addendum no. 1 march 18, 2019 project: city of...

ADDENDUM NO. 1

March 18, 2019

PROJECT: CITY OF COLEMAN WATER TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS

The following changes and/or additions shall be made to the Plans, Specifications, and Contract

Documents for the above referenced project. Bidder shall acknowledge receipt of this Addendum

by signing below and returning this Addendum with the Bid.

I. Geotech Report: The attached Geotech Report shall be included in the Contract

Documents.

Prepared by:

JACOB & MARTIN, LLC.

Consulting Engineers

3465 Curry Lane

Abilene, Texas 79606

_________________________________

Bidder’s Acknowledgment

_________________________________

Date

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT WTP IMPROVEMENTS

PEACH STREET COLEMAN, TEXAS

Prepared for:

JACOB & MARTIN, LTD. Abilene, Texas

EWI Report No. JM184840 August 2018

Ellerbee-Walczak, Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS TESTING SERVICESL.tl21

August 31,2018

Jacob & Martin, Ltd. 3465 Curry Lane Abilene, Texas 79606

Attn: James A. Phillips

Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report WTP Improvements Peach Street Coleman, Texas 76834 EWI Report No. JM184840

Gentlemen,

Ellerbee-Walczak, Inc. (EWI) has completed its Geotechnical Engineering Report at the above referenced location. The results are presented in the attached report.

Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions regarding the information in this report or if we can be of any additional assistance.

It has been a pleasure providing geotechnical services for this project.

Sincerely,

Ellerbee-Walczak, Inc. TBPE Firm No. F-4610

. M-..,

William AIDouglas, Project Engineer

i Manager Engineering

4501 Broadway Ave•• P.O. Box 14809 • Haltom City, Texas 76117 Office 817-759-9999. Fax 817-759-1888

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1.0 SITE &PROJECT INFORMATION ...................................................................................... 1

2.0 SCOPE OF SERViCES ....................................................................................................... 1

3.0 FIELD OPERATIONS ........................................................................................................ 1

4.0 LABORATORY TESTING ................................................................................................... 2

5.0 SITE SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .................................................................................... 2

6.0 GROUNDWATER ............................................................................................................... 2

7.0 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................. 3 7.1 Foundation Recommendations ................................................................................ 3

7.1.1 Floor Slabs ...................................................................................................... 3 7.1.2 Drilled Shafts ................................................................................................... 4 7.1.3 Ground-Supported Stiffened Slabs ....................................................... " ......... 5

7.2 Earthwork/Site Grading ............................................................................................ 7 7.3 Site Drainage ........................................................................................................... 7 7.4 Pavement Recommendations .................................................................................. 8

7.4.1 Pavement Subgrade Preparation ..................................................................... 8 7.4.3 Pavement Movements .................................................................................... 9

8.0 LIMITATIONS.................................................................................................................... 10 General Specifications for Water Injection .................................................................... 11 General Specifications for Chemical Injection ............................................................... 12

APPENDIX

Figure

Plan of Borings ..................................................................................................................... 1 - 2 Boring Logs ........................................................................................................................... 3 - 9 Key to Symbols used on Boring Logs ...................................................................................... 10

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT wrp IMPROVEMENTS

PEACH STREET COLEMAN, TEXAS

1.0 SITE & PROJECT INFORMATION

The sites are located at an existing water treatment plant south of the intersection of Peach Street and Rio Grande Street in the City of Coleman, Coleman County, Texas. The western most site

had existing improvements, was relatively flat and generally drains to the south. The eastern most site had existing water tanks, was relatively flat and generally drains to the east.

Proposed construction consists of two commercial structures and associated pavements on the west side of the property and unknown improvements on the east side of the property. We anticipate structural loads of less than 100 kips. Cuts and fills to achieve finished grades for the pads are assumed to be about ±2 feet from existing grades.

2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES

The purpose of our geotechnical services for this site were to:

• Evaluate the subsurface conditions encountered in the borings.

• Evaluate the pertinent engineering properties of the recovered samples.

• Provide recommendations concerning suitable types of foundation and floor slab systems for the proposed improvements.

• Provide recommendations for additional earthwork, pavements, flatwork and site grading.

3.0 FIELD OPERATIONS

The subsurface conditions of the site were evaluated by performing seven borings, which were drilled on Aug ust 22, 2018 in locations as directed by the client. The approximate boring locations are provided on the Plan of Borings (Figures 1 & 2) in the Appendix, at the locations directed by the client. The results of the field exploration program are presented on the Boring Logs (Figures 3 through 9) in the Appendix. A Soil Classification Chart containing the keys to symbols and the description of terms used on the boring logs are presented on Figure 10.

