Formal Report/Proposal Stationery

ISO9001:2015REGISTERED

GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION REPORT

Road Replacement Big Bar Lake Road at 57 Mile Creek, BCBC MOTI Project No. 24665

Type of Document:Geotechnical Exploration Report - Final

Prepared For:

Ministry of Transportation and InfrastructureSuite 310 - 1500 Woolridge StreetCoquitlam, BC V3K 0B8

Attention: James Jin, M.Eng., P.Eng., Geotechnical Engineer

Prepared By:

EXP Services Inc.275 – 3001 Wayburne DriveBurnaby, BC V5G 4W3 t: 604.874.1245 | f: 604.874.2358 | www.exp.com

Author: Kai-Sing Hui, P.Eng., Director, Geotechnical Engineering, [email protected]

Project Number:VAN-00260597-A0

Report Date:August 17, 2020

FILE COPY

EXP Services Inc.

Geotechnical Exploration Report – BC MOTI Project No. 24665Road Realignment along Big Bar Lake Road at 57 Mile Creek

EXP Ref. VAN-00260597-A0August 17, 2020

i

Table of Contents1. Executive Summary 1

2. Terms of Reference 1

3. Site and Project Description 1

4. Geotechnical Subsurface Characterization 2

4.1 Site Reconnaissance............................................................................................................2

4.2 Subsurface Exploration .......................................................................................................2

4.3 Laboratory Testing ..............................................................................................................2

4.4 Subsurface Conditions ........................................................................................................3

4.5 Groundwater Condition......................................................................................................3

5. Geotechnical Comments and Recommendations 3

5.1 General ...............................................................................................................................3

5.2 Subgrade Preparation .........................................................................................................4

5.3 Fill Materials and Re-Use of Existing Fill .............................................................................4

5.4 Pavement Design Criteria/Methodology ............................................................................4

5.5 Pavement Design ................................................................................................................4

6. Final Design and Field Review 5

7. Closure 5

FiguresFigure 1…………………………..……………………….………................................................Test Hole Location Plan

AppendicesAppendix A ...........................................................................................................................Test Pit Logs

Appendix B ........................................................................................................Results of Sieve Analysis

Appendix C .............................................................................Interpretation & Use of Study and Report

EXP Services Inc.



1

1. Executive SummaryA road realignment is proposed along Big Bar Lake Road at 57 Mile Creek, at about 8km northwest from the intersection of Big Bar Lake Road and Highway 97 to facilitate a new culvert replacement.

As part of the design activities, a subsurface site exploration consisting of machine dug test pits was undertaken and supervised by EXP Services Inc. (“EXP”) on June 24 and 25, 2020.

In general, the subsurface exploration carried out within the proposed roadway segment encountered a layer of Topsoil of about 0.3 to 0.7m thick overlying a Sandy Gravel deposit with cobbles and boulders which extended to the bottom of all the test pits. All test pit encountered refusal at depths varying from about 1.0m to 2.1m depths. The Sandy Gravel deposit is deemed to be a suitable subgrade for the proposed road.

This report summarizes the soil and groundwater conditions encountered at the site and geotechnical engineering comments and recommendations as input to design and construction of the road realignment.

The attached “Interpretation & Use of Study and Report” (Appendix C) contains instructions to readers and forms an integral part of this report and must be included with any copies of this report.

2. Terms of ReferenceEXP’s geotechnical services are provided under the BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (the “Ministry”) “As and When” General Engineering Services & Emergency Response for South Coast Region, Contract 860-CS-0956.

The work plan was outlined in EXP’s proposal dated June 22, 2020.

The 50% preliminary design drawings prepared by the Ministry titled, Big Bar Lake Road – 57 Mile Creek Road Realignment and Culvert Replacement (Project No. 24665), dated April 2, 2020 show the project details.

This report references the 2016 Standard Specifications for Highway Construction (“SSHC”) published by the British Columbia Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (BC MoTI).

