G-010-210-110_SOW_Attachments.pdf

ATTACHMENTS

Location Map Attachment No. 1

Vicinity Map Attachment No. 2

Aerial Map Attachment No. 3

Enlarged Aerial Map Attachment No. 4

Bill Burton Fishing Pier State Park Attachment No. 5

2022 EBA Report Attachment No. 6

2022 Marine Solutions Underwater Inspection Attachment No. 7

Proposed Timber Walkway Location Exhibit Attachment No. 8.

Existing Reef Ball Locations Attachment No. 9

MarcanoJ Typewritten Text G-010-210-110 Bill Burton State Park Fishing Pier Design and Demolition

ATTACHMENT 6

Bill Burton Fishing Pier

April 2022

Trappe, Maryland

Rehabilitation / Replacement

Recommendations

EBA Engineering, Inc.

6100 Chevy Chase Drive, Suite 200

Laurel, Maryland 20707

Preamble

This report is an executive summary of the inspection findings and recommendations related to the rehabilitation / replacement of the Bill Burton Fishing Pier. Every effort was made to keep this concise and to the point. If additional information or clarification is required, we refer the reader to the most recent inspection reports and site photos. As is often said, "a picture is worth a thousand words," so we will rely more on pictures than words. The pictures on pages 5 through

12 depict the observed deterioration in structural bridge elements.

Introduction

The Maryland Department of General Services commissioned EBA Engineering, Inc. (EBA) to assess the superstructure and substructure of the Bill Burton Fishing Pier Bridge. EBA inspected the bridge in May/June 2021 for portions of the structure above water. Due to severe deterioration observed near the waterline, it was necessary to perform a limited underwater inspection of select substructure units from the waterline to the riverbed. EBA retained Marine Solutions, Inc. (Marine Solutions) to perform this limited underwater inspection. The limited/modified underwater inspection was conducted in February 2022. It involved a Level I Inspection of 32 bents out of the bridge's 151 bents (approximately 20%), a Level II inspection (including cleaning three 12" high bands near the splash zone, at mid-height, and near the mudline to observe conditions) of 32 piles, and documenting water depth measurements at both ends of each bent. The inspection goals were to document the existing structural condition of the bents and piles mentioned above and assess overall site conditions.

Findings of previous inspections were given due consideration while making recommendations for future actions related to this facility.

Description of the Facility

The Bill Burton Fishing Pier was originally constructed in 1935 as the Emerson C. Harrington

Bridge. The original bridge was approximately 2 miles long and spanned the Choptank River to connect the towns of Trappe and Cambridge. Due to increased traffic demands, the four-lane

Frederick C. Mulkus Bridge was constructed in 1987, adjacent to the original bridge, which became the current Route 50 bridge. The drawbridge section of the old bridge was removed to allow vessel traffic passage. The structure was also converted into a pedestrian fishing pier, and the name was later changed to honor Bill Burton, a local fisherman, writer, and reporter.

The Bill Burton Fishing Pier is comprised of two separate structures. The south structure is approximately 3,000 feet long, supported by 56 bents. The north structure is approximately 5,000 feet long, supported by 95 bents. The bents are typically comprised of 5 square reinforced concrete piles with a horizontal concrete strut that encompasses all five piles. The struts generally are located 4' below the top of the piles within the tidal zone. Several bents appear to have had the strut removed and pile jackets installed. There is a 10-pile double bent with a reinforced concrete strut at approximately every eighth bent.

Assessment

Using FHWA's "Recording and Coding Guide for Structure Inventory and Appraisal of the Nation's

Bridges" (Report No. FHWA-PD-96-001), the Bill Burton Fishing Pier is assigned a combined overall

Condition Rating based on the type and level of severity of deterioration observed on the individual structural components of each structure. Recommendations are provided based on the facility's current condition, redundancy of structural elements, known history and age, results of previous inspections, and the most recent modified underwater inspection. An excerpt of the FHWA's bridge condition rating criteria is provided on page 18 in Appendix B.

Condition Assessment Rating

The Bill Burton Fishing Pier is in overall Serious condition (Condition Rating 3) to Critical condition (Condition Rating 2). This assigned Condition Rating is due to widespread areas of advanced deterioration and isolated areas of severe deterioration of the primary structural elements. As noted in the attached FHWA guideline, for the "Critical" condition rating, "Unless closely monitored, it may be necessary to close the bridge until corrective action is taken."

Recommendations

EBA's development of recommendations for additional actions and rehabilitation to various structural elements of the Bill Burton Fishing Pier focused on determining the most efficient and cost-effective use of funds. In addition, due consideration was given to life-cycle cost and benefit-cost aspects, as total costs encompass both the upfront investments and those required for recurring maintenance over the anticipated service life of the structure.

Marine Solutions' limited underwater inspection of February 2022 confirmed our suspicion of crumbling concrete in many areas of the structure below the water surface (see photos 12 thru

17). We believe this condition is prevalent throughout the structure. These defects can cause sudden failures, often with little to no warning, making them unpredictable. In addition, they are very costly to repair due to the need for special underwater construction methods and materials and limiting environmental regulations for construction work in water.

Repair/Replacement Options

1. Repair Existing Bridge:

The repair cost estimate of approximately $25 million provided by Kumi Construction

Management Corp. (KUMI) in September 2021 did not include underwater repairs. Our initial estimate of underwater repairs is approximately $15 to $20 million, which would result in a total bridge repair cost of approximately $40 to $45 million.

2. Construct New Bridge:

Construction of a new fishing pier, approximately 1,500 feet long on each side of the river, will require additional study to determine the best-suited and most economical structure type for this location and application. However, one structure type that could meet the requirements is shown in the sketch on page 14 (Appendix A). Our preliminary estimate indicates that the cost of such a structure would be far less than for the repair of the existing bridge. To confirm this, we need to perform a limited preliminary structure type study and retain KUMI's services for cost estimation.

An accurate cost comparison between fixing the old bridge versus building a new fishing pier will require the following additional considerations:

a. Including the cost of demolishing the existing structure to option 2 above.

b. Comparing the life cycle cost of options 1 and 2 above. This analysis would include consideration of the required regular inspections and maintenance costs for the existing structure versus the minimal maintenance needs (15-plus years) and the much longer service life (50-plus years) of a new structure.

c. Because a new structure would have a much longer service life than the repaired existing structure, a time-dependent life cycle cost-benefit analysis would need to be performed to compare the two options equitably.

Conclusion

We await direction from the Maryland Department of General Services for the next steps. We are available to meet and discuss further at the convenience of the Department.

Photo 1

Photo 2

Photo 3

Photo 4

Photo 5

Photo 6

Photo 7

Photo 8

Photo 9

Photo 10

Photo 11

Photo 12

Photo 13

Photo 14

Photo 15

Photo 16

Photo 17

Appendix A

Proposed Bridge Sketch

Appendix B

FHWA Bridge Condition Assessment Criteria

ATTACHMENT 7

Bill Burton Fishing Pier Cambridge, Maryland Modified Underwater

Inspection Report February 2022

For:

EBA Engineering, Inc.

6100 Chevy Chase Drive, Suite 200

Laurel, Maryland 20707

By:

23 Fontana Lane, Rosedale, MD

21237 443.484.2394 www.MSImarinesolutions.com

Bill Burton Fishing Pier February 2022

Modified Underwater Inspection Report

03/26/2022

Inspection Team Leader: Clayton Niemiec, PE Date

PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION:

“I hereby certify that this document was prepared or approved by me, and that I am a duly licensed professional engineer under the laws of the State of Maryland, License No. 52301;

Expiration Date: 02/14/2024.˝

DISCLAIMER: The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising, publication, or promotional purposes.

