report of geotechnical investigation proposed pre-k …

Corporate Headquarters

(610) 277-0880 FAX 277-0878

Southern New Jersey

403 Commerce Lane

West Berlin, NJ 08091 (856) 768-1001 FAX 768-1144

Central Pennsylvania (717) 697-5701 FAX 697-5702

Lehigh Valley

(610) 967-4540 FAX 967-4488 [email protected] www.earthengineering.com

REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

PROPOSED PRE-K TO GRADE 4, ELEMETARY SCHOOL

SCHOOL HOUSE ROAD

JOINT BASE MCGUIRE-DIX-LAKEHURST

NORTH HANOVER TOWNSHIP

BURLINGTON COUNTY, NEW JERSEY

Prepared For: North Hanover Township School District 331 Monmouth Road

Wrightstown, New Jersey

EEI Project No. 28337.J0

December 18, 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 1 II. SITE & PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................................... 1 III. FIELD INVESTIGATION ..................................................................................................................... 3 IV. LABORATORY TESTING ................................................................................................................... 4 V. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ............................................................................................................ 7

A. Geology ...................................................................................................................................... 7 B. Soils ............................................................................................................................................ 8 C. Groundwater .............................................................................................................................. 11

VI. EXISTING FEATURE DEMOLITION ................................................................................................ 13 VII. SITE PREPARATION ........................................................................................................................ 14 VIII. FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................. 16

A. Building Pad Construction and Floor Slab Support .................................................................. 16 B. Foundation Settlement Analysis ............................................................................................... 17 C. Rammed Aggregate Pier (RAP) Option ................................................................................... 18 D. Timber Pile Option .................................................................................................................... 21

IX. EXCAVATION METHODS ................................................................................................................ 23 X. GENERAL PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................. 24 XI. FILL AND COMPACTION ................................................................................................................. 25

A. Fill Criteria .................................................................................................................................. 25 B. Compaction Criteria ................................................................................................................... 28

XII. GENERAL SOIL PROPERTIES ........................................................................................................ 28

A. Lateral Earth Pressures ............................................................................................................ 28 B. Seismic Design Criteria ............................................................................................................ 30

XIII. CONSTRUCTION QUALITY CONTROL .......................................................................................... 30 XIV. LIMITATIONS .................................................................................................................................... 30

APPENDIX SITE LOCATION MAP

TESTING LOCATION PLAN BORING AND TEST PIT PROFILES

BORING AND TEST PIT LOGS LABORATORY TEST RESULTS SETTLEMENT PLATE DETAIL

1

I. INTRODUCTION

Earth Engineering Incorporated (EEI) has completed the Geotechnical Investigation for

the proposed Pre-K to Grade 4 Elementary School to be located on School Road in North

Hanover Township, Burlington County, New Jersey. The objective of this project has been to

investigate, document, and analyze the subsurface conditions present at the site. Based on the

conditions encountered and the results of the testing performed for this project, EEI has

developed geotechnical recommendations to aid in the design and construction of the proposed

school building, as well as general earthwork and construction guidelines for the development of

this site.

This study was performed in general accordance with EEI’s Proposal No. WB-5883

dated October 5, 2015. The scope of work for this project included a test boring and test pit

investigation, geologic analysis of site conditions, laboratory testing of soil samples, and a

geotechnical engineering analysis of the data obtained. The following report sections present

the results of our field and laboratory investigations and documents our recommendations

regarding the geotechnical engineering aspects of this project.

II. SITE & PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The project site is located on School Road in North Hanover Township, Burlington

County, New Jersey. School Road borders the site to the west. Wooded land borders the site

to the south and east. Existing school properties border the site to the north. The general

location of the project site is presented on the Site Location Map included within the Appendix of

this report.

A school building previously occupied the site. At the time of the field investigation, the

building superstructure was removed but the building slab and foundation elements remained.

2

These remnant building features are generally located within a portion of the proposed school

building. An existing shed is also located within proposed parking areas. Significant portions of

the proposed construction area are grass covered. Portions of the proposed building area and

parking lot are wooded. An asphalt paved driveway that provides access to the subject site also

traverses the proposed building area. In addition, asphalt playing courts and two (2) baseball

fields occupy the proposed building area. Several utilities also traverse the proposed

construction area. A meandering stream is located beyond the property border to the south and

east. An ephemeral stream, which is oriented in an east-west trend, is located beyond the area

of proposed construction to the north.

In general, the topography slopes from the south gently to steeply downward to the

north. The areas of the former building area and upper baseball fields are generally flat.

Traversing the site from south to north the site slopes moderately to steeply downward to the

lower playing fields. Maximum relief across the area investigated measures approximately 30.0

feet.

According to the Concept Exhibit plan, Drawing C-11, prepared by Pennoni Associates,

dated July 28, 2015 an approximate 1500,000 to 160,000 square foot steel and masonry

bearing building is proposed for construction at the site. The building will be 1 to 2 stories in

height. Maximum estimated column loads of 155 kips and maximum estimated walls of 3.2 kips

per foot were provided by Harrison-Hamnett, P.C.. In addition to the school building, new

driveway and parking lots are included in the planned site development.

The location of the proposed school building, relative to existing site features, is shown

on the Testing Location Plan, EEI Drawing No. 28337.J0-B-101, included in the Appendix of this

report.

3

III. FIELD INVESTIGATION

Twenty-seven (27) standard earth borings were originally proposed to be conducted at

the project site. Due to weak soil conditions several borings were extended beyond the

proposed drilling depth. Consequently, borings B-7 and B-18 were not performed. EEI also

adjusted the depths of several parking lot borings to maintain the project drilling budget. The

test borings were completed by F.M. & W. Drilling Company of Bellmawr, New Jersey on

November 3, 4, 5, 6 and 9, 2015.

The test borings were advanced using a truck mounted drill rig equipped with hollow

stem augers and split spoon samplers. Split-spoon samples, conducted in accordance with

ASTM standard D1586, were taken at regular intervals throughout the depth of the borings.

Standard Penetration Test (SPT) values were recorded for each sample. The SPT values,

which are a measure of soil density and consistency, are the number of blows required to drive

a 2-inch (outer diameter) split-barrel sampler one foot using a 140-pound weight dropped 30

inches. The number of blows required to advance the sampler over the 12 inch interval from 6

to 18 inches is considered the "N" value, or the SPT value which is recorded on the boring and

test pit profiles, Sheet 1 through 7, included in the Appendix. Test boring logs containing

sample depths, descriptions of the materials encountered, and SPT values are also included in

the Appendix.

Six (6) test pits, designated as TP-1 and TP-6, were performed within the proposed

construction areas. Test pits TP-1, TP-2, and TP-3 were performed to evaluate the limits of a

potential organic zone observed in boring B-4. As detailed below, organic testing from these

locations indicate an organic content of less than 2 percent indicating the layer observed is

inorganic. Test pits TP-4 and TP-5 were conducted in an area of the site requiring potential

significant excavation to achieve proposed parking lot grading. Test pit TP-6 was performed to

4

evaluate the existing foundation elements. The test pits were excavated on November 17, 2015

by Advantage Site Work of Little Egg Harbor, New Jersey utilizing a Volvo Ec1600 track-hoe.

The test borings and test pits were field located by scaling and measuring distances

from existing site features. The ground surface elevations at the testing locations were

estimated using the topographic contours shown on the referenced Concept Scheme plan.

Supervision and monitoring of the test boring and test pits were provided by a representative of

Earth Engineering Incorporated. The relative location and corresponding number of each boring

and test pit, relative to the existing and proposed site features, is shown on the Testing Location

Plan.

IV. LABORATORY TESTING

All soil samples were taken to EEI's soils laboratory and visually classified by our

engineers. In addition to visual classification, nine (9) representative soil samples recovered

from the subsurface investigation were subjected to laboratory classification analysis. The

laboratory testing conducted on the samples consisted of standard classification testing, in

accordance with ASTM standard D2487, to verify visual classifications and to establish

engineering parameters required for foundation design analysis. The tests performed included

Particle Size Analysis (ASTM D422), Atterberg Limits Determination (ASTM D4318), and

Natural Moisture Content (ASTM D2216). One (1) Moisture-Density test (ASTM D698,

Standard Proctor) was also conducted on a bulk sample of soil retrieved from the site.

The results of the laboratory testing conducted are presented in Table I. Gradation

curves, graphically depicting the results of the particle size analyses, in addition to results of the

Moisture Density testing are included in the Appendix.

5

TABLE I - LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

Boring Location B-2 & B-3 B-4 B-14 B-17

Sample Number S-2, S-3 S-1, S-2 S-5, S-6 S-6

Sample Depths 4.0’ – 6.0’ 0.0’ – 4.0’ 8.0’ – 12.0’ 13.0’ – 14.5’

Stratum Stratum I Stratum I Stratum II Stratum II

Particle Size Distribution

1.5" 100 100 100 100

3/4” 100 100 100 100

3/8" 100 100 100 100

No. 4 100 100 100 97.6

No. 10 100 99.9 99.2 92.9

No. 40 83.6 89.3 82.0 86.1

No. 100 23.6 62.4 71.6 81.7

No. 200 20.4 31.6 54.1 65.2

Atterberg Limits

Liquid Limit Non-Plastic Non-Plastic Non-Plastic Non-Plastic

Plastic Limit Non-Plastic Non-Plastic Non-Plastic Non-Plastic

Plasticity Index Non-Plastic Non-Plastic Non-Plastic Non-Plastic

Natural Moisture Content (percent) 17.6 12.5 33.8 35.4

Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) Group Symbol

SM SM ML ML

ASTM Group Name Silty Sand Silty Sand Sandy Silt Sandy Silt

Organic Content (percent) (ASTM D2974 Loss on Ignition)

-- -- -- 5.46

6

TABLE I - LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

Boring Location B-17 B-19 B-20 B-22 TP-4

Sample Number S-7, S-8 S-6, S-7 S-1, S-2 S-4, S-6 S-1

Sample Depths 18.0’ – 25.0’ 10.0’ – 15.0’ 1.0’ – 4.0’ 6.0’ – 12.0’ 4.0’ – 4.5’

Stratum Stratum III Stratum II Stratum I Stratum II Stratum I

Particle Size Distribution

1.5" 100 100 100 100 100

3/4” 100 100 100 100 100

3/8" 100 100 100 100 100

No. 4 100 100 100 100 100

No. 10 100 99.6 99.8 99.8 99.7

No. 40 86.3 99.0 85.8 98.7 74.0

No. 100 17.9 98.4 60.3 98.2 37.0

No. 200 13.6 68.8 29.4 85.9 15.1

Atterberg Limits

Liquid Limit Non-Plastic Non-Plastic Non-Plastic Non-Plastic Non-Plastic

Plastic Limit Non-Plastic Non-Plastic Non-Plastic Non-Plastic Non-Plastic

Plasticity Index Non-Plastic Non-Plastic Non-Plastic Non-Plastic Non-Plastic

Natural Moisture Content (percent)

27.5 24.9 7.4 28.0 6.9

Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) Group Symbol

SM ML SM ML SM

ASTM Group Name Silty Sand Sandy Silt Silty Sand Silt Silty Sand

Optimum Moisture Content (percent) (ASTM D698)

-- -- -- -- 110.3

Maximum Dry Density (pcf) (ASTM D698)

-- -- -- -- 9.6

7

Additional laboratory analysis included organic content testing, the results of which are

shown below in Table II.

TABLE II - Organic Content Testing

Sample Depth

Organic Content, %

(ASTM D2974)

Moisture Content

Stratum

B-4 3.8’ – 4.5’ 0.16 13.0 Stratum I

B-10 13.0’ – 14.0’ 6.08 38.0 Stratum II

B-17 13.0’ – 14.5’ 5.46 35.4 Stratum II

TP-102 3.6’ – 4.6’ 1.21 10.8 Stratum I

TP-104 3.3’ – 4.1’ 0.79 9.8 Stratum I

V. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

A. Geology

According to the 1998 Bedrock Geologic Map of Central and Southern New Jersey, the

area investigated is underlain by the Kirkwood Formation Lower Member (Geologic Symbol -

Tkl) near contacts with the Vincentown Formation (Geologic Symbol – Tvt).

The Kirkwood Formation is lower Miocene in age and consists predominantly of sand

and clay. The upper sand facies consists of fine to medium grained massive to thick bedded

and cross-bedded light yellow to white sand with extensive iron oxide staining in near surface

beds. The lower thick bedded strata commonly consists of clay or clay silt sequences which are

typically dark gray in color and occasionally contain wood fragments, lignitized logs, twigs and

plant debris.

