HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-09-01_BILLINGS CLINIC BOZEMAN CDP_090420
BILLINGS CLINIC BOZEMAN CAMPUS
COMPREHENSI VE DRAINAGE REPORT
BOZEMAN , MONTANA
CERTIFICATION
I hereby state that this Final Drainage Report has been prepared by me or under my supervision and
meets the standard of care and expertise which is usual and customary in this community of
professional engineers. The analysis has been prepared utilizing procedures and practices specified by
the City of Bozeman and within the standard accepted practices.
____________________________________________ ___________________________
Pat Davies, P.E. Date
09/04/20
September 2, 2020
Project No. 15063.02
COMPREHENSIVE DRAINAGE REPORT
BILLINGS CLINIC BOZEMAN CAMPUS INFRASTRUCTURE
BOZEMAN, MONTANA
OVERVIEW NARRATIVE
The purpose of this drainage plan is to present a summary of calculations to quantify the stormwater
runoff for Phase I of the Infrastructure for the Billings Clinic Bozeman Campus project. All design
criteria and calculations are in accordance with The City of Bozeman Design Standards and Specifications
Policy , dated March 2004. The site stormwater improvements have been designed with the intent to
meet the current City of Bozeman drainage regulations for the entire site to the extent feasible.
Stormwater for future build-out of the property will be considered in future phase submittals.
The Billings Clinic Bozeman Campus site is located off East Valley Center Road just south of
Westlake Road between Davis Lane and North 27 th Avenue and is approximately 58.03 acres. The
project area currently consists of unimproved land. The Phase I Infrastructure project will include
the construction of Sanitary Sewer, Water and Storm Drain mains, streets, and other surface and
landscape improvements. Stormwater facilities proposed for the campus infrastructure development
includes a curb inlets and piping that are routed to three separate underground boulder pits located
on each leg of the street infrastructure. The boulder pits are to be used for retention and
infiltration/treatment of runoff from the developed area. Calculations for each onsite sub-basin and
boulder pit are included in this submittal.
I. Design Approach
The modified rational method was used to determine peak runoff rates and volumes. The
rational formula provided in The City of Bozeman Standard Specifications and Policy was used to
calculate the peak runoff rates on site, time of concentration, rainfall intensities, etc. We
assumed a time of concentration of 5-minutes. For impervious surfaces, a runoff coefficient
of 0.95 was assumed, and for pervious surfaces, a runoff coefficient of 0.15 was assumed.
Infiltration was not considered in the sizing of the boulder pits. There is a large area of off-
site flow that flows through the eastern portion of the site. The runoff from this area will
pass through the site via the original drainage swale and a new culvert under the road. The
stormdrain pipe has been sized for this volume of flow.
II. Proposed On-Site Watershed Descriptions
The watershed basins include runoff from the proposed roads and the pass-through
runoff from the southeast section of the site and south of the site. For the following
V:2020-06-23_BILLINGS CLINIC DRAINAGE REPORT 2 (09/04/20)LMH
sections, please refer to Exhibit A of this report, which graphically shows and labels
the off-site watersheds as well as the proposed drainage and storage facilities.
All storage calculations used the 10-year, 2-hour design storm frequency for rainfall
data. Runoff flow rates were calculated using the 25-year design storm. A void ratio
of 0.38 was assumed. All stormwater will be stored, treated, and infiltrated on site.
West Basin (Blue)
The West Basin consists of the western leg of the proposed road. It consists of 1.1 Acres.
Based on a rational method analysis of the pervious and impervious areas for the basin, the
required site retention volume was calculated to be 2,733 ft 3. The Boulder Pit is sized as
follows: 60’ (L) x 25’ (W) x 5’ (D). Considering a void ratio of 0.38, the West Boulder Pit
provides 2,850 ft 3 of storage, so adequate storage is provided for the West Basin. It is located
on the north side of the Street ‘A’, west of the access road for Phase 1 of the on-site
development. Gravels in the area are approximately 6-feet below existing ground and
groundwater is approximately 7-feet below existing ground surface.
East Basin (Green)
The East Basin consists of the eastern leg of the proposed road. This area consists of 1.30
Acres. The unimproved, on-site and off-site area, that will pass through the site is a total of
23.14 Acres (12.47 Acres on-site and 10.66 Acres off site). Based on a rational method
analysis of the pervious and impervious areas for the basin, the required site retention
volume was calculated to be 3,320 ft 3. The boulder pit is sized as follows: 85’ (L) x 30’ (W) x
3.5’ (D). Considering a void ratio of 0.38, the East Boulder Pit provides 3,391 ft 3 of storage,
so adequate storage is provided for the East Basin. The Boulder Pit is located on the north
side of the Street ‘A’, east of the roundabout. Gravels in the area are approximately 4-feet
below existing ground and groundwater is approximately 5-feet below existing ground
surface.
North Basin (Red)
The North Basin consists of the northern leg of the proposed road. It consists of 0.93 Acres.
Based on a rational method analysis of the pervious and impervious areas for the basin, the
required site retention volume was calculated to be 2,192 ft 3. The Boulder Pit is sized as
follows: 50’ (L) x 20’ (W) x 6’ (D). Considering a void ratio of 0.38, the North Boulder Pit
provides 2,280ft 3 of storage, so adequate storage is provided for the North Basin. It is
located on the west side of the Street ‘B’, north of the roundabout. Gravels in the area are
approximately 9-feet below existing ground and groundwater is approximately 10-feet below
existing ground surface.
III. Water Quality
The City of Bozeman Design Standards and Specifications Policy states the requirement to
capture or reuse the runoff generated from the first 0.5 inches of rainfall from a 24-hour
storm. We meet this requirement by retaining all storm runoff on site with no
discharge into the City storm drain system for the 10-year, 2-hour design storm. All
V:2020-06-23_BILLINGS CLINIC DRAINAGE REPORT 3 (09/04/20)LMH
structures will have deep sumps to act as pretreatment prior to entering the boulder
pits. The runoff will be infiltrated for treatment.
Infiltration tests were performed on the Phase 1 site development location. The average of
the 1-hour lowest infiltration rate calculated for each of the six tests performed was 3.12
in/hour. This rate is divided by 2 in the ‘cfs’ column to be conservative. Infiltration rate field
data can be found in the attachments.
West Boulder Pit:
Total Storage: 2,850 CF
Drawdown time: 2,850 cf/60 / 60 /.05 cfs = 15.83 hr
East Boulder Pit:
Total Storage: 3,320 CF
Drawdown time: 3,320 cf/60 / 60 /.09 cfs = 10.25 hr
North Boulder Pit:
Total Storage: 2,280 CF
Drawdown time: 2,280 cf/60 / 60 /.04 cfs = 15.83 hr
IV. Outlet Structures
All runoff will be captured and retained/infiltrated using the proposed boulder pits. There
are no outlet structures proposed for this project.
V. Conveyance Pipes
Pipes are sized to convey the 25-year storm event as required by the City of Bozeman
Design Standards and Specifications Policy.
VI. Appendices
Appendix A – Exhibit A – Stormwater Basins
Appendix B – Hydrology Calculations
Appendix C – Geotechnical Investigation
V:2020-06-23_BILLINGS CLINIC DRAINAGE REPORT 4 (06/23/20) JAZ
Appendix A
EXHIBIT A – STORMWATER BASINS
IN PATIENT
BUILDINGBUILDING
BUILDING BUILDING
STRUCTURE
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
BUI
L
D
I
N
G
BUI
L
D
I
N
G
BUI
L
D
I
N
G
BUILDING BUILDING
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
PARKING
PARKING
PARKINGPARKING
PA
R
K
I
N
G
PA
R
K
I
N
G
PARKING
PARKING
PA
R
K
I
N
G
PA
R
K
I
N
G
PAR
K
I
N
G
PAR
K
I
N
G
PA
R
K
I
N
G
PA
R
K
I
N
G
PARKING
PA
R
K
I
N
G
PA
R
K
I
N
G
PARKING STRUCTURE 1
ACC 2
FACILITIES
PARKING
B2B1
A1 A2 C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
D3
D1
D
2
D8
D7 D6
D4
D5
2
PA
R
K
I
N
G
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
A3
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
C8
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
C7
PA
R
K
I
N
G
PA
R
K
I
N
G
EXHIBIT A
NORTH
100 50 0
SCALE:1" = 100'
100 200
WEST BASIN
NORTH
BASIN
EAST BASIN
EAST BASIN
UNDEVELOPED
PASS-THROUGH
FLOW
EAST BASIN
OFF-SITE
UNDEVELOPED
PASS-THROUGH
FLOW
EAST
BOULDER PIT
NORTH
BOULDER PIT
WEST
BOULDER PIT
V:2020-06-23_BILLINGS CLINIC DRAINAGE REPORT 5 (06/23/20) JAZ
Appendix B
HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS
Project: Billings Clinic Bozeman Campus
Number: 15063.02
Design Storm Frequency = 4 years
Discharge Rate, d = 0.00 cfs Length (ft) Width (ft) (in/hr)* cfs
50 20 0 0.00
Surface Type
Area A
(ft 2)
Area
(acres)
Runoff
Coefficient
C
Frequency
Factor
Cf C x C f
Calculation
Value
C'
C' x A
(acres)
20 32,238 0.74 0.95 1 0.95 0.95 0.70
25 8,104 0.19 0.2 1 0.2 0.2 0.04
27 0.00 0 1 0 0 0.00
27 0.00 0 1 0 0 0.00
27 0.00 0 1 0 0 0.00
Totals 40342 0.93 0.74
Weighted Runoff Coefficient, C wd = SCjAj = 0.80 Cwd x C f = 0.80
SAj Cwd x C f x SAj = 0.74
Time of Concentration = 5 minutes
Rainfall Duration, t
(min)
Rainfall
Intensity, i
(in/hr)
Runoff
Volume
(ft 3)
Discharge
Volume
(ft 3)
Site
Detention
(ft 3)
0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 3.22 720.73 0.00 720.73
10 2.05 918.62 0.00 918.62
15 1.58 1058.68 0.00 1058.68
20 1.31 1170.83 0.00 1170.83
25 1.13 1265.94 0.00 1265.94
30 1.00 1349.35 0.00 1349.35
35 0.91 1424.16 0.00 1424.16
40 0.83 1492.30 0.00 1492.30
45 0.77 1555.10 0.00 1555.10
50 0.72 1613.52 0.00 1613.52
55 0.68 1668.25 0.00 1668.25
60 0.64 1719.83 0.00 1719.83
120 0.41 2192.03 0.00 2192.03
180 0.31 2526.27 0.00 2526.27
360 0.20 3219.88 0.00 3219.88
720 0.13 4103.93 0.00 4103.93
1440 0.08 5230.71 0.00 5230.71
Water Quantity Storage Required = 2192.03 ft 3
Water Quality Storage Required = 0.03 acre-ft 1299.68 ft 3
Peak Flow Rate = 2.38 cfs
Water Quantity Calculations
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL
RATIONAL METHOD FOR RUNOFF CALCULATIONS
Area of Boulder Pit Discharge
Permeability
* Based upon geotechnical report. Discharge flow rate
assumes 50% percolation rate.
