G-Street Sewer Improvements - Geotechnical Report

GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
G Street Sewer Improvement Project

Blaine, Washington
HWA Project No. 2021-010-21
Prepared for
David Evans & Associates, Inc.
June 4, 2021
Geotechnical Engineering
Pavement Engineering
Geoenvironmental
Hydrogeology
Inspection & Testing
June 4, 2021
David Evans & Associates, Inc.

14432 S.E. Eastgate Way, Suite 400
Bellevue, Washington 98007
Attn: Rodney Langer, P.E.

Subject: GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
G STREET SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
CITY OF BLAINE, WASHINGTON
Mr. Langer,
This report presents the results of geotechnical engineering studies for design and construction of
sewer improvements within the City of Blaine, Washington. This report includes the results of
our field explorations and our geotechnical engineering analysis and recommendations for the
design and construction of the sewer installation and associated manholes along the project
alignment.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide geotechnical engineering services for this project.
Please contact us if you have any questions regarding this report or require additional
information or services.
Respectfully submitted,
HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.
Ralph Boirum, P.E.

Geotechnical Engineer, Principal
Enclosure: Geotechnical Report
21312 30th Dr. SE, STE. 110, Bothell, WA 98021 | 425.774.0106 | hwageo.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................1
1.1 GENERAL .......................................................................................................1
1.2 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING ............................................................................1
2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION AND LABORATORY TESTING ................................2
2.1 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS ........................................................................2
2.2 LABORATORY TESTING .................................................................................3
3.0 SITE CONDITIONS ................................................................................................4
3.1 SURFACE CONDITIONS ...................................................................................4
3.2 GENERAL GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ................................................................4
3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ............................................................................5
3.4 GROUND WATER CONDITIONS ......................................................................5
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................7
4.1 OPEN-TRENCH CONSTRUCTION .....................................................................7
Excavation and Temporary Shoring ..............................................7
Shoring Methods ...........................................................................8
Trench Base Preparation and Pipe Bedding ..................................8
Settlement ......................................................................................9
Fill and Compaction ......................................................................9
4.2 DEWATERING CONSIDERATION .....................................................................10
4.3 TRENCHLESS OPTION FOR SEWER REPLACEMENT .........................................10
Pipe Bursting Considerations ........................................................11
Possible Ground Displacement .....................................................11
Pipe Bursting and Adjacent Utilities .............................................12
4.4 MANHOLES ....................................................................................................12
4.5 PAVEMENT RESTORATION .............................................................................12
4.6 DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONSIDERATION ...................................................12
4.7 WET WEATHER EARTHWORK ........................................................................13
5.0 CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS......................................................................13
6.0 REFERENCES .........................................................................................................15
Table of Contents (Continued)
LIST OF FIGURES (FOLLOWING TEXT)

Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Site and Exploration Plan
Figure 3 Geologic Map of Project Site
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Field Exploration
Figure A-1 Legend of Terms and Symbols Used on Exploration Logs
Figures A-2 – A-15 Logs of Borings BH-1 through BH-14
Appendix B: Laboratory Testing

Figures B-1 – B-3 Summary of Material Properties
Figure B-4 Atterberg Limits
Figures B-5 – B-6 Particle-Size Analysis of Soils
ii
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
CITY OF BLAINE, WASHINGTON
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
This report summarizes the results of the geotechnical engineering studies conducted in support
of sewer line improvements in Blaine, Washington. Our field work included site reconnaissance
and drilling 14 borings along the proposed trunk sewer improvements. Appropriate laboratory
tests were conducted on selected soil samples to determine relevant engineering properties of the
subsurface soils. Geotechnical engineering analyses were conducted to develop
recommendations for design and installation of the sewer lines and associated works.
1.2 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING

The City of Blaine (City) is planning to construct new sewer pipelines and manholes as well as
upsize segments of sewer pipelines at various locations east of I-5 within the City as part of its G
Street Sewer Improvement Project. Approximate location of the project site is shown on the
Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The project segments and approximate borehole locations are shown on
the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 2. Relevant information pertaining to these locations is
summarized in Table 1 below. The total length of sewer pipelines in this project is
approximately 8,200 feet. The depths of the sewer pipelines vary from approximately 3 to 18
feet.
Installation of the new sewer mains will require excavations supported by trench box or vertical
shoring with dewatering along most alignments. Restoration of pavement will be required once
the excavations are completed for those sewer lines within existing roadways. Pipe bursting is
being considered to upsize the existing pipe along portions of the alignments.
Specific projects are understood as follows:
Segment 21-A – G Street, starting in the west from near F Street and 4th Street and extending
along G Street to 10th Street. The G Street portion of the project will consist of a new sewer
pipeline and two new manholes. The portion northwest toward F Street and 4th Street will
consist of upsizing a portion of Trunk H4.
Segment 21 B – G Street, along two short segments at 12th Street and 14th Street. Existing sewer
pipelines will be upsized.
Blaine Sewerline Geotechnical Report FINAL 1 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.

June 4, 2021
Segment 21 C – 8th Street, between D Street and H Street. The existing sewer pipeline of Trunk
G2 will be upsized, with a new pipeline connection to be made in the southern end between an
alley and H Street.
Segment 21 D – From H Street at 6th Street at the northwest, down Elm Drive and through alley
and south on Mitchell Ave and east on Boblett Street. The existing sewer pipeline of Trunk H5
will be upsized.
Segment 21 E – Pacific Highway Port of Entry, SR-543 truck route (east-west portion). Existing
sewer pipelines will be upsized.
2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION AND LABORATORY TESTING
2.1 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS

In support of the design and construction of the proposed project, HWA drilled 14 exploratory
borings, designated BH-1 through BH-14, to determine the subsurface and ground water
conditions. The locations of the borings are presented in Table 1 and shown on Figure 2.
Monitoring wells were installed in Boreholes BH-1, BH-4, BH-7, BH-9, BH-13, and BH-14.
Drilling was performed in asphalt roadway pavements within the right of way (ROW) to depths
ranging from about 11½ feet to 26½ feet. Eight borings were drilled on April 20 and 21, 2021
by Environmental Drilling Inc. of Snohomish, Washington, under subcontract to HWA using a
Mobile B-61 drill rig equipped with a hollow-stem auger. Six subsequent borings were drilled
on April 28 and 29, 2021 by Cascade Environmental, LLC of Bothell, Washington, under
subcontract to HWA using a CME 75 drill rig equipped with a hollow-stem auger.
In each boring, Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampling was performed at selected depth
intervals and the SPT resistance (“N-value”) of the soil was logged. Standard Penetration
Testing (SPT) was performed using a 2-inch outside diameter split-spoon sampler driven by a
140-pound automatic hammer. During the test, a soil sample was obtained by driving the
sampler 18 inches into the soil with the hammer free-falling 30 inches. The number of blows
required for each 6-inches of penetration was recorded. If a total of 50 blows was recorded
within a single 6-inch interval, the test was terminated, and the blow count was recorded as
50 blows for the number of inches of penetration. The number of blows required for the last two
6-inch intervals of penetration were deemed the N-value, which provides an indication of relative
density of granular soils or the relative consistency of cohesive soils.
Two relatively undisturbed samples were obtained in Shelby tubes from two of the borings (BH-
1 and BH-6). Sampling with a Shelby tube consists of pushing a 4-inch diameter, thin-walled
steel tube (bolted to the bottom of the sampling rods) 30 inches into the bottom of the borehole
using drill rig hydraulics. The tube is allowed to sit a few minutes before retrieval to ensure full
recovery.
A geologist from HWA logged the explorations and recorded pertinent information, including
sample depths, stratigraphy, soil descriptions, and ground water occurrence. Soil samples
obtained from the explorations were classified in the field and representative portions were

June 4, 2021
placed in plastic bags. These soil samples were then taken to our Bothell, Washington,
laboratory for further examination and testing. Soils were classified in general accordance with
the classification system described in Figure A-1, which also provides a key to the exploration
log symbols. The boring logs are presented in Figure A-2 to Figure A-14. The stratigraphic
contacts shown on the exploration logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types;
actual transitions may be more gradual. The soil and ground water conditions depicted are only
for the specific date and location reported and, therefore, are not necessarily representative of
conditions at other locations and times.
Table 1: Sewer Line Improvement Sites and Borehole ID
Approx. Max. Depth

Borehole
Segment Location Length of Sewer
ID
(feet) (feet)
G Street, from near F Street & 4th Street to 10th BH-1 to

21A 2,820 18
Street BH-5
BH-6 &
21B G Street, at 12th Street and 14th Street 960 5
BH-7
BH-8 &
21C 8th Street, between D Street and H Street 950 10
BH-9
BH-10 to
21D H Street & 6th Street to east on Boblett Street 2,680 11
BH-13
Pacific Highway Port of Entry, SR-543 truck
21E 790 10 BH-14
route
2.2 LABORATORY TESTING

Laboratory tests were conducted on selected samples retrieved from our explorations to
characterize relevant engineering and index parameters of the soils encountered at the site. The
tests included visual classifications, determination of natural moisture contents, grain size
distribution analyses, Atterberg limits, and torvane shear strength testing of relatively
undisturbed clay samples. All testing was conducted in general accordance with appropriate
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standards. A brief description of
laboratory test methodology is presented in Appendix B. The test results are presented in
Appendix B or displayed on the boring logs in Appendix A, as appropriate.