Citation of trade names does not constitute an official endorsement or approval of the use of such commercial products. All product names and trademarks cited are the property of their respective owners.

Modified Underwater Inspection Report

Table of Contents 1 Introduction

1.1 Description of the Facility

1.2 Inspection Procedures

1.3 Condition Assessment Criteria

2 Observed Conditions

2.1 Reinforced Concrete Pile Bents

2.1.1 Reinforced Concrete Struts

2.1.1 Square Reinforced Concrete Piles

2.2 Pier Wall 1 (Bent 56)

2.3 Pier Wall 6 (Bent 57)

2.4 North Abutment (Bent 151)

3 Conclusions and Recommendations

3.1 Overall Condition Assessment Rating

3.2 Recommendations

3.2.1 Immediate (Within 6 months)

3.2.2 Priority (Within 2 years)

3.2.3 Routine (Within 5 years)

Appendices

Appendix A: Inspection Limits and Reference Drawings

Appendix B: Photos

Appendix C: ASCE Damage Grading Figure

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Page 1

1 Introduction

Marine Solutions, Inc. (Marine Solutions) was retained by EBA Engineering, Inc. (EBA Engineering) to perform a modified underwater inspection of the substructure units that comprise the Bill Burton Fishing Pier near Cambridge, Maryland. The modified underwater inspection was to perform a Level I Inspection of 32 bents out of the 151 bents (approximately 20%), complete a Level II inspection (cleaning three 12" high bands near the splash zone, mid-height, and near mudline) on 32 piles (approximately 20%), and document water depth measurements at both ends of each bent during the dates of February 22nd through the 24th 2022. The purpose of the inspection was to document existing structural conditions, assess the overall site conditions, and provide recommendations for future actions. This report includes a description of the facility, inspection procedures, condition assessment criteria, observed conditions, and recommendations for repairs.

Previous inspection reports and facility plans were available and provided by EBA Engineering and used for comparison during the modified underwater inspection. For reporting purposes, bents and piles were numbered from the south and the east, respectively.

1.1 Description of the Facility

The Bill Burton Fishing Pier was originally constructed in 1935 as the Emerson C. Harrington Bridge. The original bridge was approximately two miles long spanning across the Choptank River connecting the Maryland towns of Trappe and Cambridge. Due to increased traffic demands, the four-lane Frederick C. Mulkus Bridge was constructed in 1987 adjacent to the original bridge and became the current Route 50 bridge. The draw bridge section was removed from the original bridge to allow vessel traffic to pass through. The structure was turned into a pedestrian fishing pier and later named after Bill Burton, a local fisherman, writer, and reporter.

The Bill Burton Fishing Pier is currently comprised of two separate structures. The south structure is approximately 3,000' long and is supported by 56 bents (Photo 1). The south pier is approximately 5,000' long and supported by 95 bents (Photo 2). The bents are typically comprised of 5 square reinforced concrete piles with a horizontal concrete strut that encompasses all five piles (Photos 3 and 4). The struts are located 4' below the top of the piles within the tidal zone.

Several bents appear to have had the strut removed and pile jackets installed (Photo 5).

Approximately every 8 bents consist of a 10-pile double bent with a reinforced concrete strut (Photo 6).

Pier Wall 1 (Bent 56) is the northern most bent on the south structure and consists of two reinforced concrete columns orientated east and west (Photo 7). The columns are connected by a full-height reinforced concrete web wall. The columns and the web wall are founded on a reinforced concrete footing and subfooting. Pier Wall 6 (Bent 57) is the southernmost bent on the north structure and consists of two reinforced concrete columns orientated east and west (Photo 8). The columns are connected by a partial height reinforced concrete strut that extends from 7' below the high-water mark down to the top of the footing. The columns are founded on a footing and subfooting. The North Abutment (Bent 151) is comprised of a reinforced concrete stem, two reinforced concrete wingwalls, and a footing (Photo 9). The South Abutment was dry and did not require an underwater inspection.

1.2 Inspection Procedures

The underwater inspection was performed by a three-person dive team lead by a Professional Engineer/Dive Supervisor. Diving operations were conducted using surface-supplied diving equipment with hardwire communications between the diver and topside personnel, and in accordance with all applicable ADCI, OSHA, and USCG regulations. The operations were staged from a fully equipped diving support vessel (DSV). All Marine Solutions on-site personnel were

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Page 2 experienced in the inspection, maintenance, rehabilitation, and construction of waterfront structures.

The inspection was performed in general accordance with ASCE Manuals and Reports on

Engineering Practice No. 130: Waterfront Facilities Inspection and Assessment (ASCE Manual).

The purpose of the inspection was to document existing structural conditions, assess the overall site conditions, and provide recommendations for future actions.

The underwater inspection included 35 randomly selected bents which included Pier Wall 1, Pier

Wall 6, and the North Abutment. A Level I inspection effort (visual/tactile) was performed on 100% of the accessible structural elements within the selected bents from the high-water mark down to the mudline. A Level II inspection effort (visual inspection of cleaned areas) was performed on approximately 20% of the accessible structural elements within the selected bents. Water depths measurements were recorded at the east and west ends of each selected bents using a diver carried depth gauge. See Appendix A for detailed inspection notes and water depth measurements.

1.3 Condition Assessment Criteria

In accordance with ASCE, the inspection condition and assessment criteria use a six-point standardized rating system provided in the ASCE Manual. The condition assessment of the facility is determined based on the findings during the underwater inspection. These ratings are required to categorize the results of the inspection and to provide a basis for comparison of new deficiencies in future inspections or other facilities. The condition assessment ratings as defined in the ASCE manual are described in Table 1 below.

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Page 3

Table 1: ASCE Condition Assessment Ratings.

Rating Description

6 – Good

No visible damage or only minor damage noted. Structural elements may show very minor deterioration, but no overstressing observed. No repairs are required.

5 – Satisfactory

Limited minor to moderate defects or deterioration observed but no overstressing observed. No repairs are required.

All primary structural elements are sound but minor to moderate defects or

4 – Fair deterioration observed. Localized areas of moderate to major deterioration may be present but do not significantly reduce the load-bearing capacity of the structure.

Repairs are recommended, but the priority of the recommended repairs is low.

Advanced deterioration or overstressing observed on widespread portions of the

3 – Poor structure but does not significantly reduce the load-bearing capacity of the structure.

Repairs may need to be carried out with moderate urgency.

Advanced deterioration, overstressing, or breakage may have significantly affected

2 – Serious the load-bearing capacity of primary structural components. Local failures are possible, and loading restrictions may be necessary. Repairs may need to be carried out on a high-priority basis with urgency.

Very advanced deterioration, overstressing, or breakage has resulted in localized failure(s) of primary structural components. More widespread failures are possible

1 - Critical or likely to occur, and loading restrictions should be implemented as necessary.

Repairs may need to be carried out on a very high-priority basis with strong urgency.

Each structural element was evaluated and assessed an element level damage rating (minor, moderate, major, or severe). See Appendix C for the ASCE Manual Element Level Damage

Rating Figure. The element damage ratings were utilized to give an overall condition rating to each structural element inspected based on the marine environment, overall use, redundancy, section loss, bearing capacity, physical damage, and deterioration of each individual element.

2 Observed Conditions

The observed conditions of each structural element inspected at the Bill Burton Fishing Pier is discussed in the following sections. Please refer to Appendix A for Field Note Data detailing the exact locations, type, and extend of the observed defects. Refer to Appendix B for photographs of observed defects. Refer to Appendix C for ASCE Element Level Damage Rating Figure.

