GEOTECHNICAL BASELINE REPORT

SOUTH HARTFORD CONVEYANCE AND STORAGE TUNNEL

FRANKLIN AVENUE CONSOLIDATION CONDUIT AND WEST PRESTON STREET
REPLACEMENT CONDUIT, HANMER STREET AND TREDEAU STREET
CONSOLIDATION CONDUITS
(CONTRACT #4)

MDC Contract No 2015B-34

May 2016
(Revised October 2019)
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1

General..................................................................................................................... 1
Purpose and Scope .................................................................................................. 2
Precedence of GBR over GDR within Contract Documents ...................................... 2

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................ 4

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL, GEOLOGICAL, AND GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION SOURCES

.......................................................................................................................................... 5
Geotechnical Explorations ........................................................................................ 5
Environmental Investigations .................................................................................... 5
Other Available Geotechnical Information Sources ................................................... 5

4.0 GEOLOGIC SETTING AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ............................................. 6

Geologic Setting ....................................................................................................... 6
Soil Stratigraphy ....................................................................................................... 6
Bedrock Geology ...................................................................................................... 6
4.3.1 Lithology ....................................................................................................... 6
4.3.2 Structure ....................................................................................................... 6
4.3.3 Bedrock Surface Topography ........................................................................ 6
4.3.4 Seismicity ...................................................................................................... 7
4.3.5 Potential for Natural Hazardous Gases ......................................................... 7
Site-Specific Subsurface Conditions ......................................................................... 7
4.4.1 Franklin Avenue Tunnel and Shafts............................................................... 7
4.4.2 West Preston Street Replacement Conduit ................................................... 8
4.4.3 Hanmer Street Consolidation Conduit ........................................................... 9
4.4.4 Tredeau Street Consolidation Conduit........................................................... 9
Groundwater Conditions ........................................................................................... 9
4.5.1 Franklin Avenue ............................................................................................ 9
4.5.2 West Preston Street ...................................................................................... 9
4.5.3 Hanmer Street ............................................................................................. 10
4.5.4 Tredeau Street ............................................................................................ 10
Soil and Groundwater Quality and Management ..................................................... 10
4.6.1 Existing Environmental Conditions .............................................................. 10
4.6.2 Environmental Permits and Regulatory and Owner Criteria ......................... 10
4.6.3 Environmental Data Summary..................................................................... 11

5.0 PREVIOUS CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE ................................................................ 12

PRAC Tunnel Construction ..................................................................................... 12
Franklin Avenue Area Sewer Separation Package D – West Side Projects ............ 12
Jefferson Street Interceptor Tunnel Construction .................................................... 12

6.0 GROUND CHARACTERIZATION ................................................................................... 13

General................................................................................................................... 13
Soil ......................................................................................................................... 13
6.2.1 Fill ............................................................................................................... 13

Page | i
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

6.2.2 Glaciolacustrine........................................................................................... 13
6.2.3 Glacial Till ................................................................................................... 13
6.2.4 Summary of Soil Properties ......................................................................... 13
6.2.5 Laboratory Testing ........................................................................................ 14
Intact Rock Specimens ........................................................................................... 14
6.3.1 Slake Durability ........................................................................................... 14
6.3.2 Cerchar Abrasivity Index ............................................................................. 14
In-Situ Rock Mass................................................................................................... 15
6.4.1 Weathering.................................................................................................. 15
West Preston Street Summary................................................................................ 15
Franklin Avenue and Hanmer Street Summary ....................................................... 16
Tredeau Street Summary........................................................................................ 17
Obstructions ........................................................................................................... 17

7.0 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS ......................................................................................... 18

Tunnel .................................................................................................................... 18
7.1.1 TBM Starter and Tail Tunnel Excavation and Support ................................. 18
7.1.2 FACC TBM Tunnel Excavation and Support ............................................... 18
7.1.3 Tunnel Carrier Pipe ..................................................................................... 18
7.1.4 Tunnel Grouting .......................................................................................... 18
Shafts ..................................................................................................................... 18
7.2.1 Shaft Excavation and Support ..................................................................... 18
7.2.2 Design Ground and Water Pressures .......................................................... 19
7.2.3 Groundwater Control and Grouting Requirements....................................... 19
Connector Tunnels ................................................................................................. 19
7.3.1 Excavation and Support .............................................................................. 19
Trenched Pipelines and Diversion Structures ......................................................... 20
7.4.1 Excavation Support ..................................................................................... 20
7.4.2 Groundwater Control ................................................................................... 20
Gate Chambers and Approach Channels ............................................................... 20
7.5.1 Excavation Support ..................................................................................... 20
7.5.2 Groundwater Control ................................................................................... 20

8.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS .......................................................................... 21

Infiltration flow......................................................................................................... 21
8.1.1 Franklin Avenue Tunnel .............................................................................. 21
8.1.2 Large Diameter Shafts ................................................................................ 21
Environmental Evaluation and Soil and Groundwater Disposal ............................... 21
8.2.1 Quantitative Approach for Basis of Bid for Material Disposal Costs ............. 22
8.2.2 Spoil Material Management ......................................................................... 22
8.2.3 Groundwater Management .......................................................................... 22
Obstructions ........................................................................................................... 22
Bedrock in Trenches ............................................................................................... 22

9.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 23

FIGURES
Figure 1 Subsurface Exploration Location Plan
Figure 2 Regional Bedrock Geologic Map
Figure 3 Bedrock Structural Geologic Map
Figure 4 Legend and General Notes for Geologic Profiles

Page | ii
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

Figure 5 Franklin Avenue Consolidation Conduit Subsurface Exploration Location Plan

Figure 6 Franklin Avenue Consolidation Conduit Geologic Profile
Figure 6A Franklin Avenue Connector Tunnel Geological Profile
Figure 7 West Preston Street Replacement Conduit Subsurface Exploration Location Plan
Figure 8 West Preston Street Replacement Conduit Geologic Profile
Figure 9 Hanmer Street Consolidation Conduit Subsurface Exploration Location Plan
Figure 10 Hanmer Street Consolidation Conduit Geologic Profile
Figure 11 Tredeau Street Consolidation Conduit Subsurface Exploration Location Plan
Figure 12 Tredeau Street Consolidation Conduit Geologic Profile

TABLES
Table 6-1: Baseline Values for the In situ Soil Properties .......................................................................... 14
Table 6-2: Baseline Intact Rock Strength Properties – Franklin Avenue Consolidation Conduit and West
Preston Replacement Conduit, Hanmer Street and Tredeau Street Consolidation Conduits .................... 14
Table 6-3: Summary of Properties of Intact Rock Specimens from the Portland Formation from the South
Tunnel Project ............................................................................................................................................. 15
Table 6-4: Baselines for the Subsurface Conditions for the West Preston Street Replacement Conduit . 16
Table 6-5: Baselines for the Subsurface Conditions for the Franklin Avenue and the Hanmer Street
Consolidation Conduits ............................................................................................................................... 16
Table 6-6: Baselines for the Subsurface Conditions for the Tredeau Street Consolidation Conduit ......... 17
Table 6-7: Baseline for Obstructions .......................................................................................................... 17

APPENDICES
Appendix A Historical Record Drawing – Maple Avenue Area South CSO Abatement Project
Appendix B Tunnelman’s Ground Classification for Soils

Page | iii
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

ABBREVIATIONS
Abbreviations used in this report are as follows:

ASTM ASTM International

bgs Below Ground Surface
BWI Bit Wear Index
B&V Black & Veatch
CAI Cerchar Abrasiveness Index
CFRPM Cast Fiberglass Reinforced Polymer Mortar
CIP Cast-in-place
CLI Cutter Life Index
CSO Combined Sewer Overflow
CVVC Connecticut Valley Varved Clay
DS Drop Shaft
DSC Differing Site Condition
EDR Environmental Data Report
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
ERS Excavation Retention System
FACC Franklin Avenue Consolidation Conduit
GBR Geotechnical Baseline Report
GDR Geotechnical Data Report
GEIP Geotechnical and Environmental Investigation Program
GIP Geotechnical Investigation Program
gpd Gallons per day
gpm Gallons per Minute
HSCC Hanmer Street Consolidation Conduit
HWPCF Hartford Water Pollution Control Facility
LTCP Long Term Control Plan
MDC Metropolitan District Commission
MSL Mean Sea Level
NAVD North American Vertical Datum
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PPE Personnel Protective Equipment
psf Pounds per Square Foot
PRAC Park River Auxiliary Conduit
RCP Reinforced Concrete Pipe
RSR Remediation Standard Regulation
SDI Slake Durability Index
SPT Standard Penetration Test
TSCC Tredeau Street Consolidation Conduit
TBM Tunnel Boring Machine
TPS Tunnel Pump Station
USACE United States Army Corp of Engineers
UCS Uniaxial Compressive Strength
USCS United Soil Classification System
USGS United States Geological Survey
VOC Volatile Organic Compound
WPSRC West Preston Street Replacement Conduit

Page | iv
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

1.0 INTRODUCTION
General
This Geotechnical Baseline Report (GBR) has been prepared for the Franklin Avenue Consolidation Conduit,
West Preston Street Replacement Conduit, Hanmer Street Consolidation Conduit, and Tredeau Street
Consolidation Conduit. Locations for the consolidation conduits are shown on Figure 1. These conduits are
part of the overall South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel (South Tunnel) Project, which is part of
the Metropolitan District Commission’s (District’s) Long-Term Combined Sewer Overflow Control Plan to
address discharges to various water bodies throughout the greater Hartford area. In the future, an additional
deep rock tunnel (North Tunnel) will be constructed that will connect to the South Tunnel.

The South Tunnel project generally includes a main conveyance and storage tunnel; a tunnel boring machine
(TBM) Launch Shaft and Retrieval Shaft; several adit tunnels along with associated drop shafts and CSO
connection structures; consolidation conduits and manholes; and a tunnel pump station (TPS). The South
Tunnel Project includes the collection and storage of combined sewer overflow (CSO) discharges from new
relief locations within the Franklin Avenue and West Preston Street area drainage basins. The relief locations
in the Franklin and West Preston Street areas were designed to alleviate basement flooding by reducing
hydraulic grade issues in the sewer system. The improvements in the Franklin and West Preston Street areas
will be constructed under Contract 4. The design intent is to close the remaining CSOs and build a relief point
tributary to the South Tunnel.

The following components of the South Tunnel project will be constructed as part of Contract 4:

• Franklin Avenue Consolidation Conduit (FACC)

• West Preston Street Replacement Conduit (WPSRC)

• Hanmer Street Consolidation Conduit (HSCC)

• Tredeau Street Consolidation Conduit (TSCC)

• Associated diversion structures, approach channels, and shallow combined sewers.

The South Tunnel project includes additional facilities that will be constructed under four other separate
contracts:

• Contract 1 – CL&P duct bank relocation and switchgear site work.

• Contract 2 – Deep rock tunnel; associated adits, shafts, drop and vent shafts; TPS (structural shell
only); and the West Hartford Consolidation Conduit.

• Contract 3 – Fit out of the TPS, ancillary TPS structures and force main to convey flow to the Hartford
Water Pollution Control Facility (HWPCF);

• Contract 5 - Diversion structures, approach channels and shallow consolidation conduits associated
with CSO’s along Arlington Street, New Britain Avenue, and Hillcrest Avenue.

