor or even another civil engineer. Because each geot- echnical engineering study is unique, each geotechnical engl- neering report Is unique, prepared solely for the client. No one except you should rely on your geotechnkal engineering report without first conferring with the geotechnkal engineer who pre- pared It. And no one--not even you--should apply the report for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. Read the M Report Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary. Do not read selected elements only. A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Band on A Unique Set of Project-Specific Factors Geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique, project-spe- cifk factors when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the client's goals, objectives, and risk management pref- erences; the general nature of the structure Involved, its size, and configuration; the location of the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site Improvements, such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless the geotechnical engineer who conducted the study specificalry, indicates other- wise, do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report that was, • not prepared for you, • not prepared for your project, • not prepared for the specific site explored, or • completed before Important project changes were made. Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical engineering report Include those that affect: • the function of the proposed structure, as when it's changed from a parking garage to an office building, or from a light industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse, • elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proposed structure, • composition of the design team, or • project ownership. As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project changes--even minor ones-and request an assessment of their impact. Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which they were not informed. Subsurface Conditions Can Change A geotechnical engineering report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was performed. Do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report whose adequacy may have been affected by: the passage of time., by manmade events, such as construction on or aclacent to the site; or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctua- tions. Always contact the geotechnical engineer before apply- ing the report to determine if it Is still reliable. A minor amount of additional testing or analysis could prevent major problems. Most GeotechnIcal Findings Ape Professional Oplnlons Site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. Geotechnical engineers review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual sub- surface conditions may differ-sometimes signfficant"om those Indicated in your report. Retaining the geotechnical engi- neer who developed your report to provide construction obser- vation Is the most effective method of managing the risks asso- clated with unanticipated conditions. A Report's RecoinimbIlMs Apo Not Mal Do not overrely on the Construction recommendations included in your report. Those recommendations are not final, because geotechnical engineers develop them principally from judgment and opinion. Geotechnical engineers can finalize their recom• mendatlons only by observing actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. The geotechnical engineer who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or liability for the report's recommendations if that engineer does not perform construction observation. A Gootochnical Engineering Report Is 8ubled To WdOrpretatlon Other design team members' misinterpretation of geotechnical engineering reports has resulted in costly problems. Lower that risk by having your geotechnical engineer confer with appropriate members of the design team after submitting the report. Also retain your geotechnical engineer to review perti- nent elements of the design team's plans and specifications. Contractors can also misinterpret a geotechnlcal engineering report. Reduce that risk by having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstruction conferences, and by providing construction observation. Do Not Redraw the Engineer's Logs Geotechncal engineers prepare final boring and testing logs based upon their Interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or omissions, the logs Included In a geotechnical engineering report should never be redrawn for Inicluslon In architectural or other design drawings. Only photo- graphic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognize that separ&ing logs from the report can elevate risk. Give Contractors a Conpiete Report mind Gddance Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make contractors liable for unanticipated subsurface condi- tions by limiting what they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give contractors the complete geotech- nical erlglneedrlg report, but preface it with a dearly written let- ter of transmittal. In that letter, advise contractors that the report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the report's accuracy is limited; encourage them to confer with the geotechnical engineer who prepared the report (a modest fee may be required) and/or to conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of Information they need or prefer. A prebld conference can also be valuable. Be sure contractors have wM clent time to perform additional study. Ony then might you be In a position to give contractors the best information available to you, while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions. Read ResponslbMty Provisions Closely Some clients, design professionals, and contractors do not recognize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disciplines. This lack of understanding has created unrealistic expectations that have led to disappoint- ments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce such risks, geot- echnlcal engineers commonly Include a variety of explanatory provisions In their reports. Sometimes labeled `limitations", many of these provisions indicate where geotechnlcal engi- neers responsibilities begin and end, to help others recognize their own responsibilities and risks. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should respond fully and frankly. Geonviromnental Concerns Are Not Covered The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform a geoenvtronmental study differ significanty, from those used to perform a geotechnical study. For that reason, a geotechnieal engineering report does not usually relate any geoenvironmerv tal findings, conclusions, or recommendations; e g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regu` Iated contaminants. Unanticipated environmental problems have led to numerous protect failures. If you have not yet obtained your own gecenvironmentai information, ask your geotechnloal consultant for risk management guidance. Do not rely on an environmental report prepared for someone else. Rely an Your Geotechnkal Engineer for Additional Asslstanire Membership In ASFE exposes geotechnical engineers to a wide array of risk management techniques that can be of genuine ben- efit for everyone Involved with a construction project. Confer with your ASFEanember geotechnical engineer for more Information. F E 8811 Colesv111e Road SWO 0106 Sltver SpAnq, MV 20910 Telephone: 301-868.2733 Facsknlle, 301-589-2017 emoll- Inroft0e,orq www,osfe.org copyright 2000 by ASFE, inc. Unless ASFE grents written permission to do so, dupllcetlon of this document by airy means wnstsoever Is expressly prohlblted. Re-me of the wonMrd In this document, In whole or In pert. also Is expressly prohlblted, and may be done only with the express permission of ASFE or for purposes of review or scholarly research. I1GER11100.10M 0 ?I SITE VICINITY MAP • ""°' FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. CLIENT: Town of Holly Springs F GEOTECHNICAL ENVIFONMENTAL • MATERIALS PROJECT: Novortis O ENGINE ;PS • LABORATORIES ?( OVER ONE HUNOAEO vEARS Of SERVICE' LOCATION: Holly jDrir)gS, Woke County, NC 310 Hubert Siram? Polelgh.NC 27603 (919)828-3441 F&R PROJECT No.: H66-098 ??? O lqr: Iyly18<<"B STSI vwr.EoriaR.co'n DATE: SeDtambHr 2G06 SCGI F? N7C m 300F -- - B- 14 I 8-1 3 'I ' ' 13-8 R-1) • I I 13 7 13-111 1? 13-18 10 j IZ 8 13 R-13 14 16 13 y ?I 18 la In 11 I Ij IZ i;Q 11) 13 13 15 8 l? I I 1? 13 13 I 13 Ii i it I ' 1 13-II Iv I Is 1 ? • l0 I_ 16 Ii ; y 30 ll II ! 18 340 - I 1- FF I ± 1 23 l i 4 24 ;; 11 II y 7 67 II - - 12 3v i(1'(i' S04, 12 - .0.2" ) I0 i0/i• ;11 _' 50110" 12 ?V 31-5 i0/s- ill v' ?-?1)I i 50. V, il; 50::2" 111 +1 Il r ifl I" iU;U" w,U., ? I I 3uu i S -4CE ('LIENI" TUN%nol'I lolly Springs Ce FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. GEOTECHNICAL " ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS 11(1)3F(1 N,,,,r1„ rjv?_ ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES LOCA I ION I lull. Springs, Wikc ( nunh. NC' l "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" DATF Sepictubvi 14. 2006 SURS IJRFACI. PROFILI= F KA W1{ No. 3 lael 355 - , I3-19 i 10 350 22 14 ?2 345 B-21 B-17 B-16 ,18 1G 16 29 f2 16 _3 3411 1 = I 14 49 8 Z J 9 B -211 A 335 28 4 ' 24 c 7 I9 _ 17 ? i E1-20 14 3 U 6 30 9 .9 q fI ' I1 i4 17 3251 21 I7 I 40 I ! 14 50.5 j 14 321 ? 50;'-3" 18 50/5" 36 i 50%5 5015" 1 315 1 I 4q0'?" 5W511 ? 35 31UI 5014" SINCE CLIENT : Town of licIN Springs FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. FQ GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS PROJECT Nmartu a ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES " I.OCA'1TON : Holly Springs, Wake County, NC OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" a DATE : Septcmbcr 14, 2006 SUBSURFACE PROFILL FTGURF Nu 4 iBBi 315 - 34U FIFE= 340 i B-26 335 j .7 I 72 i i 12 is 330 B-25 ?i 3=5 Is z 20 5015" ' 320' :u 24 20 3151 ? 13 I I '3 I 310 I I I 57 3051 50;- I 30L) , 5(„5.. 295 1 i I I I 290 SINCE CLIENT Town of Holly Springs FROEHLING & ROBERTSON INC. FQ , GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS PROJECT: Nneartis a ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES LOCATION : Hull} Springs, Rake County, NC "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" DATE : September 19. 2006 SUBSURFACE PROFILE. FIGURE No. 5 asst 350 i Q-7 1716 13 345 21 35 Sao FIFE = Sao f 13-4 44 to 1 2 33; 50;5" 50.5 B-5 13 ? 330 50; 4" I 10 SD.:J la < 26 ,25 do 50/4" ti 320 62 Sll I I 50/3" I 3151 50r l " 50/5" 310 J SGi4" I 50"0" II 50i3 " -- ? 305 I W1" i j I 3Oki SINCE CLIENT: TownofHotlySprigs FROEHLING & ROBERTSON INC. , GEOTECHNICAL - ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS PROJECT: Na ani; 8c 11 ? ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES LOCATION Holly Springs. Wake County- NC "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" LEA l L . September 14. 2006 SI BSURFAC'E PROFILE FIGURE No- 6 7887 355 1 B"1 I'?: 116 30 I 12 9 350 11 7 14 3451 illy 10 B-2 II I 13 i 64 I ? 18 f 18 340 FFE = 340 50/4" z i 50T' 56 B-24 3351 50:4- B-22 7 4 50/3" B-3 5014" 26 7 3301 .23 19 17 26 '6 20 B-23 ?11 56/1" 19 7 34 10 32 19 ' I 5011 19 31 I 32u1 I 50/2" 23 1 C1; 1, 45 3151 50/3 I 50/4 5 0,0" I 310 t 50/3" I .i05! SINCE CLIENT Town of HollySpring.s FROENLING & ROBERTSON, INC. GEOTECHNiCAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS PROJECT: Novartls R ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES LOCATION : Holly Springs, Wake County. NC "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" DATE - September 14, 2006 SUBSUIUACF. PROFILE FIGURE No. 7 1881 345 ' i 340 FFF =340 ? ,35 +I 1 330 1 325 i B-36 S 10 z 320 ^ 13-34 IS 21 -32 B < 7 ?3 8 315 15 B-33 12 L 27 1U t l3 21 24 310 50/5" 56 57 50l4" 1 60 305 50/4" 7 B-31 50i4" 42 18 300 43 26 ' - ,3 B 29 SQ 2 . 24 9 50/5" 8 295 5U/2" 57 `0,; 1 2901 50/0" 5015" 2851 I sorz^ 280 SINCE CLIENT : Town of Holly Springs FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. CO GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL ^ MATERIALS PROJECT: Novartis 11 a ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES LOCATION : Ilolh Springs, Wake County, NC "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE DATE- : September 19, 2006 SUBSURFACE PROFILE FIGURE No. 8 1881 345 340 FFE = 340 I 335 i 330 B-27 20 2i 5015" B-2R 32; 50/3" 12 12 Z I 17 50.3" F 320 .t i B-2 9 L 12 R 15 315 14 1R 12 310 24 ] B-30 16 3051 12 504" 20 14 BOO I Il I i I 12 295 i. 15 290 1 30 2851 SINCE CLIENT' Town of Holly Sprngs FROENLING & ROBERTSON, INC. CQ GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS PROJECT. Novartis ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES LOCAPION Holly Springs, Wake County, NC "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" a DATE. September 19, 2006 SUBSURFACE PROFILE FIGDRF No. 9 ?aat 11"C[ fi APPENDIX B KEY TO SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART BORING LOGS SINCE F&R KEY TO SOIL CLASSIFICATION Correlation of Penetration Resistance with Relative Density and Consistency Sands and Gravels Silts and Clavs No. of Relative No. of Relative Blows, N Density Blows, N Dcnsii 0- 4 Very loose 0- 2 Very soft 4-10 Loose 2- 4 Soft 10-110 Medium de nse 4- 4 Firm 30 - 50 Dense 8-15 Stiff Over 50 Very dense 15 - 30 Very stiff 30 - 50 Hard Over 50 Very hard Particle Size Identification (Unified Classification Svstem) Boulders: Diameter exceeds 8 inches Cobbles: 3 to 8 inches diameter Gravel: Coarse - 3/4 to 3 inches diameter Fine - 4.76 nlm to 3r4 inch diameter Sand: Coarse - 2.0 mm to 4.76 mm diameter Medium - 0.42 nlm to 2.0 mnl diameter Fine - 0.074 nlnl to 0,42 mm diameter Silt and Clay: Less than 0.07 rain (particles cannot be seen with naked eye) )Modifiers Tile modifiers provide our estimate of the amount of silt, clay or sand size particles in the soil sample. Approximate Content Modifiers - 5IVo: 'l'racc 5'1 to 12" Slightly silty. slightly clavvy slightly sandy 12°4> to 30". tiilty, clayey, sandy 30%, to 50"%: Verv silty, very clayey, very sandy Field Moisture Descrintion Saturated: lauaily liquid: very wet, usually from below the groundwater table Wet: Semisolid: requu-CS drying to attain optimum nwisture Moist: Solid: at or near optimum mm,ture Dry : Requires additional water to attain optimum moisture UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (USCS) MAJOR DIVISION TYPICAL NAMES r GW Well graded grovels GRAVELS CLEAN GRAVEL More than 50'/. (little or no fines) . GP Poorly graded grovels Y 9 r f se o coa froction larder GM Silty grovels than No. 4 sieve GRAVELS with fines VN? GC Clayey gravels SW Wellgroded sands SANDS CLEAN SAND More than 50Y. (little or no fines) SP Poorly graded sands of coarse froction smaller SM Silty sands, than No. 4 sieve SAND .' ,•. sand/silt mixtures with fines Clayey sands, SC Bond/Clay mixtures Inorganic silts, sandy ML and clayey silts with slightly plasticity SILTS AND CLAYS Sandy or silty cloys Liquid Limit is less than 50 CL of low to medium plasticity f I I + UL Organic silts of low plasticity Inorganic silts, MH sandy micoceous or Clayey elastic silts SILTS AND CLAYS Inorganic clays of Liquid Limit is greater than 50 CH high plasticity, fat Clays Organic clays of DH medium to high plasticity Peat and other highly HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT organic soils PWR (Partially Weathered Rock) Rock MISCELLANEOUS Aspholt MATERIALS - ABC Stone ,.p. o • ' Concrete n BORING LOG SINCE FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. (O&R "GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" Repon No . H66-098 t881 - I Rae August 2006 t•liem. Town of Holly Springs Prclject. Novartig, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC I3oring No. R-I (1 of l) li pilt 20.U' I'Ie? 35d.Oft t Loe auon: - I)pe of Boring 2.25" 11) HSA Started: 8/7/06 _ Crnnpleled. 