ag32sds170056_sf18_rfq_fbo_7-12-2017.pdf

CALCULATION OF SELF-PERFORMED/SUBCONTRACTED WORK

Offerors for General Construction (NAICS code 238910) must provide at least 15 percent (25% for specialty trade NAICS codes) of the cost of the contract performance incurred for personnel will be spent on the concern's employees or the employees of other eligible small business concerns. Provide a breakdown of material and personnel costs, by specification division listed for the project. Home Office overhead, profit/fee and bond costs shall be added after a subtotal of personnel and material/Equipment costs has been calculated. Clearly identify the personnel costs you will be performing, and the personnel costs of other eligible small business concerns. Below is a suggested format.

Specification Division SB Vendor (Y or N) Personnel Cost Material/Equipment Costs

(Add additional lines as necessary for each Division applicable to this project)

Sub Total (Personnel Costs, Material/Equipment Costs)

Profit $ Home Office Overhead $ Bond $ Grand Total $

Calculation of self-performed personnel costs:

1. Total personnel costs * both prime and all subcontractors: $

2. Subtract all subcontractor personnel costs* that are not SB companies that will perform work on this contract: $

3. Remainder is ‘Total amount of work to be self-performed under the Contract’: $

4. Self-performed work = Line 3/Line 1 x 100 = %

*personnel costs include labors, mechanics, other tradesmen, and office personnel directly charged to the project (includes project manager, job superintendent, administrative, estimators, etc.)

I certify the above representations are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

(Signature and Typed Name of Authorized Representative) Date

(Title of Authorized Representative)

EXISTING MICRO-INGREDIENTS

STORAGE BUILDING TO REMAIN EXISTING BUILDINGS TO REMAIN

DURING CONSTRUCTION OF NEW

FACILITY. NO CONNECTION WILL BE

MADE TO NEW FACILITY.

EXISTING

STORAGE BINS

EXISTING FEED LOTS

TO REMAIN

FO

RT

K

EO

GH

R

OA

D

EXISTING DIRT ROAD TO REMAIN

EXISTING DIRT ACCESS

DRIVE TO REMAIN

FUTURE EXPANSIONFUTURE HAMMER MILL

BUCKET ELEVATOR

CONVEYOR PIT BELOW

FUTURE INGREDIENT

BIN STRUCTURE

DUMP PIT BELOW

FUTURE FINISHED FEED

BIN STRUCTURE

DATE PAGE NUMBER

DRAWING TITLE:

COOVER-CLARK JOB NUMBER:

VERIFY SCALE:

BAR IS ONE INCH ON

ORIGINAL DRAWING

0 1"

IF NOT ONE INCH ON THIS SHEET,

ADJUST SCALES ACCORDINGLY

PLOTTED:

COOVER-CLARK & ASSOCIATES, INC.

DENVER, COLORADO

COPYRIGHT © 2017

THESE DRAWINGS AND PLANS ARE COPYRIGHTED AND ARE NOT TO

BE USED OR REPRODUCED WHOLLY OR IN PART WITHOUT THE

WRITTEN PERMISSION OF COOVER-CLARK AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

1 2 3 4 5

A

B

C

D www.cooverclark.com

UNCLASSIFIED

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

CooverClark

APPROVED BY: COMMUNICATION:

SAFETY:CHECKED BY, PM:

BIO-ENVIR. ENGR.:DRAWN BY:

FIRE CHIEF:

DESIGNED BY: USING AGENCY:

BASE SHEET BY:

PROJECT NUMBER:

PROJECT TITLE:

6/8/2017 8:08:06 AM

MAY 2017

PROGRESS G003

201616

Proj Number 1 Proj Number 2

USDA AGRICULTURE

RESEARCH SERVICE

FEED MILL UPGRADES

PHASE 1

FORT KEOGH RANGE AND

LIVESTOCK RESEARCH

MILES CITY, MONTANA

PHASE 1 - SITE PLAN

Project Status

Comm

Safety

Bio-envir

Fire Chief

Using Agency

Author

Designer

Checker

Approver

MARK REVISION DATE

G003

1 PHASE 1 - SITE PLAN

4 5

B

C

D

E

A

S105

S104

G102

S101

S103

S103

S104

CONVEYOR HEAD

CONVEYOR

CONVEYOR TAIL

BASE OF HOPPER

'-6

/25

6"

2'-0 1/2" 9'-1" 3'-10 1/2"

BUCKET ELEVATORS

2'- 4"

2'-

FUTURE HOPPER

FUTURE CONVEYOR

FUTURE BUCKET ELEVATOR

ACCESS LADDER

ACCESS LADDER

S105

S103

2'-5 1/4"

4 5

B

C

D

E

A

S105

S104

G102

S101

S104

TRUCK DUMP PIT GRATE

CONVEYOR TAILCONVEYOR

CONVEYOR HEAD

44'-7 1/8"

LADDER PLATFORM

TOWER LADDER

'-3

2'-9" 11'-6" 3'-6" 11'-6" 3'-6" 11'-6"

6'- 8"

6'-8"

8'- 9"

1'-0"

24" SQ. ACCESS

OPENING & LADDER

W/ PLATE HATCH

6" SCREW CONVEYOR

CONE HOPPER BIN BY FACILITY

TOWER

24" SQ. ACCESS OPENING &

LADDER W/ PLATE HATCH

DATE PAGE NUMBER

DRAWING TITLE:

COOVER-CLARK JOB NUMBER:

VERIFY SCALE:

BAR IS ONE INCH ON

ORIGINAL DRAWING

0 1"

IF NOT ONE INCH ON THIS SHEET,

ADJUST SCALES ACCORDINGLY

PLOTTED:

COOVER-CLARK & ASSOCIATES, INC.

