A001.pdf

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended. is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

Previous edition unusable

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

CENTRAL FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAY DIVISION

12300 WEST DAKOTA AVENUE, SUITE 360

LAKEWOOD, COLORADO 80228

ATTENTION:

5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

A001

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION

NUMBER

6982AF27B000003

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10/06/2026

11/03/2026

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

The purpose of this amendment is to add the 222-418A Tishomingo Pavement Report 4-23-26.

*FAILURE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THIS AMENDMENT IN BLOCK 19 OF THE SF 1442 BY THE DESIGNATED DATE AND HOUR SPECIFIED IN THE SOLICITATION MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR BID (REFER TO ITEM 11.)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

ERIC GROSSKREUZ

OK FW TSM 10(1)

FINAL

Tishomingo National Fish Hatchery

Entrance Road and Parking

Geotechnical and Pavement Report

Revised April 23rd, 2026

Tishomingo National Fish Hatchery, Oklahoma

Yeh Project No. 222-418A

April 23rd 2026

Prepared for:

AtkinsRealis 4600 Ulster, Suite 1100 Denver, Colorado 80237 Attn: Dustin Robbins, PE

Prepared by:

Yeh and Associates, Inc.

2000 Clay Street, Suite 200

Denver, Colorado 80211 Phone: 303-781-9590 i

Table of Contents

1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY

2. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

3. PROJECT AREA GEOLOGY

4. SITE INVESTIGATION

4.1 GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION

4.2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

5. SITE INVESTIGATION

5.1 RESULTS

5.2 SULFATE RESISTANCE AND CORROSION POTENTIAL

6. CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 SITE GRADING CONDITIONS

6.2 FILL MATERIALS AND PLACEMENT

6.3 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS

7. PAVEMENT DESIGN

7.1 TRAFFIC LOADING

7.2 PAVEMENT TREATMENTS

7.2.1 Existing Pavements

7.2.3 New Pavement Parking Areas

7.3 RECOMMENDED PAVEMENT THICKNESS

7.4 RECOMMENDED ASPHALT MIXES

8. SUBGRADE PREPARATION

9. LIMITATIONS

10. REFERENCES

ii

List of Figures

Figure 1

Figure 2 Project Area 3

Figure 3 4

List of Tables

Table 5-2 Analytical Test Results 6 Table 7-2 . . 10 Table 7-3 Recommended HMA . 10

List of Appendices

Appendix A Sample Locations

Appendix B Boring Legend and Logs

Appendix C Soil Test Data

Appendix D Pavement Design and Binder Recommendations

Tishomingo National Fish Hatchery Final Geotechnical and Pavement Report Hatchery Entrance Roads Yeh No. 222-418A

1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY

investigation and pavement recommendations for the construction of both new and rehabilitated

Asphalt Concrete Pavements (ACP). The project and location are shown in Figure 1. The purpose of this report is to provide the geotechnical investigation results and pavement recommendations for use by Hatchery and AtkinsRealis personnel for the rehabilitation of the Hatchery access roads and the initial paving of several parking areas.

Figure 1 Project Location

Our scope of work includes:

Sample soils to provide subsurface information.

Performing laboratory tests on select soil samples collected during subsurface investigation to determine the engineering characteristics of the on-site soils.

Preparing a report that:

o Summarizes field and laboratory data.

o Presents the results of geotechnical investigation.

o Provides asphalt concrete pavement (ACP) design recommendations.

2. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

The project location is within the Tishomingo National Fish Hatchery in south central Oklahoma. The existing pavements to be rehabilitated are Route 900, Route 901 and Route 010. New pavement sections for parking areas are located north of Route 901 and at Route 903 in the southwest area of the facility.

3. PROJECT AREA GEOLOGY

The project area, Figure 2, is mapped by the Oklahoma Geological Survey (Chang and Stanley, 2013) as

Precambrian-age Tishomingo Granite (Xti). This granite is typically coarse-grained and contains large pink phenocrysts of microcline in a matrix of pink microcline, white plagioclase, and clear quartz.