8/7/06 - Driller. Webb/Luusford Pt:.anun - Depth IWSCRIPIION(')I-•`IA'IL'.RL\L, IC'las,ilic;tttottl S;Inaplt: P li,utt. -f Depth _ sects , Nvalue (hltttt's! (t) -- REMARKS __ NATIk L SOILS: Medium dense dr tan/ ? light -1,. j ---? -- 352.E 1.5 -,brown. silt fine SAND (Sm1. wilh tine grrtvel. Loose, moist. orange/brown, clayey tine SAN SAND (SC1. 349.5 ii 4.5. 348.0 1 6.0 - 340.5 - 13.5 334.0 ? 20.0 cl Slift', moist, reddish bromvian, sandy SILT 4-7-7 with fine .gravel. -.- Stil7to very hard, di). gray, fine sandy SILT (NIL), with fine gravel. PAR 11ALLY WEATHERED ROCK: sampled as reddish brown/purple, clayey SILT. Boring terminated at 20.0 feet. 18.5 (,ROL NU"ATER DA 1-;\ 30 0 Hrs.: Dry/caved !iu 14.0' 9 7 14 64 50/4 50/3" Igu s 1uh nnaur lp?n khl% 2'u l) 'i ;/'„1I) ills un - -- 'Numher .11 hl1,t,? retes far 1 I In Ih ; h,aumel rlln? ? u+ ' 1 p n ,dny,ler in wire>?i?e 6" i;aacnt.•ni. I Ite van OfIlle wcond ,uxl ihuri nrrcntrnh ufpateu; inn a trrrne(I Ihr Slanrl,rrtl I'ellelrllUJ11 esI \ n(ur "N" 1.5 3.0 4.5 (i.0 37 8.5 - I ll.(1 13.5 14.8 BORING LOG Report No H66-098 SINCE FRO ROBERTSON, INC. R GEOTECHLAICANICAL - • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" 16 B r Darr August 2006 chem. T own of H oll y Springs I>n>.Icct N ovartis, Holly Springs, Wake Count, NC l3nring No B-2 (1 of 1) [7c 111 15.0' I-lcv. 345.6ft t -- Lnc ? aurnr - - -? FN Pe of l3o Elc?otion rinp 2.2 Drptl, 5" 11) HSA Slarted 8/10/06 comple UFSCRIVTION OF NL\I'FRIAI.S (Classtticutloll) Jy ted: 8/10/0 Sample 131u, 6 Sample Depth I'ect) miller W N Value Ihlm,s: Ill - ebb/Lunsford Rl?MARKS 344. ( 1.5 NATI\;E SOILS: Medium dense, dry, light brown!gray, silly fine SAND (SM13), with rootlets & (free gravel. 7-o-7 7-8-I0 1,5 13 CiROI_IVDVJA'1'ER DA 1A: 0 }lrs.: Dry/caved ti; e.0' 342.6 3.0 ',',cry' stitT, dry, line sandy ('LAY (C1.), with fine raVel. 3-8-10 z•o 18 341.1 4.5-- Very stiff. moist. reddish broviVur . sandy SILT ML . S_22_26 4.5 18 2 1 - 1 I lard to very hard. dry to moisi reddish brown/gra). clayey Sll.f (NII.). ` 8-27-29 6.0 3 5 11).0 3 48 56 33 . 330 6 3.5 I 15 0 PARTIALLY WFATHE.RF.D ROCK: sampled as maroon/black claye SILT 1Q t 5941 1 5 I 50/4" - - . 1 I . I I , y . fiorinc terminated at 15.0 feet. I I l t I I I I ,ombcr ul hlur„ mimic,) fur e 14(1 Ih maom.u(n. wi:wr Jmhpmp ?q" rn ,lm e ° () 1). 1 ; l;- I U ;plu-,1•,n,n mnplcr m ?uccc?.n c W incrcmcnr, I K ;um ul rhr ccund and Third nrcico,cni, 01 pcnclratton r, Icrn.J Lhc Gundarnl I'rnelr.mun 1 c,r %;0u,: "N" BORING LOG SINGE FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. e n GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS l?/c ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" Report No H66-098 113 81 f)atc. August 2006 Ghent Town of Holy Springs -- i'T»1ccI. Novartis, Holly Springw, Wake County, NC - i)nrint No B-3 (1 of 1) j)`> Ijt 15.0'330.Sft ll INpeuflionng 2.23" 1DHSA Sta an d 8/9/06 l'omplcte,l 8/9/06) Ilc,auon Depth I)GS( R1P'I'ION (,l R1r\1'I:RIAI S " ?antple Sample Depth lClatiellie;tuoni _ plow - Ifect) ;: R(IOT?•LAT: Medium drnsc, d,?, ?rayilighl brown, F] 4-9 Ti (1 3' '9 3 1 5 ? ,sit tine SAND (SM) with fine bravct _ . . , . . _ NATIVF. SOILS: Stiff. dry, orange/brown, sandy 10 13-14 1,5 327.8 3.0 _ -\C LAY (CL). with fine to coarse gravel. I I G 9 30 326 3 - 5 4 __ Very stiff', moist. Oran-e•'gray/tan mottled. fine sandy - ' . . -\ c1a c SILT(tll >. 9-8-III t'o Very stiff moist. maroon. sandy SILT (NIL), with tote gravel. r-- 6.0 ')-10 ? 8.5 10.0 317.3 - 315.8 x 13.E - I{ I ?;.0 7 1 3.5 Hard, moist, maroon, clayey SILT S8 2 (h-tL?. Borim, terminated at 1 5.0 feet. I 0 ')lumber of blm« n-,limcd Ior ;I 140 Ih ;un,nmul hummer dnlppm^ :o lu ,Imc !) [ t. I J' I I t .p u( the ,Geom. and Ilurd 1110emcnl, ,l 11cli'm.1011 r, lenrted the 51.111, id 1'rnct allon I cst ,,duc I)nllcr Webb/Lunsforil \ V sl REMARKS (h(mkSu CiR011ND) VATE.R DA"IA: 23 0 Hrs.: Dry-caved 6t) 7.5' 26 .'l) . 19 19 45 i I I I 11•1p00n }amplet• 111 irte,c- ,c 6" iflocnn'nt, I he sun, BORING LOG Rcpurt No H66-098 _ -- - ---tee -- Date -August 2006 rtlcnt- Tomrn of Holly Springs I'rojeet yus•artis, Holly Springs, Wake County, lYC J --- J - - _-- HonngNn B-4 (I of l) "', ijt-_ 30A' I?Ic? 339.3ftf t.r,?:nion: I}pc of Borug: 2.25" 11) HSA Started 8/9/06 Completcd _ 819106 nralcr WebnrLuntifore I:Ic?auoo Uc,llt? DISC RIPI ION ()F \1A1'I:RIAI.S - - 's:anple sttrttpl. 'N Value - _ 11'lassilicnuuttl HIOt1s Depllt thlous/ tl) kEM11ARKS tw?.mon. OOTNIAT: Loose. dry, reddish brown, Alty SAND 3-5-5 337.8 1.5 M). with tne gravl & rootlets. 1.5 AIF' SILS: Stiff, moist, reddish brown, fine 336.3 - 3.0 ndy CC[.,-\Y I -ith rootlets. 3.0 R] IAl-LY WFATHERED ROCK: samplcd as 1 sandy clayey SIL 1. $0/i^ 4 su+Ce FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. Q GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS /V?•` ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" GROUNDWATER DATA: 10 0 1lrs.: Drv/caved (a, 16.0' 12 50/5„ 50/5" 50/4" 80 62 8.5 325.8 13.5 319.3 20.0- 309-3 30.0 - Verv hard, dry, maror,n.',,ray. line to coarse sandy SILT (NIL), with tine to coarse gravel. PARTIALLY WkATHERF:D ROCK: samplcd a; Maroon. sandy SILT. Boring lenmttated at 30.0 feet. 13.5 15.0 .i5 .? 13.5 -- 20.0 y„ 23.5 '8.5 29.3 50/3" 50/4" ^? l i 7 NUmhCr (it No"; regUned Isaa 14( !h uua,maue hammer drlnml ,0" it) dri, c 2" 1 ; j•' I D pln-;piton .;uuhler m ;uce?;;ne (," nrremcnl: I hr ,um of the set nlld cold third In.rl'IllenlN of polw;Uem is termed tltr mmid;nd Pcnclrimon I c,t ,.ihic SINCE BORING LOG FROEHLINO & ROBERTSON, INC. Q GEOTECHNICAL - ENVIRONMENTAL - MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE lleport ;fin.. H66-098 oak: August 2006 llem. Town of Holly Springs Pr(iject Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC Boring No B-5 (1 of 1) [iciih 30.0' I Iey. 333_5ft f I oturn h. pc of Horing,: 2.25" lD HSA ?r,med 8/10/06 Completed 8/10/06 lilc?atic,n r)cpllt UI.tiCltllr llu\ OF 11;\ I I?it1ALS lampl? r ti:unplc Ik [h -- (Cla;silication) lilo,ts IficU _ NAT1VF S011 S: %ledium dense. moist, dark 6-7 0 332.0 1.5 ?iwn/gryL, . ty SAND (SNI), with fine gavel _ 1 5 Verv stiff. moist, dark gray, fine sandy SIL I'tNIL) . 7-7-9 , 330.5 3.0 with root fra mxmts. _ ' J a-7-7 :.0 0 329 5 - 4 Still . moist, orange/tan. sandy silty CLAY (Ct:). . . \rCfY slltt. 11101St, maroon. .4;ittdy SILT (MIA 9-12-16 45 327,5 6.0 - - 6 0 ( Medimm dense. dry to nimst, nmaroon, gray'brown . - I. ? mottled. sitty fine to medium SAND (SM). 320.01 - 13.5 1 ARTIA11Y WEATHERED ROCK: sampled as maroon, clayey SILT. 18.5 23.5 303.5 d 30.0 x f i '?\nmber of hlo,,; Iryuul uI'IIIC SCCIII) I omI thud in rioring terminated at 30.0 feet. I C, • R. 5 10.(t 13.5 28.5 Lhino Webb/Lunsford N value Rlitvl;\IZKS Iblmts? lit 13 CiK0UND\VATFR DATA- 13 lrs.' Dry 'caved (ib 24.0' 16 14 2K 30 50/3" 50/5', 50/3" 50/1'r I I I J lirr ? I Jli Ih alw +uaue honuncl dloppmg 31)" to di n c '"'(1 1). I 17 " I I) ?p1i' sPoml ampler In .uccc-1% h" mvremcnt, 1 lie "um rentcnl. aI I)ci tr,mon a t,:mwd 0V tiiendurd Pcimrmw„ i l c:t %aluc. "N" SINCE BORING LOG / FROENLING & ROBERTSON, INC. 1F4 n GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS afK` E=NGINEERS • LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE kepart No H66-098 , ee 1 - Date. August 2006 Chen[ Town of Holly Springs Proiect. Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC Honng \'o. R-b (1 of 1) 1 jel tit t5.0' E.le? 35•f.7ft t I ocmion: '1\,pe of Honng 2.25" ID HSA _ Ctarwd 8/9/06 Completed ttuHcr Webb/Lunsford Flet'atiun Depth GSCKIPI'1C)N O1 MAI FRIALS ' Sample Samplc N Valor RI MARKS IC lassificaltoll) maw, Depth (blows/ III) Teel) NATIVE SOH-S Loose to medium dense, dry, light brown/Ian silly fine SAND (SCI) with fine rav l & 5'6-5 1 1 _ GR(-)UNDWATER DATA: , , g e rootlets. 5 7-q l 5 0 I Irs.r Drycaved P!, 39.0' 351 2 3 5 3.0 16 . 50? . 5 4 - - - Stiff, moist, reddish brown, fine sandy CLAY (Ctl) 4-5-7 3 . , t It rme Krayel._ 3-5-6 t a 12 Medium dense, moist, marunn'black!white mottled, silly fine SAND (SNI). _ 0 I I 346 2 8 5 - . . Stiffto very hard, dn' to moist, marooWblack, clayev 4-5-5 8'S 10 SILT (ML) . IO.ti 1 16- 32.48 3.5 80 ti - 15.0 336 2 5 18 . . PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK: sampled as x(1,4„ 18.5 5014' maroon. clavey SIL f. 23 50!33" - .5 50/3" SOJ1" 28.5 >0/I.. I 50i 1' ------- 50-0" 13.5 50/0 309.7 45.0 -- - -- --- -- - -- - - - -- - -- ---- - - - -- -- -- - --- Borim terminated al 45,0 feet. y y \lunbrr of film„ rcyuurd liu ;t IJn Ih aiammitic h;munet dre,ppnr i)" lo d nr '" i I I) . I 7;r I D I,h -.o,w ,ampler Pit succc.si\e b" moemems The sum of the accund and Ih+rd nterclnrots nl'peucnauuil I, tinned the Staudol d Pcncuulllnt I cst .:due. W. S RICE BORING LOG R Rcpon No . H66-098 as I FROENLING & ROBERTSON, INC. GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS Of SERVICE" Uolc. August 2006 Clienl. town of hotly Springs I'rolcct Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC Boring No B-7 _? -- - (1 of I) I'o111 Dc (1) X0.0' t lei 3?i9.Or1 t l.ucalu,n I%peol Itonng. 2.2_5" Il) HSA Slnrte,l 8/8/06 Complcted 8/8/06 _ Driller Webb/Lunsford Ele?:,uon Ucpdt UFSCRIP'CIUN Ol' MA I i.RIALS trample Sample lle @, N Value REM R (CLusllication) Rl p feet) (hlo?c?r I)) A KS 347 5 1 5 NATIVE SOILS: Loose, (hy, tan/light brown, silty ti S ' 1 ' GROUNDWATER DATA: . . ne AI? u (sn9). with rootlets 8 fine 'rtveL 9_ 1 {.5 6 0 Hrs.: Drv'%t awed ) X2 5' Medium dense, dn. tan, silty fine SAND (SM) with . - - 346.0 3.U , tine to c , . I oarse , ,a, I I 1 3.0 1 3 _ Verv stiff to hard, dry to moist_ . 0-I I tan'oran e'grav%reddish brown mottled, clayev SILT 18-t5.3( 4.5 2I (I`dL). with fine gravel. 6.0 35 340 7 8 5 . . - -" 8 5 lard, dry, maroon. cimcy SILT CML). 12-I -36 A . 44 339 0 10 0 -- . . - ' ' - 10.0 PAR T IALLY WEATI IERED ROCK: sampled as maroon. sandy SILT. with fine to coarse gravel. 50/5" I3.5 50/5'1 503„ 18.5 50/3„ - 25-50/4" ' 1.3, 50/4 34.3 X0,0„ 2R.5 SO!U' 50/I" 33.5 SU/I" I X0;0" j0/0" 309.0 - 4o.0 - ---- --, ? I I Boring terminmcd at 40.0 IM. I I i i 1 ?t 'i Y /I m a,lllnn;ui...... m"I,I,nr .U to UrIN c U I ? >>" 1 1 ,pltt-elwon :•;unplrr in >uccr..n: h" tn.rcmenl., fhc cunt ofll,e.,:Coml md ihud tncrcntcul. 14Innciumon i1 tcmtrd Ill, Sl.mdaid I'cncMition Ic.l N;,luc. •'V„ BORING LOG Rcport No. H66-1198 SINCE f& R IBBt client. of Holy' Sprinns ' _-- Prolccr Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake Count', NC 110611 t B-8 _ (1 of 2) i)ciih 53.0' I ic% 357.Oft t Lucauurr npeorlimm, 2.2 5"11)HSA stated: 8/8/06 contplclcd 8/8/06 Llc%auon Depth I)F.SCRIP I 1(1\ r )I: 'RIALS IlI'l"sIIlc':ttloll) . 5;uuplc Wo%%s Sample Depth tlecll N.NTIVG SOILS: ?Mcdimn dcwx, dry, tan orange 5-6-7 ? .0 35i.5 1.5 , silty fine SAND (5N11, with rootlets '& fine?veL 1 5 Very stiff, dry reddish brown cla ey SILT (ML) 10-0-12 . 354,0 3.0 . , y , \with rootlets & fine gravel. 0 3 j 352 ? ? Medium dense. dn, tan%oran ?c silt.' fine S,-\ IN D c 7 . . . = SM), with rootlets & line to oarse gravel. 10>-7-I I 'S 35 1.0 6.0 -- Very still', moist. maroon, clavev SILT (v11.). FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. GEOTEGHNICAL ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES ,,OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" n,llc August 2006 6.0 5-5 10 8.5 10.0 1)nllcr' Webb/Lnnsfortl REMARKS N T 13 21 13 18 15 13'? 8 I_'-18 30 --- 15.0 7-10-14 Ift.s '4 'ou ? Al 333.0 ?5.0 PARTIALLI WF.A'I HERED ROCK: sampled as reddish brown, clavcy fine to medium SAND, with fine ,ravel. -22-27 23.5 35.0 49 14 SOi2 ?8 S 3. i 50/ . l - ;t ;,-- - I 5015" z 50i2" ^I _ rr - I L _ u --- - ' ?U; lei 48,5 501 "?unth?r l hlu t rcyutrcJ litt ;t I ll) Ih,tat nlatir hi lnunrrth tphlnc :I I" InJnvr /) I) I I I)..Itlll Y -til' n n ;. uthl.I in ti otllte wwnd and third tncremcnt, ,,I peocamwit r, termed the ',wn(hrd I'cnewiti,m I,:,( N +duc -N- C;ROUND\i'ATER DATA: 0 Hrs.: DD-caved tip 35.0' I i I Icce?at c (?" nt?rrmcnl • I he ?,linl BORING LOG Report No. H66-098 c iiew Town of Holly Springs Prolect Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC RoriuL No, B-8 (2 of 2) Il)'t'1 !It- 53.0' Idev. TN-pc ol• LIorntg: 2.25" ID HSA _ Starlyd 8/8/06 Elcv:,uun I)cpth UF.SCRIFFION OF NIA I FRI AILS 304.0 -1 53.0 of the ,ccund mid thlrt SIN(;E FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE 1981 )ate August 2006 357.Oft t I I.ucauon: Completed 8/8/06 ti;unplr f Smnp C)ept ?lilu,(s ? tli•rI Willer. Webb/Lunsford Valut:? 1tC1M1,1Rf:S (blows/ ti) Au,,cr refusal R boring terminated at 53,0 feel. tort I ,tl? i I Ti for a 140 H, atilnlu,diL h;unmcr dropping ;I)" to JI n , '_" O I) I ;7;" I I) split-.lawn :::unplrr m ,tte?c„i, c 0' uteuatcnt. "l he ?uat rcntcnls of pcncimI on t, Iknncd 111-c titandard I'Qnc(muon I esI , att ic "t, BORING LOG Slid( E FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. ?R GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" Report No. 1166-098 -- last ' Date: August 2006 l here Town of Holly Springs Protect. Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC -- 13orinK Nt, B-9 (I of 21 II 53 E I Ile% t 357 Uf . t )c . . t Loc ation, TvPe of Ronng 2.25" ID HSA Started 8/7/06 Comp lelcd: 8/7/0 6 Driller Webb/Lunsford Llevanon Depth Dt'SCRIP-1 [ON 01 ALA I ERIALS . • Sample Sample N Value I(-I:tsilirfUon) Blo%N? Depth (feet) (blows/ R) RIAMARKS NATIVE SDILS: I.oo5e, moist. dark gray/brown 3-3-4 355.5 1.5 , silt fine SAND ISM). with fine gravel & rootlets - I 5 7 C,ROUNDWATF.R DATA: ' . Stiff, moist. oran-ge, clayey SILT (NIL). 3-5-6 . 0 Ilrs.: 38.0 3 3-5 3A 11 352 5 4 5 . . - Still. moist, reddish brown, fine sandy CLAN' (CH). 2-?>-R 4.5 8 6.0 14 348.5 8.5 - 5 8 Stiff. moist. maroon, slightly clayey SILT IML). 5-7-8 . 15 I- 10.0 343.5 13.5 - 342.0 15.0- 337.0 f 20.0- 0.0 - - Still, moist, maroon <,rav. clayey SILT (ML), with Still" fine travel. Very hard, dry to moist. maroon, clayey sandy SILT (N•1 L ). PARTIALLI' '"'FA I'HERF.D ROCK: sampled as tnaro(.n>.-gra)•"%%hitc!black. sandy SIL'T'. 6 13.5 1 I -- 15.0 10-20-34 18.5 54 - 30.0 23. 5 35-50/6„ 34. 