HomeMy WebLinkAboutPRELIMINARY SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION1
SCANNED
' r�Y
_ St Lucie County
UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES
PRELIMINARY SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Proposed_ Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision
Oakland Lake Circle
Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie County,. Florida
Universal Project No. 0330.1700052.0000
May 19, 2017
riL�,J y
PREPARED FOR:
Ryan Homes
2005 Vista Parkway, Suite 102
West Palm Beach, Florida 33411
PREPARED BY:
'Universal Engineering Sciences, Inc.
820 Brevard Avenue
;Rockledge, Florida 32955
(321) 638-0808
Consultants in: Geotechnical Engineering • Environmental Sciences • Construction Materials Testing • Threshold Inspection
Offices in: Orlando • Daytona Beach Fort Myers • Gainesville • Jacksonville • Ocala . Palm Coast • Rockledge •_ Sarasota
Miami •Panama City • Pensacola • Fort Pierce Tampa • West Palm Beach • Atlanta, GA • Tifton, GA
1 LOCATIONS:
AtlantaUNIVERSAL: Daytona beach
Fort Myers.
N, INMeRRM'SCI ij Fort Pierce
elmet's -
66nsu'
itants.In_:*G'eotec _hlcallcAeerihg �&vironmenta Sciences :FGainesville
i
4, Jacksonville
Construction Materials Testing - Threshold ln�p�ction Geophysical SeiViCe5 cMiami
Building In: spection:Plan Reviews Building' Code Administration Ocala
Orlando.(Headquarfers)
Palm Coast
Panama City
Ma 19 2017 Pensacola
i Rockledge
Ryan Homes Sarasota
1450 Centre ' park Boulevard, 'Suite 340 iq-j Tampa
West Palm Beach, Florida 334011 Atlanta, GA
West Palm Beach:
• Tifton, GA
,Attention' Mr. Michael DeBock
Bock
Referericc PrellinilinarySubsurface Exploration
,
Proposed Oakland Lake Estdtes: Subdivision.
Oakland Lake Circle
Fort Pierce, .Saint Lucie CoUnty, Florida
Universal'Prqject'No. 0330. 1 760952.0000
Dear Mr. bdBock:
Universal Engineering Sciences, Inc,. (Universal)
iversal) . has completed
le I ted a preliminary subsurface
exploration .ait the above referenced, site in Fort Pierce,- Saint Lucie County, Florida. Out
exploration Was authorized by you and Was conducted as outlined in Universal's Proposal No.
0330.0417.00005. This exploration was performed in accordance with generally -accepted :soil
and a fou'ndatipn engineering practices. No otherVarranty, ekpress6d.or implied, is made.
The following report Presents the re_ sults,of our field exploration with a, geqtechn . i I cal engineering
. ineering
inter'pretatio'n6f those results with respect to the pr0i 'e6t characteristics as provided . to us. . We
have included our estimates of the typical wet season high groundwater levels at the boring
1.6.c.ations-400 general, comments concer . n.ing anticipated'so.il suppolitcharactedstics for typical
'low-rise residential buildings.
1N6.-appreci.ate the opportunity: to have worked with you on this project and look forward to a
continued association: Please -do not hesitate to c6r
if we may further assist you 'as your plans pfocmed'.,
Sincerelyt
Yours,
UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES- INC.
Certificate' bf.,AUitfddiiifi6h,',"No..549
Jose R. Benitez Jr, Ej,'
Staff Engineer
:2 — Addres9be
UESDOCSL#1450465
820 Brevaircl Avqnue; Rockledge, Florida 32956 (321) 08-6.808 Fax (321) 638.-0978 '-1
wMv;,UniVersalEhgine6dh. com
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.6 INTRODUCTION ........
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION _._ _....�,._
................:::.,...:.::............::::::::::::..............:::::::::,..........:.....................::.1
3.0 PURPOSE...........
4.0 SITE DESCRIPTION ............ :........... _.............�.:::::.:::::::::;:..:,�„ . .1
.... ...:.
4.1 SOIL SURVEY .. .................... .........................................................................2
4.2 TOPOGRAPHY ......................... ...........................................................................2
5.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES .................................... ........ ........ ..............:..................................2
6.0 LIMITATIONS
7.0 FIELD METHODOLOGIES - _.__._...._....
7.1 STANDARD PENETRATION TESTS...... -
7.2 DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER TESTS .. _ 4
7.3 PAVEMENT CORE SAMPLES ..... -- ......
8.0 LABORATORY METHODOLOGIES., ..............,...:..:.:.:.-..:......:....................:. _ ::4
8.1 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS...... _ _ 4
9.0 SOIL STRATIGRAPHY................... .. ...:.:....:................::............. _ - - ,.- _r_ :5
9.1 PAVEMENT CORE RESULTS...........
10.0 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS ........................ w- .... _......` ..; .:_.... 6
10.1 EXISTING GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS .........._ ...... . ..... ..._.........,............-........:..............6
10.2 TYPICAL WET SEASON HIGH GROUNDWATER LEVEL,,,,,.,,: ; ...;.:.,.....,.: ........:..:....:..-..........: :6
11.0 LABORATORY RESULTS.......- . _...7
11.1 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS....... ;j: _ - - - ,7
12.1 PROPOSED B 1 DI ..._v._.. :�=. ..._ . .......................... „....:., _...,.. .<u.
U L NG AREAS......:,. -,...:.........:..............:..... - 7
13.0 CLOSURE . .......................................`..-..r... ;..-...__:...___.v _........__ ..._.._ _.. ........................ -.-- _ 8
LIST OF TABLES
Table I: Saint Lucie County Soil Survey Designated Soil Types . 2
Table II: Generalized Soil Profile .................................................
