0 geological hemphill corporation - nrc

CONSUL-.ING ENGINEERING 0 GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION 0 ENGINEERING INSPECTION

HEMPHILL CORPORATION4834 SOUTH 83RD EAST AVENUE

OFFICE.-918) 022-5133 TULSA. OKLAHOMA 74145 AFTER HOURS 587-5822

CLIENT: Mr. James A. PierretProject ManagerFansteel, IncorporatedTen Tantalum PlaceMuskogee, Oklahoma 74401

September II, 1978

ii

REPORT OF

RETENTION POND STUDY

FANSTEEL, INC.

MUSKOGEE, OKLAHOMA

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

Part One

I. Geotechnical Engineering Review

2. Appendixa. Boring Location Planb. Boring Logsc. Laboratory Test Results

COPIES : 9-C i lentI-Engi neer

,I~ ~&

G-1

RETENTION POND STUDY - PART I

RESPONSE TO: FANSTEEL METALS - RENEWAL

OF SOURCE MATERIALS LICENSE

DOCKET NO. 040-07580

PROPOSED WASTE RETENTION POND

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REVIEW

REVIEWED BY: RICHARD W. TURNBULL, G.E.S., G.B., D.S.E.

INTRODUCTION

Before a detailed response to the two questionnaires is offered, it isfelt to be in order to describe the basic design concept for the retentionpond, and to present the construction procedure that will be used to build

the pond.

Based on information available from previous soils investigations, andfrom data accumulated from nearby observation wells, it was suspected thatthe proposed pond bottom would be below the present water table. This sus-picion was confirmed by data obtained during the soils investigation for thisproject. It was found that the present water table remained consistentlyaround EL. 513. The bottom of the pond was planned to be located at EL. 505.Another possible problem was identified also. A sand stratum was identifiedthat extended below the. water table. A great deal of difficulty would beexperienced in excavating this sand, unless the water table were lowered.

It was decided that the first priority would be to install a dewateringsystem that would lower the water table to below construction limits for easeof excavation. This dewatering system would need to be a permanent systemso that after the pond was constructed, a rising water table would not possi-bly harm the pond liner.

The system that is planned is a French drain system that will extendaround the perimeter of the pond. This system will externally intercept allground water tending to flow toward the pond. Trapped internal ground waterwill flow to the drain and be removed. Some internal ground water will dis-charge to the atmosphere. With no source of external recharge, the soil in-terior to the French drain will rapidly become dewatered. Construction canbe accomplished in the dry, and the proposed pond liner will not be exposedto external hydrostatic forces.

FANSTEEL COMMENT

The revised location of the pond and drainage system is shown onDrawing No. 6413, 2A1-R, revised on August 21, 1978. The answers to theoriginal question presented in the report dated March 21, 1978, are modifiedih this report to show the change of plan. The answers to the additionalquestions posed by 0. Thompson, B.B., D.S.E., N.R.R., are presented in thelatter part of this report. As a result there may be some repetition.

ITEM 362.1 Foundation and Embankment Materials

Four test borings were drilled around the perlmeter of the pond area.All four holes were drilled to refusal (100+ blows per foot from standardpenetration tests). After refusal was reached, ten feet of NX-size rockcore were cut in each bore hole. In the upper levels of the overburden,Shelby tubes were taken as directed by Mr. Lloyd Young, the Fansteel repre-sentative. These tubes were retained by Fansteel and are not considereda part of this investigation. After the dike, or fill soil, had beentotally penetrated, Shelby tube samples were taken at each stratum change,or at five foot intervals, whichever came first. These bore holes areidentified as BH I - 4.

Two test borings were drilled through the old dikes to natural soil,which was 12 feet below the crest of the dikes. Shelby tube samples weretaken at five foot Intervals and composite bag samples were obtained from0 - 6 feet and*6 - 12 feet in both bore holes. The purpose of these twoborings was to obtain samples to determine If the old dike soil is suitablefor use in the construction of new dikes. These two holes are identifiedas DI and D2.

Four probe holes were drilled in the proposed borrow area in order toobtain samples to determine the suitability of the borrow soil for use onthe new construction. All probings were drilled to a depth of four feetand composite bag samples were obtained from 0 - 4 feet in each hole.

All these bore holes were drilled with a rotary rig using compressedair to return the cuttings to the surface. It is felt that this method ofdrilling produces the most reliable subsurface Information as well asreturning the cuttings to the surface at their natural moisture content.

The places where these holes were drilled are shown on. the boringlocation plan, whilch Is contained In the appendix to this report. Detailsfor each of these borings are recorded on the boring logs, which are alsoa part of the appendix.

ITEM 362.2 Laboratory Investiqatlon

The Shelby tube samples, bag samples and rock cores were brought toour soil mechanics laboratory where the samples were compared with thefield logs to insure logging accuracy. Each sample was then classifiedby the Unified Classification System using the results of the washed sieveanalysis and the Atterberg limits to make these classifications.

After the samples were classified, they were separated into soiltypes according to classification, color and texture. This yielded threedistinct soil types which were then tested for required soil properties.

The strengths of the soils in BH I - 4 were determined by directshear. Two of these specimens were placed In consolidometers and incre-mentally loaded. These specimens were then rebounded. It was necessaryto measure the specific gravity of solids in order to make the necessarycalculations. While the specimens were In the consolldometers, fallinghead permeability tests were made on each sample. The grain size distri-bution for each of the soil types was completed by running a hydrometeranalysis on each type. The compaction characteristics of each soil typewere determined by making standard Proctor density tests on them.

The results of these tests are summarized In the appendix.

ITEM 362.3 Moisture - Density Determination

The optimum moisture content and maximum dry density of each typesoil to be used as borrow soil was determined by making a standard Proctordensity test (ASTM D-698, Method A) on them. The composite sample fromthe old dike has a maximum dry density of 110.5 pounds per cubic foot ata moisture content of 15.0 per cent. The composite sample from the pro-posed borrow area has a maximum dry density of 106.6 pounds per cubic footat a moisture content of 16.6 per cent.

ITEM 362.4 Local Seismic Conditions

The Fansteel site Is In seismic zone I. Even though there has neverbeen any recorded seismic activity in the area, the U. S. Corps of Engineershas recently started using a seismic coefficient of 0.025 g In their leveeevaluations Instead of the previous zero.

op

ITEM 362.5 Slope Stabillty of Embankment and, Foundation

The entire pond area is supported by a gray shale formation of unknownthickness. Above the shale is a thin layer of sandstone about five feetthick. The upper two feet will be excavated during construction. Theremainder will form the bottom of the pond. The newly constructed dikewill be supported by alternating layers of silty clay, clayey silt, andsilty sand. The silty clay is the uppermost formation and will directlysupport the dike. The silty sand overlies the sandstone, and carries alloverlying formations plus the dike.

