W912EP23B0008 Dredge Offset Recommendations.pdf

Puma Energy Caribe, LLC

DREDGING OFFSET RECOMENDATIONS

Puma Energy Bulk Liquids Terminal

June 28, 2022 Rev 3

Dredging Offset Recommendations at Puma Energy Caribe Berthing Facility San Juan, Puerto Rico June 2021

PRESENTED TO PRESENTED BY

Carlos A. Ramos, Operations Manager Puma Energy Caribe, LLC PO Box 11961 San Juan, PR 00922

Tetra Tech PR, LLC 251 Calle Recinto Sur, Suite 200 San Juan, PR 00901

Prepared by:

Renee Vandermause, PE, Civil/Water Resources Engineer Mauricio Posada, PE, Senior Structural Engineer Ross McGillivray, PE Senior Geotechnical Engineer

Name Title

Reviewed and Authorized by:

Fernando Pagés, PE Director

Name Title

Puma Energy Caribe, LLC Dredging Offset Recommendation i June 2022

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

As part of the USACE San Juan Harbor Navigation Project, USACE will be deepening and widening navigation channels within San Juan Bay. The Army Terminal Turning basin, adjacent to Puma Energy’s bulk liquids terminal, referred hereinafter as Puma Caribe Dock (PCD), will be deepened to -44 feet, MLLW (plus 2 feet of over dredge) and the flares expanded east and west (Ref 1). The berthing area for PCD currently extends into the Army Terminal Turning Basin. After the San Juan Harbor improvement project is implemented, the Corps will designate the area associated with Puma’s berthing area a non-federal area (Appendix A).

As part of the project, the USACE needs to determine dredging offsets of the non-federal areas. This includes a technical certification by a PR registered professional engineer providing an analysis/assessment and recommendations for dredging offsets including the condition of the structures and relevant subsurface information.

This document provides a summary of existing information, review of structural loads, geotechnical analysis, and certification of analysis by a PR registered professional engineer, to support the Dredging Offset recommendation for the PCD Structure.

Lateral loads on the existing piles were derived from previous analysis at PCD as described in the report herein. Bathymetric information along the PCD structure was not well covered by the periodic bathymetric surveys in San Juan Bay collected by USACE in 2020 and 2021. This was likely due to the presence of a ship berthed at the PCD structure during the time of the bathymetric surveys. Tetra Tech collected a multibeam bathymetric survey in 2014 in the San Juan Bay and Puerto Nuevo Channel as part of a separate project. A comparison of the data to more recent soundings in the bay by USACE is described further within the document. Profiles of the bed elevation near the Chiksan Platform were extracted from the 2014 dataset and used for the lateral load analysis. A review of geotechnical borings in the San Juan Bay and near the PCD structure was performed to identify the appropriate soil profile to use in the lateral load analysis including borings from the 1960s and borings collected just north of the site in 2021.

The geotechnical analyses (Section 3 and Appendix D) indicate a maximum calculated lateral displacement of

0.13 inches to a dredge depth of El. -44 ft with 2 feet of overdredge (El. -46 ft, MLLW). Normally acceptable tolerances of displacement for a structure like the Chiksan Platform is approximately 0.5 inches. As maximum calculated lateral displacement meets acceptable tolerances, the analyses indicates that the dredging can approach the piles with an appropriate clearance to avoid possible damage by the dredging equipment.

While the geotechnical analysis included the structural properties of the steel pipe, GROUP is a geotechnical engineering program and does not assess the corresponding structural effect on the piles from dredging to - 46 ft, MLLW. Therefore, the structural capacity of the piles was estimated above and below the mudline for axial plus flexure stress combination and for shear stress. Below the mudline, the piles are 24-inch diameter x 0.500-inch with a minimum yield strength of 36 ksi. Above the mudline the section corresponds to the actual leg which is a 26-inch pile x 0.375-inch with the 24-inch x 0.375-inch pile inside based on the 1963 structural drawings prepared by Brown & Root (Brown and Root, 1963).

ii June 2022

The demand of the section below the mudline is taken from the GROUP geotechnical analysis in order to capture the non-linearity and the stiffness of the soil. For the demand above the mudline a 3D finite elements model was generated in SAP2000 with the loads that produce the maximum axial and flexure stresses indicated in the Geotechnical section (see Section 4).

The axial plus flexure stresses were verified and found to be adequate. The formula used for the combination of the stresses and the member capacities meet AISC steel construction manual ANSI /AISC 360-16.

Soil stability analyses were performed using the computer program SLIDE V6.0. The analyses utilized bathymetric sections through the PUMA platform, a dredged condition to Elev. -46 feet, MLLW, within 5 feet of the structure pile, and a slope of 1H/1V through the existing stiff clay stratum. Consistent with the lateral load analysis, two soil profiles were analyzed as there were no Standard Penetration Test borings performed specifically for this project. The minimum safety factor for the cohesive soil profiles was 8.8 and 7.3 and the failure arc was confined to the stiff clay above the “Decomposed Limerock” stratum (see Appendix E). Stability analyses were also performed for the soft silt above the stiff clay layer and resulted in a minimum safety factor of 3.6 for the slope in silt. The required factor of safety is 1.5 for permanent slopes and 1.3 for temporary slopes. The calculated factor of safety meets required factor of safety values.

The structural and geotechnical verification was performed only for the Chiksan platform due to the fact that the platform includes the most comprehensive study (2014) including all applicable loads, and because it is the largest structure with the largest loads. For this reason, all conclusions and recommendations for the Chiksan platform are applicable to the other platforms.

A proposed setback of 5.5-feet with allowance of equipment within 3.5 feet within the structure is currently proposed in the February 2022 USACE Draft Dredging Plans and Specifications (USACE, 2022). This offset from the face of the piles, for a dredge depth of -44 feet, MLLW with 2 feet over dredge is allowable along the Puma Dock under the conditions evaluated for the proposed dredged condition.