A truck-mounted drilling rig with continuous flight augers was used to advance the borings. Soils were sampled using spilt spoon sampling procedures. The samples were extruded in the field, logged, sealed, and packaged to preserve their in-situ moisture content and reduce disturbance

during transportation to the laboratory. The load carrying capacity of the limestone found in the

borings was assessed in the field using Texas Department of Transportation's (TxDOT) Cone Penetration Test. Drilling and sampling were performed in general accordance with applicable

ASTM and TxDOT procedures.

-1- JM184840

4.0 LABORATORY TESTING

The Boring Logs were reviewed by a geotechnical engineer who assigned soil samples for testing. Tests were performed in the laboratory by technicians working under the direction of the engineer. Testing was performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM procedures.

Liquid and Plastic Limit tests were performed on samples of the cohesive soils. These tests were used in conjunction with moisture content tests for classification and estimating their volume change potential. A percent passing the No. 200 Sieve test was performed on selected samples of cohesive soils to determine the percentage finer than 0.075 mm to aid in classification.

The results of the laboratory tests are presented on the Boring Logs in the Appendix.

5.0 SITE SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

The conditions encountered at each boring location are depicted on the Boring Logs in the Appendix. Descriptions of each strata with its approximated depth and thickness are provided. The depths reported on each log refer to the depth from the existing ground surface at the time the boring was performed. A generalized description of the variable stratigraphy indicated by the borings is provided below.

Brown and tan silty clay and clay soils, some with sand seams and limestone seams were encountered at the surface of Borings 1 through 7 and extended to depths of about 1 Y:! to 9 feet below existing grades. The clay soils had Liquid Limits (LL) from 31 to 42 percent, Plasticity Indices (PI) from 9 to 24, classified as CL according to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) and were stiff to hard in consistency.

Tan limestone with clay seams was next encountered in the borings and extended to termination depths of about 2Y:! to 10 feet. The tan limestone found at this site was found to be very hard. Any deep excavations planned at this site will require heavy construction equipment.

The soils encountered in the borings at this site are considered to be slightly active to moderately active with respect to moisture-induced volume changes. The soils encountered in the borings have shrink and swell potential with seasonal moisture changes within the active zone.

6.0 GROUNDWATER

The borings were advanced using dry auger-drilling techniques. This process allows relatively accurate short-term observations of groundwater while drilling. Seepage was not observed in the borings while drilling and the borings were found to be dry at the completion of drilling.

Groundwater levels will seasonally fluctuate due to variations in the amount of precipitation, evaporation and surface water runoff. Seepage can occur perched at the interface of the limestone and overlying clay soils or within fissures in the limestone, particularly during wet seasonal/annual cycles. In addition, groundwater conditions may change due to landscape irrigation, tree root demand and from leaking buried utilities.

-2- JM184840

7.0 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 Foundation Recommendations

The moisture related volume changes associated with the overburden clayey soils at the site, indicate that shallow foundation systems will be subject to some differential movements. If the owner is tolerant to differential foundation movements, lightly-loaded structures such as these commonly use a ground-supported, stiffened slab foundation system for soil conditions similar to this site. Drilled shafts independent of the ground supported floor slabs can be used to provide additional support.

Design parameters are presented below.

7.1.1 Floor Slabs

The potential magnitude of the moisture-induced movements is influenced by the soil properties, overburden pressures, thickness of clay strata and to a great extent by soil moisture levels at the time of construction.

The Potential Vertical Rise (PVR) estimates for the borings were estimated using the information from the testing program and are based on the Texas Highway Department's Method 124-E and our general knowledge of the area. PVR calculations are one-dimensional representations of the Potential Vertical Movements (PVM) (Le. - swell is only considered). Shrinkage due to soil desiccation of about ~ to % of the magnitude can also occur. PVR calculations are estimates based on assumptions that the area around the structure will be well drained and properly graded, landscape beds are uniformly-watered, and utility leaks are promptly repaired. Long-term utility leaks beneath the foundation may exceed those estimated in this report.

Based on the soils encountered in Borings 1 through 3 (WTP Building), at a dry condition, we estimate the potential magnitude of post-construction heave for slabs-on-grade will be on the order of 1 inch, or less (TxDOT 124E - PVR).

Based on the soils encountered in the Boring 4 (Chemical Building), at a dry condition, we estimate the potential magnitude of post-construction heave for slabs-on-grade will be on the order of 2 inches (TxDOT 124E - PVR).

Reductions in antiCipated movements (dry soil conditions) can be achieved by using methods to reduce on-grade floor slab movements and can be considered for this site if slabs-on-ground are constructed for the proposed chemical building planned at the south portion of the western most improvement site.

-3- JM184840

It is estimated that slab movements of approximately 1 inch can generally be obtained by excavation of the surface soils to a minimum depth of 4 feet below current grades and replacing the removed soils at a moisture conditioned state (minimum of 95 percent compaction at a or above the soils optimum moisture). The moisture-conditioning should extend a minimum of 5 feet beyond the building lines or the extent of the flatwork. Water or chemical injection to a depth of 4 feet below finished grade may be used in lieu of excavation and replacement. Water and chemical injection specifications are provided in the Appendix of this report.