Mafic minerals present in the granite include biotite and rare hornblende. U/Pb zircon age dating indicates this granite is approximately 1363 million years old. Numerous faults offset Paleozoic and

Precambrian units adjacent to and north of the project area.

Figure 2 Project Area Geology Map

4. SITE INVESTIGATION

4.1 Geotechnical Exploration

The subsurface explorations were conducted on March 26, 2025. Soil samples were obtained using test pits dug by a small excavator as shown in Figure 3 as well as several hand auger samples. Asphalt pavement thickness varied from 3 to 4 inches and most paved areas had 4 to 5 inches of gravelly sand beneath the existing pavement.

Figure 3 Sampling and Typical Terrain

The sample locations were selected following utility clearances, and the locations are presented in

Appendix A. Bulk soil samples were taken from depths ranging up to 5 feet.

4.2 Subsurface Conditions

Hand auger sample YA-HA-1 taken on the shoulder near the entrance contained 3 inches of ACP with a sandy lean clay immediately below the paved shoulder. Sample YA-HT-2 taken from Route 900 contained 4 inches of ACP with 4 inches of gravel base and 6 inches of well graded sand beneath the pavement. Sample YA-HT-3 taken from Route 901 contained 3 inches of ACP on top of 5 inches gravelly sand with approximately 2 inches of clayey sand beneath.

Test pit sample YA-TP-1 (Rte. 900) contained silty sand over a sandy lean clay. Test pit sample YA-TP-2 near a future parking area at the junction of Rte. 900 and Rte. 901 contained 4 inches of non-plastic fill over 6 inches of gravelly sand. Silty clay with sand (CL-ML) underlies the gravelly sand in YA-TP-2.

Test pit sample YA-TP-3 located near Route 903 contained 6 inches of clayey sand with gravel over 6 inches of clayey sand on top of weathered sandy claystone.

The thickness of the ACP and various soils were recorded are presented on the boring Logs in

Appendix B.

At the time of drilling, groundwater was not encountered below the existing surface in any of the boring locations. Year-round groundwater observations were not performed as part of the field investigation. Groundwater conditions in the study area may vary throughout the year. Groundwater elevation variations can occur seasonally, following precipitation events, after site grading changes, and due to changes in surface and subsurface drainage characteristics of the surrounding area.

5. SITE INVESTIGATION

Testing was performed in the laboratory on selected soil samples to evaluate their engineering characteristics. Laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C and summarized on the boring logs in Appendix B. The following tests were performed in general accordance with locally recognized standards:

Sieve analysis (ASTM D6913)

Soil classification (ASTM D2487, D3282, AASHTO M145)

Natural moisture content determination (ASTM D2216)

Atterberg limits (ASTM D4318, AASHTO T89, T90)

Water-soluble sulfate content (ASTM D4327, AASHTO T290)

Water-soluble chloride content (ASTM D4327, AASHTO T291)

Resistivity (AASHTO T288) pH (AASHTO T289)

R-value (AASHTO T190)

5.1 Results

The sieve analysis and Atterberg limits test results were used to classify soils and bedrock according to

Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) and AASHTO standards. In general, the tested soils classified as sandy lean clay (CL), and silty clay with sand (CL-ML) and clayey sand (SC) according to the USCS.

These samples have AASHTO classifications of A-2, A-4 and A-6 according to AASHTO standards. The bedrock sample encountered a depth of approximately 1 foot in boring YA-TP-3 and was identified as weathered sandy claystone.

R-values of 14 (YA-HT-3) and 21 (YA-TP-2) were obtained from lab testing on bulk samples of the A-6 soils and A-4 soils, respectively. All the samples had plastic indices (PI) below 20.

Using equation 1.5.3 from the AASHTO 1993 Pavement Design Guide, a resilient modulus of 8,770 psi was calculated using the R-value of 14 for input to the pavement design program.

