GEOTECHNICAL STUDY NOBLE STREET UPGRADE FAIRBANKS, …dot.alaska.gov/nreg/projects/61725/Geotechnical-Study... · 2016-10-24 · GEOTECHNICAL STUDY NOBLE STREET UPGRADE FAIRBANKS,

GEOTECHNICAL STUDY NOBLE STREET UPGRADE

FAIRBANKS, ALASKA

February 2012

Submitted To: PDC, Inc.

1028 Aurora Drive Fairbanks, Alaska 99709

By: Shannon & Wilson, Inc. 2355 Hill Road

Fairbanks, Alaska 99709-5326

31-1-02273-001

31-1-02273-001

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................1

2.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY STUDIES .............................................................................1 2.1 Field Exploration and Drilling Methods ....................................................................2 2.2 Geotechnical Laboratory Testing ...............................................................................2 2.3 Environmental Screening and Testing .......................................................................3

3.0 GEOLOGIC SETTING AND SITE CONDITIONS .............................................................3 3.1 Surface Conditions .....................................................................................................4 3.2 Subsurface Conditions ................................................................................................4

4.0 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .........................................................................5 4.1 Pavement Design ........................................................................................................6

4.1.1 Traffic Data ..................................................................................................6 4.1.2 Mechanistic Pavement Analysis ..................................................................7

4.2 ARP Pavement Section ..............................................................................................8 4.3 Minimum Mechanistic Pavement Section ..................................................................9 4.4 Site Preparation ........................................................................................................10 4.5 Rigid Pavements .......................................................................................................10 4.6 Frost Transitions .......................................................................................................10

5.0 LIMITATIONS ....................................................................................................................11

TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

31-1-02273-001

ii

FIGURES Figure No.

1 Site Plan and Approximate Boring Locations 2 Log of Boring 11-01 3 Log of Boring 11-02 4 Log of Boring 11-03 5 Log of Boring 11-04 6 Log of Boring 11-05 7 Log of Boring 11-06 8 Log of Boring 11-07 9 Log of Boring 11-08 10 Log of Boring 11-09 11 Log of Boring 11-10 12 Log of Boring 11-11 13 Log of Boring 11-12 14 Log of Boring 11-13 15 Log of Boring 11-14

APPENDICES Appendix

A Soil Classification and Grain Size Distribution B Analytical Test Results C Project Photos and Schematic of Noble Street with Boring Locations D Alaska Flexible Pavement Design Results E Important Information about your Geotechnical/Environmental Report

31-1-02273-001

1

GEOTECHNICAL STUDY NOBLE STREET UPGRADE

FAIRBANKS, ALASKA

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report presents the results of our geotechnical study for the proposed upgrade of Noble Street in Fairbanks, Alaska. The purpose of this study was to characterize subsurface conditions, identify potential geotechnical-design concerns, and provide geotechnical recommendations for pavement design.

We understand the City of Fairbanks is planning to reconstruct Noble Street from 1st Avenue to 12th Avenue, as part of road improvements in downtown Fairbanks. Our scope of services consisted of logging and sampling 14 exploratory borings, screening for potential hydrocarbon contamination and submitting select samples analytical testing, testing select soil samples for engineering properties, and preparing this report. Our services were performed in general accordance with our proposal dated September 6, 2011.

2.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY STUDIES

We drilled 14 exploratory borings, designated 11-01 through 11-14, on September 28 through October 1, 2011, to approximately 15 feet below the ground surface (bgs). We selected boring locations to provide coverage along each of the three lanes and attempted to target both distressed and non-distressed areas while avoiding aboveground and underground utilities. The purpose of the borings was to investigate the existing pavement section and subsurface soil conditions. Figure 1 shows approximate boring locations; boring logs are presented in Figures 2 through 15. The existing pavement conditions near each of the borings are described in the table below.

SHANNON & WILSON, INC.

31-1-02273-001

2

PAVEMENT CONDITIONS

Boring Existing Pavement Conditions Near Borings 11-01 Longitudinal crack in northbound traffic lane 11-02 No pavement distress observed 11-03 No pavement distress observed 11-04 Localized pavement settlement near curb in southbound lane 11-05 Localized settlement of curb and retaining wall along southbound lane 11-06 Shallow settlement along curb near southbound lane 11-07 No pavement distress observed 11-08 Area of alligator cracking 11-09 No pavement distress observed 11-10 Old sidewalk along southbound lane; newer sidewalk along northbound lane 11-11 1-inch-wide transverse crack, patch in northbound lane 11-12 Ponded water in localized pavement settlement near curb in northbound lane 11-13 Area of alligator cracking and ponded water in localized pavement settlement

in northbound lane 11-14 No pavement distress observed

2.1 Field Exploration and Drilling Methods

Drilling was accomplished using a CME-55, truck-mounted drill rig equipped with an 8-inch O.D. (outside diameter), hollow-stem auger operated by Homestead Drilling Co. (Homestead). Rinu Samuel, a geological engineer with our firm, observed and logged drilling operations. As the borings progressed, we generally obtained samples at 2.5-foot intervals using a split-spoon sampler driven into the soil at the base of the auger hole with a 300-pound cathead hammer falling 30 inches onto the drill rods. We used a 3-inch O.D. by 2½-inch I.D. (inside diameter) split-spoon sampler to collect soil samples. For each sample, the number of blows required to advance the sampler the final 12 inches of an 18-inch sample is termed the penetration resistance, a measure of the relative consistency of unfrozen fine-grained soils and relative density of unfrozen granular soils.

We visually classified soil samples recovered using these techniques in the field, sealed them in airtight containers, and returned them to our Fairbanks laboratory for testing.

2.2 Geotechnical Laboratory Testing

We reviewed the visual classification of selected samples, and prepared samples for testing in our laboratory. We conducted our laboratory testing in general accordance with ASTM International (ASTM) procedures; our testing program consisted of 74 moisture-content tests (ASTM D2216) and 28 mechanical gradation analyses (ASTM C136/C117). The resulting


31-1-02273-001

3

moisture contents are plotted on the boring logs in Figures 2-15; the soil grain-size distribution curves are presented in Appendix A.

2.3 Environmental Screening and Testing

In addition to geotechnical testing, we screened soils for volatile organic compounds using a photoionization detector (PID). We allowed the samples to warm to room temperature in our lab prior to screening the headspace in the sample bags. The PID was calibrated with a 100 ppm isobutylene gas standard. The screening results provide an indication of potential petroleum-hydrocarbon contamination. PID results ranged from >1 ppm to 7 ppm and are shown on the boring logs.

We collected six soil samples from split-spoons driven in the anticipated smear zone (between 10 feet and 14 feet bgs) of four exploratory borings (11-02, 11-08, 11-10, and 11-13) in general accordance with Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) regulations and guidance documents. We selected the four exploratory borings from which the analytical samples were taken based on their proximity to known contaminated sites.

The samples were labeled with the sample ID, date, and analysis requested, and placed in hard plastic coolers with adequate quantities of ice substitute to maintain sample temperatures between at 2 ºC and 6 ºC until the samples reached the laboratory. For each sample, two samples jars were filled, one as is for gasoline range organics (GRO) and diesel range organics (DRO) testing, and one field-preserved with methanol for volatile organic compounds (VOC) testing. We packed a “temperature blank” with the samples in each cooler. We maintained custody of the samples at all times prior to submitting them to SGS Environmental Services, Inc. (SGS).

DRO was detected in Sample S-4 of Boring 11-02 at a concentration of 22.0 mg/kg. The ADEC Method 2 Table B1 migration-to-groundwater cleanup level for DRO is 250 mg/kg. The remaining analyte concentrations were less than the limit of quantitation (LOQ) of the laboratory. According to the case narrative, Sample S-4 of Boring 11-02 was flagged as biased low (JL) for Toluene due to the analysis being performed outside of the hold time. We relied on SGS’s internal quality control review and did not perform an additional data quality analysis. A summary of analytical test results and the SGS laboratory report is included as Appendix B.

3.0 GEOLOGIC SETTING AND SITE CONDITIONS

Fairbanks is at the boundary between the Tanana Lowlands to the south and Yukon-Tanana Uplands to the north. The project site is in the lowlands between the Chena and Tanana Rivers. The lowlands consist of vegetated floodplains and low benches cut by the Tanana River, and


31-1-02273-001

4

sloughs and oxbow lakes representing former channels of the Tanana River or its tributaries. Soils in the lowlands typically consist of interbedded alluvial sands and gravels covered by silty overbank deposits. The thickness of the sediments overlying bedrock in the vicinity of the project is unknown, but has been estimated to be as great as 400 feet to 500 feet in the Fairbanks area. Former slough channels are commonly filled with organic silt and peat deposits. These deposits are laterally discontinuous and vary in thickness. The project site has not been glaciated.

Groundwater in the area fluctuates seasonally with the levels of the nearby Tanana and Chena Rivers. Highest groundwater levels typically occur in the late spring after breakup and late summer when the Tanana River is fed by rainfall and runoff from melting glaciers.

Fairbanks is in a discontinuous permafrost zone. Permafrost is defined as material that has been colder than 32 °F (0 °C) for at least two consecutive years. The presence of permafrost is widespread in the area, although its nature and occurrence varies. Permafrost ground-temperatures in the area are generally only a few tenths of a degree below freezing. Removal of trees and insulating ground cover generally leads to degradation of the permafrost.

Seasonal-frost depths can exceed 12 feet in areas kept clear of insulating snow cover, such as roads and parking areas. In natural, undisturbed vegetated areas with thick organic surface cover, seasonal-frost depths may be less than 2 feet.

3.1 Surface Conditions

Noble Street is paved with asphalt concrete. We observed pavement cracking, and shallow settlement areas, as well as some curb and sidewalk settlement. South of 8th Avenue, the pavement appears older; we observed increased and wider cracks in the pavement, scattered alligator cracking, increased pavement roughness, deteriorated sidewalks, and occasionally ponded water in shallow settlement areas. We also observed evidence of past maintenance activities such as asphalt patching and sidewalk repair.

3.2 Subsurface Conditions

The project site encompasses Noble Street from 1st Avenue to Gaffney Street; the exploratory borings were drilled in the asphalt-concrete (AC) paved street. The approximate locations of the borings are shown in Figure 1 and Appendix C.

We encountered approximately 2 inches of AC at the surface of each boring. Below the AC, the pavement section typically consisted of relatively clean sandy gravel fill to a depth of 2.5 feet to 3.5 feet bgs. We were unable to clearly differentiate between a base course and subbase course.


31-1-02273-001

5

Beneath the pavement section, we encountered sandy silts and silty sands grading into gravelly sands and sandy gravels. We did not encounter silty soils in Borings 11-01, 11-04, 11-05, 11-09, 11-12, and 11-13, where they were likely removed during previous construction activities such as utility installations. We encountered groundwater in all the borings, from approximately 12 feet to 15 feet bgs. The soils encountered in the borings were generally loose to medium-dense.

We did not encounter seasonal frost or permafrost in our borings.

Moisture contents of ranged from approximately 1.8 percent to 30.7 percent. The higher moisture contents are generally associated with silts and elevated organic contents in the samples.

4.0 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Our field investigations indicate subgrade conditions at the site generally consist of a 30-inch to 42-inch pavement section overlying a combination of silts, sands, and gravels. We did not observe a strong correlation between section thickness or subgrade conditions and surface distress.

In our opinion, the existing pavement section has performed well; the observed distress is typical of older pavements at the end of their design life and does not indicate the presence of unstable subgrade conditions which would require improvement or subexcavation. Therefore, during our pavement analyses, we maintained a total pavement section of 30 inches.

Based on Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (ADOT&PF) guidance, we designed pavement sections in accordance with the Alaska Flexible Design Manual, General Policy Statement 7 (GP-7). GP-7 states, for projects with annual average daily traffic (AADT) greater than 5,000 with curb and gutter, Alaska Renewable Pavement (ARP) should be used with a 30-year design life for fatigue failure and a 15-year analysis period for functional failure. ARP generally provides a thicker AC pavement separated into two layers, an upper wearing course and lower binder course. The two AC courses allow for the wearing course to be replaced using mill-and-fill techniques without exposing traffic to unpaved surfaces, prolonging the life of the complete pavement section. We included two ARP sections in our design, one with crushed-aggregate base and one with asphalt-stabilized base.

We understand the City of Fairbanks may wish to obtain an exception from GP-7; therefore, we have also included analyses of pavement sections using a single layer of AC surfacing for a range of design lives.


31-1-02273-001

6

Our analyses and recommendations are described in the following sections.

4.1 Pavement Design

We evaluated section requirements for Noble Street using the ADOT&PF Alaska Flexible Pavement Design (AKFPD) software Version 1.1.5 mechanistic analysis. We conducted the analyses using soil parameters developed from the characterization of subsurface conditions along the alignment, pavement material properties commonly used by the ADOT&PF, estimates of future traffic, and our experience.

