18R3001PH2vol2.PDF

Fort Gordon, Georgia

Solicitation Number

W912HN-18-R-3001

Two Phase Design-Build for Blood Donor Center Replacement, Phase 2 of 2 Volume 2 of 3: Appendices A through I

PN 76934

May 2018

This acquisition is being solicited on an unrestricted basis as full and open competition, but contains a HubZone Price Evaluation Preference

This acquisition will be awarded utilizing the Best Value Trade-Off methodology in accordance with FAR 15.101-1

U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, SAVANNAH

CORPS OF ENGINEERS

100 WEST OGLETHORPE AVENUE

SAVANNAH, GEORGIA 31401-3640

US Army Corps of Engineers Savannah District

Bl ood Donor Cent er 18-r-3001 Ft . Gor don, GA Phase 2

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS

DI VI SI ON 01 - GENERAL REQUI REMENTS

01 14 00 WORK RESTRI CTI ONS

01 30 00 ADMI NI STRATI VE REQUI REMENTS

01 32 01. 00 10 PROJECT SCHEDULE

01 33 00 SUBMI TTAL PROCEDURES

01 33 29 SUSTAI NABI LI TY REPORTI NG

01 35 26 GOVERNMENTAL SAFETY REQUI REMENTS

01 42 00 SOURCES FOR REFERENCE PUBLI CATI ONS

01 45 00. 00 10 QUALI TY CONTROL

01 45 00. 15 10 RESI DENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM CONTRACTOR MODE ( RMS CM)

01 45 35 SPECI AL I NSPECTI ONS

01 50 00 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTI ON FACI LI TI ES AND CONTROLS

01 57 19 TEMPORARY ENVI RONMENTAL CONTROLS

01 57 19. 11 I NDOOR AI R QUALI TY ( I AQ) MANAGEMENT

01 74 19 CONSTRUCTI ON AND DEMOLI TI ON WASTE MANAGEMENT

01 78 00 CLOSEOUT SUBMI TTALS

01 78 23 OPERATI ON AND MAI NTENANCE DATA

APPENDICES

A SITE

B GEOTECHNI CAL REPORT

C FORT GORDON I NSTALLATI ON PLANNI NG STANDARDS

D FLOW TEST

E ENVI RONMENTAL REPORTS

F CONCEPT OF OPERATI ONS

G PROGRAM FOR DESI GN

H PROJECT ROOM CONTENTS

I MEDCOM I NTERI OR DESI GN MASTER PLAN

J <not used>

K DRAFT COMMI SSI ONI NG PLAN

L WORLD- CLASS FACI LI TI ES

M SAFETY RI SK ASSESSMENT CHECKLI STS

N <not used>

O PROFESSI ONAL REGI STRATI ON

P SAMPLE EMERGENCY MESSAGES

Q BI M I MPLEMENTATI ON

R FT. GORDON FI RE ALARM AND MASS NOTI FI CATI ON SPECI FI CATI ON

S ENERGY AND SUSTAI NABI LI TY RECORD CARD

T DHA LAN

U ARMY METERI NG PROGRAM

V FT. GORDON GRAY WATER I RRI GATI ON

- - End of Pr oj ect Tabl e of Cont ent s - -

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1

APPENDIX A

SITE

APPENDIX B

GEOTECHNICAL REPORT

PRELIMINARY

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION

AND

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

Blood Donor Center

L.I. 76934, FY-18

Fort Gordon, Georgia

By Soils Section

Geotechnical & HTRW Branch U.S. Army Engineer District, Savannah

December 2017

Table of Contents

Section Page

1. PURPOSE

2. QUALIFICATION OF REPORT

3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

4. EXPLORATION PROCEDURES

a. Site Reconnaissance

b. Field Exploration

c. Review of available USDA NRCS Soils Data

5. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

a. Site Description

b. Regional and Site Geology

c. Subsurface Conditions

d. Groundwater Conditions

6. ENGINEERING EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

a. General

b. Site Preparation

c. Foundation Design and Construction

d. Seismic Design

e. Concrete Slabs-On-Grade

f. Groundwater and Surface-Water Considerations

g. Structural Fill

h. Construction Quality Control Testing

i. Drawings

j. Specifications

7. FINAL GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT

ATTACHMENT A: Soil Boring Location Plan ATTACHMENT B: Soil Boring Logs ATTACHMENT C: USDA NRCS Soils Report

PRELIMINARY

SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

L.I. 76934, FY-18

Fort Gordon, Georgia

1. PURPOSE

The Government has conducted a preliminary geotechnical investigation for the proposed Blood Donor Center in the Fort Gordon cantonment area. This report provides a general overview of the site conditions, including subsurface soil and groundwater conditions at discrete locations in the immediate vicinity of the building. Preliminary recommendations are also provided with respect to the geotechnical aspects of the design and construction of the project.

2. QUALIFICATION OF REPORT

The field exploration performed for this report was made to determine the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions and was not intended to serve as an assessment of site wetlands, environmental, or contaminant conditions. No effort was made to define, delineate, or designate any areas of environmental concern or of contamination. The design-build contractor’s team shall include a licensed geotechnical engineer to interpret the report and develop foundation and earthwork recommendations and design parameters on which to base the contractor’s proposal. The preliminary findings and evaluation presented in this report are based on widely-spaced explorations performed at the project site. Any additional subsurface investigations and laboratory analyses conducted to better characterize the site and to develop the final design shall be performed under the direction of a licensed geotechnical engineer and shall be the full responsibility of the contractor. A final geotechnical evaluation report shall be prepared by the licensed geotechnical engineer and submitted along with the first design submittal.