3. Site and Project Description The proposed road segment (the site) is located to the southwest of Big Bar Road, and about 8km northwest from the intersection of Big Bar Lake Road and Highway 97. The site spans approximately 1.36km and ties into the existing Big Bar Road at both ends. The approximate coordinates for the eastern tie-in would be at N 5670175.662 E 599817.963 while the western tie-in would be at N 5671141.840 E 598943.927. This road section would be a ‘Low Volume Gravel Road’, similar to the existing Big Bar Lake Road.

EXP Services Inc.



2

Based on preliminary drawings provided, the proposed finished top of road grade will generally match average existing site grades, with localized cuts and fills. The site is currently undeveloped and contains thick tree cover in areas and presence of occasional boulders at surface.

4. Geotechnical Subsurface CharacterizationA subsurface exploration was carried out to assess soil types and strength including subgrade soil conditions.

4.1 Site Reconnaissance

A preliminary site reconnaissance was completed as part of the subsurface exploration. The site was walked from end to end and the south side of the right-of-way flagged prior to excavation. In addition, a review of Google Earth imagery was carried out by EXP to get an appreciation for the site and surroundings.

4.2 Subsurface Exploration

EXP completed a geotechnical exploration at the site on June 24 and 25, 2020 consisting of ten (10) test pits designated as TP20-01 through TP20-10. The approximate locations of the test pits are shown on Figure 1 and the coordinates for each test pit are noted on the test pit logs. The test pit logs are provided in Appendix A. The test pits were advanced to refusal on probable bedrock at depths between 1.0m and 2.1m below the existing ground surface and backfilled upon completion.

The test pits were completed using a Hitachi 350 excavator provided by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure.

The field work was carried out under the full-time supervision of a member of EXP geotechnical staff, who located the test pits in the field, recorded the location of each test pit using GPS coordinates, logged the subsurface conditions, and collected representative soil samples for visual examination and index testing in our Kamloops laboratory.

The test pits indicated subsurface conditions only at the locations of test pits. The precision of the subsurface condition information indicated depends on the methods used, frequency of sampling, and the uniformity of the subsurface conditions. The spacing of the test pits, frequency of sampling, and the method of exploration have been selected to meet the needs of the project within constraints of the budget and schedule for geotechnical exploration purposes. As the site had not been cleared prior to the investigation, the spacing of the test pits was influenced by site access and time considerations. Significant stripping/clearing of boulders and trees was required to advance the excavator. There was an area of thick poplar tree growth and boulders to the northwest of TP20-04 that was impractical to pass.

4.3 Laboratory Testing

Laboratory testing included moisture content tests and sieve analyses on select soil samples obtained from the exploration work to assist in confirmation of soil types. The laboratory testing was done in

EXP Services Inc.



3

general accordance with appropriate ASTM test procedures. Results of Moisture Contents determinations are shown on the test pit logs provided in Appendix B.

4.4 Subsurface Conditions

Table 1 provides a simplified subsurface profile of the subsurface conditions encountered in the test pits, intended for discussion purposes.

Table 1 - Subsurface Profile

Unit Name

Unit No.

Soil Type / Classification Soil Description / Properties Typical Thickness

Topsoil 1 Organic Silt (OL) or Silt Sandy Silt, brown to dark brown, moist, loose, occasional boulders 0.3 to 0.7m

Sandy Gravel to Sand and Gravel

2 Gravel and Sand, some Silt (GM)

Brown, dry to moist, compact, 30-50% cobbles, boulders encountered 0.5m to 1.5m

Bedrock 3 Probable Bedrock Refusal with 350 Excavator, which was able to remove boulders Starts between 1.0 and 2.1m

4.5 Groundwater Condition

At the time of exploration, groundwater seepage was not encountered in any of the test pits while they remained open. It is noted that fluctuations in the groundwater levels should be expected and may be associated with seasonal and climatic conditions, as well as, the water levels in 57 Mile Creek. Perched water table conditions above the probable bedrock layer should be anticipated.

5. Geotechnical Comments and Recommendations5.1 General

Based on review of the test pit logs, the proposed road segment is underlain by a layer of topsoil overlying a Sandy Gravel deposit with cobbles and boulders. The Sandy Gravel deposit is a favorable subgrade for the proposed road realignment; however, large cobbles and boulders should be removed from the subgrade to avoid undesirable bumps in the driving surface.