It should be realized that even slab movements of one-half inch can result in distress to floor coverings, interior partitions and finishes. Special provisions should be made to accommodate movement if slabs-on-grade construction is used.

Design parameters are presented below. The following recommendations are based on the assumption that the finished floor elevations will be near the current grades. These recommendations should be reviewed when the grading plan is available.

7.1.2 Drilled Shafts

Drilled shafts, independent of the stiffened slab foundation system can be considered for additional support of the ground supported foundation.

Straight drilled shafts should be situated a minimum of 3 feet into non-fractured tan limestone. A minimum diameter of 12-inches is recommended for the straight shafts. The drilled shafts may be proportioned using an allowable bearing pressure of 20,000 pounds per square foot (PSF) and an allowable skin friction value of 3,000 PSF for compressive loads are recommended in the limestone.

The shafts will be subject to some uplift as a result of heave in the overlying soils. The magnitude of these loads varies with the shaft diameter, soil parameters, and particularly the in-situ moisture levels at the time of construction. They can be approximated at this site by assuming a uniform uplift of 800 PSF over the shaft perimeter for a depth of 9 feet or to the top of the limestone. The shafts must contain sufficient continuous vertical reinforcing to resist the net tensile load.

Groundwater seepage was not observed in the borings but could be encountered if construction proceeds after periods of prolonged precipitation. Rapid placement of steel and concrete may permit some shaft installation to proceed; however, seepage rates or caving soils could be sufficient to require the use of temporary casing for installation of the shafts. Should casing be necessary, it should be seated with all water and most loose material removed prior to beginning the design penetration. Care must then be taken that a sufficient head of plastic concrete is maintained within the casing during extraction.

-4- JM184840

Adjacent shafts should maintain a minimum center-to-center spacing of 2.5 times the diameter of the larger shaft. Closer spacing will require reductions in the skin friction values presented above, and possibly special installation sequences. As a general guide, the design skin friction will vary linearly from the full value at a spacing of 2.5 diameters to 50 percent of the design value at 1.0 diameter. This 'firm should be contacted to review, on a case-by-case basis, shafts requiring closer spacing.

Settlements of properly constructed drilled shafts bearing on non-fractured tan limestone for the anticipated loads are on the order of 1 inch.

Complete installation of individual shafts should be completed in one day's operation.

7.1.3 Ground-Supported Stiffened Slabs

Post-tensioned or conventionally reinforced, ground-supported stiffened slab foundation systems must be designed to resist and/or tolerate potential vertical movements due to volume changes in the site soils without inducing unacceptable distress in the foundation or structural elements. These movements will typically occur as differential movement between the periphery and interior of the slab-on-grade system.

An Effective PI of 25 can be considered for designing conventionally reinforced Slab-On-Grade (SOG) foundations for the chemical building (Boring 4). This was calculated assuming dry condition soils, a weighted PI = 18, a Slope Correction Coefficient = 1 and a Consolidation Correction Coefficient =1.3.

An Effective PI of 15 can be considered for designing conventionally reinforced Slab-On-Grade (SOG) foundations for the chemical building (Boring 4). This was calculated assuming moisture conditioned soils, a weighted PI =18, a Slope Correction Coefficient = 1 and a Consolidation Correction Coefficient =0.8.

An Effective PI of 15 can be considered for designing conventionally reinforced Slab-On-Grade (SOG) foundations for the wrp Building (Borings 1 through 3). This was calculated assuming dry condition soils, a weighted PI =15, a Slope Correction Coefficient =1 and a Consolidation Correction Coefficient 1.0.

PVR calculations are estimates based on assumptions that the area around the structure will be well drained (Properly Graded), landscape beds are not over-watered, and utility leaks are promptly repaired. Long term utility leaks can result in soil movements in excess of those estimated above. The following parameters assume that the subgrade beneath the slab should meet the requirements discussed in the Earthwork/Site Grading section of this report.

Adjacent flatwork such as sidewalks and pavements should be designed in such a way as to allow for differential movements between flatwork and the exterior perimeter of the commercial structure foundation.

-5- JM184840

Design parameters were developed for differential swell (Ym) using the Post-Tensioning Institute's (PTI) slabs-on-ground (3rd Edition) design method and the VOLFLO 1.5 computer program. The PTI design criteria based on soils in a dry condition and moisture conditioned subgrade are presented in Tables 1 through 3 below.

TABLE 1 - PTI DESIGN CRITERIA WTP Building

Based on Dry Condition Soi.ls

(PTI 3rd Edition) Center Lift Boring 4

Edge Moisture Variation (em) 7.5 ft.

