Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
StormwaterReport_04212021
STORMWATER DRAINAGE REPORT UPS BOZEMAN PARCEL DISTRIBUTION FACILITY Lot 1A, Block 6 Nelson Meadows Subdivision Bozeman, MT 59718 Prepared For: United Parcel Service 3300 Airport Drive Rockford, IL 61109 Prepared By: Cushing Terrell 411 East Main Street, Suite 101 Bozeman, MT 59715 406.922.7111 www.cushingterrell.com Cushing Terrell Project No. UPS_BZMN April 21, 2021 Adam Schlegel, PE Stormwater Drainage Report UPS Bozeman Parcel Distribution Facility Project No. UPS_BZMN Cushing Terrell i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................. 2 1.1 Zoning ............................................................................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Existing Ground Cover and Vegetation ................................................................................................ 3 1.3 Topographic Features and Slopes .......................................................................................................... 3 1.4 FEMA Floodplain Classification................................................................................................................ 3 1.5 Major Drainage Ways and Receiving Channels ................................................................................. 3 1.6 Existing Drainage Facilities ........................................................................................................................ 3 1.7 Wetlands .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.8 Geologic Features and Geotechnical Data .......................................................................................... 3 1.8.1 Soils ........................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.8.2 Groundwater.......................................................................................................................................... 4 2.0 STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN .......................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Methodology .................................................................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Pre-Development Conditions................................................................................................................... 4 2.3 Post-Development Conditions ................................................................................................................ 5 2.4 Post-Development Conveyance .............................................................................................................. 6 2.5 Post-Development Water Quality Design ........................................................................................... 6 2.6 Post-Development Stormwater Retention .......................................................................................... 6 3.0 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................................................... 7 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Zoning Map .................................................................................................................................................... 2 LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1: Pre-Development Basin ............................................................................................................................ 5 Table 2.2: Pre-Development Total Runoff Volume (10-yr/2-hr Storm) ...................................................... 5 Table 2.3: Post-Development Basins ........................................................................................................................ 5 Table 2.4: Post-Development Total Runoff Volume (10-yr/2-hr Storm) .................................................... 5 Table 2.4: Water Quality Volume Calculations ..................................................................................................... 6 APPENDICES APPENDIX A: Geotechnical Engineering Report APPENDIX B: Storm Drainage Exhibits APPENDIX C: Pre-Development Calculations APPENDIX D: Post Development Calculations APPENDIX E: FEMA Flood Map APPENDIX F: NRCS Soils Stormwater Drainage Report UPS Bozeman Parcel Distribution Facility Project No. UPS_BZMN Cushing Terrell 2 1.0 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to address the proposed stormwater facility for the UPS Bozeman Parcel Distribution Facility project consisting of a new building (approximately 35,100 square feet) and parking/staging area (approximately 3.5 acres). There are no existing buildings on site and the site is vacant with the exception of an existing gravel area, abandoned septic tank, and a newly constructed trail which was installed as part of the underlying subdivision. This property is located at the following legal address: Lot 1A, Block 6, Nelson Meadows Subdivision Southeast ¼, Section 22, Township 1 South, Range 5 East, Gallatin County, Montana Common street address has not yet been determined. 1.1 Zoning This property, located with the limits of the City of Bozeman, is zoned M-1 Light Manufacturing. Figure 1: Zoning Map Stormwater Drainage Report UPS Bozeman Parcel Distribution Facility Project No. UPS_BZMN Cushing Terrell 3 1.2 Existing Ground Cover and Vegetation Existing ground cover and vegetation consists of native grasses with minimal topsoil with asphalt and gravel trails along the north, west, and south sides. The east side of the site is bound by existing curb and pavement. 1.3 Topographic Features and Slopes The natural grade of the existing site is generally from south to north/northwest at approximately 1.3% slope. The elevation change across the entire site is 8’±. 1.4 FEMA Floodplain Classification The project boundary is within Zone X as shown on FEMA Flood Panel 30031C0802D 1.5 Major Drainage Ways and Receiving Channels The historic drainage pattern of the project site is from south to north and flows off site toward an existing irrigation ditch approximately 1,100 ft to the north of the site. 1.6 Existing Drainage Facilities Nelson Meadows Subdivision has an existing retention pond which manages the stormwater runoff from the internal roadways of the subdivision, however, has not been designed to accommodate developed runoff from individual parcels within the subdivision. Therefore, the proposed site development will be required to manage stormwater on-site. 1.7 Wetlands Wetlands are not present within the proposed site development. The Nelson Meadows Subdivision does contain wetlands around an existing channel which is approximately 560 feet to the east of the proposed site development. 1.8 Geologic Features and Geotechnical Data A geotechnical site investigation was performed as part of this project and has been included in Appendix A of this report. 1.8.1 Soils 15 soil borings were conducted throughout the subject property and the soil profile was relatively consistent throughout. The soils observed include a thin layer of topsoil underlain with “lean clay with varying amounts of sand encountered surficially in all borings” which was found to a depth of 7.5 to 10 feet below the ground surface. “Poorly graded sand encountered below the clay layer” was discovered in only 1 of the 15 soil borings. “Poorly graded gravel with varying amounts of silt and sand encountered below the clay and sand layers in all borings” to the bottom of exploration (approximately 21 feet). Stormwater Drainage Report UPS Bozeman Parcel Distribution Facility Project No. UPS_BZMN Cushing Terrell 4 1.8.2 Groundwater Groundwater was observed in all of the soil boring locations between approximately 10 and 14 feet below the ground surface. 2.0 STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN Storm drainage was designed in accordance with the City of Bozeman Design Standards and Specifications Policy Addendum 7 approved 3/13/2020 (DSSP). In general, the proposed developed site will incorporate 2 retention ponds for stormwater management including vegetated swales for conveyance. 2.1 Methodology · Storage/Treatment Facilities (DSSP II_C): Retention pond capacity has been designed based on a 10-year, 2-hour storm intensity using the rational method. Surface water storage has been limited to a maximum basin depth of 2.5’ with a max water elevation of 1.5’ at the specified storm interval. The retention ponds have been sized assuming no release and no infiltration although infiltration is anticipated. · Estimation of Runoff Rates (DSSP II-E): The rational method is used to calculate peak runoff rates for the sizing of storm retention and conveyance facilities. Table I-1 of the DSSP and DEQ-8 were utilized for the selection of runoff coefficients. o Open Land: C=0.2 o Paved or other hard surface (DEQ8): C=0.9 · Time of concentration is calculated per the DSSP and is limited to a minimum of five minutes. Runoff intensities are selected using the provided tables in the DSSP. · Conveyance: Storm conveyance channels are sized for the 25-year event in accordance with the DSSP. Additionally, water quality volumes are calculated using the methodology set forth in Sections 3.2 and 3.3 of the Montana Post-Construction Storm Water BMP Design Guidance Manual (MPCSW). 2.2 Pre-Development Conditions As previously described above, the existing project site consists of undeveloped native grasses which drains to the north/northwest. The north side of the property is bounded by a future public right-of-way dedication. The underlying subdivision contains stormwater conveyance and retention, however, is only sized for the improvements performed within the public right-of-way and not for developed conditions of each parcel. See Appendix B for historic drainage conditions exhibit. Stormwater Drainage Report UPS Bozeman Parcel Distribution Facility Project No. UPS_BZMN Cushing Terrell 5 Table 2.1: Pre-Development Basin Table 2.2: Pre-Development Total Runoff Volume (10-yr/2-hr Storm) 2.3 Post-Development Conditions See Appendix B for developed conditions exhibit. In general, post-development conditions consist of a proposed building, concrete and asphalt paving, parking lot landscaping, and stormwater management facilities. Table 2.3: Post-Development Basins Table 2.4: Post-Development Total Runoff Volume (10-yr/2-hr Storm) Basin Pervious (Landscape/ Undeveloped) (sf) (C=0.2) Impervious (Roof/ Paving) (sf) (C=0.9) Total (sf) Total (ac) Weighted Coefficient % Impervious DEV-01 195419 110576 305995 7.02 0.45 36% DEV-02 56955 41354 98309 2.26 0.49 42% Total: 252374 151930 404304 9.28 0.46 38% POST-DEVELOPMENT BASINS Stormwater Drainage Report UPS Bozeman Parcel Distribution Facility Project No. UPS_BZMN Cushing Terrell 6 Table 2.5: Post-Development Peak Runoff (25-yr/24-hr Storm) 2.4 Post-Development Conveyance Surface drainage will be utilized to drain the parking lot and landscaped areas toward the stormwater retention ponds via overland flow curb cut chases and grass channels (see Appendix D for conveyance calculations). The curb cuts were modeled as a weir and sized based on the contributing sub basin with the largest peak runoff for the 25-yr event. 2.5 Post-Development Water Quality Design Stormwater will first be directed toward vegetated channels/filter strips which will filter sediment and begin treatment of the water quality stormwater event (0.5”, 24-hour). Additionally, the stormwater ponds contain a 12” depth of sandy loam with organics based on MPCSW guidance to filter stormwater prior to entering a perforated drainpipe and into the proposed drywells. The overflow rims of the dry wells have been set above the bottom of the pond to account for water quality volume ponding (see Pond 01 and Pond 02 Volume Tables in Appendix D for WQV height). Table 2.4: Water Quality Volume Calculations 2.6 Post-Development Stormwater Retention Stormwater will be retained in surface water retention ponds (see exhibit in Appendix B for locations). These ponds have been sized to manage the 10-year, 2-hour storm event in accordance with DSSP. The sizing of the retention ponds is conservative in the fact that infiltration was not accounted for, however is anticipated. The Pond 01 10-yr depth is 1.17 feet and the Pond 02 10-yr depth is 1.22 feet (see Pond 01 and Pond 02 Volume Table for calculations in Appendix D). In the case that the retention ponds overtop during a larger storm event, Pond 01 will overflow to the north west corner of the property in the direction of historic drainage for this site. Overland flow will convey this stormwater toward a nearby irrigation ditch in the BASIN C Area (ac)(i) in/hr * Q cfs DEV-01 0.45 7.02 3.83 12.2 DEV-02 0.49 2.26 3.83 4.3 Peak Runoff (25-yr/24-hr storm) BASIN Area (ac)P (in) Imperv. Rv WQV (cf) DEV-01 7.02 0.50 0.36 0.38 4784 DEV-02 2.26 0.50 0.42 0.43 1756 * Calculation uses 5-min time of concentration Water Quality Volume (WQV) * Stormwater Drainage Report UPS Bozeman Parcel Distribution Facility Project No. UPS_BZMN Cushing Terrell 7 property to the north. Overflow from Pond 02 will overtop the curb on Royal Wolf way and be conveyed into the Nelson Meadows stormwater system. 3.0 CONCLUSION In conclusion, with the implementation of stormwater conveyance and retention ponds, the proposed developed project site will not increase peak runoff rates and volumes based on the 10-year, 2-hour storm event per DSSP. APPENDIX A: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT REPORT COVER PAGE Geotechnical Engineering Report __________________________________________________________________________ New Parcel Distribution Facility Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 Terracon Project No. 26205042 Prepared for: United Parcel Service Oasis Supply Corporation Seattle, Washington Prepared by: Terracon Consultants, Inc. Billings, Montana Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 1 REPORT TOPICS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 SITE CONDITIONS ......................................................................................................... 