HomeMy WebLinkAboutApplication-PermitI
Garfield County
Building & Planning Department
108 8th Street, Suite #401 Glenwood Springs, Co. 81601
Office:970·945-8212 Fax: 970·384·3470
Inspection Line: 970·384·5003
Building Permit No.
Parcel No: 2409-352-00-151
Locality:
Job Address: 1620 CR 300 Parachute
Owner: Williams Production RMT
Contractor: Williams Production RMT
Fees: Plan Check: $ 260.88 Septic: ' >.·~-~-··-. "~-~-~--...
Bldg Permit: $ 401.35 Other Fees:
-"·-·-·-"---~-~---
Total Fees: $ 662.23
Date: I
1
2
GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION
108 8'h Street, Suite 401, Glenwood Springs, Co 81601
Phone: 970-945-8212/ Fax: 970-384-3470 /Inspection Line: 970-384-5003
www.garfield~countv.com
Parcel No: (this information is available at the assesso;,ce 970-945-913u ~
2409-352-00-151 ,;;.. .. fccf~L,
Job Address: (if an address has not been assigned, please provide Cr, Hwy or Street Name & City) or and legal description
C:, 'if((, $:j
SW 1/4 NW 1/4 of Section 35, Township 7 South, Range 96 west of the 6th P.M. Garfield County, CO
3 Lot No: Block No: SubdJ Exemption:
4 Owner: (properd owner) Maili~ Address: Ph: AltPh;
Williams Pro uction RMT Co. 1058 R 215 Parachute, CO 81635 970-263-27 43
5 Contractor: Maili~ Address: Ph: AltPh:
Williams Production RMT CO. 1058 R 215 Parachute, CO 81635 970-263-27 43
6 Architect I Engineer: Mailing Address: Ph: AltPh:
S.M. Naeem Akhter 8WDryCreekCirclittletonC080120 303-513-3632
7 S~ Ft. of Building: S.<j, Ft. or Acres of Lot: ~ He~ht: No. of Floors:
63 s.f. 20'-" 1
8 Use of :Building:
Acousticall::.nclosure for a Natural Gas Compressor-'•Unit C-323: F2 Occupancy
9 Describe Work:
Construction of an acoustical enclosure foundation and building. Garfield County SUP 2008-137
10 Class of Work:
EJNew o Alteration o Addition
ll Garage: Septic:
o Attached 0 Detached o ISDS o Community
12 Driveway Permit: $Owners valuation of Work:
30,000.00
$
-NOTICE
Authnritv. TI1is application for a Building Permit must be signed by the Owner of the property, described above, or an authorized agent. If the signature below is not that of the Owner, a separate
Jetter of authority, signed by the Owner, must be provided with this Application.
Legal Acces.~. A Building Pennit cannot be issued without proof of legal and adequate access to the property for purposes ofinspcctions by the Building Department.
Other Permit~. Multiple separate permits may be required: (1) State Electrical Permit, (2) County ISDS Permit, (3) anotherpCJmit required for use on the property identified above, e.g. State or
County Highway/ Road Access or a State Wastewater Discharge Permit
Void Permit. A Building Permit becomes nul! and void if the work authorized is llOtcommenced within 180 days of the date of issuance and if work is suspended or abandoned for a period of 180
days after commencement.
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that I have read this Application and that the infonnation contained above is true and correct. I understand that the Building Department accepts the Application, al(lng with the plans
and specifications and other data submitte<i by me or on my behalf {submittals), based upon my certification as to accuracy.
A<>suming completeness of the submittals ancl approval of this Application, a Building Permit \vill be issued granting permission to me, as Owner, to construct the structnre(s) and facilities detailed on
the submittals reviewed by the Building Department.
In consideration of the issuance of the Building Permit, I agree that I and my agents will comply with provisions of any federal, state or local law regulating the work and the Garfield County Building
Code, ISDS regulations and applicable land use regulations (County Regulation(s)). I acknowledge that the Building Permit maybe suspended or revoked, upon notice from the County, if the location,
constmction or use of the structure(s) and facility(ies), described above, are not in compliance with County Regulation(s) or any other applicable law.
I hereby grant permission to the Building Department to enter the property, described above, to inspect the work I further acknowledge that the issuance of the Building Permit does not prevent the
Building Official from: (I) requiring the correction of errors in the submittals, if any, discovered after issuance; or (2) stopping construction or use of the structurc(s) or facllity(ies) if such is in violation
ofCotmty Regulation(s) or any other applicable law.
Review of this Application, including submittals, and inspections of the work by the Building Department do not constitl!te an acceptance of responsibility or liability by the County of errors, omissions
or discrepancies. As the Owner, I acknowledge that responsibility for compliance with federal, state and local laws and County Regulations rest with me and my authorized ageri:t<;, inc!~ ding without
limitation my architect designer, engineer and! or bllilder.
1 HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE NOTICE & CERTIFICATION ABOVE;
~~~\\~, 2/18/09 Please call Phil Vaughan 625-5350 when permit is ready
--·-
DATE
STAFF USE ONLY
Special Co?s: </JS, 4x )(. f ~'1.~
Adjusted Valuation: Plan Check Fee: Permit Fee: Manu home Fee: Mise Fees:
e.£4B'3. ?12. Uo.~ 40t.%'"
ISDS Fee: Total Fees: JCl~:/D Balance Due; ~ & Issue Date: ISDS No & Issued Date:
(p(p2. .2'3 %/!;.6'~ I/22A 2.';. 3-09
Setbacks: OCCGroup: ConstType: Zoning:
R
BLDG DEPT:~ ~ ~~~~~~DATE ~~'3Lo~ ~~~ ~ APRO-:u:-~-~DATE 2L2~
The following items are required by Garfield County for a final Inspection:
1) A final Electrical Inspection from the Colorado State Electrical Inspector.
2) Permanent address assigned by Gru·field County Building Department and posted at the
stmcture and where readily visible from access road.
3) A finished roof; a lockable building; completed exterior siding; exterior doors and windows
installed; a complete kitchen with cabinets, sink with hot & cold running water, non-absorbent
kitchen floor covering, counter tops and finished walls, ready for stove and refrigerator; all
necessary plumbing.
4) All bathrooms must be complete, with washbowl, tub or shower, toilet, hot and cold mnning
water, non-absorbent floors, walls finished, and privacy door.
5) Steps over three (3) risers, outside or inside must be must have handrails. Balconies and decks
over 30" high must be constmcted to all IBC and IRC requirements including guardrails.
6) Outside grading completed so that water slopes away from the building;
7) Exceptions to the outside steps, decks, grading may be made upon the demonstration of
extenuating circumstances., i.e. weather. Under such circumstances A Ce1iificate of
Occupancy may be issued conditionally.
8) A final inspection sign off by the Garfield County Road & Bridge Department for driveway
installation, where applicable; as well as any final sign off by the Fire District, and/or State
Agencies where applicable.
A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY (C.O.) WILL NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL ALL THE
ABOVE ITEMS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED.
A C.O. MAY TAKE UP TO 5 BUSINESS DAYS TO BE PROCESSED AND ISSUED.
OWNER CANNOT OCCUPY OR USE DWELLING UNTIL A C.O. IS ISSUED.
OCCUPANCY OR USE OF DWELLING WITHOUT A C.O. WILL BE CONSIDERED AN
ILLEGAL OCCUPANCY AND MAY BE GROUNDS FOR VACATING PREMISES
UNTIL ABOVE CONDITIONS ARE MET.
I understand and agree to abide by the above conditions for occupancy, use and the issuance of a
C.O. for the building identified in the Building Permit.
~o~~J\~~ 2/18/09
OWNERS SIGNATURE DATE
Bapplicationdecember2007
GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDING AND PLANNING
970-945-8212
MINIMUM APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS
FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF
COMMERCIAL OR MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS
Including
NEW CONSTRUCTION
ADDITIONS
ALTERATIONS
And
MOVED BUILDINGS
In order to understand the scope of the work intended under a permit application and expedite the issuance of a
permit it is important that complete information be provided. When reviewing a plan and it's discovered that
required information has not been provided by the applicant, this will result in the delay of the pe1mit issuance
and in proceeding with building construction. The owner or contractor shall be required to provide this
information before the plan review can proceed. Other plans that are in line for review may be given attention
before the new information may be reviewed after it has been provided to the Building Department.
Please review this document to determine if you have enough information to design your project and
provide adequate information to facilitate a plan review. Also, please consider using a design
professional for assistance in your design and a construction professional for construction of yonr
project. Any project with more than ten (10) occupants requires the plans to be sealed by a Colorado
Registered Design Professional.
To provide for a more understandable plan and in order to detennine compliance with the building, plumbing
and mechanical codes, applicants are requested to review the following checklist prior to and during design.
Plans to be included for a Building Permit must be on draft paper at least 18"x 24"" and drawn to
scale.
Plans must include a floor plan, a concrete footing and foundation plan, elevations all sides with decks,
balcony steps, hand rails and guard rails, windows and doors, including the finish grade and original grade
line. A section showing in detail, from the bottom of the footing to the top of the roof, including re-bar,
anchor bolts, pressure treated plates, floor joists, wall studs and spacing, insulation, sheeting, house-rap,
(which is required), siding or any approved building material. Engineered foundations may be required.
Check with the Building Department.
A window schedule. A door schedule. A floor framing plan, a roofing framing plan, roof must be designed to
withstand a 40 pound per square foot up to 7,000 feet in elevation, a 90 M.P.H. windspeed, wind exposure B
or C, and a 36 inch frost depth.
All sheets need to be identified by number and indexed. All of the above requirements must be met or your
plans will be returned.
All plans submitted must be in compliance with the 2003 IBC, IPC, IMC, IFGC, and IFC.
Applicants are required to indicate appropriately and to submit completed checklist at time of
application for a permit:
1. Is a site plan included that identifies the location of the proposed structure, additions or other buildings,
setback easements, and utility easements showing distances to the property lines from each corner of
the proposed stmcture prepared by a licensed surveyor and has the surveyors signature and
professional stamp on the drawing? Slopes of30% or more on properties must be show on site plan.
(NOTE: Section 106.2) Any site plan for the placement of any portion of a stmcture within 50 ft. of a
property line and not within a previously surveyed building envelope on a subdivision final plat shall
be prepared by a licensed surveyor and have the surveyors signature and professional stamp on the
drawing. Any structure to be built within a building envelope of a lot shown on a recorded
subdivision plat, shall include a copy of the building envelope as it is shown on the final plat with the
proposed structure located within the envelope.
YesX . __ _
2. Does the site plan when applicable include the location of the I.S.D.S. (Individual Sewage Disposal System)
and distances to the property lines, wells (on subject property and adjacent properties), streams or
water courses? This information must be certified by a licensed surveyor with their signature and
professional stamp on the design.
Yes Not necessary for this project _x __
3. Does the site plan indicate the location and direction of the State, County or private road accessing the
property?
YesX
4. Is the I.S.D.S. (Individual Sewage Disposal System) designed, stamped and signed by a Colorado
Registered Engineer?
Yes Not necessmy for this project_X __
5. Are the plans submitted for application review construction drawings and not drawings that are stamped or
marked identifying them as "Not for constmction, for permit issuance only", "Approval drawings
only", "For permit issuance only" or similar language?
YesX Not necessary for this project. __ _
6. Do the plans include a foundation plan indicating the size, location and spacing of all reinforcing steel in
accordance with the building code or per stamped engineered design?
YesX __ Not necessmy for this project __
2
7. If the building is a pre-engineered structure, is there a stamped, signed engineered foundation plan for this
building?
YesX __ Not necessary for this project __
8. Do the plans indicate the location and size of ventilation openings for under floor crawl spaces and the
clearances required between wood and earth?
Yes __ Not necessary for projectX __
9. Do the plans indicate the size and location of the ventilation openings for the attic, roof joist spaces and
soffits?
Yes __ Not necessary for this project_X __
10. Do the plans include design loads as required under the IBC or IRC for roof snowloads, (a minimum of 40
pounds per square foot in Garfield County)?
Yes_X __ Not necessary for this project __
II. Do the plans include design loads as required for floor loads under the IBC or IRC?
Yes __ Not necessary for this project_X __
12. Does the plan include a building section drawing indicating foundation, wall, floor, and roof construction?
Yes_X __ Not necessmy for this project __
13. Is the wind speed a11d exposure design included in the plan?
YesX __ Not necessary for this project __
14. Does the building section drawing include size and spacing of floor joists, wall studs, ceiling joists, roof
rafters or joists or liusses?
YesX __ Not necessary for this project __
15. Does the building section drawing or other detail include the method of positive connection of all columns
and beams?
YesX __ Not necessary for this project __
16. Does the elevation plan indicate the height of the building or proposed addition from the undisturbed
grade to the midpoint between the ridge and eave of a gable or shed roof or the top of a flat roof?
(Check applicable zone district for building height maximum)
Y es_X __ Not necessary for this project __
3
17. Does the plan include any stove or zero clearance fireplace planned for installation including make and
model and Colorado Phase II certifications or Phase II EPA certification?
Yes __ Not necessary for this projectX __
18. Does the plan include a masonry fireplace including a fireplace section indicating design to comply with
the IBC or IRC?
Yes __ Not necessary for this projectX __
19. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that egress/rescue windows from sleeping
rooms and/or basements comply with the requirements of the IBC or lRC?
Yes __ Not necessary for this projectX __
20. Does the plan include a window schedule or other verification that windows provide natural light and
ventilation for all habitable rooms?
Yes __ Not necessary for this project_X __
21. Do the plans indicate the location of glazing subject to human impact such as glass doors, glazing
immediately adjacent to such doors; glazing adjacent to any surface nmmally used as a walking
surface; sliding glass doors; fixed glass panels; shower doors and tub enclosures and specifY safety
glazing for these areas?
Yes __ Not necessary for this projectX __
22. Do the plans include a complete design for all mechanical systems planned for installation in this building?
Y esX No Not necessary for this project __ _
23. Have all areas in the building been accurately identified for the intended use? (Occupancy as identified in
the IBC Chapter 3)
YesX __ Not necessary for this project __ _
24. Does the plan indicate the quantity, form, use and storage of any hazardous materials that may be in use in
this building?
Yes __ Not necessary for this project X __
25. Is the location of all natural and liquid petroleum gas fumaces, boilers and water heaters indicated on the
plan?
Yes __ Not necessary for this project_X __
26. Do the plans indicate the location and dimension of restroom facilities and if more than four employees and
both sexes are employed, facilities for both sexes?
Yes __ Not necessary for this projectX __
4
27. Do the plans indicate that restrooms and access to the building are handicapped accessible?
Yes __ Not necessary for this projectX __
28. Have two (2) complete sets of construction drawings been submitted with the application?
YesX
29. Have you designed or had this plan designed while considering building and other construction code
requirements?
YesX
30. Does the plan accurately indicate what you intend to construct and what will receive a final inspection by
the Garfield County Building Department?
YesX
31. Do your plans comply with all zoning rules and regulations in the County related to your zone district? For
comer lots see supplemental section 5.05.03 in the Garfield County Zoning Resolution for setbacks.
YesX ---
32. Do you understand that approval for design and/or construction changes are required prior to the
implementation of these changes?
YesX
33. Do you understand that the Building Department will collect a "Plan Review" fee from you at the time of
application and that you will be required to pay the "Permit" fee as well as any "Septic System" or
"Road Impact" fees required, at the time you pick up your building permit?
YesX
34. Are you aware that you are required to call for all inspections required under the IBC including approval on
a final inspection prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy and occupancy of the building?
YesX
35. Are you aware that the Permit Application must be signed by the Owner or a written authority be given for
an Agent and that the party responsible for the project must comply with the Uniform Codes?
YesX
36. Are you aware that you must call in for an inspection by 3:30 the business day before the requested
inspection in order to receive it the following business day? Inspections will be made between
7:30 a.m. and 3:30p.m. Monday through Friday. Inspections are to be called in to 384-5003.