2.1 Reinforced Concrete Pile Bents

Marine Solutions inspected 27 reinforced concrete five pile bents and 5 reinforced concrete ten pile bents. Seven out of the 32 reinforced concrete bents did not have reinforced concrete struts. The reinforced concrete piles and struts are discussed in more detail in the sections below.

2.1.1 Reinforced Concrete Struts

The reinforced concrete struts are in overall Poor condition. The north and south faces of the struts typically have severe spalling that extends full length x full height and up to 10" deep (full-

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Page 4 depth) with the deepest areas of spalling concentrated in a 2' high band at the bottom of the strut (Photos 10 and 11). The spalling exposes all the main longitudinal bars and stirrups, which exhibit severe corrosion and section loss. The exposed stirrups typically are debonded and have areas of 100% section loss. The exposed longitudinal reinforcing bars are intermittently debonded and have 50% section loss throughout with isolated areas of up to 90% section loss. Areas without spalling typically have corrosion cracks with rust staining up to 1/4" wide with associated delamination.

The east and west faces of the struts typically have severe spalling that extends full width x full height and up to 20" deep (full-depth) with the deepest areas of spalling concentrated within the top and bottom 1' of the strut (Photos 12 through15 ). The spalling exposes several horizontal and vertical steel reinforcing bars which exhibit severe corrosion and section loss. The exposed reinforcing bars are intermittently debonded in random areas and have up to 100% section loss.

Areas without spalling typically have corrosion cracks with rust staining up to 1/4" wide with associated delamination.

2.1.1 Square Reinforced Concrete Piles

The square reinforced concrete piles are in overall Fair condition. This is due to widespread minor to moderate abrasion, spalling, and cracking (Photos 16 through 19). Most of these defects are located within the top 4' of the pile above the reinforced concrete strut. Piles that do not have a strut or repairs in the tidal zone typically have abrasion up to 2" deep most notably at the corners.

Bent 148, Pile 4 has an area of abrasion with exposed reinforcement where the strut is missing due to deterioration (Photo 20). Approximately 18% of the piles have corner spalls within the top 5' of the piles (Photos 21). The spalls are up to 5'-0" high x up to 10" wide x up to 7" deep with exposed reinforcement that exhibits 50% to 75% section loss. Three piles (Bent 90 Pile 1 and 5;

Bent 149 Pile 5) have several spalling and deterioration from 3' to 7' below the top of the piles (Photo 22). These spalls are approximately 4'-0" long x full-width x 7" deep with exposed and corroded reinforcement with up to 50% section loss. Approximately 75% of the piles have cracking typically 1/8" to 1/4" wide with isolated 1/2" wide cracks within the top 4' of the pile. As a result of the cracking, there are areas of associated delamination and spalling on all faces of the affected piles (Photos 18 through 22). See Table 3 for total quantities and percentages of piles with observed defects.

Table 2: Type and Number of Pile Defects.

Defect Type No. of Piles Percentage of Piles with Defect

Abrasion 15 8%

Spall 34 18%

Cracking 138 75%

< 1/8" Wide 15 8%

1/8" to 1/4" Wide 112 61%

>=3/8" Wide 11 6%

With Spalling and Delamination 36 19%

Approximately 92% of the piles have been previously repaired with either a square epoxy filled fiberglass jacket or a grout filled fabric bag with welded wire mesh. Piles within bents without a strut typically have the square epoxy filled fiberglass jackets. These jacket repairs typically extend

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Page 5 from 3' to 10' below the top of the pile (Photo 23). Isolated piles with these repairs have areas of missing or damaged epoxy epoxy jackets typically from 4' to 9' below the top of the pile (Photos 24 and 25). Piles within bents with a strut typically have the grout filled fabric bag repairs. The bag repairs typically extend from the bottom of the strut to 13' below the top of the pile. Isolated bag repairs have voids up to 1'-0' high x 8" wide x 2" deep exposing the wire mesh within the grout (Photo 26). At these locations the underlying pile is not exposed. For specific repair numbers and percentages, see Table 3.

Table 3: Number of Pile Repairs and Defects.

No. of Pile with Percentage of Percentage of

Repair Type No. of Piles Damage/Missing Total Piles Total Repairs

Area Inspected with Defects

No Repair 15 0 8% 0%

Square Epoxy 34 5 18% 15%

Jacket

Grout Filled 136 3 74% 2%

Fabric Bag

Totals: 185 8 100% 4%

2.2 Pier Wall 1 (Bent 56)

Pier Wall 1 (Bent 56) is in Poor condition. The west column exhibits random areas of scale up to full height x 3" deep. Full circumference of the footing/column interface, there is spalling up to 10'- 0" wide x 2'-6" high x 6" deep with exposed and corroded reinforcement. The east column exhibits random areas of scale up to full height x 3" deep. Full circumference of the footing/column interface, there is spalling up to 10'-0" wide x 3'-0" high x 10" deep with exposed and corroded reinforcement.

The web wall exhibits random areas of scaling 1" deep and isolated areas 9" deep concentrated at the waterline (Photo 27). The top of the footing is approximately 5'-6" below the waterline and approximately 8'-0" high. There are random areas of scaling up to 8" deep throughout with exposed and loose aggregate. The footing has large areas of latent concrete throughout resulting in small voids and removal of the concrete matrix when sounded with a hammer. At the west face near the centerline, there is an area of undermining 3'-0" long x 1'-6" high x 2'-0" deep.

2.3 Pier Wall 6 (Bent 57)

Pier Wall 6 (Bent 57) is in Poor condition. The west and east columns have 9'-0" high grout filled fiberglass jackets that begin 4' above the waterline and extend within 4" to the top of the strut. In the tidal zone, there are random areas of missing jacket throughout exposing the underlying grout layer.

The grout exhibits 3" deep scale; however, is not deep enough to reach the original column This deterioration is most notable on the west faces of both columns (Photo 28).

The top of the reinforced concrete strut is located approximately 7' below the high water mark and has random areas of voids and spalling up to 1'-0" diameter x 3" deep (Photo 29). The top of the footing is located approximately 15' below the high-water mark. The footing is 5'-0" high x 4'-0" wide and encompasses both columns. The footing has large areas of latent concrete throughout resulting in small voids and removal of the concrete matrix when sounded with a hammer. There are random up to 1'-0" diameter x 3" deep voids throughout (Photos 30 and 31).

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Page 6

The top of the subfooting is located approximately 20' below the high-water mark. The subfooting is exposed up to 7'-0" x 2'-0" wide and encompasses the entire footing. The subfooting has large areas of latent concrete throughout resulting in small voids and removal of the concrete matrix when sounded with a hammer. There are random up to 5'-0" diameter x 1'-6" deep voids throughout (Photo 32). No signs of undermining were observed during the inspection.

2.4 North Abutment (Bent 151)

The North Abutment (Bent 151) is in Fair condition. The footing of the North Abutment and both wingwalls is exposed full-length x up to 3'-0" high with no signs of undermining and up to 3" deep scale. At the centerline of the stem wall and extending to the footing, there is a 6'-0" high x 2'-0" wide x 2" deep spall. At the east end of the stem wall, there is a spall of similar size. At the west end of the stem wall, there is a 2'-0" high x 1'-0" wide x 3" deep spall (Photos 33 and 34). At the interface of the stem wall and Northwest Wingwall near the waterline, there is a 2'-0" high x 1'-0" wide x 2" deep spall.

3 Conclusions and Recommendations

The Bill Burton Fishing Pier was assigned a combined overall Condition Assessment Rating (CAR).