Table III: Pavement Core Results . ................. .
i
820 Brevard Avenue, Rockledge; Florida 32955 (321) 638-0808 Fax (321) 638-0978
1 www.Universal Engineering.Com
FIGURES
Boring Location Plan: .......: ..: ... _ :;:�._ r ..-Figure No. 1
APPENDICES
Key to Boring Logs..: a ;.... .: ..... ....:., .....:::......... : Appendix A
Boring Logs ... �. :::.,... �. Appendix A
EXHIBITS
GBADocumerit,._ _ ....__ _....._...__.. _ _-. ...........:Exhibit 1
820 Brevard Avenue, Rockledge, flofida 32955 (32,1)'638-0808 Fax (321) 638-0978•
www.lJn�iversa1Eng i nee�ing,eom ;
Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision Universal Project No. 0330.1700052.0000
Fort'Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Universal Engineering Sciences, Inc. (Universal) has completed a preliminary subsurface
exploration for ,the proposed Oakland Lake ,Estates Subdivision in Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie
County, Florida. Our exploration was authorized by Mr: Michael DeBock of Ryan Homes and
was conducted as outlined in Universal's Proposal No. 0330.0417.00003.' This exploration was
performed in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering. practices. No
other warranty,, expressed or implied; is made.
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
It is Universal's understanding, based upon
.information provided by the client; that the: proposed:
project :will consist of a residential subdivision in Fort Pierce, Florida; currently envisioned as,
shown in Figure No.A. The proposed subdivision is intended to have 'seventy-three (73)
residential lots.
We -understand that the'stormwater runoff from :impervious surfaces to be developed at this site
Will be collected within an existing retention basin located -in.-the central sections of the project
area.
Please note that our subsurface exploration waspreTiminaru in nature and conducted to acquire
general subsurface. 'information only. Once specified -site configuration, building detail and
structural and traffic loading information are available a final subsurface exploration should be
performed.
$.0 'PURPOSE
The purposes of this exploration were:
• to'explore the subsurface. conditions at general locations and depths as requested by the
client and
• to provide our estimates of the typical wet season high groundwater levels at the boring
locations and
•, to provide general comments concerning the anticipated soil support characteristics for
typical low-rise residential construction.
4.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
The subject site is -located within Section 11,'Township 34 South, Range 39 East in Saint Lucie
County, Florida. More specifically, -the site is located on the northwest quadrant of Palomar
Street Road. and North Kings Highway; in Fort Pierce, Florida. At the time of drilling, the site
vegetation consisted of mostly grass, along with an existing paved circular road around the,
proposed subdivision.
820 Brevard Avenue; Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321 ) 638-0808' Fax (321)1638-0978_
www.UniversalEngineering.com
Oakland Lake Estates,Su_bdivision Universal Project No., 0330.1700052. 0000
Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
4.1 SOIL SURVEY
Tw
o wo 2i soil ,types. are mapped within the general, project area accord - ing to the Saint Lucie
County Soil 'Survey 1(SLCSS):, dated 1980. A brief, description of these soils is 'provided in the
following Table I.
TABLE I'
SLCSS DESIGNATED SOIL TYPES
SoII.Type
MaiP Symbol),-
Brief DescripAion,
A
Soil Material that has been :dug up from several areas with different
Arents, 0 to. 5 percent slopes, (4) T,'kindsof
soil. It is used to fill up areas such as low sloughs-,, Marshes,'
shallow depressions, and swamps,
Wabasso'sand (48)
early level, poorly 'drained sandy soils in broad areas. in. the.
'flatwoods.
1
4.2 TOPOGRAPHY,
According to in.fo-rmati6h obtained from the United States Geologic Sbiv6,y(USGS) Osilo, Florida
quadrangle ma ".dated 1949, phold-revised 1970, ground. surface elevation :across the'site area.
.(pre,�-developrrient'al)igap-proximately +20 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD).,
6.0 SCOPE- OF SERVICES -
The services. conducted by .1. Universa I I during our . preliminary spbsu I rface,expl . o . ratio, n pro . gram are
asIollows,..
• Drill..se-ven (7) Standa_ard PeneiratJon Test._(SPT) borings within t0d,project site area to a
,depth of 10 feet -below existing land s, urface (bls).
Core- through -the existing p pavement sections . At fo . ur (4 . lo'cat ions with, a dia'mond.tipped core
drill to ascertain the.approximate. thickness of the asphaltic surfacing and base Course.
'Perform DYnami& Cone Penetrometer (DOP) testing within the Upper' portions of this
selected $PT. boreholes to help further determine soil consistencies.
Secure samples of representative soils encountered in the soil bodrigoor review, laboratory
analysis and classification by q Peotechnical Er�gine_er.
Ueasbm the existing site groundwater levels- and provide an estimate ;.of the typical wet,
,season -:high groundwater -levels.-
4. Conduct soil diri-idati6n tests on selected soil samples obtaih6d.in"-the field to help determine
'their engineering .properties:.
• Asses's the existing soil conditions with respect to the proposed construction:
ioril
2
ko brevard Avenue,:Roic - k . [edge,: Florida'3'2- b55 (321).638-0808 -Fax ('321) 638-0978..
www..UniversalEngineering.do.m,
Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision Universal Project No. 0330.1700052.00100
FortPierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
Q Preparing a geotechnical engineering report which documents the results of our preliminary
Subsurface exploration and laboratory testing program with analysis and general comments.
6.0 LIMITATIONS
Please note th-at'this report is based on a preliminarysubsurface exploration program with the
scope of services, general boring locations and depths as developed in conjunction with the
client. The information submitted in this report is based on data obtained from the soil borings
performed at the locations indicated on the Boring Location Plan and from other information as
referenced. This report has not been prepared to meet the full needs of design professionals,
contractors, or any other parties, and any use of this report by them.without the guidance of the
soil and foundation engineer who prepared it constitutes improper usage which -could lead to
erroneous assumptions, faulty conclusions, and other problems.
This report does not reflect any variations which may occur across the site. The nature and
extent of such variations may not become evident until the course of future explorations or
actual construction. If variations then become evident, it will be necessary. for re-evaluation of
the recommendations in this report after performing on -site observations during the construction
period and noting the .characteristics of any variations. Deleterious soils were not encountered
at any. of our boring locations; however, we cannot completely. preclude their presence across
the entire property. Therefore, this report should not be used for estimating such .items as cut
and fill quantities.
Our field exploration did not find unsuitable or unexpected materials at the. time of occurrence.
