GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

Transcription

1 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT Route 0 (Patrick Henry Highway) Bridge and Approaches over Louse Creek Charlotte County, Virginia UPC 907, VDOT Project: Schnabel Reference P1079 / 110, On-Call Contract 1779 December 1, 01 Revised August, 015 Revised September 3, 015

2 December 1, 01 Revised August, 015 Revised September 3, 015 Mr. Robert A. Reid, PE Assistant District Materials Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation Lynchburg District 19 Campbell Avenue Lynchburg, Virginia 501 Subject: UPC 907, On-Call Contract 1779, Geotechnical Engineering Report, Route 0 (Patrick Henry Highway) Bridge and Approaches over Louse Creek, Charlotte County, Virginia (VDOT Project: ), Schnabel Reference P1079 / 110 Dear Mr. Reid: SCHNABEL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC. (Schnabel) is pleased to submit our geotechnical engineering report for this project. This document includes tables, figures, and appendices with relevant data collected for this study. This study was performed in accordance with our revised proposal dated August 1, 01. Our scope includes preparing a combined Soil Survey Report (SSR) and a Major Structures Report (MSR). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents the results of subsurface exploration, laboratory testing, and preliminary geotechnical engineering analysis for the proposed Route 0 bridge and approaches over Louse Creek in Charlotte County, Virginia. Based on the results of our exploration, the project site is underlain by fill, alluvial, and residual soils overlying bedrock. VDOT s RFP identified pile supported, semi-integral abutments and a spread footing-supported pier as the anticipated substructure units. Our preliminary recommendations indicated that the anticipated foundation units were appropriate for support of the proposed substructures. However, VDOT s subsequent hydrologic and hydraulics analysis (H&HA) predicts significant scour at each substructure location. We understand that VDOT will now perform the design of foundations for both abutments. Therefore, foundations recommendations for support of the proposed abutments are not included in our final report. However, we have included recommendations regarding the abutment earth pressures per VDOT s request. Based on the anticipated scour and related concerns, we recommend straight-sided drilled shafts socketed into fair quality bedrock for support of proposed Pier 1.

3 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) Based on evaluation of the test boring data, the bridge site classifies as Seismic Site Class D and Seismic Zone 1 in accordance with the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, Sixth edition (01). Slope stability analyses indicate that the planned H:1V excavation cut slopes at the critical cut sections achieve the minimum required factor of safety of 1.5. However, for the non-critical cut slopes excavated into the existing roadway embankment from Station Nos to 11+00, analyses indicated a minimum factor of safety of 1.. We recommend an excavation cut slope no steeper than.5h:1v between Station Nos and to maintain a minimum factor of safety of 1.3. For critical embankment slopes, analyses indicate that the minimum required factor of safety of 1.5 is not achieved at H:1V slope ratios, and flattening of the slopes is recommended. For the critical embankment fill, which extends from approximate Station 9+00 to Station 1+50, we recommend a slope ratio no steeper than.5h:1v. At this reduced slope, our analyses indicate an adequate factor of safety of 1.5 or greater. Our stability analyses also indicate that the planned 1.5H:1V rip rap armored slopes on the inboard side of Abutments A and B achieve the minimum required factor of safety of 1.5. Settlement of embankments is expected to be on the order of 1 to inches, most of which should occur during embankment construction. Therefore, no waiting period is necessary between the end of embankment construction and the beginning of pavement construction. We are providing this executive summary solely for purposes of overview. Any party that relies on this summary must read the full report. This executive summary omits several details, any one of which could be very important to the proper application of the report. SCOPE OF SERVICES Our proposal dated August 1, 01 defines the scope of services for this project. Our services included subsurface exploration, field engineering, soil laboratory testing, and development of geotechnical engineering recommendations. The objective of this study is to evaluate the subsurface conditions and provide geotechnical engineering design recommendations for this project. This is the Soil Survey Report and final Major Structures Report. Services not described in our proposal are not included in this study. PROJECT IDENTIFICATION VDOT Project No.: , P1, R01, C501, B05 UPC: 907 From: 0.30 Mile West of Louse Creek To: 0.5 Mile East of Louse Creek Project Length: 0.55 Mile September 3, 015 Page Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

4 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) PROJECT DESCRIPTION Site Description Route 0, also known as Patrick Henry Highway, is a two-lane rural highway, classified as a Rural Minor Arterial, extending through southern Virginia. The project site consists of an approximately one half mile section of Route 0 centered over Louse Creek in Charlotte County, Virginia. Located between the communities of Phenix to the east and Brookneal to the west, the site lies between Routes 78 and 17. The existing bridge carrying Route 0 over Louse Creek is a two-lane structure with two piers and two abutments. The existing roadway maintains a general east to west alignment in the project limits. Land development along Route 0 in the project vicinity consists of a mixture of agricultural and private residences. Along the proposed roadway alignment, the terrain west of the bridge drops down from about El 90 at the beginning of the project (Station 1+00) to the flood plain at about El 05 (Station ). East of the new bridge crossing, existing ground surface grades rise up to El 8 at the east end of the project (Station 15+00). Fill embankments support the existing roadway on both approaches to Louse Creek. It appears that moderate amounts of cut and fill were necessary to grade the existing road. The site is mostly wooded. Louse Creek flows from north to south at the project site. Project plans indicate a normal water elevation of about El 39 and a high water elevation at El 05. Water flow in the river was steady at the time of our subsurface investigation. Schnabel obtained the site information from VDOT s RFP dated August, 01, and through our site visits. A Site Vicinity Map is included at the end of this report as Figure 1. Proposed Construction We understand that VDOT has plans to replace the existing bridge over Louse Creek, and realign Route 0 at the river crossing. The replacement bridge is located from Station (Abutment A) to Station (Abutment B) in a sag vertical curve. The proposed roadway elevations are El 1.7 at Abutment A and El 1.1 at Abutment B. To construct the roadway realignment, new fill embankments up to ft high will be required west of Louse Creek. Up to about 18 ft of fill will be required to build the bridge approach immediately west of Embankment A. Cut slopes up to 31 ft high will be required to grade the road alignment east of Louse Creek between approximate Station Nos and +50. The two-span replacement bridge will have two substructure units (Abutment A and Pier 1) west of the stream channel and one substructure unit (Abutment B) east of the stream channel. VDOT s RFP listed anticipated foundations consisting of semi-integral abutments (Abutments A and B) on two rows of HP x or HP 1x53 end bearing piles, and piers on either spread footings or piles bearing on rock. VDOT estimated factored nominal capacities for the piles of 150 tons for HP x and 190 tons for HP 1x53. For spread footings, a factored bearing resistance of tsf was estimated by VDOT. Bottom of foundation elevations of El.5 for Abutment A, El 0.0 for Abutment B, and El for Pier 1 were estimated by VDOT. VDOT plans indicate a high water elevation of El 05.0, which is 15.5 ft above the Pier 1 proposed bottom of footing. September 3, 015 Page 3 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

5 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) Schnabel obtained proposed grading, anticipated foundation types, and estimated nominal capacities from VDOT s RFP. A stormwater management basin will be constructed north of Route 0 between approximate Station Nos and +00, west of Louse Creek. This pond will collect stormwater runoff from both sides of Route 0. A -inch culvert will pass beneath Route 0 at approximate Station +80 to collect runoff from the south side of the road. The basin will have a bottom elevation at El 37 and a perimeter ft wide berm at El 1.5. Berm side slopes will be 3H:1V. Up to 7 ft of fill and ft of cut will be required to construct the basin. A ft by 0 ft sand filter will be provided immediately upstream of the riser structure. The riser will have a top at El The outlet will consist of a 70 ft long, 1-inch diameter pipe exiting beneath the east end of the embankment with an invert in at El 3.5. A 1 ft long, 0-inch diameter culvert pipe will pass beneath the new road alignment at approximate Station An existing box culvert will be extended beneath the new road at approximate Station Regional Geology We reviewed published geologic data and information in our files. Based on this review, the site is located within the Piedmont Physiographic province of Virginia. The Piedmont Physiographic province is characterized by mostly metamorphic and igneous rocks ranging in age from Proterozoic to Paleozoic. The province is composed of a number of different and complex geologic terranes which are separated by ancient faults. To our knowledge, no known active faults exist in the project vicinity. Many of the terranes have experienced multiple episodes of deformation and metamorphism, and research into the complicated geologic history of the Piedmont Province is ongoing. No publically available site-specific geologic literature was available for the study site. According to the Geologic Map of Virginia, the site is underlain by Cambrian age, interlayered, mafic and felsic, metavolcanic rocks. The rocks are described as a heterogeneous layered assemblage of foliated to granular metavolcanic rocks that include muscovite-feldspar-quartz schist, gneiss and granofels. Also mapped in this unit, but not observed in the rock cores, are massive crystal metatuff, welded ashflow tuff and inequigranular metavolcanic breccia. At the rock core locations we encountered mostly schist, gneiss and granofels rocks. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM We conducted a subsurface exploration and field testing program to identify the subsurface stratigraphy underlying the site and to evaluate the geotechnical properties of the materials encountered. Exploration methods used are discussed below. The appendices contain the results of our exploration. Subsurface Exploration Methods Test Borings Schnabel s drilling vendor, Blue Ridge Drilling, drilled test borings and three offset auger probe borings under our observation between October 7 and October 1, 01. The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) September 3, 015 Page Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

6 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) was conducted at selected depths in the borings. NQ size rock coring was performed in all six of the test borings associated with the bridge abutment and pier locations. Appendix A includes specific observations, remarks, and logs for the borings; classification criteria; drilling methods; and sampling protocols. Figures and 3 (included at the end of this report) indicate the approximate test boring locations. VDOT requested that additional bulk samples of soil be collected from Borings SS-03 and SS-09 for resilient modulus testing by VDOT. These bulk samples were collected from offset borings SS-03A and SS-09A, respectively. We delivered these additional bulk samples to the Lynchburg District office on October 9, 01. We will retain remaining soil samples up to 5 days beyond the issuance of this report, unless you request other disposition. Rock core samples will be held until final approval of the report by VDOT, and later delivered to the VDOT rock core repository at the Lynchburg District office. Many correlations with SPT N-values are used in the development of our geotechnical engineering recommendations. These correlations are usually based on SPT N-values obtained using a Safety Hammer. The SPTs for this project were performed using an Automatic Trip Hammer (ATH) rather than the Safety Hammer. The energy applied to the split-spoon sampler using the ATH is about 30 percent greater than that applied using the Safety Hammer. The hammer blows shown on the boring logs are uncorrected for the higher energy. However, we corrected the field N-values to N 0 (equivalent safety hammer efficiency) to assess relative density/consistency terms, in accordance with Table 3-3 of Chapter III of the Materials Division s Manual of Instructions (MOI). Field SPT N-values were also corrected for the higher energy when using N-values with correlations in our analyses. Soil Laboratory Testing Our laboratory performed tests on selected samples collected during the subsurface exploration. The testing aided in the classification of materials encountered in the subsurface exploration and provided data for use in the development of recommendations for design of foundations, earthwork, stormwater management basins, and pavements. The results of the laboratory tests are included in Appendix B and are summarized for each stratum (as applicable) in the Site Geology and Subsurface Condition section of this report. Selected test results are also shown on the boring logs in Appendix A. Index Testing We performed index testing on samples collected as part of the exploration to provide soil classifications and to provide parameters for use with published correlations with soil properties. Index testing included performing natural moisture content, Atterberg Limit, and gradation tests on jar samples, bulk samples, and tube samples. Compaction and CBR Testing We performed Standard Proctor compaction (VTM-1) and CBR testing (VTM-8) to evaluate compaction characteristics and to provide soil parameters for pavement design. Testing was performed on eight bulk samples from the soil survey borings. September 3, 015 Page 5 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

7 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) 1-D Consolidation Testing We performed 1-D Consolidation (ASTM D35) testing to evaluate deformation characteristics and to provide engineering parameters for settlement calculations. Testing was performed on two intact soil specimens trimmed from tube samples collected in Borings SS-0 and BR-0. We also performed consolidation testing on one sample of reconstituted soil collected from Boring SS-09. Unconsolidated, Undrained Triaxial Shear Testing We performed Unconsolidated, Undrained (UU) Triaxial Shear (ASTM D1) testing to evaluate undrained shear strength parameters for slope stability calculations. Testing was performed on one intact soil specimen trimmed from a tube sample collected in Boring SS-0. Consolidated, Undrained Triaxial Shear Testing We performed Consolidated, Undrained (CU) Triaxial Shear (ASTM D77) testing with pore pressure measurements to evaluate shear strength parameters for slope stability calculations. Testing was performed on one intact soil specimen trimmed from a tube sample collected in Boring SS-05 and one sample of reconstituted soil collected from Boring SS-09. Hydraulic Conductivity Testing We performed hydraulic conductivity (permeability) testing (ASTM D508) to evaluate drainage characteristics of soil collected from the area where the stormwater management basin is planned. Testing was performed on one intact soil specimen trimmed from a tube sample collected in Boring SW- 0. Unconfined Compressive Strength of Rock We performed unconfined compressive strength (ASTM D701C) testing on two intact rock core specimens to evaluate the intact rock strength. Testing was performed on two intact rock specimens cut from recovered rock core collected in borings BR-0 and BR-05. SITE GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Site Geology and Generalized Subsurface Stratigraphy for Soil Survey Borings We characterized the following generalized subsurface stratigraphy based on the subsurface exploration and laboratory test data included in the appendices. Existing Pavement Structure Four soil survey borings were drilled through the existing pavement structure. Thicknesses of the encountered pavement structure are summarized in Table 1. September 3, 015 Page Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

8 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) Table 1: Existing Pavement Structure Thicknesses Boring Number Approx. Asphalt Thickness, ft (in) Approx. Stone Base Course Thickness, ft (in) SS (8) 0. (7) SS (9) 0.8 () SS (15) 0.5 () SS (15) 0. (5) Topsoil Topsoil and forest litter were encountered in soil survey and stormwater management basin borings located off the existing pavement structure (i.e. borings not appearing in Table 1). These materials were present at the ground surface and encountered to a median depth of about 0.3 ft. Fill Soil Fill soils associated with past roadway construction were encountered in eight soil survey borings and one stormwater management basin boring. The fill soils consist of SILT (ML), LEAN CLAY (CL), SILTY SAND (SM), and CLAYEY SAND (SC) with varying amounts of root fragments, mica, and gravel. Fill soils in Soil Survey Borings SS-03, SS-13, SS-1, and SW-01 were encountered beneath the pavement, or topsoil, to shallow depths ranging from 1.0 to 3.5 ft. Deeper fill depths of 5.0 ft to 1.0 ft were encountered in SS-01, SS-0, SS-05, SS-08, and SS-1. Field SPT N-values recorded in these fill soils ranged from 3 to 1 blows per foot (bpf) for fine-grained soil, indicating soft to stiff consistency, and 3 to 8 bpf for course-grained soils, indicating loose to medium dense relative density. Laboratory tests conducted on samples of these fill soils indicate in situ moisture contents ranging from.3 to.0 percent. Pocket penetrometer values measured in fine-grained portions of these fill soils ranged from 0.5 to.0 tsf. Atterberg Limits performed on the fill soils indicated either non-plastic or moderately plastic soils based on Liquid Limit values of 1 and 8 and Plasticity Indices of 11 and 1. Alluvium Alluvial soils associated with past stream deposition along Louse Creek were encountered in two soil survey borings (SS-0 and SS-07). The alluvial soils were encountered beneath topsoil and forest litter, and extend to depths of 1 ft and 9.5 ft, respectively. The alluvial soils consist of POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), fine to medium SILTY SAND (SM), and SILT WITH SAND (ML). These alluvial soils contained varying amounts of mica and gravel. Field SPT N-values recorded in the sandy alluvial soils ranged from weight of hammer (WOH) to 1 bpf, indicating very loose to medium dense relative density. A field SPT N-value of was recorded in the silty alluvial soils, indicating soft consistency. September 3, 015 Page 7 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

9 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) Laboratory tests conducted on alluvial soil samples indicate natural moisture contents ranging from 5.0 to 9.7 percent. An Atterberg Limits tests performed on a tube sample collected from Boring SS-0 measured a Liquid Limit (LL) value of 3 and a Plasticity Index (PI) of 11. Material passing the No. 00 sieve for this sample was 3.7 percent. The test results indicate that these soils exhibit a low potential for moisture-related volume change (shrink/swell behavior). We conducted Standard Proctor Compaction (VTM-1) and CBR (VTM-8) tests on two bulk samples of alluvial soils collected from the test borings. The test results are summarized below in Table. Boring Number Soil Classification Table : Soil CBR Summary - Alluvium Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (%) CBR Value (0.1, Soaked) CBR Swell (%) SS-0 SM SS-07 SM Residuum Residual soil consists of material derived from weathering of the underlying bedrock. We encountered residual soils in all of the soil survey and stormwater management basin borings. The residual soils are present beneath topsoil, fill and/or alluvial deposits (as applicable) and extend to depths ranging from ft (maximum depth explored in multiple soil survey borings) to.5 ft. The residual soils generally consist of fine to medium or coarse SILTY SAND (SM), fine to medium or coarse CLAYEY SAND (SC), fine to medium or coarse SANDY SILT (ML), and LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL). These residual soils contained varying amounts of mica and gravel. Field SPT N-values recorded in the sandy residual soils ranged from to 8 bpf, indicating loose to very dense relative density. Field SPT N-values recorded in the silty/clayey residual soils ranged from to 5 bpf, indicating soft to very stiff consistency. Pocket penetrometer values recorded in the silty/clayey residual soils ranged from 3.5 to.5 tsf. Laboratory tests conducted on residual soil samples indicate natural moisture contents ranging from.9 to 1. percent. The eight Atterberg Limits tests performed on residual soil samples measured a range in Liquid Limit (LL) from non-plastic to 5, and a range in Plasticity Index (PI) from non-plastic to 1. The Atterberg limits results generally indicate that these soils exhibit a low to moderate potential for moisturerelated volume change (shrink/swell behavior). Gradation tests were also performed on the residual soil bulk samples. The test results indicate the percent of mass passing a No. 00 sieve ranging from 19. to 0.5 percent. We conducted Standard Proctor Compaction (VTM-1) and CBR (VTM-8) tests on five bulk samples of residual soils collected from the test borings. The test results are summarized below in Table 3. September 3, 015 Page 8 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