YesX
5
37. Are you aware that requesting inspections on work that is not ready or not accessible will result in a
$50.00 re-inspection fee?
YesX __
38. Are you aware that prior to submittal of a building permit application you are required to show proof of a
legal and adequate access to the site? This may include (but is not limited to) proof of your right to use
a private easement/right of way; a County Road and Bridge permit; a Colorado Dept. of Highway
Permit including a Notice to Proceed; a permit from the federal government or any combination. You
can contact the Road & Bridge Department at 625-8601. See Phone book for other agencies
YesX __
39. Do you understand that you will be required to hire a State of Colorado Licensed Electrician and Plumber
to perfo1m installations and hookups? The license number will be required at time of inspection.
Yes_X __
40. Are you aware, that on the front of the building permit application you will need to fill in the Parcell
Schedule Number for the lot you are applying for this permit on prior to submittal of the building
permit application? Your attention in this is appreciated.
YesX __
41. Do you know that the local fire district may require you to submit plans for their review of fire safety
issues?
Yes_X __ (Please check with the building department about this requirement)
42. Do you understand that if you are planning on doing any excavating or grading to the property prior to
issuance of a building pe1mit that you will be required to obtain a grading permit?
Yes X__ Not necessary for this project __
43. Did an Architect seal the plans for your commercial project? State Law requires any commercial project
with occupancy of more than 10 persons as per Section I 004 of the IBC to prepare the plans and
specifications for the project.
Yes Not Necessary for this project _x ____ _
44. If you anticipate obtaining a water tap from the City of Rifle, please provide a letter indicating that
the City will provide water service. No building permit application will be accepted without such
a letter.
Yes
6
I hereby acknowledge that I have read, understand, and answered these questions to the best of my
ability.
lf~()\~~--~~
Signature
2/19/09
Date
970-625-5350
Phone: ______ ( days); _________ .(evenings)
Una Compressor Station-Acoustical Encl. C-323
Pr~ectName: ______________________________ ___
SW1/4 NW1/4, Sec. 35, T7S, R96W of the 6thPI>.
Project Address: 0
Note:
On any of these questions you may be required to provide this information. If required information is not
supplied, delays in issuing the permit are to be expected. Work may not proceed without the issuance of the
permit.
*If you have answered "Not necessary for this project" on any of the questions and it is determined by the
Building Official that the information is necessary to review the application and plans to determine minimum
compliance with the adopted codes, please expect the following:
A. The application may be placed behind more recent applications for building permits in the review process
and not reviewed until required information has been provided and the application rotates again to first position
for review.
B. Delay in issuance of the permit.
C. Delay in proceeding with construction.
BpcommDec2007
7
February 12, 2009
Mr. Fred Jarman
Director
Garfield County Building and Planning Department
1 08 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Dear Mr. Jarman:
Williams Production RMT Company
Tower 3, Suire 1000
1515 Arapahoe Street
Denver. CO 80202
303/572-3900 main
.~03/629-8262 fux
By this letter, Williams Production RMT Co. and Bargath Inc. authorize PVCMI-Land Planning
Division to represent us in any and all matters related to the building permit applications known
as the Una Compressor Station Noise Enclosures for Units C-321, C-322, and C-323 located in
the SWl/4 NWl/4 of Section 35, Township 7 South, Range 96 West, of the 6th P.M. on Garfield
County Assessor's Parcel number 2409-352-00-151.
This includes the preparation and submission of documents associated with the land use
applications and representation of these applications before the applicable appointed and elected
boards.
Sincerely,
Mr. Eric Miller
Director of Facilities and Gathering
Bargath Inc.
Williams Production RMT Co.
October I, 2008
Garfield County
I 09 glh Street
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Authority as Agent
Dear County Representative;
ElCI'LORAilON 8< PRODUCTION
1058 CR#2l5
P.o. s,;7o
PMachurc. CO 81635..03'70
970/285-9377
v7ni2&S..9573 r:n:
This letter is to confirm the appointment of Sandy Hotard and Eric Miller as authorized
Agents to execute documents for the following;
• Williams Production RMT Company
• Bargath Inc.
• Wilgath LLC
• Ryan Gulch LLC
This authority is granted for all documents furnished to Garfield County.
Sincerely,
Alan Harrison
Vice President
Denver Region
DRBISH JC/01/08
Project: Williams Gas
ANM Proj. #: 722500
Date: February 09,2009
Document: Mechanical Calculations
Total Pages: 3 Page Total
Included Calculations:
Prepared by:
Reviewed by:
• Ventilation Calculations
Diana Benson, B.Tech.
Mechanical Designer
Ralph Wesche, P. Eng.
Chief Mechanical Engineer
ATCO Noise Management Ltd.
1243 McKnight Blvd NE, Calgary, AB T2E 5Tl
Bus: (403) 292-7804 Fax: (403) E-mail: info@atconoise.com
722500 Williams Gas -Mech. Cales. 02/09/09 DB
CAT engine 03516 obtained a heat rejection and combustion air inlet flow as stated
below from the CAT engine specifications;
HREnglne= 7155 BTU/Min
= 429,300 BTU/Hr
Combustion air inlet flow= 3435 CFM
Assumed compressor heat rejection to be 15% of engine heat rejection;
HRcompmsso;= 15% (429,300 BTU/Hr)
= 64,395 BTU/Hr
Total heat rejection of building;
HRTotal = 493,695 BTU/Hr
Design Temps:
Design Elev.:
Density Ratio:
Definition:
Outdoor= 1 00.6' F
TR=40°F
4839 ft
0.85
Q = Airflow in CFM
Q = (493,695 BTU/Hr)
( 40°F)(0.85)
= 14,520 CFM
Safety Factor;
Q = (14,250 CFM)(1.15)
= 16,698 CFM
Total CFM of building;
Q = 16,698 CFM + 3435CFM
= 20,133 CFM
Inlet openings: ( 1200 PPM)
2 inlets allowing I 0,067 CFM at an opening of35" x 35"
ATCO Noise Management Ltd. Page 2 of3
722500 Williams Gas -Mech. Cales.
Exhaust openings: (1200 PPM)
2 exhaust fans allowing 8349 CFM at an opening of 32" x 32"
Volume
Vtotal
= (22 ft)(30 ft)(21 ft)
= 13.860 ftl
Ventilation required= AirC/Hr = (20,648 CFM) * 60
(13,860 ft 3)
= 89 AirC/Hr
ATCO Noise Management Ltd.
02/09/09 DB
Page 3 of3
~~~~ GEOTEGHNIGAL
I ENGINEERING GROUP
August 12, 201 0
Williams Production RMT Company
P.O. Box370
Parachute, Colorado 81635
Attention: Mr. Tom Fiore
Subject: UNA Compressor Station Enclosure Foundations
Garfield Building Permit Nos. 11232, 11233 & 11234
Garfield County, Colorado
GEG Job No. 3,128
Dear Mr. Fiore,
Garfield County Building Department Permit Nos. 11232, 11233 and 11234 relate
to foundation support of noise enclosure structures for the three existing compressors at
Williams Una Compressor station located in Garfield County, Colorado. The purpose of
this letter is to present a summary the foundations are installed in general conformance
with the design by this firm.
Foundation designs are presented in the "Williams Production RMT, UNA
Compressor Unit Acoustic Enclosure, Helical Pier Foundation Design Amendment,
Garfield County, Colorado", Sheets 1 thru 3 of 3, dated March 25, 2010. As requested, a
Geotechnical Engineering Group, Inc. (GEG) representative observed the installation of
helical piers and structural connections during construction. It is our opinion the noise
enclosure foundations, permit numbers 11232, 11233 & 11234 are completed in a
manner that is consistent with design specifications and industry standards at this time.
Geotechnical, Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants
Grand Junction -Montrose-Moab-Crested Butte -Rifle
(970) 245-4078 • fax (970) 245-7115 • geotechnicalgroup.com
2308 Interstate Avenue, Grand Junction, Colorado 81505
~~~\ GEOTEC::HNIOAI..:
1 ENGINEERING GROLIF!
If we may be of further service in discussing the contents of this report or the
engineering aspects of this project please contact us.
Sincerely,
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
Scott Godfrey, E.I.T.
Project Engineer
SEG: JPW: SG
Reviewed by:
John P. Withers, P.E.
Principal Engineer
1cc: emailed Tom Fiore-
1 cc: emailed Phil Vaughan-
Tom.Fiore@Williams.com
phil@pvcmi.com
GEG Job No. 3,128
Williams Production RMT
UNA Compressor Station Enclosure Foundations
August 12, 2010
2
Parcel Detail
Garfield County Assessor/Treasurer
Parcel Detail Information
Page I of 5
Asses~gr/T reaswr~rfuwJ:tySearch I A_s.sessorS_ubs.et Uuery I Assessor Sili~~_search
CJ~rk HHl'ti::Prder Rec~ptiollS_eJlii::h
Bi:!S.iJ:;_ Building Gharacteris.H~~ I li:!XJDformation
Parcr:!LO..~tail I ~illiJ_e Detilil I Sales_U~tflj] I R~sidentiai/Cpmfllfl.rciallm[Jroverrmnt Detail
La_mllllltilil I fl.lmt[]gei;Jphs. I MiJJlg_~yJSI:lY~nu~~Detail
IT ax Area II Account Number II Parcel Number 112008 Mill Levy I
I 027 II R005975 II 240935200151 II 35.007 I
llwner Name and Mailing Address
!WILLIAMS PRODUCTION RMT COMPANY
J1058 CNTY RD 215
!PARACHUTE. CO 81635
Assessor's Parcel Description
(Not to be used as a legal description)
ISECT.TWN.RNG:35-7-96 DESC: SWNW
IPRE:R005973 BK:0973 PG:0786 BK:OBOI
IPG:0658 BK:0581 PG:0255 BK:0580
IPG:0066 BK:0569 PG:0664 BK:0569
IPG:0301 BK:I840 PG:SIS RECPT:706396
/BK:I840 PG:917 RECPT:706395 BK:I203
IPG:425 RECPT:568115 BK:II85 PG:443
IRECPT:562930 BK:II85 PG:440
http:/ I www.garcoact.coml assessor I parcel. asp? Parce1Number=2 4093 5200151
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2118/2009
Parcel Detail Page 2 of 5
IRECPT:5S2929 BK:II35 PG:820-823 I
IRECPT:547474 BK:II35 PG:818-819 I
IRECPT:547473 BK:II35 PG:81S-817 I
IRECPT:547742 BK:II27 PG:710 I
IRECPT:54400S BK:II2S PG:41 I
/RECPT:544393 BK:II2S PG:40 I
IRECPT:544393 BK:0948 PG:OOIS I
location
I Physical Address: II1B20 300 COUNTY RO PARACHUTE I
I Subdivision: I
I land Acres: 1140 I
I land Sq Ft: I 0
I Section II Township II Range I
I 35 II 7 II 9S I
2008 Property Tax Valuation Information
II Actual Value II Assessed Value I
I land: 135.oooll 10.7501
I Improvements: J 192.5soll 15.3301
I Total: II 327.5soll 2S.080I
Most Recent Sale
Sale Date: II9!71200S
Sale Price: 11395.000
http:/ I www.garcoact.coml assessor I parcel.asp?Parce1Number=2 40935200151 211812009
Parcel Detail Page 3 of 5
Basic Building Characteristics
Number of Residential II
Buildings: I
Number of Comm/lnd
lo I Buildings:
I Residential Building Occurrence I Characteristics I
I I STORY: IILB20 I
I TOTAl HEATED AREA: IILB20 I
I ABSTRACT CODE: liS INGLE FAM.RES-IMPROVEMTS I
I ARCHITECTURAl STYlE: II MODULAR -UBC/IRC/IBC I
I EXTERIOR WAll: II MASONITE I
RDDF COVER: IICOMP SHNGL I
RDDF STRUCTURE: IIGABLE I
INTERIOR WALL: IIDRYWALL I
FLOOR: IISHT VINYL I
FLOOR: IICARPET I
HEATING FUEL: IlGAS I
HEATING TYPE: IIFDRCEO AIR I
I STORIES: IISTDRIES 1.0 I
I BATHS: 12
I ROOMS: 15
I UNITS: II
I BEDROOMS: 13
I YEAR BUILT: II1BS5 I
Tax Information
http:/ I www.garcoact.coml assessor I parcel.asp?Parcel Number= 2 40 83 5200151 2118/2008
Parcel Detail Page 4 of 5
I Tax Year II Transaction Type II Amount I
I 2008 II Tax PaymBnt: WhoiB II ($813.00)1
I 2008 II Tax Amount II $813.001
I 2007 II Tax PaymBnt: WhoiB II ($848.38)1
I 2007 II Tax Amount II $848.381
I 2008 II Tax PaymBnt: WhoiB II ($772.40)1
I 2008 II Tax Amount II $772.401
I 2005 II Tax PaymBnt: SBcond Half II ($387.08)1
I 2005 II Tax PaymBnt: First Half II ($387.08)1
I 2005 II Tax Amount II $774.181
I 2004 II Tax PaymBnt: SBcond Half II ($388.83)1
I 2004 II Tax PaymBnt: First Half II ($388.83)j
I 2004 I Tax Amount $778.28
I 2003 I Tax PaymBnt: Second Half ($418.07)
I 2003 II Tax PaymBnt: First Half II ($418.07)1
I 2003 II Tax Amount II $838.141
I 2002 II lnterBst PaymBnt II ($3.55)1
I 2002 II Interest ChargB II $3.551
I 2002 II Tax PaymBnt: Second Half II ($354.72)1
I 2002 II Tax Payment: First Half II ($354.72)1
I 2002 II Tax Amount II $708.441
I 2001 II Tax Payment: Second Half II ($378.28)1
I 2001 II Tax PaymBnt: First Half II ($378.28)1
I 2001 II Tax Amount II $758.581
I 2000 II Tax Payment: WhoiB II ($11.10)1
I 2000 I Tax Payment: First Half II $5.551
I 2000 Tax PaymBnt: First Half II ($5.55)1
I 2000 I Tax Amount II $11.101
http:! I www.garcoact.coml assessor I parcel.asp?Parce1Number=2 40935200151 2118/2009
Geoteehnieal
llfii\Engineering
I Group, Ine.