The CAR is assigned based on the type and level of severity of the deterioration observed on the individual structural components of each structure. Recommendations are provided based on the facilities current use, redundancy of structural elements, known history and age of the facility, and based on the areas inspected during this modified underwater inspection.

3.1 Overall Condition Assessment Rating

The Bill Burton Fishing Pier is in overall Poor condition. This CAR is given due to widespread areas of minor to moderate deterioration and isolated areas of major to severe deterioration on the primary structural elements.

3.2 Recommendations

Marine Solutions has developed recommendations for additional actions and rehabilitation to the various structures or areas at the Bill Burton Fishing Pier based on observed conditions. The following recommendations should be compared with facility use and production parameters to determine the most practical and economical allocation of funds.

Recommendations have been separated by immediate, priority, and routine repair items. It is recommended that immediate repair items be performed as soon as possible within the next six months. Immediate recommendations typically include action items to increase the facilities overall safety or to address significant structural concerns. Priority repair items should be executed within the next two years to minimize the potential for facility limitations or load restrictions. Typically, structural components which are observed with major to severe deterioration are included in the priority repair category due to potential loss of capacity to the element. Routine repair items are maintenance items which should be executed within the next five years. Routine maintenance items help extend the service life of the facilities and minimize the need for structural repairs and rehabilitation which are often costly and can involve temporary facility shutdowns.

3.2.1 Immediate (Within 6 months)

Based on the inspection limits and observed conditions at the time of inspection, Marine Solutions recommends the following repair items on an immediate basis:

• Due to the age of the structure and the overall CAR of poor, the Bill Burton Fishing Pier should have a complete underwater inspection of the remaining piers not included within this inspection.

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Page 7

• Perform a load rating analysis to determine if the current loading criteria requires the reinforced concrete struts to provide adequate structural capacity to the piers. If the struts are required, then they should be repaired on all bents where they remain. If they are not required, then they should be removed, and the underlying pile section should be inspected.

• Even though the struts are in overall poor condition and several struts have severe deterioration, some struts only had moderate to major deterioration and act as a protective element around the piles in the tidal zone. If the load rating determines the struts are not required for structural capacity, then struts with moderate to major damage could be left in place.

• Three piles have severe deterioration with exposed and debonded main reinforcing members. These piles should be repaired with new reinforcing bars and a grout filled structural jacket.

3.2.2 Priority (Within 2 years)

Based on the inspection limits and the observed conditions at the time of inspection, Marine Solutions recommends the following repair items on a priority basis:

• Replace all damaged or missing square epoxy filled fiberglass jackets with new grout filled fiberglass jackets.

• At Pier Wall 1 (Bent 56), there is an area of undermining. Backfill and place scour protection countermeasures to prevent further undermining.

• Remove areas of unsound concrete, clean corroded reinforcement, and patch the areas of deep (>1" deep) spalling on the piles, pier walls, and North Abutment (Bent 151).

• At Pier Wall 1 (Bent 56) and Pier Wall 6 (Bent 57), repair the areas of voids in the footing and subfooting.

3.2.3 Routine (Within 5 years)

Based on the inspection limits and observed conditions at the time of inspection, Marine Solutions recommends the following repair items on a routine basis:

• Epoxy seal all cracks equal to and greater than 1/8" wide on the piles.

• Continue to monitor the condition of the Bill Burton Fishing Pier by maintaining a consistent underwater inspection cycle.

Appendix A – Field Inspection Notes

Abbreviations Used in the Field Inspection Notes:

N – North

S - South

W – West E – East NE – Northeast NW – Northwest SW – Southwest SE - Southeast SEC – Southeast Corner SWC – Southwest Corner NWC – Northwest Corner NEC – Northeast Corner SL – Section Loss

FL – Full-Length

FW – Full Width

FD – Full Depth

FH – Full Height ML – Mudline

CRX – Cracks

HL – Hairline

ISO – Isolated

B1 – Bent Number 1

P1 – Pile Number 1

Marine Solutions, Inc. Appendix A - Field Inspection Notes February 2022

Defect / Condition Data

Inventory Data Level II Data

Abrasion/Scale Spall Vertical Cracking Exisitng Repairs

Manual

West End East End Damage Concrete Strut Notes Additional Notes

Bent No. Pile No. Top to WL Bent ML Bent ML Orig. X-sect Min X-Sect ML Depth (ft) Depth (in) Defect Top Defect Exp. Steel Depth (in) Face Defect Top Defect Exp. Steel Width (in) Face Defect Top Defect Rust Stain Yes / No Repair Top Repair Repair Type Rating

(ft) Depth (ft) Depth (ft) (in) (in) Bottom Bottom Bottom Bottom

WL TO ML WL TO ML

1 5

1 6 ML No

3/16 S,E 0 4 Yes

6' TO ML SCALE ON CORNERS 1" DEEP

2 5 22 18 2 2 6 8 No SCALE 1" DEEP ON CORNERS OF PILE

3 5

1.5 6 8 No

>= 1/2 SEC, SWC 0

4 Yes SOUTH FACE: FULL LENGTH STIRRUP

EXPOSED, TOP AND BOTTOM REINF.

SOUTH AND EAST FACES P 0 TO 4 HEAVY DELAM

8 EXPOSED. STIRRUPS 100% SL AT BOTTOM;

4 5 1 6 8 No

SCALE UP TO 6" DEEP; NORTH FACE: AND IMMINENT SPALLS WITH INTERMITTENT

REINFORCING EXPOSURE

SPALLING FL X FH X 6" DEEP, STIRRUPS 100%

5 5 1.5 6 8 No 3/16 SEC, NWC 0 4 Yes SL, OTHER REINF. 50% SL SCALE 1" DEEP ON CORNERS

6 5 1.5 6 8 No 3.5 NEC 0 5 Yes w/ SL 5'H X 2' W X 3.5" D SPALL, REINF. 75% SL

7 5 1.5 6 8 No 1/8 NWC 0 4 No DELAM NE CORNER 0 TO 4 4' H X 8" W

8 5 1 6 8 No

9 5 1 6 8 No SCALE 1" DEEP ON CORNERS

10 5 3.2' 1.5 6 8 No 1/8 N 2 5 Yes SCALE 1" DEEP ON CORNERS

1 5 4 22 20 2 1 6 7 No SE CORNER FH X 10'L X UP TO 2.5" D SPALL SCALE 1" DEEP ON CORNERS

2 5 1 6 7 No 3/16 W,N 0 4 WITH STIRRUPS AND REINF. EXPOSED 40% SL

1 6 7 No 1/8 S,E 0

4 Yes ON BAR; SCALE UP TO 3/4" DEEP; SOUTH

FACE BELOW P4 SPALL 3.5' W X 2' H X 4" D

4 5

1 6 7 No

3/8 S,W,E,N 0

4 Yes

9 WITH 3 STIRRUPS EXPOSED AND 25% SL;

BELOW P5 S FACE SCALE 2" DEEP; WEST

5 5

3.9' 1 6 7 No

1/16 S 0 3 No NOSE 2' HIGH X 3' WIDE X 4" DEEP REINF

EXPOSED 40% SL; NORTH FACE: ISO AREAS

AT PILES 3,4,5 SCALE 1.5" DEEP

1 5 3.5 HL NEC 0 2 Y 6 8.5 BAG EAST FACE: FH X FW X 3.5" DEEP REINF FAILED BAG REPAIR TOP 3"

