MAHG_121191_-_Addendum_No__1.pdf

KEESLER AIR FORCE BASE

REPAIR STORM DRAINAGE VARIOUS LOCATIONS

ON THE AIRFIELD, KEESLER AFB

MAHG 121191

ADDENDUM NO. 1

February 3, 2015

Addenda – Plans:

Item No. 1 Remove sheet IN_01 from the Drawings, and replace with the revised sheet attached with this addendum.

Addenda – Specifications:

Item No. 2 In reference to Section 00103 – Summary of Project Work Item 1.1 A I. d, delete:

“d. Cleaning and installation of approximately 1440 linear feet of 18” to 72”

Cured-in-place pipe”

And add the following sentence:

“d. Cleaning and installation of approximately 1,735 linear feet of 18” to 72”

Cured-in-place pipe”

Item No. 3 In reference to Section 01561 – Temporary Construction Fencing 2.1 Temporary

Chain Link Fencing, B. Length, delete:

“4904: Approximately 1,200 Linear Feet.”

Item No. 4 Add Existing Pavement Verification Report for informational purposes only.

SHEET NO. WORKING N O. TITLE

TL 01 1 TITLE SHEET

INDEX TO DRAWINGS

IN 01 2 INDEX TO DRAWINGS & SUMMARY OF QUAN TITIES

GN 01 3 GENERAL NOTES

LA 01 4 LEGEND AND ABBREVIATIONS

G Ol 5 OVER ALL SAFETY AND PHASING PLAN

G 02 6 SAFETY AND PHASING PLAN - PHASE 1

G 03 7 SAFETY AND PHASING PLAN - PHASE 2

G 04 8 SAFETY AND PHASING PLAN - PHASE 3

G 05 9 SAFETY AND PHASING PLAN - PHASE 4

LG 01 10 SHEET LEGEND

RM 01 11 REMOVAL PLAN, AREAS #9 - lOA RM 02 12 REMOVAL PLAN, AREAS # l OB - llA

RM 03 13 REMOVAL PLAN, AREA S # 11B - C

RM 04 14 REMOVAL PLAN, AREA S # 12A - B

RM 05 15 REMOVAL PLAN, AREAS # 13A - B

RM 06 16 REMOVAL PLAN, AREAS # 13C & I6

RM 07 17 REMOVAL PLAN, AREAS # 17 & 18 - 19

RM 08 18 REMOVAL PLAN, AREAS #20 - 21 & 22

RM 09 19 REMOVAL PLAN, AREA # 23

ER Ol 20 EROSION CONTROL PLAN, AREAS #9 - I OA ER 02 21 EROSION CONTROL PLAN, AREAS # lOB - I lA ER 03 22 EROSION CON TROL PLAN, AREAS # llB - C

ER 04 23 EROSION CON TROL PLAN, AREAS # 12A - B

ER 05 24 EROSION CONTROL PLAN, AREAS # 13A - B

ER 06 25 EROSION CONTROL PLAN, AREAS #13C & 16

ER 07 26 EROSION CONTROL PLAN, AREAS # 17 & 18 - 19

ER 08 27 EROSION CONTROL PLAN, AREAS #20 - 21 & 22

ER 09 28 EROSION CONTROL PLAN, AREA #23

PM 01 29 PAVEMENT MARKING PLAN, AREAS # l OB & 1 l A

PM 02 30 PAVEMENT MARKING PLAN, AREAS # I I B - C

PM 03 31 PAVEMEN T MARKIN G PLAN , AREAS #17 & I8 - 19

pp 01 32 PLAN & PROFILE, AREA #9 pp 02 33 PLAN & PROFILE, AREA # lOA pp 03 34 PLAN & PR OFILE, AREA # J OB pp 04 35 PLAN & PR OFILE, AREA #1 l A pp 05 36 PLAN & PR OFILE, AREA # I I B & pp 06 37 PLAN & PROFILE, AREA # llC (a) pp 07 38 PLAN & PROFILE, AREAS # llC (b) - 12A pp 08 39 PLAN & PROFILE, AREA # 12B pp 09 40 PLAN & PR OFILE, AREA #13A pp 10 41 PLAN & PR OFILE, AREA #13B pp 11 42 PLAN & PROFILE, AREA #13C pp 12 43 PLAN & PROFILE, AREA # 17 pp 13 44 PLAN VIEW, AREA #16 pp 14 45 PLAN VIEWS, AREAS # 18 - 19 & 20 - 21 pp 15 46 PLAN VIEWS, AREAS #22 & 23

ECD 01 47 EROSION CONTROL & SAFETY/ PHASING DETAILS

PD 01 48 PAYEMEN I DETAILS

PD 02 49 PAVEMENT TIEDOWN DETAILS

DD 01 so PIPE BEDDING, REPAIR & ADJUSTMENT DETAILS

DD 02 51 GRATE INLET & JUNCTION BOX DETAILS

DD 03 52 CONCRETE COLLAR DETAILS THE ABOVE LISTED QUANTITIES ARE FOR ESTIMATING PURPOSES ONLY.