Differential Swell (Ym) 1.0 in.

Edge Lift

4.8 ft.

1.4 in.

Potential Vertical Rise (PVR) About 2 inches

TABLE 2 - PTI DESIGN CRITERIA WTP Building

Based on 4' of Moisture-Conditioned Soils Center Lift

Boring 4



Edge Lift

4.8 ft.

0.6 in.

Potential Vertical Rise (PVR) About 1 inch, or less

TABLE 3 - PTI DESIGN CRITERIA Chemical Building

Site grading can greatly affect the movements discussed above.

Based on Dry Condition Soils Center Lift

Borings 1 through 3



Edge Lift

4.8 ft.

0.6 in.

Potential Vertical Rise (PVR) About 1 inch, or less

-6- JM184840

The grade beams of the slab-on-grade foundation system should exert a maximum bearing pressure of 1,500 PSF on undisturbed native soils or moisture-conditioned subgrade and 3,500 PSF for grade beams founded in or on tan limestone. These beams should extend a minimum of 12 inches below finished grade.

A properly engineered and constructed vapor retarder should be provided beneath slab areas, which will be covered, carpeted, or sealed.

7.2 Earthwork/Site Grading

Site grading can greatly affect the potential vertical movements as discussed above. Fills constructed using clay soils can increase the potential movements. Imported (select) fill to achieve finished grade beneath a ground supported foundation should have a Liquid Limit less than 35. The subgrade in areas to be filled and/or under structures, slopes and pavements should be stripped of vegetation and any debris present.

The subgrade beneath the fill should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches and uniformly compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of ASTM D 698 at or above the soil's optimum moisture determined by that test. Fill meeting select fill requirements should then be spread in loose lifts, less than 9 inches thick and uniformly compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of ASTM D 698 at or above the soil's optimum moisture determined by that test.

If trees are removed within the perimeter of the pads, the soil should be excavated to a depth beneath the root bulb and replaced to the same criteria presented above. The pads should be proof rolled with heavy pneumatic equipment. Any soft or pumping areas should be excavated to a firm subgrade and properly backfilled. It should then be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches and uniformly compacted to the same criteria presented above. If tree bulbs are not removed, the rooted areas may be in a desiccated state and the potential for heave may exist as moisture levels increase over time.

7.3 Site Drainage

All grades must be adjusted to provide positive drainage away from the structures. Water permitted to pond near or adjacent to the perimeter of a structure can result in soil movements, which exceed those discussed in this report. Open ground should preferably be sloped at a minimum of 5 percent grade for at least 10 feet beyond the perimeter of the foundations.

Flatwork will be subject to post-construction movement. Maximum grades practical should be used for flatwork to prevent areas where water can pond. In addition, allowances in final grades should take into consideration post-construction movement of flatwork, particularly if such movement would be critical. Where paving or flatwork abuts the structures, care should be taken that the joint is properly sealed and maintained to prevent the infiltration of surface water.

I#I~'I -7- JM184840

Planters located adjacent to the structures should be designed to drain. Sprinkler mains should be located a minimum of five feet away from the building lines. If heads must be located adjacent to a structures, then service lines off the main should be provided. The owner should be advised that it is important to maintain moist ground conditions during prolonged periods of dry weather. Trees and deep-rooted shrubs should be located no closer to the structures than % their mature height to reduce the potential for foundation settlement caused by moisture demand of the root systems.

Roof drains should discharge on flatwork or be extended a minimum of 3 feet away from the structures.

7.4 Pavement Recommendations

7.4.1 Pavement Subgrade Preparation

Subgrade soils will primarily consist of silty clay soils (Borings 5 through 7). The clayey soils are subject to loss in support value with the moisture increases, which occur beneath pavements. These soils react with hydrated lime, which serves to improve and maintain their support value. Lime modification or flexible base is recommended beneath flexible (asphalt) pavements. Rigid (concrete) pavements can be placed on an un-modified, properly compacted native subgrade.

A minimum of 6 percent hydrated lime (TxOOT Item 264), by dry weight, should be used beneath asphalt pavement systems if a flexible base system is not placed. The lime should be thoroughly mixed and blended with the top six inches of the subgrade (TxDOT, Item 260). Lime modification should extend a minimum of one foot beyond the edge of the pavement.

The subgrade modified or un-modified, or beneath flexible base, should be uniformly compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of ASTM 0698 near, -1 to +3 percent, the optimum moisture content determined by that test. It should be protected and maintained in a moist condition until the pavement is placed.