5.2 Sulfate Resistance and Corrosion Potential

Three representative soil samples were selected for chemical testing including water-soluble sulfate, chloride content, pH, and electrical resistivity. The test results are presented in Appendix C and summarized in Table 5.2.

The concentrations of water-soluble sulfates represent a Class 0 degree of sulfate attack on concrete exposed to these geologic materials. The degree of attack is based on a range of Class 0 (negligible) to

A qualified corrosion engineer should review the laboratory data and boring logs to determine the appropriate level of corrosion protection for materials in contact with these soils.

Table 5-2. Analytical Test Results

Boring No.

Sample

Depth (ft) Soil

Classification

Water- Soluble Sulfates

Water- Soluble

Chlorides (%) pH

Resistivity (ohm-cm)

YA-HA-1 0.3-4.5 A-6(3) CL 0.003 0.0210 7.7 9,000

YA-TP-1 2-3 A-4(2) - CL 0.002 0.0450 7.8 18,500

YA-TP-3 0.5-1.0 A-2-6(1) SC 0.006 0.0360 7.7 4,150

6. CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS

The following sections present recommendations for site preparation, ground improvement, excavation, subgrade preparation, fill placement, and surface drainage on the project. Site preparation and earthwork operations should be performed in accordance with the requirements presented in

Section 204 of FP-24. Earthwork should be observed and evaluated by a qualified representative of the engineer or project manager. The evaluation of earthwork should include observation and testing of engineered fills, ground improvement, subgrade preparation, foundation bearing soils, and other geotechnical conditions exposed during the construction of the project.

6.1 Site Grading Conditions

For any virgin alignment areas, site work should consist of stripping vegetation, organics, debris, and other deleterious materials from the proposed structure and pavement areas and any other areas to receive fill. All exposed surfaces should be free of mounds and depressions, which could prevent uniform compaction. Stripped materials consisting of vegetation and organic materials should be wasted from the site or used to revegetate landscaped areas after completion of grading operations.

Once properly cleared, all exposed areas which will receive fill should be scarified and compacted in accordance with Section 204 of FP-24.

Based upon the subsurface conditions encountered, subgrade soils exposed during construction are anticipated to be relatively stable. However, the stability of the subgrade may be affected by precipitation, repetitive construction traffic, and other factors. If unstable conditions are encountered or develop during construction, stability may be improved by scarifying and drying the subgrade soils.

In general, permanent cut slope angles in on-site overburden materials should not exceed 3H:1V, however, flatter slope angles may be necessary for revegetation.

6.2 Fill Materials and Placement

Prior to receiving fill or aggregate base, the exposed subgrade materials should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches and the scarified materials appropriately processed and compacted. Any imported embankment placed under the future pavement should have a minimum R-value of 14 to match or exceed the R-value of the on-site materials.

Visual inspection and proof rolling at the surface of the compacted fill and the subgrade is required to identify potential areas where the subgrade contains soft/loose soils. Areas which deform non-uniformly under heavy wheel loads should either be moisture conditioned and recompacted or excavated and replaced with select material such as Select Borrow conforming to Section 704.02 of

FP-24 and recompacted. The depth of over-excavation, if required, should be determined during construction.

Fill placed on existing slopes that are steeper than 4H:1V should be properly benched. Compaction should be performed in horizontal lifts that are 8 inches or less in loose thickness, using equipment and procedures that will produce a uniform fill with the required moisture contents and densities throughout the lift.

We recommend that the subgrade preparation process including soil excavation, the placement and compaction of materials, proof rolling, and visual inspection of foundation soils be observed and evaluated by the geotechnical engineer of record or the representative.

6.3 Drainage Considerations

Moisture conditions in the subgrade soils influence the performance of pavements, foundations, and other improvements. The risk of wetting these subgrade soils can be reduced by proper planning and maintenance of surface grades and drainage. Excessive wetting of the subsurface before, during, and after construction can cause movement of pavements and foundations. Precautions should be taken to avoid wetting or drying of open excavations for foundations and other earthwork.