*GRATE INLETS

SEE SHEET DD_02 FOR NUMBER OF GRATES FOR EACH INLET.

**NEW PIPE

ITEM INCLUDES AGGREGATE FOR PIPE BEDDING, GEOTEXTILE FABRIC FOR PIPE JOINT, VIDEO OF NEW STORM DRAIN

LINE, AND ALL RELATED MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS NOT MEASURED UNDER ANOTHER PAY ITEM.

***PORTLAND CEMENT PAVEMENT

ITEM INCLUDES JOINT MATERIAL, REINFORCEMENT, DOWELS, AND THICKENED EDGES AS REQUIRED AND ALL

RELATED MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS NOT MEASURED UNDER ANOTHER PAY ITEM.

****LOW PROFILE BARRICADE

BARRICADES TO REMAIN PROPERTY OF THE GOVERNMENT UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT.

t:IQ]CE Q OBAWlt:IG l::IQLOEB REVISIONS DRAWING INFORMATION

NEEL-SCHAFFER, INC., HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE NO. DATE BY DESCRIPTION N-S PROJECT NO.: 11763.001

INDEX TO DRAWINGS &

ENGINEER HAS PREPARED AND FURNISHED THIS DRAWING TO THE & OWNER FOR USE ON THIS PROJECT ONLY. THIS DRAWING SHOULD 02/02/15 SD UPDATE 48" CURED IN PLACE QUANTITY FILENAME: 11763-01_IN_GN.DWG REPAIR STORM DRAINAGE VARIOUS

1-L

NOT BE USED ON EXTENSIONS OF THIS PROJECT OR ON ANY OTHER

SCALE: NTS LOCATIONS ON THE AIRFIELD, KEESLER AFB

SUMMARY OF QUANTITIES

PROJECT. ANY REUSE OF THIS DRAWING, WITHOUT WRITIEN SURVEYED BY: N/A

VERIFICATION OR ADAPTATION BY THE ENGINEER, SHALL BE AT THE DSGN: JLD DATE: 12/22/2014

REUSER'S SOLE RISK AND THE REUSER SHALL INDEMNIFY AND HOLD

HARMLESS THE ENGINEER FROM ALL CLAIMS, DAMAGES, LOSSES AND DRWN: SD DATE: 12/22/2014

EXPENSES, INCLUDING ATIORNEY'S FEES ARISING OUT OF OR CHKD: DS DATE: 12/22/2014

NEEL-SCHAFFER

- Solutlons you can bulld upon

WORKING NUMBER: DRAWING NUMBER:

RESULTING THEREFROM.