4.5 50/6" IS 5U;0" 38.5 50/0" 29.5 33,5 Y! j 38.5 J '- 313,5 43,5 - - ------ 43.5 PARTIALLY WEAL H IERED ROCK: sampled ; maroon, clayey SILT. s x x _ 45.5 3 Number o! bloat rr luurd 611 a 1.10 Ill ctut,anaur ;.:uumc, dmp?,urs ±U" W Jricc " (r D . I ;'1s" I It hI I ;porn 01,0W -cond and Jnrd uic rrmenta of pcnctnuiun t, tenncd tlt< .tit.mdard Pcnen'alion Fee t \aluc. "N" 50/1 " 50/1 " 50/1 50/0 .unplcr to st i I icccs;i.cv° mcrcmcnL fhc;wn BORING LOG Report Rio.: H66-098 SINGE FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. CQ GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS R ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" as r hate August 2006 Chenr Town of Holly Springs Prolcer Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC _ Boring No.. 13-9 (2 of 2) I hi tfh 53.5' I'le- 357.Oft t Location. 'h-pe of liorm- 2.25x' iD HSA 1?Iarted 8/7/06 Compfcted 817106 Drittcr Webb/Lunsford EIe?aUtm Depth Dl SCltll''fli)\ OF MATERIALS Sample Samptc DQ th N Value RII M,\RRS (c], stfieatirnt) Blots MCI) thio?tsl ti) 3 3 5 5 ; . 0 ) > - I Auger refusal & boring ternih micd at 53.5 feet. 1 - i V I ? i f I I I Ii I ` I \un;her t, I hl„ 1„ Ic(pired fm a lau 1h autimmlI, ll,onme, dnlppoI,- :I)" lu rlmc 2" () 1) I ; is 11) split-11)()(1)) .anytler In rLKL cs;I\ e (," Inc,cmew, l he <um f lhr cccn;d .old (herd nlcrelltcnL, of hcnrlra „n 1c IrnucJ lhr SI,nulllyd 1'011010(1 11 l :,, ,,IIII \ BORING LOG Report No.: H66-098 SINCE FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. GEOTECHNICAL - ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" mate: August 2006 C liens. To'vvu of Holly Springs Project. Noyrrtis, -Holly Springs, Wake County, NC Boring No : B-10 0 of 1) be'ti, 33.51 i:iev: 355.6ft f I.oc:,lloi, r•mc of doting 2.25" ID USA started: 819106 C ornpleted 819106 _ Driller: WebblLunsford PleNaliou I>e I1, p llF.SC'RIP'I'ION 01' NIA IT.RIALS S:unple Ilepth N Value ' RF M1AhK5 I0:15SIIICLIIUII) Illr+vi fleet) Iblo,ti.,, ft) . N.A"FIVE SOILS: Firm, moist, brown: tan, clayey 4-4-4 (TT _ _ GROUNDWATER DATA: 1 354 1 5 SILT ML) 8 . . . _ ' 0-6-7 1.5 0 1Irs.: Dry?caved (c? 1.0' Stiff . moist, brown, clayey SILK (ML). 352 6 3 0 . • Vcry ,tiff. moist, orange brown, clayey SILT (ML). 6-7-9 3'0 13 1 351 4 5 - - . . - Stiff. moist. maroon, clayey sandy SILT (MLI. with 3-4-(i 4.5 1G 349 6 6 0 tine ,ravel . . - . _ Stiff. moist, reddish brown, clayey SILT (Ni .), with ' 6.0 10 veins ol black silt. 4-5-6 8.5 11 - 1 11.0 1 342 13 5 • . . - StilT, moist, maroon/gray, clayey SILT (Nil.). with 5-6-1) 13. 1 fine travel - I . 15.0 i 3-? 18.5 1 335 6 ? 0 0 . . . PARTIALLY WEAT) IFRED RUCK: sampled as maroon, clayey SILT. 50110" i 50/011 q?1' 28.5 50/1., 322 1 33 -, - -- ---? . .- ducr refusal & boring terminated at 33.5 feet. ? i I I j ! ' i I l i I 1 1 ? 1 ,unnrCr „i Mill, ,,cyulicu rue .1 140 n, MIMT11;111C nanuncr un,ppl112 •I' to (Ir1?c .' t ) 1 ) 1 i i," 1 U spin- lwon ampl,er in :ucLc sr,c !," increntenl¢. The um Of the aeclnnl .u,d 11,11,1 maentcnts ul pencuuuon is lenncd the tilandcnd I'cnctr Lion I ea N :1111C "n" BORING LOG SINCE FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. Q GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS a ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" Report No H66-098 Date: August 2006 Chem Town of Holy Springs t'ro,cct: Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC Boring No 13-11 (1 of 1) Total Dcnllt 26.5' I7e? 3 t6.Oft I t.oc:uioo: 1) pc of Rorme 2.25" 1D HSA rtitaned 8/8/06 Completed. 8/8/06 UFSCRII'I It IN 0I NI:N fI.RIAI,S ((las>tlicauon) P S am Blows tianlflc De (feelb t) NATIVE SOILS: Loose, moist, light brownvlan. silty 1-3-3 344.5 1.5 tine S,%ND (SNI). with tine gravel & decayed root 1 ?• I,; 343.0 3.0 ra mI-nts. stiff. wet, rnaroun. sandy clayey SILT (1,1L). - 1- 5- 6 3.0 341 5 s 4 Stiff. moist. brown/orange. clayey sandy SILT (Ml ). . . Very stiff, moist, orangc1gray, clayey SILT (ML). with fine gravel. l u ?j- 11( 4.5 6.0 337.5 336.0 Driller. Webb/Lunsford N' Value REMARKS (blows- lit 1 CiROUNDWATF:R Dr'1TA: (' 0 Hrs.: Dry caved (d 13.5' 7 11 23 R.5 -; _ - - I 8.5 Very dense. moist, reddish hrown, silty fine to t 1 -'Q-39 67 1010 medium SAND SM), teilh fine gravel. ----- IO.U r PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK: sampled as reddish brown, sandy SILT. r-2 I13.51 -1 14.7 18.5 I 50/1,, 33.5 50,0.. 319.5 - J 26.5 -M I ALWcr refusal &- boring terminated at 36.5 feel. 2 - I _i I I Numhcrof blue, rcyuncJ for,i 1'10Ih;uoomatiic homm:rJtopl)m_ to Jrt\C II l1 I ',7,'! 11 :plil-,lwon,ampler m,ucc:..i c " mcrrmcol; Ihe,tun ofthc ?cuuid :utd (had mclcrticnt, of penctrimon I, miiwd the SIanJ.Ird I'cncnauon 101 N'thug , V BORING LOG Rcpun No H66-098 SINCE FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. GEOTECHNICAL - ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" aa, untt August 2006 (Cl-ir-»r Torn of Holly Springs i - PrPlcct Novart s, Holly Springs, Wake Counts, NC 13on»? Nu B-12 (1 Of 1) i)o1`ih 417.5' [:Icy 352-Oft f --?ueauun. '- 'Lrpeol'Horinp 2.25" Ill HSA Started: 8/7106 complewo 8/7/06 uri to Webb/Lunsford on Depth t)I ti( I(IN 11ON OF MAl VRIALS • Sam le p ' ti.+mple IN Value - -- IC Ias,Ilicauonl f31o1„ Depth t Itet) (bl»??'sr Ill RLh1ARKS F NA E SOILS: N,ledium dense. dry. orangcitan N I 350 5 1.5 , e SAND 11 GRoUNDWATE.R DATA: . U 3A dense. dry. orange, silty fine SAND 7 (' 1.5 0 Hrs.: D caved rn'43' ryr ` . ei. --? _ ddi i h 11.7-- ;.0 1 ; 347 5 5 r st. re s brown, silty (LA Y (CH), with el. -8-1 I 4.5 ll'. moist, reddish brownigray'white/tan line sandy clayey SILT (Mb. with fine 6.0 343 5 8 5 . . V ery stiff, moist, maroon, clayey SILT (ML). 18 10.0 i 338.5 13.5 13 Stiff, moist, reddish brown/gray 'white/black mottled, 4-5-0 .5 11 sandy clayey SILT (NIL) < I . 1 0 3-5.7 18.5 12 - 10.0 4-5-7 ? i 5 12 - I Z5.0 323 5 28 5 I . . --- PARTIALLY WEATHERED RO(:K: sampled as 50%5„ 3-0-50/5" _8.5 50/511 maroon, clayey SILT. -- 19.9 , 5U'S„ ?I _ I 33.5 50/5" I 50/2.. I I 43.5 30 1 5 47 5 - . . --- -- - - - ---- -- -- 1»_,er refusal & boring terminated at 17.5 rect. "., , v ^ .. wm•ni u.uinncr unlpl,n c m 1o un?e 1 I I I , I _'. I I I 'PIII-poo 1 .,In,plrl 1n 1»CR•SSICe W, 111crcmdnl< I i1, ,11111 ul the ,ccnnd and 1111111 Inuclneut, of penetration I? t.rmell the % Iianderd Penetrauon Pest ? Iluc. 'N" BORING LOG >INCE FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. Q n GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS J?/•`lx` ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES r OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" Report No H66-098 Date: August 2006 ('lirnr Town of Holly Springs I'roicct: Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC Boring No. 13-13 (I of I) I)0", 39.11' rl358.0ft Lor uion - t}pe ol'Roring. 2.25" ID TISA Started _ 8/7/06 comp leted: 8/7/06 Dither Webb/Lunsford Elr?:,lion Depth DI,SCRIt'TI0V Of `IATIiRlnl-5 T" Sample S:l"JAC Depth N Value RI-MARKS - (Class,lianionl -_ ._ _.. _ lilu?4s fleet) (h1ows/ Q) NA hIVC SOILS: Loose, dry, orange tan, silty line 3-3 3 GROUNDWATER DATA: 356.5 1.5 SAND (SNI), with fine to coarse gravel, large root 3 2 1,5 6 0 Hrs.: Dry/caved (d) 2_.3' tfa11nle)tt in spoon. _ - _ i __ Firm. moist, reddish brown, clayey SR-T (ti1L), with 7 5 353 large quartz fragment in spoon. _ . Stiff to very stitT, moist, reddish brown/gray. clayey 7.8-8 4.5 14 SILT ('0k), with tine to coarse gravel. 6.0 16 { t 13 I 1 338.0 -' 20.0 333.5 23.5 } I _ Stiff. dry, maroon- clayey SILT (NIL). PARTIALLY WEATHERF.I.) RO('K: sampled as maroon, clove), SILT. i l I 13.5 15.0 3-5-6 1 8.5 -- 1-0.0 23.5 r e 319.0 1 39.0 Augcr refusal & horing terminated at 39.0 feet. 9 ? I1 S 0/3" 50/5" 50/2' I *Nun,hrr ul'hlo „ Iryuueil lin a I31I Ih aulumalie honorer Jruppni_ ?(1" to Jrnr ?" O U 1 17>; LU ,phl-,pour sampler in <ueLC;sne macmems I he sun, nl'IhC secunJ and dill (1 1110 Q111011.1 oI'pCnelr:uion 11 termed the Suualard I'enelmhou test value "N" BORING LOG Report No 1166-098 SINCE F& FRO ROBERTSON, INC. GEOTECHLAICAL ICAL - ENVIRONMENTAL MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" _. P Date August 2006 ci,cot Town of Holly Springs - Pro_ect Novartis, Holh' Sps•ings, Wake County, NC -'- -- -- -- - -- L ---- Rorinc No B-14 --(1 of 2) Il)°n jt 32.0' filar 359.Oft f I I,oe,+lu,n ' l'ype of Boring 2.25" ID HSA S,artc_id 8/10/06 Complctrd: 8/10/06 tlrillcr Wcbb/Lunsford I N.S(AW "I ION UP Ni \ I t ltl!1Lti • Sample C;u,tplc N Value - - I.Ic?auo„ Ucptlt hptl, IREMARKS ICIu.>ilir,o,,nl Hlua;` itcCtl .; Ill vnTIVE SOILS: Medium dense, -dry, bray, silty f tle T 7 5 GkUUNDWA I'LR DA'I A: 357.5 I .5 SAND Srvl , with tine grwei & rootlets. 1-5 I I 0 Hrs.: I)ry'caved t 24.5' Very stiff. dry to moist, orange, silty ('L \Y 356.0 3.0 - - 10 Vcry stiff. dry, reddish brown, sandy SILT (Nil.). I2 354.5 4.5 with fine gravel__ 4 Stiff to vcr} still; moist, reddish brown%tan/grad I mottled, fine to medium sandy SILT with fine 6.0 Lravel. 349.0 10.0-- 344.0 15.0-- 339.0 20.0 - 5101 moist, reddish brown/tan, clayey SILT (ML). Very hard, dry, maroon. clavev SILT (ML ). PAICI IALLY \\ FATHERED ROCK: sampled as maroon.;midv SILT. 4.6-2 8.5 1-6-6 - 15.0 i-30-35 18.5 -- 20-0 i-5t)i5" 23.51 24.4 28.5 5011" 327.0 d 32.0 - Atiger refusal & borin, terminated at 32.0 feet. 17 20 13 13 12 65 50/5" 50:x1„ I ".Number nt h1uMe n•yr,n cd I,a ,, I to Ill auwnmuc Imnw cr Jnq>I,h, gin" u, drn r 1 75" 1 1) elan-ml,r,m ;urhlcr it ,nCCCS ? d h" iurrcmcnl, I L•c mull, 01'111V scuntJ 111x1 Ih,rd macn,cnl> ill l,Cnctralwn ?> lenueJ Ih, titaml:u l I'cncuauun'I"cmt aloe. "V P BORING LOG Report No H66-098 Client Town of Holly Springs Proicct. Novartis, Holly Springs, W ike County, NC SINCE FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. R GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" I a s i Date: August 2006 34Boring Nu. B-15 (1 of l) Utplh _ .0' hlev? 354.1 ft f Locahun. _ 1\ pe of Borne 215" 10 HSA Started: 8/10/06 Cumploed. 8/10/06 Driller: Webb/Lunsford Ile,auult Depth DI'SC'ltIP'I'ION OF MAI'I:RI,\LS • Samp- le Sample N Valuc (Classification) 0 Rlo\r, &0 Iblow,! 11) Rf ?1-\RKS cM) 3 ROO INIAT: Loose, dry, gray/brown, silty frnc S N 4-4-5 0.0 (;ROI ND\V,?'I tR DATA: 52.6 1.5 A D SM with fir ravel, roots & grass. 1 5 9 l (J 1lrs D d f 26 5' NATIVE SOILS: Stiff, moist, reddish brown tine 5-7-8 . .: ry cave r . 3? 1 . I 3.0 , sdv CLAY CL) i h f ( , w t ine gravel R rootlets. 4 7 8 3.0 1 5 - Stiff. moist. reddish brown/orange/white mottled, . . ? s:u,dy clayey SIL'I 0,11-). with fine gravel. 4.5 1; 6.0 i - 13 6 315 8 5 . . Very stiff. moist. while pink.'brown mottled, clayey 6-8-8 8.5 16 - SILT (MI,). 10.0 i 340 6 5 - 13 - . . - Stiff. moist, reddish hrown;'tan, clayey SILT (?1L). - 4-li-S 11.5 1 1 15.0 , 335 6 18 5 - . . - 18.5 Stiff, moist. maroon/gray/brown mottled, clayev 4-6-6 13 sandy Sll , f (\tt.l with frnc gravel - . . 20.0 I 25-5015" 23.5 5015" 329 1 25 0 24.4 . . PARTIALLY WEA 1'IIERED ROCK: sampled as - maroon. clayey SILT. 50 5„ 28.5 50/5 _ I I 320.1 34.0 - -- - I i i i , t Atiger rcfirsal S borin-1 terminated at 34.0 Icet. I , l „ „ nlu,,, it:,,, l mr a 1 iV 10 ;U(Ijlauc h IMIlicr ,Iropputg ;U" to dm "' ( 1 t) I t'i" 1 1) Iilu-spoon ,ampler In soar;>i, r 6" iucrcmrnl. f he uni nl* the seCUl,d artd 11 urd utclcnt ., of peimration 1S knout] the ltaadard Pcm-wm nl Ica ,:due "N" SINCE BORING LOG / FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. 1Fe GEOTECHNtCAL • ENVIRONMENTAL - MATERIALS JV?` ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS Of SERVICE" Report No.: H66-098 t e e t Date August 2006 c iienl. Town of Holly Springs Project: Nol•artis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC lioring No: B-16 (1 of 1) Depth 30.0' I lev 342.6ft f Locution: Type of Llorng 2.2 5" ID HSA Srarled 8/10/06 Complet ed: 8/10/06 [ac,nliun repo, ul-SC RIP ZION 01: MATLRIALS • sample S01111' (t'lassilicution} Blows Ifcr NATI\'F, SOILS: Nledium dense, dry, dark 3 _84- 341.1 1.5 gray brown. silty fine SAND with roots X fine 1 coarse gavel. 5-6-8 339.6 3.0 titiff, moist. reddish brown, sand % sit CLAY (C - - 4-7-7 338 1 5 4 Stiff. moist. reddish brown tan./gray mottled, clayey . . S1LT1?IL) ' 3-3-6 Still , moist to wet, reddish brown/gray/black/pink mottled. clayey SILT (NIL), with fine gravel. 6 Driller: Webb/Lunsford N Valle RFN1ARKS (blows; ru -- 8.5 10.0 12 GROUNDWATER DAI'A: 0 Hrs.: Dn•-caved !jr 22.0' 14 14 9 7 3-4-5 13.E 9 15.0 324.1 18.5 18.5 Hard, moist, reddish brown. sandy SILT (10L). with 4 IS --5 10 fine to coarse oravel. 20.0 I 23 5 314. 1] 23.5 Irilard, R I IALLY WEATHERED ROCK: sampled as?I7-36-'0 5" 50/j" 31 7.6 25.( oon, claycl' SILT. '4.4 moist. reddish brown. sandy SILT (x•IL). 9__li -20 28.5 35 3.ti 30.0 Boring terminated at 30.0 feet. 30.0 x L I ? i I rct turn I II) Ih aupanalic hmimicr dwppm,, ;u" In i1u\, ) I l) '\unhclulhlur . piircd 1 1 I) :plil-,pnvn s;u 0 I'1hc,cumd and Ihird mcremeniN ol' j,enomij al i< lcnnI: d IhrSUM, lord I'e IcItanun I,.t ?:iltic . "N" I i I in ucu ;n. A" 111clolmit, 1 he >tnrt BORING LOG ?I1+isE FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. Q GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" Report Nt, 1166-098 Dml: August 2006 C Iteot Town of Hotly Springs Project. Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC - - - Boring No. B-17 (1 of 1) 1)c Ilh 30.0' I lev. - - 344.0 ft f ?Loc:num type of 13onng 2.25 D HS.A 8_/$/06 _c„n,plctcd. $!$/06 D_ tiller R'ebb/Lunsford 1•:Ic,auon Depth LA-WRII' I'ION Ul NIA FERIAI_S "Sample Scunple N Value (Class,lication) Mow,; _ Depth (blows t)) klAfARKS Ilcetl \ATIVE SOILS: Medium dense, dry, gray, sill% fine 3 10 CIROUND?N'ATER DATA 342.E I.5 SAND (511. with fine to coarse gravel & root -0 Hrs.: I)t 1.5 18 y ca?cd!c? --.tl • Iral.mcnt;. ? t I?-9-j _r, .. 341.0 3.0 h9edium dense, Jry, or?ngert<an, silty fine SAND G 10-14 16 % 3.0 S?1), with rout frarrments. Very stiff to hard, moist, or<ange:tan, clay ey SILT -17.? t _28 4•5 24 (M11L), with fine gavel. _ 6.0 I. 49 ,35.E 8.5 - 3 30.E 13.5 - i , - 319.0 25.0- 314.0 30.0- 0.0 - Very Very stiff. moist, reddish hrown, clavev SILT CNIH). I irm to %erv stiff. moist to wet, maroon'white'black'gray mottled. clayey SILT with line to coarse gavel. PAR FIALL t WF:A 11 If RED ROCK: sampled as maroon!grm white mottled, sandy clayey SILT. fiorina terminated at 30.0 feet. i i _ I \umhrr )I'blm%; ;aluucJ Jill a 141) Ih cnuon,:,uc hmmncr dmppur_ o" u, du%c „f,hc sct+tmd u,d third ,nocmvnts of pcocununn is kxllcll tl,c SIm,Janl Pcnclr,uum Ic,t 5-7-17 - f 8.5 24 10,0 i-5-4 13.5 9 - 15.0 -3-4 18.5 7 20.0 -q n 23.5 18 25.0 77-10;5'9 28 50/5, 1 I i I I -? I I) .(,lit-spoon ampler n,,LKACS,I\C u,cnn,ans tlie .,um luc BORING LOG SINCE FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. O&R "OVER • ENVIRONMENTAL - MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" Report Nu H66-098 Date: August 2006 Clicut Town of Holly Springs I,rolect. Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC Rornng No. B-l8 (1 of 1) I)el lh 40.0' 1ilc. 355.3ft f _-?- - Location 2 ,r INPC or I3 ormg. 2-7 W IU HSA Srtrted- 8/9/06 Compleled 8/9/06 Drdlcr Wcbb/[ unsford r lev:ui un Depth _ DES(- Rill I'ION ()I N1A'I I-RIALS ` Smnplc Sm„PIC UCPt h N Value , NiARKS RI Icla*sific.(lon) Elo??; I tcCn thlo,u tit . NATIVE SOILS: Loose, dry, light browntan, silty 2-4-6 L GROUNDWATER D T 3j 3.8 I .5 tine SAND (SM), with fine to coarse gravel S; 10 A A: jrootlet% 8 r? l ? 