3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

This project involves the design and construction, in accordance with Unified Facilities Criteria UFC 4-510-01, of an approximately 16,700 square foot (sf.) Blood Donor Center with additional 2,000 sf. of covered outdoor seating space. The project also entails the design and construction of supporting facilities to include utilities, utility connection fees, site improvements, access roads, and parking. Furthermore, the project requires the abatement and demolition of the existing blood donor facilities in Buildings BDC 001 and 25712. Since the project will be constructed under a design-build contract, detailed structural information for the proposed building is unavailable. The design-build construction contractor shall be responsible

Preliminary Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Report December 2017

P.N. 76934, FY-18

Fort Gordon, Georgia for final connections to all site utilities (including connections from new utilities to existing utilities) unless otherwise specified in the RFP specification.

4. EXPLORATION PROCEDURES

a. Site Reconnaissance Prior to the field explorations, the proposed project site and surrounding areas were visually inspected by a geotechnical engineer. The observations were used in planning the exploration, in determining areas of special interest, and in relating site conditions to known geologic conditions in the area.

b. Field Exploration

(1) Subsurface conditions at the project site were explored by five soil test borings

(designated B-01 through B-05). The soil borings, drilled to depths ranging from 15 to 25 feet, were drilled at the approximate locations shown on the Soil Boring Plan in Attachment A of this report and on the RFP drawings.

(2) Boring locations were established in the field by an engineer using a hand-held global positioning system (GPS) device having sub-meter accuracy. Since the measurements were not precise, the locations shown on the boring location plans and the locations indicated on the boring logs should be considered approximate. The ground surface elevation at each boring location was determined by interpolation from historical site topographic data; therefore, the elevations shown on the boring logs should be considered approximate.

(3) The soil borings were drilled by Preston Geotechnical Consultants, LLC, of Macon, Georgia under contract to the Savannah District. These borings were drilled with a truck mounted CME 55 drill rig that had an automatic trip hammer and used a 6-inch outside diameter (O.D.) by 21⁄4-inch inside diameter (I.D.) hollow stem auger to advance the boreholes. Split-barrel sampling with standard penetration testing (SPT) was performed at intervals shown on the boring logs. All soil sampling and standard penetration testing were in accordance with ASTM D 1586. In the standard penetration test, a soil sample is obtained with a standard 13⁄8-inch I.D. by 2-inch O.D. split-barrel sampler. The sampler is first seated 6 inches and then driven an additional 12 inches with blows from a 140 lb. hammer falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the final 12 inches is recorded and is termed the “standard penetration resistance,” or the “N-value.” In some soils it is not always practical to drive a split-spoon sampler the full three consecutive 6-inch increments. Whenever more than 50 blows are required to drive the sampler over a 6-inch increment, or the sampler is observed not to penetrate after 50 blows, the condition is called split-spoon refusal. Split-spoon refusal conditions may occur because of obstructions or because the earth materials being tested are very dense or very hard. When split-spoon refusal occurs, often little or no sample is recovered. The SPT N-value for split-spoon refusal conditions is typically estimated as greater than 100 blows per foot (bpf). Where the sampler is observed not to penetrate after 50 blows, the N-value is reported as 50/0″. Otherwise, the depth of penetration after 50 blows is reported in inches, i.e.

P.N. 76934, FY-18

Fort Gordon, Georgia

50/5″, 50/2″, etc. Penetration resistance, when properly evaluated, is an index of the soil’s strength, density, and foundation support capability.

(4) Soil classifications shown on the boring logs were determined in the field by a geotechnical engineer. Classification of the soil samples was performed in accordance with ASTM D 2488 (Visual-Manual Procedure for Descriptions of Soils). The soil classifications include the use of the Unified Soil Classification System described in ASTM D 2487 (Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes). Since the soil descriptions and classifications are based on visual examination and manual tests, they should be considered approximate. Logs of the soil borings graphically depicting soil descriptions, N-values, and observed groundwater levels are included in Attachment B of this report.

c. Review of available USDA NRCS Soils Data Prior to initiating the abovementioned field investigation, a soil survey for Richmond

County, Georgia was obtained from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) website. The report was used to obtain an overview of possible soil series located within the project area, and it is included as Attachment C of this report.

5. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

a. Site Description Construction activities for this project are proposed on a half-acre lot located approximately 200 feet due west of the existing Kendrick Memorial Blood Center, which is located at 48 Central Hospital Court in the cantonment area of Fort Gordon. The rectangular project site is approximately 200 ft. north of Chamberlain Avenue, about 1300 ft. west of its intersection with East Hospital Road. The site is mostly cleared of tall vegetation and grassed, with an approximately 180-ft. by 40-ft. patch of asphalt pavement, in poor condition, on its southern extremity. The site is relatively flat with a gentle westward slope and approximate mean sea level elevations ranging from 471-ft. to 475-ft. Utility markings for the subsurface exploration indicate that multiple underground utilities are present within the project area.

b. Regional and Site Geology

(1) Fort Gordon is located in east-central Georgia approximately nine miles southwest of

Augusta and occupies roughly 56,000 contiguous acres in Jefferson, McDuffie, Columbia, and Richmond counties. The majority of Fort Gordon is in Richmond County, Georgia. This area is on the Upper Coastal Plains geomorphic province. This broad belt of relatively flat country is underlain by a wedge of Cretaceous-age and younger continental shelf sediments that thicken to the south and southeast. The Piedmont Province, a pre-Cretaceous-age complex of igneous and metamorphic rocks, is adjacent to and northwest of the site. The regional contact between the two provinces is the Fall Line, which has no topographic expression but is identified lithologically. The Fall Line underlies Augusta, Georgia and trends southwesterly, passing about 4 miles north of Fort Gordon and continues through Macon, Georgia towards Columbus, Georgia.