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Southwest '!. of the Northwest '!. of Section 35,
Township 7 South, Range 96 West, 61h Principal Meridian,
Garfield County, Colorado
Prepared For:
Star Valley Engineering
107657 N. U.S. Highway 89
Etna, WY83118
Attention: Mr. Charles Bucans
Job No. 3,071
November 5, 2008
Geotechnical, Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants
Grand Junction -Montrose -Moab -Crested Butte
(970) 245-4078 • fax (970) 245-7115 • geotechnicalgroup.com
2308 Interstate Avenue, Grand Junction, Colorado 81505
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SCOPE ............................................................................................................................................ 1
SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS ..••....•.•...•...•..................................................................•....••......•. 2
SITE CONDITIONS •.................................................•.......•..•......•.....••..•..••....•..•.........•...................• 2
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ....•.........................................•..•...•..•....•••..•.•..••.••..•.....••...........•.... 3
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ..••.••..•..•......•.....••..•...••.••......•...................................•.....................•. 4
SITE DEVELOPMENT ......................................................................•....•••.......••.•...•.•...••.•..•.••........ 5
EXCAVATION ................................................................................................................................. 6
EMBANKMENT ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 8
FOUNDATIONS ..................•.......................................•...•..••.••..••.••..••••..••.•..................•................ 10
DRIVEN FRICTION PILES ............................................................................................................... 11
DRILLED PIER AND SCREW PILE FOUNDATIONS •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 13
SPREAD FOOTINGS-STRUCTURES WHERE MORE RISK OF MOVEMENT IS ACCEPT ABLE ••••••••••••••••••••• 15
REINFORCED MAT FOUNDATIONS ................................................................................................. 16
TANK SPREAD FOOTING RING FOUNDATIONS AND TANK BOTTOM SUPPORT •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 18
SEISMIC AND VIBRATING FOUNDATION DESIGN CON SID ERA TIONS ..........................•..... 20
FLOOR SYSTEMS ........................................................................................................................ 21
BELOW-GRADE CONSTRUCTION ........................•.......................•...........•......•.....•.....••..••••...... 23
SOIL RESISTIVITY CONSIDERATIONS •....•••....•••.••...•..•.........•...........•.........•...........................• 23
PAVEMENT ................................................................................................................................... 23
CONCRETE ••.....••.....••.......•....•..•.............................................•.•................•.•...•.••..•..•..••...•..•..•...•. 28
SURFACE DRAINAGE ..................•.................••......••.•....•..•..••.••.....................•............................ 29
CONSTRUCTION MONITORING .•...............•..•........................•..............................•......•.....••.....• 30
LIMITATIONS ..•........•......•••..•..•.....••....•.....•...•....................•......•..................................•.......•......•. 31
FIG. 1 ·VICINITY MAP
FIG. 2 ·LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIG. 3-KEY TO SYMBOLS
FIGS. 4 THROUGH 7 ·LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGS. 8 THROUGH 10-SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
FIG. 11 -DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS
FIGS.12 THROUGH 15-GRADATION TEST RESULTS
FIG. 16-MOISTURE DENSITY TEST RESULTS
FIG. 17-CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST RESULTS
FIG. 18-KEY AND BENCH CONCEPT
FIG. 19-KEY AND BENCH DRAIN DETAILS
TABLES I AND II ·SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
APPENDIX A· SAMPLE SITE GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
APPENDIX B-PAVEMENT DESIGN CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX C-CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FLEXIBLE AND RIGID
PAVEMENT
SCOPE
This report presents the results of our Geotechnical Investigation for the proposed
UNA Compressor Station to be located in the Southwest Y. of the Northwest Y. of Section
35, Township 7 South, Range 96 West, 6th Principal Meridian in Garfield County,
Colorado. Our investigation was conducted to explore subsurface conditions and provide
foundation design recommendations for the anticipated construction. The report includes
descriptions of subsoil and groundwater conditions found in four exploratory borings made
during this investigation, recommended foundation systems, allowable design soil
pressures and design and construction criteria for details influenced by the subsurface
conditions. This investigation was performed in general conformance with our proposal
No. 08-133 dated September 24, 2008.
The report was prepared from data developed during field exploration, laboratory
testing, engineering analysis and experience with similar conditions. A brief summary of
our conclusions and recommendations follows. Detailed criteria are presented within the
report.
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS
1. Subsoils found in the exploratory borings consisted generally of 5% to 28%
feet of sandy and gravelly clay with cobbles and boulders. No formational
material was encountered to a depth of 28% feet, the maximum depth
explored. Auger refusal was encountered in all exploratory test borings on
cobbles and boulders. Groundwater was not encountered in the exploratory
test borings on the day of drilling to the depths explored.
2. We believe a deep foundation such as drilled piers can provide a more
positive foundation. An alternative, with risk of movement, footing type
foundation bearing on a well-compacted structural fill and reinforced mat
foundation is also presented. A discussion, including detailed design and
construction criteria are included in the text of the report.
3. Surface drainage should be designed for rapid runoff of surface water away
from the proposed structures.
SITE CONDITIONS
The subject site was located in the Southwest Y. of the Northwest Y. of Section 35,
Township 7 South, Range 96 West, 6th Principal Meridian in Garfield County, Colorado. A
project vicinity map is shown on Fig.1. The subject site was an existing staging area site
adjacent to an existing well pad. The site was relatively flat and had been stripped of
vegetation. The south portion of the site contained existing trailers and an operating drill
rig. The area south and west of the site sloped down to the site at a inclination of about 1
horizontal to 1 vertical for a height of about 35 to 40 feet and appeared to be an
excavation cut slope. The area above the excavation cut slope sloped down toward the
site at an inclination of about 3 horizontal to 1 vertical and contained a cover of sage
UNA Compressor Station
Wllll$ms Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
RE!port Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
2
brush and Juniper trees. The area north and east of the site sloped down from the site at
an inclination of about 1.5 horizontal to 1 vertical for a height of about 50 feet and
appeared to be a constructed fill slope. The area beyond the placed fill slope sloped
down away from the site at an inclination of about 3 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter and
contained a cover of sage brush and Juniper trees.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
We understand the proposed construction will consist of a gas compressor station.
The proposed construction will include buildings, compressor pads and ancillary
equipment. Building foundation loads will include column loads up to 30 Kips.
Compressor foundation will be about 12 feet by 30 feet and have a total foundation load
up to 1 ,000 Kips. Miscellaneous Equipment will be skid supported with skid dimensions fo
4 feet by 4 feet to 20 feet by 20 feet. Miscellaneous tanks will be 1 0 feet diameter by 15
feet high to 16 feet diameter by 25 feet high and will be supported by ring-wall
foundations. We anticipate differential settlement tolerances for these structures are 2
inches. No below grade construction is planned. Site development may include existing
excavation cut slopes up to 35 feet high and existing placed fill slopes up to 50 feet high.
If proposed construction changes or is different from what is stated, we should be
contacted to review actual construction and our recommendations.
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Gatfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
3
Proposed construction is gas field industrial. There will be no landscaping, irrigation
or finished areas.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Subsurface conditions at the site were investigated by drilling and sampling four
exploratory borings. Locations of the exploratory borings are shown on Fig. 2. Graphic
logs of the soils found in the borings and field penetration resistance tests are presented
on Figs. 3 through 7. Subsurface conditions encountered consisted generally of 5)1:, to
28)1:, feet of sandy and gravelly clay with varying amounts cobbles and boulders. Auger
refusal was encountered in all exploratory test borings on cobbles and boulders. When
auger refusal was encountered the test boring was offset 5 to 10 feet and re-drilled until
auger refusal was encountered. No formational material was encountered to a depth of
28Y:. feet, the maximum depth explored. Groundwater was not encountered in the
exploratory test borings on the day of drilling. The sandy and gravelly clay was medium
stiff to stiff, moist and brown. Existing fill was not encountered in the exploratory test
boring, however we anticipate existing fill will be encountered near the northwest edge of
the compressor site.
UNA Compressor Station
Wlllla:ms Production RMT Company
Garfl(!ld County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
4
Four sandy and gravelly clay sample tested had moisture contents of 3.2 to 11.0
percent, liquid limits of 27 to 30, plasticity indexes of 9 to 16 and had 50 to 68 percent
passing a No.200 sieve (silt and clay sized particles). Three sandy and gravelly clay
samples tested had moisture contents of 10.8 to 13.0 percent, dry densities of 94 to 115
pcf and exhibited 0.2 to 6.8 percent one-dimensional consolidation when wetted under a
confining pressure of 250, 500 and 1,000 psf. One sandy and gravelly clay sample
tested had a moisture content of 9.8 percent, a dry density of 105 pcf and exhibited an
internal angle of friction of 23 degrees and a cohesion of 300 when tested for direct
shear strength properties. Three sandy and gravelly clay samples tested had moisture
contents of 3.2 to 11.0 percent and had a water soluble sulfate concentrations of 1 ,300
to 5,000 ppm. One blended bulk from exploratory test borings TH-2 and TH-3 at a
depth of 0 to 5 feet had a liquid limit of 27, a plasticity index of 9, a maximum standard
Proctor dry density of 114.5 pcf, an optimum moisture content of 13.0, had 68 percent
passing a No.200 sieve, and had a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of 3.2. Results of
laboratory testing are presented on Figs. 8 through 17 and summarized on Tables I and
II.
SITE DEVELOPMENT
The surface in areas to receive additional fill, if any, or support structures should
be scarified to a depth of 1 0 inches, moisture conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
5
moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor (ASTM 0 698)
maximum dry density. On-site soils free of deleterious materials, organics and particles
over 6-inches diameter can be reused in non-structural areas for general site grading. Fill
in structural areas may include special requirements as discussed later under the
"FOUNDATIONS" section of this report. Additional fill placement should be moisture
conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95
percent of standard Proctor (ASTM 0698) maximum dry density in 10-inch maximum
thickness loose lifts. Subgrade soils and fill greater than 10 foot in depth should be
moisture conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture and compacted to at least
100 percent maximum dry density standard Proctor (ASTM 0698). Subgrade
preparation, and placement and compaction of grading fill should be observed and tested
by a representative of our firm during construction. Sample site grading specifications are
included in Appendix A.
Excavation
Soils used to construct additional general site fill slopes, if any, will be obtained
from the excavation cut slopes above the pad location. The subject site should be
stripped of all vegetation and organic material prior to additional fill slope construction.
We recommend that all material disturbed by excavation be removed from excavation
areas to expose undisturbed material. The inclination of the cut slopes based on stability
analysis will depend on the height of the slope and the soil strength characteristics. Our
UNA Compressor Station
Willia_ms Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
6
analysis of the existing excavation cut slope was based on "Effect of Soil Strength
Parameters on Stability of Man-Made Slopes" by Awtar Singh. The soil strength
characteristics used in our stability analysis were obtained from direct shear strength test
data from our laboratory and site soil samples. We used an internal angle of friction of 23
degrees, a cohesion of 300 psf, a moist soil density of 115 pcf and rnaximurn cut slope
height of 35 feet in our analysis. We consider a calculated factor of safety against
movement of 1.5 or greater is adequate for permanent slopes and a calculated factor of
safety of 1.2 is adequate for temporary slopes.
We calculated a minimum factor of safety against slope failure of 1.2 for the
existing/proposed cut slope of 1.0 H to 1.0 V with a rnaxirnum height of 35 feet. In our
opinion, temporary excavations cut slopes should therefore be constructed for at least 1.0
horizontal to 1 .0 vertical or flatter if possible. Cut slopes should be adequately treated to
mitigate erosion and other potential stability concerns. Our observations and calculations
indicate slopes constructed at an inclination of 1.0 horizontal to 1 vertical will require
periodic maintenance due to surface erosion. We calculated a factor of safety against
slope failure of 1.5 for an inclination of 2 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter for permanent
reclamation excavation cut slopes.
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
7
Embankment
Fill materials, if any, should contain no particles larger than about one half of the
lift thickness with the largest scattered pieces no greater than six inches. All areas to
receive additional fill should be stripped of all vegetation, organic soils, and other
deleterious material prior to fill placement. Our recommendation for general fill
materials, preparation and placement are included in APPENDIX A.
Man made fill construction in soils such as those encountered in the area is
problematic. Clays can require significant hydration periods. Silts are highly moisture
sensitive and shale fragments require breakdown. These factors present more
challenge than the moisture content, lift thickness and compactive effort factors involved
with other embankment projects. The additional factors involved at the subject site
result in less confidence in operator experience or 'dead reckoning' contractor methods
and the need for more reliance on engineering controls such as laboratory Proctor and
field moisture I density gauge measurements. Compaction equipment including large
self propelled sheepsfoot compactor, steel drum vibratory compactor, disc and I or
pneumatic breakdown (tractor attached or equivalent), blade and water truck have also
been part of successful embankment construction such as that planned on the subject
site.
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garlleld County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
8
Areas to receive fill should be constructed with a toe key and benched into
competent foundation material. The key and bench concept is shown on Fig. 18. We
should observe the key and bench preparation to verify that the key and bench extends
into competent material and meets our recommendations. Prior to placement of
structural fill, the resulting subgrade should be scarified 1 0-inches, moisture conditioned
and compacted as discussed in APPENDIX A. A drain should be constructed at the
back of the toe key and each bench in all permanent fill slopes to drain subsurface
water that may accumulate at the fill I natural soil contact. The toe key and bench drains
should consist of a 4 or 6 inch diameter perforated drain pipe surrounded by at least 3
cubic feet per linear foot of drain, free draining aggregate all wrapped with an
appropriate filter fabric. Toe key and bench drain details are shown on Fig. 19.
The inclination of the fill slopes based on stability analysis will depend on the
height of the slope and · the soil strength characteristics. Our analysis of the
embankment fill slope was based on "Effect of Soil Strength Parameters on Stability of
Man-Made Slopes", by Awtar Singh. The soil strength characteristics used in our
stability analysis were obtained from direct shear strength tests from our laboratory of
soil samples from the subject site. We used an internal angle of friction of 23 degrees,
a cohesion of 300 psf, a moist soil density of 115 pcf and a maximum fill height of 50
feet in our analysis. Our analysis indicates a temporary fill slope constructed with a
slope inclination of 1% horizontal to 1.0 vertical has a calculated factor of safety against
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
9
slope failure of about 1.3. Our analysis indicates a permanent reclamation fill slope
constructed with a slope inclination of 2.0 horizontal to 1.0 vertical or flatter has a
calculated factor of safety of 1.5.
FOUNDATIONS
This investigation indicates subsurface conditions at foundation levels generally
consist of medium stiff to very stiff sandy, silty clay with volume change potential. The
recommendations presented in this report are intended to reduce or mask the influence
of swelling or settling soils but will not completely mitigate the influence of swelling or
settling soils. In our opinion, a foundation to better mitigate risk of movement should be
anchored below the zone of probable moisture variation and concentrate the weight of
the structure to resist potential swell of the clay soils. In our opinion, a straight shaft
drilled pier, driven pile or screw pile foundation bedded in an underlying competent
stratum most nearly satisfies these criteria. Drilled piers, driven piles or screw piles will
not likely reach a formational material bearing stratum due to the varying cobble and
boulder content of the site subsurface soils. Drilled piers, driven piles or screw piles
may be designed as friction piles in the natural undisturbed soils.
UNA Compressor Station
WHII~ms Production RMT Company
Giirfield County, Colorado
Repqrt Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
10
We present design and construction criteria for drilled piers, driven piles, screw
piles, spread footings and reinforced mat foundations in order of decreasing
attractiveness. These criteria were developed from analysis of field and laboratory data
and our experience. The additional requirements (if any) of the structural engineer should
also be considered.
Based on the soils encountered in the exploratory test borings and observations of
the existing site conditions, the proposed compressor station structures will be located
entirely on cut areas and will not be supported by existing fill. If existing fill is encountered
during foundation construction, the existing fill should be completely removed and
replaced with well compacted structural fill as discussed below.
Driven Friction Piles
1. Pile material should be concrete filled, closed end, steel pipes (10-3/4-inch
O.D., 0.25-inch thick walled or heavier). Pipe piles are typically used in
this area. Tip reinforcement should be provided to reduce pile damage
during hard driving. A maximum allowable service stress of 12,000 psi
should not be exceeded. Based on our experience, capacities of 10 tons
to 55 tons can be developed during driving. The piles should be driven to
a minimum depth of 40 feet and designed using a skin friction value of 400
psf for the portion of pier in native sandy and gravelly clay soils. Skin
friction should be neglected for the portion of pier within 5 feet of the ground
surface. After installation the pile should be allowed to rest for a minimum
of 24 hours then the pile driving hammer reinstalled on the pile and the
pile re-struck to verify the skin friction has developed.
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
11
2. We did not identify a competent bearing strata to a depth of 28% feet, the
maximum depth explored. The subsurface soils contained varying
amounts of cobbles and boulders which may provide varying resistance
during pile installation. We anticipate variable and increased depths to
competent bearing stratum across the site. Piles should have a minimum
length of 40 feet below the finished site grade.
3. Groups of piles placed closer than three diameters, center to center,
should be evaluated to determine their reduced capacity.
4. The pile-driving hammer should be operated at the manufacturer's
recommended stroke and speed when the "set" is measured.
5. The contractor should select a driving hammer and cushion combination
which is capable of installing selected piles without overstressing the pile.
The contractor should submit the pile driving plan and the pile hammer
cushion combination to the structural engineer for evaluation of the driving
stress in advance of the pile installation.
6. We believe a modulus of subgrade reaction of 220 psi/in can be used for
lateral resistance of pile caps. A plate load test can be performed to
provide a more direct correlation between site soils and modulus of
subgrade reaction.
