Owners Project Requirements Volume 1 - RFP Amendment 0004 20201110.pdf

VOLUME 1

VOLUME 1 Project Design Intent Narratives

Division 1 Specifications

VOLUME 2 Technical Specifications 02 30 00- 23 82 39.16

VOLUME 3 Technical Specifications 26 05 19- 33 90 50

VOLUME 4 Appendices

VOLUME 5 Drawings

Monica Ponce de Leon Studio, Inc.

29 Stanhope Street rd

Floor

Boston, Massachusetts 02116

T 612 426 0995 F 617 426 0998 www.mpdlstudio.com

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED (SBU)

PROPERTY OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT

COPYING, DISSEMINATION, OR DISTRIBUTION OF

THIS DOCUMENT TO UNAUTHORIZED RECIPIENTS IS

PROHIBITED.

UNITED STATES LAND PORT OF ENTRY

MADAWASKA, MAINE

Final Bridging DocumentsOwner’s Project

Requirements

09.09.2020 10.30.2020

PatrickESbardelli Strikeout

JohnKMaurer Textbox RFP Amendment 0004 11/10/2020

JohnKMaurer Rectangle

GSA

Design & Construction

Division (1PCM)

Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr.

Federal Building, 11th Floor

10 Causeway Street

Boston, MA 02222

CBP

Thomas P. O’Neill Federal

Building 10 Causeway

Street, Room 801

Boston, MA 02222

MPdL Studio

ARCHITECTURE

29 Stanhope Street, 3 rd Floor

Boston, MA 02116

Landworks Studio

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

83 North Street

Salem, MA 01970

DuBois & King, Inc.

CIVIL & TRAFFIC ENGINEERING

36 Penn Plaza

Bangor, ME 04401

CSA Group

MECHANICAL/ELECTRICAL/PLUMBING

ENGINEERING/LEED ENGINEERING

55 Broadway, FL 14

New York, NY 10006

Simpson Gumpertz & Heger

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING

135 South LaSalle Street, Suite 3800

Chicago, IL 60603

Toscano Clements Taylor COST ESTIMATING

150 W. 30th Street, 7th Floor

New York, NY 10001

ACENTECH

SECURITY, ACOUSTIC AV/IT ENGINEERING

33 Moulton Street

Cambridge, MA 02138

Tillotson Design Associates

LIGHTING DESIGNER

40 Worth Street

Room 703

New York, NY 10013

MADAWASKA, ME

GSA PBS – REG 1

NME00012

VOLUME 1

SECTION 00 01 00- PERFORMANCE SPECIFCATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS

00 01 00 Table of Contents 00 01 01 Design Intent Narratives

DIVISION 01- GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

01 10 00 Summary 01 10 03 Summary of Work- DB Design Services for DB-B Project Delivery 01 14 00 Work Restrictions 01 24 00 Options 01 25 00 Substitution Procedures 01 29 00 Payment Procedures 01 30 00 Electronic Project Management (ePM) System 01 31 00 Project Management and Coordination 01 31 10 Critical Path Method (CPM) Scheduling 01 32 00 Construction Progress Documentation 01 32 20 Photographic Documentation 01 33 00 Submittal Procedures 01 36 00 Construction Operations Building information exchange (COBie) 01 40 00 Quality Assurance & Control Requirements 01 40 25 Quality Control Testing for Air Barrier System 01 40 50 System Quality Control 01 41 00 Structural Testing Laboratory Services 01 42 00 References 01 50 00 Temporary Facilities and Controls 01 56 39 Tree and Plant Protection 01 59 30 Security Regulations 01 59 50 Safety and Health 01 60 00 Product Requirements 01 70 00 Execution Requirements 01 73 10 Cutting and Patching 01 73 20 Selective Demolition 01 73 50 Fire Prevention Precautions for Hot Work 01 74 10 Construction Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) Management 01 74 19 Construction Nonhazardous Waste Management and Disposal 01 77 00 Closeout Procedures 01 78 10 Project Record Documents 01 78 22 Operation and Maintenance Documentation 01 81 11 Sustainable Design Requirements 01 91 13 General Commissioning Requirements 01 91 19 Building Enclosure Commissioning COBie- Information Delivery Plan (IDP) Template

VOLUME 2

DIVISION 02- EXISTING CONDITIONS

02 30 00 Subsurface Investigation

DIVISION 03- CONCRETE

03 30 00 Cast-In-Place Concrete 03 35 00 Concrete Finishing 03 45 00 Precast Architectural Concrete

DIVISION 05- METALS

05 12 00 Structural Steel 05 31 00 Metal Decking 05 40 00 Cold Formed Metal Framing

DIVISION 07- THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION

07 21 00 Insulation 07 22 20 Roof Boards 07 41 13 Standing Seam Metal Roof Panels 07 42 13 Metal Wall Panels 07 42 43 Composite Wall Panels 07 53 05 EPDM Thermoset Single Ply Roofing 07 62 10 Sheet Metal Flashing and Trim 07 65 26 Self-Adhering Sheet Flashing 07 72 33 Roof Hatches

DIVISION 08- OPENINGS

08 11 13 Hollow Metal Doors and Frames 08 44 13 Glazed Aluminum Curtain Walls

DIVISION 09- FINISHES

09 27 01 Gypsum Board Accessories 09 29 00 Gypsum Board

DIVISION 12- FURNISHINGS

12 24 13 Roller Window Shades 12 48 13 Entrance Floor Mats and Frames

DIVISION 21- FIRE SUPPRESSION EQUIPMENT

21 05 17 Sleeves and Sleeve Seals for Fire Suppression Piping

21 05 18 Escutcheons for Fire Suppression Piping 21 05 23 General Duty Valves for Water Based Fire Suppression Piping 21 05 29 Hangers and Supports for Fire Suppression Piping and Equipment 21 05 48 Vibration and Seismic Controls for Fire Suppression Piping and Equipment 21 05 53 Identification for Fire Suppression Piping and Equipment 21 11 00 Facility Fire Suppression Water Service Piping 21 11 19 Fire Department Connections 21 13 13 Wet-Pipe Sprinkler Systems 21 13 16 Dry-Pipe Sprinkler Systems

