Upload
lethu
View
222
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
CITY AND BOROUGH OF JUNEAU
JNU RUNWAY 8/26 REHABILITATION
Contract Number E14-034 AIP No. 3-02-0133-0XX-2014
ENGINEER’S DESIGN REPORT
Prepared For:
City and Borough of Juneau Juneau International Airport
Prepared by:
USKH, Inc. 2515 A Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 1 A. Existing Conditions ......................................................................................... 1 B. Project Scope ................................................................................................. 2
II. DESIGN ANALYSIS ............................................................................................... 6 A. Airport Layout Considerations ........................................................................ 6
1. Conformance with Standards ........................................................................ 6 a. Conformance with FAA Standards ........................................................... 6 b. Conformance with the Airport Layout Plan ............................................... 7 c. Analysis of Alternatives and Preferred Alternative .................................... 7 d. Environmental Considerations .................................................................. 8
2. Preliminary Environmental Commitments: ..................................................... 8 a. Air Quality ................................................................................................. 8 b. Water Quality ............................................................................................ 8 c. Construction ............................................................................................. 9 d. Historical, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources .................................. 9 e. Fish, Wildlife and Plants ........................................................................... 9 f. Required Permits .................................................................................... 10 g. Federal Aviation Regulation Part 77 Clearances .................................... 10
3. Design Aircraft ............................................................................................. 10 B. Soils and Grading ......................................................................................... 11
1. Existing Soil Conditions ............................................................................... 11 2. Internal Drainage and Frost Considerations ................................................ 11 3. Material Borrow Sources ............................................................................. 11
C. Drainage ...................................................................................................... 11 D. Pavements ................................................................................................... 12 E. Lighting and NAVAIDs ................................................................................. 15
1. Lighting ........................................................................................................ 15 2. NAVAIDs ..................................................................................................... 16
III. MODIFICATIONS/EXCEPTIONS TO DESIGN STANDARDS ............................. 18
IV. COST ESTIMATES .............................................................................................. 19 A. Quantities and Unit Costs ............................................................................ 19 B. Special Considerations ................................................................................ 19 C. Additive Alternatives ..................................................................................... 19
V. PROJECT SCHEDULE ........................................................................................ 20
VI. SAFETY PLAN ..................................................................................................... 22 A. Impact of Work ............................................................................................. 22 B. Planned Closures ......................................................................................... 22 C. Coordination ................................................................................................. 22 D. Conditions for Closures ................................................................................ 23
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page ii
E. Vehicle Marking ............................................................................................ 23
List of Figures Figure 1 – Project Map .................................................................................................... 5
List of Tables
Table 1 – Runway Design Criteria ................................................................................... 6 Table 2 – Taxiway Design Criteria .................................................................................. 6 Table 3 – Transverse Grade Criteria ............................................................................... 7 Table 4 – BERG2 Analysis Parameters for Frost Depth ................................................ 11 Table 5 – Runway 8/26 ................................................................................................. 14 Table 6 – Taxiway B-1 and H ........................................................................................ 14
Appendices
Appendix A ......................................... CONSTRUCTION SAFETY AND PHASING PLAN Appendix B ......................................................................................... COST ESTIMATES Appendix C ............................................................................. PAVEMENT EVALUATION Appendix D ............................ GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page iii
ACRONYMS
AAC ......................................................................................... Airport Approach Category ACs ...................................................................................................... Advisory Circulars A.C. ....................................................................................................... Asphalt Concrete ADG .............................................................................................. Airplane Design Group ADF&G .................................................................. Alaska Department of Fish and Game ALCS .................................................................................. airfield lighting control system ALP ..................................................................................................... Airport Layout Plan APDES .................................................... Alaska Pollutant Discharge Elimination System BMPs ..................................................................................... Best Management Practices CABC .............................................................................. crushed aggregate base course CBJ ....................................................................................... City and Borough of Juneau CSPP ........................................................................ Construction Safety & Phasing Plan DOT&PF ..................................... Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities EA .......................................................................................... Environmental Assessment EIS ................................................................................ Environmental Impact Statement EVAR ........................................................................... Emergency Vehicle Access Road FAA .................................................................................. Federal Aviation Administration FAR ....................................................................................... Federal Aviation Regulation FOD ................................................................................................... foreign object debris FSS .................................................................................................... flight service station GPS ........................................................................................... global positioning system HDPE ........................................................................................ high-density polyethylene HMA .......................................................................................................... hot mix asphalt JNU ....................................................................................... Juneau International Airport LDIN ........................................................................................................... lead-in lighting LED ..................................................................................................... light-emitting diode MALS ............................................................. medium-intensity approach lighting system MALSF ................... medium-intensity approach lighting system with sequenced flashers MTOW ............................................................................. maximum design takeoff weight NAVAIDs ................................................................................................ Navigational Aids NOTAMs ............................................................................................... Notices to Airmen OFZ .................................................................................................... Obstacle Free Zone PAPI .............................................................................. precision approach path indicator PCI .......................................................................................... Pavement Condition Index PFC ................................................................................................. porous friction course PG ....................................................................................................... performance grade PND ........................................................................................................... PND Engineers RDC .................................................................................................. runway design code REILS ...................................................................................... runway end identifier lights RPU ............................................................................................. remote processing units RVR ................................................................................................ Runway Visual Range RW ....................................................................................................................... Runway RSA ................................................................................................... Runway Safety Area SHPO ............................................................................ State Historic Preservation Office
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page iv
SWPPP ................................................................ Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan TDG ............................................................................................... Taxiway Design Group TOFA ............................................................................. taxiway/taxilane object Free Area TW ........................................................................................................................ Taxiway USKH ................................................................................................................ USKH Inc. USACE .............................................................................. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers UV ..................................................................................................................... ultra violet VASIs ............................................................................. visual approach slope indicators
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 1
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Existing Conditions
Juneau International Airport’s (JNU) sole runway (RW) 8/26, is a 150-foot wide by
8,857-foot long runway that is accessed from taxiways (TW) B, C, D, E, F and G. The
runway serves a variety of aircraft from Alaska Airlines 737s to smaller Part 135 aircraft
such as Cessna 206/207s, Grand Caravans, and Piper Navajos. It also serves as a very
active medevac hub for King Airs and Learjets. The airport is occasionally used by
military aircraft such as the U.S. Coast Guard’s C-130 and the U.S. Air Force C-17
Globemaster III.
The surface of RW 8/26 is asphalt concrete (A.C.) pavement, with the west end varying
in thickness from 6 to 8 inches overlaying asphalt emulsion sand, and the east end
varying in thickness from 10 to 12 inches over subgrade. The transverse grade is
approximately 1.0 percent. The A.C. at the runway shoulders varies in thickness from
1.5 to 3 inches.
Following a periodic Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspection in November
2011 and a subsequent FAA surveillance inspection in April 2012, the runway surface
pavement was found to be failing and producing foreign object debris (FOD) that could
be ingested into aircraft engines. The widening long longitudinal cracks were also found
to be a potential danger for loss of aircraft control during takeoff or landing procedures.
In July 2012, the Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF)
produced a Pavement Inspection Report that assigned the runway a Pavement
Condition Index (PCI) of 61.23, indicating corrective maintenance was required.
Emergency repairs (cold-planing and patching) were performed on the center of the
runway to mitigate FOD and potential loss of control issues. In October 2012, a second
15-foot wide A.C. patch, spanning the entire length of the runway, was constructed on
each side of the runway centerline. In June 2013, a similar 7-foot wide A.C. patch,
spanning the entire runway length, was constructed along both edges of the patch
constructed the previous October. The patching efforts left a 2-foot wide swath of
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 2
existing pavement remaining along the centerline of the RW, which encompassed the
centerline lighting.
Over the past few years, there have been multiple construction projects at JNU. The
major projects included:
Expanding the runway safety area (RSA) and extending the runway on each end.
Relocating TW G and reconstructing TW B.
Relocating Duck Creek and the Emergency Vehicle Access Road (EVAR aka Dike
Trail).
The last major runway resurfacing project at JNU was completed in 1997 and consisted
of cold-planing 2.75 inches, to remove a layer of porous friction course (PFC), and
repaving with standard A.C. using AC-5 grade asphalt.
B. Project Scope
The City and Borough of Juneau (CBJ) contracted with USKH Inc. (USKH) to provide
design services needed to rehabilitate RW 8/26 at JNU. The project will resurface the
entire length of the 150-foot wide runway to eliminate the surface deterioration problems
currently being experienced. Shoulder pavement will be replaced in its entirety and any
transition pavement needed on the overruns will be included. All markings will be
replaced.
