HomeMy WebLinkAbout016 Appendix O - Geotechnical Report
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR:
West University
Bozeman, Montana
August 2022
Project 22-027
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 1
KEY GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS .......................................................................................... 1
SCOPE OF WORK ............................................................................................................................. 2
GEOLOGY OF THE SITE .................................................................................................................... 3
EXPLORATIONS AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........................................................................... 3
Subsurface Explorations .............................................................................................................. 3
Subsurface Conditions ................................................................................................................. 4
Groundwater Conditions ............................................................................................................. 6
Laboratory Testing ...................................................................................................................... 6
FOUNDATION, SLAB, AND DRAINAGE RECOMMENDATIONS......................................................... 7
Seismic Design Factors ................................................................................................................ 7
Foundation Design ...................................................................................................................... 7
Foundation Bearing Criteria ........................................................................................................ 8
Option 1: Mass-Excavation Down to Native Sandy Gravels ........................................................ 8
Option 2: Over-Excavation Under Footings Down to Native Sandy Gravels .............................. 9
Lateral Earth Pressures.............................................................................................................. 10
Subgrade Reaction Modulus (Under Interior Slabs) ................................................................. 11
Foundation Wall Backfill............................................................................................................ 11
Subsurface Drainage and Damp-Proofing ................................................................................. 11
Vapor Barrier ............................................................................................................................. 11
Soil Corrosion to Concrete and Metal ....................................................................................... 12
Surface Drainage Recommendations ........................................................................................ 12
Interior Slab Recommendations................................................................................................ 12
Exterior Slab Recommendations ............................................................................................... 13
FOUNDATION-RELATED FILL MATERIAL RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................... 14
Excavated Foundation Soils ....................................................................................................... 14
Structural Fill ............................................................................................................................. 14
Clean Crushed Rock ................................................................................................................... 15
FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION ........................................................................................... 15
ii
PAVEMENT SECTION RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................. 16
UNDERGROUND UTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................... 23
Foundation Support of Utility Lines .......................................................................................... 23
Trench Backfill ........................................................................................................................... 23
COLD/WINTER WEATHER CONSTRUCTION .................................................................................. 24
AESI FUTURE INVOLVEMENT ........................................................................................................ 24
LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................................. 24
REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................. 25
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
• List of Tables
o Table 1. Summary of Subsurface Conditions
o Table 2. Atterberg Limit Results
o Table 3. Standard Proctor Results Per ASTM D-698.
o Table 4. Corrosion Testing Results
o Table 5. Interior Concrete Slab Support – Mass-Excavation Down to Native Gravels
(Option 1)
o Table 6. Interior Concrete Slab Support – Over-Excavation Down to Native Gravels
Under Footings Only (Option 2)
o Table 7. Exterior Concrete Slab (Light Duty) – Sidewalks Away from Buildings
o Table 8. Exterior Concrete Slab (Medium Duty) – Sidewalks Near Buildings
o Table 9. Exterior Concrete Slab (Heavy Duty) – Vehicle Loaded Slabs
o Table 10. Compaction Recommendations (Application vs. Percent Compaction)
o Table 11. Required Design ESALs
o Table 12. Pavement Section 1A – South 19th Avenue – Stable Silt/Clay Subgrade
o Table 13. Pavement Section 1B – South 19th Avenue – Native Sandy Gravel
Subgrade
o Table 14. Pavement Section 1C – South 19th Avenue – Geogrid-Reinforced
Silt/Clay Subgrade
o Table 15. Pavement Section 2A – Kagy Boulevard – Stable Silt/Clay Subgrade
o Table 16. Pavement Section 2B – Kagy Boulevard – Native Sandy Gravel Subgrade
o Table 17. Pavement Section 2C – Kagy Boulevard – Geogrid-Reinforced Silt/Clay
Subgrade
o Table 18. Pavement Section 3A – Stucky Road – Stable Silt/Clay Subgrade
o Table 19. Pavement Section 3B – Stucky Road – Native Sandy Gravel Subgrade
iii
o Table 20. Pavement Section 3C – Stucky Road – Geogrid-Reinforced Silt/Clay
Subgrade
o Table 21. Pavement Section 4A – City Streets – Stable Silt/Clay Subgrade
o Table 22. Pavement Section 4B – City Streets – Native Sandy Gravel Subgrade
o Table 23. Pavement Section 4C – City Streets – Geogrid-Reinforced Silt/Clay
Subgrade
o Table 24. Pavement Section 5A – Private Drives – Stable Silt/Clay Subgrade
o Table 25. Pavement Section 5B – Private Drives – Native Sandy Gravel Subgrade
o Table 26. Pavement Section 5C – Private Drives – Geogrid-Reinforced Silt/Clay
Subgrade
• List of Figures
o Figure 1 – Vicinity Map
o Figure 2 – Quadrangle Map
o Figure 3 – Geology Map
o Figure 4 – Groundwater Map
o Figure 5 – Test Pit Location Map
o Figure 6 – Depth to Gravels Map
o Figure 7 – Depth to Peak Groundwater Map
o Figure 8 – Foundation Typical – Slab-On-Grade (Option 1)
o Figure 9 – Foundation Typical – Slab-On-Grade (Option 2)
• List of Appendices
o Appendix A – Test Pit Logs
o Appendix B – Laboratory Testing Results
o Appendix C – Groundwater Monitoring Results Through 7/27/2022
o Appendix D – Pavement Section Design
o Appendix E – Limitations of Your Geotechnical Report
INTRODUCTION
This report and attachments provide our geotechnical recommendations for the future
development of West University located on the south side of Bozeman, Montana. The
information contained herein is based on an investigation of the property’s topographical and
subsurface conditions, a review of geologic maps and literature for the project area, and our
experience with similar developments in the area. The purpose of this report is to provide a
description of the site’s soil and groundwater conditions as well as recommendations for the
design and construction of future developments proposed for the property.
The 95.65-acre property is located northwest of the intersection of the Stucky Road and South
19th Avenue. The property is described as Remainder Lot 2A of Minor Subdivision 191-B located
in the Southeastern One-Quarter of Section 14, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, Principal
Meridian Montana, Gallatin County, Montana. See Figures 1 and 2 for site location maps.
The property is comprised of an undeveloped agricultural field that is mostly flat, falling slightly
to the north at less than 2 percent. The property is bound to the west by Montana State
University property, the north by Montana State University property and Kagy Boulevard, the
east by Kagy Crossing Subdivision and South 19th Avenue, and the south by Stucky Road. Site
vegetation consists primarily of agricultural crops and grasses. An irrigation ditch bisects the
property, flowing in a northerly direction. Two existing stream and wetland corridors also flow
to the north along the western and eastern portions of the property. One stand of cottonwoods
and willows are situated in the southwest corner of the property.
At this time, we understand improvements will include South 19th Avenue widening, Kagy
Boulevard widening and extension, Stucky Road widening and reconstruction, and new
extensions of South 22nd Avenue, South 25th Avenue, and Remington Way. We understand the
proposed zoning of the property will consist of a combination of REMU (Residential Emphasis
Mixed-Use) and B-2M (Community Business District – Mixed). At this time, we have not been
provided any specific site plans so our geotechnical recommendations can be described as
general recommendations for future development. We ask that we be retained for future work
to review proposed developments to ensure our geotechnical recommendations are
appropriate.
KEY GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Below are some of the critical geotechnical conditions encountered at the property and should
be considered in design:
• High groundwater is present across the site. Groundwater monitoring beginning on
March 25, 2022, through July 27, 2022, indicate that groundwater rises within
approximately 2 feet of the ground surface outside of the stream corridors. Groundwater
within the stream corridors rises to the existing ground surface. There is always a
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 2
possibility of groundwater levels rising even higher than we observed during our
monitoring in 2022 in particularly wet years.
• Depth to “target bearing” native sandy gravels varies from 1.25 to 4.0 feet across the site.
Our geotechnical recommendations are based on placing foundations on the native sandy
gravels or on import granular structural fill that in turn bears on the native sandy gravels.
• Due to high groundwater conditions, slab-on-grade foundations set above existing grade
should be considered to alleviate any flooding issues.
• If crawlspace foundations are considered, there will be significant challenges with
pumping out high groundwater that enters crawlspaces and finding a suitable place to
discharge the water. The City of Bozeman does not allow groundwater to be pumped into
city streets or storm facilities. If crawlspaces are considered, we suggest setting the
bottom of footing grades a minimum of 2 feet above high groundwater elevations (likely
putting footing grades near the existing ground surface). Road finished grades will need
to be elevated accordingly to help limit the depth of crawlspaces.
• With high groundwater, it should be anticipated that soft and very moist to saturated
subgrade will be present during construction. To achieve proper compaction of the onsite
soils, it will likely be necessary to dry, re-work, and scarify the soils to ensure proper
compaction. If the soils cannot be dried to a point to achieve proper compaction, import
materials to achieve proper compaction will be needed. Various pavement sections have
been provided in this report to account for soft subgrade conditions.
• Dewatering will likely be needed during construction activities including but not limited
to road construction, utility installation, and foundation earthwork.
SCOPE OF WORK
The Scope of Services for this project included:
• Review of the project site information and geologic maps.
• Completion of twenty-two (22) test pits across the property. Fourteen (14) groundwater
monitors were installed in select test pits for future monitoring. The location of each test
pit and monitoring well is shown on Figure 5.
• Perform laboratory testing of select samples from the test pits.
• Provide foundation recommendations, allowable bearing capacity criteria, lateral earth
pressures, and foundation earthwork recommendations.
• Perform corrosion testing and DIPRA Analysis.
• Perform weekly groundwater monitoring beginning in March 2022.
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 3
• Provide surface and subsurface drainage recommendations.
• Recommend backfill material and compaction recommendations.
• Prepare asphalt pavement section materials and design thickness.
GEOLOGY OF THE SITE
The geologic map for the area prepared by Lonn and English in 2002 indicates the site is underlain
by older alluvial deposits of braid plains (Qabo) which is described as well-rounded, moderately
to well-sorted, bouldery gravel with interbedded silt. An excerpt of this mapping is provided on
Figure 3. Geologic mapping prepared in 1995 by the Unites States Geological Survey also maps
the site as alluvial-fan deposits (see Figure 4). During our test pit explorations, we encountered
alluvial deposits of sandy gravel with rounded cobbles across the site, which is consistent with
the geologic mapping shown in Figures 3 and 4.
In addition, available hydrogeologic information (see Figure 4) roughly indicate that the
groundwater elevation drops approximately 50 feet from the south to north end of the property
(elevation 4,950 to 4,900) with flow primarily in a northerly to northeasterly direction. Ground
surface elevations across the site roughly match the groundwater elevations suggesting that
groundwater is shallow across the site. Groundwater monitoring performed this year at the site
further support that groundwater levels across the property are shallow (4 feet or less),
particularly in the vicinity of the stream and irrigation corridors.
EXPLORATIONS AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Subsurface Explorations
Subsurface conditions were investigated on March 11 and 14, 2022, under the direction of Erik
Schnaderbeck, a professional geotechnical engineer with Allied Engineering Services, Inc.
Twenty-two (22) test pit excavations, which are identified as TP-1 through TP-22, were excavated
on the property using a tracked excavator provided by RLS Construction. It should be noted that
TP-3 and TP-17 were excavated with a rubber-tracked mini-excavator to minimize site
disturbance within the stream corridors. The test pits were evenly distributed to provide
coverage of the property. A total of fourteen (14) groundwater monitoring wells were installed
in select test pits across the property for future monitoring.
During the explorations, soil and groundwater conditions were characterized, measured, and
logged. The relative densities of the exposed soils were estimated based on the ease or difficulty
of digging, probing of the test pit walls, pocket penetrometer readings, and overall stability of
the completed excavations. Copies of our test pit logs are provided in Appendix A. The logs
provide assorted field information, such as soil depths and descriptions, groundwater conditions,
relative density data, and a sketch of the soil stratigraphy. Please be aware that the detail
provided in the logs cannot be summarized in a paragraph; therefore, it is important to review
the logs in conjunction with this report. Following completion of the fieldwork, the test pit
locations were backfilled and cleaned up to the extent possible. Each was staked with a wooden
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 4
lath that identified it accordingly. If any test pits will underlie future site improvements, they
should be completely re-excavated and backfilled in properly compacted lifts to avoid
undesirable settlements.
Select soil samples were brought back to the laboratory for further testing and classification.
Laboratory testing results are provided in Appendix B.
Subsurface Conditions
Similar soil conditions were encountered in all 22 test pits across the site. Topsoil consisted of
about a 0.5 to 1.5 feet of dark brown organic silt/clay with fine roots and occasional cobbles. Fine
roots in many test pits extended less than one foot below the ground surface indicating that deep
root penetration is not required by vegetation due to high groundwater levels. Below the topsoil
from depths of 0.5 to 4.0 feet, the test pits encountered soft to medium stiff, light brown, native
sandy silt/clay that was very moist. It should be noted that the sandy silt/clay became softer and
moister with depth. Underlying the sandy silt/clay deposits were alluvial deposits of dense sandy
gravel with 6-inch-minus rounded cobbles that extended to the bottom of all 22 test pits to
depths of 10.5 feet. Please refer to Table 1 for a summary of soil conditions encountered.
Table 1: Summary of Subsurface Conditions
Test Pit
Identification Native Topsoil Native Sandy
Silt/Clay
Native Sandy Gravel
TP-1 0.0’ – 1.5’ 1.5’ – 2.5’
2.5’ – 10.0’
TP-2 0.0’ – 1.0’ 1.0’ – 3.0’ 3.0’ – 10.0’
TP-3 0.0’ – 1.5’ 1.5’ – 2.5’ 2.5’ – 8.5’
TP-4
0.0’ – 0.5’ 0.5’ – 2.75’ 2.75’ – 10.0’
TP-5 0.0’ – 1.0’ 1.0’ – 3.5’ 3.5’ – 10.0’
TP-6
0.0’ – 1.0’ 1.0’ – 2.25’ 2.25’ – 10.0’
TP-7
0.0’ – 1.25’ 1.25’ – 4.0’ 4.0’ – 10.0’
TP-8 0.0’ – 1.5’ 1.5’ – 3.0’ 3.0’ – 10.5’
TP-9 0.0’ – 1.0’ 1.0’ – 3.5’ 3.5’ – 10.0’
TP-10 0.0’ – 1.0’ 1.0’ – 2.75’ 2.75’ – 9.0’
TP-11
0.0’ – 0.75’ 0.75’ – 2.5’ 2.5’ – 9.0’
TP-12
0.0’ – 1.0’ 1.0’ – 2.5’ 2.5’ – 9.0’
TP-13 0.0’ – 1.0’ 1.0’ – 3.5’ 3.5’ – 10.0’
TP-14 0.0’ – 0.75’ 0.75’ – 3.0’ 3.0’ – 10.0’
TP-15 0.0’ – 0.5’ 0.5’ – 3.5’ 3.5’ – 9.5’
TP-16 0.0’ – 1.5’ 1.5’ – 2.5’ 2.5’ – 8.5’
TP-17 0.0’ – 1.5’ -- 1.5’ – 8.0’
TP-18 0.0’ – 0.75’ 0.75’ – 2.5’ 2.5’ – 9.0’
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 5
TP-19 0.0’ – 1.0’ 1.0’ – 4.0’ 4.0’ – 9.0’
TP-20 0.0’ – 1.5’ 1.5’ – 3.5’ 3.5’ – 9.0’
TP-21 0.0’ – 1.5’ 1.5’ – 2.5’ 2.5’ – 9.0’
TP-22 0.0’ – 1.25’ -- 1.25’ – 9.0’
Target foundation bearing is within the native sandy gravel deposits found at depths of 1.25 to
4.0 feet depending on location. Foundation support recommendations provided later in this
report are based on excavation to these gravels and placement of the footings either on the
native gravels or on granular structural fill placed on the native sandy gravels. Please refer to
Photo 1 for details on the native sandy gravel. A map showing the depth to target bearing gravels
across the site is shown on Figure 6 attached to this report.
Photo 1: Native sandy gravel (Target Bearing Material) observed in TP-14.
Native Sandy Gravel
(Target Bearing Material)
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 6
Groundwater Conditions
During the test pit explorations conducted on March 11 and 14, 2022, groundwater was
encountered in all 22 test pits. Monitoring wells were installed in select test pits across the site
for future monitoring. Weekly groundwater monitoring was conducted after completion of the
test pits beginning on March 25, 2022, through July 27, 2022. A summary of the groundwater
monitoring data is provided in Appendix C. Our weekly monitoring will continue into the fall of
2022. Results can be provided upon request.
Groundwater levels rose as high as 2.23 feet below the existing ground surface in areas outside
of the stream corridors across the site. In TP-17 (MW-11), located within the western stream
corridor, groundwater rose to the existing ground surface. In TP-3 (MW-3), located within the
eastern stream corridor, groundwater rose to approximately 1.36 feet below the existing ground
surface.
During our monitoring period, sporadic dewatering may have been conducted as part of the
South University District development construction located just east of the site across South 19th
Avenue. For this reason, groundwater levels observed in the eastern portion of this property may
not be representative of the true peak groundwater elevations. Figure 7 attached shows the
highest groundwater levels observed during our monitoring during the Spring of 2022.
Based on this information, high groundwater will impact design and construction activities.
Dewatering should be anticipated for all construction activities.
Laboratory Testing
Select sack samples were taken in all 22 test pits for moisture content testing, corrosion testing,
and Atterberg Limit testing. In addition to sack samples taken from the explorations, three
composite samples were taken of the upper fine-grain sandy silt/clay soils at 1.5 to 2.5 feet to
obtain a range of Standard Proctor densities of soils to be encountered during utility and site
work. All laboratory testing results are provided in Appendix B.
Moisture contents of the soils present above groundwater during the time of the test pit
explorations ranged from approximately 3.3 to 26.4 percent. The upper fine-grained soils were
generally very moist and became softer and wetter with depth. A table of the Atterberg Limits
results from samples of the upper fine-grained soils are provided in Table 2.
Table 2: Atterberg Limit Results
Sample
Identification
Plastic Limit
(PL)
Liquid Limit
(LL)
Plastic
Index (PI)
USCS Soil Classification
S1-A at 2.0’ (TP-1) 19.6 39.8 20.2 Lean Clay (CL)
S3-A at 2.0’ (TP-3) 16.6 39.0 22.4 Lean Clay (CL)
S7-A at 2.0’ (TP-7) 18.8 36.8 18.1 Lean Clay (CL)
S15-A at 2.0’ (TP-15) 20.4 31.3 10.9 Lean Clay (CL)
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 7
Due to the elevated groundwater conditions across the site, the soils will likely be saturated
during construction activities and be very difficult to properly compact. The material will likely
need to be dried out to achieve proper compaction or import material will be needed to ensure
proper compaction is achieved.
Table 3 provides the Standard Proctor results of anticipated soils (silts and clays) mostly likely to
be encountered at the road subgrade elevations.
Table 3: Standard Proctor Results Per ASTM D-698
Sample Identification Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture (%)
Composite A (1.5’ – 2.5’) 98.0 18.5
Composite B (1.5’ – 2.5’) 102.7 18.5
Composite C (1.5’ – 2.5’) 104.0 16.0
During the test pit explorations, four additional composite samples were obtained from 4.0 to
8.0 feet for corrosion testing and to perform a DIPRA Analysis for protection of ductile iron water
mains across the site. Corrosion testing was performed by Energy Labs in Helena, Montana. The
results are provided in Table 4. Sulfide levels were not detected at the reporting limit.
Table 4: Corrosion Testing Results
Sample ID: pH
Chloride
(mg/kg)
Conductivity
(mmhos/cm)
Oxidation-
Reduction
Potential
(mV)
Sulfide
(mg/L)
Resistivity
(ohm-cm)
Composite 1 8.4 5 0.2 296 ND 6610
Composite 2 8.2 3 0.1 292 ND 7840 Composite 3 8.4 3 0.1 337 ND 9100 Composite 4 8.2 2 0.1 278 ND 7450
FOUNDATION, SLAB, AND DRAINAGE RECOMMENDATIONS
Seismic Design Factors
Based on our on-site explorations and knowledge of the area’s geology, the project site class is
Site Class D per the 2021 IBC (not Default Site Class D).
Foundation Design
Due to the presence of high groundwater, we recommend that foundations consist of slab-on-
grades with finished floor elevations raised to the extent possible and above native grades. We
do not recommend basement foundations across the site.
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 8
If crawlspaces are considered, we recommend maintaining a minimum of two feet of separation
between high groundwater and the bottom of footings (in crawlspace applications). The City of
Bozeman does not allow groundwater to be pumped into streets or storm facilities, so we
recommend elevating the crawlspaces as discussed earlier. This would likely place footings near
the existing grade across the site meaning adjacent streets will also need to be brought up as well
as exterior grades adjacent foundations to provide appropriate frost protection.
Recognize that providing appropriate separation to groundwater in crawlspace applications will
also require additional structural fill to extend from the target bearing sandy gravels encountered
at 1.0 to 4.0 feet below existing grade up to footing grade. Clean crushed rock would be
recommended to infill the crawlspace up to the top of footings.
Foundation Bearing Criteria
The upper sandy silt/clay found at the site are prone to excessive settlement (over an inch) under
anticipated foundation loads. For this reason, we recommend over-excavating to the native
sandy gravel (found at a depth of 1.25 to 4.0 feet) and bearing footings on this material or on
granular structural fill that is founded on the native sandy gravel. For frost protection, exterior
and perimeter footings should bear at a depth of four feet below the lowest adjacent exterior
finished grade (unless the foundation is insulated and frost-protected in accordance with IBC
standards).
In a slab on grade application or an elevated crawlspace, two options exist with respect to the
installation of the structural fill (if needed) to extend from the target bearing native sandy gravels
up to the bottom of footings:
Option 1: Mass-Excavation Down to Native Sandy Gravels
• The first option is to mass-excavate within the footprint of the structures down to the
target bearing native sandy gravels and replace with compacted structural fill (1.5-inch
minus road mix or 3-inch-minus pit-run gravel). This may be the easiest option if there
are a significant number of interior spread footings that need to be dug out individually.
• Prior to placing granular structural fill (under footings and throughout the foundation
footprint area), the excavated gravel subgrade surface must be vibratory re-compacted
with a large, smooth drum roller to densify the native sandy gravel and induce soil
settlements in the uppermost gravels. If any soft spots are found in the subgrade, they
should be removed and replaced with compacted structural fill.
• For the mass over-excavation scenario, the minimum excavated width (beyond the
outside edge of perimeter footings) will depend on the thickness of granular structural fill
to be placed under footings (if needed). The excavation should extend laterally a
minimum of one-half (½) the required thickness of structural fill required to build back up
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 9
from the native sandy gravel subgrade up to footing grade, but at a minimum should
extend 2.0 feet. For instance, if the depth to the native gravel below a foundation is 5
feet, the excavation should extend 2.5 feet laterally from the outside edge of footings.
This dimension is measured at the bottom of the excavation. It is important that
adequate compaction is achieved along the edges and corners of the excavation where
access is difficult with large compaction equipment. Please see Figure 8 for details.
Option 2: Over-Excavation Under Footings Down to Native Sandy Gravels
• The second option to perhaps save on foundation preparation costs is to leave the non-
organic sandy silt/clay under the interior slab (or between the interior spread footings in
a crawlspace application) and dig out the footings individually down to the native gravels,
using compacted structural fill as needed to build back up to footing elevation.
• To ensure load transfer occurs in the structural fill, the required width of the excavation
is the width of the footing plus the depth of structural fill measured from the bottom of
footing to the native gravels (essentially a load transfer of 2V:1H). For instance, if the
width of the footing is 2 feet and the thickness of structural fill extending from the bottom
of footing to native gravels is 2 feet, the width of the excavation would need to be 4 feet.
This assumes the footing is centered on the trench. The native sandy gravel subgrade
shall be proof-rolled prior to placing structural fill. It is important that adequate
compaction is achieved along the edges and corners of the excavation where access is
difficult with large compaction equipment.
• With Option 2, lightly loaded interior slabs would be supported by the native non-organic
fine-grained soils and a section of structural fill. We recommend against supporting any
portion of interior slabs on organic soils since these soils will be prone to settlement
depending on the degree of organics present. Organic soils should be completely
removed and the non-organic fine-grained subgrade proof-rolled to a dense, unyielding
condition. Please recognize that the upper sandy silt/clay soils were very moist and may
be soft upon excavation. Drying and scarifying of the surface may be needed to compact
the subgrade to an unyielding condition.
• Under interior slabs, we recommend placing 6 inches of crushed drainage rock over 18
inches of structural fill, which in turn is placed on compacted subgrade. If widespread
unstable subgrade conditions are encountered, we recommend placing a woven
geotextile fabric (Mirafi 600X) on top of the subgrade prior to placing granular structural
fill. Please refer to Figure 9 for details.
Our experience is that there is often a balance between leaving some of the fine-grain soils under
the slabs and individually digging the spread footings and perimeter footings down to the native
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 10
gravels versus the ability to utilize larger construction equipment and excavating everything
down to the gravel. In the case of the latter, more gravel is used; however, the work can proceed
much faster with the use of the larger equipment. We suggest consulting with a foundation
excavation contractor to determine which option will be the most cost-effective for this
development.
In the event groundwater is encountered at the bottom of the excavation, clean crushed rock
may be placed to raise the bottom of the excavation above the groundwater before switching
to more traditional structural fill (3-inch-minus pit-run or crushed sandy gravel). Providing
separation from groundwater using the non-moisture-sensitive clean crushed rock will avoid the
saturation of the structural fill and subsequent difficulty with compaction. Clean crushed rock
should be placed in loose lifts not exceeding 12 inches and vibratory compacted. Clean crushed
rock should be covered with a nonwoven geotextile fabric such as a Mirafi 180N or equal prior to
structural fill placement to prevent the migration of fines into the crushed rock. Structural fill
shall be placed in lifts and compacted to 98 percent of its Standard Proctor Density based on
ASTM D-698. Further details on lift thickness and compaction requirements are provided later in
this report.
