2021_04-06_MANUAL.pdf

P R O J E C T M A N U A L

VA PROJ NO.: 552-20-104

CBLH PROJ. NO. : 18110

FEBRUARY 9, 2021

VA DAYTON MEDICAL CENTER

CONSTRUCTION – ISSUED FOR BID

RENOVATION

PRIMARY CARE FOR PACT

BUILDING 340 AND BUILDING 341

VOLUME 1

VA PROJECT NO. 552-20-104

CBLH PROJECT NO. 18110

05-01-20

RENOVATE PRIMARY CARE for PACT BLDG 340, BLDG 341 - DAYTON VA MEDICAL CENTER

– CONSTRUCTION – ISSUED FOR BID

00 01 10-1

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section 00 01 10

SECTION NO. DIVISION AND SECTION TITLES DATE

DIVISION 00 - SPECIAL SECTIONS

00 01 15 List of Drawing Sheets 5-20 00 31 32 Geotechnical Data and Report

DIVISION 01 - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

01 00 00 General Requirements 01-21 01 31 00.01 Project Management and Coordination 09- 19 01 32 16.15 Project Schedules (Small Projects – Des ign/Bid/Build 03-20 01 33 23 Shop Drawings, Product Data, and Samples 05-17 01 35 26 Safety Requirements 07-20 01 42 19 Reference Standards 11-20 01 45 00 Quality Control 02-21 01 45 29 Testing Laboratory Services 11-18 01 45 35 Special Inspections 03-19 01 57 19 Temporary Environmental Controls 01-21 01 58 16 Temporary Interior Signage 07-15 01 74 19 Construction Waste Management 01-21 01 81 13 Sustainable Construction Requirements 10-1 7 01 91 00 General Commissioning Requirements 10-15

DIVISION 02 – EXISTING CONDITIONS

02 41 00 Demolition 08-17

DIVISION 03 – CONCRETE

03 01 31 Concrete Floor Flash Patching 03 30 00 Cast-in-Place Concrete 01-21

DIVISION 04 – MASONRY

04 01 00 Maintenance of Masonry 01-21 04 05 13 Masonry Mortaring 10-17 04 05 16 Masonry Grouting 01-21 04 20 00 Unit Masonry 08-17 04 72 10 Thin Calcium Silicate

DIVISION 05 – METALS

05 12 00 Structural Steel Framing 11-18

00 01 10-2

SECTION NO. DIVISION AND SECTION TITLES DATE

05 21 00 Steel Joist Framing 11-18 05 31 00 Steel Decking 01-21 05 40 00 Cold-Formed Metal Framing 01-21 05 50 00 Metal Fabrications 08-18

DIVISION 06 – WOOD, PLASTICS AND COMPOSITES

06 06 60 Decorative Resin Panels 06 10 00 Rough Carpentry 10-17 06 20 00 Finish Carpentry 01-21

DIVISION 07 - THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION

07 21 13 Thermal Insulation 01-21 07 22 00 Roof and Deck Insulation 01-21 07 25 00 Weather Barriers 07 40 00 Roofing and Siding Panels 01-21 07 53 23 Ethylene-Propylene-Diene-Monomer (EPDM) Ro ofing 01-21 07 54 23 Thermoplastic Polyolefin (TPO) Roofing 01- 21 07 60 00 Flashing and Sheet Metal 01-21 07 71 00 Roof Specialties 01-21 07 84 00 Firestopping 01-21 07 92 00 Joint Sealants 10-17 07 95 13 Expansion Joint Cover Assemblies 01-21

DIVISION 08 - OPENINGS

08 11 13 Hollow Metal Doors and Frames 01-21 08 14 00 Interior Wood Doors 01-21 08 31 13 Access Doors and Frames 01-21

084229.23 Sliding Automatic Entrances

08 44 13 Glazed Aluminum Curtain Walls 04-20 08 71 00 Door Hardware 01-21 08 80 00 Glazing 01-21 08 87 00 Glazing Surface Films

DIVISION 09 – FINISHES

09 05 16 Subsurface Preparation for Floor Finishes 01-21 09 06 00 Schedule for Finishes 01-21 09 22 16 Non-Structural Metal Framing 06-18 09 29 00 Gypsum Board 04-20 09 30 13 Ceramic/Porcelain Tiling 01-21 09 51 00 Acoustical Ceilings 12-18 09 65 13 Resilient Base and Accessories 01-21 09 65 19 Resilient Tile Flooring 05-18 09 68 00 Carpeting 01-21

00 01 10-3

SECTION NO. DIVISION AND SECTION TITLES DATE

09 91 00 Painting 01-21

DIVISION 10 – SPECIALTIES

10 14 00 Signage 01-21

10 26 00 Wall and Door Protection 01-21 10 28 00 Toilet, Bath, and Laundry Accessories 01-2 1 10 44 13 Fire Extinguisher Cabinets 08-18

DIVISION 11 – EQUIPMENT

11 73 00 Ceiling Mounted Patient List System 08-20

DIVISION 12 – FURNISHINGS

12 36 00 Countertops 12-18

DIVISION 13 - SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION – Not used

DIVISION 14– CONVEYING EQUIPMENT – Not used

DIVISION 21- FIRE SUPPRESSION

21 13 13 Wet-Pipe Sprinkler Systems 06-15

DIVISION 22 – PLUMBING

22 05 11 Common Work Results for Plumbing 09-20 22 05 23 General-Duty Valves for Plumbing Piping 09 -20 22 07 11 Plumbing Insulation 09-19 22 11 00 Facility Water Distribution 11-19 22 13 00 Facility Sanitary and Vent Piping 09-20 22 14 00 Facility Storm Drainage 09-15 22 40 00 Plumbing Fixtures 09-15

DIVISION 23 – HEATING, VENTILATING, AND AIR

CONDITIONING (HVAC)

23 05 11 Common Work Results for HVAC 02-20 23 05 12 General Motor Requirements for HVAC and St eam

