The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20150615 Ver 1_SCM Calculations_20160625SCM Summary and Calculations Project: Rockingham Grocery 704 U.S. 74 Business City of Rockingham Richmond County, NC Project Number: NCR151000 Client: GRDI, LLC 1500 Sunday Drive, STE. 101 Raleigh, NC 27607 Date: 2016.06.24 CA R� ° 0 FEssi° 4 _ GINE��° Professional Engineer: Mike Roselli, PE A • °R 201�o.O�o.24 NC License #040768 BOHLER ENGINEERING ♦ 4000 WESTCHASE BLVD ♦ SUITE 290 ♦ RALEIGH, NC 27607 ♦ 919.578.9000 Wet Pond Calculations AVIIA NCDENR Permit No. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT APPLICATION FORM 401 CERTIFICATION APPLICATION FORM WET DETENTION BASIN SUPPLEMENT This form must be filled out, printed and submitted. The Required Items Checklist (Part 111) must be printed, filled out and submitted along with all of the required information. I. PROJECT INFORMATION Project name Rockingham Grocery Contact person Mike Roselli, PE Phone number 919-578-9000 Date 6/24/2016 Drainage area number 1 (to be provided by DWQ) ��F \NA _0A oNiii�-c II. DESIGN INFORMATION Site Characteristics Drainage area 111,514 ft2 Impervious area, post -development 90,169 ft2 % impervious 80.86 % Design rainfall depth 1.0 in Storage Volume: Non -SA Waters Minimum volume required Volume provided Storage Volume: SA Waters 1.5" runoff volume Pre -development 1 -yr, 24 -hr runoff Post -development 1 -yr, 24 -hr runoff Minimum volume required Volume provided Peak Flow Calculations Is the prelpost control of the lyr 24hr storm peak flow required? 1 -yr, 24 -hr rainfall depth Rational C, pre -development Rational C, post -development Rainfall intensity: 1 -yr, 24 -hr storm Pre -development 1 -yr, 24 -hr peak flow Post -development 1 -yr, 24 -hr peak flow Pre/Post 1 -yr, 24 -hr peak flow control Elevations Temporary pool elevation Permanent pool elevation SHWT elevation (approx. at the perm. pool elevation) Top of 1 Oft vegetated shelf elevation Bottom of 1 Oft vegetated shelf elevation Sediment cleanout, top elevation (bottom of pond) Sediment cleanout, bottom elevation Sediment storage provided Is there additional volume stored above the state -required temp. pool? Elevation of the top of the additional volume 7,227 ft3 7,461 ft3 OK, volume provided is equal to or in excess of volume required. ft3 ft3 ft3 ft3 ft3 N (Y or N) 3.1 in 0.35 (unitless) 0.84 (unitless) 0.13 in/hr OK N/A ft3/sec N/A ft3/sec #VALUE! ft3/sec 260.40 fmsl 259.00 fmsl 259.50 fmsl 259.50 fmsl 258.50 fmsl 254.00 fmsl 253.00 fmsl 1.00 ft N (Y or N) 260.4 fmsl OK Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin-Rev.9-4/18/12 Parts I. & II. Design Summary, Page 1 of 3 Permit No. II. DESIGN INFORMATION Surface Areas Area, temporary pool 6,383 ft2 Area REQUIRED, permanent pool 3,791 ft2 SAIDA ratio 3.40 (unitless) Area PROVIDED, permanent pool, Aperm_pool 4,298 ft2 OK Area, bottom of 1 Oft vegetated shelf, Abot shelf 2,188 ft2 Area, sediment cleanout, top elevation (bottom of pond), Ayot_,nd 444 ft2 Volumes ft Length of flowpath to width ratio Volume, temporary pool OK 7,461 ft3 OK Volume, permanent pool, Vpsnpool Trash rack for overflow & orifice? 8,871 ft3 OK Volume, forebay (sum of forebays if more than one forebay) 2.8 ft 1,614 ft3 Vegetated filter provided? Forebay % of permanent pool volume 18.2% % OK SAIDA Table Data Capures all runoff at ultimate build -out? Y (Y or N) OK Design TSS removal Pump 85 % Coastal SAIDA Table Used? N (Y or N) Mountain/Piedmont SAIDA Table Used? Y (Y or N) SAIDA ratio 3.40 (unitless) Average depth (used in SAIDA table): Calculation option 1 used? (See Figure 10-2b) N (Y or N) Volume, permanent pool, Vpertnyool 8,871 ft3 Area provided, permanent pool, Ape._p�l 4,298 ft2 Average depth calculated ft Need 3 ft min. Average depth used in SAIDA, dav, (Round to nearest 0.5ft) ft Calculation option 2 used? (See Figure 10-2b) Y (Y or N) Area provided, permanent pool, Ape,m_pool 4,298 ft2 Area, bottom of 1 Oft vegetated shelf, Abot shelf 2,188 ft2 Area, sediment cleanout, top elevation (bottom of pond), Ahot_pund 444 ft2 "Depth" (distance b/w bottom of 1Oft shelf and top of sediment) 4.50 ft Average depth calculated 3.07 ft OK Average depth used in SAIDA, deV, (Round to down to nearest 0.5ft) 3.0 ft OK Drawdown Calculations Drawdown through orifice? Y (Y or N) Diameter of orifice (if circular) 1.50 in Area of orifice (if -non -circular) int Coefficient of discharge (Co) 0.60 (unitless) Driving head (Ho) 0.41 ft Drawdown through weir? N (Y or N) Weir type N/A (unitless) Coefficient of discharge (CW) N/A (unitless) Length of weir (L) N/A ft Driving head (H) N/A ft Pre -development 1 -yr, 24 -hr peak flow N/A ft3/sec Post -development 1 -yr, 24 -hr peak flow N/A ft3 /sec Storage volume discharge rate (through discharge orifice or weir) 0.04 ft3 /sec Storage volume drawdown time 2.20 days OK, draws down in 2-5 days. Additional Information Vegetated side slopes Vegetated shelf slope Vegetated shelf width ft Length of flowpath to width ratio 3 :1 OK Length to width ratio 3.0 :1 OK Trash rack for overflow & orifice? Y (Y or N) OK Freeboard provided 2.8 ft OK Vegetated filter provided? (Y or N) Recorded drainage easement provided? Y (Y or N) OK Capures all runoff at ultimate build -out? Y (Y or N) OK Drain mechanism for maintenance or emergencies is: Pump (to be provided by DWQ) Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin-Rev.9-4/18/12 Parts I. & II. Design Summary, Page 2 of 3 Permit No III. REQUIRED ITEMS CHECKLIST (to be provided by DWQ) Please indicate the page or plan sheet numbers where the supporting documentation can be found. An incomplete submittal package will result in a request for additional information. This will delay final review and approval of the project. Initial in the space provided to indicate the following design requirements have been met. If the applicant has designated an agent, the agent may initial below.lf a requirement has not been met, attach justification. Pagel Plan Initials Sheet No. MR C-6.0. 1. Plans (1" 50' or larger) of the entire site showing: See Sheet Design at ultimate build -out, C-3.1 for Off-site drainage (if applicable), Drainage Delineated drainage basins (include Rational C coefficient per basin), Areas Basin dimensions, Pretreatment system, High flow bypass system, Maintenance access, Proposed drainage easement and public right of way (ROW), Overflow device, and Boundaries of drainage easement. MR C-6.0 2. Partial plan (1" = 30' or larger) and details for the wet detention basin showing: Outlet structure with trash rack or similar, Maintenance access, Permanent pool dimensions, Forebay and main pond with hardened emergency spillway, Basin cross-section, Vegetation specification for planting shelf, and Filter strip. MR C-6.0 3. Section view of the wet detention basin 0" = 20' or larger) showing: Side slopes, 3:1 or lower, Pretreatment and treatment areas, and Inlet and outlet structures. MR C-5.1 4. If the basin is used for sediment and erosion control during construction, clean out of the basin is specified on the plans prior to use as a wet detention basin. MR REPORT 5. A table of elevations, areas, incremental volumes & accumulated volumes for overall pond and for forebay, to verify volume provided. MR C-5.1 6. A construction sequence that shows how the wet detention basin will be protected from sediment until the entire drainage area is stabilized. MR REPORT 7. The supporting calculations. MR REPORT 8. A copy of the signed and notarized operation and maintenance (0&M) agreement. N/A 9. A copy of the deed restrictions (if required). MR REPORT 10. A soils report that is based upon an actual field investigation, soil borings, and infiltration tests. County soil maps are not an acceptable source of soils information. Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin-Rev.9-4/18/12 Part III. Required Items Checklist, Page 3 of 3 BOHLER Project Information Wet Detention Basin Design Project: Rockingham Grocery Location: 705 U.S. 74 Business Project Number: NCR151000 Date: Jun -24-2016 Designed: MAR Checked: WLB Site Information Sub Area Location: Wet Detention Basin 1 Drainage Area (DA) = 111,514 sf Impervious Area (IA) = 90,169 sf Percent Impervious (1) = 80.9 % Elevations Top of Bank Elevation = 264.00 ft Emergency Elevation = 263.00 ft Temporary Pool Elevation = 260.40 ft Permanent Pool Elevation = 259.00 ft Bottom of Pond Elevation = 254.00 ft Sediment Cleanout, Bottom Elevation = 253.00 ft Basin Areas/Volumes Area of Permanent Pool = 4,298 sf Area of Bottom of Shelf = 3,156 sf Area of Bottom of Pond = 106 sf Area of Temporary Pool = 6,432 sf Volume, main pool = 7,257 cf Volume, forebay (sum of forebays) = 1,614 cf Volume, permanent pool = 8,871 cf Forebay % of permanent pool volume = 18.2 % Average Depth Depth of Pond = 4.5 ft Average Depth = ft Use Average Depth of = 0.00 ft Required Surface Area Aperm pooh (includes main pond & forebays) (Elev = 259.00 ) A bot shelf (includes main pond & forebays) (Elev = 258.50 ) Abot_pond (excluding sediment storage & forebays) A tew_p-d (includes main pond and forebays) (Elev = 260.40 ) V malnl,00l (from Hydraflow) V forebay (from Hydraflow) V perm_,00l (Vforebay+Vmainyool) OK Depth (dist. btwn. bot. of shelf & btm. of pond, excludes sediment) See Wet Basin Supplement SA/DA = 3.4 (85% TSS Removal via Pond) Min Req'd Surface Area = 3,791 sf (at Permanent Pool) Required Storage Volume - Using Simple Method Design Storm = 1.0 inch (Project Does Not Drain to SA Waters) Determine Rv Value = 0.05 + 0.009 (1) = 0.78 in/in Storage Volume Required = 7,227 cf (above Permanent Pool) Side Slopes of Pond = 3 :1 Is Permenant Pool Surface Area Sufficient (yes/no)? Yes ( 4298 > 3791 ) sf BOH LER Wet Detention Basin Design 1.0 inch Volume Elevation Required Temporary Pool Volume = 7,227 Elev (fmsl) Permanent Pool Elevation = 259.00 Frustrum* Bottom Elevation = 260.00 Temporary Pool = 260.40 Frustrum* Top Elevation = 261.00 Temporary Pool Volume = 7,461 cu ft Area (so 4,298 6,045 6,432 7,036 cu ft *Frustrum bounds in which Temporary Pool will ultimately reside Orifice Sizing - Wet Detention Q2 Days = 0.0432 cfs Q5 Days = 0.0173 cfs Orifice Size = 1 1/2 in 259.00 Driving Head (He) = 0.44 ft Q Orifice = 0.039 cfs Drawdown Time = 2.2 days less than 5 days (yes/no) ? Yes 2,905 greater than 2 days (yes/no) ? Yes 261.00 Anti -Flotation Device 6,534 11,901 Outside Length = 5.00 ft Outside Width = 5.00 ft Inside Length = 4.00 ft Inside Width = 4.00 ft Bottom Thickness = 0.50 ft Top of Riser = 260.40 ft Invert of Riser = 257.97 ft Area = 25.0 sf Volume = 73 cf Weight= 4,571 lbs Factor of Safety = 1.10 WT Req'd of Anti -Flotation Device = 5,028 lbs Volume of Concrete Req'd = 57.4 cf Depth Provided = 1.00 ft Volume Provided = 59.4 cf WT of Anti -Flotation Device Provided = 5,201 lbs Contour Contour Area Incremental Accumulated Volume Volume, S Stage, Z sq ft cu ft cu ft ft 259.00 4,298 0 0 0.0 259.50 5,577 2,462 2,462 0.5 260.00 6,045 2,905 5,367 1.0 261.00 7,036 6,534 11,901 2.0 262.00 7,798 7,414 19,315 3.0 263.00 8,595 8,193 27,508 4.0 264.00 9,428 9,008 36,516 5.0 (Flowrate required for a 2 day drawdown) (Flowrate required for a 5 day drawdown) (Diameter) (Water Displaced - Top of Riser to Bottom of Riser) (Weight Water Displaced) (Unit WT of Concrete = 150 pcf) Submerged Concrete Unit Weight 87.6 pcf Ce7P )rebav volume Contour Area al Volume Accumulat Stage, Z Contour Increment ed ft Contour Area al Volume Volume, S Stage, Z 254.00 sq ft cu ft cu ft ft 255.00 99 0 0 0.0 256.00 222 161 161 1.0 257.00 379 301 461 2.0 258.00 569 474 935 3.0 259.00 789 679 1,614 4.0 Contour Area al Volume ed Stage, Z sq ft cu ft cu ft ft 253.00 106 0 0 0.0 254.00 301 204 204 1.0 255.00 590 446 649 2.0 256.00 962 776 1,425 3.0 257.00 1,600 1,281 2,706 4.0 258.00 2,176 1,888 4,594 5.0 258.50 2,481 1,164 5,758 5.5 259.00 3,513 1,499 7,257 6.0 Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2016 by Autodesk, Inc. v10.5 Hyd. No. 2 Wet Pond Routed Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume Inflow hyd. No. = 1 - Wet Pond Inflow Max. Elevation Reservoir name = Wet Pond Overall Max. Storage Storage Indication method used. Q (cfs) 14.00 12.00 10.00 .m 4.00 2.00 0.00 ' 1- 0 120 240 Hyd No. 2 Wet Pond Routed Hyd. No. 2 -- 10 Year 4 Friday, 06 / 24 / 2016 = 9.478 cfs = 728 min = 39,073 cuft = 261.39 ft = 15,110 cuft Q (cfs) 14.00 12.00 10.00 4.00 f►a[iIi� 0.00 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560 Time (min) Hyd No. 1 1111111 Total storage used = 15,110 cuft 10 -Year Velocity Exiting SCMS Wetpond CFS 9.48 ftA3/s (See routing) Cross sectional area 7.07 ftA2 (Area of 18in pipe. Conservative, as flow is directed to wider dissipator pad) Velocity 1.34 ft/s Less than 2 ft/s? OK Bioretention CFS 2.86 ftA3/s (See routing) Cross sectional area 3.60 ftA2 (0.24' depth in 10 -year storm x 15' spillway) Velocity 0.79 ft/s Less than 2 ft/s? OK Permit Number: (to be provided by DWQ) Drainage Area Number: Wet Detention Basin Operation and Maintenance Agreement I will keep a maintenance record on this BMP. This maintenance record will be kept in a log in a known set location. Any deficient BMP elements noted in the inspection will be corrected, repaired or replaced immediately. These deficiencies can affect the integrity of structures, safety of the public, and the removal efficiency of the BMP. The wet detention basin system is defined as the wet detention basin, pretreatment including forebays and the vegetated filter if one is provided. This system (check one): ❑ does ® does not incorporate a vegetated filter at the outlet. This system (check one): ❑ does ® does not incorporate pretreatment other than a forebay. Important maintenance procedures: — Immediately after the wet detention basin is established, the plants on the vegetated shelf and perimeter of the basin should be watered twice weekly if needed, until the plants become established (commonly six weeks). — No portion of the wet detention pond should be fertilized after the first initial fertilization that is required to establish the plants on the vegetated shelf. — Stable groundcover should be maintained in the drainage area to reduce the sediment load to the wet detention basin. — If the basin must be drained for an emergency or to perform maintenance, the flushing of sediment through the emergency drain should be minimized to the maximum extent practical. — Once a year, a dam safety expert should inspect the embankment. After the wet detention pond is established, it should be inspected once a month and within 24 hours after every storm event greater than 1.0 inches (or 1.5 inches if in a Coastal County). Records of operation and maintenance should be kept in a known set location and must be available upon request. Inspection activities shall be performed as follows. Any problems that are found shall be repaired immediately. BMP element: Potentialproblem: How I will remediate theproblem: The entire BMP Trash/ debris is present. Remove the trash/ debris. The perimeter of the wet Areas of bare soil and/or Regrade the soil if necessary to detention basin erosive gullies have formed. remove the gully, and then plant a ground cover and water until it is established. Provide lime and a one-time fertilizer application. Vegetation is too short or too Maintain vegetation at a height of long. approximately six inches. Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin O&M-Rev.4 Page 1 of 5 Permit Number: (to be provided by DWQ) Drainage Area Number: BMP element: Potentialproblem: How I will remediate theproblem: The inlet device: pipe or The pipe is clogged. Unclog the pipe. Dispose of the swale sediment off-site. The pipe is cracked or Replace the pipe. otherwise damaged. Erosion is occurring in the Regrade the swale if necessary to swale. smooth it over and provide erosion control devices such as reinforced turf matting or riprap to avoid future problems with erosion. The forebay Sediment has accumulated to Search for the source of the a depth greater than the sediment and remedy the problem if original design depth for possible. Remove the sediment and sediment storage. dispose of it in a location where it will not cause impacts to streams or the BMP. Erosion has occurred. Provide additional erosion protection such as reinforced turf matting or riprap if needed to prevent future erosion problems. Weeds are present. Remove the weeds, preferably by hand. If pesticide is used, wipe it on the plants rather than spraying. The vegetated shelf Best professional practices Prune according to best professional show that pruning is needed practices to maintain optimal plant health. Plants are dead, diseased or Determine the source of the dying. problem: soils, hydrology, disease, etc. Remedy the problem and replace plants. Provide a one-time fertilizer application to establish the ground cover if a soil test indicates it is necessary. Weeds are present. Remove the weeds, preferably by hand. If pesticide is used, wipe it on the plants rather than spraying. The main treatment area Sediment has accumulated to Search for the source of the a depth greater than the sediment and remedy the problem if original design sediment possible. Remove the sediment and storage depth. dispose of it in a location where it will not cause impacts to streams or the BMP. Algal growth covers over Consult a professional to remove 50% of the area. and control the algal growth. Cattails, phragmites or other Remove the plants by wiping them invasive plants cover 50% of with pesticide (do not spray). the basin surface. Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin O&M-Rev.4 Page 2 of 5 Permit Number: (to be provided by DWQ) Drainage Area Number: BMP element: Potentialproblem: How I will remediate theproblem: The embankment Shrubs have started to grow Remove shrubs immediately. on the embankment. Evidence of muskrat or Use traps to remove muskrats and beaver activity is present. consult a professional to remove beavers. A tree has started to grow on Consult a dam safety specialist to the embankment. remove the tree. An annual inspection by an Make all needed repairs. appropriate professional shows that the embankment needs repair. if applicable) The outlet device Clogging has occurred. Clean out the outlet device. Dispose of the sediment off-site. The outlet device is damaged Repair or replace the outlet device. The receiving water Erosion or other signs of Contact the local NC Division of damage have occurred at the Water Quality Regional Office, or outlet. the 401 Oversight Unit at 919-733- 1786. The measuring device used to determine the sediment elevation shall be such that it will give an accurate depth reading and not readily penetrate into accumulated sediments. When the permanent pool depth reads 5 feet in the main pond, the sediment shall be removed. When the permanent pool depth reads 3 feet in the forebay, the sediment shall be removed. BASIN DIAGRAM ill in the blanks) Permanent Pool Elevation 259 Sediment Removal q. 256 Pe anen Pool - ---------------- - Volume Sediment Removal Elevation 254 ----- ------ Toume ----------------------- Bottom Elevation`255 1 -ft Min. Sediment Storage FOREBAY Bottom Elevation 253 1 -ft Min. Sediment Storage MAIN POND Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin O&M-Rev.4 Page 3 of 5 Permit Number: (to be provided by DWQ) Drainage Area Number: Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin O&M-Rev.4 Page 4 of 5 Permit Number: (to be provided by DWQ) I acknowledge and agree by my signature below that I am responsible for the performance of the maintenance procedures listed above. I agree to notify DWQ of any problems with the system or prior to any changes to the system or responsible party. Project name:LIDL Grocery Store - Rockingham, NC BMP drainage area number: l Print name:Ryan Wehmann Title:Real Estate Manager - Development Address: 1500 Sunday Drive, Suite 101, Raleigh, NC 27607 Note: The legally responsible party should not be a homeowners association unless more than 50% of the lots have been sold and a resident of the subdivision has been named the president. I, w'�_�P,u M, r^ul(p U q h , a Notary Public for the State of N oh ✓ v()linc. ,County of W a ke , do hereby certify that L y an W P h Mc,, n r\ personally appeared before me this -2- 1 day of An VI 1 7 Cl (� , and acknowledge the due execution of the forgoing wet detention basin maintenance requirements. Witness my hand and official seal, O - PURL 'COU _ X11111111\\ a W.11I My commission expires hJpyrfflhe r 201 cl Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin O&M-Rev.4 Page 5 of 5 Bioretention Calculations Permit Number: (to be provided by DWQ) AUII'Ar t r NCDENR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT APPLICATION FORM 401 CERTIFICATION APPLICATION FORM BIORETENTION CELL SUPPLEMENT This form must be filled out, printed and submitted. The Required Items Checklist (Part III) must be printed, filled out and submitted along with all of the required information. I. PROJECT INFORMATION 10.9 hr Project name Rockingham Contact name Bohler Engineering NC, PLLC - Mike Roselli, PE Phone number 919-578-9000 Date 2016.06.23 Drainage area number 2 II. DESIGN INFORMATION N/A ft3/sec Site Characteristics Post -development 1 -yr, 24 -hr peak flow Drainage area 46,827 ft2 Impervious area 36,810 ft2 Percent impervious 78.6% % Design rainfall depth 1.0 inch Peak Flow Calculations 10.9 hr OK Is pre/post control of the 1 -yr, 24 -hr peak flow required? N (Y or N) OK 1 -yr, 24 -hr runoff depth 3.1 in 1 -yr, 24 -hr intensity 0.35 in/hr Pre -development 1 -yr, 24 -hr peak flow N/A ft3/sec OK Post -development 1 -yr, 24 -hr peak flow N/A ft3/sec Pre/Post 1 -yr, 24 -hr peak control #VALUE! ft3 /sec OK Storage Volume: Non -SA Waters Minimum volume required 2,269.0 ft3 OK Volume provided 2,285.0 ft3 OK Storage Volume: SA Waters 1.5 runoff volume ft3 Parts I and 11. Design Summary, Page 1 of 4 Pre -development 1 -yr, 24 -hr runoff ft3 Post -development 1 -yr, 24 -hr runoff ft3 Minimum volume required 0 ft3 Volume provided ft3 Cell Dimensions Ponding depth of water 10 inches OK Ponding depth of water 0.83 ft Surface area of the top of the bioretention cell 2,385 ft' OK Length: 120 ft OK Width: 20 ft OK -or- Radius ft Media and Soils Summary Drawdown time, ponded volume 10.9 hr OK Drawdown time, to 24 inches below surface 22 hr OK Drawdown time, total: 32.9 hr In-situ soil: Soil permeability UNDERDRAINS in/hr OK Planting media soil: Soil permeability 1.00 in/hr OK Soil composition % Sand (by volume) 85% OK % Fines (by volume) 10% OK Form SW401-Bioretention-Rev.8 June 25, 2010 Parts I and 11. Design Summary, Page 1 of 4 % Organic (by volume) 5% OK Total: 100% Phosphorus Index (P -Index) of media 20 (unitless) OK Permit Number: (to be provided by DWQ) Form SW401-Bioretention-Rev.8 June 25, 2010 Parts I and It. Design Summary, Page 2 of 4 Basin Elevations Temporary pool elevation Type of bioretention cell (answer "Y" to only one of the two following questions): Is this a grassed cell? Is this a cell with trees/shrubs? Planting elevation (top of the mulch or grass sod layer) Depth of mulch Bottom of the planting media soil Planting media depth Depth of washed sand below planting media soil Are underdrains being installed? How many clean out pipes are being installed? What factor of safety is used for sizing the underdrains? (See BMP Manual Section 12.3.6) Additional distance between the bottom of the planting media and the bottom of the cell to account for underdrains Bottom of the cell required SHWT elevation Distance from bottom to SHWT Internal Water Storage Zone (IWS) Does the design include IWS Elevation of the top of the upturned elbow Separation of IWS and Surface Planting Plan Number of tree species Number of shrub species Number of herbaceous groundcover species Additional Information Does volume in excess of the design volume bypass the bioretention cell? Does volume in excess of the design volume flow evenly distributed through a vegetated filter? What is the length of the vegetated filter? Does the design use a level spreader to evenly distribute flow? Is the BMP located at least 30 feet from surface waters (50 feet if SA waters)? Is the BMP localed at least 100 feet from water supply wells? Are the vegetated side slopes equal to or less than 3:1? Is the BMP located in a proposed drainage easement with access to a public Right of Way (ROW)? Inlet velocity (from treatment system) Is the area surrounding the cell likely to undergo development in the future? Are the slopes draining to the bioretention cell greater than 20%? Is the drainage area permanently stabilized? Pretreatment Used (Indicate Type Used with an "X" in the shaded cell) Gravel and grass (8'inches gravel followed by 3-5 ft of grass) Grassed swale Forebay Other Form SW401-Bioretention-Rev.8 June 25, 2010 Permit Number: (to be provided by DWQ) 269.33 fmsl Y (Y or N) OK N (Y or N) 268.5 fmsl GRASSED inches Insufficient mulch depth, unless installing grassed cell. 265.5 fmsl 3 f A474 Y (Y or N) (2) 6" Drains OK 10 OK 1 f 264.33 fmsl USING LINER fmsl #VALUE! ft N (Y or N) fmsl 268.5 ft 0 0 SOD Y (Y or N) OK N/A (Y or N) Enter Data N/A ft N/A (Y or N) Enter Data Y (Y or N) OK Y (Y or N) OK Y (Y or N) OK Y (Y or N) OK 1 ft/sec OK N (Y or N) OK N (Y or N) OK Y (Y or N) OK X OK #VALUE! #VALUE! Parts I and It. Design Summary, Page 3 of 4 Permit No: (to be assigned by DWQ) Please indicate the page or plan sheet numbers where the supporting documentation can be found. An incomplete submittal package will result in a request for additional information. This will delay final review and approval of the project. Initial in the space provided to indicate the following design requirements have been met. If the applicant has designated an agent, the agent may initial below. If a requirement has not been met, attach justification. Pagel Plan Initials Sheet No. 1. Plans (1" - 50' or larger) of the entire site showing: Design at ultimate build -out, Off-site drainage (if applicable), Delineated drainage basins (include Rational C coefficient per basin), Cell dimensions, Pretreatment system, High flow bypass system, Maintenance access, Recorded drainage easement and public right of way (ROW), Clean out pipe locations, Overflow device, and Boundaries of drainage easement. 2. Plan details (1" = 30' or larger) for the bioretention cell showing: - Cell dimensions Pretreatment system, High flow bypass system, Maintenance access, Recorded drainage easement and public right of way (ROW), Design at ultimate build -out, Off-site drainage (if applicable), Clean out pipe locations, Overflow device, and Boundaries of drainage easement. Indicate the P -Index between 10 and 30 3. Section view of the bioretention cell (1" = 20' or larger) showing: - Side slopes, 3:1 or lower Underdrain system (if applicable), and Bioretention cell layers [ground level and slope, pre-treatment, ponding depth, mulch depth, fill media depth, washed sand, filter fabric (or choking stone if applicable), #57 stone, underdrains (if applicable), SHWT level(s), and overflow structure] 4. A soils report that is based upon an actual field investigation, soil borings, and infiltration tests. The results of the soils report must be verified in the field by DWQ, by completing & submitting the soils investigation request form. County soil maps are not an acceptable source of soils information. All elevations shall be in feet mean sea level (fmsl). Results of soils tests of both the planting soil and the in situ soil must include: Soil permeability, Soil composition (% sand, % fines, % organic), and P -index. 5. A detailed planting plan (1" = 20' or larger) prepared by a qualified individual showing: A variety of suitable species, Sizes, spacing and locations of plantings, Total quantity of each type of plant specified, A planting detail, The source nursery for the plants, and Fertilizer and watering requirements to establish vegetation. 6. A construction sequence that shows how the bioretention cell will be protected from sediment until the entire drainage area is stabilized. 7. The supporting calculations (including underdrain calculations, if applicable). 8. A copy of the signed and notarized inspection and maintenance (AM) agreement. 9. A copy of the deed restriction. Form SW401-Bioretention-Rev.7 Part III, Page 4 of 4 ® B O I LER Bioretention Basin 1 Project Information 7.81 ? Ql/2D,= Project Name: Rockingham (Flowrate for a 12 hr drawdown) Project #: NCR151000 in Designed by: MAR Date: 6/24/2016 Checked by: WLB Date: 6/24/2016 Site Information cfs Sub Area Location: Bioretention Basin 1 Drainage Area (DA) = 46,827 at Impervious Area (IA) = 36,810 at Percent Impervious (I) = 78.6 Submerged Concrete Unit Weight 87.6 Elevations 24 in Top of Bank Elevation = 270.70 ft Top of Spillway Elevation = 269.33 ft Top of Cell Elevation = 268.50 ft Bottom of Cell Elevation = 264.50 ft Invert Elevation = 264.00 ft Basin AreaslVolumes less than 12 hours (yes/no) ? Area of Bottom of Cell= 2,385 sf Volume of Basin= 2,285 cf Required Storage Volume - Using Simple Method 1 Design Storm = 1 inch (Project Does Not Drain to SA waters) Determine Rv Value = 0.05 + 0.009 (I) = 0.76 in/in Storage Volume Required = 2,956 cf Required Storage Volume - Using Discrete SCS Method Flow (Q) = Impervious Area cfs CN = 98 S= 0.20 P = 1.43 Q = 0.74 in Storage = 2,269 cf (above Permanent Pool) Pervious Area 5.60 USE 2, 6" underdrains CN = 39 S= 15.64 P = 1.43 Q = N/A in Storage = N/A Storage Volume Required = 2,269 Orifice Sizing - Drawdown If D is less than R of o" 5.13 2 7.81 ? Ql/2D,= 0.0529 cfs (Flowrate for a 12 hr drawdown) Orifice Size = 1 1/2 in (Diameter) Driving Head (Ho) = 1.76 ft (Weight of Water Displaced) Go-= 0.078 cfs Drawdown Time = 8.1 hours less than 12 hours (yes/no) ? Yes (Unit WT of Concrete = 150 pcf) Media Drawdown 0.0 cf Submerged Concrete Unit Weight 87.6 Inches Below Surface = 24 in Q1/2 D-= 0.0596 cfs (Flowrate for a 12 hr drawdown) Driving Head (Ho) = 1.48 ft concrete) Q oma = 0.072 cfs INCORRECT Drawdown Time = 10.0 hours less than 12 hours (yes/no) ? Yes Underdrain Sizing D=16((Q-N)/SA.5))A(3/8) Media Infiltration Rate = 1 in/hr Flow Rate Through Media = 0.0552 cfs Factor of Safety 10 Flow (Q) = 0.5521 cfs Roughness Coefficient (n) = 0.011 Slope = 0.01 D = 5.60 USE 2, 6" underdrains BMP Manual. Cheater 5 - Table 5-1 If D is less than N of {" If D is less than R of o" 5.13 2 7.81 ? 5.95 3 9.11 3 o.tab 4 10.1? d Displaced Volume = 0 7.75 Bottom of Riser) 8.'17 0 Anti -Flotation Device N/A - no outlet structure proposed Outside Length = ft Outside Width = ft Inside Length = It Inside Width = ft Bottom Thickness = ft Top of Riser = sf Invert of Riser = ft Displaced Area = 0.0 sf (Outside Dim. = x, Inside Dim. = x) (Water Displaced - Top of Riser to Displaced Volume = 0 cf Bottom of Riser) Displaced Weight= 0 lbs (Weight of Water Displaced) Factor of Safety = 1.10 WT Req'd of Anti -Flotation Device = 0 lbs (Unit WT of Concrete = 150 pcf) Volume of Concrete Req'd = 0.0 cf Submerged Concrete Unit Weight 87.6 Depth Provided = 2.00 ft (4 -ft x 4 -ft Box filled 2 -ft deep vrith Volume Provided = 0.0 cf concrete) WT of Anti -Flotation Device Provided = 0 lbs INCORRECT Hydrograph Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2016 by Autodesk, Inc. v10.5 Hyd. No. 4 Bioretention Routed Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume Inflow hyd. No. = 3 - Bioretention Inflow Max. Elevation Reservoir name = Bioretention Max. Storage Storage Indication method used. Q (cfs) 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 Bioretention Routed Hyd. No. 4 -- 10 Year 1 Friday, 06 / 24 / 2016 = 2.859 cfs = 728 min = 11,184 cuft = 269.57 ft = 3,199 cuft 0.00 ' ' 0 240 480 720 960 1200 1440 1680 1920 Hyd No. 4 Hyd No. 3 1111111 Total storage used = 3,199 cuft Q (cfs) 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 ---.4 0.00 2160 Time (min) 10 -Year Velocity Exiting SCMS Wetpond CFS 9.48 ftA3/s (See routing) Cross sectional area 7.07 ftA2 (Area of 18in pipe. Conservative, as flow is directed to wider dissipator pad) Velocity 1.34 ft/s Less than 2 ft/s? OK Bioretention CFS 2.86 ftA3/s (See routing) Cross sectional area 3.60 ftA2 (0.24' depth in 10 -year storm x 15' spillway) Velocity 0.79 ft/s Less than 2 ft/s? OK Permit Number: (to be provided by DWQ) Drainage Area Number: Bioretention Operation and Maintenance Agreement I will keep a maintenance record on this BMP. This maintenance record will be kept in a log in a known set Iocation. Any deficient BMP elements noted in the inspection will be corrected, repaired or replaced immediately. These deficiencies can affect the integrity of structures, safety of the public, and the removal efficiency of the BMP. Important operation and maintenance procedures: Immediately after the bioretention cell is established, the plants will be watered twice weekly if needed until the plants become established (commonly six weeks). Snow, mulch or any other material will NEVER be piled on the surface of the bioretention cell. — Heavy equipment will NEVER be driven over the bioretention cell. — Special care will be taken to prevent sediment from entering the bioretention cell. — Once a year, a soil test of the soil media will be conducted. After the bioretention cell is established, I will inspect it once a month and within 24 hours after every storm event greater than 1.0 inches (or 1.5 inches if in a Coastal County). Records of operation and maintenance will be kept in a known set location and will be available upon request. Inspection activities shall be performed as follows. Any