Task 09L Geotechnical Report

5600 West Herriman; Main Street to

11800 South
December 14, 2010

Final Report

UDOT Project F-LC35(197) PIN 7635

Prepared by:
URS Corporation
756 East Winchester Street, Suite 400
Salt Lake City, Utah 84107
(801) 904-4000

URS Project 24585139

5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ................................................ 1
SECTION 2 SITE CONDITIONS ................................................................................ 2
SECTION 3 FIELD INVESTIGATION AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .............. 3
3.1 GEOLOGY ..................................................................................................................... 3
3.2 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION .................................................................................. 3
3.3 PENETRATION TEST RESULTS .................................................................................. 3
3.4 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS................................................................................... 4
3.5 INTERPRETED SOIL PROFILES .................................................................................. 4
SECTION 4 SEISMICITY AND GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ........................................... 6
4.1 GENERAL ...................................................................................................................... 6
4.2 SEISMIC HAZARD......................................................................................................... 6
4.3 WETTING-INDUCED COLLAPSE ................................................................................. 7
4.4 PROBLEMATIC SOILS ................................................................................................. 8
SECTION 5 EARTHWORK AND COMPACTION ..................................................... 9
5.1 GENERAL ...................................................................................................................... 9
5.2 EXCAVATIONS ............................................................................................................. 9
5.3 BORROW AND COMPACTION SPECIFICATIONS ...................................................... 9
5.3.1 General .................................................................................................................. 9
5.3.2 Subgrade Preparation .........................................................................................10
5.3.3 Embankment ........................................................................................................10
5.3.4 Granular Borrow and Granular Backfill Borrow ................................................11
5.3.5 Free Draining Granular Backfill ..........................................................................11
5.4 GROUND IMPROVEMENT ...........................................................................................11
5.4.1 Recommendations for Zone A ............................................................................12
5.4.2 Recommendations for Zone B ............................................................................12
5.4.3 Recommendations for Zone C ............................................................................13
SECTION 6 PAVEMENT DESIGN........................................................................... 14
6.1 DESIGN APPROACH ...................................................................................................14
6.2 INPUT PARAMETERS ..................................................................................................14
6.2.1 Subgrade Support ...............................................................................................15
6.2.2 Traffic Data ...........................................................................................................16
6.3 RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................16
SECTION 7 EARTH RETAINING STRUCTURES ................................................... 19
7.1 RETAINING WALL DESIGN GUIDELINES ..................................................................19
7.1.1 General .................................................................................................................19
7.1.2 Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls ...................................................................20
7.1.3 Post & Panel Walls ..............................................................................................21
7.2 EXTERNAL STABILITY OF MSE WALLS ....................................................................21
SECTION 8 CULVERT FOUNDATIONS ................................................................. 23
8.1 GENERAL .....................................................................................................................23
8.2 BEARING CAPACITY ...................................................................................................23
8.3 FOUNDATION CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS ................................................24

page ii
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

SECTION 9 LIMITATIONS ...................................................................................... 25

SECTION 10 REFERENCES ..................................................................................... 26

TABLES
1 Distribution of N’60 Values by Soil Type
2 Interpreted Subsurface Profile for the Midas Creek Crossing – North
3 Interpreted Subsurface Profile for the Midas Creek Crossing – South
4 Interpreted Subsurface Profile for P&P Retaining Walls
5 Fault Properties and Distances
6 NEHRP Bedrock Ground Motion Values
7 AASHTO 2009 Seismic Design Parameters
8 Laboratory Results for Wetting-Induced Collapse
9 AASHTO Classification Criteria
10 Ground Improvement Zones
11 Minimum Layer Thicknesses
12 Flexible Pavement Design Parameters
13 Design CBR Values
14 Recommended Pavement Sections
15 Geotechnical Design Criteria for Retaining Walls
16 Interpreted Strength Parameters for MSE Wall Stability
17 Minimum Factors of Safety for MSE Walls
18 Mat Foundation Bearing Capacity Summary

FIGURES
1 Location Map
2 Exploration Location Map
3 Geologic Map
4 Schematic of Wetting-Induced Collapse
5 Wetting Induced Collapse Susceptibility of Samples
6 Ground Improvement Areas
7 Pavement Areas

APPENDICES
A Logs of Borings and Test Pits
B Laboratory Test Results
C Seismicity
D Specifications
E Pavement Design
F MSE Wall Stability

page iii
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

This report presents findings of the geotechnical investigation and our recommendations for the
geotechnical portions of task 09L in support of the 5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800
South Project, UDOT project number F-LC35(197) PIN 7635. The proposed project consists of
construction of approximately 1.6 miles of new roadway for 5600 West between Main Street and
11800 South and a steel arch structure at Midas Creek. A five lane alignment is planned for the
roadway. Proposed work will require grading, ground improvement, construction of post and
panel (P&P) retaining walls south of Herriman Parkway, and construction associated with the
crossing at the Midas Creek. Site location and exploration location maps showing the locations
of the site, borings, and tests pits are provided as Figures 1 and 2.

The scope of work included the following:

A Field Investigation The field exploration included site reconnaissance, exploratory drilling,
excavation of test pits, in-situ testing, and sampling. Findings are discussed in Section 3 and
provided in Appendices A and B.
B Laboratory Testing of samples obtained during the field investigation. Results are
discussed in Section 3 and provided in Appendices A and B.
C Geotechnical Evaluations and Recommendations
a) Subsurface Conditions evaluated from available geologic data, field investigation data,
and laboratory data to develop interpreted subsurface profiles for the site.
b) Pavement Design including subgrade characterization, flexible pavement design, and
drainage recommendations.
c) Retaining Wall Design including external stability, bearing resistance, and development
of project specifications for contractor designed MSE walls.
c) Embankment Design including global stability, foundation support, and development of
project specifications for embankment subgrade.
d) Ground Improvement evaluated to improve soils susceptible to wetting induced
collapse and having poor subgrade strength.
e) Foundation Design including bearing resistance and construction considerations for the
foundations of the Midas Creek Crossing.

This geotechnical investigation was performed according to the UDOT Design Network Manual
(UDOT, 2009a), the Geotechnical Manual of Instruction (GMOI) (UDOT, 2009b), and related
UDOT specifications.

page 1
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

SECTION 2 SITE CONDITIONS

The site is located in the southwest portion of the Salt Lake Valley in the City of Herriman. The
Oquirrh, Traverse, and Wasatch Mountains are located approximately 8 miles west, 3 miles
south, and 16 miles east of the site respectively. The project area extends as shown in Figure 2,
between Main Street and 11800 South for approximately 8,000 feet.

The project area is largely undeveloped land; however, residential development was observed
adjacent to the project area from stations 23+00 to 50+00 and again from 200+00 to 210+00.
The alignment intersects with Main Street, 12900 South, Toscana Way, Salerno Street,
Herriman Parkway, and 11800 South as shown in Figure 2. The project alignment north of
station 50+00 is currently used for agricultural purposes. It is likely that the entire project area
was historically used for agriculture. A Questar high-pressure gas line runs along the project
alignment. A school is located east of the site near stations 11+20 to 20+00. The ground surface
in the project area generally slopes downward to the east as indicated by the contours shown
on the geologic map in Figure 3.

page 2
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

SECTION 3 FIELD INVESTIGATION AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

3.1 GEOLOGY
Subsurface soils within the project area are mapped as Holocene to Upper Pleistocene Age,
fine grained lacustrine sand, silt, and clay deposits with localized areas of coarse-grained
(gravel and sand) lacustrine and alluvial deposits (Biek, 2005). Fine grained soils (silt and clay)
were deposited at and below the highest Lake Bonneville Shoreline level and above the Provo
Lake Bonneville Shoreline level. The coarse grained alluvial soils (sand and gravel) have been
deposited primarily by alluvial and debris-flow processes. The project area also includes some
areas of modern stream deposits consisting of moderately to well-sorted sand, silt, clay, and
pebble to boulder size gravel in active stream channels and flood plains (Midas Creek). A
geologic map of the project area is shown in Figure 3.

3.2 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION

URS performed a subsurface investigation in support of the design and construction of the
project components listed in Section 1. The subsurface investigation included two test borings
and 19 test pits at the approximate locations shown on Figure 2. Groundwater was not
encountered in any of the explorations during the subsurface investigation.

Drilling and test pit excavations were performed between February 24, and March 1, 2010.
Drilling and excavating services were provided by AGEC. A truck-mounted Central Mine
Equipment (CME) 750 all-terrain rig equipped with hollow stem augers was used to advance the
borings to a depth of 40 feet below the existing ground surface. Soil samples were obtained by
driving a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) split-spoon sampler and a Dames and Moore
sampler according to ASTM D 1586 and ASTM D 3550; respectively. Test pits were excavated
to depths between 13 and 14 feet below the existing ground surface to enable visual
observations of subsurface soils and to obtain disturbed bag and relatively undisturbed block
samples. A URS engineer logged the boreholes and test pits and collected soil samples which
were labeled and sealed in plastic bags and buckets. The boring and test pit logs are provided
in Appendix A.

Groundwater was not encountered in any of the borings or test pits. There is a possibility that
the contractor may encounter some localized groundwater perched on fine grained soil layers.

3.3 PENETRATION TEST RESULTS

The field blowcounts (N-Values) were adjusted for drilling conditions, hammer energy, and
confining stress to calculate the N’60 values. Mean N’60 values of 43 and 11, for granular and
fine grained soils, respectively, demonstrate the variation in soil density and consistency near
the culvert location. See Table 1 for additional information.

page 3
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

Table 1. Distribution of N’60 Values by Soil Type

Statistical N’60 Blowcounts1

Parameters Granular Soils2 Fine-Grained Soils3
Number of Tests 6 12
Minimum 30 4
Maximum >50 19
Mean >43 11
Median >48 10
Standard Deviation 9 5
Notes:
1. N’60 values greater than 50 were truncated to 50.
2. Granular soils consist of sand and gravel.
3. Fine-grained soils consist of clay and silt.

3.4 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

Laboratory tests were performed on selected samples collected during the site investigation to
assess index and strength properties of the subsurface soils. Laboratory testing was performed
by AGEC and IGES. Laboratory testing included moisture content, dry unit weight, Atterberg
limits, grain size distribution, hydrometer, collapse, direct shear, and chemical reactivity.
Laboratory testing was completed in accordance with ASTM and AASHTO specifications.
Laboratory test results are provided in Appendix B.

Soil classification according to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) and the American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) classification system was
performed after completion of the laboratory testing program. Soil classifications are provided
on the boring logs in Appendix A.

3.5 INTERPRETED SOIL PROFILES

Interpreted subsurface profiles for the Midas Creek crossing and retaining walls are shown
below in Tables 2 through 4. The crossing and retaining structures are located as shown on
Figure 2. The interpreted subsurface profiles for the Midas Creek Crossing are based on
borings B-8 (north) and B-9 (south). The interpreted profile for the post and panel (P&P)
retaining walls is based on test pits TP-12 through TP-19. These profiles were developed by
grouping soils with similar material properties and were used for global stability analyses as
discussed in Section 7.2.

Table 2. Interpreted Subsurface Profile for the Midas Creek Crossing – North
Elevation Depth Description of soil units USCS Symbol
(ft) (ft)
4867-4834 0-33 Lean Clay and lean Clay with some Sand CL
4834-4829 33-38 Gravel GW
4829-4827 38-40 Lean Clay CL

page 4
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

Table 3. Interpreted Subsurface Profile for the Midas Creek Crossing – South
Elevation Depth Description of soil units USCS Symbol
(ft) (ft)
4869-4856 0-13 Lean Clay CL
4856-4846 13-23 Gravel GW/GP-GM
4846-4841 23-28 Lean Clay with some Sand CL
4841-4828 28-42 Gravel GW/GC

Table 4. Interpreted Subsurface Profile for P&P Retaining Walls

Elevation1 Depth Description of soil units USCS Symbol
(ft) (ft)
4878-4873 0-5 Lean Clay CL
4873-4864 5-14 Well-graded Gravel GW
Notes:
1. Average value from test pits TP-12 to TP-19.

page 5
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

SECTION 4 SEISMICITY AND GEOLOGIC HAZARDS

4.1 GENERAL
The project area is located in a zone of high seismicity. Evidence of surface rupture hazard
including visible scarps and geomorphology was not observed at the site. Soils susceptible to
liquefaction (loose and saturated sand and gravel) were not encountered during our subsurface
investigation. The banks of Midas Creek may be susceptible to erosion and freeze-thaw.

4.2 SEISMIC HAZARD

Anticipated strong ground motion is high due to the site’s proximity to known nearby faults
shown in Table 5 and the high seismic hazard in the region associated with tectonic uplift and
extension within the basin and range province of the central Rocky Mountains (Machette, 2005).

Table 5. Fault Properties and Distances

Name Magnitude1 Length1, mile Closest Distance2, mile
Wasatch Fault (Salt Lake) 7.1 30 10
Wasatch Fault (Provo) 7.4 46 11
Taylorsville Fault 6.5 10 9
Oquirrh Fault 6.7 17 9
Utah Lake Faults — 19 14
Notes:
1. Fault parameters were taken from the USGS Fault and Fold Database (USGS, 2009) when available.
2. The distance from the site to the nearest surface projection of the fault.

The UDOT GMOI requires seismic design using bedrock ground motions from the National
Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) National Seismic Hazard Maps (Peterson et
al., 2008). Horizontal peak ground acceleration (PGA) and spectral acceleration (SA) values of
bedrock ground motions are shown in Table 6.

Table 6. NEHRP Bedrock Ground Motion Values

Intensity Measure Type Intensity Measure Level (g)1,2

Exceedance Probability 3% in 75 yr. 7% in 75 yr.
PGA3 0.48 0.30
SS4 1.10 0.80
S15 0.36 0.21
Notes:
1. Peterson et al. 2008
2. Intensity measure values correspond to the following location: 40.5 Latitude and -112.0 Longitude.
3. Peak ground acceleration is the acceleration at a period of zero seconds.
4. The spectral acceleration at 0.2 seconds.
5. The spectral acceleration at 1.0 seconds.

UDOT has adopted the seismic design provisions of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design
Specifications (AASHTO, 2009a) for seismic design of geotechnical elements and structures in
the State. Based on NEHRP bedrock motions, AASHTO requires assigning a Site Class to the
project site to develop the site response spectrum. The Site Class represents the general
density or consistency of the soils and bedrock within the upper 100 ft of the subsurface profile.

page 6
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

The project area is generally classified as Site Class D based on shallow explorations from our
subsurface investigation, local geologic information (McDonald and Ashland 2008), and
engineering judgment. McDonald and Ashland correlated Vs30 and Site Class with major
geologic units along the Wasatch Front. The site class values reported for the site by McDonald
and Ashland range from C to D.

AASHTO seismic design parameters are shown in Table 7. The parameters are derived from
the bedrock ground motions in Table 6 and Site Class D NEHRP factors for 3 and 7 percent
probabilities of exceedance in 75 years corresponding to return periods of 2,462 and 1,033
years. Refer to the governing UDOT Manuals of Instruction and project specifications for
geotechnical and structural applications of the ground motions parameters provided in Table 7.
As shown in Appendix C, the corresponding response spectra can be constructed from these
values using AASHTO 2009 seismic design provisions.

Table 7. AASHTO 2009 Seismic Design Parameters

Intensity Measure Type1 Intensity Measure Level
Exceedance Probability 3% in 75 yr. 7% in 75 yr.
Fpga 1.02 1.20
Fa (-) 1.06 1.18
Fv 1.68 1.98
AS 0.49 0.36
SDS (g) 1.17 0.94
SD1 0.60 0.42

Notes:
1. Fpga Site coefficient for peak ground acceleration,
Fa Site coefficient for 0.2-sec period spectral acceleration
Fv Site coefficient for 1.0-sec period spectral acceleration
AS Design acceleration coefficient
SDS Design earthquake response spectral acceleration for 0.2-second period
SD1 Design earthquake response spectral acceleration for 1.0-second period

4.3 WETTING-INDUCED COLLAPSE

Wetting-induced collapse can occur in soil deposits having considerable strength in a dry state
despite a loose particle structure. Collapsible soils may be found in debris-flow deposits in
young alluvial fans, aeolian (wind blown) deposits such as dunes and loess, lacustrine and
colluvial deposits, residual soils and tuff, loose sands and gravels, dispersive clays, and fills
compacted dry of optimum moisture content (Owens and Rollins, 1990; Mulvey, 1992; and
Santi, 2005). Collapsible soils are generally characterized by relatively low dry unit weight and
high void ratio.

Collapsible soils are able to support increased loading while in a dry state; however, the
introduction of water to the soil structure causes particle reorientation, resulting in settlement. A
conceptual view of wetting-induced collapse is shown in Figure 4.

Collapsible soils were encountered during our subsurface investigation. Laboratory testing was
performed to evaluate collapse potential and unit weight. A summary of key index properties
and collapse measurements is shown in Table 8.

page 7
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

Table 8. Laboratory Test Results for Wetting-Induced Collapse

Dry Unit
Exploration Sample Liquid Collapse3, Collapse
Weight,
ID1 Depth2, ft Limit % Potential4
pcf

B-8 2 89.8 34 — Moderate

TP-16a 2 80.1 35 5.1 High
TP-16b 2 79.5 35 7.3 High

Notes:
1. Samples in bold text indicate potential for collapse (see below for more information).
2. Sample depths are measured below the existing ground surface.
3. Collapse tests were performed with a load of 1000 psf.
4. High collapse potential – Based on measured or correlated collapse (Gibbs and Bara, 1962; Holtz and Hilf,
1961; and Holtz and Kovacs, 1981)
Moderate collapse potential –Potential for collapse is indefinite based on the correlations listed above and
was not excluded based on available data including direct measurement of liquid limit and clay content.

Results in bold on Table 8 correspond to locations and depths where collapse potential exists
based on collapse test results showing greater than 2 percent collapse and empirical
relationships. Collapse potential was estimated using empirical correlations based on in-situ dry
density and liquid limit (Gibbs and Bara, 1962; Holtz and Hilf, 1961; and Holtz and Kovacs,
1981). Figure 5 shows the correlations with boring and test pit specimens sampled in native
soils.

Soils with fines content, sand content, and plasticity indices similar to the collapsible samples
from TP-16 were also encountered in test pits TP-15 through TP-19. The sample from boring B-
8 plots at the upper boundary for collapse potential as shown on Figure 5. However, if this
sample underwent densification during sampling, the collapse potential could be somewhat
higher than shown on Figure 5. Further discussion of wetting induced collapse potential and
recommendations for ground improvement are provided in Section 5.4.

4.4 PROBLEMATIC SOILS

The upper strata encountered in all explorations consist of soils considered to provide poor
subgrade support. These soils consist of lean clay (CL) soils according to the USCS soil
classification system and A-6 to A-7 soils according to the AASHTO soil classification system
(see Table 9 in Section 5). These soils range in thickness across the alignment between 2 and
10 feet below existing surface grades and deeper in explorations TP-6, TP-7, B-8, and B-9.
Further information related to construction practices with A-6 and A-7 soils is provided in
Section 5.

page 8
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

SECTION 5 EARTHWORK AND COMPACTION

5.1 GENERAL
Anticipated earthwork for this project consists of removing surface topsoil, ground treatment,
grading, construction of MSE and post and panel walls, excavation, culvert foundation
preparation, and backfilling around the culvert. Evaluation or identification of potentially
hazardous materials is not part of the URS scope of work.

5.2 EXCAVATIONS
It is the responsibility of the contractor to provide a safe excavation during the construction of
the proposed project. All excavations should be constructed in accordance with applicable
Federal, State, and local safety regulations, including but not limited to current Occupational
Safety and Health Administration excavation safety standards and UDOT standard
specifications 02316 and 02317.

Excavations to the depths required for the installation of new retaining walls and culvert
foundations are expected to be up to 30 feet. The excavations are expected to encounter
various types of natural soils as described in Section 3.

Soil pressures on temporary shoring are dependent on soil conditions, depth of the excavation,
shoring design and installation procedures, and the magnitude of any surcharge loads on the
ground surface adjacent to the support. Field determinations of these conditions should be made
by the contractors’ competent person trained in OSHA excavation requirements as required by
OSHA.

5.3 BORROW AND COMPACTION SPECIFICATIONS

5.3.1 General

Approved soil gradations and compaction requirements for embankment, granular borrow, and
backfill are provided in UDOT specification 02056. A modified version of this specification
02056M was prepared for use on this project to provide wet-of-optimum compaction criteria to
reduce the potential for collapse of soils compacted dry of optimum moisture content.
Specifications for ground improvement are discussed further in Section 5.4 and include 02058S,
02076S, and 02316M.

Special provision 02832S has been prepared for use on this project and provides subgrade and
backfill soil specifications and compaction requirements for MSE walls. See Section 7 for
additional information related to MSE walls. Modified and special project specifications are
included in Appendix D.

All soils should be unfrozen and free of organic matter, debris, and other deleterious substances
including chemical or petroleum products. Soils may include recycled portland cement concrete;
however, the recycled concrete should meet all the requirements of the relevant specifications.
Materials should be tested using methods and frequencies listed in the project specifications.
AASHTO classification descriptions are provided for reference in Table 9. Imported material
should be inspected and tested by a qualified geotechnical laboratory prior to delivery to site to
verify conformance with project and AASHTO specifications.

page 9
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

Table 9. AASHTO Classification Criteria

Granular Material Silt-Clay Materials

General Classification1
(35 Percent or Less Passing No. 200) (More Than 35 Percent Passing No. 200)

A-1 A-2 A-72

Group Classification A-3 A-4 A-5 A-6 A-7-5,
A-1-a A-1-b A-2-4 A-2-5 A-2-6 A-2-7
A-7-6

Sieve Analysis, percent passing

No. 10 50 max - - - - - - - - - -
No. 40 30 max 50 max 51 min - - - - - - - -
No. 200 15 max 25 max 10 max 35 max 35 max 35 max 35 max 36 min 36 min 36 min 36 min
Characteristics of fraction passing No.
40
Liquid Limit - - 40 max 41 min 40 max 41 min 40 max 41 min 40 max 41 min
Plasticity Index 6 max NP 10 max 10 max 11 min 11 min 10 max 10 max 11 min 11 min

Usual types of significant constituent Stone Fragments, Fine

Silty or Clayey Gravel and Sand Silty Soils Clayey Soils
materials Gravel, and Sand Sand

General rating as subgrade Excellent to Good Fair to Poor

Notes:
1. AASHTO M 145, Table 2
2. Plasticity index of A-7-5 subgroup is equal to or less than LL minus 30. Plasticity index of A-7-6 subgroup is
greater than LL minus 30.

5.3.2 Subgrade Preparation

Site work should begin with removal of vegetation, debris and other deleterious material in
areas to receive fill per project specifications 02231 and 02912. Topsoil, vegetation, debris, and
other deleterious or adverse soils and materials excavated during construction should not be
reused for backfill, but should be properly disposed of off-site.

The upper 8 inches of granular (sand and gravel) subgrade should be scarified, moisture
conditioned, and compacted to at least 96 percent of the maximum dry unit weight and between
0 and 3 percent wetter than the optimum moisture content. The maximum dry unit weight and
optimum moisture content for embankment soils should be determined by AASHTO T-99
standard Proctor per specification 02056M.

Areas of clayey subgrade are anticipated to be very soft within the project area and need to be
handled to limit disturbance and deformation. Ground improvement is needed to provide
adequate subgrade strength and an adequate working platform. See Section 5.4 for additional
information.

5.3.3 Embankment

Embankment soils should meet the requirements in specification 02056M. Compaction of

embankment soils should be performed to at least 96 percent of the maximum dry unit weight
and between 0 and 3 percent wetter than the optimum moisture content. The maximum dry unit
weight and optimum moisture content for embankment soils should be determined per AASHTO
T-99 standard Proctor. On-site clayey soils are not anticipated to meet the embankment
requirements.

page 10
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

5.3.4 Granular Borrow and Granular Backfill Borrow

On-site and imported granular borrow should meet the requirements of specification 02056M.
Compaction of granular borrow soils should be performed to at least 96 percent of the maximum
dry unit weight and between plus or minus 2 percent of the optimum moisture content. The
maximum dry unit weight and optimum moisture content for granular borrow soils should be
determined per AASHTO T-180 modified Proctor.

5.3.5 Free Draining Granular Backfill

Free-draining granular backfill borrow should meet the requirements of specification 02056M.
Three passes with a vibratory plate compactor and a reduced maximum lift thickness of 8
inches (uncompacted thickness) should be used in areas of limited access or near sensitive
structures. Use appropriate compaction equipment adjacent to sensitive structures such as,
backwalls, wing walls, and retaining walls. Specification 02056M describes the process for
placing free draining granular backfill around pipes.

5.4 GROUND IMPROVEMENT

Wetting induced collapse and poor performance of clayey subgrade soils contribute to a
potential for differential settlement of the pavement subgrade. Settlement of the subgrade may
lead to structural damage and premature failure of the proposed pavement section. Damage
from wetting induced collapse is not expected to occur immediately; rather, it is likely to occur
slowly over the design life of the pavement section and result in multiple repairs and leveling
projects. Ground improvement can be used to mitigate these hazards within the project area.

Ground improvement is recommended in areas where collapse was measured in laboratory

tests, correlated using empirical relationships, or suspected based on similar soil composition,
fabric, and deposition as shown on Table 8 and Figure 6. Improvement is also recommended to
increase the subgrade strength of weak clayey soils (AASHTO classification A-6 and A-7)
present across the site. Ground improvement is divided into three zones based on the ground
treatment requirements discussed below (see Figure 6 and Table 10).

page 11
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

Table 10. Ground Improvement Zones

Bid Stations (ft)

Zone ID1 Methods2,3
Component Start End
Additive 1 10+99 22+50 OR
Additive 2 40+82 50+92 OR
A
Additive 3 29+46 40+82 —
Additive 4 22+50 29+46 —
B Main Bid 51+68 86+13 GG
C Main Bid 200+38 210+82 OR/GG
Notes:
1. Treatment required within roadway area between outside edges of proposed pavement.
2. See below for additional information related to ground improvement including method and depth
requirements.
3. OR, over-excavation of subgrade and replacement with granular borrow; and GG, improvement using
geogrid and compacted granular borrow.

5.4.1 Recommendations for Zone A

Zone A is not part of the main bid and is divided into four additive bids as shown in Figures 6
and 7. Ground improvement for additive bid areas 1 and 2 includes the complete removal of the
surficial clay layer to a depth up to 5 feet below proposed grade to mitigate wetting-induced
collapse potential and weak subgrade soils (see specification 02058S in Appendix D). A gravel
layer suitable for pavement support was observed in the test pits within 1 to 9 feet of the existing
ground surface. Site grading consists mostly of cut and may expose the gravel layer at some
locations. A CBR of 10 may be used for design of pavements in zone A constructed on the
following subgrades:

 Undisturbed native gravel

 Compacted granular borrow over undisturbed native gravel
 Five feet of compacted granular borrow over non-woven geotextile over clayey
undisturbed native soils

The gravel level is deep in additive bid areas 3 and 4 and significant earthwork is required to
remove the deleterious soils. Our understanding is that Herriman City has elected not to perform
any ground treatment in these areas and understands that additional maintenance will be
required during the design life of the pavement section.

5.4.2 Recommendations for Zone B

Ground improvement in zone B is recommended to mitigate the potential for pavement distress
due to relatively soft subgrade soils present at the site. URS recommends ground improvement
using geogrid and compacted granular borrow to provide reinforcement across the pavement
shear surface and lateral restraint of the pavement section. A CBR of 6 can be used for design

page 12
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

of pavements constructed over 16 inches of compacted granular borrow, underlain by type II

geogrid (see specification 02076S) over non-woven geotextile placed directly over the subgrade
soil. SpectraPav4Pro (Tensar, 2010) was used to calculate the improved subgrade thickness.

5.4.3 Recommendations for Zone C

Ground improvement in zone C includes the complete removal of the relatively soft surficial clay
layer (see specification 02058S in Appendix D. A gravel layer suitable for pavement support
was observed in the test pits within 2 to 4 feet of the existing ground surface. A CBR of 10 may
be used for design of pavements in zone A constructed on the following improved subgrades:

 Undisturbed native gravel

 Compacted granular borrow over undisturbed native gravel

The geogrid improvement method specified for zone B may be used for zone C if over
excavation/replacement is too costly due to the depth of the gravel layer.

page 13
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

SECTION 6 PAVEMENT DESIGN

6.1 DESIGN APPROACH

URS performed pavement design of flexible hot mix asphalt (HMA) pavements. URS relied on
traffic volume, truck percentages, and growth rates provided by Herriman City.

The designs were performed using standard UDOT pavement design procedures (UDOT, 2008)
based on the AASHTO 1993 design guide (AASHTO 1993). The computer program DARWin
3.1 (AASHTOWare) was used to calculate the pavement design thicknesses. The layered
flexible pavement section evaluated consists of hot mix asphalt, underlain by untreated base
course, granular borrow, and subgrade.

6.2 INPUT PARAMETERS

The thickness of each individual layer and the overall thickness of the section were adjusted for
the minimum frost depth, drainage condition, and minimum layer thickness. Table 11 presents
the minimum layer thicknesses required by UDOT. The design parameters used for flexible
pavement design are presented in Table 12.

Table 11. Minimum Layer Thicknesses

Layer Minimum Thickness (in)

Dense Graded Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) 2.5

Untreated Base Course (UTBC) 4
Granular Borrow (GB) 6

page 14
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

Table 12. Flexible Pavement Design Parameters

Parameters Descriptions Comments

Classification Urban -
Design Life 20 years -
Traffic Loading See Appendix E Obtained from Herriman City

Frontage Roads
Pavement Serviceability PSI = 1.7
UDOT manual
Index, PSI PSIinitial = 4.2
PSIterminal = 2.5

1
HMA : 160,000 psi
1 Mr = (CBR value X 1,500) for
Resilient Modulus, Mr UTBC : 27,000 psi
1 subgrade layers
GB : 15,000 psi

HMA: 0.40
UDOT manual
Layer Coefficient, ai UTBC: 0.1
GB: 0.08

1.0 with positive drainage maintained.

Drainage quality classification (Table Maximum value 1.0 set by
Drainage Coefficient, mi
3D-3) and coefficient values (Table UDOT
3D-4) (AASHTO, 1993)
Reliability, ZR 90% UDOT manual
Standard Deviation, So 0.45 UDOT manual
Minimum Frost Depth 20-30 inches UDOT Manual Figure 3A-4

Notes:
1. HMA, hot mix asphalt; UTBC, untreated base course; GB, granular borrow.
2. SN, structural number; ai, layer coefficient; Di, layer thickness; mi, drainage coefficient.

6.2.1 Subgrade Support

UDOT has specified the use of California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test results performed at 96 to
100 percent of the maximum density using the AASHTO T99 compaction method. The
proposed alignment and laboratory test data are shown in Figure 7.

The alignment was divided into three zones with similar subgrade properties. These zones
correspond to the ground improvement zones discussed in Section 5.4. The alignment north of
Herriman Parkway (station 52+00) in zones B and C is dominated by weak clayey soils with
CBR measurements less than 2. CBR values increase south of Herriman Parkway with
increasing sand content. Table 13 shows the design CBR values with and without consideration
of ground improvement.

page 15
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

Table 13. Design CBR Values

Design CBR
1 Bid Measured
Zone ID
Component CBR2 Unimproved Improved

Additive 1, 2 3.0 10
A 3.3 – 8.7
Additive 3, 4 3.5 —
B Main Bid 1.6 – 1.9 1.5 6

C Main Bid 1.8 1.5 10

Notes:
1. See Table 10 for limits of treatment zones.
2. See Appendices A and B for CBR test results.