10 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) Boring Number Soil Classification Table 3: Soil CBR Summary - Residuum Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (%) CBR Value (0.1, Soaked) CBR Swell (%) SS-03 ML SS-08 SC SS-09 SM SS-13 SM SW-03 SM Intermediate Geomaterials (IGM) Intermediate geomaterial is a term used to describe residual material as it transitions between soil and rock, and vice-versa. VDOT classifies IGM as residual material with SPT N-values greater than 50 blows per inches of penetration (VDOT MOI Chapter III, May 01). IGM was encountered in Soil Survey Borings SS-05, SS-0, SS-09, SS-, and SS-11, and all four of the stormwater management basin borings. The IGM encountered in these borings displayed a range in material composition consisting of: very hard, fine to medium or coarse SILTY SAND (SM); and fine CLAYEY SAND (SC) containing gravel. The IGM strata lie beneath fill, alluvial, and beneath or interbedded with residual strata (as applicable) and generally transitions to bedrock with depth. We conducted Standard Proctor Compaction (VTM-1) and CBR (VTM-8) tests on one bulk sample of IGM collected from the Boring SS-. The test results are summarized below in Table. Boring Number Soil Classification Table : Soil CBR Summary - IGM Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (%) CBR Value (0.1, Soaked) CBR Swell (%) SS- SC Table 5 presents the encountered top of IGM in the soil survey borings. September 3, 015 Page 9 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

11 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) Table 5: Encountered Top of IGM in Soil Survey and Stormwater Management Pond Borings Boring Number Proposed Grading A Depth (ft) Encountered Top of IGM Elevation (ft) SS-05 ft Fill SS-0 3 ft Fill 1.0 B 389. SS-09 ft Cut 5.5 C 15. SS- 7 ft Cut SS ft Cut SW ft Cut SW-0.7 ft Cut SW-03 At Grade SW-0 At Grade A Based on grading information presented in VDOT RFP except at SWMP borings where based on Plan Sheet No. D(1) dated B Transitioned back to Residuum at 18.0 ft (El 385.). C Transitioned back to Residuum at 8.0 ft (El 1.9). Groundwater We encountered groundwater during soil drilling in two soil survey borings, SS-07 and SS-13 at depths of.0 ft, El 39. in Boring SS-07 and El.3 in Boring SS-13. The groundwater observations are during drilling and are denoted on the boring logs as first encountered. We did not obtain long term water level readings in soil survey borings since we backfilled them upon completion for safety. The groundwater levels on the logs indicate our estimate of the hydrostatic water table at the time of our subsurface exploration. The final design should anticipate the fluctuation of the hydrostatic water table depending on variations in precipitation, surface runoff, pumping, evaporation, Louse Creek level, and similar factors. Geology and Generalized Subsurface Stratigraphy for Bridge Borings We characterized the following generalized subsurface stratigraphy at the bridge location, based on the subsurface exploration and laboratory test data included in the appendices. Abutment A VDOT anticipates the Abutment A bottom of footing at elevation.5 ft, or about to 7 ft above the current ground surface. Two borings, BR-01 and BR-0, were drilled at Abutment A, which encountered soil strata and IGM overlying bedrock. September 3, 015 Page Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

12 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) The soil strata generally consisted of fill and residual deposits of loose to medium dense SILTY SAND (SM) and CLAYEY SAND (SC) and stiff to very stiff SANDY SILT (ML). Field SPT N-values recorded ranged from to 18 bpf (median value of bpf). IGM was encountered about 1 ft below the bottom of footing elevation, and generally consisted of very dense SILTY SAND (SM), with field SPT N-values of 50 blows over to 3 inches of penetration. Auger refusal on bedrock was encountered about 17 to 0 ft below the bottom of footing elevation. Bedrock near the IGM-bedrock interface generally consisted of very poor quality MICA SCHIST and GNEISS, and transitioned to very good quality GNEISS and GRANOFELS at about 8 to ft below the interface, corresponding to 7 to 9 ft below the bottom of footing. Recovery and rock quality designation (RQD) values ranged from to 88 percent and 1 to 30 percent, respectively, in the MICA SCHIST and increased to 9 to percent and 9 to percent, respectively, in the GNEISS and GRANOFELS. Groundwater was not encountered during drilling at Abutment A. We performed 1-D Consolidation (ASTM D35) testing on an intact residual soil sample obtained from BR-0 to provide engineering parameters for settlement considerations. Pier 1 VDOT anticipates the Pier 1 bottom of footing at elevation ft, or about 11 to 1 ft below the current ground surface. Two borings, BR-03 and BR-0, were drilled at Pier 1, which encountered soil strata and IGM overlying bedrock. The soil strata generally consisted of fill and alluvial deposits of loose to medium dense POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM) to SILTY SAND (SM) and soft SANDY SILT (ML). Field SPT N- values recorded ranged from weight of hammer over 18 inches to 1 bpf (median value of 3 bpf). IGM was encountered about 3 ft above the bottom of footing elevation, and generally consisted of very dense SILTY SAND (SM) with field SPT N-values of 50 blows over to 5 inches of penetration. Auger refusal on bedrock was encountered at about 3 to 5 ft below the bottom of footing elevation. Bedrock near the IGM-bedrock interface generally consisted of very poor quality MICA SCHIST and transitioned to fair quality GRANOFELS overlying GNEISS at about 7 to 11 ft below the interface, corresponding to to 17 ft below the bottom of footing. Recovery and RQD values ranged from 7 to 89 percent and 0 to percent, respectively, in the MICA SCHIST and increased to 8 to percent and 5 to 75 percent, respectively, in the GRANOFELS and GNEISS. Groundwater was encountered in boring BR-03 during drilling at about 5 ft above the bottom of footing elevation. Groundwater was not encountered in boring BR-0 during drilling. We performed unconfined compressive strength (UCS; ASTM D701C) testing on one intact rock core specimen consisting of GNEISS from boring BR-0 to evaluate the intact rock strength. The measured UCS for this specimen was 8,88 psi. September 3, 015 Page 11 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

13 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) Abutment B VDOT anticipates the Abutment B bottom of footing at elevation 0 ft, or about ft above the current ground surface. Two borings, BR-05 and BR-0, were drilled at Abutment B, which encountered alluvial deposits and IGM overlying bedrock. The alluvial deposits generally consisted of very loose to loose POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) to SILTY SAND (SM) and soft to firm SANDY SILT (ML). Field SPT N-values recorded ranged from 1 to 5 bpf (median value of 3 bpf). IGM was encountered in boring BR-0 at about 1 ft below the bottom of footing elevation. The IGM encountered generally consisted of very dense POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM) with a field SPT N-value of 50 blows over inches of penetration. IGM was not encountered in boring BR-05 as the alluvium is deposited directly on bedrock. Auger refusal on bedrock was encountered in both borings at about 1 ft below the bottom of footing. Bedrock near the soil-bedrock interface in boring BR-05 generally consisted of very poor quality GNEISS that significantly improved beginning at about 19 ft below the interface, corresponding to 3 ft below the bottom of footing. Bedrock near the IGM-bedrock interface in boring BR-0 generally consisted of good quality GNEISS that deteriorated to very poor quality at about 9 ft below the interface, then significantly improved beginning at about 1 below the interface, corresponding to 3 ft below the bottom of footing elevation. Recovery and RQD values were 8 and 79 percent and 50 and 77 percent, respectively, at the IGMbedrock interface in boring BR-0 before deteriorating to very poor quality. Recovery and RQD values ranged from 30 to 90 percent and 0 to percent, respectively, in the very poor quality GNEISS encountered in both borings and increased to 8 and 9 percent and 7 and 8 percent, respectively, with depth. Groundwater was encountered in both borings during drilling at about 9 ft below the bottom of footing. We performed UCS testing on one intact rock core specimen consisting of GNEISS from boring BR-05 to evaluate the intact rock strength. The measured UCS for this specimen was 15, psi. Scour Considerations A jar and tube sample were obtained in borings BR-03 and BR-05A, respectively, at depths equal to or below the Louse Creek streambed elevation. At these depths, the samples were residual and alluvial soils consisting of SILTY SAND (SM) and POORLY GRADED SAND (SP). We performed two gradation tests (one with hydrometer analysis) to aid VDOT s Hydrologic and Hydraulics Analysis (H&HA). Results of the scour sample gradation testing are included in Appendix B. GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS We based our geotechnical engineering analysis on the information developed from our subsurface exploration and soil laboratory testing, along with the project development plans and site plans. The September 3, 015 Page 1 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

14 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) following sections of the report provide our recommendations. Final recommendations regarding bridge design will be included in a subsequent Major Structures Report after we have received additional information from VDOT. Seismic Site Classification We evaluated the Seismic Site Class and Seismic Zone for the proposed bridge site according to the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, sixth edition (01). Our analysis classifies the bridge site as Site Class D, per Table of LRFD, based on the general procedure used to characterize the site s seismic acceleration spectrum, and site effects using the average Standard Penetration Test (N avg ) method. This bridge site, per Table of LRFD, is assigned to Seismic Zone 1. Based on our interpretation of Article.5.. of to the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, Sixth edition (01), sites located in Seismic Zone 1 do not require liquefaction analysis due to the relatively low ground accelerations in this zone. Therefore, liquefaction is not an applicable design consideration for this site. Earthwork and Grading Earthwork and grading for this project should be performed in accordance with requirements presented in Division III of the VDOT Road and Bridge Specifications. Construction of the roadway realignment will require new fill embankment west of Louse Creek (back station) with heights reaching up to about 7 ft. New embankment fill up to 18 ft in height will also be required for the approaches west of Abutment A and east of Abutment B. Excavation east of Louse Creek (forward station) will result in slope heights of about 31 ft. Roadbed Subgrades and Embankment Fill Foundations Based on the test boring data, we anticipate potentially difficult excavation to achieve planned roadbed, and the occurrence of potentially unsuitable soils at the planned roadbed subgrade and/or embankment fill foundation grade, at specific points along the Route 0 realignment. Very dense residual soils or IGM may be encountered during regular excavation in the vicinity of Soil Survey Borings SS-09 and SS- that may substantially reduce the productivity of soil excavation methods. We encountered soft consistency and loose density existing fill, alluvium, and residuum in several borings within 5 ft or more of planned roadbed subgrade and/or embankment fill foundation elevation. Roadbed subgrades and embankment fill foundations will need to be evaluated by proofrolling at the time of construction, and they may require mitigation prior to placement of embankment fill and roadway materials. A summary of locations where potentially unsuitable soils were encountered is presented in Table below: September 3, 015 Page 13 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

15 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) Boring Number Station Number Table : Potentially Unsuitable Soil Summary Depth of soft or loose soils (ft) Elevation (ft) Soil Classification Stratum SS SM Alluvium SS ML, SM, SP Alluvium BR SM, ML, SP- SM, SP Alluvium BR ML, SM, SP- SM Alluvium Fill Foundation Preparation On a site that has been previously developed, it should be anticipated that existing fill and/or disturbed soils will be encountered immediately adjacent to structures (pavements, culverts, utilities) which will be demolished. Existing fills may also exist in those areas not explored. Site planning should also consider removal of existing foundations, utilities, pavements, and other associated infrastructure. Any existing buried utilities that are to be abandoned in place should be fully grouted. As indicated in Table above, we encountered soft consistency and loose density existing fill, alluvium, and residuum in several of the borings at the existing ground surface to depths of 8.0 to about 1.0 ft. The presence of these soft and loose soils has been considered in our evaluations of embankment settlement and slope stability. However, the presence of these soft and/or loose soils could impact embankment construction and their suitability for fill support. Embankment foundations will need to be evaluated prior to fill placement using proofrolling with a loaded dump truck performed under the observation of the Geotechnical Engineer. Where foundation soils perform satisfactorily when they are proofrolled, they may be left in place. Foundations that are determined by the Geotechnical Engineer to be unsuitable for embankment support will require mitigation. Mitigation of embankment foundations should be anticipated from Station 9+50 to Station 1+75 and from Abutment B at Station to Station Due to the presence of 8 ft or more of soft and loose foundation soils, undercut and replacement is not practical. We recommend stabilizing these embankment foundation subgrades in place using geogrid reinforcement. Geogrid should be placed directly on top of the unsuitable foundation soils prior to the placement and compaction of embankment fill. The placement of synthetic materials, including minimum lap lengths, should be in conformance with the manufacturer s guidelines and should be performed under the observation of the Geotechnical Engineer. The initial lift of fill should be between and 1 inches in loose thickness and should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density per ASTM D- 98, Standard Proctor per the project specifications. Compacted Fill Compacted embankment fill and backfill should consist of material classifying CL, ML, SC, SM, SP, SW, GC, GM, GP, or GW per ASTM D87. Non-organic, on-site soils are generally expected to meet this criterion. September 3, 015 Page 1 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

16 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) Successful re-use of excavated, suitable on-site soils as compacted fill will depend on their moisture contents during excavation. Laboratory test results indicate the soils tested have field moistures both dry and wet of their optimum moisture content for compaction. Scarifying and drying of the wet soils should be anticipated to achieve the recommended compaction. Drying of these soils will likely result in some delays, and may not be possible during cooler, wetter weather. We recommend that the earthwork be performed during the warmer, drier times of the year. Compacted fill should be placed according to VDOT specifications. The contractor should bench compacted fill foundation grades steeper than H:1V to allow placement of horizontal lifts. Compacted fill slopes should not be designed and built steeper than.5h:1v. Slope Stability As discussed in Chapter III of VDOT Material Division s Manual of Instructions (MOI, June 01), earthwork slopes are not addressed by LRFD and require engineering evaluation for design of stable soil slopes. VDOT s proposed grading includes embankment fill for widened or new roadway from about Station +00 to Station 5+50, from Station 8+00 to Abutment A at Station 11+00, and from Abutment B at Station to Station Planned embankment fill heights will be up to about 7 ft. VDOT s proposed grading includes new excavation from about Station to Station 11+00, with planned cut slope heights reaching 31 ft. VDOT s preliminary plans show embankment and excavation slope ratios of H:1V. At both Abutment A and Abutment B, inboard slopes of 1.5H:1V are planned. These slopes will be armored with rip rap. Per VDOT s MOI, slopes greater than 5 ft in height or those supporting a structure are defined as critical. The minimum factor of safety against slope failure for critical slopes is 1.5. For non-critical slopes, defined as 5 ft in height or less and not supporting a structure, the minimum required factor of safety is 1.3. We assumed that new roadway embankment materials will come from regular excavation within the project. We have assigned material properties correlated to laboratory measured values, as applicable. Properties of the remaining materials were developed through SPT N-value correlations. A tension crack at the head of the slope was also incorporated in the slope models. Table 7 summarizes the assigned material properties used in our slope stability analyses. September 3, 015 Page 15 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

17 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) Table 7: Material Properties used in the Slope Stability Analyses Material New Roadway Embankment Existing Roadway Embankment Moist Unit Weight (pcf) Drained Shear Strength Φ (deg.) c (psf) Comments Site-specific laboratory measurements Alluvium 5 0 Loose to Medium Dense Residuum Dense to Very Dense Residuum N 1,0 = to7 bpf, Φ from LRFD Table...-1 N 1,0 = 1 bpf, Φ from LRFD Table...-1 N 1,0 = to 30 bpf, Φ from LRFD Table...-1, c estimated Site-specific laboratory measurements IGM Class II Dry Rip Rap Avg. N 1,0 > 50 bpf, Φ from LRFD Table...-1, c estimated Estimated properties based on review of literature We used SLOPE/W (01) to perform the slope stability analyses in combination with the Morgenstern and Price procedure (i.e. complete equilibrium theory). Design life (long-term, drained) conditions were considered for each of the slope scenarios. End of construction (short-term) concerns do not exist for the excavation cut slopes or the embankment slope scenarios due to the presence of free-draining soils in the slope areas. Interim loading cases were not considered for any scenarios, as they are dictated by the contractor s means and methods in performing the earthwork and are indeterminate at this time. We evaluated two excavation slope sections, one embankment slope section, and two slope sections at the abutments. The excavation sections are a VDOT-designated critical cut at Station (slope height about 30 ft) and a second section we identified as potentially unstable at Station (noncritical with a slope height of 13 ft) where excavation into a very loose existing road embankment will be required. The embankment section we evaluated is a VDOT designated critical fill at Station 1+00 with a slope height ft. The abutment sections consist of rip rap armored 1.5H:1V slopes with heights of 1 ft at Abutment A and 7 ft at Abutment B. Our analyses demonstrate that the proposed H:1V slope ratio meets VDOT s minimum factor of safety criterion of 1.5 for critical cut slopes (MOI, Section , Table 3.7) which extend from approximate Station Nos to +00. Our analyses also demonstrate that the proposed 1.5H:1V slopes at Abutments A and B meet VDOT s minimum factor of safety criterion of 1.5. Our analyses indicate that the proposed H:1V slope ratio for excavation slopes into existing road embankments (slope height 13 ft, non-critical) do not meet the minimum factor of safety criterion of 1.3. For excavation slopes that extend into existing roadway embankment fill, we recommend reducing the September 3, 015 Page 1 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