Two inches of hot mix asphaltic concrete (HMAC) above 6 inches of properly compacted flexible should be adequate in parking spaces servicing light duty load traffic. This should be increased to 10 inches of flexible base in the drive aisles servicing heavy duty load traffic. The HMAC section should consist of a two-inch surface course similar to TxOOT Type O. Flexible base should meet TxOOT Item 247, Type A, Grade 1 and be compacted to a minimum of 98 percent of ASTM D 698 at ±3 percent of the crushed stone product's optimum moisture content. The flexible base should be placed above the optimum moisture content. A regular maintenance program consisting of cracking sealant and repair will be necessary if relatively thin asphalt pavement systems are constructed.

-8- JM184840

Portland cement concrete is recommended in areas subject to heavy truck traffic and should provide excellent service for other pavement areas. Five inches of concrete is recommended for parking lots and 6 inches for drives and 7 or more inches in areas subject to truck traffic. The concrete should have a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 3,000 psi in automobile lots and 3,500 psi in truck traffic areas. It should contain a minimum of 6±1.5 percent entrained air. As a minimum, the section should be reinforced with No. 3 bars on 18-inch centers in both directions.

The pavement will be subject to movements due to volume changes in the site soils. Flat grades should be avoided with positive drainage provided away from the pavement edges.

Backfilling of curbs should be accomplished as soon as practical to prevent ponding of water.

7.4.3 Pavement Movements

The clays encountered in the borings are slightly active and subject to volume changes with fluctuations in their moisture content. The clays expand (heave) with increases in moisture and contract (shrink) with decreases in moisture. The movement at the center of the pavement typically occurs as post construction heave. At the edge of the pavement, both shrinkage and swell could occur due to seasonal moisture fluctuations in response to rainfall and evapotranspiration.

The potential magnitude of the moisture-induced movements is rather indeterminate. It is influenced by the soil properties, surface drainage, overburden pressures and to a great extent by soil moisture levels at the time of construction. The greatest potential for post-construction movement occurs when the soils are in dry condition at the time of construction. Based on TxDOT Test Method 124-E, potential active soil movements, to the boring depths evaluated, are estimated to range up to on the order about 1 % inches, based on clay soils. The potential for more greater vertical movements increases with the addition of supplementary clay soils.

Openings in parking lot, such as landscape islands, are sources of water permeation into adjoining pavement. Water collects in the islands and migrates into the surrounding subgrade thereby corrupting support of the pavement. This is principally applicable for islands with raised concrete curbs, irrigated plants, and low permeability near-surface soils. The civil design for the pavements with these conditions should include features to restrict or to collect and discharge excess water from the islands. Examples of features are edge drains connected to the storm water collection system or other suitable outlet and impermeable barriers preventing lateral migration of water such as a cutoff wall installed to a depth below the pavement structure.

Pavements should be sloped to provide rapid drainage of surface water. Water allowed to pond on or adjacent to the pavements could saturate the subgrade and contribute to premature pavement deterioration. A minimum grade of 0.5% and preferably 1 % is recommended for all pavements.

-9- JM184840

8.0 LIMITATIONS

The professional services performed for the preparation of this geotechnical report were accomplished in accordance with current and locally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices. The recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained from the borings at the indicated locations and/or from other information discussed in this report. The possibility always exists that the subsurface conditions occurring between borings, beneath the previous structures, across the site, or due to seasonal/annual climatic cycles may vary from those encountered in the borings. The nature of these variations may not become evident until during or after construction. Should subsurface conditions vary significantly from those described herein, EWI should be immediately notified to evaluate the effects on these recommendations and so supplemental recommendations can be provided. EWl's services should also be retained for the final review of design plans/specifications so comments can be made regarding interpretation of the geotechnical recommendations provided in this report.

The recommendations provided in this report were prepared for the exclusive use of our client. No warranties, expressed or implied, are intended or made. The information and recommendations provided in this report are applicable only for the design of the types of structure(s) described in the Site and Project Information section of this report and should not be used for any other structures, locations or for any other purposes. We should not be held responsible for the conclusions, opinions or recommendations made by others based upon the information submitted in this report. If changes to the design and/or location of this project as outlined in this report are planned, the recommendations provided in this report shall not be considered valid unless EWI reviews these changes and either verifies or amends this report in writing. Construction issues such as site safety support of excavations and dewatering procedures are the responsibility of others.

The scope of services for this report does not include any environmental or biological assessments either specifically or implied. If the owner is concerned about the potential mold, fungi, bacteria, identification of contaminants or hazardous materials and conditions, additional studies should be undertaken.

EWI's capabilities include a full range of construction material testing and observation services. EWI should be retained to provide testing and observation during excavation, grading, foundation and construction phases of this project.

We will retain the samples recovered from the borings on this project for a period of 3D days subsequent to the submittal date printed on this report. After the 3D-day period, the samples will be discarded unless otherwise notified by the owner in writing.

-10- JM18484D

GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR

WATER - PRESSURE INJECTION

1. Injection process shall be observed on a full-time basis by a qualified inspector under the direction of the owner's designated geotechnical engineer.

