Addendum_2_B-25-07-COC_Final.pdf

August 27, 2025

Addendum 2 To the Contract Documents and Specifications:

ITB # B-25-07-COC

Banana River Booster Station Chloramination Improvements

To All Plan Holders:

The following addresses and provides clarification of the Bidding Documents and Specifications as fully and completely as if the same were fully set forth therein. Receipt of this addendum must be noted on the Receipt of Addendum(s) and Acknowledgement Form.

1. Revise Specification Section 01 31 13 Paragraph 1.02 B 3 as follows by removing text shown in strikethrough and adding text shown in underline:

3. Coordinate and deliver to Engineer’s office hardware and standard software components as specified for PICS. Contractor shall provide components required to Engineer’s office a minimum of four (4) weeks prior to commencement of ORT2 and PAT.

2. Revise Specification Section 01 31 13 Paragraph 1.04 A as follows by removing text

A. Include the following work sequences and constraints in the Progress Schedule:

1. The Banana River Booster Station (BRBS) operates daily to supply water to a portion of the City of Cocoa distribution system. Each day, the operation of the BRBS cycles between filling the ground storage tanks from the distribution system; and pumping water stored in the ground storage tanks into the distribution system.

2. The entire BRBS may be taken offline continuously between January 1, 2026 through April 30May 31, 2026 to perform the Work. Work not

Finance Department, Purchasing 65 Stone Street • Cocoa, FL 32922

PHONE: (321) 433-8844

www.CocoaFL.gov requiring the BRBS to be offline may be performed outside the January 1, 2026 through April 30May 31, 2026 window. Notify City 30 days prior to needing the BRBS offline. City will isolate the BRBS from the distribution system by closing a 24 inch valve near the intersection of the BRBS access road and S.R. 520.

3. The existing sodium hypochlorite feed system including the tank, piping and chemical feed pump skid may be taken offline and demolished between December 1, 2025 through April 30May 31, 2026 to perform the Work associated with the upgrade of the new sodium hypochlorite and ammonium sulfate chemical systems. This part of the Work shall be performed during the same time frame as the remainder of the Work described above. Notify City 30 days prior to taking existing sodium hypochlorite feed system offline. Contractor shall be responsible for safely removing and disposing of remaining sodium hypochlorite in existing system.

4. Prior to taking the BRBS offline, all equipment and materials required to perform the Work must be at the Site. All equipment and materials must be approved in accordance with Section 01 33 00, Submittal Procedures.

5. After the BRBS is taken offline, the Work must be substantially complete by April 30May 31, 2026 of the same year including, but not limited to the following:

a. All startup, training, and functional and performance testing.

b. Cleaning, disinfection, and submission of passing bacteriological test results to Engineer. Engineer will submit request for clearance along with bacteriological test results to FDEP for approval to place BRBS back into operation.

c. The BRBS must be functional and operational. Operation of the BRBS consists of remotely filling the storage tanks from the distribution system, pumping finished water from the storage tanks to the distribution system, and adding sodium hypochlorite to the finished water as it is pumped to the distribution system. Operation of the BRBS requires all components of these systems to be functional including, but not limited to, valves, instrumentation, electrical components, and communications. Emergency backup power is not required for the BRBS to be functional and operational.

d. Generator Demolition Constraints:

1) Generator is Contractor’s to dispose of.

2) Existing bridge crane may be used to remove portions of the generator. Any damage to the bridge crane from the Contractor’s misuse shall be repaired at no cost to the Owner.

3) Existing louvers on the building are allowed to be removed to allow demolition of the generator.

Reinstallation and correction of any damages shall be at no cost to the Owner.

6. After the BRBS is taken offline and the Work complete, the facility is required to be disinfected by the Contractor in accordance with Section 33 13 00, Disinfection of Water Utility Distribution Facilities. City shall disinfect the interior of the two ground storage tanks. Contractor shall be responsible for disinfecting all piping and equipment from the ground storage tanks to the 24-inch discharge valve near the intersection of the BRBS access road and S.R. 520. Refer to FDEP permit for additional requirements.

7. The Work components listed below may be completed after May 31, 2026 if this Work does not interfere with function and operation of the BRBS. Temporary shutdowns to install and / or test the components below are acceptable if coordinated with the Owner as specified herein.

a. Ammonium sulfate chemical storage and feed system.

b. Emergency backup power generation system.

c. Tank access stairs, bridge, and lighting.

d. Booster Station PLC.