4.1.1 Traffic Data

We obtained traffic data from an ADOT&PF memorandum which provided backup for the Design Designation of Noble Street as an urban collector. The memo includes Traffic Data Request (TDR) Forms, computations, summary data tables of Average Daily Traffic (ADT), and turning movement diagrams and data. The AADT data for four blocks was recorded in 2006: 1st Avenue to Wendell Avenue, 7th Avenue to 8th Avenue, 11th Avenue to 12th Avenue, and 12th Avenue to Gaffney Road. A maximum AADT of 11,150 was recorded between 1st Avenue and Wendell Avenue, selected for the basis of our traffic calculations (see table below). A historic annual growth rate of 1 percent per year has been calculated from data recorded at the Wendell Avenue Bridge Permanent Traffic Recorder (PTR) station. The computations show the percent of AADT for each of the two lanes is 40 percent and 60 percent. The computations also show 3 percent of the AADT consists of truck traffic, with 2 percent consisting of two-axle trucks with a load factor of 0.28 and 1 percent consisting of three-axle trucks with a load factor of 1.51.

2006 TRAFFIC FOR NOBLE STREET

Block AADT 1st Avenue to Wendell Avenue 11,1507th Avenue to 8th Avenue 7,28211th Avenue to 12th Avenue 10,41112th Avenue to Gaffney Road 10,514

Using this data in conjunction with the ADOT&PF ESAL_Calculator.xls excel workbook, we calculated the following total design equivalent single-axle loads (ESALs) for the given design life periods assuming a 2014 design construction year:


31-1-02273-001

7

ESTIMATED TRAFFIC LOADING

Design Life

Total Design Loading

(years) (ESALs) 10 572,61815 881,01520 1,205,14425 1,545,80730 1,903,847

For our analyses, we conservatively chose an ESAL tire pressure of 110 pounds per square inch (psi).

4.1.2 Mechanistic Pavement Analysis

In the mechanistic approach, the structural response is calculated in terms of elastic stress and strains within the layered pavement structure. Structural distress to flexible pavements caused by traffic loading normally consists of cracking of the asphalt concrete surface (flexural) and development of ruts in the subgrade (functional). The approach to mechanistic pavement design is to control both modes of distress by limiting the cumulative damage caused by horizontal strain repetitions at the base of the asphalt concrete and vertical strain repetitions at the top of the underlying unbound pavement layers. AKFPD uses ELSYM5 to calculate the stresses and strains in the layered system; the cyclic stresses and strains are then compared to load repetitions that will cause the pavement to fail.

We selected the following presumptive elastic material properties given in AKFPD for use in our analyses:

ASSUMED MATERIAL PROPERTIES

Resilient Modulus (ksi)/Poisson’s Ratio Course Material Spring Summer/Fall Winter

Surface Plant Mix Asphalt-Concrete Pavement 755/0.30 510/0.30 1,500/0.30 Base 3% to 4% Asphalt-Treated Base 200/0.35 200/0.35 200/0.35 Base Aggregate base, D-1 (P200 < 6%) 45/0.35 50/0.35 100/0.35 Subbase Selected Material Type A (P200 < 6%) 25/0.40 35/0.40 90/0.40 Subgrade Frost-susceptible In Situ and Fill Soils

(P200 < 30%) 50/0.45 10/0.45 10/0.45


31-1-02273-001

8

These values are based on the ADOT&PF’s experience with existing pavements and falling-weight deflectometer studies. Reduced moduli values were selected for the spring, when the pavement section is thawing and in a weakened condition.

The elasticity of the pavement structure and therefore, the damage resulting by a given number of loadings, varies with season. We assumed 10 percent, 50 percent, and 40 percent of the traffic load will be applied to each season: spring, summer/fall, and winter, respectively.

The load capacity of a layer is exceeded when the total damage calculated by AKFPD is greater than 100 percent. In order to provide a “factor of safety” it is standard practice to limit flexural damage to bound surface courses to less than 80 percent and functional damage to the underlying unbound layers to less than 90 percent.

We tabulated the results of our pavement analyses including the percent damage to each layer in Appendix D. Our recommended pavement sections are discussed below.

4.2 ARP Pavement Section

The results of our analysis indicate the minimum ARP surface and base course layers, using either granular or stabilized base, in a 30-inch section are structurally sufficient to support the design-traffic loads.

The pavement sections are designed for a 30-year design life based on at least one mill-and-fill replacement of the surface wearing course. Damage not accounted for in this analysis, such as thermal-cracking, wear, and weathering, may occur within the design-life of the pavement, requiring additional maintenance and repairs.

Our recommendations for ARP pavement sections are as follows:

ALASKA RENEWABLE PAVEMENT SECTION (GRANULAR BASE)

Course Minimum Thickness (in)

Material Recommendation

Surface (wearing) 2 Asphalt Concrete Pavement Surface (binder) 3 Asphalt Concrete Pavement

Base 4 Aggregate base course meeting all the requirements for ADOT&PF grading D-1, compacted to 98 percent of the maximum density with moisture control determined by AASHTO T 180.

Subbase 21 ADOT&PF Selected Material Type A with a maximum particle size of 3 inches, compacted to 95 percent of the maximum density with moisture control determined by AASHTO T 180.


31-1-02273-001

9

ALASKA RENEWABLE PAVEMENT SECTION (STABILIZED BASE)

Course Minimum Thickness (in)

Material Recommendation

Surface (wearing) 2 Asphalt Concrete Pavement Surface (binder) 2 Asphalt Concrete Pavement

Base 3 Asphalt Stabilized Base

Subbase 23 ADOT&PF Selected Material Type A with a maximum particle size of 3 inches, compacted to 95 percent of the maximum density with moisture control determined by AASHTO T 180.

4.3 Minimum Mechanistic Pavement Section

The results of our analysis indicate a 30-inch pavement section, composed of 3 inches to 4 inches of AC pavement, 6 inches of granular base, and 20 inches to 21 inches of granular subbase, is structurally sufficient to support the design-traffic loads.

The pavement sections are designed for a 10- to 30-year design life. Damage not accounted for in this analysis, such as thermal-cracking, wear, and weathering, may occur within the design-life of the pavement, requiring additional maintenance and repairs.

Our recommendations for minimum mechanistic pavement sections are as follows:

MINIMUM MECHANISTIC PAVEMENT SECTION

Course

Design Life

(years)

Minimum Thickness

(in) Material Recommendation

Surface 10-15 3

Asphalt Concrete Pavement 20-25 3.5 30 4

Base 10-30 6 Aggregate base course meeting all the requirements for ADOT&PF grading D-1, compacted to compacted to 98 percent of the maximum density with moisture control determined by AASHTO T 180.

Subbase 10-30 20-21* ADOT&PF Selected Material Type A with a maximum particle size of 3 inches, compacted to 95 percent of the maximum density with moisture control determined by AASHTO T 180.

*Adjust to maintain a 30-inch pavement section.


31-1-02273-001

10

4.4 Site Preparation

Site preparation should consist of removing the existing AC pavement and excavating to a depth of 18 inches below final grade. If excavated material meets the requirements of ADOT&PF Selected Material Type A, it may be reused in the pavement section.

The base of the excavation should be observed by an engineer from our firm to determine if suitable soils are present, or if additional localized over-excavation is required. We recommend the removal of any frost-susceptible soils encountered to a depth of 30 inches. Although we did not encounter soft, wet, highly organic soils, wood, or peat in our explorations, if they are encountered during excavation they should be removed. If frozen ground is present at the base of the excavation, the frozen material should be excavated and replaced with thawed compacted fill, or allowed to thaw to a minimum depth of 2 feet below the base of the excavation.

Once undesirable soils are removed, the base of the excavation should be moisture-conditioned and compacted with a minimum of eight passes of a heavy, self-propelled vibratory compactor prior to the first lift of subbase fill.

4.5 Rigid Pavements

We understand the City of Fairbanks may elect to pave one or more intersections using a Portland cement concrete (PCC) pavement. The presence and depth to frost-susceptible soils varies along the alignment creating the potential for differential frost heaving, which could damage PCC pavements. The effects of differential frost heave may be reduced by utilizing a pavement design which limits frost penetration into frost-susceptible subgrade soils. If the thickness of the rigid pavement section differs from the adjacent flexible pavement frost transitions should be used between the pavement sections. Even with frost transitions, additional maintenance may be required to preserve a smooth transition between rigid and flexible pavements due to differences in wear and thermal expansion/contraction.

4.6 Frost Transitions

Typically we recommend frost transitions under pavements to spread out differential ground displacements due to frost heaving and differences in frost susceptibility between NFS fills and frost susceptible subgrade soils.

We understand Noble Street is underlain by several utilities, including district heat, sanitary sewer, potable water, and storm sewer. Construction of the utilites has likely resulted in the excavation and replacement or blending of the majority of the subgrade soils within 2.5 feet to 4


31-1-02273-001

11

feet of the surface with granular fills, reducing the potential benefits of constructing frost transitions in conjunction with new utility work. We did not observe and are not aware of significant frost heave related issues with as currently constructed; therefore we do not recommend site-wide use of frost transitions for this project.

Where frost transitions are warranted to improve pavement performance, such as areas with abrupt changes in the frost suseptability of the subgrade, they should be provided by sloping the interface between NFS fills and adjacent frost-susceptible subgrade soils no steeper than 5H:1V. Frost transitions should start at the base of the NFS fill or a maximum depth of 4 feet bgs.

5.0 LIMITATIONS

Subsurface explorations and testing will identify subsurface conditions only at those points where samples are taken, and at the time they are taken. Actual conditions at other locations of the project site, including those inferred to exist between the sample points, may differ significantly from conditions existing at the sampling locations. The passage of time or intervening causes may change the actual conditions at the sampling locations as well.

Interpretations and recommendations made by Shannon & Wilson are based solely upon information available to Shannon & Wilson at the time the interpretations and recommendations are made.

All documents prepared by Shannon & Wilson are instruments of service with respect to the project for the sole use of the design-construct team. Only our team shall have the right to rely upon such documents. Such documents are not intended or represented to be suitable for reuse. Any such reuse without written verification or adaptation by Shannon & Wilson, as appropriate for the specific purpose intended, shall be at the user’s sole risk.

Copies of documents that may be relied upon by the design-construct team are limited to the printed copies (also known as hard copies) signed or sealed by Shannon & Wilson. Text, data, or graphics files in electronic media format are furnished solely for the Client’s convenience. Any conclusion or information obtained or derived from such electronic files shall be at the user’s sole risk. If there is a discrepancy between the electronic files and the hard copies, the hard copies govern.

Shannon & Wilson, Inc., has prepared the attachment Important Information About Your Geotechnical/Environmental Report in Appendix E to assist you and others in understanding the uses and limitations of our reports.

Asphalt Concrete.

Gray-brown, sandy GRAVEL, trace silt; moist;(Fill).

Medium-dense to dense, brown, trace toslightly silty, gravelly SAND; moist.

Medium-dense, dark brown, slightly silty,sandy GRAVEL; moist.

Medium-dense, brown, gravelly SAND, tracesilt; moist.

Medium-dense, brown, slightly gravelly, siltySAND; moist.

Medium-dense, black to brown, sandyGRAVEL, trace silt; moist; scattered asphaltconcrete chunks.

Medium-dense, brown-gray, slightly gravelly,medium to coarse SAND, trace silt; moist.- 10.5 feet to 11.3 feet: occasional organics.

Medium-dense to dense, brown-gray, sandyGRAVEL, trace silt; moist to wet below 14feet.

G-1

S-1

S-2

S-3A

S-3B

S-4

S-5

S-6

Bottom of Boring

Boring Completed 9/28/2011

1.6

1.2

1.1

1.4

1.4

2.3

0.2

3.0

5.5

5.8

7.0

8.6

10.5

13.0

16.5

*

Geotechnical StudyNoble Street Upgrade

Fairbanks, Alaska

2. The discussion in the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding ofthe nature of subsurface materials.


1. The stratification lines represent the approximate boundaries between soil types,and the transition may be gradual.

31-1-02273-0012011

Penetration Resistance(300 lb. weight, 30" drop)

Blows per foot Water Content (%)

Sample Not Recovered

LEGEND Water Content (%)

Plastic Limit

DE

PT

H, f

t

30

3. Water level, if indicated above, is for the date specified and may vary.

LOG OF BORING 11-01

40

10 20 30 40

SA

MP

LE

S

GR

OU

ND

WA

TE

R

Natural Water ContentLiquid Limit

Approximate Elevation: 447 ft

Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants

5

10

15

20

25

30

Ground Water Level At Time Of Drilling

50

SY

MB

OL

0

5010 20

3" O.D. Split Spoon Sample

0

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Figure 2

PID

(p

pm

)

DE

PT

H, f

t

NOTES

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L LO

G N

OB

LE S

T.

BO

RE

HO

LE L

OG

S.G

PJ

SW

NE

W5.

GD

T

12/0

2/1

1

Asphalt Concrete.

Gray-brown, sandy GRAVEL, trace silt; moist;(Fill).

Medium-dense, brown, silty SAND; moist.

Loose, dark brown, SILT, trace fine sand;moist.

Loose, brown, trace to slightly silty, SAND,moist. - 6 feet to 6.5 feet: some iron staining.

Very loose, brown, silty fine SAND; moist.

Loose, light brown, SAND, trace silt; moist.