18 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) slope angle from H:1V to.5h:1v. At this reduced slope angle, our analyses indicate an adequate factor of safety of 1.3 or greater. Our analyses also indicate that critical embankment fill slopes do not meet the minimum factor of safety criterion of 1.5. For critical fill sections (slope heights in excess of 5 ft), which extend from about Station Nos to 1+50, we recommend a maximum slope angle of.5h:1v. At this reduced slope angle, our analyses indicate an adequate factor of safety of 1.5 or greater. Table 8 summarizes the factors of safety determined by our analyses. Figures depicting the critical slip surface for each of the analyzed scenarios are included at the end of this report. Table 8: Summary of Slope Stability Factors of Safety Scenario Slope Height (ft) Section Station Demonstrated Minimum Factor of Safety 1 Design Life (long-term, drained) Figure # Critical Embankment Slope H:1V Critical Embankment Slope.5H:1V Non-Critical Excavation Slope Into Existing Embankment H:1V Non-Critical Excavation Slope Into Existing Embankment.5H:1V Critical Excavation Slope into Residuum H:1V Critical Slope at Abutments A Critical Slope at Abutment B Minimum Factors of Safety Required per VDOT MOI: Critical Slope - 1.5, Non-Critical Slope Embankment Fill Slopes New embankment fill should be benched into existing slopes to reduce the potential for development of weak planes or the creation of seepage/slippage lines between the face of existing slopes and the new embankment fill. Each lift of fill should be scarified to provide adequate bond with the subsequent lift. September 3, 015 Page 17 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

19 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) The fill should be placed in accordance with VDOT Road and Bridge Specifications and the recommendations provided in the Earthwork and Grading section of this report. Furthermore, it is critical that proper compaction equipment be utilized for the placement of these fills. Under no circumstances should tracked equipment be used to compact fill slopes. This equipment, while useful for moving fill and shaping slopes, is designed to distribute its weight over a broad area, whereas a roller transfers concentrated energy to the fill and thus compacts the lift. Positive drainage should be provided at the crest and base of all embankment fill slopes to reduce the potential and magnitude of slope face erosion and the softening of soils at the slope toe. Fill slopes should be seeded as soon as possible after completion of slope construction to establish vegetation and help reduce erosion. Excavation Cut Slopes Based upon our evaluation of the test boring and soil laboratory data, we recommend that excavation slopes on this project be designed and constructed no steeper than H:1V, except where excavation extends into existing roadway embankments. As discussed in the Slope Stability section of this report, excavation slopes into existing roadway embankments should be no steeper than.5h:1v. Grading at the top of cut slopes should be designed to prevent ponding of water at the top of slopes and so that surface runoff is directed away from the slope to reduce the potential and magnitude of slope face erosion. Similarly, positive drainage should be provided at the base of excavation cut slopes to prevent ponding of water and consequent softening of soils at the base of these slopes. Excavation cut slopes should be seeded as soon as possible after completion of slope construction to establish vegetation and help reduce erosion. Embankment Settlement Our embankment settlement analyses demonstrated that locations within ft of the bridge abutments are anticipated to settle more than the VDOT criterion of 1 inch or less. We anticipate total settlements (at the top of embankment) at the maximum embankment height sections (approx. Station 11+50) on the order of 1. inches. Based on site-specific consolidation data, we anticipate a majority of this settlement will occur during embankment construction. Therefore, no waiting period is considered necessary between the completion of embankment construction and paving. For the critical fill section at approximate Station 1+00, our analyses indicate maximum total settlement at the top of the embankment on the order of about inches, which is the maximum allowable settlement for embankments per VDOT criterion. Based on site-specific consolidation data, we anticipate a majority of this settlement to occur during embankment construction. Therefore, no waiting period is considered necessary between the completion of embankment construction and paving. Pavements We understand that VDOT will be performing the pavement design. We recommend that the contractor prepare pavement subgrades and place compacted fill for pavement support in accordance with VDOT Road and Bridge Specifications. Dense-graded aggregate placed as pavement base course should also be compacted according to VDOT Road and Bridge Specifications. September 3, 015 Page 18 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

20 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) Minor Structures Culverts VDOT anticipates a 0-inch concrete pipe culvert at Station We encountered soft SILT WITH SAND (ML) and loose to very loose SILTY SAND (SM) and POORLY GRADED SAND (SP) in Soil Survey Boring SS-07 drilled at Station These soft and loose alluvial soils extend to depths of about 8 ft, El 390., below the existing ground surface. This depth corresponds to about 7 ft below the invert in elevation and about ft below the invert out elevation. Additionally, we encountered groundwater at a depth of ft (El 39.) during drilling in SS-07. VDOT anticipates a box culvert extension at Station This structure will have an invert in elevation at El.75. In Soil Survey Boring SS-13 drilled at Station 1+75, we encountered firm density SANDY SILT (ML) fill and firm density residual SILT WITH SAND (ML) from the existing ground surface at El.3 to a depth of ft (El.3). These fine grained fill and residual soils were underlain by loose to medium dense residual SILTY SAND (SM) to the termination depth of ft, El 1.3. We encountered groundwater in SS-13 at a depth of.0 ft, El.3. We anticipate that foundation soils at both the 0-inch culvert and the box culvert extension will be unsuitable. We recommend undercutting unsuitable soils to a depth of at least ft below planned culvert foundation grades. A layer of geotextile stabilization fabric should be placed across the bottom and sides of the undercut excavation. The geotextile should meet the requirements of AASHTO M88 for strength property requirements, Table 1, Class I for grab strength, tear strength, and puncture strength. The undercut should be backfilled to design foundation grade with VDOT No. 357 stone. The geotextile should cover the No. 357 stone backfill prior to placement of bedding material. In accordance with VDOT Standard Specification 30.03(a).b, bedding material for culvert foundations, including foundations in soft materials shall be VDOT No. 5 or aggregate. Because bedding material will be placed over the ft layer of No. 357 stone, we recommend a bedding layer thickness of inches for both the 0-inch concrete pipe and the box culvert extension. Corrosion testing was not performed in conjunction with this study. The selection of the pipe material should consider the ph and resistivity of both the water and soil. Stormwater Management Basins Four borings were drilled in the vicinity of the planned stormwater management basin north of the roadway alignment between approximate Station Nos and +00. These borings, SW-01 through SW-0, indicate the area is underlain primarily by coarse grained residual soils consisting of loose to very dense SILTY SAND (SM). At the test boring locations, we encountered 3 to inches of topsoil. At Boring SW-01, we also encountered about 1.5 ft of existing fill consisting of loose SILTY SAND (SM). Based on information shown on Sheet D(1) Stormwater Management Details, dated October 0, 01, the facility will have a basin bottom grade at El 37. Up to ft of fill and ft of cut will be required to grade the bottom of the basin to this elevation. The basin will be surrounded by a berm with a ft wide crest and a top grade at El 1.5. Up to about 3 ft of cut and 7 ft of fill will be required to construct this perimeter berm. In the four stormwater management basin borings, we did not encounter IGM or rock September 3, 015 Page 19 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

21 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) within the depths of likely excavation for the facility and therefore do not anticipate that rock excavation techniques will be required to construct the pond. Additionally, no groundwater was encountered in any of the four borings to the depths explored. We anticipate that residual soil subgrades should generally be suitable for support of the proposed dam and outfall works. However, loose surficial soils should be anticipated within about ft of the existing ground surface. These loose soils may require undercut and replacement or compaction in place. The suitability of these subgrades for embankment support should be evaluated at the time of construction by the Geotechnical Engineer. We performed laboratory permeability testing on a tube sample of soil collected from Boring SW-0 between the depths of 5 ft (El 3.7) and 7 ft (3.7). The results of this test indicate a permeability/infiltration rate of 1. x - cm/sec, or ft/hr. From a stability standpoint, we consider the on-site soils suitable for embankment dam construction. However, due to the relatively high permeability of the soils, it may be necessary to line the pond and upstream embankment face with compacted clay or a synthetic material to reduce the infiltration rate. Clay soils suitable for a pond liner would have to be imported from off-site. Major Structure Foundations VDOT s RFP identified pile-supported, semi-integral abutments and a spread footing-supported pier as the anticipated substructure units. Our preliminary recommendations indicated that the anticipated foundation units were appropriate for support of the proposed substructures. However, VDOT s subsequent hydrologic and hydraulics analysis (H&HA) predicts significant erosion of material at each substructure location. We understand that VDOT will now perform the design of foundations for both abutments. Therefore, foundations recommendations for support of the proposed abutments are not included in our final report. However, we have included recommendations regarding the abutment earth pressures per VDOT s request. Pier 1 As previously stated, VDOT performed a hydrologic and hydraulics analysis (H&HA) that predicts significant erosion of material at each substructure location. VDOT s scour elevations for Pier 1 are summarized in Table 9. Table 9: Pier 1 Scour Elevations Summary Substructure Design Scour (-year) Scour Elevation A (ft) Check Scour (500-year) Pier A Scour elevations obtained from string forward by Robert Reid dated January 15, 015 Our preliminary recommendations anticipated that spread footings bearing on either IGM or bedrock could be suitable for support of Pier 1. However, the anticipated check flood scour elevation is on the September 3, 015 Page 0 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

22 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) order of 13 ft below the top of IGM and 5 to 7 ft below the top of bedrock at the pier location. Therefore, spread footing foundations would require significant bedrock excavation to achieve long-term stability. Similarly, driven steel H-piles are not anticipated to penetrate more than 1 for ft into IGM, requiring prebored sockets through the IGM and into suitable bedrock to achieve long-term stability. The required bedrock excavation to construct either a spread footing or steel H-pile with prebored sockets into bedrock results in both constructability and economic concerns. We therefore recommend straight-sided drilled shafts socketed into fair quality bedrock for support of proposed Pier 1, due to their constructability and structural section (i.e. ability to accommodate loss of lateral support). Factored structural loads provided by VDOT for the strength and service limit states at Pier 1 are summarized in Table. Table : Pier 1 Factored Structural Loads per Drilled Shaft for Strength and Service Limit States Limit State Axial Load (kips) Longitudinal Load (kips) A Transverse Load (kips) A M x (kip-ft) B M z (kip-ft) B Strength , 18 Service A Longitudinal axis (along the centerline of the bridge); Transverse axis (perpendicular to the centerline of the bridge) B M x (about transverse axis); M z (about longitudinal axis) We understand that VDOT plans a single row of three drilled shafts spaced at approximately 18 ft centerto-center for support of the pier, and bottom of column / top of shaft transition at EL 398 ft. Our analyses demonstrate that straight-sided drilled shafts achieve a factored axial geotechnical resistance of 953 kips when socketed into fair quality bedrock. Our analyses are based on a minimum 8-inch socket diameter and a minimum 7-ft socket length in continuous, fair quality bedrock with structural load transfer occurring in socket side resistance only. We used a resistance factor of 0.55 in accordance with Table in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, Sixth edition (01) guidelines for side resistance in bedrock. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered at Pier 1 (previously discussed) and the predicted scour elevations, we recommend a minimum socket tip elevation be established. Drilled shaft tip elevations are governed by the depth to fair quality bedrock and the required minimum fair quality bedrock socket length. The recommended minimum tip elevation, based on subsurface conditions encountered at the Pier 1 location, along with other pertinent elevations, is listed in Table 11. September 3, 015 Page 1 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

23 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) Table 11: Pier 1 Minimum Socket Tip Elevation Bottom of Column / Top of Shaft Elevation (ft) Recommended Minimum Socket Tip Elevation (ft) Design Socket Elevations (ft) A Estimated Total Shaft Length (ft) to 39 9 A Based on recommended minimum 7-ft socket length Final drilled shaft and socket lengths could increase based on actual conditions encountered during construction. LPILE v013 was used to perform the lateral drilled shaft analyses. Our analyses used the resultant lateral loading (longitudinal and transverse) and resultant applied moment (M x and M z ), applied at the top of shaft (EL 398 ft). In accordance with Table in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, Sixth edition (01) guidelines, a P-multiplier of 0.95 was applied in our analyses for the planned center-to-center shaft spacing of 18 ft. Our lateral analyses were based on 5,000 psi compressive strength concrete and Grade 50 (yield strength of 50 ksi) steel reinforcement equivalent to about 1.7% of the drilled shaft socket gross area. The shaft was modeled as a free-head condition and unsupported from the anticipated bottom of column / top of shaft transition elevation (EL 398 ft) to the design scour elevation (EL 38. ft). Per VDOT construction practices, the shaft diameter was increased by inches above the approximate top of bedrock (EL 38 ft). However, no corresponding increase in steel reinforcement was modeled (i.e, consistent steel reinforcement throughout shaft). Our analyses demonstrate the geotechnical stability of drilled shafts with a minimum 8-inch socket diameter and minimum 7-ft socket length in fair quality rock at the strength limit state loading under design scour conditions. Results of the strength limit state lateral analyses are summarized in Table 1. Table 1: Pier 1 Strength Limit State Lateral Analyses Results A Maximum Internal Moment Maximum Internal Shear Depth to Geotechnical Depth (ft) B Depth (ft) B Fixity (ft) B Calculated Value (kip-ft) Calculated Value (kips) 1, A Free-head condition; design scour conditions B All depths relative to bottom of column / top of shaft (EL 398 ft) The anticipated top of design socket (EL 37 ft) occurs approximately 3 ft below the check scour elevation (EL ft). However, no extreme limit states were analyzed as extreme event loading was not available. The calculated drilled shaft head deflection under service limit state loading was 0.39 inches, which meets VDOT s criterion of a maximum of 0.5 inches. September 3, 015 Page Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

24 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) Drilled shaft structural resistance relative to the anticipated loading has not been evaluated. The project structural engineer should verify that the shaft s structural resistances are adequate for the anticipated loading. Corrosion testing was not performed in conjunction with this study. We recommend representative samples from the overburden soils be tested to determine corrosion potential. These results will aid in the design of the proposed foundations. Abutments Based on the subsurface conditions encountered at the abutments (previously discussed), IGM and bedrock may be potential bearing strata for support of the proposed abutments. The encountered depths of IGM and bedrock relative to VDOT s anticipated bottom of footing (BoF) at each abutment are summarized in Table 13. Table 13: Encountered Depth of IGM and Bedrock Relative to Abutment Footing Substructure Unit Boring IGM Depth (ft) Bedrock Depth (ft) Abutment A BR (BoF =.5 ft) 1 BR Abutment B BR-05 Not Encountered 15. (BoF = 0.0 ft) 1 BR ) VDOT anticipated bottom of footing elevation..) Depths relative to the substructure s anticipated bottom of footing elevation provided by VDOT. The design of abutments requires estimation of earth pressures imparted by the retained backfill. VDOT road and bridge standards prescribe a zone of select backfill against the abutment backwall, consisting of VDOT Select Material, Type 1. On this project, new roadway embankment will occur beyond the zone of select backfill, and is likely to consist of regular excavation or borrow materials. As such, it can only be anticipated at this time that the new roadway embankment will be a homogeneous mass of regular excavation materials. Table 1 provides estimated material properties for roadway embankment at the proposed bridge abutments. September 3, 015 Page 3 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

25 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) Table 1: Estimated Material Properties for Roadway Embankment at Abutments Embankment Material Moist Unit Weight (pcf) Effective Angle of Internal Friction, φ (degrees) Friction Angle for Dissimilar Materials, δ (degrees) Select Material, A Type I Regular Excavation A VDOT specified Select Material, Type I properties CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS Construction Dewatering The Contractor should anticipate groundwater during excavations along Louse Creek. Temporary cofferdams may be needed for construction of the foundations. Dewatering methods and temporary cofferdam design should be the responsibility of the Contractor. Drilled Shafts Drilled shaft construction should be performed in accordance with project-specific VDOT special provisions (as applicable). The contractor should be prepared to tremie drilled shaft concrete if groundwater cannot be easily controlled by pumping. Excessive pumping should be avoided as it can lower groundwater levels in the vicinity of the pumping activity. Earthwork and Grading The test boring data indicate the approximate depth of topsoil based on our visual identification procedures. The required depth of stripping should be evaluated by the excavation contractor prior to construction using test pits, probes, or other means that the Contractor wishes to employ. This evaluation should be the Contractor's responsibility. Some of the on-site soils are susceptible to moisture changes, and will be easily disturbed and difficult to compact under wet weather conditions. Drying and reworking of the soils are likely to be difficult during wetter winter months. We recommend that the earthwork phases of this project be performed during the warmer, drier times of the year to limit the potential for disturbance of on-site soils. The site has areas of soils that consist of low to moderate plasticity silts and clays. These soils are moisture sensitive, and will readily become disturbed by construction traffic on exposed surfaces of wet subgrades and foundation grades. We recommend avoiding wet weather site preparation and grading activities. Traffic on stripped or undercut subgrades or foundation grades should be restricted as much as September 3, 015 Page Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