However, borings for a typical geotechnical report are widely spaced and generally not sufficient
for reliably _detecting the presence of isolated, anomalous surface or subsurface conditions, or
reliably estimating unsuitable or suitable material quantities. Accordingly, Universal does not
recommend relying on our _boring information to negate presence of anomalous materials or for
estimation of material quantities unless our contracted services specifically include sufficient
exploration for such, purpose(s) and within the report we so state that the level of exploration
providedshould be. sufficient to detect such anomalous conditions or estimate such quantities.
Therefore, Universal will not be .responsible for any extrapolation or use of our data by others
beyond the purpose(s) for which 'it is applicable or intended.
All users of this report are cautioned; that there was no requirement for Universal.to attempt to
locate any man-made buried objects or identify any other potentially hazardous conditions that
may exist at the site during the course of this exploration. Therefore no attempt was made by
Universal to locate or identify such concerns. Universal cannot be responsible for any buried
man-made objects or environmental hazards which may be subsequently _encountered during -
construction that are not discussed within the text of this report.. We can provide this service if
requested, -
For a further description of the scope and limitations of this report please review the document
attached within Exhibit 1 "Important Information About Your Geotechn_ ical Engineering Report'
prepared by GBA/The Geoprofessional Business Association.
3
820 Brevard Lenue, Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321) 638-0808 Fax'.1(321) 638-0978
www. UniversalEngineering.com
Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision .Universal Project No. 0330.1700052.0000
Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
7.0 FIELD iVIETHODOLOGIES
7.1 STANDARD PENETRATION TESTS
The seven, (7), SPT,borings, designated 131 through: B7 on the .attached Figure-W. 1, were
performed in.'general accordance with :the .procedures of ASTM D 1586 (Standard Method for
Penetration Test and Split -Barrel Sampling of Sol .Is). The SPT drilling technique involves driving
a standard split -barrel sampler into the soil by a 140 pound hammer, free -falling 30 inches. The,
number: of blows. required to drive the sampler, 1 foot, after an initial seating of 6-inches,is
designated the penetration resistance, or. N, value; an. index .to soil strength .and consistency.
The soil samples recovered from the split -barrel sampler were visually. inspected and classified
in general accordance with the 'guidelines of ASTM D 2487 (Standard Classification ofSoils for
Engineering Purposes [Unified Soil Classification System]).,
The:SPT soil borings were performed with a CME 45.ATV mounted drilling rig..Universal located
the'test`borings :in'the field- by using the provided site plan and,by plotting in the field with. a,
Garmin GPS receiver. No survey control, was provided on -site, and our boring locations should
:be 'considered, only. as accurate as :implied' by the methods of measurement used: The
approximate boring locations are shown on the ;attached Figure No..1.
7.2 . DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER TESTS,
Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP),_tests were performed within the upper portions of -the
selected SPT boreholes to help further determine soils consistencies. The DCP tests were
performed at 1 'foot intervals -in general accordance with the procedures developed by Professor
G. F. Sowers and Charles S. Hedges (ASCE, 19664, The basic procedure for the DCP testis as
follows: A 'standard 1.5 inch diameter conical point is driven into the soil by a 15-pound steel
hammer falling 20 inches. Following the seating of the point to a depth of 2 inches, the number
of blows required to drive 'the sampler an additional ,1.75 inches is designated the' penetration
resistance, 'providing an index to _soil strength and density. -
7.3' PAVEMENT CORE SAMPLES
Samples of the existing asphaltic pavement sections were obtained, at four (4) -core locations,
,(Cl through C4) with -a.4 inch nominal' diameter diamond bit core drill, advancing through the
asphaltic pavement, into the underlying base, course -materials.. Afterwards the core. holes. were
backfilled and the surfacing patched with an asphaltic "cold patch" mixture and the core samples
returned to our laboratory for ;subsequent examination..
8.0 ' LABORATORY METHODOLOGIES
8.1' PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS .
We completed 2- 00 sieve` particle size analyses on seven (7)'representative soil :samples...
.These samples were tested according to the procedures listed ASTM D 1140 (Standard Test
Method for.Amount of Material in Soils Finer than -the No. 200 Sieve).. In part, ASTM D 1140
requires a thorough mixing the sample with water and flushing it:through a No. 200 sieve until all:
of the particles smaller than the sieve size leave -the sample.
4
820 Brevard Avenue; Rockledge, 'Florida 32955 (321) 638=0808 Fax (321) 63870978
www.UniversalEn_qineering.com
Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision Universal Project No. 0330.1700052. 0000
Fort Pierce; Saint Lucie County, Florida Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
The percentage of the material finer than the No. 200 sieve helps determines the textural nature
of the soil sample and aids, in evaluating its engineering characteristics. The percentage of
materials passing the #200 sieve is shown on the attached boring logs.
94 SOIL STRATIGRAPHY
The results of our field exploration and laboratory analysis, together with pertinent information
obtained from the SPT borings, such as soil profiles, penetration resistance and stabilized
groundwater levels are shown on the boring logs included in Appendix A. The Key to Boring
Logs, Soil Classification Chart is also included in Appendix A. The soil profiles were prepared
from field logs after the recovered soil samples were examined by a Geotechnical Engineer.
The stratification lines shown on the boring logs represent the- approximate boundaries between
soil types, and may not depict exact subsurface soil conditions. The actual soil boundaries may
be more transitional than depicted. A generalized profile of the soils encountered at our boring
locations is presented in the following Table 11. For more detailed soil profiles, please refer to the
attached boring logs.
TABLE 11
GENERALIZED SOIL PROFILE
Depth
Encountered
'(feet, bls)
Approximate '
Thickness
(feet)
Soil Description
j
Fill soils consisting of fine sands with varying quantities of silt, clay,
Surface
2 to 9 j
gravel, broken shell, and clay lumps [SP, SP-SM, SC]; Loose to!
medium dense.
Highly interlayered strata consisting of fine sands [SP], fine sands
with silt [SP-SM], and clayey fine sands [SC], with varying
2 to 9
1+ to 8+
quantities of broken shell and occasional cemented rock layers;
loose to dense. At boring location 62, the fine sand with silt [SP- .