Per USACE request, additional analyses were performed to assess the stability of the structure to a dredge depth of -47ft. The analyses were performed at a dredge depth of -47ft plus 2 feet of over dredge (-49 ft), to evaluate a conservative lower limit for dredging. Results indicate that the structural performance of the structure would not be affected should dredging be performed deeper than the proposed -44 ft with 2-feet of overcut and up to -47 feet with 2-feet of overcut. The updated lateral load and soil stability analyses are included in Appendix G.

A more detailed analysis is recommended to verify the structure deformations, adequacy of the deck members, joint capacities, fatigue life under cyclic loads (waves), seismic performance, connections, and welds. In particular, this analysis is recommended for future loading conditions by larger vessels (i.e., LR-2).

iii June 2022

DATA ASSUMPTIONS

The Client (i.e., Puma Energy Caribe, LLC) and Tetra Tech acknowledge that Tetra Tech will rely on information furnished by other parties, as well as statements and representations made by Client in performing its services under the Project. Unless otherwise requested and stated in the report herein, Tetra Tech did not independently verify the accuracy or completeness of existing analyses conducted by others.

The structural loads were derived from the 2014 Project Management International (PMI) design reports (included as Attachment 1 to this memorandum). The 2014 Design Basis provides context for the calculations.

The forces used for the current analysis were derived from the 2014 Detail Design Calculation Report. These reports assume that all repairs recommended during the 2011 through 2013 assessments were implemented.

The report herein is not a technical certification of the structures condition. The condition of the structure was assessed through previous surveys and inspections between 2011 and 2019, (see Section 2.3). Tetra Tech recommends continued monitoring of the structure’s condition per standard operation and maintenance best practices and to maintain up-to-date with recommended structure improvements per previous inspections conducted by others.

iv June 2022

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project Purpose

1.2 USACE San Juan Harbor Navigation Project

2.0 PUMA CARIBE DOCK EXISTING DATA REVIEW

2.1 Existing Reports and Drawings

2.2 Existing Facility

2.3 Condition of Structure

2.4 Elevations

2.5 Berthing Face

2.6 Geotechnical Information

2.7 Previous Structural Analysis

3.0 GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS FOR PROPOSED DREDGED CONDITION

3.1 Purpose

3.2 Analysis Summary

4.0 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

5.0 REFERENCES

v June 2022

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2-1: Coordinates along PCD including Fender Line Table 4-1 – Combined Flexure-Axial Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 1- Berthing case) Table 4-2 – Combined Flexure-Axial Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 2- Seismic with loaded platform) Table 4-3 – Combined Flexure-Axial Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 3- Seismic with light platform, load perpendicular) Table 4-4 – Combined Flexure-Axial Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 4- Seismic with light platform, load parallel) Table 4-5 Combined Flexure-Axial Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 5- Seismic with light platform, load 45 degrees) Table 4-6 Shear Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 1- berthing case) Table 4-7 Shear Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 2- Seismic with loaded platform) Table 4-8 - Shear Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 3- Seismic with light platform, load perpendicular) Table 4-9 Shear Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 4- Seismic with light platform, load parallel) Table 4-10 Shear Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 5- Seismic with light platform, load 45 degrees)

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Limits of proposed dredging extents in USACE Army Turning Basin. Note Puma Vessel Berth located on bottom right of Figure Figure 2. Proposed dredging areal extent in Army Terminal Turning Basin. Note Puma Vessel Berth located on bottom right of Figure. Soundings collected by the USACE in August 2020. Soundings in blue font represent depths of -40.0 feet, MLLW or deeper. Soundings in red font represent depths shallower than -40.0 feet, MLLW.

Figure 3. Puma Energy Berthing Structure on southside of San Juan Bay (Image extracted Puma, 2018) Figure 4. Front elevation, Side elevation, and Plan Views of Jackets: Southern Jacket (left), Chiksan Jacket (center), and Northern Jacket (right). (Image extracted from Puma, 2018) Figure 5. Existing Chiksan Platform Section View from 2014 PMI Drawing 2268-DWG-1010 (End Elevations).

Horizontal Levels at +3.048m, -1.625m, -6.300m, and 10.973m (10 ft, -5.33ft, -20.67ft, -36ft) (PMI, 2014c) Figure 6. USACE soundings from Hydrographic Exam Surveys adjacent to PUMA facility. Top Figure: August 2020. Bottom Figure: November 2021 vi June 2022

Figure 7. Approximate location of berthing face from 2268-DWG-1004 (PMI Proposed Chiksan Platform Upgrades)

APPENDICES

Appendix A: November 19, 2021 USACE Meeting Notes Appendix B: Puma Facility Drawings Appendix C: Historical Geotechnical Information Appendix D: Lateral Load Analysis (-44 ft plus 2-ft overdredge) Appendix E: Soil Stability Analysis (-44 ft plus 2-ft overdredge) Appendix F: PR PE Certification of Analysis Appendix G: Lateral Load and Soil Stability Analyses (-47 ft plus 2-ft overdredge)

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1: Existing Chiksan Upgrades Design Basis and design calculation reports by project management international (2014)

Reports attached separately:

RPT_2014-07_11-008 PMI RPT 008 REV B - Existing Chiksan Updgrades Design Basis.pdf

RPT_2014-07_11-008 PMI RPT 010 REV A - CALCULATION NOTE.pdf

1 June 2022

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PROJECT PURPOSE

As part of the USACE San Juan Harbor Navigation Project, USACE will be deepening and widening navigation channels within San Juan Bay (USACE, 2018). As part of the project, the USACE needs to determine dredging offsets of the non-federal areas. USACE has requested a dredging offset recommendation from the Puma Caribe Dock (PCD). This includes a technical recommendation by a PR registered Professional Engineer providing an analysis/assessment and recommendations for dredging offsets considering relevant subsurface information. It is important to note that these recommendations are based exclusively on geotechnical information in the vicinity of the structure, and structural dimensional data provided by others. No structural analysis of the PCD has been conducted by Tetra Tech.