North Leg
Project: Billings Clinic Bozeman Campus
Number: 15063.02
Design Storm Frequency = 4 years
Discharge Rate, d = 0.00 cfs Length (ft) Width (ft) (in/hr)* cfs
60 25 0 0.00
Surface Type
Area A
(ft 2)
Area
(acres)
Runoff
Coefficient
C
Frequency
Factor
Cf C x C f
Calculation
Value
C'
C' x A
(acres)
20 40,693 0.93 0.95 1 0.95 0.95 0.89
25 7,707 0.18 0.2 1 0.2 0.2 0.04
27 0.00 0 1 0 0 0.00
27 0.00 0 1 0 0 0.00
27 0.00 0 1 0 0 0.00
Totals 48400 1.11 0.92
Weighted Runoff Coefficient, C wd = SCjAj = 0.83 Cwd x C f = 0.83
SAj Cwd x C f x SAj = 0.92
Time of Concentration = 5 minutes
Rainfall Duration, t
(min)
Rainfall
Intensity, i
(in/hr)
Runoff
Volume
(ft 3)
Discharge
Volume
(ft 3)
Site
Detention
(ft 3)
0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 3.22 898.48 0.00 898.48
10 2.05 1145.17 0.00 1145.17
15 1.58 1319.78 0.00 1319.78
20 1.31 1459.59 0.00 1459.59
25 1.13 1578.15 0.00 1578.15
30 1.00 1682.14 0.00 1682.14
35 0.91 1775.39 0.00 1775.39
40 0.83 1860.33 0.00 1860.33
45 0.77 1938.62 0.00 1938.62
50 0.72 2011.45 0.00 2011.45
55 0.68 2079.68 0.00 2079.68
60 0.64 2143.99 0.00 2143.99
120 0.41 2732.64 0.00 2732.64
180 0.31 3149.30 0.00 3149.30
360 0.20 4013.98 0.00 4013.98
720 0.13 5116.06 0.00 5116.06
1440 0.08 6520.73 0.00 6520.73
Water Quantity Storage Required = 2732.64 ft 3
Water Quality Storage Required = 0.04 acre-ft 1616.74 ft 3
Peak Flow Rate = 2.97 cfs
Water Quantity Calculations
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL
RATIONAL METHOD FOR RUNOFF CALCULATIONS
Area of Boulder Pit Discharge
Permeability
* Based upon geotechnical report. Discharge flow rate
assumes 50% percolation rate.
West Leg
Project: Billings Clinic Bozeman Campus
Number: 15063.02
Design Storm Frequency = 4 years
Discharge Rate, d = 0.00 cfs Length (ft) Width (ft) (in/hr)* cfs
85 30 0 0.00
Surface Type
Area A
(ft 2)
Area
(acres)
Runoff
Coefficient
C
Frequency
Factor
Cf C x C f
Calculation
Value
C'
C' x A
(acres)
20 48,065 1.10 0.95 1 0.95 0.95 1.05
25 8,541 0.20 0.2 1 0.2 0.2 0.04
27 0.00 0 1 0 0 0.00
27 0.00 0 1 0 0 0.00
27 0.00 0 1 0 0 0.00
Totals 56606 1.30 1.09
Weighted Runoff Coefficient, C wd = SCjAj = 0.84 Cwd x C f = 0.84
SAj Cwd x C f x SAj = 1.09
Time of Concentration = 5 minutes
Rainfall Duration, t
(min)
Rainfall
Intensity, i
(in/hr)
Runoff
Volume
(ft 3)
Discharge
Volume
(ft 3)
Site
Detention
(ft 3)
0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 3.22 1058.74 0.00 1058.74
10 2.05 1349.42 0.00 1349.42
15 1.58 1555.18 0.00 1555.18
20 1.31 1719.92 0.00 1719.92
25 1.13 1859.64 0.00 1859.64
30 1.00 1982.17 0.00 1982.17
35 0.91 2092.05 0.00 2092.05
40 0.83 2192.15 0.00 2192.15
45 0.77 2284.40 0.00 2284.40
50 0.72 2370.22 0.00 2370.22
55 0.68 2450.62 0.00 2450.62
60 0.64 2526.40 0.00 2526.40
120 0.41 3220.05 0.00 3220.05
180 0.31 3711.03 0.00 3711.03
360 0.20 4729.93 0.00 4729.93
720 0.13 6028.58 0.00 6028.58
1440 0.08 7683.79 0.00 7683.79
Water Quantity Storage Required = 3220.05 ft 3
Water Quality Storage Required = 0.04 acre-ft 1893.19 ft 3
Peak Flow Rate = 3.50 cfs
Water Quantity Calculations
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL
RATIONAL METHOD FOR RUNOFF CALCULATIONS
Area of Boulder Pit Discharge
Permeability
* Based upon geotechnical report. Discharge flow rate
assumes 50% percolation rate.
East Leg
Project: Billings Clinic Bozeman Campus
Number: 15063.02
4
Design Storm Frequency = 5 years
Discharge Rate, d = 0.00 cfs Length (ft) Width (ft) (in/hr)* cfs
0 0 0 0.00
Surface Type
Area A
(ft 2)
Area
(acres)
Runoff
Coefficient
C
Frequency
Factor
Cf C x C f
Calculation
Value
C'
C' x A
(acres)
20 36,963 0.85 0.95 1.1 1.045 1 0.85
25 464,461 10.66 0.2 1.1 0.22 0.22 2.35
24 543,362 12.47 0.15 1.1 0.165 0.165 2.06
27 0.00 0 1.1 0 0 0.00
27 0.00 0 1.1 0 0 0.00
Totals 1044786 23.98 5.29
Weighted Runoff Coefficient, C wd = SCjAj = 0.20 Cwd x C f = 0.22
SAj Cwd x C f x SAj = 5.29
Time of Concentration = 45 minutes
Rainfall Duration, t
(min)
Rainfall
Intensity, i
(in/hr)
Runoff
Volume
(ft 3)
Discharge
Volume
(ft 3)
Site
Detention
(ft 3)
0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 3.83 6123.62 0.00 6123.62
10 2.46 7859.21 0.00 7859.21
15 1.89 9094.36 0.00 9094.36
20 1.58 10086.72 0.00 10086.72
25 1.37 10930.44 0.00 10930.44
30 1.22 11671.93 0.00 11671.93
35 1.10 12337.97 0.00 12337.97
40 1.01 12945.56 0.00 12945.56
45 0.94 13506.28 0.00 13506.28
50 0.88 14028.41 0.00 14028.41
55 0.82 14518.10 0.00 14518.10
60 0.78 14980.06 0.00 14980.06
120 0.50 19225.80 0.00 19225.80
180 0.39 22247.30 0.00 22247.30
360 0.25 28552.76 0.00 28552.76
720 0.16 36645.35 0.00 36645.35
1440 0.10 47031.59 0.00 47031.59
Water Quantity Storage Required = 47031.59 ft 3
Water Quality Storage Required = 0.03 acre-ft 1476.86 ft 3
Peak Flow Rate = 4.96 cfs
Water Quantity Calculations
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL
RATIONAL METHOD FOR RUNOFF CALCULATIONS
Area of Boulder Pit Discharge
Permeability
* Based upon geotechnical report. Discharge flow rate
assumes 50% percolation rate.
East Leg Pass Though
V:2020-06-23_BILLINGS CLINIC DRAINAGE REPORT 6 (06/23/20) JAZ
Appendix C
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
V:2020-06-23_BILLINGS CLINIC DRAINAGE REPORT 7 (06/23/20) JAZ
REPORT COVER PAGE
Geotechnical Engineering Report
__________________________________________________________________________
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements
Bozeman, Montana
July 17, 2019
Terracon Project No. 26195038
Prepared for:
Sanderson Stewart
Billings, Montana
Prepared by:
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
Billings, Montana
Terracon Consultants, Inc. 2110 Overland Avenue, Suite 124 Billings, Montana 59102
P (406) 656 3072 F (406) 656 3578 terracon.com
REPORT COVER LETTER TO SIGNJuly 17, 2019
Sanderson Stewart
1300 North Transtech Way
Billings, Montana 59102
Attn: Mr. Pat Davies, P.E., CDP, LEED AP – Commercial Market Lead
P:(406) 869 3333
E:pdavies@sandersonstewart.com
Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements
Bozeman, Montana
Terracon Project No. 26195038
Dear Mr. Davies:
We have completed the Geotechnical Engineering services for the above referenced project. This
study was performed in general accordance with Terracon Proposal No. P26195038 dated June
10, 2019. This report presents the findings of the subsurface exploration and provides geotechnical
and design recommendations concerning earthwork, subsurface conditions, and pavement
sections associated with the project.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions
concerning this report or if we may be of further service, please contact us.
Sincerely,
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
Travis Goracke, P.E.Gary W. Rome, P.E.
Senior Engineer Senior Project Manager
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 1
REPORT TOPICS
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1
SITE CONDITIONS ......................................................................................................... 1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................. 2
GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION ...................................................................... 2
EARTHWORK................................................................................................................. 4
PAVEMENTS .................................................................................................................. 7
CORROSIVITY.............................................................................................................. 10
GENERAL COMMENTS ............................................................................................... 10
FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... 12
Note: This report was originally delivered in a web-based format.Orange Bold text in the report indicates a referenced
section heading. The PDF version also includes hyperlinks which direct the reader to that section and clicking on the
GeoReport logo will bring you back to this page. For more interactive features, please view your project online at
client.terracon.com.
ATTACHMENTS
EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES
PHOTOGRAPHY LOG
SITE LOCATION AND EXPLORATION PLANS
EXPLORATION RESULTS
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
Note: Refer to each individual Attachment for a listing of contents.
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 1
INTRODUC TION
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements
North 27th Avenue and East Valley Center Drive
Bozeman, Montana
Terracon Project No. 26195038
July 17, 2019
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering
services performed for the Phase I Infrastructure Improvements project to be located in Bozeman,
Montana. The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering
recommendations relative to:
■Subsurface soil conditions ■Site preparation and earthwork
■Groundwater conditions ■Excavation considerations
■Pavement design and construction
■Subsurface soil conditions
The geotechnical engineering Scope of Services for this project included the advancement of 4
test borings to depths ranging from approximately 15.8 to 16.5 feet below existing site grades.