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................. 2 GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION ...................................................................... 3 EARTHWORK................................................................................................................. 5 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS ........................................................................................... 8 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS ...................................................................................... 11 FLOOR SLABS............................................................................................................. 11 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES ................................................................................. 13 PAVEMENTS ................................................................................................................ 15 FROST CONSIDERATIONS ......................................................................................... 20 CORROSIVITY.............................................................................................................. 21 GENERAL COMMENTS ............................................................................................... 21 FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... 23 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 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 New Parcel Distribution Facility Bozeman, Montana Terracon Project No. 26205042 November 2, 2020 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering services performed for the potential new parcel distribution facility to be located in Bozeman, Montana. The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to: ■Subsurface soil conditions ■Foundation design and construction ■Groundwater conditions ■Floor slab design and construction ■Site preparation and earthwork ■Seismic site classification per IBC ■Excavation considerations ■Lateral earth pressures ■Frost considerations ■Pavement design and construction The geotechnical engineering Scope of Services for this project included the advancement of 15 test borings to depths ranging from approximately 16.5 to 21.5 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 site is located west of Nelson Road and north of I-90 Frontage Road in Bozeman, Montana. Approximate Latitude/Longitude 45.7325° N, 111.0891° W See Site Location Existing Improvements The site is currently undeveloped greenfield and/or agricultural land. Nelson Road lies nearby to the east. Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 2 Item Description Current Ground Cover Undeveloped greenfield including farmland and adjacent creek to the east. Existing Topography Based on review of Google Earth aerial imagery, the site is relatively flat with elevations ranging between 4,588 to 4,595 feet above mean sea level (MSL). Geology Alluvial deposits consisting of a mixture of clay, sand, and gravel. Photograph: Looking N towards B-5. 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 Preliminary information provided via email correspondence with Mr. Casey Ingle with UPS on June 29, 2020. Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 3 Item Description Project Description Based on the information provided, the project involves a new greenfield site construction of a new 35,288 square foot building on 9.28 acres of which 4 to 6 acres will be developed. Site development will include paving for employee and customer parking, concrete for trailer and tractor staging, landscaping, and storm water systems. A stormwater retention pond is depicted on the preliminary site plan in the northwest corner of the site. Percolation testing was not performed at the proposed pond location. Proposed Structure The building is anticipated to be single-story, light-gauge metal framed, slab-on-grade construction. Maximum Loads (assumed by Terracon) Maximum anticipated loading was not provided at the time of report preparation. Structural loading information is assumed as follows. ■Columns: 50 kips ■Walls: 4 kips per linear foot (klf) ■Slabs: 200 pounds per square foot (psf) Grading/Slopes Up to 3 feet of cut and/or fill is anticipated to be required to develop final grade. Final slope angles of as steep as 3H:1V (Horizontal:Vertical) are expected. Pavement We have considered both rigid (concrete) and flexible (asphalt) pavement sections. The following traffic loading was provided for pavement thickness design: ■Autos/light trucks: 132 to 204 passes per day ■Loaded 40 foot feeders: 2 to 4 passes per day ■Loaded 28 foot double feeders: 2 passes per day ■Loaded 28 foot single feeders: 5 to 10 passes per day ■Loaded Package Cars: 77 to 121 passes per day ■Loaded Tractors: 2 to 4 passes per day 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 New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 4 Model Layer Layer Name General Description 1 Clay Lean clay with varying amounts of sand encountered surficially in all borings. 2 Sand Poorly graded sand encountered below the clay layer in boring B- 7. 3 Gravel Poorly graded gravel with varying amounts of silt and sand encountered below the clay and sand layers in all borings. Clay: Clay was the first soil layer encountered in all borings. The clay layer extended to an approximate depth of 7.5 to 10 feet below existing grade. Representative samples of clay obtained from borings B-3 and B-6, at approximate depths of 5 to 7 feet below existing grade classified as lean clay (CL) and lean clay with sand (CL), respectively, in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System and ASTM D2487. Penetration resistance values in the clay ranged from 1 to 9 blows per foot, indicating a very soft to stiff soil stratum. Moisture content in the clay ranged from 8.6 to 34.1 percent. Liquid and plastic limit testing performed on the representative samples of the clay described above indicated liquid limits ranging from 30 to 32 percent and plasticity indices ranging from 8 to 9. One-dimensional consolidation testing performed on relatively undisturbed samples of clay obtained from borings B-3 and B-6 at an approximate depth of 5 to 7 feet below existing grade indicated a moderate to high potential for compressibility under conditions of wetting and normal loading up to 4 kips per square foot (ksf). Unconfined compressive strength testing performed on relatively undisturbed samples of clay obtained from borings B-3 and B-6 from approximate depths of 5 to 7 feet indicated unconfined compressive strengths of 582 and 689 pounds per square foot (psf), respectively. Dry densities of the unconfined compressive strength and consolidation test samples ranged from approximately 90 to 92 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). Moisture-density characteristic (Proctor) testing performed on a disturbed bulk sample of lean clay with sand obtained from boring B-11 at approximate depths of 4 to 7 feet indicated a maximum dry density of 108.6 pcf at an optimum moisture content of 17.4 percent. California Bearing Ratio (CBR) testing performed on a disturbed bulk sample of lean clay with sand, remolded to approximately 95 percent of the maximum dry density near optimum moisture, indicated a CBR value of 5.2 percent at 0.1-inch penetration. Sand:Sand was encountered beneath the clay layer in boring B-7. The sand layer extended to a depth of approximately 12 feet below existing grade. A sample of the sand obtained from boring B-7 at an approximate depth of 10 to 11.5 feet below existing grade, classified as poorly graded sand with gravel (SP) in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System and ASTM D2487. Penetration resistance values in the sand layer was on the order of 20 blows per foot, indicating a medium dense soil stratum. Moisture content in the sand was approximately 3.5 Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 5 percent. Liquid and plastic limit testing performed on the representative samples of the sand described above indicated the fine-grained portion of the sand was nonplastic. Gravel: Gravel was encountered beneath the clay and/or sand layers in all borings. The gravel layer extended beyond the maximum depth explored of approximately 21.5 below existing grade. Although samples of the gravel obtained from borings B-9 and B-11, at approximate depths of 15 to 16.5 feet and 10 to 11.5 feet below existing grade, respectively, classified as well-graded gravel with silt and sand (GW-GM) in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System and ASTM D2487, the material visually classified as a poorly-graded gravel with silt and sand. This is due, in part, by the split spoon sampler not being large enough to accommodate the coarse aggregate and cobble encountered in the gravel 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 ranged from 2.5 to 8.1 percent. Groundwater:Groundwater was encountered in all borings at depths ranging from approximately 10 to 14 feet below existing grade during the field investigation. Accurate water levels 24 hours after drilling could not be obtained due to borings caving in the cohesionless coarse-grained gravel layer slightly above where groundwater was initially encountered during drilling. Artesian water conditions were not encountered during drilling. Groundwater level fluctuations occur due to complex hydrogeologic conditions in the area, any existing subdrainage systems, and 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 be higher or lower than the levels indicated on the boring logs. EARTHWORK The following presents recommendations for site preparation, demolition, excavation, fill materials, compaction requirements and grading and drainage. Earthwork on the project should be observed and evaluated by Terracon. Evaluation of earthwork should include observations and/or testing of placement of engineered fills and other geotechnical conditions which may be exposed during construction of the project. Site Preparation Prior to placing fill, strip and remove existing vegetation, topsoil, and any other deleterious materials from the proposed construction areas. Our borings did not encounter a layer of topsoil or other organic material thick enough to visually classify. We anticipate relatively minor stripping of the site will be required. Stripped topsoil should be wasted from the site or used to re-vegetate landscaped areas after completion of grading operations. Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 6 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 of soft or otherwise unsuitable material should be undercut and replaced with new structural fill meeting the requirements in Fill Material Types below. Areas excessively deflecting under the proofroll should be delineated and subsequently addressed by the Geotechnical Engineer. Excessively wet or dry subgrade 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 USCS Classification Fill Parameters Granular GP, GW, SP, SW (and dual symbols) For Structural Fill: 100% passing 3-inch sieve; 30-60% passing No. 4 sieve; less than 10% passing No. 200 sieve On-Site Soils CL For Structural Fill: Liquid Limit less than 40; plasticity index less than 20 1.Structural and general fill should consist of materials free of organic matter and debris, meeting the material recommendations provided above. Frozen material should not be used, and fill should not be placed on a frozen subgrade. A sample of each material type should be approved by the Project Engineer for evaluation prior to use on this site. 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 98% of max. below foundations 95% of max. above foundations, floor slab subgrade, utility trench backfill, and pavement subgrade Same as Structural Fill Water Content Range 1 Low plasticity cohesive: -2% to +2% of optimum Granular: -3% to +3% of optimum As required to achieve min. compaction requirements Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 7 Item Structural Fill General Fill 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 For low permeability subgrades, utility trenches are a common source of water infiltration and migration. Utility trenches penetrating beneath the building should be effectively sealed to restrict water intrusion and flow through the trenches, which could migrate below the building. The trench should provide an effective trench plug that extends at least 5 feet from the face of the building exterior. The plug material should consist of cementitious flowable fill or low permeability clay. The trench plug material should be placed to surround the utility line. If used, the clay trench plug material should be placed and compacted to comply with the water content and compaction recommendations for structural fill stated previously in this report. Grading and Drainage All grades must provide effective drainage away from the building and pavement section during and after construction and should be maintained throughout the life of the structure. Water retained next to the building can result in soil movements greater than those discussed in this report. Greater movements can result in unacceptable differential floor slab and/or foundation movements, cracked slabs and walls, roof leaks, and pavement distress. Exposed ground should be sloped and maintained at 5% away from the pavement footprint for at least 10 feet beyond the perimeter. Locally, flatter grades may be necessary to transition ADA access requirements for flatwork. After building construction and landscaping have been completed, final grades should be verified to document effective drainage has been achieved. Grades around the structure should also be periodically inspected and adjusted, as necessary, as part of the structure’s maintenance program. Where paving or flatwork abuts the structure, a maintenance program should be established to effectively seal and maintain joints and prevent surface water infiltration. Earthwork Construction Considerations Shallow excavations for the proposed structure are anticipated to be accomplished with conventional construction equipment. Upon completion of filling and grading, care should be taken to maintain the subgrade water content prior to construction of floor slabs. Construction traffic over the completed subgrades should be avoided. The site should also be graded 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, Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 8 or is disturbed, the affected material should be removed, or the materials should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and recompacted prior to floor slab construction. As a minimum, excavations should be performed in accordance with OSHA 29 CFR, Part 1926, Subpart P, “Excavations” and its appendices, and in accordance with any applicable local, and/or state regulations. 