Other improvements will need to be constructed to accommodate aircraft operations
during the closure of RW 8/26 and to take advantage of a rare full closure of the
airport’s only runway. Additional work to be accomplished in conjunction with the RW
8/26 rehabilitation project is:
Convert TW A to a temporary runway so RW 8/26 can be shut down for resurfacing
operations. This work will include relocating or removing Navigational Aids
(NAVAIDs), restriping TW A as a runway and returning it to a taxiway when runway
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 3
work is complete, and installation of temporary runway lighting and NAVAIDs on the
taxiway.
Installation of tie-downs south of Duck Creek to relocate general aviation aircraft out
of the TW H taxiway object free area (TOFA) during the temporary operations.
Construct new access road along Duck Creek to intersect with the Float Pond Road.
This will allow vehicle access from Gate E to the Float Pond while keeping traffic
away from TW A during temporary operations. The intersection of Float Pond Road
with the new access road will be reconfigured to eliminate a “Y” intersection.
Reconstruct TW B-1 to handle increased aircraft operations by larger aircraft to
minimize back taxi operations during temporary operations. Currently this taxiway
can only handle Airplane Design Group (ADG)-I aircraft and grades do not meet
FAA requirements. Additionally, TW B-1 will be relocated to align with TW W to
reduce incursions that originate from the tug road adjacent to TW B-1, as identified
by the FAA on their last certification inspection in December 2013.
Extend Taxiway H to intersect with Taxiway E1 and provide a taxi-route for medevac
aircraft parked on Apron D-1 without having to back taxi on the temporary runway.
Replacement and/or upgrade of runway centerline, edge, and threshold lighting with
light-emitting diode (LED) fixtures to comply with FAA standards.
Replace the existing 8-foot Jordan Creek culvert under RW 8/26 with a new 14-foot
half-pipe arch to meet the fish passage requirements in the current Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS). This culvert will be installed while RW 8/26 is closed and
will connect to the portions of existing fish passage culvert that was constructed as
part of the recent RSA project. Additionally, the same size culvert will be installed at
the TW H crossing of Jordan Creek to TW E-1.
Drainage of the infield area encompassed by TWs A, E, F, and the runway, will be
diverted to the float pond by constructing a new storm drain pipe under RW 8/26.
This project will aid the airport in improving water quality discharges.
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 4
All design will be in accordance with the FAA’s Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5300-13A,
dated 9/28/2013, unless otherwise noted.
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 6
II. DESIGN ANALYSIS
A. Airport Layout Considerations
1. Conformance with Standards
a. Conformance with FAA Standards
The RW 8/26 Rehabilitation project is being designed in accordance with FAA AC
150/5300-13A, Airport Design, dated 9/28/2013. The existing runway design code
(RDC) of C-III-5000(RVR) standards will be maintained. TW B-1 will be constructed to
ADG-I/TDG-2standards while TW H will be constructed to ADG-II/TDG-2 standards.
Tables 1 and 2 show the dimensional design criteria used for the project.
Table 1 – Runway Design Criteria
Runway RDC RW Width Shoulder Width
Total Safety Area
Width 8/26 C-III-
5000 150’ 25’ 500’
Table 2 – Taxiway Design Criteria
Taxiway ADG TDG TW Width Shoulder Width
Total Safety Area
Width B1 I 2 25’ 10’ 49’ H II 2 35’ 10’ 79’
This project will reconstruct the runway pavement, including shoulders, and taxiway
transitions; and two existing taxiways will be reconstructed/extended. The runway
transverse grade will match the existing grade. The new sections of taxiways will be
crowned at the centerline with a transverse gradient of 1.5 percent, and where possible,
the shoulders and safety areas will slope away from the centerline at 3.0 percent. Areas
at intersections, aprons, etc., will be graded to drain to existing ditches and trench
drains. Table 3 shows the transverse grade limitations specified in FAA AC 150/5300-
13A for aircraft approach category C, D and E airports:
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 7
Table 3 – Transverse Grade Criteria
Surface Grade Runway 0% to 1.5% Taxiway 1.0% to 1.5% Shoulder 1.5% to 5% Safety Area Beyond Shoulder 1.5% to 3%
b. Conformance with the Airport Layout Plan
The current JNU Airport Layout Plan (ALP) was approved by the FAA in May 2010, and
an update was just recently submitted for their review. RW 8/26’s existing designation
RDC is C-III-5000 and is to remain so in the future. The TW H extension and relocated
TW B-1 will not encroach on the runway object free area or the runway obstacle free
zone.
c. Analysis of Alternatives and Preferred Alternative
Three preliminary alternatives were developed for the rehabilitation of RW 8/26.