Generation Equipment 02-20

23 05 41 Noise and Vibration Control for HVAC Pipin g and Equipment

02-20

23 05 93 Testing, Adjusting, and Balancing for HVAC 02-20 23 07 11 HVAC and Boiler Plant Insulation 02-20 23 08 00 Commissioning of HVAC Systems 02-20 23 09 23 Direct-Digital Control System for HVAC 08- 20

00 01 10-4

SECTION NO. DIVISION AND SECTION TITLES DATE

23 21 13 Hydronic Piping 02-20 23 21 23 Hydronic Pumps 02-20 23 31 00 HVAC Ducts and Casings 02-20 23 34 00 HVAC Fans 02-20 23 36 00 Air Terminal Units 02-20 23 37 00 Air Outlets and Inlets 02-20 23 74 13 Packaged, Outdoor, Central-Station Air-Han dling Units 03-20

DIVISION 25 – INTEGRATED AUTOMATION – Not used

DIVISION 26 – ELECTRICAL

26 05 11 Requirements for Electrical Installations 01-16 26 05 19 Low-Voltage Electrical Power Conductors an d Cables 01-17 26 05 26 Grounding and Bonding for Electrical Syste ms 01-17 26 05 33 Raceway and Boxes for Electrical Systems 0 1-18 26 08 00 Commissioning of Electrical Systems 11-16 26 09 23 Lighting Controls 01-18 26 22 00 Low-Voltage Transformers 01-18 26 24 16 Panelboards 01-18 26 27 26 Wiring Devices 01-18 26 29 11 Motor Controllers 01-18 26 29 21 Enclosed Switches and Circuit Breakers 01- 17 26 41 00 Facility Lightning Protection 01-17 26 51 00 Interior Lighting 01-18 26 56 00 Exterior Lighting 01-18

DIVISION 27 – COMMUNICATIONS

27 05 11 Requirements for Communications Installati ons 09-19 27 05 26 Grounding and Bonding for Communications S ystems 06-15 27 05 33 Raceways and Boxes for Communications Syst ems 10-18 27 08 00 Commissioning of Communications Systems 11 -16 27 10 00 Control, Communication and Signal Wiring 0 6-15 27 15 00 Communications Structured Cabling 01-16 27 21 29 Data Communication Network Equipment 27 51 16 Public Address and Mass Notification Syste ms 10-18 27 52 23 Nurse Call and Code Blue Systems 12-20

DIVISION 28 – ELECTRONIC SAFETY AND SECURITY

28 05 00 Common Work Results for Electronic Safety and Security 04-18 28 05 13 Conductors and Cables for Electronic Safet y and

Security 10-18

28 05 26 Grounding and Bonding for Electronic Safet y and Security

09-11

00 01 10-5

SECTION NO. DIVISION AND SECTION TITLES DATE

28 05 28.33 Conduits and Backboxes for Electronic S afety and Security

09-11

28 13 00 Physical Access Control System 10-11 28 21 13 Video Surveillance System 28 31 00 Fire Detection and Alarm 10-11

DIVISION 31 – EARTHWORK

31 20 11 Earthwork (Short Form) 10-12

DIVISION 32 – EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS

32 05 23 Cement and Concrete for Exterior Improveme nts 08-16 32 90 00 Planting 08-16

DIVISION 33 – UTILITIES

33 40 00 Storm Sewer Utilities 12-17

DIVISION 34 – TRANSPORTATION -Not used

DIVISION 48 – Electrical Power Generation – Not use d

RENOVATE PRIMARY CARE for PACT BLDG 340, BLDG 341 - DAYTON VA MEDICAL CENTER –

CONSTRUCTION – ISSUED FOR BID

00 01 15-1

SECTION 00 01 15

LIST OF DRAWING SHEETS

The drawings listed below accompanying this specifi cation form a part of the contract.

Drawing No. Title

GENERAL

GI-100 COVER

GI-101 ABBREVIATIONS, LEGENDS AND SYMBOLS

GI-102 LIFE SAFETY PLAN - PHASE 1

GI-103 LIFE SAFETY PLAN - PHASE 2 & 3

GI-104 FIRST FLOOR PHASING PLAN

GI-105 FIRST FLOOR PHASING PLAN - PHASE 1

GI-106 FIRST FLOOR PHASING PLAN - PHASE 2

GI-107 FIRST FLOOR PHASING PLAN - PHASE 3

GI-110 FIRE STOPPING DETAILS

GI-111 FIRE STOPPING DETAILS

GI-112 FIRE STOPPING DETAILS

GI-113 FIRE STOPPING DETAILS

GI-114 FIRE STOPPING DETAILS

GI-115 FIRE STOPPING DETAILS

CIVIL

TS TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY

CD-100 DEMOLITION PLAN

CS-100 GEOMETRIC PLAN

CU-100 GRADING & UTILITY PLAN

CN-100 NOTES

CI-100 DETAILS

ARCHITECTURAL

AD-200 FIRST FLOOR DEMOLITION PLAN - PHASE 1

AD-201 FIRST FLOOR DEMOLITION PLAN - PHASE 2

AD-202 FIRST FLOOR DEMOLITION PLAN - PHASE 3

AD-203 FIRST FLOOR DEMOLITION CEILING PLAN - PHASE 1

AD-204 FIRST FLOOR DEMOLITION CEILING PLAN - PHASE 2

AD-205 FIRST FLOOR DEMOLITION CEILING PLAN - PHASE 3

AD-206 ROOF DEMOLITION PLAN

00 01 15-2

AD-210 DEMOLITION ELEVATIONS AND SECTIONS - PHASES 1

& 2

AE-300 FIRST FLOOR DIMENSION PLAN - PHASE 1

AE-301 FIRST FLOOR DIMENSION PLAN - PHASE 2

AE-302 FIRST FLOOR DIMENSION PLAN - PHASE 3

AE-303 FIRST FLOOR REFLECTED CEILING PLAN - PHASE 1

AE-304 FIRST FLOOR REFLECTED CEILING PLAN - PHASE 2

AE-305 FIRST FLOOR REFLECTED CEILING PLAN - PHASE 3

AE-306 FIRST FLOOR REFLECTED CEILING PLAN - PHASE 1

ALTERNATIVES

AE-307 ROOF PLAN

AE-308 FIRST FLOOR PATTERN PLAN

AE-309 FIRST FLOOR FURNITURE PLAN (FOR REFERENCE

ONLY)