The Vincentown Formation is Paleocene in age and is primarily quartz and glauconite

sand, medium grained, well to poorly sorted, dusky yellow to pale gray in color. This formation

weathers orange brown or red brown and is typically very glauconitic and clayey. Feldspar and

8

mica are minor sand constituents.

Based upon the observations made during the field investigation, the natural soils

encountered throughout the test borings appeared to be typical of Kirkwood Formation Lower

Member and Vincentown Formation.

B. Soils

Each of the soil samples recovered from the testing operation was examined and

visually classified by EEI. One (1) material described as FILL and three (3) naturally occurring

soil strata were observed at this site. The bedrock surface was not encountered to the depths

achieved.

A surface layer of topsoil was encountered at most test locations. The topsoil thickness

varied from 2.5 to 7 inches. The ability of the topsoil to support plants and vegetation was not

determined and is not implied by EEI. In addition, the depth or thickness of topsoil is expected

to vary across the project area and may differ from that stated above.

Cross-sections of the borings and test pits, displaying the various strata and other

information obtained from the field investigation are included on the boring and test pit profiles.

The test boring and test pit information is further detailed on the boring and test pit logs also

included in the Appendix. A general description of each stratum is as follows:

FILL

The soil designated as FILL is visually described as a yellowish brown to orange brown,

brownish green and gray fine to coarse Sand, trace to some Silt, no to little Gravel, no to little

Concrete Fragments. This material was encountered at the ground surface or below the

surficial materials in borings B-1, B-10, B-13, B-14 B-15, B-16, B-23, and B-25, and test pit TP-

9

6. Where found the FILL extends to depths ranging from 0.7 to 7.8 feet below the existing

ground surface. This soil appears typical of the reworked natural soil found at the site.

SPT values ranging from 5 to 11 blows on the sampling barrel per foot of penetration

were recorded while sampling this soil. Based on the SPT values, the FILL exists in a loose to

medium dense state.

STRATUM I

The material designated as Stratum I is visually described as a multi-colored fine to

medium Sand, little to some Silt, no to little Gravel, no to trace Clay. As determined by

laboratory testing, the USCS Group Symbol for representative samples of this soil is SM. The

assigned ASTM Group Name for the samples tested is Silty Sand. Stratum I was encountered

in each test boring with the exception of boring B-14 and each of the test pits with the exception

of TP-6. Where found the Stratum I soil extends downward to the Stratum II or Stratum III soils

or to the conclusion depths of the borings or test pits.

It is noted that a gray and dark brown layer of soil was observed within Stratum I in

boring B-4, and test pits TP-1, TP-2, and TP-3. Due to the appearance of this soil and a slight

organic odor, EEI performed organic content testing on three (3) representative sample of this

layer retrieved from boring B-4 and test pits TP-2 and TP-3. Laboratory testing of

representative samples measured organic contents ranging from 0.16 to 1.21 percent,

respectively. Based on these measured organic contents this layer is considered inorganic and

will not impact the proposed site development.


were recorded while sampling the Stratum I soil. Based on the SPT values, Stratum I exists in a

very loose to medium dense state.

10

STRATUM II

The soil designated as Stratum II is visually described as multi-colored Silt, little to some

fine Sand, no to trace clay, and no to trace organics. As determined by laboratory testing, the

USCS Group Symbol for representative samples of this soil is ML. The assigned ASTM Group

Names are Silt and Sandy Silt. Although portions of this soil appeared cohesive, laboratory

testing determined this soil is non-plastic. As received moisture contents for the Stratum II

samples tested ranged from 24.9 to 35.4 percent. The high moisture content of this soil resulted

in some samples of this soil appearing very moist to wet. However, the recorded groundwater

levels were measured below this stratum. Thus, the Stratum II soil may be acting as a limiting

zone that has such low permeability that it effectively restricts the downward passage of

infiltrating water. Stratum II was encountered in borings B-10 through B-22 and B-24 and test

pit TP-6. Where observed this soil extended to the Stratum III soil or the conclusion depth of the

borings and test pit.

It is noted that a gray and dark brown layer of soil was also observed Stratum II in

borings B-10 and B-17. Due to the appearance of this soil and a slight organic odor, EEI

performed organic content testing on two (2) representative sample of this layer retrieved from

borings B-10 and B-17. Laboratory testing of representative samples measured organic

contents of 6.08 and 5.46 percent, respectively. Foundation construction measures will bypass

the soils containing organic material and thus will not impact the proposed site development.


were recorded while sampling this soil. Based on the SPT values, Stratum II exists in a very

loose to medium dense state. In general, the Stratum II soil exists in a very loose to loose state.

11

STRATUM III

The soil identified as Stratum III is described as a multi-colored fine to medium Sand,

little to some Silt, no to little Gravel. As determined by laboratory testing, the USCS Group

Symbol for a representative sample of this soil is SM. The assigned ASTM Group Name is Silty

Sand. Laboratory analysis determined the sample tested to be non-plastic and possess a

moisture content of 27.5 percent. Stratum III was encountered in each of the borings conducted

within the building area. Where observed this soil extended to the conclusion depths of the

borings.

SPT values ranging from weight of hammer (zero blows) per foot of penetration to 50

blows on the sampling barrel per four inches of penetration were recorded while sampling this

soil. Based on the SPT values, Stratum III exists in a very loose to very dense state.

C. Groundwater

Groundwater was encountered in most of the borings completed. The recorded initial

and subsequent depths to groundwater range from 5.5 to 23.0 feet below the existing ground

surface. The groundwater depths correspond to high groundwater elevations ranging from 88.0

to 94.8 feet. Table III below details the groundwater level readings at the test locations.

Groundwater level readings are also shown on the boring profiles and logs.

Based on the anticipated building finished floor elevation of 109.0 feet, excavation

necessary for foundation installation is not expected to encounter the recorded groundwater

levels. It should be noted that the groundwater observations were made at the time of the

drilling operation and that groundwater table elevations may fluctuate with daily, seasonal, and

climatic variations.

12

TABLE III – GROUNDWATER DEPTH AND ELEVATION READINGS

Test Location

Approx. Ground Surface Elevation

(ft.)

Depth to Groundwater High Groundwater Elevation

(ft.) Initial Reading

(ft.)

Subsequent Reading

B-1 102.8 8.0 11.0’ @ 2.0 hrs. 94.8

B-2 100.1 9.0 9.0’ @ 4 hrs. 91.1

B-3 98.8 13.0 10.0’ @ 3 hrs. 88.8

B-4 98.3 8.0 7.0’ @ 24 hrs. 91.3

B-5 105.5 15.0 12.0’ @ 24 hrs. 93.5

B-6 101.6 8.0 11.0’ @ 4 hrs. 93.6

B-8 100.4 11.0 8.0’ @ 24 hrs. 92.4

B-9 98.2 10.0 9.0’ @ 24 hrs. 89.2

B-10 109.8 18.0 18.0 @ 72 hrs. 91.8

B-11 109.4 20.0 18.0 @ 24 hrs. 91.4

B-12 107.0 16.0 18.0 @ 4 hrs. 91.0

B-13 109.8 19.0 18.0 @ 72 hrs. 91.8

B-14 107.0 19.0 19.0 @ 3 hrs. 88.0

B-15 112.0 23.0 22.0’ @ 24 hrs. 90.0

B-16 110.0 18.0 18.0 @ 72 hrs. 92.0

B-17 109.2 20.0 20.0’ @ 2 hrs. 89.2

B-19 112.0 Dry Collapse @ 22.0’, Dry @ 24.0 hrs.

--

B-20 110.0 20.0 20.0’ @ 1 hr. 90.0

B-21 109.2 19.5 18.0’ @ 72 hrs. 91.2

B-22 108.7 21.0 19.0’ @ 24 hrs. 89.7

B-23 108.0 Dry Dry @ 4 hrs. --

B-24 106.8 Dry Dry @ 3 hrs. --

B-25 95.5 5.5 5.5 @ 3 hrs. 90.0

B-26 93.2 Dry Dry @ 2 hrs. --

B-27 95.1 Dry Dry @ 1 hrs. --

13

TABLE III – GROUNDWATER DEPTH AND ELEVATION READINGS

Test Location

Approx. Ground Surface Elevation

(ft.)

Depth to Groundwater High Groundwater Elevation

(ft.) Initial Reading

(ft.)

Subsequent Reading

TP-1 98.8 Dry Dry @ 1/4 hr. --

TP-2 98.8 Dry Dry @ 1/4 hr. --

TP-3 100.6 Dry Dry @ 1/4 hr. --

TP-4 123.0 Dry Dry @ 1/4 hr. --

TP-5 121.7 Dry Dry @ 1/4 hr. --

TP-6 109.0 Dry Dry @ 1/4 hr. --

VI. EXISTING FEATURE DEMOLITION

EEI recommends the complete removal of the remnant slab and foundation elements.

Existing utilities should also be completely removed from and rerouted outside the area of the

proposed building. Proof-rolling within demolition areas will be important since the soil

underlying these areas will be disturbed during the demolition effort. Upon confirmation of a

stable soil subgrade, the excavation can be backfilled up to the proposed construction subgrade

elevation with controlled compacted lifts of structural fill as detailed in the Structural Fill section

of this report. The removal of existing foundation elements and subsequent excavation

backfilling should be evaluated and monitored by a representative of the Geotechnical Engineer

of Record. Demolition debris including, but not limited to, concrete and asphalt should be

processed as detailed in the Fill and Compaction section if intended for reuse as structural fill.

EEI performed a test pit adjacent to the existing building to evaluate the existing

foundations. Figure 1 below shows an existing column foundation. EEI partially excavated

below the footing and probed below the footing and determined it was supported on the Stratum

II soil. The top of the 44” x 44” square footing is situated at a depth of 6.3’ and the bottom of the

14

footing is situated at a depth of 7.7’ below existing surrounding grades.

Figure 1 – Existing footing to be removed and replaced with compacted lifts of structural fill.

VII. SITE PREPARATION

In addition to demolition and removal of existing site features, initial site preparation

measures should include the complete removal of the asphalt and crushed stone pavement

subbase and all organics, including topsoil, trees, and root mass extending a minimum distance

of 5 feet beyond the proposed construction areas. Based on the building finished floor elevation

of 109.0’, fill placement of up to 12.0 feet will be required to achieve the corresponding build pad

15

subgrade elevation. Following excavation to achieve proposed grades and prior to the

placement of structural fill, the proposed building areas should be proof-rolled and compacted.

It is recommended that a steel drum vibratory roller having a minimum static weight of 10 tons

be utilized for this purpose.

Proof-rolling and compaction procedures are necessary to compact and verify the

integrity of the upper zones of the soils. Soft/loose zones of soil attributed to excessive soil

moisture, if any, can be aerated and dried in-place. Aeration and drying of excessively moist

soil are best accomplished in warm dry summer months. Following adequate drying time, the

soils can be densified in-place. Alternately, any soft/loose zones of soil can be removed and

replaced with structural fill, as outlined in the Fill and Compaction section of this report. The

proof-rolling effort should be observed and evaluated by a qualified representative of the

Geotechnical Engineer of Record.

The site should be graded during construction to direct surface runoff away from the

construction areas. Proper grading and management of surface runoff will help minimize

disturbance of the subgrade. Additionally, work areas should be sealed on a daily basis.

Furthermore, EEI recommends that all construction areas, including those which are excavated

to achieve the planned subgrade elevation, be proof-rolled immediately prior to the placement of

subbase stone and again prior to the concrete floor and asphalt pavement section. This will

allow for loose and weak areas to be observed and remediated.

16

VIII. FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

A. Building Pad Construction and Floor Slab Support

As previously discussed, the proposed finished first floor elevation of 109.0 feet will

require the placement of up to approximately 12.0 feet of structural fill to achieve the

corresponding building pad subgrade elevation. Engineering analysis indicates that the

placement of up to 12.0 feet of structural fill will result in consolidation of the underlying natural

soil. EEI estimates that the primary consolidation period should last approximately 30 days and

that building construction should be delayed until consolidation from the surcharge is complete.

Prior to the placement of structural fill, EEI recommends the installation of at least 6

settlement plates to monitor surcharge settlement. The settlement plate can consist of a vertical

metal pipe welded to a stiffened steel plate. Structural fill is then placed on the settlement

plates and around the pipe. Sections of pipe can be added as needed based on the thickness

of fill to be placed. A detail of the settlement plate is included in the Appendix, EEI Drawing No.

