SW5220302_Stormwater Report (As-Built)_20220406

March 30, 2022
NARRATIVE, AS -BUILT CALCULATIONS / SOILS
REPORTS / AS -BUILT CONSTRUCTION PHOTOS
FOR STORMWATER REVIEW
for project
North Carolina National Guard
JFHQ Helipad
SCO#17-16713-01 A
Site Address: 1636 Gold Star Drive, Suite 2600, Raleigh, NC 27607
Engineer
Timmons Group
Attn: Frank Slinsky III, PE
5410 Trinity Road, Ste. 102
Raleigh, NC 27607
T: 919.866.4505
E: frank.slinsky(a.timmons.com
Owner / Developer
North Carolina National Guard
Attn: LTC Rodney Newton
1636 Gold Star Dr., Suite 2600
Raleigh, NC 27607
T:984.345.6137
E: rodney.d.newton.mil(a)mail.mil

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Stormwater Narrative
As -Built Stormwater Calculations
Bioretention Sizing
Pre -Post Development Hydraulic Routing
Pipe Sizing Calculations
Outlet Protection Calculations
Nutrient Calculations (SNAP)
Seasonal High Water Table Report
Geotechnical Exploration Report
Bioretention Media Soil Report
As -Built Construction Photos

Stormwater Narrative

Narrative
1. General Information
a. Project Name: North Carolina National Guard JFHQ Helipad
b. Address: 1636 Gold Star Drive, Suite 2600, Raleigh, NC
c. Total Site Area: 12.64 Acres
d. Disturbed Area: 11.3 Acres
e. Wetlands and Jurisdictional Streams: A environmental survey was completed for the site in
January 2019 which was confirmed by the USACE with the following results:
1.There are no Wetlands are on the project site.
2.There is 289-If of jurisdictional stream on the property and a 50' riparian buffer
around it. (there will be no impacts to the stream or buffer as part of this project)
f. Ownership: North Carolina National Guard
g. Proposed Development: The North Carolina National is planning to build a limited -use
helipad on their State property adjacent to Joint Forces headquarters between District Drive
(SR 1774) and Wade Avenue Extension (SR 1728). The helipad is being designed in
accordance with State and Federal regulations to land and park up to three helicopters as
required for the North Carolina National Guard and State Emergency Management to
increase response times during states of emergency. Initially the facility was designed to be
larger, but the North Carolina National Guard reduced the footprint for low impact to the
surrounding area while still maintaining FAA and Antiterrorism Force Protection (ATFP)
safety requirements.
The NCDOT Board of Transportation has approved abandonment of a 28,047-sf linear
section of the Wade Avenue right-of-way and tree clearing within the right-of-way for a safe
landing zone. The request for the sliver of right-of-way is dictated by the required elevation for
the landing pad and minimum surrounding slopes, the minimum size helipad parking pad,
ATFP standoff distances, and FAA clear zone requirements. Tree clearing is required for a
safe landing approach and on to 3:1 slope off the ATFP stand-off from the perimeter security
fence. All cleared areas, including those within the right-of-way, will be planted with Bermuda
grass and the National Guard agrees to maintain and upkeep those grass areas after
construction. There are no proposed changes to existing stormwater flows off the site. The
site is located within the Neuse Watershed.
The site naturally drains to the northwest. Stormwater runoff will be captured in ditches and
pipes. Stormwater quality and quantity regulations will be met via a bioretention cell that will
treat stormwater for nutrients and reduce post development runoff to below pre -development
levels.
h. Phasing: This project will be completed in a single phase.
Existing Stormwater Permit: N/A
NCDEQ Compliance Issues: None.
k. Water & Sewer Service: N/A
I. Historic Sites: N/A This is not a historic site and there are no historic features on this site.
m. Public Funding This project is being funded through the state Connect NC Bond through the
North Carolina National Guard.
n. FEMA FIRM # 3720078400J, dated May 5th, 2006 indicates there are no 100-year or 500-
year flood plains that exist on the project site.
o. Soils on the site consist of predominately Pacolet sandy loam and Cecil sandy loam. Pacolet
Soils have a HSG Soil Classification of B and Cecil Soils have a HSG Soil Classifications A.
p. Pre -development BUA (On -Site): 0.00-ac
q. Post -development BUA (On -Site): 2.73-ac

As -Built Stormwater Calculations
Bioretention Sizing
Pre -Post Development Hydraulic Routing
Pipe Sizing Calculations
Outlet Protection Calculations
Nutrient Calculations (SNAP)

J
11-Mar-22 ..
2866 TIMMONSoGpROUP
Drainage Area, (DA) =
6.11 ac
Impervious Area c=0.95
2.73 ac
Pervious Area c= 0.35
3.38 ac
Cc =
0.62
Impervious =
44.7
Temporary Water Quality Pool
Design Storm Rainfall
1.00 in (Typically 1-in)
Runoff Coeff. (Rv = 0.05 + 0.009 (% Imperv.)) =
0.45 ac/ac
Required Volume (design rainfall)(Rv)(DA) =
10,028 cf
Bio-Retention Design
Depth of Storage= 12 in
Surface Area Req: 10,028 sf
Surface Area Provided= 11,088 sf
Underdrain Design
Soil Mix Hyd. Conductivity, K =
2.0 inthr =
Surface Area, A =
11088 sf
Flow through Soil Mix, (K x A)
0.513 cfs
Safety Factor =
3.5
Design Flow, Q =
1.797 cfs
Req'd Underdrain Pipe Diameter, D =
9.92 in
D=16[(Qxn)/S"]'a
S = Underdrain Slope = 0.5%
n = 0.O11 (smooth PVC)
Number of Pipes Required in Underdrain (per Tbl 5-1, NCDENR BMP Manual)
If D is <
# 4" Pipes
If D is <
# 6" Pipes
5.13
2
7.84
2
5.95
3
9.11
3
6.66
4
10.13
4
722
5
11.03
5
7.75
6
11.82
6
820
7
12.45
7
13.09
8
13.68
9
1423
1 10
Underdrains Provided
Diameter =
6 in
Quantity =
4
Water Quality Volume
Percent Impervious, 1
45%
Rv = 0.05 + 0.009(1)
0.45
1.0 inch Runoff volume (Required)
Runoff Volume, S = (Design Rainfall) (Rv) (Drainage
Area)
Design Rainfall =
1.0 in
Drainage Area =
6.11 ac
Storage Required =
10028 cf
Stage Storage
Elevation (ft) Area (sgft) Inc. Storage (cf)
Total Storage (cf)
426 11088
427 12267 11677.5
11677.50
428 13491 12879
24556.50
WQV Elevation =
426.87
Weir Elevation =
42722
4.6E-05 fps
s \1319\Wg1l�alrs\Biaelen\ion Si g(-built) printed T1012M4:14PM Page 1 of

CONTROL STRUCTURE NAME
CONTROL STRUCTURE O
CALCULATED BY TIMMONS GROUP
JDL ENG'NEE RING DESIGN TECH N OLOG I.
ANTI-BOUYANCY CALCULATIONS
,DIMENSIONS OF CONTROL
Length of the Riser Exterior (L)
4.83
ft
Width of the Riser Exterior (W)
4.83
ft
Wall Thickness of the Riser (WT)
0.416
ft
Top of Riser Elevation
427.22
ft
Invert Out of Outlet Pipe
422.30
ft
Concrete / Non -shrink Grout Base Height
1.75
ft
Height of Resultant Riser (H)
6.67
ft
Volume of Riser and Base (Vr)
77.00
Cu-ft
Area of Weir 1
Area of Weir 2
0.00 ftA2
0.00 ftA2
Area of Weir 3 0.00 ftA2
Void Volume of Weirs (Vw) 0.00 Cu-ft
Outlet Pipe Diameter 18.00 inches
Void Volume of Pipe (Vp) 0.73 Cu-ft
Volume of Displaced Water (Vwat) 155.7004 Cu-ft
Weight of Displaced Water 9715.706 Ibs
Factor of Safety 1.15 FS
Resultant Weight of Displaced Water 11173.06 Ibs
Weight of Concrete Riser 11550.02 Ibs
Void Weight of Weirs 0 Ibs
Void Weight of Pipes 110 Ibs
Total Weight of Control Structure 11440 Ibs
Total Weight > Displaced Water Weight? OK
JFHQ Helipad
PROJECT NUMBER
42866
(Typically 6" (0.5 ft) to 8" (0.67 ft) thickness)
(Obtained from Hydrographs)
(Obtained from Hydrographs)
(1.5' minumum. Engineer to ensure base is deeper than toe of slope)
(Top of Riser Elevation - Invert Out of Outlet Pipe - Base Height)
(Obtained from Hydrographs)
(Obtained from Hydrographs)
(Obtained from Hydrographs)
(Obtained from Hydrographs)
(Control Structure Length (L) * Width (W) * Height (H))
(Weight = Volume (Vwat) * unit weight of water 62.4 Ibs/ftA3)
Factor
(Weight = Volume (Vr) * unit weight of concrete 150 Ibs/ftA3)
(Void Weight = Volume (Vw) * unit weight of concrete 150 Ibs/ftA3)
(Void Weight = Volume (Vp) * unit weight of concrete 150 Ibs/ftA3)
(Weight of Concrete Riser - Void Weight of Weirs - Void Weight of Pipes)
f Total Weight < Water Weight (Increase Base Height / Increase Wall Thickness
s:\1319\0001\calcs\Bioretention Sizing (as built) printed: 3/10/2022 4:19 PM Page 1 of 1

I
Watershed Model Schematic HydraflowHydrographsExtension for Autodesk®Civil 3D®byAutodesk,Inc. v2021
� �
5
Le end
Hvd. Origin Description
1 Mod. Rational Pre Development
2 Mod. Rational Post Development SCM
3 Mod. Rational Post Development Bypass
4 Reservoir Bioretention Routing
5 Combine Combined
Project: Pre -post Calcs (as built).gpw Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022

Hydrograph Return Period Recap
draflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Hyd.
Hydrograph
Inflow
Peak Outflow (cfs)
Hydrograph
No.
type
hyd(s)
Description
(origin)
1-yr
2-yr
3-yr
5-yr
10-yr
25-yr
50-yr
100-yr
1
Mod. Rational
------
9.425
11.30
-------
-------
15.87
-------
-------
22.09
Pre Development
2
Mod. Rational
------
6.181
6.877
-------
-------
6.245
-------
-------
7.982
Post Development SCM
3
Mod. Rational
------
6.600
7.912
-------
-------
11.11
-------
-------
15.47
Post Development Bypass
4
Reservoir
2
2.593
5.928
-------
-------
6.244
-------
-------
7.982
Bioretention Routing
5
Combine
3,4
9.193
13.84
-------
-------
17.23
-------
-------
23.44
Combined
Proj. file: Pre -post Calcs (as built).gpw
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022

Hydrograph Summary Report Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3DO by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Hyd.
No.
Hydrograph
type
(origin)
Peak
flow
(cfs)
Time
interval
(min)
Time to
Peak
(min)
Hyd.
volume
(cult)
Inflow
hyd(s)
Maximum
elevation
(ft)
Total
strge used
(cuft)
Hydrograph
Description
1
Mod. Rational
9.425
1
22
37,325
------
------
------
Pre Development
2
Mod. Rational
6.181
1
6
17,447
------
------
------
Post Development SCM
3
Mod. Rational
6.600
1
22
26,137
------
------
------
Post Development Bypass
4
Reservoir
2.593
1
50
17,411
2
427.31
15,668
Bioretention Routing
5
Combine
9.193
1
50
43,549
3,4
------
------
Combined
Pre -post Calcs (as built).gpw
Return Period: 1 Year
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022

4
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Hyd. No. 1
Pre Development
Hydrograph type
= Mod. Rational
Peak discharge
= 9.425 cfs
Storm frequency
= 1 yrs
Time to peak
= 0.37 hrs
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 37,325 cuft
Drainage area
= 17.580 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.42*
Intensity
= 1.277 in/hr
Tc by TR55
= 22.00 min
OF Curve
= Helipad.IDF
Storm duration
= 3.0 x Tc
Target Q
=n/a
Est. Req'd Storage
=n/a
* Composite (Area/C) = [(15.640 x 0.35) + (1.940 x 0.95)] / 17.580
Q (cfs)
10.00
. 11
4.00
2.00
Pre Development
Hyd. No. 1 -- 1 Year
Q (cfs)
10.00
. 11
4.00
2.00
0.00 ' 0.00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5
Hyd No. 1 Time (hrs)

TR55 Tc Worksheet
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Hyd. No. 1
Pre Development
Description
A
B
C
Totals
Sheet Flow
Manning's n-value
= 0.150
0.011
0.011
Flow length (ft)
= 300.0
0.0
0.0
Two-year 24-hr precip. (in)
= 3.46
0.00
0.00
Land slope (%)
= 4.40
0.00
0.00
Travel Time (min)
= 16.55 +
0.00 +
0.00 =
16.55
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Flow length (ft)
= 1026.00
0.00
0.00
Watercourse slope (%)
= 4.40
0.00
0.00
Surface description
= Unpaved
Paved
Paved
Average velocity (ft/s)
=3.38
0.00
0.00
Travel Time (min)
= 5.05 +
0.00 +
0.00 =
5.05
Channel Flow
X sectional flow area (sqft)
= 16.00
0.00
0.00
Wetted perimeter (ft)
= 16.00
0.00
0.00
Channel slope (%)
= 3.20
0.00
0.00
Manning's n-value
= 0.026
0.015
0.015
Velocity (ft/s)
=10.25
0.00
0.00
Flow length (ft)
({0})725.0
0.0
0.0
Travel Time (min)
= 1.18 +
0.00 +
0.00 =
1.18
TotalTravel Time, Tc..............................................................................
22.00 min

Hydrograph Report
I
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Hyd. No. 2
Post Development SCM
Hydrograph type
= Mod. Rational
Storm frequency
= 1 yrs
Time interval
= 1 min
Drainage area
= 6.110 ac
Intensity
= 1.632 in/hr
OF Curve
= Helipad.IDF
Target Q
=3.600 cfs
* Composite (Area/C) = [(2.730 x 0.95) + (3.380 x 0.35)] / 6.110
Q (cfs)
7.00
5.00
i
3.00
2.00
1.00
Peak discharge
Time to peak
Hyd. volume
Runoff coeff.
Tc by TR55
Storm duration
Est. Req'd Storage
Post Development SCM
Hyd. No. 2 -- 1 Year
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
= 6.181 cfs
= 0.10 hrs
= 17,447 cuft
= 0.62*
= 6.00 min
= 7.8 x Tc
=11,661 cuft
Q (cfs)
7.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 I/ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I u 0.00
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 2 Mod. Rational Est. Storage = 11,661 cuft

7
TR55 Tc Worksheet
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Hyd. No. 2
Post Development SCM
Description
A
B
C
Totals
Sheet Flow
Manning's n-value
= 0.011
0.011
0.011
Flow length (ft)
= 300.0
0.0
0.0
Two-year 24-hr precip. (in)
= 3.46
0.00
0.00
Land slope (%)
= 1.40
0.00
0.00
Travel Time (min)
= 3.24 +
0.00 +
0.00 =
3.24
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Flow length (ft)
= 103.00
103.00
0.00
Watercourse slope (%)
= 2.80
2.80
0.00
Surface description
= Unpaved
Paved
Paved
Average velocity (ft/s)
=2.70
3.40
0.00
Travel Time (min)
= 0.64 +
0.50 +
0.00 =
1.14
Channel Flow
X sectional flow area (sqft)
= 3.14
0.00
0.00
Wetted perimeter (ft)
= 6.28
0.00
0.00
Channel slope (%)
= 0.70
0.00
0.00
Manning's n-value
= 0.015
0.015
0.015
Velocity (ft/s)
=5.22
0.00
0.00
Flow length (ft)
({0})352.0
0.0
0.0
Travel Time (min)
= 1.12 +
0.00 +
0.00 =
1.12
Total Travel Time, Tc..............................................................................
6.00 min

8
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Hyd. No. 3
Post Development Bypass
Hydrograph type =
Mod. Rational
Peak discharge
= 6.600 cfs
Storm frequency =
1 yrs
Time to peak
= 0.37 hrs
Time interval =
1 min
Hyd. volume
= 26,137 cuft
Drainage area =
11.490 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.45*
Intensity =
1.277 in/hr
Tc by TR55
= 22.00 min
OF Curve =
Helipad.IDF
Storm duration
= 3.0 x Tc
Target Q =n/a
Est. Req'd Storage
=n/a
Composite (Area/C) = [(1.940 x 0.95) + (9.550 x 0.35)] / 11.490
Post Development Bypass
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 3 -- 1 Year Q (cfs)
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 00
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5
— Hyd No. 3 Time (hrs)