AECOM, in association with Black & Veatch (B&V) is the prime designer for the District and has prepared
this GBR. CDM Smith is the Program Manager for the District.

Page | 1
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

Purpose and Scope

The primary purpose of this GBR is to establish contractual baselines describing the anticipated ground
conditions that will be encountered during construction of the Contract 4 improvements. The baselines
established in this GBR are intended to be used in the assessment of differing site conditions (DSCs) during
construction. In addition to setting baselines, this GBR contains summaries of field and laboratory testing data,
interpretations of those data, and discussion of design and construction considerations for the Contract 4
improvements. The Contractor is responsible for reading and considering the GBR and all other Contract
Documents in their entirety for developing construction means and methods, equipment selection, and for
planning all other elements of the work. It is required that bidders retain the services of a qualified engineering
geologist/geotechnical tunneling engineer to help evaluate and interpret this document and related
geologic/geotechnical documents.

The geotechnical baseline conditions described in this report represent the Designer’s judgment of anticipated
subsurface conditions and ground behavior based on anticipated construction means and methods. In
establishing these baselines, the Designer considered available data and past construction experience in
similar ground conditions. Although actual conditions encountered in the field are expected to be within the
range of conditions discussed herein, there is no warranty that the baseline conditions will be encountered.
Ground behavior will be influenced by the construction sequence and means and methods employed by the
Contractor, as well as the Contractor’s equipment and workmanship. It has been assumed that the level of
workmanship will be consistent with what can be reasonably expected from an experienced and qualified
Contractor.

Other purposes of this GBR are as follows:

• Summarize and present site specific information along the project consolidation conduit
alignments; as well as at the structures that are specific to Contract 4.

• Provide expected geological and geotechnical conditions for assistance in bid preparation.

• Provide a basis for the geotechnical design of various elements and the rationale for contractual
requirements indicated in other locations of the Contract Documents.

• Identify important geotechnical considerations and constraints which need to be addressed by

the Contractor during bid preparation and construction.

Precedence of GBR over GDR within Contract Documents

This GBR establishes baseline values for construction related to tunneling, excavating, and supporting the
ground for use in preparing bids. The baseline statements in this GBR provide a contractual definition of the
site conditions the Contractor is expected to encounter during construction, and are to serve as the basis for
Contractor’s bid. Parameter values not explicitly identified as baselines are not contractual definitions of
expected site conditions, but are only intended to provide a general characterization for the parameter in
question, and may not always represent the value or range of values the Contractor will encounter.

This document is intended to complement the final Geotechnical Data Report (GDR) prepared by AECOM
and Haley & Aldrich, Inc. for this Project. The GDR contains factual soil and rock strata data obtained from
the geotechnical investigation programs identified in the GBR. The GBR baseline values shall take
precedence to reconcile any apparent conflicts, discrepancies, or inconsistencies with the GDR, documents
referenced in the GBR, or any other geotechnical data available to Contractor.

Where the baseline values are represented as a single value without an estimated value range, the Contractor
shall base his bid on the conditions represented by the baseline value.

Page | 2
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

Where baseline values are presented as a range (i.e., with maximum and minimum baseline values) the
Contractor must base his bid using means and methods that are able to accommodate the full range and
distribution if defined.

Page | 3
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The construction of the consolidation conduits and near surface connection structures is included under this
contract. Construction of the drop shaft and deep connecting adits associated with each of the consolidation
conduits is included in Contract 2.

Contract 4 includes the FACC, WPSRC, HSCC, and the TSCC. These areas and relative locations are shown
on Figure 1. The regional bedrock geology underlying these locations is shown on Figure 2 as well as the
bedrock structural geology shown on Figure 3. The legend and general notes for information collected from
subsurface borings is shown on Figure 4. The specific improvements for these areas are described below.

The FACC includes the consolidation conduit tunnel, related launch and retrieval shafts; one short connector
tunnel: Adelaide Street and Standish Street diversion structures; approach channels, junction chambers; and
odor control enclosures. The location of the FACC is shown on Figure 5. The FACC tunnel will be a 66-inch
finished inside-diameter pipe lined tunnel in rock, sloping from north to south from north of the intersection of
Adelaide Street on Franklin Avenue to south of the intersection of Standish Street on Franklin Avenue. The
Launch shaft is located near the Franklin/Standish intersection. The Retrieval shaft is located near the Franklin
Avenue/Adelaide intersection. Four access shafts are located along the alignment. There will also be one
short connector tunnel at the launch shaft. A geologic profile of the FACC alignment is presented on Figure 6
and the geologic profile for the connector tunnel is presented on Figure 6A.

The WPSRC includes the consolidation conduit trenched pipeline; two short connector tunnels; Maple/Preston
diversion structure; approach channel, junction chamber; and odor control enclosures at the drop structure.
The location of the WPSRC is presented on Figure 7. The WPSRC will be constructed primarily as a trenched,
open-cut pipeline project with two short sections of trenchless construction. A geologic profile of the WPSRC
alignment is presented on Figure 8.

The HSCC includes the Hanmer diversion structure; inlet conduit and inlet control gate chamber; approach
channel; and odor control enclosure at the drop structure. The HSCC will be constructed in open cut. The
location of the HSCC is presented on Figure 9. A geologic profile of the HSCC alignment is presented on
Figure 10.

The TSCC includes the Tredeau diversion structure; inlet conduit and inlet control gate chamber; approach
channel; and odor control enclosure at the drop structure. The TSCC will be constructed in open cut. The
location of the TSCC is presented on Figure 11. A geologic profile of the TSCC alignment is presented on
Figure 12.

Page | 4
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL, GEOLOGICAL, AND GEOTECHNICAL

INFORMATION SOURCES
Geotechnical Explorations
Relevant geotechnical information from the various investigation programs is included in the following report
which is also part of the Contract Documents:

“Geotechnical Data Report, Contract No. 4 – South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel,
Franklin Avenue and Maple Avenue Consolidation Conduits” Haley & Aldrich, Inc., dated May 2016
(hereinafter referred to as 2016 GDR).

Borings BD-212, BD-215, BD-217, BD-221, and BD-222 and shallow consolidation conduit borings and CPT
soundings were drilled in 2013 and 2014 as part of the final design phase of work.

Environmental Investigations
An environmental investigation was conducted concurrently with the geotechnical work. All soil, bedrock and
groundwater sample locations and analytical results are included in the following report:

“Environmental Data Report, Contract No. 4 – South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel,
Franklin Avenue and Maple Avenue Consolidation Conduits” AECOM, dated May 2016 (hereinafter
referred to as 2016 EDR).

Rock radiation screening was completed for comparison to ambient background levels. The screening data
are presented in the 2016 GDR.

Other Available Geotechnical Information Sources

Additional geotechnical information from the 2009 Geotechnical Investigation Program (GIP); and the 2012,
2013 and 2014 Geotechnical and Environmental Investigation Programs (GEIPs) for the South Hartford
Conveyance and Storage Tunnel project has been collected. This information is included in the following
report which is included as a reference document:

“Geotechnical Data Report, Contract No. 2 – South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel
Project”, AECOM, dated May 29, 2015.

Numerous subsurface explorations have been performed by others along and near the project site. Existing
borings performed by others are indicated on Figure 1. The relevant reports and/or data include:

• Franklin Avenue Area, Contracts #7 and #11 (Package A), prepared by GEI Consultants, Inc., dated
July 10, 2009.

• Franklin Avenue Area, Contracts #1 and #13 (Package B), prepared by GEI Consultants, Inc., dated
July 17, 2009.

• Franklin Avenue Area, Contracts #4, #5 and #12 (Package D), prepared by GEI Consultants, Inc.,
dated July 24, 2009.

• Maple Avenue Area South CSO Abatement Project, Contract No. 2001-29, bid date July 26, 2001
boring logs provided by New England Boring Contractors of CT, Inc.

Relevant boring logs for Contract 4 are provided in the 2016 GDR.

Page | 5
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

4.0 GEOLOGIC SETTING AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

Geologic Setting
The site area is underlain by sedimentary rocks and the associated igneous basalts. The source area for the
sedimentary rocks was mainly the metamorphic rocks of the Eastern Highlands. A series of volcanic flows
separated the deposition of the lacustrine and fluvial deposits. Displacements along the faults continued
throughout the depositional period. The depositional sequence resulted in a series of features including the
alluvial fan, lake, alluvial mudflats and floodplain deposits separated by basaltic flows. The youngest formation
is the Portland Formation and is the bedrock in the project site area. Faults in the project area are considered
to be inactive. Additional information about the site geology is presented in the 2016 GDR.

Soil Stratigraphy
The project site soil stratigraphy is generally composed of artificial Fill, Glaciolacustrine deposits, and
Glacial Till. The soil stratigraphy is further described in the 2016 GDR.

Bedrock Geology

4.3.1 Lithology
The Portland Formation is expected to be encountered in the Franklin Avenue tunnel, West Preston Street,
and at both the Hanmer Street and Tredeau Street project sites. The bedrock is a reddish brown to gray, fine
to medium grained, fresh to slightly weathered, moderately hard siltstone which developed as alluvial fans.
The formation has closely spaced to widely-spaced bedding joints, with calcite infillings, pyrite crystals, and
interbedded sandstone layers and lenses. The bedding generally strikes slightly east of north and dips
between 12 and 22 degrees toward the east.

4.3.2 Structure
Extensional tectonics produced the fault bounded basins and developed an overlying northerly trending joint
system throughout New England. As shown on Figure 2, northeasterly trending faults are shown south and
southwest of Hartford. These faults bring the older formation upward to contact the overlying Portland
Formation. The displacement along these faults can be significant. A number of northwesterly trending faults
are also shown south of the project area. Additional information describing the bedrock bedding and jointing,
as well as the project boring logs is presented in the 2016 GDR.

The faults shown on the Hartford South bedrock geologic map, Figures 2 and 3, typically trend N10E to N35E,
N55E to N60E, and N20W to N35W. As stated earlier, movement along the faults continued throughout the
deposition of the Portland Formation, and it is believed that activity along the northwesterly trending faults was
the latest. No faults are anticipated to be encountered, despite the location of faults in the general vicinity of
the FACC.

4.3.3 Bedrock Surface Topography

Bedrock is not typically exposed at the project site. In the project area, the bedrock surface east of the high
point along Fairfield Avenue drops consistently to the east to the Connecticut River. The bedrock surface was
encountered in the boring logs presented in the 2016 GDR and is shown on the profiles in Figures 6, 6A, 8,
10, and 12. As shown in Figure 6 for the Franklin Avenue Consolidation conduit, the top of rock elevation
varies from approximately El 30 at the north end to approximately El 7 at the south end. As shown in Figure
8 for the West Preston Street Replacement Conduit, the top of rock elevation is approximately El 61 on the
west end to El 58 at the east end. The Hanmer Street area top of rock elevation as shown in Figure 10 varies
from approximately El 25 at the west end to El 18 at the east end. The Tredeau Street area as shown in Figure
12 varies from approximately El 20 at the south end to El 32 at the north end. The top of the rock information
presented in this GBR was determined solely from the boring logs and probes. See Section 6 for discussions
on the variability of the bedrock surface elevation.

Page | 6
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

4.3.4 Seismicity
There have been small earthquakes located across the state, as close as East Hartford. These are relatively
small earthquakes with vibration and durations well below the current building code limits.