An appropriate bearing capacity for design assuming conventional spread and continuous
footings is 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf). Total settlements are estimated to be under 0.75
inches with minimal differential settlements. Allowable bearing pressures during earthquakes
may be increased by 50 percent.
Lateral Earth Pressures
All foundation walls that will be fixed at the top prior to the placement of backfill should be
designed for an “at rest” equivalent fluid pressure of 60 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). In contrast,
cantilevered retaining walls may be designed for a lower, “active” equivalent fluid pressure of 45
pcf, provided either some slight outward rotation of the wall is acceptable upon backfilling, or
the wall is constructed in such a way that accommodates the expected rotation. The “at rest”
and “active” design values are only applicable for walls that will have backfill slopes of less than
ten percent and will not be externally loaded by surface pressures applied above and/or behind
the wall.
Lateral forces from wind, earthquakes, and earth pressures on the opposite side of the structure
will be resisted by passive earth pressure against the buried portion of the foundation wall and
by friction at the bottom of the footing. Passive earth pressures in compacted backfill should be
assumed to have an equivalent fluid pressure of 280 pcf; while a coefficient of friction of 0.4
should be used between cast-in-place concrete and the native gravels or granular structural fill.
Actual footing loads (not factored or allowable loads) should be used for calculating frictional
resistance to sliding along the base of the footing. Please be aware that the friction coefficient
has no built-in factor of safety; therefore, an appropriate safety factor should be selected and
used in all subsequent calculations for each load case.
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 11
The lateral earth pressures summarized above are for static conditions and should be factored
for seismic conditions.
Subgrade Reaction Modulus (Under Interior Slabs)
If our recommendations are followed for support of interior slabs, the subgrade reaction modulus
(k) can be assumed to be 200 pounds per cubic inch (pci). The design value assumes the slab will
be underlain by at least 24 inches granular structural fill and clean crushed rock (6 inches of clean
crushed rock over 18 inches of compacted granular structural fill).
Foundation Wall Backfill
Interior foundation backfill shall consist of granular structural fill (3-inch-minus pitrun or 1.5-
inch-minus road mix). The native sandy gravels found onsite contain abundant oversize cobbles
making the material difficult to compact with small compaction equipment under interior slabs
and behind the interior side of walls; therefore, we do not recommend using it for interior
foundation backfill unless rock over 3 inches is screened off.
Exterior wall backfill can consist of any excavated foundation soil, other than topsoil, provided it
is not overly moist, highly plastic, or too rocky in composition. The native soils will likely require
drying prior to re-use as backfill. All select backfill materials should be placed in multiple thin lifts
and properly compacted to 95 percent of their Standard Proctor density. Foundation walls
intended to be braced should not be backfilled until the bracing (such as floor joists) is in place
to prevent unintended rotation/deflection of the wall. To prevent damaging foundation walls
during the backfilling process, only hand-operated compaction equipment is recommended
within three feet of walls that are not buried on both sides. Finally, the re-use of topsoil as backfill
should be limited to the uppermost four to six inches in landscaped areas.
Subsurface Drainage and Damp-Proofing
Perimeter footing drains for slab-on-grade foundations are not necessary unless the exterior
grade will extend above the top of slab (which is normally not done). Buried foundation walls
should be damp-proofed with an acceptable commercial product as per the requirements of the
International Building Code (IBC 2021).
If crawslpaces are proposed, the installation of footing drains (while always preferable), may not
be possible unless there is a daylight point (again not likely on a flat site). It is possible to run the
footing drains to a sump and pump, but again, discharging the water to an appropriate location
may not be possible given the City’s stance on groundwater discharge from sump pumps. In
those cases, the only option is to elevate the footings as discussed earlier.
Vapor Barrier
To control moisture vapor, we recommend installing a heavy-duty vapor barrier under interior
slabs or over the top of crawlspace subgrades. We recommend a vapor barrier with a water vapor
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 12
transmission rate of 0.006 or lower as established by ASTM E-96, such as a Stego 15-mil Vapor
Barrier. The vapor barrier should be installed as per the manufacturer recommendations and
ASTM E-1643, ensuring it is properly attached to footings/walls and sealed at the seams.
Soil Corrosion to Concrete and Metal
Corrosion testing performed by Energy Labs on Composite Samples 1, 2, 3, and 4 indicated that
sulfide levels were not detectable at the reporting limit. Based on the results, the soils are not
corrosive to standard concrete.
Resistivity testing conducted by Energy Labs on Composite Samples 1, 2, 3, and 4 ranged from
6,610 to 9,100 ohm-cm. NACE classifies soils with resistivity values ranging from 5,000 to 10,000
ohm-cm as “mildly corrosive.” Based on test results, the soils onsite are “mildly corrosive” to
metal.
Surface Drainage Recommendations
No water should be allowed to accumulate against or flow along any exposed foundation walls.
Concrete or asphalt surfacing that abuts the foundation should be designed with a minimum
grade of 2 percent away from the structure, and adjacent landscaped areas should have a slope
of at least 5 percent within 10 feet of the wall (see the IBC building codes). Note that surface
water or roof water should never be routed to foundation drains. To further reduce the
potential for moisture infiltration along foundation walls, backfill materials should be well-
compacted. The upper 4 to 6 inches of backfill should consist of low permeability topsoil. Except
for locations that will be surfaced by concrete or asphalt, finished grades next to foundation walls
should be set no less than 6 inches below the top of the sill plate.
Interior Slab Recommendations
As discussed earlier, interior slab support will be dictated by how the earthwork contractor
decides to proceed with foundation excavation (mass-excavate down to native gravels or follow
footing lines). Slab thickness for interior slabs will be dictated by the Structural Engineer. Table
5 provides our interior slab support recommendations if Option 1 (Mass-Excavation Down to
Native Sandy Gravels) is followed.
Table 5. Interior Concrete Slab Support – Mass-Excavation Down to Native Gravels (Option 1)
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Concrete Slab Determined by Structural Engineer
1”-Minus Clean Crushed Rock 6
Granular Structural Fill As Required to Extend Up from Native
Sandy Gravels
315 lb. Woven Geotextile Fabric (Mirafi 600X) No
TOTAL SECTION THICKNESS Slab Thickness + 6” Crushed Rock +
Granular Structural Fill
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 13
Table 6 provides the minimum section under interior slabs if Option 2 is followed for foundation
excavation. The section assumes all footings will supported on native sandy gravels or on
granular structural fill that in turn bears on native sandy gravels. Assuming topsoil and organics
are stripped from under the foundation, the interior slab would be supported by the upper fine-
grained silts/clay.
Table 6. Interior Concrete Slab Support – Over-Excavation Down to Native Gravels Under
Footings Only (Option 2)
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Concrete Slab Determined by Structural Engineer
1”-Minus Clean Crushed Rock 6
Granular Structural Fill 18
315 lb. Woven Geotextile Fabric (Mirafi 600X) As Needed
Stable Subgrade Soils Compacted to 95%
TOTAL SECTION THICKNESS Slab Thickness + 6” Crushed Rock + 18”
Structural Fill
Exterior Slab Recommendations
Provided below are three exterior slab recommendations for various applications. We suggest
that critical exterior slab areas where minimal frost heaving is required be underlain by additional
crushed rock and two inches or more of below-grade insulation extending outward two feet from
the edge of the slab to limit frost penetration. Prior to placing any embankment fill or structural
fill, both of which must be adequately compacted, the subgrade surface should be proof-rolled
to confirm its stability. If soft or wet areas are identified, they should be over-excavated and
replaced with compacted structural fill. An appropriate slab thickness based on application will
be determined by the Structural Engineer. A structural section for light duty sidewalks away
from buildings is listed in Table 7.
Table 7. Exterior Concrete Slab (Light Duty) – Sidewalks Away from Buildings – Stable Subgrade
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Concrete Slab 4 (min.)
1”-Minus Clean Crushed Rock 6
Granular Structural Fill No
315 lb. Woven Geotextile Fabric (Mirafi 600X) No
Stable Subgrade Soils or Embankment Fill Compacted to 95%
TOTAL SECTION THICKNESS Slab Thickness + 6” Crushed Rock
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 14
Provided in Table 8 is our recommendations for design section under medium duty slabs
(including pedestrian sidewalks next to buildings and doorways).
Table 8. Exterior Concrete Slab (Medium Duty) – Sidewalks Near Buildings – Stable Subgrade
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Concrete Slab 4 (min.)
1”-Minus Clean Crushed Rock 12
Granular Structural Fill No
315 lb. Woven Geotextile Fabric (Mirafi 600X) No
Stable Subgrade Soils or Embankment Fill Compacted to 95%
TOTAL SECTION THICKNESS Slab Thickness + 12” Crushed Rock
Provided in Table 9 is our recommendations for the design section under vehicle loaded slabs.
Table 9. Exterior Concrete Slab (Heavy Duty) – Vehicle Loaded Slabs – Stable Subgrade
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Concrete Slab 6 (min.) – design by Structural Engineer
1”-Minus Clean Crushed Rock 6
Granular Structural Fill 12
315 lb. Woven Geotextile Fabric (Mirafi 600X) Yes
Stable Subgrade Soils or Embankment Fill Compacted to 95%
TOTAL SECTION THICKNESS Slab Thickness + 6” Crushed Rock + 12”
Structural Fill
FOUNDATION-RELATED FILL MATERIAL RECOMMENDATIONS
Excavated Foundation Soils
All topsoil should be stripped and stockpiled for re-use during site reclamation. On-site soils
suitable for re-use as site fill or backfill should be separated from wet, rocky, or otherwise
unsuitable soils during excavation. The suitability of the non-organic excavated soils will depend
on their rockiness, plasticity, natural moisture content, and ability to be re-compacted. The driest
soils containing an even mixture of soil matrix and smaller rock fragments should be selected for
use as compacted fill, while the wettest and rockiest soils should either be hauled off-site or used
for general site grading in non-critical locations. Depending on the time of year, some of the
native soil that is excavated will likely be wet of optimum and require drying prior to re-use. This
may necessitate the import of easily compacted fill material if work is conducted during the wet
or winter season when drying is not an option.
Structural Fill
If needed, import granular structural fill under foundations and slabs for the project should
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 15
consist of organic-free, well-graded 3-inch-minus sandy (pit-run) gravel or 1.5-inch-minus
crushed (road mix) gravel. The gravels shall meet the material and gradation specifications as
presented in the Montana Public Works Standard Specifications (MPWSS) for sub-base course
and base course gravel. The native gravels may be acceptable for re-use as structural fill
assuming rock larger than 3 inches in diameter is screened off.
Clean Crushed Rock
The primary uses for clean crushed rock include placement under concrete slabs and behind
foundation and retaining walls for drainage-related purposes. It may also be used to bring the
subgrade up above the groundwater level in below foundation applications. Crushed rock shall
consist of a clean assortment of angular fragments with 100 percent passing a one-inch screen
and less than 1 percent (by weight) finer than the No. 100 sieve. Over 50 percent of the rock
particles must have fractured faces.
FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION
All fill materials should be placed in uniform, horizontal lifts and compacted to an unyielding
condition. The “loose” thickness of each layer of fill prior to compaction should not exceed 10
inches for self-propelled rollers, 6 inches for remote-controlled trench rollers, and 4 inches for
plate compactors. The moisture content of any fill material to be compacted should be within 2
percent of its optimum value. Table 10 provides our compaction recommendations for general
site applications. These recommendations apply to all fill materials and are presented as a
percentage of the maximum dry density of the material being placed as defined by ASTM D-698.
A common misconception is that washed or screened crushed rock does not require compaction.
However, this material does require compaction with a vibratory plate or smooth drum roller.
Table 10. Compaction Recommendations (Application vs. Percent Compaction)
APPLICATION % COMPACTION
Granular Structural Fill Under Footings and Interior Slabs: 98
Site Fill Under Concrete and Pavement Areas: 95
Exterior Backfill Behind Foundation: 95
Clean Crushed Rock Under Slabs: N/A (Vibration Required)
Sub-base and Base Course Materials for Asphalt Pavement: 95
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 16
PAVEMENT SECTION RECOMMENDATIONS
From our understanding, significant improvements of surrounding streets and roads will be part
of the development of the property. At this time, we understand that South 19th Avenue will be
widened on the east side of the property, Kagy Boulevard will be widened and extended to the
west, Stucky Road will be either reconstructed and/or widened, local streets will be extended
across the property. Private drives and internal streets will also be constructed on a lot-specific
basis. Design ESAL requirements were provided by Stahly Engineering based on the Bozeman
2017 Transportation Master Plan and are provided in Table 11.
Table 11. Required Design ESALs
Road Identification Required Design ESALs
South 19th Widening (City Arterial) 2,190,000
Kagy Boulevard Extension/Widening (City Arterial) 1,314,000
Stucky Road Reconstruction/Widening (City Collector) 1,051,200
City Streets 292,000
Private Drives 150,000
Pavement sections have been provided for each road with a specific ESAL design requirement.
Specific road pavement sections are numbered 1 through 5. For each road section, various
pavement options have been provided to account for various subgrade conditions and
demonstrate how various subgrade conditions control the calculated ESALs that each road can
support over its lifetime. The various pavement sections for each specific road are labeled as
“A”, “B”, and “C”. All pavement sections in this report exceed the required design values listed
in Table 11.
Please note, that MDT controlled state routes (such as 19th Avenue) often require the gravel
section to consist solely of crushed aggregate (no sub-base gravel), with an increased base course
structural coefficient of 0.14. This would effectively decrease the required gravel sections
summarized below which include an uncrushed sub-base section. They may also require a
minimum asphalt section of 6 inches placed in two lifts, which would also impact the required
gravel section thickness. In these cases, please consult with this office and we will work with the
design team to develop a new gravel section based solely on the use of crushed aggregate and/or
the use of a thicker asphalt section.
Option A for all sections assumes stable silt/clay subgrade with a 315 lb. woven geotextile fabric
(Mirafi 600X or equivalent) placed over the compacted stable subgrade. Option A is considered
the minimum design section.
Option B assumes native sandy gravel subgrade. This option was provided since the depth to
gravels in some areas across the site is shallow and it may be advantageous to sub-excavate down
to native gravels and build back up to subgrade elevations. Option B can also be considered as a
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 17
pavement section if unstable subgrade conditions are encountered as the unstable material (very
moist silt/clay) will be removed down to the native gravels and replaced with subbase. Due to
high groundwater conditions, there is a significant possibility that the upper fine-grained
silts/clays will become softer and wetter with depth creating increasingly worse conditions until
the native sandy gravels are encountered. Option B demonstrates a significant increase in the
calculated ESALs based on the improved subgrade conditions. For example, in Tables 12 (Option
1A) and 13 (Option 1B) for South 19th Avenue widening, the calculated ESALs for the design
section increases from approximately 2,430,000 to 39,700,000 ESALS (approximately a 16X
increase) respectively simply by excavating to the native gravels.
Option C assumes silt/clay subgrade with geogrid reinforcement (Tensar TX-190L underlain by an
8-ounce nonwoven geotextile fabric or Mirafi RS580i) to improve subgrade conditions. Option C
is an option if “moderately” unstable thick silt/clay subgrade conditions are encountered, and
there is a cost advantage using this option versus Option B (removing all the unsuitable silts/clay
down to native sandy gravels). Note that if the subgrade is highly unstable, we recommend
utilizing Option B. With Option C, the subgrade soils should be compacted to the extent possible,
and care should be taken to avoid severe rutting and deflection or damaging the road
stabilization fabrics from heavy construction equipment. The improved subgrade modulus was
obtained using Tensar+ design software for calculations. Option C also shows a significant
increase in the calculated ESALs for the various sections. In Tables 12 (Option 1A) and 14 (Option
1C) for South 19th Avenue widening, the calculated ESALs are 2,430,000 and 18,000,000
(approximately a 7.4X increase) respectively.
All pavement sections are listed in Tables 12 through 26. A summary of the pavements section
design calculations and explanation of the input design values are provided in Appendix D.
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 18
Table 12 provides our pavement section recommendation (Option 1A) for widening of South 19th
Avenue assuming stable silt/clay subgrade. The calculated ESALs is 2,430,000.
Table 12. Pavement Section 1A – South 19th Avenue – Stable Silt/Clay Subgrade
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Asphalt 5 (placed in 2 lifts)
Base Course Gravel 6
Sub-Base Course Gravel 24
315 lb. Woven Geotextile Fabric Yes
Stable Subgrade Soils (less Topsoil) Compacted to 95%
TOTAL SECTION DESIGN THICKNESS 35
Table 13 provides our pavement section recommendation (Option 1B) for widening of South 19th
Avenue assuming sandy gravel subgrade. The calculated ESALs is 39,700,000.
Table 13. Pavement Section 1B – South 19th Avenue – Native Sandy Gravel Subgrade
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Asphalt 5 (placed in 2 lifts)
Base Course Gravel 6
Sub-Base Course Gravel 24
Sub-Excavate Down to Native Sandy Gravels and
Replace with Sub-Base Compacted to 95% Yes
315 lb. Woven Geotextile No
TOTAL SECTION DESIGN THICKNESS 35 + Additional Sub-Excavation and
Replacement
Table 14 provides our pavement section recommendation (Option 1C) for South 19th Avenue
widening assuming geogrid-reinforced silt/clay subgrade. The calculated ESALs is 18,000,000.
Table 14. Pavement Section 1C – South 19th Avenue – Geogrid-Reinforced Silt/Clay Subgrade
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Asphalt 5 (placed in 2 lifts)
Base Course Gravel 6
Sub-Base Course Gravel 24
8 ounce nonwoven geotextile fabric and Tensar
TX-190L geogrid or Mirafi RS580i Yes
Stable Subgrade Soils (less Topsoil) Compacted To Extent Possible
TOTAL SECTION DESIGN THICKNESS 35
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 19
Table 15 provides our pavement section recommendation (Option 2A) for Kagy Boulevard
widening/extension assuming stable silt/clay subgrade. The calculated ESALs is 1,660,000.
Table 15. Pavement Section 2A – Kagy Boulevard– Stable Silt/Clay Subgrade
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Asphalt 5 (placed in 2 lifts)
Base Course Gravel 6
Sub-Base Course Gravel 21
315 lb. Woven Geotextile Fabric Yes
Stable Subgrade Soils (less Topsoil) Compacted to 95%
TOTAL SECTION DESIGN THICKNESS 32
Table 16 provides our pavement section recommendation (Option 2B) for Kagy Boulevard
widening/extension assuming sandy gravel subgrade. The calculated ESALs is 27,200,000.
Table 16. Pavement Section 2B – Kagy Boulevard – Native Sandy Gravel Subgrade
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Asphalt 5 (placed in 2 lifts)
Base Course Gravel 6
Sub-Base Course Gravel 21
Sub-Excavate Down to Native Sandy Gravels and
Replace with Sub-Base Compacted to 95% Yes
315 lb. Woven Geotextile Fabric No
TOTAL SECTION DESIGN THICKNESS 32 + Additional Sub-Excavation and
Replacement
Table 17 provides our pavement section recommendation (Option 2C) for Kagy Boulevard
widening/extension assuming geogrid-reinforced subgrade. The calculated ESALs is 12,400,000.
Table 17. Pavement Section 2C – Kagy Boulevard – Geogrid-Reinforced Silt/Clay Subgrade
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Asphalt 5 (placed in 2 lifts)
Base Course Gravel 6
Sub-Base Course Gravel 21
8 ounce nonwoven geotextile fabric and Tensar
TX-190L geogrid or Mirafi RS580i Yes
Stable Subgrade Soils (less Topsoil) Compacted To Extent Possible
TOTAL SECTION DESIGN THICKNESS 32
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 20
Table 18 provides our pavement section recommendation (Option 3A) for Stucky Road
widening/extension assuming stable silt/clay subgrade. The calculated ESALs is 1,260,000.
Table 18. Pavement Section 3A – Stucky Road– Stable Silt/Clay Subgrade
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Asphalt 4 (placed in 2 lifts)
Base Course Gravel 6
Sub-Base Course Gravel 24
315 lb. Woven Geotextile Fabric Yes
Stable Subgrade Soils (less Topsoil) Compacted to 95%
TOTAL SECTION DESIGN THICKNESS 34
Table 19 provides our pavement section recommendation (Option 3B) for Stucky Road
widening/reconstruction assuming sandy gravel subgrade. The calculated ESALs is 20,600,000.
Table 19. Pavement Section 3B – Stucky Road – Native Sandy Gravel Subgrade
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Asphalt 4 (placed in 2 lifts)
Base Course Gravel 6
Sub-Base Course Gravel 24
Sub-Excavate Down to Native Sandy Gravels and
Replace with Sub-Base Compacted to 95% Yes
315 lb. Woven Geotextile Fabric No
TOTAL SECTION DESIGN THICKNESS 34 + Additional Sub-Excavation and
Replacement
Table 20 provides our pavement section recommendation (Option 3C) for Stucky Road assuming
geogrid-reinforced silt/clay subgrade. The calculated ESALs is 9,400,000.
Table 20. Pavement Section 3C – Stucky Road – Geogrid-Reinforced Silt/Clay Subgrade
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Asphalt 4 (placed in 2 lifts)
Base Course Gravel 6
Sub-Base Course Gravel 24
8 ounce nonwoven geotextile fabric and Tensar
TX-190L geogrid or Mirafi RS580i Yes
Stable Subgrade Soils (less Topsoil) Compacted To Extent Possible
TOTAL SECTION DESIGN THICKNESS 34
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 21
Table 21 provides our pavement section recommendation (Option 4A) for city streets. The
calculated ESALs is 405,000.
Table 21. Pavement Section 4A – City Streets – Stable Silt/Clay Subgrade
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Asphalt 3
Base Course Gravel 6
Sub-Base Course Gravel 21
315 lb. Woven Geotextile Fabric Yes
Stable Subgrade Soils (less Topsoil) Compacted to 95%
TOTAL SECTION DESIGN THICKNESS 30
Table 22 provides our pavement section recommendation (Option 4B) for city streets assuming
native sandy gravel subgrade. The calculated ESALs is 6,650,000.
Table 22. Pavement Section 4B – City Streets – Native Sandy Gravel Subgrade
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Asphalt 3
Base Course Gravel 6
Sub-Base Course Gravel 21
Sub-Excavate Down to Native Sandy Gravels and
Replace with Sub-Base Compacted to 95% Yes
315 lb. Woven Geotextile Fabric No
TOTAL SECTION DESIGN THICKNESS 30 + Additional Sub-Excavation and
Replacement
Table 23 provides our pavement section recommendation (Option 4C) for city streets assuming
geogrid-reinforced silt/clay subgrade. The calculated ESALs is 3,020,000.
Table 23. Pavement Section 4C – City Streets – Geogrid-Reinforced Silt/Clay Subgrade
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Asphalt 3
Base Course Gravel 6
Sub-Base Course Gravel 21
8 ounce nonwoven geotextile fabric and Tensar
TX-190L geogrid or Mirafi RS580i Yes
Stable Subgrade Soils (less Topsoil) Compacted To Extent Possible
TOTAL SECTION DESIGN THICKNESS 30
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 22
Table 24 provides our pavement section recommendation (Option 5A) for private drives and
parking lots. The calculated ESALs is 155,000.
Table 24. Pavement Section 5A – Private Drives - Stable Silt/Clay Subgrade
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Asphalt 3
Base Course Gravel 6
Sub-Base Course Gravel 15
315 lb. Woven Geotextile Fabric Yes
Stable Subgrade Soils (less Topsoil) Compacted to 95%
TOTAL SECTION DESIGN THICKNESS 24
Table 25 provides our pavement section recommendation (Option 5B) for private drives and
parking lots assuming sandy gravel subgrade. The calculated ESALs is 2,540,000.
Table 25. Pavement Section 5B – Private Drives – Native Sandy Gravel Subgrade
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Asphalt 3
Base Course Gravel 6
Sub-Base Course Gravel 15
Sub-Excavate Down to Native Sandy Gravels and
Replace with Sub-Base Compacted to 95% Yes
315 lb. Woven Geotextile Fabric No
TOTAL SECTION DESIGN THICKNESS 24 + Additional Sub-Excavation and
Replacement
Table 26 provides our pavement section recommendation (Option 5C) for private drives and
parking lots assuming geogrid-reinforced silt/clay subgrade. The calculated ESALs is 1,150,000.
Table 26. Pavement Section 5C – Private Drives – Geogrid-Reinforced Silt/Clay Subgrade
MATERIAL COMPACTED THICKNESS (IN)
Asphalt 3
Base Course Gravel 6
Sub-Base Course Gravel 15
8 ounce nonwoven geotextile fabric and Tensar
TX-190L geogrid or Mirafi RS580i Yes
Stable Subgrade Soils (less Topsoil) Compacted To Extent Possible
TOTAL SECTION DESIGN THICKNESS 24
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 23
Please recognize that the Option A sections listed above are only applicable to stable subgrade
conditions (no rutting, deflecting, etc). Given that the fine-grain soils were generally very moist
(wet of optimum) and became softer with depth, it will likely need to be dried, scarified, and
re-worked to achieve adequate compaction to a stable condition prior to placing fabric and
sub-base gravel.
