Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation · The attached report summarizes our field and laboratory test results and presents our geotechnical engineering opinions and recommendations

605 North Warehouse Road, Casper, Wyoming 82601 Phone 307-234-2126 Fax 307-266-5143 www.stratageotech.com

October 8, 2015 File: WY15272A

Mr. Brad Hopkins Central Wyoming Rescue Mission 230 North Park Street Casper, Wyoming 82601 RE: Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Central Wyoming Rescue Mission 548 East “A” Street Casper, Wyoming Dear Mr. Hopkins:

Strata, A Professional Services Corporation, (STRATA) has performed the authorized geotechnical engineering evaluation for the proposed Central Wyoming Rescue Mission building to be located on the northwest corner of North Park Street and East “A” Street in Casper, Wyoming. The purpose of the evaluation has been to explore the subsurface conditions in the proposed development area and to provide geotechnical recommendations to assist project planning, design and construction. The attached report summarizes our field and laboratory test results and presents our geotechnical engineering opinions and recommendations.

The report must be read, understood and implemented in its entirety. Report portions

cannot be relied upon individually without the supporting text of remaining sections, appendices and figures. Our opinion is, the success of the proposed construction will depend on following the report recommendations, good construction practices, and providing the necessary construction monitoring, testing, and consultation to verify that work has been completed as recommended. We recommend STRATA be retained to provide monitoring, testing and consultation services to verify our report recommendations are being followed.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide these services to you. We look forward to our

continued involvement on this project through the design and construction phases. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or comments.

Sincerely, STRATA

Brian L. Chandler, P.E. Staff Engineer

Dennis A. Russell, P.E. Wyoming Engineering Manager

cc: Wes Hayden – Caspar Building Systems

BLC/DAR/bec \Strata Projects\C\CWRM\WY15272A\GEO\CWRM Report.docx

Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Proposed Central Wyoming Rescue Mission Building

548 East “A” Street Casper, Wyoming

PREPARED FOR: Mr. Brad Hopkins

Central Wyoming Rescue Mission

230 North Park Street Casper, Wyoming 82601

PREPARED BY: STRATA, A Professional Services Corporation

605 North Warehouse Road Casper, Wyoming 82601

Telephone (307) 234-2126 Facsimile (307) 266-5143

October 8, 2015

www.stratageotech.com

© 2015 by Strata, A Professional Services Corporation. All rights reserved.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING ..................................................................................................... 2

Existing Conditions .................................................................................................................... 2

Proposed Construction .............................................................................................................. 2

FIELD EXPLORATION ................................................................................................................. 2

LABORATORY TESTING ............................................................................................................. 3

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ...................................................................................................... 3

GEOTECHNICAL OPINIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................ 4

Seismicity/IBC Soil Profile ......................................................................................................... 4

Earthwork .................................................................................................................................. 4

Excavation/Temporary Slope Stability ................................................................................... 5

Subgrade Preparation ............................................................................................................ 5

Structural Fill/Compaction Requirements .............................................................................. 5

Foundation Design .................................................................................................................... 7

Bearing Capacity and Settlement .......................................................................................... 7

Concrete Slab-on-Grade ........................................................................................................... 8

Site Drainage ............................................................................................................................. 9

GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN CONTINUITY .................................................................................... 9

EVALUATION LIMITATIONS ...................................................................................................... 10

Plate 1: Location of Exploratory Boring Plan Appendix A: Exploratory Boring Logs Appendix B: Laboratory Test Results



Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Proposed Central Wyoming Rescue Mission Building

548 East “A” Street Casper, Wyoming

INTRODUCTION

STRATA, A Professional Services Corporation (STRATA) is pleased to provide our

geotechnical engineering evaluation for the proposed new building for the Central Wyoming

Rescue Mission to be located at 548 East “A” Street at the northwest corner of the intersection of

East “A” Street and North Park Street in Casper, Wyoming. The purpose of this evaluation was to

assess the subsurface conditions at the project site and to prepare geotechnical engineering

opinions and recommendations that may be referenced for planning, design and construction of

the proposed building and pavement area. We accomplished this evaluation referencing our

proposal dated August 28, 2015. To accomplish our evaluation, STRATA performed the following

services:

1. Four exploratory borings were drilled to depths ranging from 16 to 21 ft in a grid pattern over the site. At the time of our study the building location on the site had not been determined.

2. The soils encountered were visually described, classified, and logged referencing the

Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Selected samples of the soil encountered were returned to our laboratory for additional visual assessment and testing.