7. There should be at least a 4-inch or thicker continuous void beneath all
grade beams and foundation walls, between piles, to concentrate dead load
on the piles and provide separation between the bottom of grade beams
and site soils.
8. If the pile foundations are designed and constructed as discussed above,
we estimate that the post construction total settlement will be about % to
% inch with about % of the total settlement occurring as differential
settlement. The estimated settlement is dependent on pile design loads,
soil conditions supporting the piles and pile depth. If the pile design loads,
soil conditions or the pile depths are different than discussed above, we
should be contacted to provide additional settlement considerations.
9. Exterior walls must be protected from frost action. Refer to the local building
code for details. We understand the Garfield County Building Department
recommends coverage of at least 36 inches at an elevation up to 6,000
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
12
feet, at least 42 inches for elevations of 6,000 to 8,000 feet and at least 48
inches for elevations above 8,000 feet for frost protection.
10. A representative of our office should observe and keep records of
penetration resistance, pile lengths and other factors that could affect the
performance of the foundation, during driving.
11. We recommend performing a load test of select piles to verify the design
load has been obtained during installation.
Drilled Pier and Screw Pile Foundations
1. Piers and I or screw piles should be designed for a maximum allowable end
bearing pressure of 4,000 psf and an allowable skin friction value of 400 psf
for the portion of pier in native sandy and gravelly clay soils. Skin friction
should be neglected for the portion of pier within 5 feet of the ground
surface.
2. Piers should be designed for a minimum deadload pressure of 500 psf
based on pier cross-sectional area. If this deadload cannot be achieved,
pier length should be increased. The native sandy and gravelly clay can be
assigned a skin friction value of 300 psf for uplift resistance, at least 5 feet
below the pier cap.
3. Piers should penetrate at least 40 feet into the native sandy clay soils and
have a total length of at least 40 feet.
4. Piers should be reinforced the full length of the pier with at least two No. 4
Grade 60 reinforcing bars to resist tension in the event of soil movement.
Reinforcement should extend into grade beams and foundation walls.
5. Foundation walls and grade beams should be well reinforced; the
reinforcement should be designed by a qualified structural engineer.
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
13
6. If the pier or screw pile foundations are designed and constructed as
discussed above, we estimate that the post construction total settlement
will be about Y. to % inch with about Y. of the total settlement occurring as
differential settlement. The estimated settlement is dependent on pier oor
screw pile design loads, soil conditions supporting the piers or screw piles
and pier or screw pile depth. If the pier or screw pile design loads, soil
conditions or the pier or screw pile depths are different than discussed
above, we should be contacted to provide additional settlement
considerations.
7. There should be at least a 4-inch or thicker continuous void beneath all
grade beams and foundation walls, between piers, to concentrate dead load
on the piers and provide separation between the bottom of grade beams
and site soils.
8. Piers should be carefully cleaned prior to placement of concrete.
Groundwater was not encountered at the time of this investigation to the
depths investigated.
9. We believe problems associated with pier installation can be significantly
reduced by using a "drill and pour'' construction procedure; that is, placing
concrete immediately after pier holes are drilled, cleaned and inspected.
Pumping, tremie placement, vacuum truck or auger cast methods may be
required for proper dewatering of the pier holes if water is encountered
during drilling. Concrete should not be placed in any pier hole containing
more than 3 inches water. Due to recent experience with improper
installation, we recommend the use of a contractor with previous drilled pier
installation experience.
10. Installation of drilled piers should be observed by a representative of our
firm to identify the proper bearing strata and confirm proper installation
technique. Our representative should be called to visit the site at the time of
the first pier excavation and all subsequent pier excavations.
11. Exterior walls must be protected from frost action. Refer to the local building
code for details. We understand the Garfield County Building Department
recommends coverage of at least 36 inches at an elevation up to 6,000
feet, at least 42 inches for elevations of 6,000 to 8,000 feet and at least 48
inches for elevations above 8,000 feet for frost protection.
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
14
12. Formation of mushrooms or enlargements at the top of piers should be
avoided during pier drilling and subsequent construction operations. It
may be necessary to case the top portion of the pier hole prior to pier
concrete placement to prevent flaring of the top of the pier.
13. Installation of drilled piers should be observed by a representative of our
firm to identify the proper bearing strata and confirm proper installation
technique. Our representative should be called to visit the site at the time
of the first pier excavation.
14. We recommend performing a load test of select piers and I or screw piles
to verify the design load has been obtained during installation.
Spread Footings-Structures where more risk of movement is acceptable
1. Footing foundations bearing on at least 4-feet depth of well compacted,
structural fill can be designed for maximum soil bearing pressure of 2,500
psf. The soil bearing pressure may be increased by 30 percent for
temporary loading such as wind and seismic loads. Loose soils, existing
fill, existing foundations, if any, and organic materials should be removed
full depth and replaced with a well compacted structural fill.
2. The foundation areas should be over excavated 4-feet. The resulting
subgrade should be scarified 10 inches, moisture conditioned and re-
compacted to 95 percent of standard Proctor (ASTM 0698) to help
mitigate potential soil settlement and provide a uniform subgrade. The
foundation should bear completely on at least 4-feet uniform depth of well-
compacted structural fill to at least 4-feet beyond each footing,
horizontally. Loose soils should be completely removed from foundation
bearing areas, prior to placing fill or concrete. The structural fill should be
a crushed, uniformly graded, granular material with a maximum size of 1.5
inches, maximum of 15 percent passing the No. 200 sieve and maximum
liquid limit of 30. A COOT Class 5 or Class 6 type crushed base course
could be used to satisfy these criteria and is recommended. The
structural fill should be placed in maximum 1 0-inch loose lifts, moisture
conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and
compacted to at least 95 percent maximum standard Proctor (ASTM D
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
15
698) dry density. If structural fill soils are required to achieve grade they
should consist of a granular material and should be placed and compacted
as stated above.
3. We recommend a minimum width of 18 inches for continuous footings.
Isolated pads should be at least 30 inches by 30 inches. Foundation walls
should be well-reinforced top and bottom. We recommend reinforcement
sufficient to span an unsupported distance of at least 12 feet. A qualified
structural engineer should design foundation reinforcement.
4. If the footings are designed and constructed as discussed above, we
estimate that the post construction total settlement will be about 1 to 1 Y.
inch with about Y, of the total settlement occurring as differential
settlement. The estimated settlement is dependent on foundation bearing
pressure, soil conditions supporting the footings and footing width. If the
foundation bearing pressures, soil conditions or the footing widths are
different than discussed above, we should be contacted to provide
additional settlement considerations.
5. Exterior walls must be protected from frost action. Refer to the local building
code for details. We understand the Garfield County Building Department
recommends coverage of at least 36 inches at an elevation up to 6,000 feet,
at least 42 inches for elevations of 6,000 to 8,000 feet and at least 48 inches
for elevations above 8,000 feet for frost protection.
6. The completed foundation excavation should be observed by our
representative, to test subgrade and fill compaction and to verify subsurface
conditions are as anticipated.
Reinforced Mat Foundations
1. Reinforced mat foundations bearing on at least 4-feet depth of well
compacted, structural fill can be designed for maximum soil bearing
pressure of 2,500 psf. The soil bearing pressure may be increased by 30
percent for temporary loading such and wind and seismic loads. Loose
UNA Compressor Station
WUiia_ms Production RMT Company
Garfi~ld County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GE.G Job No. 3,071
16
soils, existing fill, existing foundations and organic materials need to be
removed full depth and replaced with a well compacted structural fill.
2. The foundation areas should be over excavated 4-feet. The resulting
subgrade should be scarified 10 inches, moisture conditioned and re-
compacted to 95 percent of standard Proctor (ASTM 0698) to help
mitigate potential soil settlement and provide a more uniform subgrade.
The foundation should bear completely on at least 4-feet uniform depth of
well-compacted structural fill to at least 4-feet beyond each footing,
horizontally. Loose soils should be completely removed from foundation
bearing areas, prior to placing fill or concrete. The structural fill should be
a crushed, uniformly graded, granular material with a maximum size of 1.5
inches, maximum of 15 percent passing the No. 200 sieve and maximum
liquid limit of 30. A COOT Class 5 or Class 6 type crushed base course
could be used to satisfy these criteria and is recommended. The
structural fill should be placed in maximum 1 0-inch loose lifts, moisture
conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and
compacted to at least 95 percent maximum standard Proctor dry density
(ASTM D 698). If structural fill soils are required to achieve grade they
should consist of a granular material and should be placed and compacted
as stated above.
3. We performed a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test in general accordance
with ASTM 01883. The CBR test results are presented on Fig. 17. The
CBR test results indicate a CBR of 3.2 when compacted to about 95 percent
of the maximum dry density as defined by ASTM 0698, standard Proctor
test. Based on the CBR test results we calculated a modulus of subgrade
reaction (K) of 220 psi/in.
4. Mat foundations should be well reinforced, both top and bottom. We
recommend reinforcement sufficient to span an unsupported distance of at
least 12 feet and to distribute loads over entire mat. Reinforcement
should be designed by the structural engineer.
5. If mat foundations are designed and constructed as discussed above, we
estimate that the post construction total settlement will be about 1% to 2
inch with about % of the total settlement occurring as differential
settlement. The estimated settlement is dependent on foundation bearing
pressure, soil conditions supporting the mat foundation and mat
foundation width. If the foundation bearing pressures, soil conditions or
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
17
the mat foundation widths are different than discussed above, we should
be contacted to provide additional settlement considerations.
6. Foundations should be protected from freezing. Refer to local building code
for details. We understand the Garfield County Building Department
recommends coverage of at least 36 inches at an elevation up to 6,000 feet,
at least 42 inches for elevations of 6,000 to 8,000 feet and at least 48 inches
for elevations above 8,000 feet for frost protection.
7. The completed foundation excavation should be observed by our
representative to verify subsurface foundation conditions are as anticipated
from our borings and to test compaction.
Tank Spread Footing Ring Foundations and Tank Bottom Support
1. Footing foundations bearing on a 2 feet depth layer of well compacted
structural fill can be design for a maximum soil bearing pressure of
2,500psf. Loose soils should be completely removed from foundation
bearing areas, prior to placing concrete. We understand the tank bottoms
will be supported on grade. The tank bottom can be designed for a
maximum soil bearing pressure of 2,500 psf. Loose soils should be
completely removed from foundation bearing areas, prior to well compacted
structural fill or tank foundations.
2. The completed ring spread footing foundation excavation should be over
excavated 1 feet depth below tank bottom bearing level and 2 feet depth
below the ring footing bearing elevation. The tank bottom should be
supported completely on a layer of well compacted structural fill at least 1
foot thick and the ring foundation should be supported on a layer of well
compacted structural fill at least 2 feet thick. The well compacted structural
fill should extend horizontally beyond each edge of the ring footing at least 2
feet. The resulting subgrade should be scarified 1 0-inches, moisture
conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and compacted
to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor (ASTM 0698) maximum dry
density. Our representative should be called to test subgrade compaction,
UNA Compressor Station
Willla_ms Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
18.
prior to structural fill placement. A granular imported structural fill should
consist of a maximum particle size of 1.5-inches, maximum of 30 percent
passing the No. 200 sieve and a maximum liquid limit of 30. We recommend
structural fill be placed in a maximum 1 0-inch thickness loose lifts and
compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density and within 2
percent of optimum moisture content (ASTM D698). Structural fill should be
tested every 1 foot depth of placement. If soft conditions are encountered in
the open excavation then stabilization may be necessary. Our
representative should be called to test compaction of subgrade and/or
observe stabilization, prior to forming.
3. We recommend a minimum width of 1.5 feet for continuous footings.
Foundation walls should be well-reinforced top and bottom. We
recommend reinforcement sufficient to span an unsupported distance of at
least 12 feet. The structural engineer should design reinforcement.
4. Based on a design soil bearing pressure of 2,500 psf, a footing width of
about 1.5 feet and footings placed on a 2 feet thick layer of well compacted
structural fill the estimated total settlement is about 6 inches at the edge of
the tank and about 4 inches at the center of the tank. The tank bottom
should be designed with sufficient camber to accommodate the estimated
differential settlement between the center and the edge of the tank. Utility
lines that will be connected to the tank should be designed with flexible
connections to accommodate the total settlement. If the support conditions
are modified or the tank support is changed we should be contacted to
provide additional settlement analysis and recommendations. The tank
and contents will act as a uniformly applied load over the area of the tank
and will significantly influence the supporting soil to the depth of about 30.
Due to the influence of the tank and contents loads acting as a uniformly
applied load on the entire tank bottom area, the settlement of the spread
footing type ring foundation will be directly associated with the estimated
settlement of the tank bottom as discussed below. The ring footing will
likely be nearly uniform to itself
5. Exterior walls should be protected from freezing. We understand the
Garfield County Building Department recommends coverage of at least 36
inches at an elevation up to 8,000 feet and at least 42 inches for elevations
above 8,000 feet for frost protection. Frost protection concepts are shown
in Appendix A. In our experience, a 1.5 inch imported aggregate is not
particularly frost sensitive and the proposed construction does not lend
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
19
itself well to frost protection. While more risk is involved, frost protection
via minimum depth of imported aggregate fill and/or an equivalent styro
board type insulation product may be substituted for strict burial.
6. The completed foundation excavation should be observed by our
representative prior to placing forms, to verify the foundation bearing
conditions, test compaction.
7. Exterior walls should be protected from freezing. We understand the
Garfield County Building Department recommends coverage of at least 36
inches at an elevation up to 8,000 feet and at least 42 inches for elevations
above 8,000 feet for frost protection. In our experience, a 1.5 inch
imported aggregate is not particularly frost sensitive and the proposed
construction does not lend itself well to frost protection. While more risk is
involved, frost protection via minimum depth of imported aggregate fill
and/or an equivalent styro board type insulation product may be substituted
for strict burial.
8. The completed foundation excavation should be observed by our
representative to verify subsurface foundation conditions are as anticipated
from our borings and to test compaction.
SEISMIC AND VIBRATING FOUNDATION DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
Foundation and floor systems include structural support from the surficial clay
with shale fragment soils. Based on 2000 UBC we believe the site is located in Seismic
Zone 1. Based on our understanding of proposed construction and subsurface
conditions, we suggest a "Site Class D" be used for foundation seismic design as
described in 2006 IBC. Based on the field and laboratory results we calculate a shear
modulus of 3,000 psi. We have estimated a modulus of subgrade reaction based on
field and laboratory test data. We recommend a modulus of subgrade reaction of 220
UNA Compressor Station
WHII"ms Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
20
psi/inch.
FLOOR SYSTEMS
The near-surface soils that will support slab-on-grade floors exhibited movement
potential. Some movement must be assumed. To our knowledge, the only reliable
solution to control floor movement is the construction of floors supported by the foundation
system over a minimum 12 inch void. If the owner and builder accept the risk of
movement and associated damage, the floors may be constructed as slab on grade
floors.
We recommend the following precautions for construction of slabs-on-grade at this
site. These precautions will not prevent movement in the event the underlying conditions
become wetted; they tend to reduce damage if movement occurs.
1. Slabs should be supported by at least a 1 foot depth of well compacted,
structural fill. The completed subgrade should be scarified 1 0-inches depth,
moisture conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and
compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum standard Proctor (ASTM
0698) dry density, prior to structural fill placement. The compacted
structural fill should consist of a non expansive granular material with a
maximum size of 1.5 inches, a maximum of 15 percent passing the number
200 sieve, a maximum liquid limit of 35 and a maximum plasticity index of
10. The structural fill should be moisture conditioned to within 2 per cent of
optimum moisture content placed in thin lifts and compacted to at least 95
percent of the maximum standard Proctor (ASTM 0698) dry density. A
Geotechnical Engineering Group, Inc. representative should be called to
visit the site to test compaction and observe soils in the excavation bottom
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
21
and structural fill.