1.5 U Hrs.: Dry/caved c!? 26.0' 312 3 0 3 . / . . Very stiff, moist, reddish brown. silty CLAY (CL) 3.0 1 - .. Al?llith fine to coarse s ravel 6-7-5 2 l . ' Firm to stilt , moist. maroon, white/gra? Ilan mottled. j 4.5 I fine sandy clayey SIL I (`IL_), with line to coarse I travel. 6.0 8 _-1 8.5 1 t) 10.01 Z-( 13.5 g 15.0 18.5 I 1 I 20.0 11 330.3 • 4.4.6 '_.i.5 I 10 25.0 25.0 \'rry still; dry Io moist, maroon, clavey SIL I'tML). 9-II-1S 28.5? 29 0.0 - 11111 322.3 -'? 33.0 -- - PARTIALLY N4'E.q'f11r.Rf D ROIL h: sampled as 5[t ,;_-' 33.5 marr,un, clayey SILT. =. 50/2 315,3 -10.O - ,'1` - --------- ----- 5010" r3orinp (erminatcd at 40.0 fcc z ? y I i °? - - --?? -J- -? \umhe: ul hl,,,,, rcyuned 1 r :, tall Ib aI lomaue Iwmincr dn,ppmr- .0" I, _ - . I) ,plu-yu ,m timplci in .nee.sl, a 6" InerL:n,cmH I IIC 141111 t, Ic;ccunJ ant{ Ilnnl oxn•menty nl'penetnar,m I- Iermcd the Yx d,ad I'cnctrmwll TL.I volur. BORING LOG Itepurt No H66-098 IrlC, [ FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. Q GEOTECHNICAL • LNVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" tARt ' f)nt,, :?IIO,ICt 7nno; i'Iloot Town of Holly Springs Prt,l,.•ct Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC _ Boring No 13-19 (I of 1) I)CI)Ilh 39.0' Elev: 353.Oft+ Location •rypc of Boring 2.25 " 11) HSA Sta ted: 8/8/06 Compleled: 8/8/06 Driller: Webb/Lunsford l:Icvatinn Depth r ulacRU?I tun i,r ?i ?ilkl??i,s---- • s11»pIe s,l»plc N Value - --- - -- ti lagcl hc_IIIPIII Blow, L)epdt (till) (hlOl4'S/ 11) RLMARKS NA SOILS: Stiff, moist, reddish brown, silty _ 6-4-6 GROUNDWATER DA'T'A H) with rootlets I (1 : , . l0 9 I i 1.5 0 l lrs.: Drvicaved rr_i! 28.5' 30 0 3 0 r . . ry stiff, moist, reddish -?, 8 i 3.0 ynvhite/blrjck mottled fine sand cL ev 5 . y ry ), with fine gravel. `7 10" 12 4. 14 - - - 6.0 22 5.7 .9 8.S 16 --- 10.0 2-3-5 13.5 4 I -- 15.0 - 18.5 4- 9 I 20.0 3-5-G 73.5 Il 25 0 33 'i U 30 0 6-6-8 28J 14 . . 30 0 Hard. moist, maroon. clayey SILT (NIL). . I 9-I6-20 315 36 318 0 35 0 . . - - P 35.0 ARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK: sampled as maroon, clayey SII,T. 3 14 0 39 0 ' 38 ' . . 50'5 __ _ Borin-, terminated al 39.0 feet. -- i I 1I _.a Ntlhit ?t Lil m??n iuilrr J r. I.lu th - ... I. . - - ..,,.t,,. , c , • 1 .c - , 1 11, i ,; _ I I) •Inn-:puun ti:unplcr tit .ucrr,v?c (," muenn nl; I he :um tit Il e wton l and thlyd utctcmcnts ul powlr.unm 1< lci-mcd the SI;IIldard PriIt'll ill it'n'I r?1 %J111C. "N" BORING LOG Report No H66-098 INC;E FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. e GEOTECHNICAL - ENVIRONMENTAL - MATERIALS ENGINEERS - LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" 1881 Dale: August 2006 C•Ilcnr 1 own OL golly' lprln€s ---- --- ? -- Ir Proicct. Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC liorinr Vo Q-20 (I of 1)I 20.0' 1:1c". 331.8ft+ Locotam: 15Pc of l4ormn 2.2-" 11) HSA ',lined: 8/10/06 Completed 8/10/06 Drillcv Webb/Lunsford FIc,uUun Ik Id, DI[ti?'RII'hION i,l t,1.11'I RIA15 ' itt"Pic Sample Depth N Value RFNIARKS t(7asslliwuon) f31o,%s (IecU (No,k,/ It) 3 5 _.. ROOTNIAT: Loose, dry, clerk brown/gray, silty fine S \ND SCI i h i _ 2-3-3- (lROL•NDWATFR DATA: 330. 1. , , ( ). w t t ne to coarse Rravd, 1.5 6 0 Mrs : Drvicaved (r-r? 14 0' NA'[ I\'E SOILS L i b il 3-4-5 . . 348 8 3 0 ' : oose, mo st, rown, s ty tine . . SAND (SKI), with tine gravel R rootlets. 3-6 5 3.0 9 327 3 1 5 5lilf. moist. reddish bromi tan, clayey SILT (ML). . . 1?'CI?• stiff, moist, gray, tine sandy SILT (ML). 3-7-10 4'5 (1 325 8 0 0 . . Stit•1•to vcly stifil moist. dark brown/tan/grav mottled, 6.0 sandv elayev SILT 6ML), with fine gravel. 17 5-G-8 Y.5 14 - -- I 10.0 318 3 . ' I3.5 ' PARTIALLY WE:ATHE:RFD ROC h: sampled as 4 5055 - maroon. clayey SILT. 1 .4 ;7.50'}„ 50/4„ 8 31 1 20 0 1 q ' . t . l I I - --•---- Boring terminated at 20.0 feet. I ? I i i I I I Y Nit ill ba of , n,v; rryun•cJ I„r it 140 1h ?ulumau? hummer JruppnI iz ill" lu Lhi,e „t ? [ l • I 17;" ID spIi t-a•uwit ,am plcr in ,nCL e:<iu• r,., n,crcnu•nk I he vlm nl'thc >econd ?nd third Increment; ul pcncir;au,n is termed the S1.111d;lrJ Pctmramun I c.t ?akwc "N" BORING LOG Report No H66-098 SINCE FROEHIING & ROBERTSON, INC. e GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" +aa+ Date. August 2006 Client Town of Holly Springs Piolect Novar ds, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC Boring No B-21 (1 of 1) I)`1iib_ 30.00' I!.lev 345.2 ft f I ype of 13oring. 2.25" ID NSA _ Started 8/9/06 ('om FIe?;Ition L)eplh DI'SC'RIP 110N OF MA I FRIALS IC'lasslliurtion) TT: NATIVE SOILS: Nlcditum dense, dry. light brown, 343.7 - 1.5 silty line SAND ISM), with line to coarse gravel, rootlets l' wood fragments. 3422 3.0 hledium dense, dry, tan, silty fine SAND (SNt). with 340 7 4.5- fine to coarse gravel. Verv stiff, drv. tan/orange, ck e% SII.I 330.2 6.Q Stiff, hoist, maroolvbrowniorange mottled, clayey ? :11'r(NOL). with fine .'ravel. _ Stiff to very still', moist, reddish brown';-ray, clayey SILT 331.7 326.7 321.7 315.3 - 13.5 Very stiff. moist, maroon. clayey SILT INII.) 18.5 11111 Very stiff, moist. tnaruon,',,r.tv!whiteiblxck mottled. -III sandy clayey SII. I'(\41..), with fine gravel. 1 23.5 30,0 PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK: sampled as -11 maroon, clayey SILT. Burin, terminated at 30.0 feet. l l - "umber nl hlm+, 1"'jimcd Ior I 110 Ih .nluona(lc hmnmcr .lroppa+r ;n" In dn\c "'- 6_1) ,11 the Second anti Il u;l nlcremcnl; of pcncluanm I; IermCll the ?,Ian,lanf hmcwition 1 c;t va I ucaUon :d 8/9/06 --? *,Sample S;unhlc Rlorvs lkplh 1lVe11 4-8-8 .l 10-13-16 1'5 9-10- I ; 3.0 - 9 4 ` 5.r1 I_12-16 8.5 10.0 Driller. Webb/Lunsford N Value RI.j\1ARKS Iblu?+s,- Il) 16 GROUNDWATER DATA: 0 Hrs.; Dry/caved (b I5.(I' 29 13 15 5-12-18 13.5 30 15.0 4-8-13 18.5 21 20.0 12-50/4"_ 23 '' {.} 50/4" 6-SO;S" 28.' 5 5015' ? I 37i" I U ,plu-.pu„n ;ampler in :u?ecs,I?c c," mcrcmcntti 'I'h? .;un+ luc. "?" BORING LOG SINCE FROEHLING 8r ROBERTSON, INC. Q GEOTECHNICAL - ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ?//?•` ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" Report No- U166-098 Dive: August 2006 Client. 'Gown of Holly Springs Projca, Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC Loring No : B-21 A? (1 of 1) Dcj'ttlh 24.01 Elcv. 337.1 t't t Tvpe of Boring 2.25" 16 HSA titartcd. _ 8/9/06 Corn Doaliou Depth DLSC'RIPTI(M OF MATERIALS (Classification) 335 6 1 5 NATIVE. SOILS: Very loose, dry light hrovn. silh fi SAND . . ne (Sht32with fnr to coarse .t ravel & roots. 334 1 _ 3 Firm, dry, orange, clayey. "' L' (NIL). with fine . .0 rr3vel. 332 6 4 5 Very sLtft, moist, reddish brown, clayev SILT (%(L). . 331 1 . 6 0 Stiff, moist, maroon.'brown/gray/white mottled, fine d SIL . . y san T (ML), slightly clayey, with fine to coarse ravel. Vcry hard, moist. maroon!eray'white mottled, sandy SILT (ML). slightly clayey, vCrv rocky. 323.6 13.5 --- PARTIALLY WEA I'HERF1) RO(."K: sampled as ntaroitn, sandy SILT. 313.1 1 24.0 --r7 I I Auger refusal & boring terminated at 21.0 feet. s 1 Locotion d: 8/9/(16 Sample Sample Rh)Nc. Depth fleet) 1-2-2 5-6-II 3.0 5-7-7 4.5 6.0 12-22-32 8.5 10.0 5&5" 13.5 r,,.1„ 18.5 Y 1 i "Number of blow < ic.purcJ im it I AO lb autumaUC hannncr Jtnppinc ?U" In dme 2" U D . I (A tile .a!d thud M,tkil III, ul'pcneirtulinn I., Icrmcd III,, ?la.td,ud PcnctroUOn 1 CS1 .aloe "N" Driller Webb/Lunsford N Value (blow s? tl)IZE.M:\RKS GROUN'DWATFR DATA 4 0 Hrs.: Dry/caved @q 19.0' 17 14 54 0/i- 5015" II-pnrtn ,ampler m ;uc tic 6" atcrcnicnt,. I he ;trn BORING LOG SINCE FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL - MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS Of SERVICE" RcportNo. H66-098 9q, Ome August 2006 c imit Town of Holly Springs Prolcet Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC Borth" No B-22 (1 0f 1)i Dc III 20.0' 1 1c, 33l.Oft - -- Los:nwn. T-3 2 25'1 ID T,PL: of 1,1111". _ HSA Started. 8/8!06 Contplatcd 8/8/06 Drlllcr. Webb/Lunsford Flr,'ant Ucpth I)F-SCRIPT ION UI M II:RI ALS • Saru Ic p ti:un Ic f value K lasslllcatioll) 1111>,t,; I)cp b (blow" fl) REM NRK.S NATI``'F. SOILS: %'cry loose. dry, ^111 brown silts y -_.--- ' 3.32.5 I .? , finc SAND (SR11. with fine crave! & rootlets. i I GROL ND\& A FE:R DATA: ' SOW moist, tart'urangc, fine sandy CLAY (('11). ?:3 . I) Hrs.: Dry/caved lir' 13.0 )31,0 - 3.0 3 0 Firth, moist, reddish brown"gray, clayc} SI1. 1 l NII.I. 4-7-10 -7-10 ' 7 6_12_14 4.5 324.0 1 10,0 J 1-1.0 d 20.0 PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK: sampled as reddish bro«n. clayey SI1.1" . Boring laminated at 20.0 feet. 6.0 1 26 8.5 32 10.0 2" Ii.S W?j I s.,1 50/3" I I I i I =1 1 c I II J *Numhcr o1 hhm I:,lIII r, I I„r I I101h em onuuic h.nl,nl:I &oppIli_ 311" to cite l I U. I I> :plil-;pooh .:unplcr ul .?1cci„ni (," mirrntcm • Ih. um nails second and Ilmd nmenlint> nl penclreuon a lrrll,l:,l 1h1: ?I:u, lard I'cnclr;W<n, i a eahl l "n' BORING LOG SINCE FROEHLING B ROBERTSON, INC. (®R GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL - MATERIALS ENGINEERS - LABORATORIES OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" Report No. H66-098 _ 1 a e 1 wic August 2006 aicm Town of Holly Springs Project. Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County. NC J Borin.- No. B-23 (1 of I) Depth 20.011 rlcv 327.Oft f T\Pe or Bonng 2.25" Ill HSA started: 8/_8/06 Cunt H,!Vauon Depth DL'SCRII''I-ION OF MA'T'ERIALS - -- _ (Classification) T T. NATI\'F. SOILS Loose, dry, light brown tan. silty 335.5 1.5 tine SAND SMI, with rootlets & fine kravel. Loose, dn. orange/tan, silty fine SAND (SMt . with 324.0 3.0 rootlets fi tine gravel. 322 5 4 5 Very stiff, moist, reddish brown/gray, clayey SILT . . Very stiff to hard. dry to moist, maroon, clayev SILT 3 12.5 ? 14.5 __ -11) 1'AIt'TI.ALL1' WFA] HE F1) RR0CK- saled as maroon, clayey SILT. 307.0 ^_(1.0 Boring terminated at 20.0 Icel. I Location d 818/06 Driller: Webb/Lunsford " Santrle Sample Depth _ N Value REMARKS Blow,; I Ii co (hioasi Il l - 2-23-4 07T 7 GROUNDWATER DATA: q-4-6 1 •? 0 Hrs.: Dry/caved ,?i) 10.5' 5-x-11 3.0 10 5-12-19 4.5 19 --- 6.0 31 $ I0-i ; 3.5 23 10.0 numher of hlo%?i required 16r a 130 Ih auiomotre Ilillnlncr drohlmr ;!''-lo Jm c U f 1 I urllte :Ocond ;rn,l (hrrd im:remcm cI I,cnclrtlloll a Icrncd the Standard Pcilelrauon 1 cal value "N" 1 ' S 50/4„ la.x ? 18.51 50/3 I _ ->h?nm ?antplcr m <uece;a?,: 6" utert.ntcnts. I he ,um BORING LOG Report \I) H66-098 SINCE FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. R GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS LABORATORIES OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" 18El I l?;,le August 2006 c'Iicnr Town of Holly Springs _ no,lvct:_Novartis_, +Holly Springs, Wake County, NC hornre No.: B-24 0 of 1) 1 c?;ih 10.0' Fle, 335.8ft f LOL-1 t 011 --- -?? TMpe of Boring 2,25" ID HSA I Started: 8/9/06 (-'omplctcd 8/9/06 Oriller. Webb/Lunsford Elevation Dcpth I)I!SC'Itl1111(1N Of. ?AA I LKIAI.S • ,SaI,, Ic• r Sarnplc L)cplh % S kl b1ARKS ___Y_- 1( las?iliwliu°) (feel) (Mo ? / 11) 334 3 1 5 NATIVE SOILS: Soft, dry, tan gray, fine sandy SILT :V11 2-2•2 0.0 GROUNDWATER D;-%T;1: . . .). - 1 5 /• 0 H D d ? ' 332 3 First, moist, oran,e:'hrown, clayey SILT (MI.). with -3-4 . , rs.: we ry c 3.0 .8 .0 rootlets. i S I , I? 3.0 7 331 3 4 Very stiff. moist, orangetan;reddish brown mottled, . .:1 cla'e SILT MIA ?_? ? X1.5 2 Very stiff to hard, moist, mam011Purple. clayey SILT (ML). 6.0 - I? 325 8 - 10 0 6-I6-)8 8.5 a . . - Boring terminated at 10.0 feet. I I i 1 t 1 -i z ?L __ ....., , „n,ppm, ! w urns 1 11) . t ± 1, 1 1) s1>I t-?pnun smllplcr In Slit t C-1) e 6" increment, I he suns 1,1 11;e ,etlmd and Third I"cremenl; ol'rrltrlr: nm, I, lermcrl the Slcntd;lr l I'cnrtr.dl,n1'I e,l ?;Iluc 'N" BORING LOG SINCE FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. (®R GEOTECHNICAL - ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" Reporl No H66-098 - -- 981 I)alr August 2006 c unit Town of Holly Springs ? - t'ntlccr No?artis, Holly Springs, Wake Counh', N(' B - ?rm, tio11-25 (1 of 1) 33.0' F.lc1 Depth 327.2ft Location. F it I ype or Boring: ,.,25 ID HSA - -^^ tiutrted 8/10/06 completrd. 8/!0/06 D rlller . Webb/Lunsforcl F Icvahon Ucpdt _- DUSCRl111ION 01 NINITRIALS .1 . ?.. _ p tiara le TSal" lc l _ _ N Value --- . (•lussilicalion) HIi111, - Lhp h ?e l (blows, Il) REMARKS NATIVE SOILS: Stiff. dry, brown/!,rty• fine sandy ' 3-4-5 --- GROUNDWATER DATA: 325.7 1.5 S I L I t.%,1LI, with root fragments & fine to coarse 1 5 9 - gra% e1 . ,? 9 . 0 Firs.: Dry/caved (i?. 23.0 324.2 3.0 _ Very stiff, dry to moist. reddish brown, sandy silty 9 3 0 18 CI.AN' (Cl,). 5- -11 Very still: moist, reddish brown/white!gray; tan " ' 3-7-10 4.5 321 ^ 6 O mottled cla ev SIL I (1y1L). . _ . Very stiff, moist, reddish brown, sandy clayey SILT 60 with root fra?nlents. 17 7-1(-I3 8.5 24 10.0 313.7 - 312.2 - 13.5 15.0 303.7 -i 23.5 294.2 d 33.0 - l L v Stiff. moist to wet. reddish brown/urty lmi-'pink mottled; Sandy SILT (till.,), with line to coarse gri Very hard. dry. maroon/purple/tray, clayey SILT (k,11 I. PARTIALLY WF:AT1-IERED ROCK: sampled as maroon,purple.`gray. clayey Auger refilsal & boring terminated at 33.0 feet. 1?.5 4-5-8 13 15.0 12-23.34 18.5 57 20.0 16-50/5" '3.5 50/5„ 24.4 13-30-50:5" 18'5 5015" 29.9 f I l \umhcr of him- rn'ywrrd Ior it i 40 Ih automatic h,utt pltt-:pool oflhc second nrnl Ihtrd ntcrrnnnls ol'pcnetramin is Iennrd the SImtd,ull PenelnWon I'cst %ailuc. "N" i Il'I111 I he X11111 BORING LOG Report \o. H66-098 diem Town of Holly Springs Project. Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC SI NCt FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. Q GEOTECHNICAL - ENVIRONMENTAL - MATERIALS ?J/?•` ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" 1881 Uatc: August 2006 Boring No B-26 (1 of 1) 1701 ill, 25.0' F.Ie? 337.2ft f --I Location T% pc of Boring: 2.25 1D HSA Started 8/8/06 Completed 8/9/06 Driller. Webb/Lnnsford Depth DESC•RIP ZION OF NIA I E:RIALS ' ' sample Sample Depth N Vulue KIfMARKS --- (C la ;sllicalionl -- --- - ..._._---- (310 `,, (luwsi Il) h F NATIVE SOILS: Loose, dry, tan/light brown, silty 2-3-4 GROUNDWATER DA'T A 35. 1.5 fine S?>ND M??vitfi fine trttyel & rootlets 7 : .- S iff d / i ' 5-4-8 I.S 0 Hrs.: Dry/caved 17.0' t ry. orange. brown, f ne sandy 51L I (NIL), with 3.0 - fine -ravel. 3 5 3'0 12 332 7 5 4 _Stiff, moist. reddish brown, clayey SILT (`IL). - -7 . , Stift, moist, reddish brown, clayey SILT (NIL), with 5-7-8 4.5 12 tine gravel. -- 6.0 15 328.7 8 5 - -------- --- - --- _ _ . I lard, moist, maroon, claycy SILT with fine 9-I8- 24 8 - 5 42 gravel. 10.0 323 7 13 5 - -- -- . . PARTIALLY WEA'I HERFI) ROCK: sampled as 50/5" 13.5 5015" 322? 15.0- maroon, SILT. Very stiff, dry to moist, maroon/browii,'gray white mottled, sandy claycy SILT (,AIL). with fine gravel. 7 x l0 18.5 2U 20.0 9-10- 18 23.' 28 312.2 25.0- Bonn, terminated at 25.0 feet. -°' - I I "VIlI11hC1' iil hllN'. iel7 Ulr ed (iH :t 111 Ih mnnul of it h:un n„•r ,ir.,.,....