2. A surfactant (wetting agent) shall be added to the water. The amount of surfactant used should be in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations.

3. The lower portion of the injection nozzle shall consist of a hole pattern that will uniformly disperse the water throughout the entire depth.

4. Injection pressures should be adjusted to disperse as large a volume of water as possible within a pressure range of 50 to 200 pounds per square inch.

5. Injection pipe shall be forced downward (not jetted or washed) in twelve to 18-inch intervals, injecting to refusal at each interval (minimum of two intervals) for a total depth of about 4 feet. Refusal will be determined on site by the inspector.

6. Spacing for the injections not to exceed five feet on center each way, and injections shall be carried at least five feet outside building lines. Subsequent injections should be offset from initial locations in a pattern that maximizes distribution of the mixture.

7. After the recommended number of injection passes the moisture content of the soils shall be evaluated by the owner's designated geotechnical engineer on the basis of laboratory tests on tube samples (not cuttings) obtained from shallow borings under his supervision following a twenty-four-hour curing period. This engineer shall develop recommendations on the need for any additional injections.

8. In the event that more than three injection passes are required, the surface of the injected area shall be scarified to a depth of at least eight inches and re-compacted prior to the next injection.

9. The surface of the injected area should be sealed or otherwise protected against moisture loss as soon as possible after acceptance of the water injection process.

-11- JM184840

GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR

CHEMICAL - PRESSURE INJECTION

1. The chemical ionic stabilizer should be mixed with clean water at the concentration recommended by the manufacturer.

2. The lower portion of the injection nozzle shall consist of a hole pattern that will uniformly disperse the chemical throughout the entire depth.

3. Injection pressures should be adjusted to disperse as large a volume as possible within a pressure range of 200 to 250 pounds per square inch.

4. Injection pipe shall be forced downward (not jetted or washed) in twelve to 18-inch intervals, to a depth of 4 feet.

5. Spacing for the injections not to exceed three feet on center each way, and injections shall be carried at least one foot outside curb lines. Subsequent injections, if necessary, should be offset from initial locations in a pattern that maximizes distribution of the mixture.

6. After the chemical injection is completed, the soils shall be evaluated by the owner's designated geotechnical engineer on the basis of laboratory tests on tube samples (not cuttings) obtained from shallow boring under his supervision following a seventy-two-hour curing period. This engineer shall develop recommendations on the need for any additional injections should the average of 3 swell tests per test boring exceed one percent.

7. The surface of the injected area should be properly compacted and sealed as soon as possible after acceptance of the injection process.

-12- JM184840

- -~ , -;(~f;;.f;;.

. r\ 5' . ,--::r..G· ~'I:"/

UB~---B:~-ro I 4-5I PROPOSED BUILDING

f1 ~B-3 I PROPOSED BUILDINGi..-----------~

r--'I-------~j19-41 1~IC_6 I I I IL_\' ~\

o 50 100 FEET,-..-.APPROXIMATE SCALE

PLAN OF BORINGS L~ II Ellerbee Walczak, Inc. Coleman WTP Improvements

Peach Street EWI Project No. JM184840 Coleman, Texas

a 50 100 FEET

APPROXIMATE SCALE

0">.2'··

':;

fA

::;;,

/"

~L[G[ND:

l __""~ Boring Location

oo ~

D AUSTIN STREET

~

./ l ····'·····;······0 D

PLAN OF BORINGS C:;j ~ U Ellerbee Walczak, Inc. Coleman WTP Improvements

Peach Street EWI Project No. JM184840 Coleman, Texas

~

~ b (!)

::> '" !z a ~

i (!)

~ '" ~ :::> ..J o (.)

ill

~ o

Ellerbee-Walczak, Inc. 4501 Broadway Avenue Haltom City, Texas 76117 Telephone: 817-759-9999 Fax: 817-759-1888 CLIENT Jacob & Martin

PROJECT NUMBER JM184840

DATE STARTED 8122/18 COMPLETED 8/22118

DRILLING METHOD Continuous Flight Auger

NOTES Auger refusal at 5.5'

uI IC)b:iE" 0. 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION w~ ~...J0 C)

0.0 Brown clay

-Tan silty clay

- with limestone seams -

--

~ Tan limestone 2.5 - with clay seams

-

-

Bottom of hole at 6 feet.