Maps showing the site and boring locations are shown in the Site Location and Exploration
Plan sections, respectively. The results of the laboratory testing performed on soil samples
obtained from the site during the field exploration are included on the boring logs and as separate
graphs in the Exploration Results section.
SITE CONDITIONS
The following description of site conditions is derived from our site visit in association with the
field exploration and our review of publicly available geologic and topographic maps.
Item Description
Project Location
The project is located west of the intersection of North 27th Avenue and East
Valley Center Drive in Bozeman, Montana.
Latitude/Longitude (approximate) 45.7202° N, 111.0768° W
Existing
Improvements
Residential house, barn, shop, and smaller ancillary structures and mass
graded land previously cultivated for agricultural use.
Current Ground
Cover
Primarily earthen, lightly to moderately vegetated and some areas of
aggregate-surface and asphalt paved drives
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements ■ Bozeman, Montana
July 17, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 26195038
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 2
Item Description
Existing Topography
The site can be generally characterized as relatively flat with localized gently
to moderately sloping terrain. Elevations are expected to range from 4,635 to
4,650 feet above mean sea level (MSL).
Geology Subsurface conditions consist of fine-grained clay and/or silt overlying
coarse-grained gravel alluvium deposits.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Our initial understanding of the project was provided in our proposal and was discussed during
project planning. A period of collaboration has transpired since the project was initiated, and our
final understanding of the project conditions is as follows:
Item Description
Information Provided Project information provided via email and attachments from Sanderson
Stewart dated June 4, 2019.
Project Description
Project includes construction of waterline, sanitary sewer, storm sewer,
and new paved drive lanes to support future commercial development
west of the intersection of North 27th Avenue and East Valley Center
Drive in Bozeman.
Pavements
Approximately 3,000 feet of paved drive will be constructed across the
approximate 50 acre development.
We have anticipated both rigid (concrete) and flexible (asphalt) pavement
sections will be considered.
Anticipated traffic is as follows:
■Autos/light trucks: 3,000 vehicles per day
■Light delivery and trash collection vehicles: 20 vehicles per week
■Tractor-trailer trucks: <5 vehicles per week
The pavement design period is 20 years.
GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION
We have developed a general characterization of the subsurface conditions based upon our
review of the subsurface exploration, laboratory data, geologic setting and our understanding of
the project. This characterization, termed GeoModel, forms the basis of our geotechnical
calculations and evaluation of site preparation and foundation options. Conditions encountered at
each exploration point are indicated on the individual logs. The individual logs can be found in the
Exploration Results section and the GeoModel can be found in the Figures section of this report.
Based on the findings of the exploratory borings, subsurface conditions beneath a thin layer of
topsoil can be generalized as follows. For a more detailed view of the model layer depths at each
boring location, refer to the GeoModel.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements ■ Bozeman, Montana
July 17, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 26195038
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 3
Model Layer Layer Name General Description
1 Clay Lean clay with varying amounts of sand present in all borings.
2 Gravel Poorly graded gravel with varying amounts of sand and silt present
in all borings.
Clay: Clay was encountered below a thin layer of topsoil in all of the borings. The clay extended
to depths ranging from approximately 4.5 to 9 feet below existing grade. Representative samples
of clay obtained from borings B-2 and B-3 at approximate depths of 3 to 5 feet and 2.5 to 5 feet
below existing grade, respectively, classified as lean clay (CL) in general accordance with the
Unified Soil Classification System and ASTM D2487. Penetration resistance values in the clay
ranged from 3 to 14 blows per foot, indicating a soft to stiff soil stratum. Moisture content in the
clay ranged from 19 to 27 percent. Liquid and plastic limit testing performed on the representative
samples of the clay described above indicated liquid limits ranging from 32 to 35 percent and
plasticity indices ranging from 10 to 13.
Compressive strength testing performed on a relatively undisturbed sample of clay obtained from
boring B-2 at approximate depths of 3 to 5 feet indicate an unconfined compressive strength of
2,295 pounds per square foot (psf). A natural dry density of 100 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) was
obtained from the compressive strength sample. Moisture-density relationship (Proctor) testing
on a disturbed bulk sample of the clay obtained from boring B-3 at approximate depths of 2.5 to
5 feet indicated a maximum dry density of 106.8 pcf at corresponding optimum moisture of 16.1
percent. California Bearing Ratio (CBR) testing on the disturbed bulk sample of clay obtained
from boring B-3 described above, indicates a CBR value of approximately 3.2 percent at a density
of approximately 101.5 pcf (95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM
D698).
Gravel: Gravel was encountered beneath the clay layers in all of the borings. The gravel layer
extended beyond the maximum depths explored of approximately 16.5 feet below existing grade.
The material visually classified as poorly-graded gravel with sand in general accordance with
ASTM D2488. Based on drilling conditions, cobbles and boulders were noted within the gravel
stratum. Although a sample of material obtained from boring B-1 at approximate depths of 10 to
11.5 feet classified as poorly graded sand with gravel (SP) in accordance with the Unified Soil
Classification System and ASTM D2487, the in-situ gradation of the material would be coarser,
due to the fact that the split spoon sampler used in obtaining the sample has an inside diameter
of 1.38 inches and cannot accommodate the larger aggregate present in the layer. Penetration
resistance values in the gravel stratum ranged from 28 to greater than 50 blows per foot, indicating
a medium dense to very dense soil stratum. Unsaturated moisture contents in the gravel stratum
were on the order of about 12 percent. Liquid and plastic limit testing performed on a sample of
the gravel obtained from boring B-1 from depths of approximately 10 to 11.5 feet below existing
grade indicated the material was non-plastic.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements ■ Bozeman, Montana
July 17, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 26195038
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 4
Groundwater:Groundwater was encountered at depths ranging from 6 to 10 feet below existing
grade in all borings during drilling. Groundwater level fluctuations can occur due to seasonal
variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff, and other factors not evident at the time the borings were
performed; therefore, groundwater levels during construction or at other times in the life of the project
may differ from the levels noted on the boring logs.
EARTHWORK
Earthwork is anticipated to include excavation, utility trench backfill, and subgrade preparation.
The following sections provide recommendations for use in the preparation of specifications for
the work. Recommendations include critical quality criteria, as necessary, to render the site in the
state considered in our geotechnical engineering evaluation for pavements.
Site Preparation
Prior to placing fill, existing topsoil, vegetation and root mat should be removed. Complete
stripping of the topsoil should be performed in the proposed pavement areas.
The subgrade should be proofrolled with an adequately loaded vehicle such as a fully-loaded
tandem-axle dump truck. The proofrolling should be performed under the direction of the
Geotechnical Engineer. Areas excessively deflecting under the proofroll should be delineated and
subsequently addressed by the Geotechnical Engineer. Such areas should either be removed or
modified with geotextile fabric and/or grid. Excessively wet or dry material should either be
removed or moisture conditioned and recompacted.
Fill Material Types
Fill required to achieve design grade should be classified as structural fill and general fill.
Structural fill is material used below, or within 10 feet of structures, pavements or constructed
slopes. General fill is material used to achieve grade outside of these areas. Earthen materials
used for structural and general fill should meet the following material property requirements:
Soil Type 1, 2 USCS Classification Acceptable Parameters (for Structural Fill)
Low Plasticity
Cohesive CL, CL-ML, ML Liquid Limit less than 40.
Granular GW, GP, GM, GC,
SW, SP, SM, SC Less than 20% Passing No. 200 sieve (SM only)
1.Structural and general fill should consist of approved materials free of organic matter and debris. Frozen
material should not be used, and fill should not be placed on a frozen subgrade. A sample of each material
type should be submitted to the Geotechnical Engineer for evaluation prior to use on this site.
2.On-site materials can be reworked and reused as site grading fill, utility trench backfill, and pavement
subgrade.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements ■ Bozeman, Montana
July 17, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 26195038
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 5
Fill Compaction Requirements
Structural and general fill should meet the following compaction requirements.
Item Structural Fill General Fill
Maximum Lift
Thickness
8 inches or less in loose thickness when heavy,
self-propelled compaction equipment is used
4 to 6 inches in loose thickness when hand-
guided equipment (i.e. jumping jack or plate
compactor) is used
Same as Structural fill
Minimum
Compaction
Requirements 1, 2, 3
95% of max. dry density for site grading, utility
trench backfill, and pavement subgrade 92% of max.
Water Content
Range 1
Low plasticity cohesive: -2% to +2% of optimum
High plasticity cohesive: 0 to +4% of optimum
Granular: -3% to +3% of optimum
As required to achieve min.
compaction requirements
1.Maximum density and optimum water content as determined by the standard Proctor test (ASTM D 698).
2.High plasticity cohesive fill should not be compacted to more than 100% of standard Proctor maximum dry
density.
3.If the granular material is a coarse sand or gravel, or of a uniform size, or has a low fines content,
compaction comparison to relative density may be more appropriate. In this case, granular materials should
be compacted to at least 70% relative density (ASTM D 4253 and D 4254).
Utility Trench Backfill
In general, soils encountered within the exploratory borings consist predominantly of fine-grained
clays and coarse-grained gravel soils. The site soils encountered within the exploratory borings
are generally suitable for trench backfill provided they are placed under controlled moisture and
density conditions in accordance with the Montana Public Works Standard Specifications
(MPWSS). Compaction in narrow utility trenches can be difficult to achieve given the anticipated
physical space limitations; therefore, consideration should be given to utilizing a vibratory
compactor or a sheeps foot wheel on the end of a backhoe arm to compact in these tight spaces
to minimize the potential for future settlement. Based on laboratory testing, the excavated clay
soil will have in-place natural moisture contents ranging from 19 to 27 percent. Much of the clay
encountered during the field investigation has in-situ moisture contents anticipated to be above
optimum moisture contents and will likely require drying. Compaction of the trench backfill will be
difficult and time consuming unless the materials used for trench backfill are uniform in mixture
and moisture content. Selective excavation, stockpiling, spreading for drying, and backfilling of
the excavated materials will be required to ensure a uniform fill for use as backfill. Based on
groundwater information obtained during the field investigation, utility trench excavations are
expected to extend near or below groundwater elevations. Potential contractors should be
advised of and recognize these conditions prior to bidding the construction work. Consideration
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements ■ Bozeman, Montana
July 17, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 26195038
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 6
should be given to wasting the clay soils removed from the trenches and importing a select
granular material for trench backfill.