P.N. 76934, FY-18

Fort Gordon, Georgia

(2) Two Coastal Plain formations are exposed on Fort Gordon, the Upper Eocene-age Barnwell group and the Upper Cretaceous to Lower Tertiary-age Oconee group. The Barnwell group, which occurs at the higher elevations, consists primarily of interbedded, coarse to fine sands and clays. The thickness of the Barnwell group is a maximum at the southern part of the reservation, thinning to almost nothing at the northern boundary. Underlying the Barnwell group, the Oconee group, which is exposed in the valleys, consists of sands and gravels with interbedded clays, including massive white kaolin beds. The Oconee group thickens considerably to the southeast of the reservation.

c. Subsurface Conditions

(1) Field classification of the samples obtained from soil borings drilled at the project site indicate the area’s subsurface to be comprised primarily of sands with varying amounts of silt and clay (fines). Most of the soil samples recovered were field classified as silty sand or poorly graded sand (SM or SP, respectively). Most of the near-surface soils, encountered within the first 10 feet of the soil borings, are of very loose or loose density based on these soils exhibiting N-values within the ranges of 0 to 4 or 4 to 10 blows-per-foot, respectively. These very loose and loose sands were typically underlain by sands of medium density with N-values in the range of 10 to 30 blows-per-foot that extended to the terminations of the 15-ft. borings, or were in turn underlain by elastic silt (MH). The elastic silt encountered was of hard consistency, indicated by split spoon refusal or N-values exceeding 50 bpf.

(2) Previous experience with soils in the Fort Gordon cantonment area indicate buried, undocumented concrete material to be a common occurrence in the area’s subsurface. Although the soil borings do not indicate the presence of the aforementioned concrete material, visual observations made during the site visit indicate that prior construction activities have occurred on this site.

(3) The above subsurface description is of a generalized nature to highlight the major subsurface stratification features and material characteristics. The boring logs should be reviewed for specific information at individual boring locations. The stratifications shown on the boring logs represent the conditions only at the actual boring locations. Variations are expected between boring locations. The stratification lines shown on the boring logs represent the approximate boundaries between the subsurface materials; the actual transitions are typically more gradual.

(4) According to the USDA NRCS soils report for the project site, the site is characterized by the Lakeland sand, 2 to 5 percent slopes (LkB) soil map unit. Per the report, soils in the LkB soil map unit typically exhibit the following general soil profile:

0 to 70 inches: sand 70 to 99 inches: sand

P.N. 76934, FY-18

Fort Gordon, Georgia

This general soil profile, described by the USDA NRCS soils report, roughly correlates with the sandy soils with varying amounts of fines that were observed during the subsurface investigation.

d. Groundwater Conditions

(1) Water levels were measured in all of the boreholes during drilling and at the completion of drilling. Typically, when groundwater is encountered during drilling, water level measurements are made 24 hours after termination of drilling. In such instances, the 24-hour water level is generally considered the true groundwater level. Groundwater was not encountered in any of the soil borings that were performed for this preliminary subsurface investigation.

(2) A perched-water condition occurs when water seeping downward is slowed by a low permeability soil layer (typically with high fines content), such as clayey sand or clay, and saturates the more permeable soil above it. The perched-water level can be any number of feet above the true groundwater level. The soil test borings indicate the presence of sandy soils with varying amounts of fines in the subsurface of the project site. Furthermore, although groundwater was not encountered in any of the borings, the moisture content of the SPT samples that were collected in boring B-01 varied noticeably with field descriptions ranging from moist to very moist. Perched-water conditions could thus be encountered during construction in the more permeable zones (layers of cleaner sands) that are underlain by sands with higher fines content. The successful design-build contractor should expect to encounter perched water during foundation excavations.

(3) It should be noted that groundwater conditions vary during periods of prolonged drought and excessive rainfall as well as seasonally. Therefore, fluctuations in the elevation of the groundwater should be anticipated with changing climatic and rainfall conditions.

6. ENGINEERING EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

a. General The following evaluations and recommendations are based on the information available on the proposed structures, observations made at the project site, interpretation of the data obtained from the soil test borings, and previous experience with soils and subsurface conditions similar to those encountered at the site. It is emphasized that the preliminary findings and evaluation presented in this report are based on widely-spaced explorations performed at the project site. Additional subsurface investigations and/or laboratory analyses, if required to determine site soil conditions and develop the final design, shall be performed under the direction of a licensed geotechnical engineer and shall be the full responsibility of the contractor.

b. Site Preparation Following clearing and removal of trees, structures, pavement, etc., the construction area should be grubbed and stripped of all vegetation, topsoil, organics, and other deleterious materials. Clean topsoil can be stockpiled and reused in landscaped areas. It is recommended

P.N. 76934, FY-18

Fort Gordon, Georgia that the zone of stripping extend a minimum of 10 feet beyond the outer edges of structures and pavements. Any utilities in the project area should be located and rerouted, or properly abandoned, as necessary.

c. Foundation Design and Construction

(1) Given the proposed site and the proposed structures, shallow spread foundations are anticipated to be appropriate for support of the proposed building additions. However, the contractor’s consulting geotechnical engineer must determine the appropriate foundation system for the proposed structures and evaluate impacts of the very loose and loose sands that were encountered in the soil borings. Additional investigation, at no additional costs to the Government, may be required. The selected design-build contractor’s foundation design shall provide an adequate level of protection against structural failure due to uniform and/or differential foundation settlement or general shear.