3. Laboratory testing was performed in general accordance with ASTM procedures including

in-situ moisture content, Atterberg limits, grain-size analysis, swell or settlement potential, and water soluble sulfate. We utilized these laboratory results to help characterize the engineering properties of the soils for use in our engineering analyses.

4. Engineering analyses was performed in order to provide geotechnical design and

construction recommendations for the proposed development. Specifically, recommendations were developed for:

Earthwork Foundation Design Concrete Slab-on-Grade Site Drainage Geotechnical Design Continuity

5. Three hard copies and an electronic copy of our final geotechnical report are provided,

including exploratory boring logs and laboratory test results.

Central Wyoming Rescue Mission File: WY15272A

Page 2



PROJECT UNDERSTANDING

Existing Conditions

The project site is located on the northwest corner of the intersection of East “A” Street

and North Park Street at 548 East “A” Street. The site is located south of the existing Central

Wyoming Rescue Mission which is located at 230 North Park Street. The site is currently vacant

of permanent structures. However, prior to our field exploration existing buildings were located

on the site, generally on the southwest corner of the site. The topography of the site is generally

rough due to the recent demolition of the former buildings. The ground surface undulates with a

general slope slightly downward to the north with an approximate elevation difference of 4 ft

between borings B-1 and B-4. There was no vegetation on the site. A portion of the southeast

corner of the site is covered with asphalt pavement.

Proposed Construction

The proposed new building will be one story in height with no basement and will have a

footprint area of approximately 20,000 sf. The type of construction for the building will be wood-

framing. Structural loads are expected to range from 1.5 to 2 klf for walls. The finished floor

elevation was not provided. However, we understand that the finished floor elevation will be 1 to

2 ft higher in elevation that the existing ground surface.

FIELD EXPLORATION

STRATA drilled four exploratory borings on the site in a grid pattern on September 21,

2015. The borings were drilled on a grid pattern due to the building location not being determined

at the time of our study. The borings were drilled to depths ranging from approximately 16 ft to

20.5 ft. The locations of the exploratory borings are presented on Plate 1, Location of Exploratory

Borings, and the logs of the exploratory borings are presented in Appendix A. The buildings

shown on Plate 1 were removed prior to our field exploration.

STRATA advanced the borings using a CME-55 truck-mounted drill rig equipped with 3.25

inch inside diameter hollow-stem auger. An experienced geotechnical field representative logged

and visually classified the soils encountered in the borings referencing the Unified Soil

Classification System (USCS). Soil samples were obtained within the borings via 2-inch outside

diameter (standard) split-barrel samplers and 2.5 inch outside diameter California samplers driven

with a 140-pound automatic hammer falling 30 inches. The standard penetration test SPT N-

values (in blows per foot) were recorded on the boring logs for each soil sample. Sampling was


Page 3



performed in general conformance with ASTM D1586 and samples were collected at selected

depth intervals as indicated on the logs. N values have not been corrected for hammer efficiency

or sampler size.

LABORATORY TESTING

The soil samples collected in the field were returned to our laboratory for further

classification and testing in accordance with ASTM procedures. We developed our laboratory

testing program for this project primarily to verify soil classification through index testing and to

evaluate settlement potential through consolidation tests. Further discussion regarding

geotechnical laboratory testing is provided in the following report sections. Specifically, we

completed the following laboratory testing:

Natural Moisture Content and Dry Density Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve Sieve Analyses Atterberg Limits Swell Potential Water Soluble Sulfate

The laboratory test results are presented on the figures and summary table in

Appendix B.

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

Soil conditions encountered within the borings generally consist of 2 to 5 ft of existing fill,

0 to 3 ft of lean to fat clay, and 5.5 to 10.5 ft of poorly graded sand with silt and gravel to poorly

graded gravel with silt and sand overlying claystone bedrock. The exploratory boring logs should

be referenced for detailed soil descriptions and classifications, N values, stratum thicknesses,

groundwater levels, and laboratory test results. A more specific discussion of each soil stratum

and groundwater encountered is presented below:

Existing Fill: Sand with Silt to Sandy Lean Clay – Existing fill consisting of predominately of sand with silt and some gravel to sandy lean clay was encountered at the ground surface in borings B-1, B-2, and B-3 and below the asphalt pavement section in boring B-4. The fill extends to depths of 2 ft in boring B-1, 3.5 ft in boring B-2, 5 ft in boring B-3, and 4 ft in boring B-4. N values within the fill ranged from 11 to 26. The exact lateral and vertical extent of the existing fill can only be determined at the time of excavation.


