No Slide Titlesp.construction.transportation.org/Documents/US90Reconstruction28...Introduction –...

RESPONSE TORESPONSE TO

HURRICANE HURRICANE KATRINAKATRINA

AUGUST 29, 2005AUGUST 29, 2005

August 1, 2007

St. Louis BaySt. Louis BayHarrison and Hancock CountiesHarrison and Hancock Counties

Damage and DestructionDamage and DestructionDesign Build ProcessDesign Build Process

Reconstruction of US 90 BridgesReconstruction of US 90 Bridges

Biloxi BayBiloxi BayJackson and Harrison CountiesJackson and Harrison Counties

Introduction Introduction –– St. Louis Bay BridgeSt. Louis Bay Bridge

David David SeyfarthSeyfarth, P.E., P.E.•• District 6, Area District 6, Area

Construction EngineerConstruction Engineer•• Saucier, Mississippi Saucier, Mississippi

(District 6 Field Office)(District 6 Field Office)

Rodney Gray, P.E.Rodney Gray, P.E.•• URS Resident EngineerURS Resident Engineer•• Bay St. Louis Mississippi Bay St. Louis Mississippi

(Field 6 Office)(Field 6 Office)

Allan NelsonAllan Nelson•• GraniteGranite--Archer Western Archer Western

Project DirectorProject Director

Introduction Introduction –– Biloxi Bay BridgeBiloxi Bay Bridge

Kelly Castleberry, P.E.Kelly Castleberry, P.E.•• District 6, Area Construction District 6, Area Construction

EngineerEngineer•• Ocean Springs, Mississippi Ocean Springs, Mississippi

(District 6 Field Office)(District 6 Field Office)

Kent Kent DussomDussom, P.E., P.E.•• URS Transportation URS Transportation

ManagerManager•• Field OfficeField Office

Steve UnderwoodSteve Underwood•• GC Constructors GC Constructors

Project DirectorProject Director

AgendaAgenda

Challenges of Hurricane KatrinaChallenges of Hurricane Katrina

DesignDesign--Build ProcessBuild Process

Bridge over the St. Louis BayBridge over the St. Louis Bay

Bridge over the Biloxi BayBridge over the Biloxi Bay

Hurricane KatrinaHurricane Katrina

The Costliest ($81.2B)The Costliest ($81.2B)

One of the Deadliest (1,836)One of the Deadliest (1,836)•• 238 in Mississippi238 in Mississippi

Destruction 100 Miles from Destruction 100 Miles from CenterCenter



Path of DestructionPath of Destruction

Clearing the RoadClearing the Road

Monday, August 29, 2005Monday, August 29, 2005

Early Morning Early Morning –– Hurricane Katrina strikes the Hurricane Katrina strikes the Mississippi CoastMississippi Coast

4:00 p.m. 4:00 p.m. -- MDOT began clearing roadwaysMDOT began clearing roadways

11:00 p.m. 11:00 p.m. -- One lane open on US 49 SouthOne lane open on US 49 South

Tuesday, August 30, 2005Tuesday, August 30, 2005

6:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m. -- One lane open on I 59 South One lane open on I 59 South from Meridian to Hattiesburgfrom Meridian to Hattiesburg

Initial Debris Removal (Phase I)Initial Debris Removal (Phase I)

Most routes were not passable immediately Most routes were not passable immediately after the storm.after the storm.

MDOT had every highway passable by MDOT had every highway passable by Wednesday (8/31) evening.Wednesday (8/31) evening.

All lanes were open by Friday (9/2) evening.All lanes were open by Friday (9/2) evening.

Personnel reallocation was required.Personnel reallocation was required.

Debris Removal (Phases 2 & 3)Debris Removal (Phases 2 & 3)

Phase II Phase II -- MDOT forces & 8 highway contractors MDOT forces & 8 highway contractors pushed all debris off of the shoulderspushed all debris off of the shoulders

Phase III Phase III -- MDOT contracted with 30+ MDOT contracted with 30+ contractors to haul debris off of state highways to contractors to haul debris off of state highways to approved landfills. MDOT personnel were approved landfills. MDOT personnel were monitors in the field. monitors in the field.

