Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutATF Infrastructure - Storm Water Design Narrative - 03-20-2019               PN 80037  ATF Infrastructure  STORM WATER MANAGEMENT & STORM DRAIN DESIGN  March 20, 2019                          American States Utility Services March 20, 2019  ATF Infrastructure – Storm Water Management & Storm Drainage Design      Page | 1              TABLE OF CONTENTS  1.0   INTRODUCTION  2.0   STORM WATER MANAGEMENT  3.0   STORM DRAIN DESIGN    APPENDIX  A ‐ Bioretention Pond #1 Calculations  B ‐ Bioretention Pond #2 Calculations  C ‐ Sediment Basin #1 Calculations  D ‐ Sediment Trap #2 Calculations  E ‐ Storm Drainage Piping and Ditch Calculations  F‐ Building and Earth Sciences Geotechnical Report – 11/27/2018  G‐ Building and Earth Sciences SHWT / Infiltration Report – 02/05/2019  H ‐ Fort Bragg Rainfall Depth and Intensity Charts  I ‐ NCRS Riprap Outlet Design Chart  J ‐ Specification Section 33 40 00 Storm Drainage Utilities  K ‐ Specification Section 33 46 11.23 Storm Water Bioretention Pond                    American States Utility Services March 20, 2019  ATF Infrastructure – Storm Water Management & Storm Drainage Design      Page | 2              1.0 INTRODUCTION  This project consists of the design and construction of a new gravity sewer collection  system, a new lift station, and a new force main to collect the existing and future sanitary  sewer waste flows from the Aberdeen Training Facility and pump the collected wastewater  to the Town of Aberdeen’s existing sanitary sewer collection system. The project also  includes a new gravel access drive, to upgrade a portion of the existing perimeter road at  the ATF, to provide access to the lift station site.   Storm  Water  Management  and  Storm  Drainage  Design  are  to  be  provided for the  development of the Lift Station Access Road and the Lift Station Site.   2.0 STORM WATER MANAGEMENT  The existing ATF perimeter road outside of the fence is to be upgraded and replaced from  the ATF Access Control Point (ACP) to the proposed Lift Station site, approximately 1625  linear feet. The access road will be constructed as an 18‐foot wide gravel road with a cross  slope of 2‐percent, with a trapezoidal grass side ditch with a depth of 1‐foot (see plans for  detail). The proposed Lift Station site is approximately 55‐feet x 75‐feet, and will be  surfaced with stone and gravel.  The proposed road grading requires two separate bioretention areas one at the northeast  end of the access road and the other adjacent and southwest of the Lift Station site.  Drainage is conveyed to the bio‐retention areas by a grass channel lined with an erosion  control  blanket  along  the  southwest  side  of  the  access  road  with  inlets  and  piping  conveying the drainage from the roadside channel to bioretention areas, and piping from  the lift station site conveying drainage to the bioretention area.  The construction of the access road and Lift Station site will add impervious area as defined  under the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) regulations. Per  the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, Federal projects must comply with Section  438, which establishes strict stormwater runoff requirements for Federal development  and redevelopment projects. To comply with EISA 438 the 95th percentile storm event is  captured and infiltrated on site in the proposed bioretention areas. The 95th percentile  storm event is equivalent to 1.8‐inches of rainfall at Fort Bragg. The criteria required per  the NCDEQ storm water regulations were also reviewed and calculations provided. EISA  438 volume requirements superseded the NCDEQ requirements, so the bioretention cell      American States Utility Services March 20, 2019  ATF Infrastructure – Storm Water Management & Storm Drainage Design      Page | 3              volume is based on EISA 438 criteria (see calculations included in the appendix of this  report).  The proposed bioretention basins will consist of an open storage area for the runoff to  accumulate, a layer of mulch, a layer of media mix with a depth of 30‐inches for both  bioretention ponds, and an underdrain system.  Storm water accumulating up to the  overflow elevation will infiltrate into the ground and through the underdrain system. The  underdrain system is proposed to meet NCDEQ criteria requiring an undrain system if the  infiltration rate of the native soil is less than 2‐inches/hour. A maximum of 12‐inches of  open ponding storage is provided in the bioretention basins. Overflow events are captured  and directed to drainage courses that flow offsite.   Runoff to the bioretention cells to determine the required storage was calculated in  accordance  with  the  “Technical  Guidance  on  Implementing  the  Stormwater  Runoff  Requirements for Federal Projects under Section 438 of the Energy Independence and  Security Act”. The runoff and chainsaw routing for the bioretention basins for the 10‐year  and 100‐year storm events was calculated based on “Elements of Urban Stormwater  Design by H. Rooney Malcom ” published by North Carolina State University. Runoff depth  from the Fort Bragg runoff depth chart was used to determine runoff depth (see Appendix  for chart).  The bioretention basins will provide peak flow attenuation for the 10‐year storm event as  required by NCDEQ criteria, and will safely discharge the 100‐year storm event to the  outfalls (see attached chainsaw routing of the proposed bioretention basins).  A geotechnical investigation was performed by Building and Earth Sciences, and is included  in the Appendix of this report. Most of the site has well‐draining soils which will is suitable  for infiltration. Infiltration testing was also performed by Building and Earth Science, one  test for each bioretention cell, at the elevation of the discharge into the ground. Seasonal  high water table elevation was determined to be below the depth required to provide  adequate separation as required by NCDEQ for seasonal high water table. See attached  reports from Building and Earth Sciences in the Appendix.   Specifications for the Bioretention Pond are included in the Appendix.         American States Utility Services March 20, 2019  ATF Infrastructure – Storm Water Management & Storm Drainage Design      Page | 4              3.0 STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN  All storm drain piping was sized for the 10‐year storm design storm. Storm water runoff  for the storm drain piping was calculated utilizing the Rationale formula. Rainfall intensity  chart for Fort Bragg were used to calculate runoff (see Appendix for chart).  Pipe flow calculations were performed utilizing the Manning’s formula for pipe flow. Inlet  capacity  was  calculated  utilizing  the  weir  and orifice  formulas.  Computations  for  the  roadside side ditches were calculated using the Manning’s equation for open channel flow.  Sizing of the Riprap outlet protection for the storm drain piping was done using the NCRS  Riprap chart for Minimum Tailwater Condition. The chart is included in the Appendix to  this report.  Specifications for the Storm Drainage are included in the Appendix.                               American States Utility Services March 20, 2019  ATF Infrastructure – Storm Water Management & Storm Drainage Design         Appendix A ‐ BIORETENTION POND #1 CALCULATIONS  PROJECT: ATF Infrastructure LS & Access RoadStorm Water Management Bioretention Pond 1 CalculationsPN 80037 ‐ GWO 253000289DRAINAGE AREADrainage Area Designation#1 ‐ Access Road = 44627 SF#2 ‐ Lift Station = 4030 SF#3 ‐ Pond Area = 7950 SFDrainage Area  =  1.30 AcresIMPERVIOUS AREALift Station Area = 4030 SFLift Station Access Road Area = 23100 SFOffsite Road Area = 0 SFTotal Developed Area =  27130 SFTotal BUA (Impervious Area) =  0.62 AcresWet Pond Area = 4250 SFTotal Wet Pond Area = 0.10 AcresPERVIOUS AREARemaining Direct Pond Area (Grass) = 3700 SF Pervious Area Adjacent to Access Road (Grass) = 21527 SFTotal Pervious Area = 0.58 AcresTotal Drainage Area =  1.30 AcresTREATMENT  VOLUME REQ'D NCDEQIA (Impervious Faction)= 0.52 IA = Impervious Area (Acres) / Total Drainage Area (Acres)RV (Runoff Coefficient) = 0.52 RV = 0.05 + 0.9 x IARD (Design Storm Depth) = 1.0 inches RD = 1.5‐inches Coastal Counties and 1.0‐inches Remaining Portions of NCA (Total Drainage Area) = 1.30 AcresDV (Design Volume) = 2440 Cubic Feet DV = 3630 x RD x RV x AEISA 438Soli Classification (Access Road and LS) ‐ Silty Sands (SM), Clayey Sands (SC)Maximum Infiltration Rate = 2.27 inches/hour From Infiltration Test by Building & Earth Sciences ‐ Infiltration Test for Boring 202 ‐ 02/01/2019Minimum Infiltration Rate = 0.1 inches/hour From Infiltration Test by Savannah District Phase 1 detention pondDecay Factor = 2 /hourPervious Area Depression Storage = 0.2 inches EISA Guidance95th Percentile 24 hour Rainfall = 1.8 inches Fort Bragg Installation Design GuidelinesRunoff = Rainfall ‐ Depression Storage ‐ Infiltration Loss (EISA Guidance)Impervious Area Runoff = 1.7 inches EISA Guidance ‐ Depression Storage = 0.1 inches ‐ Infiltration Loss = 0Pervious Area Runoff = 0.0 inches EISA Guidance ‐ Depression Storage = 0.2 inches ‐ Infiltration Loss > 1.6 inches (over 24 hours)Site Runoff = 0.88 inches Site Runoff =  (Impervious Area R.O. X Impervious Acres + Pervious Area R.O. X Pervious Acres)/(Total Site Area ‐ Pond Area)Site Area ‐ Pond Area = 1.20 AcresStorage Required =  3840 Cubic Feet S = Site Runoff x Total Site Area ‐ Pond Area) USE FOR BIORETENTION STORAGE VOLUME"Technical Guidance on Implementing the Stormwater Runoff Requirements for Federal Projects under Section 438 of the Energy Independence and Security Act" (EISA Guidance), EPA December 2009. PROJECT: ATF Infrastructure LS & Access RoadStorm Water Management Bioretention Pond 1 CalculationsPN 80037 ‐ GWO 253000289RUNOFF DATAPRE‐DEVELOPMENT RUNOFFComposite C‐factor Pre‐DevelopmentC Area (Acres) C x A PercentExisting Road = 0.60 0.24 0.142 18%Pervious =  0.30 1.06 0.319 82%Total =  1.30 0.461 100%Composite "C" =  0.35i10 = 6.32 inches/hour Based on duration of 10 minutes ‐ NOAA Data ‐ Fort Bragg, NCExisting Q10 = 2.9 CFS Q (Flowrate) = CiA ‐ Rationale FormulaPOST‐DEVELOPMENT RUNOFFComposite C‐factor Post‐DevelopmentC Area (Acres) C x A PercentImpervious =  0.95 0.62 0.59 48%Pond =  1.00 0.10 0.10 8%Pervious =  0.30 0.58 0.17 45%Total =  1.30 0.86 100%Composite "C" =  0.66i10 = 7.91 inches/hour Based on duration of 5 minutes ‐ NOAA Data ‐ Fort Bragg, NCPost Q10 (Qo) = 6.8 CFS Q (Flowrate) = CiA ‐ Rationale Formulai100 = 10.00 inches/hour Based on duration of 5 minutes ‐ NOAA Data ‐ Fort Bragg, NCPost Q100 (Qo) = 8.6 CFS Q (Flowrate) = CiA ‐ Rationale FormulaPOND DESIGN DATAHYDROGRAPH DEVELOPMENTCN Area (Acres) CN x A PercentImpervious =  98 0.62 61.0 48%Pond =  98 0.10 9.6 8%Pervious =  49 0.58 28.4 45%Total =  1.30 99.0 100% Composite CN = 76 use CN = 75S = 3.3 S = (1000/CN) ‐ 10 ‐ NCRS TR55 equation 2‐4P = 3.90 inches Depth of Runoff (10‐year storm ‐ 6‐hour duration) ‐ NOAA Data ‐ Fort Bragg, NCRunoff Volume (10‐year ‐ 6‐hour) = 1.59 inches Runoff Volume = (P‐0.2S)2  / (P+0.8S)  ‐ NCRS TR55 equation 2‐3Tp (time to peak 10 year) = 13.2 minutes Tp = Runoff Volume x Drainage Area / 1.39 * Peak FlowEstimated 10 year S = 3100 Cubic Feet Estimated Storage = (Qp‐Qo) x Tp ‐ Qo = Pre‐Development Peak FlowP = 5.94 inches Depth of Runoff (100‐year storm ‐ 6‐hour duration) ‐ NOAA Data ‐ Fort Bragg, NCRunoff Volume (100‐year ‐ 6‐hour) = 3.23 inches Runoff Volume = (P‐0.2S)2  / (P+0.8S)  ‐ NCRS TR55 equation 2‐3Tp (time to peak 100 year) = 21.2 minutes Tp = Runoff Volume x Drainage Area / 1.39 * Peak Flow PROJECT: ATF Infrastructure LS & Access RoadStorm Water Management Bioretention Pond 1 CalculationsPN 80037 ‐ GWO 253000289POND VOLUMEElevation Area (SF) Volume (CF) Volume (Ac‐ft)415 3452 0 0.00416 4254 3853 0.09417 5113 8537 0.20418 6028 14107 0.32INFILTRATION DESIGNKsat = 2.27 inches/hour From Hydraulic Conductivity  Test by Building & Earth Sciences ‐ Ksat for Boring 202 ‐ 02/01/2019Minimum Ksat for  Underdrains NOT Being Required = 2 inches/hour Underdrain is NOT required ‐ NCDEQ Stormwater Design ManualUnderdrain will be provided as a precaution due to the hydraulic conductivity rate minimially above required minimum Average Soil Media Design Flow (K) = 3.5 inches/hour Based on average of required Media Hydraulic Conductivity0.000081 ft/secCrosssectional  Area = 100 SF A = Depth of Media x Average Pond Width (perpendicular to flow direction) = 30"/12"/ft x 40‐feetHydraulic Gradient = 1.0000 ft/ft dh/dl = 12" depth of pondingFlow to Underdrain  x Safety Factor of 10 = 0.0810 CFS Qud = KA dh/dl x 10S = 0.25 % Slope of the Hydraulic Gradientn = 0.011 Manning n‐factor (0.011 for PVC)Underdrain Size Required = 3.5 Diameter = 16(Qud x n/S1/2)3/8Underdrain Size Provided = 4 ‐inch Perforated PVCNumber of Pipes Required = 2INLET BOXWeir Length = 24 inches Use 36" X 36" Inside Dimension Precast Inlet Box with 24" x 10" high Weir in one side of boxCw = 3.0 Broad Crested WeirTop of Weir El. = 416.0Q = Cw * Weir Length * H1.5416.5Stage El h (feet) Q (CFS)416.0 0.0 0.0416.25 0.3 0.8416.50 0.5 2.1416.75 0.8 3.9417.00 1.0 6.0SPILLWAY FLOWWeir Length = 10 feet Use 10' wide trapezoid section spillwayCw = 3.0 Broad Crested WeirTop of Weir El. = 416.5Q = Cw * Weir Length * H1.5  ‐ Conservative Estimate of Spillway FlowStage El h (feet) Q (CFS)416.5 0.0 0416.75 0.3 4417.00 0.5 11417.25 0.8 19417.50 1.0 30 PROJECT: ATF Infrastructure LS & Access RoadStorm Water Management Bioretention Pond 1 CalculationsPN 80037 ‐ GWO 253000289INLET BOX FLOTATION COMPUTATIONSInside Length Inlet Box =  3 feetInside Width of Inlet Box =  3 feetInvert of Inlet Box Elevation =  411.50Top of Inlet Box Elevation =  417.33Weir Height (if applicable) =  10 inchesWeir Width (if applicable) =  24 inchesNumber of Weirs (if applicable) =  1Inside Volume of Inlet Box =  52.5 cubic feetUnit Weight of Water =  62.4 lbs/cubic footWater Displaced =  3276 lbsWall Thickness =  4 inchesBase Thickness =  4 inchesTop Thickness =  4 inchesDiameter of Manhole in Top =  24 inchesUnit Weight of Concrete =  150 lbs/cubic footVolume of Concrete Walls =  25.4 cubic feetVolume of Concrete Base =  4.5 cubic feetVolume of Concrete Top =  3.4 cubic feetVolume of Concrete 33.3 cubic feetWeight of Manhole Cover & Frame =  100 lbsWeight of Inlet Box =  5093 lbsOK PROJECT: ATF Infrastructure LS & Access Road Storm Water Management Bioretention Pond 1 Calculations PN 80037 ‐ GWO 253000289 10 YEAR ROUTING Time Interval = 1.5 Minutes Qp = 6.8 CFS 10‐year peak flow Tp = 13.2 minutes INLET BOX Weir Length = 24 inches Cw =3.0 Top Weir El. = 416.0 Outflow =Cw * Weir Length * H1.5 Elevation Area (SF) Volume (CF) Volume (Ac‐ft) 415 3452 0 0.00 416 4254 3853 0.09 417 5113 8537 0.20 418 6028 14107 0.32 TIME INFLOW ΔS STORAGE STAGE OUTFLOW 0 0.0 0 0 415.00 0.00 1.5 0.2 19 19 415.01 0.00 3 0.8 75 95 415.02 0.00 4.5 1.8 160 255 415.07 0.00 6 2.9 264 518 415.13 0.00 7.5 4.1 373 891 415.23 0.00 9 5.3 474 1365 415.35 0.00 10.5 6.1 553 1918 415.50 0.00 12 6.7 602 2520 415.65 0.00 13.5 6.8 614 3134 415.81 0.00 15 6.5 586 3720 415.97 0.00 16.5 5.8 524 4245 416.08 0.15 18 5.0 439 4684 416.18 0.45 19.5 4.3 350 5034 416.25 0.76 21 3.7 268 5302 416.31 1.03 22.5 3.2 197 5500 416.35 1.25 24 2.8 138 5637 416.38 1.41 25.5 2.4 89 5726 416.40 1.52 27 2.1 50 5776 416.41 1.58 28.5 1.8 19 5795 416.41 1.60 30 1.5 ‐6 5789 416.41 1.60 31.5 1.3 ‐24 5765 416.41 1.57 33 1.1 ‐38 5728 416.40 1.52 34.5 1.0 ‐48 5680 416.39 1.46 36 0.9 ‐55 5625 416.38 1.40 37.5 0.7 ‐59 5566 416.37 1.33 39 0.6 ‐62 5503 416.35 1.26 40.5 0.5 ‐64 5440 416.34 1.18 42 0.5 ‐64 5376 416.33 1.11 43.5 0.4 ‐63 5312 416.31 1.04 45 0.4 ‐62 5250 416.30 0.98 46.5 0.3 ‐61 5189 416.29 0.91 48 0.3 ‐59 5131 416.27 0.85 49.5 0.2 ‐57 5074 416.26 0.80 51 0.2 ‐54 5020 416.25 0.75 Note ‐ Chainsaw Routing per "Elements of Urban Stormwater Design" ‐ H. Malcom Rooney ‐ North Carolina Sate University ‐ 1989 PROJECT: ATF Infrastructure LS & Access Road Storm Water Management Bioretention Pond 1 Calculations PN 80037 ‐ GWO 253000289 100 YEAR ROUTING Time Interval = 2 Minutes Qp = 8.6 CFS 100‐year peak flow Tp = 21.2 minutes INLET BOX SPILLWAY Weir Length = 24 inches Weir Length = 10 feet Cw =3.0 Cw =3.0 Top Weir El. = 416.0 Top Weir El. = 416.5 Outflow =Cw * Weir Length * H1.5 Outflow =Cw * Weir Length * H1.5 Elevation Area (SF) Volume (CF) Volume (Ac‐ft) 415 3452 0 0.00 416 4254 3853 0.09 417 5113 8537 0.20 418 6028 14107 0.32 TIME  (min) INFLOW  (CFS) ΔS          (cubic  feet) STORAGE (cubic  feet) STAGE  (El.) WEIR (cfs) SPILLWAY  (cfs) OUTFLOW  (cfs) 0 0.0 0 0 415.