No cracks, faults, or fissures were detected during the entire fielddrilling program. Although no rock strength tests were made on these rockcores, it is felt that the rock strength is very much greater than theembankment soil, and would not fail under any anticipated combinations ofload. It is also felt that no combination of anticipated loads wouldcause measurable consolidation of. this rock.

The method to permanently dewater the-project area has already beendescribed in -the introduction to this response to the questionnaire. Thepond will be lined with a water tight liner. The dike will have no wateror pond liquid. It is felt that these two facts result in a conditionwhere the embankment can never become saturated; and, hence, there cannever be any pore pressure build up. All cases for embankment and founda-tion stability were analyzed with excess pore pressure equal to zero.

The method of analysis used for the embankment was the graphical'integration method outlined in Appendix VI of Engineering and DesignStability of Earth and Rock-Fill Dams, Corps of Engineers Manual EM 1110-2-1902, dated I April 1970. The analysis was checked by the method ofSwedish slices described in the same reference.

Two different soil sources will be used as borrow for embankmentconstruction. The first source will be the soil excavated during con-'struction. This soil will consist of In situ soil from the reservoirplus soil used to construct the old dikes. After that source Is exhausted,soil from the borrow area southwest of the reservoir will be utilized.

The physical properties used in this analysis for these soil sourcesare: cohesion = 720 psf, angle of internal friction, ý = 150, dry density =

103.2 pounds per cubic foot, moist density = 122 pounds per cubic foot,moisture content = 16 per cent.

A summary of calculations for the method of Swedish slices for thecritical circle is presented for Informational purposes as Fig. I ofthis report.

ITEM 362.5 Continued

An impervious liner is to be provided for the interior (upstream)surface of the dike; and a permanent dewatering system is being providedto preclude ground water from outside the pond entering the dike area.The two provisions result in a dike that will never be in a saturatedstate. The only two stability cases that will apply will be the endof construction state and the earthquake state under the same conditionsas were used for the end of construction state.

The project area has never had a recorded earthquake. Until veryrecently, zero acceleration was used In analyses of river levees for thisarea. A few years ago, this acceleration was increased to 0.025 g, whichwas used in this analysis. The non-earthquake factor of safety Is 3.2,and the earthquake factor of safety is 3.1. Both these safety factorsgreatly exceed the allowable factor of safety of 1.3 for non-earthquakeconditions, and 1.0 for earthquake conditions.

The north dike, at the northeast corner of the pond, has the highestmanufactured dike height. This area was analyzed for settlement. Thehighest dike is 18 feet high. The foundation soil under this area isabout ten feet thick. Based on the analysis, it was found that the follow-ing settlement will occur during the life of the dike:

Foundation settlement 0.69 inch

Dike settlement 0.97 inch

Total settlement 1.ý6 inches

All other sections of the dike should have a settlement less than theabove values. It was further determined that this magnitude settlementwill not impose any detrimental stresses on the liner.

The liner and French drain system will prevent ground water or pondliquid from being a source of pore water for the dike soil. Hence, thissoil does not have a source of water, liquificatlon never becomes a pro-blem. It is'further felt that no additional provisions need be made toprevent liquiflcatlon.

SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS

NORTH DIKE

9CL + ZTAN bZ T

0.720 ( +C0.) ÷ 55.4 TAN 1'

20.2

0 - 3.2

20. z

[TOcE~ .. CtS

Ffl.RE I

ITEM 362.6 Assess Erosion and Piping Potential ofEmbankment and Foundation Materials

Since the system foundation will be sound, intact shale, which hasa very low coefficient of permeability, there is no danger of pipingbeing developed within the shale mass. In order for piping to developwithin the embankment soil, there must be a source of water. A lineris being provided to prevent seepage from the Impoundment Into the embank-ment mass. Under normal operating conditions, there will be no seepagethrough the embankment.

In the event of a major disaster, such as a violent wind ripping anentire panel of liner off, seepage can start. It has been assumed thatif this happens, the pond will be dewatered, and repairs made. It hasfurther been assumed that corrective action will take 30 days to be com-pleted. An analysis was made to determine how deeply seepage would pene-trate Into the embankment In 30 days under a full head of water. Since,in reality, this head will be rapidly reduced as the pond is drained, theactual seepage penetration will be somewhat less.

The theoretical maximum penetration during this 30 day period hasbeen calculated to be 0.03 Inch under the above assumed conditions.. Theactual penetration will be even less, It Is felt that no problem existswith respect to seepage.

A ten foot wide crest Is provided around the perimeter of the dike.A layer of crushed limestone will be used to surface this area. Thestone blanket will be six inches thick. It will be used to minimizeerosion, to prevent dust from high winds, and to serve as a driving sur-face for maintenance equipment. Recommended gradational requirements areas outlined In Table I, below.

TABLE I

Gradational REquirements

SIEVE SIZE PER CENT PASSING

I inch 1003/4 inch 95-100No. 4 5-75No. 20 0-30No. 200 0-10

In order to protect the downstream face of the embankment againstpossible erosion, this face Will be sprigged, or slab sodded, with Bermudagrass in those areas where riprap Is not provided for flood protection.

The embankment soil has sufficient natural cohesion so that additivessuch as Portland cement will not be required for additional stabilization.

ITEM 362.7 Gradational Requirements forUpstream Erosional Control

The entire upstream face of the embankment will be lined. The fullsurface area of the pond is so small that there is insufficient fetchfor wave generation.

If crushed stone were provided for erosion control, this stone mightpossibly puncture the liner and allow seepage to occur.

Based on these conditions, it is recommended that crushed stone notbe provided for upstream embankment erosion control.

ITEM 362.8

Drawing DC-3-102-2, Pond 3 Contour, gives details of the finalcontour of the area of the Pond. The run-off from about twelve (12)acres of the Fansteel Plant site discharges through at 48" in diameterculvert under the railroad tracks to a flat plain located between thetracks and the West dike of the pond. A cross-section is given onthe drawing identified as E-E 1 . The water will flow North to intersectthe flow from another .30" in diameter culvert. The combined flow ofrun-off water will then flow along the North side of the new ponddirectly to the river. A typical cross-section of the North Side ofthe pond is present and identified as F-F 1 . The entire area aroundthe new pond will be seeded with grass and appropriately maintainedto protect against erosion per the construction specification.