As discussed earlier, should widespread moderately unstable subgrade conditions be found
(minor rutting and deflecting, very moist subgrade, etc.), we recommend implementing either
Option B or C for all pavement sections. We suggest incorporating a bid item within the contract
documents in the event unstable subgrade conditions are encountered. Due to high
groundwater and anticipated soft subgrade, bid items should be provided for both Option B
and Option C to help plan for increased costs with unstable subgrades and avoid delays during
construction. We should be retained during construction of roadways and parking areas to
evaluate the severity of any unstable conditions encountered and the need for higher strength
fabrics and/or increasing the sub-base section.
The sub-base and base course materials that comprise the granular parts of the pavement
section shall consist of 6-inch-minus uncrushed sandy (pitrun) gravel and 1-1/2-inch-minus
crushed (road mix) gravel, respectively. Both gravel courses shall meet the material and
gradation specifications presented in MPWSS, Sections 02234 and 02235. Under normal
circumstances, the gravel products should be placed in lifts not exceeding 12 inches in thickness
(depending on the size of the compactor) and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum
dry density as defined in ASTM D-698. However, if the subgrade soils are found to be overly moist,
soft, or unstable, the initial lift thickness of the sub-base gravel should be thickened to prevent
damaging and tearing the geotextile fabric with construction equipment and to bridge unstable
subgrade. Asphalt pavement shall meet specifications in MPWSS Section 02510 and be
compacted to a minimum of 93 percent of the Rice mix density.
UNDERGROUND UTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
Foundation Support of Utility Lines
Exterior utility lines (water, sewer, and dry utilities) can be adequately supported by the native
gravels. If utility lines will be supported by the upper fine-grained soils that were very moist and
soft, Type 2 bedding may be required by the Engineer to support the lines. We recommend a bid
item be included on the bid form in case Type 2 bedding is deemed necessary. We suggest proper
bedding of all utilities following the specifications found in the Montana Public Works Standard
Specifications.
Trench Backfill
Trench backfill can consist of any native material (except materials containing significant
organics) that is not overly wet. Due to the very moist and soft upper fine-grained soils and likely
saturated soils from high groundwater, we recommend that a bid item be included in the event
West University, LLC. Geotechnical Report – West University
August 5, 2022 Project Number: 22-027
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582-0221
Page 24
import material is needed for trench backfill. We recommend that trench backfill be compacted
to a minimum of 95 percent of ASTM D-698 under pavement/slab areas and 92 percent in
landscaped areas.
Note that development wide construction de-watering will likely be required (particularly in the
spring/summer). We suggest setting the dewatering in place several weeks in advance of the
utility and road construction. This additional time may help to dry the upper materials.
COLD/WINTER WEATHER CONSTRUCTION
If foundation construction will occur during the cold/winter weather season, the Contractor shall
take all necessary precautions to prevent the earthwork from freezing and/or from being
contaminated with snow. Exposed subgrade and fill materials (under footings, slabs, and walls)
should be adequately covered with concrete insulation blankets to prevent frost penetration and
to protect them from snow. All soils that are used for fill under or around foundation components
should be relatively dry, free of intermixed snow and frozen clods, and must not be placed when
it is snowing. Fill materials or foundations should not be placed over frozen soils, which may be
in a “frost-heaved condition,” or over layers of snow. When earthwork will proceed during the
non-optimal times of the year, we recommend that it be performed expeditiously to minimize
the time that the foundation excavation is open and exposed to the elements.
AESI FUTURE INVOLVEMENT
We suggest that we be retained during the design of the development to ensure that the
recommendations provided herein are followed properly. We further recommend that we be
allowed to view the construction excavations to verify that the appropriate target bearing
materials have been reached and during road construction to verify subgrade conditions.
LIMITATIONS
This report provides our geotechnical-related recommendations for West University located in
Bozeman, Montana. Please be advised that this report is only applicable for the above-
referenced project and shall not be used for other nearby projects.
The recommendations presented herein are primarily based on observation and evaluation of
the site’s surface and subsurface conditions, along with review and interpretation of geologic
maps, and previous engineering experience in the area. If during earthwork construction, soil and
groundwater conditions are found to be inconsistent with those described in the report, we
should be advised immediately so we can analyze the situation and modify our
recommendations.
All individuals associated with this project should consult this report during the planning, design,
and construction of the site improvements. It should be made available to other parties for
information on factual data only and not as a warranty of actual subsurface conditions such as
those interpreted herein.
LIST OF FIGURES
FFiigguurree 11 –– VViicciinniittyy MMaapp
FFiigguurree 22 –– QQuuaaddrraannggllee MMaapp
FFiigguurree 33 –– GGeeoollooggyy MMaapp
FFiigguurree 44 –– GGrroouunnddwwaatteerr MMaapp
FFiigguurree 55 –– TTeesstt PPiitt LLooccaattiioonn MMaapp
FFiigguurree 66 –– DDeepptthh ttoo GGrraavveellss MMaapp
FFiigguurree 77 –– DDeepptthh ttoo PPeeaakk GGrroouunnddwwaatteerr MMaapp
FFiigguurree 88 –– FFoouunnddaattiioonn TTyyppiiccaall––SSllaabb--OOnn--GGrraaddee ((OOppttiioonn 11
FFiigguurree 99 –– FFoouunnddaattiioonn TTyyppiiccaall––SSllaabb--OOnn-- GGrraaddee ((OOppttiioonn 22))
FIGURECivil Engineering
Geotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying
32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY
QUADRANGLE MAP
BOZEMAN, MONTANA
2
N
FIGURECivil Engineering
Geotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying
32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY
GEOLOGY MAP
BOZEMAN, MONTANA
3
N
FIGURECivil Engineering
Geotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying
32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY
GROUNDWATER MAP
BOZEMAN, MONTANA
4
N
FIGURECivil Engineering
Geotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying
32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY
TEST PIT LOCATION MAP
BOZEMAN, MONTANA
5
TP#
NTP#MW#
TP-6TP-5
TP-16
TP-19
TP-14
TP-21
TP-12
TP-10
TP-1MW-1
TP-3MW-3TP-4MW-4
TP-17
MW-11TP-18
MW-12
TP-15MW-10
TP-20
MW-13
TP-8MW-6TP-9MW-7
TP-7MW-5
TP-13MW-9
TP-22
MW-14
TP-11MW-8
TP-2MW-2
FIGURECivil Engineering
Geotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying
32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY
DEPTH TO GRAVELS MAP
BOZEMAN, MONTANA
6
TP-6
2.25'TP-5
3.5'
TP-162.5'
TP-19
4.0'
TP-14
3.0'
TP-21
2.0'
TP-12
2.5'
TP-10
2.75'
TP-12.5'
TP-3
2.5'TP-42.75'
TP-17
1.5'
TP-18
2.5'
TP-153.5'
TP-20
3.5'
TP-83.0'TP-93.5'TP-7
4.0'
TP-13
3.5'
TP-221.25'
TP-11
2.5'
TP-2
3.0'
NTP-#
##'
FIGURECivil Engineering
Geotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying
32 DISCOVERY DRIVE . BOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221 . FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY
DEPTH TO PEAK GROUNDWATER MAP
BOZEMAN, MONTANA
7
NTP-#
MW-#
##'
TP-1MW-13.44'
TP-2
MW-2
3.62'
TP-3
MW-3
1.36'
TP-4
MW-4
2.39'
TP-17
MW-11
0.00'
TP-18MW-122.42'
TP-15
MW-10
2.53'
TP-20
MW-13
2.23'TP-7
MW-5
3.55'
TP-8
MW-6
3.72'
TP-9
MW-7
3.40'
TP-13
MW-9
3.11'
TP-11MW-82.69'
TP-22
MW-14
3.32'
Figure 822-027Aug. 2022West UniversityFoundation Typical - Slab-On-Grade (Option 1)Bozeman, MontanaLegendFoundation BackfillAnd Embankment FillNative Sandy Gravel(”Target” Bearing Material)ConcreteNative TopsoilLow Permeable TopsoilNot To ScaleCivil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 Discovery DriveBozeman, MT 59718Phone: (406) 582-0221Fax: (406) 582-5770Native Fine-Grained Soil(Sandy Silt/Clay)Granular Structural FillClean Crushed RockGroundwaterFinished Floor Elevation15 Mil Polyethylene Vapor Barrier (Typ.)ExistingGroundReviewed By:EGS/CRMAug. 20226” (Min.) Clean Crushed Rock Under SlabMass Over-Excavate Entire Foundation Footprint And Place Granular StructuralFill From Excavated Gravel Surface Up To Perimeter And Interior Footing Grades.Perimeter FootingImportant Note: Increase The Level Of Care For Wall BackfillAnd Compaction In Areas That Will Receive Concrete Slabs.Finished Landscape GradeTo Slope Away @ 5% (Min.)Concrete andAsphalt ToSlope Away @ 2% (Min.)Upper 4” - 6” Of FoundationBackfill Should Consist OfLow Permeable Topsoil.2’ (Min.)6” (Min.)Raise FF Above Existing Grades As HighAs Site Grading Will Allow.Depth Of Cover ForFrost Protection4’ (Min.)Excavated Gravel Surface Should Be “Clean” Sandy Gravel. Re-Compact To An Unyielding Condition Prior To Placement Of Structural Fill.1.25’ To 4.0’Depth To“Target” GravelAll Fill Materials Shall Be Placed And Compacted InAccordance With The Specifications In The Report.All Footings Must Bear Directly On Native Gravel Or OnStructural Fill That In Turn Is Supported On Native Gravel.Foundation Walls To Be Damp-Proofed Per IBC Requirements. No FootingDrain Is Required Unless Exterior Grade Will Extend Above Top Of SlabGroundwater Likely To Be Encountered During Foundation Excavation. Dewatering ToBe Anticipated. Clean Crushed Rock May Be Used To Raise Bottom of Excavation AboveGroundwater. See Geotechnical Report For Details.Interior Foundation Backfill To Consist Of GranularStructural Fill.Interior FootingSee Report for Details RegardingWidth Of Mass Over-Excavation
Figure 922-027Aug. 2022West UniversityFoundation Typical - Slab-On-Grade (Option 2)Bozeman, MontanaLegendFoundation BackfillAnd Embankment FillNative Sandy Gravel(”Target” Bearing Material)ConcreteNative TopsoilLow Permeable TopsoilNot To ScaleCivil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 Discovery DriveBozeman, MT 59718Phone: (406) 582-0221Fax: (406) 582-5770Native Fine-Grained Soil(Sandy Silt/Clay)Granular Structural FillClean Crushed RockGroundwaterFinished Floor Elevation15 Mil Polyethylene Vapor Barrier (Typ.)ExistingGroundReviewed By:EGS/CRMAug. 20226” (min.) Clean Crushed Rock Under SlabPerimeter FootingImportant Note: Increase The Level Of Care For Wall BackfillAnd Compaction In Areas That Will Receive Concrete Slabs.Finished Landscape GradeTo Slope Away @ 5% (Min.).ConcreteAnd Asphalt ToSlope Away at 2% (Min).Upper 4” - 6” Of FoundationBackfill Should Consist OfLow Permeable Topsoil.6” (Min.)Depth Of Cover ForFrost Protection4’ (Min.)Excavated Gravel Surface Should Be “Clean” Sandy Gravel. Re-Compact To An Unyielding Condition Prior To Placement Of Structural Fill.Foundation Walls To Be Damp-Proofed Per IBC Requirements. No FootingDrain Is Required Unless Exterior Grade Will Extend Above Top Of SlabGroundwater Likely To Be Encountered During Foundation Excavation. Dewatering ToBe Anticipated. Clean Crushed Rock May Be Used To Raise Bottom of Excavation AboveGroundwater. See Geotechnical Report for Details.1.25’ To 4.0’Depth To“Target” GravelInterior FootingRaise FF Above Existing Grades As HighAs Site Grading Will Allow.All Fill Materials Shall Be Placed And Compacted InAccordance With The Specifications In The Report.6”-min of Clean Crushed Rock Under Slab18”-min of Granular Structural FillInterior FoundationBackfill To Consist OfGranular Structural FillAll Footings Must Bear Directly On Native Gravel Or OnStructural Fill That In Turn Is Supported On Native Gravel.The Required Width Of Structural Fill UnderInterior Footings Is The Width Of The FootingPlus The Depth Of Structural Fill MeasuredFrom The Bottom Of The Footings To TheNative Gravels. The Footing Needs To BeCentered On The Trench For Load Transfer.The Required Width Of Structural Fill Under InteriorFootings Is The Width Of The Footing Plus The Depth OfStructural Fill Measured From The Bottom Of The FootingsTo The Native Gravels. The Footing Needs To Be CenteredOn The Trench For Load Transfer.Subgrade To Be Proof-Rolled Prior ToPlacing Structural Fill. Soft Spots ShouldBe Removed And Replaced With GranularStructural Fill. A Woven 315 Lb. GeotextileFabric May Be Used To Stabilize Subgrade.
LIST OF APPENDICES
AAppppeennddiixx AA –– TTeesstt PPiitt LLooggss
AAppppeennddiixx BB –– LLaabboorraattoorryy TTeessttiinngg RReessuullttss
AAppppeennddiixx CC –– GGWW MMoonniittoorriinngg RReessuullttss TThhrroouugghh 77//2277//2222
AAppppeennddiixx DD –– PPaavveemmeenntt SSeeccttiioonn DDeessiiggnn
AAppppeennddiixx EE –– LLiimmiittaattiioonnss ooff YYoouurr GGeeootteecchhnniiccaall RReeppoorrtt
APPENDIX A
TTeesstt PPiitt LLooggss
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 1.5'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.·Frost to 24".{1.5' - 2.5'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Medium stiff; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY;very moist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.0' = 1.5 tsf.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.{2.5' - 10.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 7.5'.·Groundwater encountered at 8.5'.·Target bearing material.Notes:·MW-1 installed.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-02710.0'8.5'Test Pit Designation: TP-1 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Dan (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 11, 20223S1-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.65856, -111.0639018.0%246810108642LAB TESTING RESULTS:Atterberg Limits at 2.0'PL = 19.6, LL = 39.8, PI = 20.2Soil Classification = CL (Lean Clay)S1-B@4.0'5.8%S1-C@6.0'8.5%132Target Bearing at 2.5'GWT at 8.5'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 1.0'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.{1.0' - 3.0'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Stiff; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY; slightlymoist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 1.5' = 3.5 tsf.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.5' = 3.0 tsf.·Drier than TP-1.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.{3.0' - 10.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 8.0'.·Groundwater encountered at 9.5'.·Target bearing material.Notes:·MW-2 installed.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-02710.0'9.5'Test Pit Designation: TP-2 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Dan (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 11, 20223S2-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.65715, -111.063929.2%246810108642S2-B@4.0'3.6%S2-C@6.0'5.9%132Target Bearing at 3.0'GWT at 9.5'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 1.5'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.·No frost.{1.5' - 2.5'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Medium stiff; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY;slightly moist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.0' = 1.0 tsf.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.{2.5' - 8.5'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant12"-minus rounded boulders and cobbles; moistto wet.·Wet below 5.0'.·Groundwater encountered at 6.5'.·Target bearing material.Notes:·MW-3 installed.·Test pit conducted in proposed pondlocation.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-0278.5'6.5'Test Pit Designation: TP-3 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 50 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: John (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 14, 20223S3-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.65745, -111.06610(Wetland Pond)21.0%246810108642S3-B@4.0'8.5%S3-C@6.0'9.1%LAB TESTING RESULTS:Atterberg Limits at 2.0'PL = 16.6, LL = 39.0, PI = 22.4Soil Classification = CL (Lean Clay)132Target Bearing at 2.5'GWT at 6.5'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 0.5'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.·Frost to 6".{0.5' - 2.75'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Medium stiff; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY;very moist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 1.5' = 1.0 tsf.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.5' = 0.5 tsf.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.{2.75' - 10.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 6.5'.·Groundwater encountered at 8.0'.·Target bearing material.Notes:·MW-4 installed.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-02710.0'8.0'Test Pit Designation: TP-4 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Dan (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 11, 20223S4-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.65734, -111.0678820.0%246810108642S4-B@4.0'5.3%S4-C@6.0'6.3%132Target Bearing at 2.75'GWT at 8.0'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 1.0'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.·No frost.{1.0' - 3.5'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Medium stiff; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY;very moist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.0' = 1.0 tsf.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 3.0' = 0.5 tsf.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.{3.5' - 10.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 6.5'.·Groundwater encountered at 7.75'.·Target bearing material.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-02710.0'7.75'Test Pit Designation: TP-5 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Dan (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 11, 20223S5-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.65871, -111.0677425.2%246810108642S5-B@4.0'8.5%S5-C@6.0'7.0%132Target Bearing at 3.5'GWT at 7.75'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 1.0'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.·No frost.{1.0' - 2.25'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Medium stiff; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY;very moist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.0' = 1.0 tsf.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.{2.25' - 10.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 7.0'.·Groundwater encountered at 8.0'.·Target bearing material.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-02710.0'8.0'Test Pit Designation: TP-6 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Dan (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 11, 20223S6-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.65876, -111.0662323.6%246810108642S6-B@4.0'4.4%S6-C@6.0'5.1%132Target Bearing at 2.25'GWT at 8.0'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 1.25'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.{1.25' - 4.0'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Medium stiff; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY;moist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.0' = 3.5 tsf.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 3.0' = 2.0 tsf.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.·Drier than Layer 2 in other test pits.{4.0' - 10.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 8.5'.·Groundwater encountered at 9.75'.·Target bearing material.Notes:·MW-5 installed.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-02710.0'9.75'Test Pit Designation: TP-7 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Dan (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 11, 20223S7-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.65970, -111.0659114.0%246810108642S7-B@4.0'3.3%LAB TESTING RESULTS:Atterberg Limits at 2.0'PL = 18.8, LL = 36.8, PI = 18.1Soil Classification = CL (Lean Clay)132Target Bearing at 4.0'GWT at 9.75'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 1.5'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.·No frost.{1.5' - 3.0'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Medium stiff; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY;very moist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.0' = 1.0 tsf.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.5' = 0.5 tsf.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.{3.0' - 10.5'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 8.0'.·Groundwater encountered at 10.0'.·Target bearing material.Notes:·MW-6 installed.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-02710.5'10.0'Test Pit Designation: TP-8 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Dan (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 11, 20223S8-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.65958, -111.0674714.9%246810108642S8-B@4.0'4.4%S8-C@6.0'7.1%132Target Bearing at 3.0'GWT at 10.0'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 1.0'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.·No frost.{1.0' - 3.5'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Medium stiff; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY;very moist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.0' = 1.0 tsf.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 3.0' = 0.5 tsf.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.{3.5' - 10.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 8.0'.·Groundwater encountered at 9.0'.·Target bearing material.Notes:·MW-7 installed.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-02710.0'9.0'Test Pit Designation: TP-9 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Dan (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 11, 20223S9-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.66025, -111.0682724.1%246810108642S9-B@4.0'5.6%S9-C@6.0'6.1%132Target Bearing at 3.5'GWT at 9.0'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 1.0'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.·No frost.{1.0' - 2.75'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Medium stiff; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY;very moist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.0' = 1.0 tsf.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.5' = 0.5 tsf.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.{2.75' - 9.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 7.0'.·Groundwater encountered at 7.5'.·Target bearing material.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-0279.0'7.5'Test Pit Designation: TP-10 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Dan (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 11, 20223S10-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.66144, -111.0682318.5%246810108642S10-B@4.0'4.6%S10-C@6.0'6.5%132Target Bearing at 2.75'GWT at 7.5'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 0.75'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.{0.75' - 2.5'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Very soft; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY; verymoist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.0' = 0.5 tsf.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.{2.5' - 9.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 6.5'.·Groundwater encountered at 7.5'.·Target bearing material.Notes:·MW-8 installed.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-0279.0'7.5'Test Pit Designation: TP-11 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Dan (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 11, 20223S11-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.66226, -111.0680425.0%246810108642S11-B@4.0'5.3%S11-C@6.0'6.7%132Target Bearing at 2.5'GWT at 7.5'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 1.0'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.{1.0' - 2.5'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Very soft; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY;slightly moist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.0' = 1.0 tsf.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.{2.5' - 9.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 6.0'.·Groundwater encountered at 7.0'.·Target bearing material.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-0279.0'7.0'Test Pit Designation: TP-12 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Dan (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 11, 20223S12-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.66243, -111.0697425.4%246810108642S12-B@4.0'6.1%S12-C@6.0'6.8%132Target Bearing at 2.5'GWT at 7.0'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 1.0'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.{1.0' - 3.5'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Medium stiff; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY;very moist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 1.5' = 1.0 tsf.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.0' = 0.5 tsf.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 3.0' = 0.5 tsf.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.{3.5' - 10.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 6.5'.·Groundwater encountered at 7.5'.·Target bearing material.Notes:·MW-9 installed.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-02710.0'7.5'Test Pit Designation: TP-13 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Dan (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 11, 20223S13-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.66136, -111.0697023.8%246810108642S13-B@4.0'5.3%S13-C@6.0'10.5%132Target Bearing at 3.5'GWT at 7.5'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 0.75'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.{0.75' - 3.0'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Very soft; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY; verymoist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 1.5' = 1.0 tsf.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.0' = 0.5 tsf.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 3.0' = 0.5 tsf.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.{3.0' - 10.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 7.5'.·Groundwater encountered at 8.75'.·Target bearing material.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-02710.0'8.75'Test Pit Designation: TP-14 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Dan (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 11, 20223S14-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.66017, -111.0697026.4%246810108642S14-B@4.0'3.8%S14-C@6.0'7.0%132Target Bearing at 3.0'GWT at 8.75'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 0.5'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.{0.5' - 3.5'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Medium stiff; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY;very moist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 1.5' = 1.0 tsf.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.0' = 0.5 tsf.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 3.0' = 0.5 tsf.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.{3.5' - 9.5'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 6.5'.·Groundwater encountered at 7.5'.·Target bearing material.Notes:·MW-10 installed.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-0279.5'7.5'Test Pit Designation: TP-15 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Dan (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 11, 20223S15-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.65872, -111.0697017.2%246810108642S15-B@4.0'4.2%S15-C@6.0'5.7%LAB TESTING RESULTS:Atterberg Limits at 2.0'PL = 20.4, LL = 31.3, PI = 10.9Soil Classification = CL (Lean Clay)132Target Bearing at 3.5'GWT at 7.5'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 1.5'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.