DENVER, COLORADO

COPYRIGHT © 2017

THESE DRAWINGS AND PLANS ARE COPYRIGHTED AND ARE NOT TO

BE USED OR REPRODUCED WHOLLY OR IN PART WITHOUT THE

WRITTEN PERMISSION OF COOVER-CLARK AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

1 2 3 4 5

A

B

C

D www.cooverclark.com

UNCLASSIFIED

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

CooverClark

APPROVED BY: COMMUNICATION:

SAFETY:CHECKED BY, PM:

BIO-ENVIR. ENGR.:DRAWN BY:

FIRE CHIEF:

DESIGNED BY: USING AGENCY:

BASE SHEET BY:

PROJECT NUMBER:

PROJECT TITLE:

6/8/2017 8:08:07 AM

MAY 2017

PROGRESS G100

201616

Proj Number 1 Proj Number 2

USDA AGRICULTURE

RESEARCH SERVICE

FEED MILL UPGRADES

PHASE 1

FORT KEOGH RANGE AND

LIVESTOCK RESEARCH

MILES CITY, MONTANA

OVERALL EQUIPTMENT

LAYOUT AT GRADE

Project Status

Comm

Safety

Bio-envir

Fire Chief

Using Agency

Author

Designer

Checker

Approver

MARK REVISION DATE

G100

1 EQUIPTMENT AT TUNNEL

G100

2 EQUIPTMENT AT GRADE

FORT KEOGH SITE SURVEY

Miles City, Montana

406-234-6666

713 Pleasant Street Miles City, Montana 59301 FIGURE #1

406-586-8834 ■ 800-865-9847 (fax) ■ 2090 Stadium Drive ■ Bozeman, Montana 59715 ■ www.dowl.com

Alaska ■ Arizona ■ Colorado ■ Montana ■ North Dakota ■ Oregon ■ Washington ■ Wyoming

March 24, 2017 \\MLS-FS\MLS-Projects\31\21456-01\40Study\Report\Report Cover Ltr .docx

Mr. Vincent Rodriguez

CooverClark

1936 Market St.

Denver, CO 80202480

RE: Geotechnical Investigation Report for proposed upgrades to the USDA Feed Mill Facility –

243 Fort Keogh Road Miles City, Montana.

Dear Vincent:

We are pleased to present this geotechnical report for the proposed for a proposed upgrade to the

USDA Miles City Feed Mill located within the Fort Keogh Livestock Range and Research

Facility near Miles City, Montana. This investigation and report were conducted in accordance to our proposal to CooverClark dated December 21, 2016.

The enclosed report describes site conditions and presents geotechnical related conclusions and recommendations for design and construction of the Feed Mill upgrade. We are available to answer any questions that may come up as the design progresses.

Please contact me if you have any questions in regard to this report.

Respectfully submitted, DOWL

Gregory Underhill, P.E.

Geotechnical Engineering Manager

\\MLS-FS\MLS-Projects\31\21456-01\40Study\Report\Milles City Feed Mill GI RPT.doc - i -

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1.0 SUMMARY

2.0 PLANNED CONSTRUCTION

3.0 INVESTIGATION PROCEDURE

3.1 FIELD INVESTIGATION

4.0 SITE CONDITIONS

4.1 SITE DESCRIPTION

4.2 SOILS

4.3 GROUNDWATER

4.4 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS

4.5 EARTHQUAKES AND SEISMICITY

5.0 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 STRUCTURE FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1.1 Proposed Facilities -Foundation Discussion

5.1.2 Hammer Mill Building -Spread Footings Bearing on Structural Fill

5.1.3 Bin Cluster Mat Foundation Bearing on Sand/w gravel or Gravel deposits

5.1.4 Storage Bins

5.1.5 Footing Subgrade Soil Compaction

5.1.6 Foundation Wall Backfill Compaction

5.2 DUMP AND CONVEYOR PITS GROUNDWATER

CONSIDERATIONS

5.3 INTERIOR CONCRETE FLOOR SLABS

5.4 STRUCTURAL FILL OR ONSITE FILL PLACEMENT

5.5 LATERAL LOAD RESISTANCE

5.6 EARTHWORK

5.6.1 Site Grading and Drainage Considerations

5.6.2 Earthwork

5.6.3 Excavation and Allowable Temporary Excavation Slopes

6.0 LIMITATIONS

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Vicinity Map

Figure 2: Site Map with Boring Locations

APPENDICES

Appendix A: Proposed Site Improvement Figures

Appendix B: NTL Boring Information

Appendix C: DOWL Exploration Boring Logs

\\MLS-FS\MLS-Projects\31\21456-01\40Study\Report\Milles City Feed Mill GI RPT.doc - 1 -

1.0 SUMMARY

DOWL has completed a geotechnical investigation for the proposed Upgrade to the USDA Miles

City Feed Mill located within the Fort Keogh Livestock Range and Research Facility near Miles

City, Montana (See Figure 1 – Vicinity Map). The scope of geotechnical services consisted of a subsurface exploration, field observations, engineering analyses, and submitting this geotechnical report. The purpose of these services is to provide geotechnical related recommendations in support of design and construction of the improvements. DOWL’s scope of work has been conducted in accordance to our proposal dated December 21, 2016.

The project will consist of upgrades to the existing feed mill. The Figures in Appendix A present the proposed improvements to the facility. Figure 2 presents a site map showing the existing facilities. DOWL has discussed the project with the project Structural Engineer, Mr. Greg

Williams. In summary the proposed improvements will consist of a new Bin Cluster, Hammer mill building, small storage bins and dump and conveyor pits.

The soil profile characteristics have been discussed in Section 4.2. In summary the upper 7.5 to

8.0 feet of the soil profile consists of loose silty sand which exhibits low bearing strength and moderate to high compressibility. Medium dense sand and gravel is encountered at approximately 7.5 to 8.0 feet. It is noted the site is variable based on information from NTL borings and some clay may be encountered within the foundation excavations near surface.

Spread footings or mat foundation bearing either on structural fill or native soils as recommended will provide suitable support for the site structures. Because some differential movement is anticipated between the separate structures it is recommended to provide slip joints at conveyor spout transitions. Shallow groundwater will exist at the site at certain times of the year based on irrigation practices. The buried structures must be designed accordingly for hydrostatic conditions. Groundwater dewatering may be required during construction dependent upon the time of year.

Recommendations in this report are contingent upon DOWL’s involvement. A representative of

DOWL should provide a subgrade observation prior to the construction of any foundation or drainage elements recommended in this report. If any unexpected soils or conditions are revealed during construction, this office should be notified immediately to evaluate the conditions and make necessary modifications.

Recommendations for interior concrete floor slabs, backfill placement, lateral load resistance, basement water proofing and site earthwork are discussed in more detail in this report.

