10-19-25 - Sol 47PH0825R0006 Amendment 0002.pdf

Solicitation #: 47PH0825R0006, Amendment 0002 Project/Kahua #: 0349 Contracting Officer: Temica Stewart Project Manager/Contracting Officer's Representative: Adena Alarcon

RFI # RFI/Question GSA's Response

1 Please provide a copy of the sign-in sheet/list of attendees for the pre-proposal meeting and site visit.

Please see attached.

If CBP or port authority activity directly impacts the construction schedule, causing delays, will contractors be entitled to claims for time extensions or general conditions?

Please refer to FAR Clause 52.242-14 and FAR 52.243-4. Also, if there is a government delay or a weather day, the contractor is requested to notify the Contracting Officer and the Contracting Officer’s Representative within 24 hours of the delay. Both types of delays must also be documented in the contractor's daily logs.

3 For bidding purposes, please provide quantities for all necessary scopes. Reference the design documents posted in SAM.gov.

Please provide the existing underground utilities location as built drawings, in order to identify if an electrician/communication contractor would be required to remove and reinstall services prior to Demo/installing the new pavement/concrete roadway?

No as-built drawings are available at this time. Reference C200 of the design documents for utility information.

5 Please clarify if an electrician/communications subcontractor is to be required, if so where would we add their cost?

An electrician/communications subcontractor would only be required for the installation of loop sensors if necessary. Reference the design documents posted in SAM.gov.

Will jersey barriers be required for lane closures, or will the government permit the use of other traffic control devices such as temporary fencing, barrels, traffic cones?

Jersey barriers may be needed in some instances. The use of water filled barriers, barrels and traffic cones are all acceptable means of traffic control.

Contractor may choose to use any of the mentioned barriers.

What is the preferred access route for delivery (for concrete trucks or materials)?

Once the contract is awarded, the Government will work with the contractor & CBP to provide the best access route for the area that is being worked. An accessible route will be coordinated prior to start of construction.

8 Is there a designated laydown area or staging area? If so, where is it located? Reference the design drawings posted in SAM.gov; locations are clearly marked.

9 Is water available on site? Yes, water is available onsite.

10 Are there any limits/restrictions for lane closures? (i.e. during: Peak traffic hours? CBP inspection shifts?)

Yes, there will be lane restrictions; this will be coordinated when the Contractor provides the phasing plan for the area where work will take place.

11 Will it be possible to work on multiple locations simultaneously?

This will be allowed provided the contractor does not request closure of all lanes in one location. Contractor shall provide phasing plans for approval.

12 Will pavement marking be required? If so, please provide a quantity for bidding purposes.

Yes, reference design documents posted in SAM.gov. Drawing sheets indicate pavement markings.

13 Is there a requirement for signage? If so, what type and how many signs are required?

Yes, reference design documents posted in SAM.gov for requirements.

14 Is the demolition of concrete to be stockpiled or hauled off?

If not re-used onsite, it must be hauled off. Refer to Sheet C503 for recycled concrete requirement.

Can existing concrete pavement be crushed and re-used onsite as the base material required for new concrete paving sections, provided it meets or exceeds the specified material properties? If so, are there any additional actions the Offeror will need to take to qualify the recycled material?

Existing crushed concrete pavement can be used for RipRap material. Refer to Sheet C503 for recycled concrete requirement.

16 Please confirm both pricing schedules include labor and material in each line.

Yes, both pricing sheets (Cost Summary and Base Scope & Options) include labor and material in each line item. Specifically, the Base Scope & Options sheet shall include a detailed breakdown of labor and material costs for each line item;

the Cost Summary Sheet is for the lump sum/totals for each line item.

17 Do the Superintendent, SSHO and QC Manager need to be 3 separate individuals?

Superintendent & QC manager must be 2 separate individuals. The SSHO can be combined with either of the other 2 key personnel positions.

18 Are there any phasing requirements?

Yes, phasing is required. To be used coordinating lane closures, traffic control & schedule.

Can the period of performance be extended after award once the material/equipment lead times are confirmed due to current market conditions for the equipment for this project?

No. Contractors shall reference applicable FAR/GSAM clauses (see the Agreement posted in SAM.gov; 52.211-13 and 552.211-13) should conditions arise.

20 Please provide bidding quantities for deteriorated base course (paving). Reference design documents posted in SAM.gov.

21 Technical Proposal — Would the government consider projects similar in complexity and type valued less than $5,000,000 in total construction cost?

No, this does not meet the requirements for similar projects stated in the solicitation.

22 Factor 2— Past Experience — Can past experience of Designers and/or Subcontractors be used as one of the minimum (2) projects required?

Past experience of the designer is not applicable to this project. Past experience for the subcontractor will be considered.

23 Factor 2— Past Experience — Can previously completed Past Performance Questionnaires be used in lieu of obtaining new PPQs/CPARS?

No. Only FINAL CPARS evaluations will be accepted in lieu of obtaining new PPQs.

24 Factor 3 — Experience of Key Personnel — Are the Project Superintendent and Quality Control Manager required to be two separate individuals?

Reference response to RFI #17.

25 Is a Stormwater Pollution Plan and NOI required for this project? If so, please provide the Government's expectation(s).

Reference the design documents posted in SAM.gov for erosion control.

26 How many lanes of traffic are acceptable to be closed at any given time?

Based on traffic flow and peak times, CBP will coordinate with GSA and the contractor, but no more than 40% of lanes can be closed at any given time.

27 Are there any known historical or archeological sites within the site work limits?

There are no known historical or archeological sites. There is an abandoned mine below the hillside stabilization location adjacent to the Primary Commercial inspection area.

