Prepared for: HDR Engineering, Inc. 200 West Forsyth Street, Suite 800 Jacksonville, Florida Prepared by:

Transcription

1 REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION REHABILITATE WHARF STRUCTURE AT BERTHS 6 AND ½ OF BERTH 5 TALLEYRAND MARINE TERMINAL, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA E&A PROJECT NO Prepared for: HDR Engineering, Inc. 00 West Forsyth Street, Suite 800 Jacksonville, Florida 0 Prepared by: Ellis & Associates, Inc. 706 Davis Creek Road Jacksonville, Florida 56 June, 01

2 June, 01 Eng. Frank Proctor, P.E. HDR Engineering, Inc. 00 West Forsyth Street, Suite 800 Jacksonville, Florida 0 Reference: Report of Geotechnical Exploration Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and ½ of Berth 5 Talleyrand Marine Terminal, Jacksonville, Florida E&A Project No Dear Frank: Ellis & Associates, Inc. has completed the requested geotechnical exploration in general accordance with our proposal dated January 8, 01. The exploration was performed to evaluate the general subsurface conditions within the proposed sheet pile replacement areas and to provide recommendations for design soil parameters for sheet piles and pile capacities for H piles. Recommendations for support of the excavation which is needed to facilitate construction are also provided. We appreciate the opportunity to be your geotechnical consultant on this phase of the project and look forward to providing the materials testing and observation that will be required during the construction phase. If you have any questions, or if we may be of any further service, please contact us. Very truly yours, ELLIS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Raoaa F. Essa, P.E. Nemer (Nick)Y. Oweis, P.E. Project Engineer Chief Engineer Registered, Florida No Registered, Florida No. 755 Distribution: Eng. Frank Proctor, P.E. HDR Engineering, Inc. 1 pdf

3 Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and ½ of Berth 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS Subject Page No. 1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION Site Location and Project Description FIELD EXPLORATION LABORATORY TESTING GENERAL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS....1 General Soil Profile.... Groundwater Level ENGINEERING EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS General Sheet Pile Retained Soil General Condition Sheet Pile Structure Recommendations Ultimate Compressive Pile Capacities Ultimate Uplift Pile Capacities Lateral Load Resistance PILE INSTALLATION RECOMMENDATIONS Installation Criteria Hammer Selection Pile Installation Test Pile Program Excavation Recommendation QUALITY CONTROL TESTING REPORT LIMITATIONS... 6 PLATES Plate 1. Soil Parameters for Sheet Pile Design Sta to 1+00 Plate. Soil Parameters for Sheet Pile Design Sta to 7+5 Plate. Estimated Ultimate Bearing Resistance Graphs for 1X7 H-piles Plate. Estimated Ultimate Uplift Resistance Graphs for 1X7 H-piles FIGURES Figure 1. Figure. Figure. APPENDICES Appendix A. Appendix B. Site Location Plan Field Exploration Plan Generalized Subsurface Profiles Soil Boring Logs Field Exploration Procedures Key to Soil Classification Laboratory Data Laboratory Test Procedures Corrosion Series Test Results rfe i June, 01

4 Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and ½ of Berth PROJECT INFORMATION 1.1 Site Location and Project Description The project site is located along Talleyrand Avenue, northeast of its intersection with 11 th Street in Jacksonville, Florida. The general site location is shown on Figure 1. At the time of our exploration, the site was a developed commercial dock area, with the St. Johns River located to the east of the site. Project information was provided to us via several discussions and s. We were provided with a modified aerial photograph for the subject site, prepared by HDR Engineering, Inc., undated. This plan photograph indicates the existing roadways and structures at the site, the stationing along the face of the dock, and the requested boring locations. We understand the existing sheet pile bulkhead at Berth 6 and the northern half of Berth 5 (approximate Sta to 17+8) (which was constructed in the 1960 s) will be replaced We understand the new steel pile wall will be installed on the landside of the existing wall and tie into the crane rail beam. Our scope of services included performing soil borings to determine subsurface soil conditions with respect to encountered voids or zones of loose soil, providing design soil parameters for the sheet pile replacements, and ultimate pile axial and uplift capacity for 1X7 H-piles. If actual project information varies from these conditions, then the recommendations in this report may need to be re-evaluated. We should be contacted if any of the above project information is incorrect so that we may reevaluate our recommendations..0 FIELD EXPLORATION We performed a field exploration on April through 10, 01. The approximate boring locations are indicated on the attached Field Exploration Plan (Figure ). Our personnel determined the boring locations using taped measurements from existing roadways and survey controls adjacent to the site. The boring locations on the referenced Field Exploration Plan should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method of measurement used. We located and performed Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings, drilled to depths of approximately 90 feet below the existing ground surface, in general accordance with the methodology outlined in ASTM D 1586 to explore the subsurface conditions within the area of the proposed structure. In addition, we attempted to drill the fourth boring (B); however, we drilled through approximately 8 inches of concrete and terminated the boring. Split-spoon soil samples recovered during performance of the borings were visually classified in the field and representative portions of the samples were transported to our laboratory for further evaluation..0 LABORATORY TESTING A geotechnical engineer classified representative soil samples obtained during our field exploration using the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) in general accordance with ASTM D 88. A Key to the Soil Classification System is included in Appendix A. Selected samples of the soils encountered during the field exploration were subjected to quantitative laboratory testing to better define the composition of the soils encountered and to provide data for correlation to their anticipated strength and compressibility characteristics. The laboratory testing determined the Atterberg limits, percent fines, moisture and organic contents of selected soil samples. The results of the laboratory testing are shown in the Summary of Laboratory Test Data included in Appendix B. Also, these results are shown on the Generalized rfe 1 June, 01