The shallowest refusal encountered in the test pit was 1.0m depth, hence, excavation of the side ditches of less than 1m depth is not expected to encounter significant difficulties. However, with some uncertainly as to the actual continuity of the bedrock surface profile, some contingency for bedrock removal would be suggested.

Recommendations for site preparation, road section and permanent slopes are presented in the subsequent sections.

EXP Services Inc.



4

5.2 Subgrade Preparation

The near surface topsoil should be stripped from within the proposed road subgrade. Typical stripping depth is estimated to range in the order of 0.3 to 0.7m; however, localized areas of greater stripping depths could be encountered. Additional excavation may be required to facilitate placement of the proposed road section. At locations where filling is required to achieve the design subgrade level, the excavated Sandy Gravel may be reused for subgrade fill, provided the aggregate larger than 150mm is removed (see Section 5.3 for more details) and placed in favorable weather conditions. Due to the higher fines content (over 10%), compaction may not be practical if excessively wet of the optimum.

Aggregates larger than 150m should be removed from the subgrade level and any voids/pockets infilled with finer granular material. Following over-sized aggregate removal, the upper 300mm of the subgrade should be compacted as per Section 5.3 below.

5.3 Fill Materials and Re-Use of Existing Fill

Where new fills of greater than 150mm is required, it is recommended that the fill material be placed in lifts not exceeding 150mm when compacted and compacted to at least 95% of Standard Proctor maximum dry density as per ASTM D698 and to 100% within 300mm of subgrade as set out in Section 303 of SSHC. Backfill and compaction should be done symmetrically as set out in Section 303 of SSHC.

The results of the sieve analysis carried out on samples of Sandy Gravel material collected during the exploration are provided Appendix B. The results generally indicate the native Sandy Gravel material has fines content in the range of 10 to 15%. This Sandy Gravel material may be re-used as new subgrade fill material providing that the aggregates larger than 150mm is removed and it can be suitably moisture conditioned to near optimum levels to facilitate adequate compaction, subject to review by the geotechnical engineer during construction.

In general, the fill materials used for roadway embankment construction and pavement construction should satisfy Sections 201 and 202 of SSHC.

Permanent Side Slopes

It is recommended that permanent fill slopes required to achieve the design road grades be developed not steeper than about 2 Horizontal to 1 Vertical (2H:1V) where granular fill is used to construct the fill slopes.

5.4 Pavement Design Criteria/Methodology

The pavement for the upgraded section of road is designed in accordance the MoTI Technical Circular T-01/15, Pavement Structure Design Guidelines, considering a Low Volume Road.

5.5 Pavement Design

The design pavement section for the road upgrade may be taken as follows:

EXP Services Inc.



5

Table 2 – Pavement Structure for Road Upgrade

Pavement StructureAssumed Subgrade

Material Type Min. Thickness

19mm High Fines Surfacing Aggregate (HFSA) 150mm

25mm Well-Graded Base Course (WGB) 150mmCompact to Dense Sand and Gravel to Gravel and Sand

Select Granular Subbase (SGSB) 200mm

The minimum road section summarized in Table 2 above is considered suitable for the proposed low volume road.

The HFSA, WGB and SGSB materials should meet the requirements of Section 202 of 2016 SSHC.

To reduce potential frost impacts on the road subgrade and road performance, side ditches are recommended with the inverts located at least 1m below the top of the finished road grades.

6. Final Design and Field ReviewIt is recommended that EXP review final design drawings and specifications to confirm geotechnical contents for tender and construction purposes. The following field review activity is recommended.

Review of on-site material for reuse as subgrade fill; and,

Review of subgrades prior to placing of SGSB.

7. ClosurePlease note that this report was prepared for the exclusive use of EXP’s client, the British Columbia Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, and their designated consultants and agents. The attached Interpretation & Use of Study and Report (Appendix C) forms part of this report, and it should be included with copies of the report.