(2) Assuming shallow foundations are feasible, it is recommended that all load-bearing wall footings and column footings have a minimum width of 24 inches and a minimum depth of 24 inches, as measured from finish floor or finish grade, whichever is lower, to the bottom of the footing. For all other wall footings, the recommended minimum width is 18 inches and the recommended minimum depth is 18 inches, as measured from finish floor or finish grade, whichever is lower, to the bottom of the footing.

(3) Foundation excavations should be concreted as soon as practical following excavation.

Exposure to the environment could weaken the soils at the footing bearing level should the foundation excavations remain open for an extended period of time. Bottoms of foundation excavations should be inspected immediately prior to placement of reinforcing steel and concrete to verify that adequate bearing soils are present and that all debris, mud, and loose, frozen or water-softened soils are removed. If the bearing surface soils have been softened by surface-water intrusion or by exposure, the softened soils must be removed to firm bearing and replaced with additional concrete during the concreting or replaced to design subgrade with No. 57 or No. 67 stone, compacted to a non-yielding condition. To minimize exposure, the final excavation (4 to 6 inches) to design subgrade could be delayed until just prior to placement of reinforcing steel and concrete.

d. Seismic Design Seismic loads should be computed in accordance with the 2015 International Building

Code (IBC 2015) section 1613. Seismic site class should be evaluated using the criteria given in the ASCE Standard 7-10 - Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures - Chapter

20. The contractor’s consulting geotechnical engineer shall make the final determination of the mapped acceleration parameters, the site class, the site coefficients and adjusted maximum considered earthquake spectral response acceleration parameters, the design spectral response acceleration parameters, and the seismic design category to be used for seismic design of the project.

P.N. 76934, FY-18

Fort Gordon, Georgia

e. Concrete Slabs-On-Grade

(1) Based upon past experience and the subsurface conditions encountered at the site, concrete floor slabs can be supported on densified in situ soils or on fill soils placed and compacted in accordance with the recommendations presented in this report regarding structural fill. It is recommended that all concrete slabs-on-grade in inhabitable areas, including storage areas, be underlain by a minimum of 4 inches of open graded, washed pea gravel or stone, often termed “capillary water barrier,” to prevent the capillary rise of groundwater. Nos. 57, 67, 78, or 89 stone could be used. It is also recommended that a moisture vapor barrier consisting of lapped polyethylene sheeting having a minimum thickness of 10 mils be provided beneath the building floor slabs to reduce the potential for slab dampness from soil moisture. Concrete slabs should be jointed around columns and along supported walls to minimize cracking due to possible differential movement.

(2) Construction activities and exposure to the environment often cause deterioration of the prepared slab-on-grade subgrade. Therefore, the slab subgrade soil shall be inspected and evaluated immediately prior to floor slab construction. The evaluation might include a combination of visual observations, hand rod probing, and field density tests to verify that the subgrade has been properly prepared. If unstable soil is revealed, the affected soil should be removed to firm bearing. The unstable soil shall then be replaced to design subgrade with suitable structural fill soil placed and compacted as recommended or replaced with additional capillary water barrier material.

f. Groundwater and Surface-Water Considerations Due to the presence of sands with appreciable fines content in the subsurface soils at the project site, perched-water conditions could be encountered, and the accumulation of run-off water or seepage at the base of excavations may occur during foundation construction and site work. Water should not be allowed to collect near the foundation or on floor slab areas of the building either during or after construction. Undercut or excavated areas should be sloped toward one corner to facilitate removal of any collected rainwater, groundwater, or surface runoff. Positive site drainage should be provided to reduce infiltration of surface water around the perimeter of the building and beneath floor slabs.

g. Structural Fill In order to achieve high density structural fill, the following evaluations and recommendations are offered:

(1) Based on the soil test borings, excavated on-site soils (excluding any organics/topsoil and debris) can be used as structural fill. Some moisture content adjustment will probably be necessary to achieve proper compaction. If water must be added, it should be uniformly applied and thoroughly mixed into the soil by discing. It is recommended that the contractor have appropriate disc harrows on site during earthwork for mixing, drying, and wetting of the soils.

(2) Materials selected for use as structural fill should be free from roots and other organic matter, trash, debris, frozen soil, and stones larger than 3 inches in any dimension, and in

P.N. 76934, FY-18

Fort Gordon, Georgia general, should have a liquid limit less than 50 percent and a plasticity index of less than 30. The following soils represented by their Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) (ASTM D 2487) group symbols will be suitable for use as structural fill: GP, GW, GC, GM, SP, SP-SM, SP-SC, SW, SC, SM, SM-SC, CL, and ML. The following soil types are considered unsuitable: Pt, OH, OL, CH, and MH.

(3) Suitable fill soils should be placed in lifts of maximum eight inches loose measurement. The soil should be compacted by mechanical means such as steel drum, sheepsfoot, tamping, or rubber-tired rollers. Compaction of clays is best accomplished with a sheepsfoot or tamping roller. Periodically rolling with heavily loaded, rubber-tired equipment may be desirable to seal the surface of the compacted fill, thus reducing the potential for absorption of surface water following a rain. This sealing operation is particularly important at the end of the work day and at the end of the week. Within confined areas or foundation excavations, we recommend the use of manually operated, internal combustion activated compactors (“whacker packers” or sled tamps). The compactors should have sufficient weight and striking power to produce the same degree of compaction that is obtained on the other portions of the fill by the rolling equipment as specified. Where hand operated equipment is used, the soils should be placed in lifts of maximum four inches loose measurement.