6.2.2 Traffic Data

Traffic loading for 5600 West project was developed based on verbal communication with
Herriman City and data from the Traffic Master Plan (Herriman City, 2008). Daily traffic volumes
were taken from the Table for Screenline 5 (Herriman City, 2008). The city requested (personal.
communication. with J. Howell) that the traffic volumes for Screenline 5 consist of three percent
trucks, with a distribution of 0.5 percent combination vehicles and 2.5 percent single-unit
vehicles be used for the entire alignment.

The total Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESAL) were calculated in general accordance with
methodology described in the UDOT Pavement Design Manual. ESAL calculations in the
manual use average annual daily traffic (AADT) and growth rates provided in the Traffic Master
Plan (Herriman City, 2008). URS calculated ESALs for the design period on a yearly basis.

The UDOT Manual specifies a lane factor of 1.0 for roadways with 1 to 3 lanes in each direction.
A drainage factor of 1.0 was used in all calculations. The midpoint truck factor considers an
increase in truck weight over the design life of the pavement. This factor is calculated at the
midpoint of the design period and applied to the average AADT over the full design period. URS
calculated and applied an increasing truck factor on a yearly basis. This was assumed to be a
linearly increasing factor based on the midpoint truck factor described in the UDOT manual as
follows:

Classes 1-4 Truck Factor is constant

Classes 5-7 Truck Factor = Initial Truck Factor + (0.01*Years Since Construction)
Classes 8-13 Truck Factor = Initial Truck Factor + (0.03*Years Since Construction)

Design traffic loading for the entire alignment was calculated to be 1.95 million ESALs.

6.3 RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The design thicknesses for flexible pavement are summarized in Table 14. The recommended
pavement section for zone C consists of 6 inches of dense graded HMA, and 7 inches of UTBC
followed by the improved subgrade. The recommended pavement section for Zone B consists of

page 16
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

6 inches of dense graded HMA, 7 inches of UTBC, and 8 inches of GB followed by the improved
subgrade (additional GB and geogrid).

Zone A consists of 4 additive bid areas. The pavement section for additive bids 1 and 2 should
be 6 inches of dense graded HMA and 7 inches of UTBC followed by the improved subgrade.
The pavement section for additive bids 3 and 4 should be 6 inches of dense graded HMA, 7
inches of UTBC, and 17 inches of GB followed by the subgrade. These design thicknesses are
based on the provided traffic loading, URS field investigation, deep groundwater table, UDOT
pavement design methodology, and URS calculations.

URS understands that the pavement section will be constructed with paved shoulders and curb
and gutter. Positive drainage should be maintained when possible. However, when positive
drainage is not possible, the areas beyond the curb and gutter should be protected from
infiltration of surface water by compacting on-site clayey soils (AASHTO A-6 and A-7) instead of
granular (sand and gravel) soils.

A layer of separation geotextile should be used when UTBC or GB overly native clayey soils.
The separation layer is not required when UTBC or GB overly native gravel deposits.

page 17
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

Table 14. Recommended Pavement Sections

Design Pavement Section

5
Subgrade
Pavement Project Bid Resilient
1 1 Improvement 2
Zone Component 1 Modulus Structural Number Total
6
Method HMA (in) UTBC (in) GB (in)
(psf) 3 4
(in)
Required Provided
Additive Bids Overexcavation
15,000 2.98 3.10 6.0 7.0 0.0 13.0
1,2 / Replacement
A
Additive Bids
None 5,200 4.42 4.46 6.0 7.0 17.0 30.0
3,4

B Main Bid Geogrid 9,000 3.62 3.74 6.0 7.0 8.0 21.0

Overexcavation
C Main Bid 15,000 2.98 3.10 6.0 7.0 0.0 13.0
/ Replacement

Notes:
1. See Table 10 for limits of treatment zones.
2. See Tables 12 and 13.
3. Calculated using Darwin 3.0 based on design resilient moduli and 1.9 million ESALs.
4. SN = a1D1+a2D2m2+a3D3m3
5. HMA, hot-mix asphalt; UTBC, untreated base course; GB, granular borrow.
6. Minimum pavement section thickness requirement of 20-30 inches (see Table 12) is satisfied by including the additional thickness of granular
borrow from ground improvement (see Section 5.4).

page 18
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

SECTION 7 EARTH RETAINING STRUCTURES

7.1 RETAINING WALL DESIGN GUIDELINES

7.1.1 General

Special provisions 02831S, 02832S, 02833S, and 02834S for MSE walls and 02861 for Post
and Panel (P&P) walls provide the performance requirements for contractor designed walls
consistent with the geotechnical design recommendations included herein. The MSE wall type
consists of concrete facing panels and or steel reinforcing elements. Specifications are included
in Appendix D. The wall locations are shown on Figure 2.

The walls should be designed and constructed by a qualified and UDOT-approved specialty wall
contractor using an approved wall system (see specifications 02831S and 02834S). Selection
and design of the walls should be performed in accordance with AASHTO Load Resistance
Factor Design (LRFD) Bridge Design Specifications for Highway Bridges (AASHTO, 2007) and
UDOT specifications. The contractor is responsible for all stability calculations excluding global
stability and bearing capacity for MSE walls. The walls should be designed for a minimum
service life of 75 years.

Estimated earth pressures are provided to assist with design of permanent structures for this
project. Earth pressure and wall design criteria are given in Table 15 below.

Table 15. Geotechnical Design Criteria for Retaining Walls

Wall Description West East Midas Creek
Wall Type Post & Panel Post & Panel MSE
Wall Stationing 23+00 to 50+00 38+00 to 50+00 Near 64+00
Retained / Exposed Height1 (ft) 0-4 0-4 20
Minimum Embedment2 (ft) — — 8
Maximum Scour Depth3 (ft) — — 6
Live Load4 (psf) 0 0 230
Friction Angle (degrees)5 25 25 25
Cohesion Intercept (psf)5 275 275 275
Total Unit Weight (pcf)5 100 100 115
Sliding Friction Angle (degrees) — — 25
Sliding Cohesion — — 275
Foundation Unit Weight — — 110
Factored Bearing Resistance (ksf) — — 11.4
Factored Bearing Resistance with
— — 7.6
Scour (ksf)
Active Coefficient5 0.41 0.41 0.41
Passive Coefficient 2.4 2.4 2.4
Dynamic Active Coefficient5,6 0.55 0.55 0.55
Dynamic Passive Coefficient6 2.1 2.1 2.1
Notes:
1. Retained height for post & panel walls. Exposed height for MSE walls and excludes min. embedment depth.
2. Measured from the ground surface to the top of the concrete leveling pad for MSE Walls. MSE walls must be
embedded 2 feet deeper than the maximum scour depth.

page 19
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

3. Maximum scour depth is based on 500-year storm event.

4. Calculated as the product of the unit weight of retained soil and equivalent soil height per (AASHTO, 2007) p
3-96.
5. Properties of retained soils.
6. Based on reduced horizontal acceleration coefficient using (AASHTO, 2007) equation C11-6-5.1 and an
allowable horizontal deflection of 2 inches.

For surcharge loads or loads caused by construction equipment, we recommend that the specific
loading condition be evaluated based on the surcharge plan and contractor’s equipment. The
contractor should submit their specific loading conditions and evaluation of required support
system as a part of their work plan.

Retaining walls should be designed under dynamic loading for a seismic event with a 7%
probability of exceedance in 75 years. Retaining wall facing connections should be designed in
all cases to withstand a seismic event with a 3% probability of exceedance in 75 years. Design
earthquake coefficients are provided in Table 7.

Soil and compaction requirements are provided in UDOT specification 02832S. All materials
and construction should be tested and inspected in accordance with UDOT standards.

7.1.2 Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls

MSE walls associated with the Midas Creek plate arch structure should be constructed using a
wall system approved by UDOT consisting of concrete facing panels and geogrid or steel
reinforcing elements (see project specifications 02833S and 02834S). Decorative structural
elements or other decorative facing should be used as approved by Herriman City.

All metal components and connections should be galvanized or corrosion-protected by other

acceptable and standardized methods. All components should be tested and demonstrated to
be compatible with fill soils in accordance with UDOT requirements.

MSE walls should meet the embedment requirements of AASHTO LRFD (AASHTO, 2007)
including the minimum embedment depth due to scour as reported in Table 15. Embedment
depth is measured from the ground surface to the top of the leveling pad. The MSE wall should
be founded on a cast-in-place concrete leveling pad over adequately prepared subgrade (see
Section 5.3.2). Factored bearing resistance for MSE walls is provided in Table 15. When MSE
walls are built on a slope, near-horizontal benches at least 4 feet wide should be included below
the toe of the MSE walls. The benches should provide positive drainage for the MSE walls.

The contractor should plan to address and accommodate all drainage features to prevent
negative effects on the wall system. Grading details and landscape irrigation should be
designed to prevent surface water from entering retaining wall backfill.

The placement of geogrid or steel reinforcement, connections, and backfill materials should be
in accordance with the wall manufacturer’s recommendations and AASHTO and UDOT
standards. Each wall course, reinforcement, connections, backfill, and compaction should be
fully completed before proceeding to the next course. The vertical spacing of primary
reinforcement should not exceed 30 inches.

page 20
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

7.1.3 Post & Panel Walls

P&P walls should be constructed of reinforced concrete piles and panels meeting strength
requirements and be free of cracks or other damage. Precast P&P walls should be fabricated
and installed in accordance with specification 02861M (see Appendix D).

The contractor should install a minimum of 12 inches of free-draining gravel directly behind the
walls. The contractor should plan to address and accommodate all drainage features to prevent
negative effects on the wall system. Grading details and landscape irrigation should be
designed to prevent surface water entering retaining wall backfill.

Particular attention should be paid to the plumb of concrete posts and panels. All posts found
more that 0.25-in out of plumb or that do not adequately support or accept insertion of the
precast panels should be replaced.

P&P walls for this project are primarily decorative; however, they can retain up to 4 feet of soil..
The primary failure mechanisms of P&P walls are internal such as sliding or tilting and should
be addressed by the specialty wall contractor. The interpreted subsurface profile for P&P
retaining walls along the alignment between stations STA 23+00 to 50+00 is shown in Table 4.
See Table 15 for strength parameters and lateral earth pressure coefficients.

The walls should be designed consistent with the seismic criteria in Section 4.2 for an event with
a 7 percent probability of exceedance in 75 years. A pseudostatic factor of 0.5 may be applied
to the PGA for a design acceleration of 0.18g, reflecting a mean, monotonic energy value
conversion from the maximum cyclic energy value.

7.2 EXTERNAL STABILITY OF MSE WALLS

The global stability of MSE retaining walls was considered for static and dynamic scenarios
using Slide v6 software (Rockscience, 2010). Spencer’s method of slices was used for the limit-
equilibrium computations, and soils were modeled using interpreted Mohr-Coulomb material
strength parameters based on laboratory testing and subsurface investigations. The subsurface
interpreted profiles for the walls are provided in Tables 2 & 3, and geotechnical strength
parameters are shown in Table 16. The retained soil at the tallest point of the wall consists of
culvert backfill.

Table 16. Interpreted Strength Parameters for MSE Wall Stability

Unit Weight2 Friction Angle3 Cohesion3

Soil Type
(pcf) (deg) (psf)
MSE Backfill (Reinforced)1 135 Infinite Strength
Lean Clay (CL) 110 25 275
Culvert Backfill (GW) 135 35 0.02
Notes
1. Infinite strength was used to force the failure surface outside the MSE wall.
2. Total unit weight.
3. Effective friction angle and cohesion intercept. The undrained strength of the in-situ soils exceeds the
drained strength.

page 21
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

Global stability of the MSE walls was evaluated by limit-equilibrium analysis with the seismic
criteria in Section 4.2 for an event with a 7 percent probability of exceedance in 75 years. The
walls were evaluated using a live-load surcharge of 250 psf. A pseudostatic factor of 0.5 was
applied to the PGA for a design acceleration of 0.18g, reflecting a mean, monotonic energy
value conversion from the maximum cyclic energy value.
The results of this analysis comply with AASHTO and UDOT requirements for static and
dynamic conditions as indicated in Table 17. For additional information see Appendix F.

Table 17. Minimum Factors of Safety for MSE Walls

Required
Failure
Wall ID Condition Minimum Factor Calculated FS
Mechanism
of Safety
Construction Static (No-Impact) 1.1 —
Static 1.3 2.31
Crossing
Long-Term Dynamic 1.0 1.61
Scour — 1.83

page 22
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

SECTION 8 CULVERT MAT FOUNDATION

8.1 GENERAL
A mat foundation is recommended as the foundation type for the proposed steel arch structural
plate culvert conveying Midas Creek underneath 5600 West. The culvert will be approximately
110 feet long and 33 feet wide. The height of the backfill around the culvert will be 20 feet, with
approximately 5 feet of cover over the top of the culvert. Cutoff walls extending to the scour
depth are needed to control scour around the mat foundation.

The culvert should be designed and constructed by a qualified and UDOT-approved specialty
contractor. The culvert wingwalls and headwalls will be constructed using MSE retaining walls.
See Section 7 for information related to retaining walls.

The culvert mat foundation is intended to function under the design live and dead loads and
other design criteria as required in the 2007 AASHTO LRFD bridge design specifications
(AASHTO, 2007) and UDOT Specification 03310 for structural concrete.

8.2 BEARING CAPACITY

Bearing capacity was evaluated in accordance with AASHTO 2007 LRFD requirements,
including calculation of bearing resistance and associated settlements. Total settlements were
calculated to be less than 1 inch. Due to the largely unsaturated nature of the foundation soils,
settlements are predicted to occur during construction. Calculations show that the soils under
the proposed foundations will satisfy bearing resistance requirements. A cutoff wall should
extend below the scour depth to prevent undermining of soils supporting the mat foundation. A
summary of recommended bearing resistance criteria is provided in Table 18.

Table 18. Mat Foundation Bearing Capacity Summary

Minimum Factored
Load
Depth of Bearing
Condition Width (ft)
Embedment Resistance
(ft) (ksf)
Service /
33 8 5.7
Strength I
Extreme
NA NA NA
Event I1
Notes
1. Scour is prevented by cutoff walls extending below scour depth at the entrance and exit of the culvert

page 23
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

8.3 FOUNDATION CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

A qualified geotechnical engineer should observe and approve the area prepared for the
foundation before it is placed. Foundations should be embedded at least 8 feet below the
existing channel to allow the channel to be rebuilt above the mat foundation. Cutoff walls
extending below scour depth are required to prevent scour.

Mixed soil conditions (clay and gravel) may be encountered at the planned footing excavation
depth. A smooth cutting blade should be used for excavating in clayey soils at the footing
excavation depth.

Metallic exposures, if any, should be galvanized, or corrosion-protected by other acceptable,

standardized methods and tested to be compatible with fills in accordance with UDOT
requirements.

page 24
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

SECTION 9 LIMITATIONS

The data, interpretations, and assessments contained in this report are based upon the project
concepts discussed herein, the available information about the project, the available subsurface
exploration and geologic data, and on professional judgment and experience.

This report presents our opinion of the subsurface conditions and the properties of the materials
anticipated to be encountered during construction. To accomplish this, it was necessary to
interpolate between borings and extrapolate the data to estimate the conditions. While the
properties of the material encountered in the field are expected to be within the ranges
discussed, the actual distribution of materials encountered will likely vary from those discussed
in this report. Should conditions be encountered which differ from those reported herein, we
should be contacted immediately so that we can review and modify our recommendations as
necessary.

We have prepared this report for the use of Herriman City for planning and design purposes in
accordance with the scope of services outlined in our contract agreement with Herriman City.
Our services were performed in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily
exercised by other professional consultants under similar circumstances, No other warranty,
expressed or implied is made to the professional advice included in this report. This report may
not contain sufficient information for purposes of other parties or for other uses. URS does not
assume responsibility for the accuracy of project information provided by others.

page 25
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

SECTION 10 REFERENCES

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 2007. Load
Resistance Factor Design Bridge Design Specifications, Washington, D.C.

AASHTO, 2009a. Guide Specifications for Load Resistance Factor Design Seismic Bridge
Design, Washington, D.C.

AASHTO, 2009b. Standard Specifications for Transportation Materials and Methods of

Sampling and Testing, 29th Edition and AASHTO Provisional Standards Washington, D.C.

Biek, 2005. Geologic Map of the Jordan Narrows Quadrangle, Salt Lake and Utah Counties,
Utah, Utah Geological Survey, M-208, Salt Lake City, Utah.

Holtz, W. G., and Hilf, J. W.,1961 Settlement of Soil Foundations Due to Saturation,
Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, Vol 11, pp. 673-679.

Holtz and Kovacs, 1981. An Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering, Prentice Hall.

Lawton, 2008. Presentation on Collapsible Soils, ASCE Utah Geotechnical Group Meeting,
December.

McDonald, G.N., and Ashland, F.X., 2008. Earthquake site conditions in the Wasatch Front
urban corridor, Utah: Utah Geological Survey Special Study 125, 1 pl. scale 1:50,000, 41 p.,
CD.

Machette, M.N, 2005, Summary of the late Quaternary tectonics of the Basin and Range
province in Nevada, Eastern California, and Utah, in Lund, W.R., ed., Proceedings of the Basin
and Range Province Seismic Hazards Summit II, Western States Seismic Policy Council
meeting, Reno, Nevada, May 16-91, 2004: Utah Geological Survey Special Publication 05-2
(CD-ROM), 18 p., 12 full-color figures, 2 tables

Mulvey, W.E., 1992, Soil and rock causing engineering geologic problems in Utah, Utah
Geological Survey Special Study 80, 23 p., 2 plates, scale 1:500,000.

Owens, R.L., and Rollins, K.M., 1990, Collapsible soil hazard map for the southern Wasatch
Front, Utah: Utah Geological and Mineral Survey Miscellaneous Publication 90-1, 38 p.

Petersen, Mark D., Frankel, Arthur D., Harmsen, Stephen C., Mueller, Charles S., Haller,
Kathleen M., Wheeler, Russell L., Wesson, Robert L., Zeng, Yuehua, Boyd, Oliver S., Perkins,
David M., Luco, Nicolas, Field, Edward H., Wills, Chris J., and Rukstales, Kenneth S., 2008,
Documentation for the 2008 Update of the United States National Seismic Hazard Maps: U.S.
Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008–1128, 61 p.

Rockscience 2010. Slide 2D Limit Equilibrium Slope Stability for Soil and Rock Slopes,
Rocscience Inc., Canada.

page 26
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

Santi, P., 2005, Recognition of collapsible soils based on geology, climate, laboratory tests, and
structural crack patterns [abs]: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 37,
no. 7, p. 326.

Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT), 2008. Standard Specifications, Salt Lake City, UT.

UDOT, 2009a. Design Network, Salt Lake City, UT.

UDOT, 2009b. Geotechnical Manual of Instruction (GMOI), Salt Lake City, UT.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and Utah Geological Survey (UGS), 2009, Quaternary fault and
fold database for the United States, accessed April 9, 2010, from USGS web site:
http//[Link]/regional/qfaults/.

~o0o~

page 27
 120

Not Susceptible to Collapse

110

100

Boring Sample
Dry Density, pcf

Test Pit Sample

90
Gibbs and Bara (1962)
Holtz and Hilf (1961)
80 Holtz and Kovacs (1981)

70

60

Susceptible to Collapse
50
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Liquid Limit, %

Figure 5
Wetting-Induced Collapse Susceptibility of Samples
5600 West; Main Street to 11800 South
Herriman City, Utah
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

APPENDIX A — LOGS OF BORINGS AND TEST PITS

 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Key to Log of Boring
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139

SAMPLES

USCS Symbol
Recovery, %

Graphic Log
Blows/ 6in.
Elevation,

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND

Number
Depth,

OTHER TESTS
Type
Feet

feet

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12
COLUMN DESCRIPTIONS
SLC_GEOTECH_KEY T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link] [Link] 6/8/10

1 Depth: Depth in meters below the ground surface. Fines Content: Fines content of soil sample passing a #200
10 sieve measured in laboratory, expressed as a percentage.
2 Depth: Depth in feet below the ground surface.
Dry Unit Weight: The degree of compaction of a soil measured in
Sample Type: Type of soil sample collected at depth interval a laboratory, expresed as pounds per cubic-foot
3
shown; sampler symbols are explained below. Moisture Content: Water content of soil sample measured in
4 Sample Number: Sample identification number. laboratory, expressed as percentage of dry weight of specimen.
Remarks and Other Tests: Comments and observations regarding
5 Blows/ 6in. Number of blows required to advance sampler .3 m 12 drilling or sampling made by driller or field personnel. Other field and
(12 inches) beyond first .15 m (6-inch) interval, or distance noted, laboratory test results, using the following abbreviations:
using a 300-lb or 140-lb hammer with a .76 m drop.
6 Recovery, % Sample Recovery, expressed as a percentage
Trace 0 - 10% Little 10 - 20%
7 Graphic Log: Graphic depiction of subsurface material Some 20 - 35% And 35 - 50%
encountered; typical symbols are explained below.
8 USCS: Graphic depiction of subsurface material encountered; Descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive; field descriptions may have been
typical symbols are explained below. modified to reflect lab test results. Descriptions on these logs apply only at the
specific boring locations and at the time the borings were advanced; they are not
9 Material Description: Description of material encountered; may warranted to be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations or times.
include color, moisture, grain size, and density/consistency.
Symbols Typical Descriptions
Major Divisions
Graph Letter
Well-Graded Gravels, Gravel-Sand Mixtures, Little or no
Clean GW
Retained in No. 4 Sieve

Gravels Fines
More than 50% of
Coarse Fraction

(little or Poorly-Graded Gravels, Gravel-Sand Mixtures, Little or no

GP
Gravels
More than 50% of No. 200 Sieve

no fines) Fines
Gravels
Coarse Grained Soils

GM Silty Gravels, Gravel-Sand-Silt Mixtures

TYPICAL SAMPLER
with Fines
(appreciable GRAPHIC SYMBOLS
GC Clayey Gravels, Gravel-Sand-Clay Mixtures
Unified Soil Classification System

amount of fines)
Size

Dames & Moore

Sampler
SW
Coarse Fraction Passing

Clean Sand Well-Graded Sands, Gravelly Sands, Little or no Fines

through No. 4 Sieve
More than 50% of

(little or
no fines) SP Poorly Graded Sands, Gravelly Sands, Little or no Fines 3" O.D. Shelby Tube
Sands

Sands with SM Silty Sands, Sand-Clay Mixtures Non-standard Sample

Fines
(appreciable
amount of fines) SC Clayey Sands, Sand-Clay Mixtures 2" O.D. Split Spoon
with Standard
Inorganic Silts and very Fine Sands, Rock Flour, Silty or Penetration Test
More than 50% of Material is Smaller

ML Clayey Fine Sands or Clayey Silts with Slight Plasticity

Silts
Inorganic Clays of Low to Medium Plasticity, Gravelly Clays, Piston Sample
than No. 200 Sieve Size

Liquid Limit
and CL
Fine Grained Soils

Less than 50% Sandy Clays, Silty Clays, Lean Clays

Clays
OL Organic Silts and Organic Silty Clays of Low Plasticity Grab Sample

Inorganic Silts, Micaceous or Diatomaceous Fine Sand or

MH Silty Soils
Silts
Liquid Limit
and Greater than 50%
CH Inorganic Clays of High Plasticity, Fat Clays
Clays
Organic Clays of Medium to High Plasticity, Organic Silts
OH

Highly Organic Soils PT Peat, Humus, Swamp Soils with High Organic Contents

Note: Dual Symbols are used to indicate borderline soil classifications

 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Log of Test Pit TP-01
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139 Sheet 1 of 1

Date(s)
Excavated 2/26/10 Logged By R. Snow Checked By T. Binder
Excavation Excavation Total Depth
Equipment Backhoe Contractor AGEC of Test Pit 13.5 feet
Excavation Pit Ground Surface
Dimensions 4.5ft x 14ft Alignment
North-South Elevation (ft) 4855.50
Sampling
Groundwater Level Not Encountered Method(s) Bulk

Coordinates Northing (ft) 7364644 Easting (ft) 1495086 Station (ft) 210+36 Offset (ft) LT 38

(%<#200 Sieve)
Fines Content
Graphic Log
Elevation

Weight, pcf

Content, %
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND
Depth,
12/14/10

Moisture
Number

Dry Unit
USCS

OTHER TESTS
feet

feet
Type
SLCGEOTECHTP1 T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link]

0
4855 CL Lean CLAY; brown, moist
(A-7-6) Atterberg Limits:
1 87 20.5 LL = 49
PI = 30
Gradation:
GW Well-graded GRAVEL; fine to coarse, subrounded, with Sand = 13%
2 sand, fine to medium, brown, moist Fines = 87%
Standard Proctor:
iron oxide staining from 2.5 to 13.5 feet bgs max = 94 pcf
Mopt = 24%
5 California Bearing
4850 Ratio:
CBR @ 96% = 1.8
CBR @ 100% = 1.8

grades to orangish brown

3

10
4845

End of Test Pit @ 13.5' bgs

15
4840

20
4835

25
4830

30
 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Log of Test Pit TP-02
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139 Sheet 1 of 1

Date(s)
Excavated 2/26/10 Logged By R. Snow Checked By T. Binder
Excavation Excavation Total Depth
Equipment Backhoe Contractor AGEC of Test Pit 13.5 feet
Excavation Pit Ground Surface
Dimensions 4.5ft x 14ft Alignment
North-South Elevation (ft) 4852.50
Sampling
Groundwater Level Not Encountered Method(s) Bulk

Coordinates Northing (ft) 7364244 Easting (ft) 1495083 Station (ft) 206+36 Offset (ft) LT 37

(%<#200 Sieve)
Fines Content
Graphic Log
Elevation

Weight, pcf

Content, %
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND
Depth,
12/14/10

Moisture
Number

Dry Unit
USCS

OTHER TESTS
feet

feet
Type
SLCGEOTECHTP1 T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link]

0
CL Lean CLAY; brown, moist
grades light brown

4850
GW Well-graded GRAVEL; fine (0.25") to coarse (6"),
subrounded, with sand, fine to medium, orangish brown,
moist, iron-oxides

4845

10

4840

End of Test Pit @ 13.5' bgs

15

4835

20

4830

25

4825

30
 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Log of Test Pit TP-03
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139 Sheet 1 of 1

Date(s)
Excavated 2/26/10 Logged By R. Snow Checked By T. Binder
Excavation Excavation Total Depth
Equipment Backhoe Contractor AGEC of Test Pit 14 feet
Excavation Pit Ground Surface
Dimensions 4.5ft x 14ft Alignment
North-South Elevation (ft) 4856.00
Sampling
Groundwater Level Not Encountered Method(s) Bulk

Coordinates Northing (ft) 7363846 Easting (ft) 1495050 Station (ft) 202+38 Offset (ft) LT 66

(%<#200 Sieve)
Fines Content
Graphic Log
Elevation

Weight, pcf

Content, %
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND
Depth,
12/14/10

Moisture
Number

Dry Unit
USCS

OTHER TESTS
feet

feet
Type
SLCGEOTECHTP1 T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link]

0
CL Lean CLAY; dark brown, moist
4855

GM Silty GRAVEL; fine (0.3") to coarse (4"), subrounded, with

sand, fine to coarse, white, dry, strong cementation
5 GW Well-graded GRAVEL; fine (0.75") to coarse (6"),
subrounded, with sand, fine to medium, brown, moist
4850

grades to reddish brown, iron-oxides

10
4845

15 End of Test Pit @ 14' bgs

4840

20
4835

25
4830

30
 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Log of Test Pit TP-04
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139 Sheet 1 of 1

Date(s)
Excavated 2/26/10 Logged By R. Snow Checked By T. Binder
Excavation Excavation Total Depth
Equipment Backhoe Contractor AGEC of Test Pit 14 feet
Excavation Pit Ground Surface
Dimensions 4.5ft x 14ft Alignment
North-South Elevation (ft) 4860.50
Sampling
Groundwater Level Not Encountered Method(s) Bulk

Coordinates Northing (ft) 7363486 Easting (ft) 1494883 Station (ft) 81+01 Offset (ft) LT 92

(%<#200 Sieve)
Fines Content
Graphic Log
Elevation

Weight, pcf

Content, %
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND
Depth,
12/14/10

Moisture
Number

Dry Unit
USCS

OTHER TESTS
feet

feet
Type
SLCGEOTECHTP1 T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link]

0
4860 CL Lean CLAY; brown, moist

grades light brown, moist

small root structures from 0 to 4' bgs

5
4855
GW Well-graded GRAVEL; fine (0.25") to coarse (6"),
subrounded, with sand, fine to coarse

10
4850 grades to reddish or orangish brown, iron-oxides

15 End of Test Pit @ 14' bgs

4845

20
4840

25
4835

30
 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Log of Test Pit TP-05
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139 Sheet 1 of 1

Date(s)
Excavated 3/1/10 Logged By R. Snow Checked By T. Binder
Excavation Excavation Total Depth
Equipment Backhoe Contractor AGEC of Test Pit 14.5 feet
Excavation Pit Ground Surface
Dimensions 4.5ft x 15ft Alignment
North-South Elevation (ft) 4862.50
Sampling
Groundwater Level Not Encountered Method(s) Bulk

Coordinates Northing (ft) 7363133 Easting (ft) 1494765 Station (ft) 77+53 Offset (ft) RT 5

(%<#200 Sieve)
Fines Content
Graphic Log
Elevation

Weight, pcf

Content, %
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND
Depth,
12/14/10

Moisture
Number

Dry Unit
USCS

OTHER TESTS
feet

feet
Type
SLCGEOTECHTP1 T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link]

0
CL Lean CLAY; dark brown, moist
(A-6)

4860

Atterberg Limits:
5 1 95 17.9 LL = 39
PI = 18
Gradation:
Sand = 5%
Fines = 95%
Standard Proctor:
4855 max = 98 pcf
Mopt = 22.5%
GW Well-graded GRAVEL; fine to coarse (6"), subrounded, with California Bearing
sand, fine to coarse, brown, moist Ratio:
CBR @ 96% = 1.9
CBR @ 100% = 1.6
10
GM Silty GRAVEL; fine to coarse (4"), subrounded to subangular,
with sand, fine to coarse, dark brown, moist

4850

2
15
End of Test Pit @ 14.5' bgs

4845

20

4840

25

4835

30
 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Log of Test Pit TP-06
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139 Sheet 1 of 1

Date(s)
Excavated 3/1/10 Logged By R. Snow Checked By T. Binder
Excavation Excavation Total Depth
Equipment Backhoe Contractor AGEC of Test Pit 15 feet
Excavation Pit Ground Surface
Dimensions 4.5ft x 15ft Alignment
North-South Elevation (ft) 4866.00
Sampling
Groundwater Level Not Encountered Method(s) Bulk

Coordinates Northing (ft) 7362740 Easting (ft) 1494684 Station (ft) 73+44 Offset (ft) RT 32

(%<#200 Sieve)
Fines Content
Graphic Log
Elevation

Weight, pcf

Content, %
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND
Depth,
12/14/10

Moisture
Number

Dry Unit
USCS

OTHER TESTS
feet

feet
Type
SLCGEOTECHTP1 T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link]

0
CL Lean CLAY; dark brown, moist
4865
grades brown

5
4860

10
4855

2 GM Silty GRAVEL; fine to coarse, subrounded, with sand, fine to

15 medium, dark brown, moist
4850 End of Test Pit @ 15' bgs

20
4845

25
4840

30
 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Log of Test Pit TP-07
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139 Sheet 1 of 1

Date(s)
Excavated 3/1/10 Logged By R. Snow Checked By T. Binder
Excavation Excavation Total Depth
Equipment Backhoe Contractor AGEC of Test Pit 14 feet
Excavation Pit Ground Surface
Dimensions 4.5ft x 14ft Alignment
North-South Elevation (ft) 4868.00
Sampling
Groundwater Level Not Encountered Method(s) Bulk