June 4, 2021
3.0 SITE CONDITIONS
3.1 SURFACE CONDITIONS

Surface conditions for Segments 21-A and 21-B extend along parts of G Street. These segments
are in a generally flat-lying area between I-5 and SR-543, along and to a short distance north and
south of G Street, and east of SR-543. The land was developed with a rectangular street grid
with alleyways. The streets grades are at similar to the grades on adjacent residential properties.
Development consists primarily of single-family homes. To the east of SR-543, the 21-B
segment is adjacent to woods to the north, with a gradual gain in elevation northward, and
commercial properties to the south.
Segment 21-C (Trunk G2) extends 2½ blocks north from G Street along 8th Street. This
alignment extends into a through a flat-lying residential area.
The Segment 21-D (Trunk H5) is developed with single-family homes along the east side of I-5
and west of Mitchell Avenue, and the large property with the Blaine Public School complex to
the east of Mitchell Avenue and north of Boblett Street. The area is generally flat lying.
The Segment 21-E area is within a flat area at the international border above the rest of town.
The segment runs east-west through the Border Patrol station for truck crossing, within a parking
area and exit lanes. The east-west sewer alignment is generally flat.
3.2 GENERAL GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS

General geologic information within the project area was obtained from the Geologic Map of
Western Whatcom County, Washington (Easterbrook, 1976). A portion of this geologic map
covering the project area is shown on Figure 3. The map indicates that the geologic units within
the project areas consist of late Pleistocene glacial deposits. Segments 21A through 21D are in an
area mapped as younger glacial outwash deposits of the Sumas Stade of the Frasier Glaciation.
The northeast portion of town, which includes Segment 21E, is mapped as the Bellingham Drift
of the older Everson Interstade.
The truck border station area is mapped as Modified Land on a map entitled Geomorphic Map of
Western Whatcom County, Washington (Kovanen et al, 2020). Furthermore, Lidar imagery from
2017 available on the Washington DNR Lidar Portal (web site) shows in the truck border station
area a north-facing cut immediately south of the east-west portion of 12th Street and the Visitor
Lot. The geomorphic map legend indicates that the Modified Land consists of areas of old
quarries and settling ponds.
Glacial Outwash of the Sumas Stade mantles a broad area of the lower Fraser Valley, with
gravel and cobbles near the Canadian border. It was deposited in an outwash plain by meltwater
from the Sumas Stade glacier. The Nooksack River has incised a floodplain within this plain.
Silt and Clay of the Sumas Stade is mapped nearby by, east of Birch Bay. It is poorly stratified
and considered to be of estuarine origin.
Bellingham Drift mostly mantles broad upland surfaces above the outwash plain and crops out as
the uppermost unit in the region northward from Bellingham to the Canadian border. This unit

June 4, 2021
consists of glaciomarine drift, an unsorted mixture largely consisting of clay and containing
variable amounts of silt, sand, pebbles, cobbles and boulders. The poor sorting characteristic
was a function of particles dropping out of glacial ice floating on seawater, to the seafloor below.
It is of low relative density due to not becoming over-consolidated by ice, as the subsequent
Sumas Stade ice did not reach this far south.
3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

Our interpretations of subsurface conditions are based on the results of our field explorations,
published geologic mapping, review of available geologic and geotechnical data, and our
experience in similar geologic settings. The soils observed in the borings are generally
consistent with the published geologic map.
Each major material unit is described below, with materials interpreted as being youngest in
origin and nearest to the surface described first.
• Fill: Possible cut-and-fill sand and gravel was interpreted from cuttings in the upper foot
or so of borehole BH-9. In BH-14, nearly the upper 15 feet consisted of fill, with the
upper 2.5 feet or so consisting of gravelly, silty sand and the remainder consisting of soft
to very soft clay with variable sand and gravel content.
• Glacial Outwash – Sumas Stade: Loose, gravelly sand to sandy gravel was
encountered in boreholes BH-1 through BH-13, beneath the pavement to depths of from
less than 2½ feet to a depth of about 4½ feet. As the first sampling attempt in each
boring was at 2½ feet, for most of these boreholes this unit was not seen in SPT samples
but was observed in auger cuttings before reaching a depth of about 2½ feet. We
understand from Public Works personnel that this sand and gravel deposit is encountered
down to a few feet through most of the town.
• Estuarine Deposits – Sumas Stade: Clay and plastic silts were encountered below the
glacial outwash in boreholes BH-1 through BH-13. The clay/silt was generally medium
stiff to stiff and moist down to a depth of approximately 7 to 10 feet, then abruptly
changed to very soft and wet to the full depths explored. Shallower borings such as BH-
13 did not encounter the very soft clay/silt. The difference in relative density is likely
due to desiccation consolidation of the near-surface clay/silt after relative sea level
dropped and the former tidelands became permanently subaerial.
• Bellingham Drift: Borehole BH-14 encountered hard, sandy, gravelly clay below 15
feet.
3.4 GROUND WATER CONDITIONS

Ground water seepage was encountered in eight of the borings during drilling, as indicated by a
hollow symbol on the pertinent borehole logs. Depth to ground water at time of drilling in these
borings varied from 8 to 17½ feet. Ground water levels reported during drilling reflect the level
of water noted by us during the time of our exploration and were not stabilized values, as such
actual groundwater levels are likely higher than those reported in our exploration logs.

June 4, 2021
Standpipe piezometers consisting of 2-inch diameter PVC with machine-slotted screens were
installed in borings BH-1, BH-4, BH-7, BH-9, BH-13, and BH-14. The water levels within the
first four wells were measured on April 29, 2021. These readings indicate stabilized water levels
are several feet higher than observed during drilling. Levellogger transducers were installed in
all six wells to gather hourly readings through the next few months. A summary of the water
level readings or levels encountered during drilling is provided in Table 2.
Table 2: Ground Water Levels Observed/Measured in Borings and Wells
Ground Water
Piezometer Ground Water Depth in
Boring Depth During
Installation Well – 4/29/21
Designation Drilling
(Y/N) (feet)
(feet)
BH-1 17½ Y 11.35
BH-2 Not Observed N

BH-3 11½ N
BH-4 11 Y 5.42
BH-5 10 N
BH-6 Not Observed N
BH-7 8 Y 1.59
BH-8 Not Observed N
BH-9 8 Y 3.74
BH-10 13 N
BH-11 12½ N
BH-12 Not Observed N
BH-13 Not Observed Y None
BH-14 Not Observed Y None
It should be noted that the ground water information, reported herein and on the boring logs
contained in Appendix A of this report, is for the specific dates and locations indicated and
therefore, may not be indicative of ground water conditions at other locations and/or times.
Furthermore, it is anticipated that ground water conditions will vary depending on local
subsurface conditions, the weather and other factors. It is likely that higher ground water levels
will occur during the wetter times of the year.