VICINITY MAP

USDA FEED MILL FACILITY

406-234-6666

713 Pleasant Street Miles City, Montana 59301 MILES CITY, CUSTER COUNTY, MT FIGURE #1

U S

D A

FEED

M

ILL

FA

C

ILITY

\\MLS-FS\MLS-Projects\31\21456-01\40Study\Report\Milles City Feed Mill GI RPT.doc - 3 -

2.0 PLANNED CONSTRUCTION

The project will consist of upgrades to the existing feed mill. The Figures in Appendix A present the proposed improvements to the facility. Figure 2 presents a site map showing the existing facilities. DOWL has discussed the project with the project Structural Engineer, Mr. Greg

Williams. In summary the proposed improvements will consist of a new Bin cluster, Hammer mill building and small storage bins. There will also be two dump/conveyor pits located under the bin cluster structure. The approximate 25x50 foot rectangular bin cluster structure will be supported on a mat foundation. The hammer mill building will consist of a slab-on-grade 15x30 foot CMU building with frost wall foundation. The storage bins will consist of individual 15 foot diameter bins supported by six legs each. The legs may bear on individual spread footings.

The dump and conveyor pits will be buried from 8 to 15 feet below grade. Various existing structures will be demolished as indicated on the figures in Appendix A.

The following approximate structural loads were provided by the structural engineer:

Bin Cluster mat load +/- 3000psf

Hammer mill building: wall load =3000 plf

Slab-on–grade floor load=200 to 300 psf

Storage bins: 60,000 lbs each bin (+/-10,000 lbs per support leg)

Should building loads vary from these assumptions we should be advised so we may adjust our recommendations if required.

The site is relatively flat and minimal site fill will be required.

3.0 INVESTIGATION PROCEDURE

3.1 FIELD INVESTIGATION

A previous geotechnical investigation was conducted the site during July of 1985 by Northern

Engineering and Testing Laboratories (NTL). Their boring locations are shown on Figure 2 as well as DOWL’s borings. The boring information from the NTL investigation is presented on the figure in Appendix B.

DOWL conducted our investigation on February 23, 2017. The field investigation included a

\\MLS-FS\MLS-Projects\31\21456-01\40Study\Report\Milles City Feed Mill GI RPT.doc - 4 -geologic review of the area and advancement of two (2) exploration borings. The borings were advanced at the locations shown on Figure 2. Drilling was performed utilizing a Mobile BK-81 truck-mounted drill rig operated by Haz-Tech Drilling of Billings, Montana. An Auto Hammer was utilized for standard penetration tests. Borings were advanced to a depths ranging from 30 to 31.5 feet below ground surface (bgs). The boring locations are shown on Figure 2.

Continuous logs of exploration borings are presented in Appendix C.

Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampling was performed within each exploration boring using a

2-inch outside diameter split-spoon sampler in accordance with ASTM D 1586. During the test, the sampler was driven into the soil utilizing a series of drops of a 140 lb. weight falling 30 inches for a total penetration of 18 inches into the soil. The number of blows required for each 6 inches of penetration was recorded. The Standard Penetration Resistance ("N-value") of the soil was then calculated as the number of blows required for the final 12 inches of penetration; this test is terminated if 50 blows are recorded within a single 6-inch interval. This resistance, or N-value, provides a measure of the relative density of granular soils and the relative consistency of cohesive soils. In addition, pertinent information including soil sample depths, stratigraphy, soil engineering characteristics, and groundwater occurrence were noted.

A DOWL Geotechnical Engineer observed the exploration boring operations, obtained soil samples, and visually classified the soils according to ASTM D 2488. Continuous logs of the borings were recorded and are presented in Appendix C.

The soil descriptions shown on the test pit logs are based on field testing in accordance with

ASTM Standards D 2488. Stratification contacts shown on the logs of exploration borings represent approximate boundaries between soil types. The actual transitions may be more gradual or abrupt. Subsurface conditions are recorded for the exploration location and may not represent those at other locations. Groundwater levels, if encountered and shown on the logs, are indicative of the levels existing at the time of the investigation and may vary according to season, irrigation practice, and change in land use.

U

SD

A

FE

ED

M

IL

L

FA

C

IL

IT

Y M

IL

ES

C

IT

Y, C

U S

TE

R

C O

U N

TY

,M

T

6-

4-

P le as an tS tre et M ile s

C ity

,M on ta na

FI

G U

R E

#2

TO

P

O G

R A

PH

IC

M

AP

\\MLS-FS\MLS-Projects\31\21456-01\40Study\Report\Milles City Feed Mill GI RPT.doc - 6 -

4.0 SITE CONDITIONS

4.1 SITE DESCRIPTION

The site of the proposed development is located on flat topography adjacent to agricultural fields and feed lots. Figure 1 presents and aerial photograph of the site. A photograph of the site is presented below. A site contour map is presented on Figure 2.

Looking northwest at the building site. Drill rig set up on Boring BH-1

\\MLS-FS\MLS-Projects\31\21456-01\40Study\Report\Milles City Feed Mill GI RPT.doc - 7 -

4.2 SOILS

The soil profiles encountered in DOWL’s boring BH-1 and BH-2 are relatively consistent and comprised of approximately 1 to 3 feet of fill overlaying silty to poorly graded sand which extends to 8.5 to 9 feet. Poorly graded gravel with scattered cobbles is encountered underlying the sand and extends to depths greater than 31 feet (the greatest depth drilled). A very sandy zone was encountered in the gravel layer at approximately 28 feet in BH-2. Excessive sand heave prevented obtaining a penetration resistance (N) value at the 30 foot depth in boring BH-2. It is noted that the soil profile encountered in the upper 5 to 6 feet in DOWL’s borings varied somewhat than those encountered in the NTL borings. NTL borings encountered clay in the upper 3 to 5 feet while DOWL’s borings encountered silty sand. The site soil deposits are alluvial deposits of the Yellowstone River. Stratigraphic variations within relatively short horizontal distances are common for these types of deposits. DOWL’s borings were advanced in the immediate vicinity of the proposed structures.

Fill – The fill encountered in borings BH-1 and BH-2 consisted of a thin layer of gravel surfacing overlaying either silty sand or lean clay with sand and gravel. The fill in the upper 18 inches was frozen at the time of the investigation. The fill is unsuitable for support of foundations or concrete pavements.

Sand – Native silty and or poorly graded sand with gravel was encountered in Borings BH-1 and

BH-2 and extended to depths ranging from 8.5 to 9.0 feet. The sand was loose in relative density to depths of approximately 7 to 7.5 feet. The sand was medium dense below these elevations.

Penetration resistance values obtained ranged from 4 to 8 blows per foot which indicates a very loose to loose soil profile in the upper 7.5 feet. The loose sand is considered to exhibit low bearing strength and moderate to high compressibility.

Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand and Scattered Cobbles – Poorly graded gravel with sand and scattered cobbles was encountered in both borings at depths ranging from 8.5 to 9.0 feet. The gravel extended beyond the maximum depths explored (approximately 31.5 feet below existing grade). The gravel was generally moist above the water table and saturated below the water table. Penetration resistance (N) values obtained ranged from 19 to 46 blows per foot which indicates a medium dense to dense soil profile. A loose layer (N values of 7 bpf to 8 bpf) was encountered between the depths of 15 to 17 feet in both borings. In general, the poorly graded gravel with sand deposits exhibit relatively high bearing strength and low compressibility.

\\MLS-FS\MLS-Projects\31\21456-01\40Study\Report\Milles City Feed Mill GI RPT.doc - 8 -

4.3 GROUNDWATER

Groundwater was encountered at the time of the investigation in both DOWL borings advanced during February 23, 2017 and also during the NTL investigation which was conducted in June of

1985. DOWL’s borings were backfilled shortly after drilling and groundwater elevations were therefore not allowed to fully stabilize. The table below indicates the depth to groundwater encountered in the borings. It is noted that there is significant irrigation in the general vicinity of the project and groundwater elevations will be influenced by irrigation. DOWL’s Borings were advanced in the winter prior to irrigation. NTL’s borings were advanced during the irrigation season. Additionally, groundwater elevations may rise later in the irrigation season after June and could be higher than the elevations indicated by the NTL borings.

*BH-1 DOWL boring advanced 2/23/17

**DH-1-NTL borings advanced 6/18/85

*** Elevations not confirmed but site is relatively flat

Fluctuations of groundwater occur due to seasonal moisture conditions, irrigation practices, changes in land use, and many other factors. Groundwater conditions may vary from those encountered at the time of the field investigation depending upon the influence of these factors.

Evaluation of these factors is beyond the scope of this report.

Miles City Feed Mill

Depth to Groundwater Encountered During Geotechnical Investigations

Boring

Number

Surface

Elevation

(feet)*

Exploration

Boring Depth

(feet) bgs

Depth to

Groundwater

(feet) bgs

Approximate

Elevation of

Groundwater

*BH-1 2,372.1 30 12.1 2,359.60

*BH-2 2,372.1 31.5 13.0 2,359.10

**DH-1 *** 30.0 9.2 ***

**DH-2 *** 30.0 11.3 ***

**DH-3 *** 20.0 6.4 ***

**DH-4 *** 20.0 6.6 ***

**DH-5 *** 20.0 8.6 ***

\\MLS-FS\MLS-Projects\31\21456-01\40Study\Report\Milles City Feed Mill GI RPT.doc - 9 -

4.4 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS

The site is located on Quaternary age alluvial deposits of the Yellowstone River. These deposits consist of interbedded clay, sand and gravel. Tertiary age sandstone, claystone and shale bedrock underlay the alluvial deposits at depth.

4.5 EARTHQUAKES AND SEISMICITY

The project site is within an area of low seismicity.

The methods of ASCE/SEI 7-05 require that the properties of the soil at the proposed building site be classified as one of several site classes. The seismic design parameters for this site include a seismic zone soil profile type of (D), in accordance with the above referenced standard.

Site Class D corresponds to a “stiff soil profile”. We have based this assessment on exploration information and known geologic conditions of the site.

5.0 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the planned construction and soils encountered at the site, the following recommendations are provided.

5.1 STRUCTURE FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1.1 Proposed Facilities -Foundation Discussion

DOWL has discussed the project with the project Structural Engineer, Mr. Greg Williams. In summary the proposed improvements will consist of a new Bin Cluster, Hammer Mill building and small storage bins. There will also be two dump/conveyor pits located under the bin cluster structure. The approximate 25x50 foot rectangular bin cluster structure will be supported on a mat foundation. The hammer mill building will consist of a slab-on-grade 15x30 foot CMU building with frost wall foundation. The storage bins will consist of individual 15 foot diameter bins supported by six legs each. The legs may bear on individual spread footings. The dump and conveyor pits will be buried from 8 to 15 feet below grade. Various existing structures will be

\\MLS-FS\MLS-Projects\31\21456-01\40Study\Report\Milles City Feed Mill GI RPT.doc - 10 -demolished as indicated on the figures in Appendix A.

The following approximate structural loads were provided by the structural engineer:

Bin Cluster mat load +/- 3000psf

Hammer mill building: wall load =3000 plf

Slab-on–grade floor load= 200 to 300 psf

Storage bins: 60,000 lbs each bin (+/-10,000 lbs per support leg)

Should building loads vary from these assumptions we should be advised so we may adjust our recommendations if required.

The site is relatively flat and minimal site fill will be required.

The soil profile characteristics have been discussed in Section 4.2. In summary the upper 7.5 8 feet of the soil profile consists of loose sand which exhibits low bearing strength and moderate to high compressibility. Medium dense sand and gravel is encountered at approximately 7.5 to 8 feet. It is noted the site is variable based on information from NTL borings and some clay may be encountered within the foundation excavations near surface.

Spread footings or mat foundation bearing either on structural fill or native soils as recommended will provide suitable support for the site structures. Because some differential movement is anticipated between the separate structures it is recommended to provide slip joints at conveyor spout transitions.

Groundwater considerations: Based on the boring information groundwater levels could be as shallow as 6.5 feet below existing ground surface during the summer and fall months (irrigation season). It is proposed to construct the Bin Cluster mat bearing at a depth of 8 feet. The dump and conveyor pits will be buried from 8 to 15 feet below grade. The deeper foundations (Bin

Cluster, Dump and Conveyor Pits) must be designed appropriately for shallow groundwater conditions and must consider water proofing and hydrostatic uplift (see section 5.2).

Construction dewatering may also be required during construction dependent upon the time of year.

5.1.2 Hammer Mill Building -Spread Footings Bearing on Structural Fill

\\MLS-FS\MLS-Projects\31\21456-01\40Study\Report\Milles City Feed Mill GI RPT.doc - 11 -

The hammer mill building will consist of a slab-on-grade 15x30 foot CMU building with frost wall foundation and slab-on-grade interior floor. As discussed loose silty sand deposits extend to depths of 7 to 7.5 feet below grade. The perimeter footings should extend a minimum of 4.0 feet below existing grade for frost considerations. The spread footing foundation may be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on a minimum of 2 feet of compacted structural fill (See structural fill section 5.4) After removal of the existing loose silty sands, structural fill or suitable onsite sand may be placed on native soils and compacted prior to footing placement. The over excavation should extend a minimum of two feet below the new footings. Prior to structural fill placement the subgrade soils should be compacted as specified in this report. Care should be taken when using vibratory compaction equipment so as not to damage existing foundation elements or induce excessive settlement to adjacent soils.