SM] strata is partially cemented with iron oxide & organic salts and
which is locally known as hardpan.
NOTE, [ ] denotes Unified Soil Classification system designation.
+ indicates strata encountered at boring termination, total thickness undetermined.
9.1 PAVEMENT CORE RESULTS
j The results of our examination and measurement of the core samples taken in the field from the
existing pavement sections are shown in the following Table III:
5
820 bre6cl Avenue, Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321) 638-0806 Fax (321.) 638-0978
www.UniversalEngineering.com
Oakland'Lake Estates Subdivision Universal Project No. ,0330.-1700052.0666
Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
TABLE Ili
PAVEMENT CORE RESULTS
Boring/Core :
Approximate Thickness/Type
Approximate Thickness
Type of Base Course
E,ocatlon� •
of Asphaltic Sur<acing
-
of Base. Course
Materials
(inches}
finches)
- -- - - --
0.7 -S3"
C1
1.083.
8'/s
Coquina
0.888.
C2
1.1 S3;
1 1S3
'
--
g+
Coquina
f
1.6 S3
8,
Coquina
C4 `
1.0 S1
10,
Coquina
--- =0.7
1.- See attached Figure No. 1 for approximatecofe locations,-
2; Classification of. asphaltic, layerings was performed 'visually
'Parameters.
3. Subgrade soils consist' mostly of fine sands with traces of
subgrade).
10.0 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS
16A EXISTING GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS
and may not represent actual FDOT mix —
gavel A .broken .shell [SP] -(Le.. stabiliied
We measured the water levels in the boreholes on May 8, 2017 after, the groundwater was
allowed_ to. stabilize. The groundwater levels 'are shown on ;the attached boring logs. The
groundwater level depths ranged from' 4.3-feet bls-at boring location 66 to 5.7 feet bls at boring
,locations 132 and B7: Fluctuations in groundwater levels should,be anticipated throughout the
year, primarily due to seasonal variations in rainfall, surface runoff, and :other factors that may,
vary from the time the borings were conducted.
'10.2 TYPICAL'WET SEASON HIGH GROUNDWATER LEVEL
The typical 'wet season high groundwater 'level is defined as the highest groundwater level
sustained for a period of ,2 to 4 weeks during the "wet' season of the year, for existing site
condition's, in- a year with average normal -rainfall amounts. Based on historical data, the rainy
season in, Saint .Lucie County, Florida is between June and October of .the year,. In order to
estimate ;the ,wet season water level at the boring locations, many ,factors are examined,
including the following:
a.; Measured groundwater level
b.;: :Drainage -characteristics of existing soil types
c: Season of the year (wet/dry, season)
d,_, Current & historical rainfall data (recent and year-to-date)
e,, Natural relief points (such as lakes, rivers, swamp areas, etc.):.
f. Man=made drainage systems (ditches, 'canals, etc.)
g:• Distances to relief points and man-made drainage systems
6
820 Brevard Avenue,' Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321) 6.38-0808 Fax (321) 638-0978
www..UniversalEngine-ering.com
Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision Universal Project No. 0330.1700062.0000
Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
k. .On -site types of vegetation
is Area topography (ground surface. elevations)
Groundwater level readings were taken on May 8, 2017. According to data from the Southeast
Regional Climate Center. and the National Weather Service, the total rainfall in the previous
month of April for Central Saint Lucie County was 2.2 inches, approximately aftFie normal levels
for the month of April: Year-to=date. rainfall for 2017 through May. 8t' was::approximately 6%Z
inches, roughly 6 inches below the normal level for -this time period.
Based on this information and factors listed above, we estimate that the. typical wet -season high
groundwater levels at the boring locations will be approximately 2Y2 feet above the existing
measured- levels. Please note, however, that peak, stage elevations immediately following
various -intense storm events, may be somewhat higher than the, estimated typical wet season
levels.
Due to the variable silt and clay content within the near surface soils at this site, we suspect that,
there may be occasional isolated pockets of "perched" groundwater:throughout the project area;
particularly, during periods of prolonged :wet, weather. These temporary perched water table
levels may be higher than the. estimated wet season high groundwater levels in above.
11.0 LABORATORY RESULTS
11 A PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS,
The .soil*samples submitted for. analysis were 'classified `as fine sands, [SP].' The .percentage of
-soil sizes passing the #200 sieve size are shown on the boring ;logs at the approximate' depth
sampled.
12,0 ' ANALYSIS AND GENERAL COMMENTS
'12.1 PROPOSED -BUILDING AREAS
The removal of site vegetation, and -roots, along with other construction activities, will further
loosen surficial soils to various depths. To provide a homogeneous; 'compacted; sandy soil
system. underneath the proposed_ foundations -and floor. slabs, .for the , proposed residences,.
densification of 'at . least the upper 2, feet of the existing surficial, loose soils and subsequent
additional. fill -soils will be necessary: This, should create a soil mat capable of dissipating the
building loads over any remaining loose strata at depth.
We believe that this can be effectively accomplished using conventional site 'preparation
procedures, including a comprehensive root: raking and stripping procedure to remove
vegetation, root mats; debris and organic topsoils; and then an extensive proof -rolling, and
densification program for .the surficial soils and, subsequent structural fill. Assuming that such
procedures are properly performed, we .anticipate that conventional, shallow spread footing
foundations may Used to supportconventional one,tb two sryc toresidehtial Iconstruction:
7
do Brevard Avenue; Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321) 631-0808. Fax (321) 638-00"
www.UniversalEngineering.com
Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision Univ_ ersad Project No. 0330.1700052.0000
Port Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
13:0 CLOSURE
We'appreciate.this:opportunity to be of service as your geotechnical consultant on this phase .of
the project and look forward to providing follow up explorations and .geotechnical engineering
analyses as the project progresses through the design phase. If you have any questions
concerning this report or when we may be of any -further service, please contact,us,
8' I
.820 Brevard Avenue, Ro-46dge, Florida 32955 (321). 638-0808 Fax (321) 638-096'
www. Un iversalEngineering.com
� 7
UNIVERSAL
ENGINEERING SCIENCES•
N
Approximate SPT Boring Location
Note: Figure 'is 'based upon a Google Earth
aerial Photograph.