3. Revise Specification Section 2 6 3 2 1 3 Paragraph 2 .01 A as follows by removing text

2. Cummins

4. Section 3.03 Liquidated Damages of the Original ITB is removed and replaced with the updated attached 3.03 Liquidated Damages shown below:

3.03 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES

Upon failure of Contractor to obtain Substantial Completion within the deadline as established in the contract, plus approved time extensions, Contractor shall pay to City the sum of One Hundred ($100.00) for each building for each calendar day after the deadline for Substantial Completion, plus any approved time extensions, until Substantial Completion is obtained. After Substantial Completion, should Contractor fail to complete the remaining Work within the deadline as established in the contract, plus approved time extensions thereof, Contractor shall pay to City the sum equal to fifty percent (50%) of applicable amount for each calendar day after the deadline for Final Completion, plus any approved extensions, until Final Completion is obtained. These amounts are not penalties but are liquidated damages to City for its inability to obtain full beneficial use/occupancy of the Project. Liquidated damages are hereby fixed and agreed upon between the Parties; recognizing the impossibility of precisely ascertaining the amount of damages that will be sustained by City as a consequence of such delay; And both Parties desiring to obviate any question of dispute concerning the amount of said damages and the cost and effect of the failure of Contractor to complete this Contract on time. The above-stated liquidated damages shall apply separately to each portion of the Project for which a deadline for completion is given.

The full amount of such damages shall be deducted from payments due the Contractor or obtained by other legitimate means of recovery if earned payments withheld are inadequate to cover such damages.

Applicable liquidated damages are the amounts established in the following schedule:

Original Contract Amount Daily Charge Per Calendar Day $50,000 and under ........................................................$956 Over $50,000 but less than $250,000............................$964 $250,000 but less than $500,000.................................$1,241 $500,000 but less than $2,500,000..............................$1,665 \$2,500,000 but less than $5,000,000...........................$2,712 $5,000,000 but less than $10,000,000.........................$3,447 $10,000,000 but less than $15,000,000.......................$4,866 $15,000,000 but less than $20,000,000.......................$5,818

The City has the right to apply, as payment on such liquidated damages, any money the City owes the Contractor. The City does not waive its right to liquidated damages due under the Contract by allowing the Contractor to continue and finish the work, or any part of it, after the expiration of the Contract Time including granted time extensions.

In the case of default of the Contract and the completion of the work by the City, the Contractor and his surety are liable for the liquidated damages under the Contract, but the City will not charge liquidated damages for any delay in the final completion of the City’s performance of the work due to any unreasonable action or delay on the part of the City.

The City considers the Contract complete when the Contractor has completed all work and the City has accepted the work. The City will then release the Contractor from further obligation except as set forth in his bond.

5. Revise Specification Section 40 90 00 by replacing “Supplement 4, PLC and Network Component List” with the attached “Supplement 4, PLC and Network Component List (Revised)”, attached to this addendum.

6. Revise Technical Specifications by adding “Appendix A”, attached to this addendum.

7. The bid due date and time is extended to September 5, 2025 at 3:00PM local time to allow additional time to prepare a response as a result of these modifications.

8. Note Exhibit B is plotted to 11x17 inches, but the intended drawing size and scales are referenced to 22x34 inches. If scaling the drawings adjust the scale or upscale the drawings evenly. Use reference bar on each sheet for 1 inch on full size drawings.

9. This addendum includes and addresses the following questions:

1. Is there an engineer’s estimate for this project?

The City prefers not to share this information.

2. Under spec section 26 32 13.13, 2.01 Manufacturers, can Cummins be added as an approved supplier of the generator?

Refer to item 3 of this addendum for specification modification allowing Cummins as an approved supplier.

3. The substantial completion time for this project is given as 151 days.

Also, the work sequencing / constraints states that the entire BRBS may be taken offline continuously between January 1 through April 30 to perform the work.

Some of the material for this project will have long lead times. All lead time stated start after approval of shop drawings. Using 4 weeks for purchasing and 4 weeks for receiving submittals; then another 4 weeks for Owner / Engineer approval; we are now out to 12 weeks until material is release for fabrication and delivery to the job site.

As of today, the valves will take 10 to 16 weeks for fabrication and delivery. The pipe and fittings will take 6 to 10 weeks for fabrication and delivery. The flow meter will take 15 to 20 weeks for fabrication and delivery. The chemical feed equipment will take 6 to 10 weeks for fabrication and delivery. The electrical equipment will take 24 to 30 weeks for fabrication and delivery. The standby generator will take 30 to 40 weeks for fabrication and delivery.

We cannot start any work at the job site until the longest lead item is delivered. From the lead time listed above, the pipe and flow meter will not be delivered until 32 weeks after the notice to proceed. The chemical feed equipment will not be delivered until 22 weeks after the notice to proceed. The electrical equipment will not be delivered until 42 weeks after notice to proceed. The generator will not be delivered until 52 weeks after the notice to proceed.