Loose, brown, slightly silty to silty, fine SAND,trace gravel; moist to wet below 13.5 feet.

Very loose, gray-brown, sandy GRAVEL, tracesilt; wet.

G-1

S-1A

S-1B

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6A

S-6B

Bottom of Boring


2

2.4

2

3.5

3.7

1.2

1.9

2.5

0.2

3.5

4.5

6.0

8.2

9.5

11.3

16.0

16.5

*


Fairbanks, Alaska




31-1-02273-0012011





Plastic Limit

DE

PT

H, f

t

30


LOG OF BORING 11-02

40

10 20 30 40

SA

MP

LE

S

GR

OU

ND

WA

TE

R




5

10

15

20

25

30


50

SY

MB

OL

0

5010 20


0


Figure 3

PID

(p

pm

)

DE

PT

H, f

t

NOTES

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L LO

G N

OB

LE S

T.

BO

RE

HO

LE L

OG

S.G

PJ

SW

NE

W5.

GD

T

12/0

2/1

1

Asphalt Concrete.

Gray-brown, sandy GRAVEL, trace silt; moist.

Loose to medium-dense, brown, sandy SILT;moist.

Loose, gray-brown, medium SAND, tracegravel; moist.

Loose, brown, silty SAND, trace gravel; moist.

Loose, gray-brown to gray, medium SAND,trace silt and gravel; moist.

Medium-dense, gray, trace to slightly gravelly,SAND, trace silt; moist.

Medium-dense, gray, slightly cobbly, sandyGRAVEL, trace silt; wet.

G-1

S-1

S-2

S-3A

S-3B

S-4

S-5

S-6

Bottom of Boring


2.8

3

3

1.2

3

1.9

2.3

0.2

3.2

7.7

8.0

8.5

12.0

13.0

16.5

*


Fairbanks, Alaska




31-1-02273-0012011





Plastic Limit

DE

PT

H, f

t

30


LOG OF BORING 11-03

40

10 20 30 40

SA

MP

LE

S

GR

OU

ND

WA

TE

R




5

10

15

20

25

30


50

SY

MB

OL

0

5010 20


0


Figure 4

PID

(p

pm

)

DE

PT

H, f

t

NOTES

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L LO

G N

OB

LE S

T.

BO

RE

HO

LE L

OG

S.G

PJ

SW

NE

W5.

GD

T

12/0

2/1

1

Asphalt Concrete.

Gray-brown, sandy GRAVEL, trace silt; moist.

Medium-dense, brown, silty fine SAND; moist.

Loose, gray-brown, medium SAND, trace silt;moist.

Medium-dense, brown, slightly silty, sandyGRAVEL; moist.

Loose to medium-dense, gray-brown, mediumSAND, trace silt; moist.

Medium-dense, brown to gray-brown, trace toslightly silty, sandy GRAVEL; moist to wetbelow 12 feet.

G-1

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

Bottom of Boring


2.7

2.3

>1

1.6

1

1.4

0.2

3.0

5.0

7.0

8.2

11.5

16.5

*


Fairbanks, Alaska




31-1-02273-0012011





Plastic Limit

DE

PT

H, f

t

30


LOG OF BORING 11-04

40

10 20 30 40

SA

MP

LE

S

GR

OU

ND

WA

TE

R




5

10

15

20

25

30


50

SY

MB

OL

0

5010 20


0


Figure 5

PID

(p

pm

)

DE

PT

H, f

t

NOTES

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L LO

G N

OB

LE S

T.

BO

RE

HO

LE L

OG

S.G

PJ

SW

NE

W5.

GD

T

12/0

2/1

1

Asphalt Concrete.

Gray, sandy GRAVEL, trace silt; moist; (Fill).

Medium-dense, brown to gray, trace to slightlysilty, fine to medium SAND; moist.- 5.5 to 6.5 feet: trace gravel.

Medium-dense to dense, gray toorange-brown to brown, trace to slightly silty,sandy GRAVEL; moist to wet below 12 feet.

G-1

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

Bottom of Boring


1.1

1.1

>1

1.5

2.1

1.8

0.2

2.5

6.5

16.5

*


Fairbanks, Alaska




31-1-02273-0012011





Plastic Limit

DE

PT

H, f

t

30


LOG OF BORING 11-05

40

10 20 30 40

SA

MP

LE

S

GR

OU

ND

WA

TE

R




5

10

15

20

25

30


50

SY

MB

OL

0

5010 20


0


Figure 6

PID

(p

pm

)

DE

PT

H, f

t

NOTES

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L LO

G N

OB

LE S

T.

BO

RE

HO

LE L

OG

S.G

PJ

SW

NE

W5.

GD

T

12/0

2/1

1

53

Asphalt Concrete.

Gray, sandy GRAVEL, trace silt; moist.

Medium-dense to dense, brown to dark brown,sandy SILT; moist.

Loose to medium-dense, gray to brown, fine tomedium SAND, trace silt and gravel; moist towet below 13.5 feet.

Medium-dense, gray, sandy GRAVEL, tracesilt; wet.

G-1

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6A

S-6B

Bottom of Boring


2

>1

>1

1.3

1.2

1.2

2

0.2

3.0

10.5

15.7

16.5

*


Fairbanks, Alaska




31-1-02273-0012011





Plastic Limit

DE

PT

H, f

t

30


LOG OF BORING 11-06

40

10 20 30 40

SA

MP

LE

S

GR

OU

ND

WA

TE

R




5

10

15

20

25

30


50

SY

MB

OL

0

5010 20


0


Figure 7

PID

(p

pm

)

DE

PT

H, f

t

NOTES

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L LO

G N

OB

LE S

T.

BO

RE

HO

LE L

OG

S.G

PJ

SW

NE

W5.

GD

T

12/0

2/1

1

Asphalt Concrete.


Medium-dense, brown, SILT, trace sand;moist.

Medium-dense, gray, medium SAND; moist.

Medium-dense to dense, gray to gray-brown,sandy GRAVEL, trace silt; moist.

Medium-dense, gray to brown, silty fineSAND; moist to wet below 14.5 feet.

G-1

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

Bottom of Boring


2.5

2.3

1.6

2.7

2.1

1.3

0.2

3.0

8.0

8.3

13.3

16.5

*


Fairbanks, Alaska




31-1-02273-0012011





Plastic Limit

DE

PT

H, f

t

30


LOG OF BORING 11-07

40

10 20 30 40

SA

MP

LE

S

GR

OU

ND

WA

TE

R




5

10

15

20

25

30


50

SY

MB

OL

0

5010 20


0


Figure 8

PID

(p

pm

)

DE

PT

H, f

t

NOTES

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L LO

G N

OB

LE S

T.

BO

RE

HO

LE L

OG

S.G

PJ

SW

NE

W5.

GD

T

12/0

2/1

1

Asphalt Concrete.

Brown, sandy GRAVEL, trace silt; moist.

Medium-dense, brown, sandy SILT; moist.

Medium-dense, gray-brown, fine to mediumSAND; moist.

Loose to medium-dense, gray-brown to brown,silty fine SAND; moist. - 8.4 feet to 13.3 feet: trace gravel.

Loose to medium-dense, gray-brown, trace toslightly silty, sandy GRAVEL; moist to wetbelow 13.8 feet.-15.5 feet to 16 feet: Black, organics, roots,wood, etc.

G-1

S-1

S-2A

S-2B

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6A

S-6B

Bottom of Boring


3

1.9

1.6

3.6

1.5

>1

1

0.2

3.0

5.8

7.0

13.3

16.5

*


Fairbanks, Alaska




31-1-02273-0012011





Plastic Limit

DE

PT

H, f

t

30


LOG OF BORING 11-08

40

10 20 30 40

SA

MP

LE

S

GR

OU

ND

WA

TE

R




5

10

15

20

25

30


50

SY

MB

OL

0

5010 20


0


Figure 9

PID

(p

pm

)

DE

PT

H, f

t

NOTES

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L LO

G N

OB

LE S

T.

BO

RE

HO

LE L

OG

S.G

PJ

SW

NE

W5.

GD

T

12/0

2/1

1

Asphalt Concrete.

Gray-brown, trace to slightly silty, sandyGRAVEL; moist.

Medium-dense, gray-brown, trace to slightlysilty, fine SAND; moist.

Medium-dense, brown, trace to slightly silty,sandy GRAVEL; moist.

Medium-dense, brown, fine SAND, trace silt;moist.

Loose to medium-dense, brown to gray,gravelly SAND, trace silt; moist.

Medium-dense, brown to gray, mediumSAND, trace silt; moist.

Medium-dense, brown-gray, trace to slightlysilty, sandy GRAVEL; moist to wet below 15feet.

Medium-dense, gray, slightly gravelly, mediumto coarse-grained SAND, trace silt; wet.

G-1

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

Bottom of Boring


2

2.4

2.3

2.5

1.6

2.4

0.2

3.5

4.5

6.2

7.0

12.0

13.0

15.5

16.5

*


Fairbanks, Alaska




31-1-02273-0012011





Plastic Limit

DE

PT

H, f

t

30


LOG OF BORING 11-09

40

10 20 30 40

SA

MP

LE

S

GR

OU

ND

WA

TE

R




5

10

15

20

25

30


50

SY

MB

OL

0

5010 20


0


Figure 10

PID

(p

pm

)

DE

PT

H, f

t

NOTES

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L LO

G N

OB

LE S

T.

BO

RE

HO

LE L

OG

S.G

PJ

SW

NE

W5.

GD

T

12/0

2/1

1

Asphalt Concrete.

Gray, trace to slightly silty, sandy GRAVEL;moist.

Medium-dense, gray to orange-brown, trace toslightly silty, fine SAND; moist.

Loose, gray, sandy GRAVEL, trace silt; moist.

Loose, brown, sandy SILT; moist.

Loose, gray-brown, medium SAND, trace silt;moist to wet below 14.5 feet.

G-1

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

Bottom of Boring


1.2

1.3

2

2.1

1.3

1.7

0.2

3.0

4.5

5.5

7.0

16.5

*


Fairbanks, Alaska




31-1-02273-0012011





Plastic Limit

DE

PT

H, f

t

30


LOG OF BORING 11-10

40

10 20 30 40

SA

MP

LE

S

GR

OU

ND

WA

TE

R




5

10

15

20

25

30


50

SY

MB

OL

0

5010 20


0


Figure 11

PID

(p

pm

)

DE

PT

H, f

t

NOTES

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L LO

G N

OB

LE S

T.

BO

RE

HO

LE L

OG

S.G

PJ

SW

NE

W5.

GD

T

12/0

2/1

1

Asphalt Concrete.

Brown, sandy GRAVEL, trace silt; moist.

Loose to medium-dense, brown, fine sandySILT; moist.

Medium-dense, brown, trace to slightly silty,fine SAND; moist.

Loose, gray-brown to brown, medium SAND,trace silt; moist.

Loose, brown, silty fine SAND; moist.

Loose, gray-brown, medium SAND, trace silt;moist.

Loose to medium-dense, brown-gray toorange-brown, sandy GRAVEL, trace silt;moist to wet below 14.5 feet.

G-1

S-1

S-2

S-3A

S-3B

S-4B

S-4A

S-4B

S-5

S-6

Bottom of Boring


3.3

3.5

3

2.8

2

2.4

2

2.1

3.9

0.2

2.5

7.0

8.5

10.5

11.0

12.0

16.5

*


Fairbanks, Alaska




31-1-02273-0012011





Plastic Limit

DE

PT

H, f

t

30


LOG OF BORING 11-11

40

10 20 30 40

SA

MP

LE

S

GR

OU

ND

WA

TE

R




5

10

15

20

25

30


50

SY

MB

OL

0

5010 20


0


Figure 12

PID

(p

pm

)

DE

PT

H, f

t

NOTES

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L LO

G N

OB

LE S

T.

BO

RE

HO

LE L

OG

S.G

PJ

SW

NE

W5.

GD

T

12/0

2/1

1

Asphalt Concrete.

Loose to dense, gray, slightly silty, gravellySAND; moist.

Loose, gray, medium SAND, trace silt; moist.

Medium-dense, gray, sandy GRAVEL, tracesilt; moist to wet below 12.5 feet.

G-1

S-1

S-2A

S-2B

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

Bottom of Boring


2.2

3.1

2

1.2

2

2.8

0.2

6.0

7.0

16.5

*


Fairbanks, Alaska




31-1-02273-0012011





Plastic Limit

DE

PT

H, f

t

30


LOG OF BORING 11-12

40

10 20 30 40

SA

MP

LE

S

GR

OU

ND

WA

TE

R




5

10

15

20

25

30


50

SY

MB

OL

0

5010 20


0


Figure 13

PID

(p

pm

)

DE

PT

H, f

t

NOTES

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L LO

G N

OB

LE S

T.

BO

RE

HO

LE L

OG

S.G

PJ

SW

NE

W5.

GD

T

12/0

2/1

1

40-50/2"

Asphalt Concrete.


Medium-dense to dense, brown to gray, traceto slightly silty, fine to medium SAND; moist.

Loose, gray, gravelly SAND, trace silt; moist;scattered organics.

Dense, gray, medium SAND, trace silt; moist.