5 Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and ½ of Berth 5 Subsurface Profiles on Figure and on the Log of Boring records at the respective depths from which the tested samples were recovered. Corrosion tests were performed on selected soil samples obtained from the SPT split-spoon samples. The test results are included in Appendix B. The samples were classified in accordance with FDOT procedures. Based on the results of the tests, the soils are considered extremely aggressive for concrete and steel substructures for Boring B sample, and moderately aggressive for both concrete and steel for Boring B1 sample..0 GENERAL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS.1 General Soil Profile A graphical presentation of the generalized subsurface conditions is presented on Figure. Detailed boring records are included in Appendix A. It should be understood that the soil conditions will vary between the boring locations. The following table summarizes the soil conditions encountered. TYPICAL DEPTH (ft) GENERAL SOIL PROFILE: BULKHEAD REPLACEMENT AREA FROM TO SOIL DESCRIPTION USCS (1) Surficial asphalt pavement and limerock base () N/A 1- to 7 to 7-57 Very loose to dense fine sand, fine sand with silt, silty fine sand, fine sand with clay, clayey fine sand, silt, Loose to medium dense fine sand, and soft to stiff organic silt, sandy clay, and silt Highly weathered limestone SP, SP-SM, SM, SP-SC, & SC, SP, OH, CH and MH Dense silty fine sand and hard sandy silt (marl) SM, ML (1) Unified Soil Classification System () See Log of Boring Records for encountered thicknesses of these materials. As an exception to the table above, Boring B encountered a -foot thick layer of concrete between.5 to 5.5 feet below existing ground level.. Groundwater Level Groundwater was encountered at each boring location and recorded at the time of drilling at a depth of approximately 5 feet below the existing ground surface. We note that groundwater levels will fluctuate due to seasonal climatic variations, surface water runoff patterns, construction operations, and other interrelated factors. The groundwater depth at each boring location is noted on the Generalized Subsurface Profiles and on the Log of Boring records. 5.0 ENGINEERING EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 General Our geotechnical engineering evaluation of the subsurface conditions along the proposed sheet pile bulkhead replacement areas, and our recommendations as presented below are based on (1) our site observations, () the field and laboratory test data obtained, and () our understanding of the project information as presented in this report. If the project information is incorrect or should rfe June, 01

6 Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and ½ of Berth 5 the alignment of the sheet pile wall or provided structural information be changed, please contact us so that we can review our recommendations. The discovery of any site or subsurface conditions during construction which deviate from the data obtained during this geotechnical exploration should also be reported to us for our evaluation. 5. Sheet Pile Retained Soil General Condition Very loose to loose or soft zones were encountered in each of the borings; however the very loose or soft soils were typically relatively thin layers of silty and/or clayey materials. While some loss of drilling fluid circulation was experienced within the weathered limestone unit, we did not experience loss of drilling fluid within the overburden (retained) soils. The conditions encountered at our boring locations do not indicate the presence of large void systems, such as those typically associated with soil raveling. 5. Sheet Pile Structure Recommendations We understand the new bulkhead will be designed using steel sheet piles. The sheet pile bulkhead will consist of interlocking anchored sheet piles. The design of the sheet pile bulkhead should be based on the data obtained from our subsurface exploration and on the depths of the proposed mudline. The elevation of the ground surface at the boring locations was provided by HDR, Inc. from As-Built drawings. Based on the subsurface information obtained from the soil borings, two generalized soil profiles (Sta. 18 to 1 and Sta. 1 to 7 + 5) were established. The soil parameters provided in the profiles were based on our interpretation of the N-values obtained from the SPT borings. The soil parameters are shown on Plates 1 and. These plates include: soil description/classification, strength parameters (cohesion, phi angles and interactive friction angle between soil and wall), saturated and moist unit weights and soil modulus and strain at 50% stress (for lateral analysis). 5. Ultimate Compressive Pile Capacities Static pile capacities were estimated for the requested type of deep foundation systems following FDOT procedures utilizing SPT N-values from the borings performed for this study. The computer program FB-Deep (version 1.) was used for these calculations. This program was developed by the design team of Dr. Marc Hoit, PhD, Dr. Ahmed Abdet-Akher, PhD and Dr. Frank Townsend, PhD. with the Florida Bridge Software Institute. Pile tip elevations versus Davisson pile capacities (Ultimate Bearing Resistance 1 (Q n )) for 1X7 H-pile are presented on Plate. Scour and downdrag affects should be considered if the piles are installed in water or if additional backfill is placed to raise the existing pier, respectively. 5.5 Ultimate Uplift Pile Capacities Plate presents a graph of our calculated ultimate uplift resistance capacity vs. depth for 1X7 H-piles. 5.6 Lateral Load Resistance Lateral loads acting on the pile foundations are primarily resisted by the available lateral resistance of the piles. The main criteria in assessing the allowable pile load is to satisfy both the allowable bending moment and the allowable deflection of the pile, depending on the soil conditions within a depth equal to approximately 10 to 0 times the pile diameter, measured from the proposed final grade. The recommended soil parameters for lateral analysis are shown in Plates 1 and, and are 1 (Q n ) Ultimate Bearing Resistance = [(Factored Design Load) / ], where = rfe June, 01