DIVISION 22- PLUMBING & PIPING SPECIALTIES

22 05 13 Common Motor Requirements for Plumbing Equipment 22 05 16 Expansion Fittings and Loops for Plumbing Piping 22 05 17 Sleeves and Sleeve Seals for Plumbing Piping 22 05 18 Escutcheons for Plumbing Piping 22 05 19 Meters and Gauges for Plumbing Piping 22 05 23 General Duty Valves for Plumbing Piping 22 05 29 Hangers and Supports for Plumbing Piping and Equipment 22 05 48 Vibration and Seismic Controls for Plumbing Piping and Equipment 22 05 53 Identification for Plumbing Piping and Equipment 22 07 19 Plumbing Piping Insulation 22 11 13 Facility Water Distribution Piping 22 11 16 Domestic Water Piping 22 11 19 Domestic Water Piping Specialties 22 13 13 Facility Sanitary Sewers 22 13 16 Sanitary Waste and Vent Piping 22 13 19 Sanitary Waste Piping Specialties 22 13 19.13 Sanitary Drains 22 13 23 Sanitary Waste Interceptors 22 14 13 Facility Storm Drainage Piping 22 14 23 Storm Drainage Piping Specialties 22 14 29 Sump Pumps 22 33 00 Electric, Domestic-Water Heaters 22 34 00 Fuel-Fired, Domestic Water Heaters 22 42 13.13 Commercial Water Closets 22 42 13.16 Commercial Urinals 22 42 16.13 Commercial Lavatories 22 42 16.16 Commercial Sinks 22 42 23 Commercial Showers 22 45 00 Emergency Plumbing Fixtures 22 46 00 Security Plumbing Fixtures

DIVISION 23- HEATING, VENTILATING, AND AIR-CONDITIOINING (HVAC)

23 05 13 Common Motor Requirement for HVAC Equipment 23 05 16 Expansion Fittings and Loops for HVAC Piping 23 05 17 Sleeves and Sleeve Seals for HVAC Piping

23 05 19 Meters and Gages for HVAC Piping 23 05 23 General-Duty Valves for HVAC Piping 23 05 29 Hangers and Supports for HVAC Piping and Equipment 23 05 33 Heat Tracing for HVAC Piping 23 05 48 Vibration and Seismic Controls for HVAC Piping and Equipment 23 05 53 Identification for HVAC Piping and Equipment 23 05 93 Testing, Adjusting, and Balancing for HVAC 23 07 13 Duct Insulation 23 07 16 HVAC Equipment Insulation 23 07 19 HVAC Piping Insulation 23 08 00 Commissioning of HVAC 23 09 00 Instrumentation and Control for HVAC 23 09 93 Sequence of Operations for HVAC Controls 23 11 13 Facility Fuel-Oil Piping 23 11 26 Facility Liquefied-Petroleum Gas Piping 23 12 13 Facility Fuel-Oil Pumps 23 13 13 Facility Underground Fuel-Oil, Storage Tanks 23 21 13 Hydronic Piping 23 21 13.13 Underground Hydronic Piping 23 21 16 Hydronic Piping Specialties 23 21 23 Hydronic Pumps 23 23 00 Refrigerant Piping 23 25 13 Water Treatment for Closed-Loop Hydronic Systems 23 31 13 Metal Ducts 23 33 00 Air Duct Accessories 23 34 16 Centrifugal HVAC Fans 23 34 23 HVAC Power Ventilators 23 37 13 Diffusers, Registers and Grilles 23 51 23 Gas Vents 23 52 16 Condensing Boilers 23 57 00 Heat Exchangers for HVAC 23 72 23.19 Packaged Indoor Fixed Plate Energy Recovery Units 23 73 13.16 Indoor, Semi-Custom Air-Handling Units 23 81 29 Variable Refrigerant Flow HVAC Systems 23 82 33 Convectors 23 82 36 Finned-Tube Radiation Heaters 23 82 39.16 Propeller Unit Heaters

VOLUME 3

DIVISION 26- ELECTRICAL

26 05 19 Low-Voltage Electrical Power Conductors and Cables 26 05 23 Control-Voltage Electrical Power Cables 26 05 26 Grounding and Bonding for Electrical Systems 26 05 29 Hangers and Supports for Electrical Systems 26 05 33 Raceway and Boxes for Electrical Systems

26 05 36 Cable Trays for Electrical Systems 26 05 39 Underfloor Raceways for Electrical Systems 26 05 43 Underground Ducts and Raceways for Electrical Systems 26 05 44 Sleeves and Sleeve Seals for Electrical Systems 26 05 48 Vibration and Seismic Controls for Electrical Systems 26 05 53 Identification for Electrical Systems 26 05 73.13 Short-Circuit Studies 26 05 73.16 Coordination Studies 26 05 73.19 ARC-Flash Hazard Analysis 26 09 13 Electrical Power Monitoring and Control 26 09 23 Lighting Control Devices 26 09 43.16 Addressable-Luminaire Lighting Controls 26 22 13 Low Voltage Distribution Transformers 26 23 13 Paralleling Low Voltage Switchboard 26 24 13 Switchboards 26 24 16 Panelboards 26 27 13 Electricity Metering 26 27 26 Wiring Devices 26 28 13 Fuses 26 28 16 Enclosed Switches and Circuit Breakers 26 31 00 Photovoltaic Collectors 26 32 13.13 Diesel-Engine Driven Generator Sets 26 33 53 Static Uninterruptible Power Supply 26 36 00 Transfer Switches 26 41 13 Lightning Protection for Structures 26 51 19 LED Interior Lighting 26 52 13 Emergency and Exit Lighting 26 56 13 Lighting Poles and Standards 26 56 19 LED Exterior Lighting