QA/QC: TH DATE: 12/22/2014 BILOXI, MISSISSIPPI IN 01 02

KEESLER AIR FORCE BASE

MAHG 121191

KEESLER AIR FORCE BASE

SlJMMARY OF QlJAN TITIES

PAY ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS

Re m ova l Ite m s

1.0 Clearin g and Gru bbing 1 LS

2.0 Removal of Obstructi ons 1 LS

3.0 Removal of I nlet and Ju ncti on Box, Al l Types & Sizes 40 EA

4.0 Removal of Pi pe, al l sizes and depths 4, 225 L F

5.0 Removal of Concrete Pa1.ement , A ll De pths 6,460 SY

6.0 Removal of Tren ch Drai n 1, 070 L F

Ex cava tion Ite ms

7.0 U nclassified Excavati on (FM) 11, 250 CY

8.0 Borrow Excavati on (FM) 5,600 CY

9.0 Geotextile Fabri c 7,920 SY

10.0 Tem porary Wattl es, 12" 750 L F

1 1.0 Restoration of Ai rfield Turf 3 AC

Dra i n age Ite ms

12. 0 Ju ncti on Box (6'x6') 4 EA

13.0 Ju ncti on Box (8'x8') 1 EA

14. 0 *Grate I n let (4'x4') 13 EA

15.0 *Grate I n let (5'x4') 8 EA

16.0 *Grate I n let (5'x5') 5 EA

17.0 *Grate I n let (6'x6') 3 EA

18.0 *Grate I n let (7'x4') 1 EA

19.0 *Grate I n let (7'x6') 1 EA

20. 0 **18 i nch Reinforced Concrete P i pe Class Il l 231 L F

21 .0 **24 i nch Reinforced Concrete P i pe Class Il l 2, 545 L F

22. 0 **30 i nch Reinforced Concrete P i pe Class Il l 266 L F

23. 0 **42 i nch Reinforced Concrete P i pe Class Il l 152 L F

24. 0 **48 i nch Reinforced Concrete P i pe Class Il l 275 L F

25. 0 **18"X11" Rei nforced Arch Con crete Pi pe Class IV 325 L F

26. 0 **15 i nch Reinforced Concrete P i pe Class IV 230 L F

27. 0 **24 i nch Reinforced Concrete P i pe Class IV 683 L F

28. 0 **30 i nch Reinforced Concrete P i pe Class IV 523 L F

29. 0 **48 i nch Reinforced Concrete P i pe Class IV 334 L F

30. 0 **Cured i n Place Pi pe, 18" RCP 199 L F

31 .0 **Cured i n Place Pi pe, 42" RCP 270 L F

32. 0 **Cured i n Place Pi pe, 48" RCP 697 L F

33. 0 **Cured i n Place Pi pe, 60" RCP 405 L F

34. 0 **Cured i n Place Pi pe, 72" RCP 164 L F

35.0 Fl owable Fi l l 140 CY

36. 0 Gradi ng Calculation and Constru ction Staking 1 LS

Pavi n g Ite ms

37. 0 ***Portland Cem ent Concrete Pa1.em ent , 12" Th ick 6,460 SY

38.0 Crush ed Stone Base, Size 610, 6" Thick 1, 070 CY

39. 0 Tie Downs and Static Grou nds 30 EA

40. 0 Taxiway and Apron Pai nti n g , Reflectorized (Yel l ow) 685 SF

41 .0 Taxiway and Apron Pai nti n g , Non-Reflectorized Black 825 SF

M iscella neous I te ms

42. 0 I m plem entation of Constru ction Safety Plan and

M aintena nce of Traffi c

1 LS

43. 0 ****Low P rofi l e Ai rport Runway Ba rriers wit h Solar Li ghts 20 EA

44. 0 M obil ization 1 LS

SECTION 00103

SUMMARY OF PROJECT WORK

PART 1 GENERAL

1.1 WORK COVERED BY CONTRACT DOCUMENTS

A. Project Description

This project consists replacing and rehabilitating existing storm drain lines on the Airfield. The replacement will include removing and replacing grate inlets, existing storm drain pipe, and rehabilitation using cast-in-place pipe. The contractor will be required to make temporary connections between new and existing drainage structures as required to maintain positive drainage during construction. A construction sequencing plan showing temporary drainage connections and anticipated road closures will be submitted by the contractor prior to starting work. The plan must address the following items:

I. Drainage Rehabilitation and Replacement

a. Removal of approximately 4225 linear feet of 15” to 48” Concrete Storm Drain and approximately 1070 linear feet of trench drain. Removal of approximately 40 drainage inlets and junction boxes.

b. Removal of approximately 6460 square yards of concrete paving including tie downs and static grounds.

c. Installation of approximately 5,565 linear feet 15” to 48” RCP and 18”X11” RCAP

(Class III and Class IV) Storm Drain, 36 drainage inlets and junction boxes at the invert elevations and locations shown on the Drawing. Seeding and mulching or concrete paving will be required over the disturbed areas.

d. Cleaning and installation of approximately 1,735 linear feet of 18” to 72” Cured-in-place pipe.

II. Utilities

a. Existing underground utilities are located throughout the project limits. The contractor shall notify the Government immediately if any unanticipated utility conflicts occur and provide a recommended relocation/accommodation plan.

b. All water lines and power lines found to be in conflict with construction shall be relocated.

c. All gravity sewer lines found to be in conflict with construction shall be accommodated through adjustments to the drainage plan or installation of “conflict boxes”.

B. Location

The project is located on Keesler Air Force Base, Biloxi, Mississippi on the Airfield.

C. In addition to "FAR 52.236-9, Protection of Existing Vegetation, Structures, Equipment, Utilities, and

Neel-Schaffer, Inc.

00103-1

Biloxi, Mississippi MAHG 121191

Improvements":

1. Remove or alter existing work in such a manner as to prevent injury or damage to any portions of the existing work which remains.

2. Repair or replace portions of existing work which have been altered during construction operations to match existing or adjoining work, as approved by the Contracting Officer.

At the completion of operations, existing work shall be in a condition equal to or better than that which existed before new work started.

1.2 LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND FACILITIES

A. Obtain digging permits prior to start of excavation by contacting the Contracting Officer 15 calendar days in advance. Scan the construction site with electromagnetic or sonic equipment, and mark the surface of the ground paved surface where existing underground utilities or utilities encased in pier structures are discovered. Verify the elevations of existing piping, utilities, and any type of underground or encased obstruction not indicated to be specified or removed but indicated or discovered during scanning in locations to be traversed by piping, ducts, and other work to be conducted or installed.

Verify elevations before installing new work closer than nearest manhole or other structure at which an adjustment in grade can be made.

1.3 NOTIFICATION PRIOR TO EXCAVATION

A. Notify the Contracting Officer at least 15 days prior to starting excavation work.

Contact Miss Utility 48 hours prior to excavating. Contractor is responsible for marking all utilities not marked by Miss Utility or base utilities shop.

PART 2 PRODUCTS NOT USED

PART 3 EXECUTION NOT USED

END OF SECTION

00103-2

SECTION 01561

TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION FENCING

PART 1 – GENERAL

1.1 SUMMARY

A. Section includes: Erection, maintenance, and dismantling of temporary fencing around construction site and materials storage areas. This section does not apply where security fencing is required.

B. Refer to Contracting Officer for location of Personnel Gates and Vehicular Access Gates.

1.2 SUBMITTALS

A. Submit in accordance with Division 01 requirements

Shop drawing indicating layout of temporary fencing, location and size of gates, existing pavement and roads, access to fire hydrants and hose connections, and other site specific conditions. Prepare drawing after site observation and verification of existing conditions.