7 Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and ½ of Berth 5 based on our interpretation of the SPT boring results and published industry standards. Use a resistance factor of 1.0 for lateral analysis. 5.7 Excavation Slope Protection Recommendation To facilitate construction of the new sheet pile structure, we understand the soils behind the existing sheet pile will generally be excavated to depths of 7 to 8 feet below existing grade. We also understand the east wall of the existing building between approximate Stations and 7 is underpinned with pin piles during a previous pier repair. For the proposed excavation north of approximately Station and south of approximately Station 7, a slope stability analysis was performed for the proposed excavation utilizing a twodimensional limiting equilibrium method using the computer program GSTABL7. The slope stability analyses were performed to determine the factors of safety against instability. A minimum factor of safety of 1. is considered adequate to preclude slope failure. The results of the analysis indicated temporary slopes with horizontal to 1 vertical (H:1V) will preclude slope movement. However, if space is limited, a H:1V slopes can be used given a dewatering system be installed to keep the groundwater feet below the toe of the slope, or a temporary sheet pile support can be used. A temporary sheet pile system should be used along the existing building between approximate Stations and 7. The temporary sheet pile wall and bracing, if required, should be designed using the soil properties given in Plates 1 and. The system should be designed to limit the deflection at the top of the sheet pile to 0.5 inches. It is estimated that this deflection will result in vertical movement (settlement) on the order of 1/ to /8 inches, with the majority of this settlement occurring during construction. These settlements may result in minor cracks to the existing on-grade supported slabs. The construction budget for this project should allow for cosmetic repairs to the existing structures, if cracking occurs. In this regard, the existing building should be monitored for potential movement during construction. 6.0 PILE INSTALLATION RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 Installation Criteria The actual in-place length of the driven piles should be determined in the field by the use of dynamic field pile driving analysis. We recommend that wave equation analyses be performed prior to pile installation as an aid in selecting the installation equipment and procedures, to estimate driving stresses, and to determine the drivability of the hammer-pile system. The results of the wave equation analyses can also be used in conjunction with a dynamic pile driving analyzer (PDA) during the installation of test piles to develop driving criteria for the production piles. 6. Hammer Selection To help prevent over-driving, we recommend that the final driving criteria be carefully specified with respect to the pile type, pile size, and hammer size. The pile driving hammer should therefore be properly selected with relation to the size, weight, and type of pile specified. The ratio of the pile hammer or ram weight (for steam or air hammers) to the weight of the pile typically should not be less than 0.5 for concrete piles and preferably be on the order of 0.50 to Proper selection of the pile hammer based upon pile type, ram weight, and the use of proper anvil and cushioning material and thickness should result in compressive and tensile driving stresses in the piles that are within tolerable magnitudes rfe June, 01

8 Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and ½ of Berth 5 Actual pile driving hammer requirements and acceptable pile penetration resistances, including practical refusal resistances, can be determined when the selected pile elements, the proposed driving equipment, and cushioning systems are determined. Ellis & Associates, Inc. can perform all necessary wave equation analysis (WEAP) and dynamic pile testing (PDA) to determine the suitability of the contractor s pile driving equipment. 6. Pile Installation Piles should be driven with a steam, air, hydraulic, or diesel hammer delivering a minimum energy per blow as determined in accordance with Section 55 of the FDOT Standard Specifications of Road and Bridge Construction, current edition. The hammer should be operated at the chamber pressure and speed recommended by the manufacturer at all times. Pile driving should be as continuous an operation as possible and should proceed without stopping over the last 6 to 10 feet of penetration. The hammer acceptance criteria of the piles will be established prior to construction once the type and size of hammer are furnished by the contractor. We note that difficult driving and/or practical refusal may occur in the limestone and marl layers encountered at approximately El. -5 and -51. Since the soils and lateral loading conditions require piles to be installed into or below the limestone and into the marl layer, punched pile holes may be required. The punched pile holes should extend to the minimum tip elevation required for lateral stability. The contractor should anticipate the need for special equipment and/or methods (i.e. H-pile punches) as needed to facilitate punching through the limestone. During pile driving, records should be kept for each pile detailing pertinent information such as the pile type, pile length, date driven, and blow count per foot. The capacity of each pile should be reviewed based on its final tip elevation and driving record. We recommend that pile driving operations be continuously monitored by the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative. Their duties should include, but not be limited to, the following: (1) Keep an accurate record of pile installation and driving procedures. () Verify that all piles are installed to the proper driving resistance and to a depth indicative of the piles bearing in the desired formation. () Confirm that pile driving equipment is operating properly. () Inspect the piles prior to installation for defects and confirm that the piles are not damaged during installation. 6. Test Pile Program We recommend a test pile program prior to driving the production piles. The test pile program will be used to assess pile drivability, and refine foundation design parameters, final pile lengths and tip elevations at each location. We recommend that three test piles for each pile size and type be performed. Each test pile should be instrumented with the Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA). Dynamic pile testing should also be performed during pile re-striking to evaluate time dependent soil strength changes (i.e. setup) during the installation of the test piles. Re-strikes of test piles may be required at various intervals after initial driving. The data will be used to evaluate the following: hammerdriving system performance, pile stresses during driving, pile structural integrity, and calculation of pile static compressive bearing capacity. The dynamic testing results will then be used in CAPWAP and wave equation (WEAP) analyses to establish an optimum driving criterion to be employed during driving the production piles. A pile installation plan should be submitted prior to the test pile program rfe 5 June, 01