DIVISION 28– ELECTRIC SAFETY AND SECURITY

28 46 31 Analog Addressable Voice Evacuation Fire Alarm Systems

DIVISION 31– EARTHWORK

31 10 00 Site Preparation 31 11 00 Clearing and Grubbing 31 20 00 Earth Moving 31 23 19 Dewatering and Drainage 31 23 25 Granular Fill Materials 31 23 33 Trenching, Backfilling, and Compaction

DIVISION 32 – EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS

32 11 00 Base Courses 32 12 00 Asphalt Paving 32 13 00 Concrete Paving

32 16 50 Granite Curbing 32 17 23 Pavement Marking 32 30 00 Site Improvements 32 31 19 Decorative Metal Fences 32 32 12 Traffic Signs 32 32 23 Concrete Segmental Retaining Walls

DIVISION 33 – UTILITIES

33 00 00 Site Utilities 33 05 16 Precast Concrete Manhole, Structures, and Catch Basins 33 90 11 Reinforced Concrete Pipe 33 90 13 Ductile Iron Pipe and Fittings 33 90 50 Hydrants, Valves, and Appurtenances

VOLUME 4 APPENDICES

Appendix A Final Concept Report Appendix B Energy Model & Monthly Energy Consumption Appendix C LEED Checklist & SITES Scorecard Appendix D Maine DoT Coordination Items Appendix E Geotechnical Engineering Report Appendix F ESA Report Appendix G Art-in-Architecture Concept Appendix H Design Charrette with Room Tenant Notes Appendix I Program of Requirement (POR) Appendix K CBP Antenna and X-Ray Equipment Information Appendix L Site Security and Fence Diagram Appendix M Hydrant Flow Test Appendix N Hydrology Report Appendix O BIM Execution Plan (BEP) Appendix P Traffic Impact Assessment Appendix Q P100 Performance Matrix

VOLUME 5 DRAWINGS

END OF SECTION

DESIGN INTENT NARRATIVES

Madawaska LPOE Design Narratives 00 01 00 MPDL and GSA Page 2

Design Intent Narratives

Table of Contents

Introduction to Design Narratives

Site Narrative

Civil Engineering, Site Planning, Landscape Narrative

Architectural Narrative

Inspection Booth Narratives

Structural Narrative

Mechanical Narrative

Electrical Narrative

Lighting Narrative

Plumbing Narrative

Fire Protection and Fire Alarm Narrative

Sustainable Design & LEED & SITES Narrative

Security Systems Narrative

Audio Visual Systems Narrative

Information Technology Infrastructure Narrative

Acoustic Provisions Narrative

BIM Requirements and Strategies Narrative

Waivers and Deviations from Standards Narrative

MPDL and GSA Page 3

Introduction to Design Narratives he GSA is using the Design Build Bridging (DBB) delivery method to design and construct a new Land Port of Entry

(LPOE) for the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in Madawaska, ME. The GSA hired a Bridging Architect, Monica Ponce de Leon Studios (MPDL) as part of the DBB delivery method. MPDL is referred to as the Owner’s

Designer Consultant (ODC) or the Designer of Record (DOR) throughout the documents.

The GSA and MPDL created the Owners Project Requirements (OPR). The OPR is a compilation of narratives, specifications, drawings, appendices, studies, calculations and other documents that identify the specific functional requirements of the new LPOE that are in addition to, qualify or exceed the GSA PBS Facilities Standards for the

Public Buildings Service (P-100 2018 edition) and Customs and Border Protection Land Port of Entry Design

Standard (2018) requirements.

This OPR was developed with GSA and CBP from Feasibility Study through LPOE Concept Design to inform the

Design Build Contractor (DB Contractor) of design priorities to be maintained during further development of the design following the OPR handover.

The design intent narratives provided in this document illustrate the needs of GSA and CBP. These design narratives shall be used in conjunction with all documents contained in the OPR to provide a fully realized design that meets the goals and objectives of the statement of work.

MPDL and GSA Page 4

Site Narrative

Site Description

The Madawaska Land Port of Entry is a 24 hour, 7 day, 365 days per year mission critical operation, processing both commercial and noncommercial vehicles entering and exiting the United States from Edmundston, New

Brunswick. The New U.S. Madawaska Land Port of Entry will be located on approximately +/- 10.7 acres of land on a bluff south of the St. John River. The site is at the western edge of downtown Madawaska, Maine (Approx. Pop.

4,000) and the city of Edmundston, New Brunswick, Canada lies on the opposite side of the river to the north

(Approx. Pop. 16,500). The site is located within walking distance to the town’s primary commercial district as well as Twin Rivers Paper Company industrial site.

The +/- 10.7 acre site is made up of 5 previously defined parcels.

The parcels include:

USA Owned Parcel (from Twin Rivers) – Acquired in 2005

180 Main Street- commercial- McDonald’s – Acquisition TBD

170 Main Street- residential- Acquired

91 Vital Drive - residential- Acquired

93 Vital Drive - residential - Acquired.

Properties at 91 and 93 Vital Drive will be demolished under a separate GSA contract. After the U.S.A. acquires 170

Main Street & 180 Main Street (McDonald’s), it will turn the building and properties over to the DB for the project duration and demolition.

Land Acquisition is not complete at the time of the solicitation; the parcels are referred to by their current addresses.