PART 2 – PRODUCTS

2.1 TEMPORARY CHAIN LINK FENCING

A. Unless otherwise indicated, type of temporary chain link fencing shall be Contractor's option.

Following types are acceptable:

a. New materials or previously used salvaged chain link fencing in good condition.

b. Posts: Galvanized steel pipe of diameter to provide rigidity. Post shall be suitable for setting in concrete footings, driving into ground, anchoring with base plates, or inserting in precast concrete blocks.

c. Fabric: Woven 2” galvanized steel wire mesh. Provide in continuous lengths to be wire tied to fence posts or prefabricated into modular pipe-framed fence panels.

B. Length:

C. Height: 6’-0”

D. Post Spacing: Max 10’-0” OC

E. Post Caps

Fit all exposed ends of post with caps. Provide caps that fit snugly and are weather tight.

Where top rail is used, provide caps to accommodate the top rail. Install post caps as recommended by the manufacturer and as shown.

F. Top and Bottom Tension Wire

ASTM A817 and ASTM F626, zinc-coated, having minimum coating the same as the fence fabric.

G. Gates: Provide personnel and vehicle gates of the quantity and size indicated on the Drawings or by Contracting Officer required for functional access to site.

1. Fabricate of same material as used for fencing.

2. Vehicle gates:

a. One (1) Required: Location by Contracting Officer

01561-1

b. Minimum width: 20 feet to allow access for emergency vehicles.

c. Capable of manual operation by one person.

d. Lockable by Padlock: Provide Padlock and deliver three (3) sets of keys total for all gates to Contracting Officer. All Padlocks for Vehicular gates and Personnel gates must be keyed the same.

3. Personnel / Pedestrian Gates

a. Min two (2) required: Location by Contracting Officer

b. Minimum Width: 48”

c. Capable of manual operation by one person.

d. Lockable by Padlock: Provide Padlock and deliver three (3) sets of keys total for all gates to Contracting Officer. All Padlocks for Vehicular gates and Personnel gates must be keyed the same.

2.2 PRIVACY FABRIC

A. Provide continuous water resistant knitted polypropylene 95% visibility blockage privacy fabric equal to PRIVACY SCREEN – 200 SERIES by www.fencescreen.com.

B. Color: Chosen by Contracting Officer from MFGR standard line of colors.

C. Height: Match fence height.

2.3 PLASTIC MESH FENCING

A. Where indicated on Drawings or by Contracting Officer as required to provide visual warning and control, provide plastic mesh fencing supported by steel posts driven into ground or set in precast concrete blocks.

B. Height: 36 inches minimum.

Color: Safety orange.

PART 3 – EXECUTION

A. Installation of temporary fencing shall not deter or hinder access to existing and new hose connections and fire hydrants. Maintain 3 feet diameter clear space around fire hydrants.

B. Where fire hydrant or hose connection is blocked by fencing, provide access gate.

C. Access: Provide gates for personnel, delivery of materials, and access by emergency vehicles.

D. Field verify location with Contracting Officer.

3.1 INSTALLATION

A. Chain link posts:

a. Space as 10 maximum.

b. For solid ground conditions drive posts min 36”, set in holes and compact backfill, or anchor in precast concrete blocks with concrete.

c. For soft and unstable ground conditions, cast concrete plug around post.

d. For posts over pavement: Use galvanized steel post plates or precast concrete blocks filled with concrete.

B. Gate posts: Use bracing or concrete footings to provide rigidity for accommodating size of gate.

C. Fence Mesh Fabric: Securely attach to posts top and bottom and min 12” OC vertical

01561-2

ADDENDUM NO. 1

http://www.fencescreen.com/

D. Privacy Fabric: Securely attach to line posts and secure to top and bottom tension wire min

24” OC.

E. Gates: Install with required hardware.

F. Plastic mesh fencing: Space steel support posts to ensure mesh remains vertical and at proper height. Securely tie mesh to posts.

3.2 MAINTENANCE AND REMOVAL

A. Maintain fencing in good condition. If damaged, immediately repair.

B. Remove temporary fencing upon completion of Work or when no longer required for security or control. Backfill holes and compact to finish grade. Holes in pavement shall be surfaced to match existing paving. Repair damage caused by installation of temporary fencing.

** END OF SECTION **

01561-3

Existing Pavement Verification

Keesler Air Force Base

Biloxi, Mississippi

Prepared For

772 Howard Avenue

Biloxi, Mississippi 39530

December 4, 2014

CJ l J

;:DI

SOILTECH CONSULTANTS

Geoeechn lcal Engineering

December 4, 2014

772 Howard Avenue

Biloxi, Mississippi 39530 Project No. NS.11763.001.004

Attention: Mr. Steve Twedt, P.E.

Re: Existing Pavement Verification

Biloxi, Mississippi

Gentlemen:

Submitted herein is a report of our investigation to evaluate the existing pavement structure and provide pavement thickness design recommendations for Apron 2, Apron 3, and Taxiway No. 2 at Keesler Air Force Base in Biloxi, Mississippi. This work was authorized by Mr. Steve Twedt, P.E. on November 13, 2014 .