June 4, 2021
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The results of our explorations and analyses indicate that most of the sewer alignments are
underlain by a couple feet of sand and gravel, under which is clay and silt that gets progressively
softer with increasing depth. The clay/silt contains sandy seams and is typically very soft below
a depth of 7 to 12 feet. Ground water is likely to be perched in the sands and gravels atop the
underlying clays. Dewatering wells are unlikely to be effective in managing ground water in
trench excavations, but ground water flows should be limited, and dewatering can probably be
accomplished with sumps within most excavations. The effluent from sumps will likely be
turbid, so treatment is anticipated to be necessary before disposal.
The soft clays/silts should provide adequate support for the pipe, but the weight of the new
trench backfill should be minimized to minimize post-construction settlements. The excavated
soil will not be suitable for reuse as trench backfill where post construction surface settlements
are to be minimized. We recommend the use of uniform sand for trench backfill. Compacted
uniform sand would typically weigh about 105 pound per cubic foot (pcf), whereas compacted
sand & gravel would typically weigh about 135 pcf. The native clay typically weighs 92 to 95
pcf. Replacing the relatively light clay with heavier sand and gravel could cause excessive post
construction settlement. The use of uniform sand will help to limit the increase in pressure on
soft subsoils.
Normal trench pipeline construction with trench boxes, augmented with steel sheets, should be
satisfactory for pipe installation along most of the alignments. Trenches which get into the soft
to very soft clays could tend to cave. The contractor might have to hold the upper 12 to 15 feet
of deeper excavations with expandable shoring before excavating deeper, with additional lateral
support below.
We understand pipe bursting is being considered in some areas to upsize the existing pipe. Soil
conditions are generally favorable for pipe bursting. In these soil conditions, we expect pipe
diameters could be doubled by pipe bursting, providing the contractor is experienced and uses
appropriate equipment.
The following sections present additional conclusions and recommendations related to trench
excavation and support, construction dewatering, pipe bedding and backfill, and trench
compaction. Recommendations for pipe bursting are also provided.
4.1 OPEN-TRENCH CONSTRUCTION

In our opinion the proposed sewers can be re-constructed utilizing conventional open-trench
construction. To limit excavation, temporary trench support will be required for all open cuts
deeper than 4 feet. If excessive caving occurs in loose upper soils or ground water seepage is
excessive, temporary shoring may be needed in excavations less than 4 feet deep.
Excavation and Temporary Shoring

Excavations for the sewer line can be accomplished with conventional excavating equipment
such as track-hoes. The contractor should be responsible for determining equipment suitability
for excavation of the varying soils noted in this report, as well as for other soil strata, which may

June 4, 2021
be encountered. Trench support can be achieved using trench boxes, augmented as necessary
with steel sheets, struts and hydraulic bracing.
Maintenance of safe working conditions, including temporary excavation stability, is the
responsibility of the contractor. In accordance with Part N of Washington Administrative Code
(WAC) 296-155, latest revisions, all temporary cuts deeper than 4 feet must be either
appropriately sloped or shored prior to entry by personnel.
Steps should be taken to protect workers from loose soils that could fall or roll from an
excavation face by scaling to remove loose material, installing protective barricades or other
acceptable forms of protection. The contractor should monitor the stability of the temporary
excavations and adjust the construction schedule, slope inclination and shoring accordingly. The
contractor should be responsible for control of ground and surface water and should employ
sloping, slope protection, ditching, sumps, dewatering, and other measures, as necessary, to
prevent sloughing of soils and heave of the bottom of the excavation.
The existing sands and clays/silts should be considered Type C soil per WAC 296-155. Where
no trench box is used, excavations in Type C Soil should be sloped no steeper than 1.5H:1V
(horizontal: vertical). Flatter slopes could be required where ground water seepage exists.
The act of advancing the trench box may cause pipe joints within or near the trench box to be
pulled apart. It may be necessary to extend a cable through the pipeline and tension it to prevent
joints in newly laid pipe from being pulled apart as the trench box is advanced.
Shoring Methods
Trench boxes are a passive trench support system that allows the sides of the trench to slough
while providing protection for workers in the trench. Trench boxes are only feasible where
ground water can be safely controlled to allow installation of the sewer line in relatively dry
conditions. Trench boxes do not prevent caving of the sides of the trench, therefore where
nearby utilities or structures could be damaged by caving, shoring which can be expanded to
provide support for the trench should be used. Alternatively, soldier piles and lagging or driven
steel sheet piles could be used.
Temporary shoring should be capable of resisting lateral earth pressures equal to an equivalent
fluid pressure of 95 pcf. Surcharge pressures for equipment and material should be added to this
pressure where appropriate. Precautions should be taken during removal of shoring to minimize
disturbance of the pipe, underlying bedding materials, and native subgrade soils.
Trench Base Preparation and Pipe Bedding

If unsuitable materials are encountered at the pipe invert during excavation, they should be over-
excavated and removed as described in this section. Unsuitable materials include peat, old
topsoil, or organic material such as logs and stumps. Over-excavated areas should be backfilled
with pipe bedding material. Over-excavation to remove unsuitable materials should extend to
the base of the unsuitable material or to a depth of 2 feet, whichever is less. The over-excavation
should extend to the same depth across the full width of the trench.

June 4, 2021
Where the native soils are competent and do not require over-excavation, bedding material
should be placed directly on the undisturbed native soils. Trench bottoms should be free of
debris and have less than 1 inch of standing water. If subgrade soils are disturbed, the disturbed
material should be removed and replaced with additional compacted bedding material.
Excavation to pipe subgrade should be accomplished with a toothless bucket or with a bucket
having a steel plate welded over the teeth.
Pipe bedding material, placement, compaction, and shaping should be in accordance with the
project specifications and the pipe manufacturer’s recommendations. Pipe bedding material
should consist of uniformly graded sand. We recommend pea gravel not be used for pipe bedding
or backfill.
Pipe bedding should provide a firm uniform cradle for support of the pipes. A minimum 3-inch
thickness of bedding material beneath the pipe should be provided. Prior to installation of the
pipe, the pipe bedding should be shaped to fit the lower part of the pipe exterior with reasonable
closeness to provide uniform support along the pipe. Pipe bedding material should also be used
as pipe zone backfill and placed in layers and tamped around the pipes to obtain complete
contact. To protect the pipe, bedding material should extend at least 6 inches above the top of
the pipe.
Settlement
The likely mechanisms for pipe settlement involve poor bearing support immediately below the
pipe, consolidation of underlying compressible soils under loads greater than previously existing,
and recompression of excavation subgrade heave. Bedding the pipe in accordance with the
recommendations described above, including removal of any unsuitable material from the trench
base, will reduce the potential for differential settlement along the pipeline. Using uniform sand
as trench backfill will minimize the potential increase in weight on the underlying native soils
and minimize pipe settlement. Where highly compressible materials such as peat must be left
below the pipe, it may be desirable to place Styrofoam blocks in the trench as backfill to reduce
loads on the compressible material. The need for Styrofoam can be evaluated if that situation
should arise during construction.
Post construction surface settlement is likely to occur as even well-compacted fill is likely to
settle about ¼ to ½ percent of its thickness. Such settlement generally occurs within several
months of fill placement. Where possible, re-pavement and/or final patching of streets should be
delayed for at least 6 months to allow settlements to occur.
Fill and Compaction

Existing materials along the alignment were found to be primarily fine material unsuitable for re-
use as trench backfill. As recommended above, trench backfill should consist of uniformly
graded sand. Backfill should be placed in lifts no thicker than 8 inches unless a hoe-pack is used
for compaction. Each lift should be compacted to at least 95 percent of its modified Proctor
maximum density (ASTM D-1557). The thickness of each lift should be small enough to allow
95% compaction throughout the lift.