No Action – This alternative would result in no new pavement rehabilitation work for
RW 8/26. Although patches have addressed the immediate concerns of the RW 8/26
pavement deficiencies, these issues will recur in the near term without a permanent
fix.
Alternative A – This alternative removes 5 inches of existing runway pavement by
cold-planing and replaces it with 5 inches of new A.C. This alternative is perfectly
viable. However, it does not provide any substantive benefits over the existing
condition and will impact the runway centerline lighting to the point that that it will
need to be replaced.
Alternative B – This alternative removes 3 inches of the existing runway pavement
by cold-planing and replaces it with 5 inches of new A.C. This preferred alternative
will provide a means to increase the total thickness of the asphalt layer and increase
the overall strength of the pavement. The cold-planing with this alternative will not
penetrate below the bottom of the runway centerline lighting can grade rings,
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 8
therefore the centerline lighting can remain in place and reduce the project’s cost
and construction time requirements.
d. Environmental Considerations
The following preliminary environmental commitments, permits, and measures are
anticipated to reduce environmental impacts and were considered in the project design.
Additions and deletions to environmental commitments, mitigation measures, and
design considerations may occur once the design is final.
2. Preliminary Environmental Commitments:
a. Air Quality
Measures to control short-term and temporary fugitive dust, such as pre-watering sites
prior to excavation, applying a dust palliative, controlling construction traffic patterns and
haul routes, and covering or otherwise stabilizing fill material stockpiles will be
implemented during construction.
b. Water Quality
The contractor will be required to comply with the Alaska Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (APDES) Construction General Permit and to prepare and
implement a storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP).
Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be implemented to minimize any increase
in stormwater runoff from pollution-generating impervious surfaces. Bio-filtration
swales and grass filter strips will be installed along the reconstructed portions of the
Runway to treat runoff and improve the quality of storm water.
All in-stream work associated with the Runway 8-26 culvert replacement and
extension of Taxilane H will be isolated from the flowing water of Jordan Creek
through either diversion of the stream during construction, or pumping the flowing
water around the disturbed area.
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 9
c. Construction
To avoid conflicts with high tides and reduce risk of equipment loss or damage, or
construction delays, all equipment and supplies will be staged and stockpiled in a
defined construction staging area and out of the construction zone. If feasible, grading
and other ground-disturbing activities (in-stream work) will be timed to coincide with the
months of lowest stream flow (February through June). However, the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) Fish Habitat Permit will provide guidance on
the periods recommended for construction to minimize impacts to fish.
d. Historical, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources
According to the Juneau International Airport Final Environmental Impact Statement,
dated April 23, 2007, the Alaska State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) concurred
that there are no sites within the airport property eligible for listing on the National
Register of Historic Places.
If cultural, archaeological, or historical sites are discovered during project construction,
the Contractor is required to immediately cease operations and notify the Engineer if the
Contractor’s operations encounter items of historical significance. Work will not resume
in the vicinity of the site until consultation is conducted with FAA and SHPO.
e. Fish, Wildlife and Plants
Impacts to fish will be minimized by following guidance of the ADF&G timing windows
for in water work, and isolating work areas from the stream flow. The Jordan Creek
culvert complex has been designed to provide adequate complexity and flow to flush
adult salmon carcasses from the daylighted sections between Taxilane H and TW 8-26
to avoid attracting birds to the area.
All vegetation treatment (seeding and planting) shall be performed using species under
the following order of preference to prevent establishment of invasive species: 1.
species native to the project site; 2. species native to the project area; 3. species native
to the State of Alaska; 4. non-native species. If native species are not available, only
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 10
non-native species that are known to not reproduce in the general project area shall be
used for revegetation. Monitoring and remedial vegetation treatment shall be performed
until 95% vegetation cover is achieved.
f. Required Permits
A Section 404/10 permit for fill in Waters of the U.S. will be obtained from the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
A Grading Permit for the extension of Taxilane H and culvert installation will be
obtained from the CBJ Engineering Department.