9 7.0 QUALITY CONTROL TESTING Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and ½ of Berth 5 We recommend that Ellis & Associates, Inc. be retained to perform the construction material testing and observations required for this project, to verify that our recommendations have been satisfied. In our opinion, we are most qualified to address problems that may arise during construction, since we are familiar with the intent of our engineering design. 8.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS Our geotechnical exploration has been performed, our findings obtained, and our recommendations prepared, in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices. Ellis & Associates, Inc. is not responsible for any independent conclusions, interpretation, opinions, or recommendations made by others based on the data contained in this report. Our scope of services was intended to evaluate the soil conditions within the zone of soil influenced by the foundation system. Our scope of services does not address geologic conditions, such as sinkholes or soil conditions existing below the depth of the soil borings. This report does not reflect any variations that may occur adjacent to or between soil borings. The discovery of any site or subsurface condition during construction that deviates from the data obtained during this geotechnical exploration should be reported to us for our evaluation. Also, in the event of any change to the supplied structural conditions, please contact us so that we can review our recommendations. We recommend that we be provided the opportunity to review the foundation plans and earthwork specifications to verify that our recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented rfe 6 June, 01

10 PLATES

11

12

13 Plate Ultimate Bearing Resistance Graph 1X7 H-Pile Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and 1/ of Berth 5 E&A Project Number Boring B1 Boring B Recommended Design Curve Boring B -0 Elevation (ft) Ultimate Bearing Resistance (Q n ), Tons

14 Plate Ultimate Uplift Resistance Graph 1X7 H-Pile Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and 1/ of Berth 5 E&A Project Number Boring B1 Boring B Recommended Design Curve Boring B -0 Elevation (ft) Ultimate Skin Friction Resistance, Tons

15 FIGURES

16

17

18

19 APPENDIX A SOIL BORING LOGS FIELD EXPLORATION PROCEDURES KEY TO SOIL CLASSIFICATION

20 LOG OF BORING Project No.: Boring No.: B1 Sheet 1 of Project: Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and 1/ of Berth 5 Client: HDR Engineering Inc Boring Location: Station 18+00, 75' Lt. Drill Rig: ATV Drill Rod: AWJ Driller: M. Foster Drill Mud: Super Gel-X Casing Size: Length of Casing: Groundwater Depth: 5 ft Time: Drilling Date: /9/1 Boring Begun: /9/1 Boring Completed: /9/1 SAMPLE NO. 1 5 DEPTH, FEET SAMPLE TYPE DESCRIPTION 10" Asphalt Pavement 11" Limerock Base DENSE Light Brown Fine SAND (SP) MEDIUM DENSE to DENSE Gray Fine SAND (SP) DENSE Light Gray Fine SAND (SP) BLOWS PER 6 IN N Value 9 7 PERCENT ORGANIC MATERIAL PERCENT PASSING NO. 00 SIEVE PLASTIC LIMIT MOISTURE CONTENT LIQUID LIMIT (%) SHEAR STRENGTH (ksf) Undisturbed Sample Disturbed Sample Torvane Unconfined Compression Triaxial Compression 0 1 LOOSE Gray Fine SAND (SP) LOG OF BORING GPJ ELLIS ASSOCIATES.GDT 6// Remarks LOOSE Light Gray Fine SAND With Clay Seems (SP)

21 LOG OF BORING Project No.: Boring No.: B1 Sheet of Project: Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and 1/ of Berth 5 Client: HDR Engineering Inc Boring Location: Station 18+00, 75' Lt. Drill Rig: ATV Drill Rod: AWJ Driller: M. Foster Drill Mud: Super Gel-X Casing Size: Length of Casing: Groundwater Depth: 5 ft Time: Drilling Date: /9/1 Boring Begun: /9/1 Boring Completed: /9/1 SAMPLE NO. DEPTH, FEET 5 SAMPLE TYPE DESCRIPTION LOOSE Light Gray Fine SAND With Clay Seems (SP) (Continued) BLOWS PER 6 IN. N Value PERCENT ORGANIC MATERIAL PERCENT PASSING NO. 00 SIEVE PLASTIC LIMIT MOISTURE CONTENT LIQUID LIMIT (%) SHEAR STRENGTH (ksf) Undisturbed Sample Disturbed Sample Torvane Unconfined Compression Triaxial Compression 0 1 LOOSE Light Gray Fine SAND (SP) Wood Pieces SOFT Gray Very Sandy SILT, Some Organic Fines (MH) SOFT Dark Grayish Brown Organic SILT (OH) 6 69 LOG OF BORING GPJ ELLIS ASSOCIATES.GDT 6//1 1A Remarks DENSE Light Gray Fine SAND (SP) STIFF Gray Sandy CLAY (CH)

