Statesville Water Line Geotechnical Engineering Report REV 1 · Four rod soundings (RS-1 through RS-4) were performed by driving a 1/2-inch diameter steel rod in 3-foot and 4-foot

Report of Subsurface Exploration – Revision 1

Statesville Water Line

Iredell County, North Carolina

S&ME Project No. 1335-19-068

PREPARED FOR:

Hazen and Sawyer

9101 Southern Pine Boulevard, Suite 250

Charlotte, North Carolina 28273

PREPARED BY:

S&ME, Inc.

9751 Southern Pine Boulevard

Charlotte, NC 28273

April 8, 2020

S&ME, Inc. | 9751 Southern Pine Boulevard | Charlotte, NC 28273 | p 704.523.4726 | www.smeinc.com

April 8, 2020

Hazen and Sawyer

9101 Southern Pine Boulevard, Suite 250

Charlotte, North Carolina 28273

Attention: Mr. Matthew Buswell, P.E.

Reference: Report of Subsurface Exploration – Revision 1


Statesville, North Carolina


NC PE Firm License No. F-0176

Dear Mr. Buswell:

S&ME, Inc. (S&ME) has completed the subsurface exploration for the above-referenced project. This exploration

was performed in general accordance with the Subcontract Agreement for Professional Services between Hazen &

Sawyer and S&ME, Inc. for City of Statesville Amity Hill Road and Moose Club Road Waterlines signed November 5,

2019.

The purpose of the exploration was to determine the subsurface conditions at the site and to evaluate those

conditions with regard to the utility installation. This report presents our findings together with our conclusions

and recommendations.

S&ME appreciates the opportunity to assist you during this phase of the project. If you should have any questions

concerning this report or if we may be of further assistance, please contact us.

Sincerely,

S&ME, Inc.

J. Cole Phillips, E.I. Kristen H. Hill, P.E., P.G.

Geotechnical Staff Professional Principal Geotechnical Engineer

Registration No. 29147

29147





April 8, 2020 ii

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Project and Site Description .......................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Purpose and Scope ......................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 Exploration Procedures .................................................................................................... 2

2.1 Soil Test Borings ............................................................................................................................. 2

2.2 Rod Soundings ................................................................................................................................ 2

2.3 Laboratory Testing ......................................................................................................................... 2

3.0 Area Geology and Subsurface Conditions .................................................................. 3

3.1 Physiography and Area Geology ................................................................................................. 3

3.2 Subsurface Conditions ................................................................................................................... 4

3.2.1 Amity Hill Road and Moose Club Run (Borings B-1 through B-6) ................................................. 4

3.2.2 I-77 Crossing (Borings TB-101 through TB-104) ............................................................................ 5

3.2.3 Alternate I-77 Crossing (Borings TB-105 and TB-106) ................................................................... 5

4.0 Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................................. 6

4.1 General ............................................................................................................................................. 6

4.2 Design and Installation Considerations ...................................................................................... 6

4.2.1 Rock and Partially Weathered Rock .................................................................................................. 6

4.2.2 Groundwater ..................................................................................................................................... 7

4.2.3 Existing Fill and Alluvial Soils ......................................................................................................... 7

4.2.4 Uplift Forces ...................................................................................................................................... 8

4.3 Pipe Bedding ................................................................................................................................... 8

4.4 Untrenched Pipe Recommendations ........................................................................................... 8

4.4.1 General .............................................................................................................................................. 8

4.4.2 Design and Installation Considerations ............................................................................................ 9

4.4.3 Boring and Receiving Pits ................................................................................................................. 9

4.5 Earthwork Considerations .......................................................................................................... 10

4.5.1 Existing Underground Utilities ...................................................................................................... 10





April 8, 2020 iii

4.5.2 Site Preparation ............................................................................................................................... 11

4.5.3 Temporary Dewatering ................................................................................................................... 11

4.5.4 Temporary Excavation Stability ..................................................................................................... 11

4.5.5 Fill Material and Placement ............................................................................................................ 12

5.0 HDD Subsurface Conditions ........................................................................................ 12

6.0 Limitations of Report ..................................................................................................... 14

List of Figures Figure 3-1: Physiographic Provinces of North Carolina ....................................................................... 3

Figure 3-2: Typical Piedmont Weathering Profiles (After Sowers/Richardson, 1983) ...................... 4

List of Tables Table 4-1: Untrenched Pipe Installation Pit Design Parameters ........................................................ 10

Table 5-1: HDD Strata Interpretation .................................................................................................... 13

Table 5-2: HDD Design Parameters ....................................................................................................... 14

AppendixHDD Natural Geologic Hazards, Table A-1

Site Vicinity Plan, Figure 1

Test Location Plan, Figure 2

Generalized Subsurface Conditions and Profile drawings, Figures 3 through 7

Legend to Soil Classification and Symbols

Boring Logs

Rock Core Photo Log

Rod Sounding Logs

Summary of Laboratory Test Data, Table A-2

Laboratory Test Results





April 8, 2020 1

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Project and Site Description

Project information is based on a meeting and e-mail correspondence between Mr. Buswell of Hazen and Kristen

Hill of S&ME between September 23 and November 5, 2019. Hazen has provided .kml files of the proposed

alignments and a plan view and bore path model of the I-77 HDD crossing with proposed boring locations.

Additional project information was provided in email correspondence between Mr. Buswell and Kristen Hill on

February 26, 2020.

We understand that Hazen is providing design services to the City of Statesville for a water distribution line in

Statesville, North Carolina. The approximate site location is shown on the Site Vicinity Plan (Figure 1) in the

Appendix. This project consists of an approximately 2.2-mile long, 16-inch diameter line along Amity Hill Road

including a bore under I-77. It also includes an approximately 0.9-mile long, 12-inch diameter line along Moose

Club Road. We understand that pipes will generally bear within 5 feet of the ground surface and will be installed

mostly via cut and cover methods. In addition to the I-77 horizontal directional drill crossing, a shallow creek

crosses the proposed alignment along Amity Hill Road. As the project progressed, Hazen identified an alternate

I-77 horizontal directional drill crossing.

1.2 Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this geotechnical study was to explore the subsurface conditions at/along portions of the

waterline alignment and develop geotechnical recommendations for the design and construction of the project.

S&ME has completed the following scope of geotechnical services for this project:

Visited the site to mark the boring locations.

Contacted North Carolina 811 to mark underground utilities.

Mobilized a drill rig and crew to the site.

Performed twelve (12) soil test borings at approximate requested locations along the proposed alignment.

Cored rock to reach planned termination depths.

Attempted water level measurements in the borings.

Backfilled the boreholes with soil cuttings, installed a hole closure device near the ground surface in each

borehole, and backfilled with soil cuttings to the ground surface.

Performed four (4) rod soundings at approximate requested locations along the proposed alignment.

Performed laboratory testing.

Prepared this geotechnical engineering report summarizing our testing procedures, describing the

subsurface conditions at the site, and providing geotechnical conclusions and recommendations.





April 8, 2020 2

2.0 Exploration Procedures

2.1 Soil Test Borings

In order to explore the general subsurface conditions at the project site, twelve (12) soil test borings (B-1 through

B-6 and TB-101 through TB-106) were drilled to depths of 15 to 57.8 feet below existing grades. The borings were

advanced at the approximate locations shown on the Test Location Plan (Figure 2) in the Appendix. The

approximate boring locations were selected by Hazen and/or S&ME and were located in the field by an S&ME

staff professional using a hand-held GPS. The northings and eastings indicated on the soil test boring logs

included in the Appendix should be considered approximate. The ground surface elevations indicated on the soil

test borings should be considered approximate.

A CME-550X drill rig mounted on a Truck and an ATV carrier was used to advance the borings using hollow-stem

augers. Standard Penetration Test (SPT) split spoon sampling was performed at designated intervals in the soil

test borings in general accordance with ASTM D1586 to provide an index for estimating soil strength and relative

density or consistency. SPT tests were performed with a hydraulic automatic hammer. In conjunction with the SPT

testing, samples are obtained for soil classification purposes. Representative portions of each soil sample were

placed in glass jars or plastic bags and taken to our laboratory.

Water level measurements were attempted in the borings at the termination of drilling activities and after a

waiting period. The borings were backfilled with soil cuttings, a hole closure device was installed near the ground

surface and backfilling with soil cuttings was continued to the ground surface.

2.2 Rod Soundings

Four rod soundings (RS-1 through RS-4) were performed by driving a 1/2-inch diameter steel rod in 3-foot and 4-

foot lengths with an approximately 16.5-pound pipe hammer manually to refusal. Sounding rods can be used to

verify the depth to hard rock or partially weathered rock beneath soft to loose alluvium along creek channels and

beneath soft to loose soils. Please note however, the blow counts and blows per foot measurements shown on

the Rod Sounding logs are not the same as those from SPT testing in the borings and should not be directly

compared.

The rod soundings were advanced to depths ranging from 5 to 6.5 feet below the existing ground surface along

the proposed alignment. The rod sounding locations are shown on the Test Location Plan in the Appendix. The

elevations, northings and eastings indicated on the rod sounding logs included in the Appendix should be

considered approximate.

2.3 Laboratory Testing

Once the split-spoon samples arrived in our laboratory, a geotechnical staff professional visually examined each

sample in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) to estimate the distribution of

grain sizes, plasticity, organic content, moisture condition, color, presence of lenses and seams and apparent

geological origin. The results of the classifications, as well as the field test results, are presented on the individual

boring logs included in the Appendix. Similar materials were grouped into strata on the logs. The strata contact





April 8, 2020 3

lines represent approximate boundaries between the soil and rock types; the actual transition between the soil

and rock types in the field may be gradual in both the horizontal and vertical directions.

Laboratory classification tests were also performed on select soil samples to confirm visual soil classifications and

estimate the engineering properties of the soils tested. Laboratory testing included grain-size distribution,

Atterberg Limits, and moisture content tests. Results of the laboratory testing as well as a Summary of Laboratory

Test Data (Table A-2) are presented in the Appendix.

3.0 Area Geology and Subsurface Conditions

3.1 Physiography and Area Geology

The site is located within the Charlotte Belt of the Piedmont Physiographic Province of North Carolina, as shown in

Figure 3-1. The Piedmont Province generally consists of well-rounded hills and ridges, which are dissected by a

well-developed system of draws and streams. The Piedmont Province is predominantly underlain by metamorphic

rock (formed by heat, pressure and/or chemical action) and igneous rock (formed directly from molten material),

which were initially formed during the Precambrian and Paleozoic eras. The volcanic and sedimentary rocks

deposited in the Piedmont Province during the Precambrian eras were the host for the metamorphism and were

changed to gneiss and schist. The more recent Paleozoic era had periods of igneous emplacement, with at least

several episodes of regional metamorphism resulting in the majority of the rock types seen today.