26 VDOT Lynchburg District VDOT Project No (UPC 907) possible to reduce disturbance of underlying soils. The contractor should provide site drainage to maintain subgrades and foundation grades free of water and to avoid saturation and disturbance of the subgrade and foundation grade soils before placing compacted fill, pavement base course or moisture barrier material. This will be important during all phases of the construction work. The contractor should be responsible for reworking of subgrades, foundation grades and compacted fill that were initially considered suitable but were later disturbed by equipment and/or weather. We expect soils in the low-lying areas of the site to be wet and easily disturbed. Crushed stone and stabilization geotextile working platforms could be used to facilitate construction. Recommendations for working platforms should be based on observations of the actual subgrade and foundation grade conditions during construction. LIMITATIONS We based the analyses and recommendations submitted in this report on the information revealed by our exploration. We attempted to provide for normal contingencies, but the possibility remains that unexpected conditions may be encountered during construction. This report has been prepared to aid in the evaluation of this site and to assist in the design of the project. It is intended for use concerning this specific project. We based our recommendations on information on the site and proposed construction as described in this report. Substantial changes in loads, locations, or grades should be brought to our attention so we can modify our recommendations as needed. We would appreciate an opportunity to review the plans and specifications as they pertain to the recommendations contained in this report, and to submit our comments to you based on this review. We have endeavored to complete the services identified herein in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing in the same locality and under similar conditions as this project. No other representation, express or implied, is included or intended, and no warranty or guarantee is included or intended in this report, or other instrument of service. September 3, 015 Page 5 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. Project All Rights Reserved

27

28 FIGURES Figure 1: Site Vicinity Map Figure : Test Boring Location Plan Figure 3: Test Boring Location Plan Figure : Critical Embankment Slope, Design Life (long-term, drained), H:1V Slope Figure 5: Critical Embankment Slope, Design Life (long-term, drained),.5h:1v Slope Figure : Non-Critical Excavation Slope into Existing Road Embankment, Design Life (long-term, drained), H:1V Slope Figure 7: Non-Critical Excavation Slope into Existing Road Embankment, Design Life (long-term, drained),.5h:1v Slope Figure 8: Critical Excavation Slope into Residuum, Design Life (long-term, drained), H:1V Slope Figure 9: Inboard Slope at Abutment A, Design Life (long-term, drained), 1.5H:1V Slope Figure : Inboard Slope at Abutment B: Design Life, (long-term, drained), 1.5H:1V Slope September 3, 015 Project 110 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. 015 All Rights Reserved

29 UPC 907, VDOT # , RT 0 Bridge & Approaches over Louse Creek, Charlotte County, VA Approximate site location Maptech, Inc. 00 1/1

30 N SW-03 SW-0 SW-0 SS-01 SS-0 SW-01 SS-03, SS-03A SS-0 SS-05 SS-0 BR-01 BR-0 BR-03 BR-05, BR-05A BR-0 BR-0 SS-07 SS-09, SS-0 SS-08 Matchline - See Figure 3 LEGEND APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION Base Plan Provided by VDOT SCALE: 1"=' 0 ' 00' UPC 907, VDOT # RT 0 BRIDGE & APPROACHES OVER LOUSE CREEK CHARLOTTE CO., VIRGINIA Figure Name: Project Number: BORING LOCATION PLAN Done: J. SPENCER Reviewed: S. WINTER Figure Number: Date: DEC 01

31 N 05A SS-07 Matchline - See Figure SS-09, SS-09A SS- SS-11 SS-1 SS-13 Channel Relocation SS-1 SS-08 LEGEND APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION SCALE: 1"=' UPC 907, VDOT # RT 0 BRIDGE & APPROACHES OVER LOUSE CREEK CHARLOTTE CO., VIRGINIA 0 ' 00' Figure Name: Project Number: ac. Done: BORING LOCATION PLAN J. SPENCER Base Plan Provided by VDOT Reviewed: Figure Number: Date: S. WINTER DEC 01

32 Figure - Route 0 Over Louse Creek Slope Stability Analysis - Station 1+00 Critical Embankment Slope - Design Life (long-term, drained) Slope Height: 7 ft H:1V Slope Embankment Fill Phi' = 35 Degrees c' = 0 psf Residual Phi' = 33 Degrees c' = 50 psf Elevation Alluvial Phi' = 5 Degrees c' = 0 psf Very Dense Residual Phi' = 3 Degrees c' = 50 psf Distance

33 Figure 5 - Route 0 Over Louse Creek Slope Stability Analysis - Station 1+00 Critical Embankment Slope - Design Life (long-term, drained) Slope Height: 7 ft.5h:1v Slope Embankment Fill Phi' = 35 Degrees c' = 0 psf Residual Phi' = 33 Degrees c' = 0 psf Elevation Phi' = 5 Degrees c' = 0 psf Very Dense Residual Phi' = 3 Degrees c' = 0 psf Distance

34 Figure - Route 0 Over Louse Creek Slope Stability Analysis - Station Non-Critical Excavation Slope into Existing Road Embankment - Design Life (long-term, drained) Slope Height: 13 ft H:1V Slope Elevation Alluvial Phi' = 5 Degrees c' = 0 psf Embankment Fill Phi' = 35 Degrees c' = 0 psf Residual Phi' = 33 Degrees c' = 50 psf Existing Fill Embankment Phi' = 9 Degrees c' = 0 psf Distance

35 Figure 7 - Route 0 Over Louse Creek Slope Stability Analysis - Station Non-Critical Excavation Slope into Existing Road Embankment - Design Life (long-term, drained) Slope Height: 13 ft.5h:1v Slope Elevation Alluvial Phi' = 5 Degrees c' = 0 psf Embankment Fill Phi' = 35 Degrees c' = 0 psf Residual Phi' = 33 Degrees c' = 50 psf Existing Fill Embankment Phi' = 9 Degrees c' = 0 psf Distance

36 Figure 8 - Route 0 Over Louse Creek Slope Stability Analysis - Station Critical Excavation Slope into Residuum - Design Life (long-term, drained) Slope Height: 31 ft H:1V Slope Elevation Loose to Medium Dense Residual Phi' = 33 Degrees c' = 5 psf Dense to Very Dense Residual Phi' = 3 Degrees c' = 50 psf IGM Phi' = 3 Degrees c' = 50 psf Distance

37 Figure 9 - Route 0 Over Louse Creek Slope Stability Analysis - Station Inboard Slope at Abutment A- Design Life (long-term, drained) Slope Height: 1 ft 1.5H:1V Slope Elevation 1 Abutment A Foundation Embankment Fill Phi' = 35 Degrees c' = 0 psf 9 Rip Rap Phi' = 5 Degrees c' = 0 psf 3 5 Residual Phi' = 33 Degrees c' = 5 psf 13 1 IGM Phi' = 3 Degrees c' = 50 psf Distance

38 Figure - Route 0 Over Louse Creek Slope Stability Analysis - Station Inboard Slope at Abutment B- Design Life (long-term, drained) Slope Height: 7 ft 1.5H:1V Slope Abutment B Foundation Elevation 00 Alluvial Phi' = 5 Degrees c' = 0 psf Rip Rap Phi' = 5 Degrees c' = 0 psf Embankment Fill Phi' = 35 Degrees c' = 0 psf Distance

39 APPENDIX A SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION DATA Subsurface Exploration Procedures General Notes for Subsurface Exploration Logs VDOT Unified Soil Classification System VDOT Material and Sample Symbols List Boring Logs, SW-01 through SW-0 Boring Logs, SS-01 through SS-1 (including SS-03A and SS-09A) Boring Logs, BR-01 through BR-0 (including BR-05A) Rock Core Photographic Logs September 3, 015 Project 110 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. 015 All Rights Reserved

40 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROCEDURES Test Borings Hollow Stem Augers (HSA) The borings are advanced by turning a continuous flight auger with a center opening of ¼ or 3¼ inches. A plug device blocks off the center opening while augers are advanced. Cuttings are brought to the surface by the auger flights. Sampling is performed through the center opening in the hollow stem auger, by standard methods, after removal of the plug. Usually, no water is introduced into the boring using this procedure. Standard Penetration Test Results The numbers in the Sampling Data column of the boring logs represent Standard Penetration Test (SPT) results. Each number represents the blows needed to drive a -inch O.D., 1⅜-inch I.D. split-spoon sampler inches, using a 10-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The sampler is typically driven a total of 18 or inches. The first inches are considered a seating interval. The total of the number of blows for the second and third -inch intervals is the SPT N-value. The SPT is conducted according to ASTM D158. Many correlations with SPT N-values are used in the development of our geotechnical engineering recommendations. These correlations are usually based on SPT N-values obtained using a Safety Hammer. The SPTs for this project were performed using an Automatic Trip Hammer (ATH) rather than the Safety Hammer. The energy applied to the split-spoon sampler using the ATH is about 30 percent greater than that applied using the Safety Hammer. The hammer blows shown on the boring logs are uncorrected for the higher energy. However, we corrected SPT N-values for the higher energy when using N-values with correlations in our analyses. Soil Classification Criteria The group symbols on the logs represent the Unified Soil Classification System Group Symbols (ASTM D87) based on visual observation and limited laboratory testing of the samples. Criteria for visual identification of soil samples are included in this appendix. Some variation can be expected between samples visually classified and samples classified in the laboratory. Residual soils are derived through the in-place physical and chemical weathering of the underlying rock. Intermediate geomaterials (IGM) describe residual material as it transitions between soil and rock, and vice-versa. VDOT classifies IGM as residual material with SPT N-values greater than 50 blows per inches of penetration (VDOT MOI Chapter III, June 01). For the purposes of classification, we have described rock as material encountering auger or SPT refusal. SPT refusal is defined as SPT N-values greater than 50 blows per 1 inch of penetration. Pocket Penetrometer Results The values in the Pkt. Penetrometer data column of the logs represent pocket penetrometer readings, in units of tons per sq. ft. Pocket penetrometer readings provide an estimate of the unconfined compressive strength of fine-grained soils. September 3, 015 Project 110 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. 015 All Rights Reserved

41 Rock Core Drilling The drillers core drilled rock using special core bits set with carbide steel or diamond, depending upon the rock texture. The bit was fitted onto a double-tube, swivel-type core barrel in which an exterior tube and bit rotate, and an interior barrel remains stationary to receive the rock core. Drillers circulated water between the barrels and across the bit face to provide cooling and to flush away cuttings. The size of bits is indicated on individual boring logs. The length of rock core recovered expressed as a percentage of the total length cored is shown on the logs. Rock Quality Designation (RQD) is also given for rock cores drilled with NQ-size core drilling equipment. RQD is defined as the total length of NX-size sound rock fragments recovered which are greater than inches in length, discounting drilling breaks, expressed as a percentage of the total length cored. RQD is preferred to core recovery as a measure of engineering characteristics of rock. Boring Locations and Elevations Proposed boring locations were surveyed and marked by Thompson & Litton, Inc. (T&L). Where borings were offset in the field, less than 5 ft, due to access constraints, the locations were determined by measuring from the known surveyed location. The elevations of the ground surface at offset boring locations were obtained using a lock-level to measure from the known surveyed elevation. One boring, SS-1, was moved 7 ft to the southeast of the surveyed location due to access restraints. We consulted with Rusty Hall, PG at VDOT who indicated that re-surveying would not be necessary. We measured the change in elevation between the surveyed location and the as-drilled location of SS-1 using a hand level. Approximate boring locations are shown on Figures and 3. Ground surface elevations at the boring locations were provided by the surveyor (except as noted for SS-1) and are indicated on the logs. Locations and elevations should be considered no more accurate than the methods used to determine them. September 3, 015 Project 110 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. 015 All Rights Reserved

42 GENERAL NOTES FOR SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOGS 1. Numbers in sampling data column next to Standard Penetration Test (SPT) symbols indicate blows required to drive a -inch O.D., 1⅜-inch I.D. sampling spoon inches using a 10 pound hammer falling 30 inches. The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N value is the number of blows required to drive the sampler 1 inches, after a inch seating interval. The Standard Penetration Test is performed in general accordance with ASTM D158.. Visual classification of soil is in accordance with terminology set forth in VDOT MOI Chapter III, June 01. The ASTM D87 group symbols (e.g., CL) shown in the classification column are based on visual observations. 3. Estimated water levels indicated on the logs are only estimates from available data and may vary with precipitation, porosity of the soil, site topography, and other factors.. The logs and related information depict subsurface conditions only at the specific locations and at the particular time when drilled or excavated. Soil conditions at other locations may differ from conditions occurring at these locations. Also, the passage of time may result in a change in the subsurface soil and water level conditions at the subsurface exploration location. 5. The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary between soil and rock types as obtained from the subsurface exploration. Some variation may also be expected vertically between samples taken. The soil profile, water level observations and penetration resistances presented on these logs have been made with reasonable care and accuracy and must be considered only an approximate representation of subsurface conditions to be encountered at the particular location. September 3, 015 Project 110 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. 015 All Rights Reserved

43 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION AND SYMBOL CHART COARSE-GRAINED SOILS (more than 50% of material is larger than No. 00 sieve size.) GRAVELS More than 50% of coarse fraction larger than No. sieve size SANDS 50% or more of coarse fraction smaller than No. sieve size Clean Gravels (Less than 5% fines) Well-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines Poorly-graded gravels, gravel-sand GP mixtures, little or no fines Gravels with fines (More than 1% fines) Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures Clean Sands (Less than 5% fines) Well-graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines Sands with fines (More than 1% fines) FINE-GRAINED SOILS (50% or more of material is smaller than No. 00 sieve size.) SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid limit less than 50% SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid limit 50% or greater HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS GW GM GC SW SP SM SC ML CL OL MH CH OH PT Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty of clayey fine sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts Peat and other highly organic soils GW GP GM GC SW SP SM SC LABORATORY CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA Cu = Cu = D0 D Atterberg limits below "A" line or P.I. less than Atterberg limits above "A" line with P.I. greater than 7 D0 D Atterberg limits below "A" line or P.I. less than Atterberg limits above "A" line with P.I. greater than 7 D30 greater than ; Cc = between 1 and 3 D x D0 Not meeting all gradation requirements for GW D30 greater than ; Cc = between 1 and 3 D x D0 PLASTICITY CHART Above "A" line with P.I. between and 7 are borderline cases requiring use of dual symbols Not meeting all gradation requirements for GW Limits plotting in shaded zone with P.I. between and 7 are borderline cases requiring use of dual symbols. Determine percentages of sand and gravel from grain-size curve. Depending on percentage of fines (fraction smaller than No. 00 sieve size), coarse-grained soils are classified as follows: Less than 5 percent More than 1 percent 5 to 1 percent PLASTICITY INDEX (PI) (%) CL GW, GP, SW, SP GM, GC, SM, SC Borderline cases requiring dual symbols CH A LINE: PI = 0.73(LL-0) MH&OH CL+ML ML&OL LIQUID LIMIT (LL) (%)

44 Page 1of MATERIAL AND SAMPLE SYMBOLS LIST Pavement/Soils Sedimentary Rocks Igneous Rocks Metamorphic Rocks Sampling ASPH- ASPHALT PVT GP - Poorlygraded Gravel MH - Elastic Silt SC - Clayey Sand CGL - Conglomorate SE - Shell Bed AND - Andesite GGE - Gouge SPT CH - Fat Clay GP-GC MH/CH SM - Silty Sand CLST - Cherty Limestone SHL - Shale BST - Basalt GNS - Gneiss Core CL - Lean Clay GP-GM MH/ML SP - Poorly- Graded Sand COL - Coal SLS - Siltstone DBS - Diabase MYL - Mylonite Auger CL-ML GW - Well- Graded Gravel MH/SM SP-SC MST Mudstone SST - Sandstone DRT - Diorite PHY - Phyllite Vane CONC- CONCRETE PVT GW-GC ML - Silt SP-SM GWK - Graywacke SST-SHL - Interbedded Sandstone/Shale GBR - Gabbro SCH - Schist Undisturbed FL -Fill GW-GM ML/CL SW - Well- Graded Sand LST - Limestone SST-SLS - Interbedded Sandstone/Siltstone GRD - Granodiorite SLT - Slate Grab GC - Clayey Gravel GM/GP ML/GM SW-SC UCY - Underclay SHLS-Shaly Limestone GRN Granite Misc. CAV - Cavity No Recovery GC-GM GM/ML ML/SM SHDS Shaly Dolostone MSH Silty Shale POR - Porphyry HWR Highly Weathered Rock Other GM - Silty Gravel GM/SM SW-SM CHK Chalk SSHL Sandy Shale RHY - Rhyolite BRC - Breccia