Trenches for the proposed waterline are expected to encounter fine-grained soils which may be
above optimum moisture content and are susceptible to pumping and rutting at the anticipated
trench bottom. If the trench excavations encounter wet or unstable material, one to two feet of
Type 2 Pipe Bedding, only placed as directed by the Engineer, separated from the natural soil
with a separation/stabilization geotextile, such as a Mirafi 180N or equivalent, may be needed to
replace unsuitable material encountered in the trench bottom in accordance with Section 02221
of MPWSS.
Thrust blocks may be required along proposed waterline alignments. At the time of report
preparation, utility installation depths were not provided to Terracon; an unfactored lateral bearing
pressure of 1,000 pounds per square foot (psf) may be used to calculate lateral restraint for blocks
bearing against the recompacted site clay soils, based upon an anticipated utility burial depth of
approximately 5 feet.
Trench Stability
Trench stability is very important for worker safety, as well as protection of nearby utilities and/or
private property. The Contractor is responsible for maintaining excavations for worker safety. This
will be governed by Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) Regulations (29 CFR 1926,
Subpart P). The route for the utility installations may extend through areas where trench
excavations are restricted in width by existing utilities, easements, road width, or other physical
features. It is anticipated that Type 2 trenches will most likely be used (i.e., shored excavations
or the use of a trench box). The shoring system will be governed by OSHA Regulations.
During pipe installation, various construction practices (e.g., stockpiling excavated soil
immediately adjacent to the excavation or operating equipment next to the trench walls) may
contribute to trench instability. These construction procedures create a surcharge load to the sides
of the excavation that the soil might not be capable of supporting. Consequently, attention should
be paid to construction practices.
Pipe Bedding
Type 1 bedding material and Type 2 bedding material are recommended in accordance with the
Montana Public Works Standard Specifications. Type 2 bedding material shall be installed only
as directed by the Engineer. Bedding material should also meet the requirements of the pipe
manufacturer.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements ■ Bozeman, Montana
July 17, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 26195038
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 7
Earthwork Construction Considerations
Shallow excavations for the utility installation are anticipated to be accomplished with
conventional construction equipment. Upon completion of utility trench backfill, care should be
taken to maintain the subgrade water content prior to construction of pavements. Construction
traffic over the completed subgrades should be avoided, when possible. Care should be taken to
prevent ponding of surface water on the prepared subgrades or in excavations. Water collecting
over or adjacent to construction areas should be removed. If the subgrade freezes, desiccates,
saturates, or is disturbed, the affected material should be removed, or the materials should be
scarified, moisture conditioned, and recompacted prior to pavement construction.
The groundwater table could affect excavation efforts, especially for installation of the utilities and
backfilling with lower strength soils. A temporary dewatering system consisting of sumps with pumps
may be necessary to facilitate construction, depending on groundwater level fluctuations.
Construction site safety is the sole responsibility of the contractor who controls the means,
methods, and sequencing of construction operations. Under no circumstances shall the
information provided herein be interpreted to mean Terracon is assuming responsibility for
construction site safety, or the contractor's activities; such responsibility shall neither be implied
nor inferred.
PAVEMENTS
General Pavement Comments
Pavement designs are provided for the traffic conditions and pavement life conditions as noted in
Project Description and in the following sections of this report. A critical aspect of pavement
performance is site preparation. Pavement designs noted in this section must be applied to the
site which has been prepared as recommended in the Earthwork section.
We anticipated the onsite soils will be utilized in subgrade construction. A California Bearing Ratio
(CBR) test has been performed on a disturbed bulk sample of the clay subgrade obtained from
boring B-3 at approximate depths of 2.5 to 5 feet below existing grade. The moisture-density
relationship and CBR test results are presented in the Exploration Results section.
Pavement Design Parameters
Based on laboratory test results, a subgrade CBR of 3.2 was used for the AC pavement designs,
and a modulus of subgrade reaction of 100 pci was used for the PCC pavement designs. The
values were empirically derived based upon our experience with the lean clay subgrade soils and
our understanding of the quality of the subgrade as prescribed by the Site Preparation conditions
as outlined in Earthwork. A modulus of rupture of 580 psi was used for pavement concrete.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements ■ Bozeman, Montana
July 17, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 26195038
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 8
Pavement design recommendations for this project have been based on procedures outlined in
the AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures, 1993, coupled with publications by the
Asphalt Institute and the American Concrete Institute on the design of parking lots and our local
experience. Pavement design input parameters and resulting pavement sections are provided in
the following table:
Pavement Thickness Design Parameters
Input Parameter Flexible (asphalt)Rigid (concrete)
Reliability, %85 85
Initial Serviceability 4.2 4.5
Terminal Serviceability 2.0 2.5
Standard Deviation 0.45 0.35
Drainage Coefficient 1.0 1.0
Design ESAL Value: Anticipated Traffic 155,000 195,000
Pavement Section Thicknesses
Traffic was estimated using 2018 traffic count data obtained from the Montana Department of
Transportation (MDT) website. The following table provides options for AC and PCC Sections:
Asphaltic Concrete Design
Traffic Area Asphalt Concrete (in.)1 Aggregate Base (in.)2 Total Thickness (in.)1
Flexible Section 4 9 13
1.Asphalt concrete should conform to Montana Public Works Standard Specifications (MPWSS).
2.Aggregate base should meet the requirements for 1-1/2 inch crushed aggregate in accordance with MPWSS.
Portland Cement Concrete Design
Traffic Area Portland Cement
Concrete (in.)1 Aggregate Base (in.)2 Total Thickness (in.)
Rigid Section 6.5 6 12.5
1.Portland cement concrete should conform to MPWSS requirements.
2.Aggregate base should meet the requirements for 1-1/2 inch crushed aggregate in accordance with MPWSS.
Migration of fines into the aggregate base course layer will reduce the support characteristics of
the base and decrease performance of the pavement section. The placement of a geotextile
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements ■ Bozeman, Montana
July 17, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 26195038
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 9
separation fabric, such as a Mirafi 180N or equivalent, between the fine-grained subgrade and
the aggregate base course to improve constructability and extend the pavement’s service life is
recommended for the above sections.
Pavement Drainage
Pavements should be sloped to provide rapid drainage of surface water. Water allowed to pond
on or adjacent to the pavements could saturate the subgrade and contribute to premature
pavement deterioration. In addition, the pavement subgrade should be graded to provide positive
drainage within the granular base section. Appropriate sub-drainage or connection to a suitable
daylight outlet should be provided to remove water from the granular subbase.
Pavement Maintenance
The pavement sections represent minimum recommended thicknesses and, as such, periodic
maintenance should be anticipated. Therefore, preventive maintenance should be planned and
provided for through an on-going pavement management program. Maintenance activities are
intended to slow the rate of pavement deterioration and to preserve the pavement investment.
Maintenance consists of both localized maintenance (e.g., crack and joint sealing and patching)
and global maintenance (e.g., surface sealing). Preventive maintenance is usually the priority
when implementing a pavement maintenance program. Additional engineering observation is
recommended to determine the type and extent of a cost-effective program. Even with periodic
maintenance, some movements and related cracking may still occur and repairs may be required.
Pavement performance is affected by its surroundings. In addition to providing preventive
maintenance, the civil engineer should consider the following recommendations in the design and
layout of pavements:
■Final grade adjacent to paved areas should slope down from the edges at a minimum 2%.
■Subgrade and pavement surfaces should have a minimum 2% slope to promote proper
surface drainage.
■Install below pavement drainage systems surrounding areas anticipated for frequent
wetting.
■Install joint sealant and seal cracks immediately.
■Seal all landscaped areas in or adjacent to pavements to reduce moisture migration to
subgrade soils.
■Place compacted, low permeability backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter.
■Place curb, gutter and/or sidewalk directly on clay subgrade soils rather than on unbound
granular base course materials.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements ■ Bozeman, Montana
July 17, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 26195038
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 10
CORROSIVITY
The table below lists the results of laboratory soluble sulfate, electrical resistivity, and pH testing.
The values may be used to estimate potential corrosive characteristics of the on-site soils with
respect to contact with the various underground materials which will be used for project
construction.
Corrosivity Test Results Summary
Boring
Sample
Depth
(feet)
Soil Description
Soluble
Sulfate
(%)
Electrical Resistivity 1
(Ω-cm)pH
B-1 2.5 – 4 Lean Clay ND 2 1,090 8.5
1.Performed on a saturated sample of soil.
2.Not detected at the reporting limits.
Results of resistivity testing indicate the sample of the on-site soil tested possesses severe
anticipated corrosion activity to buried metal in accordance with the USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS). If corrosion of buried metal is critical, it should be protected using
a non-corrosive backfill, wrapping, coating, sacrificial anodes, or a combination of these methods,
as designed by a qualified corrosion professional.
Results of soluble sulfate testing indicate samples of the on-site soils tested possess negligible
potential for sulfate attack on normal strength concrete. Concrete should be designed in
accordance with the provisions of the ACI Design Manual, Section 318, Chapter 4.
GENERAL COMMENTS
Our analysis and opinions are based upon our understanding of the project, the geotechnical
conditions in the area, and the data obtained from our site exploration. Natural variations will occur
between exploration point locations or due to the modifying effects of construction or weather.
The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction.
Terracon should be retained as the Geotechnical Engineer, to provide observation and testing
services during pertinent construction phases. If variations appear, we can provide further
evaluation and supplemental recommendations. If variations are noted in the absence of our
observation and testing services on-site, we should be immediately notified so that we can provide
evaluation and supplemental recommendations.
Our Scope of Services does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or
biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of
pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for
such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements ■ Bozeman, Montana
July 17, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 26195038
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 11
Our services and any correspondence or collaboration through this system are intended for the
sole benefit and exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and
are accomplished in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices with
no third-party beneficiaries intended. Any third-party access to services or correspondence is
solely for information purposes to support the services provided by Terracon to our client.
Reliance upon the services and any work product is limited to our client, and is not intended for
third parties. Any use or reliance of the provided information by third parties is done solely at their
own risk. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made.
Site characteristics as provided are for design purposes and not to estimate excavation cost. Any
use of our report in that regard is done at the sole risk of the excavating cost estimator as there
may be variations on the site that are not apparent in the data that could significantly impact
excavation cost. Any parties charged with estimating excavation costs should seek their own site
characterization for specific purposes to obtain the specific level of detail necessary for costing.
Site safety, and cost estimating including, excavation support, and dewatering
requirements/design are the responsibility of others. If changes in the nature, design, or location
of the project are planned, our conclusions and recommendations shall not be considered valid
unless we review the changes and either verify or modify our conclusions in writing.