4.3.5 Potential for Natural Hazardous Gases

To assess for the presence of toxic and explosive gas in bedrock formations, a four-gas meter was used to
monitor for the presence of gases escaping from the boreholes during drilling. The readings are included on
the boring logs presented in the 2016 GDR. From the South Tunnel Project, readings above 0, but not
exceeding 8.0 ppm, were encountered in test borings BD-225, BD-227, BD-228, BD-230, BD-238 and BD-
249. The closest boring BD-225 is approximately 2,000 feet west of Maple Avenue. It is believed that standard
ventilation practices required by OSHA standards will dissipate any accumulation of gases that may be
hazardous or explosive in the tunnel excavations. Additionally, the specifications will require monitoring of all
gases as part of a safety program for any underground space entry.

For baseline purposes, all bedrock excavations for the tunnel, shafts, and trenches for this project are
classified as non-gassy.

Site-Specific Subsurface Conditions

This section of the GBR summarizes site-specific subsurface conditions along the alignments for the tunnel
on Franklin Avenue and for the excavations on West Preston Street and at the Hanmer and Tredeau Street
locations. The subsurface conditions are shown on geologic profiles for the respective alignments and should
be referred to in connection with the characterization described below.

4.4.1 Franklin Avenue Tunnel and Shafts

The location of explorations along the tunnel and shafts alignment is included on Figures 1 and 5. The
geologic profile for the tunnel alignment is presented on Figure 6 and for the connector tunnel is presented
on Figure 6A. Legend and notes for the geologic profile are presented on Figure 4. The subsurface materials
consist of:

• Fill – Fill was found along the alignment at the surface in varying thickness from approximately 0 to
9 feet. The Fill material typically includes topsoil, asphalt, concrete, roadbase, or soil deposits. The
soil deposits included silty sand to lean clay with sand, medium dense to medium stiff to very stiff,
dry to moist, with varying amounts of gravel. The uncorrected blow counts varied from 7 to 14 blows
per foot. The Fill material was variable and classifications varied between sand (SW), silty sand (SM),
and lean clay (CL) in the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Due to the nature of Fill,
significant variations in its composition and properties are expected between the exploratory borings,
including the potential for cobbles, boulders, debris and other manmade obstructions.

• Glaciolacustrine Deposit – Glaciolacustrine Deposits were found along the alignment in varying
thicknesses from approximately 12 to 24 feet at the ground surface in some areas, beneath Fill in
others. The Glaciolacustrine deposits measured 18 feet in thickness with artesian conditions noted
on the BD-217 boring log at a depth of 12.5 feet below ground surface. The soil deposits ranged from
reddish brown to brown, varved lean clay and silt to gravelly clay with sand, medium stiff to very soft,
dry to wet. Some of the material had a consistency that would not support the weight of the drilling
rods or the weight of the standard penetration testing hammer. The stiffer soils were typically closer
to the ground surface with softer materials at greater depth. The uncorrected blow counts varied from
0 to 14 blows per foot near the ground surface. Blow counts between 0 and 2 blows per foot were
typically recorded at greater depths. Glaciolacustrine Deposits are a part of the Connecticut Valley
Varved Clay (CVVC) formation which is known to consist of alternating varves of clay and silt.
Composite samples of the material classified as lean clay (CL), silt (ML), elastic silt (MH), and fat clay
(CH) in the USCS.

Page | 7
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

• Glacial Till Deposit – Glacial Till found along the alignment varied from approximately 4 to 12 feet
in thickness. The deposit was described as clayey sand to clayey sand with gravel to silty clayey
sand to gravelly lean clay with sand, red-brown to brown, loose to very dense to very stiff, and wet.
The uncorrected blow counts varied from 9 to over 50 blows per foot. The Glacial Till was generally
classified as silty sand (SM) or silt (ML) with other classifications of clayey gravel (GC), silty gravel
(GM), clayey sand (SC), lean clay (CL) and sand with clay and silt (SC-SM) in the USCS. Cobbles
were encountered in BD-222. Cobbles and boulders are generally expected in Glacial Till formations.

• Bedrock – The Portland Formation is the bedrock beneath the soil deposits. The top of the bedrock
varied from the ground surface to depths of approximately 16 to 37 feet. The proposed Franklin
Avenue tunnel will be constructed within the Portland Formation. The dominant rock type, siltstone,
is generally described as reddish brown to medium gray to tan siltstone with occasional vugs filled
with calcite, very closely to widely spaced bedding joints, fine-grained, with laminar to moderately
thick bedding, fresh to slightly weathered, and moderately hard. Please refer to Figure 3 which shows
the bedrock structural geology in the project area.

4.4.2 West Preston Street Replacement Conduit

The West Preston Street alignment includes the open cut construction and two short connector tunnels for a
48-inch diameter reinforced concrete pipe along West Preston Street. The locations of explorations along the
alignment are included on Figures 1 and 7. The geologic profile for the alignment is presented on Figure 8.
Legend and notes for the geologic profile are presented on Figure 4. The subsurface materials consist of:

• Fill – Fill was found along the alignment at the surface in varying thicknesses. Fill thicknesses
typically encountered were approximately 1 to 2 feet. Materials in these Fill deposits ranged from
loose to dense or soft to medium stiff. The uncorrected blow counts varied from 4 to 50+ blows per
foot. The Fill material was variable and classifications varied between sand (SW), silty sand (SM),
poorly graded sand (SP), silt (ML), and poorly graded sand with silt (SP-SM) in the Unified Soil
Classification System (USCS). Due to the nature of Fill, significant variations in its composition and
properties are expected between the exploratory borings including the potential for cobbles,
boulders, debris and other manmade obstructions.

• Glaciolacustrine Deposit – Glaciolacustrine Deposits were found along the alignment in varying
thicknesses. The Glaciolacustrine Deposits were found generally beneath the Fill. Materials in these
Glaciolacustrine Deposits ranged from medium stiff to very stiff and are potentially sensitive. The
uncorrected blow counts varied from 5 to 21 blows per foot. These Glaciolacustrine Deposits are a
part of the Connecticut Valley Varved Clay (CVVC) formation which is known to consist of alternating
varves of clay and silt. Composite samples of the material classified as lean clay (CL), silt (ML), elastic
silt (MH), and poorly graded sand with clay (SP-SC) in the USCS.

• Glacial Till Deposit – Glacial Till thickness was recorded between approximately 2 and 22 feet.
Materials in the Glacial Till deposits ranged from loose to very dense. The uncorrected blow counts
varied from 10 to 50+ blows per foot. The Glacial Till material was generally classified as silt (ML)
with other classifications of clayey sand (SC), lean clay (CL) and clayey sand (SC) in the USCS.
Cobbles were encountered in BD-222. Cobbles and boulders are generally expected in Glacial Till
formations.

• Bedrock – Part of the open-cut trench, connector tunnel, and the approach channel and the inlet
control gate chamber located at DS-3 will penetrate bedrock. The dominant rock type, siltstone, is
generally described as red brown, with very closely to widely spaced bedding joints, laminar to
moderately thick bedding, fine grained, fresh to slightly weathered, and moderately hard. Please refer
to Figure 3 which shows the bedrock structural geology in the project area.

Page | 8
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

4.4.3 Hanmer Street Consolidation Conduit

The Hanmer Street Consolidation Conduit includes a diversion structure, inlet conduit, and inlet control gate
chamber, approach channel, and odor control enclosure along Hanmer Street near its intersection with
Franklin Avenue. The locations of explorations along the alignment are included on Figures 1 and 9. The
geologic profile for the alignment is presented on Figure 10. Legend and notes for the geologic profile are
presented on Figure 4.

The subsurface materials along this alignment consist of Fill, Glaciolacustrine Deposits, Glacial Till, overlying
the Portland Formation bedrock, generally similar to that described for the West Preston Street open cut
construction. The Fill is approximately 1 to 8 feet in thickness. Subsurface soils below the Fill are typically
comprised of fine-grained deposits overlying high to low plasticity clays and silts to clayey sands with gravel.
The Glacial Till is comprised of deposits ranging from sandy silt with gravel to clayey gravel. The soils are
brown to reddish brown, and soft to stiff. The Glacial Till sediments are brown to dark brown to red brown,
medium stiff to dense, moist to wet, silts, sands, and gravels. The bedrock was found at a depth of
approximately 16 to 19 feet below the ground surface and was described as siltstone with very close to
moderately spaced bedding joints, laminar bedding, fine grained, fresh to moderately weathered, and
moderately hard.

4.4.4 Tredeau Street Consolidation Conduit

The Tredeau Street Consolidation Conduit includes a diversion structure, inlet conduit, and inlet control gate
chamber, approach channel, and odor control enclosure near the intersection of Tredeau Street and Franklin
Avenue. The locations of explorations along the alignment are included on Figures 1 and 11. The geologic
profile for the alignment is presented on Figure 12. Legend and notes for the geologic profile are presented
on Figure 4.

The subsurface materials along this alignment typically contain Fill, Glaciolacustrine Deposits, and Glacial Till
overlying the Portland Formation bedrock, generally similar to that described for the West Preston Street open
cut construction. The Fill is typically comprised of sandy silt approximately 5 feet in thickness. Subsurface
soils below the Fill are typically comprised of sandy silt with gravel and Glaciolacustrine Deposits to Glacial
Till. The Glacial Till is comprised of deposits ranging from silty gravel with sand to silty sand with gravel. The
soils are dark brown to red brown to brown to gray silt and range from medium stiff to stiff. The Glacial Till
sediments are brown to dark brown to red brown, medium dense to dense, dry to wet, silts, sands, and gravels.
The bedrock was found at a depth of approximately 9 to 20 feet below the ground surface and was described
as siltstone with very close to moderately spaced bedding joints, laminar to thin crossbedding, fine grained,
fresh, and moderately hard.

Groundwater Conditions
For purposes of general characterization, groundwater levels in the bedrock generally follow the ground
surface topography. Direction of groundwater flow within the bedrock is toward the Connecticut River.
Additional information on groundwater levels is presented in the 2016 GDR.

4.5.1 Franklin Avenue

Groundwater observation wells were installed in boreholes FR-5, FR-9, FR-10, and BD-217. Piezometers
were installed in boreholes BD-217 and FR-10. Shallow and deep piezometers were installed in FR-11.
Measured groundwater level elevations are summarized in the 2016 GDR.

The drilling of borehole BD-217 produced artesian conditions at a depth of 12.5 feet below ground surface.
Additional information on artesian groundwater conditions is presented on the boring log in the 2016 GDR.

4.5.2 West Preston Street

Groundwater observation wells were installed in boreholes MP-1 and BD-222. A piezometer was installed in
borehole BD-222. Measured groundwater level elevations are summarized in the 2016 GDR.

Page | 9
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

4.5.3 Hanmer Street

Groundwater observation wells were installed in boreholes HM-3 and BD-215. Measured groundwater level
elevations are summarized in the 2016 GDR.

Artesian conditions were identified when drilling for Drop Shaft 5 and Vent Shaft 5. Following installation of
the carrier pipe and grouting of the annular space between the rock and carrier pipe, the artesian conditions
were still observed within the temporary casing. The elevation of water within the steel casings was estimated
at 5 feet above grade, or approximately El 46.5, in March of 2018. The source of the artesian conditions was
estimated to originate approximately 165 feet below grade. At one point the casing was cut off at grade and
the estimated overflow rate was 5 gpm. The contractor’s drilling logs for shaft construction are included as
an addendum to the GDR.

