6503 - Construction of Water & Sanitary Sewer Improvements Phase 2 For the Denton Energy Center, 4.Drawings/ Plans (6)Geotechnical Engineering Report
Denton Municipal Electric
Denton Energy Center
Denton, TX
November 4, 2016
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...................................................................................... 1
2.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE ........................................................................................ 2
3.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION ....................................................... 2
3.1 Drilling and Sampling ........................................................................................ 2
3.1.1 Field Resistivity Surveys .......................................................................... 3
3.2 Laboratory Testing ............................................................................................ 4
3.2.1 Unconfined Compression Tests ............................................................... 5
3.2.2 Overburden Swell Tests ........................................................................... 5
3.2.3 California Bearing Ratio (CBR) ................................................................ 5
4.0 SITE CONDITIONS ................................................................................................ 5
4.1 Geology ............................................................................................................. 5
4.2 Stratigraphy ....................................................................................................... 6
4.3 Groundwater ..................................................................................................... 7
4.4 Frost Depth ....................................................................................................... 9
5.0 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS .................................................................................... 9
5.1 Estimated Potential Vertical Movement (PVM) ................................................. 9
5.2 Settlement Potential .......................................................................................... 9
6.0 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................. 9
6.1 Drilled Shaft Foundations ................................................................................ 10
6.1.1 Straight-sided Drilled Shafts .................................................................. 10
6.1.2 Pier-supported Grade Beams and Suspended Floor Slabs ................... 11
6.1.3 Lateral Load Parameters ....................................................................... 12
6.1.4 Drilled Shaft Construction Considerations ............................................. 13
6.2 Shallow Foundations ....................................................................................... 14
6.2.1 Mat Foundations .................................................................................... 14
6.2.2 Shallow Footings .................................................................................... 15
7.0 EARTHWORK RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................ 16
7.1 Subgrade Modifications .................................................................................. 16
7.2 Utility Lines and Flexible Connections ............................................................ 17
7.3 Additional Considerations ............................................................................... 18
8.0 RETAINING WALLS AND BELOW GRADE WALLS ............................................ 18
8.1 Lateral Earth Pressures .................................................................................. 18
8.2 Wall Drainage ................................................................................................. 19
8.3 Wall Backfill ..................................................................................................... 20
9.0 EXCAVATIONS .................................................................................................... 20
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
10.0 DEWATERING ...................................................................................................... 20
11.0 CORROSION POTENTIAL ................................................................................... 21
12.0 PAVEMENTS ........................................................................................................ 22
12.1 General ......................................................................................................... 22
12.2 Behavior Characteristics of Expansive Soils Beneath Pavement ................. 22
12.3 Subgrade Strength Characteristics ............................................................... 23
12.4 Flexible Pavement Design and Recommendations ...................................... 23
12.4.1 Full Depth HMAC ................................................................................. 23
12.4.2 Soil Preparation for Flexible Pavements – Lime Treatment ................. 23
12.4.3 Aggregate Base ................................................................................... 25
12.5 All-weather Roads and Parking .................................................................... 26
12.6 Non-Paved Areas .......................................................................................... 26
13.0 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS / SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS ..................................... 27
14.0 LIMITATIONS ....................................................................................................... 27
APPENDIX A – BORING LOGS AND SUPPORTING DATA
APPENDIX B – ROCK CORE PHOTOGRAPHS
APPENDIX C – SOIL RESISTIVITY SURVEY REPORT
APPENDIX D – CHEMICAL TEST RESULTS
APPENDIX E – GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROCEDURES
1
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
DENTON MUNICIPAL ELETRIC
DENTON ENERGY CENTER
DENTON, TEXAS
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This report presents the results of the geotechnical investigation for the proposed Denton
Municipal Electric Denton Energy Center to be constructed just northwest of the existing
Denton Municipal Airport in Denton, Texas. The site is addressed at 8201 Jim Christal
Road, Denton, Texas. The project originally consisted of a quick start natural gas fired,
simple cycle reciprocating internal combustion engine (RICE) driven generating plant with
nominal electrical output of 110 megawatts. Since the original investigation, the center
has expanded to provide about double the output capacity. Additional investigation was
performed as a result. This new information has been incorporated into this report. The
engines will be housed in a steel, clear span, moment framed, metal sided building. The
building columns and floors are anticipated to be supported on mat foundations. In
addition to the engines and housing structure, the project will include the installation of
support facilities including fan coolers, steel supported exhaust ducts, steel stacks, steel
storage tanks and pumps, and step-up transformers. The anticipated foundation types of
the support facilities will include grade supported mat foundations, drilled shaft supported
mat foundations, drilled piers and spread footings. We understand that foundation
elements are sensitive to post-construction deflection, and all foundations shall be limited
to ½ inch differential deflection.
The site is currently generally undeveloped, and is primarily utilized for agricultural
purposes. The site is covered with bare, plowed soils and occasional vegetation. An
electrical transmission line is located to the west, an electrical substation is located to the
north and an underground natural gas line traverses the south site boundary from east to
west. Based on the Boring Location Plan by Burns McDonnell (dated October 27, 2015),
which shows topographic contours in 1-foot intervals, the site is generally flat, with
estimated total relief of approximately 2 feet. While a grading plan was not available during
our investigation, the Technical Guidelines state that minimal grading in the vicinity of the
project is anticipated, with cut/fill heights of 2 feet or less of existing grades. Photographs
showing the condition of the site during the field portion of this investigation are included
below.
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
2
2.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of this investigation was to:
Identify the subsurface soil and bedrock stratigraphy and groundwater conditions
across the proposed energy center site.
Evaluate the physical and engineering properties of the subsurface materials
present.
Provide geotechnical recommendations for use in design and construction of the
energy center facilities, and related site work.
The scope of this investigation included:
Drilling and sampling thirteen (13) borings (B1-1 through B1-13) to depths of about
10 to 50 feet for the original investigation in February and March 2016, and an
additional six (6) borings (B1 through B6) to depths of 30 feet in August 2016 for the
additional investigation. All boring locations were determined by the design team.
Perform field electrical resistivity survey as described in section 7.0 of the Technical
Guidelines.
Laboratory testing of selected soil samples obtained during the investigation.
Preparation of a Geotechnical Report, including:
o A discussion of subsurface soil and groundwater conditions.
o A discussion of the site geology and potential geologic hazards
o Recommendations for the design of energy structure foundations, alternate
foundation types, depths and allowable loading, modulus of subgrade reaction,
uplift considerations, and Seismic Site Class and spectral acceleration
parameters (2012 IBC).
o Estimates of soil movement related to settlement and heave.
o Recommendations for subgrade preparation.
o Recommendations for earthwork, including materials type(s) and backfill
requirements.
o Asphalt pavement and gravel pavement recommendations.
o Subsurface soil resistivity data for use in substation grounding grid design.
3.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION
3.1 Drilling and Sampling
The borings were advanced utilizing truck-mounted drilling equipment outfitted with
continuous flight and hollow-stem augers, as well as wet rotary bedrock coring
equipment. The approximate locations of borings explored at the site are shown on
the boring location map included in Appendix A.
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
3
Undisturbed samples of cohesive soil and certain weathered shale bedrock strata
were obtained using 3-inch diameter tube samplers that were advanced into the soils
in one (1) foot increments using the continuous thrust of hydraulic rams on the drilling
equipment (ASTM D 1587). Field estimates of soil consistency of each cohesive
samples were collected using a hand penetrometer.
Bedrock materials were periodically tested in situ using cone penetration tests to
examine the resistance of the bedrock materials to penetration and to augment
information developed during coring. In this test a 3-inch diameter steel cone is driven
by the energy equivalent of a 170-pound hammer freely falling 24 inches and striking
an anvil at the top of the drill string. Depending on the resistance of the materials,
either the number of blows of the hammer required to provide 12 inches of penetration
(in two increments of 6 inches each), or the inches of penetration of the cone due to
100 blows of the hammer are recorded (in two increments of 50 blows each).
The rock strata present were drilled and sampled using a double-tube core barrel fitted
with a tungsten-carbide, sawtooth bit (ASTM D 2113) within Borings B1-1, B1-7, B1-9
and B1-11. The lengths of core recovered (REC), expressed as a percentage of the
coring interval, and the Rock Quality Designations (RQD) are tabulated at the
appropriate depths on the Log of Boring illustrations. The RQD is the sum of all core
pieces longer than four inches divided by the total length of the cored interval. Pieces
shorter than four inches which were determined to be broken by drilling or by handling,
were fitted together and considered as one intact piece. Color photographs of each
complete box of core samples are included in the appendix of this report.
All samples were extruded in the field, described by an engineering geologist, placed
in plastic bags to minimize changes in the natural moisture condition, labeled as to
appropriate boring number and depth, and placed in protective cardboard boxes for
shipment to the laboratory.
The specific depths, thicknesses and descriptions of the strata encountered are
presented on the individual Boring Log illustrations presented in Appendix A. Strata
boundaries shown on the boring logs are approximate.
3.1.1 Field Resistivity Surveys
Field resistivity surveys were conducted originating from the Boring B1-6 location
and extending along two perpendicular lines, east-west and north-south, for total
traverse lengths of 450 feet each, as shown on the Resistivity Plan included in
Appendix A. The survey was conducted using the Wenner Four-Electrode
Method (IEEE Standard 81, Guide for Measuring Earth Resistivity, Ground
Impedance, and Earth Surface Potentials of a Ground System). The depth of
investigation is approximately equal to the “A” spacing distance.
In the Wenner configuration, a known current is applied between the outer pins
and the resultant electrical potential induced by that applied current is measured
between the inner pins. The resistance, in Ohm-cm, is obtained by achieving a
“null” reading on the readout box, reading the measured resistance and applying
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
4
a multiplier factor based on the spacing. The “A” spacing is progressively
increased until the desired depth of exploration is achieved. For this
investigation, “A” spacings ranged from 1 foot to 150 feet along each traverse.
Current generation and readings were obtained using an AEMC® Instruments
6471-B multifunction ground resistance soil resistivity tester and a MC Miller B#-
A1 multimeter. Results of the surveys are included Appendix A.
3.2 Laboratory Testing
Laboratory tests were performed in order to identify relevant engineering
characteristics of the subsurface materials encountered and to provide data for
developing engineering design parameters. Descriptions of the subsurface soil and
bedrock samples obtained during the field exploration were later refined by a
Geotechnical Engineer based on results of the laboratory tests performed.
All recovered soil samples were classified and described using procedures in general
accordance with ASTM and the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Bedrock
strata were described using standard geologic nomenclature.
In order to determine soil characteristics and to aid in classifying the soils, index
property testing was completed on samples selected by the Geotechnical Engineer.
These tests were performed in general accordance with the following test procedures.
Moisture Content ASTM D 2216
Atterberg Limits ASTM D 4318
Particle size analysis ASTM D 422 and D 1140
Additional tests were performed to aid in evaluating soil strength and volume change
characteristics, including:
Unconfined Compressive Strength of Cohesive Soil ASTM D 2166
Unconfined Compressive Strength of Rock Cores ASTM D 7012
Unconsolidated-Undrained Triaxial Compression ASTM D 2850
Direct Shear Test Under Consolidated Drained Conditions ASTM D 3080
Compaction Characteristics of Soil ASTM D 698
California Bearing Ratio ASTM D 1883
Absorption Pressure and Swell Tests ASTM D 4546
Soluble Sulfates EPA SW-846 9038
Chloride Ion, Mercuric Nitrate Method NEMI SM4500-CI-B
Redox Potential ASTM G 200
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
5
Sulfides NEMI SM4500-S-F-00
pH EPA SW-846 9045C
Electrical Resistivity NACE
The results of these tests are presented at the corresponding sample depths on the
appropriate Boring Log illustrations. The index property tests are described in more
detail in Appendix B (General Description of Procedures).
3.2.1 Unconfined Compression Tests
Unconfined compression tests were performed on selected samples
of the cohesive soil and weathered bedrock, and on selected sections
of the in-tact rock cores of the unweathered bedrock. These tests
were performed in general accordance with ASTM D 2166 for tube
samples, and ASTM D 7012 for intact rock core specimens. For each
unconfined compression test performed, a cylindrical specimen was
subjected to an axial load applied at a constant rate of strain until
failure or a large strain (greater than 15 percent) occurred.
3.2.2 Overburden Swell Tests
Selected samples of the near-surface cohesive soils were subjected to
overburden swell tests. In this test, a sample is placed in a consolidometer and
subjected to the estimated overburden pressure. The sample is then inundated
with water and allowed to swell. Moisture contents are determined both before
and after completion of the test. Test results are recorded as the percent swell,
with initial and final moisture content.
3.2.3 California Bearing Ratio (CBR)
These tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM D 1883. The test
consists of measuring the pressure required to penetrate a soil sample molded
in the laboratory according to ASTM D 698 (Standard Proctor) with a plunger of
standard area. The pressure is then recorded and divided over the pressure
necessary to obtain equal penetration into a standard crushed rock material.
4.0 SITE CONDITIONS
4.1 Geology
Based upon a review of the Geologic Atlas of Texas, Sherman Sheet, this site located
in an area underlain by soil and bedrock strata associated with the undivided Pawpaw
Formation, Weno Limestone and Denton Clay with Quaternary surficial deposits
overlying the native materials. While shown on the geologic map, Quaternary surficial
deposits were not observed within the near surface soil samples in the borings. The
subsurface materials are indicated to be lower Weno Limestone and upper Denton
Clay strata.
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
6
The Weno Limestone is generally composed of marl and limestone. It weathers to a
light brown color, with abundant clay-ironstone concretions and some thick limestone
beds in the lowermost parts. The Denton Clay is a compaction shale. It is brownish
gray and calcareous. The upper 3 to 5 feet consists of an impure limestone with
Gryphaea (oysters).
4.2 Stratigraphy
Native soils were found and no imported fill were noted. This property’s historic use
has been for agricultural purposes.
The near surface soils consist of clays (CH and CL), which range from medium stiff to
very stiff in consistency, are dark shades of brown near the surface, becoming orange-
brown and more calcareous with depth. The clay soils had Liquid Limits ranging from
34 to 60 and Plasticity Indices of 14 to 42, with 33 to 91 percent material passing the
No. 200 sieve. This level of variability is not uncommon. The native clay soils extend
to the top of a weathered limestone layer at depths of 7.5 to 12.5 feet below existing
site grades.
The weathered limestone strata varied from 8 inches to 9 feet in thickness. The
limestone materials are hard in rock hardness, highly fractured, and contain Gryphaea
(oyster) fossils. The limestone strata extend to the top of the weathered shale strata
at depths of about 10 to 18.5 feet below the existing site grades. The limestone strata
extends to the maximum depth of 10 feet within Borings B1-12 and B1-13.
The upper portions of the shales present are differentially weathered, having been
leached by percolating waters over time. The zone of weathering extends to the top
of the fresh shale strata at depths ranging from about 17 to 29.5 feet. The weathered
shale extends to the maximum depth 30 feet within Borings B1-8 and B1-10. The
weathered shale strata are very soft to soft in rock hardness, light brown and light gray
in color, and contain occasional fossils. The weathered shale material had unconfined
compressive strengths values ranging from 3,100 to 21,200 pounds per square foot
(psf).
Below the zone of weathering fresh shale strata were encountered which are soft to
medium hard in rock hardness, dark gray in color, possess a fissile structure, and
contain occasional fossils. The fresh shale material had compressive strength results
ranging from 11,700 to 35,000 psf.
A Summary of the subsurface conditions encountered during our field investigation is
provided in the tables below.
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
7
Table 1. Subsurface Stratigraphy (Original Investigation)
Boring
No.
Top of Weathered
Limestone (ft)
Top of
Weathered
Shale (ft)
Top of Fresh
Shale(ft)
Total Depth
Drilled (ft)
B1-1 10.5 17 24 50
B1-2 11.5 18.5 25.5 30
B1-3 8.5 17.5 24 50
B1-4 12.5 17.5 27 30
B1-5 10.5 11.5 26 30
B1-6 9 14.5 17 30
B1-7 10 17 19 45
B1-8 11 14.5 NE 30
B1-9 11 14 27 50
B1-10 11 12 NE 30
B1-11 9 10 29.5 45
B1-12 8.5 NE NE 10
B1-13 7.5 NE NE 10
NE – not encountered
Table 2. Subsurface Stratigraphy (Additional Investigation)
Boring
No.
Top of Weathered
Limestone (ft)
Top of
Weathered
Shale (ft)
Top of Fresh
Shale (ft)
Total Depth
Drilled (ft)
B1 12 17 20 30
B2 10.5 17 24 30
B3 11 18 27 30
B4 11 13 27 30
B5 11 15.5 27 30
B6 12 16 24 30
4.3 Groundwater
Groundwater seepage was encountered within Borings B1-2 through B1-7, B1-10 and
B1 at depths ranging from about 8.5 to 23 feet during drilling, but was not encountered
within Borings B1-8 and B2 through B6. Groundwater seepage was not encountered
in Borings B1-1, B1-9 or B1-11 prior to the introduction of water used for coring
purposes. Noticeable water circulation losses during bedrock coring were not
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
8
observed. At the completion of drilling, groundwater was observed at depths ranging
from 6 to 21 feet below the existing ground surface within Borings B1-2 through B1-7
and B1-10. The following day, groundwater was observed at depths of 4.1 to 10 feet
below the existing ground surface within Borings B1-2 through B1-7, B1-10 and B1
through B6. Groundwater levels may be anticipated to fluctuate with seasonal and
annual variations in rainfall and also may also vary as a result of development.