1.2 USACE SAN JUAN HARBOR NAVIGATION PROJECT

A meeting was held between USACE, a representative of Puma Energy, and Tetra Tech, as consultants to Puma Energy on November 19, 2021. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the USACE Navigation Project in the vicinity of PCD and identify what information was required from Puma Energy to evaluate dredging in the Puma Berthing Area A summary of meeting notes and attendees are included in Appendix A. Below are the main items of discussion:

Limits of Army Terminal Turning Basin currently extend through PUMA Vessel Berthing area.

The Basin will be deepened from the existing seabed elevation (which may range from -41 feet to -44 feet MLLW to -44 feet (+ 2 feet allowable for over dredge). The resulting basin depth will be elevation– 46 feet MLLW.

A new non-federal berthing area will be established 125-feet offset from the berthing face after dredging occurs in the San Juan Harbor.

o Pilots have a requirement to be 3-feet off berthing structures o Thus, current setback of dredge equipment noted as 3-feet. The dredge project sequence has a 2.0 feet allowance for dredging which results in a 1-feet buffer area from structure.

o USACE needs to be notified if this set-back is sufficient or if a greater setback is required (i.e. the dredge equipment would be fendered off further) o In the area of the PUMA berth, a shoal typically forms from shore moving seaward into southern area of berth. USACE (Milan Mora) mentioned that dredging deeper in PUMA berthing area (to 45-feet or 46-feet) may be advisable as “advanced” maintenance.

Therefore, sufficient depths would likely be available for berthing vessels until the next Operation and Maintenance dredging effort is conducted by USACE.

2 June 2022

Figure 1. Limits of proposed dredging extents in USACE Army Turning Basin. Note Puma Vessel Berth located on bottom right of Figure.

3 June 2022

Figure 2. Proposed dredging areal extent in Army Terminal Turning Basin. Note Puma Vessel Berth located on bottom right of Figure. Soundings collected by the USACE in August 2020. Soundings in blue font represent depths of -40.0 feet, MLLW or deeper. Soundings in red font represent depths shallower than -40.0 feet, MLLW.

4 June 2022

2.0 PUMA CARIBE DOCK EXISTING DATA REVIEW

2.1 EXISTING REPORTS AND DRAWINGS

Data files to assess existing structure condition, pile data, soil boring information was provided to Tetra Tech from Puma Energy. A summary of the data provided and reviewed is noted below. For full summary of data files and contents see PUMA FILES.xlsx (included as a separate file to this report).

Existing Data:

DRAWINGS

o Brown and Root Design Drawings (Brown and Root, 1963)

REPORT (GEOTECH)

o Report on Foundation Investigation; 3 soil borings

REPORT (GEOTECH)

o Report on Foundation Investigation; 3 soil borings

REPORT

o Logan Diving and Salvage Underwater Repairs and Inspection Report (Logan Diving and Salvage, 2011)

REPORTS

o Kpone Marine Services LTD Underwater Inspection (Sept/Oct) (Kpone Marine

Services, LTD, 2012) o Berthing Structure Assessment After Repairs (March) by PMI (PMI, 2012a) o Navigational Restrictions (March) by PMI (PMI, 2012b) o Environmental Restrictions (March) by PMI (PMI, 2012c)

REPORTS

o Existing Chiksan Platform Upgrade Proposals Summary Report (December) by PMI

(PMI, 2013)

DRAWINGS

San Juan Bulk Liquids Terminal Upgrade Drawings – Draft

REPORTS

o Existing Chiksan Platform Upgrade Proposals – Design Basis (July) by PMI (PMI, 2014a)

5 June 2022 o Existing Chiksan Platform Upgrade – Detail Design – Calculation Report (July) by PMI (PMI, 2014b)

DRAWINGS

o San Juan Bulk Liquids Terminal Upgrade Drawings – For Construction (PMI, 2014c)

REPORT

o Puma Energy Inspection of Mooring Jetty (April) (PUMA, 2018)

REPORT

o Remedial works to Mooring Jetty (Sept) by Puma (PUMA, 2019)

2.2 EXISTING FACILITY

The Puma Energy Berthing Structure is located in the south-eastern corner of San Juan Bay(shown in Figure 1 through Figure 3). Information of the existing facility has been obtained and summarized from reports developed by Project Management International (PMI) and inspection surveys performed by PUMA as described below:

The structure is composed of an access trestle or walkway, three berthing structures (Northern Jacket, Chiksan Platform, and Southern Jacket), and a hose platform (PMI, 2012a) (Figure 3).

The Southern Jacket is the forward berthing platform (28’ berthing structure) and supports one cone fender. The jacket consists of six (6) 26-inch diameter piles. All vertical diagonals and horizontals members are 8-inch. There are four (4) horizontal member layers at the following elevations: +3.048m, -1.625m, -6.300m, and 10.973m (10 ft, -5.33ft, -20.67ft, -36ft). (Puma, 2018).

The hose platform houses 3 hose arms, the articulated gangway and the control room. There is no mooring fender on this structure. The hose platform is constructed on stand-alone piles.

There are 16 x 16 inch piles supporting the host platform. There is no bracing between piles below the waterline (Puma, 2018).

The Chiksan Jacket (42’ berthing structure) has 1 cone mooring fender. The jacket consists of eight (8) 26-inch diameter legs. The jacket legs are the pile guides. All vertical diagonals and horizontals members are 8-inch. There are four (4) horizontal member layers at the following elevations: +3.048m, -1.625m, -6.300m, and 10.973m (10 ft, -5.33ft, -20.67ft, -36ft) (Ref 4). The Chiksan jacket houses 7 hose arms. The piles are 24-inch diameter x 0.375-in wall thickness (36 ksi material), (Puma, 2018).

The Northern Jacket is the stern berthing platform and supports one cone fender. The jacket consists of six (6) 26-inch diameter legs. All vertical diagonals and horizontals members are 8-inch. There are four (4) horizontal member layers at the following elevations: +3.048m, -

6 June 2022

1.625m, -6.300m, and 10.973m (10 ft, -5.33ft, -20.67ft, -36ft). (Ref 5). Discharge of vessel wastewater is conducted at this location (Puma, 2018).

All three fenders are Bridgestone SUC1450 R1 fenders mounted on a supporting framework of the W-beams attached to the jacket legs on each of the South and North Breasting Dolphins and the Chiksan Platform (PMI, 2012a).