TR55 Tc Worksheet
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Hyd. No. 3
Post Development Bypass
Description
A
B
C
Totals
Sheet Flow
Manning's n-value
= 0.150
0.011
0.011
Flow length (ft)
= 300.0
0.0
0.0
Two-year 24-hr precip. (in)
= 3.46
0.00
0.00
Land slope (%)
= 4.40
0.00
0.00
Travel Time (min)
= 16.55 +
0.00 +
0.00 =
16.55
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Flow length (ft)
= 580.00
0.00
0.00
Watercourse slope (%)
= 4.40
0.00
0.00
Surface description
= Unpaved
Paved
Paved
Average velocity (ft/s)
=3.38
0.00
0.00
Travel Time (min)
= 2.86 +
0.00 +
0.00 =
2.86
Channel Flow
X sectional flow area (sqft)
= 3.14
16.00
0.00
Wetted perimeter (ft)
= 6.28
16.00
0.00
Channel slope (%)
= 1.40
3.20
0.00
Manning's n-value
= 0.013
0.015
0.015
Velocity (ft/s)
=8.52
17.77
0.00
Flow length (ft)
({0})994.0
238.0
0.0
Travel Time (min)
= 1.94 +
0.22 +
0.00 =
2.17
TotalTravel Time, Tc..............................................................................
22.00 min

10
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Hyd. No. 4
Bioretention Routing
Hydrograph type
= Reservoir
Peak discharge
= 2.593 cfs
Storm frequency
= 1 yrs
Time to peak
= 0.83 hrs
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 17,411 cuft
Inflow hyd. No.
= 2 - Post Development SCM
Max. Elevation
= 427.31 ft
Reservoir name
= Bioretention SCM
Max. Storage
= 15,668 cuft
Storage Indication method used. Outflow includes exfiltration
Q (cfs)
7.00
5.00
i
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0.0 2.0 4.0
— Hyd No. 4
6.0
Bioretention Routing
Hyd. No. 4 -- 1 Year
8.0
Hyd No. 2
Q (cfs)
7.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 22.0
Time (hrs)
Total storage used = 15,668 cult

Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Pond No. 1 - Bioretention SCM
Pond Data
Contours -User-defined contour areas. Conic method used for volume
calculation. Begining
Elevation = 426.00 ft
Stage / Storage Table
Stage (ft) Elevation (ft)
Contour area (sgft)
Incr. Storage (cult)
Total storage (cult)
0.00 426.00
11,026
0
0
1.00 427.00
12,252
11,632
11,632
2.00 428.00
13,466
12,853
24,485
3.00 429.00
14,951
14,201
38,686
Culvert / Orifice Structures
[A]
[B]
[C]
[PrfRsr]
Rise (in)
= 18.00
Inactive
Inactive
Inactive
Span (in)
= 18.00
5.00
0.00
0.00
No. Barrels
= 1
1
0
1
Invert El. (ft)
= 421.99
422.20
0.00
0.00
Length (ft)
= 49.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Slope (%)
= 1.00
0.00
0.00
n/a
N-Value
= .013
.013
.013
n/a
Orifice Coeff.
= 0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
Multi -Stage
= n/a
Yes
No
Yes
Stage (ft)
3.00
2.00
m
0.00
0.00 7.00
Total Q
Weir Structures
[A]
[B]
[C]
[D]
Crest Len (ft)
= 20.00
20.00
0.00
0.00
Crest El. (ft)
= 427.22
428.00
0.00
0.00
Weir Coeff.
= 3.33
2.60
3.33
3.33
Weir Type
= 1
Broad
---
---
Multi-Stage
= Yes
No
No
No
Exfil.(in/hr) = 2.000 (by Contour)
TW Elev. (ft) = 0.00
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows are analyzed under inlet (ic) and outlet (oc) control. Weir risers checked for orifice conditions (ic) and submergence (s).
Stage / Discharge
14.00 21.00 28.00 35.00 42.00 49.00 56.00 63.00 70.00
Elev (ft)
429.00
428.00
427.00
1 426.00
77.00
Discharge (cfs)

vt, v Nv
Pond No. 1 - Bioretention Sf.M
3,00
Elev. 429.00
we
1.00
Me
Section
NTS
Hydraflow H yd rog raphs /Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D@ by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Bottom of pond
AMMy�:1[1I�]
CulvA - 49.0 LF of 18.0 in @ 1.00%
100-yr
10-yr
2-yr
Project: Pre -post Calcs (as built).gpw I Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022 1

12
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Hyd. No. 5
Combined
Hydrograph type
= Combine
Peak discharge
= 9.193 cfs
Storm frequency
= 1 yrs
Time to peak
= 0.83 hrs
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 43,549 cuft
Inflow hyds.
= 3, 4
Contrib. drain. area
= 11.490 ac
Combined
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 5 -- 1 Year Q (cfs)
10.00 10.00
8.00 8.00
6.00 6.00
4.00 4.00
2.00 2.00
0.00 0.00
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0
Time (hrs)
— Hyd No. 5 Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 4

Hydrograph Summary Report
13
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3DO by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Hyd.
No.
Hydrograph
type
(origin)
Peak
flow
(cfs)
Time
interval
(min)
Time to
Peak
(min)
Hyd.
volume
(cult)
Inflow
hyd(s)
Maximum
elevation
(ft)
Total
strge used
(cuft)
Hydrograph
Description
1
Mod. Rational
11.30
1
22
44,742
------
------
------
Pre Development
2
Mod. Rational
6.877
1
6
21,464
------
------
------
Post Development SCM
3
Mod. Rational
7.912
1
22
31,332
------
------
------
Post Development Bypass
4
Reservoir
5.928
1
53
21,435
2
427.41
16,841
Bioretention Routing
5
Combine
13.84
1
53
52,767
3,4
------
------
Combined
Pre -post Calcs (as built).gpw
Return Period: 2 Year
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022

14
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Hyd. No. 1
Pre Development
Hydrograph type
= Mod. Rational
Peak discharge
= 11.30 cfs
Storm frequency
= 2 yrs
Time to peak
= 0.37 hrs
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 44,742 cuft
Drainage area
= 17.580 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.42*
Intensity
= 1.530 in/hr
Tc by TR55
= 22.00 min
OF Curve
= Helipad.IDF
Storm duration
= 3.0 x Tc
Target Q
=n/a
Est. Req'd Storage
=n/a
* Composite (Area/C) = [(15.640 x 0.35) + (1.940 x 0.95)] / 17.580
Q (cfs)
12.00
10.00
i
2.00
Pre Development
Hyd. No. 1 -- 2 Year
Q (cfs)
12.00
10.00
4.00
2.00
0.00 ' 0.00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5
Hyd No. 1 Time (hrs)

15
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Hyd. No. 2
Post Development SCM
Hydrograph type
= Mod. Rational
Peak discharge
= 6.877 cfs
Storm frequency
= 2 yrs
Time to peak
= 0.10 hrs
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 21,464 cuft
Drainage area
= 6.110 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.62*
Intensity
= 1.815 in/hr
Tc by TR55
= 6.00 min
OF Curve
= Helipad.IDF
Storm duration
= 8.7 x Tc
Target Q
=4.000 cfs
Est. Req'd Storage
=14,443 cuft
* Composite (Area/C) = [(2.730 x 0.95) + (3.380 x 0.35)] / 6.110
Q (cfs)
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 00
0.0 0.2
— Hyd No. 2
Post Development SCM
Hyd. No. 2 -- 2 Year
0.3 0.5 0.7
Mod. Rational Est. Storage = 14,443 cuft
Q (cfs)
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
0000- 3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0.8 1.0
Time (hrs)

16
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Hyd. No. 3
Post Development Bypass
Hydrograph type =
Mod. Rational
Peak discharge
= 7.912 cfs
Storm frequency =
2 yrs
Time to peak
= 0.37 hrs
Time interval =
1 min
Hyd. volume
= 31,332 cuft
Drainage area =
11.490 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.45*
Intensity =
1.530 in/hr
Tc by TR55
= 22.00 min
OF Curve =
Helipad.IDF
Storm duration
= 3.0 x Tc
Target Q =n/a
Est. Req'd Storage
=n/a
Composite (Area/C) = [(1.940 x 0.95) + (9.550 x 0.35)] / 11.490
Q (cfs)
8.00
i
2.00
0.00
0.0 0.2
— Hyd No. 3
Post Development Bypass
Hyd. No. 3 -- 2 Year
0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3
Q (cfs)
8.00
4.00
2.00
1"- 0.00
1.5
Time (hrs)

17
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Hyd. No. 4
Bioretention Routing
Hydrograph type
= Reservoir
Peak discharge
= 5.928 cfs
Storm frequency
= 2 yrs
Time to peak
= 0.88 hrs
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 21,435 cuft
Inflow hyd. No.
= 2 - Post Development SCM
Max. Elevation
= 427.41 ft
Reservoir name
= Bioretention SCM
Max. Storage
= 16,841 cuft
Storage Indication method used. Outflow includes exfiltration
Q (cfs)
7.00
5.00
i
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0.0 2.0
— Hyd No. 4
Bioretention Routing
Hyd. No. 4 -- 2 Year
4.0 6.0
Hyd No. 2
8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0
Total storage used = 16,841 cuft
Q (cfs)
7.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
==- 0.00
16.0
Time (hrs)

18
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Hyd. No. 5
Combined
Hydrograph type
= Combine
Peak discharge
= 13.84 cfs
Storm frequency
= 2 yrs
Time to peak
= 0.88 hrs
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 52,767 cuft
Inflow hyds.
= 3, 4
Contrib. drain. area
= 11.490 ac
Combined
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 5 -- 2 Year Q (cfs)
14.00 14.00
12.00 12.00
10.00 10.00
8.00 8.00
6.00 6.00
4.00 4.00
2.00 2.00
0.00 0.00
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0
Time (hrs)
— Hyd No. 5 Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 4

Hydrograph Summary Report
19
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3DO by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Hyd.
No.
Hydrograph
type
(origin)
Peak
flow
(cfs)
Time
interval
(min)
Time to
Peak
(min)
Hyd.
volume
(cult)
Inflow
hyd(s)
Maximum
elevation
(ft)
Total
strge used
(cuft)
Hydrograph
Description
1
Mod. Rational
15.87
1
22
62,843
------
------
------
Pre Development
2
Mod. Rational
6.245
1
6
36,352
------
------
------
Post Development SCM
3
Mod. Rational
11.11
1
22
44,007
------
------
------
Post Development Bypass
4
Reservoir
6.244
1
97
36,323
2
427.41
16,926
Bioretention Routing
5
Combine
17.23
1
66
80,330
3,4
------
------
Combined
Pre -post Calcs (as built).gpw
Return Period: 10 Year
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022

20
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Hyd. No. 1
Pre Development
Hydrograph type
= Mod. Rational
Peak discharge
= 15.87 cfs
Storm frequency
= 10 yrs
Time to peak
= 0.37 hrs
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 62,843 cuft
Drainage area
= 17.580 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.42*
Intensity
= 2.149 in/hr
Tc by TR55
= 22.00 min
OF Curve
= Helipad.IDF
Storm duration
= 3.0 x Tc
Target Q
=n/a
Est. Req'd Storage
=n/a
* Composite (Area/C) = [(15.640 x 0.35) + (1.940 x 0.95)] / 17.580
Q (cfs)
18.00
15.00
12.00
3.00
Pre Development
Hyd. No. 1 -- 10 Year
Q (cfs)
18.00
15.00
12.00
3.00
0.00 ' 0.00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5
— Hyd No. 1 Time (hrs)

21
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Hyd. No. 2
Post Development SCM
Hydrograph type
= Mod. Rational
Peak discharge
= 6.245 cfs
Storm frequency
= 10 yrs
Time to peak
= 0.10 hrs
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 36,352 cuft
Drainage area
= 6.110 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.62*
Intensity
= 1.648 in/hr
Tc by TR55
= 6.00 min
OF Curve
= Helipad.IDF
Storm duration
= 16.2 x Tc
Target Q
=3.600 cfs
Est. Req'd Storage
=25,169 cuft
* Composite (Area/C) = [(2.730 x 0.95) + (3.380 x 0.35)] / 6.110
Q (cfs)
7.00
5.00
i
3.00
2.00
1.00
Post Development SCM
Hyd. No. 2 -- 10 Year
Q (cfs)
7.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 'y 0.00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.8
Time (hrs)
— Hyd No. 2 Mod. Rational Est. Storage = 25,169 cuft

22
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Hyd. No. 3
Post Development Bypass
Hydrograph type =
Mod. Rational
Peak discharge
= 11.11 cfs
Storm frequency =
10 yrs
Time to peak
= 0.37 hrs
Time interval =
1 min
Hyd. volume
= 44,007 cuft
Drainage area =
11.490 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.45*
Intensity =
2.149 in/hr
Tc by TR55
= 22.00 min
OF Curve =
Helipad.IDF
Storm duration
= 3.0 x Tc
Target Q =n/a
Est. Req'd Storage
=n/a
Composite (Area/C) = [(1.940 x 0.95) + (9.550 x 0.35)] / 11.490
Q (cfs)
12.00
10.00
i
2.00
Post Development Bypass
Hyd. No. 3 -- 10 Year
Q (cfs)
12.00
10.00
4.00
2.00
0.00 ' 0.00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5
Hyd No. 3 Time (hrs)

23
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Hyd. No. 4
Bioretention Routing
Hydrograph type
= Reservoir
Peak discharge
= 6.244 cfs
Storm frequency
= 10 yrs
Time to peak
= 1.62 hrs
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 36,323 cuft
Inflow hyd. No.
= 2 - Post Development SCM
Max. Elevation
= 427.41 ft
Reservoir name
= Bioretention SCM
Max. Storage
= 16,926 cuft
Storage Indication method used. Outflow includes exfiltration
Bioretention Routing
Hyd. No. 4 -- 10 Year
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0
— Hyd No. 4 Hyd No. 2
8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0
Total storage used = 16,926 cuft
Q (cfs)
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
16.0
Time (hrs)

24
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Hyd. No. 5
Combined
Hydrograph type
= Combine
Peak discharge
= 17.23 cfs
Storm frequency
= 10 yrs
Time to peak
= 1.10 hrs
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 80,330 cuft
Inflow hyds.
= 3, 4
Contrib. drain. area
= 11.490 ac
Combined
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 5 -- 10 Year Q (cfs)
18.00 18.00
15.00 15.00
12.00 12.00
9.00 9.00
6.00 6.00
3.00 3.00
0.00 0.00
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 5 Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 4

Hydrograph Summary Report
25
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Hyd.
No.
Hydrograph
type
(origin)
Peak
flow
(cfs)
Time
interval
(min)
Time to
Peak
(min)
Hyd.
volume
(cult)
Inflow
hyd(s)
Maximum
elevation
(ft)
Total
strge used
(cuft)
Hydrograph
Description
1
Mod. Rational
22.09
1
22
87,484
------
------
------
Pre Development
2
Mod. Rational
7.982
1
6
57,014
------
------
------
Post Development SCM
3
Mod. Rational
15.47
1
22
61,262
------
------
------
Post Development Bypass
4
Reservoir
7.982
1
96
56,974
2
427.45
17,393
Bioretention Routing
5
Combine
23.44
1
66
118,236
3,4
------
------
Combined
Pre -post Calcs (as built).gpw
Return Period: 100 Year
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022

26
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Hyd. No. 1
Pre Development
Hydrograph type
= Mod. Rational
Peak discharge
= 22.09 cfs
Storm frequency
= 100 yrs
Time to peak
= 0.37 hrs
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 87,484 cuft
Drainage area
= 17.580 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.42*
Intensity
= 2.992 in/hr
Tc by TR55
= 22.00 min
OF Curve
= Helipad.IDF
Storm duration
= 3.0 x Tc
Target Q
=n/a
Est. Req'd Storage
=n/a
* Composite (Area/C) = [(15.640 x 0.35) + (1.940 x 0.95)] / 17.580
Q (cfs)
24.00
16.00
12.00
4.00
Pre Development
Hyd. No. 1 -- 100 Year
Q (cfs)
24.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
4.00
0.00 ' 0.00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5
— Hyd No. 1 Time (hrs)

27
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Hyd. No. 2
Post Development SCM
Hydrograph type
= Mod. Rational
Peak discharge
= 7.982 cfs
Storm frequency
= 100 yrs
Time to peak
= 0.10 hrs
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 57,014 cuft
Drainage area
= 6.110 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.62*
Intensity
= 2.107 in/hr
Tc by TR55
= 6.00 min
OF Curve
= Helipad.IDF
Storm duration
= 19.8 x Tc
Target Q
=3.700 cfs
Est. Req'd Storage
=42,991 cuft
* Composite (Area/C) = [(2.730 x 0.95) + (3.380 x 0.35)] / 6.110
Q (cfs)
8.00
i
2.00
0.00 ",,-
0.0 0.2 0.3
— Hyd No. 2
Post Development SCM
Hyd. No. 2 -- 100 Year
0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.8 2.0
Mod. Rational Est. Storage = 42,991 cuft
Q (cfs)
8.00
4.00
2.00
-1-- 0.00
2.2
Time (hrs)

28
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Hyd. No. 3
Post Development Bypass
Hydrograph type =
Mod. Rational
Peak discharge
= 15.47 cfs
Storm frequency =
100 yrs
Time to peak
= 0.37 hrs
Time interval =
1 min
Hyd. volume
= 61,262 cuft
Drainage area =
11.490 ac
Runoff coeff.
= 0.45*
Intensity =
2.992 in/hr
Tc by TR55
= 22.00 min
OF Curve =
Helipad.IDF
Storm duration
= 3.0 x Tc
Target Q =n/a
Est. Req'd Storage
=n/a
Composite (Area/C) = [(1.940 x 0.95) + (9.550 x 0.35)] / 11.490
Q (cfs)
18.00
15.00
12.00
3.00
Post Development Bypass
Hyd. No. 3 -- 100 Year
Q (cfs)
18.00
15.00
12.00
3.00
0.00 ' 0.00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5
— Hyd No. 3 Time (hrs)

Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Hyd. No. 4
Bioretention Routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Time interval = 1 min
Inflow hyd. No. = 2 - Post Development SCM
Reservoir name = Bioretention SCM
Storage Indication method used. Outflow includes exfiltration.
Q (cfs)
8.00
WE
i W
2.00
0.00
0.0 2.0
— Hyd No. 4
Peak discharge
Time to peak
Hyd. volume
Max. Elevation
Max. Storage
Bioretention Routing
Hyd. No. 4 -- 100 Year
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
= 7.982 cfs
= 1.60 hrs
= 56,974 cuft
= 427.45 ft
= 17,393 cuft
4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0
Hyd No. 2 Total storage used = 17,393 cuft
Q (cfs)
8.00
.W
Elm
2.00
0.00
16.0
Time (hrs)

30
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Hyd. No. 5
Combined
Hydrograph type
= Combine
Peak discharge
= 23.44 cfs
Storm frequency
= 100 yrs
Time to peak
= 1.10 hrs
Time interval
= 1 min
Hyd. volume
= 118,236 cuft
Inflow hyds.
= 3, 4
Contrib. drain. area
= 11.490 ac
Q (cfs)
24.00
16.00
12.00
4.00
Combined
Hyd. No. 5 -- 100 Year
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
Hyd No. 5 Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 4
7.0 8.0
Q (cfs)
24.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
4.00
==- 0.00
9.0
Time (hrs)

Hydraflow Rainfall Report
31
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3DO by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Return
Period
Intensity -Duration -Frequency Equation Coefficients (FHA)
(Yrs)
B
D
E
(N/A)
1
63.1989
12.9000
0.8933
--------
2
69.7856
12.8000
0.8748
--------
3
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
--------
5
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
--------
10
67.8359
12.0000
0.7923
--------
25
62.2639
11.1000
0.7421
--------
50
56.0597
10.1000
0.6969
--------
100
51.0945
9.2000
0.6569
--------
File name: Helipad.IDF
Intensity = B / (Tc + D)^E
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Return
Period
Intensity Values (in/hr)
(Yrs)
5 min
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
1
4.80
3.85
3.23
2.79
2.46
2.20
1.99
1.82
1.68
1.56
1.46
1.37
2
5.62
4.53
3.81
3.29
2.91
2.61
2.37
2.17
2.01
1.87
1.75
1.64
3
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
10
7.19
5.86
4.98
4.35
3.88
3.51
3.21
2.96
2.76
2.58
2.42
2.29
25
7.92
6.48
5.53
4.86
4.35
3.95
3.63
3.36
3.14
2.94
2.78
2.63
50
8.45
6.93
5.93
5.23
4.70
4.28
3.94
3.66
3.43
3.23
3.05
2.90
100
8.94
7.34
6.30
5.57
5.02
4.59
4.24
3.95
3.71
3.50
3.32
3.16
Tc = time in minutes. Values may exceed 60.
Precip. file name: S:\333\42866-NCNG_Raleigh_Helipad\Calc\Stm\Helipad.pcp
Storm
Rainfall Precipitation Table (in)
Distribution
1-yr
2-yr
3-yr
5-yr
10-yr
25-yr
50-yr
100-yr
SCS 24-hour
2.87
3.46
0.00
3.30
5.03
5.96
6.80
7.47
SCS 6-Hr
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Huff -1st
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.75
0.00
0.00
6.50
0.00
Huff-2nd
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Huff-3rd
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Huff-4th
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Huff-Indy
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Custom
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.80
0.00
0.00
6.00
0.00

Hydraflow Table of Contents
Pre -post Calcs (as built).gpw
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2021
Thursday, 03 / 10 / 2022
Watershed Model Schematic...................................................................................... 1
Hydrograph Return Period Recap............................................................................. 2
- Year
SummaryReport......................................................................................................................... 3
HydrographReports................................................................................................................... 4
Hydrograph No. 1, Mod. Rational, Pre Development............................................................... 4
TR-55 Tc Worksheet............................................................................................................ 5
Hydrograph No. 2, Mod. Rational, Post Development SCM.................................................... 6
TR-55 Tc Worksheet............................................................................................................ 7
Hydrograph No. 3, Mod. Rational, Post Development Bypass ................................................. 8
TR-55 Tc Worksheet............................................................................................................ 9
Hydrograph No. 4, Reservoir, Bioretention Routing............................................................... 10
Pond Report - Bioretention SCM....................................................................................... 11
Hydrograph No. 5, Combine, Combined................................................................................ 12
2 - Year
SummaryReport....................................................................................................................... 13
HydrographReports................................................................................................................. 14
Hydrograph No. 1, Mod. Rational, Pre Development............................................................. 14
Hydrograph No. 2, Mod. Rational, Post Development SCM.................................................. 15
Hydrograph No. 3, Mod. Rational, Post Development Bypass ............................................... 16
Hydrograph No. 4, Reservoir, Bioretention Routing............................................................... 17
Hydrograph No. 5, Combine, Combined................................................................................ 18
10 -Year
SummaryReport....................................................................................................................... 19
HydrographReports................................................................................................................. 20
Hydrograph No. 1, Mod. Rational, Pre Development............................................................. 20
Hydrograph No. 2, Mod. Rational, Post Development SCM.................................................. 21
Hydrograph No. 3, Mod. Rational, Post Development Bypass ............................................... 22
Hydrograph No. 4, Reservoir, Bioretention Routing............................................................... 23
Hydrograph No. 5, Combine, Combined................................................................................ 24
100 -Year
SummaryReport....................................................................................................................... 25
HydrographReports................................................................................................................. 26
Hydrograph No. 1, Mod. Rational, Pre Development............................................................. 26
Hydrograph No. 2, Mod. Rational, Post Development SCM.................................................. 27
Hydrograph No. 3, Mod. Rational, Post Development Bypass ............................................... 28
Hydrograph No. 4, Reservoir, Bioretention Routing............................................................... 29
Hydrograph No. 5, Combine, Combined................................................................................ 30
OFReport.................................................................................................................. 31

NAME
INC!NG Helipad
DATE
June,2020
DESIGN PHASE
PRELIMT
CONSTR /XFHQ
REVISION / /
RECORD / /
OTHER / /
(SPECIFY)
PROJECT NO
42866
LOCATION
Raleigh, NC
BY
FS
CHECKED BY
n= 0.013
g= 195
h= 22
1= 7.22
STORM DRAINAGE SCHEDULE CONTINUED
INLET
AREA
(SF)
INLET
AREA
(AC)
IMPERVIOUS
(%)
INLET
Cc
RUNOFF
COEFF.
INLET
DISCHARGE
(CFS)
TOTAL
AREAS
(AC)
INLET
TIME
(MIN)
PIPE
TIME
(MIN)
Tc
TIME
OF CONC.
(MIN)
I
INTENSITY
(IN/HR)
Cc
RUNOFF
COEFF.
FROM TO
210,054 4.82 41 0.57
0 0.00 0 0.30
7,508 0.17 0 0.30
6,172 0.14 29 0.49
26,114 0.60 0 0.30
124,627 2.86 58 0.68
3,345 0.08 72 0.77
24,968 0.57 36 0.53
6,764 0.16 36 0.53
13,528 0.31 100 0.95
15,975 0.37 93 0.90
17,307 0.40 16 0.40
0 0.00 50 0.63
0 0.00 0 0.00
4.82 5.00 0.00
4.82 5.00 0.02
4.99 5.00 0.17
5.14 5.00 0.21
0.60 5.00 0.00
3.46 5.00 1.20
0.08 5.00 0.00
0.65 5.00 0.00
0.81 5.00 1.40
1.12 5.00 2.12
0.37 5.00 1.40
0.40 5.00 0.00
0.40 5.00 0.67
0.40 5.00 0.76
Al
A2
19.84
5.00
7.22
0.57
A2
A3
0.00
5.02
7.22
0.57
A3
A4
0.37
5.17
7.18
0.56
A4
A5
0.50
5.21
7.17
0.56
B1
B2
1.30
5.00
7.22
0.30
B2
B3
13.99
6.20
6.92
0.61
Y1
Y2
0.43
5.00
7.22
0.77
Y2
B5
2.21
5.00
7.22
0.56
B5
B7
0.60
6.40
6.87
0.56
B7
B8
2.13
7.12
6.70
0.67
Y3
B7
2.40
5.00
7.22
1.07
C1
C2
1.16
5.00
7.22
0.40
C2
C3
0.00
5.67
7.05
0.40
C4
C2
6.22
5.00
7.22
0.40
PipeSizingSTORM Pagel of 8

. ' ' ''DATE
NAME
!NCNG JFHQ Helipad
June,2020
DESIGN PHASE
PRELIMCT
CONSTR /X
REVISION
RECORD
IOTHER
(SPECIFY)
PROJECT NO
42866
LOCATION
Raleigh, NC
BY
IFS
CHECKED BY
n= 0.013
g= 195
h= 22
1= 7.22
STORM DRAINAGE SCHEDULE -CONTINUED
Q
DISCHARGE
(CFS)
Q
SIDE-
STREAM
(CFS)
SLOPE
DIA.
(IN)
CAPACITY
(FULL)
(CFS)
V FULL
(FPS)
LENGTH
(FT)
SEGMENT
TIME
(MIN)
UPPER
INV.
(FT)
LOWER
INV.
(FT)
UPSTREAM
TOP
ELEV.
(FT)
PIPE
COVER
(FT)
FROM TO
19.84 0.00 2.60% 24 35.8
19.82 0.00 2.60% 24 35.8
20.08 0.00 3.68% 24 43.4
20.55 0.00 1.00% 24 22.6
1.30 0.00 0.98% 15 6.4
14.64 0.00 0.60% 24 16.0
0.43 0.00 0.71% 8 1.0
2.64 0.00 0.71% 12 3.0
3.08 0.00 0.71% 15 5.4
7.80 2.82 0.78% 18 9.3
2.82 0.00 1.96% 10 3.1
1.16 0.00 1.00% 15 6.5
7.35 6.22 17.87% 18 44.4
6.22 0.00 4.90% 18 23.2
11.4 13 0.02 433.50 433.18 438.00 2.32
11.4 106 0.16 432.98 430.33 438.00 2.84
13.8 33 0.04 430.13 428.91 435.80 3.49
7.2 71 0.16 428.71 428.00 436.50 5.61
5.2 374 1.20 431.00 427.32 433.90 1.54
5.1 223 0.73 427.12 426.00 430.40 1.10
2.9 245 1.40 431.27 429.53 433.50 1.50
3.8 210 0.92 429.53 428.04 432.80 2.18
4.4 190 0.71 428.04 426.69 431.80 2.40
5.2 89 0.28 426.69 426.00 432.80 4.47
5.6 194 0.58 430.50 426.69 433.80 2.39
5.3 210 0.67 422.00 419.90 425.80 2.44
25.1 141 0.09 419.70 394.50 426.50 5.16
13.1 49 0.06 422.30 419.90 428.00 4.06
Al
A2
A2
A3
A3
A4
A4
A5
B1
B2
B2
B3
Y1
Y2
Y2
B5
B5
B7
B7
B8
Y3
B7
Cl
C2
C2
C3
C4
C2
PipeSizingSTORM Page 2 of 8

. ' ' ''DATE
NAME
!NCNG JFHQ Helipad
June,2020
DESIGN PHASE
PRELIMCT
CONSTR /X
REVISION / /
RECORD / /
OTHER
(SPECIFY)
PROJECT NO
42866
LOCATION
Raleigh, NC
BY
FS
CHECKED BY
n= 0.013
g= 195
h= 22
1= 7.22
HYDRAULIC GRADE LINE CONTINUED
BEND LOSS KS
90 DEG=0.7 30 DEG=0.28
60 DEG=0.55 15 DEG=0.10
PIPE HYDRAULIC SIDESTREAM HEAD LOSS BEND FRICTION FRICTION
AREA RADIUS SUMMATION Hf He He Hb Ht LOSS SLOPE VELOCITY
(FT) (FT) (CFS) K (FT/FT) (FPS)
FROM TO
0.25 0.00 0.0076
1.51 0.55 0.0076
0.63 0.00 0.0078
1.31 0.55 0.0082
0.15 0.00 0.0004
1.03 0.55 0.0042
0.31 0.70 0.0012
1.20 0.00 0.0055
0.48 0.70 0.0023
0.65 0.55 0.0055
3.32 0.70 0.0166
0.07 0.00 0.0003
0.76 0.00 0.0049
0.31 0.00 0.0035
Al
A2
3.1416
0.5000
0.00
0.10
0.15
0.00
0.00
6.28
A2
A3
3.1416
0.5000
0.00
0.81
0.15
0.21
0.34
6.28
A3
A4
3.1416
0.5000
0.00
0.26
0.16
0.21
0.00
6.36
A4
A5
3.1416
0.5000
0.00
0.58
0.16
0.22
0.35
6.51
B1
B2
1.2272
0.3125
0.00
0.15
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.05
B2
B3
3.1416
0.5000
0.00
0.93
0.08
0.01
0.01
4.64
Y1
Y2
0.3491
0.1667
0.00
0.31
0.01
0.00
0.00
1.22
Y2
B5
0.7854
0.2500
0.00
1.15
0.04
0.01
0.00
3.35
B5
B7
1.2272
0.3125
0.00
0.43
0.02
0.01
0.02
2.50
B7
B8
1.7671
0.3750
2.82
0.49
0.07
0.03
0.05
4.39
Y3
B7
0.5454
0.2083
0.00
3.21
0.10
0.00
0.00
5.16
Cl
C2
1.2272
0.3125
0.00
0.07
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.94
C2
C3
1.7671
0.3750
6.22
0.69
0.07
0.00
0.00
4.14
C4
C2
1.7671
0.3750
6.22
0.17
0.05
0.09
0.00
3.50
PipeSizingSTORM Page 3 of 8

' '''DATE
NAME
!NCNG JFHQ Helipad
June,2020
DESIGN PHASE
PRELIMCT
CONSTR /X
REVISION / /
RECORD / /
OTHER
(SPECIFY)
PROJECT NO
##
LOCATION
Raleigh, NC
BY
FS
CHECKED BY
n= 0.013
g= 195
h= 22
1= 7.22
HYDRAULIC
GRADE LINE - CONTINUED
DESIGN CRITERIA:
1. DESIGN FOR THE 10 YR STORM
2. ASSUME TIME OF CONCENTRATION TO
AN INDIVIDUAL INLET = 5 MIN.
3. INTENSITY = g/(h+T), FOR 10 YR STORM
g=195, h=22, T= TIME OF CONCENTRATION
4. MANNINGS "n" FACTOR= .013
5. RATIONAL METHOD: C= .30 GRASS, C= .95 PAVEMENT
OUTLET
W.S. ELEV
(FT)
INLET W.S. ELEV.
FLOW
CONDITION
CONTROL
FREE-
BOARD
(FT)
UPSTREAM
INLET
TYPE
COMMENTS
FROM TO
OUTLET
CONTOL
(FT)
INLET
CONTROL
(FT)
USE
(FT)
1.78 FES OK
2.31 DI OK
2.91 DI OK
4.44 CB OK
2.23 MH OK
1.34 DI OK
0.62 CB OK
1.78 CB OK
2.86 DI OK
0.08 DI OK
1.23 CB OK
1.39 DI OK
2.16 DI OK
4.42 DI OK
Al
A2
435.69
435.94
436.22
436.22
INLET
A2
A3
432.89
434.40
435.69
435.69
INLET
A3
A4
431.56
432.18
432.89
432.89
INLET
A4
A5
429.60
430.91
431.56
431.56
INLET
Tailwater Elev=
429.60
B1
B2
429.06
429.21
431.67
431.67
INLET
B2
B3
427.60
428.63
429.06
429.06
INLET
Tailwater Elev=
427.60
Y1
Y2
432.07
432.38
431.67
432.38
OUTLET
Y2
B5
428.04
429.24
430.52
430.52
INLET
B5
B7
427.20
427.68
428.94
428.94
INLET
B7
B8
432.07
432.72
428.28
432.72
OUTLET
Tailwater Elev=
427.20
Y3
B7
427.36
430.67 432.07
432.07
INLET
Tailwater Elev=
427.36
Cl
C2
424.34
424.41
422.66
424.41
OUTLET
C2
C3
423.58
424.34
421.20
424.34
OUTLET
Tailwater Elev=
395.70
C4
C2
421.10
421.41 423.58
423.58
INLET
Tailwater Elev=
421.10
Tailwater Elev=
421.10
PipeSizingSTORM Page 4 of 8