A Fish Habitat permit will be required from the ADF&G.
g. Federal Aviation Regulation Part 77 Clearances
Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77 establishes standards for determining
obstructions in navigable airspace; sets forth the requirements for notice to the
Administrator of certain proposed construction or alteration; provides for aeronautical
studies of obstructions to air navigation to determine their effect on the safe and efficient
use of airspace; provides for public hearings on the hazardous effect of proposed
construction or alteration of air navigation; and provides for establishing antenna farm
areas. FAR Part 77, Subpart B, Notice of Construction or Alterations provides
requirements for notifying the FAA Administrator of the project.
This project will not impact JNU’s existing Part 77 airspace. CBJ should notify the FAA
Administrator of this project that there will be work within the primary and transitional
surfaces of RW 8/26.
3. Design Aircraft
The design aircraft for this project is the Boeing 737-900ER, with a wingspan of 113 feet
and an approach speed of 141 knots. This is an Aircraft Approach Category (AAC) C
and ADG III aircraft. The Boeing 737-900ER has a maximum design takeoff weight
(MTOW) of 187,200 pounds.
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 11
B. Soils and Grading
1. Existing Soil Conditions
PND Engineers (PND) conducted a geotechnical investigation and produced a
geotechnical report to support the design effort. Existing runway construction consists of
varying pavement thicknesses ranging from 9.5 inches to 17.5 inches over poorly
graded, sand with silt and gravel directly beneath the pavement. Appendix D contains a
copy of the geotechnical report.
2. Internal Drainage and Frost Considerations
JNU’s internal drainage is collected in the infield drainage areas and is infiltrated to the
soil beneath the surface. This water is marginally influenced by the surrounding tides
and eventually drains into the Mendenhall Wetlands State Game Refuge.
The PND geotechnical report states that the CBJ Building Code recommends using a
32-inch frost depth. The calculated depth of freezing was 5.3 feet beneath the pavement
surface. Table 4 provides the BERG-2 analysis inputs for the frost depth analysis.
Table 4 – BERG2 Analysis Parameters for Frost Depth
Location Freezing Index
Thawing Index
Mean Temp.
Soil Type Moisture Content
Thaw Depth
Freeze Depth
Juneau, AK
1,609 ºF-Days*
3,920 ºF-Days*
40.0 ºF* Sandy Gravel
6% 12.7 ft. 5.3 ft.
*Values from NOAA AFI-pubreturn.xls spread sheet.
3. Material Borrow Sources
To construct this project, structural fill (subbase and crushed aggregate base course)
and hot mix asphalt aggregates will be required from an off-site source. The material will
be imported to the airport by the construction contractor.
C. Drainage
Approximately half of the project (main apron, terminal, and parking areas) drains to a
series of storm drains that lead to ditches that drain to the east through several culverts
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 12
into Jordan Creek, which flows into the Gastineau Channel. The other half (general
aviation, commercial, and air cargo areas) drains through ditches that flow west into a
storm drain system, which empties into the float pond basin. Measures to minimize
changes to existing drainage patterns were considered in the design, and improvements
will be made for water quality considerations.
Taxiways A, E, F, and the runway. This location drains surface runoff laden with the de-
icing agent urea into Jordan Creek. To help minimize the airports urea discharge into an
anadromous waterway, a new storm drain crossing RW 8-26 to the float basin will be
constructed during the runway closure
The new float pond access road will be crowned and all runoff will flow to the existing
storm water system, ditches, and/or Duck Creek. Infield areas impacted by construction
will be regraded to promote existing drainage patterns.
D. Pavements
USKH performed a visual pavement inspection of RW 8-26 on August 27-28, 2013. The
pavement distresses were mapped by hand and the severity of each distress noted.
The following distresses were observed:
Low- to medium-severity longitudinal cracks that run the entire length of the runway;
these cracks appear to be along the construction joints created when the runway
was paved in 1997.
Sporadic, discontinuous, low-severity longitudinal cracks observed between the
construction joint cracks.
An area of pavement settlement nicknamed the “sink hole” near TW F on the south
side of the runway centerline. This area has been patched multiple times, and is
reported to move up and down with the seasons.
Medium-severity transverse cracks as a result of reflection cracking from lower, past
pavement lifts.
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 13
Localized areas of low-severity alligator cracking.
General observations by the FAA indicated the asphalt looked brittle or as if it was
drying out and was prone to cracking; likely due to considerable attack by ultra violet
(UV) light and urea use on the runway surface.