AE-310 FIRST FLOOR EQUIPMENT PLAN - PHASE 1

AE-311 FIRST FLOOR EQUIPMENT PLAN - PHASE 2

AE-312 FIRST FLOOR EQUIPMENT PLAN - PHASE 3

AE-313 FIRST FLOOR SIGNAGE PLAN

AE-314 ENLARGED PLANS

AE-400 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS

AE-500 BUILDING SECTIONS

AE-501 WALL SECTIONS

AE-502 WALL SECTIONS

AE-503 WALL SECTIONS

AE-504 WALL SECTIONS

AE-510 TYPICAL INTERIOR DETAILS

AE-511 SECTION DETAILS

AE-512 SECTION DETAILS

AE-513 SECTION DETAILS

AE-514 SECTION DETAILS

AE-515 PLAN DETAILS

AE-516 PLAN DETAILS

AE-700 ENLARGED FLOOR PLANS AND INTERIOR ELEVATIONS

AE-701 ENLARGED FLOOR PLANS AND INTERIOR ELEVATIONS

AE-800 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS - PHASE 1

AE-801 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS - PHASE 1

AE-802 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS - PHASE 2

AE-810 MILLWORK & INTERIOR DETAILS

AE-811 INTERIOR PERSPECTIVES

AE-1000 DOOR SCHEDULES AND DETAILS

AE-1001 FINISH SCHEDULE AND DETAILS

AE-1002 INTERIOR SIGN SCHEDULE

00 01 15-3

AE-1010 PARTITION TYPES

STRUCTURAL

SS-001 GENERAL NOTES

SS-002 GENERAL NOTES

SS-100 FOUNDATION PLAN

SS-100A PHASE II FOUNDATION PLAN

SS-101 ROOF FRAMING PLAN

SS-200 TYPICAL FOUNDATION DETAILS

SS-201 FOUNDATION SECTIONS

SS-300 TYPICAL COLD FORMED FRAMING DETAILS

SS-400 TYPICAL STEEL FRAMING DETAILS

SS-401 FRAMING SECTIONS

FIRE PROTECTION

FJ-100 FIRE SUPPRESSION GENERAL NOTES, SYMBOL LEGEN D AND DETAILS

FD-100 DEMOLITION - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - FIRE PROTECT ION

FX-100 FIRST FLOOR PLAN - FIRE SUPPRESSION PHASE 1

FX-101 FIRST FLOOR PLAN - FIRE SUPPRESSION PHASE 2

FX-102 FIRST FLOOR PLAN - FIRE SUPPRESSION PHASE 3

PLUMBING

PJ-100 PLUMBING GENERAL NOTES, SYMBOL LEGEND AND SCHEDULES

PJ-101 PLUMBING DETAILS

PD-100 DEMOLITION - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - PLUMBING (SA NITARY) PHASE

PD-101 DEMOLITION - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - PLUMBING (WA TER) PHASE 1

PD-102 DEMOLITION - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - PLUMBING (SA NITARY) PHASE

PD-103 DEMOLITION - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - PLUMBING (WA TER) PHASE 2

PD-104 DEMOLITION - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - PLUMBING (SA NITARY) PHASE

PD-105 DEMOLITION - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - PLUMBING (WA TER) PHASE 3

PL-100 SANITARY - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - PLUMBING PHASE 1

PL-101 WATER - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - PLUMBING PHASE 1

PL-102 SANITARY - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - PLUMBING PHASE 2

PL-103 WATER - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - PLUMBING PHASE 2

PL-104 SANITARY - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - PLUMBING PHASE 3

PL-105 WATER - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - PLUMBING PHASE 3

MECHANICAL

00 01 15-4

MJ-100 MECHANICAL GENERAL NOTES AND SYMBOL LEGEND

MJ-101 MECHANICAL DETAILS

MJ-102 MECHANICAL DETAILS

MJ-103 MECHANICAL SCHEDULES

MI-100 MECHANICAL TEMPERATURE CONTROLS

MD-100 DEMOLITION - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - HVAC (DUCTWO RK) PHASE 1

MD-101 DEMOLITION - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - HVAC (PIPING ) PHASE 1

MD-102 DEMOLITION - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - HVAC (DUCTWO RK) PHASE 2

MD-103 DEMOLITION - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - HVAC (PIPING ) PHASE 2

MD-104 DEMOLITION - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - HVAC (DUCTWO RK) PHASE 3

MH-100 DUCTWORK - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - HVAC PHASE 1

MH-101 ROOF PLAN - HVAC PHASE 1

MH-102 DUCTWORK - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - HVAC PHASE 2

MH-103 DUCTWORK - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - HVAC PHASE 3

MP-100 PIPING - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - HVAC PHASE 1

MP-101 PIPING - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - HVAC PHASE 2

MP-102 PIPING - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - HVAC PHASE 3

ELECTRICAL

EJ-100 ELECTRICAL GENERAL NOTES AND SYMBOL LEGEND

EJ-101 LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE AND DETAILS

EJ-102 MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT AND PANELBOARD SCHEDULE

EJ-103 PANELBOARD SCHEDULES

EJ-104 ELECTRICAL DETAILS

ED-100 DEMOLITION - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - ELECTRICAL P HASE 1

ED-101 DEMOLITION - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - ELECTRICAL P HASE 2

ED-102 DEMOLITION - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - ELECTRICAL P HASE 3

EL-100 LIGHTING - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - ELECTRICAL PHA SE 1

EL-100A LIGHTING - FIRST FLOOR PLAN ALTERNATES - EL ECTRICAL

EL-101 LIGHTING - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - ELECTRICAL PHA SE 2

EL-102 LIGHTING - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - ELECTRICAL PHA SE 3

EP-100 POWER - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - ELECTRICAL PHASE 1

EP-100A PARTIAL FIRST FLOOR PLAN - ELECTRICAL

EP-101 POWER - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - ELECTRICAL PHASE 2

EP-102 POWER - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - ELECTRICAL PHASE 3