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. Construction Observation and Testing The earthwork efforts should be monitored under the direction of the Geotechnical Engineer. Monitoring should include documentation of adequate removal of vegetation and topsoil, proofrolling, and mitigation of areas delineated by the proofroll to require mitigation. Each lift of compacted fill should be tested, evaluated, and reworked, as necessary, until approved by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to placement of additional lifts. Requirements for structural and general fill can be found in the Fill Compaction Requirement table located in the Earthwork section of this report. Each lift of fill should be tested for density and water content at a frequency of at least one test for every 2,500 square feet of compacted fill in the building areas and 5,000 square feet in pavement areas. In areas of foundation excavations, the bearing subgrade should be evaluated under the direction of the Geotechnical Engineer. If unanticipated conditions are encountered, the Geotechnical Engineer should prescribe mitigation options. In addition to the documentation of the essential parameters necessary for construction, the continuation of the Geotechnical Engineer into the construction phase of the project provides the continuity to maintain the Geotechnical Engineer’s evaluation of subsurface conditions, including assessing variations and associated design changes. SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS If the site has been prepared in accordance with the requirements noted in Earthwork, the following design parameters are applicable for shallow foundations. Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 9 Design Parameters – Compressive Loads Item Description Maximum Net Allowable Bearing pressure 1, 2 2,000 psf Required Bearing Stratum 3 A minimum 3-foot thick zone of granular structural fill Minimum Foundation Dimensions Columns:24 inches Continuous: 18 inches Ultimate Coefficient of Sliding Friction 4 0.70 (granular material) Minimum Embedment below Finished Grade 5 Exterior footings / unheated areas:42 inches Interior footings in heated areas:24 inches Estimated Total Settlement from Structural Loads 2 Less than about 1 inch Estimated Differential Settlement 2, 6 About 1/2 to 3/4 of total settlement 1.The maximum net allowable bearing pressure is the pressure in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure at the footing base elevation. An appropriate factor of safety has been applied. Values assume that exterior grades are no steeper than 20% within 10 feet of structure. 2.Values provided are for maximum loads noted in Project Description. 3.Unsuitable or soft soils should be over-excavated and replaced per the recommendations presented in the Earthwork. 4.Can be used to compute sliding resistance where foundations are placed on suitable soil/materials. Should be neglected for foundations subject to net uplift conditions. 5.Embedment necessary to minimize the effects of frost and/or seasonal water content variations. For sloping ground, maintain depth below the lowest adjacent exterior grade within 5 horizontal feet of the structure. 6.Differential settlements are as measured over a span of 50 feet. Design Parameters - Uplift Loads Uplift resistance of spread footings can be developed from the effective weight of the footing and the overlying soils. As illustrated on the subsequent figure, the effective weight of the soil prism defined by diagonal planes extending up from the top of the perimeter of the foundation to the ground surface at an angle, q, of 20 degrees from the vertical can be included in uplift resistance. The maximum allowable uplift capacity should be taken as a sum of the effective weight of soil plus the dead weight of the foundation, divided by an appropriate factor of safety. A maximum total unit weight of 100 pcf should be used for the backfill. This unit weight should be reduced to 40 pcf for portions of the backfill or natural soils below the groundwater elevation. Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 10 Foundation Construction Considerations As noted in Earthwork, the footing excavations should be evaluated under the direction of the Geotechnical Engineer. The base of all foundation excavations should be free of water and loose soil, prior to placing concrete. Concrete should be placed soon after excavating to reduce bearing soil disturbance. Care should be taken to prevent wetting or drying of the bearing materials during construction. Excessively wet or dry material or any loose/disturbed material in the bottom of the footing excavations should be removed/reconditioned before foundation concrete is placed. If unsuitable bearing soils are encountered at the base of the recommended footing excavation level, the excavation should be extended deeper to suitable soils, and the footings could bear directly on these soils at the lower level or on lean concrete backfill placed in the excavations. This is illustrated on the sketch below. Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 11 Over-excavation for structural fill placement below footings should be conducted as shown below. The over-excavation should be backfilled up to the design footing level, with granular structural fill, meeting the requirements of and placed as recommended in Fill Material Types and Fill Compaction Requirements parts of the Earthwork section. SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS The seismic design requirements for buildings and other structures are based on Seismic Design Category. Site Classification is required to determine the Seismic Design Category for a structure. The Site Classification is based on the upper 100 feet of the site profile defined by a weighted average value of either shear wave velocity, standard penetration resistance, or undrained shear strength in accordance with Section 20.4 of ASCE 7 and the International Building Code (IBC). Based on the soil properties encountered at the site and as described on the exploration logs and results, it is our professional opinion that the Seismic Site Classification is D. Subsurface explorations at this site were extended to a maximum depth of 21.5 feet. The site properties below the boring depth to 100 feet were estimated based on our experience and knowledge of geologic conditions of the general area. Additional deeper borings or geophysical testing may be performed to confirm the conditions below the current boring depth. FLOOR SLABS Depending upon the finished floor elevation, unsuitable, weak, very soft to stiff soils may be encountered at the floor slab subgrade level. These soils should be replaced with structural fill so the floor slab is supported on at least 2 feet of structural fill. Design parameters for floor slabs assume the requirements for Earthwork have been followed. Specific attention should be given to positive drainage away from the structure and positive drainage of the aggregate base beneath the floor slab. Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 12 Floor Slab Design Parameters Item Description Floor Slab Support 1 Minimum 6 inches of free-draining (less than 6% passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve) crushed aggregate compacted to at least 95% of ASTM D 698 2, 3 At least 18 inches of granular Structural Fill soils placed and compacted per the Earthwork section should underlie the 6-inch free-draining gravel layer. Estimated Modulus of Subgrade Reaction 2 250 pounds per square inch per inch (psi/in) for point loads 1.Floor slabs should be structurally independent of building footings or walls to reduce the possibility of floor slab cracking caused by differential movements between the slab and foundation. 2.Modulus of subgrade reaction is an estimated value based upon our experience with the subgrade condition, the requirements noted in Earthwork, and the floor slab support as noted in this table. It is provided for point loads. For large area loads the modulus of subgrade reaction would be lower. 3.Free-draining granular material should have less than 5% fines (material passing the No. 200 sieve). The use of a vapor retarder should be considered beneath concrete slabs on grade covered with wood, tile, carpet, or other moisture sensitive or impervious coverings, or when the slab will support equipment sensitive to moisture. When conditions warrant the use of a vapor retarder, the slab designer should refer to ACI 302 and/or ACI 360 for procedures and cautions regarding the use and placement of a vapor retarder. Saw-cut control joints should be placed in the slab to help control the location and extent of cracking. For additional recommendations refer to the ACI Design Manual. Joints or cracks should be sealed with a water-proof, non-extruding compressible compound specifically recommended for heavy duty concrete pavement and wet environments. Where floor slabs are tied to perimeter walls or turn-down slabs to meet structural or other construction objectives, our experience indicates differential movement between the walls and slabs will likely be observed in adjacent slab expansion joints or floor slab cracks beyond the length of the structural dowels. The Structural Engineer should account for potential differential settlement through use of sufficient control joints, appropriate reinforcing or other means. Floor Slab Construction Considerations Finished subgrade, within and for at least 10 feet beyond the floor slab, should be protected from traffic, rutting, or other disturbance and maintained in a relatively moist condition until floor slabs are constructed. If the subgrade should become damaged or desiccated prior to construction of floor slabs, the affected material should be removed and structural fill should be added to replace the resulting excavation. Final conditioning of the finished subgrade should be performed immediately prior to placement of the floor slab support course. Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 13 The Geotechnical Engineer should approve the condition of the floor slab subgrades immediately prior to placement of the floor slab support course and concrete. Attention should be paid to high traffic areas that were rutted and disturbed earlier, and to areas where backfilled trenches are located. LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES Design Parameters Structures with unbalanced backfill levels on opposite sides should be designed for earth pressures at least equal to values indicated in the following table. Earth pressures will be influenced by structural design of the walls, conditions of wall restraint, methods of construction and/or compaction and the strength of the materials being restrained. Two wall restraint conditions are shown in the diagram below. Active earth pressure is commonly used for design of free- standing cantilever retaining walls and assumes wall movement. The “at-rest” condition assumes no wall movement. The recommended design lateral earth pressures do not include a factor of safety and do not provide for possible hydrostatic pressure on the walls (unless stated). Lateral Earth Pressure Design Parameters Earth Pressure Condition 1 Coefficient for Backfill Type2 Surcharge Pressure 3, 4, 5 p1 (psf) Effective Fluid Pressures (psf)2, 4, 5 Unsaturated 6 Submerged 6 Active (Ka)Granular - 0.27 Fine Grained - 0.49 (0.27)S (0.49)S (35)H (55)H (80)H (85)H At-Rest (Ko)Granular - 0.43 Fine Grained - 0.66 (0.43)S (0.66)S (55)H (70)H (90)H (95)H Passive (Kp)Granular - 3.69 Fine Grained - 2.04 --- --- (480)H (225)H (315)H (160)H Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 14 Lateral Earth Pressure Design Parameters Earth Pressure Condition 1 Coefficient for Backfill Type2 Surcharge Pressure 3, 4, 5 p1 (psf) Effective Fluid Pressures (psf)2, 4, 5 Unsaturated 6 Submerged 6 1.For active earth pressure, wall must rotate about base, with top lateral movements 0.002 H to 0.004 H, where H is wall height. For passive earth pressure, wall must move horizontally to mobilize resistance. 2.Uniform, horizontal backfill, compacted to at least 95% of the ASTM D 698 maximum dry density, rendering a maximum unit weight of 130 pcf and an angle of internal friction of 35° for granular structural fill; a maximum unit weight of 110 pcf and an angle of internal friction of 20° was estimated for fine-grianed on- site soils. 