28 Due to the current volatility in the oil market and project duration. Will the Government add an escalation clause for bituminous products?

No.

29 Is the LPOE closed for any holidays? LPOE does not close for holidays.

Project Title: Construction Services: Colombia Land Port of Entry, Border Roadway Improvement & Construction/Paving Project, Laredo, TX

PRE-PROPOSAL REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION (RFIs)/QUESTIONS

30 What are the days and hours of operations for this facility?

Sunday: 10:00am - 2:00pm Weekdays: 8:00am - 10:30pm Saturday 9:00am - 4:00pm

31 There is integral concrete curb. Please provide a quantity of integral curb to be replaced for each area.

Reference the design documents posted in SAM.gov.

32 How many Primary Booths can be closed at any given time? No more than 40%.

33 How many Secondary Booths can be closed at any given time? No more than 40%.

34 Are any temporary pavements required or is construction to remain in the existing footprint?

Some temporary pavement is required withing the existing footprint, reference design documents posted in SAM.gov. Construction is to remain within the existing footprint.

Is the contractor responsible for additional geotechnical investigations or utility verification beyond existing data provided in the Traffic and Pavement Study?

Additional Geotechnical Investigations are not required. Refer to the attached Geotechnical Engineering Report, dated February 15, 2024. Contractor is responsible for locating existing utilities within the areas of pavement reconstruction. Refer “Utility” note section on C305

36 Are alternative pavement designs (e.g., value engineering) allowed if they meet structural and IRA requirements?

IRA requirements are no longer applicable to this project due to IRA funding being rescinded. The concrete pavement designs have been reviewed and approved by GSA. Any alternate pavement designs submitted by the contractor would need to be prepared by at Professional Engineer and submitted to GSA for acceptance. EPD requirements – Low Embodied Carbon (LEC) and Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) for construction materials are not required. For Specification Section 32 13 13 – CONCRETE PAVEMENT, remove Item 1.5 LOW EMBODIED CARBON (LEC) CONCRETE STANDARDS, Item 1.6 LOW EMBODIED CARBON (LEC) STEEL STANDARDS and Item 1.7.F. For Specification Section 32 12 16 ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVING, remove Item 1.5.C and Item 1.8 LOW EMOBODIED CARBON (LEC) ASPHALT STANDARDS.

37 Are there restrictions or requirements for using high-early-strength concrete mixes to expedite critical milestones?

High Early Strength (HES) concrete mix designed are allowed. Refer to 32 13 13 Concrete, Section 2.1.B

38 Are there any anticipated utility conflicts based on current drawings, or should contractors budget for potholing and additional surveys?

There are no anticipated conflicts. Reference design documents; Sheet 305 utility notes.

39 Will CBP approve night work or extended weekend lane closures to expedite critical activities?

A request must be submitted no less than 72 hrs. in advance for CBP consideration, GSA will coordinate with CBP for lane closures or night work.

40 Are there predefined detour routes or contingency plans for traffic delays caused by phased construction?

There are no predefined detour routes. When the phasing plans are submitted, CBP will review and provide feedback to avoid any operational impacts.

41 Will GSA/CBP provide a liaison to coordinate lane closures and operational impacts during construction?

Phasing plans are to be submitted to the GSA PM/COR for approval by

CBP/GSA.

42 Will GSA provide onsite staging and laydown areas, or should contractors include offsite storage and logistics costs?

Reference the design documents for locations of laydown areas.

43 Who will be responsible for obtaining required permits (e.g., environmental, noise, traffic)?

No permits will be required.

44 What is the expected timeline for obtaining security clearances under HSPD-t2 for contractor and subcontractor personnel?

Plan for a minimum of 45 days.

45 Will certain project areas require restricted access, and what are the protocols for obtaining entry?

Once the contractor has been vetted and cleared, there will not be any restricted areas. In addition, all work is exterior work and there should be no reason for the contractor to access any interior facility.

Are there specific work hour restrictions or noise limits during CBP operational periods?

No specific work restrictions, noise limits shall comply with OSHA requirements for notification and protection. In addition, Contractor shall follow all requirements for dust mitigation during demolition activities.

What is the process for addressing unforeseen conditions, change orders, or scope adjustments during

Any unforeseen conditions shall be brought to the attention of the PM/COR and Contracting Officer via an RFI. Change orders or scope adjustments shall be brought to the attention of the Contracting Officer and will be addressed accordingly.

Will GSA provide a contingency allowance for issues such as subgrade failures, unidentified utilities, or poor soil conditions?

No.

49 What are the specific requirements for substantial completion, final acceptance, and project closeout documentation?

Substantial completion will be based on the construction schedule. It is expected that as each area of reconstruction is competed, a final acceptance walkthrough will be conducted. Once an area has been accepted, the contractor is to issue the warranty documents and the 1 yr. warranty clock will start on the date issued. For closeout documentation, see Scope of Work Section 16.

50 Can we use concrete barriers onsite to aid traffic control? Concrete Jersey barriers, cones, barrels and water filled barriers are acceptable to aid in traffic control.

51 Are there any restrictions for lane closures?

Lane closures will be coordinated with CBP/GSA and no more than 40% of the lanes will be closed an any one time.

52 What are the busiest hours of operation? Peak times will vary, based on time of year.

53 Is there a preferred time for construction activities that would reduce impact to traffic?There is no preferred time for construction, phasing will help coordinate activities.

Concrete placements may be best done early evening or at night.

54 Can we work in multiple locations simultaneously? Yes, as long as areas are phased accordingly and impact to operations is minimized.

55 Is temporary striping required? No.

56 Is an SWPPP required? Yes, reference erosion control information in the design documents.

57 What is the preferred access route for delivery (for concrete trucks or materials)?There is no preferred route, access will be coordinated prior to construction start.