EP-103 POWER - ROOF PLAN - ELECTRICAL PHASE 1

EY-001 AUXILIARY SYSTEMS DETAILS - ELECTRICAL

EY-100 AUXILIARY SYSTEMS - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - ELECT RICAL PHASE 1

EY-101 AUXILIARY SYSTEMS - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - ELECT RICAL PHASE 2

EY-102 AUXILIARY SYSTEMS - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - ELECT RICAL PHASE 3

00 01 15-5

ET-001 TELECOM DETAILS

ET-100 TELECOM - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - ELECTRICAL PHAS E 1

ET-101 TELECOM - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - ELECTRICAL PHAS E 2

ET-102 TELECOM - FIRST FLOOR PLAN - ELECTRICAL PHAS E 3

- - - E N D - - -

CBLH

00 31 32 - 1

DOCUMENT 00 31 32

GEOTECHNICAL DATA

PART 1- GENERAL

1.1 DESCRIPTION:

A. This Document with its referenced attachment is part of the Procurement and Contracting Requirements for Project. They provide Owner's information for Bidders' convenience and are intended to supplement rather than serve in lieu of Bidders' own investigations. They are made available for Bidders' convenience and information, but are not a warranty of existing conditions. This Document and its attachments are not part of the Contract Documents.

- - - E N D - - -

Geotechnical Exploration Report

Dayton VAMC PACT Addition

Dayton, Ohio

S&ME Project No. 1178-20-008

PREPARED FOR:

CBLH Design, Inc.

7850 Freeway Circle

Cleveland, Ohio 44130

PREPARED BY:

S&ME, Inc.

862 East Crescentville Road

Cincinnati, OH 45246

April 2, 2020

S&ME, Inc. | 862 East Crescentville Road | Cincinnati, OH 45246 | p 513.771.8471 | www.smeinc.com

April 2, 2020

CBLH Design, Inc.

7850 Freeway Circle

Cleveland, Ohio 44130

Attention: Mr. Mike Serdinak, AIA, EDAC mserdinak@cblhdesign.com

Reference: Geotechnical Exploration Report

Dayton VAMC PACT Addition

Dayton, Ohio

S&ME Project No. 1178-20-008

Dear Mr. Serinak:

S&ME, Inc. (S&ME) is pleased to submit the results of our geotechnical exploration and laboratory services completed for the proposed PACT Addition at the Dayton VA Medical Center in Dayton, Ohio. The purpose of our project was to explore subsurface conditions at the site, evaluate those conditions, and provide recommendations for site preparation and foundations. We conducted this project in general accordance with our Proposal No. 11-

200006B, dated January 13, 2020, which was authorized by CBLH Design, Inc. (CBLH) on January 29, 2020. This report presents our understanding of the project, documents our findings, and presents our conclusions and geotechnical engineering recommendations.

S&ME appreciates the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. We look forward to helping you through project completion. If you have any questions, please call us at 513-771-8471.

Sincerely, S&ME, Inc.

Rebecca E. Scherzinger, E.I. Benjamin C. Dusina, P.E.

Staff Professional II Senior Engineer

Dayton, Ohio

S&ME Project No. 1178-20-008

April 2, 2020 ii

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction

2.0 Site and Project Description

3.0 Site Geology

4.0 Exploration and Testing

4.1 Field Exploration

4.2 Laboratory Testing

5.0 Subsurface Conditions

6.0 Geotechnical Considerations

6.1 Geotechnical Evaluation

6.1.1 Existing Fill Material

6.1.2 Existing Utilities

6.1.3 Overexcavations

6.2 Stripping and Site Preparation

6.3 Structural Fill

6.4 Water Management

6.5 Excavation Considerations

6.6 Foundation Recommendations

6.6.1 Shallow Spread Foundations

6.6.2 General Foundation Considerations

6.7 Seismic Site Classification

6.8 Floor Slab Recommendations

6.9 Pavement Subgrade Recommendations

7.0 Follow Up Services

8.0 Final Considerations and Report Limitations

Dayton, Ohio

S&ME Project No. 1178-20-008

April 2, 2020 iii

List of Tables Table 4-1 – Summary of Unconfined Compressive Strength Testing

Table 5-1 – Summary of Subsurface Conditions

Appendices Appendix I – Additional Figures

Appendix II – Soil Boring Logs

Appendix III – Laboratory Testing

Appendix IV – ACI 302.1R-96 Form

Dayton, Ohio

S&ME Project No. 1178-20-008

April 2, 2020 1

1.0 Introduction

S&ME is pleased to submit the results of our geotechnical exploration completed for the proposed PACT Addition at the Dayton VA Medical Center in Dayton, Ohio. The purpose of our project was to explore subsurface conditions at the site, evaluate those conditions, and provide recommendations for site preparation and foundations. This report presents our understanding of the project, documents our findings and presents our conclusions and geotechnical engineering recommendations.

2.0 Site and Project Description

The project site is located at the Dayton VA Medical Center in Dayton, Ohio, as shown on the vicinity map presented in Appendix I. The location of the proposed building addition is currently grass covered with some sections of concrete sidewalk. A Site Plan was provided by CBLH on January 8, 2020, which indicated the proposed addition will extend south of the existing Buildings 340 and 341. Concrete slab-on-grade is expected for the building floor. The site is generally flat with elevations around 973. A photograph of the site is provided below.

D a te

: 2 /3

/2

P h o to g ra p h e r:

R e b e cc a E

. S ch e rz in g e r, E I

Location / Orientation East End of Proposed Addition / Looking West

Remarks Location of proposed PACT Addition

Dayton, Ohio

S&ME Project No. 1178-20-008

April 2, 2020 2

3.0 Site Geology

Geologic mapping indicates the project site is within the Southern Ohio Loamy Till Plain physiographic region and the soils are loam till from the Wisconsinan age, up to 60 feet thick (Surficial geology of the Ohio portion of the

Dayton 30 x 60-minute quadrangle, Ohio Division of Geological Survey). The bedrock is the Sub-Lockport

Undifferentiated of the Silurian system (Reconnaissance Bedrock Geology of the Miamisburg, Ohio Quadrangle, Ohio Division of Geological Survey). Based on Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) well records, bedrock in this location is generally 15 to 30 feet below the existing ground surface. Bedrock was not encountered in the borings, however, borings B-303 and B-304 encountered split-spoon refusal (greater than 50 blows per 6-inch interval) at 18.6 feet below the existing ground surface. Bedrock was encountered within 20 feet of the existing grades at the nearby PET/CT project and in Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) well records near the project location.