problems that are found shall be repaired immediately. BMP element: Potentialproblems: How I will remediate theproblem: The entire BMP Trash/debris is present. Remove the trash/ debris. The perimeter of the Areas of bare soil and/or Regrade the soil if necessary to bioretention cell erosive gullies have formed. remove the gully, and then plant a ground cover and water until it is established. Provide lime and a one-time fertilizer application. The inlet device: pipe, The pipe is clogged (if Unclog the pipe. Dispose of the stone verge or swale applicable). sediment off-site. The pipe is cracked or Replace the pipe. otherwise damaged (if applicable). Erosion is occurring in the Regrade the swale if necessary to swale (if applicable). smooth it over and provide erosion control devices such as reinforced turf matting or riprap to avoid future problems with erosion. Stone verge is clogged or Remove sediment and clogged covered in sediment (i£ stone and replace with clean stone. applicable). Form SW40 I -Bioretention O&M-Rev.3 Page 1 of 4 SMP element: Potentialproblems: How I will remediate theproblem: The pretreatment area Flow is bypassing Regrade if necessary to route all pretreatment area and/or flow to the pretreatment area. allies have formed. Restabilize the area after grading. Sediment has accumulated to Search for the source of the a depth greater than three sediment and remedy the problem if inches. possible. Remove the sediment and restabiIize the pretreatment area. Erosion has occurred. Provide additional erosion protection such as reinforced turf matting or riprap if needed to prevent future erosion problems. Weeds are present. Remove the weeds, preferably by hand. The bioretention cell: Best professional practices Prune according to best professional vegetation show that pruning is needed practices. to maintain optimal plant health. Plants are dead, diseased or Determine the source of the dying. problem: soils, hydrology, disease, etc. Remedy the problem and replace plants. Provide a one-time fertilizer application to establish the ground cover if a soil test indicates it is necessary. Tree stakes/wires are present Remove tree stake/ wires (which six months after planting. can kill the tree if not removed). The bioretention cell: Mulch is breaking down or Spot mulch if there are only random soils and mulch has floated away. void areas. Replace whole mulch Iayer if necessary. Remove the remaining much and replace with triple shredded hard wood mulch at a maximum depth of three inches. Soils and/or mulch are Determine the extent of the clogging clogged with sediment. - remove and replace either just the top layers or the entire media as needed. Dispose of the spoil in an appropriate off-site location. Use triple shredded hard wood mulch at a maximum depth of three inches. Search for the source of the sediment and remedy the problem if possible. An annual soil test shows that Dolomitic lime shall be applied as pH has dropped or heavy recommended per the soil test and metals have accumulated in toxic soils shall be removed, the soil media, disposed of properly and replaced with new planting media. Form SW401-Bioretention O&M-Rev.3 Page 2 of 4 BMP element: Potentialproblems: How I will remediate theproblem: The underdrain system Clogging has occurred. Wash out the underdrain system. if applicable) The drop inlet Clogging has occurred. Clean out the drop inlet. Dispose of the sediment off-site. The drop inlet is damaged Repair or replace the drop inlet. The receiving water Erosion or other signs of Contact the NC Division of Water damage have occurred at the Quality 401 Oversight Unit at 919 - outlet. 733-1786. Form SW401 -Bioretention O&M-Rev.3 Page 3 of 4 Permit Number: (to be provided by DWQ) I acknowledge and agree by my signature below that I am responsible for the performance of the maintenance procedures listed above. I agree to notify DWQ of any problems with the system or prior to any changes to the system or responsible party. Project name:LIDL Grocery Store - Rockingham, NC BMP drainage area number:2 Print name: Joseph Gallo Title: Development - Construction Manager Address: 1500 Sunday Drive, Suite 101, Raleigh, NC 27607 Phone: (703) 408-5643 Si Date: Note: The legally responsible party should not be a homeowners association unless more than 50% of the lots have been sold and a resident of the subdivision has been named the president. I, s&nX'2A R. C41.5 et n , a Notary Public for the State of NO (kk) (911 Y)OLCounty of W CLZ--Z , do hereby certify that Jo 5i G-� OL 1 I U personally appeared before me this L,401 day of J"-[, , U i �, and acknowledge the due execution of the forgoing bioretention maintenance requirements. Witness my hand and official seal, EN SEAL„ My commission expires r Form SW401-Bioretention I&M-Rev. 2 Page 4 of 4 Geotechnical Reports GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION REPORT PROPOSED RETAIL DEVELOPMENT MGP PROJECT #P000339 / BOHLER PROJECT #NCC142080 HAMLET AVENUE (US 7413) ROCKINGHAM, NORTH CAROLINA S&ME, INC. PROJECT NO. 1305-15-022 Prepared for: Bohler Engineering, NC, PLLC 4011 WestChase Boulevard, Suite 290 Raleigh, North Carolina 27607 MGP Retail Consulting, LLC 1500 Sunday Drive, Suite 101 Raleigh, North Carolina 27607 Prepared By: S&ME, Inc. 3201 Spring Forest Road Raleigh, North Carolina 27616 N.C. Firm License No. F-0176 April 2, 2015 April 2, 2015 Bohler Engineering, NC, PLLC 4011 WestChase Boulevard Raleigh, North Carolina 27607 Attention: Mr. Chris Capellini ccapellini(a,bohlerenp—com Reference: Geotechnical Exploration Report Proposed Retail Development Hamlet Avenue (US 74B) Rockingham, North Carolina S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 Bohler Project No. NCC142080 MGP Retail Project No. P000339 Dear Mr. Capellini, S&ME, Inc. (S&ME) is pleased to submit this geotechnical exploration report for the referenced project. Our services were performed in general accordance with executed WA#1 dated March 16, 2015 and the "Subconsultant Master Agreement" between Bohler Engineering and S&ME, Inc. dated June 20, 2014. This report presents a summary of our understanding of the project, the findings of our field exploration, laboratory test results, and our geotechnical conclusions and recommendations regarding site grading and building/pavement support. Our exploration was performed in general accordance with item 9 of the MGP Retail Environmental and Geotechnical Scope of work. We appreciate the If you have any qt Sincerely, S& Inc. Keith Brown, P.E. ,Work with Bohler Engineering during this phase of the project. gpisxeport, please contact us. n, 9° e S L <g - 0 .s•• 0 %Ari ti Senior Geotechnical EngineerNice President NC Registration No. 022540 Adam Browning, P.E. Project Manager TAProjects\2015\GE0\1305-15-022 MGP Realty-Rockingham\Deliverables\1305-15-022 MGP Rockingham Initial Report.doc S&ME, INC. / 3201 Spring Forest Road / Raleigh, NC 27616 / p 919.872.2660 / IF 919.876.3958 / www.smeinc.com Geotechnical Exploration Report S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 Proposed MGP Retail # P000339 — Rockingham, North Carolina April 2, 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1. PROJECT INFORMATION.................................................................................... 1 2. EXPLORATION PROGRAM................................................................................. 2 2.1 Field.................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Laboratory...........................................................................................................3 3. AREA GEOLOGY.................................................................................................... 3 4. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS................................................................................ 3 4.1 Laboratory Testing.............................................................................................. 4 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................. 5 5.1 Site Preparation................................................................................................... 6 5.2 Structural Fill...................................................................................................... 7 5.2.1 Structural Fill.......................................................................................... 7 5.2.2 Fill Placement......................................................................................... 7 5.3 Subgrade Evaluation and Repair......................................................................... 8 5.4 Excavations......................................................................................................... 8 6. BUILDING FOUNDATION DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ......................... 8 6.1 Bearing Pressure................................................................................................. 8 6.2 Bearing Depth and Dimension............................................................................ 9 6.3 Settlement........................................................................................................... 9 7. FLOOR SLAB............................................................................................................ 9 8. RETAINING WALL PARAMETERS.................................................................. 10 8.1 Retaining Walls - General................................................................................. 10 8.2 Cast -In -Place Concrete Walls........................................................................... 10 8.3 Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) Walls .................................................... 11 9. SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS............................................................................. 12 10. PAVEMENTS.................................................................................................12 11. LIMITATIONS OF REPORT....................................................................... 13 FIGURES Figure 1 Exploration Location Plan Figure 2 Alta Survey Figure 3 Generalized Subsurface Conditions APPENDICES Appendix I Legend Boring Logs Appendix II Laboratory Test Results Summary Table Laboratory Test Results Geotechnical Exploration Report S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 Proposed MGP Retail # P000339 — Rockingham, North Carolina April 2, 2015 1. PROJECT INFORMATION Information for this project is based on the following: Section 9 MGP Geotechnical Scope of Work, undated, provided by Bohler Engineering via email on January 20, 2015. Bohler Engineering email requesting geotechnical services on March 3, 2015 with attachments including a site plan prepared by Bohler Engineering, dated February 24, 2015. Alta survey provided by Bohler Engineering. Google Earth aerial image. We understand that a retail development is planned north of US 74 Business and west of an existing Zaxby's in Rockingham, North Carolina. The 5.15 +/- acre site is currently moderately to heavily wooded. Portions of the site appears to have been previously developed and has also been used as a dumping area. A stockpile of soil was observed in the vicinity of boring P-2. Miscellaneous construction debris was observed randomly across the site. An apartment complex is currently under construction, just north of the proposed site. A sedimentation basin is located immediately adjacent to the northern property line, just north of the building. The basin discharges water onto the site in the vicinity of the northern most proposed detention pond. *Based map obtained from Google Earth (Imagery Date 11/30/2014). Geotechnical Exploration Report SWE Project No. 1305-15-022 Proposed MGP Retail # P000339 — Rockingham, North Carolina April 2, 2015 The retail building will have a plan area of about 36,000 square feet with 175 space parking lot with associated drive areas. We understand that two BMP's were to be located on the site, one in the southwest corner of the site and another east of the access drive off US 74 B. The northern most BMP has been eliminated due to its proximity to existing wetland areas. The finished floor elevation is estimated at 272 feet by Bohler. No grading plans are currently available. We understand the building will consist of a pre-engineered metal structure with concrete slab -on -grade floor. No structural loading was provided, but we have assumed maximum column and wall loads of 100 kips and 3 kips per linear foot, respectively. Estimated maximum uniform floor slab live load is 125 pounds per square foot (psf) and the maximum floor slab concentrated load is 5 kips. The site is moderately to heavily wooded. Wetland areas have been identified onsite but not confirmed with the Army Corps of Engineers. The existing wetland areas are shown on the attached Figure 1. Existing site elevations range from 275 feet along the eastern property line to 259 feet along the western property line. 2. EXPLORATION PROGRAM 2.1 Field The subsurface exploration program for this project included a visual site reconnaissance by representatives of S&ME and performance of 11 Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings. Test locations were selected by S&ME and located in the field by estimating distances from existing site features. Approximate test locations are shown on Figure 1 in the Appendix. Elevations were estimated from an Alta Survey provided by Bohler Engineering (Figure 2) and should be considered approximate. SPT = Standard Penetration Test Standard Penetration Test borings were performed using an ATV -mounted CME 550X drill rig. A 3-t/4 inch hollow stem auger was used to advance the borings. Split -spoon samples of subsurface soils were taken at approximate 2.5 foot intervals above a depth of 10 feet and at 5 foot intervals below 10 feet. Standard penetration tests were conducted in conjunction with split -spoon sampling in general accordance with ASTM D 1586-11. The drill rig is equipped with an autohammer. Depths Exploration Explored Test Locations Location Method Below Existing Grade (feet) B-1 — B-5 Retail Building SPT 20 to 40 P-1 through P-3 Parking/Access Drive Areas SPT 10 D-1 through BMP's D-3 SPT 10 SPT = Standard Penetration Test Standard Penetration Test borings were performed using an ATV -mounted CME 550X drill rig. A 3-t/4 inch hollow stem auger was used to advance the borings. Split -spoon samples of subsurface soils were taken at approximate 2.5 foot intervals above a depth of 10 feet and at 5 foot intervals below 10 feet. Standard penetration tests were conducted in conjunction with split -spoon sampling in general accordance with ASTM D 1586-11. The drill rig is equipped with an autohammer. Geotechnical Exploration Report SWE Project No. 1305-15-022 Proposed MGP Retail # P000339 — Rockingham, North Carolina April 2, 2015 Three bulk samples of auger cuttings were collected from boring B-4 from 1 to 5 feet and D- 2 from 1 to 5 feet and 5 to 10 feet. Boreholes were observed for groundwater at completion of drilling and in selected boreholes after a period of 24 hours. At completion of drilling operations, representative soil samples were returned to our laboratory for quantitative testing and visual classification in general accordance with Unified Soil Classification System guidelines. Soil samples will be stored in our Greensboro laboratory for a minimum of 6 months, and can be stored for a longer period, if requested. A Profile of Generalized Subsurface Conditions (Figure 3) along with Boring Log records are included in the Appendix. Stratification lines shown on Boring Logs and profile are intended to represent approximate depths of changes in soil types. Naturally, transitional changes in soil types are often gradual and cannot be defined at particular depths. 2.2 Laboratory Laboratory testing was performed on bulk and split -spoon samples obtained from selected boreholes and depths. Laboratory testing included natural moisture content, standard Proctor compaction, California Bearing Ratio (CBR), Atterberg Limits, and grain size distribution. All laboratory testing was performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM standards. 3. AREA GEOLOGY The site is located within the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province of North Carolina. The Coastal Plain Province is typically characterized by marine and eolian sediments that were deposited during periods of fluctuating sea levels and moving shore lines. As such, the Coastal Plain Province is characterized by subdued topographic features and flat low- lying terrain. Near surface soils often consist of more recent undifferentiated deposits of interbedded sand, silts and clays. Deeper deposits also consist of sand, silts and clays but can be defined as particular formations with distinguishable characteristics and engineering properties. The primary geologic formation within the area of the site is the Middendorf Formation. The Middendorf Formation is typically sand, sandstone and mudstone that is gray to pale gray with an orange cast. Clay balls and iron -cemented concentrations are common, beds laterally discontinuous and cross -bedding is common. 4. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The description of subsurface conditions provided below is relatively brief and general. More detailed descriptions of conditions at each location are included on individual Boring Logs in Appendix II. Topsoil was encountered in all of the soil test borings to depths ranging from 3 to 6 inches below the existing ground surface. The near surface soils were significantly wet as you move toward and into the approximate wetland areas. Several hand auger borings were performed in the wetland areas. Topsoil thicknesses of 12 inches were observed in this area along with near surface groundwater conditions. Geotechnical Exploration Report S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 Proposed MGP Retail # P000339 — Rockingham, North Carolina April 2, 2015 Fill soil was encountered in borings B-3 and P-2 to a depth of 3 feet below existing ground surface. The fill was generally comprised of silty and clayey sands (Unified Soil Classifications SM and SC) with a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N -value of 2 to 6 blows per foot (bpf). The SPT N -values are indicative of poorly compacted materials. Coastal Plain soils were encountered underlying the fill at the above mentioned borings and below the topsoil in the remaining borings. The natural soils generally consisted of very loose to dense silty sands (SM) and clayey sands (SC), and soft to very stiff sandy clays and silty clays (CL). SPT N -values in the Coastal Plain soils ranged from 2 to 51 bp£ Each boring was terminated in coastal plain soils at depths of 10 to 40 feet below the existing ground surface. No partially weathered rock (PWR) or auger refusal was encountered in the performed borings. Water level measurements were attempted in open boreholes at the termination of drilling and in several borings following a period of 24 hours. Groundwater was encountered in borings B-1 through B-4, D-1 through D-3 and P-2 and P-3 at depths ranging from the ground surface to 8 feet below the existing ground surface. Boreholes B-5 and P-1 caved at depths of 6 to 11 feet below existing ground surface. Borehole cave depths are typically an indication groundwater is present. It is important to realize that groundwater levels will fluctuate with changes in rainfall and evaporation rates. Additionally, perched water conditions may exist during the typically wetter winter months above less permeable fine-grained soils. Past experience with similar soil conditions indicates that perched water will be present during wet periods of the year. 4.1 Laboratory Testing Laboratory testing included natural moisture content, standard Proctor compaction, California Bearing Ratio (CBR), consolidation, Atterberg Limits, and grain size distribution. Natural moisture content testing was performed on selected split -spoon and bulk samples. Natural moisture content testing indicated moisture contents ranging from 12.3 to 22.1 percent. Atterberg limits testing was performed on split -spoon and bulk samples obtained from B- 5 (3.5-5 feet), D-1 (1-2.5 feet) and D-2 (1-5 feet). Testing indicated liquid limits ranging from 28 to 52 percent, plastic limits ranging from 13 to 21 percent, and plasticity indices ranging from 15 to 31 percent. These values are indicative of low to moderate plasticity soils. Geotechnical Exploration Report SWE Project No. 1305-15-022 Proposed MGP Retail # P000339 — Rockingham, North Carolina April 2, 2015 Grain size analysis testing was performed on samples obtained from B-1 (1-2.5 feet) and B-4 (3.5-5 feet). Testing indicated soils that contained 12.8 to 42.5 to percent fines (percent passing #200 sieve) and 57.4 to 85.8 percent sand. A standard Proctor compaction test was performed on a bulk sample obtained from B-4 (5-10 feet). Testing indicated a maximum dry density of 116.8 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) with corresponding optimum moisture content of 13.3 percent. The natural moisture content of the bulk sample tested was 15 percent indicating the bulk sample tested is 1.7 percent wet of optimum. A California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test was performed on a specimen from the bulk sample obtained from B-4 (5-10 feet). The specimen was recompacted to approximately 98 percent of its maximum dry density at a moisture content 3 percent dry of optimum. The sample was soaked for 96 hours and a swell value of 2 percent was recorded. CBR testing on the soaked sample indicated a CBR value of 3.2 percent. A tabular summary and individual lab results are provided in Appendix II of this report. 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The following conclusions recommendations are based upon review of exploration data, our understanding of the proposed construction, and past experience with similar projects and subsurface conditions. If structural loads or site grades are significantly different from those anticipated, we request the opportunity to review and comment upon the recommendations of this report so that they may be confirmed, extended, or modified as necessary. If subsurface conditions adverse to those indicated by this report are encountered during construction, those differences should be reported to us for review and comment. The subsurface exploration findings indicate the site is suitable for the proposed construction following remedial measures. Portions of the parking lot will be constructed within existing wetland areas. Depending upon design finished grades, undercutting and stabilization with fabric and stone could be required to properly prepare the subgrade soils to allow for placement of compacted structural fill. The majority of soils excavated from proposed pond locations, utility excavations within low-lying portions of the site, and in general any soils excavated from below the groundwater table will require significant drying prior to reuse as compacted structural fill. Foundations for the building may be designed as conventional spread footings bearing in approved existing soils and well -compacted structural fill. The following paragraphs present more detailed conclusions and geotechnical recommendations regarding site development and building and pavement construction. Geotechnical Exploration Report S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 Proposed MGP Retail # P000339 — Rockingham, North Carolina April 2, 2015 5.1 Site Preparation Our experience with previously graded sites indicates unexpected conditions often exist between soil test boring locations. These may include active or abandoned utility lines, areas of low consistency fill, buried debris, and others. Such conditions, if encountered, can be handled by engineering evaluations at the time of construction. Prior to initiating the earthwork, all vegetation should be cleared, roots grubbed, and topsoil stripped from the proposed building, parking, and retaining wall areas, extending a minimum of 10 feet beyond the outside edges of the building/pavement footprints. Demolition should include removal of any foundations, slabs, utilities, etc. All debris associated with the demolition should be removed from the development area. Cavities created by demolition should be backfilled with structural fill placed and compacted in accordance with the recommendations in this report. Topsoil stripping depths of 6 inches are anticipated in areas outside the designated wetland areas. These areas can be cleared and stripped with conventional equipment. Within and around wetland areas, rubber -tired equipment will rut near surface soils, mixing topsoil with underlying materials. Wetland areas should be cleared and stripped with wide -track equipment. Heavy rubber -tired equipment should not be allowed to operate on exposed subgrade soils. After stripping of surficial materials has been completed, and following excavation to final grade in cut areas, the exposed subgrade should be evaluated by the project Geotechnical Engineer (or his representative) by proofrolling with a loaded dump truck or similar pneumatic tire vehicle (minimum loaded weight of 20 tons) to identify unstable soils requiring remediation. The proofrolling procedure should consist of two complete passes of the equipment over the subgrade. Areas of the subgrade that rut or deflect excessively in the opinion of the project Geotechnical Engineer, considering the depth below finished grade and proposed construction at the specific location, should be repaired. Repair may consist of undercut and replacement or scarifying, moisture conditioning, and recompacting. In parking lot areas receiving greater than 4 feet of structural fill, a geotextile stabilization fabric (i.e. Mirafi 500x or equivalent) followed by an initial bridge lift of no greater than 18 inches of off-site borrow soils with less than 15% passing the No. 200 sieve may be considered. Bridge lifts should be recommended in the field at the time of construction by a representative of the geotechnical engineer. Bridge lifts should be kept as thin as possible and may not be practical based on amount of proposed structural fill, prevailing weather conditions and type of bridge lift material. Geotechnical Exploration Report S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 Proposed MGP Retail # P000339 — Rockingham, North Carolina April 2, 2015 5.2 Structural Fill After initial site preparation has been completed and the subgrade is determined to be stable, site grading should proceed immediately. 5.2.1 Structural Fill After proper site preparation, areas requiring fill may be raised to their design subgrade levels using approved off-site borrow materials. The majority of site fill materials are anticipated to be from an off-site location (or locations). A shrinkage factor of 15 percent from excavation to compaction is typically assumed for natural soils in this region based on NCDOT guidelines. We recommend that borrow soils consist of the following characteristics: General Site Grading: Less than 3 percent organics and no deleterious materials. USCS classification of SW, SP, SM, SC, ML, CL or some combination of these. Low plasticity soil (with a liquid limit less than 50% and a plasticity index less than 20%). A standard Proctor maximum dry density of at least 100 pcf. Maximum particle size of 3 inches in any dimension. Backfill for loading dock walls and MSE retaining: Less than 3 percent organics and no deleterious materials. USCS classification of SW, SP, or SM with less than 15% passing the #200 sieve. A standard Proctor maximum dry density of at least 100 pcf. Maximum particle size of 3 inches in any dimension. 5.2.2 Fill Placement Each lift of structural fill should be placed in maximum 8 -inch loose lifts. All structural fill should compacted to at least 95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) except for the final 12 inches which should be increased to 98 percent. Fill moisture should be maintained within 3 percent of optimum moisture during compaction. Field density tests should be performed on the structural fill to evaluate whether the specified compaction is achieved. One -point Proctor tests should also be performed on the fill at a frequency determined by the project Geotechnical Engineer to evaluate whether the laboratory Proctor data is appropriate Samples of the proposed fill soils should be tested for moisture content and moisture - density relationship (standard Proctor) to establish their compaction properties. Moisture adjustment may be needed to achieve a compactable soil moisture content. The extent of soil moisture adjustments will be affected by the weather conditions prior to and during grading. Drying may be accomplished by spreading and discing to maximize exposure to sun and wind during favorable weather conditions. Favorable weather conditions are Geotechnical Exploration Report S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 Proposed MGP Retail # P000339 — Rockingham, North Carolina April 2, 2015 typical of the late Spring, Summer, and early Fall. During unfavorable weather conditions, drying may require chemical additives (i.e. lime or cement amendment). 5.3 Subgrade Evaluation and Repair The exposed subgrade can deteriorate and lose support when exposed to construction traffic and adverse weather conditions. Deterioration can occur in the form or rutting, pumping, freezing, or erosion. We recommend that during construction, exposed subgrade surfaces be sealed at the end of each day or when wet weather is forecast. Water should not be allowed to pond on exposed subgrades. Immediately prior to floor slab or pavement construction, exposed subgrade soils should be evaluated by proofrolling to determine their stability. Soils which rut, pump, or deflect under proofrolling should be repaired prior to crushed stone placement. Repair measures may include scarifying/drying/recompacting, undercutting, placement of geotextiles, or some combination of these. Actual repair measures will be influenced by project schedule and weather conditions and can only be determined in the field. 5.4 Excavations This exploration encountered low to moderate consistency soils within the anticipated construction excavation depths. Past experience indicates that these materials can be excavated by routine earth -moving equipment. Local excavations for shallow utility trenches and foundations within site soils and fill can likely be accomplished by a conventional rubber -tired backhoe. Groundwater was encountered at the ground surface in wetland areas and typically within 3 to 5 feet of existing ground surface. Depending on design subgrade elevations, groundwater could be encountered within excavation limits. Groundwater should be maintained 2 feet below the bottom of any mass or confined excavation. For confined excavations, trench safety must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The contractor will be responsible for all site safety, including the determination of appropriate trench safety measures according to OSHA guidelines. 6. BUILDING FOUNDATION DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION Based on the borings and provided structural loads, the MGP building may be supported on shallow spread footings. The following sections provide our geotechnical conclusions and recommendations regarding structural support. 6.1 Bearing Pressure Shallow foundations for the MGP building may be designed using a net allowable bearing pressure of up to 2,500 pounds per square foot, provided the earthwork procedures and recommendations outlined in this report are implemented. Please note that this bearing pressure assumes a final floor elevation of 272 feet. S&ME should be Geotechnical Exploration Report S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 Proposed MGP Retail # P000339 — Rockingham, North Carolina April 2, 2015 contacted to review this recommendation if the finished floor elevation is different than stated above. All foundation excavations should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer or his representative prior to concrete placement to confirm the suitability of underlying materials. If soft or otherwise unsuitable soils are encountered, these soils should be overexcavated and backfilled with washed stone (NCDOT No. 57) or lean concrete. The backfill material should be readily available to backfill immediately after overexcavation in order to prevent sloughing of sidewalls. If water collects in any excavations it should be removed promptly. Care should be exercised during construction of foundations in order not to disturb bearing soils and reduce their bearing strength. Concrete for the footings should be placed as soon as practical following excavation. If concrete placement is delayed, placement of a concrete "mud mat" on exposed bearing soils should be considered. 6.2 Bearing Depth and Dimension Footings should bear at least 18 inches below exterior grade to avoid frost penetration and develop the design bearing capacity. Continuous wall footings should be at least 18 inches wide and isolated column footings should be at least 24 inches wide. This recommendation is made to prevent a localized or "punching" shear failure condition which can occur with very narrow footings. 