58 Is there a requirement for signage? If so, what type and how many signs are required?

Reference the design documents for temporary signage.

59 Is the contractor required to locate utilities? Reference the design documents.

60 Which CLIN should pricing for the demo be accounted for? CLIN 0005.

61 Please clarify what items to include in CLIN 04 - Division 1 General requirements, submittals, As-builts, meetings, execution,etc.

62 Please clarify what items to include in CLIN 05 - Division 31 Earthwork. Items such as demolition, foundation prep, etc.

63 Please clarify what items to include in CLIN 06 - Division 32 Exterior Improvements.Items such as pavement markings, signage, etc.

64 Does the Superintendent, SSHO and QC Manager need to be 3 separate individuals?

Reference response to RFI #17.

66 What is the address for the project? Termination of SH-255, Laredo, TX 78040.

67 Is third party testing required? Yes, to include rebar/dowel placement inspections and field testing of concrete and laboratory cylinder tests.

68 If concrete is to be hauled off can a concrete crushed be utilized on site to minimize tonnage & capacity?

Reference response to RFI #15.

Requirements for the "proprietary information agreement" as outlined on page 14 of the solicitation for the Columbia LPOE BRIC project in Laredo, Texas. Is there a template for said agreement.

No, there is no specific template for said agreement. The Construction Manager as Advisor (CMa) Contractor will provide an Agreement/Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) to each offeror for execution. The offeror must contact the CMa directly via email (copy the Contracting Officer, Temica Stewart;

temica.stewart@gsa.gov on the email) to request the agreement to be executed prior to submission of proposals. Each offeror must submit a copy of the agreement with their proposal.

See The Solicitation Section II.E(3) for the CMa contact information.

Damage was observed North of Site A on the approach to the inspection booth. After review, this area was not included in the contract documents as an area to be addressed. Will this area be added to the SOW?

Yes, see attached CSK-1 Site A Plan. Addition Site A Scope – As part of the Base Contract, Drawing C404 SITE A PLAN shall be revised to include two (2) additional areas, totaling 1500 square feet, of complete pavement removal and reconstruction (see attached CSK-1). Refer to C600 CIVIL DETAILS, Detail 1-9” CONCRETE PAVEMENT FOR SITES A AND B for concrete pavement and subgrade requirements.

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

Laredo Colombia LPOE Paving

TX-255

Laredo, Texas

PSI Project No. 0312-3017-1

PREPARED FOR:

Richter Architects 201 South Upper Broadway Corpus Christi, Texas 78401

February 15, 2024

BY:

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC.

3 Burwood Lane

San Antonio, Texas 78216 Phone: (210) 342-9377

Professional Service Industries, Inc.

3 Burwood Lane

San Antonio, Texas 78216 Office – (210) 342-9377 www.intertek.com/building

February 15, 2024

Richter Architects 201 South Upper Broadway Corpus Christi, Texas 78401

Attn: Mr. Alejandro J. Garza, AIA, NCARB

RE: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

Laredo Colombia LPOE Paving

TX-255

Laredo, Texas PSI Project No. 0312-3017

Dear Mr. Garza:

Professional Service Industries, Inc. (PSI), an Intertek company, is pleased to submit this revised Geotechnical Engineering Report for the referenced project. This report includes the results from the field and laboratory investigation along with recommendations for use in preparation of the appropriate design and construction documents for this project.

PSI appreciates the opportunity to provide this Geotechnical Engineering Report and looks forward to continuing participation during the design and construction phases of this project. PSI also has great interest in providing materials testing and inspection services during the construction of this project and will be glad to meet with you to further discuss how we can be of assistance as the project advances.

If there are questions pertaining to this report, or if PSI may be of further service, please contact us at your convenience.

Respectfully submitted, PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC.

Texas Board of Professional Engineers Certificate of Registration # F003307

S. Peter Gonzales, P.E. Dexter Bacon, P.E.

Department Manager Chief Engineer Geotechnical Services i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Electronic Navigation: The TOC below and Keywords are hyperlinked to sections of relevance. The

Symbol will return the reader to the TOC.

Page No.

TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................. I

PROJECT INFORMATION

PROJECT AUTHORIZATION

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES

SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

SITE DESCRIPTION

FIELD EXPLORATION

LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM

SITE GEOLOGY

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

EXISTING PAVEMENT CONDITIONS

PAVEMENT DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

GEOTECHNICAL DISCUSSION

PAVEMENT DESIGN PARAMETERS

PAVEMENT SECTION RECOMMENDATIONS

CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

INITIAL SITE PREPARATION CONSIDERATIONS

MOISTURE SENSITIVE SOILS/WEATHER RELATED CONCERNS

EXCAVATION OBSERVATIONS

DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS

EXCAVATIONS AND TRENCHES

REPORT LIMITATIONS

APPENDIX

Site Vicinity Map Boring Location Plan Boring Logs Key to Terms and Symbols Used on Logs ii

INDEX OF FIGURES

Page No.

Figure 3.1: Rigid Pavement Typical Section

INDEX OF TABLES

Page No.