■B
OAKLAND ESTATES SUBDIVISION
HUMMINGBIRD WAY ; 1
FORT PIERCE, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BORING LOCATION PLAN
NN BY: CB _ DATE May 16.,2017 CHECKEDBY: .4F Mid 15,ZQ17
.E: REPORT No: PAGE No:
1' = 200' 0330.17Fiduio No i'1+
PROJECT NO.; 0330.1700052.0000
J-UNOVER.SAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES
BORING LOG REPORT NO.:
APPENDIX: A
Oakland Estates Subdivision
BORING DESIGNATION: BI
SHEET.
I Of I
Hummingbird Way
SECTION: TOWNSHIP:
SOUTH RANGE:
EAST
Fort Pierce, Florida
G.S. ELEVATION (ft):
DATE STARTED:
-
514117
SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN'
WATER TABLE (ft): 4.6
DATE FINISHEDt'
6/4117
DATE OF READING: 51812017
DRILLED BY:
TM, RP, Mc
EST. W.SW.T. (it):
TYPE OF SAMPLING:
W
IL
BLOWS
Uij
-
j
0
K
ORG.
LU
PER 6"
>
DESCRIPTION
-200
Mc
(INJ
COKTa
93
INCREMENT
z
O
HR.)
A-
L
fine -SAND with traces of'clay lu[6ps-(Fill ), brown, [SP]
4.1
T4
14
V
fine SAND with gravel, broken shell, and clay lumps (Fill),
brown, [SP]
10.6
5-6-12
18-
I FEclayey
V,
fine SAND with traces of broken -shell (Fill),-brdwn, [SC] —
7-1-4
11
clayey fineSANDwithtraces-oforganics- dark brown, [SC]
BORING TERMINATED AT 10'
r
c
Z
v
PROJECT NO.: 0330.1700052.0000
UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES REPORT NO.:
BORING LOG - _ -
APPENDIX: A
Oakland Estates Subdivision
Hummingbird Way
Fort Pierce, Florida
SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN
BORING DESIGNATION: B2 SHEET: 9 Of I
SECTION: TOWNSHIP: SOUTH RANGE: EAST
G.S. ELEVATION (ft): DATE STARTED: 614117
t
WATER TABLE (it): 5.7 DATE FINISHED: 514117
DATE OF READING: 6/8/2017 DRILLED BY: TM, RP, MC
EST. W.S.W.T. (ft): TYPE OF SAMPLING:
BLOWS
ut
7
_
K
ORG.
PER 8" ;!
;
3
DESCRIPTION
200
I
MC
(INJ I
CONT.
o f
y
IN
0
(Yl
(/�)
HR.)
M)
fine SAND with -traces of clay lumps (Fill), brown, [SP]
;Aic
3.0
5;0
J
5-6-16 IJ
6'
5-22-26 +
22`
j
fine SAND, grey- [SP]- _ - -- - -. _ - _
7-R 1
R'
I
fine SAND with silt, dark brown, (hardpan) [SP-SM]
clayey fine SAND, brown, [SC]- - -
6-7-8
15
.
I
64-4
8
I
�
clayey fine SAND with occasional cemented rock layers, grey,, -
�
I
[SC];10
I
BORING TERMINATED AT 10'
" DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) VALUES
j
R - DENOTES REFUSAL TO PENETRATION WITH DYNAMIC
I
,I
CONE PENETROMETER.
l; I
I
u
PROJECT NO, C: _ 0330.1700062.0000
UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES - -
BOWNG LOG REPORT NO.:
V APPENDIX: A
PROJECT:
Oakland Estates Subdivision
Hummingbird Way
Fort Pierce, Florida
CLIENT:
I
LOCATION:
SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN
REMARKS:
BORING DESIGNATION: B3 SHEET: 1 Of 1
SECTION: TOWNSHIP: SOUTH RANGE: EAST
G.S:• ELEVATION (ft): DATE STARTED: 614/17
WATER TABLE (ft): 6.3. DATE FINISHED: 6/4117
DATE OF READING: 618/2017 DRILLED BY. TM, RP, MC
EST. W.S.W.T: (ft): TYPE OF SAMPLING:
lu
. 2
BLOWS
PERK
W
$
°IL m
w �,
DESCRIPTION
zoo
Mc
�
CONT+,
w
c
y
INCREMENT
.,NJ
HR.)
+
(SL)
'
w;;•::;
fine SAND with silt and traces of clay lumps (Fill), brown;-
[SP-SM]
9-23-28
23•,
5-18-20
18"
fine SAND; dark brown, [SP] -
04.5
'•.-, ,
5-6-7
.13'
; ;' �
18,3
f.'SANI)
fine with -silt, brown, [SP-SM] - - - -
-
6-7-9
16
•t
I
I'
I
'
•r••
�
rli
I
__ - - __ _
I
^fine SAND, grey, SP]
5-7-8
15
I1
3.9
19.5
••c
BORING TERMINATED AT 10'
{
;
' DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) VALUES
-7 7
PRO'E . CT No _.,0330.1700052.0000,
UNIVER
SAL ENGINEERIING'SCIENCES REPORT NO.,
BORING LOG
APPENDIX:- A
Oakland Estates Subdivision
Hummingbird Way
Fort Pierce, Florida
SEE'BORING LOCATION PLAN
BORING DESIGNATION:
GNATION: 194 SHEET:. I Of I
S . ECTION:' TOWNSHIP: SOUTH RANGE- EAST
G, S,,ELEVATION (11): DATE STARTED: 514117
WATER TABLE (ft): GA' -DATE FINISHED: 614/17
DATE OF READING:' 51812017 ;DRILLED BY: TM
Itp. kAc
EST. W.S.W.T. (fty 'TYPE OF SAMPLING:,
SLOWS
PER 6
F2
DESCPUPT104
-200
MC
K
ORG I'
1
1
3:
.