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 2 0.2 23 23 415.01 0.00 0.0 0.0 4 0.7 89 111 415.03 0.00 0.0 0.0 6 1.6 192 303 415.08 0.00 0.0 0.0 8 2.7 324 627 415.16 0.00 0.0 0.0 10 3.9 473 1100 415.29 0.00 0.0 0.0 12 5.2 625 1725 415.45 0.00 0.0 0.0 14 6.4 769 2494 415.65 0.00 0.0 0.0 16 7.4 890 3384 415.88 0.00 0.0 0.0 18 8.2 979 4363 416.11 0.22 0.0 0.2 20 8.6 1002 5365 416.32 1.10 0.0 1.1 22 8.6 900 6265 416.51 2.22 0.1 2.3 24 8.3 718 6983 416.67 3.28 2.1 5.3 26 7.6 267 7250 416.73 3.71 3.2 6.9 28 6.7 ‐24 7226 416.72 3.67 3.1 6.8 30 5.9 ‐99 7127 416.70 3.51 2.7 6.2 32 5.3 ‐110 7017 416.68 3.33 2.2 5.5 34 4.6 ‐107 6910 416.65 3.16 1.8 5.0 36 4.1 ‐101 6808 416.63 3.01 1.4 4.4 38 3.6 ‐96 6713 416.61 2.86 1.1 4.0 40 3.2 ‐90 6623 416.59 2.73 0.8 3.6 42 2.8 ‐86 6537 416.57 2.60 0.6 3.2 44 2.5 ‐82 6455 416.56 2.48 0.4 2.9 46 2.2 ‐79 6377 416.54 2.37 0.2 2.6 48 2.0 ‐76 6300 416.52 2.27 0.1 2.4 50 1.7 ‐75 6225 416.51 2.16 0.0 2.2 52 1.5 ‐77 6148 416.49 2.06 0.0 2.1 Note ‐ Chainsaw Routing per "Elements of Urban Stormwater Design" ‐ H. Malcom Rooney ‐ North Carolina Sate University ‐ 1989     American States Utility Services March 20, 2019  ATF Infrastructure – Storm Water Management & Storm Drainage Design                       Appendix B ‐ BIORETENTION POND #2 CALCULATIONS  PROJECT: ATF Infrastructure LS & Access RoadStorm Water Management Bioretention Pond 2 CalculationsPN 80037 ‐ GWO 253000289DRAINAGE AREADrainage Area Designation#4 ‐ Access Road = 18670 SF#5 ‐ Pond Area = 3206 SFDrainage Area  =  0.50 AcresIMPERVIOUS AREALift Station Access Road Area = 6237 SFOffsite Road Area = 3300 SFTotal Developed Area =  9537 SFTotal BUA (Impervious Area) =  0.22 AcresWet Pond Area = 1567 SFTotal Wet Pond Area = 0.04 AcresPERVIOUS AREARemaining Direct Pond Area (Grass) = 1639 SF Pervious Area Adjacent to Access Road (Grass) = 9133 SFTotal Pervious Area = 0.25 AcresTotal Drainage Area =  0.50 AcresTREATMENT  VOLUME REQ'D NCDEQIA (Impervious Faction)=0.47IA= Impervious Area (Acres) / Total Drainage Area (Acres)RV (Runoff Coefficient) =0.47RV= 0.05 + 0.9 x IARD (Design Storm Depth) =1.0 inchesRD= 1.5‐inches Coastal Counties and 1.0‐inches Remaining Portions of NCA (Total Drainage Area) = 0.50 AcresDV (Design Volume) = 860 Cubic FeetDV = 3630 x RDx RVx AEISA 438Soli Classification (Access Road and LS) ‐ Silty Sands (SM), Clayey Sands (SC)Maximum Infiltration Rate = 0.12 inches/hour From Infiltration Test by Building & Earth Sciences ‐ Infiltration Test for Boring 202 ‐ 02/01/2019Minimum Infiltration Rate = 0.1 inches/hourDecay Factor = 2 /hourPervious Area Depression Storage = 0.2 inches EISA Guidance95th Percentile 24 hour Rainfall = 1.8 inches Fort Bragg Installation Design GuidelinesRunoff = Rainfall ‐ Depression Storage ‐ Infiltration Loss (EISA Guidance)Impervious Area Runoff = 1.7 inches EISA Guidance ‐ Depression Storage = 0.1 inches ‐ Infiltration Loss = 0Pervious Area Runoff = 0.0 inches EISA Guidance ‐ Depression Storage = 0.2 inches ‐ Infiltration Loss > 1.6 inches (over 24 hours)Site Runoff = 0.80 inches Site Runoff =  (Impervious Area R.O. X Impervious Acres + Pervious Area R.O. X Pervious Acres)/(Total Site Area ‐ Pond Area)Storage Required =  1350 Cubic Feet S = Site Runoff x Total Site Area ‐ Pond Area) USE FOR BIORETENTION STORAGE VOLUME"Technical Guidance on Implementing the Stormwater Runoff Requirements for Federal Projects under Section 438 of the Energy Independence and Security Act" (EISA Guidance), EPA December 2009.From Infiltration Test by Savannah District Phase 1 detention pond ‐ Mason & Hangar SOF Special Tactics Facility Phase 2 Design Analysis Volume 2 PROJECT: ATF Infrastructure LS & Access RoadStorm Water Management Bioretention Pond 2 CalculationsPN 80037 ‐ GWO 253000289RUNOFF DATAPRE‐DEVELOPMENT RUNOFFComposite C‐factor Pre‐DevelopmentC Area (Acres) C x A PercentExisting Road = 0.60 0.24 0.142 47%Pervious =  0.30 0.27 0.080 53%Total =  0.50 0.221 100%Composite "C" =  0.44i10=6.32 inches/hourBased on duration of 10 minutes ‐ NOAA Data ‐ Fort Bragg, NCExisting Q10=1.4 CFS Q (Flowrate) = CiA ‐ Rationale FormulaPOST‐DEVELOPMENT RUNOFFComposite C‐factor Post‐DevelopmentC Area (Acres) C x A PercentImpervious =  0.95 0.22 0.21 44%Pond =  1.00 0.04 0.04 7%Pervious =  0.30 0.25 0.07 49%Total =  0.50 0.32 100%Composite "C" =  0.63i10=7.91 inches/hourBased on duration of 5 minutes ‐ NOAA Data ‐ Fort Bragg, NCPost Q10 (Qo) =2.5 CFS Q (Flowrate) = CiA ‐ Rationale Formulai100=10.00 inches/hourBased on duration of 5 minutes ‐NOAA Data ‐ Fort Bragg, NCPost Q100 (Qo) =3.2 CFS Q (Flowrate) = CiA ‐ Rationale FormulaPOND DESIGN DATAHYDROGRAPH DEVELOPMENTCN Area (Acres) CN x A PercentImpervious =  98 0.22 21.5 44%Pond =  98 0.04 3.5 7%Pervious =  49 0.25 12.1 49%Total =  0.50 37.1 100% Composite CN = 74 use CN = 75S = 3.3 S = (1000/CN) ‐ 10 ‐ NCRS TR55 equation 2‐4P = 3.90 inchesDepth of Runoff (10‐year storm ‐ 6‐hour duration) ‐NOAA Data ‐ Fort Bragg, NCRunoff Volume (10‐year ‐ 6‐hour) = 1.59 inchesRunoff Volume = (P‐0.2S)2  / (P+0.8S)  ‐ NCRS TR55 equation 2‐3Tp (time to peak 10 year) =13.8 minutesTp= Runoff Volume x Drainage Area / 1.39 * Peak FlowEstimated 10 year S = 930 Cubic FeetEstimated Storage = (Qp‐Qo) x Tp ‐Qo= Pre‐Development Peak FlowP = 5.94 inchesDepth of Runoff (100‐year storm ‐ 6‐hour duration) ‐ NOAA Data ‐ Fort Bragg, NCRunoff Volume (100‐year ‐ 6‐hour) = 3.23 inchesRunoff Volume = (P‐0.2S)2  / (P+0.8S)  ‐ NCRS TR55 equation 2‐3Tp (time to peak 100 year) =22.2 minutesTp= Runoff Volume x Drainage Area / 1.39 * Peak Flow PROJECT: ATF Infrastructure LS & Access RoadStorm Water Management Bioretention Pond 2 CalculationsPN 80037 ‐ GWO 253000289POND VOLUMEElevation Area (SF) Volume (CF) Volume (Ac‐ft)468 1137 0 0.00469 1586 1362 0.03469.27 1737.2 1810 0.04470 2146 3228 0.07INFILTRATION DESIGNKsat =0.12 inches/hourFrom Hydraulic Conductivity  Test by Building & Earth Sciences ‐ Ksatfor Boring 202 ‐ 02/01/2019Minimum Ksat for  Underdrains NOT Being Required =2 inches/hourUnderdrain is required ‐ NCDEQ Stormwater Design ManualAverage Soil Media Design Flow (K) = 3.5 inches/hour Based on average of required Media Hydraulic Conductivity0.000081 ft/secCrosssectional  Area = 57.5 SF A = Depth of Media x Average Pond Width (perpendicular to flow direction) = 30"/12"/ft x 23‐feetHydraulic Gradient = 1.0000 ft/ft dh/dl = 12" depth of pondingFlow to Underdrain  x Safety Factor of 10 = 0.0466 CFSQud = KA dh/dl x 10S = 0.25 % Slope of the Hydraulic Gradientn = 0.011 Manning n‐factor (0.011 for PVC)Underdrain Size Required = 2.9Diameter = 16(Qud x n/S1/2)3/8Underdrain Size Provided = 4 ‐inch Perforated PVCNumber of Pipes Required = 2SPILLWAY FLOWWeir Length = 10 feet Use 10' wide trapezoid section spillwayCw = 3.0 Broad Crested WeirTop of Weir El. = 469.27Q =Cw * Weir Length * H1.5  ‐ Conservative Estimate of Spillway FlowStage El h (feet) Q (CFS)469.27 0.0 0.0469.46 0.2 2.5469.50 0.2 3.3469.75 0.5 10.0470.00 0.7 18.7 PROJECT: ATF Infrastructure LS & Access RoadStorm Water Management Bioretention Pond 2 CalculationsPN 80037 ‐ GWO 253000289INLET BOX FLOTATION COMPUTATIONSInside Diameter Inlet Box =  3 feetInvert of Inlet Box Elevation =  464.50Top of Inlet Box Elevation =  470.25Weir Height (if applicable) =  0 inchesWeir Width (if applicable) =  0 inchesNumber of Weirs (if applicable) =  0Inside Volume of Inlet Box =  40.6 cubic feetUnit Weight of Water =  62.4 lbs/cubic footWater Displaced =  2536 lbsWall Thickness =  4 inchesBase Thickness =  12 inchesTop Thickness =  0 inchesDiameter of Manhole in Top =  39 inchesUnit Weight of Concrete =  150 lbs/cubic footVolume of Concrete Walls =  9.5 cubic feetVolume of Concrete Base =  7.1 cubic feetVolume of Concrete Top =  0.0 cubic feetVolume of Concrete 16.6 cubic feetWeight of Manhole Cover & Frame =  100 lbsWeight of Inlet Box =  2590 lbsOK     American States Utility Services March 20, 2019  ATF Infrastructure – Storm Water Management & Storm Drainage Design                      Appendix C ‐ SEDIMENT BASIN #1 CALCULATIONS  PROJECT: ATF Infrastructure LS & Access RoadSediment Basin 1 CalculationsPN 80037 ‐ GWO 253000289DRAINAGE AREADrainage Area Designation#1 ‐ Access Road = 44627 SF#2 ‐ Lift Station = 4030 SF#3 ‐ Pond Area = 7950 SFDrainage Area  =  1.30 AcresSEDIMENT BASIN VOLUME REQUIREDVolume Required = 4678 CF Volume Required = 3600 cubic feet/acreVolume Provided Elevation = 416.2 FT See Pond Volume Provided BelowPost Q10 (Qo) =6.8 CFS Q (Flowrate) = CiA ‐ Rationale Formula (see Storm Water Calculations)Surface Area Required = 2969 SFSurface Area Required = 435 square feet per cfs (Q10 peak flow)Surface Area Provided = 4405 SF @ Elevation 416.2Side Slopes = 3 :1Porous Baffles = 3 RequiredPOND VOLUMEElevation Area (SF) Volume (CF) Volume (Ac‐ft)415 3452 0 0.00416 4254 3853 0.09417 5113 8537 0.20418 6028 14107 0.32     American States Utility Services March 20, 2019  ATF Infrastructure – Storm Water Management & Storm Drainage Design                      Appendix D ‐ SEDIMENT TRAP #2 CALCULATIONS  PROJECT: ATF Infrastructure LS & Access RoadSediment Trap 2 CalculationsPN 80037 ‐ GWO 253000289DRAINAGE AREADrainage Area Designation#4 ‐ Access Road = 18670 SF#5 ‐ Pond Area = 3206 SFDrainage Area  =  0.50 AcresSEDIMENT TRAP VOLUME REQUIREDVolume Required = 1808 CF Volume Required = 3600 cubic feet/acreVolume Provided Elevation = 469.3 FT See Pond Volume Provided BelowPost Q10 (Qo) =2.5 CFS Q (Flowrate) = CiA ‐ Rationale Formula (see Storm Water Calculations)Surface Area Required = 1095 SFSurface Area Required = 435 square feet per cfs (Q10 peak flow)Surface Area Provided = 1737 SF @ Elevation 469.3Side Slopes = 3 :1Porous Baffles = 3 RequiredPOND VOLUMEElevation Area (SF) Volume (CF) Volume (Ac‐ft)468 1137 0 0.00469 1586 1362 0.03469.3 1737 1810 0.04470 2146 3228 0.07     American States Utility Services March 20, 2019  ATF Infrastructure – Storm Water Management & Storm Drainage Design                      Appendix E ‐ STORM DRAINAGE PIPING AND DITCH CALCULATIONS  PROJECT: ATF Infrastructure LS & Access RoadStorm Drain Piping and Ditch CalculationsPN 80037 ‐ GWO 253000289DRAINAGE AREADrainage Area Designation#1 ‐ Access Road = 44627 SF 1.02 Acres#2 ‐ Lift Station = 4030 SF 0.09 Acres#3 ‐ Pond Area = 7950 SF 0.18 Acres#4 ‐ Access Road = 18670 SF 0.43 Acres#5 ‐ Pond Area = 3206 SF 0.07 AcresSTORM DRAIN PIPING CALCULATIONSn = 0.012 Water Tight Integral Bell HDPEDA #Area (Acres)CCAtci10       (in/hr)Q10        (cfs)Pipe Dia. (inches)O‐3 1 1.02 0.64 0.65 5.0 7.91 5.2 18O‐4 2 0.09 0.95 0.09 5.0 7.91 0.7 12O‐2 4 0.43 0.63 0.27 5.0 7.91 2.1 12Composite C‐factor Post‐DevelopmentC Area (Ac) C x ADrainage Area #1 Impervious =  0.95 0.53 0.50 Road AreaPervious =  0.30 0.49 0.15 Grass AreaTotal =  1.02 0.65Drainage Area #2 Impervious =  0.95 0.09 0.09 Road AreaPervious =  0.30 0.00 0.00 Grass AreaTotal =  0.09 0.09Drainage Area #4 Impervious =  0.95 0.22 0.21 Road AreaPervious =  0.30 0.21 0.06 Grass AreaTotal =  0.43 0.27STORM DRAIN ROADSIDE DITCHESProposed Roadside Ditch Section 1‐foot depth3:1 Slope 4:1 SlopeTYPICAL DITCH SECTIONManning Friction Factor n = 0.035 Grass Channel with 2‐inches of grassCritical Ditch Section Flow CalculationsSlope (ft/ft)Max. DA (Acres)CCAi10       (in/hr)Q10        (cfs)Depth   (ft)Area    (SF)WP        (ft)RHV         (fps)Qcalculated (cfs)0+9.5 0.055 0.08 0.63 0.05 7.91 0.4 0.23 0.19 1.68 0.11 2.3 0.41+75 0.010 0.22 0.63 0.14 7.91 1.1 0.45 0.71 3.28 0.22 1.5 1.14+50 0.031 0.25 0.64 0.16 7.91 1.3 0.39 0.53 2.84 0.19 2.4 1.37+50 0.060 0.63 0.64 0.40 7.91 3.2 0.48 0.81 3.50 0.23 3.9 3.211+00 0.0415 0.76 0.64 0.48 7.91 3.8 0.55 1.06 4.01 0.26 3.6 3.814+00 0.050 1.02 0.64 0.65 7.91 5.2 0.60 1.26 4.37 0.29 4.1 5.2Structure No.              From                    ToTall Fescue with Curlex III Erosion Control BlanketTall Fescue with Curlex III Erosion Control BlanketTall Fescue with Curlex III Erosion Control BlanketI‐1I‐2I‐3Lining RequiredTall Fescue with Curlex III Erosion Control BlanketTall Fescue with Curlex III Erosion Control BlanketTall Fescue with Curlex III Erosion Control BlanketStation to Station0+503+576+4010+6012+2016+10 PROJECT: ATF Infrastructure LS & Access RoadStorm Drain Piping and Ditch CalculationsPN 80037 ‐ GWO 253000289STORM DRAIN INLET CALCULATIONSInlet #Inlet Opening (sf)Inlet Perimeter (LF)Orifice Coef.Weir Coef.Percent BlockedQ10 to Inlet   (cfs)I‐1 7.33 16.33 0.6 3.3 25% 5.2I‐2 3.67 8.17 0.6 3.3 25% 0.7I‐3 3.67 8.17 0.6 3.3 25% 2.1RIPRAP OUTLET SIZINGOutlet # Pipe SizeQ10 (cfs)La ‐ Riprap Length (ft)Riprap Width (ft)NotesO‐1 15" 1.6 8 9NCRS Riprap Design Minimum TailwaterO‐2 12" 2.1 6 7NCRS Riprap Design Minimum TailwaterO‐3 18" 5.2 10 11'‐6NCRS Riprap Design Minimum TailwaterO‐4 12" 0.7 6 7NCRS Riprap Design Minimum TailwaterO‐5 18" N/A 10 11'‐6NCRS Riprap Design Minimum TailwaterO‐6 24" N/A 12 14NCRS Riprap Design Minimum Tailwater0.59Inlet Capacity Orifice Flow              (cfs)13.36.4Maximum Depth         (ft)0.645.30.412 ‐ NCDOT 840.46 with NCDOT 840.16 grate1 ‐ NCDOT 840.46 with NCDOT 840.16 grate1 ‐NCDOT 840.46 with NCDOT 840.16 grateNCDOT Reference0.75.32.1Inlet Capacity     Weir Flow                 (cfs)     American States Utility Services March 20, 2019  ATF Infrastructure – Storm Water Management & Storm Drainage Design                      Appendix F ‐ BUILDING AND EARTH SCIENCES GEOTECHNICAL REPORT – 11/27/2018  REPORT OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR DESIGN BUILD ATF I NFRASTRUCTURE BUILDING & EARTH PROJECT: RD180554 PREPARED FOR: AMERICAN STATES UTILITY SERVICES NOVEMBER 27, 2018 Bldg & Earth Office Address Office_City, Office_State Office_Zip Ph: (xxx) xxx-xxxx 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 November 27, 2018 ASUS, Inc. 903 Armistead Street Fort Bragg, NC 28307 Attention: Ms. Shay Coombs, EI Subject: Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation Aberdeen Training Facility (ATF) Infrastructure Fort Bragg, North Carolina Building & Earth Project No: RD180554 Ms. Coombs: Building & Earth Sciences, LLP has completed the authorized subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering evaluation for the Aberdeen Training Facility (ATF) Infrastructure project located at 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 thirty-two (32) soil test borings conducted at the site. 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 NC Engineering License F-1081 Kurt Miller, PE C. Mark Nolen, PE Geotechnical Engineer Sr. Vice President Page | i Table of Contents  1.0 PROJECT & SITE DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................... 1  2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES ............................................................................................................................................... 1  3.0 GEOTECHNICAL SITE CHARACTERIZATION ................................................................................................... 2  3.1 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 3  AUGER REFUSAL ............................................................................................................................................... 