Site contractors should make their own assessment of subsurface conditions and select the construction means and methods most appropriate to the site conditions. This geotechnical report should not be included in contract specifications without suitable qualifications and prior review by EXP Services Inc. However, the geotechnical report may be used as an attachment to contract specifications, for information purposes only.

We trust that this report satisfies your present requirements. Please contact the undersigned should you have any questions.

EXP Services Inc.



6

Yours truly,

EXP Services Inc.

Kai-Sing Hui, P.Eng. Ben Weiss., P.Eng. Director, Geotechnical Engineering Senior Geotechnical Engineer

EXP Services Inc.



1

Figures

Test Hole Location PlanFigure 1

TP20-04 TP20-05 TP20-03TP20-02

TP20-01

TP20-10

TP20-09TP20-08 TP20-07

TP20-06

BH19-01

BH19-02

BIG BAR LAKE ROAD

100+00

104+

00 108+

00

112+

00

APPROXIMATE ROAD REALIGNMENT

EXP Services Inc. TEST HOLE LOCATION PLANMOTIBIG BAR LAKE ROAD REALIGNMENT

57 MILE CREEK, CLINTON, BC

VAN-00260597-A0 2020-08-14 1:4000 FIGURE 1

MG

KSH

REFERENCE:- GOOGLE EARTH IMAGE, 2020-08-14- MOTI ROAD ALIGNMENT, 2020-04-14

LEGEND

BOREHOLE

TEST PIT

AutoCAD SHX Text

DESCRIPTION

AutoCAD SHX Text

ISSUE/REVISION

AutoCAD SHX Text

No.

AutoCAD SHX Text

DATE

AutoCAD SHX Text

PROJECT NO.

AutoCAD SHX Text

PROJECT

AutoCAD SHX Text

CLIENT

AutoCAD SHX Text

DATE

AutoCAD SHX Text

TITLE:

AutoCAD SHX Text

SCALE:

AutoCAD SHX Text

DWG NO.

AutoCAD SHX Text

DFTR.

AutoCAD SHX Text

DSGN.

AutoCAD SHX Text

CHK.

AutoCAD SHX Text

275-3001 Wayburne Drive

AutoCAD SHX Text

Burnaby, British Columbia V5G 4W3

AutoCAD SHX Text

Telephone: 604-874-1245

AutoCAD SHX Text

Fax: 604-874-2358

AutoCAD SHX Text

exp.com

AutoCAD SHX Text

N

AutoCAD SHX Text

0

AutoCAD SHX Text

200

AutoCAD SHX Text

1:4000

EXP Services Inc.



2

Appendix A

Test Pit Logs of Drill HolesTP20-01 to TP20-10

EXP Services Inc.

Big Bar Lake Road Realignment 57 Mile Creek, Clinton, BC

Reference No: VAN-00260597 Date: June 2020

_____________________________________________________________________________________

TEST PIT LOGS BIG BAR LAKE ROAD REALIGNMENT

57 MILE CREEK, BC MOTI, NEAR CLINTON BC

TP20-01 (599340, 5670594)

DEPTH DESCRIPTION REMARKS

From To

0 0.7m Sandy Silt Topsoil/Rootmat – organics, roots and rootlets, brown to dark brown, moist, loose

0.7m END Silty Sand and Gravel, angular cobbles and boulders, brown, moist, compact

MC @ 1.2m = 12.6% >50% cobbles/boulders

1.9m End of excavation – Refusal (Probable Bedrock) No seepage observed

TP20-02 (599303, 5670621)


From To





TP20-03 (599256, 5670675)


From To


MC @ 0.4m = 16.0%


MC @ 0.8m =7.0% >50% cobbles/boulders


EXP Services Inc.