Footings placed in on structural fill may be designed utilizing a net allowable bearing pressure of

2,500 pounds per square foot. Total settlement for footings designed and placed in this manner is estimated to 1 inch or less with differential settlement approximately ½ inch or less.

Wall footings should be a minimum of 18 inches in width and isolated column footings should have minimum dimensions of 24 inches.

Horizontal rebar should be placed within the foundation stem walls so the walls will provide grade beam type support.

Minimum embedment for column footings is 1.0 foot below the floor slab.

Footing subgrades shall be inspected by a DOWL geotechnical engineer to confirm foundation conditions are similar to those encountered in the borings. Soft or loose zones or zones of unsuitable material if encountered will have to be removed and replaced with structural fill.

All footings should be embedded a minimum of 4 feet below adjacent ground for frost considerations.

Prior to placement of structural fill, subgrades should be proof rolled to check for soft spots.

5.1.3 Bin Cluster Mat Foundation Bearing on Sand/w gravel or Gravel deposits

The proposed bin cluster mat foundation may be supported on a mat foundation buried approximately 8 feet below existing grade. It is noted that medium dense poorly graded sand

\\MLS-FS\MLS-Projects\31\21456-01\40Study\Report\Milles City Feed Mill GI RPT.doc - 12 -deposits are encountered at depths of approximately 7.0 To 7.5 feet and medium dense to dense poorly graded gravel underlays the sand deposits at 8 to 9 feet. These soil layers will provide suitable support for the mat foundation. If the depth of the mat foundation is to be founded less than the seven foot depth, then sub-excavation of the loose silty sand deposits down to the medium dense poorly graded sand or gravel deposits and placement of structural fill to subgrade will be required. The mat foundation placed in accordance to the following recommendations may be designed utilizing a net allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot. It is estimated that the above bearing pressure may result in total settlements of approximately 1 inch and differential settlements of approximately half the total settlement. A factor of safety of three

(3) was applied in the allowable bearing pressure calculation.

Qualified personnel should observe all footing subgrades to confirm subgrade soil condition prior to placement of footing forms. Soft or very loose zones or zones of unsuitable material if encountered will have to be removed and replaced with structural fill.

It is noted that the foundation should be designed to accommodate groundwater elevations that may be as shallow as 6.5 feet below existing ground. Dewatering during construction may be required dependent upon the time of year construction takes place.

5.1.4 Storage Bins

The storage bins will consist of individual 15 foot diameter bins supported by six legs each.

Estimated loads for each leg will not exceed 10,000 lbs. The legs may bear on individual spread footings. The footings should be embedded a minimum of 4 feet below existing grade for frost considerations. Based on the available boring information subgrade soils at the proposed storage bin locations may consist of either clay or silty sand soils. Footings placed on the natural undisturbed clay soils may be designed utilizing a net allowable bearing pressure of 1,500 pounds per square foot. It is estimated that the above bearing pressure may result in total settlements of approximately 1 inch and differential settlements of approximately half the total settlement. A factor of safety of three (3) was applied in the allowable bearing pressure calculation.

5.1.5 Footing Subgrade Soil Compaction

Should loose or unsuitable soils be encountered at footing subgrades, prior to footing placement

\\MLS-FS\MLS-Projects\31\21456-01\40Study\Report\Milles City Feed Mill GI RPT.doc - 13 -the unsuitable soils should be removed and suitable structural fill placed and/or the subgrade should be moisture conditioned to plus or minus 2 percentage points of optimum moisture and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of maximum dry density at plus or minus 2 percent of optimum moisture in accordance to ASTM D -698.

5.1.6 Foundation Wall Backfill Compaction

The onsite native silty sand or clay may be utilized for foundation wall backfill. Foundation wall backfill should be compacted to not less than 95 percent of maximum dry density at plus or minus 2 percentage points of optimum moisture content in accordance to ASTM D 698 (Standard

Proctor).

Large compaction equipment should be utilized no closer than 4 feet adjacent to the foundation walls. Care should be taken not to damage foundation walls by over compaction or compaction with large equipment directly adjacent to the walls. It is the contractor’s responsibility to ensure damage to the wall does not occur during backfilling operations.

5.2 DUMP AND CONVEYOR PITS GROUNDWATER CONSIDERATIONS

The dump and conveyor pits will be buried from 8 to 15 feet below grade. Groundwater conditions have been discussed previously and it is possible that groundwater may be as shallow as 6.5 feet at times during the summer and fall months (irrigation season). Appropriate water proofing design considerations should be incorporated into the footings, foundation walls and mat floor slabs. It is also recommended as a precaution, that a foundation drainage system with a sump be installed; Or the foundation may be designed to accommodate hydrostatic pressures.

The sump will allow dewatering if groundwater should approach the Bin Cluster mat, dump and conveyor pit and floor slab elevations. . The system may be installed economically during the initial construction of the building verses having to mitigate groundwater problems that may occur in the future.

A perforated drain pipe and envelope of drain gravel should be placed between the backfill and foundation stem walls. Drain piping and drain rock should also be placed under the interior slab.

The pipe and drain gravel should be placed around the foundation perimeter adjacent to the outside edge of the perimeter wall footing and, routed to a storm drain or sump to allow dewatering of the foundation area. A minimum 2 foot thickness of low permeability fill material should be placed over the wall backfill to final grade and sloped to provide positive drainage away from the foundation walls.

\\MLS-FS\MLS-Projects\31\21456-01\40Study\Report\Milles City Feed Mill GI RPT.doc - 14 -

5.3 INTERIOR CONCRETE FLOOR SLABS

After excavation of any unsuitable fill material, it is anticipated that the Hammer Mill interior slab subgrade will consist of loose silty and or lean clay. These deposits are suitable to support the interior floor slab. These deposits should be moisture conditioned and compacted If fill is needed to bring the subgrade up to the interior floor elevation, suitable onsite sand or structural fill may be utilized or interior floor It may be necessary to place.

The sand or clay subgrade must be moisture conditioned and compacted to not less than 95 percent of maximum dry density at plus or minus 2 percentage points of the optimum moisture content according to ASTM D 698 (Standard Proctor) prior to imported granular fill placement.

The subgrade should then be evaluated by proof-rolling with heavy equipment prior to placement of gravel base material. Soft or unstable areas should be either moisture conditioned and recompacted or replaced with suitable compacted granular material. A minimum thickness of 6 inches of ¾ inch minus road mix or washed crushed rock should be placed and compacted to grade prior to placement of concrete.