Medium-dense, gray, sandy GRAVEL, tracesilt; wet.

G-1

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4A

S-4B

S-5

S-6

Bottom of Boring


4

4.8

6.4

6

4

4.5

5

0.1

2.5

10.7

12.0

13.0

16.5

*


Fairbanks, Alaska




31-1-02273-0012011





Plastic Limit

DE

PT

H, f

t

30


LOG OF BORING 11-13

40

10 20 30 40

SA

MP

LE

S

GR

OU

ND

WA

TE

R




5

10

15

20

25

30


50

SY

MB

OL

0

5010 20


0


Figure 14

PID

(p

pm

)

DE

PT

H, f

t

NOTES

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L LO

G N

OB

LE S

T.

BO

RE

HO

LE L

OG

S.G

PJ

SW

NE

W5.

GD

T

12/0

2/1

1

Asphalt Concrete.

Brown to gray-brown, trace to slightly silty,sandy GRAVEL; moist.

Medium-dense, brown, fine sandy SILT; moist. - 3.3 feet to 4.5 feet: trace gravel, occasionaliron staining.

Medium-dense, brown, SAND, trace silt;moist.

Loose, gray to brown, trace to sandy, SILT;moist.

Medium-dense, gray-brown, medium SAND;moist.

Medium-dense to dense, gray-brown to gray,sandy GRAVEL, trace silt; moist to wet below14.5 feet. - 12.5 to 14 feet: cobbly.

G-1

S-1

S-2

S-3A

S-3B

S-4A

S-4B

S-5

S-6

Bottom of Boring


5.5

4.4

5.1

6.3

6.5

5.1

6.8

0.2

3.3

7.0

8.3

10.5

11.0

16.5

*


Fairbanks, Alaska




31-1-02273-0012011





Plastic Limit

DE

PT

H, f

t

30


LOG OF BORING 11-14

40

10 20 30 40

SA

MP

LE

S

GR

OU

ND

WA

TE

R




5

10

15

20

25

30


50

SY

MB

OL

0

5010 20


0


Figure 15

PID

(p

pm

)

DE

PT

H, f

t

NOTES

GE

OT

EC

HN

ICA

L LO

G N

OB

LE S

T.

BO

RE

HO

LE L

OG

S.G

PJ

SW

NE

W5.

GD

T

12/0

2/1

1

31-1-02273-001

APPENDIX A

SOIL CLASSIFICATION & GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION


Soil and Rock Classification 1 31-1-02273-001 Noble Street Upgrade Fairbanks, Alaska

Soil and Rock Classification Soil samples were classified in accordance with Shannon & Wilson’s soil classification system. This system is generally based on the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) presented in ASTM D 2487 Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System). The soil classification system provides for the identification of the following characteristics in the order that they are listed. a) Relative density or consistency – The relative consistency or density of the material is estimated based on the

penetration resistance of unfrozen soil. The relative consistency is used to describe fine-grained cohesive soils (such as clay) and the relative density is used to define coarse-grained granular soils (such as sand). The penetration resistance is calculated by summing the blows required to drive the split-spoon sampler the final 12 inches of an 18-inch sample run. The penetration resistance is not valid in frozen soils. Relative density or consistency is determined according to the following table.

Penetration Resistance

(blows per foot) Relative Consistency Penetration Resistance

(blows per foot) Relative Density

< 2 Very Soft 0 – 4 Very Loose 2 – 4 Soft 4 – 10 Loose 4 – 8 Medium Stiff 10 – 30 Medium Dense

8 – 15 Stiff 30 – 50 Dense 15 – 30 Very Stiff > 50 Very Dense

> 30 Hard

b) Color – Color descriptions are generally kept as simple as practical, using basic soil colors such as brown, gray, and tan. Color is generally used to distinguish soil layers or indicate the degree of weathering within a single soil layer.

c) Minor Constituents, Major Constituents, and Trace Constituents – In the field, visual-manual procedures are

used to classify the soil type. The constituents are generally limited to (in decreasing size) boulders, cobbles, gravel, sand, silt, and clay. Minor constituents are soil types that comprise a significant portion of the sample (more than 5 percent), but are not the largest component of the sample. Minor constituents that comprise between 5 and 12 percent of the sample are identified as “slightly.”

The major constituent is the one that comprises the largest fraction of the soil mass. The major constituent will generally appear in the form of all capital letters, such as SILT. Trace constituents are soil types that are observed in the soil sample but comprise a limited portion of the sample. The presence of these soil types may or may not influence the behavior of the soil. Organics may also be considered as constituents in the soil description. The following terms are used to describe the organic content.

Descriptor Percent by Volume Occasional 0 – 1 Scattered 1 – 10 Numerous 10 – 30 Organic Minor constituent PEAT Major constituent



Moisture content – The relative moisture content (dry, slightly moist, moist, or wet) is given to the sample based on observations of the sample. This is a qualitative description that assists the engineer in identifying how the sample may behave at that particular moisture content. d) Other – following the relative moisture content, the geologist or engineer may also include additional

observations that will describe the characteristics or behavior of the soil. These terms include structure, plasticity, gradation, grain shape, cementation, description of organics, or dilatancy. Some of these descriptions are presented in the following tables.

Structure Descriptor Criteria, Thickness Parting 0 – 1/16 inch Seam 1/16 – ½ inch Layer > ½ inch Lamination < ¼ inch Pocket Irregular, < 1 foot Varved Alternating seams or laminations Occasional < 1 per foot Frequent >= 1 per foot Stratified Alternating layers Interbedded Alternating layers > ½ inch thick Laminated Alternating layers < ¼ inch thick Fractured Breaks easily along definite fractured planes Slickensided Polished, glossy, striated fractured planes Blocky, Diced Easily breaks into small angular lumps Homogeneous Same color and appearance throughout Sheared Disturbed texture, mix of strengths

Plasticity Descriptor Criteria, Thickness Nonplastic A 1/8-inch thread cannot be rolled at any water content

Low The thread can be rolled and the lump cannot be formed when drier than the plastic limit

Medium The thread is easy to roll and not much time is required to reach the plastic limit. The thread cannot be rerolled after reaching the plastic

limit. The lump crumbles when drier than the plastic limit. High It takes considerable time rolling and kneading to reach the plastic

limit. The thread can be rerolled several times after reaching the plastic limit. The lump can be formed without crumbling when drier

than the plastic limit.



Shannon & Wilson’s frozen soil classification is based on the descriptions developed by Linell and Kaplar (1966). The frozen soil descriptions are primarily based on visual observations regarding the presence, orientation, and form of ice. A summary of the Linnel and Kaplar classification is presented on the following page.

Description Designation Segregated ice is not visible by eye

Friable, poorly bonded Material is easily broken up

Nf

Well bonded – Soil particles strongly held together by ice

No excess ice Nbn Excess ice Nbe

Segregated ice is visible by eye (less than 1-inch thick)

Individual ice crystals or inclusions Vx Ice coatings on soil particles Vc Stratified or distinctly oriented ice formations Vs Randomly or irregularly oriented ice formations Vr

Ice greater than 1-inch thick

Ice with soil inclusions ICE + soil type Ice without soil inclusions ICE

(Based on Linell, K.A. and C.W. Kaplar, 1966, Description and Classification of Frozen Soils, U.S. Army Cold Regions Research Engineering Laboratory, Technical Report 150, Hanover, N.H.)

In addition to describing the presence, orientation and form of ice, our soil classification may also include a visual volumetric estimation of ice content and a description of the size and orientation of individual ice features.

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t

Grain Size in Millimeters

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION

Sample

U.S. Standard Sieve Size

Unified Soil Classification*Sieve Size

Percent Passing by

Weight

Poorly-graded gravel with sand (GP) 4"

3"

2.5"

2"

1.5" 1001" 90

Grain Size 3/4" 77Parameter (mm)** 1/2" 55

D10 0.28 3/8" 42D16 0.73 #4 25

D30 5.88 #10 19D50 11.28 #20 17D60 13.84 #40 14D84 22.01 #60 9

** nv - no value (insufficient data) #100 4Cu = 48.9 #200 2.0Cc = 8.8 0.02mm

* Unified soil classification in general accordance with ASTM D2487

**-4 material was washed /sample was oven dried 31-1-02273-001

Figure A1

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study


Boring 11-01, Sample G1

Noble Street Upgrade

Grain Size in Millimeters Sample

Figure A1

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight


3"

2.5"

2"

1.5" 1001" 98


D10 0.18 3/8" 69D16 0.26 #4 50

D30 0.42 #10 37D50 4.75 #20 34D60 6.79 #40 30D84 13.60 #60 15




Figure A2

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study


Boring 11-01, Sample S-6



Figure A2

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight

Silt (ML) 4"

3"

2.5"

2"

1.5"

1"


D10 nv 3/8" 98D16 nv #4 97

D30 nv #10 96D50 nv #20 96D60 nv #40 96D84 #NUM! #60 95

** nv - no value (insufficient data) #100 93Cu = nv #200 89.3Cc = nv 0.02mm



Figure A3

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A3

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight

Silty sand (SM) 4"

3"

2.5"

2"

1.5"

1"


D10 nv 3/8" 99D16 nv #4 98

D30 0.08 #10 98D50 0.11 #20 98D60 0.12 #40 98D84 0.18 #60 96




Figure A4

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A4

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight

Silt with sand (ML) 4"

3"

2.5"

2"

1.5"

1"

Grain Size 3/4"

Parameter (mm)** 1/2"

D10 nv 3/8" 100D16 nv #4 100

D30 nv #10 100D50 nv #20 99D60 nv #40 99D84 0.09 #60 99




Figure A5

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A5

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight


3"

2.5"

2"

1.5" 1001" 97


D10 0.17 3/8" 67D16 0.25 #4 50

D30 0.39 #10 41D50 4.76 #20 37D60 7.10 #40 33D84 15.10 #60 16




Figure A6

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A6

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight

Poorly-graded sand with silt (SP-SM) 4"

3"

2.5"

2"

1.5"

1"


D10 0.08 3/8" 97D16 0.10 #4 95

D30 0.15 #10 93D50 0.21 #20 91D60 0.24 #40 88D84 0.39 #60 63




Figure A7

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A7

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight


3"

2.5"

2"

1.5"

1"


D10 nv 3/8" 100D16 nv #4 99

D30 nv #10 99D50 nv #20 99D60 nv #40 99D84 0.09 #60 98




Figure A8

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A8

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight


3"

2.5"

2"

1.5"

1"

Grain Size 3/4"


D10 nv 3/8"

D16 nv #4 100 D30 nv #10 100

D50 nv #20 100D60 nv #40 100D84 0.08 #60 99




Figure A9

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A9

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight

Silt (ML) 4"

3"

2.5"

2"

1.5"

1"

Grain Size 3/4"


D10 nv 3/8" 100D16 nv #4 100

D30 nv #10 100D50 nv #20 100D60 nv #40 100D84 #NUM! #60 99




Figure A10

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A10

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight

Silty sand (SM) 4"

3"

2.5"

2"

1.5"

1"

Grain Size 3/4"


D10 nv 3/8" 100D16 nv #4 100

D30 0.08 #10 100D50 0.11 #20 100D60 0.12 #40 99D84 0.18 #60 98




Figure A11

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A11

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight

Well-graded gravel with sand (GW) 4"

3"

2.5"

2" 1001.5" 99

1" 94Grain Size 3/4" 85

Parameter (mm)** 1/2" 71D10 0.20 3/8" 63D16 0.31 #4 42

D30 2.01 #10 30D50 6.14 #20 24D60 8.55 #40 20D84 18.31 #60 13




Figure A12

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A12

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight


3"

2.5"

2"

1.5"

1"

Grain Size 3/4"


D10 nv 3/8"

D16 nv #4 100 D30 nv #10 100

D50 nv #20 100D60 nv #40 99D84 0.10 #60 97




Figure A13

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A13

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight

Silty sand (SM) 4"

3"

2.5"

2"

1.5"

1"

Grain Size 3/4"


D10 nv 3/8" 100D16 nv #4 100

D30 nv #10 100D50 0.09 #20 100D60 0.10 #40 100D84 0.14 #60 100




Figure A14

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A14

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight

Poorly-graded sand with gravel (SP) 4"

3"

2.5"

2"

1.5"

1"

Grain Size 3/4"

Parameter (mm)** 1/2" 100D10 0.17 3/8" 96D16 0.21 #4 76

D30 0.31 #10 59D50 0.68 #20 52D60 2.06 #40 45D84 6.24 #60 20




Figure A15

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A15

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight


3"

2.5"

2"

1.5"

1"

Grain Size 3/4"


D10 nv 3/8" 100D16 nv #4 100

D30 nv #10 100D50 nv #20 100D60 nv #40 100D84 0.10 #60 99




Figure A16

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A16

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight


3"

2.5"

2" 1001.5" 96

1" 93Grain Size 3/4" 88

Parameter (mm)** 1/2" 72D10 0.18 3/8" 60D16 0.26 #4 41

D30 2.02 #10 30D50 6.63 #20 26D60 9.42 #40 24D84 17.16 #60 15




Figure A17

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A17

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight

Sandy silt (ML) 4"