Figure 3-1: Physiographic Provinces of North Carolina

The topography and relief of the Piedmont Province have developed from differential weathering of the igneous

and metamorphic rock. Because of the continued chemical and physical weathering, the rocks in the Piedmont

Province are now generally covered with a mantle of soil that has weathered in place from the parent bedrock.

These soils have variable thicknesses and are referred to as residuum or residual soils. The residuum is typically

finer grained and has higher clay content near the surface because of the advanced weathering. Similarly, the

soils typically become coarser grained with increasing depth because of decreased weathering. As the degree of

weathering decreases, the residual soils generally retain the overall appearance, texture, gradation and foliations

of the parent rock.

APPROXIMATE

SITE LOCATION





April 8, 2020 4

The boundary between soil and rock in the Piedmont is not sharply defined. A transitional zone termed “partially

weathered rock” is normally found overlying the parent bedrock. Partially weathered rock (PWR) is defined for

engineering purposes as residual material with Standard Penetration Resistances (N-values) exceeding 100 blows

per foot (bpf). The transition between hard/dense residual soils and partially weathered rock occurs at irregular

depths due to variations in degree of weathering. A graphic depiction of typical Piedmont weathering profiles is

presented in Figure 3-2.

Figure 3-2: Typical Piedmont Weathering Profiles (After Sowers/Richardson, 1983)

Water is typically present in the residual soils and within fractures in the PWR or underlying bedrock in the

Piedmont. On upland ridges in the Piedmont, water may or may not be present in the residual soils above the

PWR and bedrock. Alluvial soils in floodplains are generally saturated to within a few feet of the ground surface.

Fluctuations in water levels are typical in residual soils and PWR in the Piedmont, depending on variations in

precipitation, evaporation and surface water runoff. Seasonal high water levels are expected to occur during or

just after the typically wetter months of the year (November through April).

3.2 Subsurface Conditions

Subsurface conditions as indicated by the soil test borings generally consist of surficial topsoil underlain by fill

soils, residual soils, partially weathered rock, and auger refusal material. The generalized subsurface conditions at

the site are described below. Additionally, Generalized Subsurface Conditions and Profile drawings (Figures 3

through 7) are included in the Appendix. For more detailed soil descriptions and stratifications at a particular

boring location, the respective boring log should be reviewed.

3.2.1 Amity Hill Road and Moose Club Run (Borings B-1 through B-6)

Surface: The surface material at Borings B-1 through B-6 consisted of 1 to 2 inches of topsoil.





April 8, 2020 5

Fill Soils: Fill soils were encountered in Boring B-5 and extended to a depth of approximately 3 feet beneath the

existing ground surface. The fill soils consisted of soft sandy silt (ML). The fill soils exhibited SPT N-value of 4 bpf.

Residual Soils: Residual soils were encountered underlying the surficial topsoil and fill soil. The residuum

consisted of stiff silty clay (USCS Classification CH), firm to very stiff sandy clay (CL), firm to very stiff clayey silt

(MH), firm to stiff sandy silt (ML), and loose to dense silty sand (SM) with SPT N-values ranging from 5 to 36 bpf.

Based on the rod soundings, refusal material (i.e. rock) was not encountered at our test locations. The rod

soundings were terminated at depths ranging from 5 to 6.5 feet in dense residual soils.

Water Levels: Groundwater was encountered in Boring B-4 at a depth of 7.4 feet.

Water levels tend to fluctuate with seasonal and climatic variations, as well as with some types of construction

operations. Therefore, water may be encountered during construction at depths not indicated by the borings.

3.2.2 I-77 Crossing (Borings TB-101 through TB-104)

Surface: The surface material at Borings TB-101 through TB-104 consisted of 1 to 4 inches of topsoil.

Residual Soils: Residual soils were encountered underlying the surficial topsoil. The residuum consisted of firm

to stiff sandy clay (USCS Classification CL), firm to stiff clayey silt (MH), firm to very hard sandy silt (ML), and loose

to very dense silty sand (SM) with SPT N-values ranging from 7 to 64 bpf.

Partially Weathered Rock and Auger Refusal Material: Partially Weathered Rock (PWR) is defined for

engineering purposes as residual material that can be penetrated with drill rig augers and has standard

penetration resistance values in excess of 50 blows for 6 inches of penetration. PWR was encountered in borings

TB-101 through TB-103 at approximate depths ranging from 37 to 47 feet.

A lens of rock was encountered in boring TB-102 at an approximate depth of 27.3 feet. The rock extended to a

depth of 35.8 feet before transitioning to PWR. The rock was poor quality with Recovery of 40 to 74 percent and

Rock Quality Designation of 0 to 8 percent. Additional mechanical breaks occurred during the coring and

recovery process as well. The initial rock encountered consists of a 1-foot thick lens of quartz rich biotite gneiss

which is moderately to severely weathered, hard, with close fracture spacing. The Mohs hardness ranged from 6-7

in this layer. Underlying the quartz rich layer, a fine-grained biotite gneiss was encountered which is moderately

severely to completely weathered, soft to medium hard, with close fracture spacing. The Mohs hardness ranged

from 0-2 in this layer.

Water Levels: Groundwater was encountered at the termination of drilling in borings TB-101 and TB-103 at

approximate depths of 21.2 feet and 40.5 feet respectively.

3.2.3 Alternate I-77 Crossing (Borings TB-105 and TB-106)

Surface: The surface material at Borings TB-105 and TB-106 consisted of 2 inches of topsoil.





April 8, 2020 6

Residual Soils: Residual soils were encountered underlying the surficial topsoil. The residuum consisted of firm

to very stiff sandy clay (USCS Classification CL), soft to stiff sandy silt (ML), and loose to medium dense silty sand

(SM) with SPT N-values ranging from 3 to 25 bpf.

Partially Weathered Rock and Auger Refusal Material: PWR was encountered in boring TB-105 at approximate

depths ranging from 37 to 42 feet.

Auger refusal material was encountered in boring TB-105 at an approximate depth of 42 feet. Auger refusal is a

relative term used to define material that could not be penetrated with the drilling equipment used at the site.

Auger refusal may result from the presence of boulders, rock ledges, lenses, or seams, or the top of parent

bedrock. Rock coring, which was not performed at this boring location, would be required to confirm the type

and continuity of the refusal material. However, based on the conditions encountered across the site, we

anticipate that the auger refusal material is the top of parent bedrock.

Water Levels: Groundwater was encountered after an approximate 3-day waiting period in boring TB-105 at an

approximate depth of 25.2 feet.

4.0 Conclusions and Recommendations

4.1 General

Our conclusions and recommendations are based on the project information outlined previously and on the data

obtained from the field-testing program. If the structural loading, geometry or proposed water line locations or

depths are changed or significantly differ from those outlined, or if conditions are encountered during

construction that differ from those encountered by the soil test borings and sounding rod tests, S&ME requests

the opportunity to review our recommendations based on the new information and make any necessary changes.

4.2 Design and Installation Considerations

4.2.1 Rock and Partially Weathered Rock

Based on the results of the soil test borings and sounding rod tests, it appears that the general excavation for

water lines in traditional cut and cover trenches, as well as sending and receiving pits for road crossings, will be in

fill soils and residual soils. Generally, the existing fill and residual soils can be excavated using traditional

equipment (e.g., scrapers, trackhoes, and front-end loaders).

PWR/weathered rock and rock/refusal material was not encountered within the upper 15 feet in borings B-1

through B-6. PWR/weathered rock and rock/refusal material was encountered in borings TB-101 through TB-103

and TB-105 at depths ranging from 27 to 47 feet (approximate elevations ranging from 783 to 829 ft MSL). The

depth to, and thickness of, PWR, rock lenses or seams and bedrock, can vary dramatically in short distances and

between boring locations; therefore, PWR, boulders or bedrock may be encountered during any excavation on this

project.





April 8, 2020 7

Excavatable PWR is defined as material that can be excavated using traditional equipment by first loosening with a

single tooth ripper attached to a suitable sized dozer, such as a Caterpillar D-8 or D-9, or suitable sized trackhoe

such as a Caterpillar C320 equipped with a rock bucket with a curling force of 18,300 pounds or greater.

Jack hammering or blasting may be required for PWR in trench excavations, below the upper 2-4 feet of PWR in

open excavations, and for rock in both open site (greater than 10 feet wide and 30 feet long) and trench

excavations. We anticipate blasting will not be allowed to excavate sending and receiving pits due to the close

proximity of the roadways.

Jack hammering or blasting of rock may result in an uneven rock surface in the bottom of trench excavations and

a subsequent point load condition on the pipe. If dissimilar bearing conditions exist in trench excavations, we

recommend that those conditions be evaluated prior to placement of the pipe. To provide a uniform bearing

surface and reduce the potential for point loading, over-excavation below the bearing elevation and replacement

with properly compacted low-plasticity granular soil, crushed stone, or lean concrete may be required. If

dissimilar bearing conditions are encountered during excavation for the pipes, bedding should be provided in

accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations for the pipe.

4.2.2 Groundwater

Groundwater was encountered in Borings B-4, TB-101, TB-103 and TB-105 at the time of the exploration or after a

waiting period. Temporary de-watering techniques may be required during installation of the proposed pipeline,

particularly in deeper excavations such as pits for untrenched installation of pipe. At the creek crossings, it is

assumed that the groundwater levels will be near the water level in the creeks. In addition, uplift or buoyancy will

be a factor where the pipeline will be installed below the groundwater table. Depending on the time of year

construction proceeds and the depths of the proposed excavations, groundwater may be encountered during

construction at levels which deviate from this report.

4.2.3 Existing Fill and Alluvial Soils

Fill soils were encountered in Boring B-5. The fill soils encountered were soft sandy silts (ML) and were noted as

moist.

Undercutting of soft existing fill soils encountered at the pipe bearing elevation may be required. Although not

encountered by the borings, soft alluvial soils may also be encountered at the pipe bearing elevation, and

undercutting may be required. The extent and depth of undercutting should be determined in the field prior to

placement of the pipe.