7 June 2022

Figure 3. Puma Energy Berthing Structure on southside of San Juan Bay (Image extracted Puma, 2018)

8 June 2022

Figure 4. Front elevation, Side elevation, and Plan Views of Jackets: Southern Jacket (left), Chiksan Jacket (center), and Northern Jacket (right). (Image extracted from Puma, 2018).

Figure 5. Existing Chiksan Platform Section View from 2014 PMI Drawing 2268-DWG-1010 (End Elevations). Horizontal Levels at +3.048m, -1.625m, -6.300m, and 10.973m (10 ft, -5.33ft, -20.67ft, -36ft) (PMI, 2014c).

9 June 2022

2.3 CONDITION OF STRUCTURE

Portions of the berthing structure were repaired between 2011 to 2013. An inspection in 2012 identifies additional vertical diagonal members (VDM) to be repaired. Replacement of the VDMs identified in 2012 were performed by the 2018 inspection survey.

The following existing reports were used to summarize the condition of the structure:

2011 Underwater Repairs and Inspection (Logan Diving & Salvage, 2011) o Summary of phase I repairs and identification of critical defects above and below waterline in order to bring dock into serviceable status to receive vessels.

2012 Inspection Report (Kpone Marine Services LTD, 2012) o General inspection of condition of all structures and collection of UTs on every member. Repairs recommended.

2012 Berthing Structure Assessment After Repairs (PMI, 2012a) o Structural analysis of refurbished analysis (assuming all recommended repairs from previous reports are performed; at time of analysis not all repairs had been implemented)

2018 Inspection Report (Puma, 2018) o General inspection of condition of the structures, including subsea inspection, cleaning of the marine growth to enable inspection of repairs performed in 2011 through 2013

2019 Inspection Report of Remedial Works to the Mooring Jetty (Puma, 2019) o Inspection of jacket installation procedure and painting works above the waterline and below the walkway, small cathodic protection survey, inspection of subsea structures including location of anode sleds, inspection of replaced bracing between piles on Hose Platform, and visual inspection of repairs to spalling concrete below concrete slab

Overall, during the 2018 inspection all the structures below the waterline appear to be in good condition and no damage to any members was noted. However, only the repair area (-1.625m to +3.048m) was cleaned and inspected, not the entire jackets. During the 2019 inspection a visual diving inspection of all Jackets and hose platform piles was performed. The general condition of the inspected structure in 2019 was noted as good. No visible damage to any part of the structures was noted and no evidence of scour was observed at the jacket legs. Marine growth was noted as within acceptable levels.

A description of structure condition and recommended repairs is included below. See inspection reports for additional information.

Southern Jacket

2012 inspection survey (Kpone Marine Services LTD, 2012):

10 June 2022 o The 2012 inspection survey inspected the jacket to the mud level. The 36-ft level jacket member was under the mud.

o The fender had a new chain, shackles, hammerlocks and bottle screws. Features appeared to be in good condition o Lack of anodes on structure. Recommended installation anodes as required.

o All repair clamps noted to be retorqued o Cleaning of rust scale and application of protection layer recommended on all legs and VDMs in splash zone o Replacement of 6 VDMs has been performed.

o Recommended replacement of two additional VDMs.

o Jacket appeared solid

2018 inspection survey (Puma, 2018):

o 2018 Puma Inspection included inspecting and cleaning heavy marine growth from the 2012 (Logan Diving and Salvage) and 2013 (Puma) repairs.

o All seven (7) of the Vertical Diagonal Members from Elevation -1.625m to +3.048m were replaced by survey. There is 1 repair clamp at the -1.625m level, four (4) repair clamps at the 6.300 level and one (1) repair clamp at the 10.973 level.

o There are no sacrificial anodes on the structure. An impressed current system was in place but the anode bank could not be located during the 2018 inspection. The structure had no protection as of the 2018 inspection.

o The cone fender was in reasonable condition. The support chains are corroding and could use replacement.

o The inter-tidal zone has heavy corrosion, primarily on the jacket legs. There is heavy corrosion above the waterline to the bottom of the platform.

o No structural damage was noted.

2019 inspection (Puma, 2019):

o Repair existing holes at two (2) each horizontal steel support located at Southern Jacket

Hose Platform

2018 Inspection Survey (Puma, 2018):

o The bracing above the waterline in the intertidal zone is severely corroded due to lack of maintenance.

o There are no sacrificial anodes on the piles. Impressed current system cables are noted going into the mudline but the anode bank could not be located during the 2018 inspection.

o No structural damage was identified below the waterline.

2019 Inspection survey (Puma, 2019):

11 June 2022 o Repair two (2) each existing 4x4 steel bracing located at the east side of the Hose Platform o The firefighting nozzles under the platform have huge holes caused by corrosion

Chiksan Jacket

2012 Inspection Survey (Kpone Marine Services LTD, 2012):

o Eight (8) VDMs recommend for replacement o Lack of anodes. Recommended installation o Cleaning of rust scale and application of protection layer recommended on all legs and VDMs in splash zone o The fender has a new chain, shackles, Hammerlocks and bottle screws. The fender appears to be in good condition.

o All repair clamps are recommended to be retorqued o The Chiksan jacket was inspected to the mud line with UT’s taken on every member in

2012. The structure was noted as solid and repairs appeared to be good.

2018 Inspection Survey (Puma, 2018):

o All 10 of the vertical diagonal members running from -1.625m to +3.048m had been replaced o There are two (2) repair clamps at the -1.625m level for repair of the horizontal members.

o A pipe rack add-on is clamped onto the back legs to support new vertical diagonal members for the pipe rack. All nuts and bolts of these clamps were secure during the 2018 inspection.

o Corrosion was noted in the intertidal zone during the 2018 inspection 2019 inspection (Puma, 2019):

o Replace existing support chain on the cone fender with six (6) each new galvanized 1 ¼” bolt type anchor shackle o Repair one side of the existing support plate on the cone fender with a new welder plate o Repair horizonal structural support at the Chiksan Jacket and as per instructions and photos provided by email on September 5, 2019 o The large fender on the Chiksan platform has damage. The pad eye on the Chiksan structure has been pulled off the jacket leg which has been weakened by corrosion.