Coordinates Northing (ft) 7362340 Easting (ft) 1494680 Station (ft) 69+41 Offset (ft) RT 37

(%<#200 Sieve)
Fines Content
Graphic Log
Elevation

Weight, pcf

Content, %
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND
Depth,
12/14/10

Moisture
Number

Dry Unit
USCS

OTHER TESTS
feet

feet
Type
SLCGEOTECHTP1 T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link]

0
CL Lean Clay; dark brown, moist
(A-6)

1
4865

4860

10 2 96 19.4 Atterberg Limits:

LL = 34
PI = 15
Gradation:
Sand = 4%
Silt = 66%
4855 Clay = 30%
grades with increasing fine sand
3

15 End of Test Pit @ 14' bgs

4850

20

4845

25

4840

30
 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Log of Test Pit TP-10
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139 Sheet 1 of 1

Date(s)
Excavated 2/26/10 Logged By R. Snow Checked By T. Binder
Excavation Excavation Total Depth
Equipment Backhoe Contractor AGEC of Test Pit 14 feet
Excavation Pit Ground Surface
Dimensions 4.5ft x 14ft Alignment
North-South Elevation (ft) 4867.00
Sampling
Groundwater Level Not Encountered Method(s) Bulk

Coordinates Northing (ft) 7361297 Easting (ft) 1494728 Station (ft) 58+80 Offset (ft) RT 37

(%<#200 Sieve)
Fines Content
Graphic Log
Elevation

Weight, pcf

Content, %
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND
Depth,
12/14/10

Moisture
Number

Dry Unit
USCS

OTHER TESTS
feet

feet
Type
SLCGEOTECHTP1 T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link]

0
CL Lean CLAY; dark brown

grades brown
1
4865

4860

10
GW Well-graded GRAVEL; fine to coarse, subrounded, with
sand, fine to coarse, brown

4855

15 End of Test Pit @ 14' bgs

4850

20

4845

25

4840

30
 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Log of Test Pit TP-11
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139 Sheet 1 of 1

Date(s)
Excavated 2/26/10 Logged By R. Snow Checked By T. Binder
Excavation Excavation Total Depth
Equipment Backhoe Contractor AGEC of Test Pit 13 feet
Excavation Pit Ground Surface
Dimensions 4.5ft x 13ft Alignment
North-South Elevation (ft) 4867.00
Sampling
Groundwater Level Not Encountered Method(s) Bulk

Coordinates Northing (ft) 7360902 Easting (ft) 1494793 Station (ft) 54+81 Offset (ft) RT 13

(%<#200 Sieve)
Fines Content
Graphic Log
Elevation

Weight, pcf

Content, %
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND
Depth,
12/14/10

Moisture
Number

Dry Unit
USCS

OTHER TESTS
feet

feet
Type
SLCGEOTECHTP1 T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link]

0
1 CL Lean CLAY; dark brown, moist, organic material 94.2 22.4 Atterberg Limits:
(A-7-6) LL = 44
grades brown PI = 23
Gradation:
4865 Fines = 94.2%
Organic Matter:
Organics = 5%

4860
grades with fine (0.75") to coarse (2") gravel
GW Well-graded GRAVEL; fine (0.75") to coarse (6"), Gradation:
(A-1-a) subrounded, with sand, fine to coarse, brown, dry Gravel = 69%
Sand = 27%
Fines = 4%
10
2 4.4 3.3
Caving of trench walls
observed
4855

End of Test Pit @ 13' bgs

15

4850

20

4845

25

4840

30
 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Log of Test Pit TP-12
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139 Sheet 1 of 1

Date(s)
Excavated 2/26/10 Logged By R. Snow Checked By T. Binder
Excavation Excavation Total Depth
Equipment Backhoe Contractor AGEC of Test Pit 13.5 feet
Excavation Pit Ground Surface
Dimensions 4.5ft x 14ft Alignment
North-South Elevation (ft) 4879.00
Sampling
Groundwater Level Not Encountered Method(s) Bulk

Coordinates Northing (ft) 7360475 Easting (ft) 1494791 Station (ft) 50+52 Offset (ft) LT 18

(%<#200 Sieve)
Fines Content
Graphic Log
Elevation

Weight, pcf

Content, %
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND
Depth,
12/14/10

Moisture
Number

Dry Unit
USCS

OTHER TESTS
feet

feet
Type
SLCGEOTECHTP1 T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link]

0
CL Lean CLAY; dark brown, moist Gravel on surface
(A-7-6)

Atterberg Limits:
1 95.7 13.3 LL = 44
PI = 24
4875 Gradation:
Fines = 95.7%
5 Standard Proctor:
max = 94 pcf
Mopt = 25.8%
GW Well-graded GRAVEL; fine (0.75") to coarse (6"), California Bearing
subrounded, with sand, fine to coarse, brown, dry Ratio:
CBR @ 96% = 3.6
CBR @ 96%
(unsoaked) = 3.6
CBR @ 100% = 3.3
4870
10
Caving of trench walls
observed

4865
End of Test Pit @ 13.5' bgs
15

4860
20

4855
25

4850
30
 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Log of Test Pit TP-13
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139 Sheet 1 of 1

Date(s)
Excavated 2/25/10 Logged By R. Snow Checked By T. Binder
Excavation Excavation Total Depth
Equipment Backhoe Contractor AGEC of Test Pit 14 feet
Excavation Pit Ground Surface
Dimensions 4.5ft x 14ft Alignment
North-South Elevation (ft) 4871.00
Sampling
Groundwater Level Not Encountered Method(s) Bulk

Coordinates Northing (ft) 7360103 Easting (ft) 1494787 Station (ft) 46+80 Offset (ft) LT 15

(%<#200 Sieve)
Fines Content
Graphic Log
Elevation

Weight, pcf

Content, %
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND
Depth,
12/14/10

Moisture
Number

Dry Unit
USCS

OTHER TESTS
feet

feet
Type
SLCGEOTECHTP1 T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link]

0
CL Lean CLAY; dark brown, moist Gravel on surface
1
4870

grades light brown

GW Well-graded GRAVEL; fine (0.75") to coarse (6"),

subrounded, with sand, fine to coarse, brown, dry
5
4865
Caving of trench walls
observed

10
4860

15 End of Test Pit @ 14' bgs

4855

20
4850

25
4845

30
 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Log of Test Pit TP-14
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139 Sheet 1 of 1

Date(s)
Excavated 2/25/10 Logged By R. Snow Checked By T. Binder
Excavation Excavation Total Depth
Equipment Backhoe Contractor AGEC of Test Pit 14 feet
Excavation Pit Ground Surface
Dimensions 4.5ft x 14ft Alignment
North-South Elevation (ft) 4875.50
Sampling
Groundwater Level Not Encountered Method(s) Bulk

Coordinates Northing (ft) 7359704 Easting (ft) 1494781 Station (ft) 42+80 Offset (ft) LT 13

(%<#200 Sieve)
Fines Content
Graphic Log
Elevation

Weight, pcf

Content, %
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND
Depth,
12/14/10

Moisture
Number

Dry Unit
USCS

OTHER TESTS
feet

feet
Type
SLCGEOTECHTP1 T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link]

0
4875 CL Lean CLAY; with gravel, dark brown, moist to wet, organic
1 material

grades brown, moist

5 GW Well-graded GRAVEL; fine (0.75") to coarse (6"),

2 subrounded, with sand, fine to coarse, brown, moist
4870

10
4865 grades drier Caving of trench walls
observed

15 End of Test Pit @ 14' bgs

4860

20
4855

25
4850

30
 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Log of Test Pit TP-15
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139 Sheet 1 of 1

Date(s)
Excavated 2/25/10 Logged By R. Snow Checked By T. Binder
Excavation Excavation Total Depth
Equipment Backhoe Contractor AGEC of Test Pit 13 feet
Excavation Pit Ground Surface
Dimensions 4.5ft x 13ft Alignment
North-South Elevation (ft) 4878.50
Sampling
Groundwater Level Not Encountered Method(s) Bulk

Coordinates Northing (ft) 7359304 Easting (ft) 1494776 Station (ft) 38+80 Offset (ft) LT 11

(%<#200 Sieve)
Fines Content
Graphic Log
Elevation

Weight, pcf

Content, %
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND
Depth,
12/14/10

Moisture
Number

Dry Unit
USCS

OTHER TESTS
feet

feet
Type
SLCGEOTECHTP1 T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link]

0
CL Lean CLAY; with sand, fine, dark brown, moist

Gradation:
grades brown, dry Gravel = 2%
Sand = 22%
1 76 Silt = 50%
4875 Clay = 27%

5
GW Well-graded GRAVEL; fine to coarse, subrounded, with
sand, fine to coarse, brown, dry

Caving of trench walls

observed
4870

10

4865
End of Test Pit @ 13' bgs

15

4860

20

4855

25

4850

30
 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Log of Test Pit TP-16
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139 Sheet 1 of 1

Date(s)
Excavated 2/25/10 Logged By R. Snow Checked By T. Binder
Excavation Excavation Total Depth
Equipment Backhoe Contractor AGEC of Test Pit 15 feet
Excavation Pit Ground Surface
Dimensions 4.5ft x 15ft Alignment
North-South Elevation (ft) 4880.00
Sampling
Groundwater Level Not Encountered Method(s) Bulk

Coordinates Northing (ft) 7358904 Easting (ft) 1494767 Station (ft) 34+80 Offset (ft) LT 12

(%<#200 Sieve)
Fines Content
Graphic Log
Elevation

Weight, pcf

Content, %
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND
Depth,
12/14/10

Moisture
Number

Dry Unit
USCS

OTHER TESTS
feet

feet
Type
SLCGEOTECHTP1 T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link]

4880 0
1 CL Lean CLAY; dark brown, moist
(A-6)
grades with some sand, brown, dry, pinhole structures
2 87 80.1 10.5 Atterberg Limits:
79.5 9.5 LL = 35
PI = 18
Gradation:
Sand = 13%
Fines = 87%
4875 5 Collapse:
2-A = 5.1% @ 1000
psf
2-B = 7.3% @ 1000
psf

GW Well-graded GRAVEL; fine (0.75") to coarse (6"),

subrounded, with sand, fine to coarse, brown, dry
4870 10
Caving of test pit
walls observed

4865 15
End of Test Pit @ 15' bgs

4860 20

4855 25

4850 30
 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Log of Test Pit TP-17
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139 Sheet 1 of 1

Date(s)
Excavated 2/25/10 Logged By R. Snow Checked By T. Binder
Excavation Excavation Total Depth
Equipment Backhoe Contractor AGEC of Test Pit 14 feet
Excavation Pit Ground Surface
Dimensions 4.5ft x 14ft Alignment
North-South Elevation (ft) 4878.50
Sampling
Groundwater Level Not Encountered Method(s) Bulk

Coordinates Northing (ft) 7358504 Easting (ft) 1494762 Station (ft) 30+80 Offset (ft) LT 9

(%<#200 Sieve)
Fines Content
Graphic Log
Elevation

Weight, pcf

Content, %
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND
Depth,
12/14/10

Moisture
Number

Dry Unit
USCS

OTHER TESTS
feet

feet
Type
SLCGEOTECHTP1 T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link]

0
CL Lean CLAY; with some sand, dark brown, moist

grades with sand, fine, brown, dry

1
4875
GW Well-graded GRAVEL; fine (0.75") to coarse (6"),
(A-1-a) subrounded, with sand, fine to coarse, brown, dry
5

4870

10
grades increasing sand Caving of trench walls
observed

4.3 3.7
Gradation:
Gravel = 67%
Sand = 29%
4865 2 Fines = 4%

15 End of Test Pit @ 14' bgs

4860

20

4855

25

4850

30
 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Log of Test Pit TP-18
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139 Sheet 1 of 1

Date(s)
Excavated 2/24/10 Logged By R. Snow Checked By T. Binder
Excavation Excavation Total Depth
Equipment Backhoe Contractor AGEC of Test Pit 13 feet
Excavation Pit Ground Surface
Dimensions 4.5ft x 13ft Alignment
North-South Elevation (ft) 4880.50
Sampling
Groundwater Level Not Encountered Method(s) Bulk

Coordinates Northing (ft) 7358104 Easting (ft) 1494755 Station (ft) 26+80 Offset (ft) LT 8

(%<#200 Sieve)
Fines Content
Graphic Log
Elevation

Weight, pcf

Content, %
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND
Depth,
12/14/10

Moisture
Number

Dry Unit
USCS

OTHER TESTS
feet

feet
Type
SLCGEOTECHTP1 T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link]

0
4880 CL Lean CLAY; with sand, fine to medium, dark brown, moist

grades brown Gradation:

1 73.2 11.6 Gravel = 4%
Sand = 23%
GW Well-graded GRAVEL; fine (0.75") to coarse (6"), Fines = 73%
subrounded, with sand, fine to coarse, brown, dry Organic Matter:
Organics = 3.3%

5
4875

Caving of trench walls

observed

10
4870

End of Test Pit @ 13' bgs

15
4865

20
4860

25
4855

30
 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Log of Test Pit TP-19
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139 Sheet 1 of 1

Date(s)
Excavated 2/24/10 Logged By R. Snow Checked By T. Binder
Excavation Excavation Total Depth
Equipment Backhoe Contractor AGEC of Test Pit 13 feet
Excavation Pit Ground Surface
Dimensions 4.5ft x 13ft Alignment
North-South Elevation (ft) 4879.00
Sampling
Groundwater Level Not Encountered Method(s) Bulk

Coordinates Northing (ft) 7357730 Easting (ft) 1494756 Station (ft) 23+06 Offset (ft) LT 0

(%<#200 Sieve)
Fines Content
Graphic Log
Elevation

Weight, pcf

Content, %
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND
Depth,
12/14/10

Moisture
Number

Dry Unit
USCS

OTHER TESTS
feet

feet
Type
SLCGEOTECHTP1 T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link]

0
1 CL Lean CLAY; with trace sand, dark brown, moist
(A-6)
grades with some sand, fine to medium, brown Atterberg Limits:
LL = 34
grades dry PI = 17
Gradation:
Gravel = 6%
2 81 12.1 Sand = 13%
4875 Fines = 81%
Standard Proctor:
5 max = 102 pcf
Mopt = 19%
California Bearing
GW Well-graded GRAVEL; fine (0.75") to coarse (6"), Ratio:
subrounded, with sand, fine to coarse, brown, moist CBR @ 96% = 4.1
CBR @ 96%
(unsoaked) = 5.4
CBR @ 100% = 5.6
4870
grades with decreasing maximum gravel diameter
3
10

4865 End of Test Pit @ 13' bgs

15

4860
20

4855
25

4850
30
 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Log of Test Pit TP-20
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139 Sheet 1 of 1

Date(s)
Excavated 2/24/10 Logged By R. Snow Checked By T. Binder
Excavation Excavation Total Depth
Equipment Backhoe Contractor AGEC of Test Pit 13 feet
Excavation Pit Ground Surface
Dimensions 4.5ft x 13ft Alignment
North-South Elevation (ft) 4877.00
Sampling
Groundwater Level Not Encountered Method(s) Bulk

Coordinates Northing (ft) 7357306 Easting (ft) 1494737 Station (ft) 18+82 Offset (ft) RT 8

(%<#200 Sieve)
Fines Content
Graphic Log
Elevation

Weight, pcf

Content, %
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND
Depth,
12/14/10

Moisture
Number

Dry Unit
USCS

OTHER TESTS
feet

feet
Type
SLCGEOTECHTP1 T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link]

0
GC Clayey GRAVEL; fine (0.25") to coarse (3"), subrounded, Atterberg Limits:
1 (A-1-b) with sand, fine to coarse, dark brown, organic material 21 4.4 LL = 30
PI = 12
Gradation:
4875 Gravel = 54%
GM Silty GRAVEL; fine (1") to coarse (6"), subrounded, with
Sand = 25%
sand, fine to coarse, light brown, trace cobbles (8")
Fines = 21%
Standard Proctor:
max = 118.3 pcf
Mopt = 10.7%
5 California Bearing
Ratio
CBR @ 96% = 8.7
grades brown CBR @ 100% = 8.4
4870

10

4865
2

End of Test Pit @ 13' bgs

15

4860

20

4855

25

4850

30
 Project: 5600 West, Main Street to 11800 South
Log of Test Pit TP-21
Project Location: Herriman, Utah
Project Number: 24585139 Sheet 1 of 1

Date(s)
Excavated 2/24/10 Logged By R. Snow Checked By T. Binder
Excavation Excavation Total Depth
Equipment Backhoe Contractor AGEC of Test Pit 13 feet
Excavation Pit Ground Surface
Dimensions 4.5ft x 13ft Alignment
North-South Elevation (ft) 4878.50
Sampling
Groundwater Level Not Encountered Method(s) Bulk

Coordinates Northing (ft) 7356925 Easting (ft) 1494616 Station (ft) 14+83 Offset (ft) LT 6

(%<#200 Sieve)
Fines Content
Graphic Log
Elevation

Weight, pcf

Content, %
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION REMARKS AND
Depth,
12/14/10

Moisture
Number

Dry Unit
USCS

OTHER TESTS
feet

feet
Type
SLCGEOTECHTP1 T:\UDOT\24585139 - 5600 WEST HERRIMAN\GEOTECH & PAVEMENT\FIELD INVESTIGATION\24585139 BORING & TEST PIT [Link] [Link]

0
GC Clayey GRAVEL; fine (0.25") to coarse (2"), subrounded,
1 with sand, dark brown, moist, organic material

GM Silty GRAVEL; coarse (4 to 5"), subrounded, with sand, fine

to coarse, light brown, moist
4875
2
5

CL Sandy CLAY; light brown, moist Gradation:

Fines = 60%
4870
3 60 14.7

10

CL Lean CLAY; with some sand, brown, moist, pinhole

4 structures

4865
End of Test Pit @ 13' bgs

15

4860

20

4855

25

4850

30
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

APPENDIX B — LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY INDEX AND STRENGTH TEST RESULTS: 5600 West Herriman; Main St. to 11800 South

5
Percent Passing by Weight Atterberg Limits CBR (%)
Sample USCS AASHTO Moisture Organic Drained Strength Maximum Optimum Soil Soluble
Sample Sample
Group Group
Dry Unit
Dry Unit Moisture Collapse6 Resistivity
Depth Content Matter 96% 96% 100% pH Sulfate
Location Type1,2,3 Wt (pcf) 0.002 Liquid Plastic Plasticity Friction Cohesion %
Name4 (W-cm)
4
(Feet) Name (%) #4 #40 #200 (%) Weight (pcf)6 Content (%)6 Compaction Compaction Compaction (ppm)
mm Limit Limit Index Angle (°) (psf)
Soaked Non-Soaked Soaked
B-8 2 DM CL A-6 26.3 89.8 96.8 34 18 16

B-8 9 DM CL 17 91.8 94.7

B-8 19 DM CL A-6 14.7 105.2 90 80.5 61.1 34 14 20 27 276

B-8 29 DM CL A-6 27.3 95.6 97.9 37 18 19 940 8.44 27

B-8 39 DM CL 28.4 94.1

B-9 4 SS 280 7.62 430

B-9 14 SS GP-GM A-1-a 2.4 41.5 14.9 6.7 2700 9.44 57

B-9 24 SS CL A-6 25.7 86.4 32 22 10

TP-1 0.5-2.5 Bulk CL A-7-6 20.5 87.2 49 19 30 94 23.8 1.8 1.8

TP-5 4-6 Bulk CL A-6 17.9 99.8 99.5 95 39 21 18 98.2 22.5 1.9 1.6

TP-7 10 Bulk CL 19.4 100 99.8 96.5 30.4 34 19 15

TP-11 0-1 Bulk CL A-7-6 22.4 94.2 44 21 23 5.0

TP-11 8-13 Bulk GW A-1-a 3.3 30.6 9.4 4.4

TP-12 2.5 Bulk CL A-7-6 44 20 24

TP-12 1.5-6 Bulk CL 13.3 95.7 94 25.8 3.6 3.6 3.3

TP-15 1.5-5 Bulk CL 97.7 90.3 76.2 26.8

TP-16 2-A Bulk/Block CL A-6 10.5 80.1 100 97 87 35 17 18 5.1

TP-16 2-B Bulk/Block CL 9.5 79.5 7.3

TP-17 13 Bulk GW A-1-a 3.7 32.8 14.5 4.3

TP-18 1-2.5 Bulk CL 95.8 85.4 73.2 3.3

TP-19 1-6 Bulk CL A-6 12.1 94.1 90 80.6 34 17 17 19 102.1 4.1 5.6 5.4

TP-20 0-2 Bulk GC A-1-b 4.4 45.5 30.9 20.9 30 18 12 10.7 118.3 8.7 8.4

TP-21 7-11 Bulk CL 14.7 60

NOTES: 1. SS = Split Spoon Sample

2. Bulk/Bag = Bucket/Bag Sample of Cuttings
3. DM = Dames & Moore Sample
4. USCS = Unified Soil Classification System, AASHTO = American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
5. ASTM D3080 Direct Shear Test
6. ASTM T99 Standard Proctor Test
Moisture Content and Unit Weight of Soil
(In General Accordance with ASTM D2937 and D2216)  IGES 2006

Project: URS
No: M00100-091 (24585139)
Location: 5600 West Herriman
Date: 3/24/2010
By: NB

Boring No. B-8 B-8 B-8 B-8 B-8 B-9 B-9 TP-1
Sample Info.

Sample 1 3 5 7 9 4 6 Bucket
Depth 2' 9' 19' 29' 39' 14' 24' 0.5-2.5'
Split No No No No No Yes No Yes
Split sieve No.10 3/8"
Total sample (g) 531.68 19556.23
Moist coarse fraction (g) 383.02 112.63
Moist split fraction (g) 148.66 19443.60
Sample height, H (in) 5.000 6.000 6.000 5.000 5.000
Unit Weight

Sample diameter, D (in) 2.416 2.416 2.416 2.416 2.416

Data

Wt. rings + wet soil (g) 903.99 1038.89 1138.78 952.68 946.48
Wt. rings/tare (g) 221.64 263.95 267.33 220.42 219.11
Moist unit wt., γm (pcf) 113.4 107.3 120.7 121.7 120.9
Wet soil + tare (g) 536.00 291.79
Fraction
Coarse

Dry soil + tare (g) 530.44 289.58

Tare (g) 152.98 179.18
Moisture content (%) 1.5 2.0
Wet soil + tare (g) 516.78 903.20 433.87 401.85 1009.55 167.79 318.47 667.47
Fraction
Split

Dry soil + tare (g) 440.82 792.74 396.16 345.80 820.56 166.51 282.00 602.73
Tare (g) 151.52 141.45 139.72 140.17 156.13 140.30 139.85 288.73
Moisture content (%) 26.3 17.0 14.7 27.3 28.4 4.9 25.7 20.6
Moisture Content, w (%) 26.3 17.0 14.7 27.3 28.4 2.4 25.7 20.5
Dry Unit Wt., γd (pcf) 89.8 91.8 105.2 95.6 94.1

Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]1
Moisture Content and Unit Weight of Soil
(In General Accordance with ASTM D2937 and D2216)  IGES 2006

Project: URS
No: M00100-091 (24585139)
Location: 5600 West Herriman
Date: 3/24/2010
By: DKS

Boring No. TP-5 TP-11 TP-12 TP-17 TP-19 TP-20 TP-11 TP-21
Sample Info.

Sample Bucket Bucket Bucket Bucket Bucket Bucket Bag Bag

Depth 4-6' 8-13' 1.5-6' 13' 1-6' 0-2' 0-1' 7-11'
Split Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes
Split sieve 3/8" 3/4" 3/4" 3/4" 3/4" 3/4"
Total sample (g) 17881.83 27272.10 32214.80 20591.52 28484.50 2922.50
Moist coarse fraction (g) 29.53 11697.30 15985.10 518.42 9810.10 110.97
Moist split fraction (g) 17852.30 15574.80 16229.70 20073.10 18674.40 2811.53
Sample height, H (in)
Sample diameter, D (in)
Wt. rings + wet soil (g)
Wt. rings/tare (g)
Moist unit wt., γm (pcf)
Wet soil + tare (g) 189.70 1690.70 1823.60 659.33 1084.01 290.59
Fraction
Coarse

Dry soil + tare (g) 188.97 1660.73 1797.93 655.02 1077.50 289.24
Tare (g) 160.17 299.58 288.76 140.94 294.51 179.62
Moisture content (%) 2.5 2.2 1.7 0.8 0.8 1.2
Wet soil + tare (g) 781.08 3772.90 816.73 2349.90 1139.15 1882.50 709.24 893.38
Fraction
Split

Dry soil + tare (g) 706.15 3654.40 746.46 2259.54 1062.43 1793.88 618.27 801.92
Tare (g) 288.37 735.30 219.51 711.60 446.73 410.00 211.73 205.97
Moisture content (%) 17.9 4.1 13.3 5.8 12.5 6.4 22.4 15.3
Moisture Content, w (%) 17.9 3.3 13.3 3.7 12.1 4.4 22.4 14.7
Dry Unit Wt., γd (pcf)

Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]2
Moisture Content and Unit Weight of Soil
(In General Accordance with ASTM D2937 and D2216)  IGES 2006

Project: URS
No: M00100-091 (24585139)
Location: 5600 West Herriman
Date: 3/24/2010
By: BRR

Boring No. TP-7

Sample Info.

Sample Bag
Depth 10'
Split No
Split sieve
Total sample (g)
Moist coarse fraction (g)
Moist split fraction (g)
Sample height, H (in)
Sample diameter, D (in)
Wt. rings + wet soil (g)
Wt. rings/tare (g)
Moist unit wt., γm (pcf)
Wet soil + tare (g)
Dry soil + tare (g)
Tare (g)
Moisture content (%)
Wet soil + tare (g) 346.83
Moisture
Data

Dry soil + tare (g) 313.21

Tare (g) 140.35
Moisture content (%) 19.4
Moisture Content, w (%) 19.4
Dry Unit Wt., γd (pcf)

Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]3
Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
(ASTM D4318)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: B-8

No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: 1
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 2'
Date: 3/25/2010 Description: Dark brown clay
By: MP
Preparation method: Air Dry
Liquid limit test method: Multipoint
Plastic Limit
Determination No 1 2
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 5.54 4.89
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 4.90 4.35
Moisture Loss (g) 0.64 0.54
Tare (g) 1.39 1.40
Dry Soil (g) 3.51 2.95
Moisture Content, w (%) 18.23 18.31
Liquid Limit
Determination No 1 2 3
Number of Drops, N 34 25 16
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 9.11 7.95 9.35
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 7.21 6.27 7.23
Moisture Loss (g) 1.90 1.68 2.12
Tare (g) 1.39 1.39 1.38
Dry Soil (g) 5.82 4.88 5.85
Moisture Content, w (%) 32.65 34.43 36.24
One-Point LL (%) 34

Liquid Limit, LL (%) 34

Plastic Limit, PL (%) 18
Plasticity Index, PI (%) 16
37 60
36.5
Flow Curve Plasticity Chart
50 A-Line
36 U-Line
35.5 CH
Moisture content (%)

40
Plastic Index (PI)

35
34.5 30
LL = 34
34 CL MH
20
33.5
33
10
32.5 CL-ML ML
32 0
10 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Number of drops, N Liquid Limit (LL)

Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]1
Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
(ASTM D4318)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: B-8

No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: 5
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 19'
Date: 3/26/2010 Description: Brown clay
By: MP
Preparation method: Air Dry
Liquid limit test method: Multipoint
Plastic Limit
Determination No 1 2
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 5.69 6.52
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 5.15 5.86
Moisture Loss (g) 0.54 0.66
Tare (g) 1.38 1.35
Dry Soil (g) 3.77 4.51
Moisture Content, w (%) 14.32 14.63
Liquid Limit
Determination No 1 2 3
Number of Drops, N 24 31 12
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 7.26 8.10 9.92
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 5.76 6.40 7.62
Moisture Loss (g) 1.50 1.70 2.30
Tare (g) 1.39 1.35 1.34
Dry Soil (g) 4.37 5.05 6.28
Moisture Content, w (%) 34.32 33.66 36.62
One-Point LL (%) 34

Liquid Limit, LL (%) 34

Plastic Limit, PL (%) 14
Plasticity Index, PI (%) 20
37 60
Flow Curve Plasticity Chart
36.5 A-Line
50
U-Line
36
CH
Moisture content (%)

40
Plastic Index (PI)

35.5

35 30
MH
34.5
LL = 34 20
34 CL
10
33.5
CL-ML ML
33 0
10 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Number of drops, N Liquid Limit (LL)

Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]2
Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
(ASTM D4318)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: B-8

No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: 7
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 29'
Date: 3/29/2010 Description: Tan brown clay
By: MP
Preparation method: Air Dry
Liquid limit test method: Multipoint
Plastic Limit
Determination No 1 2
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 8.43 5.86
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 7.32 5.19
Moisture Loss (g) 1.11 0.67
Tare (g) 1.39 1.38
Dry Soil (g) 5.93 3.81
Moisture Content, w (%) 18.72 17.59
Liquid Limit
Determination No 1 2 3
Number of Drops, N 35 23 27
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 8.79 8.42 10.12
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 6.98 6.45 7.80
Moisture Loss (g) 1.81 1.97 2.32
Tare (g) 1.38 1.33 1.32
Dry Soil (g) 5.60 5.12 6.48
Moisture Content, w (%) 32.32 38.48 35.80
One-Point LL (%) 38 36

Liquid Limit, LL (%) 37

Plastic Limit, PL (%) 18
Plasticity Index, PI (%) 19
39 60
Flow Curve Plasticity Chart
38 A-Line
50
LL = 37 U-Line
37
CH
Moisture content (%)

40
Plastic Index (PI)

36

35 30
MH
34
20
33 CL
10
32
CL-ML ML
31 0
10 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Number of drops, N Liquid Limit (LL)

Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]3
Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
(ASTM D4318)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: B-9

No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: 6
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 24'
Date: 3/26/2010 Description: Brown clay
By: MP
Preparation method: Air Dry
Liquid limit test method: Multipoint
Plastic Limit
Determination No 1 2
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 6.07 5.71
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 5.20 4.92
Moisture Loss (g) 0.87 0.79
Tare (g) 1.39 1.35
Dry Soil (g) 3.81 3.57
Moisture Content, w (%) 22.83 22.13
Liquid Limit
Determination No 1 2 3
Number of Drops, N 34 15 24
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 9.18 7.31 10.62
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 7.34 5.83 8.37
Moisture Loss (g) 1.84 1.48 2.25
Tare (g) 1.37 1.38 1.32
Dry Soil (g) 5.97 4.45 7.05
Moisture Content, w (%) 30.82 33.26 31.91
One-Point LL (%) 32

Liquid Limit, LL (%) 32

Plastic Limit, PL (%) 22
Plasticity Index, PI (%) 10
33.5 60
Flow Curve Plasticity Chart
33 50 A-Line
U-Line
CH
Moisture content (%)

32.5 40
Plastic Index (PI)

32 30
LL = 32 MH
31.5 20
CL
31 10
CL-ML ML
30.5 0
10 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Number of drops, N Liquid Limit (LL)

Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]4
Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
(ASTM D4318)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-1

No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample:
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 0.5-2.5'
Date: 3/30/2010 Description: Light brown clay
By: MP
Preparation method: Air Dry
Liquid limit test method: Multipoint
Plastic Limit
Determination No 1 2
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 4.82 4.13
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 4.26 3.69
Moisture Loss (g) 0.56 0.44
Tare (g) 1.38 1.39
Dry Soil (g) 2.88 2.30
Moisture Content, w (%) 19.44 19.13
Liquid Limit
Determination No 1 2 3
Number of Drops, N 21 34 11
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 7.56 7.75 6.87
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 5.51 5.69 4.97
Moisture Loss (g) 2.05 2.06 1.90
Tare (g) 1.33 1.39 1.39
Dry Soil (g) 4.18 4.30 3.58
Moisture Content, w (%) 49.04 47.91 53.07
One-Point LL (%) 48