22 LOG OF BORING Project No.: Boring No.: B1 Sheet of Project: Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and 1/ of Berth 5 Client: HDR Engineering Inc Boring Location: Station 18+00, 75' Lt. Drill Rig: ATV Drill Rod: AWJ Driller: M. Foster Drill Mud: Super Gel-X Casing Size: Length of Casing: Groundwater Depth: 5 ft Time: Drilling Date: /9/1 Boring Begun: /9/1 Boring Completed: /9/1 SAMPLE NO. DEPTH, FEET 50 SAMPLE TYPE DESCRIPTION STIFF Gray Sandy CLAY (CH) (Continued) BLOWS PER 6 IN. N Value PERCENT ORGANIC MATERIAL PERCENT PASSING NO. 00 SIEVE PLASTIC LIMIT MOISTURE CONTENT LIQUID LIMIT (%) SHEAR STRENGTH (ksf) Undisturbed Sample Disturbed Sample Torvane Unconfined Compression Triaxial Compression VERY LOOSE Yellowish Brown Clayey Fine SAND (SC) 1 Gray Highly Weathered Limestone With Sand Gray Weathered Limestone WOH/1" VERY DENSE Light Gray SILT (Marl) (ML) LOG OF BORING GPJ ELLIS ASSOCIATES.GDT 6// Remarks VERY DENSE Gray Very Silty Fine SAND (Marl) (SM)

23 LOG OF BORING Project No.: Boring No.: B1 Sheet of Project: Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and 1/ of Berth 5 Client: HDR Engineering Inc Boring Location: Station 18+00, 75' Lt. Drill Rig: ATV Drill Rod: AWJ Driller: M. Foster Drill Mud: Super Gel-X Casing Size: Length of Casing: Groundwater Depth: 5 ft Time: Drilling Date: /9/1 Boring Begun: /9/1 Boring Completed: /9/1 SAMPLE NO. DEPTH, FEET 75 SAMPLE TYPE DESCRIPTION VERY DENSE Gray Very Silty Fine SAND (Marl) (SM) (Continued) BLOWS PER 6 IN. N Value PERCENT ORGANIC MATERIAL PERCENT PASSING NO. 00 SIEVE PLASTIC LIMIT MOISTURE CONTENT LIQUID LIMIT (%) SHEAR STRENGTH (ksf) Undisturbed Sample Disturbed Sample Torvane Unconfined Compression Triaxial Compression VERY DENSE to DENSE Gray Silty Fine SAND With Phosphate Nodules (Marl) (SM) Boring 90 ft LOG OF BORING GPJ ELLIS ASSOCIATES.GDT 6//1 Remarks

24 LOG OF BORING Project No.: Boring No.: B Sheet 1 of Project: Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and 1/ of Berth 5 Client: HDR Engineering Inc Boring Location: Station 1+00, 75' Lt. Drill Rig: ATV Drill Rod: AWJ Driller: M. Foster Drill Mud: Super Gel-X Casing Size: Length of Casing: Groundwater Depth: 5 ft Time: Drilling Date: /8/1 Boring Begun: /8/1 Boring Completed: /8/1 SAMPLE NO. 1 5 DEPTH, FEET SAMPLE TYPE DESCRIPTION 5" Asphalt Pavement 9" Limerock Base DENSE Light Brown Fine SAND (SP) MEDIUM DENSE to LOOSE Light Gray to Gray Fine SAND (SP) BLOWS PER 6 IN N Value 16 8 PERCENT ORGANIC MATERIAL PERCENT PASSING NO. 00 SIEVE PLASTIC LIMIT MOISTURE CONTENT LIQUID LIMIT (%) SHEAR STRENGTH (ksf) Undisturbed Sample Disturbed Sample Torvane Unconfined Compression Triaxial Compression Some Organic Fines LOOSE Light Gray Silty Fine SAND, Few Organic Fines (SM) 1 LOG OF BORING GPJ ELLIS ASSOCIATES.GDT 6// Remarks VERY LOOSE Grayish Brown Silty Clayey Fine SAND (SC) LOOSE Brown Fine SAND With Clay (SP-SC) WOH/18" 5 WOH/18" 9 6

25 LOG OF BORING Project No.: Boring No.: B Sheet of Project: Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and 1/ of Berth 5 Client: HDR Engineering Inc Boring Location: Station 1+00, 75' Lt. Drill Rig: ATV Drill Rod: AWJ Driller: M. Foster Drill Mud: Super Gel-X Casing Size: Length of Casing: Groundwater Depth: 5 ft Time: Drilling Date: /8/1 Boring Begun: /8/1 Boring Completed: /8/1 SAMPLE NO. DEPTH, FEET 5 SAMPLE TYPE DESCRIPTION LOOSE Brown Fine SAND With Clay (SP-SC) (Continued) BLOWS PER 6 IN. N Value PERCENT ORGANIC MATERIAL PERCENT PASSING NO. 00 SIEVE PLASTIC LIMIT MOISTURE CONTENT LIQUID LIMIT (%) SHEAR STRENGTH (ksf) Undisturbed Sample Disturbed Sample Torvane Unconfined Compression Triaxial Compression MEDIUM DENSE Light Orange Fine SAND With Clay (SP-SC) FIRM Gray CLAY With Sand (CH) DENSE Light Brown to Light Orange Fine SAND (SP) LOG OF BORING GPJ ELLIS ASSOCIATES.GDT 6// Remarks LOOSE Light Orangish Brown Fine SAND (SP)