3.Uniform surcharge, where S is surcharge pressure. 4.Loading from heavy compaction equipment is not included. 5.No safety factor is included in these values. 6.To achieve “Unsaturated” conditions, follow guidelines in Subsurface Drainage for Below-Grade Walls below. “Submerged” conditions are recommended when drainage behind walls is not incorporated into the design. Backfill placed against structures should consist of granular soils or low plasticity cohesive soils. For the granular values to be valid, the granular backfill must extend out and up from the base of the wall at an angle of at least 45 and 60 degrees from vertical for the active and passive cases, respectively. Subsurface Drainage for Below-Grade Walls A perforated rigid plastic drain line installed behind the base of walls and extends below adjacent grade is recommended to prevent hydrostatic loading on the walls. The invert of a drain line around a below-grade building area or exterior retaining wall should be placed near foundation bearing level. The drain line should be sloped to provide positive gravity drainage to daylight or to a sump pit and pump. The drain line should be surrounded by clean, free-draining granular material having less than 5% passing the No. 200 sieve, such as ASTM No. 57 aggregate. The free-draining aggregate should be encapsulated in a filter fabric. The granular fill should extend to within 2 feet of final grade, where it should be capped with compacted cohesive fill to reduce infiltration of surface water into the drain system. Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 15 As an alternative to free-draining granular fill, a pre-fabricated drainage structure may be used. A pre-fabricated drainage structure is a plastic drainage core or mesh which is covered with filter fabric to prevent soil intrusion, and is fastened to the wall prior to placing backfill. 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. Based on the existing grading, 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-11 at approximate depths of 4 to 7 feet below existing grade. This material was remolded to about 95 percent of the standard proctor maximum dry density at approximately optimum moisture. The moisture-density relationship and CBR test results are presented in the Exploration Results section. Pavement Design Parameters A subgrade CBR of 5 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 on laboratory test results and 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. Design of pavements for the project is based on procedures outlined in the AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures, 1993, coupled with publications by the Asphalt Institute and the Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 16 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: Design Criteria Value Roadway Classification Private parking areas and drive lanes Anticipated Design Daily Traffic (for 20-year design period) The following anticipated traffic loading was provided by UPS: ■Autos/light trucks: 132 to 204 passes per day ■Loaded 40 foot feeders: 2 to 4 passes per day ■Loaded 28 foot double feeders: 2 passes per day ■Loaded 28 foot single feeders: 5 to 10 passes per day ■Loaded Package Cars: 77 to 121 passes per day ■Loaded Tractors: 2 to 4 passes per day Calculated ESAL – Flexible < 1,000 (Light Duty) to 275,000 (Heavy Duty) Calculated ESAL - Rigid < 1,000 (Light Duty) to 315,000 (Heavy Duty) Based upon the AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures, the project is located within Climatic Zone II-A. The region is characterized as having seasonal variability of moisture in the pavement structure and severe winters with high potential for frost penetration to appreciable depths into the subgrade. Please reference Frost Considerations for further discussion. Local characteristics of proposed pavement areas are considered to be poor to fair. These characteristics, coupled with the approximate duration of saturated subgrade conditions, result in a design drainage coefficient of 0.9 when applying the AASHTO criteria for design. Pavement Thickness Design Parameters Input Parameter Flexible (asphalt)Rigid (concrete) Reliability 90 90 Serviceability Loss 2.2 2.0 Standard Deviation 0.45 0.35 Asphalt Layer Coefficient 0.41 N/A Aggregate Base Coefficient 0.14 N/A Concrete Elastic Modulus (Ec)N/A 3,605,000 psi Concrete Modulus of Rupture (S’c)N/A 580 psi Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 17 Pavement Thickness Design Parameters Input Parameter Flexible (asphalt)Rigid (concrete) Load Transfer Coefficient (J)N/A 3.81 1.The Load Transfer Coefficient value provided is based on jointed plain concrete pavement and doweled longitudinal and expansion joints at a spacing interval no greater than 15 feet. Also, doweled into the concrete curb and gutter. Pavement Section Thicknesses UPS provided seven pavement types for consideration. The pavement sections are referenced below as Options A through G. Based on the parameters presented above, we recommend the following pavement sections be considered: 20-year Asphaltic Concrete Design 1 Traffic Area ESAL Asphalt Concrete (in.)2 Aggregate Base (in.)3, 4 Total Thickness (in.) (Option A) Light Duty (Employee Parking) - Asphalt pavement with aggregate base < 1,000 3 10 13 (Option B) Light Duty (Employee Parking) – Full depth asphalt pavement < 1,000 4 6 10 (Option C) Heavy Duty (Main Site) – Asphalt pavement with aggregate base 275,000 4 16 20 (Option D) Heavy Duty (Main Site) – Full depth asphalt pavement 275,000 7 6 13 1.See Pavement Design Parameters for traffic loading estimated in design. 2.All materials should meet the current Montana Public Works Standard Specifications (MPWSS) Section 2510. 3.A 1.5-inch minus base course meeting the requirements of MPWSS Section 02235 is recommended. 4.Due to the soft, fine-grained subgrade soils encountered in the pavement borings, the base course thicknesses recommended above include an extra 6-inch thick layer to provide extra strength and improve constructability of the underlying materials. Prior to proceeding with construction of the pavement section, a passing proofroll of the subgrade should be documented. Due to the soft conditions encountered in the surficial clay soils, a Mirafi 180N or equivalent geotextile fabric should be placed at the natural fine-grained soil/Structural Fill interface to limit the intrusion of fines into the Structural Fill and improve constructability. Asphalt concrete should be composed of aggregate, filler, and additives (if required), with approved bituminous material. The asphalt concrete should conform to approved mix design which include volumetrics, Marshall Properties, optimum asphalt content, project mix formula, and Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 18 recommended mixing and placing temperatures. The asphalt concrete should be consistent with an approved mix design conforming to MPWSS. Aggregate used in the asphalt should meet MPWSS for quality and gradation. Asphalt material should be placed in maximum 3-inch lifts and should be compacted to the minimum standards outlined in the MPWSS. In addition, the average of the density tests should be a minimum of 93 percent with no single test below 92 percent of the maximum theoretical maximum, as determined by ASTM D2041. The recommended sections in this report are based on the selected parameters presented herein and Terracon’s experience with similar projects and soil conditions. Parameters may vary with the specific project and material source. Variation of these parameters may change the thickness of the pavement sections presented. If traffic details differ substantially from those presented above, Terracon should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations provided at additional time and expense. 20-year Portland Cement Concrete Design 1 Traffic Area Portland Cement Concrete (in.)2 Aggregate Base (in.)3, 4 Total Thickness (in.) (Option E) Light Duty (non-parking, non-main site) Portland Concrete Pavement 4 4 8 (Option F) Heavy Duty (Main site) Portland Concrete Pavement with Aggregate Base 7.5 6 13.5 (Option G) Heavy Duty (Main site) Full Depth Portland Concrete Pavement 8 4 12 1.See Pavement Design Parameters for traffic loading estimated in design. 2.All materials should meet the current Montana Public Works Standard Specifications (MPWSS) Section 2510. 3.A 1.5-inch minus base course meeting the requirements of MPWSS Section 02235 is recommended. 4.Due to the soft fine-grained subgrade soils encountered in the pavement borings, 4 inch minimum base course thickness is recommended below the concrete pavement sections to provide some extra strength and improve constructability of the overlying materials. Portland cement concrete should meet the requirements of MPWSS. It is recommended concrete for rigid pavements have a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 4,000 psi and be placed with a maximum slump of 4 inches. Requirements for reinforcement, joint design, and spacing should be assessed by the Structural Engineer for the project. Although not required for structural support, the minimum 4-inch thick base course layer recommended below concrete pavements Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 19 will provide a relatively uniform base for support of the concrete pavement, improve constructability, and help reduce potential for slab curl, shrinkage cracking, and subgrade pumping through joints. Pavement design methods are intended to provide structural sections with adequate thickness over a subgrade such that wheel loads are reduced to a level the subgrade can support. The support characteristics of the subgrade for pavement design do not account for shrink/swell movements of the silt and clay subgrades such as the soils encountered in the borings. Thus, the pavement may be adequate from a structural standpoint, yet still experience cracking and deformation due to shrink/swell related movement of the subgrade. It is, therefore, important to minimize moisture changes in the subgrade to reduce shrink/swell movements. Openings in pavements, such as decorative landscaped areas, are sources for water infiltration into surrounding pavement systems. Water can collect in the islands and migrate into the surrounding subgrade soils thereby degrading support of the pavement. This is especially applicable for islands with raised concrete curbs, irrigated foliage, and low permeability near- surface soils. The civil design for the pavements with these conditions should include features to restrict or collect and discharge excess water from the islands. Examples of features are edge drains connected to the storm water collection system or other suitable outlets and impermeable barriers preventing lateral migration of water such as a cutoff wall installed to a depth below the pavement structure. 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. Based on the groundwater elevations encountered during the field investigation, we do not anticipate groundwater will affect long-term pavement performance. Therefore, installation of subdrains beneath the pavement footprint is not recommended. 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 by a Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 20 pavement management professional 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. FROST CONSIDERATIONS The soils on this site are frost susceptible, and small amounts of water can affect the performance of the slabs on-grade, sidewalks, and pavements. Exterior slabs should be anticipated to heave during winter months. If frost action needs to be eliminated in critical areas, we recommend the use of non-frost susceptible (NFS) fill or structural slabs (for instance, structural stoops in front of building doors). Placement of NFS material in large areas may not be feasible; however, the following recommendations are provided to help reduce potential frost heave: ■Provide surface drainage away from the building and slabs, and toward the site storm drainage system. ■Install drains around the perimeter of the building, stoops, below exterior slabs and pavements, and connect them to the storm drainage system. ■Grade clayey subgrades, so groundwater potentially perched in overlying more permeable subgrades, such as sand or aggregate base, slope toward a site drainage system. ■Place NFS fill as backfill beneath slabs and pavements critical to the project. ■Place a 3 horizontal to 1 vertical (3H:1V) transition zone between NFS fill and other soils. As an alternative to extending NFS fill to the full frost depth, consideration can be made to placing extruded polystyrene or cellular concrete under a buffer of at least 2 feet of NFS material. Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 21 CORROSIVITY The table below lists the results of laboratory soluble sulfate, soluble chloride, 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 Resistivity1 (Ω-cm)pH B-5 0-1.5 CL ND 2 1,180 7.0 1.Performed on a saturated sample of soil 2.Not detected at reporting limit Results of soluble sulfate testing indicate samples of the on-site soils tested classify as a S0 sulfate exposure in accordance with Table 19.3.1.1 of ACI 318. Concrete should be designed in accordance with the provisions of the ACI Design Manual, Section 318. According to the USDA National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) National Soil Survey Handbook, soil resistivity below 2,000 ohm-cm are anticipated to be highly corrosive. 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. 