45 Page of MATERIAL AND SAMPLE SYMBOLS LIST Pavement/Soils Sedimentary Rocks Igneous Rocks Metamorphic Rocks Sampling TOPS- TOPSOIL SC/CH CH/CL CH/MH CH/SC BLD-Boulder Bed CHT Charnocktite MSLS Metasiltstone CL/ML CL/SC CL/CH GP/GW CRA Crushed Aggregate DLS Dolostone MSST Metasandstone GW/GP ML/MH GC/SC OH/OL GP/SP LST-DLS- Interbedded Limestone/Dolostone QZT - Quartzite OL/OH PT Peat OH Organic SC/CL OL Organic CHRT SPS Soapstone SC/GC SC-SM SP/SW SM/GM SM/MH MBST Metabasalt SM/ML SM/SC SP/GP SW/SP MBL Marble

46 DEPTH (ft) 8 ELEVATION (ft) 0 35 S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS SOIL RECOVERY (%) FIELD DATA SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL 8 CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BASIN STATION: 5+15 LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION:.0 ft Date(s) Drilled: //01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: M. Spencer, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 /.0 Topsoil TOPS 0.3 / 1.7 Fill, Brown, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, contains mica and root fragments, loose, moist SM 1.5 / 0.5 Residuum, Brown, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, contains mica, medium dense, moist SM.0 / 38.0 Residuum, White and light brown, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, contains mica, medium dense, moist SM 5.0 / 37.0 Residuum, White and light brown, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, medium dense to dense, moist SM SW-01 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 75 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LAB DATA LIQUID LIMIT LL PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) / / 8.0 IGM, White and light brown, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, very dense, moist SM SPT_LOG: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/ REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia Bottom of Boring at 19.5 ft. 5. PAGE 1 OF 1 SW-01

47 DEPTH (ft) ELEVATION (ft) 35 5 S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS 3 5 FIELD DATA 5 SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL 5 CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BASIN STATION: 5+50 LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 39.7 ft Date(s) Drilled: //01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: M. Spencer, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 39.7 Topsoil TOPS 0. / 39.3 Residuum, Red-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains mica, loose, moist SM.0 / 37.7 Residuum, Red-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica, medium dense, moist SM SW-0 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 5 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LIQUID LIMIT LL LAB DATA PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) FINES CONTENT -#00 (%) NP NP / 31.7 Residuum, White and gray, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica, dense to very dense, moist SM SPT_LOGB: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/ / 18.0 / 1.7 IGM, White and brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, very dense, moist SM REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia Bottom of Boring at 18. ft. PAGE 1 OF 1 SW-0

48 DEPTH (ft) 8 ELEVATION (ft) S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS FIELD DATA SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL 5 8 CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BASIN STATION: 5+5 LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 3.5 ft Date(s) Drilled: //01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: M. Spencer, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 3.5 Topsoil TOPS 0.3 / 3. Residuum, Brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains mica and root fragments, loose to medium dense, moist SM.0 / 3.5 Residuum, Light brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains mica, medium dense, moist SM 5.0 / 31.5 Residuum, White and brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica, medium dense, moist SM 8.0 / 8.5 Residuum, White and gray, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, medium dense, moist SM SW-03 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 135 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LAB DATA LIQUID LIMIT LL PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) SPT_LOG: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/ /5 SAME, very dense REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Bulk sample collected from 5.0 to.0 ft. Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia / 19.5 IGM, Light brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, very dense, moist SM Bottom of Boring at 18. ft PAGE 1 OF 1 SW-03

49 DEPTH (ft) 8 ELEVATION (ft) 30 5 S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS WOH FIELD DATA SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL 8 CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BASIN STATION: +30 LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 3.0 ft Date(s) Drilled: /13/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: M. Spencer, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 3.0 Topsoil TOPS 0.3 / 31.7 Residuum, Light brown, fine to medium, SANDY SILT, trace gravel, contains mica, stiff, moist ML.0 / 30.0 Residuum, Light brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica, medium dense, moist SM.0 / 8.0 Residuum, Light brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace mica, medium dense, moist SM.0 /.0 Residuum, Mottled black, brown and white, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, dense, moist SM SW-0 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 155 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LAB DATA LIQUID LIMIT LL PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) / / 1.5 IGM, Mottled black, brown and white, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, very dense, moist SM 11.0 SPT_LOG: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/ /5 REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia Bottom of Boring at 19. ft. 1.9 PAGE 1 OF 1 SW-0

50 PKT. PENETROMETER (tsf) DEPTH (ft) ELEVATION (ft) S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS 1 5 FIELD DATA 5 7 SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL 8 CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: STATION: +00 LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 83.7 ft Date(s) Drilled: /07/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: M. Spencer, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 83.7 Asphalt ASPH 0.7 / 83.0 Crushed Aggregate CRA 1.3 / 8. Fill, Red-brown, SILT WITH SAND, contains root fragments, and mica, very stiff, moist ML SAME, soft below ft UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia SOIL SURVEY 7.3 / 7. Residuum, Orange-brown, SILT WITH SAND, contains mica and manganese, stiff, moist ML 8.5 / 75. Residuum, Orange-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains manganese, medium dense, moist SM SS-01 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LAB DATA LIQUID LIMIT LL PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) Bottom of Boring at ft. SPT_LOGA: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/15 REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Boring backfilled with grout and patched with cold patch asphalt. Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia PAGE 1 OF 1 SS-01

51 PKT. PENETROMETER (tsf) DEPTH (ft) ELEVATION (ft) S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS FIELD DATA SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL 8 CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia SOIL SURVEY STATION: +00 LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 9. ft Date(s) Drilled: /07/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: M. Spencer, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 9. Asphalt ASPH 0.8 / 8. Crushed Aggregate CRA 1. / 7. Fill,Tan, SILTY SAND, contains mica, loose, moist SM.0 / 5. Fill, Tan, SILT WITH SAND, contains mica and root fragments, soft, moist ML.0 / 3. Residuum, Brown, LEAN CLAY WITH SAND, contains mica and root fragments, soft, moist CL 7.5 / 1.7 Residuum, Brown, fine to medium, SANDY LEAN CLAY, trace gravel, contains mica, stiff, moist CL SS-0 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 1 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LIQUID LIMIT LL LAB DATA PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) NP NP FINES CONTENT -#00 (%) Bottom of Boring at ft. SPT_LOGAB: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/15 REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Boring backfilled with grout and patched with cold patch asphalt. Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia PAGE 1 OF 1 SS-0

52 PKT. PENETROMETER (tsf) DEPTH (ft) 8 ELEVATION (ft) S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS FIELD DATA SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia SOIL SURVEY STATION: +75 LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 5.7 ft Date(s) Drilled: /13/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: M. Spencer, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 5.7 Topsoil TOPS 0.1 / 5. Fill, Red-brown, fine to medium, SANDY LEAN CLAY, contains root fragments and mica, stiff, moist CL.8 / 51.9 Residuum, Red-brown, fine to medium, SANDY SILT, trace gravel, contains mica and manganese, very stiff, moist ML.0 / 50.7 Residuum, Orange-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains mica, medium dense, moist SM.0 / 8.7 Residuum, Brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains mica and quartz, loose, moist SM 8.0 /.7 Residuum, White and light brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains mica and quartz, medium dense, moist SM SS-03 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 1 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LAB DATA LIQUID LIMIT LL PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) Bottom of Boring at ft. SPT_LOGA: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/15 REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Bulk sample collected from 3.0 to 7.0 ft. Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia PAGE 1 OF 1 SS-03

53 DEPTH (ft) ELEVATION (ft) 5 S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS FIELD DATA SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia SOIL SURVEY STATION: +75 LATITUDE: SURFACE ELEVATION: 5.7 ft Date(s) Drilled: /13/1 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Automatic Hammer Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: M. Spencer, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 5.7 Auger probe, no sampling SS-03A PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 1 ft LT LONGITUDE: COORD. DATUM: LAB DATA LIQUID LIMIT LL PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) / 51.7 Residuum, Light brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND SM Bottom of Boring at 7.0 ft. SPT_LOG: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/15 REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Bulk sample collected from 3.0 to 7.0 ft. and given to VDOT for Resilient Modulus Testing. Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia PAGE 1 OF 1 SS-03A

54 DEPTH (ft) 8 ELEVATION (ft) S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS FIELD DATA 7 8 SOIL RECOVERY (%) 35 SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL 8 CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia SOIL SURVEY STATION: 8+00 LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 3. ft Date(s) Drilled: /13/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: M. Spencer, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 3. Topsoil TOPS 0.1 / 3.1 Residuum, Red-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains root fragments and mica, medium dense, moist SM.0 / 3. Residuum, Red-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains mica, medium dense, moist SM 5.7 / 30.5 Residuum, Light brown, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica, loose, moist SM 8.0 / 8. Residuum, White, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica, loose, moist SM SS-0 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 30 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LIQUID LIMIT LL LAB DATA PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) FINES CONTENT -#00 (%) Bottom of Boring at ft. SPT_LOGB: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/15 REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia PAGE 1 OF 1 SS-0

55 DEPTH (ft) 8 ELEVATION (ft) 05 S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS WOH FIELD DATA SOIL RECOVERY (%) 75 SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia SOIL SURVEY STATION: 9+00 LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 13.5 ft Date(s) Drilled: /13/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: M. Spencer, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 13.5 Topsoil TOPS 0.3 / 13. Fill, Light brown, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, contains root fragments and mica, loose, moist SM.0 / 09.5 Fill, Light brown, fine to coarse, CLAYEY SAND, contains mica, loose, moist SC 5.5 / 08.0 Residuum, Dark olive-brown and black, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, contains mica, medium dense, moist SM SS-05 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 5 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LIQUID LIMIT LL LAB DATA PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) FINES CONTENT -#00 (%) NP NP SAME, mottled white, black and brown, very dense SPT_LOGB: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/ /.5 / IGM, Brown and white, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, contains mica, very dense, moist SM Auger refusal at.5 ft. Bottom of Boring at.5 ft. REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia.8 PAGE 1 OF 1 SS-05

56 DEPTH (ft) ELEVATION (ft) 00 S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS SOIL RECOVERY (%) WOH WOH WOH 1 WOH WOH 1 1 WOH WOH 1 1 FIELD DATA SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia SOIL SURVEY STATION: 1+00 LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 03. ft Date(s) Drilled: /13/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: M. Spencer, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 03. Topsoil TOPS 0.3 / 03.1 Alluvium, Brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains root fragments, very loose, moist SM.0 / 01. Alluvium, Brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains mica, very loose, moist SM.0 / 399. Alluvium, Dark brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica, very loose, moist SM SS-0 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 70 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LIQUID LIMIT LL LAB DATA PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) FINES CONTENT -#00 (%) WOH WOH WOH WOH / 395. Alluvium, Black, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, contains mica, very loose, moist SM SPT_LOGB: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/ / / IGM, Mottled white, brown and black, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, very dense, moist SM 1.3 / Residuum, Olive and white, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, contains mica, dense, moist SM REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Bulk sample collected from 0.3 to 5.0 ft. Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia Bottom of Boring at 0 ft PAGE 1 OF 1 SS-0

57 DEPTH (ft) 8 ELEVATION (ft) S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS SOIL RECOVERY (%) WOH WOH WOH WOH WOH 3 19 FIELD DATA SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia SOIL SURVEY STATION: LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 398. ft Date(s) Drilled: /08/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: R. Reed, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER FIRST ENCOUNTERED AT.0 ft DEPTH NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 398. Forest litter, Rootmat, and Topsoil TOPS 0. / 398. Alluvium, Brown, SILT WITH SAND, contains root fragments and mica, soft, moist ML SAME, brown with mottles of gray, wet below ft 3.0 / 395. Alluvium, Gray, fine, SILTY SAND, contains root fragments and mica, loose to very loose, wet SM.0 / 39. Alluvium, Light gray, fine to medium, POORLY GRADED SAND, very loose, wet SP 8.0 / 390. Alluvium, Light gray, fine to coarse, POORLY GRADED SAND, medium dense, wet SP 9.5 / Residuum, Brown, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, dense, wet SM SS-07 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 0 LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LAB DATA LIQUID LIMIT LL PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) Auger refusal at 1.0 ft. Bottom of Boring at 1 ft. SPT_LOG: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/15 REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Bulk sample collected from 1.0 to 5.0 ft. Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia PAGE 1 OF 1 SS-07

58 PKT. PENETROMETER (tsf) DEPTH (ft) ELEVATION (ft) 05 3 S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS FIELD DATA SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL 8 CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia SOIL SURVEY STATION: LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 13. ft Date(s) Drilled: /07/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: M. Spencer, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 13. Asphalt ASPH 1.3 / 11.9 Crushed Aggregate CRA 1.8 / 11. Fill, Brown, fine, SILTY SAND, contains mica, loose, moist SM.0 / 09. Fill, Brown, LEAN CLAY, contains mica, soft, moist CL.0 / 07. Fill, Brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains mica, loose, moist SM 8.0 / 05. Fill, Brown and white, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica, loose, moist SM SS-08 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 70 ft RT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LIQUID LIMIT LL LAB DATA PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) FINES CONTENT -#00 (%) WOH WOH / 01. Residuum, Brown and gray, fine to medium, CLAYEY SAND, contains root fragments and organics, loose, moist SC SPT_LOGAB: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/ REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Boring backfilled with grout and patched with cold patch asphalt. Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Bulk sample collected from 1.1 to 19.0 ft. Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia 19 Bottom of Boring at 19 ft. PAGE 1 OF 1 SS-08

59 DEPTH (ft) 8 ELEVATION (ft) 0 15 S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS SOIL RECOVERY (%) / 50/ FIELD DATA SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia SOIL SURVEY STATION: LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 0.9 ft Date(s) Drilled: /08/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: R. Reed, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 0.9 Forest litter, Rootmat, Topsoil TOPS 0. / 0.7 Residuum, Brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains root fragments and mica, medium dense, moist SM 0.7 / 0. Residuum, Light orange-brown, fine, SILTY SAND, contains mica, dense to very dense, moist SM 5.5 / 15. IGM, Light brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains mica, very dense, moist SM 7. / 13.7 Residuum, Light white-brown and green-gray, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains mica, dense, dry SM SS-09 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 3 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LAB DATA LIQUID LIMIT LL PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) Bottom of Boring at 15.5 ft. SPT_LOG: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/15 REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Bulk sample collected from 5.0 to.0 ft. Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia PAGE 1 OF 1 SS-09

60 DEPTH (ft) ELEVATION (ft) 0 18 S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS FIELD DATA SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia SOIL SURVEY STATION: LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 0.9 ft Date(s) Drilled: /08/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: R. Reed, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 0.9 Auger probe, no sampling SS-09A PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 3 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LAB DATA LIQUID LIMIT LL PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) / 15.9 Residuum, Light brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND SM Bottom of Boring at.0 ft. SPT_LOG: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/15 REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Bulk sample collected from 5.0 to.0 ft. and given to VDOT for Resilient Modulus Testing. Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia PAGE 1 OF 1 SS-09A

61 DEPTH (ft) 8 ELEVATION (ft) S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS FIELD DATA SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL 8 CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia SOIL SURVEY STATION: LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 1. ft Date(s) Drilled: /08/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: R. Reed, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 1. Forest litter, Rootmat, and Topsoil TOPS 0. / 1.0 Residuum, Light orange-brown, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, contains mica, medium dense, moist SM.0 / 39. Residuum, Light orange-brown, fine to coarse, POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT, contains mica, medium dense, dry SP-SM 3.8 / 37. Residuum, Orange-brown, fine to medium, SANDY SILT, few gravel, contains mica, very stiff, moist ML.0 / 35. Residuum, Orange-brown, fine, SILTY SAND, contains mica, loose, moist SM SS- PAGE 1 OF OFFSET: 55 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LIQUID LIMIT LL LAB DATA PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) FINES CONTENT -#00 (%) 30 1 SAME, light gray-brown, dense SPT_LOGB: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/ / 37 50/ /. IGM, Light gray-brown, fine, CLAYEY SAND, few gravel, contains mica, very dense, moist SC REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Bulk sample collected from.0 to 31.0 ft. Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia PAGE 1 OF SS-

62 DEPTH (ft) ELEVATION (ft) S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS FIELD DATA SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia SOIL SURVEY STATION: LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 1. ft Date(s) Drilled: /08/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: R. Reed, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA SS- PAGE OF OFFSET: 55 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LIQUID LIMIT LL LAB DATA PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) FINES CONTENT -#00 (%) / IGM, Light gray-brown, fine, CLAYEY SAND, few gravel, contains mica, very dense, moist SC / SAME, brown and dark gray-brown below 33 ft.5 Auger refusal at 35.0 ft. Bottom of Boring at 35 ft. SPT_LOGB: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/15 REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Bulk sample collected from.0 to 31.0 ft. Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia PAGE OF SS-