For design purposes, a modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pci may be utilized for concrete slabs placed either on 6 inches of ¾-minus road mix or washed crushed rock overlaying the compacted native sand or clay subgrade.

Positive separations and isolation joints should be provided between floor slabs and all foundations, columns, and utility lines to allow unrestrained movement. Construction joints should be provided in all slabs to control the location and extent of cracking. The requirements for slab reinforcement should be established by the designer based on experience and the intended slab use.

If floor coverings less permeable than the concrete slab will be used, or if moisture is a concern, we recommend a moisture barrier be placed directly beneath the slab.

5.4 STRUCTURAL FILL OR ONSITE FILL PLACEMENT

Suitable approved onsite sand or imported structural fill should be utilized for all fill used to replace unsuitable material zones if encountered and structural fill under footings. The structural fill should extend horizontally beyond the footing edge one foot for each foot of depth below the footing.

Structural fill should be compacted to not less than 98 percent of maximum dry density at plus or

\\MLS-FS\MLS-Projects\31\21456-01\40Study\Report\Milles City Feed Mill GI RPT.doc - 15 -minus 2 percentage points of optimum moisture content in accordance to ASTM D 698 (Standard

Proctor). For a material that does not exhibit a well-defined moisture density curve, 75 percent of relative density according to ASTM D 4253 or D 4254 are required.

Use of 1-12 inch minus washed crushed rock is acceptable for use a structural fill.

The onsite silty and poorly graded sand is also suitable for use as structural fill.

If imported gravel is used it should meet the following specification:

The structural fill gravel should be a well graded to poorly graded sand with gravel or gravel classified according to Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) and meeting the following gradation or use of ¾-inch minus washed crushed rock is acceptable:

Recommended Structural Fill Specification

Sieve Size Percent Passing by Dry Weight

3-inch 100

No. 4 30-70

No. 200 2-12

Liquid Limit less than 25 and Plasticity Index less than 6

Proposed structural fill gradation submittals should be approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to use.

Quality control is absolutely essential during fill placement. Frequent compaction testing and consistent placement procedures with properly sized compaction equipment are required to produce a consistent and unyielding subgrade for successful support of the structural elements.

5.5 LATERAL LOAD RESISTANCE

For lateral load resistance the following values may be used. It is assumed that the backfill material will be lean clay, silty sand, poorly graded gravel or structural fill. It should be noted that the following lateral loads do not include a factor of safety and do not apply to submerged soils or hydrostatic loading. The following lateral earth pressures may be used:

\\MLS-FS\MLS-Projects\31\21456-01\40Study\Report\Milles City Feed Mill GI RPT.doc - 16 -

Lateral Earth Pressures

Silty Sand or Lean Clay Backfill

Condition Coefficient of Earth

Pressure

K (equivalent fluid pressure)

Static Condition

Level Backfill

At Rest Ko = 0.55

Active Ka = 0.40

Passive Kp = 2.4

61 pcf

45pcf

265 pcf**

*Assumes moist soil unit weight of 110 pcf, internal friction angle 25°

**Neglecting the first foot of backfill depth

Coefficient of Friction between formed concrete and lean clay soils: Tan = 0.25

Lateral Earth Pressures

Gravel or Structural Fill

Condition Coefficient of Earth

Pressure

K (equivalent fluid pressure)

Static Condition

Level Backfill

At Rest Ko = 0.44

Active Ka = 0.28

Passive Kp = 3.0

59 pcf

38 pcf

400 pcf** *assumes moist soil unit weight of 135 pcf, internal friction angle 34°

**Neglecting the first foot of backfill depth

Coefficient of Friction between formed concrete and structural fill: Tan = 0.45

5.6 EARTHWORK

5.6.1 Site Grading and Drainage Considerations

Surface grading should provide positive flow away from all structures. Landscaped areas, within

10 feet of foundations, should be graded to provide a minimum 2 percent slope away from the building. To help prevent surface water infiltration, do not allow the placement of lawn irrigation within 10 feet of the structures. All roof spouts should have extensions and or splash guards that will route storm water away from building foundation elements.

\\MLS-FS\MLS-Projects\31\21456-01\40Study\Report\Milles City Feed Mill GI RPT.doc - 17 -

5.6.2 Earthwork

Site preparation should consist of stripping the existing vegetation and loose surficial materials from the areas beneath any footing, concrete slab, or pavement area. All exposed surfaces should be free from mounds and depressions, which could prevent uniform compaction. If unexpected fills or obstructions are encountered during site clearing such features should be removed and the excavation thoroughly cleaned prior to backfill placement and/or construction. Fill, footings, floor slabs, crushed base or bituminous pavement should not be placed on frozen subgrade.

Additional earthwork parameters include:

Prior to fill placement under bituminous pavement, exterior concrete slabs and walk ways, the subgrade should be scarified to a depth of six inches and compacted to 95 percent of maximum dry density at plus or minus 2 percentage points of optimum moisture content in accordance to ASTM D 698 (Standard Proctor). Subgrades should be proof rolled with heavy equipment. Soft and yielding areas should be over-excavated and replaced with structural fill.

Soil densities for general oversight fill in landscaped areas shall not be less than 90 percent of maximum dry density at plus or minus 2 percentage points of optimum moisture content in accordance to ASTM D 698 (Standard Proctor).

Fill should be placed and compacted in horizontal lifts, using equipment and procedures that will produce recommended moisture contents and densities throughout the lift.

Dependent upon the type and size of compaction equipment, un-compacted fill lifts should not exceed 10 inches in thickness.

Quality control is essential during fill placement. Frequent compaction testing and consistent placement procedures with properly sized compaction equipment are required.

If density test indicate compaction is not being achieved, the fill should be scarified, conditioned to near optimum moisture content, re-compacted, and re-tested. No fill should be placed in a frozen state or upon frozen subgrade.

5.6.3 Excavation and Allowable Temporary Excavation Slopes

Based on the soils encountered, conventional earthmoving equipment should be capable of excavating site soils. All excavations should be approved by a qualified observer prior to backfill placement.

\\MLS-FS\MLS-Projects\31\21456-01\40Study\Report\Milles City Feed Mill GI RPT.doc - 18 -

Temporary excavation slopes will also have to be considered for the foundation excavations. All temporary excavation must conform to OSHA Standards for Excavations, 29 CFR Part 1926.652

Appendix B to Subpart P. Based on field observations, laboratory tests and OSHA guidelines, the majority of the soils at the site are classified as Type C using OSHA classification system.