{1.5' - 2.5'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Medium stiff; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY;very moist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.0' = 0.5 tsf.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.{2.5' - 8.5'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 5.5'.·Groundwater encountered at 6.5'.·Target bearing material.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-0278.5'6.5'Test Pit Designation: TP-16 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: Dan (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 11, 20223S16-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.65748, -111.0696323.4%246810108642S16-B@4.0'9.8%S16-C@6.0'8.4%132Target Bearing at 2.5'GWT at 6.5'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 1.5'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAYwith roots and large cobbles; moist.·Roots to 3.5'.{1.5' - 8.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 3.5'.·Groundwater encountered at 4.5'.·Target bearing material.Notes:·MW-11 installed.·Test pit conducted in proposed pondlocation.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-0278.0'4.5'Test Pit Designation: TP-17 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 50 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: John (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 14, 2022S17-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.65753, -111.07048(Wetland Pond)17.6%246810108642S17-B@4.0'15.5%S17-C@6.0'13.0%12Target Bearing at 1.5'GWT at 4.5'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 0.75'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.{0.75' - 2.5'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Medium stiff; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY withsome gravels; very moist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.0' = 1.0 tsf.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.{2.5' - 9.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 4.0'.·Groundwater encountered at 4.5'.·Target bearing material.Notes:·MW-12 installed.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-0279.0'4.5'Test Pit Designation: TP-18 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: John (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 14, 20223S18-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.65750, -111.0713912.3%246810108642S18-B@4.0'8.7%S18-C@6.0'10.6%132Target Bearing at 2.5'GWT at 4.5'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 1.0'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAYwith roots; moist.·Roots to 3.0'.{1.0' - 4.0'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Medium stiff; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY;very moist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 1.5' = 1.0 tsf.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.0' = 0.5 tsf.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 3.0' = 0.5 tsf.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.{4.0' - 9.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 5.0'.·Groundwater encountered at 6.0'.·Target bearing material.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-0279.0'6.0'Test Pit Designation: TP-19 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: John (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 14, 20223S19-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.65875, -111.0713317.5%246810108642S19-B@4.0'8.5%S19-C@6.0'8.3%132Target Bearing at 4.0'GWT at 6.0'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 1.5'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.{1.5' - 3.5'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Medium stiff; light brown; sandy SILT/CLAY withsome gravels; very moist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.0' = 1.0 tsf.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.{3.5' - 9.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 4.0'.·Groundwater encountered at 4.5'.·Target bearing material.Notes:·MW-13 installed.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-0279.0'4.5'Test Pit Designation: TP-20 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: John (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 14, 20223S20-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.66000, -111.0715520.2%246810108642S20-B@4.0'9.2%S20-C@6.0'10.4%132GWT at 4.5'Target Bearing at 3.5'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 1.5'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.{1.5' - 2.5'}: Fine-Grain Deposit:Medium stiff to stiff; light brown; sandySILT/CLAY with some gravels; very moist.·Pocket Penetrometer @ 2.0' = 1.5 tsf.·Becoming softer and wetter with depth.{2.5' - 9.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant6"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 5.0'.·Groundwater encountered at 6.0'.·Target bearing material.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-0279.0'6.0'Test Pit Designation: TP-21 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: John (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 14, 20223S21-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.66129, -111.0717811.0%246810108642S21-B@4.0'8.9%S21-C@6.0'10.7%132Target Bearing at 2.5'GWT at 6.0'
Civil EngineeringGeotechnical EngineeringLand Surveying32 DISCOVERY DRIVEBOZEMAN, MT 59718PHONE (406) 582-0221FAX (406) 582-5770www.alliedengineering.com{0.0' - 1.25'}: Native Topsoil:Stiff; dark brown to black; organic SILT/CLAY;moist.{1.25' - 9.0'}: Alluvium:Dense; brown; sandy GRAVEL with abundant8"-minus rounded cobbles; moist to wet.·Wet below 5.5'.·Groundwater encountered at 6.5'.·Target bearing material.Notes:·MW-14 installed.·No fine-grained deposit observed in test pit.12DEPTH (FT)
SAMPLES
% WATER
CONTENTDESCRIPTION OF MATERIALSHorizontal Distance in FeetNA22-0279.0'6.5'Test Pit Designation: TP-22 Location:Surface Elevation: Backhoe Type: Hitachi 130 Job Number:Total Depth: Backhoe Operator: John (RLS Construction) Project: West University PropertyGroundwater: Logged By: EGS (AESI) Date: March 14, 2022S22-A@2.0'See Test Pit Location Map;45.66256, -111.071687.9%246810108642S22-B@4.0'6.0%S22-C@6.0'9.7%12Target Bearing at 1.25'GWT at 6.5'
APPENDIX B
LLaabboorraattoorryy TTeessttiinngg RReessuullttss
MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION (ASTM D-2216)
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027Sample Identification: Varies
Soil Classification: Varies
Date Sampled: March 11, 2022 & March 14, 2022
Date Tested: March 16, 2022
Tested By: HRT
Sample Identification:S1-A S1-B S1-C S2-A S2-B S2-C S3-A S3-B
Exploration Location:TP-1 TP-1 TP-1 TP-2 TP-2 TP-2 TP-3 TP-3
Sample Depth (ft):2.0 4.0 6.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 2.0 4.0
Container Number:K SS DD UU H LL QQ I
Weight of Container:31.73 30.98 30.89 30.99 31.60 31.06 31.19 31.83
Container + Wet Soil:143.68 170.46 208.08 126.58 219.04 170.66 160.72 185.39
Container + Dry Soil:126.63 162.82 194.22 118.50 212.54 162.92 138.25 173.37
Weight of Water:17.05 7.64 13.86 8.08 6.50 7.74 22.47 12.02
Weight of Dry Soil:94.90 131.84 163.33 87.51 180.94 131.86 107.06 141.54
Moisture Content:18.0%5.8%8.5%9.2%3.6%5.9%21.0%8.5%
Sample Identification:S3-C S4-A S4-B S4-C S5-A S5-B S5-C
Exploration Location:TP-3 TP-4 TP-4 TP-4 TP-5 TP-5 TP-5
Sample Depth (ft):6.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 2.0 4.0 6.0
Container Number:MM TT A C RR B JJ
Weight of Container:31.05 31.01 31.97 31.78 31.27 31.56 30.96
Container + Wet Soil:180.54 184.12 192.21 217.91 192.90 161.29 183.83
Container + Dry Soil:168.10 158.59 184.15 206.92 160.35 151.18 173.78
Weight of Water:12.44 25.53 8.06 10.99 32.55 10.11 10.05
Weight of Dry Soil:137.05 127.58 152.18 175.14 129.08 119.62 142.82
Moisture Content:9.1%20.0%5.3%6.3%25.2%8.5%7.0%
Reviewed By:
32 Discovery DriveBozeman, MT 59718
Phone (406) 582-0221
Fax (406) 582-5770
MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION (ASTM D-2216)
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027Sample Identification: Varies
Soil Classification: Varies
Date Sampled: March 11, 2022 & March 14, 2022
Date Tested: March 16, 2022
Tested By: HRT
Sample Identification:S6-A S6-B S6-C S7-A S7-B S8-A S8-B S8-C
Exploration Location:TP-6 TP-6 TP-6 TP-7 TP-7 TP-8 TP-8 TP-8
Sample Depth (ft):2.0 4.0 6.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 6.0
Container Number:KK OO J F G E D L
Weight of Container:31.21 31.10 31.65 31.73 31.61 31.64 31.75 31.70
Container + Wet Soil:183.74 182.72 196.91 153.56 245.42 168.79 183.99 150.44
Container + Dry Soil:154.61 176.31 188.85 138.59 238.50 151.04 177.62 142.56
Weight of Water:29.13 6.41 8.06 14.97 6.92 17.75 6.37 7.88
Weight of Dry Soil:123.40 145.21 157.20 106.86 206.89 119.40 145.87 110.86
Moisture Content:23.6%4.4%5.1%14.0%3.3%14.9%4.4%7.1%
Sample Identification:S9-A S9-B S9-C S10-A S10-B S10-C
Exploration Location:TP-9 TP-9 TP-9 TP-10 TP-10 TP-10
Sample Depth (ft):2.0 4.0 6.0 2.0 4.0 6.0
Container Number:NN V Q HH T AA
Weight of Container:30.86 51.02 50.97 48.30 51.59 49.02
Container + Wet Soil:158.44 218.00 229.12 250.53 202.07 222.76
Container + Dry Soil:133.70 209.18 218.88 218.93 195.44 212.22
Weight of Water:24.74 8.82 10.24 31.60 6.63 10.54
Weight of Dry Soil:102.84 158.16 167.91 170.63 143.85 163.20
Moisture Content:24.1%5.6%6.1%18.5%4.6%6.5%
Reviewed By:
32 Discovery DriveBozeman, MT 59718
Phone (406) 582-0221
Fax (406) 582-5770
MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION (ASTM D-2216)
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027Sample Identification: Varies
Soil Classification: Varies
Date Sampled: March 11, 2022 & March 14, 2022
Date Tested: March 16, 2022
Tested By: HRT
Sample Identification:S11-A S11-B S11-C S12-A S12-B S12-C S13-A
Exploration Location:TP-11 TP-11 TP-11 TP-12 TP-12 TP-12 TP-13
Sample Depth (ft):2.0 4.0 6.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 2.0
Container Number:EE P BB Z U R S
Weight of Container:48.92 49.28 48.39 49.46 51.14 50.73 50.55
Container + Wet Soil:300.68 204.72 239.97 271.28 233.45 229.99 233.61
Container + Dry Soil:250.36 196.93 227.91 226.35 222.95 218.56 198.42
Weight of Water:50.32 7.79 12.06 44.93 10.50 11.43 35.19
Weight of Dry Soil:201.44 147.65 179.52 176.89 171.81 167.83 147.87
Moisture Content:25.0%5.3%6.7%25.4%6.1%6.8%23.8%
Sample Identification:S13-B S13-C S14-A S14-B S14-C S15-A S15-B S15-C
Exploration Location:TP-13 TP-13 TP-14 TP-14 TP-14 TP-15 TP-15 TP-15
Sample Depth (ft):4.0 6.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 2.0 4.0 6.0
Container Number:M Y B E UU TT A G
Weight of Container:50.63 50.97 31.59 31.67 31.00 30.99 31.97 31.58
Container + Wet Soil:216.96 296.31 172.57 195.51 226.57 189.98 191.27 153.72
Container + Dry Soil:208.63 273.08 143.13 189.48 213.83 166.69 184.87 147.12
Weight of Water:8.33 23.23 29.44 6.03 12.74 23.29 6.40 6.60
Weight of Dry Soil:158.00 222.11 111.54 157.81 182.83 135.70 152.90 115.54
Moisture Content:5.3%10.5%26.4%3.8%7.0%17.2%4.2%5.7%
Reviewed By:
32 Discovery DriveBozeman, MT 59718
Phone (406) 582-0221
Fax (406) 582-5770
MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION (ASTM D-2216)
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027Sample Identification: Varies
Soil Classification: Varies
Date Sampled: March 11, 2022 & March 14, 2022
Date Tested: March 16, 2022
Tested By: HRT
Sample Identification:S16-A S16-B S16-C S17-A S17-B S17-C S18-A S18-B
Exploration Location:TP-16 TP-16 TP-16 TP-17 TP-17 TP-17 TP-18 TP-18
Sample Depth (ft):2.0 4.0 6.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 2.0 4.0
Container Number:L NN JJ MM H F SS J
Weight of Container:31.71 30.88 30.97 31.07 31.58 31.72 31.00 31.65
Container + Wet Soil:214.33 150.93 193.09 130.81 170.67 107.10 159.71 176.80
Container + Dry Soil:179.70 140.21 180.55 115.88 152.03 98.42 145.65 165.23
Weight of Water:34.63 10.72 12.54 14.93 18.64 8.68 14.06 11.57
Weight of Dry Soil:147.99 109.33 149.58 84.81 120.45 66.70 114.65 133.58
Moisture Content:23.4%9.8%8.4%17.6%15.5%13.0%12.3%8.7%
Sample Identification:S18-C S19-A S19-B S19-C S20-A S20-B S20-C
Exploration Location:TP-18 TP-19 TP-19 TP-19 TP-20 TP-20 TP-20
Sample Depth (ft):6.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 2.0 4.0 6.0
Container Number:QQ I KK RR C D DD
Weight of Container:31.20 31.84 31.22 31.33 31.79 31.75 30.89
Container + Wet Soil:170.70 168.70 168.86 125.76 166.92 232.52 130.00
Container + Dry Soil:157.30 148.29 158.13 118.49 144.24 215.68 120.69
Weight of Water:13.40 20.41 10.73 7.27 22.68 16.84 9.31
Weight of Dry Soil:126.10 116.45 126.91 87.16 112.45 183.93 89.80
Moisture Content:10.6%17.5%8.5%8.3%20.2%9.2%10.4%
Reviewed By:
32 Discovery DriveBozeman, MT 59718
Phone (406) 582-0221
Fax (406) 582-5770
MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINATION (ASTM D-2216)
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027Sample Identification: Varies
Soil Classification: Varies
Date Sampled: March 11, 2022 & March 14, 2022
Date Tested: March 16, 2022
Tested By: HRT
Sample Identification:S21-A S21-B S21-C S22-A S22-B S22-C
Exploration Location:TP-21 TP-21 TP-21 TP-22 TP-22 TP-22
Sample Depth (ft):2.0 4.0 6.0 2.0 4.0 6.0
Container Number:OO K LL Y S M
Weight of Container:31.10 31.76 31.06 51.13 50.52 50.63
Container + Wet Soil:146.62 140.69 174.69 233.26 299.41 344.07
Container + Dry Soil:135.14 131.78 160.80 219.95 285.30 318.24
Weight of Water:11.48 8.91 13.89 13.31 14.11 25.83
Weight of Dry Soil:104.04 100.02 129.74 168.82 234.78 267.61
Moisture Content:11.0%8.9%10.7%7.9%6.0%9.7%
Sample Identification:
Exploration Location:
Sample Depth (ft):
Container Number:
Weight of Container:
Container + Wet Soil:
Container + Dry Soil:
Weight of Water:
Weight of Dry Soil:
Moisture Content:
Reviewed By:
32 Discovery DriveBozeman, MT 59718
Phone (406) 582-0221
Fax (406) 582-5770
ATTERBERG LIMITS DETERMINATION (ASTM D-4318)
Project: West UniversityProject Number: 22-027Sample Identification: S1-A at 2.0'
Soil Classification: Lean CLAY (CL)
Date Sampled: March 11, 2022
Date Tested: June 16, 2022Tested By: Zach Liley
Test Results
Plastic Limit:19.6
Liquid Limit:39.8
Plasticity Index:20.2
Reviewed By:_________________
A-Line
CL
ML or OL
CH
MH or OH
CL-ML
ML
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100Plasticity IndexLiquid Limit
PLASTICITY CHART
32 Discovery Drive
Bozeman, MT 59718
Phone (406) 582-0221
Fax (406) 582-5770
ATTERBERG LIMITS DETERMINATION (ASTM D-4318)
Project: West UniversityProject Number: 22-027Sample Identification: S3-A at 2.0'
Soil Classification: Lean CLAY (CL)
Date Sampled: March 14, 2022
Date Tested: June 16, 2022Tested By: Zach Liley
Test Results
Plastic Limit:16.6
Liquid Limit:39.0
Plasticity Index:22.4
Reviewed By:_________________
A-Line
CL
ML or OL
CH
MH or OH
CL-ML
ML
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100Plasticity IndexLiquid Limit
PLASTICITY CHART
32 Discovery Drive
Bozeman, MT 59718
Phone (406) 582-0221
Fax (406) 582-5770
ATTERBERG LIMITS DETERMINATION (ASTM D-4318)
Project: West UniversityProject Number: 22-027Sample Identification: S7-A at 2.0'
Soil Classification: Lean CLAY (CL)
Date Sampled: March 14, 2022
Date Tested: June 16, 2022Tested By: Zach Liley
Test Results
Plastic Limit:18.8
Liquid Limit:36.8
Plasticity Index:18.1
Reviewed By:_________________
A-Line
CL
ML or OL
CH
MH or OH
CL-ML
ML
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100Plasticity IndexLiquid Limit
PLASTICITY CHART
32 Discovery Drive
Bozeman, MT 59718
Phone (406) 582-0221
Fax (406) 582-5770
ATTERBERG LIMITS DETERMINATION (ASTM D-4318)
Project: West UniversityProject Number: 22-027Sample Identification: S15-A at 2.0'
Soil Classification: Lean CLAY (CL)
Date Sampled: March 11, 2022
Date Tested: June 16, 2022Tested By: Zach Liley
Test Results
Plastic Limit:20.4
Liquid Limit:31.3
Plasticity Index:10.9
Reviewed By:_________________
A-Line
CL
ML or OL
CH
MH or OH
CL-ML
ML
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100Plasticity IndexLiquid Limit
PLASTICITY CHART
32 Discovery Drive
Bozeman, MT 59718
Phone (406) 582-0221
Fax (406) 582-5770
STANDARD PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST (ASTM D-698)
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027
Sample Identification: Comp. A from 1.5'-2.5' (East Portion of Site)
Soil Classification: Sandy Silt/Clay
Date Sampled: March 11, 2022
Date Tested: June 23, 2022
Tested By: Zach Liley
Note: No Oversize Correction Applied Note: In situ moisture content may be wetter than optimum.
Natural Moisture Content: 3.3 - 26.4 %
Optimum Moisture Content: 18.5 %
Maximum Dry Unit Weight: 98.0 pcf
Reviewed By:
Summary of Lab Test Data
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% 22% 24% 26%Dry Unit Weight (pcf)Moisture Content
PROCTOR COMPACTION CURVE
Compaction CurveZ.A.V. for S.G.=2.50
Z.A.V. for S.G.=2.65
Z.A.V. for S.G.=2.80
Poly. (Compaction Curve)
32 Discovery Drive
Bozeman, MT 59718
Phone (406) 582-0221
Fax (406) 582-5770
STANDARD PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST (ASTM D-698)
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027
Sample Identification: Comp. B from 1.5'-2.5' (Central Portion of Site)
Soil Classification: Sandy Silt/Clay
Date Sampled: March 11, 2022
Date Tested: June 23, 2022
Tested By: Zach Liley
Note: No Oversize Correction Applied Note: In situ moisture content may be wetter than optimum.
Natural Moisture Content: 3.3 - 26.4 %
Optimum Moisture Content: 18.5 %
Maximum Dry Unit Weight: 102.7 pcf
Reviewed By:
Summary of Lab Test Data
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% 22% 24% 26%Dry Unit Weight (pcf)Moisture Content
PROCTOR COMPACTION CURVE
Compaction CurveZ.A.V. for S.G.=2.50
Z.A.V. for S.G.=2.65
Z.A.V. for S.G.=2.80
Poly. (Compaction Curve)
32 Discovery Drive
Bozeman, MT 59718
Phone (406) 582-0221
Fax (406) 582-5770
STANDARD PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST (ASTM D-698)
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027
Sample Identification: Comp. C from 1.5'-2.5' (West Portion of Site)
Soil Classification: Sandy Silt/Clay
Date Sampled: March 11, 2022
Date Tested: June 23, 2022
Tested By: Zach Liley
Note: No Oversize Correction Applied Note: In situ moisture content may be wetter than optimum.
Natural Moisture Content: 3.3 - 26.4 %
Optimum Moisture Content: 16.0 %
Maximum Dry Unit Weight: 104.0 pcf
Reviewed By:
Summary of Lab Test Data
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% 22% 24% 26%Dry Unit Weight (pcf)Moisture Content
PROCTOR COMPACTION CURVE
Compaction CurveZ.A.V. for S.G.=2.50
Z.A.V. for S.G.=2.65
Z.A.V. for S.G.=2.80
Poly. (Compaction Curve)
32 Discovery Drive
Bozeman, MT 59718
Phone (406) 582-0221
Fax (406) 582-5770
ANALYTICAL SUMMARY REPORT
The analyses presented in this report were performed by Energy Laboratories, Inc., 3161 E. Lyndale Ave., Helena, MT 59604, unless
otherwise noted. Any exceptions or problems with the analyses are noted in the report package. 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:
H22030461-001 Composite 1 (East) [4-8]03/14/22 8:00 03/17/22 Soil Conductivity, 1:X Water Extractable
Anions, Water Extractable
Moisture
Oxidation Reduction Potential
pH, 1:X Water Extractable
DI Water Soil Extract ASA10-3
Resistivity
Soil Preparation USDA1
Sulfide, Methylene Blue Colorimetric
H22030461-002 Composite 2 (SE
Portion of SW Corner)
[4-8]
03/14/22 8:00 03/17/22 Soil Conductivity, 1:X Water Extractable
Anions, Water Extractable
Moisture
Oxidation Reduction Potential
pH, 1:X Water Extractable
DI Water Soil Extract ASA10-3
Resistivity
Sulfide, Methylene Blue Colorimetric
H22030461-003 Composite 3 (NW
Portion of SW Corner)
[4-8]
03/14/22 8:00 03/17/22 Soil Same As Above
H22030461-004 Composite 4 (North) [4-
8]
03/14/22 8:00 03/17/22 Soil Same As Above
Allied Engineering Services Inc
Project Name:West University Property
Work Order:H22030461
32 S Discovery Dr
Bozeman, MT 59718-3428
March 29, 2022
H2173Quote ID:
Energy Laboratories Inc Helena MT received the following 4 samples for Allied Engineering Services Inc on 3/17/2022 for
analysis.
Page 1 of 13
Project:West University Property
CLIENT:Allied Engineering Services Inc
Work Order:H22030461 CASE NARRATIVE
03/29/22Report Date:
Tests associated with analyst identified as ELI-B were subcontracted to Energy Laboratories, 1120 S. 27th St., Billings, MT,
EPA Number MT00005.
Page 2 of 13
LABORATORY ANALYTICAL REPORT
Client:Allied Engineering Services Inc
Project:West University Property
Lab ID:H22030461-001
Client Sample ID:Composite 1 (East) [4-8]
Collection Date:03/14/22 08:00
Matrix:Soil
Report Date:03/29/22
DateReceived:03/17/22
Prepared by Helena, MT Branch
Analyses Result Units Analysis Date / ByRLMethod
MCL/
QCLQualifiers
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
03/18/22 08:30 / jjp0.2wt%6.9Moisture D2974
1:X SOIL:WATER
03/22/22 15:54 / jjp0.1s.u.8.4pH, 1:2 ASA10-3
WATER EXTRACTABLE
03/23/22 22:52 / JAR1mg/kg5Chloride, 1:2 E300.0
1:X SOIL:WATER
03/22/22 16:39 / sah0.1mmhos/cm0.2Conductivity, 1:2 ASA10-3
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
03/23/22 12:55 / eli-b23mV296Oxidation-Reduction Potential A2580 BM
INORGANICS
H 03/24/22 11:12 / JAR0.04mg/LNDSulfide A4500-S D
RESISTIVITY OF SOIL
03/23/22 11:59 / sah1ohm-cm6610Resistivity A2510 B
Report
Definitions:
RL - Analyte Reporting Limit MCL - Maximum Contaminant Level
QCL - Quality Control Limit ND - Not detected at the Reporting Limit (RL)
H - Analysis performed past the method holding time
Page 3 of 13
LABORATORY ANALYTICAL REPORT
Client:Allied Engineering Services Inc
Project:West University Property
Lab ID:H22030461-002
Client Sample ID:Composite 2 (SE Portion of SW Corner) [4-8]
Collection Date:03/14/22 08:00
Matrix:Soil
Report Date:03/29/22
DateReceived:03/17/22
Prepared by Helena, MT Branch
Analyses Result Units Analysis Date / ByRLMethod
MCL/
QCLQualifiers
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
03/18/22 08:30 / jjp0.2wt%9.1Moisture D2974
1:X SOIL:WATER
03/22/22 15:56 / jjp0.1s.u.8.2pH, 1:2 ASA10-3
WATER EXTRACTABLE
03/23/22 23:06 / JAR1mg/kg3Chloride, 1:2 E300.0
1:X SOIL:WATER
03/22/22 16:40 / sah0.1mmhos/cm0.1Conductivity, 1:2 ASA10-3
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
03/23/22 13:00 / eli-b23mV292Oxidation-Reduction Potential A2580 BM
INORGANICS
H 03/24/22 11:12 / JAR0.04mg/LNDSulfide A4500-S D
RESISTIVITY OF SOIL
03/23/22 11:59 / sah1ohm-cm7840Resistivity A2510 B
Report
Definitions:
RL - Analyte Reporting Limit MCL - Maximum Contaminant Level
QCL - Quality Control Limit ND - Not detected at the Reporting Limit (RL)
H - Analysis performed past the method holding time
Page 4 of 13
LABORATORY ANALYTICAL REPORT
Client:Allied Engineering Services Inc
Project:West University Property
Lab ID:H22030461-003
Client Sample ID:Composite 3 (NW Portion of SW Corner) [4-8]
Collection Date:03/14/22 08:00
Matrix:Soil
Report Date:03/29/22
DateReceived:03/17/22
Prepared by Helena, MT Branch
Analyses Result Units Analysis Date / ByRLMethod
MCL/
QCLQualifiers
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
03/18/22 08:30 / jjp0.2wt%6.5Moisture D2974
1:X SOIL:WATER
03/22/22 15:59 / jjp0.1s.u.8.4pH, 1:2 ASA10-3
WATER EXTRACTABLE
03/23/22 23:21 / JAR1mg/kg3Chloride, 1:2 E300.0
1:X SOIL:WATER
03/22/22 16:40 / sah0.1mmhos/cm0.1Conductivity, 1:2 ASA10-3
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
03/23/22 13:08 / eli-b23mV337Oxidation-Reduction Potential A2580 BM
INORGANICS
H 03/24/22 11:12 / JAR0.04mg/LNDSulfide A4500-S D
RESISTIVITY OF SOIL
03/23/22 11:59 / sah1ohm-cm9100Resistivity A2510 B
Report
Definitions:
RL - Analyte Reporting Limit MCL - Maximum Contaminant Level
QCL - Quality Control Limit ND - Not detected at the Reporting Limit (RL)
H - Analysis performed past the method holding time
Page 5 of 13
LABORATORY ANALYTICAL REPORT
Client:Allied Engineering Services Inc
Project:West University Property
Lab ID:H22030461-004
Client Sample ID:Composite 4 (North) [4-8]
Collection Date:03/14/22 08:00
Matrix:Soil
Report Date:03/29/22
DateReceived:03/17/22
Prepared by Helena, MT Branch
Analyses Result Units Analysis Date / ByRLMethod
MCL/
QCLQualifiers
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
03/18/22 08:30 / jjp0.2wt%7.3Moisture D2974
1:X SOIL:WATER
03/22/22 16:00 / jjp0.1s.u.8.2pH, 1:2 ASA10-3
WATER EXTRACTABLE
03/23/22 23:35 / JAR1mg/kg2Chloride, 1:2 E300.0
1:X SOIL:WATER
03/22/22 16:41 / sah0.1mmhos/cm0.1Conductivity, 1:2 ASA10-3
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
03/23/22 13:24 / eli-b23mV278Oxidation-Reduction Potential A2580 BM
INORGANICS
H 03/24/22 11:12 / JAR0.04mg/LNDSulfide A4500-S D
RESISTIVITY OF SOIL
03/23/22 11:59 / sah1ohm-cm7450Resistivity A2510 B
Report
Definitions:
RL - Analyte Reporting Limit MCL - Maximum Contaminant Level
QCL - Quality Control Limit ND - Not detected at the Reporting Limit (RL)
H - Analysis performed past the method holding time
Page 6 of 13
Client:Allied Engineering Services Inc Work Order:H22030461
QA/QC Summary Report
03/29/22Report Date:
Analyte Result %REC RPDLow Limit High Limit RPDLimitRLUnits QualCount
Prepared by Helena, MT Branch
Method:A2580 BM Batch: B_R376632
Lab ID:LCS2 03/23/22 11:35Laboratory Control Sample Run: SUB-B376632
Oxidation-Reduction Potential 101 97 103304mV
Lab ID:H22030464-001B 03/23/22 11:47Sample Duplicate Run: SUB-B376632
Oxidation-Reduction Potential 100.2303mV
Qualifiers:
RL - Analyte Reporting Limit ND - Not detected at the Reporting Limit (RL)
Page 7 of 13
Client:Allied Engineering Services Inc Work Order:H22030461
QA/QC Summary Report
03/29/22Report Date:
Analyte Result %REC RPDLow Limit High Limit RPDLimitRLUnits QualCount
Prepared by Helena, MT Branch
Method:A4500-S D Analytical Run: GENESYS 20_220324B
Lab ID:CCV 03/24/22 11:12Continuing Calibration Verification Standard
Sulfide 98 85 1150.0400.489 mg/L
Lab ID:CCB 03/24/22 11:12Continuing Calibration Blank
Sulfide 0.040-0.00484 mg/L
Method:A4500-S D Batch: R173182
Lab ID:MBLK 03/24/22 11:12Method Blank Run: GENESYS 20_220324B
Sulfide 0.005NDmg/L
Lab ID:LCS 03/24/22 11:12Laboratory Control Sample Run: GENESYS 20_220324B
Sulfide 103 85 1150.0400.278 mg/L
Lab ID:H22030461-001AMS 03/24/22 11:12Sample Matrix Spike Run: GENESYS 20_220324B
Sulfide 98 70 1300.0400.535 mg/L
Lab ID:H22030461-001AMSD 03/24/22 11:12Sample Matrix Spike Duplicate Run: GENESYS 20_220324B
Sulfide 98 70 130 200.040 0.40.533 mg/L
Lab ID:H22030464-004ADUP 03/24/22 11:12Sample Duplicate Run: GENESYS 20_220324B
Sulfide 200.040NDmg/L
Qualifiers:
RL - Analyte Reporting Limit ND - Not detected at the Reporting Limit (RL)
Page 8 of 13
Client:Allied Engineering Services Inc Work Order:H22030461
QA/QC Summary Report
03/29/22Report Date:
Analyte Result %REC RPDLow Limit High Limit RPDLimitRLUnits QualCount
Prepared by Helena, MT Branch
Method:ASA10-3 Analytical Run: SOIL EC_220323B
Lab ID:ICV_1_220322_1 03/22/22 16:35Initial Calibration Verification Standard
Conductivity, 1:2 105 90 1100.101.48 mmhos/cm
Lab ID:CCV_1_220322_1 03/22/22 16:36Continuing Calibration Verification Standard
Conductivity, 1:2 101 90 1100.105.04 mmhos/cm
Lab ID:CCV1_1_220322_1 03/22/22 16:37Continuing Calibration Verification Standard
Conductivity, 1:2 101 90 1100.101.01 mmhos/cm
Method:ASA10-3 Batch: 60562
Lab ID:MB-60562 03/22/22 16:37Method Blank Run: SOIL EC_220323B
Conductivity, 1:2 0.1NDmmhos/cm
Lab ID:LCS-60562 03/22/22 16:38Laboratory Control Sample Run: SOIL EC_220323B
Conductivity, 1:2 100 70 1300.101.17 mmhos/cm
Lab ID:H22030464-002ADUP 03/22/22 16:43Sample Duplicate Run: SOIL EC_220323B
Conductivity, 1:2 100.10 0.60.274 mmhos/cm
Method:ASA10-3 Analytical Run: SOIL PH METER - ORION A211_220323A
Lab ID:ICV_1_220322_1 03/22/22 15:47Initial Calibration Verification Standard
pH, 1:2 100 98.6 101.40.106.99 s.u.