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, where noted in this report, 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 New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 22 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 expressed 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 (2 pages) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22DEPTH BELOW GRADE (Feet)New Parcel Distribution Facility Bozeman, MT Terracon Project No. 26205042 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 B-5 B-6 B-7 B-8 GEOMODEL This is not a cross section. This is intended to display the Geotechnical Model only. See individual logs for more detailed conditions. 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. First Water Observation Poorly graded gravel with various amounts of silt and sandencountered below the clay and sand layers in all borings.3 LEGEND Lean Clay Lean Clay with Sand Poorly-graded Gravel withSand Poorly-graded Sand withGravel Model Layer General DescriptionLayer Name Lean clay with various amounts of sand encounteredsurficially in all borings.1 Poorly graded sand encountered below the clay layer inboring B-7.2 Gravel Clay Sand 8.5 21.5 1 3 13.4 9 21.5 1 3 13 9.5 21.5 1 3 12.2 7.5 21.5 1 3 13 10 21.5 1 3 13 9 21.5 1 3 13.2 8 12 21.5 1 2 3 13 8 21.5 1 3 13 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18DEPTH BELOW GRADE (Feet)New Parcel Distribution Facility Bozeman, MT Terracon Project No. 26205042 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-9 B-10 B-11 B-12 B-13 B-14 B-15 GEOMODEL This is not a cross section. This is intended to display the Geotechnical Model only. See individual logs for more detailed conditions. 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. First Water Observation Poorly graded gravel with various amounts of silt and sandencountered below the clay and sand layers in all borings.3 LEGEND Lean Clay Lean Clay with Sand Poorly-graded Gravel withSand Model Layer General DescriptionLayer Name Lean clay with various amounts of sand encounteredsurficially in all borings.1 Poorly graded sand encountered below the clay layer inboring B-7.2 Gravel Clay Sand 9 16.5 1 313 7.5 16.5 1 3 13.2 8 16.5 1 313 9.5 16.5 1 312.7 9.5 16.5 1 3 12.4 9.5 16.5 1 313.1 9.5 16.5 1 3 10.3 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable ATTACHMENTS Geotechnical Engineering Report New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES 1 of 2 EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES Field Exploration Number of Borings Boring Depth (feet)Planned Location 8 21.5 Planned building area 7 16.5 Planed parking/driveway area Boring Layout and Elevations: The boring locations were originally laid out at the locations chosen by UPS personnel using a handheld GPS unit (estimated horizontal accuracy of ±10 feet). If elevations and a more precise boring layout are desired, we recommend borings be surveyed. Subsurface Exploration Procedures: We advanced the borings with a truck-mounted, rotary drill rig using continuous flight, hollow-stem augers. Four samples were obtained in the upper 10 feet and at intervals of 5 feet thereafter 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 were 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 New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 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 Soil ■ASTM D2435 Standard Test Method for One-Dimensional Consolidation Properties of Soils Using Incremental Loading ■ASTM D698 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Standard Effort (12,400 ft-lbf/ft3) ■ASTM D1883 Standard Test Method for California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of Laboratory- Compacted Soils ■Resistivity, pH, and soluble sulfate content The laboratory testing program 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-5 at an approximate depth of 0 to 1.5 feet were submitted to Energy Laboratories for chemical analysis, to include the determination of the soils’ pH, soluble sulfate content, and resistivity. The boring and depth were chosen as a representation of the worst-case soil (lean clay) by visual classification. The results of these chemical analyses are discussed in the Corrosivity section. 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 New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 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 New Parcel Distribution Facility ■ Bozeman, Montana November 2, 2020 ■ Terracon Project No. 26205042 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-15) Atterberg Limits Grain Size Distribution (3 pages) Unconfined Compressive Strength (2 pages) One-dimensional Consolidation/Swell (2 pages) Moisture Density Relationship CBR Corrosivity (7 pages) Note: All attachments are one page unless noted above. 1-2-4 N=6 2-1-1N=2 1-0-1 N=1 2-2-16 N=18 16-50/4" 18-29-39N=68 50/4" 24.0 21.2 28.5 24.5 3.4 LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, moist, soft to medium stiff LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), brown, moist, soft POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP), fine to coarsegrained, rounded to subrounded, brown to gray, moist to wet, very dense Boring Terminated at 21.5 Feet 4.0 8.5 21.5 Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 9/10/20WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 10 15 20 FIELD TESTRESULTSUNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH (psf)PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)DRY UNITWEIGHT (pcf)ATTERBERGLIMITS LL-PL-PI LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 45.7319° Longitude: -111.0893°GRAPHIC LOGMODEL LAYERDEPTH Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion. Notes: Project No.: 26205042 Drill Rig: BK-81 BORING LOG NO. B-1 United Parcel Service Oasis Supply CorporationCLIENT:Seattle, WA Driller: Haztech Boring Completed: 08-04-2020 PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility 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. Nelson Meadows Industrial Park Bozeman, MT SITE: Boring Started: 08-04-2020 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT While drilling WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS While drilling 1 3 SAMPLE TYPE LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, moist, soft to medium stiff LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), brown, moist POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP), with cobbles, fineto coarse grained, rounded to subrounded, brown to gray, moist to wet, very dense Boring Terminated at 21.5 Feet 4.0 9.0 21.5 5-4-1 N=5 2-1-1N=2 2-5-31 N=36 15-28-24N=52 18-26-39N=65 24-42-50/5" 18.7 19.6 26.4 23.9 3.8 Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 9/10/20WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSATTERBERGLIMITS LL-PL-PI LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 45.7318° Longitude: -111.0891°GRAPHIC LOGMODEL LAYERDEPTH Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion.DEPTH (Ft.)5 10 15 20 FIELD TESTRESULTSUNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH (psf)PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)DRY UNITWEIGHT (pcf)Notes: Project No.: 26205042 Drill Rig: BK-81 BORING LOG NO. B-2 United Parcel Service Oasis Supply CorporationCLIENT:Seattle, WA Driller: Haztech Boring Completed: 08-03-2020 PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility 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. Nelson Meadows Industrial Park Bozeman, MT SITE: Boring Started: 08-03-2020 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT While drilling WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS While drilling 1 3 SAMPLE TYPE 2-2-1 N=3 2-2-1N=3 2-2-1 N=3 15-33-26N=59 18-26-23N=49 27-50 580 97 20.9 22.0 21.7 24.6 8.1 90 32-23-9 LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, moist, soft POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP), fine to coarse grained, brown to gray, moist to wet, dense to very dense Boring Terminated at 21.5 Feet 9.5 21.5 Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 9/10/20WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 10 15 20 FIELD TESTRESULTSUNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH (psf)PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)DRY UNITWEIGHT (pcf)ATTERBERGLIMITS LL-PL-PI LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 45.7322° Longitude: -111.089°GRAPHIC LOGMODEL LAYERDEPTH Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion. Notes: Project No.: 26205042 Drill Rig: BK-81 BORING LOG NO. B-3 United Parcel Service Oasis Supply CorporationCLIENT:Seattle, WA Driller: Haztech Boring Completed: 08-04-2020 PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility 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. Nelson Meadows Industrial Park Bozeman, MT SITE: Boring Started: 08-04-2020 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT While drilling WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS While drilling 1 3 SAMPLE TYPE 6-5-4 N=9 3-2-1N=3 1-1-1 N=2 13-35-42 N=77 19-20-9N=29 10-24-41N=65 18-30-34 N=64 13.1 19.6 4.5 2.5 LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, moist, soft to stiff LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), brown, moist, soft POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP), fine to coarsegrained, rounded to subrounded, brown to gray, moist to wet, mediumdense to very dense Boring Terminated at 21.5 Feet 4.0 7.5 21.5 Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 9/10/20WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 10 15 20 FIELD TESTRESULTSUNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH (psf)PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)DRY UNITWEIGHT (pcf)ATTERBERGLIMITS LL-PL-PI LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 45.7321° Longitude: -111.0888°GRAPHIC LOGMODEL LAYERDEPTH Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion. Notes: Project No.: 26205042 Drill Rig: BK-81 BORING LOG NO. B-4 United Parcel Service Oasis Supply CorporationCLIENT:Seattle, WA Driller: Haztech Boring Completed: 08-03-2020 PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility 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. Nelson Meadows Industrial Park Bozeman, MT SITE: Boring Started: 08-03-2020 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT While drilling WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS While drilling 1 3 SAMPLE TYPE 3-2-2 N=4 1-2-1N=3 2-2-3 N=5 2-3-3 N=6 17-25-23N=48 4-18-29N=47 50/4" 18.2 21.9 21.5 34.1 4.3 LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, moist, soft to medium stiff LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), brown, moist, medium stiff POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP), fine to coarse grained, rounded to subrounded, brown to gray, moist to wet, dense to very dense Boring Terminated at 21.5 Feet 4.0 10.0 21.5 Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 9/10/20WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 10 15 20 FIELD TESTRESULTSUNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH (psf)PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)DRY UNITWEIGHT (pcf)ATTERBERGLIMITS LL-PL-PI LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 45.7324° Longitude: -111.0887°GRAPHIC LOGMODEL LAYERDEPTH Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion. Notes: Project No.: 26205042 Drill Rig: BK-81 BORING LOG NO. B-5 United Parcel Service Oasis Supply CorporationCLIENT:Seattle, WA Driller: Haztech Boring Completed: 08-04-2020 PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility 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. Nelson Meadows Industrial Park Bozeman, MT SITE: Boring Started: 08-04-2020 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT While drilling WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS While drilling 1 3 SAMPLE TYPE 5-5-3 N=8 2-1-2N=3 1-1-1 N=2 10-40-34N=74 14-22-27N=49 26-50/5" 690 84 8.6 21.8 20.1 26.1 4.3 90 30-22-8 LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, moist, soft to medium stiff LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), with silt, brown, moist, soft POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP), fine to coarsegrained, rounded to subrounded, brown to gray, moist to wet, dense to very dense Boring Terminated at 21.5 Feet 4.0 9.0 21.5 Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 9/10/20WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 10 15 20 FIELD TESTRESULTSUNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH (psf)PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)DRY UNITWEIGHT (pcf)ATTERBERGLIMITS LL-PL-PI LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 45.7323° Longitude: -111.0884°GRAPHIC LOGMODEL LAYERDEPTH Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion. Notes: Project No.: 26205042 Drill Rig: BK-81 BORING LOG NO. B-6 United Parcel Service Oasis Supply CorporationCLIENT:Seattle, WA Driller: Haztech Boring Completed: 08-03-2020 PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility 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. Nelson Meadows Industrial Park Bozeman, MT SITE: Boring Started: 08-03-2020 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT While drilling WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS While drilling 1 3 SAMPLE TYPE 6-4-3 N=7 2-2-1N=3 2-6-20 N=26 9-13-7N=20 4-19-25N=44 14-27-25 N=52 5 17.9 20.0 23.1 3.5 NP LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, moist, soft to medium stiff LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), brown, moist POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP), fine to coarse grained, rounded to subrounded, brown to gray, moist, medium dense POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP), fine to coarse grained, rounded to subrounded, brown to gray, moist to wet, dense tovery dense Boring Terminated at 21.5 Feet 4.0 8.0 12.0 21.5 Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 