26101.J0-A-102. The settlement plates and attached pipe will enable monitoring of the vertical

settlement resulting from the surcharge load. The settlement plates should be monitored at

least two (2) times a week by a professional land surveyor with second order accuracy using at

least 2 control points outside the building construction influence area.

EEI will evaluate the survey results from monitoring of the settlement plates on a weekly

basis to determine when the actual duration of the surcharge can terminate. A detailed

settlement monitoring program can be provided by EEI at the request of the client.

Following completion of the building pad surcharge, EEI recommends the building slabs

be constructed as slab-on-grade. EEI recommends a minimum four (4) inches of granular sub-

base be placed beneath the slab to provide uniform support distribution between the subgrade

soils and the base of the concrete slab. Floor slabs supported on a minimum 4-inch thick layer

17

of a clean stone, AASHTO #57 or equivalent can be designed using a modulus of subgrade

reaction of approximately 150 psi/inch. This recommendation is provided that the soils are

compacted to a minimum of 98% of the soils maximum dry density as determined by ASTM

D698 (Standard) in fill areas and assume that adequate slab reinforcing and joints to control

cracking will be provided. EEI also recommends the use of a vapor barrier in conjunction with

the clean stone capillary break.

B. Foundation Settlement Analysis The results of the field study, supported by laboratory testing, revealed that the general

geotechnical cross-section within the building area consists of a loose to medium dense FILL

material, very loose to medium dense natural Stratum I soil and very loose to loose Stratum II

soil situated above very loose to very dense Stratum III soils. Based on the subsurface

conditions encountered in the test borings, the site soil density conditions are highly variable.

Engineering analysis of the site conditions indicates that settlements above acceptable limits

are expected if conventional shallow foundations are placed on or above the site soils.

EEI evaluated the foundation settlement based on the maximum anticipated building

column loads of 155 kips and a soil bearing pressure of 3000 psf. For the maximum anticipated

column load of 155 kips and a 3000 psf soil bearing pressure, total foundation settlement of up

to 3.0 inches and differential settlement of up to 2.0 inches are estimated. EEI also evaluated

foundation settlement utilizing building column loads of 155 kips and a bearing pressure of 2000

psf. For the maximum anticipated column load of 155 kips and a 2000 psf soil bearing

pressure, total foundation settlement of up to 2.25 inches and differential settlement in excess of

1.0 inch are estimated.

18

Therefore, Earth Engineering has evaluated several foundation support alternatives

which would meet the criteria of limiting settlements to generally accepted tolerances and

provide adequate bearing. Of the alternatives evaluated, those deemed most appropriate by

EEI for this site include Rammed Aggregate Piers and Timber Piles.

It is noted that the deep foundation system utilized for this project should bypass the

existing FILL materials and natural Stratum I and Stratum II soils and bear on the suitably dense

Stratum III soils. Furthermore, installation of the chosen deep foundation system within the area

of newly placed structural fill shall commence after monitoring of the fill consolidation is

completed. Deep foundation alternatives including rammed aggregate piers and timber piles for

support of the building column and wall loads are provided in the following subsections.

C. Rammed Aggregate Pier (RAP) Option

Rammed Aggregate Piers (Geopiers®) consist of aggregate piers constructed in soil to

reinforce the subsoils in order to support relatively high capacity spread and strip footings. The

RAP support elements are constructed by drilling a hole to create a cavity, removing a volume

of compressible subsoil materials, then building a bottom bulb of clean, open-graded stone

while vertically pre-stressing and pre-straining subsoils underlying the bottom bulb. The RAP

shaft is built on top of the bottom bulb, using well-graded highway base course stone (NJDOT

dense graded aggregate or equivalent) and/or an aggregate cement mix placed in twelve (12)

inch lifts. Densification of the bottom bulb and of the shaft lifts are accomplished by using the

impact ramming action of a modified hydraulic hammer. The tamper consists of a special steel

alloy shaft and a round, beveled tamper head. The beveled tamper head assists in transferring

force laterally during impact densification, resulting in pushing of aggregate against the confined

walls of the cavity. The nature of soil is to “push back”, creating significant lateral soil pressure

19

build-up in the matrix soil and lateral confinement to the RAP elements. In addition to

increasing shear resistance at the RAP element perimeter, the increased horizontal stress

improves the matrix soils and makes them stiffer. The structure is then supported on a standard

shallow foundation system, with an increase of bearing on a composite of the stone columns

and the adjacent pre-stressed soils. It should be noted that the recommended technique will

require proper implementation of a specified plan, including strict field controls to assure that the

objectives have been met and that costs have been controlled.

The licensed RAP foundation installer would design and install RAP foundations for this

project. Responsibility for settlement performance is accepted by the RAP design-build team. It

is recommended that the RAP foundation installer review and analyze the subsurface data

contained in this report using available structural load and design information. After designing

the support system, the RAP foundation installer should provide a cost and time estimate. The

cost estimate should include the cost to provide a full-scale RAP Modulus Load Test on-site to

verify design assumptions.

Considering the newly placed structural fill rammed aggregate piers are not required for

support of strip footings in areas of newly placed structural fill exceeding 3 feet in depth. Due to

the relatively light strip footing loads of 3.2 kips per linear foot a foundation undercut may be

substituted for strip footing support in lieu of RAP support in the upslope building areas that

requiring little or no structural fill placement. The strip foundation undercut should extend a

minimum of 2B (B = strip foundation width) below the proposed footing bottom elevation.

Subsequently the undercut shall be backfilled with controlled compacted lift of NJ DOT dense

graded aggregate or equivalent. A cost analysis should be performed to evaluate the cost

effectiveness of substituting the foundation undercut for strip foundation support versus strip

foundation support via rammed aggregate piers.

20

The following foundation system recommendations are provided by EEI, based upon

geotechnical engineering analysis of the data obtained during the investigation and the

assumption that the recommendations presented are followed.

1. Supported on the composite soil and RAP elements, column and strip footings are expected to be designed for an allowable composite bearing pressure of 6,000 psf.

2. Due to the variability in the FILL and natural Stratum I and Stratum II soils, it is recommended that the RAP be drilled through the FILL and Stratum I and Stratum II soils and into the suitably dense Stratum III soils.

3. The base of the foundations will be situated on the RAP columns and densified pre-

stressed soils. 4. EEI recommends at least one (1) modulus load test be performed. The modulus test

should be situated at a location(s) to be determined by the Impact Pier designer in cooperation with the Professional Geotechnical Engineer.

5. The Professional Geotechnical Engineer should observe and record all RAP installation activities in order to satisfy applicable building code requirements and prepare a permanent record of RAP activities, and recommended changes during production if field conditions warrant such action.

6. The Professional Geotechnical Engineer should prepare or be provided the opportunity

to review and comment on all RAP specifications.

7. The bottom of exterior footings and footings in unheated areas should be placed at least three (3) feet below the final exterior grade for protection from frost heave.

8. After the installation of the RAP, all footing bottoms should be completely dry and

cleaned of loose/soft soils or debris immediately prior to the placement of concrete. The base of the foundation excavation will require densification in place. The base of all foundation excavations should be compacted with a “jumping jack” tamper to densify and verify the integrity of the footing bottom. Soft/loose soils which cannot be compacted due to high moisture content shall be removed and replaced with structural fill, as deemed necessary by the site engineer.

21

D. Timber Pile Option

Standard Southern Pine, treated piles with an 8" minimum tip diameter and natural taper

and comply with ASTM D25 can also be used for support of the foundation loads. The

recommended design allowable pile capacity is 20 tons supported in the suitably dense Stratum

III soil. These recommendations were developed based upon the geotechnical engineering

analysis of the data obtained during the investigation. When driving the piles in the field, EEI

recommends that the ENR formula be satisfied to determine the terminal resistance of the piles.

This formula is presented as follows:

S= 2(Wh)H - C Qa

where: (Wh)H is the rated energy for the specific hammer used for the pile driving operation.

· Qa is the allowable pile capacity. · C is a constant, such that,

C = 1.0 for drop hammers and 0.1 for steam/air hammers. · S is the pile penetration (inches per blow) Based on the data obtained within the test borings, piles with lengths ranging from 23.0

to 27 feet below existing site grades are estimated for this project to allow for firm seating within

the suitably dense Stratum III soil. The calculated pile lengths correspond to an average length

of 25.0 feet. The pile length range and average length were determined based on the existing

ground surface elevations. At or below these depths, it is believed that piles will be firmly

seated within suitably dense Stratum III soil. These estimates are based on an engineering

analysis utilizing the data obtained from the geotechnical investigation. The actual average pile

length can vary significantly and therefore the final pile installation contract quantities should be

based on the actual depths driven.

22

It is possible that some piles may require driving to greater depths in order to achieve

their allowable load bearing capacities. Therefore, it is recommended that a test pile program

be implemented. The test pile program should consist of a minimum of three (3) test piles to be

driven across the site. This program will enable a suitable pile driving criteria to be developed at

the site and allow for a more accurate estimation of required pile lengths. Provided that the test

piles are driven to a design load equal to or greater than the required load bearing capacity of

20 tons per pile, these piles may be used as production piles.

Pre-drilling, spudding may be required to advance the timber piles through denser zones

of the Stratum I soil. Driving shoes will also be required to protect the pile tip and prevent

splitting of piles that encounter very dense soil conditions. It should be noted that pre-drilling,

spudding, and driving shoes, if required, will result in additional construction costs. Therefore,

the project specifications should include provisions for pre-drilling, spudding, and driving shoes.

Vibration or vibration-induced soil densification may result in settlement damage

to structures located within approximately 500 feet of the pile driving location. Any

neighboring structures should be thoroughly examined prior to and after pile driving with

the examinations fully documented with photographs. During the pile driving operation,

vibration-monitoring devices should be used to monitor the effects of the pile driving

operation.

During the driving of the test piles, the same equipment and procedures should be

followed as those reviewed and approved by the Geotechnical Engineer for the installation of

structural piles.

The requirements for the deep foundation system for the structure are outlined below.

1. Twenty (20) ton design capacity timber pile foundations are recommended for support of the building columns, load bearing walls, and canopy foundations.

23

2. For estimating purposes, the pile tip take-up depths are estimated to range from 23 to 27 feet below the existing ground surface. The average pile length has been estimated at 25.0 feet. The recommended pile design capacity and depth were determined based on engineering analysis. These will require verification by a test program prior to installation of production piles. Increased depths may be required to reach the specified terminal resistance, as weaker zones in Stratum I and Stratum II may be encountered during installation.

3. Pile settlements are expected to be negligible. 4. Pre-drilling through denser zones of the Stratum I soil may be required at some pile

locations. 5. Pile, pile cap, and structural slab design should be in accordance with local building

code, latest edition. 6. The bottom of exterior pile caps and grade beams should be placed a minimum of 3'

below finish grade for frost protection. 7. The pile driving operation should be performed under the supervision of a Professional

Engineer registered in the State of New Jersey and qualified in Geotechnical Engineering.

8. The pile caps should be designed to adequately spread uniform loading to the piles. 9. Prior to the installation of the piles, the contractor, experienced in foundation system

installation, should submit a pile driving scheme, a description of the hammer to be used, and a sequence of work to the Geotechnical Engineer for approval. Their credentials and the planned construction procedures should be reviewed and approved prior to issuing a notice to proceed.

IX. EXCAVATION METHODS

Excavation required for installation of the foundation elements and basin construction

will occur within the FILL material and natural soils. The bedrock surface was not encountered

in any of the test borings or test pits to the depths achieved. Therefore, rock excavation will not

be required for the proposed site construction.

The non-cohesive, granular nature of the FILL and natural Stratum I soils may require

the footings be formed due to the potential of excavation sidewall collapse. Excavations must

24

be sloped, benched or shored to prevent collapse during soil excavation and provide a safe

working environment. Sloping, benching, or shoring of all construction excavation should be

conducted in accordance with 29 CFR 1926, Subpart P. A competent person as defined by the

aforementioned regulation is required to confirm the stability of all excavations during

construction. The actual excavation wall slopes, benching, or shoring should be field

determined and should be based on the required depth of excavations and on the soil types

encountered.

X. GENERAL PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

It is the opinion of EEI that the existing FILL material and natural soil are generally

capable of providing pavement support. This recommendation is based on the assumption that

all pavement areas be proof-rolled and evaluated prior to the placement of the sub-base stone

and again prior to asphalt placement. It is imperative that a stable subgrade be realized to

ensure the durability and longevity of the pavement section.