Type C soils require excavation slope angles not to exceed 1.5 H to 1 V (horizontal to vertical) or be shored.

The nature and extent of subsurface variations and groundwater condition between boring locations may not become evident until construction. Soil conditions should be evaluated at the time of construction by the contractor’s responsible person to ensure compliance to OHSA requirements. The stability of the construction excavations and associated worker safety is the responsibility of the contractor.

6.0 LIMITATIONS

The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report assume that site conditions are not substantially different than those exposed by the explorations. If during construction, subsurface conditions are observed or appear to be present that are different from those encountered in the explorations, DOWL geotechnical staff should be advised promptly so that those conditions can be reviewed and recommendations reevaluated, where necessary.

If there is a substantial lapse of time between submission of this report and the start of work, and if conditions have changed due to natural causes or construction operations, DOWL should review this report to determine the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations considering the changed conditions.

This report was prepared for use by the owner and their representatives. It should be made available to prospective contractors for information on factual data only and not as a warranty of subsurface conditions.

These services have been performed in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing in this area under similar conditions. No warranty is made or implied.

\\MLS-FS\MLS-Projects\31\21456-01\40Study\Report\Milles City Feed Mill GI RPT.doc - 19 -

Any conclusions by a construction contractor or bidder relating to construction means, methods, techniques, sequences, or costs based upon the information provided in this report are not the responsibility of the Client or DOWL.

Appendix A

Proposed Site Improvement Figures

EXISTING BUILDING

TO REMAIN

EXISTING BUILDINGS

TO REMAIN DURING

CONSTRUCTION OF

NEW FACILITY

EXISTING

STORAGE BINS2CP1.3

2CP1.2

2CP1.3 2 2CP1.22

MILES CITY, MT - FEED MILL - SCHEME 2C/PHASE 1 - SITE PLAN

FORT KEOGH LIVESTOCK RANGE & RESEARCH LABORATORY

22 NOVEMBER 2016 2CP1.1

TR

UE

NO

RT

H

PL

AN

NO

RT

H

0' 10' 20' 40'

VRodriguez Callout Future Expansion Laboratory

VRodriguez Callout Bucket Elevator

VRodriguez Callout Future Hammer Mill

VRodriguez Callout Micro-Ingredients Storage Building

VRodriguez Callout Existing dirt road to remain

VRodriguez Callout Existing dirt access drive to remain

VRodriguez Callout Future Ingredient Bin Structure (steel structure on concrete foundation)

VRodriguez Callout Future Finished Feed Bin Structure (steel structure on concrete foundation)

VRodriguez Callout Dump Pit below

VRodriguez Callout Conveyor Pit below

VRodriguez Callout Existing Feed Lots to remain

VRodriguez Callout Fort Keogh Road

VRodriguez Rectangle

VRodriguez Callout Extent of Topographic Survey

ELEVATOR - HIGH

EL. = 266'-0"

FINISH FLOOR

EL. = 100'-0"

MIXER PLATFORM

EL. = 131'-0"

ELEVATOR - HIGH

EL. = 266'-0"

FINISH FLOOR

EL. = 100'-0"

MIXER PLATFORM

EL. = 131'-0"

MILES CITY, MT - FEED MILL - SCHEME 2C/PHASE 1 - ELEVATIONS

FORT KEOGH LIVESTOCK RANGE & RESEARCH LABORATORY

22 NOVEMBER 2016 2CP1.2

0' 10' 20' 40'

2CP1.2

1 SCHEME 2C/PHASE 1 - NORTH ELEVATION

2CP1.2

2 SCHEME 2C/PHASE 1 - EAST ELEVATION

ELEVATOR - HIGH

EL. = 266'-0"

FINISH FLOOR

EL. = 100'-0"

MIXER PLATFORM

EL. = 131'-0"

LEVEL 1

EL. = 100'-0"

ELEVATOR - HIGH

EL. = 266'-0"

FINISH FLOOR

EL. = 100'-0"

MIXER PLATFORM

EL. = 131'-0"

MILES CITY, MT - FEED MILL - SCHEME 2C/PHASE 1 - ELEVATIONS

FORT KEOGH LIVESTOCK RANGE & RESEARCH LABORATORY

22 NOVEMBER 2016 2CP1.3

0' 10' 20' 40'

2CP1.3

1 SCHEME 2C/PHASE 1 - SOUTH ELEVATION

2CP1.3

2 SCHEME 2C/PHASE 1 - WEST ELEVATION

Appendix B

NTL Boring Information

Appendix C

DOWL Exploration Boring Logs

-------------18'-------------r I R7'-11 ' + 18'

1650 CONCRETE

SCALE: 1/4"=1 '-0"

CONCRETE SPECIFICATIONS-WITHOUT SKID BASE

CONCRETE PAD TO BE A MINIMUM DIMENSION OF

18'X18"X18". (4800 BU BIN)

PROVIDE #5 REBAR ON A 18" GRID.

PROVIDE 2 LAYERS OF REBAR ONE 3" FROM TOP

SURFACE AND ONE 3" FROM BOTTOM SURFACE.

CONCRETE SHALL HAVE A 28 DAY COMPRESSIVE

STRENGTH OF 4000 PSI. (6 SACK MIN)

SUBSOIL BELOW CONCRETE SHALL HAVE A LOAD

CAPACITY OF 2000 PSF.

PROVIDE EDGE OWLS AT 18" OC

=1 USE #5 REBAR ALL EDGES.

CONCRETE SPECIFICATIONS-WITH SKID BASE

CONCRETE PAD TO BE A MINIMUM DIMENSION OF

18'X18'X12". (4800 BU BIN)

PROVIDE #5 REBAR ON A 18" GRID.

PROVIDE 2 LAYERS OF REBAR ONE 3" FROM TOP

SURFACE AND ONE 3" FROM BOTTOM SURFACE.

CONCRETE SHALL HAVE A 28 DAY COMPRESSIVE

STRENGTH OF 4000 PSI. (6 SACK MIN.)

SUBSOIL BELOW CONCRETE SHALL HAVE A LOAD

CAPACITY OF 2000 PSF.

NOTE:

THIS CONCRETE DESIGN IS A GENERAL

RECOMMENDATION ONLY AND SHALL NOT BE USED AS

THE FINAL DESIGN. ALL SITUATIONS ARE DIFFERENT

AND EVERY SITE SHALL BE EVALUATED ON AN

INDIVIDUAL BASIS. ALL INSTALLATIONS SHALL COMPLY

WITH STATE AND LOCAL BUILDING CODES.