A Summary of the groundwater conditions encountered during our field investigation
is provided in the tables below.
Table 3. Groundwater Conditions (Original Investigation)
Boring No. Seepage During
Drilling (ft)
At Completion
(ft)
After 24 Hours
(ft)
B1-1 Dry* NM NM
B1-2 14.5 10.5 5.3
B1-3 8.5 9.5 5
B1-4 13 6 5.5
B1-5 13 12.5 4.1
B1-6 14 21 NM
B1-7 18* NM NM
B1-8 Dry 19 5.3
B1-9 Dry* NM NM
B1-10 9.5 10 5.7
B1-11 Dry* NM NM
B1-12 Dry Dry Dry
B1-13 Dry Dry Dry
NM – not measured, *Prior to introduction of drilling fluids for coring purposes
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
9
Table 4. Groundwater Conditions (Addition al Investigation)
Boring No. Seepage During
Drilling (ft)
At Completion
(ft)
After 24 Hours
(ft)
B1 23 Dry 8.5
B2 Dry Dry 7.5
B3 Dry Dry 7.5
B4 Dry Dry 7
B5 Dry Dry 8
B6 Dry Dry 10
4.4 Frost Depth
The design frost depth in Denton County is 12 inches.
5.0 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS
5.1 Estimated Potential Vertical Movement (PVM)
Potential Vertical Movement (PVM) was evaluated utilizing a variety of different
methods for predicting movement as described in Appendix B, and augmented by our
experience and professional opinion. The near surface soils are highly plastic. The
soils to depths of at least 12 feet were found range from average to very wet in
moisture condition at the time of our field investigation.
Site grading plans were not available at the time of our investigation, but the Technical
Guidelines state that minimal grading in the vicinity of the project is anticipated, with
cut/fill heights of 2 feet or less of existing grades. Based upon the results of our
analysis, the site is estimated to possess a PVM about 1 inch at the current soil
moisture conditions and when given free access to water. Should the near surface
soils dry appreciably prior to or during construction, the PVM could exceed 3 inches.
5.2 Settlement Potential
Long-term settlement of the existing soils under the anticipated loading is estimated to
range from 1 to 2 inches, assuming the soil is prepared in accordance with the
earthwork recommendations and the selected foundation type.
6.0 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS
The soils present at the site have some potential for vertical movement with changes in
soil moisture content. If potential movements on the order of one-inch can be tolerated
after earthwork preparation of native and imported soils has been completed, we
anticipate that a footing / mat foundation should perform satisfactorily for structures and
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
10
equipment pads. If post-construction vertical movements on the order of those described
cannot be tolerated, consideration should be given to a drilled shaft foundation system
with structurally-supported floor slabs / equipment pads.
Recommendations for subgrade preparation to reduce potential post-construction
movement are described in the Earthwork Section of this report. Note that a soil-supported
foundation / floor system may experience some movement with changes in soil moisture
content. Non-load bearing walls, partitions, equipment and other elements bearing on the
floor slab will reflect these movements should they occur. However, with appropriate
design, adherence to good construction practices and appropriate post-construction
maintenance, these movements can be minimized and controlled.
6.1 Drilled Shaft Foundations
Drilled straight-sided shaft foundations are currently anticipated for the exhaust stack
structure, auxiliary equipment and pipe supports, but are also well-suited for all
structures at the site. Consideration was given to underreamed shaft foundations. Due
to the generally shallow depth to rock and groundwater conditions observed, we do
not recommend the use of underreamed shafts.
6.1.1 Straight-sided Drilled Shafts
We recommend that major structure loads, conduit racks, and other movement
sensitive elements, be supported on reinforced concrete, straight-shaft drilled
piers bearing in dark gray fresh shale encountered at depths of 17 to 29.5 feet
below existing site grades. We recommend those shafts penetrate a minimum
of 1 pier diameter into the fresh shale to utilize the full amount of allowable end
bearing. Drilled shafts may be designed to transfer imposed loads into the
bearing stratum using a combination of end-bearing and skin friction.
We recommend the piers be a minimum of 18 inches in diameter. Larger
diameters may be required to accommodate anchor bolts, embed plates, or other
geometric considerations. We recommend using allowable bearing parameters
as outlined in Table 3 below. The allowable side frictions noted in Table 3 may
be taken from the top each stratum or from the bottom of any temporary casing
used, whichever is deeper, to resist both axial loading and uplift. As there is
appreciable strain-compatibility between the weathered and the fresh shales, the
side friction for both may be included in the shaft design for shafts extending into
the fresh dark gray shale. The allowable bearing values are summarized in Table
5 below.
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
11
Table 5. Drilled Shaft Allowable Bearing
Material
Depth Below
Current Grades
(ft)
Allowable Side
Friction (psf)
Allowable
End Bearing
(psf)
Weathered Light Brown and
Light Gray Shale; and
Weathered Light Brown
Limestone
10 to 18.5 2,000 10,000
Dark Gray Shale 17 to 29.5 3,200 18,000
The values outlined above should provide a factor of safety of at least 3.0 against
shear failure. Drilled straight-sided shafts designed and constructed with these
recommendations could be subjected to total and differential settlements of small
fractions of an inch.
The uplift tension forces caused by expansive near surface clays and other uplift
forces will be resisted by the structural load on the shaft plus the uplift side
resistance developed around that portion of the shaft below a depth of 10 feet
below final exterior grade. The uplift pressures due to expansive soils are
approximated to be an average of about 750 pounds per square foot of shaft
area in contact with overburden soils above a depth of 10 feet. The shafts should
be provided with sufficient steel reinforcement throughout their length to resist
the uplift pressures that will be exerted by the near surface soils. We recommend
using ½ percent of steel by cross-sectional area, and expect that will be sufficient
for this purpose (ACI 318).
6.1.2 Pier-supported Grade Beams and Suspended Floor Slabs
If movements on the order of one-inch cannot be tolerated, and in lieu of
performing subgrade improvements to reduce post-construction vertical
movement, the various elements may be constructed using structurally
suspended floor slabs or equipment pads over a void or crawl space. This
system minimizes post-construction slab movements due to swelling of on-site
soils. For a pier and grade beam foundation with a structurally suspended floor
slab, a minimum void space of 8 inches should be provided beneath all structural
elements. Two methods are typically utilized for constructing a suspended floor
slab system. These include using pan and joist type construction utilizing either
concrete or steel beams, or using cardboard carton forms to create a void.
If a pan and joist system is used, and if utility lines are suspended beneath the
slab, the void space clearance should be increased to either a minimum of 2 feet
to provide for access to these lines, or to provide a minimum of 12 inches
clearance below the lowest suspended utility, whichever is greater. Flexible
connections should be considered in the design of utilities to accommodate
potential future movements of soil supported utility lines, especially where these
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
12
lines approach or enter the stationary structure. Provisions should be made for
positive drainage of the floor slab crawl space. Sufficient ventilation should also
be provided where construction with metal beams and joists is planned to limit
corrosion of the metal components.
Structural cardboard carton forms (void boxes) may also be used to provide the
required voids beneath the floor slab and grade beams; however, trapezoidal
void boxes should not be used. Care should be taken to assure that the void
boxes are not allowed to become wet or crushed prior to or during concrete
placement and finishing operations. We recommend that masonite (1/4” thick) or
other protective material be placed on top of the carton forms to reduce the risk
of crushing the cardboard forms during concrete placement and finishing
operations. We recommend using side retainers along the grade beams to
prevent soil from infiltrating the void space after the carton forms deteriorate.
Grade beams may be earth-formed only if the sides can be cut and maintained
vertical. If sloughing occurs, or if the sides cannot be maintained vertical, the
grade beams should then be formed on both sides. The bottom of all grade
beam excavations should be essentially free of any loose or soft material prior
to the placement of concrete. All grade beams and floor slabs should be
adequately reinforced to minimize cracking as normal movements occur in the
foundation soils. Required fill under the void boxes may be any clean soil and
should be compacted in accordance with the earthwork recommendations
provided. If needed, a thin (less than 3-inches thick) leveling bed of lean concrete
or flowable fill may be used.
If grade beams are formed, the exterior side of the grade beams around the
structure should be carefully backfilled with on-site clayey soils. The backfill soils
should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density for the
backfill material as determined by ASTM D 698 (standard Proctor). The fill
should be placed at a moisture content that is at least three (3) percent above
the optimum moisture content, as determined by that same test. This fill should
extend the full depth of the grade beam and void box, and should extend a
minimum distance of one foot away from the exterior grade beam perimeter.
6.1.3 Lateral Load Parameters
The subsurface stratigraphic sections for this project are represented by borings
which are similar in composition. These stratigraphic sections were selected due
to the soil variability across the site. Geotechnical parameters recommended for
shaft design are presented in the tables below. Many of these parameters are
common among various brands of commercial lateral load analysis software.
Those shown are used in the software program LPILE 2012®. If needed, other
parameters not shown will be provided upon request. We recommend that the
lateral resistance parameters be neglected for the uppermost 2 feet of shaft to
account for seasonal and annual cyclic variations in soil desiccation and
contraction. Tables 6 through 8 below describe stratigraphic sections for the soils
and rock encountered at the site.
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
13
Table 6. Representative Soil Stratigraphy
Stratum Depth
Range (ft)
Software Material
Designation
Effective
Unit Weight
(pcf)
CLAY, dark brown, orange
brown 0.0 – 12.5 Stiff Clay w/o Free Water 105
SHALE, weathered, light gray,
light brown 15.0 – 30.0 Stiff Clay w/o Free Water 125
SHALE, dark gray 30.0 – 50.0 Weak Rock 130
Table 7. Recommended Geotechnical Parameters – Soil & Weathered Shale
Boring Material
Software
Material
Designation
Undrained
Cohesion
(psf)
Friction
Angle
Strain
Factor,
ε50
Soil
modulus,
k (pci)
CLAY, dark brown, orange
brown
Stiff Clay w/o
Free Water 1,600 NA 0.007 NA
SHALE, moderate to highly
weathered
Stiff Clay w/o
Free Water 5,600 NA 0.0045 NA
Table 8. Recommended Geotechnical Parameters – Shale
Boring Material
Software
Material
Designation
Unconfined
Compressive
Strength –
(psi)
Modulus
(psi) RQD
Strain
Factor,
krm (rock)
SHALE, dark gray Weak Rock 115 10,000 95 0.00035
6.1.4 Drilled Shaft Construction Considerations
Groundwater seepage was encountered within several borings at depths ranging
from about 8.5 to 23 feet during drilling. While caving was not observed, some
of the clay soils contained abundant gravel-sized calcareous nodules, indicating
that sloughing may at some locations during pier drilling operations (especially
near Boring B1-10 at depths of 6 to 11 feet). If the rate of groundwater seepage
precludes use of conventional pumps, temporary casing will be required. If
needed due to excessive groundwater seepage, or if sloughing of overburden
soils is observed, temporary casing should be installed to a sufficient depth to
obtain an adequate seal against sloughing or groundwater. After the satisfactory
installation of the temporary casing, the required penetration into the bearing
material may be excavated by conventional means through the casing.
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
14
The installation of all drilled piers should be observed by experienced
geotechnical personnel during construction to verify compliance with design
assumptions including: 1) verticality of the shaft excavation, 2) identification of
the bearing stratum, 3) minimum pier diameter and depth, 4) correct
reinforcement is placed, 5) proper removal of loose spoil, and 6) proper handling
of groundwater, if encountered. D&S would be pleased to provide these services
in support of this project.
During construction of the drilled shafts, care should be taken to avoid creating
an oversized cap ("mushroom") in excess of the shaft diameter, particularly near
the ground surface, that could allow expansive soils to heave against. If near
surface soils are prone to sloughing and “mushroom” formation, the tops of the
shafts should be formed above the depth of sloughing using cardboard or other
circular forms equal to the diameter of the shaft.
Concrete used for the shafts should have a slump of 8 inches ± 1. Individual
shafts should be excavated in a continuous operation and concrete placed as
soon as practical after completion of the drilling. All pier holes should be filled
with concrete within 8 hours after completion of drilling. In the event of
equipment breakdown, any uncompleted open shaft should be backfilled with
soil to be redrilled at a later date. Backfilled shafts that have reached the target
depth prior to the delay and then backfilled should be extended a minimum of 2
feet deeper than the original target depth. However, in such cases this office
should be notified to evaluate individual situations.
6.2 Shallow Foundations
If limited post-construction slab movements are acceptable, shallow foundations may
be suitable for site structures that are less movement-sensitive.
6.2.1 Mat Foundations
Grade supported mat foundations are currently anticipated for the engine hall
elements, containment structure, transformers and gas equipment. For
structural loads supported on reinforced concrete, monolithic shallow mats, the
mats should be founded in properly prepared subgrade soils at a minimum depth
of 24 inches below final exterior grades. Mat foundations should be a minimum
of 16 inches thick and should be designed using a load-deformation method.
The value of the elastic modulus (k) should be taken as 85 pci. This value is
based on an assumed plate diameter of 30 inches. With these methods, it is
customary to assume an allowable bearing capacity for the iterations. The initial
assumption should be that value given for the shallow footings. The standard
practice for design of mat foundations uses a total and differential settlement of
2-inches and 0.5-inch, respectively. If designing for less movement, that should
be compensated for in the mat design iteration process.
Mat foundations should be formed on all sides. The base of mat excavations
should not be left open overnight. Concrete or engineered fill should be placed
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
15
the same day that mats are excavated. In the event that reinforcement and
concrete cannot be placed on the day final excavation grades are achieved, the
base of the excavation may be deepened slightly and covered by a thin seal slab
of lean concrete or flowable fill to protect the integrity of the foundation bearing
material. The bottom of all mat excavations should be free of any loose or soft
material prior to the placement of concrete. All equipment pads should be
adequately reinforced to minimize cracking as noted movements may occur in
the foundation soils. We recommend that a representative of D&S observe all
mat excavations prior to placing concrete to verify the excavation depth,
cleanliness, and integrity of the mat bearing surface. Any mat excavations left
open overnight should be observed by D&S prior to placing concrete to evaluate
the depth of additional excavation required.
6.2.2 Shallow Footings
Shallow footings are anticipated for the support of the radiator structure, SCR
structure and charge air filters. For shallow footing foundations, we recommend
that structural loads for these structures be supported on reinforced concrete,
monolithic shallow isolated spread or continuous footings that are founded at a
minimum depth of 24 inches below the final exterior grade. The continuous
footings should be a minimum of 12 inches in width, whereas isolated footings
should be a minimum of 24 inches in width. The footings may be designed using
a net allowable bearing capacity 3,400 pounds per square foot when placed on
prepared subgrade as described in the Earthwork section of this report. We
recommend that shallow foundations be a minimum of 16 inches thick. The
friction coefficient against sliding should be taken as 0.36 for concrete cast
against natural or compacted soils. The values outlined above should provide a
factor of safety of at least 3.0 against shear failure. We anticipate that the total
and differential settlements will be on the order of 1-inch and 0.5-inch,
respectively.
Footings should be formed on all sides. The base of footing excavations should
not be left open overnight. Concrete or engineered fill should be placed the same
day that footings are excavated. In the event that reinforcement and concrete
cannot be placed on the day final excavation grades are achieved, the base of
the excavation may be deepened slightly and covered by a thin seal slab of lean
concrete or flowable fill to protect the integrity of the foundation bearing material.
The bottom of all footing excavations should be free of any loose or soft material
prior to the placement of concrete. All equipment pads should be adequately
reinforced to minimize cracking as noted movements may occur in the foundation
soils. We recommend that a representative of D&S observe all footing
excavations prior to placing concrete to verify the excavation depth, cleanliness,
and integrity of the footing bearing surface. Any footing excavations left open
overnight should be observed by D&S prior to placing concrete to evaluate the
depth of additional excavation required.
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
16
7.0 EARTHWORK RECOMMENDATIONS
In order to reduce Potential Vertical Movements to less than one-inch for soil-supported
equipment pads and other elements, we have the following recommendations for
subgrade preparation for the energy center.
7.1 Subgrade Modifications
Strip the site of all vegetation and remove any remaining organic or deleterious
material, including all tree stumps and root balls of existing trees under areas
that will be covered with structures and pavements.
After stripping the site, perform any required cuts.
After excavating, and prior to the placement of any grade-raise fill across non-
paved areas, scarify, rework, and recompact the upper 12 inches of the exposed
subgrade soils. The soils should be compacted to between 93 and 98 percent
of the maximum density as determined by ASTM D 698 (Standard Proctor), and
to at least plus three (+3) percentage points above its optimum moisture content.
Grade raise fill should be placed in layer-compacted lifts not exceeding 8 inches
in compacted thickness. These fills should be compacted to between 93 and 98
percent of the maximum density as determined by ASTM D 698 (Standard
Proctor), and to at least plus three (+3) percentage points above its optimum
moisture content.