_____________________________________________________________________________________

TP20-04 (599092, 5670822)


From To


0.4m END Silty Sand and Gravel, round cobbles, grey to brown, dry to moist, compact

MC @ 1.0m = 6.0% >30% cobbles


TP20-05 (599174, 5670732)


From To


0.6m 1.1m Silty Sand and Gravel, round cobbles, brown, dry to moist, compact

MC @ 0.8m = 10.1% >30% cobbles

1.1 END Sand and Gravel, some silt, round cobbles, grey, dry to moist, compact

MC @ 1.2m = 7.2% >30% cobbles


TP20-06 (599708, 5670245)


From To


0.3m END Silty Sand and Gravel, round cobbles, brown, dry to moist, compact

MC @ 1.0m = 5.6% >50% cobbles


EXP Services Inc.



_____________________________________________________________________________________

TP20-07 (599585, 5670344)


From To


0.4m END Silty Sand and Gravel, round to subangular cobbles, brown, dry to moist, compact

MC @ 0.8m = 5.2% >30% cobbles


TP20-08 (599464, 5670471)


From To


0.3m END Silty Sand and Gravel, round to subangular cobbles and boulders, brown, dry to moist, compact



TP20-09 (599404, 5670517)


From To

0 0.4m Sandy Silt Topsoil/Rootmat – organics, roots and rootlets, brown to dark brown, moist, loose, boulders

0.4m END Silty Sand and Gravel, round cobbles and boulders, brown, dry to moist, compact

MC @ 0.8m= 7.1% >50% cobbles/boulders


EXP Services Inc.



_____________________________________________________________________________________

TP20-10 (599377, 5670558)


From To


0.3m END Silty Sand and Gravel, angular cobbles, brown, dry to moist, compact

MC @ 1.0m = 8.8% >20% cobbles


EXP Services Inc.



3

Appendix B

Results of Sieve AnalysisNo. 1 to 5

exp Services Inc.100B - 1425 Pearson Place

Kamloops, BC V1S 1J9

SIEVE ANALYSIS REPORTSI gradation SERIES

PROJECT NO.

CLIENT

C.C.

002-60597BC Ministry of Transportation

BC Ministry of Transportation andInfrastructureSuite 310 - 1500 Woolridge StCoquitlam, BCV3K 0B8

ATTN: James Jin

Big Bar Lake Road Realignment Big Bar Lake RoadClinton

1 Jul 29,2020 Jun 25,2020

TO

PROJECT

SIEVE TEST NO. DATE TESTED DATE SAMPLED

COMMENTS

PER.Page 1 of 1 Jul 31,2020Reporting of these test results constitutes a testing service only. Engineering interpretation or evaluation of test results is provided only on written request.

exp Services Inc.

CONTRACTOR

GRAVEL SIZES GRADATIONLIMITS

100.0 88.7 84.3 78.5 73.0 64.7 60.1

SAMPLED BY K. HawkesSUPPLIER NativeSOURCE [email protected] No Spec TEST METHOD WASHED

TESTED BY K. Hawkes

MATERIAL TYPE Gravel & Sand, some Silt

PERCENTPASSING

75 mm50 mm38.1 mm25 mm19 mm12.5 mm9.5 mm

SAND SIZES AND FINES GRADATIONLIMITS

50.4 41.5 34.0 28.7 24.4 20.7 15.0

PERCENTPASSING

4.75 mm2.36 mm1.18 mm600 µm300 µm150 µm75 µm

DATE RECEIVEDJun 26,2020

Report System Software Registered to: EXP Services Inc., Kamloops




PROJECT NO.

CLIENT

C.C.



ATTN: James Jin


2 Jul 29,2020 Jun 24,2020

TO

PROJECT


COMMENTS


exp Services Inc.

CONTRACTOR


100.0 91.2 88.0 83.1 78.2 69.5 64.4

SAMPLED BY K. HawkesSUPPLIER NativeSOURCE TP20-03 @ 0.8mSPECIFICATION No Spec TEST METHOD WASHED

TESTED BY K. Hawkes

MATERIAL TYPE Gravel and Sand, some Silt

PERCENTPASSING

75 mm50 mm38.1 mm25 mm19 mm12.5 mm9.5 mm


52.1 42.4 34.8 28.8 23.5 18.5 12.5

PERCENTPASSING

4.75 mm2.36 mm1.18 mm600 µm300 µm150 µm75 µm






PROJECT NO.