3"

2.5"

2"

1.5"

1"

Grain Size 3/4"


D10 nv 3/8"

D16 nv #4

D30 nv #10

D50 nv #20

D60 0.08 #40 100D84 0.12 #60 100




Figure A18

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A18

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight

Silty sand (SM) 4"

3"

2.5"

2"

1.5"

1"

Grain Size 3/4"


D10 nv 3/8"

D16 nv #4

D30 nv #10

D50 0.08 #20 100D60 0.09 #40 100D84 0.13 #60 97




Figure A19

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study


Boring 11-11, Sample S-4A



Figure A19

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight


3"

2.5"

2"

1.5" 1001" 96


D10 0.65 3/8" 56D16 2.08 #4 28

D30 4.94 #10 15D50 8.24 #20 11D60 10.18 #40 8D84 17.22 #60 4




Figure A20

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A20

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight

Poorly-graded sand with silt and gravel (SP-SM) 4"

3"

2.5"

2"

1.5"

1" 100Grain Size 3/4" 91

Parameter (mm)** 1/2" 82D10 0.17 3/8" 76D16 0.21 #4 55

D30 0.41 #10 41D50 3.46 #20 35D60 5.61 #40 31D84 13.78 #60 20




Figure A21

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A21

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight


3"

2.5"

2" 1001.5" 99

1" 93Grain Size 3/4" 85

Parameter (mm)** 1/2" 71D10 0.20 3/8" 63D16 0.29 #4 42

D30 1.11 #10 33D50 6.17 #20 28D60 8.60 #40 23D84 18.66 #60 13




Figure A22

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A22

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight

Poorly-graded sand with gravel (SP) 4"

3"

2.5"

2"

1.5" 1001" 89


D10 0.20 3/8" 83D16 0.25 #4 75

D30 0.37 #10 51D50 1.83 #20 44D60 2.78 #40 35D84 11.94 #60 16




Figure A23

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study


Boring 11-13, Sample S-4B



Figure A23

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight


3"

2.5"

2"

1.5" 1001" 94


D10 0.42 3/8" 59D16 0.60 #4 40

D30 2.59 #10 26D50 6.75 #20 22D60 9.65 #40 10D84 18.93 #60 6




Figure A24

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A24

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight

Poorly-graded gravel with silt and sand (GP-GM) 4"

3"

2.5"

2"

1.5" 1001" 97


D10 0.15 3/8" 69D16 0.22 #4 49

D30 0.76 #10 37D50 4.93 #20 31D60 6.91 #40 27D84 15.14 #60 18




Figure A25

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A25

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight

Silt (ML) 4"

3"

2.5"

2"

1.5"

1"

Grain Size 3/4"


D10 nv 3/8"

D16 nv #4

D30 nv #10

D50 nv #20 100D60 nv #40 100D84 #NUM! #60 100




Figure A26

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study





Figure A26

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight

Silt (ML) 4"

3"

2.5"

2"

1.5"

1"

Grain Size 3/4"


D10 nv 3/8"

D16 nv #4

D30 nv #10

D50 nv #20 100D60 nv #40 100D84 #NUM! #60 100




Figure A27

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study


Boring 11-14, Sample S-3B



Figure A27

4" 3" 2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

Per

cent

Fin

er b

y W

eigh

t



Sample



Percent Passing by

Weight

Silt (ML) 4"

3"

2.5"

2"

1.5"

1"

Grain Size 3/4"


D10 nv 3/8"

D16 nv #4 100 D30 nv #10 98

D50 nv #20 97D60 nv #40 97D84 #NUM! #60 94




Figure A28

Fairbanks, Alaska

C136/**C117

2011

Geotechnical Study


Boring 11-14, Sample S-4A



Figure A28

31-1-02273-001

APPENDIX B

ANALYTICAL TEST RESULTS

SGS Work Order:

Contents:

Cover Page

Case Narrative

Final Report Pages

Quality Control Summary Forms

Chain of Custody/Sample Receipt Forms

Project:

Client:

SGS North America Inc.

Alaska Division

Level II Laboratory Data Report

Released by:

Note:

Unless otherwise noted, all quality assurance/quality control criteria is in compliance with the standards set forth by the proper regulatory authority, the

SGS Quality Assurance Program Plan, and the National Environmental Accreditation Conference.

1118946

NOBLE STREET UPGRADE

Shannon & Wilson-Fairbanks

Page 1 of 70

CASE NARRATIVE Print Date: 10/18/2011

Workorder No.: 1118946

Project Name: NOBLE STREET UPGRADE

Client Name: Shannon & Wilson-Fairbanks

Lab Sample ID

Sample Comments

Sample Type Client Sample ID

Refer to the sample receipt form for information on sample condition.

1118946001

AK102 - Unknown hydrocarbon with several peaks is present.

8260B - Sample was analyzed outside the hold time for toluene due to lab error (lab contamination for toluene)

PS 2273-1102-S4

1058668

8260B - MS/MSD RPD for 4-methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) does not meet QC criteria. This analyte was not detected above

the LOQ in the associated samples.

MSD 1118946001(1058666MSD)*

1058692

8260B - CCV recoveries for chloroethane, trichlorofluoromethane and carbon tetrachloride do not meet QC criteria (biased

high). These analytes were not detected above the LOQ in the associated samples.

CCV CCV for HBN 1271337 (VMS/12481*

* QC comments may be associated with the field samples found in this report. When applicable, comments will be applied to

associated field samples.

SG S N o rth A m eric a Inc . En vir onm enta l D ivis ion 200 W e st Pot ter D rive A nc hora ge A K 99518 t(907 )562.2343 f( 907)561 .5301 w w w .us.sgs .com M em ber of SG S Group

Page 2 of 70


Project Manager

Jennifer Dawkins

[email protected]

T: (907)322-2564 F:

Attn: Rinu Samuel

2355 Hill Road

Fairbanks, AK 99707

Certification:

This data package is in compliance with the terms and conditions of the contract, both

technically and for completeness, unless otherwise noted on the sample data sheet(s) and/or

case narrative. This certification applies only to the tested parameters and the specific

sample(s) received at the laboratory. If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we

can be of further assistance, please contact your SGS Project Manager.

1118946


Workorder No.:

Client:

Project:

Laboratory Analytical Report

Contents (Bookmarked in PDF):

Cover Page

Glossary

Sample Summary Forms

Case Narrative

Sample Results Forms

Batch Summary Forms (by method)

Quality Control Summary Forms (by method)

Chain of Custody/Sample Receipt Forms

Attachments (if applicable)

SGS No rth Americ a Inc . En vir onmenta l Divis ion 200 W e st Pot ter D rive Anc hora ge AK 99518 t(907 )562.2343 f( 907)561 .5301 w ww.us.sgs .com Member of SG S Group

Page 3 of 70

Enclosed are the analytical results associated with the above work order. All results are intended to be used in their entirety and SGS is not

responsible for use of less than the complete report. If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we can be of any other assistance, please

contact your SGS Project Manager at 907-562-2343. All work is provided under SGS general terms and conditions

(<http://www.sgs.com/terms_and_conditions.htm>), unless other written agreements have been accepted by both parties.

SGS maintains a formal Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) program. A copy of our Quality Assurance Plan (QAP), which outlines this

program, is available at your request. The laboratory certification numbers are AK00971 (DW Chemistry & Microbiology) & UST-005 (CS) for

ADEC and AK100001 for NELAP (RCRA methods: 1020A, 1311, 3010A, 3050B, 3520C, 3550C, 5030B, 5035B, 6010B, 6020, 7470A, 7471B,

8021B, 8081B, 8082A, 8260B, 8270D, 8270D-SIM, 9040B, 9045C, 9056A, 9060A, AK101 and AK102/103). Except as specifically noted, all

statements and data in this report are in conformance to the provisions set forth by the SGS QAP and, when applicable, the National Environmental

Laboratory Accreditation Program and other regulatory authorities. The following descriptors or qualifiers may be found in your report:

* The analyte has exceeded allowable regulatory or control limits.

! Surrogate out of control limits.

B Indicates the analyte is found in a blank associated with the sample.

CCV Continuing Calibration Verification

CL Control Limit

D The analyte concentration is the result of a dilution.

DF Dilution Factor

DL Detection Limit (i.e., maximum method detection limit)

E The analyte result is above the calibrated range.

F Indicates value that is greater than or equal to the DL

GT Greater Than

ICV Initial Calibration Verification

J The quantitation is an estimation.

JL The analyte was positively identified, but the quantitation is a low estimation.

LCS(D) Laboratory Control Spike (Duplicate)

LOD Limit of Detection (i.e., 2xDL)

LOQ Limit of Quantitation (i.e., reporting or practical quantitation limit)

LT Less Than

M A matrix effect was present.

MB Method Blank

MS(D) Matrix Spike (Duplicate)

ND Indicates the analyte is not detected.

Q QC parameter out of acceptance range.

R Rejected

RL Reporting Limit

RPD Relative Percent Difference

U Indicates the analyte was analyzed for but not detected.

Note: Sample summaries which include a result for "Total Solids" have already been adjusted for moisture content.

All DRO/RRO analyses are integrated per SOP.

Print Date: 10/18/2011

SGS No rth Am eric a Inc . En vir onm enta l Divis ion 200 W e st Pot ter D rive Anc hora ge AK 99518 t(907 )562.2343 f( 907)561 .5301 w ww.us.sgs .com M ember of SG S Group

Page 4 of 70

http://www.sgs.com/terms_and_conditions.htm

SAMPLE SUMMARY

Client Name: Shannon & Wilson-Fairbanks

Project Name: NOBLE STREET UPGRADE

Workorder No.: 1118946

Analytical Methods

Method Description Analytical Method

Diesel Range Organics (S) AK102

Gasoline Range Organics (S) AK101

Percent Solids SM2540G SM20 2540G

VOC 8260 (S) Field Extracted SW8260B

Print Date: 10/18/2011 11:21 am

Sample ID Cross Reference

Client Sample IDLab Sample ID

1118946001 2273-1102-S4

1118946002 2273-1108-S4

1118946003 2273-1108-S5

1118946004 2273-1113-S4

1118946005 2273-1110-S4

1118946006 2273-1110-S5

1118946007 TRIP BLANK


Page 5 of 70

Print Date: 10/18/2011 11:21 amDetectable Results Summary

Client Sample ID: 2273-1102-S4

SGS Ref. #: 1118946001 Result UnitsParameter

Semivolatile Organic Fuels Department

mg/Kg22.0Diesel Range Organics

Client Sample ID: TRIP BLANK

SGS Ref. #: 1118946007 Result UnitsParameter

Volatile Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectroscopy

mg/Kg0.0290Toluene


Page 6 of 70

Shannon & Wilson-Fairbanks Print Date: 10/18/2011 11:21 am


SGS Ref. #: 1118946001 Collection Date/Time: 09/28/11 12:45

Receipt Date/Time: 10/04/11 09:08Project ID: NOBLE STREET UPGRADE

Matrix: Soil/Solid (dry weight)

Percent Solids: 92.4

Analytical

Batch

Prep

BatchLOQ/CL Units QualifiersParameter Result

Volatile Fuels Department

DF

Gasoline Range Organics 2.69 U 2.69 mg/Kg VFC107611

4-Bromofluorobenzene <surr> 86.1 50-150 % VFC107611

Batch Information

Initial Prep Wt./Vol.: 59.396 gAnalytical Batch: VFC10761

Analytical Method: AK101

Analysis Date/Time: 10/12/11 22:54 Container ID:1118946001-B

Dilution Factor: 1 Analyst: EAB


Page 7 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF

Diesel Range Organics 22.0 21.5 mg/Kg XFC10128 XXX259101

5a Androstane <surr> 87.2 50-150 % XFC10128 XXX259101

Batch Information

Initial Prep Wt./Vol.: 30.202 g

Prep Extract Vol.: 1 mL

Analytical Batch: XFC10128


Analysis Date/Time: 10/12/11 03:16

Prep Batch: XXX25910

Prep Method: SW3550C

Prep Date/Time: 10/11/11 06:10 Container ID:1118946001-A

Dilution Factor: 1 Analyst: MCS


Page 8 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811



1,1-Dichloroethane 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

1,1-Dichloroethene 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

1,1-Dichloropropene 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 0.0538 U 0.0538 mg/Kg VMS124811

1,2,3-Trichloropropane 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811


1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 0.0538 U 0.0538 mg/Kg VMS124811

1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 0.108 U 0.108 mg/Kg VMS124811

1,2-Dibromoethane 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

1,2-Dichlorobenzene 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811


1,2-Dichloropropane 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811






2-Butanone (MEK) 0.269 U 0.269 mg/Kg VMS124811

2-Chlorotoluene 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

2-Hexanone 0.269 U 0.269 mg/Kg VMS124811


4-Isopropyltoluene 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) 0.269 U 0.269 mg/Kg VMS124811