Debris Quantity & Cost to DateDebris Quantity & Cost to Date

First PassFirst Pass

Over 6 million ydOver 6 million yd33 debris debris removedremoved

Total cost: $149.4 millionTotal cost: $149.4 million•• FHWA FHWA

Completed Jan 31, 2006Completed Jan 31, 2006

Second PassSecond Pass

Cost: $19.7 million thru Cost: $19.7 million thru 10/17/0610/17/06

•• FEMAFEMA

Debris RemovalDebris Removal

Debris RemovalDebris Removal

US 90 Grand Casino @ GulfportUS 90 Grand Casino @ Gulfport

Other Issues Immediately After LandfallOther Issues Immediately After Landfall

Supply ChainSupply Chain

FuelFuel

CommunicationsCommunications

StaffingStaffing

Personnel HousingPersonnel Housing

Damage Assessment TeamsDamage Assessment Teams

Documented Estimated Quantities for Repair & CostDocumented Estimated Quantities for Repair & Cost

Submitted by County & RouteSubmitted by County & Route

Items Covered such as Pavement Damage, Debris (1Items Covered such as Pavement Damage, Debris (1stst

pass), Signals, Signs, Guardrails, etc.pass), Signals, Signs, Guardrails, etc.

Required for FHWA Emergency Relief fundingRequired for FHWA Emergency Relief funding

Barge struck the bridge during storm surge. Barge struck the bridge during storm surge.

Replaced 300Replaced 300’’ of bridge of bridge –– out of alignment out of alignment

Contractor Contractor –– T L WallaceT L Wallace

Cost Cost -- $5,200,000 Incentive $100,000/day$5,200,000 Incentive $100,000/day

Began work Began work –– September 10 September 10

Completed Completed –– October 1 October 1 –– 10 days early!10 days early!

Emergency Bridge Repair IEmergency Bridge Repair I--1010at Pascagoula Riverat Pascagoula River




Damage to an outside pile Damage to an outside pile

Drove two additional piles & extended cap.Drove two additional piles & extended cap.

Contractor Contractor –– T L WallaceT L Wallace

Cost Cost -- $2,500,000$2,500,000

Work Began Work Began –– September 20September 20

Work Completed Work Completed –– October 8October 8

Emergency Bridge Repair IEmergency Bridge Repair I--110 110 at Back Bay of Biloxiat Back Bay of Biloxi



US 90 Bridge @ Henderson PointUS 90 Bridge @ Henderson Point

Replace six spans total.Replace six spans total.

Contactor Contactor –– Hill BrothersHill Brothers

Cost Cost -- $1,900,000$1,900,000

Work Began Work Began –– November 7, 2005November 7, 2005

Completion Date Completion Date -- February 17, 2006February 17, 2006



US 90 Harrison CountyUS 90 Harrison County

►► ““Spot reconstructSpot reconstruct”” over 116 lane miles of over 116 lane miles of pavement pavement

►► 3 paving contractors at a total cost of 3 paving contractors at a total cost of approximately $25 Millionapproximately $25 Million

►►Work Began September 10, 2005Work Began September 10, 2005

►►Completion Date Completion Date –– December 17, 2005December 17, 2005



Storm Drain CleanoutStorm Drain Cleanout



Traffic SignalsTraffic Signals

Damage to all 40 Intersections on US 90 in Harrison Damage to all 40 Intersections on US 90 in Harrison County County

All signals up and running by September 19.All signals up and running by September 19.

MDOT forces, B & B Electric, C & L Const.MDOT forces, B & B Electric, C & L Const.

MDOT also repaired 33 intersections for citiesMDOT also repaired 33 intersections for cities

Traffic SignalsTraffic Signals

18,00018,000’’+ of Guardrail Damage+ of Guardrail Damage

12,000+ Signs Damaged12,000+ Signs Damaged

Ferry Service @ Bay St. LouisFerry Service @ Bay St. Louis

Total Cost $5 millionTotal Cost $5 million

$987,000 for Dredging$987,000 for Dredging

$1.37 Million for Materials & Pile Driving$1.37 Million for Materials & Pile Driving

Remainder for OperationsRemainder for Operations

45 minute schedule 45 minute schedule

7 days a week from 6:30 am to 6:30 pm7 days a week from 6:30 am to 6:30 pm

Operational on November 1Operational on November 1stst, 2006 , 2006

Bay St. Louis Ferry ServiceBay St. Louis Ferry Service



Destruction of the US 90 BridgesDestruction of the US 90 Bridges

Combination of EventsCombination of Events

Storm Surge raised water levelStorm Surge raised water level•• Ocean Engineering Associates Report Ocean Engineering Associates Report

–– 2828’’ at Bay St. Louisat Bay St. Louis–– 2424’’ at Biloxi Bayat Biloxi Bay

Bridge Panels became buoyantBridge Panels became buoyant

Wave Action knocked down panelsWave Action knocked down panels

Destruction of the Bridges Destruction of the Bridges ––St. Louis BaySt. Louis Bay

Destruction of the Bridges Destruction of the Bridges –– Biloxi BayBiloxi Bay

St. Louis BaySt. Louis Bay

Biloxi BayBiloxi Bay

Consider User CostsConsider User Costs

Economic Impact of Additional Travel TimeEconomic Impact of Additional Travel Time

Up to 45 minutes rerouteUp to 45 minutes reroute

Vehicle Travel Cost Vehicle Travel Cost -- $100,000 / day$100,000 / day

How to Fix It?How to Fix It?

Bridges Could Not Be RepairedBridges Could Not Be Repaired•• Extensive Damage to BridgesExtensive Damage to Bridges•• Not to Current StandardsNot to Current Standards•• Existing Problems with Movable SpansExisting Problems with Movable Spans

Bridges Needed to Be ReplacedBridges Needed to Be Replaced•• Realignment Required to Miss Debris FieldRealignment Required to Miss Debris Field

Look at Alternative ProcurementLook at Alternative Procurement

Conventional DesignConventional Design--BidBid--BuildBuild

DesignDesign•• 9 months to one year9 months to one year

BiddingBidding•• 3 months3 months

ConstructionConstruction•• 2 to 3 years2 to 3 years

Total 3 to 4 yearsTotal 3 to 4 years

Owner

EngineerContractor

Conventional DesignConventional Design--BidBid--BuildBuild

DesignDesign--BuildBuild

Bid Process UpfrontBid Process Upfront•• 6 months from start to selection6 months from start to selection•• Concurrent designConcurrent design

DesignDesign--BuildBuild•• Less than 2 yearsLess than 2 years

Total Time to OperationTotal Time to Operation•• 2.5 years2.5 years•• Savings of over 6 months to 1.5 years!Savings of over 6 months to 1.5 years!

PartnershipPartnership

Owner

Engineer

Contractor

TEAMTEAM

DesignDesign--BidBid--Build versus DesignBuild versus Design--BuildBuild

Task Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

DesignBiddingConstruction

2 yearsBid ProcessDesign-Build

Year 5Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4

AgendaAgenda





How does DesignHow does Design--Build Save Time?Build Save Time?

Design is concurrent with bid process and Design is concurrent with bid process and construction processconstruction process

Designer works for contractor, not ownerDesigner works for contractor, not owner•• Different RelationshipDifferent Relationship•• Higher Risk to DesignerHigher Risk to Designer

Judicious Sharing of Risk between Owner Judicious Sharing of Risk between Owner --ContractorContractor

What does DesignWhat does Design--Build Require?Build Require?

Owner must define what is needed:Owner must define what is needed:•• ““The problemThe problem””

Owner must define the rules: Owner must define the rules: •• Design parameters/requirements to allow for Design parameters/requirements to allow for

flexibility in design (promote creativity)flexibility in design (promote creativity)

What does DesignWhat does Design--Build Require?Build Require?

Owner Must Define the Project:Owner Must Define the Project:•• Existing Information (Maps, Existing Information (Maps, topotopo, geotechnical), geotechnical)•• RightRight--ofof--Way / Utility AgreementsWay / Utility Agreements•• Environmental PermitsEnvironmental Permits•• Design CriteriaDesign Criteria•• Vessel Collision ReportVessel Collision Report•• Special ProvisionsSpecial Provisions•• Form of the Contract (DesignForm of the Contract (Design--Build Contract)Build Contract)

TwoTwo--Step Selection ProcessStep Selection Process

Request for Qualifications (RFQ) Request for Qualifications (RFQ)

Step One Step One –– Equate all Bidders that are qualified Equate all Bidders that are qualified to Bid on projectto Bid on project

•• RFQ required:RFQ required:–– Purpose / Overview / ScopePurpose / Overview / Scope–– Management ApproachManagement Approach–– Experience of Key PersonnelExperience of Key Personnel–– Past PerformancePast Performance–– QA / QC PlanQA / QC Plan–– Financial ConditionFinancial Condition

TwoTwo--Step Selection ProcessStep Selection Process

Request for Proposal (RFP) Request for Proposal (RFP)

Step Two Step Two -- Technical Evaluation of Design and Technical Evaluation of Design and Bid PriceBid Price•• RFP RequirementsRFP Requirements

–– Purpose / Overview / General InformationPurpose / Overview / General Information–– Stipend ($100,000)Stipend ($100,000)–– Instructions to BiddersInstructions to Bidders–– Project ScopeProject Scope–– Proposal DevelopmentProposal Development

•• Volume 1Volume 1•• Volume 2Volume 2

Request for ProposalsRequest for Proposals

Volume 1 Volume 1 –– Technical ProposalTechnical Proposal•• SummarySummary•• Scope Scope –– Design PlansDesign Plans•• Management ApproachManagement Approach•• Construction PlanConstruction Plan•• Key PersonnelKey Personnel•• Technical SolutionsTechnical Solutions•• Quality PlanQuality Plan•• ScheduleSchedule•• Certifications, etc.Certifications, etc.

RFP Technical EvaluationRFP Technical Evaluation

Compliance with the RFP Requirements Compliance with the RFP Requirements

Management Approach Management Approach

Technical Solutions Technical Solutions

Qualitative Considerations Qualitative Considerations

ScheduleSchedule

Volume 2 Volume 2 –– Lump Sum PriceLump Sum Price•• Lump Sum PriceLump Sum Price•• Schedule of ValuesSchedule of Values•• Assumptions (Escrow Documents)Assumptions (Escrow Documents)•• CertificationsCertifications

Request for ProposalsRequest for Proposals

Incentive / DisincentiveIncentive / Disincentive

NoNo--Excuse Bonus for Achieving Milestone 1Excuse Bonus for Achieving Milestone 1•• $5,000,000$5,000,000

Road User PenaltyRoad User Penalty•• Days beyond Milestone 1 Days beyond Milestone 1 -- $100,000 / Day $100,000 / Day •• Days beyond Milestone 2 Days beyond Milestone 2 -- $50,000 / Day$50,000 / Day

RFP Price EvaluationRFP Price Evaluation

A = Bid PriceA = Bid Price

B = Days to Milestone 1B = Days to Milestone 1

C = Days from Milestone 1 to Milestone 2C = Days from Milestone 1 to Milestone 2

D = Technical Score (1 D = Technical Score (1 –– 100)100)

Best Value Proposal = Best Value Proposal = A + B*100,000 + C*50,000A + B*100,000 + C*50,000

[ 1 + (D/100) ][ 1 + (D/100) ]

Development of RFQ / RFPDevelopment of RFQ / RFP

Timeline Timeline -- St. Louis BaySt. Louis Bay•• Advertise RFQAdvertise RFQ Sept 28Sept 28•• Submit RFQSubmit RFQ Oct 17Oct 17•• Notify RespondersNotify Responders Oct 24 Oct 24 •• Issue RFPIssue RFP Nov 3Nov 3•• PrePre--Proposal MeetingProposal Meeting Nov 10Nov 10•• RFP Addendum 1RFP Addendum 1 Nov 30Nov 30•• RFP Addendum 2RFP Addendum 2 Dec 22Dec 22•• Submit Volume 1Submit Volume 1 Jan 13Jan 13•• Submit Volume 2Submit Volume 2 Jan 23Jan 23•• AwardAward Jan 24Jan 24•• Notice to ProceedNotice to Proceed Feb 20Feb 20

Development of RFQ / RFPDevelopment of RFQ / RFP

August September October November December January February

Hurricane KatrinaImpact AssessmentIssue RFP Nov 3Pre-Proposal Meeting Nov 10RFP Addendum 1 Nov 30RFP Addendum 2 Dec 22Submit Volume 1 Jan 13Submit Volume 2 Jan 23Award - Jan 24 6 MonthsNotice to Proceed Feb 17

Timeline Timeline -- St. Louis Bay St. Louis Bay

Bid ResultsBid Results

St. Louis Bay BridgeSt. Louis Bay Bridge•• Best Value Best Value -- $266,782,833$266,782,833•• Milestone 1 Milestone 1 –– 451 Days, Milestone 2 451 Days, Milestone 2 –– 649 Days649 Days•• Granite/ArcherGranite/Archer--Western (GAW) Western (GAW) --ContractorContractor•• HNTB HNTB -- Designer and CEIDesigner and CEI

Biloxi Bay BridgeBiloxi Bay Bridge•• Best Value Best Value -- $338,631,734$338,631,734•• Milestone 1 Milestone 1 –– 516 Days, Milestone 2 516 Days, Milestone 2 –– 671 Days671 Days•• Massman/Traylor/Kiewit (GCC) Massman/Traylor/Kiewit (GCC) –– ContractorContractor•• Parsons Transportation Group Parsons Transportation Group –– DesignerDesigner•• VolkertVolkert -- CEICEI

Bid ResultsBid Results

Annual Construction Budgets

$570.00

$580.00

$590.00

$600.00

$610.00

$620.00

$630.00

$640.00

2002 2003 2004 2005

Fiscal Year

Mill

ions

US 90 Bridges US 90 Bridges Total $605 MTotal $605 M

Dedication of MDOT/FHWA Dedication of MDOT/FHWA

The speed at which the bid documents were The speed at which the bid documents were prepared was amazing.prepared was amazing.

Complete Teamwork by MDOT Complete Teamwork by MDOT –– HQ, DistrictHQ, District

FHWA expertise FHWA expertise –– participationparticipation

URS support role URS support role –– additional manpower and additional manpower and expertise in designexpertise in design--buildbuild

AgendaAgenda





71

St. Louis Bay BridgeSt. Louis Bay BridgePROJECT OVERVIEWPROJECT OVERVIEW

Pass Christian, MS

72

St. Louis Bay BridgeSt. Louis Bay Bridge

Client: MISSISSIPPI DOTNTP: February, 20, 2006

451 days to Milestone1 – May 16, 2007685 days to Milestone2 – January 5, 2008

Value: $266,782,883 (Original)$283,492,058 (With Change Orders)

73

MAJOR ITEMS OF WORKMAJOR ITEMS OF WORK

•463 ea 36” square precast, prestressed piles (avg 145’)•435 ea 30” square precast, prestressed piles (avg 125’)•43 ea Trestle-bent caps 95’ long on 36” piles•46 waterline footings on 30” piles, (6,600 cy)•48 Cast-in-place concrete columns from 30 - 72 ft tall (7,600 cy)•48 Cast-in-place hammerhead-style caps (4,500 cy)•3,573,000 lbs black rebar•9,647,000 lbs epoxy-coated rebar•531 Bulb-T, 78” girders on typical 150’ spans. 154 Type IV AASHTO Girders. •Middle 250’-long mid span bracketed by 200 ft back spans; post-tensioned, spliced girders consisting of 18 haunches, and 27 drop-in/end segments. •1,074,000 sf bridge deck, (34,000 cy).

74

LANDSIDE BRIDGE LANDSIDE BRIDGE L&AL&A

75

DEMOLITIONDEMOLITION

76

PILEDRIVINGPILEDRIVING898 Pile on Water

435 – 30” - max 157 ft (57 TNS)463 – 36” – max 164 ft (77 TNS)

77

PILEDRIVINGPILEDRIVING

78

PILEDRIVINGPILEDRIVING

79

PILEDRIVING TEMPLATEPILEDRIVING TEMPLATE

80

PILE LOFTING

OVERVIEW PLANNING DEMO PILES PILES TRESTLE CIP BENTS BEAMS DECKS

81

Pile CutoffPile CutoffOriginal PlanOriginal Plan RevisedRevised

82

TRESTLE CAPSTRESTLE CAPS

83

TRESTLE CAPSTRESTLE CAPS

84

WATERLINE FOOTINGS

Soffit slab and formwork tubs: Soffit slab and formwork tubs:

85

WATERLINE FOOTINGS

86

Internal Rebar Internal Rebar Bracing FrameBracing Frame

87

COLUMNS

88

HAMMERHEAD HAMMERHEAD CAPSCAPS

89

GIRDERSGIRDERS

90

GIRDERSGIRDERS

91

Navigational Span

92

Navigational Span Temporary Bracing

93

INTERMEDIATE INTERMEDIATE DIAPHRAGMSDIAPHRAGMS

94

Deck FormingDeck Forming

95

DECKS:

70 spans; 4 lanes

96

PROGRESS TRACKING

Decking/Diaphragms-Milestone 2(ES/LS Curves Based Upon Schedule Update UD18 5/13/07)

0.00

200.00

400.00

600.00

800.00

1000.00

1200.00

1400.00

1600.00

6-May-0

713

-May

-07

20-M

ay-0

727

-May

-07

3-Ju

n-0710

-Jun-0

717

-Jun-0

724

-Jun-0

71-

Jul-0

78-

Jul-0

715

-Jul-0

722

-Jul-0

729

-Jul-0

75-

Aug-07

12-A

ug-0

719

-Aug

-07

26-A

ug-0

72-

Sep-07

9-Sep-0

716

-Sep

-07

23-S

ep-0

7

Wee

kly

Dec

king

(CY)

0.00

2000.00

4000.00

6000.00

8000.00

10000.00

12000.00

14000.00

16000.00

18000.00

Cum

ulat

ive

Deck

ing

(CY

)

Actual_wkEarly_cmActual_cmLate_cm

97

Safety Meeting

AgendaAgenda





US90 BRIDGE ACROSS BILOXI BAY

PROJECT STAKEHOLDERS


AERIAL VIEW OF DAMAGED BILOXI BAY BRIDGE


TYPICAL BRIDGE CROSS SECTION


RENDERING OF HIGH LEVEL APPROACH


STATNAMIC LOAD TESTING


850 TON STATIC LOAD TEST


DRIVING 30” PILE AT M/S PIER 52


DRIVING 30” PILE AT M/S PIER 51


PILE SUPPORTED SEAL SLAB SYSTEM


INSTALLATION OF LOW LEVEL SEAL SLAB & FORMS


INSTALLING SUPPORT BEAMS FOR M/S FOOTING


MAIN SPAN SEAL SLAB INSTALLATION


M/S PIER 52 FOOTING READY FOR REBAR


COLUMN FORMINGLOW LEVEL HIGH LEVEL & M/S


CAP CONSTRUCTION ON EAST LOW LEVEL


MAIN SPAN SUBSTRUCTURE


ERECTION OF FIRST BT-54 GIRDERS AT SPAN 4


ERECTION OF 120 FT. LONG BT-72 GIRDERS


FALSEWORK FOR M/S SPLICED GIRDERS


Pier 52 Haunch Girder Erection


W/B Bridge Drop-In Girder Erection


W/B Main Span Bridge, April 24, 2007


INSTALLATION OF OVERHANG BRACKETS


TEMPORARY GIRDER BRACING


DECK FORMING ON WEST LOW LEVEL BRIDGE


FIRST DECK CONCRETE PLACEMENT


DECK PLACEMENT SPANS 7 TO 9


TEXAS STYLE SEE-THROUGH BARRIER


North CSX Bridge Construction April 24, 2007


Construction Progress June 20, 2007

Change Order StatusChange Order Status

Cost ($1,000's)

Percent of Total

Original Proposal $338,6321 Utility Agreements (3) $1,544 0.5%2 Environmental (0) $0 0.0%3 Value Engineering (0) $0 0.0%4 Dispute Review Board (0) $0 0.0%5 Project Additions $1,808 0.5%

Accent Lighting $1,495Roadway Lights $189Aesthetic Plaques $124

6 RFP Issues $324 0.1%HS20 Loading $233Finger Joint Welds $91

Total $342,308 101.1%

Description

St. Louis Bay St. Louis Bay Biloxi BayBiloxi BayCost

($1,000's)Percent of

TotalOriginal Proposal $266,783

1 Utility Agreements (4) $193 0.1%2 Environmental (1 UST) $43 0.0%3 Value Engineering (2) ($73) 0.0%4 Dispute Review Board (1) $539 0.2%5 Project Additions $14,457 5.4%

Accent Lighting $7,121Barrier Rails $1,893Pedestrian Rail $210Aesthetic Plaques $233No Excuse Bonus $5,000

6 RFP Issues $1,550 0.6%Vessel Collision $437Debris Disposal (FA) $1,113

Total $283,492 106.3%

Description

Thank You!Thank You!

Questions?Questions?

Date post:	14-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	lethien
View:	212 times
Download:	0 times