Based on the findings from the pavement evaluation, a number of distressed locations
were identified for further investigation. USKH hired PND to core some of these
distressed locations and in some cases, bore into the subgrades. The investigations
revealed the longitudinal construction cracks extend 2.5 inches below finished grade
and are likely the result of cold joints during the 1997 construction. The sporadic cracks
between the construction joints extended less than 3 inches deep, and there is no real
indication of a cause. The pavement sink hole and alligator cracking are caused by a
frost susceptible subgrade.
To rehabilitate the runway, it is recommended to cold-plane a minimum of 3 inches from
the runway surface and replace with 5 inches of hot mix asphalt (HMA). In addition to
providing additional structural thickness, this will allow for the removal of the upper layer
of A.C. in which the majority of the pavement distresses occur, and provide a solid base
for the new paved surface. For the locations of the runway that showed pavement
distresses due to subgrade issues, a replacement section of 5 inches HMA, 6 inches of
crushed aggregate base course (CABC) and 22 inches of new subbase for a total
replacement section of 32 inches is recommended. Shoulders will be removed and
replaced with 3 inches of HMA over 6 inches of CABC to meet minimum thickness
requirements. All HMA will be performance grade (PG) 64-28 (DOT&PF Class E), Type
II mix.
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 14
Table 5 – Runway 8/26
Section Recommendations Runway Shoulders
5” HMA (P-401) 3” HMA (P-401) 6” CABC (full depth locations) (P-209) 22” Subbase (P-154)
6” CABC (P-209)
Table 6 – Taxiway B-1 and H
Section Recommendations Taxiway Shoulders
3” HMA (P-401) 3” HMA 6” CABC (P-209) 6” CABC (P-209) 18” Subbase (P-154) 18” Subbase (P-154)
Pavement structural recommendations were validated using FAA FAARFIELD 1.305
software and the minimum thickness recommendations of FAA AC 150/5320-6E, Airport
Pavement Design and Evaluation using the fleet mix for JNU and a 20-year design life.
PND’s geotechnical report is provided in Appendix D.
Improved construction techniques will be employed to help extend the life of the runway
pavement. Material transfer vehicles will be required in front of the paver to accept
delivered HMA and keep it mixed. These vehicles help maintain consistent asphalt
temperatures before it is delivered to the paver’s hopper. Echelon paving will be
implemented to reduce the number of longitudinal construction joints. Where cold joints
are necessary, joint adhesive will be applied to provide a better bond between the new
asphalt and existing pavement. Finally, intelligent compaction equipment will be utilized
on the breakdown rollers behind the paver to provide temperature, asphalt stiffness, and
global positioning system (GPS) location data to both the compactor operators and the
quality control personnel so they have up to the minute information on how consistently
the final lift of HMA is being compacted.
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 15
E. Lighting and NAVAIDs
1. Lighting
The new lighting and NAVAIDs will meet the requirements of FAA AC 150/5340-30G,
Design and Installation Details for Airport Visual Aids, and applicable equipment AC
150/5345 series equipment standards.
The runway lighting system will be replaced as part of the runway rehabilitation project,
including the runway centerline, edge, and threshold lighting. Taxiway lighting will be
replaced on Taxiways A and B1 as required for the Taxiway B1 configuration. Runway
guard lights will be installed at Taxiways C and E where they were removed from the
scope of the previous construction project. The existing lighting regulators, airfield
lighting control system (ALCS), and standby generator were recently installed as part of
the previous construction project in 2013 and will not be affected by this project.
The new runway edge, centerline, threshold, and taxiway edge lighting will consist of
LED fixtures minimize maintenance and energy use. They will be provided with heaters
where applicable to prevent icing.
The existing edge light base and conduit system will be replaced using high-density
polyethylene (HDPE) conduit and galvanized steel light bases. Conduit under aircraft
traffic areas will be concrete-encased galvanized rigid steel. The new light bases will
include 6-inch drain openings in the bottom covered with galvanized hardware fabric
and drain rock below the light base to prevent water accumulation.
The existing centerline light base and conduit system appears to be in good condition
and there are no known issues with it. The light base bottom sections and connecting
conduits will be reused, and the top sections will be removed and replaced to allow for
pavement removal and replacement. This will provide significant time and money
savings over a full replacement. Spacer rings will be installed under the new lights to
allow the light elevation to be adjusted in the future. The light base top sections, spacer
rings, and flange rings will be installed in a core-drilled hole and surrounded by epoxy.
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 16
This installation method facilitates elevation adjustments as well as future pavement
overlays.