Liquid Limit, LL (%) 49

Plastic Limit, PL (%) 19
Plasticity Index, PI (%) 30
54 60
Flow Curve Plasticity Chart
53 50 A-Line
U-Line
52 CH
Moisture content (%)

40
Plastic Index (PI)

51
30
50 MH
20
49 LL = 49 CL

48 10
CL-ML ML
47 0
10 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Number of drops, N Liquid Limit (LL)

Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]5
Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
(ASTM D4318)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-5

No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample:
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 4-6'
Date: 3/25/2010 Description: Brown clay
By: MP
Preparation method: Air Dry
Liquid limit test method: Multipoint
Plastic Limit
Determination No 1 2
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 3.48 5.39
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 3.11 4.69
Moisture Loss (g) 0.37 0.70
Tare (g) 1.39 1.38
Dry Soil (g) 1.72 3.31
Moisture Content, w (%) 21.51 21.15
Liquid Limit
Determination No 1 2 3
Number of Drops, N 24 16 31
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 8.16 6.41 7.31
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 6.25 4.93 5.69
Moisture Loss (g) 1.91 1.48 1.62
Tare (g) 1.38 1.38 1.35
Dry Soil (g) 4.87 3.55 4.34
Moisture Content, w (%) 39.22 41.69 37.33
One-Point LL (%) 39

Liquid Limit, LL (%) 39

Plastic Limit, PL (%) 21
Plasticity Index, PI (%) 18
42 60
41.5
Flow Curve Plasticity Chart
50 A-Line
41 U-Line
40.5 CH
Moisture content (%)

40
Plastic Index (PI)

40
39.5 30
39 MH
LL = 39
20
38.5
38 CL
10
37.5 CL-ML ML
37 0
10 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Number of drops, N Liquid Limit (LL)

Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]6
Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
(ASTM D4318)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-12

No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample:
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 2.5'
Date: 3/26/2010 Description: Dark brown clay
By: MP
Preparation method: Air Dry
Liquid limit test method: Multipoint
Plastic Limit
Determination No 1 2
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 4.88 6.11
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 4.30 5.33
Moisture Loss (g) 0.58 0.78
Tare (g) 1.38 1.34
Dry Soil (g) 2.92 3.99
Moisture Content, w (%) 19.86 19.55
Liquid Limit
Determination No 1 2 3
Number of Drops, N 25 34 14
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 8.92 6.97 8.58
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 6.61 5.29 6.33
Moisture Loss (g) 2.31 1.68 2.25
Tare (g) 1.38 1.34 1.37
Dry Soil (g) 5.23 3.95 4.96
Moisture Content, w (%) 44.17 42.53 45.36
One-Point LL (%) 44

Liquid Limit, LL (%) 44

Plastic Limit, PL (%) 20
Plasticity Index, PI (%) 24
46 60
Flow Curve Plasticity Chart
45.5 A-Line
50
U-Line
45
CH
Moisture content (%)

40
Plastic Index (PI)

44.5

44 30
LL = 44
MH
43.5
20
43 CL
10
42.5
CL-ML ML
42 0
10 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Number of drops, N Liquid Limit (LL)

Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]7
Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
(ASTM D4318)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-19

No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample:
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 1-6'
Date: 3/26/2010 Description: Dark brown clay
By: MP
Preparation method: Air Dry
Liquid limit test method: Multipoint
Plastic Limit
Determination No 1 2
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 5.46 6.03
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 4.87 5.35
Moisture Loss (g) 0.59 0.68
Tare (g) 1.39 1.39
Dry Soil (g) 3.48 3.96
Moisture Content, w (%) 16.95 17.17
Liquid Limit
Determination No 1 2 3
Number of Drops, N 25 35 18
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 9.82 9.02 8.92
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 7.68 7.19 6.91
Moisture Loss (g) 2.14 1.83 2.01
Tare (g) 1.34 1.40 1.39
Dry Soil (g) 6.34 5.79 5.52
Moisture Content, w (%) 33.75 31.61 36.41
One-Point LL (%) 34

Liquid Limit, LL (%) 34

Plastic Limit, PL (%) 17
Plasticity Index, PI (%) 17
37 60
Flow Curve Plasticity Chart
36 50 A-Line
U-Line
CH
Moisture content (%)

35 40
Plastic Index (PI)

34 LL = 34 30
MH
33 20

CL
32 10
CL-ML ML
31 0
10 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Number of drops, N Liquid Limit (LL)

Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]8
Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
(ASTM D4318)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-20

No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample:
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 0-2'
Date: 3/30/2010 Description: Brown clay
By: BRR
Preparation method: Air Dry
Liquid limit test method: Multipoint
Plastic Limit
Determination No 1 2
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 11.47 14.13
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 9.94 12.19
Moisture Loss (g) 1.53 1.94
Tare (g) 1.33 1.37
Dry Soil (g) 8.61 10.82
Moisture Content, w (%) 17.77 17.93
Liquid Limit
Determination No 1 2 3
Number of Drops, N 26 22 16
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 8.55 10.02 11.20
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 6.90 8.03 8.90
Moisture Loss (g) 1.65 1.99 2.30
Tare (g) 1.37 1.40 1.39
Dry Soil (g) 5.53 6.63 7.51
Moisture Content, w (%) 29.84 30.02 30.63
One-Point LL (%) 30 30

Liquid Limit, LL (%) 30

Plastic Limit, PL (%) 18
Plasticity Index, PI (%) 12
30.7 60
30.6
Flow Curve Plasticity Chart
50 A-Line
30.5 U-Line
30.4 CH
Moisture content (%)

40
Plastic Index (PI)

30.3
30.2 30
30.1 MH
20
30
CL
29.9
LL = 30 10
29.8 CL-ML ML
29.7 0
10 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Number of drops, N Liquid Limit (LL)

Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]9
Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
(ASTM D4318)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-11

No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample:
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 0-1'
Date: 3/30/2010 Description: Brown clay
By: BRR
Preparation method: Air Dry
Liquid limit test method: Multipoint
Plastic Limit
Determination No 1 2
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 8.82 9.09
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 7.53 7.77
Moisture Loss (g) 1.29 1.32
Tare (g) 1.35 1.34
Dry Soil (g) 6.18 6.43
Moisture Content, w (%) 20.87 20.53
Liquid Limit
Determination No 1 2 3
Number of Drops, N 35 26 20
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 9.27 10.66 10.47
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 6.93 7.86 7.64
Moisture Loss (g) 2.34 2.80 2.83
Tare (g) 1.37 1.37 1.37
Dry Soil (g) 5.56 6.49 6.27
Moisture Content, w (%) 42.09 43.16 45.14
One-Point LL (%) 43 44

Liquid Limit, LL (%) 44

Plastic Limit, PL (%) 21
Plasticity Index, PI (%) 23
45.5 60
Flow Curve Plasticity Chart
45 A-Line
50
U-Line
44.5
CH
Moisture content (%)

40
Plastic Index (PI)

44
LL = 44
43.5 30
MH
43
20
42.5 CL
10
42
CL-ML ML
41.5 0
10 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Number of drops, N Liquid Limit (LL)

Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]10
Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
(ASTM D4318)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-7

No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample:
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 10'
Date: 3/30/2010 Description: Brown clay
By: BRR
Preparation method: Air Dry
Liquid limit test method: Multipoint
Plastic Limit
Determination No 1 2
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 9.78 11.90
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 8.39 10.21
Moisture Loss (g) 1.39 1.69
Tare (g) 1.38 1.34
Dry Soil (g) 7.01 8.87
Moisture Content, w (%) 19.83 19.05
Liquid Limit
Determination No 1 2 3
Number of Drops, N 28 22 14
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 11.54 10.42 10.75
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 8.96 8.11 8.29
Moisture Loss (g) 2.58 2.31 2.46
Tare (g) 1.38 1.39 1.37
Dry Soil (g) 7.58 6.72 6.92
Moisture Content, w (%) 34.04 34.38 35.55
One-Point LL (%) 35 34

Liquid Limit, LL (%) 34

Plastic Limit, PL (%) 19
Plasticity Index, PI (%) 15
35.8 60
35.6
Flow Curve Plasticity Chart
50 A-Line
35.4 U-Line
35.2 CH
Moisture content (%)

40
Plastic Index (PI)

35
34.8 30
34.6 MH
20
34.4
CL
34.2 LL = 34
10
34 CL-ML ML
33.8 0
10 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Number of drops, N Liquid Limit (LL)

Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]11
Particle-Size Analysis of Soils
(ASTM D422)  IGES 2004
Project: URS Boring No.: B-8
No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: 5
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 19'
Date: 3/23/2010 Description: Brown sandy clay
By: NB
Moisture data
Split: No Moist soil + tare (g): - 433.87
Dry soil + tare (g): - 396.16
Moist Dry Tare (g): - 139.72
Total sample wt. (g): 294.15 256.4 Moisture content (%): 0.0 14.7
0 0.0
0 0.00

Split fraction: 1.000

Accum. Grain Size Percent

Sieve Wt. Ret. (g) (mm) Finer
12" - 300 -
8" - 200 -
6" - 150 -
4" - 100 -
3" - 75 -
1.5" - 37.5 100.0
3/4" 12.87 19 95.0
3/8" 20.18 9.5 92.1
No.4 25.64 4.75 90.0
No.10 31.62 2 87.7
No.20 39.62 0.85 84.5
No.40 50.05 0.425 80.5
No.60 62.04 0.25 75.8
No.100 75.29 0.15 70.6
No.200 99.84 0.075 61.1

3 in 3/4 in No.4 No.10 No.40 No.200

100
Mechanical
90

80
Percent finer by weight

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01
Entered by:___________ Grain size (mm)
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]1
Particle-Size Analysis of Soils
(ASTM D422)  IGES 2004
Project: URS Boring No.: B-9
No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: 4
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 14'
Date: 3/26/2010 Description: Brown gravel with silt and sand
By: NB
Moisture data C.F.(+#10) S.F.(-#10)
Split: Yes Moist soil + tare (g): 536.00 167.79
Split sieve: #10 Dry soil + tare (g): 530.44 166.51
Moist Dry Tare (g): 152.98 140.30
Total sample wt. (g): 531.68 519.2 Moisture content (%): 1.5 4.9
+#10 Coarse fraction (g): 383.02 377.5
-#10 Split fraction (g): 84.74 80.79

Split fraction: 0.273

Accum. Grain Size Percent

Sieve Wt. Ret. (g) (mm) Finer
12" - 300 -
8" - 200 -
6" - 150 -
4" - 100 -
3" - 75 -
1.5" - 37.5 100.0
3/4" 88.84 19 82.9
3/8" 215.21 9.5 58.5
No.4 303.79 4.75 41.5
No.10 377.46 2 27.3 ←Split
No.20 23.10 0.85 19.5
No.40 36.80 0.425 14.9
No.60 45.60 0.25 11.9
No.100 53.10 0.15 9.4
No.200 60.90 0.075 6.7

3 in 3/4 in No.4 No.10 No.40 No.200

100
Mechanical
90

80
Percent finer by weight

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01
Entered by:___________ Grain size (mm)
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]2
Particle-Size Analysis of Soils
(ASTM D422)  IGES 2004
Project: URS Boring No.: TP-5
No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 4-6'
Date: 3/22/2010 Description: Brown clay
By: DKS
Moisture data C.F.(+3/8") S.F.(-3/8")
Yes Split: Moist soil + tare (g): 189.70 781.08
3/8" Split sieve: Dry soil + tare (g): 188.97 706.15
Moist Dry Tare (g): 160.17 288.37
Total sample wt. (g): 17881.83 15166.2 Moisture content (%): 2.5 17.9
+3/8" Coarse fraction (g): 29.53 28.8
-3/8" Split fraction (g): 492.71 417.78

Split fraction: 0.998

Accum. Grain Size Percent

Sieve Wt. Ret. (g) (mm) Finer
12" - 300 -
8" - 200 -
6" - 150 -
4" - 100 -
3" - 75 -
1.5" - 37.5 -
3/4" - 19 100.0
3/8" 28.80 9.5 99.8 ←Split
No.4 - 4.75 99.8
No.10 0.28 2 99.7
No.20 0.63 0.85 99.7
No.40 1.37 0.425 99.5
No.60 2.95 0.25 99.1
No.100 6.70 0.15 98.2
No.200 20.06 0.075 95.0

3 in 3/4 in No.4 No.10 No.40 No.200

100

90
Mechanical
80
Percent finer by weight

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01
Entered by:___________ Grain size (mm)
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]3
Particle-Size Analysis of Soils
(ASTM D422)  IGES 2004
Project: URS Boring No.: TP-11
No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 8-13'
Date: 3/26/2010 Description: Brown gravel with sand
By: MP
Moisture data C.F.(+3/4") S.F.(-3/4")
Yes Split: Moist soil + tare (g): 1690.70 3772.90
3/4" Split sieve: Dry soil + tare (g): 1660.73 3654.40
Moist Dry Tare (g): 299.58 735.30
Total sample wt. (g): 27272.10 26412.5 Moisture content (%): 2.2 4.1
+3/4" Coarse fraction (g): 11697.3 11445.3
-3/4" Split fraction (g): 3037.6 2919.10

Split fraction: 0.567

Accum. Grain Size Percent

Sieve Wt. Ret. (g) (mm) Finer
12" - 300 -
8" - 200 -
6" - 150 -
4" - 100 100.0
3" 2813.16 75 89.3
1.5" 7409.46 37.5 71.9
3/4" 11445.30 19 56.7 ←Split
3/8" 786.80 9.5 41.4
No.4 1342.60 4.75 30.6
No.10 1855.40 2 20.6
No.20 2216.40 0.85 13.6
No.40 2437.00 0.425 9.4
No.60 2562.30 0.25 6.9
No.100 2633.10 0.15 5.6
No.200 2693.60 0.075 4.4

3 in 3/4 in No.4 No.10 No.40 No.200

100
Mechanical
90

80
Percent finer by weight

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01
Entered by:___________ Grain size (mm)
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]4
Particle-Size Analysis of Soils
(ASTM D422)  IGES 2004
Project: URS Boring No.: TP-17
No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 13'
Date: 3/26/2010 Description: Gravel with sand
By: MP
Moisture data C.F.(+3/4") S.F.(-3/4")
Yes Split: Moist soil + tare (g): 1823.60 2349.90
3/4" Split sieve: Dry soil + tare (g): 1797.93 2259.54
Moist Dry Tare (g): 288.76 711.60
Total sample wt. (g): 32214.80 31052.3 Moisture content (%): 1.7 5.8
+3/4" Coarse fraction (g): 15985.1 15717.8
-3/4" Split fraction (g): 1638.3 1547.94

Split fraction: 0.494

Accum. Grain Size Percent

Sieve Wt. Ret. (g) (mm) Finer
12" - 300 -
8" - 200 100.0
6" 2825.93 150 90.9
4" 4558.66 100 85.3
3" 6043.70 75 80.5
1.5" 11622.41 37.5 62.6
3/4" 15717.75 19 49.4 ←Split
3/8" 312.20 9.5 39.4
No.4 520.10 4.75 32.8
No.10 716.40 2 26.5
No.20 907.80 0.85 20.4
No.40 1093.20 0.425 14.5
No.60 1242.00 0.25 9.8
No.100 1350.50 0.15 6.3
No.200 1414.50 0.075 4.3

3 in 3/4 in No.4 No.10 No.40 No.200

100
Mechanical
90

80
Percent finer by weight

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01
Entered by:___________ Grain size (mm)
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]5
Particle-Size Analysis of Soils
(ASTM D422)  IGES 2004
Project: URS Boring No.: TP-19
No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 1-6'
Date: 3/17/2010 Description: Dark brown clay with sand
By: DKS
Moisture data C.F.(+3/4") S.F.(-3/4")
Yes Split: Moist soil + tare (g): 659.33 1139.15
3/4" Split sieve: Dry soil + tare (g): 655.33 1062.43
Moist Dry Tare (g): 140.94 446.73
Total sample wt. (g): 20591.52 18363.4 Moisture content (%): 0.8 12.5
+3/4" Coarse fraction (g): 518.42 514.4
-3/4" Split fraction (g): 692.42 615.70

Split fraction: 0.972

Accum. Grain Size Percent

Sieve Wt. Ret. (g) (mm) Finer
12" - 300 -
8" - 200 -
6" - 150 -
4" - 100 -
3" - 75 -
1.5" - 37.5 100.0
3/4" 514.42 19 97.2 ←Split
3/8" 13.86 9.5 95.0
No.4 19.87 4.75 94.1
No.10 28.10 2 92.8
No.20 36.16 0.85 91.5
No.40 45.74 0.425 90.0
No.60 54.80 0.25 88.5
No.100 71.59 0.15 85.9
No.200 105.46 0.075 80.6

3 in 3/4 in No.4 No.10 No.40 No.200

100
Mechanical
90

80
Percent finer by weight

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01
Entered by:___________ Grain size (mm)
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]6
Particle-Size Analysis of Soils
(ASTM D422)  IGES 2004
Project: URS Boring No.: TP-20
No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 0-2'
Date: 3/25/2010 Description: Brown clayey gravel with sand
By: DKS
Moisture data C.F.(+3/4") S.F.(-3/4")
Yes Split: Moist soil + tare (g): 1084.01 1882.50
3/4" Split sieve: Dry soil + tare (g): 1077.50 1793.88
Moist Dry Tare (g): 294.51 410.00
Total sample wt. (g): 28514.50 27307.9 Moisture content (%): 0.8 6.4
+3/4" Coarse fraction (g): 9810.1 9729.2
-3/4" Split fraction (g): 1472.5 1383.88

Split fraction: 0.644

Accum. Grain Size Percent

Sieve Wt. Ret. (g) (mm) Finer
12" - 300 -
8" - 200 -
6" - 150 -
4" - 100 100.0
3" 1377.70 75 95.0
1.5" 5432.00 37.5 80.1
3/4" 9729.20 19 64.4 ←Split
3/8" 227.30 9.5 53.8
No.4 404.90 4.75 45.5
No.10 553.20 2 38.6
No.20 640.20 0.85 34.6
No.40 719.30 0.425 30.9
No.60 822.00 0.25 26.1
No.100 882.60 0.15 23.3
No.200 934.20 0.075 20.9

3 in 3/4 in No.4 No.10 No.40 No.200

100
Mechanical
90

80
Percent finer by weight

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01
Entered by:___________ Grain size (mm)
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]7
Particle-Size Analysis of Soils
(ASTM D422)  IGES 2004
Project: URS Boring No.: TP-18
No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample:
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 1-2.5'
Date: 3/26/2010 Description: Brown clay with sand
By: BRR
Moisture data
Split: No Moist soil + tare (g): - 858.19
Dry soil + tare (g): - 794.46
Moist Dry Tare (g): - 226.62
Total sample wt. (g): 631.57 567.8 Moisture content (%): 0.0 11.2
0 0.0
0 0.00

Split fraction: 1.000

Accum. Grain Size Percent

Sieve Wt. Ret. (g) (mm) Finer
12" - 300 -
8" - 200 -
6" - 150 -
4" - 100 -
3" - 75 -
1.5" - 37.5 -
3/4" - 19 100.0
3/8" 16.28 9.5 97.1
No.4 23.67 4.75 95.8
No.10 35.84 2 93.7
No.20 57.54 0.85 89.9
No.40 83.02 0.425 85.4
No.60 101.67 0.25 82.1
No.100 120.73 0.15 78.7
No.200 151.90 0.075 73.2

3 in 3/4 in No.4 No.10 No.40 No.200

100
Mechanical
90

80
Percent finer by weight

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01
Entered by:___________ Grain size (mm)
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]8
Particle-Size Analysis of Soils with hydrometer
(ASTM D422)  IGES 2004
Project: URS Boring No.: TP-7
No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample:
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 10'
Date: 3/30/2010 Description: Brown clay
By: BRR
Moisture data C.F.(+#10) S.F.(-#10) Hyd.(-No.10)
Split sieve: Yes Moist soil + tare (g): - 61.23 61.23
Split sieve: #10 Dry soil + tare (g): - 60.14 60.14
Moist Dry Tare (g): - 30.27 30.27
Total sample wt. (g): 54.65 52.73 Moisture content (%): 0.00 3.65 3.65
+#10 Coarse fraction (g): 0 0.00 Hydrometer data Slope: -0.164
-#10 Split fraction (g): 54.65 52.73 Hyd. split: No.10 Intercept: 16.3
Hydrometer fraction (g): 54.65 52.73 Gs: 2.65 Assumed α: 1.00
Split fraction: 1.000 Composite corr.: 5 Hyd. fraction: 100.00
Dispersion period (min): 15 Dispersion device: Air-jet
Accum. Grain Size Percent Elapsed time Temp. Hydrometer Grain Size % Soil in
Sieve Wt. Ret. (g) (mm) Finer (min) (°C) Reading (mm) Suspension
12" - 300 - 0.5 17.8 53 0.05473 91.04
8" - 200 - 1 17.8 50 0.03993 85.35
6" - 150 - 2 17.8 46.5 0.02922 78.71
4" - 100 - 5 17.8 42 0.01925 70.17
3" - 75 - 15 18.3 37.5 0.01147 61.64
1.5" - 37.5 - 30 18.3 33.5 0.00837 54.05
3/4" - 19 - 60 18.9 30 0.00603 47.41
3/8" - 9.5 - 120 19.4 27 0.00432 41.73
No.4 - 4.75 - 250 20 23.5 0.00305 35.09
No.10 - 2 100.0 <=Split 490 21.8 21 0.00216 30.35
No.20 0.03 0.85 99.9 1430 20 18 0.00132 24.66
No.40 0.09 0.425 99.8
No.60 0.19 0.25 99.6
No.100 0.49 0.15 99.1
No.200 1.82 0.075 96.5

3 in 3/4 in No.4 No.10 No.40 No.200

100
Mechanical
90 Hydrometer

80
Percent finer by weight

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Entered by:___________ Grain size (mm)
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]1
Particle-Size Analysis of Soils with hydrometer
(ASTM D422)  IGES 2004
Project: URS Boring No.: TP-15
No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample:
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 1.5-5'
Date: 3/30/2010 Description: Brown clay with sand
By: BRR
Moisture data C.F.(+#10) S.F.(-#10) Hyd.(-No.10)
Split sieve: Yes Moist soil + tare (g): 229.01 88.71 88.71
Split sieve: #10 Dry soil + tare (g): 228.68 87.08 87.08
Moist Dry Tare (g): 182.22 30.36 30.36
Total sample wt. (g): 430.22 418.73 Moisture content (%): 0.71 2.87 2.87
+#10 Coarse fraction (g): 25.20 25.02 Hydrometer data Slope: -0.164
-#10 Split fraction (g): 50.45 49.04 Hyd. split: No.10 Intercept: 16.3
Hydrometer fraction (g): 50.45 49.04 Gs: 2.65 Assumed α: 1.00
Split fraction: 0.940 Composite corr.: 5 Hyd. fraction: 94.02
Dispersion period (min): 15 Dispersion device: Air-jet
Accum. Grain Size Percent Elapsed time Temp. Hydrometer Grain Size % Soil in
Sieve Wt. Ret. (g) (mm) Finer (min) (°C) Reading (mm) Suspension
12" - 300 - 0.5 18.1 42 0.06064 70.94
8" - 200 - 1 18.1 39 0.04399 65.19
6" - 150 - 2 18.1 36 0.03187 59.44
4" - 100 - 5 18.1 32.5 0.02070 52.73
3" - 75 - 15 18.1 29 0.01226 46.01
1.5" - 37.5 - 30 18.3 27.5 0.00874 43.14
3/4" - 19 100.0 60 18.6 25.5 0.00624 39.30
3/8" 3.52 9.5 99.2 120 18.9 23.5 0.00446 35.47
No.4 9.84 4.75 97.7 250 19.4 21 0.00312 30.68
No.10 25.02 2 94.0 <=Split 482 21.8 19 0.00221 26.84
No.20 1.06 0.85 92.0 1422 20 18 0.00132 24.92
No.40 1.95 0.425 90.3
No.60 3.09 0.25 88.1
No.100 4.96 0.15 84.5
No.200 9.29 0.075 76.2

3 in 3/4 in No.4 No.10 No.40 No.200

100
Mechanical
90 Hydrometer

80
Percent finer by weight

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Entered by:___________ Grain size (mm)
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]2
Amount of Material in Soil Finer than the No. 200 (75µm) Sieve
(ASTM D1140)  IGES 2010

Project: URS
No: M001000-091 (24585139)
Location: 5600 West Herriman
Date: 3/25/2010
By: NB/DKS/BRR/MP

Boring No. B-8 B-8 B-8 B-9 TP-1 TP-12 TP-11 TP-21
Sample Info.

Sample 1 3 7 6 Bucket Bucket Bag Bag

Depth 2' 9' 29' 24' 0.5-2.5' 1.5-6' 0-1' 7-11'
Split No No No No Yes No No Yes
Split Sieve* 3/8" 3/4"
Moist total sample wt. (g) 365.26 761.75 261.68 178.62 19556.23 597.22 497.51 2922.50
Moist coarse fraction (g) 112.63 110.97
Moist split fraction + tare (g) 931.71 893.38
Split fraction tare (g) 273.22 205.97
Dry split fraction (g) 545.93 595.95
Dry retained No. 200 + tare (g) 160.72 176.28 144.48 159.20 340.07 242.16 235.24 428.07
Wash tare (g) 151.52 141.45 140.17 139.85 273.22 219.51 211.73 205.97
No. 200 Dry wt. retained (g) 9.20 34.83 4.31 19.35 66.85 22.65 23.51 222.10
Split sieve* Dry wt. retained (g) 110.42 109.62
Dry total sample wt. (g) 289.30 651.29 205.63 142.15 16230.42 526.85 406.54 2547.08
Moist soil + tare (g) 291.79 290.59
Fraction
Coarse

Dry soil + tare (g) 289.58 289.24

Tare (g) 179.18 179.62
Moisture content (%) 2.00 1.23
Moist soil + tare (g) 516.78 903.20 401.85 318.47 667.47 816.73 709.24 893.38
Fraction

Dry soil + tare (g) 440.82 792.74 345.80 282.00 602.73 746.36 618.27 801.92
Split

Tare (g) 151.52 141.45 140.17 139.85 288.73 219.51 211.73 205.97
Moisture content (%) 26.26 16.96 27.26 25.66 20.62 13.36 22.38 15.35
Percent passing split sieve* (%) 99.3 95.7
Percent passing No. 200 sieve (%) 96.8 94.7 97.9 86.4 87.2 95.7 94.2 60.0

Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]1
Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil
(ASTM D698 / D1557)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-1

No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 0.5-2.5'
Date: 3/22/2010 Sample Description: Light gray/brown clay
By: DKS Engineering Classification Not requested
As-received moisture content (%): 20.5
Method: AASHTO T99 A Preparation method: Moist
Mold volume (ft3): 0.0333 Rammer: Mechanical-circular face
Rock Correction: No
Optimum moisture content (%): 23.8
Maximum dry unit weight (pcf): 94
Point Number +2% +4% +6% As Is
Wt. Sample + Mold (g) 5990.8 6008.9 5988.7 5886.4
Wt. of Mold (g) 4251.1 4251.1 4251.1 4251.1
Wet Unit Wt., γm (pcf) 115.1 116.3 114.9 108.2
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 670.99 588.78 585.68 546.46
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 573.66 505.41 490.53 478.01
Tare (g) 152.7 179.59 150.73 151.09
Moisture Content, w (%) 23.1 25.6 28.0 20.9
Dry Unit Wt., γd (pcf) 93.5 92.6 89.8 89.4

120

115 Maximum dry unit weight and

optimum moisture content
110
Dry unit weight (pcf)

105

100 Maximum dry unit

weight = 94 (pcf)
95 ZAVL Gs = 2.7
ZAVL Gs = 2.6

90

85

80

75

70
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Entered by:___________ Moisture content (%)
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]1
Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil
(ASTM D698 / D1557)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-5

No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 4-6'
Date: 3/22/2010 Sample Description: Brown clay
By: DKS Engineering Classification Not requested
As-received moisture content (%): 17.9
Method: AASHTO T99 A Preparation method: Moist
Mold volume (ft3): 0.0333 Rammer: Mechanical-circular face
Rock Correction: No
Optimum moisture content (%): 22.5
Maximum dry unit weight (pcf): 98.2
Point Number As Is +2% +4% +6%
Wt. Sample + Mold (g) 5925.9 5999.3 6070.5 6045.8
Wt. of Mold (g) 4251.1 4251.1 4251.1 4251.1
Wet Unit Wt., γm (pcf) 110.8 115.6 120.3 118.7
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 714.78 580.34 628.05 601.85
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 640.52 515.47 537.88 509.48
Tare (g) 226.59 195.53 140.3 141.34
Moisture Content, w (%) 17.9 20.3 22.7 25.1
Dry Unit Wt., γd (pcf) 93.9 96.1 98.1 94.9

105

103 Maximum dry unit weight and

optimum moisture content
101
Dry unit weight (pcf)

99 Maximum dry unit

weight = 98.2 (pcf) ZAVL Gs = 2.7
97
ZAVL Gs = 2.6
95

93

91

89

87

85
15 20 25 30
Entered by:___________ Moisture content (%)
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]2
Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil
(ASTM D698 / D1557)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-12

No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 1.5-6'
Date: 3/24/2010 Sample Description: Brown clay with sand
By: DKS Engineering Classification Not requested
As-received moisture content (%): 13.3
Method: AASHTO T99 A Preparation method: Moist
Mold volume (ft3): 0.0333 Rammer: Mechanical-circular face
Rock Correction: No
Optimum moisture content (%): 25.8
Maximum dry unit weight (pcf): 94
Point Number +8% +10% +12% +14%
Wt. Sample + Mold (g) 5856.9 5917.0 5952.2 5902.2
Wt. of Mold (g) 4168.7 4168.7 4168.7 4168.7
Wet Unit Wt., γm (pcf) 111.7 115.6 118.0 114.6
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 556.37 700.85 584.94 581.23
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 482.06 591.27 494.81 487.65
Tare (g) 152.67 140.55 153.31 152.31
Moisture Content, w (%) 22.6 24.3 26.4 27.9
Dry Unit Wt., γd (pcf) 91.1 93.0 93.3 89.6

110
Maximum dry unit weight and
optimum moisture content
105

ZAVL Gs = 2.7
Dry unit weight (pcf)

100
Maximum dry unit ZAVL Gs = 2.6
weight = 94 (pcf)
95

90

85

80
15 20 25 30 35
Entered by:___________ Moisture content (%)
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]3
Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil
(ASTM D698 / D1557)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-19

No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 1-6'
Date: 3/18/2010 Sample Description: Brown clay with sand
By: DKS Engineering Classification Not requested
As-received moisture content (%): 12.1
Method: AASHTO T99 C Preparation method: Moist
Mold volume (ft3): 0.0333 Rammer: Mechanical-circular face
Rock Correction: No
Optimum moisture content (%): 19
Maximum dry unit weight (pcf): 102.1
Point Number +6% +8% +4% +2%
Wt. Sample + Mold (g) 6006.3 5989.5 5920.4 5828.6
Wt. of Mold (g) 4168.7 4168.7 4168.7 4168.7
Wet Unit Wt., γm (pcf) 121.5 120.4 115.9 109.8
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 579.47 593.33 601.39 584.5
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 515.39 521.01 539.88 531.08
Tare (g) 178.56 182.15 179.68 172.16
Moisture Content, w (%) 19.0 21.3 17.1 14.9
Dry Unit Wt., γd (pcf) 102.1 99.2 99.0 95.6

