HomeMy WebLinkAboutREPORT - 06-00184 - Madison Memorial Hospital - AdditionPrepared by
J. Paul Bastian, P.E.
Teri L. Bowman, E.T.
STRATA, Inc.
4460 Kings Way #3
Chubbuck, Idaho 83202
P. 208.237.3400
F. 208.237-3449
REPORT
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Madison memorial Hospital Additions
Rexburg, Idaho
0600184
Madison Memorial Hospital Addition
Prepared for
Adams Management Service
Corporation
C/O Madison Memorial Hospital
10475 Park Meadows Drive
Suite 600
Lone Tree, Colorado 80124
August 24, 2005
j rtfxc;rr f�. Fr<�x� /:ir car �ir«l
August 24, 2005
AMSCOR-PO5040A
Mr. Steve Catts
Adams Management Services Corporation
10475 Park Meadows Drive
Suite 600
Lone Tree, CO 80124
RE: Revised Report
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Madison Memorial Hospital Additions
Rexburg, Idaho
Dear Mr. Catts:
STRATA, Inc. has performed the authorized geotechnical engineering evaluation
for the proposed additions to the Madison Memorial Hospital in Rexburg, Idaho. The
purpose of our geotechnical engineering evaluation was to explore the subsurface soil
and geologic conditions within the proposed development area and to provide
geotechnical -engineering recommendations to assist project planning, design and
construction. The work was performed in general accordance with our proposal dated
March 30, 2005.
This report summarizes the results of our field evaluation, laboratory testing,
engineering opinions, and geotechnical recommendations. The soil and groundwater
conditions at the site are presented in the following report. Specific geotechnical opinions
and recommendations for foundation design, earthwork construction, pavement, lateral
earth pressure and storm water discharge are included. The geotechnical
recommendations presented must be read and implemented in their entirety. Portions or
individual portions of the report cannot be relied upon without the supporting text of
relevant sections.
The success of the proposed construction will depend in part, on following the
report recommendations and good construction practice. We recommend that STRATA
be retained to provide geotechnical testing and consultation services during construction
to verify our report recommendations are followed. It has been our experience that
maintaining continuity with a single geotechnical consultant reduces errors and
contributes to overall project success and economy.
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com 4460 Kings Way #3, Chubbuck, Idaho 83202 P.208.237.3400 F.208.237.3449
We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project. Please do not
hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or comments.
Sincerely,
STRATA, Inc.
i
Teri Bowman, E.T
Project Assistant
J. Paul Bastian, PE
Project Engineer
JBP/tlb
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
REVISED REPORT
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Madison Memorial Hospital Additions
Rexburg, Idaho
PREPARED FOR:
Adams Management Services Corporation
10475 Park Meadows Drive
Suite 600
Lone Tree, CO 80124
PREPARED BY:
Strata, Inc.
4460 Kings Way #3
Chubbuck, Idaho 83202
(208) 237-3400
August 24, 2005
TABLE OF CONTENTS
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com 4460 Kings Way #3, Chubbuck, Idaho 83202 P.208.237.3400 F.208.237.3449
PAGE
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................1
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION...........................................................................................2
SUBSURFACE EVALUATION PROCEDURES...................................................................2
SUBSURFACECONDITIONS.............................................................................................2
LABORATORYTESTING....................................................................................................3
GENERAL OPINIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...........................................................3
SITEPREPARTATION..........................................................................................................4
EXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS.........................................................................................5
TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT SLOPES...............................................................................5
STRUCTURALFILL..............................................................................................................5
LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE................................................................................................7
FLEXIBLE AND RIGID PAVEMENT DESIGN..............................................................................
9
CONCRETE SLAB -ON -GRADE FLOORS...............................................................................10
PERIMETER WALL DRAINAGE............................................................................................11
SEISMICITY......................................................................................................................
12
SITEGEOLOGY................................................................................................................13
FOUNDATIONDESIGN.......................................................................................................13
WET WEATHER CONSTRUCTION........................................................................................15
SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE.............................................................................16
VOID DETECTION AND REMEDIATION ALTERNATIVES...........................................................16
ADDITIONAL SERVICES RECOMMENDED.....................................................................17
REVIEW OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS...........................................................................17
CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING.....................................................................17
EVALUATION LMITIATIONS.............................................................................................18
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com 4460 Kings Way #3, Chubbuck, Idaho 83202 P.208.237.3400 F.208.237.3449
REVISED REPORT
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Addition to Madison Memorial Hospital
Rexburg, Idaho
INTRODUCTION
STRATA, Inc. has preformed the authorized geotechnical engineering evaluation
for the proposed addition to the Madison Memorial Hospital in Rexburg, Idaho. A
vicinity map is presented as Plate 1. The purpose of the geotechnical engineering
evaluation was to assess the general soil and geologic conditions within the proposed
development area and to provide geotechnical and soil related construction
recommendations with respect to the proposed development. Our recommendations are
based on our field observations and laboratory test results. To provide this evaluation
of the site we conducted the following scope of work:
I. Notified utility mark out prior to the excavation of the test pits.
2. Reviewed site map and topography maps provided by
3. Observed the advancement of 7 borings to depths of up to 16 feet and were
terminated in basalt bedrock. The soil encountered in the borings was described
and classified referencing ASTM D 2487 and D 2488 Unified Soil Classification
System (USCS) and the soil profiles were logged. The borings were backfilled at
the time of excavation. Backfill was not compacted or landscaped.
4. Performed Standard Penetration testing to verify the condition of the soil types
encountered in the borings.
5. The field and laboratory data were analyzed to provide the project team with
geotechnical opinions and recommendations as outlined in our proposal.
6. Prepared and provided five copies of our final summary report of findings,
opinion, and geotechnical recommendations to assist design planning and
construction.