The northern boundary of the site is atop a steep bluff that overlooks the active railroad line running parallel to the

St John River.

The eastern edge of the property runs along Mill Street.

The western edge of the site is primarily defined by Martin Creek that runs north into the St. John River, and the three residential properties at the southwest corner of the site. The three residential parcels are in a row north to south along Vital Drive (private Road) and are bordered by Martin Creek to the west, Main Street to the south and the U.S.A-owned property to the north and east.

The southern end of the property borders Main Street / US HWY 1. The frontage along Main Street is broken by and surrounds on three sides a property occupied by a McDonalds. This McDonalds property has been cut and filled to create a mostly level lot along Main Street. The McDonalds property western edge is similar in elevation to the

U.S.A.-owned property, but it’s northern and eastern edges are defined by built up bluffs that slope steeply 10’-0” down to the U.S.A.- owned property.

JohnKMaurer Callout Insert the following paragraph in place of the one struck out:

"Buildings at 91 and 93 Vital Drive and 170 Main St. will be demolished under a separate GSA contract; pavements and utilities will remain for removal by the DB Contractor. The foundation slab of the former Aztec building will be demolished under that GSA contract as well. After the U.S.A. acquires 180 Main St. (McDonald's restaurant), GSA will turn the building and site over to the DB Contractor for demolition and for the remainder of the project.

JohnKMaurer Strikeout

JohnKMaurer Highlight

MPDL and GSA Page 5

The new site is roughly 825 ft east to west and 750 ft north to south, and undergoes a total elevation change of around 45 feet falling from the southern end of the site toward the north, and an additional +/- 15 feet as it reaches Martin Creek in the northeast corner. Beyond the site boundary, it drops a further 25 feet to the railroad bed below.

In the middle of the U.S.A.-owned parcel there is a steep 25’-0” bluff topped with a small stand of trees that runs east to west which effectively divides the parcel into northern and southern halves. The northern and southern halves are currently accessed by a pair of gravel roads from Mill Street.

The northern half of the USA-owned property is currently utilized by Twin Rivers for tractor trailer parking, and contains a vacant storage building. This portion of the USA Property will be vacated by Twin Rivers.

The southern half of the property is unused and defined by a gravel parking lot at the corner of Mill Street and

Main Street, and a grassy field to the west separated from the gravel parking lot by the McDonalds parcel.

Adjacent Land Use

Design and Construction for the New LPOE shall avoid encroachments on all surrounding non-USA owned properties, and all construction access shall be contained within the USA owned properties – 10.7+ acres owned and to be acquired.

Land uses immediately adjacent to the project site include vacant land, Twin Rivers Paper Company and several residential properties. The scale of existing development in the downtown varies significantly from the very large industrial complex owned by Twin Rivers Paper Company, to small residences and businesses along Main Street.

The northern side of Main Street is a mix of uses, with several clusters of primarily residential properties to the east of Mill Street. South of Main Street development is largely residential in nature with some commercial properties along the main thoroughfare.

To the north, between the project site and the St. John River, is the Central Maine & Quebec Railroad.

East of the site is a Twin Rivers Mill parking lot, residential properties, and a gas station on the opposite side of Mill

Street. A large industrial building owned by Twin Rivers Paper Company occupies the land to the north east.

MPDL and GSA Page 6

On the West, the opposite side of Martin Creek, there is a steep wooded area with residences beyond.

To the south, 17th and 16th Avenue enter Main Street opposite the U.S.A.-owned property, both residential streets.

Town Land Use and Development Code, Zoning , Setbacks

Madawaska’s Town Land Use and Development Code was most recently adopted in 1977. The project site is located within the Industrial District of the Land Use and Development Code, which allows for uses consistent with this project. Along the Saint John River, development is governed by Madawaska’s Shoreland Protection Ordinance, which designates the area within 250 feet from the St. John River as a General Development District, which allows industrial and commercial activities that are consistent with this project. Martin Creek’s shoreland protection area is not identified on the Madawaska Shoreland Protection Ordinance Map, which means it falls under the jurisdiction of the Maine Department of Environmental Protection (MDEP) which requires that a buffer of 75 feet from the normal high-water line remains unaltered. Any encroachment into this buffer area will require a variance from MDEP.

Per the P—100 It should be noted that the Federal Government is exempt from, and not required to comply with local regulations. The intent of GSA’s “Good Neighbor Policy” is to comply with local requirements to the maximum extent feasible. The project will however require adherence to MDEP state regulations as it relates to Site Law and other resource impacts. The proposed New LPOE should comply with local regulations and be consistent with the community’s long-range goals. As per 40 USC 3312, the project will comply with local environmental requirements.

Endangered species and cultural resources There are no state or federal endangered species on the project site, however, according to the US Fish and Wildlife

Service (USFWS), the Canada lynx and northern long-eared bat could be found in the area. Both species are listed as threatened. There are no critical habitats mapped within the site. The site is located near a natural community of statewide ecological importance but would not directly impact this natural community. Coordination with the

Maine Natural Areas Program (MNAP) may be performed during design and prior to construction to determine the exact limits of the bluebell-balsam ragwort shoreline outcrop so that it can be avoided/protected and be eliminated as a concern. There are no known archaeological or historic resources on or adjacent to the site. No known tribal land would be affected. Air Quality and Noise are a potential concern that can only be addressed by re-evaluating these topics based on the new design and operation of the facility.

Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessments The project team has Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs) surveys for the various parcels. Phase I

Environmental Site Assessments (Phase I ESAs) were conducted in 2005, on the current LPOE property and the

USA‐owned property GSA acquired in 2010 and 2011.