4  GROUNDWATER ............................................................................................................................................... 4  4.0 SITE DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS ......................................................................................................... 5  4.1 INITIAL SITE PREPARATION ..................................................................................................................................... 5  4.2 SUBGRADE EVALUATION ......................................................................................................................................... 5  4.3 MOISTURE SENSITIVE SOILS ................................................................................................................................... 6  4.4 STRUCTURAL FILL ..................................................................................................................................................... 6  4.5 EXCAVATION CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 7  GROUNDWATER ............................................................................................................................................... 8  4.6 UTILITY TRENCH BACKFILL ...................................................................................................................................... 8  4.7 LANDSCAPING AND DRAINAGE CONSIDERATION ............................................................................................... 8  4.8 WET WEATHER CONSTRUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 8  5.0 LIFT STATION FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................. 9  6.0 SLABS-ON-GRADE ................................................................................................................................................. 10  7.0 PAVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS ......................................................................................................................... 10  7.1 CRUSHED STONE PAVEMENT .............................................................................................................................. 11  8.0 SUBGRADE REHABILITATION ............................................................................................................................ 12  9.0 CONSTRUCTION MONITORING ....................................................................................................................... 12  10.0 CLOSING AND LIMITATIONS .......................................................................................................................... 13  APPENDIX Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation, ATF Infrastructure, Fort Bragg, North Carolina Project No: RD180554, November 27, 2018 Page | 1 1.0 PROJECT & SITE DESCRIPTION The subject site is located at the Aberdeen Training Facility at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. We understand that this project includes the design and construction of a wastewater transfer system including about 0.5 miles of gravity-fed sewer, a new lift station, and approximately 2.5 miles of force main sewer. A gravel road will also be constructed along the southern border of the ATF compound to provide access to the new lift station. The new wastewater transfer system will tie into the Aberdeen wastewater system at a point along Highway 211 in Aberdeen, North Carolina. 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES The authorized subsurface exploration was performed on October 10 and 12, 2018 in general conformance with our proposal RD20426, dated July 5, 2018. Notice to proceed was provided by Ms. Shay Coombs, EI with ASUS, Inc. Occasionally some modification of the scope outlined in our proposal is required to provide for proper evaluation of the encountered subsurface conditions. Due to a significant number of potential underground utility conflicts, boring B-02 was not performed. 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 thirty-two (32) soil test borings. The site was drilled using a Diedrich D-05, track-mounted drill rig, equipped with an automatic SPT hammer. The soil boring locations were provided to us by Ms. Shay Coombs, EI with ASUS, Inc. These locations were determined in the field by a representative of our staff by measuring distances from known points on the RFP drawings. 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 14 Atterberg Limits D4318 14 Material Finer Than No. 200 Sieve by Washing D1140 14 Modified Proctor Compaction Test D1557 4 Laboratory California Bearing Ratio D1883 1 Table 1: Scope of Laboratory Tests Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation, ATF Infrastructure, Fort Bragg, North Carolina Project No: RD180554, November 27, 2018 Page | 2 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 boring 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. ◾ Boring logs detailing the materials encountered with soil classifications, penetration values, depth to bedrock (if encountered), and groundwater levels (if measured). ◾ Presentation of laboratory test results. ◾ Recommendations for foundation design, gravel pavement design, and slab-on- grade recommendations. ◾ Presentation of the estimated total and differential settlement. ◾ 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. Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation, ATF Infrastructure, Fort Bragg, North Carolina Project No: RD180554, November 27, 2018 Page | 3 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. 3.1 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Because the borings were performed over a wide area, the generalized subsurface conditions are discussed more in reference to the following three areas: roadway, lift station, sanitary sewer lines. The stratification depicts the general soil conditions and strata types encountered during our field investigation. Roadway: Test borings B-101, B-102, B-103, and B-04 through B-07 and B-09 were performed within the alignment of the future gravel road that will provide access to the new lift station. Each of the borings were advanced to a depth of about 10 feet below the ground surface. A thin layer of topsoil was observed at each boring location. The topsoil measured about 3 inches thick. Below the topsoil, the subsurface soils consist of layers of poorly graded sand with silt (SP-SM), silty sand (SM), and clayey sand (SC). The fines content of these soils ranged from 10.3 to 33.3 percent, and where plastic, the soils have a liquid limit of 28 and plastic index of 7. A moisture-density relationship test, as well as a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test was performed for a bulk sample at boring location B-102. Based on the results of these tests, the soils at this location have a maximum dry density of 109.1 pounds per cubic foot, an optimum moisture content of 9.2 percent, and a CBR of about 23 percent. These test borings terminated in the silty or clayey sand at a depth of 10 feet. Lift Station: Test borings B-08 and B-29 were performed within the area that will support the lift station, and were advanced to a depth of about 35 feet. The surface soils consist of 3 to 6 inches of topsoil, underlain by generally silty sand (SM) or clayey sand (SC) in the upper 13.5 to 17 feet. The clayey sand has a fines content of 33.8 percent, a liquid limit of 31 and a plastic index of 15. Below the sand layer, the test borings encountered sandy clay (CL). The clay has a fines content of 70.1 percent, a liquid limit of 28, and a plastic index of 11. Test borings B-08 and B-29 terminated in the sandy clay layer at a depth of about 35 feet below the ground surface. Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation, ATF Infrastructure, Fort Bragg, North Carolina Project No: RD180554, November 27, 2018 Page | 4 Sanitary Sewer Lines (Gravity Lines): The remainder of the test borings were performed within the approximate alignment of the sanitary sewer lines. Test Borings B-09A, and B-10 through B-16 were performed for the gravity sewer, while borings B-17 through B-28, and B-01 through B-03 were performed for the Force Main line between the lift station and the Aberdeen tie-in. At these boring locations, a 3 to 12-inch thick layer of topsoil was encountered at each test boring. Below the topsoil, boring B-09A encountered a layer of elastic silt (MH). This material has a fines content of 65.6 percent, a liquid limit of 58, and a plastic index of 26. Below the elastic silt in test boring B-09A, and in the remaining borings, silty and clayey sands were encountered (SM and SC). These soils have a fines content of 13.9 to 45.8 percent, and at location B-23 the soils have a liquid limit of 54 and plastic index of 21. All of the test borings terminated in this sand layer at a depth of 10 feet below the ground surface, except borings B-21, B-24, B-26, B-28 and B-03. Test borings B-21, B-24, B-26, B-28 and B-03 encountered a layer of sandy clay below the silty and clayey sand layer. These test borings terminated in the clay layer at a depth of approximately 10 feet, except boring B-03. Boring B-03 terminated at a depth of about 25 feet below the ground surface. 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 were estimated based on aerial photography from Google Earth, and should be considered approximate. 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 any of the test borings. GROUNDWATER At the time of drilling, groundwater was encountered at test boring B-03 at a depth of 21.7 feet. After a period of 24 hours, groundwater was not encountered at this location within the upper 19.0 feet. We note that wet soils were noted in test boring B-08, B-09, B-20 and B-29. Although standing water was not observed, it is likely that these wet soils are a result of perched water. Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation, ATF Infrastructure, Fort Bragg, North Carolina Project No: RD180554, November 27, 2018 Page | 5 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, or after our stabilized groundwater reading. 4.0 SITE DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS A grading plan was not available at the time of this report. The primary geotechnical concerns for this project include: ◾ Potential for perched water to be encountered during excavation ◾ Potential for excavation sidewalls to collapse if not properly shored ◾ Moisture sensitive soils that will require proper management during construction 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 3 to 12 inches of topsoil were observed at the boring locations. 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. We have included 4 moisture-density curves with this investigation. These curves are included in the “Laboratory Results” section of the Appendix of this report. 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. 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. Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation, ATF Infrastructure, Fort Bragg, North Carolina Project No: RD180554, November 27, 2018 Page | 6 ◾ 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. 4.3 MOISTURE SENSITIVE SOILS Moisture sensitive silty sands (SM), clayey sands (SC), sandy clays (CL), and elastic silts (MH) 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 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 All Fill Placement Areas Clay CL, SC, GC LL<50, PI<25, d>100 pcf All Fill Placement Areas Clay CH LL>50, PI>25, d>100 pcf Non-structural areas only Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation, ATF Infrastructure, Fort Bragg, North Carolina Project No: RD180554, November 27, 2018 Page | 7 Soil Type USCS Classification Property Requirements Placement Location Silt ML, MH N/A Non-structural areas only On-site soils SC, SM, SP, CL, MH As listed above As listed above Table 2: 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. Placement requirements for structural fill are as follows: Specification Requirement Lift Thickness 12” compacted Density 85 Percent maximum per ASTM D-1557 all non-structural areas 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 for materials with a fines content greater than 12 percent +/- 5.0 Percentage Points ASTM D-1557 Optimum for materials with a fines content less than 12 percent Density Testing Frequency 1 test per 2,500 S.F. Minimum 2 tests per lift 1 test per 150 LF in trenches Table 3: Structural Fill Placement Requirements 4.5 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. All of the onsite soils shall be considered Type C. Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation, ATF Infrastructure, Fort Bragg, North Carolina Project No: RD180554, November 27, 2018 Page | 8 GROUNDWATER Groundwater was encountered at test boring location B-03 at a depth of 21.7 feet. Additionally, wet soils were encountered in B-08, B-09, B-20 and B-29. Groundwater (perched or otherwise) could be encountered during construction, particularly during wet periods of the year. 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. 4.6 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. 4.7 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 the lift station and the gravel access road. Side ditches should also be installed along the edges of the access road. The ditches should be designed such that they are at least 24 inches deeper than the finished subgrade of the road. 4.8 WET WEATHER CONSTRUCTION Excessive movement of construction equipment across the site during wet weather may result in ruts, which will collect rainwater, prolonging the time required to dry the subgrade soils. 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. 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. Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation, ATF Infrastructure, Fort Bragg, North Carolina Project No: RD180554, November 27, 2018 Page | 9 5.0 LIFT STATION FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS Specific structural loading conditions were not known at the time of this report; however, based on our experience with similar projects, we anticipate that the lift station will be designed using a mat (slab) foundation. Based on information provided by Mr. Pat Jennings, PE of ASUS, Inc, we understand that the lift station will bear about 10.5 feet below the existing grade, and will have an 18-inch thick washed stone base. Based on the conditions encountered at test borings B-08 and B-29, 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 2,000 psf. We note that very loose soils were encountered at test boring B-29 to a depth of about 12 feet below the ground surface. The very loose soils should be removed to stable material, or a minimum depth of 24 inches. The resulting over-excavation should be backfilled using NCDOT washed No. 57 stone wrapped in a filter fabric such as Mirafi 140N. 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. Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation, ATF Infrastructure, Fort Bragg, North Carolina Project No: RD180554, November 27, 2018 Page | 10 6.0 SLABS-ON-GRADE Site development recommendations presented in this report should be followed to provide for subgrade conditions suitable for support of grade supported slabs. The lift station foundation slab should be supported on a minimum 12-inch 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 course. With addition of the granular material, an effective modulus of subgrade reaction of 130 pci can be used in the design of grade supported building floor slabs. 