The chain has been extended and connected to a pad eye at the back of the jacket leg.

This chain is unable to be in tension therefore it is not taking the weight of the fender which is putting unnecessary stress on the fender. Repair one side of the existing support plate on the cone fender with a new welder plate at the Chiksan Jacket Area

Northern Jacket

2012 Inspection survey (Kpone Marine Services LTD, 2012):

o One (1) VDM recommended for replacement

12 June 2022 o Cleaning of rust scale and application of protection layer recommended on all legs and VDMs in splash zone o Anodes were cleaned and noted to be 20-30% wasted.

o Cracks which seem to be due to the sun were noted on the top of the fender The fender on this jacket was not used on either of the vessels that were on the berth at the time of the survey o The Hammerlocks, bottle screws, chain and shackles all appeared to be in good condition.

2018 Inspection (Puma, 2018):

o All the vertical diagonal members between the -1.625m and +3.048m level had been replaced o The 2018 inspection cleaned marine growth from the repairs and visually inspected the repairs. No anomalies were found.

o There is one (1) repair clamp at the -6.300m level to support a repaired vertical diagonal member.

o There are two (2) sacrificial anodes at each level (for a total of 6 sacrificial anodes welded to the jacket). The anodes were observed to be approximately 30-40% wasted during the 2018 inspection.

The top component of the fender cone had cracks from the sun 2019 inspection (Puma, 2019):

o Replace existing support chain on the cone fender with six (6) each new galvanized 1 ¼” bolt type anchor shackle

Relevant Structure Recommendations from 2018 Puma inspection

Short term

Repair the impressed current system, urgently Replace all the support chains on all three (3) of the cone fenders. The chains are corroded and worn.

The area from the platform to the waterline requires grit blasting and painting on all structures. Maintenance in this area should be done on a frequent and ongoing basis.

Repair corroded walkway supports at the southern jacket

Medium term

Replacement of the anodes on the northern jacket Investigate replacement of corroded bracing and flowline supports below the hose platform Investigate repairing the spalling concrete slab below the hose platform Rotate the cones on the fenders Fabricate an 8-inch by 8-inch clamp to secure the wastewater pipe at the northern jacket

Long Term

13 June 2022

Investigate coating for the intertidal zone. A wrapping of Denzo, Stopaq or similar

Updates

Per recommendations in the 2019 remedial investigation report, anodes were proposed for installation on each structure. The client confirmed that as of 2022 all of the anodes have been installed.

2.4 ELEVATIONS

Drawings with Elevations – see Appendix B o Jacket extends to the mudline (PMI 2012a)

Lowest elevation, horizontal bracing at El -36 ft Piles driven to approx. depth of 18m below mud line.

Driven in 1962 610 mm (PMI 2014a) Pile toe at elevation -31.00m (2013 Drawings) Pile toe elevation El -96.0 ft (Brown & Root, 1963) Existing fender piling at El -56.0 ft (Brown and Root, 1963): Note, the fender piles have since been removed from the structure.

Chiksan Platform o The 2012 jacket survey notes that the mud levels as indicated on the drawings are incorrect for this jacket. The mud level is 19 ft along horizontal member 1 A, B, C and D (i.e. west, or most landward horizontal members). The mud runs steeply down to 35 ft at horizontal member No 2 A, B, C and D (i.e. the east horizonal member).

o This data is general consistent from the 2014 bathymetric data collected around the Chiksan Platform.

Berthing Area Mudline elevation o The 2014 Proposed Chiksan Platform Drawings indicated that the mudline in the berthing area is roughly aligned with the bottom of the jacket (near -36ft).

o A multi-beam bathymetric survey was collected by Tetra Tech in 2014. The survey covered PUMA’s berthing area and surrounding structures. The depth near the vertical pile was approximately between -30 ft to -36 ft, MLLW. Elevation data was selected from transects through the Chiksan platform for approximate elevations and soil slopes for use in the geotechnical analysis. The depths are consistent with those presented on the 2014 drawings.

o USACE soundings in San Juan Bay did not collect bathymetric data immediately adjacent to the PUMA berthing structure. Soundings from August 2020 were at a minimum of approximately 50ft offset from the structure. Depth soundings nearest to the structure ranged from 40.4 ft to 41.8 ft, MLLW in the vicinity offset from the Chiksan

14 June 2022 platform. Due to a ship on-line, soundings from November 2021 were offset completely from the PUMA berthing area. See images in Figure 6.

15 June 2022

Figure 6. USACE soundings from Hydrographic Exam Surveys adjacent to PUMA facility. Top Figure:

August 2020. Bottom Figure: November 2021.

16 June 2022

2.5 BERTHING FACE

An approximate fender line is identified by the 2014 PMI Chiksan Upgrade Design Drawings (PMI, 2014c). Points along the berthing structure are summarized in Table 2-1 and shown in Figure 6.

Coordinates were derived from PMI Drawing 2268-DWG-1004 and are in WGS84, UTM Zone 19N meters. Coordinates shown for existing structures were referenced from the Caribbean Gulf Refining Company Berth Modifications by Raymond Kaiser Engineers (May 1983) and Tanker Berthing Facilities Caribbean Refining Company By Brown & Root Inc. (Dec 1962).