Proof-rolling should be performed with a steel drum vibratory roller having a minimum

static weight of 10 tons. Excessively moist soil encountered at the pavement subgrade will

result in an unstable subgrade. Therefore, any excessively moist soil should be aerated,

sufficiently dried, and densified in-place. Alternately, stabilization can be performed via soil

over-excavation and replacement utilizing a geogrid stabilization material to provide a stable

pavement subgrade. It is also assumed that periodic maintenance, such as patching and

sealing, is performed at regular intervals. The proof-rolling effort and evaluation should be

conducted under the supervision of the Geotechnical Engineer of Record.

25

XI. FILL AND COMPACTION

A. Fill Criteria

Fill material which supports foundations, slabs, and pavements, in addition to material

used for retaining wall backfill is considered structural fill. Following the performance of the site

preparation measures as discussed in Section VII of this report, structural fill required to achieve

proposed construction elevations may be placed. Excavation necessary for site construction is

expected to make the FILL and natural Stratum I and Stratum II soils available for use as

structural fill.

Based on visual observation, the FILL material is non-plastic and consists primarily of

fine to coarse Sand, trace to some Silt, no to little Gravel, no to little Concrete Fragments. The

FILL material encountered in the test borings was free of organics and other deleterious

materials and appears suitable for reuse as structural fill. EEI recommends the FILL material be

further evaluated during site construction activities by the on-site Geotechnical Representative

during fill placement. FILL material containing significant organics or other deleterious material,

if any, should be stockpiled separately and used in non-structural areas of the site or disposed

of properly.

As determined by laboratory testing and visual observation, the Stratum I soil is non-

plastic and consists primarily of fine to medium Sand with varying secondary constituents of Silt

and Gravel. This predominately granular soil is suitable for reuse as structural fill for building

pad and parking lot/driveway construction. Laboratory testing as per ASTM D698 of a

representative sample of the Stratum I soil measured an optimum moisture content of 9.6

percent. The natural moisture content measurements of representative samples of Stratum I

ranged from measured 6.9 to 17.6 percent. Based on the laboratory results and visual

observation, portions of the Stratum I soil exists at or in proximity to its optimum moisture

26

content and is suitable for use as structural fill in its current moisture state. Excessively moist

portion of the Stratum I soil were generally located in the lower elevations of the site where fill

placement will be required to achieve proposed grading.

Laboratory classification testing determined the Stratum II soil consists of Sandy Silt and

Silt. The natural moisture content testing on these samples measured 24.9 to 35.4 percent.

Based on the laboratory testing and visual observation, the fine grained Stratum II soils

generally exist in an excessively moist state. Due to the primarily fine grained nature of the

Stratum II soil, significant difficulties achieving the required densities and percentage

compaction values will be realized if these on-site soils are re-used as structural fill during the

cool, wet Fall, Winter, and Spring months. Therefore, based on the elevated moisture content

and fine grained content, the Stratum II soils are not considered an ideal source of soil for reuse

as structural fill within building and driveway areas. The suitability of the Stratum II soil for reuse

as structural fill can be reevaluated during site construction activities by the on-site Geotechnical

Representative.

Excessively moist portions of the FILL and natural soil that are suitable for re-use as

structural fill will require time for aeration and drying to achieve the required densities and

percentage compaction values. Aeration and drying of excessively moist soil are best

accomplished during warm dry summer months.

The on-site soils will require careful moisture control as portions are fine-grained and

sensitive to moisture changes. Caution should be exercised during construction to not stockpile

and/or expose these soils to weather conditions for long periods of time. Materials stockpiled

for use as structural fill should be graded to shed water and rolled to maintain the soils. During

periods of wet site conditions, travel upon the building pad and construction areas should be

limited to minimize disturbance of the subgrade which will lead to instabilities.

27

Existing concrete slab and foundation elements may be utilized as structural fill provided

it is processed to less than 4 inches in diameter and mixed with the suitable natural soils to

provide a well-graded material. Likewise, existing crushed stone and asphalt may be

stockpiled and reused as structural fill materials in the driveway areas, as long as local

regulations are adhered. EEI recommends the asphalt be processed to less than 4 inches in

diameter and mixed with crushed stone or suitable on-site soil to provide a well-graded mix.

These materials will also prove useful in stabilizing any soft/loose subgrade conditions observed

during proof-rolling of the parking lot and driveway areas.

No other significant sources of structural fill material are present at the site. If

necessary, EEI recommends that a borrow source with a granular soil be established, or a

modified crushed aggregate, such as NJDOT dense graded aggregate, be utilized for filling

purposes at this site. Any structural or load-bearing soil for use is the building area, which is

required to be imported to the site, should meet the following criteria:

- Free of organic matter, ash, cinders, deleterious material, and debris.

- Particle size distribution that is well graded.

- Plasticity index less than 10.

- less than 15 percent by weight rock fragments larger than 3", less than 30 percent by weight larger than 3/4" and less than 30 percent by weight smaller than the No. 200 sieve.

The above criteria are provided as a general guideline for soil materials to be imported to

the site. Soil materials available for use as a structural fill should be submitted to the

Geotechnical Engineer of Record for evaluation and subsequent consideration prior to its

importation to the site.

28

B. Compaction Criteria

Structural fill should generally be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding eight (8) inches

in loose thickness and compacted with a minimum ten (10) ton steel-drum, smooth-barrel

vibratory roller. Fill material should generally be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding six (6)

inches in loose thickness where compaction by hand-operated equipment is necessary. The

optimum lift thickness and number of repetitions necessary to achieve the required percentage

compaction values should be determined in the field with test passes of the chosen compaction

equipment. All structural fill should be placed at the optimum moisture content ± 3% as

determined in accordance with ASTM D1557 and compacted to a minimum percentage of the

maximum dry density as indicated in Table IV.

TABLE IV - COMPACTION CRITERIA

Fill Area Percent of Maximum Dry Density as per ASTM D1557

Foundation Bearing and Slab-On-Grade Areas 95

Pavements 95

Non-Structural 92

XII. GENERAL SOIL PROPERTIES

A. Lateral Earth Pressures

The lateral earth pressures that may be used for design purposes of retaining walls or

walls constructed below grade are shown in Table V. Retaining walls which are restrained from

deflection such as loading dock, basement, or other structure walls, should be designed for the

at rest (Ko) condition. Retaining walls which are free to deflect such as landscaped walls should

be designed for the active (Ka) condition. The data for the natural soils was determined based

upon standard classification testing and/or visual classification of the site soil samples

compared to generally accepted published values for the various properties.

29

TABLE V - Soil Properties For Computation of Lateral Loads

Soil Property FILL & Stratum I Stratum II Stratum III

Angle of Internal Friction – φ 30.0o 28.0o 30.0o

Coefficient of Active Earth Pressure - Ka 0.33 0.36 0.33

Coefficient of Passive Earth Pressure - Kp 3.00 2.77 3.00

Coefficient of At Rest Earth Pressure - Ko 0.50 0.53 0.50

Coefficient of Sliding, Soil to Mass Concrete - µ 0.38 0.35 0.38

Moist Unit Weight (pcf) Ym 114.8 110.0 120.0

These values do not include a design safety factor. This information should only be

used by design professionals with experience in this type of design as certain soil parameters

can vary depending on anticipated loading conditions.

EEI typically recommends that a drainage system be installed for all walls constructed

below grade. The presence of a drainage system will serve to minimize hydrostatic pressures

caused by water trapped against the walls. If adequate drainage is not provided, the walls

should be designed to resist hydrostatic loads. Additionally, consideration should be given to

any surcharge loads at the top of walls.

If segmental walls are chosen for this project, the wall designer should determine if

additional investigations and testing are warranted depending on the type, size, and location of

the proposed walls. At a minimum, EEI recommends additional laboratory testing, specifically a

Direct Shear test (ASTM D3080), be conducted on representative soils if concrete masonry unit

(CMU) or mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) retaining walls are proposed for the site. The

results of this test may provide more aggressive soil parameters to be used in retaining wall

design, which may effectively reduce retaining wall costs.

30

B. Seismic Design Criteria

According to the 2009 International Building Code IBC Section 1615.1.1 Site Class

Definitions, and based on data from the borings and calculations performed by EEI, the average

properties in the top 100 feet correspond to Site Class E.

XIII. CONSTRUCTION QUALITY CONTROL

The development of this site will involve significant earthwork and foundation

construction activities, the quality of which directly impacts the validity of the recommendations

presented in this report. Based upon past experience, the most effective and economical

construction and earthwork inspection is obtained through the presence of a qualified

representative of the Geotechnical Engineer of Record. Therefore, it is recommended that the

site preparation, placement of structural fill, and foundation construction be observed, tested,

and documented in the field by EEI.

XIV. LIMITATIONS

The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based upon the

subsurface data collected and on details stated in this report. Should conditions arise which

differ from those specifically stated herein, or if design criteria are modified, our office should be

notified immediately so that our recommendations can be reviewed and revised, if necessary.

Unless specifically indicated to the contrary in this report, the scope of this report is

limited to only investigations and evaluations of the geotechnical aspects of the site conditions

and does not include any considerations of potential site pollution, contamination or other

environmental issues. This report offers no facts or opinions related to potential pollution or

contamination on the site.

31

It is emphasized that this analysis was made for the proposed Pre-K to Grade 4

Elementary School to be located on School Road in North Hanover Township, Burlington

County, New Jersey. Earth Engineering Incorporated does not assume any responsibility in

using this report to generate foundation design other than at the specific site addressed.

Respectfully submitted, Earth Engineering Incorporated

Jim Ward, P.G. Assistant Director - New Jersey Division

Thomas B. Louis, P.E. Director - New Jersey Division New Jersey Professional Engineer License Number GE 40918

APPENDIX SITE LOCATION MAP

TESTING LOCATION PLAN BORING AND TEST PIT PROFILES

BORING AND TEST PIT LOGS LABORATORY TEST RESULTS SETTLEMENT PLATE DETAIL

Site Location Map

Proposed Pre-K to Grade 4, Elementary School

School House Road

Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst North Hanover Township

Burlington County, New Jersey

-

77.8

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

S-7

S-8

S-6

S-5

S-4

S-3

S-2

S-9

DEPTH: 11.0' TIME: 2 HrsRECOVERY(%)

DEPTH (FT)

AUGER: SIZE: 4.0" I.D.

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN

PROJECT NUMBER 28337.J0

Topsoil (3")

CHECKED BY: T. Louis

DEPTH

84.3

.

.

.

.

S-1

.

571012

.

.

.

.

Stratum IIII - Gray fine to medium sand,little silt, trace cemented gravel

Stratum III - Black fine sand, little silt

Stratum III - Dark orange brown fine sand,little silt

Stratum I - Yellow brown to green fine tomedium sand, little silt

Stratum I - Brown fine sand, some silt,trace clay

FILL- Brownish green fine sand, little silt

1657

4101013

0002

2123

2333

4433

3778

4455

0.3

25.0

18.5

14.5

12.0

6.0

88.3

90.8

96.8

101.3

102.5

End of Boring (EOB) @ 25.0'

NA

1.5

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

WATER:

DRILLER NAME/COMPANY K. Ryan/F.M.&W. Drilling Company

DATE: 11/3/2015DATE: 11/23/15

GRAPHIC LOG

USCS

PROJECT NAME Proposed Pre-K to Grade 4 Elementary School

DATE:

1

;

BORINGLOG

END 11/3/15

** D = DRY, M = MOIST, W = WET

EQUIPMENT USED Truck Mounted Drill Rig

Geotechnical Engineers & Geologists

1

EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED

OF

BORING NO. B-1

AUGER DEPTH: 23.0'

RQD (%)

AASHTO

SHEET

H2O CONTENT

ELEVATION

INSPECTOR NAME J. Ward

PROJECT LOCATION School House Rd., McGuire AFB, NJ 08641

DESCRIPTION

;

NOT ENCOUNTERED

DEPTH: 8.0' TIME: 0.25 Hrs DATE: 11/3/2015

DRILLING METHODS Hollow Stem Augers/Split Spoon Sampler

SURFACEELEV. (FT) 102.8

START 11/3/15

;

RECOVERY

(Ft.)

REMARKS

23.0

20.0

18.0

25.0

0.0

16.0

14.0

10.0

8.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

-

S-6

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

S-8


PROJECT NAME Proposed Pre-K to Grade 4 Elementary SchoolSAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN

Topsoil (3.5")

TIME: 4 HrsDEPTH: 9.0'CHECKED BY: T. Louis

S-5

DEPTH

RECOVERY(%)

DEPTH (FT)


.

S-7

.

.

.

.

.

NA

.

.