ITEM 362.9 Location and Installation Detailsof Vent System

Details of the vents are given on the "Liner Layout" drawing, Sheet 2.Vents are located at the top of the inner slope of the pond wall 6" to 9"from the berm. A simple flap type cover is placed over each 1" in diametervent opening. The flap is rectangular piece of liner material attached tothe liner on'hree sides to prevent rain from entering the vent.

ITEM 362.10 Location and Elevation Map of Basin

The elevation, location and contour of the drainage area is shownin two drawings:

DG-3-102-2 - Contour Map - Revised 9-8-78 and

DC-3-102-1 - Pond Ground Water Drainage System - Revised 9-11-78

~1

ITEM 362.11 Typical Cross-Sections

The crest of the embankment will be at Elevation 533. The floor ofthe pond will be at Elevation 505. Both the upstream and downstreamslopes of the embankment will be a constant of three horizontal to onevertical. The embankment crest will be ten feet wide.

The embankment will be constructed from a combination of soil removedduring excavation of the pond plus the soil excavated when the old dikesare removed. After these sources of soil are exhausted, dike soil willbe obtained from the borrow area located southwest of the project.

Two typical cross-sections are presented to illustrate excavationand fill for the project. Section A-A is through embankments in an east-west view. In this presentation, It may be seen that very little dikewill be required on the west side. A double dike will be constructedon the east side. This dike will separate the existing full Basin 2,and the new basin. Old Basins 3 and 4 (which are empty) will be eliminatedduring construction of the new basin. The double dike on the east sidewill provide more than adequate lateral restraint as It separates theold Basin 2 and the new basin.

Section B-B is a view of the north and south embankments. Thesouth side has a minimum embankment, while the north side has the maximumembankment for the entire project. This north embankment was the one forwhich the slope stability analysis was made. The north side view alsoshows the French drain that prevents ground water from entering the pro-ject area as well as the relocated drainage ditch which handles surfacewater runoff from the west.

In both sections are shown the existing water table. After theFrench drains are completed, the interior portion of the overburdensoil will be dewatered, and the area will be dry; hence, there will beno water table or fluctuation thereof.

A P P E N D I X

BORING LOG HOLE NO. BH I

PROJECT Retention Pond Area SHEET I OF

DATE 12-7/8-77HOLE LOCATION See borina location plan

/Hole CavedG.R. ELEV. 525.0 WATER TABLE/ BOCa ED BY Lane LOGGED BY HImphl II

(After 24 hours)

DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL(TYPE. COLOR, TEXTURE, CONSISTENCY)

CASING INFORMATION

SIZE I :T-RUN FT-PUuLLID FT-LEFTt

r, Sandy, Brown

SI LT,Sandy,CIayey,Tan,?4olst

4" 11 28 0

"DRILLING MUD

TYPE NO. SACK

PENETRATION TEST

SILT,Sandy,Clayey,Tan w/Some Gray

SAND,FIne Gralned,Sl1ty,Clayey,Tan,Moist

CLAY,S I I ty, Red-Brown

NOTE: Hole caved In to 13.0'. Nowater at 13.0'.

CLAY,Silty,Sandy,Tan,Gets Wetter wýDepth 010. 1 FROM I TO

Fansteel-I 1.0 2.0

FPnC+n IA A r

SANDSTONE,Poorly Cemented,Tan 15.0 16.0

AlR5 N 0 5

CORING

SHALE,Dark Gray FROM TO RE COVEWY

28.0 33.0 98%

33.0 38,0 94%

WATER, LOSS

CEMENT (NO. SACKS)

AOn7 r

Bottom of hol

REMARKSNOTE: Hole caved to 13.9'-No water at 13.0'.

re

• MK04-01MIC-L INVUlTlICATII•4t amaOIlvafiIto INOIECICM [•'rllvl

ILLI G 'ONSNN -EMPHILL CORPORATION4834 SOuTH'83RD EAST"AVKENUE .

TULSA. OKLAHOMA 74145 A FTrR HOURS 567.-502

G-24

BORING LOG JHOLE NO. 2

PROJECT Retention Pond Area SHEET - I OF I

HOLE LOCATION See boring location plan DATE 12-7-77

GIR.ELEV. 531.0. WATER TABLE iSR_ ' BORED BY Innp LOGGED BY HemphilI

(After 24 hours)

DEPTH c DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL CASING INFORMATIONELEV. AND

SCALE (TYPE, COLOR, TEXTURE , COBISTENCY) size FT-RUN[T PtILKD FT-LrFT

530.0 SILT,SANDSTQNE & CLAY (Fill) 4" 215' .In

CLAY,Silyt,Red-Brown & Tan. w/SittLenses,tjIst (FI Il) DRILLING MUD

TYPE IO 3A KS

PENETRATION TESTFRtOM TO Lw/

524.0 _____

SILT,Ca1yey,Red-Brown,Moist.522.3 A 7

SANDSTONE,Poorly Cemented,Tan,Moist,520.5 It) 5 (FIll)

S I LT,Cl ayey,Tan ,Mo i st

cii-/ 13 14-0

SILT, Sandy, Red-Brown

SAND Fine Grained,Tan w/Clay Binders SHELBY TUBE SAMPLES

14.0 17.0 Mols+ .SHELBY TUBE SAM_____SAND,FIne Grained,Tan,Wet at 17.0' No. FROM TO

Eanstpet-I Lfl 2.0~

- o511. 200.0 Fanste_ I- 4.0 4.6SANDSTONE,Poorly Cemented,Tan 11 I7.0

5 15.0 16.0

6 19-0 20.059n6.3 247,pedium- e _ained w/Small to- I

5~2J 2r CORING5qn4 5 96- SHALE,Dark Gray FROM TO RECOVIWY

SHALE,Dark Gray,Firm ?