63 DEPTH (ft) 8 ELEVATION (ft) S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS SOIL RECOVERY (%) FIELD DATA SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL 8 CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia SOIL SURVEY STATION: LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 0.3 ft Date(s) Drilled: /08/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: R. Reed, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 0.3 Forest litter, Rootmat, and Topsoil TOPS 0. / 0.1 Residuum, Light brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains mica, medium dense, moist SM. / 37.9 Residuum, Red-brown, fine to medium, SANDY SILT, contains mica and root fragments, stiff to very stiff, moist ML.0 / 3.3 Residuum, Light brown, fine, SILTY SAND, loose to medium dense, moist SM SS-11 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 0 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LAB DATA LIQUID LIMIT LL PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) SAME, light brown and white, very dense below 18.5 ft 7.8 SPT_LOG: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/ / 50/5 9 REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia / 15.8 IGM, Gray and brown, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, contains mica, very dense, moist SM Bottom of Boring at 8. ft.. 8. PAGE 1 OF 1 SS-11

64 PKT. PENETROMETER (tsf) DEPTH (ft) ELEVATION (ft) S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS FIELD DATA SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia SOIL SURVEY STATION: LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 7. ft Date(s) Drilled: /07/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: M. Spencer, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 7. Asphalt ASPH SS-1 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 1 ft RT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LAB DATA 1.3 /.1 Crushed Aggregate CRA / Fill, Brown, fine to medium, SANDY SILT, contains mica,.0 3 stiff, moist ML.0 / 3. Fill, Brown and black, SILT WITH SAND, contains mica.0 1 and root fragments, soft, moist ML 5.0 /. Residuum, Gray, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, contains 5 mica, medium dense, moist SM / Residuum, Gray and brown, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica, dense, moist SM 3 LIQUID LIMIT LL PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) Bottom of Boring at ft. SPT_LOGA: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/15 REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Boring backfilled with grout and patched with cold patch asphalt. Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia PAGE 1 OF 1 SS-1

65 DEPTH (ft) 8 ELEVATION (ft) 0 18 S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS FIELD DATA SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia SOIL SURVEY STATION: 1+75 LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION:.3 ft Date(s) Drilled: /08/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: R. Reed, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER FIRST ENCOUNTERED AT.0 ft DEPTH NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 /.3 Forest litter, Rootmat, and Topsoil TOPS 0.3 /.0 Fill, Dark brown, fine to medium, SANDY SILT, trace gravel, firm, moist ML 1.0 / 5.3 Residuum, Gray, SILT WITH SAND, contains root fragments, firm, moist ML.0 /.3 Residuum, Brown and gray, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, loose to medium dense, wet SM 7.0 / 19.3 Residuum, Brown, fine, SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL, contains mica, medium dense, moist SM SS-13 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 0 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LAB DATA LIQUID LIMIT LL PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) Bottom of Boring at ft. SPT_LOG: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/15 REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Bulk sample collected from 0.3 to 5.0 ft. Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia PAGE 1 OF 1 SS-13

66 DEPTH (ft) 8 ELEVATION (ft) 0 38 S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS SOIL RECOVERY (%) WOH FIELD DATA SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL 8 CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia SOIL SURVEY STATION: 1.00 LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION:.5 ft Date(s) Drilled: /07/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: M. Spencer, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 /.5 Topsoil TOPS 0.3 /. Fill, Brown, fine to coarse, CLAYEY SAND, contains rock fragments and root fragments, medium dense, moist SC 3.5 / 3.0 Residuum, Brown, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, contains mica and manganese, medium dense, moist SM.0 / 0.5 Residuum, Light brown, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, contains mica and manganese, loose, moist SM 8.0 / 38.5 Residuum, Light brown, fine to coarse, SILTY SAND, contains mica, loose, moist SM SS-1 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 3 ft RT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LIQUID LIMIT LL LAB DATA PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) FINES CONTENT -#00 (%) Bottom of Boring at ft. SPT_LOGB: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/15 REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia PAGE 1 OF 1 SS-1

67 DEPTH (ft) 8 ELEVATION (ft) S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS SOIL RECOVERY (%) / /3 FIELD DATA SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia ABUTMENT A - LEFT STATION: LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 03. ft Date(s) Drilled: /1/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA / NQ Double Barrel SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: M. Spencer, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 03. Topsoil TOPS 0. / 03.0 Fill, Brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains mica, and root fragments, loose, moist SM.0 / 01. Residuum, Red-brown, fine to medium, SANDY SILT, contains mica, stiff, moist ML 3.0 / 00. Residuum, Light brown, fine to medium, SANDY SILT, contains mica, very stiff, moist ML. / 39.8 IGM, White and brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, very dense, moist SM BR-01 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 0 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LAB DATA LIQUID LIMIT LL PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) Auger refusal at.0 ft..0 / 393. Bedrock, Slightly weathered to moderately weathered, moderately hard to hard, light gray, MICA SCHIST, highly fractured, foliation dips at degrees, few quartz veins, iron stained joints dip at 5 to 0 degrees, highly weatherd to decomposed and heavily iron stained at 1 to 15 ft.; fine grained rock SCH 15.1 / Bedrock, Slightly weathered to unweathered, hard to very hard, GNEISS, moderately to slightly fractured, quartz feldspathic, foliation at degrees, contains quartz veins and occasional quartz epidote healed joint dipping at 0 degrees, fine to medium grained rock with schistose partings parrallel to foliation GNS 0 0 SPT_LOG: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/ REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia Bottom of Boring at 7.5 ft. PAGE 1 OF 1 BR-01

68 PKT. PENETROMETER (tsf) DEPTH (ft) 8 ELEVATION (ft) S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS 5 5 FIELD DATA 3 50/ SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia ABUTMENT A - RIGHT STATION: LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 0. ft Date(s) Drilled: /1/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA / NQ Double Barrel SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: M. Spencer, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 0. Topsoil TOPS 0.3 / 0.3 Fill, Dark brown, fine to medium, SANDY SILT, contains root fragments, and mica, stiff, moist ML 1. / 03. Residuum, Brown, fine to medium, SANDY SILT, contains mica, stiff, moist ML.0 / 00. Residuum, Light brown, fine, CLAYEY SAND, contains mica, medium dense, moist SC 8.0 / 39. IGM, White and brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, very dense, moist SM BR-0 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 0 ft RT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LIQUID LIMIT LL LAB DATA PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) FINES CONTENT -#00 (%) / Auger refusal at 1. ft. 1. / 390. Bedrock, Moderately weathered to highly weathered, soft to moderately hard, light gray to white, MICA SCHIST, highly fractured, foliation dips at 0-5 degrees; few quartz veins, iron stained joints dip at 0 to 70 degrees SCH SPT_LOGAB: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/ REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Collected bulk sample from 8.1 to 1.0 ft. Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia / 38. Bedrock, Unweathered, very hard, GRANOFELS, no observed fractures, coarse grained rock GRN 3. / 381. Bedrock, Slightly weathered to unweathered, hard to very hard, dark gray to black and white, GNEISS, slightly fractured, foliation at 0 - degrees, contains quartz veins and schistose partings parallel to foliation GNS Bottom of Boring at 3. ft. PAGE 1 OF 1 BR-0

69 DEPTH (ft) 8 1 ELEVATION (ft) S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS WOH WOH WOH WOH WOH / FIELD DATA SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia PIER 1 - LEFT STATION: LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 00.8 ft Date(s) Drilled: /1/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA / NQ Double Barrel SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: M. Spencer, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER FIRST ENCOUNTERED AT.0 ft DEPTH NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 00.8 Topsoil TOPS 0. / 00. Alluvium, Dark brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains mica, and root fragments, very loose, moist SM.0 / Alluvium, Brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains mica, loose, moist SM.0 / 39.8 Alluvium, Brown, fine to medium, POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT, contains mica, medium dense, wet SP-SM 8.5 / 39.3 IGM, White and black, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, very dense, moist SM BR-03 PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 0 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LIQUID LIMIT LL LAB DATA PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) FINES CONTENT -#00 (%) SPT_LOGB: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/ / Auger refusal at 1.5 ft. 1.5 / 38.3 Bedrock, Moderately weathered, moderately hard, light gray to white, MICA SCHIST, highly fractured, foliation dips at degrees, iron stained joint dips at 0 degrees, fine grained rock SCH 15.5 / Bedrock, Highly weathered to decomposed, soft to very soft, dark gray to black, MICA SCHIST, intensely to highly fractured, foliation dips at degrees, iron stained joint at bottom of recovered core dips at 80 degrees, rock discs along foliation planes, fine grained rock SCH 1.5 / Bedrock, Slightly weathered, very hard, pinkish white and light gray, GRANOFELS, moderately to slightly fractured, rough joints dip at 5 degrees, coarse grained rock GRN 7.0 / Bedrock, Slightly weathered, hard to very hard, black and white, GNEISS, moderately fractured, with interlayered granofels, foliation dips at 0 - degrees, rock discs along foliation planes, fine to medium grained rock, contains schistose partings parallel to foliation GNS REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia Bottom of Boring at 31.1 ft. PAGE 1 OF 1 BR-03

70 DEPTH (ft) 8 1 ELEVATION (ft) S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS SOIL RECOVERY (%) /3 FIELD DATA SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia PIER 1 - RIGHT STATION: 11+9 LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 01.1 ft Date(s) Drilled: /1/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA / NQ Double Barrel SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: M. Spencer, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 01.1 Topsoil TOPS 0. / 00.9 Fill, Red-brown, fine to medium, SANDY SILT, contains mica, and root fragments, soft to firm, moist ML.0 / Alluvium, Brown, fine to medium, SANDY SILT, contains mica, soft, moist ML 5.7 / 395. Alluvium, Tan, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica, medium dense, moist SM 8.5 / 39. IGM, Brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, very dense, moist SM BR-0 PAGE 1 OF OFFSET: 0 ft RT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LAB DATA LIQUID LIMIT LL PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) / SPT_LOG: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/ REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia Auger refusal at 17.0 ft / 38.1 Bedrock, Highly weathered to decomposed, soft to moderately hard, dark gray to black, MICA SCHIST, highly fractured, foliation dips at 0 - degrees, iron stained joints dip at degrees; contains few quartz veins, fine grained rock, few decomposed layers, rock discs along foliaiton planes, fine grained rock SCH PAGE 1 OF BR-0

71 DEPTH (ft) ELEVATION (ft) 375 S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS FIELD DATA SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL 5.8 CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia PIER 1 - RIGHT STATION: 11+9 LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 01.1 ft Date(s) Drilled: /1/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA / NQ Double Barrel SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: M. Spencer, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA BR-0 PAGE OF OFFSET: 0 ft RT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LAB DATA LIQUID LIMIT LL PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) / 37.8 Bedrock,Slightly weathered, very hard, white light gray and pink, GRANOFELS, moderately to slightly fractured, joints dip at 5-0 degrees; coarse grained rock GRN / Bedrock,Slightly weathered, moderately hard to hard, dark gray to black and white, GNEISS, moderately fractured, steeply dipping joint cundulates from 80 to 90 degrees, weakly healed, Granofels layers from 33.8 to 3.7 ft. and 35.8 to 3.3 ft.; few quartz augens and stringers, fine to medium grained rock, contians schistose partings parallel to foliation GNS Bottom of Boring at 0.8 ft. SPT_LOG: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/15 REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia PAGE OF BR-0

72 DEPTH (ft) 8 ELEVATION (ft) S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS WOH WOH WOH WOR WOR 1 FIELD DATA SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL 8 CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia ABUTMENT B - LEFT STATION: LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 0.0 ft Date(s) Drilled: /09/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA / NQ Double Barrel SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: R. Reed, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER FIRST ENCOUNTERED AT.5 ft DEPTH NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 0.0 Forest litter, Rootmat, and Topsoil TOPS 0. / 01.8 Alluvium, Brown, fine, SILTY SAND, contains mica, contains root fragments, loose, moist SM.5 / Alluvium, Brown, fine to medium, SANDY SILT, contains mica, soft, moist ML 3.8 / 398. Alluvium, Brown with mottles of orange-brown, fine, POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT, contains mica, very loose, wet SP-SM 9.5 / 39.5 Alluvium, Dark gray, fine to medium, POORLY GRADED SAND, trace silt, contains mica, loose, wet SP BR-05 PAGE 1 OF OFFSET: 0 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LAB DATA LIQUID LIMIT LL PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) Auger refusal at 11. ft. 11. / 390. Bedrock, Moderately weathered, moderately hard, gray and dark gray, GNEISS, highly fractured, quartzo feldspatic with interlayered mica schist/schistose partings, foliation dips at degrees GNS SAME, highly weathered to decomposed, brown and gray, intensely fractured below 13.5 ft SPT_LOG: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/ REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Running sand encountered at 9.0 ft. Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia 0. PAGE 1 OF BR-05

73 DEPTH (ft) 8 ELEVATION (ft) 375 S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS FIELD DATA SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL 5. CORE RECOVERY (%) 90 R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia ABUTMENT B - LEFT STATION: LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 0.0 ft Date(s) Drilled: /09/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA / NQ Double Barrel SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: R. Reed, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER FIRST ENCOUNTERED AT.5 ft DEPTH NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 5. / 37. Bedrock, Moderately weathered, moderately hard, gray and light brown, GNEISS, highly fractured, foliation dips at 0- degrees, joints generally dip at 50-0 degrees; slickensided joint with epidote mineralization at 7.0 ft.; few epidote stringers, schistose partings GNS BR-05 PAGE OF OFFSET: 0 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LAB DATA LIQUID LIMIT LL PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) Bottom of Boring at 35. ft. SPT_LOG: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/15 REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Running sand encountered at 9.0 ft. Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia PAGE OF BR-05

74 DEPTH (ft) ELEVATION (ft) 00 S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS FIELD DATA SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia ABUTMENT B - LEFT STATION: LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 0.0 ft Date(s) Drilled: /09/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: R. Reed, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER NOT ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 0.0 Auger probe to 7.0 ft to collect undisturbed sample, no SPT sampling performed BR-05A PAGE 1 OF 1 OFFSET: 0 ft LT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LIQUID LIMIT LL LAB DATA PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) FINES CONTENT -#00 (%) / Alluvium, Gray, fine to medium, POORLY GRADED SAND, trace silt, wet SP Bottom of Boring at 9 ft. SPT_LOGB: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/15 REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia PAGE 1 OF 1 BR-05A

75 DEPTH (ft) 8 ELEVATION (ft) S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS WOH 1 3 WOH 1 FIELD DATA 3 7 SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL 8 CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia ABUTMENT B - RIGHT STATION: LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 01.7 ft Date(s) Drilled: /09/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA / NQ Double Barrel SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: R. Reed, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER FIRST ENCOUNTERED AT.7 ft DEPTH NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA 0.0 / 01.7 Forest litter, Rootmat, and Topsoil TOPS 0. / 01.5 Alluvium, Brown, fine to medium, SANDY SILT, contains mica and root fragments, firm, moist ML 3.0 / Alluvium, Brown and orange-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains mica, loose, moist SM.0 / Alluvium, Brown with mottles of orange-brown, fine to medium, SANDY SILT, contains mica and root fragments, firm, moist ML.7 / Alluvium, Gray, fine, POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT, contains mica, loose, wet SP-SM BR-0 PAGE 1 OF OFFSET: 0 ft RT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LAB DATA LIQUID LIMIT LL PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) / / IGM, Green-gray with speckles of white, fine, POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT, contains mica, very dense, moist SP-SM Auger refusal at 11.5 ft / 390. Bedrock, Slightly weathered, hard, gray and dark gray, GNEISS, slightly fractured, contains quartz and / or epidote stringer and garnets; quartz filled joint dipping at degrees at 15.7 ft. GNS SPT_LOG: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/ REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia SAME, moderately weathered, moderately hard to hard, highly to intensely fractured, iron stained joints, slickensided foliation plane with pyrite at 0 degrees; small vugs present from 0.0 to 0.7 ft.; schistose partings, foliation dips at 5 to degrees below 17.8 ft. PAGE 1 OF BR-0

76 DEPTH (ft) ELEVATION (ft) 375 S O I L STANDARD PENETRATION TEST HAMMER BLOWS FIELD DATA SOIL RECOVERY (%) SAMPLE LEGEND SAMPLE INTERVAL 5.7 CORE RECOVERY (%) R O C K ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION STRATA DIP JOINTS STRATA LEGEND PROJECT #: LOCATION: STRUCTURE: UPC 907, VDOT Charlotte County, Virginia ABUTMENT B - RIGHT STATION: LATITUDE: N SURFACE ELEVATION: 01.7 ft Date(s) Drilled: /09/01 Drilling Method(s): 3.5" HSA / NQ Double Barrel SPT Method: Auto Hammer (10 lb) Other Test(s): Not Applicable Driller: Blue Ridge Drilling, Inc. Logger: R. Reed, Schnabel Engineering GROUND WATER FIRST ENCOUNTERED AT.7 ft DEPTH NO LONG TERM MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FIELD DESCRIPTION OF STRATA BR-0 PAGE OF OFFSET: 0 ft RT LONGITUDE: W COORD. DATUM: NAD 83 LAB DATA LIQUID LIMIT LL PLASTICITY INDEX PI MOISTURE CONTENT (%) / 37.0 Bedrock, Slightly weathered, hard, gray and dark gray, GNEISS, slightly fractured, contains quartz and / or epidote stringer and garnets below 7.7 ft GNS Bottom of Boring at 30.7 ft. SPT_LOG: VDOT.GPJ: :0151:1/15/15 REMARKS: Rig Type: CME-55 (Track). Relative density and consistency terms reflect correction for hammer efficiency (N x 1.3). Copyright 015, Commonwealth of Virginia PAGE OF BR-0