CLIENT

C.C.



ATTN: James Jin


3 Jul 29,2020 Jun 25,2020

TO

PROJECT


COMMENTS


exp Services Inc.

CONTRACTOR


100.0 84.9 77.4 72.8 68.5 61.0 57.0

SAMPLED BY K. HawkesSUPPLIER NativeSOURCE TP20-07 @ 0.8mSPECIFICATION No Spec TEST METHOD WASHED

TESTED BY K. Hawkes

MATERIAL TYPE Gravel and Sand, some Silt

PERCENTPASSING

75 mm50 mm38.1 mm25 mm19 mm12.5 mm9.5 mm


45.6 35.0 27.4 21.4 16.8 13.7 10.3

PERCENTPASSING

4.75 mm2.36 mm1.18 mm600 µm300 µm150 µm75 µm






PROJECT NO.

CLIENT

C.C.



ATTN: James Jin


4 Jul 29,2020 Jun 24,2020

TO

PROJECT


COMMENTS


exp Services Inc.

CONTRACTOR


100.0100.0 88.8 77.5 72.7 63.3 56.8

SAMPLED BY K. HawkesSUPPLIER NativeSOURCE TP20-02 @ 1mSPECIFICATION No Spec TEST METHOD WASHED

TESTED BY K. Hawkes

MATERIAL TYPE Sandy Gravel, some Silt

PERCENTPASSING

75 mm50 mm38.1 mm25 mm19 mm12.5 mm9.5 mm


49.1 40.1 33.5 29.0 24.9 21.2 15.7

PERCENTPASSING

4.75 mm2.36 mm1.18 mm600 µm300 µm150 µm75 µm






PROJECT NO.

CLIENT

C.C.



ATTN: James Jin


5 Jul 29,2020 Jun 25,2020

TO

PROJECT


COMMENTS


exp Services Inc.

CONTRACTOR


100.0100.0 84.0 68.0 61.7 53.9 50.7

SAMPLED BY K. HawkesSUPPLIER NativeSOURCE TP20-06 @ 1mSPECIFICATION No Spec TEST METHOD WASHED

TESTED BY K. Hawkes

MATERIAL TYPE Sandy Gravel, some Silt

PERCENTPASSING

75 mm50 mm38.1 mm25 mm19 mm12.5 mm9.5 mm


41.9 34.6 28.6 23.3 19.6 16.8 13.8

PERCENTPASSING

4.75 mm2.36 mm1.18 mm600 µm300 µm150 µm75 µm


EXP Services Inc.



4

Appendix C

Interpretation & Use of Study and Report

INTERPRETATION & USE OF STUDY AND REPORT 1. STANDARD OF CARE This study and Report have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted engineering consulting practices in this area. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Engineering studies and reports do not include environmental consulting unless specifically stated in the engineering report. 2. COMPLETE REPORT All documents, records, data and files, whether electronic or otherwise, generated as part of this assignment are a part of the Report which is of a summary nature and is not intended to stand alone without reference to the instructions given to us by the Client, communications between us and the Client, and to any other reports, writings, proposals or documents prepared by us for the Client relative to the specific site described herein, all of which constitute the Report. IN ORDER TO PROPERLY UNDERSTAND THE SUGGESTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND OPINIONS EXPRESSED HEREIN, REFERENCE MUST BE MADE TO THE WHOLE OF THE REPORT. WE CANNOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR USE BY ANY PARTY OF PORTIONS OF THE REPORT WITHOUT REFERENCE TO THE WHOLE REPORT. 3. BASIS OF THE REPORT The Report has been prepared for the specific site, development, building, design or building assessment objectives and purpose that were described to us by the Client. The applicability and reliability of any of the findings, recommendations, suggestions, or opinions expressed in the document are only valid to the extent that there has been no material alteration to or variation from any of the said descriptions provided to us unless we are specifically requested by the Client to review and revise the Report in light of such alteration or variation. 4. USE OF THE REPORT The information and opinions expressed in the Report, or any document forming the Report, are for the sole benefit of the Client. NO OTHER PARTY MAY USE OR RELY UPON THE REPORT OR ANY PORTION THEREOF WITHOUT OUR WRITTEN CONSENT. WE WILL CONSENT TO ANY REASONABLE REQUEST BY THE CLIENT TO APPROVE THE USE OF THIS REPORT BY OTHER PARTIES AS “APPROVED USERS”. The contents of the Report remain our copyright property and we authorise only the Client and Approved Users to make copies of the Report only in such quantities as are reasonably necessary for the use of the Report by those parties. The Client and Approved Users may not give, lend, sell or otherwise make the Report, or any portion thereof, available to any party without our written permission. Any use which a third party makes of the Report, or any portion of the Report, are the sole responsibility of such third parties. We accept no responsibility for damages suffered by any third party resulting from unauthorised use of the Report. 5. INTERPRETATION OF THE REPORT a. Nature and Exactness of Descriptions: Classification and identification of soils, rocks, geological units, contaminant materials, building envelopment