-33 0 3722 B

WATER LOSS

CEMENT (NO. SACKS)

49L&. R . ". ? - _REMARKS

Bottom of hole

CIINUL1*6ZNICK~fe 0 GECK-00CAL 04IESgTIGATIO" 0 ff~U~k "mING IMSurcT1omm

CO"SI T"O ""G=kKW "HEMPHILL CORPORATIONNEMPHI4834 SouTh 8311t E~*:ASItANWK

OFFICE-9f UlS) 622-.5t33 TULSA. OKLAHOMA 74145 A"Eft NOURtS 567.!gU22

G-24

BORING LOG IHOLE NO._

PROJECT Retention Pond Area SHEET I OF

HOLE LOCATION Cri hnrtnq Inra-tinn plAn DATE 19-Ri/7-77

GR. ELEV. 533.0 WATER TABLE 21.5' BORED BY I-Am LOGGED BY VFmphtIi

(After 24 hours)DEPTH 0 DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL CASING INFORMATION

ELEV. AND ZSCALE 9 (TYPE. COLOR, TEXTURE, CO'SISTKMCY) SizI F'-RuM FT-Puu.LJD rT-LIFT

CLAY,SIlty,Brown & Red Brown, w/Some 4 7 8R-0 ?I, 01Silt Lenses,Moist (Fill)

593_ v.0 DRILLING MUDSAND,Medlum Grained,Clayey,Silty w/ TYPE O. "ACK

S 4.5 Rocks. F PENETRATION TEST- k1ASILT,Clayey,Wet (Fill) FROM R TO TE ST

527.0 AR/, To DLW/If"SILT,Clayey,Red-Brown,High Moisture,(Fl0 (Fill)I

SILT,Clayey,Red-Brown,Wet

16. 1.0SHELBY TUBE SAMPLES"#•# CLAY,Silty,Rend- ,R -ighw tNo. FROM TO

SANDSiltyT•n-Gray

51. 3 14.0 15.0

511.5 ?1 SR 5 •";>•i

1A SAND,S1l ty,GrayWet w/Water at 21.5' 4- 17-0 18.05 18-0 19.0

SANDSTONE,Poorly Cemented -- 23 2L5

CORING

FROM TO RECOVTWY

0_ 228. 2fl "53.0 96%SHALE,Dark Gray

WATER LOSS

CEMENT (NO. SACKS)

REMARKS

495.0 31. -

Bottom of hole

CiN.ULT1 ,N0 elvatNK , * .OeCL. I NV aI I AlYIO * KNGINAT , Ir a i N. iiP 1 K CTIFW

HEMPHILL CORPORATIONHE P IL 48..... ... 34 SOUTH 83R,- -AT AVEN.U

OFrFIC-FCK916) 622-5133 TULSA. OKLAHOMA 74145 AFTER HOUIiS 567.-822

G-24

BORING LOG JHOLE NO. D-I

PROJECT Old Dike Borina SHEET I OF I

HOLE LOCATION See borlng location plan DATE 12-8-77

GR. ELEV. WATER TABLE. 00 . BORED BY ILane LOGGED BY Hemph I I!(After 24 hours)

DEPTH DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL CASING INFORMATIONSCV. ALE COSSTNYSCALEND (TYPE, COLOR, TEXTURE , iZ[ FT-RUN 'T-PULLED FT-LlrT

n A WR CHAT.Rock4-

SAND,SiIty w/Clay,Light Brown,Molst

DRILLING MUD

!NNO. SACKi r

In>

CLAY,SIIty,Llght Red,kolstT Y•

PENETRATION TESTt

JI A CLAY,Tan & Gray,Molst

Bottom of hole ,I

I SHELBY TUBE SAMPLES I

NOTE: Bag samples taken at:0.0-6.0,6.0-12.0.

I CORING I

-1 WATER LOSS

CEMENT (NO. SACKS)

- REMARKS

A nLCO#4lULTI=IA EA"aINENIra , GEOLOGICAL INVzNTIGATIOEN 0 KrINOIrqG INSPEC FlOwi

HEMIPIlI HEMPHILL CORPORATIONC..-,. "34 sourH 8&3R EiST AvENuE

OFFICK-IS18) 622-5133 TULSA. OKLAHOMA 74145 AFTER HOURS 587-5922

G-24

L LBORINOG LOG IHOLE NO. -jPROJECT gI irl kA brFJng SHEET I OF

HOLE LOCATION Spe boring location plan DATE 12-8-77

GR.ELEV. WATER TABLE . ,-BORED BY lan- LOGGED BY He-rhT I I

(After 24 hours)

DEPTH 6 DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL CASING INFORMATIONSCALE AN (TYPE. COLOR. TEXTURE . COKSITfMCY) SIZE FT-RUN FT-PULLID FT-LEFT

1o 4W CA,.Rock (Fill)

SSAND,Si1lty, CIayey,Tan,1tio ist

DRILLING MUDi CLAY,Si Ity, Llaht Red,Moist 1-TYPE IWO. BICKS

PENETRATION TEST

FROM TO BLOws/6

/ CLAY,Tan-Li ght Red,14olst

Bottom of hole

SHELBY TUBE SAMPLES

NO. FROM TO

I5.0 .6.0

I I! f) 1?_n

CORING

NOTE: Bag samples taken at: O TOREOG

0.0-6.0,6.0-12.0. ROM TO R[covE•

WATER LOSS

CEMENT (NO. SACKS)

REMARKS

CO#4zULTIMG fiGINERIING 0 GKOLOGICAL INVESTIIATIOW 0 3P40,NKrN, INlPUCiO-

PHEMPHILL CORPORATION' ' x•u4834 So4uT- 83RD EAST AVENUE

OFFICE-IS91) 622-5133 TULSA. OKLAHOMA 74145 AFTER HOURS 587.3822

G-24

BORING LOG 0HOLE NO. P-f

PROJECT_ r-rrnw Pit Area SHEET L_ OF I

HOLE LOCATION see boring location plan DATE 12-8-77

GR.ELEV. WATER TABLE Q0.0 BORED BY Lane LOGGED BY Hemphill(After 24 hours)

DEPTH 0i DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL CASING INFORMATIONELEV. AND z

SCALE 0 (TYPE, COLOR, TEXTURE, CONSISTINCY) IZE I FT-RUN lir-PULLiro FT-LEFT(1 "n I'll 11 2 RMO Mi~r< t n F• Ir

CLAY,Silty,Tan & Light Red

CLAY,SilIy,Light Brown,Moist DRILLING MUD

________ _________________________________ _ 4____ NYEO1 SACKS

Bottom of hole PENETRATION TEST

FROM TO ILOWI/6 w

+ +

+ 4

+ 4

NOTE: Bag sample taken at:0.0-4.0.