Benzene 0.0135 U 0.0135 mg/Kg VMS124811

Bromobenzene 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

Bromochloromethane 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

Bromodichloromethane 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

Bromoform 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

Bromomethane 0.215 U 0.215 mg/Kg VMS124811

Carbon disulfide 0.108 U 0.108 mg/Kg VMS124811

Carbon tetrachloride 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

Chlorobenzene 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811


Page 9 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF

Chloroethane 0.215 U 0.215 mg/Kg VMS124811

Chloroform 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

Chloromethane 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

Dibromochloromethane 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

Dibromomethane 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

Dichlorodifluoromethane 0.0538 U 0.0538 mg/Kg VMS124811

Ethylbenzene 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

Hexachlorobutadiene 0.0538 U 0.0538 mg/Kg VMS124811

Isopropylbenzene (Cumene) 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

Methylene chloride 0.108 U 0.108 mg/Kg VMS124811

Methyl-t-butyl ether 0.108 U 0.108 mg/Kg VMS124811

Naphthalene 0.0538 U 0.0538 mg/Kg VMS124811

n-Butylbenzene 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

n-Propylbenzene 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

o-Xylene 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

P & M -Xylene 0.0538 U 0.0538 mg/Kg VMS124811

sec-Butylbenzene 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

Styrene 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

tert-Butylbenzene 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

Tetrachloroethene 0.0135 U 0.0135 mg/Kg VMS124811

Toluene 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124881

trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

Trichloroethene 0.0135 U 0.0135 mg/Kg VMS124811

Trichlorofluoromethane 0.0538 U 0.0538 mg/Kg VMS124811

Vinyl chloride 0.0269 U 0.0269 mg/Kg VMS124811

Xylenes (total) 0.108 U 0.108 mg/Kg VMS124811

1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 <surr> 102 79-118 % VMS124811

4-Bromofluorobenzene <surr> 101 67-138 % VMS124811

Toluene-d8 <surr> 102 85-115 % VMS124811


Page 10 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF

Batch Information

Initial Prep Wt./Vol.: 59.396 gAnalytical Batch: VMS12481

Analytical Method: SW8260B


Dilution Factor: 1 Analyst: HM






Page 11 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep


Solids

DF

Total Solids 92.4 % SPT85081

Batch Information

Initial Prep Wt./Vol.: 1 mLAnalytical Batch: SPT8508

Analytical Method: SM20 2540G

Analysis Date/Time: 10/10/11 18:15 Container ID:1118946001-A

Dilution Factor: 1 Analyst: DDR


Page 12 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF



Batch Information






Page 13 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF

Diesel Range Organics 21.9 U 21.9 mg/Kg XFC10128 XXX259101


Batch Information











Page 14 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF






































Page 15 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF


































Page 16 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF

Batch Information










Page 17 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep


Solids

DF


Batch Information






Page 18 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF



Batch Information






Page 19 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF


5a Androstane <surr> 87 50-150 % XFC10128 XXX259101

Batch Information











Page 20 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF






































Page 21 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF


































Page 22 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF

Batch Information










Page 23 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep


Solids

DF


Batch Information






Page 24 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF


4-Bromofluorobenzene <surr> 92 50-150 % VFC107611

Batch Information






Page 25 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF



Batch Information











Page 26 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF






































Page 27 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF


































Page 28 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF

Batch Information










Page 29 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep


Solids

DF


Batch Information






Page 30 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF



Batch Information






Page 31 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF



Batch Information











Page 32 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF






































Page 33 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF


































Page 34 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF

Batch Information










Page 35 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep


Solids

DF


Batch Information






Page 36 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF



Batch Information






Page 37 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF



Batch Information











Page 38 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF






































Page 39 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF


































Page 40 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF

Batch Information










Page 41 of 70







Analytical

Batch

Prep


Solids

DF


Batch Information






Page 42 of 70





Matrix: Solid/Soil (Wet Weight)

Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF


4-Bromofluorobenzene <surr> 94 50-150 % VFC107611

Batch Information






Page 43 of 70






Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF






































Page 44 of 70






Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF























Toluene 0.0290 0.0254 mg/Kg VMS124811









Toluene-d8 <surr> 97.4 85-115 % VMS124811


Page 45 of 70






Analytical

Batch

Prep



DF

Batch Information






Page 46 of 70

Matrix

SGS Ref.#

Client Name

Project Name/#

Printed Date/Time 10/18/2011 11:21Batch

Method

Date

Prep

1058367 Method Blank



Soil/Solid (dry weight)

XXX25910

SW3550C

10/11/2011

QC results affect the following production samples:

1118946001, 1118946002, 1118946003, 1118946004, 1118946005, 1118946006

Parameter Results LOQ/CL UnitsAnalysis

DateDL


Diesel Range Organics 12.4 U 20.0 mg/Kg 10/11/116.20

Surrogates

5a Androstane <surr> 80.5 60-120 % 10/11/11

Instrument

Method

Batch XFC10128

AK102

HP 6890 Series II FID SV D F

Page 47 of 70

Matrix

SGS Ref.#

Client Name

Project Name/#


Method

Date

Prep






1118946001, 1118946002, 1118946003, 1118946004, 1118946005, 1118946006


DateDL

Solids

Total Solids 100 % 10/10/11

Instrument

Method

Batch SPT8508

SM20 2540G

Page 48 of 70

Matrix

SGS Ref.#

Client Name

Project Name/#


Method

Date

Prep






1118946001, 1118946002, 1118946003, 1118946004, 1118946005, 1118946006, 1118946007


DateDL


Page 49 of 70

Matrix

SGS Ref.#

Client Name

Project Name/#


Method

Date

Prep






DateDL


1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.0300 U 0.0500 mg/Kg 10/11/110.0150

1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

1,1-Dichloroethane 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

1,1-Dichloroethene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

1,1-Dichloropropene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 0.0300 U 0.0500 mg/Kg 10/11/110.0150

1,2,3-Trichloropropane 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 0.0300 U 0.0500 mg/Kg 10/11/110.0150

1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 0.0620 U 0.100 mg/Kg 10/11/110.0310

1,2-Dibromoethane 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

1,2-Dichlorobenzene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

1,2-Dichloroethane 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

1,2-Dichloropropane 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780





2-Butanone (MEK) 0.156 U 0.250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.0780

2-Chlorotoluene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

2-Hexanone 0.156 U 0.250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.0780

4-Chlorotoluene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

4-Isopropyltoluene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) 0.156 U 0.250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.0780

Benzene 0.00780 U 0.0125 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00390

Bromobenzene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

Bromochloromethane 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

Bromodichloromethane 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

Bromoform 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

Bromomethane 0.124 U 0.200 mg/Kg 10/11/110.0620

Carbon disulfide 0.0620 U 0.100 mg/Kg 10/11/110.0310

Carbon tetrachloride 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

Chlorobenzene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

Chloroethane 0.124 U 0.200 mg/Kg 10/11/110.0620

Chloroform 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

Chloromethane 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780Page 50 of 70

Matrix

SGS Ref.#

Client Name

Project Name/#


Method

Date

Prep






DateDL


cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

Dibromochloromethane 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

Dibromomethane 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

Dichlorodifluoromethane 0.0300 U 0.0500 mg/Kg 10/11/110.0150

Ethylbenzene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

Hexachlorobutadiene 0.0300 U 0.0500 mg/Kg 10/11/110.0150

Isopropylbenzene (Cumene) 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

Methylene chloride 0.0620 U 0.100 mg/Kg 10/11/110.0310

Methyl-t-butyl ether 0.0620 U 0.100 mg/Kg 10/11/110.0310

Naphthalene 0.0300 U 0.0500 mg/Kg 10/11/110.0150

n-Butylbenzene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

n-Propylbenzene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

o-Xylene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

P & M -Xylene 0.0300 U 0.0500 mg/Kg 10/11/110.0150

sec-Butylbenzene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

Styrene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

tert-Butylbenzene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

Tetrachloroethene 0.00780 U 0.0125 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00390

Toluene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

Trichloroethene 0.00780 U 0.0125 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00390

Trichlorofluoromethane 0.0300 U 0.0500 mg/Kg 10/11/110.0150

Vinyl chloride 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/11/110.00780

Xylenes (total) 0.0620 U 0.100 mg/Kg 10/11/110.0310

Surrogates

1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 <surr> 101 79-118 % 10/11/11

4-Bromofluorobenzene <surr> 101 67-138 % 10/11/11

Toluene-d8 <surr> 99 85-115 % 10/11/11

Instrument

Method

Batch VMS12481

SW8260B

HP 5890 Series II MS5 VLA

Page 51 of 70

Matrix

SGS Ref.#

Client Name

Project Name/#


Method

Date

Prep






1118946001, 1118946002, 1118946003, 1118946004, 1118946005, 1118946006


DateDL


Toluene 0.0156 U 0.0250 mg/Kg 10/12/110.00780

Surrogates

1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 <surr> 90.9 79-118 % 10/12/11


Toluene-d8 <surr> 100 85-115 % 10/12/11

Instrument

Method

Batch VMS12488

SW8260B


Page 52 of 70

Matrix

SGS Ref.#

Client Name

Project Name/#


Method

Date

Prep






1118946001, 1118946002, 1118946003, 1118946004, 1118946005, 1118946006, 1118946007


DateDL


Gasoline Range Organics 1.50 U 2.50 mg/Kg 10/12/110.750

Surrogates


Instrument

Method

Batch VFC10761

AK101

HP 5890 Series II PID+FID VCA

Page 53 of 70

Matrix

SGS Ref.#

Client Name

Project Name/#

Printed Date/Time 10/18/2011 11:21

Batch

Method

DateOriginal

PrepShannon & Wilson-Fairbanks


Duplicate1058371


1118940001


1118946001, 1118946002, 1118946003, 1118946004, 1118946005, 1118946006

ParameterQC

Result

Analysis

DateRPDRPD

LimitsOriginal

ResultUnits

Solids

85.5 85.8 % 0 (< 15 ) 10/10/2011Total Solids

Batch

Method

Instrument

SPT8508

SM20 2540G

Page 54 of 70

Matrix

SGS Ref.#

Client Name

Project Name/#


Batch

Method

Date

Prep

1058368 Lab Control Sample

1058369 Lab Control Sample Duplicate




XXX25910

SW3550C

10/11/2011


1118946001, 1118946002, 1118946003, 1118946004, 1118946005, 1118946006

ParameterQC

Results

Pct

Recov

Spiked

Amount

Analysis

DateRPDLCS/LCSD

Limits

RPD

Limits


Diesel Range Organics LCS 134 80 ( 75-125 ) 167 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

LCSD 148 89 10 (< 20 ) 167 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Surrogates

5a Androstane <surr> LCS 83 ( 60-120 ) 10/11/2011

LCSD 93 11 10/11/2011

Batch

Method

Instrument

XFC10128

AK102

HP 6890 Series II FID SV D F

Page 55 of 70

Matrix

SGS Ref.#

Client Name

Project Name/#


Batch

Method

Date

Prep






1118946001, 1118946002, 1118946003, 1118946004, 1118946005, 1118946006, 1118946007

ParameterQC

Results

Pct

Recov

Spiked

Amount

Analysis

DateRPDLCS/LCSD

Limits

RPD

Limits


Page 56 of 70

Matrix

SGS Ref.#

Client Name

Project Name/#


Batch

Method

Date

Prep





ParameterQC

Results

Pct

Recov

Spiked

Amount

Analysis

DateRPDLCS/LCSD

Limits

RPD

Limits


1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane LCS 0.833 111 ( 75-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,1,1-Trichloroethane LCS 0.858 114 ( 70-135 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane LCS 0.735 98 ( 55-130 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,1,2-Trichloroethane LCS 0.731 97 ( 60-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,1-Dichloroethane LCS 0.804 107 ( 75-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,1-Dichloroethene LCS 0.807 108 ( 65-135 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,1-Dichloropropene LCS 0.737 98 ( 70-135 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene LCS 0.808 108 ( 60-135 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,2,3-Trichloropropane LCS 0.834 111 ( 65-130 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene LCS 0.836 112 ( 65-130 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene LCS 0.805 107 ( 65-135 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane LCS 0.698 93 ( 40-135 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,2-Dibromoethane LCS 0.783 104 ( 70-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,2-Dichlorobenzene LCS 0.731 97 ( 75-120 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,2-Dichloroethane LCS 0.769 103 ( 70-135 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,2-Dichloropropane LCS 0.714 95 ( 70-120 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene LCS 0.803 107 ( 65-135 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011


1,3-Dichloropropane LCS 0.757 101 ( 75-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011


2,2-Dichloropropane LCS 0.798 106 ( 65-135 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011Page 57 of 70

Matrix

SGS Ref.#

Client Name

Project Name/#


Batch

Method

Date

Prep





ParameterQC

Results

Pct

Recov

Spiked

Amount

Analysis

DateRPDLCS/LCSD

Limits

RPD

Limits


2-Butanone (MEK) LCS 2.10 93 ( 30-160 ) 2.25 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

2-Chlorotoluene LCS 0.746 100 ( 70-130 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

2-Hexanone LCS 2.22 99 ( 45-145 ) 2.25 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

4-Chlorotoluene LCS 0.748 100 ( 75-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