Table 1.1: Project Description

Table 2.1: Site Description

Table 2.2: Field Exploration Summary

Table 2.3: Field Exploration Description

Table 2.4: Laboratory Testing Program

Table 2.5: Summary of Existing Pavement Thicknesses

Table 3.1: Pavement Design Parameters and Assumptions (Rigid)

Table 3.2: Rigid Pavement Section Options

Table 3.3: Pavement Design and Construction Recommendations

Table 3.4: Compaction and Testing Recommendations for Pavement Areas

TABLE 3.23: REQUIREMENTS FOR CONCRETE EXPOSED TO SULFATE

TABLE 3.24: SULFATE TEST RESULTS

Table 4.1: Subgrade Preparation for Non-Structural - General Fill

Table 4.2: Fill Compaction Recommendations Outside of Building and Pavement Areas

Table 4.3: Considerations for Demolition of Existing Pavement and Abandoning Utilities

Laredo Columbia LPOE Paving PSI Project No: 0312-3017-1 TX-255, Laredo, Texas February 15, 2024

PROJECT INFORMATION

PROJECT AUTHORIZATION

Professional Service Industries, Inc. (PSI), an Intertek company, has completed a field exploration and geotechnical evaluation for some of the existing pavements at the Laredo Colombia Land Port of Entry (LPOE) in Laredo, Texas. Ms. Elizabeth Chu Richter, FAIA, representing Richter Architects, authorized PSI’s services per email on 11/3/2023. The work is in accordance with the current MSA between Intertek PSI and Richter Architects.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Based on information provided by the Client and the results of this geotechnical investigation a summary of our understanding of the proposed project is provided below in the following Project Description table.

TABLE 1.1: PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Project Items Areas in the existing pavements at the Laredo Colombia LPOE, Laredo, Texas Construction Type Replacement of existing pavements Finished Grade Anticipated to match existing Pavement for Drives Rigid Concrete Pavement

Design Traffic Load Low Traffic: 13,300,000 ESALs for 20-Year Pavement Design Life High Traffic: 88,400,000 ESALs for 20-Year Pavement Design Life

The geotechnical recommendations presented in this report are based on the available project information, structure locations, and the subsurface materials encountered during the field investigation. If the information presented above is incorrect, please inform PSI so that the recommendations presented in this report can be amended, as necessary. PSI will not be responsible for the implementation of provided recommendations if not notified of changes in the project.

PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the subsurface conditions at the site and develop geotechnical engineering recommendations and guidelines for use in preparing the design and other related construction documents for the proposed project. The scope of services included drilling soil borings, performing laboratory testing, and preparing this geotechnical engineering report.

This report briefly outlines the available project information, describes the site and subsurface conditions, and presents the following:

• General site development and subgrade preparation recommendations.

• Recommendations for site excavation, fill compaction, and the use of on-site and imported fill material under pavements.

• Recommendations for the design of rigid concrete pavement systems for the proposed dock roads and parking and commercial areas.

The scope of services for this geotechnical exploration did not include an environmental, mold nor detailed seismic/fault assessment for determining the presence or absence of wetlands, or hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, bedrock, surface water, groundwater, or air on or below, or around this site. Statements in this report or on the boring logs regarding odors, colors, and unusual or suspicious items or conditions are strictly for informational purposes. The report also does not include a detailed settlement analysis or slope stability analysis.

SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

SITE DESCRIPTION

The following table provides a generalized description of the existing site conditions based on visual observations during the field activities, as well as other available information.

TABLE 2.1: SITE DESCRIPTION

Site Location TX-255, Laredo, Texas Site History Existing rigid pavements Existing Site Features Laredo Colombia LPOE Paving Existing Grade/Elevation Changes ± 20 Feet Estimated (Google Earth Pro) Site Geology (Geologic Atlas of Texas) El Pico Clay (Eep)

Ground Surface Soil Support Capability for Operational Stability and Site Access

Firm Enough for Field Equipment

FIELD EXPLORATION

Field exploration for the project consisted of drilling a total of six (6) borings. The boring design element, approximate depths and drilling footage are provided in the following table.

TABLE 2.2: FIELD EXPLORATION SUMMARY

Design Element Number of Borings

Boring Depth (ft)

Drilling Footage

(feet) Existing Pavement 6 15 90

TOTAL: 6 --- 90

The boring locations were selected by PSI personnel and located in the field using a recreational-grade GPS system. Elevations of the ground surface at the boring locations were not provided and should be surveyed by others prior to construction, if required. We have estimated ground surface elevations at the boring locations from the topographic survey provided (or from Google Earth) and estimate an approximate 1-foot accuracy. The references to elevations of various subsurface strata are based on depths below existing grade at the time of drilling. The approximate boring locations are depicted on the Boring Location Plan provided in the Appendix.

TABLE 2.3: FIELD EXPLORATION DESCRIPTION

Drilling Equipment Truck-Mounted Drilling Equipment Drilling Method Continuous Flight-Auger Field Testing Hand Penetrometer Sampling Procedure ASTM D1587 Sampling Frequency Continuously to a Depth of 10 Feet and at 5-foot Intervals Thereafter Frequency of Groundwater Level Measurements

During and After Drilling

Boring Backfill Procedures Soil Cuttings and Asphalt Patch Sample Preservation and Transportation Procedure

General Accordance with ASTM D4220

During field activities, the encountered subsurface conditions were observed, logged, and visually classified (in general accordance with ASTM D2487). Field notes were maintained to summarize soil types and descriptions, water levels, changes in subsurface conditions, and drilling conditions.

LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM

PSI supplemented the field exploration with a laboratory testing program to determine additional engineering characteristics of the subsurface soils encountered. The laboratory testing program included:

TABLE 2.4: LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM

Laboratory Test Procedure Specification Visual Classification ASTM D2488 Moisture Content ASTM D2216 Atterberg Limits ASTM D4318 Material Finer than No. 200 Sieve ASTM D1140

The laboratory testing program was conducted in general accordance with applicable ASTM Test Methods.

The results of the laboratory tests are provided on the Boring Logs in the Appendix. Portions of samples not altered or consumed by laboratory testing will be discarded 60 days from the date shown on this report.