Lab ID:CCV_1_220322_1 03/22/22 15:48Continuing Calibration Verification Standard
pH, 1:2 100 98.6 101.40.107.01 s.u.
Lab ID:CCV1_1_220322_1 03/22/22 15:49Continuing Calibration Verification Standard
pH, 1:2 100 97.5 102.50.103.99 s.u.
Method:ASA10-3 Batch: 60562
Lab ID:LCS-60562 03/22/22 15:51Laboratory Control Sample Run: SOIL PH METER - ORION A2
pH, 1:2 100 95 1050.108.23 s.u.
Lab ID:H22030464-002ADUP 03/22/22 16:05Sample Duplicate Run: SOIL PH METER - ORION A2
pH, 1:2 200.10 0.18.98 s.u.
Qualifiers:
RL - Analyte Reporting Limit ND - Not detected at the Reporting Limit (RL)
Page 9 of 13
Client:Allied Engineering Services Inc Work Order:H22030461
QA/QC Summary Report
03/29/22Report Date:
Analyte Result %REC RPDLow Limit High Limit RPDLimitRLUnits QualCount
Prepared by Helena, MT Branch
Method:D2974 Batch: PMOIST_220318_A
Lab ID:H22030461-002A DUP 03/18/22 08:30Sample Duplicate Run: SOIL DRYING OVEN 2_22032
Moisture 200.20 108.19 wt%
Qualifiers:
RL - Analyte Reporting Limit ND - Not detected at the Reporting Limit (RL)
Page 10 of 13
Client:Allied Engineering Services Inc Work Order:H22030461
QA/QC Summary Report
03/29/22Report Date:
Analyte Result %REC RPDLow Limit High Limit RPDLimitRLUnits QualCount
Prepared by Helena, MT Branch
Method:E300.0 Batch: 60562
Lab ID:MB-60562 03/23/22 22:23Method Blank Run: IC METROHM_220323A
Chloride, 1:2 0.008NDmg/kg
Lab ID:LCS-60562 03/23/22 22:37Laboratory Control Sample Run: IC METROHM_220323A
Chloride, 1:2 114 70 1301.0121mg/kg
Lab ID:H22030464-002ADUP 03/24/22 00:18Sample Duplicate Run: IC METROHM_220323A
Chloride, 1:2 201.0 5.014.1 mg/kg
Lab ID:H22030471-003AMS 03/24/22 02:28Sample Matrix Spike Run: IC METROHM_220323A
Chloride, 1:2 99 90 1101.0523mg/kg
Qualifiers:
RL - Analyte Reporting Limit ND - Not detected at the Reporting Limit (RL)
Page 11 of 13
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 parameterssuch as pH, DO, Res Cl, Sulfite, Ferrous Iron, etc.)
Container/Temp Blank temperature:
Containers requiring zero headspace have no headspace or bubble that is <6mm (1/4").
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
R
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
Not Present
Not Present
Not Present
£
R
R
No VOA vials submitted
Not Applicable R
R
18.0°C No Ice
3/17/2022Skyler T. Pester
FedEx Ground
RMF
Date Received:
Received by:
Login completed by:
Carrier name:
BL2000\spester
3/29/2022
Reviewed by:
Reviewed Date:
Contact and Corrective Action Comments:
COC not signed or dated when relinquished. No collection times listed on COC, Collection times estimated in
laboratory. 3/17/2022 STP.
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.
The reference date for Radon analysis is the sample collection date. The reference date for all other Radiochemical
analyses is the analysis date. Radiochemical precision results represent a 2-sigma Total Measurement Uncertainty.
Standard Reporting Procedures:
Work Order Receipt Checklist
Allied Engineering Services Inc H22030461
Page 12 of 13
Page 13 of 13
APPENDIX C
GGWW MMoonniittoorriinngg RReessuullttss TThhrroouugghh 77//2277//2222
Date Time Name MW- 1 MW- 2 MW- 3 MW- 4 MW- 5 MW- 6 MW- 7 MW- 8 MW- 9
MW-
10
MW-
11
MW-
12
MW-
13
MW-
14
3/25/2022 2:00 PM JGE 7.19 7.39 4.19 6.69 7.89 7.55 7.32 6.90 6.68 6.18 3.03 5.32 4.94 6.25
4/1/2022 2:00 PM JGE 6.67 6.96 4.04 6.20 7.66 7.36 7.26 6.93 6.73 6.13 2.96 5.46 5.11 6.32
4/6/2022 12:00 PM JGE 6.72 7.03 4.21 6.33 8.11 7.58 7.44 7.07 6.88 6.25 3.03 5.51 5.20 6.39
4/12/2022 3:45 PM ORB 6.58 6.97 4.44 6.42 8.19 7.60 7.53 7.19 6.99 6.33 3.12 5.63 5.31 6.46
4/19/2022 2:30 PM ORB 6.49 6.95 4.46 6.51 7.54 7.65 7.60 7.20 7.05 6.39 3.12 5.64 5.31 6.54
4/26/2022 11:30 AM ORB 6.99 7.40 4.24 5.65 7.36 7.07 6.88 6.44 6.27 5.74 2.75 5.17 4.73 6.06
5/4/2022 9:00 AM ORB 6.52 7.11 3.29 4.72 6.30 6.33 6.10 5.71 5.62 5.07 2.41 4.76 4.23 5.61
5/10/2022 12:40 PM ORB 6.02 6.49 2.77 4.50 5.92 6.12 6.02 5.66 5.55 4.95 2.34 4.65 4.14 5.47
5/17/2022 3:30 PM JGE 5.26 5.51 3.00 4.48 5.33 5.69 5.74 5.67 5.60 5.10 2.42 5.00 4.49 5.57
5/23/2022 12:45 PM ORB 5.29 5.49 3.11 4.73 5.89 5.99 6.05 5.98 5.82 5.31 2.56 5.17 4.77 5.84
5/31/2022 1:15 PM ORB 5.20 5.00 2.76 3.75 5.27 5.00 4.90 4.89 4.87 4.49 2.30 4.68 4.06 5.29
6/8/2022 4:15 PM ORB 4.81 4.83 2.81 4.06 5.20 5.11 5.16 5.20 5.06 4.74 2.33 4.86 4.24 5.25
6/15/2022 1:20 PM ORB 5.45 5.27 3.03 4.35 5.80 5.62 5.70 5.77 5.46 4.99 2.42 4.99 4.45 5.50
6/22/2022 2:30 PM ORB 5.99 5.71 3.18 4.89 6.88 6.40 6.31 6.16 6.00 5.46 2.58 5.30 5.02 5.94
6/29/2022 2:40 PM ORB 6.87 6.53 3.61 5.55 8.01 7.10 7.02 6.80 6.59 5.88 2.84 5.52 5.46 6.41
7/6/2022 3:40 PM ORB 6.57 6.96 4.87 5.89 8.42 7.25 6.97 6.66 6.75 6.12 2.91 5.55 5.68 6.57
7/13/2022 1:45 PM HDS 6.90 7.52 5.42 6.45 8.87 7.86 7.58 7.20 7.13 6.42 3.17 5.65 5.87 6.84
7/20/2022 1:30 PM HDS 7.30 8.22 5.95 6.94 9.24 8.22 7.94 7.50 7.39 6.69 3.36 5.70 5.98 7.03
7/27/2022 1:50 PM HDS 7.58 8.60 6.22 7.17 9.40 8.58 8.21 7.80 7.64 7.00 3.56 5.84 6.16 7.22
Measure from TOC to GW (feet)
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027
Location: See well location map
Date Installed: March 11 and 14, 2022
Installed By: EGS (AESI)
NOTES:
If the well is dry, graph shows the groundwater at bottom of the well casing.
Ground Surface Elevation and Top of Casing provided by Stahly Engineering on 3/25/2022
All measurements for this well are in reference to the elevations provided by Stahly Engineering.
Total Well Well Measure Depth to Top Bottom 4'
Well Casing Casing from T.O.C.GW Depth to Ground of of GW below Measured
Date Time Casing Height Bury to GW Below GW Surface Casing Casing Elev.Ground by
Length Depth Ground Elev.Elev.Elev.Surface
(ft)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)(inches)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)
3/25/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.37 8.63 7.19 5.82 69.84 4926.57 4927.94 4917.94 4920.75 4922.57 JGE
4/1/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.37 8.63 6.67 5.30 63.60 4926.57 4927.94 4917.94 4921.27 4922.57 JGE
4/6/2022 12:00 PM 10 1.37 8.63 6.72 5.35 64.20 4926.57 4927.94 4917.94 4921.22 4922.57 JGE
4/12/2022 3:45 PM 10 1.37 8.63 6.58 5.21 62.52 4926.57 4927.94 4917.94 4921.36 4922.57 ORB
4/19/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.37 8.63 6.49 5.12 61.44 4926.57 4927.94 4917.94 4921.45 4922.57 ORB
4/26/2022 11:30 AM 10 1.37 8.63 6.99 5.62 67.44 4926.57 4927.94 4917.94 4920.95 4922.57 ORB
5/4/2022 9:00 AM 10 1.37 8.63 6.52 5.15 61.80 4926.57 4927.94 4917.94 4921.42 4922.57 ORB
5/10/2022 12:40 PM 10 1.37 8.63 6.02 4.65 55.80 4926.57 4927.94 4917.94 4921.92 4922.57 ORB
5/17/2022 3:30 PM 10 1.37 8.63 5.26 3.89 46.68 4926.57 4927.94 4917.94 4922.68 4922.57 JGE
5/23/2022 12:45 PM 10 1.37 8.63 5.29 3.92 47.04 4926.57 4927.94 4917.94 4922.65 4922.57 ORB
5/31/2022 1:15 PM 10 1.37 8.63 5.20 3.83 45.96 4926.57 4927.94 4917.94 4922.74 4922.57 ORB
6/8/2022 4:15 PM 10 1.37 8.63 4.81 3.44 41.28 4926.57 4927.94 4917.94 4923.13 4922.57 ORB
6/15/2022 1:20 PM 10 1.37 8.63 5.45 4.08 48.96 4926.57 4927.94 4917.94 4922.49 4922.57 ORB
6/22/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.37 8.63 5.99 4.62 55.44 4926.57 4927.94 4917.94 4921.95 4922.57 ORB
6/29/2022 2:40 PM 10 1.37 8.63 6.87 5.50 66.00 4926.57 4927.94 4917.94 4921.07 4922.57 ORB
7/6/2022 3:40 PM 10 1.37 8.63 6.57 5.20 62.40 4926.57 4927.94 4917.94 4921.37 4922.57 ORB
7/13/2022 1:45 PM 10 1.37 8.63 6.90 5.53 66.36 4926.57 4927.94 4917.94 4921.04 4922.57 HDS
7/20/2022 1:30 PM 10 1.37 8.63 7.30 5.93 71.16 4926.57 4927.94 4917.94 4920.64 4922.57 HDS
7/27/2022 1:50 PM 10 1.37 8.63 7.58 6.21 74.52 4926.57 4927.94 4917.94 4920.36 4922.57 HDS
Installed By: EGS (AESI)
Groundwater Monitoring Results: MW-1
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027
Location: See well location map
Date Installed: March 11 and 14, 2022
4916
4918
4920
4922
4924
4926
4928
4930
3/15/2022 4/4/2022 4/24/2022 5/14/2022 6/3/2022 6/23/2022 7/13/2022 8/2/2022 8/22/2022 9/11/2022 10/1/2022ELEVATION (FT)DATE
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY (PROJECT 22-027)MONITOR WELL 1
Ground Surface Elevation Top oF Casing Elevation Groundwater Elevation Bottom of Casing Elevation 4' of Separation from GSE
NOTES:
If the well is dry, graph shows the groundwater at bottom of the well casing.
Ground Surface Elevation and Top of Casing provided by Stahly Engineering on 3/25/2022
All measurements for this well are in reference to the elevations provided by Stahly Engineering.
Total Well Well Measure Depth to Top Bottom 4'
Well Casing Casing from T.O.C.GW Depth to Ground of of GW below Measured
Date Time Casing Height Bury to GW Below GW Surface Casing Casing Elev.Ground by
Length Depth Ground Elev.Elev.Elev.Surface
(ft)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)(inches)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)
3/25/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.21 8.79 7.39 6.18 74.16 4935.73 4936.94 4926.94 4929.55 4931.73 JGE
4/1/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.21 8.79 6.96 5.75 69.00 4935.73 4936.94 4926.94 4929.98 4931.73 JGE
4/6/2022 12:00 PM 10 1.21 8.79 7.03 5.82 69.84 4935.73 4936.94 4926.94 4929.91 4931.73 JGE
4/12/2022 3:45 PM 10 1.21 8.79 6.97 5.76 69.12 4935.73 4936.94 4926.94 4929.97 4931.73 ORB
4/19/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.21 8.79 6.95 5.74 68.88 4935.73 4936.94 4926.94 4929.99 4931.73 ORB
4/26/2022 11:30 AM 10 1.21 8.79 7.40 6.19 74.28 4935.73 4936.94 4926.94 4929.54 4931.73 ORB
5/4/2022 9:00 AM 10 1.21 8.79 7.11 5.90 70.80 4935.73 4936.94 4926.94 4929.83 4931.73 ORB
5/10/2022 12:40 PM 10 1.21 8.79 6.49 5.28 63.36 4935.73 4936.94 4926.94 4930.45 4931.73 ORB
5/17/2022 3:30 PM 10 1.21 8.79 5.51 4.30 51.60 4935.73 4936.94 4926.94 4931.43 4931.73 JGE
5/23/2022 12:45 PM 10 1.21 8.79 5.49 4.28 51.36 4935.73 4936.94 4926.94 4931.45 4931.73 ORB
5/31/2022 1:15 PM 10 1.21 8.79 5.00 3.79 45.48 4935.73 4936.94 4926.94 4931.94 4931.73 ORB
6/8/2022 4:15 PM 10 1.21 8.79 4.83 3.62 43.44 4935.73 4936.94 4926.94 4932.11 4931.73 ORB
6/15/2022 1:20 PM 10 1.21 8.79 5.27 4.06 48.72 4935.73 4936.94 4926.94 4931.67 4931.73 ORB
6/22/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.21 8.79 5.71 4.50 54.00 4935.73 4936.94 4926.94 4931.23 4931.73 ORB
6/29/2022 2:40 PM 10 1.21 8.79 6.53 5.32 63.84 4935.73 4936.94 4926.94 4930.41 4931.73 ORB
7/6/2022 3:40 PM 10 1.21 8.79 6.96 5.75 69.00 4935.73 4936.94 4926.94 4929.98 4931.73 ORB
7/13/2022 1:45 PM 10 1.21 8.79 7.52 6.31 75.72 4935.73 4936.94 4926.94 4929.42 4931.73 HDS
7/20/2022 1:30 PM 10 1.21 8.79 8.22 7.01 84.12 4935.73 4936.94 4926.94 4928.72 4931.73 HDS
7/27/2022 1:50 PM 10 1.21 8.79 8.60 7.39 88.68 4935.73 4936.94 4926.94 4928.34 4931.73 HDS
Installed By: EGS (AESI)
Groundwater Monitoring Results: MW-2
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027
Location: See well location map
Date Installed: March 11 and 14, 2022
4926
4928
4930
4932
4934
4936
4938
3/15/2022 4/4/2022 4/24/2022 5/14/2022 6/3/2022 6/23/2022 7/13/2022 8/2/2022 8/22/2022 9/11/2022 10/1/2022ELEVATION (FT)DATE
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY (PROJECT 22-027)
MONITOR WELL 2
Ground Surface Elevation Top oF Casing Elevation Groundwater Elevation Bottom of Casing Elevation 4' of Separation from GSE
NOTES:
If the well is dry, graph shows the groundwater at bottom of the well casing.
Ground Surface Elevation and Top of Casing provided by Stahly Engineering on 3/25/2022
All measurements for this well are in reference to the elevations provided by Stahly Engineering.
Total Well Well Measure Depth to Top Bottom 4'
Well Casing Casing from T.O.C.GW Depth to Ground of of GW below Measured
Date Time Casing Height Bury to GW Below GW Surface Casing Casing Elev.Ground by
Length Depth Ground Elev.Elev.Elev.Surface
(ft)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)(inches)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)
3/25/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.40 8.60 4.19 2.79 33.48 4932.58 4933.98 4923.98 4929.79 4928.58 JGE
4/1/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.40 8.60 4.04 2.64 31.68 4932.58 4933.98 4923.98 4929.94 4928.58 JGE
4/6/2022 12:00 PM 10 1.40 8.60 4.21 2.81 33.72 4932.58 4933.98 4923.98 4929.77 4928.58 JGE
4/12/2022 3:45 PM 10 1.40 8.60 4.44 3.04 36.48 4932.58 4933.98 4923.98 4929.54 4928.58 ORB
4/19/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.40 8.60 4.46 3.06 36.72 4932.58 4933.98 4923.98 4929.52 4928.58 ORB
4/26/2022 11:30 AM 10 1.40 8.60 4.24 2.84 34.08 4932.58 4933.98 4923.98 4929.74 4928.58 ORB
5/4/2022 9:00 AM 10 1.40 8.60 3.29 1.89 22.68 4932.58 4933.98 4923.98 4930.69 4928.58 ORB
5/10/2022 12:40 PM 10 1.40 8.60 2.77 1.37 16.44 4932.58 4933.98 4923.98 4931.21 4928.58 ORB
5/17/2022 3:30 PM 10 1.40 8.60 3.00 1.60 19.20 4932.58 4933.98 4923.98 4930.98 4928.58 JGE
5/23/2022 12:45 PM 10 1.40 8.60 3.11 1.71 20.52 4932.58 4933.98 4923.98 4930.87 4928.58 ORB
5/31/2022 1:15 PM 10 1.40 8.60 2.76 1.36 16.32 4932.58 4933.98 4923.98 4931.22 4928.58 ORB
6/8/2022 4:15 PM 10 1.40 8.60 2.81 1.41 16.92 4932.58 4933.98 4923.98 4931.17 4928.58 ORB
6/15/2022 1:20 PM 10 1.40 8.60 3.03 1.63 19.56 4932.58 4933.98 4923.98 4930.95 4928.58 ORB
6/22/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.40 8.60 3.18 1.78 21.36 4932.58 4933.98 4923.98 4930.80 4928.58 ORB
6/29/2022 2:40 PM 10 1.40 8.60 3.61 2.21 26.52 4932.58 4933.98 4923.98 4930.37 4928.58 ORB
7/6/2022 3:40 PM 10 1.40 8.60 4.87 3.47 41.64 4932.58 4933.98 4923.98 4929.11 4928.58 ORB
7/13/2022 1:45 PM 10 1.40 8.60 5.42 4.02 48.24 4932.58 4933.98 4923.98 4928.56 4928.58 HDS
7/20/2022 1:30 PM 10 1.40 8.60 5.95 4.55 54.60 4932.58 4933.98 4923.98 4928.03 4928.58 HDS
7/27/2022 1:50 PM 10 1.40 8.60 6.22 4.82 57.84 4932.58 4933.98 4923.98 4927.76 4928.58 HDS
Installed By: EGS (AESI)
Groundwater Monitoring Results: MW-3
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027
Location: See well location map
Date Installed: March 11 and 14, 2022
4922
4924
4926
4928
4930
4932
4934
4936
3/15/2022 4/4/2022 4/24/2022 5/14/2022 6/3/2022 6/23/2022 7/13/2022 8/2/2022 8/22/2022 9/11/2022 10/1/2022ELEVATION (FT)DATE
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY (PROJECT 22-027)
MONITOR WELL 3
Ground Surface Elevation Top oF Casing Elevation Groundwater Elevation Bottom of Casing Elevation 4' of Separation from GSE
NOTES:
If the well is dry, graph shows the groundwater at bottom of the well casing.
Ground Surface Elevation and Top of Casing provided by Stahly Engineering on 3/25/2022
All measurements for this well are in reference to the elevations provided by Stahly Engineering.
Total Well Well Measure Depth to Top Bottom 4'
Well Casing Casing from T.O.C.GW Depth to Ground of of GW below Measured
Date Time Casing Height Bury to GW Below GW Surface Casing Casing Elev.Ground by
Length Depth Ground Elev.Elev.Elev.Surface
(ft)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)(inches)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)
3/25/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.36 8.64 6.69 5.33 63.96 4934.05 4935.41 4925.41 4928.72 4930.05 JGE
4/1/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.36 8.64 6.20 4.84 58.08 4934.05 4935.41 4925.41 4929.21 4930.05 JGE
4/6/2022 12:00 PM 10 1.36 8.64 6.33 4.97 59.64 4934.05 4935.41 4925.41 4929.08 4930.05 JGE
4/12/2022 3:45 PM 10 1.36 8.64 6.42 5.06 60.72 4934.05 4935.41 4925.41 4928.99 4930.05 ORB
4/19/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.36 8.64 6.51 5.15 61.80 4934.05 4935.41 4925.41 4928.90 4930.05 ORB
4/26/2022 11:30 AM 10 1.36 8.64 5.65 4.29 51.48 4934.05 4935.41 4925.41 4929.76 4930.05 ORB
5/4/2022 9:00 AM 10 1.36 8.64 4.72 3.36 40.32 4934.05 4935.41 4925.41 4930.69 4930.05 ORB
5/10/2022 12:40 PM 10 1.36 8.64 4.50 3.14 37.68 4934.05 4935.41 4925.41 4930.91 4930.05 ORB
5/17/2022 3:30 PM 10 1.36 8.64 4.48 3.12 37.44 4934.05 4935.41 4925.41 4930.93 4930.05 JGE
5/23/2022 12:45 PM 10 1.36 8.64 4.73 3.37 40.44 4934.05 4935.41 4925.41 4930.68 4930.05 ORB
5/31/2022 1:15 PM 10 1.36 8.64 3.75 2.39 28.68 4934.05 4935.41 4925.41 4931.66 4930.05 ORB
6/8/2022 4:15 PM 10 1.36 8.64 4.06 2.70 32.40 4934.05 4935.41 4925.41 4931.35 4930.05 ORB
6/15/2022 1:20 PM 10 1.36 8.64 4.35 2.99 35.88 4934.05 4935.41 4925.41 4931.06 4930.05 ORB
6/22/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.36 8.64 4.89 3.53 42.36 4934.05 4935.41 4925.41 4930.52 4930.05 ORB
6/29/2022 2:40 PM 10 1.36 8.64 5.55 4.19 50.28 4934.05 4935.41 4925.41 4929.86 4930.05 ORB
7/6/2022 3:40 PM 10 1.36 8.64 5.89 4.53 54.36 4934.05 4935.41 4925.41 4929.52 4930.05 ORB
7/13/2022 1:45 PM 10 1.36 8.64 6.45 5.09 61.08 4934.05 4935.41 4925.41 4928.96 4930.05 HDS
7/20/2022 1:30 PM 10 1.36 8.64 6.94 5.58 66.96 4934.05 4935.41 4925.41 4928.47 4930.05 HDS
7/27/2022 1:50 PM 10 1.36 8.64 7.17 5.81 69.72 4934.05 4935.41 4925.41 4928.24 4930.05 HDS
Installed By: EGS (AESI)
Groundwater Monitoring Results: MW-4
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027
Location: See well location map
Date Installed: March 11 and 14, 2022
4924
4926
4928
4930
4932
4934
4936
3/15/2022 4/4/2022 4/24/2022 5/14/2022 6/3/2022 6/23/2022 7/13/2022 8/2/2022 8/22/2022 9/11/2022 10/1/2022ELEVATION (FT)DATE
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY (PROJECT 22-027)MONITOR WELL 4
Ground Surface Elevation Top oF Casing Elevation Groundwater Elevation Bottom of Casing Elevation 4' of Separation from GSE
NOTES:
If the well is dry, graph shows the groundwater at bottom of the well casing.