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com 4460 Kings Way #3, Chubbuck, Idaho 83202 P.208.237.3400 F.208.237.3449
Addition to Madison Memorial Hospital
Rexburg, ID
File: AMSCOR-PO5040A
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION Page 2
The project site is located near the end of East main in Rexburg, Idaho. We
understand proposed additions will consist of three single story structures, one two-
story structure and a new below grade truck loading dock. The structures will be
masonry or wood frame buildings with concrete slab on grade floors. Conventional
spread footings for perimeter wall and interior column foundations are proposed. We
understand that footing loads for perimeter walls will be approximately 2000 pounds per
linear foot and interior column loads will be approximately 450 kips. Storm water will be
discharged on site. Parking and access roads for cars and service vehicles is planned
near the new additions. The parking areas will be designed predominantly for auto
parking and the access roads will support delivery and service vehicle truck traffic.
SUBSURFACE EVALUATION PROCEDURES
Seven borings were drilled on April 18, 2005 within the proposed project area as
identified on the Site Map presented on Plates 2 Site Map.
The borings were drilled with a truck mounted CME 75 auger & core drill rig. The
soil and rock encountered in the borings was visually classified and described
referencing ASTM D 2487 and D 2488, Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The
USCS is provided on Plate 3 and should be referenced to interpret the terms used
throughout this report. The subsurface profiles were logged and the exploratory logs
and laboratory test data are presented in the Appendix to this report. Select soil
samples were obtained for laboratory testing. The borings were loosely backfilled at
the conclusion of the field evaluation. We recommend the ground surface in the boring
locations be monitored and adjusted as necessary to maintain a level surface.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Subsurface soil conditions in test pits typically consisted of 3 to 11 feet of brown
fine sandy silt "ML" and/or gravel fill underlain by basalt bedrock. The sandy silt was
relatively uniform across the site and the gravel was intermittent. The silt and gravel
were underlain by hard to very hard basalt bedrock. Areas of cinders or voids were not
i4
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
Addition to Madison Memorial Hospital
Rexburg, ID
File: AMSCOR•PO5040A
Page 3
encountered in the borings. Groundwater was not encountered in the locations
explored to a depth of up to 16 feet. We do not anticipate groundwater will be
encountered within the planned excavation depths, as we understand the proposed
construction.
LABORATORY TESTING
Select soil samples were tested to assess the unconfined compressive strength
of the basalt bedrock underlying the site. Laboratory testing was performed referencing
ASTM test procedures. The laboratory test results are presented on the boring logs,
which are presented in the Appendix to this report.
GENERAL OPINIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Our geotechnical opinions and recommendations are presented in the following
sections to assist project planning, design, and construction of the proposed additions.
Our recommendations are based on the results of our field evaluation, laboratory
testing, our experience with similar projects in the area, and our understanding of the
proposed construction. These opinions and recommendation reflect our conversations
with the project team and are based, in part on preliminary information provided to us by
your company and the structural engineer. If design plans change, such as loading
conditions, foundation sizes or configuration, STRATA should be notified to review our
report recommendations and make necessary modifications.
Soil conditions in the test pits were observed to be relatively uniform. However,
subsurface conditions may vary across the site. These changes in conditions may not
be apparent until construction. If the subsurface conditions change from those
observed in the test pit locations, the construction schedule, plans, and costs may
change.
04
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
Addition to Madison Memorial Hospital
Rexburg, ID
File: AMSCOR-PO5040A
Site Preparation Page
At the time of our field evaluation the site was developed and landscaped.
Removal of existing pavement and topsoil will be required. Soil containing roots and
vegetation is not suitable for support of the planned pavement sections or concrete
floors for the additions and must be removed from the site at the commencement of
construction.
The native sand/silt soil is prone to collapse and will not support foundation loads
without experiencing significant consolidation that would manifest in settlement of the
structure. Therefore, all surficial sand/silt soil in its present condition is unsuitable for
support of the planned foundation loads and should be removed from the locations to
expose the underlying basalt rock. The native soil may be replaced in 6 to 8 inch thick
compacted lifts in the footing locations to achieve a subgrade suitable for support of
2000 pounds per square foot. The recompacted silt is not suitable for support of
bearing pressures greater than 2000 psf.
The native soil is suitable for support of the proposed concrete floors and
pavement sections in parking and access road areas provided it is properly moisture
conditioned and compacted as outlined in the following sections of this report.
After design subgrade elevation has been achieved in the floor, parking and
access road locations, we recommend the exposed native soil surface be proof rolled
with a minimum of five passes of a large vibratory roller with a drum weight greater than
5 tons. If pumping or unstable soil is observed during the proof rolling operation, the
unstable soil should be removed and replaced with structural fill.
We recommend final subgrade preparation for sidewalks and building areas
include compaction of the upper 8 inches of exposed sub -grade soil to at least 95
percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D-698 (Standard Proctor).
Subgrade soil should be properly moisture conditioned prior to attempting
compaction efforts. Optimum moisture content for compaction will vary with soil types.
Therefore, the contractor should anticipate a moisture conditioning effort to achieve
q
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
Addition to Madison Memorial Hospital
Rexburg, ID
File: AMSCOR-PO5040A
acceptable moisture levels. STRATA should review the compaction process priorgto
placing structural fill. Once the native soil subgrade has been proof rolled as described
above, structural fill placement or foundation or slab preparation may commence.
Excavation Characteristics
Native soil may be excavated using conventional soil excavation techniques.
The upper fine sandy silt soil can be excavated near vertical for excavations up to 4 feet
in depth. Trench excavations deeper than 4 feet should allow provisions for excavations
to be sloped back at 1.5:1 (horizontal to vertical). Alternatively, deeper trenches and
excavations should be shored or braced in accordance with OSHA regulations and local
codes.
The basalt rock encountered on the site is moderately to closely fractured. While
the basalt can be excavated or blasted to achieve vertical slopes the risk of falling rock
is present and retaining structures or wire mesh slope or excavation face covering will
be required on rock faces over 6 feet in height.
Temporary and Permanent Slopes
The on-site sandy silt soil is easily eroded by water and prone to sloughing and
slope or trench instability. Excavations for utility trenches in the silt to depths of 4 feet
can be made with a vertical slope. Trench excavations deeper than 4 feet should be
sloped or braced in accordance with OSHA regulations. Temporary slopes in the silt
may be at a 1.5 to 1 (H: V) slope and permanent slopes may be at a 2 to 1 slope. Care
should be taken to rout run-off away from slopes to avoid erosion or saturation of the
slope. Permanent slopes should be re -vegetated as quickly as possible to reduce the
risk of erosion and improve slope stability.