26 LOG OF BORING Project No.: Boring No.: B Sheet of Project: Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and 1/ of Berth 5 Client: HDR Engineering Inc Boring Location: Station 1+00, 75' Lt. Drill Rig: ATV Drill Rod: AWJ Driller: M. Foster Drill Mud: Super Gel-X Casing Size: Length of Casing: Groundwater Depth: 5 ft Time: Drilling Date: /8/1 Boring Begun: /8/1 Boring Completed: /8/1 SAMPLE NO. DEPTH, FEET 50 SAMPLE TYPE DESCRIPTION LOOSE Light Orangish Brown Fine SAND (SP) (Continued) BLOWS PER 6 IN. N Value PERCENT ORGANIC MATERIAL PERCENT PASSING NO. 00 SIEVE PLASTIC LIMIT MOISTURE CONTENT LIQUID LIMIT (%) SHEAR STRENGTH (ksf) Undisturbed Sample Disturbed Sample Torvane Unconfined Compression Triaxial Compression 0 1 Orangish Brown Weathered Limestone 1 55 WOH/1" 1 1 Lost Some Circulation LOG OF BORING GPJ ELLIS ASSOCIATES.GDT 6// Remarks Gray Weathered Limestone DENSE to VERY DENSE Gray Silty Fine SAND With Phosphate Nodules (Marl) (SM) 50/" 6 50/5" 50/" 50/5"

27 LOG OF BORING Project No.: Boring No.: B Sheet of Project: Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and 1/ of Berth 5 Client: HDR Engineering Inc Boring Location: Station 1+00, 75' Lt. Drill Rig: ATV Drill Rod: AWJ Driller: M. Foster Drill Mud: Super Gel-X Casing Size: Length of Casing: Groundwater Depth: 5 ft Time: Drilling Date: /8/1 Boring Begun: /8/1 Boring Completed: /8/1 SAMPLE NO. DEPTH, FEET 75 SAMPLE TYPE DESCRIPTION DENSE to VERY DENSE Gray Silty Fine SAND With Phosphate Nodules (Marl) (SM) (Continued) BLOWS PER 6 IN. N Value PERCENT ORGANIC MATERIAL PERCENT PASSING NO. 00 SIEVE PLASTIC LIMIT MOISTURE CONTENT LIQUID LIMIT (%) SHEAR STRENGTH (ksf) Undisturbed Sample Disturbed Sample Torvane Unconfined Compression Triaxial Compression /" 50/" Boring 90 ft LOG OF BORING GPJ ELLIS ASSOCIATES.GDT 6//1 Remarks

28 LOG OF BORING Project No.: Boring No.: B Sheet 1 of 1 Project: Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and 1/ of Berth 5 Client: HDR Engineering Inc Boring Location: Station +00, 50' Lt. Drill Rig: ATV Drill Rod: AWJ Driller: M. Foster Drill Mud: Super Gel-X Casing Size: Length of Casing: Groundwater Depth: NE Time: Drilling Date: /10/1 Boring Begun: /10/1 Boring Completed: /10/1 SAMPLE NO. DEPTH, FEET 0 SAMPLE TYPE DESCRIPTION 7" Asphalt Pavement 16" Limerock Base Light Brown Fine SAND With Limerock (SP) Light Gray Fine SAND (SP) Concrete Boring ft. BLOWS PER 6 IN. N Value PERCENT ORGANIC MATERIAL PERCENT PASSING NO. 00 SIEVE PLASTIC LIMIT MOISTURE CONTENT LIQUID LIMIT (%) SHEAR STRENGTH (ksf) Undisturbed Sample Disturbed Sample Torvane Unconfined Compression Triaxial Compression LOG OF BORING GPJ ELLIS ASSOCIATES.GDT 6//1 0 5 Remarks Cut through 8" of concrete with rebard and couldn't cut any further.

29 LOG OF BORING Project No.: Boring No.: B Sheet 1 of Project: Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and 1/ of Berth 5 Client: HDR Engineering Inc Boring Location: Station 7+5, 70' Lt. Drill Rig: ATV Drill Rod: AWJ Driller: M. Foster Drill Mud: Super Gel-X Casing Size: Length of Casing: Groundwater Depth: 5 ft Time: Drilling Date: //1 Boring Begun: //1 Boring Completed: //1 SAMPLE NO. 1 DEPTH, FEET 0 SAMPLE TYPE DESCRIPTION 7" Asphalt Pavement 5" Limerock Base MEDIUM DENSE Light Brown Fine SAND (SP) ' Concrete BLOWS PER 6 IN N Value 0 PERCENT ORGANIC MATERIAL PERCENT PASSING NO. 00 SIEVE PLASTIC LIMIT MOISTURE CONTENT LIQUID LIMIT (%) SHEAR STRENGTH (ksf) Undisturbed Sample Disturbed Sample Torvane Unconfined Compression Triaxial Compression LOOSE Grayish Brown Fine SAND (SP) MEDIUM DENSE to VERY LOOSE Gray Fine SAND (SP) LOG OF BORING GPJ ELLIS ASSOCIATES.GDT 6// Remarks 1 8