The survey by Dubois and King (D&K) dated May 25, 2010 focuses on the USA Owned site. This 2010 survey was field-checked in June 2018 and updated in 2019. Additional surveys were conducted to incorporate new the four additional parcels (the three (3) residential properties (91 Vital Drive, 93 Vital Drive, 170 Main Street) on Vital

Drive, and the McDonalds (180 Main Street).

The Phase I ESAs found no evidence of uncontrolled petroleum, hazardous, toxic, or radioactive wastes. however, access was not provided to the interior of the McDonald’s restaurant building. The ESAs are included as appendices to the design narratives.

MPDL and GSA Page 7

Flood Plain Despite its adjacency to the Saint John River and Martin Creek, there is no mapped flood hazard area within the project site. The FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map for Madawaska (effective August 19, 1985) shows the project area is in

Zone C, which is outside the 500 year floodplain. The 100 and 500 year floodplains are primarily contained within the area occupied by the St. John River due to steep topography and existing rail infrastructure. To the east of Bridge Street, well outside of the project area, there are locations where the topography is gradual enough that during a 100 year event some flooding might occur.

Martin Creek is not officially mapped. In the event that St. John River were to flood into the confluence of Martin Creek, some inland flooding might occur, but the steep upward topography between Martin Creek and the project site make it unlikely that any impacts to the site would occur.

As mentioned above sites in Maine that are adjacent to rivers like the Saint John that drain more than 25 square miles are subject to setback regulations of 250 feet from the normal high water line. In addition, streams that are below the confluence of two perennial streams depicted on a USGS topographic map require a 75-foot setback. This is the case with

Martin Creek on the west side of the New LPOE site.

Wetlands The USFWS has classified the Saint John River as a riverine, lower-perennial, unconsolidated bottom, permanently flooded wetland. The Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS) (available online) conducted a study on wetland impacts. No palustrine wetlands were identified on National Wetland Inventory (NWI) mapping within the study area while preparing the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and Final Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation dated August 2019 (FSEIS). A reconnaissance of the study area was performed as part of the previous FEIS; no palustrine wetlands were observed. One locally listed hydric soil was identified within the study area. Located along the steep slopes between the Saint John River and the CM&Q Railroad, Mixed alluvial soils (Mn) are listed as local hydric soil for Aroostook

County (USDA 2005a). No state or federally listed hydric soils were identified within the study area. The FSEIS concluded that the alternative presented in the Feasibility Study (the alternative that this project is moving forward) would not impact wetlands so this was not identified as a concern.

Water Storage and Storm Water Design Since the Saint John River in Madawaska is classified by the MDEP as a sensitive or threatened region or watershed, and since the New LPOE will create large impervious areas, the GSA needs to limit disturbance and the impact to the quality of the receiving surface waters by managing stormwater runoff, and treating the quality of runoff in accordance with the

MDEP stormwater management standards in addition to the EISA Section 438 guidance.

Since the site is greater than 5,000 square feet and the topography will change, EPA’s Technical Guidance on

Implementing the Stormwater Runoff Requirements for Federal Projects under Section 438 of the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA 438) applies to the site design. The purpose of EISA 438 is to replicate to the maximum extent technically feasible (METF) the pre-development hydrology to protect and preserve both the water resources onsite and those downstream. This Guidance required determination of the total volume of rainfall for the 95th percentile storm, or completing a site-specific hydrologic analysis with an intent of using site planning, design, construction, and maintenance strategies for the property to maintain or restore, to the METF, the predevelopment hydrology of the property with regard to the temperature, rate, volume, and duration of flow. Complying with EISA 438 requires that a percentage of the land on the site be dedicated to stormwater control and not be available for impervious surfaces, thus constraining design.

In addition, the design should accommodate guidelines and design criteria identified in the Maine Stormwater

Management Design Manual, dated March 2016 and published by the Maine Department of Environmental

Protection. This manual (volumes I through III) provides specific stormwater management objectives and

MPDL and GSA Page 8 associated design considerations as well as landscape designs to enhance stormwater treatment.

The overarching goal of the design for stormwater is to minimize changes to the site hydrology so that Martin Creek and the Saint John River (the receiving waters of stormwater runoff from the New LPOE site) are not negatively impacted by improvements to the site. This will be accomplished by reducing possible offsite flow of stormwater to less than pre-development conditions, and also mimicking processes of the natural hydrologic cycle including infiltration and evapotranspiration to the extent possible. Stormwater facilities should be designed using the green infrastructure/low impact development infrastructure tools outlined in EISA 438 to the extent feasible.

The current U.S.A.-owned site drains north and then west, to Martin Creek, and ultimately to the St. John River. There are two existing subcatchment areas. One subcatchment drains to the Martin Creek and the other drains towards the railroad tracks to the north of the site, which ultimately drains to Martin Creek further downstream. New grading for the New

LPOE will adjusts the size of each subcatchment area, making the Martin Creek subcatchment potentially larger. Nearly all of the stormwater on site will be collected and conveyed to stormwater best management practices (BMPs) proposed for the project.

Development of the property and the associated increase in impervious land cover will increase the volume of stormwater runoff; increase the peak flow of runoff; extend the duration of stormwater discharge; increase pollutant loads; and increase the temperature of the stormwater discharge from the site. The stormwater collection, conveyance, and treatment system shall be designed to maintain or reduce peak runoff rates and volume to match existing conditions, meet the required discharge temperature, minimize the duration of discharge to the technically feasible.

Recognizing the desire for water quality improvements, the designed basin volumes include storage for the 95th percentile storm without discharge, assuming that the basin is empty at the onset of the event. Depending on the time between rain events, evapotranspiration and infiltration may completely drain the basins; however, to assure faster draining while still achieving water quality benefits, an underdrained soil filter is desired. These are commonly installed in Maine and while they require some maintenance, the frequency of necessary inspections and potential repairs is generally measured in years rather than months. The downside of having an underdrain filter is that there is more total offsite discharge rather than infiltration and evapotranspiration, but the discharge is at a minimal rate.