After the overall site has been brought to grade, excavate equipment pad areas
to a minimum depth of three (3) feet below the bottom of mat and spread footing
foundations. The excavated materials may be stockpiled for possible future
reuse. Excavations should extend at least to the exterior mat dimensions and
then extend up to the ground surface at a slope no steeper than 1:Horizontal to
1:Vertical.
Place geogrid across bottom and up the sides of the pad excavations to at least
the bottom of mat elevation. Geogrid may be either Tensar BX-1100, Tensar
Triax 160, or approved equivalent.
Place the stockpiled excavated soil in maximum 8-inch thick compacted lifts.
Continue placing the reworked soil to a depth of 2 feet below the bottom of the
foundation. The reworked on-site fill should be compacted to between 93 and 98
percent of the maximum density as determined by ASTM D 698 (Standard
Proctor), and to at least plus three (+3) percentage points above its optimum
moisture content.
On-site soils in the borrow area (near B1-12 and B1-13) may be used for general
fill beneath the proposed structures, but may not be used in the select fill zone.
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
17
Place a minimum of 2 feet of select fill below the bottom of the mat footing
elevation. Select fill should have a liquid limit less than 35 and a plasticity index
between 6 and 18, should be essentially free of organic materials and particles
in excess of 4 inches in their maximum direction, and should have not less than
30 percent material passing a No. 200 mesh sieve. The select fill should be
placed in maximum 6-inch thick compacted lifts and compacted to at least 95
percent of the maximum Standard Proctor density and within three (-3 to +3)
percentage points of its optimum moisture content.
Alternatively, aggregate base meeting the gradation, plasticity, and durability
requirements of TxDOT Standard Specification Item 247, Type A or D, Grade 2
or better may be used in lieu of select fill materials. If used, these materials
should be placed in maximum 4-inch thick compacted lifts and should be
compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum Standard Proctor density.
Backfill around the equipment pad containment walls above the reworked on-site
soil, select fill, or aggregate base pad fill should be clay soils with a Plasticity
Index of at least 25.
Backfill should be placed in maximum 8-inch compacted lifts and should be
compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum density as determined
by ASTM D 698 (Standard Proctor), and to its optimum moisture content or
above.
Each lift of fill or backfill should be tested for moisture content and compaction
by a testing laboratory at the rate of 1 test every 3,000 square feet per lift, with a
minimum of 3 tests per lift within each pad.
7.2 Utility Lines and Flexible Connections
There is concern regarding the effect of potential vertical movements on buried utilities
at transitions from soils, to connections supported by drilled shafts. The buried utilities
are reported to range in depth from approximately 2 to 7.5 feet below grades. Flexible
connections should be used regardless of the ground penetration. In order to minimize
the potential for post-construction vertical movement to 1-inch for buried site utilities,
we recommend the following:
Excavate to a minimum depth of 8 feet or to 2 feet below bottom of pipe elevation,
whichever is deeper, and stockpile the excavated soils for subsequent trench
backfill.
After the excavations has reached target depth, begin backfilling by placing the
stockpiled soils in layer-compacted lifts required to bottom of pipe elevation.
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
18
The trench backfill should be placed in compacted lifts not exceeding 8-inches
in thickness, and should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the materials
maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698, and at a moisture content
that is at least one percent above the material’s optimum moisture content.
7.3 Additional Considerations
In order to minimize the potential for post-construction vertical movement,
consideration should be given to the following:
Final subgrade should slope away from the foundations to the maximum degree
possible. A minimum of 5 percent in the first 5 feet is recommended.
Water should not be allowed to pond next to foundations or containment walls.
8.0 RETAINING WALLS AND BELOW GRADE WALLS
As outlined in the Technical Guidelines, no significant below grade construction is
anticipated, however some short retaining walls may be required to establish required
grades. If below grade elements (including utility lines) require excavations extending to
depths greater than 4 feet below existing grade, the excavations should conform to
applicable OSHA excavation safety requirements. The soils present should be considered
as Type C soils for excavation safety purposes.
8.1 Lateral Earth Pressures
Retaining or below grade structures will be subjected to lateral earth pressures and
should be designed in consideration of these forces. Earth pressures will be
influenced by structural design of the walls, conditions of wall restraint, methods of
construction and/or compaction, the strength of the materials being restrained, and
drainage conditions.
Active earth pressure is commonly used for design of free-standing cantilever site
retaining walls and assumes some small outward rotation of the wall. Passive
pressures below the toe of walls may be taken as an equivalent fluid pressure of 200
pounds per square foot (undrained) or 275 pounds per square foot (drained) for that
portion of the wall or wall footing below a depth of 2 feet below final exterior grade.
The coefficient of friction beneath concrete footings cast on clay soils present may be
taken as 0.36. This is an ultimate value. The lateral movement required to develop
the passive pressure values above can be taken as 0.02 multiplied by the height of
the passive zone. The passive pressure values may only be used if no excavations
will be cut along the toe of the retaining walls.
The design lateral earth pressures recommended herein do not include a Factor of
Safety and do not provide for hydrostatic or dynamic pressures on the walls. Lateral
loads due to surcharge should be calculated as shown in Table 9. These loads need
to be considered where appropriate.
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
19
Table 9. Lateral Earth Pressures
Earth
Pressure
Conditions
Coefficient for
Backfill Type
Equivalent
Fluid Density
(pcf)
Surcharge
Pressure
(psf)
Earth
Pressure
(psf)
Active (Ka)
Free Draining
Granular Soil - 0.28 35 (0.28) S1 (35) H2
On-Site Soils - 0.55 68 (0.55) S1 (68) H2
At-Rest (Ko)
Free Draining
Granular Soil - 0.44 55 (0.44) S1 (55) H2
On-Site Soils - 0.71 88 (0.71) S1 (88) H2
Notes: (1) S = surcharge pressure
(2) H = wall height
Applicable conditions to Table 7 above include:
For active earth pressure, wall must rotate about base, with top lateral
movements of about 0.002 H to 0.004 H for granular backfill, and about 0.02H to
0.04H for cohesive backfill, where H is wall height
Uniform surcharge, where S is surcharge pressure
A maximum in situ soil total unit weight of 125 pcf
Horizontal backfill, compacted as described in later sections
No loading contribution from compaction equipment
No loading present from nearby footings or slabs
Positive drainage is provided behind all below-grade walls to preclude
development of hydrostatic pressures
8.2 Wall Drainage
Positive drainage should be provided behind the below grade structures to preclude
development of hydrostatic pressure behind the walls, and to prevent saturation of
backfill and foundation soils. We recommend using a vertical wall drainage layer
immediately behind the wall to control groundwater when fine-grained soils are used
as backfill. If free-draining sand or gravel is utilized as backfill behind the wall, a
vertical drainage layer is not required. Free-draining backfill should meet the
requirements of ASTM D 448, size numbers 57, 6, 67, 7, 8, 89, 9, or 10. A minimum
2-foot thick backfill cap utilizing on-site clays with a PI of at least 25 should be placed
over the wall backfill from the outer edge of the wall excavation to a distance of at least
five (5) feet beyond the wall excavation limits in order to minimize water infiltration into
the wall backfill. Filter fabric should be placed between free-draining backfill and on-
site retained soils, and between the free-draining backfill and the backfill cap soils.
Filter fabric should not be subject to clogging.
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
20
We recommend that a perimeter drain, such as a perforated pipe drain, be installed
along the base of the fill to rapidly remove water from behind the retaining wall. The
perimeter drain should discharge collected water at least at 5 feet away from any
structure foundations. Design of perimeter drainage systems should consider the
potential for movement due to expansive soil and should employ flexible pipe,
connections, or both.
8.3 Wall Backfill
Free-draining backfill materials should be placed in maximum 1-foot thick loose layers
and be consolidated by use of a vibrating plates or sleds, light hand-held compactors,
or other appropriate methods to adequately consolidate the backfill. Heavy
compactors and grading equipment should not be allowed to operate within 5 feet of
the walls during backfilling to avoid developing excessive temporary or long-term
lateral soil pressures.
If on-site soils are used as backfill, these materials should be placed in maximum 6-
inch compacted lifts and be compacted to between 90 and 93 percent of the maximum
dry density as determined by ASTM D 698 and at a moisture content that is at least 3
percentage points above the optimum moisture content as determined by that same
test. A qualified geotechnical engineer or geotechnical representative should be
present to monitor backfill placement. D&S would be pleased to provide these
services in support of this project.
9.0 EXCAVATIONS
Excavations performed during site grading operations should not be difficult and will
require the use of normal construction equipment. Drilled shaft excavations also should
not be difficult, even when penetrating the bedrock limestone strata. These excavations
are typically accomplished with normal pier drilling rigs using single flight augers fitted with
“spade–type” teeth.
Excavations greater than 5 feet in height/depth should be in accordance with 29CFR 1926
Subpart P using temporary slopes as described therein or temporary shoring as
appropriate.
10.0 DEWATERING
Excavation dewatering may become crucial in deep excavations or after periods of
prolonged or heavy precipitation. We anticipate that a combination of sump pits and
trenching can adequately control the groundwater within the planned excavations. The
soils encountered at the site are susceptible to erosion through groundwater seepage and
surface water runoff. Adequate groundwater control and siltation control measures should
be maintained throughout the earthwork operations.
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
21
11.0 CORROSION POTENTIAL
Laboratory tests to assess soil corrosivity were performed on soil samples from Borings
B1-1 and B1-11. These tests include pH, chloride ion, soluble sulfates, electrical resistivity,
redox potential and sulfides. These samples were selected to be representative of the
various subsurface material types anticipated at and above the proposed pipeline depths.
A summary of the corrosion suite results are provided in Table 10 below.
Table 10. Soil Corrosion Potential/Chemical Parameters
Sample pH Chloride
Ion (ppm)
Soluble
Sulfates
(ppm)
Sulfides
(ppm)
Redox
Potential
(mV)
Electrical
Resistivity
(ohms-cm)
B1-1, 3’-6’ 8.55 7.50 <50.0 <200 248 630
B1-11, 3’-6’ 8.46 17.5 <50.0 <200 274 1210
The susceptibility of buried concrete elements to chemical attack is generally evaluated
on the basis of soil pH and water-soluble sulfate content. The pH levels (above pH = 6)
indicate a negligible potential for attack of buried concrete due to an acidic environment.
Sulfate ions can react adversely with the hydrated lime and hydrated calcium aluminate in
cement paste to form calcium sulfate and calcium sulfoaluminate, which can be
accompanied by considerable expansion and disruption of the paste matrix within porous
concrete. A concentration of soluble sulfates less than 1,000 ppm (mg/kg) is considered
to be negligible with regard to exposure of buried concrete to sulfate attack. The measured
soluble sulfate concentrations of less than 50 ppm indicate a negligible exposure for
concrete degradation.
The soil pH, resistivity, and chloride content are important in the evaluation of possible
corrosion of buried steel elements and reinforcing steel embedded in concrete exposed to
these soils. In general, the aggressiveness of soils on buried steel can be evaluated by
comparison with values summarized as follows:
Table 11. Potential of Chemical Attack of Buried Steel Elements
Soil Resistivity,
ohm-cm
Soluble Chlorides
in Soil, ppm Soil pH Corrosion
Potential
0 – 1,000 > 500 0 – 4.5 Very High
1,000 – 2,000 > 500 4.5 – 5.5 High
2,000 – 5,000 < 500 5.5 – 6.5 Moderate
> 5,000 < 500 > 6.5 Mild
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
22
Each of the columns in this table should be used independently of the others when
evaluating corrosion potential. (For example, it is not necessary to have a soil resistivity
between 0 and 1,000 ohm-cm and a pH between 0 and 4.5 to indicate a very high potential
for corrosion of steel.) The two (2) laboratory soil resistivity test results ranged from 630
to 1,210 ohm-cm. The laboratory test procedures for soil resistivity often yield results
representative of soils at a high moisture content with correspondingly lower resistance
values. The laboratory resistivity test results indicate a high to very high potential for
corrosion of buried steel elements.
In summary, the results of the soil chemistry corrosivity tests obtained to date indicate a
low potential for corrosion of buried concrete. However, the results indicate a moderate
potential for corrosion of buried steel. Corrosivity tests on additional soil samples could be
performed (upon request) for a more comprehensive evaluation of soil corrosion potential.
12.0 PAVEMENTS
We understand that final site work will consist of either asphalt or gravel surfaces. This
includes access roads and parking areas in the immediate vicinity of the engine plant and
surrounding facilities. Access roads will consist of two 12-feet wide lanes with 3-foot wide
shoulders, while the plant loop road will be 20-feet wide.
Considering the existing subsurface conditions, the earthwork recommendations
presented previously, and the foregoing discussion, our recommendations for pavements
are presented in subsequent paragraphs.
12.1 General
The pavement designs given in this report are based upon the geotechnical
information developed during this study and design criteria assumptions based on
conversations with Denton Municipal Electric personnel and the design team. The
pavement designs shown below were produced considering the pavement design
practices for rigid pavements, the guidelines and recommendations of the American
Concrete Pavement Association (ACPA) as well as our experience and professional
opinion. However, the Civil Engineer-of-Record should produce the final pavement
design and all associated specifications for the project.
12.2 Behavior Characteristics of Expansive Soils Beneath Pavement
The near surface soils for this site are somewhat expansive. These soils and have
the potential for volume change with changes in soil moisture content. The moisture
content can be maintained to some degree in these soils by covering them with an
impermeable surface such as pavement areas. However, if moisture is introduced
to the subgrade soils by surface or subsurface water, poor drainage, addition of
excessive rainfall after periods of no moisture, or removed by desiccation, the soils
can swell or shrink significantly, resulting in distress to pavements in contact with the
soil in the form of cracks and displacements. The edges of pavements are
particularly prone to moisture variations, and these areas often experience the most
distress (cracking).
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
23
In order to minimize the negative impacts of expansive soil on pavement areas and
improve the long term performance of the pavement, we have the following
recommendations:
Provide a crowned or sloped pavement to quickly shed water off the pavement
surface.
Provide the maximum practical drainage away from the pavement. A minimum
of 5% slope for the first 5 feet is considered ideal.
Avoid long areas of low slope roadway. Adjust slopes to account for the
Potential Vertical Movement.
12.3 Subgrade Strength Characteristics
Based on the testing from the investigation and support characteristics after
performing the recommended subgrade soil preparation, we recommend using a
California Bearing Ratio (CBR) value of 3.5 for the on-site dark brown clay soils and
a CBR value of 7.5 for the orange-brown clay soils for the pavement section design.
A corresponding resilient modulus of 5,000 psi may be used for the dark brown clays.
Should pavement grading reach the orange brown soils, a corresponding subgrade
modulus of 10,000 psi may be used. We also recommend a Modulus of Subgrade
Reaction (k) of 85 pounds per cubic inch (pci) for the subgrade soils (300 pci if
pavement is placed over aggregate base).
As the shear strength of soil is inversely related to the soil moisture content, we
recommend using an undrained shear strength of 1,600 psf for reworked soils
prepared as recommended herein, and when the site is graded properly to preclude
water from ponding at pavement edges.
12.4 Flexible Pavement Design and Recommendations
If utilized for this project, hot mix asphaltic concrete (HMAC) pavement should
conform to current TxDOT standards. The following subparagraphs provide
recommendations for HMAC. Actual loading conditions may require modifications.
12.4.1 Full Depth HMAC
Full-depth HMAC should consist of at least 2 inches of Type C or D surface
course over 4 inches of Type B base course as specified by TxDOT. The full-
depth asphalt should be placed over a minimum of 8 inches of lime treated
subgrade soil, or 6 inches of aggregate base.
12.4.2 Soil Preparation for Flexible Pavements – Lime Treatment
Strip the site of all vegetation and existing pavement materials to a
minimum depth of 6 inches below existing grades and remove any
remaining organic or deleterious material under the planned paved
areas, including all tree stumps and root balls of existing trees.
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
24
Cut or fill as needed to required pavement subgrade elevation. In
areas to receive fill, the fill should be placed in maximum 6-inch
compacted lifts, compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry
density, as determined by ASTM D 698 (standard Proctor), and
placed at a moisture content that is at least two percentage points
above the optimum moisture content, as determined by the same test
(≥+2%). Fill materials may be derived from on-site or may be
imported as long as the materials are essentially free of organic
materials and particles in excess of 4 inches their maximum direction.
Imported fill material should have no less than 35 percent material
passing a No. 200 mesh sieve and a Plasticity Index of no more than
30.
Mix lime slurry into the prepared subgrade soil after scarifying to a
depth of at least 6 inches. We estimate that a treated subgrade with
a minimum of 6 percent lime by dry weight measure (about 27 pounds
of lime per square yard of treated area) will be required. The actual
amount of lime should be determined by the testing lab once rough
grading is complete. The hydrated lime should be applied only in an
area where the initial mixing operations can be completed the same
working day. The area of lime treated subgrade should extend a
minimum of 18-inches beyond the back of roadway curbs or edges.