6.3 Settlement Based on conditions encountered by this exploration, anticipated structural loads, and provided the earthwork procedures and recommendations outlined in this report are implemented, we expect that maximum total settlements beneath footings will be 1 inch or less. Differential settlements are expected to be'/2 inch or less for footings bearing on similar materials. 7. FLOOR SLAB The building floor slab may be grade -supported provided that our site preparation and fill placement recommendations are implemented. We recommend that 4 inches of aggregate base course (ABC) stone be placed beneath the floor slab. ABC stone should conform to the 2012 edition of the NCDOT "Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures." ABC stone should meet requirements under Section 520 and Section 1010. The ABC stone should be compacted to at least 98 percent of its modified Proctor maximum dry density (AASHTO T-180, as modified by NCDOT). We recommend a subgrade modulus value of 150 pci for subgrades prepared in accordance with the recommendations of this report. Geotechnical Exploration Report SWE Project No. 1305-15-022 Proposed MGP Retail # P000339 — Rockingham, North Carolina April 2, 2015 8. RETAINING WALL PARAMETERS General recommendations with respect to retaining wall design and construction are provided below along with specific recommendations for cast -in-place concrete and mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls. As previously noted, additional geotechnical evaluation and analysis is required in order to provide recommendations and parameters related to any proposed retaining structures along the east building wall. Once additional information is available, we should be contacted for any additions or revisions to the recommendations that may be appropriate. 8.1 Retaining Walls - General Retaining walls must be designed to resist lateral earth pressures from the backfill. In addition to the lateral stresses from backfill, the walls may be subjected to surcharge loading from adjacent traffic, stockpiled materials, or stresses from nearby footings or floor slabs. If present, these surcharge stresses should be resolved into appropriate lateral stress distributions and added to the earth pressures outlined below. Walls should have adequate factors of safety against overturning, sliding, and global failure. We recommend placing a drainage medium, such as clean stone (NCDOT No. 57) wrapped in geotextile fabric or a prefabricated geocomposite drain, behind the wall. The drainage medium should be connected to a footing drain or weep holes to reduce potential buildup of hydrostatic pressure due to surface water, perched water, or utility leaks. Backfill soils placed behind retaining walls should meet the requirements described in section 5.2.1 and be compacted to at least 95 percent of the soil's standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) within 3 percent of optimum moisture. Operating heavy compaction equipment within 5 feet behind the retaining structures can create lateral earth pressures far in excess of those recommended for design. As such, we recommend that hand -operated equipment be used within 5 feet from walls. A reduced lift height of 4 inches (loose measure) should be used in conjunction with hand -operated equipment. 8.2 Cast -In -Place Concrete Walls Structural fill meeting the requirements of Section 5.2.1 is recommended for use as backfill behind cast -in-place concrete walls. Recommended backfill parameters for silty sands behind cast -in-place concrete retaining walls are summarized in the table below. The lateral earth pressure coefficients presented below assume no wall friction between the wall and soil backfill ( = 0 degrees) and are based on placement of properly compacted backfill and a level backfill surface. 10 Geotechnical Exploration Report SWE Project No. 1305-15-022 Proposed MGP Retail # P000339 — Rockingham, North Carolina April 2, 2015 Recommended Parameters for Cast -In Place Wall Backfill Parameter Value Friction Angle, (degrees) 30 At -Rest Earth Pressure Coefficient (K)) 0.50 Active Coefficient Earth Pressure (Ka) 0.33 Ultimate Passive Earth Pressure Coefficient (K) 3.00 Moist Unit Weight of Backfill c 120 Ultimate Friction Coefficient Between Wall Foundations and Bearing Soil 0.35 8.3 Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) Walls Select off-site borrow as described in section 5.2.1 is recommended for use as reinforced backfill (backfill containing mechanical reinforcement or geogrid) behind MSE walls. Depending on several factors (i.e., geogrid length, compaction conditions of backfill, and others), use of silts, clays, and clayey sands as backfill could cause wall instability. It is our opinion that silt, clay and clayey sand backfill causes more long term lateral deflection of the backfill mass (and wall face) when compared to a granular soil backfill with low fines contents. Excessive lateral deflection could cause leaning of the wall face and development of cracks behind the wall (e.g., cracking of ground surface or asphalt behind the wall). Cracks behind the wall can create a path for surface water infiltration into the backfill. Water infiltration into the backfill can create loss of backfill strength (i.e., soil strength lower than the design strength) and lead to wall instability (i.e., possible wall failure). It is our opinion that use of granular backfill soils will result in less long-term lateral deflection because most of the deflection occurs during the construction process. As a result, MSE walls with granular soils as backfill tend to experience less cracking behind the wall. Provided that select off-site borrow as described in section 5.2.1 with a maximum of 15% passing the #200 sieve is used as reinforced backfill, a friction angle of at least 30 degrees should be available for reinforced backfill, provided that the backfill is properly compacted in accordance with our recommendations. The above friction angle would correspond to an active earth pressure coefficient Ka of 0.33. This coefficient assumes a level backfill surface behind the wall. A unit weight of 120 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) may be used for this material. Once a backfill material is selected, sufficient laboratory testing including grain size analysis and triaxial testing of the backfill should be performed prior to construction to verify design soil parameters for reinforced fill. The parameters in the table below are applicable for on-site retained soils (i.e. soils behind 11 Geotechnical Exploration Report S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 Proposed MGP Retail # P000339 — Rockingham, North Carolina April 2, 2015 the reinforced zone). The parameters assume that retained soils are properly compacted in accordance with recommendations presented previously. Recommended Parameters for Retained Soils Parameter Value Friction Angle, (degrees) 26 Cohesion (c) 0 Active Coefficient Earth Pressure (Ka) 0.39 Moist Unit Weight of Backfill (pcf) 120 9. SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS Based on the subsurface conditions encountered and experience with the area geology, we recommend Site Class D for use in seismic design at this site in accordance with the 2012 North Carolina Building Code (2009 IBC with North Carolina Amendments). 10. PAVEMENTS S&ME was not provided traffic frequency or vehicle weight information and thus a detailed pavement design was not conducted. However, for parking areas that receive only car traffic, we generally recommend a minimum pavement section consisting of 2 - inches of Type 5-9.5B surface mixture underlain by 6 -inches of aggregate base course stone. In the main access drives and truck (dumpster) routes, we generally recommend a minimum of 4 -inches of asphalt (2.5 inches of I -19B underlying 1.5 inches of 5-9.5B) underlain by a minimum of 8 -inches of aggregate base course. These thicknesses are based on our experience and assume that a compacted, stable subgrade was developed at the time of construction. The asphalt pavement should not be deficient by more than 1/4 inch in any area. All materials and workmanship should meet the North Carolina Department of Transportation's Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures, latest edition. The aggregate base course should consist of Aggregate Base Course (Refer to NCDOT's Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures, Section 520). This base course should be compacted to at least 98 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by the modified Proctor compaction test (ASTM D1557). To confirm that the base course has been uniformly compacted, in-place field density tests should be performed by a qualified Materials Technician and the area should be methodically proofrolled under his evaluation. The condition of the subgrade is critical for the performance of the pavement. The soil subgrade should be proofrolled immediately prior to placement of base course stone. The stone subgrade should be proofrolled immediately prior to placement of asphalt. Unstable areas identified should be repaired. Sufficient testing and evaluation should be 12 Geotechnical Exploration Report SWE Project No. 1305-15-022 Proposed MGP Retail # P000339 — Rockingham, North Carolina April 2, 2015 performed during pavement installation to confirm that the required thickness, density, and quality requirements of the specifications are followed. Also, the pavement subgrade should be sloped to allow rainwater to properly drain away. Areas adjacent to pavements (embankments, landscape islands, ditching, etc.) which can drain water should be designed so that water does not seep below or surface drain onto pavements. Adequate drainage is very important for the long-term performance of the pavement. 11. LIMITATIONS OF REPORT This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice for specific application to this project. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report were based on the applicable standards of our profession at the time this report was prepared. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. Analysis and recommendations submitted in this report are based, in part, upon the data obtained from the geotechnical exploration. The nature and extent of variations between and outside of the borings made may not become evident until construction. If variations appear evident, then it will be necessary to re-evaluate the recommendations of this report. In the event that any changes in the grades, nature, design, or location of the proposed development are planned, the recommendations contained in this report should be reviewed and modified or verified in writing. We recommend that our firm be provided the opportunity for general review of final design specifications to verify that geotechnical recommendations are properly interpreted and implemented. 13 APPENDIX FIGURES P-3 RE 7 D-2' y P-2 P-1 CAtwy B-5 Cx 3uA 01 hTFw-ECw*'.---A TURPILRE NOTE: DRAWING PROVIDED BY BOHLER ENGINEERING AND MODIFIED BY S&ME TO SHOW TEST LOCATIONS. DO NOT USE DRAW ING TO DETERMINE DISTANCES OR QUANTITIES. w_vfr PROP. 4NMmmy STCRE Tex �IF Rm 1%-3 JJJ -F-v � I 1 LSF ;1 Dw -�j LEGEND APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION SCALE: Not to Scale DATE: 3/30/15 ing Forest Road Re PH:sigh, NC 27616 S&ME (919) 872-2660 FAX: (919) 8 6-3958 ENOINEERING - VESTING wvww.SmEINC.00m BORING LOCATION PLAN ROCKINGAM SITE US 74B ROCKINGHAM, NORTH CAROLINA FIGURE NO. PROJECT NO 1305-15-022 DRAWN BY KCB CHECKED BY: KHH EINYRONMENTAL SERVICE -5 J. ? � � + � r 1�1 7YRI9I PRVF NLWYP P �L 9NtlFk rr.+rrt . r 4 wr-,..,.,_� niuraf� . _ I yy PL up II: mc FURr �A '{ `I FF� { . 1 'i- �ff J I ggg- �✓� �,�. � ��k AGlafR ara�araR i I '"x+�.y. �'. �e. � ,1� °b, �yd '� 11 � } ooxiner�i rinir{amaao� o�ie Yr' J{ i1rrF � �'F� es % + - Z ■ :. r1 x.� �:� rte•~ .-,.I. y� l �� ._ 1 +,lk� w er •� �' .�„ : ,' e:. armor r I aiPir - •-• '.' .r � Ell ldl A'R NOTE: DRAWING PROVIDE c - i.,nrow map +--� r ff2 amen ffl�m.,. SCALE: DATE: FIGURE NO. Not to Scale 3/30/15 EXISTING GROUND SURFACE ELEVATIONS 3201 Spring Forest Road (PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY::#S&ME Raleigh, )$ 27616 ^ 1305-15-022 KCB PH: (919)872-2660 ROCKINGAM SITE L FAX: (919) 876-3958 US 74B CHECKED BY: ENGINEER NG • VESTING WWW.SMEINC.COM ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ROCKINGHAM, NORTH CAROLINA JOB NO DATE ■ Topsoil FACL, Low Plasticity Clay Clayey Sand Sandy Clay Silty Sand Clay El Sand N = Standard Penetration Test resistance value (blows per foot). The depicted stratigraphy is shown for illustrative purposes only. The actual subsurface conditions will vary between boring locations. 1305-15-022 S&ME MARCH 2015 Diagram: Generalized Subsurface Profile Project: MGP Retail - Rockingham Location: Rockingham, North Carolina Figure 3 B-2 Finished Floor Elevation = 272 feet 275 - N ... - - ..... B-4...... . 270 B-1 ---- -N ;.'. 4B-3 N --- N-- -- - -- B-5 ---- - - - - - - - - ------P-1- ---- ---- ---- ------ 9 8 N N 6 - 18 6 �7 28 r 7 D-1 D-3 Z i. 4 P-2 P-3 265 27 _ 21 18 - '. 22- - N - N - N- - N 17 17 D-2 9 HC 19 7 2 6 260 HC - 46 _ 15 - _ 6 - _ - 47 1 - 3 _ N HC 24 45 - 2 - 46 J — 41 10HC 51 28 - %' 32 W4 37 40 44 '.'- 2728 BT @ 10' 255 - - ;' ------ 28- ---- - ,'. , ,. -13 -- 27 ---- ------ -23 ---- 28 23 16 20 23 BT @ 10' BT @ 10' BT @ 10- Z BT @ 20' BT @ 10 27 p 16 I 250 .14 . 9 BT @ 20'- .:', . 15 . . . . . . � BT @ 20' BT @ 20' BT @ 1020 LU 245 — 10 - 240 24 - 235 22 230 - 19 BT@40' JOB NO DATE ■ Topsoil FACL, Low Plasticity Clay Clayey Sand Sandy Clay Silty Sand Clay El Sand N = Standard Penetration Test resistance value (blows per foot). The depicted stratigraphy is shown for illustrative purposes only. The actual subsurface conditions will vary between boring locations. 1305-15-022 S&ME MARCH 2015 Diagram: Generalized Subsurface Profile Project: MGP Retail - Rockingham Location: Rockingham, North Carolina Figure 3 APPENDIX I LEGEND TO SOIL CLASSIFICATION AND SYMBOLS SOIL TYPES (Shown in Graphic Log) Fill Asphalt Concrete ■ Topsoil ®Partially Weathered Rock Cored Rock WELL -GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL - �' GW SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES pp POORLY -GRADED GRAVELS, P GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES �p o GM SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL- SAND - n SILT MIXTURES GC CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND - CLAY MIXTURES WATER LEVELS (Shown in Water Level Column) = Water Level At Termination of Boring 1 = Water Level Taken After 24 Hours = Loss of Drilling Water HC = Hole Cave CONSISTENCY OF COHESIVE SOILS STD. PENETRATION Shelby Tube RESISTANCE SW SANDS, LIGRAVELLY Very Soft 0 to 2 LITTLE OR NO FINES 3 to 4 SP POORLY-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SAND, LITTLE OR NO Stiff 9 to 15 FINES 16 to 30 Hard 31 to 50 Very Hard SM SILTY SANDS, SAND -SILT MIXTURES `SC' CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAY MIXTURES INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE ❑ M L SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO CL MEDIUM PLASTICITY,GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS OL ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY ® MH INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SILTY SOILS ® CH INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY OH ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS WATER LEVELS (Shown in Water Level Column) = Water Level At Termination of Boring 1 = Water Level Taken After 24 Hours = Loss of Drilling Water HC = Hole Cave CONSISTENCY OF COHESIVE SOILS RELATIVE DENSITY OF COHESIONLESS SOILS RELATIVE DENSITY Very Loose Loose Medium Dense Dense Very Dense STD. PENETRATION RESISTANCE BLOWS/FOOT 0to4 5to10 11 to 30 31 to 50 Over 50 UA IN 4 IM WO WIIIIIIIIII (Shown in Samples Column) STD. PENETRATION Shelby Tube RESISTANCE CONSISTENCY BLOWS/FOOT Very Soft 0 to 2 Soft 3 to 4 Firm 5 to 8 Stiff 9 to 15 Very Stiff 16 to 30 Hard 31 to 50 Very Hard Over 50 RELATIVE DENSITY OF COHESIONLESS SOILS RELATIVE DENSITY Very Loose Loose Medium Dense Dense Very Dense STD. PENETRATION RESISTANCE BLOWS/FOOT 0to4 5to10 11 to 30 31 to 50 Over 50 UA IN 4 IM WO WIIIIIIIIII (Shown in Samples Column) Shelby Tube ® Split Spoon I Rock Core ❑ No Recovery TERMS Standard - The Number of Blows of 140 Ib. Hammer Falling Penetration 30 in. Required to Drive 1.4 in. I.D. Split Spoon Resistance Sampler 1 Foot. As Specified in ASTM D-1586. REC - Total Length of Rock Recovered in the Core Barrel Divided by the Total Length of the Core Run Times 100%. RQD - Total Length of Sound Rock Segments Recovered that are Longer Than or Equal to 4" (mechanical breaks excluded) Divided by the Total Length of the Core Run Times 100%. *,.S&ME ENGINEERING • TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES PROJECT: MGP Retail - Rockingham Rockingham, North Carolina BORING LOG B-1 S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 DATE DRILLED: 3/18/15 ELEVATION: 269.0 ft NOTES: Borehole backfilled with auger cuttings and a commercial hole closure device placed near the surface. PP = Pocket Penetrometer DRILL RIG: Diedrich D-50 BORING DEPTH: 20.0 ft DRILLER: J. Wino WATER LEVEL: Water at 5' @ 24 hours HAMMER TYPE: Auto LOGGED BY: F. Lloyd SAMPLING METHOD: Split soon NORTHING: 0 EASTING: 1 DRILLING METHOD: 21/4' H.S.A. w BLOW COUNT U w Oz /CORE DATA STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DATA w = _ (D w ~ z C) w (blows/ft) a w W a o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 a w -1 J > w F w- a_ a /REMARKS (D Jo W U)< N M 10 20 30 6080 z TOPSOIL 3 2 3 3 1 6 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SC) loose, gray red, fine to medium, moist to wet, - PP = 1.0 tsf _. 