'(-y
VNJ
CONT.-
liCREMENT]
Z>
Or
CA)
HR.)
L .....
C
-gravelbrok n shelf, andclay himps fine SAND wiffirsilt;
r
1Sp7SM1
t
3-18-29
118•.
11-21-25
23*
5
—
b
flftaSAND WlWpllkdark brown; [SP-SM]
S-1244
T
14-12-16,
217
_fine SAND with slitandbroken shell, brown, [SP-SM
sy
14-16 16 1
32
10
50RING TERMINATED'AT -10'
DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) VALUES
L15
E
} UN-f.VERSAL S, (11fNEERING 80EN.CES PRaJECTNO.:� 0330.1700062.0000 j
1 REPORT NO
BORING LOG -- -- _- - -j
APPENDIX. - A
)akland Estates Subdivision
lummingbird Way
'ort Plercei Florida
IEE BORING LOCATION PLAN
BORING DESIGNATION: B.JS SHEET: 7 Of •1
SECTION: TOWNSHIP: SOUTH RANGE: EAST
G.S.ELEVATION(ft):' DATE :STARTED: •514117
-WATER TABLE.(ft): 4:6 DATE FINISHED: 514117
DATE OF READING; 8812017 DRILLED BY" TiN, RP, MC
EST. W.S;W.T. (i4): TYPE OF SAMPLING:
i
BLOWS
r
L, O .
i m
I
1
200
MC
K
ORG
6
C
w
r
DESCRIPTION
(INJ
CONT-
INCPE
REMENT
—
"traces
fine SAND with of gravel. broken shell; and clay lurrtpsi
i,� f
' �I
P, (Filk brown, [SP]
J.
.
I
I
4t Sri
�
I
a,4
ril
p
3-4
2=R
R
Ysn,
i
ir
.`, r,
i
i�
•
#
8-R
R�
i
i
4
♦
2-21 R
- 21•
r(
u: ,{
i
10-15 15
yy
Y
t
(fl
fine SAND With i lif and fret®s of brok®n shellgray, [SP-SM]
.
,
f
i1 4t
15
a?
4
II
a 4
s
{
- - —
"
-A ,1
'
E�
I
'" DYNAMIC;CONE I'ENETROMETER,.(DCP`) VALUES
j
'R = DENOTES'REFUSAL TO PENETRATION WITH DYNAMIC
4
O
_!CME PNETROME7ER
+i
t T
i I�
ll
•i
i
'
i
n
I
0330.1700062.0000
PROJECT
Ek' SAL--: 0 S L INEERING-SCIENCES
REPORT NO BORINGL66�
APPENDIX
Wieland Estates Subdivision
lurnmingbird Way
art Pierce, Florida
EE BORING LOCATION PLAN
BORING DESIGNATION: BIS I Of
SECTION: TOWNSHIP: SOUTH RANGE- !EAST
G.S. ELEVATION (ft): DATE STARTED: 614117
DATE FINISHED-.' 614117
DATE OF READING:' 51612017 DRILLED BY. Tid. RP . MC .
m EgT.V�S.W T.-(ft):- TYPE OF SAMPLING:
BLOWS
US,
-0j
m
M6
7
K
ORG�*,
PER 6"
T.
gill
_DESCRIPTION
-200
(IN./
i -CONI.,!
INCREMENT
•
N
777
iv
-fine SAND with silt and tracesofbrown
(Sp-S
Rk
17-20-25
20
It
-
� , [SP] 7—
ini SAND, dne-y,
5-19-21
19*,
V
14
AN
gtBy, [SC]o;IBjy6ykn9:S-, P
"-6
-14
y
6-6-6
12
BORING TERMINATED AT 10'
DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (bcp) VALUES
R - DENOTES REFUSAL TO PENETRATION WITH DYNAMIC
CONE PENETROMETER.
UNIVERSAL ENG.IIV�±ERING SCIENCES iPROJECTNO.: 0330.1700092.0000
BORING LOG REPORT NO.: -- -
APPENDIX: A -
PROJECT-
Oakland Estates Subdivision
Hummingbird Way
Fort Pierce.' Florida
I
CLIENT:
LOCATION:
SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN
REMARKS:
BORING DESIGNATION: B7 SHEET: 1 Of I
SECTION: TOWNSHIP: SOUTH RANGE: EAST
G.S. ELEVATION (ft): DATE STARTED: 514117
WATER TABLE (ft): 6.7 DATE FINISHED: M4117
DATE OF READING: 61812017 DRILLED BY: TM, RP, MC
EST. WS:WT. (ft): TYPE OF SAMPLING:
a
BLOWSui
F
' m
200
MC
K
ORG.
o
o
• PER6"
INCREMENT
> ,
II
c�
6
DESCRIPTION
(Y')
, G
(x)
(IN.1
CONT;,
Z
y
S
Hai
'
-SAND
i fine -with silt and clay lumps (Fill), brown, [SP-SM]
21-R
R' f
'r 4
' +`• ,
,
flne SAND, -grey, [SP]-
10-24-26
24`
'1
. t. •r•`'
f
�
1.6
3 4
I
•I
�
'
't:ti%%••ta
•I
-
7- 7.7
r•.xt.
•Lh.
•
:;til L
i
- — - -- — -
clayey fine SAND, -grey; [SC] - -
i
-
5-5-5
10
I
10
7.9-10
19
BORING TERMINATED AT 10'
"DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) VALUES
.i
R - DENOTES REFUSAL TO PENETRATION WITH DYNAMIC
I
I
1)
1 �
CONE PENETROMETER.
I
I•
'
i�
1
I,
Kt<Y TO SORING LOGS
SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART"
0
Sand or Gravel [SP,SW,GP,GWI
Sand or Gravel vnth Silt
or Clay [SP-SM,SP-SC] ;I
12� �.4.r......
W
Siltyor'Cla"'G :Sand. -
Or Gravel{SM;SGGM,GC],
0
y.