(4) Cut or fill slopes should not be steeper than 3.0H:1.0V. Fill slopes should be compacted in horizontal lifts not to exceed 8 inches in loose thickness as fill is placed.

(5) It is recommended that the structural fill and subgrades be compacted to the following minimum percents of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557):

Beneath structures and building slabs, to 5 feet beyond building and structure line, around footings and in trenches

92 percent

Beneath paved areas, except top 12 inches 92 percent Beneath paved areas, top 12 inches 95 percent Beneath shoulders 90 percent Beneath sidewalks and grassed areas 85 percent Base course beneath paved areas 100 percent

h. Construction Quality Control Testing

(1) Prior to initiating any structural fill placement and/or compaction operations, it is recommended that representative samples of the soils which will be used as structural fill or subgrade, both suitable on-site soils and off-site soils (borrow), be obtained and tested to determine their classification and compaction characteristics. The samples should be carefully selected to represent the full range of soil types to be used. The moisture content, maximum dry density, optimum moisture content, grain-size, and plasticity characteristics should be determined. These tests are required to determine if the fill and subgrade soils are acceptable and for compaction quality control of the subgrades and structural fill. Tests for the above soil properties should be in accordance with the following:

P.N. 76934, FY-18

Fort Gordon, Georgia

Moisture Content ASTM D 2216 Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture ASTM D 1557 Grain-Size (Wash No. 200, less hydrometer) ASTM D 422 and D 1140 Plasticity ASTM D 4318

(2) A representative number of in-place field density tests should be performed in the subgrade of compacted on-site soils and in the structural fill and backfill to confirm that the required degree of compaction has been obtained. In-place density tests should be performed in accordance with the sand cone method prescribed in ASTM D 1556. The use of the ASTM D6938 - Standard Test Method for In-Place Density and Water Content of Soil and Soil- Aggregate by Nuclear Methods is authorized provided the test results are checked for accuracy at a minimum rate of one ASTM D1556 test for every ten ASTM D6938 tests in the same material.

It is recommend that at least one density test be performed for each 5,000 square feet and 12,500 square feet, or portion thereof, for buildings and pavements, respectively, of compacted native soil subgrade and in each lift of compacted structural fill. It is also recommended that at least one density test be performed for each 75 linear feet in the bearing level soils of continuous footings. Density tests should be performed at 100-foot intervals along roadway subgrades. In addition, a density test should be performed for each 100 linear feet of backfill placed per foot of depth in trenches for utilities systems. Where other areas are compacted separately by manually operated compactors, a minimum of one density test should be performed for every 250 square feet, or portion thereof, of fill placed per foot of depth.

(3) Compaction control of soils requires the comparison of fill water content and dry density values obtained in the field density tests with optimum water content and maximum dry density determined in a laboratory compaction test performed on the same soil. It is, however, not feasible to do this as the testing could not keep pace with fill construction. It is, therefore, recommended that compaction control of the earthwork construction be performed using a “family” of compaction curves and the one-point or two-point compaction methods.

(4) Any area that does not meet the required compaction criteria should be reworked and retested. If the moisture content of the soil is within the recommended range, additional compaction may be all that is necessary to increase the density. If the moisture content is not within the recommended range, the moisture content should be adjusted to within the range and the area recompacted.

(5) All laboratory and field density testing shall be performed by a commercial testing laboratory that has been validated by the Engineer Research and Development Center Materials Testing Center (MTC) under the Corps of Engineers laboratory inspection and validation program.

i. Drawings The exploration locations shown in ATTACHMENT A and the soil test boring logs in

ATTACHMENT B shall be shown on the final design and on the project as-built drawings

P.N. 76934, FY-18

Fort Gordon, Georgia completed by the design-build contractor. In addition, the selected design-build contractor shall show all additional soil boring logs, records of additional alternative subsurface investigations, and laboratory soils test data on the final design drawings and on the as-built drawings.

j. Specifications It is recommended that the design-build contractor use the Savannah District’s

EARTHWORK specification 31 00 00 when editing the specifications for this project. It is also recommended that the design-build contractor use the Unified Facilities Guide Specifications CHEMICAL TERMITE CONTROL Specification 31 31 16.13. These specifications and associated compaction figures, are available at the following website:

http://www.sas.usace.army.mil/About/DivisionsandOffices/EngineeringDivision/EngineeringDes ignCriteria/SASGuideSpecifications.aspx

A SpecsIntact format of the specifications can be obtained by following the instructions provided at the above website.

7. FINAL GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT

A final geotechnical evaluation report shall be prepared by the contractor’s licensed geotechnical engineer and submitted along with the first foundation design submittal. The geotechnical report shall summarize the subsurface conditions and provide recommendations for the design of appropriate foundations, floor slabs, retaining walls, embankments, roadways, and pavements. Additionally, the report shall evaluate the impacts of, and mitigate the very loose and loose sands in the subsurface of the project site. The report shall recommend the type of foundation system to be used, lateral load resistance capacities for foundation systems, and allowable bearing elevations for footings, grade beams, slabs, etc. An assessment of post-construction settlement potential including total and differential shall be provided.