HydroCAD software was used to evaluate the proposed future site conditions for stormwater retention basin sizing.

Data from the pre-development and post-development runoff flows for these events is shown in Table 1 along with retention basin the peak basin depth for each event model. The retention basin should utilize vegetated, level bottom and may require an underdrained soil filter to achieve desired dewatering and treatment goals.

Table 1

Rain Event frequency

Pre-developme nt Peak Flow (cfs)

Post-developme nt Peak Flow (cfs)

Basin 1 Peak Elevation

Basin 2 Peak Elevation

95th percentile 1.45 0.07 527.28 516.67

2 year 11.93 1.08 528.61 518.53

10 year 24.92 2.92 528.88 521.89

25 year 33.87 4.96 529.16 523.14

100 year 48.53 22.41 529.64 523.94

MPDL and GSA Page 9

We do not advise that stormwater be directed into Madawaska’s water and sewer system. Instead, it will be conveyed through a separate network of pipes and drainage structures to the bioretention/infiltration basin.

Storm Water Design Analysis and Rationale

EISA 438 allows two options for stormwater management: EISA 438 Option 1 requires retention of a 95th percentile rain event and the use of practices that infiltrate, evapotranspire and/or harvest and use rainwater. The 95th percentile storm option in EISA 438 is suggested for use where modelling information is limited or unavailable, and it assumes beneficial reuse or infiltration of this volume.

EISA 438 Option 2 requires analysis of pre- and post- development peak flows for the goal of no increase;

however, it does not dictate the storm frequency required for analysis. Our design essentially hybridized these contrasting options. We explain why below.

The soils on the Madawaska site allow for only minimal infiltration, and without some other way to utilize the water, it’s going to stay in the basin for an extended period of time, potentially weeks rather than days. The detention basins can’t be designed based solely on retaining the 95th percentile storm without consideration to peak flow when the 95th percentile storm is exceeded or when multiple 95th percentile storms fall back to back.

If we simply create storage for the 95th percentile storm on this site ignoring the peak flow increases off site, we would likely have at least three or four unrestricted discharges that are higher flows than the downstream facilities have ever seen. This would likely increase the erosion of downstream receiving waters, and also might exceed the capacity of downstream facilities to receive it. For these reasons, we cannot exclusively recommend storage of only the 95th percentile storm volume, while freely discharging flows in excess of this volume. Peak flow storage and flow restriction is necessary and would also be required under Maine DEP rules.

The greater than 60-foot elevation difference across this site from the south to the northwest corner has several implications. First, runoff occurs quickly due to the combination of the large impervious area and the steep slopes. Second, the need to match into the bridge and Main Street while still connecting with the lower part of Mill Street shortens the transition through this already great elevation difference. In order to collect this drainage, at least some part of the basin must be below the lowest street elevations.

First iterations of a single stormwater treatment/storage basins had to be deep to allow for this dramatic elevation difference, creating issues for security, maintainability, and perceived vehicle safety.

Recognizing that the “EISA 438 Option 1” 95th percentile method could not be an exclusive solution for this site, D&K developed a stormwater management plan that simultaneously mitigates the overall basin depth concerns, while accomplishing the downstream protection and adequate draining of the catch basins on Mill Street. We find that two basins, each with less overall depth, could have less visual impact and provide for clear line of sight from the main building. Generally, the upper basin will capture most of the site runoff while the lower basin will collect the runoff from the northeast corner by Mill Street, in order to accommodate the lower outlets from these catch basins. To better apportion the runoff to the basins, a swale was created along the Main Street entrance to carry some of the runoff from that area to the lower basin. This swale should provide some additional water quality benefit as well by capturing sediment and nutrients.

Addition of underdrained filter beds in the bottom area of the ponds provide additional water quality and temperature improvement. The underdrain would need to drain directly to the discharge piping

MPDL and GSA Page 10 that carries the stormwater to the Town’s system to allow for complete draining of the basins. This system would also reduce potential for mosquito breeding and for attraction of waterfowl.

After looking at several designs that discharged stormwater to Martin’s Creek from the BMPs, CBP determined that it did not want the discharge piping to pass under the primary inspection area, the only direct discharge route to Martin Creek. The team looked at several alternative discharge locations.

We do not advise that stormwater be discharged directly into Madawaska’s water and sewer system.

Instead, it will be conveyed through a separate network of pipes and drainage structures to the bioretention/infiltration basins. Pending approval from the Town, the detained stormwater will be released at a controlled rate from these basins to the Towns stormwater collection system, and then ultimately into the St. John River.

For the Madawaska site, we do not believe that it would be prudent to design to a lesser standard than

Maine DEP’s stormwater rules (no significant peak flow increase on 2-year, 10-year, and 25-year storm frequencies). We have not mitigated the pre-development flow to post development peak flows on the

100-year event; however, we have allowed additional storage to accommodate this volume. We believe that this is prudent mainly because the frequency of severe storms in the past 20 years has increased to beyond what historic data indicates. The current configuration prevents erosion by controlling post-development peak flows, provides some level of infiltration and evapotranspiration of the 95th percentile event, and provides a flat area adjacent to the road for safety.

Materials

Storm drain system materials should follow MaineDOT specifications for these types of materials.

Unless larger basins are required (such as where multiple large pipes enter a structure or in flow control structures), 4-foot diameter precast structures should be used. All precast structures, as well as frames and grates, need to be certified for H-20 wheel loading whether in grass or under pavement.

Beehive type castings should be used in recessed vegetated areas away from pavement. Storm drain piping can be double wall HDPE piping with the exception of the outlet to Mill Street, which should be reinforced concrete pipe.