4-Isopropyltoluene LCS 0.806 107 ( 75-135 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) LCS 2.67 119 ( 45-145 ) 2.25 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Benzene LCS 0.741 99 ( 75-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Bromobenzene LCS 0.744 99 ( 65-120 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Bromochloromethane LCS 0.788 105 ( 70-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Bromodichloromethane LCS 0.806 107 ( 70-130 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Bromoform LCS 0.841 112 ( 55-135 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Bromomethane LCS 0.848 113 ( 30-160 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Carbon disulfide LCS 1.26 112 ( 45-160 ) 1.13 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Carbon tetrachloride LCS 0.907 121 ( 65-135 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Chlorobenzene LCS 0.800 107 ( 75-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Chloroethane LCS 0.909 121 ( 40-155 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Chloroform LCS 0.760 101 ( 70-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Chloromethane LCS 0.814 109 ( 50-130 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

cis-1,2-Dichloroethene LCS 0.787 105 ( 65-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

cis-1,3-Dichloropropene LCS 0.781 104 ( 70-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Page 58 of 70

Matrix

SGS Ref.#

Client Name

Project Name/#


Batch

Method

Date

Prep





ParameterQC

Results

Pct

Recov

Spiked

Amount

Analysis

DateRPDLCS/LCSD

Limits

RPD

Limits


Dibromochloromethane LCS 0.831 111 ( 65-130 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Dibromomethane LCS 0.721 96 ( 75-130 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Dichlorodifluoromethane LCS 0.792 106 ( 35-135 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Ethylbenzene LCS 0.806 108 ( 75-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Hexachlorobutadiene LCS 0.868 116 ( 55-140 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Isopropylbenzene (Cumene) LCS 0.815 109 ( 75-130 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Methylene chloride LCS 0.788 105 ( 55-140 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Methyl-t-butyl ether LCS 1.21 107 ( 63-149 ) 1.13 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Naphthalene LCS 0.743 99 ( 40-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

n-Butylbenzene LCS 0.830 111 ( 65-140 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

n-Propylbenzene LCS 0.776 104 ( 65-135 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

o-Xylene LCS 0.817 109 ( 75-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

P & M -Xylene LCS 1.55 103 ( 80-125 ) 1.50 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

sec-Butylbenzene LCS 0.791 105 ( 65-130 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Styrene LCS 0.828 110 ( 75-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

tert-Butylbenzene LCS 0.769 103 ( 65-130 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Tetrachloroethene LCS 0.821 109 ( 65-140 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Toluene LCS 0.815 109 ( 70-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

trans-1,2-Dichloroethene LCS 0.832 111 ( 65-135 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

trans-1,3-Dichloropropene LCS 0.879 117 ( 65-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Trichloroethene LCS 0.781 104 ( 75-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011Page 59 of 70

Matrix

SGS Ref.#

Client Name

Project Name/#


Batch

Method

Date

Prep





ParameterQC

Results

Pct

Recov

Spiked

Amount

Analysis

DateRPDLCS/LCSD

Limits

RPD

Limits


Trichlorofluoromethane LCS 0.955 127 ( 25-185 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Vinyl chloride LCS 0.843 112 ( 60-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Xylenes (total) LCS 2.36 105 ( 80-125 ) 2.25 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Surrogates

1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 <surr> LCS 111 ( 79-118 ) 10/11/2011

4-Bromofluorobenzene <surr> LCS 108 ( 67-138 ) 10/11/2011

Toluene-d8 <surr> LCS 109 ( 85-115 ) 10/11/2011

Batch

Method

Instrument

VMS12481

SW8260B


Page 60 of 70

Matrix

SGS Ref.#

Client Name

Project Name/#


Batch

Method

Date

Prep






1118946001, 1118946002, 1118946003, 1118946004, 1118946005, 1118946006

ParameterQC

Results

Pct

Recov

Spiked

Amount

Analysis

DateRPDLCS/LCSD

Limits

RPD

Limits


Toluene LCS 0.771 103 ( 70-125 ) 0.750 mg/Kg 10/12/2011

Surrogates

1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 <surr> LCS 96 ( 79-118 ) 10/12/2011


Toluene-d8 <surr> LCS 98 ( 85-115 ) 10/12/2011

Batch

Method

Instrument

VMS12488

SW8260B


Page 61 of 70

Matrix

SGS Ref.#

Client Name

Project Name/#


Batch

Method

Date

Prep


1059351 Lab Control Sample Duplicate





1118946001, 1118946002, 1118946003, 1118946004, 1118946005, 1118946006, 1118946007

ParameterQC

Results

Pct

Recov

Spiked

Amount

Analysis

DateRPDLCS/LCSD

Limits

RPD

Limits


Gasoline Range Organics LCS 8.90 89 ( 60-120 ) 10.0 mg/Kg 10/12/2011

LCSD 9.41 94 6 (< 20 ) 10.0 mg/Kg 10/12/2011

Surrogates


LCSD 107 0 10/12/2011

Batch

Method

Instrument

VFC10761

AK101

HP 5890 Series II PID+FID VCA

Page 62 of 70

Matrix

SGS Ref.# Printed Date/Time 10/18/2011 11:21Batch

Method

Date

Original

Prep1058667 Matrix Spike

1058668 Matrix Spike Duplicate

1058666

Solid/Soil (Wet Weight)


1118946001, 1118946002, 1118946003, 1118946004, 1118946005, 1118946006, 1118946007

ParameterQC

Result

Pct

Recov

Spiked

Amount Analysis

Date

MS/MSD

Limits RPDRPD

LimitsOriginal

Result Qualifiers


1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane MS (0.0131) U 0.653 103 ( 75-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.659 104 1 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,1,1-Trichloroethane MS (0.0131) U 0.636 101 ( 70-135 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.663 105 4 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane MS (0.0252) U 0.556 88 ( 55-130 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.650 103 16 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,1,2-Trichloroethane MS (0.0131) U 0.555 88 ( 60-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.619 98 11 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,1-Dichloroethane MS (0.0131) U 0.602 95 ( 75-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.625 99 4 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,1-Dichloroethene MS (0.0131) U 0.592 94 ( 65-135 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.615 97 4 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,1-Dichloropropene MS (0.0131) U 0.578 92 ( 70-135 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.600 95 4 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene MS (0.0252) U 0.644 102 ( 60-135 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.624 99 3 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,2,3-Trichloropropane MS (0.0131) U 0.694 110 ( 65-130 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.678 107 2 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene MS (0.0131) U 0.573 91 ( 65-130 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.642 102 12 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene MS (0.0252) U 0.616 98 ( 65-135 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.614 97 0 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane MS (0.0522) U 0.607 96 ( 40-135 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.607 96 0 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,2-Dibromoethane MS (0.0131) U 0.613 97 ( 70-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.633 100 3 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,2-Dichlorobenzene MS (0.0131) U 0.580 92 ( 75-120 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.602 95 4 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,2-Dichloroethane MS (0.0131) U 0.594 94 ( 70-135 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.597 95 0 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,2-Dichloropropane MS (0.0131) U 0.561 89 ( 70-120 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.611 97 9 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene MS (0.0131) U 0.612 97 ( 65-135 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.609 97 0 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011


MSD 0.586 93 3 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

1,3-Dichloropropane MS (0.0131) U 0.586 93 ( 75-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011Page 63 of 70

Matrix


Method

Date

Original



1058666


ParameterQC

Result

Pct

Recov

Spiked

Amount Analysis

Date

MS/MSD

Limits RPDRPD

LimitsOriginal

Result Qualifiers


MSD 0.630 100 7 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011


MSD 0.597 95 2 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

2,2-Dichloropropane MS (0.0131) U 0.547 87 ( 65-135 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.549 87 0 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

2-Butanone (MEK) MS (0.131) U 1.64 87 ( 30-160 ) 1.89 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 1.73 92 6 (< 20 ) 1.89 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

2-Chlorotoluene MS (0.0131) U 0.581 92 ( 70-130 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.590 93 2 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

2-Hexanone MS (0.131) U 1.68 89 ( 45-145 ) 1.89 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 1.88 100 11 (< 20 ) 1.89 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

4-Chlorotoluene MS (0.0131) U 0.598 95 ( 75-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.610 97 2 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

4-Isopropyltoluene MS (0.0131) U 0.588 93 ( 75-135 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.591 94 0 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) MS (0.131) U 1.67 88 ( 45-145 ) 1.89 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 2.13 112 24 (< 20 ) 1.89 mg/Kg 10/11/2011*

Benzene MS (0.00656) U 0.572 91 ( 75-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.599 95 5 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Bromobenzene MS (0.0131) U 0.590 94 ( 65-120 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.579 92 2 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Bromochloromethane MS (0.0131) U 0.606 96 ( 70-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.639 101 5 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Bromodichloromethane MS (0.0131) U 0.619 98 ( 70-130 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.632 100 2 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Bromoform MS (0.0131) U 0.677 107 ( 55-135 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.687 109 1 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Bromomethane MS (0.104) U 0.588 93 ( 30-160 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.607 96 3 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Carbon disulfide MS (0.0522) U 0.957 101 ( 45-160 ) 0.947 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 1.01 106 5 (< 20 ) 0.947 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Carbon tetrachloride MS (0.0131) U 0.674 107 ( 65-135 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.683 108 1 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Chlorobenzene MS (0.0131) U 0.611 97 ( 75-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.627 99 3 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Chloroethane MS (0.104) U 0.645 102 ( 40-155 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.640 101 1 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Chloroform MS (0.0131) U 0.587 93 ( 70-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.592 94 1 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Chloromethane MS (0.0131) U 0.564 89 ( 50-130 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011Page 64 of 70

Matrix


Method

Date

Original



1058666


ParameterQC

Result

Pct

Recov

Spiked

Amount Analysis

Date

MS/MSD

Limits RPDRPD

LimitsOriginal

Result Qualifiers


MSD 0.589 93 4 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

cis-1,2-Dichloroethene MS (0.0131) U 0.583 92 ( 65-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.587 93 1 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

cis-1,3-Dichloropropene MS (0.0131) U 0.579 92 ( 70-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.637 101 10 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Dibromochloromethane MS (0.0131) U 0.638 101 ( 65-130 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.652 103 2 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Dibromomethane MS (0.0131) U 0.566 90 ( 75-130 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.607 96 7 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Dichlorodifluoromethane MS (0.0252) U 0.476 75 ( 35-135 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.509 81 7 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Ethylbenzene MS (0.0131) U 0.619 98 ( 75-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.616 98 0 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Hexachlorobutadiene MS (0.0252) U 0.524 83 ( 55-140 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.540 86 3 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Isopropylbenzene (Cumene) MS (0.0131) U 0.608 96 ( 75-130 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.650 103 7 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Methylene chloride MS (0.0522) U 0.603 96 ( 55-140 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.607 96 1 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Methyl-t-butyl ether MS (0.0522) U 0.886 94 ( 63-149 ) 0.947 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.922 97 4 (< 20 ) 0.947 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Naphthalene MS (0.0252) U 0.601 95 ( 40-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.627 99 4 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

n-Butylbenzene MS (0.0131) U 0.585 93 ( 65-140 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.585 93 0 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

n-Propylbenzene MS (0.0131) U 0.594 94 ( 65-135 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.622 99 5 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

o-Xylene MS (0.0131) U 0.624 99 ( 75-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.625 99 0 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

P & M -Xylene MS (0.0252) U 1.15 91 ( 80-125 ) 1.26 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 1.23 98 6 (< 20 ) 1.26 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

sec-Butylbenzene MS (0.0131) U 0.585 93 ( 65-130 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.601 95 3 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Styrene MS (0.0131) U 0.629 100 ( 75-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.653 104 4 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

tert-Butylbenzene MS (0.0131) U 0.594 94 ( 65-130 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.609 97 3 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Tetrachloroethene MS (0.00656) U 0.634 100 ( 65-140 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.566 90 11 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Toluene MS 0.0286 0.615 93 ( 70-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011Page 65 of 70

Matrix


Method

Date

Original



1058666


ParameterQC

Result

Pct

Recov

Spiked

Amount Analysis

Date

MS/MSD

Limits RPDRPD

LimitsOriginal

Result Qualifiers


MSD 0.648 98 5 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

trans-1,2-Dichloroethene MS (0.0131) U 0.607 96 ( 65-135 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.616 98 1 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

trans-1,3-Dichloropropene MS (0.0131) U 0.610 97 ( 65-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.656 104 7 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Trichloroethene MS (0.00656) U 0.605 96 ( 75-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.635 101 5 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Trichlorofluoromethane MS (0.0252) U 0.619 98 ( 25-185 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.673 107 8 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Vinyl chloride MS (0.0131) U 0.568 90 ( 60-125 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 0.609 96 7 (< 20 ) 0.631 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Xylenes (total) MS (0.0522) U 1.78 94 ( 80-125 ) 1.89 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

MSD 1.86 98 4 (< 20 ) 1.89 mg/Kg 10/11/2011

Surrogates

1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 <surr> MS 0.737 117 ( 79-118 ) 10/11/2011

MSD 0.649 103 13 10/11/2011

4-Bromofluorobenzene <surr> MS 1.58 94 ( 67-138 ) 10/11/2011

MSD 1.52 90 4 10/11/2011

Toluene-d8 <surr> MS 0.725 115 ( 85-115 ) 10/11/2011

MSD 0.650 103 11 10/11/2011

Batch

Method

Instrument

VMS12481

SW8260B


Page 66 of 70

Matrix


Method

Date

Original



1058950



1118946001, 1118946002, 1118946003, 1118946004, 1118946005, 1118946006

ParameterQC

Result

Pct

Recov

Spiked

Amount Analysis

Date

MS/MSD

Limits RPDRPD

LimitsOriginal

Result Qualifiers


Toluene MS 0.0117J 0.632 99 ( 70-125 ) 0.629 mg/Kg 10/12/2011

MSD 0.633 99 0 (< 20 ) 0.629 mg/Kg 10/12/2011

Surrogates

1,2-Dichloroethane-D4 <surr> MS 0.595 95 ( 79-118 ) 10/12/2011

MSD 0.619 99 4 10/12/2011

4-Bromofluorobenzene <surr> MS 1.37 82 ( 67-138 ) 10/12/2011

MSD 1.48 88 7 10/12/2011

Toluene-d8 <surr> MS 0.618 98 ( 85-115 ) 10/12/2011

MSD 0.609 97 1 10/12/2011

Batch

Method

Instrument

VMS12488

SW8260B


Page 67 of 70

Page 68 of 70

Page 69 of 70

Page 70 of 70

31-1-02273-001

APPENDIX C

PROJECT PHOTOS AND SCHEMATIC OF NOBLE STREET WITH BORING LOCATIONS


Photo Log 1 31-1-02273-001 Noble Street Upgrade Fairbanks, Alaska

Photo 1: Northbound lane near Boring 11-01.