4.5.4 Tredeau Street

A groundwater observation well and a piezometer were installed in borehole BD-212. Measured groundwater
level elevations are summarized in the 2016 GDR.

Soil and Groundwater Quality and Management

4.6.1 Existing Environmental Conditions

Excavations along the proposed consolidation conduit alignments, approach channels, and inlet control gate
chambers associated with Contract 4 are anticipated to encounter varying Fill materials and natural soils. The
project is located within an urban area with a history of industrial and commercial activity. Therefore, soils in
some locations have been affected by man-made chemical compounds used in industrial and commercial
processes. Specific details addressing the characterization, handling, and disposal of soil and groundwater
are addressed in the project specifications.

The following subsections describe the environmental regulatory criteria, the owner’s criteria, and
environmental permits used to evaluate the environmental data and a summary of the environmental data
collected.

4.6.2 Environmental Permits and Regulatory and Owner Criteria

Environmental permits and regulatory criteria considered as part of this evaluation include the Connecticut
Department of Energy and Environmental Protection’s (CTDEEP) General Permit for the Discharge of
Groundwater Remediation Wastewater to the Sanitary Sewer (General Permit-Sanitary Sewer), General
Permit for the Discharge of Groundwater Remediation Wastewater to the Surface Water (General Permit-
Surface Water) and the CTDEEP Remediation Standard Regulations (RSRs). Additionally, select U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) hazardous waste criteria were used as part of this evaluation. A brief
description of the various criteria is provided below:

• Connecticut Remediation Standard Regulations - The Connecticut RSRs include procedures

and criteria used to establish remediation goals for environmental projects in the State of
Connecticut. The RSRs are directly applicable to specific sites (i.e., transfer of “establishment site
as defined by the CTDEEP, voluntary remediation program sites, sites under CTDEEP order etc.).
Although the RSRs are not directly applicable to this project, they can be used as guidance for
following best management practices for placement of the excess materials at non-regulated
disposal locations in Connecticut. Connecticut General Statute Section 22a-133k-2(h) provides
guidance regarding procedures to follow for soil re-use and disposal alternatives.

• Select U.S. EPA Hazardous Waste Criteria - U.S. EPA regulations include criteria to determine
whether materials are considered hazardous based on characteristic criteria. As part of this
evaluation, samples were analyzed for reactivity, pH, specific conductance, and flash point.
Additionally, select soil and bedrock samples were analyzed for metals following a toxicity

Page | 10
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) preparation of the soil samples. U.S. EPA regulations
include criteria to determine whether materials are considered hazardous based on characteristic
criteria. EPA criteria are provided in 40 CFR 261.24. These are typical parameters used by disposal
facilities as part of their process to determine whether the material is acceptable for disposal at
their facility.

• MDC Specifications Section 02260 - Soil analytical results were reviewed for classifications as
defined in the MDC Specifications Section 02260 Excavation, Handling, Transportation, and Disposal
of Regulated Soil dated January 2014. The MDC specification includes definitions for multiple soil
classifications including: Clean Fill, Contaminated Soil, Hazardous Soil, and Polluted Soil, as well as
definitions for Reusable Regulated Soil and Non-Reusable Regulated Soil. Soil classification is based
on comparison of analytical results to CT RSR criteria, EPA hazardous waste criteria, and typical
background levels. The MDC specification includes classifications that are specific to this project
which are not found in State and Federal regulations; however, compliance to State and Federal
regulations is maintained.

• MDC Specifications Section 02145 - Groundwater analytical results were reviewed for classifications
as defined in the MDC Specifications Section 02145, Handling Contaminated Groundwater. This
specification references the maximum discharge concentrations included in Appendix A of the
General Permit-Sanitary Sewer and Appendix A of the General Permit-Surface Water.

• MDC Specifications Section 02420 – Bedrock analytical results and geologic data were reviewed for
classifications as defined in the MDC Specifications Section 02260 Excavation, Handling,
Transportation, and Disposal of Regulated Soil dated January 2014, as described above. MDC
Specification Section 02420 – Muck Management requires that tunnel muck containing
concentrations of arsenic greater than Connecticut RSR Criteria may not be managed as clean fill
and must be managed at a facility permitted to receive such material.

4.6.3 Environmental Data Summary

A summary of the soil and groundwater data is presented in the EDR. Regarding the soil data, as per
Specification 02260, it must be categorized as clean, polluted, contaminated, or hazardous and reusable or
non-reusable by a Licensed Environmental Professional. Regarding groundwater, it is evaluated against
General Permit-Sanitary Sewer and General Permit-Surface Water discharge levels. Analytical results and
summary figures are included in the 2016 EDR.

Note that a contiguous area of groundwater containing chemicals at concentrations exceeding General Permit
discharge limits was observed in the vicinity of Drop Shaft 3. In the area of the DS-5 inlet control structure ,
soil was identified that contains trichloroethylene at mass concentrations in excess of 20 times the TCLP limit
for hazardous waste, which is expected to render the soil represented by these samples as hazardous waste
upon excavation. Groundwater in this area also contains chemicals at concentrations exceeding General
Permit discharge limits.

The 95 Hanmer St property is subject to the CT Transfer Act. Any soil that is identified as reusable regulated
soil, within these property limits, is baselined as non-reusable regulated soil for the purpose of disposal.

Portions of rock within the area of work have been identified as containing naturally occurring metals, including
arsenic, at concentrations greater than those identified in the Direct Exposure Criterion of the CT RSRs. In
addition to those specifically identified by data, excavated gray and/or black siltstone within the project limits
is known to contain naturally occurring arsenic concentrations greater than the 10 mg/kg Direct Exposure
Criterion.

Page | 11
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

5.0 PREVIOUS CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE

PRAC Tunnel Construction
The Park River Auxiliary Conduit (PRAC) tunnel was constructed between February 1978 and July 1981 for
the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to reduce the flooding potential of the low lying developed area in
Hartford due to the backwater from the Connecticut River and the flood waters of the Park River drainage
basin. The location of the PRAC Tunnel is approximately 1.4 miles north of the retrieval shaft of the Franklin
Avenue Tunnel as shown on Figure 2.

The PRAC tunnel was driven in an east to west direction with an upward slope of just under 0.6 percent,
starting at the construction access shaft adjacent to the Connecticut River. The 9,100-foot long tunnel was
excavated with a 24-foot, 3-inch diameter, fully shielded, hard-rock Robbins TBM (Model Series 240). The
segmental liner was installed within the tail shield yielding a 22-foot finished diameter. The invert at the launch
shaft was approximately El -148 and at the retrieval shaft was approximately El -97.

The tunnel is designed as an inverted siphon up to 200 feet in depth below the city. The Portland Formation
encountered while excavating the tunnel was described as shale (siltstone) with areas of interbedded shales
and sandstones. The gray marker beds were noted in the mapping of the tunnel.

A more detailed summary of the PRAC Tunnel Project investigation program can be found in the following
references:

• Park River Local Protection, Hartford, Connecticut, Volume 1 Main Report, prepared by US Army
Corps of Engineers, dated December, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as “As-built Foundation Report”).
This document provides details on: the exploration program; the geology including engineering
characteristics of the soils and rock and geologic factors affecting the tunneling; excavation
procedures and water control methods; the bidding process; and the tunnel and shaft construction
methods including equipment utilized, rate of progress, deviations from design, contract modifications
and design verification. Details provided on the profile also include the number of sacks of cement
used for grouting along the length of the tunnel. The report is included as an Appendix to the Contract
2 2016 GDR.

Franklin Avenue Area Sewer Separation Package D – West Side Projects

Recent open cut construction experience on a sewer separation project in the Franklin Avenue Area indicates
that the bedrock surface elevation can vary significantly along the sewer pipeline alignments and also
indicates that the bedrock is non-rippable by backhoes equipped with rock buckets and rock teeth. Based on
these recent experiences, the rock elevations shown on the geologic profiles should be considered average
elevations which will vary along the proposed pipeline alignments.

Jefferson Street Interceptor Tunnel Construction

The Jefferson Street Interceptor Tunnel was completed in the 1930s, largely as a rock tunnel constructed
using drill and blast methods with short portions on each end constructed through soil. The tunnel is
approximately 7,820 feet in length and was constructed as a 6-foot, 2 and 1/2-inch high by 6-feet wide finished
horseshoe section. Although there are no reports documenting design or construction, there is plan showing
its alignment. It runs nearly east-west and its location is shown on Figure 2.

Page | 12
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

6.0 GROUND CHARACTERIZATION

General
Soil, rock, and groundwater engineering and index properties have been evaluated based on results from
laboratory and in-situ testing, empirical correlations, past experience with similar materials, and engineering
judgment. Laboratory and in-situ test results are documented in the 2016 GDR. Methods and procedures
used in soil, rock, and groundwater sampling; field and laboratory testing; and soil and rock core sample
classifications are also described in the 2016 GDR. Soil, rock, and groundwater properties are described in
this section of the report.

Soil
Engineering characteristics of the various soil units are discussed in the following sections.

6.2.1 Fill
Fill was found throughout the alignment. Materials in the Fill deposits along the alignment varied considerably
as a result of the large project area and inherent variability of the Fill. Due to the nature of Fill, significant
variations in its composition and properties are expected between the exploratory borings including the
proportion of debris and other manmade objects. The Fill material varied widely in composition containing
sands, gravels, silts, and clays. Gradation test results on Fill soil samples are presented in the 2016 GDR.

6.2.2 Glaciolacustrine
The Glaciolacustrine Deposits are predominately a part of the Connecticut Valley Varved Clay (CVVC)
formation. These deposits consist of alternating varves of fat clay (CH) or lean clay (CL) and silt (ML) or elastic
silt (MH). The majority of composite samples of the Glaciolacustrine deposits classify as lean or fat clay (CL
or CH). Bulk Atterberg limits test results, moisture contents, and gradation test results are presented in the
2016 GDR. Materials in the Glaciolacustrine Deposits along the alignment are typically very soft but stiffer
deposits were encountered in some borings.

The CVVC formation often exhibits sensitive behavior with respect to shear strength properties, losing
significant strength upon disturbance or remolding. Typical sensitivity of the formation is estimated to be an
average of 10 (extra sensitive) based on the Contract 2 database. This value was estimated from a
combination of CPT results, field vane shear test results, laboratory results, and reported literature values.
Sensitivity will range from approximately 2 to 15 (extra sensitive). If the sensitivity exceeds 15 such clays are
described as quick and should be treated with care during construction operations because disturbance tends
to transform them, at least temporarily, into viscous liquids.

6.2.3 Glacial Till

Glacial Till was found throughout the alignment. Materials in the Glacial Till deposits along the alignment were
typically very dense. SPT blow counts are presented on the geologic profiles in Figures 6, 6A, 8, 10, and 12
and are generally greater than 50.

The Glacial Till material is variable but most of the formation was classified as silty sand (SM) or silty gravel
(GM) in the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The formation can also vary between SP-SM, GP-GM,
SC-SM, GC-GM, SC, GC, ML, CL-ML, and CL. Occasional cobbles and boulders were found in these
deposits.