•a1° ?.., J..?,--? n i ,^c.. T, ---- ----? _ „ . .....n ,,untncr ui ,ucccti,nc a I'mcmentN the sum ol•thc ccond and Ilurd incrcmcnlz u(pcnetr troll n lamed Illc Standarnl 11rnclnaton l c,1 ?nhtc "\" BORING LOG Rcport Ivu.: H66-098 I& R .,_.•-_- 1 881 FROENLING & ROBERTSON, INC. GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL - MATERIALS ENGINEERS - LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" Datc. August 2006 c Bent Town of Holly Springs -? rr„Ica No,'artis, Holh Springs, Wake County, NC Boring No B-27 (1 of 1) liciih 14.0 File" 330. 1 ft I)pc of Nnring: 2.25rr ID HSA Started: 8/10/06 Completed. 8/10/06 Driller Webb/Lunsford 1:Ic?atittn f)cpth DESCRIP 1 [ON OF NIIA'f £RIALS R Sampl -'Plc n value (Classification) 131mv.; Deptl h tleet (hlows/ III REMARKS - NA f'IVF. SOILS: Vcn still; dry, tan/orange, fine to 9 1 I CIROUNDN% ATER DATA 328.6 Li -\tncdiutn sand, (A-AY i(A.). with fine gravel. 1 5 20 : 0 H D ' Ver stiff: dn d k b i . rs.: ry caved (it1 8.0 y . ar rowngray. t ne to medium 327.1 3.0 sandy CLAY CL) , 50; 3.0 21 PARTIALLY WEATI IERED R 5 OCK: sampled as maroon'gray,/white mottled, sandy SILT. 40.50/3" 4.5 50/5" 50/3 " 47-50,3'- 8.5 50/3" 316 1 14 0 . . I Auger refusal & boring tenninated at 14,0 feet. I „ a c hammer rnppnlg to ? rn c 2" () IT . 1 .• „' i I) ,plit-;puon ,antlll,:r in ,uuc„n ? t." mcrrmcnls `I'hc nun 01 111c c,ond end third nurcment; nl p.•nruaiion i; termed the Stmt .11,1 I'cuctratiou 1 c,1 N. luc "N" BORING LOG Report No I IJLt FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. Ce GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS - LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS Of SERVICE" _I aa, Date. August 2006 Client. Town of Holly Springs Proicct Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC - Burinb g No B-28 ( 1 of 1 ) Total 20.U' De rill I: I cv 325.8ft f --- 1 ocuuon Type or Boring 2.25" ID HSA started. 8/9/06 Col» pi cted: 8/9/06 Oriucr Webb/Lunsford Llevatlon Depth _ Dl: (101111ON 01 NIA I L•RIAI S * Sample i: Satnplc Depth V Value K MARKII (CLu;lricmionl 131 .? (Icel) Iblovvs R) 4 3 x 1 5 :11 - NATWE SOII.S: Medium dense. dry, light ' ti S b il ND 7-6-6 0.0 GROUNDWATER DATA: . 32 . rovrn: tan. s ne ty A ISM), with fine to coarse 4-5-7 1.5 12 0 Hrs.: Drvlcaved lie, WAY 322 8 0 3 Al diw dc i . . e nsc. mo n st, reddish brown, clayey SAND S_8 r? 3.0 12 '21 4 1501. with tine gravel. 1 \'rry stiff, moist. orange'grayrreddish brown. clavev 3-4-? 4'5 SILT \t fl. with fine ?ravcl. 17 Firm to very stiff. moist, reddish brown/dray; black, --- 6.0 clo\ ev SILT (NIL), with tint gravel. 9 3-a_4 8.5 8 10.0 3 s 13,5 12 15.0 =1 7-7-9 18.5 16 305 8 20 0 . . I i I - - terminated at 20.0 reel. I t ' I I I .I I i x Y tN 1.1I11het ul hloN; IC11U11 Cd Inr a 1411 Ili oUNll1IJ1N h,unmcn ,b 11, 1"np -,Ir' It, LitI": `.? t ? t I I I I 1 .1)1,1 ,p,,,ln sampler m .o CC?•.-:ICr t," uurc - 'f llc ,uul 01'111C 1eC011d Ind Ihlnl InCrcnlcnls oI powtr,I],.al I. lcunrd Ih, tiumdxd t', nnr.dl,al I :,I , Akl, H66-098 BORING LOG Report No.: H66-098 __-- clicm. Town of Holly Springs 1'rojecr Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC SINGE FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. e GEOTECHNICAL ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS - LABORATORIES OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE 1881 1)me August 2006 Bonn-,No B-29 (I of 1), I)p1litlh 18.0'1 Flev 319.Ort f I ocatton I NTc of 13ortng 2.25" ID HSA Slarted. 8/10/06 completed: 8/10/06 Driller Webb/Lunsford I)I NCRIP'I10N (A MArI:RIAIS ' satnple Samplo N Value I Icvanon Depth REMARKS Depth reC1) Ibiwvsi ill -- ((laatlicaloll) lila,ks 317 5 5 1 N:11'I VF SOII.S: Medium dense, dry, light / b il i 17-8-1 GROUNDWATER DATA: . , rown gray. s ty t ne SAND {SCI), with fine to ' - - 4"7"8 I.5 12 0 Hrs.: f)ry/cavcd ,iv 13.5' coarse rock I raements, grass & rootlets. 316.0 3.0 Stiff. moist, light brown, fine sandy silty CLAY 8-7-7 -- 3.0 15 CU Stiff, moist. tan'orangeireddish brown mottled. 7-8-10 4.5 14 313 0 6 0 clavev SILT AIL). - . . - Vcry stiff, moist. maroon, clavcy SILT (t`•iL ). -- - 6.0 18 -10-12-12 8.5 24 10.0 305 5 13 5 . . ' „ ' " 13.5 PARTIALLY WEATI IERED ROCK: sampled as i m l il SAN : 4 16-17-50; 4 SO/4" rurp ar0on c, s ty D. 14.8 301 0 18 0 . I . Anuer refusal & boring terminated at 18.0 feet. --- I I I 11 nn ,u of hlu?,. tQynucd lot ,t I IU Ih nulonuuic hammrr dn,npotp 30•' a, llft,e 2*'() 1) . 1 37 ^ 1 I) spin-,peon .ampler In weecSSive (," increnlcnts I he .um nfthc Second ,Ind Ihlrcl rncreinom, of nencumion i, Icnncd the til;nnlarnl 11cnclrallon I "I "Attic "N' BORING LOG Report No H66-098 01ciu 'row" of Holly Springs pfolcct Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC SINCE FROEHLINd & ROBERTSON, INC. Q GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS a ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" e a I Date: August 2006 Ronne No B-30 (1 of 1) Dctiilh 20.0' tae, ---306.7Rf Locution. Type of 13orhtg 2.25" ID HSA _ Suirted• 8/9/06 Completed: 8/9/06 Driller: Webb/Lunsford lac?alinn UcpOt I)F'.5('f{IP'I'IUN OF h1A'I I KL1t S 'Sample S;"ttp1e N Value IC'lassilicatiunl Dit) Depth IM) (hlo -s/ h ) REMARKS 305 2 1 5 S: Medium dense, dry, orange tan, 7 GROUNDWATER DATA: . . se (YO), with large rock fragments & 1 5 12 V 1 I . Hrs.: DrOc aved (0 9.{) 303.7 3.0 t, redditih brownsilty CLP (C'L). 4-7-7 0 20 302 2 4 5 oon, clayev SILT (ML). . . Stiff. moist, maroon, tine sandy SILT (NIL), with 4-4-7 4'5 14 veins of black silt. 0 II 4-5'7 12 10.0 293 2 5 13 - - -- . . INlediunt dense, moist, maroon, silty fine to medium 4-74 13.5 15 SAND (SM)• 15.0 283 2 18 5 . . Very stiff, dry, maroon. clayey SILT (ML). 6-12-18 18.5 30 286 7 20 0 . . _ 2 _ Goring terminated at 20.0 fret. l I i " I I l I \unfhcr it hhn,. reLlul re d ti,r . I Itl Ib .nuomauc h, Honer dro oW 'n" j- . , - . -- - - -- Y J, pp rn _ t Ll) I.,, , I !) ,1,ht-tiponn ;ampler in succc,>n e o" ntcrcfncins. I he um nflhc>rc,vt? .utJ thud nlcrcnfcnl.,?f pcnrlr;ntlal i, lcrnn•,I the Slnndanl Penru.luon Ic>t ?aluc \. BORING LOG Report No. H66_098 SINCE FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. Q GEOTECHNICAL ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS /V?`• ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS Of SERVICE" _I a g, 1)mc August 2006 Client. Town of Holly Springs Prgiccr Novarlis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC- --? __-- --- L3orine No. 13-31 (1 of 1) Pepth 20.0' HQ% 303.3ft t Location- I vPe of ltonng. 2.25" 11) HSA -swried 8/11/06 Completed 8/11/06 Driller Webb/Lunsfor(3 flevacion Depth DL;SCR1PTION ()I- FRIAI.S (Closslticat[on) _ ' SarnPle HILms Simple Depth I1cet1 N Value Mom! f0 RI:,\TARKS 301 9 5 1 NnT)%'E SO[LS: Very stiff, dry. dark brownigray. li SI 6-8-10 T(T CROL;NDWAT ,R DATA: . . ne sanrL _ L I?_N1LLwith roots & fine gravel, ' 1,; 18 0 Hrs : Dr /caved t 14 5 300 3 __ 3 0 Very stiff, dry, orange./tan, clayey SILT (NIL), with ro tl t & ti g l 12-I -14 . y . . . o e s ne rave ' 11 13 16 3.0 '6 Very still; dry, reddish brown, tine sandy CLAY - - - (CL), with fine to coarse gravel. 8-11-13 4.? ,q - 294 8 8 5 6.0 24 . . Very hard, dry, maroon, clayey sandy SILT' (ML). 7 17-20-37 8.5 i7 289 8 13 -• 10.0 . . - PARTIALLY WEATI IERED ROCK: sampled as 3G-S0/5" 13.5 X0/51• maroon, clayey S11,"I', I-l•a 50 3 14.5 i0/2" 283 3 20 0 . . I ' I i I I f3urin-, terminated at 20.0 feet. 1 I I c rl WI ?..• ??•,?? ,.? .. . icyrmcu rur ,i t ,u n, auwinnnc nannl)t-I JlnIIin,_ ;!F n, drn c _" O 1) . I - 7; c „ " 1 I> npln •<?,oon ,on gllr m alcccs,nc h" uuremcnts. I hr tium nfthe >ccunJ ,mJ thud ntrremenIs oI Nmn tratton t. termed [he SI;Ifl ; ,I Penetration I'c,t %oluc "N•' SINCE BORING LOG FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. Q GEOTECHNICAL - ENVIRONMENTAL - MATERIALS ENGINEERS - LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" Repor( No. H66-098 I ee I Date August 2006 clicac Town of Holly Springs i,roicct. Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, N(' - Boring No: B-32 (1 of I) Uc th 20.0' vi,, 318.3ft t Loca(lnn --'a I)peofHonne. 2.25" ID HSA started 8/11/06 Compleied 8/11/06 Driller- Webb/Lunsford I.tcvalion Dvoll UI SCRII1Y)0N UI N4AfE.RG1) S * .tiantplc sample Depth N Value EMARKS _ (( las,ifcalion) Hlo%\s I tcctJ IMoa,l ti I 316 8 1 NATIVE SOILS: Firm. (Irv, light brown/gray, tine d 51 3-3-5 GROUNDWATER DATA: . .5 san LT NILI. With line gravel. 5 5 7 1.5 ? S 0 Hrs.: Dry!cavcd (d 13 0' Stiff to very stiff, moist, reddish brown, sandy CLAY (Cl with r ) tl t - - 3 . - . . oo e s. -11-10 .0 1 313 8 5 4 -- . . -- ?'" Verv stiff, moist, maroon, clayey SILT (%1L). 10-11-13 21 CA 24 309 8 8 5 . . - 8 5 PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK: sampled as 5 3Q-014 . 3 9 J0/4„ maroon. clayey sandy SILT. . I 5014" 13'5 50/4" 50/2„ 18.5 50/2•• 298 3 20 0 . I . Boring terminated at 20.0 feet. --? I I I I *\unth'r If hl - - - - V C7 i z im., Iequired Lx a 1111 1h aulomalic hm m ur druphinp •u to dri U I) - 1 375" 1 1) ;pln-,Pours SAMPlcl nl sue?c nc N• inercmcwl 'f hr .unt Of (hc,crowd and 11111d Inacmcnt:0fpcnclration I., trrmrrl Ills Sl:uldmd Pcncir,diou'Ical value. 'N'. SINCE BORING LOG FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. o GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS - LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" ReponNn. H66-098 I9gt U:uc AugustlQ06 chew Town of Holly Springs Project IYovartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC v Boring No .. B-33 (1 of 1) p°pitt 12.0' El, 299.4ft t I nrauon I}peofR onng. 2.2 5" ID HSA ?lartcd. 8/11/06 Compl eted 8/11/ 06 Driller: Webb/Lunsfor( fi}r%anon I>eplh DESCRIP'l 11)N Ilf MA 1'LA IIALS ' )ample Sample N Vahlr ^_ - (C'l:,scitican'ml _ Blows Depth ?fcet) Iblo??s:' 17 ) RF?IARK Al I"?L SOILS: Finn to stiff. dry. tan/light brown 4 S ., , ndy SILT tML). GROUNDWATL-A DATA: r 1.5 0 Hrs.: Dry/caved 7.0' 295.4 - L0 _ 12-34-50,2. . ;.0 g PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK: sampled as ". - ' 13 orange'brown sand SILT 5U: 3 50/21 . y . 50/3" SU/p' 8.S 5011011 287 4 12 () --- . . - 1 Auger refusal & boring terminated at 12.0 feet. I I i I I I I 1 I f I I I I I 'Number ol' hlow. rry11 nr0 lur it 111) Ib auh?ut:nic h:u» n,r dn-'I.- M of the ccond and d11rl mo:n,cnts of Ix nctr:won K tcrnlcJ the tiamclarJ I'enctl;uton'fest ,,due. "N"I, ,I,nt-spoon iampicr ut SUCil'S;I,C 0" rocremems 'fhc .11111 SINCE BORING LOG FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. R GEOTECHNICAL - ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS - LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" Report No : H66-098 teat Dale. August 2006 Cl+enl. Town of Holly Spl•ings Project No%artis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC lionnlg No B-34 (I of 1)? 20,0' i,ie? 319.7ft t Location: f%pe of l3onng: 2.25" ID NSA Started 8/9/06 Completed 8/9/06 [)nllzr Webb/Lunsford I le,ution Depth DISC RI11I ]ON OF MA I I.RJAI S ' * S;+i++l,l ample )Wll I N Valuc - RIiMARKS - IC L+silicalion) Blows ( Dell tblu,v5! 0) _ .. NATIVE SOILS: Loose, dry, gray/brown, silty fine 1-2-2 GROUNDWA'T'ER DATA 318.2 I.i SAND (SM). with fine gravcl & large wood 4 : fra ntents. __ 3 4 1.5 0 1 frs.: Dry/caved (c? 15.5' 316.7 3.0 Firm, dry, orange brown. elastic SIL I' (MI I), with 4 7 3.0 7 rootlets. 4 Stiff to very stiff, moist, maroon!eray. elaycy SILT -.._58:1 y 4 5 (ML). 15 b.l 1 27 311? 8 5 . ' A'S PARTIALLY WEA I l IFRED ROCK: sampled as 50N, maroon, sandy SILT. 13,5 50/4„ 40-50/2" 18.5 50/2„ 299.7 20-0-- , Boring. terminated at 20.0 feet. i I +n- h ,nn yr o . - - - --- ---L--- -?L . +cyuncd for a Iat1 Ih automatic hnouurr dro, ,ors ,O- it, dme ?" t) I 1 -- 1 I - 7: " I O split-<I,oon ;:unpYcr in succe,sn c t," lncrcntcni? {'he ;unt Of the second and Third 11cmi+ertlti ntprneuaUor 1, tanrncd (hr Sl;utd,ml Pcnemalion Ic,t,:+luc. 'N" BORING LOG SINCE FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. O(&R GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" Report No. H66-098 ee r ' Diu August 2006 Client. To,#*•n of Holly Springs -- Project Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC Ilorhw No B-35 (1 of 1) Dc tth 20.0' vivv 314.8ftt I ucatiorr f}pe of liorutg. 2.2 5" ID HSA Started- 8/10/06 Completed- 8/10/0 6 Driller: Webb/1-unsford filcvatwn Depth UIISCI?11''fU.)N UP A1.\ I LRIALS • Sample Sample N Value (Classification) Hlancs Depth licl ) (hl.%,,,/ R) RLMARKS JA 11 E SOILS: Loose, dry, tan/light brown silty 5-5-5 313.3 1.5 . fine S,1NU sSM), with fine to fine to coarse ravel. 1 5 10 GRUI!NDW,,\TER DATA: Stiff, dr}. tan/rcd, sandy SILT (Mfl). G 7 . 0 Firs.: Dry/caved (a) 14.0' 311 8 3 0 --- " . _ Very hard. dry. maroon. elastic SILT Ih1H). I8-25-31 3.0 13 310 1 4 5 . , _ Very hard, dry, grayhnaroon, clayey St [."f (ML), with 24-27-30 4.5 56 coarse rock fragments. 0 57 306.3 8.5 Dense, dry, maroon/gray/whitc, silty fine to medium ?O't) ?7 R'S 47 - : SAND ISM). 10.0 301.; 13.5}?- ?IIII Hard, do. maroon, clayey 296.3 18.5 ----- PAR'T'IALLY WEATHERED ROCK: sampled as 294.8 1 20.0 mavuon, clavev SILT. Boring terminated at 20.0 feet. ?i ?I \umhcr of hh` 1 Ih arnongttlc h;uni±xr Jmpprn_• ;.I" to d(I\ C ?' U t) . I ? 7 " I. of the ,econd ;nul Thud urcrcmcnls of pcnctralnx, r, Icnned the tiIamlord I'cnclra(ion I c>I alur '\j" 43 ) 5.0 11.5 50/5" -spoon :unplcr ur su..c,:r?c h" incronunls 'I'hc um BORING LOG Report No . H66-098 31NGE FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. GEOTECHNICAL - ENVIRONMENTAL - MATERIALS ENGINEERS - LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE' a s Date: August 2006 client i own of troll' Isprings ProlecC Novartis, Holly Springs, Wake County, NC Bprint No. B-36 (1 of 1) D' ih 20.0' rlc? 322.3ft t (nCallJll 1) pe of Bonug. 2.25" ID HSA Stalled 8/9/06 C'on,pleted. 8/9106 Driller Webb/Lunsford Flevation Depth DFSC'RIP'I'ION OF MA'tCsRLVLS • sample S.m+plc Dc tl+ N Value REMAR IClacsilii:+honl 131owe p Ifccil (blowsi 11) KS ROOTN1AT: Stiff, dry. gray-light brown, fine sandy 2-4-6 GROUNDWATER 320.9 1 5 - SILT (SM) withILT with finchravel 0 DATA: 319 3 . 3 , . NATIVE SOILS: Stiff. dry. oran!,r,'brown, fine sandy 7.7 8 1 0 Hrs.: llrylcaved (r? 14.0' . .0 CLAY CL). G 7 1 3.0 1 Very stiff, dry to moist, reddish brown.,gray, clayey - - 4 SI1;I (NIL). 