After the last item is delivered, we will need 4 weeks to complete the work.

Next, if the work has to be done from January 1 through April 30 time frame, the Will you please adjust the contact substantial completion time to the times listed above? Or provide additional feedback on how to complete in the time frame given.

project has to be extended until April 30, 2027.

Refer to item 2 in this addendum for revised contract times.

4. Will you please provide the name of the prestressed tank builder who built the prestressed tanks that are on this project?

Crom Corporation

5. On page 55 of the ITB, Section A, it appears that the blank spaces for information are not in the correct spots. Where “Name of Entity..” Is, there should be a blank space for the address to be listed. Can this form be updated in an addendum?

See Attachment “I” REVISED Conflict of Interest and Non-Collusion Statement which is uploaded as a separate file with this Addendum.

6. For liquidated damages, it states “As agreed upon”, is there a daily amount for liquidated damages?

Refer to item 4 of this addendum for liquidated damage information.

7. Does the new hand rail around the top of the existing prestressed tanks have to be furnished and installed by the original tank builder or can the contractor do this with his own personal?

Hand rail may be installed by Contractor, but all anchoring must be coordinated with the tank builder as indicated on note #1 sheet 10-S-201. Handrails shall be furnished in coordination with the tank builder to ensure loads and connection points are adequate.

8. On drawing 23 section A the pipe piece just below the flange tee is not labeled. I have assumed that this is another flange valve- V-500. Is the assumption correct?

Per plan sheet 05-Y-203 there is a V-500 valve in the vertical below the flanged tee.

9. Do you have a soil report for this project? If not, at what elevation is ground water at for the 20” pipeline and meter vault?

Refer to Appendix A, attached to this Addendum.

10. What are the liquidated damages for this project?

Refer to item 4 of this addendum for liquidated damage information.

11. Contract Length (requesting extension), Document Reference: ITB Document, Para. 1.03

- PROJECT COMPLETION TIME, Stated for this Project is a Substantial Completion of 151 Days; with a Final Completion of 30 Days beyond the Substantial Completion (or 181 Days). We feel this is inadequate to meet typical timelines for Shop Drawing Submittal & Approval; Control Panel Fabrication and Delivery to Site; and then on-site mounting/installation, followed by Start-up/Commissioning. Accordingly, we specifically request that the dates of Substantial and Final Completion be adjusted as follows: SC - 240 Days; FC - 270 Days.

Refer to item 2 of this addendum for revised contract times.

12. Liquidated Damages, Document Reference: ITB Document ? Unable to locate the identified Liquidated Damages for this Project -- typically provided on a per-day amount based on not meeting the Substantial or Final Completions as stated. Please state these LD's, or otherwise indicate where these are stated.

Refer to item 4 of this addendum for liquidated damage information.

13. Software, Document Reference: 40 90 00-1.01-F.4, Please confirm that the PICs Supplier does not need to provide any PLC or HMI software for this project.

Refer to the specification section 40 90 00, 1.01, F, 4.

14. Application Software (Programming), Document Reference: 40 90 00-1.01-F.5, Please confirm that the PICs Supplier will not be responsible for the Application Programming for the PLC and the HMI on this project.

Refer to the specification section 40 90 00, 1.01, F, 5. The Automation Solutions Provider role and duties are provided by a 3rd party under a separate contract.

15. Ethernet Switch, Document Reference: 40 90 00 Supplement 4-1 / 40 91 00-2.03-M, Please clarify the Manufacturer and Model number for the Managed Ethernet Switch.

Section 40 90 00 Supplement 4-1 states it will be a Transition Networks SISPM1040- 362-LRT, and section 40 91 00-2.03-M states it will be a Siemens SCALANCE XC206.

Refer to revised 40 90 00 Supplement 4 PLC and Network Components, addendum number 2.

16. Telemetry/Communications pathway into SCADA for Remote Sites, Document Reference: 40 90 00; 40 91 00, Drawing: 08-N-601 through 08-N-604, While the I&C ("N") Drawings don't generally show the I/O tie-in's and extensions into SCADA beyond the MCP, it was described during site-visit that the off-site tie-in of Control and Monitoring (SCADA) was at-first telemeterd via radio; then recently upgraded to a Fiber Optics communication solution. Specification 40 90 00 - 1.01-F-5 & -6 describes the roles and responsibilities of both the Automation Solution Provider ("ASP") and the PIC Supplier (commonly recognized as the I&C sub-contractor for this Project). As with the PLC and Local Touchscreen responsibilities, please confirm that all off-site SCADA screen modifications, as well as the tie-in / re-establishment of communications -- is likewise the responsibility of the ASP (and NOT the PIC Supplier).