6.2.4 Summary of Soil Properties

The baselines of the subsurface conditions for the soil ground conditions are as follows:

Page | 13
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

Table 6-1: Baseline Values for the In situ Soil Properties

Average Average Friction

Average Total Unit Weight
Soil Formation Cohesion Angle (degrees)
(pcf)
(psf)
Fill 120 0 27
Glaciolacustrine 110 450 0
Glacial Till 135 0 37

6.2.5 Laboratory Testing

Additional laboratory test data not summarized herein are provided in the 2016 GDR.

Intact Rock Specimens

The following sections present the evaluation of the engineering properties of bedrock for the Portland
Formation. There are different rock types within the Portland Formation, including siltstone, sandstone and
shale. There are also variations in grain size and mineralogy that could affect certain engineering properties.
For purposes of intact rock specimen characterization, the predominant rock type (siltstone) is referred to
when discussing properties of this formation. The prevalence of siltstone over sandstone and shale suggests
that average properties will be governed by the properties of the siltstone. Although it is possible that local
interbeds of sandstone and shale will be encountered at any time during construction, it can be assumed that
the properties of these materials will fall within the indicated baseline ranges for siltstone.

Limited Portland Formation Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) data along Franklin Avenue ranged
from above 12,000 to almost 34,000 psi with an average bulk density of 165 pcf. From the South Tunnel
geologic testing database, the Portland Formation UCS values averaged 12,500 psi. The South Tunnel
vertical alignment is approximately 150 feet lower in elevation than the Franklin Avenue tunnel. The difference
in average UCS values may reflect differences in the rock at the different elevations. The proportionately lower
average Brazilian Tensile Strength (BTS) values may be influenced by bedding plane weakness causing
structural breaks during testing.

Portland Formation dry unit weight values along West Preston Street averaged approximately 162 pcf.

Table 6-2: Baseline Intact Rock Strength Properties – Franklin Avenue Consolidation Conduit and
West Preston Replacement Conduit, Hanmer Street and Tredeau Street Consolidation Conduits

UCS (psi) BTS (psi)

Bedrock Formation
Range Average Range Average
Portland 2,900* to 34,000 21,000 180 to 2,300 1,100

* From the Contract 2 database.

6.3.1 Slake Durability

It is anticipated that the majority of siltstone, sandstone and shale of the Portland Formation will not exhibit
significant slaking behavior. However, it is expected that localized zones of bedrock occurring in weaker zones
may be subject to slaking behavior. The average slake durability index is 98.

6.3.2 Cerchar Abrasivity Index

The Portland Formation was tested for abrasiveness of the rock using the Cerchar Method (ASTM
D7625). The average Cerchar Abrasivity Index (CAI) is 2.3.

Page | 14
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

Table 6-3: Summary of Properties of Intact Rock Specimens from the Portland Formation from the
South Tunnel Project

Engineering Properties Portland Formation

Bulk Density (pcf) 160 - 170
Slake Durability Index 92 - 100

In-Situ Rock Mass

6.4.1 Weathering
From the geologic database of the South Tunnel project, the weathering along the bedrock surface is not
extensive. The core is generally fresh to slightly weathered. Some weathering was noted along joints and in
the sandstone interlayers. In the borings closer to the fault zones, the joint surfaces exhibited a greater amount
of iron oxide staining and there was some clay filling.

Vugs and pits have been observed in the Portland Formation. The vugs are typically less than an inch in
length and extend to ¼ inch into the core. There have been instances where the vugs are up to 2-1/2 inches
in length and ½ inch deep in zone where the rock mass is slightly to moderately weathered. Overall the vugs
are small scale and large scale dissolution features are not anticipated to be encountered along the tunnel
alignment.

The top of rock delineation on the geologic profiles shall be considered the average elevation of the non-
rippable rock surface. The non-rippable rock surface can vary as much as 5 feet plus or minus in elevation
at any given location. Non-rippable rock shall be defined as rock that cannot be excavated with small,
medium or even large backhoes (large being defined as a backhoe with 200 or greater net flywheel
horsepower) equipped with rock buckets and rock teeth.

West Preston Street Summary

The subsurface materials along this alignment typically contain Fill comprised of asphaltic concrete pavement
and aggregate base. Subsurface soils below the Fill are typically comprised of sandy silt with gravel,
Glaciolacustrine Deposits to Glacial Till. The Glacial Till is comprised of deposits ranging from silty gravel with
sand to silty sand with gravel. The soils are medium stiff to stiff and the Glacial Till sediments are medium
dense to dense, dry to wet, silts, sands, and gravels. Additional information is presented in Section 4.4. The
baselines of the subsurface conditions for the construction for the West Preston Street alignment are
presented in Table 6-4.

A short connector tunnel shall be constructed west of Maple Avenue as indicated on Figure 8. For baseline
purposes, the rock surface shall protrude one foot into the tunnel invert for 10 feet of the tunnel length. The
rest of the tunnel shall be constructed in soil classified as flowing in accordance with the Tunnelman’s Ground
Classification for Soils. The Tunnelman’s Ground Classification for Soils is included in Appendix B.

A short connector tunnel shall be constructed east of Maple Avenue as indicated on Figure 8. For baseline
purposes, the average rock surface shall be two feet below the top of the tunnel excavation. The soils above
the bedrock shall be classified as flowing in accordance with the Tunnelman’s Ground Classification for Soils.

Page | 15
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

Table 6-4: Baselines for the Subsurface Conditions for the West Preston Street Replacement
Conduit

Parameter Baseline Value

Soil Excavation Conventional large hydraulic equipment with trenching buckets with
teeth can be used for excavation of the subsoils. The soils to be
excavated can be considered Type C soils according to OSHA (29
CFR Part 1926, Subpart P).
Groundwater The groundwater level will be as high as El 76 (1929 NAVD).
Bedrock Excavation From the top of rock as baselined and lower in elevation is non-
rippable bedrock. Robust rock excavation methods such as hydraulic
hammers or hoe rams mounted on a large backhoe combined with
closely-spaced drill holes, or drill and blast methods will be required.

Franklin Avenue and Hanmer Street Summary

The subsurface materials along these alignments typically contain Fill, Glaciolacustrine Deposits, Glacial Till,
and bedrock. The Fill material typically includes topsoil, asphalt, concrete, roadbase, or soil deposits. The soil
deposits included silty sand to lean clay with sand, medium dense to medium stiff to very stiff, dry to moist,
with varying amounts of gravel. The Glaciolacustrine Deposits ranged from varved lean clay and silt to gravelly
clay with sand, medium stiff to very soft, dry to wet. The Glacial Till deposits ranged from clayey sand to clayey
sand with gravel to silty clayey sand to gravelly lean clay with sand, loose to medium dense to very stiff, and
wet. The Portland Formation is the bedrock beneath the soil deposits. Depending on the depth of excavation,
some bedrock excavation will be required. Additional information is presented in Section 4.4. Baselines for
soil and rock are presented in Table 6-5.

The connector tunnel near the Franklin Avenue Launch Shaft will be constructed in a full face of rock.

Table 6-5: Baselines for the Subsurface Conditions for the Franklin Avenue and the Hanmer
Street Consolidation Conduits

Parameter Baseline Value

Soil Excavation Conventional large hydraulic equipment with trenching buckets with teeth
can be used for excavation of the subsoils. The soils to be excavated can be
considered Type C soils according to OSHA (29 CFR Part 1926, Subpart P).
Groundwater The groundwater level will be as high as El 38 (1929 NAVD) except in the
vicinity of Drop Shaft and Vent Shaft 5 where artesian conditions occurred
during drilling of the shafts, where the elevation of the groundwater was as
high as El 46.5 (NAVD 1929).
Bedrock Excavation From the top of rock baselined and lower in elevation is non-rippable
bedrock. Robust rock excavation methods such as hydraulic hammers or
hoe rams mounted on a large backhoe combined with closely-spaced drill
holes, or drill and blast methods will be required.

Page | 16
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

Tredeau Street Summary

The subsurface materials along this alignment typically contain Fill, Glaciolacustrine deposits, and Glacial Till
over bedrock. Depending on the depth of excavation, some bedrock excavation will be required. Additional
information is presented in Section 4.4. The baselines of the subsurface conditions for the open cut
construction for the Tredeau Street alignment are as follows:

Table 6-6: Baselines for the Subsurface Conditions for the Tredeau Street Consolidation Conduit

Parameter Baseline Value

Soil Excavation Conventional large hydraulic equipment with trenching buckets with
teeth can be used for excavation of the subsoils. The soils to be
excavated can be considered Type C soils according to OSHA (29 CFR
Part 1926, Subpart P).
Groundwater The groundwater level will be as high as El 39 (1929 NAVD).
Bedrock Excavation From the top of rock baselined and lower in elevation is non-rippable
bedrock. Robust rock excavation methods such as hydraulic hammers or
hoe rams mounted on a large backhoe combined with closely-spaced drill
holes, or drill and blast methods will be required.

Obstructions
During construction, it is anticipated that cobbles and boulders will be encountered in the open cut soil portion
of the excavation for shafts and open cut trenches. Boulders, cobbles, and large rock fragments were noted
in boring logs FR-3, BD-222, HAN-1, and HAN-4 and boulders are typically known for occurring in Glacial Till.
Boring logs for geoprobes GP-3 and GP-5 indicate concrete debris between 5 and 8 feet in depth from the
ground surface. The baseline for obstructions is shown below. Boulders are rock fragments with a minimum
dimension of twelve (12) inches.

Table 6-7: Baseline for Obstructions

Parameter Baseline Value

No obstructions will be encountered that conventional large hydraulic
construction equipment with robust trenching buckets (of at least one
Obstructions cubic yard size) cannot handle. Cobbles and boulders will be
encountered in the hand mined tunnels. Large boulders in the tunnel
envelope will need to be broken up by mechanical methods. Cobbles,
boulders and other obstructions will impact sheeting installation.

Page | 17
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

7.0 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

Tunnel

7.1.1 TBM Starter and Tail Tunnel Excavation and Support

It is anticipated that the excavation of the FACC starter and tail tunnels will be performed by controlled blasting
(drill-and-blast) techniques. After the excavation of the main tunnel is completed, a carrier pipe will be installed
in the starter tunnel. The TBM tail tunnel will be filled with concrete. The requirements for drilling and blasting
are provided in Specification Section 02405. The Contractor will be required to limit the round lengths to proper
values in order to meet the requirements for vibration and air over pressure control and also to maintain the
over-break to acceptable limits.

For the TBM starter and tail tunnels, the minimum initial rock support is prescriptive, as indicated in
Specification Section 02340 – Tunnel Ground Support Systems, and on the Drawings. The cross section
geometry of the starter and tail tunnel will be selected by the Contractor based on his means and methods.
The length of the tail tunnel will be subject to the limitations indicated on the Drawings.

7.1.2 FACC TBM Tunnel Excavation and Support

Due to schedule constraints, the FACC Tunnel will be excavated by a tunnel boring machine (TBM). A main
beam TBM with a hydraulically operated finger shield will be adequate to construct the tunnel.

No upper limitation on the excavated tunnel diameter is specified to accommodate a wider range of TBM
diameters. However, the initial support of the tunnel is based on a maximum excavated diameter of 13 feet.
More initial support will be required for a tunnel with an excavated diameter larger than 13 feet. The initial
support for the FACC TBM mined tunnel will be rock dowels, mine straps, and welded wire fabric as indicated
on the Drawings. The baseline for initial support shall be 95 percent Class I initial support and 5 percent Class
II initial support as indicated on the Drawings. The baseline shall include installation of up to 50 W4x13 ring
beams at spot locations along the tunnel as required by ground conditions.