June 4, 2021
Persons performing compaction tests on trench backfill should probe the surrounding lift of fill
represented by an individual density test to confirm that the compaction of the entire lift is
consistent throughout. If inconsistencies are noted additional compaction should be administered
by the contractor to achieve uniform compaction throughout the lift. The person performing the
in-place density test should certify to what extent all backfill to be represented by the field
density test is similar in density and composition to soil at the actual test location. The person
administering the test (not the contractor) should select test locations.
During placement of the initial lifts, the trench backfill material should not be bulldozed into the
excavation or dropped directly on the pipe. Heavy vibratory equipment should not be permitted
to operate directly over the pipe until at least 2 feet of backfill has been placed over the pipe.
A significant cause of trench settlement is inadequate shoring practices and inadequate
compaction during shoring removal and backfilling. Good compaction up to the edges of the
excavation must be accomplished as the shoring is removed.
4.2 DEWATERING CONSIDERATION

Ground water is likely to be encountered in all trench excavations. Flow is likely from water
perched atop the clay/silt layers and from sand seams within the clay/silt. Flows are likely to
diminish with time and in most areas can be handled by dewatering with sumps within the
excavations. Dewatering with wells will generally not be effective, but wells or well points may
be required at selected locations where soils are more permeable.
Though dewatering using wells is not anticipated to be effective based on our explorations, soil
variability may make it necessary to utilize dewatering wells in some locations. As a result, we
recommend that the contractor’s base bid include the cost of designing, installing, operating and
removing at least six 30-foot-deep construction dewatering wells or 200 lineal feet of vacuum
well points. The need and use of such wells should be the decision of the contractor, with
approval, in advance, of the owner.
The contractor should be prepared to manage extracted ground water generated during site
excavation consistent with all local, state, and federal laws, including all permitting, treatment,
and disposal activities. Management of extracted ground water may need to be integrated with
the contractor’s stormwater management system and the contractor will be required to obtain a
temporary construction National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and
abide by all associated pretreatment and monitoring requirements for stormwater. Effluent from
the dewatering system or stormwater runoff from the construction zone may be turbid, requiring
temporary storage in holding tanks for settling of particulates prior to discharge, and disposal in
conformance with applicable laws and regulations.
4.3 TRENCHLESS OPTION FOR SEWER REPLACEMENT

We understand pipe bursting is being considered for replacement and upsizing existing sewer
pipelines. In our opinion, the soil conditions encountered in our explorations are favorable for
pipe bursting.

June 4, 2021
Pipe bursting typically consists of in-situ pipe fragmentation, displacement, and replacement of
the existing pipe with new fusible polyethylene pipe of the same or larger diameter. The existing
pipe is split by one of three main pipe bursting means: static pull, hydraulic expansion, or a
pneumatic bursting-head or nose cone. With the static pull method, the head is simply pulled
through the existing pipe by a heavy-duty pulling device via a segmented drill rod assembly or
heavy anchor chain. In hydraulic expansion, the head expands and closes sequentially as it is
pulled through the pipe, bursting the pipe on its way. Pneumatic pipe bursting uses pulsating air
pressure to drive the head forward and burst the existing pipe. This method of pipe bursting may
create noticeable ground vibrations on the surface above the bursting operation. A pulling
device guides the head via a constant tension winch and cable.
As the existing pipe is burst using any of the three methods, the replacement pipe is pulled along
the alignment of the old pipe behind the bursting-head. Typically, the fusible pipe installed
during the pipe bursting process consists of 20- to 40-foot sections that are welded together on-
site. Pipe bursting is conducted between two points of access, i.e., station–to-station with
stations consisting of existing or newly constructed manholes, or insertion and extraction pits.
Information regarding the proximity of other service lines or underground structures, and the
location of any documented service repairs that reinforce the existing pipe should be evaluated.
Such information is utilized to select the most appropriate pipe bursting methods and tools, and
to evaluate the potential effects of vibrations and ground displacements, associated with the
bursting operations.
Pipe Bursting Considerations

Favorable ground conditions for pipe bursting are within soils that can be moderately densified
to accommodate the increased volume of the larger pipe. This scenario results in minimal lateral
and vertical ground movement because the volume change is accommodated by densification or
consolidation of the local soils. This results in lower drag and reduced stress on the pipe and the
installation equipment. Less favorable ground conditions include densely compacted trench
backfill and dense native soil. These ground conditions tend to increase the force required for
the bursting operation and may increase the zone of influence of any associated ground
movements (TTC, 2001).
The results of our borings indicate that the soils along the alignment and depth of the sewer line
consist of relatively loose sands and gravels overlying soft clayey soils. These conditions are
generally favorable for pipe bursting.
Possible Ground Displacement

Some ground displacement should be expected as a result of a pipe bursting operation.
Displacements tend to be localized and develop in the direction of least resistance. The
magnitude of the displaced soil is largely dependent upon the type and relative density of the soil
surrounding the pipe, the increased pipe volume, and the depth of the pipe. Typically, loose soils
will densify with little surface displacement while more dense soils at the same depth will exhibit

June 4, 2021
greater vertical (heave) expansion. The localized restraining effect of strong soils along trench
sides and bottom also serves to direct ground movement upward.
We understand that the existing sewer pipes along the project alignment range in depth from 3
feet to 18 feet below the existing ground surface. Ground movement (heaving) may distort the
existing ground surface at the shallower depths.
Pipe Bursting and Adjacent Utilities

Potential impacts to adjacent utilities due to ground disturbance from pipe bursting should be
considered. The risk of distress to existing pipes due to vibration and ground displacement from
pipe bursting is typically low for pipes farther than about 3 pipe diameters from the bursting
head. Where existing utilities are within this distance, local excavations should be made around
the utilities prior to bursting. They should be left open during bursting and backfilled once
installation of the pipe is complete.
4.4 MANHOLES
Manhole structures should be able to support an equivalent fluid pressure of 95 pcf (this value
includes hydrostatic pressures, but no dead or live load) with an acceptable factor of safety (FS >
1.25). Manholes should also be designed to resist uplift pressures assuming the ground water
table is at the ground surface. They should be founded on a 6-inch-thick (minimum) layer of
1¼-inch-minus crushed rock (crushed surfacing base course). Backfill around all manholes and
other below-grade structures should consist of clean uniform sand. The backfill should be
compacted to at least 95 percent of its maximum dry density for the full depth of the structure.
4.5 PAVEMENT RESTORATION

We understand that disturbed/removed pavement areas will be restored to the existing pavement
sections, where applicable. All backfill in areas to be paved should be compacted to at least 95%
of its maximum dry density.
4.6 DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONSIDERATION

The native soils are moderately erodible when exposed and subjected to surface water flow.
Surface water runoff should be controlled during construction by sandbagging around work areas
to prevent stormwater from entering trench excavations. All collected water should be directed
under control to a suitable discharge system.
Erosion can also be limited through the judicious use of silt fences and straw bales. The
contractor should be responsible for control of ground and surface water and should employ
sloping, slope protection, ditching, sumps, dewatering, and other measures, as necessary, to
prevent erosion of soils.

June 4, 2021
4.7 WET WEATHER EARTHWORK

General recommendations relative to earthwork performed in wet weather or in wet conditions
are presented below. These recommendations should be incorporated into the contract
specifications and applied, if necessary.
• Earthwork should be performed in small sections to minimize exposure to wet weather.
Excavation of unsuitable and/or softened soil should be followed promptly by placement
and compaction of clean sand. The size and type of construction equipment used may
need to be limited to prevent soil disturbance.
• For wet weather conditions, the allowable fines content of the structural fill should be
reduced to no more than 5 percent by weight of the portion of the fill material passing the
¾-inch sieve. The fines should be non-plastic.
• The ground surface within the construction area should be graded to promote surface
water run-off and to prevent ponding.
• Within the construction area, the ground surface should be sealed on completion of each
shift by a smooth drum vibratory roller, or equivalent, and under no circumstances should
soil be left uncompacted and exposed to moisture infiltration.
• Bales of straw, sandbags, and/or geotextile silt fences should be strategically located to
control erosion and the movement of soil and water.
5.0 CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS

We have prepared this report for David Evans and Associates and the City of Blaine, for use in
the design and construction of this project. This report should be provided in its entirety to
prospective contractors for bidding and estimating purposes; however, the conclusions and
interpretations presented herein should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface
conditions. Experience has shown that soil and ground water conditions can vary significantly
over small distances. Inconsistent conditions can occur between explorations that may not be
detected by a geotechnical study. If, during future site operations, subsurface conditions are
encountered which vary appreciably from those described herein, HWA should be notified for
review of the recommendations in this report, and revision of such, if necessary. If there is a
substantial lapse of time between submission of this report and the start of construction, or if
conditions change due to construction operations at or adjacent to the project site, it is
recommended that this report be reviewed to determine the applicability of the conclusions and
recommendations considering the changed conditions and time lapse.
We recommend that HWA be retained to review the plans and specifications to verify that our
recommendations have been interpreted and implemented as intended. Sufficient geotechnical
monitoring, testing, and consultation should be provided during construction to confirm that the
conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to provide
recommendations for design changes should conditions revealed during construction differ from
those anticipated, and to verify that the geotechnical aspects of construction comply with the
contract plans and specifications.