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable
FIGURES
Contents:
GeoModel
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
DE
P
T
H
B
E
L
O
W
G
R
A
D
E
(
F
e
e
t
)
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements Bozeman, MT
Terracon Project No. 26195038
Layering shown on this figure has been developed by thegeotechnical engineer for purposes of modeling the subsurfaceconditions as required for the subsequent geotechnical engineeringfor this project.Numbers adjacent to soil column indicate depth below ground
surface.
NOTES:
B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4
GEOMODEL
This is not a cross section. This is intended to display the Geotechnical Model only. See individual logs for more detailed conditions.
First Water Observation
Groundwater levels are temporal. The levels shown are representative of the dateand time of our exploration. Significant changes are possible over time.Water levels shown are as measured during and/or after drilling. In some cases,boring advancement methods mask the presence/absence of groundwater. See
individual logs for details.
LEGEND
Topsoil
Lean Clay
Poorly-graded Gravel withSand
Model Layer General DescriptionLayer Name
Lean clay with varying amounts of sand present in all borings.1
Poorly graded gravel with varying amounts of sand and siltpresent in all borings.2
Clay
Gravel
5
15.8
1
2
8
5.8
16.5
1
2
8
9
16.5
1
2
10
4.5
16.4
1
2
6
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable
ATTACHMENTS
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements ■ Bozeman, Montana
July 17, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 26195038
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES 1 of 2
EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES
Field Exploration
Number of Borings Boring Depth (feet)Planned Location
4 15.8 to 16.5 Potential roadway and utility
alignments
Boring Layout and Elevations: The anticipated locations of the borings were provided by
Terracon and were originally staked in the field by Sanderson Stewart personnel. GPS
coordinates were recorded at each boring location using a handheld GPS unit (estimated
horizontal accuracy of about ± 10 feet. If elevations and a more precise boring layout are desired,
we recommend borings be surveyed following completion of fieldwork.
Subsurface Exploration Procedures: We advanced the borings with a truck-mounted rotary drill
rig using continuous-flight, hollow-stem augers. Samples were obtained at intervals of 2.5 or 5 feet
throughout the borings. In the thin-walled tube sampling procedure, a thin-walled, seamless steel
tube with a sharp cutting edge was pushed hydraulically into the soil to obtain a relatively undisturbed
sample. In the split-barrel sampling procedure, a standard 2-inch outer diameter split-barrel sampling
spoon was driven into the ground by a 140-pound automatic hammer falling a distance of 30 inches.
The number of blows required to advance the sampling spoon the last 12 inches of a normal 18-inch
penetration is recorded as the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) resistance value. The SPT
resistance values, also referred to as N-values, are indicated on the boring logs at the test depths.
The sampling depths, penetration distances, and other sampling information was recorded on the
field boring logs. The samples were placed in appropriate containers and taken to our soil laboratory
for testing and classification by a Geotechnical Engineer. Our exploration team prepared field
boring logs as part of the drilling operations. These field logs included visual classifications of the
materials encountered during drilling and our interpretation of the subsurface conditions between
samples. Final boring logs were prepared from the field logs. The final boring logs represent the
Geotechnical Engineer's interpretation of the field logs and include modifications based on
observations and tests of the samples in our laboratory.
Laboratory Testing
The project engineer reviewed the field data and assigned laboratory tests to better understand
the engineering properties of the various soil strata, as necessary, for this project. Procedural
standards noted below are for reference to methodology in general. In some cases, variations to
methods were applied because of local practice or professional judgment. Standards noted below
include reference to other, related standards. Such references are not necessarily applicable to
describe the specific test performed.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements ■ Bozeman, Montana
July 17, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 26195038
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES 2 of 2
■ASTM D2216 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture)
Content of Soil and Rock by Mass
■ASTM D4318 Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of
Soils
■ASTM D422 Standard Test Method for Particle-Size Analysis of Soils
■ASTM D2166 Standard Test Method for Unconfined Compressive Strength of Cohesive
Soils
■ASTM D698 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil
Using Standard Effort
■ASTM D1883 Standard Test Method for California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of Laboratory-
Compacted Soils
■Resistivity, pH, and soluble sulfate content
The laboratory testing program often included examination of soil samples by an engineer. Based
on the material’s texture and plasticity, we described and classified the soil samples in accordance
with the Unified Soil Classification System.
Chemical Analysis:Soil samples obtained from boring B-1 at an approximate depth of 2.5 to 4
feet was submitted to Energy Laboratories for chemical analysis, to include the determination of
the soils’ pH, soluble sulfate content, and resistivity. The results of these chemical analyses are
discussed in the Corrosivity section.
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements ■ Bozeman, Montana
July 17, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 26195038
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable PHOTOGRAPHY LOG 1 of 1
PHOTOGRAPHY LOG
Looking east at drill rig set up on boring B-1 Looking east at drill rig set up on boring B-2
Looking northeast at rig set up on boring B-3 Looking north at boring B-4
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable
SITE LOCATION AND EXPLORATION PLANS
Contents:
Site Location Plan
Exploration Plan
Note: All attachments are one page unless noted above.
SITE LOCATION
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements ■ Bozeman, Montana
July 17, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 26195038
Note to Preparer: This is a large table with outside borders. Just click inside the table
above this text box, then paste your GIS Toolbox image.
When paragraph markers are turned on you may notice a line of hidden text above and
outside the table – please leave that alone. Limit editing to inside the table.
The line at the bottom about the general location is a separate table line. You can edit
it as desired, but try to keep to a single line of text to avoid reformatting the page.
SITE LOCA TION
DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES MAP PROVIDED BY MICROSOFT BING MAPS
EXPLORATION PLAN
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements ■ Bozeman, Montana
July 17, 2019 ■ Terracon Project No. 26195038
Note to Preparer: This is a large table with outside borders. Just click inside the table
above this text box, then paste your GIS Toolbox image.
When paragraph markers are turned on you may notice a line of hidden text above and
outside the table – please leave that alone. Limit editing to inside the table.
The line at the bottom about the general location is a separate table line. You can edit
it as desired, but try to keep to a single line of text to avoid reformatting the page.
EXPLORATION P LAN
DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES MAP PROVIDED BY MICROSOFT BING MAPS
EXPLORATION RESULTS
Contents:
Boring Logs (B-1 through B-4)
Atterberg Limits
Grain Size Distribution (2 pages)
Unconfined Compressive Strength
Moisture Density Relationship
CBR (4 pages)
Corrosivity (7 pages)
Note: All attachments are one page unless noted above.
4-4-3N=7
4-4-3
N=7
23-34-31N=65
24-50/2"
16-14-15N=29
17-50/4"
1
19
27
12
11 NP
TOPSOIL, approximately 4 inches thick.
LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, moist, medium stiff
POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP), with cobbles andboulders, fine to coarse grained, subrounded to subangular, brown, moist towet, medium dense to very dense
Boring Terminated at 15.8 Feet
0.3
5.0
15.8
Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.
TH
I
S
B
O
R
I
N
G
L
O
G
I
S
N
O
T
V
A
L
I
D
I
F
S
E
P
A
R
A
T
E
D
F
R
O
M
O
R
I
G
I
N
A
L
R
E
P
O
R
T
.
G
E
O
S
M
A
R
T
L
O
G
-
N
O
W
E
L
L
2
6
1
9
5
0
3
8
P
H
A
S
E
I
I
N
F
R
A
S
T
R
U
.
G
P
J
T
E
R
R
A
C
O
N
_
D
A
T
A
T
E
M
P
L
A
T
E
.
G
D
T
7
/
1
7
/
1
9
WA
T
E
R
L
E
V
E
L
OB
S
E
R
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
DE
P
T
H
(
F
t
.
)
5
10
15
FIE
L
D
T
E
S
T
RE
S
U
L
T
S
PE
R
C
E
N
T
F
I
N
E
S
WA
T
E
R
CO
N
T
E
N
T
(
%
)
DR
Y
U
N
I
T
WE
I
G
H
T
(
p
c
f
)
ATTERBERGLIMITS
LL-PL-PI
LOCATION See Exploration Plan
Latitude: 45.7221° Longitude: -111.0805°
GR
A
P
H
I
C
L
O
G
MO
D
E
L
L
A
Y
E
R
DEPTH
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:0-16.5' Hollow stem auger
Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
2110 Overland Ave, Ste 124Billings, MT
Notes:
Project No.: 26195038
Drill Rig: BK-81
BORING LOG NO. B-1
Sanderson StewartCLIENT:Billings, MT
Driller: HazTech
Boring Completed: 06-17-2019
PROJECT: Phase I Infrastructure Improvements
See Exploration and Testing Procedures for adescription of field and laboratory procedures usedand additional data (If any).
See Supporting Information for explanation of
symbols and abbreviations.
North 27th Avenue & East Valley Center Drive Bozeman, MT
SITE:
Boring Started: 06-17-2019While drilling
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
1
2
SA
M
P
L
E
T
Y
P
E
2-3-3N=6
3-1-30N=31
32-50/2"
17-17-24N=41
23-42-50N=92
86
22
21
20
100 32-22-10
TOPSOIL, brown, moist, approximately 6 inches thick.
LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, moist, medium stiff
POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP), with cobbles and
boulders, fine to coarse grained, subrounded to subangular, brown, moist towet, dense to very dense
Boring Terminated at 16.5 Feet
0.5
5.8
16.5
Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.
TH
I
S
B
O
R
I
N
G
L
O
G
I
S
N
O
T
V
A
L
I
D
I
F
S
E
P
A
R
A
T
E
D
F
R
O
M
O
R
I
G
I
N
A
L
R
E
P
O
R
T
.
G
E
O
S
M
A
R
T
L
O
G
-
N
O
W
E
L
L
2
6
1
9
5
0
3
8
P
H
A
S
E
I
I
N
F
R
A
S
T
R
U
.
G
P
J
T
E
R
R
A
C
O
N
_
D
A
T
A
T
E
M
P
L
A
T
E
.
G
D
T
7
/
1
7
/
1
9
WA
T
E
R
L
E
V
E
L
OB
S
E
R
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
DE
P
T
H
(
F
t
.