Based on the visual observations of the split-spoon samples, the existing fill soils encountered generally appear to

be unsuitable for re-use as structural fill. The re-use and placement of the existing soils is discussed in Section

4.5.5.

It should be noted that, if encountered, alluvial soils are often saturated or above optimum moisture content and

may require drying prior to re-use as structural fill. Further evaluation regarding the suitability for re-use could be

performed during construction.





April 8, 2020 8

4.2.4 Uplift Forces

Uplift or buoyancy will be a factor where the pipeline will be installed below the groundwater table. If the uplift

forces are approximately equal to the weight of the pipe (empty) and backfill or larger, it will be necessary to

anchor the pipe. We recommend a minimum factor of safety of 1.25 be provided against uplift when utilizing

dead load for resistance.

4.3 Pipe Bedding

The pipe bedding material should comply with all requirements of the pipe manufacturer. In excavations where

groundwater is encountered, we recommend that adequate temporary de-watering measures be provided to help

maintain stable subgrade conditions. It may be necessary, depending on the actual subsurface conditions, that

the excavation bottoms and sides be lined with a needle punched non-woven filter fabric such as Mirafi 140N, or

equivalent and the granular backfill wrapped in the fabric to prevent the infiltration of soil fines into the granular

material which could otherwise result in the creation of voids and corresponding subsidence of these soils. The

fabric should be placed in areas where the water table is encountered during construction and at designated

areas, such as roadway and stream crossings where open cuts are required.

4.4 Untrenched Pipe Recommendations

4.4.1 General

Pipe installation at the roadway crossings will be performed using untrenched methods. The methods used by the

contractor should comply with NCDOT requirements.

Jack and bore tunneling methods are generally used for untrenched pipe installation and consist of excavating a

jacking pit adjacent to the proposed installation location and hydraulically pushing sections of pipe or casing

along the alignment. After installation of the first section of casing, additional sections of casing are subsequently

welded to the previous section of casing and advanced with the jacking system. Earth removal is generally

accomplished by mechanical means such as augers or boring equipment. A receiving pit is constructed at the

other end of the tunnel to receive the casing.

The casing is advanced forward using a jacking system. Horizontal forces induced by the jacking system are

resisted by the jacking pit support system. It is necessary to provide a relatively uniform distribution of load

around the pipe or casing periphery to prevent localized stress concentrations. This is accomplished by using a

cushion material between the pipe sections and jacking system. Where extreme jacking pressures are anticipated

due to long jacking distances or excessive friction forces are anticipated, additional pipe casing thickness may be

required.

The pipe or casing section should be designed by a registered engineer with regard to the anticipated

overburden, hydrostatic, and anticipated jacking pressures, if performed.





April 8, 2020 9

4.4.2 Design and Installation Considerations

As previously indicated, PWR, auger refusal, and/or rock were not encountered at any of the three road crossings

(B-1 through B-6). Based on the borings, untrenched pipe installation will not likely extend through PWR, rock, or

auger refusal material. However, the depth to, and thickness of, PWR, rock lenses or seams and bedrock, can vary

dramatically in short distances and between boring locations; therefore, PWR, boulders or bedrock may be

encountered during any excavation on this project. Excavation and maintaining a proper alignment may be more

difficult in mixed face conditions, such as PWR/rock and/or highly weathered and fractured rock/slightly

weathered rock.

Trenchless excavations should be designed to accommodate the roadway loading conditions. Deflections from

settlement or heave should be limited to NCDOT requirements. Limiting settlement and heave within tolerable

limits is dependent on both the tunneling and overburden material and on the installation method. Survey

control should be established at the ground surface along the tunnel alignment and should be monitored

regularly. The contractor should be prepared to repair the roadway if any distress is noted at the roadway surface.

During installation, any voids between the casing and surrounding soil/PWR/rock should be filled with grout upon

completion of the casing installation. Care should be taken to avoid excessive grouting pressures that could

damage the casing or cause surface disruption to the roadway. If the casing is hydraulically advanced, friction or

adhesion between the casing and surrounding materials can be reduced by injecting a bentonite slurry or other

lubricant through ports within the casing. Alternatively, a coating could be applied to the outside of the casing

prior to installation to reduce friction, as well as provide some corrosion resistance.

4.4.3 Boring and Receiving Pits

The following items should be appropriately addressed with regard to the design and construction of the

installation boring pits:

1. The design and construction of the temporary excavation and/or shoring and bracing systems for the pits

should be the responsibility of the contractor. Shoring for the pits should be designed by a registered

structural engineer and should be designed to withstand the lateral loads exerted by the surrounding

soils, hydrostatic pressures, as well as any anticipated surcharge loads. For boring pits, the back of the pit

should be designed to provide adequate thrust for the installation system. Some displacement of the wall

will be necessary to develop the passive resistance of the soils behind the wall. Based on our experience

we conservatively estimate the following design parameters:





April 8, 2020 10

Table 4-1: Untrenched Pipe Installation Pit Design Parameters

Geotechnical Design Parameters Retained Soil

Fill Residuum

At-Rest Lateral Earth Pressure Coefficient K0 = 0.56 K0 = 0.53

Active Lateral Earth Pressure Coefficient KA = 0.39 KA = 0.36

Passive Lateral Earth Pressure Coefficient KP = 2.56 KP = 2.77

Effective Angle of Internal Friction of Soils φ’ = 26° φ’ = 28°

Effective Cohesion of Soils c’ = 50 psf c’ = 200 psf

Moist Unit Weight of Soils γmoist = 115 pcf γmoist = 120 pcf

2. For temporary excavations, shoring and bracing or flattening (laying back) of the slopes should be

performed to obtain a safe working environment. Excavations should be sloped or shored in accordance

with local, state and federal regulations, including OSHA (29 CFR Part 1926) excavation trench safety

standards. We recommend that all excavated soils be placed away from the edges of the excavation, at a

distance equaling or exceeding the depth of the excavation. The contractor is solely responsible for site

safety. This information is provided only as a service and under no circumstances should we be assumed

responsible for construction site safety.

3. Surface water must be directed away from the pit areas and sumps with pumps should be available to

drain the pits if necessary. Groundwater was encountered within two of the borings so temporary

dewatering should be anticipated during excavation and installation of the shoring systems and during

construction. Temporary dewatering is discussed in more detail in Section 4.5.3.

4. A registered geotechnical engineer should visit the site once the pits are excavated. The purpose of the

engineer’s visit will be to confirm that adequate drainage is in place, dewatering techniques are available,

if needed, and settlement hubs or other methods available to take deflection readings are in place.

5. The boring pits should be backfilled immediately after pipe installation is complete and all slopes

repaired, as required.

4.5 Earthwork Considerations

4.5.1 Existing Underground Utilities

The project alignment crosses several roadways where utilities are present. Care should be taken as to not

damage the utility lines during construction. Any loose trench backfill should be removed and replaced with

properly compacted structural fill.

Utility lines can provide a conduit for water to enter excavations or tunnel areas; therefore, special attention

should be given to the proximity of these lines to the construction areas and adequate protection provided to

prevent surface water from entering and ponding in the excavations.





April 8, 2020 11

4.5.2 Site Preparation

Prior to excavation, stripping of asphalt pavement, topsoil, rootmat, trash, debris, vegetation, and other organic

materials should be performed along the proposed alignment to reduce the risk of these materials being mixed

with the underlying soils. Additionally, plans for segregating excessively wet alluvial/fill soils along the project

alignment should be in place to prevent potential mixing with dryer soils.

Based on our experience, stripping depths of up to 12 inches may be required, particularly in wooded areas.

Deeper stripping depths may be required in order to adequately remove large root bulbs. In addition, the depth

of topsoil stripping will be dependent upon prevailing weather conditions at the time of construction. During wet

conditions, rubber-tired equipment will mix topsoil with underlying “clean” soils, causing stripping depths to be

greater than topsoil depths indicated on the borings. We recommend that topsoil stripping be performed with

light, tracked equipment to reduce disturbance of the underlying soils, or be performed during dry periods.

4.5.3 Temporary Dewatering

Temporary dewatering is anticipated for utility installation in the areas along the alignment where groundwater is

present above the pipe invert elevation. Depending on the amount of groundwater flow encountered, a backup

dewatering system should be readily available by the contractor. Dewatering should be maintained until the

pipeline installation and backfilling around the pipeline is complete. If pumping is used, at no time should

pumping be performed directly beneath the exposed pipe bearing elevation since this could result in disturbance

of the bearing materials and a loss of soil strength and increased settlement.

We recommend, independent of the temporary de-watering methods used, that the water level be kept a

minimum of three feet below the bottom of the advancing excavation and three feet below the bottom of the

excavations at all times during construction. Dewatering must be maintained continuously for any beneficial de-

watering to be derived and a back-up system should be maintained on-site. Discontinuous pumping, for example,

will result in softening of the subgrade soils and additional undercutting may be required. The contractor should

also be prepared to implement additional de-watering techniques should the need arise.

Positive site drainage should be maintained away from working areas at all times to prevent ponding of water that

could soften and disturb the subgrade materials. We recommend that all subgrade surfaces and fill surfaces be

adequately sloped to provide positive drainage as construction progresses.

4.5.4 Temporary Excavation Stability

For temporary excavations, shoring and bracing or flattening (laying back) of the slopes should be performed to

obtain a safe working environment. Excavations should be sloped or shored in accordance with local, state and

federal regulations, including OSHA (29 CFR Part 1926) excavation trench safety standards. The contractor is

solely responsible for site safety. This information is provided only as a service and under no circumstances should

we be assumed responsible for construction site safety.

As previously discussed, untrenched installation pits will be required for the proposed water line. The system’s

design and construction should be the responsibility of a qualified contractor who is experienced in this type of

construction. The system should be designed by a registered professional engineer.





April 8, 2020 12

4.5.5 Fill Material and Placement

All fill used for site grading operations should consist of a clean (free of organics and debris), low plasticity soil

(Liquid Limit less than 50, Plasticity Index less than 25). The proposed fill should have a maximum dry density of at

least 90 pounds per cubic foot as determined by a Standard Proctor compaction test, ASTM D 698. All fill should

be placed in loose lifts not exceeding eight inches in thickness. In pavement areas (existing or proposed), fill

should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its Standard Proctor maximum dry density, with the final 12

inches compacted to 100 percent. Fill placed in landscaped areas, which can include plastic materials (LL greater

than 50, PI greater than 25) should be compacted to a minimum of 92 percent of its Standard Proctor maximum

dry density unless otherwise specified. The fill should be placed at moisture contents within +/- 3 percent of the

material’s optimum moisture content. We recommend that field density tests, including one-point Proctor

verification tests, be performed on the fill as it is being placed. We recommend that at least one density test be

performed per 200 linear feet of pipe installation per lift of fill placement.