Recommendations regarding lateral earth pressures (active, at-rest, and passive) to be used in the design of any retaining walls shall be provided. The report shall include the recommended spectral accelerations and Site Class for seismic design along with an evaluation of any seismic hazards and recommendations for mitigation, if required. Calculations shall be included to support the recommendations for bearing capacity, settlement, and any pavement sections.

Supporting documentation shall be included for all recommended design parameters such as Site Class, shear strength, earth pressure coefficients, friction factors, subgrade modulus, California Bearing Ratio (CBR), etc. In addition, the report shall provide earthwork recommendations, expected frost penetration, seasonal high water table levels, soil infiltration rates, expected groundwater levels, and recommendations for dewatering and groundwater control. The report must also identify the possible presence of any surface or subsurface features that may affect the construction of the project such as sinkholes, boulders, shallow rock, undocumented fill, old structures, soft areas, or unusual soil conditions.

http://www.sas.usace.army.mil/About/DivisionsandOffices/EngineeringDivision/EngineeringDesignCriteria/SASGuideSpecifications.aspx http://www.sas.usace.army.mil/About/DivisionsandOffices/EngineeringDivision/EngineeringDesignCriteria/SASGuideSpecifications.aspx

ATTACHMENT A

Soil Boring Location Plan

460460

460 460

460460

461461

462 462

463 463

464464

465 465

468 468

469 469

470 470

470 470 470

471 471

472472

473 47

474 474

475475

475 475

B-05 N 1246232.62222 E 666785.609003

15 FT

B-04 N 1246135.22196 E 666760.376256

15 FT

B-03 N 1246190.8154 E 666812.754843

15 FT

B-02 N 1246268.71219 E 666762.517063

25 FT

B-01 N 1246206.96482 E 666729.066947

25 FT

CHAMBERLAIN AVE

HOSPITAL

CT

CHAMBERLAIN AVE

DATE: NOV 2017 FIGURE: 1 OF 1

PN 76934 (FY 18) -

Blood Donor Center

BORING LOCATION PLAN

Fort Gordon, GA

U.S. ARMY

CORPS OF ENGINEERS

SAVANNAH DISTRICT

SAVANNAH, GEORGIA

Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

0 75 15037.5

Feet

Document Path: G:\EN-GS\FT GORDON\FY18\LI_76934_Blood Donor Center\Drawings\PN_76934_BloodDonorCenter_101917_topo.mxd

NOTE:

B-XX = Soil Boring Number XX ft = Depth of Hole

All borings marked with stakes, flagging and paint.

Imagery Date: 14 Sept 2015

ATTACHMENT B

Soil Boring Logs

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

S-8

Water Level Data Reading Depth Notes

470.0

458.5

453.5

447.0

2.0

13.5

18.5

25.0

SILTY SAND (SM), fine to medium; dark brown, slightly moist, with rootlets, topsoil.

Fine to medium; pale brown, slightly moist, no rootlets.

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), fine to medium;

yellowish brown, moist, trace silt.

Fine to medium; very pale brown, moist, trace silt.

CLAYEY SAND (SC), fine to medium; reddish brown mottled with gray, very moist.

ELASTIC SILT (MH), red mottled with gray, slightly moist, medium plasticity, few fine sand.

ELASTIC SILT, red mottled with gray, dry, medium plasticity, with concretions, very stiff.

BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE AT 25.0 ft Notes:

1. Soils visually field classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System.

2. N-Value: Total blows over last 1.0 foot of 1.5-foot driven interval, unless otherwise indicated, using a 1 3/8-inch ID splitspoon with 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches.

3. The CME 55 drilling rig utilizes an automatic trip hammer.

/5″

During drilling Not encountered 1/11/2017 After drilling Not encountered 1/11/2017

Split Spoon Refusal: Sampler advanced only 5" in seating drive after 50 blows.

Chipper Renfroe

17. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING

11/1/17

SHEETSDRILLING LOG

12. TOTAL SAMPLES

13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES

B-01

DIVISION

11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL

South Atlantic Division

See Remarks

11/1/17

N/A

14. ELEVATION GROUND WATER

SHEET

Fort Gordon, GA

DISTURBED

6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN

7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK

8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING

STARTEDVERTICAL

1. PROJECT

UNDISTURBED

NAVD88

2. HOLE NUMBER

18. SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF INSPECTOR

CME-55

BEARING

3. DRILLING AGENCY

OF

COMPLETED

15. DATE BORING

DEG FROM

VERTICAL

HORIZONTAL

2-1/4" Hollow Stem Auger

INSTALLATION

8 0

INCLINED

Preston Geotechnical Consultants, LLC

4. NAME OF DRILLER

5. DIRECTION OF BORING

9. COORDINATE SYSTEM

10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT

NAD83Blood Donor Center

P.N. 76934 FY 18

>25'

0'

25'

N 1246206.96 E 666729.07

LOCATION COORDINATES

16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING

VERTICAL

Forpu Njikam, Civil (Geotechnical) Engineer

472' (estimated from plans)

State Plane - Georgia West

Boring Designation B-01 SHEET 1 of 1

B lo w s/

0.

ft

R Q

D

S am p N o.

REC

Boring Designation B-01

FEB 08

ELEV

LE

G

E N

D

DEPTH

SAS FORM 1836-A

FIELD CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

N -V al ue

REMARKS

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

S-7

Water Level Data Reading Depth Notes

470.5

459.0

454.5

447.5

2.0

13.5

18.0

25.0

SILTY SAND (SM), fine to medium; dark brown, slightly moist, with rootlets, topsoil.