)
5
10
15
FIE
L
D
T
E
S
T
RE
S
U
L
T
S
PE
R
C
E
N
T
F
I
N
E
S
WA
T
E
R
CO
N
T
E
N
T
(
%
)
DR
Y
U
N
I
T
WE
I
G
H
T
(
p
c
f
)
ATTERBERGLIMITS
LL-PL-PI
LOCATION See Exploration Plan
Latitude: 45.7203° Longitude: -111.0805°
GR
A
P
H
I
C
L
O
G
MO
D
E
L
L
A
Y
E
R
DEPTH
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:0-16.5' Hollow stem auger
Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
2110 Overland Ave, Ste 124Billings, MT
Notes:
Project No.: 26195038
Drill Rig: BK-81
BORING LOG NO. B-2
Sanderson StewartCLIENT:Billings, MT
Driller: HazTech
Boring Completed: 06-17-2019
PROJECT: Phase I Infrastructure Improvements
See Exploration and Testing Procedures for adescription of field and laboratory procedures usedand additional data (If any).
See Supporting Information for explanation of
symbols and abbreviations.
North 27th Avenue & East Valley Center Drive Bozeman, MT
SITE:
Boring Started: 06-17-2019While drilling
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
1
2
SA
M
P
L
E
T
Y
P
E
2-2-2N=4
1-2-1N=3
2-4-10
N=14
50/4"
11-21-11N=32
96
21
19
24
27
35-22-13
TOPSOIL, brown, moist, approximately 6 inches thick.
LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, moist, soft to stiff
POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP), with cobbles andboulders, fine to coarse grained, subrounded to subangular, brown, moist towet, dense to very dense
Boring Terminated at 16.5 Feet
0.5
9.0
16.5
Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.
TH
I
S
B
O
R
I
N
G
L
O
G
I
S
N
O
T
V
A
L
I
D
I
F
S
E
P
A
R
A
T
E
D
F
R
O
M
O
R
I
G
I
N
A
L
R
E
P
O
R
T
.
G
E
O
S
M
A
R
T
L
O
G
-
N
O
W
E
L
L
2
6
1
9
5
0
3
8
P
H
A
S
E
I
I
N
F
R
A
S
T
R
U
.
G
P
J
T
E
R
R
A
C
O
N
_
D
A
T
A
T
E
M
P
L
A
T
E
.
G
D
T
7
/
1
7
/
1
9
WA
T
E
R
L
E
V
E
L
OB
S
E
R
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
DE
P
T
H
(
F
t
.
)
5
10
15
FIE
L
D
T
E
S
T
RE
S
U
L
T
S
PE
R
C
E
N
T
F
I
N
E
S
WA
T
E
R
CO
N
T
E
N
T
(
%
)
DR
Y
U
N
I
T
WE
I
G
H
T
(
p
c
f
)
ATTERBERGLIMITS
LL-PL-PI
LOCATION See Exploration Plan
Latitude: 45.7204° Longitude: -111.0766°
GR
A
P
H
I
C
L
O
G
MO
D
E
L
L
A
Y
E
R
DEPTH
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:0-16.5' Hollow stem auger
Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
2110 Overland Ave, Ste 124Billings, MT
Notes:
Project No.: 26195038
Drill Rig: BK-81
BORING LOG NO. B-3
Sanderson StewartCLIENT:Billings, MT
Driller: HazTech
Boring Completed: 06-17-2019
PROJECT: Phase I Infrastructure Improvements
See Exploration and Testing Procedures for adescription of field and laboratory procedures usedand additional data (If any).
See Supporting Information for explanation of
symbols and abbreviations.
North 27th Avenue & East Valley Center Drive Bozeman, MT
SITE:
Boring Started: 06-17-2019While drilling
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
1
2
SA
M
P
L
E
T
Y
P
E
4-5-5N=10
1-1-10
N=11
9-11-17N=28
11-22-36N=58
18-43-50/5"
23
26
11
TOPSOIL, brown, moist, approximately 6 inches thick.
LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, moist, stiff
POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP), with cobbles and
boulders, fine to coarse grained, subrounded to subangular, brown, moist towet, medium dense to very dense
Boring Terminated at 16.4 Feet
0.5
4.5
16.4
Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.
TH
I
S
B
O
R
I
N
G
L
O
G
I
S
N
O
T
V
A
L
I
D
I
F
S
E
P
A
R
A
T
E
D
F
R
O
M
O
R
I
G
I
N
A
L
R
E
P
O
R
T
.
G
E
O
S
M
A
R
T
L
O
G
-
N
O
W
E
L
L
2
6
1
9
5
0
3
8
P
H
A
S
E
I
I
N
F
R
A
S
T
R
U
.
G
P
J
T
E
R
R
A
C
O
N
_
D
A
T
A
T
E
M
P
L
A
T
E
.
G
D
T
7
/
1
7
/
1
9
WA
T
E
R
L
E
V
E
L
OB
S
E
R
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
DE
P
T
H
(
F
t
.
)
5
10
15
FIE
L
D
T
E
S
T
RE
S
U
L
T
S
PE
R
C
E
N
T
F
I
N
E
S
WA
T
E
R
CO
N
T
E
N
T
(
%
)
DR
Y
U
N
I
T
WE
I
G
H
T
(
p
c
f
)
ATTERBERGLIMITS
LL-PL-PI
LOCATION See Exploration Plan
Latitude: 45.7191° Longitude: -111.074°
GR
A
P
H
I
C
L
O
G
MO
D
E
L
L
A
Y
E
R
DEPTH
Page 1 of 1
Advancement Method:0-16.5' Hollow stem auger
Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
2110 Overland Ave, Ste 124Billings, MT
Notes:
Project No.: 26195038
Drill Rig: BK-81
BORING LOG NO. B-4
Sanderson StewartCLIENT:Billings, MT
Driller: HazTech
Boring Completed: 06-18-2019
PROJECT: Phase I Infrastructure Improvements
See Exploration and Testing Procedures for adescription of field and laboratory procedures usedand additional data (If any).
See Supporting Information for explanation of
symbols and abbreviations.
North 27th Avenue & East Valley Center Drive Bozeman, MT
SITE:
Boring Started: 06-18-2019While drilling
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
1
2
SA
M
P
L
E
T
Y
P
E
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 20 40 60 80 100
CH
o
r
O
H
CL
o
r
O
L
ML or OL
MH or OH
"U"
L
i
n
e
"A" L
i
n
e
ATTERBERG LIMITS RESULTS
ASTM D4318
P
LAS
TIC
IT
Y
I
NDE
X
LIQUID LIMIT
PROJECT NUMBER: 26195038
SITE: North 27th Avenue & East Valley Center
Drive
Bozeman, MT
PROJECT: Phase I Infrastructure Improvements
CLIENT: Sanderson Stewart
Billings, MT
2110 Overland Ave, Ste 124Billings, MT
LA
B
O
R
A
T
O
R
Y
T
E
S
T
S
A
R
E
N
O
T
V
A
L
I
D
I
F
S
E
P
A
R
A
T
E
D
F
R
O
M
O
R
I
G
I
N
A
L
R
E
P
O
R
T
.
A
T
T
E
R
B
E
R
G
L
I
M
I
T
S
2
6
1
9
5
0
3
8
P
H
A
S
E
I
I
N
F
R
A
S
T
R
U
.
G
P
J
T
E
R
R
A
C
O
N
_
D
A
T
A
T
E
M
P
L
A
T
E
.
G
D
T
7
/
1
6
/
1
9
NP
32
35
NP
22
22
NP
10
13
SP
CL
CL
POORLY GRADED SAND with GRAVEL
LEAN CLAY
LEAN CLAY
DescriptionUSCSFinesPIPLLLBoring ID Depth
B-1
B-2
B-3
10 - 11.5
3 - 5
2.5 - 5
1
86
96
CL-ML
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
0.0010.010.1110100
P
E
R
C
E
N
T
C
O
A
R
S
E
R
B
Y
W
E
I
G
H
T
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
ASTM D422
3 2 10 14 506 2001.5 81 140
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
3/4 1/23/8 30 403 60
HYDROMETERU.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES
16 20
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS
44 1006
PE
R
C
E
N
T
F
I
N
E
R
B
Y
W
E
I
G
H
T
PROJECT NUMBER: 26195038
SITE: North 27th Avenue & East Valley Center
Drive
Bozeman, MT
PROJECT: Phase I Infrastructure Improvements
CLIENT: Sanderson Stewart
Billings, MT
2110 Overland Ave, Ste 124Billings, MT
LA
B
O
R
A
T
O
R
Y
T
E
S
T
S
A
R
E
N
O
T
V
A
L
I
D
I
F
S
E
P
A
R
A
T
E
D
F
R
O
M
O
R
I
G
I
N
A
L
R
E
P
O
R
T
.
7
3
1
5
5
0
8
0
G
R
A
I
N
S
I
Z
E
-
D
9
5
-
D
5
0
2
6
1
9
5
0
3
8
P
H
A
S
E
I
I
N
F
R
A
S
T
R
U
.
G
P
J
T
E
R
R
A
C
O
N
_
D
A
T
A
T
E
M
P
L
A
T
E
.
G
D
T
7
/
1
6
/
1
9
POORLY GRADED SAND with GRAVEL
(SP)
D50
D95
0.182
3.368
D60
CC
D10
0.655
0.30
7.958
100.076.362.2653.4146.4741.1928.3519.356.41
1.04
1 1/2"3/4"3/8"#4#8#16#30#50#100
#200
fine coarse fine SILT OR CLAYCOBBLESGRAVELSAND
medium
32.488
D30
43.77CU
10 - 11.5 SP1.052.446.60.0B-1
coarse
Sieve % Finer Sieve Sieve % Finer
SOIL DESCRIPTIONGRAIN SIZE
COEFFICIENTS
BORING ID % GRAVEL % SAND % SILT% COBBLES % CLAY
% Finer
DEPTH % FINES USCS
REMARKS
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
0.0010.010.1110100
P
E
R
C
E
N
T
C
O
A
R
S
E
R
B
Y
W
E
I
G
H
T
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
ASTM D422
3 2 10 14 506 2001.5 81 140
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
3/4 1/23/8 30 403 60
HYDROMETERU.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES
16 20
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS
44 1006
PE
R
C
E
N
T
F
I
N
E
R
B
Y
W
E
I
G
H
T
PROJECT NUMBER: 26195038
SITE: North 27th Avenue & East Valley Center
Drive
Bozeman, MT
PROJECT: Phase I Infrastructure Improvements
CLIENT: Sanderson Stewart
Billings, MT
2110 Overland Ave, Ste 124Billings, MT
LA
B
O
R
A
T
O
R
Y
T
E
S
T
S
A
R
E
N
O
T
V
A
L
I
D
I
F
S
E
P
A
R
A
T
E
D
F
R
O
M
O
R
I
G
I
N
A
L
R
E
P
O
R
T
.
7
3
1
5
5
0
8
0
G
R
A
I
N
S
I
Z
E
-
D
9
5
-
D
5
0
2
6
1
9
5
0
3
8
P
H
A
S
E
I
I
N
F
R
A
S
T
R
U
.