Ground Surface Elevation and Top of Casing provided by Stahly Engineering on 3/25/2022
All measurements for this well are in reference to the elevations provided by Stahly Engineering.
Total Well Well Measure Depth to Top Bottom 4'
Well Casing Casing from T.O.C.GW Depth to Ground of of GW below Measured
Date Time Casing Height Bury to GW Below GW Surface Casing Casing Elev.Ground by
Length Depth Ground Elev.Elev.Elev.Surface
(ft)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)(inches)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)
3/25/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.65 8.35 7.89 6.24 74.88 4920.49 4922.14 4912.14 4914.25 4916.49 JGE
4/1/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.65 8.35 7.66 6.01 72.12 4920.49 4922.14 4912.14 4914.48 4916.49 JGE
4/6/2022 12:00 PM 10 1.65 8.35 8.11 6.46 77.52 4920.49 4922.14 4912.14 4914.03 4916.49 JGE
4/12/2022 3:45 PM 10 1.65 8.35 8.19 6.54 78.48 4920.49 4922.14 4912.14 4913.95 4916.49 ORB
4/19/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.65 8.35 7.54 5.89 70.68 4920.49 4922.14 4912.14 4914.60 4916.49 ORB
4/26/2022 11:30 AM 10 1.65 8.35 7.36 5.71 68.52 4920.49 4922.14 4912.14 4914.78 4916.49 ORB
5/4/2022 9:00 AM 10 1.65 8.35 6.30 4.65 55.80 4920.49 4922.14 4912.14 4915.84 4916.49 ORB
5/10/2022 12:40 PM 10 1.65 8.35 5.92 4.27 51.24 4920.49 4922.14 4912.14 4916.22 4916.49 ORB
5/17/2022 3:30 PM 10 1.65 8.35 5.33 3.68 44.16 4920.49 4922.14 4912.14 4916.81 4916.49 JGE
5/23/2022 12:45 PM 10 1.65 8.35 5.89 4.24 50.88 4920.49 4922.14 4912.14 4916.25 4916.49 ORB
5/31/2022 1:15 PM 10 1.65 8.35 5.27 3.62 43.44 4920.49 4922.14 4912.14 4916.87 4916.49 ORB
6/8/2022 4:15 PM 10 1.65 8.35 5.20 3.55 42.60 4920.49 4922.14 4912.14 4916.94 4916.49 ORB
6/15/2022 1:20 PM 10 1.65 8.35 5.80 4.15 49.80 4920.49 4922.14 4912.14 4916.34 4916.49 ORB
6/22/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.65 8.35 6.88 5.23 62.76 4920.49 4922.14 4912.14 4915.26 4916.49 ORB
6/29/2022 2:40 PM 10 1.65 8.35 8.01 6.36 76.32 4920.49 4922.14 4912.14 4914.13 4916.49 ORB
7/6/2022 3:40 PM 10 1.65 8.35 8.42 6.77 81.24 4920.49 4922.14 4912.14 4913.72 4916.49 ORB
7/13/2022 1:45 PM 10 1.65 8.35 8.87 7.22 86.64 4920.49 4922.14 4912.14 4913.27 4916.49 HDS
7/20/2022 1:30 PM 10 1.65 8.35 9.24 7.59 91.08 4920.49 4922.14 4912.14 4912.90 4916.49 HDS
7/27/2022 1:50 PM 10 1.65 8.35 9.40 7.75 93.00 4920.49 4922.14 4912.14 4912.74 4916.49 HDS
Installed By: EGS (AESI)
Groundwater Monitoring Results: MW-5
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027
Location: See well location map
Date Installed: March 11 and 14, 2022
4910
4912
4914
4916
4918
4920
4922
4924
3/15/2022 4/4/2022 4/24/2022 5/14/2022 6/3/2022 6/23/2022 7/13/2022 8/2/2022 8/22/2022 9/11/2022 10/1/2022ELEVATION (FT)DATE
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY (PROJECT 22-027)
MONITOR WELL 5
Ground Surface Elevation Top oF Casing Elevation Groundwater Elevation Bottom of Casing Elevation 4' of Separation from GSE
NOTES:
If the well is dry, graph shows the groundwater at bottom of the well casing.
Ground Surface Elevation and Top of Casing provided by Stahly Engineering on 3/25/2022
All measurements for this well are in reference to the elevations provided by Stahly Engineering.
Total Well Well Measure Depth to Top Bottom 4'
Well Casing Casing from T.O.C.GW Depth to Ground of of GW below Measured
Date Time Casing Height Bury to GW Below GW Surface Casing Casing Elev.Ground by
Length Depth Ground Elev.Elev.Elev.Surface
(ft)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)(inches)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)
3/25/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.28 8.72 7.55 6.27 75.24 4921.75 4923.03 4913.03 4915.48 4917.75 JGE
4/1/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.28 8.72 7.36 6.08 72.96 4921.75 4923.03 4913.03 4915.67 4917.75 JGE
4/6/2022 12:00 PM 10 1.28 8.72 7.58 6.30 75.60 4921.75 4923.03 4913.03 4915.45 4917.75 JGE
4/12/2022 3:45 PM 10 1.28 8.72 7.60 6.32 75.84 4921.75 4923.03 4913.03 4915.43 4917.75 ORB
4/19/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.28 8.72 7.65 6.37 76.44 4921.75 4923.03 4913.03 4915.38 4917.75 ORB
4/26/2022 11:30 AM 10 1.28 8.72 7.07 5.79 69.48 4921.75 4923.03 4913.03 4915.96 4917.75 ORB
5/4/2022 9:00 AM 10 1.28 8.72 6.33 5.05 60.60 4921.75 4923.03 4913.03 4916.70 4917.75 ORB
5/10/2022 12:40 PM 10 1.28 8.72 6.12 4.84 58.08 4921.75 4923.03 4913.03 4916.91 4917.75 ORB
5/17/2022 3:30 PM 10 1.28 8.72 5.69 4.41 52.92 4921.75 4923.03 4913.03 4917.34 4917.75 JGE
5/23/2022 12:45 PM 10 1.28 8.72 5.99 4.71 56.52 4921.75 4923.03 4913.03 4917.04 4917.75 ORB
5/31/2022 1:15 PM 10 1.28 8.72 5.00 3.72 44.64 4921.75 4923.03 4913.03 4918.03 4917.75 ORB
6/8/2022 4:15 PM 10 1.28 8.72 5.11 3.83 45.96 4921.75 4923.03 4913.03 4917.92 4917.75 ORB
6/15/2022 1:20 PM 10 1.28 8.72 5.62 4.34 52.08 4921.75 4923.03 4913.03 4917.41 4917.75 ORB
6/22/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.28 8.72 6.40 5.12 61.44 4921.75 4923.03 4913.03 4916.63 4917.75 ORB
6/29/2022 2:40 PM 10 1.28 8.72 7.10 5.82 69.84 4921.75 4923.03 4913.03 4915.93 4917.75 ORB
7/6/2022 3:40 PM 10 1.28 8.72 7.25 5.97 71.64 4921.75 4923.03 4913.03 4915.78 4917.75 ORB
7/13/2022 1:45 PM 10 1.28 8.72 7.86 6.58 78.96 4921.75 4923.03 4913.03 4915.17 4917.75 HDS
7/20/2022 1:30 PM 10 1.28 8.72 8.22 6.94 83.28 4921.75 4923.03 4913.03 4914.81 4917.75 HDS
7/27/2022 1:50 PM 10 1.28 8.72 8.58 7.30 87.60 4921.75 4923.03 4913.03 4914.45 4917.75 HDS
Installed By: EGS (AESI)
Groundwater Monitoring Results: MW-6
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027
Location: See well location map
Date Installed: March 11 and 14, 2022
4912
4914
4916
4918
4920
4922
4924
3/15/2022 4/4/2022 4/24/2022 5/14/2022 6/3/2022 6/23/2022 7/13/2022 8/2/2022 8/22/2022 9/11/2022 10/1/2022ELEVATION (FT)DATE
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY (PROJECT 22-027)MONITOR WELL 6
Ground Surface Elevation Top oF Casing Elevation Groundwater Elevation Bottom of Casing Elevation 4' of Separation from GSE
NOTES:
If the well is dry, graph shows the groundwater at bottom of the well casing.
Ground Surface Elevation and Top of Casing provided by Stahly Engineering on 3/25/2022
All measurements for this well are in reference to the elevations provided by Stahly Engineering.
Total Well Well Measure Depth to Top Bottom 4'
Well Casing Casing from T.O.C.GW Depth to Ground of of GW below Measured
Date Time Casing Height Bury to GW Below GW Surface Casing Casing Elev.Ground by
Length Depth Ground Elev.Elev.Elev.Surface
(ft)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)(inches)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)
3/25/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.50 8.50 7.32 5.82 69.84 4917.27 4918.77 4908.77 4911.45 4913.27 JGE
4/1/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.50 8.50 7.26 5.76 69.12 4917.27 4918.77 4908.77 4911.51 4913.27 JGE
4/6/2022 12:00 PM 10 1.50 8.50 7.44 5.94 71.28 4917.27 4918.77 4908.77 4911.33 4913.27 JGE
4/12/2022 3:45 PM 10 1.50 8.50 7.53 6.03 72.36 4917.27 4918.77 4908.77 4911.24 4913.27 ORB
4/19/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.50 8.50 7.60 6.10 73.20 4917.27 4918.77 4908.77 4911.17 4913.27 ORB
4/26/2022 11:30 AM 10 1.50 8.50 6.88 5.38 64.56 4917.27 4918.77 4908.77 4911.89 4913.27 ORB
5/4/2022 9:00 AM 10 1.50 8.50 6.10 4.60 55.20 4917.27 4918.77 4908.77 4912.67 4913.27 ORB
5/10/2022 12:40 PM 10 1.50 8.50 6.02 4.52 54.24 4917.27 4918.77 4908.77 4912.75 4913.27 ORB
5/17/2022 3:30 PM 10 1.50 8.50 5.74 4.24 50.88 4917.27 4918.77 4908.77 4913.03 4913.27 JGE
5/23/2022 12:45 PM 10 1.50 8.50 6.05 4.55 54.60 4917.27 4918.77 4908.77 4912.72 4913.27 ORB
5/31/2022 1:15 PM 10 1.50 8.50 4.90 3.40 40.80 4917.27 4918.77 4908.77 4913.87 4913.27 ORB
6/8/2022 4:15 PM 10 1.50 8.50 5.16 3.66 43.92 4917.27 4918.77 4908.77 4913.61 4913.27 ORB
6/15/2022 1:20 PM 10 1.50 8.50 5.70 4.20 50.40 4917.27 4918.77 4908.77 4913.07 4913.27 ORB
6/22/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.50 8.50 6.31 4.81 57.72 4917.27 4918.77 4908.77 4912.46 4913.27 ORB
6/29/2022 2:40 PM 10 1.50 8.50 7.02 5.52 66.24 4917.27 4918.77 4908.77 4911.75 4913.27 ORB
7/6/2022 3:40 PM 10 1.50 8.50 6.97 5.47 65.64 4917.27 4918.77 4908.77 4911.80 4913.27 ORB
7/13/2022 1:45 PM 10 1.50 8.50 7.58 6.08 72.96 4917.27 4918.77 4908.77 4911.19 4913.27 HDS
7/20/2022 1:30 PM 10 1.50 8.50 7.94 6.44 77.28 4917.27 4918.77 4908.77 4910.83 4913.27 HDS
7/27/2022 1:50 PM 10 1.50 8.50 8.21 6.71 80.52 4917.27 4918.77 4908.77 4910.56 4913.27 HDS
Installed By: EGS (AESI)
Groundwater Monitoring Results: MW-7
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027
Location: See well location map
Date Installed: March 11 and 14, 2022
4908
4910
4912
4914
4916
4918
4920
3/15/2022 4/4/2022 4/24/2022 5/14/2022 6/3/2022 6/23/2022 7/13/2022 8/2/2022 8/22/2022 9/11/2022 10/1/2022ELEVATION (FT)DATE
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY (PROJECT 22-027)MONITOR WELL 7
Ground Surface Elevation Top oF Casing Elevation Groundwater Elevation Bottom of Casing Elevation 4' of Separation from GSE
NOTES:
If the well is dry, graph shows the groundwater at bottom of the well casing.
Ground Surface Elevation and Top of Casing provided by Stahly Engineering on 3/25/2022
All measurements for this well are in reference to the elevations provided by Stahly Engineering.
Total Well Well Measure Depth to Top Bottom 4'
Well Casing Casing from T.O.C.GW Depth to Ground of of GW below Measured
Date Time Casing Height Bury to GW Below GW Surface Casing Casing Elev.Ground by
Length Depth Ground Elev.Elev.Elev.Surface
(ft)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)(inches)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)
3/25/2022 2:00 PM 10 2.20 7.80 6.90 4.70 56.40 4907.18 4909.38 4899.38 4902.48 4903.18 JGE
4/1/2022 2:00 PM 10 2.20 7.80 6.93 4.73 56.76 4907.18 4909.38 4899.38 4902.45 4903.18 JGE
4/6/2022 12:00 PM 10 2.20 7.80 7.07 4.87 58.44 4907.18 4909.38 4899.38 4902.31 4903.18 JGE
4/12/2022 3:45 PM 10 2.20 7.80 7.19 4.99 59.88 4907.18 4909.38 4899.38 4902.19 4903.18 ORB
4/19/2022 2:30 PM 10 2.20 7.80 7.20 5.00 60.00 4907.18 4909.38 4899.38 4902.18 4903.18 ORB
4/26/2022 11:30 AM 10 2.20 7.80 6.44 4.24 50.88 4907.18 4909.38 4899.38 4902.94 4903.18 ORB
5/4/2022 9:00 AM 10 2.20 7.80 5.71 3.51 42.12 4907.18 4909.38 4899.38 4903.67 4903.18 ORB
5/10/2022 12:40 PM 10 2.20 7.80 5.66 3.46 41.52 4907.18 4909.38 4899.38 4903.72 4903.18 ORB
5/17/2022 3:30 PM 10 2.20 7.80 5.67 3.47 41.64 4907.18 4909.38 4899.38 4903.71 4903.18 JGE
5/23/2022 12:45 PM 10 2.20 7.80 5.98 3.78 45.36 4907.18 4909.38 4899.38 4903.40 4903.18 ORB
5/31/2022 1:15 PM 10 2.20 7.80 4.89 2.69 32.28 4907.18 4909.38 4899.38 4904.49 4903.18 ORB
6/8/2022 4:15 PM 10 2.20 7.80 5.20 3.00 36.00 4907.18 4909.38 4899.38 4904.18 4903.18 ORB
6/15/2022 1:20 PM 10 2.20 7.80 5.77 3.57 42.84 4907.18 4909.38 4899.38 4903.61 4903.18 ORB
6/22/2022 2:30 PM 10 2.20 7.80 6.16 3.96 47.52 4907.18 4909.38 4899.38 4903.22 4903.18 ORB
6/29/2022 2:40 PM 10 2.20 7.80 6.80 4.60 55.20 4907.18 4909.38 4899.38 4902.58 4903.18 ORB
7/6/2022 3:40 PM 10 2.20 7.80 6.66 4.46 53.52 4907.18 4909.38 4899.38 4902.72 4903.18 ORB
7/13/2022 1:45 PM 10 2.20 7.80 7.20 5.00 60.00 4907.18 4909.38 4899.38 4902.18 4903.18 HDS
7/20/2022 1:30 PM 10 2.20 7.80 7.50 5.30 63.60 4907.18 4909.38 4899.38 4901.88 4903.18 HDS
7/27/2022 1:50 PM 10 2.20 7.80 7.80 5.60 67.20 4907.18 4909.38 4899.38 4901.58 4903.18 HDS
Installed By: EGS (AESI)
Groundwater Monitoring Results: MW-8
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027
Location: See well location map
Date Installed: March 11 and 14, 2022
4898
4900
4902
4904
4906
4908
4910
3/15/2022 4/4/2022 4/24/2022 5/14/2022 6/3/2022 6/23/2022 7/13/2022 8/2/2022 8/22/2022 9/11/2022 10/1/2022ELEVATION (FT)DATE
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY (PROJECT 22-027)
MONITOR WELL 8
Ground Surface Elevation Top oF Casing Elevation Groundwater Elevation Bottom of Casing Elevation 4' of Separation from GSE
NOTES:
If the well is dry, graph shows the groundwater at bottom of the well casing.
Ground Surface Elevation and Top of Casing provided by Stahly Engineering on 3/25/2022
All measurements for this well are in reference to the elevations provided by Stahly Engineering.
Total Well Well Measure Depth to Top Bottom 4'
Well Casing Casing from T.O.C.GW Depth to Ground of of GW below Measured
Date Time Casing Height Bury to GW Below GW Surface Casing Casing Elev.Ground by
Length Depth Ground Elev.Elev.Elev.Surface
(ft)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)(inches)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)
3/25/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.76 8.24 6.68 4.92 59.04 4911.70 4913.46 4903.46 4906.78 4907.70 JGE
4/1/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.76 8.24 6.73 4.97 59.64 4911.70 4913.46 4903.46 4906.73 4907.70 JGE
4/6/2022 12:00 PM 10 1.76 8.24 6.88 5.12 61.44 4911.70 4913.46 4903.46 4906.58 4907.70 JGE
4/12/2022 3:45 PM 10 1.76 8.24 6.99 5.23 62.76 4911.70 4913.46 4903.46 4906.47 4907.70 ORB
4/19/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.76 8.24 7.05 5.29 63.48 4911.70 4913.46 4903.46 4906.41 4907.70 ORB
4/26/2022 11:30 AM 10 1.76 8.24 6.27 4.51 54.12 4911.70 4913.46 4903.46 4907.19 4907.70 ORB
5/4/2022 9:00 AM 10 1.76 8.24 5.62 3.86 46.32 4911.70 4913.46 4903.46 4907.84 4907.70 ORB
5/10/2022 12:40 PM 10 1.76 8.24 5.55 3.79 45.48 4911.70 4913.46 4903.46 4907.91 4907.70 ORB
5/17/2022 3:30 PM 10 1.76 8.24 5.60 3.84 46.08 4911.70 4913.46 4903.46 4907.86 4907.70 JGE
5/23/2022 12:45 PM 10 1.76 8.24 5.82 4.06 48.72 4911.70 4913.46 4903.46 4907.64 4907.70 ORB
5/31/2022 1:15 PM 10 1.76 8.24 4.87 3.11 37.32 4911.70 4913.46 4903.46 4908.59 4907.70 ORB
6/8/2022 4:15 PM 10 1.76 8.24 5.06 3.30 39.60 4911.70 4913.46 4903.46 4908.40 4907.70 ORB
6/15/2022 1:20 PM 10 1.76 8.24 5.46 3.70 44.40 4911.70 4913.46 4903.46 4908.00 4907.70 ORB
6/22/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.76 8.24 6.00 4.24 50.88 4911.70 4913.46 4903.46 4907.46 4907.70 ORB
6/29/2022 2:40 PM 10 1.76 8.24 6.59 4.83 57.96 4911.70 4913.46 4903.46 4906.87 4907.70 ORB
7/6/2022 3:40 PM 10 1.76 8.24 6.75 4.99 59.88 4911.70 4913.46 4903.46 4906.71 4907.70 ORB
7/13/2022 1:45 PM 10 1.76 8.24 7.13 5.37 64.44 4911.70 4913.46 4903.46 4906.33 4907.70 HDS
7/20/2022 1:30 PM 10 1.76 8.24 7.39 5.63 67.56 4911.70 4913.46 4903.46 4906.07 4907.70 HDS
7/27/2022 1:50 PM 10 1.76 8.24 7.64 5.88 70.56 4911.70 4913.46 4903.46 4905.82 4907.70 HDS
Installed By: EGS (AESI)
Groundwater Monitoring Results: MW-9
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027
Location: See well location map
Date Installed: March 11 and 14, 2022
4902.00
4904.00
4906.00
4908.00
4910.00
4912.00
4914.00
3/15/2022 4/4/2022 4/24/2022 5/14/2022 6/3/2022 6/23/2022 7/13/2022 8/2/2022 8/22/2022 9/11/2022 10/1/2022ELEVATION (FT)DATE
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY (PROJECT 22-027)
MONITOR WELL 9
Ground Surface Elevation Top oF Casing Elevation Groundwater Elevation Bottom of Casing Elevation 4' of Separation from GSE
NOTES:
If the well is dry, graph shows the groundwater at bottom of the well casing.
Ground Surface Elevation and Top of Casing provided by Stahly Engineering on 3/25/2022
All measurements for this well are in reference to the elevations provided by Stahly Engineering.
Total Well Well Measure Depth to Top Bottom 4'
Well Casing Casing from T.O.C.GW Depth to Ground of of GW below Measured
Date Time Casing Height Bury to GW Below GW Surface Casing Casing Elev.Ground by
Length Depth Ground Elev.Elev.Elev.Surface
(ft)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)(inches)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)
3/25/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.96 8.04 6.18 4.22 50.64 4925.16 4927.12 4917.12 4920.94 4921.16 JGE
4/1/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.96 8.04 6.13 4.17 50.04 4925.16 4927.12 4917.12 4920.99 4921.16 JGE
4/6/2022 12:00 PM 10 1.96 8.04 6.25 4.29 51.48 4925.16 4927.12 4917.12 4920.87 4921.16 JGE
4/12/2022 3:45 PM 10 1.96 8.04 6.33 4.37 52.44 4925.16 4927.12 4917.12 4920.79 4921.16 ORB
4/19/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.96 8.04 6.39 4.43 53.16 4925.16 4927.12 4917.12 4920.73 4921.16 ORB
4/26/2022 11:30 AM 10 1.96 8.04 5.74 3.78 45.36 4925.16 4927.12 4917.12 4921.38 4921.16 ORB
5/4/2022 9:00 AM 10 1.96 8.04 5.07 3.11 37.32 4925.16 4927.12 4917.12 4922.05 4921.16 ORB
5/10/2022 12:40 PM 10 1.96 8.04 4.95 2.99 35.88 4925.16 4927.12 4917.12 4922.17 4921.16 ORB
5/17/2022 3:30 PM 10 1.96 8.04 5.10 3.14 37.68 4925.16 4927.12 4917.12 4922.02 4921.16 JGE
5/23/2022 12:45 PM 10 1.96 8.04 5.31 3.35 40.20 4925.16 4927.12 4917.12 4921.81 4921.16 ORB
5/31/2022 1:15 PM 10 1.96 8.04 4.49 2.53 30.36 4925.16 4927.12 4917.12 4922.63 4921.16 ORB
6/8/2022 4:15 PM 10 1.96 8.04 4.74 2.78 33.36 4925.16 4927.12 4917.12 4922.38 4921.16 ORB
6/15/2022 1:20 PM 10 1.96 8.04 4.99 3.03 36.36 4925.16 4927.12 4917.12 4922.13 4921.16 ORB
6/22/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.96 8.04 5.46 3.50 42.00 4925.16 4927.12 4917.12 4921.66 4921.16 ORB
6/29/2022 2:40 PM 10 1.96 8.04 5.88 3.92 47.04 4925.16 4927.12 4917.12 4921.24 4921.16 ORB
7/6/2022 3:40 PM 10 1.96 8.04 6.12 4.16 49.92 4925.16 4927.12 4917.12 4921.00 4921.16 ORB
7/13/2022 1:45 PM 10 1.96 8.04 6.42 4.46 53.52 4925.16 4927.12 4917.12 4920.70 4921.16 HDS
7/20/2022 1:30 PM 10 1.96 8.04 6.69 4.73 56.76 4925.16 4927.12 4917.12 4920.43 4921.16 HDS
7/27/2022 1:50 PM 10 1.96 8.04 7.00 5.04 60.48 4925.16 4927.12 4917.12 4920.12 4921.16 HDS
Installed By: EGS (AESI)
Groundwater Monitoring Results: MW-10
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027
Location: See well location map
Date Installed: March 11 and 14, 2022
4916
4918
4920
4922
4924
4926
4928
3/15/2022 4/4/2022 4/24/2022 5/14/2022 6/3/2022 6/23/2022 7/13/2022 8/2/2022 8/22/2022 9/11/2022 10/1/2022ELEVATION (FT)DATE
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY (PROJECT 22-027)MONITOR WELL 10
Ground Surface Elevation Top oF Casing Elevation Groundwater Elevation Bottom of Casing Elevation 4' of Separation from GSE
NOTES:
If the well is dry, graph shows the groundwater at bottom of the well casing.
Ground Surface Elevation and Top of Casing provided by Stahly Engineering on 3/25/2022
All measurements for this well are in reference to the elevations provided by Stahly Engineering.