June 4, 2021
6.0 REFERENCES
Easterbrook, D.J., 1976, Geologic Map of Western Whatcom County, Washington. USGS, Misc.
Investigations Series Map I-854-B, 1:62,500.
Kovanen, D.J., Haugerud, R.A., and Easterbrook, D.J., 2020, Geomorphic Map of Western
Whatcom County, Washington. USGS, Scientific Investigations SIM 3406, 1:50,000.
Trenchless Technology Center (TTC), 2001, Guidelines for Pipe Bursting, Prepared by TTC for
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers-Engineering Research and Development Center (ERDC),
Vicksburg, MS, 47 p
WSDOT, 2020, Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction, 2020
Washington State Department of Transportation. M 41-10

Approximate
Project Location
N
MAP NOT TO SCALE BASE MAP FROM GOOGLE MAPS DATA © 2021 GOOGLE
FIGURE NO.
VICINITY MAP

1
PROJECT NO.
BLAINE, WASHINGTON 2021-010-21
BH-14
BH-9
BH-8
BH-1
BH-2 BH-3 BH-4 BH-5 BH-6 BH-7
BH-10
BH-11
BH-12
BH-13
BH-14 Borehole designation and

approximate location
FIGURE NO.
2
SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN
G STREET SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PROJECT NO.
BLAINE, WASHINGTON 2021-010-21

3
FIGURE NO.
GEOLOGIC MAP

PROJECT NO.
BLAINE, WASHINGTON
2021-010
APPENDIX A
FIELD EXPLORATIONS
RELATIVE DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY VERSUS SPT N-VALUE TEST SYMBOLS
%F Percent Fines
COHESIONLESS SOILS COHESIVE SOILS
AL Atterberg Limits: PL = Plastic Limit, LL = Liquid Limit
Approximate
Approximate CBR California Bearing Ratio
Density N (blows/ft) Consistency N (blows/ft) Undrained Shear
Relative Density(%) CN Consolidation
Strength (psf)
DD Dry Density (pcf)
Very Loose 0 to 4 0 - 15 Very Soft 0 to 2 <250
DS Direct Shear
Loose 4 to 10 15 - 35 Soft 2 to 4 250 - 500
GS Grain Size Distribution
Medium Dense 10 to 30 35 - 65 Medium Stiff 4 to 8 500 - 1000
K Permeability
Dense 30 to 50 65 - 85 Stiff 8 to 15 1000 - 2000
MD Moisture/Density Relationship (Proctor)
Very Dense over 50 85 - 100 Very Stiff 15 to 30 2000 - 4000
MR Resilient Modulus
Hard over 30 >4000
OC Organic Content
USCS SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM pH pH of Soils
PID Photoionization Device Reading
MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP DESCRIPTIONS PP Pocket Penetrometer (Approx. Comp. Strength, tsf)
Res. Resistivity
Gravel and
Clean Gravel
GW Well-graded GRAVEL SG Specific Gravity
Coarse
Gravelly Soils CD Consolidated Drained Triaxial
Grained (little or no fines)
GP Poorly-graded GRAVEL CU Consolidated Undrained Triaxial
Soils
More than UU Unconsolidated Undrained Triaxial
50% of Coarse Gravel with GM Silty GRAVEL TV Torvane (Approx. Shear Strength, tsf)
Fraction Retained Fines (appreciable
UC Unconfined Compression
on No. 4 Sieve amount of fines) GC Clayey GRAVEL
SAMPLE TYPE SYMBOLS

Sand and Clean Sand
SW Well-graded SAND
Sandy Soils
2.0" OD Split Spoon (SPT)
(little or no fines)
More than SP Poorly-graded SAND (140 lb. hammer with 30 in. drop)
50% Retained
50% or More Shelby Tube
on No.
of Coarse
Sand with SM Silty SAND
200 Sieve Fines (appreciable Non-standard Penetration Test
Fraction Passing (3.0" OD Split Spoon with Brass Rings)
Size
No. 4 Sieve
amount of fines) SC Clayey SAND
Small Bag Sample
ML SILT
Fine Silt
Liquid Limit Large Bag (Bulk) Sample
Grained and CL Lean CLAY
Less than 50%
Soils Clay
Core Run
OL Organic SILT/Organic CLAY
3-1/4" OD Split Spoon
MH Elastic SILT
Silt
50% or More Liquid Limit
Passing
and
50% or More CH Fat CLAY GROUNDWATER SYMBOLS
Clay
No. 200 Sieve Groundwater Level (measured at
Size OH Organic SILT/Organic CLAY
time of drilling)
Groundwater Level (measured in well or
Highly Organic Soils PT PEAT
open hole after water level stabilized)
COMPONENT DEFINITIONS COMPONENT PROPORTIONS
COMPONENT SIZE RANGE PROPORTION RANGE DESCRIPTIVE TERMS
Boulders Larger than 12 in

< 5% Clean
Cobbles 3 in to 12 in
Gravel 3 in to No 4 (4.5mm)
5 - 12% Slightly (Clayey, Silty, Sandy)
Coarse gravel 3 in to 3/4 in
Fine gravel 3/4 in to No 4 (4.5mm)
12 - 30% Clayey, Silty, Sandy, Gravelly
Sand No. 4 (4.5 mm) to No. 200 (0.074 mm)
Coarse sand No. 4 (4.5 mm) to No. 10 (2.0 mm)
Medium sand No. 10 (2.0 mm) to No. 40 (0.42 mm) 30 - 50% Very (Clayey, Silty, Sandy, Gravelly)
Fine sand No. 40 (0.42 mm) to No. 200 (0.074 mm)
Silt and Clay Smaller than No. 200 (0.074mm) Components are arranged in order of increasing quantities.
NOTES: Soil classifications presented on exploration logs are based on visual and laboratory observation.
Soil descriptions are presented in the following general order: MOISTURE CONTENT
Density/consistency, color, modifier (if any) GROUP NAME, additions to group name (if any), moisture DRY Absence of moisture, dusty,
content. Proportion, gradation, and angularity of constituents, additional comments. dry to the touch.
(GEOLOGIC INTERPRETATION) MOIST Damp but no visible water.
WET Visible free water, usually
Please refer to the discussion in the report text as well as the exploration logs for a more
soil is below water table.
complete description of subsurface conditions.
LEGEND OF TERMS AND

Blaine G St Sewer Improvements SYMBOLS USED ON
Blaine, Washington EXPLORATION LOGS
PROJECT NO.: 2021-010 FIGURE: A-1
LEGEND 2021-010.GPJ 5/25/21
DRILLING COMPANY: Environmental Drilling Inc. DATE STARTED: 4/20/2021
DRILLING METHOD: HSA, Mobile B-61 DATE COMPLETED: 4/20/2021
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Autohammer LOGGED BY: B. Thurber / C. Bourgeois
LOCATION: See Figure 2
PEN. RESISTANCE
USCS SOIL CLASS
SAMPLE NUMBER
Standard Penetration Test
(blows/6 inches)
OTHER TESTS
SAMPLE TYPE
(140 lb. weight, 30" drop)
PIEZOMETER
SCHEMATIC
ELEVATION
Blows per foot
SYMBOL
DEPTH
(feet)
(feet)
DESCRIPTION
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
5 inches A.C.P.
GW
GM
Medium dense, dark brown, slightly silty, sandy GRAVEL, S-1 11-12-6 GS
moist. Well-graded.
CH (GLACIAL OUTWASH - SUMAS STADE)
Very stiff, rust- and light gray mottled olive brown, CLAY,
5
moist. S-2 2-8-4
(ESTUARINE DEPOSITS - SUMAS STADE)
Fine sand in clay, below 6.4 feet
Grades to medium stiff. With 1-inch lens of dilatent silt. S-3 0-4-3
10
Becomes light gray. S-4 0-2-3
CH Very soft, light gray, CLAY, moist. No apparent bedding.

S-5 0/18"
15
S-6 0/18"
Torvane (standard head) = 0.15 to 0.18 tsf S-7 AL

Pocket Penetrometer (oversized head) = 0.10 to 0.30 tsf TV
PP
20
S-8 0/18"
25
S-9 1-2-1
Borehole terminated at 26.5 feet.