Backfilling around the pipes should be conducted in accordance with the pipe manufacturer’s recommendations.

Typically, backfill on the sides of the pipe should be brought up simultaneously to prevent differential loading on

the pipe. During backfilling, care should be taken to prevent over compaction of the backfill, as this could result

in increased lateral stresses against the pipe.

Based on the results of the soil test borings performed and our experience with similar type materials, the clean

existing low plasticity fill soils and low plasticity residual soils can typically be reused as pipe backfill. Existing fill

soils should be evaluated during construction to determine their suitability for re-use as structural fill. As

previously noted, existing alluvial soils, if encountered, may require drying prior to re-use as structural fill.

Excavated PWR and rock, if encountered, can be re-used as pipe backfill, provided it is crushed to fragments less

than 4 inches in maximum dimension and blended with soil.

As excavations extend near the water table, the moisture content of the soils will typically become higher and it

will be difficult to achieve proper compaction. The soils may also become wet due to weather conditions and on-

going construction activities. Therefore, moisture conditioning (“drying back” or “wetting”) of the soils may be

required prior to reuse as structural fill.

Because of the size and length of the water lines, we expect that there will be an excess volume of soil excavated.

We recommend that care be taken in separating the drier materials from the wetter materials during excavation

for re-use as backfill. Since there will be an excess of soils excavated, the wetter soils could be set aside to reduce

the amount of drying that may be required of backfill materials. Likewise, if unsuitable fill soils are excavated

during water line excavation, these soils should be separated from the other excavated materials and removed

from the site.

5.0 HDD Subsurface Conditions

Subsurface conditions along the HDD alignments were characterized based on subsurface conditions encountered

in the borings and geologic setting. Based on our experience with the area geology, Table A-1 in the Appendix

summarizes our comments relative to HDD natural geologic hazards associated with the subject site. Soils and

rock with similar HDD drilling characteristics were grouped into strata (as shown in Table 5-1) based on visual soil





April 8, 2020 13

classification, laboratory classification tests, consistencies inferred from standard penetration resistance values,

and geologic origin. Material properties were estimated from correlations to material types, laboratory test

results, and field tests. The strata contact lines shown on the Generalized Subsurface Profiles (Figures 6 and 7 in

the Appendix) will likely vary between the borings due to widely spaced data and should be considered

approximate. Material properties are provided in tables based on correlations with subsurface conditions

encountered. More detailed information is presented in the Appendix.

Table 5-1: HDD Strata Interpretation

Strata Description

Percent of Material

USCS SPT resistance

(blows/foot) Gravel Sand Silt/

Clay

I

Embankment Fill Soils, and Residual

Soils: Clayey Silts, Sandy Silts, Sandy

Clays, and Silty Sands

< 10 20 - 80 20 - 80 MH, ML,

CL, SM 3 – 64 typ.

II

Partially Weathered Rock: Partially

weathered rock which sampled as Silty

Sand

< 10 60 - 85 15 - 40 SM 100+

III Rock N/A N/A N/A ROCK N/A

Notes:

1. USCS – Unified Soil Classification System, visual classification.

2. SPT – Standard Penetration Test "N" value.

3. The range of Percentage of Materials was estimated based on lab data.

4. The information presented above is a generalization of predominant subsurface conditions

encountered. The material descriptions, percentages of materials, USCS, and SPT values

presented are estimated based on visual classification, laboratory testing, field testing, and

experience.

Stabilized groundwater was measured after completing drilling in borings TB-101 and TB-103 at approximate

depths of 21.2 and 40.5 feet respectively, corresponding to approximate elevations of 828.8 and 835.5 feet

respectively. Stabilized groundwater was measured after an approximate 3-day waiting period in boring TB-105 at

an approximate depth of 25.2 feet, corresponding to an approximate elevation of 799.8 feet. The groundwater

level typically fluctuates during the year due to seasonal and climatic changes. Therefore, groundwater may be

encountered at depths not identified during this investigation.

Based on the data obtained during our field and laboratory testing, we recommend the following parameters for

use in design of the HDD program:





April 8, 2020 14

Table 5-2: HDD Design Parameters

Soil

Type

Strata Friction

Angle

(degrees)

Cohesion

(psf) Unit Weight (pcf)

Unconfined

Compressive

Strength

(psi)

Mohs

Hardness

Total Submerged

Soil I 28 100 115 53 -- --

PWR II 38 500 145 83 -- --

ROCK III -- -- -- -- -- 0 - 7

6.0 Limitations of Report

This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice for

specific application to this project. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based

upon applicable standards of our practice in this geographic area at the time this report was prepared. No other

representation or warranty either express or implied, is made.

We relied on project information given to us to develop our conclusions and recommendations. If project

information described in this report is not accurate, or if it changes during project development, we should be

notified of the changes so that we can modify our recommendations based on this additional information if

necessary.

Our conclusions and recommendations are based on limited data from a field exploration program. Subsurface

conditions can vary widely between explored areas. Some variations may not become evident until construction.

If conditions are encountered which appear different than those described in our report, we should be notified.

This report should not be construed to represent subsurface conditions for the entire site.

Unless specifically noted otherwise, our field exploration program did not include an assessment of regulatory

compliance, environmental conditions or pollutants or presence of any biological materials (mold, fungi, bacteria).

If there is a concern about these items, other studies should be performed. S&ME can provide a proposal and

perform these services if requested.

S&ME should be retained to review the final plans and specifications to confirm that earthwork, foundation, and

other recommendations are properly interpreted and implemented. The recommendations in this report are

contingent on S&ME’s review of final plans and specifications followed by our observation and monitoring of

earthwork and foundation construction activities.

Appendix





Table A-1 – HDD Natural Geologic Hazards

SOIL CONDITIONS AND HDD DIFFICULTY POTENTIAL SITE SOIL CONDITIONS AND HDD DIFFICULTY3

Soil Condition Generally

Suitable4

Difficulties

May Occur

Substantial

Problems

Consistent

with Geology

Encountered

by BoringsComments

Soft to very soft clays, silts, and organic deposits1 X Yes Yes Encountered in the borings.

Medium to Very stiff Clays and Silts1 X Yes Yes Encountered in the borings.

Hard Clays and highly weathered shales1 X No No Not consistent with geology and not encountered in the borings.

Very loose to loose sands above and below the

water table (not more than 30% gravel by weight)1,2 X Yes Yes Encountered in the borings.

Medium to dense sands above or below the water

table (not more than 30% gravel by weight)1,2 X Yes Yes Encountered in the borings.

Very loose to dense gravelly sand,

(30% to 50% gravel by weight)1,2 X No No Not consistent with geology and not encountered in the borings.

Very loose to dense gravelly sand

(50% to 85% gravel by weight)1,2 X No No Not consistent with geology and not encountered in the borings.

Very loose to very dense gravel1,2 X No No Not consistent with geology and not encountered in the borings.

Soils with significant cobbles,

boulders, and obstructions1 X No No Not consistent with geology and not encountered in the borings.

Weathered rocks, marls, chalks,

and firmly cemented sands1 X Yes Yes Partially Weathered Rock encountered in the borings.

Slightly weathered to un-weathered rocks1 X Yes Yes Encountered in the borings.

Material with sufficient potential swell upon

exposure to water to reduce borehole diameter X Yes No Consistent with geology but not encountered in the borings.

Karst geology or preferential seepage paths

potentially resulting in loss of drilling fluid circulationX No No Not consistent with geology and not encountered in the borings.

Artesian groundwater conditions X No No Not consistent with geology and not encountered in the borings.

Rock Fill or fill containing rock X N/A No Not encountered in the borings.

General HDD Issues (Historically derived) TB-101 through TB-106 – Statesville, NC

1 Adapted from ASTM F1962, Table 1-“Soil Conditions and Suitability of Horizontal Directional Drilling”. Soil Conditions with a Superscript of 1 are directly from this reference. 2 The inside diameter of Spilt Spoon Samplers (ASTM D1586) is 1-3/8 inches. Gravel larger than 1-3/8 inches in diameter cannot be recovered from split spoon samplers used for this exploration which may result in the percent gravel and

maximum gravel size being underestimated. 3 “Potential Site Soil Conditions and HDD Difficulty” is a professional opinion based on experience with the site geology; subsurface conditions encountered by borings performed for this exploration; and subsurface soil conditions known

to be difficult for HDD. 4 “Generally Suitable” presumes a knowledgeable, experienced contractor and personnel using appropriate equipment.





Table A-2 – Summary of Laboratory Test Data

Sample Location Sample

Type

USCS

Classification

Soil Type

Atterberg LimitsNatural

Moisture

Content

%

Diameter

(millimeters)

% Silt

and

Clay

% Sand % Gravel

Rock Core

Compressive

Strength

(psi) Boring Sample Depth (ft) Strata LL PL PI D100 D60 D30 D10Fine Medium Coarse

B-1 1 1-2.5 I SS CH 61 29 32 23.5 9.5 -- -- -- 63.1 19.6 14.6 1.7 1.0 --

B-3 3 6-7.5 I SS CH 96 40 56 33.1 19 -- -- -- 62.8 14.4 12.0 1.9 8.9 --

B-6 1 1-2.5 I SS SM 38 31 7 15.4 9.5 0.15 -- -- 41.7 42.6 12.0 2.0 1.6 --

TB-103 6 18.5-20 I SS ML 48 39 9 23.8 4.75 0.1 -- -- 52.8 34.5 10.3 1.7 0.7 --

TB-104 1 1-2.5 I SS MH 74 38 36 30.1 4.75 -- -- -- 72.3 16.6 9.0 1.2 0.8 --

Legend

LL – Liquid Limit SS- Split Spoon Soil Sample * - Fines visually/ manually classified Notes 1 - USCS classification determined by visual-manual identification

PL – Plastic Limit RC – Rock Core Sample

PI – Plasticity Index NP – Non-Plastic

NTS

JCP

KHH

4/8/2020

1

FIGURE NO.SCALE:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

DATE:PROJECT NO.:

SITE VICINITY PLAN

STATESVILLE WATER LINE

AMITY HILL RD / MOOSE CLUB RUN

STATESVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA

Approximate Site Location

SITE

1335-19-068

JCP

KHH 21335-19-068

TEST LOCATION PLAN

STATESVILLE WATER LINE

STATESVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA

FIGURE NO.DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

SCALE:

DATE:

NTS

4/8/2020

PROJECT

NO:

LEGEND

BORING LOCATION PROPOSED ALIGNMENT

RS-1

B-4

RS-2

B-3

RS-3

B-1

B-2

RS-4B-5

B-6

TB-101

TB-102

TB-104

TB-103

Amity Hill Road

ROD SOUNDING LOCATION

TB-105 TB-106

870

875

880

885

890

895

900

905

910

915

0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000 2,200 2,400 2,600 2,800

Topsoil CH, High Plasticity Clay MH, High Plasticity Silt ML, Low Plasticity Silt

CL, Low Plasticity Clay SM, Silty Sand

JOB NO:

DATE:

APPROXIMATE DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (feet)

1335-19-068

4/8/20

EL

EV

AT

ION

(f

ee

t-M

SL

)

3S&ME, INC.