2 0.14 4.5 6.0 - 23 7.9-12 8.5 21 I 10.0 11-19-41 13'5 60 15.0 303 8 1$ 5 , . IR.S 302 ; 20 0 Hard, moist, maroon, fine to medium sandy SILT' ?1L 19-21-2 42 . . ). t Boring terminated at 20.0 feet, y I R x i IM1u1Iu Ior a 14[j 1b autoutat+c hotrtnrcr dropping 30 to dm c 2' () 1) I " I I>.:plil• prnm sampler in surCr;c+?C h" InerClneIIN 'I'hc ?llm oC the >econd and third Increment; of pcncuaUnn ,s termed (hC Slilnd:+lll PenctruUun lest \ aluc "N" . si+c[ APPENDIX C LABORATORY RESULTS SLOPE STABILITY SLOPE DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS siMCr KEY TO SOIL CLASSIFICATION Correlation of Penetration Resistance with Relative Density and Consistency Sands and Gravels Silts and Clays No. of Relative No. of Blows, N Densi Blows, N U- 4 Very loose 0- 2 4-10 Loose 2- 4 10 - 30 Medium den se 4- 8 30 - 50 Dense 8-15 Over 50 Very dense 15 - 30 30 - 50 Over 50 Particle Size Identification ( Unified Classification Svstem) Boulders: Diameter exceeds 8 inches Cobbles: 3 to 8 inches diameter Gravel: Coarse - 3/4 to 3 inches diameter Fine - 4.76 mm to 3/4 inch diameter Sand: Coarse - 2.0 mm to 4.76 mm diameter Medium - 0.42 mm to 2.0 mm diameter Fine - 0.074 mm to 0.42 mm diameter Relative Densi Very soft Soft Firm Stiff Very stiff Hard Very hard Silt and Clay: Less than 0.07 mm (particles cannot be seen with naked eye) Modifiers The modifiers provide our estimate of the amount of silt, clay or sand size particles in the soil sample. Approximate Content Modifiers <_ 5%: Trace 5% to 12%: Slightly silty, slightly clayey, slightly sandy 12% to 30%: Silty, clayey, sandy 30% to 50%: Very silty, very clayey, very Field Moisture Description Saturated: Usually liquid; very wet, usually from below the groundwater table Wet: Semisolid; requires drying to attain optimum moisture Moist: Solid; at or near optimum moisture Dry: Requires additional water to attain optimum moisture I SPLIT SPOON SAMPLING The borings were made in accordance with ASTM Specifications D-1586. The borings were advanced using either hollow stem augers or the rotary drill method using a bentonite slurry. The drill method employed depends upon the subsurface conditions and our experience in the general area. After cleaning all loose cuttings from the boring, the soil is sampled with a split barrel sampler. The sampler is driven to a depth of 18 inches or to a blow count of 100 blows with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows required for driving each 6-inch increment is recorded. The first 6-inch increment is required to seat the sampler below the disturbed zone, the second and third increments are added to yield blows per foot. This value is the standard penetration resistance, N. This is recorded on the attached logs of borings per each 6-inch increment of penetration. The "N" value, when properly evaluated, is an index to the in-place density strength and foundation support capacity. Representative portions of each soil sample, obtained from the split tube sampler, were placed in glass jars, sealed and transported to our Raleigh, North Carolina laboratory. The soils are classified in accordance with ASTM Specification D-2488, "Visual--Manual Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes", based on the Unified Classification System. The Unified Group Symbol is shown on the logs for each distinct stratum, and is described briefly on the attached chart. S. N C C F&R SPLIT SPOON SAMPLING The borings were made in accordance with ASTM Specifications U-1586. The borings were advanced using either hollow stem augers or the rotary (trill method using a bentonite slurry. The chill method employed depends upon the subsurface conditions and our experience in the general area. After cleaning all loose cuttings from the boring, the soil is sampled with a split barrel sampler. The sampler is driven to a depth of 18 inches or to a blow count of 100 blows with a 140- pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows required for driving each 6-inch increment is recorded. The first 6-inch increment is required to seat the sampler below the disturbed zone, the second and third increments are added to vield blows per foot. This value is the standard penetration resistance. N. This is recorded on the attached logs of borings per each 6-inch increment of penetration. The "N" value, when properly evaluated, is an index to the in-place (tensity strength and foundation support capacity. Representative portions of each soil sample, obtained from the split tube sampler, were placed in glass jars, scaled and transported to our Raleigh. North Carolina laboratory. The soils are classified in accordance with ASTM Specification D-2488, "Visual--Mail Ual Classification of Soils for Endmicering Purposes", based oil the Unified Class ifieation System. The Unified Group Symbol is shown on the logs for each distinct stratum, and is described briefly on the attached chart. S N C l F&R ?w PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS OF SOILS Purpose: The grain size data are often used to aid in the classification of soils and in the estimation of properties such as permeability, compressibility and strength. Procedure: The test samples can be prepared using either the dry method or wct method as described in the various references. After preparation, the lest can be divided into two parts, the detemlination of the size and distribution of the coarse fraction and the determination of the size distribution of the fines. The division between the two tests is the No. 200 sieve. The coarse fraction is tested using the sieve method whereas the fines are tested using the hydrometer method. If both tests are performed, the test is referred to as the combined malysis. In the sieve analysis of the coarse fraction, the soil is passed through a series of sieves, and the weight retained on each sieve is detcrnimed. The distribution of weights is then computed and the percent passing is plotted for display. In the hydrometer method, the particle sire is determined by Stoke's equation. The soil is mixed in a heavy slurry and the rate of sedimentation is measured with hydrometer. This data can then be reduced to a distribution of particle sire and percent Imer as in the sieve analysis. References: ASTM Specification D 421-55, "Dry Preparation of Soil Samples for Particle Size Analysis and Determination of Soil Constants." ASTM Spccification D 427-63, "Standard Method for Particle Size Analysis of Soils." ASTM Specification D '217-66, "Standard Method for Wet Preparation of Soil Samples for Particle Size Analysis and Determination of Soil Constants." S I N C f FAR , ,es1 ATTERI3ERG LIMITS Purpose: Atterberg limits tests (liquid and plastic limits) are perlonned to detemilne the soil classification and plasticity properties of the soil specimen. These properties can he correlated with approximate values for compressibility, strength, shrinkage (swell) and permeability. Procedure: The liquid limit of a soil is Qle water content. expressed as a percentage of the ,weight of the oven dry soil, at the boundary between the liquid and plastic stales. The plastic limit is the water content expressed as a percentage of the weight of the oven dry soil, at the boundary between the plastic and semi-solid states. The difference between these two values is the Plasticity Index (PI). The liquid limit is determined by obtaining the water content at which the soil will flow under a specified dy-namic force. The soil is wetted, placed in a special liquid limit device and ?,rooved into two halves, The device is then dropped a specified distance ?5 times. The liquid limit is defined as the water content at wbich the two halves will flow together over a specified distance. The plastic limit is determined by obtaininu the water content at which the soil can he rolled into thin threads by hand, on a ground-glass or non-absorbent paper. The plastic limit is defined as the moisture content at which the soil cannot be rolled into threads smaller than 1 /8 Inch in dlanlcter. Reference: ASTM Specification D 4318-84. "Standard 'l'est Method For Liquid Limit. Plastic limit and Plasticity lade\ or Soils." b I NGf F&R +ee+ MOISTURE CONTENT Purpose: The purpose of the moisture content test is to detemiine what percentage of the weight of a given soil is water as opposed to the weight of solid particles of the soil sample. This pcreentage in the case of in-situ soils indicates the extent to which the soil in question is saturated. For controlled till placement the moisture content is critical in achieving maximum compaction. Procedure: A sample ol'soil is weighed in the wet condition, then placed in a drying oven and is dried to constant weight. The dry weight is then determined. The noisturc content in percent is the ratio of the weight of moisture to the weight of dry soil multiplied by 100, Reference: ASTM Specification D 2216, "Standard Method of Laboratory Determination of Moisture Content of Soil. SINCE F&R MOISTURE.-DENSITY (STANDARD) Purpose; The moisture-density relationship of a givcn soil is deterntirIed using a specified compaclive effort, to provide a standard unit weight against which achieved field compaction can be compared. The maximum dry unit weight obtained in this test is considered 100 percent of the standard Proctor density that can be obtained in a given soil. Procedure: The standard Proctor test is performed on representative selected soil sampics. The prepared soil is compacted in a cylindrical mold (with collar attached) in three equal layers to give a total compacted depth of about 5 inches. Each layer is compacted by uniformly distributed blows from a sliding weight rammer (5.5 pounds with 12-inch free fall). The moisture content is increased about 2% and the above procedure is repeated until there is a decrease or no change in the wet unit'A'cight. The maximum unit weight obtained is determined and the corresponding moisture content (optimum moisture) is noted. Reference: ASTNI Specification D-698, "Standard Methods of Tcst for Moisture- Density Relations of Soils Using 5.5 Ib. (2.5 Kg) Rammer and 12-inch (304.8 mm) Drop." SINCE F&R g laei UNDISTURBED SAMPLING Under certain circumstances sonic soils require rather precise laboratory testing. Samples taken by split spoon are adequate for visual classification, but are not sufficiently intact For quantitative laboratory testing. Relatively undisturhed samples are ohtained by forcing Sections of O.D., lb gauge steel tubing (thin-wall or Shelby tubing) into the soil at desired sampling levels. This sampling procedure is described by ASTM D-15$7, "Standard Method Ibr Thin-Walled Tube Sampling of Soils." %Vhcn Undisturbed samples are indicated in the drilling operation, the sampler is introduced in the bore hole and hydraulically forced into the soil a distance of approximately 2 feet. The tube is rotated to shear the sample and then is withdrawn. The sample is scaled in the tube with wax, labeled, and shipped intact to our Raleigh, North Carolina laboratory. Samples are removed (Irom the tube by a hydraulically operated extrusion press, measured, sampled for moisture, and subjected to the appropriate test sequence. 5 1 N C [ (9, ise? TRIAXIAI. TEST Purpose: The triaxial test is performed to determine the angle of internal friction (? ), cohesion and shear strength ofcoliesive soils. Procedure: 'triaxial tests on undisturbed soils samples may be: i ) unconsolidated undrained, "W'2) consolidated undrained, "CU", or 3) consolidated drained, "CD". The type of test performed is selected to best represent the field conditions. Back pressure to cnsurc complete saturation and pore water pressure readings may also be taken in order to determine the effective stresses and angle of shear resistance,. For example, a "CU" test with pore pressure would consist of preparing at least three Undisturbed samples from a 3" O.D. Shelby tube. Each sample is placed in the triaxial chamber and saturated by confining with an all-around pressure m. After saturation is complete, the specimen is consolidated at a selected confining pressure. Once the specimen has consolidated under the confining pressure, the axial load is applied until the sample is sheared. [Pore pressure readings are recorded as the axial load is applied.] The a; pressure is increased for each specimen and the test results arc represented by a plot of shear stress versus axial stress (Mohr Circle Diagram). The testing procedure is similar for the other two test methods; however, the actual procedures differ as the name ofthe test method implies. References: Engineering Properties of Soils and Their Measurements, by Joseph E. Bowles, McGraw-I lilt Book Company. The Measurement of Soil Properties in the Triaxial "test by Bishop and Henkel, 2nd Edition 1962, Edward Arnold Publishers Ltd., 25 Hill Street, London WINSLL.. ASTM Specification D 2850-70, "Standard Method of Test for Uncon- solidated, Undrained Strcn-th ofCohcsive Soils in Triaxial Compression." S I N C E F&R ee CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO Purpose: The California Bearing Ratio test is performed on subgrade, subbase and base course materials to provide supporting values of various roadway materials which can be used as a basis for pavement design. Procedure: A sample of the subgrade soil is compacted in a cylindrical mold to the density and moisture anticipated in actual constnrction. Cohesive soils arc allowed to soak, immersed in Nvater for 96 hours. By means of a hydraulic jack, it penetration "needle" is forced into sample at a controlled rate. Load valucs and corresponding, strain or dcl'ot7mation are noted. The ratios of the load valucs in pounds per square inch at 0.1 inch and 0.2 inch penetration respectively arc compared to the standard loads of 1000 and 1500 pounds per square inch respectively. (Tile latter are those loads required to produce the same penetration in a compacted limestone sarnpic.) The CBR in percent is the ratio of the loads at 0.1 penetration multiplied by 100. Reference: ASTM Specification D 1883-07, "Standard Method of Test for Bearing Ratio of Laboratory-Compacted Soils." y 140 130 120 u 110 CL C N 0 100 90 80 70 Water content, % _ No. LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION TEST SPECIFICATION 01 Location: Bonn, B-1 ASTR•1 D 698-00a Method 1.3 Scindard Rcddtsh-Grown, Sandy Lcan (:lay. Recciycd on 08;07'2006 2 O Location: Boring B-2 r\STN1 D 698-00a Method A Standard ` Rcddtsh-13mmi, [,call Clay Rccciycd on 08!1 1 2006 t)3 Location: Boring 13-3 ASTNI 1) 698-00a Nlethod B Standard Itedddtsh-Bro%?n. Silt with sand. Reccned on 08:'11.'2000 i 0 1 Location: Boring H-24 - - - -- - ? A S IA 1 D 693 OOa Method Standard Redd ish-13ro\kn. Silt \\ i t h Sand. Rem\ cd on 08 1 1:2006 I Location: Boring B-14 - -- - ---- %S I kl D 698-00a Method .a Standard Orangc-Nr,mn, Siit v,ith Sand. Rccei\ ed 08:'1 1 2006 No. US CS 1 PI 4 NAT. MOIST. OVERSIZE No.200 MAX DRY DEN OPT MOIST 01 CL - . 36 1 1 7 1 1 ". 1 S m 9 3 532 . . . . 1 123 . , . . . pcf 10,0 U? C1 38 - 14 \0.4 :'..' - 59.1 14' - - ------ --- 114.i pct I 12.9 (13 04 titt. _ ` i. Ti -lei I-1 17.0 ^ , 3 k in ,-2.5 20 21.2 \u 4 -1.2 tq ' 6 ! 80 b _ ? 1 11 ixf 1 13,6 .., i07 . pcf - 18.5 'in - t13 X11 47 16 21 1 V)4=-3 I ?S.I "5 lfh.? pct 18.0 • • Proctor No. ROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. U S SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I US SIFVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER 6 4 3 2 1 3L4 112 318 3 4 6 8 10 14 16 20 30 40 50 60 1 00 140 200 100 95 - 90 85 -- - ff 80 - i 75 - I 70 65 ' - - w 60 - - - -- r 55 - - - - - m - Z 50 ?- 45 _ z w 40 W d _ 35 - 30 - 25 15 - 5 - 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.0 01 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS LC OBBLES GRAVEL SAND coarse fine coars di m - SILT OR CLAY e me u fine Boring No. Depth Classification LL PL PI Cc Cu • 01 _ at 0.0 - Reddish-Brown, SANDY LEAN CLAY (C L) 36 23 13 X B-2 at 0.0 Reddish-Brown, LEAN CLAY (CL) 38 24 14 A B-24 at 0.0 Reddish-Brown, SILT with SAND (ML) --?