The Contractor is responsible for connecting the new PLC panel to the existing fiber patch panel. Off-site SCADA screen modifications are provided by the ASP.

All other Bidding/Contract Documents and Specifications remain unchanged.

Should there be additional questions or clarification needed please contact the Purchasing and Contracts Division at purchasing@cocoafl.org.

Brian Dale, Purchasing Manger City of Cocoa mailto:purchasing@cocoafl.org

Banana River Booster Station Chloramination Improvements

Description Qty. Model Manufacturer Comments Banana River Main Control Panel

Banana River Main Control Panel

Banana River Simatic S7-1500 CPU, 1511-1 PN 1 SC 6ES75111AL030AB0 Siemens Provide all required ancilliary PLC hardware including but not limited to front connectors, etc for a fully functional PLC system

Banana River Simatic S7 Memory Card 2 GB 1 SC 6ES79548LP040AA0 Siemens Banana River Power Supply S7-1500 PM1507 1 SC 6EP13334BA00 Siemens Power Supply input 120VAC; Output 24VDC, 8 Amps Banana River Digital Input Module, DI 16X24VDC HF 2 SC 6ES75211BH000AB0 Siemens 16 point module; 24V DC Banana River Simatic S7-1500, Digital Output Module 1 SC 6ES75221BH010AB0 Siemens 16 point module; 24V DC Banana River S7-1500 AI 8XU/I HF Analog Input Module 4 SC 6ES75317NF000AB0 Siemens 8 point, isolated AI module; 16-bit resolution Banana River S7-1500 AQ 4XU/I HF Analog Output Module 1 SC 6ES75325ND000AB0 Siemens 4 point, isolated AO module; 16-bit resolution Banana River Front Connector, Screw Type (35MM MOD) 9 SC 6ES75921AM000XB0 Siemens Banana River Mounting Rail for Terminals 482MM (19") 1 SC 6ES75901AE800AA0 Siemens Banana River Connector IE FC RJ45 180 DEG, 1 Piece 1 SC 6GK19011BB102AA0 Siemens Banana River Managed Hardened Switch (SCALANCE XC206) 1 6GK52062BB002AC2 Siemens Banana River Fiber Optic Transceivers 2 SC 6GK59921AL008AA0 Siemens Managed Switch Fiber Optic Transceivers, SFP GIGABIT Banana River SIMATIC HMI MTP700 Unified Comfort Panel, 7" Touch 1 6AV2128-3GB06-0AX1 Siemens Touch Screen Operator Panel Banana River SIMATIC SD Indoor Card, 32 GB 1 6AV6881-0AP40-0AA0 Siemens Touch Screen Operator Panel Memory Card

Spare Parts ENS-SPARE Scalance X Accessory, SFP992-1 1 X 1000M 2 SC 6GK59921AL008AA0 Siemens Managed Switch Fiber Optic Transceivers, SFP GIGABIT

SUPPLEMENT 4

PLC AND NETWORK COMPONENTS LIST (Revised)

PW\JA (CLOUD)\EEXK9600

8/27/2025

©COPYRIGHT 2025 JACOBS

PLC AND NETWORK COMPONENTS LIST

40 90 00 SUPPLEMENT 4 - 1Page 9 of 22

Appendix A

Subsurface Exploration Report

September 13, 2024

Kimley-Horn & Associates 7341 Office Park Place #102 Melbourne, Florida 32940

Attention: Ms. Alyssa Colby

Reference: Limited Subsurface Exploration

Banana River Booster Station

SR 520

Merritt Island, Florida

UES Project Number 0330.2400121.0000 Universal Docs No. 2109731

Dear Ms. Colby:

As requested, UES Professional Solutions, LLC (UES) has completed a limited subsurface exploration program at the above referenced facility in Merritt Island, Florida. Our exploration was authorized by Mr. Kinan Husainy of Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. under Order Number 147984000 and was conducted as enumerated in UES’s Proposal #0330.0524.00010. This work was performed in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. The boring location & depth drilled were chosen by the client. The following report presents the results and methodologies of our limited subsurface exploration.

Please note that this work has been limited in scope and no analyses or recommendations are presented in this report.