Table 2-1: Coordinates along PCD including Fender Line

Point Description

WGS84

North (meters)1

WGS84

East (meters)1

Elevation of Top of Deck to

MLW

(meters)

Data Source Name2

Date of Data

E1 Existing 28ft Platform 2040128.87 805259.01 4.267 2268-DWG-1004 6/9/2014

E2 Existing Hose Handling Platform 2040154.74 805254.98 4.267 2268-DWG-1004 6/9/2014

E3 Existing 42ft Chiksan Platform 2040189.87 805258.14 4.267 2268-DWG-1004 6/9/2014

E4 Existing 14 ft Platform 2040227.98 805257.64 4.267 2268-DWG-1004 6/9/2014 F1 Existing Fender Line 2040081.63 805263.95 2268-DWG-1004 6/9/2014 F2 Existing Fender Line 2040234.13 805261.79 2268-DWG-1004 6/9/2014 B1 Existing Bent No. 7 2040176.51 805253.13 2268-DWG-1004 6/9/2014

Notes:

1 Units referenced to coordinate system WGS84 UTM Zone 19N, meters 2 Name of Design Sheet from PMI Proposed Chiksan Upgrade 2014 For Construction Drawings

17 June 2022

Figure 7. Approximate location of berthing face from 2268-DWG-1004 (PMI Proposed Chiksan Platform Upgrades).

18 June 2022

2.6 GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION

Geotechnical data included in Appendix C:

1963 Brown and Root Drawings (1954; 1962; maximum boring depth of -95 ft) o One (1) boring collected north of the Chiksan Platform and to a depth of -95 ft (1962) o Nine (9) borings collected (1954 and 1962) along the access trestle, approximately along the fenderline, in the berthing area, and to the north and east of the berthing area at depths ranging from -38 ft to -61 ft.

USACE Borings (1991; 1994; 2020; maximum boring depth of -55.8 ft) o Four (4) borings were collected in the USACE Army Terminal near the PUMA dock. One

(1) boring was collected in 1991 to a depth of -45.3 ft. One boring was collected in 1994 to a depth of -49.8 ft. Two (2) borings were collected in 2020 to a depth -55.8 ft, MLLW and -55.4 ft MLLW.

GeoCim Collected Boring (2021; maximum boring depth of -120.5 ft)

As part of the 2014 Summary Design Basis for Chiksan Platform Upgrades, geotechnical information was derived from historically collected data. Design parameters were based on geotechnical reports of Raymond Kaiser Engineers (Soil Investigation for Berthing Modification, Cataño, Puerto Rico, April 1983 and the Foundation Engineering Company of Puerto Rico report, November 19, 1962).

A review of the soil profiles is described in further detail in the Geotechnical Analysis – Provided as Appendix D to this report.

2.7 PREVIOUS STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

In 2012, Project Management International (PMI) performed a structural analysis of the berthing structure (Ref 4). The analysis was performed assuming all damaged members identified in previous inspection reports would be repaired. The purpose of the assessment was to determine if the berthing structures (in the fully repaired condition) are capable of withstanding the berthing impact from the largest vessels that could access the Puma Berthing Facility; this included a Product Tanker partially laden (due to draft restrictions), with a dead weight of 60,000 tons, a vessel length of 235 m (771 ft), beam width 34 m (111.5 ft) and draft of 11.58 m (38 ft).

3.0 GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS FOR PROPOSED DREDGED CONDITION

3.1 PURPOSE

The geotechnical analysis is used to identify the lateral capacity of the piles given the loading conditions on the structure and the soil types. The purpose of this analysis is to identify any changes in pile lateral capacity should the mudline be lowered from the existing elevations to an elevation of - 47 feet with 2 feet of overcut (El. -49 ft.) MLLW and inform how close the dredging can come to the structures.

19 June 2022

The analysis assumes using loading information from the existing structural analysis reports described in Section 2 to inform a safe offset from the structure for the dredging operation.

3.2 ANALYSIS SUMMARY

The computer program GROUP, developed by ENSOFT, Inc. of Austin, Texas, allows the analyses of the behavior of pile groups using either a 2-dimensional model or a 3-dimension model. The program considers the interactions between piles, and the piles with the soil/rock stratigraphy, using non-linear soil properties and pile properties. The program allows the application of complex loads on the piles/pile cap, and computes the deflection, shear, bending and soil response for each pile in the pile group.

Lateral load analyses were performed on the Chiksan Platform, the heaviest loaded platform of the three PUMA berthing structures. The structure was analyzed using GROUP to establish the response of the pile to the new dredge depth with the applied structural loads on the piles. The resulting pile stresses and deflections were compared to allowable structural limits and operation limits to determine if the dredging would have detrimental effects on the structures or the operations of the structures.

The performance of the platform piles for the dredge proposed to El. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (El.

-49 ft, MLLW) was acceptable for normally acceptable tolerances of displacement of 0.5 inches.

The lateral load analyses results are included in Appendix D.

A soil stability analysis post-dredging was also performed and is included in Appendix E. The analysis was performed using the computer program SLIDE V6.0. The analyses utilized bathymetric sections through the PUMA platform, a dredged condition to Elev. -49 feet, MLLW, within 5 feet of the structure pile, and a slope of 1H/1V through the existing stiff clay stratum. Consistent with the lateral load analysis, two soil profiles were analyzed as there were no Standard Penetration Test borings performed specifically for this project. The minimum safety factor for the cohesive soil profiles was 8.8 and 7.3 and the failure arc was confined to the stiff clay above the “Decomposed Limerock” stratum (see Appendix E). Stability analyses were also performed for the soft silt above the stiff clay layer and resulted in a minimum safety factor of 3.6 for the slope in silt.

4.0 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

The direct effect to a marine structure from dredging corresponds to the leg/piles. The leg/piles need to be checked from a geotechnical standpoint for the reduced embedment due to the dredging and also checked from the structural stand-point due to the larger effective length that makes the bending moments in these elements larger.

20 June 2022

The geotechnical capacity was verified and described in section 3, Appendix D, and Appendix G and concluded that the proposed dredge to EL. -47 feet with 2 feet of over-dredge is adequate.

The structural capacity of the piles was estimated above and below the mudline for axial plus flexure stress combination and also for shear stress. The piles are 24-inch diameter x 0.500-inch with a minimum yield strength of 36 ksi. These values were used below the mudline to calculate the pile capacity. Above the mudline the section corresponds to the actual leg that is a 26-inch pile x 0.375-inch with the 24-inch x 0.375-inch pile inside.

The demand of the section below the mudline is taken from the GROUP geotechnical analysis in order to capture the non-linearity and the stiffness of the soil.