DRAINAGE STRUCTURE SCHEDULE
STRUCTURE NO_
PIPE
SLOPE
PIPE
DIA_
PIPE
LENGTH
PIPE
MATRL
UPPER
INV-
LOWER
INV-
UPSTREAM
STRUCTURE
D.A.T.A.
NOTES
UP BTRM
DN BTRM
TOP ELEV
DEPTH
TYPE
IN
FT
FT
FT
FT 1
FT
Al
A2
2.50%
24
13
RCP
433.50
433.18
438.00
4.50
FES
A2
A3
2.50%
24
106
RCP
432.68
430.33
438.00
5.02
DI
A3
A4
3.68%
24
33
RCP
430.13
428_91
435.80
5.67
DI
A4
A5
1.00%
24
71
RCP
428.71
428.00
436.50
7.79
DI
Bl
B2
0_98%
15
3T4
ROP
431.00
427.32
433_90
2.90
MH
B2
B3
0.50%
24
223
RCP
427.12
426.00
430.40
3.28
DI
Y1
Y2
0.71%
8
245
HDPE
431.27
429.53
433.50
2.23
YD
Y2
135
0.71%
12
210
HDPE
429_53
428.04
432.80
3.27
YD
B5
B7
0.71 %
15
190
HDPE
428.04
426.66
431.80
3.76
DI
B7
B8
0.78%
18
89
HDPE
426.69
426.00
432.80
6.11
MH
Y3
B7
1.96%
10
194
HDPE
430.50
426.69
433.80
3.30
YD
Cl
C2
1.00%
15
210
RCP
422.00
419.90
425.80
3.80
DI
C2
C3
17_87%
18
141
RCP
419_70
394.60
426.50
6.80
MH
C4
C2
4.90%
18
49
RCP
422.30
419.90
428.00
5.70
DI

Rip Rap Calcs 6/29/2020 Page 1 of 5

Rip Rap Calcs 6/29/2020 Page 2 of 5

Rip Rap Calcs 6/29/2020 Page 3 of 5

Rip Rap Calcs 6/29/2020 Page 4 of 5

Rip Rap Calcs 6/29/2020 Page 5 of 5

Proiect Information
Project Name:
Submission Date:
Project Area (ft):
Disturbed Area (ft):
Development Land Use Type:
Development Activity Type:
Designated Downtown Area?
Project Location/Address:
County:
Local Jurisdiction:
Project Latitude Coordinates:
Project Longitude Coordinates:
Precipitation Station:
Physiographic Region:
Nutrient Management Watershed:
Subwatershed:
Phosphorus Delivery Zone:
Nitrogen Delivery Zone:
Project Designer and Contact Phone
Number / Email:
Part of Common Development Plan?
Project Owner Type:
Project Description:
NCNG JFHQ Helipad
06/19/2020
550,458
493,731
Commercial
Development - New
no
1636 Gold Star Drive, Raleigh, NC 27607
Wake
Raleigh
35.806326
-78.711905
Raleigh
Piedmont
Neuse
Neuse - 03020201
Neuse - Upper
Neuse - Upper
Frank Slinsky; [e-mail]
T
State non-NCDOT
New helipad and helicopter parking area.
ft2
ft2
N
W

R = 0.05 + (0.009 *1)
where I = percent impervious (%)
Average Annual Pollutant Load, L
L=(Pi *R *(P/12))*(C*A*2.72)
where C = event mean concentration (mg/L)
Proiect Area Land Cover Characteristics
PROJECT AREA LAND COVERS
Roof
Roadway
TN
EMC
(mg/L)
1.18
1.64
TP
EMC
(mg/L)
0.11
0.34
Pre-
Project
Area (ft)
Post -
Project
Area (ft)
0
0
0
0
Parking/Driveway/Sidewalk
1.42
0.18
0
119,081
Protected Forest
0.97
0.03
23,955
23,955
Other Pervious/Landscaping
2.48
1.07
526,503
397,372
CUSTOM LAND COVER 1
CUSTOM LAND COVER 2
CUSTOM LAND COVER 3
LAND TAKEN UP BY SCM
1.18
0.11
0
10,050
LAND COVER AREA CHECK
Net Change of Land Covers (ft): 129,131
Total Project Area Entered (ft): 550,458
Total Pre -Project Calculated Area (ft): 550,458
Total Post -Project Calculated Area (ft): 550,458
Equations Used and Project Area Calculations
SIMPLE METHOD Storm water Runoff Volume Generated, V
Runoff Coefficient R V = Pi * Rv * (P/12) * A
where A = drainage area (ft)
Pj = fraction of rain events with runoff
P = average annual rainfall depth (in)
Pre -Project:
Post -Project:
A =
12.6368
ac
A = 12.6368
ac
P =
46.22
in.
P = 46.22
in.
V =
95408
ft3
V = 500019
ft3
I =
0%
I = 23%
R =0.05
R =0.26
Pi=0.9
Pi=0.9
CTN =
2.41
mg/L
CTN = 1.55
mg/L
CTP =
1.02
mg/L
CTP = 0.30
mg/L
LTN =
14.38
Ib/yr
LTN = 48.26
Ib/yr
LTP =
6.10
Ib/yr
LTP = 9.26
Ib/yr

SCM Characteristics
Catchment I 1
SCM ID 101
T f SCM Bioretention with I WS per
Type o MDC
Predominant hydrologic soil I B
group at SCM location
SCM Description
Design Storm Size (inches/24hrs)
1.00
100%
Percent of Full Size
Hydrologic Value - Percent
Annual Effluent
27%
Hydrologic Value - Percent
Annual Overflow
6%
Hydrologic Value - Percent
Annual ET/Infiltrated
67%
0.12
SCM Effluent TP EMC (mg/L)
SCM Effluent TN EMC(mg/L)
0.58
0.11
SCM Land Cover TP EMC (mg/L)
SCM Land Cover TN EMC (mg/L)
1.18
0
Drains to SCM ID
Catchments Draining to Catchments Draining to Catchments Draining to
SCM 101 SCM 102 SCM 103
Catchment Routing
(Source Catchment)
Catchment 1
Catchment 2
L i
Catchment 3
Catchment4
'
Catchment 5
Catchment 6
SCM ID:
Allowable Total Land Use
Draining Directly to Area Draining Directly to Area Draining Directly to Total Land Use Area Post-Proj ect Untreated
Area
SCM Drainage Area Land Covers SCM 101(ft2) SCM 102 (Et SCM 103 (Et Treated By All SCMS (ftz) Area to be Treated Based Land Area (ftz)
on Post-Pro4e,t _as 2,
ioof 0 0 0 0
load— 0 0 0 1 0
ICUSTOM LAND COVER 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1
)TAKEN UP BY SCM 10,050 10,050 10,050 0
AL AREA DRAINING TO SCM
267,995 0 0 267,995 550,458 282,463
(ftz):
CATCHMENT AREA (ftz): I 267,995

Project Summary
Project Name:
NCNG JFHQ Helipad
Project Area (ft ):
550,458 ft
12.6368 acres
Submission Date:
June 19, 2020
Disturbed Area (ft):
493,731 ft2
11.3345 acres
County:
Wake
Local Jurisdiction:
Raleigh
Development Land Use Type:
Commercial
Owner Type:
State non-NCDOT
Development Activity Type:
Development -
New
Designated Downtown Area?
no
Nutrient Management Watershed:
Neuse
Subwatershed:
Neuse - 03020201
Phosphorus Delivery Zone:
Neuse -Upper
Nitrogen Delivery Zone:
Neuse -Upper
Phosphorus Delivery Factor (%):
100%
Nitrogen Delivery Factor (%):
100%
Phosphorus Loading Rate Target (Ib/ac/yr):
0.73
Nitrogen Loading Rate Target (Ib/ac/yr):
3.60
Phosphorus Load Target at Site (lb/yr):
9.26
Nitrogen Load Target at Site (lb/yr):
45.49
Phosphorus Load Leaving Site w/SCMs (lb/yr):
4.29
Nitrogen Load Leaving Site w/SCMs (lb/yr):
14.09
P Offsite Buy -Down Threshold Loading Rate (lb/ac/yr):
N/A
N Offsite Buy -Down Threshold Loading Rate
10.00
Total P Load Reduction Needed (lb/yr):
0.00
Total N Load Reduction Needed (lb/yr):
2.76
P Load Treatment Balance at Site (lb/yr):
1
-4.96
N Load Treatment Balance at Site (lb/yr):
31.40
P Load Treatment Balance at Lake (lb/yr):
-4.96
N Load Treatment Balance at Lake (lb/yr):
31.40
Nutrient Export Summary
Pre -Project
Whole Site
Conditions
Post -Project
Whole Site
without SCMs
Post -Project
Whole Site with
SCMs
Post -Project
SCM-Treated
Area
Post -Project
Untreated Area
Percent Impervious (for runoff calculation) (%)
0.0%
23.5%
23.5%
48.2%
0.0%
Percent Built -Upon Area (BUA) (%)
0.0%
21.6%
21.6%
44.4%
0.0%
Annual Runoff Volume ft3/ r
95,408
500,019
198,981
150,023
48,958
Annual Runoff %Change (relative to re-D
0%
424%
109%
Total Nitrogen EMC (mg/L)
2.41
1.55
1.14
0.74
2.35
Total Nitrogen Load Leaving Site (lb/yr)
14.38
48.26
14.09
6.90
7.19
Total Nitrogen Loading Rate (Ib/ac/yr)
1.14
3.82
1.11
1.12
1.11
Total Nitrogen % Chana (relative to re-D
0%
236%
-2%
Total Phosphorus EMC (mg/L)
1.02
0.30
0.35
0.14
0.98
Total Phosphorus Load Leaving Site (lb/yr)
6.10
9.26
4.29
1.29
3.00
Total Phosphorus Loading Rate (Ib/ac/yr)
0.48
F.
0.34
0.21
0.46
Total Phosphorus %Change (relative to re-D
0%
1 52%
1 -30%
SCWCatchment Summary
SCM ID and Type Volume
Reduction (%)
TN Out (mg/L)
TP Out (mg/L)
TN Out
(Ibs/ac/yr)
TP Out
(Ibs/ac/yr)
TN Reduction
M
TP Reduction (%)
Catchment)
66.74%
0.74
0.14
1.12
0.21
83.19%
79.31%
101: Bioretention with IWS per MDC
66.74%
0.74
0.14
1.12
0.21
83.19%
79.31%
102: NA
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
0.00%
103: NA
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
0.00%
Catch ment2
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
0.00%
201: NA
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
0.00%
202: NA
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
0.00%
203: NA
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
0.00%
Catch ment3
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
0.00%
301: NA
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
0.00%
302: NA
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
0.00%
303: NA
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
0.00%
Catchment
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
0.00%
401: NA
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
0.00%
402: NA
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
0.00%
403: NA
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
0.00%
Catch ment5
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
0.00%
501: NA
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
0.00%
502: NA
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
0.00%
503: NA
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
0.00%
Catch ment6
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
0.00%
601: NA
0.00 %
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%.
0.00%
602: NA
0.00%
0.00
0.00
0.00
1 0.00
0.00%
0.00%
603: NA
0.00%
1 0.00
1 0.00
1 0.00
1 0.00
1 0.00%
0.00%
SCM rows in red have a data entry error for the SCM that makes an error in the calculation.

Seasonal High Water Table Report

SEASONAL HIGH WATER TABLE DETERMINATION
North Carolina National Guard JFHQ Helipad Site
District Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
Timmons Group Project No.: 42866
Prepared for:
Rodney D. Newton, LTC
1636 Gold Star Drive, Suite 2600 (CFMO)
Raleigh, NC 27607
Prepared By:
TIMMONS GROUP
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.
5410 Trinity Rd., Ste 102
Raleigh, NC 27607
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
www.timmons.com
February 20, 2020
Robin Maycock Perez, LSS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On behalf of North Carolina National Guard, Timmons Group Senior Environmental
Project Manager and Licensed Soil Scientist, Robin M. Perez, conducted a soil investigation on
December 18, 2019 to identify the Seasonal High Water Table (SHWT) within the proposed
stormwater control measure (SCM) location and within the NC National Guard JFHQ Helipad
Site project limits (hereafter referred to as "Site").
The Site encompasses approximately 14.01 acres and is located in Raleigh, NC within
Wake County (See Figure 1. Vicinity Map). The Site is bound by District Road to the north, and
by Wade Avenue to the south. To the east, the Site is bound by commercial development and to
the west, by forested uplands and commercial development. The Site is located within the
Piedmont physiographic province and within the Neuse River Basin (HUC 03020201803),
within the Middle Creek- Neuse sub watershed and drains towards Richlands Creek. Site
topography includes steep slopes above a small stream valley, due to fill material. There is one
stream feature on the Site and no wetlands were identified by Timmons in January 2019.
SHWT at the Site was determined by hand auger. Soil boring 1 was advanced to a depth
of 102 inches below the ground surface (bgs). Chroma 2 redoximorphic features indicative of
SHWT were not observed in the boring. Auger refusal was experienced at 102 inches below the
soil surface at borehole 1 due to rock. Soil Boring 2 was advanced to 28 inches bgs in the stream
floodplain in order to extrapolate the SHWT in the vicinity of the proposed SCM. Table 1 below
shows the observed depth to auger refusal and SHWT below the existing soil surface.
Table 1: Soil Observation Summary
Boring
ID
Auger Refusal'
in
SHWT Depth'
(in)
SHWT Elevation
(approximate)
1
102
102+
420
2
NA
24
420
'Depth below existing soil surface
The area investigated by auger boring 1 consisted of layers of fill, with no indication of seasonal
high-water table above 102 inches depth bgs. However, infiltration rates may be compromised
due to the nature of the fill, which consisted of concrete millings and some compacted layers and
subsoil. The soil boring was located where the landscape position was convex, above a steep
side slope and approximately 6 feet above the adjacent stream valley bottom, where soil boring 2
identified SHWT at approximately 24 — 28 inches bgs. Roughly extrapolating the SHWT from
the valley bottom suggests that the SHWT could be at approximately 8 — 8.5 feet bgs. This
could not be confirmed at the soil boring 1 location due to auger refusal due to rock. The rock
encountered may or may not be bedrock and could be just a rock larger than the auger bucket
diameter (3").
SHWT Determination
NC NG JFHQ Helipad
Page i
Timmons Group
December 2019

INTRODUCTION
The Site encompasses approximately 14.01 acres and is located in Raleigh, NC within
Wake County (See Figure 1. Vicinity Map). The Site is bound by District Road to the north, and
by Wade Avenue to the south. To the east, the Site is bound by commercial development and to
the west, by forested upland and commercial development. The Site is located within the
Piedmont physiographic province and within the Neuse River Basin (HUC 03020201803),
within the Middle Creek- Neuse sub watershed and drains towards Richlands Creek.
Site topography includes moderate to steep slopes (2 — 25%) above a small stream valley, with
fill material observed in the area of soil boring 1. There is one stream feature on the Site and no
wetlands were identified by Timmons in January 2019.
SHWT at the Site was determined by hand auger. Soil boring 1 was located within the proposed
Stormwater Control Measure (See Figure 2). Soil Boring 2 was located outside of the SCM area
but was used to observe the SHWT location nearby.
The auger boring was advanced to a depth of 102 inches below the ground surface. Chroma 2
redoximorphic features indicative of SHWT were not observed in the boring. Auger refusal was
experienced at 102 inches below the soil surface at borehole 1 due to rock. Table 1 below shows
the observed depth to auger refusal below the existing soil surface.
METHODOLOGY
Soil Profiles within and nearby to the proposed SCM area were reviewed by advancing a hand
auger to a depth below ground surface of 102 inches, when the auger was stopped by an
individual rock or bedrock. General soil morphological conditions were observed and described
by a licensed soil scientist using standard techniques outlined in the "Field Book for Describing
and Sampling Soils, Version 3" published by the Natural Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS 2012).
The area investigated by auger boring 1 consisted of layers of fill, with no indication of seasonal
high-water table above 102 inches depth below ground surface. However, infiltration rates may
be compromised due to the nature of the fill, which consisted of concrete millings and some
compacted layers. The soil boring was located where the landscape position was convex, above
a steep side slope and approximately 6 feet above the adjacent stream valley bottom. Soil boring
2 was taken in the stream floodplain, where seasonal high-water table was observed at
approximately 24 — 28 inches below the ground surface. Roughly extrapolating the SHWT
from the valley bottom suggests that the SHWT could be at approximately 8 — 8.5 feet below
ground surface. This could not be confirmed at soil boring 1 due to auger refusal due to rock at
8.5 feet or 102 inches below ground surface. The rock encountered may or may not be bedrock
and could be just a rock larger than the auger bucket diameter (3").
SHWT Determination Package Timmons Group
PROJECT NAME MONTH YYYY
Page 1

SITE GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY
The Site is mapped as primarily Cecil and Pacolet soil series, which are deep, well drained
upland soils found on ridges and side slopes in the central part of Wake County. These soils are
underlain by metamorphic gneiss and schist, described as the Raleigh Belt, which is mapped as
predominantly metamorphic felsic and biotite gneiss and schist.
SOIL BORING DESCRIPTIONS
SOIL BORING 1
Horizon
Depth
Munsell color
Texture
Structure
AX
0-6
10 YR 4/3
loam
friable
AX
6 - 12
7.5YR 6/4
Silt loam
wksbk
A/U
12 — 15
7.5YR 8/1
loam
Loose, wksbk
AX
15 - 20
7.5YR4/4
Silty clay loam
msbk
A/U
20 — 32
10YR3/1
Loam/millings
massive
B
32- 42
2.5YR4/6
Clay loam
wksbk
B
42 — 58
2.5YR4/6
clay
massive
BC
58 — 72
5YR5/6
Clay loam
massive
BC
72 — 80
5YR4/6
Clay loam
massive
BC
80 -102
5YR4/6
Clay loam
massive
SOIL BORING 2
Horizon
Depth
Munsell color
Texture
Structure
A
0-2
10YR 4/3
Loam
friable
AB
2 — 24
5YR5/6
Clay loam
wksbk
B
24 — 28
10YR5/4,7/6, 8/1
Clay
wksbk
B
28 — 32
10YR7/6,8.5/N
Clay
wksbk
A/U = Urban fill Wksbk = weak sub angular blocky Msbk = moderately subangular blocky
Soil Boring 1 included layers of fill over subsoil from approximately 12 — 32 inches bgs. The fill
and subsoil below 32 inches bgs were somewhat compacted and massive in structure which
could restrict hydraulic conductivity or infiltration rates. Soil Boring 2 was taken outside of the
SCM area in order to corroborate the SHWT for the general area. SHWT could be estimated to
be at approximately 8.5 feet bgs based on the relative elevations from the two soil borings.
CONCLUSIONS
• The proposed SCM is located on a ridge and side slope at least 6 feet above the small
floodplain nearby.
• The SHWT identified on the Site is at least 8 feet below the ground surface in the area of
the proposed stormwater control measure.
• Depending on the installation depth of the SCM, and if the required 2-foot separation to
SHWT is maintained, no impact to groundwater is anticipated.
Seasonal High Water Table Determination Package Timmons Group
PROJECT NAME MONTH YYYY

Path: R:\805\42866-NCNG JFHQ Helipad\GIS\Common Shared Exhibits\42866-VIC.mxd
m N
W<�E
,•:KFgnJ' E�Rt LAKE 000NE�TRi
[ tl
r
r��ll •. I � �: it I
m
ti
1
Site Limits
THE
Site limits are approximate.
-
Topographic imagery from USGS.
53,000
4,000
0 1,000 21000
Feet
SgOR
NCNG JFHQ HELIPAD
T I M M O N S GROUP
•• `�
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
•
FIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.
TIMMONS GROUP JOB NUMBER:42866
U.S.G.S. QUADRANGLE(S): RALEIGH WEST
PROJECT STUDY LIMITS: 14.01 ACRES
DATE(S): 2016
LATITUDE: 35.805763
WATERSHED(S): UPPER NEUSE (NEUSE RIVER BASIN)
LONGITUDE:-78.713165
ese o ans and associate ocunnents are t e exc usrve orooertv o and may not ce reDrOaUcea In w
HYDROLOGIC UNIT CODE(S): 03020201
o e Orin part an s a no a use or anv ouroose w a[soever. Inc usrve. ut not
to construction, bidding, and/or construction staking without the express written consent of TI MMONS GROUP.

I 1
� I
SEGMENTAL BLOCK EXISTING SUBSURFACE FILL DIRT
6-FT GRAS� m SHOULDER ��+ RETAINING WALL TO BE USED IN GRASS AREAS ONLY
`'�'�' - ' �' $ I I N8s2928"W f532a5'fG UNDJ ` OUTLET + f
I s
S -_' �o� o I IST141 T DRIVE SR - r ~ �� PROTECTION
kh r 1,711 --� .: Y - �- _. - =--,pia = �_ o t /60FR� A
J��� ����-4 - - f
f � � _ _i�--- _ _-- ---��._��-, �y _ �� � �' �- -� � � � � �y I D- H. 15120 PG, ,35g �~ ~ 1 � •, -�_ - - - _ ` " ..���
CZ
Ir' 11 1 �r J �� sr e4�14i- f �, - � - - - - - _ y-� �, `o•� N r C5.3-
_
�IlrzPa�� J O _ 1 1 I r Jr
I r r - _ _ r _ _ _ - - -� _ �."- `� `� "� f 169.77� (TIESSi
■\\� 1 �t7 lF+I f rfi ��r-_go- + +u r Y I {
1 41y 1111 1 i 1 ! 1 l�/r "G- -
� � ►ttt 1 t�4{t� 1 Illl 1 � 1 r ! ! i f } r+ l+ 1 1 r + 1� I� � r "_`. - - - - _ _ 4.�� - - - ': ` `
"' � s►1l 11 1I I � + + r 1 } ! I r 1 f 4 } � � � - -tea �C�3.-
I- _ - - - - - - - - _ 1 - �� l _ `---- _ ` - II ti I ♦ , m 1 } Off.
xj 14f f1 t t t l l I � { � � r � • r �_ _ • � �� � ` \ti - - � ' fair ` V-1 l l I
1 1 1 t� 1 1l tlt t t I I t 11 1 t ►l f 1 { j , + I . l _ - - _ _ - - - -"� I - - r B .00
-6 EOGE
l t l r - - - - - k� - _ _ _ r SHOUL©ER _.i_ __ g I I
it t}l II11 y it 1� 11111 I It 1 I 1 N I � 1 6 • � 1� `* f4 -9 � '� ) f -} �'�'r i9 � `t � � � ♦ 1 / /
� � - -. f - � � --- `? � � � � ` � �` � � ` 1 ■
I 1 lllt 11 l' 1 ll , 1 I 1 1 f t� - _ 6 f w r, T f \ I ! ■
l t 11 1 1 t l 1 11 C5.3 ,4� . o I' y w \ ,�
1 I i 1 1 rill l 11 t t 4 t f 1 1 1 1 T 6 I r C5.3 a 1 f 1 '` + 1 , - •I -
_ 41 111 tt r� t 1 11 llll I 1 1 1 k• 11
, +
IA 1 I it l t 1 ` 111� ! ( � 1
r 1
�� �l
11�1 14 ll 1 1 11 11 11 I`` l l l l l t l l l 1 1 �1 l L 1 I I + r +: r r / �" l� - r r r 1 I I l I' 1 • . \ 1�+ 1 �r 1
li�111!
! , ��lll to �{' 427- - - _ - _ _ _ _ r I f 1 ` . , >, + r 1 r If r J 1
I� �11111 `�}yl` i 4t f �I; I'lll �'ILII,a,I 1 l 1 y 1 I + 1 1 1 1 1 1 r � �� � \• - °1° � ` `\ �' ._ ' ilrri! 11
to-389-�4,1��
div
II� ! � �11 �►j;'! i 1 1 t ��� �`�,'� ���,11 I 1 1 1 1 ll 1 1 � 1 , 1 �' ��-11 '� �'- B-2..`,. �� 43p - - � I I 1 r f + 11 f 1 I Iw1I1�j� �L'�= --_ _
t q t I 1 T
�1j111 1 � 1 ' 1 1 �
61►11 11 l 1 w`a-- 1 [ 1 1 l f � I - - - - ' C5.3 +
14 i _ -
� 111 Il � 1 1 1 , �, � � � 1 1 � ,r, ` .�.6. -.---__ -_ - Z
5H1lIIT LOCATION ► � - X � ` _ _ 1
��� o� i u I l I 1 t• ` I -` 5 - - _ r 11
-- - 433 - _ - - _ ; _ -f- C5 3
T-2 + _ Y C5.3 f - - - _ r I
\ /
_ 1 - - - -
�"� y SO \ titi ' - �434- &3 , -0
ti lr -ter' OUTLET _ � �` � t ti � � � � � f� . - - - - - - - - - - � 4�35 _ ~ �
PROTECTION �� BIDRETENTIDN- -: 1 Y r Dj I • r / r r 1 1 �1 11 �1 1
�
BASIN , ti ti 3
'�' r rr rr rr 11 111!
r _ _ �6�•
1 'i r � r r r
. I �T- / I '
m 'lit �� .� �� �- off° + _ - -rr b+ 'r rr r rr rr'1 II 11 r
1
ry + - J W+ 1 I I r r r r r 1 I 1 1 1 I
1"
KV
a400- = w40Q 4A7-__-_= ��� ❑ 1 1 I1111 �rl 4
lAr
_ ---w - -_ 403-___ -����� 1 I1 1'��j
405 ` y y '�- + �� ti 4a4 77 �O _- -!` OUTLET - _ _ - 42S �- - - - _ . - - • - °1 _ 11 11 1 11 1 rl
-- - 4a6 _� . PROTECTION
_ _ + �g 1
_ i 4- 408 _ _ ��'1 ` ` �' ' . N
_ 4(19 ='�` \titi
� ;;�=;�- -411-- __ -- - `_`.�`�._1+p
AAZ
1413414_ �` - '�.� �� `� ,:. 1 11 1 1 ., .' 11 1 1� 1 Il r I J 1 - - - - - - r. 11 + r 1 Il r ! jj Z��
`= -`- 41E - - ��_` f 1 1 1 1 �, h 1 - ! SEGMENTAL BLOCK r } r Q aO
~►� > ; -41 _ - �`_ �- �1 I 1 '`+ ti ►� I1 50' ' - I I �'�° - - - - - 1 RETAINING WALL 0
��-�� ' �`t�Q- ' - - � - - -� � ��_ � I [ r�L� y I ;t f c 501 � I � '�• 1 1 I I �l
�1 � ! I - I l �7r r1 _ _ 444
r
50'
11 1 r
_ r r !r
PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE - R r 1 C5 3 E OF GRAS OULflER - -44
1 - APPROVED DISPOSAL OF � � �
SURPLUS RIGHT OF WAY
A,91Ag E yyjD FAI IpN
co
co
Q
z
SCALE 1 "=50'
NOR
0 50' 100'
L
TEST PIT BORING DATA
T-1: 9 FEET OF UNSTRUCTURED FILL
T-2: 8.5 FEET OF UNSTRUCTURED FILL
T-3: 6 FEET OF UNSTRUCTURED FILL
T-4: 6 FEET OF UNSTRUCTURED FILL
T-5: 6.5 FEET OF UNSTRUCTURED FILL
T-6: 9 FEET OF UNSTRUCTURED FILL
T-7: 8 FEET OF UNSTRUCTURED FILL
T-S: NO FILL (NATIVE SOILS)
T-9: NO FILL (NATIVE SOILS)
(435
1 1 rf 1 l
10.FT GRASS i
SHOULDER 6 1 i
C5-3
NEW ROW FENCING TO MATCH
EXISTING. 1 , 11
11
NOTES
1•
TEST PIT BORING DATA
T-1: 9 FEET OF UNSTRUCTURED FILL
T-2: 8.5 FEET OF UNSTRUCTURED FILL
T-3: 6 FEET OF UNSTRUCTURED FILL
T-4: 6 FEET OF UNSTRUCTURED FILL
T-5: 6.5 FEET OF UNSTRUCTURED FILL
T-6: 9 FEET OF UNSTRUCTURED FILL
T-7: 8 FEET OF UNSTRUCTURED FILL
T-S: NO FILL (NATIVE SOILS)
T-9: NO FILL (NATIVE SOILS)
(435
1 1 rf 1 l
10.FT GRASS i
SHOULDER 6 1 i
C5-3
NEW ROW FENCING TO MATCH
EXISTING. 1 , 11
11
NOTES
1•
ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE
B.
IN DISTURBED AREAS, AMEND THE TOP 6 INCHES OF LAWN
NCSCO AND OSHA STANDARDS.
AREAS WITH 3 INCHES OF IMPORTED AND TESTED TOPSOIL
2.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RECYCLE ALL PAVING MATERIALS
THAT MEET THE SPECIFICATIONS.
REMOVED FROM THE SITE AND SHALL PROVIDE
9.
ALL SIDEWALKS SHALL HAVE MAX CROSS SLOPE OF 2%.
DOCUMENTATION (SWARWEB) THAT THE MATERIALS HAVE
10.
ALL ADA PARKING SPACES SHALL NOT EXCEED 2% SLOPE IN
BEEN RECYCLED.
ANY DIRECTION.
3.
DISPOSE OFF -SITE WASTE MATERIALS GENERATED DURING
11.
INSTALL ALL STORM SEWERS TO PROVIDE REQUIRED
CONSTRUCTION AND FOR OBTAINING ALL APPLICABLE
CLEARANCES TO CROSSING UTILITIES AS INDICATED IN THE
PERMITS FOR OFF -SITE STOCKPILES AND/OR WASTE AREAS.
DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
IF THE SAME PERSON CONDUCTS THE LAND -DISTURBING
ACTIVITY AND ANY RELATED BORROW OR WASTE ACTIVITY,
12.
PROVIDE AN AS -BUILT SURVEY OF ALL UTILITY AND STORM
THE RELATED BORROW OR WASTE ACTIVITY IS PART OF THE
13.
PHASE DEMOLITION AND NEW CONSTRUCTION TO ENSURE
LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITY. IF THE BORROW OR WASTE
UNINTERRUPTED ACCESS AND TO ADJACENT FACILITIES.
ACTIVITY ARE NOT CONDUCTED BY THE SAME PERSON, THEY
COORDINATE SHORT-TERM, OFF -HOUR, TEMPORARY SHUT -
SHALL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATE LAND DISTURBING
DOWNS WITH THE OWNER.
ACTIVITY AND MUST BE PERMITTED THROUGH THE SEDIMENT
14.
SEE GENERAL NOTES ON EXISTING CONDITIONS AND
POLLUTION CONTROL ACT.
DEMOLITION PLAN FOR REQUIREMENTS FOR REMOVAL AND
4.
REPAIR OR REPLACE ANY ITEMS DAMAGED DUE TO
PATCHING OF PAVEMENT FOR UTILITY INSTALLATION.
CONSTRUCTION (ONSITE AND/OR OFFSITE) AT NO EXPENSE
15.
ALL ROOF DRAINS SHALL BE 6" PVC (SCH 40) 0 1.049/a MIN.
TO THE OWNER.
SLOPE UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE. USE DUCTILE IRON
5.
COORDINATE THE PROJECT SCHEDULE WITH THE OWNER,
WHEN COVER IS LESS THAN 24-IN.
OWNER'S CIVIL ENGINEER, AND OWNER'S MATERIAL TESTING
S,
REFER TO PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL
AGENT. COORDINATE THE PROJECT SCHEDULE WITH ALL
INFORMATION.
ONSITE OPERATIONS.
6. ALL STORM DRAINAGE PIPES AND STRUCTURES SHALL BE
THOROUGHLY FLUSHED OF ALL SEDIMENT FOLLOWING SITE
STABILIZATION, INTERIOR FLUSHING OF SYSTEM SHALL BE
PERFORMED AS NEEDED TO MAINTAIN PROPER FUNCTIONING
OF THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM.
7. MAINTAIN ALL EROSION CONTROL DEVICES AFTER EACH
RAINFALL EVENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH NCDEQ LAND
QUALITY REQUIREMENTS AND AS DIRECTED BY THE CIVIL
ENGINEER.
KEY NOTES
1 TRENCH DRAIN
C5.3
2 C5.3 FLARED END SECTION
3 DRAINAGE MANHOLE
C5.3
5 STORM SEWER TRENCHES
C5.3
STANDARD CONCRETE DROP INLET
C5.3
STANDARD CATCH BASIN
C5.3
FOR REVIEW ONLY
-% R
G r
4
Q �
SEAL -
033692
V
IN
rani
DO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
O
u
n
� v
w Z
cm
� c�i�C4
¢�
-m z
a66
�08P 0
F-
O 'm
Y
1�y�{ u
ULu
t7 v 0
Ln
�L z
' o
!- .b
,i
-4 ae
LnCh
J
w
F-
ui
ot
0
W
uj
z
O
DATE
12/16/19
O
DRAWN BY
WA
DESIGNED BY
FS
CHECKED BY
FS
SCALE
NTS
i Q
H O
J r�
UD
w �
H LU
ui d
U
< 0
Z
c _ Q
0
LL N Lu
a (7
z Q
❑ J Z
Q Q
U
t
J z ❑
Q q Z
d
w
Z
~ 0 I --I
r o ❑
Q�
N
Z H rr�
� V
U)
Z L
I -I
J I
0 0
Q U]
u izi
L7
L.L �
�7
ME NO.
42866
SHEET NO.
C4 . "
L
� 0
W M
7 0
V)
_no
o �
C m
L

Geotechnical Exploration Report

GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION REPORT
NORTH CAROLINA NATIONAL GUARD
NCNG JFHQ HELIPAD
DISTRICT DRIVE
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
JOB NUMBER: 42866
PREPARED FOR:
NORTH CAROLINA NATIONAL GUARD
1636 GOLD STAR DRIVE
SUITE 2600
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27607
January 30, 2020
& 0 a
TIMMONS GROUP
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PROJECT INFORMATION.................................................................................... 1
2. FIELD EXPLORATION.......................................................................................... 2
2.1 Hand Auger Borings........................................................................................... 2
2.2 Test Pits............................................................................................................... 2
3. SITE GEOLOGY....................................................................................................... 3
4. LABORATORY TESTING...................................................................................... 3
5. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS................................................................................ 4
5.1.1 Hand Auger Borings............................................................................... 4
5.1.2 Test Pits................................................................................................... 5
6. GEOTECHNICAL COMMENTARY..................................................................... 5
7. LIMITATIONS OF REPORT.................................................................................. 5
8. CLOSURE..................................................................................................................5
APPENDICES
Appendix A — Figures
Appendix B
— Boring Logs
Appendix C
— Laboratory Test Result
Appendix D
— Field Report

sEl�E
TIMMONS GROUP
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.
January 30, 2020
North Carolina National Guard
1636 Gold Star Drive
Suite 2600
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Attention: Lieutenant Colonel Robyn Bryant
Re: Geotechnical Exploration Report
NCNG JFHQ Helipad
District Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina
Timmons Group Project No. 42866
Lieutenant Colonel Bryant:
5410 Trinity Road
Suite 102
Raleigh, NC 27607
P 919.866.4951
F 919.859.5663
www.timmons.com
Timmons Group is pleased to submit this geotechnical exploration report for the referenced
project. The objectives of our services were to explore subsurface conditions and provide a
summary of encountered conditions and laboratory test results.
This report is a revision to our Revised Geotechnical Engineering Report dated July 2, 2019. The
report has been updated to provide only the geotechnical fieldwork data and laboratory test data
performed to date.
1. PROJECT INFORMATION
The site is just south of the existing North Carolina National Guard Joint Force Headquarters
located at 1636 Gold Star Drive in Raleigh, North Carolina. A Site Vicinity Map is shown in
Figure 1.
Proposed construction will consist of a helipad and associated parking lots and paved drives. Some
of the new pavement is expected to receive occasional fuel truck traffic. Mass grading will require
excavation and fill depths on the order of 10 feet.
The site is bounded by District Drive with the North Carolina National Guard Joint Force
Headquarters beyond to the north, Wade Avenue to the south, the North Carolina State Laboratory
of Public Health and Office of the Chief Medical Examiner to the west, and Western Wake Fire

Revised Geotechnical Data Report Project No.42866
NCNG JFHQ Helipad — Raleigh, NC January 30, 2020
Department to the east. Ground surface elevations in the proposed construction area range from
approximately 440 feet in the middle of the site to approximately 424 feet at the northern edge of
the site. Site grades generally slope downward from the central peak to the north, south, east, and
west.
2. FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration included a visual site reconnaissance by a representative of Timmons Group,
performance of five (5) soil test borings (B-1 through B-5), and performance of nine (9) test pit
excavations (T-1 through T-9). Boring and test pit locations were selected by Timmons Group. A
representative from Timmons Group established their locations in the field using GPS equipment.
Approximate boring locations are shown on Figure 2 in Appendix A. Approximate test pit
locations are shown in Appendix D.
2.1 Hand Auger Borings
Hand auger borings were performed to depths of approximately 2.5 to 10 feet below the existing
ground surface with hand auger drilling techniques. Samples of subsurface soils were taken within
the borings at approximate 1-foot depth intervals. Dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) tests were
conducted at 2-foot depth intervals in general accordance with method described by Sowers and
Hedges (Dynamic Cone for Shallow In -Situ Penetration Testing, 1966). Several bulk samples of
auger cuttings were also collected.
Water levels were measured in open boreholes at the time of drilling. Upon completion, boreholes
were then backfilled up to the original ground surface with drill cuttings. Representative portions
of split -spoon soil samples were returned to our laboratory for quantitative testing and visual
classification in general accordance with Unified Soil Classification System guidelines.
Boring logs and a generalized soil profile (Figure 3), which present specific information from the
borings, are included in the Appendix. Stratification lines shown on the boring logs and profile
are intended to represent approximate depths of changes in soil types. Naturally, transitional
changes in soil types are often gradual and cannot be defined at particular depths. Boring elevations
shown on the logs and profile were obtained from the project topographic plan and should be
considered approximate.
2.2 Test Pits
After encountering debris -laden existing fill in two of the borings (B-1 and B-2), nine test pits
were performed at the site. This exploration is described in our field report dated March 7, 2019,
shown in Appendix D.
KA

Revised Geotechnical Data Report Project No.42866
NCNG JFHQ Helipad — Raleigh, NC January 30, 2020
3. SITE GEOLOGY
According to the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources,
Division of Land Resources, NC Geological Survey, the site is located in the Piedmont
Physiographic Province. In general, the Piedmont Province consists of generally rolling, well-
rounded hills and ridges with a few hundred feet of elevation difference between the hills and
valleys. Elevations in the Piedmont Province range from 300 to 600 feet above sea level near its
border with the Coastal Plain to 1,500 feet at the foot of the Blue Ridge. Resistant knobs and hills,
called monadnocks, which occur in the Piedmont Province, include the Sauratown, South, and
Uwharrie Mountains (Medina, Reid, and Carpenter, 2004).
According the referenced Survey, the site is underlain by Felsic Mica Gneiss. Felsic Mica Gneiss
is described as interlayered with biotite and hornblende gneiss and schist.
4. LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory testing was performed on representative soil samples obtained from the borings. This
testing consisted of natural moisture content, Atterberg limits, grain size analyses, Standard
Proctor, and California Bearing Ratio (CBR) on soils. Laboratory tests were performed in general
accordance with applicable ASTM procedures. Individual laboratory test data sheets are provided
in the Appendix. Summaries of laboratory test data are provided in the tables below.
Natural Moisture and Classification Tests
Grain Size
Atterberg Limits
Natural
Analysis
Depth
Moisture
USCS
o
Boring
(Feet)
Content
Classification
(%)
LL
PL
PI
Sand
%
And
Fines*
Gravel
B-2
1-2
13.9
40
29
11
46.2
53.8
ML**
B-3
1-2
12.5
22
15
7
57.1
42.9
SC*
B-4
7.0
27.7
64
47
17
46.1
53.9
NM**
*Material passing No. 200 sieve (clay and silt)
**Based on visual classification and Atterberg limits
3

Revised Geotechnical Data Report Project No.42866
NCNG JFHQ Helipad — Raleigh, NC January 30, 2020
Standard Proctor and CBR Testing
Standard Proctor
Natural
Optimum
Maximum
Boring
Depth
Moisture
Moisture
Dry
CBR
o
/oSwell
USCS
(Feet)
Content
Content
Density
(01„)
Classification
(%)
(%)
(pcf)
B-2
1-2
13.9
12.2
121.2
3.4
2.7
ML**
B-3
1-2
12.5
12.0
122.1
1.9
0.1
SC*
Based on the Atterberg limits testing, near -surface soils are of low to high plasticity. Based on
comparison of natural moisture contents of near -surface soils to the optimum moisture contents of
the bulk samples, near -surface soils appeared near optimum moisture at the time of our
exploration. Some wetting or drying of the on -site soils could be required prior to their re -use as
fill. However, the amount of moisture manipulation will likely depend on prevailing weather
conditions.
5. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
5.1.1 Hand Auger Borings
Borings encountered approximately I to 6 inches of surficial topsoil. Below topsoil, fill soils were
encountered in borings B-1 and B-2 to depths of approximately 2.5 to 3.5 feet. Refusal materials
were encountered below these depths. The borings were offset multiple times from the original
locations but were unable to be excavated deeper. Encountered fill consisted of soft to firm silty
clays and sandy silts (CL, ML). Much of the fill contained wood, asphalt, concrete and rock
fragments, tires, silt fencing, and other trash. Near the refusal depth in borings B-1 and B-2, the
fill contained asphalt and concrete fragments along with other trash. We expect refusal in borings
B-1 and B-2 occurred on asphalt or concrete debris. DCP values within the fill profile ranged from
4 to 5 blows per increment. It is possible that some SPT N-values were amplified due the presence
of asphalt, rock, and concrete fragments and may not represent the true consistency of the soil. It
is our opinion that the existing fills encountered in the borings are not consistent with -a controlled
fill intended to support structures. The fill contains excessive debris.
Below surface materials in borings B-3, B-4, and B-5, "undisturbed" residual soils were
encountered to depths of about 10 feet. These soils consisted of medium dense clayey sands (SC),
and soft to stiff silty clays, and silts with varying amounts of clay and sand (CL, ML, MH). DCP
values within these soils ranged from 3 to 20+ blows per increment, with typical values of 8 to 18
blows per increment.
4

Revised Geotechnical Data Report Project No.42866
NCNG JFHQ Helipad - Raleigh NC January 30 2020
At the time of drilling, water was not encountered in the borings. It is important to realize that
groundwater levels will fluctuate with changes in rainfall and evaporation rates. In addition,
perched groundwater could be encountered within near -surface soils, particularly after rainfall.
5.1.2 Test Pits
Due to the presence of fill material and trash in two of the initial hand auger borings (13-1 and 13-
2), several test pits (T-1 through T-9) were completed to further explore the fill mass on site. Test
Pits T-1 through T-7 encountered approximately 6 to 9 feet of fill material mixed with trash, while
Test Pits T-8 and T-9 encountered undisturbed soils below the surficial topsoil layer. Perched
ground water was also encountered in several of the borings. A detailed summary of test pits
findings along with photographs can be found in the Field Report located in the Appendix D of
this report.
6. GEOTECHNICAL COMMENTARY
We understand the design recommendations for pavements at this site will be provided by others.
The goal of this report is to provide information based on field exploration done by Timmons
Group.
7. LIMITATIONS OF REPORT
While this exploration has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical
engineering practices, there remains some potential for variation of the subsurface conditions in
unexplored areas of the site.
8. CLOSURE
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions
regarding this report or if we can be of further assistance, please contact us at [phone].
Respectfully submitted,
TIMMONs GROUP
esse L. Israel, E.I.
Geotechnical Professional
�o\11110i'li`�
@� SEAL
029383
`'�✓ ®'�
G l t� � : 5 J. Nathan Reeves P.E.
e. � ,
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
f`i€;+sfi"""� NC Registration No. 29383
5

APPENDIX A
FIGURES

5 5 +}
or � n _
qk
P:%
ti k
SCALE: NTS
CHECKED BY: JNR
PLOTTED BY: JLI
DATE: 2/20/19
TIMMONS GROUP
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.
PROJECT NUMBER: 42866
North Carolina
1p
� �,�-. Q Technolp
W slthase Blvd +1,
4K LIF.fk"ice N
SITE VICINITY MAP
NCNG HELIPAD
DISTRICT DRIVE
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH
DRAWING
1

- 5 ..-�..�. �..,..- tf-
�.J \
BORING LOCATIONS
BORING NORTHING FASTING DEPTH j / / T9u- R OF BOLT
B-1 748389.91 2084909.68 10'
8-2 748382.46 2085034.45 10,
B-3 748331.84 2085324.45 10, / 100 0 100 200
BA 748260.36 2085124.84 10, Approximate Soil
B-5 748165.64 2085314.53 10, Test Boring Locations SCALE: 1 "='106' FEET
Scale: Not to scale . �! �� Boring Location Plan Figure No.
Date: 2/19/19 NCNG Helipad
Drag By: JLl T I M M O N S GROUP Raleigh, North Carolina 2
ProjectNo.: 42866 YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.

O
co
U)
D
W
0
Ir
0-
W
C)
Ir
D
U)
co
D
U)
440
438
436
434
co
co
W
432
430
428
426
.... ...........
...........
........... ...........
....
.... ...........
...........
........... ...........
........... ........................
........................
........................
...........
............ * ...........
........... .......... ...........
B-5
....
.... ....................
.
........ ...........
....
.... ...........
...........
........... ...........
..................................................................................................
........................
........... ........
..........
...........
....
.... ...........
...........
........... ...........
.......... . ........................
........................
........................
...........
........................
........... .........
......... ...........
....
.... ...........
...........
........... ...........
..................................................................................................
........................
........... .........
......... ...........
....
...........
........... .......................
........................
........................
........................
.......................
...........
........... .........
......... ...........
....
...........
........... ...........
..................................................................................................
........................
........... .........
......... ...........
....
...........
........... .......................
........................
........................
....................................
........... ...........
*
........... .........
......... ...........
....
......... ..........
B-2
..................................
...................................
.......... ...........
B -4
........... ...........
......... ...........
....
...........
....................
...........
........... ........
...................
........... .........
00(
00(
00(
00(
00(
00(
..................................
......... ........................
......... ........................
...........................................................
........................
........................
........................
........................
.........
.........
........ ...........
........ ...........
........
........... .........
........... ..........
........
.
......... ...........
.......... ...........
....
....
.... ...........
.... ...........
.... ...........
...........
...........
00<
........... ......... ......... ........................
......... ........... ........... ........................
........... ........... ..............................................
T
........................ ........................
........................ ........................
............................................
B.3
.........
..........
7 .
......... * ...........
......................
.....................
........... .........
........... .......
........... .........
......... ...........
.........
.....
....
....
.... ...........
.... ...........
.... .......................
...........
...........
........... ...........
........... ...........
........... .......................
....................................
........... .................................
.
.........
........
.........
.
..
...
..
........................
............................................
...........................................
............................................
......... ........................
......... ........................
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.......... .....
......
....................
....................
.....................
........ ...........
......... ...........
........ ...........
....................
......... ...........
........... .........
........... .......... ...........
........... ........... .......................
....
.... ...........
.... ...........
.... ...........
...........
...........
...........
........... ...........
........... ...........
........... ...........
...................................
........... ........................
..............................................
........... ...........
........... ...........
........... ...........
........... ...........
........... ...........
........... ...........
....
....
....
.... ...........
.... ...........
.... ...........
...........
...........
........... ..........................................................
........... .......................
........................
...............................
.........
.........
.........
............................................
. ......... ........................
..................................
......... .......................
......... ........................
..............................................
........... ...........
........... ..........
........... ...........
........... ...........
........... ...........
........... ...........
....
....
....
.... ...........
.... ...........
.... ...........
...........
...........
........... ...........
........... ...........
........... ........................
..............................................
...................................
...........
...........
........................
........... ...........
.........
........... ...........
........... ...........
..........
..........
....
424
........... ........... ........... ........... ........... .............. . * .......... ......... ......... ........................ .................................. . .......... ........... ........... ....
...... ........... ............................................ .. .... .... ........... ........... ....
.......... ............................................ .. ........... ........... ....
422L
Lithology Symbols Groundwater Symbols
ETopsoil Fill (made At End
E2 ground) a of Drilling V At 24 Hours
Clayey Sand IN Silt Exploration Symbols
B-01 (Exploration ID)
1 E Elastic Silt Low Plasticity Ed Clay 13 (N-Value)
53% 98%(RQD REC)
% Soil Profile
T I M M O N S GROUP NCNG Helipad
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS. Raleigh, NC
PROJECT NUMBER DRAWN BY DATE DRAWN
42866 JLl 2/27/19
Timmons Group HORIZONTAL SCALE APPROVED BY FIGURE
VERTICAL SCALE JNR 3

APPENDIX B
BORING LOGS

TIMMONS GROUP
YOUR WSION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.
KEY TO BORING LOG TERMINOLOGY
Relative Density — Used for soils with less than 50%
passing No. 200 sieve
Consistency — Used for soils with 50 percent or more
passing No. 200 sieve
Relative Density
SPT N-Value
blows/ft
Consistency
SPT N-Value
blows/foot
Very Loose
0 to 3
Very Soft
0 to 2
Loose
4 to 10
Soft
3 to 4
Medium Dense
11 to 30
Firm
4 to 8
Dense
31 to 49
Stiff
9 to 15
Very Dense
Greater than 50
Very Stiff
15 to 30
Hard
31 to 49
Very Hard
Greater than 50
Grain Size Terminolo U.S. Standard Sieves
Natural Moisture Content
Term
Particle Size
Boulder
12 inches +
Dry
Very little apparent moisture,
dusty
Cobble
3 to 12 inches
Coarse Gravel
% to 3 inches
Moist
Damp, but no free water visible
Fine Gravel
#4 to % inches
Coarse Sand
#10 to #4
Medium Sand
#40 to #10
Wet
Visible free water, or in cohesive
soil, clearly saturated
Fine Sand
#200 to #40
Silt and Clay
<#200
PLASTICITY CHART - USED FOR
MATERIAL < #40 SIEVE
so-
For classifi
50
a
0Gr7
A
z
F
F
d
J
a
10
7
4
0
70 .. 1:6
0
10 16 20 30 40 SO 60
11
LIQUID LIMIT
{LL):
cation of fine-grained soils and
r
fine-grained fraction ofcoarse-grained soils.
,
J
Equation of ".["-line
Hotixontal at P7=1 to LC=25.3, � J
then Pl�.73 (n-?0)
G
Equation of "L'"'-line
['ertiral at LL=16 to PI=7,
then Pl�.9(L.IrB)

SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
MAJOR DIVISIONS
SYMBOLS
TYPICAL
DESCRIPTIONS
GRAPH
LETTER
GRAVEL
AND
CLEAN
GRAVELS
' �r .' r
16
• •
GW
WELL -GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -
FSANNED MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO
°
°° 3.
o p�o p
GP
POORLY -GRADED GRAVELS,
GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE
OR NO FINES
GRAVELLY
SOILS
(LITTLE OR NO FINES)
COARSE
GRAINED
SOILS
MORE THAN 50%
OF COARSE
FRACTION
GRAVELS WITH
FINES
0
00
°
°°
°
°
p
O
GM
SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -
SILT MIXTURES
RETAINED ON NO.
4 SIEVE
(APPRECIABLE
AMOUNT OF FINES)
/+G
G
CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -
CLAY MIXTURES
SAND
AND
CLEAN SANDS
SW
WELL -GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY
SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES
MORE THAN 50%
OF MATERIAL IS
Sp
POORLY -GRADED SANDS,
GRAVELLY SAND, LITTLE OR NO
FINES
LARGER THAN
NO. 200 SIEVE
SIZE
SANDY
SOILS
(LITTLE OR NO FINES)
SANDS WITH
FINES
S M
SILTY SANDS, SAND - SILT
MIXTURES
MORE THAN 50%
OF COARSE
FRACTION
PASSING ON NO.
4 SIEVE
(APPRECIABLE
AMOUNT OF FINES)
SC
CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAY
MIXTURES
INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE
ML
SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR
CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY
SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY
CL
INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO
MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY
CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY
CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS
FINE
GRAINED
SOILS
SILTS
AND LIQUID LIMIT
LESS THAN 50
CLAYS
— — — —
OL
ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC
SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY
MORE THAN 50%
OF MATERIAL IS
SMALLER THAN
NO. 200 SIEVE
MH
INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR
DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR
SILTY SOILS
SIZE
SILTS
AND LIQUID LIMIT
CLAYS GREATER THAN 50
CH
CLAYS OF HIGH
PLASTICITY
PLASTICITY
OH
ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO
HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS
0 0 0
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
'/ 0" / 0" / 0" / N
„ „ „ „
PT
PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH
HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS
NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS

•• *
BORING B-1
.
�
Timmons Group
PAGE 1 OF 1
TIMMONS GROUP
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.
PROJECT NUMBER 42866
PROJECT NAME NCNG Helipad
CLIENT North Carolina National Gaurd
PROJECT LOCATION Raleigh, NC
DATE STARTED 1 /30/2019 COMPLETED 1 /30/2019
GROUND ELEVATION 438 ft
HOLE DEPTH 3.5 feet
DRILLING CONTRACTOR Timmmons Group
BOREHOLE WATER LEVELS:
DRILLING METHOD Hand Auger
AT END OF DRILLING ---
LOGGED BY J. Israel, E.I. CHECKED BY N. Reeves,
P.E. AT 24 HOURS DRILLING ---
NOTES Refusal w/ Offset
CAVE DEPTH
z
o
z
w
O
SAMPLING
a
a
Q S
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
BLOW COUNT
w N
LAB TESTS
REMARKS
w
p
>
J
(N-VALUE)
Lu
w
O
a
0
TOPSOIUROOT MAT
00
SILTY CLAY: (CL): gray and brown, wet, firm,
with fine to medium sand, and organics, and
DCP 5-5-5
construction debris, FILL MIXED WITH
435
ASPHALT CHUNKS
Refusal at 3.5 feet.
Bottom of borehole at 3.5 feet.

4040060 BORING B-2
Timmons Group PAGE 1 OF 1
TIMMONS GROUP
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.
PROJECT NUMBER 42866 PROJECT NAME NCNG Helipad
CLIENT North Carolina National Gaurd PROJECT LOCATION Raleigh, NC
DATE STARTED 1 /30/2019 COMPLETED 1 /30/2019 GROUND ELEVATION 436 ft HOLE DEPTH 2.5 feet
DRILLING CONTRACTOR Timmmons Group BOREHOLE WATER LEVELS:
DRILLING METHOD Hand Auger AT END OF DRILLING ---
LOGGED BY J. Israel, E.I. CHECKED BY N. Reeves, P.E. AT 24 HOURS DRILLING ---
NOTES Refusal w/ Offset CAVE DEPTH
z
2 O
a Q MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Lu
W
435 TOPSOIUROOT MAT
SANDY SILT: (ML): brown, fine to medium
grained, wet, soft, with mica, and organics, and
construction debris, FILL MIXED WITH
ASPHALT CHUNKS
Refusal at 2.5 feet.
Bottom of borehole at 2.5 feet.
z
J Lu
O SAMPLING a
00 BLOW COLINTc w N LAB TESTS
(N-VALUE) U ,
O
d
CP 2-4-5
REMARKS

•• *
BORING B-3
.
�
Timmons Group
PAGE 1 OF 1
TIMMONS GROUP
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.
PROJECT NUMBER 42866
PROJECT NAME NCNG Helipad
CLIENT North Carolina National Gaurd
PROJECT LOCATION Raleigh, NC
DATE STARTED 1 /30/2019 COMPLETED 1 /30/2019
GROUND ELEVATION 432 ft
HOLE DEPTH 10 feet
DRILLING CONTRACTOR Timmmons Group
BOREHOLE WATER LEVELS:
DRILLING METHOD Hand Auger
AT END OF DRILLING ---
LOGGED BY J. Israel, E.I. CHECKED BY N. Reeves,
P.E. AT 24 HOURS DRILLING ---
NOTES
CAVE DEPTH
z
o
z
w
O
SAMPLING
a
a
`.'
Q S
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
BLOW COUNT
w N
LAB TESTS
REMARKS
w
p
>
J
(N-VALUE)
Lu
w
O
a
0
TOPSOIL
DCP 6-7-12
CLAYEY SAND: (SC): tannish red -brown, fine to
430
medium grained, medium dense, with silt
DCP 8-9-11
CLAYEY SILT: (ML): tannish red, stiff, with fine
5
to medium sand
DCP 10-11-17
SILT: (MH): red to pink, stiff, with mica
425
DCP 8-15-15
10
Bottom of borehole at 10.0 feet.

•• •.�
BORING B-4
.
�
Timmons Group
PAGE 1 OF 1
TIMMONS GROUP
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.
PROJECT NUMBER 42866
PROJECT NAME NCNG Helipad
CLIENT North Carolina National Gaurd
PROJECT LOCATION Raleigh, NC
DATE STARTED 1 /30/2019 COMPLETED 1 /30/2019
GROUND ELEVATION 436 ft
HOLE DEPTH 10 feet
DRILLING CONTRACTOR Timmmons Group
BOREHOLE WATER LEVELS:
DRILLING METHOD Hand Auger
AT END OF DRILLING ---
LOGGED BY J. Israel, E.I. CHECKED BY N. Reeves,
P.E. AT 24 HOURS DRILLING ---
NOTES
CAVE DEPTH
z
o
z
w
O
SAMPLING
a
a
`.'
Q S
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
BLOW COUNT
w N
LAB TESTS
REMARKS
w
p
>
J
(N-VALUE)
Lu
w
O
a
0
TOPSOIL
435
DCP 2-2-3
CLAYEY SILT: (ML): reddish pink, soft to stiff,
with mica
DCP 20+
SILTY CLAY: (CL): red, stiff, with fine to
'
medium sand
5
DCP 15-20+
SANDY SILT: (MH): reddish pink, stiff, with
mica, and clay
430
DCP 20+
10
Bottom of borehole at 10.0 feet.

•• *
BORING B-5
.
�
Timmons Group
PAGE 1 OF 1
TIMMONS GROUP
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.
PROJECT NUMBER 42866
PROJECT NAME NCNG Helipad
CLIENT North Carolina National Gaurd
PROJECT LOCATION Raleigh, NC
DATE STARTED 1 /30/2019 COMPLETED 1 /30/2019
GROUND ELEVATION 441 ft
HOLE DEPTH 10 feet
DRILLING CONTRACTOR Timmmons Group
BOREHOLE WATER LEVELS:
DRILLING METHOD Hand Auger
AT END OF DRILLING ---
LOGGED BY J. Israel, E.I. CHECKED BY N. Reeves,
P.E. AT 24 HOURS DRILLING ---
NOTES
CAVE DEPTH
z
o
z
w
O
SAMPLING
a
a
`.'
Q S
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
BLOW COUNT
w N
LAB TESTS
REMARKS
w
p
>
J
(N-VALUE)
Lu
w
O
a
0
TOPSOIL
440
DCP 10-12-19
SILTY CLAY: (CL): orangeish red, stiff, with fine
to medium sand
'
DCP 15-20+
SILTY CLAY: (CL): reddish pink, stiff
5
DCP 15-20+
CLAYEY SILT: (MH): reddish pink, stiff, with
435
mica
SANDY SILT: (MH): pinkish tan, stiff, with mica
SILT: (MH): pinkish tan, stiff, with mica,
CHUNKS OF MICA
DCP 14-16-17
10
Bottom of borehole at 10.0 feet.

APPENDIX C
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

80
70
L 60
A
s
T 50
1
C
1 40
T
Y
1 30
N
D
X 20
10
0
0
ASTM D-4318
20 40
Specimen Identification
LL
PL
B-2 1.0-2.0'
40
29
B-3 1.0-2.0'
22
16
B-4 7.0'
64
47
0.
60 80 100
LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
PI Fines Classification
11 63.8 Brown Medium to Fine Sandy Silt
7 42.9 Brown Silty Clayey Medium to Fine Sand
17 63.9 Red Brown Micaceous Course to Fine Sandy Silt
PROJECT NCNG Helipad - Raleigh, NC JOB NO. 1-19-0137-CA
DATE 2/26/19
Date Recieved: 1/30/2019 ATTERBERG LIMITS' RESULTS
Dates Tested: 1/30-2/20/2019 3200 Wellington Court, Ste 108
Raleigh, NC 27615

U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes
#4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200
Grain Size In Millimeters
GRAVEL
SAND
FINES
COARSE
FINE
COARSE
MEDIUM
FINE
SILT SIZES
CLAY SIZES
Boring No.
Elev./Depth
Nat. W.C.
L.L.
P.L.
P.I.
Soil Description or Classification
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
B_2
1.0-2.0'
13.9
40.0
29.0
11.0
Brown Medium to Fine Sandy Silt
Project:
Job No.: 1-19-0137-CA
NCNG Helipad
Date Recieved: 1/30/2019
3200 Wellington Court, Ste 108
Raleigh, NC
Date: 2/26/19 Dates Tested: 1/30-2/20/2019
Raleigh, NC 27615

U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes
#4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200
Grain Size In Millimeters
GRAVEL
SAND
FINES
COARSE
FINE
COARSE
MEDIUM
FINE
SILT SIZES
CLAY SIZES
Boring No.
Elev./Depth
Nat. W.C.
L.L.
P.L.
P.I.
Soil Description or Classification
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
B_3
1.0-2.0'
12.6
22.0
15.0
7.0
Brown Silty Clayey Medium to Fine Sand
Project:
Job No.: 1-19-0137-CA
NCNG Helipad
Date Recieved: 1/30/2019
3200 Wellington Court, Ste 108
Raleigh, NC
Date: 2/26/19 Dates Tested: 1/30-2/20/2019
Raleigh, NC 27615

U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes
#4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200
Grain Size In Millimeters
GRAVEL
SAND
FINES
COARSE
FINE
COARSE
MEDIUM
FINE
SILT SIZES
CLAY SIZES
Boring No.
Elev./Depth
Nat. W.C.
L.L.
P.L.
P.I.
Soil Description or Classification
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
B-4
7.0'
27.7
64.0
47.0
17.0
Red Brown Micaceous Course to Fine Sandy Silt
Project:
Job No.: 1-19-0137-CA
NCNG Helipad
Date Recieved: 1/30/2019
3200 Wellington Court, Ste 108
Raleigh, NC
Date: 2/26/19 Dates Tested: 1/30-2/20/2019
Raleigh, NC 27615

01
30
25
20
15
10
05
00
95
90
Job No: 1-19-0137-CA Date: 2/26/19
Job Name: NCNG Helipad
Job Location: Raleigh, NC
Boring No: B-2
Sample No:
Depth: 1.0-2.0'
TEST RESULTS
Method of Test: ASTM D 1557A
Maximum Dry Density: 121.2 PCF
Optimum Moisture Content: 12.2%
Natural Moisture Content: 13.9%
Atterberg Limits: LL 40.0 PI 11.0
Soil Description: Brown Medium to Fine
Sandy Silt
Date Recieved: 1/30/2019
Dates Tested: 1/30-2/20/2019
CURVES OF 100% SATURATION
FOR SPECIFIC GRAVITY EQUAL TO:
2.80
2.70
2.60
-Al
85
80
75
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
WATER CONTENT (Percent Dry Weight)
MOISTURE -DENSITY RELATIONSHIP
3200 Wellington Court, Ste 108
Raleigh, NC 27615

01
30
25
20
15
10
05
00
95
90
Job No: 1-19-0137-CA Date: 2/26/19
Job Name: NCNG Helipad
Job Location: Raleigh, NC
Boring No: B-3
Sample No:
Depth: 1.0-2.0'
TEST RESULTS
Method of Test: ASTM D 1557A
Maximum Dry Density: 122.1 PCF
Optimum Moisture Content: 12.0%
)S� Natural Moisture Content: 12.5%
Atterberg Limits: LL 22.0 PI 7.0
Soil Description: Brown Silty Clayey Medium
to Fine Sand
Date Recieved: 1/30/2019
Dates Tested: 1/30-2/20/2019
CURVES OF 100% SATURATION
FOR SPECIFIC GRAVITY EQUAL TO:
2.80
2.70
2.60
F
85
80
75
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
WATER CONTENT (Percent Dry Weight)
MOISTURE -DENSITY RELATIONSHIP
3200 Wellington Court, Ste 108
Raleigh, NC 27615

GeoTechnologies, Inc.
JOB #: 1-19-0137-CA
DATE: 2/26/2019
NOTES: PROCTOR DATA:
Opt. Moisture - 12.2%
SOIL DESCRIPTION:
CBR DATA SHEET ASTM D-1883
JOB NAME: NCNG Helipad
SAMPLE I.D.: B-2 Depth: 1.0-2.0'
TEST PROCEDURE: ASTM D-1557
Max. Dry Density - 121.2 PCF
Brown Medium to Fine Sandy Silt
CBR SPECIMEN DATA
Swell Data
MOISTURE CONTENT
12.3%
Initial Reading
0.527
WET DENSITY
133.4 lbs./cuff
Final Reading
0.650
DRY DENSITY
118.8 lbs./cuff
Mold Height
4.591
% COMPACTION
98.0 %
% Swell
2.68
LOAD CELL 5000 LB.
RATE OF DEFORMATION .05 in./min.
SURCHARGE USED 10 Ibs.
•111 ■■�.�■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 .1
CBR @ 0.1"
3.4
CBR @ 0.2°
4.5
% SWELL
2.7

GeoTechnologies, Inc. CBR DATA SHEET ASTM D-1883
JOB #: 1-19-0137-CA JOB NAME: NCNG Helipad
DATE: 2/26/2019
NOTES: PROCTOR DATA:
Opt. Moisture - 12.0%
SOIL DESCRIPTION:
SAMPLE I.D.: B-3 Depth:
TEST PROCEDURE
Max. Dry Density - 122.1 PCF
Brown Silty Clayey Medium to Fine Sand
1.0-2.0'
ASTM D-1557
CBR SPECIMEN DATA
Swell Data
MOISTURE CONTENT
12.5%
Initial Reading
0.145
WET DENSITY
134.9 lbs./cuff
Final Reading
0.150
DRY DENSITY
119.9 lbs./cu.ft.
Mold Height
4.594
% COMPACTION
98.2 %
% Swell
0.11
LOAD CELL 5000 LB.
RATE OF DEFORMATION .05 in./min.
SURCHARGE USED 10 Ibs.
100.00
I
90.00 -
80.00 - -
70.00 - -
I
60.00ell
-
y 50.00 -
L
co 40.00
30.00 ---- --
20.00 - -rz -
I
10.00 -
0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60
Penetration (in.)
CBR @ 0.1"
1.9
CBR @ 0.2"
2.4
% SWELL
0.1

APPENDIX D
FIELD REPORT

TIMMONS GROUP
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.
FIELD REPORT
Project Name:
NCNG Helipad
Location: Raleigh, NC
Project No.:
42866
Permit No.:
Client:
NCNG
Weather: Sunny, Cold
Contractor:
Neil Barnhill
Date: 3/7/19
Technician:
J. Israel & P. Strom
Portal to Portal Time: 3 Hours
Summary:
Timmons representatives arrived on site to observe the digging of several test pits in suspected fill
mass that had previously been encountered in hand auger borings and proposed parking lot. Several
trees were cleared to gain access to fill mass area from off load site.
A total of nine (9) test pits were excavated. Test pits labeled T-1 through T-7 encountered buried
organic/debris materials ranging in depth from 6 to 9 feet below surface. Test pits labeled as T-8 and
T-9 did not encounter any previously placed fill material. Depths and locations are to be considered
approximate.
Test pits labeled T-I through T-7 encountered approximately 6 to 9 feet of previously placed fill
composed of poorly compacted highly plastic soils mixed with organics and various pieces of trash.
Trash was dispersed throughout the fill soil profile and was composed of various plastics, asphalt,
concrete, and stone chunks, tires, silt fencing, and aluminum cans. Perched ground water was also
encountered in the upper part of the profile of several test pits. Below the fill material residual soils
were encountered. These residual soils were primarily composed of firm to stiff red to orange sandy
micaceous silts and silty micaceous clays. The previously placed fill soils and organic/debris are not
suitable for structural fill and will need to be removed from proposed structure areas. The estimated
amount of unsuitable soils is 17,361 cubic yards. However, the depth and extent of removal should be
determined at time of excavation and as directed by qualified technician or engineer once structural
areas are identified in the field.
T-8 did not encounter any fill material. Residual soils were observed below the top approximately 8
inches of topsoil/root mat underlain by firm red micaceous silty clay. Test pit was dry at time of
excavation.
T-9 was completed at the approximate location of proposed B-6 in the proposed future parking area. T-
9 encountered approximately 8 inches of topsoil/root mat underlain by approximately 4 feet of firm red
micaceous silty clay, followed by firm to stiff red to orange fine sandy micaceous silt to test pit
termination depth (approximately 8 feet). Test pit was dry at time of excavation.
See attached site photos and diagrams.
Report By:
Reviewed By:
Patrick Strom
(Signature) Jesse L. I
Date: 3/7/19
E.I. (Print)
Page 1 of 1

T771,
may,
w

Photo 7—T-2 excavation
Photo 8 — T-2 excavation
Photo 9—T-2 fill material
Photo 10—T-3 excavation
Photo 11— T-4 excavation
Photo 12 — T-4 excavation

Photo 13 — T-4 excavation
Photo 14 — T-5 fill material
Photo 16 — T-5 fill material
Photo 17 —T-5 fill material
Photo 18 — T-5 excavation

Photo 19 — T-6 excavation
Photo 20 — T-6 excavation
Photo 21—T-7 excavation
Photo 22 —T-7 excavation

—q� 4
JL !IT
may* •i• T T • Rk • • -
Ae
IF44
"-� ® '! •
i + !k My •
ir
' or x
7Y `V # ++
it * R
OIL
lip
if
le
Ab
�: & ao Ewt FuU oo % DmAp, @A�j ' -Cur---�� cMMcJrha� C)90 U 9LD>�o u&-C49, C C>o oaM, t a g M--4t?y CM TUHf�

44.4
DR
am
rmpf-
Aiff
------ ----- -- a
41F]pERGR3 - - - - - - -
- — r
gETEKWfl—
SANd TER
mom
T-5
FILL B-2
ti ti i I -a � y � T � FILL
T-2 0
Sy J Y - f r IYn}}
f
dra4r�4x5—~_
4.
- -~- - - � 417 di5
r r I
y I fr r f f I f r }f Ir f f f
J �
PL
kill I f
/ %
�t X k 1i

Bioretention Media Soil Report

Form No: TR-NCDENR Bioretention Soil Media
Revision No. 0 NCDENR
Revision Date: 08128117
S&ME, Inc. Raleigh, 3201 Spring Forest Road, Raleigh, North Carolina 27616
Project #: 1053-06-134 Report Date:
2/2/2021
Project Name: Wade Moore Equipment Lab Services Test Date(s): 1/28 - 2/2/2021
Client Name: Wade Moore Equipment Company
Client Address: P.O. Box 546, Louisburg, NC 27549
Source: Wade Moore Sample No. 21-02 Sample Date: 1/26/2021
Location: Test Pit Offset: N/A Sample Type: Bulk
Sample Description: Bio Soil Media
Test Data
Results
NCDENR
Specification
Data from Grainsize and Organic Content
• Sand by Weight
90.3
• Silt/Clay by Weight
9.7
• Organic by Weight of Total Sample
2.4
Grainsize Corrected for Organics
• sand by Weight of Total Sample
88.1
• Silt/Clay by Weight of Total Sample
9.5
• Organic by Weight of Total Sample
2.4
% Total by Weight
100.0
Specific Gravity
Specific Gravity of Peat (Assumed)
.6
Specific Gravity of Sand
2.638
by Weight
Weight of Sand (g)
98.69
Weight of Silt/Clay (g)
10.65
Weight of Organics (g)
2.66
by Volume
Volume of Sand (cc)
37.41
Volume of Silt/Clay (cc)
4.04
Volume of Organics (cc)
4.43
Total Volume of Sample
45.88
% by Volume
• Sand by Volume
81.5
75 - 85
• Silt and Clay by Volume
8.8
8 - 15
• Organic by Volume
9.7
5 - 10
Total %
100
Notes / Deviations / References:
Mal Krajan, ET r - Laboratory Manager 2/2/2021
Technical Responsibility Signature Position Date
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of S&ME, Inc.
S&ME, Inc. - Corporate 3201 Spring Forest RoadS-2 21-02 Bio Soil Media (Southern Garden) 1-26-2021
Raleigh, NC. 27616 Page 1 of 7

Form No: TR-C136-1 Ga
Revision No. 0 Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregates
:
Revision Date: 08/28/17
ASTM C 136, C 117
�
S&ME, Inc. Raleigh, 3201 Spring Forest Road, Raleigh, North Carolina 27616
Project #: 1053-06-134 Report Date:
2/2/2021
Project Name: Wade Moore Equipment Lab Services Test Date(s):
1/28 - 2/2/2021
Client Name: Wade Moore Equipment Company
Client Address: P.O. Box 546, Louisburg, NC 27549
Source: Wade Moore Sample #: 21-02 Sample Date:
1/26/2021
Location: Test Pit Offset: N/A Sample Type:
Bulk
Sample Description: Bio Soil Media
3" 1.5" 1" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #8 #16 00 #50 #100 #200
100%
90%
80%
0
70%
C
a 60%
C
50%
a
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
100.00 10.00 Millimeters 1.00 0.10 0.01
Maximum Particle Size #4 %Absorption ND Moisture Content ND
Specific Gravity (SSD) ND Cc = D302/(Djo x D60) N/A Cu = D60/D,o N/A
Fineness Modulus 2.26
Notes /Deviations /References_ ND=Not Determined.
ASTM C 136: Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregates
ASTM C 117: Material Finer than the 4200 Sieve in Mineral Aggregates by Washing
ASTM C702: Practice for Reducing Samples of Aggregate to Testing Size
Mal Kraian, ET Laboratory Manager 2/2/2021
Technical Responsibility Signature Position Date
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval ofS&ME, Inc.
S&ME, Inc. - Corporate 3201 Spring Forest Road S-2 21-02 Bio Soil Media (Southern Garden) 1-26-2021
Raleigh, NC. 27616 Page 2 of 7

Form No: TR-D2434 Permeability of Granular Soils
Revision No. 0 (Constant Head) '
Revision Date: 8/28/17 1 I
S&ME, Inc. Raleigh, 3201 Spring Forest Road, Raleigh, North Carolina 27616
Project #: 1053-06-134 Report Date: 2/5/2021
Project Name: Wade Moore Equipment Lab Services Test Date(s): 2/2 - 2/5/2021
Client Name: Wade Moore Equipment Co.
Client Address: P.O. Box 546, Louisburg, NC 27549
Boring No. Wade Moore Sample No. 21-02 Sample Date: 1/26/2021
Location: Test Pit Offset: NA Depth (ft): N/A
Sample Description: Bioretention Soil Media
Permeability
Test
1
2
3
MDD (pcfl
103.0
103.0
103.0
Optimum Moisture (%)
16.3
16.3
16.3
Compaction (%)
75.0
85.0
95.0
Permeability in/hr
5.25
2.62
0.85
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
d
s:
i
d
a
2.00
1.00
4,10
0.00
70.0 75.0 80.0 85.0 90.0 95.0 100.0
Percent Compaction
Notes/Deviations/References. Test specimens compacted at optimum moisture (ASTM D1557)
ASTM D422: Test Method for Particle -Size Analysis of Soils
ASTM D2049: Test Method for Relative Density of Cohesionless Soils
-I---
Mal Krajan, ET ---- Laboratory Manager 2/5/2021
Technical Responsibility Signature Position Date
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of S&ME, Inc.
3201 Spring Forest Road
S&ME, Inc. Raleigh, NC. 27616 S-2 21-02 Bio Soil Media (Southern Garden) 1-26-2021

Form No: TR-D2434 Permeability of Granular Soils
Revision No. 0 (Constant Head) Z
Revision Date: 8/28/17 ASTM D2434 I I
S&ME, Inc. Raleigh, 3201 Spring Forest Road, Raleigh, North Carolina 27616
Project #: 1053-06-134 Report Date: 2/5/2021
Project Name: Wade Moore Equipment Lab Services Test Date(s): 2/2 - 2/5/2021
Client Name: Wade Moore Equipment Company
Client Address: P.O. Box 546, Louisburg, NC 27549
Source: Wade Moore Sample #: 21-02 Sample Date: 1/26/2021
Location: Test Pit Offset: N/A Sample Depth (ft): N/A
Sample Description: Bioretention Soil Media
Initial Specimen Parameters
Final Specimen Parameters
Diameter, in:
2.878
Diameter, in:
2.878
Length, in:
6.101
Length, in:
6.101
Wet Unit Weight, pcf:
90.3
Wet Unit Weight, pcf:
95.2
Dry Unit Weight, pcf:
77.6
Dry Unit Weight, pcf:
77.6
Moisture Content, %:
16.3
Moisture Content, %:
22.6
PERMEABILITY MEASUREMENTS
Trial
V, cm 3
t, min
temp, °C
k, in/hr
uncorrected
corrected
1
363.30
10.00
21.6
5.42
5.22
2
332.30
9.00
21.8
5.51
5.28
3
515.50
14.00
21.9
5.50
5.25
K Avg.
5.48
5.25
L, cm: 15.497
A, cm 2: 41.970
h, cm. 58.420
k= VL/60Ath
where:
k = hydraulic conductivity, cm/sec
V = volume of water discharged, cm 3
L = length of test specimen, cm
A = cross -sectional area of test specimen, cm 2
t = total time of discharge, min
h = hydraulic head difference (H I - H2), cm
CONSTANT
H EAD
FILTER
TAN K
HI
—Hz
Notes/Deviations/References. Test specimen compacted to 75% at optimum moisture. MDD= 103.0 (pcf), Optimum Moisture=16.3%
ASTM D422: Test Method for Particle -Size Analysis of Soils
ASTM D2049: Test Method for Relative Density of Cohesionless Soils
Mal Krajan, ET
Technical Responsibility
Signature
Laboratory Manager 2/5/2021
Position Date
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of S&ME, Inc.
3201 Spring Forest Road
S&ME, Inc. - Corporate Raleigh, NC 27616 S-2 21-02 Bio Soil Media (Southern Garden) 1-26-2021

Form No: TR-D2434 Permeability of Granular Soils
Revision No. 0 (Constant Head) Z
Revision Date: 8/28/17 ASTM D2434 I I
S&ME, Inc. Raleigh, 3201 Spring Forest Road, Raleigh, North Carolina 27616
Project #: 1053-06-134 Report Date: 2/5/2021
Project Name: Wade Moore Equipment Lab Services Test Date(s): 2/2 - 2/5/2021
Client Name: Wade Moore Equipment Company
Client Address: P.O. Box 546, Louisburg, NC 27549
Source: Wade Moore Sample #: 21-02 Sample Date: 1/26/2021
Location: Test Pit Offset: N/A Sample Depth (ft): N/A
Sample Description: Bioretention Soil Media
Initial Specimen Parameters
Final Specimen Parameters
Diameter, in:
2.875
Diameter, in:
2.875
Length, in:
5.774
Length, in:
5.774
Wet Unit Weight, pcf:
101.9
Wet Unit Weight, pcf:
104.8
Dry Unit Weight, pcf:
87.6
Dry Unit Weight, pcf:
87.6
Moisture Content, %:
16.3
Moisture Content, %:
19.6
PERMEABILITY MEASUREMENTS
Trial
V, cm 3
t, min
temp, °C
k, in/hr
uncorrected
corrected
1
250.10
13.00
21.9
2.72
2.60
2
348.50
18.00
21.8
2.74
2.63
3
410.20
21.00
21.9
2.77
2.64
K Avg.
2.74
2.62
L, cm: 14.666
A, cm 2: 41.883
h, cm. 58.420
k= VL/60Ath
where:
k = hydraulic conductivity, cm/sec
V = volume of water discharged, cm 3
L = length of test specimen, cm
A = cross -sectional area of test specimen, cm 2
t = total time of discharge, min
h = hydraulic head difference (H I - H2), cm
CONSTANT
H EAD
FILTER
TAN K
HI
—Hz
Notes/Deviations/References. Test specimen compacted to 85% at optimum moisture. MDD= 103.0 (pcf), Optimum Moisture=16.3%
ASTM D422: Test Method for Particle -Size Analysis of Soils
ASTM D2049: Test Method for Relative Density of Cohesionless Soils
Mal Krajan, ET
Technical Responsibility
Signature
Laboratory Manager 2/5/2021
Position Date
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of S&ME, Inc.
3201 Spring Forest Road
S&ME, Inc. - Corporate Raleigh, NC 27616 S-2 21-02 Bio Soil Media (Southern Garden) 1-26-2021

Form No: TR-D2434 Permeability of Granular Soils
Revision No. 0 (Constant Head) Z
Revision Date: 8/28/17 ASTM D2434 I I
S&ME, Inc. Raleigh, 3201 Spring Forest Road, Raleigh, North Carolina 27616
Project #: 1053-06-134 Report Date: 2/5/2021
Project Name: Wade Moore Equipment Lab Services Test Date(s): 2/2 - 2/5/2021
Client Name: Wade Moore Equipment Company
Client Address: P.O. Box 546, Louisburg, NC 27549
Source: Wade Moore Sample #: 21-02 Sample Date: 1/26/2021
Location: Test Pit Offset: N/A Sample Depth (ft): N/A
Sample Description: Bioretention Soil Media
Initial Specimen Parameters
Final Specimen Parameters
Diameter, in:
2.878
Diameter, in:
2.878
Length, in:
6.101
Length, in:
6.101
Wet Unit Weight, pcf:
113.8
Wet Unit Weight, pcf:
116.3
Dry Unit Weight, pcf:
97.8
Dry Unit Weight, pcf:
97.8
Moisture Content, %:
16.3
Moisture Content, %:
18.8
PERMEABILITY MEASUREMENTS
Trial
V, cm 3
t, min
temp, °C
k, in/hr
uncorrected
corrected
1
155.41
26.00
21.8
0.89
0.85
2
157.58
27.00
21.7
0.87
0.84
3
183.81
31.00
21.8
0.89
0.85
K Avg.
0.88
0.85
L, cm: 15.497
A, cm': 41.970
h, cm. 58.420
k= VL/60Ath
where:
k = hydraulic conductivity, cm/sec
V = volume of water discharged, cm 3
L = length of test specimen, cm
A = cross -sectional area of test specimen, cm 2
t = total time of discharge, min
h = hydraulic head difference (H I - H2), cm
CONSTANT
H EAD
FILTER
TAN K
HI
—Hz
Notes/Deviations/References. Test specimen compacted to 95% at optimum moisture. MDD= 103.0 (pcf), Optimum Moisture=16.3%
ASTM D422: Test Method for Particle -Size Analysis of Soils
ASTM D2049: Test Method for Relative Density of Cohesionless Soils
Mal Krajan, ET
Technical Responsibility
Signature
Laboratory Manager 2/5/2021
Position Date
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of S&ME, Inc.
3201 Spring Forest Road
S&ME, Inc. - Corporate Raleigh, NC 27616 S-2 21-02 Bio Soil Media (Southern Garden) 1-26-2021

Form No. TR-D698-2 MOISTURE - DENSITY REPORT
Revision No.: 1
s
Revision Date: 07/25/17
Quality Assurance
S&ME, Inc. Raleigh: 3201 Spring Forest Road, Raleigh, NC 27616
S&ME Project #: 1053-06-134 Report Date: 2/2/2021
Project Name: Wade Moore Equipment Lab Services Test Date(s): 1/28 - 2/2/2021
Client Name: Wade Moore Equipment Company
Client Address: P.O. Box 546, Louisburg, INC 27549
Source: Wade Moore Sample #: S-2 Sample Date: 1/26/2021
Location: Test Pit Offset: N/A Depth: N/A
Sample Description: Bio Soil Media
Maximum Dry Density 103.0 PCF. Optimum Moisture Content 16.3%
ASTM D 1 SS7 - - Method A
115.0
110.0
105.0
v
100.0
Q
'C
Q
95.0
90.0
85.0
5.0
30.0
Soil Properties
Natural
Moisture ND
Content
Assumed
Specific 2.638
Gravity
Liquid Limit N D
Plastic Limit N D
Plastic Index N D
Moisture
-Density
Relations
of
Soil and
Soil
Aggregate
Mixtures
2.638
x
% Passing
3/4" 100.0%
3/8" 100.0%
#4 100.0%
#200 9.7%
Oversize Fraction
Bulk Gravity
% Moisture
% Oversize
MDD
Opt. MC
�
�
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
Moisture
Content
(%)
Moisture -Density Curve Displayed: Fine Fraction p Corrected for Oversize Fraction (ASTM D 4718) ❑
Sieve Size used to separate the Oversize Fraction: #4 Sieve p 3/8 inch Sieve ❑ 3/4 inch Sieve ❑
Mechanical Rammer ❑ Manual Rammer 0 Moist Preparation ❑ Dry Preparation 0
References/Comments/Deviations: ND=Not Determined.
ASTM D 2216: Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass
ASTM D 1557: Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort
Mal Krajan, ET Laboratory Manager 2/2/2021
Technical Responsibility Signature Position Date
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of S&ME, Inc.
S&MF,Inc. - Corporate 3201 Spring Forest Road S-2 21-02 Bio Soil Media (Southern Garden) 1-26-2021
Raleigh, NC. 27616 Page 7 of 7

As -Built Construction Photos

Ole
I
Bioretention SCM under construction. Installation of underdrains and gravel layer.

Bioretention SCM under construction. Installation of underdrains and gravel layer.

4v
Bioretention SCM after construction. Note that some erosion control measures are still in place at the time of this photo.
Bioretention SCM after construction. Note that some erosion control measures are still in place at the time of this photo.

Bioretention SCM riser with upturned elbows for IWS.