Photo 2: Southbound lane near Boring 11-04.






Photo Log 2 31-1-02273-001 Noble Street Upgrade Fairbanks, Alaska



r

442

440

o I

20 I I 40 SCALE I N FEET' I

60 I='

I I

I I ------1 1 -------------------.r------------

438

I ,1, I I I

1

I I 3+00

J-'-j

10. <0

'"

"" ~ .. :::I·· .... · . OM

./1 ....... ,'.~ ...... c~- -.::::1-":: .. 0':' .. ::::.... - c: :::c ..... 6J-.

I I I I I I I I I T I

I

-- --1- -- --I--I

5+00

"

I I I I

I

Q.

~ AlASKA I T DESIGNATION I YEAR I SHEET I ",,&I I STATE 1 PROJEC <0 STP OOOS( 413) NO. SHEETS

P,\2004\F1l4089\C\CODOO 12007

1 1 T ~

g

I

g

I

'I:. ppF04089 1 :,n -j¢--_.J

g

~ Ir + <0, T

I

--

=-

g I LEGEND: J, STORM DRAIN

OVERHEAD WIRE

SANITARY SEWER

WATER

FENCE

ACS COMMUNICATIONS

BURIED ELECTRIC

DISTRICT HEAT LINE

PROPERTY LINE

-

....

-_ .. - SD _ .. - ."" ....... SD ...... .

OH ....

5S 55

w---

-x-·- _·x-- ->: .... :(.-

LINE ............. ACS·· ACS-····

..... fLEe

DH

1

I

I I I 1 I,,,

I

I 1. r I 7+00 1436 "'--I 6+00 -

ras

Oval

ras

Oval

ras

Oval

ras

Text Box

PROPOSED EXPLORATORY BORING

ras

Oval

ras

Text Box

11-14

ras

Text Box

11-13

ras

Text Box

11-12

ras

Text Box

11-01

ras

Oval

ras

Oval

ras

Text Box

11-11

ras

Text Box

11-10

ras

Oval

ras

Oval

ras

Oval

ras

Text Box

11-09

ras

Text Box

11-08

ras

Text Box

11-07

ras

Oval

ras

Oval

ras

Oval

ras

Text Box

11-06

ras

Text Box

11-05

ras

Text Box

11-04

ras

Oval

ras

Oval

ras

Oval

ras

Text Box

11-03

ras

Text Box

11-02

ras

Text Box

11-01

31-1-02273-001

APPENDIX D

ALASKA FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN RESULTS

Design Life Loadings Layer Material Thickness Flexural Functional(years) (in) (%) (%)

Surface AC 2.5 30 ---Base D-1 6 --- 98Subbase Selected Type A 21.5 --- 10Subgrade Varies --- --- 1Surface AC 3 22 ---Base D-1 6 --- 51Subbase Selected Type A 21 --- 7Subgrade Varies --- --- 1Surface AC 2.5 46 ---Base D-1 6 --- 150Subbase Selected Type A 21.5 --- 15Subgrade Varies --- --- 1Surface AC 3 34 ---Base D-1 6 --- 78Subbase Selected Type A 21 --- 10Subgrade Varies --- --- 1Surface AC 3 47 ---Base D-1 6 --- 107Subbase Selected Type A 21 --- 14Subgrade Varies --- --- 1Surface AC 3.5 34 ---Base D-1 6 --- 59Subbase Selected Type A 20.5 --- 9Subgrade Varies --- --- 1Surface AC 3 60 ---Base D-1 6 --- 137Subbase Selected Type A 21 --- 17Subgrade Varies --- --- 2Surface AC 3.5 43 ---Base D-1 6 --- 76Subbase Selected Type A 20.5 --- 12Subgrade Varies --- --- 2Surface AC 3 74 ---Base D-1 6 --- 169Subbase Selected Type A 21 --- 21Subgrade Varies --- --- 2Surface AC 3.5 53 ---Base D-1 6 --- 94Subbase Selected Type A 20.5 --- 15Subgrade Varies --- --- 2Surface AC 4 38 ---Base D-1 6 --- 55Subbase Selected Type A 20 --- 10Subgrade Varies --- --- 2

Red text indicates greater than 80% flexural damage or 90% functional damage.

DamageMINIMUM MECHANISTIC PAVEMENT SECTION ANALYSES

10 572,618

10 572,618

15 881,015

15 881,015

20 1,205,144

20 1,205,144

25 1,545,807

25 1,545,807

30 1,903,847

30 1,903,847

30 1,903,847

Design Life Loadings Layer Material Thickness Flexural Functional(years) (in) (%) (%)

Surface (Wearing) AC 2Surface (Binder) AC 3Base D-1 4 --- 24 (51)Subbase Selected Type A 21 --- 10 (21)Subgrade Varies --- --- 1 (2)Surface (Wearing) AC 2Surface (Binder) AC 2Base ATB (3%-4%) 3 --- 1 (2)Subbase Selected Type A 23 --- 9 (20)Subgrade Varies --- --- 1 (2)

15 (30) 881,015

ALASKA RENEWABLE PAVEMENT SECTION ANALYSES

42

6

---

---

Damage

30 1,903,847

15 (30) 881,015

30 1,903,847

31-1-02273-001

APPENDIX E

IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR GEOTECHNICAL/ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

1/2009

SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants

Attachment to and part of Report 31-1-02273-001 Date: February 27, 2012 To: PDC, Inc. RE: Geotechnical Study

Noble Street Upgrade Fairbanks, Alaska

Important Information About Your Geotechnical/Environmental Report CONSULTING SERVICES ARE PERFORMED FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES AND FOR SPECIFIC CLIENTS. Consultants prepare reports to meet the specific needs of specific individuals. A report prepared for a civil engineer may not be adequate for a construction contractor or even another civil engineer. Unless indicated otherwise, your consultant prepared your report expressly for you and expressly for the purposes you indicated. No one other than you should apply this report for its intended purpose without first conferring with the consultant. No party should apply this report for any purpose other than that originally contemplated without first conferring with the consultant. THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT IS BASED ON PROJECT-SPECIFIC FACTORS. A geotechnical/environmental report is based on a subsurface exploration plan designed to consider a unique set of project-specific factors. Depending on the project, these may include: the general nature of the structure and property involved; its size and configuration; its historical use and practice; the location of the structure on the site and its orientation; other improvements such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities; and the additional risk created by scope-of-service limitations imposed by the client. To help avoid costly problems, ask the consultant to evaluate how any factors that change subsequent to the date of the report may affect the recommendations. Unless your consultant indicates otherwise, your report should not be used: (1) when the nature of the proposed project is changed (for example, if an office building will be erected instead of a parking garage, or if a refrigerated warehouse will be built instead of an unrefrigerated one, or chemicals are discovered on or near the site); (2) when the size, elevation, or configuration of the proposed project is altered; (3) when the location or orientation of the proposed project is modified; (4) when there is a change of ownership; or (5) for application to an adjacent site. Consultants cannot accept responsibility for problems that may occur if they are not consulted after factors, which were considered in the development of the report, have changed. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS CAN CHANGE. Subsurface conditions may be affected as a result of natural processes or human activity. Because a geotechnical/environmental report is based on conditions that existed at the time of subsurface exploration, construction decisions should not be based on a report whose adequacy may have been affected by time. Ask the consultant to advise if additional tests are desirable before construction starts; for example, groundwater conditions commonly vary seasonally. Construction operations at or adjacent to the site and natural events such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations may also affect subsurface conditions and, thus, the continuing adequacy of a geotechnical/environmental report. The consultant should be kept apprised of any such events, and should be consulted to determine if additional tests are necessary. MOST RECOMMENDATIONS ARE PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENTS. Site exploration and testing identifies actual surface and subsurface conditions only at those points where samples are taken. The data were extrapolated by your consultant, who then applied judgment to render an opinion about overall subsurface conditions. The actual interface between materials may be far more gradual or abrupt than your report indicates. Actual conditions in areas not sampled may differ from those predicted in your report. While nothing can be done to prevent such situations, you and your consultant can work together to help reduce their impacts. Retaining your consultant to observe subsurface construction operations can be particularly beneficial in this respect.

1/2009

A REPORT'S CONCLUSIONS ARE PRELIMINARY. The conclusions contained in your consultant's report are preliminary because they must be based on the assumption that conditions revealed through selective exploratory sampling are indicative of actual conditions throughout a site. Actual subsurface conditions can be discerned only during earthwork; therefore, you should retain your consultant to observe actual conditions and to provide conclusions. Only the consultant who prepared the report is fully familiar with the background information needed to determine whether or not the report's recommendations based on those conclusions are valid and whether or not the contractor is abiding by applicable recommendations. The consultant who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or liability for the adequacy of the report's recommendations if another party is retained to observe construction. THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT IS SUBJECT TO MISINTERPRETATION. Costly problems can occur when other design professionals develop their plans based on misinterpretation of a geotechnical/environmental report. To help avoid these problems, the consultant should be retained to work with other project design professionals to explain relevant geotechnical, geological, hydrogeological, and environmental findings, and to review the adequacy of their plans and specifications relative to these issues. BORING LOGS AND/OR MONITORING WELL DATA SHOULD NOT BE SEPARATED FROM THE REPORT. Final boring logs developed by the consultant are based upon interpretation of field logs (assembled by site personnel), field test results, and laboratory and/or office evaluation of field samples and data. Only final boring logs and data are customarily included in geotechnical/environmental reports. These final logs should not, under any circumstances, be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings, because drafters may commit errors or omissions in the transfer process. To reduce the likelihood of boring log or monitoring well misinterpretation, contractors should be given ready access to the complete geotechnical engineering/environmental report prepared or authorized for their use. If access is provided only to the report prepared for you, you should advise contractors of the report's limitations, assuming that a contractor was not one of the specific persons for whom the report was prepared, and that developing construction cost estimates was not one of the specific purposes for which it was prepared. While a contractor may gain important knowledge from a report prepared for another party, the contractor should discuss the report with your consultant and perform the additional or alternative work believed necessary to obtain the data specifically appropriate for construction cost estimating purposes. Some clients hold the mistaken impression that simply disclaiming responsibility for the accuracy of subsurface information always insulates them from attendant liability. Providing the best available information to contractors helps prevent costly construction problems and the adversarial attitudes that aggravate them to a disproportionate scale. READ RESPONSIBILITY CLAUSES CLOSELY. Because geotechnical/environmental engineering is based extensively on judgment and opinion, it is far less exact than other design disciplines. This situation has resulted in wholly unwarranted claims being lodged against consultants. To help prevent this problem, consultants have developed a number of clauses for use in their contracts, reports and other documents. These responsibility clauses are not exculpatory clauses designed to transfer the consultant's liabilities to other parties; rather, they are definitive clauses that identify where the consultant's responsibilities begin and end. Their use helps all parties involved recognize their individual responsibilities and take appropriate action. Some of these definitive clauses are likely to appear in your report, and you are encouraged to read them closely. Your consultant will be pleased to give full and frank answers to your questions.

The preceding paragraphs are based on information provided by the ASFE/Association of Engineering Firms Practicing in the Geosciences, Silver Spring, Maryland

Documents

GEOTECHNICAL STUDY NOBLE STREET UPGRADE FAIRBANKS, …dot.alaska.gov/nreg/projects/61725/Geotechnical-Study... · 2016-10-24 · GEOTECHNICAL STUDY NOBLE STREET UPGRADE FAIRBANKS,