120
Maximum dry unit weight and
115 optimum moisture content

110
Dry unit weight (pcf)

105 ZAVL Gs = 2.7

Maximum dry unit
weight = 102.1 (pcf) ZAVL Gs = 2.6
100

95

90

85

80
10 15 20 25 30
Entered by:___________ Moisture content (%)
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]4
Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil
(ASTM D698 / D1557)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-20

No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 0-2'
Date: 3/25/2010 Sample Description: Brown clayey gravel with sand
By: DKS Engineering Classification Not requested
As-received moisture content (%): 4.4
Method: AASHTO T99 C Preparation method: Moist
Mold volume (ft3): 0.0333 Rammer: Mechanical-circular face
Rock Correction: No
Optimum moisture content (%): 10.7
Maximum dry unit weight (pcf): 118.3
Point Number +2% +4% +6% +8%
Wt. Sample + Mold (g) 6030.9 6126.1 6153.5 6143.9
Wt. of Mold (g) 4177.1 4177.1 4177.1 4177.1
Wet Unit Wt., γm (pcf) 122.6 128.9 130.7 130.1
Wet Soil + Tare (g) 646.27 716.87 648.16 635.02
Dry Soil + Tare (g) 607.03 672.01 598.11 581.29
Tare (g) 151.93 224.02 190.07 184.99
Moisture Content, w (%) 8.6 10.0 12.3 13.6
Dry Unit Wt., γd (pcf) 112.9 117.2 116.4 114.5

130
Maximum dry unit weight and
optimum moisture content
125 ZAVL Gs = 2.7

ZAVL Gs = 2.6
Dry unit weight (pcf)

120
Maximum dry unit
weight = 118.3 (pcf)
115

110

105

100
5 10 15 20
Entered by:___________ Moisture content (%)
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]5
California Bearing Ratio
(ASTM D 1883)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-1

Number: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 0.5-2.5'
Date: 3/25/2010 Original Method: AASHTO T99 A
By: DKS Engineering Classification: Not requested
Maximum Dry Unit Weight (pcf): 94 Condition of Sample: Soaked
Optimum Moisture Content (%): 24.3 Scalp and Replace: No
Relative Compaction (%): 96.5
CBR (%): 1.8
As Compacted Data
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 11042.7 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 518.23
Wt. of Mold (g) 7229.5 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 448.52
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 90.7 Tare (g) 153.31
Moisture Content (%) 23.6
After Soaking Data Average Top 1 in.
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 11279.6 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 649.13 551.29
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 87.9 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 542.85 455.85
Tare (g) 211.92 181.18
Moisture Content (%) 32.1 34.7
Swell Data
Date Time Dial Surcharge (psf) 50
3/19/2010 16:39 0.347 Swell (%) 2.55
3/25/2010 09:15 0.464 Soaking Period (hr) 137
Penetration Data
Zero load (lb) = -2
45
Area of Piston (in2) = 3
Penetration Raw Load Piston Stress Std. Stress
40 Load Penetration Curve
(in.) (lb) (psi) (psi)
0.000 2 0 CBR
35
0.025 22 7
Stress on piston (psi)

0.050 36 11 30
0.075 48 15
0.100 56 18 1000 25
0.125 65 21 1125
0.150 70 23 1250 20
0.175 73 24 1375
0.200 76 25 1500 15
0.300 93 30 1900
0.400 108 35 2300 10
0.500 123 40 2600
Comments 5
Compacted to 96% and soaked.
0
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
Penetration (in)

Entered By:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]1
California Bearing Ratio
(ASTM D 1883)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-1

Number: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 0.5-2.5'
Date: 3/25/2010 Original Method: AASHTO T99 A
By: DKS Engineering Classification: Not requested
Maximum Dry Unit Weight (pcf): 94 Condition of Sample: Soaked
Optimum Moisture Content (%): 24.3 Scalp and Replace: No
Relative Compaction (%): 100.0
Corrected CBR (%): 1.8
As Compacted Data
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 11268.2 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 482.34
Wt. of Mold (g) 7310.3 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 424.01
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 94.0 Tare (g) 179.17
Moisture Content (%) 23.8
After Soaking Data Average Top 1 in.
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 11456.3 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 616.77 575.06
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 91.7 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 518.54 489.14
Tare (g) 179.44 177.94
Moisture Content (%) 29.0 27.6
Swell Data
Date Time Dial Surcharge (psf) 50
3/19/2010 15:51 0.686 Swell (%) 3.12
3/25/2010 09:13 0.829 Soaking Period (hr) 137
Penetration Data
Zero load (lb) = -2
60
Area of Piston (in2) = 3
Penetration Raw Load Piston Stress Std. Stress
Load Penetration Curve
(in.) (lb) (psi) (psi)
50
0.000 0 0 Corrected CBR
0.025 10 3
Stress on piston (psi)

0.050 22 7 40
0.075 36 12
0.100 50 17 1000
0.125 61 20 1125 30
0.150 74 25 1250
0.175 84 28 1375
0.200 93 31 1500 20
0.300 121 40 1900
0.400 146 49 2300
0.500 171 57 2600 10
Comments
Compacted to 100% and soaked.
0
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
Penetration (in)

Entered By:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]2
California Bearing Ratio
(ASTM D 1883)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-5

Number: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 4-6'
Date: 3/29/2010 Original Method: AASHTO T99 A
By: DKS Engineering Classification: Not requested
Maximum Dry Unit Weight (pcf): 98.2 Condition of Sample: Soaked
Optimum Moisture Content (%): 22.5 Scalp and Replace: No
Relative Compaction (%): 96.3
CBR (%): 1.9
As Compacted Data
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 10625.9 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 513.15
Wt. of Mold (g) 6690.4 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 446.88
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 94.6 Tare (g) 150.62
Moisture Content (%) 22.4
After Soaking Data Average Top 1 in.
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 10777.1 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 828.6 482.15
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 93.7 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 688.24 409.12
Tare (g) 165.3 168.43
Moisture Content (%) 26.8 30.3
Swell Data
Date Time Dial Surcharge (psf) 50
3/22/2010 11:28 0.701 Swell (%) 1.09
3/26/2010 13:03 0.751 Soaking Period (hr) 98
Penetration Data
Zero load (lb) = -2
Area of Piston (in2) = 3 60
Penetration Raw Load Piston Stress Std. Stress Load Penetration Curve
(in.) (lb) (psi) (psi) CBR
50
0.000 2 0
0.025 20 6
Stress on piston (psi)

0.050 36 11
40
0.075 48 15
0.100 58 19 1000
0.125 65 21 1125
30
0.150 73 24 1250
0.175 80 26 1375
0.200 86 28 1500
20
0.300 108 35 1900
0.400 135 44 2300
0.500 165 54 2600
10
Comments
Compacted to 96% and soaked.

0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50
Penetration (in)

Entered By:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]3
California Bearing Ratio
(ASTM D 1883)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-5

Number: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 4-6'
Date: 3/29/2010 Original Method: AASHTO T99 A
By: DKS Engineering Classification: Not requested
Maximum Dry Unit Weight (pcf): 98.2 Condition of Sample: Soaked
Optimum Moisture Content (%): 22.5 Scalp and Replace: No
Relative Compaction (%): 100.1
Corrected CBR (%): 1.6
As Compacted Data
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 11253.2 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 540.00
Wt. of Mold (g) 7151.3 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 473.06
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 98.3 Tare (g) 178.57
Moisture Content (%) 22.7
After Soaking Data Average Top 1 in.
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 11333.0 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 712.53 523.41
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 97.3 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 612.14 459.34
Tare (g) 214.17 222.24
Moisture Content (%) 25.2 27.0
Swell Data
Date Time Dial Surcharge (psf) 50
3/22/2010 13:46 0.573 Swell (%) 0.96
3/26/2010 13:15 0.617 Soaking Period (hr) 96
Penetration Data
Zero load (lb) = -2
Area of Piston (in2) = 3 70
Penetration Raw Load Piston Stress Std. Stress Load Penetration Curve

(in.) (lb) (psi) (psi) 60 Corrected CBR

0.000 2 0
0.025 12 3
50
Stress on piston (psi)

0.050 23 7
0.075 35 11
0.100 46 15 1000 40
0.125 58 19 1125
0.150 70 23 1250 30
0.175 83 27 1375
0.200 93 30 1500
20
0.300 131 43 1900
0.400 161 53 2300
0.500 191 63 2600 10
Comments
Compacted to 100% and soaked.
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50
Penetration (in)

Entered By:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]4
California Bearing Ratio
(ASTM D 1883)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-12

Number: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 1.5-6'
Date: 3/25/2010 Original Method: AASHTO T99 A
By: DKS Engineering Classification: Not requested
Maximum Dry Unit Weight (pcf): 94 Condition of Sample: Unsoaked
Optimum Moisture Content (%): 25.8 Scalp and Replace: No
Relative Compaction (%): 96.3
CBR (%): 3.6
As Compacted Data
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 10425.4 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 597.3
Wt. of Mold (g) 6561.8 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 518.87
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 90.6 Tare (g) 210.97
Moisture Content (%) 25.5
After Soaking Data Average Top 1 in.
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) Wet Soil + Tare (g)
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) Dry Soil + Tare (g)
Tare (g)
Moisture Content (%)
Swell Data
Date Time Dial Surcharge (psf) 50
Swell (%)
Soaking Period (hr) 0
Penetration Data
120
Zero load (lb) = 0
Area of Piston (in2) = 3 Load Penetration Curve
Penetration Raw Load Piston Stress Std. Stress CBR
100
(in.) (lb) (psi) (psi)
0.000 2 0
Stress on piston (psi)

0.025 33 10
80
0.050 65 21
0.075 91 30
0.100 110 36 1000
60
0.125 131 43 1125
0.150 153 50 1250
0.175 171 56 1375
40
0.200 186 61 1500
0.300 238 79 1900
0.400 281 93 2300
20
0.500 318 105 2600
Comments
Compacted to 96% and pushed with no soaking
0
period.
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50
Penetration (in)

Entered By:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]5
California Bearing Ratio
(ASTM D 1883)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-12

Number: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 1.5-6'
Date: 3/30/2010 Original Method: AASHTO T99 A
By: DKS Engineering Classification: Not requested
Maximum Dry Unit Weight (pcf): 94 Condition of Sample: Soaked
Optimum Moisture Content (%): 25.8 Scalp and Replace: No
Relative Compaction (%): 96.5
CBR (%): 3.6
As Compacted Data
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 11100.5 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 597.3
Wt. of Mold (g) 7229.4 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 518.87
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 90.7 Tare (g) 210.97
Moisture Content (%) 25.5
After Soaking Data Average Top 1 in.
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 11207.0 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 749.51 577.44
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 90.4 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 623.01 489.32
Tare (g) 178.55 179.68
Moisture Content (%) 28.5 28.5
Swell Data
Date Time Dial Surcharge (psf) 50
3/25/2010 11:50 0.492 Swell (%) 0.68
3/29/2010 14:28 0.523 Soaking Period (hr) 99
Penetration Data
Zero load (lb) = 0
80
Area of Piston (in2) = 3
Load Penetration Curve
Penetration Raw Load Piston Stress Std. Stress
70 CBR
(in.) (lb) (psi) (psi)
0.000 2 0
0.025 38 12 60
Stress on piston (psi)

0.050 71 23
0.075 93 30 50
0.100 110 36 1000
0.125 125 41 1125 40
0.150 135 44 1250
0.175 145 48 1375
30
0.200 153 50 1500
0.300 178 59 1900
0.400 198 65 2300 20
0.500 218 72 2600
Comments 10
Compacted to 96% and soaked.
0
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
Penetration (in)

Entered By:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]6
California Bearing Ratio
(ASTM D 1883)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-12

Number: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 1.5-6'
Date: 3/30/2010 Original Method: AASHTO T99 A
By: DKS Engineering Classification: Not requested
Maximum Dry Unit Weight (pcf): 94 Condition of Sample: Soaked
Optimum Moisture Content (%): 25.8 Scalp and Replace: No
Relative Compaction (%): 100.2
CBR (%): 3.3
As Compacted Data
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 10659.1 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 454.48
Wt. of Mold (g) 6619.7 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 386.56
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 94.2 Tare (g) 126.98
Moisture Content (%) 26.2
After Soaking Data Average Top 1 in.
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 10704.6 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 836.57 575.09
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 94.9 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 710.57 480.73
Tare (g) 224.02 151.71
Moisture Content (%) 25.9 28.7
Swell Data
Date Time Dial Surcharge (psf) 50
3/25/2010 14:40 0.704 Swell (%) 0.57
3/29/2010 14:35 0.73 Soaking Period (hr) 96
Penetration Data
Zero load (lb) = -2
100
Area of Piston (in2) = 3
Penetration Raw Load Piston Stress Std. Stress 90 Load Penetration Curve
(in.) (lb) (psi) (psi)
0.000 2 0 80 CBR
0.025 28 9
Stress on piston (psi)

0.050 58 19 70
0.075 81 26
60
0.100 100 33 1000
0.125 118 39 1125 50
0.150 133 44 1250
0.175 149 49 1375 40
0.200 166 55 1500
0.300 205 68 1900 30
0.400 238 79 2300
20
0.500 266 88 2600
Comments
10
Compacted to 100% and soaked.
0
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
Penetration (in)

Entered By:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]7
California Bearing Ratio
(ASTM D 1883)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-19

Number: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 1-6'
Date: 3/22/2010 Original Method: AASHTO T99 C
By: DKS Engineering Classification: Not requested
Maximum Dry Unit Weight (pcf): 102.1 Condition of Sample: Unsoaked
Optimum Moisture Content (%): 19 Scalp and Replace: No
Relative Compaction (%): 95.7
CBR (%): 5.6
As Compacted Data
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 10508.7 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 435.59
Wt. of Mold (g) 6544.3 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 387.73
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 97.7 Tare (g) 140.55
Moisture Content (%) 19.4
After Soaking Data Average Top 1 in.
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) Wet Soil + Tare (g)
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) Dry Soil + Tare (g)
Tare (g)
Moisture Content (%)
Swell Data
Date Time Dial Surcharge (psf) 50
Swell (%)
Soaking Period (hr) 0
Penetration Data
160
Zero load (lb) = 0
Area of Piston (in2) = 3 Load Penetration Curve
Penetration Raw Load Piston Stress Std. Stress 140 CBR
(in.) (lb) (psi) (psi)
0.000 2 0
Stress on piston (psi)

120
0.025 50 16
0.050 100 33 100
0.075 143 47
0.100 171 56 1000
80
0.125 193 64 1125
0.150 213 70 1250
0.175 229 76 1375 60
0.200 243 80 1500
0.300 303 100 1900 40
0.400 362 120 2300
0.500 424 141 2600 20
Comments
Compacted to 96% and pushed with no soaking
0
period.
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50
Penetration (in)

Entered By:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]8
California Bearing Ratio
(ASTM D 1883)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-19

Number: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 1-6'
Date: 3/23/2010 Original Method: AASHTO T99 C
By: DKS Engineering Classification: Not requested
Maximum Dry Unit Weight (pcf): 102.1 Condition of Sample: Soaked
Optimum Moisture Content (%): 19 Scalp and Replace: No
Relative Compaction (%): 96.1
CBR (%): 4.1
As Compacted Data
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 10941.2 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 524.27
Wt. of Mold (g) 6969.2 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 464.97
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 98.1 Tare (g) 154.28
Moisture Content (%) 19.1
After Soaking Data Average Top 1 in.
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 11088.6 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 737.17 514.88
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 96.9 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 627.64 447.08
Tare (g) 172.16 160.18
Moisture Content (%) 24.0 23.6
Swell Data
Date Time Dial Surcharge (psf) 50
3/18/2010 14:40 0.49 Swell (%) 0.76
3/22/2010 14:02 0.525 Soaking Period (hr) 95
Penetration Data
80
Zero load (lb) = 0
Area of Piston (in2) = 3 Load Penetration Curve
Penetration Raw Load Piston Stress Std. Stress 70 CBR
(in.) (lb) (psi) (psi)
0.000 2 0 60
0.025 50 16
Stress on piston (psi)

0.050 86 28 50
0.075 105 34
0.100 125 41 1000
40
0.125 138 45 1125
0.150 144 47 1250
0.175 148 49 1375 30
0.200 155 51 1500
0.300 176 58 1900 20
0.400 196 65 2300
0.500 216 71 2600 10
Comments
Compacted to 96% and soaked.
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50
Penetration (in)

Entered By:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]9
California Bearing Ratio
(ASTM D 1883)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-19

Number: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 1-6'
Date: 3/25/2010 Original Method: AASHTO T99 A
By: DKS Engineering Classification: Not requested
Maximum Dry Unit Weight (pcf): 102.1 Condition of Sample: Soaked
Optimum Moisture Content (%): 19 Scalp and Replace: No
Relative Compaction (%): 100.0
Corrected CBR (%): 5.4
As Compacted Data
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 10747.5 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 598.67
Wt. of Mold (g) 6620 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 538.82
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 102.1 Tare (g) 220.91
Moisture Content (%) 18.8
After Soaking Data Average Top 1 in.
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 10860.5 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 728.74 554.1
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 102.2 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 630.68 481.75
Tare (g) 160.88 160.37
Moisture Content (%) 20.9 22.5
Swell Data
Date Time Dial Surcharge (psf) 50
3/19/2010 13:50 0.574 Swell (%) 0.92
3/25/2010 09:10 0.616 Soaking Period (hr) 139
Penetration Data
Zero load (lb) = 0
Area of Piston (in2) = 3 160
Penetration Raw Load Piston Stress Std. Stress Load Penetration Curve

(in.) (lb) (psi) (psi) 140 Corrected CBR

0.000 0 0
0.025 25 8 120
Stress on piston (psi)

0.050 65 22
0.075 101 34 100
0.100 141 47 1000
0.125 183 61 1125 80
0.150 223 74 1250
0.175 254 85 1375 60
0.200 280 93 1500
0.300 349 116 1900 40
0.400 406 135 2300
0.500 456 152 2600 20
Comments
Compacted to 100% and soaked.
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50
Penetration (in)

Entered By:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]10
California Bearing Ratio
(ASTM D 1883)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-20

Number: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 0-2'
Date: 3/30/2010 Original Method: AASHTO T99 C
By: DKS Engineering Classification: Not requested
Maximum Dry Unit Weight (pcf): 118.3 Condition of Sample: Soaked
Optimum Moisture Content (%): 10.7 Scalp and Replace: No
Relative Compaction (%): 96.1
CBR (%): 8.7
As Compacted Data
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 11610.5 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 653.61
Wt. of Mold (g) 7310 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 603.29
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 113.7 Tare (g) 154.01
Moisture Content (%) 11.2
After Soaking Data Average Top 1 in.
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 11727.0 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 612.88 600.2
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 114.5 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 567.07 556.05
Tare (g) 221.93 215.4
Moisture Content (%) 13.3 13.0
Swell Data
Date Time Dial Surcharge (psf) 50
3/25/2010 15:24 0.58 Swell (%) 0.13
3/29/2010 15:38 0.586 Soaking Period (hr) 96
Penetration Data
Zero load (lb) = -2
Area of Piston (in2) = 3 300
Penetration Raw Load Piston Stress Std. Stress
Load Penetration Curve
(in.) (lb) (psi) (psi)
0.000 2 0 250 CBR
0.025 84 27
Stress on piston (psi)

0.050 166 55
0.075 219 72 200
0.100 263 87 1000
0.125 299 99 1125
150
0.150 332 110 1250
0.175 368 122 1375
0.200 402 133 1500
100
0.300 534 177 1900
0.400 667 222 2300
0.500 780 259 2600 50
Comments
Compacted to 96% and soaked.
0
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
Penetration (in)

Entered By:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]11
California Bearing Ratio
(ASTM D 1883)  IGES 2004

Project: URS Boring No.: TP-20

Number: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: Bucket
Location: 5600 West Herriman Depth: 0-2'
Date: 3/30/2010 Original Method: AASHTO T99 C
By: DKS Engineering Classification: Not requested
Maximum Dry Unit Weight (pcf): 118.3 Condition of Sample: Soaked
Optimum Moisture Content (%): 10.7 Scalp and Replace: No
Relative Compaction (%): 100.5
CBR (%): 8.4
As Compacted Data
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 11439.6 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 714.37
Wt. of Mold (g) 6969.1 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 659.74
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 118.9 Tare (g) 140.57
Moisture Content (%) 10.5
After Soaking Data Average Top 1 in.
Wt. of Mold + Sample (g) 11512.4 Wet Soil + Tare (g) 979.26 820.64
Dry Unit Weight (pcf) 119.5 Dry Soil + Tare (g) 904.95 763.57
Tare (g) 273.22 288.36
Moisture Content (%) 11.8 12.0
Swell Data
Date Time Dial Surcharge (psf) 50
3/25/2010 16:08 0.377 Swell (%) 0.02
3/29/2010 15:44 0.378 Soaking Period (hr) 96
Penetration Data
Zero load (lb) = 0
Area of Piston (in2) = 3 400
Penetration Raw Load Piston Stress Std. Stress
Load Penetration Curve
(in.) (lb) (psi) (psi) 350
0.000 2 0 CBR

0.025 63 20 300
Stress on piston (psi)

0.050 128 42
0.075 189 62
250
0.100 253 84 1000
0.125 309 102 1125
200
0.150 371 123 1250
0.175 426 141 1375
0.200 487 162 1500 150
0.300 675 224 1900
0.400 835 278 2300 100
0.500 1010 336 2600
Comments 50
Compacted to 100% and soaked.
0
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
Penetration (in)

Entered By:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]12
Direct Shear Test for Soils Under Drained Conditions
(ASTM D3080)  IGES 2009

Project: URS Boring No.: B-8

No: M00100-091 (24585139) Sample: 5
Location: 5600 West Herriman, UT Depth: 19'
Date: 3/24/2010 Sample Description: Brown clay with sand
By: JDF Sample type: Undisturbed-trimmed from ring

Test type: Inundated

Horizontal deformation (in.): 0.3
Shear rate (in./min): 0.0042
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
Normal stress (psf) 500 1000 2000
Peak shear stress (psf) 516 804 1284
Horizontal deformation at peak(in) 0.035 0.050 0.150
Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final
Sample height (in) 1.0000 0.9982 1.0000 0.9780 1.0000 0.9565
Sample diameter (in) 2.416 2.416 2.416 2.416 2.416 2.416
Wt. rings + wet soil (g) 191.36 200.77 184.88 194.00 185.71 193.18
Wt. rings (g) 43.16 43.16 42.78 42.78 43.14 43.14
Wet soil + tare (g) 433.87 170.08 433.87 162.82 433.87 161.14
Dry soil + tare (g) 396.16 142.45 396.16 136.15 396.16 136.07
Tare (g) 139.72 16.80 139.72 15.31 139.72 15.04
Water content (%) 14.7 22.0 14.7 22.1 14.7 20.7
Dry unit weight (pcf) 107.4 107.6 102.9 105.3 103.3 108.0
φ (deg) 27 Average of 3 samples Initial Final
c (psf) 276 Water content (%) 14.7 21.6
Dry unit weight (pcf) 104.5 106.9
1400
1200 2500
Shear stress (psf)

1000 Normal stress = 500 psf

Normal stress = 1000 psf
800 Normal stress = 2000 psf
Regression Total stress array
2000 Line fit
600
R2 = 1.00 Table m b σn (psf) τf (psf)
400 Intercept (b) = 276.00 m 0.51 276.00 0.00 276.00
Shear stress (psf)

200 Slope (m) = 0.51 se(n) 0.02 31.42 2200.00 1392.34

1500
0
φ (deg) = 26.90 R2 1.00 25.66
c (psf) = 276.00 F 456.33 1.00
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
0.010 ss (reg) ######## 658.29
Axial deflection (in)

0.005 1000

0.000
Normal stress (psf) 500 1000 2000
Peak shear stress (psf) 516 804 1284
-0.005
500
-0.010
-0.015
-0.020 0
-0.025 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
Horizontal deflection (in) Normal stress (psf)

Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]1
Normal stress = 500 psf Normal stress = 1000 psf Normal stress = 2000 psf
Horizontal Shear Axial Horizontal Shear Axial Horizontal Shear Axial
Deflection Stress deflection Deflection Stress deflection Deflection Stress deflection
(in) (psf) (in) (in) (psf) (in) (in) (psf) (in)
0.005 276 0.000 0.005 300 0.000 0.005 204 -0.001
0.010 360 0.000 0.010 420 0.000 0.010 336 -0.001
0.015 420 0.001 0.015 516 0.001 0.015 444 -0.002
0.020 444 0.001 0.020 576 0.001 0.020 552 -0.003
0.025 480 0.002 0.025 636 0.001 0.025 648 -0.003
0.030 504 0.003 0.030 684 0.001 0.030 732 -0.004
0.035 516 0.004 0.035 732 0.001 0.035 804 -0.004
0.040 516 0.005 0.040 756 0.002 0.040 864 -0.005
0.045 492 0.006 0.045 780 0.002 0.045 912 -0.005
0.050 468 0.006 0.050 804 0.003 0.050 960 -0.005
0.055 468 0.006 0.055 804 0.003 0.055 1008 -0.006
0.060 468 0.006 0.060 804 0.003 0.060 1044 -0.006
0.065 468 0.006 0.065 804 0.004 0.065 1068 -0.006
0.070 468 0.006 0.070 792 0.004 0.070 1092 -0.007
0.075 468 0.006 0.075 792 0.004 0.075 1128 -0.007
0.080 468 0.006 0.080 780 0.004 0.080 1140 -0.007
0.085 456 0.006 0.085 780 0.004 0.085 1164 -0.008
0.090 456 0.006 0.090 768 0.004 0.090 1176 -0.008
0.095 444 0.006 0.095 756 0.004 0.095 1200 -0.008
0.100 432 0.006 0.100 756 0.003 0.100 1212 -0.008
0.105 420 0.006 0.105 756 0.003 0.105 1212 -0.009
0.110 420 0.006 0.110 732 0.003 0.110 1212 -0.009
0.115 420 0.006 0.115 732 0.003 0.115 1224 -0.009
0.120 420 0.006 0.120 720 0.003 0.120 1236 -0.010
0.125 408 0.006 0.125 720 0.003 0.125 1248 -0.010
0.130 420 0.005 0.130 708 0.002 0.130 1260 -0.011
0.135 408 0.005 0.135 708 0.002 0.135 1260 -0.011
0.140 408 0.005 0.140 708 0.002 0.140 1260 -0.011
0.145 408 0.005 0.145 708 0.002 0.145 1272 -0.012
0.150 408 0.005 0.150 696 0.001 0.150 1284 -0.012
0.155 408 0.005 0.155 696 0.001 0.155 1284 -0.012
0.160 408 0.005 0.160 696 0.001 0.160 1284 -0.012
0.165 408 0.005 0.165 684 0.001 0.165 1284 -0.013
0.170 396 0.005 0.170 696 0.001 0.170 1284 -0.013
0.175 396 0.004 0.175 684 0.000 0.175 1284 -0.013
0.180 396 0.004 0.180 696 0.000 0.180 1284 -0.013
0.185 396 0.004 0.185 696 0.000 0.185 1272 -0.014
0.190 396 0.004 0.190 696 0.000 0.190 1272 -0.014
0.195 396 0.004 0.195 696 -0.001 0.195 1260 -0.014
0.200 396 0.004 0.200 696 -0.001 0.200 1260 -0.014
0.205 396 0.004 0.205 696 -0.001 0.205 1260 -0.015
0.210 396 0.004 0.210 684 -0.001 0.210 1260 -0.015
0.215 396 0.004 0.215 684 -0.001 0.215 1260 -0.015
0.220 396 0.004 0.220 684 -0.002 0.220 1260 -0.015
0.225 396 0.004 0.225 684 -0.002 0.225 1260 -0.016
0.230 396 0.003 0.230 684 -0.002 0.230 1260 -0.016
0.235 396 0.003 0.235 684 -0.002 0.235 1260 -0.016
0.240 396 0.003 0.240 684 -0.002 0.240 1260 -0.016
0.245 396 0.003 0.245 684 -0.003 0.245 1260 -0.017
0.250 396 0.003 0.250 684 -0.003 0.250 1260 -0.017
0.255 396 0.003 0.255 684 -0.003 0.255 1260 -0.017
0.260 396 0.003 0.260 684 -0.003 0.260 1260 -0.017
0.265 396 0.003 0.265 684 -0.003 0.265 1260 -0.018
0.270 384 0.002 0.270 684 -0.003 0.270 1260 -0.018
0.275 384 0.002 0.275 684 -0.004 0.275 1260 -0.018
0.280 384 0.002 0.280 672 -0.004 0.280 1260 -0.019
0.285 384 0.002 0.285 672 -0.004 0.285 1260 -0.019
0.290 384 0.002 0.290 672 -0.004 0.290 1260 -0.019
0.295 384 0.002 0.295 672 -0.004 0.295 1260 -0.019
0.300 384 0.002 0.300 672 -0.005 0.300 1248 -0.020
Moisture, Ash, and Oragnic Matter of Peat and Other Organic Soils
(ASTM D2974)  IGES 2004

Project: URS
No: M00100-091 (24585139)
Location: 5600 West Herriman
Date: 3/26/2010
By: JDF

Boring No. TP-11 TP-18

Sample Info.

Sample: Bag
Depth: 0-1' 1-2.5'
Test Method: C C
Furnace temp. (°C) 440 440
Ash / Organic Info Moisture

Wet soil + tare (g) 432.43 450.37

Dry soil + tare (g) 391.88 418.14
Tare (g) 215.01 141.37
Wt of crucible and oven-
517.82 615.82
dried sample (g)
Wt. of crucible and ash
509.04 606.72
(g)
Wt. of crucible (g) 340.91 339.15
a
Moisture Content, w (%) 22.9 11.6
Ash Content (%) 95.0 96.7
Organic Matter (%) 5.0 3.3
a
Moisture contents are by proportion of oven-dried mass (geotechnical convention).

Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]1
Minimum Laboratory Soil Resistivity, pH of Soil for Use in Corrosion Testing, and
 IGES 2007
Ions in Water by Chemically Suppressed Ion Chromatography (AASHTO T 288, T 289, and ASTM D 4327)
Project: URS
No: M00100-091 (24585139)
Location: 5600 West Herriman
Date: 3/26/2010
By: NB/JDF

Boring No. B-8 B-9 B-9

Sample
info.