Fine to medium; pale brown, slightly moist, no rootlets.

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), fine to medium; pale brown, slightly moist, trace silt.

Fine to medium; very pale brown.

CLAYEY SAND (SC), fine to coarse; brownish yellow mottled with red, slightly moist, some silt.

ELASTIC SILT (MH), white mottled with red, dry, medium plasticity, trace fine sand.

Red mottled with white, medium plasticity, with concretions, very stiff.

BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE AT 25.0 ft Notes:

1. Soils visually field classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System.

2. N-Value: Total blows over last 1.0 foot of 1.5-foot driven interval, unless otherwise indicated, using a 1 3/8-inch ID splitspoon with 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches.

3. The CME 55 drilling rig utilizes an automatic trip hammer.

/5″

/3″

During drilling Not encountered 1/11/2017 After drilling Not encountered 1/11/2017

Driller omitted 6.5' - 8' sampling interval... Auger cuttings indicate material is the same very pale brown SP encountered at 3.5'.

Split Spoon Refusal: Split-spoon advanced only 5" in drive after seating, after 51 blows.

Split Spoon Refusal: Split-spoon advanced only 3" in drive after seating, after 50 blows.

Chipper Renfroe

17. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING

11/1/17

SHEETSDRILLING LOG

12. TOTAL SAMPLES

13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES

B-02

DIVISION

11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL

South Atlantic Division

See Remarks

11/1/17

N/A

14. ELEVATION GROUND WATER

SHEET

Fort Gordon, GA

DISTURBED

6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN

7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK

8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING

STARTEDVERTICAL

1. PROJECT

UNDISTURBED

NAVD88

2. HOLE NUMBER

18. SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF INSPECTOR

CME-55

BEARING

3. DRILLING AGENCY

OF

COMPLETED

15. DATE BORING

DEG FROM

VERTICAL

HORIZONTAL

2-1/4" Hollow Stem Auger

INSTALLATION

7 0

INCLINED

Preston Geotechnical Consultants, LLC

4. NAME OF DRILLER

5. DIRECTION OF BORING

9. COORDINATE SYSTEM

10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT

NAD83Blood Donor Center

P.N. 76934 FY 18

>25'

0'

25'

N 1246268.71 E 666762.52

LOCATION COORDINATES

16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING

VERTICAL

Forpu Njikam, Civil (Geotechnical) Engineer

472.5'(estimated from plans)

State Plane - Georgia West

Boring Designation B-02 SHEET 1 of 1

B lo w s/

0.

ft

R Q

D

S am p N o.

REC

Boring Designation B-02

FEB 08

ELEV

LE

G

E N

D

DEPTH

SAS FORM 1836-A

FIELD CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

N -V al ue

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

Water Level Data Reading Depth Notes

470.0

459.5

458.5

3.5

14.0

15.0

SILTY SAND (SM), fine to medium; dark brown, slightly moist, with rootlets.

Fine to medium; pale brown, slightly moist, no rootlets.

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), fine to medium; very pale brown, slightly moist, some silt.

Wet.

CLAYEY SAND (SC), fine to coarse; reddish brown mottled with gray, very moist, some silt.

BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE AT 15.0 ft Notes:

1. Soils visually field classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System.

2. N-Value: Total blows over last 1.0 foot of 1.5-foot driven interval, unless otherwise indicated, using a 1 3/8-inch ID splitspoon with 1

During drilling 13.85 Inside HSA 1/11/2017 After drilling Not encountered 1/11/2017

Chipper Renfroe

17. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING

11/1/17

SHEETSDRILLING LOG

12. TOTAL SAMPLES

13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES

B-03

DIVISION

11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL

South Atlantic Division

See Remarks

11/1/17

N/A

14. ELEVATION GROUND WATER

SHEET

Fort Gordon, GA

DISTURBED

6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN

7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK

8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING

STARTEDVERTICAL

1. PROJECT

UNDISTURBED

NAVD88

2. HOLE NUMBER

18. SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF INSPECTOR

CME-55

BEARING

3. DRILLING AGENCY

OF

COMPLETED

15. DATE BORING

DEG FROM

VERTICAL

HORIZONTAL

2-1/4" Hollow Stem Auger

INSTALLATION

6 0

INCLINED

Preston Geotechnical Consultants, LLC

4. NAME OF DRILLER

5. DIRECTION OF BORING

9. COORDINATE SYSTEM

10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT

NAD83Blood Donor Center

P.N. 76934 FY 18

>15'

0'

15'

N 1246190.82 E 666812.75

LOCATION COORDINATES

16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING

VERTICAL

Forpu Njikam, Civil (Geotechnical) Engineer

473.5'(estimated from plans)

State Plane - Georgia West

Boring Designation B-03 SHEET 1 of 1

B lo w s/

0.

ft

R Q

D

S am p N o.

REC

Boring Designation B-03

FEB 08

ELEV

LE

G

E N

D

DEPTH

SAS FORM 1836-A

FIELD CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

N -V al ue

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

Water Level Data Reading Depth Notes

468.0

464.5

462.5

457.5

456.5

3.5

7.0

9.0

14.0

15.0

SILTY SAND (SM), fine to medium; dark brown, slightly moist, with rootlets.

Fine to medium; brown, slightly moist, no rootlets.

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), fine to medium; very pale brown, slightly moist, trace silt.

SILTY SAND (SM), fine to medium; yellowish red, moist.

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), fine to medium; very pale brown, moist, trace silt.