SHELBY TUBE SAMPLES

NO. FROM TO

CORING

FROM TO RECOVEirY

WATER LOSS

CEMENT (NO. SACKS)

REMARKS

0 43IOLOGICAL INVIKSTICIATION a awamGIN leaRN INP#2ECTION : I:HEMPHILL CORPORATION

4834 SOUTH 83RD EAST AVENUE.

3 TULSA- OKLAHOMA 74145 AOFFICE-(918) 622-513 FTER HOURS 587.•122

G- 24

I

BORING LOG )HOLE NO.

PROJECT Porrov, Pit Area SHEET I OF .

HOLE LOCATION See boring location plan DATE 12-8-77

GR. ELEV. WATER TABLE 0.0 BORED BY I LOGGED BY HpmnhijII

(After 24 hours)

DEPTH 0 DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL CASING INFORMATIONELEV. AND

SCALE 9 (TYPE , COLOR, TEXTURE , CONSIST[ENCY) SIZE FT-RUX FrT-PULLEDI FT-LIFTI}.q I I iIT I Il~rT .Mrnwn orlnlT~r

CLAY,Tan & Light Red,Molst

DRILLING MUD

40 TYPE No. -ACKS,Bo-ttom of hole PENETRATION TEST

NOTE: Bag samples0.0-4.0.

taken at:

SHELBY TUBE SAMPLES

NO. FROM TO

CORING

FROM TO RECOVERY

WATER LOSS

CEMENT (NO. SACKS)

REMARKS

CONSULTIN+G ENINIERING 0 GEOLOGICAL INVIESTIGATION a ENOINEEIINO INSP'CTION

EMPIL . ..... HEMPHILL CORPORATION4834 SOUTH 83RD EAST AVENUE

OFFCIE-(91,) a22-5133 TULSA. OKLAHOMA 74145 AFTER HOURS 587.5,22

G- 24

B 0F3%1.1G LOG 0G L E M . P--

PROJECT Borrow Pit Are~a SHEET JI OF I

HOLE LOCATION See boring location plan DATE 12-3-77 1

GR. ELEV. WATER TABLE Q00 BORED BY lane

(After 24 hours)LOGGED BY H-mphi I I

DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL CASING INFORMATION

(TYPE, COLOR, TEXTURE, CONSISTENCY) SIZE FT-RUN IrT-PUL.LD FT-LIEFT

SI LT,Black,Moist I

SI LT,Tan,Molst DRILLING MUD

CLAY,SIIty,Tan,Molst TY NO. SACKS

Bottom of hole PENETRATION TEST 3ITO SLOwS/I

.4- 4

-4- 9

+ 4

+ 9

SHELBY TUBE SAMPLES

NOTE: Bag samples taken at:0.0-4.0.

CORING

FROM TO RECOVErY

WATER LOSS

CEMENT (NO. SACKS)

REMARKS

* BIOLOGIC-AL INVIESTIGATIOP4 0 11414-kKNRINQN iNpdSPKCTIo"

HEMPHILL CORPORATION4834 SOUTH 83RD E"ST AVENUE

3 TULSA. OKLAHOMA 74145 AOFF ICE. I 91) (522-513 F-TER HOURS 587.!!1822

G- 24

BORING LOG IHOLE NO. P-4

PROJECT .. rrow Pit Area SHEET I OF L

HOLE LOCATION See borina location plan DATE 12-8-77

GR.ELEV. WATER TABLE 0.0 BORED BY Lane LOGGED BY Hemphl I I(After 24 hours)

DEPTH 0 DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL CASING INFORMATIONELEV. AND zSCALE A (TYPE, COLOR, TEXTURE , CONUIITENCY) SIZE FT-RUN FT-PULLED FT-LEFTS I " SILT,Dark brown,Moist

?._,,___, CLAY,Mo Ist,Tan

CLAY,Moist,Light Red DRILLING MUD

4.0 _ _ _ __ _ *P. ,SACXS

Bottom of hole PENETRATION TEST

SHELBY TUBE SAMPLES

NOTE: Bag samples taken at0.0-4.0.

NO. FROM TO

CORING

FROM TO RECOVEWY

WATER LOSS

CEMENT (NO. SACKS)

REMARKS

Lr CONSULTING ENGIN|ERING 0 GKOLOGICAL INVIETIGATIOd B ENOINEEUING INSPECTION

_l,. I HEMPHILL CORPORATIONHEMPIL V - 4834 SOUTH 83RO EAST AVENUE

OFFICE- I 91g) 622-5133 TULSA OKLAHOMA 74145 AFTER HOURS 587.8-22

G-24

BORING LOG JHOLE NO. 4

PROJECT Retention Pond Area SHEET L__. OF I

HOLE LOCATION Crpe hcnrlnq Incatinn plan . . DATE 12-7-7R

GR. ELEV. 523.(3 WATER TABLE 9"31 BORED BY _ _n _ LOGGED BY HiemphI Il

.(After 24 hours)

DEPTH 6 DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL CASING INFORMATIONELEV. ANDFT - - FT-LIFTSCALE 9 (TYrPE, COLOR. TEXTURE, CONIS1TErNaCY) SIZE F IT-RUN/I r'PUILJLED F-I t

522.0 1.0 / •fl`iayey,lan w/Small doulders,Mols, 4 "I 19.0 19.0 07."- .SAND,Silty,Fine GrainedTan w/Clay I

Binders & Small Boulders,t4olst (Fill) DRILLING MUD-519.5 1 3.5 9

:-": SAND,Silty,Fine (ralned,Ian -(F VP('T Na. EACKS

_51R8.4 16 A• C-11PENETRATION TEST

- CLAY,Silty,Tan,Moist (Fill) FROM TO qLI)4"

516-0 __0

SiLT,Clayey,Tan,Moist (F-II)514.5 8.5514-0 . SANDFine Grained.Silt-Tan:Wet

SAND,FIne Grained,Gray,Clayey w/Waterat 9.0'

508.0 15.0 n'- SAND,tMedium-Coarse GraIned,Gray,Water

507 n 4. -SANDSTONE,Poorly Cemented,Tan SHELBY TUBE SAMPL-ES

505.0 NO8.0 NO. FROM TO

SHALE,Dark Gray,Moisture at 24.0' F .0 2.0

Fansteel-I 4.0 5.0

CORING

FROM TO RrCOVEITW

JI_5 24.5 96d- :~- 24_5 295.5 I0D.E29-5_ 5 no%5

Bottom of hole

WATER LOSS

CEMENT (NO. SACKS)