Structural Fill
If foundation loads higher than 2000 psf are planned structural fill beneath
column foundations or footings must consist of soil classified as GP, GW or GM soil
types according to the USCS. This compacted, granular, structural fill over basalt will
i4l
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
Addition to Madison Memorial Hospital
Rexburg, ID
File: AMSCOR-PO5040A
Page 6
provide a maximum allowable bearing capacity of 4000 psf. Aggregate and rocks
comprising the gravel should be hard and durable and should not experience significant
crushing or breaking while being compacted. Because the native silt soil on the site is
loose and prone to collapse it is not suitable for support of foundations in its present
condition. However, if properly placed and compacted the silt is suitable for support of
foundations with a contact pressure of 2000 pounds per square foot or less.
Structural fill supporting concrete slab -on -grade floors pavement sections or
foundations with contact pressures of 2000 psf or less should consist of GP, GW, GM,
SP, SW, SM or ML soil types according to the USCS. The sandy silt soil and sandy
gravel fill on the site are suitable for use as structural fill beneath foundations with a
contact pressure of 2000 psf or less provided the soil is removed to expose the
underlying basalt and replaced in compacted lifts as part of the site preparation.
Removal and replacement of the soil will be required to help control differential
settlement of the foundations. The silt and/or sandy gravel fill should be placed in loose
lifts that are 8 -inches or less in thickness and compacted to a minimum of 95% of its
maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D-698. The sandy silt and sandy gravel
fill are also suitable for use as structural fill beneath concrete slab -on -grade floors or
paved areas.
Structural fill for all applications should be of high quality and should not be
saturated or contain vegetation, organic matter, frozen clods, debris or other deleterious
materials and should meet the soil classification requirements for the soil types listed
previously. Structural fill should not contain rocks or aggregate larger than 6 inches in
any dimension because the compaction equipment will tend to ride on the larger
aggregate which hinders uniform compaction of the lift and can lead to poorly or non -
uniformly compacted fill.
Structural fill in pavement areas or in areas where concrete floors will be
constructed should be placed in loose lifts that are 8 -inches or less in thickness. Each
lift should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density of the soil,
as determined by ASTM test D 698 (Standard Proctor).
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
Addition to Madison Memorial Hospital
Rexburg, ID
File: AMSCOR-PO5040A
Page 7
Structural fill will be required beneath foundations where the planned elevation of
the bottom of the footings is higher than the basalt contact. In order to provide uniform
support of foundations this will require removal of all the native sandy silt and its
replacement in compacted lifts or its replacement with compacted gravel structural fill.
Foundation support should be as uniform as possible in order to reduce the potential for
differential settlement. Use of different types of structural fill beneath footings in the
same building is not recommended. Structural fill placed beneath column foundations
should be placed directly on the basalt bedrock in uniform 6 -inch thick loose lifts. If
contact pressures are 2000 psf or less each lift of the silt should be compacted to 95%
of its maximum density per ASTM D-698. If contact pressures are 4000 psf or less
each lift of gravel should be compacted to at least 95% of its maximum dry density per
ASTM D-1557. The compaction requirements outlined above assume that heavy
compaction equipment such as vibratory rollers with a minimum drum weight of 5 tons is
used. The maximum loose lift thickness should be reduced where smaller and/or lighter
compaction equipment is used. STRATA should be retained to perform field density
testing of structural fill to verify contractor compliance with the above minimum
compaction criteria.
Lateral Earth Pressure
Retaining wall systems should be designed to resist lateral earth pressures.
These pressures will be generated from the soil retained, plus any surcharge from
backfill materials, slopes or equipment adjacent to the walls. We recommend that lateral
earth pressures be calculated using an equivalent fluid pressure (efp) of 60 pounds per
cubic foot (pcf) for the at -rest case (no wall movement), 300 pcf for the passive case,
(wall movement towards the soil mass), and 40 pcf, for the active case (wall movement
away from soil mass). These equivalent fluid pressures assume fully drained
conditions, and that no hydrostatic forces are acting on the wall.
The recommended equivalent fluid pressures also assume the top surface of the
backfill adjacent to all retaining walls slopes down and away from the retaining wall at a
minimum of two percent for drainage. Lateral surcharge pressures due to equipment,
04
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
Addition to Madison Memorial Hospital
Rexburg, ID
File: AMSCOR-PO5040A
Page a
slopes, storage loads, etc. have not been included in the above lateral earth pressure
recommendations. The lateral earth pressure coefficient of 0.5 could be used to
estimate the lateral earth pressure induced on retaining walls due to adjacent surcharge
loads. We recommend all retaining walls be drained to reduce the potential for
instability, leakage or seepage. Typical methods for wall drainage are illustrated on
Plate 4, Schematic of Wall Drainage System and are discussed further in the Perimeter
Wall Drainage section of this report. Wall drainage systems can be combined with
footing drains if appropriately designed. Retaining walls should be designed for internal
and external stability. We recommend STRATA be retained to provide a global stability
analysis of the final slope geometry, including the designed retaining walls. We
recommend a coefficient of friction of 0.45 be used for footing and wall design for
concrete cast directly on the basalt or silty sand.
Lateral surcharge pressures, due to equipment, slopes, storage loads, etc., have
not been included in the above lateral earth pressure recommendations. The lateral
earth pressure coefficient of 0.5, acting over the entire wall height could be used to
estimate the lateral earth pressure induced on walls due to adjacent surcharge loads
from equipment and the slope behind the structure. Below -grade walls will be subject to
load influences from adjacent equipment structures and foundations. The design of
below -grade walls should account for seismic load influences using an equivalent,
dynamic lateral fluid pressure equal to 20 pcf. The dynamic pressure should be added
to the design static equivalent fluid pressure. The above estimated passive equivalent
fluid pressure will be reduced to 240 pcf during earthquake loading conditions.