7.0 PAVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS Based on the materials encountered at the boring locations that were performed within the access road, 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). For pavement design purposes, we have assumed a level of traffic shown as shown below. Specific traffic information was not provided. If the pavement were a typical roadway, according to the “AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures, 1993”, these pavement sections would be adequate for the following daily traffic volume: Type Automobiles (per day) Delivery Trucks (2-Axle/4-Tire) (per day) Tandem Trucks (3-Axle) (per day) Delivery Trucks (Tractor Trailer) (per day) ESAL Standard Duty 5 0 2 0 2.2E+04 Table 4: Assumed Traffic Volume The volumes shown above are just one example of possible vehicle types and daily traffic that would result in the total equivalent 18-kip single-axle load (ESAL) shown. 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. In addition, we have assumed the following design parameters: Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation, ATF Infrastructure, Fort Bragg, North Carolina Project No: RD180554, November 27, 2018 Page | 11 Design Criteria Value Design life (Years) 20 Terminal Serviceability 2.0 Reliability 85% Initial Serviceability 4.2 Table 5: Assumed Design Parameters 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 Mineral Aggregate Base Materials 520 Soil 500 Table 6: NCDOT Specification Sections 7.1 CRUSHED STONE PAVEMENT The crushed stone pavement sections described herein were designed using the “AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures, 1993”. Alternative pavement sections were designed by establishing the structural numbers used for the AASHTO design system and substituting materials based upon structural equivalency as follows: Material Structural No. Crushed Stone Base 0.14 Table 7: Structural Equivalent Coefficient The following crushed stone pavement sections are based on the design parameters presented above: Minimum Recommended Thickness (in) Material Standard Duty 8.0 Aggregate Base Course (ABC) Stone 12.0 Prepared Subgrade Soils @ 95% Compaction Table 8: ABC Stone Recommendations Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation, ATF Infrastructure, Fort Bragg, North Carolina Project No: RD180554, November 27, 2018 Page | 12 All pavement components must be placed and compacted in accordance with the applicable sections of the NCDOT Standard Specification for Roads and Bridges. All subgrade, base and pavement construction operations should meet minimum requirements of this Geotechnical Report. Because the ABC stone will be placed on a sandy soil with areas of low fines content, we recommend that a woven Geotextile fabric such as US Fabric US3600, or equivalent be used. The Geotextile fabric should be placed in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations. 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. 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. ◾ Compaction and Moisture Testing of Soils ◾ Proofrolling of Soil Subgrade and ABC stone ◾ Foundation Bearing Grade Inspection for the Lift Station Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Evaluation, ATF Infrastructure, Fort Bragg, North Carolina Project No: RD180554, November 27, 2018 Page | 13 10.0 CLOSING AND LIMITATIONS This report was prepared for ASUS, Inc. for specific application to the Design Build ATF Infrastructure Project located at 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. 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 .......................................................................................................................................... 2  GRAPHIC .............................................................................................................................................................. 3  REMARKS ............................................................................................................................................................. 3  SOIL CLASSIFICATION METHODOLOGY..................................................................................................................... 4  KEY TO LOGS ......................................................................................................................................................................... 6  KEY TO HATCHES ................................................................................................................................................................ 8  BORING LOCATION PLAN ............................................................................................................................................... 9  BORING LOGS ..................................................................................................................................................................... 10  LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES .............................................................................................................................. 11  DESCRIPTION OF SOILS (VISUAL-MANUAL PROCEDURE) (ASTM D2488) ............................. 11  NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT (ASTM D2216) ............................................................................... 11  ATTERBERG LIMITS (ASTM D4318) .......................................................................................................... 11  MATERIAL FINER THAN NO. 200 SIEVE BY WASHING (ASTM D1140) ..................................... 11  MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST (ASTM D1557) ............................................................ 11  LABORATORY CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO (ASTM D1883) ....................................................... 12  LABORATORY TEST RESULTS ..................................................................................................................... 12  Table A-1: General Soil Classification Test Results ....................................................................... 12  IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THIS GEOTECHNICAL-ENGINEERING REPORT ............................ 13  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.  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 #: RD18554 Address: Aberdeen Training Facility Drawing Source: GoogleEarth City: Fort Bragg, NC Client: ASUS, Inc Figure 1 Project: ATF Infrastructure B-24 N B-01 500 250 0 B-02 B-27 B-03 Approximate Scale (feet) Boring Location B-28 B-26 B-25 B-23 B-22 Boring Location Map BES Project #: RD18554 Address: Aberdeen Training Facility Drawing Source: GoogleEarth City: Fort Bragg, NC Client: ASUS, Inc Figure 2 Project: ATF Infrastructure B-17 B-20 600 0 B-21 B-13 B-11 N B-12 300 B-14 B-15 Approximate Scale (feet) B-101 Boring Location B-102 B-103 B-04 B-05 B-06 B-06 B-09 B-08 B-07 B-29 B-18 B-19 B-10 B-09A B-16 BORING LOGS 1-1-2 2-2-2 2-2-4 2-7-10 5-8-9 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): very loose, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sands - loose, brown CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 3.5 10.0 466.8 463.5 457.0 1 2 3 4 5 Sample 3: % Passing #200 seive: 33.8 Liquid Limit (LL): 31 Plastic Limit (PL): 22 Plasticity Index (PI): 9 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling. Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Surface Elevation: 467 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 ELEVATION (ft)465 460 455 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: State Highway 211 BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-01 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:78 F, Raining LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 2-5-4 4-5-5 7-8-16 7-26-31 6-6-7 5-9-8 3-5-5 3-4-5 2-3-3 Topsoil (Approximately 4 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): medium dense, brown, moist, fine to medium sands CLAYEY SAND (SC): medium dense, orange, moist, fine to medium sands - dense - very dense - medium dense, light orange - loose SANDY CLAY (CL): medium stiff, light brown, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 25 feet 0.3 2.1 24.4 25.0 450.7 448.9 426.6 426.0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Sample 1: % Passing #200 seive: 24.6 Liquid Limit (LL): 22 Plastic Limit (PL): 17 Plasticity Index (PI): 5 Groundwater encountered immediately after drilling, at 21.7 ft No groundwater encountered after 24 hours, with cave-in at 19 ft Sample 9: % Passing #200 seive: 79.1 Liquid Limit (LL): 40 Plastic Limit (PL): 25 Plasticity Index (PI): 15 Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Surface Elevation: 451 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/10/18 ELEVATION (ft)450 445 440 435 430 425 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: 150 ft from Center Line of HWY 211 BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 15 20 25 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-03 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:82 F, Raining LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18>> 2-3-3 3-3-4 2-3-4 2-4-4 3-3-3 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 8.5 10.0 454.8 446.5 445.0 1 2 3 4 5 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling. Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Surface Elevation: 455 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)455 450 445 440 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: Access Road Entry plus 900 ft BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-04 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 3-3-4 2-2-3 5-6-6 3-3-4 3-4-5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense SILTY SAND (SM): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 2.7 6.0 10.0 439.8 437.3 434.0 430.0 1 2 3 4 5 Sample 3: % Passing #200 seive: 18.8 Liquid Limit (LL): 28 Plastic Limit (PL): 21 Plasticity Index (PI): 7 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling. Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Surface Elevation: 440 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)440 435 430 425 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: Access Road Entry plus 1200 ft BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-05 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 2-2-3 3-4-5 3-3-4 2-2-3 2-3-3 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands - white/orange (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 3.5 10.0 432.8 429.5 423.0 1 2 3 4 5 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Surface Elevation: 433 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)430 425 420 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: Access Road Entry plus 1500 ft BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-06 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 1-2-2 1-2-4 2-3-4 2-4-4 2-3-3 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sands - brown CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense - loose (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 4.0 10.0 426.8 423.0 417.0 1 2 3 4 5 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/17/18 Surface Elevation: 427 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/17/18 ELEVATION (ft)425 420 415 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: Lift Station - East - Access Road BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-07 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 1-1-1 1-1-1 2-2-2 2-4-6 5-5-6 9-11-15 7-18-20 8-12-16 10-15-32 18-27-35 Topsoil (Approximately 6 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): very loose, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sands - loose, brown - medium dense, wet, black SANDY CLAY (CL): hard, black, wet, fine to medium sands SILTY SAND (SM): very dense, orange, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 35 feet 0.5 13.5 34.0 35.0 425.5 412.5 392.0 391.0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Sample 8: % Passing #200 seive: 70.1 Liquid Limit (LL): 28 Plastic Limit (PL): 17 Plasticity Index (PI): 11 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Surface Elevation: 426 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)425 420 415 410 405 400 395 390 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: Lift Station - East - Building Pad BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 15 20 25 30 35 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-08 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18>> 2-2-3 2-3-4 3-3-4 1-1-1 W-O-H Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sands - wet - very loose (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 10.0 424.8 415.0 1 2 3 4 5 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Surface Elevation: 425 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)425 420 415 410 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: Lift Statation - North - Access Road BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-09 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 2-3-4 2-3-5 2-4-5 3-4-5 3-4-5 Topsoil (Approximately 12 inches) ELASTIC SILT (MH): stiff, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - white SILTY SAND (SM): medium dense, white, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 1.0 6.5 10.0 462.0 456.5 453.0 1 2 3 4 5 Sample 3: % Passing #200 seive: 65.6 Liquid Limit (LL): 58 Plastic Limit (PL): 32 Plasticity Index (PI): 26 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Surface Elevation: 463 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)460 455 450 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: Near Sewer Manhole MH-15 BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-09A Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 2-2-2 2-2-2 3-3-5 4-6-6 5-7-9 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands CLAYEY SAND (SC): medium dense, orange/brown, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 3.5 10.0 469.8 466.5 460.0 1 2 3 4 5 Sample 1: % Passing #200 seive: 13.9 Liquid Limit (LL): NP Plastic Limit (PL): NP Plasticity Index (PI): NP Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling No groundwater encountered after 24 hours, Cave-in at 8 ft Boring backfilled 10/17/18 Surface Elevation: 470 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)470 465 460 455 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: Near Sewer Manhole MH-16 BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-10 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 1-3-3 3-3-4 3-4-4 4-6-6 4-4-5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sands CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense (Coastal Plain) Boring terminated at 10 feet 0.3 2.5 10.0 474.8 472.5 465.0 1 2 3 4 5 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Surface Elevation: 475 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)475 470 465 460 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: Crushed Stone Acess Road Entry BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-101 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 2-2-2 2-2-2 2-2-3 4-5-5 5-7-9 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense CLAYEY SAND (SC): medium dense, orange, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 8.5 10.0 474.8 466.5 465.0 1 2 3 4 5 Sample 3: % Passing #200 seive: 14.9 Liquid Limit (LL): NP Plastic Limit (PL): NP Plasticity Index (PI): NP Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Surface Elevation: 475 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)475 470 465 460 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: Access Road Entry plus 300 ft BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-102 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 3-4-4 1-2-2 2-3-3 2-3-4 2-3-5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT (SP-SM): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 10.0 470.8 461.0 1 2 3 4 5 Sample 1: % Passing #200 seive: 10.3 Liquid Limit (LL): NP Plastic Limit (PL): NP Plasticity Index (PI): NP Groundwater not encountered at