2 5 1/8 N 0 4 Y 6 8.5 BAG EXPOSED 40% SL… SOUTH FACE: FL X 2'H X DELAM 0 TO 4, 4'H X 10" W SEC

3 5 Y 6 8.5 BAG 3" DEEP SCALE WITH RANDOM REINF

22 22 3

Y 6 8.5 BAG EXPOSED 25% SL WITH ADJACENT DELAM

AND HORIZ CRX FL… WEST NOSE 6'L AREA

4.4 1/16 E,N 0

3 Yes Y 6 8.5 BAG SCALE 3.5" DEEP WITH 100% SL ON

STIRRUPS… NORTH FACE SAME AS SOUTH

1 5.25 8 1/4 N,W 0 3 Yes Y 6 11 BAG WITH ASSOCIATED SPALLING 2"W X 2" D

2 5.25 1/8 S,W,E,N 0 3 Yes Y 6 11 BAG DELAM SOUTH FACE 2' DIA P=1

18 3 5.25

1/16 N,W 0

4 Yes Y 6 11 BAG SOUTH FACE: SCALE UP 12 TO 15" DEEP

HARDWARE GONE… NORTH FACE SAME

4 5.25 Y 6 11 BAG

5 5.25 7 22 22 7 1/4 W,S 0 6 Yes Y 6 11 BAG NEC DELAM 2'H X 10" W

1 5.25 11 22 22 11 1/8 N,S,W 0 3 No Y 3 8 SQ EPOXY 1.5" ANNULUS ON JACKET

2 5.25 0.75 SWC 3 3 1/4 W, N 0 3 Yes Y 3 8 SQ EPOXY SPALL 6" DIA X 3/4" D

19 3 5.25 1/16 S,E,N 0 2 Yes Y 2 9 BAG NO STRUT HERE

4 5.25 1/8 W,S,E,N 0 3 Yes Y 3 6 SQ EPOXY

5 5.25 10 1/8 E,N,W 0 3 Yes Y 3 6 SQ EPOXY WITH ASSOCIATED SPALLING 3"W X 1.5" D

1 5.25 11 1/16 E,N 0 4 Yes Y 6 13 BAG

2 5.25 22 22 12 1/8 W,N 0 4 Yes Y 6 12 BAG

3 5.25

1/16 E 12 17 No Y 6 12 BAG ALL FACES: FH X 9" D SCALE WITH

VC SOUTH FACE 1/16" W 0 TO 3

4 5.25

1/4 N,S 0

4 Yes Y 6 12 BAG INTERMITTENT AREAS FD, STIRRUPS 100% SL

MAIN REINFORCING 75 TO 90% SL

5 5.25 11 1/8 W,N 0 4 Yes Y 6 12 BAG

ASSOCIATED DELAM AND SPALLING 4"W X 2"D

1 5.5 10 2 S, NWC 0 4 1/4 S,W 0 4 Y 6 11 BAG 8"H X 6"W X 2.5" D NWC SPALL

NORTH AND SOUTH FACE: BOTTOM 2' SCALE NORTH FACE SHALLOW SPALLING; CRACKS

2 5.5

0.25 N 0 4

>= 1/2 W,S 0

2 Yes Y 6 13 BAG

UP TO 2" INTERMITTENT STRUT EXPOSED 25% HAVE ASSOC. HONEYCOMBING

SL… WEST END: SPALLING/SCALE 10'L X FD

28 3 5.5

Y 6 13 BAG

(10") DEBONDED REINR WITH UP TO 100%

4 5.5 22 22 11 Y 6 13 BAG SL… EAST NOSE: 12'L X FH X FD

SCALE/SPALLING WITH MULTIPLE REINF AND

5 5.5

1/16 S,E 0

4 No Y 6 13 BAG STIRRUPS EXPOSED WITH 100% SL

1 5.5 10 1/16 E,N,S 0 2 No Y 6 12 BAG

2 5.5 3/8 S,NWC 0 4 Yes Y 6 12 BAG NORTH AND SOUTH FACES: BOTTOM 1' 2"D

3 5.5

22 22 9

3/8 NWC 0

4 Yes Y 6 11 BAG SCALE INTERMITTENT STRUT EXPOSED… CRACK WITH ASSOCIATED SPALLING 6" DIA X 3"

EAST NOSE: FH X FL X 8" DEEP SCALE WITH DEEP

4 5.5 1/16 S 0 3 Yes Y 6 12 BAG EXPOSED REINF 80% TO 100% SL… WEST

5 5.5

1 6 7

3/8 E,SWC 0

4 Yes Y 7 12 BAG

NOSE SAME AS EAST

ABOVE BAG REPAIR UP TO 1" DEEP SCALE AT

CORNERS

Bent No. Pile No. Top to WL Bent ML Bent ML Orig. X-sect Min X-Sect ML Depth (ft) Depth (in) Defect Top Defect Exp. Steel Depth (in) Face Defect Top Defect Exp. Steel Width (in) Face Defect Top Defect Rust Stain Yes / No Repair Top Repair Repair Type Rating

1 5.5 11 22 22 11 Y 6 12 BAG

2 5.5

1 6 7

Y 7 12 BAG NORTH AND SOUTH FACES: BOTTOM 1' UP TO

2" DE SCALE STIRRUPS EXPOSED AND

3 5.5

Y 6 12 BAG

INTERMITTENT FL HORIZONTAL CRACK 1/4"

4 5.5

1/16 S,E,N

4 Yes Y 6 12 BAG

WIDE NEAR THE TOP EDGE… EAST NOSE: FH

X 6' L X 4" DEEP SCALE EXPOSING STIRRUPS WEST FACE ASSOCIATED SPALLING 2" DIA X

5 5.5 11 1/8 N,W,S 0 4 Yes Y 6 12 BAG WITH 50% SL 2"D; NE CORNER AND EAST FACE HC 6" DIA X 1"

D

NE CORNER, CRACK WITH ADJACENT SPALLING.

1 6.25 14 22 22 14 0.5 NW 3 4 1/4 S,E,N 0 7 Yes Y 6 12 BAG SHALLOW SPALL ON NORTH FACE 1' HGIH 0.5

WIDE 1/2" DEEP.

2 6.25 Y 7 13 BAG SOUTH FACE, FULL LENGTH X FULL HEIGHT X

3 6.25

1/4 S, N

4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG 5" DEEP SPALLING WITH EXPOSED REBAR., 2 CRACKS ON SOUTH FACE.

STIRRUPS HAVE 100% SECTION LOSS. EAST

38 FACE OF STRUT MISSING. WEST END TYP BAG NOTE: TOP 10% OF FABRIC IS

4 6.25

0.5 N 3 3.5

Y 7 13 BAG MISSING. NORTH FACE FULL LENGTH X FULL WEARING AWAY BUT GROUT UNDERNEATH IS

HEIGHT X 5" DEEP SPALL WITH EXPOSED OK. SE CORNER LIGHT HONEY COMBING ABOVE

REBAR, STIRRUPS 100% SECTION LOSS. STRUT.

NORTH WEST CORNER HAS CRACKS WITH

5 6.25 15 1.5 NW 2 4 NO 1/8 S, NW 0 6 Yes Y Y 13 BAG ASSOCIATED SPALLING HAIRLINE CRACKS ON

NORTH FACE (0 TO 5).

VC ON S, E, N AND W FACES 0 TO 6 UP TO 3/16"

WIDE WITH RUST STAINING. N FACE VC 1/4"

1 6.25 15 0.25 S 3 4 NO 3/16 ALL 0 6 YES Y 7 13 BAG WIDE WITH RUST STAINING. NW CORNER HAS

LIGHT SPALLING AND DELAM (1 TO 4) 4" WIDE X

3/4" DEEP.