Care must be taken during the use of heavy and/or vibratory equipment near the
face of walls (in a zone extending 5 feet back from the wall) to avoid creating an
undesirable degree of over -compaction in the soil immediately along the walls and
imposing high stresses on the walls. Walls designed for little or no wall movement
should be monitored during the backfilling process through survey and string line
methods. Below -grade walls should be backfilled as described in the Perimeter Wall
Drainage section of this report.
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
Flexible and Rigid Pavement Design
Addition to Madison Memorial Hospital
Rexburg, ID
File: AMSCOR-PO5040A
Page 9
We recommend that all topsoil and vegetation be removed from the proposed pavement
area. The upper 6 to 8 inches of fine sandy silt exposed by removal of the topsoil and
vegetation should be compacted in-place to at least 95% of its maximum dry density as
determined by ASTM D-698 using a large (5 -ton drum weight) vibratory roller prior to placement
of subbase or base course for the pavement section. STRATA should be retained to verify the
upper 6 to 8 inches of the native subgrade has been proof rolled and structural fill has been
compacted as outlined.
Providing the site preparation procedures are accomplished as described above, the
following minimum pavement sections are recommended for the automobile parking areas:
Access Road and Automobile Parking Areas:
3.0"- Class III asphalt concrete top course.
6.0%% -inch -minus, crushed sand and gravel base course.
6.0% Pit -run sand and gravel subbase course.
Rigid Concrete Pavement:
6.0" - 4000 psi compressive strength (at 28 days) Portland cement
concrete with a maximum 4 -inch slump and 4 to 6 percent entrained air
6.0" — %-inch-minus, crushed sand and gravel base course compacted to
at least 95% of its maximum dry density per ASTM D-698.
Note: We recommend a curing membrane be place on all finished exterior
concrete surfaces immediately after finishing. The curing membrane
The above -recommended flexible pavement sections are based on a maximum 20 -year
design life. The flexible pavement sections provided above are also based on an estimated
structural support R -value of 45 for the near -surface silt soil. The access road pavement
section is also based on an estimated Traffic Index (TI) of 6.0.
The subbase should consist of 6 -inch -minus, well -graded sand and gravel consistent
with Idaho Standards for Public Works Construction (ISPWC) Section 801 and with less than
10% passing the No. 200 sieve and should have an R -value of at least 65. The subbase should
be compacted to at least 95% of its maximum dry density as determined by ASTM test D-698.
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
Addition to Madison Memorial Hospital
Rexburg, ID
File: AMSCOR-PO5040A
Page 10
The base course should consist of '14 -inch-minus, well -graded, crushed sand and gravel
with less than 8% passing the No. 200 sieve and should be consistent with ISPWC Section 802
and should have an R -value of at least 80. The base course should be compacted to at least
95% of the maximum dry density of the soil per ASTM test D 698 (Standard Proctor).
The asphalt concrete for the flexible pavement area should have material properties as
specified in ASTM D 3515 and have a mix design with a maximum aggregate size between 3/4
and 3/8 -inch. The asphalt concrete should be compacted as required by ISPWC Sections 809
and 810.
Poor maintenance and crack repair of the new pavement section will allow
saturated conditions to occur in the section and underlying subgrade. The native silty
sand subgrade will soften if saturated and experience a reduction of load bearing
capacity. Loss in subgrade strength in the pavement section will result in early failure
and higher maintenance requirements during the service life of the pavement.
Therefore, we recommend that crack maintenance be accomplished in all pavement
areas as needed and at least once every three to five years to reduce the potential for
surface water infiltration into the pavement section and underlying subgrade.
Concrete Slab -on -Grade Floors
We recommend that concrete slab -on -grade floors be underlain by at least 6
inches of % -inch-minus, well -graded, crushed sand and gravel base course to provide
a leveling course and moisture protection for the slab. The base course shall be placed
over the native basalt or structural fill compacted to at least 95 percent of its maximum
dry density as determined by ASTM test D 698 (Standard Proctor). The native silty
sand is suitable for support of the concrete slab on grade provided the upper 6 to 8
inches is compacted, in-place, to at least 95% of its maximum dry density per ASTM
test D-698. The base course should be compacted to at least 95 percent of its
maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 698 (Standard Proctor). Subgrade
areas that become soft, wet or disturbed must be overexcavated to dense, native soil or
basalt and replaced with granular structural fill. The base course and vapor barriers
should be installed after the majority of under slab plumbing and utilities are completed.
Floor slabs should be designed for the anticipated use and equipment or storage
#4
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
Addition to Madison Memorial Hospital
Rexburg, ID
File: AMSCOR•PO5040A
Page 11
loading conditions. Based on correlation to our field and laboratory test results, we
recommend a modulus of subgrade reaction (k) of 230 pounds per cubic inch (pci) be
used for concrete floor slab design. This modulus is based on a sandy silt subgrade
with at least 6 inches of properly compacted %-inch-minus base course sand and gravel
beneath the floor slab.
Moisture migration through floor slabs can break down a floor covering, its
adhesive or cause various other floor covering performance problems. We recommend
the owner consider a vapor barrier for concrete slab -on -grade floors. Vapor barriers
should consist of a thick (10 mil), puncture resistant, polyethylene sheeting covered with
and additional 2 -inch thick layer of clean, coarse sand placed between the base course
and the concrete slab -on -grade floors. Form stakes should never be allowed to
penetrate the barrier. Although these recommendations are used, water vapor
migration through the concrete floor slab is still possible. Floor covering should be
selected accordingly. Manufacturer's recommendations should be strictly followed.
Perimeter Wall Drainage
We recommend below grade walls be drained to reduce the potential for
instability, leakage or seepage. Free -draining, granular structural fill should be used to
backfill all below grade walls. Locally supplied top and base course gravel conforming
to ITD specifications and with less than ten percent passing the #200 sieve is an
acceptable backfill. Two typical wall drainage details are presented on Plate 4, Wall
Drainage System. Wall and foundation drain systems may be combined; however, they
should never be connected to roof drains. All retaining walls greater than four feet
should be designed to resist sliding, overturning, bearing and global stability failures.
From our experience, segmental landscape walls can realize some design efficiencies if
accomplished by the geotechnical engineer while performing global stability
assessments. No matter how the wall design is performed, global stability must be
considered for landscape walls.