SITE GEOLOGY

We reviewed the Laredo Sheet of the Geologic Atlas of Texas in an effort to determine the geologic setting of the project site and surrounding areas. The Geologic Atlas of Texas was developed by the Bureau of Economic Geology at The University of Texas using aerial photography, data from various oil and gas exploration companies, and very limited ground reconnaissance. Our review indicates that the project site is located in the El Pico Clay (Eep) Geological Formation. The Laredo Sheet generally describes the formation as consisting of clay, sandstone, and coal.

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

The results of the field and laboratory investigation have been used to develop a generalized subsurface profile at the project site. The following subsurface descriptions highlight the major subsurface stratification features and material characteristics.

TABLE 2.5: SUMMARY OF EXISTING PAVEMENT THICKNESSES

Boring Location Pavement Thickness (in) B-1 9 B-2 9 B-3 9 B-4 9 B-5 10 B-6 9

The boring logs included in the Appendix should be reviewed for specific information at the boring locations.

The boring logs include soil descriptions, stratifications, locations of the samples, and field and laboratory test data. The descriptions provided on the logs only represent the conditions at the specific boring location. The stratifications represent the approximate boundaries between subsurface materials. The actual transitions between strata may be more gradual and less distinct. Variations will occur and should be expected across the site.

2.5.1 GROUNDWATER INFORMATION

Water level measurements were performed during drilling and after completion of drilling. Specific information concerning groundwater is noted on each boring log presented in the Appendix of this report.

Groundwater was not encountered during the field investigation of this site.

Groundwater levels fluctuate seasonally as a function of rainfall, proximity to creeks, rivers and lakes, the infiltration rate of the soil, seasonal and climatic variations and land usage. In relatively pervious soils, such as sandy soils, the indicated depths are a relatively reliable indicator of groundwater levels. In relatively impervious soils, water levels observed in the borings may not provide a reliable indication of groundwater elevations, even after several days. If a detailed water level evaluation is required, observation wells or piezometers can be installed at the site to monitor water levels. The groundwater levels presented in this report were measured at the time of PSI field activities. The contractor should be prepared to control groundwater, if encountered during construction activities.

EXISTING PAVEMENT CONDITIONS

Areas of the existing pavements have experience failures including: Spalling at joints,

• Displacement at joints,

• Joint Seal Damage, and

• Corner Breaks

The photos below show some failures observed at the site.

Photo 1: Corner Break in the vicinity of Boring B-1. Photo 2: Spalling at Joints in the vicinity of Boring B-3.

The failures observed may be attributed to a combination of weakened subgrade from the infiltration of water through joints, poor drainage and pavement edges and stress at joints due to repeated heavy wheel loads.

PAVEMENT DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

GEOTECHNICAL DISCUSSION

PSI understands this project will consist of replacement of some areas of the existing rigid pavements in the Laredo Colombia LPOE. Based upon the information gathered from the soil borings and laboratory testing, the soils encountered, below the existing pavements, consist of sandy lean clay and poorly graded sands. The existing pavements ranged in thickness at the boring locations from 9 inches to 10 inches

The following design recommendations have been developed based on the previously described project characteristics and subsurface conditions encountered. If there are changes in the project criteria, PSI should be retained to review the changes to determine if modification of the recommendations presented in this report will be required. The findings of such a review should be presented in a supplemental report. Once final design plans and specifications are available, a general review by PSI is recommended to verify that the earthwork and pavement recommendations are properly interpreted and implemented.

PAVEMENT DESIGN PARAMETERS

PSI understands that rigid pavements will be considered for this project. Therefore, pavement design recommendations for several levels of traffic loading were developed based on assumptions of potential traffic, drive paths or patterns and anticipated soil support characteristics of pavement subgrades. PSI utilized the “AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures” published by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials to evaluate the pavement thickness recommendations in this report.

This method of design considers pavement performance, traffic, roadbed soil, pavement materials, environment, drainage and reliability. Each of these items is incorporated into the design methodology. PSI is available to provide laboratory testing and engineering evaluation to refine the site-specific design parameters and sections, upon request.

Specific design traffic types and volumes for this project were not available to PSI at the issuance of this report.

This traffic information is typically used to determine the number of 18-kip Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESAL) that is applied to the pavement over its design life. Furthermore, the scope of services for this project did not include California Bearing Ratio (CBR) testing. In lieu of project specific design parameters, general traffic and subgrade parameter assumptions were used for this design. Based on this information, PSI has provided recommended pavement sections “low traffic” “heavy duty” pavements constructed on stable and properly prepared/compacted subgrades. Details regarding the basis for this design are presented in the table below.

TABLE 3.1: PAVEMENT DESIGN PARAMETERS AND ASSUMPTIONS (RIGID)

Reliability, percent 95 Initial Serviceability Index, Rigid Pavement 4.5 Terminal Serviceability Index 2.0 Rigid Pavement Low Traffic (Dock Roads and Parking) 13,300,000 ESALs Rigid Pavement Heavy Duty Pavement (Commercial Areas) 34,200,000 ESALs Standard Deviation, Rigid Pavement 0.35 Concrete Compressive Strength 4,000 psi

Subgrade Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k in pci 150 for lean clay with sand subgrade

During the paving life, maintenance to seal surface cracks and to reseal joints within concrete pavement should be undertaken to achieve the desired paving life. Perimeter drainage should be controlled to prevent or retard influx of surface water from areas surrounding the paving. Water penetration leads to paving degradation. Water penetration into subgrade materials, sometimes due to irrigation or surface water infiltration leads to pre-mature paving degradation.

Material specifications, construction considerations, and section requirements are presented in the following sections.