The material and hydrated lime should be thoroughly mixed to obtain
a homogeneous, friable mixture free of clods or lumps larger than
about the size of a golf ball. After initial mixing, roll the mixed material
with a suitable type and size of equipment in order to “seal-in”
moisture and minimize moisture loss. The rolled subgrade should be
left to cure from one to four days. During the curing period, the
material should be kept moist. To that end, in no case should the
subgrade surface be allowed to dry for more than 12 hours between
instances of surface moistening / wetting.
After the curing period, the subgrade should be thoroughly re-mixed
to a depth of 6 inches until the following gradational characteristics
are achieved (after the removal of non-slaking particles such as
limestone, concrete and/or asphalt fragments):
o Minimum passing 1-3/4 inch sieve = 100%
o Minimum passing no. 4 sieve = 60%
After achieving the required gradation, the treated soil-lime mixture
should then be immediately compacted to at least 95 percent of the
maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D 698 (standard
Proctor), at placed at a moisture content that is at or above the optimum
moisture content, as determined by the same test.
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
25
Water should not be allowed to pond on the treated surface. To that
end, the lime-treated subgrade surface should be shaped in a way
that will allow water to shed from one or more edges of the prepared
subgrade.
Field density and moisture content testing should be performed at
the rate of one test per 10,000 square feet in pavement areas whose
planned use will principally consist of personal vehicles, and one
test per 100 linear feet in utility trenches. For fire lanes and areas
that will be subjected to heavy vehicular traffic, the rate of testing
should be increased to one test performed per 5,000 square feet.
12.4.3 Aggregate Base
As an alternative to lime treatment, aggregate base may be placed over the
prepared subgrade in accordance with the following recommendations prior
to placing the pavement.
After stripping the site and prior to the placement of aggregate base,
the exposed subgrade beneath pavement areas should be scarified
and reworked to a depth of 12 inches, moisture added or removed
as required, and the subgrade soils recompacted to a minimum of
95 percent of the maximum dry density of the materials obtained in
accordance with ASTM D 698 (standard Proctor test) and to at least
two percentage points above the material’s optimum moisture
content (≥ 2%). The rework should extend to at least 18-inches
beyond the outside edges of curbs.
Within 24 hours of subgrade rework, begin fill operations as required
to final grade elevation. The fill soil should be placed in maximum
8-inch loose lifts and be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of
the maximum dry density of the materials obtained in accordance
with ASTM D 698 (standard Proctor test) and to at least two
percentage points above the material’s optimum moisture content
(≥ 2%).
After completing the subgrade preparation, place a minimum 4-inch
thick layer of aggregate base for parking areas and minimum 6-inch
thick layer in drive areas, fire lanes, and areas that will be subjected
to occasional truck traffic. The area of aggregate base should
extend a minimum of 18-inches beyond the back of roadway curbs
or edges of pavement.
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
26
Aggregate base should be TxDOT Type A and meet the gradation,
durability and plasticity requirements of TxDOT Item 247 Grade 1.
Aggregate base material should be uniformly compacted to a
minimum of 95% of the maximum standard Proctor dry density
(ASTM D 698) and placed at a moisture content that is sufficient to
achieve density.
12.5 All-weather Roads and Parking
For truck and trailer parking, product storage, and others areas that will be
constructed as all-weather surfaces, we have the following recommendations:
Prepare the subgrade similar to that described above for lime treatment.
Place a minimum of 10-inches of aggregate base. Aggregate base, should be
TxDOT Type A and meeting the gradation, durability and plasticity
requirements of TxDOT Item 247 Grade 1. Aggregate base material should be
uniformly compacted to a minimum of 95% of the maximum standard Proctor
dry density (ASTM D 698) and placed at a moisture content that is sufficient to
achieve density.
Place a minimum 2-inch thick surface course of clean durable gravel or
crushed stone over the compacted aggregate base surface. Suitable surface
course materials may include ASTM C 33 Types 3, 4, 5 or other similar coarse
gravel or crushed stone.
Field density and moisture content testing should be performed at the rate of
one test per 10,000 square feet in parking areas whose planned use will
principally consist of personal vehicles and one test per 100 linear feet in utility
trenches. For fire lanes and areas that will be subjected to heavy vehicular
traffic, the rate of testing should be increased to one test performed per 5,000
square feet.
12.6 Non-Paved Areas
We understand that non-paved areas within the substation footprint will receive
about 12 inches of crushed stone over the prepared subgrade. For these areas, we
recommend the following:
After the site has been brought to grade in accordance with the Earthwork
Section of this report, place a geotextile “filer fabric” between the subgrade soil
and the crushed stone to prevent soil migration into the stone
Place 12 inches of crushed stone around the paved areas as shown on the
plans.
Crushed stone should be a clean material conforming to ASTM C 33 with
particle sizes meeting materials size No. 57 or larger, or other similar coarse
gravel or crushed stone.
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
27
13.0 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS / SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS
North central Texas is generally regarded as an area of low seismic activity. Based on
the data developed, and considering the geologic conditions present, we recommend that
IBC Soil Site Class “C” be used at this site. The acceleration values below were
interpolated from published U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Maps.
Table 12. Seismic Design Parameters
Design Parameters Values
Site Class C
Spectral Acceleration for 0.2 sec Period, Ss (g) 0.111
Spectral Acceleration for 1.0 sec Period, S1 (g) 0.054
Site Coefficient for 0.2 sec Period, Fa 1.2
Site Coefficient for 1.0 sec Period, Fv 1.7
Design Spectral Acceleration for 0.2 sec Period, SDS (g) 0.089
Design Spectral Acceleration for 1.0 sec Period, SD1 (g) 0.061
Expansive soils are the principal geotechnical issue at the site. There does not appear to
be a significant hazard from slope instability, liquefaction or subsurface rupture due to
faulting or lateral spreading that would occur during earthquake motion. Landslides,
dispersive or collapsible soils, tsunamis, seiches inundation, scour and subsidence, are
unlikely at the site. Bedrock solutioning is extremely rare in the north central Texas
bedrock formations. Based on review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s
Flood Insurance Rate Map (map no. 48121C0355G, revised April 18, 2011), the site is
located within Zone X, which is defined as “areas determined to be outside the 0.2%
annual chance flood plain”. The closest creeks are located approximately 1,800 feet
northeast and 2,200 feet west of the site, therefore, flooding, inundation and scour should
not be a concern.
14.0 LIMITATIONS
The professional geotechnical engineering services performed for this project, the findings
obtained, and the recommendations prepared were accomplished in accordance with
currently accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices.
Variations in the subsurface conditions are noted at the specific boring locations for this
study. As such, all users of this report should be aware that differences in depths and
thicknesses of strata encountered can vary between the boring locations. Statements in
the report as to subsurface conditions across the site are extrapolated from the data
obtained at specific boring locations. The number and spacing of the exploration borings
were chosen to obtain adequate geotechnical information for the design and construction
of industrial structure foundations. If there are any conditions differing significantly from
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
28
those described herein, D&S should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations
contained in this report.
Recommendations contained herein are not considered applicable for an indefinite period
of time. Our office must be contacted to re-evaluate the contents of this report if
construction does not begin within a one year period after completion of this report.
The scope of services provided herein does not include an environmental assessment of
the site or investigation for the presence or absence of hazardous materials in the soil,
surface water, or groundwater.
All contractors referring to this geotechnical report should draw their own conclusions
regarding excavations, construction, etc. for bidding purposes. D&S is not responsible for
conclusions, opinions or recommendations made by others based on these data. The
report is intended to guide preparation of project specifications and should not be used as
a substitute for the project specifications.
Recommendations provided in this report are based on our understanding of information
provided by the Client to us regarding the scope of work for this project. If the Client notes
any differences, our office should be contacted immediately since this may materially alter
the recommendations.
APPENDIX A - BORING LOGS AND SUPPORTING DATA
**BORING LOCATIONS ARE INTENDED FOR GRAPHICAL REFERENCE ONLY**
N.T.S.
DENTON TEXAS
SHEET NO.
DATE DRILLED
G1
August 30 to September 20, 2016
PLAN OF BORINGS
DME DEC Additional
KEY TO SYMBOLS AND TERMS
CONSISTENCY: FINE GRAINED SOILS
CONDITION OF SOILS
SECONDARY COMPONENTS
WEATHERING OF ROCK MASS
TCP (#blows/ft)
< 8
8 - 20
20 - 60
60 - 100
> 100
Relative Density (%)
0 - 15
15 - 35
35 - 65
65 - 85
85 - 100
SPT (# blows/ft)
0 - 2
3 - 4
5 - 8
9 - 15
16 - 30
> 30
UCS (tsf)
< 0.25
0.25 - 0.5
0.5 - 1.0
1.0 - 2.0
2.0 - 4.0
> 4.0
CONSISTENCY OF SOILSLITHOLOGIC SYMBOLS
CONDITION: COARSE GRAINED SOILS
QUANTITY DESCRIPTORS
RELATIVE HARDNESS OF ROCK MASS
SPT (# blows/ft)
0 - 4
5 - 10
11 - 30
31 - 50
> 50
Description
No visible sign of weathering
Penetrative weathering on open discontinuity surfaces,
but only slight weathering of rock material
Weathering extends throughout rock mass, but the rock
material is not friable
Weathering extends throughout rock mass, and the rock
material is partly friable
Rock is wholly decomposed and in a friable condition but
the rock texture and structure are preserved
A soil material with the original texture, structure, and
mineralogy of the rock completely destroyed
Designation
Fresh
Slightly weathered
Moderately weathered
Highly weathered
Completely weathered
Residual Soil
Description
Can be carved with a knife. Can be excavated readily with
point of pick. Pieces 1" or more in thickness can be broken
by finger pressure. Readily scratched with fingernail.
Can be gouged or grooved readily with knife or pick point.
Can be excavated in chips to pieces several inches in size
by moderate blows with the pick point. Small, thin pieces
can be broken by finger pressure.
Can be grooved or gouged 1/4" deep by firm pressure on
knife or pick point. Can be excavated in small chips to
pieces about 1" maximum size by hard blows with the point
of a pick.
Can be scratched with knife or pick. Gouges or grooves 1/4"
deep can be excavated by hard blow of the point of a pick.
Hand specimens can be detached by a moderate blow.
Can be scratched with knife or pick only with difficulty.
Hard blow of hammer required to detach a hand specimen.
Cannot be scratched with knife or sharp pick. Breaking of hand
specimens requires several hard blows from a hammer or pick.
Trace
Few
Little
Some
With
Designation
Very Soft
Soft
Medium Hard
Moderately Hard
Hard
Very Hard
< 5% of sample
5% to 10%
10% to 25%
25% to 35%
> 35%
Condition
Very Loose
Loose
Medium Dense
Dense
Very Dense
Consistency
Very Soft
Soft
Medium Stiff
Stiff
Very Stiff
HardARTIFICIALAsphalt
Aggregate Base
Concrete
Fill
SOILROCKLimestone
Mudstone
Shale
Sandstone
Weathered Limestone
Weathered Shale
Weathered Sandstone
CH: High Plasticity Clay
CL: Low Plasticity Clay
GP: Poorly-graded Gravel
GW: Well-graded Gravel
SC: Clayey Sand
SP: Poorly-graded Sand
SW: Well-graded Sand
!
"
!
#$%&'()$%*++$,-)
,-)'.$/'',01/' %2
,-)'.$/'',01/' %2
3
"
!
#$%&'%-%2/(%4)++$,-)
56/-7#$%&'%-%2
/(%4)++$,-)
8%2#$%&'()$%*++$,-)
,-)'.$/'',01/' %2
,-)'.$/'',01/' %2
!
" 9
9
" 9
9
60 20 40
4,4
6,6
7,10
25,18
50=0.25"
50=0.25"
50=3.0"
50=3.5"
2.5
2.5
3.0
4.0
4.5+
4.5+
4.5+
104.2 2.9
30.4
28.6
27.0
24.3
21.3
17.9
23.9
14.8
12.0 ft
17.0 ft
20.0 ft
FAT CLAY (CH) stiff to very stiff; dark
brown, brown; trace calcareous
LIMESTONE; weathered; moderately
hard; tan, light gray
SHALE; moderately weathered; very
soft; dark gray; fissile
SHALE; fresh; soft; dark gray; fissile
S
S
S
T
S
T
S
T
S
S
T
T
T
Swell
(%)LL
(%)
PL
(%)PI
Total
Suction
(pF)
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Passing
#200
Sieve
(%)
BORING LOG
Graphic
Log
DUW
(pcf)
Unconf.
Compr.
Str (ksf)
Depth
(ft)
0
5
10
15
20
25
Atterberg Limits
Clay
(%)
B1
PAGE 1 OF 2
MC
(%)
Legend:
S-Shelby Tube
N-Standard Penetration
T-Texas Cone Penetration
C-Core
B-Bag Sample
- Water Encountered
REC
(%)
RQD
(%)
Sample
Type
CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Kevin Kavadas (D&S)
START DATE: 8/30/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Ricky Ybarra (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 8/30/2016
GROUND ELEVATION:
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21549, W97.20942
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12b
50=4.0"
50=3.0"
50=2.0"
50=3.25"
30.4 ft
SHALE; fresh; soft; dark gray; fissile
End of boring at 30.4'
Notes:
-seepage at 23 feet during drilling
-water at 8.5 feet after 24 hours
T
T
Swell
(%)LL
(%)
PL
(%)PI
Total
Suction
(pF)
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Passing
#200
Sieve
(%)
BORING LOG
Graphic
Log
DUW
(pcf)
Unconf.
Compr.
Str (ksf)
Depth
(ft)
25
30
35
40
45
50
Atterberg Limits
Clay
(%)
B1
PAGE 2 OF 2
MC
(%)
Legend:
S-Shelby Tube
N-Standard Penetration
T-Texas Cone Penetration
C-Core
B-Bag Sample
- Water Encountered
REC
(%)
RQD
(%)
Sample
Type
CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Kevin Kavadas (D&S)
START DATE: 8/30/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Ricky Ybarra (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 8/30/2016
GROUND ELEVATION:
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21549, W97.20942
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12b
50 19 31
3,5
4,7
2,5
9,91=5.75"
35,29
14,13
0.5
1.75
1.25
3.25
4.5+
3.5
4.5+
113.8 5.5
27.5
27.1
26.1
16.9
21.7
20.2
18.7
4.5 ft
10.5 ft
17.0 ft
24.0 ft
FAT CLAY (CH); soft to very stiff;
dark brown, brown; trace calcareous
nodules
FAT CLAY (CH); stiff to very stiff;
orange-brown, gray; few calcareous
nodules; trace iron stains
LIMESTONE; weathered; soft; tan,
light gray
SHALE; moderately weathered; very
soft; dark gray; fissile
SHALE; fresh; very soft to soft; dark
gray; fissile
S
S
S
T
S
T
S
T
S
S
T
T
T
Swell
(%)LL
(%)
PL
(%)PI
Total
Suction
(pF)
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Passing
#200
Sieve
(%)
BORING LOG
Graphic
Log
DUW
(pcf)
Unconf.
Compr.
Str (ksf)
Depth
(ft)
0
5
10
15
20
25
Atterberg Limits
Clay
(%)
B2
PAGE 1 OF 2
MC
(%)
Legend:
S-Shelby Tube
N-Standard Penetration
T-Texas Cone Penetration
C-Core
B-Bag Sample
- Water Encountered
REC
(%)
RQD
(%)
Sample
Type
CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Kevin Kavadas (D&S)
START DATE: 8/31/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Ricky Ybarra (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 8/31/2016
GROUND ELEVATION:
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21542, W97.21009
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12b
50=6.0"
50=2.5"
50=5.5"
50=2.0" 30.6 ft
SHALE; fresh; very soft to soft; dark
gray; fissile
End of boring at 30.6'
Notes:
-dry during drilling
-water at 7.5 feet after 24 hours
T
T
Swell
(%)LL
(%)
PL
(%)PI
Total
Suction
(pF)
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Passing
#200
Sieve
(%)
BORING LOG
Graphic
Log
DUW
(pcf)
Unconf.
Compr.
Str (ksf)
Depth
(ft)
25
30
35
40
45
50
Atterberg Limits
Clay
(%)
B2
PAGE 2 OF 2
MC
(%)
Legend:
S-Shelby Tube
N-Standard Penetration
T-Texas Cone Penetration
C-Core
B-Bag Sample
- Water Encountered
REC
(%)
RQD
(%)
Sample
Type
CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Kevin Kavadas (D&S)
START DATE: 8/31/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Ricky Ybarra (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 8/31/2016
GROUND ELEVATION:
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21542, W97.21009
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12b
53
44
17
14
36
30
4,3
8,8
9,23
28,31
50=1.5"
50=6.0"
43,57=4.0"
1.25
3.0
1.5
1.5
3.25
4.5+
97.7 4.1
29.0
26.4
23.5
25.5
20.6
20.6
5.5 ft
11.0 ft
18.0 ft
FAT CLAY (CH); medium stiff to stiff;
dark brown; trace calcareous nodules
LEAN CLAY (CL); stiff to very stiff;
orange-brown, gray, dark brown; trace
to few calcareous nodules; trace
limestone fragments
LIMESTONE; weathered; soft; tan,
light gray
SHALE; slightly to moderately
weathered; very soft; dark gray; fissile
S
S
S
T
S
T
S
T
S
T
T
T
Swell
(%)LL
(%)
PL
(%)PI
Total
Suction
(pF)
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Passing
#200
Sieve
(%)
BORING LOG
Graphic
Log
DUW
(pcf)
Unconf.