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
Seismicity
Addition to Madison Memorial Hospital
Rexburg, ID
File! AMSCOR-PO5040A
Page 12
We understand the 2003 International Building Code (IBC) will be utilized for
project structural design. Section 1615.1 of the 2003 IBC outlines the procedure for
evaluating site ground motions and design -spectral response accelerations. STRATA
utilized site soil and geologic data and the project location to establish earthquake
loading criteria at the site referencing Section 1615.1 of the 2003 IBC, Based on the
results from exploration, and our review of well logs in the area, we recommend a Site
Class B be utilized as a basis for structural seismic design for the project.
The Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) maps from the 2003 IBC were
referenced to develop the site response spectrum for Site Class B. The recommended
response spectrum is presented in Figure 1, below. This response spectrum assumes a
five percent critical damping ratio in accordance with the IBC, Section 1615.1. A site-
specific study was not performed. Structural design may use the spectral response at
period T=0.3 seconds for peak ground acceleration at the site. Individual seismic
response criteria as utilized to develop the response spectrum are presented in Table 2
below.
Design Criteria
Value
IBC 2003 Reference
Ss
0.5
Figure 1615(1)
SI
0.17
Figure 1615(2)
FA
1.0
Table 1615.1.2(1)
F„
1.0
Table 1615.1.2(2)
SMs
0.5
Equation 16-38
SMI
0.17
Equation 16-39
SDs
0.33
Equation 16-40
SD1
0.11
Equation 16-41
To
0.07
Section 1615.1.4
Ts
0.33
Section 1615.1.4
aulu c. otwmc response untena for ]BG 2003
!4
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
Addition to Madison Memorial Hospital
Rexburg, ID
File: AMSCOR-PO5040A
Page 13
Site Geology
The geology of eastern Idaho, specifically the Rexburg area is characterized by a
complex series of volcanic calderas, volcanic vents, faults and basalt flows overlain by
varying depths of windblown soil. The Rexburg hill consists of a ryolite caldera
associated with the Yellowstone volcanic hotspot. After the ryolite 'volcano" became
extinct, Quaternary aged basalt of the Snake River Group erupted through the
discontinuities in the ryolite core and covered much of the present-day Rexburg hill.
Following emplacement of the basalt, windblown silt or "loess" covered the basalt to
various depths.
Based on our experience in the area and the observed conditions on-site, the
conditions on-site are typical of the area and consist of windblown loess, underlain
basalt. The basalt in the area is typically variable in nature and can change in
appearance and engineering performance in short lateral and vertical distance. The
basalt may contain inclusions of the surrounding soil, ryolite clasts, cinder zones, large
voids and zones of massive basalt. Figure 1 below illustrates typical basalt properties in
the
Figure 1. Typical Rexburg Area Basalt
Foundation Design
The site preparation procedures discussed above must be implemented prior to
initiating foundation preparations. We recommend all foundations for these structures
bear on basalt bedrock or properly placed and compacted structural fill over basalt
i4
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.COM
Addition to Madison Memorial Hospital
Rexburg, ID
File: AMSCOR-PO5040A
Page 14
bedrock. If native soil is removed and structural fill is required to achieve the desired
footing elevation the width of excavation should increase 1 foot horizontally on each
side of the footing for every two feet of native soil removed to expose the basalt
bedrock.
The native sandy silt excavated below footings may be reused as landscaping fill,
structural fill for footings with a contact pressure of less than 2000 psf, in pavement
areas or as backfill against foundation stem walls or soil retaining walls. The silt should
be properly moisture conditioned and compacted as outlined for structural fill in the
pavement areas.
The following recommendations should be accomplished for all foundations for
the hospital:
1. SITE OBSERVATION: Strata should be retained to observe ail footings
(soil improvement) overexcavations to verify dimensions, structural fill, and
to verify that all bearing surfaces have been prepared in accordance with
this report.
2. EXTERIOR FOOTINGS: Exterior footings should bear at least 36 inches
below the final exterior grade to help reduce frost effects. Interior footing_ s
should bear a minimum of 18 inches below the finished floor elevation.
3. FOOTING WIDTHS: Minimum strip footing widths should be consistent
with the International Building Code (IBC).
4. FOOTING SUBGR.ADE: Loose soil, rock or debris must be removed from
the basalt surface prior to placement of structural fill or concrete. Footings
should never be,constructed over loose, saturated or frozen soil. If loose
or unstable areas are observed prior to placing structural fill or concrete,
they should be overexcavated to 'he basalt and replaced with compacted
granular structural fill. Structural fill should extend a minimum of'i foot
beyond the footing edge on both sides of the footing for every 2 feet of
vertical depth.
5. ALLOWABLE BEARING VALUE: If above recommendations are
accomplished; a maximum allowable bearing value (ABV) of 4,000 psf for
iuunticl"un ull uuuiNduteu gravel uver basalt art' 2000 psf for foundations
on re -compacted silt over basalt could be used for the footing design.
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www. stratag eotech. con
Addition to Madison Memorial Hospital
Rexburg, ID
File: AMSCOR-PO5040A
Page 15
Placement of individual footings on the existing gravel is not
recommended because the relative density of the gravel is variable and
could lead to non-uniform support of the foundations.
6. ANTICIPATED SETTLEMENT: If the above bearing soil, site preparation,
earthwork and foundation recommendations are accomplished, we
anticipate total settlement will be less than 1/4 inch and differential
settlement will be less than 1/8 inch per 25 feet of wall length, or between
similarly loaded footings that are not less than 25 feet apart.
7. LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL: Potential for liquefaction on the site is
limited to the fine sandy silt covering the site. In order for liquefaction to
occur in the sandy silt the soil would need to be saturated and loose
during a seismic event. Since the sandy silt layer is relatively thin and
underlain by moderately fractured basalt it is unlikely that saturated
conditions will occur and remain on the site. Therefore it is our opinion
that the potential for liquefaction on the site is very low.