-48 28 20 * B-3 at 0.0 Reddish_Brown_SANDY SILT (ML) 41 27 14 Boring No. Depth D100 060 D30 D10 L%Gravel %Sand %Silt%Clay 0 at 0.0 37.5 0.254 11.2 35.6 53 2 Z B-2- --at -- 00 25 . I 2.2 8.7-- ---- 89.1 -- j B-24 at --- 0.0 --25 - ------- 2.2 17.2 80.6 * B-3 -- at 0.0 25 0.081 - - - - - - - - - - - -- 6.4 34.1 59.5 i-- I -- - - --------- 1 6I 4 CE T GR AIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. Report No.: 8 GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS Client: ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES Town own o o of Holly Springs "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" Project: Novartis Location: Holly Springs, Wake County, NC e o Date: A ust 2006 60 (C-L Z 50 '0 P L A S 40 T 1 C I 30 T Y I N 20 D Z E X 10 20 40 60 80 100 LIQUID LIMIT Boring No. Depth LL PL PI Fines Classification % Natural Moisture Content • 01 at 0.0 36 23 13 53 SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL),(A-6} m B-10 at 6.0 36 33 3 51 SANDY SILT (ML),(A-4) A B-12 at 10.0 35 28 7 69 SANDY SILT (ML),(A-4) * B-14 at 0.0 47 31 16 78 SILT with SAND (ML),(A-7-5} O B-19 at 1.5 82 35 47 88 FAT CLAY (CH),(A-7-5) 0 B-2 at 0.0 38 24 14 89 LEAN CLAY (CL),(A-6) 0 B-22 at 3.0 54 28 26 80 FAT CLAY with SAND (CH),(A-7-6} 0 B-24 at 0.0 48 28 20 81 SILT with SAND (ML),(A-7-6) ® B-24 at 6.0 33 27 6 86 SILT (ML).(A-4) ® B-26 at 10.0 40 31 9 64 SANDY SILT (ML),(A-4} U B-3 at 0.0 41 27 14 59 SANDY SILT (ML),(A-7-6} 9 B-31 at 4.5 42 22 20 77 LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL),(A-7-6) 0 B-34 at 1 0 NP NP NP 44 SILTY SAND with GRAVEL (SM),(A-4} B-34 at 2.9 59 33 26 96 ELASTIC SILT (MH),(A-7-5) m B-35 at 30 57 32 25 66 SANDY ELASTIC SILT (MH),(A-7-5) ¦ B-5 at 3.0 NP NP NP 63 SANDY SILT (ML),(A-4) ,L ? B-6 at 3.0 55 29 26 73 FAF CLAY with SAND (CH),(A-7-6) S N`E ATTE RBERG LIMITS' RESULTS FROEHLING & ROBE RTSON, INC. _ Report No.: H66-098 n &? GE OTECH NICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL - MATERIALS ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES Client: Town of Holly Springs "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" Project: Novartis Location: Holl rin S s W k C t NC y p g . a e oun y, ev' Date: August 2006 CH CL-ML ? ML MH m ?' ...:. ...?.,...?n.,. .,....:r :.:?.':f... >,f.rn.x?.....nn...,....:....,r,..!ri:ar:Y•:t :!•:J.. , Froehling & Robertson s Consolidated Undrained '1'riaxial Test (ASTM D4767) ?.i....?? _...... n.. ?...1........?!?....-ar::ff!,f,:,t:f:::f,f:.:,:H.ns....?.:..?.....r.....t:t:.::::?:::i::..:f,f:::w:w,A•s:.h.>??...M,t?.?. i i Effective Stress at )Maximum Deviator Stress Criterion v n J 'J i I '± 1 y s i 1 ` i c c. 150 v 0.0 15.0 30.0 45.0 Normal Stress (psi) .' '-S1x:Clnun,1 -Spccimen n -StA:fiinl'n C ......'fun cm Lam Deviator Stress vs. Axial Strain Specimen Initial A B C 40.0 Water Content (%) 29.6 25.3 25.1 Drv Density (psi) 85.4 97.8 94.0 35.0 Saturation ('%. 83.8 97.2 87.4 Void Ratio 11.932 0.689 0.757 30.0 Diameter in 2.830 2.828 2.819 ?5 l) Height (in) 6.062 4.575 5.886 Specific Gravitv 2.65 2.65 2.65 f 20.0 Liquid Limit 39 39 39 o Plastic Limit 37 37 37 R 15.0 Before Shear A B C o IU O B-Value 1(10.(1 99.0 99.0 . Water Content '%i 27.0 23.9 21.8 5.0 Dry Density ()ct) 85.5 97.8 94.0 Saturation ('%i 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 Void Ratio 0.716 0.632 0.576 0.0 10,(1 20.() 30 .0 Confining Press, (psi) TO 16.8 24.2 i l St i A '% Back Press. (psi) 56.6 S6.3 55.1 x a ra ,) n ( Strain Rate (in/min) 0.0010 0.0010 0.0010 Maximium Deviator Stress Criterion After Shear A B C C (psi) 3.6 a'I at Failure(psi) 23.96 5O.()l 50.63 C' (psi) 2.1 W3 at Failure (psi) 6.60 13.80 16.10 O (de) 19.9 0' (deg) 27.8 i I { CU Triaxial Test - Results Page 1 of 2 H66-098 (Novartis B-33).HSD Froehling & Robertson ii .1 Consolidated Undrained Triaxial'l'est (ASTNI D4767) Effective Stress at :Maximum Deviator Stress Criterion 30.0 c. ii 1. 1i.0 r .e 0.0 I -spacimcn 14 E. ii Iangenl Line M ii i 0.0 Ii0 300 4i.0 60.0 7,0 Normal Stress (psi) m 1 'J :J :J Deviator Stress vs. Axial Strain Specimen Initial A B i0 0 Water Content ('%, 26.1 14.5 Dry Density ( s f) 95.02 105.30 45A Saturation (%, 93.53 68.76 40.0 void Ratio 0 735 0.568 N 35 0 Diameter (in) 2.551 2.874 . I[eight (in) 5.958 5.943 ^ 30.0 Specific Gravity 2.65 2.05 S 0 Liquid Limit 59 59 ?(1 (1 Plastic Limit 33 33 = Before Shear A B 15.0 B-Value 99.00 95.00 10.0 Water Content ('%, 24.5 12.8 Dry Density ( cf) 95.10 105.34 ''O Saturation ('%,) 1011.00 100.00 0 0 V id R i . o at o 0 050 0.330 0. 0 10.0 20.11 30 .0 Confining Press. ( si) 7.8 22.5 g i ) S i Back Press. ( si S I .!? 51.5 r n tra n Strain Rate (in/ntin) 0.0010 0.0010 Maximium Deviator Stress Criterion After Shear A It C (psi) 2.6 0' 1 at Failure (psi) ?9.19 72.82 C' (psi) 3.1 e'3 at Failure (psi) 8.0(1 25.70 F) (dc) 27.8 0' (deg) 25.11 Project: NOVAR FIS Location: Boring Project Number: 1166-098 N:A N'A VA N;A Boring Number: B-34 Sample Number: 01 Depth: 142' - -7.92' Sample Type: t:ndiswibed Failure Photographs Description: I.ighl Brown, Elastic Silt (Mfl) Test 'Iype Consohdated Undiamed -- Remarks CU Triaxial Test - Results Page 1 of 2 H66-098 (Novartis).HSD Froehling & Robertson ' Consolidated Undrained Triaxial Test (AS I NI D4767) Etfeclive Stress at Maximum Deviator Stress Criterion i. cc 1 I? J K ? s 4 7 v i 1. L :C G T a.0 15.0 300 45.0 Normal Stress (psi) 00 _........... Spccimcn ;\ ^Spccimcn o -'s1wTimun C ... Van-gent Lint' 11.1 Deviator Stress vs. Specimen Axial Strain Initial A B C 40 0 eater Content ('%.) 19,9 19.4 19 9 . Dry Density s1) 101.14 101.46 10100 35.0 Saturation (%) 83.0 83.6 84.8 Void Ratio 0.632 0.627 0.619 30.0 Diameter in 3.864 2.863 2.861 c - 75 Height (in) 5.863 5.850 5.556 ,11 specific Gravity 2.65 2.65 2.65 f 200 Liquid Limit 47 47 47 o Plastic Limit 31 31 31 15.0 Before Shear A B C B-Value 199 99.0 98.(1 10.0 Water Content ('%. 18.4 17.8 16.0 5 0 Drv Density ( ei) 101.2 101.5 102.1 . Saturation 0/6) 100.0 100.0 100.0 0 0 Void Ratio 0 487 0 472 0 423 . . . 0. 0 10.0 20.0 30 .0 _Confining Press. (psi) 7.4 16.0 23.3 Back Press. (psi) 71.7 71.4 71.0 Axial Strain Strain Rite (in/min) 0.0010 0.0010 (1.00101 Maximium Deviator Stress Criterion After Shear A B C C (psi) 4.4 a' I at Failure (psi) 29.20 39.16 i 1.67 C' (psi) 1.1 d3 at Failure (psi) 050 13.90 IS 20 U (dc) 18.2 0' (deg) 26S Project: NOVARTIS Location: Bulk Project Number: 1166-098 h A N A NIA kA &rring Number: _A-14 Sample Number. OS Depth: Bulk Sample T% Remolded Failure Phwmnaphs . PC: Description: Or.mee-Hrown, Sill with Sand. Test Type Cowolidated Lndrained Remarks Ml. CU Triaxial Test - Results Page 1 of 2 H66-098 (Novartis B-14).HSD 80 60 40 Novartis 2:1 Slope c:lapps\gstable7lbranch 66knovartis total.pl2 Run By: ECH 9/18/2006 11:44AM tf FS Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Piez. Load Value a 2.151 Desc Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Surface 1 t _240 r>1 b 2.167 No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) No, c 2219 rill 1 122.0 122.0 600.0 18.0 W1 d 2.229 Silt 2 120.0 120.0 3500 28.0 W1 a- 2 352 f 2.419 g 2.455 n 2.509 1 2.518 i j 2 521 2 20 D 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=2.151 Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Bishop Method -- .--' 7w a J ?g bd fi 80 60 Novartis 2:1 Slope c:lappslgstableAbranch 661novartis eff.pl2 Run By: ECH 911812006 11:42AM # FS Soil Soil Total Saturated Conesion Friction Piez, Load Value a 1.616 Desc. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Surface 1.1 24U p,i b 1.635 No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) No. c 1.671 Fill 1 122.0 122"0 150.0 27.0 W1 d 1 680 Silt 2 120.0 120.0 4000 25.0 W1 e 1.691 f 1 714 g 1.760 h 1 760 i 1.805 h I 1.820 40 2 20 0 0 GSTABLZ ?d 2 20 40 60 80 GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=1.616 Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Bishop Method a c?bj I i 100 120 FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC GEOTECHNICAL * ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS V` ENGINEERS 9 LABORATORIES "OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE" s ri•a_ aG CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS September 07, 2006 LAB#: 0608744 CLIENT: F&R Raleigh 310 Hubert St. Raleigh NC, 27603-2302 Michael Sabodish PROJECT: Novartis PROJECT NO.: H66-098 SAMPLED BY: RECEIVED: 08/30/06 Results to follow. aj-no xsju?& Audrey N. Brubeck Manager Analytical Laboratory Services HEADQUARTERS: 3015 LIIMBARTON R(:,+f,. • FOX.'S,4 • W"711MCNIC VA 71:, TE-_F`H,1NW IND:I 2??4.2.01 FAX eCe1 264 202 - F.n. Ul: -n Page I n1 t.Ek-II`ICAHJN:l VIPINId? EFI"IKIN(7 Wei-'FF 001?? BRANCHES. AZHEVI'. _F. N•.: H.:L-IN . RE MC EV GRL _,'7E, N!' ?:1 F ;P:r FKE V;, NI'P(H r•,GIt(1, INP ()"NR -'2 CROZET •i4 ??-,:V?'TF. V'l I F N ! --EJEkICK;,a'JHC VA 5C'.:T•? ',0401-INA' -IFL 3301UVJI Ab30I0 3 a. EFNVI l F N(: • -LILIK,H NC • HC,,;NCKE VA • _TERI.ING VA MAP'?LSN7 JPINMING WATER -279 faR Lab ID: 11611$744-01 (Soil) Client ID: U-21A 1.0-4.5 Sampled Date/Time: 8/29/06 0:00 page _' ?, f i O -w 4nalyle Rc;ull I-nml Gnils Rcpared Annlyicd \lelhal Anah+l Now, Malerials'Testing, Chlorin: 18 ppm 9 5 06 n 00 95.06 0 OU \ \\II M 1'291 \1' IM 4.51 SLI 95:06 000 9;5:06 1100 \\sFI10'1281) RoAtiOly 64900 ohln-cm 9:6(16 o Oo 9.606 ono In Ilnuse AT 5Ulf" le 105 1 ppm n:5:0O 0 1Nl 9.5.06 0 00 \A\I 1111 I ?N) .Yf FAR L.1b ID: 0608744-02 (Soil) Client ID: 13-25 I.-S-3.0 Sampled Date/Time: 8/29106 11:00 P.1v "or i I /cant -\nal?tc Krtolt I_nnu l,nno t'rcpattJ \nall?ed \Icdiod Anakst Nolos Materials Testing Chloride 22 rpm 9:5.06 C 00 9f 406 0 00 AASI I I'O -1'291 \1 P11 4.86 su 95.06 OW 9.5,06 00() \.\s 111'01.289 \I Itesislhity 91161111 ohm-cm 9.6:06 000 9: 6. 06 0W In Itous9 AI sulrale 62 1 pptn 9:5:06 0 00 9;5;06 0 00 :\ASIITO rl90 \ r R 9 NC: a9'. Lab ID: 0608744-04 (Soil) Client ID: A-5 3.04.5 Sampled Datell'ime: 8129/06 0:00 page 5 d'5 Lllnttlt \ial5 to Ii cull 1, 116t Units prepared Amily/ed NICII11K1 \nalasl N01cs Materials Teming Chlnride SI ppm 9; s:06 0n0 rt-i:06 0.00 AAtiH 1'0 1791 AI pit 4.4% su 95:06 000 9.9'116 000 A.\SHI'U'17xe \1 Itesktivili 41800 ohm-cm 96:06 0 00 9:64-6 0 00 In I lnuxc \ f sulfale 711 I ppm 95;06 000 9.5:06 0.00 AASIIIO 12% Af Notes and Definitions mg I nulls}rum I? i Licr pg•I mterogtawn<per I ner ng•. Lg mdhgratna NI'"kViuu .u elantlaiJ -nil. ROL Hcln" the Ouanlnauon Linn ?v R 5N{:. 89• Lab ID: 06(08744-03 (Soil) Client ID: H-8 23.5-25 Sumpled Date/Time: 8/29/116 0:110 Prue I ul'S pu:o,l IN lr Ite:ull Lu9,l t. nit, PI CPA, CO :\nah Ord \IcUuxl AmIN•51 Nole, Materials Testis g Chloride 16 ppm 9:5;06 0 00 9 5:06 0,00 AASI 11O T291 XI' 1111 5.35 Sll 9;506 0.1NI 9 5 06 0 00 .\:\511'10124v ;\ I Re%kth'il1 6711111 ohm-k; m 9.606 (IM 9;6 (16 0 (0 III I lou,'• \T ';UIrae 86 I ppln 9;5416 000 0%5100, 99n AA: IIro T'90 A1 Client: town of Holly Springs Project: Novartis 8/21/2006 Soil Resistivity Data Sheet R-1 moist silt clay R-2 moist sand R-3 moist sand R - Mca ure R;sistance r - Rom,; ivirv A - (ft) 5 10 20 30 40 Formula 957.5*R 1915*R 3830*R 5745*R 7660*R Area I R 102.5 32.8 9.2 3 1.7 Average R 29.9 4rca i r 98,143 5 62.812.0 35,236.0 20,107.5 13,022.0 Average r 15.864.3 Area 2 R 30.0 5.5 1.1 0.5 03 ;lvera e R 7.5 Arca 2 r 28,725.0 10,532,5 4.213.0 2,872.5 2,298.0 Average r 9,728.2 Area 3 R 62.0 13.4 2.8 p 1.6 0.8 Avera<ge R 16.1 Arca 3 r 59,365.0 25,661.0 10,724.0 9,192.0 6,12S.0 Avcra?er 22,214.0 Avcraec R for Site 17.8 Avera?_,c r for Site (ohm-cm) 25,935.5 FROEHLING & ROBERTSON California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Load Penetration Curve 250.0 e e ,. 200.0 e e" e' a e e 150.0 e' • Specimen A 0 in ° -+-Specimen B • -+ Specimen C o 100 0 e o • ° ° Specimen D . e ° o O U_ e' o ° o e' o ° 50.0 r o ° r ° 0.0 . 0.000 0.100 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 Penetration (in) CBR Results Results B-1 B-2 B-3 B-24 Average 0.1 in Pen. 4.5 0.2 2.9 2.9 2.6 0.2 in Pen. 6.5 0.3 4.4 3.6 3.7 Moisture % 12.2 13.8 15.4 22.6 16.0 Dens (pcf) 122.8 114.3 117.3 102.5 114.2 Project Informa tion Project Num H66-098 Sample Location Project NOVARTIS Specimen A Boring B-1 Date 08/18/2006 Specimen B Boring B-2 Client Town Of Holly Springs Specimen C Boring B-3 Specimen D Boring B-24 No. Soil Description Max. D Den Optimum Moisture B-1 Reddish-Brown, Sandy Lean Clay 123.3 10.0 B-2 Reddish-Brown, Lean Clay 114.5 12,9 B-3 Reddish-Brown, Silt with Sand 115.7 136 B-24 Reddish-Brown, Silt with Sand 107.2 18.5 CBR Test - Results Page 1 of 1 H66-098 (Novartis).H SD TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE . prIWTE FtlM IEAFL MMSE ro A IElMG1N rnaraE FD,M PpMPDRLLpIr IEewuM° Mac aaoc M cases Aocawc BFMSC .SET aAOew s,ras t A r aFFSEr ro 1FCR1fME FAOFEIM M9¢r rIOPMDMT. . I]® eanaa aA9Fr e' slay FIBiD wOE Ar iMM FKE a ,FUi a As sMnsl oN Mu NgnlL . rNEtE NMnMON owMGE Mac tOE of sIaFE MIOMEM. TIE MIL sNru ff n[svm N ,r MNCIpp115 so PAIL IPPS MP: IPSaPI. alPb GroF. ].' MG,. OwN ?, E+u.asi li,vA .eMOOP1 FiVPJ1LLr TD MP]Ilr r - z' MPME r1c TO' IM01?11OL w enwn w G0 ? 1MOF °wEFI srwa m rwctaP MM1aPY Oft OEMN AT A Mc WM CONIEIR amaM t= W aMmPPI IMaMmFC raDEMr. •FIA¢ ,'-Y aF TOPSOL MaMMG vkxIG1L FKE Mo O,FA THE Ton z FI2r ar snnlc,ua? Ftl. ,•-r ,a.a wP,r.TFD alwcnwv, ru STEP 1 STEP 4 .FOP DE FPISr caPaE OF TIE MlL MIDI eA9aTS nDMOUr SFArES Aw Mac eNC rDmlen. SIO?i 16 A6 •N1M YlaMPwn PEMDIIcEmEw OVA Tap9 MD COMPACTED STMXT MI Fu AMn ArnMGP .rtr m .PIKE T1F MPxr MMSMO:r ] q><r ®ao TIE rncitnPMC InMEn IA9RT Aro SrpM% NOG PNC AS N SIFP 2 F1OiVAlMW LPRS STEP 2 STEP 5 •RKl 1aMME5N SELOMCIR! PE1fOI1FE1E11r M1PMSr 1PE lII.9iT FAFE .wEE IFEPIIE91 aen MSIQr r.a.PIG PoIM ,1a: Pml.l® MPM,Y cPED,IOO. .FaurErr urns of MPI.APSI sMOUn aVAUa r. .Arrrz, snaps TNIPMCI, AvarFMS?I,/?ro(yw1 rc aislEr Ar A zz'-za• srr c. I FKE A11MR ??D I •RPGT SRDS 2 1MPU 3 IP,R OD® 1lRilr aF aYl 6 PFACIED. .,1,E roDr.I. FMZ AIO ro. ]FEET e< FMiI SIFJ+ saua E r,Dw s® Ar T1E CaMP1Emr DF SIfiE mMMnnlcnarl. `/ STEP 3 STEP 6 ?72• MIN. MIRAMESH FACE WRAP 1.5' TP WELDED WIRE BASKET WRAP FACE BASKET DETAIL NTS WIRE MES MIRAMESHs GR REINFORCEMENT BASKET FACING FACE WRAP NT LENGTH 7 VEGETATIO 1.5 WRAPPED FACE REINFORCED STEEPENED 2:1 SLOPE FACE CROSS SECTION NTS ® PROEHLINC k ROBERTSON, INC. PROJECT Torn of Holl Sp, ings - ®IE6NMC,1L F]1FNpPpITAL rroNF,LG PROJECT, Novnrt I s F]MO[1m¢ LAgMAip11FS "OFtl M?+oPEeIO E+AO e+ LOCATION, HoIIy Springs, Wake County, NC 310 lk6w str-t P Mc woh. r Cwu,r nim FLR PROJECT No.: H66-098 <Pm .:.l. F:;,p. Im9,1" ?M DATE- 9/06 SCALE, NTS FIGURE No. ? 