9 12 15 _ 2 27 5— COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SC) 264.0 medium dense to dense, gray tan, fine to medium, moist, with mica below 8', PP = 4.5+ 3 8 18 28 46 tsf 4 11 15 26 41 10- HC 259.0 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND -(UC medium dense, gray tan, fine to coarse, moist to wet, with white clay vein, PP = 2.0 tsf 10 11 12 5 23 15 254.0 _ COASTAL PLAIN: SILTY SAND (SM) medium dense, gray white, fine to medium, wet, with clay and trace mica, PP = 1.0 tsf 6 7 8 6 14 20 249.0 Boring terminated at 20 ft VOTES: 1. THIS LOG IS ONLY A PORTION OFA REPORT PREPARED FOR THE NAMED PROJECT AND MUST ONLY BE USED TOGETHER WITH THAT REPORT. 2. BORING SAMPLING AND PENETRATION TEST DATA IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D-1586. 3. STRATIFICATION AND GROUNDWATER DEPTHS ARE NOT EXACT. 4. WATER LEVEL IS AT TIME OF EXPLORATION AND WILL VARY. Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: MGP Retail - Rockingham Rockingham, North Carolina BORING LOG B-2 S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 DATE DRILLED: 3/18/15 ELEVATION: 274.0 ft NOTES: Borehole backfilled with auger cuttings and a commercial hole closure device placed near the surface. PP = Pocket Penetrometer DRILL RIG: Diedrich D-50 BORING DEPTH: 20.0 ft DRILLER: J. Wino WATER LEVEL: Water at 8' after drilling HAMMER TYPE: Auto LOGGED BY: F. Lloyd SAMPLING METHOD: Split soon NORTHING: 0 EASTING: 2 DRILLING METHOD: 21/4' H.S.A. w BLOW COUNT U w Oz /CORE DATA STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DATA w = _ (D w ~ z C) (blows/ft) a w a o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 a w -� J w > o w F w- a_ a /REMARKS (D -io W can N M 10 20 30 6080 z TOPSOIL 4" 2 2 2 1 4 ALLUVIUM: SAND (SP) very loose, tan, fine, moist .� COASTAL PLAIN: SILTY SAND (SM) 2 3 3 6 _ 9 5 loose to medium dense, gray tan, fine to coarse, 269.0 moist to wet, with trace fine rounded gravel, PP = 1.0 tsf 3 7 9 9 18 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAY (CH) very stiff, white tan, moist, with some fine sand, 4 6 9 12 21 10 PP = 3.5 tsf 264.0 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SCS loose, gray tan, fine, moist to wet, with trace mica, PP = 1.0 tsf _. 2 4 6 5 10 15 259.0 COASTAL PLAIN: SAND (SM medium dense, gray, fine to medium, saturated, with trace fine subrounded gravel 6 8 7 9 16 20 254.0 Boring terminated at 20 ft NOTES: 1. THIS LOG IS ONLY A PORTION OFA REPORT PREPARED FOR THE NAMED PROJECT AND MUST ONLY BE USED TOGETHER WITH THAT REPORT. 2. BORING SAMPLING AND PENETRATION TEST DATA IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D-1586. 3. STRATIFICATION AND GROUNDWATER DEPTHS ARE NOT EXACT. 4. WATER LEVEL IS AT TIME OF EXPLORATION AND WILL VARY. Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: MGP Retail - Rockingham Rockingham, North Carolina BORING LOG B-3 S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 NOTES: Borehole backfilled with auger cuttings DATE DRILLED: 3/18/15 ELEVATION: 270.0 ft and a commercial hole closure device placed near the surface. PP = Pocket Penetrometer DRILL RIG: Diedrich D-50 BORING DEPTH: 40.0 ft DRILLER: J. Wino WATER LEVEL: Water at 10' after drilling HAMMER TYPE: Auto LOGGED BY: F. Lloyd SAMPLING METHOD: Split soon NORTHING: 0 EASTING: 3 DRILLING METHOD: 21/4' H.S.A. w BLOW COUNT U w Oz /CORE DATA STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DATA w = _ (D w ~ z C) (blows/ft) a w W a o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 a w -1 J w > w w- a_ a /REMARKS (D F Jo W can N M 10 20 30 6080 Z TOPSOIL 3" 2 3 3 1 6 FILL: CLAYEY SAND (SC) loose, tan, fine, moist to wet, with trace organics POSSIBLE ALLUVIUM: SILTY SAND (SMS 2 7 9 9 18 5 medium dense, gray, fine to medium, wet 265.0 3 7 8 9 17 COASTAL PLAIN: SANDY CLAY (CL) stiff, white tan, fine, moist to wet, PP = 0.5 tsf 5 7 8 15 10 V 260.0--4 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SCS medium dense, gray tan, fine to medium, moist, with trace mica, PP = 4.5+ tsf 8 12 16 5 28 15 255.0 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SC) loose to medium dense, gray white, fine to medium, wet, with trace mica and silty sand 3 4 5 20 layers, PP = 2.0 tsf 250.0 6 9 7 4 4 6 10 25 245.0- COASTAL 45.0 COASTAL PLAIN: SILTY SAND (SM) _ medium dense, blue tan, fine to medium, wet, with trace rounded quartz gravel 8 8 12 12 24 30 240.0 COASTAL PLAIN: SANDY CLAY (CHS very stiff, red purple, fine, moist, PP = 3.0 tsf 9 6 9 13 22 VOTES: 1. THIS LOG IS ONLY A PORTION OFA REPORT PREPARED FOR THE NAMED PROJECT AND MUST ONLY BE USED TOGETHER WITH THAT REPORT. 2. BORING SAMPLING AND PENETRATION TEST DATA IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D-1586. 3. STRATIFICATION AND GROUNDWATER DEPTHS ARE NOT EXACT. 4. WATER LEVEL IS AT TIME OF EXPLORATION AND WILL VARY. Page 1 of 2 PROJECT: MGP Retail - Rockingham Rockingham, North Carolina BORING LOG B-3 S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 NOTES: Borehole backfilled with auger cuttings DATE DRILLED: 3/18/15 ELEVATION: 270.0 ft and a commercial hole closure device placed near the surface. PP = Pocket Penetrometer DRILL RIG: Diedrich D-50 BORING DEPTH: 40.0 ft DRILLER: J. Wino WATER LEVEL: Water at 10' after drilling HAMMER TYPE: Auto LOGGED BY: F. Lloyd SAMPLING METHOD: Split soon NORTHING: 0 EASTING: 3 DRILLING METHOD: 2'/4' H.S.A. J w BLOW COUNT U w 0 } CORE DATA STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DATA w = = c� H w ~ z c) 0 (blows/ft) J Q 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION rr -1 w " LU o w w -- a_ a � /REMARKS > (� Q J w< Q io co -2 Z COASTAL PLAIN: SANDY CLAY (CH) N 10 20 30 6080 very stiff, red purple, fine, moist, PP = 3.0 tsf (continued) COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SCS medium dense, gray tan, fine to medium, moist 4 8 11 40 to wet, PP = 1.5 tsf 230.0 10 19 Boring terminated at 40 ft NOTES. 1. THIS LOG IS ONLY PORTION OFA REPORT PREPARED FOR THE NAMED PROJECT AND MUST ONLY BE USED TOGETHER WITH THAT REPORT. 2. BORING, SAMPLING AND PENETRATION TEST DATA IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D-1586. 3. STRATIFICATION AND GROUNDWATER DEPTHS ARE NOT EXACT. 4. WATER LEVEL IS AT TIME OF EXPLORATION AND WILL VARY. Page 2 of 2 PROJECT: MGP Retail - Rockingham Rockingham, North Carolina BORING LOG B-4 S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 DATE DRILLED: 3/18/15 ELEVATION: 271.0 ft NOTES: Borehole backfilled with auger cuttings and a commercial hole closure device placed near the surface. Bulk samples obtained from 1' to 5' and T to 10'. PP = Pocket Penetrometer DRILL RIG: Diedrich D-50 BORING DEPTH: 20.0 ft DRILLER: J. Wino WATER LEVEL: Water at 6' after drilling HAMMER TYPE: Auto LOGGED BY: F. Lloyd SAMPLING METHOD: Split soon NORTHING: 0 EASTING: 4 DRILLING METHOD: 21/4' H.S.A. w BLOW COUNT U w ZO Oz 0- /CORE DATA STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DATA w = _ (D w ~ z C) w (blows/ft) a w a o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 a w -� J > o w F w- a_ a /REMARKS (D � -i w can N o M 10 20 30 6080 z TOPSOIL 6 4 4 4 1 8 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SC) loose, tan, fine to medium, moist, PP = 4.0 tsf COASTAL PLAIN: SAND (SM 2 9 13 15 - 28 5 medium dense, tan orange, fine to medium, 266.0 moist, with thin gray clayey sand layer j 77 COASTAL PLAIN: SAND (SM 3 9 9 8 17 medium dense, tan orange, fine to coarse, wet COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SC) 3 2 4 10- loose, white, fine to medium, wet, PP = 0.5 tsf 261.0 4 6 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SCS medium dense, gray, fine to medium, moist, with trace mica, PP = 4.5 tsf 8 12 15 5 27 15 256.0 6 6 7 9 16 20 251.0 Boring terminated at 20 ft NOTES: 1. THIS LOG IS ONLY A PORTION OFA REPORT PREPARED FOR THE NAMED PROJECT AND MUST ONLY BE USED TOGETHER WITH THAT REPORT. 2. BORING SAMPLING AND PENETRATION TEST DATA IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D-1586. 3. STRATIFICATION AND GROUNDWATER DEPTHS ARE NOT EXACT. 4. WATER LEVEL IS AT TIME OF EXPLORATION AND WILL VARY. Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: MGP Retail - Rockingham Rockingham, North Carolina BORING LOG B-5 S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 NOTES: Borehole backfilled with auger cuttings DATE DRILLED: 3/18/15 ELEVATION: 269.0 ft and a commercial hole closure device placed near the surface. PP = Pocket Penetrometer DRILL RIG: Diedrich D-50 BORING DEPTH: 20.0 ft DRILLER: J. Wino WATER LEVEL: Dry to 11'@ TOB HAMMER TYPE: Auto LOGGED BY: F. Lloyd SAMPLING METHOD: Split soon NORTHING: 0 EASTING: 5 DRILLING METHOD: 21/4' H.S.A. w BLOW COUNT U w Oz /CORE DATA STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DATA w = _ (D w ~ z C) (blows/ft) a w a o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 a w -� J w > o w w- a_ a /REMARKS (D F -io W U)< N M 10 20 30 6080 z TOPSOIL 6 3 3 4 1 7 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SC) loose, gray tan, fine to medium, moist COASTAL PLAIN: SANDY CLAY (CLI 2 4 8 14 _ 22 5— very stiff, gray tan, fine to medium, moist, PP = 264.0 4.5+ tsf 3 11 20 27 47 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SC) dense to very dense, gray tan, fine to medium, moist, with trace mica, PP = 4.5+ tsf 4 15 21 30 51 10- 253.0 _ HC _ COASTAL PLAIN: SILTY SAND (SM) medium dense, gray, fine to medium, wet, with trace mica and some clay, PP = 2.0 tsf _. 8 9 11 5 20 15 i 254.0 6 7 7 8 15 20 249.0 Boring terminated at 20 ft NOTES: 1. THIS LOG IS ONLY A PORTION OFA REPORT PREPARED FOR THE NAMED PROJECT AND MUST ONLY BE USED TOGETHER WITH THAT REPORT. 2. BORING SAMPLING AND PENETRATION TEST DATA IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D-1586. 3. STRATIFICATION AND GROUNDWATER DEPTHS ARE NOT EXACT. 4. WATER LEVEL IS AT TIME OF EXPLORATION AND WILL VARY. Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: MGP Retail - Rockingham Rockingham, North Carolina BORING LOG D-1 S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 DATE DRILLED: 3/18/15 ELEVATION: 264.0 ft NOTES: Borehole backfilled with auger cuttings and a commercial hole closure device placed near the surface. PP = Pocket Penetrometer DRILL RIG: Diedrich D-50 BORING DEPTH: 10.0 ft DRILLER: J. Wino WATER LEVEL: Water at 3.5'@ 24 hours HAMMER TYPE: Auto LOGGED BY: F. Lloyd SAMPLING METHOD: Split soon NORTHING: 0 EASTING: 6 DRILLING METHOD: 21/4' H.S.A. w BLOW COUNT U w Oz /CORE DATA STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DATA w = _ (D w ~ z C) (blows/ft) a w W a o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 a w -1 J w > w F w- a_ a /REMARKS (D Jo W U)< N M 10 20 30 6080 z TOPSOIL 4" 2 1 2 1 3 POSSIBLE ALLUVIUM: SANDY CLAY (CH) _ soft, tan, fine, wet, PP = 0.5 tsf ` 1 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (S CS 2 9 12 16 _ 28 5 medium dense, gray red, fine to medium, moist, 259.0 with trace mica, PP = 4.5+ tsf 3 11 12 16 28 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SCS medium dense, gray, fine to medium, moist, highly micaceous, PP = 4.5+ tsf 10- -- 254.0 4 9 10 13 23 COASTAL PLAIN: SILTY SAND (SM) � medium dense, gray tan, fine to medium, moist, with clay and trace mica, PP = 4.5 tsf Boring terminated at 10 ft VOTES: 1. THIS LOG IS ONLY A PORTION OFA REPORT PREPARED FOR THE NAMED PROJECT AND MUST ONLY BE USED TOGETHER WITH THAT REPORT. 2. BORING SAMPLING AND PENETRATION TEST DATA IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D-1586. 3. STRATIFICATION AND GROUNDWATER DEPTHS ARE NOT EXACT. 4. WATER LEVEL IS AT TIME OF EXPLORATION AND WILL VARY. Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: MGP Retail - Rockingham Rockingham, North Carolina BORING LOG D-2 S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 DATE DRILLED: 3/18/15 ELEVATION: 260.0 ft NOTES: Borehole backfilled with auger cuttings and a commercial hole closure device placed near the surface. Bulk sample obtained from V to 5'. PP = Pocket Penetrometer DRILL RIG: Diedrich D-50 BORING DEPTH: 10.0 ft DRILLER: J. Wino WATER LEVEL: Water at 1' @ 24 hours HAMMER TYPE: Auto LOGGED BY: F. Lloyd SAMPLING METHOD: Split soon NORTHING: 0 EASTING: 7 DRILLING METHOD: 21/4' H.S.A. w BLOW COUNT U w ZO Oz 0- /CORE DATA STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DATA w = _ (D w ~ z C) w (blows/ft) a w a o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 a w -� J > o w F w- a_ a /REMARKS (D -io W can N M 10 20 30 6080 z TOPSOIL 1 6" 1 2 2 1 4 COASTAL PLAIN: SANDY CLAY (CHS soft, tan orange, fine to medium, wet, PP = 1.0 - tsf _ 2 4 5 8 13 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SC) 5 255.0 medium dense, gray tan, fine to medium, moist to wet, PP = 1.5 tsf 3 8 12 15 27 COASTAL PLAIN: SILTY SAND (SM) medium dense, gray, fine to medium, moist, with clay and trace mica, PP = 4.5+ tsf 4 7 9 11 20 10- 250.0 — COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SC) medium dense, gray, fine to medium, moist, with trace mica and trace fine rounded gravel, PIP =4.5tsf Boring terminated at 10 ft NOTES: 1. THIS LOG /S ONLY A PORTION OFA REPORT PREPARED FOR THE NAMED PROJECT AND MUST ONLY BE USED TOGETHER WITH THAT REPORT. 2. BORING SAMPLING AND PENETRATION TEST DATA IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D-1586. 3. STRATIFICATION AND GROUNDWATER DEPTHS ARE NOT EXACT. 4. WATER LEVEL IS AT TIME OF EXPLORATION AND WILL VARY. Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: MGP Retail - Rockingham Rockingham, North Carolina BORING LOG D-3 S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 NOTES: Borehole backfilled with auger cuttings DATE DRILLED: 3/18/15 ELEVATION: 265.0 ft and a commercial hole closure device placed near the surface. PP = Pocket Penetrometer DRILL RIG: Diedrich D-50 BORING DEPTH: 10.0 ft DRILLER: J. Wino WATER LEVEL: Water at 0' @ 24 hours HAMMER TYPE: Auto LOGGED BY: F. Lloyd SAMPLING METHOD: Split soon NORTHING: 0 EASTING: 8 DRILLING METHOD: 21/4' H.S.A. W w BLOW COUNT U w ZO z O /CORE DATA STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DATA w = _ (7 w ~ z C) (blows/ft) a w W a o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION a w -� J w > w W - � a /REMARKS (7 Q w Q Q U) U) a - M 10 20 30 6080 Z TOPSOIL 5 2 3 6 1 9 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SC) loose, tan gray, fine to medium, moist, PP = 4.5+ tsf - 4 7 17 - 5— HC — 260.0 2 24 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SC) medium dense to dense, gray tan, fine to medium, moist, with trace mica, PP = 4.5+ tsf 3 8 15 22 37 4 7 11 16 27 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAY (CH) 10 very soft, white, moist, with fine to medium sand 255.0 layer, PP = 3.0 tsf Boring terminated at 10 ft VOTES: 1. THIS LOG IS ONLY A PORTION OFA REPORT PREPARED FOR THE NAMED PROJECT AND MUST ONLY BE USED TOGETHER WITH THAT REPORT. 2. BORING SAMPLING AND PENETRATION TEST DATA IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D-1586. 3. STRATIFICATION AND GROUNDWATER DEPTHS ARE NOT EXACT. 4. WATER LEVEL IS AT TIME OF EXPLORATION AND WILL VARY. Page 1 of 1 IPROJECT DATE DRILLED: DRILL RIG: Diec DRILLER: J. Wir HAMMER TYPE: SAMPLING MET DRILLING METH = U w w a J v MGP Retail - Rockingham Rockingham, North Carolina S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 5 ELEVATION: 268.0 ft •50 BORING DEPTH: 10.0 ft WATER LEVEL: Dry to 6'@ TOB LOGGED BY: F. Llovd BORING LOG P-1 NOTES: Borehole backfilled with auger cuttings and a commercial hole closure device placed near the surface. PP = Pocket Penetrometer t s oon NORTHING: 0 EASTING: 9 Q.S.A. W w BLOW COUNT W ZO >- Oz /CORE DATA STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DATA w W (blows/ft) MATERIAL DESCRIPTION a w J Of Ir W w — 0- fr /REMARKS > F- J w 2 can c - N M 10 20 30 6080 Z \TOPSOIL 3 1 2 1 3 4 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SC) very loose, tan orange, fine to medium, wet, PP 1.5 tsf - 2 3 8 11 19 5 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SC) 263.0 medium dense, gray red, fine to medium, moist, He with trace mica, PP = 4.5+ tsf 3 12 19 26 45 10 Boring terminated at 10 ft NOTES: 1. THIS LOG IS ONLY A PORTION OFA REPORT PREPARED FOR THE NAMED PROJECT AND MUST ONLY BE USED TOGETHER WITH THAT REPORT. 2. BORING SAMPLING AND PENETRATION TEST DATA IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D-1586. 3. STRATIFICATION AND GROUNDWATER DEPTHS ARE NOT EXACT. 4. WATER LEVEL IS AT TIME OF EXPLORATION AND WILL VARY. 258.0 ] 4 A 1 14 1 18 32 1 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: MGP Retail - Rockingham Rockingham, North Carolina BORING LOG P-2 S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 NOTES: Borehole backfilled with auger cuttings DATE DRILLED: 3/18/15 ELEVATION: 265.0 ft and a commercial hole closure device placed near the surface. PP = Pocket Penetrometer DRILL RIG: Diedrich D-50 BORING DEPTH: 10.0 ft DRILLER: J. Wino WATER LEVEL: Water T@ TOB and 24 hours HAMMER TYPE: Auto LOGGED BY: F. Lloyd SAMPLING METHOD: Split soon NORTHING: 0 EASTING: 10 DRILLING METHOD: 21/4' H.S.A. w BLOW COUNT U w Oz /CORE DATA STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DATA w = _ (D w ~ z C) (blows/ft) a w a o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 a w -1 J w W w w- a_ a /REMARKS > (D F Jo W z U)< N M 10 20 30 6080 TOPSOIL 6„ 1 1 1 1 * 2 X - FILL: SILTY SAND (SM) 1 very loose, black gray, fine to medium, moist to - wet, with trace roots, with silt layers 5 POSSIBLE ALLUVIUM: CLAYEY SAND (SC) very loose, gray, wet j COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SC) dense, gray tan, fine to medium, moist, with mica, PP = 4.5+ tsf 10- COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SC) medium dense, gray, fine to medium, moist to wet, highly micaceous, PP = 4.0 tsf Boring terminated at 10 ft NOTES: 1. THIS LOG IS ONLY A PORTION OFA REPORT PREPARED FOR THE NAMED PROJECT AND MUST ONLY BE USED TOGETHER WITH THAT REPORT. 2. BORING SAMPLING AND PENETRATION TEST DATA IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D-1586. 3. STRATIFICATION AND GROUNDWATER DEPTHS ARE NOT EXACT. 4. WATER LEVEL IS AT TIME OF EXPLORATION AND WILL VARY. 2 111211111 i, 1 21 3 11 9 116 124 I -�-v -1 40 4 I11 8 1 11113 I 4 1 23 1 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: MGP Retail - Rockingham Rockingham, North Carolina BORING LOG P-3 S&ME Project No. 1305-15-022 DATE DRILLED: 3/18/15 ELEVATION: 265.0 ft NOTES: Borehole backfilled with auger cuttings and a commercial hole closure device placed near the surface. Moved boring 15' toward B-1. PP = Pocket Penetrometer DRILL RIG: Diedrich D-50 BORING DEPTH: 10.0 ft DRILLER: J. Wino WATER LEVEL: Dry to 5'@ TOB HAMMER TYPE: Auto LOGGED BY: F. Lloyd SAMPLING METHOD: Split soon NORTHING: 0 EASTING: 11 DRILLING METHOD: 21/4' H.S.A. w BLOW COUNT U w ZO Oz 0- /CORE DATA STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DATA w = _ (D w ~ z C) w (blows/ft) a w a o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 a w -� J > o w F w- a_ a /REMARKS (D -io W can N M 10 20 30 6080 z TOPSOIL 5 2 2 4 1 6 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (S CS loose, gray tan, fine to medium, moist to wet, - with trace fine rounded gravel, PP = 1.0 tsf - 10 19 27 - 2 46 5 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SCS 260.0 dense, gray red, fine to medium, moist, PP = 4.5+ tsf 3 11 18 26 44 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SCS dense, gray, fine to medium, moist, with trace mica and trace fine rounded gravel, PP = 4.5+ 4 8 12 16 28 10 tsf 255.0 COASTAL PLAIN: CLAYEY SAND (SCS medium dense, gray, fine to medium, moist, with trace mica, PP = 4.5+ tsf Boring terminated at 10 ft NOTES: 1. THIS LOG /S ONLY A PORTION OFA REPORT PREPARED FOR THE NAMED PROJECT AND MUST ONLY BE USED TOGETHER WITH THAT REPORT. 2. BORING SAMPLING AND PENETRATION TEST DATA IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D-1586. 3. STRATIFICATION AND GROUNDWATER DEPTHS ARE NOT EXACT. 4. WATER LEVEL IS AT TIME OF EXPLORATION AND WILL VARY. Page 1 of 1 APPENDIX 11 MGP Retail Rockingham, North Carolina *S&ME S&ME Project Number 1051-15-022 TABLE 1 Summary of Laboratory Test Results Standard Proctor, CBR 1) - indicates test not performed * Soaked Condition TABLE 2 Summary of Laboratory Test Results Natural Moisture Content, Atterberg Limits, Grain Size Analysis, USCS Classification BORING NUMBER SAMPLE DEPTH (ft.) NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT (%) STANDARD PROCTOR TEST RESULTS CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO (CBR) TEST RESULTS (corrected) USCS CLASSIFICATION Liquid Limit (LL) Plastic Index (PI) % SiItlClay %Sand CBR Value* 1.0-2.5 15.9 - - BORING NUMBER SAMPLE DEPTH (ft.) USCS CLASSIFICATION Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (%) Natural Moisture Content (%) Compaction Moisture (%) Percent Compaction ON 12.8 Percent Swell (%) 0.1" 0.2" B-4 5-10 SM 116.8 13.3 15.0 13.3 97.6 2.7 3.2 2 1) - indicates test not performed * Soaked Condition TABLE 2 Summary of Laboratory Test Results Natural Moisture Content, Atterberg Limits, Grain Size Analysis, USCS Classification BORING NUMBER SAMPLE DEPTH (ft.) NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT (%) ATTERBERG LIMITS GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS USCS CLASSIFICATION Liquid Limit (LL) Plastic Index (PI) % SiItlClay %Sand B-1 1.0-2.5 15.9 - - 42.5 57.5 Sc B-4 3.5-5.0 12.3 - - 12.8 87.2 ML B-5 3.5-5.0 13.2 42 26 - - CL D-1 1.0-2.5 22.1 52 31 - - CH D-2 1.0-5.0 15.9 28 15 - - CL 1) - indicates test not performed 2) % silt/clay indicates percent passing the no. 200 sieve Form No: TR-D2216-T265-1 Revision No. 0 ,..SE Revision Date: 02122108 Laboratory Determination of Water Content ASTMD 2216 0 AASHTO T265 ❑ Quality Assurance S&ME, Inc. - Greensboro 8646 West Market St. Suite 105, Greensboro NC 27409 Project #: 1305-15-022 Report Date: 4-1-15 Project Name: MGP Retail Site - Greensboro Test Date(s): 3-23-15 Client Address: Sample by: J. Wingo Sample Date(s): 3-18-15 Sampling Method: NA Drill Rig: NA Method: A (1%) ❑ B (o.l%) 0 Balance ID. 5544 Calibration Date: 2-26-15 Boring No. Sample No. Sample Depth Tare # Tare Weight Tare Wt.+ Wet Wt Tare Wt. + Dry Wt Water Weight Percent Moisture N o t ft. or m. grams grams grams grams % e B-1 1 1.0'-2.5' 7 117.67 344.61 313.47 31.14 15.9% B-4 2 3.5'-5.0' 22 139.77 395.94 367.79 28.15 12.3% B-5 2 3.5'-5.0' 30 9.33 70.80 63.63 7.17 13.2% D-1 1 1.0'-2.5' 3 7.92 70.34 59.05 11.29 22.1% D-2 Bulk 1.0'-5.0' 7.87 70.75 62.11 8.64 15.9% Notes /Deviations /References AASHTO T 265: Laboratory Determination of Moisture Content of Soils ASTM D 2216: Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass Jimmy Thomasson Nicet #119392 Technician Name Signature Certification Type /No. Date Finley Lloyd, PE Project Engineer 4/1/2015 Technical Responsibility Signature Position Date This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of S&ME, Inc. 3718 Old Battleground Rd., Greensboro, NC. 27410 Form No: TR -D2216 -T265-1 Revision No. 0 Revision Date: 02/22/08 Laboratory Determination of Water Content ASTM D 2216 0 AASHTO T265 ❑ *S&ME Quality Assurance S&ME, Inc. - Greensboro 8646 West Market St. Suite 105, Greensboro NC 27409 Project #: 1305-15-022 Project Name: MGP Retail Site - Greensboro Report Date: 4-1-15 Boring No. Sample No. Sample Depth Tare # Tare Weight Tare Wt.+ Wet Wt Tare Wt. + Dry Wt Water Weight Percent Moisture N o t ft, or m. grams grams grams grams % e 1 2 Notes / Deviations / References 3718 Old Battleground Rd., Greensboro, NC. 27410 Form No. TR -D4318 -T89-90 #S&ME Revision No. 0 Revision Date: 11120107 Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plastic Index Another code ASTMD 4318 [K AASHTO T 89 ❑ AASHTO T 90 ❑ Quality Assurance S & ME, Inc.- Greensboro 8646 West Market St. Suite 105, Greensboro NC 27409 ad Project #: 1305-15-022 Report Date: 3-28-15 Project Name: MGP Retail Site - Rockingham Test Date(s) 3-27-15 Client Name: Client Address: Boring #: B-5 Sample #: 2 Sample Date: 3-18-15 Location: NA Offset: NA Elevation: 3.5'-5.0' Sample Description: Gray Tan Sandy CLAY 16 Type and Specification S&ME ID # Cal Date: Type and Specification S&ME ID # Cal Date: Balance (0.01 g) 5544 2/26/2015 Grooving tool 5788 2/28/2015 LL Apparatus 5571 2/28/2015 Grooving tool Oven 5470 12/1/2014 Grooving tool Pan # Tare #: 16 19 Liquid Limit 24 4 5 6 Plastic Limit 114 121 9 A Tare Weight 15.98 15.93 15.77 11.13 11.34 B Wet Soil Weight + A 23.84 23.39 23.83 17.18 17.94 C Dry Soil Weight + A 21.59 21.21 21.33 16.34 17.03 D Water Weight (B -C) 2.25 2.18 2.50 0.84 0.91 E Dry Soil Weight (C -A) 5.61 5.28 5.56 5.21 5.69 F % Moisture (D/E)* 100 40.1% 41.3% 45.0% 16.1% 16.0% N # OF DROPS 34 28 15 Moisture Contents determined by ASTMD 2216 LL LL = F * FACTOR Ave. Average 16.1% 50.0 One Point Liquid Limit N Factor N Factor 20 0.974 26 1.005 21 0.979 27 1.009 45.0 22 0.985 28 1.014 23 0.99 29 1.018 C 0 U 24 0.995 30 1.022 0 40.0 25 1.000 h NP, Non -Plastic ❑ Liquid Limit 42 Plastic Limit 16 Plastic Index 26 Group Symbol CL 0 35.0 30.0 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 100 Multipoint Method "❑ M h d One -pont et o Wet Preparation Lj Dry Preparation Lj Air Dried r Notes /Deviations /References: ASTMD 4318: Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, & Plastic Index of Soils Jimmy Thomasson Finley Lloyd, PE 3/31/2015 Technician Name Date Technical Responsibility Date This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of S&ME, Inc. 3718 Old Battleground Rd., Greensboro, NC. 27410 Form No. TR -D4318 -T89-90 #S&ME Revision No. 0 Revision Date: 11120107 Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plastic Index Another code ASTMD 4318 [K AASHTO T 89 ❑ AASHTO T 90 ❑ Quality Assurance S & ME, Inc.- Greensboro 8646 West Market St. Suite 105, Greensboro NC 27409 ad Project #: 1305-15-022 Report Date: 3-28-15 Project Name: MGP Retail Site - Rockingham Test Date(s) 3-27-15 Client Name: Client Address: Boring #: D-1 Sample #: 1 Sample Date: 3-18-15 Location: NA Offset: NA Elevation: 1.0'-2.5' Sample Description: Tan Sandy CLAY Type and Specification S&ME ID # Cal Date: Type and Specification S&ME ID # Cal Date: Balance (0.01 g) 5544 2/26/2015 Grooving tool 5788 2/28/2015 LL Apparatus 5571 2/28/2015 Grooving tool Oven 5470 12/1/2014 Grooving tool Pan # Tare #: 25 23 Liquid Limit 18 4 5 6 Plastic Limit 101 123 9 A Tare Weight 15.89 15.83 15.98 11.43 11.38 B Wet Soil Weight + A 23.36 23.11 23.18 17.32 17.63 C Dry Soil Weight + A 20.93 20.59 20.64 16.31 16.53 D Water Weight (B -C) 2.43 2.52 2.54 1.01 1.10 E Dry Soil Weight (C -A) 5.04 4.76 4.66 4.88 5.15 F % Moisture (D/E)* 100 48.2% 52.9% 54.5% 20.7% 21.4% N # OF DROPS 35 22 15 Moisture Contents determined by ASTMD 2216 LL LL = F * FACTOR Ave. Average 21.1% 60.0 One Point Liquid Limit N Factor N Factor 20 0.974 26 1.005 21 0.979 27 1.009 55.0 22 0.985 28 1.014 23 0.99 29 1.018 C 0 U 24 0.995 30 1.022 0 50.0 25 1.000 h NP, Non -Plastic ❑ Liquid Limit 52 Plastic Limit 21 Plastic Index 31 Group Symbol CH 0 45.0 40.0 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 100 Multipoint Method "❑ M h d One -pont et o Wet Preparation Lj Dry Preparation Lj Air Dried r Notes /Deviations /References: ASTMD 4318: Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, & Plastic Index of Soils Jimmy Thomasson Finley Lloyd, PE 3/31/2015 Technician Name Date Technical Responsibility Date This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of S&ME, Inc. 3718 Old Battleground Rd., Greensboro, NC. 27410 Form No. TR -D4318 -T89-90 #S&ME Revision No. 0 Revision Date: 11120107 Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plastic Index Another code ASTMD 4318 [K AASHTO T 89 ❑ AASHTO T 90 ❑ Quality Assurance S & ME, Inc.- Greensboro 8646 West Market St. Suite 105, Greensboro NC 27409 ad Project #: 1305-15-022 Report Date: 3-28-15 Project Name: MGP Retail Site - Rockingham Test Date(s) 3-27-15 Client Name: Client Address: Boring #: D-2 Sample #: Bulk Sample Date: 3-18-15 Location: NA Offset: NA Elevation: 1.0'-5.0' Sample Description: Tan Orange Sandy CLAY 8 Type and Specification S&ME ID # Cal Date: Type and Specification S&ME ID # Cal Date: Balance (0.01 g) 5544 2/26/2015 Grooving tool 5788 2/28/2015 LL Apparatus 5571 2/28/2015 Grooving tool Oven 5470 12/1/2014 Grooving tool Pan # Tare #: 8 22 Liquid Limit 15 4 5 6 Plastic Limit 120 118 9 A Tare Weight 15.75 16.03 15.70 11.39 11.20 B Wet Soil Weight + A 23.82 23.54 23.01 17.40 17.17 C Dry Soil Weight + A 22.14 21.88 21.33 16.71 16.50 D Water Weight (B -C) 1.68 1.66 1.68 0.69 0.67 E Dry Soil Weight (C -A) 6.39 5.85 5.63 5.32 5.30 F %Moisture (D/E)*100 26.3% 28.4% 29.8% 13.0% 12.6% N # OF DROPS 32 26 17 Moisture Contents determined by ASTMD 2216 LL LL = F * FACTOR Ave. Average 12.8% 40.0 One Point Liquid Limit N Factor N Factor 20 0.974 26 1.005 21 0.979 27 1.009 35.0 22 0.985 28 1.014 23 0.99 29 1.018 C 0 U 24 0.995 30 1.022 0 30.0 25 1.000 h NP, Non -Plastic ❑ Liquid Limit 28 Plastic Limit 13 Plastic Index 15 Group Symbol CL 0 25.0 20.o 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 100 Multipoint Method "❑ M h d One -pont et o Wet Preparation Lj Dry Preparation Lj Air Dried r Notes /Deviations /References: ASTMD 4318: Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, & Plastic Index of Soils Jimmy Thomasson Finley Lloyd, PE 3/31/2015 Technician Name Date Technical Responsibility Date This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of S&ME, Inc. 3718 Old Battleground Rd., Greensboro, NC. 27410 Form No: TR -D422 -WH -1 Ga Revision No. 0 Revision Date: 07114108 Sieve Analysis of Soils p —s: a ASTM D 422 Quality Assurance S&ME, Inc. - Greensboro 8646 west market St. Suite 105 Greensboro NC 27409 Project #: 1305-15-022 Report Date: 4-1-15 Project Name: MGP Retail Site - Rockingham Test Date(s): 3-27-15 Client Name: Client Address: Sample Id. B-1 Type: NA Sample Date: 3-18-15 Location: NA Sample: I Elevation: 1.0'-2.5' Cobbles < 300 nun (12") and > 75 mm (311) Fine Sand < 0.425 mm and > 0.075 nun (#200) Gravel < 75 mm and > 4.75 mm (#4) Silt < 0.075 and > 0.005 mm Coarse Sand < 4.75 mm and >2.00 mm (#10) Clay < 0.005 mm Medium Sand < 2.00 mm and > 0.425 mm (#40) Colloids < 0.001 mm Maximum Particle Size 3/8" Coarse Sand 1.3% Fine Sand 31.6% Gravel 0.1% Medium Sand 24.5% Silt & Clay 42.5% Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Plastic Index Specific Gravity Cc = ###### Cu = ###### Moisture Content Coarse Sand 1.3% Medium Sand 24.5% Fine Sand 31.6% Description of Sand & Gravel Particles: Rounded ❑ Angular ❑ Hard & Durable ❑ Soft ❑ Weathered & Friable ❑ Notes /Deviations /References: Finley Lloyd, PE Project En ig neer 4/1/2015 Technical Responsibility Signature Position Date This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of S&ME, Inc. 3718 Old Battleground Rd., Greensboro, NC. 27410 Form No: TR -D422 -WH -1 Ga Revision No. 0 Revision Date: 07114108 Sieve Analysis of Soils p —s: a ASTM D 422 Quality Assurance S&ME, Inc. - Greensboro 8646 west market St. Suite 105 Greensboro NC 27409 Project #: 1305-15-022 Report Date: 4-1-15 Project Name: MGP Retail Site - Rockingham Test Date(s): 3-27-15 Client Name: Client Address: Sample Id. B-4 Type: NA Sample Date: 3-18-15 Location: NA Sample: 2 Elevation: 3.5'-5.0' Cobbles < 300 nun (12") and > 75 mm (311) Fine Sand < 0.425 mm and > 0.075 nun (#200) Gravel < 75 mm and > 4.75 mm (#4) Silt < 0.075 and > 0.005 mm Coarse Sand < 4.75 mm and >2.00 mm (#10) Clay < 0.005 mm Medium Sand < 2.00 mm and > 0.425 mm (#40) Colloids < 0.001 mm Maximum Particle Size 3/8" Coarse Sand 4.4% Fine Sand 49.2% Gravel 1.4% Medium Sand 32.2% Silt & Clay 12.8% Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Plastic Index Specific Gravity Cc = ###### Cu = ###### Moisture Content Coarse Sand 4.4% Medium Sand 32.2% Fine Sand 49.2% Description of Sand & Gravel Particles: Rounded ❑ Angular ❑ Hard & Durable ❑ Soft ❑ Weathered & Friable ❑ Notes /Deviations /References: Finley Lloyd, PE Project En ig neer 4/1/2015 Technical Responsibility Signature Position Date This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of S&ME, Inc. 3718 Old Battleground Rd., Greensboro, NC. 27410 Form No. TR -D698-2 Revision No.: 0 Revision Date: 11121107 Moisture - Density Report #S&ME Quality Assurance S&ME, Inc. Raleigh, 3201 Spring Forest Road, Raleigh, North Carolina 27616 S&ME Project #: 1305-15-022 Report Date: 3/27/15 Project Name: MGP Retail Site - Rockingham Test Date(s): 3/24 - 3/27/15 Client Name: Client Address: Boring #: B-4 Sample #: Bulk Sample Date: 3/18/2015 Location: Borehole Offset: N/A Depth: 5 - 10 ft Sample Description: Tan -Brown Silty SAND Maximum Dry Density 116.8 PCF. Optimum Moisture Content 13.3% ASTMD 698 -- Method A Moisture -Density Curve Displayed: Fine Fraction ❑x Corrected for Oversize Fraction (ASTM D 4718) ❑ Sieve Size used to separate the Oversize Fraction: #4 Sieve ❑x 3/8 inch Sieve ❑ 3/4 inch Sieve ❑ Mechanical Rammer ❑ Manual Rammer ❑x Moist Preparation ❑ Dry Preparation ❑x References/Comments/Deviations: ND=Not Determined. ASTM D 422: Particle Size Analysis of Soils ASTM D 2216: Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass ASTM D 698: Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Standard Effort Mal Kraj an, ET Laboratory Manager 3/27/2015 Technical Responsibility Signature Position Date This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of S&ME, Inc. S&ME,Inc. - Corporate 3201 Spring Forest Road 15-022 B-4 (5 - ]Oft) Proctor.xls Raleigh, NC. 27616 Page 1 of I 71 ■0000■■■ I I ' MMMEMM■■ ■0000010M< ■■■ ICurve NOME■MMMMMMMMMMMMNMMMMMMMMMMMM , ■NOMMOMMON■OMMOMMOMMENNOM ■MMMMMMMMM■MMIC■MMMMM■MMM■ ■MMMMMMMMM■MMr■MMMMM■MMM■ 1 , Passing ■MMMMMMMMM■MMM■MMMMM■MMM■ ■MMMMMMMMM■MMS■OMMMM■MMM■ NMMMMMMMMMWMMMMWWM0MMMMMM 314 100.0% 31811 100.0% OMMMM MMMMM I/MMaO O\\MIM MMMMM #10 ND #40 ND ■MMMMMMMMI/■MMF■■MM\\MM■MMM■ #60 ND #200 ND ■MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM0MMM Oversize Fraction ■MMM■MMMMM■MMF�■NMMMM■MM�i1OBulk Gravity III MMMMMM■■■MMMMhM■■MMMMM■MA , , Moisture I I I I I I I I I % Oversize ii i, Moisture -Density Curve Displayed: Fine Fraction ❑x Corrected for Oversize Fraction (ASTM D 4718) ❑ Sieve Size used to separate the Oversize Fraction: #4 Sieve ❑x 3/8 inch Sieve ❑ 3/4 inch Sieve ❑ Mechanical Rammer ❑ Manual Rammer ❑x Moist Preparation ❑ Dry Preparation ❑x References/Comments/Deviations: ND=Not Determined. ASTM D 422: Particle Size Analysis of Soils ASTM D 2216: Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass ASTM D 698: Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Standard Effort Mal Kraj an, ET Laboratory Manager 3/27/2015 Technical Responsibility Signature Position Date This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of S&ME, Inc. S&ME,Inc. - Corporate 3201 Spring Forest Road 15-022 B-4 (5 - ]Oft) Proctor.xls Raleigh, NC. 27616 Page 1 of I Form No. TR -D1883 -T193-3 *S&ME Revision No. 0 CBR (California Bearing Ratio) of Laboratory Revision Date: 216108 Compacted Soil ASTMD 1883 Quality Assurance S&ME, Inc.Raleigh, 3201 Spring Forest Road, Raleigh, North Carolina 27616 Project #: 1305-15-022 Report Date: 4/1/15 Project Name: MGP Retail Site - Rockingham Test Date(s) 3/24 - 4/1/15 Client Name: Client Address: Boring #: B-4 Sample #: Bulk Sample Date: 3/18/15 Location: Borehole Offset: N/A Depth (ft): 5 - 10 ft Sample Description: Tan -Brown Silty SAND ASTMD 698 MethodA Maximum Dry Density: 116.8 PCF Optimum Moisture Content: 13.2% Compaction Test performed on grading complying with CBR spec. % Retained on the 3/4" sieve: 0.01% Uncorrected' Values : ' B' at I :' at I I I I I I I I I I I i Before IISoaking Effort (Blows per Layer) Final Dry Density (PCF) DensityCompactive Initial Dry (PCF) Average FinalMoisture Content 1 1 Moisture Content oftheCompacted Specimen�1 MoistureContent•/soaking) . 1 Percent Compaction Percent Swell Soak Time: 96 -hr Surcharge Weight 20.0 Surcharge Wt. per sq. Ft. 101.9 Liquid Limit ND Plastic Index ND Notes/Deviations/References: ND=Not Determined. Test specimen was compacted to 98% at 3% dry of optimum moisture. Mal Krajan, ET Technical Responsibility Signature Laboratory Manager 4/1/2015 Position Date This report shall not be reproduced, except in full without the written approval of S&ME, Inc. S&ME, Inc. - Corporate 3201 Spring Forest Road 15-022 B-4 (5 - ]Oft) CBR.xIs Raleigh, NC. 27616 Page 1 of I *S&ME March 27, 2015 Bohler Engineering, NC, PLLC 4011 WestChase Boulevard Raleigh, North Carolina 27607 Attention: Mr. Justin Brown Via email: fibrown(a,bohlereng-com Reference: Report for Soil Evaluation / Seasonal High Water Table (SHWT) Estimation for Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMP's) Proposed Retail Development Hamlet Avenue (US 74B) Rockingham, North Carolina S&ME Project No. 4335-15-061 Bohler Engineering Project No. NCC142080 Dear Mr. Brown: S&ME, Inc. (S&ME) has conducted a soil evaluation including Seasonal High Water Table (SHWT) estimation in general accordance with S&ME Proposal No. 43-1500281, dated March 3, 2015 and Bohler Engineering WA#2 dated March 5, 2015. Our evaluation was conducted to provide information for the design of an appropriate stormwater Best Management Practice (BMP) device and a Stormwater Management Permit Application to the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) — Division of Energy, Minerals, & Land Resources (DEMLR). A soil scientist evaluated the soil conditions within the proposed stormwater BMP area. PROJECT BACKGROUND We understand that a retail development is planned north of US 74 Business and west of an existing Zaxby's in Rockingham, North Carolina. The 5.15 +/- acre site is currently moderately to heavily wooded. The site appears to have been previously developed and has also been used as a dumping area. Miscellaneous construction debris was observed randomly across the site. An apartment complex is currently under construction, just north of the proposed site. A sedimentation basin is located immediately adjacent to the northern property line, just north of the building. The basin discharges water onto the site in the vicinity of the northern most proposed detention pond. S&ME, INC. / 3201 Spring Forest Road / Raleigh, NC 27616 / p 919.872.2260 f 919.790.8909 / www.smeinc.com Soil Evaluation for Stormwater BMP S&ME Project No. 4335-15-061 MGP Retail Site, Rockingham, North Carolina March 27, 2015 *Based map obtained from Google Earth (Imagery Date 11 /30/2014). The retail building will have a plan area of about 36,000 square feet with 175 space parking lot with associated drive areas. As a result of the proposed construction and associated impervious surface, stormwater BMP's are required to treat stormwater generated from the site to comply with State stormwater management requirements. Use of stormwater BMP's are subject to the suitability of site soils and regulatory approval. Regulatory guidance on requirements for permitting of stormwater BMP's are provided in the DEMLR— Stormwater BMP Manual (NCDENR-SW-BMP), dated July 2007 (Revised September, 2009). Based on the site plan two BMP's will be located on the site, one in the southwest corner along US 74 B and the other along the northern property line in the vicinity of Boring Locations B 1 through B-3 which are depicted on the attached Stormwater Soil Evaluation Map (Figure 1). FINDINGS The soil evaluation was performed with hand auger borings at three locations (B-1 through B-3) within the proposed BMP areas as shown on the attached Figure 1. Our evaluation consisted of identifying and recording the soil morphological conditions at these locations in order to develop soil profile descriptions, which are also shown on the attached Figure 1. 2 Soil Evaluation for Stormwater BMP S&ME Project No. 4335-15-061 MGP Retail Site, Rockingham, North Carolina March 27, 2015 Permeability/Hydraulic Conductivity Estimation Under current DEMLR requirements for various stormwater devices, the in-situ soil permeability/conductivity is an important design factor. Therefore, the soil profile descriptions on the attached Figure 1 show the soil morphological conditions including texture, estimated United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) permeability and estimated USDA hydraulic conductivity (Ksat) for the different soil horizons found on- site. In the area of Boring Location B-1 within the proposed stormwater BMP area, the soil surface layer to a depth of 12 inches consisted of sandy loam material which has an estimated USDA permeability range of 2 to 6 inches per hour and USDA estimated Ksat range of 0.14 to 1.4 inches per hour. The underlying soil material from a depth of 12 to 18 inches consisted of sandy clay loam which has an estimated USDA permeability range of 0.6 to 2 inches per hour and USDA estimated Ksat range of 0.14 to 1.4 inches per hour, and sandy clay from a depth of 18 to 34+ inches which has an estimated USDA permeability range of 0.06 to 0.2 inches per hour and USDA estimated Ksat range of 0.014 to 0.14 inches per hour. In the area of Boring Location B-2 within the proposed stormwater BMP area, the soil surface layer to a depth of 14 inches consisted of sandy loam material which has an estimated USDA permeability range of 2 to 6 inches per hour and USDA estimated Ksat range of 0.14 to 1.4 inches per hour. The underlying soil material from a depth of 14 to 22 inches consisted of sandy clay loam which has an estimated USDA permeability range of 0.6 to 2 inches per hour and USDA estimated Ksat range of 0.14 to 1.4 inches per hour, and sandy clay from a depth of 22 to 36 inches which has an estimated USDA permeability range of 0.06 to 0.2 inches per hour and USDA estimated Ksat range of 0.014 to 0.14 inches per hour, and sandy clay loam from a depth of 36 to 42+ inches which has an estimated USDA permeability range of 0.6 to 2 inches per hour and USDA estimated Ksat range of 0.14 to 1.4 inches per hour. In the area of Boring Location B-3 within the proposed stormwater BMP area, the soil surface layer to a depth of 18+ inches consisted of sandy loam material which has an estimated USDA permeability range of 2 to 6 inches per hour and USDA estimated Ksat range of 0.14 to 1.4 inches per hour. Please refer to the enclosed map and soil profile descriptions, for more information. These estimates were obtained from one or more of the following: Rockingham County Soil Survey "Physical & Chemical Properties of the Soil - Permeability"; and/or USDA- NRCS (United States Department of Agriculture - Natural Resource Conservation Service) official series description, and/or "NRCS Field Book for Describing & Sampling Soils" the permeability estimates were converted to conductivity on the profile description tables. 3 Soil Evaluation for Stormwater BMP SAME Project No. 4335-15-061 MGP Retail Site, Rockingham, North Carolina March 27, 2015 SHWT Estimation and OWT Measurement Under current DEMLR regulations, the depth of various stormwater BMP devices from the SHWT is an important design consideration. For example, current regulations for wet detention basins require that the permanent pool elevation (PPE) shall be no more than six inches above or below the SHWT in order to maintain a permanent pool of water and to avoid doing a hydrogeologic analysis. Therefore, S&ME evaluated the SHWT by advancing hand auger borings and evaluating the soil for evidence of SHWT influence. This evaluation involved looking at the actual moisture content in the soil and observing the matrix and mottle colors. Depending on the soil texture, the soil color will indicate processes that are driven by SHWT fluctuations, such as iron reduction and oxidation and organic matter staining. See Table 1 below and the soil profile descriptions on Figure 1 for the estimated SHWT depths based on soil color. In addition, S&ME recorded the observed water table (OWT) level below existing ground level (EGL) at each indicated hand auger boring location if applicable. The OWT was measured as the static water level in each of the temporary hand auger boring locations. It should be noted that the static water level/OWT measured in the auger holes is a measurement of the water table at that moment and does not represent an average water level or the highest point at which the water table may rise to. Furthermore, it is expected that groundwater elevations in the study area will likely be influenced by factors such as precipitation and proximity to surface water discharge/recharge features. See Table 1 below and the attached soil profile descriptions for the estimated SHWT depths based on soil color and measured OWT depths. Table 1: SHWT & OWT Information Boring Location SHWT inches below EGL OWT (inches below EGL) B-1 30 12 B-2 36 30 B-3 <12 8 LIMITATIONS • Data and conclusions presented herein are based on materials encountered at the hand auger boring locations only. Conditions may vary between hand auger boring locations and in other areas of the proposed stormwater BMP's. 4 Soil Evaluation for Stormwater BMP S&ME Project No. 4335-15-061 MGP Retail Site, Rockingham, North Carolina March 27, 2015 CLOSING S&ME appreciates the opportunity to provide these services to you. If you have any questions, please contact us. Sincerely, S&ME, Inc. Walter Cole, L.S.S. Environmental Scientist (919) 801-3798 wcole@smeinc.com alp* Rob Willcox, L.S.S. z - Natural Resources Team Leader Attachments: Figure 1: Stormwater Soil Evaluation Map SAProjects\4335-15-061\Rockingham MGP Retail Site\Reports\Storrnwater Soil Evaluation.doc Rockingham MGP Site S&ME Project No, 4305-15-061 Boring B-1 Seasonal High Water Table from existing ground surface: 30 Inches (2.5 feet) Observed Water Table from existing ground surface: 12 Inches ( 1.0 feet) Boring B-2 lor Color USDA Estimated USDA Estimated Horizon Moist Consistence USDA Estimated USDA Estimated Horizon Depth (in) Texture Grade Structure Consistence Notes Permeability (INhr) Conductivity (In/hr) Matrix Mottles Al 0-3 10YR 3/1 sandy weak ' subangular may, made 2 - 6 1 4 -14 loam block 2 - 6 1 4 - 14 A2 3.12 10YR 4/3 sandy weak subangular very friableloam 2 - 6 14 .14 Btl 12-18 10YR 5/6 5YR 5/8 sandy weak subangular Irm -enable clay loam blocky 06-2 0 14 .14 Bt2 18-30 10YR 5/6 SYR 518 sandy weak subangular In" 06-2 0 14. 14 Bt2 22-28 10YR 5/3 clay I blocky 1 Armclay 1 006-02 0014-014 Bt3 30-34. 10YR 5/6 10YR 6/1 1 sandy weak subangular Irm 006 - 02 0 014 -0 14 10R4/8 clay I blocky Bt3 2832 006-02 0014-014 Seasonal High Water Table from existing ground surface: 30 Inches (2.5 feet) Observed Water Table from existing ground surface: 12 Inches ( 1.0 feet) Boring B-2 aessonai nIgn vvaler iaDm nom eauung grouno sunace: oo inches (a.0 reef I Obseryed Water Table from exlstl ng ground surface: 30 Inches ( 2.5 feet) Boring B-3 lor Color USDA Estimated USDA Estimated Horizon Moist Consistence USDA Estimated USDA Estimated Horizon Depth (in) Texture Grade Structure Consistence Notes Permeability (INhr) Conductivity (INhr) Matrix Mottles Al 03 10YR 3/1 weak subayar very, made 2 - 6 1 4 -14 loam 2 - 6 1 4 - 14 A2 314 tOYR 4/3 sandy amm weak subangular very made 2 - 6 1 4 - 14 Bl1 14,22 10YR 5/4 sandy weak subangular Ann - enable clay loam 06-2 0 14. 14 Bt2 22-28 10YR 5/4 sandy weak subangular Armclay 006 - 02 0 014 -0 14 sarrdy subangular Bt3 2832 tOYR 5/8 5YR 5/8 Clay weak blocky Am 006-02 0.014 -0 14 10Y sandy subangular B14 3236 10YR 5/6 5YR 5/88 1 5YR clay weak blocky Am 006-02 0.014 -0 14 Bis 36.42* 10YR 6/1 10YR 516 sandy weak subangular Arm 1 O 418 clay loam blocky 0 6 - 2 0 14. 14 aessonai nIgn vvaler iaDm nom eauung grouno sunace: oo inches (a.0 reef I Obseryed Water Table from exlstl ng ground surface: 30 Inches ( 2.5 feet) Boring B-3 seasonal nrgn water [a D18 from existing ground surface: <12 Inches (<1.0 toot) Observed Water Table from existing ground surface: a inches ( 0.07 foot) LEGEND B-# APPROXIMATE SOIL AUGER BORING LOCATION At. Ar WITH ASSOCIATED PROFILE DESCRIPTION ABOVE ! HIS MAP IS ONLY A PORTION OF A REPORT FOR THE NAMED PROJECT AND MUST ONLY BE USED TOGETHER WITH THAT REPORT 'BACKGROUND AUTOCAD MAP FROM FILE SUPPLIED BY BOHLER ENGINNERING NAMED ARS ALTA 150319.DWG ch 0 C14 = Y U > m tr to O W Y Q < S 0 U w to R m D U7 i UJ Z z Z I to Lli O aZ 'oma a U w w In a o co LIJN O z U = z nw LIJ R >o V) W� Cl)F U� n UL W C7 W Z y Z lY CD C- 1` Z rn U.1 U� Z rr) I O Q _Z Q J � U � LL, U Q O = W d -JO J Q Z O w� U _ a 0 2iZ LLj leU O U) FIGURE N0. 1 lor Moist USDA Estimated USDA Estimated Horizon Depth (in) Moores Texture Grade Structure Consistence Notes Permeablllty (In/hr) Conductivity (INhr) At weak subangular 0.6 sandy r � made loam 2-6 a - 1a A2 8.18+ ganm' weak subaylar very trade 2 - 6 1 4 -14 seasonal nrgn water [a D18 from existing ground surface: <12 Inches (<1.0 toot) Observed Water Table from existing ground surface: a inches ( 0.07 foot) LEGEND B-# APPROXIMATE SOIL AUGER BORING LOCATION At. Ar WITH ASSOCIATED PROFILE DESCRIPTION ABOVE ! HIS MAP IS ONLY A PORTION OF A REPORT FOR THE NAMED PROJECT AND MUST ONLY BE USED TOGETHER WITH THAT REPORT 'BACKGROUND AUTOCAD MAP FROM FILE SUPPLIED BY BOHLER ENGINNERING NAMED ARS ALTA 150319.DWG ch 0 C14 = Y U > m tr to O W Y Q < S 0 U w to R m D U7 i UJ Z z Z I to Lli O aZ 'oma a U w w In a o co LIJN O z U = z nw LIJ R >o V) W� Cl)F U� n UL W C7 W Z y Z lY CD C- 1` Z rn U.1 U� Z rr) I O Q _Z Q J � U � LL, U Q O = W d -JO J Q Z O w� U _ a 0 2iZ LLj leU O U) FIGURE N0. 1