Compr.
Str (ksf)
Depth
(ft)
0
5
10
15
20
25
Atterberg Limits
Clay
(%)
B3
PAGE 1 OF 2
MC
(%)
Legend:
S-Shelby Tube
N-Standard Penetration
T-Texas Cone Penetration
C-Core
B-Bag Sample
- Water Encountered
REC
(%)
RQD
(%)
Sample
Type
CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Kevin Kavadas (D&S)
START DATE: 9/1/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Ricky Ybarra (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 9/1/2016
GROUND ELEVATION:
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21521, W97.21066
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12b
50=5.0"
50=7.0"
50=3.25"
50=1.0"
27.0 ft
30.3 ft
SHALE; slightly to moderately
weathered; very soft; dark gray; fissile
SHALE; fresh; soft; dark gray; fissile
End of boring at 30.3'
Notes:
-dry during drilling
-water at 7.5 feet after 24 hours
T
T
Swell
(%)LL
(%)
PL
(%)PI
Total
Suction
(pF)
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Passing
#200
Sieve
(%)
BORING LOG
Graphic
Log
DUW
(pcf)
Unconf.
Compr.
Str (ksf)
Depth
(ft)
25
30
35
40
45
50
Atterberg Limits
Clay
(%)
B3
PAGE 2 OF 2
MC
(%)
Legend:
S-Shelby Tube
N-Standard Penetration
T-Texas Cone Penetration
C-Core
B-Bag Sample
- Water Encountered
REC
(%)
RQD
(%)
Sample
Type
CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Kevin Kavadas (D&S)
START DATE: 9/1/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Ricky Ybarra (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 9/1/2016
GROUND ELEVATION:
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21521, W97.21066
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12b
55 17 38
4,4
10,10
9,8
20,23
17,19
1.75
2.0
1.75
3.0
4.5+
4.5+
4.5+
4.5+
103.1 4.0
27.3
26.3
25.2
22.2
17.0
16.9
19.8
6.0 ft
11.0 ft
13.0 ft
FAT CLAY (CH); stiff; dark brown,
brown; trace calcareous nodules
FAT CLAY (CH); very stiff;
orange-brown, gray, brown; trace to
little calcareous nodules and iron
stains; few limestone fragments and
fine gravel
LIMESTONE; weathered; soft; tan,
light gray
SHALE; moderately to highly
weathered; very soft; gray,
olive-green; fissile; trace iron stains
S
S
S
T
S
T
S
T
S
S
T
T
S
Swell
(%)LL
(%)
PL
(%)PI
Total
Suction
(pF)
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Passing
#200
Sieve
(%)
BORING LOG
Graphic
Log
DUW
(pcf)
Unconf.
Compr.
Str (ksf)
Depth
(ft)
0
5
10
15
20
25
Atterberg Limits
Clay
(%)
B4
PAGE 1 OF 2
MC
(%)
Legend:
S-Shelby Tube
N-Standard Penetration
T-Texas Cone Penetration
C-Core
B-Bag Sample
- Water Encountered
REC
(%)
RQD
(%)
Sample
Type
CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Kevin Kavadas (D&S)
START DATE: 8/31/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Ricky Ybarra (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 8/31/2016
GROUND ELEVATION:
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21498, W97.21012
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12b
43,57=3.0"
50=3.25"
50=2.0"
27.0 ft
30.4 ft
SHALE; moderately to highly
weathered; very soft; gray,
olive-green; fissile; trace iron stains
SHALE; fresh; soft; dark gray; fissile
End of boring at 30.4'
Notes:
-dry during drilling
-water at 7 feet after 24 hours
T
T
Swell
(%)LL
(%)
PL
(%)PI
Total
Suction
(pF)
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Passing
#200
Sieve
(%)
BORING LOG
Graphic
Log
DUW
(pcf)
Unconf.
Compr.
Str (ksf)
Depth
(ft)
25
30
35
40
45
50
Atterberg Limits
Clay
(%)
B4
PAGE 2 OF 2
MC
(%)
Legend:
S-Shelby Tube
N-Standard Penetration
T-Texas Cone Penetration
C-Core
B-Bag Sample
- Water Encountered
REC
(%)
RQD
(%)
Sample
Type
CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Kevin Kavadas (D&S)
START DATE: 8/31/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Ricky Ybarra (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 8/31/2016
GROUND ELEVATION:
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21498, W97.21012
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12b
58 18 40
4,4
4,5
10,10
8,12
50=1.75"
50=0.25"
43,57
1.25
1.5
1.25
1.5
4.5+
4.5+
2.25
95.7 2.2
28.4
23.1
26.6
18.7
19.7
5.0 ft
11.0 ft
15.5 ft
FAT CLAY (CH); medium stiff; dark
brown; trace calcareous nodules
FAT CLAY (CH); stiff to very stiff;
orange-brown, gray; few calcareous
nodules; trace iron stains
LIMESTONE; weathered; moderately
hard; tan, light gray
SHALE; moderately weathered; very
soft; dark gray; fissile
S
S
S
T
S
T
S
T
S
S
T
T
S
Swell
(%)LL
(%)
PL
(%)PI
Total
Suction
(pF)
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Passing
#200
Sieve
(%)
BORING LOG
Graphic
Log
DUW
(pcf)
Unconf.
Compr.
Str (ksf)
Depth
(ft)
0
5
10
15
20
25
Atterberg Limits
Clay
(%)
B5
PAGE 1 OF 2
MC
(%)
Legend:
S-Shelby Tube
N-Standard Penetration
T-Texas Cone Penetration
C-Core
B-Bag Sample
- Water Encountered
REC
(%)
RQD
(%)
Sample
Type
CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Miles Sorbel (D&S)
START DATE: 8/31/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Ricky Ybarra (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 8/31/2016
GROUND ELEVATION:
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21518, W97.20972
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12b
45,55=4.0"
50=3.0"
50=1.5"
27.0 ft
30.3 ft
SHALE; moderately weathered; very
soft; dark gray; fissile
SHALE; fresh; soft; dark gray; fissile
End of boring at 30.3'
Notes:
-dry during drilling
-water at 8 feet after 24 hours
T
T
Swell
(%)LL
(%)
PL
(%)PI
Total
Suction
(pF)
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Passing
#200
Sieve
(%)
BORING LOG
Graphic
Log
DUW
(pcf)
Unconf.
Compr.
Str (ksf)
Depth
(ft)
25
30
35
40
45
50
Atterberg Limits
Clay
(%)
B5
PAGE 2 OF 2
MC
(%)
Legend:
S-Shelby Tube
N-Standard Penetration
T-Texas Cone Penetration
C-Core
B-Bag Sample
- Water Encountered
REC
(%)
RQD
(%)
Sample
Type
CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Miles Sorbel (D&S)
START DATE: 8/31/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Ricky Ybarra (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 8/31/2016
GROUND ELEVATION:
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21518, W97.20972
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12b
54
44
19
14
35
30
3,5
3,3
6,9
13,18
50=2.0"
50=0.25"
50=5.0"
50=6.75"
106.7 5.9
29.9
26.5
21.3
18.9
21.9
17.0
5.0 ft
12.0 ft
16.0 ft
24.0 ft
FAT CLAY (CH); stiff to stiff; dark
brown; trace calcareous nodules
LEAN CLAY (CL); stiff to very stiff;
orange-brown, light gray, dark brown;
trace to few calcareous nodules; trace
limestone fragments
LIMESTONE; weathered; moderately
hard; tan, light gray
SHALE; moderately weathered; very
soft; dark gray; fissile
SHALE; fresh; soft; dark gray; fissile
S
S
S
T
S
T
S
T
S
S
T
T
T
Swell
(%)LL
(%)
PL
(%)PI
Total
Suction
(pF)
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Passing
#200
Sieve
(%)
BORING LOG
Graphic
Log
DUW
(pcf)
Unconf.
Compr.
Str (ksf)
Depth
(ft)
0
5
10
15
20
25
Atterberg Limits
Clay
(%)
B6
PAGE 1 OF 2
MC
(%)
Legend:
S-Shelby Tube
N-Standard Penetration
T-Texas Cone Penetration
C-Core
B-Bag Sample
- Water Encountered
REC
(%)
RQD
(%)
Sample
Type
CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Miles Sorbel (D&S)
START DATE: 8/30/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Ricky Ybarra (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 8/30/2016
GROUND ELEVATION:
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21478, W97.20939
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12b
50=5.0"
50=3.5"
50=3.5"
50=2.0"
30.3 ft
SHALE; fresh; soft; dark gray; fissile
End of boring at 30.3'
Notes:
-dry during drilling
-water at 10 feet after 24 hours
T
T
Swell
(%)LL
(%)
PL
(%)PI
Total
Suction
(pF)
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Hand
Pen. (tsf)
or
SPT
or
TCP
Passing
#200
Sieve
(%)
BORING LOG
Graphic
Log
DUW
(pcf)
Unconf.
Compr.
Str (ksf)
Depth
(ft)
25
30
35
40
45
50
Atterberg Limits
Clay
(%)
B6
PAGE 2 OF 2
MC
(%)
Legend:
S-Shelby Tube
N-Standard Penetration
T-Texas Cone Penetration
C-Core
B-Bag Sample
- Water Encountered
REC
(%)
RQD
(%)
Sample
Type
CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Miles Sorbel (D&S)
START DATE: 8/30/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Ricky Ybarra (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 8/30/2016
GROUND ELEVATION:
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21478, W97.20939
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12b
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
26.1 97.0STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Kevin Kavadas (D&S)
START DATE: 2/16/2016 DRILL METHOD: HSA/Core
LOGGED BY: Jennifer Shields (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 2/17/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21450, W97.20949
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
3.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-1 CLAY (CH); medium stiff to stiff; dark brown; trace calcareous
nodules
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
25.7 98.1STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Kevin Kavadas (D&S)
START DATE: 2/16/2016 DRILL METHOD: HSA/Core
LOGGED BY: Jennifer Shields (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 2/17/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21450, W97.20949
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
7.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-1 CLAY (CH); stiff; dark brown, light brown; some calcareous
nodules
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
24.3 100.8STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Andrew Gibson (D&S)
START DATE: 2/18/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Jennifer Shields (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 2/18/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21411, W97.21030
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
4.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-10 CLAY (CH); medium stiff to stiff; dark brown; trace calcareous
nodules
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
22.5 101.8STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Andrew Gibson (D&S)
START DATE: 2/18/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Jennifer Shields (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 2/18/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21411, W97.21030
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
6.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-10 CLAYEY GRAVEL (GC); medium dense; orange-brown,
occasionally dark brown; with calcareous nodules and
weathered limestone fragments
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
17.7 120.0STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Andrew Gibson (D&S)
START DATE: 2/18/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Jennifer Shields (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 2/18/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21411, W97.21030
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
20.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-10 SHALE; highly weathered; dark gray; fissile
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
0 4 8 12 16
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
19.4 103.2STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Kevin Kavadas (D&S)
START DATE: 2/16/2016 DRILL METHOD: HSA/Core
LOGGED BY: Jennifer Shields (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 2/16/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21428, W97.21054
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
2.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-11 CLAY (CH); medium stiff to stiff; dark brown; trace
calcareous nodules and roots
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
23.1 104.5STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Kevin Kavadas (D&S)
START DATE: 2/16/2016 DRILL METHOD: HSA/Core
LOGGED BY: Jennifer Shields (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 2/16/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21428, W97.21054
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
5.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-11 CLAY (CH); medium stiff to stiff; dark brown; trace
calcareous nodules and roots
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
13.9 122.0STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Kevin Kavadas (D&S)
START DATE: 2/16/2016 DRILL METHOD: HSA/Core
LOGGED BY: Jennifer Shields (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 2/16/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21428, W97.21054
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
30.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-11 SHALE; very soft to soft; dark gray; fissile; occasional thin
limestone seams
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
0 4 8 12 16
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
23.5 104.2STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Charles Ray Stephens (D&S)
START DATE: 3/3/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Jennifer Shields (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 3/3/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 641 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21407, W97.20947
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
4.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-2 CLAY (CH); medium stiff to stiff; dark brown; trace
calcareous nodules
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 2 4 6 8 10
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
17.5 111.5STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Charles Ray Stephens (D&S)
START DATE: 3/3/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Jennifer Shields (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 3/3/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 641 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21407, W97.20947
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
6.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-2 CLAY (CL); stiff to very stiff; light brown; with calcareous
nodules
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
13.6 121.6STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Charles Ray Stephens (D&S)
START DATE: 3/4/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Ricky Ybarra (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 3/4/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21426, W97.20970
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
20.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-3 SHALE; moderately weathered; very soft; gray; fissile; trace fossils
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 4 8 12 16
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
15.6 113.9STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Charles Ray Stephens (D&S)
START DATE: 3/4/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Ricky Ybarra (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 3/4/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21426, W97.20970
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
7.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-3 CLAY (CH); very stiff; light brown, gray; few calcareous
nodules and limestone fragments
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
13.6 121.6STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Charles Ray Stephens (D&S)
START DATE: 3/4/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Ricky Ybarra (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 3/4/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21426, W97.20970
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
20.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-3 SHALE; moderately weathered; very soft; gray; fissile; trace fossils
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 4 8 12 16
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
24.8 102.0STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Charles Ray Stephens (D&S)
START DATE: 3/3/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Jennifer Shields (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 3/3/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21463, W97.20977
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
3.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-4 CLAY (CH); stiff; dark brown; trace calcareous nodules
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
18.4 112.6STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Charles Ray Stephens (D&S)
START DATE: 3/3/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Jennifer Shields (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 3/3/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21463, W97.20977
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
8.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-4 CLAY (CL); stiff to very stiff; light brown, occasionally gray;
with calcareous and ferrous nodules; trace limestone fragments
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0 4 8 12 16
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
21.9 106.3STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Charles Ray Stephens (D&S)
START DATE: 3/3/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Jennifer Shields (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 3/3/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21477, W97.21021
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
3.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-5 CLAY (CH); stiff; dark brown; trace to some calcareous
nodules
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
21.5 104.9STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Charles Ray Stephens (D&S)
START DATE: 3/3/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Jennifer Shields (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 3/3/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21477, W97.21021
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
7.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-5 CLAY (CH); stiff to very stiff; light brown, occasionally light
gray; with calcareous nodules
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
21.2 107.5STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Charles Ray Stephens (D&S)
START DATE: 3/3/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Jennifer Shields (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 3/3/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21477, W97.21021
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
20.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-5 SHALE; highly weathered; very soft; gray, light brown;
fissile; occasional very thin limestone seams; trace fossils
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
27.9 96.6STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Charles Ray Stephens (D&S)
START DATE: 2/19/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Patritzia Kolarova (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 2/19/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21445, W97.21007
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
4.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-6 CLAY (CH); stiff; dark brown, brown
0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
25.1 97.4STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Charles Ray Stephens (D&S)
START DATE: 2/19/2016 DRILL METHOD: Cont. Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Patritzia Kolarova (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 2/19/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21445, W97.21007
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
8.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-6 CLAY (CH); very stiff; light brown, orange-brown; with
calcareous nodules and weathered limestone fragments
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
25.1 95.7STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Kevin Kavadas (D&S)
START DATE: 2/18/2016 DRILL METHOD: HSA/Core
LOGGED BY: Patritzia Kolarova (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 2/19/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21408, W97.21005
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
4.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-7 CLAY (CH); medium stiff to stiff; dark brown; trace calcareous
nodules
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
15.0 121.7STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Kevin Kavadas (D&S)
START DATE: 2/18/2016 DRILL METHOD: HSA/Core
LOGGED BY: Patritzia Kolarova (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 2/19/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21408, W97.21005
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
23.9
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-7 SHALE; very soft to soft; dark gray; fissile; occasional
thin limestone seams
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.8
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
14.6 118.6STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Kevin Kavadas (D&S)
START DATE: 2/18/2016 DRILL METHOD: HSA/Core
LOGGED BY: Patritzia Kolarova (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 2/19/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21408, W97.21005
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
33.6
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-7 SHALE; medium hard; dark gray; fissile
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
23.8 98.8STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Andrew Gibson (D&S)
START DATE: 2/18/2016 DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Jennifer Shields (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 2/18/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21424, W97.21018
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
2.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-8 CLAY (CH); stiff; dark brown; trace calcareous nodules
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
24.3 97.6STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Andrew Gibson (D&S)
START DATE: 2/18/2016 DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Jennifer Shields (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 2/18/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21424, W97.21018
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
5.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-8 CLAY (CH); stiff to very stiff; orange-brown, occasionally
dark brown
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
15.7 117.8STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Andrew Gibson (D&S)
START DATE: 2/18/2016 DRILL METHOD: Hollow Stem Flight Auger
LOGGED BY: Jennifer Shields (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 2/18/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21424, W97.21018
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
19.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-8 SHALE; highly weathered; very soft; light brown to dark gray;
fissile
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
24.8 99.2STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Kevin Kavadas (D&S)
START DATE: 2/17/2016 DRILL METHOD: HSA/Core
LOGGED BY: Patritzia Kolarova (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 2/17/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21446, W97.21029
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
4.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-9 CLAY (CH); stiff; dark brown
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
STRAIN, %
17.9 117.3STRESS (psi)CLIENT: Denton Municipal Electric
LOCATION: Denton, TXPROJECT: Denton Energy Center
DRILLED BY: Kevin Kavadas (D&S)
START DATE: 2/17/2016 DRILL METHOD: HSA/Core
LOGGED BY: Patritzia Kolarova (D&S)
FINISH DATE: 2/17/2016
GROUND ELEVATION: Approx. 642 feet
GPS COORDINATES: N33.21446, W97.21029
PROJECT NUMBER: 13-0278-12
25.0
Borehole Depth Description MC%
B1-9 SHALE; slightly weathered; very soft; dark gray; fissile
Tested By:GA and EA Checked By:Y. LeeNormalLoadswereappliedperProjectRequestDIRECT SHEAR TEST REPORT
Kleinfelder, Inc.