9/10/20WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 10 15 20 FIELD TESTRESULTSUNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH (psf)PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)DRY UNITWEIGHT (pcf)ATTERBERGLIMITS LL-PL-PI LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 45.7327° Longitude: -111.0884°GRAPHIC LOGMODEL LAYERDEPTH Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion. Notes: Project No.: 26205042 Drill Rig: BK-81 BORING LOG NO. B-7 United Parcel Service Oasis Supply CorporationCLIENT:Seattle, WA Driller: Haztech Boring Completed: 08-04-2020 PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility 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. Nelson Meadows Industrial Park Bozeman, MT SITE: Boring Started: 08-04-2020 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT While drilling WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS While drilling 1 2 3 SAMPLE TYPE 6-2-3 N=5 2-2-2N=4 2-2-3 N=5 4-11-20 N=31 21-27-27N=54 12-30-38 N=68 20.6 18.3 23.7 7.2 4.3 LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, moist, medium stiff LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), brown, moist, medium stiff POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP), fine to coarse grained, rounded to subrounded, brown to gray, moist to wet, verydense Boring Terminated at 21.5 Feet 4.0 8.0 21.5 Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Boring moved 20 feet west of staked location due to utility concerns THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 9/10/20WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 10 15 20 FIELD TESTRESULTSUNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH (psf)PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)DRY UNITWEIGHT (pcf)ATTERBERGLIMITS LL-PL-PI LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 45.7326° Longitude: -111.0882°GRAPHIC LOGMODEL LAYERDEPTH Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion. Notes: Project No.: 26205042 Drill Rig: BK-81 BORING LOG NO. B-8 United Parcel Service Oasis Supply CorporationCLIENT:Seattle, WA Driller: Haztech Boring Completed: 08-04-2020 PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility 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. Nelson Meadows Industrial Park Bozeman, MT SITE: Boring Started: 08-04-2020 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT While drilling WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS While drilling 1 3 SAMPLE TYPE 1-2-3 N=5 2-2-2N=4 1-2-1 N=3 2-3-4 N=7 17-28-32N=60 17-24-45N=69 8 20.5 21.9 27.9 33.6 3.7 NP LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, moist, medium stiff LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), brown, moist, soft to medium stiff POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP), fine to coarsegrained, rounded to subrounded, brown to gray, moist to wet, very dense Boring Terminated at 16.5 Feet 4.0 9.0 16.5 Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 9/10/20WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 10 15 FIELD TESTRESULTSUNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH (psf)PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)DRY UNITWEIGHT (pcf)ATTERBERGLIMITS LL-PL-PI LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 45.7313° Longitude: -111.0898°GRAPHIC LOGMODEL LAYERDEPTH Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion. Notes: Project No.: 26205042 Drill Rig: BK-81 BORING LOG NO. B-9 United Parcel Service Oasis Supply CorporationCLIENT:Seattle, WA Driller: Haztech Boring Completed: 08-04-2020 PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility 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. Nelson Meadows Industrial Park Bozeman, MT SITE: Boring Started: 08-04-2020 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT While drilling WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS While drilling 1 3 SAMPLE TYPE 1-3-2 N=5 2-2-1N=3 2-2-1 N=3 50/5" 19-36-50/2" 4-7-36N=43 17.4 20.0 27.2 4.7 4.9 LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, moist, soft to medium stiff LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), brown, moist, soft POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP), fine to coarsegrained, rounded to subrounded, brown to gray, moist to wet, dense tovery dense Boring Terminated at 16.5 Feet 4.0 7.5 16.5 Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 9/10/20WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 10 15 FIELD TESTRESULTSUNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH (psf)PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)DRY UNITWEIGHT (pcf)ATTERBERGLIMITS LL-PL-PI LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 45.7315° Longitude: -111.0891°GRAPHIC LOGMODEL LAYERDEPTH Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion. Notes: Project No.: 26205042 Drill Rig: BK-81 BORING LOG NO. B-10 United Parcel Service Oasis Supply CorporationCLIENT:Seattle, WA Driller: Haztech Boring Completed: 08-05-2020 PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility 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. Nelson Meadows Industrial Park Bozeman, MT SITE: Boring Started: 08-05-2020 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT While drilling WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS While drilling 1 3 SAMPLE TYPE 2-3-3 N=6 2-2-2N=4 2-1-1 N=2 8-33-50/4" 21-32-34N=66 50/2" 8 16.9 19.0 26.0 4.3 4.3 NP LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, moist, soft to medium stiff LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), brown, moist, soft POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP), fine to coarse grained, rounded to subrounded, brown to gray, moist to wet, verydense Boring Terminated at 16.5 Feet 4.0 8.0 16.5 Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 9/10/20WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 10 15 FIELD TESTRESULTSUNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH (psf)PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)DRY UNITWEIGHT (pcf)ATTERBERGLIMITS LL-PL-PI LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 45.7321° Longitude: -111.0895°GRAPHIC LOGMODEL LAYERDEPTH Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion. Notes: Project No.: 26205042 Drill Rig: BK-81 BORING LOG NO. B-11 United Parcel Service Oasis Supply CorporationCLIENT:Seattle, WA Driller: Haztech Boring Completed: 08-05-2020 PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility 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. Nelson Meadows Industrial Park Bozeman, MT SITE: Boring Started: 08-05-2020 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT While drilling WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS While drilling 1 3 SAMPLE TYPE 4-3-2 N=5 2-1-1N=2 1-2-3 N=5 2-2-2 N=4 2-15-30N=45 25-29-36N=65 20.6 19.9 24.3 32.7 3.6 LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, moist, soft to medium stiff LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), brown, moist, medium stiff POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP), fine to coarse grained, rounded to subrounded, brown to gray, moist to wet, dense tovery dense Boring Terminated at 16.5 Feet 4.0 9.5 16.5 Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Boring moved 25 feet west of staked location for utility concerns THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 9/10/20WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 10 15 FIELD TESTRESULTSUNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH (psf)PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)DRY UNITWEIGHT (pcf)ATTERBERGLIMITS LL-PL-PI LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 45.7324° Longitude: 111.0882°GRAPHIC LOGMODEL LAYERDEPTH Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion. Notes: Project No.: 26205042 Drill Rig: BK-81 BORING LOG NO. B-12 United Parcel Service Oasis Supply CorporationCLIENT:Seattle, WA Driller: Haztech Boring Completed: 08-05-2020 PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility 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. Nelson Meadows Industrial Park Bozeman, MT SITE: Boring Started: 08-05-2020 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT While drilling WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS While drilling 1 3 SAMPLE TYPE 2-1-2 N=3 2-2-1N=3 2-2-2 N=4 2-2-1 N=3 14-21-22N=43 15-26-23N=49 20.8 22.6 25.6 30.7 3.9 LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, moist, soft LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), brown, moist, soft to medium stiff POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP), fine to coarse grained, rounded to subrounded, brown to gray, moist to wet, dense Boring Terminated at 16.5 Feet 4.0 9.5 16.5 Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 9/10/20WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 10 15 FIELD TESTRESULTSUNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH (psf)PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)DRY UNITWEIGHT (pcf)ATTERBERGLIMITS LL-PL-PI LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 45.7327° Longitude: -111.0887°GRAPHIC LOGMODEL LAYERDEPTH Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion. Notes: Project No.: 26205042 Drill Rig: BK-81 BORING LOG NO. B-13 United Parcel Service Oasis Supply CorporationCLIENT:Seattle, WA Driller: Haztech Boring Completed: 08-05-2020 PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility 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. Nelson Meadows Industrial Park Bozeman, MT SITE: Boring Started: 08-05-2020 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT While drilling WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS While drilling 1 3 SAMPLE TYPE 2-3-4 N=7 2-1-1N=2 2-2-3 N=5 2-2-2 N=4 4-10-18N=28 13-26-37N=63 19.3 26.9 24.0 29.3 5.3 LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, moist, soft to medium stiff LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), brown, moist, medium stiff POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP), fine to coarse grained, rounded to subrounded, brown to gray, moist to wet, mediumdense to very dense Boring Terminated at 16.5 Feet 4.0 9.5 16.5 Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual.THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 9/10/20WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 10 15 FIELD TESTRESULTSUNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH (psf)PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)DRY UNITWEIGHT (pcf)ATTERBERGLIMITS LL-PL-PI LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 45.733° Longitude: -111.0883°GRAPHIC LOGMODEL LAYERDEPTH Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion. Notes: Project No.: 26205042 Drill Rig: BK-81 BORING LOG NO. B-14 United Parcel Service Oasis Supply CorporationCLIENT:Seattle, WA Driller: Haztech Boring Completed: 08-05-2020 PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility 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. Nelson Meadows Industrial Park Bozeman, MT SITE: Boring Started: 08-05-2020 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT While drilling WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS While drilling 1 3 SAMPLE TYPE 5-3-2 N=5 2-1-1N=2 2-2-1 N=3 1-1-2 N=3 14-27-16N=43 21-34-29N=63 20.2 21.3 26.0 25.4 5.2 LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, moist, soft to medium stiff LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), brown, moist, soft POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GP), fine to coarse grained, rounded to subrounded, brown to gray, moist to wet, dense tovery dense Boring Terminated at 16.5 Feet 4.0 9.5 16.5 Hammer Type: AutomaticStratification lines are approximate. In-situ, the transition may be gradual. Boring moved 15 feet west of staked location due to utility concerns THIS BORING LOG IS NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GEO SMART LOG-NO WELL 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 9/10/20WATER LEVELOBSERVATIONSDEPTH (Ft.)5 10 15 FIELD TESTRESULTSUNCONFINEDCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTH (psf)PERCENT FINESWATERCONTENT (%)DRY UNITWEIGHT (pcf)ATTERBERGLIMITS LL-PL-PI LOCATION See Exploration Plan Latitude: 45.733° Longitude: -111.0892°GRAPHIC LOGMODEL LAYERDEPTH Page 1 of 1 Advancement Method:Hollow Stem Auger Abandonment Method:Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon completion. Notes: Project No.: 26205042 Drill Rig: BK-81 BORING LOG NO. B-15 United Parcel Service Oasis Supply CorporationCLIENT:Seattle, WA Driller: Haztech Boring Completed: 08-05-2020 PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility 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. Nelson Meadows Industrial Park Bozeman, MT SITE: Boring Started: 08-05-2020 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT While drilling WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS While drilling 1 3 SAMPLE TYPE 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 20 40 60 80 100CH or OHCL or OLML or OL MH or OH"U" Line"A" Line ATTERBERG LIMITS RESULTS ASTM D4318 P LAS TIC IT Y I NDE X LIQUID LIMIT PROJECT NUMBER: 26205042 SITE: Nelson Meadows Industrial Park, Lots 1 and 27 Bozeman, MT PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility CLIENT: United Parcel Service Oasis Supply Corporation Seattle, WA 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. ATTERBERG LIMITS 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 8/27/20 32 30 NP NP NP 23 22 NP NP NP 9 8 NP NP NP PIPLLLBoring ID Depth B-3 B-6 B-7 B-9 B-11 97.2 84.0 4.8 8.1 8.0 Fines 5 - 7 5 - 7 10 - 11.5 15 - 16.5 10 - 11.5 CL CL SP GW-GM GW-GM LEAN CLAY LEAN CLAY with SAND POORLY GRADED SAND with GRAVEL WELL-GRADED GRAVEL with SILT and SAND WELL-GRADED GRAVEL with SILT and SAND DescriptionUSCS 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 506 2001.5 8 1 140 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 3/4 1/23/8 30 403 60 HYDROMETERU.