2. We performed a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test in general accordance
with ASTM 01883. The CBR test results are presented on Fig. 17. The
CBR test results indicate a CBR of 3.2 when compacted to about 95 percent
of the maximum dry density as defined by ASTM 0698, standard Proctor
test. Based on the CBR test results we calculated a modulus of subgrade
reaction (K) of 220 psi/in.
3. Slab-on-grade construction should be limited to unfinished areas and
exterior flatwork where practical.
4. Slabs should be separated from exterior walls and interior bearing members
with a slip joint which allows for free vertical movement of slabs.
5. The use of slab-bearing partitions should be minimized. Where such
partitions are necessary, a slip joint allowing at least 4 inches of free vertical
slab movement should be used. Doorways and stairwells should also be
designed for this movement.
6. Underslab plumbing should be eliminated where feasible. Where such
plumbing is unavoidable, it should be thoroughly pressure tested during
construction for leaks and should be provided with flexible couplings.
Plumbing extending through slab on grade floors should be separated from
floor slab to allow independent movement.
7. Frequent control joints should be provided to reduce problems associated
with shrinkage and curling. The American Concrete Institute (ACI) and
Portland Cement Association (PCA) recommend a maximum panel size of
8 to 15 feet depending upon concrete thickness and slump, and the
maximum aggregate size. We advocate additional control joints 3 feet off
and parallel to grade beams and foundation walls.
UNA Compressor Station
Wlllla:ms Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
22
BELOW-GRADE CONSTRUCTION
No below-grade construction is anticipated at this site. Typically, building
foundation drains are not required for construction of this type. Crawl space, if any, in
building areas should be sloped so that potential moisture will not collect in these areas,
but flow out of the crawl space. Crawl space areas should also be well ventilated to
reduce potential humidity and musty odors.
SOIL RESISTIVITY CONSIDERATIONS
Our field study included performing field soil resistivity tests at one location Line
on the proposed compressor location. The approximate location of the field soil
resistivity test was between exploratory test borings TH1 and TH-2 and between
exploratory test borings TH-3 and TH-4 . The field soil resistivity tests were conducted
in general conformance with ASTM test method G-57. The field soil resistivity tests
indicate a resistivity of about 490 and 1460 Ohm-em.
PAVEMENT
The pavement subgrade soils include medium stiff to stiff, sandy and gravelly clay.
We tested a combined bulk sample (TH-1, TH-2 and TH-3 at a depth of 0 to 5 feet) for
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
23
pavement design purposes. The sample was tested for standard Proctor, and California
Bearing Ratio (CBR). The sample tested exhibited a maximum dry density of 114.5 pcf,
an optimum moisture of 13.0 percent and a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of 3.2. We
used a California Bearing Ratio of 3.2 in our analysis. The results of the laboratory testing
are shown on Table II and included on Figs. 16 and 17.
Our design utilized the computer program WinPAS, based on the 1993 AASHTO
Guide for Design of Pavements Structures a 20 year design period and our experience.
We understand pavements will be used for general drive lanes. We used an Equivalent
Single Axle Load (ESAL) of 62,400, 156,000 and 187,200. The ESAL values were
calculated using an EDLA of 10, 25 and 30 over a 20 year period. We used a regional
factor of 2.0 and a design serviceability index of 2.0. We used an AASHTO developed,
non-linear relationship to relate the CBR value to the subgrade resilient modulus (M,), for
flexible pavement. Using this relationship, we calculated a M, value of 4,300 psi. We
used this M, value for flexible pavement design. Using the calculated M, value we
calculated a modulus of subgrade reaction, K value of 220 psi/in for rigid pavement
design. The WinPAS analysis results are presented in Appendix B. Table A below shows
our recommendations.
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
24
TABLE A
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED PAVEMENT SECTIONS
Traffic Type Asphaltic Asphalt and Asphalt, Aggregate Base Portland Cement Concrete
Concrete Aggregate Base Course and Aggregate
Course Sub Base Course
ESAL ~62,400 6~" 3"+11 " 3"+ 5" +8" 6"
ESAL = 156,200 7%" 4" + 11" 4"+ 5" + 8" 6"
ESAL ~ 187,200 7%" 4" + 12" 4"+6"+8" 6"
5"+5"+9"
Existing fill was not identified in the exploratory borings, however we anticipate
that existing fill may exist on site associated with previous development. Existing fill, if
any, should not be relied upon for structural support and should be removed full depth
and be replaced as a well compacted structural fill as described in the "SITE
DEVELOPMENT" section of this report. Geotechnical Engineering Group, Inc.
representative should be called to confirm adequate stabilization prior to placement of
fabric.
Prior to construction of the recommended section, the resulting subgrade should
be stripped free of organics and deleterious materials, scarified at least 1 0-inches depth,
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
25
moisture conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture and compacted to at least
95 percent standard Proctor (ASTM 0698) maximum dry density. Portions of the
pavement subgrade areas may encounter soft yielding soils. If yielding soils are
encountered it may be necessary to provide subgrade stabilization. Subgrade
stabilization may include over excavation about 1 to several feet, placement of a
geotechnical stabilization fabric and placement of compacted structural fill. We should be
contacted to observe subgrade conditions and provide additional recommendations as
needed.
The design of a pavement system is as much a function of paving materials as
supporting characteristics of the subgrade. The quality of each construction material is
reflected by the strength coefficient used in the calculations. If the pavement system is
constructed of inferior material, then the life and serviceability of the pavement will be
substantially reduced. Prior to construction of the recommended section, the resulting
subgrade should be stripped free of organics and deleterious materials, scarified 1 0-
inches depth, moisture conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and
compacted to at least 95 percent standard Proctor (ASTM 0698) maximum dry density.
The asphalt component of the pavement was designed assuming at least 1,650
pounds Marshall Stability. Normally, an asphaltic concrete should be relatively
impermeable to moisture and should be designed with a well-graded sand/gravel mix.
UNA Compressor Station
Willip_ms Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
26
The oil content, void ratio, flow and gradation need to be considered in the design. We
recommend a job mix design be performed and periodic checks are made to verify
compliance with these specifications. We can perform these services, as requested.
If construction materials cannot meet the above requirements, then the pavement
design should be evaluated based upon available materials. We recommend the
materials and placement methods conform to the requirements listed in the Colorado
Department of Transportation "Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge
Construction". All materials planned for construction should be submitted and tested to
confirm their compliance with these specifications.
A primary cause of early pavement deterioration is water infiltration into the
pavement system. The addition of moisture usually results in softening of untreated base
course and subgrade and eventual failure of the pavement. We recommend drainage be
designed for rapid removal of surface runoff. Curb and gutter should be backfilled and the
backfill compacted to reduce pending adjacent to pavements. Final grading of the
subgrade should be carefully controlled so that design cross-slope is maintained and low
spots in the subgrade which could trap water are eliminated. Seals should be provided
between curb and pavement and at all joints to reduce moisture infiltration. Landscaped
areas and detention ponds in pavements should be avoided.
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
27
We have included construction recommendations for flexible and rigid pavement
construction in Appendix C. Routine maintenance, such as sealing and repair of cracks
annually and overlays at 5 to 7 -year intervals, are necessary to achieve the long-term life
of an asphalt pavement system. If the design and construction recommendations cannot
be followed or anticipated traffic loads change considerably, we should be contacted to
review our recommendations.
CONCRETE
Three samples (TH-1, TH-2 and TH-3 at a depth of 0 to 5 feet) were tested for
water soluble sulfate concentrations. The test results indicate a water soluble sulfate
concentration of 1 ,300 to 5,000 ppm. Sulfate concentrations in this amount are
considered to have a severe effect on concrete that comes into contact with the soils. We
recommend following the American Concrete Institute (ACI) guidelines for sulfate
resistant cement. ACI recommends a Type V (sulfate resistant) cement be used for
concrete that comes into contact with the subsoils. In addition, the concrete should have
a water cement ratio of 0.45. We understand that Type V cement may not be locally
available. Although, not meeting ACI recommendations for sulfate resistant cement, Type
II modified cement has been used in similar conditions.
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
28
SURFACE DRAINAGE
Performance of foundations and concrete flatwork is influenced by surface
moisture conditions. The site sandy clay soils have significant consolidation potential.
The consolidation and I or swell potential typically is mobilized by wetting and or loading.
Reducing the potential for moisture migration into the site soil and formational sandstone
with reduce the risk of mobilization of consolidation or swell potential of site materials.
Risk of wetting foundation soils can be reduced by carefully planned and maintained
surface drainage. Surface drainage should be designed to provide rapid runoff of surface
water away from the proposed structures. We recommend the following precautions be
observed during construction and maintained at all time after the construction is
completed.
1. The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the structures should be
sloped to drain away from the foundations in all directions. We recommend
a slope of at least 12 inches in the first 10 feet around the structures, where
possible. In no case should the slope be less than 6 inches in the first 5
feet. The ground surface should be sloped so that water will not pond
adjacent to the foundations.
2. Backfill around foundation walls should be moistened and compacted.
Foundation backfill should be moisture conditioned to within 2 percent of
optimum moisture centered and compacted to at least 90 percent of the
maximum standard Proctor (ASTM 0698) dry density. Foundation backfill
supporting concrete flatwork or other structural components should be
moisture conditioned and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum
standard Proctor dry density.
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
29
3. Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all
backfill. Splash blocks and downspout extenders should be provided at all
discharge points.
4. Landscaping, if any, should be carefully designed to minimize irrigation.
Plants used close to foundations should be limited to those with low
moisture requirements; irrigated grass should not be located within 5 feet of
the foundation. Sprinklers should not discharge within 5 feet of foundations.
Irrigation should be limited to the minimum amount sufficient to maintain
vegetation; application of more water will increase likelihood of slab and
foundation movements.
5. Impervious plastic membranes should not be used to cover the ground
surface immediately surrounding the structures. These membranes tend to
trap moisture and prevent normal evaporation from occurring. Geotextile
fabrics can be used to limit the weed growth and allow for evaporation.
CONSTRUCTION MONITORING
Geotechnical Engineering Group, Inc. should be retained to provide general
review of construction plans for compliance with our recommendations. Geotechnical
Engineering Group, Inc. should be retained to provide construction-monitoring services
during all earthwork and foundation construction phases of the work. This is to observe
the construction with respect to the geotechnical recommendations, to enable design
changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to
start of construction and to give the owner a greater degree of confidence that the
additions are constructed in accordance with the geotechnical recommendations.
UNA Compressor Station
WUI/~ms Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
30
LIMITATIONS
Four exploratory borings were drilled in the proposed structure areas at locations
requested by Sun Valley Engineering. The exploratory borings are representative of
conditions encountered only at the exact boring locations. Variations in the subsoil
conditions not indicated by the borings are always possible. Our representative should be
called to monitor deep foundation installation and provide actual pile capacities based on
actual installation conditions. Our representative should observe open foundation
excavations, observe proof roll and test compaction of subgrade and structural fill soils (as
applicable) to confirm soils are as anticipated from the borings and foundations are
prepared as recommended herein.
The scope of work performed is specific to the proposed construction and the client
identified by this report. Any other use of the data, recommendations and design
parameters (as applicable) provided within this report are not appropriate applications.
Other proposed construction and I or reliance by other clients will require project specific
review by this firm. Changes in site conditions can occur with time. Changes in standard
of practice also occur with time. This report should not be relied upon after a period of
three years from the date of this report and is subject to review by this firm in light of new
information which may periodically become known.
UNA Compressor Station
Williams Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
Report Dated November 5, 2008
GEG Job No. 3,071
31
We believe this investigation was conducted in a manner consistent with that level
of care and skill ordinarily used by geotechnical engineers practicing in this area at this
time. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. If we can be of further service in
discussing the contents of this report or the analysis of the influence of the subsurface
conditions on the development or design of the proposed construction, please call.
orman W. JohniJil'(liJ~
Senior Enginee
NWJ:nj
( 1 copy sent)
(1 copy by E-mail: sve@silverstar.com)
UNA Compressor Station
Willi~ms Production RMT Company
Garfield County, Colorado
R~port Dated November 5, 2008
G~G Job No. 3,071
32
\ ;~~·.:.:
··. ~~v~·...: ., ~ '
II
Geotechnical
~Engineering
~Group, Inc.
GEGJOBNO.
Una Compressor Station
3,071
DATE:
10/28/2008
Fig. 1
Note: This figure was based on drawing
UN-BHL-100.dwg provided by Williams
Production RMT Company, dated
September, 2008 and notes obtained
during our field study, and is intended to
show test boring locations only.
Note: Longitude, latitude, and elevation are
based on a handheld GPS, and are
approximate.
e Indicates approximate
test boring locations.
I
Geotechnical lllil.,fnglneerlng Ia.. Group, Inc.
GEGJOBNO. 3,071
Bore Longitude Latitude
H-1 108°515.100" 39'23'42.144"
H-2 108'5'3.804" 39'23'42.504"
H-3 1 08'5'6.432" 39'23'42.072"
i-f-1-4 108'5'6.00' 39'23'42.828'
Una Compressor Station
Test Boring Location Map
Elevation
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
DATE:
10/28/2008
Fig. 2
Symbol Description
Strata Symbols
Clay, sandy, slightly
KEY TO SYMBOLS
gravelly, with cobbles and
boulders, medium stiff to stiff,
moist, brown (CL)
~t Boulders, very dense, dry,
._~!': tan
Notes:
1. SH -Thinwall Tube Sample.
2. CT -Modified California Barrel Sample.
3. STD -Standard Split Barrel Sample.
4. Bulk -Bulk Disturbed Sample.
5. 15/12 -Indicates Standard Penetration test where 15 Blows with
a 140 LB hammer falling 30 inches was required to drive the
sampler 12 inches.
6. Exploratory test borings were excavated on 10/03/08 using a
track mounted 4 inch diameter solid stem power auger.
7. These logs are subject to the interpretation by GEG of the soils
encountered and limitations, conclusions, and recommendations in
this report.
Fiqure 3
I Gt•ttteehuit,al PROJECT: UNA Comeressor Station Garfield Couun:: PROJECT NO.:, 3 071 ~.:ugineerhog CLIENT:
Grona•· hoe. LOCATION: See Fig. 2 ELEVATION:
DRILLER: Odell CME 55 LOGGED BY: MF
LOG OF DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: ¥ NE AFTER 24 HOURS: ~
TEST BORING TH-1 DATE: 10/03/08 DEPTH TO CAVING: £..
a~ .2 J!l v ~2 .c
Description I! ~g; ..Q § Notes ~~ (!) SJf-"'8
0
1--
Clay, sandy, slightly gravelly, with cobbles and boulders, stiff, moist, z· brown (CL)
1--~ BULK
1--
1--15/12
r-2---CT
1--u 12/12 CT
1--
1--~ 1--...... 24/12
~ CT
%. 1--
1--Bottom of boring when terminated: ll.5 ft. CT 50/0
1--Auger Refusal.
1--
~
1--
1--
1--
1--
~
-
-
-
-
..22....
-
-
-
-
2Q_
-
-
-
-
.2L
-
-
-
-
This information oertains onlv to this borina and should not be internreted as beinn indicitive of the site.
Fiqure 4 PAGE 1 of1
I (~entedauic,al .. PROJECT: UNA Com£ressor Station Garfield Coun~ PROJECT NO.: 3 071 ~~ugiaaeeriug CLIENT:
(,;rnUJ>. Iue. LOCATION: See Fi•. 2 ELEVATION:
DRILLER: Odell CME 55 LOGGED BY: MF LOG OF DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: ¥ NE AFTER 24 HOURS: ~
TEST BORING TH-2 DATE: 10/03/08 DEPTH TO CAVING: L
:6c-.Q Q)
;o:l!l .c o..g_ C.Q) Description c. E , 0 § Notes "$ !!! ffi8 o-(9 c\'j>-
0
-Clay, sandy, slightly gravelly, with cobbles and boulders, stiff, slightly h dry, tan, slightly red (CL) ~ -
-'/ BULK ~ 37/12
-CT
_L .. 140/11 CT -Bottom ofboring when terminated: 5.5 ft. lSil.. 50/0
-Auger Refusal
-
-
---"-"-
-
-
~
-
~
f.--
f.--
f.--
f.--
~
f.--
1--
f.--
f.--
1_2!;_
1--
1-
1--
1--
W-2--
1--
1--
1-
1--
~
1--
1--
1--
1-
This information nertalns onlv to this borinn and should not be internreted as beinn indicitive of the site.