8. SOIL PROFILE CLASSIFICATION: Our site geologic research,
exploration findings, and our experience in the project vicinity indicate
structural design may utilize a Site Class B for seismic design referencing
section 1615 of the 2003 IBC. Grading, Drainage and Storm water
Disposal
Wet Weather Construction
We recommend that site construction be undertaken during dry weather
conditions. If the site preparation and grading is undertaken during wet conditions, the
native or re -compacted silty or sandy soil will be susceptible to pumping or rutting when
subjected to heavy loads from rubber -tired equipment or vehicles which exert a point
load. Wet weather earthwork should be performed by low pressure, track -mounted
equipment that spread and reduces the vehicle load. Work should not be performed
immediately after rainfall. All soft and disturbed areas should be excavated to
undisturbed soil and backfilled with structural fill. Alternatively, the area should be
moisture conditioned and re -compacted to structural fill requirements. Assuming the soil
is wet and soft but not disturbed, the initial layer of fill placed over the native soil should
be at least 12 inches, but no greater than 24 inches, in depth. Compaction of the fill
should be sufficient to prevent pumping of the native soil.
114
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
Addition to Madison Memorial Hospital
Rexburg, ID
File: AMSCOR•PO6040A
Page 16
Subgrades that become disturbed under construction traffic will require
overexcavation to remove soft or disturbed soil. Overexcavated soil should be replaced
with compacted structural fill. In summary, careful construction procedures are critical
to the successful grading operation if the onsite soil is at or above optimum moisture
content and loose. Consulting STRATA prior to initiating this type of construction is
recommended to help improve earthwork efficiency and achieve a stable subgrade.
Surface and Subsurface Drainage
Site grading, including all sidewalks and landscaped area grading, should slope a
minimum of 2 percent away from the proposed building to help prevent ponding and to
direct surface runoff away from the structure. All runoff from downspouts, roof areas,
sidewalk areas, landscaped areas, and other large volumes of storm water should be
directed and maintained away from the structure and not be allowed to infiltrate the soil
beneath the building area, sidewalks or footings. All drainage should be directed to an
approved discharge and/or collection facility, such as shallow detention ponds or
seepage beds, located a minimum of 50 feet away from building foundations. The
native silty sand encountered in the test pits can be used for storm water disposal.
Filtration beds in the native soil should be designed using an infiltration rate of 20
minutes per inch. Gravel used to construct filtration beds should be separated from the
native soil by a non -woven filter. If silt or clay fines are permitted to enter the gravel it
will greatly reduce the infiltration rate and reduce the efficiency of the storm water
disposal system. It will be critical to control water from the structure to reduce the
potential for soil saturation that could create conditions where ice heaving or differential
movement of sidewalks or other improvements could occur.
Void Detection and Remediation Alternatives
Borings have been drilled at predetermined locations across the site. Areas of
possible voids or cinders have not been detected in any of the borings. However,
isolated areas of voids or cinder pockets may be exist within the project limits and may
not become apparent until after construction has commenced. If voids or areas of
weaker basalt are encountered remediation may be required
# I
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
Addition to Madison Memorial Hospital
Rexburg, ID
File: AMSCOR-PO5040A
Page 17
Remediation alternatives include 1) blasting to collapse the areas, 2) using
concrete grout to fill the zones or 3) excavation of the basalt, voids or cinders and
replacement with compacted structural fill. Based on the information obtained from the
borings, we do not anticipate large areas requiring remediation. If voids are
encountered during construction Strata should be notified to assess the discovered
conditions and provide recommendations for remediation.
Loading on the concrete floor slab is much less than the loads supported by
footings for the structure. The rock cores obtained at the site indicate approximately 5+
feet of competent basalt with a compressive strength of approximately 4000 to 8000
pounds per square inch underlying the site. Based on the high compressive strength of
the basalt rock and the relatively light floor loads, remediation of the basalt under the
concrete floors should not be required.
ADDITIONAL SERVICES RECOMMENDED
Review of Plans and Specifications
We recommend that STRATA be retained to review the civil and structural
foundation plans and earthwork specifications prior to bidding of the construction
documents. It has been our experience that having the geotechnical consultant from
the design team review the construction documents reduces the potential for errors, and
also reduces costly changes to the contract during construction. STRATA can provide
review of the construction documents on a time and expenses basis.
Construction Observation and Testing
We recommend that STRATA be retained to observe the exposed subgrade in all
building footing trenches and sidewalk areas to verify site stripping, and excavation has
been accomplished to the recommended native bearing soil, that all soft or unsuitable
soil has been removed as described above, and that all bearing surfaces have been
prepared in accordance with this report. STRATA can provide construction material
testing and special inspection for earthwork, concrete, asphalt, masonry, and steel. If
we are not retained to perform the recommended services, we cannot be responsible
�41
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
Addition to Madison Memorial Hospital
Rexburg, to
File: AMSCOR-PO5040A
Page 18
for soil engineering related construction errors or omissions. The recommended
services are not included in this evaluation and would be billed on a time and expense
basis.
EVALUATION LIMITATIONS
This geotechnical engineering report has been prepared to assist planning,
design of the proposed additions to Madison Memorial Hospital in Rexburg, Idaho. Our
services consist of professional opinions and recommendations made in accordance
with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices. This
acknowledgment is in lieu of all warranties either expressed or implied.
The following plates accompany and complete this report:
Plate 1:
Vicinity Map
Plate 2:
Site Map
Plate 3:
Unified Soil Classification System (USCS)
Plate 4:
Schematic of Wall Drainage System
Appendix:
Exploratory Boring/Laboratory Results
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
N
jj
FFFTTFTI FT7
MTM
z
UNIFIED S®MS V_LA(RF-,Vrlirt-AT7rnN QVccqrrq1nK
SOIL CLASSIFICATION CuaaT
IStandard
2—Inch OD
Split—Spoon Sample
.Groundwater
— After 24 Hours
BG
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GRAPH
SYMBOL
LETTER
SYMBOL
TYPICAL NAMES
RG
Bulk Sample
Ring Sample
«:
GW
Well—Graded Gravel,
CLEAN
Gravel—Sand Mixtures.
BORING LOG SYMBOLS
GRAVELS
Q
GP
Poorly—Graded Gravel,
GRAVELS
Gravel—Sand Mixtures.
GRAVELS
GM
Silty Gravel, Gravel—
WITH
Sand—Silt Mixtures.
GC
Clayey Gravel, Gravel—
COARSE
FINES
GRAINEDSand—Clay
Mixtures.
SOILS
< < ° ° , ;;
SW
Well—Graded Sand,
CLEAN
o o
Gravelly Sand.
SANDS
SP
Poorly—Graded Sand,
SANDS
Gravelly Sand.
SANDS
e
SM
Silty Sand,
WITH
E
Sand—Silt Mixtures.
`' .� u `
SC
Clayey Sand,
FINES
E. e,
Sand—Clay Mixtures.
ML
Inorganic ilt, Sandy
SILTS AND CLAYS
or Clayey Silt.
Inorganic Clay of Low
LIQUID LIMIT
CL
to Medium Plasticity,
LESS THAN 50%
Sandy or Silty Clay.
I
1
I
1
I
1
OL
Organic Silt and Clay
FINE
1
1
1
of Low Plasticity.
GRAINED
Inorganic Silt, Mica—
SOILS
MH
ceous Silt, Plastic
SILTS AND CLAYS
Silt.
CH
Inorganic Clay of High
LIQUID LIMIT
Plasticity, Fat Clay.
OH
Organic Clay of Medium
GREATER THAN 50%\
to High Plasticity.
PT
Peat, Muck and Other
Highly Organic Soils.
SOIL CLASSIFICATION CuaaT
IStandard
2—Inch OD
Split—Spoon Sample
.Groundwater
— After 24 Hours
BG
Baggie Sample
IIRock
California Modified 3—Inch
OD Split—Spoon Sample
Core
Q GroundwaterBK
=_ at Time of Drilling
RG
Bulk Sample
Ring Sample
Shelby Tube 3—Inch OD
Undisturbed Sample
BORING LOG SYMBOLS
GROUNDWATER SYMBOLS
TEST
PIT LOG SYMBOLS
SYFR&-r&
C'EJIJ:NN CK_ EilOI!1EEE'�'C g 11.\IEFI!ld'E611!A..
'f�IY.�Y: Y�. FV✓a.t hnS �] p„Y,d!Jf-
File: PLATE- 'i
THIS DRAWINGS' CROSS-SECTIONS MAY BE USED FOR
GRAVITY WALLS. THIS IS NOT A STRUCTURAL DETAIL.
2% SLOPE
e
WALL MEMBRANE AS
APPROVED BY THE
PROJECT ENGINEER
a
e
d
3/4 IN. BASE
COURSE
°
CONCRETE d
FLOOR '
°
0 °d
I=1 I I
INFORMATIONAL ONLY (NOT TO
�% SLOPE
12 -INCH
SOIL COVER
IIII I 'I BY THE
PROJEOCT VED ENGINEERS
UNDISTURBED NATIVE OR
COMPACTED GRANULAR
MATERIAL
12 -INCH
SOIL COVER
MIRADRAIN OR EQUIVALENT
UNDISTURBED NATIVE OR
COMPACTED MATERIAL
Pop
NON—WOVEN
PERFORATEDFILTER FABRIC
.
E.0.5% MINIMUM
• • •.
UNDISTURBED NATIVE OR
COMPACTED MATERIAL
REFER TO MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS AND TEXT
OF REPORT FOR INFORMATION
REGARDING DRAINAGE
SYSTEM, WALL DESIGN AND
RELATED GEOTECHNICAL
CONSIDERATIONS.
SAND OR GRAVEL BACKING
= 4 -INCH -DIAMETER,
PERFORATED PVC
PIPE LAID WITH A
0.5% MINIMUM
LONGITUDINAL
SLOPE WITH
(1 -INCH) DRAIN
ROCK WRAPPED
IN FILTER FABRIC.
sYFI&Y&
4EOriGFNI":4EIIG NE6q NC E Ia14TE�lALS ISTN/i
�(I,x�v! y Frew x:Ls �rneNA ter
SCHEMATIC OF WALL
APPENDIX
BORINGS, & LABORATORY
TEST RESULTS
F
Boring No. I I
Subsurface
En
JL!
w
N
0
}
w o
Soil o
��
CO
aFP
°0
c o
oo �
o—` v
U c
REMARKS
s i tion
Cn
'n
CO
ED
m
o_
U
c O
o a E
W—
Fine Sandy SILT (native) —
ML
brown, loose, slightly moist. 1
2
3
qbIack,
4
8
4
30/1
> V`A>
+,
BASALT —>�`A>
strong to>moderatel
;ti�A;
RX
�>1<A>
>N<A>
60
>N<A>
9
>ti<A>
>� <A>
<� L
�'
A
10
> °<A>
Boring Terminated in basalt
RX
i`A>
' at 11'
',
r`
>�,A>�
7�
,
i 12
13
14
15
File: AMSCOR
Boring Number: 1
EKpLOo AyORV
Project
No.: P05040A
Date Drilled: 4/18/2005
O EON@ LOOS
Drill Rig: CME 75
Boring Diameter: 0.2' core
S T R aTa
T, y,,yF, N;F .:n<Mnnop
sweet g of 1
Depth to Ground Water: NA
Logged By. JPB
Boring No. ;
J
w
o
I y
Subsurface Soil a
w
a
NJ
m
a N
0 0~
a c
o i°
o- o
> � t
o— a
Y
v v o
REMARKS
Description c
N~
m
ma
0 0
w _=
a n F
Fine Sandy SILT (native) —
brown, loose, slightly moist.
ML
1
2
3
4
5
2
17
6
2
6
7
8
9
10
s
<n
5;<n5
I BASALT —Gray to black,
r>;<n>
>ti<n>
strong to very strong,
RX
moderately fractured.
>� n>
13
> i n>
�<n>
` �' `
60
14
> <n>
> <n>
�a n>
Boring Terminated in basalt 16� 15
40
d<n> 0
File: AMSCOR
Boring Number: 2
E`pLOo aVO��
0 �Q��� �0��
Sheat Il of Il
04
SYRaTa
Project No.: P05040A
Date Drilled: 4/18/2005
Drill Rig: CME 75
Boring Diameter: 0.2' core
Depth to Ground Water: NA
Logged By. JPB��+��--r-�r�^��-<��•�n.���1•
Boring No. r 0
N
o
J
y o
1
N o N
Subsurface Soil 1
v"
°'
o ,
d o
` o =W
LU
REMARKS
Description _
o
N~
mm;
o ,
o v
LU
Fine Sandy SILT (fill) — brown,
loose, slightly moist.