Page 4



Lean Clay (CL) to Fat Clay (CH) – Lean clay to fat clay was encountered below the existing fill in borings B-1 and B-2. The clay stratum extends to a depth of 5 ft in boring B-1 and 6.5 ft in boring B-2. The consistency of the clay stratum is stiff to very stiff as indicated by the N values of 9 and 17. Based on laboratory test results the lean to fat clay possess a moderate swell potential when becoming wetted under a relatively light loading.

Poorly Graded Sand with Silt and Gravel (SP-SM) to Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP) – Poorly graded sand with silt and gravel to poorly graded gravel with sand was encountered below the clay stratum in borings B-1 and B-2 and below the fill in borings B-3 and B-4. The sand and gravel stratum extends to depths of 11 ft in borings B-1 and B-3, 12 ft in boring B-2, and 14.5 ft in boring B-4. The relative density of the sand and gravel stratum is loose to dense as indicated by the N values ranging from 8 to 37.

Claystone Bedrock – Claystone bedrock was encountered below the poorly graded sand in all four borings and extended to the depths explored, approximately 16 ft to 20.5 ft. The claystone was hard to very hard and gray to dark gray in color.

Groundwater – Groundwater was encountered at depths ranging from 10 to 14.5 ft below the existing ground surface in all four borings at the time of drilling (September 2015). Numerous factors can contribute to the fluctuation of groundwater levels. The evaluation of these factors is beyond the scope of this study.

GEOTECHNICAL OPINIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This report’s recommendations reflect our understanding of the proposed building location

and configuration, existing topography and subsurface conditions as encountered. Subsurface

conditions may vary from what was observed during our subsurface evaluation and the extent of

this variation is unknown and will not be known until construction, and may impact construction

cost and/or schedule. This report provides geotechnical data and recommendations that can be

utilized for planning, design and construction documents.

Seismicity/IBC Soil Profile

We expect the 2012 IBC will be utilized for project structural design. Section 1615.1 of the

2012 IBC outlines the procedure for evaluating site ground motions and design spectral response

accelerations. STRATA utilized site soil and geologic data and the project location to establish

earthquake-loading criteria at the site referencing Section 1615.1 of the 2012 IBC. Based on our

field exploration and our general knowledge of the upper 100 ft of the soil profile, we recommend

a Site Class C be utilized as a basis for structural seismic design.

Earthwork

Based on the presence of existing fill, site grading will include removing all existing fill from

beneath the proposed building footprint and from beneath all other critical areas such as concrete

flatwork. In addition, based on laboratory test results, the lean to fat clay stratum possesses a


Page 5



moderate swell potential. Therefore, the lean to fat clay should be entirely over-excavated from

beneath the entire building footprint. The quantity of over-excavation will depend significantly on

the final building location. The fat to lean clay stratum was only encountered on the northern

portion of the site in borings B-1 and B-2. Based on the existing topography, which includes low

areas, we expect that importing fill will be required after the existing fill is removed and replaced.

Excavation/Temporary Slope Stability

We anticipate excavation for the proposed structure will be accomplished via open-

excavations. These excavations, including trench construction and earthwork, should be

constructed according the OSHA excavation regulations, Document 29, CFR Part 1926,

Occupation Safety and Health Standards – Excavations; Final Rule. In general, the lean to fat

clay is classified as “B” soil and the poorly graded sand and gravel is classified as “C” soil

according to the OSHA criteria.

Foundation excavations will extend into the fill, the lean to fat clay, and potentially into the

sand and gravel stratums. Conventional earth excavation equipment should be adequate for

excavations to the anticipated depths.

Subgrade Preparation

We recommend the following for building pad construction:

All topsoil, vegetation, and existing pavements should be stripped from the building footprint, pavement areas, and cut and fill areas.

The existing fill is not suitable for support of foundations, floors, exterior concrete flatwork, or pavements. The existing fill should be entirely removed and replaced under controlled moisture and density specifications.

Prior to placement of new fill, the subgrade should be proof-rolled with a loaded dump truck to inspect for any unstable or pumping subgrade conditions within the planned building area. Where encountered, these unstable soils should be over-excavated and replaced with on-site soil or granular structural fill, potentially incorporating geotextile reinforcement materials, as recommended by the geotechnical engineer.

Structural Fill/Compaction Requirements

All fill placed within the planned building footprint should be considered structural fill. The

on-site existing fill appears suitable for re-use as fill below floor slabs, and below exterior concrete

flatwork. However, the quality of the existing fill can only be determined at the time of excavation.

STRATA should be contacted during excavation to determine the suitability of the existing fill for


Page 6



re-use. The lean to fat clay can be re-used as exterior foundation wall backfill, and utility trench

backfill. The following table summarizes the suitability of potential fill materials.