Total Well Well Measure Depth to Top Bottom 4'
Well Casing Casing from T.O.C.GW Depth to Ground of of GW below Measured
Date Time Casing Height Bury to GW Below GW Surface Casing Casing Elev.Ground by
Length Depth Ground Elev.Elev.Elev.Surface
(ft)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)(inches)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)
3/25/2022 2:00 PM 10 2.30 7.70 3.03 0.73 8.76 4928.66 4930.96 4920.96 4927.93 4924.66 JGE
4/1/2022 2:00 PM 10 2.30 7.70 2.96 0.66 7.92 4928.66 4930.96 4920.96 4928.00 4924.66 JGE
4/6/2022 12:00 PM 10 2.30 7.70 3.03 0.73 8.76 4928.66 4930.96 4920.96 4927.93 4924.66 JGE
4/12/2022 3:45 PM 10 2.30 7.70 3.12 0.82 9.84 4928.66 4930.96 4920.96 4927.84 4924.66 ORB
4/19/2022 2:30 PM 10 2.30 7.70 3.12 0.82 9.84 4928.66 4930.96 4920.96 4927.84 4924.66 ORB
4/26/2022 11:30 AM 10 2.30 7.70 2.75 0.45 5.40 4928.66 4930.96 4920.96 4928.21 4924.66 ORB
5/4/2022 9:00 AM 10 2.30 7.70 2.41 0.11 1.32 4928.66 4930.96 4920.96 4928.55 4924.66 ORB
5/10/2022 12:40 PM 10 2.30 7.70 2.34 0.04 0.48 4928.66 4930.96 4920.96 4928.62 4924.66 ORB
5/17/2022 3:30 PM 10 2.30 7.70 2.42 0.12 1.44 4928.66 4930.96 4920.96 4928.54 4924.66 JGE
5/23/2022 12:45 PM 10 2.30 7.70 2.56 0.26 3.12 4928.66 4930.96 4920.96 4928.40 4924.66 ORB
5/31/2022 1:15 PM 10 2.30 7.70 2.30 0.00 0.00 4928.66 4930.96 4920.96 4928.66 4924.66 ORB
6/8/2022 4:15 PM 10 2.30 7.70 2.33 0.03 0.36 4928.66 4930.96 4920.96 4928.63 4924.66 ORB
6/15/2022 1:20 PM 10 2.30 7.70 2.42 0.12 1.44 4928.66 4930.96 4920.96 4928.54 4924.66 ORB
6/22/2022 2:30 PM 10 2.30 7.70 2.58 0.28 3.36 4928.66 4930.96 4920.96 4928.38 4924.66 ORB
6/29/2022 2:40 PM 10 2.30 7.70 2.84 0.54 6.48 4928.66 4930.96 4920.96 4928.12 4924.66 ORB
7/6/2022 3:40 PM 10 2.30 7.70 2.91 0.61 7.32 4928.66 4930.96 4920.96 4928.05 4924.66 ORB
7/13/2022 1:45 PM 10 2.30 7.70 3.17 0.87 10.44 4928.66 4930.96 4920.96 4927.79 4924.66 HDS
7/20/2022 1:30 PM 10 2.30 7.70 3.36 1.06 12.72 4928.66 4930.96 4920.96 4927.60 4924.66 HDS
7/27/2022 1:50 PM 10 2.30 7.70 3.56 1.26 15.12 4928.66 4930.96 4920.96 4927.40 4924.66 HDS
Installed By: EGS (AESI)
Groundwater Monitoring Results: MW-11
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027
Location: See well location map
Date Installed: March 11 and 14, 2022
4920
4922
4924
4926
4928
4930
4932
3/15/2022 4/4/2022 4/24/2022 5/14/2022 6/3/2022 6/23/2022 7/13/2022 8/2/2022 8/22/2022 9/11/2022 10/1/2022ELEVATION (FT)DATE
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY (PROJECT 22-027)
MONITOR WELL 11
Ground Surface Elevation Top oF Casing Elevation Groundwater Elevation Bottom of Casing Elevation 4' of Separation from GSE
NOTES:
If the well is dry, graph shows the groundwater at bottom of the well casing.
Ground Surface Elevation and Top of Casing provided by Stahly Engineering on 3/25/2022
All measurements for this well are in reference to the elevations provided by Stahly Engineering.
Total Well Well Measure Depth to Top Bottom 4'
Well Casing Casing from T.O.C.GW Depth to Ground of of GW below Measured
Date Time Casing Height Bury to GW Below GW Surface Casing Casing Elev.Ground by
Length Depth Ground Elev.Elev.Elev.Surface
(ft)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)(inches)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)
3/25/2022 2:00 PM 10 2.23 7.77 5.32 3.09 37.08 4929.66 4931.89 4921.89 4926.57 4925.66 JGE
4/1/2022 2:00 PM 10 2.23 7.77 5.46 3.23 38.76 4929.66 4931.89 4921.89 4926.43 4925.66 JGE
4/6/2022 12:00 PM 10 2.23 7.77 5.51 3.28 39.36 4929.66 4931.89 4921.89 4926.38 4925.66 JGE
4/12/2022 3:45 PM 10 2.23 7.77 5.63 3.40 40.80 4929.66 4931.89 4921.89 4926.26 4925.66 ORB
4/19/2022 2:30 PM 10 2.23 7.77 5.64 3.41 40.92 4929.66 4931.89 4921.89 4926.25 4925.66 ORB
4/26/2022 11:30 AM 10 2.23 7.77 5.17 2.94 35.28 4929.66 4931.89 4921.89 4926.72 4925.66 ORB
5/4/2022 9:00 AM 10 2.23 7.77 4.76 2.53 30.36 4929.66 4931.89 4921.89 4927.13 4925.66 ORB
5/10/2022 12:40 PM 10 2.23 7.77 4.65 2.42 29.04 4929.66 4931.89 4921.89 4927.24 4925.66 ORB
5/17/2022 3:30 PM 10 2.23 7.77 5.00 2.77 33.24 4929.66 4931.89 4921.89 4926.89 4925.66 JGE
5/23/2022 12:45 PM 10 2.23 7.77 5.17 2.94 35.28 4929.66 4931.89 4921.89 4926.72 4925.66 ORB
5/31/2022 1:15 PM 10 2.23 7.77 4.68 2.45 29.40 4929.66 4931.89 4921.89 4927.21 4925.66 ORB
6/8/2022 4:15 PM 10 2.23 7.77 4.86 2.63 31.56 4929.66 4931.89 4921.89 4927.03 4925.66 ORB
6/15/2022 1:20 PM 10 2.23 7.77 4.99 2.76 33.12 4929.66 4931.89 4921.89 4926.9 4925.66 ORB
6/22/2022 2:30 PM 10 2.23 7.77 5.30 3.07 36.84 4929.66 4931.89 4921.89 4926.59 4925.66 ORB
6/29/2022 2:40 PM 10 2.23 7.77 5.52 3.29 39.48 4929.66 4931.89 4921.89 4926.37 4925.66 ORB
7/6/2022 3:40 PM 10 2.23 7.77 5.55 3.32 39.84 4929.66 4931.89 4921.89 4926.34 4925.66 ORB
7/13/2022 1:45 PM 10 2.23 7.77 5.65 3.42 41.04 4929.66 4931.89 4921.89 4926.24 4925.66 HDS
7/20/2022 1:30 PM 10 2.23 7.77 5.70 3.47 41.64 4929.66 4931.89 4921.89 4926.19 4925.66 HDS
7/27/2022 1:50 PM 10 2.23 7.77 5.84 3.61 43.32 4929.66 4931.89 4921.89 4926.05 4925.66 HDS
Installed By: EGS (AESI)
Groundwater Monitoring Results: MW-12
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027
Location: See well location map
Date Installed: March 11 and 14, 2022
4920
4922
4924
4926
4928
4930
4932
4934
3/15/2022 4/4/2022 4/24/2022 5/14/2022 6/3/2022 6/23/2022 7/13/2022 8/2/2022 8/22/2022 9/11/2022 10/1/2022ELEVATION (FT)DATE
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY (PROJECT 22-027)
MONITOR WELL 12
Ground Surface Elevation Top oF Casing Elevation Groundwater Elevation Bottom of Casing Elevation 4' of Separation from GSE
NOTES:
If the well is dry, graph shows the groundwater at bottom of the well casing.
Ground Surface Elevation and Top of Casing provided by Stahly Engineering on 3/25/2022
All measurements for this well are in reference to the elevations provided by Stahly Engineering.
Total Well Well Measure Depth to Top Bottom 4'
Well Casing Casing from T.O.C.GW Depth to Ground of of GW below Measured
Date Time Casing Height Bury to GW Below GW Surface Casing Casing Elev.Ground by
Length Depth Ground Elev.Elev.Elev.Surface
(ft)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)(inches)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)
3/25/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.83 8.17 4.94 3.11 37.32 4918.00 4919.83 4909.83 4914.89 4914.00 JGE
4/1/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.83 8.17 5.11 3.28 39.36 4918.00 4919.83 4909.83 4914.72 4914.00 JGE
4/6/2022 12:00 PM 10 1.83 8.17 5.20 3.37 40.44 4918.00 4919.83 4909.83 4914.63 4914.00 JGE
4/12/2022 3:45 PM 10 1.83 8.17 5.31 3.48 41.76 4918.00 4919.83 4909.83 4914.52 4914.00 ORB
4/19/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.83 8.17 5.31 3.48 41.76 4918.00 4919.83 4909.83 4914.52 4914.00 ORB
4/26/2022 11:30 AM 10 1.83 8.17 4.73 2.90 34.80 4918.00 4919.83 4909.83 4915.10 4914.00 ORB
5/4/2022 9:00 AM 10 1.83 8.17 4.23 2.40 28.80 4918.00 4919.83 4909.83 4915.60 4914.00 ORB
5/10/2022 12:40 PM 10 1.83 8.17 4.14 2.31 27.72 4918.00 4919.83 4909.83 4915.69 4914.00 ORB
5/17/2022 3:30 PM 10 1.83 8.17 4.49 2.66 31.92 4918.00 4919.83 4909.83 4915.34 4914.00 JGE
5/23/2022 12:45 PM 10 1.83 8.17 4.77 2.94 35.28 4918.00 4919.83 4909.83 4915.06 4914.00 ORB
5/31/2022 1:15 PM 10 1.83 8.17 4.06 2.23 26.76 4918.00 4919.83 4909.83 4915.77 4914.00 ORB
6/8/2022 4:15 PM 10 1.83 8.17 4.24 2.41 28.92 4918.00 4919.83 4909.83 4915.59 4914.00 ORB
6/15/2022 1:20 PM 10 1.83 8.17 4.45 2.62 31.44 4918.00 4919.83 4909.83 4915.38 4914.00 ORB
6/22/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.83 8.17 5.02 3.19 38.28 4918.00 4919.83 4909.83 4914.81 4914.00 ORB
6/29/2022 2:40 PM 10 1.83 8.17 5.46 3.63 43.56 4918.00 4919.83 4909.83 4914.37 4914.00 ORB
7/6/2022 3:40 PM 10 1.83 8.17 5.68 3.85 46.20 4918.00 4919.83 4909.83 4914.15 4914.00 ORB
7/13/2022 1:45 PM 10 1.83 8.17 5.87 4.04 48.48 4918.00 4919.83 4909.83 4913.96 4914.00 HDS
7/20/2022 1:30 PM 10 1.83 8.17 5.98 4.15 49.80 4918.00 4919.83 4909.83 4913.85 4914.00 HDS
7/27/2022 1:50 PM 10 1.83 8.17 6.16 4.33 51.96 4918.00 4919.83 4909.83 4913.67 4914.00 HDS
Installed By: EGS (AESI)
Groundwater Monitoring Results: MW-13
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027
Location: See well location map
Date Installed: March 11 and 14, 2022
4908.00
4910.00
4912.00
4914.00
4916.00
4918.00
4920.00
4922.00
3/15/2022 4/4/2022 4/24/2022 5/14/2022 6/3/2022 6/23/2022 7/13/2022 8/2/2022 8/22/2022 9/11/2022 10/1/2022ELEVATION (FT)DATE
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY (PROJECT 22-027)MONITOR WELL 13
Ground Surface Elevation Top oF Casing Elevation Groundwater Elevation Bottom of Casing Elevation 4' of Separation from GSE
NOTES:
If the well is dry, graph shows the groundwater at bottom of the well casing.
Ground Surface Elevation and Top of Casing provided by Stahly Engineering on 3/25/2022
All measurements for this well are in reference to the elevations provided by Stahly Engineering.
Total Well Well Measure Depth to Top Bottom 4'
Well Casing Casing from T.O.C.GW Depth to Ground of of GW below Measured
Date Time Casing Height Bury to GW Below GW Surface Casing Casing Elev.Ground by
Length Depth Ground Elev.Elev.Elev.Surface
(ft)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)(inches)(feet)(feet)(feet)(feet)
3/25/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.93 8.07 6.25 4.32 51.84 4905.05 4906.98 4896.98 4900.73 4901.05 JGE
4/1/2022 2:00 PM 10 1.93 8.07 6.32 4.39 52.68 4905.05 4906.98 4896.98 4900.66 4901.05 JGE
4/6/2022 12:00 PM 10 1.93 8.07 6.39 4.46 53.52 4905.05 4906.98 4896.98 4900.59 4901.05 JGE
4/12/2022 3:45 PM 10 1.93 8.07 6.46 4.53 54.36 4905.05 4906.98 4896.98 4900.52 4901.05 ORB
4/19/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.93 8.07 6.54 4.61 55.32 4905.05 4906.98 4896.98 4900.44 4901.05 ORB
4/26/2022 11:30 AM 10 1.93 8.07 6.06 4.13 49.56 4905.05 4906.98 4896.98 4900.92 4901.05 ORB
5/4/2022 9:00 AM 10 1.93 8.07 5.61 3.68 44.16 4905.05 4906.98 4896.98 4901.37 4901.05 ORB
5/10/2022 12:40 PM 10 1.93 8.07 5.47 3.54 42.48 4905.05 4906.98 4896.98 4901.51 4901.05 ORB
5/17/2022 3:30 PM 10 1.93 8.07 5.57 3.64 43.68 4905.05 4906.98 4896.98 4901.41 4901.05 JGE
5/23/2022 12:45 PM 10 1.93 8.07 5.84 3.91 46.92 4905.05 4906.98 4896.98 4901.14 4901.05 ORB
5/31/2022 1:15 PM 10 1.93 8.07 5.29 3.36 40.32 4905.05 4906.98 4896.98 4901.69 4901.05 ORB
6/8/2022 4:15 PM 10 1.93 8.07 5.25 3.32 39.84 4905.05 4906.98 4896.98 4901.73 4901.05 ORB
6/15/2022 1:20 PM 10 1.93 8.07 5.50 3.57 42.84 4905.05 4906.98 4896.98 4901.48 4901.05 ORB
6/22/2022 2:30 PM 10 1.93 8.07 5.94 4.01 48.12 4905.05 4906.98 4896.98 4901.04 4901.05 ORB
6/29/2022 2:40 PM 10 1.93 8.07 6.41 4.48 53.76 4905.05 4906.98 4896.98 4900.57 4901.05 ORB
7/6/2022 3:40 PM 10 1.93 8.07 6.57 4.64 55.68 4905.05 4906.98 4896.98 4900.41 4901.05 ORB
7/13/2022 1:45 PM 10 1.93 8.07 6.84 4.91 58.92 4905.05 4906.98 4896.98 4900.14 4901.05 HDS
7/20/2022 1:30 PM 10 1.93 8.07 7.03 5.10 61.20 4905.05 4906.98 4896.98 4899.95 4901.05 HDS
7/27/2022 1:50 PM 10 1.93 8.07 7.22 5.29 63.48 4905.05 4906.98 4896.98 4899.76 4901.05 HDS
Installed By: EGS (AESI)
Groundwater Monitoring Results: MW-14
Project: West University Property
Project Number: 22-027
Location: See well location map
Date Installed: March 11 and 14, 2022
4896
4898
4900
4902
4904
4906
4908
3/15/2022 4/4/2022 4/24/2022 5/14/2022 6/3/2022 6/23/2022 7/13/2022 8/2/2022 8/22/2022 9/11/2022 10/1/2022ELEVATION (FT)DATE
WEST UNIVERSITY PROPERTY (PROJECT 22-027)
MONITOR WELL 14
Ground Surface Elevation Top oF Casing Elevation Groundwater Elevation Bottom of Casing Elevation 4' of Separation from GSE
APPENDIX D
PPaavveemmeenntt SSeeccttiioonn DDeessiiggnn
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN 1A - Arterial (S. 19th Ave.)
Project: West University
Project Number: 22-027
Date: July 11, 2022
Prepared By: Erik Schnaderbeck
Important Notes:
1) See following pages for an Explanation of the Design Input Parameters.
2) Design assumes that subgrade is stable (no rutting, deflecting, or yielding)
3) Design assumes silt/clay subgrade (CBR = 2.5)
4) Design Requirement = 2,190,000 ESALs
5) Subgrade to be covered with 315 lb. woven geotextile fabric (Mirafi 600X or equivalent).
DESIGN INPUT PARAMETERS
ESALs (total)2,430,000
Subgrade CBR, (%)2.50
Subgrade Resilient Modulus, MR (psi)3,750
Reliability, R (%)90Standard Normal Deviate, ZR -1.282
Overall Standard Deviation, So 0.45
Initial Serviceability, po 4.2
Terminal Serviceability, pt 2.0
Design Serviceability Loss, (PSI)2.2
6.38561 = left side
Required Structural Number, RSN 4.75 6.3859 = right side
(Manipulate RSN such that the left and right side of equation match.)
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient, a1 0.41
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a2 0.14
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m2 0.90
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a3 0.09
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m3 0.90
DESIGN PAVEMENT SECTION
Asphalt Concrete Thickness, D1 (in)5.0
Granular Base Course Thickness, D2 (in)6.0
Granular Sub-Base Course Thickness, D3 (in)24.0
Calculated Structural Number, CSN 4.75
(Manipulate layer thicknesses such that CSN matches or exceeds RSN.)
DESIGN EQUATION
Pavement Section Design: Page 1 of 1
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN 1B - Arterial (S. 19th Ave.)
Project: West University
Project Number: 22-027
Date: July 11, 2022
Prepared By: Erik Schnaderbeck
Important Notes:
1) See following pages for an Explanation of the Design Input Parameters.
2) Design assumes that subgrade is stable (no rutting, deflecting, or yielding)
3) Design assumes "clean" sandy gravel subgrade (CBR = 20)
4) Sub. Exc to Native Gravels and Replacement w/Pitrun Sandy Gravel.
5) Design Requirement = 2,190,000 ESALs
DESIGN INPUT PARAMETERS
ESALs (total)39,700,000
Subgrade CBR, (%)20.00
Subgrade Resilient Modulus, MR (psi)12,500
Reliability, R (%)90
Standard Normal Deviate, ZR -1.282
Overall Standard Deviation, So 0.45
Initial Serviceability, po 4.2
Terminal Serviceability, pt 2.0
Design Serviceability Loss, (PSI)2.2
7.59879 = left side
Required Structural Number, RSN 4.75 7.5990 = right side
(Manipulate RSN such that the left and right side of equation match.)
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient, a1 0.41
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a2 0.14
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m2 0.90
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a3 0.09
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m3 0.90
DESIGN PAVEMENT SECTION
Asphalt Concrete Thickness, D1 (in)5.0
Granular Base Course Thickness, D2 (in)6.0
Granular Sub-Base Course Thickness, D3 (in)24.0
Calculated Structural Number, CSN 4.75
(Manipulate layer thicknesses such that CSN matches or exceeds RSN.)
DESIGN EQUATION
Pavement Section Design: Page 1 of 1
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN 1C - Arterial (S. 19th Ave.)
Project: West University
Project Number: 22-027
Date: July 11, 2022
Prepared By: Erik Schnaderbeck
Important Notes:
1) See following pages for an Explanation of the Design Input Parameters.
2) Design assumes that subgrade is moderately stable (minor rutting, deflecting, or yielding)
3) Design assumes geogrid-reinforced silt/clay subgrade.
4) Subgrade to be covered with 8-oz nonwoven fabric + Tensar TX-190L or Mirafi RS580i
5) Improved Resilient Modulus = 8,900 psi (From Tensar+ Analysis)
6) Design Requirement = 2,190,000 ESALs
DESIGN INPUT PARAMETERS
ESALs (total)18,000,000
Subgrade CBR, (%)NA
Subgrade Resilient Modulus, MR (psi)8,900
Reliability, R (%)90Standard Normal Deviate, ZR -1.282
Overall Standard Deviation, So 0.45
Initial Serviceability, po 4.2
Terminal Serviceability, pt 2.0
Design Serviceability Loss, (PSI)2.2
7.25527 = left side
Required Structural Number, RSN 4.75 7.2567 = right side
(Manipulate RSN such that the left and right side of equation match.)
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient, a1 0.41
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a2 0.14
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m2 0.90
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a3 0.09
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m3 0.90
DESIGN PAVEMENT SECTION
Asphalt Concrete Thickness, D1 (in)5.0
Granular Base Course Thickness, D2 (in)6.0
Granular Sub-Base Course Thickness, D3 (in)24.0
Calculated Structural Number, CSN 4.75
(Manipulate layer thicknesses such that CSN matches or exceeds RSN.)
DESIGN EQUATION
Pavement Section Design: Page 1 of 1
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN 2A - Arterial (Kagy Blvd.)
Project: West University
Project Number: 22-027
Date: July 11, 2022
Prepared By: Erik Schnaderbeck
Important Notes:
1) See following pages for an Explanation of the Design Input Parameters.
2) Design assumes that subgrade is stable (no rutting, deflecting, or yielding)
3) Design assumes silt/clay subgrade (CBR = 2.5)
4) Design Requirement = 1,314,000 ESALs
5) Subgrade to be covered with 315 lb. woven geotextile fabric (Mirafi 600X or equivalent).
DESIGN INPUT PARAMETERS
ESALs (total)1,660,000
Subgrade CBR, (%)2.50
Subgrade Resilient Modulus, MR (psi)3,750
Reliability, R (%)90Standard Normal Deviate, ZR -1.282
Overall Standard Deviation, So 0.45
Initial Serviceability, po 4.2
Terminal Serviceability, pt 2.0
Design Serviceability Loss, (PSI)2.2
6.22011 = left side
Required Structural Number, RSN 4.51 6.2220 = right side
(Manipulate RSN such that the left and right side of equation match.)
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient, a1 0.41
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a2 0.14
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m2 0.90
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a3 0.09
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m3 0.90
DESIGN PAVEMENT SECTION
Asphalt Concrete Thickness, D1 (in)5.0
Granular Base Course Thickness, D2 (in)6.0
Granular Sub-Base Course Thickness, D3 (in)21.0
Calculated Structural Number, CSN 4.51
(Manipulate layer thicknesses such that CSN matches or exceeds RSN.)
DESIGN EQUATION
Pavement Section Design: Page 1 of 1
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN 2B - Arterial (Kagy Blvd.)
Project: West University
Project Number: 22-027
Date: July 11, 2022
Prepared By: Erik Schnaderbeck
Important Notes:
1) See following pages for an Explanation of the Design Input Parameters.
2) Design assumes that subgrade is stable (no rutting, deflecting, or yielding)
3) Design assumes "clean" sandy gravel subgrade (CBR = 20)
4) Sub. Exc to Native Gravels and Replacement w/Pitrun Sandy Gravel.
5) Design Requirement = 1,314,000 ESALs
DESIGN INPUT PARAMETERS
ESALs (total)27,200,000
Subgrade CBR, (%)20.00
Subgrade Resilient Modulus, MR (psi)12,500
Reliability, R (%)90
Standard Normal Deviate, ZR -1.282
Overall Standard Deviation, So 0.45
Initial Serviceability, po 4.2
Terminal Serviceability, pt 2.0
Design Serviceability Loss, (PSI)2.2
7.43457 = left side
Required Structural Number, RSN 4.51 7.4351 = right side
(Manipulate RSN such that the left and right side of equation match.)
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient, a1 0.41
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a2 0.14
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m2 0.90
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a3 0.09
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m3 0.90
DESIGN PAVEMENT SECTION
Asphalt Concrete Thickness, D1 (in)5.0
Granular Base Course Thickness, D2 (in)6.0
Granular Sub-Base Course Thickness, D3 (in)21.0
Calculated Structural Number, CSN 4.51
(Manipulate layer thicknesses such that CSN matches or exceeds RSN.)
DESIGN EQUATION
Pavement Section Design: Page 1 of 1
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN 2C - Arterial (Kagy Blvd.)
Project: West University
Project Number: 22-027
Date: July 11, 2022
Prepared By: Erik Schnaderbeck
Important Notes:
1) See following pages for an Explanation of the Design Input Parameters.
2) Design assumes that subgrade is moderately stable (minor rutting, deflecting, or yielding)
3) Design assumes geogrid-reinforced silt/clay subgrade.
4) Subgrade to be covered with 8-oz nonwoven fabric + Tensar TX-190L or Mirafi RS580i
5) Improved Resilient Modulus = 8,900 psi (From Tensar+ Analysis)
6) Design Requirement = 1,314,000 ESALs
DESIGN INPUT PARAMETERS
ESALs (total)12,400,000
Subgrade CBR, (%)NA
Subgrade Resilient Modulus, MR (psi)8,900
Reliability, R (%)90Standard Normal Deviate, ZR -1.282
Overall Standard Deviation, So 0.45
Initial Serviceability, po 4.2
Terminal Serviceability, pt 2.0
Design Serviceability Loss, (PSI)2.2
7.09342 = left side
Required Structural Number, RSN 4.51 7.0928 = right side
(Manipulate RSN such that the left and right side of equation match.)