The presented recommended pavement sections are based on the field and laboratory test results for the project, local pavement design practice, design assumptions presented herein and previous experience with similar projects. The project Civil Engineer should verify that the ESAL and other design values are appropriate for the expected traffic and design life of the project. PSI should be notified in writing if the assumptions or design parameters are incorrect or require modification.

PAVEMENT SECTION RECOMMENDATIONS

PSI anticipated that the drive lanes will be used primarily by commercial traffic including 18-wheeled tractor trails.

3.3.1 RIGID PAVEMENT

The proposed roadways and parking areas for this project may also be constructed with rigid concrete pavement. Recommendations for rigid concrete pavement for roadways and parking areas are provided below.

FIGURE 3.1: RIGID PAVEMENT TYPICAL SECTION

TABLE 3.2: RIGID PAVEMENT SECTION OPTIONS

Material Low Traffic (Dock Roads and Parking)

Heavy Duty Pavement (Commercial Areas)

Traffic 13,300,000 ESALs 13,200,000 ESALs

Portland Cement Concrete 11.5 inches 13 inches

Low PI Material (PI<25) As required to achieve grade

Compacted Subgrade 8 inches

Low PI Material

3.3.2 GENERAL PAVEMENT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS

TABLE 3.3: PAVEMENT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS

Minimum Undercut Depth 6 inches or as needed to remove loose soils

Reuse Excavated Soils Must be free of debris and meet material requirements of intended use

Undercut Extent 2 feet beyond the paving limits

Exposed Subgrade Treatment

Proof-roll subgrade with rubber tired 20-ton (loaded) construction equipment Alternate Equipment can be used with Geotechnical Engineer Approval

Proof-Rolled Pumping and Rutting Areas Excavate to firmer materials and replace with compacted general or select fill under direction of a representative of the Geotechnical Engineer

General Fill Materials free of roots, debris, and other deleterious materials with a maximum rock size of 4 inches with a CBR greater than 10

Minimum General Fill Thickness As required to achieve grade

Maximum General Fill Loose Lift Thickness 9 Inches Low PI Material (Other low plasticity materials may be used pending review and approval from

PSI)

On-Site or Imported Free of organics, trash, or other deleterious material Plasticity Index < 25 Max Particle Size < 3”

Flexible Base TxDOT Item 247, Type A, Grade 1-2 Maximum Flexible Base Loose Lift Thickness 9 Inches

Concrete Minimum Recommended Strength 4,000 psi (avg. 28-day comp. strength)

Concrete Contraction Joint Min.

Reinforcement (Intended to assist in countering cracking)

Minimum of 0.15 percent steel located in top half of concrete section Minimum 2 inches cover

Concrete Construction Joint Min.

Reinforcement

1¼-inch diameter dowels 18 inches long Spaced 12 inches on-center along the joint

Contraction Joint Spacing (In General Accordance with ACI 330) Maximum joint spacing should be less than 15 feet.

TABLE 3.4: COMPACTION AND TESTING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PAVEMENT AREAS

Location Material Density Test Method Soil Type Percent

Compaction

Optimum Moisture Content

Testing Frequency

Pavement Areas

Subgrade, General Fill Soil, Low PI Material

ASTM D698

PI ≥ 25 94% to 98% 0 to +4% 1 per 10,000 SF;

min. 3 tests PI < 25 ≥ 95% -2 to +3%

3.3.3 CHEMICAL ATTACK POTENTIAL FOR DEGRADATION OF CONCRETE

The concentration of water-soluble sulfates is considered to be a good indicator of the potential for chemical attack on concrete. Based on ACI Manual of Concrete Practice (ACI 201.2R-10) or (ACI 318/318R-33), the amount of water-soluble sulfate in soil can be used to evaluate the need for protection of concrete based on the following table.

TABLE 3.5: REQUIREMENTS FOR CONCRETE EXPOSED TO SULFATE

Water Soluble Sulfate in soil

(percent by weight) Sulfate Exposure

0.00 to 0.10 Negligible or Class 0 Exposure

0.10 to 0.20 Moderate or Class 1 Exposure

0.20 to 2.00 Severe or Class 2 Exposure

Over 2.0 Very Severe or Class 3 Exposure

The results of the laboratory sulfate ion concentration tests performed on soil samples obtained at the site are as follows.

TABLE 3.6: SULFATE TEST RESULTS

Boring Locations Depth (ft) Sulfate Content

Cement Type mg/kg Percent by Weight

B-1 0 - 1.5 7,666 0.77 V B-3 0 - 1.5 9,666 0.97 V

Based on the test results of selected soil samples, the sulfate ion concentration is between 0.20 and 2.00 percent by weight and the potential for reactions within concrete exposed to sulfates is Sever with a Class 2 Exposure. Evaluations of soluble sulfate content contained within the selected samples suggest that Type V cement should be utilized. The actual cement type to be used shall be determined by the project Structural Engineer.

CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

Geotechnical Engineer Involvement at the Time of Construction – It is recommended that the site preparation recommendations presented in this report be confirmed immediately prior to construction by the Geotechnical-Engineer-of Record (GER). Wetter climate conditions near the time of construction can lead to a significant reduction in site preparation requirements which can often be a substantial percentage of site development cost.

Having a Geotechnical Engineer retained to review the earthwork recommendations in the Construction Documents and be an active participant in team meetings near the time of construction can often result in project cost savings. Therefore, PSI recommends that an AASHTO accredited 3rd party laboratory with qualified professional engineers who specialize in geotechnical engineering be retained to provide observation and testing of construction activities involved in the earthwork, pavements and related activities of this project. As the GER, PSI’s services can be retained as the 3rd party laboratory. PSI’s participation would be advantageous to the project flow and value engineering during construction since we are most familiar with the existing soil conditions at the site.