30 LOG OF BORING Project No.: Boring No.: B Sheet of Project: Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and 1/ of Berth 5 Client: HDR Engineering Inc Boring Location: Station 7+5, 70' Lt. Drill Rig: ATV Drill Rod: AWJ Driller: M. Foster Drill Mud: Super Gel-X Casing Size: Length of Casing: Groundwater Depth: 5 ft Time: Drilling Date: //1 Boring Begun: //1 Boring Completed: //1 SAMPLE NO. DEPTH, FEET 5 SAMPLE TYPE DESCRIPTION MEDIUM DENSE to VERY LOOSE Gray Fine SAND (SP) (Continued) BLOWS PER 6 IN. N Value PERCENT ORGANIC MATERIAL PERCENT PASSING NO. 00 SIEVE PLASTIC LIMIT MOISTURE CONTENT LIQUID LIMIT (%) SHEAR STRENGTH (ksf) Undisturbed Sample Disturbed Sample Torvane Unconfined Compression Triaxial Compression 0 1 MEDIUM DENSE Light Gray Fine SAND (SP) SOFT Dark Brown Organic SILT (OH) 10 5 WOH/1" MEDIUM DENSE Light Gray Fine SAND, Trace Clay (SP) LOG OF BORING GPJ ELLIS ASSOCIATES.GDT 6// Remarks Gray Weathered Limestone 5 50/" /" 18

31 LOG OF BORING Project No.: Boring No.: B Sheet of Project: Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and 1/ of Berth 5 Client: HDR Engineering Inc Boring Location: Station 7+5, 70' Lt. Drill Rig: ATV Drill Rod: AWJ Driller: M. Foster Drill Mud: Super Gel-X Casing Size: Length of Casing: Groundwater Depth: 5 ft Time: Drilling Date: //1 Boring Begun: //1 Boring Completed: //1 SAMPLE NO. DEPTH, FEET 50 SAMPLE TYPE DESCRIPTION Gray Weathered Limestone (Continued) BLOWS PER 6 IN. N Value PERCENT ORGANIC MATERIAL PERCENT PASSING NO. 00 SIEVE PLASTIC LIMIT MOISTURE CONTENT LIQUID LIMIT (%) SHEAR STRENGTH (ksf) Undisturbed Sample Disturbed Sample Torvane Unconfined Compression Triaxial Compression LOG OF BORING GPJ ELLIS ASSOCIATES.GDT 6// Remarks VERY DENSE Gray Very Silty Fine SAND With Phosphate Nodules (Marl) (SM) 50/.5" 50/.5" 100/6" 100/6"

32 LOG OF BORING Project No.: Boring No.: B Sheet of Project: Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and 1/ of Berth 5 Client: HDR Engineering Inc Boring Location: Station 7+5, 70' Lt. Drill Rig: ATV Drill Rod: AWJ Driller: M. Foster Drill Mud: Super Gel-X Casing Size: Length of Casing: Groundwater Depth: 5 ft Time: Drilling Date: //1 Boring Begun: //1 Boring Completed: //1 SAMPLE NO. DEPTH, FEET 75 SAMPLE TYPE DESCRIPTION VERY DENSE Gray Very Silty Fine SAND With Phosphate Nodules (Marl) (SM) (Continued) BLOWS PER 6 IN. N Value PERCENT ORGANIC MATERIAL PERCENT PASSING NO. 00 SIEVE PLASTIC LIMIT MOISTURE CONTENT LIQUID LIMIT (%) SHEAR STRENGTH (ksf) Undisturbed Sample Disturbed Sample Torvane Unconfined Compression Triaxial Compression /5" 50/5" 0 85 VERY DENSE Gray Silty Fine SAND With Phosphate Nodules (Marl) (SM) Boring 90 ft LOG OF BORING GPJ ELLIS ASSOCIATES.GDT 6//1 Remarks

33 APPENDIX B LABORATORY DATA LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES

34 FIELD EXPLORATION PROCEDURES Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Borings The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings were made in general accordance with the latest revision of ASTM D 1586, Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils. The borings were advanced by rotary (or wash-n-chop ) drilling techniques. At ½ to 5 foot intervals, a split-barrel sampler inserted to the borehole bottom and driven 18 inches into the soil using a 10 pound hammer falling on the average 0 inches per hammer blow. The number of hammer blows for the final 1 inches of penetration is termed the penetration resistance, blow count, or N-value. This value is an index to several in-place geotechnical properties of the material tested, such as relative density and Young s Modulus. After driving the sampler 18 inches (or less if in hard rock-like material), the sampler was retrieved from the borehole and representative samples of the material within the split-barrel were containerized and sealed. After completing the drilling operations, the samples for each boring were transported to our laboratory where they were examined by our engineer in order to verify the driller s field classification. The retrieved samples will be kept in our facility for a period of six (6) months unless directed otherwise.