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient, a1 0.41
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a2 0.14
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m2 0.90
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a3 0.09
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m3 0.90
DESIGN PAVEMENT SECTION
Asphalt Concrete Thickness, D1 (in)5.0
Granular Base Course Thickness, D2 (in)6.0
Granular Sub-Base Course Thickness, D3 (in)21.0
Calculated Structural Number, CSN 4.51
(Manipulate layer thicknesses such that CSN matches or exceeds RSN.)
DESIGN EQUATION
Pavement Section Design: Page 1 of 1
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN 3A - City Collector (Stucky Road)
Project: West University
Project Number: 22-027
Date: July 11, 2022
Prepared By: Erik Schnaderbeck
Important Notes:
1) See following pages for an Explanation of the Design Input Parameters.
2) Design assumes that subgrade is stable (no rutting, deflecting, or yielding)
3) Design assumes silt/clay subgrade (CBR = 2.5)
4) Design Requirement = 1,051,200 ESALs
5) Subgrade to be covered with 315 lb. woven geotextile fabric (Mirafi 600X or equivalent).
DESIGN INPUT PARAMETERS
ESALs (total)1,260,000
Subgrade CBR, (%)2.50
Subgrade Resilient Modulus, MR (psi)3,750
Reliability, R (%)90Standard Normal Deviate, ZR -1.282
Overall Standard Deviation, So 0.45
Initial Serviceability, po 4.2
Terminal Serviceability, pt 2.0
Design Serviceability Loss, (PSI)2.2
6.10037 = left side
Required Structural Number, RSN 4.34 6.1022 = right side
(Manipulate RSN such that the left and right side of equation match.)
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient, a1 0.41
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a2 0.14
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m2 0.90
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a3 0.09
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m3 0.90
DESIGN PAVEMENT SECTION
Asphalt Concrete Thickness, D1 (in)4.0
Granular Base Course Thickness, D2 (in)6.0
Granular Sub-Base Course Thickness, D3 (in)24.0
Calculated Structural Number, CSN 4.34
(Manipulate layer thicknesses such that CSN matches or exceeds RSN.)
DESIGN EQUATION
Pavement Section Design: Page 1 of 1
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN 3B - City Collector (Stucky Road)
Project: West University
Project Number: 22-027
Date: July 11, 2022
Prepared By: Erik Schnaderbeck
Important Notes:
1) See following pages for an Explanation of the Design Input Parameters.
2) Design assumes that subgrade is stable (no rutting, deflecting, or yielding)
3) Design assumes "clean" sandy gravel subgrade (CBR = 20)
4) Sub. Exc to Native Gravels and Replacement w/Pitrun Sandy Gravel.
5) Design Requirement = 1,051,200 ESALs
DESIGN INPUT PARAMETERS
ESALs (total)20,600,000
Subgrade CBR, (%)20.00
Subgrade Resilient Modulus, MR (psi)12,500
Reliability, R (%)90Standard Normal Deviate, ZR -1.282
Overall Standard Deviation, So 0.45
Initial Serviceability, po 4.2
Terminal Serviceability, pt 2.0
Design Serviceability Loss, (PSI)2.2
7.31387 = left side
Required Structural Number, RSN 4.34 7.3152 = right side
(Manipulate RSN such that the left and right side of equation match.)
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient, a1 0.41
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a2 0.14
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m2 0.90
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a3 0.09
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m3 0.90
DESIGN PAVEMENT SECTION
Asphalt Concrete Thickness, D1 (in)4.0
Granular Base Course Thickness, D2 (in)6.0
Granular Sub-Base Course Thickness, D3 (in)24.0
Calculated Structural Number, CSN 4.34
(Manipulate layer thicknesses such that CSN matches or exceeds RSN.)
DESIGN EQUATION
Pavement Section Design: Page 1 of 1
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN 3C - City Collector (Stucky Road)
Project: West University
Project Number: 22-027
Date: July 11, 2022
Prepared By: Erik Schnaderbeck
Important Notes:
1) See following pages for an Explanation of the Design Input Parameters.
2) Design assumes that subgrade is moderately stable (minor rutting, deflecting, or yielding)
3) Design assumes geogrid-reinforced silt/clay subgrade.
4) Subgrade to be covered with 8-oz nonwoven fabric + Tensar TX-190L or Mirafi RS580i
5) Improved Resilient Modulus = 8,900 psi (From Tensar+ Analysis)
6) Design Requirement = 1,051,200 ESALs
DESIGN INPUT PARAMETERS
ESALs (total)9,400,000
Subgrade CBR, (%)NA
Subgrade Resilient Modulus, MR (psi)8,900
Reliability, R (%)90Standard Normal Deviate, ZR -1.282
Overall Standard Deviation, So 0.45
Initial Serviceability, po 4.2
Terminal Serviceability, pt 2.0
Design Serviceability Loss, (PSI)2.2
6.97313 = left side
Required Structural Number, RSN 4.34 6.9730 = right side
(Manipulate RSN such that the left and right side of equation match.)
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient, a1 0.41
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a2 0.14
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m2 0.90
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a3 0.09
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m3 0.90
DESIGN PAVEMENT SECTION
Asphalt Concrete Thickness, D1 (in)4.0
Granular Base Course Thickness, D2 (in)6.0
Granular Sub-Base Course Thickness, D3 (in)24.0
Calculated Structural Number, CSN 4.34
(Manipulate layer thicknesses such that CSN matches or exceeds RSN.)
DESIGN EQUATION
Pavement Section Design: Page 1 of 1
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN 4A - City Streets
Project: West University
Project Number: 22-027
Date: July 11, 2022
Prepared By: Erik Schnaderbeck
Important Notes:
1) See following pages for an Explanation of the Design Input Parameters.
2) Design assumes that subgrade is stable (no rutting, deflecting, or yielding)
3) Design assumes silt/clay subgrade (CBR = 2.5)
4) Design Requirement = 292,000 ESALs
5) Subgrade to be covered with 315 lb. woven geotextile fabric (Mirafi 600X or equivalent).
DESIGN INPUT PARAMETERS
ESALs (total)405,000
Subgrade CBR, (%)2.50
Subgrade Resilient Modulus, MR (psi)3,750
Reliability, R (%)90Standard Normal Deviate, ZR -1.282
Overall Standard Deviation, So 0.45
Initial Serviceability, po 4.2
Terminal Serviceability, pt 2.0
Design Serviceability Loss, (PSI)2.2
5.60746 = left side
Required Structural Number, RSN 3.69 5.6099 = right side
(Manipulate RSN such that the left and right side of equation match.)
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient, a1 0.41
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a2 0.14
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m2 0.90
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a3 0.09
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m3 0.90
DESIGN PAVEMENT SECTION
Asphalt Concrete Thickness, D1 (in)3.0
Granular Base Course Thickness, D2 (in)6.0
Granular Sub-Base Course Thickness, D3 (in)21.0
Calculated Structural Number, CSN 3.69
(Manipulate layer thicknesses such that CSN matches or exceeds RSN.)
DESIGN EQUATION
Pavement Section Design: Page 1 of 1
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN 4B - City Streets
Project: West University
Project Number: 22-027
Date: July 11, 2022
Prepared By: Erik Schnaderbeck
Important Notes:
1) See following pages for an Explanation of the Design Input Parameters.
2) Design assumes that subgrade is stable (no rutting, deflecting, or yielding)
3) Design assumes "clean" sandy gravel subgrade (CBR = 20)
4) Sub. Exc to Native Gravels and Replacement w/Pitrun Sandy Gravel.
5) Design Requirement = 292,000 ESALs
DESIGN INPUT PARAMETERS
ESALs (total)6,650,000
Subgrade CBR, (%)20.00
Subgrade Resilient Modulus, MR (psi)12,500
Reliability, R (%)90Standard Normal Deviate, ZR -1.282
Overall Standard Deviation, So 0.45
Initial Serviceability, po 4.2
Terminal Serviceability, pt 2.0
Design Serviceability Loss, (PSI)2.2
6.82282 = left side
Required Structural Number, RSN 3.69 6.8230 = right side
(Manipulate RSN such that the left and right side of equation match.)
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient, a1 0.41
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a2 0.14
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m2 0.90
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a3 0.09
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m3 0.90
DESIGN PAVEMENT SECTION
Asphalt Concrete Thickness, D1 (in)3.0
Granular Base Course Thickness, D2 (in)6.0
Granular Sub-Base Course Thickness, D3 (in)21.0
Calculated Structural Number, CSN 3.69
(Manipulate layer thicknesses such that CSN matches or exceeds RSN.)
DESIGN EQUATION
Pavement Section Design: Page 1 of 1
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN 4C - City Streets
Project: West University
Project Number: 22-027
Date: July 11, 2022
Prepared By: Erik Schnaderbeck
Important Notes:
1) See following pages for an Explanation of the Design Input Parameters.
2) Design assumes that subgrade is moderately stable (minor rutting, deflecting, or yielding)
3) Design assumes geogrid-reinforced silt/clay subgrade.
4) Subgrade to be covered with 8-oz nonwoven fabric + Tensar TX-190L or Mirafi RS580i
5) Improved Resilient Modulus = 8,900 psi (From Tensar+ Analysis)
6) Design Requirement = 292,000 ESALs
DESIGN INPUT PARAMETERS
ESALs (total)3,020,000
Subgrade CBR, (%)NA
Subgrade Resilient Modulus, MR (psi)8,900
Reliability, R (%)90Standard Normal Deviate, ZR -1.282
Overall Standard Deviation, So 0.45
Initial Serviceability, po 4.2
Terminal Serviceability, pt 2.0
Design Serviceability Loss, (PSI)2.2
6.48001 = left side
Required Structural Number, RSN 3.69 6.4807 = right side
(Manipulate RSN such that the left and right side of equation match.)
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient, a1 0.41
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a2 0.14
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m2 0.90
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a3 0.09
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m3 0.90
DESIGN PAVEMENT SECTION
Asphalt Concrete Thickness, D1 (in)3.0
Granular Base Course Thickness, D2 (in)6.0
Granular Sub-Base Course Thickness, D3 (in)21.0
Calculated Structural Number, CSN 3.69
(Manipulate layer thicknesses such that CSN matches or exceeds RSN.)
DESIGN EQUATION
Pavement Section Design: Page 1 of 1
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN 5A - Private Drives
Project: West University
Project Number: 22-027
Date: July 11, 2022
Prepared By: Erik Schnaderbeck
Important Notes:
1) See following pages for an Explanation of the Design Input Parameters.
2) Design assumes that subgrade is stable (no rutting, deflecting, or yielding)
3) Design assumes silt/clay subgrade (CBR = 2.5)
4) Design Requirement = min. 50,000 ESALs (Used 150,000 ESALs for Construction)
5) Subgrade to be covered with 315 lb. woven geotextile fabric (Mirafi 600X or equivalent).
DESIGN INPUT PARAMETERS
ESALs (total)155,000
Subgrade CBR, (%)2.50
Subgrade Resilient Modulus, MR (psi)3,750
Reliability, R (%)90Standard Normal Deviate, ZR -1.282
Overall Standard Deviation, So 0.45
Initial Serviceability, po 4.2
Terminal Serviceability, pt 2.0
Design Serviceability Loss, (PSI)2.2
5.19033 = left side
Required Structural Number, RSN 3.20 5.1927 = right side
(Manipulate RSN such that the left and right side of equation match.)
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient, a1 0.41
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a2 0.14
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m2 0.90
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a3 0.09
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m3 0.90
DESIGN PAVEMENT SECTION
Asphalt Concrete Thickness, D1 (in)3.0
Granular Base Course Thickness, D2 (in)6.0
Granular Sub-Base Course Thickness, D3 (in)15.0
Calculated Structural Number, CSN 3.20
(Manipulate layer thicknesses such that CSN matches or exceeds RSN.)
DESIGN EQUATION
Pavement Section Design: Page 1 of 1
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN 5B - Private Drives
Project: West University
Project Number: 22-027
Date: July 11, 2022
Prepared By: Erik Schnaderbeck
Important Notes:
1) See following pages for an Explanation of the Design Input Parameters.
2) Design assumes that subgrade is stable (no rutting, deflecting, or yielding)
3) Design assumes "clean" sandy gravel subgrade (CBR = 20)
4) Sub. Exc to Native Gravels and Replacement w/Pitrun Sandy Gravel.
5) Design Requirement = min. 50,000 ESALs (Used 150,000 ESALs for Construction)
DESIGN INPUT PARAMETERS
ESALs (total)2,540,000
Subgrade CBR, (%)20.00
Subgrade Resilient Modulus, MR (psi)12,500
Reliability, R (%)90Standard Normal Deviate, ZR -1.282
Overall Standard Deviation, So 0.45
Initial Serviceability, po 4.2
Terminal Serviceability, pt 2.0
Design Serviceability Loss, (PSI)2.2
6.40483 = left side
Required Structural Number, RSN 3.20 6.4058 = right side
(Manipulate RSN such that the left and right side of equation match.)
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient, a1 0.41
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a2 0.14
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m2 0.90
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a3 0.09
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m3 0.90
DESIGN PAVEMENT SECTION
Asphalt Concrete Thickness, D1 (in)3.0
Granular Base Course Thickness, D2 (in)6.0
Granular Sub-Base Course Thickness, D3 (in)15.0
Calculated Structural Number, CSN 3.20
(Manipulate layer thicknesses such that CSN matches or exceeds RSN.)
DESIGN EQUATION
Pavement Section Design: Page 1 of 1
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN 5C - Private Drives
Project: West University
Project Number: 22-027
Date: July 11, 2022
Prepared By: Erik Schnaderbeck
Important Notes:
1) See following pages for an Explanation of the Design Input Parameters.
2) Design assumes that subgrade is moderately stable (minor rutting, deflecting, or yielding)
3) Design assumes geogrid-reinforced silt/clay subgrade.
4) Subgrade to be covered with 8-oz nonwoven fabric + Tensar TX-190L or Mirafi RS580i
5) Improved Resilient Modulus = 8,900 psi (From Tensar+ Analysis)
6) Design Requirement = min. 50,000 ESALs (Used 150,000 ESALs for Construction)
DESIGN INPUT PARAMETERS
ESALs (total)1,150,000
Subgrade CBR, (%)NA
Subgrade Resilient Modulus, MR (psi)8,900
Reliability, R (%)90Standard Normal Deviate, ZR -1.282
Overall Standard Deviation, So 0.45
Initial Serviceability, po 4.2
Terminal Serviceability, pt 2.0
Design Serviceability Loss, (PSI)2.2
6.0607 = left side
Required Structural Number, RSN 3.20 6.0636 = right side
(Manipulate RSN such that the left and right side of equation match.)
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient, a1 0.41
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a2 0.14
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m2 0.90
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a3 0.09
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m3 0.90
DESIGN PAVEMENT SECTION
Asphalt Concrete Thickness, D1 (in)3.0
Granular Base Course Thickness, D2 (in)6.0
Granular Sub-Base Course Thickness, D3 (in)15.0
Calculated Structural Number, CSN 3.20
(Manipulate layer thicknesses such that CSN matches or exceeds RSN.)
DESIGN EQUATION
Pavement Section Design: Page 1 of 1
Explanation of Design Input Parameters: Page 1 of 3
PAVEMENT SECTION DESIGN – WEST UNIVERSITY
(EXPLANATION OF DESIGN INPUT PARAMETERS)
Design Life (yr): 20
Required ESALs (From Stahly Eng.) – Arterial - S. 19th Avenue 2,190,000
Required ESALs (From Stahly Eng.) – Arterial - Kagy Boulevard 1,314,000
Required ESALs (From Stahly Eng.) – City Collector – Stucky Road 1,051,200
Required ESALs (From Stahly Eng.) – City Streets 292,000
Required ESALs – Private Drives (Minimum = 50,000 ESALs) 150,000
Soaked Subgrade CBR, (%) – Options A (Assumes Silt/Clay
Subgrade) 2.5
Soaked Subgrade CBR, (%) – Options B (Assumes Clean Sandy
Gravel Subgrade) 20
Subgrade Modulus, MR (psi) – Options A (Assumes Silt/Clay
Subgrade): 3,750
Subgrade Modulus, MR (psi) – Options B (Clean Sandy Gravel
Subgrade): 12,000
Subgrade Modulus, MR (psi) – Options C (Geogrid Reinforced -
Silt/Clay Subgrade – From Tensar+ Analysis) 8,900
Reliability, R (%): 90
Standard Normal Deviate, ZR: -1.282
Overall Standard Deviation, So: 0.45
Initial Serviceability, po: 4.2
Terminal Serviceability, pt: 2.0
Design Serviceability Loss, (PSI) 2.2
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient, a1: 0.41
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a2: 0.14
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m2: 0.90
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient, a3: 0.09
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient, m3: 0.90
Design Life: A design life of 20 years is typical for new asphalt projects in Bozeman
Soil Conditions: The soil conditions across the West University property are anticipated
to consist of 6 to 18 inches of topsoil overlying several feet of silt/clay overlying “clean”
sandy gravel. Groundwater is shallow across the site and may impact construction.
Explanation of Design Input Parameters: Page 2 of 3
Required ESALs (total): According to Table 18.12 in Reference 1, the estimated design
Equivalent 18,000-lb Single Axle Load (ESAL) value for roadways subjected to light
vehicle and medium truck traffic ranges from 10,000 to 1,000,000. ESAL design
requirements for various improvements were provided by Stahly Engineering in an
email dated on June 23, 2022. All pavement sections were designed to exceed the
required design ESALs. Pavement sections were provided for each specific ESAL
requirement and were numbered as “1 through 5”.
Soaked Subgrade CBR: The estimated soaked subgrade CBRs for silt/clay (Option A) and
for clean sandy gravel (Option B), are 2.5 % and 20.0%. For Option C, the pavement
section was designed off the subgrade resilient modulus (8,900 psi) calculated from
Tensar+ Software for geogrid stabilized subgrade.
Subgrade Resilient Modulus: The corresponding subgrade resilient modulus values for
a CBR of 2.5% (Option A assuming silt/clay subgrade), for 20.0 % (Option B assuming
clean sandy gravel subgrade), are 3,750 psi and 12,000 psi respectively. An improved
resilient modulus of 8,900 psi was used for Option C for stabilized subgrade comprised
of silt/clay (CBR = 2.5). The improved resilient modulus was obtained from Tensar+
design software for geogrid reinforced subgrade.
Reliability: According to Table 2.2 in Reference 2, the recommended reliability level for
local streets in urban settings ranges from 50 to 80 percent, while reliability levels for
collector and principal arterial streets are recommended to be 80 to 95 percent and 80
to 99 percent, respectively. For this project, we chose a conservative design reliability
level of 90 percent.
Standard Normal Deviate: According to Table 4.1 in Reference 2, a 90 percent reliability
value corresponds to a standard normal deviate of –1.282.
Overall Standard Deviation: According to Sections 2.1.3 and 4.3 in Reference 2, a
design value of 0.45 is recommended for flexible pavements.
Initial Serviceability: According to Section 2.2.1 in Reference 2, a design value of 4.2 is
recommended for flexible pavements.
Terminal Serviceability: According to Section 2.2.1 in Reference 2, a design value of 2.0
is suggested for roads that will be subjected to small traffic volumes; while a value of 2.5
or higher should be used when designing major highways. We selected a terminal
serviceability of 2.0.
Design Serviceability Loss: This is the difference between the initial and terminal
serviceability. Therefore, the design value shall be 2.2.
Asphalt Concrete Layer Coefficient: According to the table with the revised surfacing
Explanation of Design Input Parameters: Page 3 of 3
structural coefficients in Reference 4, a design value of 0.41 is recommended for all
asphalt plant mix grades.
Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient: According to the table with the revised
surfacing structural coefficients in Reference 4, a design value of 0.14 is recommended
for new 1.5”-minus, crushed base course gravel.
Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient: According to Table 2.4 in Reference 2, a
coefficient of 0.80 to 1.00 should be used when fair to good drainage is anticipated
within the pavement structure. We assume good drainage for this project (ie. 1.00);
however, in order to be more conservative, a value of 0.90 was selected for the design.
Sub-Base Course Layer Structural Coefficient: For this project, the sub-base course
gravel materials will consist of salvaged “clean” pitrun gravel (from the project site) as
well as imported, 6”-minus, uncrushed sandy (pitrun) gravel. According to pavement
design charts for gravelly soils, we estimated that 6”-minus pitrun will have a CBR of
between 15.0 and 20.0%, which correlates to a structural coefficient of 0.09.
Sub-Base Course Layer Drainage Coefficient: The drainage coefficients for sub-base
and base course layers are typically the same; therefore, we selected a value of 0.90 for
the design. See the base course layer drainage coefficient section for an explanation.
Reference List
1) Traffic and Highway Engineering; Nicholas J. Garber and Lester A. Hoel; 1988.
2) Design of Pavement Structures; AASHTO; 1993.
3) Pavement Design Manual; Montana Department of Transportation; 1991.
4) Pavement Design Memo; Montana Department of Transportation; May 11, 2006.
5) Geotechnical Manual; Montana Department of Transportation; July 2008.
APPENDIX E
LLiimmiittaattiioonnss ooff YYoouurr GGeeootteecchhnniiccaall RReeppoorrtt
LIMITATIONS OF YOUR GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS ARE PROJECT AND CLIENT SPECIFIC
Geotechnical investigations, analyses, and recommendations are project and client specific. Each project
and each client have individual criterion for risk, purpose, and cost of evaluation that are considered in
the development of scope of geotechnical investigations, analyses and recommendations. For example,
slight changes to building types or use may alter the applicability of a particular foundation type, as can a
particular client’s aversion or acceptance of risk. Also, additional risk is often created by scope‐of service
limitations imposed by the client and a report prepared for a particular client (say a construction
contractor) may not be applicable or adequate for another client (say an architect, owner, or developer
for example), and vice‐versa. No one should apply a geotechnical report for any purpose other than that
originally contemplated without first conferring with the consulting geotechnical engineer. Geotechnical
reports should be made available to contractors and professionals for information on factual data only
and not as a warranty of subsurface conditions, such as those interpreted in the exploration logs and
discussed in the report.
GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS CAN CHANGE
Geotechnical conditions may be affected as a result of natural processes or human activity. Geotechnical
reports are based on conditions that existed at the time of subsurface exploration. Construction
operations such as cuts, fills, or drains in the vicinity of the site and natural events such as floods,
earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations may affect subsurface conditions and, thus, the continuing
adequacy of a geotechnical report.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING IS NOT AN EXACT SCIENCE
The site exploration and sampling process interprets subsurface conditions using drill action, soil sampling,
resistance to excavation, and other subjective observations at discrete points on the surface and in the
subsurface. The data is then interpreted by the engineer, who applies professional judgment to render
an opinion about over‐all subsurface conditions. Actual conditions in areas not sampled or observed may
differ from those predicted in your report. Retaining your consultant to advise you during the design
process, review plans and specifications, and then to observe subsurface construction operations can
minimize the risks associated with the uncertainties associated with such interpretations. The conclusions
described in your geotechnical report are preliminary because they must be based on the assumption that
conditions revealed through selective exploration and sampling are indicative of actual
Allied Engineering Services, Inc. ● 32 Discovery Drive. Bozeman, Montana 59718 ● Ph: (406) 582‐0221 Page 2
conditions throughout a site. A more complete view of subsurface conditions is often revealed during
earthwork; therefore, you should retain your consultant to observe earthwork to confirm conditions
and/or to provide revised recommendations if necessary. Allied Engineering cannot assume responsibility
or liability for the adequacy of the report’s recommendations if another party is retained to observe
construction.
EXPLORATIONS LOGS SHOULD NOT BE SEPARATED FROM THE REPORT
Final explorations logs developed by the consultant are based upon interpretation of field logs (assembled
by site personnel), field test results, and laboratory and/or office evaluation of field samples and data.
Only final exploration logs and data are customarily included in geotechnical reports. These final logs
should not be redrawn for inclusion in Architectural or other design drawings, because drafters may
commit errors or omissions in the transfer process.
To reduce the likelihood of exploration log misinterpretation, contractors should be given ready access to
the complete geotechnical report and should be advised of its limitations and purpose. While a contractor
may gain important knowledge from a report prepared for another party, the contractor should discuss
the report with Allied Engineering and perform the additional or alternative work believed necessary to
obtain the data specifically appropriate for construction cost estimating purposes.
OWNERSHIP OF RISK AND STANDARD OF CARE
Because geotechnical engineering is much less exact than other design disciplines, there is more risk
associated with geotechnical parameters than with most other design issues. Given the hidden and
variable character of natural soils and geologic hazards, this risk is impossible to eliminate with any
amount of study and exploration. Appropriate geotechnical exploration, analysis, and recommendations
can identify and reduce these risks. However, assuming an appropriate geotechnical evaluation, the
remaining risk of unknown soil conditions and other geo‐hazards typically belongs to the owner of a
project unless specifically transferred to another party such as a contractor, insurance company, or
engineer. The geotechnical engineer’s duty is to provide professional services in accordance with their
stated scope and consistent with the standard of practice at the present time and in the subject geographic
area. It is not to provide insurance against geo‐hazards or unanticipated soil conditions.
The conclusions and recommendations expressed in this report are opinions based our professional
judgment and the project parameters as relayed by the client. The conclusions and recommendations
assume that site conditions are not substantially different than those exposed by the explorations. If
during construction, subsurface conditions different from those encountered in the explorations are
observed or appear to be present, Allied Engineering should be advised at once such that we may review
those conditions and reconsider our recommendations where necessary.
RETENTION OF SOIL SAMPLES
Allied Engineering will typically retain soil samples for one month after issuing the geotechnical report. If
you would like to hold the samples for a longer period of time, you should make specific arrangements to
have the samples held longer or arrange to take charge of the samples yourself.