REMARKS

CONSULT'Ifte a•teIMrKINr 0 GEOLOG•ICAL INVESTIGATION 0 fNgRlklgINS iftsmcT1om-

NEMPNIL-EN HEMPHILL CORPORATION" "4.834 Sou"m 83RD EAST, AVINUIE

OFFICE-(911111 622-5133 TULSA. OKLAHOMA 74145 A-rTR HOURS •6S7-.52

G-24

•EMPHL-P •CLASSIFICATION and ENGINEERING PROPERTIESHEMP,,ILD•DATE: 12-30-77 LAB NO: 0105

REPORT TO Fansteel

PROJECT: Master Retention Pond Study

zS LEATTERBERG GRAIN SIZE-%/o PASSING W W 0

crLIMITS (D>_ , < _j

uJ SAMPLE DEPTH D- F_ zLMT

Z~ F- 3:: ~h- 0 0. w I- -- CJ -

2 DESCRIPTION FEET >- z - z 5- • ) " 3/8 NO. NO. NO. NO. zM Z-3/ 8) W" < < a 4 10 40 200 _ CLM z Zo _j _- Z - z= 2

a. -J (r) 0J

BHI CLAY,Silty,Red-Brown 15.0-16.0 127.8 15.0 28.9 19.1 9.8 100.0 98.2 97.3 94.7 83.4 - - - CL

BHI CLAY,Slity,Sandy,Tan 9.5-10.5 - 18.0 22.5 17.2 5.3 100.0 100.0 99.8 97.9 50.0 - - - CL-ML

BH2 SILT,Sandy,Red-Brown 15.0-16.0 104.5 19.2 17.8 N.P. 0.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.7 55.4 - - - ML

BH3 CLAY,SI Ity,Sandy,Red-Brown 18.0-19.0 108.3 18.0 23.9 17.2 6.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.5 61.5 - - - CL-ML

BH4 CLAY,Slity,Tan 5.0-6.0 - 17.4 29.9 18.1 11.8 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.1 86.5 - - - CL

COMP. CLAY,SIIty,D* Red-Brown 0.8-12.0 - 19.5 30.5 17.8 12.7 100.0 99.9 99.3 98.4 86.7 - - - CLCOMP. CLAY,SIIty,P** Red-Brown 0.0-4.0 - 18.1 30.6 18.5 12.1 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.3 95.1 - - - CL

*COMPOSITE "V", Hole D-I from 0.8-12.0, Hole D-2 from 0.8-12.0."*COMPOSITE "P", Hole P-I from 0.0-4.0, Hole P-2 from 0.0-4.0, Hole P-3 from 0.0-4.0, Hole P-4 from 0.0-4.0.

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION DIAGRAMU. S. BUREAU OF STANDARD SIEVE NO. HYDROMETER

-0m0mn2-4

-ni

2m

co

G)

m

0

mx

i I, I , L, L i lildild i I i I i. LL. I i blildi I i I i I i LL. I Mild.... ... .-1. 1 ... I I, , 1 1, ... I , I I I100 I0

EFFECTIVE SIZE

UNIFORMITY COEFFICIENT

FINENESS MODULUS

PERMEABILITY G.P.D./SQ. FT.

<0.001

>48

GRAIN SIZE IN MM

HEMPNIL T'

11121 I, u~n.,. lIr II Jl IJ h I I I i I I I .iOOi Ii Ii I i L~j I..= ...i. , .... Willd i Iil,! I L .,.., I. , ,,I,,, I

0.01 0.001

PROJECT : Retention Pond Study

LOCATION 'Fansteel. Muskogee, Oklahoma

SOURCE ; Shelby Tube

BORING NO, BH-I. FROM 5 .0'TO 6.0'

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION DIAGRAMU. S. BUREAU OF STANDARD SIEVE NO.

144 3 A 6 8)Q12 16 20 30 40 50 60 100 140 200

HYDROMETER

"D

m0

-n

CD

M

Tm

C)0

,0 (f)m

*m

10

00

EFFECTIVE SIZE


FINENESS MODULUS


VEmCO "A

'E IT '

PROJECT Retention Pond Study

LOCATION ; Fansteel, Muskogee, Oklahoma

SOURCE : Shelby Tube

BORING NO.BH-2 FROMI5.0' TO 16.0'

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION DIAGRAMU. S. BUREAU OF STANDARD SIEVE NO.

~'~" 3 A 6 8 Q 12 16 20 30 40 50 60 100 140 200

HYDROMETE-R

m7

z.6

-n,

m5

CO.-4

m

mz.-4

0

.-)

10

m

ou

0- --4

0

0

00

EFFECTIVE SIZE


FINENESS MODULUS


Q. 005 mm

L5~

*.~CG3POATWN

PROJECT Retention Pond Study

LOCATION Fansteel. Muskogee, Oklaho

SOURCE : Shelby Tube

BORING NO. BH-3 FROM 18. 0 'TO 19.C•'

fTIa

P CO'ULTrI" !NON"NFUPING * GEOLOGICAL INVE5TIGATION E rNGINIERING INSPECTION

HEMPHILI HEMPHILL CORPORATIONICOATr1" 4834 SOUrTI4 83RD EAST AVENUE

o~F IOCE. (o Ia) D22-5 IE3 TULSA. OKLAHOMA 74i45 AHTEA HOURS 5T7-E50T

DIRECT SHEAR TEST

80PHYSICAL

PROPERTIES

UNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVE

STRENGTH LBSPER SO. FT.

PERCENT STRAIN -

PERCENT MOISTURE 15.0

DRY DENSITY LBSPER CU. FT. 127.8

C6)

wIt

wa:)

60

40 I LIQUID LIMITPLASTIC LIMIT28-9

IPLASTICITY INDEX

.SHRINKAGE LIMIT -

SHRINKAGE RATIO

CLASSIFICATION -Cl-

20

0 2 4 6

UNIT STRAIN - PERCENT

C6a:cloCnw

U)

IJJ[zCo)

GRAIN SIZESIEVE WEIGHT % I %SIZE RETAINED RETAINED1 PASSING

4" qR ?

Idn Q-4_7

PAN NUMBER

SAMPLE WEIGHT

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION:

CLAY,Si Ity,Red-Brown

SHEAR

STRENGTH

COHESION-PSi 76.0PSF , nQ_ 4

FRICTION ANGLE 20FINAL MOISTURE 1n.o

80

60

400 20 40 60

NORMAL PRESSURE,PS.I.