BORING NUMBER B-1

PROJECT NAME WTP Improvements

PROJECT LOCATION Peach St. Coleman. TX

GROUND ELEVATION ....!N""/A"'----___

GROUND WATER LEVELS:

PAGE 1 OF 1

AT TIME OF DRILLING -'!D"'rvL--____________

AT END OF DRILLING --'D~rv..L-____________

AFTER DRILLING --

w a. 1: w ...J a. :iE « (/)

.\ SS N:::: 27

II

~THD T:: 1.5"/100

~THD T = 0.34"1100

fZ

~ Z o~

u~ (/) w z u:::

9 34 19 15 65

~L___~L_~_______________________________________~______________~_~~__~_~__~__...J

FIGURE 3

Ellerbee-Walczak, Inc. BORING NUMBER B-2 4501 Broadway Avenue PAGE 1 OF 1Haltom City, Texas 76117 Telephone: 817-759-9999 Fax: 817-759-1888 CLIENT Jacob & Martin PROJECT NAME WTP Im~rovements

PROJECT NUMBER JM184840 PROJECT LOCATION Peach St. Coleman, TX

DATE STARTED 8/22/18 COMPLETED 8/22/18 GROUND ELEVATION N/A


DRILLING METHOD Continuous Flight Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING Dr!

AT END OF DRILLING Dr!

NOTES Auger refusal at 5' AFTER DRILLING .w ATIERBERG ILU ~ g w~ JMm

z 0..

CD....; LU J:

U > LLE a::~ > I-Ie> l ou. !:::c :::>1 z

li:e LU '~ci-_cTB I- Z u I-o~0..0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION zo 91 i=!::: §~LU-' ~...J ...J g;:-(I)C:~'- :::>8 Cl)LU :::> ue....

0.. (/)~_~<I)<U -I CI)::?;0 Oz o~ 1-0 CI)e> ::?; 3: ti ~ ~ a.a.. > :5:J Cl)z.2 o<l>:i:" a:: ::?;o :J...J LU« c:o.s,:,:~::;8 :5CI) 0 U 0.. Z

0.0 z~a..a::oa:: 0.. u::: I~ Brown silty clay

i\ SS N;; 16 7 33 18 15

-Tan silty clay II

-

~

I~ Tan limestone 2.5 - with clay seams

-

-

- ~ THO T = 9"/90

5.0 Bottom of hole at 5 feet.

~ THO T =0.38"/100

FIGURE 4

0.0

Ellerbee-Walczak, Inc. 4501 Broadway Avenue Haltom City, Texas 76117 Telephone: 817-759-9999 Fax: 817-759-1888 CLIENT Jacob & Martin


DATE STARTED -,,8,-,-,12.,..21,,-,1~8~__ COMPLETED 8122118



():J:

:I:C)I-~ 0. 0c.¢:: MATERIAL DESCRIPTION w~ ~...JCl

C)

BORING NUMBER B-3 PAGE 1 OF 1

PRO.IECT NAME WTP Improvements

PROJECT LOCATION Peach St. Coleman. TX

GROUND ELEVATION ~N=/A,-,--___


AT TIME OF DRILLING -,D~ryL-____________

AT END OF DRILLING -,",D'-.Iry~____________

AFTER DRILLING 000

W 0.

~ W ...J 0.

~

IZ W IZ o~

()~ (/") w z u:

Brown silty clay

-N =49 10 39 19 20SS

Tan silty clay II- with limestone seams -

-Tan limestone

- with clay seams 2.5 !~

- I~ Bottom of hole at 4 feet.

~ THO T = 0.38"/100

l:::'" ~ .... e (!) f/) ::> .... z a 2

i (!)

~ f/) z ::E

~ ili :x: (.)

I!: @ __-L______________________________________~____________ __~(!)L-__~ ~ __~~__~__~~

FIGURE 5

Ellerbee-Walczak, Inc. BORING NUMBER B-4 4501 Broadway Avenue PAGE 1 OF 1Haltom City, Texas 76117 Telephone: 817-759-9999 Fax: 817-759-1888 CLIENT Jacob & Martin PROJECT NAME WTP Improvements

PROJECT NUMBER JM184840 PROJECT LOCATION Peach St. Coleman. TX

DATE STARTED ~8",",/2""21,,-,1,-,,,8___ COMPLETED ~"""-''-=--__ GROUND ELEVATION -'N-'!./A""--___


DRILLING METHOD Continuous Flight Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING ....!D~ryL-____________

AT END OF DRILLING ~D~ryJ....____________

NOTES Auger refusal at 10' AFTER DRILLING

w c.. ~ WMATERIAL DESCRIPTION ..J c.. ::2 « C/)

Brown silty clay

Tan silty clay 9 37 14 23N = 21SS

14 32 19 13N=8SS

- with limestone seam from 6'-6.5'

Tan limestone - with clay seams

SS N 50/2.5"


THO T = 0.38"/100

CI) z :::; ::;) ..J o (.)