Sample 7 2 4
Depth 29' 4' 14'
Wet soil + tare (g) 223.97 240.12 32.67
Moisture

Dry soil + tare (g) 218.59 232.90 32.66

data

Tare (g) 178.60 179.72 22.45

Moisture content (%) 13.5 13.6 0.1
pH* 8.44 7.62 9.44
Chemical

Soluble chloride* (ppm) 43 1300 21

data

Soluble sulfate* (ppm) 27 430 57

Soil Soil Soil Soil

condition Resistivity condition Resistivity condition Resistivity condition Resistivity
(%) (Ω-cm) (%) (Ω-cm) (%) (Ω-cm) (%) (Ω-cm)
As is 3700 As is 2700 +9 8900
+3 2800 +3 1500 +12 5600
+6 1700 +6 920 +15 3300
+9 1100 +9 410 +18 2700
+12 940 +12 280 +21 2700
Resistivity data

+15 970 +15 280

Minimum resistivity
940 280 2700
(Ω-cm)
* Performed by AWAL using EPA
300.0

Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________ Z:\PROJECTS\M00100_URS\091_West_Herriman\[[Link]]1
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

APPENDIX C — SEISMICITY
 1.50
AASHTO 2009 Design Response Spectrum - 3% Probability of Exceedence in 75 Years - Site Class D

1.25

1.00
Spectral Acceleration, (g)

0.75

0.50

0.25

0.00
0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000
Period of Vibration, (s)

Acceleration at PGA, PGA = 0.48g

Title: AASHTO 2009 Response Spectrum
Spectral Acceleration at 0.2 Seconds, Sms = 1.1g
Spectral Acceleration at 1.0 Seconds, Sm1 = 0.36g
Project: 5600 West - Herriman Project Number: 24585139
NEHRP Site Class = D
Main to 11800 South
Design Acceleration at PGA, As = 0.49g Figure: C-1
Design Spectral Acceleration at 0.2 Seconds, Sds = 1.17g
Clients: Date: October 2010
Design Spectral Acceleration at 1.0 Seconds, Sd1 = 0.6g
 1.50
AASHTO 2009 Design Response Spectrum - 7% Probability of Exceedence in 75 Years - Site Class D

1.25

1.00
Spectral Acceleration, (g)

0.75

0.50

0.25

0.00
0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000
Period of Vibration, (s)

Acceleration at PGA, PGA = 0.3g

Title: AASHTO 2009 Response Spectrum
Spectral Acceleration at 0.2 Seconds, Sms = 0.8g
Spectral Acceleration at 1.0 Seconds, Sm1 = 0.21g
Project: 5600 West - Herriman Project Number: 24585139
NEHRP Site Class = D
Main St. to 11800 South
Design Acceleration at PGA, As = 0.36g Figure: C-2
Design Spectral Acceleration at 0.2 Seconds, Sds = 0.94g
Clients: Date: October 2010
Design Spectral Acceleration at 1.0 Seconds, Sd1 = 0.42g
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

APPENDIX D — SPECIFICATIONS
 December 13, 2010
SPECIAL PROVISION

PROJECT F-LC35(197) PIN 7635

SECTION 02056M

EMBANKMENT, BORROW, AND BACKFILL

Add Article 1.2 paragraph E and F:

E. Section 02316M: Roadway Excavation

F. Section 02058S: Ground Improvement

Add Article 3.1 paragraph C:

C. Perform subgrade improvement where required prior to placing

embankment. Refer to Section 02058S.

Delete Article 3.2 paragraphs G, I, and J and replace with the following:

G. Spread embankment materials uniformly in layers not exceeding 1 ft

(uncompacted depth) and compact to an average of 96 percent maximum
laboratory density and at moisture content between 0 and 3 percent wetter
than the optimum moisture content before placing the next layer. Reduce
the lift thickness if tests show unsatisfactory density.

Add Article 3.3 paragraphs E:

E. Free Draining Granular Backfill for Walls

1. Place 12 inches of loose free draining granular backfill behind the
wall facing/panels.
2. Compact the layer using three passes of a vibratory plate
compactor.

END OF SECTION

Embankment, Borrow, and Backfill

02056M – Page 1 of 2
 December 13, 2010

SPECIAL PROVISION

PROJECT F-LC35(197) PIN 7635

SECTION 02058S

GROUND IMPROVEMENT
PART 1: GENERAL

1.1 SECTION INCLUDED

A. The limits and approved methods for ground improvement.

1.2 RELATED SECTIONS

A. Section 02076S: Geogrids

B. Section 02316M: Roadway Excavation

C. Section 02056M: Embankment, Borrow, and Backfill

1.3 DEFINITIONS

Not Used

1.4 SUBMITTALS

Not Used

1.5 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT

A. See related sections.

1.6 QUALIFICATIONS

A. See related sections.

1.7 QUALITY

A. See related sections.

Ground Improvement
02058S – Page 1 of 3
 December 13, 2010

PART 2: PRODUCTS

2.1 EQUIPMENT

A. See related sections.

2.2 IMPORT SOIL

A. Section 02056M: Embankment, Borrow, and Backfill.

B. Section 02316M: Roadway Excavation.

PART 3: EXECUTION

3.1 PREPARATION AND PROTECTION

A. Coordinate scheduling and sequencing of ground improvement with other

components of the Contract Work.

B. Elevation of gravel layer shown on the project plans.

3.2 IMPROVEMENT

A. Provide improvement to the depths, horizontal limits, and dimensions

described in Table 1.

Table 1. Ground Improvement Zones

Bid Stations (ft)

Zone ID1 Methods2,3
Component Start End
Additive 1 10+99 22+50 OR
Additive 2 40+82 50+92 OR
A
Additive 3 29+46 40+82 —
Additive 4 22+50 29+46 —
B Main Bid 51+68 86+13 GG
C Main Bid 200+38 210+82 OR/GG

Notes:
1. Treatment required within roadway area between outside edges of proposed pavement.
2. See below for additional information related to ground improvement including method and depth
requirements.
3. OR, over-excavation of subgrade and replacement with granular borrow; and GG, improvement using
geogrid and compacted granular borrow.

Ground Improvement
02058S – Page 2 of 3
 December 13, 2010

B. Zone A:

1. Additive Bids 1 and 2: Remove the surficial clay layer until the
native gravel layer is exposed or to a maximum depth of 5 feet
below proposed subgrade elevation.
a. The approximate elevation of the native gravel layer is
shown in the project plans.
b. The pavement section can be constructed directly on
undisturbed native gravel layer.
i. If needed, place granular borrow over the undisturbed
native gravel to bring the subgrade to the elevations
shown on the plans.
ii. Where the clay layer extends deeper than 5 feet
below the proposed subgrade elevation, place
granular borrow over non-woven geotextile placed
directly over the clayey in-situ soils.

2. Additive Bids 3 and 4: No Improvement

C. Zone B: Remove the surficial clay to a depth of 16 inches below proposed

subgrade elevation.
1. Place 16 inches of granular borrow over a type II geogrid over a
non-woven geotextile placed directly over the exposed clay.

D. Zone C: Remove the surficial clay layer until undisturbed native gravel is
exposed.
1. The approximate elevation of the native gravel layer is shown in the
project plans.
2. The pavement section can be constructed directly on undisturbed
native gravel.
a. If needed, place granular borrow over undisturbed native
gravel to bring the subgrade to the elevations shown on the
plans.
3. The geogrid improvement method specified for zone B may be
used for zone C if over excavation/replacement is too costly due to
the depth of the native gravel.

3.4 WATER HANDLING

A. Provide means to remove surface water which may accumulate in

excavations.

Ground Improvement
02058S – Page 3 of 3
 December 13, 2010

3.5 TOLERANCE AND SURVEY CONTROL

A. The Contractor shall provide survey services to ensure that lateral limits of
ground improvement are maintained. The Contractor shall provide regular
survey services to ensure that the roadway alignment is maintained.

B. The contractor shall record the lateral limits of ground improvement as

Record Drawings. The Contractor shall provide the Owner with updated
Record Drawings for ground improvement work with each submittal of
request for payment.

END OF SECTION

Ground Improvement
02058S – Page 4 of 3
 December 9, 2010

SPECIAL PROVISION

PROJECT # F-LC35(197) PIN 7635

SECTION 02076S

GEOGRIDS
PART 1 GENERAL

1.1 SECTION INCLUDES

A. Roadway and roadway embankment applications.

1.2 REFERENCES

A. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

(AASHTO)
1. AASHTO Recommended Practice for Geosynthetic Reinforcement
of the Aggregate Base Course of Flexible Pavement Structures,
AASHTO PP46-01, April 2001 Interim Edition of the AASHTO
Provisional Standards.
2. Standard Specification for Highway Bridges (1997 Interim)
3. AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures (1993)
4. AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures (1993)

B. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)

1. D5732-95 - Standard Test Method for Stiffness of Fabrics
2. D6637-01- Standard Test Method for Determining Tensile
Properties of Geogrids by the Single or Multi-rib Tensile Method
3. D4354-96 - Practice for Sampling of Geosynthetics for Testing
4. D4759-92 - Practice for Determining the Specification Conformance
of Geosynthetics
5. D5818-95 - Practice for Obtaining Samples of Geosynthetics from a
Test Section for Assessment of Installation Damage

C. Geosynthetic Research Institute (GRI)

1. GRI-GG2-87 - Standard Test Method for Geogrid Junction Strength

D. U.S. Department of Transportation – Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)
1. Specification for Geogrid Reinforced Base Courses, Engineering
Brief No. 49 (1994).

E. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA)

1. EPA 9090 - Compatibility Test for Wastes and Membrane Liners

Geogrids
02076S - Page 1 of 9
 December 9, 2010

F. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (U.S. COE)

1. Draft specification for Grid Aperture Stability by In-Plane Rotation
2. CW-02215 Determination of Percent Open Area.

G. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)

1. Giroud, J.P., and Han, J. (2004). “Design method for geogrid-
reinforced unpaved roads. Part I – Development of design method.”
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 130
(8), 775-786.
2. Giroud, J.P., and Han, J. (2004). “Design method for geogrid-
reinforced unpaved roads. Part II – Calibration and applications.”
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 130
(8), 787-797.

H. Dr. Thomas C. Kinney, P.E.

1. Determining the Aperture Stability Modulus of a Geogrid (2001).

1.3 DEFINITIONS

A. Geogrid - A biaxial or triaxial polymeric grid formed by a regular network of

integrally connected tensile elements with apertures of sufficient size to
allow interlocking with surrounding soil, rock, or earth to function primarily
as reinforcement.

B. Multi-Layer Geogrid - A geogrid product consisting of multiple layers of

grid which are not integrally connected throughout.

C. Woven Geogrid – A geogrid product formed by weaving discrete strips of

polymer into a network.

D. Welded Strip geogrid – A geogrid product formed by heat bonding

(welding) discrete strips of polymer into a regular network.

E. Minimum Average Roll Value (MARV) - Value based on testing and

determined in accordance with ASTM D4759-92.

F. Traffic Benefit Ratio (TBR) (also known as Traffic Improvement Factor or

TIF) - A ratio comparing the performance of a pavement cross-section with
a geogrid-reinforced base course to a similar cross-section without
geogrid reinforcement, based on the number of cycles to failure, with
failure defined as a selected depth of rut.

G. True Initial Modulus in Use - The ratio of tensile strength corresponding to

zero strain. The tensile strength is measured via ASTM D6637 at a strain
rate of 10 percent per minute. Values shown are MARVs. For multi-layer

Geogrids
02076S - Page 2 of 9
 December 9, 2010

geogrid products, rib tensile testing shall be performed on the multi-layer

configurations, as prescribed by ASTM D6637.

H. Junction Strength - Breaking tensile strength of junctions when tested in

accordance with GRI-GG2 as modified by AASHTO Standard
Specification for Highway Bridges, 1997 Interim, using a single rib having
the greater of 3 junctions or 8 inches and tested at a strain rate of 10
percent per minute based on this gauge length. Values shown are
minimum average roll values. For multi-layer geogrid products, junction
strength testing shall be performed across junctions from each layer of
grid individually, and results shall not be assumed as additive from single
layers to multiple layers.

I. Flexural Stiffness (also known as Flexural Rigidity) - Resistance to

bending force measured via ASTM D5732-95, using specimens of width
two ribs wide, with transverse ribs cut flush with exterior edges of
longitudinal ribs (as a “ladder”), and length sufficiently long to enable
measurement of the overhang dimension. The overall Flexural Stiffness is
calculated as the square root of the product of the MD and XMD Flexural
Stiffness values. For multi-layer geogrid products, flexural stiffness testing
shall be performed directly on the multi-layer configuration without using
any connecting elements other than those used continuously throughout
the actual product, and results shall not be assumed as additive from
testing performed on a single layer of the multi-layer product.

J. Aperture Stability Modulus (also known as Torsional Rigidity or Torsional

Stiffness) - Resistance to in-plane rotational movement measured by
applying a 20 kg-cm (2 m-N) moment to the central junction of a 9-inch by
9-inch specimen restrained at its perimeter. Values shown are MARVs.
For multi-layer geogrid products, torsional stiffness testing shall be
performed on each layer of grid individually, and results shall not be
assumed as additive from single layers to multiple layers.

K. Subgrade Improvement – Placement of a geogrid immediately over a soft

subgrade soil in order to improve the bearing capacity and mitigate
deformation of the subgrade soil. The goal of this application may be to
reduce undercut requirements, improve construction efficiency, reduce the
amount of aggregate subbase/base material required, provide a stiff
working platform for pavement construction, or combination of these.

L. Base Reinforcement - Placement of a geogrid beneath or within the

aggregate base course of a flexible pavement system to improve the
stiffness of the system. The goal of this application may be to reduce the
amount of aggregate base material required (reducing initial cost),
increase the life of the pavement (reduce life-cycle cost), or a combination
of the two.

Geogrids
02076S - Page 3 of 9
 December 9, 2010

1.4 SUBMITTALS

A. Submit geogrid product sample approximately 4 inches by 7 inches or

larger. Refer to ASTM D 4354.

B. Submit geogrid product data sheet and certification from the Manufacturer
that the geogrid product supplied meets the requirements of this Section,
Article 2.2.

C. Submit Manufacturer’s installation instructions and general

recommendations.

D. Submit the following to the Engineer at least 15 days prior to bid letting for
alternate geogrid materials that do not meet the requirements of this
Section, Article 2.2. The Engineer will respond within 10 days with a
written justification to allow or disallow the requested alternate Geogrid.
The Engineer will consult with the Region Pavement Design Engineer to
decide on and approve the materials.

1. Full-scale laboratory and in-ground testing of pavement structures

reinforced with the specific geogrid that quantifies the TBR or
structural benefit of the product. Include full-scale independent
research to substantiate the benefits of submitted research. The
geogrid must meet or exceed that of the design geogrid.
2. A list of 5 comparable projects that are similar in terms of size and
application, are located in the United States, and where the results
of using the specific alternate geogrid material can be verified after
a minimum of five years of service life.
3. A sample 4 x 7 inches or larger.
4. Recommended installation instructions.
5. Additional information as requested by the Engineer to fully
evaluate the product.

1.5 DELIVERY STORAGE AND HANDLING

A. Storage and Protection

1. Prevent excessive mud, wet concrete, epoxy, or other deleterious

materials from coming in contact with and affixing to the geogrid
materials.
2. Store at temperatures above -20 degrees F (-29 degrees C).
3. Rolled materials may be laid flat or stood on end.
4. Geogrid materials should not be left directly exposed to sunlight for
a period longer than recommended by the manufacturer.

Geogrids
02076S - Page 4 of 9
 December 9, 2010

1.6 QUALITY ASSURANCE

A. Pre-Construction Conference - Prior to the installation of the geogrid, the

Contractor shall arrange a meeting at the site with the geogrid material
supplier and, where applicable, the geogrid installer. The Owner and the
Engineer shall be notified at least 3 days in advance of the time of the
meeting. A representative of the geogrid supplier shall be available on an
“as needed” basis during construction.

1.7 ACCEPTANCE

A. Department rejects geogrid at installation if it has defects, rips, holes,

flaws, deterioration, or damage incurred during manufacture, transport,
handling, or storage.

PART 2 PRODUCTS

2.1 GEOGRID – GENERAL

A. Synthetic fiber net at least 85-percent by weight of polypropylene,

polyethylene, or polyester.

B. Resistant to chemical attack, rot and mildew.

C. No tears or defects that will adversely alter properties of product.

2.2 ROADWAY AGGREGATE GEOGRID – BASE REINFORCEMENT

A. Geogrids are a regular network of integrally connected polymer tensile

elements constructed in a single layer with aperture geometry sufficient to
permit significant mechanical interlock with the surrounding soil or rock.
Geogrids must also be dimensionally stable and able to retain their
geometry under manufacture, transport and installation.

B. Geogrids shall have the following properties:

BX GEOGRID PROPERTY VALUES

Type 1 Type 2
Geogrid Test
Properties Method Perpendicular Perpendicular
Machine Machine
to Machine to Machine
Direction Direction
Direction Direction
MD MD
CMD CMD

Geogrids
02076S - Page 5 of 9
 December 9, 2010

Type of Punched Punched and Punched Punched and

Geogrid and Drawn Drawn and Drawn Drawn
Rectangular Rectangular or Rectangular Rectangular or
Rib Shape Observation
or Square Square or Square Square
Rib Thickness Nominal Minimum - Minimum – Minimum - Minimum –
Dimensions 0.03 in 0.03 in 0.05 in 0.05 in
Nominal I.D. 1.0 in to 1.5 1.0 in to 1.5
1.0 in to 1.5 in 1.0 in to 1.5 in
Aperture Size Callipered in in
Min. Min.
Flexural ASTM D-
250,000 NA 750,000 NA
Stiffness 5732-952
mg-cm mg-cm
Minimum True
ASTM Minimum – Minimum – Minimum – Minimum –
Initial Modulus
6637-011 17,140 lb/ft 27,420 lb/ft 27,420 lb/ft 44,550 lb/ft
in Use
Junction GRI-GG2-
93% 93% 93% 93%
Efficiency 87
Aperture
Stability 0.32 m- 0.65 m-
Kinney -01 NA NA
Modulus at 20 N/deg N/deg
cm-kg
Resistance to EPA 9090
Long Term Immersion 100% 100% 100% 100%
Degradation Testing

1. Resistance to elongation when initially subjected to load measured via ASTM

6637 without deforming test materials under load before measuring such
resistance or employing “secant” or “offset” tangent methods of measurement.
2. Resistance to bending force measured via ASTM D-5732-95, using specimens of
width two ribs wide, with transverse ribs cut flush with exterior edges of
longitudinal ribs (as a “ladder”), and of length sufficiently long to enable
measurement of the overhang dimension. The overall Flexural Stiffness is
calculated as the square root of the product of machine-and cross-machine-
direction Flexural Stiffness values.

TX GEOGRID PROPERTY VALUES

Type 2
Geogrid
Test Method
Properties
Longitudinal Diagonal Transverse General

Punched and
Type of Geogrid
Drawn
Nominal
Rib pitch 1.6 in 1.6 in
Dimensions
Mid-rib depth Nominal
0.06 in 0.05 in
Dimensions
Mid-rib width Nominal
0.04 in 0.04 in
Dimensions
Rib Shape Observation Rectangular
Aperture shape Observation Triangular
Junction
GRI-GG2-87 93 %
Efficiency(1)
15,430 lb/ft @
Radial Stiffness(2) ASTM 6637-01
0.5% strain

Geogrids
02076S - Page 6 of 9
 December 9, 2010

EPA 9090
Resistance to Long
Immersion 100%
Term Degradation(3)
Testing

1. Load transfer capability determined in accordance with GRI-GG2-87 and expressed

as a percentage of ultimate tensile strength.
2. Determined from tensile stiffness measured in any in-plane axis from testing in
accordance with ASTM D6637-01.
3. Resistance to loss of load capacity or structural integrity when subjected to
chemically aggressive environments in accordance with EPA 9090.

C. Using multiple layers of geogrid to meet the requirements set forth in the
preceding table will not be accepted.

D. Acceptance Requirements – Base the actual minimum average roll values

furnished by the manufacturer on representative test results from the
manufacturing plant which produced the geogrid. Meet or exceed each of
the specified minimum values. Clearly label all geogrids as being part of
the same production run certified as meeting all applicable requirements.

2.3 ROADWAY AGGREGATE GEOGRID – SUBGRADE IMPROVEMENT

A. Geogrids are a regular network of integrally connected polymer tensile

elements constructed with aperture geometry sufficient to permit
significant mechanical interlock with the surrounding soil or rock. Geogrids
must be dimensionally stable and able to retain their geometry under
manufacture, transport, and installation.

B. Geogrids shall have the following properties:

BX GEOGRID PROPERTY VALUES

Type 1 Type 2
Geogrid
Test Method Perpendicular Perpendicular
Properties Machine Machine
to Machine to Machine
Direction Direction
Direction Direction
MD MD
CMD CMD
Type of Punched Punched and Punched Punched and
Geogrid and Drawn Drawn and Drawn Drawn
Rectangular Rectangular or Rectangular Rectangular or
Rib Shape Observation
or Square Square or Square Square
Rib Thickness Nominal Minimum - Minimum – Minimum - Minimum –
Dimensions 0.03 in 0.03 in 0.05 in 0.05 in
Nominal I.D. 1.0 in to 1.5 1.0 in to 1.5
1.0 in to 1.5 in 1.0 in to 1.5 in
Aperture Size Callipered in in
Min. Min.
Flexural ASTM D-
250,000 NA 750,000 NA
Stiffness 5732-952
mg-cm mg-cm

Geogrids
02076S - Page 7 of 9
 December 9, 2010

Minimum
True Initial ASTM 6637- Minimum – Minimum – Minimum – Minimum –
Modulus in 011 17,140 lb/ft 27,420 lb/ft 27,420 lb/ft 44,550 lb/ft
Use
Junction
GRI-GG2-87 93% 93% 93% 93%
Efficiency
Resistance to EPA 9090
Long Term Immersion 100% 100% 100% 100%
Degradation Testing

1. Resistance to elongation when initially subjected to load measured via ASTM

6637 without deforming test materials under load before measuring such
resistance or employing “secant” or “offset” tangent methods of measurement.
2. Resistance to bending force measured via ASTM D-5732-95, using specimens of
width two ribs wide, with transverse ribs cut flush with exterior edges of
longitudinal ribs (as a “ladder”), and of length sufficiently long to enable
measurement of the overhang dimension. The overall Flexural Stiffness is
calculated as the square root of the product of machine-and cross-machine-
direction Flexural Stiffness values.

TX GEOGRID PROPERTY VALUES

Type 2
Geogrid
Test Method
Properties
Longitudinal Diagonal Transverse General

Punched and
Type of Geogrid
Drawn
Nominal
Rib pitch 1.6 in 1.6 in
Dimensions
Mid-rib depth Nominal
0.06 in 0.05 in
Dimensions
Mid-rib width Nominal
0.04 in 0.04 in
Dimensions
Rib Shape Observation Rectangular
Aperture shape Observation Triangular
Junction
GRI-GG2-87 93 %
Efficiency(1)
15,430 lb/ft @
Radial Stiffness(2) ASTM 6637-01
0.5% strain
EPA 9090
Resistance to Long
Immersion 100%
Term Degradation(3)
Testing

4. Load transfer capability determined in accordance with GRI-GG2-87 and expressed

as a percentage of ultimate tensile strength.
5. Determined from tensile stiffness measured in any in-plane axis from testing in
accordance with ASTM D6637-01.
6. Resistance to loss of load capacity or structural integrity when subjected to
chemically aggressive environments in accordance with EPA 9090.

Geogrids
02076S - Page 8 of 9
 December 9, 2010

C. Acceptance Requirements – Base the actual minimum average roll values

furnished by the manufacturer on representative test results from the
manufacturing plant which produced the geogrid. Meet or exceed each of
the specified minimum values. Clearly label all geogrids as being part of
the same production run certified as meeting all applicable requirements.

PART 3 EXECUTION

3.1 GRANULAR BASE REINFORCEMENT AND SUBGRADE IMPROVEMENT

A. Place geogrid at the proper elevation and alignment as shown on the

construction drawings. Provide minimum overlap per manufacturer’s
recommendations. Install geogrid in accordance with the installation
guidelines provided by the manufacturer or as directed by the Engineer.
Geogrid may be temporarily secured in place with ties, staples, pins, sand
bags or backfill as required by fill properties, fill placement or weather
conditions or as directed by the Engineer.

B. Place, spread, and compact granular fill material in such a manner that
minimizes the development of wrinkles in or movement of the geogrid.

C. A minimum loose fill thickness of 6 inches is required prior to operation of

tracked vehicles over the geogrid. Keep turning of tracked vehicles to a
minimum to prevent tracks from displacing the fill and damaging the
geogrid. Rubber-tired equipment may pass over the geogrid reinforcement
at slow speeds (less than 10 mph) when integrally-formed geogrids are
used if subgrade conditions permit. Do not use rubber-tired equipment
directly on the geogrid when woven, multi-layer, or welded strip geogrids
are used. Avoid sudden braking and sharp turning movements.

D. Replace at no additional cost to the Department any roll of geogrid

damaged before, during, or after installation. Proper replacement consists
of replacing the affected area and overlapping the geogrid one foot on all
sides adjacent to the damaged area. Follow ASTM 5818 for exposure and
retrieval damages done during installation of evaluation samples.

3.2 PROTECTION
A. A minimum of 6 inches of cover is required if tracked vehicles are
operated over geogrid.

END OF SECTION

Geogrids
02076S - Page 9 of 9
 December 13, 2010

SPECIAL PROVISION

PROJECT F-LC35(197) PIN 7635

SECTION 02316M

ROADWAY EXCAVATION

Delete Article 1.2 and replace with the following:

A. Section 00725: Scope of Work

B. Section 00820: Legal Relations and Responsibility to the Public

C. Section 01355: Environmental Protection

D. Section 01571: Environmental Controls

E. Section 01721: Survey

F. Section 02056M: Embankment, Borrow, and Backfill

G. Section 02075: Geotextiles

H. Section 02231: Site Clearing and Grubbing

I. Section 02705: Pavement Cutting

J. Section 02912: Topsoil

K. Section 02058S: Ground Improvement

Delete Article 2.1 and replace with the following:

A. Refer to Section 02056M

B. Geotextile Fabric: Refer to Section 02075

Roadway Excavation
02316M – Page 1 of 2
 December 13, 2010

Delete Article 3.5 and replace with the following:

A. Finish excavation to reasonably smooth and uniform surface.

B. Provide and maintain satisfactory access to roads, streets, and adjacent

property during all phases of construction according to the Traffic Control
Plan.

C. Remove material in all cut sections to the depth shown.

1. Refer to Section 02058S in areas where ground improvement is

specified. Refer to Section 02056M for material and compaction
specifications.

2. At all other locations scarify to an 8-inch depth and compact to at

least 96 percent of maximum laboratory density and at moisture
content between 0 and 2 percent wetter than the optimum moisture
content. Refer to Section 02056M.

E. Excavate and waste unsuitable material as described in Section 02231

and 02056M.

F. Material for backfilling or finishing.

1. Use on-site or imported granular borrow in accordance with
Sections 02058S and 02056M.

END OF SECTION

Roadway Excavation
02316M – Page 2 of 2
 December 13, 2010
SPECIAL PROVISION

PROJECT # F-LC35(197) PIN 7635

SECTION 02831S

RETAINING WALL - ALTERNATE SYSTEMS

PART 1 GENERAL

1.1 SECTION INCLUDES

A. Select from the following wall systems for retaining walls indicated as
Contractor-selected alternative systems. Refer to the project plans for
situation and layout drawings.
1. MSE Wall- ARES Geogrid Retaining Wall (refer to Section 02834S)

2. Wall- SSL MSE Plus Retaining Wall (refer to Section 02833S)

1.2 RELATED SECTIONS

A. Section 02832S: Select Backfill for MSE Walls

B. Section 02834S: MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Geogrid
Reinforcing Elements

C. Section 02833S: MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Metal
Reinforcing Elements

1.3 REFERENCES

A. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

(AASHTO) LRFD Bridge Design Specifications

B. AASHTO Interim Specifications for Highway Bridges

1.4 WALL SYSTEM SELECTION

A. Notify the Engineer in writing before the preconstruction conference which

option listed in Article 1.1 will be used.

B. Use only one wall system for the Contractor-selected alternative.

Retaining Wall – Alternate Systems

02831S - Page 1 of 7
 C. Do not change the wall type after the preconstruction conference without
written approval from the Engineer.

1.5 DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

A. Incorporate current FHWA guidelines, AASHTO LRFD Specifications, and

Interim Specifications for Highway Bridges in design of the selected wall
system in addition to, or as modified by, the following:
1. For all walls, or sections of walls, located within 50 feet of bridge
abutments, use a design earthquake peak horizontal ground
acceleration coefficient of 0.48 g, corresponding to a 3%
exceedence in 75 years. For all other walls, or sections of walls
more than 50 feet away from bridge abutments, use an acceleration
coefficient of 0.30 g, corresponding to a 7% exceedence in 75
years.
2. Design retaining wall panel connections in all cases to not fail
during the seismic event corresponding to 3% exceedence in 75
years.
3. The Contractor-selected Wall Company is responsible for all
stability calculations, except global stability and bearing capacity.
4. Minimum service life of 75 years.
5. The Wall Company is responsible to ensure that drainage features
do not negatively impact the wall system, and that the drainage
system can function properly through/beneath the wall as the
Project Designer intends, without negatively impacting the wall
system. This includes checking the drainage system details, and/or
developing appropriate MSE reinforcement design details in the
vicinity of the drainage features (pipes, catch basins, etc.) within the
reinforcement mass, and for the outlet point at the wall face (see
article 1.6.A.2).
6. Sections 02832S through 02834S as applicable for the selected
wall system.
7. Provide corrosion protection for metallic reinforcement by one of
the following two measures:
a. Provide sacrificial steel sufficient for a corrosion rate of at
least 0.80 mils/year per exposed surface after 16 years of
corrosion protection service allowed for the galvanized
coating.
b. Provide a protective geomembrane (either PVC or HDPE) of
at least 30 mils thickness above the final layer of
reinforcement, sloping downwards towards the back of the
reinforced mass (i.e. away from the wall face) at a grade of 2
percent, and lapped upward against the top facing element;
and design the reinforcement to provide sacrificial steel
sufficient for a corrosion rate of at least 0.50 mils/year per

Retaining Wall – Alternate Systems

02831S - Page 2 of 7
 exposed surface after 16 years of corrosion protection
service for the galvanized coating.
8. Use a vertical spacing of primary reinforcement not exceeding 30
inches for single-stage walls, or 24 inches for two-stage walls to
provide a coherent MSE reinforced soil mass. This may require
modification of panels.
8. In accordance with Section 11 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design
Specifications, provide horizontal benches at least 4 feet in width at
the base of walls to be founded on earth slopes.
a. Benches may be eliminated for walls located adjacent to
concrete slope-protected slopes.
9. Use the following soil design properties:

Wall Description West East Midas Creek

Wall Type Post & Panel Post & Panel MSE
Wall Stationing 23+00 to 50+00 38+00 to 50+00 Near 64+00
Retained / Exposed Height1 (ft) 0-4 0-4 20
Minimum Embedment2 (ft) — — 8
Maximum Scour Depth3 (ft) — — 6
Live Load4 (psf) 0 0 230
Friction Angle (degrees)5 25 25 25
Cohesion Intercept (psf)5 275 275 275
Total Unit Weight (pcf)5 100 100 115
Sliding Friction Angle (degrees) — — 25
Sliding Cohesion — — 275
Foundation Unit Weight — — 110
Factored Bearing Resistance Before
— — 11.4
Scour (ksf)
Factored. Bearing Resistance During
— — 7.6
Scour (ksf)
Active Coefficient5 0.41 0.41 0.41
Passive Coefficient 2.4 2.4 2.4
Dynamic Active Coefficient5,6 0.55 0.55 0.55
Dynamic Passive Coefficient6 2.1 2.1 2.1
Notes:
1. Retained height for post & panel walls. Exposed height for MSE walls and excludes min. embedment depth.
2. Measured from the ground surface to the top of the concrete leveling pad for MSE Walls. MSE walls must be
embedded 2 feet deeper than the maximum scour depth.
3. Maximum scour depth is based on 500-year storm event.
4. Calculated as the product of the unit weight of retained soil and equivalent soil height per (AASHTO, 2007) p 3-96.
5. Properties of retained soils.
6. Based on reduced horizontal acceleration coefficient using (AASHTO, 2007) equation C11-6-5.1 and an allowable
horizontal deflection of 2 inches.

1.6 SUBMITTALS

A. Submit working drawings and design calculations to the Engineer,

prepared and signed by a licensed professional engineer, for the wall
construction including all plans, profiles, cross sections, quantities, and
details that address the following:

Retaining Wall – Alternate Systems

02831S - Page 3 of 7
 1. Cast-in-place concrete coping/cap to the facing panels/blocks to be
aesthetically pleasing and to adequately support any fence and/or
barrier. Do not use precast coping without prior written approval
from the Engineer.
2. Provisions for facilities which penetrate the wall face or soil
reinforcing elements (including, but not limited to, drainage catch
basins, piping, foundation elements, guard-rail posts, and other
buried facilities).
3. MSE wall design accommodates surface and subsurface drainage
details.
4. Proposed architectural treatment detail for wall facing elements and
proposed color of concrete. Provide architectural treatment for all
walls consistent throughout the project and matching all other
structural elements incorporated in the project.
5. Design calculations sufficient to determine the walls have been
designed in accordance with the required criteria.