Soil Fill Product

Allowable Use Material Specifications

Non-Structural Fill (Landscape Fill)

Any area that will not contain structures (typically landscape areas)

Soil classified as GM, GW, SM, SW, SC, CL, CH or ML according to the USCS.

Soil may not contain particles larger than 8 inches in median diameter.

Soil must be reasonably free from deleterious substances such as wood, metal, plastic, waste, etc.

Approved by Landscape Architect

General Structural Fill

Site grading at least 10 feet outside the building footprint.

Utility backfill areas Non-structural fill

Soil classified as GP, GM, GW, GC, SP, SM, SW, SC, CL, or ML according to the USCS.

Site soil free of vegetation, organics and debris meets these requirements.

Soil may not contain particles larger than 6 inches in diameter.

Soil must contain less than 3% (by weight) of organics, vegetation, wood, metal, plastic, or other deleterious substances

Granular Structural Fill

General structural fill

Over-excavations Soil improvements Wall backfill

Soil may not contain particles larger than 2 inches in diameter.

Soil must contain less than 3% (by weight) of organics, vegetation, wood, metal, plastic, or other deleterious substances

Pipe Bedding Utility pipe bedding

within 4 inches of the pipe invert

Gravel Backfill for Pipe Zone Bedding in the Public Works Manual

Unsatisfactory Soil

NONE

Soil classified as MH, OH, CH, OL or PT may not be used at the project site

Any soil type not maintaining moisture contents within 5% of optimum during compaction is unsatisfactory soil that must be moisture conditioned prior to disposal and replacement

Any soil containing more than 3% (by weight) of organics, vegetation, wood, metal, plastic or other deleterious substances

If the quantity of on-site soils is not sufficient for fill and backfill, it may be require to import

a fill material. Imported fill material should consist of a granular material. All imported soil should

have a maximum particle size of 2 inches, 90 to 100% passing the 1.5 inch sieve, 35 to 75%

passing the No. 4 sieve, and 0 to 15% passing the No. 200 sieve, or approved alternative material.

All imported fill should be approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to importing.


Page 7



All fill material should be placed within ±2% of the optimum moisture content as

determined by ASTM D698. Fill required to obtain design grades should be placed in thin (8 inch

maximum), uniform lifts and compacted to the following minimum percentages of the maximum

dry density as determined by ASTM D698 (Standard Proctor).

Application Compaction (%) Below Foundations .................................................... 98 Building Pad (below floors) ........................................ 95 Foundation Wall Backfill ............................................ 95 Utility Trenches .......................................................... 95 Overlot Fill ................................................................. 90

STRATA should be retained to perform field density testing of all fill to verify contractor

compliance with the above minimum compaction criteria.

Foundation Design

Based on the subsurface profile and the nature of the proposed construction, the on-site

existing fill and lean to fat clay are not suitable for the support of shallow foundations, such as

spread footings. However, the underlying poorly graded sand and gravel stratum is suitable for

the support of shallow foundations. All foundation excavations should extend to the sand and

gravel stratum.

Bearing Capacity and Settlement

Shallow spread footings and continuous wall footings should be established a minimum

of 42 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade for frost protection and confinement. Footings

placed on the natural, undisturbed sand and gravel soil or properly placed and compacted

granular structural fill should be proportioned for a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 3,000

psf. All continuous spread footings should be a minimum of 18 inches wide and all isolated

footings should be at least 24 inches wide. A one third increase may be applied for transient wind

or seismic loads. Friction acting along the base of footings founded on the natural soil should be

computed by using a coefficient of friction of 0.35 with the normal dead load. Foundations must

be structurally designed to conform to the latest edition of the International Building Code (IBC).

Care should be taken when excavating the foundation soils to avoid disturbing the

supporting material. Disturbing the natural soils will increase settlements. Disturbed soils should

be removed and footings extended to undisturbed soil. All footing excavations should be proof-

rolled with vibratory compaction equipment prior to placement of formwork and reinforcement.


Page 8



We estimate total and differential settlement of conventional spread footings due to

settlement of the native soil to be on the order of 1-inch and 1/2-inch, respectively. STRATA

should observe the foundation system installation including subgrade fill compaction prior to

placing concrete forms or concrete. Reviewing the site preparation process and final foundation

bearing surfaces helps confirm our allowable bearing pressures and settlement estimates, and is

an important part of the geotechnical design process.