FIELD METHODOLOGIES

During this exploration program, a total of one (1) standard penetration test (SPT) boring was drilled to a depth of 30 feet below existing grades (bls). This boring was performed in general accordance with the procedures of ASTM D 1586 (Standard Method for Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils). The SPT drilling technique involves driving a standard split-barrel sampler into the soil by a 140 pound hammer, free falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler 1 foot, after an initial seating of 6 inches, is designated the penetration resistance, or N-value, an index to soil strength and consistency.

The soil samples recovered from the split-barrel sampler were visually inspected and classified in general accordance with the guidelines of ASTM D 2487 (Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes [Unified Soil Classification System]).

Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) tests were performed within the upper portions of the SPT borehole, to help further determine soil consistencies. The DCP tests were performed at 1 foot intervals in general accordance with the procedures developed by Professor G. F. Sowers and Charles S. Hedges (ASCE, 1966).

Banana River Booster Station, SR 520 Universal Project No. 0330.2400121.0000 Merritt Island, Florida Limited Subsurface Exploration

The basic procedure for the DCP test is as follows: A standard 1.5 inch diameter conical point is driven into the soil by a 15-pound steel hammer falling 20 inches. Following the seating of the point to a depth of 2 inches, the number of blows required to drive the sampler an additional

1.75 inches is designated the penetration resistance.

The location of the SPT boring was designated by the client prior to the commencement of drilling operations. UES located the test boring in the field using a hand held GPS receiver. No survey control was provided on-site, and our boring location should be considered only as accurate as implied by the methods of measurement used. The approximate location of the SPT borehole, designated B1, is shown on the attached Figure 1.

LABORATORY TESTING –SUBSOIL MATERIALS

We completed #200 sieve particle size analyses on four (4) representative samples from the SPT boring location. These samples were tested according to the procedures listed ASTM D 1140 (Standard Test Method for Amount of Material in Soils Finer than the No. 200 Sieve). In part, ASTM D 1140 requires a thorough mixing the sample with water and flushing it through a No. 200 sieve until all of the particles smaller than the sieve size leave the sample.

The percentage of the material finer than the No. 200 sieve helps determine the textural nature of the soil sample and aids in evaluating its engineering characteristics. The percentage of materials passing the #200 sieve is shown on the attached boring log at the approximate depth sampled.

ATTERBERG LIMITS TEST ASTM D-4318 (FM1-T90)

An Atterberg limits test was attempted on one (1) sample at a depth of 15 feet bls from the SPT boring location. The Atterberg limits (ASTM D-4318) are the upper and lower limits of the range of water content over which a soil exhibits plastic behavior, and are defined as the liquid limit and plastic limit, respectively.

The liquid limit is estimated as follows: The soil is mixed with distilled water to form a thick paste, which is then placed in a brass cup mounted on an edge pivot and rests initially on a rubber base, The base is then leveled off horizontally and divided by cutting a groove with a standard tool, The two halves of the soil gradually flow together as the cup is repeatedly dropped onto its base at a specified rate. The liquid limit is defined as the water content at which 25 blows are required to close the grove over a distance of 1 cm.

The plastic limit is estimated as follows: The soil is mixed with distilled water until it can be molded. A ball of soil is then rolled into a thread 1/8 inch in diameter between the hand and a glass plate. The soil is molded together again and the process repeated until the thread cracks when its diameter is 1/8 inch. The water content of the soil at this state is determined and defined as the plastic limit.

The sample to be tested could not be rolled into an 1/8th inch thread. Therefore, the sample was determined to be non-plastic.

SOIL STRATIGRAPHY

The results of our field exploration, together with pertinent information obtained from the SPT boring are shown on the attached boring log sheet. The soil profiles were prepared from the field log after the recovered soil samples were examined by a Geotechnical Engineer. The stratification lines shown on the boring log represent the approximate boundaries between soil types, and may not depict exact subsurface soil conditions. The actual soil boundaries may be more transitional than depicted.

For more detailed subsurface information, please see the boring logsattached in Appendix A of this report.

EXISTING GROUNDWATER LEVEL

Groundwater level readings were taken on August 20, 2024. The groundwater table was encountered at the boring location at a depth of 4.6 feet bls, as shown on the attached boring logs. Fluctuations in groundwater levels should be anticipated throughout the year, primarily due to seasonal variations in rainfall, surface runoff, and other factors that may vary from the time the boring was conducted.

GENERAL QUALIFICATIONS

Please note that this report is based on a limited subsurface exploration program with the scope of services, approximate boring location and depth as designated by the client. The information submitted in this report is based on data obtained from the soil boring performed at the location indicated on the attached Figure 1, and from other information as referenced. We cannot be held responsible for the conclusion or interpretations of this data made by others.