Groundwater observed at 17.5 feet during drilling.
2-inch PVC piezometer installed to 25 feet. DOE # BLP 348
Water level measured at 11.35 feet BGS on 4/29/2021.
30
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
Plastic Limit Liquid Limit
NOTE: This log of subsurface conditions applies only at the specified location and on the date indicated Natural Water Content
and therefore may not necessarily be indicative of other times and/or locations.
BORING:
Blaine G St Sewer Improvements BH- 1
Blaine, Washington PAGE: 1 of 1

PZO-DSM 2021-010.GPJ 5/25/21
PEN. RESISTANCE
USCS SOIL CLASS
SAMPLE NUMBER
GROUNDWATER
(blows/6 inches)
OTHER TESTS
SAMPLE TYPE
ELEVATION
Blows per foot
SYMBOL
DEPTH
(feet)
(feet)
DESCRIPTION
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
5 inches A.C.P.
SM
Loose, olive brown, silty, gravelly SAND, moist. With 2-inch
lens of dark brown and dark gray SILT.
(GLACIAL OUTWASH - SUMAS STADE)
S-1 4-3-4 GS
5
CH Very soft, olive gray, CLAY, moist. Scattered charcoal and S-2 1-1-1
dark brown organics; fine blocky texture.
S-3 0-0-2
10
S-4 0-0-3
Becomes soft; grading to gray. With 1/2-inch lens of coarse
SILT at 10.5 feet.
Becomes very soft, light gray. Highly plastic. S-5 0/18"
15
S-6 0/18"
20
S-7 0-1-2
25
No recovery. S-8 1/12"-1

No groundwater seepage observed during drilling.
Borehole abandoned with bentonite chips.
30
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
BORING:

BORING-DSM 2021-010.GPJ 5/25/21
PEN. RESISTANCE
USCS SOIL CLASS
SAMPLE NUMBER
GROUNDWATER
(blows/6 inches)
OTHER TESTS
SAMPLE TYPE
ELEVATION
Blows per foot
SYMBOL
DEPTH
(feet)
(feet)
DESCRIPTION
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
4 inches A.C.P.
GP
GM Cuttings of sandy GRAVEL, moist.
CH (GLACIAL OUTWASH - SUMAS STADE)
Stiff, rust- and light gray-mottled olive brown, CLAY, moist.
(ESTUARINE DEPOSITS - SUMAS STADE) S-1 3-4-7
5
S-2 2-3-4
ML Loose, dark olive brown, SILT, moist to wet. Dilatent.
CH
Stiff, olive brown, CLAY, moist.
S-3 2-5-8
10 CH
Very soft, dark gray, CLAY, moist. Highly plastic. S-4 1/12"-1
Becomes light gray. S-5 0/18"
15
S-6 0/18"
S-7 0/18"
20
S-8 0/18"
25
S-9 0/18"

Groundwater observed at approx. 11.5 feet during drilling.
Borehole abandoned with benontie chips.
30
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
BORING:

BORING-DSM 2021-010.GPJ 5/25/21
PEN. RESISTANCE
USCS SOIL CLASS
SAMPLE NUMBER
(blows/6 inches)
OTHER TESTS
SAMPLE TYPE
PIEZOMETER
SCHEMATIC
ELEVATION
Blows per foot
SYMBOL
DEPTH
(feet)
(feet)
DESCRIPTION
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
4 inches A.C.P.
GP
GM Cuttings of sandy, fine GRAVEL, moist.
CH
Stiff, rust- and light gray-mottled olive brown, CLAY, moist. S-1 1-4-5
With fine lenses of silt.
5
Becomes medium stiff. S-2 0-3-4
CH
Very soft, olive brown with some rust mottling, CLAY, moist. S-3 0/18"
10
Becomes light gray. S-4 0/18"
S-5 0/18"
15
S-6 0/18"
20
S-7 0/18"

Groundwater observed at approx. 11 feet during drilling.
Water level measured at 5.42 feet on 4/29/2021.
25
30
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
BORING:

PZO-DSM 2021-010.GPJ 5/25/21
DRILLING COMPANY: Cascade Drilling, Inc. DATE STARTED: 4/28/2021
DRILLING METHOD: HSA, CME 75 DATE COMPLETED: 4/28/2021
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Autohammer LOGGED BY: C. Bourgeois
PEN. RESISTANCE
USCS SOIL CLASS
SAMPLE NUMBER
GROUNDWATER
(blows/6 inches)
OTHER TESTS
SAMPLE TYPE
ELEVATION
Blows per foot
SYMBOL
DEPTH
(feet)
(feet)
DESCRIPTION
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
SM About 3.25 inches A.C.P.
Boring drilled with hand auger to about 2.5 feet.
SM Dark brown, silty, SAND, moist. S-0
(TOPSOIL)
CH Brown, silty, gravelly, SAND, moist. Contained about 4-inch S-1 3-4-7
cobbles.
5 Stiff grading to medium stiff, rust-mottled olive brown, CLAY,
moist. Contains scattered organics. S-2 1-3-2
2-inch-thick silt lens.
CH Very soft, gray, CLAY, moist. S-3 0-1-1
10
Grades to gray, becomes wet. S-4 0-0-0
15
S-5 0-0-0
Borehole 5 terminated at about 17 feet below ground surface.

Groundwater observed at about 10 feet during drilling.
Borehole abandoned with 3/8" bentonite chips.
20
25
30
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
BORING:

BORING-DSM 2021-010.GPJ 5/25/21
SAMPLING METHOD: SPT w/ Autohammer LOGGED BY: C. Bourgeois / B. Thurber
PEN. RESISTANCE
USCS SOIL CLASS
SAMPLE NUMBER
GROUNDWATER
(blows/6 inches)
OTHER TESTS
SAMPLE TYPE
ELEVATION
Blows per foot
SYMBOL
DEPTH
(feet)
(feet)
DESCRIPTION
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
5 inches A.C.P.
SM
Cuttings: Dark brown, gravelly, silty SAND, moist.
CH Soft, rust-mottled gray and olive brown, CLAY, moist. S-1 3-1-3
5
Stiff, rust-mottled olive brown CLAY, moist. Scattered S-2 3-6-8
organics.
S-3 3-4-5
10
Becomes soft, rust-mottling grades from prevalent to rare S-4 0-1-2
CH Very soft, gray CLAY, moist.

Torvane (standard head) = 0.07 to 0.16 tsf S-5 AL
Pocket Penetrometer (oversized head) = 0.025 to 0.225 tsf TV
PP
15
S-6 1-0-1

Groundwater not observed during drilling.
Abandoned with bentonite chips.
20
25
30
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
BORING:

BORING-DSM 2021-010.GPJ 5/25/21
PEN. RESISTANCE
USCS SOIL CLASS
SAMPLE NUMBER
(blows/6 inches)
OTHER TESTS
SAMPLE TYPE
PIEZOMETER
SCHEMATIC
ELEVATION
Blows per foot
SYMBOL
DEPTH
(feet)
(feet)
DESCRIPTION
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
5 inches A.C.P.
Did not note cuttings in this interval
CH Stiff, rust-mottled olive brown, CLAY, moist. Scattered S-1 3-3-3

organics.
5
Becomes less mottled, contains more organic material S-2 3-6-8
SM Very loose, dark gray, silty fine SAND, wet. S-3 1/18" GS
10
Scattered clam shell fragments and scattered pebbles. S-4 1/12"-1
S-5 1/12"-1
15
S-6 0/18"

Groundwater observed at 8 feet during drilling.
20
25
30
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
BORING:

PZO-DSM 2021-010.GPJ 5/25/21
PEN. RESISTANCE
USCS SOIL CLASS
SAMPLE NUMBER
GROUNDWATER
(blows/6 inches)
OTHER TESTS
SAMPLE TYPE
ELEVATION
Blows per foot
SYMBOL
DEPTH
(feet)
(feet)
DESCRIPTION
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
3 inches A.C.P.
Gravelly drill action
CH No recovery; drove rock? S-1 5-3-5
5
Stiff, rust-mottled olive brown, CLAY, moist. Scattered S-2 6-5-5
organics.
Becomes very stiff, with scattered detrital organics S-3 4-9-7
10
Becomes soft, less mottled S-4 0-1-2
No longer mottled S-5 0-1-2
15 Borehole terminated at 14 feet.