Stratum I - Pale brown to orange brownfine sand, some silt

Stratum I - Green and gray fine to mediumsand, little silt

Stratum I - Green and orange brown finesand, little silt, trace clay


Stratum III - Gray fine sand, some silt

3355

79911

66912

11610

3333

891112

1358

NA

2122

25.0

NA

94.1

S-4

S-3

S-2

S-1

75.1

91.6

97.6

99.8

6.0

86.114.0

NA

NA

NA

NA

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

NA

2.5

0.3

EOB @ 25.0'

Hard drilling 17.0' to 18.0'

8.5

DATE: 11/3/2015


DATE: 11/23/15

1

;

BORINGLOG

WATER:

OF

DATE: 11/3/2015TIME: 0.25 HrsDEPTH: 9.0'

END 11/3/15

DATE:

USCS

GRAPHIC LOG

RQD (%)

BORING NO. B-2

SHEET

AASHTO



1


EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED

AUGER DEPTH: 23.0'

H2O CONTENT

ELEVATION



NOT ENCOUNTERED

DESCRIPTION

;


RECOVERY

(Ft.)

;


START 11/3/15

REMARKS

25.0

23.0

21.0

19.0

15.0

13.0

10.0

8.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

0.0

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

73.8

S-2

25.0

9.0

8.0

5.0

89.8

90.8

93.894.3

98.2

S-1

95.3



DEPTH


-

0.6

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

Asphalt (7")

Stratum - Greenish brown fine to mediumsand, little silt

Stratum - Dark brown fine to mediumsand, little silt

Stratum - Greenish brown fine to mediumsand, little silt

Stratum - Greenish brown to gray brownfine to medium sand, little silt trace clay

Stratum - Dark orange brown fine sand,little silt

Stratum - Grayish green fine sand, little tosome silt

4.5

2244

2333

3434

3454

791011

89/6

;

BORINGLOG

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

20182223

EOB @ 25.0'

NA

.

.

.

3.5

.

56810

.

.

.

.

DATE: 11/23/15


DATE: 11/4/2015


START 11/4/15

REMARKS

WATER:

END 11/4/15

OF

BORING NO. B-3


DATE:

USCS

GRAPHIC LOG

AUGER DEPTH: 23.0'

RQD (%)

AASHTO

SHEET




1

EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED

;

;

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER


DESCRIPTION


DEPTH (FT)


RECOVERY

(Ft.)


INSPECTOR NAME C. Lang

ELEVATION

H2O CONTENT

NOT ENCOUNTERED

20.0

1.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

14.0

18.0

23.0

25.0

16.0

-

S-7

-

-

-

-

-

-

-



BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

Topsoil (2.5")


S-6


TIME: 24 HrsRECOVERY(%)

DEPTH (FT)

DEPTH: 9.0'

DEPTH

.

S-8

.

.

.

.

.

NA

.

.

Stratum I - Brown , yellow brown, gray,and light green fine to medium sand,some silt

Stratum I - Green and orange brown finesand, some silt, trace clay

Stratum I - Orange brown fine sand, tracesilt

Stratum III - Black fine sand, trace silt

Stratum III - Gray fine sand, some silt

5865

6101315

1350/6

2112

5434

8101211

1258

NA

2222

NA

89.3S-5

S-4

S-3

S-2

S-1

81.3

90.3

92.8

98.1

9.0

73.325.0

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

8.0

5.5

0.2

EOB @ 25.0'

17.0

DATE: 11/23/15


DATE: 11/4/2015

1

WATER:

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN

;

BORINGLOG

BORING NO. B-4


END 11/3/15

AUGER DEPTH: 23.0'

DATE:

USCS

GRAPHIC LOG

OF

RQD (%)

SHEET

AASHTO



1


EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED

H2O CONTENT

ELEVATION



NOT ENCOUNTERED

DESCRIPTION

;


RECOVERY

(Ft.)

;


REMARKS

START 11/3/15

18.0

25.0

23.0

19.0

15.0

13.0

10.0

8.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

0.0

S-5

90.0

S-9

S-8

S-6

S-4

S-3

S-2

S-1

80.5

S-7

96.5

17.0 88.5

25.0

15.5

9.0

5.0

2.5

0.3

100.5

103.0

105.2

DEPTH: 12.0'


BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Stratum - Dark reddish brown, and darkbrown fine to medium sand, little silt

RECOVERY(%)

Stratum - Black fine to medium sand, littlesilt

Stratum I - Orange brown and gray fine tomedium sand, little silt

Stratum I - gray, tan, and brown fine sand,little silt

Stratum I - Gray fine to medium sand, littlesilt, trace gravel

Stratum I - Yellowish brown and orangebrown fine to medium sand, little silt

Topsoil (3")

1223

EOB @ 25.0'

2345

3345

6645

9999

DEPTH (FT)

1258

TIME: 24 HrsCHECKED BY: T. Louis


DEPTH

3386

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

1112

NA

.

.

46913

.

.

.

.

.

.

.


DATE: 11/5/2015DATE: 11/23/15

;

BORINGLOG

WATER:

1

END 11/4/15

OF

BORING NO. B-5

AUGER DEPTH: 23.0' DATE: 11/4/2015TIME: 0.25 HrsDEPTH: 15.0'

DATE:

USCS

GRAPHIC LOG

AASHTO

SHEET

RQD (%)




1

EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED



NOT ENCOUNTERED

H2O CONTENT

ELEVATION

DESCRIPTION

;

REMARKS

START 11/4/15



;


RECOVERY

(Ft.)

25.0

18.0

20.0

0.0

16.0

14.0

10.0

8.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

23.0

99.1

S-1

72.6

81.682.1

87.6

S-396.6

S-4

101.3

93.1

S-2

S-10

S-9

S-8

S-7

S-6

S-5

DEPTH

TIME: 4 Hrs


DEPTH (FT)

Topsoil (3")


DEPTH: 11.0'

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-


-

-

571012

.

.

.

52189

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Stratum III - Greenish gray fine sand, littlesilt

1735/6

Stratum III - Light Greenish gray fine sand,some gravel, little silt

Stratum III - Dark brown fine sand, little silt

Stratum I - Green and orange brown finesand, little silt

Stratum I - Green fine sand, little silt, traceclay

Stratum I - Light grayish brown fine sand,little silt

Stratum I - Green and orange brown finesand, little silt

0013

1112

2111

3222

3223

2554

3467

19.5

14.0

8.5

5.0

2.5

29.0

EOB @ 29.0'

0.3

RECOVERY(%)

20.0NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

WATER:


DATE: 11/3/2015DATE: 11/23/15

;

BORINGLOG

1

END 11/3/15

OF

BORING NO. B-6

AUGER DEPTH: 28.0'

DATE:


USCS

GRAPHIC LOG

SHEET

AASHTO


1


EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED


RQD (%)

;

ELEVATION



BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN


DESCRIPTION

RECOVERY

(Ft.)

H2O CONTENT

;

REMARKS

START 11/3/15



NOT ENCOUNTERED

16.0

14.0

12.0

10.0

19.0

6.0

29.0

4.0

2.0

0.0

8.0

21.0

23.0

28.0

25.0

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

S-9

S-8

S-7

S-6

S-5

S-4

S-3


DEPTH (FT)

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN



Topsoil (5")


DEPTH

75.4

.

.

.

.

.

S-2

.

.

.

.

Stratum III - Grayish black fine to mediumsand, some silt

Stratum III - Black fine to medium sand,little silt

Stratum I - Orange brown, green andbrown fine to medium sand, little silt

Stratum I - Dark brown and gray fine tomedium sand, little silt

Stratum I - Tan and light brown fine tomedium sand, little silt

7965

871010

8141617

2279

2334

5544

NA

10121414

1347

2212

25.0

24.0

9.5

4.5

3.0

76.4

90.9

95.9

97.4

100.0

NA

0.4

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

S-1

NA

EOB @ 25.0'

WATER:


DATE: 11/5/2015DATE: 11/23/15

USCS

DATE:


1

GRAPHIC LOG

;

BORINGLOG

END 11/4/15




1

EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED

OF

BORING NO. B-8

AUGER DEPTH: 23.0'

RQD (%)

AASHTO

SHEET

H2O CONTENT

ELEVATION



DESCRIPTION

; DEPTH: 11.0'

NOT ENCOUNTERED

TIME: 0.25 Hrs DATE: 11/4/2015



START 11/4/15

;

RECOVERY

(Ft.)

REMARKS

23.0

16.0

18.0

20.0

0.0

14.0

12.0

10.0

8.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

25.0

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

S-9

S-8

S-7

S-6

S-5




BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN

Topsoil (4")


DEPTH (FT)

S-2


DEPTH

.

.

.

.

.

.

NA

.

S-4

.

.

Stratum III - Black and grayish black fineto medium sand, little silt

Stratum III - Reddish brown and brownfine to medium sand, little silt

Stratum I - Yellowish brown, orange brownand greenish brown fine to medium sand,little silt

Stratum I - Yellowish brown and tan finesand, some silt

1112

25151718

20192325

1235

NA

4444

3344

4433

1356

2225

EOB @ 25.0'25.0

14.5

10.5

2.5

S-1

73.2

83.7

87.7

97.9

Hard Augering @ 17.5'

95.7

NA

0.3

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Moist @ 7.0'

S-3

WATER:

DATE: 11/5/2015DATE: 11/23/15


;

DATE:

GRAPHIC LOG

BORINGLOG

USCS

END 11/4/15

11



EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATEDGeotechnical Engineers & Geologists

RQD (%)

OF

BORING NO. B-9

AUGER DEPTH: 23.0'

SHEET

AASHTO


NOT ENCOUNTERED

H2O CONTENT

ELEVATION


DESCRIPTION

; DATE: 11/4/2015


DEPTH: 10.0' TIME: 0.25 Hrs


REMARKS

;

RECOVERY

(Ft.)

START 11/4/15

25.0

16.0

20.0

18.0

0.0

14.0

12.0

10.0

8.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

23.0

-

90.5

-

-

-

-

S-6

S-9

S-7

S-5

S-4

S-3

S-2

S-1

S-8

-

DEPTH (FT)

-

DEPTH: 18.0'RECOVERY(%)


DEPTH

TIME: 72 Hrs


Topsoil (6")


-

-

95.8

.

.

.

.

.

79.8

.

.

.

.

Stratum III - Black and gray fine tomedium sand, little silt

Stratum III - Green, gray, and yellowishbrown fine to medium sand, little silt

Stratum II - Dark brown silt, trace finesand and organics

Stratum I - Orange brown and gray fine tomedium sand, some silt

FILL - Orange brown fine to medium sand,little gravel and silt

5339

28202025

7678

4467

4566

4445

4567

2457

4434

30.0

19.3

14.0

9.7

2.0

0.5

EOB @ 30.0'

100.1

107.8

109.3

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

WATER:

DATE: 11/23/15


DATE:

GRAPHIC LOG

USCS

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN

1BORINGLOG

END 11/6/15

;


1

EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED

RQD (%)

DATE: 11/9/2015



OF

BORING NO. B-10

AUGER DEPTH: 28.0'

SHEET

AASHTO

ELEVATION

H2O CONTENT



DESCRIPTION

;


BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER




NOT ENCOUNTERED

START 11/6/15

REMARKS

RECOVERY

(Ft.)

;

20.0

25.0

15.0

28.0

0.0

23.0

18.0

13.0

10.0

8.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

30.0

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

S-8

S-7

S-6

S-5

DEPTH: 18.0'


TYPE/CORE RUN


Topsoil (3")

DEPTH (FT)

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

TIME: 24 HrsCHECKED BY: T. Louis

S-2


RECOVERY(%)

DEPTH

.

.

.

.

.

S-4

.

.

.


Stratum III - Dark orange brown and darkgray fine to medium sand, little silt

Stratum III - Greenish gray fine to mediumsand, little silt

Stratum II - Gray and yellow brown silt,some fine sand

Stratum I - Orange brown and gray fine tomedium sand, little silt

Stratum I - Yellow brown and light grayfine to medium sand, some silt

7656

NA

3477

2345

2334

2333

3323

1357

2232

18.0

25.0

NA

106.4

S-1

84.4

85.9

91.4

101.4

14.5

109.1

94.9

23.5

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

S-3

8.0

3.0

0.3

EOB @ 25.0'

NA

DATE: 11/5/2015DATE: 11/23/15


1BORINGLOG

WATER:AUGER DEPTH: 23.0'

OF


END 11/4/15

DATE:

USCS

GRAPHIC LOG

SHEET

BORING NO. B-11

AASHTO

;

1


RQD (%)


EARTH

ENGINEERING


ELEVATION



H2O CONTENT

NOT ENCOUNTERED

DESCRIPTION

;


RECOVERY

(Ft.)