EAST END OF STRUT MISSING. SOUTH AND

VC ON S (0 TO 4). N CORNER CRACKS UP TO 1/6"

2 6.25 3/16 S 0 4 YES Y 7 13 BAG NORTH FACE HEAVY SPALLING AND SCALE WIDE. NW CORNER SCALE AND DELAM (1 TO 4)

FULL HEIGHT X FULL LENGTH UP TO 6" DEEP, 8" WIDE X 1" DEEP.

REBAR EXPOSED STIRRUPS 100% SECTION

3 6.25

Y 7 13 BAG

LOSS, LONGITUDINAL BARS DEBONDED AND

100% SECTION LOSS. WEST END OF STRUT

W FACE DELAM (0 TO 2) 1' HIGH X 6" WIDE. N

MISSING.

4 6.25

0 W 0 2

NO 1/8 SE

4 YES Y 7 13 BAG

FACE VERTICAL CRACKS (0 TO 6) WITH

ASSOCIATED SPALLING UP TO 1/4" WIDE

CRACKS.

5 6.25

22 22 14

2 3 NO

3/16 N, E,W

4 YES Y 7 13 BAG SCALE ON NW CORNER 1' HIGH 3" WIDE 1"

DEEP.

1 6.25

1/4 SW, SE 0

4 YES Y 7 13 BAG BAG REPAIR: AT TOP OF BAG AT THE SE

CORNER, REBAR HAS DEBONDED FROM THE

GROUTH 1' HIGH X 4" WIDE X 1.5" DEEP.

2 6.25 Y 7 13 BAG

3 6.25 Y 7 13 BAG SOUTH AND NORTH FACE FULL HEIGHT X

FULL LENGTH X 6" DEEP. BOTTOM 1' HAS

BAG REPAIR: TOP OF BAG REPAIR HAS A VOID 1'

4 6.25 Y 7 13 BAG ADDITIONAL SCALING 2" DEEP, STIRRUPS ARE

EXPOSED WITH 100% SECTION LOSS, HIGH X 8" WIDE X 2" DEEP.

40 REINFORCING ALSO HAS 100% SECTION

5 6.25 15 1.5 2 4 NO 1/4 S 0 4 NO Y 7 13 BAG

LOSS. EAST END OF STRUT TOP 1' HAS HEAVY

NE CONER HAS SCALE. 2 CRACKS ON S FACE.

SPALLING 1' HIGH X FULL WIDTH X FULL

6 6.25 Y 7 13 BAG DEPTH (8" DEEP). EAST FACE HEAVY SPALL

7 6.25 Y 7 13 BAG AND SCALE TOP 1' -8" DEEP.

8 6.25 3/16 N 0 4 YES Y 7 13 BAG

9 6.25 1/4 N 0 4 YES Y 7 13 BAG

10 6.25 22 22 15 2 NW 2 3 NO 1/4 NW 0 5 NO Y 7 13 BAG VERTICAL CRACKS ON N FACE AND

ASSOCIATED SPALL 8" WIDE.

1 6.5 14 1/8 S, W 0 5 YES Y 7 13 BAG HAIRLINE CRACKS ON W FACE.

2 6.5 Y 7 13 BAG SOUTH FACE SCALE/SPALLING FULL LENGTH

3 6.5

22 22 15 3/16 S, W

4 YES Y 7 13 BAG X FULL HEIGHT, WORSE ALONG BOTTOM 2' UP W FACE HAS A 1/8" WIDE DIAGONAL CRACK

TO 8" DEEP. TOP OF STRUT ON SOUTH FACE WITH ASSOCIATED 1' DIA DELAM.

AT PILES 1 AND 3. STIRRUPS 100% SECTION

4 6.5

LOSS AND REINFORCING 50% SECTION LOSS.

WEST AND EAST ENDS OF THE STRUT HAVE SW AND NW CORNERS HAVE CRACKS AND

48 5 6.5 15 1/4 NW, SW 0 4 YES Y 7 13 BAG SPALLING UP TO 8" DEEP STIRRUPS AND DELAM UP TO 1/4" WITH RUST STAINING. DELAM

REINFORCING 100% SECTION LOSS. NORTH 4' H X 10" WIDE.

6 6.5 1/16 N, W 0 4 Y 7 13 BAG FACE HAS SCALE SPALLING HAS FULL

7 6.5

Y 7 13 BAG LENGTH X FULL HIEGHT UP TO 4" DEEP WITH

INTERMITTENT AREAS OF REINFORCMENT

8 6.5 3/16 NW 0 4 No Y 7 13 BAG EXPOSED. AT PILE 4, NORTH FACE HEAVY

9 6.5 Y 7 13 BAG SPALLING 8" DEEP.

10 6.5 1/4 NW 0 4 Y Y 7 13 BAG CRACK ON N FACE HAS ASSOCIATED DELAM.

Bent No. Pile No. Top to WL Bent ML Bent ML Orig. X-sect Min X-Sect ML Depth (ft) Depth (in) Defect Top Defect Exp. Steel Depth (in) Face Defect Top Defect Exp. Steel Width (in) Face Defect Top Defect Rust Stain Yes / No Repair Top Repair Repair Type Rating

1 6.5

13 22 22 13

2 NE 1 2

1/8 S, E 0

4 NO Y 7 13 BAG

EAST END HAS HEAVY SPALLING, TOP 1' UP SPALL ON NE CORNER 1' H X 10" WIDE X 2"

DEEP.

TO 8" DEEP WITH EXPOSED AND DEBONDED

2 6.5 1/8 S, E 0 4 NO Y 7 13 BAG REINFORCEMENT WITH 100% SECTION LOSS.

3 6.5

1/8 S,E,W,N 0

4 NO Y 7 13 BAG SOUTH FACE HAS SCALING/SPALLING FULL

LENGTH X FULL HIEGHT UP TO 6" DEEP ALONG

THE BOTTOM 2 FEET. WEST END OF STRUT

100% MISSING. NORTH FACE HAS HEAVY

5 6.5 14 1.5 NW 2 4 NO 1/4 W 0 5 Yes Y 7 13 BAG SPALLING UP TO 6" DEEP FULL HEIGHT X FULL

W FACE HAS ASSOCIATED SPALLING AT NW

LENGTH.

CRACK,

1 6.5 15 1/8 S, E 0 4 YES Y 7 13 BAG

EAST END HAS HORIZONTAL CRACK 8' LONG

2 6.5

WITH ASSOCIATED DELAM... S FACE HAS

50 3 6.5 Y 7 13 BAG ABRASION UP TO 3 INCHES DEEP NO REBAR

Y 7 13 BAG EXPOSED. SAME ON NORTH FACE. WEST END

SCALE UP TO 2" DEEP NO REBAR.