77 Route 0 Bridge and Approaches over Louse Creek Charlotte County, Virginia (Schnabel Reference ) Page 1 of 13

78 Route 0 Bridge and Approaches over Louse Creek Charlotte County, Virginia (Schnabel Reference ) Page of 13

79 Route 0 Bridge and Approaches over Louse Creek Charlotte County, Virginia (Schnabel Reference ) Page 3 of 13

80 Route 0 Bridge and Approaches over Louse Creek Charlotte County, Virginia (Schnabel Reference ) Page of 13

81 Route 0 Bridge and Approaches over Louse Creek Charlotte County, Virginia (Schnabel Reference ) Page 5 of 13

82 Route 0 Bridge and Approaches over Louse Creek Charlotte County, Virginia (Schnabel Reference ) Page of 13

83 Route 0 Bridge and Approaches over Louse Creek Charlotte County, Virginia (Schnabel Reference ) Page 7 of 13

84 Route 0 Bridge and Approaches over Louse Creek Charlotte County, Virginia (Schnabel Reference ) Page 8 of 13

85 Route 0 Bridge and Approaches over Louse Creek Charlotte County, Virginia (Schnabel Reference ) Page 9 of 13

86 Route 0 Bridge and Approaches over Louse Creek Charlotte County, Virginia (Schnabel Reference ) Page of 13

87 Route 0 Bridge and Approaches over Louse Creek Charlotte County, Virginia (Schnabel Reference ) Page 11 of 13

88 Route 0 Bridge and Approaches over Louse Creek Charlotte County, Virginia (Schnabel Reference ) Page 1 of 13

89 Route 0 Bridge and Approaches over Louse Creek Charlotte County, Virginia (Schnabel Reference ) Page 13 of 13

90 APPENDIX B SOIL LABORATORY TEST DATA Summary of Soil Laboratory Tests (3) Gradation Curves (18) Moisture-Density Relationships Test Curves (8) California Bearing Ratio Test Curves (8) 1-D Consolidation Reports (3) Consolidated Undrained (CU) Triaxial Shear Reports () Unconsolidated, Undrained (UU) Triaxial Shear Report (1) Hydraulic Conductivity Determination (1) Unconfined Compressive Strength of Rock Core () September 3, 015 Project 110 Schnabel Engineering Consultants, Inc. 015 All Rights Reserved

91 Summary Of Laboratory Tests Appendix Sheet 1 of 3 Project Number: 110 Boring No. Sample Depth ft Elevation ft Sample Type Description of Soil Specimen Natural Moisture (%) Liquid Limit Plasticity Index Percent Clay % Passing No. 00 Sieve Percent Sand Percent Gravel Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (%) Proctor Test Method CBR Value CBR Surcharge Pressure (psf) CBR Percent Swell Specific Gravity ph Resistivity (ohm-cm) BR Tube Yellow-brown, fine, CLAYEY SAND, trace gravel (SC) BR Jar Light brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND (Visual Classification) DYNAMIC LAB SUMMARY 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/0/1 BR-05A SS-0 SS-03 SS-0 SS-05 Notes: Tube Jar Bulk Jar Tube Light gray, fine to medium, POORLY GRADED SAND, trace silt (SP) Red-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica (SM) 1.0 NP NP Orange-brown, fine to medium, SANDY SILT, trace gravel, contains mica (ML) VTM1 Red-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains mica (SM) Yellow-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND (SM) -- NP NP Soil tests in general accordance with ASTM standards.. Soil classifications are in general accordance with ASTM D87(as applicable), based on testing indicated and visual classification. 3. Key to abbreviations: NP=Non-Plastic; -- indicates no test performed Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA

92 Summary Of Laboratory Tests Appendix Sheet of 3 Project Number: 110 Boring No. Sample Depth ft Elevation ft Sample Type Description of Soil Specimen Natural Moisture (%) Liquid Limit Plasticity Index Percent Clay % Passing No. 00 Sieve Percent Sand Percent Gravel Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (%) Proctor Test Method CBR Value CBR Surcharge Pressure (psf) CBR Percent Swell Specific Gravity ph Resistivity (ohm-cm) SS Bulk Brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica (SM) VTM SS Tube Light gray, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica (SM) DYNAMIC LAB SUMMARY 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/0/1 SS-07 SS-08 SS-08 SS-09 SS- Notes: Bulk Jar Bulk Bulk Bulk Brown and gray, fine, SILTY SAND, contains mica (SM) 7.3 NP NP VTM1 Brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica (SM) Brown and gray, fine to medium, CLAYEY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica (SC) VTM1 Light gray, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica (SM) VTM1 Gray-brown, fine, CLAYEY SAND, trace gravel (SC) VTM1 1. Soil tests in general accordance with ASTM standards.. Soil classifications are in general accordance with ASTM D87(as applicable), based on testing indicated and visual classification. 3. Key to abbreviations: NP=Non-Plastic; -- indicates no test performed Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA

93 Summary Of Laboratory Tests Appendix Sheet 3 of 3 Project Number: 110 Boring No. Sample Depth ft Elevation ft Sample Type Description of Soil Specimen Natural Moisture (%) Liquid Limit Plasticity Index Percent Clay % Passing No. 00 Sieve Percent Sand Percent Gravel Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (%) Proctor Test Method CBR Value CBR Surcharge Pressure (psf) CBR Percent Swell Specific Gravity ph Resistivity (ohm-cm) SS Bulk Dark brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica (SM) VTM SS Jar Red-brown, fine to coarse, CLAYEY SAND, few gravel, contains mica (SC) DYNAMIC LAB SUMMARY 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/0/1 SW-0 SW-03 Notes: Tube Bulk Red-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel (SM) 7. NP NP Orange-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica (SM) VTM1 1. Soil tests in general accordance with ASTM standards.. Soil classifications are in general accordance with ASTM D87(as applicable), based on testing indicated and visual classification. 3. Key to abbreviations: NP=Non-Plastic; -- indicates no test performed Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA

94 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 1 1/ / 3/ HYDROMETER PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL coarse fine coarse SAND medium fine SILT OR CLAY SIEVE 1/SHEET 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Specimen Sample Description LL PL PI Cc Yellow-brown, fine, CLAYEY SAND, trace gravel (SC) BR ft Sieve Size % Finer Test Method ASTM D Tested By MJF D TTM D D30 Tested Date Reviewed By Calc By /17/1 19 No. 00 No. No No Percent Finer No No. MJF 9.5 D No /8 in %Gravel.1 %Sand 1.3 %Silt GRADATION CURVE Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: 110 3/ in Cu %Clay

95 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 1 1/ / 3/ HYDROMETER PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL coarse fine coarse SAND medium fine SILT OR CLAY SIEVE 1/SHEET 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 BR-03 Sieve Size % Finer Specimen Sample Description LL PL Test Method ASTM D Tested By MJF 8.0 ft Light brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND (Visual Classification) -- D TTM D0 0.1 D30 Tested Date Reviewed By Calc By 11//1.75 No. 00 No. No No D %Gravel %Sand Percent Finer No No. MJF 98.0 No PI -- %Silt.9 GRADATION CURVE Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: 110 %Clay.5

96 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 1 1/ / 3/ HYDROMETER PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL coarse fine coarse SAND medium fine SILT OR CLAY SIEVE 1/SHEET 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 BR-05A Sieve Size % Finer Specimen Sample Description LL PL Test Method ASTM D Tested By MJF 7.0 ft Light gray, fine to medium, POORLY GRADED SAND, trace silt (SP) -- D D0 0.3 D30 Tested Date Reviewed By Calc By /17/1.75 No. 00 No. No No D %Gravel %Sand Percent Finer No No. MJF 99.7 No..0 3/8 in PI -- %Silt GRADATION CURVE Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: %Clay

97 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 1 1/ / 3/ HYDROMETER PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL coarse fine coarse SAND medium fine SILT OR CLAY SIEVE 1/SHEET 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 SS-0 Sieve Size % Finer Specimen Sample Description LL PL PI Cc Test Method ASTM D Tested By MJF.0 ft Red-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica (SM) D TTM D D30 Tested Date Reviewed By Calc By 11//1 19 No. 00 No. No No Percent Finer No No. MJF 97.5 D No /8 in %Gravel 1. NP %Sand. NP NP %Silt GRADATION CURVE Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: 110 3/ in Cu %Clay

98 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 1 1/ / 3/ HYDROMETER PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL coarse fine coarse SAND medium fine SILT OR CLAY SIEVE 1/SHEET 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Specimen Sample Description LL PL PI Cc Orange-brown, fine to medium, SANDY SILT, trace gravel, SS ft contains mica (ML) Sieve Size % Finer Test Method ASTM D Tested By MJF D TTM D0 D30 Tested Date Reviewed By Calc By //1 9.5 No. 00 No. No No Percent Finer No No. MJF 99.3 D No /8 in..0 %Gravel 0.3 %Sand 39. %Silt GRADATION CURVE Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: Cu %Clay

99 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 1 1/ / 3/ HYDROMETER PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL coarse fine coarse SAND medium fine SILT OR CLAY SIEVE 1/SHEET 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Specimen Sample Description LL PL PI Cc Red-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, contains mica (SM) SS ft Sieve Size % Finer Test Method ASTM D Tested By MJF D TTM D D30 Tested Date Reviewed By Calc By 11//1.75 No. 00 No. No No Percent Finer No No. MJF 99.5 D No..0 3/8 in..0 %Gravel 0.0 %Sand 5. %Silt GRADATION CURVE Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: Cu %Clay

100 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 1 1/ / 3/ HYDROMETER PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL coarse fine coarse SAND medium fine SILT OR CLAY SIEVE 1/SHEET 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 SS-05 Sieve Size % Finer Specimen Sample Description LL PL PI Cc Test Method ASTM D Tested By MJF 8.0 ft Yellow-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND (SM) D TTM D D30 Tested Date Reviewed By Calc By /7/1.75 No. 00 No. No No Percent Finer No No. MJF 99.9 D No..0 %Gravel 0.0 NP %Sand.3 NP NP %Silt GRADATION CURVE Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: Cu %Clay

101 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 1 1/ / 3/ HYDROMETER PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL coarse fine coarse SAND medium fine SILT OR CLAY SIEVE 1/SHEET 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Specimen Sample Description LL PL PI Cc Brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains SS ft mica (SM) 31 7 Sieve Size % Finer Test Method ASTM D Tested By MJF D TTM D D30 Tested Date Reviewed By Calc By //1 9.5 No. 00 No. No No Percent Finer No No. MJF 98. D No /8 in..0 %Gravel 0.3 %Sand 5.7 %Silt GRADATION CURVE Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: Cu %Clay

102 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 1 1/ / 3/ HYDROMETER PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL coarse fine coarse SAND medium fine SILT OR CLAY SIEVE 1/SHEET 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Specimen Sample Description LL PL PI Cc Light gray, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, SS-0.0 ft contains mica (SM) Sieve Size % Finer Test Method ASTM D Tested By MJF D TTM D D30 Tested Date Reviewed By Calc By /0/1 9.5 No. 00 No. No No Percent Finer No No. MJF 99.1 D No /8 in..0 %Gravel 0.1 %Sand 5. %Silt GRADATION CURVE Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: Cu %Clay

103 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 1 1/ / 3/ HYDROMETER PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL coarse fine coarse SAND medium fine SILT OR CLAY SIEVE 1/SHEET 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 SS-07 Sieve Size % Finer Specimen Sample Description LL PL PI Cc Test Method ASTM D Tested By MJF 1.0 ft Brown and gray, fine, SILTY SAND, contains mica (SM) D No. 00 No. No TTM D0 0.1 D30 Tested Date Reviewed By Calc By /15/ No Percent Finer No No. MJF.0 D No..0 %Gravel 0.0 NP %Sand 7.0 NP NP %Silt GRADATION CURVE Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: Cu %Clay

104 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 1 1/ / 3/ HYDROMETER PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL coarse fine coarse SAND medium fine SILT OR CLAY SIEVE 1/SHEET 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Specimen Sample Description LL PL PI Cc Brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains SS-08.0 ft mica (SM) Sieve Size % Finer Test Method ASTM D Tested By MJF D TTM D D30 Tested Date Reviewed By Calc By 11//1 9.5 No. 00 No. No No Percent Finer No No. MJF 97.0 D No /8 in..0 %Gravel 0.7 %Sand 55.1 %Silt GRADATION CURVE Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: 110. Cu %Clay

105 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 1 1/ / 3/ HYDROMETER PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL coarse fine coarse SAND medium fine SILT OR CLAY SIEVE 1/SHEET 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Specimen Sample Description LL PL PI Cc Brown and gray, fine to medium, CLAYEY SAND, trace gravel, SS ft contains mica (SC) 3 Sieve Size % Finer Test Method ASTM D Tested By MJF D TTM D D30 Tested Date Reviewed By Calc By /15/1 19 No. 00 No. No No Percent Finer No No. MJF 9.3 D No /8 in %Gravel. %Sand 50.1 %Silt GRADATION CURVE Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: 110 3/ in Cu %Clay

106 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 1 1/ / 3/ HYDROMETER PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL coarse fine coarse SAND medium fine SILT OR CLAY SIEVE 1/SHEET 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Specimen Sample Description LL PL PI Cc Light gray, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, SS ft contains mica (SM) 31 7 Sieve Size % Finer Test Method ASTM D Tested By MJF D TTM D D30 Tested Date Reviewed By Calc By /15/1 9.5 No. 00 No. No No Percent Finer No No. MJF 99.3 D No /8 in..0 %Gravel 0. %Sand 53. %Silt GRADATION CURVE Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: 110. Cu %Clay

107 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 1 1/ / 3/ HYDROMETER PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL coarse fine coarse SAND medium fine SILT OR CLAY SIEVE 1/SHEET 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Specimen Sample Description LL PL PI Cc Gray-brown, fine, CLAYEY SAND, trace gravel (SC) SS-.0 ft Sieve Size % Finer Test Method ASTM D Tested By MJF D TTM D D30 Tested Date Reviewed By Calc By /1/1 9.5 No. 00 No. No No Percent Finer No No. MJF 98.9 D No /8 in..0 %Gravel 0.5 %Sand 51.3 %Silt GRADATION CURVE Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: Cu %Clay

108 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 1 1/ / 3/ HYDROMETER PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL coarse fine coarse SAND medium fine SILT OR CLAY SIEVE 1/SHEET 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Specimen Sample Description LL PL PI Cc Dark brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, SS ft contains mica (SM) Sieve Size % Finer Test Method ASTM D Tested By MJF D TTM D D30 Tested Date Reviewed By Calc By /15/1 19 No. 00 No. No No Percent Finer No No. MJF 95. D No /8 in %Gravel 1.8 %Sand 5.1 %Silt GRADATION CURVE Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: 110 3/ in Cu %Clay

109 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 1 1/ / 3/ HYDROMETER PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL coarse fine coarse SAND medium fine SILT OR CLAY SIEVE 1/SHEET 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Specimen Sample Description LL PL PI Cc Red-brown, fine to coarse, CLAYEY SAND, few gravel, SS ft contains mica (SC) Sieve Size % Finer Test Method ASTM D Tested By MJF D TTM D0 0.3 D30 Tested Date Reviewed By Calc By 11//1 19 No. 00 No. No No Percent Finer No No. MJF 83. D No /8 in. 9.5 %Gravel. %Sand 50.1 %Silt GRADATION CURVE Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: 110 3/ in Cu %Clay

110 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 1 1/ / 3/ HYDROMETER PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL coarse fine coarse SAND medium fine SILT OR CLAY SIEVE 1/SHEET 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 SW-0 Sieve Size % Finer Specimen Sample Description LL PL PI Cc Test Method ASTM D Tested By MJF 5.0 ft Red-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel (SM) D TTM D D30 Tested Date Reviewed By Calc By /17/1 9.5 No. 00 No. No No. 0. D %Gravel NP %Sand Percent Finer No No. MJF 97.3 No /8 in..0 NP NP %Silt GRADATION CURVE Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: Cu %Clay

111 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 1 1/ / 3/ HYDROMETER PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL coarse fine coarse SAND medium fine SILT OR CLAY SIEVE 1/SHEET 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Specimen Sample Description LL PL PI Cc Orange-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, SW ft contains mica (SM) Sieve Size % Finer Test Method ASTM D Tested By MJF D TTM D D30 Tested Date Reviewed By Calc By /15/1 19 No. 00 No. No No Percent Finer No No. MJF 9.9 D No /8 in. 99. %Gravel.9 %Sand 8. %Silt GRADATION CURVE Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: 110 3/ in Cu %Clay