1
ML
Fine to Coarse Sandy GRAVEL
GP
Q
— (fill) brown, dense, damp t
.o::
':b•�%
moist. 3
0.
tr .g
dr ..o.:.
4
a..
5
0. O
X92
2
6
50/1'
BASALT — Gray to black, hard
to
'v
very hard, fresh, fine to'G^�
6
moderate grain, closed joints
RX
>;� >;
with moderately to widely
>'h-A>N
spaced fractures.
>�<A>'
7
G'
>j<A>
>;<A>;
60
RQD = 1007
>N.
8
<A
> * AL
>;'A>;
9
G
>�<A>N
A7 G>
�<A>
G
Boring Term. in basalt 10.5' 10
^>>x�A;x
5
11
12
13
14
Boring Terminated in basalt 16' 15
File: AMSCOR
Boring Number: 3
Project No.: P05040A
Date Drilled: 4/18/2005
QORHO L082
Drill Rig: CME 75
Boring Diameter: 0.2' core
STRaT�
,.
Sheet I of 1
Depth to Ground Water: NA
Logged By, JPBr.
Boring No.'
�
a
J
m
a°
3
N
>
w
Subsurface Soil
A7--
o_
N a
a=
t
o—.
Y° L
REMARKS
Description
0
m
m
v
o
-.
`o
o_
M —
a a 4)
Fine to Coarse Sandy GRAVEL
(fill) — Light brown, dense,
moist.
1 1 GP
BASALT
Fine Sandy SILT (nabrown,
loose, slightl
A7--
— Gray to black,
strong to very strong,
moderately fractured.
HI Bnrinn Tarm!nm.l ;.. L... --
U at 14'
p File: AMSCOR — P05040A
Project No.: P05040A
g Drill Rig: CME 75
Depth to Ground Water: NA
>�zA>;
RX >I<A>N
8 >i<A>i
L
>H<n>H
9 >1A>i
>H<A>H
>)<A' V
10
RX >,<A>ti
<A>�
11 >ti7A>ti
�<A>j
12 ;<A>AH
> <A>V
H<n>H
13
n7
�<A> V
.7 L l
9
18
84
3 Number: il
Drilled: April 18, 2005
1 Diameter: 0.2' Core-rRa�-a
0OMHO LOW
Sheet Y of &
Boring No. 5v
Subsurface Soil
�N
o
m
o
a ��
0
Y N
W
Description _
Q
N~
a=
m
o
n;
0` v
c� v a
0 o w
REMARKS
—
as 0
L
E
Fine to Coarse Sandy GRAVEL
— (fill) Light brown, dense,
j
GP
':�:.•0;
moist.
2
:....
.
a •.
p..
3
�..
a.•
9.
4
o:O
o�
5
BASALT — Gray to black,
>ti<ti
n>
strong to very strong,
RX
>N<njH
moderately fractured. 8
>i<A>
>^
<n>H
>�<n>b
9
<n>>
^ ^
> V<n>
84
10
RX
>'I<n>S
_
> �G^>N
11
>ti<n>i
4>
>N<A>N
t�
>ry<n>�
12
<n `>
ti ^>>
>
<n>+
13
>
Boring Terminated In basalt
>
<n>�
;
at 14,
V�^> V
C
A.^
15
File: AMSCOR — P05040A
Boring Number: 540��
0 �Q��O ����
Project No.: P05040A
Date Drilled: April 18, 2005
Drill Rig: CME 75
Boring Diameter: 0.2' Core
�TRaTa
�•r--.�,u�r. ^--�r�...,.,>e
Sheet I of g
Depth to Ground Water: NA
Logged By: JPB
Boring No.5
W
o
I N
Subsurface Soil
N am
w —W
REMARKS`NDescription
o
CO
Q_
L —
as E
:.g
Fine to Coarse Sandy GRAVEL:.6:..00
(fill) — Light brown, dense,
GP
::o:•�•
moist. 1
4:1.
o....
2
o..
o
v
w.:
>,<A>
N
�
<n>
Li
7 L
L>
> v<n> v
BASALT — Gray to black, 5
RX
> L>
A>"
<>
strong to very strong,
>ti�A>'�
moderately fractured.A>N
6
Iti A>1
"<A>"
60
<A>
7
>,<A>H
A>
<
Boring Terminated in basalt
>
>"<n>N
at 6
L>
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
File: AMSCOR — P05040A
Boring Number: 6
IMPLOPATOWY
QOQSHO LOW
Project No.: P05040A
Date Drilled: April 18, 2005
Drill Rig: CME 75
Boring Diameter: 0.2' Core
sTRa-ra
�^�-e•-yYF ^ �--�>:...,.�:r.
Sheet I of i
Depth to Ground Water: NA
ILogged By. JPB
Boring No. 7 =
V) V)
0
J
v
o
o N
Subsurface Soil W
�g
°'
M
oa
a o�
o =
1 d
REMARKS
Description _
N~
m
m
C
c 0
o
� —
v
a a P
Fine Sandy SILT (native) —
brown, loose, slightly moist.
ML
1
2
3
4
5
5
6
11
5
7
8
BASALT — Gray to black,
'`^<
very strong, widely spaced
fractured.
10
;<^>
<,<
sX�^s
12
RX
>"<^>
;<^>
13
;ti ^;
<,<
SM Ate'
Boring Terminated in basalt 14'
15
File: AMSCOR
Boring Number: 7
Project
No.: P05040A
Date Drilled: 4/18/2005
QOQ��R LO�aO
Drill Rig: CME 75
Boring Diameter: 0.2' core
S T R 3T 3
�i���--'��,ryF„k...
,Fe�.<:,'.ee
Sheet g of 1
Depth to Ground Water: NA
Logged By. JPB