For the demand above the mudline, a 3D finite elements model was created in SAP2000 with the loads that produce the maximum axial and flexure stresses indicated in Section 3.

The axial plus flexure stresses are shown in the table below. The maximum unity check ratio (also called demand/capacity ratio) is 0.78. This is adequate (less than 1.00). The formula used for the combination of the stresses and the member capacities meet AISC steel construction manual ANSI

/AISC 360-16.

21 June 2022

Table 4-1 – Combined Flexure-Axial Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 1- Berthing case)

22 June 2022

Table 4-2 – Combined Flexure-Axial Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 2- Seismic with loaded platform)

23 June 2022

Table 4-3 – Combined Flexure-Axial Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 3- Seismic with light platform, load perpendicular)

24 June 2022

Table 4-4 – Combined Flexure-Axial Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 4- Seismic with light platform, load parallel)

25 June 2022

Table 4-5 Combined Flexure-Axial Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 5- Seismic with light platform, load 45 degrees)

Similarly, the shear capacity is checked for the leg/pile section above and below the mudline, see the following tables.

26 June 2022

Table 4-6 Shear Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 1-berthing case)

Table 4-7 Shear Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 2- Seismic with loaded platform)

SHEAR Vmax = 91.3 Kips 13 Kips 37,000 lbs. 13,000 lb-in

E= 29000 ksi 29000 ksi Lv 300 in. 300 in.

D 24 in. 24 in.

t 0.375 in. 0.375 in.

Fcr= 72.5 ksi 72.5 ksi Fcr= 44.18 ksi 44.18 ksi Fcr= 72.5 ksi 72.5 ksi Fcr= 31.2 ksi 26.4 ksi Fcr= 31.2 ksi 26.4 ksi

Capacity fVn= 391 Kips 689 Kips Demand Vu= 91 Kips 13.0 Kips

U.C.= 0.23 0.02

C

AS

E

Above Mudline

Below Mudline

27 June 2022

Table 4-8 - Shear Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 3- Seismic with light platform, load perpendicular)

Table 4-9 Shear Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 4- Seismic with light platform, load parallel)

SHEAR Vmax = 70.9 Kips 13 Kips 37,000 lbs. 13,000 lb-in

E= 29000 ksi 29000 ksi Lv 300 in. 300 in.

D 24 in. 24 in.

t 0.375 in. 0.375 in.

Fcr= 72.5 ksi 72.5 ksi Fcr= 44.18 ksi 44.18 ksi Fcr= 72.5 ksi 72.5 ksi Fcr= 31.2 ksi 26.4 ksi Fcr= 31.2 ksi 26.4 ksi

Capacity fVn= 391 Kips 689 Kips Demand Vu= 71 Kips 13.0 Kips

U.C.= 0.18 0.02

C

AS

E

Above Mudline

Below Mudline

SHEAR Vmax = 30.1 Kips 25 Kips 37,000 lbs. 25,000 lb-in

E= 29000 ksi 29000 ksi Lv 300 in. 300 in.

D 24 in. 24 in.

t 0.375 in. 0.375 in.

Fcr= 72.5 ksi 72.5 ksi Fcr= 44.18 ksi 44.18 ksi Fcr= 72.5 ksi 72.5 ksi Fcr= 31.2 ksi 26.4 ksi Fcr= 31.2 ksi 26.4 ksi

Capacity fVn= 391 Kips 689 Kips Demand Vu= 30 Kips 25.0 Kips

U.C.= 0.08 0.04

C

AS

E

Above Mudline

Below

28 June 2022

Table 4-10 Shear Capacity of the Legs including dredge to EL. -47 with 2 feet of over-dredge (case 5- Seismic with light platform, load 45 degrees)

The formula used for the combination of the stresses and the member capacities meet AISC steel construction manual ANSI /AISC 360-16. A more detailed analysis is recommended to verify the structure deformations, adequacy of the deck members, joint capacities, fatigue life under cyclic loads (waves), seismic performance, connections, welds, and slope stability analysis.

SHEAR Vmax = 58.1 Kips 18 Kips 37,000 lbs. 18,000 lb-in

E= 29000 ksi 29000 ksi Lv 300 in. 300 in.

D 24 in. 24 in.

t 0.375 in. 0.375 in.

Fcr= 72.5 ksi 72.5 ksi Fcr= 44.18 ksi 44.18 ksi Fcr= 72.5 ksi 72.5 ksi Fcr= 31.2 ksi 26.4 ksi Fcr= 31.2 ksi 26.4 ksi

Capacity fVn= 391 Kips 689 Kips Demand Vu= 58 Kips 18.0 Kips

U.C.= 0.15 0.03

Mudline

C

AS

E

AboveBelow

29 June 2022

5.0 REFERENCES

Brown and Root, Inc. 1963. Tanker Berthing Facilities: Design Plans. 17 pp.

Kpone Marine Services LTD. 2012 Inspection Report. September 24, 2012 through October 5, 2012.

Logan Diving & Salvage. Underwater Repairs & Inspection Report. Prepared for Puma Energy Caribe, LLC, Guaynabo, Puerto Rico. July – November 2011.

Project Management International (PMI). 2012a. San Juan Bulk Liquid Terminal Puerto Rico.

Berthing Structure Assessment After Repairs. March 2012. Ref: 11-008 PMI RPT 003 REV1. 19 pp.

PMI. 2012b. San Juan Bulk Liquid Terminal Puerto Rico, Environmental Restrictions. March 2012.

Ref: 11-008 PMI RPT 004 REV 1

PMI. 2012c. San Juan Bulk Liquid Terminal Puerto Rico, Navigational Restrictions. March 2012. Ref:

11-008 PMI RPT 002 REV 1

PMI. 2013. San Juan Bulk Liquids Terminal Puerto Rico, Existing Chiksan Platform Upgrade Proposals, Summary Report. December 2013. Ref: 11-008 PMI RPT 007 REV B. 27pp.

PMI. 2014a. San Juan Bulk Liquids Terminal Puerto Rico, Existing Chiksan Platform Upgrade Proposals, Design Basis. July 2014. Ref: 11-008 PMI RPT 008 REVB.