This report does not reflect any variations which may occur across the site. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until the course of future explorations or future construction. If variations then become evident, it will be necessary for re-evaluation of the information contained in this report after performing on-site observations during the construction period and noting the characteristics of any variations.

Deleterious soils were not encountered at our boring location; however, we cannot completely preclude their presence across the project area. Therefore, this report should not be used for estimating such items as cut and fill quantities.

Borings for a typical geotechnical report are widely spaced and generally not sufficient for reliably detecting the presence of isolated, anomalous surface or subsurface conditions, or reliably estimating unsuitable or suitable material quantities. Accordingly, UES does not recommend relying on our boring information to negate presence of anomalous materials or for estimation of material quantities unless our contracted services specifically include sufficient exploration for such purpose(s) and within the report we so state that the level of exploration provided should be sufficient to detect such anomalous conditions or estimate such quantities.

Therefore, UES will not be responsible for any extrapolation or use of our data by others beyond the purpose(s) for which it is applicable or intended.

All users of this report are cautioned that there was no requirement for UES to attempt to locate any man-made buried objects or identify any other potentially hazardous conditions that may exist at the site. Therefore, no attempt was made by UES to locate or identify such concerns.

UES cannot be responsible for any buried man-made objects or environmental hazards which may be subsequently encountered during construction that are not discussed within the text of this report. We can provide this service if requested.

For a further description of the scope and limitations of this report please review the document attached within Exhibit 1 "Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report" prepared by GBA/The Geoprofessional Business Association.

CLOSURE

We appreciate the opportunity to be working with you on this project and look forward to a continued association. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you should have any questions, or if we may further assist you as your plans proceed.

Sincerely yours, UES PROFESSIONAL SOLUTIONS, LLC.

Certificate of Authorization No. 549

Brad Faucett, M.S. P.E.

Regional Engineer Florida Registration No. 33123

1 – Client (by e-mail) Attachments, UES DOCS# 2109731

FIGURES

BORING LOCATION PLAN

BANANA RIVER BOOSTER STATION

1950 E MERRITT ISLAND CSWY

MERRITT ISLAND, FLORIDA

B1

APPENDIX A

4-8-10

4-7-9

2-4-4

4-5-5

3-4-4

1-2-2

2-2-2

2-4-7

10-16-20

9-12-13

10-9-10

8*

7*

4* fine SAND, trace of broken shell and roots, brown, [SP] (fill) fine SAND with clay, trace of roots, brown, [SP-SC] (fill) fine SAND, trace of broken shell, brown, [SP] fine SAND with broken shell, grey, [SP] fine SAND with clay, broke shell and occasional cemented rock layers, gray, [SP-SC] fine SAND with broken shell, grey, [SP] fine SAND, grey, [SP] fine SAND with silt, gray, [SP-SM]

BORING TERMINATED AT 30'

* DENOTES DYNAMIC CONE

PENETROMETER (DCP) VALUE.

CLIENT:

LOCATION:

REMARKS:

G.S. ELEVATION (ft):

WATER TABLE (ft):

DATE OF READING:

EST. W.S.W.T. (ft):

DATE STARTED:

DATE FINISHED:

DRILLED BY:

TYPE OF SAMPLING:

SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN 4.6

8/20/2024

8/20/24

8/20/24

JL, JH

UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES

BORING LOG

PROJECT NO.:

REPORT NO.:

APPENDIX:

PROJECT: BORING DESIGNATION: SHEET:

SECTION: TOWNSHIP: RANGE:

DEPTH

(FT.)

S A M P L E

BLOWS

PER 6"

INCREMENT

N

(BLOWS/

FT.)

W.T.

S Y M B O L

DESCRIPTION

-200

MC

ATTERBERG

LIMITS

LL PI

K

(FT./

DAY)

ORG.

CONT.

0330.2400121.0000

A

BANANA RIVER STATION

SR 520

MERRITT ISLAND, FLORIDA

B L3

_2

B1 1 of 1

MH/OH

[ML,CL-ML,CL,MH,CH,OL,OH]

Silt or Clay or Gravel [SM,SC,GM,GC] Silty or Clayey Sand

Silt or Clay with Sand or Gravel

[ML,CL-ML,CL,MH,CH,OL,OH]

or Clay [SP-SM,SP-SC] Sand or Gravel with Silt

GRAVELS [GW]

[GP-GC]

GRAVELS WITH CLAY

POORLY-GRADED

[GP-GM]

GRAVELS WITH SILT

POORLY-GRADED

POORLY-GRADED

WELL-GRADED

GRAVELS [GP]

SILTY CLAYEY SANDS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM.

** LOCALLY MAY BE KNOWN AS MUCK.

IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 2487 - UNIFIED SOIL

HARD - more than 30 Blows/ft.