4.0 Exploration and Testing

4.1 Field Exploration

On February 10 and 11, 2020 S&ME performed five (5) borings designated as B-301 through B-305 to investigate the existing soils for the proposed PACT Addition. The borings were located within the existing grass covered area south of Buildings 340 and 341. S&ME was provided with a topographic survey dated January 28, 2020.

Each of the borings were advanced to 15 to 20 feet below the surface, or spilt-spoon refusal, whichever was encountered first. The borings were performed with a Diedrich D-50 track mounted drill rig using a 3-1/4 inch I.D.

hollow-stem augers to advance the borings between sampling attempts. Disturbed, but representative soil samples were attempted at 2.5 foot intervals. This sampling was done by lowering a 2-inch O.D. split-barrel sampler through the augers to the bottom of the boring and then driving the sampler into the soil with blows from a 140-pound hammer freely falling 30 inches (ASTM D1586 - Standard Penetration Test). The hammer system on the drilling rig has been calibrated in accordance with ASTM D 4633 to determine the drill rod energy ratio of 77.8%. SPT samples were examined immediately after recovery and representative portions were preserved in airtight glass jars. Upon completion of each boring, the boreholes were backfilled with soil cuttings. A

Plan of Borings showing the approximate locations of the borings is included as Figure 2 of Appendix I. Locations of the boring locations were estimated by S&ME using a hand held GPS (sub-meter horizontal accuracy) and ground surface elevations were interpolated from the provided topographic survey.

In the field, experienced personnel from S&ME supervised the drilling as well as performed the following specific duties: preserved all recovered samples; prepared a log of each boring; made seepage and groundwater observations; obtained hand-penetrometer measurements in soil samples exhibiting cohesion; and, contacted the

Project Engineer so that the program of explorations could be modified, if necessary, because of unanticipated conditions. All samples were transported to the laboratory of S&ME for further identification and testing.

Dayton, Ohio

S&ME Project No. 1178-20-008

April 2, 2020 3

4.2 Laboratory Testing

The recovered soil samples were returned to our laboratory, and visually classified by a geotechnical engineer in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D2487). Natural moisture content determinations, Atterberg limit tests, grain size analysis, and unconfined compression tests were also performed on selected sampled to aid in classification and the evaluation of the engineering properties of the soil.

Based on the results of the laboratory testing program, the soil descriptions on the boring logs were modified, if necessary, and the laboratory-corrected logs of the borings are submitted as Plates 2 through 5 in Appendix II.

The boring logs include: descriptions of the soil stratigraphy encountered; depths at which samples were procured; groundwater observations; and, values of hand-penetrometer measurements made on soil samples exhibiting cohesion.

The obtained laboratory data and descriptions of these tests are included in Appendix III. A summary of the unconfined compressive strength testing is provided in the table below.

Table 4-1 – Summary of Unconfined Compressive Strength Testing

Boring Number Sample Depth (ft) Soil Description

Unconfined

Compressive

Strength (psf)

B-303 6 to 8 Brown Lean Clay (CL) 1,888

B-304 8 to 9 Brown Silty Clay (CL-ML) 3,195

5.0 Subsurface Conditions

Each of the borings were drilled through the grass area adjacent to the existing buildings. Surficial materials consisted on approximately 12 inches of topsoil/rootmat. Below the surficial material, existing fill was encountered in each of the borings except B-302. The existing fill ranged from 3 to 8.5 feet below the existing ground surface.

The fill was described as soft to very-stiff brown and gray Lean Clay (CL).

Natural soils encountered in the borings generally consisted of cohesive soils to depths of 15 to 18.6 feet. The cohesive soils were typically described as firm to hard brown and gray Lean Clay (CL) and Silty Clay (CL-ML). Hand penetrometer test values were typically between 0.75 and 4.5+ tons per square foot (tsf). Bedrock was not encountered in the borings, however, borings B-303 and B-304 encountered split-spoon refusal (greater than 50 blows per 6-inch interval) at 18.6 feet below the existing ground surface. Bedrock was encountered within 20 feet of the existing grades at the nearby PET/CT project and in Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) well records near the project location. The ODNR wells encountered bedrock approximately 15 to 30 feet below the existing ground surface.

For further detail of subsurface conditions encountered, refer to the individual boring logs presented on in

Appendix II. The stratum lines shown on the boring logs should be considered approximate. The following table summarizes the groundwater conditions and existing fill depths encountered in each boring.

Dayton, Ohio

S&ME Project No. 1178-20-008

April 2, 2020 4

Table 5-1 – Summary of Subsurface Conditions

Boring

Number

Groundwater at Completion

(ft)

Depth of

Existing Fill (ft)

Depth to

Sampler Refusal

(ft)

B-301 Dry 8.5 Not Encountered

B-302 Dry Not Encountered Not Encountered

B-303 Dry 5.3 18.6

B-304 Dry 3 18.6

B-305 Dry 6 Not Encountered

6.0 Geotechnical Considerations

6.1 Geotechnical Evaluation

Our conclusions and recommendations are based on the design information furnished to us by CBLH and our past experience at the Medical Center. They do not reflect variations in the subsurface conditions which may exist between our borings and in unexplored areas of the site.

In general, the natural firm to hard cohesive soils encountered at the site are considered suitable for support of the proposed structures provided that the necessary site preparation for foundation and slab support is performed as described in this report. However, it is our opinion that the construction costs for the project will be impacted by the following:

6.1.1 Existing Fill Material

Existing fill was encountered to depths ranging from 3 to 8.5 feet beneath the existing ground surface in each of the borings (except B-302) advanced during this exploration. The fill generally consisted of soft to very stiff Lean

Clay (CL). No information was available regarding the history of the placement of the fill and, therefore, it is not known whether the fill was placed with compaction and control. The borings where existing fill was encountered are near existing utilities, and it is possible this existing fill was used to backfill utility trenches. The existing fill may remain below foundations if it is discontinuous (i.e., trench backfill). Based on our experience with uncontrolled fill, it is our opinion that foundations and floor slabs constructed on existing fill will be susceptible to unpredictable total and differential settlements which can lead to cracking in the concrete. Therefore, S&ME recommends one of the following options be considered for the treatment of existing fill within the building addition footprint:

Recommendations to Minimize Risk of Settlement – To minimize the potential for differential settlement of the planned foundations and floor slab, it is recommended to remove any existing fill and buried topsoil encountered within the footprint of the proposed structure and 5 feet beyond the edges of the structure footprint to expose the suitable underlying natural firm to hard cohesive soils. Based on the borings performed for this exploration, the proposed building footprint, and the estimated FFE, it is recommended that all of the existing fill will be removed to obtain the proposed grade. The

Dayton, Ohio

S&ME Project No. 1178-20-008

April 2, 2020 5 overexcavation of the existing fill should be backfilled in a controlled manner up to the proposed building pad subgrade elevation. Provided new fill is placed and compacted in a controlled manner in accordance with the recommendations given in the Section 6.2 of this report, the proposed structure foundations and floor slab may then be supported on newly-placed controlled fill.

Alternative Recommendation for Floor Slab Support – As an alternative to complete removal and replacement of the existing fill material, the Owner could consider leaving the existing fill in place for support of the floor slab if the subgrade is deemed suitable via a favorable proofroll. With this approach, the interior and exterior foundations excavations should be extended through the existing fill and bear on natural stiff to hard cohesive soil. The Owner should be made aware that there is a potential risk of differential settlement of the floor slab supported on fill that may not have been controlled. The amount of settlement cannot be quantified in existing uncontrolled fill. Recommendations to prepare and stabilize the building subgrade to help minimize extraordinary and abrupt differential floor settlements will be provided in later sections of this report.

6.1.2 Existing Utilities

Based on the Utility Plan provided, there are several underground utilities in the vicinity of the planned construction. These utilities may need to be relocated prior to foundation excavations. It is our experience that old utilities are poorly backfilled. Expect that the backfill used around underground utility lines and structures may need to be removed and replaced with compacted soil in accordance with the recommendations presented later in this report. The excavated material may be re-used as structural fill, provided it meets the criteria for structural fill presented Section 6.3 of this report.

6.1.3 Overexcavations

As described above and in subsequent section of this report, existing fill was encountered in each of the borings

(except B-302) performed for this exploration. Therefore, during foundation construction, overexcavations to extend shallow spread footings through existing fill or weak soil should be expected if the foundations are to be supported on natural soils. Recommendations for overexcavations are provided in Section 6.6 of this report.

6.2 Stripping and Site Preparation

To prepare the site for construction, strip and remove the topsoil/rootmat from the project area. Previously unexplored or unknown conditions could become evident during these operations to assess that adequate (but not excessive) material has been stripped. We must judge whether the recommendations in this report should be modified in view of the conditions encountered.

The existing fill should be removed and replaced from within the limits of the proposed building footprints unless the Owner is willing to accept the risk of differential settlement occurring beneath the new building floor slab (see

Section 6.1 of this report).

After stripping and removal of existing fill, the exposed soil areas that are to receive structural fill or subbase stone should be evaluated by an S&ME engineer or representative by observing proof-rolling. Proof-rolling consists of applying repeated passes (4 to 5 passes) on the subgrade with a loaded dump truck, or similar rubber tired

Dayton, Ohio

S&ME Project No. 1178-20-008

April 2, 2020 6 vehicle. Any materials judged to deflect excessively under the wheel loads should be undercut to more stable soils or remediated as recommended by the S&ME Engineer. If the subgrade is not accessible to a proof-roll, then the subgrade should be visually observed and probed by an experienced Geotechnical Technician to assist in identifying any soft or weak zones. It is recommended that any observed unsuitable materials, or subgrade soils which exhibit significant pumping and/or rutting during proof-rolling, either be scarified, aerated and compacted or completely removed and replaced with newly placed and compacted structural fill in accordance with recommendations presented in this report. Visual observation of the removal of these unsuitable materials by a representative of S&ME may result in at least a partial reduction of the necessary undercutting in these areas.

Once the area has been observed by S&ME, and remediated if necessary, fill material can be placed to the desired grades.

6.3 Structural Fill

S&ME recommends that suitable structural soil fill be defined as inorganic natural soil with a maximum particle size of 3 inches, a maximum dry density of at least 100 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) when tested by the standard

Proctor method (ASTM D698), and a plasticity index (PI) less than 30 percent. The existing fill soils encountered in our borings are generally suitable for re-use as structural fill provided the recommendations in this section are followed, however standard Proctor testing and Atterberg limits testing of reused fill soils is recommended to ensure unsuitable soils are not encountered during overexcavation.

Structural fill placed within three feet of the design subgrade elevation in the building area, should not consist of high plasticity clay. High plasticity clay is general characterized as having a plasticity index greater than 30. Higher plasticity clay may be used when more than three feet below the design subgrade elevation. For example, in the case of a five foot fill within the building footprint, the lower two feet of fill may consist of higher plasticity clay;

however, the upper three feet of new fill below the subgrade should consist of compacted lower plasticity clay or a dense graded aggregate (DGA).

During construction, standard Proctor testing and Atterberg limits testing of proposed fill soils should be performed by S&ME for compliance with the project specifications before they are used as fill material. If soils are imported to the site, we recommend that the soils be tested for conformance with the project specifications before being transported to the site. Please realize that the laboratory conformance testing usually takes three to four business days to complete. Therefore, the Contractor should plan accordingly.

Structural fill placement should occur in relatively thin (6 to 8-inch maximum) layers and be compacted to at least

98 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density beneath new floor slabs and foundations, and to at least

95 percent of the standard Proctor maximum dry density beneath the proposed pavement areas. The moisture content of the fill should be maintained within 3 percent of the soil’s optimum moisture content even though compaction may be achieved at moisture contents outside the specified range.