Many of the existing lighted signs are in poor condition. All of the lighted signs, except
for those replaced in the previous runway project, will be replaced with new signs
utilizing LED lamps. The signs will be installed on new concrete foundations.
The existing wind cones will remain in service and will not be affected by this project.
Temporary runway lighting will be provided to convert Taxiway A into a temporary
runway. The existing taxiway lighting will be removed and temporary runway lights or
blank covers will be installed on the existing light bases. The light spacing of the
existing taxiway lights does not meet the requirements of the ACs for runway lighting,
however, a general spacing will be established as near as possible to the AC
requirements as the existing light base locations allow. This will provide a lighting
system that will be allowed by FAA for a temporary installation with Notices to Airmen
(NOTAMs) regarding non-standard light spacing and monitoring by the airport operator.
The temporary runway lighting will be a high-intensity system, but will only have 3-step
intensity control due to the use of the taxiway lighting circuits for the temporary lighting.
The temporary runway lighting will be controlled through the ALCS by controlling the
existing taxiway lighting circuits. These circuits can be controlled manually from the
control tower, flight service station (FSS), and regulator vault, or by pilots via radio.
2. NAVAIDs
Temporary runway end identifier lights (REILs) will be installed at each threshold of the
temporary runway. They will be powered from the temporary runway lighting circuit and
therefore share on/off and intensity step control with the temporary runway lights. The
temporary REILs will be provided and installed by the contractor and will be removed
when use of the temporary runway is complete.
Temporary visual approach slope indicators (VASIs) will be installed to serve each end
of the temporary runway. The VASI systems will be designed and furnished by FAA
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 17
and installed by the contractor. The temporary VASIs will be removed when no longer
in use.
A temporary lead-in lighting (LDIN) system will be installed for temporary runway 8,
consisting of three sequenced flashers. Additional flashers would be preferable, but not
practical due to location conflicts with the water and taxiway beyond the temporary
threshold. The LDIN will be pilot-controlled via radio.
The existing medium-intensity approach lighting system with sequenced flashers
(MALSF) and medium-intensity approach lighting system (MALS) systems at RWs 8
and 26, respectively, will remain in place and be turned off by FAA. The semi-flush
threshold lights of both systems will be removed and reinstalled on light base
extensions based on grade changes at the runway thresholds.
The remaining NAVAIDs, including the RW 8 VASI and REIL and the RW 26 precision
approach path indicator (PAPI) and REIL will be turned off and protected during
construction.
A surface sensor system will be installed, including three surface condition sensors, one
subsurface temperature probe, and two sets of environmental sensors. Two remote
processing units (RPUs) will be located on the airfield and will communication wirelessly
back to the central system equipment located in the airport maintenance building.
Conduit installed for this system as part of the previous construction project will be
utilized where applicable.
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 18
III. MODIFICATIONS/EXCEPTIONS TO DESIGN STANDARDS
Except for two conditions, construction for this project will be completed in accordance
with applicable FAA ACs and the Standard Alaska State Modified version of the FAA
Guide Specifications. The exceptions are:
Runway centerline light spacing does not meet FAA design standards since the
2012 Runway Safety Area construction project moved the thresholds of the runway
and fixtures vary in their offset from centerline. Since this project will not remove the
existing centerline light bases but only replace the fixtures, the centerline lights will
continue to be an exception to FAA standards.
Construction of the RW 26 extension during the 2012 Runway Safety Area project
created a grade change within the first 1,000 feet of the runway. This project will
lessen this grade change but will not fully remove it.
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 19
IV. COST ESTIMATES
A. Quantities and Unit Costs
A cost estimate was prepared for the preferred runway rehabilitation alternative of cold-
planing 3 inches and placing 5 inches of A.C. Due to the runway closure during phasing,
TW A will be used as a temporary runway. This will require additional pay items on the
cost estimate. Quantities and unit costs for the recommended alternative for the runway
rehabilitation are provided in Appendix B. The quantities were derived from the design
data that has been gathered and generated to date. The unit costs were estimated from
previous projects within the last 3 years.
B. Special Considerations
Phasing requirements have created cost items for temporary construction that include,
but are not limited to, temporary runway and taxiway painting, temporary runway
lighting, and temporary tie-downs.
Construction duration and timing requirements dictate an accelerated construction
schedule. Completing all the required work between weather windows, wildlife windows,
and periods of high aircraft usage will result in enough restrictions on the contractor that
multiple crews will need to be employed almost around the clock, and any unforeseen
conditions or unusual weather conditions will make the situation more difficult and
costly.