Stormwater Facility Maintenance

Stormwater basins will require maintenance such as mowing and silt removal. Silt removal frequency is dependent on buildup and would typically be years rather than months, but annual inspection is typical. The steeper slopes (2:1) would likely require mowing with a motorized trimmer (weed whacker) but the others would be mowed with typical lawn mowing equipment. Maintenance of the bottom of the basins would ultimately depend on whether it is underdrained or not and the choice of soil filter media. For water quality benefits, it’s best that mowing be limited to a couple times a year, particularly at the bottom. Recognizing the security implications, we would assume the that side slopes would be maintained as lawn with an approximately weekly mowing depending on weather conditions. An operation and maintenance plan for site stormwater would be created during the final design phase after the basin construction drawings are complete.

This site-specific plan should include:

• Phasing of pond construction to minimize erosion

• Mowing frequencies for different area

• Inspection frequencies for stormwater facilities

• Repair procedure for soil filter media areas (if required)

• Maximum sediment depths in catch basins

MPDL and GSA Page 11

• Maximum sediment depths in pond

• Inspection log

• Reporting procedure for facility failures or illegal discharges (if necessary)

The inspection plans are usually written such that they can be implemented by personnel with basic maintenance skills. Some of the required maintenance that results from inspections might ultimately require outside staff or contractors (catch basin cleaning, pipe flushing, washout stabilization).

Snow Fall During the study winter, (2018-2019), Madawaska got 170 inches of snow throughout the season. It should be assumed that a 2’ storm event is common for this area, and additional 1’ should be considered.

Given this snowfall and the amount of pavement on the site, we estimate that 450,000 CF of snow will need to be stored on the site. Plowing and piling will compact this amount by 30%. As a point of reference, if all the snow was to be piled in a single area, this will require a mound of about 200’ in diameter. A single mound is, of course not practicable. Fencing and snow storage need to be considered as piling snow near fencing poses logistical challenges for removal and induces maintenance repairs. Maine Department of Environmental Protection will not allow snow storage in buffer or stormwater mitigation areas.

Snow loading, snow sight hazards and snow storage are all problems that need to be addressed by the DB contractor.

Madawaska/Edmundston International Bridge

The existing International Bridge between Madawaska, ME and Edmundston, is nearing the end of its useful life based on condition and functionality. The bridge which opened in 1921 has undergone many repairs during its lifespan, but deterioration prevailed and lead to an imposed reduced weight restriction of 5 tons in October 2017 due to concerns of its structural integrity.

These circumstances lead to the commissioning of ‘The Madawaska/Edmundston International Bridge and Border

Crossing Feasibility and Planning Study’ undertaken by the Maine Department of Transportation (Maine DOT) as the lead agency, the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), New Brunswick

Department of Transportation and Infrastructure (NBDTI), Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC), and Canada

Border Services Agency (CBSA). The purpose of the Maine DOT Feasibility and Planning Study was to provide for the long-term safe and efficient flow of current and projected traffic volumes, including the movement of goods and people, between Edmundston, New Brunswick and Madawaska, Maine.

In the Madawaska/Edmundston International Bridge and Border Crossing Feasibility and Planning Study twelve alternatives were conceptually developed and evaluated including rehabilitating the existing bridge or building a new bridge, retaining the existing Edmundston POE, and taking a New LPOE at various locations on the US side into consideration. The project sponsors aimed to focus on maintaining an international crossing in the downtown business zone of Madawaska, ME.

The scheme advanced from the twelve alternatives is an the approx. 1,865-ft long bridge that supports two traffic lanes, two shoulders, and a single sidewalk on the downstream (east) side of the bridge for an overall width of 45' 3". Both ends of the bridge require flares to accommodate an efficient port traffic flow and required turn movements. The bridge piers will be founded on spread footings on bedrock.

The bridge lands on the northern portion of the USA owned property, it is being constructed by Maine DOT.

MPDL and GSA Page 12

Coordination between the International Bridge and New LPOE site is ongoing between Maine DOT and GSA.

A number of elements (including final wingwall, design of the guardrails and fencing; construction access and phasing) must be coordinated with MaineDOT. Coordination is discussed further in the Site Planning section.

MaineDOT will install a number of items for GSA/CBP under the bridge project (e.g., three light poles; two signage gantries; utility conduit for security cameras and electronic signage; roadway signage). The DB Contractor must coordinate their work with MaineDOT, GSA, and CBP to successfully complete these items.

Site Design Constraints The following lists the constraints and their impact on the site design of the New Madawaska LPOE.

Code Considerations The design shall be in compliance with GSA specifications and technical guides. Codes and guidelines that are applicable to the New LPOE site design include: the 2018 Land Port of Entry Design Standard; the 2018

PBS-P100 Facilities Standards for the Public Buildings Service; Section 438 of the Energy Independence and

Security Act (EISA); the MaineDOT Highway Design Guide; MaineDOT Access Management guidelines from

Chapter 299: Highway Driveway and Entrance Rules Part A of the State of Maine Rule Chapters for the

Department of Transportation (17-229); Maine DEP Stormwater Management Design Manual; and the

Madawaska Town Land Use Development Code. GSA has the final authority to accept or reject any recommendation from State and/or local government officials.

Existing Site Conditions of the 10.7 acre Parcel

Existing site conditions pose some of the greatest constraints on the project. The combination between the steep topography, property line configuration and the 75-foot setback from Martin Creek pose severe limitations on the site. The steep topography will necessitate fill placement in large areas of the site to comply with CBP requirements. The setback from Martin Creek greatly reduces the amount of land available. The configuration of the site limits access to and from the site with traffic, safety and security consequences.