;

START 11/4/15

REMARKS

20.0

23.0

18.0

16.0

14.0

10.0

8.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

0.0

25.0

104.0

S-1

77.0

80.0

87.3

94.5

S-3

101.0

S-4

106.7

98.0

S-2

S-10

S-9

S-8

S-7

S-6

S-5

19.7

12.5

9.0

6.0

3.0

30.0

EOB @ 30.0'

0.3

27.0

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-


-


-

Stratum III - Dark brown and gray fine tomedium sand, little silt and gravel

Topsoil (3")


Stratum III - Orange brown fine to mediumsand, little silt

Stratum II - Orange brown and gray silt,some fine sand

Stratum I - Pale brown fine sand, some silt

Stratum I - Yellowish brown and gray finesand, little silt

2224

3434

3357

101087

7111312

5131310

1258

Stratum I - Yellowish brown fine sand, littlesilt

DESCRIPTION


BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN

5342024

NA

2333

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

.

.

1111

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

WATER:


DATE: 11/3/2015DATE: 11/23/15

;

BORINGLOG

1

END 11/3/15

OF

BORING NO. B-12

AUGER DEPTH: 28.0'

DATE:


USCS

GRAPHIC LOG

SHEET

AASHTO


1


EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED


RQD (%)

;

ELEVATION




DEPTH: 18.0'

DEPTH

TIME: 4 HrsRECOVERY(%)

DEPTH (FT)

START 11/3/15

REMARKS

;


RECOVERY

(Ft.)

NOT ENCOUNTERED

H2O CONTENT


8.0

25.0

4.0

28.0

0.0

23.0

22.0

20.0

18.0

15.0

13.0

10.0

6.0

2.0

30.0

S-12

S-11

109.4


S-2

S-10

S-9

S-8

S-7

S-6

S-5

S-3

S-1

73.3

80.8

90.8

96.3

105.3

107.3

S-4

-


DEPTH

-


Topsoil (5")

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

141210

.

.

.

.

.

2234

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

12141416

Stratum III - Dark green fine sand, somesilt

Stratum III - Dark green and black finesand, little silt

Stratum III - Orange brown, yellowishbrown, and gray fine to medium sand, littlesilt

Stratum II - Gray and yellowish brown silt,little fine sand, trace clay


FILL - Pale brown fine to medium sand,little silt

2359

5435

5454

2244

2222

3233

4433

6764

4445

19.0

29.0

13.5

4.5

2.5

0.4

EOB @ 36.5'

Gravely sand interlayer @ 5.5' - 6.5'

36.5

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

WATER:

DATE: 11/9/2015


DATE: 11/23/15

1

;

BORINGLOG

OF

BORING NO. B-13

AUGER DEPTH: 34.5'


DATE:


USCS

GRAPHIC LOG

END 11/6/15Geotechnical Engineers & Geologists

AASHTO

SHEET


1


EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED

RQD (%) DESCRIPTION

;


DEPTH (FT)

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER


TYPE/CORE RUN


;

REMARKS

START 11/6/15

RECOVERY

(Ft.)

ELEVATION


H2O CONTENT


NOT ENCOUNTERED

6.0

28.0

0.0

2.0

4.0

25.0

36.5

34.5

23.0

30.0

8.0

20.0

18.0

15.0

13.0

12.0

10.0

33.0

105.0

106.4

90.0

S-4

S-11

S-10

S-9

S-8

S-7

103.0

S-5

94.5

S-3

S-2

S-1

73.6

77.0

85.0

S-6

Hard Augering @ 32.5'

0.6

2.0

DEPTH (FT)

EOB @ 33.4'33.4

30.0

22.0

17.0

12.5

4.0


DEPTH


-

-

24410

Stratum III - Gray fine to medium sand,little silt


Stratum III - Orange brown fine to mediumsand, little silt

Stratum III - Greenish brown fine tomedium sand, little silt

Stratum II - Gray and orange brown silt,some fine sand, trace clay

FILL - Gray fine to coarse sand, trace silt

3434

3322

2112

3333

3433

1234

2458

-

FILL - Pale brown fine to medium sand,little silt

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

12161212

Topsoil (7")


NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

2234

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

50/4

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

-

WATER:

DATE: 11/23/15


DATE: 11/8/2015

BORINGLOG

1

;

OF

BORING NO. B-14

AUGER DEPTH: 33.0'

DATE:


USCS

GRAPHIC LOG

END 11/8/15

AASHTO



1


EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED

SHEET

RQD (%) DESCRIPTION

;

DEPTH: 19.0' TIME: 3 Hrs

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN



NOT ENCOUNTERED

REMARKS

RECOVERY(%)


START 11/8/15

;

RECOVERY

(Ft.)

ELEVATION

H2O CONTENT



18.0

33.4

33.0

30.0

28.0

25.0

23.0

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

20.0

10.0

12.0

13.0

15.0

104.0

S-3

S-2

S-1

82.0

90.0

S-5

99.5

S-6

106.0

111.3

95.0

S-4

S-10

S-9

S-8

S-7


DEPTH: 24.0'

DEPTH


TIME: 24 Hrs

FILL - Orange brown fine to medium sand,little silt

DEPTH (FT)

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-


-

.

.

.

.

1216199

.

.

.

.

.

.

Stratum III - Dark reddish brown, gray, andblack fine to medium sand, trace silt

Stratum III - Greenish brown and yellowishbrown fine to medium sand, little silt

Stratum II - Gray and yellowish brown silt,trace fine sand, trace clay

Stratum II - Gray and yellowish brown silt,some fine sand

Stratum I - Light gray and orange brownfine sand, some silt

Stratum I - Yellowish brown and palebrown fine sand, little silt

2545

8765

8101110

4448

2334

2222

4645

5778

1213128

Some Gravel @ 4.5' - 5.0'

17.0

12.5

8.0

6.0

0.7

30.0

Moist @ 7.5'

EOB @ 30.0'

22.0

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

RECOVERY(%)


WATER:

DATE: 11/6/2015DATE: 11/23/15

1

;

BORINGLOG

END 11/5/15

OF

BORING NO. B-15

AUGER DEPTH: 28.0'

DATE:


USCS

GRAPHIC LOG


SHEET

AASHTO


1


EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED

RQD (%)

;

H2O CONTENT

ELEVATION


PROJECT LOCATION School House Rd., McGuire AFB, NJ 08641PROJECT NAME Proposed Pre-K to Grade 4 Elementary School

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN

DESCRIPTION

RECOVERY

(Ft.)

;

REMARKS

START 11/5/15


NOT ENCOUNTERED


15.0

13.0

12.0

10.0

18.0

6.0

0.0

4.0

2.0

8.0

20.0

23.0

25.0

30.0

28.0

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

S-9

S-8

S-7

S-6

S-5

S-4

S-3


DEPTH (FT)

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN



Topsoil (4.5")


DEPTH

85.0

.

.

.

.

.

S-2

.

.

.

.

Stratum III - Dark gray fine to mediumsand, little silt

Stratum III - Dark gray and green finesand, some silt

Stratum II - Yellowish brown and gray silt,little fine sand, trace clay

Stratum I - Light yellowish brown finesand, little silt

FILL - Yellowish brown fine sand, little siltand concrete fragments

5333

4357

6666

2579

2223

3211

NA

4555

2454

3334

25.0

18.5

13.5

6.5

4.5

91.5

96.5

103.5

105.5

109.7

NA

0.3

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

S-1

NA

EOB @ 25.0'

WATER:


DATE: 11/9/2015DATE: 11/23/15

USCS

DATE:


1

GRAPHIC LOG

;

BORINGLOG

END 11/6/15




1

EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED

OF

BORING NO. B-16

AUGER DEPTH: 23.0'

RQD (%)

AASHTO

SHEET

H2O CONTENT

ELEVATION



DESCRIPTION

; DEPTH: 18.0'

NOT ENCOUNTERED

TIME: 0.25 Hrs DATE: 11/6/2015



START 11/6/15

;

RECOVERY

(Ft.)

REMARKS

23.0

15.0

18.0

20.0

0.0

13.0

12.0

10.0

8.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

25.0

84.2

S-6

S-5

S-4

S-3

S-2

79.2

S-9

94.4

96.7

101.7

104.2

106.7

S-1

S-7

S-8

DEPTH (FT)


DEPTH

RECOVERY(%)

TIME: 2 Hrs


Topsoil (4")

DEPTH: 20.0'

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-


471214

.

108.9

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

2244

Stratum III - Black fine sand, trace to littlesilt

Stratum III - Dark green fine to mediumsand, little silt

Stratum II - Dark brown silt, some finesand, trace organics

Stratum I - Gray and yellowish brown finesand, some silt

Stratum I - Orange brown to gray fine tomedium sand, little silt

Stratum I - Yellowish brown and gray finesand, little silt

Stratum I - Orange brown to yellowishbrown fine to medium sand, little silt

5556

4458

3334

10966

4869

5777

1245

7.5

30.0

25.0

12.5

5.0

2.5

0.3

EOB @ 30.0'

14.8

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

WATER:

1

DATE:


END 11/9/15

GRAPHIC LOG

;

BORINGLOG


1


EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED


RQD (%)

BORING NO. B-17

OF

AUGER DEPTH: 28.0'

DATE: 11/9/15DATE: 11/23/15

SHEET

AASHTO

H2O CONTENT

;

USCS

ELEVATION



BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER


TYPE/CORE RUN

DESCRIPTION REMARKS

;

START 11/6/15


NOT ENCOUNTERED



RECOVERY

(Ft.)

6.0

28.0

2.0

30.0

0.0

25.0

23.0

20.0

18.0

15.0

13.0

10.0

8.0

4.0

Shelby tube S-2 retrieved from 11.0' to13.0' from B-19 offset

8.5

6.0

2.0

0.4

EOB @ 30.0'

22.0

Collapsed dry @ 22.0', 1/4 hr.

30.0

Shelby tube S-1 retrieved from 9.0' to11.0' from B-19 offset

Collapsed dry @ 22.0', 24 Hrs

15.0

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA


110.0

S-2

S-1

82.0

90.0

97.0

S-4

106.0

S-5

111.6

103.5

S-3

S-10

S-9

S-8

S-7

S-6

DATE:DATE: 11/23/15


;

1BORINGLOG


WATER:

.

.

.

.

4457

.

.

.

.

.

.

Stratum III - Dark green fine sand, little silt

Stratum III - Orange brown and gray fineto medium sand, little silt

Stratum II - Gray and orange brown silt,some fine sand

Stratum I - Brown and orange brown fineto coarse sand, little gravel, trace silt

Stratum I - Yellowish brown and palebrown fine sand, trace silt

3445

Topsoil (4.5")

5558

5458

3222

2323

6222

891013

2445

12121512

;

START 11/5/15

REMARKS


RECOVERY

(Ft.)



H2O CONTENT


ELEVATION

NOT ENCOUNTERED

END 11/5/15

OF

BORING NO. B-19

AUGER DEPTH: 28.0'

DATE:

DATE:TIME:DEPTH:

USCS

GRAPHIC LOG


SHEET

AASHTO

EARTH

ENGINEERING


1

X


RQD (%)

DEPTH


DEPTH (FT)

-

-

-

-

-

DEPTH: TIME:

-

-

RECOVERY(%)


-

-

-

;

DESCRIPTION


BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN

6.0

25.0

0.0

2.0

4.0

8.0

12.0

13.0

15.0

18.0

10.0

23.0

28.0

30.0

20.0

S-12

S-11

109.7


S-2

S-10

S-9

S-8

S-7

S-6

S-5

S-3

S-1

75.0

92.5

95.5

99.5

104.0

109.1

S-4

-


DEPTH

-


Concrete (4")

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

4456

.

.

.

.

.

2233

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

21213039

Stratum III - Black fine sand, trace silt

Stratum III - Orange brown and green fineto medium sand, some silt

Stratum II - Orange brown, green and graysilt, some fine sand

Stratum - Orange brown and gray fine tomedium sand, little silt

Stratum I - Light yellowish brown andorange brown fine to medium sand, somesilt

Crushed stone (7")78/6

3445

3334

2213

3233

3233

1111108

6679

6677

14.5

17.5

10.5

6.0

0.9

0.3

EOB @ 35.0'

Hard augering @ 32.5'

35.0

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

WATER:

DATE: 11/9/2015


DATE: 11/23/15

1

;

BORINGLOG

OF

BORING NO. B-20

AUGER DEPTH: 33.0'


DATE:


USCS

GRAPHIC LOG

END 11/9/15Geotechnical Engineers & Geologists

AASHTO

SHEET


1


EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED

RQD (%) DESCRIPTION

;


DEPTH (FT)

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER


TYPE/CORE RUN


;

REMARKS

START 11/9/15

RECOVERY

(Ft.)