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES PERCENT COARSER BY WEIGHTGRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ASTM D422 3 2 10 1416 20 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 44 1006 PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT LEAN CLAY (CL) LEAN CLAY with SAND (CL) POORLY GRADED SAND with GRAVEL (SP) D50 D95 0.166 0.623 D60 CC D10 0.366 0.85 0.942 3/4"3/8"#4#8#16#30#50#100#200 100.094.3484.9474.2765.4549.122.397.854.79 100.099.6699.2998.7197.8796.3792.3483.99 3/8"#4#8#16#30#50#100#200 100.0100.099.9199.8299.6699.3397.22 #4#8#16#30#50#100#200 fine coarse fine SILT OR CLAYCOBBLESGRAVELSAND medium 0.237 10.301 D30 5.67CU 5 - 7 5 - 7 10 - 11.5 CL CL SP 97.2 84.0 4.8 2.8 15.7 80.2 0.0 0.3 15.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 B-3 B-6 B-7 coarse PROJECT NUMBER: 26205042 SITE: Nelson Meadows Industrial Park, Lots 1 and 27 Bozeman, MT PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility CLIENT: United Parcel Service Oasis Supply Corporation Seattle, WA 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. 73155080 GRAIN SIZE - D95-D50 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 8/27/20Sieve % Finer Sieve Sieve % Finer SOIL DESCRIPTION GRAIN 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 506 2001.5 8 1 140 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 3/4 1/23/8 30 403 60 HYDROMETERU.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES PERCENT COARSER BY WEIGHTGRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ASTM D422 3 2 10 1416 20 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 44 1006 PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT WELL-GRADED GRAVEL with SILT and SAND (GW-GM) D50 D95 0.133 5.297 D60 CC D10 1.365 1.84 7.629 100.091.1266.0147.0136.7128.2220.1814.3510.42 8.05 1 1/2"3/4"3/8"#4#8#16#30#50#100 #200 fine coarse fine SILT OR CLAYCOBBLESGRAVELSAND medium 25.571 D30 57.48CU 15 - 16.5 GW-GM8.1 39.053.00.0B-9 coarse PROJECT NUMBER: 26205042 SITE: Nelson Meadows Industrial Park, Lots 1 and 27 Bozeman, MT PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility CLIENT: United Parcel Service Oasis Supply Corporation Seattle, WA 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. 73155080 GRAIN SIZE - D95-D50 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 8/27/20Sieve % Finer Sieve Sieve % Finer SOIL DESCRIPTION GRAIN 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 506 2001.5 8 1 140 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 3/4 1/23/8 30 403 60 HYDROMETERU.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES PERCENT COARSER BY WEIGHTGRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ASTM D422 3 2 10 1416 20 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 44 1006 PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT WELL-GRADED GRAVEL with SILT and SAND (GW-GM) D50 D95 0.115 3.891 D60 CC D10 0.905 1.00 7.138 100.082.7565.0452.8242.9433.5124.5616.811.25 8.01 1 1/2"3/4"3/8"#4#8#16#30#50#100 #200 fine coarse fine SILT OR CLAYCOBBLESGRAVELSAND medium 30.791 D30 62.22CU 10 - 11.5 GW-GM8.0 44.847.20.0B-11 coarse PROJECT NUMBER: 26205042 SITE: Nelson Meadows Industrial Park, Lots 1 and 27 Bozeman, MT PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility CLIENT: United Parcel Service Oasis Supply Corporation Seattle, WA 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. 73155080 GRAIN SIZE - D95-D50 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 8/27/20Sieve % Finer Sieve Sieve % Finer SOIL DESCRIPTION GRAIN SIZE COEFFICIENTS BORING ID % GRAVEL % SAND % SILT% COBBLES % CLAY % Finer DEPTH % FINES USCS REMARKS 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0COMPRESSIVE STRESS - psfAXIAL STRAIN - % ASTM D2166 UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST PROJECT NUMBER: 26205042 SITE: Nelson Meadows Industrial Park, Lots 1 and 27 Bozeman, MT PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility CLIENT: United Parcel Service Oasis Supply Corporation Seattle, WA 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. UNCONFINED 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 8/27/20Calculated Saturation: % Height:in. Diameter:in. Failure Mode: Bulge (dashed) Remarks: 97 Percent < #200 SievePIPLLL 291 DESCRIPTION: LEAN CLAY(CL) 0.0500 SAMPLE LOCATION: B-3 @ 5 - 7 feetSAMPLE TYPE: Shelby Tube 90 Strain Rate: in/min Failure Strain: % SPECIMEN FAILURE MODE Dry Density: pcf Moisture Content: % 2.14 1.98Height / Diameter Ratio: Calculated Void Ratio: Undrained Shear Strength: (psf) Unconfined Compressive Strength (psf) 92332 Assumed Specific Gravity: 582 5.59 2.83 SPECIMEN TEST DATA 21.7 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6COMPRESSIVE STRESS - psfAXIAL STRAIN - % ASTM D2166 UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST PROJECT NUMBER: 26205042 SITE: Nelson Meadows Industrial Park, Lots 1 and 27 Bozeman, MT PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility CLIENT: United Parcel Service Oasis Supply Corporation Seattle, WA 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. UNCONFINED 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 8/27/20Calculated Saturation: % Height:in. Diameter:in. Failure Mode: Bulge (dashed) Remarks: 84 Percent < #200 SievePIPLLL 344 DESCRIPTION: LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL) 0.0500 SAMPLE LOCATION: B-6 @ 5 - 7 feetSAMPLE TYPE: Shelby Tube 90 Strain Rate: in/min Failure Strain: % SPECIMEN FAILURE MODE Dry Density: pcf Moisture Content: % 1.07 2.03Height / Diameter Ratio: Calculated Void Ratio: Undrained Shear Strength: (psf) Unconfined Compressive Strength (psf) 82230 Assumed Specific Gravity: 689 5.61 2.76 SPECIMEN TEST DATA 22.9 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 100 1,000 10,000AXIAL STRAIN, %PRESSURE, psf NOTES: SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST ASTM D2435 PROJECT NUMBER: 26205042 SITE: Nelson Meadows Industrial Park, Lots 1 and 27 Bozeman, MT PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility CLIENT: United Parcel Service Oasis Supply Corporation Seattle, WA 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. TC_CONSOL_STRAIN-USCS 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 8/27/20 B-3 LEAN CLAY(CL)5 - 7 ft 91 21.2 Specimen Identification Classification , pcf WC, % -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 100 1,000 10,000AXIAL STRAIN, %PRESSURE, psf NOTES: SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST ASTM D2435 PROJECT NUMBER: 26205042 SITE: Nelson Meadows Industrial Park, Lots 1 and 27 Bozeman, MT PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility CLIENT: United Parcel Service Oasis Supply Corporation Seattle, WA 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. TC_CONSOL_STRAIN-USCS 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 8/27/20 B-6 LEAN CLAY with SAND(CL)5 - 7 ft 92 20.1 Specimen Identification Classification , pcf WC, % 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45DRY DENSITY, pcfWATER 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: 26205042 SITE: Nelson Meadows Industrial Park, Lots 1 and 27 Bozeman, MT PROJECT: New Parcel Distribution Facility CLIENT: United Parcel Service Oasis Supply Corporation Seattle, WA 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124Billings, MT LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. COMPACTION - V2 26205042 NEW PARCEL DISTRI.GPJ TERRACON_DATATEMPLATE.GDT 8/27/20ASTM D698 Method A B-11 @ 4 - 7 feetSource of Material Description of Material Remarks: Test Method PCF % TEST RESULTS Maximum Dry Density % LL 108.6 Optimum Water Content PIPL ATTERBERG LIMITS 17.4 Percent Fines PROJECT:New Parcel Distribution Facility PROJECT NO:26205042 LOCATION:Bozeman, Montana MATERIAL:Lean Clay with Sand SAMPLE SOURCE:B-11 @ 4 to 7 feet DATE:8/27/2020 REVIEWED BY:TG COMPACTION(%)95.0%CORRECTED COMPACTION:Recompacted at 95% MDD near optimum moisture PENETRATION C B R PERCENT SWELL -0.1%0.100 5.2% 0.200 5.2% BEFORE SOAK AFTER SOAK DRY DENSITY 103.2 lbs./cu.ft 103.3 lbs./cu.ft D698 PROCTOR PERCENT MOISTURE 17.4 %20.9 %DRY DENSITY(pcf) 108.6 MOISTURE(%)17.4 SURCHARGE WEIGHT 10 lbs. CBR (CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO) OF LABORATORY-COMPACTED SOILS (ASTM D1883) 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0 140.0 160.0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5PENETRATIONSTRESS(psi)PENETRATION (in) 2110 Overland Avenue, Suite 124, Billings, Montana PHONE: (406) 656-3072 FAX: (406) 656-3578 ISSUED: 8/27/2020 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: B20081492-001 B-5 [0-1.5]08/03/20 0:00 08/14/20 Soil pH, Saturated Paste Saturated Paste Extraction ASA Resistivity, Sat Paste Sulfate-Geochemical Terracon Consultants Project Name:26205042 UPS Work Order:B20081492 2110 Overland Ave Ste 124 Billings , MT 59102-6440 August 28, 2020 Energy Laboratories Inc Billings MT received the following 1 sample for Terracon Consultants on 8/14/2020 for analysis. Page 1 of 7 LABORATORY ANALYTICAL REPORT Client:Terracon Consultants Project:26205042 UPS Lab ID:B20081492-001 Client Sample ID:B-5 [0-1.5] Collection Date:08/03/20 Matrix:Soil Report Date:08/28/20 DateReceived:08/14/20 Prepared by Billings, MT Branch Analyses Result Units Analysis Date / ByRLMethod MCL/ QCLQualifiers SATURATED PASTE EXTRACT 08/20/20 11:20 / srm1ohm-cm1180Resistivity, Sat. Paste Calculation 08/20/20 11:20 / srm0.1s.u.7.0pH, sat. paste ASA10-3 CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS 08/27/20 11:58 / 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 (RL) Page 2 of 7 Client:Terracon Consultants Work Order:B20081492 QA/QC Summary Report 08/28/20Report Date: Analyte Result %REC RPDLow Limit High Limit RPDLimitRLUnits QualCount Prepared by Billings, MT Branch Method:ASA10-3 Batch: 147711 Lab ID:B20081492-001A DUP 08/20/20 11:20Sample Duplicate Run: MISC-SOIL_200820A pH, sat. paste 100.10 0.07.00 s.u. Lab ID:LCS-2008201120 08/20/20 11:20Laboratory Control Sample Run: MISC-SOIL_200820A pH, sat. paste 96 90 1100.107.20 s.u. Qualifiers: RL - Analyte Reporting Limit ND - Not detected at the Reporting Limit (RL) Page 3 of 7 Client:Terracon Consultants Work Order:B20081492 QA/QC Summary Report 08/28/20Report Date: Analyte Result %REC RPDLow Limit High Limit RPDLimitRLUnits QualCount Prepared by Billings, MT Branch Method:Calculation Batch: 147711 Lab ID:B20081492-001A DUP 08/20/20 11:20Sample Duplicate Run: MISC-SOIL_200820A Resistivity, Sat. Paste 70 130 301.0 2.41150ohm-cm Lab ID:LCS-2008201120 08/20/20 11:20Laboratory Control Sample Run: MISC-SOIL_200820A Resistivity, Sat. Paste 99 70 1301.0241ohm-cm Qualifiers: RL - Analyte Reporting Limit ND - Not detected at the Reporting Limit (RL) Page 4 of 7 Client:Terracon Consultants Work Order:B20081492 QA/QC Summary Report 08/28/20Report Date: Analyte Result %REC RPDLow Limit High Limit RPDLimitRLUnits QualCount Prepared by Billings, MT Branch Method:MTDOT Batch: R347746 Lab ID:MBLK1 08/27/20 11:57Method Blank Run: MISC-SOIL_200828A Sulfate, HCL Extractable ND wt% Lab ID:B20081491-001A DUP 08/27/20 11:58Sample Duplicate Run: MISC-SOIL_200828A Sulfate, HCL Extractable 300.010.00 wt% Lab ID:LCS 08/27/20 11:58Laboratory Control Sample Run: MISC-SOIL_200828A Sulfate, HCL Extractable 92 70 1300.010.06 wt% Qualifiers: RL - Analyte Reporting Limit ND - Not detected at the Reporting Limit (RL) 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 30.2°C No Ice 8/14/2020Taylor K. Burris Hand Del jmm Date Received: Received by: Login completed by: Carrier name: BL2000\cindy 8/17/2020 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. Radiochemical precision results represent a 2-sigma Total Measurement Uncertainty. Standard Reporting Procedures: Work Order Receipt Checklist Terracon Consultants B20081492 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. New Parcel Distribution Facility Bozeman, MT Terracon Project No. 26205042 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 Strength Qu, (psf) GrabSample ShelbyTube Split Spoon N (HP) (T) (DCP) UC (PID) (OVA) Standard Penetration TestResistance (Blows/Ft.) Hand Penetrometer Torvane Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Unconfined CompressiveStrength Photo-Ionization Detector Organic Vapor Analyzer SAMPLING WATER LEVEL FIELD TESTS GENERAL NOTES DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS Water levels indicated on the soil boring logs are the levels measured in the borehole at the timesindicated. Groundwater level variations will occur over time. In low permeability soils, accuratedetermination of groundwater levels is not possible with short term water level observations. Water Initially Encountered Water Level After a Specified Period of Time Water Level Aftera Specified Period of Time Cave InEncountered Exploration point locations as shown on the Exploration Plan and as noted on the soil boring logs in the form of Latitude andLongitude are approximate. See Exploration and Testing Procedures in the report for the methods used to locate theexploration points for this project. 