Fipure 5 PAGE 1 of 1
I G.,otec•hni.,al PROJECT: UNA ComEressor Station Garfield Coun!): PROJECT NO,: 3 071 ~~ugi•te(•••ing CLIENT:
Grou1•• ln.,. LOCATION: See Fi2. 2 ELEVATION:
DRILLER: Odell CME 55 LOGGED BY: MF
LOG OF DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: ¥ NE AFTER 24 HOURS: '!!'
TEST BORING TH-3 DATE: 10/02/08 DEPTH TO CAVING: .r._
:5:;::;-.Q .S!"' ;;:2 .c O.<D Description 0. ~g: .2 § Notes "'.I! [;! o-(!) t!Jf-"'8
0
-Clay, ~andy, slightly gravelly, with cobbles and boulders, medium stiff, ;?) slightly moist, brown (CL)
-~ BULK -
-
__!;_ ~ CT 7/12
-
-~ -
-12/12
___!!)_ ~ CT
-
-0 -
-~ ---'2-
-
-z -
-~ CT 17112
2L
-~ -
-
-
_2L % -It -
27. -Boulders verv dense. drv. tan ~-~· -Bottom of boring when terminated: 28.5 ft. SPT 37/12
5011
_1.<>._ Auger Refusal
-
-
-
-
_2L
-
-
-
-
This information nertains onlv to this borina and should not be interoreted as beina indicitive of the site.
Fioure 6 PAGE 1 of1
lf;eote•,hni•,al PROJECT: UNA Com2ressor Station Garfield Coun~ PROJECT NO.: 3 071 ~~~·~hoe.,ring CLIENT:
Grout>. lne. LOCATION: See Fk 2 ELEVATION:
DRILLER: Odell CME 55 LOGGED BY: MF
LOG OF DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: ¥ NE AFTER 24 HOURS: '!!'
TEST BORING TH-4 DATE: 10/02/08 DEPTH TO CAVING: L.
" w ~2 :5~ :E li~ c.w Description c. E » ..Q § Notes W.j1 !!! o-(!) Jl>-CD8
0
-Clay, sandy, gravelly, with cobbles and boulders, stiff, slightly ~ 1--moist, brown to slightly tan (CL) e--~ f--.-BULK
e--
~ ~ 9/12
e--CT
f--.-~ e--~ f--.-~ 15112
f..-l!!-CT
f--.-
e--~ f--.-
e--~ I2L
e--
f--.-~ e--~ f--.-
CT 19/12
]...2"._
tJ8 f--.-
e--
f--.-~ e--
~ ~ e--
f--.-tit e--37/9 CT I--Bottom of boring when terminated: 28.5 ft.
]...22_ Auger Refusal
I--
1-
I--
1--
~
1--
I--
1--
I--
This information nertains onl" to this borinn and should not be internreted as beinn indicitive of the site.
Fiqure 7 PAGE 1 of 1
SWELL I CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT
-1
- 1
0
WATERADDED I
-0
).., -t-r--!"-. 1 .......
' --1
~"\
2 '\
\ --2
3 \
' --3
c \ -u
·~ "' Cl U5 "' :l c 4 -"" 1\ --4 I e "' "" "' (1_ < "'
5 1\
' --5
\
6 \ --6
7
I 1\ --7
8
1\ --8
9 100 200 500 1000 2000 \ Applied Pressure -psi
Natural Dry Dens. LL PI Sp. Overburden Pc Cc Cr Swell Press. Hea~e eo Sat. Moist. (pel) Gr. (psf) (psf) (psf) %
10.8% 93.7 961 -0.2
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION uses AASHTO
Project No. 3,071 Client: Remarks:
Project: UNA Compressor Station Garfield County
Source: TH-1 Elev./Depth: 4 II Geoteehnieal ~~ngineering
Grout•~ In~. Figure 8
SWELL I CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT
-1 ! i i I
-0
1 I
I
i I
--2
3
I ' ' WATER ADDED ' --4
r-.... I
5
' I ' ' I
I '-I I ' I ~ I I --6
7 ' I ' I c
' ' -u
·~ ' --8 CD
~
ii5 ' ()
CD
c 9 I~
;;<
"' "
I e CD
"' Ol
0.. --10 < CD
11 ' ' ~ --12
I
13
' ' ' ! ' I
-' -14
I 15
' ' ' I I
I
I
--16
17 I
I
--18
19 100 200 500 1000 2000
Applied Pressure -psf
Natural Dry Dens. LL PI Sp. Overburden Pc Cc Cr Swell Press. Heave
Sat. Moist. (pel) Gr. (psi) (psi) (psi) % eo
13.0% 115.0 522 "3.2
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION uses AASHTO
Project No. 3,071 Client: Remarks:
Project: UNA Compressor Station Garfield County
Source: TH-3 Elev./Depth: 9 II Geoteehnieal ~~ngineering
Group~ ln4!. Figure 9
SWELL I CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT
-1
I
I 0 I
1
-2
3 I
I
I
--4
5
--6
7
WATER ADDED
........ ' c lJ .i§ r-----8 (!)
~
ii5 !'.. 0
(!)
::J c 9 ~
"' ' "
I
f! ' (!)
"' -"' CL -10 ~
11 i\.
' r\ 1--12
I i\. 13 " " r---.. 1--14
' 15
1--16
17
I 1--18
I I 19 100 200 500 1000 2000 5000
Applied Pressure -psf
Natural Dry Dens. LL PI Sp. Overburden Pc Cc Cr Swell Press. Heave eo
Sat Moist (pel) Gr. (psf) (psf) (psf) %
12.8% 98.4 1351 -6.8
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION uses AASHTO
Project No. 3,071 Client: Remarks:
Project: UNA Compressor Station Garfield County
Source: TH-4 Elev./Depth: 19 II Geote<hniul ~~ngineering
Group~ lne. Figure 10
-0.03 --15 Results .. ·---
C, psi 2.06 ;
-0.02 3 4.deo 23.3
' ' Tan 0.43 --I ' .£ .
' 2 c -0.01 10
0 ·u;
~ 1 a.
o;latk>n '" -E I "' I
.12 0 ~ I Ql iii 0 _ _j ---~-"·---
ro Consol. ..• -'(ii ----
:2 u. -
0.01 5 ~ ' -
i
-9 I --~·-
0.02
-w-..
0.03 I 0 --i
0 3.5 7 10.5 14 0 5 10 15
Strain,% Normal Stress, psi
15 Sample No. 1 2 3 I
... ..
Water Content, % 9.8 9.8 9.8 ...
12.5 ... 1 Dry Density, pel 104.6 104.6 104.6
. ._j ro Saturation,% 44.5 44.5 44.5 "' -. £ Void Ratio 0.5809 0.5809 0.5809 10 2 ·u; I ' a. Diameter, in. 1.94 1.94 1.94 -u'i
Heioht. in. 1.00 1.00 1.00 "' 3 ~ 7.5 Water Content, % 20.9 20.9 20.9
tii Dry Density, pel 104.6 104.6 104.6 Ql --
.<:: u; 95.3 (f) 5 Ql Saturation, % 95.3 95.3 f-. :;;: Void Ratio 0.5809 0.5809 0.5809
Diameter, in. 1.94 1.94 1.94
2.5 + i Heioht. in. 1.00 1.00 1.00 -
+---Normal Stress, psi 10.40 6.90 3.50
! I+ Fail. Stress, psi 6.59 4.93 3.62 0 ;
0 5 10 15 20 Strain,% 4.1 6.2 4.6
Strain,% Ult. Stress, psi
Strain,%
Strain rate, in./min. 0.63 0.63 0.63
Sample Type: Client:
Description:
Project: UNA Compressor Station Garfield County
Assumed Specific Gravity= 2.65 Source of Sample: TH-4 Depth: 9
Remarks:
Proj. No.: 3,071 Date Sampled: 10/03/08
~ ........ ;., .. ,
nr,einN•rina
Finnr<> 11 t;ro111h lnt~.
Tested By: "'-'"'-----------Checked By: ""-"'-----------
0:: w z u:
~ w
~ w o_
Gradation Test Report
I I' I I I II I II I I I I
_L L-~ ---~--~~---+----HI-H-1-'il-+'11+-'-1-'ttt'H'+++-t-+H+t++-t-t---i
I I I I II. I I I I I I I
I II Ill i I I I I I II
10:tt I II
90 --~~-;
ao I I i I I I I li '\).1'--o I il I I I I : : : + :--~ H--+--"-'Fti1N.'cH~t-+,...,._+-i +-+: -c:tH+t: +++-+--1--+i-Hr-t++-t-+--1
I ~ I I I ~~ I ~~ I' ~I II
: :
I . I
I I
70
6orr-r++-4+H+++~~~~+H~~~--+M+++~~-H~~H-I-r+--r-+tt++r+-r-r-~
I I I I I I ,I l1 I I I I I ~
soH-++r-1 -ti-lr1HI +it-1 -h1 1 1
II +-~-tr1-t-l-l--+hl1 tt-h1H-r1+r1 -rt11 -h1H1 +K-+--+tm-f-t-t--t----1 I 1
1
I I II I I, II I II I I I I 4orr~_J'--+HLJ+++-+j_'JL-llil-t''i+HH'Ii+-t--+-+H+++'iil-+-''-f-''-"H,fit+++-+-t---H+++++-+-----
1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I! I I I! I !I I I I I 3oH-+-~+-4+~~~~~~-hl+H--lr~---l--+hl++++-+H-+~H--l+-t-+-~++-rt+~---l
I I I , I li I I li I il I I I I
I I I i I I I I I I I I I i 2oH-+++-1 -+t,~H1--i+-1 tt-1 -ir1---i1~1 m~1+t-t----lt1K+t+-H1~+1 -tr1nt1 +H---l--++r+K-+--1
I II I II I 'tl' I I ~ ~I I 101-r+-1-i---li -:-~,~~:-1 +-1--1---tllll+t-I I I I
0 I li I I I I I I I I I LL~~_,1Moo~~LL~--,,~o o.
%+3"
SIEVE
SIZE
1.0"
3/41!
1/2 11
3/8"
#4
#8
#16
#30
#50
#100
#200
0
PERCENT
FINER
100
93
91
89
81
76
72
69
66
62
57
0. 1
GRAIN SIZE-mm.
% Gravel % Sand %Fines
Coarse I Fine Coarse I Medium I Fine Silt I
7 12 6 7 I II 57
SPEC.*
PERCENT
PASS?
(X=NO)
Material Description
Clay, slightly gravelly, dense, moist, brown (CL)
Atterberg Limits (ASTM D 4318)
PL= 14 LL-28 PI-14
USGS= CL
o85 = 6.7620
D3o=
Cu=
Date Tested:
Classification
AASHTO= A-6(5)
Coefficients o60-o.I078 o50=
D15= D1o=
Cc=
10/08/08 Tested By: SP
Remarks
(no specification provided)
0.001
Clay
Sample No.:
Location:
Source of Sample: TH-1 Date Sampled: I 0/03/08
Elev./Depth: 0-5
Checked Bv: LM Title:
Client:
Project: UNA Compressor Station Garfield County
Project No: 3,071 Figure 12
Gradation Test Report
.. 5 ~ ~ . c 8 0 8 .s .E .s ~ c ·-0 0 0 i i ~ ·-ro
w M N ~ ~ (:5 " ii 11! l1 " ii 11!
I 100 T
II
I ~!I I I
: I : I I I : : I I
90 .
I I I I I !,<.. I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
80 I
I I I I I I I 1~'--"0. I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I 70
11 1 I I I I I i I I I I I I -I 0.
0:: I 11! I ! I I I I I !-.., ~ I I I
w 60 -i~ z I 11! I I I I I I I I u::
1-I I I I I I I I I I I I
z 50 i ~ I I I : : I w I II 1Llj: I I I I I ()
0:: __L_ 11: I lL I_ .. L _j_j w 40 ---··----·-------
0.. I 111 I II I I 11 I I I I I I I
I I I jl I I I I I I I I I I
30 Ill I II I I I I I I I I I I I
I Ill I I I I II I I I I I I I 20 I II! I I I I I! I I I I I I I, I
! II! I ! I ! I!
I I I
! !
I 1
1 i L ____ . 10
I 11 1 I I I I 11 I I I I I I :I I I 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
100 10 1 0.1 O.D1 0.001
GRAIN SIZE-mm.
%+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines
Coarse f Fine coarser· Medium I Fine Silt I Clay
0 0 I 21 6 I 8 I 14 51
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.' PASS? Material Descrit!tion
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) Clay, slightly gravelly, dense, slightly dry, tan, slightly red
3/411 100 (CG)
112" 88 Atterberg Limits (ASTM D 4318)
3/8" 85 PL= 14 LL-27 PI-13
#4 79
Classification #8 74
#16 70 USCS= CL AASHTO= A-6(3)
#30 67 Coefficients
#50 62 o85= 9.0914 o60-o.2216 D5o= #100 57 D3o= D15= D1o=
#200 50 Cu= Cc=
Date Tested: 10/08/08 Tested By: SP
Remarks
(no specification provided)
Sample No.: Source of Sample: TH-2 Date Sampled: 10/03/08
Location: Elev./Depth: 0-5
Checked Bv: LM Title:
lfaeotN,hni•,al Client:
~~ngiue>eriug Project: UNA Compressor Station Garfield County
........ p .... .,. Proiect No: 3,071 Fi!!ure 13
Gradation Test Report
.. s ~~ . c 0 0 0 .6 .6 .£: ~ c ·-0 0 0 0 0 0 " 0 ·-00 ~M ~ " \'1 M ~ '11 " " N m M N ~ " " 100 I 1: I I~ I : ! I ! I I I ! I I
1: i . I 90 "'' I I I I I I I I I I I 'D. I I
I I II I I I I I "'-o I I I I I I
80 T II ~....., i'
I
I I I I I I I I ~: I
I I I I I I I I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I ~
0:: ! I I! I I I I I I I I ! !I llJ 60 li il z I I I I I I I I I I I I u:: I I I I I I I I I I I I jl I 1-z 50 I
1:
I I I I
: :1 llJ
! I ! I ! I I I I I I ()
0:: 1: I I :1
llJ 40 ·-.
a.. I :I I I I I I I I I I I !I I
I II I I I I I I I I I II I
30 lj . I Uill1 jl I I I I I I I I I I
I I I II I I I I I I I jl I 20 I I 1l I I I I I I I I !I I
I I I! I I I I I! I I I I !I I
10 +-II-1-1 -~ 1---l-+
I I I I I I I 11! I I I I I I
0 I I I i I I I I I I I I I jl 111
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
GRAIN SIZE-mm.
%+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines
Coarse I Fine Coarse I Medium I Fine Silt I Clay
0 0 11 s I 6 I 12 66
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.* PASS? Material Descri(!tion
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) Clay, slightly gravelly, medium dense, slightly moist, brown
3/4" 100 (CG)d
1/2" 98 Atterberg Limits (ASTM D 4318)
3/8" 95 PL= 14 LL-30 PI-16
#4 89
Classification #8 85
#16 82 USGS= CL AASHTO= A-6(8)
#30 79 Coefficients #50 76 o85= 2.5354 D6o-Dso= #100 72 D3o= D1s= D1o=
#200 66 Cu= Cc=
Date Tested: 10/08/08 Tested By: SP
Remarks
(no specification provided)
Sample No.: Source of Sample: TH-3 Date Sampled: 10/03/08
Location: Elev ./Depth: 0-5
Checked Bv: LM Title:
~-~eohleltni•~al Client:
~.:n~inNlring Project: UNA Compressor Station Garfield County
Groii(J• Ine. Proiect No: 3 071 Fi11ure 14
Gradation Test Report
" ~~ . " g ~ g .E .E .5 ~ .5. ;;; 0 0 ~ ~ 0 ;t " &¥ ~ ;u; ~ ~ ~ M N ~ ~ M " 100
: 1: : I~ : : :1 I I I I I
90 r-,L ___ L _L LJ--tl I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I! I I I I I I "'"'< I I I li
80
i li N I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I ct. I I I I I I I I I ' 70 I I T I ,--~ I I 1!1 I I I I
0:: I I I! I I I I I 1!1 I I I I I
w 60 ' ! I z I I lj I I I I I ljl I I I I I u:: Iii I
1-I I I I I I I I I I I I I
z 50
: :
I 1:1 tttt : I w I I 0 I I I : II 0:: 40-1--· _j I I __ L_j J --· ··--------w
Q_ I I I I I I I I I I I I,
I II I I I I I I I I I I
30
i I ' I I I I I! I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I. I I I I I I I
I I I ! I !iii I I I I ! I I
10 1-· 1-1--1 I -
I II! I II I : ~:I I I I I I I I
I !11 I I ' I I I I I I I 0 '
100 10 1 0.1 O.Q1 0.001
GRAIN SIZE -mm.
%+3" %Gravel %Sand %Fines
Coarse I Fine Coarse Medium I Fine Silt I Clay
0 0 I 8 4 5 I 15 68
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.' PASS? Material Descri(ltion
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) TH -1, 2, 3 Blended
3/4" 100
1/2" 98 Atterberg Limits (ASTM D 4318)
3/W' 96 PL= 17 LL-27 PI-9
#4 92
#8 89 Classification
#16 87 USCS= CL AASHTO= A-4(4)
#30 85 Coefficients
#50 82 o85 = o.6897 Dso-Dso= #100 77 D3o= D1s= D1o=
#200 68 Cu= Cc=
Date Tested: 10/15/08 Tested By: SP
Remarks
(no specification provided)
Sample No.: Source of Sample: 1-3Biend Date Sampled: 10/03/08
Location: Elev./Depth: 0-5
Checked Bv: LM Title: I faeot•~.,ltni•:al Client:
~~nginet•ring Project: UNA Compressor Station Garfield County
Gr••n1•• lne. Project No: 3,071 Figure 15
't5
0.
.i-·u;
c
<])
"0 c
0
Moisture-Density Relationship Curve ( Proctor )
I Geotechnical
~ .... Engineering Ia. Group~ Ine.
Curve No.: 1
Project No.: 3,071
Project: UNA Compressor Station Garfield County
Date:
140
130
120
110
100
90
80
Source: l-3Blend
Remarks:
Description: TH-1, 2, 3 Blended
Elev./Depth: 0-5 Sample No.
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Classifications -
Nat. Moist. = 6.6 %
Liquid Limit = 27
% > 3/8 in. = 4.0 %
uses: cL AASHTO: A-4( 4)
Sp.G.=
Plasticity Index = 9
% < No.200 = 68 %
TEST RESULTS
Maximum dry density= 114.5 pcf
Optimum moisture= 13.0%
"\. Test specification:
"\. ASTM D 698-00a Method B Standard
"\.
'\.
"\
'\. "\
"\ ,,
'\.
-" ~ '"' 1"'-100% SATURATION CURVES -' 1"'-FOR SPEC. GRAV. EQUAL TO:
' 1"'-2.8
-./ ,..... 2.7
"" 2.6 ,
-r---~-
1'\. ~' --!----------· --· ·-· ......
......
...... ' ! ! ....... 1'\.
' , ......
·---·
! , ...... ~ .....
...... !-... 1'\.
~ k """'
-
---~ -r-· -·-r--j--------
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Water content, %
~--..... ......
r--r----
40
Figure 16
BEARING RATIO TEST REPORT
ASTM D 1883·99
100
I
'
I
80
'iii .~ Eo ., ---" 60 ~-------------c
"' -~ .!!l ' "' v &!
c
~
f! 40 o; c .,
n.
20 . ------------------~-·-·-
1/
0 I
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Penetration Depth (in.)
Molded Soaked CBR(%) Linearity Surcharge Max.
Density Percent of Moisture Density Percent of Moisture 0.10 in. 0.20 in. Correction (lbs.) Swell
(pcij Max. Dens. (%) (pcij Max. Dens. (%) (in.) (%)
1 0 99.0 86.5 12.4 99.0 86.6 19.4 4.1 3.2 0.000 17.6490 0
26
------··-~~ ----····---·-·-------------·
30
Material Description Max. Optimum
uses ~~~~-Mo;~~~re LL PI
%
TH-1, 2, 3 Blended CL 114.5 13.0 27 9
Project No: 3,071 Test Description/Remarks:
Project: UNA Compressor Station Garfield County
Source of Sample: l-3Biend Depth: 0-5
Date: 10/03/08
IICo••oh•••l•••i•,.•l -~··~···· ........... ~ «• •·•••• ..... I •••!· Figure 17
!'
Geotechnical
lilr.,Engineeting fl• Group, Inc.
GEGJOBNO. 3,071
Existing
Slope
Irrigation Ditch
Fill Slope
Compacted
Fill
~Toe key excavated into
competent foundation
material
Existing
Slope
Benched into competent
foundation material.
Number of benches is
dependent on onsite
condition encountered
during construction.
GEG representative to
confirm at that time.
Recommended Key and Bench
Into Existing Slopes Concept
DATE:
10/29/2008
Fig. 18
II
Geotechnical
l!lilf"ngineering Ia. Group, Inc.
GEGJOBNO.
Compacted
Fill
4" or 6" diameter
perforated drain pipe
Free draining aggregate at least 3
cubic feet per linear foot of pipe
wrapped with an appropriate filter
fabric.
'-Rinnr·nnri::~llo filter fabric
4" or 6" diameter
perforated drain pipe
Free draining aggregate at least
3 cubic feet per linear foot of pipe
wrapped with an appropriate filter
fabric.
Toe Key and Bench Drain Details
DATE:
10/29/2008
3,071 Fig. 19
Hole
TH-1
TH-1
TH-2
TH-3
TH-3
TH-4
TH-4
Geoteehnieal l ~lrrrr... Engineering
la..Gronp, Ine.
Depth Natural Dry
(feet) Moisture Density
(%) (pel)
0 to 5 4.1 --
4 10.8 94
0 to 5 3.2 --
Oto 5 11.0 --
9 13.0 115
9 9.8 105
19 12.8 98
Job No. 3071
TABLE I
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Atterberg Limits Swell 1 Consolidation Direct Shear Passing Water Soil Type
No. 200 Soluble
Liquid Plasticity Swell Confining Estimated Internal Cohesion Sieve Sulfates
Limit Index (%) Pressure Swell Angle of (psi) (%) (ppm)
(%) (%) (psf) Pressure Friction
(psi) (Degrees)
28 14 ----------56 5,000 Clay, slightly gravelly (CL)
-----0.2 250 ----------Clay, slightly gravelly (CL)
27 13 ---------50 1,300 Clay, slightly gravelly (CL)
30 16 ---------65 3,800 Clay, slightly gravelly (CL)
----3.2 500 ---------Clay, slightly gravelly (CL)
-- ------23 300 ------Clay, slightly gravelly (CL)
----6.8 1000 ----------Clay, slightly gravelly (CL)
Page 1 of 1
Geotechnical l lill~ngineering
I Group, Inc.
Hole Depth Natural
(Feet) Moisture
TH-1, TH-2 0 to 5 6.6
and TH-3
Atterberg Limits
Liquid Plasticity
Limit(%) Index(%)
27 9
TABLE II Job No. 3071
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Standard Proctor CBR Passing Water Soluble Soil Type
(ASTM 0698) Value No. 200 Sulfates
Maximum Optimum Sieve (ppm)
Dry Density Moisture (%)
(pcf) Content
(%)
114.5 13.0 3.2 68 .. Clay, gravelly (CL)
Page 1 of 1
APPENDIX A
SAMPLE SITE GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
SAMPLE SITE GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
UNA Compressor Station
Garfield County, Colorado
Note: Appendix A presents sample specifications. These sample specifications are not
project specific. The sample specifications should be modified by the Architect, Civil
engineer or Structural engineer as needed to reflect project specific requirements.)
1. DESCRIPTION
This item shall consist of the excavation, transportation, placement and
compaction of materials from locations indicated on the plans, or staked by the
Engineer, as necessary to achieve preliminary street and overlot elevations. These
specifications shall also apply to compaction of excess cut materials that may be
placed outside of the subdivision and/or filing boundaries.
2. GENERAL
The Soils Engineer shall be the Owner's representative. The Soils Engineer
shall approve fill materials, method of placement, moisture contents and percent
compaction, and shall give written approval of the completed fill.
3. CLEARING JOB SITE
The Contractor shall remove all trees, brush, and rubbish before excavation
or fill placement is begun. The Contractor shall dispose of the cleared material to
provide the Owner with a clean, neat appearing job site. Cleared material shall not
be placed in areas to receive fill or where the material will support structures of any
kind.
4. SCARIFYING AREA TO BE FILLED
All topsoil and vegetable matter shall be removed from the ground surface
upon which fill is to be placed. The surface shall then be plowed or scarified until
the surface is free from ruts, hummocks or other uneven features, which would
prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be used.
Job No. 3,071 Fig. A-1
5. COMPACTING AREA TO BE FILLED
After the foundation for the fill has been cleared and scarified, it shall be
disked or bladed until it is free from large clods, brought to the proper moisture
content (within 2 percent above or below optimum) and compacted to not less than
95 percent of maximum density as determined in accordance with ASTM D 698. If
soft/ yielding subgrade conditions are encountered, stabilization may be required.
6. FILL MATERIALS
Fill soils shall be free from vegetable matter or other deleterious substances,
and shall not contain rocks or lumps having a diameter greater than six (6) inches.
Fill materials shall be obtained from cut areas shown on the plans or staked in the
field by the Engineer.
On-site materials classifying as CL, SC, SM, SW, SP, GP, GC and GM are
acceptable. Concrete, asphalt, organic matter and other deleterious materials or
debris shall not be used as fill.
7. MOISTURE CONTENT
Fill materials shall be moisture treated to within 2 ± percent of optimum
moisture content as determined from Proctor compaction tests. Sufficient laboratory
compaction tests shall be made to determine the optimum moisture content for thee
various soils encountered in borrow areas.
The Contractor may be required to add moisture to the excavation materials
in the borrow area if, in the opinion of the Soils Engineer, it is not possible to obtain
uniform moisture content by adding water on the fill surface. The Contractor may be
required to rake or disk the fill soils to provide uniform moisture content through the
soils.
The application of water to embankment materials shall be made with any
type of watering equipment approved by the Soils Engineer, which will give the
desired results. Water jets from the spreader shall not be directed at the
embankment with such force that fill materials are washed out.
Should too much water be added to any part of the fill, such that the material
is too wet to permit the desired compaction from being obtained, rolling and all work
on that section of the fill shall be delayed until the material has been allowed to dry
to the required moisture content. The Contractor will be permitted to rework wet
material in an approved manner to hasten its drying.
Job No. 3,071 Fig. A-2
8. COMPACTION OF FILL AREAS
Selected fill material shall be placed and mixed in evenly spread layers.
After each fill layer has been placed, it shall be uniformly compacted to not less than
the specified percentage of maximum density. Expansive soils classifying as CL or
SC shall be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as
determined in accordance with ASTM D 698 ( 1 00 percent for fill deeper than 15 feet
below final grade). At the option of the Soils Engineer, soils classifying as SW, SP,
GP, GC or GM may be compacted to 90 percent of the maximum density as
determined in accordance with ASTM D 1557 (95 percent for fill deeper than 15 feet
below final grade). Fill materials shall be placed such that the thickness of loose
material does not exceed 1 0 inches and the compacted lift thickness does not
exceed 6 inches.
Compaction, as specified above, shall be obtained by the use of sheepsfoot
rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other equipment approved by the
Engineer for soils classifying as CL or SC. Granular fill shall be compacted using
vibratory equipment or other equipment approved by the Soils Engineer.
Compaction shall be accomplished while the fill material is at the specified moisture
content. Compaction of each layer shall be continuous over the entire area.
Compaction equipment shall make sufficient trips to insure that the required density
is obtained.
9. COMPACTION OF SLOPES
Fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or other
suitable equipment. Compaction operations shall be continued until slopes are
stable, but not too dense for planting, and there is no appreciable amount of loose
soil on the slopes. Compaction of slopes may be done progressively in increments
of three to five feet (3' to 5') in height or after the fill is brought to its total height.
Permanent fill slopes shall not exceed 3:1 (horizontal to vertical).
1 0. DENSITY TESTS
Field density tests shall be made by the Soils Engineer at locations and
depths of his choosing. Where sheepsfoot rollers are used, the soil may be
disturbed to a depth of several inches. Density tests shall be taken in compacted
material below the disturbed surface. When density tests indicate that the density
or moisture content of any layer of fill or portion thereof is below that required, the
particular layer or portion shall be reworked until the required density or moisture
content has been achieved.
Job No. 3,071 Fig. A-3
11. COMPLETED PRELIMINARY GRADES
All areas, both cut and fill, shall be finished to a level surface and shall meet
the following limits of construction:
A. Overlot cut or fill areas shall be within plus or minus 2/10 of one foot.
B. Street grading shall be within plus or minus 1/10 of one foot.
The civil engineer, or duly authorized representative, shall check all cut and
fill areas to observe that the work is in accordance with the above limits.
12. SUPERVISION AND CONSTRUCTION STAKING
Observation by the Soils Engineer shall be continuous during the placement
of fill and compaction operations so that he can declare that the fill was placed in
general conformance with specifications. All inspections necessary to test the
placement of fill and observe compaction operations will be at the expense of the
Owner. All construction staking will be provided by the Civil Engineer or his duly
authorized representative. Initial and final grading staking shall be at the expense of
the owner. The replacement of grade stakes through construction shall be at the
expense of the contractor.
13. SEASONAL LIMITS
No fill material shall be placed, spread or rolled while it is frozen, thawing, or
during unfavorable weather conditions. When work is interrupted by heavy
precipitation, fill operations shall not be resumed until the Soils Engineer indicates
that the moisture content and density of previously placed materials are as
specified.
14. NOTICE REGARDING START OF GRADING
The contractor shall submit notification to the Soils Engineer and Owner
advising them of the start of grading operations at least three (3) days in advance of
the starting date. Notification shall also be submitted at least 3 days in advance of
any resumption dates when grading operations have been stopped for any reason
other than adverse weather conditions.
Job No. 3,071 Fig. A-4
15. REPORTING OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
Density tests made by the Soils Engineer, as specified under "Density Tests"
above, shall be submitted progressively to the Owner. Dry density, moisture
content, of each test taken and percentage compaction shall be reported for each
test taken.
16. DECLARATION REGARDING COMPLETED FILL
The Soils Engineer shall provide a written declaration stating that the site
was filled with acceptable materials, or was placed in general accordance with the
specifications.
17. DECLARATION REGARDING COMPLETED GRADE ELEVATIONS
A registered Civil Engineer or licensed Land Surveyor shall provide a
declaration stating that the site grading has been completed and resulting elevations
are in general conformance with the accepted detailed development plan.
Job No. 3,071 Fig. A-5
APPENDIXB
PAVEMENT DESIGN CALCULATIONS
Win PAS
Pavement Thickness Design According to
1993 AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavements Structures
American Concrete Pavement Association
Flexible Design Inputs
Agency: Star Valley Enterprises
Company:
Contractor:
Project Description: GEG Job No 3071 UNA Compressor Station
Location: Parachutte, Colorado
Flexible Pavement Design/Evaluation
2.49
62,400.00
Structural Number
Design ESALs
Reliability
Overall Deviation
80.00 percent
0.45
Layer Pavement Design/Evaluation
Layer Layer
Material Coefficient
Asphalt Cement Concrete 0.40
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:33:00PM Engineer: NWJ
Soil Resilient Modulus
Initial Serviceability
Terminal Servicea6ility
Drainage Layer
Coefficient Thickness
1.00 6.22
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
l: '"
4,300.00 psi
4.50
2.50
Layer
SN
2.49
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.49
Fig. 81
Win PAS
Pavement Thickness Design According to
1993 AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavements Structures
American Concrete Pavement Association
Flexible Design Inputs
Agency: Star Valley Enterprises
Company:
Contractor:
Project Description: GEG Job No 3071 UNA Compressor Station
Location: Parachutte, Colorado
Flexible Pavement Design!Evaluation
2.49
62,400.00
Structural Number
Design ESALs
Reliability
Overall Deviation
80.00 percent
0.45
Layer Pavement Design/Evaluation
Layer Layer
Material Coefficient
Asphalt Cement Concrete 0.40
Crushed Stone Base 0.12
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:27:10PM Engineer: NWJ
Soil Resilient Modulus
Initial Serviceability
Terminal Serviceability
Drainage Layer
Coefficient Thickness
1.00 3.00
1.00 10.72
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
L:;~
4,300.00 psi
4.50
2.50
Layer
SN
1.20
1.29
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.49
Fig. 82
Win PAS
Pavement Thickness Design According to
1993 AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavements Structures
American Concrete Pavement Association
Flexible Design Inputs
Agency: Star Valley Enterprises
Company:
Contractor:
Project Description: GEG Job No 3071 UNA Compressor Station
Location: Parachutte, Colorado
Flexible Pavement Design/Evaluation
2.49
62,400.00
Structural Number
Design ESALs
Reliability
Overall Deviation
80.00 percent
0.45
Layer Pavement Design/Evaluation
Layer Layer
Material Coefficient
Asphalt Cement Concrete 0.40
Crushed Stone Base 0.12
Granular Subbase 0.09
0.00
0.00
0.00
Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:35:10PM Engineer: NWJ
Soil Resilient Modulus
Initial Serviceability
Terminal Serviceability
Drainage Layer
Coefficient Thickness
1.00 3.00
1.00 5.00
1.00 7.63
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
:E "''
4,300.00 psi
4.50
2.50
Layer
SN
1.20
0.60
0.69
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.49
Fig. B3
Win PAS
Pavement Thickness Design According to
1993 AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavements Structures
American Concrete Pavement Association
Flexible Design Inputs
Ag~ncy: Star Valley Enterprises
Company:
Contractor:
Project Description: GEG Job No 3071 UNA Compressor Station
Location: Parachutte, Colorado
Flexible Pavement Design/Evaluation
2.88
156,200.00
Structural Number
Design ESALs
Reliability
Overall Deviation
80.00 percent
0.45
Layer Pavement Design/Evaluation
Layer Layer
Material Coefficient
Asphalt Cement Concrete 0.40
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:38:33PM Engineer: NWJ
Soil Resilient Modulus
Initial Serviceability
Terminal Serviceability
Drainage Layer
Coefficient Thickness
1.00 7.19
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
Ltsl'
4,300.00 psi
4.50
2.50
Layer
SN
2.88
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.88
Fig. 84
Win PAS
Pavement Thickness Design According to
1993 AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavements Structures
American Concrete Pavement Association
Flexible Design Inputs
Agency: Star Valley Enterprises
Company:
Contractor:
Project Description: GEG Job No 3071 UNA Compressor Station
Location: Parachutte, Colorado
Flexible Pavement Design/Evaluation
2.88
156,200.00
Structural Number
Design ESAls
Reliability
Overall Deviation
80.00 percent
0.45
layer Pavement Design/Evaluation
layer layer
Material Coefficient
Asphalt Cement Concrete 0.40
Crushed Stone Base 0.12
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:42:43PM Engineer:. NWJ
Soil Resilient Modulus
Initial Serviceability
Terminal Serviceability
Drainage Layer
Coefficient Thickness
1.00 4.00
1.00 10.64
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
~"''
4,300.00 psi
4.50
2.50
layer
SN
1.60
1.28
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.88
Fig. B5
Win PAS
Pavement Thickness Design According to
1993 AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavements Structures
American Concrete Pavement Association
Flexible Design Inputs
Ag~ncy: Star Vall~y Ent~rpris~s
Company:
Contractor:
Proj~ct D~scrlptlon: GEG Job No 3071 UNA Compr~ssor Station
Location: Parachutt~. Colorado
Flexible Pavement Design/Evaluation
2.88
156,200.00
Structural Number
Design ESALs
Reliability
Overall Deviation
80.00 percent
0.45
layer Pavement Design/Evaluation
layer layer
Material Coefficient
Asphalt Cement Concrete 0.40
Crushed Stone Base 0.12
Granular Subbase 0.09
0.00
0.00
0.00
Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:44:36PM Engineer: NWJ
Soil Resilient Modulus
Initial Serviceability
Terminal Serviceability
Drainage layer
Coefficient Thickness
1.00 4.00
1.00 5.00
1.00 7.52
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
l:bN
4,300.00 psi
4.50
2.50
layer
SN
1.60
0.60
0.68
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.88
Fig. B6
Win PAS
Pavement Thickness Design According to
1993 AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavements Structures
American Concrete Pavement Association
Flexible Design Inputs
Agency: Star Valley Enterprises
Company:
Contractor:
Project Description: GEG Job No 3071 UNA Compressor Station
Location: Parachutte, Colorado
Flexible Pavement Design/Evaluation
2.96
187,200.00
Structural Number
Design ESALs
Reliability
Overall Deviation
80.00 percent
0.45
Layer Pavement Design/Evaluation
Layer Layer
Material Coefficient
Asphalt Cement Concrete 0.40
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:47:00PM Engineer: NWJ
Soil Resilient Modulus
Initial Serviceability
Terminal Serviceability
Drainage Layer
Coefficient Thickness
1.00 7.40
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
l:M
4,300.00 psi
4.50
2.50
Layer
SN
2.96
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.96
Fig. B7
Win PAS
Pavement Thickness Design According to
1993 AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavements Structures
American Concrete Pavement Association
Flexible Design Inputs
Agency: Star Valley Enterprises
Company:
Contractor:
Project Description: GEG Job No 3071 UNA Compressor Station
Location: Parachutte, Colorado
Flexible Pavement Design/Evaluation
2.96
187,200.00
Structural Number
Design ESALs
Reliability
Overall Deviation
80.00 percent
0.45
Layer Pavement Design/Evaluation
Layer Layer
Material Coefficient
Asphalt Cement Concrete 0.40
Crushed Stone Base 0.12
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:48:26PM Engineer: NWJ
Soil Resilient Modulus
Initial Serviceability
Terminal Serviceability
Drainage Layer
Coefficient Thickness
1.00 4.00
1.00 11.33
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
>;;>I'
4,300.00 psi
4.50
2.50
Layer
SN
1.60
1.36
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.96
Fig. 88
Win PAS
Pavement Thickness Design According to
1993 AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavements Structures
American Concrete Pavement Association
Flexible Design Inputs
Agency: Star Valley Enterprises
Company:
Contractor:
Project Description: GEG Job No 3071 UNA Compressor Station
Location: Parachutte, Colorado
Flexible Pavement Design/Evaluation
2.96
187,200.00
Structural Number
Design ESALs
Reliability
Overall Deviation
80.00 percent
0.45
Layer Pavement Design/Evaluation
Layer Layer
Material Coefficient
Asphalt Cement Concrete 0.40
Crushed Stone Base 0.12
Granular Subbase 0.09
0.00
0.00
0.00
Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:50:33PM Engineer: NWJ
Soil Resilient Modulus
Initial Serviceability
Terminal Serviceability
Drainage Layer
Coefficient Thickness
1.00 4.00
1.00 6.00
1.00 7.11
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
);::51'
4,300.00 psi
4.50
2.50
Layer
SN
1.60
0.72
0.64
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.~6
Fig. 89
Win PAS
Pavement Thickness Design According to
1993 AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavements Structures
American Concrete Pavement Association
Flexible Design Inputs
Agency: Star Valley Enterprises
Company:
Contractor:
Project Description: GEG Job No 3071 UNA Compressor Station
Location: Parachutte, Colorado
Flexible Pavement Design/Evaluation
2.96
187,200.00
Structural Number
Design ESALs
Reliability
Overall Deviation
80.00 percent
0.45
Layer Pavement Design/Evaluation
Layer Layer
Material Coefficient
Asphalt Cement Concrete 0.40
Crushed Stone Base 0.12
Granular Subbase 0.09
0.00
0.00
0.00
Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:52:47PM Engineer: NWJ
Soil Resilient Modulus
Initial Serviceability
Terminal Serviceability
Drainage Layer
Coefficient Thickness
1.00 4.00
1.00 5.00
1.00 8.44
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
~:SN
4,300.00 psi
4.50
2.50
Layer
SN
1.60
0.60
0.76
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.96
Fig. B10
Win PAS
Pavement Thickness Design According to
1993 AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavements Structures
American Concrete Pavement Association
Rigid Design Inputs
Agency: Star Valley Enterprises
Company:
Contractor:
Project Description: GEG Job No 3071 UNA Compressor Station
Location: Parachutte, Colorado
Rigid Pavement Design/Evaluation
4.08 inches Load Transfer, J PCC Thickness
Design ESALs
Reliability
Overall Deviation
Modulus of Rupture
Modulus of Elasticity
62,400.00
80.00
0.45
500
percent
psi
Mod. Subgrade Reaction, k
Drainage Coefficient, Cd
Initial Serviceability
Terminal Serviceability
3,375,000 psi
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction (k-valuel Determination
Resilient Modulus of the Subgrade
Resilient Modulus of the Subbase
Subbase Thickness
Depth to Rigid Foundation
Loss of Support Value (0, 1,2,3)
4,300.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
psi
psi
inches
feet
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction 220.00 psi/in
Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:55:44PM Engineer: NWJ
3.20
220 psi/in
1.00
4.50
2.50
Fig. 811
WinPAS
Pavement Thickness Design According to
1993 AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavements Structures
American Concrete Pavement Association
Rigid Design Inputs
Agency: Star Valley Enterprises
Company:
Contractor:
Project Description: GEG Job No 3071 UNA Compressor Station
Location: Parachutte, Colorado
Rigid Pavement Design/Evaluation
PCC Thickness 5.06 inches Load Transfer, J
Design ESAls 156,200.00 Mod. Subgrade Reaction, k
Reliability
Overall Deviation
Modulus of Rupture
Modulus of Elasticity
80.00 percent Drainage Coefficient, Cd
0.45 Initial Serviceability
500 psi Terminal Serviceability
3,375,000 psi
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction lk·valuel Determination
Resilient Modulus of the Subgrade 4,300.00
Resilient Modulus of the Subbase
Subbase Thickness
Depth to Rigid Foundation
Loss of Support Value (0, 1 ,2,3)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
psi
psi
inches
feet
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction 220.00 psi/in
'
Wednesday, October 29,2008 2:57:12PM Engineer: NWJ
3.20
220 psi/in
1.00
4.50
2.50
Fig. B12
Win PAS
Pavement Thickness Design According to
1993 AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavements Structures
American Concrete Pavement Association
Rigid Design Inputs
Agency: Star Valley Enterprises
Company:
Contractor:
Project Description: GEG Job No 3071 UNA Compressor Station
Location: Parachutte, Colorado
Rigid Pavement Design/Evaluation
PCC Thickness 5.27 inches load Transfer, J
Design ESALs 187,200.00 Mod. Subgrade Reaction, k
Reliability
Overall Deviation
Modulus of Rupture
Modulus of Elasticity
80.00 percent Drainage Coefficient, Cd
0.45 Initial Serviceability
500 psi Terminal Serviceability
3,375,000 psi
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction (k-value) Determination
Resilient Modulus of the Subgrade 4,300.00
Resilient Modulus of the Subbase
Subbase Thickness
Depth to Rigid Foundation
Loss of Support Value (0, 1 ,2,3)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
psi
psi
inches
feet
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction 220.00 psi/in
Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:58:39PM Engineer: NW J
3.20
220 psi/in
1.00
4.50
2.50
Fig. 613
APPENDIXC
CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR FLEXIBLE AND RIGID PAVEMENT
FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS
Experience has shown that construction methods can have a significant effect on
the life and serviceability of a pavement system. We recommend the proposed pavement
be constructed in the following manner:
1. The subgrade should be stripped of organic matter, existing fill and deleterious
materials, scarified, moisture treated, and compacted. Existing structures
should also be removed completely. Soils should be moisture treated to within
2 percent of optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of
maximum standard Proctor dry density (ASTM D 698).
2. After final subgrade elevation has been reached and the subgrade compacted,
the area should be proof-rolled with a heavy pneumatic-tired vehicle (i.e., a
loaded 1 0-wheel dump truck). Subgrade that is pumping or deforming
excessively should be stabilized.
3. If areas of soft or wet subgrade soils are encountered, the material should be
subexcavated and replaced with properly compacted structural backfill. Where
extensively soft, yielding subgrade is encountered, we recommend the
excavation be inspected by a representative of our office.
4. Aggregate base course and aggregate subbase course should be laid in thin,
loose lifts, moisture treated to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and
compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum modified Proctor dry density
(ASTM D 1557, AASHTO T 180).
5. Asphaltic concrete should be hot plant-mixed material compacted to between
92 and 96 percent of maximum theoretical density. The temperature at
laydown time should be at least 235 degrees F. The maximum compacted lift
should be 3.0 inches and joints should be staggered.
6. The subgrade preparation and the placement and compaction of all
pavement material should be observed and tested. Compaction criteria
should be met prior to the placement of the next paving lift. The additional
requirements of the Colorado Department of Transportation and Garfield
County Specifications should apply.
Job No. 3,071 Fig. C-1
RIGID PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS
Rigid pavement sections are not as sensitive to subgrade support characteristics
as flexible pavement. Due to the strength of the concrete, wheel loads from traffic are
distributed over a large area and the resulting subgrade stresses are relatively low. The
critical factors affecting the performance of a rigid pavement are the strength and quality of
the concrete, and the uniformity of the subgrade. We recommend subgrade preparation
and construction of the rigid pavement section be completed in accordance with the
following recommendations:
1. Subgrade areas should be stripped of organics, existing fill and deleterious
materials. Existing structures should also be completely removed. The
pavement subgrade shall be compacted within 2% of optimum moisture
content to at least 95% of maximum standard Proctor dry density (ASTM D
698). Moisture treatment and compaction recommendations also apply
where additional fill is necessary.
2. The resulting subgrade shall be checked for uniformity and all soft or
yielding materials should be replaced prior to paving. Concrete should not
be placed on soft, spongy, frozen, or otherwise unsuitable subgrade.
3. The subgrade shall be kept moist prior to paving.
4. Concrete should not be placed in cold weather or on frozen subgrade.
5. Curing procedures should protect the concrete against moisture loss, rapid
temperature change, freezing, and mechanical injury for at least 3 days
after placement. Traffic should not be allowed on the pavement for at least
one week.
6. A white, liquid membrane curing compound, applied at the rate of 1 gallon
per 150 square feet, should be used.
7. Construction joints, including longitudinal joints and transverse joints,
should be formed during construction or should be sawed shortly after the
concrete has begun to set, but prior to uncontrolled cracking. All joints
should be sealed.
8. Construction control and inspection shall be carried out during the subgrade
preparation and paving procedures. Concrete shall be carefully monitored
for quality control. The additional requirements of Garfield County and The
Colorado Department of Transportation Specifications should apply.
9. Deicing salts should not be used for the first year after placement.
Job No. 3,071 Fig. C-2