In-place density testing must be performed on structural fill to confirm that the recommended compaction criteria have been achieved. This allows our project engineer to monitor the quality of the fill construction and assess that the design criterion is being achieved in the field. We further recommend that these tests be performed on a full-time basis by S&ME. The testing frequency for density tests performed on a full-time basis may then be determined by our personnel based on the area to be tested, the grading equipment used, project specifications, Dayton, Ohio

S&ME Project No. 1178-20-008

April 2, 2020 7 and construction schedule. Tests should be performed at vertical intervals of 8-inches or less (the recommended lift thickness) as the fill is being placed.

6.4 Water Management

The on-site soils (both natural and existing fill) are sensitive to changes in moisture content. If grading operations are performed during periods of wet weather, these materials will not perform satisfactorily with regard to site access and stability. If the site soils become wet during construction, the owner should retain S&ME to send an

Engineer to the site to assess the area and make recommendations for remediation.

The contractor should make provisions to direct water away from the excavations during construction via site grading, drainage ditches, sump pits, etc. Water should never be allowed to pond in or around the foundation and floor slab excavations.

At the discretion of the S&ME Engineer, probing or excavation of shallow test pits may be requested, based on the observed conditions at the time of construction. To reduce, but not eliminate, access problems associated with the on-site soils, we recommend that the earthwork portion of this project be performed during the warm, dry summer months of the year.

For any below grade excavations, subsurface water may seasonally impact the excavations. We recommend the design include provisions such as foundation drains tied to nearby storm sewer systems or sump pits and sump pumps to discharge any water that may infiltrate the below grade portion of the structures. We further recommend the below grade portions of the building be waterproofed.

6.5 Excavation Considerations

All excavations and corresponding construction for the project site must be performed without endangering the construction workers. Therefore, in accordance with OHSA Trench/Excavation Regulations (OSHA 29 CFR Part

1926), any excavations exceeding a depth of four feet for which workers will be entering the excavation/trench, the excavation sides must be sloped to the required maximum inclination or flatter (based on the soil type and strength) or braced.

The existing fill and natural firm to very-stiff clay soil encountered in the borings at the project site to a maximum depth of 20 feet should be considered as an OSHA Type C soil. Therefore, the maximum slope inclination for Type

B soils should be 1.5 Horizontal to 1 Vertical (1.5H: 1V) unless properly supported. S&ME recommends that the actual excavation slope layback be based upon the soil conditions encountered during the excavation, as evaluated by a "Competent Person" in accordance with OSHA regulations.

6.6 Foundation Recommendations

Existing fill was encountered to depths ranging from 3 to 8.5 feet in the borings performed for this exploration within the new building footprint. The existing fill was placed in an unknown manner; however, the existing fill was relatively consistent and comprised of firm to very-stiff lean clay, with the exception of B-301 which was soft. The planned building foundations will likely encounter existing fill at the planned bearing elevations (designed for typical frost depths).

Dayton, Ohio

S&ME Project No. 1178-20-008

April 2, 2020 8

6.6.1 Shallow Spread Foundations

To minimize settlement of shallow spread foundations to support to proposed building, S&ME recommends that all existing fill material be removed from within the building footprints and 5 feet beyond the footprint until suitable natural material is encountered. Based on the boring data, this will require excavation depths of approximately 3 to 8.5 feet.

S&ME recommends that shallow spread foundations bearing in stiff to very-stiff cohesive soil or newly placed and compacted structural fill be proportioned based on a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf). Exterior foundations should be placed at least 36 inches below finished exterior grades in accordance with local codes for frost penetration while the interior column pads may bear at minimum practical depths. A minimum foundation width of 24 inches for wall foundations and 36 inches for column foundations are recommended, regardless of calculated size. Foundations designed and constructed in accordance with the foregoing recommendations and procedures will have a factor of safety of at least 3 with respect to shearing strength.

If existing fill or weaker soils are present at or just below the proposed bottom of foundation elevation, the material should be overexcavated and the foundation lowered to more suitable soils, or the overexcavation below the plan foundation bearing elevation should be filled with low strength concrete or controlled density fill (CDF) having a minimum 28-day compressive strength of at least 100 psi. The determination of removal of weak foundation bearing soils should be made by an S&ME representative present during foundation excavations.

We recommend that foundation excavations be cut neat and the foundation concrete placed directly against the trench sidewalls, whenever possible. The foundation excavations should be free of loose soil and debris, as well as free of water or frozen soil at the time of concrete placement. We recommend that the ground surface adjacent to the foundation excavations be graded to prevent surface water runoff from entering the footing excavations. It should be noted that the on-site cohesive soils, when exposed to standing water, will absorb moisture and result in a decrease in strength and an increase in compressibility. Therefore, these conditions should be prevented from occurring and it is recommended that all foundation excavations be poured the same day as excavated.

6.6.2 General Foundation Considerations

Structural loading information was not available at the time of this report; however, for the proposed structures it is anticipated that foundation settlements for the proposed structures will be within tolerable ranges (less than 1-inch of total settlement and differential settlements not exceeding 1/2-inch) provided the site preparation and foundation construction are performed in accordance with the recommendations provided in this report.

All foundation excavations should be observed by an S&ME representative to assess whether suitable bearing soils are present and capable of supporting the foundation loads as designed, and to reduce the amount of overexcavation required during excavation if existing fill or weak soils are encountered.

Dayton, Ohio

S&ME Project No. 1178-20-008

April 2, 2020 9

6.7 Seismic Site Classification

Based on the subsurface stratigraphy encountered within the borings at the project site, the encountered depth to bedrock, and the estimated stratigraphy between the bottoms of the borings and 100 feet below existing grades, it is the opinion of S&ME that the project site is best characterized by the Ohio Building Code site class D.

6.8 Floor Slab Recommendations

Dependent upon final grading, it is anticipated that the proposed floor slab will generally be supported on either newly placed and compacted fill comprised of on-site soils, or existing fill left in place. On this basis, concrete floors may be designed as slabs-on-grade utilizing a Modulus of Subgrade Reaction of 110 pounds per cubic inch

(pci). If the existing fill is left in-place, there is a potential for differential settlement and slab cracking.