9751 SOUTHERN PINE BOULEVARD

CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 28273

P: (704) 523-4726

F: (704) 525-3953

Figure:

The depicted stratigraphy is shown for illustrative purposes only. The actual subsurface conditions will vary between boring locations.

N = Standard Penetration Test resistance value (blows per foot) HC = Hole Cave. BT = Boring Terminated AR = Auger Refusal

- Approximate Depth/Elevation of Water Line

Diagram: Generalized Subsurface Conditions

Project: Statesville Water Line

Location: Statesville, North Carolina

HC

7

30

13

12

10

B- 1

BT @ 15'

N

HC

17

19

20

18

36

B- 2

BT @ 15'

N

MOOSE CLUB RUN

790

800

810

820

830

840

850

860

870

880

890

900

910

920

RS- 1

BT @ 6.5'

Topsoil CH, High Plasticity Clay MH, High Plasticity Silt ML, Low Plasticity Silt

CL, Low Plasticity Clay SM, Silty Sand

JOB NO:

DATE:

1335-19-068

4/8/20

EL

EV

AT

ION

(f

ee

t-M

SL

)

4S&ME, INC.



P: (704) 523-4726

F: (704) 525-3953

Figure:


BT @ 5'

RS- 3

BT @ 6'

RS- 2

Groundwater level after24 hours.






HC 8 11 9 11 20

B- 3

BT @ 15'

N

HC 8 8 9 7 9

B- 4

BT @ 15'

N

AMITY HILL ROAD

800

805

810

815

820

825

830

835

840

845

850

855

ML, Low Plasticity Silt Topsoil MH, High Plasticity Silt SM, Silty Sand

JOB NO:

DATE:

1335-19-068

4/8/20

EL

EV

AT

ION

(f

ee

t-M

SL

)

5S&ME, INC.



P: (704) 523-4726

F: (704) 525-3953

Figure:




RS- 4

BT @ 6'




HC

4

5

5

10

11

B- 5

BT @ 15'

N

10

28

25

22

34

B- 6

BT @ 15'

N

HC

AMITY HILL ROAD

800

810

820

830

840

850

860

870

880

890

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Topsoil CL, Low Plasticity Clay SM, Silty Sand ML, Low Plasticity Silt

Partially Weathered Rock Cored Rock MH, High Plasticity Silt

JOB NO:

DATE:


EL

EV

AT

ION

(f

ee

t-M

SL

)

S&ME, INC.



P: (704) 523-4726

F: (704) 525-3953

Figure:


I I- Approximate Depth/Elevation of HDD Borepath


- Residual Soil I I

I

- PWR II

I

Diagram: Generalized Subsurface Profile



- Rock

I

I

IIII II

IIII

Groundwater level at termination of boring.

I

1335-19-068

4/8/20 6

7 11 7 7

7

15

19

11

56

50/.4

TB- 101

BT @ 38.9'

N 11 12 16 19

31

28

38

50/.3

50/.4

TB- 102

AR @ 27.3'BT @ 46.5'

N

50/0 50/.3

7 15 12 12

10

8

9

13

13

23

50/.3

50/0

TB- 103

AR @ 57.8'BT @ 57.8'

64

N

13 16 11 12

10

12

11

TB- 104

BT @ 25'

N

HDD CROSSING I-77

770

775

780

785

790

795

800

805

810

815

820

825

830

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260

Topsoil CL, Low Plasticity Clay ML, Low Plasticity Silt SM, Silty Sand

Partially Weathered Rock

JOB NO:

DATE:


1335-19-068

4/8/20

EL

EV

AT

ION

(f

ee

t-M

SL

)

Diagram: Generalized Subsurface Profile


Location: Statesville, North Carolina 7S&ME, INC.



P: (704) 523-4726

F: (704) 525-3953

Figure:

HC

25

20

15

16

9

5

5

13

25

TB- 105

AR @ 42'BT @ 42'

N

7

7

6

3

5

6

6

4

10

5

6

5

TB- 106

BT @ 50'

N


I I- Residual Soil I I- PWR II - Rock

ALTERNATE HDD CROSSING I-77

Groundwater level after waiting period

N = Standard Penetration Test resistance value (blows per foot) HC = Hole Cave BT = Boring Terminated AR = Auger Refusal

I

I

II

III

50/.3

Asphalt

Concrete

Topsoil

Fill

Partially Weathered Rock

Cored Rock

SOIL TYPES(Shown in Graphic Log)

SM

WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NOFINES

CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAYMIXTURES

ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANICCLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY

INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS ORDIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND ORSILTY SOILS, ELASTIC SILTS

ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANICCLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGHPLASTICITY

OH

CONSISTENCY OF COHESIVE SOILS

STD. PENETRATIONRESISTANCEBLOWS/FOOTCONSISTENCY

RELATIVE DENSITY

Very LooseLoose

Medium DenseDense

Very Dense

0 to 45 to 1011 to 3031 to 50Over 50

(Shown in Samples Column)

CONSTITUENT MODIFIERS

GW

GP

GM

GC

SW

SP

SC

ML

CL

OL

MH

CH

POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS,GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES, LITTLEOR NO FINES

SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL- SAND -SILT MIXTURES

CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND-CLAY MIXTURES

WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLYSANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES

POORLY-GRADED SANDS,GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NOFINES

SILTY SANDS, SAND - SILTMIXTURES

INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINESANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY ORCLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEYSILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY

INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TOMEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLYCLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS,LEAN CLAYS

INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGHPLASTICITY, FAT CLAYS

0 to 23 to 45 to 89 to 1516 to 3031 to 50Over 50

Very SoftSoftFirmStiff

Very StiffHard

Very Hard

RELATIVE DENSITY OF COHESIONLESS SOILS

STD. PENETRATIONRESISTANCEBLOWS/FOOT

Shelby Tube

Split Spoon

Rock Core

No Recovery

SAMPLER TYPESTrace: <5%

Few: 5 to <15%Little: 15 to <30%Some: 30 to <50%Mostly: 50 to 100%

- The Number of Blows of 140 lb. Hammer Falling30 in. Required to Drive 1.4 in. I.D. Split SpoonSampler 1 Foot. As Specified in ASTM D-1586.

- Total Length of Rock Recovered in the CoreBarrel Divided by the Total Length of the Core RunTimes 100%.

- Total Length of Sound Rock Segments Recoveredthat are Longer Than or Equal to 4" (mechanicalbreaks excluded) Divided by the Total Length ofthe Core Run Times 100%.

REC

RQD

StandardPenetrationResistance

TOB

LEGEND TO SOIL CLASSIFICATION AND SYMBOLS

TERMS

- Termination of Boring

WATER LEVELS(Shown in Water Level Column)

= Water Level At Termination of Boring= Water Level Taken After 24 Hours= Loss of Drilling Water= Hole CaveHC

3

13

7

5

5

4

17

6

7

5

3

9

11

4

5

7

30

13

12

10

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

Topsoil (1 inch)

RESIDUUM: SILTY CLAY (CH) - firm, orange,moist

CLAYEY SILT (MH) - very stiff, red, moist

SANDY SILT (ML) - stiff, orange red, tracemica, moist

Boring terminated at 15 feet

HC

THIS LOG IS ONLY A PORTION OF A REPORT PREPARED FOR THE NAMEDPROJECT AND MUST ONLY BE USED TOGETHER WITH THAT REPORT.

BORING, SAMPLING AND PENETRATION TEST DATA IN GENERALACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D-1586.

STRATIFICATION AND GROUNDWATER DEPTHS ARE NOT EXACT.

WATER LEVEL IS AT TIME OF EXPLORATION AND WILL VARY.

1.

2.

3.

4.

PROJECT:

B- 1

EASTING: 1440397

2nd

6in

/ RE

C

BORING DEPTH: 15.0 ft

LOGGED BY: C. Phillips

3rd

6in

/ RQ

D

GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

N V

AL

UE

DE

PT

H

(fe

et)

NOTES:

DATE DRILLED: 11/6/19

DRILL RIG: CME 550X

DRILLER: L. Guempel

HAMMER TYPE: Automatic

SAMPLING METHOD: Split spoon

DRILLING METHOD: 2¼" H.S.A.

5

10

15

1st 6

in /

RU

N #

BLOW COUNT/ CORE DATA

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

BORING LOG

NOTES: Ground surface elevation obtained

from Google Earth and should be considered

approximate. Northing and easting obtained


approximate.


Statesville Water LineStatesville, North Carolina

NORTHING: 728022

ELEVATION: 912.0 ft

WATER LEVEL: Not Encountered

907.0

902.0

897.0

EL

EV

AT

ION

(fe

et-

MS

L)

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

REMARKS

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SP

T R

EC

. (i

n.)

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

Page 1 of 1

S&

ME

BO

RIN

G L

OG

S

TA

TE

SV

ILL

E W

AT

ER

LIN

E.G

PJ

S&

ME

.GD

T

4/7

/20

8060302010

STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DATA(blows/ft)

7

30

13

12

10

8

8

9

8

18

9

11

11

10

18

6

5

7

6

15

17

19

20

18

36

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

Topsoil (2 inches)

RESIDUUM: SANDY CLAY (CL) - very stiff,red orange, trace mica, moist

SILTY SAND (SM) - medium dense to dense,tan white, trace mica, fine to coarse grained,moist


HC





1.