G
P
J
T
E
R
R
A
C
O
N
_
D
A
T
A
T
E
M
P
L
A
T
E
.
G
D
T
7
/
1
6
/
1
9
LEAN CLAY (CL)
LEAN CLAY (CL)
D50
D95
D60
CC
D10
100.099.7699.6599.4599.1198.6597.8295.54
3/8"#4#8#16#30#50#100#200
100.093.9493.1992.4391.9891.3790.4489.1286.35
3/4"3/8"#4#8#16#30#50#100#200
fine coarse fine SILT OR CLAYCOBBLESGRAVELSAND
medium
10.724
D30
CU
3 - 5
2.5 - 5
CL
CL
86.3
95.5
6.8
4.2
6.8
0.2
0.0
0.0
B-2
B-3
coarse
Sieve % Finer Sieve Sieve % Finer
SOIL DESCRIPTIONGRAIN SIZE
COEFFICIENTS
BORING ID % GRAVEL % SAND % SILT% COBBLES % CLAY
% Finer
DEPTH % FINES USCS
REMARKS
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
2,200
2,400
0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
AXIAL STRAIN - %
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
ASTM D2166
CO
M
P
R
E
S
S
I
V
E
S
T
R
E
S
S
-
p
s
f
PROJECT NUMBER: 26195038
SITE: North 27th Avenue & East Valley Center
Drive
Bozeman, MT
PROJECT: Phase I Infrastructure Improvements
CLIENT: Sanderson Stewart
Billings, MT
2110 Overland Ave, Ste 124Billings, MT
LA
B
O
R
A
T
O
R
Y
T
E
S
T
S
A
R
E
N
O
T
V
A
L
I
D
I
F
S
E
P
A
R
A
T
E
D
F
R
O
M
O
R
I
G
I
N
A
L
R
E
P
O
R
T
.
U
N
C
O
N
F
I
N
E
D
W
I
T
H
P
H
O
T
O
S
2
6
1
9
5
0
3
8
P
H
A
S
E
I
I
N
F
R
A
S
T
R
U
.
G
P
J
T
E
R
R
A
C
O
N
_
D
A
T
A
T
E
M
P
L
A
T
E
.
G
D
T
7
/
1
6
/
1
9
SAMPLE LOCATION:B-2 @ 3 - 5 feetSAMPLE TYPE: Shelby Tube
100
Strain Rate:in/min
Failure Strain:%
Calculated Saturation:%
Height:in.
Diameter:in.
SPECIMEN FAILURE PHOTOGRAPH
Remarks:
86
Percent < #200 SievePIPLLL
1147
21
DESCRIPTION: LEAN CLAY(CL)
0.0500
Dry Density:pcf
Moisture Content:%
3.73
1.95Height / Diameter Ratio:
Calculated Void Ratio:
Undrained Shear Strength:(psf)
Unconfined Compressive Strength (psf)
102232
Assumed Specific Gravity:
2295
5.60
2.87
SPECIMEN TEST DATA
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
DR
Y
D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
,
p
c
f
WATER CONTENT, %
Z
A
V
f
o
r
G
s =
2
.
8
Z
A
V
f
o
r
G
s =
2
.
7
Z
A
V
f
o
r
G
s =
2
.
6
MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP
ASTM D698/D1557
PROJECT NUMBER: 26195038
SITE: North 27th Avenue & East Valley Center
Drive
Bozeman, MT
PROJECT: Phase I Infrastructure Improvements
CLIENT: Sanderson Stewart
Billings, MT
2110 Overland Ave, Ste 124Billings, MT
LA
B
O
R
A
T
O
R
Y
T
E
S
T
S
A
R
E
N
O
T
V
A
L
I
D
I
F
S
E
P
A
R
A
T
E
D
F
R
O
M
O
R
I
G
I
N
A
L
R
E
P
O
R
T
.
C
O
M
P
A
C
T
I
O
N
-
V
2
2
6
1
9
5
0
3
8
P
H
A
S
E
I
I
N
F
R
A
S
T
R
U
.
G
P
J
T
E
R
R
A
C
O
N
_
D
A
T
A
T
E
M
P
L
A
T
E
.
G
D
T
7
/
1
6
/
1
9
ASTM D698 Method B
B-3 @ 2.5 - 5 feetSource of Material
Description of Material
Remarks:
Test Method
PCF
%
TEST RESULTS
LEAN CLAY(CL)
Maximum Dry Density
%
35LL
106.8
95.5
Optimum Water Content
PIPL2213
ATTERBERG LIMITS
16.1
Percent Fines
PROJECT:Phase I Infrastructure Improvements PROJECT NO:26195038
LOCATION:Bozeman, Montana
MATERIAL:Lean Clay (CL)
SAMPLE SOURCE:B-3 @ 2.5 to 5 ft DATE:7/16/2019
REVIEWED BY:TG
POINT 1 POINT 2 POINT 3
COMPACTION(%)79.8%92.8%100.4%
BLOWS/LIFT 10 25 56
CORRECTED CBR 1.4%2.7%6.1%
SURCHARGE WEIGHT 10 lbs.
CBR(CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO) OF LABORATORY-COMPACTED SOILS(ASTM D1883)
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
6.0%
7.0%
75%80%85%90%95%100%105%
C O R R E C T E D
C B R
(%)
RELATIVE COMPACTION (%), per ASTM D698
1335 WEST AUTO DRIVE, TEMPE, ARIZONA PHONE: (480) 763-1200 FAX: (480) 763-1212
ISSUED: 7/16/2019
PROJECT:Phase I Infrastructure Improvements PROJECT NO:26195038
LOCATION:Bozeman, Montana
MATERIAL:Lean Clay (CL)
SAMPLE SOURCE:B-3 @ 2.5 to 5 ft DATE:7/16/2019
REVIEWED BY:TG
COMPACTION(%)79.8%CORRECTED
COMPACTION:3 LIFTS @ 10 BLOWS/LIFT PENETRATION C B R
PERCENT SWELL 1.6%0.100 1.4%
0.200 1.1%
BEFORE SOAK AFTER SOAK
DRY DENSITY 85.2 lbs./cu.ft 83.5 lbs./cu.ft D698 PROCTOR
PERCENT MOISTURE 1 5 . 5%28.6%DRY DENSITY(pcf) 106.8
MOISTURE(%)16.1
SURCHARGE WEIGHT 10 lbs.
CBR (CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO) OF LABORATORY-COMPACTED SOILS (ASTM D1883)
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
P E N E T R A T I O N
S T R E S S
(p s i )
PENETRATION (in)
2110 Overland Avenue, Suite 124, Billings, Montana PHONE: (406) 656-3072 FAX: (406) 656-3578 ISSUED: 7/17/2019
PROJECT:Phase I Infrastructure Improvements PROJECT NO:26195038
LOCATION:Bozeman, Montana
MATERIAL:Lean Clay (CL)
SAMPLE SOURCE:B-3 @ 2.5 to 5 ft DATE:7/16/2019
REVIEWED BY:TG
COMPACTION(%)92.8%CORRECTED
COMPACTION:3 LIFTS @ 25 BLOWS/LIFT PENETRATION C B R
PERCENT SWELL 2.2%0.100 2.7%
0.200 2.5%
BEFORE SOAK AFTER SOAK
DRY DENSITY 99.1 lbs./cu.ft 96.8 lbs./cu.ft D698 PROCTOR
PERCENT MOISTURE 15.5%24.4%DRY DENSITY(pcf) 106.8
MOISTURE(%)16.1
SURCHARGE WEIGHT 10 lbs.
CBR(CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO) OF LABORATORY-COMPACTED SOILS(ASTM D1883)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
U N I T
L O A D
(p s i )
PENETRATION (in)
1335 WEST AUTO DRIVE, TEMPE, ARIZONA PHONE: (480) 763-1200 FAX: (480) 763-1212
ISSUED: 7/17/2019
PROJECT:Phase I Infrastructure Improvements PROJECT NO:26195038
LOCATION:Bozeman, Montana
MATERIAL:Lean Clay (CL)
SAMPLE SOURCE:B-3 @ 2.5 to 5 ft DATE:7/16/2019
REVIEWED BY:TG
COMPACTION(%)100.4%CORRECTED
COMPACTION 3 LIFTS @ 56 BLOWS/LIFT PENETRATION C B R
PERCENT SWELL 1.1%0.100 6.1%
0.200 5.8%
BEFORE SOAK AFTER SOAK
DRY DENSITY 107.2 lbs./cu.ft 105.7 lbs./cu.ft D1557C PROCTOR
PERCENT MOISTURE 15.5%21.0%DRY DENSITY(pcf) 106.8
MOISTURE(%)16.1
SURCHARGE WEIGHT 10 lbs.
CBR(CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO) OF LABORATORY-COMPACTED SOILS(ASTM D1883)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
U N I T
L O A D
(p s i )
PENETRATION (in)
1335 WEST AUTO DRIVE, TEMPE, ARIZONA PHONE: (480) 763-1200 FAX: (480) 763-1212
ISSUED: 7/17/2019
ANALYTICAL SUMMARY REPORT
The analyses presented in this report were performed by Energy Laboratories, Inc., 1120 S 27th St., Billings, MT
59101, unless otherwise noted. Any exceptions or problems with the analyses are noted in the Laboratory
Analytical Report, the QA/QC Summary Report, or the Case Narrative. Any issues encountered during sample
receipt are documented in the Work Order Receipt Checklist.
The results as reported relate only to the item(s) submitted for testing. This report shall be used or copied only in
its entirety. Energy Laboratories, Inc. is not responsible for the consequences arising from the use of a partial
report.
If you have any questions regarding these test results, please contact your Project Manager.
Lab ID Client Sample ID Collect Date Receive Date Matrix Test
Report Approved By:
B19070481-001 B-1 @ 2.5-4 07/03/19 12:00 07/03/19 Soil pH, Saturated Paste
Saturated Paste Extraction ASA
Resistivity, Sat Paste
Sulfate-Geochemical
Terracon Consultants
Project Name:Ph I Infrastructure 26195038
Work Order:B19070481
2110 Overland Ave Ste 124
Billings, MT 59102-6440
July 12, 2019
Energy Laboratories Inc Billings MT received the following 1 sample for Terracon Consultants on 7/3/2019 for analysis.