5 6.5

22 22 13

1/8 S,, N FACE 0

4.5

4.5 NWWW: footing (2' thick) exposed FL x 2'-0"H. scale.

At NWWW/abutment interface - 2'-0"H x 1'-0"W x 2"D

4.5 spall at waterline. Abutment stem: -at west end, 2'-

0"H x 1'-0"W x 3"D spall. Footing exposed FL x up to

N. Abutment

3'-0"H with scale up to 3" deep throughout. 6'-0"H x 2'-

4.5

0"w x 2"D spall at centerline and similar spall at east end. NEWW footing exposed FL x 2'-6"H with scale

4.5 up to

1 4.5 5.5 4 E 4 7 Yes 1/4 E 0 4 Yes Y 7 10 BAG

ALL FACES FULL LENGTH X FULL HEIGHT X

150 2 4.5

22 22 5.5

1/4 S,E 0

4 Yes Y 7 10 BAG

FULL DEPTH SCALE/SPALLING. STIRRUPS

3 4.5

Y 7 10 BAG

HAVE 100% SL

4 4.5 1/16 N 1 4 Yes Y 7 10 BAG

5 4.5 5.5 5 W 4 7 Yes 1/4 S,W 1 4 Yes Y 7 10 BAG

1 4.5 5.5 4 SE 0 5 Yes w/ SL 1/8 N,E,S 0 4 Yes Y 7 10 BAG

2 4.5 1/4 W,S 0 4 Yes Y 7 10 BAG ALL FACES FULL LENGTH X FULL HEIGHT X

149 3 4.5 22 22 5.5 Y 7 10 BAG FULL DEPTH SCALE/SPALLING. STIRRUPS

4 4.5

1/4 N,W 0

4 Yes Y 7 10 BAG HAVE 100% SL

5 4.5

5.5 6 W 3 6

Yes w/ SL 1/4 W,N,S 0 4 Yes Y 7 10 BAG FULL WIDTH SPALL WITH FULL REBAR CAGE

EXPOSED

1 4.5 6 3 E 4 6 Yes 1/4 E,N 0 4 Yes Y 7 10 BAG

2 4.5 NW, SW 0 4 1/4 N,W,S 0 4 Yes Y 7 10 BAG ALL FACES FULL LENGTH X FULL HEIGHT X DELAM WITH RUST STAINING

148 3 4.5 22 22 6 Y 7 10 BAG FULL DEPTH SCALE/SPALLING. STIRRUPS

4 4.5

2 5 6 Yes

1/8 W 0

Y 7 10 BAG

HAVE 100% SL

ABRASION WHERE STRUT IS MISSING REBAR IS

5 4.5 6 4 N,W,S 3 7 Yes w/ SL 3/16 N,W 0 4 Y 7 10 BAG

1 4.5 11 1/4 NW, E 0 4 Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY ASSOC DELAM WITH CRACKS

2 4.5 1/8 ALL 0 4 Yes Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY

131 3 4.5 1/4 ALL 0 4 Yes Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY NO STRUT THIS BENT

4 4.5 22 22 11 1/4 ALL 0 4 Yes Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY

5 4.5

1/4 N,W,S 0

Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY JACKET MISSING ON S. FACE WITH 1" OF SCALE

ON GROUT

1 4.5 12 1.5 SW 2 3 3/16 ALL 0 4 Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY JACKET IS DAMAGED FROM 4 TO 7

2 4.5

22 22 10 1.5 7 9

1/4 ALL 0

Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY JACKET IS MISSING FROM 4 TO 9 SCALE ON

PILE

3 4.5

1.5 7 9

1.5 SW 3 4

1/4 ALL 0

Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY NO STRUT THIS BENT JACKET IS MISSING FROM 4 TO 9. SCALE ON

PILE

4 4.5 1/4 ALL 0 4 Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY JACKET DAMAGED FROM 4 TO 7

5 4.5 12 1/4 N,S 0 4 Yes Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY

1 4.5 14 1/4 ALL 0 4 Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY

2 4.5 1/4 ALL 0 4 YES Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY

129 3 4.5 22 22 12 1.5 NW,SW 3 4 3/16 ALL 0 4 YES Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY NO STRUT THIS BENT

4 4.5 1.5 NW 1 4 1/4 S,W,N 0 4 Yes Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY

5 4.5 13 1/4 ALL 0 4 YES Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY

Bent No. Pile No. Top to WL Bent ML Bent ML Orig. X-sect Min X-Sect ML Depth (ft) Depth (in) Defect Top Defect Exp. Steel Depth (in) Face Defect Top Defect Exp. Steel Width (in) Face Defect Top Defect Rust Stain Yes / No Repair Top Repair Repair Type Rating

1 4.5 12 3/8 N,W,S 0 4 YES Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY

2 4.5 3/16 S 0 4 Yes Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY

128 3 4.5 1 NW 2 4 RS 1/8 N,W 0 4 Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY NO STRUT THIS BENT

4 4.5 22 22 11 1/2 S,W 0 4 Yes Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY

5 4.5 13 1/4 E,S 0 4 YES Y 4 10 SQ EPOXY

1 4.5 14 0.5 4 7 3/16 S 0 4 Y 7 13 BAG

2 4.5 22 22 14 Y 7 13 BAG

3 4.5 1/4 W,S 0 4 YES Y 7 13 BAG ASSOC SPALLING WITH CRACK

4 4.5 1/4 W,E,S 0 4 YES Y 7 13 BAG EAST AND WEST ENDS: STRUT MISSING…

111 5 4.5 14 1 4 7 1/4 N,S 0 4 YES Y 7 13 BAG NORTH AND SOUTH FACES: FULL LENGTH X

FULL HEIGHT X FULL DEPTH SCALE/SPALLING.

6 4.5 22 22 14 1 6 7 3/8 N 0 4 Y 7 13 BAG STIRRUPS HAVE 100% SL

ASSOC DELAM/IMMINENT SPALL NW CORNER

7 4.5 1/8 N,W 0 4 YES Y 7 13 BAG

8 4.5 1/16 E,N,W 0 4 Y 7 13 BAG

9 4.5 3/16 W,E 0 4 YES Y 7 13 BAG

10 4.5 15 1/4 N,S 0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG

1 5 14 0.5 4 7 2 SW 0 4 1/2 ALL 0 4 YES Y 7 13 BAG

EAST AND WEST ENDS: STRUT MISSING…

NORTH AND SOUTH FACES: FULL LENGTH X

110 2 5

FULL HEIGHT X FULL DEPTH SCALE/SPALLING.

1/8 S

STIRRUPS HAVE 100% SL

4 5 22 22 15 1/4 N,W,S 0 4 YES Y 7 15 BAG

5 5 15 1.5 4 7 3 SW 3 7 1/4 S,N Y 7 13 BAG

1 5 14 3/8 N,S, 0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG

EAST AND WEST ENDS: STRUT MISSING…

2 5

Y 7 13 BAG FULL HEIGHT X 4"D SCALE/SPALLING.

STIRRUPS HAVE 100% SL RANDOMLY

4 5 1/16 W 0 4 YES Y 7 13 BAG

5 5 13 22 22 13 2 4 7 4 NW,SW 0 4 Yes w/ SL Y 7 13 BAG

1 5 14 0.5 4 7 3/16 ALL

0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG

FULL HEIGHT X 4"D SCALE/SPALLING.

Y 7 13 BAG STIRRUPS HAVE 100% SL RANDOMLY

EXPOSED… EAST AND WEST ENDS: STRUT

3/8 N,W

MISSING

4 5 22 22 13 2 NW,SW 0 4 3/8 N,S,W 0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG

5 5 15 1 4 7 3/16 N,W,S 0 4 YES Y 7 13 BAG

1 5

5 S,E,N 3 7

Yes w/ SL 1/4 ALL

4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG SPALLS REBAR CAGE EXPOSED DEBONDED

EAST AND WEST SIDES: STRUSTS MISSING… REBAR WITH 50% SL

2 5 22 22 19 Y 7 13 BAG NORTH AND SOUTH FACES: FULL LENGTH X

90 FULL HEIGHT X 4"D SCALE/SPALLING. EAST FACE ASSOCIATED SPALLING 4" WIDE X 2"

1/4 N,W

4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG

STIRRUPS HAVE 100% SL AND RANDOMLY DEEP WITH RUST STAINING

4 5 1/8 S,W,N 0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG

5 5 18 7 W,N,S 3 7 Yes w/ SL 1/8 N,S,W 0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG SV SPALL REBAR CAGE EXPOSED 50% SL