Positive drainage away from the pavement structures should be provided. Proper design of drainage should include preventing the ponding of water on or immediately adjacent to structures and pavements. Surface features that could retain water in areas adjacent to the roadway or structures should be graded to drain. Backfill against structures should be moisture-conditioned, well-compacted, and free of all construction debris to reduce the possibility of moisture infiltration and migration.

7. PAVEMENT DESIGN

7.1 Traffic Loading

No traffic volumes or traffic loading information was provided for this project, but these roads service primarily local Hatchery traffic with limited large vehicles. The CFL minimum ESAL value of 50,000 was used for all pavement designs.

7.2 Pavement Treatments

As discussed in the tech memo dated April 7th 2025, following the preliminary scoping trip, the anticipated treatment for the existing pavements is full depth reclamation followed by a new ACP pavement. In later discussions, most areas of new pavement will be treated and paved allowing an elevation rise equivalent to the new pavement thickness. After later discussion, there are two areas along Route 900 where minimal pavement rise will be needed to match the elevation of existing facilities.

There are also two locations near YA-TP-2 and YA-TP-3 that are currently gravel covered and will become paved parking areas.

7.2.1 Existing Pavements

Since the existing pavements contain 3 to 4 inches of old ACP and test pits through the existing ACP revealed 4 to 5 inches of gravelly material beneath, we recommend that the existing pavements be treated with Full Depth Reclamation (FDR) to a depth of 6 inches followed by grading, compaction and placement of the new ACP.

7.2.2 No Rise Areas

For the areas on Route 900 where no rise is anticipated, we recommend that the paved areas be treated with 6 inches of FDR followed by removal of 3 inches and placement of the new ACP. There will be approximately 2 inches of old aggregate base beneath the FDR treated area, so credit for the old aggregate base is addressed in the pavement design for these areas.

7.2.3 New Pavement Parking Areas

For these areas, we recommend that the existing gravel be scarified, graded and recompacted followed by placement of a minimum of 4 inches of ABC and 3 inches of new ACP.

Table 7-1 presents the ACP design parameters for addressing all new and reconstructed pavement sections. This design was completed through the Win Pas program which follows the AASHTO 1993

Pavement Design Guide. ACP design parameters were obtained from Section 11.2.1 of the current version of the Federal Lands Highway Project Development and Design Manual (PDDM). Table 7-2 presents the input variables used for the pavement thickness determination.

Table 7-2. Pavement Design Parameters

Design Parameter Parameter Value Traffic Loading, 20-Year ESAL 50,000

Reliability (%) 75 Initial Serviceability 4.2

Terminal Serviceability 2.0 Overall Deviation 0.49 Subgrade R-value 14

Subgrade Resilient Modulus MR (psi) 8,770 HMA Structural Layer Coefficient

(/in.) 0.44

ABC Layer Coefficient (/in.) 0.12 Full Depth Reclamation (FDR) (/in.) 0.12

Existing ABC, (/in.) 0.08 Minimum Structural Number 1.79

7.3 Recommended Pavement Thickness

Table 7-3 presents the recommended pavement section thickness for each location. The Win Pas

Pavement design program output is presented in Appendix D. Structural numbers (SN) were determined by using equation 3.1, found in Figure 3.1, in the AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement

Structures 1993.

Table 7-3. Recommended HMA Pavement Thickness

Roadway Section Number of Lanes

Minimum

HMA

Thickness, in.

Minimum ABC or FDR

Thickness, in

Removal of

FDR

Minimum SN / Design SN

Rte. 900 & Rte. 901 2 3.0 6.0 - 1.79/2.20 Rte. 900 N. Rise 2 3.0 3.0 3 1.79/1.84

New Parking 2 3.0 4.0 - 1.79/1.80

7.4 Recommended Asphalt Mixes

The asphalt mixes for this project should be 75 gyration mixes meeting the requirements for either nominal ½ or ¾ inch mixes and conforming to the requirements in Section 703 of FP-24. The gradations should conform to Table 703-3 of FP-24.