7.1.3 Tunnel Carrier Pipe

The FACC Tunnel will be lined with a carrier pipe that will be transported into the tunnel and blocked in place.
The annular space shall be backfilled with grout.

7.1.4 Tunnel Grouting

No pre-excavation grouting is anticipated for the FACC Tunnel.

Shafts

7.2.1 Shaft Excavation and Support

For the FACC Tunnel launch and retrieval shafts, the Contractor is required to use a secant pile wall system
to serve as the initial support through soil overburden. Design and construction requirements for this system
are indicated on the Drawings and further details are provided in Specification Sections 02310 – Shaft
Construction and 02314 – Secant Pile Construction.

Minimum requirements for initial rock support are provided on the Drawings and include the use of shotcrete
and pattern rock dowels for both shafts. Rock reinforcement requirements are also provided in Specification
02345 – Rock Reinforcement.

Permanent lining of the shafts will consist of a pipe liner as indicated on the Drawings.

Page | 18
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

For the FACC Tunnel access shafts, it is anticipated the Contractor will use drilled shaft construction and
pertinent requirements for this work are included on the Drawings and in Specification Sections 02310 – Shaft
Construction and 02440 – Drilled Shaft Construction.

7.2.2 Design Ground and Water Pressures

It is the Contractor’s responsibility to retain the services of a licensed Professional Engineer to design the
initial support for each shaft. The Contractor’s Design Engineer will design each shaft in accordance with the
minimum requirements indicated on the Drawings, and for the ground and water table conditions in this GBR.
Soil properties used in design are indicated in Table 6-1. Groundwater levels are indicated in tables in Section
6.

7.2.3 Groundwater Control and Grouting Requirements

The groundwater control for the FACC Tunnel launch and retrieval shafts will consist of the secant pile walls
to cut off groundwater infiltration in the soil overburden and upper bedrock. No additional cut off methods or
pre-excavation grouting is anticipated for the FACC Tunnel launch and retrieval shafts. Some minor seepage
should be anticipated through the secant pile wall. Also the shaft inflow baseline from the rock is presented in
Section 8 of this report. Sump pumping will be required to remove this shaft inflow and tunnel inflow.

Connector Tunnels

7.3.1 Excavation and Support

There will be a short connector tunnel from a diversion structure on Franklin Avenue to the FACC Tunnel
Launch Shaft. This tunnel will be in a full face of rock. Rock dowels and welded wire fabric will be required for
the initial support as indicated on the Drawings. It is anticipated that the Contractor will excavate the rock
using controlled blasting (drill-and-blast) techniques, pneumatic jackhammers, hydraulic splitters, or swelling
grout. The requirements for drilling and blasting are provided in Specification Section 02405 – Drilling and
Blasting.

There will be two short connector tunnels on the WPSRC.

The connector tunnel west of Maple Avenue will be constructed in a mixed face condition of mostly soil with
some rock in the invert as described in Section 6. A jacked steel casing shall be used as initial support as
indicated on the Drawings. Hand mining will probably be the most likely method for this mixed face condition.
Combinations of forepoling and breast boards should provide the needed pre-support of the ground. It is
anticipated that the Contractor will be limited to non-blasting methods such as jackhammers, hydraulic splitters
or swelling grouts due to the proximity of gas utility lines to the tunnel.

The connector tunnel east of Maple Avenue will be constructed in a mixed face condition of mostly rock with
some soil in the tunnel crown as described in Section 6. Due to difficulty of this mixed face condition, forepoling
using steel C channels will be required for the entire length of the tunnel as indicated on the Drawings. Steel
liner plate will also be required for initial support as indicated on the Drawings. It is anticipated that the
Contractor will be limited to non-blasting methods such as jackhammers, hydraulic splitters or swelling grouts
due to the proximity of gas utility lines to the tunnel.

Page | 19
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

Trenched Pipelines and Diversion Structures

7.4.1 Excavation Support

It is the Contractor’s responsibility to retain the services of a licensed Professional Engineer to design the
temporary excavation support for trenches and excavations for the proposed consolidation and replacement
conduits. Specification Section 02160 – Excavation Support Systems provides the minimum design criteria
and acceptable excavation support systems based upon depth limitations. The proposed trenches and
excavations are in the soft to very soft Glaciolacustrine Deposits (varved clays), Glacial Till, and Fill.

Excavation support system designs shall account for existing adjacent structures, utilities, roadway
infrastructure, and facilities.

7.4.2 Groundwater Control

Groundwater conditions for the proposed consolidation and replacement conduits extend into Fill, the
Glaciolacustrine Deposits (varved clays), and Glacial Till. Open cut trenches for the pipeline and diversion
structures will extend over 20 feet below ground surface and over 10 feet below groundwater levels. The
Contractor is responsible for groundwater control to suit his means and methods with consideration to the
maintenance and protection of the permanent works as well as third party structures and utilities.

Gate Chambers and Approach Channels

7.5.1 Excavation Support

The entire Gate Chamber and Approach Channel for the FACC will be founded in rock. The Contractor will
be allowed to construct these facilities in a shaft and tunnel or a deep open cut excavation. The base of the
Gate Chamber and Approach Channel for the WPSRC, the HSCC and the TSCC will also be founded in rock.
It is the Contractor’s responsibility to retain the services of a licensed Professional Engineer to design the
initial support for these excavations. Specification Section 02160 – Excavation Support Systems provides the
minimum design criteria and acceptable excavation support systems based upon depth limitations.

7.5.2 Groundwater Control

Ground conditions for the proposed West Preston Street, Hanmer Street, and Tredeau Street Gate Chambers
and Approach Channels extend into limited thicknesses of Fill, the Glaciolacustrine Deposits (varved clays),
and Glacial Till and rock. Open cut trenches for the pipeline and diversion structures will extend over 20 feet
below ground surface and over 10 feet below groundwater levels. The Contractor is responsible for
groundwater control to suit his means and methods with consideration to the maintenance and protection of
the permanent works as well as third party structures and utilities. Impacted groundwater containing petroleum
products and other constituents exceeding the general sewer permit has been identified in wells GP-1, GP-4,
GP-6, and MP-1. Groundwater in the area of DS-3 and the West Preston facilities will require additional
handling measures potentially including but not limited to groundwater cut off systems and treatment prior to
discharge to the sanitary sewer.

Page | 20
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

8.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

Infiltration flow

The Contractor is responsible for estimating groundwater inflow in the soil sections of excavations and
designing appropriate groundwater control methods based on his specific means and methods. No baseline
inflow is provided for the soil sections of the excavations.

8.1.1 Franklin Avenue Tunnel

Allowable groundwater inflows will be a combination of two types of inflow; initial or flush flows; and sustained
steady-state inflows. The differences between initial and sustained inflows depend upon the site
hydrogeology; hydrostatic head; length of exposed, unlined tunnel; and effectiveness of lining in limiting
inflows. The time taken for initial inflows to diminish to steady-state levels can vary significantly.

The steady-state baseline inflow during construction for the entire length of the Franklin Avenue Tunnel is two
hundred (200) gpm. The Contractor shall provide pumping and treatment capacity for this inflow value and
additional water added to the tunnel for various reasons. The flush flow baseline during construction for the
Franklin Avenue Tunnel shall be three (3) flush flows of sixty (60) gpm each over a period of one week per
flush.

8.1.2 Large Diameter Shafts

The steady-state baseline inflow for the rock section of the launch shaft shall be fifty (50) gpm. The steady-
state baseline inflow for the rock section of the retrieval shaft shall be fifty (50) gpm.

The flush flow baseline during construction, for both the launch and retrieval shafts respectively, shall be two
(2) flush flows of one hundred (100) gpm each.

Environmental Evaluation and Soil and Groundwater Disposal

The best management practices presented in Section 4.6 apply to all disturbed materials and extracted
groundwater, whether the intention is to replace them at the area of excavation, re-use them on site, or dispose
of them off-site. For management of soil and groundwater associated with this project, the Contractor must
obtain all applicable local, State and Federal permits associated with handling, transport, re-use, and/or
disposal of all excess materials. This may include: CT Soil Reuse Approval, General Permit for Contaminated
Soil and/or Sediment Management (Staging and Transfer), General Permit for the Discharge of Groundwater
Remediation Wastewater to a Sanitary Sewer (General Permit-Sanitary Sewer), and General Permit for the
Discharge of Groundwater Remediation Wastewater Directly to Surface Water (General Permit-Surface
Water).

For disposal locations in Connecticut, a licensed environmental professional (LEP) must be retained to ensure
proper storage, handling and disposal of excess earth materials generated during construction is conducted
in compliance with all applicable best management practices, guidelines, standards, and regulations. Excess
earth materials include soil and groundwater. For disposal considerations outside of Connecticut, an
environmental professional equivalent to a Connecticut LEP is necessary to ensure proper storage, handling
and disposal of excess earth materials generated during construction as described above.

Storage, handling, and disposal of excess earth materials must also be compliant with MDC Specifications,
including Section 02260 – Excavation, Handling, Transportation, and Disposal of Regulated Soils and Section
02145 – Handling Contaminated Groundwater.

Page | 21
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

8.2.1 Quantitative Approach for Basis of Bid for Material Disposal Costs
The following approach is to be used as a basis for evaluating material disposal costs based on analytical
testing results presented in the 2016 EDR. The Contractor is to base his bid on this methodology. This
approach will be used to assess the validity of a differing site conditions claim.

Ground conditions around each discrete soil sample are to extend to a spatial point mid-way to all adjacent
analytical sample locations or a significant lithology change. This spatial boundary will be applied in three
dimensions. This quantitative approach to baseline soil conditions is also known as the Thiessen Polygon
Method (see Dorf, 2005). This data evaluation process is to be applied to all material data provided in the
2016 EDR by the Contractor’s LEP to determine quantities for the soil categories defined in Specification
02260.

8.2.2 Spoil Material Management

Regarding disposal of spoil materials, characterization testing (parameters and frequency) will be conducted
in accordance with the requirements of the accepting facility. Evaluating potential disposal locations for spoil
materials shall be performed using best management practices. As part of the bid, the Contractor shall identify
primary and alternative disposal facilities for each spoil category as defined in Specification 02260 (i.e.
polluted, contaminated, and hazardous).

For locations on the project where soil is excavated in areas not reasonably covered by analytical data
provided in the contract documents, the in-situ soil shall be assumed to be polluted but meet criteria for
Reusable Regulated Soil.

8.2.3 Groundwater Management

Throughout the Contract 4 project limits, groundwater disposal alternatives may include sanitary sewer and/or
surface water. This will need to be evaluated on a location by location basis and may include discharge to
sanitary sewer via a manhole access, discharge directly to a surface water body, discharge to a storm drain
which ultimately discharges to a surface water body, or a combination of disposal alternatives.

Groundwater treatment may be required when discharging to sanitary sewer, namely for pH. More rigorous
groundwater treatment is necessary when discharging to surface water. A summary of groundwater results
are provided in the 2016 EDR.

For baseline purposes, environmental characterization of in-situ groundwater shall match analytical data for
the closest observation well(s) screened in the same strata as the area from which groundwater is being
generated. The Contractor shall utilize this characterization in conjunction with their chosen means and
methods in determining the requirements for management of dewatering effluent.