2.

3.

4.

PROJECT:

B- 2

EASTING: 1442824

2nd

6in

/ RE

C



3rd

6in

/ RQ

D

GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

N V

AL

UE

DE

PT

H

(fe

et)

NOTES:


DRILL RIG: CME 550X

DRILLER: L. Guempel




5

10

15

1st 6

in /

RU

N #



BORING LOG





approximate.



NORTHING: 728981

ELEVATION: 888.0 ft


883.0

878.0

873.0

EL

EV

AT

ION

(fe

et-

MS

L)

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

REMARKS

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SP

T R

EC

. (i

n.)

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

Page 1 of 1

S&

ME

BO

RIN

G L

OG

S

TA

TE

SV

ILL

E W

AT

ER

LIN

E.G

PJ

S&

ME

.GD

T

4/7

/20

8060302010


17

19

20

18

36

4

5

4

5

7

4

6

5

6

13

3

3

3

3

6

8

11

9

11

20

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

RESIDUUM: SANDY CLAY (CL) - firm to stiff,red orange, moist

SILTY CLAY (CH) - stiff, tan gray, moist to wet

SILTY SAND (SM) - medium dense, brown,fine to coarse grained, moist


HC





1.

2.

3.

4.

PROJECT:

B- 3

EASTING: 1444413

2nd

6in

/ RE

C



3rd

6in

/ RQ

D

GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

N V

AL

UE

DE

PT

H

(fe

et)

NOTES:


DRILL RIG: CME 550X

DRILLER: L. Guempel




5

10

15

1st 6

in /

RU

N #



BORING LOG





approximate.



NORTHING: 729999

ELEVATION: 849.0 ft


844.0

839.0

834.0

EL

EV

AT

ION

(fe

et-

MS

L)

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

REMARKS

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SP

T R

EC

. (i

n.)

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

Page 1 of 1

S&

ME

BO

RIN

G L

OG

S

TA

TE

SV

ILL

E W

AT

ER

LIN

E.G

PJ

S&

ME

.GD

T

4/7

/20

8060302010


8

11

9

11

20

4

3

4

3

4

4

5

5

4

5

3

2

3

3

3

8

8

9

7

9

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

RESIDUUM: SANDY SILT (ML) - firm to stiff,red tan, trace mica, moist


HC





1.

2.

3.

4.

PROJECT:

B- 4

EASTING: 1443955

2nd

6in

/ RE

C



3rd

6in

/ RQ

D

GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

N V

AL

UE

DE

PT

H

(fe

et)

NOTES:


DRILL RIG: CME 550X

DRILLER: L. Guempel




5

10

15

1st 6

in /

RU

N #



BORING LOG





approximate.



NORTHING: 731190

ELEVATION: 813.0 ft

WATER LEVEL: 7.4 ft on 11/7/19

808.0

803.0

798.0

EL

EV

AT

ION

(fe

et-

MS

L)

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

REMARKS

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SP

T R

EC

. (i

n.)

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

Page 1 of 1

S&

ME

BO

RIN

G L

OG

S

TA

TE

SV

ILL

E W

AT

ER

LIN

E.G

PJ

S&

ME

.GD

T

4/7

/20

8060302010


8

8

9

7

9

2

2

2

4

5

2

3

3

6

6

1

2

4

3

3

4

5

5

10

11

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

Topsoil 1 inch

FILL: SANDY SILT (ML) - soft, red darkbrown, moist

RESIDUUM: CLAYEY SILT (MH) - firm to stiff,red brown, moist


HC





1.

2.

3.

4.

PROJECT:

B- 5

EASTING: 1447672

2nd

6in

/ RE

C



3rd

6in

/ RQ

D

GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

N V

AL

UE

DE

PT

H

(fe

et)

NOTES:


DRILL RIG: CME 550X

DRILLER: L. Guempel




5

10

15

1st 6

in /

RU

N #



BORING LOG





approximate.



NORTHING: 729401

ELEVATION: 851.0 ft


846.0

841.0

836.0

EL

EV

AT

ION

(fe

et-

MS

L)

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

REMARKS

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SP

T R

EC

. (i

n.)

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

Page 1 of 1

S&

ME

BO

RIN

G L

OG

S

TA

TE

SV

ILL

E W

AT

ER

LIN

E.G

PJ

S&

ME

.GD

T

4/7

/20

8060302010


4

5

5

10

11

4

13

11

8

16

6

15

14

14

18

3

8

11

6

11

10

28

25

22

34

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

Topsoil (2 inches)

RESIDUUM: SILTY SAND (SM) - loose, tanorange, fine to medium grained, moist

SILTY SAND (SM) - medium dense to dense,tan orange, fine to medium grained, moist


HC





1.

2.

3.

4.

PROJECT:

B- 6

EASTING: 1447923

2nd

6in

/ RE

C



3rd

6in

/ RQ

D

GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

N V

AL

UE

DE

PT

H

(fe

et)

NOTES:


DRILL RIG: CME 550X

DRILLER: L. Guempel




5

10

15

1st 6

in /

RU

N #



BORING LOG





approximate.



NORTHING: 727603

ELEVATION: 818.0 ft


813.0

808.0

803.0

EL

EV

AT

ION

(fe

et-

MS

L)

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

REMARKS

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SP

T R

EC

. (i

n.)

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

Page 1 of 1

S&

ME

BO

RIN

G L

OG

S

TA

TE

SV

ILL

E W

AT

ER

LIN

E.G

PJ

S&

ME

.GD

T

4/7

/20

8060302010


10

28

25

22

34

3

5

3

3

3

6

9

4

4

6

4

4

4

9

10

7

2

3

3

3

3

5

4

3

7

11

7

7

7

15

19

11

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

SS-6

SS-7

SS-8

Topsoil (4 inches)

RESIDUUM: SANDY CLAY (CL) - firm to stiff,brown gray, moist

SILTY SAND (SM) - loose to medium dense,tan gray, fine to coarse grained, moist to wet

SANDY SILT (ML) - stiff, brown tan, tracemica, wet





1.

2.

3.

4.

PROJECT:

TB- 101

EASTING: 1448119

2nd

6in

/ RE

C



3rd

6in

/ RQ

D

GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

N V

AL

UE

DE

PT

H

(fe

et)

NOTES:


DRILL RIG: CME 550X

DRILLER: L. Guempel




5

10

15

20

25

30

1st 6

in /

RU

N #



BORING LOG





approximate.



NORTHING: 725514

ELEVATION: 850.0 ft


845.0

840.0

835.0

830.0

825.0

820.0

EL

EV

AT

ION

(fe

et-

MS

L)

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

REMARKS

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SP

T R

EC

. (i

n.)

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

Page 1 of 2

S&

ME

BO

RIN

G L

OG

S

TA

TE

SV

ILL

E W

AT

ER

LIN

E.G

PJ

S&

ME

.GD

T

4/7

/20

8060302010


7

11

7

7

7

15

19

11

21 3513

50/.4

56

50/.4

SS-9

SS-10

SANDY SILT (ML) - very hard, brown tan,trace mica, wet

PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK: SILTYSAND - gray, fine to coarse grained

Boring terminated at 38.9 feet





1.

2.

3.

4.

PROJECT:

TB- 101

EASTING: 1448119

2nd

6in

/ RE

C



3rd

6in

/ RQ

D

GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

N V

AL

UE

DE

PT

H

(fe

et)

NOTES:


DRILL RIG: CME 550X

DRILLER: L. Guempel




35

1st 6

in /

RU

N #



BORING LOG





approximate.



NORTHING: 725514

ELEVATION: 850.0 ft


815.0

EL

EV

AT

ION

(fe

et-

MS

L)

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

REMARKS

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SP

T R

EC

. (i

n.)

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

Page 2 of 2

S&

ME

BO

RIN

G L

OG

S

TA

TE

SV

ILL

E W

AT

ER

LIN

E.G

PJ

S&

ME

.GD

T

4/7

/20

8060302010


56

100

4

5

8

8

12

12

19

74%

7

7

8

11

19

16

19

0%

3

5

5

4

8

7

13

50/0

11

12

16

19

31

28

38

50/0

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

SS-6

SS-7

SS-8

RC-1

Topsoil (2 inches)

RESIDUUM: SANDY CLAY (CL) - stiff, tanorange, moist

SANDY SILT (ML) - stiff, tan, moist

SILTY SAND (SM) - medium dense to dense,tan brown, fine to medium grained, moist

CRYSTALLINE ROCK - BIOTITE GNEISS -Quartz rich, white, moderate to moderatelysevere weathering, medium hard to moderatelyhard, close fracture spacing, Mohs Hardness =6-7, REC = 74%, RQD = 0%





1.

2.

3.

4.

PROJECT:

TB- 102

EASTING: 1448345

2nd

6in

/ RE

C



3rd

6in

/ RQ

D

GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

N V

AL

UE

DE

PT

H

(fe

et)

NOTES:


DRILL RIG: CME 550X

DRILLER: L. Guempel


SAMPLING METHOD: Rock Core, Split spoon


5

10

15

20

25

30

1st 6

in /

RU

N #



BORING LOG





approximate.



NORTHING: 725540

ELEVATION: 855.0 ft


850.0

845.0

840.0

835.0

830.0

825.0

EL

EV

AT

ION

(fe

et-

MS

L)

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

REMARKS

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SP

T R

EC

. (i

n.)

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

Page 1 of 2

S&

ME

BO

RIN

G L

OG

S

TA

TE

SV

ILL

E W

AT

ER

LIN

E.G

PJ

S&

ME

.GD

T

4/7

/20

8060302010


11

12

16

19

31

28

38

100

40% 8%

50/.3

50/.4

50/.3

50/.4

RC-2

SS-9

SS-10

FINE-GRAINED BIOTITE GNEISS - gray tan,moderately severe to complete weathering, verysoft to medium hard, close fracture spacing,Mohs Hardness = 0-2 (continued)

PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK: SILTYSAND - brown gray, fine to coarse grained

Refusal at 27.3 feetBoring terminated at 46.5 feet





1.

2.

3.

4.

PROJECT:

TB- 102

EASTING: 1448345

2nd

6in

/ RE

C



3rd

6in

/ RQ

D

GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

N V

AL

UE

DE

PT

H

(fe

et)

NOTES:


DRILL RIG: CME 550X

DRILLER: L. Guempel


SAMPLING METHOD: Rock Core, Split spoon


35

40

45

1st 6

in /

RU

N #



BORING LOG





approximate.