Groundwater not observed during drilling.
Abandoned with bentonite chips.
20
25
30
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
BORING:

BORING-DSM 2021-010.GPJ 5/25/21
PEN. RESISTANCE
USCS SOIL CLASS
SAMPLE NUMBER
(blows/6 inches)
OTHER TESTS
SAMPLE TYPE
PIEZOMETER
SCHEMATIC
ELEVATION
Blows per foot
SYMBOL
DEPTH
(feet)
(feet)
DESCRIPTION
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
4 inches A.C.P.
GM
Brown, sandy GRAVEL, moist. 3-inch piece of non-geotech
burlap material.
(FILL and GLACIAL OUTWASH - SUMAS STADE)
CH Medium stiff, rust-mottled olive brown, CLAY, moist. S-1 3-2-4
Scattered organics.
5
Becomes very stiff S-2 3-5-7 AL
S-3 3-5-4
10 CH
Becomes very soft, gray CLAY, wet. Little-to-no mottling, S-4 0/18"
some free water with sample.
S-5 0/18"
15
No mottling, no free water S-6 0/18"

Groundwater observed at 8 feet during drilling.
2-inch PVC piezometer installed to 15 feet. DOE # TBD
20
25
30
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
BORING:

PZO-DSM 2021-010.GPJ 5/25/21
PEN. RESISTANCE
USCS SOIL CLASS
SAMPLE NUMBER
GROUNDWATER
(blows/6 inches)
OTHER TESTS
SAMPLE TYPE
ELEVATION
Blows per foot
SYMBOL
DEPTH
(feet)
(feet)
DESCRIPTION
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
About 2.5 inches A.C.P. S-0
SM
Boring drilled with hand auger to about 2 feet..
Cuttings: medium dense, brown, silty, gravelly, SAND, moist.
Scattered cobbles.
CH (GLACIAL OUTWASH - SUMAS STADE) S-1 2-3-4
Medium stiff, rust-mottled olive brown, CLAY, moist.
Scattered organics.
5
Distinct 3-inch-thick coarse silt lenses from 5 to 5.8 feet. S-2 2-3-3
Becomes soft, grades to olive gray. S-3 0-1-1
10
Becomes moist to wet. S-4 0-1-2
Becomes very soft, grades to gray. S-5 0-0-0
15
S-6 1-1-1
20 Borehole terminated at about 17.5 feet below ground surface.

Groundwater observed at about 13 feet during drilling.
25
30
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
BORING:
Blaine G St Sewer Improvements BH-10

BORING-DSM 2021-010.GPJ 5/25/21
PEN. RESISTANCE
USCS SOIL CLASS
SAMPLE NUMBER
GROUNDWATER
(blows/6 inches)
OTHER TESTS
SAMPLE TYPE
ELEVATION
Blows per foot
SYMBOL
DEPTH
(feet)
(feet)
DESCRIPTION
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
SM About 1.5 inches A.C.P.
Medium dense, brown, silty, SAND, moist.
CH Medium stiff, rust-mottled dark olive brown, CLAY, moist. S-1 2-2-2
Scattered organics.
5
Becomes stiff, silty. S-2 2-4-4
Becomes rust-mottled olive brown. S-3 3-3-4
10
CH Becomes soft, rust mottling decreases. Moist to wet.
S-4 0-1-2
15 Borehole terminated at about 14 feet below ground surface.

Groundwater observed at about 12.5 feet during drilling.
20
25
30
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
BORING:

BORING-DSM 2021-010.GPJ 5/25/21
PEN. RESISTANCE
USCS SOIL CLASS
SAMPLE NUMBER
GROUNDWATER
(blows/6 inches)
OTHER TESTS
SAMPLE TYPE
ELEVATION
Blows per foot
SYMBOL
DEPTH
(feet)
(feet)
DESCRIPTION
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
SM A.C.P.
Medium brown, silty, gravelly, SAND, moist.
CH Stiff, rust-mottled olive brown, CLAY, moist. scattered S-1 2-3-6

organics.
5
Becomes medium stiff. S-2 2-3-3
Silt lens
S-3 2-2-2
10
CH Becomes very soft, rust-mottling decreases. S-4 0-1-1
15
S-5 0-1-1
No rust-mottling.
Borehole terminated at about 16.5 feet below ground surface.

Groundwater observed at about 13.5 feet during drilling.
20
25
30
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
BORING:

BORING-DSM 2021-010.GPJ 5/25/21
PEN. RESISTANCE
USCS SOIL CLASS
SAMPLE NUMBER
(blows/6 inches)
OTHER TESTS
SAMPLE TYPE
PIEZOMETER
SCHEMATIC
ELEVATION
Blows per foot
SYMBOL
DEPTH
(feet)
(feet)
DESCRIPTION
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
About 4 inches A.C.P.
SM
Medium brown, silty, SAND, moist.
CH Stiff, rust-mottled olive brown, CLAY, moist. Scattered S-1 3-4-5 AL

organics.
5
Becomes medium stiff S-2 1-2-2
CH Becomes soft
10
S-3 0-1-1

No groundwater observed during drilling.
2-inch PVC piezometer installed to about 10 feet. DOE #
BMM 607.
15
20
25
30
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
BORING:

PZO-DSM 2021-010.GPJ 5/25/21
PEN. RESISTANCE
USCS SOIL CLASS
SAMPLE NUMBER
(blows/6 inches)
OTHER TESTS
SAMPLE TYPE
PIEZOMETER
SCHEMATIC
ELEVATION
Blows per foot
SYMBOL
DEPTH
(feet)
(feet)
DESCRIPTION
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
SM About 1 inch A.C.P.
Cuttings: Gravelly, silty, SAND, moist.
(FILL)
CL Medium stiff, gray, sandy CLAY, moist. S-1 3-3-4
5
Becomes gravelly. Silty zones near gravel. S-2 2-2-2 GS
Becomes soft, gravel fraction decreases. S-3 0-2-1
10
Very soft, gray, slightly sandy, CLAY, moist. S-4 0-1-1 AL
15
CL Hard, gray, sandy, gravelly, CLAY. moist. S-5 4-7-31
(BELLINGHAM DRIFT)

No groundwater observed during drilling.
2-inch PVC piezometer installed to about 15 feet. DOE #
BMM 608
20
25
30
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Content (%)
BORING:

PZO-DSM 2021-010.GPJ 5/25/21
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTING
ATTERBERG
LIMITS (%)
SPECIFIC GRAVITY
CLASSIFICATION
BOTTOM DEPTH
EXPLORATION
DESIGNATION
CONTENT (%)
CONTENT (%)
TOP DEPTH
ASTM SOIL
MOISTURE
% GRAVEL
ORGANIC
% FINES
% SAND
(feet)
(feet)
LL PL PI SAMPLE DESCRIPTION
BH- 1,S-1 2.5 4.0 4.7 45.2 44.4 10.4 GW-GM Yellowish-brown, well-graded GRAVEL with silt and sand
BH- 1,S-3 7.5 9.0 39.3 CH Olive-brown, fat CLAY
BH- 1,S-5 12.5 14.0 51.9 CH Grayish-brown, fat CLAY
BH- 1,S-7 17.5 20.0 60.2 78 27 51 CH Gray, fat CLAY
BH- 2,S-1 2.5 4.0 12.4 34.7 44.9 20.4 SM Olive-brown, silty SAND with gravel
BH- 3,S-2 5.0 6.5 32.1 ML Olive-brown, SILT
Notes: 1. This table summarizes information presented elsewhere in the report and should be used in conjunction with the report test, other graphs and tables, and the exploration logs.
2. The soil classifications in this table are based on ASTM D2487 and D2488 as applicable.
SUMMARY OF
Blaine G St Sewer Improvements MATERIAL PROPERTIES
PROJECT NO.: 2021-010 FIGURE: B-1

INDEX MATSUM 2 2021-010.GPJ 5/25/21
ATTERBERG
LIMITS (%)
SPECIFIC GRAVITY
CLASSIFICATION
BOTTOM DEPTH
EXPLORATION
DESIGNATION
CONTENT (%)
CONTENT (%)
TOP DEPTH
ASTM SOIL
MOISTURE
% GRAVEL
ORGANIC
% FINES
% SAND
(feet)
(feet)
BH- 6,S-5 12.5 15.0 64.4 75 29 46 CH Olive-gray, fat CLAY
BH- 7,S-3 7.5 9.0 24.2 0.6 71.8 27.5 SM Grayish-brown, silty SAND
BH- 7,S-4 10.0 11.5 23.1 SM Grayish-brown, silty SAND
BH- 7,S-6 15.0 16.5 25.5 SM Dark gray, silty SAND
BH- 9,S-2 5.0 6.5 44.6 74 31 43 CH Light olive-brown, fat CLAY
BH-10,S-2 5.0 6.5 39.1 CH Olive-brown, fat CLAY
BH-10,S-5 12.5 14.0 49.1 CH Grayish-brown, fat CLAY
SUMMARY OF