Obstructions
Some obstructions are anticipated in the Fill materials. The Contractor is responsible for all costs associated
with obstructions encountered in the Fill materials. No significant obstructions are anticipated in the
Glaciolacustrine materials. Obstructions up to four percent (4%) of the volume of the excavation are
anticipated in the Glacial Till materials.

Bedrock in Trenches
It was previously noted that bedrock will be encountered in the Gate Chamber and the Approach Channel for
drop structures DS-3, DS-4, DS-5 and DS-6. The top of rock delineation on the geologic profiles shall be
considered the average elevation of the non-rippable rock surface. The non-rippable rock surface can vary as
much as 5 feet plus or minus in elevation at any given location.

Page | 22
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

9.0 REFERENCES
AECOM, 2013, South Tunnel Basis of Design Report (BODR) Appendix C, Geotechnical Data Report
(GDR).

AECOM in association with Black & Veatch, July 29, 2015, South Hartford Conveyance and Storage
Tunnel, Contract No. 2 Geotechnical Data Report (GDR).

AECOM in association with Black & Veatch, 2014, South Tunnel 30% Design Report, Appendix L,
Environmental Appendices.

AECOM, Geotechnical Data Report (GDR) Contract No. 4, Franklin Avenue and Maple Avenue
Consolidated Conduits, March 2016

AECOM Environmental Data Report (EDR) for Contract 2 dated March 2016.

Blackey, E.A., Park River Auxiliary Tunnel, Journal of the Construction Division, American Society of Civil
Engineers, December 1979.

Bureau of Public Works, The Metropolitan District, August 1934, Plan and Profile Drawing of the Jefferson
Street Interceptor Tunnel.

CDM Hatch Mott MacDonald, 2010, Geotechnical Data Report, South Hartford Conveyance Tunnel,
Metropolitan District Commission, Hartford, CT.

Dorf, Richard C., The Engineering Handbook, Second Edition. Ch. 165: Photogrammetry and Topographic
Mapping. P. 869-884. Florida, USA. CRC Press LLC, 2005.

GEI, Final Report, Geotechnical Instrumentation, In-Situ Stress Measurements and Photographic Geologic
Documentation, Park River Auxiliary Conduit, Hartford, Connecticut, Geotechnical Engineers, Inc., Project
77382, August 1980.

GEI, 2009, Revised Geotechnical Data Report (GDR), Hartford Levee Accreditation Project, Hartford Flood
Control System, Hartford, CT.

Engels, J.E., Cahill, J.T. and Blackey, E.A., Geotechnical Performance of a Large Machine-Bored Precast
Concrete Lined Tunnel, Jr., Proceedings of the Rapid Excavation and Tunneling Conference, San
Francisco, 1981.

Heuer, R.E., (1974), Important Ground Parameters in Soft Ground Tunneling, Subsurface Exploration for
Underground Excavation and Heavy Construction, New England College, Henniker, New Hampshire,
American Society of Civil Engineers, Proc. of Specialty Conference, New York, p. 41-55.

Nataraja, Mysore, 1977, In Situ Stress Measurements, Park River Project, Hartford, Connecticut, Dames
and Moore, Miscellaneous paper S-77-22, prepared for US Department of Transportation, Washington
D.C. and US Army Engineer Division, New England, Waltham, MA.

Ryder, Robert B. and Elinor H. Handman, 1973, Contour Map of the Bedrock Surface, Hartford South
Quadrangle, Connecticut, US Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-487A.

US Army Corps of Engineers, 1982, As-built Foundation Report, Auxiliary Conduit Tunnel – Park River
Local Protection, Hartford Connecticut, Volumes I and II (Main Report and Appendices) and Part II,
Volumes II and III (Field Data – Subsurface Explorations).

Page | 23
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

FIGURES
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

Appendix A

Historical Record Drawing –

Maple Avenue Area South
CSO Abatement Project
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report
South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

Appendix B

Tunnelman’s Ground Classification for Soils

South Hartford Conveyance and Storage Tunnel Contract 4 – Geotechnical Baseline Report

Tunnelman’s Ground Classification for Soils

CLASSIFICATION BEHAVIOR TYPICAL SOIL TYPES

Firm Heading can be advanced without Loess above water table; hard
initial support, and final lining can clay, marl, cemented sand and
be constructed before ground gravel when not highly
starts to move. overstressed.
Raveling Slow raveling Chunks or flakes of material begin Residual soils or sand with small
to drop out of the arch or walls amounts of binder may be fast
sometime after the ground has raveling below the water table,
been exposed, due to loosening or slow raveling above. Stiff fissured
Fast raveling
to overstress and “brittle” fracture clays may be slow or fast
(ground separates or breaks along depending upon degree of
distinct surfaces, opposed to overstress.
squeezing ground). In fast
raveling ground, the process
starts within a few minutes,
otherwise the ground is slow
raveling.
Squeezing Ground squeezes or extrudes Ground with low frictional
plastically into tunnel, without strength. Rate of squeeze depends
visible fracturing or loss of on degree of overstress. Occurs at
continuity, and without shallow to medium depth in clay
perceptible increase in water of very soft to medium
content. Ductile, plastic yield and consistency. Stiff to hard clay
flow due to overstress. under high cover may move in
combination of raveling at
excavation surface and squeezing
at depth behind surface.
Running Cohesive, running Granular materials without Clean, dry granular materials.
cohesion are unstable at a slope Apparent cohesion in moist sand,
greater than their angle of repose or weak cementation in any
(approximately 30 to 35 degrees). granular soil, may allow the
Running
When exposed at steeper slopes material to stand for a brief
they run like granulated sugar or period of raveling before it breaks
dune sand until the slope flattens down and runs. Such behavior is
to the angle of repose. cohesive‐running.
Flowing A mixture of soil and water flows Below the water table in silt, sand,
into the tunnel like a viscous fluid. or gravel without enough clay
The material can enter the tunnel content to give significant
from the invert as well as from the cohesion and plasticity. May also
face, crown, and walls, and can occur in highly sensitive clay
flow for great distances, when such material is disturbed.
completely filling the tunnel in
some cases.
Swelling Ground absorbs water, increases Highly preconsolidated clay with
in volume, and expands slowly plasticity index in excess of about
into the tunnel. 30, generally containing
significant percentages of
montmorillonite.
(Modified by Heuer 1974, from Terzaghi 1950)
 SEE FIGURE 5

FRANKLIN AVENUE
CONSOLIDATION CONDUIT
SEE FIGURE 7 WEST PRESTON STREET
REPLACEMENT CONDUIT
(SEE FIGURE 7 FOR
GEOPROBE AND HISTORICAL
BORING LOCATIONS)

AD
RAILRO
HANMER STREET
CONSOLIDATION CONDUIT
SEE FIGURE 9
(SEE FIGURE 9 FOR CLARK DIKE
GEOPROBE LOCATIONS)

TREDEAU STREET
CONSOLIDATION CONDUIT

SEE FIGURE 11

LEGEND
SB-4,B120 EXISTING BORING DRILLED BY OTHERS

BD-205 BORING DRILLED FOR SHCST PROJECT (SEE NOTE 1)

BD-208 ANGLED BORING DRILLED FOR SHCST PROJECT (ARROW IN

DIRECTION THE HOLE WAS DRILLED)

CPT-1 CONE PENETRATION TEST LOCATION

NOTES:
GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY LINE
1. BORINGS DRILLED FOR THE SHCST PROJECT INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:
DEEP TUNNEL ALIGNMENT x BH-SERIES WERE DRILLED IN 2010 AS PART OF THE PRELIMINARY DESIGN UNDER THE
SUPERVISION OF CDM SMITH (BD-1 TO BD-8 AND SHALLOW CONSOLIDATION CONDUIT BORINGS)
CONSOLIDATION CONDUIT ALIGNMENT
x BD-100 and BS-SERIES WERE DRILLED IN 2012 AS PART OF THE BASIS OF DESIGN PHASE OF WORK
(OW) OBSERVATION WELL INSTALLED IN COMPLETED BORING UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF AECOM (BD-101 TO BD-109 AND BS-21 TO BS-26)
(PZ) VIBRATING WIRE PIEZOMETER(S) INSTALLED IN COMPLETED BORING x BD-200-SERIES AND PS-SERIES WERE DRILLED IN 2013 AND 2014 AS PART OF THE FINAL DESIGN
PHASE OF WORK UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF AECOM (BD-200 TO BD-255 AND PS-1 TO PS-22)
(ATV) BOREHOLE GEOPHYSICS PERFORMED IN COMPLETED BORING
PLAN x SHALLOW CONSOLIDATION CONDUIT BORINGS AND CPT SOUNDINGS WERE DRILLED IN 2013 AND
(PT) PACKER TESTING PERFORMED IN COMPLETED BORING 2014 AS PART OF THE FINAL DESIGN PHASE OF WORK UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF AECOM. THEY
ARE DESIGNATED ACCORDING TO THE CONSOLIDATION CONDUIT THEY ARE DRILLED ALONG.
(VST) VANE SHEAR TEST PERFORMED IN BORING (e.g., FR-7 WAS DRILLED FOR THE FRANKLIN AVENUE CONSOLIDATION CONDUIT).

MDC The Metropolitan District

555 Main Street CONTRACT NO. 2015B-34 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
SOUTH HARTFORD CONVEYANCE AND LOCATION PLAN
Hartford, Connecticut STORAGE TUNNEL
 DU PARK RIVER AUXILIARY

100
UD CONDUIT TUNNEL

50

UD

JEFFERSON STREET
10
0

INTERCEPTOR TUNNEL
75 85
50

20 12

100
100

100

100

50
20 78
65 72 80 100

50
45
90
D 25
14
0 RETRIEVAL U
10
12 SHAFT D U 20
45 15-20
14
40 60-70 80
U D
70 22 15 60
45 45
22 ! 70
17 75
65
60 60
80 85 85 15 15
40 75
D 75 15
D 25
25 45-60
10 10 15 20 15 15
U 25 U 45
D 45-60
20
0
12 D U60 60 100
70 D U U 15
SOUTH HARTFORD
25 100
75 D 65 CONVEYANCE AND
25 35
12
STORAGE TUNNEL
U
55 75
100

15-30 75 25 45 15
15 15
22 25
25
! 5-10
75
22 60 75
75
80 15
15
LAUNCH
200

12 SHAFT
18
10

150

100
DU
200 10 12
50
200

14

15
10
35
8
TILCON
QUARRY 16
Fault Zone Other Existing Tunnel Alignments Portland Formation South Hartford Conveyance
and Storage Tunnel Alignment
12 Strike and Dip Readings at Rock Outcrop Hampden Basalt
D

15 Fault with Inferred Direction of Movement

G:\Projects\MUNI\60287608SOT\Maps\Fig2.mxd

(AECOM & Quadangle Report No. 40, Plate 1).

U

I
1 inch = 2,000 feet
200

Note: Other readings not shaded are from ATV East Berlin Formation
200

Fault, Inferred
100

100
Logs Run in SHCST Borings
U

Holyoke Basalt
300

200

0 1,000 2,000 4,000 Contact Between Formations Stike and Dip of Joint
75 Shuttle Meadow Formation
Feet 10
Strike and Dip of Bedding " Strike of Vertical Joint 50 Elevation Contours (NAVD88 ft)
FILE NAME: ________________
FIG4-3.MXD PLAN NUMBER

The Metropolitan District

500 ENTERPRISE DRIVE, SUITE 1A
ROCKY HILL, CT 06067
DESIGNED BY: ________________
W. SONG PHONE (860) 263-5800
DRAWN BY: ________________
Z. BANKOVIC
REGIONAL BEDROCK GEOLOGIC MAP SHEET NO.