NORTHING: 725540

ELEVATION: 855.0 ft


820.0

815.0

810.0

EL

EV

AT

ION

(fe

et-

MS

L)

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

REMARKS

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SP

T R

EC

. (i

n.)

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

Page 2 of 2

S&

ME

BO

RIN

G L

OG

S

TA

TE

SV

ILL

E W

AT

ER

LIN

E.G

PJ

S&

ME

.GD

T

4/7

/20

8060302010


100

100

CORE PHOTOS

Page 1 of 1

Project No: 1335-19-068 County: Iredell Boring No.: TB-102

Site Description: Statesville Water Line Driller: L. Guempel

Collar Elev.: 855.0 ft Core Size: NQ2 Equipment: CME-550X Geologist: C. Piercy

Elev. at T.D.: 808.5 ft Total Depth: 46.5 ft Total Run: 8.5 ft Date: 11/6-7/2019

Box 1 of 1; Top of Box @ 27.3 Feet; Bottom of Box @ 35.8 Feet

27.3’

35.8’

FEET

0 1 2

30.8’

3

6

6

6

5

4

4

6

4

9

6

6

5

4

5

7

2

4

4

5

3

2

3

4

7

15

12

12

10

8

9

13

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

SS-6

SS-7

SS-8

Topsoil (2 inches)

RESIDUUM: CLAYEY SILT (MH) - firm to stiff,red orange, trace mica, moist

SANDY SILT (ML) - stiff to firm, red orange,trace mica, moist

SILTY SAND (SM) - medium dense, tan gray,fine to medium grained, moist





1.

2.

3.

4.

PROJECT:

TB- 103

EASTING: 1448595

2nd

6in

/ RE

C



3rd

6in

/ RQ

D

GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

N V

AL

UE

DE

PT

H

(fe

et)

NOTES:


DRILL RIG: CME 550X

DRILLER: L. Guempel




5

10

15

20

25

30

1st 6

in /

RU

N #



BORING LOG





approximate.



NORTHING: 725627

ELEVATION: 876.0 ft


871.0

866.0

861.0

856.0

851.0

846.0

EL

EV

AT

ION

(fe

et-

MS

L)

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

REMARKS

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SP

T R

EC

. (i

n.)

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

Page 1 of 2

S&

ME

BO

RIN

G L

OG

S

TA

TE

SV

ILL

E W

AT

ER

LIN

E.G

PJ

S&

ME

.GD

T

4/7

/20

8060302010


7

15

12

12

10

8

9

13

6

11

20

7

12

44

4

10

13

50/.3

50/.3

50/0

13

23

64

50/.3

50/.3

50/0

SS-9

SS-10

SS-11

SS-12

SS-13

SS-14

SILTY SAND (SM) - medium dense, tan gray,fine to medium grained, moist (continued)

SILTY SAND (SM) - very dense, brown gray,fine to medium grained, wet

PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK: SILTYSAND - brown gray, fine to coarse grained

Refusal at 57.8 feetBoring terminated at 57.8 feet





1.

2.

3.

4.

PROJECT:

TB- 103

EASTING: 1448595

2nd

6in

/ RE

C



3rd

6in

/ RQ

D

GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

N V

AL

UE

DE

PT

H

(fe

et)

NOTES:


DRILL RIG: CME 550X

DRILLER: L. Guempel




35

40

45

50

55

1st 6

in /

RU

N #



BORING LOG





approximate.



NORTHING: 725627

ELEVATION: 876.0 ft


841.0

836.0

831.0

826.0

821.0

EL

EV

AT

ION

(fe

et-

MS

L)

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

REMARKS

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SP

T R

EC

. (i

n.)

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

Page 2 of 2

S&

ME

BO

RIN

G L

OG

S

TA

TE

SV

ILL

E W

AT

ER

LIN

E.G

PJ

S&

ME

.GD

T

4/7

/20

8060302010


13

23

64

100

100

100

5

7

5

5

4

5

5

8

9

6

7

6

7

6

2

6

4

3

3

4

3

13

16

11

12

10

12

11

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

SS-6

SS-7

Topsoil (1 inch)

RESIDUUM: CLAYEY SILT (MH) - stiff, redorange, moist

SANDY SILT (ML) - very stiff to stiff, redorange, trace mica, moist

SILTY SAND (SM) - stiff, brown tan, tracemica, fine to medium grained, moist






1.

2.

3.

4.

PROJECT:

TB- 104

EASTING: 1448754

2nd

6in

/ RE

C



3rd

6in

/ RQ

D

GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

N V

AL

UE

DE

PT

H

(fe

et)

NOTES:


DRILL RIG: CME 550X

DRILLER: L. Guempel




5

10

15

20

25

1st 6

in /

RU

N #



BORING LOG





approximate.



NORTHING: 725730

ELEVATION: 884.0 ft


879.0

874.0

869.0

864.0

859.0

EL

EV

AT

ION

(fe

et-

MS

L)

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

REMARKS

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SP

T R

EC

. (i

n.)

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

Page 1 of 1

S&

ME

BO

RIN

G L

OG

S

TA

TE

SV

ILL

E W

AT

ER

LIN

E.G

PJ

S&

ME

.GD

T

4/7

/20

8060302010


13

16

11

12

10

12

11

10

8

6

7

4

2

2

6

15

12

9

9

5

3

3

7

10

5

4

4

2

1

1

2

25

20

15

16

9

5

5

13

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

SS-6

SS-7

SS-8

Topsoil (2 inches)

RESIDUUM: SANDY CLAY (CL) - very stiff,red brown, dry to moist

SANDY CLAY (CL) - stiff to very stiff, brownred, moist

SANDY SILT (ML) - stiff to firm, brown gray,trace mica, trace rock fragments, moist

SILTY SAND (SM) - medium dense, gray tan,trace mica, trace rock fragments, fine tomedium, moist





1.

2.

3.

4.

PROJECT:

TB- 105

EASTING: 1448116

2nd

6in

/ RE

C


LOGGED BY: B. Kebea

3rd

6in

/ RQ

D

GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

N V

AL

UE

DE

PT

H

(fe

et)

NOTES:


DRILL RIG: CME 550X

DRILLER: F. Johnson



DRILLING METHOD: Mud Rotary

5

10

15

20

25

30

1st 6

in /

RU

N #



BORING LOG





approximate.



NORTHING: 728920

ELEVATION: 825.0 ft

WATER LEVEL: 25.2 feet on 3/23/2020

820.0

815.0

810.0

805.0

800.0

795.0

EL

EV

AT

ION

(fe

et-

MS

L)

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

REMARKS

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SP

T R

EC

. (i

n.)

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

Page 1 of 2

S&

ME

BO

RIN

G L

OG

S

TA

TE

SV

ILL

E W

AT

ER

LIN

E.G

PJ

S&

ME

.GD

T

4/7

/20

8060302010


25

20

15

16

9

5

5

13

12

20

13

50/.3

10

7

25

50/.3

SS-9

SS-10

SILTY SAND (SM) - medium dense, gray tan,trace mica, trace rock fragments, fine tomedium, moist (continued)

PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK: SILTYSAND - brown gray, fine to coarse

Refusal at 42 feetBoring terminated at 42 feet

HC





1.

2.

3.

4.

PROJECT:

TB- 105

EASTING: 1448116

2nd

6in

/ RE

C


LOGGED BY: B. Kebea

3rd

6in

/ RQ

D

GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

N V

AL

UE

DE

PT

H

(fe

et)

NOTES:


DRILL RIG: CME 550X

DRILLER: F. Johnson




35

40

1st 6

in /

RU

N #



BORING LOG





approximate.



NORTHING: 728920

ELEVATION: 825.0 ft

WATER LEVEL: 25.2 feet on 3/23/2020

790.0

785.0

EL

EV

AT

ION

(fe

et-

MS

L)

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

REMARKS

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SP

T R

EC

. (i

n.)

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

Page 2 of 2

S&

ME

BO

RIN

G L

OG

S

TA

TE

SV

ILL

E W

AT

ER

LIN

E.G

PJ

S&

ME

.GD

T

4/7

/20

8060302010


25

100

2

3

2

1

2

2

2

2

5

4

4

2

3

4

4

2

2

2

2

1

1

2

2

1

7

7

6

3

5

6

6

4

SS-1

SS-2

SS-3

SS-4

SS-5

SS-6

SS-7

SS-8

Topsoil (2 inches)

RESIDUUM: SANDY CLAY (CL) - firm, redbrown, trace rootlets, moist

SANDY SILT (ML) - firm to soft, brown, tracegravel, trace mica, moist to wet

SANDY CLAY (CL) - firm, brown red, tracemica, moist, high plasticity

SANDY SILT (ML) - firm, brown orange, tracemica, moist

SILTY SAND (SM) - loose, brown white, tracegravel, trace mica, fine to coarse, moist

SANDY SILT (ML) - soft, tan gray, trace mica,moist





1.

2.

3.

4.

PROJECT:

TB- 106

EASTING: 1448337

2nd

6in

/ RE

C


LOGGED BY: B. Kebea

3rd

6in

/ RQ

D

GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

N V

AL

UE

DE

PT

H

(fe

et)

NOTES:


DRILL RIG: CME 550X

DRILLER: F. Johnson




5

10

15

20

25

30

1st 6

in /

RU

N #



BORING LOG





approximate.



NORTHING: 728930

ELEVATION: 820.0 ft


815.0

810.0

805.0

800.0

795.0

790.0

EL

EV

AT

ION

(fe

et-

MS

L)

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

REMARKS

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SP

T R

EC

. (i

n.)

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

Page 1 of 2

S&

ME

BO

RIN

G L

OG

S

TA

TE

SV

ILL

E W

AT

ER

LIN

E.G

PJ

S&

ME

.GD

T

4/7

/20

8060302010


7

7

6

3

5

6

6

4

4

2

2

2

6

3

4

3

3

1

1

1

10

5

6

5

SS-9

SS-10

SS-11

SS-12

SANDY SILT (ML) - stiff, tan gray, trace mica,moist

SANDY SILT (ML) - firm, brown red, tracegravel, trace mica, moist






1.

2.

3.

4.