The geotechnical engineer often does not have available all design information at the time of writing the original report since the report is done very early in the design process. The GER can be of great benefit immediately prior to construction since definitive information regarding the location of the building, surrounding flatwork, pavements, planned landscaping, and drainage features is available at that time. The GER can then write Supplement letters to the original geotechnical report often resulting in less risk and significant project cost savings.

PSI cannot accept responsibility for conditions which deviate from those described in this report, nor for the performance of the pavements if not engaged to also provide construction observation and materials testing for this project. The PSI geotechnical engineer of record should also be engaged by the Design Team during construction, even if periodic on-call testing is contracted with PSI Construction Services.

INITIAL SITE PREPARATION CONSIDERATIONS

4.1.1 SUBGRADE PREPARATION FOR SITE WORK OUTSIDE BUILDING PAD AND PAVEMENT AREAS

Grade adjustments outside of the pavement areas can be made using select or general fill materials. The clean excavated onsite soils may also be reused in areas not sensitive to movement.

TABLE 4.1: SUBGRADE PREPARATION FOR NON-STRUCTURAL - GENERAL FILL

Minimum Undercut Depth 6 inches or as needed to remove roots, organic and/or deleterious materials

Exposed Subgrade Treatment

Proof-roll subgrade with rubber-tired 20-ton (loaded) construction equipment Alternate Equipment can be used with Geotechnical Engineer Approval

Proof-Rolled Pumping and Rutting Areas Excavate to firmer materials and replace with compacted general or select fill under direction of a representative of the Geotechnical Engineer

General Fill Type Any clean material free of roots, debris and other deleterious material with a maximum particle size of 4 inches

Maximum General Fill Loose Lift Thickness 8 inches

TABLE 4.2: FILL COMPACTION RECOMMENDATIONS OUTSIDE OF BUILDING AND PAVEMENT AREAS

Location Material Test Method for

Density Determination

Plasticity Index

Percent Compaction

Optimum Moisture Content

Testing Frequency

Outside of Structure / Pavement

Areas

General Fill ASTM D698 PI ≥ 25 94% to 98% 0 to +4% 1 per 10,000 SF;

min. 3 per lift PI < 25 ≥ 95% 0 to +4%

4.1.2 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS

The following table outlines construction considerations in consideration of demolition of existing paving and procedures for abandoning old utility lines.

TABLE 4.3: CONSIDERATIONS FOR DEMOLITION OF EXISTING PAVEMENT AND ABANDONING UTILITIES

Existing Pavement Former paving located within footing of proposed structures

Remove concrete and/or HMAC surface course and base entirely or review impact on case by case basis

Former paving located within footprint of proposed new paving

Remove concrete and/or HMAC surface course and evaluate if base can be reused

Abandoned Utilities Utilities of former structures located within new footprint of proposed structure

Remove pipe, bedding and backfill and then replace with select fill placed using controlled compaction

Utilities of former structures located outside of footprint of proposed structure Abandon in place using a grout plug

MOISTURE SENSITIVE SOILS/WEATHER RELATED CONCERNS

Soils are sensitive to disturbances caused by construction traffic and changes in moisture content. During wet weather periods, increases in the moisture content of the soil can cause significant reduction in the soil strength and support capabilities. In addition, soils which become wet may be slow to dry and thus significantly retard the progress of grading and compaction activities. It will, therefore, be advantageous to perform earthwork and construction activities during dry weather. A relatively all-weather compacted crushed limestone cap having a thickness of at least 6 inches should be provided as a working surface.

EXCAVATION OBSERVATIONS

Excavations should be observed by a representative of PSI prior to continuing construction activities in those areas. PSI needs to assess the encountered materials and confirm that site conditions are consistent with those discussed in this report. This is especially important to identify the condition and acceptability of the exposed subgrades under areas that are sensitive to movement. Soft or loose soil zones encountered at the bottom of the excavations should be removed to the level of competent soils as directed by the Geotechnical Engineer or their representative. Cavities formed as a result of excavation of soft or loose soil zones should be backfilled with compacted select fill or lean concrete.

After opening, excavations should be observed, and concrete should be placed as quickly as possible to avoid exposure to wetting and drying. Surface run-off water should be drained away from the excavations and not be allowed to pond. Excavations left open for more than 48 hours should be protected to reduce evaporation or entry of moisture.

DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS

Water should not be allowed to collect in or adjacent to excavations or on prepared subgrades within the construction area during or after construction. Proper drainage around grade supported sidewalks and flatwork is important to reduce potential movements. Excavated areas should be sloped toward one corner to facilitate removal of collected rainwater, groundwater, or surface runoff. Providing rapid, positive drainage away from the building reduces moisture variations within the underlying soils and will aid in reducing the magnitude of potential movements.

EXCAVATIONS AND TRENCHES

Excavation equipment capabilities and field conditions may vary. Geologic processes are erratic and large variations can occur in small vertical and/or lateral distances. Details regarding “means and methods” to accomplish the work (such as excavation equipment and technique selection) are the sole responsibility of the project contractor. The comments contained in this report are based on small diameter borehole observations. The performance of large excavations may differ as a result of the differences in excavation sizes.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Safety and Health Standards (29 CFR Part 1926, Revised October 1989), require that excavations be constructed in accordance with the current OSHA guidelines. Furthermore, the State of Texas requires that detailed plans and specifications meeting OSHA standards be prepared for trench and excavation retention systems used during construction. PSI understands that these regulations are being strictly enforced, and if they are not closely followed, the owner and the contractor could be liable for substantial penalties.