Irving, TX
Client:D&S Engineering Labs LLC
Project:D&S Engineering Labs: 2015-2016 Annual Lab Testing
Location:B1-4
Sample Number:Peak Stress Depth:2.0'-3.0'
Proj. No.:20162810.001A Date Sampled:
Sample Type:Undisturbed
Description:Fat Clay, brown, moist with
calcareous nodules
Assumed Specific Gravity=2.7
Remarks:13-0278-12
DME DEC
Figure 1
Sample No.
Water Content, %
Dry Density, pcf
Saturation, %
Void Ratio
Diameter, in.
Height, in.
Water Content, %
Dry Density, pcf
Saturation, %
Void Ratio
Diameter, in.
Height, in.
Normal Stress, psf
Fail. Stress, psf
Strain, %
Ult. Stress, psf
Strain, %
Strain rate, in./min.InitialAtTestShearStress,psf0
250
500
750
1000
1250
1500
Strain, %
0 2.5 5 7.5 10
1
2
3VerticalDeformation,in.0.03
0.02
0.01
0
-0.01
-0.02
-0.03
Strain, %
0 2.5 5 7.5 10
Dilation
Consol.
1
2
3
Fail.Stress,psf0
1000
2000
3000
Normal Stress, psf
0 1000 2000 3000
C, psf
, deg
Tan()
Results
365
20.01
0.36
1
19.7
100.7
78.8
0.6733
2.500
1.000
25.2
100.1
99.4
0.6838
2.500
1.006
496
470
0.7
0.009
2
28.0
94.8
97.0
0.7787
2.500
1.000
24.9
95.0
86.9
0.7744
2.500
0.998
1051
687
1.9
0.009
3
21.4
100.5
85.3
0.6775
2.500
1.000
25.8
101.0
104.0
0.6695
2.500
0.995
2001
1190
4.9
0.016
APPENDIX B – ROCK CORE PHOTOGRAPHS
APPENDIX C – SOIL RESISTIVITY SURVEY REPORT
Baseline
of
Study
Soil Resistivity for
South Parcel - DEC, Dênton, TX
100% Submittal - Rev. I
ELK Job No.2968.02
9 March 2016
Prepared by: ELK Engineering Associates, lnc.
8950 Forum Way
Fort Worth,fX76140
TBPE ID FOO3434
Prepared for: D & S Engineering Labs, LLC
14805 Trinity Blvd.
Fort Worth, TX 76155
Zz"
ELK Job 2968.02
Baseline Study for So/ Resrsflvrfy
100% Submittal- Rev. 1
Appendices
APPENDIX A
Field Data - Soil Resistivity Su rvey
APPEDIX B
Equipment Calibration Certificates
9 March 2016 Rev. 1
Baseline Study
of
Soil Resistivity for
South Parcel - DEC, Denton, TX
100% Submittal - Rev. I
ELK Job 2968.02
9 March 20'16
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Per a specific request by the D & S Engineering Labs, LLC (D&S) ELK Engineering
Associates, lnc. (ELK) has performed site specific soil resistivity tests using the Wenner
method. The tests were made at the referenced facility northwest of Denton.
2.0 SITE INVESTIGATIONS
Soil Resistivitv Equipment and Test Procedure
The following equipment was used to perform the soil resistivity tests required for this
project.
. Chauvin ArnouP, lnc. dba AEMC@ lnstruments model number 6471-B
multifunction ground resistance soil resistivity tester, Serial Number
2287 99HCDV (Cal ibration certificate is attached. )o MC Miller Company, lnc. model number 83-41 multimeter, Serial Number
2537 (Calibration certificate is attached.)o Battery Box. Copper Pins. Cable Clipso Wire Reels. Hand tools
Our baseline soil resistivity survey was performed using the Wenner 4-pin method in
accordance with ASTM GSTTests were performed on a North / South and East / West
alignment. The origin of both sets of tests was atN7127193.79 and E2362984.31.
Testsweretakenatpinspacingsof 1,3,5, 10, 15,20,30,40,50,60,70,80,90, 100,
110, 120, 130, 140, and 15O-feet. Each test was repeated three (3) times before
moving to the next pin spacing. The test results are recorded on the appended field
data sheet.
The multiplier used to convert the measured resistance to resistivity stated in Ohm-
meters is 1.9151 times the pin spacing. Thus the resistance multiplier at 1O-feet is
19.151 or (1 .9151 x 10) while the resistance multiplier for 1OO-feet is 191 .51 or (1 .9151
x 100.)
9 March 2016 Rev. 1 Page 1
Under uniform conditions, the following table is a rough indication of the corrosiveness
of an electrolyte based upon its resistivity.
Soil Resistivity Range in
OHM-M Classification General Rating of Corrosiveness
0 - l0 Very Low Extremely Corrosive
10 - 50 Low Usually Very Corrosive
50 - 100 Medium Often Corrosive
100 - 250 High Seldom Corrosive
250 - 1,000 Very High Seldom Corrosive, Unless Mixed
Soil resistivity is the reciprocal of conductivity, the lower the resistivity, the easier current
will flow through the soil and the more likely for corrosion to occur. Of the measurable
soil characteristics, resistivity is generally accepted as the primary indicator of soil
corrosivity.
3.0 COMMENTS
The soil resistivity survey reveals soils that are classified as Very Low and are
considered "Extremely Corrosive at typical pipe depth."
9 March 2016 Rev. 1 Page2
Frelo Dera sotL REstsrtvtry suRvEy
ELK ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. SHEET NO.
8950 FORUM WAY DATE:
FORT WORTH, TX7614O SURVEYED BY:
817/568-8585 METRO 972t455-5110 FAX 817/568-8590 JOB NO:
STRUCTURE SURVEYED:South Parcel - DEC, Denton: N:7127193.79, E:2362984.31
OF
03104t16
2968.02
Soil Resitivity
Spacing
NORTH . SOUTH ORIENTATION EAST. WEST ORIENTAT¡ON
AVERAGErEsT -1 TEST -2 TEST -3 AVERAGE rEsT -1 rEsT -2 TEST.3 AVERAGE
0-1'R
p
5.300
10.150
5.31C
1 0.1 6€
5.310
1 0.1 69
5.307
1 0.1 63
5.810
11.127
5.810
11.127
5.810
11.127
5.81C
11.12i
5.558
10.645
0-3'R
p
1.490
8.560
1.49C
8.56C
1.490
8.560
1.490
8.560
1.420
8.158
1.420
8.1 58
1.420
8.158
1.42C
8.1 58
1.455
8.359
0-5'R
0
0.880
8.426
0.88C
8.42e
0.880
8.426
0.880
8.426
0.830
7.948
0.830
7.948
0.840
8.043
0.833
7.98C
0.857
8.203
0-1 0'R
p
0.560
10.725
5600.
10.725
0.560
10.725
0.560
10.725
0.55C
10.533
0.550
10.533
0.55C
10.533
0.550
10.533
0.555
10.629
0-1 5'
R
p
0.48C
13.789
0.480
13.789
0.480
13.789
0.480
0.880
0.49C
0.83C
0.490
0.830
0.49C
M.07e
0.490
5.245
0.485
3.063
0-20'R
0
0,440
16.853
0.440
16.853
0.45C
17.23e
0.443
16.981
0.44C
16.853
0.440
16.853
0.43C
16.47C
0,437
16.725
0.44C
16.853
0-30'R
p
0.370
21.258
0.370
21.258
0.37C
21.258
0.370
21,258
0.370
21.258
0 .380
21.832
3800.
21.832
0.377
21.641
0.373
21.449
0-40'R
o
0.310
23.747
0.310
23.747
0.310
23.747
0.310
23.747
0.310
23.747
0.310
23.747
0.310
23.747
0.310
23.747
0.310
23.747
0-50'R
o
0.260
24.896
0.260
24.896
0.260
24.896
0.26C
24.89e
0.250
23.939
0.260
24.896
0.26C
24.896
0.257
24.577
0.258
24.737
0-60'R
p
0.21C
24.13C
0.210
24.130
0.210
24.130
0.21C
24.13C
0.210
24.130
0.210
24.130
0.210
24.130
0.210
24.130
0.210
24.130
0-70'R
p
0.18C
24.13C
0.1 80
24.130
0.180
24.130
0.18C
24.13C
0.1 8C
24.13C
0.1 80
24.130
0.180
24.130
0.180
24.130
0.1 80
24.130
0-80'R
p
0.1 5C
22.981
0.1 50
22.981
500.1
22.981
5C
981
0.1
22
0.150
22.981
0.150
22.981
0.150
22.981
0.1 50
22,981
0.150
22.981
0-90'R
p
0.130
22.407
0.130
22.407
0.130
22.407
0.130
22.407
0.130
22.407
0.13C
22.407
0.130
22.407
0.13C
22.407
0.130
22.407
0-l 00'R
a
0.120
22.981
2C0.1
22.981
0.12C
22.981
0.120
22.981
0.1 10
21.066
0.12C
22.981
200.1
22.981
0.117
22.34?
0.1 1B
22.662
0-1 1 0'R
p
0.100
21.066
0.10c
21.06e
0.100
21.066
0.100
21.066
0.1 00
21.066
0.1 0c
21.06e
0.100
21.066
000.1
21.066
0.100
21.066
0-120'R
p
0.095
21.887
0.095
21.887
0.095
21.887
0.095
21.887
0.090
20.683
0.09c
20.683
0.090
20.683
0.090
20.683
0.093
21.285
0-1 30'R
p
0.092
22.822
0.092
22.822
0.092
22.822
0.092
22.822
0.08c
19.917
0.090
22.407 19,917
800.0 0.083
20.747
O.OB€
21.784
0-140'R
o
0.089
23.832
0.089
23.832
0.08s
23.832
0.089
23.832
0.08c
21.449
0.080
21.449
0.080
21.449
0.080
21.449
0.084
22.641
0-1 50'R
p
0.072
20.781 20.781
720.0 0.072
20.781
0.072
20.781
0.070
20.109
0.070
20.109
0.070
20.109
0.070
20.109
0.071
20.448
Notes:All resistivity measurements are O-m
ApPENDIx B
EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION CERTIFICATES
ïþktronix
Company lD: ELKENG
ELK ENGINEERING
B95O FORUM WAY
FORT WORTH, TX76140
10194428 53-1003517 DECADE RESISTOR
Certificate of Calibratron
Iilil ililtililtililtilll tilfl t]ilililttiltil]
I 078 1 903
Ce¡tifìcate Page I of I
[nstrurnenf trdentification
PO Number: 160'1 -9034.03-01
Department: TORONTO, ON
Location: SAFINEJAD
lnstrument lD: 228788HGDV Model Number. 64708
Manufacturer: AEMC Serial Number: 22B788HCDV
Description: GROUND TESTER
ACCURACY: MFR SPECIFICATION
Certificaúe nnformafion
Reason For Service: CALIBRATION Technician: CURTIS COX
Type of Cal: NORMA¡ CalDate 06Jan2016
As Found Condition: lN TOLERANCE Cal Due Date: 06Jan2017
As Left Condition: tN TOLERANCE lnterval: 12 MONTHS
procedure: 33t<2-4-351-.1 DtctTAL GROUND RESTSTANCE TESTER, Temperature: 22.0 C
AEMC, 30OCT2O12 HumiditY: 28.0 %
Remarks:
Tektronix certifies the performance of the above instrument has been verified using test equipment of known accuracy,
which is traceable to the lnternational System of Units (Sl), National Metrology lnstitutes (NlST, NPL, PTB), derived from
ratio type measurements, compared to reference materials or recognized consensus standards. The policies and
procedures comply with ANSI/NCSL 2540.1-1 994.
The quality system complies with 1SO9001.
This certificate shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written consent of Tektronix.
Questions / Comments about our Calibration Certificate? Please visit http://wvlrw.tek.com/cert-survey
Approved By: CURTIS COX
Service Representative lssue Date: 11612016
Calihration Sfr¡nd¿rrris
NIST Traceable# lnst. lD#Description Manufacturer Model Cal Date Date Due
9844716 09-0001 CALIBRATOR FLUKE 55004-WSC300 064pr2015 064pr2016
GENERAL RADIO 1433-H 13Ju12015 13Ju12016
8400 Esters Blvd. Suite 170 . lrving, TX 75063 . Phone: 800-698-2033 . Fax: 972-243-1079
m'
nfl"G" MILLER c".
M.C. MTLLER CO., rNC.
f16,t0 US Hlghway I
Sêbasl¡Bn, Florlda 32058
PHONE:'1.772-794-9¡148
Fîú,t 1-772-589-9072
E'mril: saf€3@mcmillor.com
Certificate of Galibration
MCM# 83-41 Multimeter 2537
M. C. Miller Co. lnc. certifies that the above listed equipment meets or exceeds all
published specifications and has been calibrated with reference to the American
National Standards lnstitute (ANSI) approved sta¡rdards that are traceable to tire
National lnstitute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Standards within the
limitations of the institute's calibration services, or havs been derived from accepted
values or natural physical constants, or have been derived by using in-house
standards.
M.C. MILLER CO. lNC. certifies that the product identified above meets or exceeds all
specifications and that the product was manufactured at the M.C.Miller plant in Sebastian,
Florida, U.S.A
This unlt and the accessories were sold and shipped to:
Customer Name:Elk Englneer¡ng A&soclates
Calibrated in-house equipment used for product calibration.
'Îhe gpecll¡c equlpmsnt ilems used in corngctlon w¡th the producl identltied above are do{elled ln thê têstlng procodures dôcumnt¡tlon
lor tho producl! wh¡ch ls m¡¡ntaingd ln-house at M,C Milhi
MOoEL Asset lD Cert¡f¡cate# DESCRtpTION
SER#
Due Oate
BK Precision
BK Prec¡slon
BK Precislon
Keithley
BK Precision
Elêctfonic Development
Elèctron¡c Development
Fluke
Fluke
Fluke
Tenma
't730
I't24
9124
2000
2530
3200
3200
179
189
73 11
72,7675
263023r 6
1009
1016
1116727
253001 342
9962
9996
968705E9
77500569
62s60861
7014{15
I 15463
135222
Oct., 201ô
Oct., 2016
Oct.,2016
Oct.,2016
Oct.,2016
Oct, 2016
OcL, 2016
Oct,,2016
Oct.,20l6
Oct., 2016
Oct., 2016
Oct., 2016
Oct., 2016
90181231 PowerSupply
90181274 Powersupply
90181234 Powersupply
90'181280 System DMM
90181232 Oscilloscope
90181275 AcrtlcCurrentCalibrator
9018127ô ÀC/DC Current Caliþrator
90181253 DMM
901812s6 DMM
90181258 DMM
90181278 ACpower3ource
90181265 DCpowersource
90181273 Fl¡nctionGenerator
ùIike Ditton
Novembêr 13, 2Ol5
llov¿mber 12,2lJ18
By:
Title:
Date issued:
Date due:
APPENDIX D – CHEMICAL TEST RESULTS
Analytical Report 526313
for
D&S Engineering Lads
Project Manager: Jennifer Shields
DME DEC
16-MAR-16
13-0278-12
9701 Harry Hines Blvd
Dallas, TX 75220
Xenco-Houston (EPA Lab code: TX00122):
Texas (T104704215-15-19), Arizona (AZ0765), Florida (E871002), Louisiana (03054)
Oklahoma (9218)
Xenco-Dallas (EPA Lab code: TX01468): Texas (T104704295)
Xenco-Odessa (EPA Lab code: TX00158): Texas (T104704400)
Xenco-San Antonio: Texas (T104704534-15-1)
Xenco Phoenix (EPA Lab Code: AZ00901): Arizona(AZ0757)
Xenco-Phoenix Mobile (EPA Lab code: AZ00901): Arizona (AZM757)
Xenco-Atlanta (EPA Lab Code: GA00046):
Florida (E87429), North Carolina (483), South Carolina (98015), Kentucky (85), DoD ( L10-135)
Texas (T104704477), Louisiana (04176), USDA (P330-07-00105)
Xenco-Lakeland: Florida (E84098)
Collected By: Client
Page 1 of 14 Final 1.000
Page 2 of 14 Final 1.000
Table of Contents
Cover Page 1
Cover Letter 3
Sample ID Cross Reference 4
Case Narrative 5
Certificate of Analysis (Detailed Report) 6
Summary of Quality control 10
Explanation of Qualifiers (Flags) 12
Chain of Custody 13
Sample Receipt Conformance Report 14
Houston - Dallas - Odessa - San Antonio - Tampa - Lakeland - Atlanta - Phoenix - Oklahoma - Latin America
Recipient of the Prestigious Small Business Administration Award of Excellence in 1994.