B. Allow up to three weeks for the Engineer’s review. Within this time, the
Engineer will provide either written acceptance of the submittals with any
exceptions noted or notification the submittals are insufficient.
1. Upon receiving notification the submittals are insufficient, provide
new submittals and allow another two-week period for the
Engineer’s review.
2. Do not start wall construction until receiving full written acceptance
by the Engineer.

1.7 ACCEPTANCE

A. Non-Conformance of Select Backfill for MSE Walls

1. Select Backfill placed and found to be out of conformance with the
chemical characteristic requirements of Section 02832S, may be
allowed to remain in place at a reduced price in accordance with
this paragraph as decided by the Engineer. Refer to Section
02832S for sampling and testing requirements.
2. The Engineer will use the Contractor’s bid price and the applicable
pay factor in Table 1 to calculate the price adjustment.
3. When deviations exceed those listed for a pay factor of 0.50 in
Table 1, have the Wall Company evaluate the backfill to determine
whether the wall system meets the required design life.
a. If the Wall Company determines the wall system meets the
required design life, the wall may be accepted with a pay
factor less than 0.50 as decided by the Engineer.

B. Non-Conformance for Out-of-Tolerance Wall Facing Elements

1. Provided structural adequacy can be demonstrated, facing
elements either placed or that become out-of-tolerance from those
specified in the applicable wall system section (02833S through

Retaining Wall – Alternate Systems

02831S - Page 4 of 7
 02834S) before final acceptance may be allowed to remain in place
at a reduced price in accordance with this paragraph as decided by
the Engineer.
2. The Engineer will use the Contractor’s bid price and the applicable
pay factor in Table 2 to calculate the price adjustment.
3. The Wall Company and the Engineer will evaluate all wall facing
element cases when deviations exceed those listed for a pay factor
of 0.50 in Table 2 to determine whether the wall system has
sufficient structural integrity and is aesthetically acceptable.
a. If the Wall Company determines the wall system has
sufficient structural integrity, the wall may be accepted at a
pay factor less than 0.50 as decided by the Engineer.

C. Price adjustment calculation. The applicable pay factors in Tables 1 and 2

will be applied to the entire wall. However, only the most critical of any
one of the backfill criteria or the facing elements tolerances (i.e. the one
having the lowest pay factor), will be applied.

PART 2 PRODUCTS

2.1 MATERIALS

A. As specified in Sections 02832S through 02834S for the selected wall

system.

PART 3 EXECUTION

3.1 INSTALLATION

A. As specified in Sections 02832S through 02834S for the selected wall

system.

3.2 PRICE REDUCTION FOR NON-COMFORMING WORK

Retaining Wall – Alternate Systems

02831S - Page 5 of 7
 TABLE 1
PAY FACTORS
FOR NON-CONFORMING MSE WALL SELECT BACKFILL
Deviations of Backfill Chemical Test Results
from the Limits Specified in Section 02832S*
Pay Avg. of 2 Avg. of 3 Avg. of 4 Avg. of 5 or
1 Test
Factor Tests Tests Tests More Tests
1.00 0 to 200 0 to 190 0 to 180 0 to 170 0 to 150
0.95 201 to 400 191 to 380 181 to 360 171 to 340 151 to 300
Resistivity 0.90 401 to 600 381 to 570 361 to 540 341 to 510 301 to 450
(ohm-cm)
0.80 601 to 800 571 to 760 541 to 720 511 to 680 451 to 600
AASHTO
T 288 0.70 801 to 1000 761 to 950 721 to 900 681 to 850 601 to 750
0.60 1001 to 1200 951 to 1140 901 to 1080 851 to 1020 751 to 900
a
0.50 over 1200 over 1140 over 1080 over 1020 over 900
a - But no one test below 1600 ohm-cm will be accepted.
1.00 0 to 0.20 0 to 0.18 0 to 0.16 0 to 0.14 0 to 0.12
0.90 0.21 to 0.40 0.19 to 0.36 0.17 to 0.32 0.15 to 0.28 0.13 to 0.24
pH
0.80 0.41 to 0.60 0.37 to 0.54 0.33 to 0.48 0.29 to 0.42 0.25 to 0.36
AASHTO
0.70 0.61 to 0.80 0.55 to 0.72 0.49 to 0.64 0.43 to 0.56 0.37 to 0.48
T 289
0.60 0.81 to 1.00 0.73 to 0.90 0.65 to 0.80 0.57 to 0.70 0.49 to 0.60
b
0.50 --- over 0.90 over 0.80 over 0.70 over 0.60
b - But no one test below 5.0 or above 10.0 will be accepted
1.00 0 to 14 0 to 12 0 to 10 0 to 8 0 to 6
0.95 15 to 28 13 to 24 11 to 20 9 to 16 7 to 12
Chlorides 0.90 29 to 42 25 to 36 21 to 30 17 to 24 13 to 18
(ppm)
0.80 43 to 56 37 to 48 31 to 40 25 to 32 19 to 24
AASHTO
T 291 0.70 57 to 70 49 to 60 41 to 50 33 to 40 25 to 30
0.60 71 to 84 61 to 72 51 to 60 41 to 48 31 to 36
c
0.50 over 84 over 72 over 60 over 48 over 36
c - But no one test above 200 ppm will be accepted.
1.00 0 to 50 0 to 45 0 to 40 0 to 35 0 to 30
0.95 51 to 90 46 to 80 41 to 70 36 to 60 31 to 50
Sulfates 0.90 91 to 130 81 to 115 71 to 100 61 to 85 51 to 70
(ppm)
0.80 131 to 170 116 to 150 101 to 130 86 to 110 71 to 90
AASHTO
T 290 0.70 171 to 210 151 to 185 131 to 160 111 to 135 91 to 110
0.60 211 to 250 186 to 220 161 to 190 136 to 160 111 to 130
d
0.50 over 250 over 220 over 190 over 160 over 130
d - But no one test above 500 ppm will be accepted.
* Refer to Section 02832S for minimum sampling and testing frequency. The Engineer
determines locations and any additional tests required to evaluate the overall backfill mass.

Retaining Wall – Alternate Systems

02831S - Page 6 of 7
 TABLE 2
PAY FACTORS
FOR OUT-OF-TOLERANCE MSE WALL FACING ELEMENTS
Mean of the Deviations of Wall Placement Tolerances
from the Limits Specified in Section 02833S to 02840S
(based on the percentage of wall face having the maximum out-of-tolerance measurements)
Pay
1 to 5% 6 to 10% 11 to 20% 21 to 30% 30% or more
Factor
1.00 0 to 0.40 0 to 0.35 0 to 0.30 0 to 0.25 0 to 0.20
Horizontal 0.90 0.41 to 0.80 0.36 to 0.70 0.31 to 0.60 0.26 to 0.50 0.21 to 0.40
Alignment 0.80 0.81 to 1.20 0.71 to 1.05 0.61 to 0.90 0.51 to 0.75 0.41 to 0.60
(percent) 0.70 1.21 to 1.60 1.06 to 1.40 0.91 to 1.20 0.76 to 1.00 0.61 to 0.80
Spec: 0.7% 0.60 1.61 to 2.00 1.41 to 1.75 1.21 to 1.50 1.01 to 1.25 0.81 to 1.00
0.50 2.01 or more 1.76 or more 1.51 or more 1.26 or more 1.01 or more
1.00 0 to 0.40 0 to 0.35 0 to 0.30 0 to 0.25 0 to 0.20
Vertical 0.90 0.41 to 0.80 0.36 to 0.70 0.31 to 0.60 0.26 to 0.50 0.21 to 0.40
Alignment 0.80 0.81 to 1.20 0.71 to 1.05 0.61 to 0.90 0.51 to 0.75 0.41 to 0.60
(percent) 0.70 1.21 to 1.60 1.06 to 1.40 0.91 to 1.20 0.76 to 1.00 0.61 to 0.80
Spec: 0.7% 0.60 1.61 to 2.00 1.41 to 1.75 1.21 to 1.50 1.01 to 1.25 0.81 to 1.00
0.50 2.01 or more 1.76 or more 1.51 or more 1.26 or more 1.01 or more
1.00 0 to 0.50 0 to 0.41 0 to 0.32 0 to 0.23 0 to 0.18
0.95 0.51 to 0.64 0.42 to 0.54 0.33 to 0.43 0.24 to 0.33 0.19 to 0.26
0.90 0.65 to 0.78 0.55 to 0.66 0.44 to 0.54 0.34 to 0.43 0.27 to 0.35
Plumbness 0.85 0.79 to 0.92 0.67 to 0.79 0.55 to 0.66 0.44 to 0.52 0.36 to 0.43
(percent)
0.80 0.93 to 1.06 0.80 to 0.91 0.67 to 0.77 0.53 to 0.62 0.44 to 0.52
Spec: 0.5%
0.70 1.07 to 1.20 0.92 to 1.04 0.78 to 0.88 0.63 to 0.72 0.53 to 0.60
0.60 1.21 to 1.34 1.05 to 1.17 0.89 to 0.99 0.73 to 0.82 0.61 to 0.68
0.50 1.35 or more 1.18 or more 1.00 or more 0.83 or more 0.69 or more
1.00 0 to 0.30 0 to 0.28 0 to 0.26 0 to 0.24 0 to 0.22
0.90 0.31 to 0.60 0.29 to 0.56 0.27 to 0.52 0.25 to 0.48 0.23 to 0.44
Levelness 0.80 0.61 to 0.90 0.57 to 0.84 0.53 to 0.78 0.49 to 0.72 0.45 to 0.66
(percent)
0.70 0.91 to 1.20 0.85 to 1.12 0.79 to 1.04 0.73 to 0.96 0.67 to 0.88
Spec: 0.5%
0.60 1.21 to 1.50 1.13 to 1.40 1.05 to 1.30 0.97 to 1.20 0.89 to 1.10
0.50 1.51 or more 1.41 or more 1.31 or more 1.21 or more 1.11 or more
1.00 0 to 0.10 0 to 0.09 0 to 0.08 0 to 0.07 0 to 0.06
Joint Width 0.90 0.11 to 0.20 0.10 to 0.18 0.09 to 0.16 0.08 to 0.14 0.07 to 0.12
(inches) 0.80 0.21 to 0.30 0.19 to 0.27 0.17 to 0.24 0.15 to 0.21 0.13 to 0.18
Spec: 0.6 – 0.70 0.31 to 0.40 0.28 to 0.36 0.25 to 0.32 0.22 to 0.28 0.19 to 0.24
1.2 in. 0.60 0.41 to 0.50 0.37 to 0.45 0.33 to 0.40 0.29 to 0.35 0.25 to 0.30
0.50 0.51 or more 0.46 or more 0.41 or more 0.36 or more 0.31 or more
1.00 0 to 0.20 0 to 0.19 0 to 0.18 0 to 0.17 0 to 0.16
0.90 0.21 to 0.40 0.20 to 0.38 0.19 to 0.36 0.18 to 0.34 0.17 to 0.32
Joint Offset
0.80 0.41 to 0.60 0.39 to 0.57 0.37 to 0.54 0.35 to 0.51 0.33 to 0.48
(inches)
0.70 0.61 to 0.80 0.58 to 0.76 0.55 to 0.72 0.52 to 0.68 0.49 to 0.64
Spec: 0.4 in.
0.60 0.81 to 1.00 0.77 to 0.95 0.73 to 0.90 0.69 to 0.85 0.65 to 0.80
0.50 1.01 or more 0.96 or more 0.91 or more 0.86 or more 0.81 or more

END OF SECTION

Retaining Wall – Alternate Systems

02831S - Page 7 of 7
 December 9, 2010
SPECIAL PROVISION

PROJECT # F-LC35(197) PIN 7635

SECTION 02832S

SELECT BACKFILL FOR MSE WALLS

PART 1 GENERAL

1.1 SECTION INCLUDES

A. Placement procedures and requirements for backfill used in constructing MSE

walls.

1.2 RELATED SECTIONS

A. Section 02056M: Embankment, Borrow, and Backfill

B. Section 02831S: Retaining Wall-Alternate Systems

1.3 REFERENCES

A. AASHTO T 27: Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregates

B. AASHTO T 90: Determining the Plastic Limit and Plasticity Index of Soils

C. AASHTO T 99: Moisture-Density Relations of Soils Using a 2.5-kg (5.5-lb)

Rammer and a 305-mm (12 in.) Drop

D. AASHTO T 104: Soundness of Aggregate by Use of Sodium Sulfate or

Magnesium Sulfate

E. AASHTO T 236: Direct Shear Test of Soils Under Consolidated Drained

Conditions

F. AASHTO T 267: Determination of Organic Content in Soils by Loss on

Ignition

G. AASHTO T 288: Determining Minimum Laboratory Soil Resistivity

H. AASHTO T 289: Determining pH of Soil for Use in Corrosion Testing

I. AASHTO T 290: Determining Water-Soluble Sulfate Ion Content in Soil

Select Backfill for MSE Walls

02832S - Page 1 of 7
 J. AASHTO T 291: Determining Water-Soluble Chloride Ion Content in Soil

K. AASHTO T 310: In-Place Density and Moisture Content of Soil and Soil-
Aggregate by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth)

L. FHWA Publication No. FHWA-NHI-00-044

1.4 SUBMITTALS

A. Provide the Engineer with a certificate of compliance, from an AASHTO

accredited and UDOT certified testing lab, certifying the material complies
with this section.
1. Provide the Engineer with copies of the results of all tests
performed to determine the Select Backfill source meets the
requirements of this section.
B. Provide the Engineer with copies of test results from a UDOT certified lab
for the tests described under article 1.4, Acceptance.

1.5 ACCEPTANCE

A. In addition to the initial testing to verify the Select Backfill source meets
the requirements of this section, at a minimum, obtain on-site samples during
construction and perform testing at the following frequencies.
1. Gradation: Every 5,000 cubic yards of backfill used
2. Electrochemical: Every 10,000 cubic yards of backfill used

B. Include all costs for sampling and testing in the bid price for the work.
1. The Department will make no separate payment for the cost of
sampling and testing required in accordance with this section,
except as follows:
2. The Engineer reserves the right to require additional testing, such
as when suspecting a change in the Select Backfill.
a. When additional testing performed at the direction of the
Engineer indicates there is no change in the material and the
material is in compliance with the requirements of this
section, the Department will pay for the cost of additional
sampling and testing as extra work.
C. Density
1. The Department will perform a minimum of one in-place
moisture/density determination per lift of backfill for each 100 feet of
wall length (minimum two tests per lift) in accordance with AASHTO
T 310.
a. Tests will be made at random locations and/or at specific
locations determined by the Engineer.
2. Do not proceed with the placement of each layer of soil
reinforcement and overlying lift of backfill until the Engineer

Select Backfill for MSE Walls

02832S - Page 2 of 7
 indicates and records that all backfill placement and density
requirements (including in the 3-foot light-compaction zone) have
been met.

PART 2 PRODUCTS

2.1 SELECT BACKFILL

A. Use backfill free from frozen, organic, and otherwise deleterious materials.
Conform to the following gradation limits as determined by AASHTO T 27:
TABLE 1
Select Backfill Gradation (percent passing)
Sieve Size Metallic Reinforcement Geogrid Reinforcement
4 inch 100 –

¾ inch – 100

No. 40 0 – 60 0 – 60

No. 200 0 –15 0 –15

B. Geogrid reinforcement may use the Select Backfill gradation specified in

Table 1 for metallic reinforcement only under the following conditions:
1. Make arrangements with the wall company to perform site and
material specific installation damage testing with a representative
sample of the proposed backfill.
a. Perform testing in accordance with the guidelines provided in
sections 4.5 and 5.1 of FHWA Publication No. FHWA-NHI-
00-044. The installation damage reduction factor shall be as
determined in the test, but no less than 1.2.
b. Assume all costs for performing the tests and certification of
the test results by a registered engineer qualified in this
subject/field.
c. Assume any additional costs for the purchase of materials
and/or construction of the wall based on the installation
damage reduction factor obtained from the testing.
2. Provide additional material specific installation damage testing at
the direction of the Engineer when a change in the backfill
characteristics from the original tested representative sample is
suspected.
a. Assume all costs for performing this additional testing and
certification of the test results by a registered engineer.

Select Backfill for MSE Walls

02832S - Page 3 of 7
 b. Assume any additional costs for the purchase of materials
and/or construction of the wall based on the installation
damage reduction factor obtained from additional testing.

C. Use backfill with a Plasticity Index (PI) of 6 or less, as determined by

AASHTO T 90.

D. Use backfill with an internal friction angle of not less than 34 degrees as
determined by AASHTO T 236, using a sample of the material compacted
to 95 percent of maximum density at optimum moisture content,
determined by AASHTO T 99, Method D.
1. Internal friction angle testing is not required for backfill material that
has at least 80 percent of the material retained on the 3/4 inch
sieve.

E. Use backfill that:

1. Is substantially free of shale or other soft particles of poor durability.
2. Has a sodium sulfate soundness loss of less than 15 percent after
5 cycles, determined in accordance with AASHTO T 104.
3. Has an organic content less than one-half of one percent as
determined by AASHTO T 267 on the portion of the material finer
than the No. 10 sieve.

F. Use backfill with the following electrochemical properties:

TABLE 2
Select Backfill Electrochemical Requirements
Metallic Test
Property Geogrid Reinforcement Method
Reinforcement
Minimum 3000 ohm- AASHTO
Resistivity N/A
cm, at 100% saturation T 288
AASHTO
pH 6.0 – 9.0 5.5 – 9.0
T 289
AASHTO
Chlorides Maximum 100 ppm N/A
T 291
AASHTO
Sulfates Maximum 200 ppm N/A
T 290

Select Backfill for MSE Walls

02832S - Page 4 of 7
2.2 FREE DRAINING GRANULAR BACKFILL

A. Place Free Draining Granular Backfill along the wall face in accordance
with this Section. Refer to Section 02056 for Free Draining Granular
Backfill requirements.

PART 3 EXECUTION

3.1 INSTALLATION

A. Excavation and Foundation Preparation:

1. Excavate and grade foundation area to the lines and grades shown
on the drawings, or as directed by the Engineer.
2. Make the width of excavation equal to or exceeding the length of
soil reinforcing elements.
3. The upper 12 inches of subgrade should be scarified, moisture
conditioned, treated where required, and compacted to at least 90
percent of the maximum unit weight and between 0 and 2 percent
wetter than the optimum moisture content. The maximum unit
weight and optimum moisture content for embankment soils should
be determined per AASHTO T-99 standard proctor.
4. Remove unsuitable foundation soils and replace with Select
Backfill, or with other suitable material determined by the Engineer,
placed and compacted as specified in this article.

B. MSE Wall:
1. Follow erection of each course of panels with placement of Select
Backfill.
a. Complete backfill at the front of the wall before backfilling
more than 4 feet above the bottom of the lowermost facing
element.
2. Do not damage or disturb wall materials or misalign facing panels
during backfill placement.
3. Remove and replace or correct, as directed by the Engineer, wall
materials damaged or disturbed during backfill placement at no cost
to the Department.
4. Remove and replace or correct, as directed by the Engineer, Select
Backfill not meeting the specified requirements at no cost to the
Department.
5. Make the moisture content of the Select Backfill during placement
and compaction uniform throughout each layer.
6. Determine the optimum moisture content in accordance with
AASHTO T 99, Method D.
7. Place Select Backfill with the moisture not greater than the optimum
moisture content, nor less than four percentage points below
optimum.

Select Backfill for MSE Walls

02832S - Page 5 of 7
8. Remove any Select Backfill with placement moisture content in
excess of the optimum moisture content.
a. Select Backfill may be reused, provided it is aerated or
otherwise reworked until the moisture content is uniform and
acceptable throughout the entire lift.
9. Do not exceed 12 inches (loose) in lift thickness.
a. Decrease the lift thickness as necessary to obtain the
specified density.
b. Place backfill in uniformly thick layers.
10. Compact backfill to at least 95 percent of the maximum density,
AASHTO T 99, Method D.
11. When placing backfill over the soil reinforcement, begin placement
3 to 5 feet from the wall face and proceed away from the wall.
12. Operate all compaction equipment parallel to the wall face,
beginning at the back of the reinforced soil area and working
towards the wall facing to aid in locking the soil reinforcement into
place.
13. Place and compact each layer of backfill in a level manner before
placing subsequent backfill layers.
14. Rubber-tired equipment may pass over the reinforcement only at
slow speeds (less than 5 mph). Avoid sudden braking and sharp
turning.
15. Do not use sheeps-foot or other grid-type rollers for compacting
backfill within the limits of the soil reinforcement.
16. During the initial stage of wall construction, to avoid pushing the
facing elements out of alignment, do not place or compact backfill
against the facing elements until the first layer of soil reinforcement
has been installed and one lift of Select Backfill has been placed
and compacted over the reinforcement layer.
17. For all subsequent layers of backfill, before placement of the
reinforcement, place and compact the backfill to an elevation 2
inches above the reinforcement connection from a point
approximately 18 inches behind the back face of the wall facings
(panels, block units, etc.) to the end of the reinforcing, unless
otherwise shown on the plans at specific locations.
18. Achieve compaction within 4 to 5 feet of the back face of the wall
facing units and within 2 feet of any obstructions, by at least three
passes of a suitable lightweight or medium-weight (hand-held or
hand-guided) mechanical roller, tamper, or vibratory compactor.
a. When compacting a thin leveling lift along the reinforcement
connections level, use compaction equipment with a static
weight of less than 800 pounds within this zone.
b. Use a maximum lift thickness within this zone as warranted
by the type of compaction equipment actually used.
c. Compact within this lighter equipment zone to within at least
3 inches of the facing elements.

Select Backfill for MSE Walls

02832S - Page 6 of 7
 d. Exercise care in the compaction process to avoid
misalignment of the facing elements.
19. Place Free Draining Granular Backfill within a zone behind the wall
extending at least 30 inches from the front face of the wall facings
(but at least 12 inches in width measured from the bottom of each
backfill lift), and at least 24 inches in width behind the first-stage
wire/grid facing of 2-stage wall systems.
a. Place and compact Free Draining Granular Backfill as
specified above for the lighter equipment zone.
20. Use backfill placement and compaction methods to assure that no
voids are present beneath the soil reinforcement elements before
backfilling over the reinforcement.
21. Place soil reinforcing elements normal to face of wall in plan view.
a. If necessary, skew elements (minimizing skew angle) to
avoid obstructions, but no more than 15 degrees unless
approved by the wall company.
22. At the end of each day's operation, slope the backfill away from the
wall to direct runoff of rainwater away from the wall face.
a. Do not allow surface runoff from adjacent areas or
groundwater to enter the wall construction site, including at
the front face of the wall.
23. Place the top level of soil reinforcement parallel to the top of the
facing unit a distance below the top of the wall as shown on the
plans.
a. Place the top level of soil reinforcement at least 3 inches
below the bottom of the barrier slab lip or the bottom of the
concrete gutter behind the coping.
24. Gradually deflect the upper reinforcement elements downward to
avoid conflicts with paving and subgrade preparation.
a. Pay particular attention to special conditions such as where
roadway super-elevation is anticipated.
b. Maximum deflection of the reinforcement elements is 8
inches or as otherwise noted on the plans.
25. Slope the top of the backfill along the wall such that the top
reinforcement layer is covered with at least 16 inches of Select
Backfill.

END OF SECTION

Select Backfill for MSE Walls

02832S - Page 7 of 7
 December 13, 2010
SPECIAL PROVISION

PROJECT # F-LC35(197) PIN 7635

SECTION 02833S

MSE WALLS USING CONCRETE FACING PANELS AND

METAL REINFORCING ELEMENTS
PART 1 GENERAL

1.1 SECTION INCLUDES

A. Materials and construction requirements for mechanically stabilized earth

(MSE) walls using a wall system (refer to Section 02831S) approved by
the Engineer using concrete facing panels and metal reinforcing elements.

B. Provide and install face panels, reinforcing steel, tie strips, fasteners, joint
filler, select backfill, and all necessary attachments from the selected Wall
Company.

1.2 RELATED SECTIONS

A. Section 02831S: Retaining Wall-Alternate Systems

B. Section 02832S: Select Backfill for MSE Walls

C. Section 03055: Portland Cement Concrete

D. Section 03211: Reinforcing Steel and Welded Wire

E. Section 03310: Structural Concrete

F. Section 03390: Concrete Curing

G. Section 03935: Epoxy Injection and Sealing

1.3 REFERENCES

A. AASHTO M 111: Zinc (Hot-Dip Galvanized) Coatings on Iron and Steel

Products

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Metal Reinforcing Elements
02833S - Page 1 of 10
 B: AASHTO M 232: Zinc Coating (Hot-Dip) on Iron and Steel Hardware

C. ASTM A 325: Structural Bolts, Steel, Heat Treated, 120/105 ksi Minimum
Tensile Strength

D. ASTM A 572: High-Strength Low-Alloy Columbium-Vanadium Structural

Steel

E. ASTM A 709M: Structural Steel for Bridges

F. ASTM A 1011: Standard Steel, Sheet and Strip, Hot-Rolled, Carbon,

Structural, High-Strength Low-Alloy, High-Strength Low-Alloy with
Improved Formability, and Ultra-High Strength

G. UDOT Quality Management Plans

1.4 SUBMITTALS

A. Submit sample of the texture of the panel face for the Engineer’s approval.

B. Provide submittals in accordance with Section 02831S and working

drawings including design details which protect the reinforcement
connections from corrosion.

C. Do not start work on any wall until working drawings have been reviewed
and accepted by the Engineer.
1. Review and acceptance of the drawings does not relieve the
Contractor of any responsibility under the contract for the
successful completion of the work.

D. Certificate of compliance for incorporated materials along with copies of

results of any tests performed.

E. Wall Company’s construction manual for the specific wall system.

F. Certification from the Wall Company that the completed wall(s) meet all
Department and Wall Company specifications/requirements for the
specific wall system.
1. Where the Department’s and the Wall Company’s specifications or
requirements differ, apply the stricter of the two.

1.5 ACCEPTANCE

A. Panel Acceptance
1. Meet 28-day minimum compressive strength of 4000 psi.

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Metal Reinforcing Elements
02833S - Page 2 of 10
 2. Do not transport panels to the site before seven days after
fabrication and until:
a. A minimum 28-day compressive strength of 4000 psi has
been achieved, or
b. A minimum compressive strength of 3000 psi has been
achieved at 14 days.
3. All panels must be visually free of defects and will be rejected if
they:
a. Do not meet the above requirements.
b. Contain defects due to imperfect molding.
c. Have any honeycomb.
d. Have open texture on front face.
e. Have cracks or spalls that exceed the limits specified in
article 3.4

PART 2 PRODUCTS

2.1 PRECAST CONCRETE WALL PANELS

A. Obtain approval from the Engineer for the architectural treatment for all
MSE panel walls.

B. Concrete. Class AA(AE) per Section 03055 and Section 03310, having a
minimum 28-day compressive strength of 4000 psi.

C. Reinforcing steel to have a minimum cover of 2.0 inches.

D. Casting
1. Use only a UDOT qualified supplier for precast concrete panel
fabrication in accordance with UDOT Precast/Prestressed Concrete
Structures Quality Management Plan.
a. Do not cast panels on site.
2. Cast panels on a flat area or approved architectural treatment, with
the front face down.
a. Set tie strip guides at back face.
3. Place concrete in each unit without interruption.
a. Vibrate with approved equipment to prevent stone pockets or
cleavage planes.
b. Use clean, unused form oil.

E. Reinforcement Connections
1. Cast at least two soil reinforcement connection levels into all full-
size concrete panels.

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Metal Reinforcing Elements
02833S - Page 3 of 10
 a. Where only two connection levels are cast in panels, locate
the levels in two different horizontal planes separated by at
least one-third the panel height.

F. Curing
1. Keep surfaces wet and moist until the curing compound is applied.
2. Complete all patching or surface finishing before applying
compound.
3. Spray the entire surface of the concrete with a membrane curing
compound. Apply the curing compound at a uniform rate of 1.25
oz/ft2.
4. Immediately re-spray any membrane damage which occurs during
the curing period.
5. Leave forms in place until they can be removed without damage to
the unit.

G. Concrete Finish
1. Provide a Class 1 finish for front face of panels.
a. The thickness of the architectural treatment is in addition to
the required design thickness.
2. Provide a uniform surface finish for the back face of panels.
a. Roughly screen the finish to eliminate open pockets of
aggregate and surface distortions in excess of 1/4 inch.

H. Tolerances
1. All dimensions ± 1/8 inch.
2. Angular distortion with regard to the height of panel not to exceed
3/16 inch in 5 feet.
3. Surface defects on form surfaces not more than 1/8 inch in 5 feet.

I. Marking
1. Mark the date of manufacture and panel type designation on the
rear of each panel so that it is legible during installation.

2.2 REINFORCING STEEL

A. Epoxy coated in accordance with Section 03211.

2.3 LEVELING PAD CONCRETE

A. Class A or Class B concrete mixes in accordance with Section 03055.

2.4 REINFORCING ELEMENTS

A. Hot rolled from steel bars, galvanize coated 3.4 mils thick, meeting
minimum requirements of ASTM A 572, Grade 65; AASHTO M 111.

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Metal Reinforcing Elements
02833S - Page 4 of 10
 B. All reinforcing strips to be the specified size and free from defects.

2.5 REINFORCED WELDED WIRE MESH AND LOOP INBEDS

A. Meet minimum requirements of Section 03211 with galvanized coating at

least 3.4 mils thick.

2.6 TIE STRIPS

A. Shop fabricated, hot rolled steel conforming to minimum requirements of

ASTM A 709M, Grade 345; AASHTO M 111; and ASTM A 1011 Grade
345 or equivalent, galvanize coated at least 3.4 mils thick.

2.7 PANEL FASTENERS

A. Bolts and nuts to be hexagonal cap screw and galvanize coated, meeting
minimum requirements of ASTM A 325 and AASHTO M 232.

2.8 OTHER FASTENERS

A. Fasteners to wingwalls and abutment walls, if required, to be provided by

the Wall Company.

2.9 DAMAGED GALVANIZATION

A. Spray with zinc paint, covering the entire area that has been damaged, as
an alternative to replacement of any reinforcing steel, reinforcing strips,
wire mesh or fasteners that have damaged galvanization.

2.10 CURING COMPOUND

A. Refer to Section 03390

2.11 GEOTEXTILE

A. Cover horizontal and vertical joints between panels, when required, by a

geotextile of type and grade recommended by the Wall Company.

2.12 ADHESIVE

A. Per Wall Company's standard.

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Metal Reinforcing Elements
02833S - Page 5 of 10
2.13 BEARING PADS

A. Horizontal rubber bearing pads to be of the type and grade recommended

and supplied by the Wall Company.

2.14 LIFTING DEVICES

A. Per Wall Company’s standard.

2.15 SELECT BACKFILL

A. Refer to Section 02832S.

2.16 MATERIALS FOR CRACK AND SPALL REPAIR

A. Refer to Section 03935.

PART 3 EXECUTION

3.1 GENERAL

A. Arrange for a qualified representative (minimum five years experience with

MSE wall design and construction) from the selected Wall Company to be
directly involved and provide technical assistance during all phases of
construction of the wall(s).
1. The Wall Company representative is to be at the project site for at
least the first five working days of wall construction and until all
aspects of wall construction have been satisfactorily demonstrated
to the MSE Wall Company representative and the Engineer. The
MSE Wall Company representative is to subsequently visit the site
at least once every 10,000 sq. ft. of wall face construction, or as
otherwise determined by the Engineer.
2. The Wall Company representative is responsible for training the
Contractor’s wall construction crew(s) and Department inspectors in
proper quality control for construction of the walls.
a. If one or more construction crew members change, the Wall
Company representative is responsible to train the new crew
member(s).
3. During each site visit, the representative is to meet with the
Engineer near the conclusion of the visit to report on the observed
wall construction procedures, including providing a copy of the field
report.