Wet.

CLAYEY SAND (SC), fine to medium; reddish brown, moist.

BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE AT 15.0 ft Notes:

1. Soils visually field classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System.

2. N-Value: Total blows over last 1.0 foot of 1.5-foot driven interval, unless otherwise indicated, using a 1 3/8-inch ID splitspoon with 1

During drilling 13.75 Inside HSA 1/11/2017 After drilling Not encountered 1/11/2017

Chipper Renfroe

17. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING

11/1/17

SHEETSDRILLING LOG

12. TOTAL SAMPLES

13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES

B-04

DIVISION

11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL

South Atlantic Division

See Remarks

11/1/17

N/A

14. ELEVATION GROUND WATER

SHEET

Fort Gordon, GA

DISTURBED

6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN

7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK

8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING

STARTEDVERTICAL

1. PROJECT

UNDISTURBED

NAVD88

2. HOLE NUMBER

18. SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF INSPECTOR

CME-55

BEARING

3. DRILLING AGENCY

OF

COMPLETED

15. DATE BORING

DEG FROM

VERTICAL

HORIZONTAL

2-1/4" Hollow Stem Auger

INSTALLATION

6 0

INCLINED

Preston Geotechnical Consultants, LLC

4. NAME OF DRILLER

5. DIRECTION OF BORING

9. COORDINATE SYSTEM

10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT

NAD83Blood Donor Center

P.N. 76934 FY 18

>15'

0'

15'

N 1246135.22 E 666760.38

LOCATION COORDINATES

16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING

VERTICAL

Forpu Njikam, Civil (Geotechnical) Engineer

471.5'(estimated from plans)

State Plane - Georgia West

Boring Designation B-04 SHEET 1 of 1

B lo w s/

0.

ft

R Q

D

S am p N o.

REC

Boring Designation B-04

FEB 08

ELEV

LE

G

E N

D

DEPTH

SAS FORM 1836-A

FIELD CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

N -V al ue

S-1

S-2

S-3

S-4

S-5

S-6

Water Level Data Reading Depth Notes

470.0

460.0

458.5

3.5

13.5

15.0

SILTY SAND (SM), fine to medium; red, slightly moist, with rootlets, trace fine gravel.

Fine to medium; pale brown, slightly moist, no rootlets.

Fine to medium; pale brown, moist.

POORLY GRADED SAND (SP), fine to medium; very pale brown, moist, trace silt.

Fine to coarse; very pale brown, moist, trace silt.

CLAYEY SAND (SC), fine to coarse; yellowish brown slightly mottled with red, very moist, some silt.

BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE AT 15.0 ft Notes:

1. Soils visually field classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System.

2. N-Value: Total blows over last 1.0 foot of 1.5-foot driven interval, unless otherwise indicated, using a 1 3/8-inch ID splitspoon with 1

During drilling Not encountered 1/11/2017 After drilling Not encountered 1/11/2017

Chipper Renfroe

17. TOTAL CORE RECOVERY FOR BORING

11/1/17

SHEETSDRILLING LOG

12. TOTAL SAMPLES

13. TOTAL NUMBER CORE BOXES

B-05

DIVISION

11. MANUFACTURER'S DESIGNATION OF DRILL

South Atlantic Division

See Remarks

11/1/17

N/A

14. ELEVATION GROUND WATER

SHEET

Fort Gordon, GA

DISTURBED

6. THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN

7. DEPTH DRILLED INTO ROCK

8. TOTAL DEPTH OF BORING

STARTEDVERTICAL

1. PROJECT

UNDISTURBED

NAVD88

2. HOLE NUMBER

18. SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF INSPECTOR

CME-55

BEARING

3. DRILLING AGENCY

OF

COMPLETED

15. DATE BORING

DEG FROM

VERTICAL

HORIZONTAL

2-1/4" Hollow Stem Auger

INSTALLATION

6 0

INCLINED

Preston Geotechnical Consultants, LLC

4. NAME OF DRILLER

5. DIRECTION OF BORING

9. COORDINATE SYSTEM

10. SIZE AND TYPE OF BIT

NAD83Blood Donor Center

P.N. 76934 FY 18

>15'

0'

15'

N 1246232.62 E 666785.61

LOCATION COORDINATES

16. ELEVATION TOP OF BORING

VERTICAL

Forpu Njikam, Civil (Geotechnical) Engineer

473.5'(estimated from plans)

State Plane - Georgia West

Boring Designation B-05 SHEET 1 of 1

B lo w s/

0.

ft

R Q

D

S am p N o.

REC

Boring Designation B-05

FEB 08

ELEV

LE

G

E N

D

DEPTH

SAS FORM 1836-A

FIELD CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS

(Description)

N -V al ue

ATTACHMENT C

USDA NRCS Soils Report

United States Department of Agriculture

A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants

Custom Soil Resource Report for

Richmond County, Georgia Fy 18 PN 76934 Blood Donor Center - Ft. Gordon, GA

Natural Resources Conservation Service

November 21, 2017 155

Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.

They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.

Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment.

Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.

The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.

Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/?

cid=nrcs142p2_053951).

Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations.

The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey.

Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require

2 156 http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/ http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/ https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/?cid=nrcs142p2_053951 http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/?cid=nrcs142p2_053951 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

3 157

Contents Preface How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil Map

Soil Map Legend Map Unit Legend Map Unit Descriptions

Richmond County, Georgia LkB—Lakeland sand, 2 to 5 percent slopes

References

4 158

How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles.