PN74813 Parachute Rigging Facility - PN 74813 PARACHUTE RIGGING FACILITY - STORMWATER REPORT 04FEB2019

Stormwater Report
October 29, 2018
*** ***FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Wilmington District
prepared for

Parachute Rigging Facility
Fort Bragg, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Mason & Hanger Page - i -

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
GENERAL ....................................................................................................................................... 1
METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................................................. 1
EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................... 2
PROPOSED CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................. 2
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT .......................................................................................................... 3
NCDEQ MINIMUM DESIGN CRITERIA FOR BIORETENTION CELLS. .................................................... 6
OUTLET PROTECTION ..................................................................................................................... 8
WATER QUALITY ............................................................................................................................. 8
SEDIMENTATION AND EROSION CONTROL ........................................................................................ 8

TABLES
Table 1 RAINFALL DATA. ......................................................................................................... 2
Table 2 BIORETENTION AREAS PREDEVELOPED RUNOFF ......................................................... 3
Table 3 BIORETENTION AREAS POSTDEVELOPED RUNOFF ....................................................... 3
Table 4 95TH PERCENTILE AND 1” FIRST FLUSH BIORETENTION VOLUMES ................................. 5
Table 5 PROVIDED BIORETENTION STORAGE VOLUME ............................................................. 5
Table 6 BIORETENTION SURFACE VOLUME AND AREAS ............................................................ 5

FIGURES
Figure 1 NCDEQ SUMMARY OF STORMWATER CALCULATIONS..………………..…………………………1
Figure 2 BIORETENTION BASIN. ……………………………………………………………………………….6

APPENDIX
Appendix A USGS PROJECT LOCATION MAP ............................................................................. a.1
Appendix B PREDEVELOPMENT MAP .......................................................................................... a.2
Appendix C POSTDEELOPMENT MAP .......................................................................................... a.3
Appendix D EISA 438 CALCULATIONS ........................................................................................ a.4
Appendix E STORMWATER CALCULATIONS…………………………………………….... ................ a.5
Appendix F NRCS CUMBERLAND COUNTY SOIL SURVEY MAP .................................................... a.6
Appendix G SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ................. a.7
Appendix H BIORETENTION CELL SUPPLEMENT .......................................................................... a.8
Appendix I OUTLET PROTECTION CALCULATIONS ...................................................................... a.9
Appendix J SKIMMER SEDIMENTATION BASIN CALCULATIONS ................................................... a.10

Parachute Rigging Facility
Fort Bragg, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Mason & Hanger Page 1 of 8

GENERAL INFORMATION
The project is located within the Fort Bragg Army Installation. The site is part of the development of
Patriot Point, and is located within or near multiple projects either developed or to be developed. The site
is currently primarily undeveloped and covered with native vegetation. Limited abandoned access roads,
both dirt and asphalt, are within the site which led to previously removed ammunition supply structures.
The site is bound on the north by undeveloped wooded area and to the south by Urban Freedom
Parkway. The eastern boundary of the site is undeveloped. The western boundary is primarily
undeveloped, but scheduled to be developed within the next 12-18 months. The project consists of one
(1) new one story building totaling approximately 84,500 SF and associated site work including access
drives. Privately owned vehicle (POV) parking is not included in the project at this time. The total
disturbed site area within the limits of construction is approximately 12.12 acres. Total site acreage
(drainage area) is approximately 17.94 acres.
The site prior to construction is undeveloped, consisting of a combination of open area and sparse
vegetation. Vegetation consists primarily of brush, with a limited number of deciduous trees 8 to 12
inches in diameter. Limited asphalt pavement is required to be removed. No existing structures are on-
site. The topography slopes generally towards the south, with an elevation range of approximately 11
feet. Drainage currently flows to an existing bioretention area, discharging ultimately to an existing 48”
RCP pipe which diverts the water to the north of the site. The soils consists primarily silty sands in the
upper 3 to 4 feet with clayey sands and sandy clays beneath.
All drainage areas for the project are in the watershed of Stewarts Creek, Stream Index 18-31-24-5-4,
Classification C: Aquatic Life, Secondary Recreation, Freshwater, in the Cape Fear River Basin.
METHODOLOGY
Per the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ), the approved methods used in
stormwater calculations are as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 - Ref: NCDEQ Stormwater BMP Manual
All methodology used to determine both peak flow and storm event volumes follows the guidelines set by
the Corp of Engineers Wilmington District and NCDEQ.
As the project is a federal project which exceeds 5,000 square feet of footprint, Section 438 of the Energy
Independence and Security Act or 2007 (EISA 438) mandates the use of site planning, design,
construction, and maintenance strategies for the property to maintain or restore, to the maximum extent
technically feasible, the predevelopment hydrology of the property.

Parachute Rigging Facility
Fort Bragg, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Mason & Hanger Page 2 of 8

EXISTING CONDITIONS
The existing site where the training facility and associated supporting infrastructure is to be constructed is
approximately 11.76 acres. The site, prior to construction, is primarily undeveloped, consisting of a
combination of open area and limited vegetation. Vegetation consists primarily of limited clusters of
deciduous trees 8 to 12 inches in diameter. The topography slopes generally towards the south to an
existing bioretention basin, with an elevation range of approximately 11 feet. The bioretention basin
consists of a network of drainage pipes within a layer of water storage media. The drainage pipes would
serve only to drain the area when infiltration is not possible due to high volumes of runoff. The outfall
structure of the basin discharges to an existing 48” RCP pipe which diverts the excess water to the north
of the site. The soils consists primarily silty sands in the upper 3 to 4 feet with clayey sands and sandy
clays beneath. Due to the sandy nature of the existing soils, most first flush drainage permeates into the
ground.
For purposed of drainage calculations, the open site area is considered in fair to good condition.
No existing structures exist on-site. The site was previously part of an ammunition supply point. The
storage buildings have been previously removed. Limited asphalt and dirt paved roads lead to where the
structures used to reside.
For the purpose of the stormwater calculations, the entire drainage area to the existing bioretention basin
will be analyzed. The entire construction site lies within this drainage area. The full drainage area is
approximately 17.94 acres. Included in this area is runoff from parts of Urban Freedom Parkway which
abuts the site. No existing structures exist within the drainage area. Limited asphalt roads which led to
previously demolished ammunition supply structures cross the drainage area.
A Subsurface Exploration Report has been performed by Building & Earth, completed August 22, 2018.
This report is included in Appendix G.
To calculate storm data, 24hr rainfall data to use for design was provided for by Fort Bragg. The rainfall
data used are given in Table 1. For stormwater design, the 10yr event will be used. For temporary
erosion control measures during construction, the 2yr event will be used.
TABLE 1 RAINFALL DATA
STORM EVENT 24HR RAINFALL
DATA (IN)
1YR 3.03
2YR 3.67
5YR 4.71
10YR 5.4
25YR 6.5
50YR 7.3
100YR 8.2

WinTR55 Small Watershed Hydrology software, developed for the USDA, was utilized to calculate the
peak runoff for both predevelopment and post development runoff. This software has been used in the
past for other projects located at Fort Bragg and for NCDEQ, and is an approved method for stormwater
calculations. The composite runoff curve number calculations for each area were entered into WinTR55
and the results are shown in the appendix and on the plan drawings.

Parachute Rigging Facility
Fort Bragg, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Mason & Hanger Page 3 of 8

PROPOSED CONDITIONS
To better control runoff at the source, and to better calculate strormwater runoff for drainage structures,
the developed site was separated into 2 separate subbasins. A temporary diversion ditch will be
constructed at the onset of construction to divert most of the offsite water to a skimmer sediment basin
located on the northern portion of the site. An additional skimmer sediment basin will be constructed at
the southern portion of the site. Each of these basins will receive runoff from less than 10 acres.
The existing bioretention basin will be left in place. Stormwater runoff from the east of the site will be
diverted to the southern skimmer basin, as this runoff may contain construction induced sediment.
Stormwater runoff from the west of the site will continue to flow to the bioretention basin. Clean water
flow from each of the sediment basins will be routed to the existing 48” outfall pipe which runs through the
site, maintaining the existing point of discharge.
Post construction, each of these skimmer sediment ponds will be converted to bioretention areas.
The post-developed composite weighted CN calculations for each subbasin used in WinTR-55 as well as
post-developed peak flows are shown in the appendix for the pipe networks, in Tables 2 and 3, and on
the plan drawings. In general, the existing area is poorly grassed/brush area, which exhibits high rates of
runoff. The proposed conditions include landscaping, primarily in the form of sod. The contractor is
required to establish 100% groundcover within 1 year of construction. As such, the over CN for the
proposed site does not differ much if any from the existing conditions.

For design of all stormwater structures, AutoDesk Civil3D 2017 was utilized. As the total length of each
structure is relatively small and each contributing drainage area has a time of concentration (Tc) overall
less than 8 minutes to the inlet, it was assumed that each inlet on the system would receive the peak flow
input at the same time. This results in a “worst case” scenario for the stormwater system, and ensures an
adequate design for the 10yr storm event. Pipe sizes were calculated using the software, with minimum
pipe sizes directed by UFC 3-201-01 Civil Engineering. The results of the stormwater structure designs
are included in the appendices including HGL calculations.
TABLE 2 PRE-DEVELOPED COMPOSITE RUNOFF CURVE
NUMBER CALCULATIONS AND PEAK FLOW

DRAINAGE AREA AREA (AC)

WEIGHTED
CN Q1 (CFS) Q10 (CFS) Q25 (CFS)
Bioretention Area 1 8.85 78 7.05 22.63 30.70
Bioretention Area 2 2.96 62 2.03 7.04 9.69

TABLE 3 POST-DEVELOPED COMPOSITE RUNOFF CURVE
NUMBER CALCULATIONS AND PEAK FLOW

DRAINAGE AREA AREA (AC)

WEIGHTED
CN Q1 (CFS) Q10 (CFS) Q25 (CFS)
Bioretention Area 1 8.85 81 7.05 22.63 30.70
Bioretention Area 2 2.96 72 2.36 7.57 10.28

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
As the project is a Federal facility over 5,000 square feet, the stormwater requirements of EISA Section
438 (Title 42, US Code, Section 17094) must be met. In accordance with the Department of Defense
memo dated January 19, 2010 entitled DoD Implementation of Storm Water Requirements under Section
438 of the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) the designer of record shall implement the
procedures for complying with EISA 438 as outlined in the EPA Technical Guidance on Implementing the

Parachute Rigging Facility
Fort Bragg, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Mason & Hanger Page 4 of 8

Stormwater Runoff Requirements for Federal Projects under Section 438 of the Energy Independence
and Security Act.
The EPA Guidance manual prescribes two options to comply with the EISA 438 mandate. Option 1 is to
retain and infiltrate the 95th percentile storm event onsite. Option 2 allows site-specific hydrologic analysis
to determine the types of stormwater practices necessary to preserve predevelopment runoff conditions.
Option 2 is provided for situations where pre-development conditions can be maintained by retaining less
than the 95th percentile storm event, or where site-specific parameters dictate a prescriptive methodology
be used or Option 1 is not protective enough, for example at the headwater of an impaired stream. For
this project, Option 1 was selected.
To be in compliance with EISA 438, based upon Option 1 of the EPA Technical Guidance document, the
total volume of runoff from the 95th percentile storm event must be captured and infiltrated on-site. The
method to determine this volume is based upon guidance from the EPA document.
The 95th percentile storm event for the project area is equivalent to 1.8” of rainfall, as provided by the Fort
Bragg Installation Design Guide. Criteria used for determination of total stormwater runoff to capture and
infiltrate, the following criteria was used: Hydrologic Soil Group B, average Maximum Infiltration Rate of
15 inches per hour or as determined by the percolation testing, Minimum Infiltration Rate of 0.1 inches per
hour, a Decay Factor or 2 per hour and Pervious Depression Storage of 0.2 inches.
To provide for this storage, a total of 2 infiltration areas have been designed to help infiltrate the runoff
closest to the source. Each of these areas are bioretention area consisting of a volume of ponding
storage, a section of engineered fill to promote infiltration and sediment removal, and a layer of open
graded aggregate to provide for the storage (see Figure 2). All drainage for the construction portion of
the site is routed to an infiltration area. The design of the bioretention areas is based upon design criteria
from Sustainable Landscape Systems for Managing Storm Water 2nd Edition, developed by Ohio State
University Extension. The bioretention areas are designed to infiltrate the 95th percentile storm event as
close as practical to the origin of the drainage. All drainage enters the bioretention areas via surface flow,
or via stormwater collection pipes with the outlet at the top of the pond area, allowing for sediment to be
removed via infiltration. The storage required for each area and the amount of storage provided for
infiltration is shown on the plans. Storage is provided in the above ground ponding (maximum 12”),
media and the open graded aggregate (minimum 2 feet). The bioretention basin design is similar and
meets the Minimum Design Criteria (MDC) required for NCDEQ C-2 Bioretention Cell, revised January
19, 2018.
To determine the storage volume to meet EISA 438, the Army LID Planning and Cost Tool was compared
against what was calculated via the Direct Determination method. The database determines the volume
required to be stored and infiltrated onside in order to meet EISA 438. The Army LID Planning and Cost
Tool was developed to MILCON standards for projects within the jurisdiction of the Army. As such, the
volumes determined using the Army LID Planning and Cost Tool are used for the design of the
bioretention basins. Although the database was used to determine volume required, it was not used to
design the bioretention areas. See below for the design of the bioretention area.
The Army LID Planning and Cost Tool looks as the pre-developed and post-developed areas to calculate
the storage volume requirements. WinTR-55 was utilized to calculate pre and post developed composite
runoff curve numbers and peak flows for the areas draining to each bioretention area.
The pre-developed composite weighted CN and peak flows for each bioretention area can be found in the
appendix. A map of the post development drainage areas can be found in Appendix C.
In addition, the volume required for the first flush, or 1” rainfall event, as required by NCDEQ was
calculated. This would equate to the minimum required volume to store to meet NCDEQ requirements.
This volume is required to be stored in a ponding volume. For EISA 438, the volume required was
calculated via the Army LID Planning and Cost Tool. For bioretention areas where an underdrain is
provided, the volume provided in the open aggregate is counted towards the storage. Where underdrains
are not provided, the ponding and volume stored within the soil and aggregate is counted.

Parachute Rigging Facility
Fort Bragg, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Mason & Hanger Page 5 of 8

TABLE 4 95TH PERCENTILE AND 1” FIRST FLUSH BIORETENTION VOLUMES
DRAINAGE AREA
VOLUME
REQUIRED
EISA438
(CF)
VOLUME
REQUIRED
NCDEQ
(CF)
STORAGE
PROVIDED
EISA438
(CF)
PONDING
VOLUME
PROVIDED
(CF)
Bioretention Area 1 3,380 4,005 3,396 6,900
Bioretention Area 2 1,758 2,067 4,060 3,750

TABLE 5 PROVIDED BIORETENTION STORAGE VOLUMES
BIORETENTION
AREA
PONDING
DEPTH
PROVIDED
(IN)
PONDING
VOLUME
(CF)
STORAGE
VOLUME IN
SOIL (CF)
10% VOIDS
DEPTH OF
AGGREGATE
(FT)
40% VOIDS
STORAGE
VOLUME IN
AGGREGATE
(CF)
Bioretention Area 1 9 6,900 1,150 2.0 7,360
Bioretention Area 2 9 3,750 625 2.0 4,000

For all storm events greater than the 95th percentile event, and for other events where the infiltration
areas cannot sufficiently handle the storm event, excess runoff is bypassed directly to the outfall area. As
the open aggregate fills with water, when the level reaches the bottom of the perforated pipe, drainage
enters the pipe and is carried to either the next infiltration area, or to the outfall. In addition, if there is
excess ponding due to either the saturation of the engineered fill or a large storm event, water is collected
through the grate in the riser structure. This prevents flooding in areas surrounding the bioretention
basins as the top of the grate is set at an elevation below the surrounding grade.
Although the design of the bioretention areas are not completely compatible with the Bioretention Cell
Supplement form provided by NCDEQ, this form has been completed for the drainage areas and included
in the appendix.

TABLE 6 BIORETENTION SURFACE VOLUME AND AREAS
INFILTRATION AREA
SURFACE AREA
REQUIRED (SF)
NCDEQ
SURFACE
VOLUME
PROVIDED
(CF)
SURFACE
AREA
PROVIDED
(SF)
Bioretention Area 1 5,340 6,900 9,200
Bioretention Area 2 2,756 3,750 5,000

Parachute Rigging Facility
Fort Bragg, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Mason & Hanger Page 6 of 8

Figure 2 - Bioretention Basin
Seasonal high water table (SHWT) depths was determined in conjunction with the geotechnical report.
SHWT depths were found to be a minimum of 12’ below grade.
As the 95th percentile storm event is being captured and infiltrated on-site and all excess storm drainage
is routed to outlet structures with appropriate energy dissipation, this meets LEED 6.1 Stormwater Design
Quantity Control requirements. The existing site has less than 50% impervious surface, and the
bioretention/infiltration of the 95th percentile storm meets the quantity control requirements.
For any underdrains installed within the bioretention area, cleanouts are provided in addition to the riser
pipes to facilitate cleanout. It is the user’s desire to utilize sod in lieu of vegetation to facilitate
maintenance reduce the risk of floating debris from entering into and clogging the system.
No water supply wells are within 100’ of the project site. No surface waters are within 30’ of the project
site. No Class SA waters are within 50’ of the project site.

NCDEQ Minimum Design Criteria for Bioretention Cells
The Minimum Design Criteria (MDC) for bioretention cells for NCDEQ is as described below. These
criteria are taken from the NCDEQ Stormwater Design Manual Section C-2. Bioretention Cell
Revised 1-10-2018.

MDC 1: Separation from the SHWT
The lowest point of all bioretention cells are a minimum of 2 feet above the SHWT. Depths to the SHWT
are greater than 120” below the surface.

Parachute Rigging Facility
Fort Bragg, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Mason & Hanger Page 7 of 8

MDC 2: Maximum Ponding Depth for Design Volume
Ponding depths for both of the bioretention areas is 9”.

MDC 3: Peak Attenuation Volume
Each bioretention area is designed to store the required volume to meet EISA 438, which is greater than
the first flush volume. At volumes above this storm event, primary outlet structure is placed (9 inches
above planting surface).
This additional ponding volume would not necessarily be considered to store the peak attenuation
volume, however it acts as a measure of safety for the areas and is a maximum of 24” above the planting
surface to the emergency spillway.
The emergency spillway is designed for each bioretention basin to handle the entire flow from the 100-
year storm event in case of failure of the primary outfall and storage within each basin.

MDC 4: Underdrain
Infiltration testing was done in conjunction with design at each bioretention basin. As the Ksat values
attained are less than 2” per hour, underdrains are installed in both basins. At least one underdrain pipe
per 1,000 square feet of area is provided, spaced at no greater than 10’. The underdrain pipes are sized
to handle the infiltration rate of the engineered soil for the times that the internal water storage zone has
reached capacity.

MDC 5: Media Depth
All bioretention areas are grassed cells, without trees and shrubs. The media depth in both bioretention
areas is 30” as both include underdrains.

MDC 6: Media Mix
The planting media consists of 85% sands (by volume), 10% fines (by volume) and 5% organics (by
volume).

MDC 7: Media P-Index
The P-Index for the soil media is 10.

MDC 8: No Mechanical Compaction
The soil media will not be mechanically compacted.

MDC 9: Maintenance of Media
An in-lieu of O&M agreement with Fort Bragg DPW has been signed and provided for the bioretention
areas.

Parachute Rigging Facility
Fort Bragg, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Mason & Hanger Page 8 of 8

MDC 10: Planting Plan
In accordance with the plans and specifications, the grassed cells shall achieve 100 percent cover during
the 1 year establishment period. Plants chosen for the cells are in accordance with the Fort Bragg
Installation Design Guide.

MDC 11: Mulch
All bioretention areas will be sodded. Hardwood mulch is not desired or allowed by the user due to
maintenance issues. Hardwood mulch tends to float in ponding situations and can clog the overflow
structures.

MDC 12: Clean-Out Pipes
Clean-out pipes are provided in both bioretention areas. The cleanouts are PVC pipes with glued clean-
out fittings with screw type caps that extend at least 2 feet above the surface of the bed. No flexible pipe
is allowed.

OUTLET PROTECTION
All excess stormwater from the infiltration areas, as well as outlet structures for stormwater routed around
the project site and will be connected directly to the 48” storm conveyance pipe running from the south
west to the northeast of the site. This pipe was previously designed and installed for the express purpose
of excess storm water routing for this project and other projects within the area. Outlet protection will be
provided in accordance with guidance from Chapter 8.06 Design of Riprap Outlet Protection of the North
Carolina Division of Environmental Quality Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual
for all pipes and headwalls within the project. Calculations for the outlet protection are shown in the
appendix.

WATER QUALITY
To ensure the removal of Total Suspended Solids (TSS), all runoff is directed to the infiltration areas via
either sheet flow or via storm collection pipes with their outlets at the top of the bioretention basins
(protected with energy dissipaters). This includes runoff from all parking areas and roof drainage
structures. This makes certain that the storm events up to the 95Th percentile event (and first flush for
larger events) will have the runoff filtered through a minimum the vegetative strip and a minimum of 24” of
engineered soil. Additionally, in bioretention areas that do not have landscape rock, an 8” rock filter strip
is included as recommended by NCDEQ for pretreatment at bioretention basins.
In addition, a non-woven geotextile fabric is placed above both the gravel section of the bioretention basin
and the perforated collection pipe to keep sediment and other fines from infiltrating the storage area. It is
generally accepted that bioretention basins of this type will remove between 80-90% of TSS along with
the removal of heavy metals. This design has previously been used on projects at Fort Bragg and has
been approved by NCDEQ for TSS removal requirements. This method will also meet LEED 6.2
Stormwater Quality Control requirements.
EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL
Separate erosion and sedimentation control during construction plans have been developed for submittal
to NCDEQ for permit requirements. The permit, CUMBE-2019-068, has been approved. Calculations
used for sizing skimmer sedimentation basins is included with this report.

Parachute Rigging Facility
Fort Bragg, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Mason & Hanger Page - a.1 -

APPENDIX A
USGS PROJECT LOCATION MAP

Parachute Rigging Facility
Fort Bragg, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Mason & Hanger Page - a.2 -

APPENDIX B
PREDEVELOPMENT MAP

URBAN FREEDOM WAY
ASPHALT
ELEVATION: 261.30'
E: 1989897.14
N: 485522.55
RB&C #11
CONC
TIMBER PILE
96" CHAIN LINK FENCE WITH 3 STRAND BARBED WIRE
96" CHAIN LINK FENCE WITH 3 STRAND BARBED WIRE
BOTTOM BOX=250.78'
TOP=260.43'
BOTTOM BOX=252.49'
TOP=262.22'
BOTTOM BOX=257.22'
TOP=266.87'
BOTTOM BOX=260.94'
TOP=270.57'
ASPHALT
ASPHALT
URBAN FREEDOM WAY
ASPHALT
ASPHALT
POND
RETENTION
STORMWATER
AND HAND HOLE
ON CONC PAD
EJB
METER BOXESUNKNOWNMETER BOXESUNKNOWNCONC
CONC
CONC
CONC
GUARD SHACK
1 STORY
WOODS
6"
8"
24"
6"
6"
6"
15"13"
24"
11"O
20"
12"16"
14"
15"
15"O
15"
14"O
9"O
20"
8"
14"
15"
15"6"O
6"C
22"
WOODS
36"
32"O
6"D
24"PE
7"O
7"O
12"O9"
6"6"
6"7"42"PE
24"PE
11"O
24"PE
24"PE
6"D
22"PE
21"PE
6"O
6"C
WOODS
WOODS
24"O
22"O
24"O
INV.OUT=250.82' (NE)
INV.IN=250.86' (S)
INV.IN=252.48' (W)
TOP=259.04'
INV.OUT=253.82' (E)
TOP=257.70'
OUTFALL STRUCTURE
INV.OUT=251.49' (N)
INV.IN=252.38' (W)
TOP=259.05'
INV.OUT=250.22' (NE)
INV.IN=250.27' (SW)
TOP=260.07'
INV.OUT=249.32' (NE)
INV.IN=249.35' (SW)
TOP=265.10'
INV.OUT OFF-SITE
INV.IN=245.34' (S)
TOP=256.56'
INV.OUT=247.15' (N)
INV.IN=247.29' (SE)
TOP=264.90'
INV.OUT=248.12' (NW)
INV.IN=248.24' (SW)
TOP=265.44'
RAP
RIP
RAP
RIP
RIP RAP RIP RAP
256B STREET (ABANDONED)S
257
257
257257257TRANSFORMER PAD
ASPHALT
ASPHALT
ASPHALT
ASPHALT
ASPHALT
ASPHALT
ASPHALT
ASPHALT
ASPHALT
258 258258
258
258258258258258
D STREET (ABANDONED)
MCINTYRE TRAIL (ABANDONED)259259259259
259 259259
259259259259259259
2
59259
259
259
259259S
S48" RCP15" RCP
48" RCP260260260260
260
260260260
260
260
260 260260260260260260260
260260
260260260260260260260260260SWALE
S
SWALE
T261261261261261261261
261261261
261
261
261261261261261261261
261
261261261
261
261261
261
261261261
261261261261261 261261
2612612
6
2
262
262262
262262262
262 262262262262262262262262262262262262262
262
262
262
262
262
262
262
262262262262262262262262262262
262262262262262
262
262 262262262262
262262262262262T
D STR
E
E
T (A
BA
N
DO
N
E
D
)8" PVC6" C
PP48" RCP48" RCPT
263263
263263263
263
263263263263263263263263263263263263263
263
263
263
263
263
263263263263263263263263263
263
263263263263 263263263EJB
WV WV
FH
WVWV
FH
INV.OUT=251.42'
TOP=263.44'
BOTTOM BOX=253.31'
TOP=262.99'
TMH
BARBED WIRE
WITH 3 STRAND
84" CHAIN LINK FENCE
P264
264264
264 26426426426 4264264264264264
264
264
264
264
264
264
264
264264
264264264264
264264264264264
264264
264264 2648" HDPES
265265
2652652
6
5
265
2652652652652652
6
52652
652
65 265265265265265265265
265
265
265
265265
265
265
2652652
6
5
265265265265265265265265265
265265
26526548" RCP48" RCP
S48" RCP96" C
H
A
IN LIN
K FEN
C
E W
ITH 3 STR
A
N
D BA
R
B
ED W
IR
ES
BEYOND SURVEY LIMITSBEYOND SURVEY LIMITS
INV.OUT=259.62' (SE)
INV.IN=259.83' (NE)
TOP=264.22'96" C
H
A
IN L
IN
K FE
NC
E W
ITH 3 ST
R
AND BA
R
B
ED W
IR
E
INV.=263.07'
INV.=262.80'
INV.=265.59'
INV.=265.71'
6" CPP
INV.OUT=252.38' (W)
INV.IN=252.52' (E)
TOP=257.26'2" FORCE MAIN WITH 8" CPP15" RCP 8" HDPE10" PVC 8" PVC
INV.OUT=263.16' (SW)
INV.IN=263.52' (NE)
TOP=267.02'
266
266266266266266266266266266266
266
266266266
266266
266
266
266
266
266266
266266
266
266266266
266266 2
6
6
266
266266266266266266266266266 266266266
266 266266
URBAN FREEDOM WAYT267267267
267
26
7267267267267
267
267
267
267267267
267
267267267
267
267 267267267267
267267267267267267267267267
267267267
267
267 WITH 3 STRAND BARBED WIRE96" CHAIN LINK FENCE G
RA
V
EL RO
AD
96" CHAIN
LINK
FENCE
WITH
3
STRAND
BARBED
WIRE
GATE
268268268268268268268268268
268
268 268
268
268
268
268
2
68268
268268268268268268
268268268268268268
268
268268
2682 6 8
268
BARBED WIRE
WITH 3 STRAND
96" CHAIN LINK FENCE
GATE 269269269
269
269
269
269
269269269269269 269269269 26927
0270270 270270
270
270270GRAVEL ROADG
RAVEL ROADGATE
GRAVEL
DRIVE
GRAVEL
DRIVE
GRAVEL
GRAVEL LOT
WATER TANK
POLE W/LIGHTPOLE W/LIGHT
POLE W/LIGHT
CONC PAD
SHELTER OVER
GENERAL INSTRUCTION COMPOUNDGRAVEL ROADGRAVEL ROADT271271
27127127196" CHAI
N LI
NK FENCE WI
TH 3 STRAND BARBED W
I
RE96" CHAI
N LI
NK FENCE
WI
TH 3 STRAND BARBED WI
RE72" C
HAI
N LI
NK FE
NCE WIT
H 3 ST
R
AND B
AR
BE
D WIR
E
72"
C
HAI
N LI
NK FE
NC
E WIT
H 3 ST
R
AND B
AR
BE
D WIR
E
2
7
2272272272
272
272 12" BLOCK WALL72" CHAIN LINK FENCE WITH 3 STRAND BARBED WIRETO TORA BORA BLVDTO AFRICAN LION BLVD U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS$FILES$ANSI DCHECKED BY:DRAWN BY:ISSUE DATE:XXXXXX-XX-X-XXXXSHEET ID FILENAME:B
C
D
E
F
G
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
SOLICITATION NO.:DESIGNED BY:1
A MARKSIZE:SUBMITTED BY:DATECONTRACT NO.:®of Engineers
US Army Corps
CATEGORY CODEDESCRIPTIONP:\Projects\016801\03 CAD_BIM\_Sheets\05_Civil\BPRF_CG750.dgn10-SEP-201813:24 XXX-XX-XXR. BOSTONW912PM-18-C-001469 DARLINGTON AVENUEWILMINGTON DISTRICTWILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINAFORT BRAGG, NORTH CAROLINASPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES (SOF)PARACHUTE RIGGING FACILITYPN 74813SEPTEMBER 2018FAST TRACK SUBMITTAL
GRAPHIC SCALE: 1"=60'-0"
180'120'60'030'60'
N
GEOGRAPHIC COORDINATE DATA
HORIZONTAL DATUM:
NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE, NAD83.
VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88.
UNITS OF MEASURE: U.S. SURVEY FEET.
COORDINATES SHOWN IN FORMAT OF
EASTING, NORTHING AND ELEVATION.CG750S.HAGGARDPRE DEVELOPED HYDROLOGYS.CURRYM.MEYERQ100: 88.31
Q25: 62.22
Q10: 45.86
Q2: 22.06
Q1: 14.28
PEAK FLOW (CFS)
WEIGHTED CN: 72
DRAINAGEAREA: 17.94 ACRES
PREDEVELOPED
EXISTING 48" RCP
WITH OVERFLOW CONNETED TO
EXISTING BIORETENTION AREA
ALL DRAINAGE FLOWS TO

Parachute Rigging Facility
Fort Bragg, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Mason & Hanger Page - a.3 -

APPENDIX C
POSTDEVELOPMENT MAP

CONC
TIMBER PILE
96" CHAIN LINK FENCE WITH 3 STRAND BARBED WIRE
96" CHAIN LINK FENCE WITH 3 STRAND BARBED WIRE
BOTTOM BOX=250.78'
TOP=260.43'
BOTTOM BOX=252.49'
TOP=262.22'
BOTTOM BOX=257.22'
TOP=266.87'
BOTTOM BOX=260.94'
TOP=270.57'
ASPHALT
ASPHALT
URBAN FREEDOM WAY
ASPHALT
ASPHALT
POND
RETENTION
STORMWATER
AND HAND HOLE
ON CONC PAD
EJB
CONC
CONC
CONC
CONC
ELEVATION=262.4'
BORE HOLE
ELEVATION=262.1'
BORE HOLE
ELEVATION=267.3'
BORE HOLE
ELEVATION=262.2'
BORE HOLE
E
L
E
V
A
T
IO
N
=264.6'
BO
R
E H
O
L
E
ELEVATION=261.2'
BORE HOLE
ELEVATION=260.2'
BORE HOLE
ELEVATION=260.4'
BORE HOLE
GUARD SHACK
1 STORY
WOODS
6"
8"
24"
6"
6"
6"
15"13"
24"
11"O
20"
12"16"
14"
15"
15"O
15"
14"O
9"O
20"
8"
14"
15"
15"6"O
6"C
22"
WOODS
URBAN FREEDOM WAY ASPHALT
ELEVATION: 261.30'
E: 1989897.14
N: 485522.55
RB&C #11
CI-2
CI-3
CI-1
CB-5
CB-4
CB-3
CB-2
CB-1
SDMH-2
CI-7
CI-6
CI-5
CI-4
CI-8
CI-9
CI-10
HW-3
TR-3TR-2TR-1HW-4
HW-5TR-4GI-1
SANWWWWFH
WWW
WSAN
WWSD SDS
DSDSDS
DSDSDSDSDSDSDSD SDSDSDRDRDRDRDRDSD1
5"
1
5"
1
5"15"18"15"15"24"18"1
5
"
1
5"
1
5"15"6"10"6"6"
6"
6"
12"
HW-6
SDMH-3
SDSD15"15"10"SDMH-4
6"
6"
SD
SSMH
SSMH
HW-8
HW-7
18"
18"GG GGGPIVFH
FH
SD
SD
SD
6"RD10"6"6"RDRD6"
1
2"
RD 6"
10"
6"COCOCOCOCORDRDRD6"6"6"6"
1
0"
MH-1
SD
SANSANSAN
SANSSMHSSMH
SSMH
S
A
N SANS
ANSSMH
30"FDC8"8"8"8"8"
8"8"2"2"6"FWFW10"CO6"6"6"COS
D2
4"
GI-3GI-4GI-58"8"SDMH-6
SDMH-5
SDMH-7 SD24"CI-12
CI-11
SD 24"
S
D1
8"
SDMH-8
SD15"S
D1
5"18"12"15"8"8"8"8"8"8"8"CO
CO
CO
CO CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
8"SD18"24"SDMH-912"GI-1A 8"8"8"8"8"COCO
CO
CO
CO
6"6"6"6"RDRD RDCOCO6"
6"
INV.OUT=250.82' (NE)
INV.IN=250.86' (S)
INV.IN=252.48' (W)
TOP=259.04'
INV.OUT=253.82' (E)
TOP=257.70'
OUTFALL STRUCTURE
INV.OUT=251.49' (N)
INV.IN=252.38' (W)
TOP=259.05'
INV.OUT=250.22' (NE)
INV.IN=250.27' (SW)
TOP=260.07'
INV.OUT=249.32' (NE)
INV.IN=249.35' (SW)
TOP=265.10'
INV.OUT OFF-SITE
INV.IN=245.34' (S)
TOP=256.56'
INV.OUT=247.15' (N)
INV.IN=247.29' (SE)
TOP=264.90'
INV.OUT=248.12' (NW)
INV.IN=248.24' (SW)
TOP=265.44'
RAP
RIP
RAP
RIP
RIP RAP RIP RAP
256
SD
30"
SD
30"B STREET (ABANDONED)S
257
257
257257257ASPHALT
ASPHALT
ASPHALT
ASPHALT
ASPHALT
6' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION CHAIN LINK FENCE
TRANSFORMER PADTRANSFORMER PAD
258 258258
258
258258258258258
D STREET (ABANDONED)
MCINTYRE TRAIL (ABANDONED)
259
259
259
259
259 259259
259259259259259259
25
9259
259
259
259259S
S48" RCP15" RCP
48" RCP
260
260
260
260
260
260260260
260
260
260 260260260260260260260
260260
260260260260260260260260260
SWALESWALE
S
SWALESWALE
T
261 261
261 261
261261261
261
261
261261261261261261261
261
261261261
261
261261
261
261261261
261261261261261 2612
61261261261261261
262 262262
262
2
62262262262262262262262262262
262
262
262
262
262
262
262
262262
262
262
262
262262262262262
262262262262262
262
262 262262262262
2
622622622622622
6
2
262
262262
262262262
T
8" PVC6" CPP48" RCP48" RCPT 263263263263263263263263
263263
263263
263
263
263
263
263
263
263
263
263 263263263263263
263
263263263263 263263263263263
263263263
263
263BOTTOM BOX=253.31'
TOP=262.99'
TMH
EJB
WV WV
FH
WVWV
FH
INV.OUT=251.42'
TOP=263.44'
BOTTOM BOX=253.31'
TOP=262.99'
TMH
P 264264264264
2
64264264264
2
64
264
264
264
264
264
264
264264
264
264264
264
264264264264264
264264
264264 264264264264
264 2648" HDPES
265
2652652652652652
6526526526
5265265265265265265265
265
265
265
265265
265
265
265
265
2
6
5
265
265 265265265265265265265
265265
265265
265265
265
2652
6
5 265265
2652652
6
5 48" RCP48" RCP
S48" RCPS
BEYOND SURVEY LIMITSBEYOND SURVEY LIMITS
INV.OUT=259.62' (SE)
INV.IN=259.83' (NE)
TOP=264.22'
INV.=263.07'
INV.=262.80'
INV.=265.59'
INV.=265.71'
6" CPP
INV.OUT=252.38' (W)
INV.IN=252.52' (E)
TOP=257.26'2" FORCE MAIN WITH 8" CPP15" RCP
10" PVC 8" HDPE8" PVC
INV.OUT=263.16' (SW)
INV.IN=263.52' (NE)
TOP=267.02'266266266266266266266266266
266
266266266
266266
266
266
266
266
266266
266266
266
266266266
266266 2
6
6
266
2
6
6 266266266266266266266
266 266266266
266 266266
266
266URBAN FREEDOM WAYT267267267
267
26
7267267
2
67267
267
267
267
267267267
267
267267267267
267
267
267267267
267267267267267267267267267
267 267267
267
267
GATE
268
268
268268268268268268268
268
268 268
268
268
2
68
268268
268
268268268268268268
26826826826
8268
268
268
268
268
268
2 6 8
268
BARBED WIRE
WITH 3 STRAND
96" CHAIN LINK FENCE
GATE 269269269
269
269
269
269
269269269269269 269269269 269270270270 270270
270
270270GRAVEL ROADGATE
GRAVEL
DRIVE
GRAVEL
DRIVE
GRAVEL
GRAVEL LOT
WATER TANK
POLE W/LIGHT
POLE W/LIGHT
POLE W/LIGHT
CONC PAD
SHELTER OVER
GENERAL INSTRUCTION COMPOUNDGRAVEL ROADT271271
27127127196" CHAI
N LI
NK FENCE WI
TH 3 STRAND BARBED WI
RE72" C
HAI
N LI
NK FE
NCE WIT
H 3 ST
R
AND B
AR
BE
D WIR
E
72" C
HAI
N LI
NK FE
NCE WIT
H 3 ST
R
AND B
AR
B
E
D WIRE27
2
272272272
272
272 12" BLOCK WALL72" CHAIN LINK FENCE WITH 3 STRAND BARBED WIRETO TORA BORA BLVDTO AFRICAN LION BLVD U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERSBPRF_CG751.dgnANSI DCHECKED BY:DRAWN BY:ISSUE DATE:SHEET ID FILENAME:B
C
D
E
F
G
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
DESIGNED BY:1
A MARKSIZE:SUBMITTED BY:DATECONTRACT NO.:®of Engineers
US Army Corps
CATEGORY CODEDESCRIPTIONP:\Projects\016801\03 CAD_BIM\_Sheets\05_Civil\BPRF_CG751.dgn04-FEB-201915:19 XXX-XX-XXR. BOSTONW912PM-18-C-001469 DARLINGTON AVENUEWILMINGTON DISTRICTWILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINAFORT BRAGG, NORTH CAROLINASPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES (SOF)PARACHUTE RIGGING FACILITYPN 74813DECEMBER 2018FAST TRACK SUBMITTAL
SN2
SN7
SN1
SN8
SN3
SN4
SN6SN5
SN11 SN10
SN12
SN9
SN13
SN14
FF EL 266.00'BIO-RETENTION
EXISTING
#1
BIO-RETENTION
#2
BIO-RETENTION
2
6
0
2
6
0 2602602602
6
1261
261 2612612622622
6
2262 2622622622622
6
3
263
263263263263 2632632632
6
3
263263
2
6
4 264264264264
264 2642642
6
4264264264
264264264264264264
FACILITYPARACHUTE RIGGING2
6
5265 265265265
2652
6
5
265 2652652652652652652
6
5
2
6
5
2652652
6
4
2662
6
9
GRAPHIC SCALE: 1"=60'-0"
180'120'60'030'60'
N
GEOGRAPHIC COORDINATE DATA
HORIZONTAL DATUM:
NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE, NAD83.
VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88.
UNITS OF MEASURE: U.S. SURVEY FEET.
COORDINATES SHOWN IN FORMAT OF
EASTING, NORTHING AND ELEVATION.CG751S.HAGGARDPOST DEVELOPED HYDROLOGYS.CURRYM.MEYERBASIN 1
BASIN 2
AS ORIGINAL FLOW PATH
OUTLET TO SAME 42" RCP PIPE
BIORETENTION BASIN 2 OVERFLOW
Q100: 14.59
Q25: 10.28
Q10: 7.57
Q2: 3.64
Q1: 2.36
PEAK FLOW (CFS)
WEIGHTED CN: 72
DRAINAGE AREA: 2.96 ACRES
BIO-RETENTION BASIN 2:
Q100: 43.57
Q25: 30.70
Q10: 22.63
Q2: 10.88
Q1: 7.05
PEAK FLOW (CFS)
WEIGHTED CN: 81
DRAINAGE AREA: 8.85 ACRES
:BIO-RETENTION BASIN 1
POST DEVELOPED:

Parachute Rigging Facility
Fort Bragg, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Mason & Hanger Page - a.6 -

APPENDIX F
NRCS CUMBERLAND COUNTY SOIL SURVEY MAP
United States
Department of
Agriculture
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Cumberland
County, North
Carolina
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
September 6, 2018
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.
They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information
about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for
many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban
planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.
Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste
disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand,
protect, or enhance the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil
properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.
The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of
soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for
identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some
cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/
portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering
applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center
(https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil
Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/?
cid=nrcs142p2_053951).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as
septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to
basements or underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States
Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its
programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability,
and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion,
sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a
part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not
all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require
2
alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print,
audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at [phone] (voice
and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of
Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or
call [phone] (voice) or [phone] (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity
provider and employer.
3
Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2
How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5
Soil Map..................................................................................................................8
Soil Map................................................................................................................9
Legend................................................................................................................10
Map Unit Legend................................................................................................11
Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11
Cumberland County, North Carolina...............................................................13
BaD—Blaney loamy sand, 8 to 15 percent slopes......................................13
FaB—Faceville loamy sand, 2 to 6 percent slopes.....................................14
Soil Information for All Uses...............................................................................15
Soil Reports........................................................................................................15
Soil Physical Properties..................................................................................15
Engineering Properties (Parachute Rigging)...............................................15
References............................................................................................................19
4
How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous
areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous
areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and
limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length,
and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and
native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil
profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The
profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the
soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is
devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other
biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource
areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that
share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water
resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey
areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that
is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the
area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind
of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and
miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific
segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they
were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict
with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a
specific location on the landscape.
Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their
characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil
scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only
a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented
by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to
verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They
noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock
fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them
to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their
properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil
characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for
comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic
classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character
of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil
5
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the
individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that
they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and
research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the
objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that
have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a
unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable
proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components
of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way
diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such
landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite
investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of
mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape,
and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the
soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at
specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller
number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.
These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color,
depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for
content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil
typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of
characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct
measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit
component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other
properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally
are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists
interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed
characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the
soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through
observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.
Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new
interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other
sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of
specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management
are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same
kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on
such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over
long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example,
soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will
have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict
that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the
survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and
Custom Soil Resource Report
6
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings,
fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.
Custom Soil Resource Report
7
Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of
soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
8
9
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
38840903884140388419038842403884290388434038843903884090388414038841903884240388429038843403884390679310 679360 679410 679460 679510 679560 679610 679660 679710 679760 679810
679310 679360 679410 679460 679510 679560 679610 679660 679710 679760 679810
35° 5' 11'' N 79° 1' 59'' W35° 5' 11'' N79° 1' 38'' W35° 5' 0'' N
79° 1' 59'' W35° 5' 0'' N
79° 1' 38'' WN
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 17N WGS84
0 100 200 400 600
Feet
0 35 70 140 210
Meters
Map Scale: 1:2,390 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.
Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Cumberland County, North Carolina
Survey Area Data: Version 18, Sep 26, 2017
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Aug 13, 2014—Feb
4, 2017
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Custom Soil Resource Report
10
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
BaD Blaney loamy sand, 8 to 15
percent slopes
0.0 0.1%
FaB Faceville loamy sand, 2 to 6
percent slopes
16.6 99.9%
Totals for Area of Interest 16.6 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along
with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They
generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the
scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas
are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a
given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit
descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor
components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not
mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it
was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and
miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the
usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate
pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or
landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The
delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however,
Custom Soil Resource Report
11
onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous
areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil
properties and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major
horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness,
salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the
basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas
shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase
commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha
silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.
The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar
in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present
or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered
practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The
pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat
similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas
that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion
of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can
be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made
up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil
material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
Custom Soil Resource Report
12
Cumberland County, North Carolina
BaD—Blaney loamy sand, 8 to 15 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: w6z3
Elevation: 160 to 660 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 38 to 52 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 70 degrees F
Frost-free period: 210 to 245 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance
Map Unit Composition
Blaney and similar soils: 85 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Blaney
Setting
Landform: Low hills
Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder
Landform position (three-dimensional): Crest
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Sandy and loamy marine deposits
Typical profile
A - 0 to 4 inches: loamy sand
E - 4 to 25 inches: loamy sand
Bt - 25 to 62 inches: sandy clay loam
C - 62 to 80 inches: loamy coarse sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 8 to 15 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20
to 0.57 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.0 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: Loamy Backslope Woodland - PROVISIONAL (F137XY006GA)
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
13
FaB—Faceville loamy sand, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: w70c
Elevation: 80 to 330 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 38 to 55 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 70 degrees F
Frost-free period: 210 to 265 days
Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Faceville and similar soils: 80 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Faceville
Setting
Landform: Ridges on marine terraces, broad interstream divides on marine
terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder, summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Crest
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Clayey marine deposits
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 7 inches: loamy sand
E - 7 to 17 inches: loamy sand
Bt - 17 to 80 inches: clay
Properties and qualities
Slope: 2 to 6 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to
high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.8 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
14
Soil Information for All Uses
Soil Reports
The Soil Reports section includes various formatted tabular and narrative reports
(tables) containing data for each selected soil map unit and each component of
each unit. No aggregation of data has occurred as is done in reports in the Soil
Properties and Qualities and Suitabilities and Limitations sections.
The reports contain soil interpretive information as well as basic soil properties and
qualities. A description of each report (table) is included.
Soil Physical Properties
This folder contains a collection of tabular reports that present soil physical
properties. The reports (tables) include all selected map units and components for
each map unit. Soil physical properties are measured or inferred from direct
observations in the field or laboratory. Examples of soil physical properties include
percent clay, organic matter, saturated hydraulic conductivity, available water
capacity, and bulk density.
Engineering Properties (Parachute Rigging)
This table gives the engineering classifications and the range of engineering
properties for the layers of each soil in the survey area.
Hydrologic soil group is a group of soils having similar runoff potential under similar
storm and cover conditions. The criteria for determining Hydrologic soil group is
found in the National Engineering Handbook, Chapter 7 issued May 2007(http://
directives.sc.egov.usda.gov/OpenNonWebContent.aspx?content=17757.wba).
Listing HSGs by soil map unit component and not by soil series is a new concept for
the engineers. Past engineering references contained lists of HSGs by soil series.
Soil series are continually being defined and redefined, and the list of soil series
names changes so frequently as to make the task of maintaining a single national
list virtually impossible. Therefore, the criteria is now used to calculate the HSG
using the component soil properties and no such national series lists will be
maintained. All such references are obsolete and their use should be discontinued.
Soil properties that influence runoff potential are those that influence the minimum
rate of infiltration for a bare soil after prolonged wetting and when not frozen. These
properties are depth to a seasonal high water table, saturated hydraulic conductivity
after prolonged wetting, and depth to a layer with a very slow water transmission
15
rate. Changes in soil properties caused by land management or climate changes
also cause the hydrologic soil group to change. The influence of ground cover is
treated independently. There are four hydrologic soil groups, A, B, C, and D, and
three dual groups, A/D, B/D, and C/D. In the dual groups, the first letter is for
drained areas and the second letter is for undrained areas.
The four hydrologic soil groups are described in the following paragraphs:
Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly
wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or
gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission.
Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These
consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained
soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils
have a moderate rate of water transmission.
Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist
chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or
soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water
transmission.
Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when
thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell
potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at
or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material.
These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission.
Depth to the upper and lower boundaries of each layer is indicated.
Texture is given in the standard terms used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
These terms are defined according to percentages of sand, silt, and clay in the
fraction of the soil that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter. "Loam," for example, is
soil that is 7 to 27 percent clay, 28 to 50 percent silt, and less than 52 percent sand.
If the content of particles coarser than sand is 15 percent or more, an appropriate
modifier is added, for example, "gravelly."
Classification of the soils is determined according to the Unified soil classification
system (ASTM, 2005) and the system adopted by the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO, 2004).
The Unified system classifies soils according to properties that affect their use as
construction material. Soils are classified according to particle-size distribution of
the fraction less than 3 inches in diameter and according to plasticity index, liquid
limit, and organic matter content. Sandy and gravelly soils are identified as GW, GP,
GM, GC, SW, SP, SM, and SC; silty and clayey soils as ML, CL, OL, MH, CH, and
OH; and highly organic soils as PT. Soils exhibiting engineering properties of two
groups can have a dual classification, for example, CL-ML.
The AASHTO system classifies soils according to those properties that affect
roadway construction and maintenance. In this system, the fraction of a mineral soil
that is less than 3 inches in diameter is classified in one of seven groups from A-1
through A-7 on the basis of particle-size distribution, liquid limit, and plasticity index.
Soils in group A-1 are coarse grained and low in content of fines (silt and clay). At
the other extreme, soils in group A-7 are fine grained. Highly organic soils are
classified in group A-8 on the basis of visual inspection.
If laboratory data are available, the A-1, A-2, and A-7 groups are further classified
as A-1-a, A-1-b, A-2-4, A-2-5, A-2-6, A-2-7, A-7-5, or A-7-6. As an additional
refinement, the suitability of a soil as subgrade material can be indicated by a group
Custom Soil Resource Report
16
index number. Group index numbers range from 0 for the best subgrade material to
20 or higher for the poorest.
Percentage of rock fragments larger than 10 inches in diameter and 3 to 10 inches
in diameter are indicated as a percentage of the total soil on a dry-weight basis. The
percentages are estimates determined mainly by converting volume percentage in
the field to weight percentage. Three values are provided to identify the expected
Low (L), Representative Value (R), and High (H).
Percentage (of soil particles) passing designated sieves is the percentage of the soil
fraction less than 3 inches in diameter based on an ovendry weight. The sieves,
numbers 4, 10, 40, and 200 (USA Standard Series), have openings of 4.76, 2.00,
0.420, and 0.074 millimeters, respectively. Estimates are based on laboratory tests
of soils sampled in the survey area and in nearby areas and on estimates made in
the field. Three values are provided to identify the expected Low (L), Representative
Value (R), and High (H).
Liquid limit and plasticity index (Atterberg limits) indicate the plasticity
characteristics of a soil. The estimates are based on test data from the survey area
or from nearby areas and on field examination. Three values are provided to identify
the expected Low (L), Representative Value (R), and High (H).
References:
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling
and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Custom Soil Resource Report
17
Absence of an entry indicates that the data were not estimated. The asterisk '*' denotes the representative texture; other
possible textures follow the dash. The criteria for determining the hydrologic soil group for individual soil components is
found in the National Engineering Handbook, Chapter 7 issued May 2007(http://directives.sc.egov.usda.gov/
OpenNonWebContent.aspx?content=17757.wba). Three values are provided to identify the expected Low (L),
Representative Value (R), and High (H).
Engineering Properties–Cumberland County, North Carolina
Map unit symbol and
soil name
Pct. of
map
unit
Hydrolo
gic
group
Depth USDA texture Classification Pct Fragments Percentage passing sieve number—Liquid
limit
Plasticit
y index
Unified AASHTO >10
inches
3-10
inches
4 10 40 200
In L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H
BaD—Blaney loamy
sand, 8 to 15
percent slopes
Blaney 85 C 0-4 Loamy sand SM A-2-4 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 95-96-1
00
89-93-1
00
66-72-
82
18-23-
28
9-12 -14 NP
4-25 Loamy sand SM A-2-4 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 95-96-1
00
89-93-1
00
66-72-
82
18-23-
28
9-12 -14 NP
25-62 Sandy clay loam,
sandy loam
SC, SC-
SM, SM
A-4, A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 95-97-1
00
86-92-1
00
68-80-
95
36-47-
59
0-20 -40 NP-10-2
0
62-80 Sandy loam, sandy
clay loam, loamy
sand, loamy
coarse sand
SC, SC-
SM, SM
A-1-b,
A-2-4,
A-4, A-6
0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 95-97-1
00
86-92-1
00
45-51-
73
17-21-
39
0-10 -36 NP-0
-14
FaB—Faceville loamy
sand, 2 to 6 percent
slopes
Faceville 80 B 0-7 Loamy sand SM A-2-4 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 91-95-1
00
76-87-1
00
58-69-
84
21-27-
35
9-12 -14 NP
7-17 Loamy sand SM A-2-4 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 91-95-1
00
76-87-1
00
58-69-
84
21-27-
35
9-12 -14 NP
17-80 Clay loam, clay,
sandy clay
CH, CL A-7-6, A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 98-98-1
00
93-94-1
00
79-90-1
00
63-74-
88
25-39
-52
11-18-2
5
Custom Soil Resource Report
18
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling
and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric
soils in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for
making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577
Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/
home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/
detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084
19
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States,
the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook
296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?
cid=nrcs142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf
Custom Soil Resource Report
20

Parachute Rigging Facility
Fort Bragg, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Mason & Hanger Page - a.7 -

APPENDIX G
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND GEOTECHNICAL
ENGINEERING REPORT

REPORT OF SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION
AND GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
FORT BRAGG, NORTH CAROLINA
BUILDING & EARTH PROJECT NUMBER RD180419
PREPARED FOR:
ACC CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.
AUGUST 22, 2018

610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, North Carolina Ph: [phone]
www.BuildingAndEarth.com

Birmingham, AL  Auburn, AL  Huntsville, AL  Montgomery, AL  Mobile, AL
Tuscaloosa, AL  Columbus, GA  Louisville, KY  Raleigh, NC  Dunn, NC
Jacksonville, NC  Springdale, AR  Little Rock, AR  Tulsa, OK  Oklahoma City, OK  Durant, OK

August 22, 2018

ACC Construction Company
635 NW Frontage Road
Augusta, GA 30907

Attention: Mr. Mason McKnight, IV

Subject: Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Ft. Bragg, North Carolina
Building & Earth Project No: RD180419
Mr. McKnight:
Building & Earth Sciences, LLP has completed the authorized subsurface exploration and
geotechnical engineering evaluation for the Ft. Bragg, SOF Parachute Rigging Facility located
within the Yarborough Complex of Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
The purpose of this exploration and evaluation was to determine general subsurface conditions
at the site and to address applicable geotechnical aspects of the proposed construction and site
development. The recommendations in this report are based on a physical reconnaissance of the
site and observation and classification of samples obtained from twelve (12) soil test borings
conducted at the site by Building & Earth Sciences, and thirteen (13) prior borings drilled by
USACE for the preparation of the RFP. Confirmation of the anticipated subsurface conditions
during construction is an essential part of geotechnical services.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide consultation services for the proposed project. If you
have any questions regarding the information in this report or need any additional information,
please call us.
Respectfully Submitted,
BUILDING & EARTH SCIENCES, LLP
Engineering Firm F-1081

Kurt. A. Miller, PE C. Mark Nolen, PE
Raleigh Branch Manager Senior Vice President

Page | i

Table of Contents 
1.0 PROJECT & SITE DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................... 1 
2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES ............................................................................................................................................... 3 
3.0 GEOTECHNICAL SITE CHARACTERIZATION ................................................................................................... 4 
3.1 GEOLOGY .................................................................................................................................................................. 5 
3.2 EXISTING SURFACE CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................................... 5 
3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 6 
TOPSOIL ............................................................................................................................................................ 7 
SILTY SAND (SM) ............................................................................................................................................ 7 
CLAYEY SAND OR SANDY CLAY (SC OR CL) ................................................................................................ 7 
AUGER REFUSAL ............................................................................................................................................... 7 
GROUNDWATER ............................................................................................................................................... 8 
SEISMIC SITE CLASSIFICATION ........................................................................................................................ 8 
3.4 SEASONAL HIGH WATER TABLE AND INFILTRATION TESTING ........................................................................... 8 
4.0 SITE DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS ......................................................................................................... 9 
4.1 INITIAL SITE PREPARATION ..................................................................................................................................... 9 
4.2 SUBGRADE EVALUATION ...................................................................................................................................... 10 
4.3 MOISTURE SENSITIVE SOILS ................................................................................................................................ 11 
4.4 UNDERCUTTING OR STABILIZATION OF LOW CONSISTENCY SOILS ................................................................ 11 
4.5 STRUCTURAL FILL .................................................................................................................................................. 12 
4.6 EXCAVATION CONSIDERATIONS .......................................................................................................................... 13 
GROUNDWATER ............................................................................................................................................ 13 
4.7 UTILITY TRENCH BACKFILL ................................................................................................................................... 13 
4.8 LANDSCAPING AND DRAINAGE CONSIDERATION ............................................................................................ 13 
4.9 WET WEATHER CONSTRUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 14 
5.0 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................ 14 
5.1 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS .................................................................................................................................... 14 
6.0 FLOOR SLABS .......................................................................................................................................................... 16 
7.0 PAVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS ......................................................................................................................... 16 
7.1 FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT ............................................................................................................................................. 17 
7.2 RIGID PAVEMENT .................................................................................................................................................. 18 
8.0 SUBGRADE REHABILITATION ............................................................................................................................ 18 
9.0 CONSTRUCTION MONITORING ....................................................................................................................... 19 

APPENDIX
Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 1

1.0 PROJECT & SITE DESCRIPTION
The subject site is located in the Yarborough Complex of Fort Bragg, on the north side of
Urban Freedom Way, west of Tora Bora Road. Information relative to the proposed site
and the proposed development is listed in Table 1 below. Photographs depicting the
current site condition are presented on the following page.
Development
Item Detail Description
General Site
Size (Ac.) Approximately 12 Acres
Existing Development Vacant, partially wooded land
Vegetation Grass with some trees and shrubs
Slopes No
Retaining Walls No
Drainage Appears poorly drained, standing water onsite
Cuts & Fills Up to 4 feet of fill
Proposed
Buildings
No. of Bldgs 1
Square Ft. 84,500
Stories 1
Construction Pre-fabricated steel frame
Column Loads 125 kips
Wall Loads 4 klf
Preferred Foundation Conventional shallow spread
Preferred Slab Concrete slab-on-grade
Pavements
Traffic Provided
Standard Duty Yes, Flexible
Heavy Duty Yes, Rigid and Flexible
Table 1: Project and Site Description
Reference: RFP Documents – SOF parachute Rigging Facility at Fort Bragg, North Carolina
Notes:
1. If actual loading conditions exceed our anticipated loads, Building & Earth Sciences should
be allowed to review the proposed structural design and its effects on our recommendations
for foundation design.
2. Since information on final grades was not provided for this site, assumptions have been made
regarding grades for the purpose of this report. Therefore, it will be essential for Building &
Earth to review the final grading plans, when they become available, and be contracted to
provide supplemental recommendations prior to starting construction.
Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 2

Figure 1: Looking Northeast across site from boring B-01

Figure 2: Looking west from NE boundary
Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 3

2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES
The authorized subsurface exploration was performed on July 31 and August 1, 2018 in
general conformance with our proposal RD20008, dated January 16, 2018. Occasionally
some modification of the scope outlined in our proposal is required to provide for proper
evaluation of the encountered subsurface conditions. The proposal included a base bid
for the Building & Main Site, and an option for 160 POV Parking Lot. Both the base bid
and option were performed for this study.
The purpose of the geotechnical exploration was to determine general subsurface
conditions at specific boring locations and to gather data on which to base a geotechnical
evaluation with respect to the proposed construction. The subsurface exploration for this
project consisted of twelve (12) soil test borings. The site was drilled using a Geoprobe
drill rig equipped with an automatic hammer.
In addition to SPT sampling, our testing also included dilatometer testing in general
accordance with ASTM D6635. This method of testing in-situ soil advances a flat plate
dilatometer into the soil profile using the downward pressure from a truck mounted drill
rig. At selected depths, the dilatometer is expanded into the soil mass and is able to
provide information regarding penetration resistance, lateral stress and deformation
modulus of the soil. Using empirical data this dilatometer information can better predict
soil strength parameters that are used in the settlement analysis. The intent of this
additional testing was to be better evaluate the settlement potential of the soils within
the upper 10 to 15 feet of the soil profile.
The soil boring locations were determined in the field by a representative of our staff by
measuring from existing site features. As such, the boring locations shown on the Boring
Location Plan attached to this report should be considered approximate.
The soil samples recovered during our site investigation were visually classified and
specific samples were selected by the project engineer for laboratory analysis. The
laboratory analysis consisted of:
Test ASTM No. of Tests
Natural Moisture Content D2216 5
Atterberg Limits D4318 5
Material Finer Than No. 200 Sieve by Washing D1140 5
Modified Proctor with California Bearing ratio D1557/D1883 1
Table 2: Scope of Laboratory Tests
Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 4

The results of the laboratory analysis are presented on the enclosed Boring Logs and in
tabular form in the Appendix of this report. Descriptions of the laboratory tests that were
performed are also included in the Appendix.
The information gathered from the exploration was evaluated to determine a suitable
foundation type for the proposed structure. The information was also evaluated to help
determine if any special subgrade preparation procedures will be required during the
earthwork phase of the project.
The results of the work are presented within this report that addresses:
 Summary of existing surface conditions.
 A description of the subsurface conditions encountered at the exploration
locations.
 Site preparation considerations including material types to be expected during
foundation construction and mass grading as well as recommendations regarding
handling and treatment of unsuitable soils, if encountered.
 Compaction requirements and recommended criteria to establish suitable surfaces
for structural backfill.
 Subsurface soil logs that detail properties of the materials encountered with soil
classifications and depth to bedrock (if encountered).
 Presentation of laboratory test results.
 Recommendations for foundation and pavement design.
 Plans and maps showing the location of the project and our onsite work.

3.0 GEOTECHNICAL SITE CHARACTERIZATION
The following discussion is intended to create a general understanding of the site from a
geotechnical engineering perspective. It is not intended to be a discussion of every
potential geotechnical issue that may arise, nor to provide every possible interpretation
of the conditions identified. The following conditions and subsequent recommendations
are based on the assumption that significant changes in subsurface conditions do not
occur between boreholes. However, anomalous conditions can occur due to variations in
existing fill that may be present at the site, or the geologic conditions at the site, and it
will be necessary to evaluate the assumed conditions during site grading and foundation
installation.
Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 5

3.1 GEOLOGY
Situated near the western boundary of the North Carolina Coastal Plain physiographic
province, published geologic maps indicate that the subject site is underlain by cretaceous
aged soil deposits associated with the Middendorf and Cape Fear geologic formations.
These formations are generally composed of sandstone and mudstone. The Soil Survey
of Cumberland and Hoke Counties, North Carolina (USDA Soil Conservation Service)
describes the area as characterized by deep sedimentary soils, ranging in depth from
about 200 to about 400 feet in depth.
3.2 EXISTING SURFACE CONDITIONS
The Parachute Rigging Facility site is described as fairly level and at the time of our site
reconnaissance, the site was very wet, and there were large areas of shallow standing
water across the site. Surface elevations range from approximately 260 to 270 ft. MSL.
With a proposed finished floor elevation at about 266 feet, up to three to four feet of cut
and fill will be required to achieve finished grades.
The site has been used in the past as part of an ammunitions storage area, and there are
fenced compounds and asphalt roadways that traverse the site. From a review of historical
aerial photographs on Google Earth, a small storage building with a loop road may have
been located on the eastern portion of the site. This building is able to be seen in the
photographs before 2012. Storm drainage has been installed along Urban Freedom Way,
and temporary storm basins are also present. Ground cover is generally grass, with some
trees and shrubs that will require removal as part of site preparation operations. The
remaining trees are along old “D” Street. Below is an aerial photograph of the site as it
appears at the time of the 2/2018 aerial photograph.
Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 6

Figure 3: Google Earth Aerial Photograph with Approximate Site Boundary
3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
A generalized stratification summary has been prepared using data from the soil test
borings drilled by Building & Earth and is presented in the table below. The stratification
depicts the general soil conditions and strata types encountered during our field
investigation.
Stratum
No.
Typical
Thickness Description Consistency
1 3 to 12
inches Topsoil N.A.
2 1.2 to 2.7 ft. Silty Sand Very loose to loose
3 12.4 to
23.3+ Clayey Sand and Sandy Clay Loose to medium dense, and
Soft to Hard
Table 3: Stratification Summary
Subsurface soil profiles have also been prepared based on the data obtained at the
specific boring locations. The subsurface soil profiles are presented in the Appendix. For
specific details on the information obtained from individual soil borings, please refer to
the Boring Logs included in the Appendix. The elevations of the borings indicated in this
report, and shown on the boring logs, were provided by Joyner Kersey, a local survey firm.
Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 7

TOPSOIL
Topsoil encountered on site ranged from about 3 to 12 inches, with an average about 5
to 6 inches. No testing has been performed to verify these soils meet the requirements
of “topsoil”. Topsoil depths reported on the boring logs should only be considered an
estimate and topsoil thickness may vary in unexplored portions of the site.
SILTY SAND (SM)
Soils described as silty sand (SM) were observed in 8 of the 12 borings. The silty sand
material extends from below the topsoil to depths up to 3 feet below the surface. This
material was not observed in borings B-102, P-101, P-102 or P-107. This soil is further
describes as very loose to loose, and occasionally medium dense red to brown, and moist
to dry. N-values range from 2 to 10 blows per foot, with values in the range 4 to 6 blows
per foot considered representative.
Atterberg limits and wash 200 grain size testing was performed on a sample collected
from the depth interval 0.0 to 1.5 ft. in boring B-101. The testing indicates a liquid limit
of 14, a plasticity index of 1, and 30.4 percent of the material passes a # 200 sieve. These
data correspond to an ASTM classification Silty Sand (SM).
CLAYEY SAND OR SANDY CLAY (SC OR CL)
Below the silty sand layer, and below the topsoil in test borings B-102, P-101, P-102 and
P-107, soils described as sandy clay (CL) and clayey sand (SC) were encountered. This
layer also included inconsistent layers of silty sand (SM). This material is poorly layered in
the test borings, resulting in significant variation with respect to classification and
consistency.
This soil is further described as very loose to medium dense, and occasionally medium
dense red to brown, and moist to dry. N-values range from 2 to 10 blows per foot, with
values in the range 4 to 6 blows per foot considered representative.
Atterberg limits and wash 200 grain size testing was performed on representative samples
collected from this layer. The testing indicates a fines content of 35 to 45 percent, and
liquid limits ranging from 14 to 47, and a plastic index of 16 to 18.
AUGER REFUSAL
Auger refusal is the drilling depth at which the borehole can no longer be advanced using
soil drilling procedures. Auger refusal can occur on hard soil, boulders, buried debris or
bedrock. Coring is required to sample the material below auger refusal. Auger refusal
was not encountered in borings drilled for this study.
Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 8

GROUNDWATER
At the time of drilling, groundwater was not observed in the test borings. Water levels
reported are accurate only for the time and date that the borings were drilled. Long term
monitoring of the boreholes was not included as part of our subsurface exploration. The
borings were backfilled the same day that they were drilled.
SEISMIC SITE CLASSIFICATION
The seismic survey was not complete at the time this report was issued. The seismic survey
will be completed and reported as an addendum to this report.
3.4 SEASONAL HIGH WATER TABLE AND INFILTRATION TESTING
In order to measure the depth to the Season High Water Table (SHWT), Mr. Mike Eaker, a
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist with Southeastern Soil & Environmental Associates,
Inc., under contract to Building & Earth Sciences, performed the field measurements and
provided a letter summarizing his work. Mr. Eaker’s report details the procedures used in
his field evaluation, the results of his soil observations, the depth to SHWT, and the depth
to observed water at each test location. Mr. Eaker’s report is included in the Appendix.
Once the SHWT was measured, infiltration testing was performed as shown on the
provided plans from Stantec. The results of the testing are included in the Appendix of
this report.
The flow of the near-surface soils has been approximated using the concepts presented
in Bernoulli’s Equation for steady state flow and Darcy’s Law for fluid flow through a
porous media. Additionally, our Ksat values were calculated using the Glover solution,
which is dependent on the geometry of the borehole and the hydraulic head. To develop
our results, Building & Earth has measured the saturated flow rate (Ksat) for the soils at the
site using accepted test methods and equipment in general accordance with ASTM D5126
{4.1.6} (Standard Guide for Comparison of Field Methods for Determining Hydraulic
Conductivity in the Vadose Zone). Ultimately, the drainage of the basins will be a function
of the saturated flow rate of the soils, the surface area of the basin geometry, and the
pressure differential (hydraulic head) induced by the storm water levels in the pond.
In order to determine the appropriate Ksat for the soils in the basin, a small diameter bore
hole was advanced to a pre-determined depth of interest. At this depth, a constant head
(pressure) was established and maintained. Once our measurements approached a
stabilized flow rate, our test was terminated.
Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 9

4.0 SITE DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS
Since information on final grades was not provided for this site, assumptions have been
made regarding grades for the purpose of this report. Therefore, it will be essential for
Building & Earth to review the final grading plans, when they become available, and be
contracted to provide supplemental recommendations prior to starting construction.
Based on surface elevations at the boring sites and upon USGS topographic data, we
anticipate cuts and fills in the range of about 3 to 4 feet will be required to prepare the
site for the building pad and pavement areas.
Based on our evaluation of the subsurface soil information, and the anticipated
foundation loads, it appears that construction with a conventional spread foundation
system is feasible. The site development recommendations outlined below are intended
for development of the site to support construction with a conventional spread
foundation system. If a different type of foundation system is preferred, Building & Earth
should be allowed to review the site development recommendations to verify that they are
appropriate for the preferred foundation system.
The primary geotechnical concerns for this project are:
◾ Relatively soft and loose soils at the project surface, extending to depths generally
2 feet, and in some cases up to 8 feet below the surface (B-105, RFP B-03 and RFP
B-05).
◾ Fill placement
◾ Moisture sensitive soils.
Recommendations addressing the site conditions are presented in the following sections.
4.1 INITIAL SITE PREPARATION
All trees, roots, topsoil and deleterious materials should be removed from the proposed
construction areas. Approximately 5 to 6 inches of topsoil were observed in the borings,
with up to 12 inches observed in one of the borings. A geotechnical engineer should
observe stripping and grubbing operations to evaluate that all unsuitable materials are
removed from areas to receive buildings and pavements.
Because of the past use of the site, buried structures could be encountered such as
foundations, utility lines, septic tanks, etc. If encountered, they should be removed
and backfilled in accordance with requirements outlined in the Structural Fill section
of this report.
Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 10

Standing water was observed on the site during the evaluation. Due to the moisture
sensitive nature of the on-site soils, positive drainage and temporary dewatering methods
(as discussed in Section 4.3) is important to help avoid degradation and softening of the
soils.
Materials disturbed during clearing operations should be stabilized in place or, if
necessary, undercut to undisturbed materials and backfilled with properly compacted,
approved structural fill. During site preparation activities, the contractor should identify
borrow source materials that will be used as structural fill and provide samples to the
testing laboratory so that conformance to the Structural Fill requirements outlined below
and appropriate moisture-density relationship curves can be determined.
4.2 SUBGRADE EVALUATION
We recommend that the project geotechnical engineer or a qualified representative
evaluate the subgrade after the site is prepared. Some unsuitable or unstable areas may
be present in unexplored areas of the site, and relatively soft or loose soils were noted
within the upper 2 to 3 feet of all the borings, occasionally extending to depths up to 8
feet below the surface. All areas that will require fill or that will support structures should
be carefully proofrolled with a heavy (40,000 # minimum), rubber-tired vehicle at the
following times.
◾ After an area has been stripped, and undercut if required, prior to the placement
of any fill.
◾ After grading an area to the finished subgrade elevation in a building or pavement
area.
◾ After areas have been exposed to any precipitation, and/or have been exposed for
more than 48 hours.
Some instability may exist during construction, depending on climatic and other factors
immediately preceding and during construction. If any soft or otherwise unsuitable soils
are identified during the proofrolling process, they must be undercut or stabilized prior
to fill placement, pavement construction, or floor slab construction. All unsuitable material
identified during the construction shall be removed and replaced in accordance with the
Structural Fill section of this report.

Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 11

4.3 MOISTURE SENSITIVE SOILS
Moisture sensitive silty sands (SM), clayey sands (SC) and sandy clays (CL) were
encountered across the site during the subsurface exploration. These soils will degrade if
allowed to become saturated. Therefore, not allowing water to pond by maintaining
positive drainage and temporary dewatering methods (if required) is important to help
avoid degradation and softening of the soils.
The contractor should anticipate some difficulty during the earthwork phase of this
project if moisture levels are moderate to high during construction. Increased moisture
levels will soften the subgrade and the soils may become unstable under the influence of
construction traffic. Accordingly, construction during wet weather conditions should be
avoided, as this could result in soft and unstable soil conditions that would require ground
modification, such as in place stabilization or undercutting.
4.4 UNDERCUTTING OR STABILIZATION OF LOW CONSISTENCY SOILS
Low consistency soils (N≤6) were encountered in all of the borings within the building
footprint in the upper 2 to 3 feet. Soft or loose soils, extending to depths of about 6 to 8
feet, were encountered in borings B-105, RFP B-03, and RFP B-05. The near-surface low
consistency soils encountered within the building footprint should be undercut to a
stable, suitable subgrade. Although it may be possible to stabilize some of the surficial
soils in-place, it appears undercuts on the order of 2 to 3 feet can be anticipated within
the building pad. The undercutting should extend laterally at least 5 feet outside building
and parking lot footprints. Deeper undercuts may be required beneath foundations in
isolated areas, which is discussed further in Section 5.0.
Where soft or loose surficial soils can be stabilized in place, it is recommended these
materials be densified using a heavy (10-ton minimum), smooth-drum vibratory roller. A
rolling pattern should be determined during densification operations that will result in a
sufficiently stable subgrade.
Undercut depths within the planned pavement areas will be highly dependent upon final
grades and subgrade evaluation results. Undercutting should extend laterally at least 3
feet outside of the edge of pavement. In pavement areas, it may be possible to reduce
undercutting or stabilize the soft soils in place. Typical stabilization methods vary widely
and include modification of the soft soils with the addition of shot rock or No. 2 stone, as
well as utilization of geogrids and graded aggregates.
The design of a specific stabilization method is beyond the scope of this investigation but
can be provided by Building & Earth as an additional service if desired. Any undercutting
Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 12

or stabilization performed in pavement areas should be conducted under the observation
of the geotechnical engineer or his representative.
Some unsuitable or unstable areas may be present in unexplored areas of the site. Once
the known undercut is complete, the areas planned for construction should be proofrolled
in order to identify any additional soft soils requiring removal.
Undercut soils should be replaced with structural fill. Clean, non-organic, non-saturated
soils taken from the undercut area can be re-used as structural fill. The placement
procedure, compaction and composition of the structural fill must meet the requirements
of the Structural Fill section of this report.
4.5 STRUCTURAL FILL
Requirements for structural fill on this project are as follows:
Soil
Type
USCS
Classification Property Requirements Placement Location
Sand and
Gravel
GW, GP, GM,
SW, SP, SM or
combinations
Maximum 2” particle size Pavement subgrades, building pads
where the material can be confined.
Clay CL, SC, GC LL<50, PI<25, d>100 pcf All areas
Clay CH LL>50, PI>25, d>100 pcf Not recommended for use
Silt ML (with no
sand), MH N/A Not recommended for use
On-site
soils CL, SC, SM LL<50, PI<25, d>100 pcf All Areas
Table 5: Structural Fill Requirements
Notes:
1. LL indicates the soil Liquid Limit; PI indicates the soil Plasticity Index; d indicates the maximum dry
density as defined by the density standard outlined in the table below.
2. Laboratory testing of the soils proposed for fill must be performed in order to verify their
conformance with the above recommendations.
3. Any fill to be placed at the site should be reviewed by the geotechnical engineer.

Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 13

Placement requirements for structural fill are as follows:
Specification Requirement
Lift Thickness 8” loose, 6” compacted
Density 92 Percent maximum per ASTM D-1557 all structural area below 24 inches
95 percent maximum per ASTM D-1557, all structural areas, top 24 inches
Moisture +/- 3.0 Percentage Points ASTM D-1557 Optimum
Density Testing
Frequency 1 test per 2,500 S.F. Minimum 2 tests per lift
Table 6: Structural Fill Placement Requirements
4.6 EXCAVATION CONSIDERATIONS
All excavations performed at the site should follow OSHA guidelines for temporary
excavations. Excavated soils should be stockpiled according to OSHA regulations to limit
the potential cave-in of soils.
GROUNDWATER
Groundwater was not encountered in the test borings. However, groundwater could be
encountered during construction, particularly during undercutting operations. It should
be noted that fluctuations in the water level could occur due to seasonal variations in
rainfall. The contractor must be prepared to remove groundwater seepage from
excavations if encountered during construction. Excavations extending below
groundwater levels will require dewatering systems (such as well points, sump pumps or
trench drains). The contractor should evaluate the most economical and practical
dewatering method.
4.7 UTILITY TRENCH BACKFILL
All utility trenches must be backfilled and compacted in the manner specified above for
structural fill. It may be necessary to reduce the lift thickness to 4 to 6 inches to achieve
compaction using hand-operated equipment.
4.8 LANDSCAPING AND DRAINAGE CONSIDERATION
The potential for soil moisture fluctuations within building areas and pavement subgrades
should be reduced to lessen the potential of subgrade movement. Site grading should
include positive drainage away from buildings and pavements.
Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 14

Excessive irrigation of landscaping poses a risk of saturating and softening soils below
shallow footings and pavements, which could result in settlement of footings and
premature failure of pavements.
4.9 WET WEATHER CONSTRUCTION
During rainy periods, additional effort will be required to properly prepare the site and
establish/maintain an acceptable subgrade. The difficulty will increase in areas where clay
or silty soils are exposed at the subgrade elevation. Likewise, rainwater may become
perched on the silty and higher consistency soils encountered below the surficial
layers, which could require additional dewatering efforts not needed during dry
conditions.
Grading contractors typically postpone grading operations during wet weather to wait for
conditions that are more favorable. Contractors can typically disk or aerate the upper
soils to promote drying during intermittent periods of favorable weather. When deadlines
restrict postponement of grading operations, additional measures such as undercutting
and replacing saturated soils or stabilization can be utilized to facilitate placement of
additional fill material.
5.0 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS
It is our understanding that individual column loads will be 125 kips, and that wall loads
will be about 4 kips per lineal foot. Our geotechnical analysis and recommendations are
based upon these loading magnitudes. If these assumptions concerning structural
loading are incorrect, our office should be contacted, such that our
recommendations can be reviewed.
5.1 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS
Based on the conditions encountered during our field investigation and after our site
preparation and grading recommendations are implemented, the proposed structure can
be supported on conventional shallow foundations designed using an allowable soil
bearing capacity of 2,500 psf.
Even though computed footing dimensions may be less, column footings should be at
least 24 inches wide and strip footings should be at least 18 inches wide. These
dimensions facilitate hand cleaning of footing subgrades disturbed by the excavation
process and the placement of reinforcing steel. They also reduce the potential for
localized punching shear failure. All exterior footings should bear at least 24 inches below
the adjacent exterior grade. Total settlement of footings designed and constructed as
recommended above should be 1 inch or less.
Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 15

Soft and loose soils were encountered at and below anticipated footing depth in borings
B-105, RFP B-03, and RFP B-05. It’s possible these conditions will be encountered in other,
unexplored areas of the building; therefore, verification of bearing capacity will be critical.
We recommend that hand rod probing and dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) testing in
accordance with ASTM STP-399 be performed for all foundation excavations. Hand rod
probing should be performed for 100 percent of the excavations, and DCP testing should
be performed for at least 30 percent of the interior column footings, and for each 50-foot
increment of wall footings.
In the event that loose/soft soils are encountered during footing inspections, undercutting
and/or stabilization recommendations will be determined based on the results of these
tests. The contractor should be prepared to undercut these soils to the recommended
depth and backfill with NCDOT washed No. 57 stone. The washed No. 57 stone should
be wrapped in filter fabric if groundwater (perched or otherwise) is encountered.
The following items should be considered during the preparation of construction
documents and foundation installation:
◾ The geotechnical engineer of record should observe the exposed foundation
bearing surfaces prior to concrete placement to verify that the conditions
anticipated during the subsurface exploration are encountered.
◾ All bearing surfaces must be free of soft or loose soil prior to placing concrete.
◾ Concrete should be placed the same day the excavations are completed and
bearing materials verified by the engineer. If the excavations are left open for an
extended period, or if the bearing surfaces are disturbed after the initial
observation, then the bearing surfaces should be reevaluated prior to concrete
placement.
◾ Water should not be allowed to pond in foundation excavations prior to concrete
placement or above the concrete after the foundation is completed.
◾ Wherever possible, the foundation concrete should be placed “neat”, using the
sides of the excavations as forms. Where this is not possible, the excavations
created by forming the foundations must be backfilled with suitable structural fill
and properly compacted.
◾ The building pad should be sloped to drain away from the building foundations.
◾ Roof drains should be routed away from the foundation soils.

Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 16

6.0 FLOOR SLABS
Site development recommendations presented in this report should be followed to
provide for subgrade conditions suitable for support of grade supported slabs. Floor
slabs will be supported on either stable, natural subgrade or on compacted structural fill.
Floor slabs for the proposed building should be supported on a minimum four (4) inches
thick compacted layer of free-draining, granular material, such as AASHTO No. 610 or 57
stone. The purpose of this layer is to serve as a leveling cou rse and act as a capillary break
for moisture migration through the subgrade soil. With addition of the granular material,
an effective modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pci can be used in the design of grade
supported building floor slabs.
Depending on the proposed floor covering, consideration should be given to the use of
a polyethylene vapor barrier. The slabs should be appropriately reinforced (if required) to
support the proposed loads.
7.0 PAVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
Based on the materials encountered at the boring locations and after our
recommendations for site preparation are implemented, pavements at the subject site
may be designed based on a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of five (5) percent. Note that
CBR testing was performed, and under ideal circumstances, the subgrade soils can be
compacted to achieve a considerably higher CBR value. However, for the purposes of this
final geotechnical report, a CBR of 5% was used to evaluate the required pavement
thicknesses.
Pavement design has been performed to address parameters appearing in 3.6 of Section
01 11 02 of the RFP documents. This document references the 2012 edition of the North
Carolina Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures,
Department of Defense document UFC 3-250-01 Pavement Design for Roads and Parking
Areas, and Ft. Bragg Installation Requirements.
Pavement analysis and design has been completed using the U.S. Army COE PCASE
2.09.05 pavement design program. Traffic loads, as required in the proposal documents,
appear in Table 6, below. Design and analysis are based on the provided traffic loading
over a 25-year design life.

Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 17

Type
Vehicle Passes per Life Span
Standard Duty
Flexible Pavement
Heavy Duty
Rigid Pavement
HS20 Trucks 5-Axle
(72,000 # Vehicle Wt.) 0 18,250
CMP 60 Fork Lift
(10,000# Vehicle Wt.) 0 1,300
HMMWV 1.25-Ton Carrier
(10,000# Vehicle Wt.) 4,562,500 4,562,500
P-23 Crash Truck (Fire Truck)
(77,880 # Vehicle Wt.) 0 1,300
Truck – 3-Axle
(66,000# Vehicle Wt.) 0 1,300
Table 7: Provided Traffic Volume
It is the owner’s responsibility to evaluate whether or not the traffic volumes shown
above are in line with those expected. If the owner would like Building & Earth to assess
other likely traffic volumes, we will gladly review other options.
Note: All subgrade, base and pavement construction operations should meet minimum
requirements of the NCDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction.
The applicable sections of the specifications are identified as follows:
Material Specification
Section
Portland Cement Concrete Pavement 710
Bituminous Asphalt Wearing Layer 610
Bituminous Asphalt Binder Layer 610
Mineral Aggregate Base Materials 520
Soil 500
Table 8: NCDOT Specification Sections
7.1 FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT
The asphalt pavement section described herein was evaluated using the pavement design
program PCASE 2.09.05 described above. The minimum required pavement section was
evaluated and found to be acceptable. This section is summarized below in Table 9.

Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 18

Minimum Design Thickness (in) Material Standard Duty
2 Asphalt
6 Unbound Crushed Stone Base
Table 9: Asphalt Pavement Recommendations
7.2 RIGID PAVEMENT
The following rigid pavement sections is that appearing in the project documents as a
minimum acceptable section. Analysis confirms this section is suitable for support of the
heavy-duty traffic summarized in Table 6. This section was analyzed for suitability based
upon the traffic loading and other parameters tabulated above.
Minimum Design Thickness (in) Material Heavy Duty
6.0 Portland Cement Concrete, (S’c) of 650 psi
6.0 Crushed Stone Base
Table 10: Rigid Pavement Recommendations
The concrete should be protected against moisture loss, rapid temperature fluctuations,
and construction traffic for several days after placement. All pavements should be sloped
for positive drainage. We recommended that the pavements be reinforced to hold any
cracks that might develop tightly together and restrain their growth.
All pavement components must be placed and compacted in accordance with the
applicable sections of the North Carolina Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge
Construction. All subgrade, base and pavement construction operations should meet
minimum requirements of this document.
8.0 SUBGRADE REHABILITATION
The subgrade soils often become disturbed during the period between initial site grading
and construction of surface improvements. The amount and depth of disturbance will
vary with soil type, weather conditions, construction traffic, and drainage.
The engineer should evaluate the subgrade soil during final grading and prior to stone
placement to verify that the subgrade is suitable to receive pavement base or floor slabs.
The final evaluation may include proofrolling or density tests.
Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 19

Subgrade rehabilitation can become a point of controversy when different contractors are
responsible for mass and final grading. The construction documents should specifically
state which contractor will be responsible for maintaining and rehabilitating the subgrade.
Rehabilitation may include wetting, mixing, and re-compacting soils that have dried
excessively or drying soils that have become wet.
9.0 CONSTRUCTION MONITORING
Field verification of site conditions is an essential part of the services provided by the
geotechnical consultant. In order to confirm our recommendations, it will be necessary
for Building & Earth personnel to make periodic visits to the site during site grading.
Typical construction monitoring services are listed below.
◾ Site stripping and subgrade evaluation
◾ Placement of controlled, engineered fill
◾ Foundation bearing surfaces, reinforcing steel and concrete
◾ Structural framing
◾ Pavement subgrade and crushed stone base installation
◾ All other items subject to IBC Special Inspections
10.0 CLOSING AND LIMITATIONS
This report was prepared for ACC Construction Company, for specific application to the
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility located within Fort Bragg, North Carolina. The information
in this report is not transferable. This report should not be used for a different
development on the same property without first being evaluated by the engineer.
The recommendations in this report were based on the information obtained from our
field exploration and laboratory analysis. The data collected is representative of the
locations tested. Variations are likely to occur at other locations throughout the site.
Engineering judgment was applied in regards to conditions between borings. It will be
necessary to confirm the anticipated subsurface conditions during construction.
This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted standards of
geotechnical engineering practice. No other warranty is expressed or implied. In the
event that changes are made, or anticipated to be made, to the nature, design, or location
of the project as outlined in this report, Building & Earth must be informed of the changes
and given the opportunity to either verify or modify the conclusions of this report in
writing, or the recommendations of this report will no longer be valid.
Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation,
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
Project No: RD180419, August 22, 2018

Page | 20

The scope of services for this project did not include any environmental assessment of
the site or identification of pollutants or hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner
is concerned about environmental issues Building & Earth would be happy to provide an
additional scope of services to address those concerns.
This report is intended for use during design and preparation of specifications and may
not address all conditions at the site during construction. Contractors reviewing this
information should acknowledge that this document is for design information only.
An article published by the Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA), titled Important
Information About Your Geotechnical Report, has been included in the Appendix. We
encourage all individuals to become familiar with the article to help manage risk.

Appendix Table of Contents
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION METHODOLOGIES ........................................................................................... 1 
DRILLING PROCEDURES – STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (ASTM D1586) ........................... 1 
BULK SAMPLING ............................................................................................................................................... 1 
BORING LOG DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................................................ 2 
DEPTH AND ELEVATION ................................................................................................................................ 2 
SAMPLE TYPE ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 
SAMPLE NUMBER ............................................................................................................................................. 2 
BLOWS PER INCREMENT, REC%, RQD% ................................................................................................. 2 
SOIL DATA ........................................................................................................................................................... 2 
SOIL DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................................................................... 3 
GRAPHIC .............................................................................................................................................................. 3 
REMARKS ............................................................................................................................................................. 3 
SOIL CLASSIFICATION METHODOLOGY..................................................................................................................... 4 
KEY TO LOGS ......................................................................................................................................................................... 6 
KEY TO HATCHES ................................................................................................................................................................ 8 
BORING LOCATION PLAN ............................................................................................................................................... 9 
SUBSURFACE SOIL PROFILES ........................................................................................................................................ 10 
BORING LOGS ..................................................................................................................................................................... 11 
RFP BORING LOGS ............................................................................................................................................................ 12 
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES .............................................................................................................................. 13 
DESCRIPTION OF SOILS (VISUAL-MANUAL PROCEDURE) (ASTM D2488) ............................. 13 
NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT (ASTM D2216) ............................................................................... 13 
ATTERBERG LIMITS (ASTM D4318) .......................................................................................................... 13 
MATERIAL FINER THAN NO. 200 SIEVE BY WASHING (ASTM D1140) ..................................... 13 
MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST (ASTM D1557) ............................................................ 13 
LABORATORY CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO (ASTM D1883) ....................................................... 14 
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS ..................................................................................................................... 14 
Table A-1: General Soil Classification Test Results ....................................................................... 14 
SEASONAL HIGH WATER TABLE REPORT ................................................................................................................ 15 
INFILTRATION TESTING .................................................................................................................................................. 16 

GEOTECHNICAL CALCULATION SAMPLES .............................................................................................................. 17 
IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THIS GEOTECHNICAL-ENGINEERING REPORT ............................ 18 

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION METHODOLOGIES

The subsurface exploration, which is the basis of the recommendations of this report, has
been performed in accordance with industry standards. Detailed methodologies employed
in the investigation are presented in the following sections.

DRILLING PROCEDURES – STANDARD PENETRATION TEST (ASTM D1586)

At each boring location, soil samples were obtained at standard sampling intervals with a
split-spoon sampler. The borehole was first advanced to the sample depth by augering and
the sampling tools were placed in the open hole. The sampler was then driven 18 inches
into the ground with a 140-pound automatic hammer free-falling 30 inches. The number
of blows required to drive the sampler each 6-inch increment was recorded. The initial
increment is considered the “seating” blows, where the sampler penetrates loose or
disturbed soil in the bottom of the borehole.
The blows required to penetrate the final two (2) increments are added together and are
referred to as the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N-value. The N-value, when properly
evaluated, gives an indication of the soil’s strength and ability to support structural loads.
Many factors can affect the SPT N-value, so this result cannot be used exclusively to evaluate
soil conditions.
The SPT testing was performed using a drill rig equipped with an automatic hammer.
Automatic hammers mechanically control the height of the hammer drop, and doing so,
deliver higher energy efficiency (90 to 99 % efficiency) than manual hammers (60 %
efficiency) which are dropped using a manually operated rope and cathead system. Because
historic data correlations were developed based on use of a manual hammer, it is necessary
to adjust the N-values obtained using an automatic hammer to make these correlations
valid. Therefore, an energy correction factor of 1.3 was applied to the recorded field N-values
from the automatic hammer for the purpose of our evaluation. The N-values discussed or
mentioned in this report and shown on the boring logs are recorded field values.
Samples retrieved from the boring locations were labeled and stored in plastic bags at the
jobsite before being transported to our laboratory for analysis. The project engineer
prepared Boring Logs summarizing the subsurface conditions at the boring locations.

BULK SAMPLING
Bulk sample are obtained for the evaluation of the compaction characteristics of the site soils
and for determination of the California Bearing Ratio (CBR). The bulk samples are obtained
from manual excavations, backhoe test pits, or from auger cutting. Similar soils are normally
combined to provide samples of adequate size for compaction or CBR testing.

BORING LOG DESCRIPTION

Building & Earth Sciences, Inc. used the gINT software program to prepare the attached boring
logs. The gINT program provides the flexibility to custom design the boring logs to include
the pertinent information from the subsurface exploration and results of our laboratory
analysis. The soil and laboratory information included on our logs is summarized below:
DEPTH AND ELEVATION
The depth below the ground surface and the corresponding elevation are shown in the first
two columns.
SAMPLE TYPE
The method used to collect the sample is shown. The typical sampling methods include Split
Spoon Sampling, Shelby Tube Sampling, Grab Samples, and Rock Core. A key is provided at
the bottom of the log showing the graphic symbol for each sample type.
SAMPLE NUMBER
Each sample collected is numbered sequentially.
BLOWS PER INCREMENT, REC%, RQD%
When Standard Split Spoon sampling is used, the blows required to drive the sampler each 6-
inch increment are recorded and shown in column 5. When rock core is obtained the recovery
ration (REC%) and Rock Quality Designation (RQD%) is recorded.
SOIL DATA
Column 6 is a graphic representation of four different soil parameters. Each of the parameters
use the same graph, however, the values of the graph subdivisions vary with each parameter.
Each parameter presented on column 6 is summarized below:
 N-value- The Standard Penetration Test N-value, obtained by adding the number of
blows required to drive the sampler the final 12 inches, is recorded. The graph labels
range from 0 to 50.
 Qu – Unconfined Compressive Strength estimate from the Pocket Penetrometer test in
tons per square foot (tsf). The graph labels range from 0 to 5 tsf.
 Atterberg Limits – The Atterberg Limits are plotted with the plastic limit to the left, and
liquid limit to the right, connected by a horizontal line. The difference in the plastic and
liquid limits is referred to as the Plasticity Index. The Atterberg Limits test results are
also included in the Remarks column on the far right of the boring log. The Atterberg
Limits graph labels range from 0 to 100%.
 Moisture – The Natural Moisture Content of the soil sample as determined in our
laboratory.

SOIL DESCRIPTION
The soil description prepared in accordance with ASTM D2488, Visual Description of Soil
Samples. The Munsel Color chart is used to determine the soil color. Strata changes are
indicated by a solid line, with the depth of the change indicated on the left side of the line and
the elevation of the change indicated on the right side of the line. If subtle changes within a
soil type occur, a broken line is used. The Boring Termination or Auger Refusal depth is shown
as a solid line at the bottom of the boring.
GRAPHIC
The graphic representation of the soil type is shown. The graphic used for each soil type is
related to the Unified Soil Classification chart. A chart showing the graphic associated with
each soil classification is included.
REMARKS
Remarks regarding borehole observations, and additional information regarding the
laboratory results and groundwater observations.

SOIL CLASSIFICATION METHODOLOGY

Major Divisions
Symbols Group Name & Typical Description Lithology Group
Coarse
Grained
Soils

More than
50% of
material is
larger than
No. 200
sieve
size
Gravel and
Gravelly
Soils

More than
50% of
coarse
fraction is
larger than
No. 4 sieve
Clean Gravels

(Less than 5% fines)
GW Well-graded gravels, gravel – sand mixtures, little or
no fines
GP Poorly-graded gravels, gravel – sand mixtures, little
or no fines
Gravels with Fines

(More than 12% fines)
GM Silty gravels, gravel – sand – silt mixtures
GC Clayey gravels, gravel – sand – clay mixtures
Sand and
Sandy
Soils

More than
50% of
coarse
fraction is
smaller than
No. 4
sieve
Clean Sands

(Less than 5% fines)
SW Well-graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines
SP Poorly-graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no
fines
Sands with Fines

(More than 12% fines)
SM Silty sands, sand – silt mixtures
SC Clayey sands, sand – clay mixtures
Fine
Grained
Soils

More than
50% of
material is
smaller
than
No. 200
sieve
size
Silts and
Clays

Liquid Limit
less than 50
Inorganic
ML Inorganic silts and very find sands, rock flour, silty or
clayey fine sands or clayey silt with slight plasticity
CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly
clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays
Organic OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity
Silts and
Clays

Liquid Limit
greater than
50 sieve
Inorganic
MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine
sand, or silty soils
CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity
Organic OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic
silts
Highly Organic Soils PT Peat, humus, swamp soils with high organic
contents
Table 1: Soil Classification Chart (based on ASTM D2487)

SOIL CLASSIFICATION METHODOLOGY

* - Modified based on 80% hammer efficiency

Building & Earth Sciences classifies soil in general
accordance with the Unified Soil Classification
System (USCS) presented in ASTM D2487. Table 1
and Figure 1 exemplify the general guidance of
the USCS. Soil consistencies and relative densities
are presented in general accordance with
Terzaghi, Peck, & Mesri’s (1996) method, as
shown on Table 2, when quantitative field and/or
laboratory data is available. Table 2 includes
Consistency and Relative Density correlations
with N-values obtained using either a manual
hammer (60 percent efficiency) or automatic
hammer (90 percent efficiency). The Blows Per
Increment and SPT N-values displayed on the
boring logs are the unaltered values measured in
the field. When field and/or laboratory data is not
available, we may classify soil in general
accordance with the Visual Manual Procedure
presented in ASTM D2488.

Non-cohesive: Coarse-Grained Soil Cohesive: Fine-Grained Soil
SPT Penetration
(blows/foot) Relative
Density
SPT Penetration
(blows/foot) Consistency
Estimated Range of
Unconfined Compressive
Strength (tsf)

Automatic
Hammer*
Manual
Hammer
Automatic
Hammer*
Manual
Hammer < 2 < 2 Very Soft < 0.25
0 - 3 0 - 4 Very Loose 2 - 3 2 - 4 Soft 0.25 – 0.50
3 - 8 4 - 10 Loose 3 - 6 4 - 8 Medium Stiff 0.50 – 1.00
8 - 23 10 - 30 Medium Dense 6 - 12 8 - 15 Stiff 1.00 – 2.00
23 - 38 30 - 50 Dense 12 - 23 15 - 30 Very Stiff 2.00 – 4.00
> 38 > 50 Very Dense > 23 > 30 Hard > 4.00
Table 2: Soil Consistency and Relative Density (based on Terzaghi, Peck & Mesri, 1996)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 102030405060708090100Plasticity Index (PI)Liquid Limit (LL)
CH or OH
MH or OH
CL or OL
ML or OLCL-ML7
4
Figure 1: Plasticity Chart (based on ASTM D2487)

KEY TO LOGS

Standard
Penetration Test
ASTM D1586 or
AASHTO T-206
Dynamic Cone
Penetrometer
(Sower DCP)
ASTM STP-399

Soil Particle Size U.S. Standard
Boulders Larger than 300 mm N.A.
Cobbles 300 mm to 75 mm N.A.

Shelby Tube
Sampler
ASTM D1587

No Sample
Recovery
Gravel 75 mm to 4.75 mm 3-inch to #4 sieve
Coarse 75 mm to 19 mm 3-inch to ¾-inch sieve
Fine 19 mm to 4.75 mm ¾-inch to #4 sieve

Rock Core Sample
ASTM D2113

Groundwater at
Time of Drilling
Sand 4.75 mm to 0.075 mm #4 to #200 Sieve
Coarse 4.75 mm to 2 mm #4 to #10 Sieve
Medium 2 mm to 0.425 mm #10 to #40 Sieve

Auger Cuttings

Groundwater as
Indicated
Fine 0.425 mm to 0.075 mm #40 to #200 Sieve
Fines Less than 0.075 mm Passing #200 Sieve
Silt Less than 5 µm N.A.
Clay Less than 2 µm N.A.
Table 1: Symbol Legend Table 2: Standard Sieve Sizes

Standard Penetration Test Resistance
calculated using ASTM D1586 or AASHTO T-
206. Calculated as sum of original, field
recorded values.
A measure of a soil’s plasticity characteristics in
general accordance with ASTM D4318. The soil
Plasticity Index (PI) is representative of this
characteristic and is bracketed by the Liquid Limit (LL)
and the Plastic Limit (PL).

Unconfined compressive strength, typically
estimated from a pocket penetrometer. Results
are presented in tons per square foot (tsf).

Percent natural moisture content in general
accordance with ASTM D2216.
Table 3: Soil Data
Hollow Stem Auger Flights on the outside of the shaft advance soil cuttings to the surface. The
hollow stem allows sampling through the middle of the auger flights.

Descriptor

Meaning
Mud Rotary /
Wash Bore
A cutting head advances the boring and discharges a drilling fluid to
support the borehole and circulate cuttings to the surface. Trace Likely less than 5%
Solid Flight Auger Flights on the outside bring soil cuttings to the surface. Solid stem requires
removal from borehole during sampling.
Few 5 to 10%
Little 15 to 25%
Hand Auger Cylindrical bucket (typically 3-inch diameter and 8 inches long) attached to a
metal rod and turned by human force.
Some 30 to 45%
Mostly 50 to 100%
Table 4: Soil Drilling Methods Table 5: Descriptors

KEY TO LOGS

Manual Hammer The operator tightens and loosens the rope around a rotating drum assembly to lift
and drop a sliding, 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches.
Automatic Trip Hammer An automatic mechanism is used to lift and drop a sliding, 140-pound hammer
falling 30 inches.
Dynamic Cone Penetrometer
(Sower DCP) ASTM STP-399
Uses a 15-pound steel mass falling 20 inches to strike an anvil and cause penetration
of a 1.5-inch diameter cone seated in the bottom of a hand augered borehole. The
blows required to drive the embedded cone a depth of 1-3/4 inches have been
correlated by others to N-values derived from the Standard Penetration Test (SPT).
Table 6: Sampling Methods

Non-plastic A 1/8-inch thread cannot be rolled at any water content.
Low The thread can barely be rolled and the lump cannot be formed when drier than the
plastic limit.
Medium
The thread is easy to roll and not much time is required to reach the plastic limit. The
thread cannot be re-rolled after reaching the plastic limit. The lump crumbles when
drier than the plastic limit.
High
It takes considerable time rolling and kneading to reach the plastic limit. The thread
can be re-rolled several times after reaching the plastic limit. The lump can be
formed without crumbling when drier than the plastic limit.
Table 7: Plasticity

Dry Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch.
Moist Damp but no visible water.
Wet Visible free water, usually soil is below water table.
Table 8: Moisture Condition
Stratified Alternating layers of varying material or color with layers at least ½ inch thick.
Laminated Alternating layers of varying material or color with layers less than ¼ inch thick.
Fissured Breaks along definite planes of fracture with little resistance to fracturing.
Slickensides Fracture planes appear polished or glossy, sometimes striated.
Blocky Cohesive soil that can be broken down into small angular lumps which resist further
breakdown.
Lensed Inclusion of small pockets of different soils, such as small lenses of sand scattered
through a mass of clay.
Homogeneous Same color and appearance throughout.
Table 9: Structure

KEY TO HATCHES
Hatch Description Hatch Description Hatch Description
GW - Well-graded gravels, gravel – sand
mixtures, little or no fines Asphalt Clay with Gravel
GP - Poorly-graded gravels, gravel – sand
mixtures, little or no fines Aggregate Base Sand with Gravel
GM - Silty gravels, gravel – sand – silt
mixtures Topsoil Silt with Gravel
GC - Clayey gravels, gravel – sand – clay
mixtures Concrete Gravel with Sand
SW - Well-graded sands, gravelly sands,
little or no fines Coal Gravel with Clay
SP - Poorly-graded sands, gravelly sands,
little or no fines CL-ML - Silty Clay Gravel with Silt
SM - Silty sands, sand – silt mixtures Sandy Clay Limestone
SC - Clayey sands, sand – clay mixtures Clayey Chert Chalk
ML - Inorganic silts and very find sands,
rock flour, silty or clayey fine
sands or clayey silt with slight plasticity
Low and High
Plasticity Clay Siltstone
CL - Inorganic clays of low to medium
plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy
clays, silty clays, lean clays
Low Plasticity Silt and
Clay Till
OL - Organic silts and organic silty clays
of low plasticity
High Plasticity Silt
and Clay
Sandy Clay with
Cobbles and Boulders
MH - Inorganic silts, micaceous or
diatomaceous fine sand, or silty soils Fill Sandstone with Shale
CH - Inorganic clays of high plasticity Weathered Rock Coral
OH - Organic clays of medium to high
plasticity, organic silts Sandstone Boulders and Cobbles
PT - Peat, humus, swamp soils with high
organic contents Shale Soil and Weathered
Rock
Table 1: Key to Hatches Used for Boring Logs and Soil Profiles

BORING LOCATION PLAN

Boring Location Map

BES Project #: RD180419 Address: Urban Freedom Way
Drawing Source: RFP Drawing City: Fort Bragg, NC
Client: ACC Construction Company Figure 1 Project: SOF Parachute Rigging Facility
N
200 100 0 Building Boring Location Approximate Scale (feet)
Storm Basin Boring Pavement Boring Location B-101 S-101 P-101
SUBSURFACE SOIL PROFILES

235
240
245
250
255
260
265
270
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
235
240
245
250
255
260
265
270
BT=25.0
6
5
8
11
15
44
7
13
27
B-101
NNQu
BT=25.0
2
8
12
13
20
26
13
13
13
B-103
NNQu
BT=25.0
7
10
7
3
34
30
14
20
34
B-105
NNQu Site Map Scale 1 inch equals 0 feetExplanation
BT=Boring Termination
AR=Auger Refusal
PPqu=Unconfined compressive strength estimate
from pocket penetrometer test (tsf)
X
ELEVATION (feet)JOB NUMBER PLATE NUMBER
8/22/18
Water Level Reading
at time of drilling.
Section Name A-A'
Subsurface Profile
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (feet)
610 Spring Branch Road
Dunn, NC 28334
Parachute Rigging Facility
Fort Bragg, NC
DATE
Plate A-1
Topsoil USCS Silty
Sand
USCS Low
Plasticity Clay
USCS Clayey
Sand
RD180419
A'
Water Level Reading
after drilling.
Building & EarthSciences, Inc.
A
Horizontal Scale (feet)
X
N=Standard Penetration Test N-Value
Vertical Exaggeration: 0x
ALDOT PROFILE RECOVERED FILE - RD180419 - CONTINUOUS.GPJ BESI.GDT 8/22/180 1
B-101
B-103
B-105
________FFE=266.0'___________________________________________________________________________
238
240
242
244
246
248
250
252
254
256
258
260
262
264
266
268
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0
238
240
242
244
246
248
250
252
254
256
258
260
262
264
266
268
BT=25.0
7
9
5
12
11
26
31
8
21
B-102
NNQu
BT=25.0
2
8
12
13
20
26
13
13
13
B-103
NNQu
BT=25.0
4
4
5
5
7
9
22
13
17
B-104
NNQu
Site Map Scale 1 inch equals 0 feetExplanation
BT=Boring Termination
AR=Auger Refusal
PPqu=Unconfined compressive strength estimate
from pocket penetrometer test (tsf)
X
ELEVATION (feet)JOB NUMBER PLATE NUMBER
8/22/18
Water Level Reading
at time of drilling.
Section Name A-A'
Subsurface Profile
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (feet)
610 Spring Branch Road
Dunn, NC 28334
Parachute Rigging Facility
Fort Bragg, NC
DATE
Plate A-1
Topsoil USCS Clayey
Sand
USCS Low
Plasticity Clay
USCS Silty
Sand
RD180419
A'
Water Level Reading
after drilling.
Building & EarthSciences, Inc.
A
Horizontal Scale (feet)
X
N=Standard Penetration Test N-Value
Vertical Exaggeration: 0x
ALDOT PROFILE RECOVERED FILE - RD180419 - CONTINUOUS.GPJ BESI.GDT 8/22/180 0
B-102
B-103
B-104
___________FFE=266.0'_____________________________________________________________________
256
258
260
262
264
266
268
270
272
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2
256
258
260
262
264
266
268
270
272
BT=10.0
2
7
12
12
12
P-105
NNQu
BT=10.0
5
14
25
20
11
P-106
NNQu
BT=10.0
6
7
18
20
14
P-107
NNQu
Site Map Scale 1 inch equals 0 feetExplanation
BT=Boring Termination
AR=Auger Refusal
PPqu=Unconfined compressive strength estimate
from pocket penetrometer test (tsf)
X
ELEVATION (feet)JOB NUMBER PLATE NUMBER
8/22/18
Water Level Reading
at time of drilling.
Section Name A-A'
Subsurface Profile
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (feet)
610 Spring Branch Road
Dunn, NC 28334
Parachute Rigging Facility
Fort Bragg, NC
DATE
Plate A-1
Topsoil USCS Silty
Sand
USCS Low
Plasticity Clay
USCS Clayey
Sand
RD180419
A'
Water Level Reading
after drilling.
Building & EarthSciences, Inc.
A
Horizontal Scale (feet)
X
N=Standard Penetration Test N-Value
Vertical Exaggeration: 0x
ALDOT PROFILE RECOVERED FILE - RD180419 - CONTINUOUS.GPJ BESI.GDT 8/22/180 0
P-105
P-106
P-107
BORING LOGS

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Topsoil (approximately 5 inches)
SILTY SAND (SM): loose, brown, fine to
medium sand, moist
SANDY CLAY (CL): medium stiff, red, fine
to medium sand, moist
- stiff
CLAYEY SAND (SC): medium dense,
orange/red, fine to medium sand, moist
- very dense
SILTY SAND (SM): loose, orange, fine to
medium sand, moist
- medium dense, yellow/orange
(Coastal Plain)
Boring terminated at 25 feet.
Sample 1
% Passing #200 seive: 30.4
Liquid Limit (LL): 14
Plastic Limit (PL): 13
Plasticity Index (PI): 1
No groundwater encountered
at the time of drilling, or after
24 hrs
Boring backfilled on 08/16/18
266.6
265.1
260.1
252.7
242.1
0.4
2.0
7.0
14.4
25.0
2-2-4-4
2-2-3-4
1-3-5-8
1-3-8-17
1-1-14-15
14-29-15-18
1-1-6
5-6-7
6-12-15
GROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE
UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST
SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS
Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA
Designation: B-101
Sheet 1 of 1
N-Value
20 40 60 80
Date Drilled: 7/31/18
10 20 30 40
Qu (tsf)
N-VALUE
% MOISTURE
Qu
Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC
10 20 30 40
Birmingham, AL GRAPHICProject Name: Parachute Rigging Facility
SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED
RECOVERY
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION
LOG OF BORING 610 Spring Branch Road
Dunn, NC 28334
Office: [phone] 205-836-6300
Fax: [phone]
www.BuildingAndEarth.com
1 2 3 4
Savannah, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Springdale, AR Shreveport, LA Louisville, KY Niceville, FL
1 2 3 4
Atterberg Limits
Qu (tsf)
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger
Surface Elevation: 267.05
REMARKS
Hammer Type: Automatic
DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEGRAPHIC5
10
15
20
25
STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206)
PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT
SOIL DESCRIPTION
N-Value
Atterberg Limits
Equipment Used: Geoprobe
Weather Conditions: rain, 85F
Drill Crew: A.Baker/J.Johnson
Logged By: MLumpkinBoring Location: NW Corner of Building
Auburn, AL
Project Number: RD180419
Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTREC
RQD
UDELEVATION (ft)265
260
255
250
245
240
% Moisture
20 40 60 80
SAMPLE TYPE
LOG OF BORING 1 CONTINUOUS RECOVERED FILE - RD180419 - CONTINUOUS.GPJ BESI.GDT 8/21/18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Topsoil (approximately 3 inches)
CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, brown, fine to
medium sand, moist
- medium dense
SANDY CLAY (CL): medium stiff, red, fine
to medium sand, moist
- stiff, orange
- hard
CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange, fine to
medium sand, moist
SILTY SAND (SM): medium dense, orange,
fine to medium sand, moist
(Coastal Plain)
Boring terminated at 25 feet.
No groundwater encountered
at the time of drilling, or after
24 hrs
Boring backfilled on 08/16/18
267.0
263.6
252.8
243.3
242.3
0.3
3.7
14.5
24.0
25.0
3-3-4-7
4-4-5-6
1-1-4-7
1-4-8-12
2-3-8-16
8-12-14-17
3-14-17
3-3-5
2-6-15
GROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE
UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST
SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS
Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA
Designation: B-102
Sheet 1 of 1
N-Value
20 40 60 80
Date Drilled: 7/31/18
10 20 30 40
Qu (tsf)
N-VALUE
% MOISTURE
Qu
Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC
10 20 30 40
Birmingham, AL GRAPHICProject Name: Parachute Rigging Facility
SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED
RECOVERY
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION
LOG OF BORING 610 Spring Branch Road
Dunn, NC 28334
Office: [phone] 205-836-6300
Fax: [phone]
www.BuildingAndEarth.com
1 2 3 4
Savannah, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Springdale, AR Shreveport, LA Louisville, KY Niceville, FL
1 2 3 4
Atterberg Limits
Qu (tsf)
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger
Surface Elevation: 267.25
REMARKS
Hammer Type: Automatic
DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEGRAPHIC5
10
15
20
25
STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206)
PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT
SOIL DESCRIPTION
N-Value
Atterberg Limits
Equipment Used: Geoprobe
Weather Conditions: rain, 85F
Drill Crew: A.Baker/J.Johnson
Logged By: MLumpkinBoring Location: NE Corner of Building
Auburn, AL
Project Number: RD180419
Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTREC
RQD
UDELEVATION (ft)265
260
255
250
245
240
% Moisture
20 40 60 80
SAMPLE TYPE
LOG OF BORING 1 CONTINUOUS RECOVERED FILE - RD180419 - CONTINUOUS.GPJ BESI.GDT 8/21/18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Topsoil (approximately 6 inches)
SILTY SAND (SM): very loose, brown, fine
to medium sand, moist
SANDY CLAY (CL): stiff, brown/red, fine to
medium sand, moist
- very stiff
SILTY SAND (SM): medium dense,
brown/orange, fine to medium sand, moist
- dense
- medium dense, light brown
(Coastal Plain)
Boring terminated at 25 feet.
Sample 5
% Passing #200 seive: 25.9
Liquid Limit (LL): 47
Plastic Limit (PL): 29
Plasticity Index (PI): 18
No groundwater encountered
at the time of drilling, or after
24 hrs
Boring backfilled on 08/16/18
265.3
264.1
257.8
240.8
0.5
1.7
8.0
25.0
1-1-1-1
3-4-4-4
3-5-7-8
3-5-8-11
5-9-11-14
5-11-15-15
3-4-9
3-5-8
3-5-8
GROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE
UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST
SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS
Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA
Designation: B-103
Sheet 1 of 1
N-Value
20 40 60 80
Date Drilled: 7/31/18
10 20 30 40
Qu (tsf)
N-VALUE
% MOISTURE
Qu
Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC
10 20 30 40
Birmingham, AL GRAPHICProject Name: Parachute Rigging Facility
SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED
RECOVERY
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION
LOG OF BORING 610 Spring Branch Road
Dunn, NC 28334
Office: [phone] 205-836-6300
Fax: [phone]
www.BuildingAndEarth.com
1 2 3 4
Savannah, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Springdale, AR Shreveport, LA Louisville, KY Niceville, FL
1 2 3 4
Atterberg Limits
Qu (tsf)
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger
Surface Elevation: 265.83
REMARKS
Hammer Type: Automatic
DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEGRAPHIC5
10
15
20
25
STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206)
PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT
SOIL DESCRIPTION
N-Value
Atterberg Limits
Equipment Used: Geoprobe
Weather Conditions: rain, 85F
Drill Crew: A.Baker/J.Johnson
Logged By: MLumpkinBoring Location: Center of Building
Auburn, AL
Project Number: RD180419
Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTREC
RQD
UDELEVATION (ft)265
260
255
250
245
240
% Moisture
20 40 60 80
SAMPLE TYPE
LOG OF BORING 1 CONTINUOUS RECOVERED FILE - RD180419 - CONTINUOUS.GPJ BESI.GDT 8/21/18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Topsoil (approximately 12 inches)
SILTY SAND (SM): loose, light brown, fine
to medium sand, moist
SANDY CLAY (CL): medium stiff,
red/brown, fine to medium sand, moist
- stiff
CLAYEY SAND (SC): medium dense,
orange, fine to medium sand, moist
SILTY SAND (SM): medium dense, orange,
fine to medium sand, moist
(Coastal Plain)
Boring terminated at 25 feet.
No groundwater encountered
at the time of drilling, or after
24 hrs
Boring backfilled on 08/16/18
262.9
261.7
250.4
245.2
238.9
1.0
2.2
13.5
18.7
25.0
1-2-2-2
1-2-2-2
1-2-3-5
1-2-3-4
1-3-4-5
2-4-5-6
5-11-11
4-5-8
8-8-9
GROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE
UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST
SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS
Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA
Designation: B-104
Sheet 1 of 1
N-Value
20 40 60 80
Date Drilled: 7/31/18
10 20 30 40
Qu (tsf)
N-VALUE
% MOISTURE
Qu
Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC
10 20 30 40
Birmingham, AL GRAPHICProject Name: Parachute Rigging Facility
SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED
RECOVERY
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION
LOG OF BORING 610 Spring Branch Road
Dunn, NC 28334
Office: [phone] 205-836-6300
Fax: [phone]
www.BuildingAndEarth.com
1 2 3 4
Savannah, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Springdale, AR Shreveport, LA Louisville, KY Niceville, FL
1 2 3 4
Atterberg Limits
Qu (tsf)
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger
Surface Elevation: 263.94
REMARKS
Hammer Type: Automatic
DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEGRAPHIC5
10
15
20
25
STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206)
PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT
SOIL DESCRIPTION
N-Value
Atterberg Limits
Equipment Used: Geoprobe
Weather Conditions: rain, 85F
Drill Crew: A.Baker/J.Johnson
Logged By: MLumpkinBoring Location: SW Corner of Tower
Auburn, AL
Project Number: RD180419
Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTREC
RQD
UDELEVATION (ft)260
255
250
245
240
235
% Moisture
20 40 60 80
SAMPLE TYPE
LOG OF BORING 1 CONTINUOUS RECOVERED FILE - RD180419 - CONTINUOUS.GPJ BESI.GDT 8/21/18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Topsoil (approximately 3 inches)
SILTY SAND (SM): loose, red tan, moist,
fine to medium sand, moist
CLAYEY SAND (SC): medium dense,
orange/brown, fine to medium sand, wet
- loose
SILTY SAND (SM): dense, red/orange, fine
to medium sand, moist
- medium dense
SANDY CLAY (CL): very stiff, orange, fine
to medium sand, moist
SILTY SAND (SM): medium dense,
orange,fine to coarse sand, moist
SANDY CLAY (CL), hard, light
brown/orange, fine to medium sand, moist
(Coastal Plain)
Boring terminated at 25 feet.
Sample 3
% Passing #200 seive: 45.7
Liquid Limit (LL): 43
Plastic Limit (PL): 26
Plasticity Index (PI): 17
No groundwater encountered
at the time of drilling, or after
24 hrs
Boring backfilled on 08/16/18
262.7
260.0
254.7
248.4
243.7
239.4
238.0
0.3
3.0
8.3
14.6
19.3
23.6
25.0
3-2-5-4
5-5-5-4
2-3-4-7
1-1-2-3
1-8-26-22
16-14-16-16
6-6-8
3-8-12
8-11-23
GROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE
UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST
SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS
Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA
Designation: B-105
Sheet 1 of 1
N-Value
20 40 60 80
Date Drilled: 7/31/18
10 20 30 40
Qu (tsf)
N-VALUE
% MOISTURE
Qu
Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC
10 20 30 40
Birmingham, AL GRAPHICProject Name: Parachute Rigging Facility
SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED
RECOVERY
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION
LOG OF BORING 610 Spring Branch Road
Dunn, NC 28334
Office: [phone] 205-836-6300
Fax: [phone]
www.BuildingAndEarth.com
1 2 3 4
Savannah, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Springdale, AR Shreveport, LA Louisville, KY Niceville, FL
1 2 3 4
Atterberg Limits
Qu (tsf)
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger
Surface Elevation: 262.95
REMARKS
Hammer Type: Automatic
DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEGRAPHIC5
10
15
20
25
STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206)
PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT
SOIL DESCRIPTION
N-Value
Atterberg Limits
Equipment Used: Geoprobe
Weather Conditions: rain, 85F
Drill Crew: A.Baker/J.Johnson
Logged By: MLumpkinBoring Location: SE Corner of Building
Auburn, AL
Project Number: RD180419
Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTREC
RQD
UDELEVATION (ft)260
255
250
245
240
235
% Moisture
20 40 60 80
SAMPLE TYPE
LOG OF BORING 1 CONTINUOUS RECOVERED FILE - RD180419 - CONTINUOUS.GPJ BESI.GDT 8/21/18
1
2
3
4
5
Topsoil (approximately 3 inches)
SANDY CLAY (CL): medium stiff, orange,
fine to medium sand, moist
- very stiff
- stiff
(Coastal Plain)
Boring terminated at 10 feet.
No groundwater encountered
at the time of drilling, or after
24 hrs
Boring bacfilled on 08/16/18
264.4
254.6
0.3
10.0
2-2-2-3
2-2-4-4
2-2-3-5
4-6-10-10
2-4-7-12
GROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE
UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST
SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS
Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA
Designation: P-101
Sheet 1 of 1
N-Value
20 40 60 80
Date Drilled: 7/31/18
10 20 30 40
Qu (tsf)
N-VALUE
% MOISTURE
Qu
Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC
10 20 30 40
Birmingham, AL GRAPHICProject Name: Parachute Rigging Facility
SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED
RECOVERY
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION
LOG OF BORING 610 Spring Branch Road
Dunn, NC 28334
Office: [phone] 205-836-6300
Fax: [phone]
www.BuildingAndEarth.com
1 2 3 4
Savannah, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Springdale, AR Shreveport, LA Louisville, KY Niceville, FL
1 2 3 4
Atterberg Limits
Qu (tsf)
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger
Surface Elevation: 264.64
REMARKS
Hammer Type: Automatic
DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEGRAPHIC5
10
STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206)
PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT
SOIL DESCRIPTION
N-Value
Atterberg Limits
Equipment Used: Geoprobe
Weather Conditions: rain, 85F
Drill Crew: A.Baker/J.Johnson
Logged By: MLumpkinBoring Location: NE Parking Lot next to building
Auburn, AL
Project Number: RD180419
Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTREC
RQD
UDELEVATION (ft)260
255
250
% Moisture
20 40 60 80
SAMPLE TYPE
LOG OF BORING 1 CONTINUOUS RECOVERED FILE - RD180419 - CONTINUOUS.GPJ BESI.GDT 8/21/18
1
2
3
4
5
Topsoil (approximately 3 inches)
CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange, fine to
medium sand, moist
- medium dense
(Coastal Plain)
Boring terminated at 10 feet.
Sample 1
% Passing #200 seive: 35.4
Liquid Limit (LL): 37
Plastic Limit (PL): 21
Plasticity Index (PI): 16
No groundwater encountered
at the time of drilling, or after
24 hrs
Boring backfilled on 08/16/18
261.3
251.5
0.3
10.0
4-4-4-5
4-4-4-5
4-4-4-10
4-5-8-19
2-4-6-9
GROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE
UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST
SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS
Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA
Designation: P-102
Sheet 1 of 1
N-Value
20 40 60 80
Date Drilled: 7/31/18
10 20 30 40
Qu (tsf)
N-VALUE
% MOISTURE
Qu
Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC
10 20 30 40
Birmingham, AL GRAPHICProject Name: Parachute Rigging Facility
SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED
RECOVERY
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION
LOG OF BORING 610 Spring Branch Road
Dunn, NC 28334
Office: [phone] 205-836-6300
Fax: [phone]
www.BuildingAndEarth.com
1 2 3 4
Savannah, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Springdale, AR Shreveport, LA Louisville, KY Niceville, FL
1 2 3 4
Atterberg Limits
Qu (tsf)
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger
Surface Elevation: 261.50
REMARKS
Hammer Type: Automatic
DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEGRAPHIC5
10
STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206)
PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT
SOIL DESCRIPTION
N-Value
Atterberg Limits
Equipment Used: Geoprobe
Weather Conditions: rain, 85F
Drill Crew: A.Baker/J.Johnson
Logged By: MLumpkinBoring Location: SE Parking Lot next to building
Auburn, AL
Project Number: RD180419
Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTREC
RQD
UDELEVATION (ft)260
255
250
% Moisture
20 40 60 80
SAMPLE TYPE
LOG OF BORING 1 CONTINUOUS RECOVERED FILE - RD180419 - CONTINUOUS.GPJ BESI.GDT 8/21/18
1
2
3
4
5
Topsoil (Approximately 6 inches)
SILTY SAND (SM): loose, light brown, fine
to medium sand, moist
CLAYEY SAND (SC): very loose,
red-brown, fine to medium sand, moist
- loose
- medium desne
(Coastal Plain)
Boring Terminated at 10 feet
No groundwater encountered
at the time of drilling, or after
24 hrs
Boring backfilled on 08/16/18
258.5
257.0
249.0
0.5
2.0
10.0
1-1-3-1
1-1-2-3
1-1-1-2
3-3-4-5
4-4-7-8
GROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE
UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST
SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS
Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA
Designation: P-103
Sheet 1 of 1
N-Value
20 40 60 80
Date Drilled: 7/31/18
10 20 30 40
Qu (tsf)
N-VALUE
% MOISTURE
Qu
Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC
10 20 30 40
Birmingham, AL GRAPHICProject Name: Parachute Rigging Facility
SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED
RECOVERY
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION
LOG OF BORING 610 Spring Branch Road
Dunn, NC 28334
Office: [phone] 205-836-6300
Fax: [phone]
www.BuildingAndEarth.com
1 2 3 4
Savannah, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Springdale, AR Shreveport, LA Louisville, KY Niceville, FL
1 2 3 4
Atterberg Limits
Qu (tsf)
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger
Surface Elevation: 259.03
REMARKS
Hammer Type: Automatic
DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEGRAPHIC5
10
STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206)
PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT
SOIL DESCRIPTION
N-Value
Atterberg Limits
Equipment Used: Geoprobe
Weather Conditions: rain, 85F
Drill Crew: A.Baker/J.Johnson
Logged By: MLumpkinBoring Location: South Parking Lot next to building
Auburn, AL
Project Number: RD180419
Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTREC
RQD
UDELEVATION (ft)255
250
245
% Moisture
20 40 60 80
SAMPLE TYPE
LOG OF BORING 1 CONTINUOUS RECOVERED FILE - RD180419 - CONTINUOUS.GPJ BESI.GDT 8/21/18
1
2
3
4
5
Topsoil (approximately 6 inches)
SILTY SAND (SM): loose, light brown, fine
to medium sand, wet
SANDY CLAY (CL): stiff, brown/red, fine to
medium sand, moist
- soft
- stiff
CLAYEY SAND (SC): medium dense,
orange, fine to medium sand, moist
(Coastal Plain)
Boring terminated at 10 feet.
No groundwater encountered
at the time of drilling, or after
24 hrs
Boring backfilled on 08/16/18
263.4
261.9
254.9
253.9
0.5
2.0
9.0
10.0
1-2-2-2
3-3-4-5
1-1-2-3
3-3-5-6
1-3-6-9
GROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE
UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST
SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS
Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA
Designation: P-104
Sheet 1 of 1
N-Value
20 40 60 80
Date Drilled: 8/1/18
10 20 30 40
Qu (tsf)
N-VALUE
% MOISTURE
Qu
Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC
10 20 30 40
Birmingham, AL GRAPHICProject Name: Parachute Rigging Facility
SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED
RECOVERY
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION
LOG OF BORING 610 Spring Branch Road
Dunn, NC 28334
Office: [phone] 205-836-6300
Fax: [phone]
www.BuildingAndEarth.com
1 2 3 4
Savannah, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Springdale, AR Shreveport, LA Louisville, KY Niceville, FL
1 2 3 4
Atterberg Limits
Qu (tsf)
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger
Surface Elevation: 263.94
REMARKS
Hammer Type: Automatic
DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEGRAPHIC5
10
STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206)
PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT
SOIL DESCRIPTION
N-Value
Atterberg Limits
Equipment Used: Geoprobe
Weather Conditions: rain, 85F
Drill Crew: A.Baker/J.Johnson
Logged By: MLumpkinBoring Location: West Parking Lot next to building
Auburn, AL
Project Number: RD180419
Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTREC
RQD
UDELEVATION (ft)260
255
250
% Moisture
20 40 60 80
SAMPLE TYPE
LOG OF BORING 1 CONTINUOUS RECOVERED FILE - RD180419 - CONTINUOUS.GPJ BESI.GDT 8/21/18
1
2
3
4
5
Topsoil (approximately 6 inches)
SILTY SAND (SM): very loose, light brown,
fine to medium sand, wet
SANDY CLAY (CL): stiff, red/brown, fine to
medium sand, wet
- red
CLAYEY SAND (SC): medium dense, red,
fine to medium sand, moist
(Coastal Plain)
Boring terminated at 10 feet.
No groundwater encountered
at the time of drilling, or after
24 hrs
Boring backfilled on 08/16/18
266.0
264.5
258.5
256.5
0.5
2.0
8.0
10.0
1-1-1-1
2-3-4-6
3-4-8-10
5-6-6-9
1-3-9-13
GROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE
UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST
SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS
Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA
Designation: P-105
Sheet 1 of 1
N-Value
20 40 60 80
Date Drilled: 8/1/18
10 20 30 40
Qu (tsf)
N-VALUE
% MOISTURE
Qu
Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC
10 20 30 40
Birmingham, AL GRAPHICProject Name: Parachute Rigging Facility
SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED
RECOVERY
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION
LOG OF BORING 610 Spring Branch Road
Dunn, NC 28334
Office: [phone] 205-836-6300
Fax: [phone]
www.BuildingAndEarth.com
1 2 3 4
Savannah, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Springdale, AR Shreveport, LA Louisville, KY Niceville, FL
1 2 3 4
Atterberg Limits
Qu (tsf)
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger
Surface Elevation: 266.50
REMARKS
Hammer Type: Automatic
DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEGRAPHIC5
10
STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206)
PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT
SOIL DESCRIPTION
N-Value
Atterberg Limits
Equipment Used: Geoprobe
Weather Conditions: rain, 85F
Drill Crew: A.Baker/J.Johnson
Logged By: MLumpkinBoring Location: SW Parking Lot
Auburn, AL
Project Number: RD180419
Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTREC
RQD
UDELEVATION (ft)265
260
255
% Moisture
20 40 60 80
SAMPLE TYPE
LOG OF BORING 1 CONTINUOUS RECOVERED FILE - RD180419 - CONTINUOUS.GPJ BESI.GDT 8/21/18
1
2
3
4
5
Topsoil (approximately 6 inches)
SILTY SAND (SM): loose, light brown, fine
to medium sand, moist
CLAY WITH SAND (CL): very stiff,
red/brown, fine to medium sand, moist
- hard
- very stiff
CLAYEY SAND (SC): medium dense,
orange, fine to medium sand, moist
(Coastal Plain)
Boring terminated at 10 feet.
No groundwater encountered
at the time of drilling, or after
24 hrs
Boring backfilled on 08/16/18
267.1
265.6
258.6
257.6
0.5
2.0
9.0
10.0
2-2-3-3
3-4-10-13
4-11-14-15
4-9-11-13
2-2-9-17
GROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE
UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST
SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS
Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA
Designation: P-106
Sheet 1 of 1
N-Value
20 40 60 80
Date Drilled: 8/1/18
10 20 30 40
Qu (tsf)
N-VALUE
% MOISTURE
Qu
Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC
10 20 30 40
Birmingham, AL GRAPHICProject Name: Parachute Rigging Facility
SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED
RECOVERY
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION
LOG OF BORING 610 Spring Branch Road
Dunn, NC 28334
Office: [phone] 205-836-6300
Fax: [phone]
www.BuildingAndEarth.com
1 2 3 4
Savannah, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Springdale, AR Shreveport, LA Louisville, KY Niceville, FL
1 2 3 4
Atterberg Limits
Qu (tsf)
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger
Surface Elevation: 267.56
REMARKS
Hammer Type: Automatic
DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEGRAPHIC5
10
STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206)
PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT
SOIL DESCRIPTION
N-Value
Atterberg Limits
Equipment Used: Geoprobe
Weather Conditions: rain, 85F
Drill Crew: A.Baker/J.Johnson
Logged By: MLumpkinBoring Location: Center of Parking Lot
Auburn, AL
Project Number: RD180419
Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTREC
RQD
UDELEVATION (ft)265
260
255
% Moisture
20 40 60 80
SAMPLE TYPE
LOG OF BORING 1 CONTINUOUS RECOVERED FILE - RD180419 - CONTINUOUS.GPJ BESI.GDT 8/21/18
1
2
3
4
5
Topsoil (approximately 6 inches)
SANDY CLAY (CL): medium stiff,
red/brown, fine to medium sand, moist
-stiff
-very stiff
CLAYEY SAND (SC): medium dense, red,
fine to medium sand, moist
(Coastal Plain)
Boring terminated at 10 feet.
No groundwater encountered
at the time of drilling, or after
24 hrs
Boring backfilled on 08/16/18
270.1
261.6
260.6
0.5
9.0
10.0
2-3-3-4
2-3-4-5
4-8-10-12
4-9-11-14
2-5-9-11
GROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE
UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST
SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS
Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA
Designation: P-107
Sheet 1 of 1
N-Value
20 40 60 80
Date Drilled: 8/1/18
10 20 30 40
Qu (tsf)
N-VALUE
% MOISTURE
Qu
Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC
10 20 30 40
Birmingham, AL GRAPHICProject Name: Parachute Rigging Facility
SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED
RECOVERY
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION
LOG OF BORING 610 Spring Branch Road
Dunn, NC 28334
Office: [phone] 205-836-6300
Fax: [phone]
www.BuildingAndEarth.com
1 2 3 4
Savannah, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Springdale, AR Shreveport, LA Louisville, KY Niceville, FL
1 2 3 4
Atterberg Limits
Qu (tsf)
Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger
Surface Elevation: 270.62
REMARKS
Hammer Type: Automatic
DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEGRAPHIC5
10
STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206)
PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT
SOIL DESCRIPTION
N-Value
Atterberg Limits
Equipment Used: Geoprobe
Weather Conditions: rain, 85F
Drill Crew: A.Baker/J.Johnson
Logged By: MLumpkinBoring Location: NE Parking Lot
Auburn, AL
Project Number: RD180419
Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTREC
RQD
UDELEVATION (ft)270
265
260
% Moisture
20 40 60 80
SAMPLE TYPE
LOG OF BORING 1 CONTINUOUS RECOVERED FILE - RD180419 - CONTINUOUS.GPJ BESI.GDT 8/21/18
M(ksf)c(psf)Phi(degrees)Soil TypeDepthB101B102B104B105SE-Corner Depth B101 B102 B104 B105 SE-Corner Depth B101 B102 B104 B105 SE-Corner Depth B101 B102 B104 B105 SE-Corner1---------1770 674 1 ---------------1 ---------46.5 37.6 1 ---------Silty Sand Sand 2 ---------------2 ---------------2 ---------------2 ---------------3 922 1448 496 1480 869 3 ---------2270 ---3 ---43.4 ---------3 Sandy Silt Silty Sand Sandy Silt Silt Sandy Silt48635484138525644144813797122173---4 ---------------4 Silt Clayey Silt Silt Clayey Silt Sandy Silt5938110644263973652042------1114 1298 5 ---------------5 Silt Sandy Silt Sandy Silt Silt Silt 6 1130 1301 1375 559 822 6 2515 ------1335 1315 6 ------40.0 ------6 Silt Sandy Silt Silty Sand Clayey Silt Silt 7 ---1187 1221 839 7 ---------1801 7 ------------7 ---Sandy Silt Sandy Silt Silt 8 1263 682 8 4168 3566 8 ------8 Silty Clay Silty ClaySummary of Results
B101 B102 B104 B105 SE-CornerEff. Depth Id kd Su(psf)Phi M(ksf)Eff. Depth Id kd Su(psf)Phi M(ksf)Eff. Depth Id kd Su(psf)Phi M(ksf)Eff. Depth Id kd Su(psf)Phi M(ksf)Eff. Depth Id kd Su(psf)Phi M(ksf)1 ---------------1 ---------------1 ---------------1 2.4 45.9 ---46.5 1770 1 17.2 5.4 ---37.6 6742---------------2 ---------------2 ---------------2 ---------------2 ---------------3 1.3 19.0 ------922 3 1.9 19.8 ---43.4 1448 3 1.2 12.6 ------496 3 1.1 29.9 2270 ---1480 3 1.3 18.6 ------86941.1 16.7 1448 ---863 4 0.7 15.9 1379 ---548 4 1.1 9.7 712 ---413 4 0.7 23.1 2173 ---852 4 1.4 10.6 ------56450.8 18.5 2042 ---938 5 1.7 11.9 ------1106 5 1.5 7.0 ------442 5 1.1 11.4 1114 ---639 5 1.0 13.2 1298 ---73660.8 18.7 2515 ---1130 6 1.6 12.3 ------1301 6 2.7 9.0 ---40.0 1375 6 0.8 11.4 1335 ---559 6 1.2 11.5 1315 ---8227---------------7 1.3 11.9 ------1187 7 1.5 11.5 ------1221 7 0.9 13.1 1801 ---83980.5 22.2 4168 ---1263 8 0.3 19.7 3566 ---682 Summary of Results
DILATOMETER TEST RESULTS
Project Name:Fort Bragg Parachute Facility
Project Number:1180593EA
Date:8/1/2018
B101- North Corner
Water Depth 20 ft
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 2 4 6
Depth (ft)Id
Silty Sand0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 250 500 750 1000 1250
Modulus (ksf)ClaySiltSand0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 250 500 750 1000 1250
Su (psf)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
25º30º35º40º45º
Friction Angle (deg)
DILATOMETER TEST RESULTS
Project Name:Fort Bragg Parachute Facility
Project Number:1180593EA
Date:8/1/2018
B102 - East Corner
Water Depth 20 ft
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 2 4 6
Depth (ft)Id
Silty Sand0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 250 500 750 1000 1250
Modulus (ksf)ClaySiltSand0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 250 500 750 1000 1250
Su (psf)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
25º30º35º40º45º
Friction Angle (deg)
DILATOMETER TEST RESULTS
Project Name:Fort Bragg Parachute Facility
Project Number:1180593EA
Date:8/1/2018
B104 - Tower
Water Depth 20 ft
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 2 4 6
Depth (ft)Id
Silty Sand0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 250 500 750 1000 1250
Modulus (ksf)ClaySiltSand0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 250 500 750 1000 1250
Su (psf)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
25º30º35º40º45º
Friction Angle (deg)
DILATOMETER TEST RESULTS
Project Name:Fort Bragg Parachute Facility
Project Number:1180593EA
Date:8/1/2018
B105 - South Corner
Water Depth 20 ft
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 2 4 6
Depth (ft)Id
Silty Sand0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 250 500 750 1000 1250
Modulus (ksf)ClaySiltSand0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 250 500 750 1000 1250
Su (psf)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
25º30º35º40º45º
Friction Angle (deg)
DILATOMETER TEST RESULTS
Project Name:Fort Bragg Parachute Facility
Project Number:1180593EA
Date:8/1/2018
SE-Corner
Water Depth 20 ft
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 2 4 6
Depth (ft)Id
Silty Sand0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 250 500 750 1000 1250
Modulus (ksf)ClaySiltSand0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 250 500 750 1000 1250
Su (psf)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
25º30º35º40º45º
Friction Angle (deg)
Job Name : Fort Bragg Parachute Facility
GeoTech Job No. : 1180593EA FIGURE 5
Date : 8/1/2018
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 250 500 750 1,000
DEPTH (ft)M (ksf)
MODULUS vs DEPTH
B101
B102
B104
B105
SE-Corner
Job Name : Fort Bragg Parachute Facility
GeoTech Job No. : 1180593EA FIGURE 6
Date : 8/1/2018
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 250 500 750 1,000
Depth (ft)COHESION (psf)
C (psf) vs DEPTH
B101
B102
B104
B105
SE-Corner
RFP BORING LOGS











































































!"
#!$
!%&%
'( !(%&%
)&%()
!&%
%!$
*
+,+


*

$&"'
!"

!&%%'
!&
)&%()
!&%
&
-$
.&"
-!'&
/(!0
%
1&%'#!
!'
2+


3

!&%%'
!&
)&%()
!&%
&
'
!-&
!4&
*
+
*



#5
"
#'-$
2+


3
!&
'( !(%&%
)&%()
!&%
&
'
1&"
-$
*
+,+


*

$&"

!&%%'
!&
)&%()
!&%
')&
-$
+&"
%
#5
)
2+


3



!&%%'
!&
'( !(%&%
1&

)&%()
!&%

#'-$
&
'
!-&
-$
!-&
!4&
*
+,+


*

'
!"
)&%()
!&%
')&
-$










6
'5&"
 
7

*78,
8,*79,8+
.78
:782;
<
<
,,


7


3,

7

=3:,8
*78,
:7>,
:?
29227

3
=.
*=8,8@
,2;
27
7.
82
(

-
4'
&&
8&)!5'
< <
<


,,9
27
;87=
A
,8
,,
???
.
:!
2=8:,

2*B,
7.
79,8:=8,

,
82,
27
87*B


7

,
7.
:782;

8,9,82*


876,*
=2=8:,

9


7,
=3:,8


2;
=8,


2,
7.
2,*78
*3,? 
:,
82;

822;

;,*+


7.
*73,,

,
:782;
,;
.873
9,82*

782C7


<D
2
"
&)

(&!
2

27

 
2*2,
=
*,
4
'!-


3,
7.
82,8

28,*27
7.
:782;

*7782
,
+,3

2C,


+,
7.
:2


!-(&
8
.-$
?
 

.+
E
@
@

@





,
 
7*
27
*7782
,

,,9
27
7
7.
:782;
9,82*

6&11
-"%)
;&'
@
&')&%
1!)
#'
&
&
*
=
.





:?,,

1

8,3
8B:"'<
18FG)#








G
8,*





:?
.,:


,,9
,;,,



.2,
*
2.2*
27
7.
3
,82

&'-!#?9(&


(&!
'&

@
(!
%!
A
)&'(!&%

(&!

































































?3


'( !(%&%
)&%()
!&%
1&"
'
!-&
-$


*
+,+


*
!&%%'
#5
)&%()
!&%
)'
&
-$
!-&
'
*
+
*
$&"'
!"


!&%
)'
)&%()
#'-$
!-&
'%





'( !(%&%
)&%()
!&%
"&
!-&
-$
*
+
*
!&
"
#'-$
!-&
'%
2+
;8
9,
;3

$&"
"
#&

'( !(%&%
)&%()

-!'&
!&%
1&"
'
!-&
-$
*
+,+


*

!$

$&"'

1&

)&%()
!&%
!-&
'
;!$
-$
&'&'
2+


3

!&%%'
!&



'( !(%&%
)&%()
!&%
&
'
!-&
-$
*
+,+


*



!&'
!"
)&%()

-!'&
!&%
&
-$







#5
#!$
!%&%
'( !(%&%
)&%()

-!'&
!&%
!-&
-$
F(!0
%
1&%'#!
!'








,,9
27
7
7.
:782;7*
27
*7782
,














,
 
2

27
@
&')&%
1!)
#'

!-(&
8
.-$
?
 

.+
,,
782C7
 9,82*
876,*
,,
7..
:!
*7782
,
+,3

&
&
*
=
. 
9





:?,,

1

8,3
8B:"'<
18FG)#









G
8,*





:?
.,:


,,9
,;,,



.2,
*
2.2*
27
7.
3
,82

&'-!#?9(&


(&!
'&


@
!
A
)&'(!&%

(&!





!"

#
 $ 






















#5
#!$
!%&%
'( !(%&%
)&%()

-!'&
!&%
!-&
-$
F(!0
%
1&%'#!
!'


2+


3

#5



1&

)&%()
!&%
&
'
1&"
-$
3-
$&!'
:773
7.
:78,7,




1
&'H


'
4'($
1&%
-''1&%

--!%-&
"
&
=1&%

*''1-
$'&)


?9(&H

"'
4&!
'
?1
1
?1
%!4&
&!4
(&''
&!"'&
%-&%
('

?<
?-
2
'#'#
')#&!
"
?#(%
))&!
1
?-&'


!
!
(0&'

()-
!#
))&!



(!'   3&'(!&%


<<
(!
%!   <
<
,,9
27
7
7.
:782;7*
27
*7782
,














,
 
2

27
@
&')&%
1!)
#'

!-(&
8
.-$
?
 

.+
,,
782C7
 9,82*
876,*
,,
7..
:!
*7782
,
+,3

&
&
*
=
. 
9





:?,,

1

8,3
8B:"'<
18FG)#




G
8,*





:?
.,:


,,9
,;,,



.2,
*
2.2*
27
7.
3
,82

&'-!#?9(&














!"

#
 $ 





























!$
#'
%!5
!$
!
%& !'
'%$


3

!"

!"
'( !(%&%
1&

)&%()
!&%
&
'
!-&
-$
*
+,+


*

!&%%'
!&
1&

)&%()
!&%
')&
-$
!-&
!-5
1!)&'
.&%'#!
/(!0
)-

!&%%'
!&

$&"
)&%()
!&%
')&
-$

!&%%'
!&


$&"'

)&%()
!&%
')&
-$


3

!&%%'
!&


$&"'

'( !(%&%
)&%()
!&%
&
'
1&"
-$
!-&
-$
&'&'
:773
7.
:78,7,



1
&'H


'
4'($
1&%
-''1&%

--!%-&
"
&
=1&%

*''1-
$'&)


?9(&H

"'
4&!
'
?1
1
?1
%!4&
&!4
(&''
&!"'&
%-&%
('

?<
?-
2
'#'#
')#&!
"
?#(%
))&!
1
?-&'


!
!
(0&'

()-
!#
))&!








(!
%! 
&-(&!&% < <
6
'5&"
 
7

*78,
8,*79,8+
.78
:782;
< <
,,


7


3,

7

=3:,8
*78,
:7>,
:?
29227

3
=.
*=8,8@
,2;
27
7.
82
(

-
4'
&&
8&)!5'
< <
<


,,9
27
;87=
A
,8
,,
???
.
:!
2=8:,

2*B,
7.
79,8:=8,

,
82,
27
87*B


7

,
7.
:782;

8,9,82*


876,*
=2=8:,

9


7,
=3:,8


2;
=8,


2,
7.
2,*78
3 &
:?
:,
82;

822;

;,*+


7.
*73,,

,
:782;
,;
.873
9,82*

782C7


<D
2
"
&)

(&!
2

27


2*2,
=
*,
4
'!-


3,
7.
82,8

28,*27
7.
:782;

*7782
,
+,3

2C,


+,
7.
:2


!-(&
8
.-$
?
 

.+
E@
@
@






,


7*
27
*7782
,

,,9
27
7
7.
:782;
9,82*

6&11
-"%)
;&'
@
&')&%
1!)
#'
&
&
*
=
.





:?,,

1

8,3
8B:"'<
18FG)#





G
8,*





:?
.,:


,,9
,;,,



.2,
*
2.2*
27
7.
3
,82

&'-!#?9(&















!"

#
 $ 


























 








!$
#'
!-5
1!)&'
'%$
1
!
%& !'


3

!"
'( !(%&%
)&%()
!&%
&
'
*
+,+


*

!&

$&"'
!"
1&

)&%()
!&%
')&
-$
.&"
-!'
/(!0
1&%'#!
%
)-
!'
2+


3

!"
'( !(%&%
)&%()
!&%
&
'
!-&
-$
*
+,+


*

!"

#&
#5
)&%()
!&%
:773
7.
:78,7,



1
&'H


'
4'($
1&%
-''1&%

--!%-&
"
&
=1&%

*''1-
$'&)


?9(&H

"'
4&!
'
?1
1
?1
%!4&
&!4
(&''
&!"'&
%-&%
('

?<
?-
2
'#'#
')#&!
"
?#(%
))&!
1
?-&'


!
!
(0&'

()-
!#
))&!








(!
%! 
&-(&!&% <<
6
'5&"
 
7

*78,
8,*79,8+
.78
:782;
<<
,,


7


3,

7

=3:,8
*78,
:7>,
:?
29227

3
=.
*=8,8@
,2;
27
7.
82
(

-
4'
&&
8&)!5'
<<
<


,,9
27
;87=
A
,8
,,
???
.
:!
2=8:,

2*B,
7.
79,8:=8,

,
82,
27
87*B


7

,
7.
:782;

8,9,82*


876,*
=2=8:,

9


7,
=3:,8


2;
=8,


2,
7.
2,*78
*3,? 
:,
82;

822;

;,*+


7.
*73,,

,
:782;
,;
.873
9,82*

782C7


<D
2
"
&)

(&!
2

27


2*2,
=
*,
4
'!-


3,
7.
82,8

28,*27
7.
:782;

*7782
,
+,3

2C,


+,
7.
:2


!-(&
8
.-$
?
 

.+
E@
@
@





,


7*
27
*7782
,

,,9
27
7
7.
:782;
9,82*

6&11
-"%)
;&'
@
&')&%
1!)
#'
&
&
*
=
.





:?,,

1

8,3
8B:"'<
18FG)#





G
8,*





:?
.,:


,,9
,;,,



.2,
*
2.2*
27
7.
3
,82

&'-!#?9(&















!"

#
 $ 





















 




!$

!1-
1
!-5
1!)&'
*
+,+


*

!&'
!"
)&%()
!&%
')&
-$
!-&
!-5
1!)&'
!-&
!&'



!&%%'
!&
'( (!
1&

)&%()
!&%
&
-$

$&"'
!"
"
!$
'( (!
)&%()
!&%
')&
-$
8&%
%
!$
)
:773
7.
:78,7,



1
&'H


'
4'($
1&%
-''1&%

--!%-&
"
&
=1&%

*''1-
$'&)


?9(&H

"'
4&!
'
?1
1
?1
%!4&
&!4
(&''
&!"'&
%-&%
('

?<
?-
2
'#'#
')#&!
"
?#(%
))&!
1
?-&'


!
!
(0&'

()-
!#
))&!







(!
%! 
&-(&!&% <<
6
'5&"
 
7

*78,
8,*79,8+
.78
:782;
<<
,,


7


3,

7

=3:,8
*78,
:7>,
:?
29227

3
=.
*=8,8@
,2;
27
7.
82
(

-
4'
&&
8&)!5'
<<
<


,,9
27
;87=
A
,8
,,
???
.
:!
2=8:,

2*B,
7.
79,8:=8,

,
82,
27
87*B


7

,
7.
:782;

8,9,82*


876,*
=2=8:,

9


7,
=3:,8


2;
=8,


2,
7.
2,*78
*3,? 
:,
82;

822;

;,*+


7.
*73,,

,
:782;
,;
.873
9,82*

782C7


<D
2
"
&)

(&!
2

27


2*2,
=
*,
4
'!-


3,
7.
82,8

28,*27
7.
:782;

*7782
,
+,3

2C,


+,
7.
:2


!-(&
8
.-$
?
 

.+
E@
@
@


 


,

7*
27
*7782
,

,,9
27
7
7.
:782;
9,82*

6&11
-"%)
;&'

@
&')&%
1!)
#'
&
&
*
=
.





:?,,

1

8,3
8B:"'<
18FG)#





G
8,*





:?
.,:


,,9
,;,,



.2,
*
2.2*
27
7.
3
,82

&'-!#?9(&















!"

#
 $ 























 







!$
#'
%!5
!"
'%$
!
%& !'
2+


3
%!5
!"

!&%%'
!&
)&%()
!&%
&
'
!-&
-$
!-&
!&'
*
+,+


*

!&%%'
!&
)&%()
!&%
&
-$
F(!0
%
1&%'#!
!'

+
*
+
*

$&"


'
!$
"
#'-$
11
*
+,+


*

'
!$

$&"'
!&
)&%()
!&%
')&
-$
:773
7.
:78,7,



1
&'H


'
4'($
1&%
-''1&%

--!%-&
"
&
=1&%

*''1-
$'&)


?9(&H

"'
4&!
'
?1
1
?1
%!4&
&!4
(&''
&!"'&
%-&%
('

?<
?-
2
'#'#
')#&!
"
?#(%
))&!
1
?-&'


!
!
(0&'

()-
!#
))&!







(!
%! 
&-(&!&% <<
6
'5&"
 
7

*78,
8,*79,8+
.78
:782;
<<
,,


7


3,

7

=3:,8
*78,
:7>,
:?
29227

3
=.
*=8,8@
,2;
27
7.
82
(

-
4'
&&
8&)!5'
<<
<


,,9
27
;87=
A
,8
,,
???
.
:!
2=8:,

2*B,
7.
79,8:=8,

,
82,
27
87*B


7

,
7.
:782;

8,9,82*


876,*
=2=8:,

9


7,
=3:,8


2;
=8,


2,
7.
2,*78
*3,? 
:,
82;

822;

;,*+


7.
*73,,

,
:782;
,;
.873
9,82*

782C7


<D
2
"
&)

(&!
2

27


2*2,
=
*,
4
'!-


3,
7.
82,8

28,*27
7.
:782;

*7782
,
+,3

2C,


+,
7.
:2


!-(&
8
.-$
?
 

.+
E@
@
@





,

7*
27
*7782
,

,,9
27
7
7.
:782;
9,82*

6&11
-"%)
;&'
@
&')&%
1!)
#'
&
&
*
=
.





:?,,

1

8,3
8B:"'<
18FG)#





G
8,*





:?
.,:


,,9
,;,,



.2,
*
2.2*
27
7.
3
,82

&'-!#?9(&














!"

#
 $ 






























!$
#'
%!5
!$
!
%& !'
2+


3

!"

$&"'
!"
)&%()
!&%
&
'
!-&
-$
*
+,+


*
!"

!&%%'
!&
)&%()
!&%
')&
-$
1&%'#!
%
)-

$&"'
!"

!&%%'
!&
'( !(%&%
)&%()
!&%
&
-$
!-&
!-5
1!)&'
:773
7.
:78,7,



1
&'H


'
4'($
1&%
-''1&%

--!%-&
"
&
=1&%

*''1-
$'&)


?9(&H

"'
4&!
'
?1
1
?1
%!4&
&!4
(&''
&!"'&
%-&%
('

?<
?-
2
'#'#
')#&!
"
?#(%
))&!
1
?-&'


!
!
(0&'

()-
!#
))&!







(!
%! 
&-(&!&% < <
6
'5&"
 
7

*78,
8,*79,8+
.78
:782;
< <
,,


7


3,

7

=3:,8
*78,
:7>,
:?
29227

3
=.
*=8,8@
,2;
27
7.
82
(

-
4'
&&
8&)!5'
< <
<


,,9
27
;87=
A
,8
,,
???
.
:!
2=8:,

2*B,
7.
79,8:=8,

,
82,
27
87*B


7

,
7.
:782;

8,9,82*


876,*
=2=8:,

9


7,
=3:,8


2;
=8,


2,
7.
2,*78
3 &
:?
:,
82;

822;

;,*+


7.
*73,,

,
:782;
,;
.873
9,82*

782C7


<D
2
"
&)

(&!
2

27


2*2,
=
*,
4
'!-


3,
7.
82,8

28,*27
7.
:782;

*7782
,
+,3

2C,


+,
7.
:2


!-(&
8
.-$
?
 

.+
E@
@
@



 


,


7*
27
*7782
,

,,9
27
7
7.
:782;
9,82*

6&11
-"%)
;&'
@
&')&%
1!)
#'
&
&
*
=
.





:?,,

1

8,3
8B:"'<
18FG)#





G
8,*





:?
.,:


,,9
,;,,



.2,
*
2.2*
27
7.
3
,82

&'-!#?9(&















!"

#
 $ 





























!$
#'
%!5
!"
'%$
!
%& !'
2+


3

!"
)&%()
!&%
&
'
!-&
-$
*
+,+


*
!&%%'
!&
)&%()

-!'&
!&%
')&
-$
!-&
!-5
1!)&'
!-&
!&'
8&%%'
!&


#5'

'( !(%&%
)&%()

-!'&
!&%
&
-$
!-&
!4&
*!'&
/(!0
%
1&%'#!
!'
:773
7.
:78,7,



1
&'H


'
4'($
1&%
-''1&%

--!%-&
"
&
=1&%

*''1-
$'&)


?9(&H

"'
4&!
'
?1
1
?1
%!4&
&!4
(&''
&!"'&
%-&%
('

?<
?-
2
'#'#
')#&!
"
?#(%
))&!
1
?-&'


!
!
(0&'

()-
!#
))&!







(!
%! 
&-(&!&% <<
6
'5&"
 
7

*78,
8,*79,8+
.78
:782;
<<
,,


7


3,

7

=3:,8
*78,
:7>,
:?
29227

3
=.
*=8,8@
,2;
27
7.
82
(

-
4'
&&
8&)!5'
<<
<


,,9
27
;87=
A
,8
,,
???
.
:!
2=8:,

2*B,
7.
79,8:=8,

,
82,
27
87*B


7

,
7.
:782;

8,9,82*


876,*
=2=8:,

9


7,
=3:,8


2;
=8,


2,
7.
2,*78
*3,? 
:,
82;

822;

;,*+


7.
*73,,

,
:782;
,;
.873
9,82*

782C7


<D
2
"
&)

(&!
2

27


2*2,
=
*,
4
'!-


3,
7.
82,8

28,*27
7.
:782;

*7782
,
+,3

2C,


+,
7.
:2


!-(&
8
.-$
?
 

.+
E@
@
@





,


7*
27
*7782
,

,,9
27
7
7.
:782;
9,82*

6&11
-"%)
;&'
@
&')&%
1!)
#'
&
&
*
=
.





:? ,,

1

8,3
8B:"'<
18FG)#





G
8,*





:?
.,:


,,9
,;,,



.2,
*
2.2*
27
7.
3
,82

&'-!#?9(&











!"

#
 $ 

























!$
#'
'%$
1
'
1
&&I&
2+


3

!"
1&

)&%()
!&%
&
'
!-&
-$
*
+,+


*
!&%%'
!&

!&%%'
$&"
)&%()
!&%
')&
-$
!-&
!&'
+&"'
!&%

!$
)&%()
!&%
&
-$
*
+
*
!&%%'
!&
)&%
"
!$
"
#'-$
!-&
'%
!-&
'
11
:773
7.
:78,7,



1
&'H


'
4'($
1&%
-''1&%

--!%-&
"
&
=1&%

*''1-
$'&)


?9(&H

"'
4&!
'
?1
1
?1
%!4&
&!4
(&''
&!"'&
%-&%
('

?<
?-
2
'#'#
')#&!
"
?#(%
))&!
1
?-&'


!
!
(0&'

()-
!#
))&!





(!
%! 
&-(&!&% <<
6
'5&"
 
7

*78,
8,*79,8+
.78
:782;
<<
,,


7


3,

7

=3:,8
*78,
:7>,
:?

29227

3
=.
*=8,8@
,2;
27
7.
82
(

-
4'
&&
8&)!5'
<<
<


,,9
27
;87=
A
,8
,,
???
.
:!
2=8:,

2*B,
7.
79,8:=8,

,
82,
27
87*B


7

,
7.
:782;

8,9,82*


876,*
=2=8:,

9


7,
=3:,8


2;
=8,


2,
7.
2,*78
*3,? 
:,
82;

822;

;,*+


7.
*73,,

,
:782;
,;
.873
9,82*

782C7


<D
2
"
&)

(&!
2

27


2*2,
=
*,
4
'!-


3,
7.
82,8

28,*27
7.
:782;

*7782
,
+,3

2C,


+,
7.
:2


!-(&
8
.-$
?
 

.+
E@
@
@


 



,

7*
27
*7782
,

,,9
27
7
7.
:782;
9,82*

6&11
-"%)
;&'
@
&')&%
1!)
#'
&
&
*
=
.





:?
,,

1

8,3
8B:"'<
18FG)#



G
8,*





:?

.,:


,,9
,;,,



.2,
*
2.2*
27
7.
3
,82

&'-!#?9(&











!"

#
 $ 


























2+


3
%!5
!&%%'
!&
'( !(%&%
)&%()
!&%
%!$
&
'
!-&
-$
!-&
!4&
*
+,+


*
%!5
!&%%'
!&
)&%()
!&%
&
-$
1&"
!4&
2+


3

$&"'
!&
'( (!
)&%()

-!'&
!&%
1&"
'
!-&
-$
:773
7.
:78,7,



1
&'H


'
4'($
1&%
-''1&%

--!%-&
"
&
=1&%

*''1-
$'&)


?9(&H

"'
4&!
'
?1
1
?1
%!4&
&!4
(&''
&!"'&
%-&%
('

?<
?-
2
'#'#
')#&!
"
?#(%
))&!
1
?-&'


!
!
(0&'

()-
!#
))&!






(!
%! 
&-(&!&% <<
6
'5&"
 
7

*78,
8,*79,8+
.78
:782;
<<
,,


7


3,

7

=3:,8
*78,
:7>,
:?
29227

3
=.
*=8,8@
,2;
27
7.
82
(

-
4'
&&
8&)!5'
<<
<


,,9
27
;87=
A
,8
,,
???
.
:!
2=8:,

2*B,
7.
79,8:=8,

,
82,
27
87*B


7

,
7.
:782;

8,9,82*


876,*
=2=8:,

9


7,
=3:,8


2;
=8,


2,
7.
2,*78
*3,? 
:,
82;

822;

;,*+


7.
*73,,

,
:782;
,;
.873
9,82*

782C7


<D
2
"
&)

(&!
2

27


2*2,
=
*,
4
'!-


3,
7.
82,8

28,*27
7.
:782;

*7782
,
+,3

2C,


+,
7.
:2


!-(&
8
.-$
?
 

.+
E@
@
@





,

7*
27
*7782
,

,,9
27
7
7.
:782;
9,82*

6&11
-"%)
;&'
@
&')&%
1!)
#'
&
&
*
=
.





:?,,

1

8,3
8B:"'<
18FG)#



G
8,*





:?
.,:


,,9
,;,,



.2,
*
2.2*
27
7.
3
,82

&'-!#?9(&











!"

#
 $ 






















!$
#'
%!5
!$
'%$
!
%& !'
2+


3

!"


!&
'( !(%&%
)&%()
!&%
&
'
!-&
-$
*
+,+


*
!&%%'
!&
)&%()
!&%
&
-$
1&%'#!
%
)-

$&"

!&%%'
!&
'( !(%&%
)&%()
!&%
&
-$
:773
7.
:78,7,



1
&'H


'
4'($
1&%
-''1&%

--!%-&
"
&
=1&%

*''1-
$'&)


?9(&H

"'
4&!
'
?1
1
?1
%!4&
&!4
(&''
&!"'&
%-&%
('

?<
?-
2
'#'#
')#&!
"
?#(%
))&!
1
?-&'


!
!
(0&'

()-
!#
))&!





(!
%! 
&-(&!&% < <
6
'5&"
 
7

*78,
8,*79,8+
.78
:782;
< <
,,


7


3,

7

=3:,8
*78,
:7>,
:?
29227

3
=.
*=8,8@
,2;
27
7.
82
(

-
4'
&&
8&)!5'
< <
<


,,9
27
;87=
A
,8
,,
???
.
:!
2=8:,

2*B,
7.
79,8:=8,

,
82,
27
87*B


7

,
7.
:782;

8,9,82*


876,*
=2=8:,

9


7,
=3:,8


2;
=8,


2,
7.
2,*78
3 &
:?
:,
82;

822;

;,*+


7.
*73,,

,
:782;
,;
.873
9,82*

782C7


<D
2
"
&)

(&!
2

27


2*2,
=
*,
4
'!-


3,
7.
82,8

28,*27
7.
:782;

*7782
,
+,3

2C,


+,
7.
:2


!-(&
8
.-$
?
 

.+
E@
@
@






,

7*
27
*7782
,

,,9
27
7
7.
:782;
9,82*

6&11
-"%)
;&'
@
&')&%
1!)
#'
&
&
*
=
.





:?,,

1

8,3
8B:"'<
18FG)#



G
8,*





:?
.,:


,,9
,;,,



.2,
*
2.2*
27
7.
3
,82

&'-!#?9(&











!"

#
 $ 















 






!$

!1-
1
'%$
!-5
1!)&'
2+


3


1&

)&%()
!&%
&
'
'' &
1
*
+,+


*
!&%%'
!"


$&"'
!"
)&%()
!&%
')&
-$
1&%'#!
%
)-
:773
7.
:78,7,



1
&'H


'
4'($
1&%
-''1&%

--!%-&
"
&
=1&%

*''1-
$'&)


?9(&H

"'
4&!
'
?1
1
?1
%!4&
&!4
(&''
&!"'&
%-&%
('

?<
?-
2
'#'#
')#&!
"
?#(%
))&!
1
?-&'


!
!
(0&'

()-
!#
))&!





(!
%! 
&-(&!&% <<
B$&
B& !&"
 
7

*78,
8,*79,8+
.78
:782;
<<
,,


7


3,

7

=3:,8
*78,
:7>,
:?
29227

3
=.
*=8,8@
,2;
27
7.
82
(

-
4'
&&
8&)!5'
<<
<


,,9
27
;87=
A
,8
,,
???
.
:!
2=8:,

2*B,
7.
79,8:=8,

,
82,
27
87*B


7

,
7.
:782;

8,9,82*


876,*
=2=8:,

9


7,
=3:,8


2;
=8,


2,
7.
2,*78
*3,? 
:,
82;

822;

;,*+


7.
*73,,

,
:782;
,;
.873
9,82*

782C7


<D
2
"
&)

(&!
2

27


2*2,
=
*,
4
'!-


3,
7.
82,8

28,*27
7.
:782;

*7782
,
+,3

2C,


+,
7.
:2


!-(&
8
.-$
?
 

.+
E@
@
@


 


,

7*
27
*7782
,

,,9
27
7
7.
:782;
9,82*

6&11
-"%)
;&'

@
&')&%
1!)
#'
&
&
*
=
.





:?,,

1

8,3
8B:"'<
18FG)#



G
8,*





:?
.,:


,,9
,;,,



.2,
*
2.2*
27
7.
3
,82

&'-!#?9(&











!"

#
 $ 


















 






!$

!1-
1
'&
'%
2+


3

!"
)&%()
!&%
&
'
!-&
-$
'' &
1
*
+,+


*
!&%%'
!&

$&"'
!"
'( (!
)&%()
!&%
&
-$
!-&
!&'
8&%%'
!&
)&%()

-!'&
!&%
1&"
-$
!-&
!4&
1&%'#!
%
)-
:773
7.
:78,7,



1
&'H


'
4'($
1&%
-''1&%

--!%-&
"
&
=1&%

*''1-
$'&)


?9(&H

"'
4&!
'
?1
1
?1
%!4&
&!4
(&''
&!"'&
%-&%
('

?<
?-
2
'#'#
')#&!
"
?#(%
))&!
1
?-&'


!
!
(0&'

()-
!#
))&!






(!
%! 
&-(&!&% <<
B$&
B& !&"
 
7

*78,
8,*79,8+
.78
:782;
<<
,,


7


3,

7

=3:,8
*78,
:7>,
:?
29227

3
=.
*=8,8@
,2;
27
7.
82
(

-
4'
&&
8&)!5'
<<
<


,,9
27
;87=
A
,8
,,
???
.
:!
2=8:,

2*B,
7.
79,8:=8,

,
82,
27
87*B


7

,
7.
:782;

8,9,82*


876,*
=2=8:,

9


7,
=3:,8


2;
=8,


2,
7.
2,*78
*3,? 
:,
82;

822;

;,*+


7.
*73,,

,
:782;
,;
.873
9,82*

782C7


<D
2
"
&)

(&!
2

27


2*2,
=
*,
4
'!-


3,
7.
82,8

28,*27
7.
:782;

*7782
,
+,3

2C,


+,
7.
:2


!-(&
8
.-$
?
 

.+
E@
@
@


 


,



7*
27
*7782
,

,,9
27
7
7.
:782;
9,82*

6&11
-"%)
;&'

@
&')&%
1!)
#'
&
&
*
=
.





:?,,

1

8,3
8B:"'<
18FG)#



G
8,*





:?
.,:


,,9
,;,,



.2,
*
2.2*
27
7.
3
,82

&'-!#?9(&











!"

#
 $ 






















!$

!1-
1
-!('&%
!-5
%
'%
*
+,+


*
!&%%'
!&
'( (!
)&%()

-!'&
!&%
')&
-$
1&"
!-5
1!)&'
1&%'#!
%
)-
:773
7.
:78,7,



1
&'H


'
4'($
1&%
-''1&%

--!%-&
"
&
=1&%

*''1-
$'&)


?9(&H

"'
4&!
'
?1
1
?1
%!4&
&!4
(&''
&!"'&
%-&%
('

?<
?-
2
'#'#
')#&!
"
?#(%
))&!
1
?-&'


!
!
(0&'

()-
!#
))&!





(!
%! 
&-(&!&% <<
B$&
B& !&"
 
7

*78,
8,*79,8+
.78
:782;
<<
,,


7


3,

7

=3:,8
*78,
:7>,
:?
29227

3
=.
*=8,8@
,2;
27
7.
82
(

-
4'
&&
8&)!5'
<<
<


,,9
27
;87=
A
,8
,,
???
.
:!
2=8:,

2*B,
7.
79,8:=8,

,
82,
27
87*B


7

,
7.
:782;

8,9,82*


876,*
=2=8:,

9


7,
=3:,8


2;
=8,


2,
7.
2,*78
*3,? 
:,
82;

822;

;,*+


7.
*73,,

,
:782;
,;
.873
9,82*

782C7


<D
2
"
&)

(&!
2

27


2*2,
=
*,
4
'!-


3,
7.
82,8

28,*27
7.
:782;

*7782
,
+,3

2C,


+,
7.
:2


!-(&
8
.-$
?
 

.+
E@
@
@






,

7*
27
*7782
,

,,9
27
7
7.
:782;
9,82*

6&11
-"%)
;&'
@
&')&%
1!)
#'
&
&
*
=
.





:?,,

1

8,3
8B:"'<
18FG)#



G
8,*





:?
.,:


,,9
,;,,



.2,
*
2.2*
27
7.
3
,82

&'-!#?9(&
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES

A brief description of the laboratory tests performed is provided in the following sections.
DESCRIPTION OF SOILS (VISUAL-MANUAL PROCEDURE) (ASTM D2488)
The soil samples were visually examined by our engineer and soil descriptions were
provided. Representative samples were then selected and tested in accordance with the
aforementioned laboratory-testing program to determine soil classifications and
engineering properties. This data was used to correlate our visual descriptions with the
Unified Soil Classification System (USCS).
NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT (ASTM D2216)
Natural moisture contents (M%) were determined on selected samples. The natural moisture
content is the ratio, expressed as a percentage, of the weight of water in a given amount of
soil to the weight of solid particles.
ATTERBERG LIMITS (ASTM D4318)
The Atterberg Limits test was performed to evaluate the soil’s plasticity characteristics. The soil
Plasticity Index (PI) is representative of this characteristic and is bracketed by the Liquid Limit
(LL) and the Plastic Limit (PL). The Liquid Limit is the moisture content at which the soil will
flow as a heavy viscous fluid. The Plastic Limit is the moisture content at which the soil is
between “plastic” and the semi-solid stage. The Plasticity Index (PI = LL - PL) is a frequently
used indicator for a soil’s potential for volume change. Typically, a soil’s potential for volume
change increases with higher plasticity indices.
MATERIAL FINER THAN NO. 200 SIEVE BY WASHING (ASTM D1140)
Grain-size tests were performed to determine the partial soil particle size distribution. The
amount of material finer than the openings on the No. 200 sieve (0.075 mm) was determined
by washing soil over the No. 200 sieve. The results of wash #200 tests are presented on the
boring logs included in this report and in the table of laboratory test results.
MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST (ASTM D1557)
Modified Proctor compaction tests were performed to determine the maximum dry density
and optimum moisture content for the soil, for use as a comparative basis during fill placement.
The Modified Proctor test consists of the compaction of soil with known moisture content into
a steel mold of fixed height and diameter. The soil is compacted in the mold in five lifts of
equal volume using a 10 lb. manual hammer with an 18-inch free fall, to produce a consistent
compactive effort. The test procedure is repeated on samples at several different moisture
contents until a curve showing the relationship between moisture content and dry density of
the soil is established. From this curve, the maximum dry density (peak density value) and
optimum moisture content (moisture content correlating to the maximum dry density) are
obtained.
LABORATORY CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO (ASTM D1883)
The California Bearing Ratio, usually abbreviated CBR, is a punching shear test. The CBR value
is a semi-empirical index of the soil’s strength and deflection characteristics and has been
correlated with pavement performance to establish design curves for pavement thickness. The
tests were performed on six-inch diameter, five-inch thick disks of compacted soil, confined in
steel cylinders. The specimens were soaked for at least 96 hours prior to testing. A piston,
approximately two inches in diameter, was forced into the soaked soil at a standard rate to
determine the soil’s resistance to penetration. The CBR value is the ratio, expressed as a
percentage, of the actual load required to produce a 0.1-inch deflection to that required for
the same deflection in a certain standard crushed stone.
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
The results of the laboratory testing are presented in the following tables.
Boring or Test
Pit Location
Sample Depth
(ft) LL PL PI % Passing
#200 Sieve
Moisture
Content (%)
B-101 0-2.0 14 13 1 30.4 10.2
B-103 8.0-10.0 47 29 18 25.9 11.8
B-105 4.0-6.0 43 26 17 45.7 21.3
P-102 0-2.0 37 21 16 35.4 20.8
P-106 2.0-4.0 56 37 19 60.5 28.4
Table A-1: General Soil Classification Test Results
Soils with a Liquid Limit (LL) greater than 50 and Plasticity Index (PI) greater than 25 usually
exhibit significant volume change with varying moisture content and are considered to be
highly plastic. Soils with a LOI value greater than 3 percent are usually not suitable for
supporting building and pavement sections.

Checked By: John Dailly
08-10-18
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=
D50=D30=D15=
D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
Red Brown clayey sand
.75
.375
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
99.7
99.4
98.7
92.9
77.9
46.3
35.4
21 37 16
0.7100 0.5575 0.2422
0.1738
SC A-2-6(1)
ACC Construction Company, Inc.
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility (GEO) Fort Bragg, NC
RD180419
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Location: P-102, S-1
Sample Number: 18-3054-01 Depth: 0-2.5'Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
PERCENT COARSER100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.6 0.7 20.8 42.5 35.43 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Checked By: John Dailly
COMPACTION TEST REPORT
Dry density, pcf118
120
122
124
126
128
Water content, %
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
10.6%, 125.5 pcf
ZAV for
Sp.G. =
2.65
Test specification:ASTM D 1557-12 Method A Modified
0-2.5'SC A-2-6(1)20.8 37 16 0.6 35.4
Red Brown clayey sand
RD180419 ACC Construction Company, Inc.
Elev/Classification Nat.Sp.G.LL PI % >% <
Depth USCS AASHTO Moist.#4 No.200
TEST RESULTS MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Project No.Client:Remarks:
Project:
Location: P-102, S-1 Sample Number: 18-3054-01
Figure
Maximum dry density = 125.5 pcf
Optimum moisture = 10.6 %
SOF Parachute Rigging Facility (GEO) Fort Bragg, NC

2200 Westinghouse Blvd., Suite 103 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • Phone [phone] • Fax [phone] • www.geotechnics.net

DCN: Data Transmittal Letter Date: 1/28/05 Rev.: 1

August 13, 2018

Project No R-2018-224-001

Mr. Kurt Miller
Building & Earth Sciences, LLC
610 Spring Branch Road
Dunn, NC 28334

Transmittal
Laboratory Test Results
RD180419 SOF Parachute Rigging Facility (Fort Bragg, NC)

Please find attached the laboratory test results for the above referenced project. The tests were outlined
on the Project Verification Form that was transmitted to your firm prior to the testing. The testing was
performed in general accordance with the methods listed on the enclosed data sheets. The test results
are believed to be representative of the samples that were submitted for testing and are indicative only of
the specimens which were evaluated. We have no direct knowledge of the origin of the samples and
imply no position with regard to the nature of the test results, i.e. pass/fail and no claims as to the
suitability of the material for its intended use.

The test data and all associated project information provided shall be held in strict confidence and
disclosed to other parties only with authorization by our Client. The test data submitted herein is
considered integral with this report and is not to be reproduced except in whole and only with the
authorization of the Client and Geotechnics. The remaining sample materials for this project will be
retained for a minimum of 90 days as directed by the Geotechnics’ Quality Program.

We are pleased to provide these testing services. Should you have any questions or if we may be of
further assistance, please contact our office.

Respectively submitted,
Geotechnics, Inc.

Michael P. Smith
Regional Manager

We understand that you have a choice in your laboratory services
and we thank you for choosing Geotechnics.

2200 Westinghouse Blvd., Suite 103 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • Phone [phone] • Fax [phone] • www.geotechnics.net
SINGLE POINT CBR TEST
ASTM D 1883-16
Client Building & Earth Sciences, Inc.Boring No.P-102
Client Reference RD180419 SOF Parachute Rigging Fac. Depth(ft.)N/A
Project No.R-2018-224-001 Sample No.18-3054-01
Lab ID R-2018-224-001-001 Visual Description RED/BROWN SANDY
CLAY
Test Type MODIFIED
Molding Method C Density Before After
Mold ID R433 Measurement Soaking Soaking
Wt. of Mold (gm.)4233 Wt. Mold & WS (gm.)8921.2 8966.7
Mold Volume (cc)2121 Wt. WS (gm.)4688.2 4734
Surcharge (lbs.)10 Sample Volume (cc)2121 2124
Piston Area (in2)3 Wet Density (gm./cc) 2.21 2.23
Sample Height 4.58 Wet Density (pcf) 137.9 139.1
Sample Conditions Soaked
Blows per Layer 45 Dry Density (pcf) 125.4 125.2
Dry Density (gm./cc) 2.01 2.01
Water As Begining After Before After Top 1"
Contents Rec'd Compaction Compaction Soaking Soaking After Soak
Tare No.815 819 NA 304 318
Wt. of T+WS (gm.) 335.39 452 NA 685.84 553.22
Wt. of T+DS (gm.) 323.34 422.6 NA 628.57 497.69
Wt of Tare (gm.) 136.11 129.16 NA 110.64 86.5
Moisture Content(%) 6.4 10.0 NA 10.0 11.1 13.5
Piston Penetration
Displacement Load Stress Swell
(in.)(lbs.)(psi.)Measurement
0 5.40 1.8 Elapsed Dial Percent
0.025 401.52 133.8 Time Gauge Swell
0.050 888.83 296.3 (hrs) (Div)
0.075 1233.04 411.0
0.100 1488.70 496.2 0.00 453 0.00%
0.125 1691.55 563.8 4.00 458 0.11%
0.150 1853.92 618.0 19.00 460 0.15%
0.175 1995.63 665.2 43.00 460 0.15%
0.200 2124.47 708.2
0.250 2363.01 787.7
0.300 2590.40 863.5
0.350 2809.34 936.4
0.400 3030.30 1010.1
0.450 3242.72 1080.9
0.500 3498.00 1166.0
0.550 3716.00 1238.7
0.600 3963.00 1321.0 1Division = 0.001 in.
Tested By SFS Date 8/8/18 Checked By MPS Date 8/13/18
page 1 of 2 DCN: CT-S27 REVSI0N: 5 DATE: 11/15/05Z:\2018 PROJECTS\BUILDING & EARTH SCIENCES\2018-224 BUILDING & EARTH - SOF PARACHUTE\[2018-224-001-001 1CBR TESTNET.xls]SHEET1

2200 Westinghouse Blvd., Suite 103 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • Phone [phone] • Fax [phone] • www.geotechnics.net
SINGLE POINT CBR TEST
ASTM D 1883-16
Client Building & Earth Sciences, Inc. Boring No.P-102
Client Reference RD180419 SOF Parachute RiggingDepth(ft.)N/A
Project No.R-2018-224-001 Sample No. 18-3054-01
Lab ID R-2018-224-001-001 Visual Description RED/BROWN SANDY
CLAY
CBR VALUE (0.1") 49.6 %
CBR VALUE (0.2") 47.2 %
CORRECTED CBR VALUE (0.1") 51.0 %
CORRECTED CBR VALUE (0.2") 47.7 %
Tested By SFS Date 8/8/18 Approved By MPS Date 8/13/18
page 2 of 2 DCN: CT-S27 REVSI0N: 5 DATE: 11/15/052018 PROJECTS\BUILDING & EARTH SCIENCES\2018-224 BUILDING & EARTH - SOF PARACHUTE\[2018-224-001-001 1CBR TESTNET.xls]SHEET1
0.0
200.0
400.0
600.0
800.0
1000.0
1200.0
1400.0
0.000 0.100 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 0.600 0.700Penetration Stress (psi)Penetration (in)
Penetration Stress vs. Penetration
3DJH_$

6($621$/+,*+:$7(57$%/(5(3257
3DJH_$

,1),/75$7,217(67,1*
o
Liquid Used: Depth of Water Table: Water Temp ( ºF): ºF
Test Location: Depth of Observed Water inches
Flow rate used: Hole Diameter: inches
Start Saturation: Water Head: inches
Hole Radius: Hole Depth: inches
S 15 :55
E 16 :01
S 16 :01
E 16 :04
S 16 :04
E 16 :07
S 16 :07
E 16 :10
S 16 :10
E 16 :13
S 16 :13
E 16 :16
S
E
S
E
S
E
S
E
S
E
S
E
S
E
S
E
Stabilized Ksat
in/hr 0.14 CCHP - 1
13
14
12
11
10
9
8
7
0.148/16 8.20.35
11.1 20 5868/16 0.05
70.795
70.79
0.148/16 11.10.30
14.0 20 58
8/16 0.05
0.148/16 14.00.25
16.9 20 5848/16 0.05
82.993
70.79
0.168/16 16.90.20
20.3 20 68
8/16 0.05
0.188/16 20.30.15
24.0 20 7428/16 0.05
124.491
90.32
0.258/16 24.00.10
34.2 20 204
8/16 0.10
Remarks: Weather conditions,
etc.Reading
Tube
Flow
Flow
cm³
Flow Rate
in³/hr Ksat in/hr
1.200 120
Test Data
Trial #Date Time
Elapsed
Time (hrs)
Δ | Total
Flow Readings
Saturated
Conductivity
15:45 13.25
Storage Tube 5L 2 On 105.000
Sight Tube 1L 1 On 20.000
S-101 NA
Constants:
Capacity
Liquid Containers 20 2.4
setting Rate cm³/cm
Test Constants
Municipal Water >120" 71
5
Technician: Brad Carlson Date: 8/16/2018
Client Name: ACC Construction Company Report Number: 1
Compact Constant Head Permeameter - ASTM D-5126 {4.1.6}
In-situ Field Saturated Conductivity of Soils in the Vadose Zone via Amoozemeter
Project Name: SOF Parachute Rigging Facility Project Number: RD180419
of
Liquid Used: Depth of Water Table: Water Temp ( ºF): ºF
Test Location: Depth of Observed Water inches
Flow rate used: Hole Diameter: inches
Start Saturation: Water Head: inches
Hole Radius: Hole Depth: inches
S 14 :55
E 14 :59
S 14 :59
E 15 :03
S 15 :03
E 15 :07
S 15 :07
E 15 :11
S 15 :11
E 15 :15
S 15 :15
E 15 :19
S
E
S
E
S
E
S
E
S
E
S
E
S
E
S
E
Stabilized Ksat
in/hr 0.12 CCHP - 2
13
14
12
11
10
9
8
7
0.128/16 13.00.40
16.5 20 7068/16 0.07
64.075
64.07
0.128/16 16.50.33
20.0 20 70
8/16 0.07
0.128/16 20.00.27
23.5 20 7048/16 0.07
69.573
64.07
0.138/16 23.50.20
27.3 20 76
8/16 0.07
0.138/16 27.30.13
31.0 20 7428/16 0.07
82.381
67.74
0.15 Run less than 24" above SHWT8/16 31.00.07
35.5 20 90
8/16 0.07
Remarks: Weather conditions, etc.Reading
Tube
Flow
Flow
cm³
Flow Rate
in³/hr Ksat in/hr
1.200 96
Test Data
Trial #Date Time
Elapsed
Time (hrs)
Δ | Total
Flow Readings
Saturated
Conductivity
14:50 13.75
Storage Tube 5L 2 On 105.000
Sight Tube 1L 1 On 20.000
S-102 NA
Constants:
Capacity
Liquid Containers 20 2.4
setting Rate cm³/cm
Test Constants
Municipal Water 111" 71
5
Technician: Brad Carlson Date: 8/16/2018
Client Name: ACC Construction Company Report Number: 5
Compact Constant Head Permeameter - ASTM D-5126 {4.1.6}
In-situ Field Saturated Conductivity of Soils in the Vadose Zone via Amoozemeter
Project Name: SOF Parachute Rigging Facility Project Number: RD180419
of
Liquid Used: Depth of Water Table: Water Temp ( ºF): ºF
Test Location: Depth of Observed Water inches
Flow rate used: Hole Diameter: inches
Start Saturation: Water Head: inches
Hole Radius: Hole Depth: inches
S 10 :53
E 10 :57
S 10 :57
E 11 :05
S 11 :05
E 11 :10
S 11 :10
E 11 :20
S 11 :20
E 11 :33
S 11 :33
E 11 :36
S 11 :36
E 11 :39
S
E
S
E
S
E
S
E
S
E
S
E
S
E
Stabilized Ksat
in/hr 0.14 CCHP - 3
13
14
12
11
10
9
8
24.417 0.148/16 12.40.77
13.4 20 20
8/16 0.05
0.148/16 13.40.72
14.4 20 2068/16 0.05
24.795
24.41
0.148/16 14.40.67
18.8 20 88
8/16 0.22
0.148/16 18.80.45
22.3 20 7048/16 0.17
33.693
25.63
0.198/16 22.30.28
24.6 20 46
8/16 0.08
0.278/16 24.60.20
29.9 20 10628/16 0.13
56.751
48.51
0.328/16 29.90.07
33.0 20 62
8/16 0.07
Remarks: Weather conditions, etc.Reading
Tube
Flow
Flow
cm³
Flow Rate
in³/hr Ksat in/hr
1.200 60
Test Data
Trial #Date Time
Elapsed
Time (hrs)
Δ | Total
Flow Readings
Saturated
Conductivity
10:50 6.75
Storage Tube 5L 2 On 105.000
Sight Tube 1L 1 On 20.000
S-103 NA
Constants:
Capacity
Liquid Containers 20 2.4
setting Rate cm³/cm
Test Constants
Municipal Water >120 71
5
Technician: Brad Carlson Date: 8/16/2018
Client Name: ACC Construction Company Report Number: 3
Compact Constant Head Permeameter - ASTM D-5126 {4.1.6}
In-situ Field Saturated Conductivity of Soils in the Vadose Zone via Amoozemeter
Project Name: SOF Parachute Rigging Facility Project Number: RD180419
of
Liquid Used: Depth of Water Table: Water Temp ( ºF): ºF
Test Location: Depth of Observed Water inches
Flow rate used: Hole Diameter: inches
Start Saturation: Water Head: inches
Hole Radius: Hole Depth: inches
S 12 :27
E 12 :30
S 12 :30
E 12 :33
S 12 :33
E 12 :36
S 12 :36
E 12 :39
S 12 :39
E 12 :42
S 12 :42
E 12 :45
S 12 :45
E 12 :48
S 12 :48
E 12 :51
S 12 :51
E 12 :54
S 12 :54
E 12 :57
S 12 :57
E 13 :00
S
E
S
E
S
E
Stabilized Ksat
in/hr 0.07 CCHP - 4
13
14
12
43.9411 0.078/16 10.40.55
12.2 20 36
8/16 0.05
0.078/16 12.20.50
14.0 20 36108/16 0.05
43.949
43.94
0.078/16 14.00.45
15.8 20 36
8/16 0.05
0.088/16 15.80.40
17.9 20 4288/16 0.05
48.827
51.26
0.088/16 17.90.35
19.9 20 40
8/16 0.05
0.088/16 19.90.30
22.0 20 4268/16 0.05
46.385
51.26
0.088/16 22.00.25
23.9 20 38
8/16 0.05
0.098/16 23.90.20
26.1 20 4448/16 0.05
46.383
53.70
0.088/16 26.10.15
28.0 20 38
8/16 0.05
0.098/16 28.00.10
30.3 20 4628/16 0.05
61.021
56.14
0.108/16 30.30.05
32.8 20 50
8/16 0.05
Remarks: Weather conditions, etc.Reading
Tube
Flow
Flow
cm³
Flow Rate
in³/hr Ksat in/hr
1.200 108
Test Data
Trial #Date Time
Elapsed
Time (hrs)
Δ | Total
Flow Readings
Saturated
Conductivity
12:21 15
Storage Tube 5L 2 On 105.000
Sight Tube 1L 1 On 20.000
S-104 NA
Constants:
Capacity
Liquid Containers 20 2.4
setting Rate cm³/cm
Test Constants
Municipal Water >120 71
5
Technician: Brad Carlson Date: 8/16/2018
Client Name: ACC Construction Company Report Number: 4
Compact Constant Head Permeameter - ASTM D-5126 {4.1.6}
In-situ Field Saturated Conductivity of Soils in the Vadose Zone via Amoozemeter
Project Name: SOF Parachute Rigging Facility Project Number: RD180419
of
Liquid Used: Depth of Water Table: Water Temp ( ºF): ºF
Test Location: Depth of Observed Water inches
Flow rate used: Hole Diameter: inches
Start Saturation: Water Head: inches
Hole Radius: Hole Depth: inches
S 13 :45
E 13 :48
S 13 :48
E 13 :51
S 13 :51
E 13 :54
S 13 :54
E 13 :57
S 13 :57
E 14 :00
S 14 :00
E 14 :03
S 14 :03
E 14 :06
S 14 :06
E 14 :09
S
E
S
E
S
E
S
E
S
E
S
E
Stabilized Ksat
in/hr 0.10 CCHP - 5
13
14
12
11
10
9
0.108/16 19.20.40
21.1 20 3888/16 0.05
46.387
46.38
0.108/16 21.10.35
23.0 20 38
8/16 0.05
0.108/16 23.00.30
24.9 20 3868/16 0.05
51.265
46.38
0.118/16 24.90.25
27.0 20 42
8/16 0.05
0.118/16 27.00.20
29.0 20 4048/16 0.05
53.703
48.82
0.128/16 29.00.15
31.2 20 44
8/16 0.05
0.158/16 31.20.10
34.0 20 5628/16 0.05
95.201
68.35
0.218/16 34.00.05
37.9 20 78
8/16 0.05
Remarks: Weather conditions, etc.Reading
Tube
Flow
Flow
cm³
Flow Rate
in³/hr Ksat in/hr
1.200 120
Test Data
Trial #Date Time
Elapsed
Time (hrs)
Δ | Total
Flow Readings
Saturated
Conductivity
13:40 12.5
Storage Tube 5L 2 On 105.000
Sight Tube 1L 1 On 20.000
S-105 NA
Constants:
Capacity
Liquid Containers 20 2.4
setting Rate cm³/cm
Test Constants
Municipal Water >120 71
5
Technician: Brad Carlson Date: 8/16/2018
Client Name: ACC Construction Company Report Number: 5
Compact Constant Head Permeameter - ASTM D-5126 {4.1.6}
In-situ Field Saturated Conductivity of Soils in the Vadose Zone via Amoozemeter
Project Name: SOF Parachute Rigging Facility Project Number: RD180419
3DJH_$

*(27(&+1,&$/&$/&8/$7,216$03/(6




Settle3D Analysis Information
Parachute Facility

Project Settings
B-101Document Name
Parachute FacilityProject Title
Settlement B-101Analysis
JRJAuthor
Building & EarthCompany
8/16/2018, 1:33:53 PMDate Created
BoussinesqStress Computation Method
0.9Minimum settlement ratio for subgrade modulus

Use average properties to calculate layered stresses

Improve consolidation accuracy

Ignore negative effective stresses in settlement calculations

Stage Settings
NameStage #
Stage 11

Loads
1. Rectangular Load: "7' SQ Column"
7 ftLength
7 ftWidth
0 degreesRotation angle
FlexibleLoad Type
49 ft2Area of Load
2.5 ksfLoad
0 ftDepth
Stage 1Installation Stage

Coordinates
Y [ft]X [ft]
10.1866.924
10.18613.924
17.18613.924
17.1866.924

Parachute Facility: Page 1 of 4
SETTLE3D 4.015
B-101.s3z Building & Earth 8/16/2018, 1:33:53 PM
2. Rectangular Load: "Continuous Footing"
30 ftLength
2 ftWidth
0 degreesRotation angle
FlexibleLoad Type
60 ft2Area of Load
2.5 ksfLoad
0 ftDepth
Stage 1Installation Stage

Coordinates
Y [ft]X [ft]
-7.56-4.348
-7.5625.652
-5.5625.652
-5.56-4.348

Empirical Results
7' SQ Column
NoModified Schmertmann
NoConsider Time Dependent Settlement

Sat. Unit Weight [kips/ft3]Unit Weight [kips/ft3]Es [ksf]Thickness [ft]Schmertmann Method
0.1150.19221Layer 1
0.1150.19221Layer 2
0.1150.18631Layer 3
0.1150.19381Layer 4
0.1150.111301Layer 5
0.1150.1126310Layer 6

Settlement Results
Schmertmann [in]
0.114627Stage 1

Continuous Footing
NoModified Schmertmann
NoConsider Time Dependent Settlement

Sat. Unit Weight [kips/ft3]Unit Weight [kips/ft3]Es [ksf]Thickness [ft]Schmertmann Method
0.0180.14961Layer 1
0.0180.14961Layer 2
0.0180.14961Layer 3
0.0180.14131Layer 4
0.0180.14421Layer 5
0.0180.1137510Layer 6

Parachute Facility: Page 2 of 4
SETTLE3D 4.015
B-101.s3z Building & Earth 8/16/2018, 1:33:53 PM
Settlement Results
Schmertmann [in]
0.0737962Stage 1

Soil Layers
Depth [ft]Thickness [ft]TypeLayer #
01Soil Property 11
11Soil Property 22
23Soil Property 33
54Soil Property 44
94Soil Property 55
134Soil Property 16

Parachute Facility: Page 3 of 4
SETTLE3D 4.015
B-101.s3z Building & Earth 8/16/2018, 1:33:53 PM
Soil Properties
Soil Property 4Soil Property 3Soil Property 2Soil Property 1Property
____________Color
0.1150.1150.1150.115Unit Weight [kips/ft3]
0.1150.1150.1150.115Saturated Unit Weight [kips/ft3]
1111K0

EnabledEnabledEnabledEnabledPrimary Consolidation
Non-LinearNon-LinearNon-LinearNon-LinearMaterial Type
0.30.30.30.3Cc
0.10.10.10.1Cr
1.11.11.11.1e0
1111OCR

0000Undrained Su A [kips/ft2]
0.20.20.20.2Undrained Su S
0.80.80.80.8Undrained Su m
0000Piezo Line ID

Soil Property 5Property
___Color
0.115Unit Weight [kips/ft3]
0.115Saturated Unit Weight [kips/ft3]
1K0

EnabledPrimary Consolidation
Non-LinearMaterial Type
0.3Cc
0.1Cr
1.1e0
1OCR

0Undrained Su A [kips/ft2]
0.2Undrained Su S
0.8Undrained Su m
0Piezo Line ID

Groundwater
Piezometric LinesGroundwater method
0.0624 kips/ft3Water Unit Weight

Parachute Facility: Page 4 of 4
SETTLE3D 4.015
B-101.s3z Building & Earth 8/16/2018, 1:33:53 PM
Continuous FootingSchmertmann: 0.07 in7' SQ ColumnSchmertmann: 0.11 in7' SQ ColumnSchmertmann: 0.11 inContinuous FootingSchmertmann: 0.07 in3020100-10-100102030Analysis DescriptionSettlement B-101CompanyBuilding & EarthDrawn ByJRJFile NameB-101.s3zDate8/16/2018, 1:33:53 PMProjectParachute FacilitySETTLE3D 4.015
Pavement Design ReportU.S. Army Corps of EngineersPCASE Version 2.09.05Date : 8/20/2018Design Name : LD FLEXDesign Type : RoadsPavement Type : FlexibleRoad Type : Parking AreaTerrain Type : FlatAnalysis Type : CBRDepth of Frost (in) : 0Wander Width (in) : 33.35Layer InformationLayer Type Material Type Frost Code AnalysisNon frost Design Thickness (in)Reduced Subgrade Strength (in)Limited Subgrade Penetration (in)CBR StrengthAsphalt Asphalt NFS Compute 2 0 0 0BaseUnbound Crushed StoneNFS Manual 6 0 0 100Natural Subgrade Cohesive Cut NFS Manual 0 0 0 5Traffic InformationPattern Name : LIGHT DUTYVehicles Weight (lb)Passes per Life SpanEquivalent PassesM1114, HMMWV, UPARMORED, 4X410000 4562500 4562500M1114, HMMWV, UPARMORED, 4X410000 4562500PCASE Equivalent Single Axle Loads377
Pavement Thickness ReportU.S. Army Corps of EngineersPCASE Version 2.09.05Date : 8/20/2018Design Name : HD RIGIDDesign Type : RoadsPavement Type : RigidRoad Type : Parking AreaTerrain Type : FlatAnalysis Type : KDepth of Frost (in) : 0Wander Width (in) : 33.35% Load Transfer : 25Effective K (pci) : 130Reduced Sub Effective K (pci) : 0Joint Spacing : 10 to 15 ftDowel Spacing : 12.00 inDowel Length : 16.00 inDowel Diameter: .75 inLayer InformationLayer Type Material Type Frost CodeFlexural Strength (psi)% SteelAnalysisNon frost Design Thickness (in)Reduced Subgrade Strength (in)Limited Subgrade Penetration (in)K Strength (pci)PCC N/A NFS 650 0 Compute 7.88 0 0 0Stabilized Base Stab-GW,GP,GM, NFS 0 0 Manual 8 0 0 0Natural Subgrade Cohesive Cut NFS 0 0 Manual 0 0 0 130Traffic InformationPattern Name : HEAVY DURYVehicles Weight (lb)Passes per Life SpanEquivalent PassesAXLE, 18 KIP 72000 18250 18250CMP 60 FORKLIFT 10000 1300 1M998, HMMWV, 1.25-TON CARRIER, 4X410000 4562500 1P-23 CRASH TRUCK (FIRE TRUCK)77880 1300 1TRUCK, 3 AXLE 66000 1300 1AXLE, 18 KIP 72000 18254PCASE Equivalent Single Axle Loads5.762E+15
3DJH_$

,03257$17,1)250$7,21$%2877+,6*(27(&+1,&$/
(1*,1((5,1*5(3257





















3DJH_$




Parachute Rigging Facility
Fort Bragg, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Mason & Hanger Page - a.8 -

APPENDIX H
NCDEQ BIORETENTION CELL SUPPLEMENT FORMS

Discrete SCS Curve Number Method (NCDEQ Stormwater BMP Manual 3.3.2)
Location:Bioretention Area 1 Date:1/7/2019
Soil Group:C
Predevelopment BUA Developed BUA
Area 0.93 acres Area 2.52 acres
Area 40,511 sf Area 109,984 sf
CN*98 CN*98
S 0.20 S 0.20
ia 0.04 in ia 0.04 in
P 1 in P 1 in
Q 0.79 in Q 0.79 in
V 2,670 cf V 7,249 cf
Predevelopment Open Area Developed Open Area
Area 7.92 acres Area 6.33 acres
Area 345,209 sf Area 275,736 sf
CN*76 CN*74
S 3.16 S 3.51
ia 0.63 in ia 0.70 in
P 1 in P 1 in
Q 0.04 in Q 0.02 in
V 1,107 cf V 533 cf
Area 8.85 acres Area 8.85 acres
Total 3,777 cf Total 7,782 cf
Storage Required 4,005 cf
Surface Area 9,200 sf
Riser 9 in
Storage Provided 6,900 cf
Note: Runnoff depth for CN <= 70 set to 0.00 for 1.0" rainfall event based upon
TR55 Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds Table 2-1
*Composite CN calculated using Army LID Planning and Cost Tool
Developed by USACE Baltimore District and USACE ERDC
Discrete SCS Curve Number Method (NCDEQ Stormwater BMP Manual 3.3.2)
Location:Bioretention Area 2 Date:1/7/2019
Soil Group:B
Predevelopment BUA Developed BUA
Area 0.13 acres Area 0.85 acres
Area 5,663 sf Area 37,026 sf
CN*98 CN*98
S 0.20 S 0.20
ia 0.04 in ia 0.04 in
P 1 in P 1 in
Q 0.79 in Q 0.79 in
V 373 cf V 2,440 cf
Predevelopment Open Area Developed Open Area
Area 2.83 acres Area 2.11 acres
Area 123,275 sf Area 91,912 sf
CN*60 CN*61
S 6.67 S 6.39
ia 1.33 in ia 1.28 in
P 1 in P 1 in
Q 0.00 in Q 0.00 in
V 0 cf V 0 cf
Area 2.96 acres Area 2.96 acres
Total 373 cf Total 2,440 cf
Storage Required 2,067 cf
Surface Area 5,000 sf
Riser 9 in
Storage Provided 3,750 cf
Note: Runnoff depth for CN <= 70 set to 0.00 for 1.0" rainfall event based upon
TR55 Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds Table 2-1
*Composite CN calculated using Army LID Planning and Cost Tool
Developed by USACE Baltimore District and USACE ERDC
QuantityInfiltration SystemBioretention Cell 2Wet PondStormwater WetlandPermeable PavementSand FilterRainwater HarvestingGreen RoofLevel Spreader-Filter StripDisconnected Impervious SurfaceTreatment SwaleDry PondApplicant:Name and Title:Organization:Street address:City, State, Zip:Phone number(s):Email:DesignerCertification Statement:Signature of DesignerDateEmail:Bldg 3-1333 Butner RdFort Bragg, NC 28310(910) 396-2301Company:Contact:Mailing Address:City, State, Zip:Project Name:AddressCity / TownFort Bragg DPWLee WardSOF Parachute Rigging FacilityFort BraggSUPPLEMENT-EZ FORM COVER PAGESealviolations as well as a report being made to my professional board. - that the information provided in the form is, to the best of my knowledge - that the engineering plans, specifications, operation and maintenancethe information provided here.I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting falseinformation including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing and belief, true, accurate, and complete; andagreements and other supporting information are consistent with I certify, under penalty of law: that this Supplement-EZ form and all supportinginformation were prepared under my direction or supervision; Designer information for this project:Location(s)Please indicate the types, quantities and locations of SCMs that will be used on this project:[e-mail] number(s):Mike Mayer, Civil EngineerMason & Hanger300 W Vine St Suite 1300Lexington, KY [e-mail] Page13:48 PM 2/4/2019
BIORETENTION CELL1Drainage area number1Total coastal wetlands area (sq ft) sf - Parking / driveway (sq ft)52134 sfTotal surface water area (sq ft) sf - Sidewalk (sq ft)1850 sfTotal drainage area (sq ft)385720 sf - Roof (sq ft)56000 sfBUA associated with existing development (sq ft)40511 sf - Roadway (sq ft) sfProposed new BUA (sq ft)109984 sf - Other, please specify in the comment box below (sq ft) sfPercent BUA of drainage area29%Total BUA (sq ft)109984 sfDesign rainfall depth (in)1.0 inMinimum volume required (cu ft)4005 cfDesign volume of SCM (cu ft)6900 cf#1 Is the SCM sized to treat the SW from all surfaces at build-out?Yes#7 If applicable, with the SCM be cleaned out after construction?Yes#2 Is the SCM located on or near contaminated soils?No#8 Does the mainetenance access comply with General MDC (8)?Yes#3 What are the side slopes of the SCM (H:V)?3:1#9 Does the drainage easement comply with General MDC (9)?Yes#3 Does the SCM have retaining walls, gabion walls or other engineered side slopes? No#10 If the SCM is on a single family lot, does the plat comply with General MDC (10)?Yes#4 Are the inlets, outlets, and receiving stream protected from erosion (10-year storm)? Yes#11 Is there an O&M Agreement that complies with General MDC (11)?Yes#5 Is there a a bypass for flows in excess of the design flow?Yes#12 Is there an O&M Plan that complies with General MDC (12)?Yes#6 What is the method for dewatering the SCM for maintenance?Other#13 Was the SCM designed by an NC licensed professional?Yes#1 SHWT elevation (fmsl)248 ft #6 Percentage of medium to coarse washed sand by volume 85%#1 Bottom of the bioretention cell (fmsl)250 ft #6 Percentage of fines (silt and clay) by volume10%#1 Distance from bottom to SHWT (feet)2 ft #6 Percentage of organic matter by volume 5%#2 Surface area of the bioretention cell (square feet)9200 sf#6 Type of organic materialEngineered Fill#2 Design volume of the bioretention cell (cubic feet)6900 cf#7 Phosphorus Index (P-Index) of media (unitless) 10#2 Ponding depth of the design storm (inches)9 in#8 Will compaction be avoided during construction?Yes#3 Is the bioretention cell used for peak attenuation?No#9 Will cell be maintained to a one inch/hour standard?Yes#3 Depth of peak attenuation over planting surface (in) in #10 Describe the planting plan:#3 Height of peak attenuation outlet above the planting surface (in) in#4 Infiltration rate of the in situ soil (inch/hour).1 in/hr#4 Diameter of the underdrain pipes (if applicable)8 in#4 Does the design include Internal Water Storage (IWS)?Yes #11 Depth of mulch, if applicable (inches) in#4 if so, elevation of the top of the IWS (fmsl)252 ft #11 Type of mulch, if applicablena#4 Elevation of the planting surface (fmsl)256 ft #12 How many clean out pipes are being installed?10#5 Will the cell contain trees and shrubs?No#12 Briefly describe the pretreatment that will be used:#5 Media depth (inches)30 inTHE DRAINAGE AREABIORETENTION CELL MDC FROM 02H .10522.0 feet of open graded aggregate being provided under engineered fill/media depth in order to provide additional storage volume within cell to meet requirements for EISA 438. The engineered fill will infiltrate at approximately 2in/hr (maintained at min 1in/hr), which will eliminate the surface ponded volume within 24 hours, to the storage within the IWS for ultimate infiltration. Additionally, behive grated catch basins are provided as first-line overflow, above required storage volume, but not for peak attenuation volume. Maximum depth of storage of cell to emergency overflow is 12". Emergency overflow weir designed for 100yr storm event. Project based entirely within Fort Bragg (US Gov't property). No easements required. User requires no hardwood mulch due to maintenance issues.Break down of BUA in the drainage area (both new and existing):COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE STORMWATER PROGRAMStormwater program(s) that apply (please specify):EISA 438, ARMY LID, FORT BRAGG IDGGENERAL MDC FROM 02H .1050ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONPlease use this space to provide any additional information about this bioretention cell that you think is relevant to the review:Contractor to provide landscape establishment to achieve 100% coverage throughout site in 12 months. Sod is desired by the user for cell. User requires no hardwood mulch within cell.Minimum 3' sod strip. All outlet headwalls to cell have rip-rap outlet protection per NCDEQ requirements.SOF Parachute Rigging FacilityBioretention110:58 AM 2/5/2019
BIORETENTION CELLSOF Parachute Rigging Facility2Drainage area number2Total coastal wetlands area (sq ft) sf - Parking / driveway (sq ft)6356 sfTotal surface water area (sq ft) sf - Sidewalk (sq ft)1250 sfTotal drainage area (sq ft)128938 sf - Roof (sq ft)29420 sfBUA associated with existing development (sq ft)5663 sf - Roadway (sq ft) sfProposed new BUA (sq ft)37026 sf - Other, please specify in the comment box below (sq ft) sfPercent BUA of drainage area29%Total BUA (sq ft)37026 sfDesign rainfall depth (in)1.0 inMinimum volume required (cu ft)2067 cfDesign volume of SCM (cu ft)3750 cf#1 Is the SCM sized to treat the SW from all surfaces at build-out?Yes#7 If applicable, with the SCM be cleaned out after construction?Yes#2 Is the SCM located on or near contaminated soils?No#8 Does the mainetenance access comply with General MDC (8)?Yes#3 What are the side slopes of the SCM (H:V)?3:1#9 Does the drainage easement comply with General MDC (9)?Yes#3 Does the SCM have retaining walls, gabion walls or other engineered side slopes? No#10 If the SCM is on a single family lot, does the plat comply with General MDC (10)?Yes#4 Are the inlets, outlets, and receiving stream protected from erosion (10-year storm)? Yes#11 Is there an O&M Agreement that complies with General MDC (11)?Yes#5 Is there a a bypass for flows in excess of the design flow?Yes#12 Is there an O&M Plan that complies with General MDC (12)?Yes#6 What is the method for dewatering the SCM for maintenance?Other#13 Was the SCM designed by an NC licensed professional?Yes#1 SHWT elevation (fmsl)249 ft #6 Percentage of medium to coarse washed sand by volume 85%#1 Bottom of the bioretention cell (fmsl)254 ft #6 Percentage of fines (silt and clay) by volume10%#1 Distance from bottom to SHWT (feet)5 ft #6 Percentage of organic matter by volume 5%#2 Surface area of the bioretention cell (square feet)5000 sf#6 Type of organic materialEngineered Fill#2 Design volume of the bioretention cell (cubic feet)3750 cf#7 Phosphorus Index (P-Index) of media (unitless) 10#2 Ponding depth of the design storm (inches)9 in#8 Will compaction be avoided during construction?Yes#3 Is the bioretention cell used for peak attenuation?No#9 Will cell be maintained to a one inch/hour standard?Yes#3 Depth of peak attenuation over planting surface (in) in #10 Describe the planting plan:#3 Height of peak attenuation outlet above the planting surface (in) in#4 Infiltration rate of the in situ soil (inch/hour).1 in/hr#4 Diameter of the underdrain pipes (if applicable)8 in#4 Does the design include Internal Water Storage (IWS)?Yes #11 Depth of mulch, if applicable (inches) in#4 if so, elevation of the top of the IWS (fmsl)256 ft #11 Type of mulch, if applicablena#4 Elevation of the planting surface (fmsl)260 ft #12 How many clean out pipes are being installed?5#5 Will the cell contain trees and shrubs?No#12 Briefly describe the pretreatment that will be used:#5 Media depth (inches)30 in2.0 feet of open graded aggregate being provided under engineered fill/media depth in order to provide additional storage volume within cell to meet requirements for EISA 438. The engineered fill will infiltrate at approximately 2in/hr (maintained at min 1in/hr), which will eliminate the surface ponded volume within 24 hours, to the storage within the IWS for ultimate infiltration. Additionally, behive grated catch basins are provided as first-line overflow, above required storage volume, but not for peak attenuation volume. Maximum depth of storage of cell to emergency overflow is 12". Emergency overflow weir designed for 100yr storm event. Project based entirely within Fort Bragg (US Gov't property). No easements required. User requires no hardwood mulch due to maintenance issues.GENERAL MDC FROM 02H .1050Contractor to provide landscape establishment to achieve 100% coverage throughout site in 12 months. Sod is desired by the user for cell. User requires no hardwood mulch within cell.Minimum 3' sod strip. All outlet headwalls to cell have rip-rap outlet protection per NCDEQ requirements.ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONTHE DRAINAGE AREABIORETENTION CELL MDC FROM 02H .1052Break down of BUA in the drainage area (both new and existing):COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE STORMWATER PROGRAMStormwater program(s) that apply (please specify):EISA 438, ARMY LID, FORT BRAGG IDGPlease use this space to provide any additional information about this bioretention cell that you think is relevant to the review:Bioretention24:24 PM 2/4/2019
Fort Bragg Parachute Rigging Facility PN74813
Bioretention Cell #1 Underdrain Calculations
1/31/2019
By M. Mayer
Engineered Fill Permeability (K)2 in/hr
Surface Area (A)9200 ft2
Maximum Ponding Depth (C H)3.25 ft
Depth of media (C L)2.5 ft
Flow (Qi)0.55 cfs
Apply 10x Factor of Safety (Q)5.50 cfs
Roughness Factor (n)0.01
Internal Slope (s)0.005
Darcy's Equation
Diameter of Single Pipe (d)15.09 in
Diameter Underdrain Pipes 8 in
Equavalent Number Required 6
Number Underdrain Pipes Provided 10
NCDEQ Stormwater BMP Manual Common BMP Design Elements, July 2007
5.7 Underdrain Systems
Fort Bragg Parachute Rigging Facility PN74813
Bioretention Cell #2 Underdrain Calculations
2/1/2019
By M. Mayer
Engineered Fill Permeability (K)2 in/hr
Surface Area (A)5000 ft2
Maximum Ponding Depth (C H)3.25 ft
Depth of media (C L)2.5 ft
Flow (Qi)0.30 cfs
Apply 10x Factor of Safety (Q)2.99 cfs
Roughness Factor (n)0.01
Internal Slope (s)0.005
Darcy's Equation
Diameter of Single Pipe (d)12.01 in
Diameter Underdrain Pipes 8 in
Equavalent Number Required 3
Number Underdrain Pipes Provided 5
NCDEQ Stormwater BMP Manual Common BMP Design Elements, July 2007
5.7 Underdrain Systems

Parachute Rigging Facility
Fort Bragg, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Mason & Hanger Page - a.9 -

APPENDIX I
OUTLET PROTECTION CALCULATIONS

User Input Data
Calculated Value
Reference Data
Designed By:FMM Date:10/29/2018
Checked By:Date:
Company:
Project Name:Parachute Rigging
Project No.:
Site Location (City/Town)Fort Bragg
Culvert Id.HW2
Total Drainage Area (acres)3.24
Rational Method for Flow
Outlet pipe diameter, Do (in.)30
Tailwater depth (in.) 15
Minimum/Maximum tailwater? Max TW (Fig. 8.06b)
Discharge (cfs)14.62
Velocity (ft./s)5.81
Minimum TW Maximum TW
Figure 8.06a Figure 8.06b
Riprap d50, (ft.)0.5 0.5
Minimum apron length, La (ft.)12
Apron width at pipe outlet (ft.) 7.5 7.5
Apron shape TRAPEZOID
Apron width at outlet end (ft.) 2.5 7.3
Minimum TW Maximum TW
Max Stone Diameter, dmax (ft.) 0.75 0.75
Minimum TW Maximum TW
Apron Thickness(ft.) 1.125 1.125
User Input Data
Calculated Value
Reference Data
Designed By:FMM Date:9/25/2018
Checked By: Date:
Company:
Project Name:Parachute Rigging
Project No.:
Site Location (City/Town)Fort Bragg
Culvert Id.HW3
Total Drainage Area (acres)0.41
Rational Method for Flow
Outlet pipe diameter, Do (in.)15
Tailwater depth (in.) 5.76
Minimum/Maximum tailwater? Min TW (Fig. 8.06a)
Discharge (cfs) 1.95
Velocity (ft./s) 4.43
Minimum TW Maximum TW
Figure 8.06a Figure 8.06b
Riprap d50, (ft.)0.5 0.5
Minimum apron length, La (ft.)8 8
Apron width at pipe outlet (ft.) 3.75 3.75
Apron shape TRAPEZOID TRAPEZOID
Apron width at outlet end (ft.) 9.25 4.45
Minimum TW Maximum TW
Max Stone Diameter, dmax (ft.) 0.75 0.75
Minimum TW Maximum TW
Apron Thickness(ft.) 1.125 1.125
User Input Data
Calculated Value
Reference Data
Designed By:FMM Date:9/25/2018
Checked By: Date:
Company:
Project Name:Parachute Rigging
Project No.:
Site Location (City/Town)Fort Bragg
Culvert Id.HW5
Total Drainage Area (acres)0.41
Rational Method for Flow
Outlet pipe diameter, Do (in.)15
Tailwater depth (in.) 5.8
Minimum/Maximum tailwater? Min TW (Fig. 8.06a)
Discharge (cfs) 1.56
Velocity (ft./s) 3.59
Minimum TW Maximum TW
Figure 8.06a Figure 8.06b
Riprap d50, (ft.)0.5 0.5
Minimum apron length, La (ft.)8 8
Apron width at pipe outlet (ft.) 3.75 3.75
Apron shape TRAPEZOID TRAPEZOID
Apron width at outlet end (ft.) 9.25 4.45
Minimum TW Maximum TW
Max Stone Diameter, dmax (ft.) 0.75 0.75
Minimum TW Maximum TW
Apron Thickness(ft.) 1.125 1.125
User Input Data
Calculated Value
Reference Data
Designed By:FMM Date:9/25/2018
Checked By: Date:
Company:
Project Name:Parachute Rigging
Project No.:
Site Location (City/Town)Fort Bragg
Culvert Id.HW6
Total Drainage Area (acres)0.38
Rational Method for Flow
Outlet pipe diameter, Do (in.)15
Tailwater depth (in.) 7
Minimum/Maximum tailwater? Min TW (Fig. 8.06a)
Discharge (cfs) 2.81
Velocity (ft./s) 4.62
Minimum TW Maximum TW
Figure 8.06a Figure 8.06b
Riprap d50, (ft.)0.5 0.5
Minimum apron length, La (ft.)8 8
Apron width at pipe outlet (ft.) 3.75 3.75
Apron shape TRAPEZOID TRAPEZOID
Apron width at outlet end (ft.) 9.25 4.45
Minimum TW Maximum TW
Max Stone Diameter, dmax (ft.) 0.75 0.75
Minimum TW Maximum TW
Apron Thickness(ft.) 1.125 1.125
User Input Data
Calculated Value
Reference Data
Designed By:FMM Date:9/25/2018
Checked By: Date:
Company:
Project Name:Parachute Rigging
Project No.:
Site Location (City/Town)Fort Bragg
Culvert Id.HW8
Total Drainage Area (acres)0.38
Rational Method for Flow
Outlet pipe diameter, Do (in.)15
Tailwater depth (in.) 10.7
Minimum/Maximum tailwater? Max TW (Fig. 8.06b)
Discharge (cfs) 4.26
Velocity (ft./s) 4.55
Minimum TW Maximum TW
Figure 8.06a Figure 8.06b
Riprap d50, (ft.)0.5 0.5
Minimum apron length, La (ft.)8
Apron width at pipe outlet (ft.) 3.75 3.75
Apron shape TRAPEZOID
Apron width at outlet end (ft.) 1.25 4.45
Minimum TW Maximum TW
Max Stone Diameter, dmax (ft.) 0.75 0.75
Minimum TW Maximum TW
Apron Thickness(ft.) 1.125 1.125