AMBER WAVES, INC.

RICHARDTON, ND

PH 701-97 4-4230

FAX 701-974-4231

CONCRETE SPECIFICATIONS

DRAWN: JAH

CHK'D:

DAlE: 1/29/16

SCAI.£: 1/4"•1 '

JOB NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

REVISION NUMBER I 1

General Decision Number: MT170058 06/02/2017 MT58

Superseded General Decision Number: MT20160058

State: Montana

Construction Type: Building

Counties: Carter, Custer, Fallon, Garfield, Phillips, Powder River, Rosebud and Valley Counties in Montana.

BUILDING CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS (does not include single family homes or apartments up to and including 4 stories).

Note: Under Executive Order (EO) 13658, an hourly minimum wage of $10.20 for calendar year 2017 applies to all contracts subject to the Davis-Bacon Act for which the contract is awarded (and any solicitation was issued) on or after January 1, 2015. If this contract is covered by the EO, the contractor must pay all workers in any classification listed on this wage determination at least $10.20 (or the applicable wage rate listed on this wage determination, if it is higher) for all hours spent performing on the contract in calendar year 2017.

The EO minimum wage rate will be adjusted annually. Additional information on contractor requirements and worker protections under the EO is available at www.dol.gov/whd/govcontracts.

Modification Number Publication Date 0 01/06/2017 1 01/27/2017 2 04/07/2017 3 06/02/2017

ASBE0082-002 09/01/2016

Rates Fringes

Heat and Frost Insulator.........$ 34.17 19.35

BOIL0011-002 08/01/2016

Rates Fringes

BOILERMAKER......................$ 30.25 29.86

BRMT0010-003 06/01/2016

CARTER, CUSTER, FALLON, GARFIELD, POWDER RIVER & ROSEBUD

COUNTIES

Rates Fringes

BRICKLAYER.......................$ 26.22 13.70

BRMT0012-001 06/01/2016

PHILLIPS AND VALLEY COUNTIES

Rates Fringes

BRICKLAYER.......................$ 26.22 13.70

CARP1172-001 06/01/2015

Rates Fringes

CARPENTER (Form Work Only).......$ 22.00 11.57

MILLWRIGHT.......................$ 28.00 11.57

Zone Definition:

The hourly rate applicable to each project is determined by measuring the road miles over the shortest practical route from the County Courthouse of the following towns to the ceter of the job: Billings, Bozeman, Butte, Great Falls, Helena, Kalispell, Lewiston, Miles City, and Missoula

Zone 1: 0 to 30 miles - Base Rate Zone 2: 31 to 60 miles - $3.70 Zone 3: over 60 miles - $5.60

* ELEC0233-006 06/01/2017

Phillips and Valley Counties

Rates Fringes

ELECTRICIAN......................$ 31.05 12.71

ELEC0532-007 06/01/2016

Carter, Custer, Fallon, Garfield, Powder River & Rosebud Counties

Rates Fringes

ELECTRICIAN......................$ 32.74 13.10

ELEV0019-005 01/01/2017

ELEVATOR MECHANIC................$ 50.82 31.585

FOOTNOTE:

a. Employer contributes 8% of the basic hourly rate for over 5 year's service and 6% of the basic hourly rate for 6 months to 5 years' of service as vacation paid credit.

b. Eight paid holidays: New Year's Day; Memorial Day;

Independence Day; Labor Day; Veteran's Day; Thanksgiving Day; Friday after Thanksgiving and Christmas Day

ENGI0400-003 05/01/2013

Rates Fringes

POWER EQUIPMENT OPERATOR:

(1) A-frame truck Crane.....$ 24.32 11.40

(4) Cranes 25-44 tons.......$ 27.00 11.40

(5) Cranes 45-74 tons.......$ 28.00 11.40

(6) Cranes 75 to 144 tons, whirley cranes..............$ 29.00 11.40

(7) Cranes, 150 tons to including 250 tons (add $1.00 for every 100 tons over 250 tons); Crane, Tower (all).................$ 30.00 11.40

ZONE DEFINITIONS FOR POWER EQUPMENT OPERATORS:

The zone hourly rates applicable to each project shall be determined by measuring the road miles over the shortest practical maintained route from the nearest County Court House of the following listed towns to the center of the job:

BILLINGS, BOZEMAN, BUTTE, GREAT FALLS, HELENA, KALISPELL,

MISSOULA

Zone 1: 0 to 30 miles - Base Pay Zone 2: 30 to 60 miles - Base Pay + $3.50 Zone 3: Over 60 miles - Base Pay + $5.50

IRON0732-014 06/01/2015

Rates Fringes

IRONWORKER, REINFORCING..........$ 27.00 19.78

PLUM0030-006 09/01/2016

Carter, Custer, Fallon, Garfield, Powder River, and Rosebud Counties

PIPEFITTER, Excludes HVAC Pipe Installation................$ 32.31 16.71 PLUMBER, Excludes HVAC Pipe Installation.....................$ 32.31 16.71

PLUM0041-009 07/01/2016

PHILLIPS & VALLEY COUNTIES

Rates Fringes

PLUMBER/PIPEFITTER (Excluding HVAC Pipe Installation)..........$ 30.07 14.23

SHEE0103-009 07/01/2013

Rates Fringes

SHEET METAL WORKER (HVAC Duct Installation Only)...............$ 27.33 13.16

SUMT2011-033 01/04/2011

Rates Fringes

CARPENTER (Drywall Hanging Only)............................$ 22.69 0.00

CARPENTER, Excludes Drywall Hanging, and Form Work...........$ 16.70 2.31

CEMENT MASON/CONCRETE FINISHER...$ 18.27 1.50

IRONWORKER, STRUCTURAL...........$ 20.45 12.76

LABORER: Common or General......$ 14.47 3.11

LABORER: Mason Tender - Brick...$ 18.37 5.94

OPERATOR: Excavator.............$ 22.98 5.57

OPERATOR: Forklift..............$ 21.44 8.05

PAINTER: Brush, Roller and Spray............................$ 19.18 0.00

PLUMBER (HVAC Pipe Installation)....................$ 25.75 10.87

ROOFER...........................$ 17.36 3.83

TRUCK DRIVER: Dump Truck........$ 18.88 4.66

WELDERS - Receive rate prescribed for craft performing operation to which welding is incidental.

Note: Executive Order (EO) 13706, Establishing Paid Sick Leave for Federal Contractors applies to all contracts subject to the Davis-Bacon Act for which the contract is awarded (and any solicitation was issued) on or after January 1, 2017.