PROJECT:

TB- 106

EASTING: 1448337

2nd

6in

/ RE

C


LOGGED BY: B. Kebea

3rd

6in

/ RQ

D

GR

AP

HIC

LO

G

N V

AL

UE

DE

PT

H

(fe

et)

NOTES:


DRILL RIG: CME 550X

DRILLER: F. Johnson




35

40

45

50

1st 6

in /

RU

N #



BORING LOG





approximate.



NORTHING: 728930

ELEVATION: 820.0 ft


785.0

780.0

775.0

770.0

EL

EV

AT

ION

(fe

et-

MS

L)

WA

TE

R L

EV

EL

REMARKS

SA

MP

LE

NO

.

SP

T R

EC

. (i

n.)

SA

MP

LE

TY

PE

Page 2 of 2

S&

ME

BO

RIN

G L

OG

S

TA

TE

SV

ILL

E W

AT

ER

LIN

E.G

PJ

S&

ME

.GD

T

4/7

/20

8060302010


10

5

6

5

788.0

6.5 feet

0.5 ft TOTAL

FIELD

TECHS.

DATE

50 75 100

11/21/2019

BK/AR

NOTES

Terminated at 6.5 feet in dense soil.

77

- 100+

732320 1443368EAST

73

30 53

50

15

ELEVATION

DEPTH

NORTH

DRILL

METHODRod Sounding

4 9

29

27

23

5

50

544

10

(ft) 0.5 ft 0 25

DEPTH BLOWS PER FOOTBLOW COUNT

4 5 9

5 3 8

ROD SOUNDING LOGPROJECT Statesville Water Line



TEST

NUMBER RS-1

827.0

6 feet

0.5 ft TOTAL

15

Terminated at 6 feet in dense soil.

10

875

43 50 93

17

7 12 19

DEPTH BLOW COUNT BLOWS PER FOOT

17 20 37

50+ 50+ 100+

6 11

42 45

ELEVATION NORTH 730743 EAST 1444169 DATE 11/21/2019

NOTES(ft) 0.5 ft 0 25 50 75

DEPTHDRILL

METHODRod Sounding

FIELD

TECHS.BK/AR

100




TEST

NUMBER RS-2

863.0

5 feet

0.5 ft TOTAL

15

10

50+ 50+ 100+5


20 33 53

50+ 50+ 100+

7 11 18

100

2 5 7



NOTES(ft) 0.5 ft 0 25 50 75

DEPTHDRILL

METHODRod Sounding

FIELD

TECHS.BK/AR




TEST

NUMBER RS-3

857.0

6 feet

0.5 ft TOTAL

15


10

385

20 16 36

8

2 3 5


5 7 12

13 22 35

4 4

23 15


NOTES(ft) 0.5 ft 0 25 50 75

DEPTHDRILL

METHODRod Sounding

FIELD

TECHS.BK/AR

100




TEST

NUMBER RS-4

Moisture Content

63.1%

32

o

Medium Sand 19.6%1.7%

Hard & Durable x

Angular

Weathered & Friable

Description of Sand & Gravel Particles: Rounded

Medium Sand

29

Coarse Sand

Gravel

Liquid Limit 61

11/6-17/19

Plastic Index

Position

14.6%

23.5%

Fine Sand

Project Manager

o x

Fine Sand

Silt & Clay

SIEVE ANALYSIS OF SOILS

Coarse Sand

Clay < 0.005 mm

1.7%

Colloids < 0.001 mm

Plastic Limit

Kristen Hill, P.E.

Notes / Deviations / References:

Technical Responsibility Signature Date

oSoft

This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of S&ME, Inc.

1.0%

Specific Gravity ND

#4

< 2.00 mm and > 0.425 mm (#40)

Coarse Sand < 4.75 mm and >2.00 mm (#10)


9101 Southern Pine Blvd, Suite 250, Charlotte, NC 28273

Orange Coarse to Fine Sandy Clay (CH)

Elevation:SS-1

Project Name:

Sample Id.

Medium Sand

Maximum Particle Size

Sample Date:

12/6/19

Various 1-2.5'

Sample Description:

Sample:Location:

Project #:

Client Address:

Test Date(s):

Report Date:1335-19-068 Phase 110

S&ME, Inc. Charlotte: 9751 Southern Pine Boulevard, Charlotte, NC 28273

12/2-6/19

Form No: TR-D422-WH-1Ga

Revision No. 1

< 75 mm and > 4.75 mm (#4) Silt < 0.075 and > 0.005 mmGravel

Hazen and Sawyer

Split SpoonB-1 Type:

Client Name:

Revision Date: 8/10/17

ASTM D 422

Cobbles < 300 mm (12") and > 75 mm (3")

14.6%

19.6%

Fine Sand < 0.425 mm and > 0.075 mm

3" 1.5" 1" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.010.101.0010.00100.00

Per

cen

t P

ass

ing

(%

)

Millimeters

S&ME, Inc. - Corporate 3201 Spring Forest Road

Raleigh, NC. 27616

1335-19-068 Phase 110 B-1 SS-1 (1-2.5) Wash List.xlsx

Page 1 of 1

12.0%

14.4%



12/2-6/19


Revision No. 1


Hazen and Sawyer


Client Name:


ASTM D 422

Cobbles < 300 mm (12") and > 75 mm (3")

Sample Date:

12/6/19

Various 6-7.5'

Sample Description:

Sample:Location:

Project #:

Client Address:

Test Date(s):


1/2"

< 2.00 mm and > 0.425 mm (#40)




Tan Orange Clay w/Coarse to Fine Sand (CH)

Elevation:SS-3

Project Name:

Sample Id.

Medium Sand


8.9%

Specific Gravity ND


Kristen Hill, P.E.



oSoft

11/6-17/19

Plastic Index

Position

12.0%

33.1%

Fine Sand

Project Manager

o x

Fine Sand

Silt & Clay


Coarse Sand

Clay < 0.005 mm

1.9%

Colloids < 0.001 mm

Plastic Limit

Moisture Content

62.8%

56

o


Hard & Durable x

Angular

Weathered & Friable


Medium Sand

40

Coarse Sand

Gravel

Liquid Limit 96

3" 1.5" 1" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.010.101.0010.00100.00

Per

cen

t P

ass

ing

(%

)

Millimeters


Raleigh, NC. 27616

1335-19-068 Phase 110 B-3 SS-3 (6-7.5) Wash.xlsx

Page 1 of 1

12.0%

42.6%



12/2-6/19


Revision No. 1


Hazen and Sawyer


Client Name:


ASTM D 422

Cobbles < 300 mm (12") and > 75 mm (3")

Sample Date:

12/6/19

Various 1-2.5'

Sample Description:

Sample:Location:

Project #:

Client Address:

Test Date(s):


#4

< 2.00 mm and > 0.425 mm (#40)




Orange Brown Silty Coarse to Fine Sand (SM) w/Mica

Elevation:SS-1

Project Name:

Sample Id.

Medium Sand


1.6%

Specific Gravity ND


Kristen Hill, P.E.



oSoft

11/6-17/19

Plastic Index

Position

12.0%

15.4%

Fine Sand

Project Manager

o x

Fine Sand

Silt & Clay


Coarse Sand

Clay < 0.005 mm

2.0%

Colloids < 0.001 mm

Plastic Limit

Moisture Content

41.7%

7

o


Hard & Durable x

Angular

Weathered & Friable


Medium Sand

31

Coarse Sand

Gravel

Liquid Limit 38

3" 1.5" 1" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.010.101.0010.00100.00

Per

cen

t P

ass

ing

(%

)

Millimeters


Raleigh, NC. 27616

1335-19-068 Phase 110 B-6 SS-1 (1-2.5) Wash.xlsx

Page 1 of 1

10.3%

34.5%



12/2-6/19


Revision No. 1


Hazen and Sawyer

Split SpoonTB-103 Type:

Client Name:


ASTM D 422

Cobbles < 300 mm (12") and > 75 mm (3")

Sample Date:

12/6/19

Various 18.5-20'

Sample Description:

Sample:Location:

Project #:

Client Address:

Test Date(s):


#4

< 2.00 mm and > 0.425 mm (#40)




Orange Coarse to Fine Sandy Silt (ML) w/Mica

Elevation:SS-6

Project Name:

Sample Id.

Medium Sand


0.7%

Specific Gravity ND


Kristen Hill, P.E.



oSoft

11/6-17/19

Plastic Index

Position

10.3%

23.8%

Fine Sand

Project Manager

o x

Fine Sand

Silt & Clay


Coarse Sand

Clay < 0.005 mm

1.7%

Colloids < 0.001 mm

Plastic Limit

Moisture Content

52.8%

9

o


Hard & Durable x

Angular

Weathered & Friable


Medium Sand

39

Coarse Sand

Gravel

Liquid Limit 48

3" 1.5" 1" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.010.101.0010.00100.00

Per

cen

t P

ass

ing

(%

)

Millimeters


Raleigh, NC. 27616

1335-19-068 Phase 110 TB-103 SS-6 (18.5-20) Wash.xlsx

Page 1 of 1

9.0%

16.6%



12/2-6/19


Revision No. 1


Hazen and Sawyer

Split SpoonTB-104 Type:

Client Name:


ASTM D 422

Cobbles < 300 mm (12") and > 75 mm (3")

Sample Date:

12/6/19

Various 1-2.5'

Sample Description:

Sample:Location:

Project #:

Client Address:

Test Date(s):


#4

< 2.00 mm and > 0.425 mm (#40)




Orange Clayey Silt w/Coarse to Fine Sand (MH)

Elevation:SS-1

Project Name:

Sample Id.

Medium Sand


0.8%

Specific Gravity ND


Kristen Hill, P.E.



oSoft

11/6-17/19

Plastic Index

Position

9.0%

30.1%

Fine Sand

Project Manager

o x

Fine Sand

Silt & Clay


Coarse Sand

Clay < 0.005 mm

1.2%

Colloids < 0.001 mm

Plastic Limit

Moisture Content

72.3%

36

o


Hard & Durable x

Angular

Weathered & Friable


Medium Sand

38

Coarse Sand

Gravel

Liquid Limit 74

3" 1.5" 1" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.010.101.0010.00100.00

Per

cen

t P

ass

ing

(%

)

Millimeters


Raleigh, NC. 27616

1335-19-068 Phase 110 TB-104 SS-1 (1-2.5) Wash.xlsx

Page 1 of 1

Documents

Statesville Water Line Geotechnical Engineering Report REV 1 · Four rod soundings (RS-1 through RS-4) were performed by driving a 1/2-inch diameter steel rod in 3-foot and 4-foot