The Program of Requirements GSA and CBP’s Program of Requirements (POR) are provided in the OPR. The size of the program poses limitations on the site. The POR for the New LPOE for Madawaska, Maine proposed by the CBP and GSA calls for a 76,717 GSF facility. This is a large program that occupies a relatively large portion of a difficult site. The program of 76,717 SF represents +/- 16% of the entire USA Owned Site (after land acquisition). In addition, specific dimensional and functional requirements of the program components pose limitations on the location and configuration of each of the buildings.

MPDL and GSA Page 13

Civil Engineering, Site Planning, Landscape Narrative

Vehicular Traffic Criteria

The following sections describe the basis of design in terms of design vehicle, roadway design, traffic volumes, and the US 1/LPOE intersection.

Vehicular Traffic Projections

Traffic data from MaineDOT, the 2010 Border Wizard analysis from the GSA and the Madawaska/Edmundston International Bridge and Border Crossing Study were reviewed to determine design traffic volumes through the LPOE site. In addition, border crossing data were reviewed for the period of 2013 through 2017 to understand patterns that existed before the bridge weight restrictions were imposed. The highest hourly volumes were on Sundays from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. The average daily inbound traffic during this period is 1,243 vehicles per day. A project specific Traffic Impact Study was completed for this project.

Limited traffic count data along US Route 1 in the vicinity of the site was collected by Maine DOT. The most recent and proximate count available was conducted in 2012 on US 1 just west of 16th Street, and shows average daily traffic of 9,440. More recent counts in other locations in the area show that traffic volumes have declined since 2012, so current volumes in the area may be lower.

Future border crossing traffic was evaluated by GSA using the Border Wizard analysis tool, which projects growth in crossings of 34.5% between 2008 and 2035. Future traffic was also projected in the Madawaska/Edmundston International Bridge and Border Crossing Study, and included a growth factor of 5% growth between 2018 and 2040, and therefore a lower projected future crossing volume. For the LPOE design purposes, the GSA Border Wizard projections will be utilized, as they were developed with methodology specifically for forecasting border crossing traffic.

US Route 1 Intersection

The design of the LPOE intersection with US 1 is important to safe and efficient operations of the LPOE.

The following design criteria were considered in the development of the final concept:

Sight Distance- Providing adequate sight distance is among the most critical design factors to provide safe and efficient access from the site to US Route 1. The inbound approach to US Route 1 is at the location with most favorable sight distance, which is at the crest of a vertical curve that allows good visibility in both directions.

Access Management- The Maine DOT access management guidelines provide specifications for the distance between new driveways and the nearest public road intersection. The required distance between a driveway and an unsignalized intersection should be at least 100 feet from the edge of the existing intersection and the edge of the new driveway. The acquisition of McDonald’s property and the properties along Vital Drive makes this possible. Entry and exit permits shall be coordinated by DB-C and MaineDOT, permit application is provided in the MDOT Document appendix to this document.

Signalization- The Traffic Impact Assessment for the New Madawaska Land Port of Entry dated May 2019 (TIA) determined that a signal is not warranted for the Main Street intersection with the new border road.

MPDL and GSA Page 14

Turn Lane Warrants- The MaineDOT provides volume warrants for providing right- and left-turn lanes for the major roads at unsignalized intersections. The TIA concluded that a right-turn lane for Main Street, eastbound, is not warranted. It also concluded that a left turn lane on Main Street is not recommended at this time, though the intersection should be monitored and a left turn lane installed at a later date if safety concerns with left turning vehicles arise, or if delays and queues become greater than expected.

LOS Analyses- The TIA concluded that the intersection of the on-site roads with Main Street is anticipated to operate at acceptable levels of service, meaning there will not be undue delay or congestion at this intersection.

Vehicles- The Final Concept was designed using vehicle types determined based on review of current and projected vehicle usage and the LPOE Design Standard 2018.

The following vehicles have been used for site design and vehicle tracking purposes:

1. Commercial Inspection: AASHTO WB-67 semi-trailer and Canadian B- Trains

2. Non-commercial Inspection: AASHTO Single Unit Truck and Coach Bus

Canadian B-Trains are approximately 85 feet long double trailers, and not currently permitted on Maine State Highways, but they are used frequently by the Twin Rivers Paper Company. The final concept provides access directly from the LPOE site to Mill Street. Typically, about four B-trains make crossings on the International Bridge each day.

The non-commercial design vehicles include an AASHTO single unit truck, which would represent non-commercial uses such as moving personal belongings in a rental truck, or a large recreational vehicle.

In addition, oversized loads up to 16 feet in width will be accommodated in one inspection lane.

Roadway Design Criteria

The LPOE Design Standard specifies roadway design criteria in section 13.3.2, including maximum and recommended cross slopes and grades of the inspection areas.

The LPOE Design Standard does not provide specifications for longitudinal (vertical) road grades outside of the primary and pre-primary inspection areas. The design criteria for road grades has been established using prevailing roadway design guidance as follows:

For secondary inspection, maintain average grades of 2% to the greatest extent possible.

For the approaches to US Route 1, Maine DOT standards require a level landing of 2% for vehicles waiting to enter US Route 1. For these purposes, a level area of 75 ft in length will be provided for tractor trailers approaching US Route 1.

For the inbound approach to Mill Street, provide a landing with a grade or less of 2% for a length of at least 50 ft.

For the remaining roads on the site outside of the inspection areas and approaches to US Route 1 and Mill St, the road grades should be no higher than 5%, to allow safe maintenance and circulation in winter conditions.

The areas of the site that are required to be relatively flat for vehicles, combined with the building

MPDL and GSA Page 15 programs constitute about 30% of the USA Owned Site after land acquisition. Given the change in elevation of the site, this limits the options for the development of an efficient facility.

Connecting to Existing and Future Infrastructure

One of the goals of the project is to coordinate the…