555 Main Street CHK'D BY: ________________

L. MARTIN CONTRACT NO. 2015B-34
Hartford, Connecticut
X-CHK'D BY: ________________
R. DILL
SOUTH HARTFORD CONVEYANCE AND FIGURE 2
REV.
APPROVED BY: ________________
J. SULLIVAN
STORAGE TUNNEL REGIONAL BEDROCK GEOLOGIC MAP
DATE DRWN CHKD REMARKS MAY 2016
NO. DATE: ________________
AUGUST 2015
 15
N

WEST PRESTON STREET

REPLACEMENT CONDUIT
(SEE FIGURE 7 FOR FRANKLIN AVENUE
GEOPROBE AND CONSOLIDATION CONDUIT
HISTORICAL
LOCATIONS)
BORING
WEST PRESTON STREET U D
REPLACEMENT CONDUIT
15-20
MATCH LINE - SEE FIG 4-3

85 15
85 20
15

12
15 D U
16
15

D U 15
65

12
75 PORTLAND
FORMATION 12
15
15
15

HAMPDEN 25
BASALT
75
22
60 75

15

LEGEND
SB-4 EXISTING BORING DRILLED BY OTHERS

BD-205 BORING DRILLED FOR SHCST PROJECT (SEE NOTE 1)

BD-208 ANGLED BORING DRILLED FOR SHCST PROJECT (ARROW IN

DIRECTION THE HOLE WAS DRILLED)

CPT-1 CONE PENETRATION TEST LOCATION

GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY LINE

DEEP TUNNEL ALIGNMENT

CONSOLIDATION PIPE ALIGNMENT

U
(OW) OBSERVATION WELL INSTALLED IN COMPLETED BORING PORTLAND FORMATION 15 BEDDING STRIKE AND DIP FAULT WITH DIRECTION OF RELATIVE MOVEMENT

PLAN
D NOTES:
(PZ) VIBRATING WIRE PIEZOMETER(S) INSTALLED IN COMPLETED BORING HAMPDEN BASALT 75 JOINT STRIKE AND DIP
1. STRUCTURAL INFORMATION IN THE BORINGS WAS OBTAINED FROM THE LOWER
(ATV) BOREHOLE GEOPHYSICS PERFORMED IN COMPLETED BORING EAST BERLIN FORMATION VERTICAL JOINT HEMISPHERE PLOTS DERIVED FROM THE ACOUSTIC TELEVIEWER LOGS
2. STRUCTURAL INFORMATION IS INCLUDED FROM THE QUADRANGLE REPORT NO. 40,
(PT) PACKER TESTING PERFORMED IN COMPLETED BORING HOLYOKE BASALT FORMATION CONTACT STATE AND NATURAL HISTORY SURVEY OF CONNECTICUT.
3. STRUCTURAL INFORMATION IS ALSO ADDED FROM SITE VISIT TO AREA OUTCROPS.
(VST) VANE SHEAR TESTS PERFORMED IN BORING 4. FAULTING IS INTERPRETED FROM THE RESULTS OF THE BOREHOLE GEOPHYSICS.

BEDROCK STRUCTURAL
2015B-34
GEOLOGIC MAP
MAY 2016
 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (Based on ASTM D2488)
SOIL DEPOSIT TYPE: ROCK TYPE: BORING LEGEND:
GROUP/GRAPHIC
MAJOR DIVISIONS TYPICAL NAMES
SYMBOL PORTLAND
FILL
FORMATION
CLEAN GRAVELS GW WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES (OW, PZ, PT, ATV, VST)
WITH ≤ 5% FINES BORING DESIGNATION
ELEVATION
GP POORLY GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES GLACIOLACUSTRINE SANDSTONE
DEPOSIT OFFSET FROM
EL. 17.3 ALIGNMENT
GW-GM WELL-GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT EXISTING 14.5 R AND DIRECTION
GROUND LINE
(LOOKING UP
GRAVELS GLACIAL STATION)
GRAVELS GW-GC WELL-GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY
TILL
MORE THAN HALF (WITH 5 TO USCS GRAPHIC SYMBOL,
MEASURED SEE TABLE AT LEFT,
COARSE FRACTION 12% FINES)
GP-GM POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SILT GROUNDWATER LACK OF USCS GRAPHIC
IS LARGER THAN DURING DRILLING LEVEL SYMBOL INDICATES NO
NO. 4 SIEVE SAMPLE TAKEN
GP-GC POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH CLAY
SPT N-VALUE
GENERAL NOTES: (BLOWS/FT)
SILTY GRAVELS, POORLY GRADED GRAVEL-SAND-SILT
More than Half > #200 sieve
COARSE GRAINED SOILS

GM
MIXTURES
GRAVELS WITH
1. THIS SUBSURFACE PROFILE DEPICTS THE GENERAL APPROXIMATE
OVER 12% FINES CLAYEY GRAVELS, POORLY GRADED GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS AT THE SITE AND IS BASED ON
GC TOP OF
MIXTURES INTERPRETATION OF DATA ENCOUNTERED DURING BEDROCK
EXPLORATION. LINES REPRESENTING INTERFACES
MEASURED
CLEAN SANDS SW WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS BETWEEN STRATA ON THE PROFILE ARE BASED UPON GROUNDWATER SEE GENERAL
INTERPOLATION BETWEEN ADJACENT BORINGS. LEVEL AND DATE NOTE 5
WITH ≤ 5% FINES
BORING STICKS SHOW THE ACTUAL SEQUENCE OF OF OBSERVATION
SP POORLY GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS
STRATA ENCOUNTERED AT THEIR RESPECTIVE
LOCATIONS. ACTUAL SOIL AND ROCK CONDITIONS AND
SW-SM WELL-GRADED SAND WITH SILT INTERFACES BETWEEN BORINGS MAY VARY
SANDS
SIGNIFICANTLY FROM THOSE INDICATED ON THIS
PROFILE.
MORE THAN HALF
SANDS (WITH SW-SC WELL-GRADED SAND WITH CLAY 2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON THE NATIONAL GEODETIC
COARSE FRACTION ROCK QUALITY
5 TO 12% VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 (1929 NAVD) OBSERVATION WELL
IS SMALLER THAN DESIGNATION
FINES) 3. STRUCTURAL GEOLOGY INFORMATION SHOWN SCREENED INTERVAL (RQD, %)
NO. 4 SIEVE SP-SM POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT
INCLUDING BEDDING AND FAULTS ARE BASED ON AN
INTERPRETATION OF BORING LOGS AND BOREHOLE
SP-SC POORLY GRADED SAND WITH CLAY GEOPHYSICAL LOGGING RESULTS. RECOVERY (%)
4. GROUNDWATER LEVELS SHOWN ON THE SECTIONS
ARE BASED ON MEASUREMENTS TAKEN FROM
SM SILTY SANDS, POOORLY GRADED SAND-SILT MIXTURES
SANDS WITH BORINGS, OBSERVATION WELLS, AND PIEZOMETERS.
MEASUREMENTS TAKEN DURING AND AFTER DRILLING
OVER 12% FINES
SC CLAYEY SANDS, POORLY GRADED SAND-CLAY MIXTURES ARE INCLUDED. GROUNDWATER LEVELS MAY VARY
WITH SEASON, PRECIPITATION, AND OTHER FACTORS.
INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, MEASURED LEVELS DURING DRILLING MAY NOT BE
ML SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS, OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH REPRESENTATIVE OF EQUILIBRIUM GROUNDWATER
SLIGHT PLASTICITY
LEVELS.
INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY,
5. NO INFORMATION SHOWN IN BORING STICK INDICATES
SILTS AND CLAYS CL GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS,
LEAN CLAYS THAT NO SAMPLES WERE OBTAINED.
More than Half < #200 sieve
FINE GRAINED SOILS

LIQUID LIMIT LESS THAN 50 INORGANIC SILTS AND INORGANIC CLAYEY SILTS WITH SOIL LEGEND NOTES:
ML&CL ROCK CORE
SLIGHT PLASTICITY
RUN LIMITS
ORGANIC CLAYS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW
1. DUAL SYMBOLS (e.g. ML&CL) ARE USED TO INDICATE SOILS VIBRATING WIRE
OL HAVING PROPERTIES OF BOTH GROUPS. PIEZOMETER
PLASTICITY
2. BORDERLINE SOIL SYMBOLS (e.g. SP-SM, GP-GM) ARE USED TIP LOCATION

MH
INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACIOUS FINE TO INDICATE SOILS WITH PROPERTIES THAT DO NOT
SANDY OR SILTY SOILS, ELASTIC SILTS DISTINCTLY PLACE THEM IN A SPECIFIC GROUP, SUCH AS
SILTS AND CLAYS INTERBEDDED SOILS WITH DIFFERENT PROPERTIES.
CH INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAYS
LIQUID LIMIT GREATER THAN 50
ABBREVIATIONS:
ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY,
OH SPT - STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
ORGANIC SILTS
OW - OBSERVATION WELL
PZ - VIBRATING WIRE PIEZOMETER
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS Pt PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
ATV - ACOUSTIC TELEVIEWER
PT - PACKER TESTING
VST - VANE SHEAR TESTING
 MATCH LINE
SEE ABOVE THIS SHEET

N
N

MATCH LINE
SEE BELOW THIS SHEET
(PT)
(VST,ATV,
(PT) (OW, ATV, PT) (PT) (PT) (ATV) (OW, PT) PT, 2 PZ's) (OW, PZ, PT)
FR-2 FRA1-SB-1
FR-3 FR-4 FR-5 FR-6 FR-12 FR-7 FR-8 FR-9 FR-11 BD-217

FILL

FILL FILL

GLACIOLACUSTRINE
DEPOSIT
GLACIOLACUSTRINE
DEPOSIT GLACIOLACUSTRINE
DEPOSIT
GLA
CIA GLACIAL
L T GLACIAL TILL TILL
ILL

PORTLAND
FORMATION
PORTLAND
PORTLAND FORMATION
FORMATION
 (ATV, PT, VST, 2 PZs) (OW, PZ, PT)

FR-1 FR-11 BD-217

TOP SOIL

FILL FILL

GLACIOLACUSTRINE
GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT
GLACIO-
DEPOSIT LACUSTRINE
DEPOSIT

GLACIAL
TILL GLACIAL TILL

PORTLAND
FORMATION
N
B-1 B-2 B-3
N
 (OW) (OW) (OW,PT)

HAN-4 HAN-3 HAN-6 HAN-2 HAN-5 HAN-1 HM-3 HM-2 BD-215 HM-1

FILL

FILL

GLACIAL TILL

GLACIOLACUSTRINE
DEPOSIT PORTLAND
FORMATION

GLACIOLACUSTRINE
DEPOSIT

GLACIAL TILL
N
 (OW, PZ, PT)

BD-212 TR-1

GLACIOLACUSTRINE FILL
DEPOSIT

GLACIAL TILL

PORTLAND
FORMATION