Certified and approved by numerous States and Agencies.
A Small Business and Minority Status Company that delivers SERVICE and QUALITY
Project Manager: Jennifer Shields
D&S Engineering Lads
14805 Trinity Blvd
Fort Worth, TX 76155
Reference: XENCO Report No(s): 526313
DME DEC
Project Address: Denton, TX
Jennifer Shields :
We are reporting to you the results of the analyses performed on the samples received under the project name
referenced above and identified with the XENCO Report Number(s) 526313. All results being reported under
this Report Number apply to the samples analyzed and properly identified with a Laboratory ID number.
Subcontracted analyses are identified in this report with either the NELAC certification number of the
subcontract lab in the analyst ID field, or the complete subcontracted report attached to this report.
Unless otherwise noted in a Case Narrative, all data reported in this Analytical Report are in compliance with
NELAC standards. The uncertainty of measurement associated with the results of analysis reported is
available upon request. Should insufficient sample be provided to the laboratory to meet the method and
NELAC Matrix Duplicate and Matrix Spike requirements, then the data will be analyzed, evaluated and
reported using all other available quality control measures.
The validity and integrity of this report will remain intact as long as it is accompanied by this letter and
reproduced in full, unless written approval is granted by XENCO Laboratories. This report will be filed for at
least 5 years in our archives after which time it will be destroyed without further notice, unless otherwise
arranged with you. The samples received, and described as recorded in Report No. 526313 will be filed for
60 days, and after that time they will be properly disposed without further notice, unless otherwise arranged
with you. We reserve the right to return to you any unused samples, extracts or solutions related to them if we
consider so necessary (e.g., samples identified as hazardous waste, sample sizes exceeding analytical standard
practices, controlled substances under regulated protocols, etc).
We thank you for selecting XENCO Laboratories to serve your analytical needs. If you have any questions
concerning this report, please feel free to contact us at any time.
Respectfully,
16-MAR-16
Project Manager
Monica Tobar
Page 3 of 14 Final 1.000
Sample Cross Reference 526313
D&S Engineering Lads, Fort Worth, TX
DME DEC
Sample Id
BI-1
BI-11
02-16-16 12:00
02-18-16 12:00
Date Collected Lab Sample Id
526313-001
526313-002
3 - 6
3 - 6
Sample DepthMatrix
S
S
Page 4 of 14 Final 1.000
CASE NARRATIVE
526313Work Order Number(s):
16-MAR-16Report Date: 13-0278-12Project ID:
Project Name: DME DEC
Date Received:
Client Name: D&S Engineering Lads
03/07/2016
Samples were submitted to Sub lab for Redox Potential via Fed Ex. The data for Analysis is found in a
separate subcontractor's report that will be forwarded upon completion.
None
LBA-990002Batch:
Samples were received out of holding time. DHE 03/10/16
Sulfide by SM4500-S-F-00
Sample receipt non conformances and comments:
Sample receipt non conformances and comments per sample:
Analytical non conformances and comments:
Page 5 of 14 Final 1.000
Certificate of Analytical Results 526313
D&S Engineering Lads, Fort Worth, TX
DME DEC
03.07.16 16.25 Date Received:
02.16.16 12.00 Date Collected:526313-001Lab Sample Id:
SolidMatrix: BI-1Sample Id:
Chloride, Mercuric Nitrate Method by SM4500-CI- B
Soil Resistivity (As Received) by NACE
Soil pH by EPA 9045C
Sulfate by SW-846 9038
Analytical Method:
Analytical Method:
Analytical Method:
Analytical Method:
GRP
DAO
DAO
GRP
Analyst:
Analyst:
Analyst:
Analyst:
GRP
DAO
DAO
GRP
Tech:
Tech:
Tech:
Tech:
Chloride
Soil Resistivity
pH
Sulfate
Parameter
Parameter
Parameter
Parameter
Result
Result
Result
Result
U
5.00
50.0
Flag
Flag
Flag
Flag
mg/kg
Ohm-cm
SU
mg/kg
Units
Units
Units
Units
1
1
1
1
Dil
Dil
Dil
Dil
Cas Number
Cas Number
Cas Number
Cas Number
16887-00-6
RESISTIVITY
12408-02-5
14808-79-8
7.50
630
8.55
<50.0
990192
990000
990047
990074
Seq Number:
Seq Number:
Seq Number:
Seq Number:
3 - 6 Sample Depth:
SUB: TX104704215
SUB: TX104704215
RL
RL
RL
RL
Wet Weight
Wet Weight
Wet Weight
Wet Weight
Basis:
Basis:
Basis:
Basis:
03.10.16 14.30
03.10.16 14.24
03.11.16 11.27
03.11.16 12.10
Analysis Date
Analysis Date
Analysis Date
Analysis Date
% Moisture:
% Moisture:
% Moisture:
% Moisture:
Page 6 of 14 Final 1.000
Certificate of Analytical Results 526313
D&S Engineering Lads, Fort Worth, TX
DME DEC
03.07.16 16.25 Date Received:
02.16.16 12.00 Date Collected:526313-001Lab Sample Id:
SolidMatrix: BI-1Sample Id:
Sulfide by SM4500-S-F-00 Analytical Method:
DHEAnalyst:
DHETech:
Sulfide, total
Parameter Result
UK200
Flag
mg/kg
Units
10
DilCas Number
18496-25-8 <200
990002Seq Number:
3 - 6 Sample Depth:
SUB: TX104704215
RL
Wet WeightBasis:
03.10.16 13.00
Analysis Date
% Moisture:
Page 7 of 14 Final 1.000
Certificate of Analytical Results 526313
D&S Engineering Lads, Fort Worth, TX
DME DEC
03.07.16 16.25 Date Received:
02.18.16 12.00 Date Collected:526313-002Lab Sample Id:
SolidMatrix: BI-11Sample Id:
Chloride, Mercuric Nitrate Method by SM4500-CI- B
Soil Resistivity (As Received) by NACE
Soil pH by EPA 9045C
Sulfate by SW-846 9038
Analytical Method:
Analytical Method:
Analytical Method:
Analytical Method:
GRP
DAO
DAO
GRP
Analyst:
Analyst:
Analyst:
Analyst:
GRP
DAO
DAO
GRP
Tech:
Tech:
Tech:
Tech:
Chloride
Soil Resistivity
pH
Sulfate
Parameter
Parameter
Parameter
Parameter
Result
Result
Result
Result
U
4.99
50.0
Flag
Flag
Flag
Flag
mg/kg
Ohm-cm
SU
mg/kg
Units
Units
Units
Units
1
1
1
1
Dil
Dil
Dil
Dil
Cas Number
Cas Number
Cas Number
Cas Number
16887-00-6
RESISTIVITY
12408-02-5
14808-79-8
17.5
1210
8.46
<50.0
990192
990000
990047
990074
Seq Number:
Seq Number:
Seq Number:
Seq Number:
3 - 6 Sample Depth:
SUB: TX104704215
SUB: TX104704215
RL
RL
RL
RL
Wet Weight
Wet Weight
Wet Weight
Wet Weight
Basis:
Basis:
Basis:
Basis:
03.10.16 14.30
03.10.16 14.24
03.11.16 11.27
03.11.16 12.10
Analysis Date
Analysis Date
Analysis Date
Analysis Date
% Moisture:
% Moisture:
% Moisture:
% Moisture:
Page 8 of 14 Final 1.000
Certificate of Analytical Results 526313
D&S Engineering Lads, Fort Worth, TX
DME DEC
03.07.16 16.25 Date Received:
02.18.16 12.00 Date Collected:526313-002Lab Sample Id:
SolidMatrix: BI-11Sample Id:
Sulfide by SM4500-S-F-00 Analytical Method:
DHEAnalyst:
DHETech:
Sulfide, total
Parameter Result
UK200
Flag
mg/kg
Units
10
DilCas Number
18496-25-8 <200
990002Seq Number:
3 - 6 Sample Depth:
SUB: TX104704215
RL
Wet WeightBasis:
03.10.16 13.00
Analysis Date
% Moisture:
Page 9 of 14 Final 1.000
QC Summary 526313
D&S Engineering Lads
DME DEC
990192-1-BLK
526313-001
526313-001
526313-001
990074-1-BLK
526313-001
MB Sample Id:
Parent Sample Id:
Parent Sample Id:
Parent Sample Id:
MB Sample Id:
Parent Sample Id:
Solid
Solid
Solid
Solid
Solid
Solid
Matrix:
Matrix:
Matrix:
Matrix:
Matrix:
Matrix:
Chloride, Mercuric Nitrate Method by SM4500-CI- B
Chloride, Mercuric Nitrate Method by SM4500-CI- B
Soil Resistivity (As Received) by NACE
Soil pH by EPA 9045C
Sulfate by SW-846 9038
Sulfate by SW-846 9038
Analytical Method:
Analytical Method:
Analytical Method:
Analytical Method:
Analytical Method:
Analytical Method:
Chloride
Chloride
Soil Resistivity
pH
Sulfate
Sulfate
Parameter
Parameter
Parameter
Parameter
Parameter
Parameter
%RPD
%RPD
%RPD
%RPD
%RPD
%RPD
Flag
Flag
Flag
Flag
Flag
Flag
25
25
20
20
20
20
RPD
Limit
RPD
Limit
RPD
Limit
RPD
Limit
RPD
Limit
RPD
Limit
10
4
1
0
0
2
990192
990192
990000
990047
990074
990074
Seq Number:
Seq Number:
Seq Number:
Seq Number:
Seq Number:
Seq Number:
03.10.16 14:30
03.10.16 14:30
03.10.16 14:24
03.11.16 11:27
03.11.16 12:10
03.11.16 12:10
Analysis
Date
Analysis
Date
Analysis
Date
Analysis
Date
Analysis
Date
Analysis
Date
Limits
Limits
Limits
Limits
70-125
70-125
80-120
75-125
LCSD
%Rec
MSD
%Rec
LCSD
%Rec
MSD
%Rec
100
105
104
105
LCSD
Result
MSD
Result
LCSD
Result
MSD
Result
50.0
60.0
207
209
LCS
%Rec
MS
%Rec
LCS
%Rec
MS
%Rec
110
110
103
103
55.0
62.5
636
8.54
206
205
Spike
Amount
Spike
Amount
Spike
Amount
Spike
Amount
50.0
50.0
200
200
MB
Result
Parent
Result
Parent
Result
Parent
Result
MB
Result
Parent
Result
<5.00
7.50
630
8.55
<50.0
<50.0
990192-1-BKS
526313-001 S
526313-001 D
526313-001 D
990074-1-BKS
526313-001 S
LCS Sample Id:
MS Sample Id:
MD Sample Id:
MD Sample Id:
LCS Sample Id:
MS Sample Id:
990192-1-BSD
526313-001 SD
990074-1-BSD
526313-001 SD
LCSD Sample Id:
MSD Sample Id:
LCSD Sample Id:
MSD Sample Id:
mg/kg
mg/kg
Ohm-cm
SU
mg/kg
mg/kg
Units
Units
Units
Units
Units
Units
LCS
Result
MS
Result
MD
Result
MD
Result
LCS
Result
MS
Result
Page 10 of 14 Final 1.000
QC Summary 526313
D&S Engineering Lads
DME DEC
990002-1-BLK
526224-001
526224-001
MB Sample Id:
Parent Sample Id:
Parent Sample Id:
Solid
Solid
Solid
Matrix:
Matrix:
Matrix:
Sulfide by SM4500-S-F-00
Sulfide by SM4500-S-F-00
Sulfide by SM4500-S-F-00
Analytical Method:
Analytical Method:
Analytical Method:
Sulfide, total
Sulfide, total
Sulfide, total
Parameter
Parameter
Parameter
%RPD
%RPD
U
Flag
Flag
Flag
20
20
RPD
Limit
RPD
Limit
0
0
990002
990002
990002
Seq Number:
Seq Number:
Seq Number:
03.10.16 13:00
03.10.16 13:00
03.10.16 13:00
Analysis
Date
Analysis
Date
Analysis
Date
Limits
Limits
75-120
75-120
LCSD
%Rec
93
LCSD
Result
46.4
LCS
%Rec
MS
%Rec
92
93
46.2
<200
4640
Spike
Amount
Spike
Amount
50.0
5000
MB
Result
Parent
Result
Parent
Result
<2.00
<200
<200
990002-1-BKS
526224-001 D
526224-001 S
LCS Sample Id:
MD Sample Id:
MS Sample Id:
990002-1-BSDLCSD Sample Id:
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
Units
Units
Units
LCS
Result
MD
Result
MS
Result
Page 11 of 14 Final 1.000
Houston - Dallas - San Antonio - Atlanta - Midland/Odessa - Tampa/Lakeland - Phoenix - Latin America
4147 Greenbriar Dr, Stafford, TX 77477
9701 Harry Hines Blvd , Dallas, TX 75220
5332 Blackberry Drive, San Antonio TX 78238
1211 W Florida Ave, Midland, TX 79701
2525 W. Huntington Dr. - Suite 102, Tempe AZ 85282
Phone Fax
(281) 240-4200 (281) 240-4280
(214) 902 0300 (214) 351-9139
(210) 509-3334 (210) 509-3335
(432) 563-1800 (432) 563-1713
(602) 437-0330
Recipient of the Prestigious Small Business Administration Award of Excellence in 1994.
Certified and approved by numerous States and Agencies.
A Small Business and Minority Status Company that delivers SERVICE and QUALITY
Flagging Criteria
X In our quality control review of the data a QC deficiency was observed and flagged as noted. MS/MSD recoveries were found to be
outside of the laboratory control limits due to possible matrix /chemical interference, or a concentration of target analyte high enough
to affect the recovery of the spike concentration. This condition could also affect the relative percent difference in the MS/MSD.
B A target analyte or common laboratory contaminant was identified in the method blank. Its presence indicates possible field or
laboratory contamination.
D The sample(s) were diluted due to targets detected over the highest point of the calibration curve, or due to matrix interference.
Dilution factors are included in the final results. The result is from a diluted sample.
E The data exceeds the upper calibration limit; therefore, the concentration is reported as estimated.
F RPD exceeded lab control limits.
J The target analyte was positively identified below the quantitation limit and above the detection limit.
U Analyte was not detected.
L The LCS data for this analytical batch was reported below the laboratory control limits for this analyte. The department supervisor and
QA Director reviewed data. The samples were either reanalyzed or flagged as estimated concentrations.
H The LCS data for this analytical batch was reported above the laboratory control limits. Supporting QC Data were reviewed by the
Department Supervisor and QA Director. Data were determined to be valid for reporting.
K Sample analyzed outside of recommended hold time.
JN A combination of the "N" and the "J" qualifier. The analysis indicates that the analyte is "tentatively identified" and the associated
numerical value may not be consistent with the amount actually present in the environmental sample.
** Surrogate recovered outside laboratory control limit.
BRL Below Reporting Limit.
RL Reporting Limit
MDL Method Detection Limit SDL Sample Detection Limit LOD Limit of Detection
PQL Practical Quantitation Limit MQL Method Quantitation Limit LOQ Limit of Quantitation
DL Method Detection Limit
NC Non-Calculable
+ NELAC certification not offered for this compound.
* (Next to analyte name or method description) = Outside XENCO's scope of NELAC accreditation
Page 12 of 14 Final 1.000
Page 13 of 14 Final 1.000
Prelogin/Nonconformance Report- Sample Log-In
XENCO Laboratories
526313Work Order #:
03/07/2016 04:25:00 PMDate/ Time Received:
D&S Engineering Lads Client:
Sample Receipt Checklist
Checklist completed by: Date:
Checklist reviewed by:
Date:
Monica Tobar
03/09/2016
03/09/2016
#2 *Shipping container in good condition?
#3 *Samples received on ice?
#4 *Custody Seals intact on shipping container/ cooler?
#5 Custody Seals intact on sample bottles?
#6 *Custody Seals Signed and dated?
#7 *Chain of Custody present?
#8 Sample instructions complete on Chain of Custody?
#9 Any missing/extra samples?
#10 Chain of Custody signed when relinquished/ received?
#11 Chain of Custody agrees with sample label(s)?
#12 Container label(s) legible and intact?
#13 Sample matrix/ properties agree with Chain of Custody?
#14 Samples in proper container/ bottle?
#15 Samples properly preserved?
#16 Sample container(s) intact?
#17 Sufficient sample amount for indicated test(s)?
#18 All samples received within hold time?
#19 Subcontract of sample(s)?
#20 VOC samples have zero headspace (less than 1/4 inch bubble)?
#21 <2 for all samples preserved with HNO3,HCL, H2SO4? Except for
samples for the analysis of HEM or HEM-SGT which are verified by the
analysts.