The contractor is solely responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations and should shore, slope, or bench the sides of the excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. The contractor's "responsible person", as defined in 29 CFR Part 1926, should evaluate the soil exposed in the excavations as part of the contractor's safety procedures. In no case should slope height, slope inclination, or excavation depth, including utility trench excavation depth, exceed those specified in local, State, and Federal safety regulations.

PSI is providing this information as a service to the client. PSI does not assume responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor's or other parties’ compliance with local, State, and Federal safety or other regulations. A trench safety plan was beyond the scope of our services for this project.

REPORT LIMITATIONS

The recommendations submitted in this report are based on the available subsurface information obtained by PSI and design details furnished by the client for the proposed project. If there are revisions to the plans for this project, or if deviations from the subsurface conditions noted in this report are encountered during construction, PSI should be notified immediately to determine if changes in these recommendations are required. If PSI is not notified of such changes, PSI will not be responsible for the impact of those changes on the project.

The Geotechnical Engineer warrants that the findings, recommendations, specifications, or professional advice contained herein have been made in accordance with generally accepted professional Geotechnical Engineering practices in the local area. No other warranties are implied or expressed. This report may not be copied without the expressed written permission of PSI.

After the plans and specifications are more complete, the Geotechnical Engineer should be retained and provided the opportunity to review the final design plans and specifications to check that the engineering recommendations have been properly incorporated in the design documents. At this time, it may be necessary to submit supplementary recommendations. If PSI is not retained to perform these functions, PSI will not be responsible for the impact of those conditions on the project.

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Richter Architects for specific application to the proposed Unit Laredo Colombia LPOE Paving project in Laredo, Texas.

APPENDIX

Site Vicinity Map NOT TO SCALELaredo Columbia LPOE Paving

TX-255

Laredo, Texas

PSI Project No.: 0312-3017 3 Burwood Lane, San Antonio, Texas

(210) 342-9377 FAX (210) 342-9401

Project Site

Boring Location Plan

NOT TO SCALE

3 Burwood Lane, San Antonio, Texas

(210) 342-9377 FAX (210) 342-9401

Laredo Columbia LPOE Paving

TX-255

Laredo, Texas PSI Project No.: 0312-3017

- Approximate Boring Location

40 19

CONCRETE PAVEMENT - 9 inches

LEAN CLAY (CL) with SAND, brown, hard

LEAN CLAY (CL), gray, hard

Boring terminated at 15 feet.

50/5"

50/3"

50/5"

50/4"

BORING B-1

END OF DRILLING (ft.): N/A SEEPAGE (ft.): NONE ENCOUNTERED

DELAYED WATER LEVEL (FT): N/A

S A

M P

LE

S

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER

WC

P

LA

S T

IC

L

IM

IT

COMPLETION DEPTH: 15.0 Feet

20 40 60P

LA

S T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D E

X

R

Q D

R

Q D

R

Q D

DATE: 11/7/23

2.0 4.0 6.0

W A

T E

R

Elevation:

LL

LI

Q

U

ID

L

IM

IT

R

E T

A

IN

E D

D E

P T

H , F

T

R

Q D

M O

IS

T

U R

E C

O N

T E

N T

SOIL DESCRIPTION

P

A S

S

IN

G

R

E C

PL

S Y

M B

O L

U N

IT

D

R Y

W T

(L

B /C

U F

T

UNC CMP (TSF)HAND PEN (TSF)

Laredo Colombia LPOE Paving

TX-255, Laredo, Texas

Project No. 0312-3017 LOCATION: See Boring Location Plan

Elevation:

S

P T

N

T C

P

T

V A

LU

E

S

U N

C O

N F

. C O

M P

(T

S F

65 18

LEAN CLAY (CL) with SAND, brown, hard

- indication if cement stabilization in the top 6 inches

FAT CLAY (CH), gray, hard

Boring terminated at 15 feet.

50/5"

50/2"

50/3"

50/5"

BORING B-2

END OF DRILLING (ft.): N/A SEEPAGE (ft.): NONE ENCOUNTERED

DELAYED WATER LEVEL (FT): N/A

S A

M P

LE

S

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER

WC

P

LA

S T

IC

L

IM

IT

COMPLETION DEPTH: 15.0 Feet

20 40 60P

LA

S T

IC

IT

Y

IN

D E

X

R

Q D

R

Q D

R

Q D

DATE: 11/7/23

2.0 4.0 6.0

W A

T E

R

Elevation:

LL

LI

Q

U

ID

L

IM

IT

R

E T

A

IN

E D

D E

P T

H , F

T

R

Q D

M O

IS

T

U R

E C

O N

T E

N T

SOIL DESCRIPTION

P

A S

S

IN

G

R

E C

PL

S Y

M B

O L

U N

IT

D

R Y

W T

(L

B /C

U F

T

UNC CMP (TSF)HAND PEN (TSF)

Laredo Colombia LPOE Paving

TX-255, Laredo, Texas

Project No. 0312-3017 LOCATION: See Boring Location Plan

Elevation:

S

P T

N

T C

P

T

V A

LU

E

S

U N

C O

N F

. C O

M P

(T

S

35 18

FILL: SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, hard

- grades to gray at 6.5 feet

LEAN CLAY (CL) with SAND, firm to stiff

Boring terminated at 15 feet.

50/5"

50/5"

BORING B-3

END OF DRILLING (ft.): N/A SEEPAGE (ft.): NONE ENCOUNTERED

DELAYED WATER LEVEL (FT): N/A

S A

M P

LE

S

DEPTH TO GROUND WATER

WC

P

LA

S T

IC

L

IM

IT

COMPLETIO…