PMI. 2014b. San Juan Bulk San Juan Bulk Liquids Terminal Puerto Rico, Existing Chiksan Platform Upgrade, Detail Design Calculation Report. July 2014. Ref: 11-008 PMI RPT 010 REVA.

PMI. 2014c. San Juan Bulk San Juan Bulk Liquids Terminal Puerto Rico, Existing Chiksan Platform Upgrade, Design Drawings – For Construction. June 9, 2014. 21 pp.

PUMA Energy (Puma). 2018. Survey of Mooring Jetty, Bayamon, Puerto Rico. April 22-April 30, 2018. Performed by Keith Franklin, Marine Advisor/Diving Supervisor.

Puma. 2019. Remedial works to Mooring Jetty, Bayamon, Puerto Rico. September- 3 – September 7, 2019. Performed by Keith Franklin, Marine Advisor/Diving Supervisor.

USACE. 2018. San Juan Harbor Puerto Rico Integrated Feasibility Report and Environmental Assessment: Executive Summary and Main Report. August.

USACE. 2022. San Juan Harbor Construction Dredging 44-foot and 36-foot Project, and Condado Lagoon Sav Habitat Restoration, and Maintenance Dredging: Draft Plans, Specifications and Geotechnical Design Report . Notice ID W912EP22Z0022.

https://sam.gov/opp/f29755a8b81a43799dba543570c59a27/view

June 2022

APPENDIX A: NOVEMBER 19, 2021 USACE MEETING NOTES

SAN JUAN HARBOR IMPROVEMENTS

SUBJECT: Dredging limits in vicinity of Puma Energy Dock

DATE: 19 Nov 2021; 0930-1030

LOCATION: USACE Antilles Area Office, San Juan, PR

MEETING MINUTES:

1. ATTENDEES:

Name Company Email

In person

Milan Mora USACE milan.a.mora@usace.army.mil

Jeff Schwindaman USACE jeffrey.p.schwindaman@usace.army.mil

Steve Conger USACE stephen.r.conger@usace.army.mil

Ian Heausler USACE william.i.heausler@usace.army.mil

Jorge Miro Lopez Puerto Rico Ports Authority jamiro@prpa.pr.gov

Carlos Ramos Puma Energy carlos.ramos@pumaenergy.com

Fernando Pages Rangel TetraTech fernando.pages@tetratech.com

Renee Vandermause TetraTech renee.vandermause@tetratech.com

Webex

Cpt Kenneth Diaz San Juan Harbor Pilots kdpilot1@gmail.com

Carlos Negron Altol Enterprises carlos.negron@altolenterprises.com

William Santiago Altol Enterprises wiliam.santiago@altolenterprises.com

Adrian Perez Total Energy adrian.perez@totalenergies.pr

2. INTRODUCTION:

• Attendees introduced themselves and described how they use the Puma Energy dock. Puma

Energy is the owner. TetraTech is an engineering services consultant for Puma Energy.

3. PURPOSE:

• The Corps discussed the current and future limits of the Federal project. The berthing areas in the Army Terminal Turning Basin (ATTB) will be outside of the Federal project and the Non-

Federal (NF) stakeholders need to indicate how they want their berthing areas to be configured.

The Puma Energy dock needs to be dredged to bring in vessels drafting up to 42’ to gain all project benefits. The NF stakeholders will need to demonstrate that the structure is capable of handling that deepening. To bring in vessels drafting 42’, it will be necessary to dredge the berthing area to a depth similar to the Federal project. The current plans for the Federal project include dredging to a depth of 46’ + 1’ allowable overdepth in order to maintain 44’ + 2’ allowable overdepth for future maintenance dredging contracts in the ATTB. The exact depth and configuration of the berthing area is up to the NF stakeholders.

4. DISCUSSION:

• The Corps showed that the Puma dock currently extends into the Federal channel, which should not have been allowed previously. After the improvements project is implemented, the new channel will make the area near the Puma dock a berthing area.

• Puma Energy asked how this will affect future maintenance dredging. The Corps explained that currently the maintenance is 100% Federal responsibility, but once the SJH Improvements are completed, the berthing area will become a NF responsibility to maintain. Future Corps contracts could still be utilized to take advantage of mobilization of dredging equipment.

• The Corps discussed that the berthing area is a tradeoff for Puma Energy. The NF stakeholder gains flexibility to dredge how/ when they want to meet their needs, however they have to pay for the maintenance.

• The Corps showed a recent map of shoaling and recommended that Puma look into dredging deeper than 44’ for advanced maintenance if they had resources to accomplish this.

• The Corps discussed that Puma needs to provide the Corps with the configuration of the berthing area and the dredging limits near the structure. Puma must demonstrate that the chosen dredging limits are safe for the structure. If safe operations cannot be maintained with a deepened berthing area, then Puma will either need to improve the structure or change their operations (for example increasing the width of their fenders).

• The current parameters for dredging adjacent to structures based on the requirements of the

San Juan Harbor Pilots is 3 feet, and in order to accomplish that, dredging equipment would be allowed within 2’ of the structure.

• The Corps requires that a licensed engineer confirms that the proposed dredging limits are safe for the structure. The NF sponsor may elect to hire a Professional Engineer (PE) licensed in the state or territory of the structures to perform technical analyses and make recommendations regarding dredging offsets. The PE shall submit a signed and sealed statement, not less than 3 years old, regarding the results of the analyses and the recommendations. A PE will need to provide analysis and recommendations regarding dredging offsets of the non-federal areas. The following supporting documentation is requested:

▪ condition of the structure(s)

▪ position of the structures (XY coordinate information)

▪ relevant subsurface information including geotechnical borings and soil properties

▪ surcharge loads

▪ failure modes

▪ construction methods

▪ structural and geotechnical design calculations

▪ factors of safety

▪ any assumptions used in the analyses

• The Corps emphasized that this information is time-sensitive and is being requested as soon as possible to maintain the current schedule of the project.

• TetraTech stated that there are existing studies on the stability of the structure.