ATTERBERG
LIMITS (%)
SPECIFIC GRAVITY
CLASSIFICATION
BOTTOM DEPTH
EXPLORATION
DESIGNATION
CONTENT (%)
CONTENT (%)
TOP DEPTH
ASTM SOIL
MOISTURE
% GRAVEL
ORGANIC
% FINES
% SAND
(feet)
(feet)
BH-12,S-5 15.0 16.5 58.3 CH Grayish-brown, fat CLAY
BH-13,S-1 2.5 4.0 44.0 79 31 48 CH Olive-brown, fat CLAY
BH-14,S-2 5.0 6.5 33.1 6.2 13.7 80.1 CL Olive-brown, lean CLAY with sand
BH-14,S-4 10.0 11.5 34.4 44 22 22 CL Light gray, lean CLAY
BH-14,S-5 15.0 16.5 12.9 CL Grayish-brown, sandy lean CLAY with gravel
SUMMARY OF

60
CL CH
50
PLASTICITY INDEX (PI)
40
30
20
10
CL-ML ML MH
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
SYMBOL SAMPLE DEPTH (ft) CLASSIFICATION % MC LL PL PI % Fines
BH- 1 S-7 17.5 - 20.0 (CH) Gray, fat CLAY 60 78 27 51
BH- 6 S-5 12.5 - 15.0 (CH) Olive-gray, fat CLAY 64 75 29 46
BH- 9 S-2 5.0 - 6.5 (CH) Light olive-brown, fat CLAY 45 74 31 43
BH-13 S-1 2.5 - 4.0 (CH) Olive-brown, fat CLAY 44 79 31 48
BH-14 S-4 10.0 - 11.5 (CL) Light gray, lean CLAY 34 44 22 22
LIQUID LIMIT, PLASTIC LIMIT AND

Blaine G St Sewer Improvements
PLASTICITY INDEX OF SOILS
Blaine, Washington METHOD ASTM D4318
HWAATTB 2021-010.GPJ 5/25/21
GRAVEL SAND
SILT CLAY
Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES

3/4"
3" 1-1/2" 5/8" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200
100
90
80
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001 0.0005
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
SYMBOL SAMPLE DEPTH (ft) CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name % MC LL PL PI Gravel Sand Fines
% % %
BH- 1 S-1 2.5 - 4.0 (GW-GM) Yellowish-brown, well-graded GRAVEL with silt and sand 5 45.2 44.4 10.4
BH- 2 S-1 2.5 - 4.0 (SM) Olive-brown, silty SAND with gravel 12 34.7 44.9 20.4
BH- 7 S-3 7.5 - 9.0 (SM) Grayish-brown, silty SAND 24 0.6 71.8 27.5
PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS
Blaine G St Sewer Improvements OF SOILS
HWAGRSZ 2021-010.GPJ 5/25/21
GRAVEL SAND
SILT CLAY
Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES

3/4"
3" 1-1/2" 5/8" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200
100
90
80
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
50 10 5 1 0.5 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.005 0.001 0.0005
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
SYMBOL SAMPLE DEPTH (ft) CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL- ASTM D2487 Group Symbol and Name % MC LL PL PI Gravel Sand Fines
% % %
BH-14 S-2 5.0 - 6.5 (CL) Olive-brown, lean CLAY with sand 33 6.2 13.7 80.1
PARTICLE-SIZE ANALYSIS
Blaine G St Sewer Improvements OF SOILS
HWAGRSZ 2021-010.GPJ 5/25/21
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTING
Representative soil samples obtained from the explorations were placed in plastic bags to prevent
loss of moisture and transported to our Bothell, Washington, laboratory for further examination
and testing. Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil samples to characterize relevant
engineering and index properties of the site soils. The results are summarized on the attached
Summary of Material Properties, Figure B-1 through B-3.
MOISTURE CONTENT (BY MASS): The moisture content of selected soil samples were determined
in general accordance with ASTM D 2216. The results are shown at the sampled intervals on the
appropriate summary logs in Appendix A.
LIQUID LIMIT, PLASTIC LIMIT, AND PLASTICITY INDEX OF SOILS (ATTERBERG LIMITS):
Selected samples were tested using method ASTM D 4318, multi-point method. The results are
reported on the attached Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index report, Figure B-4.
PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS OF SOILS: Selected samples were tested to determine the particle
(grain) size distribution of material in general accordance with ASTM D 422. Particle Size
Analysis of Soils reports, Figures B-5 and B-6, which also provide information regarding the
classification of the sample.
TORVANE: Shelby tube samples were tested using a Torvane to assess shear strength. The
Torvane is a handheld device which can be used to assess soil characteristics supplementing soil
classification data. Results of the Torvane tests are provided in the boring logs.
POCKET PENETROMETER: Shelby tube samples were tested using a pocket penetrometer to
assess unconfined shear strengths of soil. The pocket penetrometer is a handheld device which
can be used to assess soil characteristics supplementing soil classification data. Results of the
pocket penetrometer tests are provided in the boring logs.
Blaine Sewerline Geotechnical Report FINALort-dr. B-1 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.

G-Street Sewer Improvements - Geotechnical Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

G-Street Sewer Improvements - Geotechnical Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GEOTECHNICAL REPORT

G Street Sewer Improvement Project

David Evans & Associates, Inc.

Attn: Rodney Langer, P.E.

HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.

Ralph Boirum, P.E.

LIST OF FIGURES (FOLLOWING TEXT)

Appendix B: Laboratory Testing

1.2 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING

Blaine Sewerline Geotechnical Report FINAL 1 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.

2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION AND LABORATORY TESTING

2.1 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS

Blaine Sewerline Geotechnical Report FINAL 2 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.

Table 1: Sewer Line Improvement Sites and Borehole ID

Approx. Max. Depth

G Street, from near F Street & 4th Street to 10th BH-1 to

2.2 LABORATORY TESTING

Blaine Sewerline Geotechnical Report FINAL 3 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.

3.0 SITE CONDITIONS

3.1 SURFACE CONDITIONS

3.2 GENERAL GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS

Blaine Sewerline Geotechnical Report FINAL 4 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.

3.3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

3.4 GROUND WATER CONDITIONS

Blaine Sewerline Geotechnical Report FINAL 5 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.

Table 2: Ground Water Levels Observed/Measured in Borings and Wells

BH-2 Not Observed N

Blaine Sewerline Geotechnical Report FINAL 6 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.

4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 OPEN-TRENCH CONSTRUCTION

Excavation and Temporary Shoring

Blaine Sewerline Geotechnical Report FINAL 7 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.

Trench Base Preparation and Pipe Bedding

Blaine Sewerline Geotechnical Report FINAL 8 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.

Fill and Compaction

Blaine Sewerline Geotechnical Report FINAL 9 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.

4.2 DEWATERING CONSIDERATION

4.3 TRENCHLESS OPTION FOR SEWER REPLACEMENT

Blaine Sewerline Geotechnical Report FINAL 10 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.

Pipe Bursting Considerations

Possible Ground Displacement

Blaine Sewerline Geotechnical Report FINAL 11 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.

Pipe Bursting and Adjacent Utilities

4.5 PAVEMENT RESTORATION

4.6 DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONSIDERATION

Blaine Sewerline Geotechnical Report FINAL 12 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.

4.7 WET WEATHER EARTHWORK

5.0 CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS

Blaine Sewerline Geotechnical Report FINAL 13 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.

Blaine Sewerline Geotechnical Report FINAL 15 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC.

G STREET SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT

BH-2 BH-3 BH-4 BH-5 BH-6 BH-7

BH-14 Borehole designation and

G STREET SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PROJECT NO.

BLAINE, WASHINGTON 2021-010-21

G STREET SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT

SAMPLE TYPE SYMBOLS

COMPONENT DEFINITIONS COMPONENT PROPORTIONS

COMPONENT SIZE RANGE PROPORTION RANGE DESCRIPTIVE TERMS

Boulders Larger than 12 in

LEGEND OF TERMS AND

CH Very soft, light gray, CLAY, moist. No apparent bedding.

Torvane (standard head) = 0.15 to 0.18 tsf S-7 AL