completion of drilling. Boring backfilled upon completion. Surface Elevation: 471 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)470 465 460 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: Access Road Entry plus 600 ft BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-103 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 1-1-1 1-2-2 1-2-2 2-3-3 3-4-4 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): very loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - loose CLAYEY SAND (SC): medium dense, light brown, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 8.5 10.0 460.7 452.5 451.0 1 2 3 4 5 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Surface Elevation: 461 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)460 455 450 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: Near Sewer Manhole MH-18 BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-11 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 4-4-6 5-3-4 2-2-2 2-3-4 2-3-4 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): medium dense, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - loose (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 10.0 458.7 449.0 1 2 3 4 5 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Surface Elevation: 459 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)455 450 445 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: Near Sewer Manhole MH-19 BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-12 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 2-2-2 3-3-4 4-5-9 1-1-2 2-2-3 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sands CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands SILTY SAND (SM): medium dense, orange/brown, moist, fine to medium sands - very loose - loose (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 2.4 3.5 10.0 450.8 448.6 447.5 441.0 1 2 3 4 5 Sample 4: % Passing #200 seive: 15.7 Liquid Limit (LL): NP Plastic Limit (PL): NP Plasticity Index (PI): NP Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Surface Elevation: 451 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)450 445 440 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: Near Sewer Future Manhole MH-20 BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-13 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 2-2-1 2-3-4 2-1-2 2-1-1 2-1-2 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): very loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - loose, brown - very loose, orange (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 10.0 445.8 436.0 1 2 3 4 5 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Surface Elevation: 446 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)445 440 435 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: Near Sewer Future Manhole MH-21 BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-14 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 2-3-4 2-2-3 3-3-3 2-3-4 2-3-4 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - orange (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 10.0 456.8 447.0 1 2 3 4 5 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Surface Elevation: 457 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 ELEVATION (ft)455 450 445 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: 400 ft East of Borehole 14 BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-15 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:78 F, Raining LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 2-3-5 5-5-6 3-3-3 2-5-6 3-4-4 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense - loose - medium dense, dark brown - brown (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 10.0 443.8 434.0 1 2 3 4 5 Sample 3: % Passing #200 seive: 15.1 Liquid Limit (LL): NP Plastic Limit (PL): NP Plasticity Index (PI): NP Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Surface Elevation: 444 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 ELEVATION (ft)440 435 430 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: 730 ft East of Borehole 09A in Parking Lot BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-16 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:78 F, Raining LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 1-1-1 1-2-2 2-2-2 1-2-2 1-2-2 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): very loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 2.4 10.0 420.8 418.6 411.0 1 2 3 4 5 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Surface Elevation: 421 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)420 415 410 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: SW of Proposed Lift Station BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-17 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 1-1-1 2-2-2 2-8-6 2-3-3 2-2-2 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): very loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - loose - medium dense - loose (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 10.0 440.8 431.0 1 2 3 4 5 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Surface Elevation: 441 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)440 435 430 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: SW of Proposed Lift Station BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-18 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 1-1-1 2-2-2 3-4-5 4-7-9 4-4-6 Topsoil (Approximately 12 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): very loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - loose - medium dense (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 1.0 10.0 451.0 442.0 1 2 3 4 5 Sample 1: % Passing #200 seive: 13.2 Liquid Limit (LL): NP Plastic Limit (PL): NP Plasticity Index (PI): NP Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Surface Elevation: 452 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)450 445 440 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: Along Driving Course BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-19 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 2-3-3 2-3-4 2-2-3 3-6-7 3-5-6 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, brown/orange, moist, fine to medium sands SILTY SAND (SM): loose, light brown, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense - wet (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 4.0 10.0 438.8 435.0 429.0 1 2 3 4 5 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Surface Elevation: 439 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)435 430 425 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: Along Driving Course BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-20 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 2-2-2 2-3-4 3-6-7 8-9-13 5-9-14 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, brown/orange, moist, fine to medium sands SANDY CLAY (CL): very stiff, orange/white, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 4.2 10.0 480.8 476.8 471.0 1 2 3 4 5 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Surface Elevation: 481 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)480 475 470 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: Near Intersection of Memory Ln and Driving Course BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-21 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 1-2-3 2-3-4 3-3-4 5-6-7 7-7-9 Topsoil (Approximately 4 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, brown/orange, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 3.5 10.0 516.7 513.5 507.0 1 2 3 4 5 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Surface Elevation: 517 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 ELEVATION (ft)515 510 505 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: 700 ft North East of Borehole 23 BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-22 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:78 F, Raining LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 2-3-4 3-3-5 3-5-10 7-11-12 4-8-9 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sands - medium desne - dense (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 10.0 520.8 511.0 1 2 3 4 5 Sample 2: % Passing #200 seive: 45.8 Liquid Limit (LL): 54 Plastic Limit (PL): 33 Plasticity Index (PI): 21 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Surface Elevation: 521 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 ELEVATION (ft)520 515 510 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: 700 ft North East of Borehole 24 BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-23 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:78 F, Raining LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 2-2-3 2-3-4 3-5-5 5-9-10 4-7-8 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange/brown, moist, fine to medium sands SILTY SAND (SM): medium dense, orange, moist, fine to medium sands SANDY CLAY (CL): very stiff, tan, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 3.5 9.0 10.0 530.8 527.5 522.0 521.0 1 2 3 4 5 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Surface Elevation: 531 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 ELEVATION (ft)530 525 520 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: 700 ft North East of Borehole 25 BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-24 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:78 F, Raining LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 2-2-2 2-2-3 2-2-3 7-7-7 4-7-7 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 10.0 521.8 512.0 1 2 3 4 5 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Surface Elevation: 522 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 ELEVATION (ft)520 515 510 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: 700 ft East of Borehole 26 BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-25 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:78 F, Raining LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 3-3-5 3-4-4 6-6-7 3-6-6 5-8-11 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense SANDY CLAY (CL): stiff, brown, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 1.5 7.5 10.0 506.8 505.5 499.5 497.0 1 2 3 4 5 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Surface Elevation: 507 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 ELEVATION (ft)505 500 495 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: 2250 ft from Center Line of HWY 211 BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-26 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:78 F, Raining LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 2-2-3 2-2-3 6-9-10 6-9-8 5-6-7 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 10.0 480.8 471.0 1 2 3 4 5 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Surface Elevation: 481 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 ELEVATION (ft)480 475 470 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: 1550 ft from Center Line of HWY 211 BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-27 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:78 F, Raining LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 4-5-8 5-5-5 4-5-8 2-3-4 4-6-11 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) CLAYEY SAND (SC): medium dense, brown/orange, moist, fine to medium sands SANDY CLAY (CL): stiff, brown/orange, moist, fine to medium sands - very stiff (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 0.3 6.0 10.0 454.8 449.0 445.0 1 2 3 4 5 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Surface Elevation: 455 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 ELEVATION (ft)455 450 445 440 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: 850 ft from Center Line of HWY 211 BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-28 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:78 F, Raining LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18 1-1-2 1-2-2 2-3-4 1-1-1 W-O-H 5-5-9 11-26-30 27-25-40 22-35-50 10-16-25 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): very loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - loose - very loose, wet CLAYEY SAND (SC): medium dense, gray, moist SANDY CLAY (CL): hard, gray, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 35 feet 0.3 13.5 17.0 35.0 422.8 409.5 406.0 388.0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Sample 6: % Passing #200 seive: 33.8 Liquid Limit (LL): 31 Plastic Limit (PL): 16 Plasticity Index (PI): 15 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Surface Elevation: 423 1 2 3 4 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 ELEVATION (ft)420 415 410 405 400 395 390 385 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 Boring Location: Lift Station - West - Building Pad BLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu GRAPHICEquipment Used: Diedrich D-50 SAMPLE TYPE LOG OF BORING Qu (tsf) 1 2 3 4 Atterberg Limits Qu (tsf) Logged By: M.Lumpkin Birmingham, AL Huntsville, AL Auburn, AL Montgomery, AL Columbus, GA Raleigh, NC Tulsa, OK Little Rock, AR Springdale, AR Tuscaloosa, AL Louisville, KY Split Spoon Project Number: RD180554 DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEREMARKS GRAPHIC5 10 15 20 25 30 35 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger REC RQD UDSAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION N-Value Atterberg Limits Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC Drill Crew: MG DrillingHammer Type: Automatic Designation: B-29 Project Name: ATF Infrastructure Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 10 20 30 40 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com 10 20 30 40 Weather Conditions:73 F, Sunny LOG OF BORING 2 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/28/18>> >> >> 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): very loose, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sands - loose, brown CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 466.8 463.5 457.0 1-1-2 2-2-2 2-2-4 2-7-10 5-8-9 0.3 3.5 10.0 Sample 3: % Passing #200 seive: 33.8 Liquid Limit (LL): 31 Plastic Limit (PL): 22 Plasticity Index (PI): 9 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling. Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Boring Location: State Highway 211 Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-01 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 467 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)465 460 455 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Topsoil (Approximately 4 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): medium dense, brown, moist, fine to medium sands CLAYEY SAND (SC): medium dense, orange, moist, fine to medium sands - dense - very dense - medium dense, light orange - loose SANDY CLAY (CL): medium stiff, light brown, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 25 feet 450.7 448.9 426.6 426.0 2-5-4 4-5-5 7-8-16 7-26-31 6-6-7 5-9-8 3-5-5 3-4-5 2-3-3 0.3 2.1 24.4 25.0 Sample 1: % Passing #200 seive: 24.6 Liquid Limit (LL): 22 Plastic Limit (PL): 17 Plasticity Index (PI): 5 Groundwater encountered immediately after drilling, at 21.7 ft No groundwater encountered after 24 hours, with cave-in at 19 ft Sample 9: % Passing #200 seive: 79.1 Liquid Limit (LL): 40 Plastic Limit (PL): 25 Plasticity Index (PI): 15 Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Boring Location: 150 ft from Center Line of HWY 211 Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-03 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/10/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 451 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)450 445 440 435 430 425 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18>> 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 454.8 446.5 445.0 2-3-3 3-3-4 2-3-4 2-4-4 3-3-3 0.3 8.5 10.0 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling. Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Boring Location: Access Road Entry plus 900 ft Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-04 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 455 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)455 450 445 440 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense SILTY SAND (SM): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 439.8 437.3 434.0 430.0 3-3-4 2-2-3 5-6-6 3-3-4 3-4-5 0.3 2.7 6.0 10.0 Sample 3: % Passing #200 seive: 18.8 Liquid Limit (LL): 28 Plastic Limit (PL): 21 Plasticity Index (PI): 7 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling. Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Boring Location: Access Road Entry plus 1200 ft Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-05 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 440 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)440 435 430 425 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands - white/orange (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 432.8 429.5 423.0 2-2-3 3-4-5 3-3-4 2-2-3 2-3-3 0.3 3.5 10.0 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Boring Location: Access Road Entry plus 1500 ft Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-06 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 433 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)430 425 420 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sands - brown CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense - loose (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 426.8 423.0 417.0 1-2-2 1-2-4 2-3-4 2-4-4 2-3-3 0.3 4.0 10.0 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/17/18 Boring Location: Lift Station - East - Access Road Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-07 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/17/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 427 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)425 420 415 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Topsoil (Approximately 6 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): very loose, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sands - loose, brown - medium dense, wet, black SANDY CLAY (CL): hard, black, wet, fine to medium sands SILTY SAND (SM): very dense, orange, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 35 feet 425.5 412.5 392.0 391.0 1-1-1 1-1-1 2-2-2 2-4-6 5-5-6 9-11-15 7-18-20 8-12-16 10-15-32 18-27-35 0.5 13.5 34.0 35.0 Sample 8: % Passing #200 seive: 70.1 Liquid Limit (LL): 28 Plastic Limit (PL): 17 Plasticity Index (PI): 11 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Boring Location: Lift Station - East - Building Pad Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-08 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 426 REMARKS Hammer Type: Automatic DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEGRAPHIC5 10 15 20 25 30 35 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION N-Value Atterberg Limits Equipment Used: Geoprobe Weather Conditions: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)425 420 415 410 405 400 395 390 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18>> 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sands - wet - very loose (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 424.8 415.0 2-2-3 2-3-4 3-3-4 1-1-1 W-O-H 0.3 10.0 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Boring Location: Lift Statation - North - Access Road Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-09 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 425 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)425 420 415 410 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 12 inches) ELASTIC SILT (MH): stiff, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - white SILTY SAND (SM): medium dense, white, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 462.0 456.5 453.0 2-3-4 2-3-5 2-4-5 3-4-5 3-4-5 1.0 6.5 10.0 Sample 3: % Passing #200 seive: 65.6 Liquid Limit (LL): 58 Plastic Limit (PL): 32 Plasticity Index (PI): 26 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Boring Location: Near Sewer Manhole MH-15 Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-09A Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 463 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)460 455 450 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands CLAYEY SAND (SC): medium dense, orange/brown, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 469.8 466.5 460.0 2-2-2 2-2-2 3-3-5 4-6-6 5-7-9 0.3 3.5 10.0 Sample 1: % Passing #200 seive: 13.9 Liquid Limit (LL): NP Plastic Limit (PL): NP Plasticity Index (PI): NP Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling No groundwater encountered after 24 hours, Cave-in at 8 ft Boring backfilled 10/17/18 Boring Location: Near Sewer Manhole MH-16 Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-10 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 470 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)470 465 460 455 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sands CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense (Coastal Plain) Boring terminated at 10 feet 474.8 472.5 465.0 1-3-3 3-3-4 3-4-4 4-6-6 4-4-5 0.3 2.5 10.0 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Boring Location: Crushed Stone Acess Road Entry Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER 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: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 475 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)475 470 465 460 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense CLAYEY SAND (SC): medium dense, orange, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 474.8 466.5 465.0 2-2-2 2-2-2 2-2-3 4-5-5 5-7-9 0.3 8.5 10.0 Sample 3: % Passing #200 seive: 14.9 Liquid Limit (LL): NP Plastic Limit (PL): NP Plasticity Index (PI): NP Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Boring Location: Access Road Entry plus 300 ft Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER 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: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 475 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)475 470 465 460 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT (SP-SM): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 470.8 461.0 3-4-4 1-2-2 2-3-3 2-3-4 2-3-5 0.3 10.0 Sample 1: % Passing #200 seive: 10.3 Liquid Limit (LL): NP Plastic Limit (PL): NP Plasticity Index (PI): NP Groundwater not encountered at completion of drilling. Boring backfilled upon completion. Boring Location: Access Road Entry plus 600 ft Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER 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: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 471 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)470 465 460 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): very loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - loose CLAYEY SAND (SC): medium dense, light brown, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 460.7 452.5 451.0 1-1-1 1-2-2 1-2-2 2-3-3 3-4-4 0.3 8.5 10.0 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Boring Location: Near Sewer Manhole MH-18 Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-11 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 461 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)460 455 450 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): medium dense, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - loose (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 458.7 449.0 4-4-6 5-3-4 2-2-2 2-3-4 2-3-4 0.3 10.0 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Boring Location: Near Sewer Manhole MH-19 Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-12 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 459 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)455 450 445 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sands CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands SILTY SAND (SM): medium dense, orange/brown, moist, fine to medium sands - very loose - loose (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 450.8 448.6 447.5 441.0 2-2-2 3-3-4 4-5-9 1-1-2 2-2-3 0.3 2.4 3.5 10.0 Sample 4: % Passing #200 seive: 15.7 Liquid Limit (LL): NP Plastic Limit (PL): NP Plasticity Index (PI): NP Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Boring Location: Near Sewer Future Manhole MH-20 Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-13 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 451 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)450 445 440 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): very loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - loose, brown - very loose, orange (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 445.8 436.0 2-2-1 2-3-4 2-1-2 2-1-1 2-1-2 0.3 10.0 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Boring Location: Near Sewer Future Manhole MH-21 Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-14 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 446 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)445 440 435 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - orange (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 456.8 447.0 2-3-4 2-2-3 3-3-3 2-3-4 2-3-4 0.3 10.0 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Boring Location: 400 ft East of Borehole 14 Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-15 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 457 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)455 450 445 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense - loose - medium dense, dark brown - brown (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 443.8 434.0 2-3-5 5-5-6 3-3-3 2-5-6 3-4-4 0.3 10.0 Sample 3: % Passing #200 seive: 15.1 Liquid Limit (LL): NP Plastic Limit (PL): NP Plasticity Index (PI): NP Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Boring Location: 730 ft East of Borehole 09A in Parking Lot Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-16 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 444 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)440 435 430 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): very loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 420.8 418.6 411.0 1-1-1 1-2-2 2-2-2 1-2-2 1-2-2 0.3 2.4 10.0 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Boring Location: SW of Proposed Lift Station Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-17 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 421 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)420 415 410 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): very loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - loose - medium dense - loose (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 440.8 431.0 1-1-1 2-2-2 2-8-6 2-3-3 2-2-2 0.3 10.0 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Boring Location: SW of Proposed Lift Station Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-18 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 441 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)440 435 430 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 12 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): very loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - loose - medium dense (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 451.0 442.0 1-1-1 2-2-2 3-4-5 4-7-9 4-4-6 1.0 10.0 Sample 1: % Passing #200 seive: 13.2 Liquid Limit (LL): NP Plastic Limit (PL): NP Plasticity Index (PI): NP Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Boring Location: Along Driving Course Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-19 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 452 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)450 445 440 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, brown/orange, moist, fine to medium sands SILTY SAND (SM): loose, light brown, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense - wet (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 438.8 435.0 429.0 2-3-3 2-3-4 2-2-3 3-6-7 3-5-6 0.3 4.0 10.0 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Boring Location: Along Driving Course Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-20 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 439 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)435 430 425 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, brown/orange, moist, fine to medium sands SANDY CLAY (CL): very stiff, orange/white, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 480.8 476.8 471.0 2-2-2 2-3-4 3-6-7 8-9-13 5-9-14 0.3 4.2 10.0 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/12/18 Boring Location: Near Intersection of Memory Ln and Driving Course Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-21 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 481 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)480 475 470 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 4 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, brown/orange, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 516.7 513.5 507.0 1-2-3 2-3-4 3-3-4 5-6-7 7-7-9 0.3 3.5 10.0 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Boring Location: 700 ft North East of Borehole 23 Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-22 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 517 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)515 510 505 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sands - medium desne - dense (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 520.8 511.0 2-3-4 3-3-5 3-5-10 7-11-12 4-8-9 0.3 10.0 Sample 2: % Passing #200 seive: 45.8 Liquid Limit (LL): 54 Plastic Limit (PL): 33 Plasticity Index (PI): 21 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Boring Location: 700 ft North East of Borehole 24 Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-23 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 521 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)520 515 510 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, orange/brown, moist, fine to medium sands SILTY SAND (SM): medium dense, orange, moist, fine to medium sands SANDY CLAY (CL): very stiff, tan, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 530.8 527.5 522.0 521.0 2-2-3 2-3-4 3-5-5 5-9-10 4-7-8 0.3 3.5 9.0 10.0 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Boring Location: 700 ft North East of Borehole 25 Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-24 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 531 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)530 525 520 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 521.8 512.0 2-2-2 2-2-3 2-2-3 7-7-7 4-7-7 0.3 10.0 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Boring Location: 700 ft East of Borehole 26 Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-25 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 522 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)520 515 510 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands CLAYEY SAND (SC): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense SANDY CLAY (CL): stiff, brown, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 506.8 505.5 499.5 497.0 3-3-5 3-4-4 6-6-7 3-6-6 5-8-11 0.3 1.5 7.5 10.0 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Boring Location: 2250 ft from Center Line of HWY 211 Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-26 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 507 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)505 500 495 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - medium dense (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 480.8 471.0 2-2-3 