assessments, and engineering estimates have been based on investigations performed in accordance with the standards set out in Paragraph 1. Classification and identification of these factors are judgmental in nature and even comprehensive sampling and testing programs, implemented with the appropriate equipment by experienced personnel, may fail to locate some conditions. All investigations, or building envelope descriptions, utilizing the standards of Paragraph 1 will involve an inherent risk that some conditions will not be detected and all documents or records summarising such investigations will be based on assumptions of what exists between the actual points sampled. Actual conditions may vary significantly between the points investigated and all persons making use of such documents or records should be aware of, and accept, this risk. Some conditions are subject to change over time and those making use of the Report should be aware of this possibility and understand that the Report only presents the conditions at the sampled points at the time of sampling. Where special concerns exist, or the Client has special considerations or requirements, the Client should disclose them so that additional or special investigations may be undertaken which would not otherwise be within the scope of investigations made for the purposes of the Report.

b. Reliance on Provided information: The evaluation and conclusions contained in the Report have been prepared on the basis of conditions in evidence at

the time of site inspections and on the basis of information provided to us. We have relied in good faith upon representations, information and instructions provided by the Client and others concerning the site. Accordingly, we cannot accept responsibility for any deficiency, misstatement or inaccuracy contained in the report as a result of misstatements, omissions, misrepresentations or fraudulent acts of persons providing information.

c. To avoid misunderstandings, EXP Services Inc. (EXP) should be retained to work with the other design professionals to explain relevant engineering

findings and to review their plans, drawings, and specifications relative to engineering issues pertaining to consulting services provided by EXP. Further,

EXP should be retained to provide field reviews during the construction, consistent with building codes guidelines and generally accepted practices.

Where applicable, the field services recommended for the project are the minimum necessary to ascertain that the Contractor’s work is being carried out

in general conformity with EXP’s recommendations. Any reduction from the level of services normally recommended will result in EXP providing qualified

opinions regarding adequacy of the work.

6. ALTERNATE REPORT FORMAT When EXP submits both electronic file and hard copies of reports, drawings and other documents and deliverables (EXP’s instruments of professional service), the Client agrees that only the signed and sealed hard copy versions shall be considered final and legally binding. The hard copy versions submitted by EXP shall be the original documents for record and working purposes, and, in the event of a dispute or discrepancy, the hard copy versions shall govern over the electronic versions. Furthermore, the Client agrees and waives all future right of dispute that the original hard copy signed version archived by EXP shall be deemed to be the overall original for the Project. The Client agrees that both electronic file and hard copy versions of EXP’s instruments of professional service shall not, under any circumstances, no matter who owns or uses them, be altered by any party except EXP. The Client warrants that EXP’s instruments of professional service will be used only and exactly as submitted by EXP. The Client recognizes and agrees that electronic files submitted by EXP have been prepared and submitted using specific software and hardware systems. EXP makes no representation about the compatibility of these files with the Client’s current or future software and hardware systems.

Formal Report/Proposal Stationery

Documents

Transcript of Formal Report/Proposal Stationery