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Metal Reinforcing Elements
02833S - Page 6 of 10
 B. Provide the Wall Company’s construction manual to the Engineer, and
assure that the wall system-specific requirements in the manual are
integrated into the wall construction.

C. Provide a final field observations report from the Wall Company that
specifically addresses that the completed wall(s) meet all Department and
Wall Company specifications/requirements and what deficiencies exist, if
any.
1. Where the Department’s and the Wall Company’s
specifications/requirements differ, the stricter of the two shall be
applied.

D. Haul, store, and ship wall materials so as to minimize the potential of

producing any type of defects.
1. Store panels to avoid damage to connection pieces, such that the
tie strips do not bend.

E. Perform excavation and foundation preparation (including removal of

unsuitable soils) as specified in Section 02832S.

F. Construct wall system in accordance with the approved plans,

specifications, and the Wall Company’s recommendations and
construction manual.

3.2 LEVELING PAD

A. Prepare the subgrade soils and/or fill so as to cast the leveling pad to the
design elevations shown on the drawings and to ensure complete contact
of the retaining wall units with the base.

B. Furnish and place concrete in accordance with Section 03055.

C. Place cast-in-place concrete leveling pad upon undisturbed in-situ soils, or

upon properly placed and compacted fill as per Section 02832S. Place
leveling pad to a thickness of at least 6 inches.

D. Allow leveling pad to cure for at least 12 hours before placing concrete
panels.

3.3 WALL CONSTRUCTION

A. Place wall backfill and reinforcement as specified in Section 02832S.

B. Handle panels by means of lifting device set into upper edge or side of the
panels and set in position vertically.

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Metal Reinforcing Elements
02833S - Page 7 of 10
C. Place panels on successive horizontal lifts in the sequence shown on the
approved plans as backfill placement proceeds.

D. Place panels initially at a slight batter towards the backfill as

recommended by the Wall Company to compensate for outward rotation
of the panel consequent upon fill placement and compaction.

E. Place bearing pads as required by the Wall Company to prevent concrete-

to-concrete contact between panels.

F. Use rubber, wood, or metal shims as necessary to make final adjustments

to the wall panel to facilitate level placement of the panel.
1. Do not leave wood shims at any location.

G. Where reinforcement is obstructed by elements such as piles, drilled

shafts, guardrail posts, catch basins, drop inlets, culverts, etc. in the wall
soil reinforcement zone, modify the reinforcement design using one of the
following alternatives:
1. If the reinforcement is modified, design the surrounding
reinforcement layers to carry the additional load.
2. Place a structural frame around the obstruction which is capable of
transferring loads from the reinforcements on one side of the
obstruction to reinforcements on the other side of the obstruction.
3. If the soil reinforcement consists of discrete strips or bar mats
rather than continuous sheets, splay the reinforcement around the
obstruction.

E. Place soil reinforcement strips normal to the face of the wall in plan view.
1. Where required to splay the reinforcement around obstructions,
skew the reinforcement (minimizing the skew angle to no more than
15 degrees).
a. Maintain a set-back for reinforcement of at least 2 inches
from piles or other metallic obstructions.
b. Do not exceed horizontal spacing between longitudinal
reinforcing of 7 feet.

F. Where reinforcement elements are to be connected using bolts and nuts,

use a crescent or socket-head ratchet wrench to securely hand-tighten the
nut.
1. Do not use pneumatic equipment.

G. Wall panel horizontal alignment tolerance is 0.7 percent (for example 2.5
inches in 30 feet). Vertical tolerance is 0.7 percent (for example 0.85
inches in 10 feet). The overall vertical tolerance of the wall (plumbness
from top to bottom) not to exceed 0.7 percent (for example 1.7 inches in

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Metal Reinforcing Elements
02833S - Page 8 of 10
 20 feet of wall height). Wall panel levelness tolerance not to exceed 0.5
percent (for example 1.2 inches in 20 feet).

H. Install panels so that joints are uniform. The maximum allowable offset in
any panel joint is 0.40 inch. Joint width is 1.0 inch maximum and 0.50
inch minimum.

I. Check panel tolerance and reset before placement of the next panel if out
of tolerance.

3.4 CRACK AND SPALL REPAIR CRITERIA FOR CONCRETE PANELS

A. A fully penetrating crack is defined as a crack extending through the

cross-section of the precast panel from the front face to the back face of
the unit.

B. Cracks at Front Face of Panel:

1. Panels with one or two partially penetrating cracks with widths less
than or equal to 12 mils are acceptable.
2. Reject panels with fully penetrating cracks, or cracks wider than 12
mils.
3. No more than two cracks per individual panel are allowed without
further evaluation.

C. Cracks at Back Face of Panel:

1. Partially penetrating cracks with widths less than or equal to 12 mils
are acceptable.
2. Partially penetrating cracks with widths between 12 mils and 30
mils are acceptable when repaired with surface sealant according
to subparagraph F, Crack Repair Procedures.
3. Evaluate partially penetrating cracks wider than 30 mils for
acceptance with epoxy injection according to subparagraph F,
Crack Repair Procedures.
4. No more than two repairable cracks per individual panel are
allowed without further evaluation.

D. Spalls at Front Face of Panel:

1. Spalls with widths less than 4.0 inches and depths less than 2.0
inches may be repaired with a patching material acceptable to the
Engineer of the same color as panel concrete. Resultant repair to
be approved by the Engineer.
2. Reject panels with spalls wider than 4.0 inches or deeper than 2.0
inches.
3. Measure spall depth from the structural thickness of the panel
excluding architectural surface finish.

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Metal Reinforcing Elements
02833S - Page 9 of 10
 4. Panels with more than two spalls are subject to further evaluation
before acceptance.

E. Spalls at Back Face of Panel:

1. Spalls with widths less than 4.0 inches and depths less than 2.0
inches may be repaired with a patching material acceptable to the
Engineer. Resultant repair to be approved by the Engineer.
2. Reject panels with spalls wider than 4.0 inches or deeper than 2.0
inches.
3. Panels with more than four spalls are subject to further evaluation
before acceptance.

F. Crack Repair Procedures:

1. Surface Sealing: Prepare surface and apply a sealant acceptable
to the Engineer according to Manufacturer’s instructions.
2. Epoxy Injection: Prepare surface and inject cracks with
Department-approved product according to Manufacturer’s
instructions.

G. Spall Repair Procedures:

1. Prepare surface and apply patching material according to
Manufacturer’s instructions, and as acceptable to the Engineer.

END OF SECTION

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Metal Reinforcing Elements
02833S - Page 10 of 10
 December 8, 2010

SPECIAL PROVISION

PROJECT # F-LC35(197) PIN 7635

SECTION 02834S

MSE WALLS USING CONCRETE FACING PANELS AND

GEOGRID REINFORCING ELEMENTS

PART 1 GENERAL

1.1 SECTION INCLUDES

A. Materials and construction requirements for mechanically stabilized earth

(MSE) walls using a wall system (see Section 02831S) approved by the
Engineer using concrete facing panels and geogrid reinforcing elements.

B. Provide and install face panels, reinforcing steel, geogrid, fasteners, joint
filler, select backfill, and all necessary attachments from the selected Wall
Company.

1.2 RELATED SECTIONS

A. Section 02831S: Retaining Wall -Alternate Systems

B. Section 02832S: Select Backfill for MSE Walls

C. Section 03055: Portland Cement Concrete

D. Section 03211: Reinforcing Steel and Welded Wire

E. Section 03310: Structural Concrete

F. Section 03390: Concrete Curing

G. Section 03924: Structural Concrete Repair

1.3 REFERENCES

A. AASHTO M 32: Steel Wire, Plain, for Concrete Reinforcement

B. AASHTO M 55: Steel Welded Wire Reinforcement, Plain, for Concrete

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Geogrid Reinforcing Elements
02834S - Page 1 of 10
 C. AASHTO M 111: Zinc (Hot-Dip Galvanized) Coatings on Iron and Steel
Products

D. AASHTO M 232: Zinc Coating (Hot-Dip) on Iron and Steel Hardware

E. ASTM D5262: Standard Test Method for Evaluating the Unconfined

Tension Creep and Creep Rupture Behavior of Geosynthetics

F. ASTM D6637: Standard Test Method for Determining Tensile Properties

of Geogrids by the Single or Multi-Rib Tensile Method

G. UDOT Quality Management Plans

1.4 SUBMITTALS

A. Submit sample of the texture of the panel face for the Engineer’s approval.

B. Provide submittals in accordance Section 02831S and working drawings

including all design details.

C. Do not start work on any wall until working drawings have been reviewed
and accepted by the Engineer.
1. Review and acceptance of the drawings does not relieve the
Contractor of any responsibility under the contract for the
successful completion of the work.

D. Certificate of Compliance for incorporated materials along with copies of

results of any tests performed.

E. Wall Company’s construction manual for the specific wall system.

F. Certification from the Wall Company that the completed wall(s) meet all
Department and Wall Company specifications/requirements for the
specific wall system.
1. Where the Department’s and the Wall Company’s specifications or
requirements differ, apply the stricter of the two.

1.5 ACCEPTANCE

A. Panel Acceptance
1. Meet 28-day minimum compressive strength of 4000 psi.
2. Do not transport panels to the site before seven days after
fabrication and until:
a. A minimum 28-day compressive strength of 4000 psi has
been achieved, or

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Geogrid Reinforcing Elements
02834S - Page 2 of 10
 b. A minimum compressive strength of 3000 psi has been
achieved at 14 days.
3. All panels must be visually free of defects and will be rejected if
they:
a. Do not meet the above requirements
b. Contain defects due to imperfect molding
c. Have any honeycomb
d. Have open texture on front face
e. Have cracks or spalls that exceed the limits specified in
article 3.5

PART 2 PRODUCTS

2.1 PRECAST CONCRETE WALL PANELS

A. Obtain approval from the Engineer for the architectural treatment for all
MSE panel walls.

B. Concrete. Class AA(AE) per Section 03055 and Section 03310, having a
minimum 28-day compressive strength of 4000 psi.

C. Reinforcing steel to have a minimum cover of 2.0 inches.

D. Casting
1. Use only a UDOT-qualified supplier for precast concrete panel
fabrication in accordance with UDOT Precast/Prestressed Concrete
Structures Quality Management Plan
a. Do not cast panels on site.
2. Cast panels on a flat area or approved architectural treatment, with
the front face down.
a. Set tie strip guides at back face.
3. Place concrete in each unit without interruption.
a. Vibrate with approved equipment to prevent stone pockets or
cleavage planes.
b. Use clean, unused form oil.

E. Reinforcement Connections
1. Cast at least two soil reinforcement connection levels into all full-
size panels.
a. Where only two connection levels are cast in panels, locate
the levels in two different horizontal planes separated by at
least one-third the panel height.

F. Curing.
1. Keep surfaces wet and moist until the curing compound is applied.

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Geogrid Reinforcing Elements
02834S - Page 3 of 10
 2. Complete all patching or surface finishing before applying
compound.
3. Spray the entire surface of the concrete with a membrane curing
compound. Apply the compound at a uniform rate of 1.25 oz/ft2 of
area.
4. Immediately re-spray any membrane damage which occurs during
the curing period.
5. Leave forms in place until they can be removed without damage to
the unit.

G. Concrete Finish
1. Provide a Class 1 finish for front face of panels.
a. The thickness of the architectural treatment is in addition to
required design thickness.
2. Provide a uniform surface finish for the back face of panels.
a. Roughly screen the finish to eliminate open pockets of
aggregate and surface distortion in excess of 1/4 inch.

H. Tolerances
1. All dimensions ± 1/8 inch.
2. Angular distortion with regard to the height of panel not to exceed
3/16 inch in 5 feet.
3. Surface defects on form surfaces not more than 1/8 inch in 5 feet.

I. Marking
1. Mark the date of manufacture and panel type designation on the
rear side of each panel so that it is legible during installation.

2.2 REINFORCING STEEL

A. Epoxy coated in accordance with Section 03211.

2.3 LEVELING PAD CONCRETE

A. Use Class A or Class B concrete mixes in accordance with Section 03055.

2.4 GEOGRID

A. Use geogrid consisting of a regular grid network of integrally connected,

discontinuous, select high-density polyethylene or polypropylene resin
polymer tensile elements.
1. Aperture geometry sufficient to permit significant mechanical
interlock with the surrounding soil and/or rock.
2. Structure to be dimensionally stable and be able to retain its
geometry under manufacture, transport, and installation.

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Geogrid Reinforcing Elements
02834S - Page 4 of 10
 B. Provide junction strength, minimum GRI-GG2 of 90 percent of ultimate
strength.

C. Provide creep rupture test for 75-year design life per ASTM D5262.

D. Provide ultimate strength, minimum per ASTM D6637 and utilize geogrid
reinforcement reduction factors as appropriate for the Project.

E. Carefully inspect all soil reinforcement and attachment devices to ensure

they are true to size and free from defects.

F. Prevent mud, wet concrete, epoxy, and other contaminants from coming in
contact with and affixing to the soil reinforcement and inserts, that would
interfere with the geogrid connections.

G. Store soil reinforcement products as recommended by the Wall Company.

2.5 REINFORCED WELDED WIRE MESH AND LOOP INBEDS

A. Meet minimum requirements of Section 03211 with galvanized coating at

least 3.4 mils thick.

2.6 PANEL FASTENERS

A. Bolts and nuts to be hexagonal cap screw and galvanize coated, meeting
minimum requirements of ASTM A-325 and AASHTO M 232.

2.7 OTHER FASTENERS

A. Fasteners to wingwalls and abutment walls, if required, to be provided by

the Wall Company.

2.8 CURING COMPOUND

A. Refer to Section 03390.

2.9 GEOTEXTILE

A. Cover horizontal and vertical joints between panels, when required, by a

geotextile of the type and grade recommended by the Wall Company.

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Geogrid Reinforcing Elements
02834S - Page 5 of 10
2.10 ADHESIVE

A. Per Wall Company's standard.

2.11 LIFTING DEVICES

A. Per Wall Company’s standard.

2.12 BEARING PADS

A. Horizontal rubber bearing pads to be of the type and grade recommended

and supplied by the Wall Company.

2.13 SELECT BACKFILL

A. Refer to Section 02832S.

2.14 MATERIALS FOR CRACK AND SPALL REPAIR

A. Refer to Section 03935.

PART 3 EXECUTION

3.1 GENERAL

A. Arrange for a qualified representative (minimum five years experience with

MSE wall design and construction) from the selected Wall Company to be
directly involved and provide technical assistance during all phases of
construction of the wall(s).
1. The Wall Company representative is to be at the project site for at
least the first five working days of wall construction and until all
aspects of wall construction have been satisfactorily demonstrated
to the MSE Wall Company representative and the Engineer. The
MSE Wall Company representative is to subsequently visit the site
at least once every 10,000 sq. ft. of wall face construction, or as
otherwise determined by the Engineer.
2. The Wall Company representative is responsible for training the
Contractor’s wall construction crew(s) and Department inspectors in
proper quality control for construction of the walls.
a. If one or more construction crew members change, the Wall
Company representative is responsible to train the new crew
member(s).

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Geogrid Reinforcing Elements
02834S - Page 6 of 10
 3. During each site visit, the representative is to meet with the
Engineer near the conclusion of the visit to report on the observed
wall construction procedures, including providing a copy of the field
report.

B. Provide the Wall Company’s construction manual to the Engineer, and

assure that the wall system-specific requirements in the manual are
integrated into the wall construction.

C. Provide a final field observations report from the Wall Company that
specifically addresses that the completed wall(s) meet all Department and
Wall Company specifications/requirements and what deficiencies exist, if
any.
1. Where the Department’s and the Wall Company’s
specifications/requirements differ, the stricter of the two shall be
applied.

D. Haul, store, and ship wall materials so as to minimize the potential of

producing any type of defects.
1. Store panels to avoid damage to connection pieces, such that the
tie strips do not bend.

E. Perform excavation and foundation preparation (including removal of

unsuitable soils) as specified in Section 02832S.

F. Construct wall system in accordance with the approved plans,

specifications, and the Wall Company’s recommendations and
construction manual.

3.2 LEVELING PAD

A. Prepare the subgrade soils and/or fill so as to cast the leveling pad to the
design elevations shown on the drawings and to ensure complete contact
of the retaining wall units with the base.

B. Furnish and place concrete in accordance with Section 03055.

C. Place cast-in-place concrete leveling pad upon undisturbed in-situ soils, or

upon properly placed and compacted fill as per Section 02832S.
1. Place leveling pad to a thickness of at least 6 inches.

D. Allow leveling pad to cure for at least 12 hours before placing concrete
panels.

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Geogrid Reinforcing Elements
02834S - Page 7 of 10
3.3 GEOGRID INSTALLATION

A. Verify the correct orientation (roll direction) of the geogrid.

B. Place geogrid horizontally on the compacted backfill at the proper design.

C. Connect geogrid to the concrete wall units as specified by the Wall

Company.

D. Pull the geogrid taut to eliminate loose folds and remove slack in the
geogrid at the wall unit connections, pretension the geogrid, and stake or
otherwise secure the back edge of the geogrid before and during backfill
and compaction.

E. Follow the Wall Company's overlap requirements for uniaxial and biaxial
geogrids.

F. Where reinforcement is obstructed by elements such as piles, drilled

shafts, guardrail posts, catch basins, drop inlets, culverts, etc. in the wall
soil reinforcement zone, modify the reinforcement design using one of the
following alternatives:
1. If the reinforcement is modified, design the surrounding
reinforcement layers to carry the additional load.
2. Place a structural frame around the obstruction which is capable of
transferring loads from the reinforcements on one side of the
obstruction to reinforcements on the other side of the obstruction.
3. If the soil reinforcement consists of discrete strips or bar mats
rather than continuous sheets, splay the reinforcement around the
obstruction.

3.4 WALL CONSTRUCTION

A. Place wall backfill and reinforcement as specified in Section 02832S.

B. Handle panels by means of lifting device set into upper edge or side of the
panels and set in position vertically.

C. Place panels on successive horizontal lifts in the sequence shown on the

approved plans as backfill placement proceeds.

D. Place panels initially at a slight batter towards the backfill as

recommended by the Wall Company to compensate for outward rotation
of the panel consequent upon fill placement and compaction.

E. Place bearing pads as required by the Wall Company to prevent concrete-

to-concrete contact between panels.

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Geogrid Reinforcing Elements
02834S - Page 8 of 10
 F. Use rubber, wood, or metal shims as necessary to make final adjustments
to the wall panel to facilitate lever placement of the panel.
1. Do not leave wood shims at any location.

G. Wall panel horizontal alignment tolerance is 0.7 percent (for example 2.5
inches in 30 feet). Vertical tolerance is 0.7 percent (for example 0.85
inches in 10 feet). The overall vertical tolerance of the wall (plumbness
from top to bottom) not to exceed 0.5 percent (for example 1.2 inches in
20 feet of wall height). Wall panel levelness tolerance not to exceed 0.5
percent (for example 1.2 inches in 20 feet).

H. Install panels so that joints are uniform. The maximum allowable offset in
any panel joint is 0.40 inch.
1. Joint width for single-stage walls is 1.2 inches maximum and 0.60
inch minimum; and for two-stage walls is 1.0 inch maximum and
0.70 inch minimum.

I. Check panel tolerance and reset before placement of the next panel if out
of tolerance.

3.5 CRACK AND SPALL REPAIR CRITERIA FOR CONCRETE PANELS

A. A fully penetrating crack is defined as a crack extending through the

cross-section of the precast panel from the front face to the back face of
the unit.

B. Cracks at Front Face of Panel:

1. Panels with one or two partially penetrating cracks with widths less
than or equal to 12 mils are acceptable.
2. Reject panels with fully penetrating cracks, or cracks wider than 12
mils.
3. No more than two cracks per individual panel are allowed without
further evaluation.

C. Cracks at Back Face of Panel:

1. Partially penetrating cracks with widths less than or equal to 12 mils
are acceptable.
2. Partially penetrating cracks with widths between 12 mils and 30
mils are acceptable when repaired with surface sealant according
to subparagraph F, Crack Repair Procedures.
3. Evaluate partially penetrating cracks wider than 30 mils for
acceptance with epoxy injection according to subparagraph F,
Crack Repair Procedures.
4. No more than two repairable cracks per individual panel are
allowed without further evaluation.

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Geogrid Reinforcing Elements
02834S - Page 9 of 10
 D. Spalls at Front Face of Panel:
1. Spalls with widths less than 4.0 inches and depths less than 2.0
inches may be repaired with an approved patching material of the
same color as panel concrete. Resultant repair to be approved by
the Engineer.
2. Reject panels with spalls wider than 4.0 inches or deeper than 2.0
inches.
3. Measure spall depth from the structural thickness of the panel
excluding architectural surface finish.
4. Panels with more than two spalls are subject to further evaluation
before acceptance.

E. Spalls at Back Face of Panel:

1. Spalls with widths less than 4.0 inches and depths less than 2.0
inches may be repaired with a patching material acceptable to the
Engineer. Resultant repair to be approved by the Engineer.
2. Reject panels with spalls wider than 4.0 inches or deeper than 2.0
inches.
3. Panels with more than four spalls are subject to further evaluation
before acceptance.

F. Crack Repair Procedures:

1. Surface Sealing: Prepare surface and apply a sealant acceptable
to the Engineer according to Manufacturer’s instructions.
2. Epoxy Injection: Prepare surface and inject cracks in accordance
with Section 03924.

G. Spall Repair Procedures:

1. Prepare surface and apply patching material according to
Manufacturer’s instructions, and as acceptable to the Engineer.

END OF SECTION

MSE Walls Using Concrete Facing Panels and Geogrid Reinforcing Elements
02834S - Page 10 of 10
 December 9, 2010

SPECIAL PROVISION

PROJECT F-LC35(197) PIN 7635

SECTION 02861M

PRECAST RETAINING/NOISE WALLS

Delete Article 1.5 SUBMITTALS paragraph B and replace with the following:

B. Precast Concrete Panels: Submit for approval samples of the specified

surface texture architectural treatments and paint before casting the
panels. Refer to the plans for the required surface texture architectural
treatments and paint color.

Add the following to Article 1.5 SUBMITTALS:

D. Submit plan and profile drawings that have been stamped by a

professional engineer for approval.

Add the following paragraph to Article 2.1 CONCRETE:

C. Wall Cap: Concrete Class AA(AE). Refer to Section 03055.

Delete Article 3.1 FABRICATION paragraph B and replace with the following:

B. Concrete Posts
1. Cast posts in metal forms. Cast pilasters in metal or wood forms.
2. Permanently mark each post with the date of casting and the post
identification number supplied by the inspector. Place markings in
fresh concrete near the bottom of the post.
3. The Department accepts posts if:
a. They meet the 28-day compressive strength.
b. They are cured and sealed according to specification. Refer
to Sections 03390 and 03392.
c. They have been visually inspected and accepted by the
Engineer.
d. They have sides that do not deviate from a straight line by
more than ⅛ inch in 10 ft.

4. Replace posts that are:

a. Cracked or damaged.
b. Not permanently marked.

5. Paint all sides of the posts as indicated on the project plans.

Precast Retaining/Noise walls

02861M – Page 1 of 3
 December 9, 2010

Delete Article 3.1 FABRICATION paragraph C and replace with the following:

C. Precast Concrete Panels

1. Cast the panels to required tolerances regarding all dimensions.
a. Cast in metal forms.
b. Do not use coloring additives.
c. Achieve uniformity of appearance, color, texture and pattern.
d. Produce a concrete panel having smooth, solid surfaces free
of voids and air pockets.
2. Permanently mark each panel with the date of casting and the
panel identification number supplied by Engineer on the panel end
near the top.
3. Provide the specified surface texture architectural treatment on
both sides of noise panels. Remove all residue from panel
surfaces.
a. Use a concrete form liner to achieve the specified concrete
texture.
b. Provide panel faces that are free of joint marks, grain, and
other obvious defects. Provide corners, including false
joints, which are uniform, straight and sharp.
4. The Department accepts panels when:
a. They meet the 28 day compressive strength.
b. They are cured and sealed according to specification. Refer
to Section 03390 and 03392.
c. They have been visually inspected and accepted by the
Engineer.
d. They have sides that do not deviate from a straight line by
more than ⅛ inch in 10 ft.
5. Replace panels that:
a. Are cracked or damaged.
b. Do not match in contrast.
c. Are not permanently marked.
d. Show discoloration from release agents or curing agents.
6. Use a single full-height noise panel between posts for all noise
walls. Use a single noise panel and a single retaining panel
between posts for retaining/noise walls.
a. The noise and retaining panels may be cast as a single
panel when there is less than 3 ft of soil provided that the
portion of the panel retaining soil meets all retaining panel
requirements.
7. Paint all sides of the panels as indicated on the project plans.

Precast Retaining/Noise walls

02861M – Page 2 of 3
 December 9, 2010

Delete Article 3.3 POST HOLES paragraph B and replace with the following:

B. Place edge of post holes no nearer than 2 ft from any underground utility.
Pothole when necessary to protect utilities. The specialty wall contractor is
responsible for all damage to utilities.

Add the following to Article 3.4 CONCRETE POSTS:

E. Place reinforcing steel and place concrete for concrete cap located on top
of posts.

Delete Article 3.7 RETAINING WALLS paragraph D and replace with the following:

D. Free Draining Granular Backfill: Place and tamp a minimum of 12 inches

behind the retaining panels, between the posts to the fill height and length,
and at the locations shown on the plans.

END OF SECTION

Precast Retaining/Noise walls

02861M – Page 3 of 3
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

APPENDIX E — PAVEMENT DESIGN

 Herriman City – Transportation Master Plan Final
March, 2008

Screenline 4: West of 6800 West

2030+ Enhanced % Full, Enhanced LOS LOS

Lanes Width 2006 2010 2015 2020 2030 w/Kenn. Capacity Capacity 2030+ 2030+ Normal Enhanced
4a 11800 South 7 120 2,000 2,500 4,000 7,000 18,000 44,000 56,000 64,000 79% 69% C C
4b Midas Creek Dr. 3 66 - - - - 4,000 10,000 16,000 18,000 63% 56% C B
4c Herriman Pkwy 5 120 - - - 3,000 16,000 37,000 41,000 47,000 90% 79% E C
4d Copper Gulch Dr. 3 66 - - - 2,000 4,000 8,000 16,000 18,000 50% 44% B B
4e 13400 South 5 80 - - - 3,000 10,000 19,000 41,000 47,000 46% 40% B B
4f Rose Canyon Dr. 5 80 3,000 3,500 - - 7,000 8,000 41,000 47,000 20% 17% A A
4g Gina Road 3 66 - - 500 1,000 2,500 5,500 16,000 18,000 34% 31% B B
All EW demand 5,000 6,000 4,500 16,000 61,500 131,500 227,000 259,000 58% 51% B B

Screenline 5: North of Herriman Parkway (12600 South)

2030+ Enhanced % Full, Enhanced LOS LOS

Lanes Width 2006 2010 2015 2020 2030 w/Kenn. Capacity Capacity 2030+ 2030+ Normal Enhanced
5a 5200 West (MVC front.) 5 80 - - 4,000 12,000 20,000 23,000 41,000 47,000 56% 49% B B
5b 5400 West 3 66 - - - 3,000 5,000 7,000 16,000 18,000 44% 39% B B
5c 5600 West 5 106 - - 9,000 21,000 30,000 34,000 41,000 47,000 83% 72% D C
5d 6000 West 3 66 4,000 5,000 6,000 6,500 7,000 9,000 16,000 18,000 56% 50% B B
5e 6400 West 5 80 - - - 5,000 18,000 22,000 41,000 47,000 54% 47% B B
5f 6800 West 3 66 - - - - 4,000 9,000 16,000 18,000 56% 50% B B
All NS demand 4,000 5,000 19,000 47,500 84,000 104,000 171,000 195,000 61% 53% C B

Screenline 6: North of Main Street (13100 South)

2030+ Enhanced % Full, Enhanced LOS LOS

Lanes Width 2006 2010 2015 2020 2030 w/Kenn. Capacity Capacity 2030+ 2030+ Normal Enhanced
6a 5200 West/Main 5 80 - 11,000 14,000 17,000 22,000 25,000 41,000 47,000 61% 53% C B
6b 5600 West 5 80 - 4,000 8,000 13,000 20,000 25,000 41,000 47,000 61% 53% C B
6c 6000 West 3 66 4,000 5,000 6,000 6,500 7,000 9,000 16,000 18,000 56% 50% B B
6d 6400 West 5 80 - - - 4,000 17,000 21,000 41,000 47,000 51% 45% B B
6e 6800 West 3 66 - - - - 4,000 8,000 16,000 18,000 50% 44% B B

Note: LOS Normal is a roadway with no intersection improvements/widening.

LOS Enhanced is a roadway with wider intersections incorporating additional right and left turn lanes.

Page 21 of 38
5600 West Herriman; Main Street to 11800 South December 14, 2010

APPENDIX F — MSE WALL STABILITY

 Safety Factor
0.000
0.167
0.333
0.500
0.667
60

0.833
1.000
1.167
1.333
1.500
1.667
1.833
40

2.000
2.167
2.333 250.00 lbs/ft2 Unit Weight Cohesion
Material Name Color Strength Type Phi
2.500 (lbs/ 3) (lb/ 2)
2.667 Lean Clay 110 Mohr‐Coulomb 275 25
2.833
2.310
20

3.000 MSE Select Backfill 135 Infinite strength

3.167
3.333 Culvert Backfill 135 Mohr‐Coulomb 0.02 35
3.500 20.0 ft
3.667
3.833
4.000+
0

8.0 ft

20.0 ft
-20
-40
-60

-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

5600 West ‐ Herriman MSE Wall Sta c Global Stability URS Corpora on
12/8/2010 Midas Creek Crossing Project Number 24585139
 Safety Factor
0.000
0.167
0.18
0.333
0.500
0.667
60

0.833
1.000
1.167
1.333 1.610
1.500
1.667
1.833
40

2.000
2.167
2.333 250.00 lbs/ft2 Unit Weight Cohesion
Material Name Color Strength Type Phi
2.500 (lbs/ 3) (lb/ 2)
2.667 Lean Clay 110 Mohr‐Coulomb 275 25
2.833
20

3.000 MSE Select Backfill 135 Infinite strength

3.167
3.333 Culvert Backfill 135 Mohr‐Coulomb 0.02 35
3.500 20.0 ft
3.667
3.833
4.000+
0

8.0 ft

20.0 ft
-20
-40
-60

-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

5600 West ‐ Herriman MSE Wall Dynamic Global Stability URS Corpora on
12/9/2010 Midas Creek Crossing Project Number 24585139
 Safety Factor
0.000
0.167
0.333
0.500
0.667
60

0.833
1.000
1.167
1.333
1.500
1.667
1.833
40

2.000
1.837
2.167
2.333 250.00 lbs/ft2 Unit Weight Cohesion
Material Name Color Strength Type Phi
2.500 (lbs/ 3) (lb/ 2)
2.667 Lean Clay 110 Mohr‐Coulomb 275 25
2.833
20

3.000 MSE Select Backfill 135 Infinite strength

3.167
3.333 Culvert Backfill 135 Mohr‐Coulomb 0.02 35
3.500
3.667 26.0 ft
3.833
4.000+
0

24.8 ft
2.0 ft

20.0 ft
-20
-40
-60

-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

5600 West ‐ Herriman MSE Wall Global Stability ‐ Scour Condi ons URS Corpora on
12/10/2010 Midas Creek Crossing Project Number 24585139