Concrete Slab-on-Grade

The on-site existing fill and expansive lean to fat clay is not suitable for the support of

concrete slab-on-grade construction. As discussed under the Earthwork section, the existing fill

and the clay stratum must be entirely removed from within the proposed building footprint. If the

existing fill is suitable, it should be replaced, compacted to the moisture and density specifications

noted above. If the quantity of on-site soils is not sufficient and additional fill is required to achieve

the finished floor elevation, we recommend that a granular material be imported to be used below

the floor slab. Subgrade areas that become soft, loose, wet, or disturbed or that cannot be re-

compacted to structural fill requirements discussed above must be over-excavated to firm soil and

replaced with granular structural fill prior to placing the free-draining gravel. A 4-inch thick layer

of free draining gravel should be placed beneath all concrete slab-on-grade floor slabs. This

material should consist of minus 1½-inch aggregate with less than 60% passing the No. 4 sieve,

and less than 5% passing the No. 200 sieve.

To reduce the effects of some differential movement, floor slabs should be separated from

all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints, which allow unrestrained vertical movement.

Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. Joints

should be provided a minimum of 15 ft apart. The requirements for slab reinforcement and

thickness should be established by the designer based on experience and the intended use of

the slab. Floor slabs must be designed for the anticipated use and equipment or storage loading

conditions. Based on correlations to our field and laboratory test results, we recommend concrete

slab design utilize a modulus of subgrade reaction (K) of 150 pci for the properly placed structural

fill.

Exterior slabs are susceptible to frost action which can generate substantial frost heave

at certain times of the year. The potential for frost heave may not be acceptable at entries, bays

or other critical areas adjacent to the building that will be exposed to weather. One approach to

provide partial frost protection would be to place and compact a minimum of 18 inches of


Page 9



aggregate base course beneath the slab. Alternatively, if partial frost protection is unacceptable,

over-excavation and aggregate base course replacement must be accomplished to 2/3 of the

anticipated frost depth (28 inches).

Site Drainage

Consistent with the IBC, we recommend the ground surface adjacent to structures slope

a minimum of 5% away from foundations within 10 ft of the structure. The ground surface beyond

10 ft of structures should be sloped at least 2%. Improper management of near-surface water, by

not providing an effective grading and drainage design, can result in moisture entering building

subgrade soils. Possible sources of near-surface water include lawn and plant irrigation,

rainwater, snowmelt, roof runoff or leaking water lines. Providing good drainage as discussed

above can be supplemented by using impermeable aprons adjacent to at-grade structures.

Impermeable aprons may consist of asphalt or Portland cement pavement that is placed directly

adjacent to the foundation stemwalls. An elastomeric sealant should also be considered between

aprons and foundation stemwalls to further reduce the potential for moisture to infiltrate the area

directly adjacent to foundations. Downspouts should discharge well beyond the limits of all

foundation wall backfill. Landscaping which requires irrigation should be minimized and kept at

least 4 ft away from all exterior walls.

GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN CONTINUITY

Geotechnical design continuity will be an important aspect of the successful completion of

this project. In our opinion, geotechnical continuity can occur in three stages in the planning, design

and construction project aspects. Specifically, we recommend STRATA maintain the geotechnical

design continuity in the following aspects:

Plan and Specification Review: We recommend STRATA be retained to review final design and construction plans and specifications to verify our geotechnical recommendations are incorporated into construction documents as well as to provide additional recommendations based on the final design concepts. These efforts can help provide document continuity and reduce the potential for errors as the project concepts evolve.

Geotechnical Design Confirmation: The potential soil variation may have a significant impact on foundation construction. As such, we recommend STRATA be retained to provide geotechnical engineering oversight during site grading and foundation excavation to observe the potential variability in the soil conditions and provide consultation regarding potential impacts on foundation construction.


Page 10



Construction Observation and Testing: We recommend STRATA be retained to provide observation and testing during site preparation, grading, structural fill placement and backfilling to verify compliance with the recommendations presented in this report. Having STRATA provide inspection and oversight during this process will reduce the potential for an unforeseen construction error which may ultimately impact the project. If we are not retained to perform the recommended services, we cannot be responsible for related construction errors or omissions. STRATA can also provide construction material testing and inspection for reinforced concrete, and structural steel.

EVALUATION LIMITATIONS

This geotechnical engineering evaluation has been prepared to assist the planning, design

and construction of the proposed building in Casper, Wyoming. Our services consist of

professional opinions and recommendations made in accordance with generally accepted

geotechnical engineering principles and practices as they exist in Wyoming at the time of this

report.

The geotechnical recommendations provided herein are based on the premise that an

adequate program of tests and observations will be conducted during construction in order to

document compliance with our recommendations and to confirm conditions exposed during

subgrade preparations. Further, the method of exploration used allows observation of a relatively

small sample of the subsurface conditions at the site. Variations may exist beyond the exploration

locations. These variations would not be apparent until construction. Where such variation does

exist, it may affect the options and recommendations presented in this report, as well as

construction timing and costs. This acknowledgment is in lieu of all express or implied warranties.