Using the Long-Term Pavement Performance Binder Program (LTTPBind) the recommended asphalt binder based on data from the 5 closest weather stations is PG 70-16. The LTPPBind Binder Selection program output is presented in Appendix D following the pavement design program outputs.

8. SUBGRADE PREPARATION

All the areas to be paved are either existing paved roadways, or gravel surfaced areas. The paved areas are to be treated using full depth reclamation, so they will be graded to obtain desired cross slope and compacted. The gravel areas should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches, graded, compacted and any new gravel required placed and compacted prior to new ACP. We also recommend that any imported soil placed below the new pavement have a minimum R-value of 14.

If any areas require imported embankment, the area should also be scarified and compacted to a depth of 6 inches prior to placement of embankment.

9. LIMITATIONS

This study was conducted in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in this area for use by the client for design and construction purposes. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from exploratory borings and field review and the proposed type of construction. Subsurface variations across the site are likely and may not become evident until excavation is performed. If during construction, fill, soil, rock, or water conditions appear to be different from those described herein, this office should be advised at once so reevaluation of the recommendations may be made. We recommend on-site observation of excavations and pavement subgrade conditions by a representative of the geotechnical engineer.

10. REFERENCES

Marshall, Murray, and Pontotoc Counties, Oklahoma. Oklahoma Geological Survey Quadrangle OGQ-

88. Scale 1:100,000.

Guide to Durable Concrete, American Concrete Institute (ACI), Publication ACI 201.2R-01.

Standard Specification for Roads and Bridges on Federal Projects, FP-24, Federal Highway Administration, 2024.

Federal Lands Highway, Project Development and Design Manual, PDDM, 2018.

Federal Lands Highway, Project Development and Design Manual, PDDM, Chapter 11: Pavements, 2008.

AASHTO 1993 Pavement Design Guide, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Organization (AASHTO) 1993.

Geotechnical Aspects of Pavements, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), National Highway Institute (NHI) Publication No. NHI-05-037, May 2006.

Appendix A

SAMPLE LOCATIONS

Appendix B

BORING LEGEND AND LOGS

Appendix C

SOIL TEST DATA

Project No: Tishomingo Fish Hatchery Date: 4/2/2025

Gradation Atterberg Chloride

YA-HA-1 0.3-4.5 Bulk 13.7

1 44 55 23 12 11 7.7 0.003 9000 0.0210

A-6 ( 3 ) CL

YA-HT-2 0.3-1.1' Bulk 7.2

10 66 24

YA-HT-2 1.1-2 Bulk 12.4

2 44 54 20 13 7

A-4 ( 1 ) ML-CL

YA-HT-3 0.75-2.5 Bulk 20.4

0 27 73 30 15 15

14 A-6 ( 9 ) CL

YA-TP-1 2-3 Bulk 16.8

2 37 61 21 13 8 7.8 0.002 18500 0.0450

A-4 ( 2 ) CL

YA-TP-2 0-0.7 Bulk 6.0

26 56 18

YA-TP-2 0.7-1.5 Bulk 6.6

1 41 58 20 14 6

21 A-4 ( 1 ) ML-CL

YA-TP-3 0-0.5 Bulk 4.9

33 52 15 24 16 8

A-2-4 ( 0 ) SC

YA-TP-3 0.5-1 Bulk 21.0

20 46 34 36 18 18 7.7 0.006 4150 0.0360

A-2-6 ( 1 ) SC

LL PL PI

AASHTO USCS

% Swell (+) / Consoli-dation (-)

R-Value

CLASSIFICATION

Resistivity ohm.cm

Fines < #200

Summary of Laboratory Test Results

222-418A Project Name:

Sample Location Natural Moisture Content

Natural Dry

Density (pcf)

PH

Water

Soluble Sulfate %Boring No. (final) Depth (ft)

Sample Type

Gravel > #4

Sand

Rev 2 - 8/02 Page 1 of 1

Appendix D

PAVEMENT DESIGN AND BINDER RECOMMENDATION