35 KEY TO SOIL CLASSIFICATION Description of Compactness or Consistency in Relation To Standard Penetration Resistance COARSE GRAINED SOILS (Sands and Gravels) N-Value Compactness 0 Very Loose 10 Loose 11 0 Medium Dense 1 50 Dense 51 and Greater Very Dense FINE GRAINED SOILS (Silts and Clays) N-Value Consistency 0 1 Very Soft Soft 5 8 Firm 9 15 Stiff 16 0 Very Stiff 1 and Greater Hard DESCRIPTION OF SOIL COMPOSITION** (Unified Soil Classification System) MAJOR DIVISION Group Symbol LABORATORY CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA FINER THAN SUPPLEMENTARY 00 SIEVE % REQUIREMENTS SOIL DESCRIPTION Coarse grained (over 50% by weight coarser than No. Gravelly soils (over half of coarse fraction larger than No. ) 00 sieve) Sandy soils (over half of coarse fraction finer than No. ) Fine grained (over 50% by weight finer than No. 00 sieve) Low compressibility (liquid limit less than 50) High compressibility (liquid limit more than 50) GW <5* GP <5* D 60 /D 10 greater than, D 0 / (D 60 x D 10 ) between 1 & Not meeting above gradation for GW Well graded gravels, sandy gravels Gap graded or uniform gravels, sandy gravels GM >1* PI less than or below A-line Silty gravels, silty sandy gravels GC >1* PI over 7 above A-line Clayey gravels, clayey sandy gravels SW <5* SP <5* D 60 /D 10 greater than 6, D 0 / (D 60 x D 10 ) between 1 & Not meeting above gradation requirements Well graded sands, gravelly sands Gap graded or uniform sands, gravelly sands SM >1* PI less than or below A-line Silty sands, silty gravelly sands SC >1* PI over 7 and above A-line Clayey sands, clayey gravelly sands ML Plasticity chart Silts, very fine sands, silty or clayey fine sands, micaceous silts CL Plasticity chart Low plasticity clays, sandy or silty clays OL Plasticity chart, organic odor or color Organic silts and clays of low plasticity MH Plasticity chart Micaceous silts, diatomaceous silts, volcanic ash CH Plasticity chart Highly plastic clays and sandy clays OH Plasticity chart, organic odor or color Organic silts and clays of high plasticity Soils with fibrous organic matter PT Fibrous organic matter; will char, burn or glow Peat, sandy peats, and clayey peat * For soils having 5 to 1 percent passing the No. 00 sieve, use a dual symbol such as SP-SM. ** Standard Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (ASTM D 87) SAND/GRAVEL DESCRIPTION MODIFIERS Modifier Sand/Gravel Content Trace <15% With 15% to 9% Sandy/Gravelly >9% ORGANIC MATERIAL MODIFIERS Modifier Organic Content Trace 1% to % Few % to % Some % to 8% Many >8% SILT/CLAY DESCRIPTION MODIFIERS Modifier Silt/Clay Content Trace <5% With 5% to1% Silty/Clayey 1% to 5% Very >5%

36 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Project: Rehabilitation Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and 1/ of Berth 5 Client: HDR engineering, Inc. Project No.: Natural Atterberg Limits Sample Organic Fines Moisture Liquid Plastic Plasticity Pocket Boring/ Depth Content Content Content Limit Limit Index Pen. Sample No. (ft.) % % % % % (tsf) B B1-1 A B B B B B B

37 Corrosion Series Test Results for Sheet Pile Replacement Rehabilitate Wharf Structure at Berths 6 and 1/ of Berth 5 Duval County, Florida E&A Project No Boring No. / Approximate Station (1) Offset (ft) Sample No. Test Depth () B1/ B1/ B/ ' Lt. SP B/ (1) Stationing and Offsets should be considered approximate. () Feet below existing ground surface. Unified Classification SP ph 7.7 Resistivity (ohm-cm) Chlorides (ppm), Sulfates (ppm)

38 LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES Percent Fines Content The percent fines or material passing the No. 00 mesh sieve of the sample tested was determined in general accordance with the latest revision of ASTM D 110. The percent fines are the soil particles in the silt and clay size range. Natural Moisture Content The water content of the sample tests was determined in general accordance with the latest revision of ASTM D 16. The water content is defined as the ratio of pore or free water in a given mass of material to the mass of solid material particles. Atterberg Limits The Atterberg Limits consist of the Liquid Limit (LL) and the Plastic Limit (PL). The LL and PL were determined in general accordance with the latest revision of ASTM D 18. The LL is the water content of the material denoting the boundary between the liquid and plastic states. The PL is the water content denoting the boundary between the plastic and semi-solid states. The Plasticity Index (PI) is the range of water content over which a soil behaves plastically and is denoted numerically by the difference between the LL and the PL. The water content of the sample tested was determined in general accordance with the latest revision of ASTM D 16. The water content is defined as the ration of pore or free water in a given mass of material to the mass of solid material particles. Organic Loss on Ignition (Percent Organics) The organic loss on ignition or percent organic material in the sample tested was determined in general accordance with ASTM D 97. The percent organics is the material, expressed as a percentage, which is burned off in a muffle furnace at 55±10 degrees Celsius.