BASE MAP IMAGE FROM:

GOOGLE EARTH(Dated 8-17-2012)

B-1B-2

B-3

B-4

LEGEND:

APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATIONS

DRILLED SEPTEMBER 21, 2015

BENCHMARK - TOP OF MANHOLE

(EL=100.00 ASSUMED)

B-1

EAST 'A' STREET

NO

RTH

PA

RK

STR

EE

T

PROPERTY BOUNDARY

ALL

EY

BM

BM

Copyright: STRATA

10/7/2015 12:28:08 P

M - V

:\S

TR

AT

A - C

AS

PE

R P

RO

JE

CT

S\A

-G

\C

EN

TR

AL W

YO

. R

ES

CU

E M

IS

SIO

N\W

Y15272A

- C

EN

TR

AL W

YO

. R

ES

CU

RE

M

IS

SIO

N\G

EO

\D

RA

FT

IN

G\W

Y15272A

P

LA

TE

1.D

WG

- M

TA

YLO

R

605 North Warehouse Road

Casper, Wyoming 82601

PHONE: 307-234-2126 FAX: 307-266-5143

Central Wyoming Rescue Mission - 548 East "A" Street

Casper, Wyoming

LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS

N

SCALE IN FEET

(APPROXIMATE)

0

THIS PLAN COMPRISES A PORTION OF STRATA'S REPORT AND THE TEXT OF THE REPORT CONTAINS ESSENTIAL INFORMATION: BEFORE UTILIZING THIS PLAN FOR ANY PURPOSE WHATSOEVER, THE REPORT

SHOULD BE READ COMPLETELY. THIS PLAN IS INTENDED TO HELP VISUALIZE THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE REPORT. THESE LOCATIONS AND INFORMATION WERE ADDED TO EXISTING PLANS OF THE

SITE PREVIOUSLY PREPARED BY OTHERS AND NO CHECK OF ACCURACY, CURRENCY, APPROPRIATENESS, ETC., OF INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OTHERS WAS PERFORMED, SINCE SUCH CHECKS WERE NOT

PART OF STRATA'S SCOPE OF SERVICES.

3015

APPENDIX A

Exploratory Boring Logs

Sulfates=381 ppm245

7128

244

2550/3.0"

50/5.0"

9

20

8

100+

100+

93.4

90.4

84.4

75.0

FILL, poorly graded sand withgravel and clay, loose, brown,slightly moist.

(CH) FAT CLAY, stiff, brown,slightly moist.

(SP-SM) POORLY GRADEDSAND with silt and gravel,medium dense, brown, slightlymoist to wet.

CLAYSTONE BEDROCK,medium hard to very hard, darkgray, slightly moist.

Borehole Terminated at 20.4Feet.

Drill Rig: CME 55

Groundwater Depth: 10' Logged By: M. Medley

Remarks

Note: BGS =Below Ground Surface

Borehole Dia.: 4" HSA

Client: Central Wyoming Resuce Mission

Pocket Penetrometer, TSF 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5

Sheet 1 Of 1

Sam

ple

Typ

e

% Passing No. 200 Sieve

TEST RESULTS

SP

TB

low

s P

er6

Inch

es

20 40 60 80

PL LLMC

Sym

bol

Dep

th(f

t)

Project Number: WY15272A

Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

95.4

Project Name: Central Wyoming Resuce Mission - 548 East A St. - Casper, WY

Date Drilled: 9/21/2015

SP

T -

N

SPT, N-Value

B-1BORING LOG

Ele

vatio

n

USCS Description

Drilled By: Elite Drilling

ST

RA

TA

BO

RE

HO

LE -

ST

RA

TA

.GD

T -

10/

7/1

5 1

2:45

- V

:\ST

RA

TA

- C

AS

PE

R P

RO

JEC

TS

\A-G

\CE

NT

RA

L W

YO

. RE

SC

UE

MIS

SIO

N\W

Y15

272A

- C

EN

TR

AL

WY

O. R

ES

CU

RE

MIS

SIO

N\G

EO

\GIN

T L

OG

S\W

Y15

272A

LO

GS

.GP

J

24 53

00

24

3

0

5

10

15

20

50

50

09-21-15

CH

SP-SM

347

710

6810

4050/2.0"

104

11

17

18

100+

92.8

89.8

84.3

80.7

FILL, poorly graded sand withgravel and clay, medium dense,brown, slightly moist.

(CL) LEAN CLAY, very stiff,brown, slightly moist.