112 DRY DENSITY, pcf WATER CONTENT, % COMPACTION 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Sample Description: Sample Source: Test Methods: VTM1 Liquid Limit (LL): Plasticity Index (PI): 11 % Retained # Sieve: 0.3 SS-03, 3.0 ft % Passing # 00 Sieve: 0.5 Orange-brown, fine to medium, SANDY SILT, trace gravel, contains mica (ML) Assumed Specific Gravity: Max. Dry Density (pcf): Opt. Moisture (%): Comments: MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: 110

113 DRY DENSITY, pcf WATER CONTENT, % COMPACTION 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Sample Description: Sample Source: Test Methods: VTM1 Liquid Limit (LL): 31 Plasticity Index (PI): 7 % Retained # Sieve: 0.3 SS-0, 0.3 ft % Passing # 00 Sieve: 3.0 Brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica (SM) Assumed Specific Gravity: Max. Dry Density (pcf): Opt. Moisture (%): Comments: MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: 110

114 DRY DENSITY, pcf WATER CONTENT, % COMPACTION 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Sample Description: Sample Source: Test Methods: Liquid Limit (LL): Plasticity Index (PI): Brown and gray, fine, SILTY SAND, contains mica (SM) SS-07, 1.0 ft VTM1 NP NP % Retained # Sieve: 0.0 % Passing # 00 Sieve: 33.0 Assumed Specific Gravity: Max. Dry Density (pcf): Opt. Moisture (%): Comments: MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: 110

115 DRY DENSITY, pcf WATER CONTENT, % COMPACTION 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Sample Description: Sample Source: Test Methods: VTM1 Liquid Limit (LL): 3 Plasticity Index (PI): % Retained # Sieve:. SS-08, 1.1 ft % Passing # 00 Sieve: 7.5 Brown and gray, fine to medium, CLAYEY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica (SC) Assumed Specific Gravity: Max. Dry Density (pcf): Opt. Moisture (%): Comments: MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: 110

116 DRY DENSITY, pcf WATER CONTENT, % COMPACTION 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Sample Description: Sample Source: Test Methods: VTM1 Liquid Limit (LL): 31 Plasticity Index (PI): 7 % Retained # Sieve: 0. SS-09, 5.0 ft % Passing # 00 Sieve:. Light gray, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica (SM) Assumed Specific Gravity: Max. Dry Density (pcf): Opt. Moisture (%): Comments: MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: 110

117 DRY DENSITY, pcf WATER CONTENT, % COMPACTION 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Sample Description: Sample Source: Test Methods: VTM1 Liquid Limit (LL): 9 Plasticity Index (PI): 9 % Retained # Sieve: 0.5 SS-,.0 ft % Passing # 00 Sieve: 8. Gray-brown, fine, CLAYEY SAND, trace gravel (SC) Assumed Specific Gravity: Max. Dry Density (pcf): Opt. Moisture (%): Comments: MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: 110

118 DRY DENSITY, pcf WATER CONTENT, % COMPACTION 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Sample Description: Sample Source: Test Methods: VTM1 Liquid Limit (LL): 39 Plasticity Index (PI): 11 % Retained # Sieve: 1.8 SS-13, 0.3 ft % Passing # 00 Sieve: 33.1 Dark brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica (SM) Assumed Specific Gravity: Max. Dry Density (pcf): Opt. Moisture (%): Comments: MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: 110

119 DRY DENSITY, pcf WATER CONTENT, % COMPACTION 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Sample Description: Sample Source: Test Methods: VTM1 Liquid Limit (LL): 33 Plasticity Index (PI): 8 % Retained # Sieve:.9 SW-03, 5.0 ft % Passing # 00 Sieve: 8.5 Orange-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica (SM) Assumed Specific Gravity: Max. Dry Density (pcf): Opt. Moisture (%): Comments: MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract: 110

120 1, STRESS ON PISTON (psi) PENETRATION (INCHES) CBR SINGLE POINT 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Sample Description: Sample Source: Sample Depth: Test Method: SS ft VTM-8 Liquid Limit (LL): Plasticity Index (PI): 11 % Retained # Sieve: 0.3 % Passing # 00 Sieve: 0.5 Orange-brown, fine to medium, SANDY SILT, trace gravel, contains mica (ML) Dry Density Before Soaking (pcf): Dry Density After Soaking (pcf): Maximum Dry Density (pcf): Moisture Content Before Soaking (%): Moisture Content After Soaking (Avg) (%): Moisture Content Top Inch After Soak (%): Optimum Moisture Content (%): 0 CBR: Surcharge (psf): Swell (%): , Soaked 1. CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract:

121 1, STRESS ON PISTON (psi) PENETRATION (INCHES) CBR SINGLE POINT 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Sample Description: Sample Source: Sample Depth: Test Method: SS ft VTM-8 Liquid Limit (LL): 31 Plasticity Index (PI): 7 % Retained # Sieve: 0.3 % Passing # 00 Sieve: 3.0 Brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica (SM) Dry Density Before Soaking (pcf): Dry Density After Soaking (pcf): Maximum Dry Density (pcf): Moisture Content Before Soaking (%): Moisture Content After Soaking (Avg) (%): Moisture Content Top Inch After Soak (%): Optimum Moisture Content (%): 13.9 CBR: Surcharge (psf): Swell (%): , Soaked 0.9 CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract:

122 1, STRESS ON PISTON (psi) PENETRATION (INCHES) CBR SINGLE POINT 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Sample Description: Sample Source: Sample Depth: Test Method: Liquid Limit (LL): Plasticity Index (PI): Brown and gray, fine, SILTY SAND, contains mica (SM) SS ft VTM-8 NP NP % Retained # Sieve: 0.0 % Passing # 00 Sieve: 33.0 Dry Density Before Soaking (pcf): Dry Density After Soaking (pcf): Maximum Dry Density (pcf): Moisture Content Before Soaking (%): Moisture Content After Soaking (Avg) (%): Moisture Content Top Inch After Soak (%): Optimum Moisture Content (%): 1. CBR: Surcharge (psf): Swell (%): , Soaked 0.0 CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract:

123 1, STRESS ON PISTON (psi) PENETRATION (INCHES) CBR SINGLE POINT 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Sample Description: Sample Source: Sample Depth: Test Method: SS ft VTM-8 Liquid Limit (LL): 3 Plasticity Index (PI): % Retained # Sieve:. % Passing # 00 Sieve: 7.5 Brown and gray, fine to medium, CLAYEY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica (SC) Dry Density Before Soaking (pcf): Dry Density After Soaking (pcf): Maximum Dry Density (pcf): Moisture Content Before Soaking (%): Moisture Content After Soaking (Avg) (%): Moisture Content Top Inch After Soak (%): Optimum Moisture Content (%): 1.7 CBR: Surcharge (psf): Swell (%): , Soaked 1.3 CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract:

124 1, STRESS ON PISTON (psi) PENETRATION (INCHES) CBR SINGLE POINT 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Sample Description: Sample Source: Sample Depth: Test Method: SS ft VTM-8 Liquid Limit (LL): 31 Plasticity Index (PI): 7 % Retained # Sieve: 0. % Passing # 00 Sieve:. Light gray, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica (SM) Dry Density Before Soaking (pcf): Dry Density After Soaking (pcf): Maximum Dry Density (pcf): Moisture Content Before Soaking (%): Moisture Content After Soaking (Avg) (%): Moisture Content Top Inch After Soak (%): Optimum Moisture Content (%): 1 CBR: Surcharge (psf): Swell (%): , Soaked 1.3 CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract:

125 1, STRESS ON PISTON (psi) PENETRATION (INCHES) CBR SINGLE POINT 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Sample Description: Sample Source: Sample Depth: Test Method: SS-.0 ft VTM-8 Liquid Limit (LL): 9 Plasticity Index (PI): 9 % Retained # Sieve: 0.5 % Passing # 00 Sieve: 8. Gray-brown, fine, CLAYEY SAND, trace gravel (SC) Dry Density Before Soaking (pcf): Dry Density After Soaking (pcf): Maximum Dry Density (pcf): Moisture Content Before Soaking (%): Moisture Content After Soaking (Avg) (%): Moisture Content Top Inch After Soak (%): Optimum Moisture Content (%):. CBR: Surcharge (psf): Swell (%): , Soaked 5. CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract:

126 1, STRESS ON PISTON (psi) PENETRATION (INCHES) CBR SINGLE POINT 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Sample Description: Sample Source: Sample Depth: Test Method: SS ft VTM-8 Liquid Limit (LL): 39 Plasticity Index (PI): 11 % Retained # Sieve: 1.8 % Passing # 00 Sieve: 33.1 Dark brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica (SM) Dry Density Before Soaking (pcf): Dry Density After Soaking (pcf): Maximum Dry Density (pcf): Moisture Content Before Soaking (%): Moisture Content After Soaking (Avg) (%): Moisture Content Top Inch After Soak (%): Optimum Moisture Content (%): 1.7 CBR: Surcharge (psf): Swell (%): , Soaked 0.7 CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract:

127 1, STRESS ON PISTON (psi) PENETRATION (INCHES) CBR SINGLE POINT 110.GPJ SCHNABEL DATA TEMPLATE 008_0_.GDT 11/17/1 Sample Description: Sample Source: Sample Depth: Test Method: SW ft VTM-8 Liquid Limit (LL): 33 Plasticity Index (PI): 8 % Retained # Sieve:.9 % Passing # 00 Sieve: 8.5 Orange-brown, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, contains mica (SM) Dry Density Before Soaking (pcf): Dry Density After Soaking (pcf): Maximum Dry Density (pcf): Moisture Content Before Soaking (%): Moisture Content After Soaking (Avg) (%): Moisture Content Top Inch After Soak (%): Optimum Moisture Content (%): 13.3 CBR: Surcharge (psf): Swell (%): , Soaked. CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Contract:

128 Log Pressure (tsf) Axial Strain (%) Probable Preconsolidation Pressure (Pp), tsf:.0 Recompression Ratio (Cεr): Type of Specimen: Tube Sample Compression Ratio (Cεc): 0.08 Description: Yellow-brown, fine, CLAYEY SAND, tracel gravel, Initial Final (SC) Water Content, % LL: 31 PI: 11 Gs:.7 P o ' (tsf): 0. Void Ratio % < No. 00: 3. Test Method: ASTM D35 Method A Saturation, % 90 Test Condition: 0.05 tsf Dry Unit Weight, pcf Remarks: Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Average Water Content of Trimmings, %: 19.1 Location Charlotte County, VA Boring: BR-0 Schnabel No.: 110 Depth: ft. Elevation: ft. Date: 1/5/01 Reviewed by: CJS Consolidation Test Report Consol 5/007 Rev.

129 Consolidation Test Data Sheet Consolidometer ID: 3 1/5/1 Schnabel Contract: 110 Test Method: ASTM D35 Method A Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Test Condition: 0.05 tsf Initial Height of Specimen (H o ), in.: 0.78 Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Height of Solids (H s ), in.: 0.73 Boring No.: BR-0 Seating Press. (tsf): 0.05 Initial Dial Gauge Reading (D o ), in.: Depth: ft. Final Height Differential (Hd), in.: Reviewed by: CJS Pressure, P TimeReadings Required Date Load Applied Time Load Applied Load Applied By A B C D Cumulative Change in Final 1 Dial Reading, D fi Apparatus Correction, D ci Height of Voids, H vi Vertical Strain 5, ε i Void Ratio, e i Height 3, H i (tsf) x - in. x - in. in. in. (%) 0.15 /18/01 9: DWC /0/01 9: DWC /1/01 9: DWC //01 9: DWC /3/01 9: DWC //01 9: DWC /5/01 9: DWC /7/01 9: DWC /8/01 9: DWC /9/01 9: DWC /30/01 9: DWC /31/01 9: DWC /1/01 9: DWC /3/01 9: DWC //01 9: DWC Notes: 1 "Final" based on test method; hrs for Method A, end of primary for Method B. Correction value, for the current pressure, from the consolidometer's calibration curve. 3 H = D fi - D o - D ci = Col. A - D o - Col. B H vi = (H o - H s ) - H 5 ε i = ( H / H o ) x = (Col. C / H o ) x Consol 5/007 Rev. e i = H vi / Hs = Col. D / Hs

130 Load Time Readings 1/5/1 Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Schnabel Contract: 110 Boring No.: BR-0 Depth: ft. Consol. ID: 3 Reviewed by: CJS Elapsed Time (min.) Test Drainage Conditions: 1 tsf 8 tsf Reload Load /8/01 /30/ Double Dial Gauge Readings (inches) Consol 5/007 Rev.

131 Consolidation Time Curves 1/5/1 Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Schnabel Contract: 110 Boring No.: BR-0 Depth: ft. Reviewed by: CJS Test Drainage Conditions: Double Elapsed Time (min.) tsf Reload Dial Gauge Reading (inches) tsf Load Consol 5/007 Rev.

132 Log Pressure (tsf) Axial Strain (%) Probable Preconsolidation Pressure (Pp), tsf:. Recompression Ratio (Cεr): 0.0 Type of Specimen: Tube Sample Compression Ratio (Cεc): Description: Light gray, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace Initial Final gravel, contains mica (SM) Water Content, % LL: 3 PI: 11 Gs:. P o ' (tsf): 0.0 Void Ratio % < No. 00: 3.7 Test Method: ASTM D335 Method A Saturation, % 98 Test Condition: 0.05 tsf Dry Unit Weight, pcf Remarks: Project: Average Water Content of Trimmings, %:. Location UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Boring: SS-0 Schnabel No.: 110 Depth: -8 ft. Elevation: ft. Date: 1/5/01 Reviewed by: CJS Consolidation Test Report Consol 5/007 Rev.

133 Consolidation Test Data Sheet Consolidometer ID: 1/5/1 Schnabel Contract: 110 Test Method: ASTM D335 Method A Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Test Condition: 0.05 tsf Initial Height of Specimen (H o ), in.: Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Height of Solids (H s ), in.: Boring No.: SS-0 Seating Press. (tsf): 0.05 Initial Dial Gauge Reading (D o ), in.: Depth: -8 ft. Final Height Differential (Hd), in.: Reviewed by: CJS Pressure, P TimeReadings Required Date Load Applied Time Load Applied Load Applied By A B C D Cumulative Change in Final 1 Dial Reading, D fi Apparatus Correction, D ci Height of Voids, H vi Vertical Strain 5, ε i Void Ratio, e i Height 3, H i (tsf) x - in. x - in. in. in. (%) 0.05 /17/01 1:30 DWC /18/01 9:15 DWC /0/01 9:15 DWC /1/01 9:15 DWC //01 9:15 DWC /3/01 9:15 DWC //01 9:15 DWC /5/01 9:15 DWC /7/01 9:15 DWC /8/01 9:15 DWC /9/01 9:15 DWC /30/01 9:15 DWC /31/01 9:15 DWC /1/01 9:15 DWC /3/01 9:15 DWC //01 9:15 DWC Notes: 1 "Final" based on test method; hrs for Method A, end of primary for Method B. Correction value, for the current pressure, from the consolidometer's calibration curve. 3 H = D fi - D o - D ci = Col. A - D o - Col. B H vi = (H o - H s ) - H 5 ε i = ( H / H o ) x = (Col. C / H o ) x Consol 5/007 Rev. e i = H vi / Hs = Col. D / Hs

134 Load Time Readings 1/5/1 Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Schnabel Contract: 110 Boring No.: SS-0 Depth: -8 ft. Consol. ID: Reviewed by: CJS Elapsed Time (min.) Test Drainage Conditions: 1 tsf 8 tsf Reload Load /8/01 /30/ Double Dial Gauge Readings (inches) Consol 5/007 Rev.

135 Consolidation Time Curves 1/5/1 Project: UPC #907, VDOT # Schnabel Contract: 110 Boring No.: SS-0 Depth: -8 ft. Reviewed by: CJS Test Drainage Conditions: Double Elapsed Time (min.) tsf Reload Dial Gauge Reading (inches) tsf Load Consol 5/007 Rev.

136 Log Pressure (tsf) Axial Strain (%) Apparent Preconsolidation Pressure (Pp), tsf:. Recompression Ratio (Cεr): 0.00 Type of Specimen: Reconstituted Sample Compression Ratio (Cεc): Description: Light gray, fine to medium, SILTY SAND, trace gravel, Initial Final contains mica (SM) Water Content, % LL: 31 PI: 7 Gs:.7 P o ' (tsf): N/A Void Ratio % < No. 00:. Test Method: ASTM D35 Method A Saturation, % 7 95 Test Condition: 0.05 tsf Dry Unit Weight, pcf Remarks: Compacted to 95% max. dry density at OMC +.% Project: target conditions (VTM-1). Average Water Content of Trimmings, %: 1. Location UPC #907, VDOT # Route 0 Bridge over Louse Creek Charlotte County, VA Boring: SS-09 Schnabel No.: 110 Depth: 5- ft. Elevation: ft. Date: 1/5/01 Reviewed by: CJS Consolidation Test Report Consol 5/007 Rev.