:t: <Xl :t:

crl l-

S ~~--~~---------------------------------------

FIGURE 6

Ellerbee-Walczak, Inc. BORING NUMBER B~54501 Broadway Avenue PAGE 1 OF 1Haltom City, Texas 76117

Telephone: 817-759-9999 Fax: 817-759-1888 CLIENT Jacob & Martin PROJECTNAME~~~~~~~______________

PROJECT NUMBER

DATE STARTED -=~'-"'-__ COMPLETED 8/22118 GROUND ELEVATION -'.N.!'-'/A"'--___


DRILLING METHOD Continuous Flight Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING ....!D~ryL-____________

AT END OF DRILLING ~L-____________

NOTES Auger refusal at 5.5' AFTER DRILLING

UJ a. ~ UJMATERIAL DESCRIPTION ....I a. ::; ~

SS N=40 9 37 22 15

SS N:= 50/4"

Brown clay

Tan silty clay - with limestone seams

THO T:= 0.38"/100

FIGURE 7

Ellerbee-Walczak, Inc. 4501 Broadway Avenue Haltom City, Texas 76117 Telephone: 817-759-9999 Fax: 817-759-1888 CLIENT

DATE STARTED -=='-=-__

Jacob & Martin

PROJECT NUMBER

COMPLETED 8/22/18



MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Brown clay


Bottom

!zc; ~

I ~

i..., r/)

3 z

8 :x: Ol :x:

~


PROJECTNAME~~~~~mn~________________

GROUND ELEVATION -'N""/A"'--___


AT TIME OF DRILLING ....!:!.!~____________

AT END OF DRILLING ....!:!.!~_____________

AFTER DRILLING

III

W s: 0Cl. iIi . ...;

~ 8U: LL:c w =..... 0-_0-8...J (jj(jj(/.)t:.!!!~Cl. s: <I> (jj 8 :!i~

..sd5 § li>':2"~ m t:1-Cl. .. 0 (/.)

z;:6.:cia~

Tan silty clay SS N = 50/5.75"

- with limestone seams

THO T =0.38"/100

~ IZ :::J >a:: 0

13 31 22 9

~L-____L-~_____________________________________~______________~__~__~__~~__-L__~

FIGURE 8

0.0

Ellerbee-Walczak, Inc. 4501 Broadway Avenue Haltom City, Texas 76117 Telephone: 817-759~9999 Fax: 817-759-1888 CLIENT Jacob & Martin


DATE STARTED 8122118 COMPLETED 8122118


NOTES Auger refusal at 4'

:x: I-~ 0.= MATERIAL DESCRIPTION w~

o


PROJECT NAME WTP Improvements

PROJECT LOCATION Peach St. ,",un~miiln. TX

GROUND ELEVATION ....:Nc.::;/A:..:.-___


AT TIME OF DRILLING ....:D:::;.:ry.L-____________

AT END OF DRILLING ...!D~ryL-____________

AFTER DRILLING --

I-w Z W

~ IZ

W O;?...J 0~a. CI)

w z~ u:: Brown silty clay - with sand seams 1\

7 42 18 24N 20SS

Brown clay



T = 0.5"/100~THD

10 :0::

~ b C)

~ fZ a 2 C)

i ~ en Z

~ J: m J: (.)

~ C)~____~~__________________________________________~______________~__~__~~~~__~__~w

FIGURE 9

SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART SYMBOLS TYPICALMAJOR DIVISIONS

DESCRIPTIONSGRAPH LETTER

WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL CLEAN SAND MIXTURES, LlTILE OR NO GWGRAVEL GRAVELS FINES

AND GRAVELLY

POORL Y-GRADED GRAVELS, SOILS (LITILE OR NO FINES) GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES, LlTILE ORNO FINES

GP

COARSE GRAINED GRAVELS WITH SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND

MORE THAN 50% GM SILT MIXTURES OF COARSE FRACTION

RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE

FINESSOILS

(APPRECIABLE CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SANDAMOUNT OF FINES) GC CLAY MIXTURES

WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY CLEAN SANDS SW SANDS, LlTILE OR NO FINES SANDMORE THAN 50% OF MATERIAL IS AND LARGER THAN SANDY

POORLY-GRADED SANDS, NO. 200 SIEVE SOILS (LITILE OR NO FINES) GRAVELLY SAND, LITILE OR NO FINES

SIZE SP

SANDS WITH SILTY SANDS, SAND - SILT MORE THAN 50% SMFINES MIXTURES

OF COARSE FRACTION

PASSING ON NO. 4 SIEVE CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAY (APPRECIABLE SCAMOUNT OF FINES) MIXTURES

INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR ML CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY

INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO SILTS MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY LIQUID LIMIT FINE AND CLLESS THAN 50 CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY GRAINED CLAYS CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS

SOILS

ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC OL SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY

MORE THAN 50% INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR OF MATERIAL IS DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR MHSMALLER THAN SILTY SOILS NO. 200 SIEVE

SIZE SILTS

INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH LIQUID LIMIT AND CH PLASTICITY CLAYS

GREATER THAN 50

ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO OH HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS

PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS

NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS Figure 10