N
{�
Sendy or GFaveUq Silt orC[a_y_
{ML CL M -CL.MH CH OL;O
(
70
II
ISjit or Ciayy with Sand or Gravel;
'
�(Ml.�yCl ML;CI,�MH,CH,,QL,OH]
�F
L M�,CL,MH,CH,OL,OFII
[ML,C100
6o
o40
v 30-
F
20
o.,
to;
r
1101,N S"IRSAL
ENGINEERING
SCIE_NCES,, INC.
gonommompa
®®®N
EEM®®
®NO®®®
®®MNM®®®N
►gin®i�i"'®�®■®�
0 10, %20 30 ^ 40 50 60 70 90 ^ 50 100
LIQUID LIMIT
PLASTICITY CHART
GROUP NAME AND SYMBOL
COARSE GRAINED SOILS
FINE GRAINED SOILS_
• ' `'
• WELL -GRADED
SANDS [SW]'
-`
s+ WELL -GRADED
GRAVELS [GWJ
INORGANIC SILTS
6LIGHTPLASTICITY
t
POORLY GRADED
G, SANDS [SP]
6 el a r POORLYGRADED
GRAVELS [GP]
4
INORGANIC SILTYCLAY'
LOW PLASTICITY
f 1 POORLY -GRADED;
SANDS WITH SILT
POORLY -GRADED
°, r GRAVELS WITH SILT,
INORGANICCLAYS
LOW TO MEDIUM
[SP SMj
pa [GP OM]
PLASTICITY [CLI
r POORL -GRADED
SANDS WITH CLAY
[SP-SCI
POORLY GRADED'
° ° GRAVELS WITH.CLAY
.. = -
IGP-GC]'
r� }t
INORGANIC SILTS HIGH
-, PLASTICITY [MH]
p"
i SILTY SANDS
' [SM]
d ° 1ILTYGRAVELS' y' INORGANIC CLAYS HIGH
e ! IGMI I PLASTICITY [CH] '
CLAYkYiIANbS
CLAYEY GRAVELS.
I ISC]IN
ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 2457 -- UNIFIED SOIL
-
t' SILTY CLAYEY_ SANDS
k 15 [SCSM]
CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM.
r
• LOCALLY MAY BE KNOWN At MUCK.! ;
NOTES:
8' ; DENOTES DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) VALUE
R - DENOTES REFUSAL TO PENETRATION `
P - DENOTES PENETRATION WITH ONLY WEIGHT OF DRIVE HAMMER
NIE . DENOTES GROUNDWATER TABLE NOT ENCOUNTERED,
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
.ORGANIC SILTSICLAYS
LOW PLASTICITY (OLr''
ORGANIC SILTSICLAYS.
MEDIUM TO HIGH p
PLASTICITY [OHr: is '
PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS 'I
WITH HIGH ORGANIC
CONTENTS[PTr'
!I
f
'RELATIVE DENSITY {
(SAND AND GRAVEL) it
VERY LOOSE -11to4BlowsM. fl
r LOOSE - 6 to 10 BlowslR.
.MEDIUM DENSE -11 to 30 BIowSHL
DENSE - 31 to SO Blowelft.
VERY DENSE_.-_ more than 60 BlowsM. II
lI i
'CONSISTENCY
(SILT AND CLAY)
'VERY SOFT- 0 to 2 BlowsAt
• SOFT - 3 to 4 Blowslit. �t
FIRM -5to8WOWS& ;
STIFF - 91016 BlowSM. ,
VERY STIFF -17 to 30 Blowsllt' ! '
HARD -more than30Blow&4 I,
°: DUAL�SYPA MS ARE USED TO INDICATE. BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS .1� APPENDIX AA
GeoteFh�ical-Engipeering
ie Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA)
is prepared this advisory to help. you _ assumedly
client representative - interpret and apply this
)otechnical-engineering report as effectively`
t possible. In that way, clients can benefit from
lowered exposure to'the subsurface problems
iat; for decades', have been a principal cause of
instruction delays,_cost overruns, claims, and
sputes. If you have questions or want more
formation about any of the issues discussed below;
intact your GBA-member geotechnical engineer.
rtive involvement In the'Geoprofessiohal Business
ssociation exposes geotechnical engineers to a
ide array of risk -confrontation techniques that can
of genuine benefit for everyone involved with a
)nstruction project.
ieotechnical-Engineering Services.Are.Performed for.
pecific Purposes, Persons, and Projects
eotechnieal engineers structure their services to'meet the specific
;eds of.their clients,.A geotechnical-engineering study conducted
r a given civil engineer will not likely meet the, needs of a civil=
orks constructor.or even a different civil engineer. Because.each
:otechnical-engineering study is unique, each geotechaical-
igineering report is unique, prepared safely for the client; Those who
ly on,a geotechnical-engineering report prepared for a different client
n be seriously misled. No one except authorized client representatives
could rely on this geotechnical-engineering report without first
inferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared, it. -And no one
not even you, - should apply `this report for any purpose or project except
e one originally contemplated.
ead this Report In Full,
ostly problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical-
igineering report did not read it in its entirety. Do not rely on an .
:ecutive summary Do not read selected elements only, Read this report
full..-. _
*ou Need to Inform Your Geotechnical Engineer
about Change
Your geotechnical engineer considered unique, project -specific factors
when designing the,
study behind this report and'developing the
dep confirmation-endent recommendations the report conveys. A few.
typical factors include:
• the client's goals, objectives, budget, schedule, and
risk -management preferences;
• the general nature of the -structure involved, its size;
configuration; and performance criteria;
the structure's location and orientation on the site; and
other planned or existing site 'improvements, such as
ret#ffiftfgwalls, access roads_; parking lots_, and
undeTround utilities.
Typical "changes that could erode a the reliability of this report indd&
those that affect -
the site's'size or shape;
the function of the proposed structure, as when its
changed from a parking garage to an office building, or
from a light -industrial plant toa refrigerated warehouse;
• the elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or
weight of the proposed structure;
• the composition of the design team; or
• project ownership.
As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project
changes - even minor ones - and request an assessment of their
impact. The geotechnical engineer who prepared this report cannot accept
responsibility or liability for problems;'that arise because the-geotechnical
engineer was not informed about developments the engineer otherwise
would have considered.