ELEVATION


H2O CONTENT


NOT ENCOUNTERED

6.0

25.0

1.0

2.0

4.0

23.0

35.0

33.0

20.0

28.0

8.0

18.0

17.0

15.0

14.0

12.0

10.0

30.0

102.0S-4

S-3

S-2

S-1

79.2

S-6 94.7

S-7

105.2

107.2

108.9

90.7

S-5

S-10

S-9

S-8

DEPTH



Topsoil (4")

RECOVERY(%)

DEPTH (FT)

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-


-

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

3356

Stratum III - Dark green fine to mediumsand, little silt

Stratum III - Orange brown and green fineto medium sand, some silt

Stratum II - Yellowish brown and gray silt,little fine sand, trace clay

Stratum I - Brown fine to coarse sand, littlegravel


Stratum I - Light yellowish brown finesand, some silt

1159

3357

2567

3224

3222

7754

9999

44610

8121614

18.5

14.5

7.2

4.0

2.0

EOB @ 30.0'

0.3

30.0

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

DEPTH: 18.0'

NA

NA

WATER:

1


;

TIME: 72 Hrs

END 11/6/15

GRAPHIC LOG

BORINGLOG

1


EARTH

ENGINEERING


RQD (%)

AUGER DEPTH: 28.0'

BORING NO. B-21


OF

DATE: 11/9/2015DATE: 11/23/15

DATE:

SHEET

AASHTO

;


PROJECT LOCATION School House Rd., McGuire AFB, NJ 08641PROJECT NAME Proposed Pre-K to Grade 4 Elementary School

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN

DESCRIPTION

;

START 11/6/15

REMARKS

ELEVATION


RECOVERY

(Ft.)

H2O CONTENT

NOT ENCOUNTERED


DEPTH: 19.5' DATE: 11/6/2015

USCS

TIME: 0.25 Hrs

25.0

30.0

0.0

27.0

2.0

23.0

20.0

18.0

15.0

13.0

10.0

8.0

6.0

4.0

28.0

S-12

S-11

S-10

S-9

S-8

S-7

S-4

S-6

102.7

S-3

S-2

S-1

74.9

75.2

92.7

95.2

104.9

106.2

108.4

S-5

94.2

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-


Topsoil (4")


-

-

-

-

1350/4

58920

2237

5559

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

2111

.

.

.

.

Stratum III - Gray fine to medium sand,little silt

5569

Stratum III - Dark green fine to mediumsand, some silt

Stratum III - Green and dark brown fine tomedium sand, trace silt

Stratum II - Dark brown and dark orangebrown silt, trace fine sand, trace organics

Stratum II - Brownish gray and orangebrown silt, little fine sand

Stratum I - Brown fine to medium sand,little gravel, little silt

Stratum I - Gray fine sand, some silt

Stratum I - Light yellowish brown fine tomedium sand, little silt, trace gravel

3223

6554

7777

4456

2444

4556

3.8

33.8

33.5

16.0

14.5

6.0

2.5

0.3

EOB @ 33.8'

Soft soils @ 8.0' - 13.0'

13.5

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

WATER:

1

DATE: 11/6/2015DATE: 11/23/15



;

BORINGLOG

OF

BORING NO. B-22

AUGER DEPTH: 33.0'


DATE:


USCS

GRAPHIC LOG

END 11/5/15

1


EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED

AASHTO

RQD (%)

SHEET


DESCRIPTION

;

DEPTH (FT)

DEPTH: 19.0'RECOVERY(%)


DEPTH

TIME: 24 Hrs


BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN


NOT ENCOUNTERED

;

START 11/5/15

REMARKS

RECOVERY

(Ft.)


ELEVATION

H2O CONTENT


15.0

20.0

33.8

33.0

30.0

28.0

27.0

12.0

23.0

0.0

18.0

13.0

10.0

8.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

25.0

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER



DEPTH (FT)

RECOVERY(%)

TIME:DEPTH:

DEPTH

;

Topsoil (5")



ELEVATION

DESCRIPTION

0.4

NA

NA

NA

EOB @ 6.0'

2.0

3.1

4.5

6.0

2356

FILL - Brown fine sand, some silt


Stratum I - Pale brown and orange brownfine sand, little silt

Stratum I - Brown, orange brown, andyellowish brown fine to coarse sand, littlegravel, trace silt

5668

8111511

.

.

.

-

-

-



107.6

106.0

104.9

103.5

102.0

S-1

S-2

S-3

AASHTO

SHEET

DATE:

H2O CONTENT


DATE: 11/23/15

USCS

END 11/5/15

RQD (%)

DATE:

DEPTH: TIME: DATE:

GRAPHIC LOG


EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED


X

1


AUGER DEPTH: 4.0'

BORING NO. B-23

OF


;

REMARKS

START 11/5/15

NOT ENCOUNTERED

RECOVERY

(Ft.)


;

1

WATER:

BORINGLOG

6.0

4.0

2.0

0.0

DEPTH:

DEPTH


DEPTH (FT)

RECOVERY(%)

TIME:CHECKED BY: T. Louis

;

Topsoil (4")


SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

-

DESCRIPTION


NA

EOB @ 10.0'

.

.

NA

NA

.

NA

.

NA

Stratum I - Light yellowish brown finesand, little silt

Stratum I - Light yellowish brown finesand, some silt

Stratum I - Orange brown, gray, and palebrown fine sand, some silt, trace gravel

Stratum II - Yellow brown and orangebrown silt, little fine sand

.

0.32467

66711

8667

4544

5554

-

-

-

-

2.5

3.6

9.0

10.0

106.5

104.3

103.2

97.8

96.8

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

AASHTO

SHEET


DATE: 11/23/15 DATE:

END 11/5/15

GRAPHIC LOG

USCS

DATE:

DEPTH: TIME: DATE:

RQD (%)

EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED


X

1



AUGER DEPTH: 8.0'

BORING NO. B-24

OF

;


RECOVERY

(Ft.)

REMARKS

START 11/5/15




ELEVATION

H2O CONTENT

NOT ENCOUNTERED

BORINGLOG

;

1

WATER:

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

0.0

S-2

-

-

-

EOB @ 6.0'

0.7

2.8

5.56.0

S-3

94.8

92.7

90.089.5

S-1

DEPTH


DEPTH (FT)

RECOVERY(%)

TIME: 3 Hrs


DEPTH: 5.5'CHECKED BY: T. Louis


REMARKS

START 11/5/15

RECOVERY

(Ft.)

;


.

2468

8677

5544

.

.

NA

NA

NA

BORINGLOG

;

FILL - Orange brown fine to medium sand,little silt

Stratum I - Brown and pale brown finesand, little silt

Stratum I - Greenish brown fine to mediumsand, little silt, trace clay

Stratum I - Dark reddish brown fine sand,trace silt

AASHTO

SHEET

DATE: 11/23/15 DATE: 11/5/2015


END 11/5/15

GRAPHIC LOG

USCS

DATE:


RQD (%)

EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED


1


AUGER DEPTH: 4.0'

BORING NO. B-25

OF


;

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER

DESCRIPTION


1

WATER:



ELEVATION

NOT ENCOUNTERED

H2O CONTENT

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER


DESCRIPTION

DEPTH


DEPTH (FT)

RECOVERY(%)

TIME:DEPTH:



ELEVATION

Topsoil (6")

AUGER: SIZE: 4.0" I.D. ;

EOB @ 6.0'

0.5

S-2

6.0

NA

92.7

91.2

87.2

2.0

Stratum I - Pale brown and yellowishbrown fine sand, little siltStratum I - Green and orange brown fineto medium sand, little silt, trace clay

2567

4568

NA

NA

.

.

.

S-3 6654


S-1-

-

-

SHEET

RQD (%)

AASHTO


H2O CONTENT


USCS

END 11/5/15

DATE:

DEPTH: TIME: DATE:

GRAPHIC LOG

EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED


X

1


AUGER DEPTH: 4.0'

BORING NO. B-26

OF


REMARKS

START 11/5/15


NOT ENCOUNTERED

;


RECOVERY

(Ft.)

1

; WATER:

BORINGLOG

4.0

6.0

2.0

0.0

SAMPLE NO./

TYPE/CORE RUN

BLOWS/0.5 FT.

ON SAMPLER


DESCRIPTION

DEPTH


DEPTH (FT)

RECOVERY(%)

TIME:DEPTH:



ELEVATION

Topsoil (3")

AUGER: SIZE: 4.0" I.D. ;

EOB @ 6.0'

0.3

S-2

6.0

NA

94.8

90.1

89.1

5.0

Stratum I - Pale brown and light greenishbrown fine sand, trace silt

Stratum I - Green and orange brown fineto medium sand, little silt, trace clay

2567

4568

NA

NA

.

.

.

S-3 6654


S-1-

-

-

SHEET

RQD (%)

AASHTO


H2O CONTENT


USCS

END 11/5/15

DATE:

DEPTH: TIME: DATE:

GRAPHIC LOG

EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED


X

1


AUGER DEPTH: 4.0'

BORING NO. B-27

OF


REMARKS

START 11/5/15


NOT ENCOUNTERED

;


RECOVERY

(Ft.)

1

; WATER:

BORINGLOG

4.0

6.0

2.0

0.0


START 11/17/15

TIME:

REMARKS

End of Test Pit (EOTP) @ 5.2'

3.6

4.6

5.2

0.3

Dry


98.5

96.4

95.2

94.2

93.6

Topsoil (4")

Stratum I - Yellow brown and pale brown fine sand, little silt

Stratum I - Gray and orange brown pale brown fine sand, little silt2.4

Stratum I - Green and orange brown fine to medium sand, somesilt, trace clay

Stratum I - Dark brown fine sand, some silt, trace organics

H2O CONTENT

OF

PIT NO. TP-1


EQUIPMENT USED Track-Hoe

TEST PITLOG

ELEVATION

DESCRIPTION

GRAPHIC LOG

USCS

EXCAVATING COMPANY M. Tuck/Advantage Sitework



**

WATER: DEPTH: TIME:

WATER: DEPTH:

DEPTH

END 11/17/15

DATE:

1

Geotechnical Engineers & GeologistsDEPTH (FT)

EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED

1SHEET



START 11/17/15

PIT NO. TP-2

TIME:

REMARKS

Dry

EOTP @ 6.3'


5.2

98.5

94.6

93.6

92.5

Topsoil (4")

Stratum I - Yellow brown, pale brown, and gray fine sand, little silt

Stratum I - Dark brown fine sand, some silt, trace organics

Stratum I - Brown fine sand, some silt6.3

0.3

4.2

H2O CONTENT

OF



TEST PITLOG

ELEVATION

DESCRIPTION

GRAPHIC LOG

USCS




**

WATER: DEPTH: TIME:

WATER: DEPTH:

DEPTH

DEPTH (FT)

1



EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATEDEND 11/17/15

DATE:

1SHEET


START 11/17/15

Stratum I - Brownish green fine sand, little silt

TIME:

REMARKS

97.3

EOTP @ 5.7'


97.9

96.5

94.9

Topsoil (4")

Stratum I - Orange brown and pale brown fine sand, little silt

100.3

Stratum I - Grayish brown fine sand, little silt, trace organicsStratum I - Light grayish green fine sand, trace silt

0.3

2.7

3.3

4.1

5.7

H2O CONTENT

OF

PIT NO. TP-3



TEST PITLOG

ELEVATION

DESCRIPTION

GRAPHIC LOG

USCS




**

WATER: DEPTH: TIME:

WATER: DEPTH:

DEPTH

DATE:

1

Geotechnical Engineers & Geologists END 11/17/15

DEPTH (FT)

EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED

1


SHEET


START 11/17/15

REMARKS


DEPTH

OF

Significant roots to 1.5'

0.3

13.0

15.0

Dry

EOTP @ 15.0'


TIME:



**

WATER: DEPTH: TIME:

DEPTH:

122.7

110.0

108.0

Topsoil (3")

Stratum I - Orange brown, pale brown, and gray fine to mediumsand, little silt

Stratum I - Gray and orange brown fine sand, some silt

WATER:

H2O CONTENT



TEST PITLOG

ELEVATION

DESCRIPTION

GRAPHIC LOG

USCS

1SHEET

DATE:


PIT NO. TP-4

DEPTH (FT)

END 11/17/15

1

EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED



START 11/17/15

PIT NO. TP-5

TIME:

REMARKS


Dry

Significant roots to 2.0'


121.4

112.7

106.7

Topsoil (4")

Stratum I - Yellow brown, pale brown, and gray fine sand, tracesilt

Stratum I - Gray and orange brown fine sand, some silt

EOTP @ 15.0'

0.3

9.0

15.0

H2O CONTENT

OF


TEST PITLOG

ELEVATION

DESCRIPTION

GRAPHIC LOG

USCS




**

WATER: DEPTH: TIME:

WATER: DEPTH:

DEPTH

END 11/17/15

1

EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED

DEPTH (FT)


DATE:


SHEET 1


START 11/17/15

PIT NO. TP-6

TIME:

REMARKS

Bottom of 44" x 44" footing @ 7.7' below grade

EOTP @ 10.0'


6.3

7.8

108.5

101.2

99.0

Topsoil (6")

FILL - Pale brown, gray, and orange brown fine to medium sand,little silt

Stratum II - Gray and orange brown silt, some fine sand

Top of 44" x 44" footing @ 6.3' below grade

0.5

7.8

10.0


OF

H2O CONTENT


TEST PITLOG

ELEVATION

DESCRIPTION

GRAPHIC LOG

USCS




**

WATER: DEPTH: TIME:

WATER: DEPTH:

DEPTH

Geotechnical Engineers & Geologists END 11/17/15

DEPTH (FT)

EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED

1

DATE:


1SHEET

17.6 moist Odor:% Gravel: Coarse: 0.0 Fine: 0.0 Diameter, % Finer

% Sand: Coarse: 0.0 Medium: 16.4 Fine: 63.2 75 #N/A38.1 #N/A19.0 #N/A9.5 #N/A4.75 #N/A2.00 100.00.425 83.60.150 23.60.075 20.40.005 NR0.001 NR

Gs: NR Cu: N/A Cc: N/A

Project: LL: NP PL: NP PI: NP

Client:Sample:

Depth:

Description:

Remarks:

Green with gray silty sand

B-2, S-3 (3-4-5-4) & B-3, S-3 (3-3-5-5)

NR

Reaction to HCl:Structure: homogeneous

AASHTO Classification:

New Hanover Township School District

28337.J0 - North Hanover Township Elementary School

A-2-4USCS Classification: SM, silty sand

NR

4.0'- 6.0'

Toughness:

Dry Strength:

NR

NRCementation:Dilatency: NR

firm

As-rec'd water content: NR0.079.6

Consistency:

3"

№ 40

№ 4⅜"Sand description:

tan, subangular to subrounded

Hardness: NR

Clay Size№ 200№ 100

№ 10

Particle SizeUS Standard Sieve Size

Hydrometer AnalysisColloids

Classification of Soils, ASTM D 2487-00 / D 2488-00 November 30, 2015

Coarse

Fine

Medium

Fine

Coarse

GRAVEL

SAND

¾"1½"Gravel description:

3" 1½" ¾" ⅜" №4 №10 №40 №100 №200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Perc

ent P

assi

ng S

ieve

Sieve Opening, mm

Particle Size Analysis of Soils

Southern NJ 856-768-1001

Central PA717-697-5701

Lehigh Valley610-967-4540115 W Germantown Pk · East Norriton, PA 19401

tel 610-277-0880 fax 610-277-0878

EARTHENGINEERINGINCORPORATED



% Sand: Coarse: 0.1 Medium: 10.6 Fine: 57.7 75 #N/A38.1 #N/A19.0 #N/A9.5 #N/A4.75 100.02.00 99.90.425 89.30.150 62.40.075 31.60.005 NR0.001 NR



Client:Sample:

Depth:

Description:

Remarks:


Coarse

Fine

Medium

Fine

Coarse

GRAVEL

SAND



№ 10



68.4

Consistency:

3"

№ 40

№ 4⅜"Sand description: tan with multicolored, subangular to subrounded

Hardness: NR

0 - 2.0' & 2.0'- 4.0'

Toughness:

Dry Strength:

NR


firm

As-rec'd water content: NR0.0

Light brown to brown Silty F-M Sand

B-4, S-1 (1-2-5-8) & S-2 (8-10-12-11)

NR



New Hanover Twp. School District

28337.J0 - North Hanover Twp. Elementary School


NR

3" 1½" ¾" ⅜" №4 №10 №40 №100 №200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Perc

ent P

assi

ng S

ieve

Sieve Opening, mm





tel 610-277-0880 fax 610-277-0878



33.8 wet Odor:% Gravel: Coarse: 0.0 Fine: 0.0 Diameter, % Finer




Client:Sample:

Depth:

Description:

Remarks:

Tan to light brown and orange-brown sandy silt

B-14, S-5 (6-2-2-2) & S-6 (3-3-2-2)

NR





A-4USCS Classification: ML, sandy silt

NR

8.0'- 10.0' & 10.0'- 12.0'

Toughness:

Dry Strength:

NR


very soft


Consistency:

3"

№ 40


light brown, subangular to subrounded

Hardness: NR


№ 10




Coarse

Fine

Medium

Fine

Coarse

GRAVEL

SAND


3" 1½" ¾" ⅜" №4 №10 №40 №100 №200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Perc

ent P

assi

ng S

ieve

Sieve Opening, mm





tel 610-277-0880 fax 610-277-0878




% Sand: Coarse: 4.7 Medium: 6.8 Fine: 20.9 75 #N/A38.1 #N/A19.0 #N/A9.5 100.04.75 97.62.00 92.90.425 86.10.150 81.70.075 65.20.005 NR0.001 NR



Client:Sample:

Depth:

Description:

Remarks:


Coarse

Fine

Medium

Fine

Organic Content (ASTM D2974 Loss On Ignition): 5.46%

Coarse

GRAVEL

SAND



№ 10



32.4

Consistency:

3"

№ 40


gray, subangular to subrounded

gray, subangular to subrounded

Hardness: NR

13.0'- 14.5'

Toughness:

Dry Strength:

NR


soft


Black Sandy Silt with organics

B-17, S-6

NR






NR

3" 1½" ¾" ⅜" №4 №10 №40 №100 №200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Perc

ent P

assi

ng S

ieve

Sieve Opening, mm





tel 610-277-0880 fax 610-277-0878




% Sand: Coarse: 0.0 Medium: 13.7 Fine: 72.7 75 #N/A38.1 #N/A19.0 #N/A9.5 #N/A4.75 #N/A2.00 100.00.425 86.30.150 17.90.075 13.60.005 NR0.001 NR



Client:Sample:

Depth:

Description:

Remarks:


Coarse

Fine

Medium

Fine

Coarse

GRAVEL

SAND



№ 10



86.4

Consistency:

3"

№ 40

№ 4⅜"Sand description: light gray with medium gray, subangular to

subroundedHardness: NR

18.0'- 20.0' & 23.0'- 25.0'

Toughness:

Dry Strength:

NR


soft


Dark green Silty F-M Sand

B-17, S-7 (5-5-5-6) & S-8 (2-2-7-4)

NR






NR

3" 1½" ¾" ⅜" №4 №10 №40 №100 №200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Perc

ent P

assi

ng S

ieve

Sieve Opening, mm





tel 610-277-0880 fax 610-277-0878







Client:Sample:

Depth:

Description:

Remarks:

Tan sandy silt

B-19, S-6 & S-7

NR






NR

10.0'- 12.0' & 13.0'- 15.0'

Toughness:

Dry Strength:

NR


soft


Consistency:

3"

№ 40

№ 4⅜"Sand description: brown to tan, subangular to subrounded

Hardness: NR


№ 10




Coarse

Fine

Medium

Fine

Coarse

GRAVEL

SAND


3" 1½" ¾" ⅜" №4 №10 №40 №100 №200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Perc

ent P

assi

ng S

ieve

Sieve Opening, mm





tel 610-277-0880 fax 610-277-0878







Client:Sample:

Depth:

Description:

Remarks:


Coarse

Fine

Medium

Fine

Coarse

GRAVEL

SAND



№ 10



70.6

Consistency:

3"

№ 40

№ 4⅜"Sand description: tan with multicolored, subangular to subrounded

Hardness: NR

1.0'- 2.0' & 2.0'- 4.0'

Toughness:

Dry Strength:

NR


firm


Light brown to orange-brown silty sand

B-20, S-1 (7-8) & S-2 (6-6-7-9)

NR






NR

3" 1½" ¾" ⅜" №4 №10 №40 №100 №200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Perc

ent P

assi

ng S

ieve

Sieve Opening, mm





tel 610-277-0880 fax 610-277-0878







Client:Sample:

Depth:

Description:

Remarks:

Tan silt

B-22, S-4 & S-6

NR





A-4USCS Classification: ML, silt

NR

6.0'- 8.0' & 10.0'- 12.0'

Toughness:

Dry Strength:

NR


soft


Consistency:

3"

№ 40

№ 4⅜"Sand description: tan to light gray and brown, subangular to subrounded

Hardness: NR


№ 10




Coarse

Fine

Medium

Fine

Coarse

GRAVEL

SAND


3" 1½" ¾" ⅜" №4 №10 №40 №100 №200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Perc

ent P

assi

ng S

ieve

Sieve Opening, mm





tel 610-277-0880 fax 610-277-0878



6.9 moist Odor:

% Gravel: Coarse: 0.0 Fine: 0.0 Diameter, mm% Finer

% Sand: Coarse: 0.3 Medium: 25.7 Fine: 58.9 75 #N/A

38.1 #N/A

19.0 #N/A

9.5 #N/A

4.75 100.0

2.00 99.7

0.425 74.0

0.150 37.0

0.075 15.1

0.005 NR

0.001 NR



Client:

Sample:

Depth:

Description:

Remarks:


Coarse

Fine

Medium

Fine

Coarse

GRAVEL

SAND

¾"

1½"Gravel description:

Clay Size

№ 200

№ 100

№ 10



84.9

Consistency:

3"

№ 40

№ 4

⅜"Sand description:

light brown with multicolored, subangular to

subrounded

Hardness: NR

4.0'- 4.5'

Toughness:

Dry Strength:

NR

NRCementation:

Dilatency: NR

firm

As-rec'd water content: NR

0.0

Orange-tan silty sand

TP-4

NR

Reaction to HCl:

Structure: homogeneous




A-2-4

USCS Classification: SM, silty sand

NR

3" 1½" ¾" ⅜" №4 №10 №40 №100 №200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Perc

en

t P

assin

g S

ieve

Sieve Opening, mm





tel 610-277-0880 fax 610-277-0878

EARTH

ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED


EEI Project Number: 28337.J0 Date: 11/30/2015

6.9%

2.68 estimated 2.68 estimated

Test:

Sieve data: 3/8 in

0.0%

100.0% estimated

G:\PROJECTS\28000\28337.J0 North Hanover Elementary School\Lab\[28337.J0 TP-104 Bulk 4'-4.5' D698.xlsm]Report

Sample:

110.3 lbf/ft³

Soils Description: Orange-tan silty sand

North Hanover Township Elementary School


Project Name:

Client:

TP-4

West Berlin, NJ · 856-768-1001EARTH

Specific Gravity of Oversize fraction:

9.6%

As-Received Water Content:

Optimum Water Content, w o :

ASTM D 698 - 12, Method B using a manual rammer (moist preparation).

Organic content, %: pH:

4.0'- 4.5' Bulk

Finer Fraction, PF:

Specific Gravity of Finer fraction:

Depth/Remarks:

Maximum Dry Unit Weight, dMAX :

Oversize Fraction, PC:

Sieve used to split fractons:

tel 610-277-0880 · fax 610-277-0878

www.earthengineering.com

[email protected]

115 W Germantown Pk · East Norriton, PA 19401

Mechanicsburg, PA · 717-697-5701


ENGINEERING

INCORPORATED Emmaus, PA · 610-967-4540

ASTM D 698 - 12

Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Standard Effort

(12,400 ft-lbf/ft³ (600 kN-m/m³))

107.0

108.0

109.0

110.0

111.0

7% 8% 9% 10% 11% 12% 13% 14%

Dry

Un

it W

eig

ht,

( D

, lb

f/ft

³

Water Content, w, %

Moisture-Density ZAV line

Moisture-Density (corrected) ZAV line (corrected)

report of geotechnical investigation proposed pre-k …

Documents