C. Additive Alternatives
An additive alternative to replace the RW 8 blast pad with new HMA has been
developed to rehabilitate old pavement not addressed by previous projects.
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 20
V. PROJECT SCHEDULE
Due to urgency of the runway repairs, and the complications and costs of having the
airport’s only runway closed for an entire summer tourist season, JNU desires to
complete the project in its entirety in 2014. Project contracts must be restricted in their
performance periods to ensure the work is completed expeditiously and that portions of
the airfield are not closed for unnecessary durations. The anticipated project schedule is
to award the construction contract approximately April 2014 and complete the work
before the end of the normal paving season in September.
Work will be required to be divided into three phases. Phase 1 will complete
improvements to the airport in anticipation of the RW 8-26 closure including construction
of TW B-1 and H, the float pond access road, installation and flight check of temporary
NAVAIDs and runway lighting, relocation of aircraft parking, and marking of TW A as a
temporary RW. Phase 2 will complete the construction of the new Jordan Creek culvert
replacement, infield drainage improvements, and runway resurfacing and lighting work.
Phase 3 will restore the airport’s original runway and taxiways to their normal mode of
operations.
The Airport Tenant and User Group has expressed their desire to see RW 8-26
reopened by June 30, 2014 to minimize disruption to their air operations during the
height of the tourist flightseeing season. The amount of preparation work phased into
the project before RW 8-26 can be closed will require a contractor to mobilize more
manpower and equipment to complete all required work. A pay item has been added for
the contractor to complete the work on an accelerated schedule to reopen the runway
by the June 30th deadline. An alternative to completing all work within a single
construction season is to complete all of the Phase 1 preparation work in 2014, and
then all of the runway work under Phase 2 could begin earlier in spring 2015 to ensure
RW 8-26 reopens by June 30th.
To minimize delay of construction based on delivery of materials, JNU has elected to
pre-purchase the culvert materials for the Jordan Creek crossings at TW H and RW 8-
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 21
26 since the installation of these culverts present the critical path to complete the
runway resurfacing work.
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 22
VI. SAFETY PLAN
The goal of the safety plan will be to facilitate access and allow time and space for
construction activities while maintaining the maximum operational use of the airport
possible during construction.
A construction safety and phasing plan (CSPP) will be attached as an appendix to
project specifications and present proposed construction staging for airport
improvements and outline the impact of construction activities on operations. It will also
be referenced in the general contract provisions related to staging areas, haul routes,
and general responsibilities of the contractor during construction. A copy of the project’s
draft CSPP prepared according to FAA AC 150/5370-2F, Operational Safety on Airports
During Construction, dated September 29, 2011 is attached in Appendix A.
A. Impact of Work
Planned work on Runway 8/26 to improve the pavement, replace and upgrade lighting,
improve drainage, along with other elements, will impact the operations of JNU.
Proposed construction phasing will include multiple stages of work in order to maintain
operations to the maximum extent practicable.
B. Planned Closures
Closure of RW 8/26 will be required to complete the project work. When the main
runway is closed, TW A will be used as a temporary runway surface as shown on the
construction safety drawings. Partial closure of TW A will be required when completing
work on or near the taxiway. Closures will be coordinated with JNU Operations to
provide a plan for the contractor that will meet operational needs.
C. Coordination
The contractor will:
Coordinate with the Airport Manager through the Airport Engineer, to issue NOTAMs
regarding current airport operations and restrictions.
Engineer’s Design Report JNU Runway 8/26 Rehabilitation
Contract Number E14-034December 2013
Page 23
Designate an individual who will be the point of contact for coordinating an
immediate response to correct any construction-related activity that may adversely
affect operational safety of the airport.
Provide a safety officer/construction inspector familiar with airport safety to monitor
construction activities.
Constantly monitor control tower radio communications.
D. Conditions for Closures
A runway closure will be required. Prior to the closure the contractor will coordinate with
airport operations, through the Engineer, who in turn will issue NOTAMs accordingly.
During closures, yellow crosses will be placed at each end of the runway, and NAVAIDS
providing misleading information will be covered.
E. Vehicle Marking
Vehicles that will operate in an aircraft movement area must have a flag or beacon
attached that is readily visible. Any vehicle operating on the movement area during
hours of darkness or reduced visibility must be equipped with a flashing dome-type light.