1 5 19 1.5 6 7 No 1/8 ALL 0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG

2 5 Y 7 13 BAG EAST AND WEST SIDE: MISSING… NORTH

89 3 5 1/4 ALL 0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG AND SOUTH FACES: FULL LENGTH X FULL CRACKS ASSOCIATED DELAM

22 22 16

DELAM SEC 0 4

1/4 N,E,S

4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG HEIGHT X 4"D SCALE/SPALLING

DELAM/IMMINENT SPALL 4' HIGH X 8" WIDE

5 5 19 1.5 4 7 No 1/4 W,E,S 0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG SWC CRACK SPALLING 4" WIDE X 2.5" DEEP

1 5 18 1/4 ALL 0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG CRACKS HAVE ASSOCIATED SPALLING 2" DIA

2 5 22 22 18 1/4 N,W 0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG EAST AND WEST SIDES: 4" DEEP SCALE

88 3 5

0.75 N 2 3

No 1/8 W,N

4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG OVER FULL LENGTH…NORTH AND SOUTH

SPALL 1' HIGH X 6" WIDE X 3/4" DEEP

FACES: FULL LENGTH X FULL HEIGHT X 4"D

4 5 1/8 N,E 0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG SCALE/SPALLING

5 5 18 1.5 W 2 3 No >= 1/2 W,S,E 0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG NWC SPALL 5" DIA X 3/4" DEEP

Bent No. Pile No. Top to WL Bent ML Bent ML Orig. X-sect Min X-Sect ML Depth (ft) Depth (in) Defect Top Defect Exp. Steel Depth (in) Face Defect Top Defect Exp. Steel Width (in) Face Defect Top Defect Rust Stain Yes / No Repair Top Repair Repair Type Rating

1 5 18 0.5 6 7 No 4 S/E FACES 3 7 Yes w/ SL >= 1/2 ALL 0 3 Yes Y 7 13 BAG 25% SL

2 5 1/8 N 0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG

3 5 0.5 6 7 No 1/16 W,SEC 0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG

4 5 0.5 6 7 No 1/8 W,S,N 0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG

WEST AND EAST SIDES: COMPLETLEY

CRX WITH ASSOCIATED SPALLING 3" WIDE X

22 21 17 0.5 6 7 No

1/4 NWC,S

4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG

GONE…NORTH AND SOUTH FACES: FULL

1.5" DEEP

LENGTH X FULL HEIGHT X 4"D

6 5 18 0.5 6 7 No 1/8 E 0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG SCALE/SPALLING

7 5 0.5 6 7 No 1/8 E,N 0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG

8 5 22 21 16 0.5 6 7 No 1/8 ALL 0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG ASSOCIATED SPALLING 2" WIDE X 2" DEEP

9 5 0.5 6 7 No 1/4 N,W 0 4 Yes Y 7 13 BAG

10 5 17 0.5 6 7 No 1/4 S,E,W 0 6 Yes Y 7 13 BAG ASSOCIATED SPALLING 2" WIDE X 2" DEEP

1 5 19 1/8 E,S 0 4 Yes Y 4 9 SQ EPOXY

1/4 N, SWC 0

4 Yes Y 4 9 SQ EPOXY ASSOCIATED SPALLING 8" HIGH X 3" WIDE X 1"

DEEP

NO STRUT HERE

3 5 22 22 18

1/4 W,S

4 Yes Y 4 9 SQ EPOXY

4 5 1 NEC 2.5 4 No 1/8 ALL 0 4 Yes Y 4 9 SQ EPOXY 1.5' HIGH X 8" WIDE X 1" DEEP SPALL

5 5 20 1 4 6 No 0.75 NEC 0 2 No 1/8 S,W 0 4 Yes Y 6 9 SQ EPOXY

MISSING JACKET ON SOUTH AND WEST FACES

1 5 17 1/8 S,E,N 0 3 Yes Y 3 9 SQ EPOXY

2 5 1/8 ALL 0 3 Yes Y 3 9 SQ EPOXY

69 3 5 Y 3 9 SQ EPOXY NO STRUT HERE

4 5 22 22 17 1/8 E,N,S 0 3 Yes Y 3 9 SQ EPOXY

5 5 18 1/8 W 0 3 Yes Y 3 9 SQ EPOXY

Appendix B - Photos

Bill Burton Fishing Pier March 2022

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Appendix B-1

Photo 1: Overall of the South Half of the Pier (East Elevation).

Photo 2: Overall of the North Half of the Pier (East Elevation).

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Appendix B-2

Photo 3: Typical 5-Pile Bent (Bent 8, North Elevation Shown).

Photo 4: Typical 5-Pile Bent (Bent 10, South Elevation Shown).

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Appendix B-3

Photo 5: Typical Bent without a Reinforced Concrete Strut (Bent 129 Shown).

Photo 6: Typical 10-Pile Double Bent (Bent 8, North Elevation Shown).

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Appendix B-4

Photo 7: South Elevation of Pier Wall 1 (Bent 56).

Photo 8: North Elevation of Pier Wall 6 (Bent 57).

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Appendix B-5

Photo 9: North Abutment Elevation Looking Northeast.

Photo 10: Typical Spalling and Exposed Reinforcement on Strut (Bent 149 Shown).

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Appendix B-6

Photo 11: Typical Spalling and Exposed Reinforcement on Strut (Bent 147 Shown).

Photo 12: Typical Spalling, Exposed Reinforcement, and Missing West and East Ends on

Strut (Bent 111 Shown).

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Appendix B-7

Photo 13: Typical Spalling and Exposed Reinforcement on Strut (Bent 28 Shown).

Photo 14: Typical Missing Strut on East and West Faces (Bent 39 Shown).

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Appendix B-8

Photo 15: Typical Spalling and Exposed Reinforcement on West and East Ends of the Strut (Bent 30 Shown).

Photo 16: Typical Condition of Pile Underwater (Bent 30, Pile 1 Shown).

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Appendix B-9

Photo 17: Bent 130, Pile 1, Corner Spall and Delamination.

Photo 18: Typical Vertical Cracking at the Top of Pile (Bent 150, Pile 5 Shown).

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Appendix B-10

Photo 19: Bent 109, Pile 5, Area of Spalling and Delamination at the Top of Pile.

Photo 20: Bent 148, Pile 4, Area of Abrasion with Exposed Reinforcement (Underwater).

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Appendix B-11

Photo 21: Bent 8, Pile 5, Corner Spall with Exposed and Corroded Reinforcement.

Photo 22: Bent 149, Pile 5, Spall with Exposed, Corroded, and Debonded Reinforcement.

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Appendix B-12

Photo 23: Typical Condition of Square Epoxy Jacket Underwater (Bent 130, Pile 4 Shown).

Photo 24: Bent 130, Pile 2, Missing Jacket and Abrasion in the Tidal Zone.

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Appendix B-13

Photo 25: Bent 130, Pile 2, Failed Square Epoxy Jacket (Underwater).

Photo 26: Bent 40, Pile 1, Void at the Top of the Grout Filled Fabric Bag Repair (Underwater).

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Appendix B-14

Photo 27: Pier Wall 1 (Bent 56), Scaling and Voids at the Waterline.

Photo 28: Pier Wall 6 (Bent 57), Typical Void in Fiberglass Jacket at the Columns (Underwater).

Modified Underwater Inspection Report Appendix B-15

Photo 29: Pier Wall 6 (Bent 57), Typical Condition of Reinforced Concrete Strut (Underwater).

Photo 30: Pier Wall 6 (Bent 57), Typical…