#22 >10 for all samples preserved with NaAsO2+NaOH, ZnAc+NaOH?
Yes
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
N/A
N/A
N/A
Xenco Houston and Summit
#1 *Temperature of cooler(s)?
Acceptable Temperature Range: 0 - 6 degC
Air and Metal samples Acceptable Range: Ambient
* Must be completed for after-hours delivery of samples prior to placing in the refrigerator
Analyst: PH Device/Lot#:
Comments
Angelica Martinez
Temperature Measuring device used :
Page 14 of 14 Final 1.000
March 14, 2016
Xenco Laboratories
Monica Tobar
Dear Monica Tobar:
RE:1033633
Order No.:16030650
FAX:(214) 351-9139
TEL:(214) 902-0300
9701 Harry Hines Blvd
Dallas, Texas 75220
Summit Environmental Technologies, Inc.
3310 Win St.
Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio 44223
Website: http://www.settek.com
TEL: (330) 253-8211 FAX: (330) 253-4489
Bachar Najm
Project Manager
3310 Win St.
Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio 44223
There were no problems with the analytical events associated with this report unless noted
in the Case Narrative.
Quality control data is within laboratory defined or method specified acceptance limits
except where noted.
If you have any questions regarding these tests results, please feel free to call the
laboratory.
Sincerely,
Summit Environmental Technologies, Inc. received 2 sample(s) on 3/10/2016 for the
analyses presented in the following report.
Page 1 of 7
Alabama 41600, Arkansas 88-0735, California 07256CA, Colorado, Connecticut PH-0105, Delaware, Florida NELAC E87688, Georgia E87688 and 943,
Idaho OH00923, Illinois 200061 and Reg.5, Indiana C-OH-13, Kansas E-10347, Kentucky (Underground Storage Tank) 3, Kentucky 90146, Louisiana
04061 and LA12004, Maine 2012015, Maryland 339, Massachusetts M-OPH923, Minnesota 409711, Montana CERT0099, New Hampshire 2996, New
Jersey OH006, New York 11777, North Carolina 39705 and 631, Ohio Drinking Water 4170, Ohio VAP CL0052, Oklahoma 9940, Oregon OH200001,
Rhode Island LA000317, South Carolina 92016001, Texas T104704466-11-5, Region 8 8TMS-L, USDA/APHIS P330-11-00244, Utah OH009232011-1,
Vermont VT-87688, Virginia 00440 and 1581, Washington C891, West Virginia 248 and 9957C and E87688, Wisconsin 399013010
Project:1033633
CLIENT:Xenco Laboratories
3/14/2016
Case Narrative
16030650
Date:
WO#:
Summit Environmental Technologies, Inc.
3310 Win St.
Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio 44223
Website: http://www.settek.com
TEL: (330) 253-8211 FAX: (330) 253-4489
This report in its entirety consists of the documents listed below. All documents contain the Summit
Environmental Technologies, Inc., Work Order Number assigned to this report.
Paginated Report including Cover Letter, Case Narrative, Analytical Results, Applicable Quality
Control Summary Reports, and copies of the Chain of Custody Documents are supplied with this
sample set.
Concentrations reported with a J-Flag in the Qualifier Field are values below the Limit of Quantitation
(LOQ) but greater than the established Method Detection Limit (MDL).
Method numbers, unless specified as SM (Standard Methods) or ASTM, are EPA methods.
Estimated uncertainty values are available upon request.
Analysis performed by DBM, VRM, or SFG were performed at Summit Labs 2704 Eatonton Highway
Haddock, GA 31033
All results for Solid Samples are reported on an "as received" or "wet weight" basis unless indicated as
"dry weight" using the "-dry" designation on the reporting units.
Summit Environmental Technologies, Inc., holds the accreditations/certifications listed at the bottom of
the cover letter that may or may not pertain to this report.
The information contained in this analytical report is the sole property of Summit Environmental
Technologies, Inc. and that of the customer. It cannot be reproduced in any form without the consent of
Summit Environmental Technologies, Inc. or the customer for which this report was issued. The results
contained in this report are only representative of the samples received. Conditions can vary at different
times and at different sampling conditions. Summit Environmental Technologies, Inc. is not responsible
for use or interpretation of the data included herein.
This report is believed to meet all of the requirements of NELAC or the accrediting / certifying agency.
Any comments or problems with the analytical events associated with this report are noted below.
Page 2 of 7
Original
3/14/2016
Qualifiers and Acronyms
16030650
Date:
WO#:
These commonly used Qualifiers and Acronyms may or may not be present in this report.
Summit Environmental Technologies, Inc.
3310 Win St.
Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio 44223
Website: http://www.settek.com
TEL: (330) 253-8211 FAX: (330) 253-4489
This list of Qualifiers and Acronyms reflects the most commonly utilized Qualifiers and Acronyms for reporting.
Please refer to the Analytical Notes in the Case Narrative for any Qualifiers or Acronyms that do not appear in this
list or for additional information regarding the use of these Qualifiers on reported data.
Qualifiers
U The compound was analyzed for but was not detected.
J The reported value is greater than the Method Detection Limit but less than the Reporting Limit.
H The hold time for sample preparation and/or analysis was exceeded.
D The result is reported from a dilution.
E The result exceeded the linear range of the calibration or is estimated due to interference.
MC The result is below the Minimum Compound Limit.
* The result exceeds the Regulatory Limit or Maximum Contamination Limit.
m Manual integration was used to determine the area response.
N The result is presumptive based on a Mass Spectral library search assuming a 1:1 response.
P The second column confirmation exceeded 25% difference.
C The result has been confirmed by GC/MS.
X The result was not confirmed when GC/MS Analysis was performed.
B/MB+ The analyte was detected in the associated blank.
G The ICB or CCB contained reportable amounts of analyte.
QC-/+ The CCV recovery failed low (-) or high (+).
R/QDR The RPD was outside of accepted recovery limits.
QL-/+ The LCS or LCSD recovery failed low (-) or high (+).
QLR The LCS/LCSD RPD was outside of accepted recovery limits.
QM-/+ The MS or MSD recovery failed low (-) or high (+).
QMR The MS/MSD RPD was outside of accepted recovery limits.
QV-/+ The ICV recovery failed low (-) or high (+).
S The spike result was outside of accepted recovery limits.
Z Deviation; A deviation from the method was performed; Please refer to the Case Narrative for
additional information
Acronyms
ND Not Detected RL Reporting Limit
QC Quality Control MDL Method Detection Limit
MB Method Blank LOD Level of Detection
LCS Laboratory Control Sample LOQ Level of Quantitation
LCSD Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate PQL Practical Quantitation Limit
QCS Quality Control Sample CRQL Contract Required Quantitation Limit
DUP Duplicate PL Permit Limit
MS Matrix Spike RegLvl Regulatory Limit
MSD Matrix Spike Duplicate MCL Maximum Contamination Limit
RPD Relative Percent Different MinCL Minimum Compound Limit
ICV Initial Calibration Verification RA Reanalysis
ICB Initial Calibration Blank RE Reextraction
CCV Continuing Calibration Verification TIC Tentatively Identified Compound
CCB Continuing Calibration Blank RT Retention Time
RLC Reporting Limit Check CF Calibration Factor
DF Dilution Factor RF Response Factor
Page 3 of 7
Original
Project:1033633
CLIENT:Xenco Laboratories
Lab SampleID Client Sample ID Tag No Date ReceivedDate Collected
14-Mar-16
Workorder
Sample Summary
16030650WO#:
Matrix
Summit Environmental Technologies, Inc.
3310 Win St.
Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio 44223
Website: http://www.settek.com
TEL: (330) 253-8211 FAX: (330) 253-4489
16030650-001 526313-001 2/16/2016 12:00:00 PM 3/10/2016 12:00:00 PM Solid
16030650-002 526313-002 2/18/2016 12:00:00 PM 3/10/2016 12:00:00 PM Solid
Page 4 of 7
Project:1033633
Client Sample ID 526313-001
Collection Date:2/16/2016 12:00:00 PM
Matrix:SOLID
CLIENT:Xenco Laboratories
Lab ID:16030650-001
3/14/2016
Analytical Report
16030650
Date Reported:
WO#:
(consolidated)
Analyses Result QualUnits Date AnalyzedDFRL
Summit Environmental Technologies, Inc.
3310 Win St.
Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio 44223
Website: http://www.settek.com
TEL: (330) 253-8211 FAX: (330) 253-4489
OXIDATION REDUCTION POTENTIAL (ASTM G200)ASTM-G200 Analyst:RMT
Oxidation-Reduction Potential H 3/11/2016 11:30:00 AM1.00 mV 1248
Qualifiers:
Page 5 of 7
Original
*Value exceeds Maximum Contaminant Level.E Value above quantitation range
H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded M Manual Integration used to determine area response
MC Value is below Minimum Compound Limit.N Tentatively identified compounds
ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit O RSD is greater than RSDlimit
P Second column confirmation exceeds PL Permit Limit
R RPD outside accepted recovery limits RL Reporting Detection Limit
U Samples with CalcVal < MDL
Project:1033633
Client Sample ID 526313-002
Collection Date:2/18/2016 12:00:00 PM
Matrix:SOLID
CLIENT:Xenco Laboratories
Lab ID:16030650-002
3/14/2016
Analytical Report
16030650
Date Reported:
WO#:
(consolidated)
Analyses Result QualUnits Date AnalyzedDFRL
Summit Environmental Technologies, Inc.
3310 Win St.
Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio 44223
Website: http://www.settek.com
TEL: (330) 253-8211 FAX: (330) 253-4489
OXIDATION REDUCTION POTENTIAL (ASTM G200)ASTM-G200 Analyst:RMT
Oxidation-Reduction Potential H 3/11/2016 11:30:00 AM1.00 mV 1274
Qualifiers:
Page 6 of 7
Original
*Value exceeds Maximum Contaminant Level.E Value above quantitation range
H Holding times for preparation or analysis exceeded M Manual Integration used to determine area response
MC Value is below Minimum Compound Limit.N Tentatively identified compounds
ND Not Detected at the Reporting Limit O RSD is greater than RSDlimit
P Second column confirmation exceeds PL Permit Limit
R RPD outside accepted recovery limits RL Reporting Detection Limit
U Samples with CalcVal < MDL
Sample ID ClientSampleIDProgram Name Matrix Status
Client:Xenco Laboratories
Project:1033633
Test Name Analyte
14-Mar-16
Accreditation Program
Analytes Report
16030650WO#:
Summit Environmental Technologies, Inc.
3310 Win St.
Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio 44223
Website: http://www.settek.com
TEL: (330) 253-8211 FAX: (330) 253-4489
16030650-001A 526313-001Florida DOH Solid Oxidation Reduction
Potential (ASTM G200)
NAOxidation-Reduction Potential
16030650-002A 526313-002 NAOxidation-Reduction Potential
Page 7 of 7
Original #16030650# v1
FL-NELAP Not AccreditedNA
APPENDIX E – GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROCEDURES
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
ANALYTICAL METHODS TO PREDICT MOVEMENT
INDEX PROPERTY TESTS
Index property testing is perhaps the most basic, yet fundamental tool available for predicting
potential movements of clay soils. Index property testing typically consists of moisture content,
Atterberg Limits, and Grain-size distribution determinations. From these results a general
assessment of a soil’s propensity for volume change with changes in soil moisture content can
be made.
Moisture Content
By studying the moisture content of the soils at varying depths and comparing them with the
results of Atterberg Limits, one can estimate a rough order of magnitude of potential soil
movement at various moisture contents, as well as movements with moisture changes. These
tests are typically performed in accordance with ASTM D 2216.
Atterberg Limits
Atterberg limits determine the liquid limit (LL), plastic limit (PL), and plasticity index (PI) of a soil.
The liquid limit is the moisture content at which a soil begins to behave as a viscous fluid. The
plastic limit is the moisture content at which a soil becomes workable like putty, and at which a
clay soil begins to crumble when rolled into a thin thread (1/8” diameter). The PI is the numerical
difference between the moisture constants at the liquid limit and the plastic limit. This test is
typically performed in accordance with ASTM D 4318.
Clay mineralogy and the particle size influence the Atterberg Limits values, with certain minerals
(e.g., montmorillonite) and smaller particle sizes having higher PI values, and therefore higher
movement potential.
A soil with a PI below about 15 to 18 is considered to be generally stable and should not
experience significant movement with changes in moisture content. Soils with a PI above about
30 to 35 are considered to be highly active and may exhibit considerable movement with changes
in moisture content.
Fat clays with high very liquid limits, weakly cemented sandy clays, or silty clays are examples of
soils in which it can be difficult to predict movement from index property testing alone.
Grain-size Distribution
The simplest grain-size distribution test involves washing a soil specimen over the No. 200 mesh
sieve with an opening size of 0.075 mm (ASTM D 1140)). This particle size has been defined by
the engineering community as the demarcation between coarse-grained and fine-grained soils.
Particles smaller than this size can be further distinguished between silt-size and clay-size
particles by use of a Hydrometer test (ASTM D 422).
Once the characteristics of the soil are determined through index property testing, a number of
movement prediction techniques are available to predict the potential movement of the soils.
Some of these are discussed in general below.
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION METHOD 124-E
The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) has developed a generally simplistic method
to predict movements for highways based on the plasticity index of the soil. The TxDOT method
is empirical and is based on the Atterberg limits and moisture content of the subsurface soil. This
method generally assumes three different initial moisture conditions: dry, “as-is”, and wet.
Computation of each over an assumed depth of seasonal moisture variation (usually about 15
feet or less) provides an estimate of potential movement at each initial condition. This method
requires a number of additional assumptions to develop a potential movement estimate. As such,
the predicted movements generally possess large uncertainties when applied to the analysis of
conditions under building slabs and foundations. In our opinion, estimates derived by this method
should not be used alone in determination of potential movement.
SUCTION
Suction measurements may be used along with other movement prediction methods to predict
soil movement. Suction is a measure of the ability of a soil to attract or lose moisture between the
soil particles. Since changes in soil moisture result in volume changes within the soil mass of
fine-grained soils (clays and to some degree silts), a knowledge of the suction potential of a soil
mass at a given point in time may be used to estimate potential future volume changes with
changes in soil moisture content. For this analysis, a series of suction measurements versus
depth is typically performed on a number of soil samples recovered from a boring in order to
develop a suction profile.
SWELL TESTS
Swell tests can lead to more accurate site specific predictions of potential vertical movement by
measuring actual swell volumes at in situ initial moisture contents. One-dimensional swell tests
are almost always performed for this measurement. Though swell is a three-dimensional process,
the one-dimensional test provides greatly improved potential vertical movement estimates than
other methods alone, particularly when the results are “weighted” with respect to depth, putting
more emphasis on the swell characteristics closer to the surface and less on values at depth.
WIRE REINFORCEMENT INSTITUTE
The Wire Reinforcement Institute (WRI) has developed a design methodology using a weighted
plasticity index. This index is modified for ground slope and the strength of the soil. These values
are also used as input into the movement potential.
D&S ENGINEERING LABS, LLC DME Denton Energy Center - Denton, Texas (13-0278-12)
POTENTIAL VERTICAL MOVEMENT
A general index for movement is known as the Potential Vertical Rise (PVR). The actual term
PVR refers to the TxDOT Method 124-E mentioned above. For the purpose of this report the
term Potential Vertical Movement (PVM) will be used since PVM estimates are derived using
multiple analytical techniques, not just TxDOT methods.
It should be noted that all slabs and foundations constructed on clay or clayey soils have at least
some risk of potential vertical movement due to changes in soil moisture contents. To eliminate
that risk, slabs and foundation elements (e.g., grade beams) should be designed as structural
elements physically separated by some distance from the subgrade soils (usually 6 to 12 inches).
In some cases, a floor slab with movements as little as 1/4 of an inch may result in damage to
interior walls, such as cracking in sheet rock or masonry walls, or separation of floor tiles.
However, these cracks are often minor and most people consider them 'liveable'. In other cases,
movement of one inch may cause significant damage, inconvenience, or even create a hazard
(trip hazard or others).
Vertical movement of clay soils under slab on grade foundations due to soil moisture changes
can result from a variety causes, including poor site grading and drainage, improperly prepared
subgrade, trees and large shrubbery located too close to structures, utility leaks or breaks, poor
subgrade maintenance such as inadequate or excessive irrigation, or other causes. A sampling
of more common moisture control procedures to reduce the potential for movement due to these
causes is presented in Appendix C.
PVM is generally considered to be a measurement of the change in height of a foundation from
the elevation it was originally placed. Experience and generally accepted practice suggests that
if the PVM of a site is less than one inch, the associated differential movement will be minor and
acceptable to most people.
SETTLEMENT
Settlement is a measure of a downward movement due to consolidation of soil. This can occur
from improperly placed fill (uncompacted or under-compacted), loose native soil, or from large
amounts of unconfined sandy material. Properly compacted fill may settle approximately 1
percent of its depth, particularly when fill depths exceed 10 feet.
14805 Trinity Boulevard, Fort Worth, Texas 76155
Geotechnical 817.529.8464 Corporate 940.735.3733
www.dsenglabs.com
Texas Engineering Firm Registration # F‐12796
Oklahoma Engineering Firm Certificate of Authorization CA 7181