CLIENT: BORING NO.BH-I LAB. NO. 0105DATE 1-7-7 _

.PROJECT: Nuclear Wa t Po d tud DEPTH 5.0 TO 6.0 PLATE NO.

CONuTN NIrANa GfOLDGICAL lNVV5TlGA7IONl 0 ENGINE ERING INSPECT60*N

-1-EMPHILL CORPORATION4834 SOUTH 83RD EAST AVENUE

TULSA. OKLAHOMA 74145 AFTER HOURS 587-5021

DIRECT SHEAR TEST

80PHYSICAL

PROPERTIES

UNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH LBSPER SO. FT..

PERCENT STRAIN -

PERCENT MOISTURE 19.2C6)a:

w

w

60

40

DRY DENSITY LBSPER CU. FT.LIQUID LIMITPLASTIC LIMITPLASTICITY INDEXSHRINKAGE LIMITSHRINKAGE RATIOCLASSIFICATION

104. 5

17.8N.p,

0.0

ML

20

0 3 6 9

C')a:U)ci,wI-C')a:wC,)

GRAIN SIZESIEVE WEIGHT % %SIZE RETAINED RETAINED PASSING

4 1nn~o -_0100.0

0 _ _99.7

200 55.4PAN NUMBER

SAMPLE WEIGHT

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION:SI LT,Sandy,Red-Brown

SHEAR

STRENGTH

COHESION-PSI 27-0

PSF 3888

FRICTION ANGLE mnoFINAL MOISTURE 19.2

40

20

NORMAL PRESSURE,PS.I1CLIENT: Fan't'el/BORING NO. BH--2 LAB. NO.°'

DATE -7-7

PROJECT: Nuclear Waste Pond Study DEPTH -TO 16,0 PLATE NO.

CONCULTIN' ENSINEERING a GEOL'GICAL INVIE-TIGATION 0 ENGINEFRING ItNPCVIfl-"

AEMPk HILi HEMPHILL CORPORATION~ j 4834 SOUTH 83RD FAST A~VENUE

" I OFFICE-(I8?) 622-5133 TULSA. OKLAHOMA 74145 Ar--NER HOUR•S C7.i521z

DIRECT SHEAR TEST

c,)

U,Lax:U)

60

40

PHYSICALPROPERTIES

UNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH LBSPER SQ. FT.

PERCENT STRAINPERCENT MOISTURE 1 8.0

DRY DENSITY LBSPER CU. FT. I.1 i3

LIQUID LIMIT 23.9PLASTIC LIMIT 17.2

PLASTICITY INDEX 6.7-SHRINKAGE LIMIT -

SHRINKAGE RATIO -

CLASSIFICATION CL-MLI

20

I

0 3 6 9


Uf)

Cl)

U)

4

U)

GRAIN SIZESIEVE WEIGHT % %SIZE RETAINED RETAINED PASSING

LioOQ-1 I Iinn" n

4n 99-51200 61-.5PAN NUMBERSAMPLE WEIGHT

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION:CLAY,SI Ity,Sandy,Red-Brown

SHEAR

STRENGTH

COHESION-PSI 11.0PSF 1984

FRICTION ANGLE 7,°FINAL MOISTURE 18.0

40

20

NORMAL PRESSURE,PS.I.CLIENT: BORING No. LAB. NO. o109CIE . Fnsteel B.RH-3 DATE 1-7-7gPROJEclear Wate pond Study DEPTH 18,(I O Ig/,I lPLATE NO-

.CONUL'TINt[ rNcE!NING a S G[O ._I1CAL INVEST*GATION a [NGINiERING INSPECTION

iM PHIL: i.HEMPHILL CORPORATION4834 SOUTH 83PD FAST AVENUF

f" OFFICE-(218) 622.5133 "tULSA, OKLAHOMA 74 45 AFTER HOURS 587.562

DIRECT SHEAR TEST

C6)

cr)'Ui-

c/)

60

40

PHYSICALPROPERTIES

UNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH LBSPER SQ. FT.

PERCENT STRAIN _

PERCENT MOISTURE 16.6

DRY DENSITY LBSPER CU. FT. 104.6"LIQUID LIMIT 30.6

PLASTIC LIMIT 18.5

PLASTICITY INDEX 12.1

SHRINKAGE LIMIT

SHRINKAGE RATIO

CLASSIFICATION ,,,.L

* Remolded

GRAIN SIZESIEVE WEIGHT %/o ISIZE RETAINED RETAINEDI PASSING3/8 I100.0

4 _10-0I0 I__ _ _

40 _99-3200 95.1PAN NUMBER

SAMPLE WEIGHT -

20

Sv

0 3 6 9


(I)

U)

'U

CC)

'rCl)

Material: CLAY, SiltyRed-Brown

40

20

SHEAR

STRENGTH

COHESION-PSI _ _

PSF 14AO

FRICTION ANGLE 300

FINAL MOISTURE 16.6

0 20 40

NORMAL PRESSURERS.I.60

CLIENT: Fanst~el BORING NO.C<mpOsite LAB. NO. '0105DATE 2-I -7a

PROJECT: Borrow Pit Area DEPTH 0.0 TO 0.4 PLATE NO.

P CoNRUL~tNOl rNOINEFRItNG GEOLOGICAL. INVESTIGATION a NGIhIrtRINc& INSPIKC7&N

HE-MPHILL CORPORATIONYcQ.P~AI~

1 jA834 SouTm 83RD EAST AVENUE'~-zF* -CErPI C)z~~ T ULSA. OKI AHO1MA 741145 AIýTrE HOUR5 ~567.az

DIRECT SHEAR TEST

I!

# #1 4_R iýI i l I iIi

PHYSICALPROPERTIES

UNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH LBSPER SO. FT.

PERCENT STRAIN

PERCENT MOISTURE 15.0_ja.:

w

crw

60 7

I

40

DRY DENSITY LBSPER CU. FT. 1I0.1 *

LIQUID LIMIT 30.5PLASTIC LIMIT 17.8

PLASTICITY INDEX 12.7

SHRINKAGE LIMIT4 SHRINKAGE RATIO -

I CLASSIFICATION' CLI

20

0 3 6 9

* Remolded

GRAIN SIZESIEVE WEIGHT % %

SIZE RETAINED RETAINED PASSING

3/8 In_4 99, 9

10 99.340 98.4

PAN NUMBER

SAMPLE WEIGHT

UNIT STRAIN - PERCENT[ . . I , . •

I I III i II

a:

w

Uf)

I II 'i III I II II

I I

RH i

Haterial : CLAY, SiltyRed-Brown

40

20

i Iii I I il il

I I I I IISHEAR

STRENGTHI ý I

I I COHESION-PSI InFRICTION PSF 1440FRICTION ANGLE 340FINAL MOISTURE 15.0I !

0 20 40

NORMAL PRESSURE,RS.I.60

CLIE.T.....s.....BORING NO. Composite LAB. NO. 0,05CLIENT: Fanstee I " U I DATE 2- 0-78PROJECT" Old Dike Boring DEPTH 0.8 TO 12.0 PLATE NO.

HEMPHILL C OR PO.R AT I ON*A Ct"I A 1. *4ý

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.40.5 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5D0 10 20 25

0i.-

<0

0:

0.470

0.460

0.450

0.440

0.430

0.420

0.410

0.400

0.390

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 1.0 2D 3.0 4.0 5.0 10 20 25

PRESSURE - TONS PER SQ. FT.

CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT

UNIT WT. (LBS PER CU. FT.) 142.4 INITIAL VOID RATIO 0.462

PERCENT OF MOISTURE-- INITIAL - 15.0 FINAL 14.8

PERCENT OF SATURATION - INITIAL 88.0 FINAL 100

SPECIFIC GRAVITY 2.90 COMPRESSION INDEX 0.112

PROJECT 'Master Retention Pond'Study. LA6. NO. 010 5AREA Retention Pond Area DATE 1-15-78DORIW NO. ,-I- SAMPLE NO. DEPTH 15.OTO 16.OFT. PLATE NO.

H E M P H I L L CORP ORAT ION. "EMPM10%

et rl 12 n t % elk It I A 12 M it n A^ilk In *^ ORv

0.575

0.570

0.565

0.560

0.555

0.550

0

0

,I I 1

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 1.0 2_D 3.0 4.0 5.0 10 20 25

PRESSURE - TONS PER SO. FT.


UNIT WT. (LBS PER CU. FT.) 104.5 INITIAL VOID RATIO 0.571

PERCENT OF MOISTURE-- INITIAL 19.2 FINAL 19.0

PERCENT OF SATURATION - INITIAL 93 FINAL ,O00

SPECIFIC GRAVITY 2_70 COMPRESSION INDEX 0-.2

PROJECT* I-,li~t-r Rr tpntinn Pond Study LAB. NO. l'QI05

ARA Retention Pond Area . DATE .I-15-78DORING NO. BH-2 SAMPLE NO. DEPTH TO 16,0 FT. PLATE NO.

HEMPHIL L CORPORAT ION,

0.1

0.560

0.555

0.550

0.2 0.3 0.40.5 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5n I0 20 25

0I-

0r

o

0.545

0.540

0.535

0.530

0.525

0.520

IN-

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 1.0 2D 3.0 4.0 5.0 I0 20 25

PRESSURE - TONS PER SQ. FT.


UNIT WT. (LBS PER CU. FT.) 0i3-3. INITIAL VOID RATIO 0,56,1

PERCENT OF MOISTURE-- INITIAL 18.0 FINAL -1L7-.7

PERCENT OF SATURATION - INITIAL9l FINAL1.00

SPECIFIC GRAVITY 2.70 COMPRESSION INDEX 0.06

PROJECT jjaqtrt LAB. NO. 0105AREA Retention Pond Area DATE 1-15-78DORINW NO. BH-3 SAMPLE NO. !DEPTH I8,0TO 19,0 FT. PLATE NO.

MOIS CTURE-7 nrDEj1S!TY r_1 I P_ J:

DATE:

CLIENT:

12-30-77

Fanstee I

LAB. NO. 0105

PROJECT: Nuclear Waste Pond Study

MATERIAL: CLAY,SI Ity,Red-Brown

MATERIAL SOURCE: Bag Sample, Composite "P"

METHOD OF TEST : ASTM D698, Method A

TEST RESULTS

MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY = 106.6 LBS PER CU. FT.

OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT= 16.6 %

FIELD MOISTURE ,CONTENT = 18.1 %

108

U-

LLI(Li

PHYSICALPROPERTIES

106LIQUIDLIMIT

PLASTICLIMIT0l

M

zWa

104

30.6 %

18.5 %

- 12.1%PLASTICITYINDEX

SHRINKAGELIMIT

102

100 EM PHILD-CORPOR ATION

3-.,

13 15I 17 9 21

MOISTURE- PERCENT OF DRY WEIGHT

kA0 Q 1777ý -rl 7tjZT voa av qzS ý .-- C3 FV .Eý CURVE

DATE:

CLIENT:

12-21-78

Fansteel

LAB. NO. 0105

PROJECT: Nuclear Waste Pond Study

MATERIAL: CLAY,Si Ity,Red-Brown

MATERIAL SOURCE: Bag Sample, Composite "D"

METHOD OF TEST ASTM D698, Method A

TEST RESULTS

MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY = 110.5 LBS PER CU. FT.

OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT = 15.0 %

FIELD MOISTURE CONTENT = 19.5 %

112

U-z

C/)

-j

zwLa

PHYSICALPROPERTIES-4

110I LIQUID

LIMIT

108

PLASTICLIMIT

PLASTICITYINDEX

= 30.5 %

= 17.8 %

= 12.7 %

106

SHRINKAGELIMIT -

H EMPHIL["-CORPORATION

10412 14 16 18 20

MOISTURE - PERCENT OF DRY WEIGHTMOISTURE - PERCENT OF DRY WEIGHT

E rrMI~~- CONSULTING ENGINEERING a GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION SI ENGINEERING INSPECTION

f ii IM, 1ý1.~t~Szcvz

DATE: March 14, 1978

CLIENT: Fansteel Corporation

PROJECT: Retention Pond Study

LABORATORY NO: 0105

PERMEABILITY TEST RESULTS

FALLING HEAD METHOD

PERMEABILITYCENTIMETERS PER SECONDBORE HOLE

1

2

3

Composite "D"

Composite "P"

DEPTH

9.5 - 10.5

15.0 - 16.0

18.0 - 19.0

FEET PER DAY

7.3 x I0-5

5.3x 10-4

1.9 x I0-4

2.4 x 10-5

7.2 x 10-5

2.6 x 15-8

1.9 x lo-7

6.7 x Io-8

8.3 x 10-9

2.5 x 10-8

"hemphill the name you can trust"

0 geological hemphill corporation - nrc

Documents