Page 1 of 7
Digitally signed by
Sonya Mallett
Date: 2019.07.12 15:03:13 -06:00
LABORATORY ANALYTICAL REPORT
Client:Terracon Consultants
Project:Ph I Infrastructure 26195038
Lab ID:B19070481-001
Client Sample ID:B-1 @ 2.5-4
Collection Date:07/03/19 12:00
Matrix:Soil
Report Date:07/12/19
DateReceived:07/03/19
Prepared by Billings, MT Branch
Analyses Result Units Analysis Date / ByRLMethod
MCL/
QCLQualifiers
SATURATED PASTE EXTRACT
07/10/19 09:30 / srm1ohm-cm1090Resistivity, Sat. Paste Calculation
07/10/19 09:30 / srm0.1s.u.8.5pH, sat. paste ASA10-3
CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS
07/11/19 13:57 / srm0.01wt%NDSulfate, HCL Extractable MTDOT
Report
Definitions:
RL - Analyte reporting limit.MCL - Maximum contaminant level.
QCL - Quality control limit.ND - Not detected at the reporting limit.
Page 2 of 7
Client:Terracon Consultants Work Order:B19070481
QA/QC Summary Report
07/12/19Report Date:
Analyte Result %REC RPDLow Limit High Limit RPDLimitRLUnits Qual
Prepared by Billings, MT Branch
Method:ASA10-3 Batch: 134867
Lab ID:B19070472-001A DUP 07/10/19 09:30Sample Duplicate Run: MISC-SOIL_190710A
pH, sat. paste 100.10 0.07.50 s.u.
Lab ID:LCS-1907100930 07/10/19 09:30Laboratory Control Sample Run: MISC-SOIL_190710A
pH, sat. paste 99 90 1100.107.40 s.u.
Qualifiers:
RL - Analyte reporting limit.ND - Not detected at the reporting limit.
Page 3 of 7
Client:Terracon Consultants Work Order:B19070481
QA/QC Summary Report
07/12/19Report Date:
Analyte Result %REC RPDLow Limit High Limit RPDLimitRLUnits Qual
Prepared by Billings, MT Branch
Method:Calculation Batch: R323717
Lab ID:B19070472-001A DUP 07/10/19 09:30Sample Duplicate Run: MISC-SOIL_190710A
Resistivity, Sat. Paste 70 130 301.0 2.1426ohm-cm
Lab ID:LCS-1907100930 07/10/19 09:30Laboratory Control Sample Run: MISC-SOIL_190710A
Resistivity, Sat. Paste 101 70 1301.0245ohm-cm
Qualifiers:
RL - Analyte reporting limit.ND - Not detected at the reporting limit.
Page 4 of 7
Client:Terracon Consultants Work Order:B19070481
QA/QC Summary Report
07/12/19Report Date:
Analyte Result %REC RPDLow Limit High Limit RPDLimitRLUnits Qual
Prepared by Billings, MT Branch
Method:MTDOT Batch: R323882
Lab ID:B19070481-001A DUP 07/11/19 13:57Sample Duplicate Run: MISC-SOIL_190712A
Sulfate, HCL Extractable 300.010.01 wt%
Lab ID:LCS 07/11/19 13:57Laboratory Control Sample Run: MISC-SOIL_190712A
Sulfate, HCL Extractable 92 70 1300.010.06 wt%
Lab ID:MBLK1 07/11/19 13:57Method Blank Run: MISC-SOIL_190712A
Sulfate, HCL Extractable 0.005 wt%
Qualifiers:
RL - Analyte reporting limit.ND - Not detected at the reporting limit.
Page 5 of 7
Shipping container/cooler in good condition?
Custody seals intact on all shipping container(s)/cooler(s)?
Custody seals intact on all sample bottles?
Chain of custody present?
Chain of custody signed when relinquished and received?
Chain of custody agrees with sample labels?
Samples in proper container/bottle?
Sample containers intact?
Sufficient sample volume for indicated test?
All samples received within holding time?
(Exclude analyses that are considered field parameters
such as pH, DO, Res Cl, Sulfite, Ferrous Iron, etc.)
Container/Temp Blank temperature:
Water - VOA vials have zero headspace?
Water - pH acceptable upon receipt?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
££
£
£
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
Not Present
Not Present
Not Present
R
R
R
No VOA vials submitted
Not Applicable R
R
22.2°C No Ice
7/3/2019Briana G. Sangiuliano
Hand Del
DEF
Date Received:
Received by:
Login completed by:
Carrier name:
BL2000\lcadreau
7/5/2019
Reviewed by:
Reviewed Date:
Contact and Corrective Action Comments:
None
Temp Blank received in all shipping container(s)/cooler(s)?Yes No£R Not Applicable £
Lab measurement of analytes considered field parameters that require analysis within 15 minutes of sampling such as
pH, Dissolved Oxygen and Residual Chlorine, are qualified as being analyzed outside of recommended holding time.
Solid/soil samples are reported on a wet weight basis (as received) unless specifically indicated. If moisture corrected,
data units are typically noted as –dry. For agricultural and mining soil parameters/characteristics, all samples are dried
and ground prior to sample analysis.
Standard Reporting Procedures:
Work Order Receipt Checklist
Terracon Consultants B19070481
Page 6 of 7
Page 7 of 7
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
Contents:
General Notes
Unified Soil Classification System
Note: All attachments are one page unless noted above.
Phase I Infrastructure Improvements Bozeman, MT
Terracon Project No. 26195038
500 to 1,000
> 8,000
4,000 to 8,000
2,000 to 4,000
1,000 to 2,000
less than 500
Unconfined Compressive StrengthQu, (psf)
GrabSample ShelbyTube
Split Spoon
Soil classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50% of their dryweight retained on a #200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have less
than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are principally described as clays if they are plastic, and silts if they
are slightly plastic or non-plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added
according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse-grained soils are defined on the basisof their in-place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency.
GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY
RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINESRELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL
DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION
LOCATION AND ELEVATION NOTES
SAMPLING WATER LEVEL FIELD TESTS
N
(HP)
(T)
(DCP)
UC
(PID)
(OVA)
Standard Penetration Test
Resistance (Blows/Ft.)
Hand Penetrometer
Torvane
Dynamic Cone Penetrometer
Unconfined CompressiveStrength
Photo-Ionization Detector
Organic Vapor Analyzer
Medium
0Over 12 in. (300 mm)
>12
5-12
<5
Percent ofDry Weight
TermMajor Component of Sample
Modifier
With
Trace
Descriptive Term(s) ofother constituents
>30Modifier
<15
Percent ofDry WeightDescriptive Term(s) ofother constituents
With 15-29
High
Trace
PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION
Water levels indicated on the soil boring logs arethe levels measured in the borehole at the times
indicated. Groundwater level variations will occur
over time. In low permeability soils, accuratedetermination of groundwater levels is not possible
with short term water level observations.
DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS
GENERAL NOTES
> 30
11 - 30
1 - 10Low
Non-plastic
Plasticity Index
#4 to #200 sieve (4.75mm to 0.075mm
Boulders
12 in. to 3 in. (300mm to 75mm)Cobbles
3 in. to #4 sieve (75mm to 4.75 mm)Gravel
Sand
Passing #200 sieve (0.075mm)Silt or Clay
Particle Size
Water Level After
a Specified Period of Time
Water Level After a
Specified Period of Time
Water InitiallyEncountered
Unless otherwise noted, Latitude and Longitude are approximately determined using a hand-held GPS device. The accuracy ofsuch devices is variable. Surface elevation data annotated with +/- indicates that no actual topographical survey was conducted
to confirm the surface elevation. Instead, the surface elevation was approximately determined from topographic maps of thearea.
Standard Penetration orN-ValueBlows/Ft.
Descriptive Term(Density)
CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS
Hard
15 - 30Very Stiff> 50Very Dense
8 - 15Stiff30 - 50Dense
4 - 8Medium Stiff10 - 29Medium Dense
2 - 4Soft4 - 9Loose
0 - 1Very Soft0 - 3Very Loose
(50% or more passing the No. 200 sieve.)
Consistency determined by laboratory shear strength testing, field visual-manualprocedures or standard penetration resistance
STRENGTH TERMS
> 30
Descriptive Term(Consistency)Standard Penetration orN-ValueBlows/Ft.
RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS
(More than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve.)
Density determined by Standard Penetration Resistance
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests A
Soil Classification
Group
Symbol Group Name B
Coarse-Grained Soils:
More than 50% retained
on No. 200 sieve
Gravels:
More than 50% ofcoarse fraction
retained on No. 4 sieve
Clean Gravels:
Less than 5% finesC
Cu ³ 4 and 1 £ Cc £ 3 E GW Well-graded gravel F
Cu < 4 and/or [Cc<1 or Cc>3.0]E GP Poorly graded gravel F
Gravels with Fines:
More than 12% fines C
Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel F, G, H
Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravelF, G, H
Sands:
50% or more of coarse
fraction passes No. 4
sieve
Clean Sands:
Less than 5% finesD
Cu ³ 6 and 1 £ Cc £ 3E SW Well-graded sandI
Cu < 6 and/or [Cc<1 or Cc>3.0]E SP Poorly graded sandI
Sands with Fines:
More than 12% fines D
Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sandG, H, I
Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand G, H, I
Fine-Grained Soils:
50% or more passes the
No. 200 sieve
Silts and Clays:
Liquid limit less than 50
Inorganic:PI > 7 and plots on or above “A”
lineJ CL Lean clayK, L, M
PI < 4 or plots below “A” line J ML Silt K, L, M
Organic:Liquid limit - oven dried < 0.75 OL Organic clayK, L, M, N
Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K, L, M, O
Silts and Clays:
Liquid limit 50 or more
Inorganic:PI plots on or above “A” line CH Fat clayK, L, M
PI plots below “A” line MH Elastic SiltK, L, M
Organic:Liquid limit - oven dried < 0.75 OH Organic clayK, L, M, P
Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K, L, M, Q
Highly organic soils:Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat
A Based on the material passing the 3-inch (75-mm) sieve.
B If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add “with cobbles
or boulders, or both” to group name.
C Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded
gravel with silt, GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay, GP-GM poorly
graded gravel with silt, GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay.
D Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded
sand with silt, SW-SC well-graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded
sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay.
E Cu = D60/D10 Cc =
6010
2
30
DxD
)(D
F If soil contains ³ 15% sand, add “with sand” to group name.
G If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM.
HIf fines are organic, add “with organic fines” to group name.
I If soil contains ³ 15% gravel, add “with gravel” to group name.
J If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay.
KIf soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add “with sand” or “with
gravel,” whichever is predominant.
L If soil contains ³ 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add
“sandy” to group name.
MIf soil contains ³ 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add
“gravelly” to group name.
NPI ³ 4 and plots on or above “A” line.
OPI < 4 or plots below “A” line.
P PI plots on or above “A” line.
QPI plots below “A” line.