This report presents the results of a field investigation, laboratory testing, and engineering recommendations related to the existing pavement structure. Details of our recommendations related to .design and construction of the pavement elements according to US Department of

Defense Unified Facilities Criteria (DOD UFC) 3-260-02 Pavement Design for Airfields are included in the body of this report.

We appreciate the opportunity of providing services to you. If we can answer any questions or provide additional information, please call.

Copies Submitted: (2)

Very truly yours, SoilTech Consultants, Inc.

Donald M. Smith, Ph.D., P.E.

i!/

P.O. Box 12466, Jackson, MS 39236, 101 Business Park Drive, Suite A, Ridgeland, MS 39157

601.952.2995, Fax 601.952.2944

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1.1 INTRODUCTION

1.2 Project Information

1.3 Scope/Purpose

2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION

Soil Sampling

3.1 LABORATORY INVESTIGATION

3.2 Index Properties

Moisture Contents Liquid and Plastic Limits No. 200 Washes

4.1 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

4.2 Soil Conditions

4.3 Groundwater Conditions

5.1 GUIDELINE PAVEMENT DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

5.2 Site Preparation

Objectionable Materials Pumping Soils Select Fill Materials

5.3 Pavement Design Thickness Recommendations

6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS

Figure 1 – Boring Location Map

Appendix A Graphical Soil Boring Logs Soil Classification Chart Table 1 – Summary of Laboratory Data

Apron 2 and 3 and Taxiway 2

1.1 INTRODUCTION

Neel-Schaffer, Inc. is developing plans for the improvement of airfield storm drainage facilities on two aprons and a taxiway at Keesler Air Force Base in Biloxi, Mississippi. A major portion of this improvement project includes removal and replacement of approximately 2,000 square yards of concrete pavement.

1.2 Project Information

The project site consists of drainage repairs which intersect Apron 2, Apron 3, and Taxiway No.

2 at Keesler Air Force Base in Biloxi, Mississippi. These airfield features are Portland Cement Concrete Pavements with thicknesses ranging from 10.5 inches to 16 inches. We understand preliminary plans call for portions of each pavement feature to be removed and replaced after installation of subsurface drainage systems. The general site layout of Keesler Air Force Base is shown in Figure 1.

1.3 Scope/Purpose

The purposes of the investigation reported herein were as follows:

To determine pavement thickness and subgrade conditions in a proposed construction area.

To evaluate pertinent physical properties of the soils and materials encountered.

To develop guideline recommendations related to pavement design and construction according to US Department of Defense Unified Facilities Criteria (DOD UFC) 3-260-02 Pavement Design for Airfields.

2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION

Subsurface conditions at the project site were investigated by means of three (3) borings as presented in Figure 1. Prior to boring advancement, the existing concrete pavement was cored to allow access to the underlying soils. One boring was located within each of the three pavement sections – Apron 2, Apron 3, and Taxiway No. 2 as presented in Figure 1. The borings were advanced by means of hand auger drilling techniques to a terminal depth of 6-feet each. All borings were backfilled in compliance with Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) regulations, and capped with Portland cement concrete. Graphical soil boring logs showing the types of soils encountered are presented in Appendix A. Symbols and soil classifications used in the graphical boring logs are presented in the Soil Classification Chart in Appendix A.

Soil Sampling. Representative disturbed samples were obtained directly from the auger bucket used to complete the nominal 6-foot borings. The samples were placed and sealed in plastic jars to prevent loss of moisture. All jars were placed in protective boxes for transportation to the laboratory for possible testing.

3.1 LABORATORY INVESTIGATION

The field investigation was expanded by means of data developed from laboratory tests.

Laboratory tests were conducted to determine the classification and in-situ moisture content of the soils encountered. The laboratory tests included natural moisture content, visual classification, Atterberg limits test, and No. 200 washes. All soil tests were performed in accordance with recognized ASTM standards and procedures in our laboratory facility. A summary of laboratory tests performed in this investigation including statistical analysis of the results is provided in Table 1 of Appendix A. The laboratory tests are discussed in the following paragraphs.

3.2 Index Properties

Moisture Contents. Nine (9) natural moisture content tests and visual classifications were performed to verify field classifications for consistency in soil type and to enhance plasticity data. The results of moisture content tests are plotted as small shaded circles in the data section of the soil boring logs. Results of the visual classifications were utilized in the development of the “Description” section in the boring logs.

Liquid and Plastic Limits. The compressibility and shrink-swell potential of the subsurface soils were investigated indirectly by means of natural moisture content and liquid and plastic limit tests. For this study, two (2) samples were investigated to determine Atterberg limits and found to be non-plastic.

No. 200 Wash. In order to classify the soil types further, three (3) soil samples were washed over the No. 200 sieve to determine the percent of fine soil in the total soil sample. Material passing through the No. 200 sieve is considered to be fine particles (clays and silts) whose particles are less than 0.075 millimeters in size. Results of No. 200 washes are presented as percent fines in the data section of the boring log.