2-2-3 6-9-10 6-9-8 5-6-7 0.3 10.0 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Boring Location: 1550 ft from Center Line of HWY 211 Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-27 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 481 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)480 475 470 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) CLAYEY SAND (SC): medium dense, brown/orange, moist, fine to medium sands SANDY CLAY (CL): stiff, brown/orange, moist, fine to medium sands - very stiff (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 10 feet 454.8 449.0 445.0 4-5-8 5-5-5 4-5-8 2-3-4 4-6-11 0.3 6.0 10.0 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Boring Location: 850 ft from Center Line of HWY 211 Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-28 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/11/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 455 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: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)455 450 445 440 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Topsoil (Approximately 3 inches) SILTY SAND (SM): very loose, brown, moist, fine to medium sands - loose - very loose, wet CLAYEY SAND (SC): medium dense, gray, moist SANDY CLAY (CL): hard, gray, moist, fine to medium sands (Coastal Plain) Boring Terminated at 35 feet 422.8 409.5 406.0 388.0 1-1-2 1-2-2 2-3-4 1-1-1 W-O-H 5-5-9 11-26-30 27-25-40 22-35-50 10-16-25 0.3 13.5 17.0 35.0 Sample 6: % Passing #200 seive: 33.8 Liquid Limit (LL): 31 Plastic Limit (PL): 16 Plasticity Index (PI): 15 Groundwater not encountered immediately after drilling Boring backfilled 10/11/18 Boring Location: Lift Station - West - Building Pad Auburn, AL Project Number: RD180554 Split SpoonBLOWSPER INCREMENTGROUNDWATER LEVEL IN THE BOREHOLE UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ESTIMATE FROM POCKET PENETROMETER TEST SOIL DESCRIPTION REMARKS Huntsville, AL Columbus, GA Designation: B-29 Sheet 1 of 1 N-Value 20 40 60 80 Date Drilled: 10/12/18 10 20 30 40 Qu (tsf) N-VALUE % MOISTURE Qu Project Name: ATF Infrastructure SAMPLE NO.UNDISTURBED RECOVERY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION LOG OF BORING 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: 423 REMARKS Hammer Type: Automatic DEPTH (ft)DEPTH (ft)SAMPLE TYPEGRAPHIC5 10 15 20 25 30 35 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE (AASHTO T-206) PERCENT NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT SOIL DESCRIPTION N-Value Atterberg Limits Equipment Used: Geoprobe Weather Conditions: 33, Clear Drill Crew: MG Drilling Logged By: A. Wilson Project Location: Fort Bragg, NC 10 20 30 40 Birmingham, AL GRAPHICREC RQD UDELEVATION (ft)420 415 410 405 400 395 390 385 % Moisture 20 40 60 80 SAMPLE TYPE 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Office: (910) 292-2085 Fax: (910) 292-2087 www.BuildingAndEarth.com LOG OF BORING 1 RD180554.GPJ BESI.GDT 11/26/18>> >> >> 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-01 3.5-5 31 22 9 33.8 23.1 B-03 0-2.0 22 17 5 24.6 15.5 B-03 28.5-30 40 25 15 79.1 23.8 B-05 3.5-5 28 21 7 18.8 9.7 B-08 23.5-25 28 17 11 70.1 12.2 B-09A 3.5-5 58 32 26 65.6 23.9 B-10 0-4.0 NP NP NP 13.9 10.0 B-102 3.5-5 ND ND NP 14.9 9.6 B-103 0-4.0 NP NP NP 10.3 6.2 B-13 6-7.5 ND ND NP 15.7 8.1 B-16 3.5-5 ND ND NP 15.1 11.2 B-19 0-4.0 NP NP NP 13.2 8.6 B-23 1.5-3 54 33 21 45.8 19.4 B-29 13.5-15 31 16 15 59.1 14.4 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 COMPACTION TEST REPORT Dry density, pcf107 108 109 110 111 112 Water content, % 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 9.2%, 109.1 pcf ZAV for Sp.G. = 2.65 Test specification:ASTM D 1557-12 Method A Modified SP-SM A-3 6.2 NP NP 0.0 10.3 Light brown poorly graded sand with silt RD180554 ONUS Elev/Classification Nat.Sp.G.LL PI % >% < Depth USCS AASHTO Moist.#4 No.200 TEST RESULTS MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Project No.Client:Remarks: Project: Location: Access Road Sample Number: 18-3113-01 Figure Maximum dry density = 109.1 pcf Optimum moisture = 9.2 % ATF Infrastructure 2018 (GEO) Fort Bragg, NC Checked By: John Dailly 11-19-18 (no specification provided) PL=LL=PI= D90=D85=D60= D50=D30=D15= D10=Cu=Cc= USCS=AASHTO= * Light brown poorly graded sand with silt #4 #10 #20 #40 #100 #200 100.0 99.9 96.4 72.8 18.7 10.3 NP NP NP 0.6507 0.5612 0.3360 0.2833 0.1975 0.1299 SP-SM A-3 As-received water content = 6.2% ONUS ATF Infrastructure 2018 (GEO) Fort Bragg, NC RD180554 Material Description Atterberg Limits Coefficients Classification Remarks Location: Access Road Sample Number: 18-3113-01 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 0.0 0.1 27.1 62.5 10.33 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 2200 Westinghouse Blvd., Suite 103 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • Phone (919) 876-0405 • Fax (919) 876-0460 • www.geotechnics.net DCN: Data Transmittal Letter Date: 1/28/05 Rev.: 1 November 14, 2018 Project No R-2018-311-001 Mr. Kurt Miller Building & Earth Sciences, LLC 610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Transmittal Laboratory Test Results RD180554 ATF Infrastructure 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 (919) 876-0405 • Fax (919) 876-0460 • www.geotechnics.net SINGLE POINT CBR TEST ASTM D 1883-16 Client Building & Earth Sciences, Inc.Boring No.Access Rd. Client Reference RD180554 ATF Infrastructure Depth(ft.)N/A Project No.R-2018-311-001 Sample No.18-3113.01 Lab ID R-2018-311-001-001 Visual Description Light Brown Sand Test Type MODIFIED Molding Method C Density Before After Mold ID R433 Measurement Soaking Soaking Wt. of Mold (gm.)4230.3 Wt. Mold & WS (gm.)8117.3 8334.2 Mold Volume (cc)2121 Wt. WS (gm.)3887 4104 Surcharge (lbs.)10 Sample Volume (cc)2121 2121 Piston Area (in2)3 Wet Density (gm./cc) 1.83 1.93 Sample Height 4.58 Wet Density (pcf) 114.4 120.7 Sample Conditions Soaked Blows per Layer 30 Dry Density (pcf) 104.7 104.0 Dry Density (gm./cc) 1.68 1.67 Water As Begining After Before After Top 1" Contents Rec'd Compaction Compaction Soaking Soaking After Soak Tare No.800 NA 800 399 304 Wt. of T+WS (gm.) 279.81 NA 601.51 746.61 734.03 Wt. of T+DS (gm.) 279.62 NA 559.34 655.1 651.99 Wt of Tare (gm.) 101.83 NA 101.83 86.45 110.55 Moisture Content(%) 0.1 NA 9.2 9.2 16.1 15.2 Piston Penetration Displacement Load Stress Swell (in.)(lbs.)(psi.)Measurement 0 0.98 0.3 Elapsed Dial Percent 0.025 170.37 56.8 Time Gauge Swell 0.050 347.60 115.9 (hrs) (Div) 0.075 524.92 175.0 0.100 690.78 230.3 0.00 374 0.00% 0.125 817.51 272.5 150.00 374 0.00% 0.150 876.97 292.3 0.175 830.05 276.7 0.200 762.88 254.3 0.250 674.15 224.7 0.300 655.02 218.3 0.350 661.61 220.5 0.400 680.35 226.8 0.450 681.74 227.2 0.500 668.17 222.7 0.550 660.53 220.2 0.600 660.98 220.3 1Division = 0.001 in. Tested By SFS Date 11/7/18 Checked By MPS Date 11/14/18 page 1 of 2 DCN: CT-S27 REVSI0N: 5 DATE: 11/15/05DING & EARTH SCIENCES\2018-311 BUILDING & EARTH - RD180554 ATF INFRASTRUCTURE\[2018-311-001-001 1CBR TESTNET.xls]Graph Uncorrected 2200 Westinghouse Blvd., Suite 103 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • Phone (919) 876-0405 • Fax (919) 876-0460 • www.geotechnics.net SINGLE POINT CBR TEST ASTM D 1883-16 Client Building & Earth Sciences, Inc.Boring No.Access Rd. Client Reference RD180554 ATF Infrastructure Depth(ft.)N/A Project No.R-2018-311-001 Sample No. 18-3113.01 Lab ID R-2018-311-001-001 Visual Description Light Brown Sand CBR VALUE (0.1") 23.0 % CBR VALUE (0.2") 17.0 % Tested By SFS Date 11/7/18 Approved By MPS Date 11/14/18 page 2 of 2 DCN: CT-S27 REVSI0N: 5 DATE: 11/15/05G & EARTH SCIENCES\2018-311 BUILDING & EARTH - RD180554 ATF INFRASTRUCTURE\[2018-311-001-001 1CBR TESTNET.xls]Graph Uncorrected 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 300.0 350.0 0.000 0.100 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 0.600 0.700Penetration Stress (psi)Penetration (in) Penetration Stress vs. Penetration Checked By: John Dailly COMPACTION TEST REPORT Dry density, pcf123 124.5 126 127.5 129 130.5 Water content, % 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 8.5%, 129.4 pcf ZAV for Sp.G. = 2.65 Test specification:ASTM D 1557-12 Method A Modified SC-SM A-2-4(0)15.5 22 5 0.4 24.6 Brown red silty, clayey sand RD180554 ONUS Elev/Classification Nat.Sp.G.LL PI % >% < Depth USCS AASHTO Moist.#4 No.200 TEST RESULTS MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Project No.Client:Remarks: Project: Location: B-03 Sample Number: 18-3113-02 Figure Maximum dry density = 129.4 pcf Optimum moisture = 8.5 % ATF Infrastructure 2018 (GEO) Fort Bragg, NC Checked By: John Dailly 11-19-18 (no specification provided) PL=LL=PI= D90=D85=D60= D50=D30=D15= D10=Cu=Cc= USCS=AASHTO= * Brown red silty, clayey sand 1 .75 .375 #4 #10 #20 #40 #100 #200 100.0 99.9 99.9 99.6 98.9 88.9 62.5 30.4 24.6 17 22 5 0.8865 0.7484 0.4001 0.3084 0.1465 SC-SM A-2-4(0) As-received water content = 15.5% ONUS ATF Infrastructure 2018 (GEO) Fort Bragg, NC RD180554 Material Description Atterberg Limits Coefficients Classification Remarks Location: B-03 Sample Number: 18-3113-02 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 0.1 0.3 0.7 36.4 37.9 24.63 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, pcf120 121 122 123 124 125 Water content, % 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 9.3%, 123.9 pcf ZAV for Sp.G. = 2.65 Test specification:ASTM D 1557-12 Method A Modified SM A-2-4(0)10.0 NP NP 0.0 13.9 Brown silty sand RD180554 ONUS Elev/Classification Nat.Sp.G.LL PI % >% < Depth USCS AASHTO Moist.#4 No.200 TEST RESULTS MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Project No.Client:Remarks: Project: Location: B-10 Sample Number: 18-3113-03 Figure Maximum dry density = 123.9 pcf Optimum moisture = 9.3 % ATF Infrastructure 2018 (GEO) Fort Bragg, NC Checked By: John Dailly 11-19-18 (no specification provided) PL=LL=PI= D90=D85=D60= D50=D30=D15= D10=Cu=Cc= USCS=AASHTO= * Brown silty sand #4 #10 #20 #40 #100 #200 100.0 99.1 87.1 61.6 19.6 13.9 NP NP NP 0.9571 0.7871 0.4098 0.3306 0.2097 0.1075 SM A-2-4(0) As-received water content = 10.0% ONUS ATF Infrastructure 2018 (GEO) Fort Bragg, NC RD180554 Material Description Atterberg Limits Coefficients Classification Remarks Location: B-10 Sample Number: 18-3113-03 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 0.0 0.9 37.5 47.7 13.93 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, pcf115 116 117 118 119 120 Water content, % 4.5 6 7.5 9 10.5 12 13.5 9.6%, 119.2 pcf ZAV for Sp.G. = 2.65 Test specification:ASTM D 1557-12 Method A Modified SM A-2-4(0)8.6 NP NP 0.1 13.2 Brown silty sand RD180554 ONUS Elev/Classification Nat.Sp.G.LL PI % >% < Depth USCS AASHTO Moist.#4 No.200 TEST RESULTS MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Project No.Client:Remarks: Project: Location: B-19 Sample Number: 18-3113-04 Figure Maximum dry density = 119.2 pcf Optimum moisture = 9.6 % ATF Infrastructure 2018 (GEO) Fort Bragg, NC Checked By: John Dailly 11-19-18 (no specification provided) PL=LL=PI= D90=D85=D60= D50=D30=D15= D10=Cu=Cc= USCS=AASHTO= * Brown silty sand .75 .375 #4 #10 #20 #40 #100 #200 100.0 100.0 99.9 99.1 89.8 66.7 21.2 13.2 NP NP NP 0.8587 0.7024 0.3673 0.2994 0.1943 0.1033 SM A-2-4(0) As-received water content = 8.6% ONUS ATF Infrastructure 2018 (GEO) Fort Bragg, NC RD180554 Material Description Atterberg Limits Coefficients Classification Remarks Location: B-19 Sample Number: 18-3113-04 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 0.1 0.8 32.4 53.5 13.23 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 Page | A-1 IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THIS GEOTECHNICAL- ENGINEERING REPORT Page | A-2     American States Utility Services March 20, 2019  ATF Infrastructure – Storm Water Management & Storm Drainage Design                      Appendix G ‐ BUILDING AND EARTH SCIENCES SHWT / INFILTRATION REPORT – 02/05/2019  610 Spring Branch Road Dunn, NC 28334 Ph: (910) 292-2085 www.BuildingAndEarth.com Birmingham, AL  Auburn, AL  Huntsville, AL  Montgomery, AL  Columbus, GA Louisville, KY  New Orleans, LA  Raleigh, NC  Springdale, AR  Little Rock, AR  Tulsa, OK February 5, 2019 American States Utility Service (ASUS) 903 Armistead Street Fort Bragg, North Carolina 28307 Attention: Ms. Shay Coombs Subject: Letter of Transmittal for Soil Science and Infiltration Report for Erosion Control and Site Drainage Calculations ATF Infrastructure @ ATF ATF - Fort Bragg, North Carolina Building & Earth Project No: RD180554 Ms. Coombs: As requested, Building & Earth Sciences, LLP is pleased to present the results of the field testing and observations for the above stated project site located along the south access road that will service the new lift station planned for the Aberdeen Training Facility at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. Scope of Service The intent of our testing and field work was to observe and document the soil profile and the groundwater conditions that will affect and influence the drainage rate of the proposed storm water basins for the new facility. At the time of our site work, the preliminary layout plan had been completed by ASUS and the locations for this testing was provided by Ms. Shay Coombs. SHWT determination was performed for each of two (2) basins, and a total of three (3) infiltration tests were performed within the basins. The controlling parameters for the design of infiltration basins are the depth to evidence of Seasonal High Water Table (SHWT), and the saturated (stabilized) permeability of the soils that should be expected in the floor and berms of the basin. Any restr ictive horizons within the soil profile could substantially affect the drainage capacity of the basin. ATF Infrastructure @ ATF Fort Bragg, North Carolina Project No.: RD180554 February 5, 2019 Page ǀ 2 In order to determine the depth to SHWT, Mr. Mike Eaker, a North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist with Southeastern Soil & Environmental Associates, Inc., under contract to Building & Earth Sciences, has assisted with the field work and reporting for this work. Mr. Eaker’s report details the procedures used in his field evaluation, the results of the soil observations, the depth to seasonal high groundwater, and the depth to observed water at each test location. Mr. Eaker’s report is included with this report. The storm water basins for this project may be designed as either wet basins or infiltration basins, provided the guidelines of the current NC Division of water Quality are observed. As required by DWQ, if ponds are designed as wet basins, the permanent pool elevation will need to be set within 6 inches of the SHWT elevation, and the permeability of the soils will need to be less than 0.01 inches per hour. Although it may be more applicable to set the permanent pool elevation at the existing (observed) groundwater elevation, there is no provision for this by DWQ. In the event that the ponds are to be designed as infiltration basins, the floor of the basin will need to be set at an elevation that is at least 24 inches above the SHWT, and the soils will need to dewater the basin within 72 hours. Summary of Field Observations and Testing In order to determine the parameters that the Civil Designer will need to design the basins, the SHWT was determined at each boring location. Once the SHWT was determined, infiltration testing was performed at the elevation provided by our client. While onsite, our representative communicated our results with Ms. Coombs. As directed, we ran an additional test in basin the basin identified as C-201. The results of our testing are summarized below. C-201a C-201b C-202 470.0 470.0 416.0 468.0 468.0 415.0 >110 >110 70 <458.8 <458.8 410.2 NE NE 52.0 NE NE 411.7 25 72 36 467.9 464.0 413.0 0.63 0.12 2.27 CCHP Test Elevation (ft) Depth to Water (in) Location SHWT Elevation (ft) CCHP Test Depth (in) Ksat (in/hour) Ground Elevation (ft)* Bottom of Basin (in) Depth to SHWT (in) Water Elevation (ft) NE – Not Encountered ATF Infrastructure @ ATF Fort Bragg, North Carolina Project No.: RD180554 February 5, 2019 Page ǀ 3 Statement of Design Method. Test Method and Limitations 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 soil saturation, the geometry of the bore hole, and the hydraulic head. To develop our recommendations, Building & Earth has measured/calculated the saturated flow rate (Ksat) for the soils at the site using accepted test methods and equipment. 