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 the area. LOCATION AND ELEVATION NOTES Soil classification as noted on the soil boring logs is based Unified Soil Classification System. Where sufficient laboratory data exist to classify the soils consistent with ASTM D2487 "Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes" this procedure is used.ASTM D2488 "Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure)" is also used to classify the soils, particularly where insufficient laboratory data exist to classify the soils in accordance with ASTM D2487. In addition to USCS classification, coarse grained soils are classified on the basis of their in-place relative density, and fine-grained soils are classified on the basisof their consistency. See "Strength Terms" table below for details. The ASTM standards noted above are for reference tomethodology in general. In some cases, variations to methods are applied as a result of local practice or professional judgment. DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION The soil boring logs contained within this document are intended for application to the project as described in this document. Use of these soil boring logs for any other purpose may not be appropriate. RELEVANCE OF SOIL BORING LOG STRENGTH TERMS Standard Penetration or N-ValueBlows/Ft. Descriptive Term (Density) 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 > 30 Descriptive Term (Consistency) Standard Penetration or N-ValueBlows/Ft. (More than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve.) Density determined by Standard Penetration Resistance CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILSRELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS 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% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve Clean Gravels: Less than 5% fines C Cu ‡4 and 1 £Cc £3 E GW Well-graded gravelF Cu < 4 and/or [Cc<1 or Cc>3.0]E GP Poorly graded gravelF Gravels with Fines: More than 12% finesC Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel F, G, H Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel F, G, H Sands: 50% or more of coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve Clean Sands: Less than 5% fines D Cu ‡6 and 1 £Cc £3E SW Well-graded sandI Cu < 6 and/or [Cc<1 or Cc>3.0]E SP Poorly graded sand I Sands with Fines: More than 12% fines D Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand G, H, I Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sandG, 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” line J CL Lean clayK, L, M PI <4 or plots below “A” lineJ ML SiltK, L, M Organic:Liquid limit - oven dried < 0.75 OL Organic clay K, 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 clay K, 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 ABased on the material passing the 3-inch (75-mm) sieve. BIf field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add “with cobbles or boulders, or both” to group name. CGravels 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. DSands 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. ECu = D60/D10 Cc = 6010 2 30 DxD )(D F If soil contains ‡ 15% sand, add “with sand” to group name. GIf 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 ‡ 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 ‡ 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add “sandy” to group name. MIf soil contains ‡ 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add “gravelly” to group name. NPI ‡ 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. APPENDIX B: STORM DRAINAGE EXHIBITS GASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGAS1324511ohohohohohohbtbtbtbtugugugugugugugugCsssssssssswmwmwmwmwmwmwmwmwmwmwmCbpbpYELLOWSTONE MEMORIAL LLCPARCEL 1 & 2, & TRACT C - CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY 2581NELSON ROAD LLC - TRACT 1A - CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY 1372A30' DEDICATED ROW - NELSON MEADOWS SUBDIVISIONLIFT STATIONTRACTNELSONMEADOWSSUB.BARTIMCO PROPERTIES, LLCLOT 26, BLOCK 7NELSON MEADOWS SUBDIVISIONBURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROADRIGHT-OF-WAYFRONTAGE ROADCERTIFICATE OF SURVEY2332 & 2952wmwmwmwmw m w m w m w m w m wmwmwmwmwmwmsssswmwmwmwm ssssssssssssssssssssssstststststststststststststst stN88°57'33"E 600.74' (R-600.80')S6°33'44"E 446.65' (R-446.51')N89°06'33"W 62.16'S3 7 ° 2 1 ' 5 9 " W 3 8 2 . 8 2 ' ( R - 3 8 2 . 6 9 ' )N53°27'02"W 246.86'(R1-246.90')(R-682.82')N0°39'01"E 682.68'357.73' (R-357.85')324.95' (R-324.97')35.43'40.00'40.00'34.00' 31 3 . 3 9 ' 34.00'66.19' (R-66.12')317.86'28.60'LOT 1ABLOCK 6NELSON MEADOWS SUBDIVISION9.282 Ac.404,304 Ft²BARTIMCO PROPERTIES, LLCLOT 2, BLOCK 5NELSON MEADOWS SUBDIVISIONBARTIMCO PROPERTIES, LLCLOT 16, BLOCK 4NELSON MEADOWS SUBDIVISIONS 01°37'56" W; 14.82'S 41°49'14" W; 8.30'S 83°01'45" W; 14.92'L = 1 6 8 .1 5 ,R=180.00D= 5 3 ° 3 1'28 " 4598 4597 45964595 45944593 45924591459145904590 458945 9 1 4 5 9 2 45 9 3 4 59 4 459545964597DRAWN BY |REVISIONS©| ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDCHECKED BY |®PARCEL DISTRIBUTION FACILITY UPS BOZEMAN, MONTANA80% CONSTRUCTIONDOCUMENTS03.23.2021NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION - PRELIMINARY DESIGN 2021Know what'sbelow.Callbefore you dig.3/31/2021 10:53 AM | L:\UPS_BOZEMAN\BIMCAD\Civil\Storm\UPS_BZMN_D.1.dwgD.1HISTORICDRAINAGEBASINSCHLEGEL-BASIN DESIGNATIONPERCENT IMPERVIOUSBASIN AREA IN ACRESHIST-019.2804HIST-###.####BASIN BOUNDARY (TYP.)1D.1HISTORIC DRAINAGE BASINNORTH0204080SCALE: 1" = 40' 1324511ohohohohohohbtbtbtbtugugugugugugugugCsssssssssswmwmwmwmwmwmwmwmwmwmwmCbpbpYELLOWSTONE MEMORIAL LLCPARCEL 1 & 2, & TRACT C - CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY 2581NELSON ROAD LLC - TRACT 1A - CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY 1372A30' DEDICATED ROW - NELSON MEADOWS SUBDIVISIONLIFT STATIONTRACTNELSONMEADOWSSUB.BARTIMCO PROPERTIES, LLCLOT 26, BLOCK 7NELSON MEADOWS SUBDIVISIONBURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROADRIGHT-OF-WAYFRONTAGE ROADCERTIFICATE OF SURVEY2332 & 2952wmwmwmwmw m w m w m w m w m wmwmwmwmwmwmsssswmwmwmwm ssssssssssssssssssssssstststststststststststststst stN88°57'33"E 600.74' (R-600.80')S6°33'44"E 446.65' (R-446.51')N89°06'33"W 62.16'S3 7 ° 2 1 ' 5 9 " W 3 8 2 . 8 2 ' ( R - 3 8 2 . 6 9 ' )N53°27'02"W 246.86'(R1-246.90')(R-682.82')N0°39'01"E 682.68'357.73' (R-357.85')324.95' (R-324.97')35.43'40.00'40.00'34.00' 31 3 . 3 9 ' 34.00'66.19' (R-66.12')317.86'28.60'LOT 1ABLOCK 6NELSON MEADOWS SUBDIVISION9.282 Ac.404,304 Ft²BARTIMCO PROPERTIES, LLCLOT 2, BLOCK 5NELSON MEADOWS SUBDIVISIONBARTIMCO PROPERTIES, LLCLOT 16, BLOCK 4NELSON MEADOWS SUBDIVISIONS 01°37'56" W; 14.82'S 41°49'14" W; 8.30'S 83°01'45" W; 14.92'L= 1 6 8 .1 5 ,R=180.00D= 5 3 ° 3 1 '28" 4598 4597 45964595 45944593 45924591459145904590 458945 9 1 4 5 9 2 45 9 3 459 4 459545964597STROYAL WOLF WAYROYAL WOLF WAYP R I N C E L A N E PRINCE LANE## # ## # ## # ## # ## # ## # ## # ## #PROPOSEDBUILDING35,100 SFFFE = 4596.00## # ### ### ### ## # ## #XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX ## #DEV-###.####DRAWN BY |REVISIONS©| ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDCHECKED BY |®PARCEL DISTRIBUTION FACILITY UPS BOZEMAN, MONTANASITE PLAN SUBMITTAL04.21.20212021Know what'sbelow.Callbefore you dig.4/16/2021 11:59 AM | L:\UPS_BOZEMAN\BIMCAD\Civil\Storm\UPS_BZMN_D.2.dwgD.2DEVELOPEDDRAINAGEBASINSSCHLEGEL-BASIN DESIGNATIONPERCENT IMPERVIOUSBASIN AREA IN ACRESDEV-017.0236BASIN BOUNDARY (TYP.)DEV-022.26411D.2DEVELOPED DRAINAGE BASINSNORTH0204080SCALE: 1" = 40'POND - 01DRYWELLPOND - 02DRYWELL APPENDIX C: PRE-DEVELOPMENT CALCULATIONS BasinLandscape/ Undeveloped (sf) (C=0.2)Impervious (sf) (C=.9)Total (sf)Total (ac)Weighted Coefficent% ImperviousHIST-01 389863 14441 404304 9.28 0.23 4%BASIN CArea(ac)2-hr(i) in/hrQcfsV(cf)HIST-01 0.23 9.28 0.41 0.86 6165HISTORIC BASINSTotal Runoff Volume (10-yr/2-hr storm) APPENDIX D: POST DEVELOPMENT CALCULATIONS BasinPervious (Landscape/ Undeveloped) (sf) (C=0.2)Impervious (Roof/ Paving) (sf) (C=0.9)Total (sf)Total (ac)Weighted Coefficent% ImperviousDEV-01 195419 110576 305995 7.02 0.45 36%DEV-02 56955 41354 98309 2.26 0.49 42%Total: 252374 151930 404304 9.28 0.46 38%BASIN CArea(ac)2-hr(i) in/hrQcfsV(cf)DEV-01 0.45 7.02 0.41 1.30 9344DEV-02 0.49 2.26 0.41 0.46 3277Total: 0.46 9.28 0.41 1.75 12621BASIN CArea(ac) (i) in/hr *QcfsDEV-01 0.45 7.02 3.83 12.2DEV-02 0.49 2.26 3.83 4.3BASINArea(ac)P (in) Imperv.RvWQV (cf)DEV-01 7.02 0.50 0.36 0.38 4784DEV-02 2.26 0.50 0.42 0.43 1756* Calculation uses 5-min time of concentrationPeak Runoff (25-yr/24-hr storm)Water Quality Volume (WQV) *POST-DEVELOPMENT BASINSTotal Runoff Volume (10-yr/2-hr storm) pond depth pond area Pond volume (increment) Pond Volume (cumulative)Comments -1.00 5547 1831 1831 Sand Media Layer (33% Voids) 0.00 5547 0 1831 0.10 5696 562 2393 0.20 5844 577 2970 0.30 5993 592 3562 0.40 6142 607 4168 0.50 6289 615 4784 WQ Volume 0.60 6439 643 5426 0.70 6588 651 6078 0.80 6736 666 6744 0.90 6885 681 7425 1.00 7034 696 8121 1.10 7182 711 8832 1.17 7288 512 9344 10-yr volume 1.20 7331 213 9557 1.30 7480 741 10298 1.40 7629 755 11053 1.50 7777 770 11824 1.60 7926 785 12609 1.70 8075 800 13409 1.80 8223 815 14224 1.90 8372 830 15053 2.00 8521 845 15898 2.10 8669 859 16758 2.20 8818 874 17632 2.30 8967 889 18521 2.40 9115 904 19425 2.50 9264 919 20344 POND 01 Volume Table pond depth pond area Pond volume (increment) Pond Volume (cumulative)Comments -1.00 1454 436 436 Sand Media Layer (33% Voids) 0.00 1454 0 436 0.10 1599 153 589 0.20 1744 167 756 0.30 1889 182 938 0.40 2034 196 1134 0.50 2180 211 1345 0.60 2325 225 1570 0.68 2438 186 1756 WQ Volume 0.70 2470 54 1810 0.80 2615 254 2064 0.90 2760 269 2333 1.00 2905 283 2616 1.10 3050 298 2914 1.20 3195 312 3226 1.22 3219 51 3277 10-yr volume 1.30 3341 275 3553 1.40 3486 341 3894 1.50 3631 356 4250 1.60 3776 370 4620 1.70 3921 385 5005 1.80 4066 399 5404 1.90 4211 414 5818 2.00 4356 428 6247 2.10 4502 443 6689 2.20 4647 457 7147 2.30 4792 472 7619 2.40 4937 486 8105 2.50 5082 501 8606 POND 02 Volume Table Weir Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Thursday, Apr 15 2021 Curb Chase Calc Rectangular Weir Crest = Sharp Bottom Length (ft) = 2.50 Total Depth (ft) = 0.50 Calculations Weir Coeff. Cw = 3.33 Compute by: Q vs Depth No. Increments = 10 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.50 Q (cfs) = 2.943 Area (sqft) = 1.25 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.35 Top Width (ft) = 2.50 0 .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Depth (ft)Depth (ft)Curb Chase Calc -0.50 -0.50 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.50 1.00 1.00 Length (ft)Weir W.S. Channel Report Hydraflow Express Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc.Tuesday, Mar 30 2021 UPS Bozeman Conveyance Channels Triangular Side Slopes (z:1) = 8.00, 8.00 Total Depth (ft) = 1.00 Invert Elev (ft) = 100.00 Slope (%) = 0.70 N-Value = 0.030 Calculations Compute by: Known Q Known Q (cfs) = 12.20 Highlighted Depth (ft) = 0.82 Q (cfs) = 12.20 Area (sqft) = 5.38 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.27 Wetted Perim (ft) = 13.22 Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.68 Top Width (ft) = 13.12 EGL (ft) = 0.90 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Elev (ft)Depth (ft)Section 99.50 -0.50 100.00 0.00 100.50 0.50 101.00 1.00 101.50 1.50 102.00 2.00 Reach (ft) APPENDIX E: FEMA FLOOD MAP 18,0560.6 Miles This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for, or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Users of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the usability of the information. Feet 2,1010 Legend 1,050 Location 2,101 Cushing Terrell City of Bozeman 11/18/2020 Created By: Created For: Date: UPS Bozeman FEMA Flood Hazard Areas Updated FEMA Special Flood Profile Baseline Updated FEMA Special Flood Hazard Areas Regulated Floodway 100-Year Floodplain 500-Year Floodplain Street Names City Limits USGS The National Map: Orthoimagery. Data refreshed October, 2020. National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000250 Feet Ü SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT SPECIAL FLOODHAZARD AREAS Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE)Zone A, V, A99With BFE or DepthZone AE, AO, AH, VE, AR Regulatory Floodway 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areasof 1% annual chance flood with averagedepth less than one foot or with drainageareas of less than one square mileZone X Future Conditions 1% Annual Chance Flood HazardZone X Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to Levee. See Notes.Zone X Area with Flood Risk due to LeveeZone D NO SCREENArea of Minimal Flood Hazard Zone X Area of Undetermined Flood HazardZone D Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer Levee, Dike, or Floodwall Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance 17.5 Water Surface Elevation Coastal Transect Coastal Transect Baseline Profile Baseline Hydrographic Feature Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE) Effective LOMRs Limit of Study Jurisdiction Boundary Digital Data Available No Digital Data Available Unmapped This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of digital flood maps if it is not void as described below.The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemapaccuracy standards The flood hazard information is derived directly from theauthoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This mapwas exported on 12/8/2020 at 6:40 PM and does notreflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date andtime. The NFHL and effective information may change orbecome superseded by new data over time. This map image is void if the one or more of the following map elements do not appear: basemap imagery, flood zone labels, legend, scale bar, map creation date, community identifiers, FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images for unmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used for regulatory purposes. Legend OTHER AREAS OF FLOOD HAZARD OTHER AREAS GENERAL STRUCTURES OTHER FEATURES MAP PANELS 8 B 20.2 The pin displayed on the map is an approximatepoint selected by the user and does not representan authoritative property location. 1:6,000 111°5'39"W 45°44'8"N 111°5'1"W 45°43'43"N APPENDIX F: NRCS SOILS