4.1 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

The soil conditions within the depths explored at the boring locations consist of Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) pavement, crushed aggregate base course, and sands/silty sands. The general soil and groundwater conditions encountered at the project site and the engineering properties of the soils are discussed in the following paragraphs.

4.2 Soil Conditions

Soils present at the site of the apron and taxiway are Crushed Limestone (FILL) and Sand (SP)/Silty Sand (SM). Soil locations in terms of depth range in each boring are summarized in Table 4.1.1.

Table 4.1.1

Soil Locations With Depth

Boring

PCC

Depth range (in)

Crushed

Limestone (FILL)

Depth Range

Sand (SP)/Silty Sand (SM)

Depth Range

B-1 Surface – 11.0 in 11.0 in.- 1.5 ft. 1.5 ft. - TD*

B-2 Surface – 16.0 in -------- 16.0 in. –TD*

B-3 Surface – 10.5 in -------- 10.5 in. – TD* (4.0 ft.**)

* TD - Terminal Depth of boring ** Encountered Obstruction

Sand (SP)/Silty sand (SM) was the most abundant material at the site, accounting for 76.9 percent of the total drilling footage. This material is brown, tan, and black in color. Eight (8) natural moisture content tests were performed on this material yielding natural moisture contents ranging from 1.6 percent to 17.8 percent with an average of 6.8 percent. Two (2) Atterberg limits tests were performed on this material with the material found to be non-plastic.

Crushed Limestone (FILL) accounted for 3.6 percent of the total drilling footage. This material is gray in color. One (1) moisture content test was performed on this material yielding a moisture content of 8.0 percent.

The remaining 19.5 percent of the drilling/coring footage was Portland Cement Concrete pavement ranging from 10.5 inches to 16 inches in thickness.

4.3 Groundwater Conditions

Groundwater conditions at the project site were determined by observing water levels in the borings upon completion. No free water was observed in the borings. Notes pertaining to groundwater level observations are presented in the lower left portion of each graphical boring log. Proper note should be taken that groundwater conditions will fluctuate seasonally with variations of rainfall and other environmental factors.

5.1 GUIDELINE PAVEMENT DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

Our recommendations related to design and construction of the pavement elements are discussed in the following paragraphs.

5.2 Site Preparation

Objectionable Materials. Site preparation for this project should include, as a minimum, the removal of objectionable materials at or near the existing ground surface. Objectionable materials that should be removed from this project site include organic matter, construction debris, stumps and roots. After removal of objectionable materials, any areas that will receive select fill or pavement section should be proof-rolled. Proof-rolling should be conducted with two passes by a fully-loaded dump truck or other suitable vehicle approved by the Engineer.

After proof-rolling, any areas that are soft or that “pump” should be overexcavated and recompacted with select fill materials.

Pumping Soils. Portions of the near-surface soils at this project site are silty. Silty soils are sensitive to increases in moisture content and have a tendency to lose strength as the moisture content increases or as construction vehicles pass over the area. Such materials, if wet, are subject to pumping when being compacted. Pumping soils are not acceptable for placement of fill materials or pavement structures and should be removed and replaced or reprocessed to establish a stable surface. Soils that are stable during proof-rolling and compaction could become unstable from exposure to inclement weather and/or construction vehicles. Therefore, the Contractor should be cautioned to provide adequate drainage both during and after earthwork activities and to minimize construction traffic.

Should pumping soils be encountered after removal of the existing pavement structure, we ask that we be promptly notified so that we can evaluate the soils and provide mitigation recommendations.

Select Fill Materials. The select fill materials for this project should consist of a soil having a liquid limit of not more than 45 percent and a plasticity index no greater than 25. Select fill used for this project should be compacted from horizontally-placed loose lifts not exceeding 9 inches in thickness to a density which is equal to at least 95 percent of modified Proctor density (ASTM D 1557). Field density tests should be completed in each lift of the select fill materials to provide some assurance that adequate and uniform densities are being obtained before proceeding with subsequent lifts. These field density tests should be completed by a competent geotechnical engineering firm retained by the Owner. The surface of each lift should be scarified prior to placement of subsequent lifts.

5.3 Pavement Design Thickness Recommendations

Apron and Taxiway. Anticipated aircraft (including aircraft weights) and annual departures used to design the aprons and taxiway were provided by Neel-Schaffer, Inc. The anticipated traffic used for design is shown in Table 5.2.1. SoilTech Consultants, Inc. should be notified if the stated assumptions are not representative of actual and/or anticipated conditions and revisions will be made to accommodate provided traffic conditions.

The US Army Corps of Engineers produced the applicable criteria for this pavement design under the Unified Facilities Criteria Program. The evolution and application of the US Army Corps of Engineer pavement design methods is well documented and presented in the Unified Facilities Criteria Design Guidance of the US Department of Defense: (DOD UFC) 3-260-02 Pavement Design for Airfields and PAVEMENT COMPUTER AIDED STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING (PCASE) VERSION 2.09. The PCASE computer program was used for all pavement design calculations presented in this report.

Table 5.2.1

Anticipated Traffic Loading

Name Gross Wt., lbs.

Annual Passes

Design Life

C 130 164,000 1200 25 years

Based on anticipated traffic loading and airfield data as stated above, thickness recommendations can be made for Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) pavement. Pavement component thicknesses are determined from application of the PCASE computer program with a Modulus of Subgrade Reaction of approximately 75-125 psi/inch estimated from soil classification testing and historical data within the PCASE Computer Program. All three pavement features: Apron 2, Apron, 3, and Taxiway No. 2 will have the same recommended pavement section as describe below.

12- inches Jointed PCC Pavement

Thickened edge of 15.0 inches (1.25 times pavement thickness) for all slabs adjacent to existing pavement

6” Crushed Limestone Base Compacted to 98% Modified Proctor density (ASTM D1557)

Scarify and compact subgrade to 95% Modified Proctor Density (ASTM D1557)

It is recommended joints in the newly constructed concrete pavement align with joints in the existing pavement except where this alignment produces a slab width or length of more than 20 feet. Isolation joints should be placed at locations where new pavement will be placed adjacent to an existing pavement. The slabs adjacent to existing pavements should be constructed with an edge thickness of 15 inches tapering back to 12 inches over a 10 foot length.

All remaining joints (those not specified as isolation joints) should be doweled joints. We recommend dowels 1 inch in diameter by 20 inches in length fixed on one end and free to move longitudinally on the other. These dowels should be spaced at 15 inches on center for both longitudinal and transverse joints. All interior joints parallel to a free edge on the same slab should be placed with a 1 inch in diameter tie bar to restrain lateral movement of exterior slabs.

6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS

The borings made for this report were located in the field by measurement from existing features at the site as shown on your plans. Elevations of the borings were not determined. The locations of the borings should therefore be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the methods used in their determination. The boring logs shown in this report contain information related to the types of soil encountered at specific locations and times and show lines delineating the interface between these materials, as well as results of tests performed in the laboratory on representative samples. The logs also contain our field representative's interpretation of conditions that are believed to exist in those depth intervals between the actual samples taken. Therefore, these boring logs contain both factual and interpretative information. It is not warranted that these logs are representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.

With regard to groundwater conditions, this report presents data on groundwater levels as they were observed during the course of the field work. In particular, water level readings have been made in the borings at the times and under conditions stated in the text of the report and on the boring logs. It should be noted that fluctuations in the level of the groundwater table can occur with passage of time due to variations in rainfall, temperature and other environmental factors.

Areas of the near-surface soils encountered at this site are of a type that may soften significantly if the soil water content should be increased for any reason. Such increases in soil water content normally cause difficulties in proper soil compaction. Sources of increased water content in the surface soils could include, but are not limited to, rainwater, improper surface drainage during earthwork or site grading, and broken or leaking utility lines.

Unanticipated soil conditions at a construction site are commonly encountered and cannot be fully predicted by mere soil samples and test borings. Such unexpected conditions frequently require that additional expenditures be made by the owner to attain a properly designed and constructed project. Therefore, provisions for some construction contingency funds are recommended to accommodate such potential extra cost.

The analyses, conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions as they existed at the time of our field investigation and further on the assumption that the exploratory borings are representative of the subsurface conditions throughout the site, that is, that the subsurface conditions everywhere are not significantly different from those disclosed by the borings at the time they were completed. If, during construction, different subsurface conditions from those encountered in our borings are observed, or appear to be present beneath excavations, we must be advised promptly so that we can review these conditions and reconsider our recommendations where necessary. If there is a lapse of time of more than one year between submission of this report and start of the work at the site, if conditions have changed due either to natural causes or to construction operations at or adjacent to the site, or if the structure location, loads or finish grades are changed, we urge that we be promptly informed, and retained to review our report to determine the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations, considering the changed conditions and/or time lapse.

Further, we request that our firm be retained to review those portions of the plans and specifications for this particular project that pertain to earthwork and pavement features as a means to determine whether the plans and specifications are consistent with the recommendations contained in this report. In addition, we are available to observe construction, particularly the compaction of structural fill, the construction of pavements as recommended in this report, and such other field observations as might be necessary.

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Neel-Schaffer, Inc. for specific application to design and construction of pavement elements for Apron 2, Apron 3, and Taxiway No. 2 at Keesler Air Force Base in Biloxi, Mississippi. The only warranty made by us in connection with the services provided is that we have used that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar conditions by reputable members of our profession practicing in the same or similar locality. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made or intended.

--y

Legend

S SoilBoring Location

EXISTING PAVEMENTVERIFICATION

KEESLERAIR FORCE BASE

BILOXI,MISSISSIPPI

.SOILTECHCONSULTANTS,INC

GEOTEOINICAL ENGll'EERING

Drawn By: A.P.W. Date:

SOIL BORING LOCATIONS

Scale:

Prqld No.: N6.1t1113Jl01.Cll4 Checked By: O.M.S. 12/03,f14 N.T S.

FIGURE 1

A P P E N D I X A

Graphical Soil Boring Logs Soil Classification Chart

Table 1 – Summary of Laboratory Data

M o is tu re

C n te n t

PROJECT: Geotechnical Investigation

Keesler Air Force Base

Biloxi, Mississippi

SOIL BORING LOG

No. B-1

SHEET 1 OF 1

PROJECT NO.: NS.11763.001.004

DATE: 11/26/14

DRILLER: M. Biglane

TECHNICIAN: M. Biglane

CLIENT: Neel-Schaffer, Inc.