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 drainage structure. In order to determine the appropriate Ksat for the soils in each 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. The recommendations in this report are limited by a number of geologic considerations. The primary limitation is the fact that geologic formations are variable in nature. The soils in Cumberland County are subject to perched water conditions, artesian conditions, and layers of undulating low permeability clay seams and layers. All of these geologic conditions have an effect on the steady state flow of groundwater. To the extent possible we have identified the material types that will impact the flow of groundwater, and have provided our professional opinion regarding the depth (elevation) to evidence of SHWT. Although Building & Earth has not provided an exhaustive survey of all of the soil deposits at the site, it is our opinion that we have properly and adequately characterized the site with regard to flow from the storm water basins that are planned for this development. ATF Infrastructure @ ATF Fort Bragg, North Carolina Project No.: RD180554 February 5, 2019 Page ǀ 4 Closing If you need further information, or if we can provide additional service, please do not hesitate to contact us. Respectfully Submitted, Building & Earth Sciences, LLP Kurt A. Miller, P.E. Senior Geotechnical Engineer Attachments: Soil Scientist Report for Soil Profile and SHWT, and CCHP Testing Results Boring Location Map BES Project #: RD180554 Address: King Road Drawing Source: (ATF) PN80037 – Sheet C-201 City: Aberdeen, NC Client: ASUS Figure 1 Project: ATF Infrastructure- Bio-retention Ponds SHWT & Infiltration Location N 200 100 0 Approximate Scale (feet) Boring Location Map BES Project #: RD180554 Address: King Road Drawing Source: (ATF) PN80037 – Sheet C-202 City: Aberdeen, NC Client: ASUS Figure 1 Project: ATF Infrastructure- Bio-retention Ponds SHWT & Infiltration Location N 200 100 0 Approximate Scale (feet) 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 9 :07E9:09S9:09E9:14S9:14E9:17S9:17E9:20SESESESESESESESESESE Stabilized Ksat in/hr 0.63 CCHP - 1 13 14 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 0.632/1 8.10.22 15.3 20 14442/1 0.05 175.753 175.75 0.632/1 15.30.17 22.5 20 1442/1 0.05 0.632/1 22.50.12 34.5 20 24022/1 0.08 285.591 175.75 1.03 Performed above clay layer in firm SM Soil2/1 34.50.03 42.3 20 1562/1 0.03 Remarks: Weather conditions, etc.Reading Tube Flow Flow cm³ Flow Rate in³/hr Ksat in/hr 1.200 25 Test Data Trial #Date Time Elapsed Time (hrs) Δ | Total Flow Readings Saturated Conductivity 9:05 9 Storage Tube 5L 2 On 105.000 Sight Tube 1L 1 On 20.000 Location 201 Basin - Shallow NA Constants: Capacity Liquid Containers 20 2.4 setting Rate cm³/cm Test Constants Municipal Water >110"65 3 Technician:Brad Carlson Date:2/1/2019 Client Name:ASUS 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:ATF Infrastructure Project Number:RD180554 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 :13E10:23S10:23E10:33S10:33E10:43S10:43E10:53SESESESESESESESESESE 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:ATF Infrastructure Project Number:RD180554 Client Name:ASUS Report Number:2 3 Technician:Brad Carlson Date:2/1/2019 Test Constants Municipal Water >110"65 Location 201 Basin - deep NA Constants: Capacity Liquid Containers 20 2.4 setting Rate cm³/cm Sight Tube 1L 1 On 20.000 10:11 7.5 Storage Tube 5L 2 On 105.000 1.200 72 Test Data Trial #Date Time Elapsed Time (hrs) Δ | Total Flow Readings Saturated Conductivity Remarks: Weather conditions, etc.Reading Tube Flow Flow cm³ Flow Rate in³/hr Ksat in/hr 1 2/1 0.17 0.17 26.2 20 96 35.15 0.17 Performed below clay layer in firm SC/SM soil2/1 21.4 2 2/1 0.17 0.33 21.4 20 68 24.90 0.122/1 18.0 3 2/1 0.17 0.50 18.0 20 70 25.63 0.122/1 14.5 4 2/1 0.17 0.67 14.5 20 70 25.63 0.122/1 11.0 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Stabilized Ksat in/hr 0.12 CCHP - 2 14 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 11 :13E11:17S11:17E11:21S11:21E11:23S11:23E11:24SESESESESESESESESESE 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:ATF Infrastructure Project Number:RD180554 Client Name:ASUS Report Number:3 3 Technician:Brad Carlson Date:2/1/2019 Test Constants Municipal Water 70"65 Location 202 Basin 48 Constants: Capacity Liquid Containers 105 2.4 setting Rate cm³/cm Sight Tube 1L 1 On 20.000 11:15 10.25 Storage Tube 5L 2 On 105.000 1.200 36 Test Data Trial #Date Time Elapsed Time (hrs) Δ | Total Flow Readings Saturated Conductivity Remarks: Weather conditions, etc.Reading Tube Flow Flow cm³ Flow Rate in³/hr Ksat in/hr 1 2/1 0.07 0.07 31.0 105 1050 961.12 2.84 Performed appox 2' below bottom of basin elevation2/1 21.0 2 2/1 0.07 0.13 21.0 105 840 768.90 2.272/1 13.0 3 2/1 0.03 0.17 13.0 105 420 768.90 2.272/1 9.0 4 2/1 0.02 0.18 9.0 105 210 768.90 2.272/1 7.0 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Stabilized Ksat in/hr 2.27 CCHP - 3 14     American States Utility Services March 20, 2019  ATF Infrastructure – Storm Water Management & Storm Drainage Design                      Appendix H ‐ FORT BRAGG RAINFALL DEPTH AND INTENSITY CHARTS  NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 2, Version 3 Location name: Fort Bragg, North Carolina, USA* Latitude: 35.1356°, Longitude: -78.9973° Elevation: 241.59 ft** * source: ESRI Maps ** source: USGS POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES G.M. Bonnin, D. Martin, B. Lin, T. Parzybok, M.Yekta, and D. Riley NOAA, National Weather Service, Silver Spring, Maryland PF_tabular | PF_graphical | Maps_&_aerials PF tabular PDS-based point precipitation frequency estimates with 90% confidence intervals (in inches)1 Duration Average recurrence interval (years) 1 2 5 10 25 50 100 200 500 1000 5-min 0.434 (0.390-0.486) 0.511 (0.461-0.573) 0.596 (0.537-0.668) 0.659 (0.592-0.736) 0.734 (0.656-0.818) 0.787 (0.703-0.875) 0.837 (0.743-0.929) 0.883 (0.781-0.980) 0.939 (0.823-1.04) 0.982 (0.855-1.09) 10-min 0.693 (0.623-0.776) 0.818 (0.737-0.916) 0.955 (0.860-1.07) 1.05 (0.947-1.18) 1.17 (1.05-1.30) 1.25 (1.12-1.39) 1.33 (1.18-1.48) 1.40 (1.24-1.55) 1.49 (1.30-1.65) 1.55 (1.35-1.71) 15-min 0.866 (0.779-0.970) 1.03 (0.926-1.15) 1.21 (1.09-1.35) 1.33 (1.20-1.49) 1.48 (1.33-1.65) 1.59 (1.42-1.76) 1.68 (1.49-1.87) 1.77 (1.56-1.96) 1.87 (1.64-2.07) 1.94 (1.69-2.15) 30-min 1.19 (1.07-1.33) 1.42 (1.28-1.59) 1.72 (1.55-1.92) 1.93 (1.74-2.16) 2.19 (1.96-2.45) 2.39 (2.13-2.66) 2.58 (2.29-2.86) 2.75 (2.43-3.05) 2.98 (2.61-3.30) 3.14 (2.74-3.48) 60-min 1.48 (1.33-1.66) 1.78 (1.61-2.00) 2.20 (1.98-2.46) 2.52 (2.26-2.81) 2.92 (2.61-3.26) 3.24 (2.89-3.60) 3.55 (3.15-3.94) 3.86 (3.41-4.28) 4.27 (3.74-4.73) 4.59 (4.00-5.09) 2-hr 1.73 (1.54-1.97) 2.10 (1.87-2.39) 2.63 (2.34-2.99) 3.04 (2.70-3.44) 3.58 (3.16-4.06) 4.00 (3.52-4.54) 4.43 (3.87-5.02) 4.86 (4.22-5.50) 5.43 (4.67-6.14) 5.88 (5.02-6.65) 3-hr 1.84 (1.64-2.10) 2.23 (1.99-2.54) 2.80 (2.50-3.19) 3.26 (2.90-3.70) 3.89 (3.43-4.41) 4.39 (3.85-4.98) 4.91 (4.28-5.57) 5.46 (4.72-6.18) 6.21 (5.31-7.02) 6.81 (5.76-7.70) 6-hr 2.19 (1.98-2.45) 2.66 (2.40-2.96) 3.35 (3.01-3.73) 3.90 (3.50-4.34) 4.66 (4.16-5.19) 5.29 (4.68-5.87) 5.94 (5.21-6.58) 6.62 (5.76-7.32) 7.57 (6.50-8.36) 8.33 (7.08-9.20) 12-hr 2.59 (2.34-2.88) 3.13 (2.83-3.49) 3.97 (3.58-4.42) 4.65 (4.17-5.17) 5.60 (4.99-6.20) 6.39 (5.65-7.05) 7.22 (6.32-7.95) 8.10 (7.02-8.90) 9.35 (7.98-10.3) 10.4 (8.74-11.4) 24-hr 3.06 (2.85-3.30) 3.70 (3.44-3.99) 4.68 (4.35-5.05) 5.46 (5.06-5.88) 6.53 (6.03-7.03) 7.39 (6.80-7.95) 8.28 (7.60-8.90) 9.20 (8.42-9.89) 10.5 (9.53-11.3) 11.5 (10.4-12.4) 2-day 3.55 (3.31-3.81) 4.28 (4.00-4.60) 5.38 (5.01-5.78) 6.24 (5.81-6.70) 7.44 (6.89-7.98) 8.39 (7.75-9.00) 9.37 (8.63-10.1) 10.4 (9.53-11.2) 11.8 (10.8-12.7) 12.9 (11.7-13.9) 3-day 3.77 (3.52-4.03) 4.54 (4.25-4.86) 5.66 (5.29-6.06) 6.55 (6.11-7.00) 7.78 (7.22-8.32) 8.77 (8.11-9.36) 9.78 (9.02-10.5) 10.8 (9.94-11.6) 12.3 (11.2-13.1) 13.4 (12.2-14.4) 4-day 3.99 (3.73-4.25) 4.79 (4.49-5.11) 5.95 (5.56-6.34) 6.87 (6.41-7.31) 8.13 (7.56-8.66) 9.14 (8.47-9.73) 10.2 (9.40-10.8) 11.3 (10.4-12.0) 12.7 (11.7-13.6) 13.9 (12.7-14.8) 7-day 4.62 (4.31-4.94) 5.52 (5.15-5.91) 6.77 (6.31-7.25) 7.76 (7.23-8.31) 9.12 (8.47-9.76) 10.2 (9.46-10.9) 11.3 (10.5-12.1) 12.5 (11.5-13.4) 14.1 (12.9-15.1) 15.3 (14.0-16.4) 10-day 5.27 (4.96-5.61) 6.29 (5.91-6.68) 7.59 (7.13-8.07) 8.62 (8.08-9.15) 10.00 (9.35-10.6) 11.1 (10.3-11.8) 12.2 (11.3-12.9) 13.3 (12.3-14.1) 14.8 (13.7-15.8) 16.0 (14.7-17.1) 20-day 7.10 (6.67-7.56) 8.40 (7.90-8.95) 9.98 (9.36-10.6) 11.2 (10.5-11.9) 12.9 (12.0-13.7) 14.2 (13.2-15.1) 15.5 (14.4-16.5) 16.9 (15.6-18.0) 18.7 (17.2-19.9) 20.1 (18.5-21.5) 30-day 8.84 (8.33-9.40) 10.4 (9.82-11.1) 12.2 (11.5-12.9) 13.5 (12.7-14.4) 15.3 (14.4-16.3) 16.7 (15.6-17.8) 18.1 (16.9-19.2) 19.4 (18.1-20.7) 21.2 (19.7-22.7) 22.6 (20.9-24.2) 45-day 11.2 (10.6-11.9) 13.1 (12.4-13.9) 15.1 (14.3-16.0) 16.6 (15.7-17.6) 18.6 (17.5-19.6) 20.0 (18.8-21.2) 21.5 (20.1-22.7) 22.9 (21.4-24.3) 24.8 (23.1-26.3) 26.2 (24.3-27.8) 60-day 13.4 (12.7-14.1) 15.7 (14.9-16.5) 17.9 (16.9-18.8) 19.5 (18.5-20.6) 21.6 (20.5-22.8) 23.2 (21.9-24.5) 24.8 (23.4-26.1) 26.3 (24.8-27.8) 28.3 (26.5-29.9) 29.7 (27.8-31.5) 1 Precipitation frequency (PF) estimates in this table are based on frequency analysis of partial duration series (PDS). Numbers in parenthesis are PF estimates at lower and upper bounds of the 90% confidence interval. The probability that precipitation frequency estimates (for a given duration and average recurrence interval) will be greater than the upper bound (or less than the lower bound) is 5%. Estimates at upper bounds are not checked against probable maximum precipitation (PMP) estimates and may be higher than currently valid PMP values. Please refer to NOAA Atlas 14 document for more information. Back to Top Page 1 of 4Precipitation Frequency Data Server 10/31/2018https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=35.1356&lon=-78.9973&da... NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 2, Version 3 Location name: Fort Bragg, North Carolina, USA* Latitude: 35.1356°, Longitude: -78.9973° Elevation: 241.59 ft** * source: ESRI Maps ** source: USGS POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES G.M. Bonnin, D. Martin, B. Lin, T. Parzybok, M.Yekta, and D. Riley NOAA, National Weather Service, Silver Spring, Maryland PF_tabular | PF_graphical | Maps_&_aerials PF tabular PDS-based point precipitation frequency estimates with 90% confidence intervals (in inches/hour)1 Duration Average recurrence interval (years) 1 2 5 10 25 50 100 200 500 1000 5-min 5.21 (4.68-5.83) 6.13 (5.53-6.88) 7.15 (6.44-8.02) 7.91 (7.10-8.83) 8.81 (7.87-9.82) 9.44 (8.44-10.5) 10.0 (8.92-11.1) 10.6 (9.37-11.8) 11.3 (9.88-12.5) 11.8 (10.3-13.1) 10-min 4.16 (3.74-4.66) 4.91 (4.42-5.50) 5.73 (5.16-6.41) 6.32 (5.68-7.06) 7.01 (6.27-7.82) 7.52 (6.71-8.36) 7.98 (7.09-8.86) 8.40 (7.42-9.32) 8.92 (7.81-9.88) 9.28 (8.08-10.3) 15-min 3.46 (3.12-3.88) 4.11 (3.70-4.60) 4.83 (4.35-5.41) 5.33 (4.79-5.96) 5.93 (5.30-6.61) 6.34 (5.67-7.06) 6.72 (5.97-7.47) 7.06 (6.24-7.84) 7.48 (6.55-8.29) 7.76 (6.76-8.60) 30-min 2.37 (2.14-2.66) 2.84 (2.56-3.18) 3.43 (3.09-3.84) 3.86 (3.47-4.32) 4.39 (3.92-4.90) 4.78 (4.27-5.32) 5.15 (4.57-5.72) 5.50 (4.86-6.10) 5.95 (5.21-6.60) 6.29 (5.47-6.97) 60-min 1.48 (1.33-1.66) 1.78 (1.61-2.00) 2.20 (1.98-2.46) 2.52 (2.26-2.81) 2.92 (2.61-3.26) 3.24 (2.89-3.60) 3.55 (3.15-3.94) 3.86 (3.41-4.28) 4.27 (3.74-4.73) 4.59 (4.00-5.09) 2-hr 0.865 (0.770-0.986) 1.05 (0.935-1.19) 1.31 (1.17-1.49) 1.52 (1.35-1.72) 1.79 (1.58-2.03) 2.00 (1.76-2.27) 2.21 (1.93-2.51) 2.43 (2.11-2.75) 2.72 (2.34-3.07) 2.94 (2.51-3.33) 3-hr 0.613 (0.546-0.698) 0.741 (0.661-0.844) 0.933 (0.832-1.06) 1.09 (0.965-1.23) 1.29 (1.14-1.47) 1.46 (1.28-1.66) 1.64 (1.42-1.85) 1.82 (1.57-2.06) 2.07 (1.77-2.34) 2.27 (1.92-2.56) 6-hr 0.366 (0.330-0.409) 0.443 (0.400-0.495) 0.559 (0.503-0.623) 0.651 (0.585-0.725) 0.779 (0.694-0.866) 0.883 (0.782-0.980) 0.991 (0.870-1.10) 1.11 (0.961-1.22) 1.26 (1.09-1.40) 1.39 (1.18-1.54) 12-hr 0.215 (0.194-0.239) 0.260 (0.235-0.289) 0.330 (0.297-0.367) 0.386 (0.346-0.429) 0.465 (0.414-0.515) 0.530 (0.469-0.585) 0.599 (0.524-0.660) 0.672 (0.582-0.739) 0.776 (0.663-0.853) 0.861 (0.726-0.944) 24-hr 0.128 (0.119-0.138) 0.154 (0.143-0.166) 0.195 (0.181-0.210) 0.228 (0.211-0.245) 0.272 (0.251-0.293) 0.308 (0.283-0.331) 0.345 (0.317-0.371) 0.383 (0.351-0.412) 0.436 (0.397-0.469) 0.478 (0.433-0.515) 2-day 0.074 (0.069-0.079) 0.089 (0.083-0.096) 0.112 (0.104-0.120) 0.130 (0.121-0.139) 0.155 (0.143-0.166) 0.175 (0.161-0.187) 0.195 (0.180-0.210) 0.216 (0.198-0.232) 0.245 (0.224-0.264) 0.269 (0.244-0.289) 3-day 0.052 (0.049-0.056) 0.063 (0.059-0.067) 0.079 (0.073-0.084) 0.091 (0.085-0.097) 0.108 (0.100-0.116) 0.122 (0.113-0.130) 0.136 (0.125-0.145) 0.150 (0.138-0.161) 0.170 (0.156-0.182) 0.186 (0.169-0.199) 4-day 0.042 (0.039-0.044) 0.050 (0.047-0.053) 0.062 (0.058-0.066) 0.072 (0.067-0.076) 0.085 (0.079-0.090) 0.095 (0.088-0.101) 0.106 (0.098-0.113) 0.117 (0.108-0.125) 0.133 (0.121-0.142) 0.145 (0.132-0.155) 7-day 0.027 (0.026-0.029) 0.033 (0.031-0.035) 0.040 (0.038-0.043) 0.046 (0.043-0.049) 0.054 (0.050-0.058) 0.061 (0.056-0.065) 0.067 (0.062-0.072) 0.074 (0.068-0.080) 0.084 (0.077-0.090) 0.091 (0.083-0.098) 10-day 0.022 (0.021-0.023) 0.026 (0.025-0.028) 0.032 (0.030-0.034) 0.036 (0.034-0.038) 0.042 (0.039-0.044) 0.046 (0.043-0.049) 0.051 (0.047-0.054) 0.055 (0.051-0.059) 0.062 (0.057-0.066) 0.067 (0.061-0.071) 20-day 0.015 (0.014-0.016) 0.017 (0.016-0.019) 0.021 (0.020-0.022) 0.023 (0.022-0.025) 0.027 (0.025-0.029) 0.030 (0.028-0.031) 0.032 (0.030-0.034) 0.035 (0.033-0.037) 0.039 (0.036-0.042) 0.042 (0.038-0.045) 30-day 0.012 (0.012-0.013) 0.014 (0.014-0.015) 0.017 (0.016-0.018) 0.019 (0.018-0.020) 0.021 (0.020-0.023) 0.023 (0.022-0.025) 0.025 (0.023-0.027) 0.027 (0.025-0.029) 0.029 (0.027-0.031) 0.031 (0.029-0.034) 45-day 0.010 (0.010-0.011) 0.012 (0.011-0.013) 0.014 (0.013-0.015) 0.015 (0.014-0.016) 0.017 (0.016-0.018) 0.019 (0.017-0.020) 0.020 (0.019-0.021) 0.021 (0.020-0.022) 0.023 (0.021-0.024) 0.024 (0.023-0.026) 60-day 0.009 (0.009-0.010) 0.011 (0.010-0.011) 0.012 (0.012-0.013) 0.014 (0.013-0.014) 0.015 (0.014-0.016) 0.016 (0.015-0.017) 0.017 (0.016-0.018) 0.018 (0.017-0.019) 0.020 (0.018-0.021) 0.021 (0.019-0.022) 1 Precipitation frequency (PF) estimates in this table are based on frequency analysis of partial duration series (PDS). Numbers in parenthesis are PF estimates at lower and upper bounds of the 90% confidence interval. The probability that precipitation frequency estimates (for a given duration and average recurrence interval) will be greater than the upper bound (or less than the lower bound) is 5%. Estimates at upper bounds are not checked against probable maximum precipitation (PMP) estimates and may be higher than currently valid PMP values. Please refer to NOAA Atlas 14 document for more information. Back to Top Page 1 of 4Precipitation Frequency Data Server 10/31/2018https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=35.1356&lon=-78.9973&da...     American States Utility Services March 20, 2019  ATF Infrastructure – Storm Water Management & Storm Drainage Design                      Appendix I ‐ NCRS RIPRAP OUTLET DESIGN CHART  Design Guide MD#6 Riprap Design Methods NRCS Engineering, Maryland October, 2003 Page 17 Sheet 2 of 3