This Report May Not. Be Reliable
Do not rely on this'report if your geotechnical engineer prepared it:
fora different client'
• for a different project;
• for a different site (that may or may not include all or a
portion of the original site); or
• before important events occurred at the site or adjacent
to it; e.g., man-made events like construction or
environmental remediation, or natural events like floods,
droughts, earthquakes; or groundwater fluctuations.
Note, too, that it could be unwise to rely on a geotechnical-engineering
report whose reliability may have been affected by the passage -of time,
because of factors like changed subsurface conditions; new or modified
codes, standards, or -regulations; or new techniques or tools. if your
geotechnical engineer has not indicated an `apply -by" date on the report;
ask what it should be, and, in general,-ifyou are the least bit uncertain
about the continued reliability of this report, contact your geotechnical
engineer -before applying it,:A minor: amount of additional testing qr
analysis.= if any is required at all - could prevent major problems.
Most of the "Findings" Related in This R_eportAre
Professiona 1, Opin Ions
Before construction begins; geotechnical engineers explore a sites
subsurface through various sampling and testing procedures.
Geotechnical engineers can observe actual subsurface conditions only at
those specific locations where sampling and testing were performed. The
data derived from that sampling and testing were reviewed by your
geotechnical engineer, who then applied professional judgment -to'
form opinions about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual
sitewide-subsurface conditions may differ - maybe significantly _ from
those indicated in this report. Confront that riskby retaining your
geotechnical engineer to serve on the.design team from project start to
project finish, so the i_n_dividua_ 1 can_pfavide informed guidance quickly,
wheneve' needed.
Report's Recommendations Are
The recommendations included in this report - including any options
or alternatives - are confirmation -dependent. In other words, they are
not final, because the geotechnical engineer who developed them relied
heavily on judgment and opinion to do so. Your geotechnical engineer
can finalize the recommendations only after observing actual subsurface
conditions revealed during construction. If through observation your
I
eotechnical engineer confirms that the conditions assumed to exist
actually do exist, the recommendations can be relied upon, assuming
I
o other changes have occurred. The geotechnical engineer who prepared
this report cannot assume responsibility or liability for confirmation -
dependent recommendations if you fail to retain that engineer to perform
construction observation.
tis Report Could Be Misinterpreted
her design professionals misinterpretation of geotechnical-
gineering reports has resulted in costly problems, Confront that risk
having your geotechnical engineer serve as a full-time member of the
;ign team, to:
confer with other design -team members,
help develop specifications,
review pertinent elements of other design professionals
plans and specifications, and
be on hand quickly whenever geotechnical-engineering
guidance is needed.
You should also confront the risk of constructors misinterpreting this
report. Do so by retaining your geotechnical engineer to participate in
i prebid and preconstruction conferences and to perform construction
Give Constructors a Complete Report and Guidance
�ome owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can shift
unanticipated -subsurface -conditions liability to constructors by limiting
the information they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent
the costly, contentious problems this practice has caused, include the
complete geotechnical-engineering report, along with any attachments
or appendices, with your contract documents, but be certain to note
conspicuously that you've included the material for informational
purposes only. To avoid misunderstanding, you may also want to note
that "informational purposes" means constructors have no right to rely
on the interpretations, opinions, conclusions, or recommendations in
the report, but they may rely on the factual data relative to the specific
times, locations, and depths/elevations referenced. Be certain that
constructors know they may learn about specific project requirements,
including options selected from the report, only from the design
drawings and specifications. Remind constructors that they may
perform their own studies if they want to, and be sure to allow enough
time to permit them to do so. Only then might you be in a position
to give constructors the information available to you, while requiring
them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming
from unanticipated conditions. Conducting prebid and preconstruction
conferences can also be valuable in this respect.
Read Responsibility Provisions Closely
Some client representatives, design professionals, and constructors do
not realize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other
engineering disciplines. That lack of understanding has nurtured
unrealistic expectations that have resulted in disappointments, delays,
cost overruns, claims, and disputes. To confront that risk, geotechnical
engineers commonly include explanatory provisions in their reports.
Sometimes labeled"limitations, many of these provisions indicate
where geotechnical engineers' responsibilities begin and end, to help
others recognize their own responsibilities and risks. Read these
provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should
respond fully and frankly.
Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered
The personnel, equipment, and techniques used to. perform an
environmental study - e.g., a "phase -one' or "phase -two' environmental
site assessment - differ significantly from those used to perform
a geotechnical_engineering study. For that reason, a geotechnical-
engineering report does not usually relate any environmental findings,
conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of
encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants.
Unanticipated subsurface environmental problems have led to project
failures. If you have not yet obtained your own environmental
information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk -management .
guidance. As a general rule, do not rely on an environmental report
prepared for a different client, site, or project, or that is more than six
months old.
Obtain Professional Assistance to Deal with Moisture
Infiltration and Mold
While your geotechnical engineer may have addressed groundwater,
water infiltration, or similar issues in this report, none of the engineer's
services were designed, conducted, or intended to prevent uncontrolled
migration of moisture - including water vapor - from the soil through
building slabs and walls and into the building interior, where it can
cause mold growth and material -performance deficiencies. Accordingly,
proper implementation of thegeotechnical engineer's recommendations
will not of itself be sufficient toprevent moisture infiltration. Confront
the risk of moisture infiltration by including building -envelope or mold
specialists on the design team. Geotechnical engineers are not building -
envelope or mold specialists.
I
GEOPROFESSIONAL
BUSINESS
�. 19 ASSOCIATION
Telephone: 301 /565-2733
e-mail: info@geoprofessional.org www.gdoprofessi4iiidl.org
Copyright 2016 by Geoprofesslodal Business Association (GBA). Duplication, reproduction, or copying of this document, in whole or in part, by any means whatsoever, is strictly
prohibited, except with GBAs specific written permission. Excerpting, quoting, or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission
of GBA, and only for purposes ofscholarly research or book review. Only members of GBA may use this document or its wording as a complement to or as an element ofa report ofany
kind, Any other firm, ind`vidual, or other entity that so uses this document without being a GBA member could be committing negligent