10 • E 0 365 South Hollan d Drive Pendergrass, GA 30567 Tel: (706) 693-2 226 Fax: (706) 693-2 083 www.mirafl.co m • Mirafi® MMESH Introduction Mirafi® MMESH is composed of green high-tenacity monofilament polypropylene yarns that are woven together to produce an open mesh biaxial geotextile. Mirafi® MMESH is specifically designed for secondary reinforcement and surface erosion protection for steepened slope and retaining wall applications. Mirafi® MMESH allows for vegetation growth, while holding back soil at the face. In wrapping the face of a retaining wall with Mirafi® MMESH, removable facing supports (e.g. wooden forms) or left-in-place welded wire mesh forms are typically used. The recommended maximum vertical spacing between lagers of Mirafi® MMESH is 18 inches (450 mm). The following figure shows a typical Mirafi MMESH vegetated wall/slope. • 2 Facing Details for Wrapped-Face Construction -- _ ! -- WIRE MESH FACING OR TEMPORARY FORMWORK VEGETATION- MIRAMESH GR WRAP AT FACE MIRAMESH GR -PRIMARY REINFORCEMENT Vegetated Vertical Steps with Welded Wire Mesh or Wooden Formwork In assessing these two facia options, there are several considerations. For instance, using a wire mesh face support will typically result in higher material costs, yet lower labor costs than using temporary wooden formwork. However, the wire mesh may provide additional long-term face protection from ultraviolet light degradation and potential vandalism. Further, the use of temporary wooden formwork will require access from the exterior of the slope/wall face in order to insert and remove forms. Inspection The owner or the owner's engineer is responsible for certifying that the contractor meets all the requirements of the specification, including material submittals and proper installation of the geosynthetic reinforcements. The Contractor shall check the geosynthetic upon delivery to ensure that the proper material has been received during all periods of shipment and storage. All geosynthetic materials shall be protected from temperatures greater than 1400F, and all deleterious material that might otherwise become affixed to the geosynthetic and adversely affect its performance. Site Preparation The foundation soil shall be excavated to the line and grades as shown on the construction drawings or as directed by the Project Engineer. Over-excavated areas shall be filled with compacted backfill material as per project specifications or as directed by the Engineer. As a minimum, foundation soil shall be proof rolled and level prior to backfill and geosynthetic placement. This exercise should be performed prior to each subsequent geosynthetic layer installed. Placement of Drainage Materials Perforated schedule 40 or equivalent pipe, surrounded in drain rock, and wrapped in geotextile, may be placed at the base of the wall/slope as shown on the Construction Drawings. The pipe shall be laid at a minimum longitudinal gradient of 1 %. The pipe shall be connected to the specified outlets with T-connectors. Outlet pipes, which pass through the base of the wall facia, shall be wrapped with a geotextile to prevent loss of infill materials. Outlet pipes shall be connected to the site drainage system or discharged in front of the wall in a manner that will not cause surface erosion. Compact all fill placed against the drainage system. Placement of Welded Wire Mesh Facia Place the wire baskets adjacent to one another at the elevation shown on the plans. Ties may be used to keep wire baskets aligned. Note: the first two vertical rows of welded wire baskets may be pushed forward during compaction of the backfill (It may be necessary to adjust their setback or install vertical braces along the proposed alignment of the wall facia at a minimum spacing of 60 inches center to center). Geosvnthetic Reinforcement Placement The geosynthetic reinforcement (Miragrid of Mirafi® PET fabric) shall be laid at the proper elevation and orientation as shown on the construction drawings or as directed by the Engineer. Correct orientation of the geosynthetic shall be verified by Contractor. The geosynthetic shall be cut to length as shown on the construction drawings using a razor knife, scissors, sharp knife, or equivalent. The geosynthetic reinforcement leading edge shall be placed up to the front of the welded wire mesh form and tensioned by hand until taut, free of wrinkles and lying flat. Adjacent geosynthetic panels, in the case of 100 percent coverage in plan view, should be butted up to one another, as necessary to ensure 100 percent coverage, unless otherwise specified on the construction drawings. The geosynthetic reinforcement and Mirafi® MMESH may need to be slit (perpendicular to the wall face) to stagger the wire basket support struts. Geosynthetic panels may be secured in-place with staples, pins, sand bags, or backfill as required by fill properties, fill placement procedures, or weather conditions, or as directed by the Engineer. The geosynthetic may not be overlapped or connected mechanically to form splices in the primary strength direction. Single panel lengths are required in the primary strength direction. Therefore the geosynthetic should be installed in one continuous piece with the primary strength direction extending the full length of the reinforced area. No overlapping is required between adjacent rolls unless specified by the Engineer. Mirafi® MMESH Placement Install Mirafi® MMESH parallel to the wall/slope face, or as directed by the project engineer. Place the Mirafi® MMESH GR against the inside front face of welded wire mesh form with 4' of embedment. When placing the Mirafi® MMESH, drape the geotextile over the wire face, allowing for the required wrap embedment (typically 2.5'). Install the reinforcing struts at 24 inch center to center (typical). I --STRUT BRACE WIRE MESH-- BASKET FACING MIRAMESH GR- i I INFILL SOILS 4'- _t When the fill soil has been placed and compacted to the elevation of the next welded wire form, the Mirafi® MMESH shall be laid back on top of the compacted soil, pulled taut and secured with compacted soil. Place geosynthetic reinforcement from the facia to the required embedment length. Slide the next welded wire facia unit into place against the prongs (optional) of the lower unit. li I WIRE MESH- j? BASKET FACING REINFORCEMENT MIRAMESH GR - 5 Place only the amount of geosynthetic required for immediately pending work to prevent undue damage. After a layer of geosynthetic has been placed, the succeeding layer of soil shall be placed, compacted and prepared as appropriate. After the specified soil layer has been placed, the next geosynthetic layer and/or facing unit shall be installed. Mirafi® MMESH should be seeded/vegetated as recommended by the project engineer. Fill Placement Fill should be placed in 6-8 inch thick lifts near the face of the wire baskets and then proceed toward the tails of the Mirafi® MMESH and Geosynthetic reinforcement to help tension the grid/fabric. Backfill material shall be compacted to a minimum 90% modified proctor or as directed by the project engineer. Backfill shall be placed, spread and compacted in such a manner as to minimize the development of wrinkles in and/or movement of the geosynthetic. Backfill shall also be placed in such a manner as to minimize the disturbance and/or the misalignment of the wall facing. A minimum fill thickness of 6 inches is required prior to the operation of tracked vehicles over the geosynthetic. Turning of tracked vehicles should be kept to a minimum to prevent tracks from displacing the fill and damaging the geosynthetic. Rubber tired equipment may pass over the geosynthetic reinforcement at low speeds, less than 5 mph. Sudden braking and sharp turns shall be avoided. Any geosynthetic damaged during installation shall be replaced by the Contractor. Backfill within 3 ft. of the wall/slope face will typically be compacted with hand equipment. Density tests shall be made every lift or as directed by the Project Engineer. Backfill shall be graded away from the wall crest and rolled at the end of each work day to prevent the freezing and/or the ponding of water on the surface of the reinforced soil mass. The site shall be maintained to prevent the flow of water from adjacent areas from entering the wall area from overtopping the retaining wall during construction and after the completion of the wall. Seed Placement While Backfilling Mirafi® MMESH is manufactured with an open weave that holds soil in, but allows vegetation to grow through it. A mix of seed (optional if hydroseeding) and topsoil be placed directly against the Mirafi° MMESH fabric face for each lift, as shown below. 6 TOPSOIL TO EDGE OF UPPER BASKET FACING -- - -- WIRE MESH-- BASKET FACING MIRAMESH GR SEEDED TOPSOIL (OPTIONAL) STRUT BRACE / j INFILL SOILS Hydroseeding/ Hydromulching Wall Face To vegetate the wall by hydroseeding, the welded wire baskets should be set back with a 4" (typical) offset at each lift, as shown below. This results in an overall batter of 781. Each 4" shelf will create a flat surface for vegetative growth. The face should be hydroseeded during the local growing season. The face should be watered prior to hydroseeding. An irrigation system and maintenance program may be needed - depending on local climate and environmental conditions. E7 MIRAMESH GR WRAP AT FACE WIRE MESH FACING- OR TEMPORARY FORMWORK MIRAMESH GR VEGETATION - PRIMARY REINFORCEMENT L Seed Selection 7 Seed performs best when planted during spring or early autumn. Three general climate zones are shown below. Areas in the cool climate zone use cool season grasses. Areas in the warm climate zone use warm climate grasses. The transition zones typically use a mixture of both cool and warm season grasses, but generally favor cool climate grasses more. Local suppliers generally have excellent knowledge of seed selection for their local climate and environment. WARM CLIMATE ZONE The table below shows some common seed choices. WARM SEASON 11 COOL SEASON Buffalo Bentgrass Centipede Bluegrass Common Bermuda Fine Fescue Hybrid Bermuda Ryegrass St Augustine Tall Fescue Tall Fescue Zoysia • • • Branch Cuttinas Live branch cuttings or rooted woody stem with the Miraf® MMESH /wire mesh facia. diameter and placed between Mirafi® MM should only be harvested while the dorm performed between the fall and early spring, should be stored in a cool moist area that ( sun). Choosing the correct species for a given environment i success. In wet environments, willows are very successt species perform better. In dry climates, a watering system native and non-native species of plants. E I i I uttings of plants that root easily may be used Live branch cutting s should be '/Z" to 1" in SH layers, as show n below. Live cuttings ant. Installation of live cuttings should be while the cuttin s are still d t tti C g orman . u ngs is well shaded neve c E r store cuttings in direct In dry climates, u be required to vec 9 LIVE BRANCH CUTTINGS- PROTRUDE FROM WALL -PRIMARY REINFORCEMENT Live Staking Live staking may be performed with the Mirafi® MMESH /wire mesh facia. Live stakes are woody stem cuttings of plants that root easily. Live stakes should be taken while a plant is dormant (before spring) and planted directly into the face of the wall/slope. Live stakes should be spaced 2 - T apart in all directions. Installation of live stakings should be performed between the fall and early spring, while the plants are still dormant. Live staking should be performed only in very moist environments or with plants known to survive in the local environment. Mirafi® MMESH install (01/05) 10 ?- TRI/ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. A Texas Research kdetmahona! Company Germination Enhancement Testing of Slope Facing Geosynthetics January 2005 Submitted to: Mirafi Construction Products 365 South Holland Drive Pendergrass, Georgia 30567 Submitted by: TRI/Environmental, Inc. 9063 Bee Caves Road Austin, TX 78733 I P?? C. Joel Sprague Project Manager f.-- TRI/ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. MRE A Texas Reseam* Irametlonal Company January 21, 2005 Mr. John Henderson Mirafi Construction Products 365 South Holland Drive Pendergrass, Georgia 30567 (John_Henderson@RTCUSA.com) RE: Germination Enhancement Testing of Slope Facing Geosynthetics (Log # E2213-33-08 & E2193-34-07) Dear John: TRI appreciates the opportunity to provide testing services, including preparing and testing vegetated facing systems composed of various products and welded wire facing. Following is a summary of the testing strategy employed and a review of the test results. STRATEGY A bench-scale performance-related index test has been developed by the Erosion Cotnrol Technology Council (ECTC) to examine the ability of a rolled erosion control product (RECP) to enhance seed germination and initial vegetation growth. TRI has modified the test method for near-vertical slope facing systems while generally following soil and seed preparation and exposure condition conditions in the original test method. TESTING APPROACH The lab constructed 18" tall x 24" wide facing sections following the schematic below. Three replicate boxes were constructed for each facing system. The boxes were maintained in an environment of 72°F & 45%RH and watered weekly. Vegetative density measurements were made at 30 and 60 days. Facing materials were installed with the cross-machine direction yarns or ribs in the vertical direction directly up against the basket. When used with an erosion control blanket, facing material was installed against the wire basket face with the erosion control blanket between the soil and the grid. Shelf Box of "Contained" Soil Light Source Welded Wire Shelf Vegetation on Face Schematic of Test Set-up 9063 Bee Caves Road / Austin, TX 78733 / 512-263-2101 / FAX 263-2558 / 800-880-TEST Z"t' SUMMARY OF TEST DETAILS AND RESULTS: Soil Used: Topsoil Compactio 85 pcf Moisture: 38% Mirafi - Facing Germination Enhancement January 21, 2005 2 Number of seeds: 252 Section area: 6.5 x 12 in 3 0 days 60 days # of total # of total stalks averag # of stalks averag # of average total Secti per e # of stal per e # of stal bioma biomass bioma Material on section stalks ks section stalks ks ss ss Seed 1 19 of 20 19 of 20 ? =? r r a Germination 2 18 of 20 18 of 20 -' i Calibration 3 19 of 20 s, 19 of 20 0.111 1 27 27 7 0.1 8 0.511 Control 2 22 34 102 33 38 113 1 0.1705 0.281 3 53 53 7 0.074 1 57 44 4 0. 1 HP 370 2 43 42 127 34 33 98 2 0.0583 0.175 0.029 3 27 20 4 0.333 1 53 53 2 BasXgrid 11 0.612 1.3 54 with double net straw 2 77 63 190 79 65 195 0.4516 9 0.409 3 60 63 3 0.597 1 88 94 7 Miramesh 87 262 93 279 0.522 0.6586 . 1975 GR 2 72 83 9 2 3 102 102 0.856 CONCLUSIONS: Please note that the results presented are based on the testing strategy described and carried out herein and do not purport to represent actual field behavior. If you have any questions concerning the results or conclusions, please call me at 864/242-2220. Thank you for the opportunity to help you in this research effort. Very truly yours, --- TRI/ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. A Texas Research 1nteme6onal Company C. Joel Sprague, Sr. Engineer TR VEnvironmental, Inc. xc: Sam Allen; Jarrett Nelson 9063 Bee Caves Road / Austin, TX 78733 / 512-263-2101 / FAX 263-2558 / 800-880-TEST ?w Y RDU PHOTO TENSAR SLOPE CONSUMER SQUARE CHARLOTTE, NC 30' TALL 12' x 300' CARY, NC r ??l M APPENDIX • • PICTURES Mirafi - Facing Germination Enhancement Jannuary 21, 2005 Al 9063 Bee Caves Road / Austin, TX 78733 / 512-263-2101 / FAX 263-2558 / 800-880-TEST Control