(SP) POORLY GRADED SAND,medium dense, brown, slightlymoist to wet.

Gravel lense at 11.5 feet.

CLAYSTONE BEDROCK, veryhard, dark gray, slightly moist.


Drill Rig: CME 55

Groundwater Depth: 11.5' Logged By: M. Medley

Remarks





Sheet 1 Of 1

Sam

ple

Typ

e


TEST RESULTS

SP

TB

low

s P

er6

Inch

es

20 40 60 80

PL LLMC

Sym

bol

Dep

th(f

t)


Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

96.3



SP

T -

N

SPT, N-Value

B-2BORING LOG

Ele

vatio

n

USCS Description


ST

RA

TA

BO

RE

HO

LE -

ST

RA

TA

.GD

T -

10/

7/1

5 1

2:45

- V

:\ST

RA

TA

- C

AS

PE

R P

RO

JEC

TS

\A-G

\CE

NT

RA

L W

YO

. RE

SC

UE

MIS

SIO

N\W

Y15

272A

- C

EN

TR

AL

WY

O. R

ES

CU

RE

MIS

SIO

N\G

EO

\GIN

T L

OG

S\W

Y15

272A

LO

GS

.GP

J

23 40

14

0

5

10

15 50

09-21-15

CL

SP

669

81313

468

3050/3.0"

50/6.0"

15

26

14

100+

100+

90.7

84.7

75.2

FILL, poorly graded sand withgravel and clay, loose, brown,slightly moist.

(GP-GM) POORLY GRADEDGRAVEL with silt and sand,medium dense, brown, slightlymoist to wet.

CLAYSTONE BEDROCK, hardto very hard, dark gray, slightlymoist.


Drill Rig: CME 55

Groundwater Depth: 10' Logged By: M. Medley

Remarks





Sheet 1 Of 1

Sam

ple

Typ

e


TEST RESULTS

SP

TB

low

s P

er6

Inch

es

20 40 60 80

PL LLMC

Sym

bol

Dep

th(f

t)


Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

95.7



SP

T -

N

SPT, N-Value

B-3BORING LOG

Ele

vatio

n

USCS Description


ST

RA

TA

BO

RE

HO

LE -

ST

RA

TA

.GD

T -

10/

7/1

5 1

2:45

- V

:\ST

RA

TA

- C

AS

PE

R P

RO

JEC

TS

\A-G

\CE

NT

RA

L W

YO

. RE

SC

UE

MIS

SIO

N\W

Y15

272A

- C

EN

TR

AL

WY

O. R

ES

CU

RE

MIS

SIO

N\G

EO

\GIN

T L

OG

S\W

Y15

272A

LO

GS

.GP

J

00

00

2

16

0

5

10

15

20

50

50

09-21-15

GP-GM

5914

131720

61012

173037

50/5.0"

23

37

22

67

100+

99.3

97.5

95.5

91.0

85.0

79.1

ASPHALTIC PAVEMENT, (2inches thick).

FILL, poorly graded sand, loose,brown, slightly moist.

FILL, sandy lean clay, stiff,brown, slightly moist.

(GP) POORLY GRADEDGRAVEL with sand, dense,brown, slightly moist to wet.

(SP) POORLY GRADED SANDwith gravel, medium dense,brown, slightly moist.

CLAYSTONE BEDROCK, hardto very hard, dark gray, slightlymoist.


Drill Rig: CME 55

Groundwater Depth: 14.5' Logged By: M. Medley

Remarks





Sheet 1 Of 1

Sam

ple

Typ

e


TEST RESULTS

SP

TB

low

s P

er6

Inch

es

20 40 60 80

PL LLMC

Sym

bol

Dep

th(f

t)


Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

99.5



SP

T -

N

SPT, N-Value

B-4BORING LOG

Ele

vatio

n

USCS Description


ST

RA

TA

BO

RE

HO

LE -

ST

RA

TA

.GD

T -

10/

7/1

5 1

2:45

- V

:\ST

RA

TA

- C

AS

PE

R P

RO

JEC

TS

\A-G

\CE

NT

RA

L W

YO

. RE

SC

UE

MIS

SIO

N\W

Y15

272A

- C

EN

TR

AL

WY

O. R

ES

CU

RE

MIS

SIO

N\G

EO

\GIN

T L

OG

S\W

Y15

272A

LO

GS

.GP

J

00

1

0

5

10

15

20 50

09-21-15

GP

SP

APPENDIX B

Laboratory Test Results

Project: Project Number WY15272AClient:

BoringDepth (feet)

In situMoisture, (%)

In situ DryDensity, (pcf)