We recommend that control joints be placed in the slab around columns and along footing supported walls to reduce cracking due to shrinkage during curing. We suggest a layer of compacted dense graded aggregate (DGA) directly beneath the slab to enhance support and provide a working base for construction of the floor slab. The actual DGA thickness should be based on the floor slab design, but our experience suggests a minimum depth of

4 inches. The DGA should be moist, but not wet, as the concrete is placed to reduce curling of the slab as the concrete cures. We recommend that ACI 302.1R-96 “GUIDE FOR CONCRETE FLOOR AND SLAB CONSTRUCTION” be followed for design and placement of concrete floor slabs. A copy of ACI 302.1R-96 is included in Appendix IV of this report for your use.

Between completion of grading and slab construction, floor slab subgrades are often disturbed by weather, footing and utility line installation, and other construction activities. For this reason, the subgrade should be evaluated by an S&ME engineer immediately prior to constructing the slab. It is recommended that final subgrade preparations be performed immediately prior to the placement of the granular base material to minimize damage to the subgrade from repeated construction traffic and/or exposure to weather.

Proofrolling operations should be performed on the final subgrades to expose any soft or unsuitable bearing materials which may have developed during construction as a result of heavy construction traffic. We recommend that the proofrolling operations be performed using a fully-loaded, tandem-axle dump truck. Any soft or unsuitable material exhibiting rutting, yielding, and/or pumping during the proofroll should be either undercut to a firm bearing material and be replaced with engineered fill to re-establish final subgrade. If the subgrade is not evaluated by an S&ME engineer prior to concrete placement, S&ME must be held harmless for any claims due to poor performance of the floor slab.

6.9 Pavement Subgrade Recommendations

Prior to pavement construction, any topsoil, organic material, existing pavement, existing fill, or other unsuitable material should be removed from proposed parking areas and driveways and the pavement subgrades should be prepared as described in the Section 6.2 of this report. It is anticipated that the subgrade for the paved parking and drive areas within the project area will consist of native soils or newly placed controlled fill deemed suitable for pavement support following favorable proofrolling. Based on laboratory classification tests performed on the near surface cohesive soils and published correlations, a CBR (California Bearing Ratio) value of 5 percent may be used for the design of pavements to be placed on these materials.

Dayton, Ohio

S&ME Project No. 1178-20-008

April 2, 2020 10

In addition to proper subgrade preparation, we recommend that the pavement design and construction include surface and subsurface drainage measures. Water which infiltrates the pavement and remains trapped within the pavement components during traffic loading is one of the leading causes of premature pavement failure.

Effective design measures include the use of finger drains below pavements and/or the use of perimeter swales, perimeter edge drains, curbs, or a combination of these features to collect surface water runoff from areas adjacent to the pavement. Cohesive subgrade soils should be crowned or sloped to promote drainage of infiltrating water towards subsurface drainage collection systems. Pavement design recommendations are beyond the scope of services for this report.

7.0 Follow Up Services

Our services should not end with the submission of this geotechnical report. S&ME should be kept involved throughout the design and construction process to maintain continuity and to assess whether our recommendations are properly interpreted and implemented. To achieve this, we should be retained to review project plans and specifications with the designers to see that our recommendations are fully incorporated. We also should be retained to observe and test the site preparation, foundation construction, and building construction. If we are not allowed the opportunity to continue our involvement on this project, we cannot be held responsible for the recommendations in this report.

Our familiarity with the site and with the foundation recommendations will make us a valuable part of your construction quality assurance team. In addition, a qualified engineering technician should observe and test all structural concrete and steel. Only experienced, qualified persons trained in geotechnical engineering and familiar with foundation construction should be allowed to evaluate and test foundation excavations. Normally, full-time observation of the site work and foundation installation is appropriate.

8.0 Final Considerations and Report Limitations

The analyses, conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on project information provided by CBLH. After the final design plans have been generated, S&ME should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications to verify that the intent of our engineering recommendations have been properly incorporated into the design documents. S&ME cannot assume responsibility or liability for the adequacy of recommendations if S&ME is not retained to review the final plans.

The contents of this report are also based on the subsurface conditions as they existed at the time of our field exploration, and further on the assumption that the exploratory borings are representative of actual subsurface conditions throughout the area investigated. It should be noted that actual subsurface conditions between and beyond the borings might differ from those encountered at the boring locations. If subsurface conditions encountered during construction vary from those discussed in this report, S&ME should be notified immediately so that we may evaluate the effects, if any, on design and construction.

We recommend that the Owner retain S&ME to continue our involvement in the project through the subsequent phases of design and construction. Our firm is not responsible for interpretation of the data contained in this report by others.

Dayton, Ohio

S&ME Project No. 1178-20-008

April 2, 2020 11

For more information on the use and limitations of this report, please read the Geoprofessional Business

Association (GBA) document that follows this page.

Geotechnical-Engineering Report

Geotechnical Services Are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of their clients. A geotechnical-engineering study conducted for a civil engineer may not fulfill the needs of a constructor — a construction contractor — or even another civil engineer. Because each geotechnical- engineering study is unique, each geotechnical-engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. No one except you should rely on this geotechnical-engineering report without first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one

— not even you — should apply this report for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated.

Read the Full Report Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical-engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary. Do not read selected elements only.

Geotechnical Engineers Base Each Report on a Unique Set of Project-Specific Factors Geotechnical engineers consider many unique, project-specific factors when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the client’s goals, objectives, and risk-management preferences; the general nature of the structure involved, its size, and configuration; the location of the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site improvements, such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless the geotechnical engineer who conducted the study specifically indicates otherwise, do not rely on a geotechnical-engineering report that was:

• not prepared for you;

• not prepared for your project;

• not prepared for the specific site explored; or

• completed before important project changes were made.

Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical-engineering report include those that affect:

• the function of the proposed structure, as when it’s changed from a parking garage to an office building, or from a light-industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse;

• the elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proposed structure;

• the composition of the design team; or

• project ownership.

As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project changes—even minor ones—and request an assessment of their impact.