Biloxi, Mississippi

ENGINEER: D. Smith

Location: See Figure 1

LABORATORY DATA

DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL

Field Test

Results

Undrained Shear

Strength (ksf)

Unit

Weight (pcf)

Cohesion / Triaxial (ksf)

1 2 3 4

PL MC% LL

Concrete (11")

Crushed limestone (7")

Tan sand (SP)

2 - slightly silty

- brown from 3' to 5'

- black with organics below 5'

6 Encountered obstruction at 6'

Terminal Depth at 6.0 ft

Moist

Dry PI 20 40 60 80

3.6

Groundwater Observations

No groundwater encountered

Advancement Method

0 - 6 ft: Hand Auger

Notes

Abandonment Method

Boring backfilled with soil cuttings

SoilTech Consultants S O

IL

B

O R

IN

G

L

G

.0

.0

.G

P J

E

O T

E C

H N

IC

A

L T

E M

P L

A T

E .G

D T

/4

/1 e p th ft

S y m b o l

S a m p le s la s ti c it y

In d x a s s in g N o is n te n t

Keesler Air Force Base

Biloxi, Mississippi

SOIL BORING LOG

No. B-2

DRILLER: M. Biglane

TECHNICIAN: M. Biglane

CLIENT: Neel-Schaffer, Inc.

Biloxi, Mississippi

ENGINEER: D. Smith

Concrete (16")

Black silty sand (SM)

- with organics to 2'

2 - brown from 2' to 4'

4 - tan below 4'

Terminal Depth at 6.0 ft

Moist

Dry PI

17.8

0 - 6 ft: Hand Auger

IL

B

O R

IN

G

L

.0

.0

.G

O T

E C

H N

IC

A

L T

E M

P L

A T

E .G

/4 p th ft

S y m b o l

S a m p la s ti c a s s in g N o

Keesler Air Force Base

Biloxi, Mississippi

SOIL BORING LOG

No. B-3

DRILLER: M. Biglane

TECHNICIAN: M. Biglane

CLIENT: Neel-Schaffer, Inc.

Biloxi, Mississippi

ENGINEER: D. Smith

Concrete (10.5")

Tan sand (SP)

Moist Dry PI

9 1.6

4 Encountered obstruction at 4' Terminal Depth at 4.0 ft

0 - 4 ft: Hand Auger

IL

B

O R

IN

G

L

.0

.0

.G

O T

E C

H N

IC

A

L T

E M

P L

A T

E .G

/4 p th ft

S y m b o l

S a m p is n te n t

P la s ti c a s s in g N o

SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART

MAJOR DIVISIONS

SYMBOLS TYPICAL

DESCRIPTIONS GRAPH LETTER

COARSE

GRAINED

SOILS

MORE THAN 50%

OF MATERIAL IS

LARGER THAN

NO. 200 SIEVE

SIZE

GRAVEL

AND

GRAVELLY

OF COARSE

FRACTION

RETAINED ON NO.

4 SIEVE

CLEAN

GRAVELS

(LITTLE OR NO FINES)

GW

WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -

SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO

FINES

GP

POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS,

GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE

OR NO FINES

GRAVELS WITH

(APPRECIABLE

AMOUNT OF FINES)

GM

SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -

SILT MIXTURES

GC

CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -

CLAY MIXTURES

SAND

AND

SANDY

OF COARSE

FRACTION

PASSING ON NO.

4 SIEVE

CLEAN SANDS

(LITTLE OR NO FINES)

SW

WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY

SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES

SP

POORLY-GRADED SANDS,

GRAVELLY SAND, LITTLE OR NO

SANDS WITH

(APPRECIABLE

AMOUNT OF FINES)

SM

SILTY SANDS, SAND - SILT

MIXTURES

SC

CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAY

MIXTURES

FINE

GRAINED

OF MATERIAL IS

SMALLER THAN

NO. 200 SIEVE

SIZE

SILTS

AND LIQUID LIMIT

LESS THAN 50

CLAYS

ML

INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE

SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR

CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY

SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY

CL

INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO

MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY

CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS,

LEAN CLAYS

OL

ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC

SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY

SILTS

AND LIQUID LIMIT

GREATER THAN 50

CLAYS

MH

INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR

DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR

SILTY SOILS

CH

INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH

PLASTICITY

OH

ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO

HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS

HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT

PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH

HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS

NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS

Table 1

Summary of Laboratory Data

Stratum Number I II

Classification Limestone (FILL) Sand (SP) / Silty Sand

(SM)

Moisture Content (%)

Number of Tests 1 8

Maximum 8.04 13.40

Minimum 8.04 2.84

Average 8.04 6.77

Standard Deviation NA 3.67

% Passing No. 200

Number of Tests 0 3

Maximum NA 17.76

Minimum NA 1.63

Average NA 7.65

Standard Deviation NA 8.81