LiquidLimit

PlasticityIndex

PassingNo. 200, (%)

Soluble Sulfates

(ppm)

B-1 2.5 24 53 29 94 381

5 3 NV NP 9

B-2 5 14 104 40 17 95

B-3 5 2 NV NP 6

10 16 NV NP 1

B-4 5 1 NV NP 4

Abbreviations:NV = No ValueNP = Non-plastic

Reviewed by:

Description and Remarks(U.S.C.S. Classification)

POORLY GRADED GRAVE with sand (GP)

POORLY GRADED SAND with silt and gravel (SP-SM)

LEAN CLAY (CL)

POORLY GRADED SAND with gravel (SP)

POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with silt and sand (GP-GM)

Index Laboratory Test Results Summary

FAT CLAY (CH)

Central Wyoming Rescue MissionCentral Wyoming Rescue Mission, 548 East A St., Casper, WY

Reviewed by:________________________

0.1110100SOIL GRAIN DIAMETER, millimeters

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PE

RC

EN

T P

AS

SIN

G

100

8581 81 80

77 76

65

45

21

129

5" 4" 3" 2" 1.5"

1" 3/4"

1/2"

3/8"

#4 #8 #10

#16

#20

#30

#40

#50

#60

#100

#200

Inches Screen Sizes

Cob

bles

Coarse Fine

Gravel Sand

FineCoarse

ATTERBERG LIMITSLiquid Limit: NVPlasticity Index: NP

Central Wyoming Rescue Mission - 548 East A St. - Casper, WYCentral Wyoming Rescue MissionWY15272AB-1 @ 5 feetPOORLY GRADED SAND with silt and gravel (SP-SM)10/2/2015BLC

Project:Client:Project Number:Sample Identification:Sample Classification:Date Tested:By:

GRADATION ANALYSISASTM D 422

Reviewed By: _______________________

Water added @ 1 ksf

0.1 1 100.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Load, ksf

3

2

1

0

-1

-2

-3

Ver

tical

Str

ain,

%

-1.6

-1.3

-0.3

0.9

-1.6

0.0

0.9

ATTERBERG LIMITSLiquid Limit 40Plasticity Index 17

Dry Unit Weight: 104 pcfMoisture Content: 14%

Central Wyoming Rescue Mission - 548 East A St. - Casper, WYCentral Wyoming Rescue MissionWY15272AB-2 @ 5 feetLEAN CLAY (CL)10/2/2015BLC


ONE-DIMENSIONAL, SWELL-SETTLEMENT TEST RESULTSASTM D 4546/2435

Method A/B

Reviewed by:________________________


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PE

RC

EN

T P

AS

SIN

G

100

84

65

58

43

33

24

17

128

6

5" 4" 3" 2" 1.5"

1" 3/4"

1/2"

3/8"

#4 #8 #10

#16

#20

#30

#40

#50

#60

#100

#200

Inches Screen Sizes

Cob

bles

Coarse Fine

Gravel Sand

FineCoarse


Central Wyoming Rescue Mission - 548 East A St. - Casper, WYCentral Wyoming Rescue MissionWY15272AB-3 @ 5 feetPOORLY GRADED GRAVEL with silt and sand (GP-GM)10/2/2015BLC



Reviewed by:________________________


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PE

RC

EN

T P

AS

SIN

G

10097

9592

85

73

58

36

11

2 1

5" 4" 3" 2" 1.5"

1" 3/4"

1/2"

3/8"

#4 #8 #10

#16

#20

#30

#40

#50

#60

#100

#200

Inches Screen Sizes

Cob

bles

Coarse Fine

Gravel Sand

FineCoarse


Central Wyoming Rescue Mission - 548 East A St. - Casper, WYCentral Wyoming Rescue MissionWY15272AB-3 @ 10 feetPOORLY GRADED SAND with gravel (SP)10/2/2015BLC



Reviewed by:________________________


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PE

RC

EN

T P

AS

SIN

G

100

94

81

67

62

50

41

34

23

11

64

5" 4" 3" 2" 1.5"

1" 3/4"

1/2"

3/8"

#4 #8 #10

#16

#20

#30

#40

#50

#60

#100

#200

Inches Screen Sizes

Cob

bles

Coarse Fine

Gravel Sand

FineCoarse


Central Wyoming Rescue Mission - 548 East A St. - Casper, WYCentral Wyoming Rescue MissionWY15272AB-4 @ 5 feetPOORLY GRADED GRAVEL with sand (GP)10/2/2015BLC



Documents

Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation · The attached report summarizes our field and laboratory test results and presents our geotechnical engineering opinions and recommendations