VERY STIFF - 17 to 30 Blows/ft.

STIFF - 9 to 16 Blows/ft.

FIRM - 5 to 8 Blows/ft.

SOFT - 3 to 4 Blows/ft.

VERY SOFT - 0 to 2 Blows/ft.

SLIGHT PLASTICITY

(SILT AND CLAY)

(SAND AND GRAVEL)

RELATIVE DENSITY

SCIENCES, INC.

ENGINEERING

UNIVERSAL

CH/OH

VERY LOOSE - 0 to 4 Blows/ft.

LOOSE - 5 to 10 Blows/ft.

MEDIUM DENSE - 11 to 30 Blows/ft.

DENSE - 31 to 50 Blows/ft.

VERY DENSE - more than 50 Blows/ft.

P

A

SS

IN

G

N O

.2

S

IE

VE

[ML,CL-ML,CL,MH,CH,OL,OH]

Sandy or Gravelly Silt or Clay

[SC-SM]

INORGANIC SILTS

HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILSFINE GRAINED SOILSCOARSE GRAINED SOILS

INORGANIC CLAYS

[CL-ML]

LOW PLASTICITY

INORGANIC SILTY CLAY

[ML]

CL/OL

GROUP NAME AND SYMBOL

KEY TO BORING LOGS

SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART*

NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS APPENDIX A.1

CONTENTS [PT]**

WITH HIGH ORGANIC

POORLY-GRADED

ML/OLCL-ML

PLASTICITY CHART

LIQUID LIMIT

PL

A

ST

IC

IT

Y

IN

D

EX

Sand or Gravel [SP,SW,GP,GW]

[SC]

PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS

PLASTICITY [OH]**

MEDIUM TO HIGH

ORGANIC SILTS/CLAYS

PLASTICITY [CH]

INORGANIC CLAYS HIGH

PLASTICITY [MH]

INORGANIC SILTS HIGH

LOW PLASTICITY [OL]**

ORGANIC SILTS/CLAYS

LOW TO MEDIUM

CLAYEY SANDS

[SM]

SILTY SANDS

[SP-SC]

SANDS WITH CLAY

POORLY-GRADED

SANDS [SW]

PLASTICITY [CL]

SANDS [SP]

[SP-SM]

0 10090807060

CONSISTENCY

WELL-GRADED

[GC]

CLAYEY GRAVELS

[GM]

SILTY GRAVELS

POORLY-GRADED

SANDS WITH SILT

EXHIBIT 1

Geotechnical-Engineering Report Important Information about This

Subsurface problems are a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes.

While you cannot eliminate all such risks, you can manage them. The following information is provided to help.

The Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA) has prepared this advisory to help you – assumedly a client representative – interpret and apply this geotechnical-engineering report as effectively as possible. In that way, clients can benefit from a lowered exposure to the subsurface problems that, for decades, have been a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. If you have questions or want more information about any of the issues discussed below, contact your GBA-member geotechnical engineer.

Active involvement in the Geoprofessional Business Association exposes geotechnical engineers to a wide array of risk-confrontation techniques that can be of genuine benefit for everyone involved with a construction project.

Geotechnical-Engineering Services Are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of their clients. A geotechnical-engineering study conducted for a given civil engineer will not likely meet the needs of a civil-works constructor or even a different civil engineer. Because each geotechnical-engineering study is unique, each geotechnical-engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. Those who rely on a geotechnical-engineering report prepared for a different client can be seriously misled. No one except authorized client representatives should rely on this geotechnical-engineering report without first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one

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

Read this Report in Full Costly problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical engineering report did not read it in its entirety. Do not rely on an executive summary. Do not read selected elements only. Read this report in full.

You Need to Inform Your Geotechnical Engineer about Change Your geotechnical engineer considered unique, project-specific factors when designing the study behind this report and developing the confirmation-dependent recommendations the report conveys. A few typical factors include:

Typical changes that could erode the reliability of this report include those that affect:

As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project changes – even minor ones – and request an assessment of their impact. The geotechnical engineer who prepared this report cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems that arise because the geotechnical engineer was not informed about developments the engineer otherwise would have considered.

This Report May Not Be Reliable Do not rely on this report if your geotechnical engineer prepared it:

Note, too, that it could be unwise to rely on a geotechnical-engineering report whose reliability may have been affected by the passage of time, because of factors like changed subsurface conditions; new or modified codes, standards, or regulations; or new techniques or tools. If your geotechnical engineer has not indicated an “apply-by” date on the report, ask what it should be, and, in general, if you are the least bit uncertain about the continued reliability of this report, contact your geotechnical engineer before applying it. A minor amount of additional testing or analysis – if any is required at all – could prevent major problems.

Most of the “Findings” Related in This Report Are Professional Opinions Before construction begins, geotechnical engineers explore a site’s subsurface through various sampling and testing procedures.

Geotechnical engineers can observe actual subsurface conditions only at those specific locations where sampling and testing were performed. The data derived from that sampling and testing were reviewed by your geotechnical engineer, who then applied professional judgment to form opinions about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual sitewide-subsurface conditions may differ – maybe significantly – from those indicated in this report. Confront that risk by retaining your geotechnical engineer to serve on the design team from project start to project finish, so the individual can provide informed guidance quickly, whenever needed.

This Report’s Recommendations Are Confirmation-Dependent The recommendations included in this report – including any options or alternatives – are confirmation-dependent. In other words, they are not final, because the geotechnical engineer who developed them relied heavily on judgment and opinion to do so. Your geotechnical engineer can finalize the recommendations only after observing actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. If through observation your geotechnical engineer confirms that the conditions assumed to exist actually do exist, the recommendations can be relied upon, assuming no other changes have occurred. The geotechnical engineer who prepared this report cannot assume responsibility or liability for confirmation-dependent recommendations if you fail to retain that engineer to perform construction observation.

This Report Could Be Misinterpreted Other design professionals’ misinterpretation of geotechnical-engineering reports has resulted in costly problems. Confront that risk by having your geotechnical engineer serve as a full-time member of the design team, to:

You should also confront the risk of constructors misinterpreting this report. Do so by retaining your geotechnical engineer to participate in prebid and preconstruction conferences and to perform construction observation.

Give Constructors a Complete Report and Guidance Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can shift unanticipated-subsurface-conditions liability to constructors by limiting the information they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent the costly, contentious problems this practice has caused, include the complete geotechnical-engineering report, along with any attachments or appendices, with your contract documents, but be certain to note conspicuously that you’ve included the material for informational purposes only. To avoid misunderstanding, you may also want to note that “informational purposes” means constructors have no right to rely on the interpretations, opinions, conclusions, or recommendations in the report, but they may rely on the factual data relative to the specific times, locations, and depths/elevations referenced. Be certain that constructors know they may learn about specific project requirements, including options selected from the report, only from the design drawings and specifications. Remind constructors that they may perform their own studies if they want to, and be sure to allow enough time to permit them to do so. Only then might you be in a position to give constructors the information available to you, while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions. Conducting prebid and preconstruction conferences can also be valuable in this respect.

Read Responsibility Provisions Closely Some client representatives, design professionals, and constructors do not realize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disciplines. That lack of understanding has nurtured unrealistic expectations that have resulted in disappointments, delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. To confront that risk, geotechnical engineers commonly include explanatory provisions in their reports.

Sometimes labeled “limitations,” many of these provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers’ responsibilities begin and end, to help others recognize their own responsibilities and risks. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should respond fully and frankly.

Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered The personnel, equipment, and techniques used to perform an environmental study – e.g., a “phase-one” or “phase-two” environmental site assessment – differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical-engineering study. For that reason, a geotechnical-engineering report does not usually relate any environmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants.

Unanticipated subsurface environmental problems have led to project failures. If you have not yet obtained your own environmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk-management guidance. As a general rule, do not rely on an environmental report prepared for a different client, site, or project, or that is more than six months old.

Obtain Professional Assistance to Deal with Moisture Infiltration and Mold While your geotechnical engineer may have addressed groundwater, water infiltration, or similar issues in this report, none of the engineer’s services were designed, conducted, or intended to prevent uncontrolled migration of moisture – including water vapor – from the soil through building slabs and walls and into the building interior, where it can cause mold growth and material-performance deficiencies. Accordingly, proper implementation of the geotechnical engineer’s recommendations will not of itself be sufficient to prevent moisture infiltration. Confront the risk of moisture infiltration by including building-envelope or mold specialists on the design team. Geotechnical engineers are not building-envelope or mold specialists.

Copyright 2016 by Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA). Duplication, reproduction, or copying of this document, in whole or in part, by any means whatsoever, is strictly prohibited, except with GBA’s specific written permission. Excerpting, quoting, or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission of GBA, and only for purposes of scholarly research or book review. Only members of GBA may use this document or its wording as a complement to or as an element of a report of any kind. Any other firm, individual, or other entity that so uses this document without being a GBA member could be committing negligent

Telephone: 301/565-2733 e-mail: info@geoprofessional.org www.geoprofessional.org